this got long and ranty

10 things for those writing about people who are blind/have low vision...

So…finishing up my portfolio and I just thought I’d share a few things:

1. Person first language: people who are blind/ people who have low vision/ people who are visually impaired. However, keep in mind not everyone likes first person language or identifies as such. It’s a lot of politics and where you’re located, and tends to be tied to professions.

2. It’s a cane… not a stick

Side note: Please have your characters be safe travelers and use canes or guides some of the time, not just super powers all of the time. It’s hard enough for some young kids to use their canes without comparing themselves to Kanan Jarrus or Daredevil…

3.You don’t get super senses… but maybe you become more aware of what you’re sensing and differentiating what you’re sensing

4. As far as I’m aware and according to people I’ve talked to…touching faces is awkward and not effective

5. People who are congenitally blind may not turn to look at who’s talking because it is a learned skill that may need to be explicitly taught to them. However, people who become blind/lose their vision later in life may still turn to face who’s talking or face things that they are focusing on regardless of whether they can see it

6. Some people turn their heads at angles or appear to be looking away from you because they only have vision in that part of their eye that’s currently facing you. They can’t see you if they look straight on.

7. When you can see, you learn things whole-to-part. You, who are sighted, see a house, you think house. Then you learn door, window, roof, chimney, shutters etc. If you can’t see, you learn part-to-whole, and you need to rely on touch/hearing/smell/taste (when appropriate) to form a concept of something you might learn like this: door, smell of home, window glass, window frame, brick of a chimney, panels on side of the house etc. But then putting in all together as a house is difficult to conceptualize if you’re going off random pieces of the puzzle. You may need a tactile model or something to fill in the gaps if it’s something you’ve never seen and can’t touch in its entirety.

8. Cane stuff: Not everyone taps their cane when they use it. Most that I’ve been with don’t or if they do, they do not use it all the time. Think about it. You miss a lot of tactile feedback and there’s a greater risk of missing things to trip on. There are three types of formal cane techniques: two-point touch (the classic tapping side to side), constant contact, and verification technique. The first two the cane is held at the center of the body and the person moves it from side to side wide enough just so that it goes past their hips. As they move it to one side, their opposite foot steps forward. This gives someone the most protection when moving. Verification technique is when the person holds the cane low in their non-dominant hand and uses constant contact as they see possible obstacles/terrain changes in their path.

9. Counting steps is a myth. People don’t take even steps generally. Sometimes it’s easy to count doors if it’s a small number. But if you’re at school and you have to travel across the building, are you really going to count 20 doors? What if you bump into something and lose count? You’d have to start all over. Most people create landmarks for locations. It could be something like the door with the only bulletin board in the hallway. Or the door with the water fountain next to it. Or the door that is one door to the left directly across  from the water fountain. Another thing here, is that you can kind of feel when you’re getting close to somewhere you’ve traveled to before. Like when you’re driving home and you feel like it’s been a while and your turn should be here, when suddenly the turn is here! That’s called time-distance estimation.

10. Most people are not totally blind. Only 2% of the population is visually impaired and only 2% of the population that is visually impaired is totally blind no light perception. This means that most people who are blind/visually impaired/have low vision can see something, and everyone is different and reacts different to their visual impairment and how they use the vision they have. 

This got long and slightly ranty, which was an accident… but I hope someone finds it useful. And now that I have this off my chest, remember creative liberty is a thing :)

matt0044  asked:

So what's this about Simon Says being episode 10? Doesn't seem that big of a deal. Only ones out of place are the Origins on Netflix and those were always all over the place to begin with. That said, it shouldn't be too hard to navigate for any casual new viewer.

Well i mean… they’re not the only ones. i’ve only watched the first two eps, and already it’s got a pretty obvious error.

Ep1 is Stormy Weather, which is cool. It’s a good intro point cos it spells out a lot of things and the duo are still kinda clumsy/feeling out their dynamic. A+++ intro ep, 5 fists of the north star.

 But then… ep 2 is Evillustrator? For some reason??? Evillustrator opens with Nathanael drawing/daydreaming about saving Marinette from Stormy Weather and…what’s this, Alya as a villain? Does he not like Alya? what is this?

Now, as a person who has seen the show, I know it’s Lady Wifi. Cool for me, who knows why he pictures her this way, but for someone who has never seen it, it’s a bit confusing…like, gosh, what does he have against Alya??? But when the Lady Wifi ep rolls around, what? I guess he’s clairevoyant? lmao no, anyone with half a brain is immediately going to realize it’s just completely out of order, that’s all. and it’s off putting when that happens. [note: it happens on netflix with other shows sometimes too (usually an ep or two) and it’s always, always annoying]… all the other versions at least have some semblance of an order. Lady Wifi is before Evillustrator in every other country, for obvious reasons. 

and mind you i have only watched the first two eps, i’m sure there’s more and i’m justggfdjghdk

Okay sorry for that tangent lol. onward to your actual question… you asked about Jackady (Simon Says). And the thing with this episode, is that is heavily implies that Gabe has figured out his son is Chat Noir. 

[gifs from this post]

Like. 

Very, very heavily.

There is no way around that. He knows. Hawkmoth or not, Gabriel at least suspects it’s the ring [which he knows about because he has a book on the miraculous]. 

Now…the problem with this being episode 10? It’s because after this, the rest of the season, he’s just gone. He’s not seen again until the final episode lol. Bubbler is episode 9 [so right before this one]. And Mr Pigeon [the only other ep he really appears in] is episode…5? 6? I forget. 

Again…Hawkmoth or not, it seems really…odd??? for it to be so early on lol. For him to know for all that time and do literally nothing about it. And don’t pull the “lol but he doesn’t care what Adrien does” cos i will fight you. He’s distant and yes totally neglectful and downright emotionally abusive [tho unintentionally i imagine] but he’s not a heartless monster. He cares about his kid.  

But yea, originally it was episode …18?? for the english version [according to the wiki], which is a bit better. French version was directly before Volpina, the ep in which he is studying the book with the miraculous in it [probably researching whether or not he was correct about the ring lol]…it’s just like, the further away from Volpina the ep is, the less sense it makes to me??? It loses it’s relevance the further away it gets, so it just really fuckin baffles me. 

Also, as a personal note, i could honestly ramble and rant about the Agreste family drama for days, cos it’s literally my favourite aspect of the show… i love it more than the love square, i love it more than fuckin adrino and chloenette, i love it more than butts i love it more than air. so just… mashing it all together right in the beginning, instead of spreading it out and letting it breathe a little…. idk it just fuckin gets to me ok? it bothers me a lot.

But maybe that’s just me tho.

There isn’t always room for everyone.
— 

Arden Cho trying to justify why she’s having to leave the show.

I’m sorry, but they could include Kira much more if they stopped focusing on Stiles as much as they do. I know he’s a main character. I know he’s been here since season 1, but he’s gotten so much focus that I feel like there’s nothing I need to learn about him, so they could cut down his screentime so they could use it to show other characters and their arcs that we don’t get to see as often, such as Kira Yukimura.

Kira is the most interesting supernatural character on this show. We know next to nothing about the kitsune mythology because they only show it in times where it’s useful to the plot and then forget about it, or they only bring it in when it pertains to Stiles, which is a shame because I’d like to know just how powerful Kira can be.

The fact that they’ve said that season 6 will focus on Stydia, but they act as if they have nowhere to go with Kira’s storyline is appalling. They never wrapped up her storyline from season 5; they just sent her away with the Skinwalkers. That is an arc that is worth its own season. Don’t just use the Skinwalkers mythology to craft a poor excuse for writing one of your main characters off of the show.

Also, please tell me why Peter Hale is coming back, yet they apparently don’t have enough room for people’s stories. Peter was an interesting villain back in seasons 1 and 2, possibly a bit of 3, but since then’s just become boring and a stereotypical power hungry man. Ian Bohen has publically disrespected Arden, yet he is allowed to come back to the show while she’s forced to leave. What could the show possibly need to tell me about Peter Hale that would keep me from scrolling through twitter or tumblr during his scenes? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. What could the show tell me about Kira’s journey that would me interested? So much. Show me what she’s doing while with the Skinwalkers. Show me how she’s coming to terms with her powers. Show me how she gets back to save the pack. There is so much these writers could do with her that they’re not going to.

I don’t care about a ship. I don’t care about that one little tidbit of information we may learn about a character who I’ve grown sick of. I don’t care about that one villain whose character arc has been wrapped up and has become so stereotypical, it’s not even fun to watch anymore. I care about good storytelling. I care that they’re writing off one of the best characters and letting a really good actress go because they can’t think of a way to write a good arc. The writers have not given us a proper end to her story.

I feel like what they’re doing is sacrificing what could potentially be a beautiful story arc about a young lady learning that she is a mythological creature whose powers she doesn’t know how to control who inevitably learns control and becomes one of the most powerful characters on the show. The saddest part is that I feel as if they’re going to sacrifice it all for a ship.

anonymous asked:

Don't you hate how people completely miss the point of why Susan couldn't return to Narnia? She chose not to believe anymore, and let materialism take over her life. It could happen to anyone. If Lewis had chosen to reverse the roles of Edmund and Susan, Edmund being the one who chose to lose belief because he focused too much on something material, like wealth or fame, he too wouldn't be allowed back. People make a big deal out of it because Susan is a female, but it could happen to anyone.

(cont’d) That was the point that Lewis was trying to make, especially in terms of the Christian faith. I doubt anyone would have complained if Peter had chosen not to believe because he cared too much about insignificant things, but because Susan is a female, people cry “sexism!” It frustrates me how people refuse to see beyond gender and look at a person for their actions and who they are.


Ahhh, The Problem of Susan. It will forever remain a major talking point of the Narnia series (I believe the other one would be Edmund and his entire character arc).

I agree entirely with your point, that Susan was refused entry back into Narnia and Aslan’s Country, at least at the conclusion of The Last Battle, because of her loss of faith. You make a fair point about the fact that if it had been Peter, there wouldn’t be as much of a fuss as there had been. The problem I think lies in the way C.S. Lewis chose to portray Susan at this point.

I believe his point here is that if you lose faith, you are no longer permitted entry into Heaven. Where I believe he goes wrong, however, is that he didn’t merely portray Susan as a woman who lost faith, but as a superficial, silly woman, concerned only with nylons and lipstick. I believe he could have made his point clearer if he hadn’t muddied the waters so to speak. You want people to understand that Susan didn’t get into Heaven because she lost faith? Then make that the point. Don’t make it sound as if she didn’t get in because she was silly and superficial. At the end of the day, Susan and Peter were told they were not going back to Narnia. It is therefore not wrong for her to invest in her life on Earth. So she wants to look nice and she might have been a bit materialistic – is that a sin? Isn’t the bigger problem the fact that she no longer has faith? If that’s the case, focus on that.

To be honest, I think he painted Susan in a wholly negative light in The Last Battle. She is described as being superficial, yet we ourselves only gain a superficial look at the woman she has become. Remember that she herself does not make an appearance; all we have to gauge the woman she has become is based on what the other characters say about her, the entirety of which takes up about the space of a page. She does not get to speak or defend herself, and none of the characters offer any sort of positive side to her, not even her own brothers and sister.

My main question, however, is why couldn’t he have left her as she was, but no longer a believer? Susan is often portrayed as being logical and pragmatic – keep that aspect of her characterisation, her logic has forced her to no longer believe in God but, like Lewis himself I believe, she is capable of finding her way back to Him after the end of the story. You don’t need to paint her as a simpering, materialistic woman who talks down to her family in order to make her a non-believer. She can be interested in things like fashion and still have faith, just like she can be a humble person who doesn’t. You don’t need to paint her as two negative things in order to drive home the point that she doesn’t get into Heaven.

To go back to your point about Peter, I think the main reason why, if Peter and Susan had been swapped, not as much of a fuss would be made of it is because C.S. Lewis probably wouldn’t have portrayed Peter in such a negative way. What could he say about Peter that would equal the way he described Susan? He sleeps around? Is only interested in going to the gym and buffing up? Likes to spend money on fancy brands and drives around in a fancy car?

I think it’s far easier to portray a woman in a superficial, negative light than it is a man (a by-product of sexism that continues today), and I think when people accuse C.S. Lewis of misogyny, this is why: because he bought into this negative portrayal of women and perpetuated it, to the extent that to this day people still buy into it. The fact that The Problem of Susan is still a talking point is evidence of that. The other major problem is that he took away something that women have fought long and hard to gain: her voice. As I said earlier, she is not given the opportunity to speak or defend herself, she does not even make an appearance. How should we interpret this? Is it really any wonder why some people accuse him of sexism, when a woman is spoken for and about, rather than being given the opportunity to speak for herself?

You make an excellent point about the fact that it could happen to anyone and that you should look at their actions and who they are. The problem is that C.S. Lewis didn’t do that: he dragged Susan’s gender into it and made it feel like part of the problem. At the end of the day, C.S. Lewis sought to write a Christian allegory, not a social commentary, and I think he made a mistake by blurring the lines and attaching something like materialism to a woman who, at this point in time, has been ‘locked out of Heaven’ because that makes it easier to miss the point I think he was ultimately trying to make: that loss of faith, not materialism and superficiality, was what kept Susan out of Aslan’s Country.

(Can I make a final point here that I don’t really think C.S. Lewis was misogynistic; he has a few progressive elements in the story regarding gender and it is important to remember that both Lewis, and therefore Narnia, are products of their time. That does not, however, mean that there aren’t a few worrying aspects regarding gender in the series.)

dae-dreamxx  asked:

♡♡♡ THIS IS A VIRTUAL HUG FROM A VERY AWKWARD PEEP WHO WANTS TO SHARE THEIR LOVE WITH YOU ♡♡♡ copy and send this to the people you care about; if you receive it back your love has been treasured!^^~ (sending it to this account to say that your recent gifs are awesome, I love them and thank you so much for making them !! <3)

Awwwwwwwwwwwwww I’m so glad that you always appreciate what I make. It means a lot T^T

I felt like what little emotional turmoil Corrin had in Conquest that wasn’t undermined by just being SHOUTING AT NOTHING SO THE PLAYER CAN KNOW THEIR FEELINGS was reasonably well done. Corrin’s emotional arc in Conquest is very interesting to me because while the game doesn’t let them actually grow very much you see a fairly fully realized emotional arc occur under the hood that ultimately isn’t given center stage. Corrin’s nativity from the other routes still exists at the start (and unfortunately all the way through) but Corrin is angry a lot in Conquest, they just actually have tact and recognize that they cannot express themselves as fully as they would like because of Hans and Iago’s constant scheming and eavesdropping. Plus they have to put on a strong face because it’s what Xander and the others expect them to do as the appointed leader. Corrin goes from being naive and hopeful at the outset to being a bit weathered in the middle by having his own wants and desires undermined by Garon’s orders and Hans’ blatant evil nature alongside Iago’s constant harassment. This then becomes a mix of sadness and anger, finally giving way to just being angry in the final act.

Corrin goes from being weathered by the realities of war to being sad, a lot, between the point that Scarlet is killed and Ryoma dies, but still expressed regret and anger throughout this point in the game just in limited amounts to avoid exposing his and Azura’s plan to his siblings or Garon’s retainers. I feel one of the scenes that best shows Corrin’s potential, Corrin’s emotional growth, and what Corrin just should have been like throughout Conquest is their interaction with Hinoka after her defeat. Corrin tells her that they cannot promise her safety, nor can they promise her that she will live, but internally they wants to give one last chance at goodness and peace and so tells her to throw down her weapons and spares her and her retainers. They are given a direction to run and hopes that they manage to get away. This is all Corrin can do for them, but it is meaningful that even in the face of Corrin’s siblings and army they would do this.

This moment was strong, to me, but is undermined by Corrin’s overall lack of growth and lack of the plot actually forcing Corrin to make hard choices up until now.  This could have worked even with Corrin not needing to make hard choices cause part of what was good about Conquest’s plot was that Corrin’s decision making is regularly undermined in a way that in a well written game would have brought about a lot of exposition and growth. But I digress, this scene feels out of place to me because in it Corrin is mad and regretful, but there’s really nothing wrong that’s happened and been expressed in the story as is to make Corrin feel angry. I mean at this point the Nohrian Army, allegedly under Corrin’s command has: Murdered an entire village because a few rebels were there, killed every single performer in the capitol of a foreign nation, enacted the genocide of a reclusive species, broken three boarder and peace treaties, and has killed Takumi and his retainers.

The problem is, other than Takumi’s death and to a lesser extent Scarlet’s execution, none of this has mattered to Corrin at all besides maybe a single line referencing how horrible it was before seemingly forgetting entirely about it. Corrin having to put up with these horrors is a strong narrative element that goes wasted because the game does not give them the weight they need. Instead they’re used as depression wank set dressing and you instantly move on with none of them referenced again besides Takumi. As is Corrin’s anger here comes out of nowhere because the story wasn’t written in such a way to consider the repercussions of these actions on either the world or Corrin and co’s mentality. Corrin’s anger in this scene should have been building up all game in tangible ways until this moment with Hinoka, where choosing to spare her is representative of them casting away the last of the naivety they could still hold onto. It also sets up well for the tragedy of Ryoma’s death, where Corrin’s sadness peaks at seeing Ryoma commit suicide for Corrin’s sake as much as his own, which THEN gives way to Corrin finally embracing the anger he’s been hiding this whole time.

The contrast of emotions here would have been great if the story allowed Corrin to consistently express themselves in ways that weren’t blind naivety or honestly weird, forced, happiness and innocence leading up to this final act of the plot because in two major ways it would contrast Corrin’s anger meaningfully. Garon takes the throne, Corrin and Azura finally reveal their plot to the army, and in Corrin’s rage they are directed to murder Hans and Iago for their unflinching and horrific actions up until now, which they had to condone because of Garon’s presence. That last part happens, and is really good because at this point Corrin’s anger with these characters should match the player’s anger toward and hate of them. It’s not a problem that Corrin isn’t angry in this route, just that because of how the plot is set up a lot of Corrin’s anger is understated until the very very end.

“Aromantic” and “Asexual” are not the same thing. Aromantic has to do with romantic attraction. Asexual has to do with sexual attraction. 

They are not the same. 

One is not an “extension” of the other. Aromantic is not a place within the asexual spectrum, and asexual is not a place within the aromantic spectrum.

They are two different identities.

Stop saying “the aroace spectrum.” Don’t tag something as #asexual if it only talks about aromanticism, and don’t tag something as #aromantic if it only talks about asexuality.

Acknowledge that these are two very different identities. Don’t just fucking smush them together in one little category and call it quits. That is extremely erasing and I’m getting tired of seeing this happen in pretty much every damn post I see. 

ok this is something i’ve tried to ignore but it’s rly starting to bother me so like here we go i guess

why do ppl almost always hc the quiet and/or awkward characters as asexual??

like?? u can be quiet and/or awkward and not be ace?? ur sexuality has literally nothing to do with ur personality?? it’s honestly so annoying that ppl automatically jump to the conclusion that a character must be ace just bc they’re a lil quiet or socially awkward

anyone can be ace. just like anyone can be gay or bi or pan etc. im sick of constantly seeing the same thing over and over. like ya, as an ace person, it’s nice to see ppl making ace headcanons but like. when it’s the same type of character 90% of the time it gets rly aggravating bc its like ppl are saying that there’s a certain image for what an ace person is supposed to be like and act like and that’s just. gross tbh. bc we’re all so different, just like any other person?? and obv im not saying that there isn’t quiet/awkward ppl who are ace bc obv there is, but not every ace person is like that?? lack of sexual attraction isn’t an explanation or reason for why a person/character is quiet or awkward. it’s a completely separate thing?? it’s honestly not that hard to understand like. i myself am awkward as fuck but it has nothing to do with my asexuality u feel me

im not saying to stop headcanoning quiet/awkward characters as ace, that’s not the point im trying to get across, i just. i want ppl to think about this more and be more diverse with the characters they hc as ace u know?? pls stop headcanoning characters as ace solely bc of a few personality traits they possess. and this isn’t directed at fellow ace ppl bc like obviously as ace ppl we’re not gonna stereotype, we just wanna see ourselves in characters we love and that’s rad. but i just rly want all the non-ace ppl to read this and understand how tiring it can be to see the same thing over and over. obviously i can’t speak for every ace person—im sure this isn’t something that bothers every ace person, but i know it bothers me

this got rly long and ranty but im just. rly salty abt this tbh and im sorry if im not making much sense lmao

Warning: This is long and blunt. Hopefully we can all move past this eventually. I just needed to get this all out, tbh, cause shit is getting too much.  

Fuck these people that are saying these horrible, ignorant things about Magnus Bane. Fuck these people who are using words like ‘predator’, like “toxic”, like “abuse”, like “manipulator”, like “rape” to - what? What are you trying to achieve? Do you not get how fucked up this is? These words, these words with serious meanings and serious connotations, do not exist for you to use to boost your argument of preference. They don’t exist for you to use so you can self-righteously laud something over other fans just because you don’t like something. Fuck you for being so goddamn inconsiderate, so goddamn willfully ignorant, so goddamn harmful. 

I’m not angry because you don’t like Magnus Bane. I’m not angry because you don’t like Show!Malec. Everyone has their opinions - excited to the point of passing out ones, heavily critical ones, merely meh ones. That’s fine. That’s not what this is about.   

I’m angry because you - these people saying these things - do not get it and you have such a lack of empathy that you can’t see past your own ego. You do not get how harmful, how biphobic and homophobic you are being by perpetuating this kind of thinking about queer characters and queer relationships. Biphobia and homophobia is so much more than whether you’d attend a gay wedding or not - it’s a mindset, a dangerous one that you either accept or unlearn, and one that you are using to severely vilify a bisexual male character. Think about this - how many villains do you know that have substantial queer coding in their characterization, for example, Loki? Why do think that is? Why are all “hero” characters straight by default and all the “villains” peripherally queer? Think about it, please.  

I’m only speaking for myself here - but I have waited a considerable amount of time for a character like Magnus Bane. A positive character that I can relate to that has flaws like pettiness and jealously, sure, but is also compassionate, sexual, emotional, wise, powerful, glamourous… I could on, I really could. I’m currently seventeen, eighteen later in the year. The fact I get a character like Magnus Bane so early in my life? Fucking amazing. It helps me hold on the fact I fucking love being bi, even through all biphobic bullshit I get from both sides. That even if I’m still working it out, if I still feel insecure/unsure about it, that maybe one day I’ll be as confident and comfortable with my identity as Magnus Bane is. 

The fact that people feel the need to turn Magnus into another queer “villain” (for reasons beyond my understanding)? Leaves a bad fucking taste in my mouth. I’m sorry you can’t see past Clare’s so-called “perfection”. I’m sorry that perception of her blinds you the actual problems that exist in her books. I’m sorry you can’t seem wrap your head around a bisexual character that isn’t manipulative, that is both romantic and sexual, that has only ever been interested in understanding and ensuring that another queer character can find himself and his happiness, whether that includes him or not. 

So, either understand what you’re doing is harmful and fix your goddamn mindset or shut the fuck up, cause neither Magnus Bane as a character and his fans as real human beings deserve this kind of damaging bullshit.     

anonymous asked:

what's your opinion on phan? like do you think it's "real"?

For me, this is a very hard question to answer. Because occasionally they do things that seriously makes me question how platonic their relationship is, but then I remember that some friends are that close and thus don’t have any clear boundaries around their relationship. Obviously, for me, it’s all about looking about the big picture to get a clear perspective on all this. 

I have seen several blogs on here saying that they think that Dan and Phil are in a sort of Friends With Benefits relationship, or an unlabelled relationship. That theory to me is extremely unlikely. I’m not saying that they weren’t at some point, or that relationships like that always end/are bad. I can’t really say this about Dan, but you have to put in to thought that Phil is at that age where you might want to settle down somewhere in the near future. I can totally grasp the idea of not labelling your relationship, but I honestly doubt that being in some sort of “We are more than friends but not in an exclusive relationship” can go on without confusion or doubt for 6 years. One day you will need to discuss what both parts want from that relationship, whether it be a future or just sex. 

One other thing that also makes me question the fact that they are in a no-label relationship is the fact of how committed they are to each other. They are together 99% of the times, and even if they don’t always publicly state it (phil’s bday……..) it is always very obvious when one of them follows the other to their parents etc. Seeing since they were planning on buying a new apartment together just last year, it doesn’t seem that they are planning on parting ways anytime soon. And, as I said before, them being at that age where they might want to settle down, buying a third flat with you platonic mate isn’t the ideal thing to do. Nearly every time they mention their future, the other one is in it. And I have best friends that I 100% see in my future too, but I don’t see my whole life revolving around them.

And as I mentioned before, the big picture, their timeline, plays a huge part in if they are together or not for me. Watching their older videos from around 2009/2010, it’s hard to not be at least a bit suspicious, whilst watching their slightly newer stuff 2012/2013 it’s easy to believe that they are in a completely platonic relationship. Their really new stuff (2014/2015) are for me very hard to analyse. It’s difficult to understand if they are just making the non-platonic parts of their relationship seem bigger for views, or if everything is genuine. I know I might’ve mentioned this before, but when I became a fan (late 2013) I honestly thought that they were in a relationship (my friend was very quick at telling me that they are in fact not though), so I guess that maybe you could still see traces of what they were trying to hide during that time period (non-platonic things) which causes me to believe that what we are seeing now is genuine. Obviously, they are always acting when being on camera (yes, this does involve vlogs) but how much is the question? Unfortunately, that is an answer we probably will never have.

But the big picture. A majority of the things they do that make people question the nature of their relationship are usually rationalised by people who quite literally refuse to believe in anything other than the official narrative. These arguments we are presented with from the non-phans are usually quite believable and logical, but is it really that when they happen repeatedly? I can almost say as a fact that it is not. If a coincidence happens once or twice it is indeed a coincidence, but when they happen over and over again it’s no longer one. A lot of things can be explained, but the big picture can’t. Or at least I have seen any rational explanations for it.

Conclusion is that yes in some prospects I genuinely do think that they are in a relationship, but there are certain aspects of what we are presented with that makes me seriously doubt it. Though, looking at everything there is it’s obvious that they are at least very comfortable with each other and not 100% platonic.

anonymous asked:

To be honest, Justice, at lest da2 justice, always kinda scared me. Since when ever he did take over he seem wildly out of control and yelling at everything. He dose almost kill a girl in Anders personal quest. Idk if you ever talked about that, it was horrifying to me to see someone so utterly out on control like that.... Though I couldn't help but sympathies with Anders a bit, if it was scary to watch, I couldn't imagine how it must feel.

I don’t think I’ve talked specifically about that, but I think the situation with Justice is not quite how Anders perceives it. It’s complicated and didn’t go the way he thought, to be sure, but I think he’s wrong about what it is now.

Justice is, at his core, a protector. His existence is devoted to preventing and righting injustices for those that cannot. And every time he comes out in game is some time during which Anders is angry, frightened, at risk, upset etc. It’s not a loss of control, as Anders perceives it, but Justice coming to protect his friend, not realizing how scary it is for Anders to be shoved back like that. Justice is the big scary dog who’s protective of the tiny kitten, except he doesn’t realize that coming out so violently might not be the most comforting thing.

So if he’s just protecting Anders, why does he do out of control things, like killing Ella unless you stop him? This is where it gets complicated. Anders and Justice are not fully merged, as evidenced by the fact that they can switch control and that they can disagree on things (e.g. Hawke, drinking, etc.), but they’re not fully separate either. How I understand it is that their thoughts are shared, without Anders necessarily knowing where any one comes from. Sometimes it’s a thought they obviously share, like ‘oppression is bad’. Other times, though, Anders has to try to figure out where it came from. And sometimes it’s easier to tell because he can clearly determine 'yeah, I wouldn’t have thought that before Justice’, but other times it’s more complicated. He can never truly know for sure who’s thought is who’s, or if they truly share one or not.

So if they share thoughts to a certain extent, it’s basically guaranteed that they share emotions in that way as well. So when Anders is upset somehow and Justice comes out, he’s also feeling Anders’ very strong, extremely negative emotions, which can lead to him lashing out at the wrong people, or in the wrong ways. Justice does not fully know how to handle emotions yet (I think he could learn) as he’s never really experienced them before, so it’s even worse, but this kind of thing is very human. People fuck up when they’re emotional, though not necessarily in such an extreme way.

Think of young children throwing temper tantrums. They do that because they don’t know how to express themselves in another way, and they need to learn. Though Justice is not a child by any means, nor should he be considered one, it’s a similar struggle. He has a hell of a lot more power behind his outbursts, obviously, but it’s not something that’s quite as out of control as it seems. During that quest you mentioned, the only way to stop him is to appeal to the rationality within both him and Anders, calming the emotions present and bringing them back to logical thinking.

Justice may seem to be completely out of control, but he’s honestly just blinded by emotions, like regular people can be (think of Fenris wanting to kill his sister, and doing so unless you directly interfere). He’s not actually as far from his Awakening self as you might think. If you bring him along during the Feynriel quest when you enter the Fade, he’s basically what we remember. I think he only came because Anders was nervous about it, but that’s a discussion for another day. Regardless, he’s not in an upset state, so he’s the same. In fact, he’s literally the only companion who will not betray you unless you make a deal with a demon, and then you kind of have it coming.

Okay this is really long. Point is, Justice comes out to protect Anders when he’s upset, not realizing how scary this is for our favourite apostate. Whatever emotion Anders was feeling when he was booted from the driver’s seat, as it were, is then felt by Justice. Justice thus expresses this emotion in a rather extreme way because he doesn’t know how to deal with such things yet. He’s simply expressing himself the only way he knows how, and it’s really a very human error, as oppsoed to a 'demonic’ one.

anonymous asked:

I agree with your posts about D&D and Cogman if by "fanfiction" you mean, "Licensed Adaptation Approved and Endorsed by the Original Author." Because that's what it is. How about a fuck you to GRRM? Because he's ultimately the one fucking his fans over. Let's put the blame where it really lies. GRRM could have not sold the rights, he could have finished the books in a more timely manner. And for all we know, he has something worse planned anyway. Fuck you, George, fuck you.

Putting this under a cut as it got long and a bit ranty.

Keep reading