Just a zelda obsessed weeb, nothing to see here ♠️

So this is generally considered a very rude thing to say to any artist. People work hard to make original work, and regardless of the commentor's intention: when that work is compared to something pre-existing it feels like all that effort was dismissed. Imagine working hard on a cake recipe only to be told its just like some other guy's. Feels bad.

I will however cut u some slack this time because that's kind of the point of Inari's character design! ...Er, not to look like ben 10, but to look like a basic boy protag. Note the spiky hairstyle!

(No shade to these characters) The reason I went for this was because Illumi on a glance fits the manic pixie dream girl trope to a T, but as you learn more about her the trope falls off.

It made sense to me that Inari in turn would appear like the basic sad dude protag. They're unemployed, they live alone, they want to eat pizza and play video games...! But, like with Illumi, we learn that he's not that trope at all. She's not even a dude!

I mean I drew this for a reason! ^

So thankfully you avoided being really mean this time, no harm no foul-- But, to anyone reading this: please dont comment on art like that, it's a major bummer.

Like, I'm just saying, proximity to shared religion ebbs and flows. There would reasonably have been times in prehistory when all members of a society felt required to participate in religion, and when large monuments were constricted solely as a result of some metaphysical belief. But there also would have been times when a culture was more interested in sharing and concretizing social values and community through their art. A healer might own tools for a ritual because ritual inserts a sense of familiarity into a situation the feels out of control (see, pain and illness), but there may or may not be a strong association between that ritual and a religious belief. Likewise, a culture might adopt an animal symbol, but that symbol could reflect a sense of identity or a particular value rather than being an actual idol to worship.

I'm saying this as someone who is secular and is determined to keep public spaces secular for the betterment and safety of everyone, but I do believe anthropology suffers from the Enlightenment-era idea that religion=uncivilized, stupid people. Religion is part and parcel with cultures that feel weak in the face of hardship, and that lack the proper education to be able to reflect on their own beliefs. Intellectual strength is a secular trait here. Which means that all prehistoric peoples would thus most likely be very, very religious, because of course fifteen thousand years ago the human brain simply wasn't developed enough to house modern levels of intelligence, right? And the lack of technology--presumed lack of technology--indicates a lack of self-reflective ability as well. All activity was simply emotional and intuitive if it was occurring before Jesus.

do...do people not know being star-crossed is bad?

Two households, both alike in dignity (In fair Verona, where we lay our scene), From ancient grudge break to new mutiny, Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean. From forth the fatal loins of these two foes, A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life Whose misadventured piteous overthrows Doth with their death bury their parents’ strife. The fearful passage of their death-marked love And the continuance of their parents’ rage, Which, but their children’s end, naught could remove, Is now the two hours’ traffic of our stage; The which, if you with patient ears attend, What here shall miss, our toil shall strive to mend.

in 8th-grade English. You folks

in the replies… wow.