ok i slept for uhhh seventeen hours on and off since last night bc chronic illness <3 BUT that means I'll be up until like five am tonight. sad. BUT!!! that gives me time to read fics that i've meant to for months, and reading fic in general is something i don't do often so i'm kind of excited for my accidental all nighter era.
[A sad violin song plays over an image of a sad hamster]
Pac: This doesn't have anything to do with me – I wear a blue sweatshirt, you're crazy, this mouse doesn't even have a sweatshirt, this hamster! [Reading chat] Am I a depressed hamster?
[ Transcript continued ↓ ]*
–
Pac: Actually– that's fine! I embrace that idea – of course I'm going to be depressed, are you crazy? [He hits his desk, then starts counting off people on his fingers] Fit is gone, Richarlyson is gone, Ramon is gone, Bagi and Empanada who were always there when we were there are also gone, I haven't seen them! It's just me and Tubbo, and sometimes Philza shows up.
Pac: I lost Chume Labs, I lost the Favela, I lost Murder Mystery, I lost Ilha Chume Labs, it's crazy! Look at how much I've lost, and I've gained nothing! Of course I'm going to be depressed, are you crazy?! How am I supposed to be happy?!
Pac: [Reading chat] "You have us Pac," that's true, thank you. No, that's true, sorry.
* NOTE: Please note that this is an incomplete transcript, as I was primarily relying on Aypierre's translation mod at the time and if I am not confident of the translation, I do not include it. As always, please feel free to add on translations or message me corrections.
I love trans people whose transness means that their sexuality is complex. I love trans people who adopt contradictory labels. I love transmasculine people who still have ties to old lesbian spaces and transfeminine people who still have ties to gay spaces (even if they themselves aren't lesbian or gay). I love trans people whose dysphoria has put them at a place where they don't want to engage with any type of sexuality. I love trans people who are confused, unsure, or questioning. I love trans people who toe the lines of queerness. I love trans people who are unapologetically embracing their sexualities. I love trans people who are working through internalized shame about their sexualities.
For anyone else who is gonna struggle surviving the next 3 weeks with the angsty and tense situation of Callowmoore here's a few things from the last 2 episodes that I feel were underrated and will assist in trying to keep me sane/emotionally stable:
- Matching messed up hands built for holding
- Fearne nervously playing with her hair as she approaches Ashton
- Ashton wanted Fearne to be either the last thing they saw if they died or the first thing they saw when they succeeded
- Fearne's admittance corroborates Ashley's 4SD revelation that Fearne is in love with someone in the party but doesn't know how to process the emotions
- Fearne wanted Ashton to be happy, while Ashton wanted to feel whole so they would be worthy of the Hells
- Ashton twice tried to lead a search for Fearne, and instantly clocking onto Chetney saying he followed Fearne
- Fearne making herself look as radiant as possible before giving Ashton the cold shoulder
- Ashton only rose to Chetney's provocations until he said 'You hurt Fearne'
Use how you will
[ID: The "missing the point" meme. On the left is a screenshot from the end of Psychonauts 2, showing a closeup of Raz saying "Big deal. Everyone's got something like you." On the right is a person staring at the screenshot and saying, "WOW!! Raz can turn into Maligula!" An arrow pointing from the screenshot and over the person's head reads "Everyone has the capacity to commit atrocities." /end ID]
Okay, random question but in the panel where Lan Zhan & Wei Ying are riding side by side, why is Alan Zhan’s horse sad? Is Little Apple bullying him? :(
PS: I check in daily for your posts, OBSESSED 😭
Alan Zhan (patron saint of when the substitute professor gets your name wrong).
love it when a character that's hard to read intuitively for you has like a dedicated fandom interpreter who can just glance at their blank face in a panel and then give you a 3k word essay on their innermost thoughts & desires & fears and neatly tie it back into the themes & whatnot as if it's the most obvious thing in the world
Another reason that Stansas hate the idea of Arya and Dany being friends (outside of them wanting to demonize Dany) is that they've convinced themselves that Dany and Sansa are the only main female characters, so if a Stark sister is going to have a significant relationship with Dany it has to be Sansa. Arya being constantly downplayed and treated like an accessory to Sansa has generally led to the consensus that her relationship with Dany will be defined by whatever Sansa's relationship (positive or negative) with her is. That's why Arya is always being left out of the "we were robbed of [x] female character friendship" conversations and why theories about Dany/Arya getting along are treated as Sansa hate; Arya, as a character, is seen as secondary to Sansa by a lot of people
to that anon I got about my last posts: if you're hurt that I'm talking about antisemitism on tumblr rather than the Israel/Palestine conflict itself then you're going to have to make your peace with a star wars blog not being an effective platform for activism.
This is the point I've been trying to hammer home perfectly illustrated. I deviated ever so slightly from what's allowed on the subject to say that I can't participate in this website's idea of 'raising awareness' (distributing real facts and misinfo alike without a care and being a bunch of fanatic Jew haters in the process) and that I don't think I'm able to critically and accurately examine every piece of news that gets passed around here, and you're taking this to assume I don't care. So no, I'm not going to spend my time trying to prove that I do care to that particular crowd.
You're upset with me for not treating this like I did fandom and assuming I value fictional characters more than real people because of it, but it's precisely because this is infinitely more important that I'm not going to be doing real people the disrespect of giving my two cents on their suffering and deaths on the same platform I did STAR WARS.
proper reupload in the high quality this fantastic segment so deserves; eagle pig and duck bias notwithstanding, this will forever be my favorite variant of the fabled switcheroo (and a reminder that Daffy was first at his own game!) the committal on behalf of both characters--especially the sincerity of Daffy's feigned sincerity--really sets it apart
i was having a chuckle to myself last night about Gristol, and how his plans are basically:
Restore Ford Cruller's memory
Find Maligula
???
Profit
but then... of course they are, right? this is Gristol we're talking about. Fatherland Follies drives home again and again that he's still operating on a child's logic, a warped and reductive version of the world that he never bothered to grow out of. both of his memory vaults center on the images of his childhood, this idealized version of the past that he clings to no matter what. and that's still how he remembers Maligula, too - as this saviour figure, who rushes in to help him when he's in trouble.
[ID: Two slides from Gristol's memory vault, Glory to Grulovia! Left: Gristol clings to Maligula's back as she summons waves to sweep away his assailants. Right: Gristol and Maligula waving from a balcony as the people cheer. Gzar Theodore brandishes a dagger in the background.]
like so much else, Maligula represents a return to this idyllic childhood - to the peace and simplicity of his youth, when he was free from worries and responsibilities. in his mind, he doesn't need to make any further plans - once Maligula's back, everything will go back to normal. Maligula will make everything better.
...is what i thought, but then i remembered this line:
[Screenshot source. ID: Gristol, in Truman's body, bows on his hands and knees in front of the newly-awaked Maligula. The caption reads: "Yes, High Priestess! I am here to correct the mistakes made by my father!"]
and that's kind of interesting, right?
to be clear: this happens directly after Maligula sees Helmut-in-Gristol's-body, and recognises him. her line before this is:
"Little Gzesaravich! Have you come to pay for your father's sins?"
my first thought was that Gristol hadn't expected to still be in Truman's body by the time he managed to find Maligula, and this was him trying to placate her and buy some time until he could explain the situation. but watching the cutscene back, that's clearly not what's happening here. Gristol is answering as himself, and his response of throwing himself to his knees before her is, as far as i can tell, genuine.
so what is going on here?
in Fatherland Follies, there's this line in the ride narration that stuck out to me:
"Why didn't the Gzar help Maligula in her time of need? No one knows, but historians agree - it is Gzar Theodore's biggest failure."
other lines mention Gzar Theodore's "mistake", and it's wording Gristol himself echoes in the screencap above. evidently, he believes that his father abandoned Maligula, leaving her to her fate at the hands of the Psychonauts, and it was that mistake that lead to them being driven out of the country - that mistake which he seeks to correct. maybe he even feels like he has a debt to repay to her for his family turning their backs on her all those years ago.
the 'High Priestess' thing, though - that's kinda weird, and threw me for a loop the first time i played the game. it took me until my second playthrough to connect the dots, and remember how the room in the Lady Luctopus - Gristol's room - was full of Delugionist scribblings and symbols.
[Screenshot source. ID: left, the walls of the hidden backroom in Gristol's hotel suite, covered in scrawlings of eyeballs and Maligula's name. Right, the pinboard from the hidden backroom. On its surface are photographs and newspaper clippings connected by pieces of string.]
i mean, look at this stuff! he had a whole conspiracy board and everything!
we learn very little about the Delugionists and their beliefs as a whole during the game, but i think drawing the connection here suggests two important things. one: that Gristol was in deep with this stuff. i don't know how he linked up with them - maybe via old family connections, or just good old-fashioned digging (we know he's skilled at worming his way into peoples' good graces, after all) - but it seems likely that he's begun to internalise their ideas, maybe even warping his own memories of events. and two: the Delugionists themselves are, if you'll pardon the pun, pretty far off the deep end.
like... i understand why PN2 didn't go heavy on the "mass-murderer cult worship" aspect of things, in the end, but man this is such a tantalising glimpse into the wider mythos around Maligula. Gristol is proud and haughty and thinks himself above everyone else; the fact that his first reaction seeing Maligula is to throw himself to the ground at her feet says so much about the way he's come to see her. he's not just trying to bring back Maligula, his childhood bodyguard. he's trying to bring back Maligula, the High Priestess of the deluge, the semi-mythical figure whose supporters believe even death couldn't stop. he doesn't even flinch at the way she confronts him, and maybe it's because he's bought in so completely to this deified figurehead, this idea of Maligula; more a living force of nature than a person. and it all comes back to the same place: an abdication of responsibility, not just to the person who protected him when he was little but to this avatar of floods and destruction. Maligula will make everything better.
i'd write more about my thoughts on the Delugionists but that'd be taking a hard turn into speculation, and this is already kind of long and rambling so i'd better end it here. but what an unexpected and evocative line, right? it's some of the only stuff we have to go off of regarding the Delugionists as a whole, but i think it does such a good job of hinting at the wider story - at teasing another layer to the mythos surrounding Maligula, one whose ripples we see throughout the game but which never quite breaches the surface.
In case it wasn't apparent from my recent fic, I believe that a crucial element to writing Metal Sonic's obsession with Sonic is not hatred, but paranoia.
Sonic is capable of arriving at any point on the planet within a matter of hours, if not minutes. The only places of relative safety are Robotnik's bases, but even this is not guaranteed. Sonic can speed through conventional defenses, tear through walls, achieve verticality and attack from every angle, at any time.
And every time Sonic arrives, he attacks with every intent to completely destroy Metal Sonic.
. . . at least, according to the programming Eggman shoved into its head. Everything in Metal Sonic's processor, every scrap of personhood or sentience it clings to, is based on code written with a single purpose. The only way that Metal views the world is through the lens of this purpose. It analyzes locations based on defensive angles or potential resources during a combat situation. It sorts any person it meets into one of three categories: An Ally (aligned with Dr. Robotnik), A Civilian (irrelevant), or A Threat (aligned with Sonic). Its knowledge of objects is a complete toss-up depending on what info's been useful in the past to fighting Sonic- Metal only knows what a grocery store is because he punched Sonic through one once.
And Metal is always scanning, scanning, scanning the environment around it for any sign that Sonic might arrive. When your opponent is faster than the speed of sound, a half-second warning can mean the difference between continued operation or utter destruction.
Maybe you can help me understand. The LATAM promo content has been great in my opinion in quantity and quality. Louis looks relaxed and his answers show thought, humility and maturity, and with his usual sass and humor. This is the most he has shared of himself since his solo career started.
So it's become a real surprise when I've read a few anons write to blogs saying they don't like the person Louis has become, and they like 1D Louis. Another said that they think his persona has gotten "progressively worse and worse". And I'm like, did you not see the years and years of being pushed aside, of being told he had a bad voice, of no support from radio, of stunts, etc fighting for his career. And did they not watch or read his interviews?? So many interviewers during this past week have complimented Louis.
Louis can never win.
I agree, it can really feel like people are just not actually seeing the same content as we are and it's hard not to feel like some of this is that they AREN'T seeing it, like people go way too much off blogs' (often very wild) interpretations of what Louis says and how he says it rather than just listening to him talk or watching him interact with fans. Or maybe it's that they have been believing in these made up versions of him when he hasn't been around for a minute and now that actual Louis reappears it doesn't match up with those ideas and they feel shocked and upset.
But if people are saying he isn't the same as he was in 1D well, it's hard not feel like they were NEVER paying attention and are just talking about the made up image of him that was sold by 1DHQ (or saying they don't like him unless he's twinky and flamboyant.) Louis said he "were a lot sweeter back then" and maybe so but in all the core ways, I think he's just the same as he has always been. If people don't like how that looks now that's their right, but he's not gonna be 19 again and he's fought hard to get to decide for himself what image he wants to project and has said over and over that he won't be going back to the 1D version of that, so maybe go find someone else to follow, IDK.
Me, I'll just be over here sitting back and admiring what he's like now. I think he's the same as every time he does promo (charming, chill, funny, introspective and smart and willing to share little glimpses of emotional honesty)! It's been a while since he's done so much promo and with so much content to enjoy just now I hope more people will tune into that rather than interpretations of it and discover that for themselves. I am gonna disagree with you about one thing though: Louis CAN and IS winning, 100%, right now in front of our very fucking eyes!!! So who cares about the haters :)
started reading the cass review because i'm apparently just Like That and i want everybody crowing about how this proves sooooo much about how terfs are right and trans people are wrong to like. take a scientific literacy class or something. or even just read the occasional study besides the one you're currently trying to prove a point with. not even necessarily pro-trans studies just learn how to know what studies actually found as opposed to what people trying to spoonfeed you an agenda claim they found.
to use just one infuriating example:
Several studies from that period (Green et al., 1987; Zucker, 1985) suggested that in a minority (approximately 15%) of pre-pubertal children presenting with gender incongruence, this persisted into adulthood. The majority of these children became same-sex attracted, cisgender adults. These early studies were criticised on the basis that not all the children had a formal diagnosis of gender incongruence or gender dysphoria, but a review of the literature (Ristori & Steensma, 2016) noted that later studies (Drummond et al., 2008; Steensma & Cohen-Kettenis, 2015; Wallien et al., 2008) also found persistence rates of 10-33% in cohorts who had met formal diagnostic criteria at initial assessment, and had longer follow-up periods.
if you recognize the names Zucker and Steensma you are probably already going feral but tldr:
There are… many problems with Zucker's studies, "not all children had a formal diagnosis" is so far down the list this is literally the first i've heard of it. The closest i usually hear is the old DSM criteria for gender identity disorder was totally different from the current DSM criteria for gender dysphoria and/or how most people currently define "transgender"; notably it did not require the patient to identify as a different gender and overall better fits what we currently call "gender-non-comforming". Whether the kids had a formal diagnosis of "maybe trans, maybe just has different hobbies than expected, but either way their parents want them back in their neat little societal boxes" is absolutely not the main issue.
This would be a problem even if Zucker was pro-trans (spoiler: He Is Not, and people who are immediately suspicious of pro-trans studies because "they're probably funded by big pharma or someone else who profits from transitioning" should apply at least a little of that suspicion to the guy who made a living running a conversion clinic); sometimes "formal" criteria change as we learn more about what's common, what's uncommon, what's uncommon but irrelevant, etc, and when the criteria changes drastically enough it doesn't make sense to pretend the old studies perfectly apply to the new criteria. If you found a study defining "sex" specifically and exclusively as penetration with a dick which says gay men have as much sex as straight men but lesbians don't, it's not necessarily wrong as far as it goes but if THAT'S your prime citation for "gay men have more sex than lesbians", especially if you keep trying to apply it in contexts which obviously use a broader definition, there are gonna be a lot of people disagreeing with you and it won't be because they're stubbornly unscientific.
Also Zucker is pro conversion therapy. Yes, pro converting trans people to cis people, but also pro converting gay people to straight people. That doesn't necessarily affect his results, i just find it funny how many people enthusiastically support his findings as evidence transitioning is… basically anti-gay conversion therapy? (even though plenty of trans people transition to gay? including T4T people so even the "that's actually just how straight people try to get with gay people" rationale for gay trans people is incredibly weak? and also HRT has a relatively low but non-zero chance of changing sexual orientation so it wouldn't even be reliable as a means of "becoming straight"? but a guy who couldn't reliably tell the difference between a tomboy and a trans boy figured out the former is more common than the latter + in one whole country where being trans is legal but being gay is not, sometimes cis gay people transition, so OBVIOUSLY that means sexism and homophobia are the driving factors even in countries with significant transphobia. or something.) anyway i hope zucker knows and hates how many gay people and allies are using his own study to trash-talk any attempts to be Less Gay. ideally nobody would take his nonsense seriously at all but it doesn't seem we'll be spared from that any time soon so i will take my schadenfreude where i can.
Steensma's studies have the exact same problem re: irrelevant criteria so "well someone ELSE had the same results!" is not exactly convincing. This is not "oh trans people are refusing to pay attention to these studies because they disagree with them regardless of scientific rigor", it's "one biased guy using outdated criteria found exactly the numbers everyone would expect based on that criteria, i can't imagine why trans people are treating those numbers as relevant to the past criteria but not present definitions, let's find a SECOND guy using outdated criteria. Why do people keep saying the outdated criteria is not relevant to the current state of trans healthcare. Don't we all know it's quantity over quality with scientific studies. (Please don't ask what the quantity of studies disagreeing with me is.)"
Steensma also counted patients as 'not persisting as transgender' if they ghosted him on follow-up which counted for a third of his study's "detransitioners" and a fifth of the total subjects and. look. i'm not saying none of them detransitioned, or assuming they all didn't would be notably more accurate, but i think we can safely treat twenty percent of subjects as a bit high for making a default assumption, especially when some of them might have simply not been interested in a study on whether or not they still know who they are. Fuck knows i've seen pro-trans studies which didn't make assumptions about the people who didn't respond still get prodded by anti-trans people insisting "the number of people claiming they don't regret transitioning can't possibly be so high, some of the people who responded must have been lying. (Scientific rigor means thinking studies which disagree with me are wrong even if the only explanation is the subjects lying and studies which agree with me are right even if we need to make assumptions about a lot of subjects to get there.)"
and this is not new information. not the issues with zucker, not the issues with steensma, not any of the issues because this is not a new study, it's a review of older studies, which in itself doesn't mean "bad" or "useless" -- sometimes that allows connecting some previously-unconnected dots -- but the idea this is going to absolutely blow apart the Woke Media, vindicate Rowling and Lineham, and "save" ""gay"" children from """being forcibly transed""" is bullshit. At most it'll get dragged around and eagerly cited by all the people looking for anything vaguely scientific-sounding to justify their beliefs, and maybe even people who only read headlines and sound bites will buy it, but the people who really believe it will be people who already agreed with all its "findings" and have already been dragging around the existing studies and are just excited to have a shiny new citation for it.
the response from people who've been really reading research on transgender people all along is going to be more along the lines of "……yeah. yeah, i already knew about that. do you need a three-page essay on why i don't think it means what you think it means? because i don't have time for that homework right now but maybe i can pencil it in for next semester if you haven't learned how to check your own sources by then."