A frustrating development with the growing lack of reading comprehension I've personally noticed is an emerging fervor of insisting things aren't canon unless they are explicitly stated beyond all reasonable doubt.
I can not emphasize enough how harmful a mindset this is to have. Yes, it's wonderful to have characters outright say "I'm trans," but to deny a character's identity for not saying that is dangerous.
Plenty of real people prefer not to use specific labels. Historically, people didn't have our modern terms or modes of expression. Many modern cultures don't use these terms, either, and plenty of people within those that do can't safely openly identify.
If the only representation you accept as canon is within modern (and let's be honest, wealthy white able-bodied American) standards, then you are denying yourself and others a huge amount of representation and seriously limiting the media around you.
Ppl going "waaahh unpopular opinion but Alice is kind of annoying and obnoxious and I don't think I'd like be her friend irl" is so funny to me bc like.
God forbid a cast of characters be multifaceted and have actual flaws and unpleasant aspects other than "grr angsty hero" and "whoops i'm so clumsy". Sometimes character dynamics and arcs need to be prioritized above "who would i personally be niceys with irl"
2. bro just WAIT until you hear about season 1 jon lol
being in art school and having basically 0 knowledge about christianity whatsoever is so funny at this point i think you could tell me literally anything was an allegory for jesus and i'd just believe you
"aroace people can still have relationships-" NOT ALL OF THEM CAN. YOU KNOW THAT RIGHT. WHY DO YOU WORD IT AS "aroaces can still be in relationships" AND NOT "some can have relationships, and others cannot."?
WHY MUST YOU INSIST THAT WE STILL CAN LOVE IN SOME WAY. WHY DOES IT MATTER. WHY SHOULD WE HAVE TO LOVE. WHY, WHEN TALKING ABOUT AROACES, DO YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO IMPLY THAT IT'S OUR OTHER WAYS OF LOVING THAT MAKES US ACCEPTABLE? WHY CAN'T THE FACT WE DON'T LOVE MAKE US GOOD PEOPLE?
WHY IS THERE ALWAYS AN EMPHASIS ON THE OTHER WAYS WE LOVE, OR THE AROACES THAT CAN STILL DATE, AND NOT ON OUR LACK OF LOVE? IT FEELS TO ME, LIKE YOU ARE TRYING TO PUSH ASIDE THAT ASPECT OF OUR IDENTITY, BECUASE IT'S TOO STRANGE TO YOU. YOU MAY NOT SAY IT OUTLOUD, BUT THERE'S STILL A STIGMA AROUND LOVELESSNESS. IN YOUR MIND, YOU STILL ARE VIEWING LOVELESS PEOPLE AS LESS MORAL OR GOOD, AREN'T YOU?
OTHERWISE, YOU WOULD CELEBRATE OUR LOVELESSNESS, NOT SHOVE IT ASIDE BECUASE "THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO LOVE"
Quackity: Oh, it's gonna be so cool to see how this develops. I'm excited, I'm gonna try my best. I'm not the greatest at Minecraft whatsoever, I did nerf Green Team a little bit by accident on the second day. My bad! But, you know, I'm so ready to just grind out and see what we can do, and I just–
I wish everyone saw it with the same amount of, like, kind of enthusiasm. I think all of this and all the development and all the potential arcs, that's going to fcking allow for something absolutely incredible.
And if anyone ends up clipping any of this, something I do want to say is I implore people to view everything with a lot of enthusiasm. No stress, no anxiety, just a lot of enthusiasm. Because, again, this is going to allow for a lot of cool things in the server. Not just now, but in the future, too.
I feel like if Dipper were ever reincarnated as a demon, he wouldn't fit in super well with the others. Yes, he's been raised to vie for power and step on everyone in his way using whatever means is necessary - it's the same toxic bizz as when he was a human, appealing to gender norms. He's tougher, scarier, more powerful (than ordinary humans, that is), but when it comes to asserting control - being Evil - he doesn't have it in him. Given enough time, I think he'd grow pretty vocal about leaving living things alone. NOT torturing organisms for the hell of it, or stealing people's souls, or conquering planets. Sure, he's a demon. That's no excuse to be a MONSTER.
It's a VERY unpopular opinion amongst neighboring demons, and rumor spreads fast about the Goody Two-Shoed Activist imp raining on everyone's blood-splattered parade, so much so that it makes it to Bill, who's immediately intrigued. Call it intuition, but only one soul's capable of overriding goddamn demon nature for some preachy bullshit about "Doing Good." Lucky for him, demons occupy the same plane of existence, so all it really takes to verify the guy is a snap of his fingers, and POOF! He's floating right next to him. Sure enough, Dipper's fashioned himself a new and improved demonic form, and it is lovely!
No one likes Dipper's kumbaya "Can't We All Just Get Along" ideology, but Bill's almost instantly smitten with the guy, whoever he is, so he's gotta be at least somewhat powerful. Demons take notice when the all-powerful Bill Cipher starts lending his time (and magic?) to some low-leveler like Dipper. Is he being blackmailed? Are they working together? No. Not possible. Bill doesn't "work" with anyone, save for whatever human catches his eye every few decades. Doesn't look to be doing him any benefit, either. The opposite, even. Lending power to a saint like Dipper only makes it harder to cause chaos, after all. Why would he actively go against his OWN best interest to cater some imp's? It's almost like he's. He's.
A henchmen.
(Bill's also 30% more affectionate the first month they reunite, because he still can't believe that his adorable little human husband came back as the same SPECIES as him! He'd never complain over having a sweet human to squeeze, but one with teeth and claws and cute pointy ears doesn't hurt).
(On Jason, Thalia, Nico, Bianca, and their parallels/connections)
The Titan's Curse (Rick Riordan), @/anxiousmaya_, Right Now (Gracie Abrams), The Battle of the Labyrinth (Rick Riordan), Joan of Arc (Mary Gordon), The Lost Hero (Rick Riordan), Episodes Toward and Elegy for Halley's Comet (Lindsey Drager), Jason Grace (Riordan Wiki), The Gods Show Up (Michael Kinnucan), The House of Hades (Rick Riordan), What the Living Do (Marie Howe), The House of Hades (Rick Riordan), Planet of Love (Richard Siken), The Blood of Olympus (Rick Riordan), Tangerine (Nolune), The Blood of Olympus (Rick Riordan), The Blood of Olympus (Rick Riordan), I Bet On Losing Dogs (Mitski), The Burning Maze (Rick Riordan), @/abhorarchive (Twitter), The Burning Maze (Rick Riordan), Seventeen (MARINA), The Burning Maze (Rick Riordan), @/rollercoasterwords, The Tyrant's Tomb (Rick Riordan), @/the-overanalyst, Where Things Come Back (John Corey Whaley), Grit (Silas Denver Martin), Softcore (The Neighbourhood), The Tower of Nero (Rick Riordan), Frost (Mitski), @/moonbends, I'm Your Man (Mitski), Sun Bleached Flies (Ethel Cain), The Tower of Nero (Rick Riordan), Three (Sleeping At Last), My Art
Baby (who still has no name) is warming up to Geralt, who also starts to connect some dots. (Like, I think he suspects that he's Jaskiers son, adopted or otherwise, but he won't even humor the idea that he could be the dad.)
That being said - the kid is an angry teenager sometimes. Jaskier tried all he could as a single parent and they have a very loving relationship, but I also think they do argue quite a bit, and there is some tension.
And the more he gets to learn how Geralt truly is the weirder is gets, cause. He's a good guy? And either Jaskier is petty and was too dramatic and kept him from meeting his dad for nothing, or Geralt isn't a good guy AT ALL and has hurt Jaskier really bad, and he doesn't think Geralt has it in him, but some people (and especially alphas) get really weird and archaic around omegas? And he had to witness again and again, with how little respect his unbonded, single father of a bastard child was treated - is Geralt like that too? But Jaskier still only ever talked somewhat kindly about him. And from all he saw... he trusts Geralt. He's a quiet, but witty and honorable man. But is it fair to doubt the parent that was there for him, that raised him, that sacrificed so much for him? The poor kid is so conflicted.
it really is starting to feel like every single person at dc has somehow just completely forgotten how storytelling works on a fundamental level. like i genuinely believe 99% of the problems they’re having could be solved if all the writers and the entire editorial staff was forced to take a middle school reading class
wait does the thing that some people think totk (or the stuff in the past) takes place before all other zelda games really just come from rauru and sonia founding hyrule??
hyrules been newly founded and switched places multiple times tho, plus this is an entirely new ""timeline"" anyway
botw + totk are their own thing with lots of references to other games bc funney referenceeee really, i doubt there was supposed to be any kind of deeper connection
(lets ignore the fact that they made botw to be a sort of soft reset and connect it all back together and then made its sequel do time fuckery AGAIN messing it all up again considering the continuity problems with them both .... and causing people to think they have to cram totks past parts into the old timeline somehow)