#but jonathan is the one to apply it as a universal truth | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 6 months

Text

By: John Barry

Published: Sep 6, 2023

Do you ever hear a new concept, and suddenly realise that it has tapped into an important truth that had already been floating around on the hinterlands of your consciousness for some time? Well, 2019 saw the birth of one such idea: the concept of luxury beliefs (explained below), which was launched in the New York Post by Dr Rob Henderson, a former student of Yale and recent PhD graduate of Cambridge. The concept struck a chord with many people, and academia suddenly became very interested in this wunderkind Henderson. Unexpectedly, this interest hasn’t been reciprocated, leaving the academic world somewhat perplexed.

As an interviewer, it’s hard for me to say which is more interesting - the story of why Rob Henderson turned his back on contemporary academia, what he is doing next, or indeed what it is about his background that helped him recognise the phenomenon of luxury beliefs before anyone else did. Read on and decide for yourself.

John Barry (JB): You are interested in a range of topics in psychology, sociology, and anthropology. What drew you to studying psychology?

Rob Henderson (RH): I suppose I’ve always been curious about human nature and social behaviour. What got me started on the academic track was when I was enlisted in the military – over 10 years ago now – I found a copy of How the Mind Works by Steven Pinker at an airport on my way to a deployment in Al Udeid. I picked up this book because I thought the cover and title were interesting. Hmmm… how does the mind work? So I picked it up on a whim, read the book, found it fascinating, and that just got me started in reading more psychology books, watching psychology lectures on YouTube, and that led me to decide to study psychology more formally. I applied to Yale and studied Psychology as an undergrad there. And while I was studying psychology, I was also experiencing a shift in the social environment, in the social class backgrounds of the people who were around me, and so naturally I connected what I was studying and these anecdotal observations. This contributed to my decision to keep studying psychology and get as much education as I could, and that led me to apply for a PhD in Cambridge which I finished in December of 2022.

JB: Was there any particular thing in Pinker’s book that hooked you?

RH: He talks about the desire for social esteem, recognition, respect. How well regarded we are by others is not a material reward, it lives in the minds of other people. Pinker links this to evolutionary psychology and how important social belonging and acceptance were in the human ancestral environment, and that was something I had never thought about at that point in my life in a conscious explicit way.

JB: Is this topic related to your PhD?

RH: I was a research assistant in Paul Bloom’s lab. He’s a developmental psychologist who studies the origins of morality in babies and young children, and that became interesting to me. I read Jonathan Haidt’s book The Righteous Mind and read about moral foundations theory, so those interests led me to study this for my PhD. It’s unrelated to my public writing, but I do still study status. One of the studies we published a couple of years ago found that social anxiety, which is a proxy for preoccupation with status, is heavily correlated with how morally objectionable people rate various transgressions. One interpretation of this is the more concerned people are with their status, the more harshly they condemn moral wrongdoers.

JB: So this is something you published from your PhD?

RH: Yes, in the journal Scientific Reports. During my doctoral program, I led another set of studies as well, and co-authored a commentary and a chapter, but otherwise I don’t really have a strong interest to publish academic texts. It was an interesting experience just to see how peer review works and how academic publishing works, but I find writing for a broader audience more interesting and fulfilling. But it’s not that I don’t appreciate it – I spend a lot of time reading these papers and trying to pull out interesting tidbits or writing about them or sharing them online, but as far as formal academic papers go, there are probably not that many left in me.

JB: Sure. When you are writing for a wider audience it doesn’t mean that academics can’t read those articles too. Going back to your experiences in Yale and Cambridge, did they teach anything about male psychology?

RH: There is some teaching on sex differences, and there isn’t that much controversy about it there, but there isn’t that much specifically about men. My impression is that if you were to highlight challenges that men face, and controversies around male behaviour, well then it does have to be framed in one specific way. If you were to cast men as victims of anything in any way I think that would be treated very unseriously. That’s just my general impression. Sex differences are probably still ok to talk about, at least in academic environments among peers, but male psychology I don’t think is taken particularly seriously.

JB: It’s sad to see that even in the most prestigious universities. If they were to teach male psychology, what do you think would be the most important topics to cover?

RH: It’s interesting that a lot of this stuff is discussed in academic research. I wrote a piece a couple of years ago, for Bari Weiss’ outlet Common Sense (now The Free Press), and for that piece I did quite a bit of research on developmental psychology which found that boys appear to be more sensitive to environmental and parental inputs than girls - not that girls are unresponsive to these inputs – but boys who are raised in single parent homes, or particularly unstable or harsh environments, are much more likely to have detrimental health consequences, so later are more likely to experience poverty and unemployment, addiction, criminality and so on, and I think these things might be worth focusing on, especially as we continue to see more and more boys and young men lose interest in education and attaining gainful employment and rates of incarceration per capita appear to be rising too, especially among men across all ethnic groups in the lower socioeconomic strata. Men with low levels of education and income are more likely to be incarcerated than they were in decades past which to me indicates that this isn’t entirely about income. Poor people existed 50 years ago, but a poor man today is much more likely to be arrested than a poor man 50 years ago.

JB: Poor families are less likely to have the stability of a father in the home. Warren Farrell described prisons as ‘institutes of dad deprivation’, or something like that. It’s interesting that you say boys are more sensitive to environmental inputs, whereas the impression we get is that boys are tougher than girls. I wonder if boys are raised to be more tough because we know that if we don’t raise them to be tough they will be more sensitive than girls.

RH: I’ve never heard that hypothesis before, that’s really interesting. So we have this social pressure for men to be tough to counteract their intrinsic sensitivity… that seems plausible. Joyce Benenson has research showing that boys are immunologically more compromised than girls, more likely to be sick and to die from illness. This was a big surprise during the peak of the covid pandemic, that boys and men were more likely to contract and fall seriously ill and die from this illness. I’ve talked to some women about this and they were shocked to hear these statistics. In the popular imagination, men are sturdier, and though we may be physically stronger, in other ways perhaps men aren’t quite as naturally resilient as we thought.

JB: And men tend to fall in love more quickly than-

RH: They are more likely to say ‘l love you’, and say it first, which surprises a lot of people-

JB: Putting themselves in a vulnerable position, demonstrating vulnerability… and suicide? Maybe there is something to this idea of the vulnerability of men…

RH: Something that just came to mind John is that it may be that the most disagreeable, hostile, aggressive and resilient people are men, but that’s just the fatter tail in the right side of the distribution, but these men become the mental model with which we compare everyone else, so we think that men in general behave that way, whereas in fact we are thinking of only the top 5% or 1% of men who act in that way, whereas most men aren’t like that.

JB: From a psychological point of view, sometimes the most aggressive men are fending off people who might hurt them, because they may have experienced severe hurt or abuse in their past. I think sometimes the idea of ‘fragile masculinity’ is just used to sneer at men, but there is something to the idea that sometimes men who are broken have to put themselves back together in a way that is harder to break again in the future. But it might be a very abrasive persona that they adopt.

RH: There was a great memoir a while back by Nora Vincent called Self Made Man. This was about a woman successfully impersonating a man for a year, and one of the things that surprised her was, she describes men as carrying this armour around them that signals strength and toughness to the world because they know that if they appear weak or vulnerable, other men will sense that and take advantage. So this was something that she had to learn to cultivate herself, because if she dressed as a man but expressed vulnerability and tenderness then other men would immediately sniff this out and sense how exploitable she – or in this sense he – was. And I found that insightful, something that only a woman who is impersonating a man would pick up on. I don’t think a man would necessarily understand in an explicit, verbalized way what they are doing when they project toughness.

JB: The armour is ok but dropping the armour is necessary sometimes too. My colleague Martin Seager described how in group therapy with men the dynamic is different that in mixed sex groups because male groups will have a lot of joking around, or banter as we call it here. But quite quicky the dynamic will go from banter to sharing serious experiences and comforting each other, and just as quickly again the dynamic can shift back again to banter. Getting back to universities teaching male psychology, this is the kind of thing that might be interesting, or on clinical training courses at least. But I don’t think that happens. Do you think there is enough diversity of thought on campus?

RH: No. There isn’t enough diversity of thought, and it seems to be shrinking. One of the reasons I decided to come to Cambridge was because of what was happening in America, with political correctness, and professors being targeted, with students and faculty uniting to try to fire academics. I saw it first hand at Yale, and at Cambridge I’ve seen it as well. Famously there was the case of Jordan Peterson having his invitation revoked. I’ve also seen behind the scenes to examples of people who were less well known academics who have been fired or had offers rescinded for basically disagreeing, for their ideas. Not for anything they had done or any behaviour they directed at any individual, but just ideas that they have expressed, either in writing or in podcasts etc. and people took issue with it. Generally my heuristic is that for every example we hear of where someone gets fired, there are probably 10 others that we don’t hear about, of people who aren’t famous or well known, who are just quietly let go. One reason I decided to relinquish continuing a traditional academic career path, and why I decided to get involved with the University of Austin, which is this new university – UATX – which is launching in Texas, because they made explicit their commitment to freedom of expression and academic inquiry, which is what I hoped that all universities would be like when I first matriculated to Yale. But instead, the place that people feel least free to speak their minds are oftentimes university, which I found absolutely stunning.

JB: Tell me more about the University of Austin. Is it a physical university?

RH: It’s in the process of being built. At the moment we are running summer programmes. I believe the inaugural date for the first official cohort of undergraduates is in the fall of 2024 and it will be a physical university. The aim is to be a traditional liberal arts education where students can feel free to explore novel ideas. There are a lot of high profile people involved, for example Pano Kanelos the former president of St John’s College in Annapolis, he’s now the president of UATX, Bari Weiss, Dorian Abbot from the University of Chicago, Glenn Loury from Brown, Peter Boghossian and many other notable academics. It’s still the early stages but I’m hoping we are building what a university should be.

JB: Is this the beginning of a trend?

RH: I hope so. Not that UATX should be cloned, but I hope more universities attempt to reform higher ed.

JB: I hope so too. There are some really questionable ideas doing the rounds in Social Sciences departments these days, such as negative views of masculinity, and ideas about male privilege and patriarchy theory. You came up with the idea of ‘luxury beliefs’ a few years ago. Would you say that ideas like patriarchy theory are examples of ‘luxury beliefs’?

RH: So luxury beliefs I’ve defined as ideas and opinions that confer status on the upper classes while often inflicting costs on the lower classes. The idea of patriarchy might be a luxury belief. A lot of things fall under the umbrella of patriarchy, for example a lot of people think marriage and monogamy are an outgrowth of patriarchy. A lot of highly educated and affluent people will publicly denigrate marriage, patriarchy, masculinity… all these things in their mind falls into the same broad category. And yet these people are the most likely to get married, the least likely to get divorced, they would be the last people to consider raising their kids without a father or strong male role model in their lives. And yet by broadcasting this belief and spreading it they have inadvertently created a situation where lower income people are less likely to get married – there’s more single mothers, single parents, more kids growing up fatherless. What’s interesting is that if you publicly discuss the challenges of kids who grow up fatherless, a lot of the anti-patriarchy people will cast an eye of suspicion upon you, like ‘Why would this be a problem?’, ‘What’s so special about fathers?’, ‘Maybe it’s a good thing’, ‘The real problem is that single mothers don’t have enough financial support, and if they just had enough money… a stack of cash can replace a father’, and all of this I think is associated with an anti-patriarchy ideology, and yes it could be considered a luxury belief. It’s interesting to think about it: if you asked on a scale of one to ten ‘Are men a problem?’ higher educated people and more affluent people would probably score on the higher end of that scale.

JB: We are both fans of The Sopranos (I co-authored an article about the relevance to men in therapy). Almost none of the characters are likable in the Sopranos, so why is it so popular?

RH: It’s like with any good story, when they take you into someone’s world, into their inner life, then someone who you wouldn’t ordinally sympathise with, you suddenly adopt their perspective and understand where they are coming from. The therapy sessions between Tony Soprano and Dr Melphi was an amazing device, so you could get a glimpse into his psyche. There were flashbacks to his severely unstable and dysfunctional childhood, with his father who was a gangster and a murderer and his mother who was clearly mentally unwell. So he was immersed in chaos and criminality from a very young age. And the show does a great job of depicting Tony outside of his criminal enterprise. You see him as a husband, a father, a regular guy going about his day wrestling with a lot of the same questions that everyone else wrestles with. So they are showing the humanity inside these characters.

JB: In a way you are saying that by walking in their shoes we are able to empathise with these characters. In male psychology we use the term ‘empathy gap’ and in The Sopranos there are a couple of times where Tony Soprano is the victim of domestic violence-

RH: I saw that in your piece. It’s so funny I’m so blind to it, that when you wrote that… I remember when I watched it about two years ago during the lockdown and it didn’t even occur to me that it was domestic violence when women are slapping him or throwing things at him. I just thought ‘Oh it’s Tony, it’s fine. He’s a man.’

JB: Exactly!

RH: David Chase [screenwriter of The Sopranos] was walking a fine line. I think for the first three or four seasons at least he was sort of on Tony’s side, so it was easy for the audience to forget who this guy really is, and what he is capable of and what he’s done. But especially when you get to the final couple of seasons, like when Tony murders his nephew, and he orders the death of Adrianna, he’s just getting more and more morally compromised. Finally towards the end you start to understand. There’s a great book on evil by Roy Baumeister called Evil: Inside Human Cruelty and Violence where he points out that if you want to understand evil, you have to suspend your judgement. You have to be willing to see things from the eyes of the perpetrator. But it’s even more important to remember that these people are evil and the rest of society needs to be protected from them. So it’s a tricky balance. They are still responsible for their acts even if you understand where they are coming from.

JB: I’ve sometimes said that one of the biggest challenges to forensic psychology is to be able to empathise with people who might have committed horrible crimes. I suspect some people are reluctant to because of the fear that if they empathise, they will then start to sympathise-

RH: And they don’t want to justify what the criminal has done. Yes. I think if someone made a mini-series about Hitler or Stalin or Mao, that might be very uncomfortable for a lot of people! Any villain, if you make them the main character, they just become an anti-hero.

JB: An interesting phenomenon. Maybe in a related way, military history is full of heroes, but we usually think of the military is being a cause of psychological damage to men, through combat stress or bullying etc. One of the surprising things I found when writing Perspectives in Male Psychology was finding out that the military could be good for mental health. How much was this your experience of the US Air Force?

RH: One thing is a selection effect. The military in the past century has perfected their screening method – standardised tests of physical health – and maybe mental health to a degree – and proxies for intelligence, and then multiple appointments, and then basic military training which selects for people who are fairly mentally adjusted. There are lots of hoops - it’s a long and extremely intense experience especially for 17 or 18 year olds. Lots of people don’t make it – they don’t make it through all of the hoops. So up front a lot of people are screened out. And then the experience of the military is unique. They are very good at creating communities out of strangers. They have learned, maybe through trial and error over the course of centuries, how to take a bunch of random men from all parts of the world or country, and make them feel like family members, getting them to feel connected. Even things like the uniform – immediately your identity is stripped. In basic training they shave your head, you are put in uniform, everyone is called by their last name, so immediately you feel like you are part of this group. So there is community, comradery, structure, predictability. When you are deployed and in the midst of severe conflict, there can be unpredictability introduced but day to day you know what the rules are, what’s expected of you, how to advance in the rank structure, who you are responsible for, who your superiors are, how to behave. All of these explicit guidelines make life easier, especially for young men. In the outside world there are all of these questions like ‘Who am I? What am I doing?’ All of these anxieties around identity. But in the military your identity is very clear. Success is clearly defined. You get regular feedback, performance reports. For a lot of guys it’s like a video game – success and failure are very clearly defined.

JB: Could it work as therapy? Could you take Christopher Moltisanti (The Sopranos) into the military and help him?

RH: He has a severe temper problem. I just don’t know if he could handle subjugating himself to the military. I had a cousin who tried to join the marines. At basic training he punched one of the recruits and then he tried to fight a drill instructor. They kicked him out. I think that might happen to Chris too. But maybe AJ (the son of Tony Soprano) could have been ok? Or maybe the young Tony Soprano. He was a high school athlete, with a high IQ, it could have worked for him, before he got too caught up in a life of crime.

JB: You joined the Air Force at age 17. What motivated you to join, and did it prepare you for the life you have led since?

RH: I joined because I grew up in foster homes and I wanted to flee as soon as I could to escape the complete chaos and disorder around me. My friends had similar upbringings. I barely passed high school, just getting into a lot of trouble, and I knew that I wasn’t on a good track, and I wasn’t really ready for college. I wouldn’t have been a good student anyway at that age, I was just so undisciplined and unfocused. So the military was a very appealing option because I knew that it would immediately get me out of the environment I was in, at that time in Red Bluff, California. I knew it would immediately get me out of there, put me on a completely different track, put me around new people, give me a different kind of structure. There were also older adults too. So one of my teachers was in the Air Force – he suggested it. My best friend’s dad also recommended I join. So these two older men that I respected, both of them could see there was some latent potential, and once I got there, all of the things I mentioned before – the discipline, respect, comradery, setting goals, building good habits – all of those things really helped me.

The other thing that I think people focus less on with the benefits of the military is… well you are well aware of the ‘young male syndrome’? 18, 19, 20 are the most volatile years of a young man’s life, most likely to commit crimes, acts of aggression, impulse, drugs, speeding, but because the military has such an overpowering structure where every aspect of your life is controlled, you can’t make mistakes. I mean you can, but they make it very clear that if you fail a drug test for example, you go to military prison. You can’t get away with anything. So it presses fast forward on the most volatile phase of your life, and then by the time you finish your enlistment in your early 20s, you have cooled off, you’ve matured, you are a bit less impulsive and full of anger and hormones. So even if you didn’t learn any lessons at all, it was a period of your life that you couldn’t screw up too badly.

JB: That’s a very good point. You mentioned ‘young male syndrome’, I read recently that young people are less likely to take risks now than youngsters in the past.

RH: They are still likely to be their most volatile years. I recently wrote an essay in The Free Press about why teenagers aren’t driving any more, and there are so many factors. As Jean Twenge says “The party’s on Instagram and Snapchat now”. I think social media is more appealing to girls, but video games are appealing to boys, as outlets for aggression and accomplishment. You can get your 5 buddies from class and go on a raid on World of Warcraft. Well, men used to go on raids, actual physical raids, which aren’t a good thing to do, but boys get excited about it still, online. And that’s how they spend their Friday nights instead of going out and getting drunk and speeding on the highway. Maybe that’s ok, but taking some risks, testing your limits, in some ways is actually a good thing. I’m curious as to where this is going to go, when you have this generation who are afraid or unwilling to take risks.

JB: I wonder how this generation would fare if a war broke out, not on Xbox, but in reality.

RH: The Pentagon said that 78% of adults wouldn’t qualify for enlisting in the military. That’s 8 out of 10 men aged 17 to 24, primarily due to issues of obesity, lack of education, and criminal records, tattoos, mental health issues - if you have repeated episodes of depression and anxiety. Jonathan Haidt has shown how anxiety and depression are increasing in teenagers and young adults in the last 15 years or so, which is alarming. Maybe some of these issues are intertwined: if you are never leaving your house, if you are always living your life online, this is contributing to issues of depression and anxiety to some extent.

JB: If you were to give advice to a guy aged 17 coming from a similar background as yourself who was considering options for their future…?

RH: My advice would be different to someone from a straight-A’s background, but a background similar to me… Look at your friends and say ask yourself if this is the kind of person you want to be like in five years time, or 10 years. Or look at people around you who are a little bit older. I worked at a restaurant when I was a teenager and I saw guys in their early 20s, or mid 20s, still working there, not making very much money. The highlight of their week was getting paid on Friday and drinking away the weekend, smoking, doing drugs, partying, it just didn’t seem like the kind of person I wanted to be when I was 25 years old. So consider getting a different peer group, whether that’s joining the military, getting involved in sports, volunteering… find a different crew to hang out with.

JB: Good advice. I know you have started Substack this year, and are with the University of Austin. Are there any other new projects coming up?

RH: I’m putting the final touches to my book. I recently did a book cover reveal on my newsletter and on Twitter/X and will say more about the publication date soon. The book elaborates on some of the things we have talked about, using my life and the lives of my childhood friends as a framework for understand what is going on with young men today, the ‘lost boys’ phenomenon that’s going on in the US and western countries in general. So most of my time is invested in my book and my Substack.

Final thoughts There is no doubt that academia needs more people like Dr Rob Henderson who can bring a fresh perspective to a culture that in recent years has started going stale. Some people say it’s a shame that he has left academia, but they are missing the point: he is helping rediscover – or reinvent - academia, and all of us left frozen on the deck need to take notice. A bit like the boy in the story of The Emperor’s New Clothes, Rob Henderson has seen right through the facade of highbrow elitism and the ivory-tower illusion of today’s academic world. His story is without doubt an interesting one, and definitely one to follow in the coming years.

#Rob Henderson #luxury beliefs #luxury goods #luxury items #status symbols #status seeking #social status #social standing #human psychology #psychology #male psychology #male vulnerability #domestic violence #domestic abuse #male victims of domestic violence #male victims of domestic abuse #violent women #religion is a mental illness #long post

9 notes · View notes

aamleh · 2 years

Text

funny how everytime Jancy have problems in their relationships, Milkovitch does too, and it lays a huuuge groundwork for Byler.

Miscommunication and trust, those are the two keys between the two couples.

In season 3 Nancy felt misunderstood bc Jonathan didn't trust her judgment and she feels like she is not listened, while Mike lie about his grandma being sick and all around his relationship try to use Max as the instigator between El and him, gaslighting El to diffuse the situation, keeping her from being with anyone but him bc he feels a need to be the first person in her life. She does not trust his words anymore.

Different problem, same effect.

As for season 4, there's a lot to unpack but the thing is, Nancy and Jonathan began to drift away bc they live opposite to each other and they lack communication about how they feel of their current situation, but never about the love they share. There's a lot of unspoken negativities. The fact that Nancy was coming for Spring Break but didn't while she thought that Jonathan will come if she didn't: there was hope and wait, but they didn't talk through it. Jonathan is incapable of saying he didn't apply to the same college and applied elsewhere, he lied about it at the end. The issue is still around at the end of the season.. Just like Mike and El! There is a LOT of unresolved tensions and miscommunication bc El doesn't feel heard and loved by Mike who still can't say he loves her, and at the end of the day, he said it, but he still lied to her and she knows, she drifts on her own bc she don't trust his romantic feelings and him by extension. That's where shit hits the fan.

As similiar as all two relationships coexist in the narrative, Jancy is sincere, because they were friends, they have a bond that cannot break, they know each other and trust each other bc they understand what they feel towards each other, even if Jonathan lied to her, Jonathan apologized to Nancy back in s3, he takes in consideration her feelings, something Mike never did. S4 didn't resolved the whole Stancy/university but they are shown to be deeply happy to be reunited again, it's just a question of time, there is hope, if it turns out like s3, Jonathan will open up, just like she will.

There is no Hope for Mike and El. Mike lied until the end, he has trouble being honest with her and himself because he doesn't love her and don't accept his truth (loving Will), Mike needs El more than she does, that's where it drifts apart with Jancy.

Jancy is a team that works well together because there was always a common understanding and honesty, there's an emotional bond built on nuture and growth that keep them from drifting apart. They simply love each other : they're on the same level, it's mutual respect.

There is no trust on a basic level inside Mike and El relationship. It was always superficial, they were never friends to begin with, they don't know anything about the other. Mike sees her like a superhero and not a young woman trying to figure herself out, he doesn't even know her basic interests. El feels stuck and unloved which makes her feel like misunderstood and alone.

That's why Byler is endgame: there's the same level of trust within them as Jancy. They know each other since years, they chose each other, they grew together. They know how to open to one another and be truthful about how they feel, even in coded confession, Will can't lie to Mike, and Mike feels the need to be honest with how he feels on a personnal level, with everything, he needs his guidance, his reassurance. They can't keep away from each other, they don't want to drift apart. All the angst is here for a reason, it's to show us how at the end of the day, it will all be alright, they will talk through every problems, every misguided actions, every worry.

So, pretty ingenious.

#Byler #Jancy #stranger things #will byers #Mike Wheeler #El Hopper

44 notes · View notes

musicalchaos07 · 7 months

Text

Don't Fear The Reaper (8179 words) by Musicalchaos07 Chapters: 3/? Fandom: Stranger Things (TV 2016) Rating: Teen And Up Audiences Warnings: Creator Chose Not To Use Archive Warnings, No Archive Warnings Apply Relationships: Jonathan Byers/Nancy Wheeler Characters: Jonathan Byers, Nancy Wheeler, Eddie Munson, Chrissy Cunningham, Background & Cameo Characters Additional Tags: Alternate Universe - Canon Divergence, Alternate Universe - Supernatural Elements, Explicit Language, Mild Sexual Content, Paranormal Investigators, Jonathan Byers Has Powers, Nancy Wheeler Has a Gun, Investigator Jancy My Beloved, Quite Literally Haunted Jonathan Byers, Protective Nancy Wheeler, Established Relationship, So Married, Fluff and Angst, Mostly Fluff, Chrissy Cunningham is still dead tragically, Drug Use, Implied/Referenced Child Abuse Summary: Jonathan Byers was 13 the first time he saw a ghost, he screamed so loud he nearly woke the neighbor. Seven years and one brief stint in Pennhurst later, he's crisscrossing the country with his girlfriend, dispelling rumors, exorcising poltergeists, and trying to bring families closure. Nancy Wheeler is first and foremost a skeptic, so of course it's her boyfriend who can see spirits. And if it weren't for her own close encounter she wouldn't believe him. She doesn't believe half the stories they hear but she's not about to let him go investigate on his own. Their latest case has brought them to the bright lights of Nashville to solve the murder of an average backup singer. Even though all signs point to one suspect, Jonathan and Nancy know by now that things are never as easy as they seem. But with an ill-natured mourner, unhelpful clientele, and an even more unhelpful apparition it's up to them to sort through the stories to find the truth before it's too late.

Chapter 3... 3 months later 🙈

#I think this is going to be the last update for a while tbh #so thanks to everyone that had patience #jancy #jonathan byers #nancy wheeler #jancy fic #paranormal investigators AU

6 notes · View notes

ao3feed-jonmartin · 8 months

Text

a dance of rebirth

read it on AO3 at https://ift.tt/bgaHiXu by Ace_0f_Shoto (UTMVNightLight) Martin took a deep breath, double-checking his appearance in the mirror. He tried to look as best as he could– After all, he’d be having an interview with the Head of the Magnus Institute, Elias Bouchard. Which was very nerve-wracking. Truth be told, he’d always felt some sort of draw to the place, or at least the name. It felt oddly.. familiar. As if there was something he should know, perhaps an old memory that he doesn’t recall. Which was.. weird. He’d never faced anything out of the ordinary, or ‘supernatural’ either, so he had no reason as to why he felt as if he should recognize the institution in the first place. --- .."Barnabas Bennett". Martin couldn’t say why, but he felt as if he’d heard that name before. As if there was a familiarity with it, yet one he could not name. Barnabas sounded like a bit of an old name. Certainly not one that would be used often currently. Words: 1757, Chapters: 1/?, Language: English Fandoms: The Magnus Archives (Podcast) Rating: Teen And Up Audiences Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply Categories: M/M Characters: Magnus Institute Archival Staff, Martin Blackwood, Elias Bouchard | Jonah Magnus, Barnabas Bennett, Jonathan "Jon" Sims | The Archivist Relationships: Martin Blackwood/Elias Bouchard | Jonah Magnus, Barnabas Bennett/Jonah Magnus, Martin Blackwood/Jonathan "Jon" Sims | The Archivist, Martin Blackwood & Magnus Institute Archival Staff Additional Tags: Eventual Martin Blackwood/Jonathan "Jon" Sims | The Archivist, Martin Blackwood Has a Crush on Jonathan "Jon" Sims | The Archivist, Tags Contain Spoilers, Martin Blackwood is Barnabas Bennett, The Magnus Archives Season 1, Time Skips, Past Lives, Alternate Universe - Past Lives, Reincarnation, Mind Control, Mind Manipulation, Implied/Referenced Mind Control, Manipulation, Memory Loss, Memory Alteration, Recovered Memories, False Memories, kind of?, Protective Martin Blackwood, POV Martin Blackwood, Martin Blackwood-centric, Warning: Elias Bouchard | Jonah Magnus, Jonah Magnus Being an Asshole, The Magnus Archives Season 3, The Magnus Archives Season 4, Episode: e118 The Masquerade (The Magnus Archives), Alternate Universe - Canon Divergence, Memory Related, Confusion, Unreliable Narrator, Canon-Typical The Beholding Content (The Magnus Archives), Deja Vu, Second Chances, Lies, Emotional Manipulation, Identity Reveal, Identity Issues, Loss of Identity, False Identity, Foreshadowing, Other Additional Tags to Be Added, Character Death, Canonical Character Death, Implied/Referenced Character Death, Past Character Death, Canon-Typical Worms (The Magnus Archives) read it on AO3 at https://ift.tt/bgaHiXu

#IFTTT #ao3feed #fanfic #tma #jonmartin #jmart #jonathan sims #martin blackwood #jonmartin fanfic

2 notes · View notes

lonelywretchjervistetch · 1 year

Text

My DC Cinematic Universe: Superman (Part III)

Chapter Three: American Gothic

We're gonna start this one by breaking into my idea for my movie, set to introduce a new Superman to a DC Cinematic Universe of my making. James Gunn, who's currently writing his Superman film, has been saying pretty ardently that this won't be an origin movie. And that's wise, in my opinion. We've had two Superman origin films, so why have a third in the docket. I think some of that should apply to the other members of the Trinity (Batman and Wonder Woman), but let's not get to far ahead of ourselves. In fact, I'll just say this: the origin story extent within the Trinity is gonna be on a three-part spectrum. Batman won't get any origin story stuff at all, Wonder Woman will get a LOT of origin story stuff (because I'll be changing some things significantly, compared to the Jenkins film), and Superman...well, he's in the middle. But OK, enough preamble; here's how this is kicking off.

Our film is going to take place mostly in Metropolis, from the jump. Because of that, there won't be much or any of the Kent Farm outside of brief scenes. In fact, the first time we see our Kents will be when they come to visit Clark in his Metropolis apartment. He'll have gotten a fairly new apartment, due to an improved status and salary at the Daily Planet, and that'll be an excuse for the Kents to visit their son (whom they're constantly worried about). I'll talk about what happens to the Kents over the course of this theoretical film as we go along, but just know for now that we'll be seeing them interact with Clark for the first time in Metropolis, not Smallville.

Since we're meeting the Kents now, let's talk about them right quick, one at a time, starting with...

Jonathan Kent: Farmer Until (Inevitable) Death

The Kents go WAY back to the Civil War, and are some of the first settlers of Kansas, according pervious DC Comics lore. Having settled the Smallville farm at least 100 years ago, they're the very definition of the American farmer. Because of this, Jonathan Kent is a dedicated farm-man, and has all the trappings of such. A traditionalist in some ways, and progressive in others, Jonathan believes in truth, justice, and the American way whole-heartedly, and his moral compass is a major influence on Clark's moral compass as an adult. It's pretty safe to say that ever Jonathan Kent is a hero to his adopted son, and I understand why. He was a good and loving father, who only wanted the best for his son, while also being aware that his son was meant for greater things.

But that said...Jonathan's characterization has danced around those points pretty considerably. In my opinion, the core tenets of Jonathan Kent are as follows:

He will do anything for his wife. Jonathan and Martha are one of the most loving and enduring couples in comic books, and their relationship is what Clark (and most other people) see as the ideal middle-aged/elderly couple. Jonathan takes his wedding vows as seriously as his life, and his love for his wife is still deeper than the ocean depths. It's sweet.

He will do anything for his son. Jonathan would be proud of Clark no matter what he did, but the fact that his son is a successful reporter and Superman makes him the proudest father that's ever lived. Only the fear of ruining his son's and Martha's life prevents him from shouting his son's secret from the mountaintops, just so the universe can love his son as much as he does. Oh, and one more thing: Clark is his son. Period.

His moral compass is as lawful good as you can get. You know how I said Clark would and should be aware that morality is in greyscale? Yeah, Jonathan believes in black-and-white, right vs. wrong, full stop. His moral compass is as monochromatic as it gets. Maybe that's him being old-fashioned; maybe it's him being isolated from larger populations...who knows? But to Jonathan Kent, right is right, and wrong is wrong. Period.

He has pretty severe heart problems. ...You'll see.

While I'd love to go into Jonathan's interesting comic book history, I'll save it for myself. However, if you're curious, my favorite Jonathan Kent story takes place mostly in Adventures of Superman #500 (1993), which happens in the fallout of The Death of Superman story, as well as being the first issue of the Reign of the Supermen story. It's also one of the few comics I physically own, and I treasure the SHIT out of it for various reasons. Anyway, check it out if you're curious! However, the first time you Jonathan in that issue, it hints as a recurring theme of his...and I'll get to that.

OK, so, Jonathan Kent adaptations real quick! Technically, Jonathan first appeared in Superman: The Movie, played by Golden Age superstar Glenn Ford. While he wasn't in the film for very long, the main thing he's remembered for is giving Clark advice about his role on Earth...and then dying of a massive heart attack immediately after that. This prompts a young Clark, eventually, into becoming the hero his dad dreamed he could be.

After this version of the character, DC rebooted its continuity in Crisis on Infinite Earths, bringing the Kents back to life in the universe's present day. Oh, uh...did I forget to mention that the Kents are fucking dead in the original comics? Yeah, we only met them in Superboy comics, which is...another story entirely. Anyway, after this, the Kent also appeared in media again. They were in Superboy and Lois and Clark, but the most famous incarnation of Jonathan Kent came in Smallville.

John Schneider's Jonathan Kent, to me and many, is THE Jonathan Kent. Still the family-oriented farmer, this Jonathan Kent comes with a few less years, a grudge against the Luthor family, and a massive anger issue. Still the supportive father, and still proud of Clark no matter what, he was a little more soap-opera-y than most versions, since...well, that's what Smallville was, to be honest. Financial issues, marital problems, etc. But still, he was a great father and a good man. So dedicated to his family was he, that he went to save his son from himself while Clark was being taken over by a supplanted Kryptonian version of himself (fucking...FUCKING DO NOT ASK), and made a deal with Jor-El in the process. This deal granted him power equivalent to Clark, because Smallville doesn't make sense. And in the process...it gave him heart problems. Time travel forward to episode 100 of the series and...yeah, Jonathan dies of a heart attack.

Seeing the pattern? Well, we haven't gotten to the dumbest example.

...Fuck you Man of Steel. This stupid-ass movies ruins Jonathan Kent. Played by a piece of cardboard given sentience by the Blue Fairy by accident, AKA Kevin Costner, This version of Jonathan wants to protect his son by sheltering him until the time is juuuuuuuust right for him to come out, like a fucking souffle. A Souperflee, if you goddamn will. Because of this, there is a point in this film when, while talking to his young son, he argues that maybe, just maybe, Clark should've let a SCHOOLBUS FULL OF CHILDREN DROWN, just to keep his secret. Yeah, Jonathan would NEVER suggest that. Absolutely not. And then, to top it all off, the man stops his son from saving him from a FUCKING TORNADO, and dies in a manner so unintentionally funny, it has a Know Your Meme page about it. #stopmyinvincibleson.

Well. In summary, Jonathan Kent is a farming man with strong morals and an intense devotion to family. And he always dies, or at the very least, almost dies. More of that later. For now, that's basically the summary. Now, let's talk about Mom.

Martha Kent: More Than a Farmer's Wife

Ever since Crisis on Infinite Earths, Martha Kent has been a part of Clark's life in the past and present. Like Jonathan, she loves her son and her husband endlessly. However, where Jonathan's morality is unbent by the world around her, Martha is traditionally a bit more practical. She's the grounding presence and the heart of the Kent household, as well as pretty much being the traditional stay-at-home mother character. Her core character traits, to me, are as follows:

Martha is a caring mother and wife. 'Nuff said.

...Shit. That actually might be it.

Yeah, unfortunately, Martha both does and doesn't get a lot of attention in the comics. I guess I could just say that Martha is compassionate and caring, for anybody who needs her help. She's taken in most people positively affiliated with the Superman mythos, especially Superboy (Conner Kent) and Krypto the Superdog, for starters. Other than that, though, you can play around with Martha a bit. And that's what the various adaptations have done with her.

Unfortunately, even though Martha's appeared in Superman: The Movie (played by Phyllis Thaxter), and Lois and Clark (played by K Callan), Martha hadn't had a lot of import in the mythos, outside of usually being the person who made Clark's iconic Superman suit. But then, Smallville came along with Annette O'Toole in the role, and this made the character WAY more dynamic. Now from high society Metropolis originally, she became a college-educated working mom, who started the series by managing the financial details of the farm. By the time the series ended, a widowed Martha Kent had been a United States Senator, a leading member of the covert-ops government agency Checkmate, and had remarried Perry White! Martha Kent is, in my opinion, one of the most underrated characters Smallville ever produced. And even though she was able to do ALL of those things, she never dipped into Mary Sue territory. She was just always...honestly, she was just always a good mom.

And honestly, so is MAARTHAAAA...sorry, Diane Lane as the character in the Snyderverse films. Infamous in name specifically, Martha "WHYDIDYOUSAYTHATNAME" Kent remained on the farm, and is an independent woman who loves her son, while recognizing his importance. Not entirely my Martha Kent, but definitely not a bad version of the character. Better than Jonathan, anyway.

With all of that said, Martha is sort-of an open book as these characters go. My version will be the caring mom who grounds Jonathan and Clark in reality, while allowing and inspiring them to reach for the stars. Also, she'll be involved in town matters, taking the politics angle from Smallville a bit more proactively.

And now, with THAT said...

My Jonathan and Martha Kent

As I said before, in my theoretical film, the Kents won't interact physically with Clark until they get to Metropolis. We'll see the farm itself, possibly while Clark and the Kents are on the phone with each other, talking about their upcoming visit, but the Kents will visit Clark in his new apartment, both alive and well. They'll also serve as a part of Clark's personal journey of discovery in this film, because they represent his earthly origins. See, we'll find out early on that while Clark does know a bit about Krypton and his origins, he's almost entirely in the dark about much of his past. There's no Fortress of Solitude, no communication from the dead, not even the names of his parents. So, a visit from the only parents he knows is welcomed.

But then, while the Kents are in Metropolis, the main villains of the piece strike. These villains, whose names will remain unsaid until later posts, have a weapon that SUperman has never seen before: Kryptonite. And yes, I know that Kryptonite has its own over-usage, but we'll get to that later. But Kryptonite, in this case, is meant to be a symbol of a piece of home that Clark doesn't know about or understand. Somebody else understands it, and has armed out villains with it. After a big climactic fight, Clark's going to be in recovery, cared for by his parents. While in recovery, Martha will give Clark an early homecoming present. They'd found it in his old room recently, and had forgotten about it. Said item is a crystal-laden necklace, which was the only thing he had on him as an infant in the ship. And when the now-adult and injured Clark makes contact with it, the device activates and creates an electronic pulse that rattles the apartment and shuts down all electronics. And detecting a comatose Clark, it also beams a message into his own mind.

And with that...it's time to talk about Krypton. Hoo boy.

Index: Superman

Part I: Why I Love Superman

Part II: On Lois Lane

Part III: The Kents

Part IV: The 'Rents

Part V: The...Frendts?

Part VI: Lex Luthor

Part VII: The Real Villains

Part VIII: Superman's Rogues Gallery

Part IX: The Story - Act One

Part X: The Story (Acts Two and Three)

Part XI: The Story - Climax

Part XII: Epilogue (Part One)

Part XIII: Epilogue (Part Two)

#dc comics #dc headcanon #dc universe #dc movies #james gunn #superman #clark kent #ma and pa kent #jonathan and martha kent #the kents #john schneider #annette o'toole #smallville #jonathan kent #martha kent #character essay #headcanon #headcanon post #dc cinematic universe

7 notes · View notes

ralfreinhardt4-blog · 11 months

Text

The Illuminati Continuing Challenge: Managing Energy and Obligation

The entire world of Wonder Comics is a great and interesting one, full of renowned superheroes, fascinating storylines, and strange organizations. One particular enigmatic class that's caught the creativity of supporters may be the Illuminati. In Marvel's mythology, the Illuminati is a secret society consisting of some of the most important and effective superheroes.

The concept of the illuminati was initially presented in the pages of "New Avengers" #7, compiled by Brian Michael Bendis and highlighted by David McNiven. The party comprises distinguished people such as for example Iron Person, Leader America, Dark Panther, Physician Unusual, Mr. Amazing, and Namor the Sub-Mariner. Each member brings their own skills, understanding, and sides to the dining table, creating the Illuminati a formidable force.

The role of the Illuminati in the Wonder Galaxy is that of covers and decision-makers. They gather in secret to talk about and manage threats that exceed the functions of personal heroes or even clubs such as the Avengers. Their aim is to safeguard the entire world and prevent catastrophic events that may endanger humanity.

One of the very most substantial events in that the Illuminati played a critical role was the "Infinity" deal, published by Jonathan Hickman. Here, the party needed aggressive actions to handle the forthcoming danger of the strong unfamiliar battle referred to as the Builders. Despite their noble motives, their measures sparked moral debates and increased issues about the balance between guarding the planet and infringing upon personal freedoms.

The symbolism surrounding the Illuminati in Marvel's mythology is also value exploring. The all-seeing attention, a common concept connected with key communities, is frequently applied to signify the group. This symbolizes their power to comprehend hidden truths and navigate complex situations. The Illuminati effect is believed in significant Marvel activities, wherever their decisions form the span of the whole universe.

Whilst the Illuminati is depicted as a force for good, their secretive character and decision-making power also have raised concerns. Some view them as manipulators, pulling the strings behind the moments and operating with their very own agenda. The gray regions of their actions and the ethical dilemmas they face put degree to their heroes and bring about thought-provoking discussions among readers.

In conclusion, the Illuminati in Miracle Comics is a exciting and elaborate aspect of the Miracle Universe. Their role as a clandestine band of superheroes with immense energy and duty adds layers of difficulty to the storytelling. Whether they're viewed as Earth's protectors or as a possible danger, the current presence of the Illuminati provides interest and excitement to the pages of Marvel's comics, catching the imaginations of fans round the world.

0 notes

ao3feed-brucewayne · 1 year

Text

Blue Moon

read it on the AO3 at https://ift.tt/xmy5B6p

by Miss_sunflower

Human desires leads to many paths and truths, they can be good and bad, they can bring salvation and destruction. One thing is true: desires move the world. Damian desire to save his friend life Jon desire to prove himself a worthy prince

…and now one curse sword

Words: 4217, Chapters: 1/?, Language: English

Fandoms: Batman - All Media Types, Superman - All Media Types, Batman (Comics)

Rating: General Audiences

Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply

Categories: Gen

Characters: Dick Grayson, Tim Drake, Jason Todd, Cassandra Cain, Stephanie Brown, Damian Wayne, Duke Thomas, Jonathan Kent, Jonathan Samuel Kent, Kon-El | Conner Kent, Kara Zor-El, Clark Kent, Lois Lane, Talia al Ghul, Bruce Wayne

Relationships: Jonathan Samuel Kent/Damian Wayne, Jonathan Kent/Damian Wayne, Tim Drake/Kon-El | Conner Kent, Cassandra Cain & Tim Drake & Dick Grayson & Duke Thomas & Jason Todd & Bruce Wayne & Damian Wayne, Jonathan Samuel Kent & Kon-El | Conner Kent

Additional Tags: Good Parent Talia al Ghul, Bruce Wayne is a Good Parent, Dick Grayson is Batman, knight & magic au, Alternate Universe - Magic, Alternate Universe - Dragons, Damian is tormented by nightmares, curses and magic swords, Dick Grayson Needs a Hug, Jonathan Samuel Kent is a Ray of Sunshine, Damian Wayne Feels, Damian Wayne is Bad at Feelings, Enemies to Lovers, currently only Damian sees Jon as an enemy, Jon just want kiss Damian, Damian and Jon has the same age

read it on the AO3 at https://ift.tt/xmy5B6p

#IFTTT #bruce wayne #batman #the dark knight #the cape crusader #gotham #dc universe #ao3 #ao3feed

0 notes

ao3feed-timkon · 1 year

Text

Blue Moon

read it on the AO3 at https://ift.tt/tCTRYq5

by Miss_sunflower

…and now one curse sword

Words: 4217, Chapters: 1/?, Language: English

Fandoms: Batman - All Media Types, Superman - All Media Types, Batman (Comics)

Rating: General Audiences

Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply

Categories: Gen

read it on the AO3 at https://ift.tt/tCTRYq5

#IFTTT #ao3feed #fanfic #timkon

1 note · View note

irvinenewshq · 1 year

Text

Westworld Solid and Creators Get Season 5 Pay Regardless of Cancellation

Picture: HBO Late Friday afternoon, information broke that HBO had pulled the plug on its sci-fi drama Westworld after 4 seasons. Earlier than this, creators Jonathan Nolan and Lisa Pleasure had already deliberate to deliver the twisty and infrequently convoluted collection to an in depth with a fifth and closing season, however these plans have been dashed as Warner Bros. Discovery tries to chop prices anyplace it could possibly following its current merger. Even so, paydays nonetheless await the creators and its high billed forged. Per Deadline, they’ll all nonetheless be paid for the fifth season, no matter the truth that it received’t ever come to fruition. The core forged—Evan Rachel Wooden, Thandiwe Newton, Jeffrey Wright, Ed Harris, and Aaron Paul, however surprisingly not Tessa Thompson—had pay-or-play offers into their contracts for season 5 earlier than the present’s closing season aired again in June. In complete, they’re anticipated to be paid $10-15 million, which isn’t nothing for a present that already price rather a lot to make. Season three was stated to have price about $100 million ($10 mil for 10 episodes), and had HBO gone forward with season 5, that will’ve been $80 million. (Seasons three and 4 had been eight-episode seasons, and 5 would’ve adopted swimsuit.) And based on The Hollywood Reporter, Nolan and Pleasure aren’t strolling away empty-handed, both. Each creators ended their take care of Warner Bros. TV earlier than the airing of season 4 to strike a nine-figure take care of Amazon. (Prime Video’s current sci-fi collection The Peripheral credit the duo as government producers, they usually’re likewise showrunners for the TV adaptation of Interaction and Bethesda’s Fallout franchise.) Throughout negotiations with Amazon, Nolan and Pleasure efficiently included permission to stay showrunners on Westworld as much as a hypothetical season six, they usually’ll receives a commission as if the present truly acquired that far. The quantity is undisclosed, however given the present’s status, one can fairly assume it might’ve been rather a lot. Whereas it’s good that the primary forged and creators don’t go residence empty, it sucks that the pay solely applies to them and never the present’s crew, and even leftover supporting forged members who would’ve made the leap from season 4 to 5. Past that, with the data given, possibly it simply makes extra sense to allow them to end the present on their phrases as a substitute of shedding all that cash in a dumber manner? Need extra io9 information? Try when to anticipate the most recent Marvel and Star Wars releases, what’s subsequent for the DC Universe on movie and TV, and the whole lot it’s essential to find out about Home of the Dragon and Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Energy. Originally published at Irvine News HQ

#Irvine News HQ

0 notes

gliklofhameln · 3 years

Text

The Christianity that eventually emerged from the tradition of Paul, Augustine, Anselm and Aquinas had strong Judaic elements. It spoke of faith, hope, charity, righteousness, love, forgiveness, the dignity of the human person and the sanctity of life. It valued humility and compassion. It spoke of a God who loves his creatures. But it also contained strands that were undeniably Greek and in striking contrast with the way Jews read the Hebrew Bible. The following are some of them.

The first and most obvious is universality. Judaism is a principled and unusual combination of universality and particularity: the universality of God, and the particularity of the ways in which we relate to God. The God of Israel is the God of all humanity, but the religion of Israel is not, and is not intented to be, the religion of all humanity. You do not have to be part of the Sinai covenant, or even the covenant of Abraham, to reach heaven and achieve salvation.

Pauline Christianity rejected this. The upside of this is its inclusivity, expressed most famously in Paul’s striking statement, ‘There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female’ (Galatians 3:28). The downside is its denial of any other route of salvation. Extra ecclesiam non est salus: ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’ Universality is supremely characteristic of Greek thought in the classic age between the sixth and third pre-Christian centuries (though of course it was not applied in their religious understanding). Above all it is the legacy of Plato, who utterly devalued particulars in favour of the universal form of all things. For Plato truth is universal and eternal or it is not truth at all. In that sense, Paul and Plato are soulmates.

The second is dualism. To a far greater extent that Judaism, Christianity after Paul develops a series of dualisms, between body and soul, the physical and the spiritual, earth and heaven, this life and the next, with the emphasis on the second of each pair. The body, says Paul in Romans, is recalcitrant. ‘What I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do’ (Romans 7:15). There is nothing like this in Jewish literature. To be sure there is the ‘evil inclination’, but no suggestion that because of our embodied condition we are slaves to sin. The entire set of contrasts — soul as against body, the afterlife as against this life — is massively Greek with much debt to Plato and traces of Gnosticism. Paul’s occasionally ambivalent remarks about sexuality and marriage also have no counterpart in mainstream Judaism.

Third is the Pauline reinterpretation, one of the most radical in the history of religion, of the story of Adam and Eve and ‘the Fall’, and the consequent tragic view of the human condition. There is no such interpretation of the passage in the Hebrew Bible. According to Judaism we are not destined to sin. In the very next chapter, before Cain murders his brother Abel, God reminds him of his essential freedom: ‘Sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you can dominate it’ (Genesis 4:7). The collective forgiveness of humankind occurs, in the Hebrew Bible, after the Flood. ‘Never again,’ says God, ‘will I curse the ground because of humans, even though every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood’ (Genesis 8:21).

The human tragedy as described by Paul is more Greek than Jewish, and as for the idea of inherited sin, it is already negated in the sixth pre-Christian century by both Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Of course, in Christianity, tragedy is avoided by salvation: but salvation in this sense, the existential delivrance of the human person from the grip of sin, does not exist in Judaism. We choose. Sometimes we choose wrongly. We atone (in biblical times through the Temple service, post-biblically by repentance) and God forgives.

Fourth is the potential for the separation, unknown in Judaism, between ‘faith’ and ‘works’. In Judaism the two go hand in hand, Faithfulness is a matter of how you behave, not what your believe. Believing and doing are part of a single continuum, and both are a measure of a living relationship characterised by loyalty. In general one of the great differences between classical Greek and Hebraic thought thought is the immense emphasis in the latter on the will. We are, on a Jewish view, what we choose to be, and it is in the realm of choice, decision and action that the religious drama takes place. The Greek view emphasises far more the role of fate and the futility of fighting against it. Under its influence Christianity became more a religion of acceptance than protest — the characteristic stance of the Hebrew prophets.

The fifth and most profound difference lies in the way the two traditions understood the key phrase in which God identifies himself to Moses at the burning bush. ‘Who are you? asks Moses. God replies, cryptically, Ehyeh asher ehyeh. This was translated into Greek as ego eimi ho on, and into Latin as ego sum qui sum, meaning ‘I am who I am’ or ‘I am he who is’. The early and medieval Christian theologians all understood the phrase to be speaking about ontology, the metaphysical nature of God’s existence. It meant that he was ‘Being-itself, timeless, immutable, incorporeal, understood as the subsiding act of all existing’. Augustine defines God as that which does not change and cannot change. Aquinas, continuing the same tradition, reads the Exodus formula as saying that God is ‘true being, that is being that is eternal, immutable, simple, self-sufficient, and the cause and principal of every creature’.

But this is the God of Aristotle and the philosophers, not the God of Abraham and the prophets. Ehyeh asher ehyeh means none of these things. It means ‘I will be what, where, or how I will be’. The essential element of the phrase is the dimension omitted by all the early Christian translations, namely the future tense. God is defining himself as the Lord of history who is about to intervene in an unprecedented way to liberate a group of slaves from the mightiest empire of the ancient world and lead them on a journey towards liberty. Already in the eleventh century, reacting against the neo-Aristotelianisn that he saw creeping into Judaism, Judah Halevi made the point that God introduces himself at the beginning of the Ten Commandments not as God who created heaven and earth, but by saying, ‘I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.’

Far from being timeless and immutable, God in the Hebrew Bible is active, engaged, in constant dialogue with his people, calling, urging, warning, challenging and forgiving. When Malachi says in the name of God, ‘I the Lord do not change’ (Malachi 3:6), he is not speaking about his essence as pure being, the unmoved mover, but about his moral commitments. God keeps his promises even when his children break theirs. What does not change about God are the covenants he makes with Noah, Abraham and the Israelites at Sinai.

So remote is the God of pure being — the legacy of Plato and Aristotle, that the distance is bridged in Christianity by a figure that has no counterpart in Judaism, the Son of God, a person who is both human and divine. In Judaism we are all both human and divine, dust of the earth yet breathing God’s breath and bearing God’s image. These are profoundly different theologies.

— Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks zt”l, in The Great Partnership: God, Science and the Search for Meaning

#jumblr #judaism #rabbi lord jonathan sacks #christianity #myposts

176 notes · View notes

steddie-fanfic-recs · 8 months

Text

Wish You Were Here

by Al0homora

Rating: Mature Archive Warning: No Archive Warnings Apply

Relationship: Steve Harrington/Eddie Munson, Minor or Background Relationship(s)

Character: Steve Harrington, Eddie Munson, Robin Buckley, Nancy Wheeler, Dustin Henderson, Maxine "Max" Mayfield, Eleven | Jane Hopper, Lucas Sinclair, Mike Wheeler, Will Byers, Jim "Chief" Hopper, Joyce Byers, Wayne Munson, Original Characters

Additional Tags: Summer Fic, Beaches, Small Towns, Alternate Universe - Canon Divergence, Witness Protection, Slow Burn, Friends to Lovers, Depressed Steve Harrington, Suicidal Thoughts, Self-Esteem Issues, Eddie Munson Lives, Eddie Munson is a Sweetheart, Gay Eddie Munson, Bisexual Steve Harrington, Self-Indulgent, Coastal Towns, Mutual Pining, Coming Out, Self-Acceptance, Period-Typical Homophobia, Getting Together, a lot of pining, Music as metaphor, Musician Eddie Munson, Musician Steve Harrington, finding yourself in your twenties, Vulnerable Steve Harrington, The Mortifying Ordeal of Being Known, Stubborn Eddie Munson, poor comunication, Tooth Rotting Fluff, these boys have a lot of feelings, Reunions, Sharing a Bed, Alternating Perspectives, Angst and Hurt/Comfort, Romantic Fluff

Words: 59,578 Chapters: 18/18

Summary

When Steve Harrington starts getting cryptic postcards in the mail in the fall of 1988, he finds that he can't ignore them, and what they might mean. The others have moved on. Robin, Nancy and Jonathan are finishing college and getting jobs, and the kids are close to graduating. With little else to do in the late spring of '89, and just wanting to know the truth, he decides to follow the bread crumb trail these post cards have created, and go in search of their sender. Maybe it'll be one last nice thing he can do for the Party before they all go their separate ways for good, well and truly leaving him in the dust. What starts out as a trip to find one missing person, whom they all assumed to be dead, turns into a journey that allows him to find himself along the way. Or: The summertime beach fic that absolutely no one asked for, because Steve Harrington deserves a vacation.

#steddie #steddie fic rec #multi-chaptered #part of a series #50-100k #future fic #slow burn #friends to lovers #mutual pining #getting together #musician eddie #musician steve #fluff #bed sharing #angst #hurt/comfort

14 notes · View notes

satrangee-ray · 3 years

Text

MEET MY MC:

Dr. Inara Hepburn (she/they)

Doctor, internal medicine | Leader of the Diagnostics team at Bloom Edenbrook Hospital, Boston.

Fiction novel writer | Published books include 'Phoenix' and 'The blurry insides of Truth' | Pen name: Indradhanush.

Non-binary | biromantic | demisexual | Out and proud.

Queer rights activist.

More below the cut—

Physical features:

Height: 5 ft 8 inches

Eye colour: Green

Hair colour: Dark brown

Current face claim: A customized cartoon character from Avatoon.

General info:

Birthdate: 21st May, 1992

Age: 29 years

Zodiac: Gemini

Birthstone: Emerald

Ancestral background: Indian, from mom's side, American from Dad's.

Hometown: LA, California (born); Kolkata, West Bengal (brought up).

Education: St. Jonathan's Convent, Kolkata; Presidency University, Kolkata; Boston University School of Medicine.

Nationality: Citizen of India, applied for a green card in the US.

Family: Manimala B. Hepburn (Mom, passed away in 2017), Thomas Hepburn (Dad, dead to Inara, they'll kill me on knowing that I've mentioned him here), Juthika Banerjee (Maternal aunt), Bhaskar Banerjee (Maternal uncle), Swara Banerjee (Cousin), Ayan Goswami and Vaani Sinha (Childhood friends, chosen family).

S/O(s): Pranani Dutta (ex, dated for 4 years) Vaani Sinha (ex, a brief trial before realizing it wouldn't work out), Dr. Ethan Jonah Ramsey (current long term partner).

Nicknames: Rookie (Ethan), Inu (Pranani), Nars (literally everyone), Tara (family members), Kokil (mom).

Personality traits: Witty, empathetic, kind as to let people walk all over them. Alternates between extreme don't-give-a-f*ck and extreme people pleasing attitudes, struggles to say no. Sarcastic to the bone, and a complete clown in front of people close to her. Communist, idealistic, but passionate enough to put in the work to get the world to the place she deems it should be.

Random facts:

Inara is bilingual. She can converse fluently in English, Bengali, or Hindi, and is currently learning Spanish for her newfound love of Spanish music.

Proud owner of a typewriter, Geetabitan, the entire Hercule Poirot book collection, and the Diagnostics Principles by Dr. Ethan Ramsey.

Having grown up among extreme financial crunches, Inara is a bit too stingy for their own good. They squeeze toothpaste out of tubes till the last drop, choose to buy only specific vegetables according to cost efficiency, stitch and alter old clothes to reuse multiple times, and cannot for their life attend a single rich people event without wearing a constant "save me" look on their face.

She can sing. Really well, but she sucks at playing an instrument. Or… she can do both, but not simultaneously. She barely learnt to play a little bit of the harmonium and the ukulele, but she always wanted a partner who either has a good voice or plays an instrument. Luckily for her, Ethan has a passable singing voice, but she had fallen for him a little more when she had gotten to know he plays the cello.

Inara's 3 main life obsessions include rainbow merchandise, clothing in general, and earphones. They can sell themselves for the love of these goods, and if you as much as touch these belongings of theirs, they will set you on fire. An important ground rule they always establish with their intercourse partner is that their clothes cannot be harmed in the process of taking them off. Ethan had once ripped off a button, and they did not talk to him for an entire day until he ordered ten more such satin shirts at his own expense.

Inara loves cats! Animals in general, but more specifically cats. No wonder she's dating Ethan.

Rabindrasangeet SNOB, their favourite pass-time with Naveen is to mutually obsess over the white-bearded man's songs. They also have sort of an inside joke with him, that they might secretly be related to him, cause he and their mother share the same maiden surname, whereas he and they, an incredible and easy bond.

Inara has two patent nicknames she loves to address other people with. The first one is Honey, which is mostly used as a sarcastic form of address, and the second B*tch, is used as an affectionate one.

They are a self-proclaimed wannabe stereotypical queerperson. They want to have at least 7 piercings in weird places on their body, and tattoos depicting random stuff like a cat in those savage sunglasses, or deep quotes saying "stay strong". But unfortunately, they are not strong enough to even think about the prospect of needles piercing their skin. Hence, they try to treasure that one nose piercing their mom had gotten done on them when they were little. As of now they also drink iced coffee, reply in key-smashes, pity queerphobes with a passion, and look forward to the day they'll be brave enough to dye their entire hair blue, orange, or purple, and carry it off in style.

So that was my entry for the 'Meet my MC' event. I was so stoked ever since this was announced, but clueless for the longest time regarding what to post and how to post it. I'm so happy I finally did this, and I can't wait to know what everyone thinks.

Tagging: @openheartfanfics @adiehardfan @irisofpurple @barbean

#choices oph #open heart #open heart fanfiction #dr ethan ramsey #mc x ethan #meet my mc #Inara Hepburn

21 notes · View notes

beholdme · 3 years

Text

All the Many Shades of Gerry - Chapter 18

Chapters: 18/19

Fandom: The Magnus Archives (Podcast)

Rating: Teen And Up Audiences

Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply

Relationships: Martin Blackwood/Gerard Keay/Jonathan “Jon” Sims | The Archivist, Martin Blackwood/Gerard Keay, Martin Blackwood/Jonathan “Jon” Sims | The Archivist, Gerard Keay/Jonathan “Jon” Sims | The Archivist

Characters: Martin Blackwood, Jonathan “Jon” Sims | The Archivist, Gerard Keay, Tim Stoker (The Magnus Archives), Sasha James, Gertrude Robinson, Elias Bouchard

Additional Tags: Alternate Universe, Library AU, Librarian Jon, Artist Gerry, Trans Male Character, Trans Martin Blackwood, Canon Asexual Character, Asexual Jonathan “Jon” Sims | The Archivist, Ace Subtype - Sex Positive, Polyamory, Fluff, Fluff and Angst, Romantic Fluff, Falling In Love, Boys in Skirts, Kissing, Demisexual Gerard Keay, Minor Character Death, Past Character Death, Canon-Typical Child Neglect, Implied/Referenced Child Abuse, Flirting, Minor Jonathan “Jon” Sims | The Archivist/Tim Stoker, Adventures in Hair Dying, Happy Ending, Banter, Gerry has a lot of sass, Gerard Keay is Morticia Adams, Jon is a very grumpy Librarian, Martin adores them anyway.

Summary: In which Gerry is a kaleidoscope and Jon and Martin can’t help falling in love with him.

He happens to love them back.

Find it on Ao3

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17]

They cook, they feed him, they chat away about inane things. Their presence soothes Martin and their voices fill him with the warmth sucked away by his unexpected encounter.

Gerry helps him make tea after dinner, and they all sit at the table together, even the cats sleeping nearby, cuddled up into one big, grey and black fluff ball.

"I think," Martin begins, voice croaky, "That I would like to tell you now."

"We're ready to listen if you're ready to tell us." Jon offers softly. Gerry reaches over to take one of his hands, turning it over to kiss the palm sweetly.

Martin talks, voice quiet and even.

"In the beginning, it was just a normal relationship. Except for the fact that he was almost twenty years older than me, and about a million times richer. I didn't know that at first, of course. He was just a middle-aged man I met in a gay bar, who didn't seem to mind that I was trans. I felt secure in our relationship, if not exactly nurtured or adored. I had never felt very secure before, and it seemed like enough, you know?

"He took me out, brought me a few things in the beginning. He was very dominant, sexually, but I was a lot less sure of my own preferences back then and I thought it was fine. He never even blinked at my trashy flat or cheap clothes, and I didn't even realise just how much money he had for a long time. Maybe I just can't really comprehend that much money, even now.

"When I was twenty-two, my mother died, and…" He huffs out a shaky, emotional laugh. "Well, I was a real mess. I lost my job, and almost my flat. Peter started paying for things, my rent, clothes, meals. He said that I needed somewhere to live and had to eat and look presentable, and it was his pleasure to provide those things for me. It made me feel a bit gross, but I struggled to find another job, and so I accepted it."

Martin hesitates here, before continuing. "The problem started when I wasn't interested in sex one night."

"He forced you?" Gerry interrupts to ask dangerously, threat explicit in his quiet words. His eyes seem to glow faintly in the growing dark of the room, as the sun sets. He wishes, more than ever, that he had helped Jon kick the shit out of Peter Lukas, instead of stopping him.

Martin sighs, eyes pressed tight closed for a second. "Not exactly. He simply pointed out that he paid for me to exist. So I made myself interested."

Gerry's hands tighten into fists and he moves them under the table where Martin can't see them anymore. Jon suddenly looks very pale. They share a look, neither able to see much difference between 'forcing' and what sounds a lot like financial abuse to them.

Martin pulls his legs up to his chest, curling around them as he goes on. "Our relationship became a lot more transactional after that night. I disengaged whatever feelings I had left for him and simply drew all my emotions down deep into myself. I wasn't ashamed to be getting paid for sex, but I felt like I had lost my own consent in the matter. Peter honestly seemed like he had gotten exactly what he wanted. Money was nothing to him, and he had someone to take out on his arm or shag whenever he wanted, without the work of a real relationship, or the complications of unfortunate attachments.

"So, if I needed something, I told him. He set a date, took me out, fucked me. He gave me however much I needed."

Martin shrugs, looking down at his hands. "I honestly hated it. Not because of the prostitution itself, sex has always been very nurturing for me, and I sometimes caught the idea that it was only another way to care for people, and being paid for that is perfectly fine, if you're doing it for the right reasons. The real issue was Peter himself. He had this way of making me feel… bereft and hollow, even before the money came into it."

A few tears track down his face, although his face remains rather blank, in a numb way. It's only as he admits the next words that his voice breaks and the heartbreak works its way out again.

"I was very foolish. Looking back, I can see that I was still a child in a lot of ways. I put myself into a situation that damaged me, but I accept the consequences of those actions, both then and now. I- I-"

"Martin," Jon whispers, warm love clear in his voice. It's nothing but an offer of support, one that he desperately needs right now.

He presses his eyes shut, forcing away the stutter and the lump of tears. "I knew I wasn't going to be able to get out of it, even if I got a crap, minimum wage job that I was qualified for. So I started applying for any work that was available. I made every application exactly what they wanted, and I hoped for the best. When Elias offered me the job at Magnus, I took it happily. Since then I found out that Peter knows him, and probably arranged the job for me, but at the time I had no idea. Looking back, I know that it's a miracle that I got out of it at all. Peter could have chosen to make my life a living hell. Instead, he accepted the several firm rejections I offered him.

"He promised me that we weren't done, that I would be back, but he left me alone. I was done. I moved on with my life, even if I had to lie to do it." Martin sighs, shakes out his shoulders, the most difficult part over now.

"I had always planned to be open about it with my next relationships, but they were so fleeting that it never even came up. By the time I fell for Jon, it had become a secret, one I was loathed to dig up for a relationship I was convinced wouldn't last. I thought to myself, 'Why ruin something that makes me happy?' I assumed it would fall apart anyway, and it was easier to allow it to be in the past.

"But I am sorry. I'm sorry that I never told you. I'm sorry you had to find out from him. I'm sorry that we've been together for more than a year and we basically live together, and I've put you in this position. I love you both, very very much."

"When did you eventually decide that our relationship was going to last?" Jon queries, genuine curiosity in his voice.

There's a beat of hazy silence at the abrupt change in tone and topic.

"Oh, ah-" Martin stumbles over his words, unsure how blatantly honest to be. He chooses the real truth, no matter how unfortunate. "The day that I got Luna was the first time I really accepted that you both loved me."

Jon simply raises an eyebrow, completely unconcerned. "What about you, Gerry?"

"With you," Gerry responds easily, "at the hospital in Morden, when I was so panicked that I couldn't decide if I wanted to kill you or handcuff us together for the rest of our lives. With Martin-"

He breaks off with a laugh, colouring slightly. "It was the day we dyed my hair purple."

"The first time we had sex?" Martin asks, surprised at such a hedonistic answer.

He laughs again, more confidently this time. "No, actually, although that was spectacular. It was afterwards, when you braided my hair for the first time. That was the first time anyone had ever braided my hair. It made me feel so… So honoured. Like I was the most precious thing to you."

"Gerry, you are the most precious thing to me. You both are." Martin whispers, tears creeping back into his voice.

"Good, because the feeling is mutual, and we desperately need you around to keep us in line," Jon tells him, voice unusually firm and confident.

"What about you?" Martin remembers to ask him, at risk of floating away in his post confession haze. "When did you know?"

"With Gerry, it was when we were teenagers. I kissed him for the first time, and he laughed at me. I just knew he was my soulmate." Jon rolls his eyes at this, but his voice is full of blatant affection. "With you, Martin, it was- Well, to be quite honest with you, there was no one special moment. It was a million tiny moments, all of them special and perfect to me. Every cup of tea, every frown while you were writing poetry, glasses pushed haphazardly up into your lovely hair. The easy, glorious look on your face the day you met Gerry for the first time, as if you weren't even capable of not falling in love with him, just as I hadn't been. It was especially the days that I would come out of the library and find you waiting for me after work. This weight of total surety would fill my chest and leave me gasping, needing you."

Jon sighs, his own eyes a little bright. "I suppose it was really the night you kissed me in the rain, and every soft moment since then has only affirmed the way I knew you were it for me."

Jon smiles at Martin so beatifically that he forgets to breathe for a moment.

"We love you too, Martin," Gerry tells him, reaching out to grasp a hand. Jon takes the other. "And we wouldn't want you any other way."

***

The next morning, Martin wakes to find Jon eyeing his phone intently. Gerry is asleep on his other side, and he feels warmly cocooned between them. Gentle cloudy light fills the space, encouraging the comfortable cozy atmosphere of their bed.

"What's wrong, love?" Martin asks sleepily, snuggling into his side.

"I got-" Jon pauses, utterly flummoxed. "I got paid a bonus."

"What?" Equally perplexed, Martin takes his phone, squinting as he tries to read the screen.

The banking app is open, and there is indeed a deposit there, Jon's normal salary amount, but on completely the wrong date.

In the purpose box, it simply reads 'Entertainment Value'.

"You don't think," Jon starts, hesitant, "that Elias paid me…"

"For hitting Peter Lukas?" Martin finishes, "His own husband."

They blink at each other, bewildered.

"Does that seem… slightly cursed, to you?" Jon whispers as if Elias might hear him. Even worse if Elias could hear them, and would probably enjoy being accused of having a cursed relationship.

"Yes, completely cursed. What is up with those two?" Martin looks as if he's smelled something bad.

"We absolutely cannot spend this money, right?" Jon asks. "Lest we are cursed with their relationship dysfunction."

"Correct," Martin responds firmly, shuddering. "Can we donate it to the animal shelter?"

"I think that's a wonderful idea." Jon's relief at this resolution is palpable.

He does it straight away, as if even having the money in his bank account might ruin their lives.

They let out a simultaneous sigh as the transfer goes through.

"That is wild," Martin mutters as he snuggles back down.

Jon tosses his phone away, no longer interested in it. Instead, he wraps his arms around Martin, burying his nose in his lover's hair. It smells of bergamot and tea leaves and the ocean in winter, just like Martin himself, and Jon luxuriates in the moment.

"I love you, Martin K. Blackwood." He whispers into the soft air.

"Even if I don't actually have a middle name?" Martin whispers back.

"Especially because of that." Jon chuckles.

They lay together, the gentle moments of the morning flowing around them. Later, they get up and shower together. They drink tea in front of the big windows in the living space. Martin reads a book from Gerry's shelves, his own books still packed, and Jon wanders off to play his piano where it is randomly set up, right in the middle of Gerry's typical painting area.

Gerry himself appears downstairs, still sleepy and bleary-eyed. He curls up with his head in Martin's lap, listening to Jon fill the flat with gentle music.

It's the soft sort of moment that each of them had been wishing for all their lives, full of love, and family, and a home of their very own.

#the magnus archives #jonathan sims #martin blackwood #gerry keay #jongerrymartin #fic #also on ao3

12 notes · View notes