This is the place where you can personalize your profile!
By moving, adding and personalizing widgets.
You can drag and drop to rearrange.
You can edit widgets to customize them.
The bottom has widgets you can add!
Some widgets you can only access when you get Core Membership.
Some widgets have options that are only available when you get Core Membership.
We've split the page into zones!
Certain widgets can only be added to certain zones.
"Why," you ask? Because we want profile pages to have freedom of customization, but also to have some consistency. This way, when anyone visits a deviant, they know they can always find the art in the top left, and personal info in the top right.
Don't forget, restraints can bring out the creativity in you!
Now go forth and astound us all with your devious profiles!
Feel free to browse through my gallery folders! My "Featured" folder contains what I feel is my highest quality, but also non-controversial artwork. My other folders contain my other works. I enjoy working with many different styles, subject matter, and mediums.
I often deal with hard subjects in my stamps, journals, and comics, but I welcome respectful disagreements. I have a strong conviction that topics that are considered "taboo" by the general public are topics that most need being brought to light and discussed. I wish more people would be willing to talk about these such topics, although perhaps not around children. So while my paintings generally don't deal with taboo or gritty subjects, my writing definitely does.
Feel free to share my artwork on DA and other websites, but please credit me if you do so. Thank you!
ABOUT ME Christian, Female, Heteroamtic asexual, INTJ - I'm an aspiring artist who specializes in animals, fantasy artwork, and portraiture. My other studies include philosophy, hermeneutics, and environmental biology (emphasis in zoology.) I'm not perfect and I've made mistakes just like everyone else, but I try to put the past behind me. We can't change the bad things that have happened. Life stinks sometimes, so laugh at it! I aim to be a positive influence on others, but I won't deny the evil that exists in the world. I want to help spread love and joy.
I have a very tender heart, and I have and will stand up for the voiceless, be them human or animal. I have obsessive haters because of this, but haters gonna hate! I've been emotionally abused to some extent growing up and have even received death threats from online bullies, although they deny it and try to shift the blame on me, all in textbook bully fashion. If you've been bullied or emotionally abused, I really sympathize with you. Words can hurt worse than anything, but don't give up! Always remember that there are people out there who care about you even if it looks like the entire world hates you. If you need someone to talk to, feel free to message me! You are not alone.
I also have a strong sense of justice and I value purity very highly. I think that's why I love unicorns so much, aside from the fact that they're happy, sparkly horses! They stand for many things I believe in: compassion on helpless creatures, sexual responsibility and restraint, and caring for the environment.
NLD: I have been professionally diagnosed with non-verbal learning disorder (NLD), which means that I have difficulty picking up on social cues, reading between the lines/picking up on subtext, etc. I speak very literally. It doesn't affect IQ or my ability to perceive reality. Sometimes I say things that may come across as angry or harsh when I don't mean them that way. I'm actually a very goofy, happy person by nature! Most of the time when someone gets offended by something I said, it's because they read something into it that I never said nor meant to say (remember, I speak literally). If I ever say something to you that hurts your feelings, please respectfully tell me. I acknowledge that I have difficulties in this area, and I don't want to hurt anyone.
ADOPTABLES / COMMISSIONS I make dragon species adoptables that anyone is free to purchase, and I take requests for art. I currently accept both points and actual currency (PayPal.) Because I'm usually working on several different projects at once, please don't expect your request to be finished overnight. If you have a deadline you need it for, please let me know. Thanks!
PRINTS: I upload low-resolution, watermarked copies of my art onto dA, but as I own the full-size unmarked images, if you'd like a print of something, feel free to ask and I'll see what I can do!
BLOCKING: I am pretty easy-going and I don't enjoy blocking people, but I will block people if A) I feel threatened or unsafe by their messaging me (such as if they are stalking me, they have or are threatening to steal personal information, etc.) B) they are exceeding hateful and/or are spewing childish insults (I don't mind opinions and respectful disagreements, but hatred is a different animal, and I want no association with it.) C) they have exhibited willful ignorance and they are pushing that ignorance on me. D) a debate has turned into an is-to-is-not type of fight / they're repeating themselves like a broken record without taking my position seriously / they're repeatedly strawmanning something I have said.
As you can probably tell, all these things have happened to me before. If you believe I have blocked you unjustly, you may *respectfully* contact me through a *neutral* third party. I understand that I frequently misunderstand people (it comes with having NLD,) but if you respect me, I'll respect you, even if we disagree about something. I do not block people for disagreeing with me. Anything less than a *respectful* attempt to mend a relationship is block evasion and is against DA etiquette policy.
However, as I believe in second chances, I generally unblock people after a period of time.
Favorite visual artistJessica "NeonDragon" Peffer and Thomas KinkadeFavorite moviesLord of the Rings, The Hobbit, How to Train Your Dragon (1 and 2), and Disney Classics (particularly animal-themed ones like The Lion King, Bambi, and Brother Bear)Favorite TV showsStar Trek (all six series), Doctor Who, Sherlock, Supernatural, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, Once Upon a Time, Merlin, Inuyasha, Phineas and Ferb, X-Files, Duck Dynasty, MythbustersFavorite bands / musical artistsMusical Theater, Classical Music, World Music, Celtic Music, Soundtracks, and I have an unhealthy obsession with bagpipesFavorite booksLord of the Rings, The Hobbit, Harry Potter series, The Two Princesses of Bamarre, Sherlock Holmes series, Dracula, Black Stallion series, Phantom Stallion series, Final FrontierFavorite writersJ. R. R. Tolkien, C. S. Lewis, Bram Stoker, James Herriot, Gail Carson Levine, Walter Farley, Terri FarleyFavorite gamesDragon Cave and Howrse.comTools of the TradeMostly 2-Dimensional: Traditional Media and Digital MediaOther InterestsAdoption and Foster Care, Singing, Horses, Horseback Riding, Wild Mustangs, Fantasy Stories/Art/Legends/Lore, Reading, Drawing, Painting, Biology, Zoology, Ecology, Nutrition/Health, Animals, Animal Behavior, Animal Welfare, Christian, Pro-Life
Most people have at least heard of Disney Junior's Lion King spin-off, The Lion Guard. It's been a pretty big hit, with the show being renewed for at least 3 seasons, possibly more. I hope Disney is willing to let it go on longer than the typical 4 seasons of a Disney show. It’s one of my favorite kids’ shows, and I tuned in when it first aired and have kept up with it since. Overall, I think its strengths outweigh its weaknesses, but even still, it’s not without its flaws. In this review, I’m going to list what I appreciate most about the show and what I think could be done better. Of course, these are my personal opinions and you’re not required to agree with them, but let’s remember that this is just a show and not worth attacking or hurting anyone over. Feel free to post what you think about The Lion Guard!
I’ll start with what I dislike so that I can end on a positive note. I'm going to go into a lot of detail as to what I dislike about Lion Guard, but understand that I'm doing that to explain myself fully, provide proof, and avoid misunderstandings, not because I have more negative things to say than positive.
Cons of The Lion Guard:
1) The “circle of life.”
What is the circle of life? It’s clearly an environmental message of some kind, but it’s unclear what it actually means. The Guard seems to defend it by beating up predators and chasing them out of the Pridelands when they try to eat, but it's hardly ever explained why it's bad for those predators to eat in the Pridelands. It’s not clear why some predators are accepted and others are thrown out. Why are lions and cheetahs okay but leopards are not? Why, for example, are vultures forced into the Outlands? They were outcasts from the very first episode, but vultures are carrion-eaters. They’re not a threat to lions or cheetahs. They’re a clean-up crew, right alongside hyenas, which are also forced out of the Pridelands. Hyenas of course are also expert predators, but they are largely scavengers, and the show established that when Jasiri explained the importance of hyenas to the circle of life.
Starting at 1:36, Kion and Jasiri discuss the circle of life (ironically illustrated by an animal preying on another one), and Jasiri explains the importance of hyenas to Kion, which, while he understands, he ultimately seems to ignore, seeing as Jasiri is not allowed into the Pridelands:
Realistically, the Pridelands would be a trash heap of rotting carcasses, overrun by herbivores. It would probably look more like the Outlands, if we're completely honest. Scavengers and predators are crucial to ecosystems, and Lion Guard's circle of life seems to forget that.
When looked at from that perspective, it's no wonder Janja says "ask anyone outside the Pridelands: the circle of life is for fools!" But even then, it's not explained why it's wrong for Janja to hunt. The plan that he describes seems like a pretty normal hunting plan. Sneak up, bite. Isn't that what lions do?
This problem can still be fixed. The characters need to explain exactly what the villains are doing that hurts the ecosystem. They don't have to use big words, just explain, "they're hunting for sport" or "they're causing too much damage when they hunt," or "they're driving a species to extinction," etc. They briefly touched on this in the first episode "Return of the Roar": while watching Janja and the hyenas hunt a herd of gazelles, Beshte remarks that the hyenas had "already scored a couple of gazelles," implying that they were killing more than they needed (hunting for sport). This single line, to me, is one of the most important in the entire series. More lines like it are needed to explain why the villains are actually villains.
That's right: The Lion Guard suffers from racist elements. No, not that certain ethnicities of voice actors are cast as certain types of characters, or that characters are made to look like human ethnicities. My issue here is that the show routinely paints entire species as evil, and in a world populated solely by talking animals, that's racism to a T. This is a problem going all the way back to The Lion King. In TLK, there is no explanation whatsoever as to why the hyenas were villains. I suspect that the writers were playing off the real-life rivalry between lions and hyenas, but let's be honest: kids aren't going to think about that when watching TLK or TLG. They're going to assume all hyenas are evil, because, well, they're hyenas. Is this really the kind of mentality we want to subtly give kids?
The same goes for almost all the other predators that the Guard chases out of the Pridelands. When Makucha the leopard showed up, the Guard didn't even ask why he was there, they just said "there aren't any leopards in the Pridelands," and proceeded to hunt him down before they even knew what he was doing. Granted, it turned out he was aggressively stalking a particular endangered animal out of spite and selfishness, which explains why he was kicked out, but it doesn't explain why there were no leopards in the first place. The Pridelanders' prejudice against leopards is later proven when the Guard meets Badili the "big, friendly leopard," in "The Trouble with Galagos." Badili was displaced by another leopard, causing him to move into the Pridelands, and while the episode had a good message of standing up to bullies, it didn't address the fact that the Guard was solely focused on getting Badili out of the Pridelands for no other reason than the fact that he's a leopard. Not only that, but when they first encountered Badili, they got ready to attack him. Why? Because he's a leopard, and all leopards must be bad in their eyes. At least they learned that not all leopards are bad, but just like Jasiri, he's not allowed to live in the Pridelands because of his species.
The leopards don't seem too bad off in their respective territories, but let's look at this from the hyenas' persepctive: before TLK, the hyenas were banished to the Outlands for reasons that are not explained. The Outlands are a barren desert, with very little food and water. The reason the hyenas sided with Scar is because he promised them food. How sad is that? They followed Scar not because they were evil, but because they were starving. It was Mufasa's xenophobia and oppression of hyenas that was his undoing. Scar probably would not have been able to start the stampede that killed Mufasa if he didn't have the hyenas on his side, and they were only on his side because Mufasa banished them and caused them to starve. In the end, Scar turned out to be a terrible king, caused overhunting in the Pridelands, the hyenas ended up as hungry as before, and then Simba took over and ran them off again. They ended up back in the Outlands, bitter and still hungry. Then to make matters worse, Simba was also forced to banish a group of lions to the Outlands for supporting Scar. In The Lion King 2: Simba's Pride, Nuka makes the remark "this place is even creepier since the hyenas ran off," implying that the Outlands lions pushed the hyenas out of their preferred land in the Outlands. This is later confirmed in The Lion Guard in the episode "Lions of the Outlands" when Jasiri gets Kion to help her family after Zira and the Outlander lions take over her watering hole. Not only were the hyenas forced back into the land that had starved them into following Scar, but they were forced out of their preferred area of that already inhospitable land. Is it any wonder that they hate Pridelanders? Granted, lions and hyenas don't get along in real life, but in our age of diversity and inclusivity, shouldn't we be encouraging kids to look past outward appearances? Besides, it's established that Kion (a lion) gets along just fine with Jasiri (a hyena), so the real-life rivalry between lions and hyenas is no longer a good reason for Disney to keep hyenas out of the Pridelands.
In "Lions of the Outlands," Kion is initially confused why there are lions who aren't welcome in the Pridelands. He never questions why Jasiri isn't welcome in the Pridelands, but he doesn't understand why his own kind would ever be unwelcome.
Introducing characters such as Jasiri and Badili are great first steps, but with season 2 of The Lion Guard almost complete, why are Jasiri and her family still not allowed in the Pridelands? Kion openly acknowledges that there are good hyenas in the Outlands, but why? Why are they still in the Outlands if they're good? Isn't that where Simba sends animals that he banishes?
I understand that convincing a society to overcome prejudices can take a very, very long time. For whatever reason, the Pridelanders do not like hyenas. Personally, I would love to see Kion respectfully confront his father about why the good hyenas are not allowed in the Pridelands. Simba is repeating the same mistake that ultimately cost Mufasa his life. In TLG season 2, the hyenas resurrect Scar, and once again, he's leading the hyenas (and a growing group of other animals) against king Simba and the Lion Guard. History is repeating itself. It would be fantastic to see Simba realize this and do something about it. It would be amazing for kids to see someone overcome a lifetime of prejudice to stand up for what's right and wise. Janja and the Army of Scar may be a lost cause, but Jasiri is not. In my opinion, Jasiri does not belong in the Outlands.
3) The Guard frequently invades other animals' territory / Simba doesn't find diplomatic solutions.
I've lost count of how many times the Guard has invaded other animals' territory and beaten up the owners instead of finding a diplomatic solution. The Outlanders aren't allowed in the Pridelands, but the Guard invades the Outlands almost every other episode. In fact, I daresay a good number of the problems the Guard faces are in fact king Simba's responsibility. We all love you Simba, but you really shouldn't be sending soldiers to force your neighbors to give you what you need. As king, it's Simba's responsibility to figure out how best to find solutions that help everyone involved and don't make enemies. Instead, when the Pridelanders need something in another animal's territory, instead of figuring out what it is that they need and reporting back to the king, they send the Lion Guard in to take it by force. That's not a good message to send kids.
In "The Golden Zebra," the Guard invades Makucha's territory, not once, but twice. The first time, they march in, beat him up, and he tells them not to come back. They then return and beat him up again. Personally, I think that after running into him once, they should go back to the king and have a qualified diplomat (Zazu?) determine a compromise with Makucha. They need temporary access to his water, but is there something he wants? Maybe temporary hunting grounds in the Pridelands?
4) When it's poorly researched.
I haven't scrutinized every episode of Lion Guard, so I honestly can't remember all the times that animals act out of character for their species, but I do remember that as I watch the show, every now and then I chuckle at something that was ill-researched. Feel free to comment with times that you noticed! Some that come to mind are these:
Beshte is a hippopotamus, but he seems to spend most of his time on land with the rest of the Lion Guard. In reality, this would completely wreck his legs. Hippos spend so much time in the water because they're so large and their legs are not made to support them for extended periods of time on land. They can suffer severe knee damage by spending too much time on land.
At 1:08, Fuli roars. Cheetahs cannot roar in real life. ("Undercover Kinyonga")
The zebras in the show whinny and neigh like horses. In real life, zebras bray more like donkeys. Also, they're born with brown stripes, not black stripes. ("The Mbali Fields Migration")
In "Wisdom of Kongwe," Makucha the leopard is able to outrun Fuli by...zigzagging? Who came up with this scenario in which a leopard, which is bigger and bulkier than a cheetah and has retractable claws, could out-zigzag a cheetah? The reason cheetahs have such big tails and why their claws aren't retractable is precisely so that they can zigzag while traveling at high speeds. The episode's message was good (slowing down to think instead of running around thoughtlessly), but the vehicle the writers chose to convey that message was unrealistic.
I'm also not a Swahili speaker, but I happen to know what most of the show's common phrases mean, and I've caught several times when they've been used incorrectly. For example, Ono's catchphrase "hapana" translates to "no" or "oh no," but there have been a couple times when he's used it as an expression of how impressed he is with something good. Fuli's catchphrase "huwezi" translates to "you can't," but she uses it pretty much every time she speeds off somewhere. Who is she talking to and what is it they can't do?
5) Fuli's design.
I'm going to have to side with the majority of the fanbase on this one: Fuli doesn't look like a cheetah. If she didn't run super fast, she could pass as a leopard.
First of all, she doesn't look like she belongs in The Lion King universe. Disney has already created cheetahs for TLK, so I don't understand why they didn't follow their own art style. They redesigned a lot of characters for The Lion Guard, but personally, I think they went too far with Fuli.
Second: her spot pattern, although visually pleasing, is not normal for typical cheetahs. It's more like a king cheetah than anything else. Even still, she's got more of a rosette thing going on than king cheetah stripes, making her look like a leopard. I'm not sure why they gave her an unusual coat pattern if they wanted her to be easily recognizable as a cheetah. I may not be a professional artist yet, but I have enough experience with cartoons to know that you usually want your audience to know immediately what species your character is, especially if it's something well-known like a cheetah. I can't think of a reason why they would want Fuli's species to be a mystery.
Below: normal cheetah on the left, king cheetah on the right.
Third: she doesn't have the cheetah cub scruff. I'm pretty sure there's a technical term for the fluffy white fur that cheetah cubs have on their backs, but whatever it's called, Fuli doesn't have it. Maybe she's grown up now (but then why are Bunga and Kion still kids?), but even when we saw her as a cub in a flashback scene, she still didn't have the cheetah cub scruff.
Fourth, and most important: She lacks the distinguishing cheetah "tear streaks." Tear streaks (sometime called tear stains) are the dark lines running from the inside corners of a cheetah's eyes down around their muzzle. It is without a doubt the easiest way to identify a cheetah in artwork. Even if they left everything about her design the same, she needs those marks. I'm sorry, but if you're going to draw a cheetah, give it tear streaks. Drawing a cheetah without tear streaks is like drawing a red fox without a bushy tail or an adult bald eagle without a white head. You just don't do it. A responsible artist works their character's design around the features of the real-life animal they are drawing. You can't leave out something that important. You always draw a cheetah with tear streaks. If it doesn't have tear streaks, it's not a cheetah. End of story.
While you're free to disagree with me, I personally think the designers stretched Fuli's design too far from their reference footage. The artist in me cringes a little bit every time I see her. There is plenty of gorgeous Fuli redesign fan art on DeviantArt!
Okay, the Lion Guard hype is pretty much all about one thing: we finally have more Lion King! Even though the movie came out over 20 years ago, the fandom for Lion King has been far from inactive. The Lion King has been one of Disney's top-grossing animated films of all time, and I was definitely excited to hear they were making a spin-off TV show. And when the show finally aired, I was more than satisfied! Lion Guard has developed its own fanbase and kids love it, too.
2) Lots of animals.
Although I mentioned above that they don't always get animal behavior right, more often than not they do get them right, and I was excited to see lots of different species being included in the show. Lion King had a relatively limited cast of animals, and Lion Guard branches out to all sorts of animals, all with lots of different designs and plenty of recurring characters.
3) The environmental message.
While I explained above that the circle of life in Lion Guard is very confusing, I appreciate that the show is trying to convey a message of protecting the environment. Our children are our future, and teaching them that their world is a delicate, balanced machine that must be cared for is very important. We don't need to teach them to worship the earth, but as stewards of the earth, it's our duty to take care of it.
I think The Lion Guard can improve on this message by first clarifying the what the circle of life means, and by showing more relevant ways to protect the environment. What if the guard encounters a group of animals throwing away things without reusing them? The show could discuss littering, recycling, and the effects of trash buildup. Of course, plastic wouldn't be a part of the animals' lives, but they could be shown littering items such as half-eaten food instead of composting it, leaving rocks and sticks around after using them (littering,) etc. The show so far really only focuses on poaching, and while that is a huge environmental problem, it's not really relevant to little kids. Kids are more likely to litter and forget to recycle than they are to poach.
4) Makuu's character development.
I love how Makuu the crocodile went from being a villain to being a hero. It shows kids that even nasty people are capable of change. Sure, he'll probably always be a bit of a cranky-pants and may stand in the guard's way from time to time, but since he was introduced, he's become more of a strong, capable leader, willing to listen to those in charge and accept wisdom from others.
5) Fuli's introversion.
In almost all the kids' shows I've ever seen (with the exception of My Little Pony), introversion is portrayed as something negative that a character must overcome. In "Fuli's New Family," Fuli tells the others that she wants to hunt alone, and they assume she's upset about something, eventually harassing her until she snaps at them. After rescuing Bunga from a volcano, the rest of the guard realize that there's nothing wrong with Fuli for being the way she is and that it's normal for her to want to be alone sometimes.
As an introvert, I can testify how much pressure there is to be extroverted, and how people often assume you're upset, snobby, that you don't like them, or even that you're arrogant when you need time to yourself to recharge. I love it how The Lion Guard shows kids that it's okay to be introverted.
6) The visuals.
The Lion Guard is stunningly beautiful. If you're a fan of animation in general, you definitely need to check out this show! Although it occasionally drops down in quality (Simba falling into the sinkhole in "Bunga and the King," *shudder*) , the animation overall is beautifully done, with gorgeous 2-D linework paying homage to the original movie. It sometimes has an Adobe Flash sort of look about it, but it keeps a hand-done look very well.
The animators capture facial expressions and dialogue extremely well. You can tell that they understand the human face and its emotions. They also include the expressions of animals, such as ears, tails, legs, etc., that are not something human characters would have. This results in unified, convincing characters that look comfortable as talking animals.
The animators also occasionally use interesting camera angles to give the show a more cinematic feel.
While the lions, Zazu, Rafiki, Timon and Pumbaa remain very similar to their original designs, with some minor tweaks such as larger eyes and slightly adjusted hair, the rest of the animals have updated, more anthropomorphized designs. This is mostly likely because The Lion King featured a limited cast, and only the main cast of characters were anthropomorphized. Seeing as Lion Guard deals with many, many more characters than Lion King did, it makes sense that more animals would feature the anthropomorphic facial expressions that the main cast featured in Lion King.
The backgrounds of The Lion Guard are lovely. They're an expert combination of CG and digital hand-painting (I'm assuming it's hand-painting). They're full of life and add a lot to each scene. Each episode is a pleasure to watch!
A great video on the animation of The Lion Guard!
5) Enriching The Lion King with more lore and connecting the original movie and its sequel.
Lion Guard delves into the lore of Lion King, providing more backstory for the characters. You learn more about Scar and Mufasa's relationship before Simba was born, more about Rafiki's role, and about the kings of the past.
The Lion Guard also helps to connect the original Lion King movie with its sequel, Lion King II: Simba's Pride. While of course there is the glaring inconsistency of why Kion wasn't part of Lion King 2 (simply because the character hadn't been written at that time), if you look past that single inconsistency, TLG does an interesting job of linking the two movies together. It explains exactly how and why Simba banished the Outsiders, whereas in TLK2, it wasn't even mentioned. It was just assumed.
It was also great to see Kovu and the TLK2 characters again! So far they've only appeared in one episode ("Lions of the Outlands"), but I hope we get to see more of them in the future.
6) The music.
The scores for The Lion Guard are pretty impressive. Sure, they're not on par with the original movie, but they're very high quality for a cartoon TV show, I'd say. Just check out this piece, parts of which play in the show's opening theme song:
Each episode features a song, and while some are going to be stronger than others, most of them are fun and enjoyable to listen to. These are my personal favorites so far; feel free to post yours, too!
Watch these videos at your own risk. These songs get stuck in your head like nothing else on earth, lol!
So even though it still has plenty of room for improvement, I think Disney's The Lion Guard is a great show that I will definitely be watching more of and would definitely encourage parents to show to their kids. It's something that the whole family honestly can enjoy, even if it isn't everyone's favorite. Personally, it's one of my favorite kids' shows, and if you haven't seen it, go ahead and check it out!
My Redbubble shop is finally up and running! www.redbubble.com/people/Unico… I now have all of my artwork (so far) that I consider quality enough to go for sale. I was even able to put some fan art up for sale! (Although, sadly, none of my Star Wars fan art was able to be sold for some reason.) You can buy T-shirts, mugs, bags, phone and tablet cases, pillows, and most affordably, stickers!
You can find designs by clicking on the categories available on my page, or by clicking on "show more" of my recently-added designs. To find specific items of a design, just click on the design and all items will appear below it.
Feel free to follow me on Redbubble if you have an account!
The seasons for Spirit: Riding Free come out pretty quickly, but considering the animation quality and the audience its aimed at, I think that's perfectly fine. The target audience is children under the age of 10, and kids that age usually don't like to wait a long time for more of their favorite show to come out. And even though the animation quality is rather primitive, they do a good job of compensating for that with interesting camera angles, lighting, etc. The lighting in the show appears to be aimed from the side, not directly overhead, which is something that's rather unique in 3-D animated television shows. While the horses' unrealistic behavior will always bother me to an extent, kids don't care, and at the end of the day, they're the ones the show is aimed at.
I had an overall positive opinion of seasons 3 and 4 of Spirit: Riding Free. Season 4 is definitely my favorite season so far, but season 3 had its high points as well. Throughout the show, we've seen Lucky maturing and making new decisions as she figures out how to be a young adult. That's important for kids to see!
Season 3 showed her dealing with the fact that her dad is dating her school teacher, dealing with mild bullying/teasing at school, helping out her school teacher even though she doesn't like her very much, and standing up for what she knows is right even if it puts her in uncomfortable situations. She also learns that immature, angry outbursts don't help her and only hurt herself and those around her.
My favorite part of season 3 was Mixli, the Tuckapaw teenager who Lucky and her friends meet. Sure, he was pretty stereotyped, but it was nice to see the show branching out from just Miradero and the ubiquitous city. The message of that episode was also a good one: just because people might do things differently from you doesn't mean they're wrong. I hope future seasons do more with bringing Native Americans into the mix! Native Americans are a very important part of our culture, and we tend to forget about them or stereotype them. Spirit: Riding Free has the opportunity to be an extremely interesting historical fiction show for kids, kind of like Liberty's Kids back in the day. So far everything has been very sanitized and modern (the girls wear jeans, what?), but they started to touch on something very interesting with Mixli. I hope the writers do more of that!
Season 4 was, in my opinion, the best season so far! Almost every episode tied in with another one, you saw Lucky mature even more, you learned more about Lucky's family, there was some slightly more realistic wild horse herd dynamics, there were actually some pretty touching scenes with Aunt Cora and the the circus, and it ended on a cliffhanger, but not the emotionally-traumatizing-for-little-kids cliffhanger of season 2.
I really liked seeing the more mature, kind way that Lucky and her friends dealt with Abigail's little brother Snips. Snips is the annoying little sibling that everyone dreads, and in past seasons, the girls had been rather mean to Snips without any punishment. It's one thing if a character behaves badly and then learns from their mistakes, but the girls had previously just been mean to Snips and never learned their lesson. It's something that a lot of us probably struggled with when we were growing up, and I understand showing a realistic portrayal, but kids also need role models, and the three girls were not being role models when it came to Snips. However, in season 4, that changed. They're much more kind and understanding with Snips, even though you can tell they're irritated at times. The only time they ever really snapped at him was when he was doing something legitimately dangerous.
You also see Lucky get a job for a little while and earn some money, which is a good thing for kids to see: you don't earn money by whining, you have to work for it.
The episode with Lucky's grandfather showed how some people are too set in their ways to change. Her grandfather disagreed with Lucky's upbringing to the point where he wanted to take her away, even though Lucky had done everything she could to show that she was happy where she was. Her grandfather just kept coming up with new excuses, and in the end, it drove him away from the rest of his family. It was sad, but sometimes that's just how life is.
The episodes with Aunt Cora were also quite good with Lucky learning that even though she finds her aunt annoying at times, they're both important to each other. Lucky learns that Aunt Cora has a place even though she may seen very different from the rest of the town.
I also enjoyed seeing Smoke, the rival stallion who wants to steal Spirit's herd. While a real-life band stallion would have kicked any rivals out of his herd long ago, I'm glad they at least acknowledged that life in the wild isn't all hunky-dory for wild horses. Even in the original movie Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron, Spirit Sr. had no rival stallions to fight off after he had been gone for a year. Spirit Jr. at least has one rival stallion.
The last two episodes (the first two-parter in the series, that I'm aware of), were very, very good! You find out about Lucky's family history, how her parents met, who her mother is, and you find out that Lucky is half Latino (not that it makes much difference, but I thought that was interesting, because I predicted it from before the first episode). I think it's good for kids to see Jim Prescott (Lucky's dad) dealing with remembering his wife while moving forward at the same time. Kids also see Lucky fall back into her immature ways when she's frustrated with her dad dating and later proposing to her school teacher, and kids see the negative effects that has on Lucky as well as her teacher. At the same time, you can see why Lucky is so frustrated at the end of the episode, because her father missed the most important performance of her life so far to propose to Ms. Flores. As important as Ms. Flores is to Mr. Prescott, he should not have missed Lucky's performance. People in love often forget about everyone but the person they're in love with, and can end up hurting others around them, like he did to his daughter. Lucky's reaction (running away) is not justified, but it is understandable. The season ended with that issue unresolved, and I hope the next season comes out soon to resolve that. Kids will deal with situations like these, and it's important for them to see how to deal with feelings like Lucky's.
All in all, I'm pleased with the series so far, and I hope it continues to get good reviews from people who aren't blinded by the thought that "it's not what fans of the original movie expected." It's a good, wholesome show for little kids, and I hope it stays renewed for future seasons!
An oldie (sort of; does 4 years count as old?), but a goodie.
“If you had a patient with a severed artery would you tourniquet the limb before addressing internal injuries? Or would you let the patient bleed out while you argue if you need x rays or a CT scan? PZP is a tourniquet to stop the bleed of wild horses leaving the range while we address other issues. Plain and simple.”
A proposal given in August of this year by Jeanne Nations of the NE Nevada Resource Advisory Council (RAC) and Laura Leigh of Wild Horse Education was barely noticed. However in October, right before the major “giving season” for non profits, an expanded proposal was given to the RAC and members of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) by Nations, Leigh, Neda DeMayo and Dr, Jay Kirkpatrick (practices proposed endorsed by Return to Freedom, Animal Welfare Institute, The Cloud Foundation, Wild Horse Education and many more). That proposal quickly became the focus of a “bash campaign” by a small handful of competitive non profits and one of the BLMs roundup contractors (In a year that the contract is being modified to include humane care and access and roundups are at the lowest level since 1977). (you can read about the October meeting here: wildhorseeducation.org/2014/10…/ )
Although being used successfully in many areas like Assateague managed by the fire department (that became a joke, “How do you manage a wild horse population? You make the federal government and a local fire department switch places… but then our houses would all burn down). And is being used, minimally by the BLM, in places like McCollough Peaks that was the subject of this article in April that went completely without a “bash fest” in social media www.slate.com/articles/health_…It is being used in multiple areas by lesser known sanctuaries as well like Sky Mountain in a cooperative with Forest Service at the Carson National Forest. (It has also been used on deer for decades and on elephants in African sanctuaries).
For years the advocate community has sent letters and commented that the BLM is addicted to roundups. That they (BLM) fails to address the program from anything but a “remove and warehouse” mindset with nearly ten thousand wild horses a year losing their freedom from 2009-2012, over 5000 in 2008, over 8000 in 2007… I think you get the picture. One of the admonishments was that BLM failed to use PZP appropriately (times of year) and in less than 3% of the wild population. In June of 2013 the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in a million dollar study, admonished the BLM for failure to use birth control and a lack of data program wide.
So why all the huh bub this time? Maybe it was the unfortunate time of year of the proposal? Maybe it goes into a “personality” conflict? Or maybe it is that it might just work?
The proposal given in October was primarily focused on a small portion of the Antelope Complex on the eastern border of Nevada and pilot programs beginning in two other districts. The presentation itself was given by (or endorsed by) members of nationally known wild horse advocacy groups.
The use of a form of PZP (native) has multiple practical purposes for implementation. It slows population growth and allows data collection from herd structure, genetic map, migratory patterns (that include boundary issues), forage utilization. It adds the ability to create and track these aspects of the herd in a “trend map” to address the planning process from a scientific basis. Isn’t that what is lacking in the program? Wont that allow things like genetic bankruptcy to be addressed and any flaws like numbers of horses on the range to be modified?
A non-cellular membrane known as the zona pellucida (ZP) surrounds all mammalian eggs. The ZP consists of several glycoproteins (proteins with some carbohydrate attached), one of which, ZP3, is thought to be the sperm receptor (the molecule which permits attachment of the sperm to the egg during the process of fertilization). The PZP vaccine is derived from pig eggs. When this vaccine is injected into the muscle of the target female animal, it stimulates her immune system to produce antibodies against the vaccine. These antibodies also attach to the sperm receptors on the ZP of her own eggs and distort their shape, thereby blocking fertilization (see Paterson and Aitkin 1990).
Thus far PZP has been a promising form of contraception in wildlife because
1. it has prevented pregnancy an average of 90% of the time in treated animals 2. it can be delivered remotely by small darts 3. the contraceptive effects are reversible 4. it is effective across many species 5. there are no debilitating health side-effects even after long-term use 6. it has almost no effects on social behaviors 7. the vaccine cannot pass through the food chain 8. it is safe to give to pregnant animals (see Kirkpatrick et al. 1996b).
So why are these points being either misrepresented or ignored?
It may be the use of terminology used in research and implementation documents. We will try to explain some of the terms and why.
“Overpopulation.” This seems to be the most recent “buzz word.” There are accusations that if you support PZP you agree to “overpopulation.” This is a spin worthy of Maytag. The term overpopulation (in discussions on BLM land) arrives from another term “Appropriate Management Level” or AML. This is the number of animals BLM says the land can sustain. The levels are set in a land use planning process (for decades not engaged by the advocacy community). The term creates a legal definition, not a justified one. If we go back to what WHE has been saying (as an example in court documents on Owyhee) is that AML is not based on any scientific equation. The NAS concurred in their report that also admonished BLM for not using birth control. Litigation is pending in two states that centers around AML from the livestock interests wanting horses off the land in Utah and in Nevada under the Nevada Association of Counties (NACO). In the NACO action we are Intervenors and point out that there is no data to support AML and the no data to support the over allocation of forage to private livestock interest.
So where in this mix do we support an assertion of “overpopulation?” The implementation of native PZP will allow the opportunity to gage population levels in a scientific fashion. (We use the term “overcrowded” by too much given to other interests and explain that distinction here: wildhorseeducation.org/2014/11…)
“Pesticide.” PZP is not DDT. PZP is a protein that breaks down. That is one of the reasons it is only effective for one year (one reproductive cycle for wild horses, they do not breed like rabbits). The classification is because of the purpose of use and was “put on the books” first in the US for dealing with deer populations for “pest control.” We might not like the term, but the classification is not because this is like DDT or RAID.
Soil and water contamination. PZP is a protein that breaks down. It has been used for decades in deer, wild horses, elephants etc. We do not have birds and fish and squirrels dying in Assateague from PZP use or lions or coyotes from the use on deer and elephants. Scientifically this is purely not the truth.
“Feral.” This is another term that can make a wild horse advocate see red. But the use of PZP does not change the legal definition of a horse. A horse (or burro) is legally designated by where it stands on the land. A horse on state land or Fish and Wildlife is legally designated as “feral.” A horse on BLM land has the legal definition of “wild.” Treating a mare at McCullogh Peaks does not change her status to feral under law. So if you read the word in research documents please understand why before reacting to it.
“Behavior Changes.” All kinds of behaviors are being attributed to PZP use from gang rape to foal murder. At Assateague we do not see tourists running screaming after watching the horses, we see them taking their children and the community getting a great reputation. In wild, untreated populations, stallions have been documented killing foals (although rare) and mares are mounted by more than one stallion (again rare, but documented). PZP also wears off and any stressor associated with any lack of fertile mares could be relieved in contrast to surgical techniques like those used at Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge (we documented how vasectomies keep males thinking they are fertile and a lack of fertile females due to hysterectomies create an intensity in behavior we, personally, have witnessed nowhere else).
Harder to Catch and will make “gathers” more difficult. This assertion has no basis in any factual information as no widespread use of PZP has been implemented. And if PZP native is successful? Helicopter removals would be increasingly diminished in any area treated.
Assertions in the “bash the concept game” even include those that claim payoffs by BLM to those making the proposal. BLM has never used PZP as an appropriate tool. At each turn there are obstacles in gaining understanding of the benefits of implementation and data collection. If we were into a “spin machine” of our own we could assert payoffs to those opposing the programs by BLM (because they are addicted to roundups), the contractor (because a horse not born is one they can not be paid to remove), the livestock industry (that wants no data collected so they can continue to use the horse as a scapegoat), but that is not what we do.
We are on the ground continuing to monitor multiple herds, animals in holding, fight for humane care and access and are addressing issues in land use planning to protect our wild horses and burros and keep them free on the range.
This post is made by request by several people asking us to. Addressing this has taken time from our work and away from the multiple threats facing our wild ones that we are in the field addressing.
We ask that YOU keep in mind the “big picture” of 50,000 wild horses in holding facilities, proposals to surgically sterilize wild horses, legal actions against horses by the livestock industry, changing public land policy, sage grouse, etc, etc. Then we ask that you put PZP in perspective as one of the tools that can be utilized to satisfy legal requirements and gather real data that can then be used to create sound management plans.
"Baby, It's Cold Outside" - When a girl can't play hard to get without people accusing her partner of date-rape.
My favorite version!
I was looking up the lyrics for "Baby, It's Cold Outside" the other day, and I kept running into post after post about how the song is about date rape, underage drinking, and other unconsensual-sex-related things. Okay, first of all, the song isn't even necessarily about sex. The woman in the song is afraid that people will think she's having sex, but it's not necessarily what's going on. Part of the beauty of this song is that it can be about that if you want, or it can be more innocent and just be about her staying a little longer at her boyfriend's place. It's not strictly one way or the other. It can be what you want it to be.
But all the same, people have chosen this song to freak out about over. First they attacked any Christmas carol with a religious vibe, like "Silent Night" or "O Come All Ye Faithful," and now they're after our secular Christmas songs. Gee whiz, will it never end? Don't go seeing raindrops on a sunny day, people.
It's gotten so bad that one couple has neutered the song into this:
The comments section on this video says it all! Not to be mean, but their lyrics don't even work with the tune and rhythm. It's just plain bad songwriting. And it's no longer sassy and flirty. It's just...blah. I mean, I guess if this makes them happy, whatever (each to their own, right?), but for them to say the song has gotten a "creepy vibe" over the years? Please. If you read too much into anything you'll get a creepy vibe from it. All it takes is a simple reading of the lyrics to understand the girl is just playing hard to get.
This isn't my favorite Christmas song, but I think it's a cute song, and I want to dispel political-correctness-fueled fear of it.
"Baby It's Cold Outside"is not about an un-consenual encounter.
Sex or not, there's undeniably some kind of encounter going on this this song. It's about a woman preparing to leave her partner's house, and he's teasing her to stay longer with him. Both man and woman flirt with each other (call-and-response song), and she eventually decides to stay longer with him (how long is up to our imagination). He never forces her to stay. He never does anything to prevent her from leaving. If she really wanted to leave, she could. Heck, the fact that the song is being sung implies that she has a say in the matter, and in the 1940s, that actually was saying something.
(Now, I did come across a version somewhere where he locks the door and hides the key, and yes, THAT is gosh-darned creepy! But that is nowhere in the original lyrics.)
My honest impression, and I really do think this is the intent of the song, is that she wants to stay from the beginning. Otherwise what's the point of her singing with him? She states repeatedly that the reason she's leaving is because of what people will think about her, not that she doesn't want to be with him. She even makes several excuses to stay longer ("maybe just a half a drink more," "maybe just a cigarette more...") She even says "I wish I knew how to break this spell," implying that she really does like him and wants to stay, but she wants to break the spell (leave) because of what people will think, not because of anything she wants or doesn't want. If she didn't want to stay, there would be no spell to break. It's as simple as that. Their encounter is completely consensual.
"Baby It's Cold Outside" does not contain date-rape drugs.
The line "Say, what's in this drink?" is mostly what has people worried. Sure, in our day and age, that line is strange. I would not be comfortable singing it unless there was a goofy joke of some kind to explain it. But remember that the song was not written for our day and age. It was written in 1944 by Frank Loesser and performed by Frank Sinatra in 1949 in the movie Neptune's Daughter. In the 1940s, women were expected to refuse men's advances, and the only way a woman could get away with doing something "radical" (like staying past curfew at her boyfriend's house) was if she got drunk or something along those lines.
“Hey what’s in this drink” was a stock joke at the time [of the song's writing], and the punchline was invariably that there’s actually pretty much nothing in the drink, not even a significant amount of alcohol.
See, this woman is staying late, unchaperoned, at a dude’s house. In the 1940’s, that’s the kind of thing Good Girls aren’t supposed to do — and she wants people to think she’s a good girl. The woman in the song says outright, multiple times, that what other people will think of her staying is what she’s really concerned about: “the neighbors might think,” “my maiden aunt’s mind is vicious,” “there’s bound to be talk tomorrow.” But she’s having a really good time, and she wants to stay, and so she is excusing her uncharacteristically bold behavior (either to the guy or to herself) by blaming it on the drink — unaware that the drink is actually really weak, maybe not even alcoholic at all. That’s the joke. That is the standard joke that’s going on when a woman in media from the early-to-mid 20th century says “hey, what’s in this drink?” It is not a joke about how she’s drunk and about to be raped. It’s a joke about how she’s perfectly sober and about to have awesome consensual sex and use the drink for plausible deniability because she’s living in a society where women aren’t supposed to have sexual agency.
So you see? He didn't spike her drink. I mean, if you want to believe he spiked it, whatever, but I sincerely doubt that was the original intention, especially given that "what's in this drink" was used commonly in the 1940s as code for consent.
Now, that said, this is nearly 2018, not the 1940s. "What's in this drink" has a very different meaning today! But instead of throwing out the song completely, why not just change the lyrics of that line? That one line could be changed to something innocent that rhymes with "ink." This adorable version uses "say, was that a wink?" in place of "what's in this drink?", and I think it's completely appropriate and true to the character of the song. They also changed the references to drinking and smoking because it's acted out by kids, and they also changed the line "the answer is no" to "but thanks for the show" to emphasize consent. But even if all the other lines are kept the same, the song still flows beautifully with "was that a wink?" as the only change.
Now, THIS is how to make "Baby, It's Cold Outside" emphasize consent, not the version by Lydia Liza and Josiah Lemanski. It's every bit as fun and flirty as the original, but with none of the problematic lyrics.
"Baby It's Cold Outside" does not contain underage drinking.
It took me a few listens to the song to figure out where this claim comes from. I think it comes from the fact that the girl lives with her parents but drinks with her boyfriend. However, remember that the song was written in the 40s. In that day and age, it was normal, even expected, for women to stay with their parents until they got married. Not to mention that states were allowed to set their own minimum legal drinking age. Most states had it set at 21 in the 40s, so assuming this is one of those states, she was either 21 or older to be drinking legally.
People claim that because she still lives with her parents that she must be younger than 21 years old. But again, remember that this is the 1940s, and back then, women were expected to live with their parents until they married. It was very common for 21-year-old women to be living with their parents. The song even implies that her unmarried aunt still lives with the family! Is her aunt underage? I doubt it! It's really only a relatively recent development that young women are expected to leave the nest while still single. But even today, it's quite common for a 21-year-old, male or female, to still live with their parents, thanks to the rising cost of living and the lack of full-time jobs over minimum wage. I don't know the exact statistics, but when I was 21, I think all of my friends of the same age lived with their parents, and I doubt much as changed since then. There's really nothing abnormal for a person of drinking age to live with their parents. The modern goal is to get independent as soon as possible, but not everyone is ready by 21. That's just how it is. So even from a modern perspective, there's no underage drinking in "Baby, It's Cold Outside."
Lyrics of "Baby, It's Cold Outside"
I really can't stay (but baby, it's cold outside) I've got to go away (but baby, it's cold outside)
This evening has been (been hoping that you'd drop in) So very nice (i'll hold your hands, they're just like ice)
My mother will start to worry (beautiful what's your hurry?) My father will be pacing the floor (listen to the fireplace roar)
So really I'd better scurry (beautiful please don't hurry) But maybe just a half a drink more (put some records on while I pour)
The neighbors might think (baby, it's bad out there) Say, what's in this drink? (no cabs to be had out there)
I wish I knew how (your eyes are like starlight now) To break this spell (I'll take your hat, your hair looks swell)
I ought to say, no, no, no sir (mind if I move in closer?) At least I'm gonna say that I tried (what's the sense in hurtin' my pride?)
I really can't stay (oh baby don't hold out) But baby, it's cold outside
I simply must go (but baby, it's cold outside) The answer is no (but baby, it's cold outside)
Your welcome has been (how lucky that you dropped in) So nice and warm (look out the window at this storm)
My sister will be suspicious (gosh your lips look delicious) My brother will be there at the door (waves upon the tropical shore)
My maiden aunt's mind is vicious (gosh your lips are delicious) But maybe just a cigarette more (never such a blizzard before)
I've gotta get home (but baby, you'd freeze out there) Say lend me a coat (it's up to your knees out there)
You've really been grand (I thrill when you touch my hand) But don't you see? (how can you do this thing to me?)
There's bound to be talk tomorrow (think of my lifelong sorrow) At least there will be plenty implied (if you got pnuemonia and died)
I really can't stay (get over that old out) Baby, it's cold Baby, it's cold outside!
I just read 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus, and what jumped out to me the most in these letters is the repeated command to avoid arguments that could lead to division. While of course Paul heartily supported intelligent conversation and questioning the teachings of elders (so as to avoid false teachers; also mentioned in these books), he clearly did not approve of anyone in the church raising arguments for the purpose of heated debate. I personally enjoy polite debate and apologetics, but I personally know how easy it is for a polite discussion to descend into a nasty fight.
It’s also especially sad to see the Christian Church divided over secondary issues to the point of even frowning on other evangelical, orthodox denominations. I can’t help but think of the Calvinism vs. Arminianism debate. I enjoy talking about it with others and I think it’s a fascinating philosophical idea to mull over, but at the end of the day, people are either saved or they are not, and the command to evangelize is the same regardless of your stance on predestination. I personally do not believe it’s an important enough issue to cause division, but that’s one of the biggest issues I see Christians fighting over.
Intelligent discussion, critical thinking, and apologetics are all very, very important to ministry, and are some of the things I’m most interested in, but they must be done very carefully so as to build others up, not tear others down.
Hey, this is a weird thing to ask, but is anyone having trouble seeing my deviations? It seems my statuses are being seen just fine, but (and I don't mean to sound like a diva here), my deviations don't get the attention they used to get. That sounds so whiny, but I'm not sure how else to say it, lol! I'm trying to figure out if it's just a watch setting thing or if my artwork is not as good as it used to be. I feel like I have improved, but my stats don't show that. Again, I'm not trying to be a diva! I'm just trying to figure out if this is something I've done or if "deviations" just became unchecked in my watchers' settings. There have been weird glitches like that before, so I was just wondering. Sorry...
I finally saw Avengers: Infinity War, and it was really cool! I do think the battles and characters are getting overpowered, but it was fun to watch nonetheless. It ranks right up there with Black Panther and Guardians of the Galaxy as one of my favorite Avengers Marvel movies.
In my opinion, what was most interesting about it was the morality play. Like in Black Panther, the villain had a very valid argument. Both movies had villains who saw real problems and wanted to fix them, but their solutions were unacceptable. The ends do not justify the means.
In Infinity War, Thanos sees overpopulation and the suffering it causes, and he seeks to end it by destroying half of all life in the universe. I won’t say more because spoilers, but I think we can all agree that overpopulation (at least on a planetwide scale), is a very real threat, but as Infinity War shows, killing others is not the answer. Infinity War sure is a slap in the face to the abortion industry and the pro “choice” logic that feeds it. Infinity War is brutally honest when it shows the logical conclusion of abortion arguments.
Black Panther is the same way. Black Panther is a massive slap in the face to Black Lives Matter. I usually don’t say much about BLM because of how volatile the issue is, but one cannot deny the violence that group supports. BLM had a noble goal: to end targeted suffering of black people, because in the end, black lives DO matter. But as Black Panther shows with brutal honesty, the way to end suffering is not by attacking the rest of the world. If you want to defeat a stereotype, don’t act like the stereotype. The ends do not justify the means. I won’t say what the Wakandans do to address the argument raised by the villain, but they do address it.
I give both of these movies a big thumbs-up for not only being fun to watch, but for tackling moral issues that big-name movies are usually too afraid to touch. It’s refreshing to see thought and care put into flashy movies such as these! If you haven’t seen them yet, I highly recommend them!
So apparently all anime is banned at my parents’ house because my dad thinks that Japanese animation is creepy and will give my little sister nightmares. She still lives with them because she’s underage and has autism. I just recently bought Inuyasha on DVD and since my little sister had enjoyed it in the past, I was excited about watching the rest of the series with her. But he won’t allow her to watch it because he watched an anime show when he was a kid and says that the way the characters moved creeped him out and “stuck in his head.” He’s said similar things about other movies and shows, like particular Star Trek episodes and the like, but they never bothered any of the rest of us or my little sister. Personally, I think he’s overreacting. My little sister really liked watching Inuyasha years ago and now she won’t be able to finish it until she moves out, which could be decades from now. All the same, I didn’t argue because he’s the father and she’s still under his control, but it’s just another hint that maybe he doesn’t know his kids as well as he thinks he does, and that worries me, especially as he gets older.
And also... my dad has made many, many blanket comments about Asian cultures that strike me as rather racist. Frankly, I’d rather not repeat them all here, but isn’t it a little bit subjective and kind of offensive to write off a culture’s favorite style of animation (in its entirety, no less!) as “creepy” and “nightmare fuel”? I mean dang. Sure, anime isn’t my favorite style of animation, but not everyone animates things the way Westerners do. Art varies from culture to culture. Apparently my dad can’t accept that.