#overthinking everything

And a pokémon is at their strongest by far under the command of a trusted human companion. Though the trust and rapport required means human commanders can only realistically lead a small band, that they form a kinship with in their own fashion together.

This means for a large span of history, warfare in this world was constantly accessible and was defined entirely by very personally driven small bands that unite under common causes and goals- large scale institutional military systems just don’t work.

Trainer militias define historical pokémon warfare, and given how readily accessible the means of war are and how much of a constant volatile threat pokémon themselves regularly pose, this trainer militia system would have been a hugely present element in society.

Scanning forward to the present this doesn’t look surprising. It explains why pokémon battling (warfare reduced to a respectful and recreational sparring practice) has such a huge hold on society, culture, infrastructure, and economy. It’s a war machine repurposed to peaceful ends.

League gyms are remnants of the militia structure, where a given region is likely to have had several allied but separate militias, given the provincial nature of such organizations, likely not organizing beyond the scope of a specific town. And even now those headquarters serve as training grounds and symbols of a community’s strength.

But there are OTHER things that are also evolved from the militia era. Namely clique fashion.

Militias wore uniforms, and made them distinct. But they weren't governmental bodies with their own funds and infrastructure for it, so these uniforms were less like military or police outfits and more like highly specific clothing that everyone IN that militia wore the same. Everyone wear a striped shirt with a blue scarf. Or everyone wear red and yellow coats. Et cetera. This is not obscure- villain teams emulate this same practice today for cultural legitimacy.

But during the 20th century, as trainer militias were gradually transitioning from a military force to a social group, OTHER social groups modeled their behavior and practices after the ubiquitous trainer militias. Social networks across a given region bound by particular interests or pastimes or professional sectors identified themselves as cliques, and “clique fashion” became a signifier of membership. Meaning: wear the same outfit that everyone else in your clique wears.

This is why even today you’ll see backpackers wear the same hat. Delinquents wear track suits in the same color scheme. Hex maniacs don the same gown and sweater. Rangers, anglers, breeders, fairy tale girls, mediums, super nerds, and so on.

The rigidity of clique fashion varies by region. In some regions it’s expected every day, or else you’re seen as claiming not to even BE a member of the clique. In others the clique outfit is worn on a whim, or worn periodically for reason. In some regions clique fashion has more or less fallen out of practice entirely.

"cain tended their parents' flowers" = hamza was shown with him and his parents in a field, his parents were farmers. he had grown up in punjab, presumably surrounded by fields of crops. "abel always smelled of blood" = rehman grew up in lyari. bastard son of babu dakait. killed his own mother at age 15. ruled lyari ever since. basically grew up surrounded by blood and violence.

lioness = here, rehman; adopted hamza as one of their own, took him along with them to meetings with major iqbal and the rest, made him supply weapons for 26/11 alongside them, which he had to watch and pretend to be happy. the meat = rehman's anti-india ideals.

hamza. did he know he would have to betray rehman? yes. did he love him despite? i think so.

again, hamza. the scene where he hallucinates seeing rehman smoke a cigarette after killing him. do i really need to elaborate further?

dare i say hamza once again. his whole motive was to simply infiltrate the gang, get info and use it to stop their operations. he had never expected getting emotionally involved, never expected getting the amount of love and trust that he did, did you, hamza?

hamza. sacrificial lamb, scapegoat, and the one screaming: because his own motherland sent him on a mission without a care if he would live, die, or face sever trauma and emotional anguish. executioner, swordslayer and the angel of death: because he himself knew exactly what he was going there for. one way or the other, he had to finish them all. no matter if the dull pain in his own chest hit harder than their dying attempts to fight back.

and maybe- just maybe- a small part of hamza wanted to apologize, apologize to rehman in his last moments. "you were good to me, and i love you, but i'm doomed"; was what he wanted to say when he hallucinated seeing him in the hospital- covered in blood, hands shaking as he lit his cigarette.

rehman. flitting in and out of consciousness as he is carried by hamza to the hospital. hamza touches him, carrying him, his fingers and some cotton jam the wound in his neck, but who will jam the wound in his heart? he reaches out to touch hamza's face one last time; his shaking hand is immediately shoved aside as it is assumed to be one of hate, of rage and animosity, not the disbelief for the soft, dull betrayal of brotherly love that he intended for it to be.

entwined? yes, sure. but fate never said theirs would be a happy ending. destiny agreed.

to me, the bigger text is rehman. he had truly, i believe, loved hamza. cared for him. given him a place, in his ranks, in his heart. he also truly, truly, hated him when he realised his betrayal in the car. but hate never fully erases love, and the gaping hole in a heart never forgets. the bottom text is hamza. i really dont think it needs an explanation.

Context of this post: I just thought of two more stims to add to the list in my doc. For… whatever reason. Why am I posting this. Am I fricking autism-bating. Tf.

At some point, we all outgrow something we once loved. Maybe it’s a hobby, a community, a show, or a career path. You used to be all in—spending time, energy, maybe even money—but now? Not so much.

The problem is, we convince ourselves we have to stay interested because we’ve already put in so much effort. (I'm lookin' at you, knitting) That’s the sunk cost fallacy talking, and it’s a load of crap.

"Marie Kondo" Your Interests

Marie Kondo says to get rid of things that don’t spark joy. Great advice for cleaning out your junk drawer or closet (ratty old hoodies, you no longer spark joy), but even better advice for your time and energy. If something no longer excites you, you don’t have to keep forcing it. You’re not obligated to stay interested in something forever just because you once were.

Sunk Costs Are Sunk—Let Them Go

The sunk cost fallacy is that little asshole voice whispering, But I’ve already spent years on this. I can’t just quit now! Except, yes, you can. Just because you’ve put time or money into something doesn’t mean you owe it a lifetime commitment. The only thing that matters is whether it still adds value to your life now. If it doesn’t, cut your losses and move on.

And yeah, we’ve all heard “Nobody likes a quitter.” But let’s be honest- nobody likes a miserable, burned-out jackwagon clinging to something out of sheer stubbornness, either. Quitting isn’t failure. It’s just refusing to keep throwing good time after bad.

Stop Making Up Dramas to Fill the Void

Here’s another thing I’ve noticed: When a steady source of content or engagement dries up—whether it’s a creator going silent, a group fizzling out, or a passion just fading—people lose their gotdamm minds. Instead of accepting the quiet, they start making up stories. And not just any stories—escalating, over-the-top, apocalyptic stories.

Did they disappear because of a scandal? Was there a secret feud? Is something awful happening behind the scenes? MIND CONTROL??!

No. Sometimes, things just stop. People move on. Not everything needs a grand conspiracy behind it. But because silence makes us uncomfortable, we scramble to fill it—even if that means manufacturing a crisis.

You don’t have to do that. You don’t have to buy into it, either. If something fades away, let it. If someone stops posting or participating, maybe they just had other shit to do. It’s not always a mystery to solve.

You’re Allowed to Change

Interests aren’t life sentences. You can be obsessed with something for years and then wake up one day and realize you just… don’t care anymore. And that’s fine. You can always pick it back up later, or not (still lookin at you, knitting). Either way, you don’t owe anyone (including past you) an explanation.

-🐈