#because applying our understanding cannot explain it | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

orcinus-veterinarius · 30 days

Note

When horses end up with severe leg/hip injuries, they are almost always put to sleep. The odds of recovering full mobility from such injuries are slim and the odds of reinjury are high, so even if the horse is perfectly healthy in all other aspects, it is generally recognized to be more humane to put them down than to keep them alive just to live the rest of their lives limping around a small paddock or stall. A life for a horse in which s/he cannot gallop, leap, explore and play is no life at all. Why not apply the same logic to cetaceans? A life for a cetacean in which they can’t dive hundreds of meters, make meaningful autonomous choices (“should I play with the rubber ball or the puzzle feeder today?” is not a meaningful choice; research has shown that autonomy is crucial for animal welfare), echolocate and experience the rich biodiversity of the ocean is no life. I really don’t understand why it’s so horrible to think it more humane to euthanize a confused and sick orca calf if there is no chance of rehab and release than to take her/him permanently into captivity. It’s not disparaging or hateful to cetacean trainers to say so—I know they care about animals—it’s simply a logical ethical stance. Instead of searching in vain for orca conservation organizations that aren’t “radically anti-captivity”, maybe pro-caps should look inwards and ask themselves why all the major orca organizations (Center for Whale Research, Orca Behavior Institute, OrcaLab, Wild Orca, Orca Conservancy, Far East Russia Orca Project, etc.) as well as some cetacean organizations (ex. Whale and Dolphin Conservation, Cetacean Society International) oppose captivity. Is it because all of these esteemed groups, which if you look them up are all staffed by credentialed scientists, have been duped by the “animal rights agenda”, or could it be because maybe, just maybe, they know what they’re talking about? If captive orcas are so different from wild ones that wild orca biologists have no credibility to speak about their welfare, then that’s a clear indictment of captivity already.

Hi. I'm sorry for not answering right away, I was still at my externship when I got your ask, and I wanted to be able to sit down and give you a proper answer. So unfortunately, I don't think what I say will satisfy you. I don't expect to change your mind, nor is that my goal here. I only want to explain why I believe the way I do, so that you or others reading this can at least understand that it's not a position I take lightly, nor do I think it's infallible.

(Long post below the cut):

To start off, as an (almost) veterinarian, there are absolutely plenty of circumstances where I find euthanasia to be the correct decision. Euthanasia is our final gift to our patients, a swift and painless death in the face of prolonged suffering or poor quality of life. A large dog with debilitating osteoarthritis. A cat with terminal lymphoma. A down cow. A raptor with an amputated leg. Or like you mentioned, a horse with a fractured hip. These animals would live in a constant state of pain that they don't understand, and death can rightly be considered a kindness to them.

But an otherwise healthy orca calf? I would consider that a false equivalence. I agree that life in the wild should be prioritized whenever possible, and that captive orcas lead very different lives than their wild counterparts. But if that orca cannot return to the wild (orphaned and unable to be reunited with its pod, habituated to humans, non-painful disability such as deafness), and there is a facility willing to take it on, I do not think euthanasia is an appropriate option. In human care, that calf can still swim, breach, and dive, even if not to the same depths as the ocean (it's also worth noting that these are all costly behavior energetically and are not performed for no reason). It can still socialize and form family bonds with an adopted pod of whales. It can still (theoretically) mate and rear calves. It can still engage its big brain in problem-solving through training and enrichment in the place of hunting. And as a bonus, it will never go hungry and has access to veterinary care if ill or injured.

This is not a wild life. This is not the same life they would've, or should've known. A pool, no matter how well-appointed, is not the ocean, and we should not claim they're comparable. But I don't think it's a fate worse than death. I truly don't. But if it is... if freedom really is worth more than life, then all captive whales need to be euthanized. Even in a sea pen setting, they will not be free. They will not choose their food, their companions, their enrichment, their comings and goings. Those choices will still be made on their behalf by caregivers, and they will still have pretty much the same levels of autonomy as in their tank habitat. They will still be captive. (While some people do advocate for this, I don't think it's a popular outlook. Even SOS Dolfijn, a historically anti-cap organization, recently announced plans to build an aqauarium as a permanent home for non-releasable cetaceans rather than continuing to euthanize them).

Speaking of autonomy, yes, it is very important. But I truly don't think the orcas are distressed by the lack of meaning in choosing between enrichment devices. I think that's why we disagree on this topic... we have different worldviews. We both see orcas as beautiful, intelligent creatures, but I do not see them as people. They are animals, and for all their complexity, I interpret their behavior the same way I do any other species... they are motivated by food, reproduction, and (since they're highly social) companionship. Because of that, I still think we can give them a good life in human care, which is why it frustrates me to see the zoo community throw up their hands and give up rather than trying to improve our current less-than-ideal setups (*shakes my fist at the Blue World project*).

Now, I don't think it's wrong to be emotional about animals. I most definitely am! And it's very clear to me you love orcas and care about their wellbeing deeply. I admire that about you, and I appreciate your passion.

On to the next point... in the cetacean world, I've found that there is an unfortunate divide between researchers and caregivers who work with cetaceans in human care and those who study them exclusively in the wild. And that schism far predates the Blackfish era. Most of those organizations you listed are indeed legitimate, and I fully support their vital work and encourage others to do the same. A few of them, though, share things like this:

I think you can understand why this hurts me. And it's a lie. I've now interned at three aquariums (two of them AZA-accredited) that house various species of cetacean, and it's impossible for me to reconcile what I know and have seen to be true and what Whale and Dolphin Conservation wants the public to believe: that these unbelievably loved, vivacious animals are drugged and tortured by their greedy captors. It's not true, and I do not appreciate WDC for spreading this creepy artwork around. Nor do I think that fighting captivity is a beneficial allocation of resources when there is an overwhelming number of genuine threats to the survival of wild cetaceans.

Anyway, back to the scientists. Personally, I don't consider researchers who work exclusively with wild orcas to be either superior or inferior to those who work with captive whales. And sometimes I wonder how much of their position is a self-fulfilling prophecy: if someone opposes captivity on moral grounds, they won't work with captive whales, so they'll never get to know what their lives and care are like beyond maybe a single tour of the park or memories of how things were done in the 1960s (like Dr. Spong, who worked with some of the very first captive orcas at the Vancouver Aquarium).

I also don't think it diminishes the expertise of wildlife biologists to say that they are not experts on husbandry, training, or medical care... those are very different fields, and ideally, they should all inform each other. And of course, there are folks who work with both wild and captive whales. One of the reasons I linked SR3 in my previous post is they have staff with backgrounds in both managed care and research of free-ranging populations (I actually have no idea what the organization's official stance on captivity is, it's not something they address).

Maybe I'm wrong. I try my best to keep an open mind, but I know I'm also swayed by my own preconceptions and experiences. When I started this blog in December 2020, I was a first year vet student with minimal actual experience outside of domestic animals and some herps, and had only recently adopted the pro-captivity outlook. Now, I'm much more deeply involved in the zoo and aquarium world. These are people I know and respect, people who have written me letters of recommendation and comment on my Facebook posts, people I've had dinner with and showed up with after hours to care for a sick animal. And I recognize that biases me. The zoo world is often resistant to change, especially folks who have been in the industry for many years. And that doesn't do anyone, especially the animals, any good. I don't want to get stuck in an echo chamber, so I make it a point to read anti-captivity literature, even when it upsets me. If there is anything I can do to improve their lives, I want to learn about it, regardless of the source.

I try to adapt to new information. For example, in the past few months alone, I've become a lot more favorable toward the idea of sea pen habitats. My concerns about "sanctuaries" are more logisitical* and philosophical** rather than the idea that artifical habitats are inherently superior to pen habitats (they're not), especially when plenty of traditional facilites already make great use of ocean pens or enclosed lagoons. There are pros and cons to both, and a lot of it depends on the needs of the individual animals.

*funding; maintenance; lack of land-based backup pools and fully-equipped medical facilities; introducing immunologically naive animals to pollutants and infectious agents; disruptions to native wildlife; staffing activists and wildlife biologists rather than those with relevant husbandry experience

**villainizing aquariums; promoting the project as a "release to freedom" to the public when it's really another form of captivity; claiming the animals' lives will be "natural" when they will still require training, artificial enrichment, contraceptives, and social management if done correctly; downplaying or completely denying the very real risks of such a transition and insisting the animals will automatically be better off when Little White and Little Grey have proved that's not the case

If you made it to the bottom, thanks for reading. I wish all the best for you, and I mean that genuinely ❤️ even if we disagree, I hope you can appreciate our shared love for these animals and a desire for their wellbeing. Best of luck in all your endeavors!

#also no hard feelings if you unfollow me #I understand #orcas #killer whales #dolphins #cetaceans #marine mammals #animal welfare #cetacean captivity #pro captivity #anti captivity #aquariums #answered asks #anonymous

149 notes · View notes

tarotwithlove · 1 year

Text

pac ♡ a short message from your guides

reminder that this is a general reading and messages found here may not apply to everyone. take what resonates, leave what doesn't, and don't force anything if it does not fit.

BOOK A READING WITH ME · TWITTER · TIPS ♡ tips and feedback are highly appreciated

GROUP ONE

“let go of the old story and of the life you once lived. you want so much more for yourself but do not make any attempt to go towards it.

you want so much more for yourself but you ignore our signs and messages because you are too afraid to leave the comfort of the life you have built.

do you want to be on your deathbed wishing you had lived your life for yourself? do you want to wake up every day and wish you had been brave enough to take a chance? to push yourself? to endure the difficulty that came with change?

we know how much you wish for change, and how much you ignore it. we are trying to bring your dream life to you but there is only so much we can do—and only so much we are willing to do before we stop trying entirely.

the greatness of your fear is almost admirable. some of us understand you, you must know that dear. some of our lives were so controlled by that same fear, asking ourselves every night, “what if my family no longer accepts me? what if i regret it? what if? what if? what if?”. until one day you wake up and you realise you have let your entire life pass you by. we want more than this for you.

we want you to live not just wish to live. we want you to want to live, so much that you fight for it”

GROUP TWO

“you are still struggling to find balance in your life. we are proud of you for how much you have overcome; how much you have healed; how much you have grown.

of course, we are proud, how could we not be? we recognize that at times our lessons were a bit too harsh for your heart, but there was no other way. you’re a bit stubborn to our messages, so if we have to take some extreme methods to get across to you, we will. and we have. and you have moved above all of the obstacles we’ve placed before you with ease.

the uncertainties and stresses and heartbreaks… all these lessons… and look at you now. we cannot help but look upon you with pride.

though, dear, there is still a need for you to try and find balance in your life. you are either too focused on work or too focused on love, and can never find a happy medium between these two things.

you long for love and connection but can you manage a relationship on top of all your other responsibilities? especially in a new connection with someone you have wanted to be with in this way for so long?

we know more than you can ever imagine but we only guide you so much. don’t just plunge into things without thinking them through. balance, remember?”

GROUP THREE

“your potential is limitless, more limitless than anyone could ever explain to you or that you could ever truly know and understand—especially right now.

you have so many dreams and you wonder how you are going to achieve all of them; wondering even as you persist in the knowledge that you will achieve everything you decide you will.

we have watched you through every moment of your life, and we are so moved by your will to live; your will to have better than anyone could ever imagine for you; your will to do anything but accept the life you have been given. don’t worry. you will have it all.

every effort you put in is being multiplied tenfold behind the scenes on our part. more than that. so much more than that. don’t focus on the hows or whys or whens, just know that you will be rewarded for all that you have done and are doing. and never, ever, worry that your manifestations and prayers are going unheard and not listened to.

for now, enjoy the little moments of the life that exists around you.

you will miss this peace and quiet when it’s gone.”

GROUP FOUR

“you may not want to admit it but that connection ending was the best thing that could have ever happened for you and your life.

and that is right: for you, not to you, because even when you felt like your life was falling apart it was just falling into place. and you are seeing so right now.

remember how tired you were every day, how tethered you felt, how unsure you were if you should have been following your mind or heart. how you woke up every day conflicted and went to bed riddled with guilt. how you wondered if you should have stayed or if you should have let go.

but you were strong enough to let go, and that should let you know that you are strong enough to do anything. you did not believe this before, always going along with the flow and shooting low out of fear that actually reaching for the things you want would do nothing but hurt you, and while it was a bit harsh to teach you the lesson in this way it was needed.

but… we also fear that we have made you too afraid to try at love again. there is only so much that we can say that is going to ease your pain and uncertainty, but know that every risk worth taking is a risk that is worth getting hurt for.

know that you will never know the true outcome of a connection and you cannot spend the rest of your life running away from potential happiness out of fear of potential heartache.

be brave in the way we know that only you can be.”

#tarot #pac #pick a card #pick a group #pick an image #pick a pile #pick a picture #tarot reading #tarotblr #tarotcommunity #channelled message #**

428 notes · View notes

trans-androgyne · 29 days

Note

Sorry if this is an irritating ask or anything, but could you please explain to me what people find wrong about the term transandrophobia? As far as I’m aware it’s literally just a word to describe trans men’s oppression. I’m not against the idea that it might have something wrong with it (as a transmasc person), but through all this fighting I’ve never once seen someone clearly explain what the problem is.

I’ve seen people claim that transmascs keep throwing transfems under the bus, but the only thing I’ve ever seen is actually the OPPOSITE way around, and only when I go searching for it (but that might just be because I make an effort to keep my dash free of that kind of thing) again I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, I just… don’t quite understand all this.

Sorry abt this rambly ask, I’m just tired and frustrated and I HATE that we’ve been pitted against each other

I will do by best to genuinely present and respond to the main arguments I have heard made against using the term. Apologies in advance for the length.

The most common in my experience is that “androphobia/misandry doesn’t exist,” or “men aren’t oppressed for being men,” based on the terms transandrophobia and its origin, transmisandry. It feels like a non-sequitur to me, completely bypassing the actual meaning of the term. Some people do include androphobia or misandry in their definition of the term, but many more don’t and just use it to describe the intersection of transphobia and misogyny in the lives of transmascs or even just “transphobia against transmascs.” I personally do believe androphobia exists in a literal sense—the fear of men that has serious consequences—but not in the way they mean it. They are attempting to paint us as MRAs, but nobody who gets any eyes on them using the term has ever argued that women oppress men as a class. MRAs are antifeminist, and the transandrophobia conversation is very much a feminist one.

The simplest is just that transmascs just “don’t need a word” to talk about their oppression. Our experiences are called “just transphobia” or “just misogyny” based on whatever they think applies most in the moment. Our theorizing is painted as useless infighting or just being jealous that trans women have a word to describe their oppression. I vehemently disagree with this one, I think everyone deserves language to describe their experiences. I think it’s impossible to ignore the way that both transphobia and misogyny interact to affect us in a new way (the very definition of intersectionality), and that we deserve to recognize and describe that intersection. Even the coiner of the word “transmisogyny” appears to agree with us on this.

Other people will focus on the term’s perceived origins. They frequently call the person who changed the term “transmisandry” to “transandrophobia” a “lesbophobic transmisogynist” and rape fetishist. From everything I’ve been able to put together on the matter, it seems to be that they’re referring to him having engaged in someone else’s detrans kinks as a sex worker on a private blog. I’ve heard from others he may have harassed people, absolutely cannot verify that. To me, it feels like another case of accusing trans people with kinks others find unsavory of being a sexual predator/sex pest, which people generally recognize as transphobic. In any case, even if every single part of their outrage was true, I do not think the behavior of a person who didn’t even come up with the ideas means that transandrophobia theory is inherently transmisogynistic.

In regard to “throwing trans women under the bus,” I think a lot of those ideas come from oppositional sexism. It’s assumed that what we’re saying is true of men must be the opposite for women. Trans women, including the woman who coined “transmisogyny,” have been using trans men’s perceived “opposite” experiences to prove their points for many years. They try to make a claim for transmisogyny by saying trans men don’t experience similar issues (violence, sexualization, demonization, safety issues, misogyny, trouble passing). But the reality is, trans men do experience those issues — some to a lesser extent, some in a different form, some just less visibly due to our chronic erasure — and have other issues of their own that trans women don’t face (like abortion rights issues). An attack on the idea that trans men have it easier is seen as an attack on transmisogyny as a concept. But it isn’t!! Transmisogyny is so blatant and oppressive of a system that it doesn’t need to compare itself to transandrophobia/trans men’s issues to have ground to stand on. Trans people are all harmed by transphobia in different, complex ways and none of us have gendered privilege.

Very few people engage with the actual meat of transandrophobia theory. We have really bad optics, I’ll give them that. It’s hard to like a word with “androphobia” in it, talking about men’s issues puts people on edge due to MRAs, and there are TERFs actively trying to recruit us. (The last part is used against us when it shouldn’t be, they try to recruit transmascs of all stripes for detransitioning and are only using us in particular because so many transfems have been awful to us because of the term. They are trying to widen that divide while most of us discussing transandrophobia are trying to close it.)

We (people who use “transandrophobia”) are often characterized as a unified movement that hates trans women (like in that post that blew up in the wake of predstrogen’s banning). We are not a movement any more than “transmisogyny” or “exorsexism” are. We don’t all believe the same things, the only thing we share in common is that we feel transmascs have a specific kind of oppression and deserve a word to describe it. And, obviously, we are doing our best not to perpetuate (trans)misogyny! The number of disclaimers I have seen people put on their post to make it exceedingly obvious to the piss on the poor website that they’re not talking about trans women is absolutely astounding. I’m sure our circles do have some transmisogyny in them, everywhere does! We do our best to combat it and I know my personal spaces have a couple transfems in them that help keep us in check. If we were being genuinely transmisogynistic, I would ask people to actually point to what they’re seeing that’s harmful instead of just dismissing all of us as evil bigots.

I think what contributes to the backlash the most is simply that trans men do not fit into current understandings of feminism well. People have gotten it into their heads that men are gender oppressors and not gender oppressed — which doesn’t shake out so well when you put being trans into the equation. I grew up hearing “ew men are gross” “I hate men” “kill all men” sentiments due to being in LGBT spaces. Some people really, really do not want to let go of the idea that men are bad and icky and dangerous and women are good and pure and safe, especially when it benefits them as non-men. Many transmascs themselves have internalized the idea that they are gender oppressors, traitors to feminism, more likely to be dangerous/predatory/misogynistic, and take up too much space because they are men/mascs. I sure felt like that before finding these conversations! I sincerely think that as we grow our transfeminism and heal from our gender essentialism a little more, this rhetoric will be left in the past.

#long post #resources #ask #mine #transandrophobia #transmisogyny #transphobia #intracommunity issues tag

78 notes · View notes

felicjana050896 · 1 month

Text

Charlastor: ship or lie

Charlastor, a ship that has been bothering me lately, apparently we have confirmed that Charlastor will not happen (unfortunately, I haven't seen this confirmation from the author, only other people writing about it, as if someone had a screenshot of this confirmation directly saying "No, Charlastor won't happen", it would be nice to reblog with this screenshot :) )

This will be a long post, I recommend arming yourself with a lot of popcorn :)

Many people are against Charlastor, their arguments are:

Alastor is aroace: although I saw a lot of people who wrote that they are aroace and ace, and yet they ship Charlastor, because being both ace and aroace doesn't mean that you cannot be in a relationship, you can be, but this relationship will look a bit otherwise, all people who bring up this argument are shooting themselves in the foot and unfortunately it shows how many people have no idea what it means to be an ace or aroace and without any actual knowledge about it, explain to others what it means, it shows how people who don't like something are able to run blindly, as long as they stick to their opinion, instead of looking around and first looking for information and making sure that they are right, and it's not that difficult to get information, after all we live in the 21st century and we have the Internet...

,,Asexuality is understood as a state in which a person does not feel sexual attraction or desire for people of the same sex or the opposite sex, or for any other objects. An asexual individual usually does not engage in sexual behavior and does not feel the need for sexual contact. It is a permanent lack of sexual drive.

And we divide asexuality based on "romantic attraction":

aromantic is characterized by a lack of feeling romantic attraction.

biromantic – feel romantically attracted to more than one gender.

heteroromantic – feel romantic attraction to the opposite sex, homoromantic people feel romantic attraction towards people of the same sex.

panromantic – they experience romantic attraction to people regardless of gender.

So, most asexual people are still interested in forming romantic relationships, and what about aromantic asexuals... Aromanticism is a type of romantic orientation whose name itself indicates a lack of interest in creating romantic relationships. Aromantic people feel no (or only a little) romantic attraction to other people. Aromanticism is usually talked about in the context of asexual orientation, but in fact, romantic orientation applies to people of all sexual identities. It is wrongly assumed that aromantic people do not have sex or that they are unable to form relationships with others. Many issues regarding aromanticism require explanation and understanding, as well as the basics of distinguishing different types of attraction: sexual, romantic, aesthetic and sensual. Aromantic orientation does not assume a dissocial attitude or social isolation - aromantic people can have close people, form relationships and lead successful social and sexual lives."

So Alastor doesn't feel sexual attraction or romantic attraction, but it still doesn't mean he can't have a relationship with someone, he can, it just will look different, we could say that for most people who feel attraction and romantic, such a relationship, that the aroace person enters into can be described as platonic for us, but it will still be a relationship and attention... such people can still have sex: ,,There are two things to distinguish: sexual attraction and sexual behavior. The former is an impulse that pushes towards a certain person or situation. In the case of asexual people, it does not occur at all or very, very rarely. However, our bodies still respond to certain stimuli, and we can become horny and orgasm. So yes, there are asexuals who have sex - if only because they want to please their partners or, even if they don't feel the need, they know it will give them pleasure."

(All quotes above are from psychologists, and the last one is from an asexual person.)

Alastor will never fall in love and will never feel sexual attraction, but he can still have sex and can enter into a deeper relationship with someone.

Another argument is Charlie has a girlfriend: yes, he does, but it doesn't mean that this relationship will last forever, is there any confirmation from the author that it will never change(?), not saying that they are canon, because they are canon at the moment, but that they are canon and will always be canon, does anyone have such confirmation...(?), if so, please reblog it with a screenshot :)

Another is that Alastor sees Charlie as his daughter: this has already been confirmed by the author, that Alastor only said this to upset Lucifer and in fact, there is no father-daughter relationship between Alastor and Charlie. Link to tiktok where the author talks about it:

And the last argument, the rarest one, but still, that Charlie is too young or too naive for Alastor (twice in the comments, once on YT, another time on Tiktok, I even saw someone writing that this ship is pedophilia.....): age first:

Alastor is 40 biological years old (because he died at that age), and chronologically he is about 130 years old, link to info:

Charlie is biologically around 20, and chronologically over 2,000, link:

So if we take biological age, of course Alastor will be about 20 years older than Charlie, if we take chronological age, then Charlie will be so much older than Alastor that it's incomparable :D

But all this happens in hell, in an animated black comedy, so in my opinion such a thing doesn't matter much, because both of them don't age very much anyway, but coming to Charlie's naivety, Charlie is a lot, a lot, a lot... older than Alastor, so technically she should be more experienced and learned about life (especially in hell), so why isn't she... because in my opinion, Lilith and Lucifer kept her in a protective bubble of safety instead of her being convinced to in her own skin, what is living in hell..., that's why Charlie is so naive, sweet, etc., but nevertheless she still has the devil in herself..., we see it in the pilot, when she gets angry on TV, we see it in the series , when he gets mad at Susan in the cannibal town, we see it during the fight with Adam, Charlie is still part demon and he also has his dark part, which I think will become more and more visible in the series, not in the context of her becoming evil, but that she will become more experienced, self-confident and will be a born leader of hell, but for this she still needs to learn a little and remember that she is much more powerful than Alastor will ever be, she just needs to learn to use her powers ;)

Also in the future, in my opinion, Charlie will be much more powerful, with more power, experience, etc., than Alastor, Alastor will only be one of the most important catalysts for her, "she has so much potential that I could guide":

the question is whether Alastor will be in able to guide (control) her when she discovers her potential..., in my opinion: NO, and just as Alastor's deal with Charlie will bite Charlie, this attempt to use Charlie and direct her potential will bite him..., which in my opinion they will learn a lot from each other :)

So, the whole argument that Charlie will be manipulated by Alastor, that he would be the "stronger one in the relationship", in my opinion, will no longer make sense in the future, because this power dynamic will change... and besides, it would be strange if the princess hell didn't spread her wings at all throughout the entire series and remained just as naive, sweet, unaware and etc..., the characters must evolve.

And now that all the arguments against have been countered, it's time to move on to forshadowings.

Many people write that all these forshadowings are just fanservice, and sure, maybe... but it's really hard for me to believe that so many details like this would be done just for fanservice... it would be terribly rude and, in my opinion, bad writing, because sure, one forshadowing, two forshadowings, even three forshadowings don't do anything, but when you start getting four, five, SIX of them... it gets weird... and it's hard to say that it doesn't mean anything..., sorry, but for me, if there is so much of this, then either it will happen, or the creators are pigs doing something like this (let's be honest) for money..., so I believe that there must be something more here, but first before I will write about forshadowings, I will also refer to the canonical relationship, i.e. Chaggie, why I am against this relationship... because this relationship is, firstly, terribly boring in my opinion, in the context that I feel absolutely no chemistry between Vaggie and Charlie, nothing, zero, total null..., and Vaggie herself is an empty character for me, apart from her past, which did not affect her relationship with Charlie in any way, apart from a momentary (literally a tiny momentary) quarrel and had no real far-reaching consequences and apart from her getting a weapon to fight, she has no purpose in the show other than Charlie..., her entire being, her existence is based on Charlie, she takes care of the hotel for Charlie, she takes care of the residents for Charlie, she gets the weapons for Charlie, she does everything for Charlie, and don't get me wrong, on the one hand, it's great to have a girl who cares about you and cares so much, but, well..., apart from Charlie, she has no other reason for existence, she has no life, no goals, no desires, which makes her a characterless character, and I don't mean her personality per se, but her being as a character, who she is to the Hazbin Hotel arc apart from being Charlie's girlfriend... NOBODY and that terribly offends me if she got some actual development, or her past was better handled not in a "oh you were an angel, you didn't tell me, I'm mad at you" - five minutes later after talking to Rosie and Carmilla - "I forgive you, let's go back to the old way, as if your past didn't exist", why..., WHY..., why was it done this way....

Sometimes, even despite all of Vaggie's care and her involvement in Charlie, I think that this relationship is toxic, precisely because Charlie saved Vaggie, took her, and from that moment, it can be safely said that Vaggie became independent from Charlie, If it was a man-woman pair and the man saved the woman and then she was completely focused on him, just like Vaggie on Charlie, most people would probably call such a relationship toxic immediately without blinking an eye, because the woman is dependent on her savior... and why doesn't anyone think this way about Vaggie... after all, it's the same situation... so until they give me the development of Vaggie's character, some of her thread, HER and ONLY HER, I see this connection first of all no chemicals, and secondly, toxic for Vaggie... even though Vaggie became addicted to Charlie, in a sense, of her own free will (I don't see Charlie forcing her to do anything, that's not what I mean :D ). Besides, in the original and in Zoophobia, Vaggie was supposed to be Angel Dust's girlfriend:

and I regret that they don't have more closer interactions with each other in season one, because I'm curious what their dynamics would be, because maybe Angel Dust and Vaggie would have better chemistry... and I know that a lot of people ship Angel Dust with Husk, me too :) , but I would still like to see if the Vaggie + Angel Dust relationship would be better, especially since Vaggie and Angel Dust are characters that quickly reach for weapons, as Vaggie's caring nature could, in my opinion, help Angel Dust a lot, and Angel Dust with his more libertarian character (apart from his bond with Valentine) could cause Vaggie's development as a character with his own dreams, desires, etc., but this is just my thought :)

So finally moving on to forshadowings, even external ones, not only internal serial ones (I may edit this post, if I find more, new information will always be added to the bottom of the post):

The Shark Robot store, where the author sells various gadgets with her characters and couples..., focusing on couples, you can buy there: A couple of Moxxie and Millie, a married couple from the Helluva Boss series: stuffed animals: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/premium-moxxie-millie-plush-bundle-bonus-pins-pre-order ; puzzle: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/helluva-boss-moxxie-millies-lovely-date-1000-pc-puzzle ; standees https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/fight-night-moxxie-millie-standee , https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/moxxie-millie-build-a-snowman-standee ; pins: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/moxxie-millie-make-out-enamel-pin , https://sharkrobot.com/products/moxxie-millie-security-enamel-pin ; playmats: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/affectionate-moxxie-and-millie-playmat , https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/moxxie-millie-playmat , https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/moxxies-lovely-song-playmat ; pants: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/moxxie-millie-pattern-loungewear-pants

Next comes the couple Stolas and Blitz, a couple who sleep together and have feelings for each other, from the Helluva Boss series: puzzle: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/helluva-boss-blitz-stolas-romantic-evening-1000-pc-puzzle , mug: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/little-stolas-and-little-blitz ; playmat: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/stolas-and-blitz-playmat ; pin: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/when-stolas-met-blitz-jumbo-enamel-pin

Fizz and Ozzie from Helluva Boss, also a couple (link to Asmodeus/Ozzie if someone hasn't watched it and wants to have certain information: https://hazbinhotel.fandom.com/wiki/Asmodeus): puzzle: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/helluva-boss-fizz-ozzies-wild-night-1000-pc-puzzle ; T-shirt: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/ozzie-fizzarolli ; playmat: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/fizzarolli-ozzie-playmat

So let's move on to Charlie and Vaggie first (from Hazbin Hotel, there is no other pair to buy than the Chaggie or Charlastor in the store): pants witches: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/witches-charlie-vaggie-loungewear-pants ; pants normal: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/charlie-vaggie-pattern-loungewear-pants ; backpack witches: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/hazbin-hotel/products/witches-charlie-vaggie-mini-backpack-limited-stock ; backpack normal: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/hazbin-hotel/products/charlie-vaggie-mini-backpack

And now Charlastor: pants: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/vivziepop/products/charlie-alastor-pattern-loungewear-pants ; and backpack: https://sharkrobot.com/collections/hazbin-hotel/products/charlie-alastor-mini-backpack

So both Chaggie and Charlastor have two items in the shop (at least for now), a backpack and pants, but Chaggie has two normal or witch versions of the backpack and pants.

But the thing is that all the previous pairs, Millie-Moxxie, Stolas-Blitz, Fizz-Ozzie are canonical in the Helluva Boss series, from Hazbin Hotel we have one canonical pair Chaggie and one non Charlastor and of course you can write "it's fanservice", so where are the Alastor-Lucifer things (this ship is extremely popular), where is Husk-Dust, where are the other Helluva Boss ships... (list of Helluva Boss ships: https://shipping.fandom.com/wiki/Helluva_Boss), there are none, there are only those that are actually canon, apart from Charlastor.

In 2018, the author posted a post on Twitter (for me it will always be Twitter, sorry, I'm too old for a new name, I don't like it :D): https://twitter.com/vivziepop/status/956857844740931584?s=61 , where Vaggie was reading from a computer to describe ideal man (it's already time when Charlie and Vaggie are a couple as we see) and Charlie replies that he is dark and mysterious (I guess Alastor is dark and mysterious, right?), that he can sing (what is it that Alastor likes more than singing..., I guess only being the most important person in the room :D) and that he can play the organ and here is a link to the author's stream:

youtube

where at 19:10 she starts talking about Alastor and says that he can play the Furby organ :D

So this is a bit of an odd post for someone who wouldn't have planned for Alastor and Charlie to be together, sure it was in 2018, but still....

Besides, I will also say this... why make Charlie bisexual if she will only be in a relationship with Vaggie..., we know she is bisexual because we know she once had a boyfriend, Seviathan, but why add that to the story... and sure there are many stories of couples in which one is bi and the other is gay, but... in all the series and books on this topic that I have watched and read, it has always been connected with the thread that a bi person discovers his/her a new sexuality that she/he had no idea about before, and of course, you can also leave it like this: Charlie is bi, she used to have a boyfriend, now she has a girlfriend, and that's the end of it, but still... it just seems weird to me because it doesn't I've also come across the idea of making someone bi without using it... I don't want to offend any bi person, it's just unusual for me and I would like to at least mention the fact that in all such stories (which I watched or read) bisexuality was somehow used in the story, maybe someone watched or read something where a bi person was just bi and was in a relationship or was single, without using his/her bisexuality as part of the story..., I would love to read or watch such thread :)

Moving on to the series, the parallel between Lucifer-Lilith and Charlie-Alastor, Lucifer is a fallen angel and Lilith is a human who became a demon (so we can rather assume that she went to hell as a sinner), so Charlie is half angel (after her father), half a demon (after her mother), but her appearance is entirely after her angelic father :) , Alastor, on the other hand, is a sinner who became a demon, i.e. Lucifer = angel, Charlie = angel (she looks closer to an angel, despite that she has hellish powers), Lilith=sinner/demonic, Alastor=sinner/demon, in addition we have the following screenshots in the series:

Lucifer:

Charlie:

Lilith:

Alastor:

This parallel ;) Lucifer as the softer one, Charlie as the softer one, Lilith as the scary one, Alastor as the scary one :)

Then, of course, the presumption of a relationship in the series, primarily Rosie, who delivers her memorable line, and Charlie, who rolls her eyes at this line (I still don't quite know how to interpret her eye roll, as she is annoyed that Rosie even did she think they could be together or out of annoyance that Rosie thinks Charlie is too young for Alastor, because it could go both ways, both Charlastor and anti-Charlastor :D ):

And of course Lucifer, who at first thinks that Alastor is Charlie's boyfriend and is clearly terrified and furious at this idea, just look at how Charlie looks at Alastor at that moment, and Alastor at Charlie, it's a short moment when they look at each other as if they didn't see Lucifer and the rest (of course you can see that Alastor is doing this to piss off Lucifer) and then Lucifer quickly (to break their stare) tells Charlie to introduce the others and separates Alastor and Charlie with his hands, and when Charlie introduces Vaggie to Lucifer, as his girlfriend, he is clearly relieved and happier than ever:

youtube

(1:25)

youtube

We also have foreshadowing with the bed, first we have a scene where Vaggie lies alone in bed and calls Charlie, who has already woken up a long time ago and is downstairs, and then in episode 7 we have a scene when Alastor comes to Charlie and what a coincidence that we have the moment when they both lie on a heart-shaped pillow...:

Of course, Alastor doesn't like to be touched, and yet Charlie touching and by Charlie is no problem for him:

(51:49)

youtube

(2:36:54)

He let her touch and use his microphone, his most prized possession:

And please someone explain to me what this look is..., in this look, at this moment I don't see a look like "I want to use you", but more a look like "I'm proud of you" and/or " I like you":

That's all for now, thank you for reading and have a nice day, evening or night :)

This entire post is based on 100% confirmed information with links, screenshots, etc., if I don't have a link to something, I won't post it, I want this post to be based on confirmed and verified information, with its interpretation, without any made-up things, so if anyone has such information about Charlastor, please feel free to reblog, comment, etc., as long as it is confirmed by links, screenshots, etc., so that no one will accuse you/us of "it's your imagination" ;)

#charlastor #alastor x charlie #radiobelle #charlie morningstar #alastor #hazbin hotel #theory #Youtube

63 notes · View notes

pistatsia · 5 months

Text

All or Nothing: Noel Noa (ft. Jinpachi Ego)

(note that this analysis contains heavy spoilers for Noa's motives in my Big little dramas fic)

What I really like about Noa is that his character, with his questionable coaching decisions and personality... Actually very evidently grows from his backstory.

We only know a few things for sure about Noa's background before Blue Lock: he grew up in the slums of Paris, where he invested all of himself to get out of that hole, he's ex-boyfriend rival of Jinpachi Ego, with whom they diverge in their ideologies and approaches to the striker's game, and he's the idol of little (and adult) Isagi Yoichi due to the fact that he plays rough and focuses on his success rather than his teammates.

On top of that, we also know that Noa was probably forced into Blue Lock. Most likely, the club management put him in front of the fact that you was specifically requested by your ex rival, so go and shine with your face on a TV show. Oh, and bring along our resident bouquet of personality disorders, code-named kainess. Noa certainly doesn't want to show off for the camera like Lavinho or Chris, doesn't want to raise the next generation of players to avoid his mistakes like Snuffy, and certainly isn't looking for friends/good play/rivals like Loki (who only came to the top 5 to evaluate the level of Blue Lock players according to his own words). Even if he'd wanted to see the sprouts of Ego's theory I doubt that he will apply for the participating in Blue Lock voluntary.

Because Noa doesn't really care. This whole mess is just out of his field of interest. Outside of the games we only see him sitting in his room staring endlessly at screens and drinking coffee.

But it's from this that we see that Noa, despite his very... die-or-die method of building a game on the field, is a responsible player and coach. He may not want to mess around with kids in front of the world, but if he took the job, he'll do it. But he will do it exactly the way he demands of himself - no more, no less. Noa is neither cruel nor kind - he doesn't go beyond what his contract asks of him and his principles.

Slightly off-topic, I'd say that's the exact difference between Noa and Ego. No one would accuse Noa of conscious cruelty: he acts within his system, which he has explained to the children in advance, and if they fail it is only their fault for failing to adjust to it. He is simply doing his job - nothing more, nothing less.

Ego, in his turn? He chooses to be cruel even in the system he have built himself. Not because it somehow motivates the children, but because he can. And in doing so, Ego doesn't hate them - he probably doesn't care about any of them. He hates in them a part of the player he once was - the player who lost either to Noel Noa or the entire football world. If not to the both at once.

But even so, it seems odd for the manga to highlight their rivalry. It's not that only very few people have different ways of dealing with children. A lot of people are losing ugly to each other.

But this work with kids is the main root of their rivalry. Because the basics of their motto, their starting point of football, the way they guide children to the game are diametrically opposed.

Because the key point of Ego theory is that the striker is created by a moment of chaos. A moment that cannot be directed - that can only be pushed towards.

Except that for Noa a player hoping for a miracle and not knowing something is nothing. He will never allow that in his team - his whole game, his team and his life is one big formula with coefficients chosen once, like a neural network.

Both of them live as a part of the all-or-nothing game. Except that while Ego plays this game with emotion and involvement, Noa approaches it as logically as possible.

And only Isagi Yoichi can resolve this decades-long conflict.

Now let's go back to Noa's game, to understand why logic is that important to Noa and the player's emotions are insignificant and even get in the way.

Remember exactly how he plays on the pitch. He never comes out to play first like other master strikers. He chooses the midfield position to support the player of his choice - he doesn't steal their shine in the center of attack. He only scores a goal once too, in the first match - the rest of the time he blocks other master strikers in an effort to ensure the kids can play fair.

And that's probably why he openly mocks both Lavinho and Chris with his dry jokes about narcissists and "kids without the proper adult". But he's especially harsh on Snuffy, angrily mocking him for being bitten by "his own dog", bringing back the "don't make my job harder than it needs to be" line. But why does Snuffy deserve this treatment (not taking into account the way Snuffy himself ridicules Noa)?

Because Noa is disgusted with his approach to teaching.

In fact, it's their approaches in the Blue Lock cut that are most opposed, and yet turned on to the max. While Snuffy has gone so far as to give each player an individual program and plan in his strategies, Noa has let things slide, making his stratum a mini version of the Hunger Games. Noa is angry that Snuffy babysits his kids; he's angry at how involved he is in their lives, how Snuffy swirls around them, and how Snuffy is always there to help and support them.

Because Noa is a "give a hungry man a fish and he'll eat for a day, teach him to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime" kind of guy. Except that he won't even teach them voluntarily. Players need to get the right advice from him themselves while framing the question correctly.

Noa's policy is non-interference.

Because he knows from experience that it's the only way kids grow up strong. From his own experience.

And to fully dive in, let's remember another moment from the manga that characterizes Noa the most. His advice to Isagi.

"Dedicate every hour, moment, second of your life to a goal. Don't think irrationally. Get your thoughts in order. I don't pick irrational people for the team. Dedicate your whole self to the goal."

Pretty cool, huh? Blossoms with potential burnout, a life on automatic, and a complete loss of feeling.

You know what I'm getting at? That's exactly the lifestyle Noa lives with. And he doesn't see anything wrong with advising Isagi to do it. He doesn't get annoyed by people's taunts about him being a machine and incapable of feeling. That's probably what he wanted.

Because Noa himself grew up completely dedicated to a goal, switching off all his feelings and without mentorship, and it made him who he is now. And it's rational for him to follow the same path with his kids.

Because feelings are illogical. They're weird, they're scary, they're very hard to predict. They're exhausting, they make you turn back to the past and wait for the future with hopes that may not be fulfilled later. They take your strength, they hurt and they wound very sharply. They make you weak, they make you vulnerable - they make you a helpless child.

Living without them is so much easier.

(If you remember my analysis on Isagi, you can see how similar he and Noa are.)

In psychology this mode is called "detached protector". Its essence is that the child or adult turns off all their feelings to avoid punishment and focus on survival.

They switch off all emotions. They cut off all emotional ties with loved ones, family and friends, seeing them more as objects. They can only work endlessly.

They function like a robot.

This mode is triggered when a person cuts off all their emotional needs, like an automaton focusing on one single goal.

In Noa's case? His survival. And that's exactly what Ego is talking about - that young Noa, obviously emotionally deprived, put all of himself into football because he had nothing else but it.

And judging by Noa today, having cut off those needs as a child, he doesn't see the point in experiencing them again. Noa doesn't smile, he doesn't get upset or frustrated. He doesn't get angry or regretful. Of course, mentally stable people can express their emotions weakly too - and even on a level like Noa.

But we're in a football manga. Football is all about emotion.

And the fact that Noa doesn't visually show the joy or at least the satisfaction of a goal or a victory - of the life that little Noa once strived so hard to live, investing all of himself - is just awful.

Of course, Noa has feelings, just like any other person. After all, he is a living being. Except they're either quite faint (because strong emotions = danger and weakness), or he crushes them as soon as he feels them coming on.

Noa's whole life is an endless race to stay where he is.

Because Noa has learned to survive. Of course, he did.

But Noa didn't learn how to live.

#i'm sorry #noel noa #ego jinpachi #bllk analysis #blue lock analysis #bllk #blue lock

86 notes · View notes

villainsandvictimsalliance · 2 months

Text

A quick analysis of AFO's origin, the world frame of bnha and the core themes of the story :

From reading other people's metas and reading the leaks when they came out, my only solid take about it is that you cannot talk about bnha and the core theme of the perpetuation of violence without understanding how the Hero Society and the hero vs villain culture came to be.

That's what AFO origin is for.

Let's see if I can explain it:

In stories where a group of people suddenly gains powers, you'll always see that authors worry to portray how a change like that would affect the world at the moment. What does it mean that part of the global population now has access to something that others don't? Does that make them "better humans"? Are they superior to the rest and therefore should control them? Are they a danger to society? Should they be repressed or eliminated?

The thing is that powers can be viewed as a metaphor to real life situations we face. People with disabilities deal with the whole stupid idea that they are less than the rest of humanity all the time. You have sexism and racism and a bunch of other problems that at heart are about how to deal with different existences. Should people with certain privileges rule the world? Etc etc etc.

For a second, think of having superpowers as having a ton of money. Those with more money can help others or totally ruin their lives, right? In our world, people with money are directly involved in how justice works. They can corrupt the system or make it work, you know how it is. Yet, people with money are only people. We are all just that. Humans. No matter the amount of privileges, you can't escape your own humanity.

The way a person looks, the amount of money they own, where they are from, how they identify as, none of that makes a person more or less human. Similarly, having powers or the nature of said powers... It doesn't make a person less of a person, you know?

When you apply that logic to superpowers, you get what MHA is trying to say.

AFO lived in these specific conditions that were a result of the violence of his time. He would have ended up bitter anyway, because since he was born he was marked as a threat. When you reject someone like that, when you reject their humanity and you make an enemy out of there, you're not asking for a nice ending. If you teach them that they have to fight for the right to exist, you are asking for a war. It's like that in our world, it's like that in bnha.

What I'm trying to say is that superpowers are just an added variable in the complex equation of human coexistence.

The moment superpowers start to appear, society has to adapt fast. People that are also weapons don't mix well with the world's problems, after all. If you want to prevent mass killings, you need to set a system that rules the allowed behaviors and balances out the board. It's a relief that humanity is both capable of great horrors and wonders, so to every criminal that's set to use their powers for evil, you'll get an individual that wants to use their powers to stop them.

That's how vigilantes were born.

Then comes the legalization of powers and the individuals who use it to protect the system. That is how you get villains (people outside the law) and heroes (people following the law).

Violà. You have the same set of problems with a new feature: quirks.

How does this connect to AFO, you ask?

AFO's origin explains the complexity of the bnha universe, comparing it to our own. It also shows that there is always a context, as in situational factors that contribute to a person being the way that person is.

That doesn't excuse who AFO became, tho. The general rule dictates that we are responsible for our choices and actions in the face of the reality we were presented with. Maybe not while we are kids, because we don't have the maturity to make those choices. However, the moment we become adults, we cannot blame our choices anymore in the world around us. If you have the frame of mind to stop hurting people and you don't, that is on you. You chose to perpetuate the violence.

Of course, simplifications don't do any good and bnha makes that clear too.

A tale of heroes that are always good and villains that are always bad is just that, fiction. When the bnha society started believing that said fiction was their reality, that's when the real struggle of bnha started. Villains and heroes stopped being perceived as such. The dehumanization went both ways. The heroes became untouchable gods and the villains unforgivable demons. The civilians all excused their apathy and lack of action by saying they couldn't do anything in such a world.

People ran away from their responsibility by putting all the weight on the heroes shoulders and ignoring whatever felt uncomfortable or mildly disturbing.

See how quickly we were able to analyze bnha?

That's what I meant when I said at the start that AFO's backstory is crucial to the story frame of the manga. If AFO had been a villain just because, then you'd have a story of evil without reason that would validate the idea of extreme moralities of black and white. Since that's not the case, we got more depth in general.

It all connects to the message Horikoshi is trying to communicate. If you compare bnha to other shonens, you'll get the feeling that they all have something to say about that violence, about the way the world is structured and how people move around it.

It's a basic of storytelling, sure. It's just that now you have the knowledge to properly study bnha, or something like that.

At some point I'll have to reread the manga and pay attention to AFO's origin... That's everything for now, tho. Hope you enjoyed it whdhjsbdjd

#bnha #mha #my hero academia #boku no hero academia #shan's bnha opinions #shan's mha opinions #bnha spoilers #mha spoilers #afo #all for one

41 notes · View notes

safety-pin-punk · 6 months

Text

A joint statement from @polyamorouspunk and @safety-pin-punk- this is NOT a divorce kids, it’s just setting some bOuNdArIeS

Dear Punks,

We are gathered here today to talk about a shared view of the punk culture specifically in the tumblr bubble that we share between ourselves and also with so many of you.

To be frank, we get a lot of asks, which is a joy for both of us, and we love answering your questions with our opinions, other’s opinions, bouncing things off each other and our other mutuals, and directing you to anything that you might find helpful in your inquires. However, we get a LOT of asks specifically asking for permission or “Is it okay if I…”, and we really want to stress a point here:

Asking what you can and cannot do to be considered “punk” goes against being punk.

We get so many questions asking “will I be considered a poser if” and the best answer we can give you is: whatever your question is, the answer is PROBABLY going to be ”no, you wont be considered a poser”, BUT, asking if you’re going to be a poser if you do ‘xyz’ thing is gonna be what makes you look like a poser. Part of being a punk is deciding what’s right for YOU. It’s going AGAINST the grain. If you are ASKING what is acceptable, you are not ACTING in a punk manner. Punk isn’t about doing what someone says is okay, its about doing what you think is right.

Not only that, but it is very draining on both of us to receive numerous asks like this. As much as we want to answer every ask that comes our way because we genuinely WANT to help, for people to ask us questions, and to come to us for advice, when there’s a buildup in our inbox of questions asking for permission, one after another, they can be really draining. (And honestly, with how often we get asks about being a poser, the term feels very overused and watered down to the both of us). (We are taking the term poser away and putting it on the tall shelf kids).

Key loves getting asks about punk history and culture, and Punk loves getting asks about DIY tips, what’s worked for them, and both of us love talking music. In fact, we both listen to non-punk genres quite a lot as well, such as metalcore and pop rock. So, yes, we’re both team “You don’t need to listen to punk music to be punk”. But like with everything else, there’s a level of subtext in that statement. There are so many different genres of punk music. There are also so many different genres of alternative music in general. When the two of us say “You don’t need to listen to punk music”, we are not talking about the people who listen to music that explicitly goes against punk values. And we would hope that if you are existing in punk spaces online, that you can reason your way to understanding that without us having to explain it every time it gets brought up.

And that goes for more than just that specific idea, there’s a lot of things we say that should be taken with nuance and your own critical thinking skills should be applied to. And on top of that, its also important to remember that we ALL come from different backgrounds and have different life experiences that have shaped our views and opinions. Because of this, we would also like to point out that you should not be asking us questions that involve us being your moral compass. Asking for opinions is one thing, but asking for what right and wrong is another.

There are punks out there who we’re both mutuals with who have differentiating opinions on topics, like whether or not punk is a music-based or political subculture at heart. Us having differing opinions than some of our mutuals doesn’t mean that us or them are less punk than each other. Since part of being punk is about thinking for yourself and going against what the mainstream and the masses think, then it makes sense that we don’t all agree on the smaller details. When it comes down to the real big problems, on topics like fascism, or bodily autonomy, or queer rights, etc., that’s what really matters.

We’re not the perfect role models for punk culture. We’re messy, flawed, human beings like everyone else. We like problematic things. We say shit that doesn’t always come across the right way. We can get irked easily from things on tumblr, either by asks we get or posts we see. We’re more than just our blogs. We have whole other lives outside of our punk worlds. We have different styles of fashion, different music tastes, etc. We do not live and breathe being 100% the perfect punk 24/7, but we try our best to make a difference where we can.

We genuinely enjoy being part of this community, but we also reserve the right to not answer asks that make us uncomfortable in any way, even if they come from a place of genuine desire to do what’s right. And again, we both do genuinely enjoy questions that ask for our opinions on topics, but asking for our opinions is a LOT different than asking for permission, which is something that we’ve both said a few times, but we feel like might not be reaching everyone who is thinking about sending in an ask like that. We thank you for taking the time to read this, and hope that our friends and followers understand where we are coming from and respect our wishes and boundaries on these matters, and hope you choose to continue along with us on both our individual and joint content.

#not a divorce

57 notes · View notes

anemoiashifts · 2 months

Text

the law of attraction explained (for reality shifting).

⋅˚₊‧ ୨୧ ‧₊˚.

let me give you a personal example of mine. i really really wanted a volkswagen beetle & after started seeing them everywhere. this is important because the first thing you must understand is that our thoughts create our reality. what we give our attention to has the ability to manifest itself into the physical just by thinking of it. the cars didn't just suddenly appear. what happened was my brain was influencing the 3d & confirming my thoughts because i was giving that thought attention.

now, we have hundreds of thoughts & assumptions everyday. this is why it's so important to pay attention to what you think & how you speak to yourself. to change your circumstances, we must change our thoughts.

going forward, most of these points are taken from the book "the power of awareness" by neville goddard. this is a very simplified explanation & this definitely does not scratch the surface so i encourage you to read. I have linked a free pdf here.

⋅˚₊‧ ୨୧ ‧₊˚.

♡ loa basics.

the term "i am" is the ultimate definition of self. manifestation is the result of your beliefs & consciousness in the physical. all that you are is your beliefs & the definition you determine for yourself. for you cannot know how other people define you, that speculation is purely assumption based on your beliefs. the only one who can define you is yourself & if you allow yourself, you can be anything. reality is what you make it & an unlimited one at that.

"...steel, when magnetized differs not in substance but from its demagnetized state but in the order & arrangement of its molecules.."

it (steel) is still the same substance, only the particles are rearranged. when these particles are mixed up at random, the particles are demagogues. but when the substance has many particles facing in one direction the substance becomes a magnet. this is exactly how our desires work.

this may seem obvious, but you must want your desires. then, make your want a present fact. assume you have already acquired everything you have ever wanted & you will. persistence is key.

mental & spiritual knowledge are different. you know something by looking at it & by physically seeing it, but you know something internally by feeling it — knowing it to be true.

again, we must change how our mind works before we can begin to see our desires in the 3d. there are no external factors at play, only yourself.

⋅˚₊‧ ୨୧ ‧₊˚.

♡ "i cannot shift".

considering what i've just told you, by telling yourself you "cannot shift", you are only reaffirming & strengthening that belief. similar to how when you tell someone something enough times, they'll start to believe it — that can also apply to yourself.when you say that you cannot do something you will start to notice all the reasons and barriers that stand in your way of you and your desire (not shifting).

since this is mainly a shifting blog, lets consider the phrases "i cannot shift" vs "i can shift". one has a positive & the other has a negative connotation when in actuality, they are both neutral statements. the reason for the shifting = good / not shifting = bad is because that is the definition you have given it; what you associate it with.

the conformation that you have shifted, cannot be found in the 3d. it is found within yourself & system of beliefs.

⋅˚₊‧ ୨୧ ‧₊˚.

i've been meaning to make a post like this for sooo long. a few people have requested it on tiktok & honestly i just wasn't sure how far in depth i should go. hope this helps some of you <3 !

#reality shifting #shifting #desired reality #shiftblr #shiftok #shifting motivation #shifting realities

23 notes · View notes

polyamorouspunk · 6 months

Text

A joint statement from @polyamorouspunk and @safety-pin-punk - this is NOT a divorce kids, it’s just setting some bOuNdArIeS

Dear Punks,

We are gathered here today to talk about a shared view of the punk culture specifically in the tumblr bubble that we share between ourselves and also with so many of you.

Asking what you can and cannot do to be considered “punk” goes against being punk.

#not a divorce

37 notes · View notes

sophieinwonderland · 8 months

Note

u have a v distinct way of doing things and i am v aware of it so i play by ur methods. i will take this excessively diplomatically so no one can possibly misconstrue my words

i made the original post ab this whole thing. in spite of having been labeled as anti endo (and a singlet for some reason) i’m not rly. i have been involved in the plural community long before my DID dx and my last bf was a veritbonder. i have seen the endo community from the inside and don’t have issues w it.

my problem is the disingenuous nature of many syscoursers, and you are not excluded from this. i could do the same thing as you have done and explain why i think PNES should just be called regular seizures and they’re exactly the same now. there are many sources where they have been called seizures for years and years. but language changes, and i know you know this. it is one of your whole arguments as to why you are for the use of tulpa. to you, that word means something different than its origins.

to me, as a bodily semiverbal person, these terms mean something different. these words have evolved within the community that they were applied to. the system community, both endogenic and traumagenic, is dissociated (ha) from the semi/nonverbal community at large. you don’t know how we use these words because you literally do not participate in our community or culture. just like someone who commented on one of your other posts said, this is exactly like when verbal autistics who lose speech insist that saying “go nonverbal” doesn’t hurt nonverbal people.

as i said in my original post, and yet people somehow become unable to read for one sentence, if one headmate fronts for a significant amount of time that you could be considered semiverbal as one body, then you can do that. you are very disingenuous with your “bodily experiences” post, even though i am very sure you understand what people mean by that. my entire body regardless of any headmate fronting will always be semiverbal or nonverbal as my brain damage progresses. i use these words to tell people that as a body i cannot speak how you speak. if i had some headmates that couldn’t talk i would just say that. those specific ones can’t talk. my body is verbal overall.

if you go into our communities, we will hear you say “i am nonverbal” and will assume that your body does not and cannot speak. we will defer to you and seek to uplift your voice as one of the most disabled members of our society. our community is based around intersectionality and understanding that there are people more disabled than you. it is the job of verbal people to listen to me, and it is my job to listen to nonverbal people.

if you use these terms just for yourself. just between you and your therapist. between you and your friends. then no, it doesn’t matter. it was never about that. it is about the community and community implications of people who are objectively less disabled taking a word for people who are more so.

headmates can be people, they can do that, but a single body exists. you can’t just ignore that. i don’t become white when my white headmate fronts. i don’t gain the ability to walk unaided when abled headmates front. i don’t become less disabled in any way. i don’t become verbal.

and if you want to counter with abled systems can have alters that can’t walk, because i know you just want to, we don’t call it paralysis. we call it functional, somatic, or psychogenic paralysis. it works differently in the body just the same. you can’t insert yourself into semi/nonverbal spaces any more than you can insert yourself into a SCI support group.

i could do the same thing as you have done and explain why i think PNES should just be called regular seizures and they’re exactly the same now. there are many sources where they have been called seizures for years and years. but language changes, and i know you know this.

I'm already lost...

Is there some sort of discourse claiming that you can't call psychogenic non-epileptic seizures... seizures?

Or that psychogenic paralysis isn't a valid type of paralysis?

The cause may be different, but there are a ton of different causes for various conditions.

Someone blinded by an eye disease is blind. Someone blinded by their eyes being physically damaged is blind. Someone who experiences psychogenic blindness is blind.

Likewise, psychogenic paralysis IS paralysis. And a psychogenic non-epileptic seizure IS a seizure. You can add a qualifier to that... but it's not necessary.

if you go into our communities, we will hear you say “i am nonverbal” and will assume that your body does not and cannot speak.

That could be a fair assumption with no context. Although I... frankly doubt this happens often, or is a mistake that lasts long without being corrected.

If someone hears me say "I'm a cis woman" without context, I'm sure they would wrongfully assume I mean that the body is AFAB.

Obviously, it's important to try to mitigate miscommunications like these. But I assume that if you're dealing with a system with nonverbal headmates, you'll realize shortly the error. Unless that nonverbal headmate is the host or is otherwise fronting all or most of the time, in which case... maybe the miscommunication isn't as important as you think it is. 🤷‍♀️

our community is based around intersectionality and understanding that there are people more disabled than you. it is the job of verbal people to listen to me, and it is my job to listen to nonverbal people.

And this, I think is a mistake. At least when taken to the extremes I see here.

First... I'm really not comfortable with the idea of "more disabled" here. Sure, you can kind of apply this in specific contexts to try to say recurrent symptoms aren't as bad because they don't happen as often... but having your legs randomly give out while crossing the street might be more harmful than being a fulltime wheelchair user who wouldn't have been in that situation.

I'm also not comfortable with this thought in this specific case as it suggests that the nonverbal singlet is "more disabled" than the traumagenic DID system with severe memory loss and c-PTSD who has nonverbal headmates, and therefore gets a right to police their terms.

But let's say for the sake of argument this has merit and DID systems with nonverbal headmates are "less disabled" than nonverbal singlets:

Yes, you should absolutely listen to people with disabilities. Especially severe ones. But...

Dysphoric transgender people are technically more disabled (in that specific context) than non-dysphoric ones.

The same logic you're using could just as easily be used to support transmedicalists over non-dysphoric transgender people. Actually, the same logic HAS been used this way. Repeatedly. It's one of the main talking points employed by transmeds to garner sympathy.

There HAS to be more critical thought put into these issues than just "listen to the most disabled people in the room," which in this context really feels more like "accept what the most vocal members of a group say on a given platform without question."

This is also the logic sysmeds use against endogenic and non-disordered systems.

"We're disabled trauma survivors, so therefore you're supposed to listen to us when we claim this other marginalized group of people aren't real and their experiences aren't valid, and they aren't allowed to use terms we claim are ours regardless of whether those terms originally were or not. If you disagree with us then you're ableist."

We cannot afford to normalize this sort of exclusionism and gatekeeping.

54 notes · View notes

jazzy---j · 3 months

Text

CC3... and just my problems with sjm as a whole.

Soooooo, yeah. that was a bit disappointing. I wanna start off that due to the problematic nature of SJM I wanna make it clear I no longer financially support her. When I first began reading her books I was in high school and didn't know much about whose books I was reading. Most of it was just pick up a book, read the summary, if I liked it I bought it. But now as an adult who is on booktok and all the other bullshit (it's a whole mess) I can see all of a book and author's pros and cons and be like, "nah, I'm not doing that." And you know as a black woman, I cannot just be and do what I want and damn whoever it may impact or the consequence. I don't get to live in that world. I feel like I have somewhat of a responsibility to not contribute to the harm that the world already does to marginalized people around the world. That's just me personally, black people are not a monolith and this way of thinking doesn't apply to all of us.

Anyway all that being said, I am a book reader who is invested in whatever story they are reading and want to know what happens. So I read CC3.., but was sailing the high seas while I did it if you know what I mean. And let me just say... yikes. The problematic things that SJM does in real life and all that those issues mean really do shine in this book. I mean I always knew white authors have different experiences than me so I don't expect something that caters to me when I read their books but, idk sjm makes all the problematic things just so apparent. And it's just generally hard to read. There can't be any separation between the art and the artist in this one guys. I'm a political science and history major in real life so I spend my time studying political theory and structures of power in historical contexts. Hopefully, I can work to better understand those structures in our current present and with my intersection of activism (I am very passionate about that in my day-to-day) work to make a better world for marginalized people. So when I read SJM, I see some very troubling themes in her work. Themes that can perpetuate misogyny, racism, and imperialism. And it just makes me queasy reading it. It's not fun for me to read that. The way she used the oppression and discrimination of people as a major plot device, that the heroes have to defeat but in real life be ok with taking a birthright trip is just... a type of cognitive dissonance that I can't even put into words. and don't think I forgot the Breonna Taylor incident that she still has on her Instagram. if you don't know what I'm talking about look it up on TikTok, many black book readers have created multiple videos explaining that whole situation.

Now some people may be like, "What the fuck are you talking about. I don't see any of this." And like that's cool maybe because of what I'm studying I just see it everywhere. But I just have not been able to shake this ickiness in my gut about her work. The most thought-out example of the problematic nature of her work that I have is the description and characterization of the Illyrian people.

Now the way she physically described the illryians is as brown-skinned, with dark hair, and brown or dark eyes. This does put them in a very racially ambiguous position but to describe them as brown-skinned makes me picture brown people who in real life are racially recognized as black and brown people. People apart of brown communities are usually Southeast Asian or Arab people. They are marginalized in real life through various forms of oppression displayed in orientalism perpetuated mostly recently by the United States in the last 30 years (the war on terror, but this behavior goes back so much further). The Illyrian people's cultural characterization coupled with their physical description aligns with the negative aspects of Orientalism. Literally, the illryians are described as "backward", "barbaric", "slow to change", and stuck in timeless, old antiquated traditions that encourage the abuse of women and children. Sjm describes an indigenous people (she makes it clear that the illryians are native to the night court and nowhere else) as "savage" culturally, in their interpersonal relationships, and communally. That is just described as inherent to the people (except for a couple of characters who are "the good ones", or "not like that" and lucky enough to get away). Culturally they are described as being constantly in a state of conflict, preparing for and/or enjoying that conflict. I'm so sorry but that is Orientalism, literally the definition of how Orientalism was used to justify the colonization of the Middle East and parts of Asian during the colonization period and again when the western powers and the United States had a vested interest in interfering politically and economically in the region in the last couple of decades. That same language was used to describe the people of the Middle East and justify their oppression in the West. The exact same words. I did not understand the connection until I took a Middle East: politics and society class about two semesters ago and again that same language was used when we were learning about Orientalism. I went back to read some of acotar again and I saw all of that in relation to the illryians and I was like, "oh, oh no." I really don't know what else to say. To me, the relation is very very clear and makes my stomach just drop when reading it.

And the thing about it is it did not have to be this way, SJM did not have to characterize them like that. There is no real narrative function of this characterization, they are not the bad guys of the story or the main antagonist. In fact, the main characters need them to actually defeat the evil. SJM at the base made an interesting indigenous group of people that could have been a unique culture in her narrative landscape and added to her world-building. Instead, she wrote harmful stereotypes about vaguely racialized, marginalized people that directly mirror a marginalized group of people in the real world. Now was that her intention or just the subconscious influence of Orientalism in our society coming out without her awareness? I mean i cannot confirm from the horse's mouth that this is the case right? She has never actually said this. But her stance on current world events that are happening right (Palestine and Gaza strip) does not give me a lot of hope that she is completely unaware. But either way, this can hurt people in the real world. In the book, because the Illyrians are characterized the way that they are, the main characters are put in a moral position of opposition, that is the the dynamic. And to me, that dynamic is hard to read knowing what I know and what actually happens in real life to people that the Illyrians mirror. it begins to be super easy to just live in that moral opposition that can stripe away people's humanity and value. Azriel's contempt for his people and desire to destroy Illyria and the culture is a good example of what happens to these groups in real life. This is just one example of things in her work that can be problematic.

And listen I'm not writing this to tell you to stop reading her, to tell you what to do with your money, or who to like/support. That is not my job. I just wanted to share some of my thoughts and give whoever is reading this food for thought. And hey I might be reading too much into this, and just going way too deep. It is just hard for me to enjoy her work anymore knowing and seeing what I see. I can't really ignore that icky gut feeling.

And hey do I think sjm is a good writer? Eh... that is a whole other blog post. I could go really deep into her world-building, story choices, and what I think might just be lazy writing. But there are some aspects that I do like and are unique. But guess what? The fandom's fanfic writers are the light in the tunnel in this situation. As they often are in other fandoms. they take the actual cool and fun things that SJM created and build on them in a way that does not negatively depict the representation of real people. In a way that is not narratively disappointing. In a way that is just fun for everyone to enjoy. Free of charge they express their talent because they love to do it for however long they want to. Fanfiction is an amazing system that I hope and pray won't get messed up. Like one of my favorite creators @separatist-apologist posted about last week, "I think no matter what happens, we've all spent so much time reading fic and developing headcanons that whatever SJM does isn't going to live up to the fantasy we've created...". And I for real felt that and I just wanna shout out to all the fic writers who make this space fun despite all the fandom fuckery and SJM fuckery.

@separatist-apologist, @thehaemanthus, @the-lonelybarricade, @moodymelanist, @ablogofsapphicpanic, @vidalinav, @vikingmagic33, @c-e-d-dreamer

There are more that I probably missed. So you know thank you guys for making things fun and giving me something to read that doesn't give me an icky feeling when I read.

So yeah, thank you for coming to my ted talk. this turned out to be hella long but you know once I started I couldn't stop. If you have any questions, my ask box is open. Again these are just my thoughts. you don't have to agree and I'm not trying to change your mind. I just needed to share this somewhere.

#acotar #acotar fanfiction #sjm critical #fanfiction #very scared to how this will be recieved #i might delete idk #acotar fandom #just a thought #black tumblr #black reader #sjm books #sjmaas #cc3 #crescent city

26 notes · View notes

rollercoasterwords · 11 months

Text

like. i still wouldn't want someone to copy and paste my fics into a large language model like chatgpt but it's not so much bc i'm worried abt my work being stolen (seems unlikely that an LLM would spit back out my exact words considering how it works, and even if it did, i doubt any individual would be able to like. publish and profit from those words, based on the nebulous status of copyright law when it comes to LLMs like chatgpt. and having my words fed into the LLM really isn't going to make much of a difference when it comes to corporations profiting off the tool in the first place; plus in instances of corporate exploitation i think there are more effective ways to organize than like...arguing for strengthened ip laws or trying to like make ip laws for fanfiction spaces). it's more because i'm wary of what that says about how a person is like...approaching my fic specifically + fanfiction more broadly. in two main ways:

1. i think it is just. basic respect to check with a writer before u take their work off ao3(or whatever fanfic-specific place it's been shared) and put it somewhere else. and like, this applies to lots of things outside chatgpt--reposting fics to other sites, posting them on goodreads/storygraph, printing + binding fics, etc. if u are treating fanfic writers as people who u are in community with, who are generously sharing a gift with u, then it seems like basic kindness to check in and see if they're alright with u taking that fic outside the space it was posted to do something else with it.

with chatgpt and similar LLMs specifically, a lot of people are wary because there's still so much unsettled in regards to how copyright laws might shake out, and most people (myself included) are unsure of how/whether our writing/data might be stored and used by these corporations that own the LLMs. i don't think ai itself is something that should be mythologized as like ontologically evil technology, but anytime a corporation is introducing us to new tech like this we need to be wary of where it's coming from and how it could be used--people have already pointed out a lot of very serious issues with the way this technology is being developed and how it could/likely will be/already is being used exploitatively--which, again, is more a matter of organizing against corporations than railing against ai tech itself, but is still a valid reason for writers (again, myself included) to be wary of having their work fed to LLMs without permission.

and like. sure, u don't have to care abt writers' feelings + boundaries and can just take their stories and do whatever u want with them. but to me that says u aren't treating fanfic as a community space, but rather a content farm in which fics are products that u are entitled to do whatever u want with. and i just think that's shitty! and if that's how ur treating fanfic then i'd rather not have u reading my fic at all

2. i honestly think it's a strange way to engage w storytelling by treating endings this way. like. story endings are usually v important + intentional, and can completely change the entire tone, themes, messages, etc of a story. i understand going to the writer and asking them abt what they had in mind for the story ending if ur looking for closure, and i understand imagining ur own story ending or even writing ur own ending to an unfinished story. what i don't understand is plugging a story into chatgpt and having it spit an ending out for u.

and like. maybe this is bc we've all been calling these LLMs ai, which evokes an impression of like. a sentient robot creating something. but that's not what these programs do! the first article i linked explains how they actually work really well, but essentially--chatgpt and similar LLMs cannot create new ideas. they can't take a story and synthesize its themes or pick apart its tone to then come up with an original idea for an ending. at the same time, they aren't just plagiarism machines that are ripping text directly from other writers and spitting it back out.

instead (to my understanding), what they're doing is compressing vast amounts of information by running statisical analyses to just save the most common trends, patterns, recurring info, etc, and then plugging that in to fill the gaps. it looks like it's writing something new, but it's essentially just paraphrasing already-existing information pulled from the internet. so i'd imagine that if u fed an ai a fic and said "write an ending," the ai would basically compare the fic to whatever similar stories it has saved and then spit out an ending that is most commonly found on the internet for that type of story. [not an expert here tho--this is just my best guess based on the bit of research i've done].

my point is--you won't be getting a new ending inspired directly by the story u put in. you'll be getting a paraphrased version of the most commonly recurring type of ending for similar stories on the web. and i just....don't see how that would be satisfying in any way. it seems, again, like a way in which someone would be approaching fic like a product, something that needs to be finished + complete bc ur entitled to it, rather than viewing fic as a piece of art with its own unique themes, message, and story that can't just be plugged into a one-size-fits-most ending generator. and like, i'm trying to avoid mysticizing writing as some sort of ethereal art form that would be blasphemously degraded by having someone plug in a shitty ending paraphrased from a conglomeration of various similar stories--i don't think someone creating a shitty ending for a story is like. a horrible evil thing. but i can understand where the satisfaction is coming from if you're writing your own shitty ending, where you get to come up with where u think the story would go + where u get to synthesize the themes u picked up on etc. but ai isn't even doing that--so again, i don't understand where the satisfaction is coming from aside from just going "well every story i read needs to be finished," which. makes me wary bc it just feels like a completely different way to approach stories and storytelling than i would hope to find in fanfic spaces, one that treats fic less as a creative place to explore and more as a transactional space where u are entitled to products.

anyway. feel like my thoughts + feelings abt ai keep changing the more i learn abt it + i'm sure they could change again, but rn my impression of this whole situation is like. i find the fact that some people are plugging fics into LLMs less concerning re: ip + ownership rights, and i don't think it's useful to exaggerate or mythologize abt what ai actually does (i think even calling it ai has kind of misled a lot of people, myself included). what concerns me more is that plugging fics into LLMs to write endings feels symptomatic of a broader culture in which people treat fanfic as an informal profit economy in which fics are product or content that a consumer-audience is entitled to, and i think that sort of approach leads to a whole plethora of other issues + makes fandom a more hostile space.

#hopefully this makes. sense #i am not a fan of most of the uses of ai/LLMs that i've seen #but i also am concerned that much of the backlash against it seems to be defaulting to this position of either #mysticizing writing in reactionary ways #and/or running into the arms of ip laws #which are a tool of capitalism and shouldn't be trusted any more than the corporations who profit from + exploit them!!#definitely feel like there are issues w plugging fics into LLMs without permission and would not want anyone to do that w my writing #but. moreso bc i don't want my writing being treated like content for consumption y’know #anyway the articles i linked esp the first and third r really good...highly encourage reading them #ranting and raving #txt

73 notes · View notes

snowflake-sage · 5 months

Text

Something to help understand/interpret my art, also lore dump (if you care):

Mae and Sage both are my sonas, Mae is my MAIN sona, she’s literally ME, and Sage represents an ASPECT of me.

Mae uses She/her pronouns and Sage uses He/him, they are both non-binary characters that represent different aspects of my gender experience. Mae represents the more physical gender experiences Ive had, and Sage represents more so what my gender is. (This is sort of hard to explain, Mae represents the experiences I’ve had in relation to my physical body that I was born with, and the experiences I’ve had in society and how society has interpreted me and my gender. She’s still accurate to my gender, but her design is more surface level and obvious. Sage on the other had, represents my gender experience at its CORE, and how I actually feel as an individual, despite my body. I feel like I am simply experiencing a feminine experience in some ways because of my body and how society sees me, but I don’t feel like who I am at my core can be put into any box, hence me being non-binary. I feel very much like I’m sort of playing a game and this is just the avatar I have, and that who I am is neither male nor female. I just happen to have more experiences in one regard because of how I was born. Sage is the aspect that cannot be boxed. He is both masculine and feminine, and also neither male or female. He’s just SAGE.) (this is also extremely personal to MY OWN gender experience so if you don’t relate to this don’t think to hard about it, this is literally how I interpret my own identity, it probably doesn’t make any sense to anyone else)

Back to Mae representing my more physical life experience, she carries a lot of my trauma and bad experiences. She represents every part of me that has ever been hurt.

Sage represents a part of me that is less in the earthly experience. If you know what a “higher self” is, that’s basically what Sage is in relation to Mae. He is an aspect of me, and therefore an aspect of Mae, they’re part of the same character. He acts as a sort of “guardian angel” who loves Mae more than anything and he would literally go any length for her. Representative of the innate love that I feel like everyone has for themself until society fucks us over and makes us hate ourselves.

Sage and Mae are NOT romantic towards each other (any art drawn of that is non-canon, sometimes I’m bored) , they are more like a queer-platonic relationship. I wouldn’t say they’re “just friends” because their lore and story and relationship is pretty complex and doesn’t fit that box for me.

Sage is an angel in canon, that takes a physical form which is the form I always draw, I’m working on drawing his true form for lore but I’m still designing it.

Sage is an angel of healing, which is why he’s so tender and gentle towards Mae and in general such a honey.

Sage is an angel of healing, and represents the higher self, but he also represents the shadow self (if you don’t know what that is, google is your friend). He carries the pain and trauma from Mae indirectly. This is why he has a darker color palette, since he represents Mae’s shadow (I actually am contemplating a few other alternate palettes for him , a crème color palette as well a blue one, as I work through the lore I’ll decide when those apply). He is NOT a dark angel or an evil angel. His character is multifaceted and complex, and his color palette just represents what I just explained. There are evil angels in my oc lore universe but their color palette doesn’t represent that bc I think that concept is overused, also I like being ironic. Sage having a darker palette is again, linked to his relation to Mae and the trauma he carries from her.

Even though Sage is small and sweet looking he is literally insanely powerful, like CRAZY strong

Sage being the shadow self, and also being so close and loving to Mae represents that our shadow self is not a part of us that is bad and needs to be pushed away, but actually a part of us that is just hurt and desperately needs love and healing.

I draw a lot of art of Mae and Sage embracing, either lovingly or during times of turmoil. I draw a lot of art of Mae being physically or mentally hurt and being comforted or embraced by Sage, Sage having different reactions situationally. A lot of the time, Mae is representing the physical effects of trauma, and Sage is the inner self mourning/crying/ suffering the trauma. Sort of like how you feel terrible for your child self for being mistreated, or how you feel bad for yourself because of the experiences you’ve had. It’s like a depiction of self pity, but also in a way, self love. It’s like holding yourself and crying for how the world has hurt you, and wishing better for yourself.

It’s symbolism✋

#I needed to write all this out and tell people because I need people to understand the deeper meaning of my art bc it’s my soul #my soul put on a canvas #but also I highkey think it’s interesting #like this is juicy stuff #but also I just want the world to know there’s a meaning behind alot of what I draw #I mean not all of it #some of it is just me goobin around #but some of it is LORE BRO #ANYWAYS #thanks for reading this if you did #hope you think I’m interesting #if not it’s whatever I’m just drawing dogs on the internet #mae rambles #oc lore #lore

25 notes · View notes