#K I'M DONE

[zeroducks-2]

There are some really out of place things a character has done maybe once or twice that are obviously OOC, and written by either someone who does not understand that character, or because the directors at DC central wanted a specific outcome and did not care about the process.

Bruce hitting Dick is not one of them. It is not character breaking or lore breaking or anything breaking, it's been happening since the 40s, it's in fact so consistent it kept happening even in the Silver Age which everyone considers all fun and games and nothing serious ever happened, it is not out of character.

I'm sorry it breaks the illusion that Bruce is a Tired Good Dad UwU but please get a grip and stop pretending you understand this character because by saying that Bruce would never hit his kids you have clearly not one idea what you're talking about.

[generalanachorcollective]

I'm bored

So yeah, just ask me about my sprunki Personal au cause yeah

(IDK WHAT ELSE TO PUT)

[maranull]

I'm no longer called Mara. I am now Daisy Dewdrop Fluffington.

[digiweed]

Forgot to share these on here.

[cultivating-wildflowers]

Orchid and Jasmine for the asks?

orchid ⇢ what’s a song you consider to be perfect?

"O Come, O Come Emmanuel" for sure, but for a more modern one:

jasmine ⇢ do you have a movie or book you loved but will never watch/read again?

It's a bit obscure, but during my dystopian YA phase I read the Birthmarked trilogy by Caragh M. O'Brien and I don't know why, but it really made an impression. It's set on the shores of a dried up Lake...Superior? Michigan? and the main character is a midwife (we seeing the impact part?). The first book especially was the sort of complex that appealed to me like Divergent and Uglies and Matched and all the rest didn't and to this day I still think about it.

But I'll probably never read it again.

(IIRC O'Brien pulled a love triangle on the readers and the guys were brothers. But that was, I think, near the end of the trilogy.)

[biganimal92]

if carlo was in the walking dead he would have been one of the kids carol shot in the back of the head for being annoying

[neunhofferart]

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING TO THE JURASSIC WORLD CHAOS THEORY SEASON 3 STORYBOARD ARTIST STREAM!

We had a blast getting some of the crew back together for a fun afternoon of showing off storyboards and madly sketching all the characters we love. Hope you enjoy looking through the chaos!

Finished magma studio boards + detail shots below:

Participating storyboard artists included @tio-trile, @kngstr, @natamouche-art, @dakooftacos, Natalie Ryubal, Shelby Peake, Ben Holm, Toniko Pantoja, Fernando Caire, myself, and one of our episodic directors Dan Forgione!

If you missed any parts of the stream or would just like to rewatch the VOD, you can check it out here! (And you totally should cause we show off everyone's boards all in one place and talk about em)!

[tears-of-xion]

Marinette has homework, so they are having a date via cellphone!

:D Have some Marigami for the prompt 'Separation' for day 5 of @mlbfemslashfebruary 's mlb femslash feb prompt list!

Marigami won the poll I made, so I put in extra effort to make sure I'd be able to post this drawing on their day on the prompt list. =^^=

-

Please do not use or re-post/re-upload my artwork without my permission. Thank you!   (reblogs, however, are welcome and appreciated)

I do not own Miraculous: Tales of Ladybug and Cat Noir, nor it’s characters. All rights to their owners.

[lightgamble]

DAREDEVIL: BORN AGAIN | 1.09

Hey, this is it.

[out-of-the-blue-comic]

Hope to get this next update done by the end of the month! In the meantime, here's a sneak peek of what's to come.

[maranull]

important edit:

e-he

[tothelasthoursofmylife]

Countess Cloudia Phantomhive and Victorian Inheritance Customs

With the snippet of the Phantomhive family tree now having been shown in the anime, I decided to make a little post to hopefully answer some of the questions that might come up!

Could a 19th-century English noblewoman...

... inherit her family estate? Yes, she could.

There was no law that stipulated that someone had to bequeath their possessions (estate, wealth) to a male relative. The rich and the noble wanted to protect their possessions, of course, and created wills that ensured that their estates and wealth would not fall into just anyone's hands but remained securely within their (close) family. If there was no close male relative (or none they wished to make their inheritor), it was not uncommon for people to will their possessions to a close female relative instead.

In Jane Eyre (1847), she famously inherits her paternal uncle's entire wealth of 20,000 pounds (the book is set sometime during George III's late reign, making the last possible (full) year 1819; this would make her inheritance 2,32 million pounds nowadays (she only keeps £5,000 = £580,000)) because he chose to will it to her, overlooking, i.a., a nephew simply because he once had a terrible fight with said nephew's father (his brother-in-law/his sister's husband). In The Tenant of Wildfell Hall (1848), Helen is the heiress to her uncle's fortune, not her brother (who inherited their father's estate already). Wuthering Heights' (1847) Catherine Linton (Catherine Earnshaw's daughter) was the heir of Thrushcross Grange.

Female heiresses were not restricted to fiction though:

(Women and Marriage in Nineteenth-Century England by Joan Perkin; Ch.3)

The rich and the noble had access to a private law system that was administered by the Court of Equity. This allowed noblewomen to have their own estates and incomes, albeit secured by trust funds/trustees. This system protected their inherited family wealth from their husbands even under coverture. (While single women, feme soles, could possess their own property, they would usually lose all rights to it to their husbands upon marriage because of coverture laws. The trust system prevented this.)

Marriage settlements (marriage contracts that, due to their complexity, could only be afforded by the rich) could also protect the daughters of noble and/or wealthy families as they, i.a., stipulated how much money she would receive monthly or annually (pin money), and how much money she would receive upon her husband's death.

(Courtship and Marriage in Victorian England by Jennifer Phegley; Ch. 1)

This was the best case scenario for women of the upper classes (and the wealthy middle class).

(Feminism, Marriage, and the Law in Victorian England by Mary Lyndon Shanley; Ch. 1)

Nevertheless, the rich knew how to protect their wealth, then as now. The aforementioned private laws also helped to pave the way for women of all social classes and statuses to have their own possessions.

Little excursus:

Their vast fortunes also granted certain freedoms to rich heiresses, i.a., the freedom to choose a husband as they pleased. After all, they did not have to think about "making a good match" anymore. They were themselves filthy rich already after all! The fact that their wealth was protected also kept them safer from vultures.

(Women and Marriage in Nineteenth-Century England by Joan Perkin; Ch.3)

"Love" emerged as a reason for marriage in the late 18th century and became more common and popular throughout the 19th.

(Love as Passion: The Codification of Intimacy by Niklas Luhmann; Ch. 14)

However, that never stopped matrimony from being a serious business. No matter what, many people put a lot of care and thought into deciding who to marry. After all, divorces were an expensive hassle until 1857 (previously, one needed a costly Act of Parliament to obtain a divorce, and the process of obtaining a divorce was particularly difficult for women too: between 1827 and 1857 only three divorces that were petitioned by women were granted; the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1857 established a civil divorce court and expanded the rights of women). It was easier for rich women to choose to marry for love; still, many opted to remain cautious nonetheless.

(For example, what about the children one might have within a marriage? Upon a wedded union's dissolution, women had difficulties getting custody of their own children. The Custody of Infants Act 1839 allowed women to petition for custody of their children if they were 7 or under. It took until 1873, with the Infant Custody Act, for the age to be lifted from 7 to 16. It also removed the 1839 Act's stipulation that she would not be given custody if she had committed adultery. Before 1839, the father always got full custody. Caroline Norton believed she made a "good match," only to get stuck with an abusive husband who, i.a., beat her and did not let her access their children upon their separation for years.)

... keep her surname?/give her surname to her husband? Yes, she could.

The nobility and the rich, naturally, were very attached to their surnames. After all, it was their family marker, and they were proud of their family history, may it be because they came from a long line of nobles and/or because their ancestor created the family business that gave them their wealth.

When there was no (suitable) close male heir and a female one was chosen instead, the question arose, "what of the family name?" Women often took their husbands' surname upon marriage after all; in this case, however, it might mean the "end" of their old, history-charged and/or important family name.

So, people simply decreed in their wills that, whoever their heiress married, would have to take her surname upon marriage.

Further, men who wanted to marry rich heiresses, of course, thought the wedding to be an honour and did not want to offend their powerful and wealthy in-laws. They, thus, often chose to hyphenate their surname with their wife's. (And the more important surnames you can show off, the better too!)

(Women and Marriage in Nineteenth-Century England by Joan Perkin; Ch.3)

Some examples:

Charles William Stewart took his wife's surname Vane (not even hyphenated!! it fully "replaced" his) when they got married in 1819 because Frances Vane was a rich heiress and her father stipulated in his will that her future husband had to take her surname, period.

In 1811, John Ward changed his surname to Ward-Boughton-Leigh after marrying Theodosia de Malsburgh Boughton-Leigh. "Boughton" is the maiden name of Theodosia's mother, "Leigh" her father's surname. She was the only heir to the fortunes of both her parents, so all families had to be honoured.

The marquessate of Salisbury belongs to the Gascoyne-Cecil family. Up until 1821, the family name was just Cecil. "Gascoyne" comes from Frances Gascoyne who married James Cecil; James hyphenated his surname with hers. She brought a considerable "Liverpool fortune" into the family. The Cecils were (and are!) very powerful and they still changed their surname.

Men also retroactively changed their surnames to their wives' maiden name if she suddenly received a great inheritance. (This could lead to some fun names like "Cresswell Cresswell.")

... hold a noble title in her own right? Yes, she could.

Henrietta Godolphin was the Duchess of Marlborough in her own right (suo jure) because of an act of parliament in 1706. (Her younger brother was meant to inherit the title but he died before their father and it went to her instead.) Henrietta's eldest son William became heir apparent to her dukedom (and his father's earldom, but that would only have been a "secondary" title because dukes > earls). Unfortunately, her son predeceased her, and the title went to her nephew instead.

This was not the first or last case of a woman holding a title in her own right. The Wikipedia article on suo jure lists more such cases.

Also: Vincent and Francis are full siblings! (Yana's tweet/Ducky's translation)

No matter whether Cloudia was married to Cedric or not, Vincent and Francis would never be bastards and always legitimate children in the face of the law.

*Note: Laws on women's property rights/custody/divorce/etc. changed multiple times throughout the 19th century; their effects on women also differed amongst the different social classes. As this post is about Cloudia's (possible) situation, it mostly deals with laws and such that would have applied to her as a noblewoman (late 18th to mid-19th century/1866).

A chronology on English marriage law:

(Courtship and Marriage in Victorian England by Jennifer Phegley)

[why-the-heck-not]

hell-bent on getting this one thing done by wednesday for some arbitrary reason. why? idk. but that's the deadline I've set for myself and I underestimated how much there was to do, so rn got 3-ish days of the mad scramble left (..hopefully)

[biganimal92]

this blog ain't big enough for the two of us

[itscuntingseason]

watched kpop demon hunters last night and ok am i actually losing my mind or is baby saja just supposed to be minthaired yoongi. he literally acts exactly like him and even kinda sounded like him. i'm not even an army anymore but the animators HAD to have had minthaired run era yoongi on the moodboard for his character.

[eldar-of-zemlya]

Uncropped version can be found here.