No but please I’m begging you please tell me they overlooked this in the beginning and someone actually got to control Withers please

I've been thinking quite a bit about this conversation I had with a butch I had a thing with, a few years back. To be honest, it crosses my mind a lot. In this conversation we were talking about butch/femme, aesthetics, stereotypes etc. The context to it is that I saw a video that showed, unfortunately stereotyped, femme as these 4 styles of clothing and whatever, you can think it was funny, it's not the end of the world certainly, but we got to talking about this notion that I think the community forgets, regardless of verbally recognising "we're not aesthetics".

He showed me a picture that he really liked of this butch/femme couple in a bar and they were both wearing the same outfit and yet we could recognise them as a butch/femme pairing. Reminds me also of this black and white picture of two butches with a femme in the middle, they were in similar clothes, only the shirts said "butch" or "fem" in the case of the one I now bring up. Both of these were taken before the 1980s, if I recall correctly. Of course these are pictures, so we don't get the full context of their identities, but the intention here is to illustrate the concept of, in a way, the silliness of separating us by clothes and aesthetics. What this expectation of femininity or masculinity means considering both of these can be presented in such a subjective way.

When I talk about this, and how I view femme through my own femme lenses, I want to once again, shed light to some parts I love of The Persistent Desire: A Femme-Butch Reader by Joan Nestle:

"the femme is the lesbian who poses this problem of misinterpreted choice in the deepest way... Femmes are women who have made choices, but we need to be able to read between the cultural lines to appreciate their strength. Lesbians should be mistresses of discrepancies, knowing that resistance lies in the change of context." - the resistance and the strength of femme, along with its meaning, isn't quite obvious and a lot of people tend to miss it.

"Butches were known by their appearance, femmes by their choices."

And this part of Butch Is A Noun by S. Bear Bergman:

"(For the record, I believe that the same is true of femmes; the femmes who get the most admiration, the most approbation in the queer community in which I live seem to be the ones who cherry-pick exactly what of femininity they want, mix it with a hearty dash of traditionally masculine characteristics like sexual agency, stompy boots, assertiveness, fondness for power tools, and so on, and shake up a gendered cocktail that makes traditional unexamined cultural femininity look a little watery, a little pale. This is what I see, as a longtime admirer of femmes in all their variations, but I freely acknowledge that I only see what any femme cares to show me, and it's really not for me to say."

I think femme identity can become this pale misconstrued concept because we're not as obviously recognizable and people aren't as prepared to recognize us. People get used to, when thinking of lesbians, noticing and expecting butch signs, in such a way that femmes flew under the radar as an identity and definition and we still deal with that heavily today. And lately I've been seeing somewhat of a guessing game of what it all means that doesn't encompass our full range, truly it's hard to encompass that in any case.

But the moral of the story, I guess, is that femme needs more than a glance, more than one size fits all, more than what meets the eye, if we can recognize the multitude and holistic nature in the other side of our coin, we're capable of recognizing it within us.

An open letter to white evangelicals: We’re done with you.

By North Carolina Pastor John Pavlovitz

 Dear White Evangelicals,

I need to tell you something: People have had it with you. They’re done. They want nothing to do with you any longer, and here’s why: They see your hypocrisy, your inconsistency, your incredibly selective mercy, and your thinly veiled supremacy.

For eight years they watched you relentlessly demonize a Black President; a man faithfully married for 26 years; a doting father and husband without a hint of moral scandal or the slightest whiff of infidelity. They watched you deny his personal faith convictions, argue his birthplace, and assail his character—all without cause or evidence.

They saw you brandish Scriptures to malign him and use the laziest of racial stereotypes in criticizing him. And through it all, White Evangelicals—you never once suggested that God placed him where he was, you never publicly offered prayers for him and his family, you never welcomed him to your Christian Universities, you never gave him the benefit of the doubt in any instance, you never spoke of offering him forgiveness or mercy, your evangelists never publicly thanked God for his leadership, your pastors never took to the pulpit to offer solidarity with him, you never made any effort to affirm his humanity or show the love of Jesus to him in any quantifiable measure.

You violently opposed him at every single turn—without offering a single ounce of the grace you claim as the heart of your faith tradition. You jettisoned Jesus as you dispensed damnation on him.

And yet you give carte blanche to a white Republican man so riddled with depravity, so littered with extramarital affairs, so unapologetically vile, with such a vast resume of moral filth—that the mind boggles.

And the change in you is unmistakable. It has been an astonishing conversion to behold: a being born again.

With him, you suddenly find religion. With him, you’re now willing to offer full absolution. With him, all is forgiven without repentance or admission. With him, you’re suddenly able to see some invisible, deeply buried heart. With him, sin has become unimportant, and compassion no longer a requirement. With him, you see only Providence.

And White Evangelicals, all those people who have had it with you—they see it all clearly. They recognize the toxic source of your inconsistency.

They see that pigmentation and party are your sole deities. They see that you aren’t interested in perpetuating the love of God or emulating the heart of Jesus. They see that you aren’t burdened to love the least, or to be agents of compassion, or to care for your Muslim, gay, African, female, or poor neighbors as yourself.

They see that all you’re really interested in doing is making a God in your own ivory image and demanding that the world bow down to it. They recognize this all about white, Republican Jesus—not dark-skinned Jesus of Nazareth.

And I know you don’t realize it, but you’re digging your own grave these days; the grave of your very faith tradition.

Your willingness to align yourself with cruelty is a costly marriage. Yes, you’ve gained a Supreme Court seat, a few months with the Presidency as a mouthpiece, and the cheap high of temporary power—but you’ve lost a whole lot more.

You’ve lost an audience with millions of wise, decent, good-hearted, faithful people with eyes to see this ugliness. You’ve lost any moral high ground or spiritual authority with a generation. You’ve lost any semblance of Christlikeness. You’ve lost the plot. And most of all you’ve lost your soul.

I know it’s likely you’ll dismiss these words. The fact that you’ve even made your bed with such malevolence, shows how far gone you are and how insulated you are from the reality in front of you. But I had to at least try to reach you. It’s what Jesus would do.

Healthy/Unhealthy Type 1

Healthy Social 1 

Rob Stark (1w9 so/sx)- In the search for a more fair and just Westeros. Maintains his anger in check and looks for morality in grounded and in bringing others up. 

Kitana (1w2 so/sp)- Depending on which timeline we are on we can see how she embodies the idealism of E1. In MK11 we see her in the search to unite outworld and restore honor to Edenia. In her arcade ending we see her restoring Edenia and forging a bright and fair future for outworld. 

Nakia (1w2 so/sp)- She subverts all of the stereotypes of E1. The enneagram 1 is known for their more “traditional” and restrictive views of moral however with Nakia we see a. fully integrated 1 to their 7. Her view of the world comes from a need to find joy and help others. 

Unhealthy Social 1 

Betty Warren (1w2 so/sx)- The need to maintain a status quo were her and others suffer due to what's moral and right seems to be her core desire in the movie. She changes eventually and decides to pursue a career where she can channel her rage into productive actions. 

Abuela Madrigal (1w2 so/sp)- While I understand fully why she is the way she is, her continuing the generational cycle of trauma instead of deciding to talk about the past leads her to stifling others. Neglecting Maribel and banishing Bruno. Her eventual change in the end promises a better future for everyone in the family. 

Zaheer (1w9 so/sp)-In search for full liberation of the nation he ends up indulging in full anarchism. His desire to see the world as free and just sets him on a path of destruction. Probably the best example of an E1 who has fully disintegrated into 4. Fully detached from a grounded sense of morality.

Healthy Self-Preservation 1 

Elijah Mikaelson (1w9 sp/so)- His desire to preserve his own sense of morality always comes into question when it comes to Klaus. The desire to see a fully redeemed Klaus can cause him allot of problems however, he always is just in his decision making always looking for the best results for everyone. 

Nancy Thompson (1w2 sp/so)- While I consider typing her as an SO6 too her desire seems to fall more on E1. She has a strong sense of morality and justice. Always in the look to help other whiteout letting her own sense of self righteousness get in the way.

Matt Murdock (1w9 sp/so)- Yes, he has a whole struggle with his sense of morality and defines good and bad however, Matt is generally a great example of an Sp1 who struggles with his idealism or perfection and morality and its realistic applications in the real world. 

Unhealthy Self-Preservation 1

Shirley Crain (1w2 sp/so)- Branded as “Perfect Shirley” for good reason.  Shirley is complete denial of reality and constantly repressing her true emotions makes her act as morally superior than her siblings. While not deciding to deal with her inner turmoil. 

Julien Slowik (1w9 sp/so)-Full detachment of reality and embraces the worst traits of the sp1. He choses to make his own personal believes others problems and internalizes his rage. Eventually channeling it into self destruction. 

Nina Sawyer (1w9 sp/so)-Her struggle to integrate towards 7 turns into a full downward spiral were identity and her perception of reality go out the window. Her need to be both the black swan and white swan end up tearing her sense of self apart. 

Healthy Sexual 1

Biscuit Krueger (1w2 sx/so)-Perfection through interpersonal connections seems to be her main drive. When she becomes Killua’s and Gon’s mentor she help them expand on their already developed powers. Using the base knowledge of their abilities so each of them could expand on them. 

Batman (1w9 sx/sp)-His struggle to define himself as a symbol for Gotham can be seen as unhealthy sometimes. However I believe he is closer to a healthy person with his own personal struggles. However as time goes on in the comics we see a Bruce who is able to foster community and have excellent children.

Kate Sheffield (1w2 sx/so)- Strong sense of morality and a desire to see things change makes Kate a force to be reckoned with. She is able to express her anger and discomforts in ways that aren't damaging or hurtful to others. 

Unhealthy Sexual 1 

Ra’s Al ghul (1w9 sx/so)-In look for a true successor he ends up exploiting both his  daughter and grandchild. His believe that there is a need for the league of assassins to make the world better place is also kind of disjointed. 

Mona Wasserman (1w2 sx/sp)- I considered typing her as an SX2 however I believe her need to maintain Bo near her and constantly demean her fell more into SX1 traits. She is the good guy in the relationship and her overbearing nature is but a need. Even contracting the only person who he has had an emotional connection with.

Tywin Lannister (1w9 sx/sp)- Perfection through his children makes him hyper obsessive man who will deny reality and neglect those same children emotionally if it means it's what's “better” for them. His cruelty towards Tyrion knew no bounds.

“Dear White Evangelicals,

I need to tell you something: People have had it with you. They’re done. They want nothing to do with you any longer, and here’s why: They see your hypocrisy, your inconsistency, your incredibly selective mercy, and your thinly veiled supremacy.

For eight years they watched you relentlessly demonize a black President; a man faithfully married for 26 years; a doting father and husband without a hint of moral scandal or the slightest whiff of infidelity. They watched you deny his personal faith convictions, argue his birthplace, and assail his character—all without cause or evidence.

They saw you brandish Scriptures to malign him and use the laziest of racial stereotypes in criticizing him. And through it all, White Evangelicals—you never once suggested that God placed him where he was, you never publicly offered prayers for him and his family, you never welcomed him to your Christian Universities, you never gave him the benefit of the doubt in any instance, you never spoke of offering him forgiveness or mercy, your evangelists never publicly thanked God for his leadership, your pastors never took to the pulpit to offer solidarity with him, you never made any effort to affirm his humanity or show the love of Jesus to him in any quantifiable measure.

You violently opposed him at every single turn—without offering a single ounce of the grace you claim as the heart of your faith tradition. You jettisoned Jesus as you dispensed damnation on him.

And yet you give carte blanche to a white Republican man so riddled with depravity, so littered with extramarital affairs, so unapologetically vile, with such a vast resume of moral filth—that the mind boggles.

And the change in you is unmistakable. It has been an astonishing conversion to behold: a being born again.

With him, you suddenly find religion. With him, you’re now willing to offer full absolution. With him, all is forgiven without repentance or admission. With him, you’re suddenly able to see some invisible, deeply buried heart. With him, sin has become unimportant, and compassion no longer a requirement. With him, you see only Providence.

And White Evangelicals, all those people who have had it with you—they see it all clearly.

They recognize the toxic source of your inconsistency.

They see that pigmentation and party are your sole deities. They see that you aren’t interested in perpetuating the love of God or emulating the heart of Jesus.

They see that you aren’t burdened to love the least, or to be agents of compassion, or to care for your Muslim, gay, African, female, or poor neighbors as yourself.

They see that all you’re really interested in doing is making a God in your own ivory image and demanding that the world bow down to it.

They recognize this all about white, Republican Jesus—not dark-skinned Jesus of Nazareth.

And I know you don’t realize it, but you’re digging your own grave these days; the grave of your very faith tradition.

Your willingness to align yourself with cruelty is a costly marriage.

Yes, you’ve gained a Supreme Court seat, a few months with the Presidency as a mouthpiece, and the cheap high of temporary power—but you’ve lost a whole lot more.

You’ve lost an audience with millions of wise, decent, good-hearted, faithful people with eyes to see this ugliness. You’ve lost any moral high ground or spiritual authority with a generation. You’ve lost any semblance of Christlikeness. You’ve lost the plot. And most of all you’ve lost your soul.

I know it’s likely you’ll dismiss these words. The fact that you’ve even made your bed with such malevolence, shows how far gone you are and how insulated you are from the reality in front of you. But I had to at least try to reach you. It’s what Jesus would do.”

John Pavlovitz

(Christian pastor and author)

Tiefling

To be greeted with stares and whispers to suffer violence and insult on the street to see mistrust and fear in every eye: this is the lot of the Tiefling. And to twist the knife Tieflings know that this is because a pact struck generations ago infused the essence of Asmodeus (Overlord of the Nine Hells.) into their bloodline. Their appearance and their nature are not their fault but the result of an ancient sin for which they and their children and their children's children will always be held accountable. Tieflings are derived from human bloodlines and in the broadest possible sense they still look human. However their infernal heritage has left a clear imprint on their appearance. Tieflings have large horns that take any variety of shapes: some have curling horns like a ram, others have straight and tall horns like a gazelle's and some spiral upward like an antelopes horns. They have thick tails 4 to 5 feet long which lash or coil around their legs when they get upset or nervous. Their canine teeth are sharply pointed and their eyes are solid colors (Black red white silver or gold) with no visible sclera or pupil. Their skin tones cover the full range of human coloration but also include various shades of red. Their hair cascading down from their horns is usually dark from black or brown to dark red blue or purple. Tieflings subsist in small minorities found mostly in human cities or towns often in the roughest quarters of those places where they grow up to be swindlers thieves or crime lords. Sometimes they live among other minority populations in enclaves where they are treated with more respect. Lacking a homeland Tieflings know that they have to make their own way in the world and that they have to be strong to survive. They are not quick to trust anyone who claims to be a friend but when a Tieflings companions demonstrate that they trust him or her the Tiefling learns to extend the same trust to them. And once a Tiefling gives someone loyalty the Tiefling is a firm friend or ally for life. People tend to be suspicious of Tieflings assuming that their infernal heritage has left its mark on their personality and morality not just their appearance. Shopkeepers keep a close eye on their goods when Tieflings enter their stores the town watch might follow a Tiefling around for a while. and demagogues blame Tieflings for strange happenings. The reality though is that a Tiefling's bloodline doesn't affect his or her personality to any degree. Years of dealing with mistrust does leave its mark on most Tieflings and they respond to it in different ways. Some choose to live up to the wicked stereotype but others are virtuous. Most are simply very aware of how people respond to them. After dealing with this mistrust throughout youth a Tiefling often develops the ability to overcome prejudice through charm or intimidation.

Traits

Intelligence increases by 1 and Charisma increases by 2. Tieflings mature at the same rate as humans but live a few years longer (105). Tieflings might not have an innate tendency toward evil but many of them end up there. Evil or not an independent nature inclines may Tieflings toward a chaotic alignment. Tieflings are about the same size and build as humans. Your size is medium Your walking speed is 30 feet.

Darkvision: Thanks to your infernal heritage you have superior vision in dark and dim conditions. You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light and in darkness as if it were dim light. You can't discern color in darkness only shades of gray.

Hellish Resistance: You have resistance (Half damage) to fire damage.

Infernal Legacy: You know the cantrip Thaumaturgy. When you reach 3rd level, you can cast the spell Hellish Rebuke as a 2nd level spell once with this trait and regain the ability to do so when you finish a long rest (Note you need to be damaged in order to use Hellish Rebuke). When you reach 5th level you can cast the spell Darkness once with this trait and regain the ability to do so after you finish a long rest. Charisma is your spellcasting ability for these spells.

Languages: You can speak read and write Common and Infernal.

How NPCS react to Tieflings: Half-Orcs are greeted with a practical caution but Tieflings are the subject of supernatural fear. The evil of their heritage is plainly visible in their features and as far as most people are concerned a Tiefling could very well be a devil straight from the Nine Hells. People might make warding signs as a Tiefling approaches cross the street to avoid passing near or bar shop doors before a Tiefling can enter.

Source: Players Handbook

The Stereotyping of the Left

Woke is a Chud bad joke.

Stephen Jay Morris

8/6/2023

©Scientific Morality

One aspect of oppositional propaganda the conservative Right hasn’t mastered is the art of stereotyping. All of history’s Left wing tropes have made a better impact than racist conservatives’ caricatures of people of color. The latter’s tripe includes Black face; bucktoothed, Japanese soldiers; dumb blondes; hook-nosed Jews; pencil thin homosexuals; and women depicted as scared little girls who were stupid and needy. Left wing propaganda was more effective, i.e.: the drawings of the workers depicted as Roman Gods; the image of the all-woman work force during World War Two, otherwise known as “Rosie the Riveter”—a female worker flexing her muscle. These images were complimentary to the oppressed masses.

The Right wing has never been astute of the arts. They are not a creative or romantic people. As such, they must imitate the art culture of the Left. But, in so doing, it all falls flat on its face, with cringe! They act like spectators watching Jesus Christ wearing the crown of thorns and carrying the cross. They mock, heckle, and laugh. The good are accused of being bad and vice versa. This has been the plight of human behavior for thousands of years.

So how do they make Leftists look? Before I get into that, let me clarify that these stereotypes are nothing new.

How do they depict the Left? The Right wing’s propaganda alternates between these two stereotypes: the effeminate male, which in today’s vernacular is called, a soy boy,” created to make the Left look weak and clueless, henpecked by feminists and anally raped by Black men. The other: that of the scary Leftist monster that is demonic and eats white children, or has sex with them. Due to the Right’s anti-intellectual bent—they are, after all, Anti-Intelligentsia—they focus on the source of intelligentsia, the place of learning:  the college campus. As most know, reality has a Left wing bias. It's fucking true! Come on! What did the Right ever do to enhance America? Not a damn thing! So, they attack and attack the universities.

Due to their misogyny, they make all the Left-wing culprits appear to be emotional and hysterical females. They get a sadistic thrill and make money from this hate porn. Their Left wing characters have pink hair and thick glasses, and their bodies are full of tattoos. They claim that the Left has school programs where white children must stand at the front of their classrooms and apologize to the Black kids for having been mean to them for 400 years. They propagate that there are rules in place which state that, when a white person stares at a Black person for more than two seconds, the former is a racist. Other rules require boys to wear dresses in class and permit the girls to lift up their skirts. The Right also claims that the Left places urinals in girls’ bathrooms to accommodate trans males.

Alas! These things do not occur! But the religious Right has paranoid fantasies. Fact: there is no CRT curriculum in any public school in the country.  The course is offered in graduate law school, but only as an elective; it is not a requirement!

These woke stereotypes abound because propaganda is a masquerade for lying. Most CHUDs are liars. Most CHUDS are also grifters, opportunists, attention whores, and mentally ill. There are more narcissists in the conservative movement than there are in the progressive. Their narcissism is evident by their proclivity to project: they accuse the Left of everything of which they are guilty!

Someday, the American people will catch on that these cretins are full of shit, and they will be tarred and feathered!

At which point, I will ask, “where’s my microwave popcorn?”

K, L, and Z 👀👀👀

This totally hasn’t been getting dusty or anything in my askbox, ahahahahahaha -_-

I’m probably gonna use TFP for this just for ease because things it could get confusing 👁️👄👁️

Answering ~

|| 🍍• K- What character has your favorite development arc/the best development arc?

~ Controversial but Megatron. No, don’t worry, I’m not talking about the lacklustre redemption arc - not fully anyways. If you know me outside of my boy Wheeljack, you’ll know this spiky boy is probably one of, if not, my favourite character. He’s just got so many layers - evidentially mostly evil but still.

I like how Megatron goes full circle. He starts off in the beginning of canon with relatively decent concepts and thoughts and then falls off the revolution wagon to dictatorville. It’s poetic because, he becomes what he wanted to destroy. And it doesn’t take some ex-bff-librarian-turned-disciple-of-God to show him he’s messed up a lot…it’s fucking robo Satan. Megatron is forced to endure a brief glimpse of life trapped under the hellish whims of another, and in turns is forced to see how life has become for every Decepticon beneath him. He’s reduced to somewhat reliving the little freedom he had aeons ago with the caste-system still intact. I mean at one point he covers/shields his face when Unicron looms over him when the Chaos Bringer says: “You possess nothing. It is I that posses all you were, and ever will be.” Like, call it what you want…justice served to a tyrant…but I see it as fear. Megatron thrives as the controller but not the controlled. There’s evident trauma there.

This whole circle cycle thingy he’s got going on is further elucidated when Megatron orders the Predacon clones to be eradicated…because they were too risky because they would be too powerful…kinda like a wayward gladiator bent on changing the world…👀

L- Say something genuinely nice about a character who isn't one of your faves. (Characters you're neutral about are fair game, as are characters you merely dislike. Characters that you absolutely loathe with the fire of ten thousand suns are exempt, as there is no point in giving yourself an aneurysm over a character that you hate.)

~ Arcee genuinely cares about others a lot, and that’s good. She’s not one of my massive massive faves, but I appreciate her character’s arc/backstory is a bit dark. I generally dislike the Autobots to be fair solely with the black/white narrative of : “we’re the good guys, those guys are fucked”

Z- Just ramble about something fan-related, go go go! (Prompts optional but encouraged.)

~ tfp would’ve been infinitely better if the morals and ethics of everyone had been questioned. The cons actually seen as caring for others, soldier to soldier. The bots answering for all the killings they’ve committed as the supposed good guys. All of this happening during like a ceasefire/truce with all the characters would’ve been GREAT. Better, non-stereotypical queer representation!!

I read your post about how Audrey and Evie are portrayed when it comes to girliness, and I just want to ask: Why must you and so many other people blame all the problems in Descendants on racism? BTW, I'm black, and I'm only letting you know this because I feel like I can't send in a question on race on anon without people assuming I'm white.

Sure, yeah, I have nothing against you stating your race.

The disconnect I think we see here is that people who ask this question seem like they're operating with a misunderstanding of what is meant when we say that there is a problem of racism in the franchise.

I think a lot of people interpret that as an accusation that, in the writers room, someone had the idea to insidiously plant negative depictions of black women. Which isn't impossible, but I wasn't in the writers room, I don't know anyone who was, and I don't necessarily care what they were thinking. They could have been twirling their mustaches thinking about how much they hate black women, or they could have been happily scrawling out the movie of their dreams without a single thought given to race. It doesn't matter, because we're referring to racism as it manifests in the finished product, not the imagination of the creators.

I say there is racism at work because the observable narrative components of the series trend more negatively for black characters. Even if the screenwriters had the most innocent of intentions, the product they created has an observable bias against the black characters.

Why are Audrey and Uma treated as villains while Mal is treated as a misguided/misunderstood hero despite having no moral high ground over either of them? Because the series isn't very well-written. Because the series has protagonist-centered morality. But the effect of that poor writing is that racism was done. Every black girl in the series is written as a villain. (Celia is the weirdest case, because she doesn't do anything wrong in the whole movie, but she's still painted as a trickster, marketed as a potential main antagonist, and gets introduced BY MAL with a line about how she could use Remedial Goodness.) Every white girl in the series is written as a hero. Even though Jane and Lonnie (Lonnie is not white, but she's relevant to this conversation) were as prejudiced as Audrey in the first movie, they are treated as friends to the VKs and Audrey is treated as an enemy. The black girl villains only cease to be villains when they befriend the white protagonist and stop holding any of her actions against her. Mal being passive aggressive is charming; Audrey being passive aggressive is proof that she's a villain. Mal teasing Uma is funny and heroic; Uma teasing Mal is mean and menacing.

Why is Audrey's girliness vilified and Evie's girliness celebrated? Because they decided early on that Evie is a protagonist and Audrey is an antagonist and were operating within that cognitive dissonance that anything Evie enjoyed should be celebrated and anything Audrey enjoyed shouldn't. Because they want to appeal to the girly-girls by giving them Evie to emulate and buy merch of, but they also want to use the narrative trope that mean girls wear pink and girls who wear pink are shallow and vain. But because they made those choices, the effect is that non-black girls in the story have their interests celebrated and black girls receive scorn for the same interests. That is contained in the product they made.

Prejudice of any kind is a passive filter on one's perception of the world that requires activity to overcome. If you're writing something without giving thought to race, racism will likely appear, because history, and the history of filmmaking, is full of so many racial stereotypes that taking a mental shortcut has a good chance of veering you right into them.

(Also, people's tolerance for meanness from black characters tends to be lower than their tolerance for meanness in white characters, and writers are people. The Black Best Friend trope and the Magical Negro trope creates an expectation that black characters should be selflessly loving to white characters, and there is discomfort when they aren't.)

Arguing whether or not racism is to blame for the problems in the franchise is, in my opinion, a pretty tedious choice of argument. It isn't a question, because racism is there as an observable effect of either an active malice or a passive prejudice or just carelessness. The series treats its black girls poorly in very cut-and-dry ways; each of them is pretty much a carbon copy of a lighter-skinned character, but with less sympathy given to them. Uma is an altruistic version of Mal, treated with less sympathy. Audrey is more privileged Evie, treated with less sympathy. Celia is Dizzy, but a tRIcKsTeR!! Treated with less sympathy. I enjoy the characters, and I enjoy the movies, but the dissonance in treatment for these characters is obvious and the effect is racism.

Dear White Evangelicals

Dear White Evangelicals,I need to tell you something: People have had it with you. They’re done. They want nothing to do with you any longer, and here’s why:

They see your hypocrisy, your inconsistency, your incredibly selective mercy, and your thinly veiled supremacy.For eight years they watched you relentlessly demonize a black President; a man faithfully married for 26 years; a doting father and husband without a hint of moral scandal or the slightest whiff of infidelity. They watched you deny his personal faith convictions, argue his birthplace, and assail his character—all without cause or evidence.

They saw you brandish Scriptures to malign him and use the laziest of racial stereotypes in criticizing him. And through it all, White Evangelicals—you never once suggested that God placed him where he was, you never publicly offered prayers for him and his family, you never welcomed him to your Christian Universities, you never gave him the benefit of the doubt in any instance, you never spoke of offering him forgiveness or mercy, your evangelists never publicly thanked God for his leadership, your pastors never took to the pulpit to offer solidarity with him, you never made any effort to affirm his humanity or show the love of Jesus to him in any quantifiable measure.You violently opposed him at every single turn—without offering a single ounce of the grace you claim as the heart of your faith tradition. You jettisoned Jesus as you dispensed damnation on him.

And yet you give carte blanche to a white Republican man so riddled with depravity, so littered with extramarital affairs, so unapologetically vile, with such a vast resume of moral filth, that the mind boggles.And the change in you is unmistakable. It has been an astonishing conversion to behold: a being born again.

With him, you suddenly find religion. With him, you’re now willing to offer full absolution. With him, all is forgiven without repentance or admission. With him, you’re suddenly able to see some invisible, deeply buried heart. With him, sin has become unimportant, and compassion no longer a requirement. With him, you see only Providence.

And White Evangelicals, all those people who have had it with you—they see it all clearly. They recognize the toxic source of your inconsistency.They see that pigmentation and party are your sole deities. They see that you aren’t interested in perpetuating the love of God or emulating the heart of Jesus. They see that you aren’t burdened to love the least, or to be agents of compassion, or to care for your Muslim, gay, African, female, or poor neighbors as yourself.

They see that all you’re really interested in doing is making a God in your own ivory image and demanding that the world bow down to it. They recognize this all about white, Republican Jesus—not the dark-skinned Jesus of Nazareth.And I know you don’t realize it, but you’re digging your own grave these days; the grave of your very faith tradition.

Your willingness to align yourself with cruelty is a costly marriage. Yes, you’ve gained a Supreme Court seat, a few months with the Presidency as a mouthpiece, and the cheap high of temporary power—but you’ve lost a whole lot more.

You’ve lost an audience with millions of wise, decent, good-hearted, faithful people with eyes to see this ugliness. You’ve lost any moral high ground or spiritual authority with a generation. You’ve lost any semblance of Christlikeness. You’ve lost the plot. And most of all you’ve lost your soul.

I know it’s likely you’ll dismiss these words. The fact that you’ve even made your bed with such malevolence shows how far gone you are and how insulated you are from the reality in front of you. But I had to at least try to reach you. It’s what Jesus would do.

John Pavlovitz

Christian pastor and author

I posted 267 times in 2022

That's 60 more posts than 2021!

11 posts created (4%)

256 posts reblogged (96%)

Blogs I reblogged the most:

@maeraevokaya

@nonbinaryvulcan

@nervousspacerobot

@springmagpies

@xspuhurax

I tagged 258 of my posts in 2022

Only 3% of my posts had no tags

#star trek - 75 posts

#lmao - 68 posts

#spock - 44 posts

#schn tgai spock - 42 posts

#nyota uhura - 37 posts

#spuhura - 31 posts

#aos - 28 posts

#benvi - 27 posts

#ben gross - 26 posts

#never have i ever spoilers - 26 posts

Longest Tag: 91 characters

#literally the number of times ive pressed that damned button on multiple separate occasions

My Top Posts in 2022:

#5

Don't reblog. Take a screenshot and upload it, but tag your OTPs.

4 notes - Posted November 23, 2022

#4

So what’s up with (SNW) Spock’s side burns???

See the full post

39 notes - Posted July 26, 2022

#3

I can’t wait for all the Benvi gifsets and fanvids, y’all. So excited!

59 notes - Posted August 12, 2022

#2

Hello, noticed you ship spock/uhura from the trek series, i was going to ask have you seen the new show strange new worlds and what are your thoughts about the uhura and the casting. please feel free to be honest. i personally think she is totally miscast and looks like a masculine man and they have downgraded uhura on the show so she is no threat to anyone, reason why the uhura in snw is presented as a very ugly masculine teenager. however if u voice that opinion you are called racist and sexist. i hope all uhura fans can begin to speak out more and be honest about uhura in strange new worlds

Yes, I have seen strange new worlds.

And, I'll be honest, I think Celia is an incredible cast for the role. They're an outspoken person with progressive morals who absolutely fits the legacy of Uhura as a character and the importance of Uhura as someone who challenges the social norms of the time.

As for looking like a "masculine man", I completely disagree. Snw Uhura's gender expression may challenge your perceptions of feminity, but I don't believe she's any less feminine in snw than in other series. She dresses in the "feminine" active duty uniform, wears stereotypically feminine accessories and dons a haircut that, as I've read and witnessed, is extremely popular among the black feminine community (as I white guy, I don't believe I have any right to speak to that authentically, however). A character could not be considered more "typically" feminine unless she adhered to the demeaning and misogynistic tropes of the twentieth century and earlier--such tropes might include "damsel in distress", "all she wants in life is to marry and have kids", "knows nothing/dense as a brick", etc.

I don't see how Uhura is and/or isn't a threat to anyone. And she certainly hasn't been "downgraded" in any way. Although we haven't much character development for her so far in snw, she's at least been given more of a backstory than in any previous series (albeit, it is a very typical family trauma trope, which is a little uncreative, imo). In the second episode, she expresses uncertainty as to her capabilities and her posting, then proceeds to save the day (demonstrating her genuine skill and intelligence and her importance and power as a character, independent of her womanhood). She is young, I'll give you that, but she's no teenager (especially not when compared to Wesley Crusher in tng) and she may have expressed insecurities, but this is to be expected of a fresh (or near fresh, idk) academy graduate who's been awarded an extremely prestigious posting. I would think it a little unrealistic were she not at least a little uncomfortable with her position, no matter how much she has worked for and earnt the position. This, in no way, diminishes her character, it only adds to her authentic characterisation if anything.

Lastly, she's not ugly. She's not at all ugly. She's gorgeous! Have you taken a look at the woman? She's a fashion sense and a beautiful array of facial expressions. And, separate from the character, Celia, too, is a splendid sight. They appear frequently happy, wear incredible outfits and speak out about what they believe in. What could be more beautiful? Though, of course, I understand that beauty is subjective. But to call her "a very ugly masculine teenager" is incredibly minimalising of Uhura as a character and of Celia as a person. To not at least appreciate her style and effort or, at least, respect her with human decency- Would you tell someone to their face that they're "a very ugly masculine teenager"? I reckon not.

I, in no way, mean to label you as "racist and sexist", as your experience with those of my opinion might suggest, though I do believe you should reconsider your perceptions of feminity and of gender expression. Perhaps, you may benefit from a more open mind toward such matters or, simply, a more progressive mindset. If both are too challenging, at least live by the maxim "live and let live" and not judge her for her appearance. To not do so is plain rude and disrespectful.

68 notes - Posted October 26, 2022

My #1 post of 2022

“What if nobody ever loves me? ‘Cause I’m always too much?”

Bruh, Ben’d die if he heard her say that.

1,784 notes - Posted August 12, 2022

Get your Tumblr 2022 Year in Review →

bernard l.

DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS OF AMERICA

14 minutes ago

From John Pavlotiz

An open letter to white evangelicals: We’re done with you.

By North Carolina Pastor John Pavlovitz

Dear White Evangelicals,

I need to tell you something: People have had it with you. They’re done. They want nothing to do with you any longer, and here’s why: They see your hypocrisy, your inconsistency, your incredibly selective mercy, and your thinly veiled supremacy.

For eight years they watched you relentlessly demonize a Black President; a man faithfully married for 26 years; a doting father and husband without a hint of moral scandal or the slightest whiff of infidelity. They watched you deny his personal faith convictions, argue his birthplace, and assail his character—all without cause or evidence.

They saw you brandish Scriptures to malign him and use the laziest of racial stereotypes in criticizing him. And through it all, White Evangelicals—you never once suggested that God placed him where he was, you never publicly offered prayers for him and his family, you never welcomed him to your Christian Universities, you never gave him the benefit of the doubt in any instance, you never spoke of offering him forgiveness or mercy, your evangelists never publicly thanked God for his leadership, your pastors never took to the pulpit to offer solidarity with him, you never made any effort to affirm his humanity or show the love of Jesus to him in any quantifiable measure.

You violently opposed him at every single turn—without offering a single ounce of the grace you claim as the heart of your faith tradition. You jettisoned Jesus as you dispensed damnation on him.

And yet you give carte blanche to a white Republican man so riddled with depravity, so littered with extramarital affairs, so unapologetically vile, with such a vast resume of moral filth—that the mind boggles.

And the change in you is unmistakable. It has been an astonishing conversion to behold: a being born again.

With him, you suddenly find religion. With him, you’re now willing to offer full absolution. With him, all is forgiven without repentance or admission. With him, you’re suddenly able to see some invisible, deeply buried heart. With him, sin has become unimportant, and compassion no longer a requirement. With him, you see only Providence.

And White Evangelicals, all those people who have had it with you—they see it all clearly. They recognize the toxic source of your inconsistency.

They see that pigmentation and party are your sole deities. They see that you aren’t interested in perpetuating the love of God or emulating the heart of Jesus. They see that you aren’t burdened to love the least, or to be agents of compassion, or to care for your Muslim, gay, African, female, or poor neighbors as yourself.

They see that all you’re really interested in doing is making a God in your own ivory image and demanding that the world bow down to it. They recognize this all about white, Republican Jesus—not dark-skinned Jesus of Nazareth.

And I know you don’t realize it, but you’re digging your own grave these days; the grave of your very faith tradition.

Your willingness to align yourself with cruelty is a costly marriage. Yes, you’ve gained a Supreme Court seat, a few months with the Presidency as a mouthpiece, and the cheap high of temporary power—but you’ve lost a whole lot more.

You’ve lost an audience with millions of wise, decent, good-hearted, faithful people with eyes to see this ugliness. You’ve lost any moral high ground or spiritual authority with a generation. You’ve lost any semblance of Christlikeness. You’ve lost the plot. And most of all you’ve lost your soul.

I know it’s likely you’ll dismiss these words. The fact that you’ve even made your bed with such malevolence, shows how far gone you are and how insulated you are from the reality in front of you. But I had to at least try to reach you. It’s what Jesus would do.

ShareEmoji

An open letter to white evangelicals: We’re done with you.

By North Carolina Pastor John Pavlovitz 

Dear White Evangelicals,

I need to tell you something: People have had it with you. They’re done. They want nothing to do with you any longer, and here’s why: They see your hypocrisy, your inconsistency, your incredibly selective mercy, and your thinly veiled supremacy.

For eight years they watched you relentlessly demonize a Black President; a man faithfully married for 26 years; a doting father and husband without a hint of moral scandal or the slightest whiff of infidelity. 

They watched you deny his personal faith convictions, argue his birthplace, and assail his character—all without cause or evidence.

They saw you brandish Scriptures to malign him and use the laziest of racial stereotypes in criticizing him. And through it all, White Evangelicals—you never once suggested that God placed him where he was, you never publicly offered prayers for him and his family, you never welcomed him to your Christian Universities, you never gave him the benefit of the doubt in any instance, you never spoke of offering him forgiveness or mercy, your evangelists never publicly thanked God for his leadership, your pastors never took to the pulpit to offer solidarity with him, you never made any effort to affirm his humanity or show the love of Jesus to him in any quantifiable measure.

You violently opposed him at every single turn—without offering a single ounce of the grace you claim as the heart of your faith tradition. You jettisoned Jesus as you dispensed damnation on him.

And yet you give carte blanche to a white Republican man so riddled with depravity, so littered with extramarital affairs, so unapologetically vile, with such a vast resume of moral filth—that the mind boggles.

And the change in you is unmistakable. It has been an astonishing conversion to behold: a being born again.

With him, you suddenly find religion. With him, you’re now willing to offer full absolution. With him, all is forgiven without repentance or admission. With him, you’re suddenly able to see some invisible, deeply buried heart. With him, sin has become unimportant, and compassion no longer a requirement. With him, you see only Providence.

And White Evangelicals, all those people who have had it with you—they see it all clearly. They recognize the toxic source of your inconsistency.

They see that pigmentation and party are your sole deities. They see that you aren’t interested in perpetuating the love of God or emulating the heart of Jesus. They see that you aren’t burdened to love the least, or to be agents of compassion, or to care for your Muslim, gay, African, female, or poor neighbors as yourself.

They see that all you’re really interested in doing is making a God in your own ivory image and demanding that the world bow down to it. They recognize this all about white, Republican Jesus—not dark-skinned Jesus of Nazareth.

And I know you don’t realize it, but you’re digging your own grave these days; the grave of your very faith tradition.

Your willingness to align yourself with cruelty is a costly marriage. Yes, you’ve gained a Supreme Court seat, a few months with the Presidency as a mouthpiece, and the cheap high of temporary power—but you’ve lost a whole lot more.

You’ve lost an audience with millions of wise, decent, good-hearted, faithful people with eyes to see this ugliness. You’ve lost any moral high ground or spiritual authority with a generation. You’ve lost any semblance of Christlikeness. You’ve lost the plot. And most of all you’ve lost your soul.

I know it’s likely you’ll dismiss these words. The fact that you’ve even made your bed with such malevolence, shows how far gone you are and how insulated you are from the reality in front of you. But I had to at least try to reach you. It’s what Jesus would do.

An open letter to white evangelicals: We’re done with you.

By North Carolina Pastor John Pavlovitz

Dear White Evangelicals,

I need to tell you something: People have had it with you. They’re done. They want nothing to do with you any longer, and here’s why: They see your hypocrisy, your inconsistency, your incredibly selective mercy, and your thinly veiled supremacy.

For eight years they watched you relentlessly demonize a Black President; a man faithfully married for 26 years; a doting father and husband without a hint of moral scandal or the slightest whiff of infidelity. They watched you deny his personal faith convictions, argue his birthplace, and assail his character—all without cause or evidence.

They saw you brandish Scriptures to malign him and use the laziest of racial stereotypes in criticizing him. And through it all, White Evangelicals—you never once suggested that God placed him where he was, you never publicly offered prayers for him and his family, you never welcomed him to your Christian Universities, you never gave him the benefit of the doubt in any instance, you never spoke of offering him forgiveness or mercy, your evangelists never publicly thanked God for his leadership, your pastors never took to the pulpit to offer solidarity with him, you never made any effort to affirm his humanity or show the love of Jesus to him in any quantifiable measure.

You violently opposed him at every single turn—without offering a single ounce of the grace you claim as the heart of your faith tradition. You jettisoned Jesus as you dispensed damnation on him.

And yet you give carte blanche to a white Republican man so riddled with depravity, so littered with extramarital affairs, so unapologetically vile, with such a vast resume of moral filth—that the mind boggles.

And the change in you is unmistakable. It has been an astonishing conversion to behold: a being born again.

With him, you suddenly find religion. With him, you’re now willing to offer full absolution. With him, all is forgiven without repentance or admission. With him, you’re suddenly able to see some invisible, deeply buried heart. With him, sin has become unimportant, and compassion no longer a requirement. With him, you see only Providence.

And White Evangelicals, all those people who have had it with you—they see it all clearly. They recognize the toxic source of your inconsistency.

They see that pigmentation and party are your sole deities. They see that you aren’t interested in perpetuating the love of God or emulating the heart of Jesus. They see that you aren’t burdened to love the least, or to be agents of compassion, or to care for your Muslim, gay, African, female, or poor neighbors as yourself.

They see that all you’re really interested in doing is making a God in your own ivory image and demanding that the world bow down to it. They recognize this all about white, Republican Jesus—not dark-skinned Jesus of Nazareth.

And I know you don’t realize it, but you’re digging your own grave these days; the grave of your very faith tradition.

Your willingness to align yourself with cruelty is a costly marriage. Yes, you’ve gained a Supreme Court seat, a few months with the Presidency as a mouthpiece, and the cheap high of temporary power—but you’ve lost a whole lot more.

You’ve lost an audience with millions of wise, decent, good-hearted, faithful people with eyes to see this ugliness. You’ve lost any moral high ground or spiritual authority with a generation. You’ve lost any semblance of Christlikeness. You’ve lost the plot. And most of all you’ve lost your soul.

I know it’s likely you’ll dismiss these words. The fact that you’ve even made your bed with such malevolence, shows how far gone you are and how insulated you are from the reality in front of you. But I had to at least try to reach you. It’s what Jesus would do.

#done

An open letter to white evangelicals: We’re done with you.

By North Carolina Pastor John Pavlovitz

Dear White Evangelicals,

I need to tell you something: People have had it with you. They’re done. They want nothing to do with you any longer, and here’s why: They see your hypocrisy, your inconsistency, your incredibly selective mercy, and your thinly veiled supremacy.

For eight years they watched you relentlessly demonize a Black President; a man faithfully married for 26 years; a doting father and husband without a hint of moral scandal or the slightest whiff of infidelity. They watched you deny his personal faith convictions, argue his birthplace, and assail his character—all without cause or evidence.

They saw you brandish Scriptures to malign him and use the laziest of racial stereotypes in criticizing him. And through it all, White Evangelicals—you never once suggested that God placed him where he was, you never publicly offered prayers for him and his family, you never welcomed him to your Christian Universities, you never gave him the benefit of the doubt in any instance, you never spoke of offering him forgiveness or mercy, your evangelists never publicly thanked God for his leadership, your pastors never took to the pulpit to offer solidarity with him, you never made any effort to affirm his humanity or show the love of Jesus to him in any quantifiable measure.

You violently opposed him at every single turn—without offering a single ounce of the grace you claim as the heart of your faith tradition. You jettisoned Jesus as you dispensed damnation on him.

And yet you give carte blanche to a white Republican man so riddled with depravity, so littered with extramarital affairs, so unapologetically vile, with such a vast resume of moral filth—that the mind boggles.

And the change in you is unmistakable. It has been an astonishing conversion to behold: a being born again.

With him, you suddenly find religion. With him, you’re now willing to offer full absolution. With him, all is forgiven without repentance or admission. With him, you’re suddenly able to see some invisible, deeply buried heart. With him, sin has become unimportant, and compassion no longer a requirement. With him, you see only Providence.

And White Evangelicals, all those people who have had it with you—they see it all clearly. They recognize the toxic source of your inconsistency.

They see that pigmentation and party are your sole deities. They see that you aren’t interested in perpetuating the love of God or emulating the heart of Jesus. They see that you aren’t burdened to love the least, or to be agents of compassion, or to care for your Muslim, gay, African, female, or poor neighbors as yourself.

They see that all you’re really interested in doing is making a God in your own ivory image and demanding that the world bow down to it. They recognize this all about white, Republican Jesus—not dark-skinned Jesus of Nazareth.

And I know you don’t realize it, but you’re digging your own grave these days; the grave of your very faith tradition.

Your willingness to align yourself with cruelty is a costly marriage. Yes, you’ve gained a Supreme Court seat, a few months with the Presidency as a mouthpiece, and the cheap high of temporary power—but you’ve lost a whole lot more.

You’ve lost an audience with millions of wise, decent, good-hearted, faithful people with eyes to see this ugliness. You’ve lost any moral high ground or spiritual authority with a generation. You’ve lost any semblance of Christlikeness. You’ve lost the plot. And most of all you’ve lost your soul.

I know it’s likely you’ll dismiss these words. The fact that you’ve even made your bed with such malevolence, shows how far gone you are and how insulated you are from the reality in front of you. But I had to at least try to reach you. It’s what Jesus would do.

#done John Pavlovitz

Morality in Wolf 359

A month ago, I made this post about how Wolf 359 doesn’t have any good or bad characters, just people making choices. I also said I’d write a full-length essay about this topic. Well, here’s the essay! Be warned, it’s a hefty 2400 words, because I wanted to be thorough. If you don’t want to read all that, here’s a TL,DR.

People who were interested in reading this: @commsroom, @a-side-character, @firstofficerrose, @afrogsmoraldilemma

Now without further ado, the essay, below the read more.

Wolf 359 is fantastic for many, many reasons, one of the most prominent being its amazing cast of characters. The podcast is practically a masterclass in interesting and nuanced character development, and a huge contributing factor to this is the continual subversion of the hero and villain labels. As Wolf 359 continues into the later seasons, it becomes obvious that while these roles exist in the narrative to an extent, they are not nearly as black and white as we would expect. There simply aren’t “good” or “bad” people of Wolf 359; there’s just people, making decisions, and those decisions can either hurt people or help people.

Wolf 359 is an utterly unpredictable and insane story, with constant (and might I add, incredible) plot twists. There is, however, at least one predictable cycle, which I like to call the “villain escalation”. Basically, the previous “bad guy” gets replaced by another, even bigger threat, which demotes the old villain to “morally grey supporting character”. The new threat forces our main protagonists to cooperate with the old threat, leaving room for the old “bad guy” to change their behavior and develop more complex relationships with both the other characters and the audience. Now, this isn’t the only way Wolf 359 removes the hero/villain labels from the equation, but it’s one of the most prominent. By my count, it happens 3 times over the course of the podcast, though that could be extended to 4 or even 5 depending on how you classify a “new threat”.

The first subject of villain escalation is Dr. Alexander Hilbert/Elias Selberg/Dmitri Volodin, caused by Captain Isabel Lovelace. Hilbert starts as such a stereotypical villain it’s almost comical. I mean, the evil Russian scientist is manipulating our heroes and performing unethical experiments on them; it can’t get much more stereotypical than that. Then Lovelace comes aboard, and suddenly he’s an ally against her. It’s a very uneasy alliance to be sure, but an alliance nonetheless. (Note that Eiffel and Minkowski do accept help from Hilbert before Lovelace arrives, but it’s mostly done by force, and the real turning point in the perception of his character occurs after she comes to the station.) Through this alliance, we learn more about Hilbert: his past, his motivations, his personality. He’s brutal sometimes, yes, and cruel, and externally callous. But he is also motivated by a genuine desire to save people. He had a family, a sister, who fell victim to radiation poisoning, which inspired him to pursue science and push further. When Eiffel is sick, he does everything he can to save him. He repeats over and over again that he did the things he did out of a sincere desire to make the world a better place. Dmitri Volodin is not just an evil monster, and for most of the podcast, he’s on the side of the “heroes”. This pushes the audience and even some of the main characters to start genuinely caring for him, to some extent.

Crucially, though, this does not absolve him. Hilbert may not have been causing pain and death just for the fun of it, but still he did cause pain and death. And it’s all for nothing, anyway, because the Decima experiment is a failure, but even if we ignore that fact, what he did was unjustifiable. (We shouldn’t ignore that failure, btw, but that’s a topic for another essay.) It doesn’t matter what “greater good” he was working toward – he committed atrocities, and there’s no justifying that. And none of the people he has wronged ever forgive him. They work with him, they talk to him, even protect him if necessary, but forgiveness is never considered. Alexander Hilbert, while maybe not a bad person, is certainly not a good person. Even after his death, he doesn’t get to be redeemed.

I said before that this development comes as a result of the villain escalation, from Hilbert to Lovelace. That’s true, considering how I defined villain escalation, but it’s important to clarify that Lovelace was never an outright villain, instead existing as a morally grey character from her first introduction. She absolutely and seriously threatens all the main characters, making it very obvious that she will hurt them if she needs to in order to reach her goal. But at the same time, she’s their best shot at making it off the Hephaestus alive. It’s also clear that that Lovelace’s aggression, paranoia, and callousness comes from a place of trauma, and that despite her harsh exterior and frequent threats, she does want to get everyone out of this situation alive. She cares about them, in her own way. Really, I think her character in season 2 can be summed up by two occurrences. In episode 26, she saves Doug Eiffel’s life, on purpose, with her blood donation, but in episode 28, she very nearly kills him, on accident, with her explosive rig. She wants to save people, but her paranoia and rage makes it so that she hurts people instead. And just as it was with Hilbert, her trauma is not an excuse. What matters most is whether she helps the people around her or harms them, and in season 2, she does both in equal measure.

We also see an interesting dimension of morality in the interactions between Hilbert/Selbert. The worst of Lovelace comes out when she’s with him. He’s the one who killed most of her crew, so she wants revenge on him personally almost as much as she wants revenge on Goddard Futuristics. In seeking revenge, she becomes her worst self. She gets violent, self-centered, becoming willing to hurt any number of people to reach her goal, in a way that is explicitly portrayed as a foil for Hilbert’s obsession with the Decima virus. It’s interesting, because when you compare them, the more “villainous” character, Hilbert, has significantly more noble intentions. Potentially saving lives with a revolutionary medical treatment is a lot more moral than tearing down the people who hurt you. And yet Hilbert is not more moral than Lovelace. This shows that intention is not as important as the effect you have on the people around you. It also shows how goodness is not innate, because Lovelace and Hilbert are quite similar in a lot of ways; they’re both consistently down with murder, for one, but there’s more subtle similarities as well. Thus the reason Lovelace is placed closer to the “good” end of the spectrum by the narrative can’t be because of some inherent morality. Instead, it must be because over the course of her life she has helped people more often than she has hurt them. Hilbert, on the other hand, has hurt much more often than he’s helped. Their day to day actions and decisions are what give them their moral statuses and roles in the narrative, not some designated classification of being a good or a bad person – both of them aren’t either.

The 2nd instance of villain escalation comes when the SI-5 board the station. At this point, we’ve been somewhat primed to view characters in moral shades of grey, but it’s still pretty obvious that they’re “bad guys”. There are repeated references to atrocities the SI-5 have committed, and they never let the main characters forget that they are in charge and that they would do terrible things to them if the situation calls for it. They’re opposite Lovelace, in a way, in that they are externally friendly, pleasant, and helpful, while being internally willing to harm any number of people. But still they’re human. Still they don’t deserve to be murdered, as Eiffel repeatedly reminds everyone.

The SI-5 members claim, as Hilbert did, to be working on behalf of a greater good that’s worth plenty of immoral actions (though to be honest, I’m doubtful how much they really believed that and how much they convinced themselves of it just because they liked being a part of something. But that’s a topic for another day). And as with Hilbert, this is not a justification. It’s more of the same, really. Maxwell cares for and helps Hera, but she still violates her autonomy in a pretty brutal way. Jacobi breaks after the mutiny, and in his brokenness becomes sympathetic, but still is not a completely good person. Then the 3rd and final villain escalation, the arrival of Cutter and Pryce, push both Jacobi and Kepler to make the decision to do the right thing and help the people around them. It’s not that any of them become good or become bad as things progress, or even that they were good or bad in the first place. They always had the capacity to do good things, we just didn’t see much of that side until the stakes got high enough. Their character shows in the decisions they make and the sides they choose to stand on.

Villain escalation is not the only way Wolf 359 flips the script on “hero” and “villain” roles. It also shows us that the protagonists, the “good guys”, can do bad things, and those bad things aren’t justified just because the people are good. Minkowski and Hera are lesser examples of this. Both of them hurt people: Hera tries to kill crew members multiple times and often lets her anger get the better of her, while Minkowski occasionally advocates for murder and actually does kill Maxwell. Minkowski also can hurt the people she cares about in a misguided attempt at leadership, such as when she sends Eiffel away in the finale. But again, these examples are relatively minor, though they are a further illustration of the fact that even seemingly good people can cause harm. The biggest subversion comes from Doug Eiffel.

For the first half of the podcast, Eiffel is portrayed as a semi-irresponsible goofball, who can be a bit of an ass but who is at worst harmless, and at best a resourceful and honorable man. This character assessment doesn’t stop being true, exactly. However, after about 40 episodes, we learn that he is also a man who ruined lives, for completely selfish and destructive reasons. That’s not something you can just overlook, or forgive. Once again, there’s no justification or absolution, even though Eiffel was at rock bottom and struggling with addiction. He did something awful, full stop, and our previous perception of him as a good person is flipped completely on its head.

Eiffel’s also shown to be a bit of a shithead even in the present day, on the Hephaestus. He commits microaggressions frequently as discussed in episode 51, “Shut Up and Listen”, and when confronted with this, he goes sullen and withdrawn. The harm there was unintentional, but it’s treated as just as real and damaging as all the other crazy threats the crew faces. This is a unique case, because Eiffel is actually forgiven by the people he’s wronged (Minkowski, Hera, and Lovelace), but that forgiveness comes because he made a tangible effort to do better, not because “he’s a good guy at heart” or some similar BS. All this is to say, Doug Eiffel isn’t necessarily a good person. He does good things and he does awful things, but because he makes the decision over and over to be helpful, and moral, and better, he is someone that the audience can root for.

I hope by now I’ve fully convinced you that Wolf 359 does not have any heroes or villains, merely people who are working with what circumstances they have, making decisions to either help those around them or harm them. This is a fairly radical position for a piece of media to have, with clear implications for the justice system and punishment. Wolf 359 doesn’t hesitate to explore those implications, either. It is extremely obvious that killing people, even if those people pose a threat to you, even if those people are seemingly reprehensible, is always immoral. The “villains” are kept alive whenever possible, and in those moments where they are killed, it is never a victory, always a tragedy. Mr. Cutter might be an exception, though I imagine Minkowski will still struggle post-canon with the fact that she took his life. That has interesting implications in the anti-capitalist part of the show’s messaging, as it implies that once someone causes a certain level of harm (as billionaires do), killing them becomes the lesser of two evils despite not being a moral act in and of itself. But honestly, I don’t feel equipped to unpack that right now. I will just say, that Wolf 359 wholeheartedly condemns capital punishment, which is of course a necessary consequence of the idea that people are not fully good or bad. You cannot kill only the bad people, because there are no bad people. Therefore capital punishment is just murder, and it cannot be justified.

I also really appreciate this position because it’s distinctly different from a redemption arc. No one is redeemed for their past. Hell, most of them don’t even apologize for their past behavior. They just start doing better. That’s a level of nuance I’ve almost never seen, and it offers fascinating commentary on the ideas of restorative justice. Wolf 359 tells us that even people who do awful, unforgiveable things can do better. No one is in a fixed moral position, and everyone is shaped by their circumstances. But importantly, this does not mean that you have to forgive anyone! You can rehabilitate, work with, and respect people while still recognizing the atrocities in their past, and while still withholding forgiveness. It’s a remarkable endorsement for restorative justice and a really important viewpoint to consider.

In conclusion: Wolf 359 is a fucking amazing podcast, guys. The writing is masterful, and it is incredibly fun and emotional, while also providing a cutting criticism of the current capitalist global system. In regards to morality and justice, it refutes the idea that people are internally “good” or “bad”, instead recognizing that everyone is just a person who does good and bad things, and the balance of these actions can change over a person’s life. This leads to a subtextual endorsement for restorative justice that is very radical (both in the leftist sense and in the cool sense). Overall, it’s a fascinating analysis of human nature and an excellent commentary on how we treat others. I love it so so so much.