#that you disagree with and happen to be a part of! lmfao. u don’t get to act like i’m silly stupid just because u don’t like it

[munamania]

there r some ppl on here i would sell to satan for one corn chip for no other reason than they annoy me deeply

#just by existing yes #none of u dw abt it #it sucks bc. if they were not so condescending and let me use a synonym for emphasis #patronizing. about their opinions. and didn’t act like anyone who held a different opinion #and gives perfectly fine reasoning to support that was an absolute fucking idiot #i wouldn’t mind them! would even respect them perhaps! but alas <3 #and i wanna be like idec like it doesn’t matter however comma i would kill. die even to know if part of this post #is abt me dushxhshxhsbxhshd bc at this point like. why #and the ways it’s phrased is just so. like. you don’t get to act like i’m fucking stupid for an observation #that you disagree with and happen to be a part of! lmfao. u don’t get to act like i’m silly stupid just because u don’t like it #you don’t get to have an opinion on anything that i do etc. anyway #🙄 #abby talks #it doesn’t matter it’s so beyond petty it’s like whatever #but just. damn baby am i still on ur mind like that 💖

[gingus-doon]

Mishima for the character ask!

thank u for asking about one of my faves 😭😭💕

what i like about him

- THERE'S SO MUCH TO LIKE! first of all, he's very caring and that's just so endearing!! stg he would adopt like at least half of the cast unofficially had they not been in a death game / simulation– and his eccentricity makes him so much more interesting, as well! he's such a down to earth guy who's very sociable and nice but he's also pretty weird sjdbsn. the way he stands, his appearance, the way he throws (apparently) to his weird laugh. then there's also that scene where keiji told him he made the air smell like oil paint (WHICH SOUNDED LIKE SOME KIND OF JOKEY INSULT NGL) and mishima is like SO PLEASED about it??? AND IN REKO'S FONDNESS EVENT (1st i think) WHERE SHE JUST BERATES HIM BUT THEN MISHIMA'S LIKE "ACTUALLY THIS MAKES ME WANT TO BEFRIEND YOU MORE" SKFKSDN

i also just love his humility!! it's so funny sometimes, like when nao gives him that godawful bathing suit aND HE JUST AGREES TO WEAR IT FOR THE SAKE OF HER FEELINGS?? his willingness to work with people, as well, like how he didn't suggest gin take his cape off and how he literally took the time to draw on some shoes just for the sake of alice's safety. and then in that same fondness event, HE PROCEEDS TO BE ASSERTIVE IN THE KINDEST POSSIBLE MANNER LMAO. not to mention the selflessness in his sacrifice for nao?? like he's just too good and considerate and odd, we have to stan

—

what i don't like about him

- OOF there's not much for me to say for this part tbh KDKSDN. ignoring no-smoking signs is pretty bad akdjsj. i could say hypocrisy, as mishima also judged alice by his appearance, but i find that a very human flaw so it makes me like him more actually haha.

perhaps one thing that i actually was Spooked by was the existence in tragedy ending of ytts. it's really jarring and a little disturbing to see mishima so caught up in this own survival that his allies drop from his mind entirely (even nao!) but i can't really fault him for that since it is, again, a very human trait and it gives him depth. it's just spooky to see the juxtaposition of him caring so much to not even having them in mind, esp if you get one of the other endings first.

—

favourite scene

- there are sooo many good ones, it's hard to choose, but one of the ones i always think of is that leaf fondness event with gin!! i love mishima's consideration for gin's feelings (as mentioned before) and really, it's just so stupid and wholesome. like you'd think he'd would be smarter than to go back and forth like that but nope, gin's the one who comes in with the common sense akhsjdnns.

—

favourite line

- off the top of my head (as all these answers have been ekfhs) I LOVE HOW HE RESPONDS TO KANNA'S INQUIRY WITH "I'm eternally young, so I wouldn't know." LIKE THAT'S LITERALLY THE SMOOTHEST QUESTION DODGE EVER. WHAT A G LMFAO

—

favourite outfit

- ik he doesn't change outfits in the game but what if his default outfit was a dress shirt and a suit sjfhsjdn. i can't imagine him in casual clothes help 😭 i also considered turtlenecks but actually i think that would be kai's thing

—

otp

- of course keishima 😔😔 i could just go on about how perfect they are for each other for hours lmao. keiji is also the only person i ship with mishima?? like kaishima is ok i guess but it just doesn't hit the serotonin like keishima 👊 shunshima is alright too but i think i'd prefer it platonically

—

brotp

- my bias towards the characters is absolutely being exposed because it's not nao, but instead shin and hinako– reko too!!

though it's less of a brotp and more of me thinking that mishima would be a father figure to them AKDHSDJFJ. for an actual brotp in terms of friendship rather than mentorship, i think kai and q-taro would be really good friends with mishima and would b more like peers than pupils to him sjfhdj

—

headcannon

- i just think it'd be neat if mishima was one of those kinds of teachers who had an array of colourful and playful ties with a wide variety of dress shirt colours :> also maybe fun socks

—

unpopular opinion

- i'm really not exactly sure! the popular opinion on mishima seems to be that he's awesome, which i agree with lolol. and i haven't seen any content for him which i disagree with in particular (i think) so i don't really have any opinions to go against lol.

if i had to say something, though, i guess it'd be that he's not perfect ? as evidenced by the smoking thing (kazumi mishima is now a morally grey character because he ignores no smoking signs lmao) and the existence in tragedy ending, and any other subtle lapses in a flawless image. though, i don't think mishima is trying to keep up a flawless image so much as a moral one around children! he seems okay to discuss or touch on his deeper feelings in conversation in order to connect with people, and i think that's very neat

and i don't blame people for perceiving him as flawless, i often also struggle to grasp at whatever his more serious character flaws would be! especially since i usually write him with keiji, and keiji is... The Most Flawed so mishima comes off as an even better person in comparison.

—

a wish

- i don't think i have any wishes for mishima's character in the main game? like i don't expect him to come back to life or anything ajdhksn. SO, my wish is that nankidai will double up on the fondness events so that we'll see mishima from other people's perspective!! LIKE I AM SERIOUSLY HOPING FOR THIS SO HARD I NEED TO SEE KEIJI AND MISHIMA INTERACT MORE (and other ppl as well SKRHJSNS)

—

an oh-god-please-dont-ever-happen

- i know this would like, definitely not happen because there's absolutely no good reason at ALL for this to happen, but it'd break my heart if there was a twist pulled like woaahhh mishima's actually a bad guy wjdhd. that goes against the whole message of "don't judge a book by its cover" that his character conveys 😭😭 honestly i probably wouldn't even think about evil mishima if it wasn't for that ai thing in chap 2. THAT WAS SO FUCKED UP, WHEN I REPLAYED YTTD AFTER PLAYING YTTS I WAS JUST LIKE "HOW DARE YOU DESECRATE THE MEMORY OF KAZUMI MISHIMA LIKE THAT YOU BASTARDS"

—

5 words to describe him

- funky uncle with misleading appearance !

—

my nickname for him

- i don't really have one haha. i just call him mishima– though sometimes i do like to use full names for the characters so i will just be out here typing "kazumi mishima" in its entirety sjdbns.

i have hc nicknames for what other people would call him though! other people being keiji JSFHS. "kazu" or "mishi"

#pov u listen to me ramble about kazumi mishima for 10 hrs #your turn to die #kazumi mishima #yttd mishima #kimi ga shine #kgs mishima

[szopenhauer]

What one event, big or small, are you going to tell your grandchildren about? I won’t even have kids...

What is your least favourite thing about your full name? it’s long, it’s polish, it’s feminine, it starts on a letter Z that is rarely used, people don’t know how to write my surname down, it reminds people of a stupid song that I hate etc. 

Do you like sunglasses? it’s complicated Do you think dreams can give us insight to things? sorta, sometimes Besides your computer, what else is cluttering your desk? what isn’t...

What is your favourite glass to drink from? prefer a mug When did your family immigrate to wherever you live now? they were born in Poland where we still live What time is it in the country you get the most of your heratige from? 14.42 Would you rather live in the 1960’s or the 1910’s? 60s  Is the computer your only current light source? window/sun too Do you think you look good with a hat on? I’m ugly no matter what so...

Do you have anyone you fully trust? not fully, not even myself, some I just trust more than others  When did you last talk on the phone with someone? yesterday with M.

Have you ever deleted Facebook friends for a significant other? kinda When did you last receive a hug and who was it from? mom, this day Was the last movie you watched a horror film? noooo Do you own a lot of tee shirts? shitload Do you handle pain well? been told  Have you ever been so nervous you threw up? I never threw up out of stress, I can feel nauseous though Do you enjoy your hairstyle? not really atm but it’s not the worst How much make up do you wear on a daily basis? none, ever Do you have a leather jacket? fake

What is the worst insult someone can call you? I’ve already heard everything I suppose... Do you write on your hands a lot? not anymore Do you think hugs are awkward? often Ever play Angry Birds? flappy bird only How late did you stay up last night? till mornin’ Has anyone ever been weirdly obsessed with you? mhm Are you afraid someone might steal your identity someday? they would have to be really stupid to choose mine tbh Is there a place you’d rather live right now? on my own... Do you go out often? lately Is there anyone who is overly nice to you? my current partner, I don’t deserve her If you’re reading a book, what page are you currently on? I’m not reading anything Do you have a job you like? I don’t have a job How many scarves do you own, if any at all? uh oh :x

What is one way in which this year is different from last year? where should I start... Do you feel like you have too much on your plate and your life is too hard? for me it is too hard Did you do anything you regret within the last 24 hours? probably What is your favorite day to go grocery shopping? I don’t have a favorite day to go but I don’t shop on Sundays and Mondays, Fridays and Saturdays are usually the hardest to get anything  Would you follow God even if it meant losing your home, your source of food, all of your friends, or even your life? jeśli byłabym 100% pewna, że Bóg tego chce i co mam robić Who’s death has affected you the most? my brother’s Have you ever grown sunflowers? they didn’t turn out well Are you scared to stand up to a police officer? no idea What is your doctor’s first name? which one?

Do you hate political posts on facebook? when there’s plenty, especially wrong  How many pictures do you have stored on your computer? omg  Which type of camera do you prefer: digital or Polaroid? hard to tell Have you ever had a camera that took film? we had when I was still a kid Do you ever squirt whip cream onto a plate and then eat it by itself? disgusting Have you ever had a hot flash? common Are you ok? my heart hurts badly Would you rather wear purple glasses or black glasses? black If you’re a girl, do you ever shop in the boys or mens section? absolutely If you’re a guy, do you ever shop in the girls or womens section? I’m a woman What do you think of when you hear the word “Christian”? religious person lmfao How many pullover hoodies do you own? bunch Which do you take more: videos or photos? pics What is the most embarrassing thing you can think of happening? my imagination is vivid What are two names you used to get mixed up when you were younger? for example - Ada and Adrianna What do u think of the quote “Life is either a daring adventure or nothing” I disagree Do you wear earmuffs when it’s cold out? I don’t own any

If you type for awhile, do your fingers start to hurt? on my phone, not computer What do you smell right now? luckily nothing much If you were an instrument, what would you be? smth annoying? Do you hate the usual 100 questions surveys? EX: Eye color boring Does your house have a doorbell? of course Do you know someone who has dropped out of high school? my classmate  If you were to get a pet turtle right now, what would you name it? mine was called Bob and I don’t want a new one  What’s your most hated commercial to watch? most of them are shit What was the last thing you charged? cellphone When you were younger, did you believe you could fly? if I did I would be dead by now (jumping out of window or smth) Favorite farm animal? chicken What’s your favorite name that begins with B? I don’t like polish names starting on B letter If someone payed you $500 would you take a bath in milk? why not Do you enjoy having time to yourself? :3 Can you do a cart wheel? still but crappy Do you like Ed Sheeran? blergh Would you rather become an author or teacher? author How many people are you currently texting? just 1 This time tomorrow, what will you be doing? hopefully spend time with @jonasz-cat Would you rather get money or gift cards for your birthday? money Have you ever been inside a recording studio? I have not Would you rather visit Mars or Neptune? Neptune Does it bother you when people keep talking to you and you want to leave? very Have you ever texted a landline phone by accident? my sister did Do you like quotes about love or life better? love is part of life What color is your garage? not applicable Do you like it when people give you compliments? they’re lying Was your hair straight today? my hair is wavy Do you ever share things on Facebook? quizzes from buzzfeed, music link from yt and selfies Do you pick out your outfits for the next day the night before or the AM? am What color was your swim suit this year? bluish Do ladders scare you? I’m cautious

1 through 10, how would you rate your day? low Any specific reason why? how I feel physically and those mirror demons mostly + some minor things

Salt or pepper? salt If you look to your right & then look down.. What do you see? bag Did you use swear words today? sigh... What did you buy today? food

If you had the choice to meet three famous people, who would you choose? dead or alive? Do you own any animals that aren’t domestic? dog is domestic ;)

Do you think people under fourteen should have sex? hell no How old were you when you had your first alcoholic beverage? 20+ What is something most people think of as lame, but you don’t? my interests? Have you ever feared that you would lose a body part? just my teeth, fingers or eyes Do you like gore? no thx Would you rather receive a kiss on the cheek, or on the forehead? neck :P Have you ever had a friend’s boyfriend/girlfriend flirt with you? someone who seriously tried to become my friend’s bf flirted with me and her sister and that’s one of reasons I say that you can lie with both actions AND words Where is your biological mother at the moment? kitchen Do you enjoy going places with your mother, like running errands? ... Do you have any annoying siblings? she indeed annoys me  How many people are in your immediate family? I count my parents and eventually my sister as immediate family Would you say you have good or bad luck? bad Do you like your laugh? uh... Do you hate it when people ask you how their survey was at the end? because they should do better, be more unique, sorry not sorry What are your plans for the rest of the day? we’ll see

Have you ever unbuttoned your ex’s pants? ... buttons? not zipper?... What does your last text say? it was the link to the article

Do you ever think about the past? I’m nostalgic and an overthinker Is math your favorite part of school? even in middle school when I was getting high grades for math I didn’t like it that much Have you held hands with anyone in the past 24 hours? yesterday  You’ve taken fifteen shots of vodka, what are you doing? exactly, WHAT AM I DOING?! Do you regret any of your relationships? yasss but I guess I learned yadda yadda yadda Whats the last taste in your mouth? stomach acid :(

What are your countries staple dishes? (Italians - pizza, pasta etc) *shrug* What was the last thing you felt disappointed by? my very own self Do you play games on your phone? nothing else but Choices Do you have music on your cellphone? spotify Name three black things that you can see? necklace, cellphone, calculator Do you like your best friends parents? Could you even tell me their names? I liked my elementary school’s bestie’s mom - Mrs. Krysia she was like an aunt to me and still recognizes me on the street, I miss her  Are you more of a mums kid or dads kid? dad’s Marilyn Monroe or Audrey Hepburn? Marilyn Monroe forever anything silly that annoys you? (i hate hearing nails being clipped) for example - someone scratching their plate with a fork, jak ktoś sztućcem zgrzebuje resztki jedzenia mam ochotę go zamordować >.<  would you perfer to do the dishes or hang washing? dishes

[elsaclack]

hi! I'm rewatching the series and I just always wonder what people's perspectives are on jake and sophia (if he was really in love with her and such). You're characterization in your writing is always so good and I love your b99 meta/long responses to asks so I was curious about your thoughts.

hi!!! i got this ask the other day and i’ve been letting it sit because i’ve been having really bad brain fog all week and i wanted to be able to fully dedicate my focus to answering this bc it’s such an interesting question and i’ve actually thought about it a lot!!!

i will qualify this by saying that i can’t speak for everyone so there are probably people who will disagree with me and that’s fine!!! the great thing about the show is that it leaves a lot of motivations-type stuff and the in-between not-seen moments up to personal interpretation so there can be a lot of different answers to this question and none of them are right or wrong unless dan goor says otherwise lmao

SO in my opinion, i think jake genuinely had feelings for sophia and probably really thought he was in love with her at the time. like i think that in his mind, he had sort of realized that amy was with someone else and was not into him in that way and he accepted it, and was doing his best to move on. like maybe initially sophia was just going to be a drunken one-night stand, but upon realizing that she was In His Life for better or worse, he also realized he actually has a lot in common with her and finds her genuinely funny and was attracted to her beyond just physical looks. so like yeah i definitely think that jake had real feelings for sophia - that’s why he stays with her for several episodes after amy and teddy break up. like i never got the feeling that jake was just bidding his time with sophia while waiting to make a move on amy after x amount of time passed post-breakup - like he was with sophia that whole time and was doing his best to connect with her coworkers/be more involved in her life and he was legitimately crushed after she broke up with him. he even spent the whole episode after their breakup trying to distract himself from constantly checking his phone for new messages from her. like that was very real and tbh i felt it in my soul, and people don’t act like that unless they were emotionally invested in a person

BUT i also think jake never really stopped having feelings for amy. it’s like i said, he’d come to the conclusion that amy was not interested in him and would most likely Never be interested in him in that way, so rather than disrespecting her and wasting his own time by waiting around on the remote possibility that she might someday develop feelings for him, he decided to move on with his life and find romantic fulfillment elsewhere. but like clearly we all know that doesn’t end up working out (for either of them lmao suckers) - in my head i think jake had convinced himself that his feelings for amy were gone and it was all purely platonic and he was genuinely happy with sophia and honestly probably would have stayed with her indefinitely (idk about a marriage proposal for them...i go back and forth but s2 jake still kind of strikes me as being afraid of commitment, i think he developed and matured later on within his relationship with amy to the point where he felt confident proposing and idk that that would have happened with sophia) but i think it was like trying to deny a fundamental part of who he is by pretending like he didn’t have feelings for amy. he could keep up a charade for a while, even convince himself that the feelings weren’t there anymore, but eventually the feelings came surging back, arguably stronger than they were before. i don’t think jake was ever lying to sophia or leading her on or anything, i think he legitimately thought at one point that sophia was The One for him, but after falling in love with amy and marrying her and starting a life with her, what he had with sophia is nothing more than a pale imitation of love. i mean i think that’s the case with most relationships that precede Real True Love - they feel so real and intense and cosmic at the moment, but once you find the Real Thing, everything that came before it sort of falls flat.

idk i don’t mean to like...romanticize...romance...especially bc i’m single and i haven’t had real romantic feelings (beyond like an occasional fleeting glimmer of attraction) for anyone in a long time, but like i’ve been in relationships that have felt all-consuming and heart-stopping at the time that ended similarly to the way things ended for jake and sophia and it was CRUSHING in the moment, but now that i’ve had some distance and i’ve grown and matured as a person, i can look back and understand that we were fundamentally different people and even if x thing that caused the breakup hadn’t happened, we probably would have broken up eventually anyways. and i think Finding True Love just further emphasizes that for a lot of people

not saying finding true love is the end-all be-all purpose of life or anything god knows fulfillment can be found in SO MANY other places, but in this specific case i think that’s basically what happened for jake. what was love at the time became a flickering baby candle flame of attraction compared to the all-consuming wildfire that is how he feels about amy.

ew i hate myself lmfao

anyways THANK U i always feel like i ramble on for way too long when i get asks like this so it’s encouraging to know people even read them let alone like them?? you’re v kind and i appreciate u VERY much

#my b99 meta #b99 #em speaks #jake x amy #jake peralta #sophia perez #amy santiago #jake x sophia #tbh

[timeisacephalopod]

Ive seen endgame! Spoilers under the cut and I’m not tagging this as spoilers because I’m literally telling you now its spoilers.

1- what the fuck was the point of Tony’s kid? We had more than 10 years with this character, he doesn’t need a kid for emotional impact when he died and now I’m kind of pissed they threw this fucking random kid in there only to orphan the poor thing and make Pepper a single mother. What fucking bullshit. Never should have been a storyline.

2- Pepper in the suit yaaaaaas.

3- Wanda. Fucking loved her moments. And Thanos’ “I don’t even know who you are” was fucking iconic lmao. I mean her “you will” was okay but holy fucking damn that was the funniest shit from Thanos.

4- they killed viz permanently lmao yeah I didn’t give 2 tits and a snare drum about him anyway so I don’t care.

5- Steve. What the fucking fuck did they do to him? Don’t get me wrong, I like Peggy, and I liked him and Peggy in FA. They were cute. But it was a 4 month fling in the middle of of a war. Not that it can’t be important, but after 15+ years you are telling me a 4 month fling from Steve’s youth is more important to him than everything else? And what of Bucky? He leaves him to HYDRA and after all the shit he went through in WS and CW you’re seriously telling me he’d just LEAVE him there like that? I don’t mean to be a dick to Peggy because I do like her, but narratively speaking Bucky has always played more importance to her except when they want to make Steve feel nostalgic. I’m sorry, I’m fucking over that plot line.

More than that though she moved on in her show, she had a life after Steve and he went back and took that from her. And I don’t see why aside from no one let him grow as a character while also having him grow as a character. He went through a huge character shift in WS and then we saw nothing of it. Aside from his motivations in CW, which make sense given the context of WS however much I disagree, we see none of that development and I’m fucking tired of watching him lament over a relationship that lasted for a shorter time than a high school semester. To any normal person, and even to Steve given his non normal stance, he would have moved the fuck on. Also he made out with her niece that one time!! How is he living with this!

Also Sam says they never had a Captain America but Steve was still big when he danced with Peggy, which means he got the serum, which means he still can’t age right, which begs the question of how the tits long did he live? And again, what does this mean for everything else considering getting the serum implies he was, at some point, Cap even if he was never the Cap they knew. What the fuck! I’m actually the most mad about this because Steve, post WS, probably would have been one of my favorite characters given his extreme narrative shift and just how interesting that could have been if anyone ever fucking let him move on with his fucking self but no. Instead we end with him in the same spot he started in! I watched ten years of this shit for him to do NOTHING? All that development (that the narratives never really let him go through in totality because he narratively never shifted out of his War and Peggy Phase even while his character, on an individual level, moved out of that several times) and I watch him end in the same place he started?

Honestly I’m pretty pissed about that. Especially with all the did with Bucky. I seriously can’t believe Steve fucking left him there, ignored every piece of information he had, ruined Peggy’s original happy ending, and then didn’t even grow as a character. I like that he got a happy ending, I think he’s earned that, but I simply cannot believe a 4 month fucking fling meant so much he’d ignore his best friend, HYDRA, Peggy’s original marriage, the fact that he made out with her niece that one time, and everything else to end up exactly where he started. Which is why I don’t really care for him to begin with- because the narrative always leaves him right at the beginning and I don’t know how to invest in a character that grows but never grows. If he narratively was allowed to grow he would have been so. Much. Better. It is so fucking frustrating to me that he never moved the fuck on. You have no idea.

6- “I can do this all day” “Yeah I know”

7- “You look like melted ice cream”

8- Hated almost everything they did with Thor. Fat jokes? Yikes. Though I did love that ice cream line. Loved the bit with Frigga. And like. Thor being devastated and traumatized is ok. I think that’s realistic enough even if I wonder how someone that’s been alive for well over 1000 years doesn’t know how to handle himself with slightly more grace. I would have liked to see him crack differently.

9- Cap picking up Thor’s hammer and Thor being happy about it? 10 000 times better than the garbage Whedon wrote. Loved that.

10- Nebula. N E B U L A. NEEEEEBBBUUUUULLLLAAAA. Start to finish fucking loved her. She was amazing. 2 questions though- how did she not kill herself when she killed herself? Which in itself is a fucky question to ask. And also the second contention point I have with the movie beyond time travel bullshit is why NO ONE asked where she was post Nat (that in a minute). I know they were sad about Nat obviously but Rhodey is a full bird colonel, he keeps track of thousands of people for his job, plus all of his involvement in Tony’s antics, plus the Avengers and you’re telling me he didn’t notice her gone even with Nat? And Tony, you’re telling me he didn’t notice her gone? He was the one who bonded with her the most and he didn’t notice that he’s now technically lost two people he was close to? And Rocket? He didn’t notice? Are you fucking kidding me? I thought that was bullshit.

Even if, by chance, Rhodey somehow didn’t notice his partner in crime was missing (”I wasn't always like this” “Neither was I”- new BroTP yo!) when I think his military experience alone would have made him the second most likely to notice after Rocket (because he knows her the best) then Rocket should have. And if for some reason Rocket didn’t notice despite her being all that’s left of his found family, making him extra invested in her whereabouts, over Nat, whom I think he’d care about but not like Nebula, then Tony, who spent all that time with her in space, would have noticed.

Fucking someone would have noticed her gone. And the whole second half relies on no one noticing this moment and I call absolute bullshit on that. Someone. Would. Have. Noticed. Rhodey if for no other reason than experience of keeping track of people in war zones, Rocket if for no other reason than her being his last remaining connection to his family, and Tony if for no other reason than Nebula being a large part of the reason he’s alive. I was completely thrown from the story here. I simply can’t see how they could over look that even considering Natasha.

11- Natasha. Are you fucking kidding me? You killed her over Clint? I fucking hate MCU Clint. He’s boring, he’s nothing like the comics, he’s a fucking prick, and I don’t give a fuck about his family or anything to do with him. I liked him best when he was going to kill himself for Natasha. That is the only moment, as Marie Kondo would say, sparked joy for me. Otherwise throw the whole thing out. Fucking Natasha over Clint. Fuck you. That was an insult to the viewers. I don’t give a fuck about Clint, I don’t give a fuck about his kids aside from thinking they didn’t deserve the snap, and I don’t give a fuck about his story.

My mom said he was a plain Timbit (donut hole for the US readers) in a donut world and I honestly think that’s insulting to the plain Timbit, which is something we give to dogs as treats in Canada. Clint isn’t even a dog treat to me and they killed Black Widow over him. Fucking pissed.

12- “That suit does nothing for your ass” “No one was asking you to look, Tony!” “That’s America’s ass!” .... “That is America’s ass”

13- I actually really liked what they did with Bruce. I was excited to see all the benefits of the Hulk and Banner in one! That was pretty cool!

14- Strange’s reappearance was pretty badass. And Wong! I was excited to see him there! Was a bit surprised by Tilda Swinton’s appearance but okay. I didn’t hate it. Loved when she punched Bruce out of the Hulk lmfao that was so funny. I do like that she apparently does that to everyone lmao. I should write a fic where she punches Wong’s soul out of his body when the meet just because I think it’d be funny. And I’d love to see more Wong.

15- Steve vs Steve was really cool, I liked that. And fucking Hail HYDRA holy fucking shit I almost lost my ass. Couldn’t fucking believe he said that (and knowing that he just leaves that all for Peggy, his 4 month fling? Find this wildly out of character for him). Then he fucks right off with the tesseract omg.

16- Scott had some iconic one-liners. “That’s America’s ass!” “Okay I'm going to go inside you” omg. Ant Man was a joy to watch in this. I find Endgame used his character right.

17- I know I said it but Pepper Potts in the fucking suit y’all! I don’t know who was watching Morgan but also Pepper Potts in the fucking suit!!

18- That time travel shit made things entirely way too fucky. I knew that’s what they were going to do because that’s all that made sense, but I thought it was fucking stupid. And can Thanos even snap the stones out of existence? Because Tilda Swinton’s speech implied if he did something like that timelines would essentially do the funky chicken and die. She removed the time stone and shit was supposed to get weird, remove all 5 and what happens? Wtf? He fucking hid those stones. Did like Thor’s bit there though, killing Thanos. I think Nebula earned it more than him but I also think it was a good moment for Thor before his character became a fucking joke. 

19- narratively I understand why they started with Clint’s family dusting but I don’t give a fuck about Clint or his dusted family. I would have preferred watching a civilian lose his shit.

20- Steve you need therapy, stop leading therapy sessions. Especially when your advice is ‘move on’ and you literally go fucking nowhere in your life even after you went all over hell’s creations. Get this man a proper therapist he needs like 15!

21- lmfao Russos talking about gay representation and it was a guy talking about a date. I shit you the fuck not that was it. Gay. It was barely even there. Only straight men would ever assume that could possibly count as representation holy fuck. Like thanks for the blink you miss it shout out I guess. You remembered gays exist, wow!

22- Strange’s one finger thing, I liked that a lot actually. I think it functioned both as a great call to action and a nice reference to Stephen’s power.

23- Quick question, why was Tilda Swinton in New York? Because they went back too far for Strange- at first I when they mentioned 3 stones in NY I was like wait, when’s Strange’s story supposed to happen? After WS right? He can’t be in NY with the stone? But then Tilda showed up and I was like... why isn’t she in Nepal at the teaching sanctum? Because apparently the NY one isn’t a teaching sanctum and as far as I knew she was training Mordo and Wong there at this time so wtf? And it can’t be explained with ‘she knew she needed to be there’ because she punched Bruce out of hulk and he had to grovel to her to get the fucking thing from her and only managed because she knew Stephen gave up the stone willingly and would never do so without good reason because he’s the best fo the best. So like. Why was she there aside from plot convenience? That was a little too easy. Frankly, the whole plot was a touch too easy but still.

24- tired of aliens we’re supposed to relate to looking like humans but in pink while aliens we’re supposed to dislike are animalistic and non human looking. That’s a garbage trope.

25- The black woman in the elevator who made Tony and Steve is 100% Fury’s mother no one can convince me otherwise. I think the timeline matches up but I don’t care if it doesn’t she’s his mom now. He gets it all from his mama.

Bonus: stop trying to make Howard happen, Marvel, its not going to. I fucking hated that scene with Tony and Howard. What kind of bullshit abuse apology was that? Howard then, sure, he didn’t suck quite yet and seems to be aware of his own shortcomings. Howard in the future? Sorry, irredeemable crap. Narratively interesting irredeemable crap but irredeemable nonetheless. Tony panicking and saying his last name was Potts was great though lol. I’ll take it as evidence he took Pepper’s last name when they got married.

Bonus Bonus: I cried when Sam held the shield. I’ve been gunning for Sam to take over as Cap since we met him and everyone told me it’d be Bucky. I argued that we’ve already seen the story of a super soldier as Cap, it would be more interesting to watch Sam as a relatively normal guy take over as Cap. And I like Bucky traumatized and Winter Solider-y. I think he’s more interesting that way. Seriously though, Sam as Cap will be amazing and I didn’t expect to cry at that of all things but I did. I’m so excited to see him in that role!

Bonus Bonus Bonus for any sorry fucking soul who’s made it this far in I think I might update the Tony, T’Challa, and Their Gaggle of Children verse to include Morgan (but older) finding Tony only she’s his actual assed kid and no one believes it even though they have a striking resemblance. Which annoys them both because he got the media to buy all his other fake kids with easy to track down parents but not his actual kid. Ending with Nebula showing up and him claiming she’s his kid and everyone buying it.

#winters ramblings

[palmettoes]

hi babe so have you ever considered neil and matt sharing an apartment? maybe they're on the same team or close enough to share one, and it's absolutely amazing because these boys love and support each other so much. but then.. they're also both absolute children when left alone together and the foxes get updates of whatever the most recent thing is with one completely ridiculous picture that never gets explained (like the Sofa Incident). basically love and fun and the brothers they never got!!

(em you already Know how much i love this prompt but like ,, in case you needed a reminder i LOVE this prompt im still crying thANK U anyway this took probably too long but i highkey poured my heart into this dumb little fic i hope u love it ur such an angel ily !!!)

read it on ao3! | prompts are closed :(

◊

Months from now, Neil will be grateful for this lifeline.It’s the offering of comfort and stability he needs long before he knows he’sallowed to want it, and Matt is holding it out to him without a second ofhesitation. Months from now, Neil will appreciate it for what it is. But fornow it feels bigger than he deserves.

“I don’t need a babysitter,” he says, placing a neatly foldedshirt on top of the growing pile beside his suitcase and turning to look atMatt. “I can look after myself.”

Matt, to his credit, doesn’t roll his eyes but Neil watchesthe corners twitch and he knows it’s a near thing.

“I know you can. I’m not asking to be your babysitter. I’masking to be your roommate.”

“Why?”

Neil can’t help it. The question is itching under his skin,making him shifty and uncomfortable. He doesn’t understand Matt’s motives: hespent three years living in close quarters with Neil and half of the last twopractically glued to Neil’s couch at any given opportunity. Why he is willinglysigning up for another year of it, Neil cannot fathom.

“We’re playing for the same team. It just makes sense,” Mattsays and he makes it sound like it really does. Neil frowns and purses his lipsand can’t think of any good reason to dispute it.

“You don’t share an apartment with any of your otherteammates.”

Matt does roll his eyes this time, but it’s a gesturefilled with fondness and, for reasons Neil can’t explain, the rest of hiscomplaints stick in his throat.

“None of my other teammates are my best friend.”

◊

It’s surprisingly easy, Neil thinks, to fall into theroutine of living with Matt. The apartment is already full of Matt’sbelongings, from his two year head start, but bits and pieces of Neil slip intothe cracks—his running shoes by the door, two mugs by the coffee pot eachmorning, Andrew’s hoodie on the back of the couch. It becomes theirs intrinsicallyuntil the discomfiture ebbs away and the word home seeps through.

When Neil wakes up in his new apartment for the first time,the morning feels stretched and torpid. The absence of weight in the bed besidehim is a hollow ache in his chest, and he gets up just to avoid the immensityof it. The world is drowsy outside his window, dark and slow as it blinksitself back to life, but their apartment is already alight with the smell ofcoffee and the muffled sound of socked footsteps.

Neil finds Matt in the kitchen, one hand pouring milk into amug of coffee, the other stirring porridge on the stove. Matt looks up at hisarrival and grins, all teeth and dimples. He sets down the milk carton andhooks his fingers around the handle of the other mug, holding it out to Neil.

“Morning, princess,” he says. Neil wraps his stiff fingersaround the mug, letting the warmth seep through to his bones and wake himproperly.

“Your porridge is done,” he observes, because he can see itthickening around Matt’s spoon as he steps past. Matt yelps and flicks off thegas, transferring the pot to a cool hob and reaching for a bowl in the samemovement.

“There’s enough for two,” he says as he scrapes the gloopymixture into his bowl. Neil stands on his toes to open one of the cupboards andgrab a granola bar from the second shelf.

“I’m good, thanks.”

Neil holds the half-opened granola bar up in defence whenMatt shoots him the look he reserves for disapproval at Neil’s tendency to skipmeals. He doesn’t comment but the tilt of his mouth is displeased. Neil shrugsit off and sips his coffee.

“Excited to meet the team later?” Matt asks as he runs hotwater into the empty pot to soak. Neil waits until the gurgle of the tap shutsoff to reply.

“Not really. I don’t care what they’re like. It’s how theyplay that matters.”

Matt turns to lean against the kitchen bench, bowl in hand,and rolls his eyes fondly—something of a recurring action around Neil.

“Now you sound like Kevin.”

“Kevin sounds like me,” Neil corrects, just to be contrary.

Matt grins around a mouthful of porridge. “You’re both asbad as each other. Come on, you can have first shower. I want to show you thebest route to the supermarket before we’re due at the stadium.”

◊

The team, as it turns out, arefar more excited to meet Neil than he is to meet them. There are three new teammembers, including him; one other first year pro and a transfer from Denver,but Neil inadvertently steals most of the attention. It’s some mixture of hismemorable face gracing television far more than any college student has a rightto, and Matt singing his praises over the past two years, that gives him adegree of interest the Cannons gravitate towards. All Neil really wants to dois talk to the Denver recruit about a certain goalkeeper on his old team, butMatt squeezes his shoulder lightly and it is as much a warning as it is acomfort. Play nice.

Neil smiles and lets KatiLaskey—starting striker—hook her elbow around his neck and rub her other handlightly through his hair. If he closed his eyes, her weight against his bodywould almost feel like Dan. The thought is both reassuring and saddening, likea weight constricting his chest not quite enough to leave him breathless, butspiking discomfort through his ribcage all the same. He finds he cannot makeeye contact with any of his new teammates.

“They’re not Foxes,” he says,when Matt prompts him for an opinion as they ease into traffic on their wayhome. Matt hums assent because it’s true, they are not and never will be theshape of puzzle pieces cut from the same jigsaw. They are Cannons, equal partschaos and content, and they have dug a Neil-sized hole in their line-up, but itis a manufactured kind of welcoming, a family born of necessity rather thandesire.

“They’re good people,” Matt saysand Neil cannot find fault to disagree.

“They’re good as teammates,” hesays instead. Matt flicks him a look under the guise of checking his blind spotbefore signalling the turn-off. They turn down the side street connected totheir apartment complex and Neil traces the vaguely familiar shapes outside thewindow with his finger.

It is still warm yet, the airhumid and muggy with the weight of summer. He can see heat hanging heavy overthe pavement and pooling in pockets between the clouds. He hates days likethese, but this one feels less like a burden and more like a blanket, swathinghim in the absence of body heat. Not ideal, but somehow enough all the same.

“They’re good as teammates, but Ialready have all the family I need.”

When Matt looks at him this time,it is with blatant intent and his smile is blinding.

◊

mattyb: someone come collect neil he’s making me sad

gaynolds: what did he tell you this time??

mattyb: a story about his mom

gaynolds: fuck those are the worst

wildz: u all g josten?

jos10: I’m fine.

gaynolds: :/

mattyb: he let me pat his head

wildz: 4 his comfort or urs ???

mattyb: honestly mine but i like to think it’shelping him too

jos10: It’s nice. Thank you.

nickyminaj: omg neil :( u cant be sad when im too faraway to hug u

jos10: I’m not sad.

jos10: Matt is.

mattyb: I AM

nickyminaj: mattie no :(

nickyminaj: coming to hug u both rn

wildz: me 2

gaynolds: me three

wildz: group hug @ the b/j apt.

nickyminaj: the WHAT

wildz: boyd/josten but im just rlzing how bad thtsounds

mattyb: H

mattyb: NNNN OFJAJKM.VWQ3JFJEZ/.DS’’;XMLD

nickyminaj: uh

wildz: r u dyin ???

mattyb: might have to take a raincheck on the grouphug

mattyb: OH HOLY FUCK

wildz: ?????

gaynolds: omg

mattyb: NEIL JUST

mattyb: CHRIST

nickyminaj: what did he do now lmfao

gaynolds: b/j apartment is my favourite soap

nickyminaj: ^^^

wildz: r they actually ded ????

gaynolds: matt??

nickyminaj: 50 bucks says neil started a fire tryingto make dinner

gaynolds: you’re on

gaynolds: josten knows how to cook

nickyminaj: lmaooo

nickyminaj: u didn’t see him try to use the sandwichpress at the columbia house

nickyminaj: andrew banished him from the kitchen

gaynolds: fuck

wildz: can confirm, neil knos how 2 cook but nt how 2use tech

kevinday: What’s happening?

mattyb: [image attached]

kevinday: What the fuck.

gaynolds: what the fuck

nickyminaj: WHAT THE FUCK

wildz: wht hppnd???

nickyminaj: UR COUCH IM CRYING

kevinday: How did that happen?

gaynolds: is neil BLEEDING

nickyminaj: holy fuck yeah his face

wildz: shit

kevinday: Is that a bird?

gaynolds: IS THAT A BIRD

nickyminaj: oh my god

wildz: matt wtf is goin on?

jos10: We’re fine. Matt had to sit down because hewas laughing too much.

wildz: neil ????

nickyminaj: EXPLAIN

jos10: I have to go. It’s fine.

gaynolds: josten you’re bleeding out of your face andthere is a pigeon on your head

kevinday: Neil

nickyminaj: oh my god

nickyminaj: we’re pretending this is normal oh my god

aaminyard: what is going on?

aaminyard: oh that couch is in shreds lol

nickyminaj: AARON PLS

wildz: called matt but it went str8 2 vmail

gaynolds: the bird probably fucking murdered them

aaminyard: finally

nickyminaj: aaron pls

wildz: aaron pls

gaynolds: aaron pls

aminyard: aaron no

◊

(The bird is collected by an ABC volunteer.

They buy a new couch.)

◊

Integrating himself into an already functioning team is botheasier and harder than knitting together the torn edges of the Foxes. TheCannons are professionals—polite because they are paid to be and serious whereexy is concerned—but they are friends off the court as well. Three months intotheir season, Neil has grown used to one or another of their teammates crashingon the couch in his and Matt’s apartment, or showing up unannounced withtakeout on their days off. Kati takes him out for coffee twice a week at asugar-free café two blocks from his apartment (which Neil delights in tellingAndrew about) and fills him in on the details of her personal life. (Her longdistance girlfriend just moved over from Missouri. They’re adopting cats.) Inreturn, Neil shows her the latest picture Andrew has texted him (the curl ofsmoke against a city skyline, or the glint of a blade under sunlight, or theopen freeway above the Maserati dashboard). Neil is never very sure, but hethinks this makes them friends.

Somewhere along the way, the team become less likecolleagues and more like something personal, something that spreads like warmbutter inside Neil’s chest. He knows parts of their lives that go deeper thannecessity for survival, while they learn where he likes to go to eat and what hiscollege major was. He lets them scavenge through his life for the titbits thatshould not matter yet somehow do, but saves the intimate details to sharebetween Matt and Kati. It’s not that he and Andrew are a secret, but Neil isprivate by nature and the Cannons, for all their friendship, are still notfamily.

They seem content to take what they’re given and pry nofurther, so Neil isn’t concerned when their captain, Breanna Ramírez, asks himto spare a minute after practice. He detours past Matt on his way off the courtto let him know he’ll make his own way home. Matt swings an arm around Neil’sshoulders and leans down to knock their heads together.

“Nice work today, honey,” he says and lets go, waving asNeil heads to the locker room.

Breanna takes him to a patisserie ten minutes from thestadium where, she tells him, they sell petits fours that her husbandthinks are to-die-for. Neil texts a picture of the display cabinet followed bya question mark to Andrew while he waits for Breanna to order. They get theircoffees to-go and Breanna’s husband’s petits fours in a small paper bag,and walk the short distance to a nearby park.

They talk about the season, about the flaws in the startingline-up, and about the kids Breanna and her husband are currently fostering.Neil wants to tell her he and Matt almost adopted an injured bird that they letfly into their apartment, but decides she might not take it in her stride aseasily as the Foxes.

Instead he says, “Maybe I’ll stop by the patisserie again onthe way home. Matt loves pain au chocolat.”

Breanna looks at him, looks away, sighs, looks at him again.

“Josten.” She fiddles with the lid of her coffee cup. “Neil.I didn’t want to say anything, but I feel, I don’t know, morally obligated.”

Neil’s pulse jumps in his wrist and he blinks at Breanna,confused and apprehensive.

“Morally obligated to what?”

“Look, you and Boyd are both lovely and I know it isn’treally my business, but the team has been talking and— Well, I’m not trying topreach to you, but sometimes his fiancée comes to visit and I just want to beclear that none of us are comfortable covering for you. If it comes to that.”

She’s doing everything to avoid his gaze now and Neil hasnever seen her so unsure of herself. He frowns, turning her words over in hishead but no matter which way he pushes and pulls he can’t make sense of them.

“What does Dan have to do with this?”

“You know, because of your… thing with Boyd.”

“My—” Neil stares at her as the pieces click into place,forming a complete picture, albeit one that makes Neil’s head ache. “You thinkI’m having an affair with Matt?”

“You’re not?” Breanna finally makes eye contact, head tiltedand eyebrows knit. Neil almost laughs but something about the set of her jawstops him.

“What makes you think we’re having an affair?”

“You’re very affectionate,” she says, shrugging. “We’venoticed things.”

“He’s my best friend.” Neil’s tongue feels numb in his mouth.His words come slowly, as though his brain is still catching up to theconversation. “We’re just like that.”

“You’re close.”

“Yeah. He’s my best friend,” Neil says again, like she mighthave missed it the first time. Breanna bites her lip and glances down at whereher fingers have twisted in the paper bag.

“There’s really nothing going on there, is there?” she asksin a small voice, and Neil’s patience slips a little.

“He wouldn’t do that to Dan. I wouldn’t do that toDan.”

“I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to—”

“Didn’t mean to what? Imply that we’re both cheatingassholes? Yes, you did, otherwise you wouldn’t have said anything.”

He knows his temper is sparking, knows he should put a lidon it, but his mouth is running faster than he can catch it. He doesn’tunderstand how she can’t see that they’re the two least likely people to beunfaithful to their partners, or why she thinks it’s any of her concern anyway.

“But you can see how it seemed like that, right? I mean, hecalls you pet names all the time. You buy him pastries for no reason. Lastweek, he kissed you at practice.”

“On the forehead,” Neil feels the need to remind her. “Becausewe’re friends. Do you need a rundown of every interaction we’ve ever had toprove that? How about a timeline of the development of our friendship?”

“This really isn’t any of my business,” Breanna says andNeil’s mouth twists in scorn.

“You’re right, it isn’t. I should go. I still want to get tothe patisserie before it closes.” He stands up, forcibly releasing the tensionin his fists, and tells himself to walk away. “See you at practice tomorrow.”

“Neil, I’m sorry,” she starts to say but he waves her off.He only makes it three steps before he decides he’s not finished. He pivots onthe spot, clenches his fists, and inhales sharply.

“For the record, I have a boyfriend and we’re very happy,”he says and watches Breanna’s face go slack, her mouth opening on words thatdon’t come out. It takes her three tries to find them.

“You never said.”

“It was never any of your business.”

She bows her head little, then looks up to meet his eyes,her cheek dimpled where it’s caught between her teeth. Neil shrugs.

“Just so you know. He’s the only one I’m interested in.”

Breanna nods and looks like she wants to say something else,but she doesn’t protest when Neil turns again to walk away. He has a funnyfeeling the patisserie doesn’t open late and he really doesn’t want to missthem.

◊

“The team think we’re having an affair,” he tells Mattlater, perched on the kitchen workbench to the left of the stove. Matt iscooking pasta sauce in a large pot, which means he’s making enough to freezethe leftovers because he knows Neil will happily go hungry if it means hedoesn’t have to cook on days when he can’t find the energy.

“Our team?” Matt asks incredulously. Neil nods,absentmindedly popping the seal on a half-empty jar of olives.

“Ramírez told me it’s been team gossip for weeks.”

Matt laughs, reaching around Neil to lift another pot downfrom the shelf above his head. He puts it on one of the empty hobs and returnsto stirring his sauce, so Neil leans over to flick the switch on the kettle. Hesettles back into his earlier position and searches Matt’s face, but all hefinds are traces of amusement. It calms him a little, his temper over Breanna’saccusations dissipating.

“Fifty bucks says Pav started it,” Matt says, grinning.Aleksei Pavlov is one of their starting backliners and notorious for hisoutlandish but widely believed rumours. He and Matt have a friendly rivalrythat involves playful nicknames and good-natured trash talking at every turn.

“I don’t bet,” Neil reminds Matt unnecessarily. The kettlepings as the water reaches boiling point and he lifts it over to pour into theempty pot on the stovetop. “Allison would have a field day with this though.”

“Oh God, let’s not tell her. If she finds out, Dan findsout, and I’ll be trying to live it down until I’m old and grey,” Matt laughs.Neil hands him a pair of scissors to cut open the bag of pasta in his hand, andreplaces the now empty kettle on its outlet.

“She wouldn’t be mad?”

“Hardly. She’d think it was hilarious.” Matt pours pastainto the pot and flicks the gas on, before giving Neil a curious look. “WouldAndrew be mad?”

Neil hums, returning to pressing the lid of the olive jarand letting it pop back into place. He doesn’t know what Andrew wouldthink—they’ve never had cause to discuss it before—but he can count on one handthe amount of times Andrew has shown interest in things that don’t directlyconcern him.

“I don’t think he’d care.”

“What, he hears his boyfriend is off gallivanting with hishot roommate halfway across the country and he doesn’t even want to check up?”

“He knows we’re not. Andrew doesn’t care for rumours,” Neilsays, shrugging. Thinking of Andrew’s signature apathy dispels the remainder ofhis anger and he finds that he doesn’t care for the rumour either. Andrew’svoice in his head asks why he cares what other people think and Neil can’t finda reason.

“That’s true enough,” Matt agrees. He twists off the heatunder the sauce and gestures at Neil. “Pass me those olives, would you, mylove?”

Neil snorts, releases the seal on the jar, and hands itover. “This is why people think we’re having an affair.”

“Maybe we are.”

Matt’s tongue dips out to lick the corner of his smile andNeil rolls his eyes.

“If I was going to cheat, I think I could at least do betterthan you.”

Neil earns himself an olive pitted straight at his foreheadfor that one. He catches its rebound in his hand and pops it into his mouth,rubbing the stain off his skin and kicking half-heartedly in Matt’s direction.Matt takes an exaggerated step out of the way and returns to slicing olives andsprinkling them into the sauce.

“Do you really want to be insulting me when the fate of yourdinner rests in my hands?” Matt asks. Neil leans over to steal another olive.

“I’ll tell Kevin you’re intentionally depriving me of abalanced diet.”

“You wouldn’t dare.”

“I have him on speed dial,” Neil says, slipping his phoneout of his pocket and holding it up for emphasis. He pushes off the counterwith his hands, landing softly on the linoleum floor and using the momentum toslide on socked feet to the other side of the kitchen. He bends to take twobowls from the cupboard and leans over to the cutlery drawer as he hears Mattchecking on the pasta behind him.

“Hey, sweetheart?”

Neil turns to find Matt beckoning to him, a strand ofspaghetti dangling from his fingers. He steps over and holds out his hand whenprompted by Matt’s grabby motions. Matt loops the spaghetti around his ringfinger, twisting and squeezing the ends until they mush together, effectivelytying the pasta to Neil’s finger.

“Give the team something to talk about, hey,” he says,exaggerating the wink that accompanies it. Neil turns his hand around and holdsup his middle finger in response. Matt laughs and the sound is white horsesbreaking over Neil’s head. He lets himself be pulled under.

◊

mattyb: [image attached]

mattyb: he said yes!

wildz: what

gaynolds: what

renesbian: what

nickyminaj: what

aminyard: what.

nickyminaj: omg

◊

Andrew calls him two hours later while Matt is making hotchocolate and Neil is flicking through sports channels with the TV on mute.

“I let you do one thing on your own and you get engaged toBoyd,” he says by way of hello. Neil smiles, tipping his head against the backof the couch and tapping the remote against his thigh.

“Jealous, are we?”

Andrew huffs, just barely but Neil catches it. He bites downon a laugh and lets his eyes slip closed.

“I thought you at least had better taste than that.”

“I chose you, didn’t I?” Neil says. Warm honey oozes downhis spine and he melts into the cracks between the couch cushions, the wholeworld slipping away and zeroing in on the static crackling down the phone line.Andrew’s voice is sturdy and smooth, garbled by the distance but stillunmistakeably his. Neil relaxes into it.

“Is that an affirmation of your good taste or further proofof your idiocy?”

Neil hums around a grin but doesn’t reply. He knows Andrewknows what he means, even though neither of them will acknowledge it. Theylapse into steady silence, soft breaths and fleeting movements between them.Neil can hear the buzz of traffic from Andrew’s end and assumes he’s on thebalcony of his high-rise apartment, overlooking the bustling street. Neilremembers the city lights and cool breeze from his last visit, the smell ofsmoke and petrol mixing in the air, the way the railing felt digging into hisback when Andrew kissed him up against it. He lets out a half-sigh, abortedbefore Andrew can make anything of it, and swallows the whiskey-flavouredmemory.

“My team knows about you,” he says, just to have somethingto say. It’s a lot like that with Andrew now—they no longer deal in weightedtruths and bleeding secrets. Neil finds that he doesn’t mind half as much as hethought he would, back when he used to worry they would run out of things tosay one day. Sometimes they have conversations without substance; after all,Andrew has always been good at making something out of nothing.

“I would hope so. They’ve played me twice,” Andrew says onan exhale. With his eyes pressed shut and his lips parted on a breath, Neil canalmost taste the smoke leaking from Andrew’s mouth.

“Funny,” he deadpans. Neither of them laugh. “I mean aboutus.”

He half expects Andrew to be difficult for the sake of it,but Andrew has long since stopped denying they are two parts of the same whole.He fiddles with his cigarette instead; Neil can hear his fingers tap away theash.

“Is that a problem?” he asks and Neil hears the part hedoesn’t say, the I don’t mind if you don’t, the this was never secretto anyone who was looking.

“No.”

“Okay.”

Neil breathes. Andrew smokes. The silence fills spacesbetween them.

Neil cracks an eye open when Matt taps him on the shoulder,holding out a steaming mug. From the smell, it’s a fruity blend from the packof herbal teas Kati had given him as thanks for helping out with hergirlfriend’s move. The mug is hot beneath his fingers so he balances it on hisknee while he resituates his grip to the handle, and raises it to his lips.

Andrew? Matt mouths as he settles onto the other sideof the couch, his own mug of hot chocolate warming his palms. Neil nods,nestling the phone between his ear and his shoulder so he can tap the ringfinger of his opposite hand, an explanation of Andrew’s call. Matt grins aroundthe lip of his mug before taking a sip.

“Tell him if he likes it then he should have put a ring onit.”

Neil frowns, glances down at his hand, and then back up atMatt. He mouths what in return but Matt just flaps his hand at thephone.

“Matt says,” Neil looks at him again and Matt gives him athumbs up, “if you like it then you should have put a ring on it?”

There’s a shuffling sound as Andrew shifts around, thesqueak of a screen door sliding open and closed, before the city noises cut offand the silence takes on a new shape.

“Tell Boyd if he likes his tongue he should keep it in hismouth.”

Neil relays the threat and Matt laughs aloud, his hotchocolate sloshing dangerously close to the rim of his mug. Neil watches him inshock—it’s the first time he can remember seeing Matt find genuine humour inanything one of Andrew’s lot have said.

“Did you just make a joke?” he asks Andrew. He’s not surewhich he’s more caught off guard by: that Andrew made a joke or that Matt foundit funny.

“It wasn’t a joke. It was a warning.”

A cupboard door clips shut from Andrew’s end and Neil hearsthe chink of crockery. He makes eye contact with Matt, who raises his eyebrowsand sips his hot chocolate, before shrugging off his surprise.

“I have to make dinner,” Andrew says. It isn’t a dismissalbut Neil can tell by his voice Andrew doesn’t feel like talking.

“Okay,” he agrees, “I’ll call you tomorrow.”

Andrew grunts, which is an affirmation in its own way, andhangs up without saying goodbye. Neil drops his phone between his thighs forsafekeeping and takes another drink of his tea. Matt nudges Neil’s shin withhis toe, nodding at the TV.

“You watching that?”

There’s a replay of an Exy match from the previous week, butNeil’s already seen it and it isn’t Andrew or Kevin’s team. He hands Matt theremote in lieu of a response and lets his eyes drift shut on the snippets ofsoaps flashing by as Matt switches channels.

◊

gaynolds: it’s been 8 days since our last b/jnonsense

nickyminaj: is that a record?

gaynolds: i think so

wildz: wild

wildz: get it haha

jos10: What’s b/j nonsense?

gaynolds: it’s you honey

aaminyard: aka every time you message this chateveryone has a stroke

nickyminaj: lmfao tru

jos10: Why?

wildz: u n matt r disasters

wildz: always gttin up 2 crzy shit

nickyminaj: u send the most concerning messages andnever elaborate

jos10: No, we don’t?

gaynolds: NO WE DON’T HE SAYS

nickyminaj: remember when matt and neil’s couch gotripped to shreds by a bird

nickyminaj: and they never explained how

gaynolds: remember when matt and neil got married

renesbian: remember when Neil texted the group chat‘cowabunga’ followed by three hashtags

renesbian: then ten seconds later said he rememberedMatt was visiting Dan and not to worry

wildz: rmbr wen m drank 3L of mntn dew at once

wildz: & n sent a pic of him passed out w ac.board cutout of dolly parton

wildz: y do they hav a c.board cutout of dolly parton

jos10: We can’t recycle her without concerning theneighbours.

renesbian: I think the question is why do you haveher in the first place

jos10: Oh.

jos10: We got her from Dollar Tree.

gaynolds: dollar tree sells cardboard cutouts ofdolly parton ???

jos10: I don’t think she was for sale.

nickyminaj: u STOLE dolly parton from dollar tree

aaminyard: you sound surprised

nickyminaj: i mean yeah

nickyminaj: aren’t u ??

aaminyard: no

gaynolds: no

wildz: no

renesbian: no

nickyminaj: good point

jos10: [image attached]

jos10: She lives in the shower.

gaynolds: that is quite literally the most terrifyingcombination of information/image i’ve ever seen

wildz: 1 time i stayed @ b/j apt & she slept inth bed w me n matt

aaminyard: what the fuck

gaynolds: why did we ever let those two live together

nickyminaj: yeah this has gone too far

wildz: m can move in w me if andrew will take n ??

aminyard: deal.

jos10: Who gets Dolly?

aminyard: never mind I don’t want him.

◊

When Neil wakes up in his and Matt’s apartment on what Mattdubs their ‘roommate-iversary’, the morning feels like a wave, hugging the bayit crashes into and guiding Neil’s breaths through the ebb and flow. A yearstretches across the floorboards, worn smooth under their tread, and laps atthe walls, where they’ve taken to sticking photographs and reminders andsmiley-face messages from one to the other. The world is quiet around him, butfor the buzz of the radio and the familiar pattern of footfalls againstlinoleum floor.

Neil finds Matt in the kitchen, two mugs on the worktop anda pancake flipping through the air towards the pan in his outstretched hand.

“Morning, princess,” Matt says, holding up one of the mugswithout turning. Neil loops his fingers through the handle and around theceramic curve, bringing it to his lips to blow the billow of steam away fromthe rim.

“Morning, sunshine,” he says, leaning against the corner ofthe fridge. The way Matt freezes is almost comedic, like each muscle isolatingand tensing one by one. When he looks up, his gigawatt smile is alreadyplastered over his face, bright enough to dissolve the dreary heaviness of themorning, and Neil’s returning grin bites into his cheeks before he can hold itback. Matt returns to his breakfast with crinkles by his eyes. Neil blowslightly on his coffee and takes a sip.

◊

mattyb has changed their name to sunshine.

jos10 has changed their name to princess.

◊

#maz.dox #mdb #naj #andreil #fic #remussloopin #answered

[besmirchthis]

this was a couple years ago, i guess.

i think about this a lot. partly maybe because it’s a kind of representation slash particular manifestation of a bunch of things that’ve fucked with me. partly because i guess i haven’t talked it out enough. partly because… well. there’s a path for thinking there, but we’ll put it aside for now.

first off, i’m sure the place i’m going to grouse about works for some people, has served some people well or at least all right, etc.  i don’t know for sure; i’m not going to go seeking that right now.

but like.

god. so the gist of it is that during my final semester of creative writing grad times, i agreed to go to this ed recovery center place. i didn’t WANT to - i deeply didn’t want to leave kristine or laramie - but the timing worked as well as any, i did wanted to get some of my act together, and i had the insurance to cover most of the cost, so. so okay. so i went.

and the gist is that it was fucking wretched, or i found it wretched.

the gist is that i found myself unheard or/and misunderstood or/and ignored.

the gist is that everything in me reacted against that place, left me feeling fucked in that place, and that over and again i was told to endure it. left to feel like it didn’t wound me the goddamn way it did.

i fucking. hate it. i hate that fucking place; i hate the people who kept me in there.

it isn’t that i didn’t try to give the place a chance. like yeah negative goddamn reaction from day one, but i fucking tried. and kept trying. and let myself be talked into staying longer, then longer, every goddamn day rending me.

i didn’t feel okay there. i rarely felt anywhere close to okay there.

i disagreed with… so fucking much about their philosophy? also about the ways certain aspects of eating and eating particular foods were framed like. i’m not going to talk about that here but just. there were some insidious messages woven in here and there and many, many places.

this may have been just me with people, but as far as i can recall, i rarely felt comfortable in group therapy sessions; there was always i think more performance in it than i liked. (i mean on my part. i mean partly because i couldn’t just keep talking about how Wrong the place felt to me, how fucking badly i wanted to needed to leave because 1) nobody in treatment needs to hear much of that probably 2) i absolutely didn’t need to hear more of my peers telling me ‘oh u just need to keep waiting you’ll see’ and 3) idk just like… i don’t know i had a three, it’s gone, whatever.) i don’t. feel like going into that further, so whatever, here i go, move along.

related: i was fucking. frustrated and at times nearly infuriated with myself, because it was easy to frame myself as someone Who Was Willfully Resisting Treatment or Who Didn’t Want To Get Better or Who Was Being A Bad Patient (which hahahaha is fuckinggg bullshit anyway heY). like ‘oh no why can’t i just focus on RECOVERY and do what i’m here to do?’ OH YOU KNOW WHAT? IF YOU’R FOCUSING ON HOW TERRIBLE THIS PLACE MAKES YOU FEEL, THERE’S PROBABLY A GOOD REASON!!!

and again, and again: ‘you need to focus on other things.’ ‘it’s fine.’ ‘sometimes treatment is uncomfortable.’ ‘you’ll see.’

like look fellas, pals, i am and i was real sick of this eating disorder bullshit, all right? i’m sure some part of me is clinging to some parts of it, but like. i wanted to improve my shitty relationship with myself and whatever with food. i want to connect to me, and i was fucking looking for ways to do it, ASKING for goddamn help in finding those ways.

and the aid provided was just. not enough. not nearly enough.

like ‘oh you can go sit in your room for an hour at x time (never mind the loud fucking fan in there that fucks with your comprehension) but really this is going to count against you even though we won’t TELL you that until you return to group and we’re like OH YOU ARE IMPROVING LOOK AT YOU BEING AROUND PEOPLE’ like hi fuck you but i don’t need to. socialize the ways you want or participate in all of these fucking groups i feel little belonging in to goddamn be ‘improving’ or whatever.

like ‘here have some earplugs’ okay i’ll try okay guess what THIS IS STILL NOT HELPING.

like mostly, like primarily ‘journal about it! give it another week! you’ll feel more at home!! you just need to give it time!!!’

at no point (i don’t think? i know i forget a lot of things but also if it did happen it was fleeting) did anyone on my treatment team seem to seriously entertain like. the idea that maYBE THIS PLACE WAS JUST NOT GREAT FOR ME. probably it would’ve helped for me to like. set myself up to enter some other program, but the entire Being There thing shook me enough and tbh tbf did set me up with some strategies so that i felt capable of going the fuck back home. (also lmfao like i had money to enter another program, hm.) and also? and also. i wasn’t near like. an actual danger point.

oh and by the way i loved, really super loveD the way my therapist kept questioning my relationship with kristine like. yes i know i talked about her a lot BECAUSE I WAS FUCKING WORRIED ABOUT HER and because i’m a sentimental shithead and like look we’ve had our whatever bumps of figuring things out but she’s super fucking supportive of me and in general i think we do a lot of good for each other? and this therapist was just. clearly super doubtful, hinted and hinted in a ‘this is unhealthy’ way that ours was a codependent relationship and my dudes, i do NOT care for the directions she seemed to be heading in.

also just. therapy sessions - individual as well as group - weren’t helpful to me, and from the sounds of it i had one of the less objectionable therapists. i tried to express this a few times, but she’d be like ‘oh we’ll get to that eventually.’ ‘oh, there’s no rush.’ like excuse me wait are you like?? just kind of pacing out your time according to a certain schedule like what the fuck this isn’t helping so i’m supposed to?? wait another three weeks and maybe, MAYBE then we’ll get to something moderately useful?

like holy shit every session felt useless felt like i was being pulled in directions i didn’t care for felt like i was being scarcely tolerated and you know what i get that it was probably tiresome listening to me talking over and again about how terrible i felt just being in that place, but mayyybe you could have listened to what and why i was saying, rather than continuing to brush it off as ‘deal with it’ and ‘oh sometimes people feel that way at first’ and ‘no i don’t think you know what you want.’ also hi that wasn’t the only thing i tried talking about but you were helpful ummm literally never bye.

and like. thinking on said therapist, there were certain… malevolences, subtle but working their way through her and a would-be ig quirky persona and like. it did not feel great. i did not feel great, anyway.

rarely did i feel even remotely okay in that place. and i know treatment centers aren’t fuckin. famous for being comfortable or whatever but like the alienation i felt was just… it wasn’t entirely related to like. my relationship to myself generally or to my relationship to my body or. i mean. shit and shit and shit, i have a hard time getting at the core of this, or anywhere close to it. my alienation felt very specific to that place, and most everything left me feeling further fractured, fragmented. like i was being taken into pieces and not in ways that worked toward rebuilding. like i was being or allowing myself to be erased with a glance.

i have a history of, i guess, being quietly devastated by other people. particularly people who are supposed to being providing some kind of care.

and it feels strange to me, hearing in a place of supposed recovery that what i’m asking is too much, that i’m just not trying the right way, that my instincts are wrong.

can i fucking. tell you something about my gut instinct, trauma-honed as it’s been for decades? IT TENDS TO BE REAL FUCKING ACCURATE. especially when i meet someone face-to-face or am physically in a place. like. look, i doubt myself about a lot of things, but my reactions are usually pretty solid.

and every impulse in me. every goddamn instinct was telling me GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE. fucking shouting it within the first hour of being there, and yes i told myself give it a few days, give it a week, because yes sometimes you can get used to things or i can. but this? the shouting continued. it was like. a constant fucking battle to muffle this impulse almost the entire time i was there.

like yes, once in a while i was able to convince myself that things were getting a little better and maybe it would be all right to stay after all. but most of that?? i think was like. trying to cling to the stasis of ‘oh this is life now why shake it up?’ because you know what else i’m real good at??? enduring shitty situations in which i feel like i’m being ignored slash my needs aren’t being met, ayyYYYYYYyy.

i’m sure there are things i’m mis-speaking here, misrecalling. but the overall of it feels right. i am… angry. and i am not angry often.

okay also this feels and felt like a minor gripe but also it… really wasn’t? and maybe it simply wasn’t possible to change but like. look it fucked with me, whatever. point being that there was a very large, very loud air vent in my room. and like. i have a hard time concentrating slash functioning slash processing anything where there are constant loud noises happening. (cold’s nearly as bad; no amount of layering keeps me from shutting down in chill.) it wears me out and i cannot, 100% cannot relax. and like I FEEL SO SHITTY BITCHING ABOUT OH NO A LOUD VENT IN MY ROOM but it amped my anxiety up, made talking on the phone real fucking difficult, made writing reading thinking pretty much impossible. every time i told them they were like ‘what can ya do’ or ‘try the earplugs’ but like. whatever. anyway.

something else: i was thirsty all. the fucking. time. which 100% happened the first time i was in treatment, and after like two months of hospitalization they were like OH HUH I GUESS YOU DID NEED MORE WATER ALL ALONG like thanks guys okay. but yeah this treatment center was round two for thaT. i brought it up multiple times, spaced out over days or weeks or fuck if i know. and it was brushed off like ‘no you’re not.’ or ‘live with it.’ or ‘your urine looks fine in the morning so there’s nothing to worry about.’ like cool story fuckos and i get that maybe you think you have reasons for caution but it doesn’t change the fact that i am always thirsty and thirsty in that like painful way? i am just asking for like?? one small extra water drink even once a day? …no? cool. thanks.

i did my shitty journaling, you assholes. i tried to communicate. and do you know what i heard? nothing, nothing, fucking nothing week after week.

and ha. HA. when i did finally screw myself up to leave? when i reached the ‘you know what i can’t keep living like this i have other places to fucking be where i can be me and work on healing with the people i was working with before this’? my treatment team dove hard and heavy into a campaign of ‘oh but if you leave against medical advice, your insurance might make you pay for everything!!’

over. and over. and over.

what i should have done was call my insurance. i’d say i don’t know why i didn’t, only lbr, i’m terrible at phone calls, terrible often at doing what needs to be done, and i was fucking scared like. i don’t know. i don’t fucking know. but i also don’t think anyone suggested that i contact my insurance? which?? is weird, in retrospect (or not weird at all). and like every goddamn day once i’d declared my intention to leave, they just kept hammering it in, and in, and in. and like, really?

i don’t know what the were told. what they might have heard, what they might have known, to what extent this might have been a scare tactic. but i eventually found out from my insurance that it was never going to be an issue. and like. i have some heavy fucking doubts about their intentions in taking that route so very, very hard.

i think there are other things i maybe meant to say.

mostly, i’m just tired. and angry. but too tired to write any more of the angry.

like hey, to be dismissed time and again. to be told my instincts are awry, when i goddamn know they’re telling truth. just.

thanks, fuckers. thanks for the terrible fucking trip.

#cw eating disorders #this is me #semi-rambling about this fucking #treatment center recovery center whatEVER #that fucked with me #so like #keep that in mind if you take a look #should also probably #cw emotional abuse #for brief references to it i guess

[armsinthewronghands]

Ron Edwards Making No Sense

https://plus.google.com/u/0/110790893064742233179/posts/JJj6ow3fEX5

Wayne Snyder Shared privately  -  Aug 18, 2015

Simon Bisley, 1997

(NOTE FOR THE TRANSCRIPT: The post consisted of a Simon Bisley painting)

43 Ron Edwards's profile photoMike Evans's profile photoMichael Moscrip's profile photoRichard Grenville's profile photo 84 comments

Richard GrenvilleAug 18, 2015+4 5 4

If I were in my bikini and bird mask ensemble I would not like to be in that position under all those razor-sharp spider parts, is all I'm saying. 

Richard GrenvilleAug 18, 2015

+Jeremy Duncan #startingequipment for Oriax?

Asia PickleAug 18, 2015

I do like his stuff. You ever seen that TV show Spaced?

Ron EdwardsAug 18, 2015

plus for audacity, but yeesh, Simon, you get the big bucks, try some figure drawing

Zak SmithAug 18, 2015+5 6 5

That is a baffling comment +Ron Edwards. I don't know if you mean to have a conversation about art here but techmastery snark against Simon Bisley is about as misplaced as taking Aretha Franklin to task for not knowing how to sing. Any distortions of naturalistic anatomy in Bisley are chosen stylistic effects.

Rafael ChandlerAug 18, 2015+3 4 3

Sweet. Love the bird-girl. Thinking she might not be human -- look at them fingers.

Ron EdwardsAug 18, 2015+3 4 3

+Zak Smith Ohhhh, I have been schooled now. I'm saying this as someone who likes you: fuck off, Zak. Can't a person post anything without you comin' in as Master Scold? Do you own art? All of it, or just Bisley? Can you not face being baffled, as you call it? Or that a person can post something wrong, like really wrong horribly OMG wrong, and the world won't collapse if you don't correct it?

And no, this isn't a debate. I don't like Bisley so much, so what, it's not going to change the world.

People knuckle under to you for one reason: because they're scared of being vilified Limbaugh-wise. You've got the moral high ground, the professional success, the accolades, and a life you can be proud of. Any reason you have to be a bully?

Answer me that before you crack down on me again.

Zak SmithAug 18, 2015+1 2 1

1. There's a difference between "I don't like Bisley" (statement of opinion, unarguable) And "Bisley lacks technical ability" (assertion of fact, arguable) and the second is so far as I can tell, simply misinformation. I have a moral obligation to correct it if I see it because you don't want people acting on bad information. 2.How are the rest of us supposed to know which of your many public opinions you want to discuss and which one we'll be attacked for discussing? You snarked at Simon Bisley (he didn't attack you), I neutrally commented that I don't think that was warranted, now you're biting my head off? 3. If you didn't want to talk about your opinion, why'd you say it where other people could read it? 4. How can a person with no coercive power over you be "bullying"? +Ron Edwards +Mike Davison 

David BaityAug 18, 2015

+Zak Smith lmfao

Victor Garrison (headspice)Aug 18, 2015+1 2 1

+Rafael Chandler​, Dude, what are you? A "fingers man"?

Ron EdwardsAug 18, 2015+1 2 1

+Zak Smith You hold and openly wield immense coercive power. You are a master of single-messaging people about whom they plus or not-plus, of posting public messages to shame, and of leveraging your deserved reputation as a great artist and contributor to the hobby for weight in conversations. You are widely feared and operate as a chilling agent throughout many discussions in which your tangible interests are not involved. You may intend this or you may not; I am not speaking to that. But either way, do not play "Li'l ol' me."

I won't be looking at this thread again until tomorrow, in case that interests anyone.

Zak SmithAug 18, 2015+1 2 1

Which one of these "powers" is forbidden from Mere Normal Men? "A master of single-messaging"? That isn't a magic spell, Ron, you can do that, too. +Ron Edwards You just type. As for "leveraging my reputation"--you can't simultaneously claim someone has a deserved reputation for contributions in a field and then claim that their influence is unfair . Either the reputation is deserved and so they should be influential. Or it isn't and they shouldn't.

Tony DemetriouAug 18, 2015+2 3 2

I love Bisley, and his style. This is pretty representative of my ideal goal, if I could magically make art in any style I choose.

The distorted anatomy is perfect, in the same way that I enjoy Disney animation - the choices of how to stylize or not to stylize it gives so much character to the piece. And I'm lucky that the choices Bisley makes are the ones I find appealing.

And those colours!

+Ron Edwards Um, not intending to dogpile or anything. I totally get why you might not like this :) - But I can't agree with the "figure drawing" comment, to my eye he clearly has mastered figure drawing, and now is deciding which rules to break. That's what I love most about this piece!

So when I see you criticize his anatomy, I assume that we've got a mismatch when it comes to what we enjoy about the stylizations.

I say this because in other posts you've made, you've linked to comics and referenced art with much weaker figure drawing than this without commenting on the lack of technical skills. While that might not mean anything, is it just that you find these particular ones to be ugly?

Joshua BlackketterAug 18, 2015

.

David Lewis JohnsonAug 18, 2015

.

Ron EdwardsAug 19, 2015

A new day, and two fallacies await.

1. The "magic spell" is classic deflection. I said nothing of who can and cannot do those things. Single-messaging is obviously available to everyone; . The question is why you do them, which you are failing to answer.

2. Deserved reputation in doing a thing, in this case art, is not a moral obligation (your term) to do some other thing. Especially if that other thing is itself morally unsound.

These were also posted as provocation: I said I wouldn't be looking at the thread again until today, which I didn't. You posted immediately with fallacy statements, which you're not dumb enough to believe are valid. I think you know well a person can barely if ever resist replying to such things. Then you can play "ah ha you were too looking." You caught me with that once, and that dog hunts no more.

I don't think you are posting in good social or intellectual faith. What frustrates me is that you usually do post in good faith, and with points I generally value - until someone flips your Scold Switch, and you launch into these modes of attack which have long passed their high-school sell-date. They're beneath you. Yes, anyone can do them, and again: why would you?

One more check-in tomorrow to see if you answer this time. Then I'm done.

Zak SmithAug 19, 2015+1 2 1

+Ron Edwards *People don't have ideas different than yours just to piss you off, Ron* You assume bad faith: this is not good. - 1. It isn't "Deflection"--Bullying by definition requires the bully have abilities the target does not. I cannot bully you as I possess no such powers. - 1b.  As for why I'd single-message someone: Because sometimes going "Dude do you know what's going on in that thread?" would derail a public thread so you send them a private message. Right now I genuinely don't know why you're attacking me or why anyone of good conscience would join in with you. I need facts. So I asked. - 2. Everybody has a moral obligation to fact-check stuff that's discussed. Period. You (or anyone else) say an inaccurate thing, it needs to get fact-checked. "I don't like Simon Bisley" requires no comment. "Simon Bisley lacks technical ability" requires a fact-check, just like "girls don't play D&D" or "game have to look like textbooks" or any other incorrect fact I come on here and check. - 2b. I say and believe things you disagree with  because I believe they're true, not out of a sadistic desire to upset you. (This probably goes for a lot of people.) I, of course, never post fallacies and don't do so in order to "provoke" people. Provoking you achieves nothing. It is a bizarre and paranoid conspiracy theory to assume I someone get some special cookie for making you (or anyone else) mad. Like what's my supposed motive in your worldview? I didn't wake up hating Simon Bisley just as much as you yesterday and suddenly pretend to think he had technical skill just because I thought it would upset Ron Edwards! And what a joy upsetting Ron Edwards is? Right? Oh I am so glad I got to do this! What glee  I have reaped from manufacturing this false opinion about my own profession simply in order to upset one random man! That would be like you pretending bats are made of goat cheese in order to piss off a biologist you don't like. Evidence I liked Bisley before today is not thin on the ground, nor is evidence that I fact-check people when they get things wrong. I would hope, as a biologist, you'd think fact-checking bullshit about your area of study is an end in itself . I feel the same way about art. When you make false  accusations and I counter them you are not the only audience for fact-checks I may do to those false accusations. Every single person who might ever read since the beginning of time needs to know you aren't telling the truth, not just you. Now:  The person making a claim has the burden of proof--if you are claiming I am lying prove that now.

Wayne SnyderAug 19, 2015+3 4 3

That's some pretty funny shit right there. This could have been one of those art posts where folks comment, "Cool." Or "Awesome!" But ya'll have brought the comments bar up a notch to down right entertaining. To bad you can't hear me slow clapping.

Wayne SnyderAug 19, 2015+2 3 2

But I must admit, I'm a bit sad it turned out to be an argument about arguing instead of an art criticism debate.

Tony DemetriouAug 19, 2015

Alas - the internet!

Zak SmithAug 19, 2015+2 3 2

+Wayne Snyder Would be happy to have the art criticism debate if there was someone who wanted to throw down on the other side. But that never really does happen.

Tony DemetriouAug 19, 2015

I don't know if anyone here has the technical chops to have that debate, +Zak Smith ?

Zak SmithAug 19, 2015+1 2 1

The whole talkin'-RPGs business relies on articulate amateurism +Tony Demetriou, if everybody here can say why they don't like Palladium or Pathfinder or Prometheus, they can, in theory, say why they think a painting fails. They may not be able to refer to personal experience painting, but I am not going to pull rank here and claim you need an MFA to critique a picture.

Tony DemetriouYesterday 12:22 AM

I kinda feel that, having played 2-10 hours of RPGs per week for a couple of decades now, I can speak as an expert on the topic (while recognizing there are many other experts)

With pictures, I can talk about what I like. But I don't really know how to engage in a criticism debate. Willing to try, of course! Especially since I learn so much by a good debate :)

Soooo....

What's with Bisley's neon colours? I love them, but my first impression when looking at this picture is a mess of brightness. That seems to be the opposite of when I look at, say, Franzetta who tends to use one dominant colour for the whole picture.

Is that a failing on Bisley's part, or just a stylistic preference? I love the colours, but could it have been possible to have made a picture like this, without the first impression being such a mess? Maybe better separation of them, rather than similar tones on overlapping objects?

I also find he often muddies the picture with unnecessary detail - like this picture has a great silhouette, and he pulls the two humans out of the background by making them brighter than the background. But the spider seems like it's a mess. What's with those skulls beneath its legs, that are the same colour as the legs, and the same brightness and contrast? It forces my eye to do work to figure out what I'm looking at. It doesn't "lead the eye" around the picture very well.

I'm a fan of both headdresses, but the material on the guy's one seems off - it looks like it's meant to be feathers, but to me it looks like some sort of white cardboard. The girl's headdress feathers look soft, which is what I'd expect from the guy's headdress too.

And the spider's abdomen kinda looks half finished? It looks like there's the brown from the background drawn over it. Or is that some sort of green in the background and not an abdomen? I dunno. I don't like it!

... but these are my nitpicks - as a whole image, I adore it!

Zak SmithYesterday 2:21 AM

I don't understand +Tony Demetriou , you have looked at far more pictures in your life than played games, why aren't you an expert on that, too?

Tony DemetriouYesterday 3:16 AM

Because of my nature.

I've mentally broken down and analysed what makes RPGs "work" and created my own, which tests my theories.

I've looked at many pictures, but until relatively recently (maybe 5 years ago?) I haven't been engaging with it in the same way. I'm trying to learn to draw, and it's given me a new perspective on art - I'm noticing things that I was never aware of before. My understanding of form and structure and linework is so much advanced just from this hobbyist learning - and I'm sure that once I go further I'll have similar gains with my understanding of tone, colour etc. once I start learning how to apply that too. So I "know how much I don't know" if that makes sense?

Maybe it's just how I learn - I very much "learn by doing", which explains why I'm more comfortable considering myself an expert on things that I make or do, rather than things I mostly observed.

That said - in the post above, I've given my criticisms of this picture. Do you agree or disagree with them, or have any comments of your own?

Zak SmithYesterday 3:26 AM+1 2 1

It can't be just you, as nearly every single intelligent person not trained inthe field is terrified of rendering an attempt at an intelligent opinion of a piece of art. As if it were somehow 1000 times more complex than a movie (which every person has opinions on). As for your criticisms: perhaps what they lack is a sufficient counterexample--like who does right the things you guess possibly he did wrong ? 

Tony DemetriouYesterday 3:39 AM

Good point. I have no problem at all discussing movies, and the artistry involved. Maybe it's some sort of assumed-complexity due to art criticism being viewed as some elite field?

Hmm, a counterexample - I can absolutely give examples of people who do it differently but I don't know if that means they're doing it right.

- For the bright colours, a lot of cartoons and 3D animation uses bright colours without the first impression being so confused. The artwork isn't nearly as good (in my opinion), but this picture is also brightly coloured, while still "reading" easily at first glance: http://www.wisdomswebzine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Tangled.jpg

I suspect it's because, although there are bright colours, it's still a pretty limited palette - mostly blue and purple. It also keeps the characters silhouetted by dressing Flynn in darker colours and with dark hair against the white horse, and putting the darker blue behind the horse.

Rembrant's The Night Watchman is a great example of a very busy picture with a lot of detail, where the detail doesn't muddy the picture (although it makes me feel like I've forgotten my glasses...) https://catholicismpure.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/the-night-watchman/

If Bisley had done something similar around the spider & figures it might have helped give it a clearer shape, and stopped the spider being such a mess?

For the headdress - I think Bisley's own picture is the best example of doing it "right" - the woman's headdress feathers look great, the man's looks like cardboard. I think he should have softened the edges of the man's feathers.

For the spider's abdomen... uh, it just looks half finished to me. I don't think that needs a comparison? Although there certainly are other pictures that use that same effect.

Zak SmithYesterday 3:46 AM

+Tony Demetriou "I can absolutely give examples of people who do it differently but I don't know if that means they're doing it right." Well if you like it they're doing it right and if you don't they' aren't

Wayne SnyderYesterday 3:55 AM+2 3 2

Bisley is known for his bizarre pallette choices. I know he often used automotive paint in his illustrations. He's riffing off Frazettas choices, but taking it up a notch. Bisley is a heavy metal painter. He is painting visual representations of heavy metal music for the covers of a magazine called heavy metal. So the subject matter is over the top brutality and horror and sexuality. If you removed the spider and the warhammer from this piece it would just be pornography. The beef cake warrior's bulging junk is aimed directly at the sorceress's bulging junk and the course of image is obvious. But it is both, it is sex and violence in a pure cartoon proportioned form. It is the teenage mind and that is who is supposed to buy the magazine this is a cover for. I don't know why he put that skull mess in the center. I suspect without it the composition would be lopsided. Maybe it just wasn't "metal" enough for the Biz, so he added the skulls. It may have even been the choice of a art director and the Biz just wanted to get it out the door and get paid. But I doubt that. 

Zak SmithYesterday 4:05 AM+3 4 3

I think "when in doubt skulls" is a pretty good creative default

Richard GrenvilleYesterday 5:37 AM+3 4 3

Regarding people's reticence about art crit, I guess I'll state the obvious to get it out there: there is a whole industry of art critics, which was at some stage dedicated to placing painting and sculpture (although not really printmaking) in a special separate category elevated above the vulgar horde - to promoting the value of art as a vital endeavour in which humans aspired to the level of gods. And even if critics haven't done much of this in the past couple of generations, some of those old attitudes still linger on, especially in primary schools which tend to be the last refuge of ancient pedagogical ideas.* And those old values still inform the economics of the art market (the aura of the art object, the figure of the artist as a conduit into some extraordinary other world). So I suspect people might be reticent to talk about paintings partly because they're haunted by the snooty ghost of e.g. Vasari or Jacob Burckhardt, refracted through a thousand indirect sources, telling them there is something spiritual and ineffable in there which is not for the likes of them. The fact that this picture in particular is not in the (socioeconomic) category elevated by Vasari or Burkhardt but makes use of its gestures probably makes things worse, not better.

In contrast, AIUI in the early days of film there were conscious efforts made by auteur directors on one hand and populist producers on the other either to place the medium firmly in the elevated sphere of Art or to rescue it from that ivory tower and make it democratic, for the people. Perhaps the economic possibilities of mass-market film just blew away the arguments on the high art side. Perhaps the costs of commercial film production spiraled out of the hands of individual directors making their individual artistic statements and left only oligarchical demagogues, reliant on sometimes-subversive film-making experts.

* and some innovative ones too, I'm not dissing early education here.

Ron EdwardsYesterday 8:38 AM

+Zak Smith You're not hitting anything with that reply. I never said you were doing this vindictively to upset me personally as me. I'm saying you use rhetorical and social tricks to marginalize people when they post things that .. whatever it is those things do that prompts it. It fits into your own definition of bullying - because using techniques not only that others don't have, but that they won't use, counts in that definition. You said my post "baffled" you, yeah, well it baffles me that a person of your qualities and insights would do these things.

You're saying Bisley's distortions serve his (an) artistic purpose. You can just say so. You don't have to pursue anyone who plusses me saying something else. You don't have to claim "moral obligation" to put me or anyone else down, with chilling and silencing techniques. It's this pious scolding and shaming I'm talking about. Not difference of views about the artist - in fact, if you'd asked in a real way, you'd have found that I like the way Bisley does it most of the time, not so much in this picture this time. I did not say "Bisley can't draw bodies and can never draw bodies and never did." That is your trip, you brought it in, and all your high-minded fact-checking claim to being the intellectual in the room is based on that alone. You revved up your moral fires for nothing.

All of the potential for easy contrast of posts, no status issues, open to the reader to evaluate or ignore, is gone when you descend with your blazing moral obligation in play. You talk about assuming things? You assumed vast tracts of attitude, position, and intention in my post, so hard you "saw" them. You've created an entertainment environment where people can enjoy you putting someone down. That's bullying.

Daily check-in tomorrow. It is remotely possible that this could be a worthwhile conversation.

Zak SmithYesterday 9:04 AM

+Richard Grenville Sure, but just because someone is telling you to stay in your class and let them handle the heavy lifting, why would you let them?

Zak SmithYesterday 9:18 AM

+Ron Edwards 1. Why would I want to marginalize you? Your claim has no motive. 2. Asking people why their friends or allies are being dicks isn't a "trick". It's a straightforward way of dealing with bad behavior. 3. No definition (including mine) of bullying includes "don't use techniques that are totally legit and make sense and that are designed to make the person making a false accusation stop" which is what these "techniques" were doing. 4. You're using a begging-the-question argument "What you did is obviously motivated by badness because it uses techniques that are bad and those techniques are bad because they are motivated by bad" 5. "You're saying Bisley's distortions serve his (an) artistic purpose. You can just say so. You don't have to pursue anyone who plusses me saying something else." I didn't do that. I only talked toone other person--Mike Davison--once you called me "bullying" because that is an insane charge. If you call me bullying--you are lying. If someone I consider a friend plusses that lie--I must address that with my friend. Period. Anything else would be irresponsible on my part. Also, in my original comments to you I didn't say the distortions "served an artistic purpose" I said he wanted them to serve an artistic purpose , which is different, in case you didn't know that, which your joke (implying the distortions were mistakes) seemed to indicate. 5. "You don't have to claim "moral obligation" to put me or anyone else down," I didn't "put you down" I fact-checked you. You asserted Bisley's distortions were down to not knowing how to draw accurately (rather than choice).This is not subjective--his distortions may be (subjectively) undesirable but they are (objectively) not "because he doesn't know any better". Therefore you said something objectively inaccurate in a semi-public space . Anyone who knew you had said this and knew the truth would have an obligation to point out the fact-checking error. 6. "in fact, if you'd asked in a real way,..." Once you express yourself in the form of a snarky attack, you don't then get to demand benefit-of-the-doubt from someone defending your target. Bisley did not begin a conversation by making fun of you . You attacked Bisley. I defended him. You then attacked me. 7. ". I did not say "Bisley can't draw bodies and can never draw bodies and never did."" No, you just made a joke to that effect at his expense and then accused me of bullying instead of going "Oh, sorry, that's not what I meant, let's sort this out" 8. "You assumed vast tracts of..." I assumed nothing. I interpreted that you made a snarky joke at Bisley's expense.  *I can only be accused of assuming if you are claiming your comment was not a snarky joke at Bisley's expense.* You got a reasonable response to that directed not just at you, but to any naive 3rd party who doesn't knowmuch about art who might be reading (naive viewers might take your joke at face value and they need to be disabused of that and know the artist you're attacking can actually identify body parts and where they go). 9. " You've created an entertainment environment where people can enjoy you putting someone down. " I wasn't putting you down, I was fact-checking you. If someone enjoys that outside of some pre-existing reasont o dislike you, they are a total asshole. If someone sees that as important and necessary, they are correct.

Richard GrenvilleYesterday 9:48 AM+2 3 2

just because someone is telling you to stay in your class and let them handle the heavy lifting, why would you let them?

this seems like it might also have some bearing on your conversation with Ron - my guess is that a lot of people feel discouraged in talking about art the same way they would feel discouraged in discussing engineering, only even more so. On one hand, they feel ignorant about what they imagine is a specialized field of knowledge (like engineering). But also they have a sense that they might trip off some kind of lurking art trap and get laughed at by the cognoscenti for their ignorance or something, as if they'd used the wrong fork at a gala dinner.

Class anxiety may be silly and useless but it's real for lots of people and harder to negotiate than ever now that it no longer runs in simple hegemonic directions. 

...I'm not saying that Ron is suffering from class anxiety. Just realised I didn't leave that clear. 

Zak SmithYesterday 9:53 AM+1 2 1

Use whatever fork. Know why you made that decision. Speak with the courage of your convictions if someone gives you static about it.

Victor Garrison (headspice)Yesterday 9:54 AM+2 3 2

My only criticism of this piece is: why did he paint such awesomely proportioned derriere and legs and stick those spooky, fucking spindly assed fingers on her hand?!?!?

I mean as far as drawing in your gaze, it's obvious Biz intentionally wanted her ass to be seen first. I say this not because I'm a perv (tho I won't deny that charge) but because it's pretty much center and hi-lighted more brightly than anything else. Your gaze moves from there over to his crotch, up his breast plate, to his face and then -- OH SHIT!-- to the monster. I like how he lures you in with submissive sexuality, brings you further along with brute sexuality, then BAM knocks you in the head with a hideous creature. Nice work, nice work.

Rafael ChandlerYesterday 9:55 AM

+Victor Garrison He gave her fingers like that so you could tell your friends, "Hey, man, she gave me her digits." <rimshot>

Richard GrenvilleYesterday 10:12 AM+1 2 1

for me it's a tangle of long golden-brown forms that could be a tree root or something, and then I see a butt, and then the rest kinda unmasks slowly. 

Zak SmithYesterday 10:16 AM+1 2 1

The greens of the spider come on before anything else for me

Victor Garrison (headspice)Yesterday 10:28 AM+1 2 1

+S Robertson , If you're telling a linear story, yeah, that's the route to take. But it seems to me that Bisley is going for a visceral "EWWW" reaction. It's a dark piece, so much so, that IMO, it almost looks like a black velvet painting technique was used. The bird woman's butt is the brightest spot in the painting, which is a signal to start viewing there. Especially since that spot seems to be the counterbalance to the large, dark negative space at the top of the painting. The next closest bright spot is the cod piece, then the breast plate, then the helmet, and that's when I made out the spider creature. IDK, that's just the way I encountered it, not as a story, but as an....oh shit, MONSTER! kinda thing.

Victor Garrison (headspice)Yesterday 10:32 AM

+Zak Smith  Damn, I didn't realize that green was the spider. Seriously, I thought it was shrubbery and had no clue wtf he stuck that in a dungeon.

Justice PlattYesterday 10:45 AM+1 2 1

Good to see that Zak knows what Ron said better than Ron does.  There is absolutely no contradiction between the belief that Bisley chose not to do good figure drawing for whatever reason and RE's comment.

Victor Garrison (headspice)Yesterday 10:57 AM+1 2 1

+Rafael Chandler​​, I wanna say I "dig it", but I'm reaching, yet I can't grasp it.... :)

Zak SmithYesterday 2:06 PM

+Justice Platt How do you interpret: "yeesh, Simon, you get the big bucks, try some figure drawing" ?

Justice PlattYesterday 2:14 PM+1 2 1

+Zak Smith , three points:

1)There is no logical contradiction between saying that and believing the artist capable of figure drawing.

2)The guy who said it says that' he did not in fact assert that Bisley cannot draw bodies.

3)It is entirely plausible that he meant to point to the lack of use of figure drawing skills.  Example: The Packers go 3 & out on consecutive off-tackle runs.  I say "Yeesh, Rodgers, you get the big bucks, try some passing" in whatever tone of voice you like.  I clearly mean, as a reasonably informed football fan, that the Packers are making a strategic blunder by not using Rodgers' passing skills.  I think the situation is exactly analogous for RE as a comic fan.

So, yeah, you seem to have jumped to conclusions about his asserting Bisley's lack of skill.

Zak SmithYesterday 2:23 PM

+Justice Platt Are you saying you think the comment was intended to be a responsible and constructive comment rather than (at best) vague snark?

Justice PlattYesterday 2:28 PM+1 2 1

I make no claims to being able to read RE's mind. He speaks for himself well.   I'm saying that your blanket statement that RE asserted that Bisley has no skill is false on logical grounds, on the grounds of the testimony of the author, and on the grounds that there exists a strongly plausible alternate interpretation.  Is any of this not true?

Zak SmithYesterday 2:30 PM

+Justice Platt I suggest only that RE;s comment was snarky and negative enough that my initial comment was necessary to clarify the facts. His subsequent comments could have been "Oh, that's not what I mean" and I'd go "Oh, ok" But instead he went "YOU CLARIFIED AFTER MY SNARKY COMMENT! YOU ARE BULLYING ME!" at which point he passed from "requiring clarification" to simply "wrong and insane"

Justice PlattYesterday 2:36 PM+1 2 1

+Zak Smith , bullshit.  You have repeated a false thing-that RE asserted that Bisley has no skill in figure drawing-multiple times, even after clarification from the author.  In no way did RE's reaction force you to do that, and blaming him for it is ridiculous.

Zak SmithYesterday 2:41 PM

+Justice Platt If he disagrees with that assertion, then he may say that and I will have no choice but to take him at his word. It does't retroactively mean: -My initial clarifying comment was in any way insulting or unnecessary (as his  initial comment was, at best, ambiguous and, at best, still insulting snark) and -any of his later statements were in any way ok, since they contain crazy false accusations

Justice PlattYesterday 2:53 PM

+Zak Smith ,  the issue is not RE and the terrible things he allegedly  forced you to do.  You are not telling the truth about what he said. My 1st & 3rd points from my comment above at 4:14 applied before you replied, and you jumped to the conclusion that he must be asserting that Bisley had no skill.  Further, it is a rather insulting assumption that a lifelong, voracious comics reader like RE has no awareness of Bisley's work & skill.

Zak SmithYesterday 2:56 PM

+Justice Platt If Ron feels that I have misrepresented his position, he can say so. My first comment is wholly justified because it was there to clarify the situation after his snark. My subsequent comments were necessary to to establish that he was not telling the truth about bullying.

Justice PlattYesterday 3:09 PM

+Zak Smith , textual evidence is what it is.  Did you in fact jump to conclusions and make false statements about what RE asserted or not?  Were those conclusions based on the insulting assumption that RE was unaware of Bisley's skill or not?  If the answer to any of these is no, which of my three points is untrue?

Zak SmithYesterday 3:48 PM

+Justice Platt I already spoke to this: " If Ron feels that I have misrepresented his position, he can say so. (Neither of us know what he meant.) My first comment is wholly justified because it was there to clarify the situation after his snark. My subsequent comments were necessary to to establish that he was not telling the truth about bullying. "

Justice PlattYesterday 4:12 PM

More bullshit.  Your entire justification for ongoing intervention has been that you need (in fact have a moral obligation) to correct RE's error of fact-an error of fact that you made up.  RE points out to you that you did so, and you repeat it yet again!  In bold even!    

As far as your subsequent statements go, this is more "Ron made me do it" nonsense.  Simply put, you can take issue with someone's tone, or with someone's attribution to you of bullying behavior, without insisting that your tendentious interpretation of his statement is utterly correct. You are perfectly aware of this.

So, do you believe that RE's statement must and can only mean that Bisley lacks technical skill or not?  If not, will you retract those parts of your statements in which you definitively, unambiguously assert that this is the case? .   And, yes, this is important.  There is at least one person on the internet with a strong propensity to twist any statements by RE that can be twisted and attack RE with them.   The person I have in mind also clearly values your opinion, and would be happy to have fodder for his horseshit that he can present as approved by you.  Whether or not there is an analogy to your own situation is up to you.

Zak SmithYesterday 4:21 PM+1 2 1

+Justice Platt " do you believe that RE's statement must and can only mean that Bisley lacks technical skill or not? " I do not know what it means, I only know what: -I think it implied and -that Ron, instead of clarifying, chose to attack me " If not, will you retract those parts of your statements in which you definitively, unambiguously assert that this is the case?" If Ron says this isn't what he meant, then he can say that, at which point I will go "ok, then that's clear now" but all of my actions remained justified: His first statement morally required that I (or someone) clarify--as it strongly implied Bisley didn't know how to draw. My later statements were likewise, *morally required* because Ron falsely claimed he was being bullied.

Justice PlattYesterday 4:35 PM

+Zak Smith , a man who does not know what a statement means does not repeatedly, confidently, unambiguously, in bold offer an interpretation of that statement, nor does he present it as a definite error of fact someone made, nor does he assert that he has a "moral obligation" to correct it.   Why are you so reluctant to admit that you jumped to conclusions?

And again, this "If Ron chooses to correct me" horseshit doesn't wash.  Either you parsed his statement right, in which case I owe you an apology, or you did not, in which case you owe him an apology.

Zak SmithYesterday 4:38 PM

+Justice Platt How, pray tell, do we know if I correctly interpreted Ron's statement, psychopath?

Justice PlattYesterday 4:56 PM

+Zak Smith, either the author agrees with your interpretation or there is no plausible alternate interpretation.  Pretty simple.  Neither is the case here.  You can answer my questions whenever you like.

Does you calling me a psychopath mean I'm officially on some list of trolls or RPG drama club members or whatever?  Can I have a membership card?

Zak SmithYesterday 5:03 PM

+Justice Platt "either the author agrees with your interpretation or there is no plausible alternate interpretation" YES. That's why we have to wait for Ron to get past addressing: -1. The minor moral crime of responding to a work of art by an artist who'd done nothing wrong with a snarky attack and -2. The major moral crime of accusing me of being a bully and then move on to -3. The minor and arguable possible crime of ignorance or incompetence of attempting to express a possibly-believed inaccurate view of Mr Bisley's working process ....before we can answer the question of just what interior mental space Ron's absolutely totally objectively shitty comment was meant to reflect. When and if he finally gets around to clarifying that, I'll address it. As for you: you are simply obviously a psychopath for being so worried about 3 after all the 1 and 2 going on and doing so with so much pointless swearing. It would be remiss if I didn't point it out, for the benefit of anyone who hadn't noticed and might considering collaborating with you on any projects or discussing anything with you.

Justice PlattYesterday 5:53 PM

+Zak Smith , how on earth can a comment that you admit you don't know the meaning of be "absolutely totally objectively shitty?"  And before you go to the "it was snarky" well, remember that my alternate interpretation turns the comment from "Hurr hurr Bisley can't draw" to "Bisley would have done well to exercise more figure drawing skills."  You appear to have admitted that my interpretation is at least plausible, so you;ll be wanting to make an actual argument about why that's "objectively shitty." Otherwise,  all you're really doing is tone policing RE, since, agree or disagree, that's a reasonably productive thing to say.

Also, we have both essentially been ignoring RE's 10:38 AM comment, in which he both specifically points out that he did not explicitly say that Bisley cannot draw, points out that you made assumptions (one of which I pointed out above as an insulting assumption) to get to that interpretation, and states that he generally likes Mr. Bisley's work.  All of this makes my interpretation substantially more plausible.

As to my concern with 3-I was under the impression that you agreed with me that smaller falsehoods in the service of "larger truths" was a bad thing.

Unnecessary swearing?  Never thought I'd see the day when you'd blanch at bad words explicitly directed at your ideas, but times do change.

Last, on the psychopath thing,  I look forward to seeing your compendium of "dumb things Justice has said."  Maybe you'll find some stuff I don't remember or whatever.  Little trip down Memory Lane.  I am disappointed by no membership card.

I don't, however, expect to see it soon.  Unlike RE, I have no real reputation in RPGs to lose, and my name, to the best of my knowledge, has never been mentioned in a thread I am not in.  That's not the case for RE. Agree or disagree with him, like his stuff or don't, he's been working very hard to write good games and think clearly about RPGs for quite a while.  This is a good & worthy thing.  Allowing distortions of his remarks to stand just gives him more nonsense to contend with, especially at the hands of the individual I referred to earlier, who clearly values your opinion, covets your influence, and craves your approval.

Zak SmithYesterday 5:56 PM

+Justice Platt "my alternate interpretation turns the comment from "Hurr hurr Bisley can't draw" to "Bisley would have done well to exercise more figure drawing skills."" Your translation inaccurately removes the snark, which is there regardless of whether you want to acknowledge it or not. And is still opinion expressed as if it were fact or advice expressed to someone who clearly chose otherwise, which is also inexcusable and does not lead to a good discussion. The helpful or informative form of the remark would be something like "I wish he showed off more of his figure drawing skill here". Most of your comments are unnecessary, you just need to wait for Ron to respond rather thant repeatedly trying to find new interpretations of his objectively dumb remark " Agree or disagree with him, like his stuff or don't, he's been working very hard..." Calling me a bully torpedoes any and all good intentions on his part and means his alleged accomplishments don't matter. He ceases to be a reliable voice immediately at that point and becomes a chew toy for the rest of his life unless he manages to apologize and there can be no real defense of him. Even if my interpretation of his remark in my first response was inaccurate, nothing licenses him to say that--it is evil.

Justice PlattYesterday 6:13 PM+1 2 1

+Zak Smith , you can do better than that.  One man's hateful snark is another's witty tone.  I found your initial response nastily condescending, but that's not an argument against you. It's just straightforward tone policing either way.

And, as far as opinion expressed as fact goes, come on.  Just silly.  



Zak SmithYesterday 6:21 PM

+Justice Platt "Witty snark" or "hateful snark" are still just snark at the artist, which makes you not A Respectable Helpful Voice In The RPG Scene it makes you The Comments. And the way you build a decent RPG community is not be ok with people acting like The Comments. The Tone was snark (not ok to make a negative comment without facts to back it up). The Content was implying inaccurate facts (likewise not ok). "Tone policing" is when you make an accurate criticism and get attacked for your tone. Ron made either: -an inaccurate criticism (which is wrong, regardless of tone) or -an opinion-as-fact criticism (which is wrong, regardless of tone) The internet SO doesn't need more opinion-as-fact or baseless snark.

Justice PlattYesterday 7:44 PM

+Zak Smith , my alternate interpretation, whether or not it is particularly incisive, is substantive.  Which, frankly, is the better standard-"accurate" kinda sucks, since how could we possibly ' whether or not a counterfactual criticism, like my reinterpretation, is accurate?  Do we have access to all the pictures Bisley could have drawn?

The opinion as fact thing is still silly.  Work harder.

I agree about elevating the tone of internet discussion to at least some degree.But notice, you've gone from a duty to correct any & all errors of fact to a duty to elevate the the tone, as judged & enforced by you.  

Which, given your earlier name-calling and ridiculous blue-stockingness about swearing, allows me only to say "Be the change," y'know?

Zak SmithYesterday 7:59 PM+1 2 1

+Justice Platt "The opinion as fact thing is still silly.  Work harder." This alone makes you wrong. The rest is icing after that. If you think the internet needs more "Kirk is just better than Picard" then you're not a person anybody else need to listen to. As for "being the change" you don't stop someone from robbing banks by quietly not robbing banks. You have to call out bad behavior or it will continue, as the entire RPG internet proves every day.

Justice PlattYesterday 8:03 PM

+Zak Smith , would repeatedly, unambiguously asserting that your somewhat implausible interpretation of someone's statement was absolutely true count as OAF?

Zak SmithYesterday 8:09 PM

+Justice Platt Only if they contest it. If I think a house is on fire that isn't because of taste it's because of what i thought was a true fact about the world (which is all any of us can do: draw conclusions from sensory data). A grown-up like Ron needs to know the difference between taste and fact right off, but everyone can take the facts in front of them and make an incorrect inference--there's no shame in that so long as it is investigated if it was insulting to the target. Since Ron's comment was a bad thing to say because represents all bad options: -"Bisley lacks technical facility (incorrect) -"Bisley doesn't lack tech facility but it's good to express personal distaste by pretending it does" (counterproductive and trolling) -"Bisley made a choice I don't like and I'm going to both obscure that it's a choice and obscure that it;s just a taste thing" (counterproductive and trolling) -"I'm gonna snark for mystery reasons" (counterproductive and trolling) ...my inference was not particularly insulting since all the options make Ron's statement bad

Tony DemetriouYesterday 8:19 PM

I also interpreted Ron's comment as implying Bisley can't draw figures well.

I can absolutely see how the comment could have been intended to imply that Bisley can draw figures well, and chose not to in this picture - but even so it was clearly snarky. By saying "try some figure drawing", in either interpretation, it's saying that he didn't do figure drawing in this image.

To me, the implication that he didn't do figure drawing in this image is objectively wrong - there are two figures in the picture with (although stylized) relatively realistic proportions, musculature, etc. - there is clearly figure drawing there, whether it's good or bad.

So, using your football metaphor, it'd be more akin to Rodgers regularly passing the ball, but failing to do it to your satisfaction. And then you make the comment about "Yeesh, Rodgers, you get the big bucks, try some passing"

So clearly snarky.

(But it doesn't bother me if Ron is snarky or not. Bisley isn't here on this thread, and isn't having his feelings hurt, so we don't need to defend him unless we believe that some tangible harm will come to him or others from this snark.)

I'm not convinced that Ron's comment was shitty or bad - but it was inaccurate, and I don't have a problem with someone disagreeing with a comment they believe to be inaccurate.

I was quite surprised by Ron's response - although Zak's comment can be read as condascending, the reply was more vitriolic than I expected. Especially as I've seen Ron handle other, more direct attacks, with grace. I'm assuming that is due to their history, rather than this thread itself. As such, hanging this disagreement on Ron's originating comment feels like everyone is talking around the actual issue*.

* Whatever that actual issue might be.

+Zak Smith - Although I recognize that you were using the word in a non-medical sense, if we're being technically correct, +Justice Platt is only a psychopath if he scores above 30 on the PCL-R checklist. http://www.minddisorders.com/Flu-Inv/Hare-Psychopathy-Checklist.html

I dunno if he's likely to show up as a psychopath, as one of the primary traits is a lack of empathy, and Justice seems to be showing a lot of empathy towards Ron. (Although a psychopath might attempt to simulate that empathy as an excuse to exert their dominance in a conversation.)

Tony DemetriouYesterday 8:22 PM+1 2 1

+Zak Smith As a matter of taste, I don't know if this house is on fire, but it certainly is flaming

http://www.cynical-c.com/2015/06/19/relentlessly-gay-yard/

Zak SmithYesterday 8:25 PM

+Tony Demetriou the fact that Bisley isn't present is not the issue. Nor are his feelings. The point is a snarky negative comment does 3 things: -makes the conversation worse (because it is vague but contestable) and -(in this case) implies incorrect information. and -Violates the golden rule You don't avoid snark to spare peoples' feelings (surely thousands of people have snarked at Bisley before--he is an artist, this is a consequence of making art, it would be bad to let it affect your feelings), you avoid it because it makes the resulting conversation worse or (at best) does nothing but take up space. And, further, everyone must be subjected to the same standard whether they are present or not because they could easily see the comment in the future, and--MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY--uninformed 3rd parties, new to the situation might see it in the future.

Tony DemetriouYesterday 8:29 PM

+Zak Smith Out of context, I have zero problem with snark. I've got a friend that communicates almost entirely via sarcasm. I'm also Australian, where we'll use insults as everyday conversation tools. To me, this doesn't muddy the conversation.

In context, if snark is used as an attack, then I've got a problem with it. If it's used to express an opinion, but not specifically as an attack, then I don't. In this particular case, I couldn't say which is true.

I do think whether Ron believes Bisley is going to see his comment makes a difference on my interpretation of whether it was an attack or not.

If you feel that snark makes the conversation worse, regardless of whether it's an attack or not, then it doesn't matter whether Bisley is present or not.

I absolutely agree with you that Ron's comment implies incorrect information, and that incorrect information is bad (which is why I also disagreed with it.)

Justice Platt12:25 AM

+Zak Smith , RE did contest your interpretation.  I've pointed this out a few times. So yeah, OAF, by the standard you explicitly set out.  Really makes the rest of your post moot.  Snark always and everywhere bad might be defensible, but it is not the argument you were making in your posts to RE.

What I do want to address is your take on my opinion of OAF.  You immediately ascribed to me a complete straw man-that I want the internet to have more "Kirk is objectively better than Picard."  You had no warrant for saying so, and before you say that I should have clarified, does that justify the insulting  ascription of the most ridiculous position I could possibly hold?

It's of a piece with your professing to find four uses of a rather mild expletive "pointless swearing" and offering that as a reason people should avoid me.  In both cases, I cannot imagine that you did not recognize what you were doing and go on to do it anyway.  You are vigilant for strawmanning where you are concerned, and your body of work (to put it mildly) shows little concern about cussing.

These are the kinds of things that concern me in argument.  Your sanctimony about snark and OAF is sadly misplaced and rather grotesque when it occurs almost literally in the same breath with these other tactics.  You admit that snark can be harmless, OAF is pretty well understood as a statement of opinion by the vast majority of English speakers.  Faux outrage and strawmanning are always harmful.  So, yeah, be the change.

Zak Smith12:58 AM

+Justice Platt You ignored this: " If I think a house is on fire that isn't because of taste it's because of what i thought was a true fact about the world (which is all any of us can do: draw conclusions from sensory data). " You also ignored the fact that while Ron has repeatedly said pieces of what he thinks Ron has NEVER claimed his original snarky comment could not imply to a good-faith, educated reader that Ron thought Bisley lacked technical skill Until he: - does so, - does so convincingly and -then I deny him and can give no counterevidence ...then I am plausibly in the realm of fact. Right now I have an interpretation of his words "He implied Bisley lacked technical ability, despite possibly not meaning it" and my responsibilities "Therefore someone needed to establish this was not a true thing to imply". Nothing that has happened has changed any of that, and none of that is me taking something I know to be an opinion and claiming it's fact. So far as I can tell (and this is a guess),, from what he's saying, Ron agrees with this: "Ron implied Bisley lacked technical ability, despite possibly not meaning it" and his take is "Who the fuck cares? I get to just say random shit on the internet because who cares if anyone believes it? The important thing is nobody should ever clean up after the mess I make." As for the rest: OAF always leads to "Kirk is better than Picard" arguments, so you are totally defending that practice. On swearing: you're doing it against a target that's done nothing wrong in defense of a target that objectively has (he said I "bullied" which is objectively incorrect), that's the disturbing bit. ' OAF is pretty well understood as a statement of opinion by the vast majority of English speakers.' Incorrect: the whole reason for edition wars and other shitty internet phenomena is that nobody clearly draws lines between what's fact and what's opinion. Like it's a fact that people I know grasp percentile systems easily. But if I go "percentile systems are easy to grasp" then we don't know whether I mean that fact I just reported or whether I am just saying they are having done no research. Same with 90% of RPG arguments, treating claims you've researched the same as info you haven't ("This is "unworkable" "--well is it literally unworkable as in the math can't ever work because of a literal error or is it just you don't like it? "You can't satisfy both this and that at once!" Well are you sayng you tested it or are you saying you guess that?  "This drives most women away?" Well are you saying you checked or you're just guessing because you don't like it?) leads to nearly all the pointless fighting on the internet about games. So, just because you aren't smart enough to see why doing bad things causes problems doesn't mean they don't cause problems. Also, because you're not smart enough to see the reasons I call out bad behavior while at the same time engaging in behavior you think is the same, doesn't mean it's the same.

Justice Platt2:03 AM

+Zak Smith , you wanna get some sleep?  Rethink that post?  It's pretty feeble,

Zak Smith2:12 AM+1 2 1

+Justice Platt Again, the fact that you even posted that, resorting to just straight trolling and attempting to sort of wish away clear objections to your mistaken argument, suggests further that you have no value as a person to talk to. If you have an argument: make it. If you don't: apologize for wasting everyone's time.

Justice Platt3:06 AM+1 2 1

+Zak Smith OK. In order then:

I have no idea what you're talking about with the house on fire thing.  Hence ignoring it.

You're shifting goalposts again.  The idea that RE clarifying his position requires proof to the good faith etc etc is ludicrous.  It's also an entirely new standard.  My position has been consistently that your repeated, unambiguous statements that RE asserted (Not "implied"-another goalpost shift,.  "Asserted" is your multiple repeated original word choice) Bisley had no skill were not warranted, given that you don't know what RE means, and plausible alternate explanations exist.  "Plausibly in the realm of fact" is a ridiculous standard for big bold text this is true statements.  It is "plausibly in the realm of fact" that you're going to the bank tomorrow morning, but I'm still not going to claim that you definitely are, especially if you say you aren't..

You again change the claim you make-your original straw-manning is that I want more KP arguments, not that I'm ok with them.  

You,  a grown-up with some experience of the world, find it "disturbing" that someone called your argument "bullshit" in a cause you think bad?  What exactly does "disturbing" mean here, anyway?  Ooh-a vague insinuation!

Last, I can summarize your claims about OAF as: 1)Leads to unclear/confusing claims that sometimes require requesting warrants.  2)Abolition of this form of statement abolishes, or at least greatly diminishes, 1.    1 is not unique to OAF statements, and it is frankly risible to imagine that unclear claims and/or the need for warrant clarification stop or greatly diminish with their elimination.  So, minimal harms and inadequate solvency.  I'm not saying the practice is laudable, but c'mon.

Zak Smith3:26 AM

+Justice Platt 1. "I have no idea what you're talking about with the house on fire thing.  " Then the decent thing to do is ask not continue to be a tremendous shithead. I will explain: A grown-up person reporting on their taste knows they're reporting a mere opinion. If they dress it up as fact, they're pulling a rhetorical maneuver. Intent to deceive or bluster past rational objections. A person who thinks a house is on fire (they see the smoke, etc) and reports that it is and turns out to be wrong, has simply made a mistake no intent to deceive there. They inaccurately reported a fact which we all do innocently from time to time because we rely on our senses. My remarks in response to Ron have been of the second kind at worst--I believe Ron's remarks to be asserting (perhaps against Ron's real beliefs, because they are jokes) a certain thing that people may believe. Just as a joke may assert that a chicken crosses the road even if the person telling the joke doesn't believe that any chickens ever cross rods. 2. "You're shifting goalposts again. " Incorrect, I never shift goalposts, that would be disgusting, and it's disgusting you'd say that. My initial comment was based on and continues to be based on (and justified by) this idea: " (a) Ron's initial comment was such that a naive viewer might believe that Ron was expressing the following idea: "Bisley lacks technical skill" WHETHER RON BELIEVES BISLEY LACKS SUCH SKILL OR NOT. (b) It is therefore the responsibility of someone to explain to such a naive viewer that Bisley does indeed have technical skill " ...this has been my contention since the beginning. We know that Bisley does not lack technical skill. If he asserted Bisley lacked technical skill despite not believing it, he is evil and negligent. If he asserted it and believed it, he is ignorant and subsequently got mad about that being exposed. Neither of these conclusions is good for Ron therefore assuming one rather than the other does nothing to harm Ron's reputation more than the other choice. But there is no evidence anywhere that he did not assert this . You don't tell someone to try figure drawing if they're trying figure drawing. (a) Is not an opinion . It is an assertion of fact, so far as I know. If Ron wishes to contest the idea that his snarky remark may be read in such a way by a third party. I am (because I am sane) willing to consider the idea that my analysis is an inaccurate statement of the facts, but thus far there is zero evidence of this. Ron's defense and yours has simply been to talk about what Ron believes not what was implied to readers by the remark  (the only relevant thing). - As for the rest: you equivocate "not all harm is caused by x" (true statement) into "therefore there is no reason to eliminate x" (not a rational conclusion. OAFs cause: -some harm and provide -zero benefit ...so there is no good argument for them. Like bedbugs.

Victor Garrison (headspice)4:03 AM+2 3 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrCPIrs90eg

Ron Edwards3:32 PM

Looks like people were busy.

+Justice Platt thanks for the input.

+Zak Smith as I've stated before, there is no connection between my initial statement and a statement that Bisley cannot draw figures. Demanding that I repeat it was unnecessary, and as this is the second time, please don't demand it again.

You also demand that this statement be assessed or discussed in terms of its impact on readers. This is not the first time you have elected yourself the Voice of the Readers - I believe we agreed that you weren't going to do that to me again.

This is the day, unfortunately, when I have decided you're not going to explain why you single-message people to criticize their plussing choices, and why you often reply to others' stated views or takes on works of art in a chilling fashion yet post very similar statements about work you don't like. These are bullying acts. Why, in the complete absence of discernible need, do you do them?

My last statement before signing off. Willing or not, knowing or not, you have cultivated an environment of fear in this subculture. You can call this crazy and talk about more and more colorful metaphors all you want. Or you can try to assess this claim in any way you want that's not your gut, and see what you see then.

Signed off now, finished with the thread.

Zak Smith3:45 PM

+Ron Edwards 1. " as I've stated before, there is no connection between my initial statement and a statement that Bisley cannot draw figures. " Then what was it meant to communicate and why should we care? What's important is what it could logically be interpreted to mean literally by third parties 2. " You also demand that this statement be assessed or discussed in terms of its impact on readers. This is not the first time you have elected yourself the Voice of the Readers - I believe we agreed that you weren't going to do that to me again. " Citation needed. Why would I ever agree that the _most important thing about a public distortion of fact not be discussed? That would be like me agreeing to let you kick readers in the balls. 3. " This is the day, unfortunately, when I have decided you're not going to explain why you single-message people to criticize their plussing choices, " I do not message people to criticize them I message them to see if they are insane or not. If they are insane, it is important to block them from my circles. You haven't even explained how that's bad . It's Good Citizenship 101 to privately contact people you have conflict with so that you don't rake each other over the coals publicly unnecessarily. You are just grabbing random acts out of the air and affixing the word "bullying" to them out of what appears to be sheer insanity. How is sending someone a message in any way a harmful act? 4. " and why you often reply to others' stated views or takes on works of art in a chilling fashion yet post very similar statements about work you don't like. " Citation Needed. Since you aren't that smart and apparently can't read very well I suspect your definition of "very similar" is the problem here. 5. " These are bullying acts. " Incorrect: a bullying act would be: -negative and -something I can do that the target cannot or refuses on moral grounds to do. ...you haven't cited any such acts. You've only cited awesome good things I did.

6. " Willing or not, knowing or not, you have cultivated an environment of fear in this subculture. " If you're trying to say "Oh no, back in my day, indie game designers used to feel totally cool about posting false allegations and now they're afraid they'll be asked for evidence" or "I can't falsely accuse someone of bullying, then run away with no calls for accountability any more" well cry me a fucking river. I don't know any good person doing good work who claims to be afraid of jack shit--in fact people seem markedly less afraid than they were a year ago when you could be publicly accused of everything from hate crimes to cattle rustling and the Oh-I-Know-That-Guy network would back the accuser up because they both had the same grudge against the same dumb game. You can allege I've had an impact--but if you do so, then you have to weigh that against the fact that the DIY RPG scene is fucking kicking ass these days, in ways it hasn't for 30 years. I am totally proud of calling out shit people for their shit behavior--it's worked and we've made things better.

Zak Smith4:28 PM

I didn't come into this assuming Ron was insane, but now, I guess, we all know he actually is.

[rubycenter]

regarding kubo

ive been making a lot of essays lately,,

this is a response to this post and the ensuing discourse that happened with OP

uhh so to start off, it's unfortunate what kubo said but it would not make me stop watching/supporting the show ofc. besides kubo wasn't the only person to work on the show so it'd be disrespectful to sayo yamamoto (who has worked on several shows with lgbt characters before) and the countless mappa artists to ignore the show entirely. yes i'd like if kubo would apologize but i get that after having a huge social media following shit gets hard to apologize for because things tend to spiral, especially with the potential words that could be lost in translation/culture. besides, if i found out people were digging up stuff about me from 7 years ago i'd be pretty upset too. it's creepy honestly. there's no solid proof that she's even blocking people either, someone just said that and everyone believed it so uh. there's that. unless someone comes forward about being blocked by her and provides proof, i'm just gonna refrain from focusing on that and acknowledging it as a truth.

about the user who posted it.... well it sucks that they are getting so much attention for it and i hope things quiet down for them. sure it was a shitty post and a lot of their responses are even worse and more ignorant but we all say things without thinking, especially in the middle of The Discourse. i want them to acknowledge what the more respectful people are saying about their actions though, and in fact i've only seen them answer a handful of truly malicious messages. of course they could just be ignoring the really bad ones (which i would too lmfao) but for the most part it seems a lot of people are being civil. if they wanted to be portrayed as credible they should act more mature, at least to those who act mature towards them.

they seem to be bringing up a lot of the same points when trying to prove that Yoi Is Bad, but from what they're saying it looks like they haven't even watched the show. they bring up the sexualization of the pairing and the characters, but totally ignore that those scenes are only a small fraction of the interactions yuuri and victor had. they also said that the engagement rings were just good luck charms and that nobody explicitly said that they were engagement rings, when victor literally said "these are engagement rings, we'll be married once he wins the gold" in the show so uh. yeah it really seems like they don't know what they're talking about and obviously have not watched the show or only cherry-pick information from the episodes to prove their points

besides, the sexualization of two consenting adult men isn't inherently bad, especially since it's portrayed in a healthy, realistic way. and they openly admitted to ignoring the culture surrounding most of these scenes (esp the onsen scenes) and the japanese mindset that people have when viewing this show, so..... honestly our western opinions of the show don’t even matter. we aren’t their target audience.

it looks like they just want to point at everything and claim homophobia which is a bad thing to do since it retracts from truly bad shows and people. they also just assume anyone sending them asks is straight, probably to give them something to be angry at without fully acknowledging all the gay people this show has made so happy. don’t get me wrong i Hate the Hets too but there’s a line you don’t cross and that’s calling everyone who disagrees with you straight. it’s immature and doesn’t make you seem any better of a person. if they didn’t want that sort of attention they should not have tagged the post with #yoi and #yuri on ice. the response happened because they put it in the tag. it doesn’t mean they deserve to have a flood of rude anons, but honestly knowing this site (and the rabid yoi fanbase/tag) they should have expected it. 

the OP also said in another post that they “don’t have proof for it but they are ‘pretty sure’ kubo said she wasn’t interested in writing wlw relationships” (paraphrased) so i mean they’re obviously willing to start shit without actually knowing what they are saying.

the topic of homophobia is hard to truly acknowledge because everyone has different interpretations of things. they seem to think that their word is holy because theyre a gay trans man without acknowledging what other gay men have to say about the show. yoi isn’t objectively Problematic, it’s subjectively problematic. depending on how you interpret these scenes and the relationship, you’ll have a different opinion about the show. and your interpretation can be based off your experiences or just who you are as a person. nobody can change OP’s mind about the show and people shouldn’t let OP change their minds about the show. let’s face it even if they acknowledge that the show is fine and kubo is fine they’ll never like the show bc of what they went through with the fans

yes yoi has problems but a huge part of why i love the show is that it opens up a whole new window of opportunities for the anime industry. i’d be lying if i said 100% of my love for yoi comes from the show itself or the relationship between victor and yuuri (tho they are adorable). a part of why i appreciate it is because it takes these characters where only a handful of anime actually dare to go. it’s not the first show to feature a relationship like this, but it’s definitely popular to say the least, meaning that it won’t be the last. with the success of the show it will definitely influence other shows in the future. i’m less excited for season 2 and more excited for where anime will go from here

(also it should be mentioned that they like sound euphonium and recommend it as Lesbian Anime despite it being one of the worst cases of kyoani bait i think i’ve ever seen and it sexualizes teenage girls. so. take that as you will. i truly think this proves that they dislike yoi bc it’s popular but hey.. u do u)

#marz.txt

[kyuu-rereads-umineko]

Ep6, Chapter 3 (End) & 4

I like how I ended the last post literally just before the end of the goddamn chapter.

Well, uh, anyways! Let’s see how far we can get before Chiru arrives officially.

(Also, shout-outs to everyone over on Rokkenjima for the warm welcome! <3)

Back on the gameboard itself, the typhoon’s started. “No longer would anyone be able to leave this island... and no longer would anyone be able to reach it. No one... unless blessed with a miracle.” Erika drags herself to her feet, cackles at the sky, and invites Battler to “entertain her.” here we go, chapter end

Like in Ep5, Erika’s welcomed as a guest, and everyone is enjoying a good conversation after dinner. Interesting - this is usually when Beato’s letter would surface from Maria or someone else, but this time, there’s no mention of such a thing.

“A strange family in a western mansion on an isolated island during a storm... Now that we have a detective stopping by to take shelter from the rain, we’ve got all the major factors lined up.” god damn it battler

Erika assures them that she’ll solve whatever crime might happen, and Krauss replies, “It almost sounds as though you want a bizarre crime to occur. I hope I don’t have to play the part of the victim.” ahaha oh man

and she goes off on a tangent about how there’s nothing new in the genre etc etc. y’know for a self-proclaimed detective she doesn’t seem to actually care much for mysteries does she

though i guess that’s kinda the point

“By that argument, wouldn’t it mean that romance was perfected back in Shakespeare’s time, so everything after that isn’t worth reading?” Erika replies yes, because of course she does.

“Just reading classics of the past and never anything new is being overly nostalgic, don’t you think? That sounds to me like the excuse of an old person who’s too lazy to read anything.” SHOTS FIRED

The conversation topic changes to Maria’s quiz book, and Erika starts rattling off the answers at an incredible rate. bern r u having fun

CHEESE RIDDLE

really though i don’t think i have much to say about this part other than it’s funny watching battler flail around while everyone else works it out

YOU CAN ONLY DO THIS BECAUSE IT’S CHEESE

Battler hitting upon his answer of one cut when the “correct” answer is three is interesting, though - it’s definitely not a conventional answer in any sense of the word, but in a way, I feel like that kind of thinking is how you need to approach Umineko itself. If you get caught up in the logistics of how the crimes could’ve been done, then you’re likely to miss the truth, even if you end up with “an answer.”

NOW I KNOW I’M READING TOO DEEP INTO THIS, GETTING MEANING OUT OF THE CHEESE RIDDLE

Erika is less than happy that Battler managed to figure out the “one slice” answer as well, though, heh.

Meanwhile, Ange concludes that Battler must’ve gotten it wrong, and Featherine just kinda laughs at her... before saying that the shape of the cheese isn’t specified in the rules. On the board, Battler says pretty much the same thing - while everyone else thought of a cheese wheel kind of thing immediately, he ended up thinking of sliced cheese.

“Since [the illustration of the cheese] hadn’t been shown, the interpretation of the cheese had been left to the answerer.”

Battler goes about demonstrating his answer. “With normal cheese, it’d break if you tried to fold it like this... but the rules say that this cheese can’t break unless you use a knife, right?” IT’S LIKE ALL THE RED TRUTH WORDPLAY

“We were thinking in three dimensions... but it looks like Battler-kun and Erika-chan were thinking in one dimension higher.” the magic of having a meta-world presence

Erika drops all pretenses of politeness at this point. “She was no longer a guest who would be staying until the storm passed. She had transformed into an annoying guest who wouldn’t leave until the storm passed...”

George tries changing the subject by springboarding off of the next puzzle (coins in cups), mentioning picking up coins with chopsticks, and Erika freaks out. lmao

And suddenly the narrative cuts back to meta-Battler in his logic error room from later on. I’d forgotten that it’s framed like this, to make it “concurrent” with the events on the gameboard.

In desperation, Battler runs into the bathroom, even though there’s no “exit” to speak of in there.

except of course smashing yourself to bits so you can fit down the bathtub drain (ryukishi why)

Next up, the windows, which have been clamped shut. I forgot just how chilling the atmosphere is during this whole sequence, not gonna lie...

Battler smashes a window open and tries sticking his arm out to break the window shutters... only for the glass to start growing and cutting into his arm. LOGIC ERRORS MAN

and there goes his finger jkfdshgjfkldhgfkljd

Back on the board, the cousins and Erika mention hearing a “clunking” sound. eep

At Erika’s prompting, Shannon mentions that there are guest rooms at the end of the hallway, though they aren’t being used. meta-battler would probably disagree

Erika and Battler trade a few jabs about her “role” as “detective”, while Shannon seems to be understandably spooked by it. kinda funny when, y’know, she’s the one killing everyone on the other boards

The cousins and Erika make their way to the front door, and as they pass by Beato’s portrait, Erika asks about it.

“Well, to be honest, I already know that it’s Beato’s portrait. Still, we only just walked past it in the last game, which is no fun.”

Shannon begins with “This is the Master’s benefactor, Beatrice-sama.” Interesting, was “benefactor” ever used to describe her in earlier Episodes? Let alone by any of the servants, or anyone who acknowledges her as a witch...

Oooh, this is interesting. Jessica brings up the ghost stories, and Battler recalls being afraid of them when he was younger. In response, Maria repeats the old adage of “she’s not scary if you respect her,” but this time, she also asks Shannon for her thoughts on the matter. On some level, Maria’s definitely aware that there’s some connection between Beato and Shannon (and Kanon), even if she just thinks “they’re friends” or some such.

Jessica giggles a bit, bringing up the story of the servant who got injured and quit. George joins in a bit, pointing out the main entrance staircase as being where said servant fell. spooky

I’m not quite sure how to express it in words here, but this is interesting - I do get the sense that Jessica and George are “in on something” in a way they weren’t before. Might just be confirmation bias, but hmm.

Erika asks for clarification on how the ghost stories and the portrait being put on display relate, and Shannon says that the ghost stories existed beforehand, but became more common once the portrait was put up.

And then, since she’s Erika, she dismisses it all as “worth less than the useless drivel of a half-sleeping nitwit,” much to Maria’s chagrin. In response, she just invites Beato to curse her, and Battler jokes about how having the detective killed right at the start is “a little too radical.” lmfao

Maria gets out her scorpion charms, Shannon remarks that spiderwebs are good as magic-repellants, and Maria says it’s because Beato’s “the incarnation of a butterfly.” Jessica responds in confusion that the spirits of Akujikishima were weak against spiders. Come to think of it, Ep6 is where we first start getting the hints that the “evil spirits” and “the ghost of the witch” tales combined to form Beato’s own mythology, isn’t it?

Everyone leaves the entrance hall... and chick!Beato arrives in front of the portrait of herself.

“Without a doubt, the figure depicted there was as like her as an image in a mirror. However, it felt as though its eyes and expression... were just a little different from hers.”

“Who... are you? ...Please tell me what kind of person you are... [...] ...Your wings should have existed for Father’s sake. ...Just when did you have one of those torn off... and end up so drastically different...?”

I’d completely forgotten this line, but now that I read it again, I absolutely love it.

Ahhh, right, this is where the narrative mentions that chick!Beato doesn’t have an adverse reaction to spiderwebs or scorpion charms.

Beato reaches out and touches the portrait, and it “ripples slightly.” something something Super Umineko 64

“...Yes. This is... a doorway. A doorway to the long path that would lead her to the Golden Witch, Beatrice...”

Chick!Beato falls through the portrait, and after resolving to “be born for Father’s sake,” she finds herself in the mansion’s entrance hall, face to face with... herself.

“That’s right... I wasn’t the only one born from the egg. She was also born. [...] ...Both of us are lacking something and immature. Yes. Both of us are chicks... but we are also... fragments of the true Beatrice.”

Elder Beato asks why chick Beato (I think I’m just gonna call them Chick and Elder from here on out) has the same face as her, and the narrative points out that she speaks the same way as the “true” Beato.

Elder’s profile is added to the menu at this point, and it’s pretty damn interesting - “A mysterious witch who existed even before the rules,” for one thing, as well as specifying her as the one who gave Shannon the gold butterfly brooch back in Ep2.

Elder posits herself as Chick’s older sister. I’d forgotten that it’s actually specified like this that “the witch of Rokkenjima” existed before Beato as we know her (i.e. the dress and hair).

Chick states that she wants to become “a complete Beatrice,” and Elder says that she herself was complete until Chick came along. Man, I’ve really forgotten everything about Ep6, haven’t I? This is a pretty obvious parallel to how Beato developed as one of Yasu’s characters, from pulling small pranks here and there to the Golden Witch herself.

Chick realizes that the portrait in the entrance hall is missing, meaning this has to be 1984 or earlier. She also puts herself forward as the ruler of the mansion at night, as other characters have said before.

The two of them head further into the mansion, with Elder planning on introducing Chick to her “boring everyday life.”

#kyuutext #umineko #umineko no naku koro ni chiru #dawn of the golden witch