#and I'm not interested in debating anyone on it

[thequeenofsastiel]

We REALLY need to talk more about how Angel has never tried to kill Spike, even when he was soulless. I know I've mentioned it in other posts, but I really think it should be examined and discussed. Spike is literally the only vampire Angel has never attempted to kill. He's never aimed a stake at him, tried to push him into the sun, set him on fire, or chop his head off. Despite the fact that Spike had been a danger to Angel and Buffy, had absolutely tried to kill both of them, Angel still never tried to kill him. So why? Was this intentional or unintentional? Was it just an oversight on Whedon's part, or did he do that on purpose?

Since there's no way to know the answer to that question, I'm just gonna go ahead and assume it was intentional. So since I'm going with that assumption, I have to wonder why. What makes Spike so special to Angel? I mean hell, in 5x19 of ATS, Angel shoved Spike aside to take a stake for him with absolutely no hesitation whatsoever. This despite the fact that their relationship had been varying degrees of antagonistic over the whole of s5, though with admittedly a handful of soft moments between them that I'll probably document at some point. But for the most part, their relationship was aggressive and even violent at times. And yet when Spike's life was in danger Angel was entirely willing to risk his life to make sure that Spike wouldn't die. Where does this devotion come from?

I think part of it comes from the relationship they had in the almost twenty years that they traveled with Darla and Drusilla. Angelus was into him from the moment they met. He got VERY salty that Spike was more interested in Drusilla than he was in Angelus, and was petty enough to insult her to try to make Spike like her less. He had sex with Drusilla in front of Spike to, in my opinion, shatter Spike's illusion that Drusilla would want only him, and make Spike more amenable to the idea of being with Angelus as well as Drusilla. I strongly believe that what happened after Spike lunged at them was that Angelus threw Drusilla aside and initiated rough sex with Spike that may or may not have been entirely consensual.

Now, to be clear, I don't think Angelus is capable of love, at least not the way soulless Spike is. But I do believe he's capable of feeling possessiveness and desire. I think Spike is the only man Angel/us was ever in a relationship with, and when you're bisexual, as I believe Angel/us is, that can be VERY meaningful. I think Angelus felt more possessiveness and desire for Spike than he did for anyone else. And I think those emotions lingered in Angel.

Whether or not Angel was in love with ensouled Spike in s5 of ATS is up for debate for me. They didn't seem to like each other all that much, and yet they still spent time together, still protected each other, and still provided emotional support sometimes. I think the desire was definitely still there. As for love, I'm not sure yet. I'm still doing my rewatch so I'll get back to y'all.

Sorry, this post got out of control. The point is, it's absolutely fascinating to me that Angel never tried to kill Spike, soul or no soul. Discuss? Why do you think that is?

[allie-leth]

Would anyone be interested in an actual blog(like real website in I make) where I ramble about the projects I make and give information on how to learn shit and resources I do, how to pass the certs I take and shit? I've been debating doing YouTube for awhile, but I'm not convinced I'm interesting enough.

[redysetdare]

"This fandom is so queer friendly!" This fandom literally hates, bisexual, trans, nonbinary, and aspec people but ok.

[muffinlance]

Wait, what’s going on with Embers???? That fic has been on my read later list since 2021, what’s happened with it???

Brief overview, then I'm likely never touching this topic again, because this is not a Drama Blog:

Context: Embers is a super old AtLA fic that was written during the early fandom days, read widely at the time, and was the origin of the widely-used fanon name of "Wani" for Zuko's ship (kind of by default that it was one of the first popular fics to give his ship a name, I think?), even though most fic writers don't seem to realize it's from there anymore.

"What's Going On": I used to include a link in all my stories to it, because I believe in crediting other writers for borrowed elements, and I was using "Wani" in all my fics. But BOY did I not want to be sending readers that way anymore, so I've adopted a new name for Zuko's ship, and removed all Embers links.

None of the criticisms about Embers itself are new; I'm assuming they date back to when the fic was being written, because this isn't an "it aged badly" thing, this is an "actually yeah this gets worse the longer you think about it and I shouldn't have ignored my bad feelings just because some of the worldbuilding was interesting" thing.

An Incomplete List of Why I Made the Change:

I don't actually like the story that much anymore, and don't want to rec it

I tried to re-read it recently to see if some things were as bad as I remembered and it turns out they were So Much Worse Oh Yikes. More specifically, the treatment of Katara and Aang and their respective cultures has... rather a lot going on. One example: The Fire Nation and Air Nomads are both given multiple backstory elements in an attempt to make the average Fire Nation soldier's participation in the genocide/war in large part the fault of the Avatar and the Air Nomads themselves, and also fully justified from the Fire Nation perspective. And I do mean fully. One of its core tenants is "People from the Fire Nation (and only people from the Fire Nation) who don't follow orders Literally Die, therefore murdering pacifists and babies and continuing the war (and their regularly scheduled war crimes) is the only thing it is physically possible for them to do". I cannot emphasize enough how literal that is.

Also the name "Wani" means "Alligator" and is... objectively a pretty lame name for Zuko's ship? Where's the personality, where's the deeper meaning, where's the resonance with Zuko's themes? @tuktukpodfics initially thought I was calling the ship "Wanyi", and that's what I've switched to, because it is Objectively So Much Better. In their words: “Wànyī (萬一): Literally ‘one in ten thousand,’ ‘perchance.’ Used grammatically in Chinese to mean ‘what if’ or ‘just in case.’ I think a ship called ‘The Perchance’ is perfect for a boy clinging to false hope.”

TL:DR; I don't rec Embers anymore, because I don't actually like the story anymore, and there are things about it that get worse the more I think on them. I've removed links to it and renamed Zuko's ship to "Wanyi" ("The Perchance") because our boy deserves a ship name that reflects his character arc.

[balleater]

something i've already posted about in the past but am thinking about again because of the conversations in this episode is that i still truly do not understand bells hells'(well, particularly ashton's) view on what is going to happen if the information about aeor gets sent out to the people of exandria. obviously, i'm not an average person living in that world and am instead a viewer of the media with fairly extensive knowledge of the lore, so i could definitely just be missing what the impact would actually be! but the insistence that it would be a world shattering revelation that completely turns everyone against the odds just... doesn't make sense to me?

unless ludinus has a way of editing the information he presents and can take away the context, which would basically make the "footage" even more strange, what they're going to be seeing is... the gods saving themselves from people with the active ability to murder them all and having a rather humanizing crisis of what they should do about it? i guess the working with the betrayer gods part could be considered the controversial aspect of it, but overall, considering everything else that was destroyed in the calamity, aeor really was the one instance that was closest to being "justified". i don't think anyone who cares enough about the gods for this to cause any sort of big disruption of faith would have as big of a problem with it as they are assuming, nor do i really think it's something that would cause mass revolts against the gods in people who aren't devout.

[ladystoneboobs]

no of fence to jon snow fans who for some reason care about his exact age, but these discussions just annoy me no end. not only bc there's no way any weirwood flashbacks bran has to rhaegar/lyanna will come with time/datestamps, but also bc there's always comments like this:

SEVERAL turns of the moon (ie, months)?! have these people never seen a human baby before or just have no concept of their ages? even if we take into account travel time from the toj to wf, meaning jon was not a newborn too fresh out the oven when catelyn and robb arrived, there's still a difference between a newborn and a 3mo and an even bigger difference between those infants and an older baby 5-7mo. there's very good reasons these lines were cut. whatever birthdates can be worked out internally for jon and robb from when they're first mentioned as 15 and 16 don't matter in the end, bc grrm doesn't care about a consistent timeline and the actual text of catelyn's pov and ned's convo with robert about cheating on her should outweigh any guesstimates about jon's official nameday wrt robb's. catelyn may not have cared for jon, but she would sure as hell have noticed his nameday if it came before robb's and made him ned's firstborn. if jon's birthday canonically came before robb's then either ned's cover story would not involve adultery (not impossible for him to sire a bastard before his wedding), or he'd just give jon a new nameday along with his new name to fit the adultery lie. it makes no sense for him to lie about one and not the other, undermining the big lie with a little public clue of his story not adding up. whatever else she was as a stepmother, cat wasn't stupid and a bastard who was actually the eldest son being raised alongside her trueborn heir could be an even bigger insult than whether he was born of adultery or not.

BUT, the unknowability of jon's true birthday is not the only reason this annoys me, it's bc this is all based on the assumption that jon must be older since rhaegar/lyanna ran off together before ned married cat, as if both boys must have been conceived asap as robb canonically was when his parents consummated their marriage. and that's not how human reproduction works! even if you don't understand how fast babies grow in the first year, you should know that people who get pregnant do so through ovulation cycles and a lucky sperm finding an egg and all that, not just immediately getting knocked up as soon as one has p-in-v sex for the first time. not unless you only know mean girls sex ed where if you have sex you will get pregnant and die. (even tho lyanna did die, there's plenty of canon examples where pregnancy did not lead straight to death. also examples of people who did not get pregnant right away and even some who are/were sexually active and childless without always having moon tea on hand.) we can't know how long lyanna was having sex before that sperm+egg match happened or even how long she was with rhaegar before losing her technical virginity. if they were married, doesn't it make sense to think they didn't consummate their relationship until the wedding night either? that's the only leverage there is to ensure a status as wife rather than just mistress.

and while i just said grrm doesn't care about exact timelines and a lot is still foggy surrounding the rebellion and esp rhaegar, there is one timemarker wrt robert's rebellion he voluntarily threw in, time and time again: that stannis was besieged at storm's end for almost a whole year. that siege, which mind you, did not match the duration of the entire war. it only started after robert won his battles at gulltown and summerhall, returned to storm's end, and then went out and lost the battle of ashford, leaving his homeland open to the reachermen. the same siege which only ended when ned made a detour there after the sack of king's landing, before going to the toj. even if lyanna may not have given birth that exact day ned found her, she could only be waiting in that bloody bed for weeks at the most, not months. so if rhaegar knocked her up the very same night he carried her off and jon was still a newborn when ned found her after the siege of storm's end had ended, wouldn't that mean lyanna was pregnant for well over a year? that's not how human pregnancy works either! so, maybe that's proof that jon and robb, whichever order they were actually born in, were actually very close in age as babies, much closer than if they were both conceived asap.

and really, jon's actual birthdate does not matter imho, when he was raised not just as the bastard to robb's trueborn heir, but with robb also known by catelyn and the world as ned's firstborn (which he was, in any case, as jon was ned's nephew by birth). what difference could a birthdate before robb's make (even were there some means of discovery) after ned, cat, and robb are all dead? if one is looking only at his birth parents then he's only a firstborn child on lyanna's side, but definitely a second son on rhaegar's side. maybe he was always meant to be a second son with a not much older half-brother! even if the aegon fka young griff is not in fact rhaegar's son, he'll still be known as aegon vi targaryen, meaning jon will never be known as any father's elder son. if i may reference mean girls again, it's not going to happen.

[thatswhatsushesaid]

there is a lot of very good commentary happening in the notes on that "did jgy kill jin rusong" poll in the tags, but i think i am finally too burnt out on that subject even to vote and reblog the poll. tl;dr i don't think there is a definitive answer either way and i don't need for there to be a definitive answer to find jin guangyao interesting and sympathetic.

[captainofthetidesbreath]

I feel like it says a lot about the relationships between the major institutions of the Trust and the Consectorship's place in it that Spahr's role, the role of any Prime Consector, can be summarized as: show pony, attack dog, scapegoat.

[ambrosiagourmet]

mx. glitz have you seen this. (@ atissi here) /post/744351681315291136/hadnt-seen-anyone-post-the-full-comic-about-laios

i feel like chewing on dry concrete. the toudens......

Post link: atissi.tumblr.com/post/744351681315291136/hadnt-seen-anyone-post-the-full-comic-about-laios

I haaave, and I honestly have like some very complicated feelings about this one, which is part of why I haven't talked about it here.....

In general I very much dislike the tendency for media (and culture at large, at least the culture I'm familiar with) to push reconciliation as the main, or sometimes ONLY happy ending for people estranged from their family. Which isn't exactly what this comic is doing, buuuut... it IS very in line with a sort of like "well you don't understand, your parents had complex reasons, you should forgive them, etc," especially when paired with the fact that it's noted in Falin's bio that she hopes Laios and her parents will reconcile.

With a little more space I've been more able to take this comic as something very anchored in Falin's perspective, rather than necessarily an objective declaration that the Touden Parents Were Right, Actually. Which also was a little hard, honestly, because A) I kind of like to imagine that in post-canon, Falin would be a little less likely to dismiss her own pain in favor of empathizing with others, and B) its kinda shitty to Laios to frame things this way, imo?

Or like... it's one thing for her to have a different perspective on her parents, but framing it as like a "Laios misunderstood" thing, especially in context of her explicitly wanting him to get back in contact with them... eugh. Girl, he is allowed to have his own feelings on the matter and make his own choices. Downplaying his trauma in order to empathize with your parents (who were ADULTS in this situation, while both you and your brother were kids) is not a neutral action.

ANYWAY that all being said... I do find it kind of believable that she might still be caught up in some messiness with all this. Navigating trauma and parents and estrangement is already hard enough on its own, and adding in a sibling - who has different needs and different coping mechanisms - doesn't make things any easier. I hope she can sit down with Laios at some point and actually talk things out.

Also I hope she can give herself a little more space to like. Acknowledge that some shit happened, even if she can empathize with her parents here?? Like... even if you can understand sympathetic reasons for them to have done what they did... they still did that. Her father still failed to communicate with her or Laios. Her mother still lowkey assaulted her. Reasons aren't the only things that matter, especially when it comes to a parent's treatment of their kid. The actions they took were still harmful, and I think that it's important for Falin to have space to acknowledge that. Honestly, if she's anything like me, its gonna hit her like a TRUCK someday, once she finally has the space and safety to sit down and work through things.

Above all else though, this comic definitely gets one thing EXTREMELY right in my book: Marcille is fucking ready to throw down with the Touden parents and give them the lecture of their lives, as is her friend-realizing-the-shit-her-friend's-parents-did given right. o7 Marcille, go with my blessing.

[ineffablefool]

Huh. It's rare for me to trust that a show won't make fatness into a joke, but the first episode of the 6th and last season of wwdits sure did wait for almost maximum payoff on betraying that trust, didn't it.

[painless-innit-colourful]

so I gave the last ten minutes of tommy’s vod (another) watch.

listening to this conversation again with a clear head and trying to ignore what I know he says last, the whole lead-up to the nuke siren is tommy trying no 1 to keep stalling, take dream down whatever path he needs to to keep him there and not leaving. not dying for nothing. 

but after that, to me at least, it reads like tommy's trying to live. this plan was a suicide mission from the start, but when tommy realises he can extract this information out of dream about the fact he just wants simpler times, he might have a way to get out alive. he asks if dream can't not kill the whole server. he's looking, as always, for the best in dream - he doesn't agree with him on anything - but he's almost trying to talk dream into believing that they can all just co-exist and things can be the way they once were. he's still talks about how much it hurts, but I think he's trying one last ditch attempt to get out alive, looking to use the guilt and the promise of something better when literally nothing else has worked and he is staring death directly in the eyes.

I will say though I still don’t like the final apology. boy you don’t have to be sorry for anything he brought this upon all of you. I think his abundance of empathy gets the better of him there but who knows this is a very optimistic take in the first place.

[thequeenofsastiel]

Really, at the end of the day, it's the fact that Armand is a sub that makes it absolutely obvious to me that there's no way in HELL that he would betray Louis. The idea is so absurd that I would like to say that I genuinely don't understand why people are rolling with it. But I know that it's because most people don't understand Dom/sub dynamics. The intense and complete DEVOTION and WORSHIP subs have for our Doms can honestly not be overstated. We would NEVER betray our Doms, ESPECIALLY if we were in love with them. We would 100% die first. Which is why I just can't take Armand betraying Louis seriously. It would NEVER happen, and ANYONE who understands subs would know that. Clearly the writers don't, or they would NOT have made Armand a sub if they wanted him to be willing to betray Louis.

The RAGE in me

[the-sun-and-the-sea]

very very unpopular but the odesta tumblr community is kinda unwelcoming

anon i am admittedly sorry to hear you say this. I won't make presumptions about who you're talking about so I will just say that if I have ever done/said anything to make you or anyone else feel unwelcome then I am sorry. that has never been my intention and if I am part of the problem then please let me know so I can address it!

Feel free to elaborate on this ask but just know that if it goes into hateful territory or mentions people by name that I won't be posting that.

[susandsnell]

🌻

I almost missed this one!!

I'm a big fan of all kinds of gothic romances, absolutely morally bankrupt characters (and the fucked up ways they might fall in love or lust or obsession or something in between), villains and foes and psychosexual nightmares, all that good stuff. I do not believe fiction needs to be moral or didactic in this respect. I say this as a preface to what I have to say next because I think it's a genuinely unpopular opinion:

This is an Edward Rochester hate zone.

I cannot abide this man. I hated him when I was thirteen, and I hate him at twenty-five. (I believe I once wrote "he should have gotten crispy in that fire" in some free reading assignment or other.) His Byronicisms all fall just in the wrong way for me, in large part because they are gross in a way that feels painfully real that isn't fun to read about, and they aren't tempered by any traits to recommend him. I find him not at all interesting and entirely unsympathetic. The only time I ever liked him was when he was doing the most with the drag act, but even then that was pretty loaded.

This all makes him a realistic jerk so he is perhaps well-constructed and well-written, but I for the life of me have never gotten the appeal of this dickwad. He's so mired in his own privilege and unearned self-pity that I genuinely find him to be insufferable. This is a bit bizarre to me as I have adored characters who have done objectively far worse and behaved far more cruelly and violently than he ever did, but again, as asserted earlier - I can get into an awful person being awful if they're doing so in a way that's interesting to witness, and/or if this is balanced out by humanizing elements. Heathcliff abuses women and children and kills innocent animals and he's still intensely sympathetic. Sweeney Todd did all of that and I feel for his plight and love his wry sense of humour and capacity for deep love. The Vampire Chronicles' entire thesis is that even the truly monstrous among us are made human by their ability to connect to art and to one another. To clarify, I know that a character need not have suffered/had a tragic backstory to be sympathetic or interesting just as people we know don't require xyz to be deserving of compassion (for instance I enjoy Dracula being The Worst because he's interesting, he's irredeemable with some zazz), but in terms of what he feels and how he acts, I cannot find any avenue for this connection to come in. I know that it's not uncommon as a modern reader to feel horror for Bertha Mason rather than at her (and it's not '''purity culture"/Puriteens/whatever paper skinned English majors are coming up with now to dismiss any critical discussion of books they like to feel this way!), and this plays a large part in my reading, but he's also cruel and dehumanizing to Jane in a way that feels very much like a Victorian era equivalent of negging/overpraise, which strikes exactly the wrong nerve in me compared to other destructive romances I've liked. That's not to say that one is more or less realistic than another, and comes down to personal bias, but I feel what I feel, and this is a free opinion sunflower emoji ask lolol.

I understand Jane Eyre and like most of it. I understand what a huge step it was as a protofeminist work, the reversing of the power balance by having him be humbled and reliant on her by the end, the emphasis on Jane's freewill and self-worth in the face of her horrific struggles and turmoil.

I cannot grasp wanting to be around this man for more than five minutes. Truly no judgment to those who get something out of this guy, but I just Don't See It.

[a-god-in-ruins-rises]

is anyone else interested in joining my server? not quite ready to invite people yet but should be soon. just gauging interest right now. “like” or reply to this post and when i’m ready i’ll send you an invite.

server will probably be dual purpose. 

there will be (1) a semi-public side oriented toward general discussion (topics like politics, books, history, philosophy, religion, media, science, tech, etc) and community building (nothing is set in stone yet but i am imagining activities like book club, movie watching, playing games, contests and giveaways, etc). and there will be (2) a private side dedicated to more focused discussions and internal cult matters.

the server won’t be a “safe space” -- i’m fine with a bit of edge (within ToS. not trying to get terminated.) -- but i do want this server (at least the semi-public side) to be /relatively/ welcoming and civil. so if you’re egregiously toxic or vulgar or prone to shitflinging or sperging out you won’t be welcome here. neither will you be welcome if you’re overly sensitive.

otherwise, as long as you follow the rules, you will be fine. though i always reserve the right to executively veto your presence for any reason.

[melonmarzal]

Does anyone know if there is a Flight Rising themed Inktober prompt list that someone has put together?