has nothing to do with logic gaps, fluffy filler episodes, absolutely absurd stories about supposedly brilliant people doing incredibly short-sighted and needlessly desperate things.
Because, fuck it. I’ve been in much worse fandoms for much less intelligent shows. What keeps me interested are characters. I’ll admit happily to being biased towards certain characters. Well, more to the point I pick one or two and devote my loyalty entirely to them.
It’s with that bias in mind that I will explain my problem with season three, and why it’s illustrated perfectly in Sign of Three.
(1) I couldn't thank you beautiful Scorpio's enough for simply existing. Your often misunderstood, complex personalities are just difficult for those, who do not take enough time to understand you. Deep down you are the most caring, most protective human beings. If I had not met my Scorpio man a few years ago, I wouldn't probably be alive anymore. He helped me, he built me up and showed me love in a way, I have never experienced it before. For the first time in my life I trusted someone.
(2) I love you guys so, so much. And I hope for you to always be happy. I migt be biased, but I am happily biased. If anyone is able to understand Capricorn’s, it’s definitely, most likely a Scorpio. I just wanted to thank you. Much love, kiss kiss.
😘 always nice to hear nice things about ourselves thanks! good luck in your relationship
I don't know what's scarier, the side/background character design in AOSTH or Sonic Underground
Well beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but let’s cross examine both shows anyway because I’m bored.
Both AoStH and Sonic Underground’s Mobius’s were depicted as being very alien worlds, with very diverse populations.
The tendency in AoStH however was to have ‘funny animals’ as side characters, like Roxy Raccoon or Captain Rescue, who despite being the same species look very different with Roxy being more in line with a Sonic character design (and remember this was back when only Sonic and Tails were the only animal Sonic characters) and Rescue being more of a traditional funny animal.
When it came to background characters it varied from episode to episode, usually the communities Sonic came across would have a majority species, such as the beaver community in ‘Baby Sitter Jitters’, or the sausage community in ‘Too Tall Tails’. However a lot of the time there would be a mixture of funny animals and surreal/alien designs in crowd scenes.
Generally speaking though the more surreal designs don’t bother me so much in AoStH, they fit in with the cartoony aesthetic the show goes for, really in most cases the colouration is a bigger problem for a lot of them.
It is also worth noting that human/humanoid beings appear in AoStH unlike Underground as side/background characters, and appear to co-exist with the other Mobians.
Also, unlike Underground actual extra-terrestrials appear, such as the amoebae-like Prince Charnock and the human (well, Amazon) Katella.
Sonic Underground’s Mobius on the other hand tended to have very alien-like funny animals/alien creatures for their side/background characters.
Interestingly the aristocrats all seemed to be mostly animal creatures, while a lot of the underclass were the weird mutant-like creatures.
As for side characters Underground did have some alright designs like Cyrus and his dad. Though you also had things like, that baby..
Ultimately however I’d say that in a lot of cases ‘it varies’, a lot of the designs in both shows are ‘ugly’ for various reasons. However I’d say AoStH’s simplicity allows most of it’s designs to fall either under the ‘cutesy’ or the ‘surreal 30s cartoon’ aesthetics. While most of Undergrounds designs just look, well, ugly, maybe it’s all the liver spots they tended to give them. I don’t know I like simplicity, while Undergrounds designs occupy an awkward middle ground between simple and interestingly complex for me, eye of the beholder again. Also, Sonic Underground had Satan’s baby in it
I’m am biased, I’ll happily admit, but I far prefer the side/background characters in AoStH, frankly they are a lot more memorable and /or funny. Not to mention that at the end of the day a lot of them look rather nice when rendered by a good artist and/or just require a few tweaks (oh, and Katella). While even Jon Gray can’t even get Dingo to look good.
- NotAnotherSonicDA (and no that’s not my Deviantart, I wish I could draw like that, I’ve just wanted to randomly plug someone for a while)
i'm legitimately looking to be educated, so i hope this doesn't come across as rude, but why do you hate the hate doesn't end hate stance? i understand oppressed people speaking out, and speaking loudly, but i have seen targeted hate towards individuals on this site for being cis or straight, which just?? baffles me? like why target people for being who they are? i do know that people in the minority are oppressed systematically and outside of tumblr but mindless hate doesn't seem good either
it’s because the two types of hatred you’re describing here are not equivalent.
to clarify: this is speaking on american socio-politics. in some places, whites are the minority, and the hatred aimed toward them is initial and not reactionary. but we’re not talking about those places right now, we’re talking about the “developed” northwest, and the other places shouldn’t be brought up in these discussions.
more on that later.
i’ll start by telling you what you already know:
the first type of hatred, the initial hatred, is comprised of socially- and systemically-enforced “phobias” such as racism, misogyny, transphobia, and binarism. these concepts are irrational and harmful. they are not caused by anything legitimate; they are arbitrary.
as a result of the initial, arbitrary hatred, you get the second type: reactionary. the concepts comprising reactionary hatred — “cisphobia,” “misandry,” “heterophobia,” and “reverse racism” — are, first off, not real things on a social level because they are not being launched toward a minority group. by definition, the party in power cannot be the subject of bullying or oppression.
more to the point, these concepts are not arbitrary.
they are learned.
they are learned by the people who are subjected to the initial hatred, the people who fear for their job security, social comfort, home situation, and even their lives, because of the initial hatred that surrounds us all and permeates our society, even in the form of law. and with that steady buildup hitting you from all directions everywhere at once, even from (arguably especially from) the police, you are going to get pretty fucking angry pretty fucking fast.
you’re going to know exactly which types of people target you, exactly which types of people are unsafe, and all of that anger is going to get funneled toward those people in an unrelenting tornado of rage and frustration that has had its compassion squeezed dry and discriminates against no target.
now we get to the part where you’ve brought up the reaction we all get for it:
“it’s not okay to hate anyone for any reason!”
and i tell you no.
without directing my anger toward you, but rather displaying it for you to see because you’re curious, i tell you no and i call bullshit. it sure as peas is okay, because they have earned it.
reaction: “whoa, whoa, how did some young white boy on tumblr earn it??”
he hasn’t directly earned it. but all the people like him have earned it for him, and unfortunate as it is, it carries over.
it’s totally okay for me to hate churchgoers, because in my 24 years of life spent attending and visiting various churches, i can count on one hand the number of churchgoers i’ve ever met who’ve had absolutely no bias against me for my gender and sexuality. this does not include all people who follow the teachings of a god, because my experience with theist people who don’t bother with church rules has been vastly different; this is specifically toward people who buy into organized religion. mostly christian, but not entirely. and it’s family, friends, people close to me, thousands of people who don’t even fucking know me, all people who start easing away from me and giving me disgusted looks and refusing to associate with me the instant they begin to suspect.
am i supposed to take this statistic and throw it aside, turn the other cheek (oh they’d love that phrasing, i just cracked myself up), and happily step with no biases into a crowd of people who have proven 99% likely to hate me for absolutely no god damn reason?
nope. i know better. burned a thousand times, i am not going to put my hand over a different flame just because “this one hasn’t hurt me yet.”
bullshit. i hate them. i hate all of them.
because they’ve taught me to hate them.
assuredly, they’re not all “like that.” there are people who reserve judgment and bias for the creator(s). but until a radical, universal, sudden change takes place, i am going to assume that if it walks like danger and talks like danger, it’s danger, because this is the hatred i have learned and it keeps me safe. the moment you tell me you go to church and follow the teachings of your church, my trust in you and fondness for you instantly start to decline.
here’s the punch line:
this hatred i immediately and irrepressibly start to form is not because “ew church, ew god, ew lies and fairy tales” and all the stereotypical atheist initial hatred you’d expect.
it is because you have just associated yourself with a group of people i know concretely i cannot fucking trust.
i’m wary of cis people because they don’t fucking get it. i’m wary of white people because they don’t fucking get it — hey, i’m a white person, and i know i sure as hell don’t fucking get it. i’m wary of republicans, i’m wary of men, i’m wary of old people, because statistically, these people don’t fucking get it.
and that makes them dangerous to me.
and here’s the staple:
every time you take reactionary, learned hatred and equate it to initial, arbitrary hatred, you are minimizing and negating the worth of the reactionary hatred.
you are shifting blame.
you are denying your responsibility, and the responsibility of others like you, in causing this reaction in the first place.
you are victim-blaming.
you are silencing people who are already silenced.
that’s why we don’t talk about places where white minority initial hatred takes place — because we don’t live there. and if you take the very real problems that exist here and try to equate it to an issue that does not exist here, you are lying, because you are telling people you have it just as bad when you do not.
and for those (mainly white cis able-bodied) people who would attempt to quote king’s “hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that” — for which i should remind you he was assassinated by a government that did not want to be politely persuaded — i’m gonna respond in closing with one of my favorite posts:
of course you don’t fight fire with fire, but you do fight it by suffocating it, drowning it, or stomping it out. you dont stop fire by just standing there and asking it nicely “please dont burn my neighborhood down.” [x]