#Also the specific phrasing of ''You made me like this'' into ''I made you'' - intentionally miswording things

[beatcroc]

turns out i have to make an unnecessarily wordy thoughtspost about doombox too bc there is nothing about this character that isn't fucking ridiculous and also really funny and i'm kind of really obsessed with all of it. ordinarily i would just start firing but in this case I need to just. paste his bio and then go through it step by step because every phrase here is absurd when looking at how he's handled along with the other characters and the world as a whole. here we go

first sidenote: i should also add 'nonsensical' to the list of descriptors up there, because this is a fighting game and no doubt has the typical Bad Fighting Game Writing at play that doesn't really hold up when put under scrutiny as i'm about to, but understand that this is something i've come to love about the genre and its typically batshit lore, and it further enhances the experience for me. it's all utter nonsense and its my favorite shit ever.

the biggest thing to me that makes his entire shtick ridiculous is that he was explicitly made to be a weapon. like his express purpose is destruction and/or killing people, and he certainly has the disposition to be doing that. except that he is not doing that. he's out there playing Ball Game, evidently of his own volition.

i feel it is also important to highlight that he was not originally or intentionally a boombox; he just kinda lives in there. his own bio frames it as happenstance, but sonata's dlc skin lore** implies he isn't permanently stuck in there and can kinda just hop out and take control of whatever he wants whenever he wants. there is an entire goddamn tank just sitting there in the background of one of these stages. he is a weapon. there is heavy artillery readily available to him that he could be commanding if he wanted to, but he's not doing that either. he is still a boombox. i think he likes it in there. *there's an argument to be made that maybe he's not powerful enough to control something that large, or maybe just that switching hosts is really tiring or risky. im just saying though there's like a bajillion host devices better suited for A Fucking Weapon than a boombox, but he seems really committed to this for some reason. while im here btw it's fucking terrifying that he apparently can possess thing that are Not tech as well **as a side note from that the specific mention of her boomhammer is interesting. i don't think it's an intentional implication but i enjoy the idea he has an affinity for sound-based devices; i like to think the boombox left an impression on him with its being the initial thing he possessed and got used to

and then there is the berserking. the 'rampaging', as it is otherwise called. not exactly strange on its own given his temperament and designation, but strange for the way it's characterized as only a tendency. it's only that he's prone to rampaging. he rampages often, but not all the time. just often! what is he doing he is not rampaging? getting a custom trimmed jacket with his own logo emblazoned on it? like a nerd? and on the flipside, what exactly do these rampages even entail? because it's apparently not anything destructive or disruptive enough for anyone to care about stopping him under normal circumstances.

like how are you a giant angry "not exactly stable" weapon of a guy and everyone's like 'yeah that's fine. that's our doombox!' toxic's specific wording regarding his getting unfucked postgame is "back to his old raging self", which implies to me there's almost a certain fondness, or at least amusement, at his being like this. i know one of the core themes of lethal league is letting these oddball misfit dudes do their thing and freely be who they are, but like. is doombox sincerely just not a threat for that? like really? dice's interactions also sort of imply that his actually trying to kill someone is really out of the ordinary for him so truly like. db my man what ARE you doing out there. * re: toxic and dice's talking about him; i do also find it amusing that one of his defining traits is just being pissed off all the time. again, not surprising given his purpose/designation as a weapon, but funny in that it's like. how he's KNOWN; in the sense that it is immediately noticeable and a cause for concern for other characters to see he is Not angry. fuckin social barometer of a guy. local angry guy isn't angry, something's wrong.

the "reasons for playing in the league unknown" bit also strikes me as a little odd even though it REALLY shouldn't. i'm like 97% sure it's just written like that to make him seems mysterious and unpredictable and dangerous, but it's a weird thing to call attention to when you consider that...less than half of the other characters' reasons are known? raptor is there trying to get info on his dad, that one's well out there. dust & ashes i think have some kind of implied reason for being there as well but it of course isn't elaborated on, and grid is like trying to impress "the youth" and establish a profile or something. nitro seems like he might not actually be IN the league as an official competitor? it's just helpful for him to know how to ball for the situations he gets into with his investigations. everybody else's "reason" pretty much seems like they're just out there to have fun. and toxic says as much in the story mode intro! the game was developed for people to escape the monotonies of shine city! so to imply doombox has a separate, non-recreational reason for being here is weird. the easiest read on it for me is just that he was drawn to it cause it's intense and destructive but at the same time.... if all he wants is an excuse to wreck shit....why are you competing in a structured sports game with rules and shit my dude. you are a weapon. just go attack people. except that we've established that he doesnt really do that. so. once again. what IS he doing out here

----

aside from the bio though, there's of course random little tidbits of characterization throughout the game itself and they are all also likewise ridiculous.

he refers to himself in third person, which is always an amusing choice for a character in general. it carries with it a certain sense of ego, an awareness of and and pride in one's presence and gravitas. this was mostly just surprising to me bc before i started looking at everything, i'd assumed he was more or less mindless and, yknow, robotic; without much personality/reason for being there beyond being the Biggest Baddest Best At Ball Game Guy doombox is already very imposing, so this is frankly a well-earned sense of pride for him to have.....but it still doubles back to being funny again because, as i've established above, he could stand to be a hell of a lot scarier! but he doesn't seem to notice or care that there are many readily-available options for becoming more powerful and/or establishing himself as unquestionable top dog. so instead he is a boombox. third-person is also often used for characters who are a little dumb, and i think this applies to doombox as well. he is a weapon, and clearly a brute-force-over-precision type of weapon at that, he doesnt need smarts. i think this is also sort of hinted at with his voice lines; where the other characters have some kind of snarky phrase or one-liner for their kill/score voice line, doombox just goes "bye-bye". Which is still appropriately Disrespectful, but it's also very, uh... simple. again i just think there are... more imposing things a guy like him could be saying there, but i guess he hasn't got anything more than fucking. bye-bye.

anyways the ego thing i think is well-echoed by his stupid fucking jacket. none of the other characters have their logo as part of their design and i'm pretty sure the rest of the symbols are just game abstractions and don't exist in-universe, but like. doombox is just going around wearing a jersey with his own damn face on it. ok. to be clear i love his jacket but it is literally so silly for him to have that. imagine being the guy having to custom-fit a fucking boombox. did db pay for it? how? we're getting into unproductive territory here but you could ask a million questions about that jacket and they all have hysterical implications. while im on the topic of designs i'd also like to say that while i don't count any of the other blaze redesigns as "canon" like actual events the characters went through between games [like raptor in particular would have already had to have the stitches since that's his backstory, it's just they weren't a design point before], doombox is in a weird spot since the first game's design for him was very specifically referencing its HUD in a meta way for his flavor and that was pretty much the entire extent of his flavor; while in blaze he and the HUD are very much separate distinct things with their own flavor. there's more to talk about here later but as it pertains to design what im saying is i think he just went out and found a better and cooler boombox to be in between games. and also got a funny jacket. *actually i have no idea if there's even a Timeline here. the gut vibe i had been running on was that blaze happens a couple years after the original, but looking at it now that doesn't seem right. does blaze Replace the timeline of the first game? are there even Events in the first game to count as a timeline? do they run concurrently?

alright anyway the last point here is the 3rd-person thing is even moreso interesting to me though bc i was under the assumption that 'doombox' was something akin to a codename he was given when other people saw this big fucking Thang rampaging through the streets. but seeing as 1. he's definitely aware of it, and 2. not even the damn scientists who made him knew he was in a boombox [as implied in his dlc skin lore], i'm led to believe he came up with the name himself. the fucking tape in his cassette player does just say 'doom' on it so i am choosing to believe that's either where he got the name, or that he put that on there himself.

MOVING on, another really good thing is that he does this

i just think it's funny he's continuing to use the thing as an actual boombox; i feel like that isn't something he necessarily Has to do. obviously he's susceptible to certain quirks and limitations of being a boombox re: mind control tape, but i don't think that means he has to play out its every function. i think he's doing that on purpose and i am filing it under "he likes it in there". hes listening to his jams.

also on a similar note,

this is also not important and i realize it's mostly just a quirky videogamey way to get around saying the robot kinda character is "asleep", but i do enjoy the implication that shine city's biggest terror is like out there running on 4 D-cells.

also i'm making this guy out to be a city street menace, and the vibe i had assumed for him before was like, a random encounter in the back alleys that you super do not want to run into; but his associated stage/hangout seems to be the desert/scrapyard? which i don't really have anything interesting to say to that, but it's definitely a different vibe for his character if he typically hangs out in more desolate areas.

---

i think maybe the most baffling thing doombox has going on is the apparent "rivalry" with dice. this is also bizzare from dice's side of things. what the fuck does it even mean to be "rivals" with doombox? what are they competing for? what kind of things does dice get up to that doombox would even give a shit about in the first place, let alone to be considered a rival in? i mean, like, the league, probably, but why dice specifically, out of everyone? would doombox's league rival not just be whoever's the [second] strongest there? i believe dice when he says they're evenly-matched, but there isn't really anything that implies dice is of particularly high prestige within the league so it feels like he shouldn't hold much interest as a target. to be fair dice doesn't seem like the type that would care about prestige, but again, if he's not out there flaunting his shit or trying to claim he's the best or whatever, why does db care? this would be a lot easier to understand if it was a one-sided thing on doombox's part like okay maybe dice pissed him off one day and he's still mad about it. whatever. that's the vibe they go for in story mode, but then there's dice's dlc skin description, which seems to run entirely counter to that and has dice as the aggressor:

when deprived of his usual sense and restraint, dice's first thought is I Gotta Go Fuckin Kill Doombox? even if he's over it under normal circumstances, it's clear both of them have some deeper-rooted beef in this exchange. there is yet another layer to this in that doombox is, weirdly enough, not really shown to be the kind of guy that's interested in revenge. again, going back to his own dlc description, he- and i quote- "couldn't care less" about the guys who made him capturing him and chaining him up. his only interest there is breaking out and getting back to doing his thing. if you want to be really generous, you could also read this vibe from the story mode epilogue: doombox was not the one hunting down the safety league, that was nitro. doombox was simply, as stated before "back to his old raging self". both of these to say, he simply does not seem to give a shit about people who have directly wronged him and only wants to Do His Thing. so. once again. what the fuck is going on with dice that they both have lasting beef here. i truly cannot fathom what either of them did to be so mad specifically at eachother. this rivalry is something they reference a LOT too like it's a big deal in-universe, or something otherwise really important to portray. like

lore so strong you gotta put it on an achievement!!!!! really!!!!! and there are no details whatsoever about this????? * while i'm here i'd just like to say have more questions about dice than fucking anything else in this game. sadly there's practically nothing to intuit from the game about any of his situations so i don't have much for coherent thoughts to post on him, but my god. what the fuck, dice. this rivalry is arguably the single strangest thing doombox has going on but it doesn't even break top 5 weird things about dice.

anyways, the final section and MOST interesting thing to me in all this is that, coming out of the first game, i was really under the impression that doombox is just the arbitrary final boss monster you gotta kill; no real purpose or personality his own to speak of, and most importantly just synonymous with the game itself and its aesthetics re: mirroring the HUD design. he certainly still holds the role of big scary final boss monster in blaze too, but blaze 1. has him much more fleshed-out as his own Guy, and more importantly, 2. doesn't really consider him a Problem like your typical big angry final boss monster. or at least not moreso than anything else going on in the game. he's not a threat to be eliminated, he's respected as a character and as a competitor in the league; and more than that he just seems to be... liked? as in, liked by other people in-universe? and he's liked enough that they'll readily help him out so he can keep doing his thing? i do think latch fixed him up postgame mostly bc he felt bad about being the one responsible for getting db brainwashed in the first place but like. the game could have just as easily gone "and then doombox was defeated yay" and left it at that. instead, they seem to have a vested interest in keeping him around. most transparently this is likely just a "we can't get rid of any of the playable characters or else story mode would be noncanon", BUT the point of this post is trying to read cohesive narrative sense into places there probably isn't any, and my read here is that doombox is a sort of inadvertent guardian of the league. for 1, he does still very much embody a lot of what the game [both The Videogame and the league itself] is about, but more importantly i think his presence is just really good at keeping a lot of the more minor threats at bay. if you try to fuck with the league, you will eventually be squaring off with doombox, most likely having freshly pissed him off in the process, and i can't imagine that goes well for who or whatever is in that situation. there's probably not much that wants to stand up to him by himself, and there's even less that can challenge the league as a whole unit; he's really just a good guy to have on your side like in general when you are running an illegal sports operation. i think at Worst toxic might see him as the league's funny little mascot but realistically i think she has more respect for him than that. either way i don't think he's going to care and it doesn't affect him much regardless. for this, doombox simply gets to keep doing his thing, whatever the fuck that may be. there are certainly still forces beyond his control at play here [as demonstrated in story mode by the safety league], and when these come into play, the league in turn looks out for him and keeps him on top of his game. i'm not sure if he has the, uh.... kind of cognitive ability that he could be grateful for this, but if nothing else, we know he seems to enjoy playing in the league, so he probably at least recognizes that he's not going to meet a lot of resistance in it and/or that it's a good environment to keep doing as he pleases. i don't mean for this all to sound so transactional, but it's hard to say whether he has much charisma in-universe for people to want him around for more "legitimate" reasons. likewise, there's also still a lot up in the air on how like... sapient doombox actually is. whether he can have complex motivations about anything or if he has some concept of "having friends" or if he can experience emotions besides rage; i tend to lean to "no" on those because i am really trying my damndest not to woobify this guy, but ultimately i don't think it matters much; in the end, he and the league are still mutually beneficial for eachother, and they still enjoy having the other around. and i think that's pretty cool :)

#lethal league blaze #lethal league #doombox #babygirl i can write misplaced analysis about anythinggggg #also ik im making this post in 2024 but to be clear i've been playing this series since 2016 #i never talk about it much but it has always held a special place 4 me. #i come back to it briefly like semi-anually. it just happened to REALLY grab me this time around for whatever reason #and i got really obsessed w doombox. as it goes i suppose #speaking of which the final word count for this one is.... apparently a little over 3k this time. oh my god. #usually these character/game writeup things are like half that length. look i just think hes neat #as my friend said: ''He seems like he should be so self-explanatory but he just isn't'' #and ''We learn just enough about Doombox to know we don't know fucking anything about Doombox'' #boy id like to know. the things id do for literally any kind of external loredump for this game. auuggghhh

[gaygoetia]

Background Details in Helluva Boss S1 E1 - Murder Family

1. The Murder Family's House

There are a lot of clues in the background of the episode that the family are serial killers (and likely cannibals) before it's revealed to the characters.

This is mainly apparent from the décor (pelvis bone wallpaper, furniture made of human-looking bones and most blatantly a human head mounted on the wall) but also the human hand hanging out of the fridge and the various weapons covering the walls.

2. I.M.P City Details

The number on the fire engine is "420" - this is possibly a play on words based on the phrase "blaze it".

And I know this one has been brought up a few times already in other posts but I can't not mention the infamous billboard mentioned in the pilot and shown in the background not far from the office.

3. The I.M.P Office Building (Exterior)

The plated sign at the entrance of the building says "Succ Ink" with a hand-written sign underneath saying "I.M.P Floor 7", implying that the building is primarily used by Succubi and Incubi.

Additionally, the building is marked as condemned but Blitzo and co appear to have intentionally hidden this by covering up the sign with an I.M.P poster advertising their services (also shout out to the "Dick?" billboard in the background)

4. The I.M.P Office rooms (interior)

I actually first noticed this in a later episode but only realised when re-watching the series later that it was present in episode 1: There's a lemon tree in Blitzo's office with a sign saying "no whores", presumably referencing this infamous porn intro.

The main room of the I.M.P offices has tons of pictures on the walls but some particularly notable ones shown in this episode are:

A drawing (in Blitzo's signature style) of two imp-horses kissing. Considering the horns and markings, one of them seems to be based on Blitzo himself but it's not clear who the other horse is supposed to be, if anyone.

Another Blitzo drawing of a bunch of horses running.

A picture of Fizzarolli with an arrow through his neck (though based on the colours and clothing this may be robo-Fizzarolli specifically)

A picture of a person in a top hat with an arrow pointing to them saying "Loser". It looks like it might be Sir Pentious from Hazbin Hotel but I'm not totally sure (let me know what you think!)

The photo Luna's holding - the main thing that's notable about this one is that the boy in the picture seems to be the same one from the Helluva Boss pilot.

5. Blitzo's Horse Thing

In addition to all the aforementioned horse drawings, this episode introduces the first of Blitzo's horse toys/figurines which he keeps in his inner pockets and for some reason takes with him on assassinations.

That's it for episode 1 but let me know if there are any other fun details I missed and if there's enough I might make a part 2.

In the meantime, you can see all my other Helluva Boss background details posts here.

#helluva boss #my posts #blitzo

[abarbaricyalp]

Hello all. I wanted to discuss some messages people have been getting in regards to my fics. I received a message about an old fic that used the ableist term "human hand" to refer to Bucky's prosthetic arm. I was directed towards the sambuckylibrary's guide on ableist and racist language in fics, which is an excellent primer.

I have since been accused of not correcting the problem, which is untrue. This fic was written before the initial guide was created (You can look up the bingo post for Halloween 2021, which does not include the guide, which has been on the posts since then) When the guide was published, I went in and corrected the language in the fics I had previously published to that point. The anon seems to only be interacting with only the tumblr post of the fic. I was unable to edit the old post due to tumblr errors. I still cannot edit old posts. I have been trying.

This language and my usage of it is incredibly embarrassing. It is indeed the kind of thing that is so obvious when it is written out. I made the effort to correct usage of it as we learned as a fandom. I am now very aware of it and do not condone usage of that language in my fics, nor have I for many years.

I cannot imagine I have used any of these terms recently in any context unless it was intentionally highlighting Bucky feeling/ being treated like a weapon. I do have a few fics (namely the WinterFalcon AU or creature features) in which dehumanizing language is specifically used for that effect. I try to tag all of my fics, including my supernatural fics, in such a way that possible triggers can be avoided. If I have failed in that regard, I am deeply sorry and I encourage anyone to let me know.

One final note on this: if I EVER used the term "unwhole" or any variation of it in regards to Bucky, which was not part of his own inner monologue, please tell me. I have written multiple fics that involve Bucky's mental health and self image in positive and negative ways. I am sorry if this was upsetting or untagged. None of the character study fics leave Bucky in a negative headspace and his journey is part of the process. If I have made an egregious misstep in this regard, please please please tell me. This is not something I have ever meant to do or would think to do.

ETA: Upon checking, I do not believe I have ever used the term "robot(ic) hand/arm/fingers" even in the robot apocalypse fic. I also found no use of the word whole/unwhole to describe anyone negatively. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Please, I want people to feel comfortable pointing out fics and phrases so I can fix them. None of this was done viciously, it was done out of ignorance. I am always growing, as are all writers, and I welcome the feedback. I am deeply, deeply sorry about these previous missteps

#sambucky

[rocketturtle4]

To Sir With Love, a Reflection

What is Love and What is Duty?

MAJOR SPOILERS

ALSO TRIGGER WARNINGS FOR SUICIDE (briefly mentioned)

The way family love is framed in this show, sparked a lot of reflection and made me realise how un-nuanced some of my thoughts about love have been. (This also made me realise how engaging I find generational family trauma in stories like this so thanks @lurkingshan for answering all my questions).

(This post follows the journey of my thinking so it’s a bit choppy, skip to Duty vs Devotion Vs Love if you want the outcomes bit)

During my initial thoughts about this show I stumbled across @waitmyturtles big meta on: Pain, Suffering, and Narratives in Some Asian Dramas/BLs and it definitely impacted my thinking so go read that.

What struck me as particularly odd (on a personal level) was the idea that western parents are conditioned to love their children. Turtles uses these phrases as examples of a common Western Experience

“There is NO WAY your parents don’t love you.”

“There is NO WAY your parents will ever give up on you. Even if they treat you badly, they love you.”

“In the West, we ALWAYS end up loving our children. That’s what society demands of PARENTS. We’re CONDITIONED to be like that.”

And uh What? *checks own brain* that doesn’t seem right fitted to my experience? (I come back to this at the end, promise)

Now, the point that Turtles goes onto make about Asian family structures is deeply meaningful and poignant (Summarised very briefly, by her, as:

“The equation is: even if you suffer at the hands of your parents, even if you don’t receive unconditional love and empathy from your parents, you must sacrifice in order to respect and serve your parents”)

GO READ IT IT’S BEAUTIFULLY MOVING AND IMPORTANT

However, part of the reason I feel this is relevant is because I DID NOT assume that Tian’s parents (Or Yang’s parents for that matter) loved him going into this show.

I am not quite sure where my own frame of thinking, (of parental love is not an automatic assumption) comes from, now that I know this isn’t standard, I’ll be looking into it further, but I felt it was important to start with this frame because I’ll be talking about the way this drama reshaped my thoughts on love, especially familial love, thus my starting point seems important.

SO

Prior to about episode 14/15 I would have argued that neither of Tian’s parents loved him, they only loved the idea of him. (A literally line I thought to myself as I watched)

Li’s (Tian's mum) arc was the most impactful so I just want to give a quick rundown of the stages I went through and then I will be talking to some of these stages, with reference to Li (Mum), Song (Dad), Yang (brother) Chan (Wife 2, Yang's Mum), and Bua (Wife 3):

Stage 1 (most of the series): She (Li) doesn’t love her son, her love died when she realised he was a homosexual and everything since then has been about his conformity and power for herself.

Stage 2 WHAT, Maybe she does love her son

Stage 3 OH she definitely loves her son (SO WHYYY?)

Stage 4 Maybe she loves his son despite him being gay, rather than accepting him as a whole?

Stage 5 No she doesn’t even seem that specifically hung up on the homosexual, just his safetly

WAIT

Stage 6 Was all this…protective did she actually love him the whole time??? WHAT THE FUCK

Thus reflection:

Stage 1 (some initial thoughts)

Turns out my view on love is (or was?) rather black and white: to love someone & to hurt that person knowingly and intentionally were two concepts I viewed as mutually exclusive: Li hurt her son both physically and mentally on a regular basis and so from my initial standpoint she could not love him. (very unnuanced) (for the record, I'm not saying love and hurt are mutually exclusive (lol) but that I thought love and ongoing intentional hurt were)

In some ways I believed (emphasis on past tense) Song's love for Tian was greater than Li’s but that his love was also false due to a lack of knowledge.

Yang is the bestest bro but we’ll get back to him

Question: Did I really believe that all the actions Li took to protect Tian’s secret were not born out of love while she actively murdered people? Yeah kind of.

I had ascribed her a very similar motivation I ascribed to Chan: She wished to remain as the first wife and retain power and thus needed her son as the next head, discovery of his secret would end this possibility, so it must be kept secret at all cost.

I did not even ascribe her fear for her son’s death as a possible motivation which retrospectively seems very odd. My bias towards Li as unloving is why I had the whole opening section of this post.

Stage 2-4

I think part of the change in my thinking began not with Li’s actions towards Tian, but with Li’s interactions with Song midway through the show.

Song knows of Tian’s secret (but not what it is) and implores Li to tell him (and implores Tian to tell him but that’s not discussed here even if it was at that moment, I decided I hated him) and it is very clear that Li, really WANTS to tell him,

She wants to preserve their marriage.

She wants to give back the honesty he’s asking for,

BUT she never even considers actually doing so because to do so would condemn her son.

That she sacrifices her relationship with her husband to protect her son’s secret was the first rock to really put a dent in my un-nuanced take on her characters motivation.  

A lot of things happen from here, but Li throwing herself in front of the police officers and begging them to take her instead was definitely the final straw that shattered my perceptions.

But hold on, I’m getting ahead of myself

Stage 5

The societal and familial homophobia woven through this story and most strongly represented by Song is also a key part of this reflection.

The fact that Song grieves his brothers death, grieves for the brother he was closest too, grieves for the breakdown of the five families that they’d built and STILL VIEWS SAID BROTHER AS LESS THAN A MAN FOR BEING A HOMOSEXUAL was feckin INSANE.

But it was also the reality of what I’d been imposing onto Li. This is the kind of (not)love I ascribed to her.

Song didn’t truly love his brother for who he was, only who he knew him to be. And if knowing something fundamental makes you view that person as less, then, in my opinion, you never really loved them in the first place. You don’t love them, you love your own perception of them. You don’t love them, you love the idea of them.

(Look at Song here, reinforcing my black and white thinking, no wonder this show got me all twisted around).

Now Li on the other hand arguably doesn’t believe that being a homosexual makes her son automatically less.

Does she believe that he needs to supress this part of himself to become head of the families? Yes,

BUT, I would argue that this is more to do with her knowledge that he’ll definitely be unable to inheret due to Songs views (and may be kicked out of the family/die) than any personal belief of his unsuitability.

She views him as competent DESPITE his homosexuality, this is something that is hidden for his safety, more than for making him less of a man.

(I am not saying this is okay, just unpacking the different motivations as I understood them, and given ep 1 she KIND OF HAS A REASON)

I'm also not saying she's not homophobic (There is also her view that he can ‘be fixed’ as seen in her repeated attempts to get him to sleep with a woman in case he realises he likes it. Which is messed up, but again NOT my primary point.)

Stage 6

Turns out she loves him a ton after all:

She throws herself in front of the police

She planned to commit suicide (yes to absolve herself of her wrongs for some religious adjacent nuance I didn’t fully understand as a western viewer but also to ensure that her wrongs didn’t negatively impact her son’s future)

She sacrifices her husbands trust in her (as mentioned earlier)

She would sacrifice who she is in her sons eyes (someone he does love) to secure his ideal future (as she see’s it).

She loves her son and this love comes out in what I have reframed for myself as Devotional love

Duty vs Devotion vs Love

Duty is, I think, what we often see framed as love or love adjacent in the families portrayed in Asian drama’s, at least to Western viewers.

Children are taught they have a duty to their parent’s ABOVE ALL ELSE

Above love

Above self-care

Above other relationships

This is what their parents expect from them.

This is what’s framing their parent’s investment in their lives.

Duty WITHOUT love is, in my opinion, what we see discussed in turtles post with the examples of “Non’s father in Dark Blue Kiss; or Korn’s father in Double Savage; or ESPECIALLY Uea’s mom in Bed Friend”

Do these children love their parents? I have no earthly clue

Do these parent’s love their children? I would say no, but that doesn’t change the fact that as their children they must be DUTIFUL.

Devotion is then the intersection of duty and love, it is love with expectations. My current thinking is that many child-parent relationships in Asian dramas, especially child to parent, fall firmly into this category. How much emphasis is placed on duty over love seems to link with how damaging that relationship can be.

Li’s love for her son falls into this category, her love is for her son but her duty is for his future position and safety and this is of highest value to her, higher than her love for who he is.

This is a thread I definitely notice in Asian dramas, she is not duty without love as mentioned above, she is not “rooted in judgement against her offspring” (again from turtles) to the exclusion of all love, but this does colour her raising of him in a way that is significantly traumatising.

I think it is possible that Dad in Khun Chai may have reached this level of judgement if he had discovered his son’s secret (in a less extreme situation) and Li knows this, and so must keep him safe.

Though in the end he sees this too:

Yang & Tian

Now, Devotional love is something I also want to talk about in the context of Yang and Tian because I feel that the kind of love Yang has for Tian is different to the kind of love Bua has for both boys and this is the only way I can articulate how.

It's also important to know that duty often forms a part of a relationship that involves commitment (family or otherwise) so I am not saying devotional love is bad.

Despite Chan's best efforts, Yang grows up devoted to his older brother, we see this COUNTLESS times through the drama, and it was undoubtedly my favourite part.

Yang’s love for Tian is unconditional and certain, his realisation that Tian is gay leads to his desperate search for, and hug of his, brother, because he IMMEDIATELY recognises how hard that must be.

It does not alter how much he loves his brother

It does not make him think of his brother as different or less

If anything it increases his determination to keep his brother safe.

This Protectiveness leads his love further up the scale into Devotion

Yang’s love felt very devotional to me because he loves his brother and acts as if it’s his duty to protect him (despite being younger).

We see this in his taking of punishments for Tian

In how he searches for answers to the murder and then only tells Tian about it after talking to Pin as he initially believes protecting Tian is more important than anything else

(I have not got to talk about Pin, but I would argue Tian’s love becomes less devotional (less lead by duty in the form of protectiveness) as:

He shifts to being the caretaker of Pin as well

Jiu is introduced into Tians life

This combination (especially Pin) leads him to treating Tian with more autonomy.)

A key difference, even at the start of the show between Li and Yang’s devotional loves is the focus of their duty.

Li’s is to Tian’s future

Yang’s is to Tian

Yang's duty to his parents (especially his father) is much less (or at least shown as less important) than his duty to his brother.

Tian

I'm not going to talk about Tian's love

ITS ALL FRICKEN SACRIFICIAL @colourme-feral

Boy needs to care less about his duty.

(Sacrificial = Extreme Duty + Love)

Bua

Bua’s love and acceptance of Tian (and of Yang) felt different to Yang’s love and acceptance of Tian and this a key part of helping me frame the duty vs devotion vs love

To me, Bua is the best example we have of love without duty (or with minimal duty at least), her (literal) separation from the family due to infertility (she lives in a different building) leads to having less stakes in the whole game. She loves the boys, but she does not believe anything is more important that them being themselves. Duty is not part of her relationship with them, and arguably, duty is not part of their relationships with her.

In my opinion, Li tries to instil a sense of duty in Bua’s love when she encourages her adoption of Tian, but it doesn’t really have the desired effect.

Bua loves them, but she also clearly loves Song and we can see (for example in the way Yang never tells her Tian’s secret and she never pressures him), that her care for others does not come with a caveat of duty. (Song pressures her though)

Did she have a duty to Song? to anyone? Would her love have lead her to the belief that Song needed to know? Ugh, honestly I have so many questions about Bua.

Side Note

Obsessional love is something different again which didn’t really feature in this drama but which my current thinking frames as possessive devotional love, (with possessiveness causing corruption maybe? Not sure).

ALSO

I feel like the duty/love scale overlaps with a lot of what we see in the portrayals of marriage on screen where duty is often put first and foremost in a way that often breaks down over time or leads to resentment but I haven’t really thought about this in detail.

What was the point of all this?

I think as westerners a key difference in family culture is the way duty is framed in parent child relationships. Having written all this I can now return to this point:

“In the West, we ALWAYS end up loving our children. That’s what society demands of PARENTS. We’re CONDITIONED to be like that.”

And, while I’m still feeling rather uncertain about the phrasing of this, I do think that societally (in the west) parents have a duty to their child RATHER THAN children having a duty to their parents (in Asian cultures)

That’s what feels the most different to me, and I think often expectation of care (duty) is framed as love, you're expected to care for your children and thus you must love them.

But parents don't necessarily love their children even when they care for them. Doing your duty is not the same as loving,

its still causing me a bit of disconnect, so maybe it’s causing disconnect for other people as well.

I’m not sure how realistic my duty to love scale is, but I wanted to chronicle the ways this show shaped my thinking, in the hopes other shows will change my thinking in new ways.

I am very keen to view other shows on @lurkingshan’s generational trauma challenge and see how my thinking continues to grow.

Also I loved this show like crazy and gave it 94%, equal 10th out of 76 shows. Go watch it if you haven't.

#Khun Chai #To Sir With Love #Rocket4Reviews #rturts is wondering #ADGTC #long post #tw: suicide

[frecklystars]

im sorry i gotta vent one more time about this situation and then i'll put a lid on it for the night 😭

dude im still so so so baffled that my abuser, will full awareness that it's easy for me to run into the *thousands* of commissions of herself that she has floating around online, literally changed her fucking color scheme to barbie pink because she knows pink was a trigger for me because of her. that's so malicious. i asked a group of friends who also struggle with cptsd and i was like "hey am i being paranoid, or-" and they were like "no, that was intentional behavior. that is how manipulation works" and it just. hurts. it sucks.

because i know the truth of why she does those tiny, subtle little actions that she knows would hurt me, and i cannot point at them in the public and say "look how this person is intentionally hurting me" because she'd phrase it as "what did i do? i just made a pink OC :) i do nothing wrong." this happened one time when she joined a patreon that i was a part of, that she KNEW i was a part of, specifically because it would fuck me up knowing she was there. and then when the patreon artist confronted her about that she was like ":) i do nothing wrong. im just supporting an artist! what's so bad about that"

it just reeks of venom that somebody that is not in my life anymore would go such lengths. she told me in the very beginning "i'm getting too attached to you. this isn't going to be good for you." and i had no idea what she meant. i know now. she'd tell me some disorders she had that would "make her act this way" and i asked my therapist about those, and she said "well let's assume she's telling the truth and she has these disorders... yeah she's going to be attached to you for a very long time. it's obsessive behavior and it's manipulative and i'm sorry it's probably not going to stop until she's attached to someone else" ... yeah that's horrifying! i remember the days she'd tell me in a creepy voice "i'm getting attached to you... this isn't good for you." and i was like, wtf does that mean...

the fact that i've been out of contact with this person for over one year now, and coming up in one week it's going to mark another year that i am still harassed and in danger by this person. i wish i could go into more detail about all the stuff that i've been dealing with offline but it's just so much and i am just, i am so tired. i am so exhausted of dealing with this person whether it's online or just battling the flashbacks and triggers.

i still feel really. bad. when i see barbie pink now. the fact that she changed her OC to make sure it was specifically that shade of pink because she knew it would trigger me... on a st/rscream commission of all things. my god. ive learned my lesson that i can never ever ever ever look at any TF images whatsoever unless if it's strictly from the source material, because she's just. everywhere. google images. i can never look at TF fanart ever again because she is more than likely to have commissioned these artists more than once. i am never touching the fandom again and i'm fine with that. i won't make any more friends who are into TF and that hurts but in the long run i accept that.

but dude. barbie pink? really? my god. i keep hoping i'm just freshly triggered and i'll move on, but i don't want to be scared of barbie. she's the one who was healing me. i don't want to lose barbie, then i'm going to lose the entire hyperfixation. i can't let this happen to me again. i feel it slipping away from me but i don't know what to do to stop it from happening. this cannot be a tr/nsformers situation all over again dude this canNOT happen to me again, i will not survive this a second time

#vent #maybe i have to draw myself with barbie and use the colors or something #i dont know. #if more ppl were online i'd ask for advice #😭 dude im exhausted

[dancefloors]

It's not a matter of Taylor losing her fame. She was sent numerous death threats. The whole world was celebrating her disappearance. It wasn't her fame they wanted dead - they wanted HER dead. She was suicidal at the time. And it's incredibly fucked up that you're just okay with that.

I'm not going to entertain this intentionally obtuse interpretation. nowhere did I say that I am "okay" with that. In fact I clarified specifically that I don't endorse behaviour that threatens the safety, wellness, and mental health of individuals, in both my post and reply to Amy.

I would encourage you to reread the post, which was written specifically about the consumer feminism aspect of it all and whether what celebrities go through at that level can be equated to structural issues. to maybe reconsider the ways in which swift herself has framed the incident(s) and what she desires - how she "got into this work because [she] wanted people to like [her], because [she was] intrinsically insecure, because [she] liked the sound of people clapping, because it made [her] forget how much [she] feels like [she's] not good enough". how what hurt her in particular is the fact that (paraphrased) when people fall out of love with her there's nothing she can do to change their minds. how she identified the striking moment for her at the 2009 VMAs was not the award being taken from her hands by k@nye but the thought that she was being boo'd by the crowd. how she has spoken herself at length (see: woman of year speech/miss americana) about how she led her career in response to public opinion and what they'd approve of, in a way that her views wouldn't confront listeners, she'd get "a pat on the head" for. how she identified that even when she DID change and want to use her voice it was a "want to be seen as a good person" (not BE, but SEEN). how she most recently phrased snakegate as a "career death" and doubled down on it (“Make no mistake—my career was taken away from me.”).

"it's not a matter of losing fame", not solely, but to deny the attachment and addiction to public approval as such a big if not the sole factor in her resentment of these incidents, is deeply delusional and blatantly ignorant of reality. she said it herself.

regarding the second half of the ask, again, I am empathetic to the pain and loneliness that comes from at a low state of mental health. I don't think anyone deserves that kind of vile behaviour towards them.

I think it's also valuable to consider the ways in which that minority of extreme behaviour has been weighed the same to her as all other callouts. e.g. those born from the unchallenged use of her image by alt-right groups (twice now) - 'her perceived overexposure to conspiracy theories about her politics. "I had all the hyenas come out and take their shots"'. Is that a good faith interpretation of criticism? Is putting out multiple puff pieces about how unphased you are to the outside voices criticising your relationship with a man who does the n@zi salute on stage, how it's the same old attempts at cancellation she's grown to ignore, how he's actually a good person, an indication of a person's perhaps black and white views on any backlash to their name? is someone who has (at best indirectly) perpetuated similarly vile sentiment her whole career via her fanbase, benefited from it, and openly stated she doesn't care or think about how the people she's writing about (and including overt and literal clues about) feel, in the position to call out bullying against her done in someone else's name?

Seemingly, any criticism of her is weighed the same (as hate) , and any criticism done in her name is not her responsibility. So, as a consumer is it not in our interest to think about how all famous people we give our money and attention to play into this contradiction - they are able to operate as an individual when criticism is made against them (we need to all band together and protect them!!) and as a brand when they are a part of the cause (it's not their responsibility and doing that could create a precedent etc etc)? what role we play in it and how often real structural issues are leveraged for our sympathy (and never again mentioned)?

Maybe the point of the post was that ultimately we as an audience should reflect on how forgiving and considerate are about the inaccessible struggle of someone who openly does not care about anyone else's. That we can be empathetic on a personal level but think about how much of ourselves we invest in that. how advocacy through consumption and idolatry leads us nowhere.

Or you can go along believing that post was pointedly about how she deserved poor mental health or that it should be dismissed entirely, if that is easier for you to grapple with. But I'm sure neither of us truly believe that.

#sorry for the long posts abt this. but if prefer that to answering multiple and clogging up the dashes #tw suicide mention

[pocketgalaxies]

okay i have a confession...i never liked ashton...i tried, especially when we found out he has chronic pain and a legitimate reason for being an asshole...but i just can't get on board with him and often roll my eyes at his scenes. and that last convo with laudna made me so frustrated bc it seemed like he was totally emotionally dismissive and wanted to play the "i had it worse" olympics. i've never disliked a cr character before and i don't know what to do about it. any advice? or anything that you particularly like about ashton that could help me get on board a little?

hi anon thanks for asking! unfortunately i can't help you a huge amount because i also! have never liked ashton and have historically had trouble finding reasons to like them. but i will try my best to help

well the first thing i'd say is i don't think you need to find reasons to get on board with ashton. interrogating your feelings about a character is always good to take in the full depth of their behavior, but if you go through that whole process and you STILL don't like them then maybe they just aren't your cup of tea. which is totally valid and acceptable!!! and i know it's not easy to dislike something about a show you love so much, but i'd say just try and sit with that and tell yourself that you're allowed. there are so so many fish in the cr sea and you're far from expected to love each one

that being said if you still want to hear my thoughts here they are! (it got very very long)

i've seen a few people mentioning that ashton might've intentionally started that conversation with laudna because he knew she specifically would be in the position to shoot them down. a sort of self-inflicted scolding, i think. watching the ep, i also got the sense that he was intentionally trying to upset her by bluntly phrasing things to dig into her trauma and i think it makes sense based on what we know about them. maybe he wanted someone to yell at him and tell him he's being weak (in a lot of ways similar to early-c2 caleb's pervasive self-hatred driving him to intentionally seek out places/people with which he is made to feel like shit). or maybe he needed someone else to look him in the eye and tell him "stop hiding and let the people around you help you." maybe they needed a reason to say out loud that they're only with the hells bc they're using them, because that's the only way they can hear themself and how ridiculous and false that sounds. who knows! regardless, i think it's uninformed to say that tal wasn't doing this on purpose. it means something, and it opened up something that will most certainly have some growth and ultimately resolution later

this is kinda separate but we could also get into the details of his word choice, like what did he mean by "i know a loneliness that you don't" was he just talking about a certain kind of loneliness that he perceives to be distinct from the loneliness that many other of the party members have experienced? (worth pointing out that bells hells is a party full of people defined by their loneliness in many ways. food for unrelated thought) is it true that ashton's loneliness is unique to them and no one else in the party? is it even meaningful to put people's loneliness into different boxes? how has loneliness affected the way they distance themself from some people vs. the way they latch protectively onto other people? maybe those questions are of interest to you!

i think ashton is a very meaty character with a lot of complicated stuff going on and tal loves to create characters like this, characters defined by arrogance or a self-aggrandizing belief in their own suffering, or characters who are intentionally and unrelentingly abrasive. they become likable and compelling because of the underlying context and past and often conflicting and changing behavior over time.

it's just that those types of characters will always be a little polarizing, and i personally have a LOT of trouble enjoying tal's characters, because that's just my personal preference. they are complicated and juicy but they historically just do not do it for me. i was very incensed by that conversation with laudna because i am a laudna stan above all else and i thought ashton was being Awful to her, even if i can understand that they knew they were being awful and had reasons to be that way. the important thing is that i recognize it's a double-standard in my own mind and i know that about myself, and i'm not being a willingly narrow-minded jerk to the fans who like ashton and were thrilled by the convo. but i don't have to feel forced to like them and read/reblog meta about how sad they actually are etc etc. you know what i mean?

anyway at the risk of going on a tangent where i complain about that convo for no real reason related to your question, i will stop talking now. hope this helps in some way or another! your feelings are valid and you definitely are not alone in struggling with this character, if the posts and tags i've seen the past few days are any indication. just be nice to people and it will be all good. cr characters are fictional but cr fans are not <3

#anonymous #ask #answered #critical role #cr3 #cr spoilers #cr meta #cr negativity #nova shh #yes i Did write two paragraphs about how much i hated that convo before realizing it wasn't needed or productive #so i deleted them #but. if you really want me to complain. and just be mean. i guess you can send me another message idk. i just don't want to be murdered

[bigkickguy]

After reading a few summaries of the untranslated chapters of leviathan and playing the story content in limbus i have like 3 theories of 'who' dante is but i will write out one of them at least because it makes me sound insane and i think its funny spoilers for limbus + leviathan bellow!

(dante accidental spoiler saver - if you don't want spoilers get out of here!!! also bolded text at the bottom for a kind of tldr on the theory...) ok so supposedly at the end of the last leviathan chapter after vergilius is done manifesting his own ego and kicking the shit out of [redacted] one of the pods opens and lapis is inside! But she is calling herself charon and doesn't remember Anything. I always assumed lapis was charon but I wasn't sure how they found her so now we know! Also [redacted] shattered Garnet's cocoon towards the end of the fight so everyone is incredibly upset (it's me I'm incredibly upset) but as charon is getting out of the pod and standing up she picks up a piece of garnet's shattered crystal cocoon / self! Vergilius gets a call and we discover that the lab was in N corp this whole time which is really ligning up to set them up as the primary antagonist force of the first part of limbus. The footage of the lab with all the orphanage kids in it was from N corp and apparently seeing the inside of a N corp lab is taboo so N corp raided Vergilius' base of operations and gathered up his remaining allies. Unclear on if they were killed immediately or taken but rip either way. Then faust and the lccb show up in the lab and faust tells dante if he works with limbus company she can save both lapis and garnet???? so he goes with them and takes charon and the shard with him???? (which also means limbus potentially takes place shortly after leviathan making these the Worst few months vergilius has had in probably a long time) So we know from Limbus that Vergilius and Faust want Dante to find the star in their head and are using some kind of activation phrase 'engraving an aspect' or something to try and motivate Dante. I think that Faust created all of Dante (not just their head + the bus) and that they are a homunculus that was made to house a consciousness from another refraction? I also think Limbus company and Faust have their own goals and are maybe not being 100% honest about Reviving Garnet We know Garnet was the best at opening windows to other refractions or whatever it was called from leviathan. I think its likely they specifically wanted some part of him in order to get what they want. I also assume the golden boughs are a reference to the aeneid where you have to kind of trade them in order to get to hell if you want to go there by choice. We also know that the golden boughs are manifesting the original lobotomy corp rooms around them - you can look at the images especially from chapter 3 backrounds and they are very intentionally lobotomy corporation rooms. We have been to 3 different districts so far and will probably go to many more. I don't think the original lobotomy corp would have stretched so far as to go into other districts and not sure if other corps would even be ok with that so I assume the original lab did not actually do that and only sections of it are manifesting in these 'dungeons' around the golden boughs. Putting this all together I think Limbus company is stringing vergilius along as a bodyguard and need Garnet's original talent for searching through refractions to find a specific refraction they are looking for and engraving the aspect is taking their consciousness / knowledge / personality and copying it onto themselves. Given the aeneid angle about going to hell and how much limbus likes to bring it up and how going to hell is somehow meaning literally going to lobotomy corporation.... I think that Limbus Company wants to 'revive' either ayin or carmen via reflecting them over Dante and 'engraving the aspect' means to make that a permanent change. (or both of them)! I think Vergilius wants to 'engrave' Garnet over Dante instead because he wants to save him + lapis.

They're possibly utilizing the sinners to grow a personality inside Dante that will want to get motivated to start resisting the city. Maybe the closer in personality they get to their projection target the more likely the success of the engraving. Anyone they can find a suitably tragic story for and can motivate to sign on would work on that angle...? I also think that is maybe why Vergilius treats Dante differently from the other sinners. Regardless of Dante's identity it really seems like Vergilus is not mad at them or annoyed with them like he is with many of the other sinners. I also think its possible purple tear lined up events to make sure vergilius and garnet and faust all met in that lab because she needs this Limbus plan to start so that she can find her lost son. And if I want to sound EVEN MORE INSANE!!! I think its possible Ayin is Purple Tear's son. Which would explain why she needed someone from the orphanage of kids who were all children from that syndicate and were all used in the experiments to open windows and refract. Regardless of who her son actually is - I think purple tear is planning on using Dante to engrave the aspect of her son as a way to 'find' him. iirc someone mentioned in ruina that her son died years before that point so I assume she is actually trying to revive him. Also its interesting Dante + Mephi's designs are so similar to Express Train to Hell from lobotomy corp because they fit the theme and have similar effects on ticket holders! When Express Train gets tickets it heals the hp and sp of the employees or even their entire department up until it is time to depart (for hell presumably) and the train starts running through the lab and causing damage. I think its cute that is similar into Dante's ability to 'heal' their teammates - though they seem to be different since dante's power is also themed around time.

#kickguyreply #limbus company #just rambling and felt insane last night reading summaries so wanted to write them out so i can look back on them and laugh #can't wait to look back on this in a year and go WHAT WAS I THINKING???

[transtundras-fr]

I hope this reads as gently and kind as I mean it: You wanted to do a very kind thing to make a difference in an extremely fucked up situation happening right now. I think that is wonderful, and I love that you're still trying to do just that despite it not being allowed directly on Flightrising.

However it is getting to the point where the situation is moving away from that very important and noble cause, and now it's being made about you in particular. I do not think it was appropriate to take their initial removal reason and cause a situation where others believed that staff was doing this out of malice, or that they said something they did not. I also did not see your unedited post, so my apologies if I am misspeaking on the content that staff asked that you retract.

I don't think you did this intentionally! But I do think it's important to recognize that these actions are now causing Flightrising to reconsider the previously allowed exceptions to their call-to-action rule. Yes, you are correct that if they choose to walk back on that exception it is their choice. But you cannot deny that this situation would not be happening if staff was not yet again experiencing misinformation and false claims being spread about their moderation actions and staff. I also think it's a bit disingenuous to lump "from the river to the sea" with other solidarity phrases, as this one in particular is truly being misused by antisemitic groups and I think the concerns FR outlined in their message to you are justified and backed up by the current state of things, especially on social media.

Although I don't agree with Anon's tone, I think the question "What exactly are you hoping to accomplish here?" is a good one to consider. What positive and constructive things can be accomplished in relation to Palestine from heading down this path of following up this situation with Flightrising staff? I only ask this as you mention a few times in your tags that you're not sure what to do.

I truly think the best action in this situation would be to move on and focus on your original goal.

Hi,

Thank you very much, this came off in a constructive way, and does raise some good points. While I don’t agree with your stance on From The River To The Sea, I do think this brings up something important.

This has become a me vs staff problem, which is not at all what I intended when I created Bisan. My goal with Bisan was to expose the FR community to easy to access resources about Palestine and also show my solidarity via one of my favorite platforms. However, with the back and forth it has become centered on me, and I want to make something very clear. I stated in the original post I was not seeking a statement from staff, and I do not nor will EVER condone harassment of them. I get they’re people, my goal here was not to cause further issues.

Asides from asks/questions, I am going to leave this specific gripe alone until staff makes any further response. My opinions are still strong in that From The River To The Sea should be allowed on FR, as well as other slogans like Land Back and BLM. If anyone learns anything from this, please go donate to accredited orgs and continue to educate yourself on the crisis in Gaza. Additionally, please encourage staff to keep these slogans on site.

I’m tired, this has been a lot.

#tundra talks #thanks again for the ask #I do appreciate it

[thebadjoe]

BAD JOE'S DRDT CH.2 CRIME SOLVING THEORY PART 3

Yo! It's me, that one DRDT theorist! And now, it's time for me to reveal even more clues I figured out about this chapter that I believe makes the most sense. So uh... sit tight, I got quite a bunch to say. Like the previous two parts of my theory (click here for part 1 and click here for part 2), this is potentially HEAVY danganronpa despair time spoilers (if I end up being right especially), especially towards the latest episode to date being episode 11, so BEWARE. And to avoid a small incident like last time I made a theory post, I feel obligated to mention that I RECOMMEND YOU TO READ BOTH PARTS OF MY THEORY BEFORE READING THIS ONE TO AVOID ANY CONFUSION, THANK YOU!

Let's do it!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Step #1 : What Ace saw and heard, is it all true?

As you know, Ace claims he knows what David's secret is, which ends up being : "You exist to manipulate others. Everyone else exists to be taken advantage of." Of course, we later learn that it's indeed David's secret for many reasons, which gives ample credibility to Ace's testimony.

Let me give you a small recap of what happened according to Ace. Yesterday evening, he was working out in the fitness room until he heard David and Arei's voices coming from the relaxation room. which caught his attention.

He decides to approach that room stealthily, listening to the conversation. Arei knows what David's secret is because she managed to get a peek of Whit's secret he was holding without him noticing (which ended up being David's). Arei keeps arguing while David is practically left speechless, then Arei says something like : "David! Say something!"

And that's where the flashback ends. Ace claims he didn't hear anything else after that.

That last part in itself is very odd, but I'll get back to it later. Let me show you the issues that may cause troubles with my theory.

According to his flashback, you get to see him in the fitness room, but there's one specific detail that makes a hole in my theory. That's right! The missing fan to the right, indicating that this is happening on DAY 3, during the evening.

Woot! I'm glad it's breaking your theory! But why is it an issue?

Because according to my theory, Arei should be already dead on DAY 3. She was murdered on the night of DAY 2. Therefore, it's definitly a huge contradiction from the looks of it.

To make matters worse, we also have another part of the flashback proving this.

The second phrase : "Nico got super pissy and tried to turn Ace into cat food." This implies that Arei was there when she heard all the commotion about the attempted murder on Ace. (Lunchtime on DAY 3). Which once again potentially disproves my suggested time on murder and also my disguise theory.

I also double checked, it is not a reference from DAY 2, when nico snapped after so much bullying from Ace and said : "I'll kill you!". Well... it could be, but Arei was nowhere to be seen in the dining room at the time and there's nothing suggesting otherwise.

Then this is it! Your theory is now broken in thousand pieces. There's no way your theory works anymore!

...are you sure about that?

Is it actually wise to believe everything Ace said regarding this topic?

So what now? Are you suggesting that everything he said was a lie?

Never claimed he lied, well... not intentionally anyways. Let me explain. Earlier, I mentioned that there was an issue with his testimony, let me show you.

He says that right after the flashback ends with Arei saying : "David! Say something!"

Now, tell me how that would be the last thing he heard? Why would the conversation ends with this line? That makes no sense!

On top of that, if there was indeed more to the conversation which there most likely is, there's no way Ace didn't hear it. Otherwise, it would imply that Ace's hiding it.

But why would Ace hide the end of the conversation? Once again, that makes no sense. The point of his testimony is to pin David as the ultimate manipulator. So it's for the best to reveal the whole conversation then.

It's not like he lied and made up the conversation eitheir because let's remember... we have the confirmation that Whit has David's secret, which matches up with the conversation between Arei and David according to the flashback.

I don't understand!!! Why is there so many inconsistencies?!!

It is pretty peculiar, isn't it? What does this all mean? Surely, there's an explanation for all of this, right? Well... what if I were to tell you that there is a logical explanation to this?

Let me bring up two moments that are highly likely to be facts : Ace not hearing anything else from Arei and David in practically the middle of the conversation and Ace being knocked unconscious with turpentine before the night of attempted murder (DAY 2).

If you combine the two, you get a new possibility : The time Ace listened to the conversation in secret is not on DAY 3. It was actually on the evening of DAY 2. The reason why Ace didn't hear anything else in the middle of the conversation is because that's the exact time he's been knocked unconscious, which matches up the events of DAY 2 better than DAY 3.

That's logical?! No! That's preposterous!!! There's so many-

Holes in my logic such as the missing fan, what arei said regarding nico, he's not that dumb to the point where he would mistake the day he heard the conversation and so on?

There's a way to explain these issues. Ever since the attempted murder, it's probably possible that he's not in top shape mentally wise. I mean... think about it. It's been confirmed that he has a eating disorder, it's most likely confirmed that he's been knocked unconscious with the turpentine and he's been nearly killed.

He has a pretty concerning neck wound and lost a certain amount of blood. It's possible that one of these facts if not all of them may have given Ace certain side effects... such as being confused.

It's possible that he mistook the day because of that.

Alright, then explain what we saw in those flashbacks.

This is a sneaky trick played by the creator yet again. This flashback is practically Ace's POV, but if combine this and the fact that he might've not been feeling amazing mental wise (aka feeling confused), we get a new possibility : At this point in time, Ace's an unreliable narrator.

A what now?

An unreliable narrator. "The unreliable narrator is either deliberately deceptive or unintentionally misguided, forcing the reader to question their credibility as a storyteller." (Quote taken in an article from MasterClass)

In other words, while most of it may seem credible as it matches up David's secret and a few other events, since it's most likely possible that this flashback happened on the evening of DAY 2, it means that the missing fan and Arei's dialogue about Nico trying to kill Ace is an illusion created by the narrator of this flashback : Ace.

This is all just speculation! You have no proof that he's not telling the whole truth, be it intentionally or not!

No, that's wrong!

There is proof that heavily implies that Ace is not telling the whole truth, all thanks to a certain individual : David Chiem!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Step #2 : What David told us, is it all a lie?

Before I dwelve into the mind of this pessimistic, yet very interesting character, I'd like to give a moment to show my appreciation in regards to this amazing reveal in episode 11.

It's not just this quote, of course. But like, the reveal and the whole chain of events was just quite a treat. I've watched it live on youtube, I disabled the chat beforehand for my own sanity, but according to some friendly sources, the chat was going crazy in that moment and honestly, I can't blame them.

It got so crazy, people made a lot of those small edit vids of David with some random song playing in the background and everytime I tried to looked through DRDT stuff on youtube, it felt like someone uploaded a new David edit video every hour or so.

People were going bonkers over this dude. I think it even managed to become trending on twitter at some point?

It was amazing to watch, to say the least. So for that, I'm gonna say to the creator of DRDT : Well done! That was a very well made reveal that made this episode all the more enjoyable to watch.

And now, let's go back to my theory talk!

Here's the proof I have in regards to Ace's shaky testimony.

Despite his whole lying, manipulative persona, I believe that this quote is the truth. It adds up anyways because if we think back on the trial of chapter 1, most of them were just nonstop accusing Teruko of being the culprit mostly because of the knife being in Teruko's hands.

So the way it's phrased heavily implies that Ace is not a completly reliable witness, which would fit perfectly well with my logic so far.

In any case, knowing that it's futile to keep arguing on that matter, David gives up and makes a confession.

Ha! He actually talked with her on the evening of Day 3! You just got yourself caught into another hole that shatters your theory!

Oh, quite the contrary! That line is actually very good for my theory. Pay close attention to the wording. He met with Arei last night in the relaxation room. This can be interpreted in a different way, which I'll get to in a moment.

What's also important here is that he never reveals what was the conversation between him and Arei. He simply says something among those lines : "I've forgotten! Who cares? She's dead, lol!"

Obviously, that's a lie. He's definitly hiding something, but what exactly? Let me show you some of the facts and ideas I theorized : It's highly likely that what Ace witnessed happened on the evening of DAY 2, David actually met with Arei on the evening of DAY 3, David claims he never saw Ace on that floor on the evening of DAY 3, Arei is supposed to be dead already by DAY 3.

With these elements, you get the following possibility : David met with Arei last night in the relaxation room, but it doesn't mean that he met her alive. That was the precise moment he discovered Arei's corpse. He was the first person to find the corpse of Arei and it was in the relaxation room.

Hold on, doesn't that create even more holes in your theory according to the two posts?

...You're right, it does. There's even a major one at that, which I'll explain later.

Initially, I theorized that David was the first person to find the body, which was supposed to happened at a slightly earlier time, sometime before David met Teruko, Whit and Charles in the kitchen. Reason being that Whit suggested David to spend time in the relaxation room, which he would've used that opportunity to come up an idea and use those fishes to make people think the murder happened at a different time.

That section is practically rejected now since according to the possibility that I revealed, he found her corpse after the trio meeting in the kitchen, not before.

So the weird change of mood he had when David met them in the kitchen, it wasn't because he found the body. It was actually because of the discussion Arei and David had in the evening of DAY 2, since she knows David's secret, after all.

In any case, David most likely still placed those fishes in the playground sometime after finding the corpse because of his character and also because he's the only one who could've done it. I have proof for this.

What does Nico have to do with any of this?

The fishes were dead on DAY 4. Nico fed these fishes on the evening night of DAY 3 and that was anytime before the room closes at 10:00pm.

However, since the relaxation becomes locked at 10:00pm until 8:00am and that the fishes were dead on the next day, someone entered that room after Nico did.

The only suitable suspect for this is David. It's already been proven that he visited the relaxation room at the evening/night of DAY 3 and Nico also points out that they saw David use the elevator.

The fishes couldn't have been placed at the morning of DAY 4 since the room in question only opens at 8:00am, but everyone alive were currently at the movie screening room at the time.

But hold on! If they visited the relaxation room before David, then they should've definitly noticed Arei's body.

Not necessarily. The corpse could've simply be hidden somewhere in that room. David was probably more perceptive when he checked out the room as compared to Nico, who was probably too preoccupied with taking care of the fishes and eating their dinner.

But that's impossible! Someone claimed that there's no place to be hidden in the relaxation room!

Sure, but remind me... who said that there was no place to hide again?

That's right! It was Eden!

Since she's the culprit in my theory, she could've easily lied about the existence of a hiding spot in the relaxation room. Eden found a spot to hide Arei's body.

Hold on a second... something's just not right at all with the timing. That seems rather impossible!

As much as I'd like to counter that argument, it's actually true. This... is the major issue I was referring to earlier. If the body was indeed hidden in that room, it practically makes my suggested time of murder impossible. Let me explain.

According to my theory, Eden tried to murder both Ace and Arei. In order to do so, to explain how there was tape around the bars of the carousel, Arei has to be murdered after Ace's attempted murder as this is the only logical conclusion.

However, that's where it becomes problematic. The time Teruko and Eden found Ace's nearly dead body in the fitness room was sometime after 10:00pm, which the relexation room should've been already locked by then.

We know the time of that discovery because before Teruko decided to grab the rest of her uniforms, monoTV made an announcement that it was 10:00pm.

My suggested time of death on Arei (late night of DAY 3) is actually impossible because there would be no way to hide the body in the relaxation room afterwards.

Well... why not just murder her that night, leave her in the playground, but come back next morning to hide her in the relaxation room?

Well, that would just be incredibly odd but more importantly, there is a piece of evidence I recently discovered that completly shatters this possibility and creates even more problems.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Step #3 : That evidence, is it truly problematic?

A ball of clothes... that's your problematic evidence?

Yup, it is. But don't worry, it's also problematic for practically most of the theories out there and I'll give you guys a good explanation as to why this ball of clothes is a lot more important than it seems.

Honestly, I'm surprised I haven't caught on to that much earlier. It seemed so obvious, yet it only clicked to me the meaning behind this recently.

Initially, I thought that the ball of clothes was used to cover the jugs of water for the seasaw murder mechanism (explained in my first post) for a better accuracy, but I was actually wrong about that. It was used for a much better purpose. The culprit used those clothes to cover Arei's body in the relaxation room.

Another ridiculous idea! What would be the point of doing that?

Try to recall what monoTV said back in episode 2.

This is the reason why that room becomes locked at nighttime. It's to turn on an automated system that waters the plants without anyone else disrupting it.

What's also important from this scene is that this system waters them with an enriched formula. I've made some research and you know this starch that Teruko mentioned in episode 8? This could definitly be part of said formula.

How so?

I swear to you guys, if you look up various topic for starch used in plants, watering plants with starch, and so on, you'll find a lot of interesting results. Starch is actually very beneficial in plant growth.

So with that in mind, if the culprit hid the body in the relaxation room, then the corpse would've been possibly covered in starch. So they needed something to cover the body. Hence, the clothes from the dress up room could've definitly be used for that purpose.

And with that, it becomes practically guaranteed that this bundle of clothes were placed in the relaxation room before someone put them back in the dress up room.

Sadly for me, because of that, it's also guaranteed that she couldn't have been murdered on the night of DAY 2.

Then that means your theory doesn't work anymore.

Not just mine, it also messes with most of the other theories. Think about it, most of them claim eitheir one of these : Arei is murdered on the evening of DAY 3 or Arei is murdered at the morning of DAY 4, between 7:30am and 8:00am. Thanks to this ball of clothes' actual use, it just becomes impossible.

Let's go through each one of them. If she was murdered on the evening of DAY 3, the culprit would need to hide and cover the body in the relaxation room which is just physically impossible. The ball of clothes was found in the dress-up room in the morning of DAY 4. Literally no one alive had access to the relaxation room since they were all present in the movie screening room at 8:00 am.

If she was murdered on DAY 4, at 7:30 am, then you wouldn't be able to explain how there was starch on these clothes. There's no way these clothes was put in the relaxation room beforehand for no reason, it just wouldn't make sense.

So yeah... all of us were wrong about the actual time of death this whole time.

What about you? Do you have any way to explain this contradiction?

I do... but first, I need to make some important statements.

Arei was not murdered on the night of DAY 2. The culprit did not hide the corpse on the night of DAY 2. Arei was alive on DAY 2, from morning to nighttime.

What are you doing? Aren't you just tearing apart your theory?!

No, I'm not breaking it, I'm fixing it. Here we go : The culprit hid the body on the evening of DAY 2 and the body remained hidden in the relaxation room during the night of DAY 2.

What the hell are you saying?! You're just contradicting yourself!

Nope, I'm not. Let me clarify : The culprit hid the body that was still alive, but unconscious. Arei was locked away in the relaxation room during the night of DAY 2.

Wh-WHAAAATT?!! That makes absolutely no sense!

Not true. In fact, because of that reasoning, it would explain a lot of things. It would explain properly why there was an attempted murder on Ace, why Arei was killed later on, why a good amount of evidence was still laid around the playground, why we didn't get to witness a specific time of the day this chapter, etc.

If she was kept locked inside the relaxation room alive during the night of DAY 2, then when did she get murdered?

There's only one possible time that would be possible without drawing any suspicions. Arei was murdered in the morning of DAY 3, shortly after the relaxation room was unlocked (8:00 am).

That's ridiculous! There's no way you can prove that!

I can prove it... with the lack of proof!

Teruko overslept in the morning of DAY 3, so there's no way to tell what the heck happened that morning because she was asleep the whole morning. This is the lack of proof that I'm referring to.

But if you think about it, that's a very convenient way to hide the real time of murder : have a time skip of sorts while also giving a reasonable excuse as to why we skipped that time. This is yet again another sneaky trick that the creator pulled right under our nose.

I was somewhat close with my theory the previous two posts, but thanks to these discoveries, I feel very confident in my revised theory. I believe I know what actually happened and you'll see that it makes more sense than what I previously had.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Step #4 : The murder, what actually happened?

Let's start with the motive, why not? On my first post, I proposed the idea that the reason why Eden wanted to commit murder is to get rid of the bullying. That motive gets sort of shut down because of episode 10, during Eden's flashback. We learn that they're friends and that Arei is willing to do anything to help her out.

Then, I proposed the idea that it still had something to do with the bullying, somewhat, but it's mostly because she's seriously intent on winning this killing game which can be fairly explained by how much efforts she put in to make herself look the least suspicious.

It's kind of a fair reason, except that if we think about it, anyone who wanted to get away with murder would've put a lot of efforts into it. Not seen through a lot of chapters, but it can happen. Therefore, it's probably not enough of a reason why she decided to kill people. I have a new interesting idea for Eden's motive, but I need to clear something up real quick.

Remember in my first post, when I said that the secret motives had nothing to do with the murder mystery? That it was all a distraction to keep us away from the truth? I was wrong. The motive for murder definitly has something to do with the secret motives. The culprit was afraid of their secret being exposed.

Huh? That seems wrong. Eden's secret was revealed during the trial, so that kind of motive to kill seem pretty pointless for Eden as the culprit.

Well, that's because you're not seeing it from the right perspective. This is not the secret that I'm referring to.

What do you mean?! This is clearly Eden's secret! It fits her perfectly! You can't really say that one of these other shown secrets is hers.

It's true that the secret "Ever since you kissed her, you were afraid your sexuality would ruin your friendships." fits Eden the best and I also believe that this her actual shown secret. So the other secrets aren't really hers eitheir (sort of). But you know... why are so keen on believing that they only have one "bad" secret?

Humans generally have a bunch of secrets that they're hiding, be it good or bad. We also have to keep in mind that in the early days of chapter 2, not a lot of people knew what their own secrets were. So if you combine these ideas together, you get the following possibility :

Eden had a secret much worse than the one shown this chapter. The reason why that secret was not chosen however is because it was practically identical to someone else's secret and the host/mastermind probably wanted to keep the secrets diverse. So they chose the person who would have the worst consequences if their secret was revealed while the other person would have a different secret shown instead. Eden's worst secret is the same as David's secret.

It'd make sense because if we think about it, everything she did from the murder schemes to her grand plan of using the letter found in a trash can to make herself the most innocent individual in that trial among a few other small things, Eden's quite the manipulative gal, isn't she? To add up to it, since it's insanely likely the Arei's body was hidden in the relaxation room, it means that Eden is a very good liar as well since neitheir Teruko nor Whit found it suspicious back in episode 7.

So what if that was her worst secret? It's not the secret that was shown for her in the trial, so she had no reason to kill whatsoever.

No, that's wrong. Put yourself in the shoes of the culprit. MonoTV tells everyone that their secret will be revealed in four days. At that moment, Eden most likely thought that her secret would be something like what David had : Lying and very manipulative. Considering the very kind persona that she's trying to portray, it would definitly take a turn for the worse if that was her actual shown secret and that it gets revealed to everyone.

David was in the same boat, after all. He did everything he could to make sure his secret would never get exposed or else, he would suffer a great amount of consequences... just like so!

Guess what David tried to do to make sure his secret wouldn't get revealed? He actively tried to make a murder happen by suggesting everyone to share their secrets. He knew that was the safest bet to get a terrible deadly outcome happening and it almost worked.

Then back to Eden. What would be the next best thing (if not the best) to get her secret hidden from the public? Commit murder, of course!

Also, to add irony and despair into this theory, if monoTV didn't screw it up and mixed up the secrets, Eden would've never really bother to commit murder since she would be able to learn that her shown secret is not the worst one. It's truly shocking, isn't it?

Alright, fine. You explained a possible motive for Eden. But you have yet to explain literally everything about how the crime was carried out!

Ah, right! The howdunnit! I've got quite some explaining to do, don't I? Let's start from the beginning. Starting with the topic that hasn't really changed in any of my theories since most of it is pretty much factual : the attempted murder on Ace.

When I made my first theory, I initially linked them both together has targets chosen because they were bullies, which would've matched my first motive idea, but that's not the case. Nonetheless, I was able to link both crimes as something done by the same culprit for a few reasons (mentioned in the first post).

We also know that Ace's been knocked unconscious by the turpentine and then the culprit set up this weird murder mechanism in the fitness room which caused neck wounds from the wires.

But then, Nico came into that room because of the bloodlust they had. They were planning on killing Ace as well, so they were looking for him, then found him in the fitness room, but they did something in that room that saved Ace's life, unintentionally or not.

Then the culprit moves on and proceeds to kill Arei the same night... but we already know by now that this is not the case. We know that her unconscious body was kept hidden and locked in the relaxation room, but why?

Well, if you combine these previous facts, you get this very interesting possibility : Eden's original murder scheme is that she wanted to murder Ace and no one else. The reason Arei was kept alive, but unconscious and locked inside the relaxation room is that she would've been an easy prime suspect for that murder with no way of getting out during the night. Someone would've seen her through the elevator next morning.

Why would she choose these two for that scheme?

It's actually pretty simple. Ace is currently the easiest target for a murder considering how weak he appears to be compared to anyone else. As for Arei, she became friends with Eden, so it can be very easy for the Eden to lure her into a trap.

If the plan would work perfectly, wouldn't Arei tell everyone that Eden knocked her out?

Not if she snuck up on her. All Eden needs to do is to lure Arei with the letter by sending her to the playground, then she can sneak up on her. I've already proven on the first part that Eden is capable of being sneaky.

Then wouldn't she mention the letter and accuse Eden afterwards?

Yes, but remember what we went through in episode 10. Eden convinced everyone that this is not her doing. She would've done the same story if the plan succeeded, so that's not really an issue here.

Well, I suppose it doesn't matter since the murder attempt failed. There's no way you can explain how and why Arei was murdered instead.

Heh. Sure I can.

Obviously, we know for a fact that the murder attempt failed because of Nico, but that messed up a lot more things that just the murder itself. Arei playing the role of the main suspect becomes null and void and the odds of pulling off another murder the same night or the next day becomes very low. This is not looking for Eden because if she can't commit a murder before the deadline, her "secret" would be revealed.

Here's the possibility that I'm proposing! Because of that murder attempt failure, it would become a lot harder to pull off another murder like that on top of Arei becoming distrusting of Eden once she gets out of that room and people might find out that Eden is not as kind as she seems. To make sure that nothing bad happens for her while also accomplishing her goal, she has no choice but to kill Arei.

There's just no way! She can't possibly commit murder the morning of DAY 3 without anyone finding out.

No, that's not true. As long as she pulls out her plan very fast and efficiently, she might be able to come back to the main floor without anyone suspecting anything. Eitheir way, we have absolutely no knowledge as to what everyone's actions were from 8:00 am to 12:00 pm on DAY 3.

Eden sets up her new murder mechanism in the playground during the night of DAY 2 after the failed murder chain of events. Then on DAY 3 at 8:00 am, as soon as the relaxation room becomes unlocked, Eden makes sure that Arei is still unconscious, drags her into the playground to kill her. Then, she drags the body back into the relaxation room, hiding her back in the same spot. She leaves any remaining evidence laying around the playground and throws whatever she could easily and quickly grab into the trash can because she didn't want to risk having someone running into her this early in the morning.

I found a contradiction! If she actually wanted to make sure that her secret would be safe, wouldn't she also try to make the body very easy to find instead?

Not quite. Let's not forget that Eden's also trying to get away with murder. And for that to happen, she needed to establish an alibi.

Actually, hold on just a second. Let's rewind a bit. Murdering Arei was kind of an improvised plan, right? So how would she be able to take the roll of tape as Ace wakes up to reveal that he's not actually dead. There's no way someone would be quick enough to think of an elaborate plan in the span of a second and take the roll of tape.

That's... actually a very good point. Sadly for you, I already have the answer for this : Eden knew that Ace wasn't dead from the moment she entered the fitness room with Teruko, found Ace's body and Nico just standing there. She knew because the BDA didn't ring.

Now you're just contradicting yourself! Even if Ace was actually dead, the BDA would've never happened. Eden would've been the culprit in that scenario after all.

No, that's wrong! If Ace was actually dead, the BDA would've happened because of a specific rule.

Rule number 10. "The Body Discovery Announcement will play when three or more people who did not witness the murder discover the body."

That was the main reason why she created such an elaborate murder mechanism in the fitness room (I still don't know how that murder mechanism in that room works yet sadly, but I'm working hard on figuring this one out). That way, she could've killed Ace without witnessing the murder itself, which would've made her look even less suspicious if she would discover that body with 2 other people if Ace turned out dead.

But in reality, the murder scheme failed and because there was three of them in here, she could easily deduce that her plan did not work. As for Teruko, there was no way she could suspect anything since it was actually a lot more natural to think that there would be no BDA. She believed that it was Nico who did it, after all.

So Eden had about a minute or two to think of a backup plan and realised that she really needed that roll of tape.

Couldn't she have predicted that Nico would've tried to murder Ace? Wasn't it risky to choose Ace as the victim?

Eden couldn't have predicted this outcome. She was not present in the dining room during lunchtime of DAY 2. She couldn't have known that Nico turned murderer mode for like a second.

What about the panicky comment Eden made before they entered the playground and triggered the BDA? If we follow your logic, Eden should've known that someone else discovered the body first since it was no longer hidden in the relaxation room.

That's a very good point. In my previous posts, I theorized that she let the body in the playground this whole time, but she was still afraid that maybe no one actually found the body since then. So if the BDA didn't play when Teruko, herself and Whit entered the playground, her whole plan would've been ruined.

This time around, it's different. We know that David found the body in the relaxation room sometime in the evening of DAY 3 and Eden quickly realised it as well by not finding the hidden body on DAY 4.

So right now, it seems like an odd, but problematic contradiction, but by thinking outside the box, there's a solution to this. We just have to consider that she was actually panicking, but find another viable reason why that was the case. There is actually one picture, one quote that answers it all.

It may seem like an unfortunate and very inappropriate joke at the time, but that line right here is exactly what gave Eden a moment of panic. Let me explain.

Aside from the obvious fact that they found Arei's body on the swingset hanging on a rope, Eden could easily interpret it as a telltale sign that the person who discovered the body first was Whit.

If we go back to my first post, the way I explained the murder mechanism, by the time the culprit releases the carousel, the jugs of water would drop which would then kill Arei, but it would also break the rope in two because of the impact and because of how the rope was arranged.

Because Eden was in a hurry to hide back the body, she only had enough time to bring one half of the rope to hide it alongside the body. Maybe she quickly placed it around her neck to make it look like she was hanged or strangled.

As ironic as it may seem, because of that silly comment Whit made, Eden immediatly assumed that Whit was the person who discovered the body first which would've been very bad for her if that was the case since they would be missing another person to trigger the BDA. That's why she panicked.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

And with that, I believe I've properly explained my whole revised theory, which makes a lot more sense now, don't you think?

This crime solving theory makes full use of all the rooms on that floor, which I feel like it's meant to be solved that way. It also makes use of a lot of hints and clues we've been given in both chapters.

That was a lot to write, so it's possible I may have missed a small detail or two, so if there's something that needs to be pointed out, just let me know and I'll probably edit my post.

Also, if you guys would like, I could make another post that would give a big recap of everything that happened according to my theory posts, which should make it easier to read and understand. It'd be kind of like a closing argument, but without the artistic talent. Just words, words and words.

Anyways, thank you so much everyone who read all my theories from beginning to the end, whether you believe in my culprit theory or not. I truly appreciate you all for taking the time to enjoy the wild ride. I had fun working on that.

But no worries, I'm not quite done with making DRDT posts yet. There's still a couple theories I'd like to tackle. Mostly possible character backgrounds and actual idendity like I mentioned in a previous post.

Alright, take care everyone!

#drdt #drdt solve #drdt theory #danganronpa despair time #drdt spoilers

[f0point5]

Maybe it’s just me but I didn’t feel like his comment was rude? It was true that Max wasn’t at his best and did get beaten by Checo. I don’t think it was the time to bring it up or the Checo aspect was necessary but I think he may have said it without considering it could be seen as a dig. The way he phrased it sounds like something that a radio host would say and he could’ve been simply repeating it bc he doesn’t know much about F1.

Also I feel like she may be intentionally (or Unintentionally) sabotaging her thing with Elliott rn because that was kind of an extreme take when the guy hasn’t said anything crazy yet. I’m wondering if she’s worried that he leaked stuff to the media about them and that’s why she’s touchy rn bc she thinks he ruined her privacy for clout.

They’ve had what like two dates? and he supposedly already told his friends a ton about her and her relationship with Max and stuff. That seems like a lot to say this early in and even if by some chance he did say all that and one of his friends leaked it that’s also bad. Because it means he told someone who he knew would be willing to leak stuff (we all know which of our friends gossip more than others) and it means he kinda talked down on Max.

It’s really a lose lose for him and I could see this being the beginning of end for them. If they somehow make it through this I don’t see them passing Max’s birthday though (because Elliott will want to come and that’s a horrible idea or the gift thing will bother him or he’ll fuck up beforehand)

Ummm, I half agree with you about the comment. I think it was the context that made it a bit spicy. Elliot was talking about something he doesn’t know about, and a person he doesn’t know. And he was saying it to someone who knows both really well. I don’t think his comment was inherently rude but I think it came off a bit ignorant, like he’s doing the thing that people do where they think the quickest way to sound knowledgeable about something is to be negative about it. Yes, RB did have a bad day but I think for him to specifically say Max wasn’t at his best when in reality the car was the problem (obviously Max had a part to play but I feel like you can give Max the benefit of the doubt that the floor changes and balance problems hindered him significantly) really showed Elliot’s total lack of understanding and how comfortable he was with it. Like, I agree it wasn’t rude but it was definitely a bit of a bold thing to bring up in the way he did. I just feel like Elliot is not used to having to read the room.

I don’t think she’s too worried about the leaks tbh. Maybe she should be more worried, but I think she is kind of like, Elliot isn’t used to this, he’s never had to weed out sneaky people in his circle, so fair enough he would know someone who would leak the info, he’s had no reason to worry about it until now. I think she would probably be a bit icked out by the fact that the rumour made it sound like they were super serious more than she’s worried that a leak happened at all. Tbf to him, I would say the confidence about not being threatened is the right attitude to have if you’re seeing a girl who has a guy best friend. You have to trust that she’s with you for a reason and just get on with doing your thing.

Elliot is a smart and very charming guy though, he’s down but he’s not out ;)

[incarnateirony]

“Jensen has m&gs where he's talked a lot about 15.18. He's also made comments to other cast and crew, some of whom have shared those comments with us. He's made comments to his friends, some of who have shared those comments with members of the fandom.

I hated the fact that so many of his answers about 15.18 were historically in private m&gs until very recently. That's one of the reasons why I encouraged people to ask him about it on stage and now we have public answers.”

From 2po. Those comments/answers from Jensen refer to Destiel. What’s the bet 2po’s “cast and crew” receipts are tweets made by Mitch Kosterman? The same guy Danneel said doesn’t speak for herself or Jensen….

Based on past behavior maybe Jensen’s comments weren’t always kind in private. But acting like Jensen is the same person he was before 15x18 filmed isn’t fair either. Why are some people so insistent on denying his growth?

Yeah it's all he has left. 2po's been pinned into so many corners on his lies and vagueblogging he's just pinballing around, appealing to lies, stupid masses, and M&Gs *we have already proven he lies about the contents of*

What 2po is doubling down on is that 2po intentionally asked a leading question about if it was fair to interpret Destiel as platonic brothers, and Jensen did his usual, interpret whatever you want. I think his phrasing there on his "gotcha" recording is, "I guess I could see interpreting it like that." and 2po is SO FUCKIN ANTI while pretending to ship that, his brain fled out his asshole and he thought "AH HAH, PROOF." then, embarrassed, cut out his leading question afterward then had his friend try to distribute it in DM in PB aggressively to any shipper trying to have fun. Because. Clearly. They're shippers. Don'cha see, DestielOTP's name says so. 2po puts the pin on!!! very believable.

Jesus christ. You've seen HOW he butchers statements, you've seen HOW weak his tweets are, and OooOoOo Clif. OoOoOOo tweets from 5 years ago.

He's just a malicious little warty assgoblin in a basement that is so entrenched in his denial and refusal of the tangible reality we're heading into he's trying to save clout that's gonna combust the second the finale airs anyway, but he's so psychically attached to his illusory world of lies he's imagined it's just gonna keep catering to his nonsense and lmfao. That and he's probably become addicted to the free silver+ con ride he's grifted out of this fandom just for lower returns on scripts/"charity" they have to be harassed into bothering once people ask where the tens of thousands of dollars went beyond 2po's closet.

Dude's so legit deadass salty/insane that he's been caught with serial lies about me just to try to discredit me down to his trashheap level, and the best he has is "reacted to memes, had fun, doesn't follow Walker" like that erases all the very specific shit or very real leaks or very real access I've had that has trounced him every time he screamed in denial. Like dude, cope. Nobody fuckin cares about Walker. "Maybe blurry white guy is Jake" is not the fuckin dunk you think it is. Nobody cared to follow up.

You guys WOULD be such nimrods you'd confuse memes with sources, though.

listen dude nobody's gonna forget you screaming that your Very Good Sources told you my script was fake. For eight months. When you just had a slightly OLDER draft than me. (well, not counting the treatments I had to know it was real when you threw the whole internet at me, those were older.) AND GUESS WHAT, YOU LYING SACK OF SHIT. It was real, and when you posted your own script, you proved not only was it real but you knew the whole time and were just big mad I gave it to everyone for free when you could have charged them for it. Sit the fuck down.

[definitelynotplanetfall]

some remembered things quasi related

for a long time (i don't know when i developed the ability) i was completely unable to voluntarily move my eyes separately from my head. i was able to track an object as i moved my head or as it moved but i couldn't look "generically left" or change to tracking an object to my left without moving my head first. to this day i think i'm still deficient at this, it requires a lot more conscious focus and feels way more unnatural to move my eyes intentionally than to just move my entire head. until i gained this ability, i assumed that people talking about the ability to move your eyes separately from your head were talking about some secret technique and i just nodded along because nobody believed i couldn't do it. i assumed it was in the same category of action as "paying attention" which was a thing they kept telling me to do and treating me like an idiot for not knowing how to do, which seemed to be related to but separate from actions i knew how to do like "listening" and "knowing the answer" (to be clear, to use present understanding, i WAS paying attention, they were mad at me for not performing attentiveness)

when i was four years old i went to a pre-k with an intimidating teacher. i don't know what it was about her exactly, possibly that her face was wrinkled in such a way that normal frowns looked like anatomically impossible ultra frowns, but this is mostly guesswork from a fuzzy visual memory and seems like the sort of thing that, if true, i would be a bad person to hold against her in retrospect. but there was still the fact that i was a tiny creature and she was not, and my memories of her are mostly after i had done something unspecific wrong and she was now bearing down on me and i couldn't look at her, i couldn't, she was terrifying and she would say look at my face and i couldn't. and one time my mom was like, ms whatever said you don't look at her why don't you look at her and the thing that came out of my mouth was that her face was an oval and my field of vision was a rectangle, (no four year olds do not know the phrase 'field of vision,' please let me paraphrase memories from nearly 22 years ago) and what my mom told me to do about that was to make an oval with my thumbs and index fingers and look through the middle and frame her face with it. she did not tell the teacher that i was going to do this so the next time the teacher just got even more upset because i was putting my hands in front of my face and i was just fucking sitting there crying and she was getting closer and i couldn't adjust my hands fast enough as she was moving to precisely frame her face.

there are two specific times i can remember what this teacher was mad at me for. one was a time i tripped and fell on a toy and broke it and she was mad at me for breaking the toy. the other was there was a time we were supposed to be i think "rehearsing" something but really we just sat in a big room doing nothing. it was soo fucking boring and i was next to some kind of light switch or something and was like what the heck i will turn the lights off this is terrible and discovered the light switch didn't work. so then i just fiddled with the light switch for what felt like hours because there was literally nothing else to do and it somehow made my hand bleed and she got mad at me for bleeding on her precious wall. i am sure there are other times where her disapproval was less of an Encapsulation of Problems but they did not stick in my head because i am a selfish manipulator trying to look good

i'm also guilty of being a facescrying neuronormie because there is a thing my mom does when she's revolted that i am not a carbon copy of her. she makes her eyes wide and breathes heavily and makes an expression i would call "terrified" if it made any sense in context. i don't know if this is something she does intentionally as a manipulation tactic or subconsciously because "someone who doesn't share my dumbass boomer boredom-worshipping values is an immediate threat" or whatever but it is a thing she does when trying to pressure me into being some shite normie and telling her things she could potentially later use against me or insult me over or blab to other people because she treats me like it's my duty to gossip to her. for noticing this pattern of body language when my mother is already having a hostile one-sided discussion with me at the literal level of what words are said i should be tortured and executed

[antonia-gergely]

Kristin Hayter

Literary Art truly is art.

although that's her real name, ironically Kristin Hayter was raised to be a devout catholic. she studied interdisciplinary creative arts at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, earning a Bachelor of Fine Arts. she earned an MFA in Literary Art from Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island in 2016. since then she created the persona Lingua Ignota between 2017 and 2021, releasing what she called 'survivor anthems', in an attempt to process abuse using religious imagery and music, often subverting the patriarchal messages embedded within.

t.w. if you do listen to her work as Lingua Ignota, there is mention of s/a, abuse, violence etc.

the below excerpts are from Vice

https://www.vice.com/en/article/kzqzwn/lingua-ignotas-liturgical-noise-is-a-celebration-of-obliteration?callback=in&code=MTNKYTIYMDETMJQ5ZC0ZZWYYLWI4OGITMGY0YJHKMJAXNMY4&state=bd7f92445dcd4b7485e2a217dea600a4

'Raised Catholic, Hayter's religion distinguished her from others and continues to inflect her musical practice. "I was in parochial school until sixth grade. My Catholic upbringing is huge in all the stuff I do, as far as the way liturgical music has influenced me, and the rituals of the church and even that homogeny and having to conform to a very specific mold of existing, of moral existence, of appearance."'

after finding a nevermind casette left behind by her cousin while in high school, hayter became enamoured with the vocal style of kurt cobain and enrolled for classical singing lessons.

'"When we sing classically, we try to create seamlessness between the registers—between the head and the chest voice. What I try to do is play with the spot between them where my voice breaks, and I write most of my songs to have my break be central, so that I move between the registers quickly and it creates this destabilizing sense ... that the voice is in this state of constant flux, dynamic and imperfect, alchemizing itself." In other words, although her music has beautiful passages, it also travels into abject spaces. "There will be half a phrase of straight classical singing and then it will drop down to a weird death growl or ... Bulgarian-like belting and then extended technique, a rush of air. I'm very intentionally manipulating my voice to make these kind of gross glides and transitions between these two registers."' the voice as a tool for art, music as a tool for art has been widely explored, although this strikes me as some uncharted realm of working.

'At Brown, she completed a thesis called Burn Everything Trust No One Kill Yourself, a 10,000-page manuscript composed of appropriated material—"lyrics, message board posts, and liner notes from subgenres of extreme music that mythologize misogyny, […] [and] court papers, audio recordings, and police filings from [her] own experiences of violence"—assembled using a Markov chain. Prior to this, she attended the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, where she studied across disciplines. "I ended up in visual/critical studies and art history. I was really into research and having a research-based practice, and then I got into writing, and then I got into the sonification of the voices I had written."' I read that the thesis was made up of 10,000 pages as it approximated her weight at the time.

'"Not ascribing to traditional models of healing such as gentleness and self-love has allowed me to be very raw and aggressive in my recounting of abuse through art. I think that's the part of it that maybe touches other survivors: mine isn't the way we're accustomed to addressing such things. I was reading several books about surviving abuse and they're basically like, 'be nice and get a hobby.' I feel like this enforces patriarchal models of civilized femininity"'

Her persona Lingua Ignota proved unsustainable, as Hayter found it harmful to dwell and rehatch her past experiences. Now going by Reverend Kristin Michael Hayter, her newest release, Saved! is a fascinating blend between literary art, musical experimentation and the avant garde. She takes existing music, hymns, religious songs and motifs and reworks them, the songs have a disconcerting crunch and occasional disconnection and imitation of tape warps. Reminds me of art appropriation and the dada and detournement movements in their reworking and recontextualising of existing imagery and ideas (usually to subvert)

The glossolalia (speaking in tongues) within the album is derived from the practice of Pentecostal and charismatic Christians. i find her work a fascinating blur between performance art and a genuine search for some salvation, which hayter mentioned she felt. I'm not religious, I have nothing much to do with Hayter's music at all, but it resonates with me as a hybrid of performance, fantasy and a desperate desire for faith which I have never seen before.

even her poster contains a persona, her artwork is central to her music. it's all intertwined and lines between writing, performance and visual art are blurred.

the below excerpts are from Kerrang (a more recent interview)

https://www.kerrang.com/reverend-kristin-michael-hayter-kerrang-cover-story-interview-lingua-ignota-new-album-saved

'“I became really interested in the idea of religious transcendence and using that analogy for personal healing ... In Pentecostalism, for instance, you can speak in tongues, you can be healed, and you can utilise extreme, unorthodox methods to develop a relationship between yourself and God. So, I wanted to see if I could develop a direct line between myself and God. I was earnestly attempting to be saved. And to get saved ... I don’t know if it worked or not. I’m not sure." In researching the project, she’d attend a lot of worship services, witnessing people experience “true joy” in tandem with the uglier side of “something really hateful and othering”.'

To prepare her mind and body for the performances, she carefully fasted and engaged in sleep deprivation techniques.

“I wanted to create as raw an emotional state as I could,” she explains of the process. “What you hear on the record is from a 30-minute session when I had not really eaten or slept"'

SIDE NOTE, in her work as Lingua Ignota, Hayter's song 'Do You Doubt Me Traitor?' repeats the phrase 'I don't eat, I don't sleep' harking back to her struggles with anorexia and insomnia in the wake of her abuse. The line reminded me of Marina Abramovic's performance The House with the Ocean View. That calls to mind a thesis I read, available in the college library, about starvation and the ethics implied between using potential disordered eating as a means of spiritual healing, performance art or political activism. Fascinating read, I do recommend. Bit of a pointless tangent but a link nonetheless.

'“I honestly don’t know what I believe. I think my work is trying very hard to engage with that question in a sort of desperate and insane way.” SAVED! may not be literal. But its purpose absolutely is. “In a lot of ways, I wanted to show healing,” Kristin explains of her intentions. “I don’t even like the word ‘healing’ because it’s so pop-psychology ... But I wanted to show the kind of ugly, complicated process that it can be. So, I think that finding this analogy of getting saved and using that to talk about my own experiences is kind of the intellectual fortress that I’ve built to protect myself through that. The attempts to find God have been in absolute earnest. I really was trying. I think out of desperation, to find something to believe in.”

Hayter's work is a testament to the wide ranging and indefinable nature of art, and how it can take many forms. i might do a masters in literary art /hj

Her music is an escape from grounded, faithless reality - someone described it as the sound of praying in a burning church - but it doesn't push faith or religion on anyone. As Hayter said, she herself doesn't know what she believes. It's definitely evocative, sometimes disquieting, and it's been a long time since a musical project has enticed me this much.

#art research #avant garde #experimental music #art theory #religion #faith

[archangels-bible-annotations]

Genesis 1

1:1 It says in the beginning that God created Heaven and Earth. What exactly is Heaven? Is it God's resting place? If it is God's resting place, where did God reside before the existence of "Heaven?" If God existed outside of Heaven and was its creator, then it can be plausible to say that God exists everywhere and His energy is a part of everything. Is the reason for Heaven supposed to be a place where human souls go to God's Kingdom? If so then as God created Heaven, he had intentionally planned out man's existence.

1:2 Before light (on earth) was created, it says that the Spirit of God hovered over the face of the water. Why the "Spirit" of God and not God himself? Is the Spirit of God definitively separable from God? Is this Spirit comparable to what we colloquially refer spirits to in relation to us humans, i.e. is this "Spirit of God" the same thing as saying the "Soul of God?" It is often regarded that this line is actually referring to the Holy Spirit. But what exactly is the Holy Spirit?

1:3 Here is the first instance we see God speak something into existence. From this statement alone we see His power that is beyond human power.

1:4 It is phrased that God saw the light but it is only seen after the command to "let there be light." This might mean that God has the power to conjure the most complex ideas without inspiration. This leads us to assume that God has the most complex and perfect imagination and is able to bring about those ideas of his imagination without limit. This is in contrast to humans because although we are able to bring our imagination to life, it is based on pre-existing ideas and concepts. God on the other hand is able to create something uniquely His that can stand alone without drawing from any foundational ideas or concepts. Also quick note: Light here is created on earth, which might entail that light already existed in Heaven. CORRECTION: In verses 14-19, God brings light to the firmament, so Heaven probably did not have light before.

Another point about verse 4 is that it mentions God seeing His creation and saying that it is "good." This reminds me of in the process of creating anything for us Humans, we will always continue to work on our item until we see that it is "good." But comparing that with God's process it seems that when God creates it is manifested instantaneously, therefore while our process of creation and review is a constant check-in, God's process is more similar to just a final review after an instantaneous creation.

In the last part of verse 4, it mentions that God divided the light from darkness. What does that mean that it was divided? Does that imply that light and darkness used to be one substance? Why should this be stated if light and darkness are understood to be different from each other? Maybe this verse gave the concrete idea that light and darkness are separate identities, rather than forming that idea from human conjecture.

1:5 What is interesting here is that "one day" is described as "evening and morning." This implies that the "day" begins with the evening of the preceding day. This is why some religious practices start their religious "new day" at 6pm every day.

1:6-7 Essentially 'let there be land' but specifically land that parts the waters. The water is sitting on land, so God simply raises the land to be parting the waters. CORRECTION: After reading verse 8 you see that firmament refers to a sky or more like an atmosphere rather than dry land.

1:8 This is confusing: after the "firmament" was created and it separated the waters from above the firmament and below the firmament, the firmament was called "Heaven." When it says waters above the firmament, this made me think about lakes, rivers, and such. But I thought the land was called 'Earth'? Does this mean that Heaven was literally on Earth, or rather is Earth? CORRECTION: Found out that "firmament" refers to a kind of atmosphere or sky. This is consistent with the idea of Heaven being separate from Earth. It also implies that Heaven's waters are waters that were once part of Earth. Maybe this is why water is considered so sacred in many places (other than the fact that it gives us vitality of course). Also a very interesting remark: The "Heaven" noted here is upper case "H" while the "heaven" in verse one is lower case "h." There must be a reason. Maybe to signify the primitive vs final form of Heaven?

1:9 Interesting because land was never 'created' but rather "appeared." This appearance gives credit to what was said earlier that land had already existed but was just under the water. It is also interesting to consider that the water had to be collected into one area to reveal the dry land. Considering the natural phenomenon of water to always be level, you would assume that land would be the substance that is manipulated and brought up rather than having water be collected in one place. I am going to assume that land was manipulated even though it was not mentioned explicitly in the text.

Side note: I do not think that everything from the Bible is to be taken literally. I take it as a means to reveal a message. For example, this passage shows us the power of God to be the Creator but we are not supposed to dive too deep into the literal words of what is said.

1:10 Calling of dry land "Earth" and the water Seas. Note from verse one earth is lowercase and here it is upper case. This might be signifying the change of earth to its final state, Earth.

1:11-13 God commands plants and orders fruit. Like forms like. interesting note that earth mentioned here is lowercase.

1:14-19 God introduces light to the firmament, so He brings light to Heaven. This light from Heaven controls seasons and signs, giving meaning to days and years. After this was the Sun, moon, and all the stars.

1:20-23 Creatures that swim and birds that can fly are introduced. Interesting that it says that birds fly "across the face of heaven's firmament." This might be why man always had the desire to fly, so we can physically reach His firmament. How does this fit into the theory of evolution? Evolution would be able to fit in here if land animals were mentioned along with the birds/fish. I would have to double-check sources but I'm pretty sure evolution followed water life -> land life -> air life. but there have always been interesting animals in that mix, such as the flying fish.

1:24-25 Earth brings forth "quadrupeds" and they are described as all the creeping things. What is interesting here is that when we think of "creeping" I think of animals that wander in the grass and stalk around. In that frame, it is curious as the Bible mentions cattle as an example. Actually, never mind, the Bible mentions three different categories: quadrupeds, creeping things, and wild animals. So creeping things are not quadrupeds :)

1:26 Now this is an important verse. It states, "Let Us make man in Our image,... Our likeness." Here it describes more than one person involved in creation. Before in verse 2, we mentioned the possibility of the Holy Spirit being involved. This verse might have confirmed that suspicion. It is also believed that the Son is here as well, thus comprising the Trinity. Now before we jump the gun, "Us" and "Our" are unspecified plurals, which means that those terms do not explicitly tell us that it was 2 people, 3 people, or more. This contrasts the usage of the word 'both,' which implies only two entities (Both not used in the Bible). We know for certain that God the Father is present in this scene of creation. Now this plural could be saying that there was God the Father and God the Holy Spirit; God the Father and God the Son; or God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Right now, the only thing that can be confirmed is that there are at least two entities involved in creation.

Man was also given authority over "Fish...birds...cattle...and earth and creeping thing." Before we mentioned that the beings that lived on land include: quadrupeds (cattle), creeping things, and wild animals. Here God gives authority and mentions only 2 of those three, leaving out wild animals. Why are they excluded from wild animals? Is this a foreshadowing of evil being associated with wild animals?

another interesting point, this is the only instance of creation where God says, "Let us make..." everything else is "Let there be..."

1:27 Some instances of creation include God speaking something into existence while other instances of creation include God speaking of something and then God making it exist.

List of items spoken to existence: light, plants/fruit (?)

List of items made into existence: heaven, earth, the firmament, dry land (?=not entirely sure), two great lights (sun and moon), stars, birds and fish, land animals, man

1:28 God blesses man, this is not seen with any other form of creation. This might be the ordinance to be ruler over all other living things. Here it is specified that man has dominion over all, and I would assume that wild animals are under that mix.

1:29-31 This gives evidence that the first people on earth were vegetarian. God says that He gives them herbs and fruits as food. This verse also states that everything that has life has the breath of life within them. Thus concludes the sixth day of creation

Other Remarks:

Knowing that there are at least two entities involved with the creation, we can maybe assign roles to them. God the Father is the one that speaks these commands in this first chapter. From His speech, only two things are directly generated: light and plant life. From God the Father's command, everything else in creation is "made." We can now make an assumption that the one who is doing the "making" is God the Holy Spirit, as it was the only other character we see mentioned in this chapter. With this in mind, let us draw conclusions about these two entities. Since God the Father brings forth light and life (plant life and the breath of life in animals), it might be so that He is comprised of such forces. He is the radiator of light and the origin of life. God the Holy Spirit is the "doer," the one that makes God's commands manifest. Looking at this frame alone, it might seem that the Holy Spirit is lesser than God the Father. However, if we look at verse 26, it mentions making man in "our" image. If you were to make someone or something in the image of two superior entities, it would imply that those entities were equal in nature.

"Made in Our Image" -> Image is singular which tells of the oneness of whenever the "Us" and "Our" comprises.

Questions:

What is "Heaven" if it was created?

What is the Holy Spirit/ Spirit of God?

What is the difference between uppercase and lowercase Heaven? Earth?

Which "God" is the one checking and saying everything is "good?" God the Father, Son, or Holy Spirit?

Things to add to prayer:

God is powerful as the creator of all: everything that moves, the sun/moon/all the stars, etc

God the Father is the radiator of light and the origin of life.

God the Holy Spirit is the manifester of God the Father.

Help us to reflect your image.

-Mikhael

#bible reading #bible study #genesis #God #Creation #Holy Spirit

[ithisatanytime]

WICCA PHASE SPRINGS ETERNAL - IT'S GETTING DARK (VISUALIZER)

“If you examine the so-called ‘Star of David,’ or hexagram, closely, you discover something astonishing. It has six points, forms six equilateral triangles, and in its interior forms a six sided hexagon. Thus, it has been intentionally designed with a 666 message. God specifically warns against this kind of thing in His written word. “

 i am so fucking dumb for not already having realized this, its specifically because im not a math/geometry guy. listen the “star of david” is the mark of the beast its what john of patmos was reffering too and its so obvious i feel like a damn idiot for not realizing it, this is one hundred percent what it is and anyone saying it isnt or the mark is something else is a liar. whenever schizos talk about the end times and i mean legit schizos you get into gematria and all this weird numerology crap that you can make to mean whatever you want it too, just google the word and google itself will tell you that KABALLIST jews invented it in order to practice their deceptive pil pul more effectively,  kabballist jews are hundreds of years AFTER the death and resurrection of christ, the reason thats important is because when you look up the accepted intended meaning that john clearly wanted us to understand from the number of the beast 666 you get explanations straight from a pol numerology schizo, well if you add up the letters of neros name blah blah fucking blah. its the “star of david” which IS the star of remphan which was warned against in amos, rothschild means “red shield” and they were so named because their forefather used the red star of david or shield of david prominently. note that nowhere in the bible is a star symbol assosciated with david or anything good.

i didnt do a good job explaining myself here, basically i had a lot of background info on the so called star of david, enough to know that its nowhere in the bible unless its what the star of remphan is reffering to and i strongly suspect that it is, but knowing all this stuff about it and then seeing someone suggest its the mark of the beast just made it click for me, johns coded message would have been understandable to even a child, all they had to do was look at the symbol he was refferring to and count the points and the triangles and the lines, i dont think this is a gematria level stretch to say that either, in fact ive never been so sure of anything in my life, certainly helps that it was the symbol adopted by the synagogue of satan. the star of david is the mark and number of the beast. also the most popular phrase or at least most well known in alchemy is “As above, so below” and this puzzled me a great deal, i spent nights thinking about it, i figured it likely had to do with justifying jewish scrying and divination using the stars, that the arrangement of celestial bodies (as above) had import and meaning on things here on earth (so below) as well as possible aspersions to underground lost stars. i also wondered if it werent partly alluding to the “on earth as it is in heaven” of the lords prayer, perhaps parodying or inverting it, but if you look at the mark of the beast the so called star of david, it is an arrow pointing up, and an arrow pointing down overlayed implying a dual sides of the same coin kind of idea.  my thoughts on this and alchemy in general are fuzzy but the star of david is plainly the mark of the beast that john was referring too, this is rambling and meandering not because i dont have much to justify this view but because i am excited because i finally know and theres so much i could throw at you to support this its hard to pick and choose.

#youtube