co opting

captainamarii  asked:

hey there! i absolutely love your art and love all the colors that you use!! especially since dnd can become very basic in terns of clothing! i was wondering if you have any tips or anything like that to creating clothes and outfits for characters? thank you in advance! :D

Hi! And thank you! :)

Something that’s really helped me over time is having a huge stockpile of reference images to pull from. Pinterest is great for this. I look at runway fashion, period costumes, concept art, and traditional clothing from around the world and history, making sure it’s attributed or doing some research so I know what I’m looking at and won’t accidentally co-opt something religious or otherwise culturally sensitive. I mostly look for shapes, silhouettes, color palettes, and motifs that inspire me (say, embroidery on a dress or the way a jacket is sewn).

Then if I’m looking to make a design, I’ll cruise through my refs and make a little moodboard on PureRef. Refs are great because they get you out of your own head into something new, and having them in one place helps me focus on the overall aesthetic rather than any one image (and just focus in general haha).

I’m always learning too, but I hope there’s something useful in there for you!

anonymous asked:

im not the anon from before, but i really dont like the words venusic and marsic? idk they just sound like there wasnt a lot of thought put inti them? why not virsexual/virisexual and femsexual?

I know the only alternatives are gynosexual (attraction to vaginas) and androsexual (attraction to penises) which have been co-opted by terfs. I prefer venussexual myself since it sticks with the theme of sexuality. “femsexual” sounds kinda.. idk like being attracted to femininity rather than women? which is more fetishy than orientation-related? and vir/virisexual sounds like ‘virus’ which implies the attraction is ‘bad’ or ‘diseased’, a stereotype the lgbt community has struggled to overturn for centuries. 

maybe I’m taking this too personally since I see the terms as helpful identifiers, but I’m a little bitter that on here, we never seem to take one step forward without taking two steps back. 

i feel very let down by feminists (or at least by the mainstream feminist movement, but i don’t want to give niche groups a pass because many of them are guilty of this as well) as a plus size woman. in calls for diversity in media, plus size women are never included as potentially marginalized individuals that need representation desperately. i spent years struggling (and nearly dying) of anorexia because i didn’t think i should be allowed to exist as a person if i wasn’t thin, much less enjoy life. we are constantly given that message, both implicitly and explicitly: if you aren’t thin, you don’t get to fucking exist. or if you do, you’re a joke, you’re a freak, you’re subhuman. in all honesty the fat positivity (not saying body positivity b/c you all co-opted and ruined that lol) community on youtube/instagram saved me. i got to see people with my body type just living their lives–even if their lives weren’t perfect, even if they weren’t perfect, they existed. they were out there. there was a possibility that i could live, that i could even be happy. 

but you all don’t fight for us. i’m not joking when i say that it’s a matter of life and death for me (and for many others) and feminists have failed us so much. you all co-opt “body positivity” to mean it applies to absolutely everyone (including skinny white girls whose bodies are constantly portrayed as not only the ideal but the only acceptable option). like fitness bloggers are out there claiming body positivity for themselves because they’re “strong not skinny” when they’re literally size fours. every single post about how fat girls are treated worse is derailed by skinny girls who complain about that time they were told to eat a cheeseburger. [[guess fucking what: as a former anorexic, being called “basically anorexic” is not even remotely comparable to the experience of being a fat woman in society, and if you try and make that comparison, i genuinely hope you choke.]] no one adds “plus size characters” to list of characters they wish were represented in media, not even people who are otherwise stalwart champions of diversity and representation. no one thinks about us, no one uplifts our voices, and g*d knows no one makes an effort to unlearn their own prejudices towards us. 

honestly at this point i feel backed into a corner because we keep saying this, we keep screaming it, and no one listens. not self-proclaimed feminists, not people who pat themselves on the back for being progressive and inclusive. it’s exhausting.

memes now last for mere hours before being co-opted by the capitalists. we must turn to our secret weapon, the anti-meme, that which should never become a meme


So Trump said, “Assad choked out the lives of innocent men, women and children. It was a slow and brutal death for so many. Even beautiful babies were cruelly murdered in this very barbaric attack. No child of god should ever suffer such horror,” in his statement justifying his missile strike on Syria… and yet these are the the same men, women, and children he has fought to stop from fleeing years of this horror and entering the US? These lives matter to him now that is it politically convenient? I am disgusted that this kind of suffering is being leveraged and co-opted by such a monster who has only perpetuated it.

i want to know why hollywood keeps re-making and westernizing successful asian films. can white people just not consume media as it already exists? is there something repulsive about subtitles or unfamiliar asians onscreen??? hollywood needs to get over itself and stop capitalizing off of asian projects especially if they are not even willing to incorporate us into their own framework. like co-opting the success of asian franchises, bastardizing the project through their half-assed understanding of “eastern” themes, and interjecting random white hollywood starlets and erasing asian roles is textbook xenophobia and racism, and just straight up disrespectful towards the people who put in time and effort to amass global attention in a field that most people don’t think we even belong in.

i understand we’re all starving for same-sex relationships/representation in media but y'all gotta stop throwing a fit every time a bisexual on tv reminds you that they’re not lesbian or gay and get with someone of a different gender

just because you can’t co-opt this kind of representation (i.e. everyone calling korra and asami lesbians after they got together despite the fact that they are literally both bisexual) doesn’t mean it stops being good representation

Ways men opt out of housework and childcare by “helping out”

  • take on weekly or monthly tasks, and think it’s equal to their wives daily tasks (even when wives also have weekly and monthly tasks)
  • take on tasks that require very little time or hard labor, like mowing the lawn.
  • take on a “project” that could be fixed by a professional, and work on it little by little but never really finish
  • create chores for their children, i.e. delegate rather than doing
  • do housework only in tandem, i.e. never on their own or without help.
  • volunteer on their own for some disliked task. For example, cleaning the toilets without asking. unfortunately, this tends to be seen as very loving and exceptional. Often it will be used as an excuse not to do anything else
  • enthusiastically volunteer to do things often, then conveniently “forget”, “make plans”, or have some sort of weird parameter to get started. When wife or child does it instead, claim they were going to do it, really!
  • pick a jurisdiction they already enjoy, like “take care of dog” or “the yard”
  • do something really badly, so that someone else has to do it for them anyway afterwards
  • “tidy up” a mess they made
  • pick up or organize clutter, however the often stressful, emotional, and time consuming task of de-cluttering is left undone or for someone else
  • meticulous keep clean a space that is only theirs, i.e. their study, their garage.
  • create tasks that aren’t needed, like “organize the toolbox” or “rearrange the bookshelf”
  • do tasks that require prep work that their wives will do for them (i.e. grilling the food, but not planning, purchasing, seasoning or preparing the sides)
  • take control of “finances” but do very little, perhaps the taxes. this is also used as a way to control their wives often
  • use their time with their children to play or dole out discipline/lessons, but very little time on feeding/bathing/dressing or organizing their lives. this is also away men can create a “fun parent/mean parent” dynamic
  • make lists of what needs to get done, discuss what needs to get done with their wives, act very invested in the housework, take on a “manager” role in the housework, but do very little of it
  • tell wives that what little is done in the house, by either of them, is “enough” and that he “doesn’t care” what the house looks like (this is a l i e). i.e. doing little and then making an emotional appeal that it’s fine, co-opting the emotional labor his wife does for him, but actually it’s very manipulative
  • getting involved with children’s after school activities, i.e. being a coach, organizing a concert, etc. often a thing he already enjoys. often does very little of the organizing/plan making. often makes little effort to create time for his wife’s personal interests

pay attention to your fathers, brothers, uncles, grandfathers, boyfriends, husbands actions. you’ll start to see these constantly
Beauty and the Beast Has Disney’s First Openly Gay Character as Director Calls Story ‘a Metaphor for AIDS’
Director Bill Condon revealed that Beauty and the Beast will feature Disney’s first-ever openly gay character: Gaston’s lovable sidekick, LeFou, played by Josh Gad

disney’s first openly gay character is a one-dimensional secondary antagonist of almost no narrative consequence. with the disney franchise’s immense influence among kids, it’s horrifying to think that they would portray their lone lgbt person in this negative way- in a film that is already extremely lacking in racial representation. to co-opt a metaphor for hiv/aids made by an hiv+ man on top of that is so fundamentally disrespectful. 

The Kendall Jenner x Pepsi Ad Made Me Want To Vomit

Before you do anything else watch this if you haven’t seen it already: 

Did you watch it? I hard a hard time making it through the entire spot myself without a few grimaces, “wtf were they thinking” faces and a “i can’t believe this shit” to a coworker. 

Let’s look at a few scenes to examine why this isn’t just the worst ad of all time but an ad that is insensitive, offensive and completely thoughtless. 

1.) Co-opting a movement 


Join the conversation


These are all very nice sentiments and shit we should strive for every single day but they aren’t the typical signs you see at real protests. The protests where people are putting their safety in danger because they’re afraid they might walk outside with a hoody on and get shot, or that their family won’t be able to return to America if they board a plane to see their family in their native country are the images of protest people actually experience. The protestors certainly not as happy as the perfectly casted multi-racial group of actors walking down this very well lit street with no menacing or threatening police officers present any step of the way. Hell, they even found time to place pretty people to eat next to the protests while it was happening. The police aren’t in riot gear, apparently seeing no threat from this massive group of protesters singing and dancing their way towards them. 

Now look, I work in advertising for big brands™.  I know major corporations are risk averse and don’t want to alienate potential consumers who don’t share in what should be non-controversial views like equality and freedom of expression. But they are. But that’s why no one has ever asked a corporation to make a fucking resistance commercial. If you aren’t going to be on the ground with organizers and protesters, or helping to pay legal funds for those wrongly incarcerated or even at the very fucking least, providing food and beverages to people who are taking hours at a time out to speak out on something they believe in, then don’t use a movement for your own commercial gain. 

2- Tropes, (Un)intentional Racism, More Tropes 

All black people are good for in commercials are for hip hoppity dancing, tattoos, giving dap and staring lustfully at white women. 

All the people of color in this ad are mostly used to check boxes provide accent color to what is an otherwise whitewashed scene. 

This is an especially embarrassing lack of effort in representation when one considers the context in which the subjects are being portrayed. 

3- Our White Savior 

Ohhhh boy what in the actual fuck?!!?!

Another white woman swoops in to save the day. I wish Pepsi had Melania Trump’s number so that I can get past a few of the issues currently concerning me. 

I would’ve had a problem with this closing scene if it was from just about anyone but we’ll get to the actual ending in a bit. The fact that it’s a fucking Kardashian Jenner – the physical embodiment of wealth, entitlement and privilege in America – shifts this ad from just terrible advertising toward the realm of parody, absurdity and offensiveness. 

Do you remember the protests in Baton Rouge after Alton Sterling was gunned down by police officers? 

This is the lasting image of those protests. Ieshia Evans is walking up to a group of white police officers dressed like they’re ready to confront ground troops in Northern Iraq, and able at a moment’s notice to gun her down. 

The ending of this thing is even more absurd. Once Jenner hands the very peaceful policeman the can of Pepsi, the crowd goes crazy, like they were all Tyrone Biggums and it was time for the free crack giveaway. 

If I knew all I had to do to avoid being shot by the police while black was carry a Pepsi around with me, I would’ve been doing it this entire time. 

I was just watching CNN as they discussed the Pepsi commercial backlash.

My favorite part? Immediately after they first played the clip, everyone just sat in awkward silence and kind of just laughed at the absurdity that Kendall’s can of Pepsi solved police brutality.

Least favorite part? Symone Sanders (top right) make a beautiful point that Pepsi co-opted Black Lives Matter while placing a white woman at the FOREFRONT when it is black women and men putting their bodies on the line. Afterwords, Paris Dennard (bottom left - a man that CNN likes to pull out of the sunken place from time to time to be the token self hating black man) had to speak over her to assert that “we can’t say black lives matter is only for black people.”

And no one called him out on how grossly he missed the original point. Everyone gets so upset at the suggestion that white people aren’t allowed to own *everything* that they’ll gladly lay the bodies of people of color down to get stepped on. And opinions like his are always heralded as the “logical” one that gets the last word.

I would recommend any watch the clip just to hear Symone Sanders take the video & Kendell to task:

What Is Liberalism?

Oftentimes in leftist circles you can hear folks decrying liberals and liberalism. If you ask them why they hate liberalism, most of them will point you in the direction of Mao’s Combat Liberalism to better understand them, but this is a mistake. Combat Liberalism is effectively an internal memo, warning other communists of the need to avoid liberalism lest it be detrimental to their work. It details results of that ideology, but not causes. To that end, I’ve compiled a brief description of what liberalism is and why it’s bad.

The ideology of liberalism is denoted by three tenets:

  1. Free-market capitalism. Liberals believe that capitalism is good, or at least “the best we have”. While liberals may argue over how much intervention in the market is necessary, they all agree on the fundamental goodness of capitalism, and that it should be tweaked rather than replaced.
  2. The state and representative “democracy”. Liberals believe that the state is good, and that representative democracy is an effective means of creating social change and an acceptable level of participation. They reject any aims outside of the state, and try to co-opt movements towards state action (e.g. electing Democrats).
    1. Nonviolence: The liberal insistence on “nonviolent” protest (usually invoking a whitewashed history of Dr. King) is largely derived from state-worship. They see the state as the only legitimate user of force, and all others as violent looters and rioters; because of that, they refuse to even consider violence as a method of protest or direct action (e.g. antifascism).
    2. Indirect action and representative problem-solving: Linked to the lionization of representative democracy, liberals care little for direct action, even as indirect as blocking a street for a few hours. They believe that the power to change things is vested solely in those representatives, and that the common person shouldn’t bother; direct action, to them, is illegitimate for the same reason as violence.
  3. A focus on individual rather than class politics. Liberals see all social issues as issues primarily affecting individuals, rather than groups. In other words, they lack a class analysis; they see racism, for example, as the result of individual prejudices and “meanness” and something to be fixed at that level, rather than a system of structural violence against non-white peoples aimed at dividing the working class.

 Liberalism, as an ideology, is dangerous. These three tenets combine to form an analysis that is insufficient to encompass the whole of the enemy, and more importantly a praxis that is ineffective at combating it. It infects activists and ordinary workers alike, and railroads them into believing that they cannot change a society that benefits only those at the top. It railroads them into believing that the burdens they bear cannot be thrown off, and stands in the way of our collective liberation. It must be combated, for it is at the root of the struggle.

So…um…are we gonna talk about how varying businesses like Dove, Lyft, Kenco, Pepsi, Starbucks, and others are co-opting activism solely as a means to get more profits?

Like…they’re using ethical consumption slacktivism as an oppurtunity for a greater consumer base to fill their pockets, not to create any meaningful or passionate change in the country, guys.


White Supremacist Propaganda 

While a lot of Klan and neo-nazi propaganda contains racial slurs, threats of violence, and other very recognizable hatred (intended to terrorize people of color, Jewish people, and LGBT people- in the case of my home town) there are also forms of white supremacist propaganda designed to recruit white people. 

These are ‘softer’ forms of propaganda, designed to appeal to people who don’t consider themselves racist but have an underlying resentment of people of color and for any progressive circle to center their experiences at all. They resent white privilege and systemic racial oppression being spoken about at length. They resent people of color rejecting white entitlement to their spaces and cultures. 

The intent is to convince racist white people (who don’t think of themselves as racist, but who clearly are, and clearly feel angry when their entitlement isn’t immediately gratified) that the hate group in question is just ‘misunderstood’ and is really about pride and celebrating your own culture, etc. 

The intent is that once someone falls for that bait and hook, they can play up on their underlying resentment and entitlement. If you already believe that you should be able to celebrate being white, and they can bring you from that belief to the belief that people of color are preventing you from your right to have pride in that, then they can foster anger against people of color. From there, any time there is a collective societal reaction of disgust towards the hate group or towards the notion of white pride, the recruited whites can be relied upon to feel victimized by society collectively. 

It’s only a short step from that to being sold conspiracy theories about ‘white genocide’ or ‘Jewish globalists’ to explain why society is against them. And a short step from there to terrorization of those suspected of being a part of that conspiracy, and the impulse to ‘warn’ other whites in the form of more hateful propaganda. 

This shit is extremely dangerous and fucked up and I want everyone to understand how this functions. Because tumblr’s meme of ‘positivity posts’ can be so easily co-opted by white supremacists to function as this form of propaganda. All they need to do is shift the vocabulary very slightly. 

How to recognize it: 

  • Resentment at not being able to openly express white pride

    “why is it okay for other races to be proud?” 
    “loving your heritage doesn’t mean being a racist” 

  • Framing white identity as a ‘culture’ with ‘heritage’ instead of as a societal category created to oppress people of color 

    “why are we not allowed to celebrate our culture?” 
    “you can love […] and actively participate in the culture of the country your ancestors came from”

  • The suggestion that these beliefs aren’t inherently hateful, they aren’t a hate group, that they’re misunderstood, and that they support other races being proud too. They frame this as people of color having a ‘right’ that white people do not. 

    “why are other races allowed these rights, as they should, but not the folk of european ancestry?” 

    [from white-sapphics about page] “Tumblr is very, very focused on minority rights, and there is nothing wrong with that, but more and more white lesbians are being alienated from other blogs.”

Call this shit out. It is dangerous and terrifying. 

Comedian George Lopez recently told a crowd “There’s two rules in the f**cking Latino family. Don’t marry somebody Black, and don’t park in front of our house.” Anti-Blackness is a global phenomenon. There’s probably an epithet to dehumanize Black people in every language. Because of the legacy of White supremacy, Anti-Blackness even affects how Black people view themselves and each other. NBPOC are not exempt from being Anti-Black.

NBPOC are pointing fingers at White people after seeing “Get Out” - but don’t get it twisted. In the eyes of many Black people we see no difference in the way you treat us from White people. Growing up in the inner-city I witnessed both White and NBPOC exploit us. NBPOC followed me around stores, and called the police on me because I looked “suspicious” too.

NBPOC appropriate Black culture, co-opt our struggle when it’s convenient, and speak in cringe-worthy imitations of Black Vernacular English (BVE), but keep Black people at a distance. I have had the chance to cross-paths with some hardcore-engaged NBPOC; I appreciate their support, but I have to hold them just as accountable as I hold White allies. Anti-Blackness can permeate the psyches of even the most well-intentioned people. As much as one might think they “get it” one still needs to check in periodically to make sure they still “got it.” Your work isn’t done just because you’ve watched “Lemonade” and read “Between the World and Me.” NBPOC don’t get a pass by virtue of not being White.

anonymous asked:

Are groin attacks on men actually the automatic off-switch we see in movies?


They aren’t universal, and you can, in fact, groin strike a woman to similar effect. What a groin strike is actually targeting is the nerve endings in that region of the body, the very same nerve endings that cause humans to experience sexual pleasure. It hurts a whole hell of a lot, it makes you sick to your stomach, and you bowl over to protect yourself. Nailing a woman with a groin strike is more difficult than a man because the area is smaller and it’s more difficult to hit. It can happen though, it’s happened to me in training with a partner.

Anyone with a strong pain tolerance is going to be resistant to groin strikes, just like with anything else. Some people are more sensitive than others. Other people will recover quicker than others. The rarest find won’t feel it at all, and they’re out there.

And, of course, if you’re opponent is wearing a cup then the groin strike goes right out. That’s why you wear cups when you’re sparring, so it doesn’t hurt when you get hit in the groin. So, if they’re armored, you’re out of luck.

It’s a pretty good stunner if you can land it and they’re not prepared for it, but it’s not a finishing move. When you see groin strikes in martial arts or just as self-defense, they’re part of what we call “combinations” which is a series of strikes performed one after the other. You use the groin strike to stun your attacker, and then follow up while they’re distracted by pain.

So, say you want to use a knee strike to the groin. You’ll grab them and strike the groin, then you grab their head and slam it into your knee again. You may hit them several more times after that if they don’t go down, but the groin strike is the opener or secondary to more effective moves that would be difficult to pull off if they weren’t distracted by pain or were… you know, upright.

The general populace often has a hard time grasping the concept of techniques feeding into each other. “I do this, so I can get over there, to do that”.

Groin strikes are conventional wisdom. Enough people have hit boys in the groin and see them bowl over to know that it’s somewhat effective, and enough boys have been hit in the groin to know it hurts.

You know what else hurts?

Your shin.

Getting hit in the shin hurts a whole hell of a lot too. It’s actually easier hit as it’s a much larger target and you don’t need to be nearly as close.

Anywhere on your body where the bone is near to the surface/isn’t protected by muscle, is direct access to your nervous system and works about as well as a groin shot. So, kick ‘em in the shin. Boxing the ears is another good one, you rattle the inner ear and cause them to lose their sense of equilibrium which makes them dizzy and they… stumble. Hit them in the nose. Their eyes will water, their nose will swell, both of which impact their ability to see.

You can, in fact, chain these together too.

Kick them in the shin. Box their ears. As their head comes forward, hit them in the nose or punch them in the throat. Then, if they’re still coming toward you or you’ve grabbed them by the shoulder or the head, knee them in the groin.

There aren’t a lot of one hit wonders when it comes to fighting, and if you did get one then you’re damn lucky. There is no 100%, no sure shot, no total shut down, no universal technique that will give you perfect accuracy on every human you will ever meet.

The problem with groin strikes in movies is that they’re actually a joke about manhood and dominance. Sometimes, it’s used intentionally and, sometimes, it’s not, but it doesn’t go much further than, “ha, ha, she hit him in the peen” and he goes down because the big, tough guy was really weak after all. It’s become that “Tough Girl Move” and is supposed to convey she’s tough, and brave, and everything that comes with a poorly thought out action girl.

In the movies, the groin shot is about dominance and asserting superiority. Whether it’s a woman doing it to a man, or a man doing it to another man (but it’s usually a woman), that’s what it’s normally about. It’s just a co-opting of the Alpha Male Bullshit Package for an Empowering Moment. It’s telling that these moments revolve entirely around the physical embodiment of manhood, because it’s often treated as the only weakness a man possesses. Given the groin shot is often paired with the threat of sexual assault, you can see all threads weaving themselves together for the underlying themes. The man is brought down by his *ahem* desires, the woman flees, and the scene is still all about sex.

So, you know, fun.


This blog is supported through Patreon. If you enjoy our content, please consider becoming a Patron. Every contribution helps keep us online, and writing. If you already are a Patron, thank you.

Happy St. Patrick's day!

No, today is Not about beer, leprechauns, or “the luck of the Irish.”

It’s about a man who was kidnapped into slavery as a child. His faith kept him going through often horrible circumstances until he escaped years later. He then dreamed of the people in Ireland that he’d met begging him to return

He finished his education as a bishop and returned to preach the gospel in Ireland. Also, a few kings and warlord types I may or may not be related to (early Irish history ancestry is really difficult to pin down) threatened to kill him multiple times but Patrick kept going.

. Happy St. Paddy’s Day!

Okay, so I must have still been at work when this commercial dropped because as soon as I got home and on social media it seemed like everyone on my TL all saw this commercial in the same living room.

In just a few short hours have been many articles written critiques put out there about the hypocritical tone deafness of this ridiculous commercial. They’ve covered such things as:

The blatant co-optation of national Black Lives Matter widespread protests, yet this commercial is overwhelmingly white, unless POC are used as props. Take, for instance the black male stock characters carefully placed to dap Kendell up and *look urban*.

This idea that all the protesters rallying for Black Lives who have been tear gassed, steamrolled, and unlawfully arrested only needed to put a smile on their face and hand police pepsi cans in order to earn respect.

Obviously everyone’s question: Who the fuck wants anyone associated with the “Keeping Negroes in the Sunken Place” Kardashians leading ANY type of revolution?

But I really want to focus on what I saw in the last image. The protest signs labeled “join the conversation.” As I stated earlier this is clearly co-opting Black Lives Matter. It completely bastardizes the purpose of protest from “we are literally fighting for our lives to” “lets kindly ask you to have a nice dialogue.”

I really hate this idea that all people who fight for their humanity need to do is kindly sit down and have a nice conversation with racists, bigots and abusers. Obviously this is a commercial and commercials only want to make money and could give a shit what message they co-opt to do it. But this time, in this national climate, where the point of protest needs to be crystal fucking clear, this sanitation of resistance paints with a broad brush.

Tons of things are coming to a head in our political climate, and this certainly does not help. I wonder what the organizers of recent Womens Marches & Strikes are thinking about this…

Song Analysis: What’s the Use of Feeling (Blue)?

I’ve been mulling this song over since I’d first heard it. For one, it confirms a lot of things about Homeworld and the Diamonds that I’ve been harping on for a while now. But this post isn’t a sermon about how to sympathise with the Diamonds better. I’m not too big a fan of that perspective. Rather, it’s the power that we receive when we empathise with them.

The thing about the Diamonds is that they’re all powerful, huge, and “human.” They err and have feelings, not necessarily in that order. So when they irrationally do something that hurts a lot of individuals and even entire planets, the answer isn’t to excuse them because “they’re sad.” The answer is to reach out to them in a way they understand so that they don’t do it again, and more appropriate to our context, make amends

Because the two very polar sides of “forgive” and “punish” aren’t constructive. To side with either doesn’t do justice to the people and gems who’ve already been lost or still are losing. It doesn’t make things better for anyone. 

This post will analyse the perspective Homeworld has of Earth and human beings. At the same time, the song reveals a lot about how gems view themselves and one another. I’ll round it up with how PD’s death impacted both Blue and Yellow Diamond and how their respective coping strategies led to the way things are now. And I’ll speculate on the immediate future of Earth in that regard.

So let’s get to it!

1. The song implies a falling-out among the Diamonds before PD’s shattering

Why would you want to be here? What do you ever see here
That doesn’t make you feel worse than you do? And tell me, what’s the use of feeling, Blue?

When the Steven Bomb opens in Steven’s Dream, we get a rare moment of hearing Blue’s thoughts. Bent over PD’s palanquin, she expresses deep regret. She says, “If only I had done more.” 

We know that Blue is sad over PD’s death. And we know from the first verse that visiting anything related to PD makes both surviving Diamonds uncomfortable. But we can find, within the lyrics, something specific about why instead of just sad, regret is interspersed in their mourning of PD.

In sharp contrast to Blue’s lament of wanting to do more, later on in the song, YD says, “Now there’s nothing we can do.” That implies at one point in time, the Diamonds were in a position to do something that could have prevented PD’s shattering. And they didn’t do it.

I want to bring back one of my older posts regarding the circumstances of PD’s shattering. In it, I mention that there’s been some sort of historical scrubbing of PD’s memory from Homeworld, such that only older gems are aware of her or feel any affinity for her. The Great Diamond Authority Logo, colour schemes, and even gem factions show no sign of PD’s ever existing, when this wasn’t the case for older structures on Earth. 

But in a slightly contradictory manner, we know the truth to be the opposite. The Diamonds didn’t take PD out of Homeworld’s memory because of the fight. Rather, they erased her because it hurt them personally to be reminded of her existence. 

When we look at the circumstances of their argument, there are a few theories I can posit. The main one being this: PD had an unconventional relationship with her Earth gems. I say this because now we have two Homeworld “subordinates” as examples in contrast.

I brought up before that Jasper felt a deep personal affinity for PD. And this may be even without having met her personally, even with the possibility of her being created after PD was shattered. On the other hand, Peridot and Holly Blue talk about their Diamonds with a sense of detachment. There is a great divide that Peridot puts between herself and YD. YD is perfect; she is not. YD is the most objective; that is what she aims to be. YD is a great decider; she was there to reaffirm the logic of the former’s decisions.

It’s much the same for Holly Blue. BD decides to maintain the zoo; she is grateful for the opportunity to serve. BD is arriving; she wants to assure a pleasant visit for her.

In both these cases the gems don’t feel like they’re coerced into serving their Diamonds. They openly acknowledge that because their Diamonds are superior in different (and at times all) aspects, they’re worth following. It’s very similar to idolising someone and hoping they’d mentor you, or even that you could contribute to their cause in some way. This cause being the betterment of Homeworld. 

2. PD’s close relationship with her gems

Keep reading