#if people were actually educated they would also understand how the motivation to do the same crimes still lives on | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

matan4il · 5 months

Note

THISTHISTHIS!!!

Like, I personally don't consider myself a "Zionist" in the modern sense. I have several disputes with the secular Herzli-esque Zionist movement (both political and theological), but I certainly wouldn't consider myself an anti-Zionist. I have a lot of respect for much of what the Tzionim have accomplished for the sake of Jews, and for Israel, even if we might disagree over correct methods and motivations.

And I definitely associate myself with the traditional Zion-loving Jewish beliefs (what you called the "Zionist nature of Judaism"). Of course I do. These are core tenants of Judaism that have been around since the days of Avraham, and they're so central that I don't really understand how any Jew couldn't believe them. Wherever in the world we might reside, the piece of land now known as Israel has always been Home.

אם אשכחך ירושלים תשכח ימיני

Hi, lovely to meet you! ^u^

I wanna reinforce your last paragraph SO MUCH. Judaism is so fundamentally tied to the Land of Israel, to Jews loving it, to sanctifying our bond with this place, and I have always felt exactly that: when I'm abroad, I'm never quite at peace, not until I'm back on Israel's soil, and have that sense of I'm home. And it always makes me so happy whenever I hear from non-Israeli Jews, that they feel something similar when they come to visit Israel. It's what I believe all native people feel when they get to experience standing on their ancestral land, whether they live there or not. It's something that allows us to feel connected, not just to the earth beneath our feet, but also to our ancestors who lived here, and to generations upon generations of our people who yearned to return here.

As for the modern political movement that is Zionism, maybe I'll just mention my personal story. I was born in Communist Romania, at a time when the financial situation was incredibly dire, food was rationed, and generally speaking, the regime had control over everything. Its power over the citizens was limitless, and quite a few people who were a part of this regime, were antisemitic. They used that limitless power to persecute Jews, even as Communism supposedly vowed all its citizens would be treated equally. Some of what was done to my family was actually described by my great uncle, Norman Manea, in his memoir, The Hooligan's Return. My life was in danger at one point. At the time, no citizen of a communist country could leave for a western one, which Israel was. Jews could be jailed for simply expressing the desire to leave for Israel (officially recognized here as "prisoners of Zion"). But in Romania, there was a unique agreement achieved thanks to the chief rabbi of Romanian Jews at the time, Rabbi Rosen (who my grandfather and his brother worked with, so he was also the rabbi who married my parents). Israel paid Communist Romania for every Jew allowed to make aliyah. IDK how much Israel had to pay for my parents, for my grandparents, and for baby me, but I know Romania demanded a higher price for people with higher education, which all of the adults in my family had. Most importantly, being brought to Israel, and getting here proper medical and nutritional care after the regime's antisemitic abuse, saved my life. I celebrate my aliyah day every year as my second birthday, because I got a second chance at life on that day.

And at the end of the day, that's what informs my personal view of Zionism, this personal experience. It leads me to feel that if Zionism saved even one Jewish person, it's the right thing to support it. And Zionism actually saved so many more than that, Jews and non-Jews. It still is! We don't talk about it enough, but when Assad regime in Syria butchered its citizens during the Civil War there, Israel got the last of the Syrian Jews out. When the war between Ukraine and Russia broke out, Israel helped to get out Jews from the war zones in Ukraine, as well as Israeli non-Jews (and even a few Arab friends, including from enemy countries, of Israeli Arabs, who the latter asked for Israel to save), as well as the families of Ukrainian Righteous Among the Nations (non-Jews who risked themselves to save Jewish people during the Holocaust). And when the Houthis, the Yemenite terrorist group funded by Iran, endangered Jews in Yemen, Israel got them out.

No political movement is without fault, obviously. But I think all of the above makes Zionism worthy of support. At least mine.

You said, "These are core tenants of Judaism that have been around since the days of Avraham, and they're so central that I don't really understand how any Jew couldn't believe them."

I agree so much! To remove the many Zionist elements of Judaism, right down to its holy language being Hebrew, which is tied to Israel, is to distort it so much, that it's no longer Judaism.

Whenever I come across an anti-Zionist Jew, I try to keep in mind the following things:

They might be pretending to be Jewish. I've seen more than one anti-Zionist online, claiming they can't be antisemitic, because they're Jewish themselves. Beyond the fact that as a statement, that's NOT true (someone can be gay with internalized homophobia, a woman with internalized misogyny, and in the same way, a Jew who has internalized an antisemitic narrative), it turned out in some cases, it was also factually untrue, as the person was eventually exposed as lying about being Jewish.

This phenomenon has also made it into the news at least twice relatively recently, once when high profile anti-Zionist "Jews" from Germany were exposed as non-Jews.

Another is connected to the Twitter account of "Jewish Voice for Peace," an organization that, despite its title, doesn't actually require its members to be Jewish, but uses its title to present itself as a Jewish organization.

A member who operates the Twitter account of JVP accidentally tweeted from his personal account, and so ended up exposing himself as a Muslim tweeting, "As Jews..."

2. Those who actually are anti-Zionist Jews often turn out to be very disconnected from their Jewish identity, except in order to use it to lend their anti-Zionist statements "more weight." (as if a gay man's homophobia should be listened to more, or be more acceptable, just because it's not homophobia coming from a straight person) A really funny example is Ariel Gold, who keeps trying to flaunt her "Judaism" as meaningful to her identity, but in doing so, keeps accidentally exposing how ignorant she is regarding some really basic Jewish concepts. Like that time she was in Iran, and gushed over a picture she took of a menorah... except she didn't know that a menorah wouldn't have 19 branches. She was just gushing over a random, Iranian candelabra.

3. And then to some anti-Zionist Jews, their Jewish identity does matter, but... the sad thing is, they're either very ignorant over what it entails (so they buy into the antisemitic anti-Zionist narrative without knowing better), or they just don't feel they personally need Israel, so they have no issue being anti-Zionists, to be "good Jews." In this context, I always think about this documentary I saw called "Gay Republicans," where they interviewed an openly gay man, living with his boyfriend, who didn't wanna be a dad himself, so he had no issue insisting that gay people shouldn't be allowed to become parents. I guess some fellow straight republicans would say he's a "good gay."

There's probably more to be said about this, but I think this kind of covers a big part of the people I've come across online. But here's the thing: I believe in the value of Jewish solidarity, I know how many Holocaust survivors talked about how that's what saved them back then, and I am gonna stand by that value, and care so much about the safety and well being of groups 2 and 3, even if they don't give a shit about mine.

Take care, and feel free to write me again, if you feel like chatting some more on this. Chag Sameach and Am Yisrael Chai! xoxox

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

65 notes · View notes

thekingofwinterblog · 8 months

Text

How Cole Became Human - Dragon Age

So in the Dragon Age Universe, amongst the countless, countless amounts of Abominations, demons, and spirits that end up on the physical side of the Veil, there are only two known cases where the beings that crossed turned, not into abominations, or a physical form of their fade self, but into actual people, with motivations, dreams, desires, fears, and all that comes with being a human being.

Cole, a spirit of compassion.

And Harren, a desire Demon.

Both of these are very, very interesting for a whole host of reasons, and the question of why these two turned out the way they are, are many.

The fact that this is not limited to either spirits or demons is interesting on it's own, but exactly what it was that made Harren so unique is hard to say when we dont know anything about his past other than the fact he presumably was pulled across the veil by the desires of his current lover Wade withouth needing a body to inhabit, and it all developed from there.

However, we can make some educated guesses from looking at Cole's past, and pinpoint the moment he turned from a spirit into a person.

Now anyone who has played inquisition knows Cole as a troubled, but well meaning cinnamon roll, who deserves the world. Knowing how he is now, it's easy to imagine his past as a serial killer murdering mages who wanted to die as a completely well meaning, but ultimately, terribly misguided soul

The truth however is much, much murkier than the image cole unitentionally presents in inquistion.

Cole during his days thinking he was a ghost in the White Spire and not knowing what he was, was a far, far darker creature than one might assume.

Now the actual, underlying motivation that Cole presents is true, his main reason for killing the mages was him believing that they really did want to die, and that he could help them by doing so... but that is not how Cole in the moment thought of it.

It's just how he in hindsight looks back at all of it, and has analyzed his own actions and the reasons behind them.

In the moment though, Cole didnt know anything. he didnt know why he was doing any of it, not truly. He felt that he was "Real" in those moment, that it was something he had to do in order to not cease existing basically.

He was terrified of ceasing to be, not knowing what he was, but killed the mages because he felt he had to do it, withouth really knowing why. When Cole speaks later of now knowing it was wrong, he isnt just talking about the fact that he stupidly missed that there were other, better ways to help people, but also just how misguided his complete lack of understanding and ability to affect his own impulses were, and the catastrophic results that lack of self control and knowledge led toi.

He was not withouth kindness and more noble trait, but Cole in Asunder, is a far, far more sinister, dark, cowardly and frankly disturbing individual.

even after his character development, the Cole at the end of Asunder, when he is confronted by Lord Seeker Lambert, and forced to confront what he is, seems a far, far cry from the Cole of inquisition, as the mocking of Lambert breaks him, breaks the belief that there was ever actually a cole, that he was anything but a stupid spirit that had convinced himself he was a person.

Which leads us to the moment that Cole actually becomes a person, in the time period between his banishment by Lambert, and the epilogue of Asunder, where he confronts, and kills the unarmored and unarmed Lambert.

The young man leaned close, his expression one of deadly intent.

"There was a Cole," he whispered.

"You forgot him in that cell, and I heard his cries when no one else would. I went to him, and held his hand in the darkness until it was over. When the templars found him, they erased everything to hide their shame . . . and I was helpless to act."

Sorrow, and perhaps even regret, crossed the young man's face, but only for a moment.

"I'm not helpless any longer." The words sent a chill through Lambert's heart.

"What do you want from me?"

The young man smiled coldly.

"I want you to look into my eyes."

Cole's actions here lines up perfectly with the later confrontation with the man who murdered the original Cole, a seething, burning rage, and making the choice to murder that son of a bitch with extreme prejudice.

And yet despite doing something that is completely, totally against everything that compassion is, Cole does not become a Demon.

at all. Despite all traditional knowledge about spirits becoming demons telling us that Cole should have become a demon here, he doesnt, despite his own fears.

And the original plans for his personal quest also adds to this, because there was going to be a choice to let him murder the piece of shit that left Cole in that cell... and he would not become a demon as a result, despite Varric and Solas fears during his quest.

Why?

Because it is his choice to do all of it. Spirits change when their original purpose is twisted by the direct actions and feelings of an outside force, usually a host, or a summoner... but there is no such here, either when Cole murdered Lambert, or in his personal quest.

Now you have the option of having Cole backtrack, become a spirit again by siding with Solas limited understanding of the situation, but im not here to talk about that route.

Im here to talk about the other route, where you reaffirm the path Cole Chose to go down when he killed Lambert for all his many, many sins.

He wanted Lambert to die, and he went through with it, all on his own choice. and by doing so he completely changed his very nature. We dont know how Cole learned about the details of the original cole, but it was the discovery of that path, and the resulting actions he took from that path, where he completely rejected the nature of what he embodied, that Cole became a true person, and changed his nature down to his bones.

That was the key.

With this in mind, it's not hard to see how Harren went down the same road.

Harren's entire dynamic with Wade, is that he is the businessman of the relationship, he is the one that has to reign in the genuis of his boyfriend in order to keep their business running, so Wade doesnt have to go back to "Living on Gruel".

In other words, he had to make a personal choice of his own free will, to act the complete opposite of a desire demon, just like Cole had to.

And the moment he did that, he became an actual person, with all the contradictions that involves... just like Cole did.

#dragon age #dragon age origins #dragon age inquisition #dragon age awakening #cole #harren #wade #meta #spirits #demons #lord seeker lambert

43 notes · View notes

mysadcorner · 2 years

Text

(Tom Holland) Peter Parker Dating Headcanons

- Credit to the gifs owner - Please be specific about characters wanted in requests -

Masterlist Navigation

• Peter would be pretty bashful the first time he saw you. He’d practically have a crush at first sight on you, and regardless of how strong and capable he is you always manage to make him shy.

• He’s one of the most emotional people you could ever meet, and almost everything he does is motivated by his feelings for those around him and what he believes to be right. Because of this you can expect him to be very romantic, and actually quite understanding of what you may be going through much better than the majority of people.

• Peter as a boyfriend is a huge mix of both silly and serious. He’s been through so much trauma in his life that he can spot a serious situation from a mile away, but he also knows just the right way to cheer you up and keep you in a positive mood. It’s a wonderful combo as he’s pretty good at determining what’s right for the situation when he really needs to.

• he’s on the road and travelling a lot, and that’s much more than he usually wants to. Peter would much rather spend time at home with you and the closest people to him while relaxing, but that doesn’t mean the thrill of helping others isn’t enjoyable. He’s always trying his best to make sure you don’t miss him too much (but he honestly misses you so much that he’s constantly lonely and border line sad when you’re far away).

• Peter would happily give up his own life in order to protect you from literally anything and has come to accept this fact a long while ago. He’d hate ti ever put you in danger so he’s definitely secretive about his second life when you first get ti know him deeply - although, this doesn’t really last for long as he feels very guilty keeping things from you.

• Rather than bringing up his adventures and fights with villains at any chance he can get, Peter actually enjoys the mundane and simple things in his life. Doing homework with you, or going out for lunch is definitely something he enjoys and are some of the happiest memories he has of you.

• PDA always makes him shy no matter how much the two of you do it, and he wouldn’t be against it unless you were going absolutely overboard and making people stare or feel uncomfortable. Peter would much rather keep that kind of intimacy for when the two of you were alone.

• Although Peter didn’t have much experience regarding relationships when you two started dating, he definitely is a quick learner. Because of his abilities he catches onto things quickly and is easily doing things better than the average person. Peter is also a great listener, so tell him what you like and he’ll stick to it.

• Peter doesn’t enter a relationship if he doesn’t think it’ll last long. He definitely wants a long term partner that he can see himself settling down with and having a happy future together (including kids and a potential marriage). He wouldn’t like you to feel forced into this, but it’s definitely something you both need to have in common before things get truly serious.

• He would be absolutely torn to shreds if the two of you broke up, and he wouldn’t be himself for a very long time. When in a relationship Peter gives his entire self to his significant other, so the thought of not being enough or not being lived anymore affects his performance in anything. Both his education and life as Spiderman would need to have a break because of the recovery he needs.

232 notes · View notes

spicybylerpolls · 2 months

Note

It's interesting how many people are bothered by the banner on this blog. It's pretty tame. This idea that Mike and Will aren't even allowed to kiss when they were younger because it's inappropriate is crazy to me when we saw Mike and El making out at that same age and people weren't scandalized by watching that. So clearly their issue is that it's 2 boys and they are uncomfortable with adults knowing they want to kiss. I saw someone claim that it wasn't homophobia but they were bothered by the fact that the disclaimer says they will be aged up in polls but then used something from S3 in the banner. But that's because on the show they have mostly been young kids so if you're making a banner there aren't pictures of them randomly as adults lol. It's not a big deal at all. People don't even think through why they are mad. They just have a trigger response to things they don't like and go off about it. It's like they are throwing darts and hoping one of the reasons they've come up with will stick and actually be a legit issue. But I have yet to see an actually criticism of this blog that was fair. All of it is coming from young people scandalized by sex and freaking out over the details and kinks people came up with. They equate "kink" with something sinister and predatory. I sincerely hope that they get educated better at some point because their attitude is a big problem. When the fandom is more active there is going to be a lot more people talking like this. And if there is a sex scene that is all anyone is going to be discussing. If it's bothering them now, they won't be able to deal with it later.

Yeah I was genuinely surprised people were/are upset about that too! I understand not liking the blog as a whole, but to single out the banner as some kind of gotcha is def strange to me. Even some people who like this blog are bothered by it. But it didn't even cross my mind once that the banner would potentially be something folks would have any opinions about at all, negative or positive lol.

Having a S3 banner isn't saying, "Go think of them as their S3 selves!" (And it isn't saying the opposite either- no one can control what others think about). The banner isn't saying anything at all. It's just a banner. Like, there's no sinister or ulterior motive behind it. It was just chosen because it looks cool and because, like you said, we don't have any pictures of them randomly as adults. It's strange to me that people think the banner is "attaching a specific image" to Byler.

But they don't think that about anyone else's profiles. Are people with S1 Byler profile pictures only talking about S1 Byler on their accounts, even when they analyze darker themes? Of course not. So I do think people are grasping at straws and partially motivated by purity culture and homophobia, even if it's internalized homophobia.

And the disclaimer says Byler is aged-up in all the sex-related polls not just to clarify the purpose of the blog as a whole and so people don't have to keep adding "for aged-up Byler" to their submissions, but also for literal reasons. Unless you believe Byler secretly boned off screen already or something, when Byler has sex, whether in the show or post-canon, they will be aged up to at least Stancy's age.

(Some of the anons haven't been specifically related to having sex but to sexuality in general, and people are usually discussing things like hosegate where obviously they aren't aged up. But the actual sex specific questions are clearly talking about Byler in S5 and beyond).

Since the show is going in a more mature direction, it makes sense to talk about sex and sexuality as it relates to Byler. As you put it, "I sincerely hope that they get educated better at some point because their attitude is a big problem. When the fandom is more active there is going to be a lot more people talking like this. And if there is a sex scene that is all anyone is going to be discussing. If it's bothering them now, they won't be able to deal with it later." Very true.

#byler #spicy byler #mike wheeler #will byers #no poll

12 notes · View notes

mdhwrites · 3 months

Note

about your aventurine rant- i don’t think agreeing w/ ratio’s assessment is the best stance to go with. ratio admits himself to his personal bias and he’s shown to be a jackass to people he thinks are stupid. even if he wants to spread education, he’s still mean and rude to people who are ‘less educated’ than himself, and saying aventurine is stupid despite knowing he had no education as a kid is kind of…? and agreeing with the (again, opinionated and biased and ignorant!!!!) statements from sparkle and ratio isn’t the best. aventurine isn’t stupid, gambling requires a level of logic and maths that isn’t elementary, and if he was stupid he sure as hell wouldn’t be one of the stonehearts. we also aren’t sure WHAT ratio’s motives are or how ‘allied’ he is with aventurine. from what little we know they can literally just be allied for one small thing, ratio isn’t against the idea of working for his own goals and we don’t know if ratio would betray aventurine. caution for a gambler isn’t a dumb move.

Before I get into this, I will actually admit that I didn't provide as much evidence as I should have in the first blog for what I knew was a controversial take. Let me correct that.

Let's start first just with your supposition that Ratio isn't an ally of Aventurine's: They are LITERALLY working together. They are LITERALLY both a part of the IPC (the Intelligentsia Guild is a branch of the IPC). Ratio only tries to leave so as to tell their BOSSES that the person assigned to lead this fucked up at step one because he managed to lose all of their leverage. They are LITERALLY working together but here's the thing:

Ratio just wants to know that this gambler has a plan that has a chance to succeed. He would have worked with him if Aventurine had even TRIED to give him one.

Now I won't say the scene is perfect. As far as I'm concerned, Ratio seems to flip flop a bit character wise because he's willing to actively try to hurt Aventurine when later apologizing that he didn't mean to offend. The latter is much more in character for Ratio, who does judge people on merit, even if harshly. Also, the line where he calls Aventurine a Sigonian thrall is just... Not good because it's entirely without reason to be brought up. It's not an answer to Aventurine's question, it's just to point out that he was a slave. It's really bad exposition which a LOT of the stuff about him Sigonian feels like. Not character work, just exposition. This becomes even more true as not true to Ratio's character because Ratio actually does give Aventurine a lot of time despite Aventurine still not being willing to tell him his plan. If it were just that Ratio was racist and biased, he would have left when he said he would and not listened to another word out of Aventurine's mouth. He would have been looking for any reason to drop this Sigonian Thrall like a hot rock. Instead, he sticks around despite the fact that the second Aventurine walks in, the onus of trust is on HIM right now. Aventurine has already fucked up in a slight way by being late and wasting his colleagues time, but also in a major way by losing his gifts and the cornerstones and so now he needs to give Ratio a reason to believe that Aventurine can do this. To trust him as the lead on this job.

But he doesn't. Instead, after trying to point the question back at Ratio, he plays his parents being dead for pity, a manipulation to get Ratio to drop the trust thing because otherwise he has no reason to bring it up. Even in the next line, he admits that his parents DID teach him life lessons. So Ratio should trust him because his parents are dead and because this grown ass man, who has had to theoretically work with a LOT of people, doesn't understand the foundation of literally any partnership. Not because, I dunno... Anything else? Anything tangible? Like Ratio hasn't, besides the out of character racism (again, the man does judge people by their merits and someone who supposedly is against ignorance should not lean into something almost always built on ignorance), given Aventurine a reason not to trust him. To not want to work with the person who is in this room to WORK WITH HIM. But then again, Aventurine gives NO ONE a reason to trust him. Not because of his race but because he's an asshole who seems to think he can just tell people to work with him and they will. The ONLY time he actually offers someone a reason to work with him is at the end of the patch when he's talking to the trailblazer about their deal. Even Black Swan admits she has no reason to work with him besides the fact that she thinks she can trust him because he's a 'good businessman'. He doesn't give Ratio a reason though and he doesn't even TRY to give Sparkle a reason. He doesn't even resort to "Don't you want to be on the winner's side."

Speaking of the racist part: This is... Rough. I am against bigotry in all forms. In theory, I empathize with someone who has been mistreated and mischaracterized for their race. It is dangerous to bring in racism for a fictional race though because it's a very complicated topic, especially when you're using it as effectively exposition on that race. It is how we know what people think of Sigonians after all. If this is meant to be negative stereotyping though, that people are judging him for his eyes and not his actions, then these traits should appear untrue in regards to him. Then he as actually experienced racism.

So what are the traits? Especially the ones most assigned to Aventurine? For the race as a whole, they are, as described by Sparkle to literally point out how Aventurine is following the stereotype: Liars, thieves, social manipulators and wolves in sheep's clothing. So, if we want to say that Ratio and Sparkle are being unfair to Aventurine, ignoring his actions because of his race's stereotype, rather than just pointing out that he is a Sigonian for *shrug* Character exposition mostly frankly? We have to interrogate if Aventurine matches this description:

Liars: I will give him this. While he makes a couple claims he can't verify 100%, he actually hasn't appeared to lie to anyone. The closest he comes is claiming his parents didn't teach him life lessons before then, you know, saying they taught him a life lesson once Ratio drops the subject the statement was useful though. He does actually even correct someone though when it would have been useful for him to have let her be wrong as admitting you stalked someone for longer than they thought is kind of a bad look for you.

Thief: We have not seen him steal anything so this is bluntly untrue. However, he is also never accused of theft or given a chance where stealing might be useful to him and passing it up/or doing it so it's really still up in the air.

Social Manipulators: Aventurine claims that his parents died before he could be taught that trust is an important part of any human relationship. However, he literally says, no ambiguity, that they taught him, "Friends are the weapons of the Avgin." Then with Sparkle, he confirms, "I am an Avgin."

...Did... Did you literally just say that above actually working with people and being nice to others, your culture taught you to use people and see them as tools? Which mind you, IS how Aventurine treats everyone. Everything is quid pro quo. Everyone is out to backstab each other. You cannot escape his game because you're already trapped in it. He will KIDNAP you, say it was saving you, and portray others as villains (he cannot prove Acheron killed Duke Inferno. His story instead could apply to pretty much everyone here but blaming it on Acheron is the most useful here. He also only lists murderous aeons for what she could be, even though he doesn't know. Again, that paints her as dangerous and thus he is the 'safe' option) so as to make his arguments more enticing. He literally uses the death of his parents to get Ratio to drop a subject. Sparkle accuses him of being silver tongued as the only truly direct insult on his character. THIS is the trait she is using the Sigonian bloodline to interrogate and it's the one that holds up the most true for him, especially since he STALKED HER FOR FORTY FIVE MINUTES! If I were in her shoes, I'd have a pretty negative opinion about this creep too, especially because only do that sort of thing to gain information you can use on someone else because you know you don't have leverage on them if you just went and talked to them like a human being, which Aventurine isn't treating Sparkle as even before talking to her.

The ONE kindness I will give him here is that he doesn't blackmail the trailblazer with the truth he has. He promises he'll give us an option after he shows us it. That is a genuinely good moment and good for any redemptive qualities of his character. It is a moment that helps but by no means fixes the rest of these problems.

Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: Acheron saves us. As far as we can tell, he uses honeyed words and an excuse to be in our room in order to make us vulnerable so that he can better use us to his ends, like a wolf pretending to be a sheep. Then he finishes his talk by menacing us and saying that we are already a part of his game. As far as the presentation goes, it looks like he's about to grab us by the shoulders and drown us in the dream pool. It is shot like the moment before an over the top action villain murders one of his henchman with sadistic glee. So yeah, he counts for this one too in my opinion.

So for the stereotype of his race, especially of the one that he is actually accused of being... He just is it. They are not being bigoted towards him, they are being ACCURATE, at least with what he is most commonly doing. After all, even the talk with Himeko ends with him excited to see what his 'friends' will do for him. Now, it is still wrong for them to do. Bigotry is awful but you do have to treat it differently in a narrative where YOU decide what those stereotypes are. To write a character who leans so hard into the negative stereotypes of the race you made... is not a great way to write a character who is trying to gain sympathy because racism is happening against him, especially when he honestly comes across like he'd potentially use this to his advantage.

Final point: Him being a Stoneheart or gambler proves nothing. They are only titles. If you want to SAY it means he's smart, go ahead. Show always beats tell though. A character's actions are more important than their words or titles. Meanwhile, this dumbass rejected help from a colleague who is there to help him and work with him, who he kept waiting, in the same conversation he's talking about needing friends. He stalked someone for 45 minutes who he wants to make his 'friend' which gives her ZERO reason to want to work with him in any capacity. Then he menaces someone he wants to be his FRIEND for NO REASON. Aventurine is not good at his job.

The closest he ever gets to a win is against Himeko, who is BAFFLING in this update, because he's right. She asks for a favor for nothing in return except a title which I just called out as meaningless. He also calls this out, which is showing his hand, before accepting the soft power which... Also makes the soft power moot, meaning he actually did do exactly what Himeko wanted him to. Give him what she wants while owing him nothing. After all, the idea behind soft power is that you garner good will with someone by doing acts that have no strings attached. That people want to be around you because you are simply a good ally to have, not just because you can make a deal with them. Aventurine on the other hand explicitly makes it clear that he's doing this because he plans to call on a favor from us. Not that we HAVE to do it (you know, until the end of his conversation with us in our room which is effectively him saying we WILL help him) but that he WILL make a price for this, removing the good will that he should be trying to gain.

Aventurine having a tragic backstory and having people bring up his race does not dismiss these flaws in his character. When a villain talks about having faced adversity when he was young, that doesn't justify the cruelties he performed. When you tell a bully their abusive to others and they say their parents abused them, that doesn't make continuing the cycle of violence and horrendous treatment correct.

It just means that as a writer, you are using these real world elements to manipulate your audience rather than actually interrogating these matters. Aventurine is not some deep exploration of racism or the effects of slavery on a person. He's a dumbass with a tragic backstory who still needs to prove he's a good person, regardless of his race or upbringing, because so far he is simply not. He could improve with future updates but for the guy we are literally forced to work with in the end?

It's not exactly a good showing, for him or his people, or for the idea that him having been the victim of such injustices is going to actually be explored or have any nuance to them. In other words: It's bad writing.

======+++++======

I have a public Discord for any and all who want to join!

I also have an Amazon page for all of my original works in various forms of character focused romances from cute, teenage romance to erotica series of my past. I have an Ao3 for my fanfiction projects as well if that catches your fancy instead. If you want to hang out with me, I stream from time to time and love to chat with chat.

A Twitter you can follow too

And a Kofi if you like what I do and want to help out with the fact that disability doesn’t pay much.

#hsr aventurine #hsr #honkai star rail #penacony

15 notes · View notes

tiodolma · 2 months

Text

MerGana and How Their Extremism May Follow Vulgate/Robert de Boron's Good vs. Evil Story

I think making bbcMorgana's first acts in S3 and S4 of saying that it was good that women and children of camelot will die was a fascinating and deliberate choice of making sure she was ireedemable and "evil" in the eyes of the audience.

The framing of bbcMorgana as killer of innocents (even when she was just following bbcMorgause's orders) in juxtaposition of bbcMerlin as vigilante executioner of treasonous criminals makes the audience lean more favorably towards bbcMerlin's extremism.

Writing bbcMorgana as one who takes pleasure in the suffering of others also enabled the producers to makes sure that the audience can forgive bbcMerlin's own crimes because he does it with obvious anguish.

............

Points to consider though:

BbcMorgana was educated for one year that what she was doing was right and justified. Based on her intimate knowledge if the peopleof Camelot, they are all complicit in the deaths of millions of the magic race and their allies. Her extremist training under bbcMorgause amplified that drive to punish all and then rejoice in their downfall. The bbcMorgana who cared for the wellbeing of Camelot already died when she was executed without trial and due cause (basically assassinated) for the sake of the Kingdom. (Remember, hemlock has no antidote)

BbcMerlin's extremism allowed him to bypass laws that even Camelot held dear. But since he does this with anguish, sorrow and burden of destiny/god's will then, he is forgiven and justified by the watchers of his acts even though he usually held the metaphorical gun at point blank range and then called it "self-defense"

............

I would say the merlinbbc show matches with the way The Story of Merlin was written in Robert de Boron tradition and the Vulgate. The clear distinction between good and evil in these classic literature was always "light and dark", "hatred and love."

Commiting heinous acts in "wrath, bitterness and revenge" "and taking pleasure in suffering" was the "work of the devil" "letting the devil into one's heart" (as the case of vulgate!merlin's conception)

And committing heinous acts while in anguish is technically acceptable in the eyes of destiny and the christian god. (As was the case of robertdeboron!merlin assisting in arthur's and ector de maris's conception)

...........

Then there is an argument that the show followed the heavily christian vulgate philosophy of good and evil all along?

That other philosophies and ideas which revolve around good/evil, light/dark, hatred/love being in constant balance should not be applied to the show because classic arthuriana doesnt use them?

..................

Redemption, also leans on the idea of bbcMerlin spreading the "good word" to the others. That the unbelievers will be saved if they join him in backing the One and Only Savior and King. If they don't and if they fight against it then there will be a judgement. It is never the other way around despite the unbelievers also having valid justification. As expected this reflects the highly christian messaging of the classic source material too.

Then if other watchers lean/sympathise more towards the motivations and actions of the "antagonists," "the unbelievers," "members of the old religion that fight against the prophecy" then they are "letting evil prevail" and "you dont understand the objective of the story"

Would it also mean that such antagonist-sympathetic fandom wank are technically not worth rehashing because it would be too rooted in actual historicity/real life instead of the classic arthurian mythology and christian influences that the show was based on?

.............

Anyhow the next time you hear people saying that the merlin bbc writers were stupid and didnt know what they were doing, please reconsider.

#otp: hatred to your love #otp: darkness to your light #vulgate #prose merlin #on how merlin bbc follows classical arthuriana: good vs evil #thots #heli blobbing #merlin meta #natural dyad #its an extremist vs extremist game #ultimately this was written as a mergana dynamic thing #theyre both terrible your honor

7 notes · View notes

mariana-oconnor · 1 year

Text

The Naval Treaty pt 3

Yes, we apparently have got to the point where I'm memeing myself.

Right, last time, after Percy, Watson's old 'pal' from school failed magnificently at understanding how to protect confidential data, he followed an old woman into the night and the stress gave him a brain fever. Meanwhile, I'm still certain that Joseph Harrison, who has not been implicated in any way, is involved because I am a well-balanced and entirely reasonable person.

Mr. Joseph Harrison drove us down to the station

See! He's trying to get rid of you! 🤣🤣😂

“It's a very cheery thing to come into London by any of these lines which run high, and allow you to look down upon the houses like this.”

Last time we had Holmes looking out a train window: Ugh, look how terrible the countryside is! I can't bear it.

The contrast is palpable.

“The board-schools.” “Light-houses, my boy! Beacons of the future! Capsules with hundreds of bright little seeds in each, out of which will spring the wise, better England of the future. I suppose that man Phelps does not drink?”

Board schools are not the same as boarding schools, the internet tells me, but the first state run schools with no religious affiliation. I was about to be cynical about Holmes' view of children and Victorian educational standards, but I can't. He's right, those schools were important and really did pave the way for a brighter future.

And then a bit of mental whiplash as he snaps back to the case at hand, because he's Holmes.

In answer to the question, I can't say whether Percy drinks alcohol, but he definitely has a caffeine addiction that he should work on. If not for that, he wouldn't be in this mess.

Also, it was unreasonable of his uncle to expect him to copy so much text in a foreign language in one night. But even so, Percy needs to work harder on curbing his need for coffee.

"Then came the smash, and she stayed on to nurse her lover, while brother Joseph, finding himself pretty snug, stayed on too."

Oh, so he's just hanging around leeching off people, huh? Exactly as I suspected! This is just the beginning. Clearly, he's been a wrong'un all along and I will be vindicated.

"But to-day must be a day of inquiries.” “My practice—” I began. “Oh, if you find your own cases more interesting than mine—” said Holmes, with some asperity.

First of all, Watson does have a job, Holmes. I get that you want to play with him, but he does have responsibilities. You really shouldn't be bitchy about that.

Second, if Watson actually cares enough about his patients to ditch you, that would be the first time ever.

“I was going to say that my practice could get along very well for a day or two, since it is the slackest time in the year.”

See. No problem at all. Why would Watson ever do his actual job when he could be running around with Holmes? What a preposterous idea!

"...there is Lord Holdhurst.” “Lord Holdhurst!” “Well, it is just conceivable that a statesman might find himself in a position where he was not sorry to have such a document accidentally destroyed.” “Not a statesman with the honorable record of Lord Holdhurst?”

Oh Watson, my sweet summer child. Out there believing in unicorns and fairies and honourable politicians.

I discounted him because honestly, a political plot involving the politician uncle and corruption seemed too spy thriller. Also, the time frame of everything being nine weeks ago, I think discounts a political motive because if there were spy games going on, it would be far too late to do anything about it. Of course, it might be the case. These stories have surprised me a few times so far.

“£10 reward. The number of the cab which dropped a fare at or about the door of the Foreign Office in Charles Street at quarter to ten in the evening of May 23d. Apply 221b, Baker Street.”

The Bank of England inflation calculator tells me that's equivalent to approximately £1000 today, which is a pretty impressive reward for a little bit of information. Honestly, I'd expect people to be climbing out of the woodwork to say they saw Queen Victoria herself driving the cab and dropping off Jack the Ripper.

"Why yes, Mr Holmes, I saw a man with a long white beard and carrying a large sack. No, it was right odd, y'see: he didn't go in through the door. He climbed up on' roof and went down the chimney, that he did."

"And then, of course, there is the bell—which is the most distinctive feature of the case. Why should the bell ring?"

This is what I'm most interested in. What is up with that bell?

He sank back into the state of intense and silent thought from which he had emerged; but it seemed to me, accustomed as I was to his every mood, that some new possibility had dawned suddenly upon him.

Tell me! Tell me! I need to know. The bell is plaguing me.

a small, foxy man with a sharp but by no means amiable expression.

So Lestrade is a ferret and Forbes is a fox. Must all police officers be described as animals? This appears to be a pattern.

“You are ready enough to use all the information that the police can lay at your disposal, and then you try to finish the case yourself and bring discredit on them.” “On the contrary,” said Holmes, “out of my last fifty-three cases my name has only appeared in four, and the police have had all the credit in forty-nine. I don't blame you for not knowing this, for you are young and inexperienced, but if you wish to get on in your new duties you will work with me and not against me.” “I'd be very glad of a hint or two,” said the detective, changing his manner.

Forbes changes his tune pretty quickly here, so he seems open minded enough. Although it does seem a bit like he doesn't understand the purpose of Holmes. Yes, he's supposed to take all the evidence the police give him and try to solve the case. That's kind of how being a detective works. I get the emphasis here is on 'yourself', but still.

I like this exchange, because we've already seen in the stories that Holmes really doesn't care about the notoriety or the accolades - though he's more than willing to display gifts he's given in his own home - it's entirely the case and helping the people involved that he cares about.

Not sure he really needed to say that 'you are young and inexperienced' bit, though. Seems a tad direct.

“We have set one of our women on to her. Mrs. Tangey drinks, and our woman has been with her twice when she was well on, but she could get nothing out of her.”

OK, I thought it sounded unlikely that there were female police officers in the late 1800s, and it seems like the first female police officer in London was in 1919. But it definitely appears from this that they have women working for them - unless one of them has set his wife on a suspect, which... fair. Fascinating either way.

Also, Mrs Tangey has an alcohol problem, that could be an angle.

“What explanation did she give of having answered the bell when Mr. Phelps rang for the coffee?” “She said that he husband was very tired and she wished to relieve him.”

Alright, so it either was her, or she's involved in some way. Which I think we already suspected, but this clarifies that no one impersonated her without her knowledge, at least.

“Did you point out to her that you and Mr. Phelps, who started at least twenty minutes after he, got home before her?” “She explains that by the difference between a 'bus and a hansom.”

That's fair. Not everyone can afford their own taxi. Check your privilege, Holmes.

Standing on the rug between us, with his slight, tall figure, his sharp features, thoughtful face, and curling hair prematurely tinged with gray, he seemed to represent that not too common type, a nobleman who is in truth noble.

I may have rolled my eyes at this bit. Watson sometimes needs to back off on his earnest belief in the glory of England and its political and social systems. He's so classist it's actually painful at some points. Even if he's saying the type is 'not too common' it just makes me wrinkle my nose.

I also don't like Lord Holdhurst, but that's mainly because I believe hereditary nobility is immoral and also because he is a tory politician. There was never any hope of me liking him. I don't think he murders puppies, but I bet he'd pass legislation saying that murdering puppies is okay in certain circumstances if his old chum wanted to start a puppy murdering business and was a generous donor.

"I fear that the incident must have a very prejudicial effect upon his career.”

Yeah, that I do agree with.

“But if the document is found?” “Ah, that, of course, would be different.”

This, I do not agree with. Not after nine weeks, anyway. If it had been a couple of hours and the document was found to have fallen down the gap between the desk and the wall then he could probably just be given extra training and not allowed to touch confidential documentation without supervision for a few years. But it's been nine weeks. That treaty is lost. Even if it's returned, he still lost it for nine weeks.

“Did you ever mention to any one that it was your intention to give any one the treaty to be copied?” “Never.” “You are certain of that?” “Absolutely.”

OK. That cuts off that line of thinking, as Watson's insistence on him looking 'noble' clearly means we're supposed to believe him. But we already knew it wasn't him.

Because it's Joseph Harrison.

“If the treaty had reached, let us say, the French or Russian Foreign Office, you would expect to hear of it?” “I should,” said Lord Holdhurst, with a wry face.

Like I say, any political motivations would have been thoroughly completed by now, before Holmes was even called upon, so that's not likely.

“Of course, it is a possible supposition that the thief has had a sudden illness—” “An attack of brain-fever, for example?”

Given he called Holmes in, I sincerely doubt Percy's involved. Again, if this weren't a Sherlock Holmes story, there's a slim possibility it could be that his brain fever cause amnesia meaning that he doesn't remember taking the treaty and causing the whole problem, but that doesn't seem like a likely plot here.

“But he has a struggle to keep up his position. He is far from rich and has many calls. You noticed, of course, that his boots had been re-soled?"

OK so now we give him a motive, when you've all just gone on about how he's a 'fine fellow'? Are Lord Holdsworth's money problems going to be relevant to the plot? Maybe. We've heard nothing of Percy having any cousins, so as it stands he might be his uncle's heir. Not sure how that would lead to the treaty being stolen, but we'll bear it in mind.

Ah, and then Watson is racist again. Native Americans this time. These stories are really trying to spread the racism around, aren't they. This whole section is strange though, because it's about how Watson can't read Holmes' face, when multiple times (in this very story) he's said how he knows Holmes so well that he can instantly tell from his face what Holmes is thinking.

“God bless you for saying that!” cried Miss Harrison. “If we keep our courage and our patience the truth must come out.”

She and Watson should get together and have optimist meetings.

Although, it's definitely your brother, Miss Harrison. I don't know how, but it is. It's got to be. We're running out of suspects. Mrs Tangey seems like she might be involved, but I doubt she's the mastermind behind events.

Maybe Joseph just bribed her into trying to discredit Percy, she saw the paper and thought 'well this looks important' and took it not really knowing what it was.

But that doesn't explain the bell. Unless it's because she was drunk and she stumbled and grabbed it. Or she didn't really want to be doing it, so she pulled it in a weird attempt to get caught. Or she let Harrison in and then saw him stealing something and pulled the bell, only to be threatened if she said anything.

“Yes, we have had an adventure during the night, and one which might have proved to be a serious one.” His expression grew very grave as he spoke, and a look of something akin to fear sprang up in his eyes. “Do you know,” said he, “that I begin to believe that I am the unconscious centre of some monstrous conspiracy, and that my life is aimed at as well as my honor?”

He's probably right to be worried - maybe not for his life, but I'm pretty sure this entirely thing is aimed at him, not the treaty. But at the same time, this does not sound like the thinking of a mentally healthy person.

"A man was crouching at the window."

No. No, you see it could be him. Of course you're going to want to make it seem like it was someone from outside forcing their way in. To keep the suspicion off the people who live in the house. It has to be him. Has to be.

Did he have a knife, or was it just something that looked like a knife... like...

uh...

The thing he used to unlock the window?

"As it was, I rang the bell and roused the house. It took me some little time, for the bell rings in the kitchen and the servants all sleep upstairs. I shouted, however, and that brought Joseph down, and he roused the others."

Oh oh... convenient, being the first person on the scene, huh? Was that because you weren't in bed asleep at all? Mr Joseph Harrison?

(If I am by some miracle right about this, it will be entirely undeserved as literally the only reason I decided it was him is because he seemed too happy and his sister is getting married)

"There's a place, however, on the wooden fence which skirts the road which shows signs, they tell me, as if some one had got over, and had snapped the top of the rail in doing so."

Okay... well... well... that doesn't really fit with my theory at all, but maybe it's a coincidence. People climb over fences all the time. Maybe it happened ages ago. I bet they don't check the fences every day. Totally not a sign I'm wrong.

“Oh, yes, I should like a little sunshine. Joseph will come, too.”

Why?

No, seriously. Why? Percy says Joseph will come, but not his fiancee? That's weird. Is it because Joseph is stronger if Percy needs to be carried back?

"I should have thought those larger windows of the drawing-room and dining-room would have had more attractions for him.” “They are more visible from the road,” suggested Mr. Joseph Harrison.

And right here we have the classic Columbo moment. I know Sherlock Holmes came first, no need to send me angry messages. But this is something that happens in Every. Single. Columbo. It's part of his method, it's kind of his whole method. He makes a comment about 'I wonder why the murderer didn't do x' to the person he (and the audience) knows is the murderer and the villain, in an attempt to cover their own tracks, immediately presents an explanation.

“Do you think that was done last night? It looks rather old, does it not?” “Well, possibly so.”

Aw shucks, is Holmes not falling for your clever ruse? What a pity!

“Miss Harrison,” said Holmes, speaking with the utmost intensity of manner, “you must stay where you are all day. Let nothing prevent you from staying where you are all day. It is of the utmost importance.” “Certainly, if you wish it, Mr. Holmes,” said the girl in astonishment.

Not the weirdest thing Holmes has ever asked a person to do - still remember Watson pretzeling himself behind the headboard that one time - but still kinda weird. I hope she has some sort of enrichment in her enclosure. Tell me she has a bookcase at least.

“Why do you sit moping there, Annie?” cried her brother. “Come out into the sunshine!”

Look! LOOK! He's trying to get her out of the room. He hid the treaty in the room and now he's trying to get it back but he can't! All aboard the Joseph Harrison train, next stop: Vindication.

Got to assume that even though Joseph wasn't present when Holmes was speaking to Anne, or when he was speaking to Percy, he will be aware that Percy is not in the house. But he'll only be able to break into the room by the window again, so I guess that is the plan. To catch him red-handed.

#Letters from Watson #The Naval Treaty #Sherlock Holmes #long post #It's beginning to look like I'm right #But that's absolutely nothing to do with my problem solving ability and everything to do with my natural paranoia and distrust #Also ACD has a type #We saw it in The Copper Beeches and in The Greek Interpreter #Men who laugh too much and smile too easily

33 notes · View notes

alovelyburn · 11 months

Note

Sometimes I read the rants from those who have a critical and contextual approach to Berserk about being disparaged with “the fandom” being unable to understand the bare minimum of the story and… I really would like to console you all, because I don’t think young American boys and bros on Reddit or YouTube venting their limited views are a valid representation for the Berserk fandom or even the western fandom. Other countries have very different attitudes while appreciating Berserk and the complexity of the story and also for example most Europeans have actual historical knowledge through physical buildings, songs and tales to know about mercenaries and continued warfare and violence. Discussions aren’t exclusively in English. And when I look at the English speaking fandom I feel that division or radical interpretations or fighting about morality or what not is motivated by particular biases and what the education system has been prioritizing. I’m sorry. I wish I could give you examples of how French, Italian or German for example people such have interesting conversations about historical stuff or art and movies that could have inspired Miura and even the boys are good with accepting multiple interpretations of Guts and Griffith’s relationship without making a big deal of everything and without the attitude of “condemning evil people”.

Oh, I know this is really an English-language fandom issue, absolutely. I've heard a bit here and there about Spanish fandom, but I couldn't really attest to what's going on there first hand. Way back in the day I used to follow a massive Italian Berserk fansite and the discussions there were much more interesting and nuanced even taking into consideration that I don't know italian and had to read through Google translate.

The main non-english fandom I'm familiar with is, of course, the Japanese fandom which, again, is significantly different in tone, in conversational topics, in variety of opinions expressed. For me, this is really where I draw most of my understanding of the series (or rather where I draw the validation of most of my understanding of the series) because in the end it's a Japanese story written for Japanese people by a man who said directly that even though it's a European-esque setting it's ultimately about Japan (thematically, I mean, obviously the influences are all over the place). It's the fact that the Japanese fandom thinks more like me than they do like the rest of English-speaking fandom that keeps me sane, because ultimately the Japanese readers are the ones with the most... hm, accurate? contextual understanding of what Miura was going for/trying to say. Particularly because, as I've said before, in a lot of cases a character type that reads one way to one culture will read very differently to another culture. Griffith being a major example of that.

I'm honestly not sure what is going on with the English-speaking fandom. I have some theories, but in the end it is kind of a mystery to me.

#ask #anonymous #ariel talks about berserk

21 notes · View notes

olderthannetfic · 2 years

Note

Re: the second language discussion.

I think for a lot of people who speak English as a native language, it can be overwhelming to choose a second language. If you don't primarily speak English, it might be easy to choose it as a second language. (Actually, it's often taught right in school.) For English speakers, it can be difficult to choose as there are so many options, and without a recommendation for work or personal passion, someone might put it off forever thinking, "Well, many people speak English anyway if we had to communicate." If I did business with Germany or loved the culture and had every expectation of visiting or moving there, obviously I would learn German. I wouldn't expect every German to speak English for me. But if I have no such spark, it can be almost impossible to choose a language and even more difficult to stick with it. Which is what everyone I know has said.

It might also be easier to choose if a person's location borders a foreign-speaking nation or has many who speak a second language in the population. (Like eastern Canada speaking French.)

Yes, I had to have two foreign language credits to graduate high school, but it was not until high school that they bothered thinking we might want to learn a second language. The teachers did not care how much we learned. And there was no support system for continuing our studies after graduation.

Over the years, I've experimented with learning Spanish, Japanese, French, and glanced at one or two others. It can be difficult to commit, especially if you're out of school with no drive but your own. I've finally chosen Spanish and do daily lessons on Duolingo (which may not be the best teacher, but it is for my budget and schedule). And even then, I have several times considering abandoning my Spanish lessons to pick up French instead.

I greatly admire people who have learned English as a second language, and I am highkey jealous of their bilingualism. I just hope everyone understands that if a person already speaks English, sometimes one of the biggest things holding them back is the overwhelm of choosing a second language, which isn't obvious for everyone.

I'll post people's opinions, but I think my own views are pretty easy to guess.

English speakers come from all over, but many of us under discussion are from the US...

As a teenager, I went to a fancy high school with great language instruction. They had a whole Japanese program. I was a massive weeb. Hell, I was a japanophile of longstanding, even before I discovered manga and then anime.

I took Spanish.

As an American there is one very obvious language to learn. Blindingly obvious. And it even happens to be one with a massive vocabulary overlap and "simple" grammar from the perspective of English. Now, I admit that back in the 90s, it was a pain in the fucking ass to find any cultural products to practice on that were easy enough but also on any topic I'd find easy, but things are better today. (Of course, this is me, so none of that ever motivated me half as much as Las aventuras del capitán Alatriste.)

My Japanese was crap even after a lot of study. I remember this one time while I was working in Japan that I went to a craft fair—one of those temple markets in Kyoto. I was looking at a table of jewelry. The guy there said something about being sorry that he didn't speak English (in Japanese, I presume, though I don't remember anymore). I looked up and realized that the tan guy with long black hair I'd seen out of the corner of my eye was definitely not Japanese. I stammered out that I understood some Spanish but didn't speak it if he spoke that. It had been a few years since I'd taken Spanish, but I figured I'd remember enough. So he started explaining his artwork and the symbolism, the river of life, various cultural motifs, etc.

Fifteen minutes later, as we were discussing educational policy in his country and how his Native parents had been part of the generation to get English removed from the schools in favor of Spanish as the foreign language and Native languages as the primary medium of instruction, he looked up at me and said "Oh, you don't speak Spanish, huh?"

It's true that a bunch of dumb racists would scream if we tried to make Spanish part of all grade school classrooms in the US. It's also true that there is one most obvious language to learn if you're an American.

73 notes · View notes

snow-system-wol · 6 months

Text

A look at the postARR Crystal Tower questline and the early interactions between G'raha and S'ria:

It was… unexpectedly nice, assisting the researchers. As much as he was growing to like the Rising Stones, hanging around there meant that so many extra tasks just ended up his responsibility, somehow. It wasn't enough being pulled in a hundred different directions with every linkpearl blip, there was always something else little to do as well.

Part of the reason it was nice was also just that things had (mostly) calmed down enough for this sort of downtime to be possible. The forays themselves were… somewhat lethal, yes, and he had needed to excuse himself to slay a primal a few days in (to G'raha's bewilderment, which was only increased by how nonchalant Cid seemed on the matter.) But all that aside, a lot of it was doing a few mindless and straightforward things about camp. Saving the world is complicated. Firewood is easy.

S'ria thought that a certain amount of it was intentional kindness from the Scions. Truly, he did not need to be making camp here for days or weeks at a time, spending mostly idle nights around the excavation site – but nobody attempted to point that out, acting as if his presence was always warranted.

The more close quarter aspects of things were… less comfortable, but S'ria could always go back to Revenant's Toll if he felt it was too much for a day. He did, a few times – especially after Nero began skulking about camp. Becoming more comfortable with Cid over time was one thing, Nero tol Scaeva was another thing entirely. S'ria hoped Nero had the wisdom to not sneak up on him, especially as they relaxed around the campfire at night, else they may have a dead war criminal on their hands.

G'raha was… interesting. S'ria hadn't known what to make of him upon their first blind meeting, as it was.

It was a frustrating experience to feel like someone was toying with him, but upon actually meeting G'raha… well, his bravado and confidence was far more subdued in a one-on-one conversation. In fact, he was downright nervous at times.

Or at least, he was nervous until one engaged him in his favorite topic of conversation, and then it melted away for a long time – until he realized he'd been talking for a long time and became rather apologetic about it. S'ria didn't mind, though. G'raha's company was animated once he got into full academic mode, but not particularly in a way that was overly loud or startling.

G'raha's regard towards S'ria seemed to change subtly but often, ranging from starry-eyed to treating him like an equal to seeming a bit off-balance and flustered. (It took several nudges from Cid for S'ria to even consider that G'raha may have a non-academic interest in him. It was of… no matter, though. Should it ever be impossible to ignore, or if G'raha forced the issue, it could be addressed then.)

As much as S'ria did actually enjoy their conversations, there was, perhaps, an ulterior motive for eliciting quite so many of G'raha's rambles.

There was a certain amount of…self-consciousness, being around all of these highly learned individuals. S'ria tried to not put too much stock into it. Most of the people he'd grown up with hadn't had what one would call a formal education, but to suggest they weren't smart would be both wildly incorrect and a mistake to say regardless. All the same, G'raha and Unei and Doga would have these conversations that were very far above S'ria's level of understanding on this subject. It was bad enough knowing that all of the Scions had such prestigious academic titles, it was just a bit difficult to handle here too. Admitting that he couldn't even read the supplementary materials they kept recommending him would just be a bit too much to bear.

So it was greatly convenient that G'raha readily would explain these concepts out loud with any degree of encouragement given.

----------

It was a pleasant part of his evening routine, joining G'raha by the fire. It wasn't uncommon for them to be the last to retire for the evening, talking late into the night.

" –ah, but that explanation ended up far lengthier than had been intended. Pray forgive the unnecessary level of detail."

S'ria laughed good-naturedly. "Once again, I would not come to you with these questions if I didn't want to hear your thoughts." S'ria paused, a passing curiosity popping up in his mind. "Have you ever considered teaching? You'd be good at it, I think."

The flickering fire made it hard to tell if the blush on G'raha's face was actually there or just a trick of the light.

"I think that may be giving me too much credit." S'ria opened his mouth to protest and G'raha hurriedly kept talking. "And more importantly, should I take up teaching in Sharlayan, I could hardly be here, studying things in situ. 'Tis the best part of being a researcher, in my humble opinion. I also would not have met – er, had the chance to meet interesting people along the way."

I also would not have met you. S'ria smiled to himself and let G'raha's graceless recovery go unchallenged. He was also glad they'd met. The hero worship was not always the most comfortable, even if it was endearing – but he did not take S'ria's time or energy for granted, something he felt had been happening too often of late. It was refreshing.

S'ria leaned back on his hands and looked up, staring up into the patches of stars visible beyond the aetherial fog. "Yes, that type of life can be nice sometimes, always being new places ...It also can be nice to stay put. To build a proper life in one place."

"Do you miss it?"

It was a startling question in some ways. G'raha had, up until this point, near-pathologically avoided prying into S'ria's personal life. There was no harm in asking something like that, though.

"... It's complicated. I think that my previous home is not the same anymore, and that my own journeys have changed me greatly – I wouldn't be able to go back to the way things were. Ha, certainly wouldn't have the subtlety for remaining mysterious anymore, that's for sure. I suppose I do miss those quieter, more consistent days, yes."

"...was that too much for me to ask?"

S'ria shrugged. "I'm not overly fond of talking about myself, but I'm not bothered by it either. You can ask things, I just might not answer."

"Ah, no, I think that is enough of me testing your good nature for tonight. We should take our rest – unless you had wanted any more clarification? I could grab paper from my supplies, should a visual sketch be helpful." There was a hopeful note in G'raha's voice and S'ria felt no need to refuse.

"Of course – a diagram would be nice, if it isn't a hardship."

(G'raha all but jogged back to his tent in response. Ah, maybe S'ria should've been paying more mind to Cid's teasing commentary – the look on his face was nothing short of smitten.)

----------

Running for your life alongside someone else really was a wonderful bonding experience. Seeing the sun again, laughing in relief alongside G'raha, being begrudgingly glad for Nero's survival – it was good. S'ria was considering next moves, once all of the business with the tower was said and done. He wondered whether G'raha might like to come to Revenant's Toll, if he'd care to join the Scions' forces. He'd proven himself to be both capable and resourceful, and S'ria had grown used to him being around during this expedition.

Once he looked at G'raha, he knew something was subtly wrong. He looked just a touch too serious, too solemn for circumstances. It wasn't that the situation didn't warrant it, it just didn't feel quite right. S'ria didn't realize until he was back at camp what was actually bothering him.

"Pray go on ahead of me; there is something small I would do before I return."

G'raha hadn't met his eyes for that entire sentence – he almost always did at the end of a conversation, so why not then? S'ria was suddenly quite certain he'd been lied to.

----------

S'ria thought he might actually hate G'raha for this.

There was no point in fighting with him anyway. Yes, S'ria could say all sorts of things, many of them feeling very warranted, but… it wouldn't change anything. Intervening would only delay what was now inevitable, with G'raha's mind made up, and cursing him for trying to avoid an actual goodbye would only – it seemed a poor last memory, that was all.

It was simply… accepted. S'ria did not condemn G'raha's choice in that last conversation, but neither did he wholeheartedly endorse it – and the absence of that approval was a tangible void in that farewell.

He wanted to, perhaps, smile at the others' assertion that they'd be ready to welcome G'raha back in a matter of years.

S'ria had heard quite enough about Allagan technology from all of those late nights, though. He knew it wouldn't happen within his lifetime.

----------

The Warrior of Light was, occasionally, permitted privacy. To be honest, it was a very uncommon privilege. Obviously S'ria got plenty of moments to himself, behind closed doors, but only if the Scions knew where he was – not on purpose, but the Twelve knew there was a price on his head by now. It was rare these days that he got true freedom to be somewhere without it being known where and why.

Perhaps it was luck, but it seemed to be permitted this time, or at least nobody felt compelled to have words with him over it.

S'ria left St. Coinach's Find, disappeared entirely for two suns, and arrived back in Revenant's Toll with a clear intent to act like nothing of note had transpired since his last visit to the Rising Stones – and just this once, no one asked.

#ffxiv-oc #snow-system #ffxiv oc #ffxiv-reactions #writing #cross posted from ao3 you know the works #augh

2 notes · View notes

kael-writ · 7 months

Text

TW Child Abuse & not believing victims

A Child Called It by Dave Pelzer meant a lot to me as a kid. While my abuse was not as extreme, the psychology of the abuser and the abused was so intimately familiar. I saw my Mom in that woman. Im not saying my Mom was that bad, or was exactly the same, Im saying I saw the same psychological state of being emotionally out of control and twisting it into sadism against a child.

It disturbs me revisiting this book that the author is accused of fraud. And the accusations aren't based on solid evidence, not any that I can find.

The article that started these accusations of lying, in 2002 in the NYT, is behind a paywall and Im honestly not going to the effort of going around it, I am sure the kids today know how to go around paywalls but I don't want to read it and get all upset that badly tbqh. It's by a sportswriter, Pat Jordan, who dabbled in true crime who somehow got to say that for the New York Times but the secondhand sources citing it dont show that Jordan actually provided evidence. They also claim Jordan had a hostility towards therapy. Jordan has his own memoir out where he accuses his own father of being a con artist. So it kinda seems like he is someone who would be hypervigilant to thinking someone is grifting.

The reasons people give for not believing him just read like a laundry list of all the reasons people call all abuse victims liars. Some of his relatives say they think he exaggerated, but still say there was abuse, like a 90 year old grandma who lived in another state and some - not all - of his brothers. The other scapegoated brother confirms the abuse in his own book. Well, that's typical. The other kids were both privileged by the abuser and separated from the rituals of abuse and Dave's life in general, young, brainwashed. Lots of times the "golden child(ren)" deny abuse. They're meant to. The abuser has arranged it that way. They're kids, they're warped by an abuser, they are in denial and feeling guilty. The majority of the abuse of the scapegoat will be entirely in private, as Dave's was.

People point out that the memoir of his childhood going only up to age 12 reads.... like a memoir of childhood memories does... as the.. memories of a child. Like, yea some stuff might have seemed "exaggerated" to him. The amount of time something took, for example, would be really common for a child to misremember. He says in the forward it is meant to capture his childhood memories!

Dave also says openly he changed names. The book is - a book. It's carefully written and edited. It's presented to the reader. It's... a book.

To get attention? Yes! You grew up abused and that was hidden and you want the world to see it! You want to save other kids! That is understandable and not a bad thing. Yes, he is bringing attention to child abuse and to his life. And yes, he's making money from it. He wants to make money from telling his story, it's hard, time and energy consuming work and in this society it's really hard to do anything you can't monetize, frankly, we should all know that by now. The man has a child, a child he devotes himself to giving a completely different life from his, one of love and safety and peace, - god forbid he makes any money from writing a book.

As Dave DETAILS in his book not just very openly but clearly to educate us on how abuse works, abused kids have to learn how to deceive and appease to survive the abuser. To tense part of your body before a punch, to cry when that will help or show no emotion if that will help, to steal food, to lie about injuries.

So could Dave's adult work as a motivational speaker, could his story telling, come off as someone with some skill in some manner of audience manipulation? Sure dude. Everyone does that sometimes, every writer and actor does that when performing. That doesn't mean someone just made up their whole life story.

People say he couldnt have survived all that. Unfortunately, and fortunately, people have survived worse. And again, yea sure, maybe the week he remembers eating nothing he did actually eat a bite somewhere. Maybe the time he got stabbed it wasnt as deep as the book makes it sound, it seemed deeper to a kid. Sure, maybe a couple little details are off.

eta: another claim is that he "doesn't have PTSD" and functions well in life. If you read his follow up work, he does struggle with PTSD, and even if he didn't, not everyone who, say, comes back from war has it, it clearly depends. And the idea that survivors will never function and thrive is false and insulting. Look at Oprah, Maya Angelou, Elie Wiesel ffs. People CAN survive! /eta

The other main claim is "how did she get away with it? Her kid coming to school every day with bruises and dirty clothes and no one did anything?" Yea dude. Especially in the 70s. Yes. Children get murdered by abusers to this day after a CPS failure. And that's when it gets reported at all. The teacher in the afterward who was one of Pelzer's saviors said he didn't even have any understanding of child abuse back then. It hasnt even always been illegal to abuse a kid. To this day, hitting and verbally abusing your kids is largely legal. There's a line, there's been progress (BECAUSE of people like Dave) but a lot of abuse is still legal.

People say he didnt provide enough proof to them of this hidden child abuse from when he was under 12 in the 70s. I dont even know what they expect. The only external proof I have of my own abuse are the times someone else witnessed something, most of the physical stuff was only seen by a fellow sibling occasionally, neighbors heard some yelling, that's about it. but it's not like we had phones and filmed it even in the 90s, it's not like my parents signed a form when they lost their temper. Its not like abusers take the kid to the doctor. The couple times someone called cops or DCFS they didnt do their jobs. There isn't just - collected evidence of all this stuff. That's- beyond unreasonable. At most there might have been some documentation of the child custody proceedings, in the 70s I really don't know if that would be available now.

And something that is striking about these allegations is that on EVERY forum alleging them you start to see abuse victims saying "that's very realistic actually. That's what it's like".

You also don't see the actual proof of fraud. Proof the teacher who wrote the afterward doesnt exist, for example, something like that. That is what you see with actual fraud cases. The person was actually not in the USA on 9/11. Stuff like that. That's proof of fraud.

Does it sound like that's a high bar to clear to call him a fraud? I don't think so, I think an abuse victim (or a person with cancer, or whatever thing that very rarely people lie about but most people arent lying about) should be believed or at the very least not persecuted like this unless you have extremely good evidence. I particularly think a journalist shouldn't make those allegations without doing actual journalism.

When 9/11 survivors and journalists started suspecting fraudulent "victim" Tania Head, they DID RESEARCH. They FOUND PROOF. Hard evidence. She was in Barcelona on 9/11. They didn't just start accusing her without proof. Because that would have been awful. And unlike Dave, she was being a jerk to other survivors, she was not showing mutual support, I dont see anyone so much as claiming Dave didnt support other survivors. Survivors seem to appreciate him, in fact.

Is it possible it's fake? I guess. Is it likely? No, it's not. Is there reasonable evidence of fraud? Not to my knowledge. Im obviously incredibly biased here, and yes I will be so crushed if it turned out to be a fraud, but I would want to see that evidence, Id want to know - if it is actually solid, compelling evidence, not just some redditor's misunderstanding of how abuse works.

In over 20 years, no one has gone and found actual proof that Dave lied. It's still just rumors and speculation burned onto his wikipedia and his legacy. A message to him as a survivor and every survivor watching, that we STILL are not to be believed.

Abuse survivors shouldn't have to live with the stigma of presumed guilt, of never feeling like we can ever just be believed. Coming forward about abuse should not mean you are indefinitely publicly on trial in a state of presumed guilt. You don't have to 100% believe every story you hear. But abusers thrive on the silencing of victims. At some point, if we want abuse to stop being a driving force in society causing so many problems and so much pain, we're gonna have to start believing victims.

#Dave Pelzer #child abuse #false accusations #believe victims #david pelzer

3 notes · View notes

harlequinfrog · 1 year

Note

Idk your ocs bc I'm new here so dealers choice for 10, 20 and 28.

YIPPEE I'm doing this with Marco my oc Marco the 16th century FtF (Failgirl to Failboy*) mercenary soldier

*girl**

**boy

10. What lie do they most frequently remember telling? Does it haunt them?

ooooo this one's kind of tough. A big part of Marco's identity and self-esteem is his perception of himself as an honest and authentic person. (He's actually a huge liar, in the sense of being able to convince himself of things and then act as if they're true) Any time he told an outright lie to another person is likely to haunt him. I'm gonna say something like she broke one of her mom's belongings as a kid and then blamed it on someone else sdlfkjd

20. If they were asked to explain the difference between romantic and platonic or familial love, how would they do so?

OH I LOVE THIS QUESTION! Marco is from a setting based on 16th century Italy and his understanding of love is influenced by his relatively wealthy, educated background. He's familiar with the classical "four loves" and sees love as defined by action and circumstance moreso than emotion. Romance would involve passion that motivates courtship, ideally a man courting a woman. Familial love is defined by acting selflessly toward family members, or people who aren't blood relatives but fulfill a similar role. Friendship is cooperation and mutual enjoyment of each other's company. She doesn't think of "platonic love" as a separate category but rather a particular quality of some loves. Like, if a relationship were a physical object, "friendship" might be its shape and "platonic" its color. A differently colored "friendship" would still be friendship

28. Would they prefer a lie over an unpleasant truth?

Oh absolutely. He would say he wouldn't but that's because [see above answer about him being a huge liar] On principle, he values truth but he also lacks the mental fortitude necessary to not be a hypocrite about it. King of operating under no less than seven layers of self-delusion at all times 🥰

#thank you for the ask! i love talking about my ocs

3 notes · View notes

mobiused · 2 years

Note

lil bit of a question based on one of ur replies to that ask, you don't have to answer! - do you think hypothetically speaking a person on the spectrum would be allowed to become an idol? to be clear I'm not saying that's what she is specifically, I could never tell if she or really anyone show clear signs of that, but just in general. I feel like they wouldn't? Or maybe it'd depend on the severity?

For starters, I think there are already idols with undiagnosed/unpublicised autism in the industry. Also I don't believe in autism severity - it alienates those classed with severe from the rest of autistic society, and puts those who would be classed as mild in a class above the rest, as well as minimizing their struggles by calling it mild.

But this kind of poses a really interesting question on the nature of autism, which I think will become more and more relevant as the Covid Kids grow up - Will a lack of healthy social development during childhood be incorrectly conflated with autism? What impact might this have on society, and how will it shape conversations and attitudes towards autism? There are many studies which suggests this causes development issues, but impairments aren't the same as neurodivergencies. Having worked with a lot of kids with special educational needs, I learnt the difference between overdiagnosis of boys with autism (who really were boys with CPTSD/boundary issues), and underdiagnosis of girls (who are notoriously brushed off as quirky and not disordered and only get their struggles acknowledged in adlthood after masking for years), and this is reflected in adulthood too with how many autistic women are incorrectly diagnosed with BPD and not autism, and not enough men are correctly diagnosed with BPD. This alone shows how misunderstood autism is by the people who are supposed to diagnose it. I guess by saying this, I also mean the idol trainee system can inadvertently create symptoms in trainees which mimick autism - and it might genuinely be impossible to differentiate between the impact of this... unique *twitches* upbringing of a trainee, and an autistic trainee.

As many people allege, neurodivergency is often considered a spectrum and even if someone has symptoms, it might not necessarily warrant a diagnosis, or even if it did, they might not want to ID with it for whatever reason. This, combined with a culture that massively underdiagnoses autism for both boys and girls due to how stigmatized it is. Despite a study which claims 1 in 38 children in SK have traits that would qualify for an Autism diagnosis (compare with 1 in 100 in USA which is probably inaccurate but w/e), only 1/3 of the kids that were flagged were actually diagnosed. Many families with a diagnosis keep it secret, even from the kid, many families who suspect autism in their child won't bring it up due to the shame associated with a diagnosis, and many don't even know what it is or what to look for, and it won't even cross their minds. Of course, these attitudes aren't unique to Korea, these ableist attitudes are global, it's just that it seems the prevalent attitude in Korea is pretending it doesn't exist. (though attitudes are changing postively!) Taking this into account, I really doubt a company would even know if one of their trainees had an autism diagnosis. If any of the staff suspected autism, I don't think they'd push for a diagnosis, and if they did actually know, I don't think they'd make it public. With a global and local lack of understanding of autism, I think it makes it extraordinarily difficult for someone to "come out" as autistic in the industry.

I'm not sure if you the asker are neurodivergent/on the spectrum yourself, but I don't think autism would necessarily be too limiting to prevent a successful career. Not every autistic person has social anxiety despite whatever social difficulties they have, and a talent motivated by special interest such as singing or dancing might actually help them be more skilled than their peers. Of course there's sensory issues, but we've seen idols have meltdowns over sensory issues before and come out the other side mostly okay, and we also know that in groups with healthy friendships that the members are happy to accomodate other members' quirks or struggles. Autism or no autism, people who care about other people naturally accomodate for other people's needs and difficulties. Implying that autistic people couldn't succeed in the idol industry rubs me the wrong way a little - anyone with autism is going to struggle in any career they do, some people more than others, some careers more than others, but having autism shouldn't universally rule out any career of any kind.

While I was joking about Sunmi, I don't see why it wouldn't be possible.

#for transparency so nobody takes this the wromg way i have neurodivergent diagnoses plural #if it wasnt already obvious from my... everything...#i dont wanna link anything like sources cuz i dont have the bandwidth to check whether theyre like secretly evil etc #also yeah sunmi has a bpd diagnosis but i srsly dont mean anything by it i just mean moreso how broadly inept #the world is at accurately diagnosing and understanding neurodivergent conditions #long post

19 notes · View notes

yr-obedt-cicero · 2 years

Note

I’m so bad at how Tumblr works, I don’t know if you got my last answer on the Hamilton/Angelica thread. The smoking gun to me is the letter she wrote to him when she was on her way back to England. The French translation is “Here I am my dearest, all alone and my heart so bitter for having left you.” Clearly, that was not meant for Eliza as she doesn’t speak French. She followed it up by saying if it were up to her she wouldn’t stay in England for two weeks. She’s devastated to be returning home after 6 months to her husband that people insist she loved. And I don’t think you said this, but no, this isn’t about the musical! It was a big topic of gossip at the time. Who calls their sister’s husband their dearest? Who says she fears that Hamilton seeing her was like a dream he no longer believed? I do agree it’s not clear to me he was in love with her like his letters to Laurens do. But there are many missing letters and the Hamilton family heavily edited the ones that exist. But Angelica does come across in hers as being in love. I know I keep on with this and I apologize lol. But I don’t get it! Angelica didn’t blast him over his cheating on Eliza the way he does in the play, she defends him and says she’s lucky for having him. That was the letter that made up my mind, same way the first letter to Laurens did. Everything thing else I read after just strengthened my opinion. But the one question no one really answered is this. Why is Angelica calling her sister’s husband her dearest?

The actual translation of that line was; “Here I am, my very dear, all at sea, and my poor heart very moved by having left you.” I have learned some of the smallest details of French from reading many historical letters, and she writes “Mon tres cher” which means “My very dear”. Dearest in French is “Chère”.

I'm not sure why you insist Elizabeth did not know French, and how Angelica used this to hide it from her. Because there's nothing to support that. Elizabeth was part of the Schuyler family, one of the wealthiest families in the colonies, and could most definitely afford one of the highest educations. Since she was the daughter of a very important war general and New York politician, she must of had to be around for a lot of foreign guests with her family, like the Marquis De Lafayette. It is highly unlikely she did not choose to learn French. Knowing French and other languages was a common standard for nearly everyone, especially the wealthy. If Angelica knew it — Why wouldn't Elizabeth? She would meet with many of French Diplomats, like Edmond-Charles Genêt (Also known as Citizen Genêt, was the French envoy to the United States appointed by the Girondins during the French Revolution).

And credit to @runawayforthesummer for debunking the commonly believed myth that Elizabeth was in Albany, whilst Angelica stayed in NYC for the entirety of summer in 1789. If anything, Angelica was more often in Albany, and Elizabeth was heavily hesitate to leave her husband as always. And I believe Elizabeth helped pay for those rented rooms.

Also, one last thing; the background and context are especially important. Background helps us understand where these real people, and not characters, come from. If you don't look at the context, you cannot find their motives, or understand their feelings. If you disregard that so easily, I find your argument to already be unstable, with or without historical accuracy.

I would also like to give some suggestions of checking your biographies sources, sometimes historians and biographers aren't completely truthful either (Cough cough Chernow). This is just a suggestion for future reference.

I find it hard to believe Angelica did not love her husband that she went as far as to elope with. But if anything, Angelica's unrequited feelings for Hamilton is more likely than any plausible affair. But I'm still dubious to even believe that.

#amrev #american history #american revolution #alexander hamilton #historical alexander hamilton #elizabeth schuyler hamilton #elizabeth hamilton schuyler #elizabeth hamilton #elizabeth schuyler #angelica church #history #cicero's history lessons #queries #night77788

13 notes · View notes

sleepy-shutin · 2 years

Note

hope it’s ok for me to rant to you lmao but i feel like 99% of syscourse bloggers on both sides fundamentally understand how studies statistics diagnostic criteria etc work. and i’m not saying those things are perfect at all but if you’re going to get into discourse about it you should probably at least understand it on a basic level ykwim. especially studies because no one interprets them in the right way in syscourse, which is understandable because a lot of them have very academic style writing and formatting and can unfortunately just be generally inaccessible, but if you don’t know what they’re saying and why then don’t act like you do is my point. i see a lot of pro endos toss around the same few studies that they say prove endogenic or tulpa related plurality, but all of the ones i’ve read are just like, the bare bones of a study that are meant to be built off of, aka essentially just surveying a group of people and saying “yeah these people say they experience this.” on the anti endo side of things, i’ve noticed a lot of them throwing around brain scan and TOSD related studies saying they inherently disprove endogenic plurality, but those studies were also conducted with strictly DID and OSDD in mind and not endogenic plurality, which would probably have to be studied completely separately. also that goes for pro endos because a lot of them try to shoehorn endogenic plurality into the DIDOSDD criteria and shit when it’s inherently going to be different lol. anyways even then a few studies into it aren’t going to prove anything, it could probably take a decade to come to any sort of conclusive scientific agreement on endos, and even then studies and their findings are very very rarely, if ever, treated as irrefutable proof. and i think a lot of people need to realize that they themselves can spread misinformation and it’s not just ableist singlets that do that, which is kind of a whole can of worms entirely but just because you have DIDOSDD or you identity as an endogenic system that doesn’t mean you inherently know how to read scientific papers and aren’t immune to bias when reading them.

no no, you're onto something. i think few people in syscourse know how to use sources or even what they're saying as well. because a lot of these people aren't super educated on DID itself, haven't read a lot of books about it, and aren't familiar with academic language.

not that i'm by any means an expert, i've been stuck trying to read the same book for several months now because i've been struggling to find the motivation, and am trying to stick to my "one book at a time" method, (though, i'll probably just have to give up and read multiple books at once anyways lmao). but like jesus christ.

the reason i'm not really "anti endo" in that i disbelieve in endogenic plurality is precisely because there aren't any actual studies proving or disproving the experience wholly for me to base an opinion off of--though, the communities i'm generally pretty unhappy with, lol. all we have are barebones ideas and surveys, and then a bunch of poorly done speculation by that one tulpa who MUST be in wonderland if she thinks half the sources she's using actually say what she thinks they're saying, lmao.

it's also a huge reason i'm burnt out on syscourse and just don't really care to argue about whether endos exist or not. i don't care. live your life, dog.

it's as markiplier once said: you do you, and i'll do me, and we won't do each other. probably.

#ask #anon #lmao #part zero

11 notes · View notes