My name is [BRUTUS] and my name means [HEAVY]
so with a [HEAVY] heart I'll guide this dagger
Into the heart of my enemy
Something about having absolutely no choice in who you marry. About being literally forced by the law to spill blood - to accept this stranger as your husband over a man you truly care for or accept the fact that the man you love might die because you put him in danger. Something about risking becoming the wife of a man you've never even seen before a few minutes prior because you know anything would be better than putting your beloved in harm's way. Something about the trust inherent in that decision and in the way she speaks of it after.
Truthfully, T'Pring doesn't know the captain and she doesn't know Spock. Either one of them could have taken her as their wife but she does know Stonn. She knows that Stonn will remain by her side no matter what. They made a plan together. They have an agreement which T'Pring believes will be upheld even though the plan changed with the arrival of Kirk. Stonn will always be there, always, and Stonn will be hers.
Something about the language used around T'Pring: Ownership, subservience, non-personhood. T'Pring is an object that Spock can win. She cannot reject him, she has no say in the matter other than having Stonn 'claim' her instead. Even when Spock leaves after being very clearly rejected by T'Pring he says "Stonn, she is yours." as if despite her clear rejection he still owns her and is must formally 'give' her to Stonn. But the language T'Pring uses around Stonn is a break from that: "There was Stonn who wanted very much to be my consort, and I wanted him."
Stonn who wanted very much to be HER consort and she WANTED him. The language here is very particular - It's not, for example: "Stonn wanted me to be his wife" - he is HERS. And she WANTS him. There's a mutual affection there and a strong trust - a trust which seems to be well founded since Stonn (though silent) stands by her side at the end of the episode. <- That might seem small but if Spock would reject her for 'daring to challenge' (again, the language is not 'because I don't want you' but more of an implied disgust at her having the AUDACITY to reject him) then it's not a stretch to assume that it'd be considered an insult in the TOS Vulcan society to NOT choose Stonn as her champion after a prior agreement.
Anyway T'Pring was a woman in an impossible situation within a society which saw her as more of an object than a person and she wanted Stonn and Stonn wanted to be hers and she trusted that he would understand if she had to publicly pick someone else to ensure his life would be spared and he did understand.
241 notes
·
View notes
Just watched the hobbit for the first time, and guys I'm gona go fucking crazy
103 notes
·
View notes
I love three houses discourse because I'm pretty sure everyone just picks their route based on which house leader they're the most gay for and then tries to defend their pick by pointing out the other sides's war crimes via twitter memes. Reader, all four of them do substantial quantities of war crimes. So many. We're just here because the woman with Issues and a big fuck-off axe said so, and then we gotta justify everything she did in the name of dismantling the class system. I mean, I'm here for that, but you could also try justifying Charm Man uses poison and perfidy to try to stop racism, A Sad Little Meow Meow gives no quarter instead of doing therapy, or the Thicc Pope tries to bring back her mom via human experimentation, depending on your tastes
115 notes
·
View notes
don’t get me wrong I think the general interpretation of Leo being like “I put up a cocky front but deep down I don’t actually think I’m that great and that’s why I have something to prove” is good. It’s cool, plenty of drama/angst potential and probably what the creators were going for, I’m here for it.
But there is a distinct appeal to me of the slightly-to-the-left interpretation of Leo being like “it’s not a front, I know I’m that good/smart/skilled, but I also know I’m seen by others as just the goofball face man and that’s why I have something to prove.”
1K notes
·
View notes
"Sorry for my bad English-" You never say sorry for your bad english. You never say sorry for it. You there.
73 notes
·
View notes
i'm sorry but this is sending me into the goddamn stratosphere, if you send people to physically attack my mom, torture my sister, cut my six year old son's head off, threaten to murder my toddler, and then also threaten to rape my six year old daughter, i would be very happy and jovial in declaring war on your psycho ass for pulling that shit on people who literally didn't do a thing to you.
consequently, if i sent people to physically attack someone who never did me any harm, torture my sister who never did me any harm, cut my six year old nephew who never did me any harm's head off, threaten to murder my toddler nephew who never did me any harm, and also threaten to rape my six year old niece who never did me any harm, i would be very full of regret and sorrow for what i've done, because those are bad things that i did.
59 notes
·
View notes
“You know, if you break up with Sveta, meet a gorgeous girl and break Sveta’s heart again, I’m obligated to throw you into the center of the Atlantic Ocean.”
....What does this mean Vicky? He's not allowed to date anyone pretty ever again???
86 notes
·
View notes
you know what's so disappointing? the way people keep saying 'don't be afraid to portray mental illness and disability in media!! in your art and writing!!! normalise it and don't shun it!!!' and then the MOMENT you bring up a symptom that's too messy and uncomfortable to handle, they take a fuckin u-turn and go "UM no that's bad. like. you're a bad person if you do that. that's weird and it makes me uncomfortable so it's wrong."
here's the thing!!!!!!! it's not convenient!!!!! it's not simple!!!! i can't be honest and keep writing about how depression paints your whole world blue and all that shit!!!!!! because guess what!!!! depression and disabilities and borderline personality disorder and SO many other things are just. not neat and clean or easily consumable. they WILL make you uncomfortable and sad. they WILL make you feel bad. honesty is not easy. it's not meant to be.
and dehumanisation of sociopaths and psychopaths is genuinely distressing. not all of them!!! are!!!! bad people!!! it's a medical condition!!!! a mental illness!!! a person's illness doesn't make them bad. their actions and the decisions they take decide that and I am SO sick and tired of people watering down every complex human trait and toxic behaviour as good and bad and right and wrong. don't you see!!! some things are simply just. human. that's all. people fuck up. badly, sometimes. but that doesn't mean they are not people. I'm not saying you should forgive everyone and become a full time saint. you are entitled to your anger. i'm just asking you: don't take away a person's right to err and still be considered human. not all actions fall in the neat divisions of right and wrong. some things just are. grow some balls if you want to see true suffering in media. because it is Not easy or pretty. not even close. you will be conflicted and uncomfortable and troubled. make peace with that fact.
68 notes
·
View notes