Hola Rosy!! T-minus 47 hours and counting!!!! What do you think Kane's arc has been this season?
Kane? Interesting question. I don’t think we got much of Kane this season. He finally got to be a diplomat with the grounders and I think he did as well as he could. But you know, he ended up back where he started, at his lowest moment, another culling that he was responsible for.
That first culling saw a great change in him and had him working for peace and unity. But I can’t help thinking that the way he went about peace and unity was a lot like capitulation and concession. As much as he worked for peace between grounders and arkadians, he was unsuccessful. And Arkadia was in a very precarious position which made it vulnerable to attack from within and without. And part of it was actually his policies.
I think we’ll see a change with Marcus in season 5. Either he’ll stop being lawful good, always trying to follow the rules, and turn to a bit more chaos, or he’ll give up politics altogether and maybe become a spiritual leader.
I don’t know. Maybe something else. Maybe he’ll just be Octavia’s advisor. But I think that second culling is going to have an effect on him. He’s also lost all but two of his children.
Any advice for writing a character who dislikes change?
This is kind of a vague question and without more details, I can’t really answer your question directly. So I’m not going to. What I am going to do is talk about characterization.
A character who dislikes change is not a full character. Disliking change is simply one of their character traits. The important thing is how that character trait impacts the rest of the character and how that impacts the story. An example:
Character Alice is a monarch who has reigned for 300 years. She refuses to believe that the world is changing around her and so continues on with horribly outdated policies and laws. Her leadership is running her country into the ground and she refuses to change.
Character Becky lives at home with her parents. She takes care of her ailing mother and her younger cousins. She continues taking care of her younger cousins after her mother passes, even though she is tired of it and no longer wants to do it. Becky’s sister is willing to take the cousins and raise them so Becky can do something else that she finds more fulfilling, but Becky doesn’t know what to do with that opportunity. So she turns it down because she is scared of change and doesn’t want to take the risk.
Character Catherine is a six year old child who until now, has been an only child. But her parents adopt a new son and Catherine is not pleased with the changes that have been happening in her house. She just wants things to go back to the way they were.
Do you see how even though each of these characters has ‘dislikes change’ as a common characteristic, they’re all very different characters with different stories? I’m sorry if I completely failed to answer your question and please feel free to send a follow up ask! Alternatively feel free to use any of the above characters.
- Ryouma often gets depressed about the death of his father – Marx will always make an attempt to comfort his lobster lover, but the mere sight of Marx causes Ryouma during these times to get flashbacks of the night his father was murdered.
- Marx sometimes will get cross with him for this; A son should not be punished for his father’s sins. The stubborn princes will often fight, their past hatred for each other’s kingdoms resurfacing. A little time away from each other, to clear their minds is the only thing that calms them down.
- The two princes received huge amounts of negativity in response to their relationship going public. Some saw it as a peaceful joining of the two kingdoms, while others still had scorn for the neighboring kingdom. They were often called traitorous and unloyal by these people.
- Their relationship is shaky due to their circumstances as leaders of once sworn-enemy countries. Tending to their respective citizens, debating about laws and other leadership duties causes great pain to them both – they are often apart, burdened with these as well as always trying to make up for the battles they had with each other in the past.
Earth hadn’t been a safe haven for a number of vorn, Cybertronians being barred from the human-populated planet due to circumstances beyond control.
When the twins had left with the Autobots, with the word of ‘traitor’ like poison on everyones’ lips, they hadn’t expected to ever go back. The lifespan of a human was so short, as Earth changed leadership.. laws changed. Eventually, the ban was lifted as the war had originally come to a close. And the twins wanted something that they knew better, having spent a vast majority of their life on battlefields and then Earth. It was suppose to be peaceful, it was rumored to now be a sanctuary.
The US Government wasn’t far off in their description, and there were a few others that resided on Earth. But the twins chose their place, secluded and isolated. They had escaped the punishment from Cybertron’s laws, even if they were right in doing it.
Neither of them wanted to be reformatted.
They had become lax in their time on Earth, the ex-frontliners spent their time the way they wanted to outside of helping with local projects as requested. There life was comfortable, for now. Little did they know of the extremes the council would take to ensnare them, placing a bounty on Sunstreaker’s head and a bonus for the capture of Sideswipe.
Both were unaware of this development, their limited contact with Cybertron allowed them to slip under the radar as it stood.
History pet peeve: people referring to the Romans like the term “Roman” is an ethnic/racial makeup. and further portraying the image of Roman with prominent Northern European features.
Short Answer: Roman is not an ethnic group, it’s a status of citizenship within the Roman Republic/Empire, like how there’s no such thing as ethnic Americans, but there are American citizens of the United States. Same concept.
Longer Answer: The founders of Rome, the Latins, rarely ever settled outside of the Italian Peninsula. They would conquer lands initially, make the peoples of those conquered lands Roman citizens, teach them Latin and school them in Roman law/customs, then hand over leadership to local rulers who would serve as Roman representatives and governors, after pledging loyalty to the Imperator of course.
So within the Empire, an Egyptian living in Alexandria was just as Roman as a Greek living in Thessalonica, who are just as Roman as a Latin living in Rome itself.
and further still, most people’s perception of what a Latin/Roman looks like has been pretty warped by Hollywood movies and other Media, who portray Romans as overwhelmingly Germanic in appearance, with fairer skin, light hair, and larger built body structures. Such as:
While there were Roman’s who looked like this, with Gauls, Britons, and Germanics obtaining Roman Citizenship and serving in the legions. a native of ancient Latium looks more like the Italians of today, such as this:
In short, Rome was an ancient “Melting Pot” not unlike the United States, but the misleading portrayal by modern media that all Romans look like they’re from northern Germany, or that this Hollywood portrayal of what the “Roman Race” looks like is very misleading to just what makes people “Roman”.
Debate motions will be delivered by Gabriella Coleman (the Wolfe Chair in Scientific and Technological Literacy at McGill University, and author of Hacker, Hoaxer, Whistleblower, Spy: The Many Faces of Anonymous) and Larry Lessig (the Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership at Harvard Law School, and director of the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard University).
Why do people on here act like straight/cis/white people or men are a collective group who automatically benefit from the oppression of minorities or women? I can guarantee you someone on the brink of poverty isn’t oppressing anyone nor are they benefiting from it.
It’s why you shouldn’t take everything they teach you in sociology class to face value.
Attorney General Eric Holder on Thursday said the federal government needs to keep track of how many individuals are injured or killed by police officers, as well as keep better records of officer fatalities…
Speaking at a Justice Department event honoring Martin Luther King Jr. on Thursday, Holder said obtaining better data on police shootings, as well as police officer deaths, is the “first step” in working toward ensuring police officers’ safety and upholding the rights of citizens.
“I’ve heard from a number of people who have called on policymakers to ensure better record-keeping on injuries and deaths that occur at the hands of police. I’ve also spoken with law enforcement leaders – including the leadership of the Fraternal Order of Police – who have urged elected officials to consider strategies for collecting better data on officer fatalities. Today, my response to these legitimate concerns is simple: We need to do both,” Holder said.