sun weed ecstasy

• | NOW SHOWING:

nasha wayne is the orphaned golden child of the late martha and thomas wayne; they, her parents, were lost to a violent robbery on crime alley one miserable night. she is famously referred to as the "enigmatic princess of gotham," and true to her title, the public isn't privy to a lot of information on the girl, much to their chagrin. here are the key details about her that are readily available for anyone who's curious:

born in gotham city in 2006 to the well-known couple who were practically gotham royalty, nasha's life was already set for her to become the heir of her family's company. raised in a way you'd typically expect from the old money crowd, she was surrounded by the rich family friends of the waynes and had gone to exclusive parties and galas of the gotham elites since childhood. nasha was registered, naturally, at the prestigious private school that is gotham academy.

things just kept getting better for her and her parents, especially with renowned philanthropist, physician, and head of wayne enterprises thomas wayne running for mayor. favored by the people, it's undeniable that he was on track to win in 2017; sadly, that would be the very same year he and his wife would meet their demise, leaving their 11 year old daughter behind to be cared for by their staff, most notably their butler and mr. wayne's valet, alfred pennyworth. with nasha still being a kid at the time and therefore not possessing any of the qualities required to be the head of the company, wayne enterprises was overseen by one of the board members for the next several years before she's able to take up the position.

in 2022, nasha graduated from the academy at just 16 and went to pursue a degree in psychology at princeton university; she would then graduate from there much earlier in spring 2025. after that, the wayne heir made the unprecedented move of donating a huge chunk of her family's money to various charities in gotham and in the state of new jersey at large, much to the shock of the people.

during the only press conference nasha did at that time, she said, "i wouldn't step up to take my father's place yet, and i have my reasons. know that i'm well aware of my status and that i agree no one in the world needs to be a billionaire, so i'll continue doing what i can to help the causes i believe in." however, the period after that whole ordeal, from december of 2025 to the first few months of 2031, is currently the most mysterious question mark in nasha wayne's life. it was suspected she went abroad somewhere when she disappeared from the face of the earth.

now, at 25, the gotham darling has come back, looking better than ever, as chair of wayne enterprises; she has appointed lucius fox, a friend of hers, as ceo. also, it has been confirmed that she earned a master's degree in criminology and criminal justice at the university of oxford during her disappearing act, but that still leaves some room for huge chunks of time not spent on studying. so far, none have come forward to give any ideas as to what activities she indulged in.

in any case, her first action taken upon return was to help numerous charities, thus committing to what she'd declared at 19, but what's different is that she also held a gala to invite other affluent people in the city to participate. it was practically a miracle that all went well in that godforsaken place because while the good done by the princess has sparked hope in many people's hearts, the numbers don't lie: crime is still all the way up in the notoriously rotten gotham. is there really any hope?

• | DIRECTOR'S CUT:

indeed, the public is right to be suspicious of nasha's activities and whereabouts before her mysterious return. what they don't know won't kill them, though:

she realized she wants to fight against crime but knew she still has to be the head of her family's company, so nasha spent the past 6 years traveling the world in order to gain skills and knowledge in various martial arts and combat training techniques. sure, going down the secret-identity-vigilante route sounds laughable, and it could be argued it's only for selfish, vengeful reasons, but she wants to believe she's not just doing it for herself; it's for the people of gotham too. the only problem was she's no superpowered being, unlike those guys she saw on television and in the newspapers.

fortunately, she had the brains and the money, which meant access to multiple resources, especially technology. eventually, with the right help (cough, lucius, cough), a suit was made, which was designed by her to look like a perfect fit for a tall, muscular man. it's the best of all disguises; no one would immediately suspect that she's a woman underneath. plus, it looked cool with the bat symbol and ears that she added, so her alias would have to be related to that creature, obviously. alfred suggested "the gotham bat," which is... something, but "batman" in particular scratches nasha's brain just right; it sounds way catchier.

instead of wanting bruce as an s/o, my mind went, "nah, i'm literally him. it's me, the gotham knight who the gotham villains drool over in their own unique ways." i didn't want to be a guy though, but i also didn't want to be batwoman, i wanted drama, and then i remembered i saw this comment under a dispatch fanart of a genderbent robert; they had this fun idea of her still being mechaman, which makes everyone thinks she must be a dude. just perfect.

anywho, i've been on this intro's ass for roughly 9 days, for the proofreading and editing perfectionist maniac in me's my nemesis. like, just post it already; it is not that serious (kinda is). i'm still pulling the "english is not my first language" card to shield my writing here, however. i made a lil edit as well (not the best but was very fun to make). the audio's strange gateway by slowerpace. love ya to anyone who eats this up!

(Shifting related)

Because some people apparently have the thinking skills of a carrot.

It’s gonna be a long post but PLEASE, it’s so worth it. Also it’s important to read till the end to be able to understand the whole thing, and understand my position on the subject, because the beginning can be misleading.

Morality, contrary to what many intuitively assume, is not universal, stable or flawless. It is a human-made concept, a conceptual framework created by societies to regulate behaviour, maintain order, and define what counts as good, bad, just, or unjust. Cmon people, it’s like the very beginning of any philosophy course. What, are you like, 12?

We know that morality is not discovered like gravity or mathematics, it is invented and shaped by culture, context, and human interpretation, just like religion (which is a copying mechanism, and also a big part of where morality come from).

The “rules” of morality exist because we collectively agree they should (for most). History itself demonstrates how morality is not fixed, but constantly evolving (again, basic 8th grade).

Some practices that were once accepted without question are now regarded with horror. In ancient civilizations such as Greece or Rome, slavery was not only legal but seen as normal, even moral. Public executions and torture served as entertainment for crowds, when today they are condemned as barbaric. Children married as early as even before birth in medieval Europe with society’s blessing was common practice (and its still is in some countries). Now, modern (American) ethics recognizes this as exploitation. Yes, American ethics, because it’s still seen as totally acceptable in some countries and cultures.

These examples simply show that morality transforms with time and cultures, proving it is socially constructed rather than objectively fixed.

Even within the same era, morality is still subjective. Two individuals can consider the same action and arrive at opposite moral conclusions. And it can range from atrocious (in my opinion, because morality is subjective) actions, from less dramatic ones. For instance, many people view eating meat as normal and don’t even question it, others believe it morally wrong and that we should stop.

Some support child physical punishment in the name of education, others oppose it as abuse (which is my personal opinion as well (that it is abuse) (but still, it’s subjective)). But a couple of years back, it was totally normal to “educate” yoir child with physical punishment, and wasn’t even questioned.

Lying is generally condemned, yet many feel it becomes acceptable to protect someone from harm.

And this raise a second question: how do we determine in which situation a thing becomes permissible? Ki||ing is currently morally wrong (currently, because it hasn’t always been throughout history), but even if it is currently morally wrong, we (as a society) still believe that killing in the name of defence is permissible. Why? Are we able to provide a reasonable justification for this that dosent involve any feelings or personal perceptions of a situation? Or is this just because we collectively agree that it’s justified, even if we can’t justify that justification? Are we not taking the life of an individual the same way they would have taken ours? Are we then not as bad as them? Why is it justified, isn’t a life being taken anyway? (I’m not saying I’m against self defence, trust me it’s the opposite, I’m just raising questions that we need to answer in order to understand morality properly) (again, one of the basic of philosophy and school in general, don’t drop out of school, there are so many dumb people already).

Religions disagree radically on what is sacred or sinful. This variability shows that morality does not exist outside human perception, it lives inside it.

As philosophers like David Hume argued, moral judgments stem not from objective facts, but from human sentiment.

Nietzsche went further, claiming morality is a tool forged by societies to enforce power and control.

Ruth Benedict demonstrated anthropologically that moral norms differ wildly across cultures, proving they are relative and not universal.

J.L. Mackie, in meta-ethics, argued that objective moral facts simply do not exist.

Since morality is constructed by humans, shaped by culture and changing across history, and interpreted differently by every individual, then it logically follows that morality is not applicable to other people, cultures, religions or era or history. Try applying your morality to country such as North Korea, and we’ll see. Do you know why? Because your morality is not more good or valid than anyone else’s. The fact that you consider someone else’s moral immoral is only because of your personal morals and beliefs, which is a loop, which is a sophism, which is an argument that seems plausible, but is false and incoherently if you start to think about it (but anyway, people lack critical troubling skills those days).

Consequently, it is not applicable to every other realities existing. Another universe, another reality, another form of life could operate under entirely different values, or with no moral concepts at all. A species evolved for cooperation might see altruism as instinct, not moral duty. Another evolved for conflict might view violence as honorable or nurturing.

If I take my personal experience as an example (which is still just a personal experience, but I think it gives a good image of what I’m trying to illustrate), in my Avatar DR it is inconcevable that we kill that much animals and at such a rate. We kill every animals individually and with respect, if my people there saw what us humans would do here, they would be outraged and horrified at the highest levels possible. This is an (non extreme) example, but keep in mind that those comparaison exist on bigger scales. For instance, YES there are realities in which mass murd€r and agressions are normalized and ENCOURAGED. And even if we are outraged and horrified by it here, it won’t stop. The same way we won’t stop mass ki||ing animals to feed a fat and overcoming society. (Yes I am totally against that, and I don’t support it AT ALL, I’m only saying it for educational purposes only).

What we call “good” is meaningless elsewhere, or even inverted. It’s not a universal law, but a local cultural man made concept that exit in the human mind in this reality. An infinity of reality has the exact same morality as ours, but an infinity don’t, an infinity have a morality that goes against everything we despise as a society in this reality, and an infinity of realities don’t even have any concept resembling the idea of a moral guideline. Because it’s a concept that is being invented by societies.

Thus, one of the first lessons in basic philosophy (again, first philosophy class you’ll even get (don’t drop out of school)) is that morality is not absolute but constructed, evolving, and subjective. It changes across centuries, differs between individuals, and cannot be assumed to apply outside the human/cultural/historical sphere. Now let alone to whole different independent reality.

Now come another question, in shifting, why are we condemning someone who shift to a ki||ing DR, but not someone who shift to a Hunger Games DR, an Harry Potter DR, a LOTR DR, ect? It’s a legitimate question, because in those DR, there are ki||ing? The only difference is that it’s romanticized but our culture and cinema. Why is killing someone’s in a killing DR unacceptable, but killing someone in an Harry Potter DR is not? “Because those people are bad people”: So it’s an excuse to commit the same horrific acts as them because somehow when you do it it’s okay but when it’s them it’s not? “Because those people are trying to hurt me/my friends/the world in the first place”: Then why don’t you just script it out? You have the possibility to do so, why don’t you script all that violence and madness out? “Because it would ruin the plot”: You are just the same as those people who have ki||ing DR then? You shift intentionally to DR in which people suffer, only for your personal experience! “Not because it’s different”: No it’s really not. The only difference is that yours is romanticized, but it’s the exact same.

This raise ANOTHER question. If you shift (any DR, any reality, any I don’t care) no matter the concept or anything. If you don’t script out war, ki||ing, violence, 🟣, abuse, ect, then aren’t you the same? Listen because even if you are not directly involved in those action, the fact that you don’t script them out make you as worst as people with a ki||ing DR? The fact that you don’t participate in those actions directly, but that you don’t script them out makes you the same? Because by not scripting it out, you are condemning those people to die?

I know you just thought “no I don’t”, and you are right, you don’t. But why? Are you able to explain and justify why you are not? Well I am: it’s becuase it will happen anyway. This is the concept of constant divergence, which I have a post about named Constant Difference 101. Here it is.

But still, IT IS WRONG for you to do such things (shifting to hurt/ki||/ect). But why? Because from the perspective of this reality (for most, the reality you were born and raised in (well not really because that’s so not how it works, but still). It is considered wrong for you not because this reality objectively defines it as wrong, but because you evolved inside this reality’s moral framework. Your brain, your empathy, your moral judgment were shaped by this moral code. So when you act elsewhere, you do so with the mindset that it is wrong, even if another reality wouldn’t see it that way at all. It may not be wrong in another reality, it is still wrong from you and for you. So yea if you shift to ki||, just, assault, ect, even if it’s normalized there (or not) it’s is not here, and you come from here. But even if it’s wrong, it dosent matter because it won’t change anything. Because your actions domc impact realiry, yous re not THAT powerful, yoir actions just determine the version of reality you’ll become aware of, but it won’t change what happen, it will still happen anyway.

And if you think about doing any of that stuff, you should go see a specialist because WTF.

I know my whole post explained it differently, but it’s because If I want to provide accurate informations, I must do it with fact, not my feelings.

So yes it’s wrong, but its important we understand we can’t apply out morality like that. Why? Because the way we consider someone else’s moral code good or wrong is based on our own morality. And it’s like that for everyone, so why would your morality be the right one, just because your little person believe in it? Its not. But the concept is that if you do something morally wrong based on the moral structure you were raised in, it is wrong.

Don’t drop out of school, or those ignorant people could be you one day.

No I am not a red flag for having the ability of critical thinking and reasoning without being overwhelmed by my little feelings, nor am I for explaining facts even if it dosent fit your narrative or soothe your feelings.

THIS IS NOT A CALL FOR YOU TO GO HURT SOMEONE, SOMETHING OR YOURSELF. THIS IS FOR TEACHING PURPOSES ONLY AND NOR AM I CONDONING THE ACT OF HARMING OR KI||NG. ALSO, KEEP IN MIND THAT I DO NOT SUPPORT, ENCOURAGE OR CONDONE THOSE BEHAVIOUR AND ACTIONS. ITS THE OPPOSITE, THIS POST IS TO EDUCATE PEOPLE IN THE MATTER.

-Apeiron

Our Discord Sever Link! Join To Meet Shifters And Learn About Shifting!

Here is the link to access my templates! You can request by commenting!

My YouTube channel! Listen To My Subliminal And My Shifting Playlists!

Link To The Masterlist Of My Blog!

Follow Me On TikTok!

You are wrong and this argument is harmful.

Let's start with this.

Morality in and of itself is NOT subjective.

Topics within morality can be but morality itself is the distinction between right and wrong; Good and bad behavior

You're correct morality is a man-made concept but its not man-made in the sense of it being an ever changing social and societal mechanism.

Morality is instinctual with sentience. The moment our ape brains became sentient is the moment morality was "created"

Morality IS shaped by human behavior but its not a social construct. its often shaped around the harm caused by humans behavior which can be objectivitly calculated.

Some of ur points:

"religion is a big part of where morality comes from"

People in ancient Rome and Greece found appalling things like slavery moral

Child marriage being accepted

And also saying "american ethics"

These arguments are awful & harmful.

A lot of this way of thinking is rooted in patriarchy, racism, colonialism, capitalism, and corruption

Neitzsche wasnt exactly right but he wasnt wrong. morality is often weaponized by people in power to enforce their control

However is wasnt "created" to do so.

(I generally would recommend treading carefully with philosophy seeing a LOT of it was written by racist white men. Remember the nuance & try to find more black and brown philosophers)

The biggest question comes down to :

who benefits when morality is up for debate

Let's go back to things like "slavery, child marriages, etc was seen as moral back then so it proves morality is subjective !"

No. No. No. And NO

A. People in the past (at any point in time) KNEW what they were doing was wrong.

Rome is reminiscent of modern america, they were fully aware that their society wasnt going to last long, they knew there was going to be a rebellion, they knew that what they were doing was oppressive. Rome didnt fall in a day it was long and complex.

Not only that there were plenty of people fighting against these regimes because they KNEW their regime was immoral.

I mean fuck we went through a world war in the 30s over the immoral actions committed by the Nazis. The genocide of Jewish people was accepted by the masses - even in america, we had a HUGE amount of nazi support until Japan bombed pearl Harbour but did that make the genocide moral ?

B. Just because the masses accepted it as normal did not make it moral. This leads straight to the weaponization of morality.

Corrupt regimes propagate, indoctrinate and manipulate the masses in order to keep their hold on power.

Again, who benefits from morality being a seen as a debate.

C. Slavery, child marriages, genocide, etc etc all STILL EXIST TO THIS DAY. IT IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW and is generally accepted. Does that make it moral ?

Now let me talk about one of your first statements "religion is a big part of where morality comes from"

NO. NO. NO PLS GOD NO

Too many people subscribe to the belief that without religion you cant be moral.

This is one of the ways they (the ppl in power) weaponize morality AND RELIGION.

Religion is one of the central ways regimes throughout history have used to opress, control and manipulate the masses.

Religion is one of the central ways our regimes, modern day have used to excuse their corrupt piece of shit barbaric actions.

Its used to excuse homophobia, transphobia, slavery, sexism, racism & to shame or harm people outside of religion

(Remember that during american slavery, slaves were not allowed education but they were forced into the church.

In order to "cleanse" the native population they forced them into catholic schools where theyre still digging up children's bodies.Judaism being weapomized in genocide against the Palestinians. Islam being weaponized against women, i could go on + remember religion isnt the problem here.)

So, Let's talk about America. USA

I laughted outloud when you framed morality as "american ethics"

Im assuming you did so because of the progressive movement in america but its genuinely laughable.

Especially since america is the futherest place from ethical

Again the morals we're seeing be debated in current day are the exact same morals people were aware of & debating in the past, all over the world (majority of progressive literature is OLD AS FUCK and from different countries)

America kind of the perfect case study when it comes to this talk about morality

History lessons !

USA was founded by white colonizers committing genocide against native Americans and used religion & morality to excuse it.

Then they started slavery. Centuries. Almost 300 hundred years of unimaginable amounts of suffering and pain.

And guess what ? Americans KNEW IT WAS WRONG.

We still do. Its why we fought a civil war, why we had the civil rights moments & groups like the black panthers. Its part of the reasons racial tensions are so high right now !

Its why so much energy and money has been put into erasing the past and trying to force ppl to "just move on".

After slavery was legally abolished (PEOPLE STILL KEPT SLAVES EVEN AFTER THE WAR) we had 90 years of segregation & even more unimaginable suffering.

And yet we know that throughout the centuries people were activley fighting back - again a lot of our progressive literature is OLD !!!

Lynchings were a form of public executions white americans saw entertainment from. STRANGE FRUIT ? PICNICS ? but was it moral because it was accepted, even praised ??

Acceptance never equated to if something was moral or not.

Morality is only up for debate because there are people who benefit a fuck ton from it being one.

Now present day america.

Our government is CURRENTLY kidnapping people off the street & sending them to concentration camps under the guize it it being the "moral thing" , that theyre protecting us from dangerous criminal immigrants. A large amount of Americans fully onboard.

Yet we know damn fucking well it isnt moral- the rest of the world being very vocal about how fucking immoral it is & How americans need to step up.

12 states allow for child marriages. Romeo and Juliette laws. Forced child pregnancys - majority of underage pregnancys are committed by adults - does that mean its moral ?

Our world is run by powerful cannibalistic pedophile racists who come from lineages of powerful cannibalistic pedophile racists. The same people who weaponize religion against the masses, who weaponize bodily autonomy, who weaponized gender wars and race wars and culture wars.

We KNOW its immoral. The fact its being accepted & propagated does not change the fact that it is immoral. There is absolutely nothing about what is happening that is moral.

The same thing goes for all of the countries around us. We have seen countries tear down their regimes IN THE PAST FEW YEARS because of the immoral actions taken by their government.

- this is the other harmful part of saying "americam ethics" it can perpetuate the colonial idea that other countries aka brown countries are more barbaric and primitive that our white western one.

America is currently going through fascism and americans are doing absolutely fuck all about it. DOES THAT MAKE IT MORAL ??

By your veiwpoint. If fascism wins - like it always has - it will be framed as socially accepted, societally praised and therefore moral.

This conversation, your argument, its harmful.

Morality is not up for debate. Topics within it can be but the idea that morality is subjective continues to allow shitty people to get away with doing shitty fucking things

A lot of the things that happened in the past where awful and wrong yet still continue to happen TO THIS DAY because we live in the same systems set up by the same people. A lot of what you referenced in this argument are things that still continue to happen and are still being accepted !!! DOES THAT MAKE IT MORAL ????

You kept framing this argument as a "but these actions werent contested or challenged, actually they were seen as accepted, praised ! so it proves that morality is fluid and subjective" but you're wrong.

They were challenged, they were faught against, we as humans have had full blown wars over immorality.

Morality is objective. Always has been always will be and we should not let people convice you that its up for debate. Thats part of the reason the cycle of harm continues and keeps us trapped in the cycle of opression.

This morality debate can also bring up the lack of education and nuance. You brought up sophism- a clever argument thats false but typically used to deceive - in talks about moral superiority (which is its own topic)

But when we tie this into power, control, opression we quickly see how sophism & the war on education is used by the powerful to manipulate and control people. Used to manipulate peoples ethics which then comes back to the question - who benefits from morality being a debate.

Of course there are nuances within morality & ethics but that does not make morality itself subjective

Now if we are to talk about if the universe, all mighty, has morality, no it doesnt.

There is not such thing as good or bad, right or wrong in the grand scheme of things.

But us as living breathing sentient beings who directly experience and are impacted by good and bad, Wrong and right, it matters !! It matters oh so much !!!!!

Just because in other realities there's a lack of morality it does not equate to morality being subjective. Its just means one reality has a lack of them.

This is a sensitive conversation that needs to be handled with care and while you framed it as fact, your lacking a whole perspective that comes from radical deconstruction of the systems around us, all while being condescending to the readers intelligence and that is dangerous.

Abraham Van Helsing is famously believed to be the first recorded hunter in all of history, every known descendant is revered by the hunting community. What most common men fail to realise is that there's more to this bloodline than meets the eye, it's linked to a centuries old entity.

All of them hunters who lived for the job and died for it too. I'm no exception.

ELEANOR

can ' t remember anything . seriously , the only thing she does remember is waking up in a box , and then she somehow ended up as a ' climber ' trying to get out of a maze . the maze itself was harsh . it was made up of all ice and it was vertical , meaning the girls had to use ice picks to climb it . oh , and the temperature was below 0° , meaning the girls were at constant risk of hypothermia . the worst thing might have been the monsters , though . they crawled through the maze to get to the girls , often causing them to fall and plummet to their untimely deaths , or they were stung and brought to an untimely death .

Originally a Supernatural DR - Spiraled into the Mega Monster Mashup of the Century.

Horror Media collision.

Universes like The Conjuring, Sinister, Evil Dead, 30 Days of Night, The Ring, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Supernatural, Sabrina, True Blood, Midnight Texas, FROM, Silent Hill, Outlast (and many more) are smashed together onto an Earth 3x the size of our own.

The supernatural varying widely.

A curse that introduces me to a monster hunter operation in hopes of concrete answers