Tumgik
#bat meet hornets nest
castiellesbian · 2 years
Text
why did Good Omens not just prev tags Supernatural
21 notes · View notes
wafflehousegothic · 6 months
Text
the ppl getting mad at tswift for saying "hey it's fucking weird that you've been speculating abt my sexuality for a decade" are the same people who are like "omg you need a dictionary to understand the lyrics to folklore" and the words theyre referring to are "dwindling" & "mercurial". Perhaps Pick Up A Book And Think For Once
495 notes · View notes
cadyrocks · 5 months
Text
No more "is transandrophobia real" discourse please. It's so fucking exhausting. To quote the eminent scholar James Stephanie Sterling (@jimquisition ) "The gays can do whatever they want". Even if the people denying that transmisandry and transandrophobia are useful concepts are right, I don't really care - they're still being dicks about it.
Whatever marginal value is gained from a strictly accurate use of terms to describe oppression, there's no fucking universe in which it's worth this much ink and invective. Trans men suffer from transphobia. We can all agree on that, right? As an academic discussion, sure, it could be useful to tease out the ways that the transmasc and transfemme experience of transphobia, misogyny, and [insert preferred additional terms here] differs... But it's a curiosity of language, not a fundamental split in the community. Posting "transandrophobia isn't a real thing" isn't Praxis, you're just being a dick. I guarantee you that anyone earnestly discussing their experience with transandrophobia has a better understanding of patriarchy and transphobia than, like, 95% of the general population, on account of, y'know, being trans.
Don't like the term trans guys use to describe their experience of oppression? Okay. I don't care. I think it's much more important that we understand what they're going through than that we split semantic hairs over the number of privilege points that can dance on the head of a clit.
If you are starting shit about transandrophobia, I am 100% certain that you have bigger problems. How can I be so sure? Because we still live in a world where being any kind of trans or gender non-conforming makes you a target for marginalization and violence, and if you're starting shit about this, you are, statistically, a trans woman posting on Tumblr.com, a website that keeps randomly nuking trans people's blogs. We're on the same side here, and if semantics are dividing us or causing members of our community to feel mocked or unwelcome, we've completely lost sight of the larger goal - trans liberation, community, and joy. (And, let it not go merely implied, mind-blowing T4T sex).
Tumblr media
Inspired by @yak-leather-whips posting on the subject.
266 notes · View notes
blueskittlesart · 11 months
Text
Tumblr media
no offense but if you have to specify this maybe you just shouldn’t make the comment. just a thought
173 notes · View notes
mrsmiroir · 1 year
Text
i understand that a lot of the crows’ characterization in the show had to be cut for run time and adaptation reasons, but i find the take that it’s impossible to convey complex interiority in visual media and that much of this recharacterization (mischaracterization) “had” to be lost in adaptation to be lukewarm at best. it is possible, it just requires good writers. the problem is that the s&b writers are not good, at least when it comes to this show!
83 notes · View notes
hazbin fandom looks craaazy from the outside bc why the fuck did I see like 50 pieces of shipping content with lucifer but Clearly Meant To Be A Tumblr Sexyman/Grell Sutcliff but from TEMU before I found out that not only was there an actual fucking canon wlw ship but one of the parties involved is the main fucking character
7 notes · View notes
judesstfrancis · 9 months
Text
like there's just something about the way people think u can write two friends and call it aroace rep just off the bat that rubs me the wrong way. u guys will scream and yell and cry when a cartoon gay couple doesn't fit your exact experience to a T but I ask for even a tiny little sliver of intentionality when it comes to aroace relationships onscreen and suddenly I'm unreasonable. get real
11 notes · View notes
shopcat · 2 months
Text
also now that it's fresh what we see of little azula in zuko alone really is not all that ... anything at all. like she's not horrifically evil or predeterminedly ANYTHING ... she's literally ten years old. she's acting like a ten year old ?! she trips her friend and pushes her big brother into a fountain. my brothers use to lock me in chests and there's literally an entire popular childhood game made up that's about tricking your friend into giving them a nosebleed by hitting them in the face. and her biggest crime is ... having a talent for firebending, which isn't actually her fault despite what people seem to strangely think, and parroting strategy and propaganda that her actual manipulative and evil father tells her that she clearly grew up around and doesn't just Randomly Know.
both of these particular aspects of her put her in a position of immense pressure by her father from an incredibly young age, in an incredibly volatile environment where she knows, and as the years pass she LEARNS, a slip up or indication of less than perfection could cost her more than just a basic reprimanding. people harp on for years about gifted children and the ramification of treating a child as more mature or capable than they are but can't seem to apply the pretty much perfect comparison even in this fictional way... that's crazy. it is literally her entire narrative arc and the way it just goes over people's heads is ASTONISHING.
like it seriously frustrates me the way people continue to villainise azula beyond logic to the point where there's this fanonised, warped version of her that exists (particularly as an even younger child than she already is) that's like, the antichrist figure to further woobify and "legitimise" zuko's various traumas and his childhood, which i find not only obviously fucking ridiculous and people should be ashamed of themselves but also like, you just don't have to do that. theirs was not a normal childhood and neither of them should be judged as a normal child, but also paradoxically, they are just normal children.
even if azula was in an average family, from a behavioural standpoint, and a LOGICAL standpoint, no, the ten year old little girl doesn't know the full capacity of what she's doing and saying and should not be judged as if an older child or adult were saying them, or as if she is entirely outside of the narrative scope. she teases zuko about how their grandfather was going to "kill him" and how he should get adopted now (which literally... all my siblings have done have people never had siblings...) which is an entirely normal way of acting out and picking fights. when ursa comes in she immediately acts innocent which no, doesn't indicate further malicious intent or "manipulation", it's... how any 10 year old would act if she got caught being naughty and picking fights. (contrary to popular belief zuko is not the main character both of the story and IN LIFE, and azula exists without her brother around – a child scared to get caught indicates a child who has been driven to be SCARED. in the household she lives in this applies tenfold).
she would have no actual reason to realise the outside forces actually at play, unlike their mother, and just like it's not her fault zuko is treated unfairly for being the "unfavoured" child it's not her fault that... adults were actually conspiring to kill her brother. which is a huge thing and is something almost intolerably inconceivable to most adults let alone children.
"but she was callous about her mom leaving" she wouldn't be able to REGISTER anything about their mother "disappearing" (or dying, at least to them at this point in time) within the... 10 hours? it happened in. she was lashing out again. she did not have a hand in "KILLING" her mother. and honestly from what little we did see of ursa, a predisposition to finding your own child unsavoury is kind of unwantonly cruel. these characters don't know that they exist in a narrative where azula is being set up as The Villain, who has to act Villainous, and honestly that's a boring fucking way to look at character behaviour anyway.
as much as i do agree that obviously it's a story and things happen for narrative enhancement, the enrichment of a story comes from the believability of a character's actions and even if that weren't true, half of what people as fans of something do is further that themselves by inferring what we can from what we see and therefore i think i'm right in thinking this anyway. you can't step up to the plate claiming you can handle depth and give me a puddle -_-. anyway. it is insanely unbelievable that a mother should write off her own child and favour the other just because her megalomaniacal husband has shown interest in cultivating his own child as a weapon, and just Plain Insane that so many people write off this character entirely WHILST giving all HER trauma to ZUKO.
also like, she's not even acting like a particularly spoiled princess COULD act like in the beginning she's just kind of an annoying kid. i'm not kidding when i say she's acting pretty much entirely normal. "she set her dolls head on fire" so has every other kid i've ever known. i'm actually going to lose my mind about how people have twisted her character into something so beyond any sort of empathy or consideration of what a child of a manipulative genocidal maniac who is shown to abuse his kids could possibly look and act like when we literally get it served up on a silver platter the entire show in the difference between zuko and azula. "azula always lies" because azula always plays the part to protect herself and the role she was manipulated into thinking she earned is like, the foundation of her character and it's embarassing the way i see so many people just like. fall for it. the inability to conceive any sort of love or compassion for a character that directly parallels the male character everyone trips over to analyse is really transparent and sad tbh. at the end of the day azula haters will be taters as i prosper in my garden of success of loving her and being capable of having a brain.
5 notes · View notes
queen--kenobi · 1 year
Text
Y'all do realize the "calling a MoC feral is racist" doesn't just apply to the clones? It also applies to Pedro's characters??? Because I sure as shit see a lot of y'all using the feral to describe a Pedro character
26 notes · View notes
Note
What do you think a modern version of enjolras would actually be like and do you agree/disagree with the popular fanon version of him ?
As always, I preface this by saying that fanon has its place and has value in its own right, and what is canonically accurate has no bearing on that status. If you like fanon, shine on, you crazy diamond.
To answer the question (or rather, how I am interpretting the question): I do not feel that popular fanon reflects what a modern, canon-based Enjolras would look like.
One reason I don't think it does is that modern AUs (and arguably fanfic in general) seek to humanize characters, and I don't think Hugo's characters were ever truly meant to be fleshed out and humanized to that extent: most of them are 90% symbolism in the same way we are 90% water. To ignore the symbolic ramifications of any given character's actions is already to sort of lose the concept of who they are. Any given two characters even merely conversing or interacting is already in and of itself a statement in the bricc (in most cases), and I think modern fanon in general often loses that. Like, Les Misérables is Invisible Man levels of "everyone is a symbol and no one simply Is a person unto themself."
Moving onto specifically what I think a modern Enjolras would look like based on the bricc description of him: an important part of the Amis, to my thinking, is that none of them are working in their own self-interest. Even Feuilly (and I may be forgetting some passage here, please feel free to correct me) is described as going out of his way to learn about the plights of fellow workers that don't actually personally affect him, and I think this really matters, because in that way Hugo indicates the importance of solidarity between classes and social stratuses in effecting change. As such, I think it remains important that Enjolras retain his privilege, though in what capacity can be very flexible (so long as he is privileged in whatever areas they are advocating for ie he is not rallying for his own rights).
It's also very important that les Amis is an actually radical org: he doesn't get caught up in the semantics of veganism or anything so milquetoast as gay rights in the year 2022. Les Amis de l'ABC are a terrorist organization in its most basic and literal of definitions ie the use or threat of violence in pursuit of political goals. In 1832, they literally were hoping to overthrow the government. Everything was so broken that it made more sense to throw the whole thing away, and this is what they were preparing to do! Enjolras does not get tripped up in the small details when there is a grander vision to behold, and he certainly doesn't argue those details with people who disagree wholesale with that grander image. Even when Courfeyrac prods at Enjolras about Rousseau's personal foibles, Enjolras's response is pretty much, "And?" The means are not perfect, but the ends are Divine.
It also means, though, that in pursuit of this divine end, the motivation throughout needs to remain as pure as possible. At no point can they allow themselves to be swayed by the temptation to loot or harm for looting or harming's sake (as seen with Bahorel and the eggs): as people they may be flawed, but the movement itself and its actions must remain immaculate (as seen in the deleted quarry scene and demonstrated in the killing of le Cabuc). If they are not restrained in this time, how will the government they hope to achieve show the restraint necessary in its dealings with the people?
On that note: I simply don't think pre-barricades Enjolras as he is written in the brick is interested in romantic or sexual relationships. I think he has room in his life for one (1) project, it is fixing the world, and it is all-encompassing. I love a modern ExR as much as the next person, but as long as there is still suffering in the world and his duty is yet to be fulfilled, even if he isn't aroace or somewhere on that spectrum, it's not even something canonically on his radar because his attention to this cause is so absolute.
Moving onto personal carriage and interpersonal relationships: Enjolras is someone capable of doing what needs to be done and making hard choices, but that doesn't mean he's senselessly cruel. Fanon likes to portray him as this outspoken leader-type, but in meetings he's actually usually quiet and content to listen to his friends banter. He rarely properly argues with anyone (certainly not over major and core beliefs), and if anyone is issuing verbal smackdowns, it's most reliably Combeferre My Beloved. Enjolras will be there for you through your revelation, but he's not wasting time or energy on closed minds — he has other things to be focusing on here. He makes stupid corny puns sometimes and speaks in a very matter-of-fact way when he does speak and above all cares about humanity, and he is willing to make hard decisions on behalf of humanity.
Back to the type of leader he is: uh, generally, not. He's happy to sink into the background, but in times like the barricade, he's mostly the leader by merit of the rest of the Amis turning into the closest approximation of a pack of cats to herd. Enjolras can inspire them, sure, and remind them of why they're here and what they're fighting for, but how many people went to sleep when he said to rest up? Feuilly was like, "What are you, a cop?" and spent the entire time doing A Graffiti. When all of this is over, he doesn't intend nor want to be in charge, he just wants to prepare the way for and facilitate a system where the voices of the people are heard. He sees himself as a tool of the revolution, not a leader.
(It is also important to note that the other Amis do care about this cause A Lot. Enjolras is not compelling them to come, they're not just here because there's nothing else to do or it's the most convenient way to hang out and they all Just So Happen to think the world would be better if they overthrew the government, and Enjolras did not drag them kicking and screaming to the barricades. This is a movement of individuals who seem very different but all have come together because they see that society needs to change, and they're all willing to whatever it takes [having sworn to go through fire but not water] to effect it.)
So uh, to sum all of those thoughts up into a single person: Enjolras is probably that person in your law class who seems really serious and rarely speaks, but when he does, he does not leave much room for argument; if you seem open to having your mind on a subject changed, he may interject with an idea or two (a la Waterloo), but he probably mentally checks out of a conversation when he hears a bad take, and he is not losing sleep over not changing their mind. Seems rather intimidating and distant until you see him around his friends, at which point he doesn't exactly talk more or even necessarily seem more approachable, but he does soften and sometimes makes little jokes in what he does say delivered so seriously that it doesn't even initially register as a joke. He's in favor of overthrowing the government (or at least major instutions within it) and is actively a part of a group planning to do just that, but they're not raggedy anarchists either: they understand that Presentation Matters and that they need to hold their movement to a higher standard. This movement and helping the people are the most important things in Enjolras's life, and no one gives him hell over it because tbh they all really admire him and everything he stands for (even if they don't necessarily aspire to be him).
134 notes · View notes
purgetrooperfox · 1 year
Text
in light of [checks palm] brendon urie breaking up with himself, are we ready to talk about how panic at the disco was always overrated and could never live up to their genre peers
12 notes · View notes
bucksboobs · 1 year
Text
The Great AO3 debate is amusing because to hear one side tell it its a bunch of uwu-core adult children who can't handle moral conflicts more complex than your average Blue's Clues episode versus the last bastions of free speech on the internet protecting the LGBT and the traumatized from censorship and to hear the other side tell it its people who would like OTW to institute the barest minimum of moderation for what they host versus hyper-libertarian edgelords that think the highest form of free speech is writing rpf smut about the teenage cast of IT (2017)
8 notes · View notes
blueskittlesart · 10 months
Note
tbh when people act like it's weird to assume zelda and link are romantically coded in fan spaces because some people hc them as siblings is just like…I'm sorry I have media literacy and you dont? it feels weird but I also feel like I'm confusing a fundamentally different media if you don't see them as romantic. or at the very least not SIBLINGS found family can be there without it being literal siblings
see the thing is before botw i could almost understand it. childhood friends and found/adopted siblings are so often overlapping categories in fandom space so i can understand where the wires got crossed even with some of the more blatant romantic subtext that sksw had going on. but with botw's spike in popularity I truly don't understand how the headcanon remained so popular. this link and zelda didn't know each other as kids, didn't really LIKE each other as teenagers, and CANONICALLY grew to love each other in young adulthood. it's literally stated within the game, glaringly obviously within npc dialog, that zelda loved link. reciprocity is really the only thing that's up for debate here. I'm all for found family guys but sometimes it's not there. sometimes characters are close without being family. its ok
74 notes · View notes
mrsmiroir · 5 months
Text
seeing some real disc horse about the sab cancellation and it’s like guys it’s a show. there’s really no need to get so heated every which way.
11 notes · View notes
drivemysoul · 6 months
Text
and i stand by my opinion that 1989 is the only good thing harry styles has contributed to pop music since one direction
3 notes · View notes