infers

anonymous asked:

Day 11: Name 10 characters you think don't deserve the ending they received and 1 who does.

Hi Advent Calendar Anon,

Hope you’re doing well.

10 Characters Who Deserved Better

*contemplates listing most of Katie McGrath’s characters…mhm. I’mma do it.*

Originally posted by random-shit-reblog

1. Morgana Pendragon (x10 <.<): I think ‘morgana deserved better’ is one of my consistent blog tags, haha. She definitely didn’t deserve her ending, especially because much of the blame was placed on her ‘suddenly turning evil’, rather than realizing their actions largely caused her reactions. Morgana wasn’t evil–she was misunderstood and in a lot of pain.

2. Harriet Chambers: Okay, so she wasn’t totally innocent (is anyone?), but she still didn’t deserve what happened to her. I think the jeers towards Ken could have been said better/less offensively; however, she seems the aggressive type. From the lines, one can infer he has a tendency to creep about (especially around the ladies’ changing room), so I think her treatment of him was to get him to back off. Her ending was wayyy too brutal and made a mockery of her. 

3.Zara Young: Her death was the definition of overkill. She was just doing her job and got repaid by serving as a chew toy between two dinosaurs…well, before the water one won out. Furthermore, usually the dramatic deaths in the Jurassic World series is reserved for antagonists (i.e. JP 1) so kind of like dinosaur fueled karma, if you will? Zara didn’t deserve that. 

4. Elizabeth Carruthers: >.> This one’s probably a bit fresh in the KMG fandom, so I won’t say much. It seemed unnecessary though.

Originally posted by protectlenaluthor

5. Lucy Westenra: .-. Her story was really just sad all the way around. Sweet precious baby gay, who was in love with her bff (said bff later hurt her), was under a lot of societal pressure, got manipulated by another woman (Lady Jayne), forced to become a vampire as ‘punishment’, er, ate her mom, etc. Also, the show was cancelled, so what ever happened to Lucy? Idk. She deserved much more.

Also, the show robbed us of Katie McGrath as a lesbian vampire  which is a certifiable crime against humanity.  <.<.

6. Lena Luthor: Yes, her story isn’t over yet, but I still feel she deserves better. I’ve felt this on & off–depending on the season or plot at the moment. She’s a dynamic character, so I wish she was treated as such consistently. 

7. Sarah Bennett: Okay, so technically she survived the horror genre which is an accomplishment in it of itself. Still didn’t like that she stayed with the guy–that annoyed me after what he did. Also, a lot of those who were close to her died (bestie, bestie’s wife, ohmygosh-he’s-my-dad guy, her parents (old news at this point) neighbor, friend’s, etc.). Yeah,pretty much everyone except for said guy. Also, the ending made it seem like there was still evil present in the town…Not sure if it would follow her or if it’s staying in the town? Poor kitty. 

Originally posted by swallowedabug

8. The Great Gatsby: Gatsby’s end wasn’t really fair, especially when he somewhat died for Daisy….then she acted as if nothing happened. Also, Tom and Daisy got away with everything, which really angered me in the book.

9. Bambi’s Mom: Yes, I’m watching the R&R vlogmas, so it’s fresh.

1 Character Who Deserved It

The Older Cop in Slasher: He had a name, but it’s unimportant. He took advantage of a girl, kept her for years (leading the town to think she’s dead), cheated on his wife (she knew about it though), messed with evidence, tried to harm/kill Sarah (also he was an ass to her in general), etc. all to play a twisted game of forced house with her. I could go into more depth about what happened etc. I think most will know who I’m referring to though. 

The Executioner's actions were ok in this instance.

Originally posted by katiemcgraths

6

This idea surely did not occur to him on the fly. He strikes me as a person who’d always have a contingency plan prepared behind the scenes, just in case, knowing there may come a time to cut his losses and get out of dodge. Even if it’d be just a last-resort option. For how long did he contemplate this course of action then?

I think it’s safe to assume that at least since this pivotal conversation. In retrospect, this probably wasn’t just a case of Okuyama apprehensively voicing his doubts out loud. By this point he must have already had a pretty good idea where all of this was leading. It was more a way of gauging Satou’s reaction by bringing up a touchy subject, basically seeking a confirmation of what he already suspects. There’s no end in sight and Satou will only continue to up the ante, he can infer that much between the lines.

Back when Okuyama joined Satou’s squad in this crusade, I don’t believe he did it with an assumption they’re actually going to succeed down the line. He’s someone grounded in reality enough to realize what a near impossible task they’re taking on. Sure, it’d be a nice bonus if despite the odds they managed to secure Ajin rights but was it imperative for him? Absolutely not. He wasn’t motivated by some higher purpose, he merely saw an opportunity, means to challenge and evaluate himself in these unconventional ways. A chance to escape the mundane life for a while and do something fulfilling.

Incidentally, it was probably a deliberate move on the show’s part to never make us privy to Okuyama’s thoughts and feelings about the matter of their end goal, during these moments in particular. Meanwhile, every other member of the team appears to be an open book, leaving no ambiguity as to how they feel about the cause. It’s at odds with how anime always makes a point to show us Okuyama’s reactions to their activities; how excited he is, in his own understated way, about his own achievements and contributions. There’s no doubt he finds the challenges themselves thrilling.

In a way, he’s similar to Satou, but this is where their differences become crucial. It was a fun game to participate in but that’s all it is ultimately. Like every game, it has to come to an end eventually, whether they clean the last stage and reach a satisfactory conclusion or not. After it’s over, it’s back to ordinary life, to him it’s just common sense. At the end of a day, left with no other choice, Okuyama’s going to act out of self-preservation, a trait which Satou seems to lack.

Which brings us back to…

How reasonable was it really to seek out Kei Nagai of all people? If even Tanaka managed to figure it out, surely Okuyama who had an accurate understanding of Satou’s personality, must have been aware of him not being the kind who’d go out of his way to seek retribution. Was the actual goal to make a favorable deal with the government?

If he anticipated being captured sooner or later (when you think about it, all additional members they incorporated into their squad, while useful, also posed a threat in the long run; loose ends that could potentially end up leading authorities to them) it made sense to make the first move and approach someone who could make it possible.

He had about as much fun as Satou with this whole operation, but he’s so low-key about it he just gets past everyone’s radar.

anonymous asked:

If it’s okay to ask what pronouns do you use? I just don’t want to infer without asking.

I’m genderfluid so any pronouns are fine

anonymous asked:

What’s the difference between MLM and MZT?

Mao Zedong Thought (MZT) was the body of specific theory, policies, programs, ideas, etc. that constituted the application of Marxism-Leninism to the Chinese Revolution. What we can infer from here is that Marxism-Leninism is a general body of theory and practice that can be applied and adapted as necessary to particular situations without revising the basis of or the body of the theory. Meaning, these specific applications do not undermine ML’s basic revolutionary character (revisionism), nor do they amount to a significant enough change that the term “Marxism-Leninism” becomes outdated. That being said, many anti-revisionist Marxist-Leninists in the 60s and 70s referred to themselves as “Mao Zedong Thought” because they largely followed the Chinese in the Sino-Soviet split. Many of these communists would later be involved in the development of “MLM” instead of “MZT”

Through the historical experiences of the Chinese Revolution up to 1976, MZT actually brought significant changes to orthodox ML, most notably the theory of Protracted People’s War and the idea of continuing revolution under socialism. Through these (and other) contributions, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism (MLM) was recognized by revolutionary anti-revisionist communists around the world as a new basis of general knowledge, as ML had been previously. This is why we call it a new stage of Marxism. Today, those who call themselves MZT are generally just apologists for Chinese and Soviet revisionism (ironic as that is).

brawl9977  asked:

What are your thoughts on the upcoming macro/micro movies coming out? “downsizing and rampage”

Well, Downsizing looks interesting, but it seems more as a sort of arthouse/sundance sort of movie, as can tell by its trailer music that gives that tone of inspiration/wonder, so the size thing is most likely a metaphorical element with a few jokes with oversized props, so I’m sure it’ll good, but not too interested myself

And Rampage is directed by the guy who did San Andreas and has the Rock in it as the main focus for the movie, so with some inference I can say that I don’t find this movie promising and comes across more as a cashgrab (Also, no scum soda? it’s all space rocks???)

So yeah, not too interested in them

friend: you need a hobby

me: i already have a hobby

friend: photoshopping aph england’s eyebrows onto other hetalia characters isn’t a hobby

me:

i always liked that trope in persona fanfics where like. mc retains memories when going into new game+ and changes actions based on what they experienced in the “first playthrough”

so like… new game + au where mc gives the lonely weird uptight dude an actual support system

As Lunar Children

As children, we are thought to act mostly from our emotional reactions and impulses, which in astrology, is represented by the Moon. Therefore the sign our Moon is in can reveal much about our personality expression as babies and children, up to a more mature age, where then, through growth and experience, our Sun also comes into play, adding a much more layered effect.

A child with their Moon in Aries would be confident and demanding, someone that shows innate leadership skills very early on. They would react to their emotions straight away, whether they are deemed “appropriate” or not, and would also show protective instincts, especially when it comes to smaller or younger children. Would be looked at as a “strong” child, but equally with emotional vulnerability.

A child with their Moon in Taurus would like to stay close to home and people they are familiar with, and may show anxiety or discomfort when forced into new situations. They would likely seem older than their age, described as mature, and would be creative and expressive, though reservedly when around those they do not fully trust. There would be a nurturing instinct in them too, whether to other children, or nature in general.

A child with their Moon in Gemini would be excitable and light spirited, even to the point of becoming easily distractible. They would enjoy mischief and outsmarting those around them, even those of much older age. Words and language likely intrigued them from the start, as well as story telling and theatrics. They might have been easily swept by more consistent or demanding personalities, but always reserved a wit that was unmistakable.

A child with their Moon in Cancer would be very receptive to the environment around them, maybe seeming easily provoked into an emotional response, or quick to pick up on the emotions of others, becoming upset if someone else was. There would be a creativity that came from them early on, the ability to nurture an idea or their imagination. There could be a shyness to them at first, but a surprising amount of will that would soon follow. 

A child with their Moon in Leo would be fiery and spirited, someone that flourished when they were the canter of attention and affection, maybe even to the point of being reliant on it and showing off. Even so, there would be an innate sense of right and wrong, of justice and what is fair, even if they don’t always follow this, putting their ego first. Shame would soon follow though, and they would once again return to their internal rules.

A child with their Moon in Virgo could appear fussy and easily disgruntled, someone that notices much of the details of what goes on around them. There would be a matter of fact quality to them, but with an underlying care and helpfulness. They may search for approval from their elders, trying to be high achievers or appear disciplined, without needing assistance. Yet, there would also be a wit and humour too, grounded in its expression.

A child with their Moon in Libra would value friendship, maybe even needing a “best friend” over others at times for their own sense of ease. There would be a natural interest in people, maybe in other children with different backgrounds or experiences to them, and they may find conflict or augments particularly upsetting. They could be attracted to physically pretty things, things that have a certain flair to them.

A child with their Moon in Scorpio may find that they can draw something powerful out in others from an early age, can get a reaction that even they may not understand at their young age, which can make them feel somewhat odd. There would be strong emotions stirring in them, but also this ability to see beauty in the things that others may discard, or the things that haunt others. They would feel the safest with strong attachments.

A child with their Moon in Sagittarius would be the ones to tread dirt into the house, never pay attention to time limits, to speak when they have been told to be quiet, and to answer back should they view something as wrong. They would be the spirits that need an element of freedom, even as children, not prioritising what others tell them they should prioritise. They would enjoy making others laugh too, in getting that reaction.

A child with their Moon in Capricorn would have a sense of what they want for their future, even if this ultimately changed, of looking forward to comparing the now and then and seeing what they have done in that time. There would also be something “old soul” about them, maybe finding enjoyment from tasks that would be considered too old for their age, or boring by their peers. They may also feel patronised by adults in general, in the inference that they would need their help in most things.

A child with their Moon in Aquarius would be someone that asks questions from a young age, someone that finds that they cannot simply follow an instruction just because it was given to them, especially if they feel they have a better grasp on something than even adults do. They may appear odd, but also unfazed by the judgement of other children and adults. There would be a sense of “to each their own” from an early age.

A child with their Moon in Pisces would be someone that both enjoyed the quiet times of imagination and creativity, but also the ability to slot themselves into wherever they were needed, able to morph into the people that surrounded them. They may ask questions of the universe from an early age, and appear to acknowledge that there may be something “more” even in childlike terms. This would be a child where the parents would hopefully see something other worldly and valuable in them.

More Details About the Kindergarten

Thanks to Peridot, we now know that the order of Gem’s classification names (8XJ, 8XL, etc) are given from top to bottom alphabetically, and apparently in some kind of zagging/non-linear pattern? I’ve seen some people attempt to map out where each of those Gems came from in the photo above in the past and found it fascinating! I tried to do the same with what we learned now, but the holes Amethyst bounced around to in “Back to the Kindergarten” were too zoomed in to tell where they might’ve lined up. Either way, I’d love for someone to attempt to map out the Amethysts now that we have this new information.

Additionally, I loved this exchange from Amethyst and Peridot:

That’s 8XJ … curly hair, right?”

“Yeah! How’d you know?”

“You can tell by the iron deposits in the formation there.”

According to Peridot, iron is involved with giving Gems the Gemetic trait of curly hair. It can then be inferred that the more iron involved in making a Gem, the curlier her hair will be once she forms. If 8XJ’s formation had enough visible iron deposits for Peridot to notice, which only gave her one distinct curl in her hair, just imagine how much iron went into making Rose!

Remember Run Ep. 12…When Jungkook threw Jimin over his shoulder and smacked him on the ass. And just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse better the Behind the Scenes came out…And Jimin was lying on the floor saying “detective I’m bored, please come play with me” in a cute teasing voice. And then you realize that that scene came before the ass smacking one. I’m just saying, he kinda asked for it. And Jungkook was all too happy to deliver.

Real Friends.

First off let’s just touch upon the acoustics and synths in this, very 90’s. Big fan. Super chilled following ‘Havana’ so I like how she’s proving herself across each genre. That being said, lets dive a little deeper.

So I think the whole ‘real friends’ is actually a critical dig at fame and Hollywood. The ‘paper town’ clearly references LA and the whole stigma surrounding the city, more specifically all the artificial, false ‘friendships’ existing within the industry. No I don’t think this is about the girls before you ask lmao. Anyway,  the second verse:

“I stay up, talkin’ to the moon
Been feelin’ so alone in every crowded room
Can’t help but feel like something’s wrong, yeah
‘Cause the place I’m livin’ in just doesn’t feel like home”

is super interesting. We’ve got the moon popping up again. But why? So Camila talks to the moon because she feels isolated in a crowd of people? But who’s the moon? We know she romanticises the concept of the moon, so it can’t be Sinu right? So we’ve got one more option. Moving on to the bridge:

“I just wanna talk about nothin’
With somebody that means something
Spell the names of all our dreams and demons
For the times that I don’t understand
Tell me what’s the point of a moon like this
When I’m alone again
Can I run away to somewhere beautiful
Where nobody knows my name?”

Well would you look at that, the moon imagery AGAIN. In a romantic context, I infered this as ‘what’s the point in having a moon (moon being a lover) when you still feel so alone. 

What I also inferred from this is, yes she “can run away to somewhere beautiful, where nobody knows her name” BUT she knows the moon will always follow. Because wherever she goes, the moon follows. 

delusions are rife today☕

The Last Jedi Trailer Breakdown

* Please note that the following breakdown contains some potential spoilers for the movie - they’re mostly based on inferences and rumours, but you probably want to skip this post entirely if you’re spoiler-averse. *

I’m exhausted (I woke up way too early to watch that trailer!), but I knew I couldn’t rest until I had done this. There is so much to unpack here, so you’ll have to excuse me for omitting some things (mainly space battles) and skimming over others. 

I’m sure I’m wrong with a good chunk of this, but this is all meant in good fun.

I hope you enjoy my first stab at breaking this baby down - if you think it can be improved or spot anything that needs to be corrected, please let me know.

Keep reading

8

five days of vixxoween: the dolls

they say that the place is haunted by demons. that there are malevolent spirits there that want only to feed on the souls of the living. but they aren’t—at least, they don’t mean to be. it’s just—they loved her. they would have done anything for her and she abandoned them, threw them away like trash when they were too broken for her. their grief changed them, turned them into—into whatever they are. no one really knows. but most know one thing: if you enter that place, they will make sure you stay with them forever.

Quirks and Genetics

Disclaimer: I do not study genetics/biology, this is not my major and what I’m saying here is all very basic, product of my own interest in the topic. It might have mistakes on it and miss some things (by all means, correct them). It was born from excitement and from a wish to understand it better. It also makes some inferences as we don’t have that much information in canon. It involves a lot of conjecture. TL;DR: all that follows here may very well be complete bollocks.

Now that that’s out of the way, let’s take a look in one of the only instances of explanation about quirk function we have in canon.

Alright, so we have some very useful information here. However, the explanation is a bit confusing, so I want to break it down: Aizawa states his quirk does not attack the quirk itself, but instead halts the quirk factor. And then there’s the addition of the plus alpha. I believe he is talking about two different things. Using the example from the manga:

  • Tail (Quirk) + Mechanism to move the tail (Plus Alpha) = Quirk Factor.

That’s my conclusion. Ultimately Erasure can halt the Plus Alpha temporarily, but it is not affecting the quirk directly. The quirk erasing bullets (and Eri’s quirk), despite its name, affects the functioning of the Quirk Factor by causing damage to the Plus Alpha.

Let’s use Midoriya as an example. He is quirkless, but in order for him to be able to use a quirk (OfA) then it means that he must have a Plus Alpha. It stands to logic that, without the mechanism, he could not use the quirk even if he had the quirk to begin with. Basically, without the presence of a Quirk to activate Plus Alpha it becomes a useless/inactive mechanism in the body.

Working with this framework, we can perhaps safely assume that everyone in the BNHA universe most likely has a Plus Alpha, but not everyone has a Quirk. That is, they have the gene for the Plus Alpha expressed, but not everyone inherited the Quirk that would activate or link to Plus Alpha.

This is the logic I will be working with. Everyone has a Plus Alpha*, not everyone has a Quirk. Let’s move on.

> Quirk Inheritance

I believe that the pattern of inheritance for quirks is based on a dominant gene. Let’s just explain this quickly as I will be using some language as we go along: homozygous are genotypes of a pair of dominant/recessive chromosome alleles (AA, aa), heterozygous are pairs of mixed alleles (Aa). Dominant traits only need one allele to be observed phenotypically, whereas a recessive trait needs both alleles, according to Mendel.

Using that logic, for someone to inherit a quirk, they would have to receive at least one dominant allele for the quirk expression from their parents. This may explain why quirks became so quickly widespread in the overall population since they first appeared, as opposed of them being recessive. This can affect both if you are going to inherit a quirk, as well as which quirk you are going to inherit.

Let me explain using Midoriya as an example again. Both his parents have a quirk, but he was quirkless just the same - the odds are small but they are real. This can mean that both his parents are heterozygous (Aa), in which their dominant allele is their quirk and the recessive allele is “no quirk”. Something like this:

A(quirk)a(no quirk):

  • Both parents: Aa
  • Possible combinations: AA (25%), Aa (50%), aa (25%)
  • Izuku: aa

So Izuku ended up quirkless because he inherited two recessive genes that did not carry any quirk. This also means that if one of the parents has a dominant homozygous gene for their quirk (AA) it is impossible for the child to be born quirkless even if the other parent does have a recessive “no quirk” gene.

However, in my opinion, the recessive genes can also carry another quirk that is simply not expressed on the parents, but might have been expressed on the grandparents. So, a quirk may jump a generation and someone can carry a quirk gene without necessarily having that quirk expressed, and being a recessive homozygous doesn’t necessarily mean that you are quirkless.

Alternatively, it can also be that it is an interaction of different pairs. For example, a pair of chromosomes may decide if you have a quirk expression or a no-quirk expression. Another pair (or two pairs) may decide which quirk you get. Either way, it’s going to be looking very similar.

But what about quirk marriage?

This is where things begin to get more interesting. Now, we don’t have that many known examples of quirk marriages characters, and the main examples are Todoroki Shouto and Bakugou Katsuki (and I have reasons to believe Aizawa also has a married quirk, but that’s another story entirely).

Todoroki’s story tells us some neat things. One of them is that it is very hard indeed to get a child to be born with a married quirk. His parents had borne 3 children before finally Shouto came along. This tells us that the concept of quirks being passed by a dominant allele is rather credible – as well as the more probable way in which a married quirk will be expressed.

One way it could go is that if a child ends up being dominant homozygous (AA), then they should probably inherit “both” the quirks - and how those genes would express themselves is another point entirely. It could also happen (perhaps more rarely) with the child being heterozygous (Aa), in which one of the parent’s quirk is recessive homozygous (aa). So here are the options:

  • Mother: Aa
  • Father: Aa
  • Possibilities: AA (25%), Aa (50%), aa (25%)

Or:

  • Mother/father (vice versa): Aa, aa
  • Possibilities: Aa (50%), aa (50%)

The reason why I think that would be the case, is because an AA would mean automatically a married quirk, whereas Aa can mean a married quirk depending on the circumstances. Shouto could be any of these two, the result would probably be the same.

But it doesn’t end there. If there’s something that confuses people a lot when coming up with quirk marriages ideas or their own OC’s quirks, is how exactly does married quirks get expressed. I reckon there’s plenty of debate in that area, so let’s try to settle it.

I think there are types of married quirks.

Or maybe, that a quirk marriage happens when dominance behaves differently than expected (which would be the complete dominance we’ve been talking about).

Originally posted by the-last-95

Todoroki‘s quirk have a similar expression as that of codominance. Which is when both traits of the parents are somewhat equally present in their offspring (usually on heterozygous). I don’t want to say that genetically a married quirk would have to be heterozygous and would need to have codominance, I’m just using it as an example of how his quirk behaves. If you pay close attention to Todoroki, you will notice that his quirk, rather than being a mixture of his parent’s quirks (which then would give him a whole new quirk, something like A+B=C. Whereas his looks more like A+B=AB) behaves more like two quirks in one body, sharing the space. He can even manipulate those powers separately. So, he has both quirks of his parents somehow expressed, behaving a lot like the concept of codominance.

Bakugou quirk, however, looks more like Partial Dominance. Which is when the offspring phenotype seems to express a mixture (or middle ground) of both parent’s traits. His mother has glycerine on her sweat, and his father has an acidic sweat that can create explosions sometimes. Different from Todoroki, Bakugou cannot manipulate and separate these two abilities as if they are independent from each other, his quirk being instead a fusion of those quirks to create a brand new one (A+B=C). Like a flower offspring between a red and white flower being pink.

To summarize, quirks can either be inherited with:

  • Complete Dominance -> receiving the same quirk as one of the parents (Example: Jirou Kyouka)
  • Codominance -> receiving both quirks somewhat equally (Example: Todoroki Shouto)
  • Partial Dominance -> manifest a quirk that is a mixture/intermediate of both parent’s quirks (Example: Bakugou Katsuki)

This is outrageously long, but I hope it makes sense and it doesn’t have that many mistakes on it. If you have any questions or would like to debate this further, please do send in asks and whatnot i LOVE debating BNHA chars and worldbuilding.

I have some other ideas about Noumu’s, OfA, AfO and Eri’s quirk as well, but then it would be a bit much. I might do something about them at another point in time.


* Plus Alpha may be affected by Epigenetics.

P.s.: I want to reiterate this is very simplified and I am aware that genetic interactions are much more complex than this.