#OP cited
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
Note
Regret to inform you lotion spider post is probably fake, in the notes there are People pointing out the same reviewer has been periodically posting the exact same review over and over
I am devastated, nobody talk to me unless you can make spider lotion real
Spiders if you’re reading this you have a huge opportunity to commit to the bit here
#were the chemicals cited real#did op target this for some reason#or is everything real except for the part where it doesn’t actually attract spiders#now I need to investigate#spiders#insects#spider lotion saga#science fun
2K notes
·
View notes
Text
i’m not asking for anyone’s forgiveness, only their understanding that people can— and do— grow and change and learn
no matter how old you are, in 10 years time you will not be the same person you were, and both you and the world around you will change (hopefully for the better!)
some things never really leave us or even get rekindled later on, like my love for gravity falls and how it inspires me to create (just like any media i enjoy), but the fandom and even the source content for gravity falls is VERY different now compared to 10 years ago! so are my opinions on certain ships.
i’m not going to “leave the fandom” because a stranger on the internet told me to. please just block me if you don’t like seeing my stuff. problem solved! you don’t have to see me and i don’t have to see you.
#also tell twitter i say hi op#some nasty stuff being said about me on there#i will keep protecting my peace when and where i can#but you can pry that old man and his triangle demon situationship from my cold dead hands#do not cite the deep magic to me witch#i was there when it was written
897 notes
·
View notes
Text
When you ask someone for evidence and they respond “i dont need to have a doctorate to have common sense,” you know youre talking to an idiot.
#actually smart people cite their sources#like they taught in history class#proship#proshippers are valid#proshippers interact#op is a proshipper#anti anti
138 notes
·
View notes
Text
#critical role#cr spoilers#op#c3#c3e108#cr memes#gloamglut#once in a while I must cite the ancient texts
47 notes
·
View notes
Text
/softly but with great feeling
The whites fucked up my Miku
#Automatic OP tag#White americans drawing Miku du liban using HINDI AND CHINESE ICONOGRAPHY#Because they cited the costume of a L/banese FUSION dance troupe#And then they exaggerated the outfit in a specifically racist way
16 notes
·
View notes
Note
Do you have headcanon/ideas about cobalt/ceruleans as a class that you think hiveswap gets wrong?
you know, it may surprise you, but i actually don't have many.
i actually really like all the ceruleans in hiveswap. none of them are insanely interesting or anything, and obviously none of them cold even come close to holding a candle to vriska-- but who could, really? vriska is supposed to be a stand-out character. it makes total sense that other ceruleans would seem boring in comparison.
i like that most of them are just conniving bitches. that's about what i would expect from the blue-blooded caste. in fact, i wish more of the indigos were like that-- it's weird to me that the indigos seem so carefree and less cutthroat. maybe wealth will do that to you. but it's not as if they're seadwellers...
i think my one note would be that i hate this remark mallek makes in his route where he basically acts like a little pissbaby and tries to claim that ceruleans have it really hard compared to indigos.
yeah of course indigos have it better than ceruleans-- they are on the rung above them. but ceruleans are not "barely blue". ceruleans ARE blue. ceruleans are bluebloods. they are well off little fuckers and it's so strange that hiveswap acts like bluebloods need to scrounge to get by... because they don't.
i mean, casual reminder that vriska lived in a fucking castle. one that was nearly equal to her neighbor equius next because they're both... bluebloods.
however did you know there's a caste that IS on the edge of blueness? who has to work hard in their field to be respected and treated well? because, while they are technically blueish, they sit on the line of it and will get a side eye about it?
that's right, tealbloods. i mean teal is literally the fucking intersection between green and blue anyway so you'd think that would be more obvious.
as you can see in this quote terezi gets grouped in with bluebloods frequently because she counts as one (perhaps especially in the POV of rusts like aradia). aradia even has to clarify that she means no offense to terezi specifically when she calls bluebloods "hateful snobs".
you can also see here that terezi literally uses blueblood slang and is mocked somewhat for that. this is because she does, again, technically count as a blueblood.
so yeah that's my one issue with the hiveswap ceruleans. it's weird that they try to go with the "ceruleans have it really hard within the blueblood group" when there was already a setup for that with tealbloods in homestuck proper. it just sort of makes it sound like mallek is a whiny little bitch lol.
making the eye mutations thing common is also a little silly to me personally, (yet another case of using the personality traits of the betas to account for the entire caste), but it's cute so whatever.
other than that though i'm a big fan of them, they're a really fun amount of awful when they aren't boring.
#'i don't have any issue with the hiveswap ceruleans' (proceeds to write an essay)#this could have been like 1 sentence... sorry everyone i just love citing my sources too much when i make points :(#hsmeta#op#hiveswap#bluebloods#alternia
33 notes
·
View notes
Text
things the US needs to address:
the collective psychosis that leads people to make posts like these
#in case it's unclear what i mean:#1.) blaming gen z men or any of the listed grifters is useless idpol#2.) half of your country did not 'vote against [your] collective best interests' lmao#if you truly believe that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the position your country occupies in the global economy#and the benefits conferred onto its citizens for supporting the imperial world order#3.) i feel like OP kept this point purposefully vague (ofc social media has on effect on the common good. what effect specifically?)#but i'll still respond by saying#social media has helped immensely in exposing how often traditional news outlets lie retract revise and outright fabricate information#the more aligned with bourgeois interests they are the worse it is#the past year of western media's reporting on the genocide in palestine has done nothing if not highlight the incongruence#between what people see n share on the ground and what narratives corporate interests deem fit to disseminate through traditional channels#the importance of following independent (which does not equal 'unbiased') journalists has never been greater#4.) 'lazy minds and lack of empathy' empathy is not some bulwark against fascism. it can actually serve to further it quite easily#idk what OP is trying to get at here. lazy point = lazy response#5.) i can't say anything here that isn't summed up better by that tweet that's like#'american *sees something american happening americanly in america*: what are we a bunch of ASIANS?!?!???'#cause there's just nooo way politicians and public figures in the US could spew reactionary nonsense and get a huge following#unless the evil russians had a hand in it#cause it's not like the US is racism central or anything#come on now#(for those unaware i'm citing this tweet bc orientalism of this kind has historically been directed at russians/slavs in addition to#people from MENA and asian countries broadly)#6.) see point number 3 above; trying to police AI is a fruitless endeavor; people need media literacy in order to#understand the interests of the parties involved in the coverage of any event and better discern the truth about what's happening;#identifying the bias inherent to any news channel and then examining how that bias impacts its reporting does far more to help dispel#misinformation than just labeling anything you don't like or you think influences people the 'wrong' way as misinformation#anyway i'm done. clown.#sansgwilie
9 notes
·
View notes
Text
I wrote a reply to this post but OP has deleted it and even though I should probably leave well enough alone, it got to me that I could have sworn I saw this post months ago and then realized it was actually from yesterday. This is a long reply so I'm putting it under a cut, but after I went to OP's blog and saw a post from them complaining how mean everyone was to them on this post, I replied to say I'm sorry if they got any anon hate I don't know about but otherwise none of the comments on this post were mean or hateful, they just disagreed with OP. I pointed out that this is partly because they cited non-canon events as canon, and OP immediately blocked me (this may be why I can't reblog the post even from another user, though that's not how tumblr usually works so who knows). I can't help but feel that OP's post was made in bad faith, as a result, and I've seen enough people on this hellsite who are more interested in protecting their egos than admit when they could have been approached something more thoughtfully, so I'm diving in. If you're going to say a character "is very interesting to study" while doing the exact opposite, then you'd better have the critical analysis skills and textual evidence to back it up.
I think OP has some misconceptions that are frustratingly common, and seem to stem from people not having read the books, or not read them for a long time, and conflating the movies with canon. While I mostly agree with the replies above, I want to take this opportunity to cite the text to refute some of OP's points. I often forget details from the text, but I choose to either look them up before asserting unconfirmed points as fact (Potter Search is a great tool, or you can just do a ctrl+F search if you have the books digitally), or else I usually state clearly that I'm not sure if I remember something correctly and don't have the spoons to look it up.
I saw OP say in the comments in response to someone arguing their points:
"that's your interpretation, I have mine, I think both can coexist within the material we are given."
It doesn't sit right with me that so many people think that referring to their subjective memory of what the text meant to them is the same as actually citing it and offering an explanation. OP's interpretation can't exist within the material given, because some of it doesn't exist in the material at all, and you can't interpret what isn't there. OP is essentially claiming to have done critical analysis, and although no one is required to always critique a text analytically on a tumblr post, I find it upsetting when people claim to do so while failing to cite a single source to support their argument. To me it sounds like someone trying to pass off a creative writing essay as an academic research paper, and in an age of rampant propaganda and knee-jerk reblogs that eschew critical thinking, I feel an almost compulsive need to go through OP's reply and argue it with the textual evidence they conveniently avoided, if for no other reason than to show why it's important to discern between loosely formed opinions and informed ones.
I also want to explain why I don't accept the films as canon, because while I do think that canon can exist across several mediums (such as with Good Omens, in which at least one of the writers of the text is directly involved in writing the TV series), I don't think that applies to Harry Potter because the original author was only marginally involved in the films, in only a consultant role, and had little input on the writing. The HP films are an interpretation as written from the perspective of Steve Kloves, except for OoTP, which was written by Michael Goldenberg. I've gone into it on other posts, but suffice to say these interpretations did not prioritize story and character development and were often influenced by pressure from the studio to prioritize marketing opportunities over storytelling. Important elements like foreshadowing and themes were not carried over from the text to the screen. These changes affected the storytelling significantly and left out crucial elements. This, combined with the films having been written with little to no involvement from the original author, is why I feel the films can't be taken as canon. This doesn't mean they can't be enjoyed by any means, just that they scenes that appear in the films but not in the text, or are presented differently on screen than in the text, are not a reasonable basis for character analysis.
And now, on to OP's ask:
"I think he is a very good representation of a man who felt insecure in his manhood; his male ego was permanently wounded by James' bullying and he decided to make it everyone else's problem by being the most insufferable teacher at Hogwarts."
The first thing we have to establish is that the books are told from Harry's perspective, so we have to take narrative bias into account. Calling Snape "the most insufferable teacher at Hogwarts" is a subjective statement and I can only assume it's based in Harry's biased perspective as narrator, given that he and Snape have a bad relationship from the outset. I have a brief analysis here about how Snape dislikes Harry because in their first class together he interprets Harry's ignorance of the course material as a lack of curiosity and appreciation for his gifts as a wizard, while also recognizing something of his own experiences with childhood poverty and abuse in Harry. Harry, being ignorant of these factors, just feels singled out for hate by a strict teacher, and their relationship deteriorates throughout the rest of the series, until the end of the final book.
To pull back from the narrative bias, let's look at some of the other teachers are Hogwarts:
McGonagall:
“Miss Granger, you foolish girl, how could you think of tackling a mountain troll on your own?” Hermione hung her head. Harry was speechless. Hermione was the last person to do anything against the rules, and here she was, pretending she had, to get them out of trouble. It was as if Snape had started handing out sweets. “Miss Granger, five points will be taken from Gryffindor for this,” said Professor McGonagall. “I’m very disappointed in you. If you’re not hurt at all, you’d better get off to Gryffindor Tower. Students are finishing the feast in their Houses.”
Philosopher's Stone, Ch. 10.
“I’m disgusted,” said Professor McGonagall. “Four students out of bed in one night! I’ve never heard of such a thing before! You, Miss Granger, I thought you had more sense. As for you, Mr. Potter, I thought Gryffindor meant more to you than this. All three of you will receive detentions — yes, you too, Mr. Longbottom, nothing gives you the right to walk around school at night, especially these days, it’s very dangerous — and fifty points will be taken from Gryffindor.” “Fifty?” Harry gasped — they would lose the lead, the lead he’d won in the last Quidditch match. “Fifty points each,” said Professor McGonagall, breathing heavily through her long, pointed nose.
Philosopher's Stone, Ch. 15
In just the first book we see McGonagall punish Hermione for successfully defending herself against a troll and take house points, then sends her back to her common room without getting medical attention, as if a ten year old can be responsible for assessing how badly they're hurt. A few chapters later McGonagall takes several hundred points from students in her own house (more than we see any other teacher do at one time throughout the series), and assigns the students detention on top of it. As we later see in the same chapter, the detentions aren't even served with her directly, but instead the children - again, ten years old - are sent into the Forbidden Forest at night with only Hagrid to protect them, to hunt down whatever creature is vicious and cunning enough to kill unicorns.
Although it's said that Snape favors the students in his own house, he doesn't seem to be the only one:
“Potter's been sent a broomstick, Professor,” said Malfoy quickly. “Yes, yes, that’s right,” said Professor Flitwick, beaming at Harry. “Professor McGonagall told me all about the special circumstances, Potter. And what model is it?” “A Nimbus Two Thousand, sir,” said Harry, fighting not to laugh at the look of horror on Malfoy’s face. “And it’s really thanks to Malfoy here that I’ve got it,” he added.
Philosopher's Stone, Ch. 10
Not only did McGonagall make an exception to school practices and allow Harry on his house Quidditch team despite being a first year, she used either school funds or her own (unclear) to purchase a first-rate broom for him. We know the school has brooms, as first years are not allowed their own and they are provided for flying lessons, and because “Harry had heard Fred and George Weasley complain about the school brooms” (PS ch. 9). And yet, McGonagall ensures Harry has his own broom, and an expensive one, new enough to be the show model in a shop window in Diagon Alley a few months earlier:
“Several boys of about Harry’s age had their noses pressed against a window with broomsticks in it. ‘Look,’ Harry heard one of them say, ‘the new Nimbus Two Thousand - fastest ever -”
-Philosopher's Stone, Ch. 5
If we're discussing which teachers are Hogwarts are the most "insufferable" then we also have to talk about Hagrid, who might mean well and be affectionate, but is also irresponsible and dangerous.
In Philosopher's Stone, Hagrid:
Punishes Dudley, a child, for his parents' offenses, the final straw being his father insulting Dumbledore (Ch. 4). While Hagrid acknowledges that he shouldn't have lost his temper, he also admits that his intention had been to turn Dudley fully into a pig.
Hatches a dragon in his cabin (Ch. 14), tries to raise it illegally and against the animal's need of care, and Harry, Ron, and Hermione (again, ten year olds) have to fix the situation and get Ron's brother to find some friends to take the dragon away safely and prevent Hagrid losing his job (Ch. 14). In the process Hagrid endangers himself as well as the children, and it's because of this that McGonagall gives them detention and deducts hundreds of house points. Hagrid not only allows the children to endanger themselves for his sake, but to be punished and subsequently ostracized by their peers also for his sake.
The reason he even has a dragon is, as we find out in Ch. 16, because he was foolish enough to accept it from a faceless stranger in exchange for unwittingly divulging the secret to getting past the three headed dog guarding the Philosopher's Stone (and the stranger later turns out to be Quirrel/Voldemort).
In Prisoner of Azkaban, Hagrid:
Starts his first lesson with a volatile creature (Ch. 6) and, although Malfoy acted irresponsibly, Hagrid was nevertheless the teacher and responsible for providing course material consistent with the experience level and maturity of his students' age.
Gets drunk and has to be taken care of by Harry, Ron, and Hermione (again, children) (Ch. 6)
Skipping ahead to Order of the Phoenix ch. 30, we find out Hagrid
Compromised his return from the mission Dumbledore sent him on by bringing a giant back to England.
Brought said giant into the school grounds and left him in the Forbidden Forest.
Asks Harry and Hermione (still children) to look after him if Hagrid is sacked.
Although Hagrid means well, his actions are consistently thoughtless and irresponsible, requiring those around him - often Harry, Ron, and Hermione - to fix the damage he causes. Although I think it remains subjective which teacher at Hogwarts is the "most insufferable" I think Hagrid is a strong enough candidate to qualify OP's interpretation of Snape holding that title as extremely contestable. Of course, since the books are presented through the lens of Harry's narrative bias, and he's fond of Hagrid, respects McGonagall, and dislikes Snape, an uncritical reading could lead one to OP's conclusions. However, a more objective analysis of the text shows that many teachers at Hogwarts are strict, punitive, biased, and wreak havoc on students in ways that make the Snape's actions look fairly tame, or at least the norm. And this is excluding an analysis of various DADA professors like Lockhart and Crouch/Moody, who were insufferable in their own rights (Lockhart was smarmy and dishonest to the point it risked students' lives; Crouch/Moodly transfigured a child into a ferret and humiliated him with torture as a disciplinary measure and deliberately triggered Neville's trauma in class).
OP continues their reply to say:
Add to this that he is a halfblood and only his mother was around, iirc?
They don't recall correctly. Snape, whose father was a muggle and whose mother was a witch, was indeed a half-blood (as is evidenced by him being revealed to be the Half-Blood Prince - I assume I don't need to cite a source as this is a pretty well-known fact and the literal title of an entire HP book, but should you need a reference it's in Ch. 28 of HBP). Both his parents were around in his childhood:
Snape staggered - his wand flew upwards, away from Harry - and suddenly Harry’s mind was teeming with memories that were not his: a hook-nosed man was shouting at a cowering woman, while a small dark-haired boy cried in a corner …
-Order of the Phoenix, Ch. 26
‘How are things at your house?’ Lily asked. A little crease appeared between his eyes. ‘Fine,’ he said. ‘They’re not arguing any more?’ ‘Oh, yes, they’re arguing,’ said Snape. He picked up a fistful of leaves and began tearing them apart, apparently unaware of what he was doing. ‘But it won’t be that long and I’ll be gone.’ ‘Doesn’t your dad like magic?’ ‘He doesn’t like anything, much,’ said Snape.
-Deathly Hallows, Ch. 33
We know that Snape's father was around because he's mentioned both in Snape's memories in OoTP that Harry accidentally invades during an Occlumency lesson, and when we see in Snape's memories that he gives Harry as he dies. Lily asks about his home life by referring to both his parents, implying that his dad is a consistent presence at home. We also know from JK Rowling that Snape's father "didn't hold back when it came to the whip" but this is supplementary and not mentioned in canon, so I don't expect anyone to refer to it when analyzing the text, I'm just adding it as bonus material.
Continuing on with OP's reply:
Snape, Voldemort and Harry all act like foils of each other in that sense, but whereas Voldemort fixated on his blood status as the main reason for his insecurities, Snape fixated on Lily.
So much to unpack here. Firstly, all of this should be backed up by examples from the text, as they are subjective readings that have significant bearing on character analysis.
Snape, Harry, and Voldemort don't act like foils of each other. For one thing, a character doesn't act like a foil, a character either is or isn't one. That being said, I don't know OP's background and there could be a language barrier because English isn't everyone's first language, I'm just being pedantic. Even with that in mind, the statement remains incorrect. A foil is a literary device - a character who contrasts with another character, often with the protagonist. It is not a choice a character makes or an action they take.
In Philosopher's Stone Snape is set up as a foil to Harry in order to misdirect the reader from suspecting the real villain, Quirrel/Voldemort. Snape is presented as secretive, sneaky, and nefarious, contrasting Harry's role as a protagonist who is outspoken, honest, and brave. As the series progresses, Snape, along with Voldemort, are eventually shown to have more parallels than contrasts with Harry. Snape and Voldemort were born into muggle poverty, and although Harry was raised in a middle class home by the Dursleys, they thrust poverty and neglect onto him in a way that parallels his childhood of neglect and want with that of Snape and Voldemort. Snape's father was abusive, as was Harry's guardian, Vernon Dursley. Harry, Voldemort, and Snape all had traumatic experiences growing up in muggle environments. If anything, Snape and Voldemort might be foils to Harry in that they both harbored resentment for their muggle fathers in ways that signified the separation between the wizarding and muggle world, while Harry's experiences with the Dursleys didn't color his image of muggles in a comparable way.
The contrast between Harry, Snape, and Voldemort is in the way each of them deals with their trauma. As Dumbledore says:
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities."
-Chamber of Secrets, Ch. 18
This becomes one of the overarching themes of the HP series, Harry, Snape, and Voldemort are all examples of how their choices took them to such different places in life from their comparable childhoods.
At school Voldemort was a handsome boy with talent, intelligence, and the recommendations of his teachers, but he chose to pursue power instead of success:
“He reached the seventh year of his schooling with, as you might have expected, top grades in every examination he had taken. All around him, his classmates were deciding which jobs they were to pursue once they had left Hogwarts. Nearly everybody expected spectacular things from Tom Riddle, prefect, Head Boy, winner of the Special Award for Services to the School. I know that several teachers, Professor Slughorn amongst them, suggested that he join the Ministry of Magic, offered to set up appointments, put him in touch with useful contacts. He refused all offers. The next thing the staff knew, Voldemort was working at Borgin and Burkes.”
Half-Blood Prince, Ch. 20
Snape chose to become a Death Eater for reasons we can only assume. We know he was in Slytherin during an era when Voldemort was in power and many of his allies had children in Slytherin house. At least two of Snape's dorm-mates, Mulciber and Avery, are canonically acknowledged to have become Death Eaters (both are present at the Ministry when Harry and his friends fight the Death Eaters in the Department of Mysteries in OoTP Ch. 35). It's unclear whether Snape chose to become a Death Eater out of admiration for them or out of peer pressure, or perhaps a lack of other options, while at school:
'… thought we were supposed to be friends?’ Snape was saying. ‘Best friends?’ ‘We are, Sev, but I don’t like some of the people you’re hanging around with! I’m sorry, but I detest Avery and Mulciber! Mulciber! What do you see in him, Sev? He’s creepy! D’you know what he tried to do to Mary Macdonald the other day?’ Lily had reached a pillar and leaned against it, looking up into the thin, sallow face. ‘That was nothing,’ said Snape. ‘It was a laugh, that’s all -‘ ‘It was Dark Magic, and if you think that’s funny -‘ ‘What about the stuff Potter and his mates get up to?’ demanded Snape. His colour rose again as he said it, unable, it seemed, to hold in his resentment.
-Deathly Hallows, Ch. 33
It's unclear what Snape thinks of Avery and Mulciber, as his reply to Lily is downplaying but doesn't defend their actions. We see Snape's indecisiveness later in the argument he has with Lily after he calls her a Mudblood:
'It’s too late. I’ve made excuses for you for years. None of my friends can understand why I even talk to you. You and your precious little Death Eater friends - you see, you don’t even deny it! You don’t even deny that’s what you’re all aiming to be! You can’t wait to join You-Know-Who, can you?’ He opened his mouth, but closed it without speaking. ‘I can’t pretend any more. You’ve chosen your way, I’ve chosen mine.’ ‘No - listen, I didn’t mean -‘ ‘- to call me Mudblood? But you call everyone of my birth Mudblood, Severus. Why should I be any different?'
-Deathly Hallows, Ch. 33
Although Snape does ultimately choose to become a Death Eater, we see in his reply to Lily about both Avery and Mulciber and later her assumption that they all want to become Death Eaters that Snape doesn't argue for or against her accusations, but instead is evasive and unsure of himself. He opens his mouth to speak when she accuses him of wanting to become a Death Eater, but then closes it again without saying anything - he can neither argue against her point, nor state clearly, let alone with any kind of conviction, that this is indeed his ambition. It can be argued that it's the passivity of his choice that lands him with a Dark Mark on his arm, and it's the active choice he makes to risk his life in order to defect from Voldemort's ranks and turn spy that defines his character and without which Harry could not have defeated Voldemort.
Harry, as the protagonist, is also significantly defined by the theme of choice:
'But, sir,’ said Harry, making valiant efforts not to sound argumentative, ‘it all comes to the same thing, doesn’t it? I’ve got to try and kill him, or -‘ ‘Got to?’ said Dumbledore. ‘Of course you’ve got to! But not because of the prophecy! Because you, yourself, will never rest until you’ve tried! We both know it! Imagine, please, just for a moment, that you had never heard that prophecy! How would you feel about Voldemort now? Think!’ Harry watched Dumbledore striding up and down in front of him, and thought. He thought of his mother, his father and Sirius. He thought of Cedric Diggory. He thought of all the terrible deeds he knew Lord Voldemort had done. A flame seemed to leap inside his chest, searing his throat. ‘I’d want him finished,’ said Harry quietly. ‘And I’d want to do it.’ ‘Of course you would!’ cried Dumbledore. ‘You see, the prophecy does not mean you have to do anything! But the prophecy caused Lord Voldemort to mark you as his equal … in other words, you are free to choose your way, quite free to turn your back on the prophecy! But Voldemort continues to set store by the prophecy. He will continue to hunt you … which makes it certain, really, that -' ‘That one of us is going to end up killing the other,’ said Harry. ‘Yes.'
-Half-Blood Prince, Ch. 33
There's a clear point made by the author through Dumbledore as her proxy here, that choice is what matters, not fate. It's Harry's choices that make him the person he is and lead him to eventually defeat Voldemort. While Snape, Voldemort, and Harry all can be contrasted through the lens of their choices, this does not make them foils, as it is the the theme of choice and how it is exemplified by each character that makes them unique, but their experiences and many of their character traits (boldness, bravery, a personal sense of conviction) that make them parallels of one another. Each of them occupies their own place on the spectrum between the light and dark that the series establishes, Voldemort at the dark end, Harry at the light, and Snape in the grey area between them.
OP goes on to say:
His character is all about male entitlement, he was obsessed with her at Hogwarts and then showed to have no boundaries as he went into her house to cradle her dead body in front of her traumatized kid.
There's a lot to unpack here, and it's particularly challenging because you can't provide textual evidence for something that didn't happen in the text. After the above scene from Ch. 33 of DH in which Lily ends her friendship with Snape, we never see them interact again:
'No - listen, I didn’t mean -‘ ‘- to call me Mudblood? But you call everyone of my birth Mudblood, Severus. Why should I be any different?’ He struggled on the verge of speech, but with a contemptuous look she turned and climbed back through the portrait hole … The corridor dissolved, and the scene took a little longer to reform: Harry seemed to fly through shifting shapes and colours until his surroundings solidified again and he stood on a hilltop, forlorn and cold in the darkness, the wind whistling through the branches of a few leafless trees. The adult Snape was panting, turning on the spot, his wand gripped tightly in his hand, waiting for something or for someone …'
-Deathly Hallows, Ch. 33
The scene in the corridor in front of Gryffindor Tower between a fifth year Snape and Lily leads directly into the scene where Snape begs Dumbledore to protect the Potters (which I wrote an analysis of a few months ago but is too long a subject to derail this post for). We see no more interactions between Snape and Lily, and therefore there is no canonical support for the idea that Snape behaved obsessively or failed to respect her boundaries.
There's also no mention of Snape going to Godric's Hollow at all after her death. Snape holding Lily's dead body is only shown in the film version of Deathly Hallows, and as mentioned, the films are not canon. That moment doesn't exist in the text and can't be considered in an analysis of Snape's character. The scene on the hilltop leads directly into the scene of Snape crying in Dumbledore's office:
The hilltop faded, and Harry stood in Dumbledore’s office, and something was making a terrible sound, like a wounded animal. Snape was slumped forwards in a chair and Dumbledore was standing over him, looking grim. After a moment or two, Snape raised his face, and he looked like a man who had lived a hundred years of misery since leaving the wild hilltop. ‘I thought … you were going … to keep her … safe …’ ‘She and James put their faith in the wrong person,’ said Dumbledore. ‘Rather like you, Severus. Weren’t you hoping that Lord Voldemort would spare her?’ Snape’s breathing was shallow.
-Deathly Hallows, Ch. 33
This is the only depiction of Snape immediately following the Potters' deaths. The scene of him cradling Lily's dead body was Steve Kloves' invention and has no basis in canon. If anything, Snape's actions in canon can be interpreted to show that he respected the boundaries Lily set, and that even when her life was at risk he chose to go to Dumbledore - who he thought might kill him on sight - rather than talk to her directly after she ended their friendship. In addition, in all the information the text gives about the night Voldemort fell in Godric's Hollow and Hagrid collected Harry to take him to Privet Drive, there's no mention of Snape whatsoever.
There isn't much in the text to support the interpretation that Snape exemplified male entitlement either. So far we've seen him being as strict, if not milder, than other teachers at the school, his favoritism is also comparable to that of other teachers - implying it's more of a norm than an example of entitlement - and there are no canonical examples to support the argument that he was obsessed with Lily or violated her boundaries. Snape struggles to argue with Lily when she accuses and berates him, and the usual markers of patriarchal entitlement - silencing women, gaslighting, dismissing women's opinions, talking over them - are all nowhere to be found in any of their interactions. The only time we see him lash out at Lily is when he calls her Mudblood (OoTP Ch. 28) which, while inexcusable, he does under traumatic duress, and is not indicative of his usual interactions with her, as exemplified by the fact that she ends their friendship over it. As cited before:
'No - listen, I didn’t mean -‘ ‘- to call me Mudblood? But you call everyone of my birth Mudblood, Severus. Why should I be any different?’
There's a clear implication that Snape has never called her this before. An argument can also be made that it speaks volumes of Lily's own biases, or perhaps her own affection for Snape (who, not long before this, was still her best friend), that she excused this behavior from him when it was directed at others, and only took issue with it when it was directed at herself. That, combined with Lily's own acknowledgment that they were "best friends" shows that Snape's relationship with her was a balanced, consensual one even when it became strained, up until their friendship ended.
Continuing with OP's points:
He only saw Lily as a trophy to be possessed, which you can see from the way he hated Harry, because Harry reminded him Lily wasn't his and that Lily had sex with another man.
There's no support for this in the text anywhere and is pure conjecture. I can appreciate it being OP's headcanon, but it's certainly not a result of studying the text and relying on it to form opinions, but rather seems to be OP projecting pre-conceived notions onto Snape as a character and trying to find justification for it. I've written a whole post extrapolating Snape's first class with Harry, but the tl;dr is that Snape, who grew up in muggle poverty and knew Aunt Petunia enough to guess that Harry didn't fare well in her care when he showed up at school bearing signs of neglect, likely expected Harry to have the same hunger for learning that he himself did at Harry's age. Instead, Harry couldn't answer a single one of his questions and showed no curiosity or enthusiasm towards being a wizard as far as Snape could tell.
Nevertheless, even though Snape did seem to dislike Harry, hate is an awful strong word given that it is revealed at the end of Deathly Hallows that Snape has risked his own life to protect him. This isn't particularly surprising when you consider that this goal was established as early as Philosopher's Stone, when Snape protected him, which Harry initially interpreted as Snape trying to kill him:
Harry couldn’t take it in. This couldn’t be true, it couldn’t. ‘But Snape tried to kill me!’ ‘No, no, no. I tried to kill you. Your friend Miss Granger accidentally knocked me over as she rushed to set fire to Snape at that Quidditch match. She broke my eye contact with you. Another few seconds and I’d have got you off that broom. I’d have managed it before then if Snape hadn’t been muttering a counter-curse, trying to save you.’ ‘Snape was trying to save me?’ ‘Of course,’ said Quirrell coolly. -Philosopher's Stone, Ch. 17
Again, the story is told through the lens of Harry's bias, but that doesn't mean his opinions of Snape reflect Snape's character. As another example, there's an implication in OoTP that Snape, having seen some of the Dursleys' abuse of Harry through his memories during Occlumency lessons, passed this information on in an effort to protect Harry, and that this is the reason why several Order members (Arthur Weasley and Moody in particular) show up at King's Cross at the end of the schoolyear and threaten the Dursleys to stop mistreating him. There seems to be no other explanation in the text for why these adults are suddenly aware of the abuse Harry experiences, except that Snape, who was abused as a child himself, and who is an Order member himself, is the only adult in the series who we see witness Harry's mistreatement firsthand. At no point in the narrative do we see Harry complain about the Dursleys to the adults he trusts or ask them for help, merely to spend his holidays away from them without explanation.
While Snape did indeed dislike Harry and often compared him to his father, his dislike for James had much more significant roots in bullying and trauma than in his concern for Lily's relationship with him. It's established in canon that James Potter and Sirius Black dislike Snape from the outset (as in the scene on the Hogwarts Express in DH Ch. 33). In their fifth year, Sirius - annoyed that Snape is so curious about where Lupin goes each month - tricks Snape into following the tunnel under the Whomping Willow to the Shrieking Shack, as Lupin tells Harry:
'Professor Snape was at school with us. ... Sirius here played a trick on him which nearly killed him, a trick which involved me -‘ Black made a derisive noise. ‘It served him right,’ he sneered. ‘Sneaking around, trying to find out what we were up to … hoping he could get us expelled …' 'Severus was very interested in where I went every month,’ Lupin told Harry, Ron and Hermione. ‘We were in the same year, you know, and we - er - didn’t like each other very much. He especially disliked James. Jealous, I think, of James’s talent on the Quidditch pitch … anyway, Snape had seen me crossing the grounds with Madam Pomfrey one evening as she led me towards the Whomping Willow to transform. Sirius thought it would be - er - amusing, to tell Snape all he had to do was prod the knot on the tree-trunk with a long stick, and he’d be able to get in after me. Well, of course, Snape tried it - if he’d got as far as this house, he’d have met a fully grown werewolf - but your father, who’d heard what Sirius had done, went after Snape and pulled him back, at great risk to his life … Snape glimpsed me, though, at the end of the tunnel. He was forbidden to tell anybody by Dumbledore, but from that time on he knew what I was …'
-Prisoner of Azkaban, Ch. 18
From this we can deduce that Sirius intended for Snape to die, or at least get severely injured, and that even as a grown adult Sirius doesn't regret trying to mete out this punishment to him as retaliation for curiosity. We can also deduce that Lupin was unaware of Sirius' intention and did not consent to be used as a weapon. For his part, Snape never did reveal that Lupin was a werewolf while at school, or even during that school year, until after Lupin ran amok on Hogwarts grounds, endangering others' lives, including Harry's.
There are other meta posts that go into Lupin's insecurities and vulnerabilities, but in short, he was grateful just to be allowed into the school as a student, let alone to have friends, and was in no position to challenge James and Sirius. Even as a prefect he didn't curb their behavior, as we see when he allows James to bully Snape later that year after their O.W.L.s:
'Leave him alone,��� Lily repeated. She was looking at James with every sign of great dislike. ‘What’s he done to you?’ ‘Well,’ said James, appearing to deliberate the point, ‘it’s more the fact that he exists, if you know what I mean …’ Many of the surrounding students laughed, Sirius and Wormtail included, but Lupin, still apparently intent on his book, didn’t, and nor did Lily. ‘You think you’re funny,’ she said coldly. ‘But you’re just an arrogant, bullying toerag, Potter. Leave him alone.’ ‘I will if you go out with me, Evans,’ said James quickly. ‘Go on … go out with me and I’ll never lay a wand on old Snivelly again.'
-Order of the Phoenix, Ch. 28
James acknowledges that he has no real reason to bully Snape and uses violence as a bargaining chip to coerce Lily into going out with him (James' behavior reflects much more entitlement than Snape's, in my opinion). He also chokes Snape with a bar of soap and then assaults him by dangling him upside down and removing his trousers (threatening to remove his underwear but we don't see it happen).
Lily herself refers to James as arrogant, and it's this trait, along with the trauma from James' bullying of him, that Snape perceives in Harry. He doesn't resent Harry for looking like his father because it reminds him that Lily had sex with another man, he resents him for it because of all the trauma James inflicted on him. The conflict-laden relationship between Snape and the Marauders is a significant driver of the story through several of the books and OP seems subjective to the point of being problematic in ignoring it completely and instead focusing Snape's dislike of Harry onto an invented idea of sexual jealousy that doesn't exist in the text.
It's never stated whether Snape had romantic feelings for Lily, or vice versa, only that they were friends. The closest we see to a hint of this is when “The intensity of his [Snape's] gaze made her [Lily] blush," or when “The moment she [Lily] had insulted James Potter, his [Snape's] whole body had relaxed, and as they walked away there was a new spring in Snape’s step …”
Lily's blush could be interpreted as implying she was attracted to him, or conversely that she didn't and felt awkward thinking he might be attracted to her. Similarly, Snape's relief at her insulting James can be interpreted as indicative of his attraction to her, or of him simply being worried about a friend hanging out with people he perceived as dangerous and was relieved to learn she wasn't putting herself in the way of danger by becoming friends with them. Although JK Rowling has said that her intention was for Snape's affections towards Lily to be romantic, and that she may have returned his affection had he not chosen the path he did, this is - like the note about Snape's father whipping him - extratextual and more of an interesting fact than a bit of canon to be extrapolated from the text.
Finally, OP says:
His interest in the Death Eaters was only secondary to his obsession with Lily and I think Lily rejecting him pushed him toward joining the Death Eaters, because, once again, his male ego was bruised and he needed to replace it with something else.
We've already seen that Snape's interest in joining the Death Eaters was a big part of Lily's reason for ending their friendship. Therefore, logically, Lily's decision didn't push him towards becoming a Death Eater, but rather isolated him from having any support system outside of the DEs. She didn't reject him, because rejection is the refusal or dismissal of another person's advances or proposal. They were friends, meaning they had a mutually consensual platonic relationship. Lily therefore didn't reject Snape, she ended their friendship and, as already stated, nothing in canon implies he didn't respect her boundaries.
As we have also seen in canon, Snape was bullied at school and had, at best, a neglectful and dysfunctional home environment in his childhood. In addition, he shared a dorm with students actively interested in becoming Death Eaters, and his one social lifeline away from them was cut off when he called Lily a Mudblood. What OP interprets as Snape's male ego being bruised is actually a much more complex set of social and emotional factors being described throughout the series to eventually reveal the profile of a character - young Snape - who was a vulnerable youth primed for radicalization by a violent faction of zealots. Although the enforcement and upholding of patriarchal norms is often a huge element of these kinds of social movements, that didn't seem to be the driving force for Snape based on everything we learn about his character. Instead, what we see is a boy who comes from abuse, lives in abuse at school, who loses all the support systems that might give him an alternative to the fascist cult he's being radicalized into which - if it's like most hate groups - would have been more than welcome to both take him in and help him cut his ties to anyone else in his life he might escape from them to.
It also goes against the argument that Snape was sexually obsessed with Lily that he continued to risk his life in order to protect her son an defeat her murderer for almost two decades after her death. He knew it would neither bring her back from the dead nor bring about forgiveness, and it goes without saying that sex was no longer an option. Framing Snape's motivation as obsession dismisses the realities of the complex and meaningful relationship we form as people, and the lasting, transformative influence we can have on each other, which is what Snape and Lily's story illustrates.
Finally, OP concludes with:
He remained mysterious up till the end and his back-and-forth with treason was very compelling to read about. So I hate him (as a "person") but he is such a good character narrative-wise and he is very interesting to study
OP openly admits to hating Snape, ie. having a bias against him, while stating he is "interesting to study" - except no part of their answer has shown that they've actually done so. Their arguments are unsupported in several ways, one being that they don't offer any evidence, and the other being that none can be found in the source text. What's ironic is that OP seems to resent Snape's subjective bias against Harry (and misinterpret his reasons for it in baseless ways) while also showing the exact same kind of bias against Snape themselves. You don't have to like a character by any means, but claiming that the kind of unfounded, superficial, and unsupported opinions that OP stated in their response have a basis in any kind of study of his character is ludicrous and an insult to the intelligence of anyone reading it.
#long post#I'd say sorry to OP for ripping into their post like this but they think people disagreeing with them politely is mean and hateful so#but yeah sorry not sorry when your argument is so unfounded that it can be shredded with an entire cited essay then maybe#reconsider the claim that your opinions have any basis in study#and look I don't think OP is stupid by any means I think they knew exactly what they were doing and that's why I decided to argue them#even if they won't see it#I usually don't tend to argue with haters and prefer to spend my allotted hellsite time delving into meta but this one got to me
22 notes
·
View notes
Text
Canon gender representation & shipping
[I posted this in a thread that started out partly about something else, then realized it would be hidden beneath Expand for lots of tumblr users. So I'm also sharing here with light edits.]
Here's some 2018 data about canon representation and how it relates to fandom shipping ratios, e.g. amount of F/F vs. M/M:
TL;DR: there are way more men than women in movie canon...
...and the women don't talk as much -- or presumably get as much screentime -- on average.
Canon gender ratios partially predict the shipping ratios we see in fanworks -- I explain the math of this more in my shipping chapter -- especially on AO3. But AO3 has more M/M and less F/M than predicted by canon (and Fanfiction.net has WAY more F/M and WAY less queer fic than predicted by canon)... I get into some of the other factors like archive history that might be relevant at the source, and I also talk more about how the popularity of different movie genres may affect gender representation in fanworks.
Also [addressing another question raised in the original thread], fans do add various forms of new gender diversity to works that wasn't in canon:
I'll definitely be bringing this stuff up in my forthcoming F/F vs M/M stats. In the meantime, you can read more about all of the above in at the source, Gender representation in movies vs. movie fanworks. I recommend starting with the TL;DR chapter, because it's lonnnnnng and possibly overly complicated. :)
#toastystats#fandom stats#gender representation#shipping#ao3#thanks to sarahthecoat for the awesome questions in the other thread!#i'm proud of these older stats and don't get to cite them enough :)#but I will be citing these and more from the same set in my forthcoming#F/F vs. M/M#analysis#op#50#100
209 notes
·
View notes
Text
have IG users ever had one (1) original thought in their life ever?
#i swear i read that exact text as a text post on tumblr like a year ago#sorry for the censorship but i ain’t giving away my IG#nothing much to see anyway#i literally use it just to see what popflex is up to#ANYWAY this guy is a total scam he uses other people’s original tweets/tumblr text posts and then sells merch about ‘his’ takes#that are not his#GROSS#oh and btw have i mentioned that they’ve also been stealing my calico critters memes without even citing who op is in the sources???#i occasionally repost things from IG but i always make sure to link who op was#these people are despicable to say the least
8 notes
·
View notes
Text
was nobody going to tell me about this? nobody? nobody was going to send me this? what am i to you, really? a sick joke?
#modposts#east blue polycule#i feel very validated right now#im going to cite this panel in ESSAYS.#i was aware that oda knew about the idea of all 4 of them being in love with nami but this confirms the harem intent more.#therefore strengthening my mission. to give nami 4 boyfriends!!!!#i think im going to have this panel engrained into my eyelids#no wonder east blue polycule fic is the oldest op work on ao3#tone of this post is imagine me as a cat making a fuss about nothing that matters#like a real meitte kind of vibe
13 notes
·
View notes
Note
Literally lost brain cells trying to read this https://www.reddit.com/r/larrystylinson/comments/1gdspya/my_chicago_theory/
Wtf people have entered a different level of delusion
I hope OP got some ibuprofen to treat the sprain from reaching so hard :)
#the Tumblr links embedded in there is why I think#older Larries do so much harm in perpetuating lies#like I’m surprised OP didn’t cite that#‘Louis was hiding in trash cans at Harry’s concerts because he wanted to watch Harry so badly’ and include a Tumblr link
4 notes
·
View notes
Text
Did Pop Team Epic's OP director include a reference to the "brush tool" comic? and then reference it in a second OP for good measure?
71 notes
·
View notes
Text
Chris Brookes says: kiss your bros 2k4ever
Non-deleted version of the tweet:
#chris brookes#mao#wrestling#twitter#not tagging every wrestler in the linked tweets but its a bunch#orig post#eta: he redid the deleted tweet but qt'ing the source of the gif#but im not changing the photo bc the op called them the new golo lol#but i added the link to that tweet on the says#eta2: ok i added a screenshot of the new tweet under readmore#my desire to always accurately cite and source and share compelled me
19 notes
·
View notes
Text
reservoir dogs really comes out strooiinnnnnng with the homoeroticism immediately
#I haven’t seen this since highschool I don’t think I like it although I’ve often cited it as a Tarantino I can stand#but we’ll see#op
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
just sent in the world's most outrageously long ask about kismesissitude to thewertsearch. im sorry everyone
10 notes
·
View notes