#2009-me is so validated

[corporalsnark]

if Kal Penn hadn't gone to work for the Obama administration I think Kutner and Taub might have had an extremely strange queerbait-y relationship

[yeslordmyking]

Good morning! It's another beautiful day to appreciate you're alive, healthy, and loved!

Today could be the day you get that dream job, the day the person you're dating could finally confess that they love you, or the day Marvel Studios could reconsider and greenlight the Channing Tatum Gambit Movie! 😁

The world's full of possibilities! You never know! Stay positive! Go get em, tiger! Love ya, mwah 😘

[starscreamingg]

Currently being very normal about having tickets for avatar 2 this weekend

[andromedasummer]

meow

MEOW i am trying to make archives for lots of things at once but i keep getting distracted

[reblogs-and-musings]

once again clicking on aromantic fics to cry to

[riverofrainbows]

Eliot Spencer. Listen to me i am obsessed with the man. He is so incredibly stereotypically masculine, and hardcore so, yet at the same time really isn't in ways that would be damning for the 2000s and early 2010s. Long hair, not unusually tall, the most emotionally aware one and most in tune with his emotions on the whole team. (Not that the others don't also have points in that area, but they're all terrible at it in some way and Eliot scores by far the most points.) He has a hobby that's not James Bond like (cooking), and he gets to be goofy while being unquestioned as the most badass guy in the room. And yes he makes inappropriate jokes about lesbians and goes all no homo at physical affection from other men, and younger people probably don't find him quite as monumental as i do in terms of masculinity. But his behaviour never reflects those jokes or the no homo, and he was the red blooded american former military guy character on a big network tv show in the year 2009. For which he was a severely mild case. He treats the other characters as people and not stereotypes, in the way the whole show does, and he has long hair he puts up in ponytails and half buns that have his side bangs falling out (you need to understand what big of a deal the manbun was in like 2013, so much so that they had to invent a word). He's emotional and doesn't actually mean his gruffness most of the time, and doesn't thinks himself above certain tasks or people. He wears ridiculous little outfits without putting up a show about his threatened masculinity, and he's the most emotionally intelligent one outside of cons. He wears little jewellery in his hair sometimes, and little braids even (yes braided hair was a no go), he plays guitar and sings earnest love songs not just to try to get laid (love songs would only be permissible in the immediate context of romance), and whenever they have a young woman as a client, that reminds him of home i presume, he works with so much effort and respect for them as the one he's in service to, and respects their opinion strongly. He wears glasses, and reads books and is way too nerdy for an action hero type of the 2010s. He is great with kids, and unironically so (there were multiple big shows and movies about the topic of "men needing to deal with children on their own" with the entire premise of that being ridiculous and them being naturally bad at it). He's the most stereotypically action hero type masculine guy on the show, and he does get strive or posture for power or dominance in their team, is content with a contributing role and trusting on the expertise of the others, and he is not portrayed as the most valuable one or as that behaviour being beneath him. He undresses so he and the woman he's fighting with are on equal ground reading undress. He is shorter than the others and continuously portrayed as the most dangerous one in any room, and height differences afe never deemphasised via cinematography (seriously, to be regarded as sufficiently masculine in western films they either get really tall actors or employ a variety of camera angles and boxes to give that impression. But just think of Eliot in the pilot when rescuing Hardison in the first break in, standing behind the group of security guys who all look way taller than him and more physically impressive with weapons and all. And then Eliot just in a t-shirt with no weapon but himself.) He has long hair (again, mainstream sufficiently masculine guys didn't do that back then, or now if we think of it (not that long at least)).

The show and all it's characters were a goddamn marvel back in 2009, and sadly in many ways still are today, 15 years later.

And he heals my little broken heart regarding gender stereotypes and masculinity, my heart that grew up in the 2000s and has so much difficulty accepting that my gender is valid. Bless him for it.

[paraphwrites]

followup on my post about dbda & loneliness.

'dead boy detectives' is a show where fundamentally, every character is very very lonely. but, they make each other less lonely. jenny is a surrogate parent for crystal, edwin and niko are always there for each other, crystal and charles understand each other, charles and edwin complete each other. there's just something so beautiful that even though they are all in pain and lonely, they are not alone, they have friends who would literally die for them.

i realized i was queer pretty young and in a very non-accepting environment. i was the only queer person i knew for a really long time, and that was really hard for me. and there was something devastatingly beautiful about watching edwin go through the a similar journey and not be alone.

dbda is important for a million reasons. but i would like to focus on one reason in particular.

'dead boy detectives' illustrates that there are multiple different ways to realize one's queer identity. you have simon, who is so wrapped up in self-hatred that he tears other people down with him. you have edwin, who is utterly unwilling to express any desire in such a way but ultimately embraces it. you have monty, who seems to have always known he was queer and always been very okay with that. you have charles, (i include him because i believe he is, but that can be debated) who goes on a long journey to realize it due to his circumstances. and they are all valid, and they are all real, and some of them hurt other people. because when the world hurts you so fundamentally, sometimes you end up hurting other people too. and you have people who have never had an issue with being queer, and that's great. and you have people who have to come to terms with it and it is hard and it is beautiful but they don't have to do it alone.

and that MATTERS. so often in media, we have a narrow, limited perspective for what realizing one's queer identity means. but there are so, so many different ways to figure yourself out, and dbda shows that in a very tangible and real way

the stories you tell are the stories we hear. so if @netflix only wants to tell stories about straight white people (maybe featuring a token gay character, so they can put it under the lgbt section), then that is the stories that people will hear

chimamanda ngozi adichie gave an incredible ted talk, back in 2009, called 'the danger of a single story.' in it, she discusses how, when you only tell & hear a singular story about a certain group of people, that becomes how you perceive the entire populace.

when a coming out journey is limited to its popular depiction (*realizes* *is kinda sad* *gets a bf*) then that is what all queer people are reduced to

look, i get that netflix has a couple of great shows featuring multiple queer characters, and i've watched & loved most of them. but god if i am not tired of people telling me to watch heartstopper. (i did & it's great & that's not the point.) the point IS that there should not be Two Gay Shows on your platform. because then the entirety of queer people are reduced to that.

now, maybe if it was just dbda, i wouldn't be so up in arms.

BUT THE FUCKING PICTURE OF DORIAN GRAY ADAPTATION?????????????????????????????????

you CANNOT reduce queer people to shows that aren't worth renewing. you CANNOT erase queer characters from classic lit just because you want it to be more mainstream. when you do that, you are reducing queer identities to the single story you are willing to tell.

(to be clear i'm not blaming all of homophobia on netflix. i am simply pointing out a way in which they are contributing)

[nekropsii]

yo, since people listen to you, can you confirm that the alpha trolls are infact described to be the alpha trolls in the comic and that "dancestor" refers to both alpha and beta trolls? I've seen so many people lately act like you can't call them "alpha trolls" and you must refer to them solely as "dancestors" and it's ridiculous as hell lmao

That's fucking wild, especially considering "Dancestor" is coined by an Alpha Troll specifically to describe the Beta Trolls, lmfao.

Illiteracy strikes again!

Also, denying that the Alpha Trolls are the Alpha Trolls is a ridiculous position that people keep trying to endear to me. It won't ever work. I've seen people try to deny it by saying that, essentially, "Beta and Alpha purely refer to Scratch Iterations", but that logic holds as much water as a sieve. "Pre-Scratch" and "Post-Scratch" are terms independent from "Beta" and "Alpha". The relation that Beta and Alpha has to each other is purely that one comes before the other, specifically that Alpha comes before Beta, because they're referencing Development Versions of specific plot-relevant programs.

LIGHTNING ROUND:

The Beta Kids are the Pre-Scratch Humans playing the Beta version of SBURB.

==> Homestuck, pg. 1 The Beta Trolls are the Post-Scratch Trolls using the Beta version of Trollian.

==> Homestuck, pg. 2009 The Alpha Kids are the Post-Scratch Humans playing the Alpha version of SBURB, and were initially known to the audience as the Guardians of the Beta Kids, meaning they came first.

==> Homestuck, pg. 4115. ... And The Alpha Trolls are the Pre-Scratch Trolls that were presumably using the Alpha version of Trollian, and were initially known to the audience as the Ancestors of the Beta Trolls, meaning they came first.

Logically speaking... Why would they not be called the Alpha Trolls?

This isn't rocket science, and takes way less mental gymnastics than saying, "Actually, everyone's been wrong in calling The Beta Trolls 'The Beta Trolls' this entire time, because 'Beta' and 'Alpha' just has to do with Scratch Iterations", even though the version of Trollian being used by the Beta Trolls is literally referred to as the Beta Client in the text of the comic. Which is a real argument I've been presented with. Several times. And it's a bad one. Every time.

It also takes way less mental gymnastics than saying that The Alpha Trolls are purely "The Dancestors", despite the term applying to almost every main character in the comic and specifically getting coined to describe The Beta Trolls, and saying that The Alpha Trolls isn't a valid term because 'they aren't explicitly called that in the comic' even though they don't need to get explicitly called. Like. Anything. In order for the reader to intuit that this is following the same very consistent train of naming logic that the entire rest of the comic has been following this entire time.

So, yeah, that argument is stupid. It is also bad, dumb, and silly. And a myriad of other terms.

[astradyke]

hey so I've been a casual Dan & Phil fan for years but never really a part of the fandom. Recently started scrolling thru the tag and like...did I miss something? Have they actually said for real for real that they dated? Like I'm queer and tbh 2 gay guys living together for that long have to at least done *something* but I'm not an rpf person (no shade) but I do wanna be up to date on the Dan and Phil facts (phacts?) Obviously they're some kinda soulmates but tbh I know some queerplatonic soulmates who aren't *together* so idk if that's them or not. Am I missing receipts or is their relationship presumed given their whole situationship? Genuinely asking and no shade to your shipping intended.

hiya! i'll try to be succinct here but i might totally miss some things as a heads up :P

In Basically I'm Gay on the Daniel Howell channel, the same monologue that led to the description of them as soulmates also included the statement: "And that was when, through the magic of the Internet, I met Phil. And obviously we were more than friends, but it was more than just romantic [...] The relationship we formed, at that point, was something that I needed in my life." Despite "relationship" being a neutral, versatile term, the preceding sentence confirms they've been in an explicitly romantic relationship. along with that explicit confirmation, we also know from several other relics from 2009-2011 in particular that the two were at the very least actively flirting (I can retrieve a few formsprings for you that point to this if u want just lmk!). Additionally, in 2010, Phil made a privated video addressed to Dan that explicitly confirms a romantic relationship; this video was unprivated via a YouTube glitch in September 2011 and circulated heavily in late 2012. it was a serious incident that outed them and thus people don't talk much about it. I've never seen it in full-- it's pretty much off the Internet entirely due to copyright strikes-- and I really solely bring it up for context that they were dating at that period in time.

Basically I'm Gay only indicates a past romantic relationship, leaving their current one ambiguous, and both Dan and Phil's respective coming out videos state that they want to keep their personal dating lives private (both of these videos were released in 2019). Since then, though, there's one other explicit confirmation of their relationship-- I had a difficult time hunting down this exact interview in entirety, but my lovely mutual freckliedan helped me find the relevant screenshot:

[ID: In bold, the interviewer's text says: "So, just like a normal gay couple then?" Below, Dan's response is not in bold, and says, "Basically, yeah."]

I was able to find another screenshot at this post as well, which has the actual context confirming that they were discussing Phil previous to this. Now, obviously, this interviewer was a little forward in their questions, so I understand any reluctance in considering Dan's response-- however, Dan is a professional, and if he was sincerely uncomfortable with this line of questioning, I have faith in his ability to avoid answering it altogether. I therefore assume he knew what he was doing, and that this can be taken as a valid statement. This was from 2023 iirc.

Both of these excerpts-- from Basically I'm Gay and from this interview-- do suggest that Dan and Phil have a romantic relationship. On top of both of these more concrete confirmations, there's a lot more information/statements they've made public that corresponds with a romantic relationship, even if none of them are technically exclusive to romantic relationships.

A brief list: They've lived together for approximately 13-15 years, and bought a house together with a mortgage (for brevity's sake, I'll exclude other things that kind of pair with this). They make frequent sex jokes on their channel, several of which stating things about the other's sexual preferences. They recently went on holiday together, just the two of them, and given the tourism biz and how they discussed the holiday it seems like they were in a place intended for couples. Phil's sister in law, Cornelia, refers to Dan as an uncle to her child. They use pet names for each other. They frequently joke with the phandom, riffing off of jokes about their relationship (reacting to posts saying they are in a situationship, making a joke about having a joint toilet, etc.) This is most arguable, but it's highly likely that they share a bed as well (again, going off of the images/videos they've shown us of 'Dan's bedroom'). Lastly, other interviews with Dan include him being highly verbose about his relationship with Phil, but he's referred to him briefly as his "husband" in a long list of other words like "soulmates" and "just mates", ending with "who the fuck knows?", in one past interview (I have a picture of this but I can't attach it rn I can find it if you'd like though!)

It's not impossible that Dan and Phil's relationship isn't currently romantic, and even operating off of the assumption that it is, there's information we don't know about that (whether they're monogamous or polyamorous, for example, or whether or not they share a bed). It honestly just seems unlikely that their relationship is queerplatonic, given the past statements indicating that it has been romantic historically and the interview (+ supplemental evidence) suggesting that it currently is (I am very aware of the variation in QPRs, though, so I'm sympathetic to that interpretation from folks. However, I also understand that many explicitly romantic partnerships are considered to be QPRs-- in media or with real people-- in a way that contributes to gay erasure. It's nuanced and I am not the person best equipped to eloquently discuss it). Obviously, just to underscore here, we are not owed any information about their personal lives and the vast majority (if not the entirety) of the phandom just riffs off of the information they tell us, all of which happen to point to a romantic relationship. They clearly don't have any discomfort in us assuming this, and I personally don't believe they'll ever give us any more conclusive statement about their relationship any time soon, given that they've told us enough that the implication of a romantic partnership is pretty solidly there.

TLDR: Dan and Phil have "hard launched" (AKA released information that portrays their relationship as irrefutably romantic) 2-3 times. There is also other more indirect information that seems to confirm a romantic relationship, though if one wanted to, it could be read as non-romantic-- however, given those conclusive statements, and the current way they treat phandom commentary about their relationship (AKA not giving a shit), it is the effective conclusion that they are in a romantic relationship. Other conclusions, such as them being queerplatonic or them having broken up, seem to rely on a lot of critical assumptions, while the idea that they are in a romantic relationship is in line with their own statements as well as what we generally see out of them.

Thank you for your patience and your very kind ask! PS calling it "phacts" is funny as fuck, I did not utilize that verbiage here through my reply but you were a visionary for this. have a lovely one :D

PS. If any folks want to add, or if I missed something when glancing back over this and corrections are needed, please please please share! I am so deeply not a phandom history i am simply a little guy! much love

[skitskatdacat63]

Fernando Alonso & His Relationship With Cards

I'm sure we're all familar with the cards on the back of Fernando's Vegas GP helmet by now, but did you know his relationship with cards goes a lot deeper?

I. Magic Tricks

You've probably seen or heard someone at least mention Fernando's propensity for card tricks. As far as I can tell he was doing them(publically) as far back as 2003 all the way to as recently as 2018. Even once performing a card trick, with a condom and a teddy bear(!??!?!??!!), in front of Valentino Rossi who said "How was that possible?"(x)

But how did this start? According to James Allen, "Fernando admits to having been heavily influenced by his grandfather, a mercurial figure, who taught him magic and card tricks, still one of his passions away from the race track."(x) And I'm not sure the validity of this one, because I couldn't find an actual source, but apparently he once said: "My parents are responsible for the two things I like doing most - driving and magic tricks. They bought me my first go-kart and a magician's kit."

In several interviews he described it as his hobby off track, and that he loved learning new tricks and surprising others in the garage with them! So clearly cards are pretty important to him both as a hobby but also to who he is as a person since they've been with him just as long as racing has.

II. Card Symbolism in His Helmets

This is the reason I originally made this post, but I thought I should also explain the origins of his card fascination first. As I said, we probably all remember the cards on the back of his helmet in Vegas, but did you know that wasn't the first time he had cards on the back of his helmet?

From 2008-2013, he used to have a pair of cards on the back of his helmets. The symbolisms of the cards themselves as well as the evolution of their design is really fascinating to me! Even more so with the recent development of the card choice in 2023.

Fernando said he wanted to reference his two titles in some way on the back of his helmet and after his friend sent him several ideas, he decided on having two cards(an ace of clubs and an ace of hearts, sometimes pictured with 05 and 06 on them as well), saying: "I picked the cloverleaf [the ace of clubs - Ed] to give me luck, but the only pity is that it doesn't have four leaves!"(X)

2008.

Here's the very first appearance of the cards! They're displayed flat, with the 05 and 06 clearly visible

2009.

Very similar to 2008, but with a slightly different design, and they're maybe a bit more straight with less shadow?

2010.

This is the first major change! I was sad they didn't have the years on them anymore, but then I realized they're sparkly to match with his signature lightning bolts on the top of the helmet!!

2011.

Honestly I'm still somewhat unsure if this is the actual 2011 helmet? It's pretty difficult to find clear photos of the back of helmets from older seasons. It's easiest to find them on replica sites or auction sites so I'm not 100%? But anyways, I like that this has the championship years on the underside of the cards

2012.

This is when I started getting weirdly emotional about the helmets. Do you see how they've progressed from being a centerpoint to being curled up and sad at the bottom of the helmet? Not listing the year anymore??

2013.

Same thoughts as 2012. And after this season, they cease to exist (just like his ferrari chair in the garage, WOAH CALLBACK), until cards make a reeappearance in his Vegas helmet, albeit in a different form

2013 Monaco(Honorable Mention):

For some reason 2013 helmets were easier to find proper pictures of, so I happened to witness this absolute beauty. The creativity of this helmet genuinely blows me away??? Wanting to keep the card motif, but making sure to incorporate it into the rest of the puzzle piece design?? Mwah! There was another special 2013 helmet but they didn't change the cards at all so I really applaud this one

2023 Las Vegas(The Return of The King):

The magnificent return! But look! The cards are different cards! Instead of being two aces, it's now an ace of hearts, a four of hearts(his driver number of course!) and, the, now iconic, representation of himself as a Joker. I literally could not believe my eyes when this helmet was released and I saw the Joker card, what a fucking silly old man....I really wonder if he felt nostalgic having cards on his helmet again or if he didn't think about it all and was just like, "ah cards because Vegas!!!"

III. Why Does This Matter?

*The rest of the post was factual, this is moreso my personal thoughts on the symbolism of the cards/designs

This post spawned from me recently watching the 2010 Bahrain gp and noticing "hey wait a minute...are those CARDS ON THE BACK OF HIS HELMET!?" It's a really tiny detail that's unfortunately covered up by the HANS device pretty much whenever he's wearing the helmet, so it's really difficult to spot! But I became fascinated with the fact that he had cards on his helmet before that recent helmet, and now here we are!

There's something to me about how the design of the cards evolves over the course of six seasons from the cards being front and center to being smaller, more folded up and closer to the bottom of the helmet. As I said, the 2012-2013 ones genuinely made me depressed because it feels, symbolically, like his hopes for getting another Ace are becoming more and more unlikely and falling away until they eventually fall falt and fade away entirely after 2013 and disappear for basically a decade.

But when they return? They're not the same cards! Instead of representing Fernando's championships, they now represent him as a person, displaying his driver number and his persona of being a Joker!! Though I do think it's interesting he happened to keep the Ace of Hearts, even though he talked more about the Ace of Clubs before. I'm not sure it's actually this deep in reality, but I like to think that it's him not letting his championships(and the lack thereof) define him, but rather letting who he is as a person shine and be the centerpoint instead! But on a sadder note, as @suzuki-ecstar said to me, maybe the Aces aren't there anymore because he's lost all hope for a chance at a third Ace entirely :(

[thelittleliars]

Eventful concert

Natasha Romanoff x Singer Fem!Reader Black Widow x Female Singer Reader

Warnings: mention of depression and being suicidal

Words: 1.7k

Summary: The Avengers couldn't prevent hydra from attacking you during one of your concerts.

AN: Not proof read. I somehow wrote this all today without having a writers block or ideas falling flat! Also since it's October 2023 *cough* Endgame events happening *cough* this is a part of remembering Natasha Romanoff. Nat moya lyubov, I will love and remember you forever 😭🖤

You heard tons of screaming fans as soon as the lights went dark. Usually you'd start with a bit of dancing and walking around from one end of the stage to the other, but you couldn't do it that night since you had a fractured foot. Instead you limped with one of the two crutches you had towards the middle of the stage where your microphone stood. When you were on your mark for the night, lights turned back on and shone on you. "Hi everyone! How are y'all doing?" You asked the crowed in which you got only screaming as an answer. "I'm excited to be here tonight. New York City baby!!!" The crowed was excited and hyped as you said the city you were in right then. You were the same back in the day when you went to concerts and you favorite artists said your hometowns name. It was always something special. "Unfortunately I fractured my foot last night and I can not give you all a 100% performance as I usually do but I hope this slowed down show is still something you'll enjoy." You smiled as you heard some get well soon's and we love you's. "Alright let's get started!!" 

The first song was a faster more upbeat and happy one. You tried your best walking with a single crutch in one hand and the microphone in your other hand from one side to the other side. Just because you needed crutches didn't mean  you wouldn't walk around to see all of your fans. You loved seeing your fans, interact with them and hear them sing the lyrics with you. The second song was slower than your first one but still faster than most of your work. It was also more of a song that was about the struggle of finally finding happiness again after dark patch. As your third and fourth song you played the saddest songs you'd ever written. They still broke your heart each night you sang them but the pain was worth it since you knew they were fan favorites and helped them as much as they helped you. 

"Thank you all so much for coming and singing along. I just wanted to make sure to let you all know that you're welcome here for whatever reason you came tonight for. It's valid if you came for only to see me and do nothing more than look at me. It's valid if you came here because I'm a lesbian artist and you wanted some safe space to relax. It's valid if you came because you can relate to my depressed and suicidal lyrics. I'm here for you all. I love you all. And thank you for having enough energy to come here tonight." You looked at your pianist and gave her a signal for them to start playing slowly. "Since I'm here in New York right now, I decided to play a cover of a huge song back in 2009. If you know it, please sing along." It was 'Empire State of Mind' by Alicia Key and Jay-Z that you decided to cover a small portion off and the crowd went absolutely wild as soon as they recognized which song it was. With fans shouting the lyrics and them screaming in general you nearly missed hearing security through your ear piece saying that there was a breach. After that somehow chaos broke out. Fans were screaming in fear and tried to leave the venue to get to a safe place. Your pianist was about to reach you to get you to safety when a huge bald guy launched at you. You tried to fight the best you could. If you hadn't your crutch you were helplessly lost. He got some good punches on you though but before you got knocked unconscious, he was flung through the entire room. Confused of what had happened you tried to move your head but two hands came out of nowhere and held your face steady in place. You looked up only for the first thing to see red hair falling down to your face. Your vision then cleared more and you saw the most mesmerizing green eyes you had ever seen in your entire life. "Let your head rest like this for a minute first. You shouldn't move your head too fast too, you might have a concussion from the brutal hits you received." When the sound of her voice hit your ears it felt like the wind got knocked out of you. Her voice was so warm and soothing but at the same time raspy and sexy. 

"I-I-I'm Y/N" You stuttered out like an idiot. She simply gave you a genuine smile. "Yeah I know." She said before she helped you up slowly. After she made sure you were good and there was no sign of a concussion she introduced herself. "I'm Natasha." Oh lord. You thought. A pretty girl with an even more prettier name. How will your lesbian ass ever not fall in love at first sight? "Let's get you backstage."

"What? No, I can't go." You started to protest. "I need to make sure that my fans will be alright!" 

"Don't worry. They're safe." She gave you your crutch. "I saw the Avengers out there helping." You took your crutch and you both started to walk very slow in the direction of the backstage. She kept a close step near you in case you loose your strength. "The Avengers..?" You said confused but by the look of her gaze it was as if you should know them. Out of fun you acted as if you realized that you them. "Ohh yeah sure THE Avengers.."

The sarcastic remark shocked Natasha a bit. After what happened with the Civil- War they caused she was sure that everyone knew about them. "You-you don't know the Avengers?"

Your face fell stone cold. "God damn why do americans always assume that people know for sure every single person in their stupid country.." You huffed down the couple of stairs that would get you behind the stage leading to your backstage room. Natasha was close behind you giving you room to take the steps at your pace. "I'm not american." She almost said it in an angry tone. You stopped when you finished going down the stairs. "But your accent...? You don't- I'm sorry for assuming." Natasha stepped closer to you before speaking in russian. ">No worries darling<" Your knees suddenly gave in a bit, the redhead was quick to steady you by having a good grip on your waist. There was this churning feeling deep inside of your stomach as she touched you again. How come that you felt like you just fell in love with her? This was insane, it possibly couldn't have happen this fast, right?

"I think I might really have a concussion." You blamed your little incident on your weak knees instead of the real reason that is your gayness. Though nobody could ever blame you for going weak for a woman, they're women for goodness sake!

Natasha knew you weren't serious but was also going to make sure you were going to see a doctor to rule it out officially. "This must be one hell of a bad day then."

"Being held by a beautiful girl is never a bad day." Natasha didn't know what to say. Men always commented on her body in a sexual way and a bunch of women were always body shaming her so hearing your sincere compliment made her feel a lot of different things. "So I have to ask since I'm too curious for my own good. Are you a fan of mine or just a casual music enjoyer?" Before she could answer she was saved by your manager who came running towards you. "Oh thank god you're alright so far. Or do you have other injury I don't know of?"

"She got pretty harsh hits to her head as you can see by all the blood." Natasha stated the obvious. "I'm no doctor but so I can't rule out a concussion." He nodded as he listened closely. "Is it still far to her room?"

He shook his head. "No but there are another set of stairs." That was enough for Natasha to swoop you up in her arms. You let out a yelp, not expecting to be carried - especially not bridal style. This truly made up for being almost beaten unconscious. Shortly after she sat you down gently on a chair, a doctor came in and made a concussion evaluation. While you were busy with the doctor, Natasha checked in with the other Avengers, said she'd come back to the Tower once you were cleared and stitched up. It didn't take long until the tests were over and you had a stitches on your forehead and temple. You ended up only with a mild concussion and thankfully nothing worse. "About that question earlier.. I'm still interested in an answer."

"Unfortunately neither." She said with a heavy heart since she didn't wanted to see you sad but lying to you didn't see the right choice either. You nodded, she noticed you not being sad or disappointed and that got her wondering what you were thinking about her. "Then what's your reason of coming to my show? There are more than two choices here." At that Natasha opened up about being an Avenger, even explained what that is and also about Hydra, you were shocked to hear it all since you apparently missed a bunch of things that were going on. Not long after her explanation you manager rushed you to get to your tour bus since you had a show the next day in another state. That was how you ended up giving her your cell phone number, even boldly told her to call or send a text since you wanted to give back something for her help. And that was exactly what Natasha did the day she knew you finished touring.

[heathersdesk]

Mormon Mommy Bloggers 2: Ballerina Farms Boogaloo

Since everyone is giving their thoughts on Ballerina Farms, and Mormonism by extension, let me step up to the mic. Especially because I'm an LDS woman that everyone seems to think they're experts on now.

I'm so tired of having to answer for the choices of other LDS women I don't know. I'm tired of them speaking for me. I'm tired of them making spectacles of their choices at the expense of other women, especially when they have so much wealth and privilege to be who they are. I'm tired of their "brand" being something I have to answer for as an LDS women.

Hannah Neeleman is nothing like the rest of us. She's nothing like most of us.

She's no different than every other LDS Mommy blogger who has been exploiting her kids for content in our community since the Aughties. She's not unique.

She was quoted in The Times article as saying she wants other people to have what she has? She thinks that's even a feasible option for the vast majority of LDS women?

Who's buying the land? The livestock? And everything that goes with it?

Not me. Not any other LDS woman I know.

There are so many incredible, important things that passionate LDS women do to serve their communities. But because they don't look like her and have her money to create the platform she has, you'll never know their names.

Did people forget that being a social media influencer is a pay-to-play system at this point? Y'all think she did anything differently?

She is a caricature of femininity that is a total fantasy being sold to y'all as part of an agenda to fund her lifestyle.

I can list off so many other influencers like her in our community who have come and gone from making all the same choices and mistakes that she's currently making. Knock off Ree Drummond doesn't even compare to some of the other LDS creators in her genre. If you want someone who broke this mold, go look up Stephanie Nielson of NieNie Dialogues. She survived a plane crash that permanently altered her appearance and had to find self-worth outside of traditional beauty standards. I never cared much for her content either, but she at least has something more interesting to say than "I'm pretty and rich and have a lot of kids." And that's before we even touch the totally valid criticisms of Daniel Neeleman and how poorly he treats his wife on camera.

I don't know if anyone walked him through the Mormon Mommy Blogger formula, but a necessary part of it is wish fulfillment for the audience, including a doting and respectful husband who would never dream of embarrassing or humiliating his wife. It's supposed to be an exercise in generating envy for everything his wife gets from being a stay-at-home mother—not what it's costing her because of him. That seems to be their only unique contribution to the genre, which is not the Mormon Mommy Blogger recipe for success. That's Shaycarl. You want to talk about the saddest "Where are they now?" Google search I just did to see if they're even still married. That tea is stone cold now. Nevertheless, it's still more interesting than watching a woman dancing ballet in a cow pasture (rather than at Juilliard) because her husband doesn't prioritize or respect her.

But I digress.

The press wants someone truly interesting to talk to? I can get them in contact with Artisans of Hope, a charity being run by LDS women in Idaho. They teach sewing and crafting skills to refugees, helping them become financially self-reliant in a new country. I can introduce them to the real work the bipartisan LDS community is doing to settle refugees all over Boise.

But no. Let's all have the same tired, ignorant conversation we've been having about Mommy bloggers since 2009. Because it was never about Hannah Neeleman. That's the sad thing she doesn't seem to realize.

People are only interested in talking about LDS women to make us look like indoctrinated freak shows. It's a very old form of misogyny that has been around since the 1840s.

The press has lifted her up specifically to make her a spectacle to the rest of the world, to laugh at her. And it's the dumbest thing in the world, I'm tired of seeing it, and tired of watching the public fall for it again and again.

[rmbunnie]

Another little inconsequential red hood thing and I'll admit that I'm decently biased but it irks me to see the whole "Jason can't shut up about his death/he makes his death everyone else's problem" take really frequently because he simply does not do that enough for it to be a thing in like any actual Red Hood story.

It's a thing you see sometimes in modern annuals/comics with large casts, particularly if a writer doesn't seem super confident with writing all of the characters that they're working with or if he's just a background character in this one, because with comics it's quicker to reduce a character to recognizable landmarks than to try and work out a whole new complex voice if you don't really need to, so it's tire iron, Jane Austen, Joker, and death, and it's all written out in dialogue because every character in a group event can't have their own internal monologue, but like. That's pretty much it. UTRH is the establishing event for Jason Todd post death so of course a lot of it is about his death, although it's arguably about the lack of response to his death more than his death itself, and he certainly makes it Bruce's issue but one beef doesn't make a trend. Plus if his death is anyone's issue beyond his own Bruce and Joker are like the number one guys whose issue it is. He THINKS about his death a ton in Lost Days, but it doesn't really reflect externally on any of his interactions besides with Joker, which again, that's justified and relevant beef. Teen Titans 29 is more about his place in the hero community/feeling like he was an outsider even before the bomb/Tim being the new robin than about his death, and side note, that being counted as an attempt on Tim's life also bugs me. He beat him up and then left of his own volition. That's not an assassination attempt its called a fight, albeit a sneaky and unfair one. But anyways. I can't speak on Battle for the Cowl because i haven't read it, both that and Batman and Robin 2009 don't really compel me, but it's entirely possible that's an outlier to my point seeing as I kinda sorta haven't read it and don't care to lmao. Even New 52 (although HIGHLY unpopular) and Rebirth/Dawn of DC/Whatever we're doing now Red Hood content don't really have him talking to people about it besides the occasional little quips. He might make stances that were developed because of his death other people's problem, like in the Mia Dearden Green Arrow situation with the "getting involved in other people's business" issue, but acting like he makes specifically his death everyone else's problem is ignoring all of the perfectly valid actually canon things he makes other people's problem. Most of the unpleasant traits he brings to the table are a result of his death and the sense of abandonment and betrayal that came with it, but that doesn't mean he's bringing his death into it when he acts unpleasantly any more than he's bringing his birth into it when he shows up in the first place. The consequences do not equal the event. All this to say it's irritating when people say the character is grating because he doesn't stop whining about his death when that kinda just indicates to me that they're working off fanon based on fanon based on kinda mid batman annual.

[homestuckreplay]

Cursed By Zazzerpan To Take Webcomics Too Seriously

(page 472-483)

8/14/2009 Wheel Spin: Captchalogue Lore Verdict: Just Captchalogue, No Lore

8/15/2009 Wheel Spin: being silly :3c Verdict: Slimer Pogo Ride – Inherently Silly

The imps have STOLEN John’s clever disguise. >:( How could they do this. Aren’t their jester hats costume enough. When John says ‘they’re mucking up all my cool stuff!’ he is right and justified in being mad. What little control John ever had over his living environment has now been completely obliterated, the imps (and Rose) running rampant and using his home as their own personal playground.

Speaking of Rose, I was deeply struck by her total lack of regard for the monetary worth of a piano. Those things are expensive, and they’re not a standard thing for a house to have either! But this is not the first time Rose has thrown an expensive musical instrument around, as shown by her violin antics (p.236, 395) being more of an annoyance than a risk to a delicate possession. Knowing how rich her family is really explains why her response to destroying John’s house is a casual ‘Oops.’

We also get another moment of Rose dismissing John’s problems as not especially serious on p.478, when John says he was ‘hoping to avoid nanna and her spooky ghost cookies’ and Rose says ‘that does sound dumb.’ I know that Rose is speaking from her personal experience, but from an external reader’s perspective, if I am going to take it seriously that Rose’s mom might be an alcoholic and that Dave’s brother might be psychologically tormenting him with puppet tricks, then I am also going to take it seriously that John could have genuine trauma surrounding food. If he’s been forced to eat beyond his limits or eat food he doesn’t like all his life, that could definitely lead to a negative relationship with food, even if John’s dad and nanna are baking for him as an act of care.

EB: i'm not sure what came over me there, i was acting really crazy for some reason. EB: but my head feels like it's clearing up, i think i'm alright now.

This is the line that’s had me scratching my head and clenching my fists all of yesterday and today. I’m truly not sure what the intended tone is – if this is meant to be a joke, or a leading question about how exactly the control panels and possible time loops work, or a setup for a possible future where John does something really bad while being mind controlled by the Vagabond, or just a way for the author to justify any potential future out of character moments. I think I am biased towards reading this story in a serious and realistic way, and I think there’s lots of other valid ways it can be read, but from my personal reading this is existential horror, and more affirmations of John’s complete lack of free will and – importantly – his steadily growing awareness of this. I think a big part of his character progression so far is going from the vague and uncertain ‘something feels missing from your life’ to slowly being able to put words to his problems.

We actually learn a fair bit more about the rules, game logic and progression of Sburb in these pages, which I’m planning to lay out in its own post in the next few days. In contrast, we get no new information about the captchalogue and strife systems – it really feels like John’s passed that level now, and is able to do these things in the background without it interrupting the narrative. The same thing will probably happen with the imps after he’s got a few more kills.

I can’t figure out how to score points in the game on p.476 where we do sick pogo ride tricks as an imp (my high score is 551?) but I love it narratively. In the game we are definitely controlling the imp directly – there’s no indication that John or Rose have any hand in the imp’s antics - but in the text below, John is still addressed as the second-person ‘you’ and the line focuses on John’s own history with the ride. I like the suggestion that the imp is doing the same dangerous stunts that John once did, and the idea that there’s some parallels between John and the imp – both low level entities who are fundamentally at the mercy of the greater forces of Sburb, both clowns wearing disguises through circumstance instead of choice.

Anyway I am politely requesting that John check out the punch designix for real now.

[my-deer-friend]

The post you reposted about not hating historians was really interesting, thank you for sharing it. Do you have recommendations for historians who are researching queer history in the 18th century?

Do I!

(Note that I'm using "queer" below in the modern sense of "behaviour outside the sanctioned/accepted gender or sexual norms of the time".)

Strands of scholarship

I've come to see two broad approaches in historical queer studies, at least those focused on the 18th century; these are my own observations, and not formal groupings (as far as I'm aware).

One one side, you have those scholars who have a very open and loose conception of queerness, and are usually interested in "queering the past" – aka using a queer scholarship lens to investigate historical social-cultural behaviours. They often focus on literary analysis and tend to be more liberal about applying modern queer terminology to the past, and usually lean social constructionist or postmodernist.

On the other side, you have strict queer scholars, who have much more stringent definitions of what is "definitely queer" and what isn't, and are interested in making sure that only those historical figures who are "truly" queer are labelled as such. They tend to focus on official documents like trial records and homosexual acts as the most valid kinds of evidence of queerness. These are most often critical realists.

The first group risks taking an over-broad approach to historical queerness, while the second risks being overly narrow, so the majority of scholars tend to fall somewhere in the middle. I do however think it's important to be aware of the differing entry points that a historian might be taking, so that you can read more critically.

All that said...

Here are some recommendations

Haggerty, G. E. (1999). Men in love: Masculinity and sexuality in the eighteenth century. Columbia Univ. Press. For me, this is the gold-standard starting point. Haggerty takes a very pragmatic and compassionate approach to investigating historical queerness. He has also published a more recent book about Horace Walpole which I've skimmed and it looks excellent (Haggerty, G. E. (2011). Horace Walpole’s Letters: Masculinity and Friendship in the Eighteenth Century. Bucknell University Press.)

Godbeer, R. (2009). The overflowing of friendship: Love between men and the creation of the American republic. Johns Hopkins University Press. Another excellent foundational work, this one focused more on America.

Tobin, R. (2000). Warm Brothers: Queer Theory and the Age of Goethe. University of Pennsylvania Press. This book focuses on queerness in late-18th/early-19th century German culture, but has lots of useful cross-cutting insights.

Sedgwick, E. K. (1985). Between men: English literature and male homosocial desire. Columbia university press. Sedgwick doesn't pull many punches, and that puts her ahead of her time; you'll find many theorists leaning on her study.

Malcolm, N. (2024). Forbidden Desire in Early Modern Europe: Male-Male Sexual Relations, 1400-1750 (1st ed.). Oxford University Press. I have heard great things about this book and it's somewhere on my long, long reading list – but by all accounts it's worth a look, and is the most recent source on this list, so it should contain the most up-to-date scholarship.

Cleves, R. H. (2014). Charity and Sylvia: A same-sex marriage in early America. Oxford University Press. This one takes place in the early 19th century, so not quite what you're looking for, but is an interesting investigation into (the scarcer field of) female same-sex relations.

Norton, R. (Ed.). Homosexuality in Eighteenth-Century England: A Sourcebook. Updated 17 December 2023. http://rictornorton.co.uk/eighteen/. An invaluable resource of source documents and analyses (with the small caution that Norton very blatantly uses modern queer terminology in historical context).

These are all books, so they serve as a good starting point for a broad exploration; all of these authors have also published academic articles, which go into much more depth on narrower topics. I also have some more focused resources, if there is a specific topic within this massive field that you have a particular interest in!

[fictionadventurer]

Austen asks! 4-24

I don't know if you intended this to be inclusive, but I'll answer them all anyway (skipping over the ones that have already been answered).

6. Favorite movie adaptation

The 1995 Sense and Sensibility. To me, it strikes a good balance between being a good adaptation and making the story accessible to audiences that haven't read the book, and it's one of the few that seems to understand Austen's humor and romance.

7. Favorite Austen couple

Anne and Wentworth. Their personalities balance each other perfectly.

8. Least favorite couple

Colonel Brandon and Marianne are so frustrating to me, mostly because of how Austen writes them. They fall victim to the Marian Halcombe Problem--if you spend the whole book showing a man and woman having tons of conversations and developing a good dynamic as equals, I'm not going to believe that he's in love with her sister.

9. Most hated foe of a heroine

Isabella Thorpe is a terrible person, and I can't think of any redeeming qualities or circumstances.

11. Least favorite book

I gained a better appreciation for Sense and Sensibility on my last reread, but it's still definitely Austen's weakest novel.

12. Least favorite Austen heroine

Marianne Dashwood is a realistic teenager, but not someone that I can admire or sympathize with too much.

14. Favorite love confession from the books

Can any Austen fan say anything other than The Letter in Persuasion?

16. Least favorite film adaptation

I hold a grudge against the 2005 Pride and Prejudice, because it did nothing to make me understand the appeal of Austen, and it's a horrible adaptation, but it has such a huge influence on fandom's interpretation of the novel.

Also, every once in a while, I remember the scene in the 2008 Sense and Sensibility where Brandon gives Willoughby a "stay away from my daughter" speech, and I shudder over how creepy it is.

17. Moment that made you sad/cry while reading

Basically any scene of Fanny Price's childhood.

18. Moment that made you smile/happy while reading

Henry Tilney's introduction scene in Northanger Abbey is just pure distilled joy.

19. Moment that made you laugh while reading

I'll never forget the time I laughed out loud in class while reading one of Miss Bates' speeches in Emma.

20. Moment that made you mad while reading

I don't know if I've ever been so mad for a heroine as I was during the scene where the neglected poor, orphaned, outsider Fanny watches everyone fawn over poor, orphaned outsider Mary Crawford.

22. Favorite Austen female casting decision

I love Tamsin Greig as Miss Bates in the 2009 Emma, because I did not imagine her talkativeness as stemming from anxiety, but it was fun to see her played that way and to experience a different interpretation that still felt valid.

I'm also going to take this opportunity to mention that I love Mrs. Jennings and Sir John Middleton in 1995's Sense and Sensibility. I just grin through every scene they're in, and I especially respect them after learning that they were the only cast members that Emma Thompson didn't have to write random extra dialogue for in crowd scenes, because they just naturally knew how to talk like Regency characters.

23. Favorite Austen male casting decision

I love Johnny Lee Miller as Mr. Knightley in 2009 Emma. I don't know if he matches the character in the novel, but I love how he portrayed the dynamic with Emma.

Also, Hugh Laurie as Mr. Palmer in 1995's Sense and Sensibility is perfection. And Greg Wise as Willoughby is beautiful and charming enough to do his job of fooling you into thinking he could be the romantic lead before he proves to be an utter cad.

24. Favorite supporting character

Mrs. Jennings. Hands-down. So vulgar, nosey, and over-the-top, but beneath it all, so kind and friendly and helpful. I love her so much.