• Breaking News

    Monday, October 14, 2019

    Home Unlabelled Fire Emblem 3 Houses Mural, but it's DONE! (Completed mural)

    Fire Emblem 3 Houses Mural, but it's DONE! (Completed mural)

    October 14, 2019

    Fire Emblem 3 Houses Mural, but it's DONE! (Completed mural)

    3 Houses Mural, but it's DONE! (Completed mural)

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 01:32 PM PDT

    Post Timeskip Annette Reference

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 06:46 AM PDT

    Timeskip Lysithea fan art

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 11:55 AM PDT

    Three Houses faculty as modern day teachers

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 03:36 PM PDT

    Untitled Bernie Game

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 06:07 PM PDT

    Some people told me that I share qualities with Mercedes so I figured that I may as well draw her

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 08:03 AM PDT

    You've got mail! Aww, somebody loves you!

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 05:26 PM PDT

    Smug Marianne

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 11:10 AM PDT

    The Make-Believe Duo (OC)

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 03:05 PM PDT

    Ingrid's hot granny

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 01:37 AM PDT

    Let us be praising the Queen of Brigid!

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 06:23 AM PDT

    Unspoken Agreement

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 03:43 PM PDT

    Magical White Bunny

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 08:01 AM PDT

    Fire Emblem Black Ink - Rinea

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 04:45 PM PDT

    Minor Annoyance

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 12:23 PM PDT

    "Admiring my gloves? I always wear them. You never know when you'll need to handle a weapon." (OC)

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 06:56 PM PDT

    Caspar is Proud of All of You

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 01:25 PM PDT

    I seriously think Astrid must have hit her head hard between Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 12:35 PM PDT

    Ashe chibi

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 08:53 AM PDT

    The Meaning of Divinity: My Issues With the Church of Seiros From the Perspective of my Faith as a Catholic

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 02:21 PM PDT

    Alternatively titled: "My 95 Theses on Why The Church of Seiros Fucking Sucks"

    So, obviously this game has resulted in a little bit of controversy ever since its release, mostly revolving around Edelgard's actions and her feelings on the Church of Seiros. Now, as a disclaimer: I am an Edelgard supporter, I think her actions are ultimately for the greater good and in terms of the actual quality of her writing she's the best character in Fire Emblem history. So if you were waiting for a sign to click off from here and ignore everything else I'm about to say, that was it.

    Now, there has been a lot of debate on whether or not the Church did anything, everything, or only some things wrong, and the comparisons to both the historical and modern-day Catholic Church are inevitable, with people's religious views obviously having a pretty large influence on how they view this issue, one way or another. What originally resonated with me so much when playing Crimson Flower was that Edelgard's ideals on meritocracy and humanity resonated with my views as an individualist, and her thoughts on nobility and monarchies resonated with my political beliefs, but there's already been a hundred different threads about that, this isn't a thread about my moral or political views, this is about my religious views. Today I'm here to talk about why I, as a Catholic (albeit not the most devout one), believe that the Church of Seiros is completely, fundamentally, broken and needs to fucking go.

    Also, another important disclaimer:

    Someone's faith is a very personal thing, and each person's relationship with God varies depending on various factors such as how they were raised, how they interpret their faith, their feelings on religion, and so on. I am not a theological scholar nor am I any sort of authority on religion, I am not telling anyone that they can't be pro-Catholic and also pro-Church of Seiros, like I said, I'm not even especially devout for a Catholic. However, I do believe in a loving God, and I do identify with the Catholic faith, so I have a lot of thoughts on this matter that I haven't seen expressed elsewhere, at least not as comprehensively as I would like. If at any point it seems like I am trying to pass my opinion off as fact, it's just because I don't feel the need to write "in my opinion" before every sentence, but all of this is purely my own thoughts and opinions.

    Depiction of Religion in Video Games

    So, to preface all this, I wanna address the elephant in the room, which is that it's not at all uncommon for religious organizations in JRPGs to be portrayed as villainous, and usually with a lot less nuance than Three Houses gives to the Church of Seiros. There are a lot of reasons for this:

    • The Catholic Church was historically pretty fucked up and as most fantasy settings tend to borrow from medieval Europe, this carries over.
    • Lots of stories will go for the basic narrative subversion of having an organization associated with "light" and "virtue" secretly being corrupt and sinful.
    • Catholic imagery looks really fucking cool, especially when applied to JRPG final bosses.

    The list goes on and on for a while. But I think one of the most relevant reasons for this is the cultural view on what constitutes a "god". To a lot of religions, gods, demons, angels, etc. are essentially just really powerful magical beings, and this makes them prime material for JRPG enemies and bosses (hell, SMT has an entire franchise and several spinoffs based entirely around this concept).

    Notably, what I don't consider to be a very prominent point on this list is "political commentary on modern day religion". That is to say that while the Church of Seiros undeniably draws influence from Christianity and the Catholic Church, I don't think that the writers of this game were trying to say that Pope Francis is secretly a lizard man who's been controlling world politics for the past thousand years, nor do I think that hating the Church of Seiros and hating the Catholic Church is the same thing. What I'm getting at here is that, for me, what tips the Church of Seiros from just "bad" to "absolutely worth starting a war over" isn't its similarities to the Catholic Church, but its differences.

    What Is a God? (A miserable pile of secrets!)

    So, one of the points I wanted to emphasize when going on that tangent is that the nature of divinity varies from religion to religion. In a lot of cultures, gods are an entire race of superbeings or personifications of abstract concepts, with varying personalities and, most importantly, flaws. The Greek pantheon is probably the most notable example of this, having an entire body of religious mythology based around how the gods are all a bunch of raging assholes and how humans have to deal with the consequences, but Japanese mythology is also no stranger to this, which probably has some influence on how religious organizations tend to be portrayed in JRPGs, if you'll excuse my reaching.

    The reason I'm wasting your time with my religious musings in a thread about the Church of Seiros is because when it comes to Christianity, this is very much not how God works. The Judeo-Christian Capital G YHWH God is defined by being perfect. He is both omnipotent and omniscient, He can do anything and knows everything ever. He created everything. A particularly poetic religious philosopher might even go so far as to describe him as "The father of all life, and arbiter of every soul." And I think that in today's modern society, this is something that's taken for granted by a lot of people, even though it's the cornerstone of the entire Christian faith. If you were to ask a priest in Ancient Greece why you should listen to the gods, and a priest in Medieval England why you should listen to God, they'd probably both tell you something along the lines of "Because they're gods!/ Because He's God!" But the former would mean "Because they're incredibly powerful beings who have lived for far longer than any of us have and are more power than we do,'' while the latter would mean "Because He, by definition, knows better than us."

    And that is what divinity means within the context of the Christian faith. That is why the Divine Right of Kings existed, that is why kings and the Pope had to get along, that is why King Henry VIII had to invent a new branch of religion just so he could get a divorce, that is why wars have been fought over religious disagreements and why heretics were burned at the stake, that is why the Catholic Church earned the reputation that led to it's look-alikes becoming stereotypical fantasy villains, that is why, to this day, people will argue tooth and nail that politicians should adhere to their political beliefs, even in countries based on separation of Church and State. Because if you believe in the basic, core tenet of the Christian faith, then "Because God said so," is the most ironclad argument in existence. You can interpret what God said differently, you can deny that God actually said anything, you can call the other person a liar, you can claim that they're twisting God's words to suit their own agenda, but if you're a Christian, and you actually believe in the core beliefs of Christianity, then you cannot say "God is wrong," because that's completely counter to what Christianity is about. Within the context of the Christian faith "God is right" isn't a matter of debate, it's like saying 2+2=4. It's a fact.

    And this is very relevant because the Faith of Seiros is based on the exact same thing.

    Yes, the Crests ARE to Blame

    So, let's think for a bit about how much influence Christianity has had on western society. How many of you reading this tend to say "Oh my god" or some variation thereof? How many of you will say "Christ" or "Sweet Jesus" in casual conversation? And how many of you do this despite not being particularly devout, followers of a different religion, or even atheists? Now imagine how much more influence Christianity had on the normal, day-to-day lives of your average everyday peasant in medieval times, back when most of the population was illiterate, life expectancy was way shorter, social movement was even more difficult than it is for people nowadays (which is saying something), priests and churches were often at the center of most communities, Kings sat on their throne because God said so and lords ruled over lands because they said so, and by extension so did God.

    Now imagine that this also took place in a world where priests and bishops can heal wounds or smite their enemies with divine light through the power of their faith, mages can rain fiery death on their enemies or summon bolts of lightning, and a very small subset of the population is born with special magic blood that lets them wield extremely powerful magic weapons and also makes them strong enough to snap a lance in half by sneezing.

    A common argument that I see floating around is "Why does Edelgard blame the Church for Crests when they were created by the Agarthans?" This is a really annoying really misinformed argument which is really missing the point, but it's also one that the writing itself does a poor job at explaining, since Edelgard (and most of the in-game writing and characters) constantly use "Crests" to refer to both "Crests as a tangible magical phenomenon" and "Crests as a social system." The former was created by the Agarthans (or, I guess stolen from Nabateans and given to humans by the Agarthans) while the latter was created by the Church, and is what Edelgard actually takes issue with.

    The problem with Crests isn't "a small subset of the population is just born with superpowers that are inherited seemingly at random." The problem with Crests is that "a small subset of the population is just born with superpowers because the Goddess decided to bless them, and because the Goddess is perfect and all-knowing her deciding to bless these people with her power means that they're better than everyone else and deserve to be rulers", because after all, if the Goddess didn't want the nobles to rule anymore why would she keep blessing them with Crests? The Goddess is always right, remember? She never makes any mistakes.

    And that is why the Crests are so terrible. That's what leads to large swathes of the population being basically second-class citizens, what lead to Fodlan's society being based on literal actual eugenics, what lead to Hanneman's sister being raped and abused to death (which is, according to Hanneman himself, the Father of Crestology, not particularly uncommon among nobility), what lead to Miklan being disinherited, basically destroying his life and very nearly Sylvain's too, what allowed Thales to convince Duke Aegir and the rest of the nobles to hand over the entire Imperial family to them over for inhumane blood experiments so that they could produce an Emperor with two crests, which also lead to Lysithea and many other innocent people being tortured and experimented on as guinea pigs.

    And all this is directly or indirectly caused by the Church's doctrine. Now, in fairness, for a time I might've accepted the argument that "Okay yeah the Church of Seiros borrows very heavily from the Catholic Church but there's no actual evidence that they preach that Sothis is an omnipotent omniscient deity akin to the Christian God", and I would've said that that was arguing in bad faith, and that just by seeing all the Christian influence in the Church of Seiros and just the way that Rhea and other believers (both from the Central and Western churches) talk about the Goddess, it should be pretty clear that that's how they treat her, but maybe they don't actually come right out and say that. However, I then went into the library, read the Book of Seiros, and nope. The Church of Seiros does in fact preach that Sothis is an all-powerful and all-knowing deity. They even explicitly use the word "omnipotence." (They don't straight up say "omniscience" but they do day she "hears all and sees all" or something along those lines which in practical terms is the exact same thing.)

    So, I'm sure by now a lot of people reading this (assuming anyone's stuck around this long) are getting a distinctly anti-religious vibe from this thread, even though this is supposed to be about how my views as a Catholic lead me to believe that the Church of Seiros is full of shit. If I believe that "God is right" really is an ironclad argument, then why do I think a religion where you have physical proof of a Goddess that you interact with in-game is so terrible? The difference is that she isn't a Goddess.

    Naga Did Literally Nothing Wrong

    Three Houses is a game that does a lot to "subvert expectations", and unlike many, many, many other modern attempts at this, I'd say it does this very well. Three Houses works on its own as a standalone story, but it is enhanced by the references and tributes to the lore of previous Fire Emblem games, with the most obvious inspiration being Jugdral (and the rest of Archanea, by extension). People have already made tons of threads on how the Three Lords are all parallels to both past villains and past lords, the similarities between Nemesis and the Ten (actually Eleven) Elites and the Twelve Crusaders, the similarities between Holy Blood and Crests, hell, I even predicted as soon as the timeskip designs were revealed that the Relics would turn out to be bones because aside from their very fossilized appearance, Falchion, the archetypical Holy Weapon, is made out of Naga's fang.

    So, let's talk about Naga for a bit. As the OG Dragon Goddess and still the most archetypical and iconic example of an object of worship in the Fire Emblem series, the similarities between her and Sothis (and Seiros) are obvious and certainly deliberate (In particular, I'm a huge fan of how Sothis, the green-haired loli girl is actually the Goddess, while Rhea, the green haired milf lady is actually the daughter of the Goddess, in a complete reversal of Naga/Tiki).

    So, I'm assuming most people reading this don't need to have Naga's lore spelled out for them so I'll keep it short. Naga was the leader of the Divine Dragon tribe, she realized that dragons were degenerating so she ordered them to seal their powers in dragonstones and coexist with humans, some dragons disagreed with her pro-human attitude, so she kicked their asses, and also periodically gave her blessing and a sword carved from her fang to various different humans throughout history for when dragons came back and started causing trouble again. The version of history that the Church gives is an obvious parallel to this, with the big twist being that Nemesis worked with the Agarthans to kill Sothis and the other dragons, then stole their blood and bones to gain their Crests and create the Relics.

    Now, the reason I'm bringing up Naga here is to showcase how Naga behaves and how the game's writing treats her, compared to how the Church of Seiros portrays Sothis (as, sadly, we have very little to go on regarding what Sothis was actually like in life and what she actually thinks of all this). While past Fire Emblem games generally haven't put as much care into the worldbuilding of the religious aspects or the moral conundrums that come with the Church of Seiros, there's still some things we can go on: she is worshipped by humans and the clergy in the games where she is mentioned seem to typically worship her, the actual doctrine of her faith is never actually explained in detail (or if it is, I've never come across it), the only time we see her worshippers actually do something evil (that I can recall) would be when Chrom's late father starts a crusade against Plegia for worshipping Grima, something which we can be reasonably certain Naga had no hand in. How can we be reasonably certain? Well, I'm glad you asked, because the quote that answers this question is what this entire segment on Naga has been building up to:

    "But know this: I am no god. [...] So do sons of man name me. But I am no creator. I possess not the powers of making or unmaking."

    And there you have it. Naga, the quintessential Good Dragon Goddess in the series, the Capital-Double-D Divine Dragon is unambiguously saying that she is not a god, and denies being omnipotent, and goes on to deny Grima's claims of divinity, just for good measure. Divine Dragon is a title that humans made up for her, and she just never bothered to correct them. Given how heavily Three Houses draws upon the lore of previous Fire Emblem games, and especially how Sothis draws from Naga, I believe that this is a very relevant point. Aside from denying divinity, Naga's attitude towards humanity is also generally much more hands-off. She steps in to help or guide when needed, but she generally lets humans rule themselves, and only really steps in when other dragons go around calling themselves Gods, starting empires, and oppressing humans (hint hint). Her quotes in Heroes elaborate some more on this, and I'm particularly fond of this line:

    "The world needs a guiding hand. My role is to steady that hand."

    Now, having said all that, it's certainly fair to say that Naga denying divinity doesn't automatically disprove Sothis', but even solely within the context of Three Houses, there's plenty of evidence that Sothis is "just" a very powerful dragon rather than an omnipotent deity. Most obviously, the fact that she even has a physical body, which needs to hibernate after using up too much power, and which can be killed, along with blood, bones, and a heart-stone-thing that can be stolen and made into a weapon is a pretty clear sign against omnipotence. On top of that, none of her feats really go beyond the scale of what's been seen in other FE games, or even other JRPGs. The Divine Pulse is certainly powerful, but Mila's Turnwheel is a thing (even if it's not quite the same thing) and Naga herself demonstrates the power to travel through time and to different timelines in Awakening. Sothis claims that Byleth would need the power of a god to get out of Zaharas but, again, we've seen dimensional travel in other FE games and, frankly, the fact that Solon is able to send Byleth to Zaharas in the first place sorta disproves the notion that dimensional travel is limited to gods. Creating an entire continent is pretty impressive and beyond the scope of what we've seen other divine dragons accomplish in FE, but aside from the fact that I think that particular feat was fictionalized and that Sothis didn't literally create an entire continent out of nothing, even if it were true, that would just make Sothis a really powerful dragon. Like I said earlier, there's a very significant difference between a lowercase-g god, and a Capital-G God, and while Sothis would likely qualify for the former I think the game makes it pretty clear that she is not the latter.

    Now, with all that said, yeah, maybe Sothis isn't actually a Goddess and this misunderstanding has caused a lot of trouble, but faith can also be a very powerful force for good, and the Church of Seiros has done a lot of good things, so even if the faith is a sham, the Church does have redeeming qualities. I won't deny this (and for that matter neither does Edelgard, nor the writing of CF, where the Church is reformed and restored after the war), but there is still one more point which pushes the Church of Seiros from simply "bad" to "unacceptable" in my eyes.

    Rhea Howard, CEO of Bethesda

    So, I've already established why I don't believe that Sothis is a Goddess, but it's also important to note that aside from that one scene in Zaharas we don't actually get any real perspective from Sothis on what she thinks of all this. The Church of Seiros was founded by Seiros, Sothis's daughter, who was claiming to be a Saint and Prophet blessed by the Goddess and chosen to strike down her enemies. Truthfully, this was all just a cover story so that she could gather an army to kill Nemesis and his followers, get revenge for her mother and the genocide of her people, and then unite the continent. Now, to be clear, what Nemesis did was undeniably terrible and Rhea was fully justified in wanting him dead, and I'd even say that her uniting the continent was more-or-less a good thing, it's everything she did after that which I take issue with.

    Not trusting humans to keep the peace on their own, Seiros established a system of ruling that placed her most trusted supporters at the top, and left the descendants of her enemies under her thumb, as their authority to rule was now granted to them by the Goddess, and by extension, the Church, especially as the Heroes Relics were now essentially granted to them by the Church. Additionally, while Seiros did not declare herself a Goddess, she did declare her mother a Goddess and placed herself at the head of the Church built around her, fully aware of the authority and power this implies, and she used and abused this with impunity. Most damningly, Seiros maintained and perpetuated this lie for nearly one thousand years. Rhea didn't just trip over herself and go "oh fuck I accidentally established an oppressive theocracy!" she consciously made those decisions and then actively continued making them for one thousand years, leading to all the above mentioned consequences. There's been a lot of debate over precisely how much power and influence the Church actually has, but I think that it's pretty obvious that the Church at least has some degree of influence, and more importantly, Rhea had more than enough time to try and enact social change and fix her mistakes, and the fact that she did not shows that she either didn't know about all the fucked up shit that was happening because of her teachings (which I find highly unlikely) or she just didn't care enough to do anything about it on a large scale, either scenario paints a very poor picture of her. Instead, she decided to spend her free time on necromantic experiments to revive her mother by creating a body for her to inhabit (and by all appearances these bodies had their own minds, wills, personalities, and souls, mind you) and then shoving her soul into the body and hoping she'd possess them.

    In spite of all this, the game does make an argument for there being good elements to the Faith of Seiros, even if it is all a lie, and I can see that, but here's where I take issue:

    Seiros and the other surviving Nabateans knew Sothis (ok so there's some debate on this point and that entire period of history is a big blank spot but I'm operating under the assumption that Seiros isn't completely delusional and that Sothis is her literal mother), and would therefore know that she wasn't actually a Goddess and that the religion they were preaching was based on a lie. Throughout history religion has been used to excuse a great number of atrocities, however, even if it's pretty obvious that they're just twisting the religion to justify their own terrible actions, you can at least, ostensibly, say that they genuinely believe in what they're doing, in some twisted way. Rhea does not have this excuse. The entire religion of Seiros is built upon a lie that Rhea knowingly and intentionally invented, and she repeatedly used this lie to justify herself and her actions. This lie may have been made with good intentions, but as Rhea herself admits, this led to a ton of terrible consequences, and the lie also conveniently happened to place her in a position of very high authority.

    If a local priest were to confide in me and say that he doesn't actually believe in a lot of what he preaches, but he believes that faith is important to a lot of people and he likes that his position allows him to help people, I'd be fine with that. If the Pope came up to me and told me that he didn't believe in God and it was all just a lie that he was riding out as a career choice, I'd be much more pissed off.

    TL/DR: The fact that the entire Church of Seiros is based on a lie, the immense consequences of that lie, and the fact that Seiros knew this was a lie, and had to actively keep lying to people for one thousand years is why I firmly believe that the Church of Seiros, in its current state cannot be allowed to continue to exist without very heavy reforms.

    So yeah if you actually bothered to read all this thanks for listening to me rant about this fictional religion from a videogame and my thoughts on Catholicism and the Christian faith.

    submitted by /u/ramix-the-red
    [link] [comments]

    I drew my favorites doing the golden deer pose!

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 07:56 PM PDT

    I made smol bean figurines of the childhood trio, Sylvain, Felix and Ingrid!

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 07:09 AM PDT

    Both sides of spook are revealed to you. What shall you do?

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 07:37 AM PDT

    Why we should be disagreeing on the story of Three Houses

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 04:52 PM PDT

    So I saw a comment on a post earlier that made me finally want to actually gave a little input. I've seen a few people complaining about this subreddit being toxic, and maybe I just missed the toxic parts, but I feel like the disagreements we have over the story are actually an important part of literal analysis. So, if you are willing to hear me out, let me explain why our own circumstances shape the way we interrupt the game, but also how disagreeing with one another allows for us to deepen our understanding and passion for this game.

    Before I continue I should put my cards on the table. I can't stand Edelgard, I love Dimitiri's arc, feel that Rhea is a grey character who tries to do more harm than good, and I feel like Verdant Wind is the most satisfying ending to the story. I also started with the Golden Deer and thus fear all should fear the deer. Now that is all out of the way, let me explain why I feel these disagreements are important.

    For starters, we must accept that it is important to accept that no one can claim to have the true "right" perspective of the story. Part of reading the text in literature (and I'd argue that story heavy games like Three Houses are literature). We all bring in our own perspectives and personal beliefs. For example, part of why I am so anti-Edelgard is that I feel like she values the collective of society over the well being of the individual. As someone who believes the life of the individual should always come before the collective, this irks me. Of course, one can view Edelgard as a savior willing to make the necessary sacrifices in order to grant greater freedom to Fodland. Neither is wrong. Its a matter of interpretation.

    Another important thing about how we come to such different perspectives is how we come in contact with the lore of Three Houses. This game is possibly the heaviest lore Fire Emblem yet, and its not given out in a linear manner. Between support conversations, actual story events, paralogues, the books in the monastery, dialogue in missions, it is a massive pile of information for us to sort through, and we often have to choose what information has greater impact and importance to the overall narrative. In a sense, this almost reminds me of the Souls franchise, and how that fandom still disagrees over certain parts of the lore.

    Of course, there is also the importance of the order we experience the lore. I saw someone suggest that anti-Edelgard people may have had a different opinion of her if they had played Crimson Flower first, and I agree with that idea. I know that since I paired Byleth with Catherine my first playthrough I have favoritism towards her (even as I learn more and more about her flaws as I keep playing). We emotionally connect with the text of the game, and the characters we meet first or relate to the most will affect how we perceive the events.

    If you're still following this post, good job. Now, there are benefits to us disagreeing. For example, we often will learn about parts of the lore we ourselves missed. Even today, having beaten all routes but Silver Snow (almost there) I still get confused over parts I know were explained in other routes. Seeing people cite the game's lore helps me understand what I missed. Sometimes I understand it, but another person uses it in a way to make a point I had never considered.

    More importantly though is the fact that we learn about different perspectives through exchanging different perspectives. I saw someone make a post relating themselves in Ingrid in a way that I had never thought possible. While they weren't arguing a point, it made an impression on me that lets me look at Ingrid in a different light. Or my roommate (who doesn't own the game, but watches the support conversations) points out things that I don't notice when we argue over what makes the best ships.

    This goes without saying, but disagreeing is only beneficial if we do it in a civilized manner. Name calling or talking down to people online will do nothing to help people grow in understanding. However, by having these discussions we are allowed a new opportunity to interact with a game that I feel most people on this subreddit truly love. And I feel that experience makes me just like the game more.

    submitted by /u/Fivehourslate
    [link] [comments]

    Quick edit of Dorothea with her hair styled up. (please ignore hand)

    Posted: 14 Oct 2019 03:13 PM PDT
    Read more
    at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment