Idk If This Is A Warning To Others Or A Mark Of Solidarity

idk if this is a warning to others or a mark of solidarity

reblog if you wear glasses. too many mutuals don't know they have glasses wearers in their midsts

You know, having characters as parts of a computer is pretty close to stuff that's already happened in TMA. For instance, when Gerry was stuck in a book without anything to do, he was a Keay, bored.

ok you know what? gwen assuming sam did something fucked up in order to consider joining the OIAR has got to be projection. she snaps back when he asks her why she joined and I just have to believe the reasons for each one of them joining aren't too savory. also, gwen doesn't want to talk about why she joins but she wants to climb the ladder? she Definitely is looking for something and that is Not a job. honestly maybe the non-puppeted by jonah version of elias bouchard might have burned down at the institute? might be a thing there???

i looooove characters who are sacrificial lamb coded. characters who have never lived for themselves. characters born to be a tool, a weapon, a sacrifice, all of the above. a character raised by the heroes to save the world, at any expense, even their own health, even their own life. a character raised by the villains to end the world, at any expense, even their own health, even their own life. characters who are denied personhood so they can be used as tools instead. characters who never even had a chance to be people because they were shaped into something else from the moment they were born. characters who were born to die.

are we allowed to talk about the magnus protocol yet ? because early release came out & i’ve already listened to the first episodes like 5 times.

If there's one specific distinct thing that I do that pissess off a very specific type of people to no end, it's my insistence on distinguishing between short term discomfort and long term damage. These are two completely different things for me, and if someone tells me "don't do that, it's bad for you", I need to know which one it is so I can respond accordingly.

I do not give a shit about short term discomfort. If the negative effect of something is only temporary, I'd rather endure the consequences of my action than waste my sparse brain cells in efforts to avoid it. I have a high pain tolerance and if something is only going to be temporary and inconvenient, I can handle it just fine without complaining of the consequences of my actions.

But I do care about long term damage. Unlike temporary inconvenience, small damage that gradually builds up over time and only gets progressively worse is a serious consequence that is worth the effort to avoid. And to someone who does not make this kind of distinctions, my way of sorting things into "super important, must be followed with absolute commitment" and "I cannot verbally express how little I give a shit about this" seems infuriatingly arbitrary. And once this type of people figure out why I want to know why I'm not supposed to do something, they'll refuse to tell me because they hate it when I contemplate the answer and elect to ignore it.

For example, I do not give a shit about sunburn, but I do give a shit about skin cancer. If the only consequence of being unprotected in the sun was my skin peeling off sometimes, I don't think I'd bother with sun screen. But because the sun damage accumulates and builds up over time into long term damage, I do not play stupid with sunscreen. The same with everything else.

I currently have a thin layer of superglue covering the tips of several of my fingers because "don't get superglue on your fingers" is a temporary inconvenience. It'll wear off eventually.