#Elizabeth Dement

[analogskullerosis]

If I had a nickel for every show I’ve watched where Elizabeth Olsen plays a woman with a seemingly idyllic suburban life only to have it all fall apart due to reckless decision making, I’d have two nickels. Not much, but weird that it’s happened twice.

[mosylufanfic]

Chapters: 22/22 Fandom: Pride and Prejudice - Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice (1995), Pride and Prejudice & Related Fandoms Rating: Mature Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply Relationships: Elizabeth Bennet/Fitzwilliam Darcy, Jane Bennet/Charles Bingley, Elizabeth Bennet & Charlotte Lucas Characters: Elizabeth Bennet, Fitzwilliam Darcy, Colonel Fitzwilliam (Pride and Prejudice), Mr. Gardiner (Pride and Prejudice), Jane Bennet, Charlotte Lucas, Caroline Bingley, Mary Bennet, Charles Bingley, Lord Tristan (OC), George Wickham, Georgiana Darcy Additional Tags: Dead Dove: Do Not Eat, Exactly What It Says on the Tin, Pride and Prejdice with a lot of swearing and a sprinkling of politics, Alternate Universe - Modern Setting, British Politics, I wanted to do Australian politics but that required way too much casual c-bombing, Eventual hints of citrus, Slight Canon Divergence, Also the occasional political scandal, hello lake scene Series: Part 1 of Politics and Profanity Summary:

A modern AU wherein Darcy has recently been elected to the House of Commons, Elizabeth is in the civil service, and unsusprisingly, there is conflict. Slight whiffs of both 'The Thick Of It' and 'Yes Minister'; and an eventual 'Darcy exiting the lake in a wet white shirt' scene, because let's be honest, that's all anyone is in this for.

Additional story and relationship tags as the story progresses. Rating due to a base level of swearing which could only be described as 'Australian'. Also because there might be some lemons later on.

Not on hiatus, I'm just really bad at updating.

-

from @cynicinafishbowl

[sshireens]

everyone and their mother likes a tudor silhouette for the lannisters and i understand why! BUT I DISAGREE! i see your sleeves (which are BEAUTIFUL i will never argue that) and your skirts and i raise you:

insane elizabethan gaudiness. skirts that force the riff raff to Keep Their Distance! ruffs god the RUFFS! embroidered and beaded until moving becomes a workout. stiff busks and small waists (looking even smaller next to that TENT of a skirt). ribbons and pearls and lace and rubies (RUBIES! DID SOMEONE SAY RUBIES? CERSEI I HAVE SOMETHING FOR YOU!) are these dresses not Dripping in luxury and finery? the silhouette is just slightly absurd enough to Stand Out okay you KNOW what era this, therefore the people of westeros KNOWWWWWWW who these people are the second they see that right angle waist. plus added benefit: those bodices are probably stiff enough to stop a blade. not that i dont literally gain years on my life every time i see cersei’s cunty chest plate.

i mean (yes these are closer to costume than recreation BUT YOU GET IT OKAY YOU UNDERSTAND) its theatric its dramatic it has me looking at paintings going What is the point?????? and then i remember the point is to stop the show and draw attention and really leave a mark and is that not the lannister way? now i am known to also be a pre-tudor Plantagenet era slim silhouette yards of fabric Typical Medieval Dress fan for cersei BUT CERSEI TRANSCENDS FASHION OKAY. this is her at casterly rock. this is THE WESTERLANDS. this is who she REALLY IS. i can see it in my mind like this is a vision i KNOW it to be true

i mean come on. guys its too easy. i can see her plotting scheming in a giant skirt and a beautiful ruff. she’s analyzing the minuscule beadwork of other court dresses trying to figure out what message she’s being sent (she is not being sent one). she orders EVERY detail of her own gowns to make sure she’s communicating properly back. ladies in waiting carry their own secret messages in beads and lace and decoration and cersei feels SOOO smart because they dont even know it. she wears gold and jewels in a pattern to mimic a maesters chain because at this point she deserves one. think also how easy it is to hide poison in this shit. so many stones that could be hollow. so many layers and folds. and listen when they’re kids and she and jaime trade clothes to pretend to be each other its EVEN EASIER cause nobody knows what you actually look like in this anyway

the wedding look went crazy okay. ruffs and the fucking. peacock head thing i can’t remember the name of. embroidered lions shimmering with ruby eyes and gold thread, dress tinkling with every move because its dripping in pearls and gold and emeralds. alright this fabric is Stiff with beading and stitching and Layers. you can’t look at cersei directly because the torchlight gleams off of her like some demented early stage psychosis medieval disco ball. golden haired golden dressed golden skinned Gold Gold Gold she exudes richness and beauty and fashion. this is fucking crazy to a baratheon court. she upstages the new king. she upstages the memory of rhaella. everyone sees now that she should have been a targaryen queen. DO YOU SEE IT. like i am such a zealot for this like this is SERIOUS TO ME. red and yellow and black and red and red and yellow and GOLD and in her insane mind these are snide allusions to rhaegar and elia and robert to everyone who can see her. and to jaime. this is a lannister woman marrying in lannister colors and she fucked her twin brother That Morning. okay that is also a silly little reference she’s making. THIS WOMAN IS CRAZY SHE DESERVES THE GAUDIEST FASHION HISTORICAL RECREATIONS CAN PROVIDE!

also if it were real (it is real. im grrm.) the allusion to elizabeth i the virgin queen sole female ruler… that just makes me giggle in and of itself.

i rest my case!

[aceinacloset]

"You found me! I can't believe it. You found me eggs, I'm so happy."

This little demented thing is Silhouette Baby, which is a shadow, agony amalgamation Elizabeth takes whenever she wishes to be seen by other people.

Consider her like the shadow animatronics in a way.

There are Silhouette variants for the other 3 funtimes, but they're not forms Elizabeth takes.

I won't go any further yet, because that's Au spoilers 😉

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Julian Adorney and Mark Johnson

Published: Jun 10, 2024

There’s a sense that the liberal order is eroding.

What do we mean by that? By “liberal order” we mean three things: political liberalism, economic liberalism, and epistemic liberalism.

Politically, it’s tough to shake the sense that we’re drifting away from our liberal roots. Fringes on both sides are rejecting the liberal principle that all human beings are created equal and that our differences are dwarfed by our shared humanity. On the left, prominent activists are endorsing the idea that people with different immutable characteristics (race, gender, etc.) have different intrinsic worth. For instance, in 2021, Yale University’s Child Study Center hosted a psychiatrist who gave a speech titled, “The Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind,” where she compared white people to “a demented violent predator who thinks they are a saint or a superhero.” In response to Hamas’ brutal attack on Israeli civilians on October 7, Yale professor Zareena Grewal tweeted, “Settlers are not civilians. This is not hard.” Across the political aisle, Dilbert comic creator Scott Adams called black Americans a “hate group” whom white Americans should “get the hell away from.”

If a core component of political liberalism is that all human beings are created equal, then many prominent voices are pushing us rapidly toward an illiberal worldview where one’s worth is determined by immutable characteristics. 

Increasingly, members of both parties seek to change liberal institutions to lock the opposition out of power. Their apparent goal is to undermine a key outcome of political liberalism: a peaceful and regular transfer of power between large and well-represented factions. On the right, prominent Republicans have refused to concede Trump’s loss in 2020, and many are refusing to commit to certifying the 2024 election should Trump lose again. “At the end of the day, the 47th president of the United States will be President Donald Trump,” Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) said in response to repeated questions about whether or not he would accept the election results. On the left, prominent Democrats advocate for abolishing the Electoral College, partly on the grounds that it favors Republicans; and for splitting California into multiple states to gain more blue Senate seats. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Tina Smith (D-MN), among others, have called for expanding the Supreme Court explicitly so they can pack it with Democrats.

This disdain for democratic norms isn’t limited to political elites on right or left; it is permeating the general populace. According to a 2023 poll, only 54 percent of young Americans (aged 18-29) agree with the statement, “Democracy is the greatest form of government.”

Economic liberalism is also under attack. In 2022, Pew found that only 57 percent of the public had a favorable view of capitalism. Those numbers are even worse among young Americans; only 40 percent among those aged 18-29 had a positive view of capitalism. By contrast, 44 percent of the same age group reported having a positive view of socialism. Faced with the choice of which system we should live under, it’s unclear whether young Americans would prefer economic liberalism over the command-and-control systems of socialism or communism. And while young people typically hold more left-of-center views and often become more conservative as they age, the intensity of young peoples’ opposition to capitalism should not be discounted. From 2010 to 2018, a separate Gallup poll found that the number of young Americans (aged 18-29) with a positive view of capitalism dropped by 23 percent. 

Epistemic liberalism is on the ropes too. As the Harper’s Letter warned, “The free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted.” In recent years, even prominent intellectuals have been terrified of being canceled for daring to write outside of the lines set by a new and predominantly left-wing orthodoxy, adversely affecting out discourse. Again, this disdain for liberalism is more acute among young people: a 2019 survey found that 41 percent of young Americans didn’t believe that the First Amendment should protect hate speech. Furthermore, a full majority (51 percent) of college students considered it “sometimes” or “always acceptable” to “shout down speakers or try to prevent them from talking.”

As Jonathan Rauch argues in The Constitution of Knowledge, a necessary precondition of epistemic liberalism is that everyone should be allowed to speak freely, a precondition increasingly unmet in recent years.

In their book Is Everyone Really Equal?, Robin DiAngelo (of White Fragility fame) and Özlem Sensoy even challenge the foundation of epistemic liberalism itself: the scientific method. This method mandates that hypotheses be tested against reality before acceptance. “Critical Theory developed in part as a response to this presumed infallibility of scientific method,” they write “and raised questions about whose rationality and whose presumed objectivity underlies scientific methods.” Of course, once we jettison the principle that ideas should be tested by holding them up to reality, all we have left are mythologies and accusations. One of the great triumphs of the Enlightenment was giving us the scientific tools to more accurately understand the world, but those tools—like other facets of liberalism—are increasingly under attack.

So, what went wrong? Why do so many Americans, particularly young Americans, harbor such disdain for our liberal order? Why have we seen the rise of widespread social censorship, and why do books telling us that not all humans are created equal become mega-bestsellers? We believe a key reason is that too many proponents of the liberal order (ourselves included) have failed to defend our ideals vigorously. In the face of our complacency, a small but impassioned minority intent on dismantling the pillars of liberalism has been gaining ground, both within institutions and within the hearts and minds of the younger generation.

Why haven’t many of us stood up for our ideas? We posit two reasons. First, there is a sense of complacency: a lot of us look at illiberalism and think, “It can't happen here.” The United States was founded as an essentially liberal country. We were the first country to really seek to embody Enlightenment ideals (however imperfectly) from our birth. Throughout our 250-year history, despite fluctuating levels of government intervention in Americans' social and economic lives, we have never lost our political, economic, or epistemological liberal foundations. This long track record of resilience has led many of us to overlook the rising threat of illiberal ideals, assuming our liberal system is too robust to be torn down.

Adding to this complacency is the fact that many threats to our liberal social contract are largely invisible to those outside educational or academic circles. Cloaked in the guise of combating racism, Critical Race Theory takes aim at the liberal order; however, most people who haven’t been inside the halls of a university in the last 10 or so years may not be aware of this aspect. Critical Theory—including Critical Race Theory, Queer Theory, Post-Colonial Theory, and others—generally opposes Enlightenment thinking, but its arguments are wrapped in jargon and mostly live in academic papers. For example, the book Is Everyone Really Equal? criticizes political, economic, and epistemic liberalism, but it’s not a mainstream bestseller; instead, it’s a widely-used textbook for prospective teachers. What begins in the academy often seeps out into schools and eventually permeates the broader society, and many teachers and professors of these ideologies explicitly describe themselves as activists or as scholar-activists whose goal is to turn the next generation onto these ideas. The threat is real, but the more anti-liberal facets of these ideologies aren’t exactly being shouted by CNN, which makes it easy to miss.

Second, as humans, we often abandon our ideals in the face of social pressure. Consider an organization consisting of ten people: one progressive and nine moderates. In 2020, each member starts to hear about Black Lives Matter (BLM). The progressive enthusiastically supports BLM, and loudly encourages his colleagues to do the same. What happens next illustrates how prone we are to jettison our ideals if doing so brings social rewards.

The first moderate faces a choice. He could thoroughly research BLM by investigating police violence nationwide, examining the evidence of systemic racism or system-wide equality, exploring BLM’s proposed program and what they actually advocate for, and making an informed decision about whether or not he supports the organization. But that’s a lot of work for not a lot of return. After all, his job doesn’t require that he understand BLM; the only immediate consequence is his colleague’s opinion of him. Consequently, he engages in what Nobel Prize winning economist Daniel Kahneman calls “substitution.” As Kahneman explains in Thinking, Fast and Slow, “when faced with a difficult question, we often answer an easier one instead, usually without noticing the substitution.” For example, when participants were asked how much money Exxon should pay for nets to prevent birds from drowning in oil ponds, they did not perform an economic calculation. Instead, what drove their decision-making process was emotion: “the awful image of a helpless bird drowning, its feathers soaked in thick oil.”

Thus, the moderate engages in substitution. Instead of tackling the complex and difficult question “What do I think of BLM?” he asks himself an easier but more emotional question: “How much do I care about black people?” For any decent person, the answer is “quite a lot”—and so he signs on with his progressive colleague. The fact that he’s now supporting an illiberal ideology—one of BLM’s co-founders said in 2019 that “I believe we all have work to do to keep dismantling the organizing principle of this society"—never occurs to him.

When the next moderate is asked the same question about whether he supports BLM, he has the same incentive as his colleague to engage in substitution, but with added social pressure: now two of his nine coworkers support BLM, and he risks losing social capital if he does not. As humans, we are social animals. Sociologist Brooke Harrington explains that we often value others’ perception of us more than our own survival, as social ostracism in our distant past often meant death anyway. As she puts it, “social death is more frightening than physical death.” And so, motivated by the social rewards for supporting BLM and the fear of social punishment if he does not, one coworker after another agrees to support BLM.

Adding to our social calculus is the fact that we all want to be seen as (and, even more importantly, see ourselves as) empathetic. In the example of BLM, we don’t want to be perceived as racists. If this means going along with an organization that says that police “cannot [be] reform[ed]” because they were “born out of slave patrols,” then that’s a small price to pay. This same desire to be seen as empathetic (again, especially by ourselves) holds when we are called to cancel a professor for saying something insensitive, or to condemn cultural appropriation, or to read and praise books and articles claiming that liberalism has failed marginalized people and that a new, totalitarian system is necessary for their salvation.

But why shouldn’t we be complacent? Why shouldn’t we go along to get along, and let our values bend here and there so we can fit in with the new illiberal crowd? One reason is that the stakes are no longer trivial. There is nothing magical about the liberal order that guarantees it will always triumph. History shows us that liberalism can give way to totalitarianism, as it did in Nazi Germany; or to empire, as in ancient Rome. In England, new rules regulate what people are allowed to say, with citizens facing fines or imprisonment for saying something the political establishment does not like. In Canada, a new bill supported by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau would criminalize speech that those in power consider hateful. The United States is not immune to these dangers. Our Constitution alone is not a sufficient defense, because laws are downstream from culture. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights can be interpreted by illiberal justices (and have been in the 20th century); and when this happens, our rights can erode very rapidly indeed. Our freedom is sustained not by our geography or even our founding documents, but by our willingness to fight for liberalism—to defend it in the court of public opinion.

If we’re going to preserve the freedoms we cherish, that is what it will take. We must find the courage to stand up for our ideals—to speak and act based on principle alone. We must be open to new evidence that might change our views, but at the same time resist having our minds changed for us. We must prioritize truth over popular opinion.

In essence, we must think and act more like August Landmesser.

[ Source: The Lone German Man Who Refused to Give Hitler the Nazi Salute (businessinsider.com) ]

--

About the Authors

Julian Adorney is the founder of Heal the West, a Substack movement dedicated to preserving our liberal social contract. He’s also a writer for the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism (FAIR). Find him on X: @Julian_Liberty.

Mark Johnson is a trusted advisor and executive coach at Pioneering Leadership and a facilitator and coach at The Undaunted Man. He has over 25 years of experience optimizing people and companies—he writes at The Undaunted Man’s Substack and Universal Principles.

==

Whatever its flaws, every alternative to liberalism is a nightmare.

[mightyflamethrower]

Never in U.S. history has a president-elect been welcomed as the real president before his January 20 inauguration.

And never has the incumbent president so willingly surrendered his last two months in office and all but abdicated—to the relief of his nation and the rest of the world.

One reason so many are welcoming Trump’s return is the universally desperate hope that his election spelled an end to a collective madness at home and its ripples abroad during the last four years. And why not?

Nations overseas had never quite witnessed anything like the lethal August 2021 American flight from Afghanistan. That utter humiliation and impotence of the U.S. military likely signaled to Russia there would be no consequences if it invaded Ukraine—and it did; to Iran that it could now unleash Hamas and Hezbollah on Israel—and it did; and to China that it could daily threaten Taiwan and send a spy balloon across the United States with impunity—and it did.

The result was the current global chaos perhaps not seen since the late 1930s when a confused United States was similarly a bystander to the rise of bellicose regimes and wars. The Biden administration shrugged that the Red Sea, the Black Sea, the South China Sea, the Straits of Hormuz, and the Eastern Mediterranean Sea all became dangerous to the U.S. Navy and unsafe to world shipping.

A disparate group of nuclear and near-nuclear powers—Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran—are either at war with Western allies or threatening war with them. Their confidence was predicated on the assumption that the U.S. after 2020 was engaged in a Maoist-like cultural revolution that warred on its own security, energy, military, universities, and social unity—and would continue with a second Biden term.

The Biden-era cultural revolution has done great damage to the United States. The U.S. border was systematically and deliberately destroyed to allow some 10-12 million illegal entrants to pour into the U.S. without legality or background checks. Never has an outgoing administration spitefully sold taxpayer-purchased border wall material for pennies on the dollar—rather than see it used for the purposes for which it was purchased.

Never had the U.S. experienced such an immigrant surge. And never had more than 50 million, and over 15 percent of the resident American population been foreign-born.

Why did Biden and Alejandro Mayorkas erase the border? What madness and hate drove them to dismantle federal immigration law? Was it sheer nihilism? Or a desperate but calculated effort to alter American demography for political purposes?

For four years, the public, elected officials, and pundits have all warned that Joe Biden was dangerously cognitively challenged and indeed completely unfit to fulfill the duties of the presidency.

A long-suffering nation winced as Biden slurred his words, spoke in unintelligible sound bites, stood frozen and mute, screamed at and libeled half the country, tripped, fell, wandered aimlessly, became bewildered, and more or less proved a global embarrassment. All knew Biden was not able to run the country; yet none knew exactly who was actually in charge of America in his stead. The Obamas? Leftists like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, the Squad, Jill Biden, and the Biden staff?

Our allies worried that the usually resilient American president was now all but demented. Our enemies enjoyed these leaderless years of opportunity. And the left serially misled the public that the decrepit Biden, whom they feared in private was senile, was “dynamic,” “energic,” and “fit as a fiddle.”

Never has a president so deserved to be removed by the 25th Amendment or through impeachment and conviction. And never has even his inner circle finally but silently agreed as they left office, the very enablers who had done their political best to mask his dementia for four long years.

Rarely have the FBI, the CIA, the IRS, the Department of Justice, and the Pentagon become weaponized and so flagrantly and with impunity broken the law, abandoned their mission statements, and served political agendas rather than the American people. Not since the J. Edgar Hoover era has the FBI hierarchy serially lied under oath, stonewalled Congress, forged a court affidavit, or partnered with the media to suppress the news. Has the FBI ever raided an ex-president’s home, spied on parents at school board meetings, monitored Catholics, or tried to terrify and harass pro-life activists?

Never has the justice system, from local to state to national jurisdictions, so systematically and coordinately, sought to bankrupt, render inert, and jail an ex-president and current presidential candidate.

Never has a presidential family so brazenly profited by selling its influence to foreign interests. Never has it used the powers of the FBI and DOJ to cover up its crimes and to ensure the family filial bagman would be for years exempted by the DOJ and later pardoned by the president himself, the father of the family miscreant and privy to the family syndicate’s illegal activities.

Seldom has a president and his administration sought to fuel a veritable cultural revolution to change the fabric of the nation by institutionalizing a third, transexual gender, violating civil rights law, and systematically admitting, hiring, and promoting Americans on the basis of their race and gender.

Never since the Civil War era had local and state insurrectionist governments established 600 nullification zones, in which they vowed to break federal law and consider it null and void within their jurisdictions. Never have rioters looted, burned, killed, assaulted, and occupied large swaths of cities for over 120 days, and largely with impunity.

Never had the U.S. Treasury borrowed so much money so quickly and owed $37 in national debt—and been so intent on borrowing continuously nearly $2 trillion a year in annual deficits.

Never has a political party sought to systematically violate long-standing traditions, customs, and often the law itself to destroy a political opponent: hiring a foreign national to spread smears among the media and bureaucracies, impeaching a president twice, trying an ex-president in the Senate, seeking to remove a presidential candidate from 16 state ballots, using five different judicial jurisdictions to try an ex-president, and serially so defaming a candidate and ex-president as a dictator, fascist, and Nazi to create a climate that encouraged two near-miss assassination attempts on him.

In sum, for the last four years, the world has watched aghast as the United States lost its collective mind and became a radical Jacobin revolutionary society.

So why is there not a sense of almost ecstatic relief, not just among conservatives but even among Democrats, that the years of darkness and madness are ending?

The global public believes that the United States will again become lawful, have a secure border, return as a beacon of free-market economics, protect its allies, deter its enemies, win over its neutrals, return to the rule of law, restore the professionalism and prestige of its government agencies, check predatory nations abroad with a new deterrent military, and prepare to lead the world in energy production, exploration of space, and scientific and technology development.

Summed up, the welcomed counterrevolution is one of restoration—to dream again that nothing is impossible, and the dreary age of stasis, envy, cynicism, and nihilism is ending, replaced again by a world without limits. No one knows quite what is ahead, but all know that it is at least better already than the current nightmare.

The next time a progressive (regressive?) says we need to put the adults back in office.........remember 2024. It could take decades to unravel this much chaos.

[mermaidsirennikita]

Any stalking historical romance you would recommend?

A Rose at Midnight by Anne Stuart. He doesn't stalk her at first, but he DOES after she poisons him with the intent to murder him (justified) and it doesn't really let up from there. Very dark, check your TWs.

Duke of Sin by Elizabeth Hoyt. Obviously. Valentine lives in his walls spying on Bridget for like. Months. Duke of Pleasure has some heroine-on-hero stalking with Alf acting as like a vigilante and watching the Duke of Kyle. Duke of Desire has some stalking as well. All of these are on the darker side, so check your TWs.

I just finished (and loved) The Gentleman Who Loved Me by Grace Callaway. The hero is 14 years older than the heroine and knew her when she was a kid--she was very much a little sister to him, she doesn't remember him because again, she was very young. Years later, when she's an adult, he comes across her again and begins keeping a look out for her, paying off people spreading gossip about her, threatening people who want to do her wrong, following her.... NORMAL BIG BRO STUFF.

Lady Charlotte's and The Seductive Spymaster by Grace Callaway. Charlie thinks her husband's long dead, but he's very much alive and has recently started following her around and fucking up her attempts to move on (after like OVER A DECADE). Very funny, and weeeeeirdly hot.

Beyond Scandal and Desire by Lorraine Heath. It's LIGHT here, but I do think that Mick Trewlove following Aslyn around as part of his Revenge Plot (and also staring out his window broodingly while rubbing a strand of pearls she lost in a bet at his club, which he immediately took from the winner) comes off as pretty stalkerish.

Rules for a Proper Governess by Jennifer Ashley. More heroine on hero stalking! The heroine is from the gutter and becomes obsessed with the stern lawyer hero, following him around all over town.

Melissa and The Vicar by S.M. LaViolette. Magnus hunts Melissa down like a DOG when she leaves him. And it takes him weeks and he doesn't sleep well during that time so he looks like SHIT and is completely deranged. I. Love. It.

In Which Matilda Halifax Learns the Value of Restraint by Alexandra Vasti. Some light heroine on hero stalking from afar. The heroine draws the hero in some of her personal porn, which is, as we know, one of my favorite things.

Tempt Me at Twilight by Lisa Kleypas. Lmao Harry most definitely stalks Poppy everywhere and basically ruins her life to force her to marry him. Kinda king shit tbh.

Shadowheart by Laura Kinsale. GLORIOUS STALKERY. Allegreto does some mastermind.mp3 shit to get Elena in his clutches, only to realize.... she's kind of A LOT.

The Duke Who Knew Too Much by Grace Callaway. Again, some heroine on hero stalking, I think. Emma is stalking her hero to prove that he committed a murder because she saw him doing thing against his mistress's will before she died! And he has to explain what CNC is to her. Bless.

I would also say that Pippa and The Prince of Secrets has a good deal of stalkery vibes? Cull is Keeping His Eye on Pippa because she's getting into trouble and he's now like, the leader of a bunch of CHILD THIEVES LMAO. A lot of Grace's books have stalkery elements, tbh, and fortunately I do love that.

The Lady Hellion by Joanna Shupe has a heroine who dresses as a man to go fight for justice at night, and a hero who's all "NOW WAIT ONE GODDAMN MINUTE" and starts stalking her as a result. It's all fun and games until you're following some broad around through brothels at night, boys.

Never Seduce a Duke by Vivienne Lorret has a hero who becomes obsessed with the heroine and follows her on a wild goose chase across Europe because he's convinced that she stole his special secret demented Arthurian cookbook. She.... just thinks he likes her, lmao.

[blowflyfag]

Pro Wrestling Illustrated: May 1995

PRESS CONFERENCE… RANDY SAVAGE

Every Issue, reporters from PRO WRESTLING ILLUSTRATED will Participate in an incisive press conference with a top wrestling star. The questions will be demanding. And the answers will reveal the innermost thoughts of the giants of the sport. 

[There was plenty of drama at Starrcade after HUlk Hogan and Randy Savage cleared the ring of the Three Faces of Fear. Hogan offered his hand and the “Macho Man” was happy to shake it. ]

The relationship between Randy Savage and Hulk Hogan is one of the most fascinating of recent times. They have gone from being arch-rivals in the mid-1980s, to tag team partners in 1988, when Savage held the WWF World belt. But by 1989, they were enemies involved in a feud centering around Elizabeth, Savage’s manager and future wife. From all appearances, that feud was never settled, although Hogan beat Savage for the World title at WrestleMania V.

Savage vs. Hogan. Hogan vs. Savage. In February 1989, Savage slapped Elizabeth and attacked Hogan. But by 1993, we were seeing a kinder, gentler Savage. He was working primarily as a color commentator on WWF broadcasts; the “Macho Man” generally condemned rulebreakers and applauded fan favorites.

Nonetheless,the history of Hogan-Savage made wrestling fans sit up and take notice when, in November 1994, Savage announced that he was leaving the WWF and coming to WCW. He left several questions unanswered, including this delectable one; WOuld he join Hogan, or challenge him?

Savage promised to answer the question at Starrcade ‘94. “I’ll either shake his hand or slap his face,” he said. In the weeks leading up to starrcade, Kevin Sullivan even hinted that Savage had signed with the Three Faces of Fear.

Starrcade ‘94 finally arrived and Hogan defeated Brutus Beefcake, another former friend. Sullivan and Avalanche then stormed the ring for a three-way attack on Hogan. Then Savage made his grand entrance. He cleared the ring and thrilled the crowd by shaking Hogan’s hand. It was a marvelous moment. 

The new Hogan-Savage alliance was the sole subject when Senior Editor Bill Apter traveled to Atlanta with Senior Writers Eddie Ellner and Dave Rosenbaum to interview Savage. They could have talked all night.

BILL APTER: “Macho,” judging by what happened at Starrcade, it looked like you didn’t make your decision regarding Hulk Hogan until the last second. Is that true?

RANDY SAVAGE: Maybe it looked that way, Bill Apter, but that’s not the way it was. No way, that’s not the way it is. No way, that’s not the way it was. Sure, I had some choices to make, and they were some tough choices, but even if I went against Hulk Hogan, I wasn’t going to do it alongside the Three Faces of Fear.

EDDIE ELLNER: But I thought you had an agreement with Kevin sullivan. 

SAVAGE: Wrong again, Eddie Ellner. Kevin Sullivan thought he had an agreement with me, but there was never any agreement, never anything I said to convince him that I was going to be on his side for one second. I don’t know where he ever got the idea, but it worked in my favor. 

DAVE ROSENBAUM: Well, where do you think he got the idea? Let’s face it, he was pretty convinced that the fourth Face of Fear had been signed already.

SAVAGE: There was never any signing on the dotted line, Dave Rosenbaum, never any handshake or discussion of contract. LEt me tell you how it went, if I may.

APTER: You certainly may.

ELLNER: I’m looking forward to hearing this, just to see how it matches up with what Kevin Sullivan told me. 

SAVAGE: You talked to Sullivan? ELLNER: That’s right.

SAVAGE: And what did that demented individual tell you?ELLNER: That’s for me to know. Let’s hear your side of the story. 

SAVAGE: He came up to me and said, “Machi, I hear you’re in WCW now. Well, there’s another man in WCW who you might be interested in. AN old friend, so to speak. Someone you once had an ax to grind with.” And I said, “Who might that be?” and he answered, “Hulk Hogan.” 

ROSENBAUM: Which, of course, you already knew. 

SAVAGE: Ooooooh-yeah, I knew it, but I didn’t want to give anything away.

ELLNER: Strike one. Sullivan told me you came to him and said, “There’s a man I want and his name is Hulk Hogan.”

SAVAGE: That’s right, that’s what I said later, but what I said and what he thought I meant were two different things.

APTER: So you were setting up the Three Faces of Fear. 

SAVAGE: Maybe, and then again, maybe not. Let me finish my story first, Bill, and you’ll see it a lot clearer, a whole lot clearer, because this is the way it went and what Kevin Sullivan heard and thought is another matter. So he said to me, “You have a bone to pick with Hulk Hogan. He did you wrong a few years ago, just like he’s done everybody else wrong, and this is your chance to get even. Don’t you want to get even?” And I said to him, “When a man does me wrong, I want to get even.”

ROSENBAUM: I can see where Sullivan might have misunderstood you. You did have a score to settle with Hogan and I can see where Sullivan thought that you would want to get even.

SAVAGE: Dave Rosenbaum, hear me once because I’m never going to say it again: Me and Hulk Hogan had our little run-in a bunch of years ago, but that doesn’t matter anymore. We settled our differences a long time ago and now it’s time to go on to something else. Besides, the thing that tore us apart is no longer a factor, and I think any wrestling historian, which all three of you men claim to be, would agree that we were better together than apart.

[When Savage first hit the ring, he made it look like he was joining the Three Faces of Fear. He says he planned to join Hogan all along, but deceived Kevin Sullivan into thinking he would be entering WCW as a rulebreaker.]

ELLNER: I wouldn’t agree with that. Hogan brought you down, and when you broke up, he beat you for the WWF World title.

SAVAGE: SummerSlam 1988. Hulk Hogan and Randy Savage. Ted DiBiase and Andre the Giant. Who beat who?

APTER: Good point, Randy, but you won another title after that. Don’t you want a shot at the WCW World title?

SAVAGE: Sure, Bill, I’d like to win the WCW World title, but what’s right is right and a man has to do what a man has to do. 

ELLNER: What in the world does that mean? It sounds to me like your only choice was to go after Hogan and the title right away. Why wait? SAVAGE: Because a man has to do what’s right. I’ve changed my ways a little, Eddie Ellner, and I’m not the man I used to be. I finally got it to the point where people could say, “There’s Randy Savage. You can trust that man.”People used to think of me as a wild, out -of-control maniac, and that’s not the image I want to project. WHat’s right is right and I had to do what’s right.

ELLNER: Sullivan told me that you told him that you were going to be there at Starrcade.

SAVAGE: Wasn't I?

ELLNER: And that you were going to be there for him.

SAVAGE: I think me and the Three Faces of Fear crossed paths, don't you?

[Savage and Hogan were partners at SummerSlam ‘88, when they reputed Ted DiBiase and Andre the Giant (Opposite page), but fell out soon thereafter. The “Hulkster” then beat Savage for the WWF World title in 1989 (above). THe “Macho Man” says the good times with Hogan far outweigh the bad.]

ELLNER: Let’s face it, Savage, this was a well-calculated ruse on your part.

SAVAGE: Maybe so, but they were the ones attacking Hulk Hogan every chance they got. Ever since he got to WCW, it’s been one enemy after another, attacking him from behind, putting on masks, trying to get him with chairs and steel pipes. Doesn't’ anybody play by the rules around here?

APTER: Interesting point …

ROSENBAUM: No it’s not. The real Randy Savage never played by the rules. Even when he was a fan favorite, he was never a flat out good guy. He’d always get around one rule or cut the corners on another and you always knew he was dangerous. Try this question on for size Randy: What do you have to gain by being on Hogan’s side?

SAVAGE: I have a better question: What do I have to lose? Maybe I don't want to be a full-time wrestler. Maybe there are little things I want to do or have to do, here and there, and they take first priority. Maybe I’m just waiting.

APTER: Waiting for what?

SAVAGE: Waiting for the “Hulkster” to pass the torch once again. When he leaves, somebody’s going to have to carry the fire for him. 

ELLINER: I can’t believe what I’m hearing.

APTER: How about Sting?

SAVAGE: Sting is fine. Now the “Hulkster” Has a choice, and he also has somebody watching his back, just like he once did for me sometime ago.

ROSENBAUM: Are you telling me this goes back to WrestleMania IV, when Hogan helped you win the WWF World title? SAVAGE: All things add up. He owes me and I owe him. Put us together and that makes us a pretty good team.

ELLNER: WE’ll see about that.

SAVAGE: Oh yes, we will. Ooooooh-yeah!

[joanjettenthusiast]

Disney gets the rights of the Anne Rice novels. Anne Rice Cinematic Universe. ARCU. Every single one of her novels is adapted. I mean every single one of them. Like even the werewolf stuff. Even the Christ The Lord stuff. It's all produced by Marvel Studios. Chris Evans as Armand. "He's right behind me isn't he?" Says Lestat before Armand pushes him off a tower. Elizabeth Olsen as Akasha. The Wolf Gift is given much more attention than it should. The Rock is there somewhere. No sex scenes. Talamasca is S.H.I.E.L.D. Owl Aliens invade Earth which culminates in a world ending franchise wide event in which all of Anne Rice's demented creations team up to stop it. "So that just happened" says Lestat after defeating Thanos or something. Awkwafina. This came to me in a nightmare.

[crackspinewornpages]

SUPERMAN'S GIRL FRIEND, LOIS LANE #67

Tickets to the new wax museum opening are sent to the Planet and Perry sends Lois and Clark to cover it and he wants them to wear picturesque costumes too. (must be a slow news day) Lois thinks Clark being a king is funny. (no need to be mean Lois) At the museum Clark comments that being a powerful ruler would be fun, (flashbacks to Injustice) Lois thinks she’s kidding, (why you so mean to him Lois) but would like to be a queen.  

Lois goes to replace the fallen dagger from Lady Macbeth, (I guess she’s real in the DC universe) but a guard stops her, the dagger is the original one and is cursed to bring madness. Lois doesn’t believe it but thinks it would be a good anecdote for the story. 

Lois has Clark dress as King Henry VIII the famous glutton and wants him to eat it to the bones. (just so mean to him) As she turns Clark gnaws it down to the bones, she sees this and thinks it proves he’s Superman, (he could sneeze a little harder than normal and you’d think it’s proof) he says it just had less meat on it. 

As revenge he has her dress as Queen Elizabeth I, and she catches on that he’s hinting that Superman will never marry her. 

As they leave the curator gives them souvenir postcards and back in her apartment Lois daydreams of being a queen when a man knocks on her door calling her Queen Lois. He has a tape of her sister Lucy, they kidnapped her, and she better obey or else. 

She has to pretend to be famous queens, and it can be blamed on the cursed dagger, they had it set since sending the tickets to the Planet. The next morning a submariner spies Lois dressed as Queen Cleopatra on a gondola in the bay in the way of their torpedoes, better call Superman.  

Lois calls him Marc Antony and he guesses she’s acting like this because of the curse.

She orders him to be taken to shore and he decides to humor her until he gets to the bottom of it. She can’t tell him anything because her crown has a bug in it, so she has to keep playing along and she wonders what they could gain by tricking Superman. She feigns coming out of it and acts confused, so he takes her home, she doesn’t dare tell him the truth. The next day Superman tells her she paid a barge 500 dollars to take her out in the bay, she explains that it must have come from her savings. He tells her he’s glad she’s doing better and goes off on a mission, she almost tells him, but Mr. Alias planted bugs everywhere. 

Her next order is to go to the Black Castle, there’s a banquet being set up and she’s to play Queen Elizabeth I, the delivery men think something’s up and call Superman. (people just call him for every strange little thing) She calls him Sir Walter Raleigh, he’s in time to celebrate the defeat of the Spanish Armada and Superman thinks she’s demented talking to empty chairs. He uses his Super-ventriloquism to make it sound like there’s a crowd calling for the queen's presence, so she’ll go out and see them. 

The drawbridge is broken so he uses his cape and stretches it out for her to walk on. (in some canon Superman’s cape can be stretched out and sometimes it has a pocket) she offers to marry him as a reward. 

She thinks she’ll play his role to the hilt and she’ll get some fun out of it and kisses him. Again, she feigns confusion, and he thinks his Super-kiss snapped her out of it. (no the super-kiss only causes amnesia) He tells her what happened, and she claims it’s the dagger’s fault, he tells her the delusions will vanish with time. 

After he leaves the kidnappers calls her on a closed circuit on the TV, if she doesn’t play along, they’ll give Lucy more bread and water. Her next order is at the costume ball by the Historical Society, she'll be Marie Antoinette and the ball will include a guillotine to reenact her execution, (what did they plan to use it for) she keeps in mind they’re afraid of Superman. At the Planet, Lois, Clark and Jimmy get dressed and she calls Clark ridiculous for dressing as Superman and he thinks she’s acting normal again. (their relationship is just so unhealthy) 

At the party Lois plays the part of the queen and Clark thinks she’s being affected again. Mr. Alias tells her to keep up the act and she will, to make his hair curl. She takes off Clark’s glasses and she calls him handsome and proposes marriage, (Lois Lane investigative reporter sees Clark in the Superman suit takes off his glasses and still can’t add 2+2) he will when the cathedral is built. For his impudence she orders him to be beheaded. Jimmy thinks Clark is in real danger and turns on his signal watch, this is Lois’s plan, when Superman arrives, he’ll stop Mr. Alias. 

As the executioner pulls up the blade Clark thinks seeing the blade shatter on his neck will prove he’s Superman and drive Lois over the edge. (her mind can’t be that fragile) The shock of seeing the blade shatter jolts her out of her fantasy, Clark tells the crowd it was a gag. He’s wearing a metal collar, and the blade was a fake, Perry was in on it too. Superman warned them of Lois’s delusions, so it was just in case, and Lois feels bad for fooling them all. 

That night, Mr. Alias comes to her apartment, for that trick they’ll feature in her final performance as the Queen of Sheba at an abandoned film lot and she’ll order Superman to find the real missing jewels. Mr. Alias disguises himself as a security guard and warns Lois not to cross them or they’ll finish off her sister Lucy. Superman arrives and she accidentally calls out to him, Mr. Alias covers that she’s waiting for King Solomon. Lois says it’s a hoax like all the other times, he’s blackmailing her, Mr. Alias orders Lucy to be killed. 

Lois tells him the whole plan and Superman is appalled she’d get her sister killed to expose him, but it wasn’t her sister, Lucy never wears black. 

The film set was from a flop, The Queen of Sheba, by director Ned King and has Superman tear down the set to reveal hidden cameras. It was all a ploy to get Superman to find the missing jewels. King says he broke no laws, it was all for publicity. (blackmail is a crime) The Lucy actress is the heiress Clarice Von Dorn, who starred in the flop. She’s angry, she backed him with a million dollars to make her a star and he ruined her, and she dumps a plant on him for the humiliation. Lois films the beat down, when the movie word sees It, he’ll need a new alias. (cue laugh track) 

Lois is at the beauty parlor thinking about how every reporter wants to interview a foreign ambassador, she needs to get the exclusive. At the parlor Lois sees Lois...La Flamme, the famous temperamental French movie actress, Bombshell of the Boulevards. She’s tired of the attention and wants to be alone and goes bike riding instead of the ambassador’s party. So, Lois, seizing an opportunity, disguises herself as Lois. (and just steals this lady’s dog I guess but she did abandon it a a beauty salon) 

She goes to Ambassador Vandergilt’s party, (is this a nod to wealthy American elite Vanderbilt) Clark sees her in the cord and thinks she reminds him of someone. (Clark Kent investigative reporter with like 20 different types of vision but apparently has face blindness) Also he was invited to the party as Superman. 

Lois avoids the other guests and gets close to Vandergilt, he’ll answer her question about him if she answers his questions about her. (oh we’re playing that game) He then gets distracted when Superman arrives and entertains them by drinking a sword he melted. The guest, Count Armand, gifts Lois a cooker with her favorite dish, snails.  

She can’t eat them but can’t give herself away, so she complains they have too much sauce and being the temperamental diva, knocks the cooker over. Vandregilt asks her to meet him later at the Charlton Hotel to answer her questions (which is the opposite reaction I’d have if someone scattered hot coals all over my nice floor) and Superman figures out it’s Lois in disguise to get the scoop. 

As Lois leaves Clark meets her outside, he saw the latest La Flamme movie and Lois didn’t, if he quotes the movie he’ll know for sure, it’s a marriage proposal. Lois wonders what got into Clark and tells him she’ll only marry Superman. With proof Clark walks away dejected and thinks he should teach her a lesson for using such tactics to get a story. (even though you all do this all the time) Lois is worried about the rejection and will keep an eye on Clark, while Clark scolds a boy for squirting a girl with a water pistol Lois sees and thinks it’s real. 

She throws the gun into the river and tells him not to do anything rash and this gives him an idea on how to teach her a lesson. At the Charlton Lois can’t wait to get out of the wig, she keeps worrying about Clark. Count Armand shows up angry she jilted him for Superman, she’ll marry him or else. 

Meanwhile, on the roof, Clark is investigating a robbery from a hotel room and sees an out-of-control truck, so he leaps off the roof to change midair, (flashbacks to Superman IV) only for Lois to see him falling, she can’t look, believing it’s her fault for rejecting him. 

Superman just hopes she didn’t see him switch, (she just saw you jump off a building) she runs out and asks if Clark is safe, he tells her Clark is fine thinking her guilty conscience prevented her from finding out his identity. (she was worried for your life that was the least on her mind) Armand demands a duel to the death since he captured the heart of Lois. Lois says it’s useless, he’s invulnerable, Superman agrees if he insists. Later it’s a shooting duel but Superman refuses to shoot. 

Lois thought it was silly of her to worry as the bullet bounces off of him but it ricochets and hits Armand. Lois reveals she was impersonating Lois La Flamme, it was a stupid hoax, she won't do it again. (liar) Superman tells Armand to get up, it was Jimmy in disguise (who else could it be) to teach her a lesson, (that you both are emotional abusing asses) Lois is so relieved she could cry. 

Later, Lois meets Clark for a date, he takes her to the latest La Flamme film, Love’s Masquerade. (get it) 

(I hope that lady got her dog back) 

LOIS RUSHES INTO MARRIAGE 

LOIS LANE STALKER ROOM 

STALKING SEEN AS ROMANTIC 

SUPERMAN IS A DICK

1 Page 3: gets back at Lois by making her wear the Virgin Queen's costume 

2 Page 6: teaching Lois a lesson for going undercover to get a story

2 Page 8: making Lois worry about his safety and believe she got a man killed

2 Page 8: taking to a movie staring the actress that gave her so much grief

DIDN'T AGE WELL 

1 Page 13: a background character wears a middle eastern costume

SOMEONE DIES 

LOIS PUTS HERSELF IN DANGER  

LOIS IS COMPETENT 

1 Page 12: making an emergency so Superman will come

1 Page 15: figuring out it was a fake Lucy

2 Page 2: Lois successfully disguising herself as La Flamme to sneak into a party to get an interview

HAPPY ENDING  

1: the bad guy got his comeuppance and no one was seriously hurt

2: relatively speaking

LOIS IS A BITCH

1 Page 2: belittles Clark for thinking it would be fun to be a king twice

1 Page 3: makes him wear an embarrassing costume

1 Page 11: calls Clark ridiculous for wearing a Superman costume

1 Page 12: putting Clark's life on the line

SUPERMAN IS ACTUALLY NICE

1 Page 7: comfort's Lois when he thinks she's suffering from delusions and checks up on her the next day

1 Page 9: plays along to keep her from getting upset and feels sorry for her

1 Page 11: tries to comfort her that her delusion will go away with time and is happy she seems to be acting like herself

[childofaura]

Thougths on Tara Platt? Voice of Edelgard? (I love Edelgard ❤)

I think she’s pretty cool! I will say here and there, I personally (PERSONALLY, again, is the key word) think there’s range issues, but she’s a cool actress and holy fuck she did NOT deserve the abuse she got from demented Three Houses/Dimitri stans during 3H’s peak popularity. Like… yes I love Dimitri but I’m not THAT delusional that I think Tara should have been dragged through that shit.

Also, she’s not only Edelgard, she’s Miriel and Flavia! Outside of FEH, some of her well-known roles include Zero from Drakengard, Mitsuru Kirijo and Elizabeth from the Persona series, Washimi from Aggretsuko, and Temari from Naruto. And fun fact, she’s married to Yuri Lowenthal!

Ok so performance, I think she’s pretty great. Her lines as Miriel are punctual and mature, as Flavia she’s loud and confident, and as Edelgard she’s factual and cold. Though I will say that her lines as Flavia almost kind of fell into each line having the same tone for each reading, but she saved it with her lines about getting along and having your back. Her Miriel is my favorite, though.

Ok, controversy time. I think she fits Miriel and Flavia well. Edelgard… she FITS, but because of the fact that Edelgard once had a different actress, I have to say that I actually prefer Edelgard’s actress from the E3 trailer with all the beta footage. I think Tara’s voice fits as she makes Edelgard distant and closed off, but her voice deliveries come off as incredibly redundant each time. Compared to the E3 trailer (Which I WILL get wrong, I’m just trying to quote it from memory and paraphrase) “Do you dare to walk this path with me?… It’s now or never!” I actually think the other actress delivered a better performance. But still, Tara fits just fine.

Range? It’s all right, but it’s not super crazy. Part of it is that Tara’s one of actors who is type-casted, always playing some level of serious characters. But if you hear her lines as Elizabeth in Persona, she can do crazy voices, especially since out of Theodore, Margaret, and Lavenza, Elizabeth has the most emotional voice.

I think Tara’s a good 8/10. Regardless of my personal feelings on Edelgard, she’s a talented and seasoned VA.

[beesmygod]

Which blackadder character are you

i want to be as demented as queen elizabeth the first in that show

[theapprof]

Muscling Through Barriers: The A&P Student Accommodations Handbook Unveiled | TAPP 151

In Episode 151 of The A&P Professor podcast, host Kevin Patton is joined by Jennifer Stokes, Rachel Hopp, and Abbey Breckling to discuss the Anatomy and Physiology Student Accommodations Handbook. This handbook released by the Human Anatomy and Physiology Society (HAPS), provides instructors with evidence-based suggestions and best practices for making A&P labs and classrooms more inclusive and accessible for all students. Developed by a HAPS subcommittee, the handbook offers guidance on accommodating students with a wide range of needs, from physical limitations to visual or hearing impairments. The goal is to help instructors identify meaningful alternatives to standard lab protocols that promote student success. The handbook is organized by common accommodation requests and includes sections on universal design principles, making accommodations for temporary conditions, and incorporating tactile and visual aids. The HAPS committee plans to regularly update the handbook as new strategies and technologies emerge.

0:00:00 | Introduction 0:00:48 | How It Started 0:19:33 | Blue Sky's From Now On * 0:20:38 | You Don't Know You Need It Until You Do 0:32:57 | Brain Break * 0:35:36 | Opportunities for Learning 0:47:33 | Show Business * 0:51:03 | Exploring the Handbook 1:02:44 | Staying Connected

* Breaks

★ If you cannot see or activate the audio player, go to: theAPprofessor.org/podcast-episode-151.html

🏅 Apply for your credential (badge/certificate) for listening to this episode: theAPprofessor.org/podcast-episode-151.html/#badge

⭐⭐⭐⭐ Please rate & review this podcast so that others can decide whether to give it a try: RateThisPodcast.com/theAPprofessor

❓ Please take the anonymous survey: theAPprofessor.org/survey

☝️ Questions & Feedback: 1-833-LION-DEN (1-833-546-6336)

✔️ Follow The A&P Professor on Twitter, Facebook, Blogger, Substack, Tumblr, or Instagram! @theAPprofessor

📰 Get the once-or-twice-weekly TAPP Science & Education Updates theAPprofessor.org/updates

  Inclusion is not bringing people into what already exists, it is making a new space, a better space for everyone. (Rachel Olivero)

  How It Started

18.5 minutes

Discover how the Human Anatomy & Physiology Society is transforming student inclusion with its new A&P Student Accommodations Handbook! Host Kevin Patton chats with experts Jennifer Stokes, Rachel Hopp, and Abbey Breckling about creating equitable lab experiences, the power of universal design, and why this groundbreaking resource is a must for educators. Tune in to hear the inspiring journey behind this 62-page guide and how it’s reshaping A&P education.

Contributing subcommittee members:

Heather Armbruster Kathy Burleson Jim Clark Patricia Clark Molli Crenshaw Liz Dement Jennifer Ellsworth Youlonda FitzGerald Sarah Greene Barbara Heard Cheryl Hill Elizabeth Hogdson Shearer Jenna Jarvis Gracie King Jennifer Rogers Angela Stearns J.P. Swigart Diane Tice Margaret Weck

  BlueSky's From Now On

1 minute

As change shakes up the social media world, many anatomy and physiology educators are migrating to BlueSky. If you’ve left X (formerly Twitter), follow The A&P Professor on BlueSky to stay connected with the community. Follow us at bsky.app/profile/theapprofessor.org  or search for "The A&P Professor" and join us for updates, insights, and more!

  You Don't Know You Need It Until You Do

12.5 minutes

Dive into the impactful journey behind the A&P Student Accommodations Handbook! Kevin's guests discuss the immense collaboration it took—spanning dozens of experts, external reviewers, and committee members. Learn how this comprehensive guide empowers A&P instructors to meet diverse student needs with actionable strategies, universal design principles, and a forward-thinking approach to inclusivity. It’s not just a resource—it’s a living document reshaping classrooms for the better.

  Brain Break

2.5 minutes

Kevin Patton tackles the surprising science behind podcast breaks! Far from annoying, these pauses enhance learning, prevent mental fatigue, and help you absorb content in bite-sized chunks. Discover why breaks are key to re-engagement and memory consolidation, all while making your listening experience better. You’re welcome!

  Opportunities For Learning

12 minutes

Accessibility meets creativity in this lively discussion on accommodating diverse learners in A&P labs. Kevin's guests explore innovative solutions, like tactile warnings, puffy paint diagrams, and mirrored setups inspired by cooking classes. They also share the importance of teamwork with disability offices and how universal design benefits everyone in the classroom. This episode will leave you inspired to make learning more inclusive and impactful!

  Show Business

3.5 minutes

Ever wondered what show notes really are? In this break, Kevin Patton dives into the treasure trove of resources offered in The A&P Professor show notes. From time-stamped chapters and embedded players to searchable transcripts and pre-formatted citations, these notes are your ultimate episode companion. Whether you're catching up on segments or claiming professional development credentials, everything you need is just a click away at theAPprofessor.org.

  Exploring the Handbook

11.5 minutes

In this closing segment, Kevin's expert guests reflect on the incredible collaboration behind the A&P Student Accommodations Handbook. From practical tools like spring-loaded scissors and braille-labeled models to universal design strategies, this episode reveals the game-changing innovations reshaping A&P education. Whether you’re tackling temporary accommodations or looking for inclusive classroom ideas, this conversation is full of inspiration for every educator.

  Links

★ Human Anatomy & Physiology Society (home page) hapsweb.org

★ A&P Student Accommodations Handbook, Link HAPS Web Member Resources Link (you will need to login to HAPS first): hapsweb.org/page/member_resources

★ Barbara Heard (website with links to accommodation resources) bheardu.net/

★ HAPS Townhall Webinars on Accommodations (replays of past conversations) hapsweb.org/page/townhalls

★ Rachel Hopp (profile) linkedin.com/in/rachelhopp/

★ Jennifer Stokes (website) StokesLab.com

★ The A&P Professor on BlueSky Social (social media profile) bsky.app/profile/theapprofessor.org

★ Brain Breaks are Essential for Learning AandP.info/ksx

★ Top 10 Things Every Presenter Needs to Know About People: People Learn Best in 20 Minute Chunks AandP.info/2hj

★ Gimme a Break: Schedule Pauses to Improve Your Next Presentation https://aandp.info/37i

★ Follow this podcast at theAPprofessor.org/follow or wherever you listen to audio

★ ADVANCING DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION IN HIGHER EDUCATION (report on benefits of making courses inclusive) AandP.info/8879cb

★ The UDL Guidelines (handy tool for implementation of Universal Design for Learning) AandP.info/brc

★ Related episodes

The Inclusive Anatomy & Physiology Course | Part 1 | TAPP 108

The Inclusive Anatomy & Physiology Course | Part 2 | 8 More Tips to Include All | TAPP 109

  People

Production: Aileen Park (announcer),  Andrés Rodriguez (theme composer,  recording artist),  Karen Turner (Executive Editor), Kevin Patton (writer, editor, producer, host).

Not People

Robotic (AI) audio leveling/processing by Auphonic.com, initial draft transcript by Rev.com, and the content, spelling, grammar, style, etc., of these episode notes are assisted by various bots, such as ChatGPT, Grammarly, and QuillBot.

    If the hyperlinks here are not active, go to TAPPradio.org to find the episode page.

★ More details at the episode page: theAPprofessor.org/podcast-episode-151.html

★ Transcript available in the transcript box: theAPprofessor.org/podcast-episode-151.html

★ Need help accessing resources locked behind a paywall? Check out this advice from Episode 32 to get what you need! my-ap.us/paywall

Take The A&P Professor experience to the next level!

★ theAPprofessor.org/community

Earn cash by referring other A&P faculty to this podcast:

★ theAPprofessor.org/refer

Tools & Resources

★ TAPP Science & Education Updates: theAPprofessor.org/updates

Follow The A&P Professor on  Twitter, Facebook, Mastodon, Reddit, TikTok,LinkedIn, Blogger, Substack, Tumblr, or Instagram @theAPprofessor

The A&P Professor® and Lion Den® are registered trademarks of Lion Den Inc. (Kevin Patton)

Check out notes and transcript for this episode!

[guywithbotheyes]

Not enough people are sounding the alarm, that based on his behavior, and in my opinion, Donald Trump is dangerously demented. In fact, we are seeing the opposite among too many in the news media, the political leaders and among the public. There is also this focus on Biden's gaffes or other things that are well within the normal limits of aging. By comparison, Trump appears to be showing gross signs of dementia. This is a tale of two brains. Biden's brain is aging. Trump's brain is dementing.

Dr. John Gartner "The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President"

[thedreadpiratejames]

Not enough people are sounding the alarm, that based on his behavior, and in my opinion, Donald Trump is dangerously demented. In fact, we are seeing the opposite among too many in the news media, the political leaders and among the public. There is also this focus on Biden's gaffes or other things that are well within the normal limits of aging. By comparison, Trump appears to be showing gross signs of dementia. This is a tale of two brains. Biden's brain is aging. Trump's brain is dementing.

Because of a commitment to horserace journalism, fake objectivity and balance, self-interest and fear, the mainstream American news media – especially the elite agenda-setting news media – has largely ignored Donald Trump’s obvious struggles with communication and cognition.

Dr. Zoffmann shares her evidence-based preliminary conclusion that Donald Trump is displaying a range of behaviors that suggest cognitive challenges if not impairment. The former president appears to be suffering from Behavioral Variant Fronto-Temporal Dementia, Dr. Zoffmann concludes, and needs to be evaluated by neurologists who specialize in the condition.

[zack4x4]

El Hospital de los Asesinos del Presidente

Un hospital psiquiátrico para asesinos de los Presidentes EL HOSPITAL ST. ELIZABETHS EN WASHINGTON, D.C., ALBERGÓ A HOMBRES QUE DISPARARON CONTRA PRESIDENTES. Abierto en 1855 como Hospital Gubernamental para Dementes, el primer hospital psiquiátrico operado por el gobierno federal de la nación dejó su huella en la historia de varias maneras. Uno de sus legados más notables fue el tratamiento…