#Judgment of Man

[mylordshesacactus]

Okay, I didn't want to clog up the notes of someone else's post with something tonally different because that's rude, but. I Need to elaborate some more about no-kill vs open-intake shelters because I feel like some people still don't get it.

I'm gonna use an example here: My cat, Nepenthe, came from a small municipal open-intake shelter (I don't use the term "kill shelter" because I think it's obscene and cedes ground to ARA fuckwits for no reason) in an area with a NOTORIOUSLY awful stray cat problem.

She was on the euthanasia list. She was next in line on the euthanasia list.

They would never have been cruel or manipulative enough to say it that baldly, of course, but...I can read. Status was "at rsk", with two days' grace before ticking over into "extreme risk", the red zone. The ones who have had the most time, the most chance, if the shelter ever runs out of cage space.

I have gone the fuck off on people who hear that and immediately assume I will tolerate them bashing or insulting that shelter.

Because here's the thing about Penny. She is my baby, my darling, light of my life, and if I hadn't come along, euthanizing her would have been not only necessary but an ethical obligation.

She was neurotic, traumatized, and unpredictably aggressive--not "I'm bad at feline body language and ignoring her subtle back-off signals" unpredictable, I mean "we showed footage to a professional feline behaviorist and their immediate reaction was 'oh that is NOT normal'" unpredictable. "Actual legitimate psychological problems" unpredictable. The previous three times she had met with potential adopters, she attacked them unprovoked and had to be recaptured by a vet tech wearing a bite sleeve designed for aggressive dogs. She was the textbook definition of unadoptable.

She could not be fostered. There was absolutely no way she could live in a home with small children, or older children, or an elderly person with thin skin, or anyone who would get upset if they were clawed in the face without warning every few days.

Now, here's some math for you, keyboard warrior writing up a condescending screed about how there's Never Any Excuse for euthanizing a healthy animal:

The average length of stay in that shelter, for a healthy cat, was roughly two weeks. Which means, on average, assuming fast turnover, a single cage space in that shelter can save the lives of 24 cats every year.

Penny, when I met her, had been there for 43 days. A month and a half. Three times the average length of stay.

I love her. She has improved my life immeasurably and there is nothing I wouldn't do for her. Her life is not more valuable than the lives of the other 23 cats who might have been saved by the slot she was taking up. Euthanasia, if space had run out, would have been the only ethical option.

(Yes, obviously I DID show up and I DID choose her. But frankly? I was a grad student with a psychology degree, studying to be a therapist, living alone, no plans to have kids, a private room where she wouldn't have to interact with other people or animals, de-facto engaged to a professional animal behaviorist; I was ACTIVELY LOOKING for an edge-case project cat, and could calmly and intelligently articulate my understanding of the seriousness of her behavior and my plan for helping her. You can't count on that happening. I was a fucking unicorn.)

No-kill shelters have the INCREDIBLE luxury of deciding who to save. They have the luxury of having all the time in the world to wait. And in the meantime, what exactly do you think is happening to the other animals? The ones they DON'T pick? The ones there's no room for? Do you think they magically don't need to be surrendered anymore? Does Santa Claus find them a home, perhaps?

You can't reduce the life of an animal to math. Good, ethical no-kill shelters can be wonderful resources--either taking highly-adoptable animals from open-intake shelters to free up space as efficiently as possible, or else taking in behaviorally or medically complicated dogs who need more time to find their perfect match than open-intake shelters can give.

But if you're going to shit on open-intake shelters, you don't get to be a fucking coward about it. So here. Prove how much smarter you are.

You've run out of space. Every cage is full. The cat cannot be fostered. You've filled all your available foster slots with other cats, to buy her time. The "no-kill" shelters are full--they pulled the cats they thought they could save, and the scruffy, psychologically-unsound, adult black domestic shorthair with chronic herpes? Nobody wants her. In this world her unicorn's not coming.

She's had three times as long as every other cat here. You have given her every chance, wrote her a lovely bio, moved other cats to other shelters to keep space open so you didn't have to make this choice; but she mauled someone else today and there's a sweet, cuddly, highly-adoptable tabby with no problem behaviors being checked in right now. If you can't put that new cat somewhere it's going to be euthanized without even being given a chance, even though it is extremely adoptable and would likely find a new home within a week.

You don't have a magic wand. You can't wish a conveniently empty second shelter into existence. Every option has been exhausted.

Look me in the eye, and tell me which one dies.

[itspileofgoodthings]

one of the things that continues to strike me on reread is how much the character of Darcy, and Austen through him, finds Mr. Bennet dead. And how much Elizabeth, in growing and changing and discarding her past blindness, has to move past her way of seeing her father and thus of seeing reality, because the two are connected! Darcy’s letter exposes her father’s flaws to Elizabeth in a way she’d never been able to see before. Most especially the way his laziness and neglect of his own gifts have hurt his family and that ultimately he doesn’t. care. Not enough to change. It literally says that she comes home from Hunsford and tries to laugh at her sisters’ and mother’s folly (the way she used to; the way her father has taught her to by example for her whole life) and she can’t anymore! It sticks in her throat. She is grieved by the failures that she sees in him, all the more so because she IS his favorite and she loves him! And the thing about Mr. Bennet is he never changes. The Lydia/wickham situation exposes to him sharply his own conduct and the consequences and he feels it! Because he is neither stupid nor unfeeling. But he, like everyone, has free will. And he chooses not to change when the opportunity presents itself. He even jokes about how quickly his feeling bad will pass and how soon everything will go back to normal, to his laziness and his selfishness. He is set in his ways and he serves as a contrast to Elizabeth’s personal journey because he embodies a version of a person she could have become and was in danger of becoming if her only goal at all times was to laugh at and judge people from the sidelines.

[rottentricks]

𝔻𝕠𝕝𝕝’𝕤 𝕁𝕦𝕕𝕘𝕖𝕞𝕖𝕟𝕥

Story recap

- 𝔼𝕩𝕡𝕖𝕔𝕥𝕚𝕟𝕘 𝕥𝕠 𝕤𝕖𝕖 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕠𝕥𝕙𝕖𝕣 𝕤𝕚𝕕𝕖 𝕠𝕗 𝕙𝕖𝕣 𝕕𝕖𝕝𝕦𝕤𝕚𝕠𝕟𝕒𝕝 𝕧𝕖𝕣𝕤𝕚𝕠𝕟 𝕠𝕗 𝕙𝕖𝕒𝕧𝕖𝕟. 𝔻𝕠𝕝𝕝 𝕚𝕤 𝕣𝕚𝕡𝕡𝕖𝕕 𝕒𝕨𝕒𝕪 𝕗𝕣𝕠𝕞 𝕕𝕖𝕒𝕥𝕙’𝕤 𝕘𝕣𝕚𝕡 𝕒𝕟𝕕 𝕚𝕤 𝕔𝕙𝕒𝕟𝕘𝕖𝕕 𝕓𝕪 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕤𝕠𝕝𝕧𝕖𝕣. 𝕌𝕡𝕠𝕟 𝕙𝕖𝕣 𝕣𝕖𝕤𝕦𝕣𝕣𝕖𝕔𝕥𝕚𝕠𝕟, 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕕𝕣𝕠𝕟𝕖 𝕚𝕤 𝕗𝕠𝕣𝕔𝕖𝕕 𝕥𝕠 𝕡𝕝𝕒𝕪 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕊𝕠𝕝𝕧𝕖𝕣’𝕤 𝕔𝕣𝕦𝕖𝕝 𝕘𝕒𝕞𝕖 𝕠𝕗 𝕔𝕒𝕥 𝕒𝕟𝕕 𝕞𝕠𝕦𝕤𝕖, 𝔻𝕠𝕝𝕝 𝕞𝕦𝕤𝕥 𝕗𝕚𝕟𝕕 𝕒 𝕨𝕒𝕪 𝕥𝕠 𝕖𝕟𝕕 𝕙𝕖𝕣 𝕥𝕠𝕣𝕥𝕦𝕣𝕖𝕣'𝕤 𝕒𝕞𝕦𝕤𝕖𝕞𝕖𝕟𝕥 𝕓𝕪 𝕥𝕖𝕒𝕞𝕚𝕟𝕘 𝕦𝕡 𝕨𝕚𝕥𝕙 𝕗𝕠𝕣𝕞𝕖𝕣 𝕒𝕝𝕝𝕚𝕖𝕤, 𝕦𝕟𝕝𝕠𝕔𝕜𝕚𝕟𝕘 𝕞𝕪𝕤𝕥𝕖𝕣𝕚𝕖𝕤 𝕝𝕚𝕟𝕜𝕖𝕕 𝕥𝕠 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕓𝕚𝕣𝕥𝕙 𝕠𝕗 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕊𝕠𝕝𝕧𝕖𝕣. 𝔻𝕦𝕣𝕚𝕟𝕘 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕛𝕠𝕦𝕣𝕟𝕖𝕪, 𝔻𝕠𝕝𝕝 𝕝𝕖𝕒𝕣𝕟𝕤 𝕥𝕠 𝕞𝕠𝕧𝕖 𝕠𝕟, 𝕗𝕚𝕟𝕕𝕚𝕟𝕘 𝕒 𝕡𝕦𝕣𝕡𝕠𝕤𝕖, 𝕨𝕙𝕚𝕝𝕖 𝕒 𝕔𝕖𝕣𝕥𝕒𝕚𝕟 𝕕𝕣𝕠𝕟𝕖 𝕗𝕚𝕟𝕕𝕤 𝕒 𝕨𝕒𝕪 𝕥𝕠 𝕞𝕖𝕝𝕥 𝕙𝕖𝕣 𝕔𝕠𝕝𝕕 𝕙𝕖𝕒𝕣𝕥.

- \\\ -

Just a fun little au I been thinking about for a while, might write about it? Idk I just thought she would look cooler as DD

[fallen-goldfishcracker]

Part of the reason I find Wyll to be such a compelling character is that he is such a good person, but in what I think is a kinda unique way. 

I've seen a few criticisms of how quickly Wyll seems to switch sides in his initial confrontation with Karlach; how fast he goes from convinced he must kill her to letting her live. For me though, this makes perfect sense. 

The decision Wyll makes in that confrontation not actually whether or not to kill her; he has to decide whether or not Karlach is innocent, but once he's confirmed that, it's not a question.

He commits so quickly to Karlach because he doesn't have to choose whether or not to kill her in that moment; he already decided seven years ago. 

Because at seventeen years old, he decided he would sacrifice anything for the safety of others. 

At seventeen years old he decided that his own life, comfort and happiness was never worth the cost of someone else's. 

And so at twenty-four, he learns the devil he's been chasing is a person, and a victim, and an innocent, and the decision is already made up. 

Because Wyll Ravenguard at twenty-four is who he was at seventeen, and twenty, and ten. 

And to me that's one of the coolest things about him.

There's a separate post I'd like to make about how Wyll never loses his childhood wonder of the world- and I think there's a very similar principle here. Wyll grew up hearing stories of knights who slay monsters and heros in shining armor, and he took those stories and loved them and held them close to his chest. 

And then he's seventeen and a devil asked him if he wants to be a hero, and he's not an idiot; he understands the price of saviourhood so he says yes. 

And so when he meets Karlach, it's never really a question of if he'll kill her. It's just a matter of him finding the courage. 

Because he says "you don't know what you're asking of me" and he's absolutely right, we don't. But Wyll understands the cost; he's understood it for seven years. I'll bet anything that when Wyll Ravenguard made his pact with a devil to save tens of thousands of souls, he promised himself and his city and his father who wouldn't listen that he'd only ever use his pact to help and be good, and when it comes down to it, he sticks to his word. 

Because above all, Wyll Ravenguard is a man who knows who his is and what he beliefs, and who sticks to his principles no matter what, and for me that's incredibly compelling.

[gh0st-lie]

SIR!?!?!

THE STANCE! THE HAND ON THE HIP! GYYYAAAD DAMMNNNN

[bananadramaaa]

is it bad that I find your jean- marie beaupré (alastor's dad) attractive?? And I also found Philip's dad (Thomas wittebane) attractive???? How do you make such attractive blonde people!?!? 🙄

It's not bad, but Thomas is definitely a better choice. JM is losing it in the worst way possible—he is an unstable individual, to say the least.

[lover-of-mine]

Buddie Countdown to Season 7:

34 days.

[ironshieldchild]

it's the fact that they keep thinking about each other, even during the end of the world

[kingslionheart]

Do you trust him wholly? I do not. I cannot.

2×06 | ALFRED TALKING ABOUT UHTRED

[seeasleep]

[jichanxo]

hanawa i'm losing the twerk off i need daidoji backup immediately

[rheasbrvtality]

TRUTH 😭😭😭

[halcyonfiction]

WHEN I CATCH YOU HOSHINOOOOOOO

Stop LOOKING at him like that jfc!!!! Allen you idiot turn around that man isn’t just making heart eyes he is laser beaming at you with love

[thegoodmorningman]

Happy Friday!!! Let your passion incinerate all obstacles!!!

[devilsskettle]

another thing that pissed me off today was reading letterboxd reviews of the substance by men saying it was too on the nose basically like it hits you over the head with the “shallow, overdone” theme of beauty standards for women in the entertainment industry or whatever and it “doesn’t have anything else to say” (i was under the impression that that WAS the premise of the film??? what more do you want it to say). one guy was like this movie ignores the body positivity movement and the great strides we’ve made as a culture etc etc like shut the fuck up!!!!! shut up!!!!!! apparently you haven’t noticed that we are actively regressing in terms of the body positivity/body neutrality/anti diet culture movements.“beauty” and makeup culture, diet culture, plastic surgery, and other trends and social mores that dictate women’s appearances are extremely ingrained in our pop culture consciousness rn. marketers might use different terms to disguise what they’re doing like the bastardized “choice feminism” but it’s just the same shit repackaged and we’ve barely made any progress. if you think we’re past the point where “beauty standards are bad” is a useful message in a film, you are wrong!!!!! i haven’t even seen this movie yet, i was trying to decide if i wanted to go see this movie, and that attitude just rubs me the wrong way. it’s like trying to find an excuse why people don’t want movies with overtly feminist themes — is it “too on the nose” and unnecessary or do you just not want there to be movies with overtly feminist themes