Researchers note that goblins often do not wear clothes, and yet, besides the ones on their head, they have no noticeable orifices for which to exchange the required formulae of cells expected with sexual reproduction. Yet, when asked on the matter, goblins dismiss the entire subject with a statement like "we do it the same as you guys" and " just rub the bits together"

For years that is where researchers have left it. But recently, with permission, we have been allowed to observe the mating rituals of goblins; here is an unabridged expert of that study.

Goblin A. Takes a knife and removes a finger from their hand.

Goblin B. States she has been keeping "an old ear lobe what got sliced off last week" when pressed as to why she kept the ear, she replies "that's good eating, lots of good meat on a goblin ear"

Goblin A then takes the two pieces in hand and, for lack of a better word, mushes them together, kneading and rolling until a smooth ball is formed, like one would with clay, or a bread dough.

Over the next hour, the outer shell of the ball will harden into a shell like structure, and turn from the opaque mottled green of goblin skin, to a smooth black crust.

Another two hours and this egg will hatch a fully formed goblin. Unlike humans, there is no infancy stage in goblinhood, the new goblin child has the same level of intelligence and dexterity as it's parents, albeit at 1/10 the size.

I've mentioned the idea that gnomes and goblins are essentially the same thing a couple of times and I wanted to expand on that in a longer post so it can be referred back to.

The overall concept essentially boils down to three key ideas. Firstly, the idea that gnomes are antignostic incarnations of earth- spirits by choice. Secondly, the idea that the term "gnome" is more about culture than species. Thirdly, Ted Holiday's concept of the 'Goblin Universe'.

[Above: Troll in autumnal mushroom forest, 1929, O. Herrfurth]

In regards to the first point, I've already mentioned my theory that gnomes are anti-gnostic Earth spirits who choose to take incarnate physical form because they consider our mode of reality to be a paradise. The point which ties this to my gnome/goblin hypothesis is that they are formless spirits in origin. They stem from a source, which you could call Fairyland, Avalon, Mother Earth, Sylvanus (or whatever vital planetary genius loci you personally prescribe to), which other fairy folk and creatures of similar nature originate from also. This includes goblins. They are born of the same essence. In essence, they are the same.

This leads into the second point wherein (bearing in mind the idea that gnomes and goblins come from the same essence) we must consider the idea of gnomishness. If the creatures of Fairyland are simply instances of formless living-will born from the same source, why are they different? Form is not the differentiating factor. Form to spirits is a fluid thing, based upon thinking, upon lifestyle. Their form follows culture and it is in culture we find the difference. The rustic living of gnomes is far removed from the court intrigue of Oberon and Titania. Gnomish culture is different from fairy culture. This is why gnomes look gnomish and fairies look fae. Their form is simply filling a groove carved out by the very concept of gnomishness itself. The study of gnomes is a matter not of biology but of sociology. The reason I choose to focus upon gnomes' similarity to goblins specifically is because, in my opinion, they are culturally very similar, which I will speak of at the end of this post.

In regards to the third point, I mention the Goblin Universe often and I want to explain what I mean when I refer to it. A paranormal researcher named Ted Holiday wanted to create a theory to explain all paranormal phenomena, which he dubbed the Goblin Universe. It essentially makes a point similar to my first point here but more broadly, stating that all pan-paranormal instances are examples of the same thing. That there is no difference between the mysterious fairy-lights in the woods which stole people away to fairy-land centuries ago and mysterious alien abductions and UAPs of modern times. What occurs is an encounter with a non-physical phenomena wherein a human being is peeking into the Goblin Universe and giving shape to what they see. The shape is dictated by surroundings, by culture, by society, by the collective unconscious but it is the human psychic response which guides the shape. Hence why gnomes look gnomish, it's because of preconceived notions. The Goblin Universe, I feel, ties my idea that gnomes and goblins are of the same essence with the idea that 'gnome' refers to culture rather than species since it is cultural markers which define the gnome's form.

I could speak more on how, historically, there was far less delineation between gnomes, goblins and other small folk of the forests and how the differences in modern times are exacerbated by media properties like World of Warcraft, D&D and so on, but that's another post, really.

What's more important is that whilst all this speaks about how gnomes and goblins are similar if not the same, I can also speak about the primary difference. I believe I have mentioned it before. I've referred to one of the key points in gnomish thinking being the high value placed upon respect. For nature, for others, for themselves and so on.

I believe this is where the key difference lies. What is a goblin but a gnome who has abandoned respect?

They have that same industriousness, the same individual streak, the same capacity for mass co-operation. But where a gnome thinks in shades of compassion, a goblin thinks in self-indulgence. Goblin is essentially a gnome sub-culture.

There are other options to consider, of course. A grim explanation of the difference between the two is that goblins are not a specific culture but rather a vocation some gnomes take. Specifically, a military vocation. It has been suggested that goblins are simply the forms gnomes take when performing aggressive asymmetrical warfare against humanity. Commandos, spies, guerillas. This is, in my view, plausible, but unpleasant to think about.

i just watched it and this THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT IM THINKING...like what the fuck

How can his parents sit there and place all of the blame on her as if they weren’t aware THAT HE HAS ATTEMPTED like what was it, 4 times????

I know!! The parents are in total denial, it was obvious to me that the mother had issues with women when she said she warned Conrad that girls will manipulate him and ruin his life. His father beat him and apparently assaulted his mother also, so it’s not surprising that they would blame a girl/woman for his death. I feel for them, but Conrad was really depressed and keeping him in a violent environment him didn’t help.