#Department of Worms

[thatsbelievable]

[asteria-of-the-stars]

Sansa Stark, Game of Thrones || Taylor Swift, “Who’s Afraid of Little Old Me?”, The Tortured Poets Department.

[lakesbian]

alright this one is getting its own post instead of a reblog on a post that is Entirely Not About That. presenting the 'what if we put amy and alec in a room together' manifesto because the thing is that it is interesting but not in the way amy/alec shippers think

Amy shook her head, talking over her, “She’s always been emotional, passionate, unrestrained, and she’s channeling all this new emotion into hate, because it’s the closest equivalent.” “New emotion?” Regent asked.  “You mean you mindraped her.” Amy looked like she’d been slapped across the face.  I wasn’t surprised, but hearing it said out loud was unsettling.

“Nice,” Regent said.  “She could be a human-spider hybrid.  Add some insult to injury with the mindrape thing.” I could see Amy tense.

it is relevant to his character that he's the first person to cut through amy's euphemisms (and everyone else's avoidance of saying the unsettling part out loud) and outright say "you mindraped her." he calls the euphemistic language out and then intentionally repeats it a second time for no other reason than to bug her about it. it's vaguely reminiscent of something he says to sophia during his interlude:

“You and I are more alike than you’d suspect, I think,” he said. “We’re both arrogant assholes, yeah?  Difference is, I admit it, I don’t dress it up and tell myself that I’m a bitch and that that’s a good thing.”  He burned Emma’s face out of another photo.

he has a repeated habit of making people uncomfortable by calling something out for exactly what it is, whether it be "yeah sure cape groupies, my dad's girls, people i used my power on towards the end" or "you mean you mindraped her." he's desensitized enough to really all forms of violence to be unbothered by committing or witnessing them, but he seems to harbor a genuine pet peeve for people who obscure or unreasonably justify what they're actually doing. as uncomfortable as he can make taylor, it's often not that he's doing things worse than the other undersiders, but that he's the person most willing to openly admit what he's doing--or to pettily call out what someone else is doing.

i think it more or less boils down to the fact that he's never gotten to be the person on the peripherals of violence making up neat and tidy ways to talk about it: he spent his entire childhood being hurt in every way imaginable & being coerced into doing the same to others. i think it left him with a sort of genuine distaste for being expected to talk in circles around the viscerally awful things he had done to him or did to others, and subsequently, for people who have done similar things but can't fucking fess up to the reality of it. it's like he's been walking around his entire life just absolutely drenched in blood, witnessing so much else get covered in it, and he's starting to get legitimately bothered over people standing around twiddling their thumbs and pretending it's red paint. he knows it's blood. he's been tasting it since he was 6. he would really like if everyone else could also grow up and admit it's fucking blood.

it's always funny to me that amy/alec shipping is, like, a Thing--a niche thing, but a Thing, because i could not think of a rapist more hand-crafted to piss amy dallon off than alec vasil. he cannot go Three seconds in her presence without going "oh you raped her? you mean you raped her? with your mind? like she doesn't just have new feelings you specifically mean you mindraped her?"

she, on some level, views herself as someone who did harm because she's irrevocably, ontologically evil, and is sort of desperately obsessed with minimalizing or half-justifying her actions to herself so that she can avoid recognizing that she feels like she can't be better. she's clinging to the idea that she can be "redeemed" if she does something of equal measure in the opposite direction (e.g 'spending the rest of her life healing people' as she mentions), but because she can't even directly acknowledge how bad her actions actually were without crumbling under the weight of the idea that she's doomed to be that bad, she's fundamentally incapable of looking directly at what she did at this point in the story.

alec, on the other hand, is really fucking upfront and fairly objective about his actions--he never ties them into some Inarguable Truth About His Soul, and he's pretty honest about whether or not he thinks they're justifiable. in 14.1, he has this dialogue with cherie:

“When daddy had you practicing your powers, you ‘hijacked’ a few people at a time, used their bodies to get high with no consequences for you, you threw orgies for yourself…” “Again.  I was a kid.”

but despite the fact that sophia is, on some level, justified in his mind by his "eye for an eye, this is a favor for taylor" rhetoric--he's fine with admitting that he's also just doing it because, yeah, he's an arrogant asshole and he feels like it. some of it was because he was a kid being groomed, and some of it was because He Felt Like It.*

*sure, he only Felt Like It because he has a comically large cocktail of unpacked psychological issues--but he doesn't know that, he just knows he felt like it.

in other words, he doesn't subscribe to the idea that any of his actions are, like, Ontologically Predetermined By His Inner Being or even necessarily all related. he's like the fuckin' "might do it again, prolly not" dude from the sex offender shuffle. okay, sorry for saying that in my seriouspost. but his philosophies would clash hilariously badly with amy--he insists on accepting his own & others actions for exactly what they are, he's generally very invested in not being his father (being asked if he intends to turn out like his dad is one of the only times something briefly upsets him), and he's actually doing pretty okay at that. he's like...shockingly well-adjusted given the circumstances. his entire arc is more or less a slow upward climb.

i think having to be around someone who both believes and would outright admit "yeah i raped people, no i dunno if i feel that bad, no i'm not raking myself over the coals for it, yeah some of it was because i was a kid, yeah some of the other stuff wasn't, no i'm not Predestined To Suck," would like. clash with her beliefs abt 'ontologically evil' being a real thing, abt punishment as justice, etc. in a way that would really bother her. she spends a lot of her time in her head trying to twist things around until they feel salvageable to her, but alec is 0 amount concerned with rationalizing to make him feel alright--he just does things, some bad, most shitty attempts to be better.

it's, funnily enough, far more functional for improving than what amy has going on--he operates on material actions as opposed to her Self-Flagellating Thought Labyrinths, and the fact that he's busier moving on from things he can't materially change than he is kicking himself in the face means he can actually achieve some form of progress towards more functional approaches wrt human interaction. i think if amy had an extended conversation w/ him about the subject, she'd both be disgusted with him for not thinking thoughtcrime is real and deeply resentful that this fellow ontologically evil villain is doing better at moving forwards as a person than her despite not 24/7 flagellating himself + yearning for "redemption" like she is. it'd throw a disturbingly large wrench in her worldview, and she would not be happy about it.

oh, and alec would think she's weird and mopey and dumb and annoying and "why do it if you can't even admit it." and he would probably tell her as much. which is the point where i unlock the door to the room so alec can sprint out to escape amy's attempt to put tastebuds on his asshole.

[a-flickering-soul]

the new taylor swift album looks great

[squimblyworms]

yap yap yap

[spindle-girl]

The real reason Jack is lame is because his clone army (already ripping off Noelle) stopped the Undersiders' 18th birthday party for Taylor

[fatewoven]

// my ideal delusional build up with Gortash in Act 3

Wyrm's Rock is merely a check point where you can find evidence of Banite worship amidst the Flaming Fist, particularly in the higher ranks. You can also find more people imprisoned with reasons such as 'inciting panic/dissent/disturbing the peace' when they simply spoke out against the change in leadership and all the new policies. If you have a Baldurian background, you will also see a childhood friend in the cells who's been in there for weeks for the crime of graffiti.

The Lower City sprawls as usual, but you hear more propaganda from speakers that twist the truth. The newspapers are silenced, forced to print out pretty lies. There's even talk of the Temples being closed as Gortash directs funds to the defense of Baldur's Gate (he simply wants them to worship the Dead Three, mainly Bane, by the time the Absolute plot is done with.)

You continue. You explore and learn more to the city, and on occasion a Steel Watcher will comment (their voice warped, lower, scratchier as if there's a thing in there that's gleefully watching you struggle and run around like a rat) on what you've done as you walk past; they do not say these comments in normal dialogue.

Upper City's gates are closed at first, but you make your way through by earning the favor of a noble opposed to Gortash's rule. They will say another noble family was slaughtered in a single (hello Dark Urge connections, you, the favored hound) and ask you to investigate the plot further. The first steps in the district are met with children wondering about the 'bad' person getting killed, then a crowd of protestors trying to stop the execution. You can help or watch it progress. The crowd watching the display will whisper Gortash's rule brings peace, and you see these people who have never struggled in their lives are desensitized to such gruesome sights. They don't want to see the violence nor the noose closing around their necks.

A disguised Banite cites the crimes, and if you pass a Religion check, you realize he speaks one of Bane's tenants as he tells people to obey, to work together to win this war. (If you are the Dark Urge and disrupted the execution, Gortash will later comment that you would've been the axe that split the neck so gleefully.)

More politics amidst noble houses, rumors to chase down. You can find smugglers carrying orders from Gortash. You can talk to people who believe him the best ruler Baldur's Gate could ever have. Everything is fine. The war will not reach the city's walls because he is here to protect us. If you stop the execution, resistance members will approach you. They are small, outnumbered, but determined to free their city from tyranny's grasp.

The coronation goes on as normal, but there's more emphasis that you are secluded here, stacked up against impossible odds as he smiles at you and offers a deal. Much later, in his study, you can talk to him over a glass of wine and as a servant comes in, tripping on themselves and spilling the food all over, Gortash will calmly address them. Tell them to pick up the knife and mutilate themselves, and they will do so while crying and whimpering in pain as he watches as if bored. Then, with that low, measured voice of his, tells them: There, that's better now. You've learned your lesson haven't you? Another mistake will not be tolerated.

As they leave, another servant comes in soon after to clean the blood from the stone floors. You know it's not the first time they were drenched in red, noting the older stains beneath the carpets.

If you side with him, he will send you out on some quests that will challenge your morals. Whether or not you really want to maintain this alliance with him as a iron-fisted regime takes place over Baldur's Gate. Where is the line drawn when it comes to a city founded by scoundrels and pirates? Where corruption courses from the destitute to the rich?

He will show you how corrupted the nobility are, how they squandered their wealth while the rest of the city suffered. The seeds of sympathy planted as he asks you to take care of them. Ah, but before that, there is a big festival to go to, the royal gardens made into a place of dance and song, and of course, political intrigue. You can dance with him here and discuss what you've found out about him and criticize his methods, and he will calmly address each point, further showing he is a reasonable and rational man who only wants the best for Baldur's Gate.

It's the slow build of dread. The atmosphere of a populace under tyrannical rule where nothing is out of place. There is no laughter in the bars of Upper City. The streets are quiet. Peaceful. There is nothing wrong in our beautiful city. You find out more about his rule, his past, and the horrors he's committed, giving you even more reason to abhor him, or perhaps join him. He brought order, maybe he can make the entire Coast a peaceful land, too.

[irrelevant-ramblings]

pLEEAAAssseee i’ve been! on my! kNEEEEEsss change the proPHECCCyyyy don’t want money! just someone who! wants my compANNNNYYYY let it once be mEEEEE who do i have to spEEEAAAK to about if they can rEDOOO the prophecyyyyy

[mxltifxnd0m]

though i have not been in my harry potter/marauders phase in over a year

but the fall vibes got me feeling some type of way and I'm slowly creeping my way back into the fandom

will i start writing for them again?

time will only tell...

[kazieka]

churning with thoughts abt the ecology in trigun. what did the worms eat before people showed up. are thomases a native or introduced species. where does the oxygen come from. where are the phototroph species. mr. nightow answer my emails

[agirlandhertypewriter]

“worms” by elssi

[dw-flagler]

you know if you think about it taylor's power and the way shards work in worm implies that taylor thinks of crabs as bugs . what the fuck is wrong with ehr

[tarantula-hawk-wasp]

I need to be so good and responsible and functioning adult tomorrow and then after tomorrow I can take a few days off from being responsible but good god do I not want to deal with tomorrow

[canidaedreams64]

finally got around to drawing all of my netbot ocs :^]

[wolfcat-hybrid]

OP I do need you to know that the morons are in no way new; back when pasteurization was first being pushed for, LOADS of people were against it (though the modern idiots are more annoying to deal with, as they flagrantly ignore DECADES of evidence).

Tl;dr: People have always been weirdly against the idea of boiling their milk.

Folks were aware of the nasty stuff in milk for ages. A New York Times' article from around 1858 suggested about 8,000 children had died the previous year due to impure milk, and German chemist Franz von Soxhlet first suggested applying Louis Pasteur's method of wine sanitation to milk in 1886. Since pasteurization didn't become standard practice in the United States until the 1930s, you can probably guess how popular that idea was!

People complained that pasteurized milk lost its flavor and/or nutritional value (I'm sure all those bacteria must have added a delightful aftertaste). We even have examples of straight-up lies being spread in defense of raw milk; In 1898 the American Pediatric Society warned "feeding babies heated [pasteurized] milk could lead them to develop scurvy." (obviously very much not true! Why would you lie about scurvy specifically, we already know what causes that!)

For a time, people were more willing to drink milk that had formaldehyde added to it than milk that had been pasteurized--which sparked this delightful quote: upon being asked if if he really thought formaldehyde in milk was really that bad for infants, Indiana’s chief public health officer, John Newell Hurty, replied “Well, it’s embalming fluid that you are adding to milk. I guess it’s all right if you want to embalm the baby.”

In 1908, the Surgeon General released a 600-page report attributing most childhood deaths at the time to impure milk and advocating for widespread pasteurization (better late than never). Even then, people weren't super on board (I'm just gonna screenshot this bit whole, because I don't think I could do it justice)

[Image ID: A screenshot of text that reads "Despite the mounting scientific evidence, pasteurization still spread slowly. Beyond nutritional concerns, some feared that it was just a superficial intervention. As one commentator noted in a March 1908 issue of Outlook, “Wholesale pasteurization, while lulling consumers into a false sense of security, would vastly increase the burdens of milk inspectors and make their work more difficult if not entirely impossible.” / Others bemoaned the high costs of pasteurization and argued that it could lead to other maladies. In Chicago, for example, Alderman Jacob Hey called it “false science” and said it was the cause of rickets and scurvy." End of ID.]

Thats right, people have been complaining about "fake science" for over 100 years! Yay!

Again, pasteurization didn't become widespread in the United States until the 1930s, about 50 years after Franz von Soxhlet first suggested it. Because we REALLY like drinking our milk as gross and bacteria-laden as possible.

(Sources linked under the cut)

people in western countries used to get brucellosis, tuberculosis, q fever, etc from milk all the time and then we ended that with pasteurization programs and now a bunch of morons are like "actually getting a horrible disease from drinking milk owns. we need raw milk."