devoutvesta

[devoutvesta]

knee-high tabi boots (eu sz 36) • martin margiela 130,000 円

[devoutvesta]

one of my least favorite misconceptions of ford is that his “ego is too big” for him to ever take accountability.

he apologizes profusely for fiddleford’s traumatic experiences with the shapeshifter and other anomalies, in fact, he worries multiple times over fiddleford’s anxieties to the point where he’s able to easily identify his tells. he wants to teach him his “advanced meditation methods” and other healthy coping mechanisms, and he tries so hard to convince him to not use the memory gun. he ACTIVELY shows concern and care towards fiddleford. and apologizing is not something foreign to him.

as for summoning bill, this is something he did when he was desperate, and mocking him for this and the decisions he made throughout his relationship with bill has victim blamey undertones. however, upon realizing his mistake in trusting bill, he immediately acknowledges that fiddleford was right. he spends the rest of his life diligently working on a way to fix his mistake and protect his dimension, that never treated him well to begin with, from the being who was once the “center of his galaxy”.

he apologizes, even in the show, when stan calls him out on how weirdmageddon was his own doing. he apologizes even though it isn’t directly his fault, even though he had been trying to prevent it for thirty years, he apologizes even though weirdmageddon was his worst nightmare. because he DOES feel remorse and he has felt immense guilt and shame the entire time. he talks about this in tbob and, i believe, the show?

you can dislike ford, but you can’t say he doesn’t apologize or own up to his mistakes.

edit: someone added that he had “i’m sorry, fiddleford” replaying over and over again in his head while he was ASLEEP. ford pines will never be this apathetic, wholeheartedly self centered person that you guys think he is.

[devoutvesta]

Please, for the love of god, leave me CLEAR INSTRUCTIONS!!! If you think it’s implied, I promise you that to me it is not. If you give me poorly worded or vague directions I’m gonna spend half an hour stressing over the potential different ways to interpret them and either become paralyzed with indecision or inevitably interpret them the least correct way possible

[devoutvesta]

Nada Esmaeel, Palestinian artist/illustrator

[devoutvesta]

Warped medullary rays found on pieces of wood that resemble animals

[devoutvesta]

If y’all haven’t already, i highlyy suggest you go take a look at Brodsky & Utkin’s work. They were Russian architects, primarily active in the late 20th century. (I think their work emerged during the late Soviet era). Their works are absolutely mind blowing. I’m Dumbfounded.

[devoutvesta]

my opinion on the domesticated ford au and how critiques have been addressed by the creator:

there is an existing issue in the fandom with them not taking the canon abuse that ford faced seriously, e.g consistently victim blaming him, etc. this au has only fed into the downplaying of his abuse, under the guise of trying to portray the reality of abuse.

now this is the biggest issue i have with it:

they may not be ill intentioned, but they are intentionally pandering to the audience by making light of this abuse (through silly memes of ford in degrading situations) for comedic purposes whenever the audience asks. they play into the jokes and will then defend it by pretending they want to show the “dark reality” of abuse, but meanwhile they’re drawing ford on a hamster wheel and engaging in discussions like this (media below the cut). it is the audience that treats this character like a pet, the artist feeds into that. this pet aspect wasn’t always a part of it.

secondly, i don’t think the quality of an au relies on how well it sticks to the source material, but i will be using canon billford as a reference point. their relationship has been praised for it’s nuance and how relatable it is to survivors of abuse. it actually helped many put their own experiences into perspective. bill and ford had a mutual, purer love and respect for one another, despite what bill did, as well as a mutual obsession. this integral part of their dynamic is surely what adds to how well written this abusive relationship was.

the au does remove this nuance, reducing their dynamic to that of a pet/nuisance and it’s apathetic owner. i do not think this is a bad thing to do, it is an au after all. but it is worth noting and it is something i dislike about it. it removes what makes it so realistic in the first place, ironically, as that was the opposite intention.

to each their own i suppose, i just think this relates to a bigger issue in the fandom itself. how they angrily react upon seeing an imperfect victim vs. the degrading manner with which they choose to discuss a less realistic but somehow more “sympathetic” portrayal.

[devoutvesta]

[devoutvesta]

it's so foggy out on the road i can't make out (makeout?! 😳😏😳🥺⁉️❤️❣️?💗💓💕💞💖💛💚💖💛💝💋?) a thing 10 feet infront of me

[devoutvesta]

Nicola Samori

Maddalena

Oil on panel

2010

[devoutvesta]

I just got described as an "ad hating commie" by someone because I said a minute of youtube ads is unpleasant. fully spent 5 minutes arguing and defending youtube ads. insane stuff

[devoutvesta]

The Real Dream by Colette (1975)

[devoutvesta]

the leaves are falling in the stream, the river flows away

[devoutvesta]

the erasure of adult women is terrifying be hairless, be smooth, no wrinkles, no cellulite, no stretch marks, no smile lines, no crow’s feet, no gray hairs we are teaching our female children that they will cease to exist if they don’t keep up the ever present demand to look youthful

[devoutvesta]

Women do not simply have faces, as men do; they are identified with their faces. Men have a naturalistic relation to their faces. Certainly they care whether they are good-looking or not. They suffer over acne, protruding ears, tiny eyes; they hate getting bald. But there is a much wider latitude in what is aesthetically acceptable in a man's face than what is in a woman's. A man's face is defined as something he basically doesn't need to tamper with; all he has to do is keep it clean. He can avail himself of the options for ornament supplied by nature: a beard, a mustache, longer or shorter hair. But he is not supposed to disguise himself. What he is "really" like is supposed to show. A man lives through his face; it records the progressive stages of his life. And since he doesn't tamper with his face, it is not separate from but is completed by his body—which is judged attractive by the impression it gives of virility and energy. By contrast, a woman's face is potentially separate from her body. She does not treat it naturalistically. A woman's face is the canvas upon which she paints a revised, corrected portrait of herself. One of the rules of this creation is that the face not show what she doesn't want it to show. Her face is an emblem, an icon, a flag. How she arranges her hair, the type of makeup she uses, the quality of her complexion—all these are signs, not of what she is "really" like, but of how she asks to be treated by others, especially men. They establish her status as an "object."

—Susan Sontag, “On Women.”

[devoutvesta]

[devoutvesta]

WELCOME ONE AND ALL TO WEIRDMAGEDDON !