Tumgik
#none of them were worth it :)
chuthulhu-reads · 26 days
Text
Tumblr media
[ID: Two panels from Dungeon Meshi. The first scows Senshi clutching his face as tears start to spill out of his eyes, saying, "I've always... always wanted to have this soup one more time." He's not wearing his helmet in this panel, so his face is unusually visible, detailed and vulnerable. The second panel shows himself as a youngster, surrounded by his old mining team, all smiling at each other, one of them rubbing Senshi's head. Modern-day Senshi continues, "Thank you. All of you. Thank you." End ID.]
Holy shit. I anticipated some tragic backstory from the "I must feed the young ones" panels, but what I'd guessed was that Senshi might have become so devoted to cooking and eating literally whatever because he'd previously survived a famine and had seen children starve to death. I did not expect him to have been the child who was the sole survivor of a doomed travel party, one of whom was determined to feed Senshi first because he was the youngest, and that Senshi has lived with the fear of having inadvertently committed cannibalism by eating stew that he'd never quite known the contents of. I'm happy for him that Laios deduced and confirmed for him that it was griffin meat, that he was able to taste the meal that saved his life once more and remember the friends he lost. Seriously, I'm crying, and also earnestly relieved that while his backstory is pretty dark, it's not the type of fucked up I'd been preparing myself mentally for.
#Dungeon Meshi#Delicious in Dungeon#Dunmeshi#though it IS really worth exploring the ethics of cannibalism in survival situations#The podcast You're Wrong About has a really interesting pairing of episodes#in the Donner Party and Flight 571 Crash episodes#Both about disasters in which people wound up eating their dead to survive#and an interesting connection they drew was that it wasn't the cannibalism itself#that destroyed the lives of the Donner survivors#it was the horror and disgust and societal rejection they got for having eaten human flesh#even the children who had no idea what they were eating were treated with revulsion#and this is clearly the response Senshi feared facing if anybody knew what he'd eaten#But Flight 571 like a century later#the survivors were faced with a lot of understanding when rescued#relatively little condemnation and revulsion#by and large commentators acknowledged that they did what they had to do#and sympathized with how difficult and painful it must have been#which is what Senshi gets from his party#Laios wants to figure out the truth because he knows it's hurting Senshi not to know#But at one point Marcille straight up says that none of them would think less of Senshi if he did eat dwarf stew#Okay so this is Marcille 'ardent student of blood magic' Donato#but Chilchuck agrees#anyway I think that would be a particularly interesting conversation to have in a cooking manga#how do you safely eat a dead friend when that's all you have to survive on?#what are the nutritional benefits other than 'better than starving'?#what are the risks? There's prion diseases and all sorts you can get#they write it off as eating the dragon part but they DO spend seven days eating Falin at the end#ARE there any in/famous cannibalism cases in this world?#Do peopel argue about whether or not it's cannibalism if a dwarf eats a tallman?#enquiring minds (mine) want to know
67 notes · View notes
tracle0 · 9 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
Feast your eyes! My pride stars :)!
315 notes · View notes
Text
Hot take: The people who are STILL insisting that Izzy is homophobic (despite the NUMEROUS instances of the cast/crew/David himself saying that nobody on the show is being targeted for their identity and ‘it’s not “I can’t believe he’s with a guy” but “I can’t believe he’s with THAT guy”‘ ad nauseam) towards Stede, Lucius, or Ed (I don’t believe I’ve seen anyone say anything about Fang or Pete, though I could be wrong, but I’m gonna touch on that in a bit too*)? They’re, unironically, being homophobic by stereotyping the characters and reducing them to just their sexuality.
If you recognize that Stede is a multifaceted character and you recognize the ways in which he is multifaceted - He’s a man born into wealth and raised on classist, colonialist ideals. Yes, he’s also traumatized by how he was treated by his father and peers but trauma doesn’t exempt people from blame when participating in, embracing, enforcing, and benefiting from classist and colonialist ideals - you will understand that Izzy is not being homophobic towards him just because he hates him.
If you only view Stede as a gay man and ignore everything else about his character then the only motivation for Izzy to hate him MUST be because he’s a gay man and therefore Izzy MUST be homophobic.
If you recognize that Lucius is a multifaceted character and you recognize the ways in which he is multifaceted - He’s a man who likely was born into some level of the middle class, given that he can read and write (It’s also possible that he was born into a working class family and he learned to read and write there, but it’s the unlikely option by default. None of the rest of the working class crew know how to read or write save Jim who was raised by a nun and would have been taught by her.), he also avoids doing work which is necessary for the function of the ship that they live on and depend on for their livelihoods and encourages the rest of the crew to do the same with his insubordination. He’s also in an unorthodox relationship that people who have not experienced the concept of consensual non-monogamy would not understand and might interpret as cheating - you will understand that Izzy is not being homophobic towards him just because he hates him.
If you only view Lucius as a gay man and ignore everything else about his character then the only motivation for Izzy to hate him MUST be because he’s a gay man and therefore Izzy MUST be homophobic.
If you recognize that Ed is a multifaceted character and you recognize the ways in which he is multifaceted - He’s a man of color, born into a working class family who worked hard to make a name for himself, to the point where he did not have to endanger himself or his crew to earn their livelihoods. He’s also some level of neurodivergent and understimulated by the environment he’s in (because he excels at his job) which leads him to make irrational and dangerous decisions and puts the lives of himself and his crew in danger. He’s also been making increasingly out of character decisions (corroborated by Fang and Ivan) by the influence of Stede - you will understand that Izzy is not being homophobic towards him just because he’s angry about his relationship with Stede.
If you only view Ed as a gay man and ignore everything else about his character then the only motivation for Izzy to be angry about his relationship with Stede (and only Stede, because he had no qualms about Ed and Calico Jack’s involvement with one another given that he sent Jack to get Ed out of the way of the English, but that’s another post I don’t have the spoons to make) MUST be because he’s a gay man and therefore Izzy MUST be homophobic.
If you IGNORE that Izzy is a multifaceted character and you IGNORE the ways in which he is multifaceted - He’s a gay (we’re not having this argument) working class man who earned his high ranking position on an extremely respectable pirate’s crew. He’s capable and is rightfully angry when he’s looked down on because of his class. He recognizes the importance of ship maintenance and is rightfully angry when those tasks are ignored. He doesn’t understand Lucius’ relationship dynamic and thinks he can use (what he thought was) him cheating on his partner (seriously, how is ‘I’m going to tell the man you were fucking that you were fucking another man’ threatening to out him?) as a motivation to make him do the necessary ship work. He is rightfully angry when his orders are ignored because he’s the highest authority on the ship next to the captains. He is in love with Ed and is jealous because Ed is in love with Stede - you can pretend that Izzy is homophobic because of how he behaves towards the other gay men on the ship.
If you ignore that Izzy has valid reasons for his actions (which does not mean that the actions are all entirely justified) then the only motivation for them MUST be because he’s homophobic.
(* The persistent neglect of Fang and Pete in these discussions is also rooted in homophobia. Fang and Pete are the only explicitly gay men on the ship who don’t, at any point, present ‘femininely’** and therefore don’t fall so easily into the bubble of the stereotypical gay man and so they get ignored in these discussions because they aren’t suitable to push the narrative that Izzy only interacts negatively towards ‘feminine’/’gnc’** gay men.)
(** The insistence that Stede, Lucius, and Ed are in any way, at any point, LEGITIMATELY presenting ‘femininely’ or are ‘gender non-conforming’ is ALSO rooted in homophobia - and I’d argue a touch of racism via Ed’s hair and beard as they relate to his indigenous roots. The assumption/association with those three being considered feminine comes from their identity as gay men. That is homophobia.
Stede wears men’s clothes. He wears RICH men’s clothes. Bright, colorful, patterned fabrics are worn by RICH men in the 1700s - if you want to argue that, say, king George presented femininely or was gnc because of the way he dressed be my guest but you won’t because he doesn’t and he isn’t. Lucius wears men’s clothes. His clothes are perfectly at place amongst the rest of the crew’s clothes. Ed wears men’s clothes. His leather is in direct relation to gay leather-men which is a hyper-masculine aesthetic in the same way drag is - typically - a hyper-feminine aesthetic. His appreciation for Stede’s clothes comes from the wealth and privilege that centers around the easy possession of those types and quantities of fabrics.
None of them behave in ways that are stereotypically feminine. Having and expressing emotions is not a uniquely or inherently feminine trait. Caring for and maintaining your appearance is not a uniquely or inherently feminine trait. Even if they were, Izzy also does those things. Izzy frequently expresses his emotions - yes, anger, a stereotypically ‘masculine’ emotion, but others as well. He also puts a great deal of care into his appearance, aside from the materials, the only difference between his and Stede’s outfits are the type of shoes and the presence of a jacket. If those traits are to be considered inherently feminine then it is disingenuous to not apply that label to Izzy as well.)
165 notes · View notes
queen-of-meows · 25 days
Text
I know I can be bit grumpy about Loki S2, but honesty if I had been asked to write a whole unplanned sequel to a self contained TV show in only a few months, while having to fit in a wider cinematic universe with constant changes in direction, the result would have been a lot worse than what we got.
9 notes · View notes
carfuckerlynch · 14 days
Text
when did it become ok to charge $150 for boots made of plastic.
13 notes · View notes
ingopotato · 1 year
Photo
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
was feeling nostalgic so i made a compilation of my submas drawings over the years just for fun! i thought it was neat to look back and see how the subway bros have evolved with my art style after all this time
69 notes · View notes
angorwhosebabyisthis · 5 months
Text
there are a lot of reasons i think pericles is really slept on as one of the most tragic characters in sdmi, and they start with how easy it is to connect the dots that he took a mind-destroying curse full to the face as an infant. one that breaks adult humans and renders them unrecognizable, when pericles was not only a baby but is from a species that is explicitly much more vulnerable to it. right from the beginning of his life the entity obliterated his sense of self so thoroughly that there's not even a version of him who shows up in the Sitting Room.
fuck, man.
#sdmi#scooby doo mystery incorporated#professor pericles#sdmi is fundamentally a show about the cycle of trauma and abuse--about breaking a very literal generational curse#and i think it does a real disservice to both that theme#and pericles' narrative specifically#that he gets painted as That One Guy Who's Just Evil and Abusive for No Reason#when everyone else gets the benefit of 'even thoroughly horrible people are still people'#'and that doesn't mean they didn't hurt you; or that you have to let them keep hurting you'#'or that you're obliged to proceed in a way allowing for the possibility they'll decide to stop. that's on them to do. and they might not.'#even w/o the systemic oppression or decades of torture and psychiatric abuse#pericles was a victim of the entity in genuinely and quite possibly the most thorough way of them all. and yet he made a lifetime worth of#choices and many many many of them were to harm people in horrific ways; to his own ends and for his own satisfaction#and like. what do you do with that.#it is difficult and uncomfortable to sit with that and draw conclusions from it that are neither 'his trauma means none of that counts'#nor 'okay yeah well he's a victim BUT HE DID BAD THINGS SO THAT DOESN'T MATTER FUCK HIM'#if there's any show that invites you to do that it's sdmi; i love that about it. but you can't leave pericles out w/o defeating the purpose#especially when the nature of his being a link in the cycle of abuse is critical context for exploring the trauma of his victims#the vast majority of what he does to ricky is very clearly projecting and reenacting his own trauma onto a vulnerable target#and just. aaaaahhhhhh i have so many feelings about it god#abuse cw#grooming cw#SDMItag
11 notes · View notes
gay-artificer · 3 months
Text
Its absurdly funny to me when people argue about which slugcat ship is better/works more. Like. Lets not kid ourselves here guys. Every single one of us is Making This Shit Up
6 notes · View notes
Note
What's up with certain feminists trying to encourage women to date ugly men? There's a lot of shit on Twitter about how you need to "critically examine your preferences" if you're attracted to men taller than you. And then all these tiktok feminists are saying to date short men because there's no power imbalance, and that men with tiny dicks are better at making women cum....
Is this how you smash the patriarchy now? By dating ugly incels???
Not feminists if they aren't primarily about the liberation of women from male violence and control. That's incompatible with guilting women into wasting time on men they aren't interested in. Most small-dicked men and short men come with a ton of insecurities they absolutely expect the women they date to labour over (and my relatively small-dicked ex was not good in bed lmao). Not worth it. If you must date men at all, only date the ones you're (no particular order) A) attracted to, and B) who seem like decent people (you can't know if they are for sure, but you try).
8 notes · View notes
peligin-eyed · 6 months
Text
Tumblr media
What happened here is that, during one of their regular tea chats, Liam mentioned to Ambrose that he’d been having some trouble getting a copy of Moral Selection and Ambrose immediately was like “those gatekeeping bastards, I know exactly what to do. Give me two days.”
And proceeded to contact his most annoying and verbose acquaintances for help. Probably like half his railway board. The Dean of Xenotheology contributed a lengthy letter of recommendation with half a page of footnotes documenting the factual basis for her opinions. September has no idea who Liam is but still sent six pages on the subject of freedom of information. The Jovial Contrarian was a key player.
8 notes · View notes
mainfaggot · 5 days
Text
it's crazyyyy 🤣🤣🤣 how music can become so crucial to your daily life and then in the grand scheme of things, the way it can end up influencing/becoming attached to certain years and even decades of your experiences....
4 notes · View notes
scuopsie · 1 year
Text
rant time!
kpop reaction content isn't exactly new (at least as far as I know) but it does seem to have kind of boomed in the last... two-three years I think. I remember there being only a handful of relevant kpop reaction content creators on youtube, some more popular that the others, but still there weren't a ton of them around. and I guess it makes sense because kpop itself has gotten much more popular and widely known outside of just [REDACTED] and among a wider age range I'd say.
but nowadays if you look up “X group - Y title track reaction” you will find tens, if not hundreds of reaction videos (especially if its a well known group) ranging from channels with hundreds of thousand subs to small account with a couple of hundred views on their reaction videos. and I just find that so weird.
like... especially for channels that do reactions as their main (and only) content, I find it extremely difficult to believe that after a certain point there is any authenticity behind these reactions. these big reaction channels are out there reacting to damn near every relevant kpop group's comebacks (and there are a LOT of them) and every single reaction is generally positive and often very enthusiastic.
aside from the fact that logically and statistically it's impossible for someone to like every title track being released, even if they're all objectively good (which they're not), because no one likes every genre and every style of music, there is basically no creativity involved in creating this type of content which makes it very dull both for the creator and the consumer after a while.
on top of that, this type of content has created a really toxic environment around expressing opinions and criticism toward kpop groups and kpop music. I just came across a video from one of these bigger (while also being newer) creators talking about how she's not happy with the content she's been making for the past year. she said that it's extremely overwhelming trying to keep up with every comeback when everyone expects you to react to their fave's CB and after a while sitting and reacting to music videos becomes repetitive especially when you're not even allowed to truly be yourself and express your opinions. she said she can't even talk about having a bias in a group because she would get tons of hate comments and dms about ppl bashing her for not having a different bias. I can't imagine how people would react to a reaction video creator saying she doesn't like a comeback or even a certain element in the song/mv.
I used to love kpop reaction videos back when I had just discovered them and they were not as big. like I genuinely get the appeal. seeing someone who's not a teenage girl (which is what stereotypically the general public thinks kpop stans are) is pretty validating. and back then there were like 'vocal coach reacts' or 'producer reacts' etc. seeing the reaction of "experts" analyzing different parts of a song/mv was really interesting for someone like me with zero knowledge of any of the technical stuff. and I also understand that they do contribute to promoting groups and comebacks to a certain degree. but it has just gone too far, in my opinion.
idk maybe I’ve just gotten old and lost the will to enjoy the small things that used to bring me joy but I genuinely don't enjoy reaction videos anymore. most of those older 'exerpts' (except for two I think) aren't active anymore (I'm guessing at least to some degree bc stans didn't want to hear that their fave was not that legendary of a vocalist or their fave song wasn't as layered and complex as they thought it was) and instead there are just random people reacting to kpop and some of them you can just tell that all their reactions are completely faked out. Youtubers are jumping on this trend bc it’s easy (in terms of not having any kind of real substance) and gets u good views if you’re a little charming and funny.
TL;DR : everything is fake and authenticity is dead. kdjfdjf I'm mostly joking but in the end, as per usual with my rants of this kind, I don't have a specific point or a solution. I'm just starting a conversation. so if any of you have something to add or just want to chat about this send me an ask!! (plz don't reply in the comments because I want this to be on my dash so everyone else can read too.)
#I believe the only technical reactors that arent new are PD and reacttorhek#iirc Dre used to be the biggest reacting channel but idk if hes not active anymore or just not relevant#there are a few ‘dancer reacts’ that are new and i didnt find any of their reactions that fun to watch. they didnt anything to the convo.#idk how new ben (birb) is but i used to like his reactions back when he would pause a lot and make longer comments. new hes making very-#short reactions and barely rewinds/pauses for comments.#i dont watch reacttorhek anymore at first bc they werent doing reactions to my faves anymore so there wasn’t anything for me to watch#but then I discovered that they have a doc where they’ve made a list of groups/songs they wouldn’t be reacting to#i think the explanation was that the producer has to choose songs that are complex enough and are worth their artists reacting to#which made sense but seeing the songs/groups they are reacting to (granted i dont stan any of them) it seems like they’re actually mostly-#-reacting to the most popular groups and not necessarily the groups/cbs that deserves the attention#like it makes sense for them to be picky bc they’re a huge team and cant be mass producing tons of videos like some of these solo reactors#but it seems like instead of picking actually musically complex and interesting songs from lesser known/underrated groups theyre just-#-picking groups that will bring the most views.#i just scrolled thru their channel and nearly all the videos were reactions of popular 4th gen gps#essentially the only reactor i still enjoy watching to some degree is PD#But i still cant get over the fact that none of these reactors ever have anything other than praise to say abt evey song they react to#even I dont like EVERY song my bias group releases#so even when i watch a reaction of a song/mv i DO LIKE i dont know if the person is being genuine abt liking it#okay i think I’m done 🤔#niki screaming into the void#long post
28 notes · View notes
zipquips · 15 days
Text
at what point am i supposed to give up on a friendship?
3 notes · View notes
dragonji · 16 days
Text
been doing so well on the neuroticisms front for the past few weeks and idk what changed but major nosedive for the night lol uhm .
5 notes · View notes
wonder-worker · 29 days
Text
It is difficult to argue that [Edward IV] was wrong in what he did. His advancement of [Richard of Gloucester] can be criticized only by those who believe that the only good nobleman is an impotent nobleman. Medieval kings did not think in these terms. Gloucester’s power was valuable because it ensured royal control of a significant and troublesome part of the country. Nor can Edward be blamed for not foreseeing the ends to which Gloucester might put his power. The duke had been a loyal upholder of the house of York, a central figure in Edward’s polity*; there was no obvious reason why he should not occupy the same role under Edward V. In this respect, precedent was on Edward’s side. Previous minorities had seen squabbles over the distribution of power, but no young king had ever been deposed. Even royal uncles traditionally drew a line at that, something which explains why Gloucester’s actions seemed so shocking to contemporaries and, perhaps, the reason why he got away with it so easily in the short term.
In the immediate sense, Gloucester must take final responsibility for what happened in 1483. However one explains the motives behind his actions, things happened because he chose that they should: there is nothing in the previous reign which compelled him to act as he did.
-Rosemary Horrox, "Richard III: A Study of Service"
*Richard was also, yk, Edward's own brother who had been entirely loyal during his life. The problem wasn’t that Edward trusted Richard, the problem is that Richard broke that trust in a horrible and unprecedented way to usurp a 12-year-old. Please understand the difference.
#wars of the roses#edward iv#richard iii#edward v#my post#The arguments of Ross and Pollard (et al) are so profoundly unserious and ahistorical#casting an unforeseeable turn of events as a predictable ('structural') one as David Horspool rightly puts it#Ross specifically is entirely dependent on his own horrible view of Elizabeth Woodville and her family as the basis of his analysis#but anyway. as Horrox points out later in the book:#''although earlier events [during Edward's reign] cannot be said to have caused the crisis they did have some bearing in how it developed'#namely Edward's legacy of forfeitures in the 1460s; manipulation of property descents; and fluctuating royal favour.#the most prominent and politically important of all of these were the manipulation of the Mowbray and Howard family fortunes#This is often used to enhance the unserious and ahistorical arguments of historians like Ross and Pollard that Edward doomed his son#But as Horrox points out: Edward's reign did not exist in a vacuum and needs to be analyzed by actual historical context.#from a broader perspective his actions were not especially transgressive as far as English kings were concerned#NO MONARCH (Edward III; Henry VII; etc) died with every single one of their nobles 100% content and supportive#they weren't living in Disney movies and there's no point holding Edward IV to fairytale standards that did not exist.#More importantly Horrox points out that Edward's actions (eg: the Mowbray and Howard cases) need to be put into actual perspective#They were not perceived as problems and did not cause problems during his own reign.#They did not cause problems after he died before Edward V arrived in London.#They only became problems after Richard decided to seize power and deliberately exploited them as bribes for political support#Had Richard decided to support his nephew or work with the Woodvilles - Edward's actions (@ the Mowbrays and Howards) would be irrelevant#(It's also worth pointing out that we don't know WHEN Richard decided to usurp. It if it was a more gradual desire then his depowering#of the Woodvilles by exploiting Mowbray & Howard discontent would not have not affected *Edward V's* ascension or prospects)#ie: the problem isn't that discontent existed with a few specific nobles (that was normal) the problem was how Richard took advantage of it#In theory this sort of thing would have been a potential threat for ANY heir to the throne whether they were a minor or an adult#In itself it's not really unique to Edward and it's silly when historians criticize him and him alone for it. It was more or less standard.#(if anything the fact that he was able to do them so successfully is an indication of his authority)#We come back to Horspool's point: 'Without one overriding factor' - Richard's initiative and actions - 'none of this could have happened.'#which is where this analysis of Horrox's comes in :)
3 notes · View notes
finexbright · 1 year
Note
My parents who aren’t even louis fans immediately went to ‘what if he’s ill?’ and ‘what if it is unsafe?’ not ‘he hasn’t sold the tickets’ when I told them about louis cancelling the asia leg
the wonders having braincells can do! and understanding that there's logical explanations for things
15 notes · View notes