#and mark was like lucas and i have a lot in common

[utilitycaster]

Sean's general self-loathing is well established, but I think the exact nature of it is something I haven't talked about at length or seen discussed in full elsewhere.

At first glance it may seem as though "just fighting squid dogs until I'm dead" and Sean's willingness to go down swinging, throwing himself at most threats, stem from him wishing for a heroic death, but I don't think this is the case. He'd like it - it would give Bee a good thing to tell his mother, for whatever that's worth - but the truth is something he says elsewhere: "No shit. I'm a monster too."

Sean is not terribly worried about harm to himself. It is tempting to assume that his decision to throw the gun down the drain is about wishing to stop himself from using it for suicidal impulses; but I don't think it is. He's worried about using it on others. He throws it away immediately after he envisions the letter in which his mother accuses him of killing innocents and flashes back; later, he acknowledges that had he had a gun, he might have shot Lucas: "I'm not holding a weapon right now, so when my right index finger twitches, nothing happens."

It's helpful to understand Sean in terms of two of the people who come closest to understanding him: Bee and Nathaniel.

Bee, on the surface, has a lot in common with him: both lost their entire family, one way or another, other than each other, Marion, and Peggy (who they did, in a way, lose) and their homes in the war. Bee understands Sean's past - him as a boy, before all of this - in a way no one else can, since Marion was also himself quite young. The difference, however, is that Bee wants to return to that past - and, to be honest, that would fix the majority of her problems. Were Bee's husband to still be alive? Were she to have her home again? That's what she wants! That would be life-changing! And so she thinks about happier times, and urges Sean to go back to a more innocent time, and blames Nathaniel as a figurehead for the war that took this from them.

The problem is that Sean's problem, in the end, is that he went to war and found out he was the kind of person who'd kill things that look like children. He doesn't think they were real children, maybe, but some days he's not sure. His worst fear is that his mother would know precisely what he did with NoMAD, in Ghost company, and he believes she'd hate him for it. If Sean had an apartment? If Sean's mother were out and living in her tenement? Hell, if his brothers were alive? This would not change. It certainly doesn't help, that there's immense loss and poverty on top of all that, but in the end, Sean does not trust himself to make choices, believes it to be only a matter of time before he hurts someone again (to the point that I wonder if this is why he's avoiding his mother, or if it's because that if he spends more time with her she might realize who he is now), and now sees himself, in a way, as, well, kind of like a squid dog - can be tasked to be a protector, but corruptible, easy to turn, and liable to bite those on the same side.

Sean explicitly equates death as freedom from having to make decisions - because he believes he will make wrong ones.

Nathaniel, on the other hand, is much more ignorant of Sean's material losses - he is unaware Sean is living at the chapter house nor does he know about his mother - but what Nathaniel does share, and Bee does not, is that sense of identity shaped by a specific action (or in Nathaniel's case, inaction). Nathaniel thinks himself a coward because he did not save his older brother from drowning; it defines him perhaps even more profoundly than the war (though his response to his officer's pistol indicates the war left plenty of marks on him as well).

Nathaniel might not know the details of Sean's connection to baseball in the same way Bee does (though, notably, they are the only two to engage with it; Jean and Marion haven't). It's not clear if Nathaniel knows quite what happened in Ghost Company either - it's not even stated if Sean came to Echo Company before, or after, though it really only makes sense after. However, he does understand someone who doesn't think they will make the correct choices; he understands guilt and self-loathing in a way Bee does not. He understands being the surviving child and believing your parents got the worse deal out of that. And so it's Nathaniel who understands the importance of giving Sean orders, and the (temporary and false) absolution even an imperfect institution and the identities it confers provides.

Nathaniel's issues with himself are not on the same level as Sean's - he seems to have come to a place of "I'm a coward, and would prefer not to be, but at least I'm attempting to use what skills I have" [ignore whether or not he's actually a coward, that doesn't ultimately matter in this discussion, the same way that it doesn't matter that Sean bought his sick brother a hat with his paltry spending money] whereas Sean is actively opposing any indication that he isn't a monster, or at best a weapon. But he does understand that Sean's issues come from a similar place and how to live with them - which is something Sean does not yet see as a possibility.

[tinderbox210]

I just realized out of the blue that maybe a part of the reason why I like Noa and Mae so much as a ship is because they remind me a lot of Lucas and Skye from Terra Nova.

Noa and Lucas have actually a lot in common if you think about it. No, I kid you not, Lucas is basically what Noa could turn out to be if he took one wrong turn too much and doesn't have his ape support system:

both are highly intelligent, much more than most around them, making them special among their kind

Noa was the only one able to fix the broken staff while Lucas was the only one able to make the portal go both ways

they both have fathers with important roles in the community (Koro is Master of Birds and leader of the clan, Taylor is the commander of Terra Nova and war hero)

both were closer to their mother and struggle to live up to their father's expectations

both lost a parent in a brutal attack they had to witness (and partly blame themselves for it)

both live a long time in the forest isolated from interacting with humans

they both have a prominent scar (Noa has the visible mark left by the electric staff and Lucas has the marks from the Nykoraptor attack)

both connect with and catch feelings for a girl belonging to the "enemy" who lies and manipulates them and ends up betraying and almost getting them killed(!!!)

important hand holding scenes with someone giving an important object to the other (the circumstances are vastly different, still...)

also Lucas and Skye got an intense foreheard touching scene which I really need Noa and Mae to have too

there are also some interesting similarities between Skye's and Mae's character, with both having a personal mission that they are willing to go to great lengths to fulfil (Skye doing everything to save her sick mother, Mae doing everything to save humanity)

from the looks, Skye and Mae could absolutely be sisters

both Lucas and Noa have the same striking green eyes, while both Skye and Mae have both blue eyes (okay, I'm not sure about Allison's eyes but they look blueish to me)

In conclusion, I'm absolutely thinking about a Terra Nova AU now where they don't go to the past but end up building the colony in a parallel dimension where apes have evolved into the dominant species. And who's to say that there can't be dinosaurs on the planet of the apes?

[wardensantoineandevka]

here's the reminder you asked for, why do you think colin being lucas fontina would be fun?? (i agree)

Note: This is as of the end of the first episode, and before the second.

Thank you, random citizen!

Now, when it comes to the question of "what is Colin's deal?", there's a LOT of possibilities. (I'm also very fond of the idea that he is Fontina's son and/or only living heir.) Some other possibilities are arguably more plausible than Colin being Lucas Fontina, but we're not here to talk about those other theories. We're here to talk about why it'd be fun if Colin was Lucas Fontina.

First, to establish who our man Lucas is. He is brought up when Colin looks at the cloth in his blackmail package. Matt narrates as follows:

It's a partially burned banner flag bearing a dotted mountain atop an island. This you do recognize as the banner of Fontina. Not since the failed coup of Lucas Fontina many decades ago has this banner been seen, a dark spot on the history of the isles, and a deep shadow that lingers at the edge of your hard-buried origins.

This is all we know about Fontina. It's not clear what the connection is between the coup and Colin. It's not clear what the timeline is relative to Colin's age or what the nature of the coup was (succession dispute, power grab by a non-ruling noble, military takeover, rebellion of the common people, etc.). All we know is the above: that Colin immediately and unquestionably recognizes it, the state of the banner and that it is Fontina's, that the coup failed but left a dark mark on history, and that the banner represents Colin's secret.

As I said at the beginning, there's a lot of possibilities. It's so open, and everything we know is vague. But, again, I (and anon) think the idea that Colin is Lucas Fontina living under an assumed identity is fun, so here's some of the why. (Some of these apply to other theories too!)

Fontina played the game—and lost! It'd position Colin as a foil to Tomaté and Amangeaux, as people who are jockeying for the throne of Greenhold and rule of Vegetania. In addition to that, the party has someone who is trying to maintain power in the government and someone who expects to one day come into power in the government. Colin being someone who has made his grab for it and failed would make him a great counterpoint, and it'd be interesting to have the perspective of someone who has been here before.

I'd generally be interested in hearing about how his perspectives on politics, power, and the game have changed over time (or haven't!) as someone who has vied for power and failed. It's also an interesting layer on top of the idea that Colin is currently positioned as someone who isn't influential or powerful; it'd be not only that, he made an attempt and lost a significant amount of the influence and power he had at one point. That's conceptually interesting in this group.

It'd be pretty great for Karna to say to Delissandro, "So when I say I don't know who the fuck you are, you should probably take that as, you know, you're not worth knowing yet," while Colin is directly standing next to Delissandro and is completely unrecognized by her as someone who has already made an indelible mark on the history of the Islands. Real learning moment for her.

I also think it'd be funny because of the HUGE gap between the idea of what kind of man Lucas Fontina is and the wet pathetic meow meow 6 Charisma that Colin is. It's very funny, but also I think it's very interesting the idea of the years and failure and depression and anxiety just shaving ten points off his Charisma. Real.

The actual motivations and logistics surrounding going into hiding and assuming an identity to separate yourself from the person you really are is always super compelling, and the specific circumstances that Lucas Fontina is apparently an infamous figure feels like rich ground for that question: how did you escape the eyes of history—and why?

[randomficrecss]

dramione pls <3

hi anon! I’ve actually just started reading dramione so i only have a few bookmarked but i’ll give u some i have in my marked for later too :)

Wait and Hope by mightbewriting

M | 94.9K | 12/12 | Memory Loss, Slowburn

“Harry,” Hermione began, voice very controlled, but she could feel the blade of panic slicing at her vocal cords. “Why was Draco Malfoy just screaming bloody murder about his,” and the word almost strangled her as she said it, “wife?”

Harry's green eyes blew wide. Healer Lucas pinched the bridge of her nose, clearly displeased with the recent series of events.

“He was referring to you, my dear,” she said. “That was the other question you got wrong. Your name is Hermione Jean Granger-Malfoy.”

Hermione had to be sedated again.

[In which Hermione loses the last six year's worth of her memories, including the entirety of her relationship and marriage to Draco.]

unexpected by ambpersand

E | 66.8K | 13/13 | Unplanned pregnancy, unexpectedly soft draco malfoy, fluff and angst, sexual content

Hand drifting down to her abdomen, she knew. When she was younger, she’d known that there was something different about her. About her abilities. Her certainty had been palpable, and was only confirmed when Professor McGonagall had shown up on her doorstep with that fateful letter in hand. And now, just over ten years later, she felt that same sense of certainty again.

She was pregnant.

And it all because she’d gone and had a one night stand with the worst person in the world… Draco Malfoy.

Tremble & Depart by DarkoftheMoon

E | 139.6K | 30/30 | Slowburn, Ministry of Magic Employee Draco Malfoy and Hermione Granger, cursebreaker hermione, Investigations, hurt/comfort, sexual content

Draco Lucius Malfoy. Death Eater. Disposable.

Life on probation at the Ministry meant keeping his head down and his mouth shut. On his first field assignment he’s tasked with investigating an abandoned Death Eater manor hiding more than a few secrets in its walls.

Stuck with the only witch who agreed to work with him.

False Pretenses by tasteoftheforbidden

M | 273.5K | 31/31 | PTSD, Fake/Pretend Relationship, Post-War, character development

(TW references self harm, child abuse)

The solicitor was convinced that the only way to salvage the Malfoy family name was marriage to a certain muggle-born witch.

"Granger is one of the people who has witnessed every single negative aspect of my personality. The moment she sees me act decent, her defenses will shoot up. She'll know from her gut that something is wrong." Draco paused, twirling the glass of firewhiskey in his hand.

"So… you're going to offer it to her? Like a deal?" Blaise was positively sure that the Malfoy heir had gone mental. What could he possibly present to his longtime mortal enemy to get her to agree?

*A story that uses the most common tropes in Dramione fanfiction... Then changes how it's done.

Bending Light by scullymurphy

M | 146.8K | 29/29 | Redeemed Draco Malfoy, slowburn, eventual smut, Post- Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Teen Angst

Draco Malfoy was in exile, though they called it protection. It was the summer after sixth year and he'd taken Dumbledore's offer, defected to the other side and been sent away to a small town in Italy for his troubles.

No magic, few rules, and not a lot to do -- until Hermione Granger arrived.

What do you do when you're thrown into exile with the last person you wanted? You live like there's no tomorrow...

Dragon in the Dark by GracefulLioness

E | 164.7K | 31/31 | Voldemort is dead, eventual smut, espionage, murder, Assassin Draco, Healer Hermione

The battle is won, Voldemort is dead, but the war is far from over. In the new Death Eater regime, Draco Malfoy does what he must to survive and keep his mother safe. Now a highly trained assassin, Draco has learned to think of his targets as inhuman beings, but when he is tasked with killing someone from his past, he can no longer hide from the horrors of the world around him.

Apple Pies and Other Amends by ToEatAPeach

M | 76.7K | 29/29 | PTSD, Stress Baking, BAMF Hermione Granger, Redeemed Draco Malfoy, post-hogwarts

(TW alcohol abuse)

It’s not until she’s brought a basil and strawberry sponge cake to Neville Longbottom and his new girlfriend, Hannah Abbott, a dozen rhubarb hand-pies to Luna and Xenophilius Lovegood, and another basket of ganache-covered muffins to Dean and Seamus, that Hermione admits to herself what she’s actually doing: she’s making a thing of this. It’s a veritable PTSD tour. With pastries. And hand-skimmed clotted cream. And she has no idea why she’s doing it, but it’s becoming very apparent that she is.

Sometimes you're sad. Sometimes you need dessert. And sometimes, it's a little of both.

Remain Nameless by HeyJude19

E | 312.2K | 51/51 | Post-Hogwarts, Slowburn, friends to lovers, PTSD, sexual content

(TW past drug addiction, suicidal thoughts)

How did it feel? It felt like he was barely holding it together. She, of all people, should shun him. Or yell at him. Curse him. Spit at him. Take out her wand and blast him off the face of the earth. It was crushing guilt and relief and confusion all at once when he looked at Hermione Granger.

The monotony of Draco’s daily routine had become both a lifeline and a noose. But this new habit of grabbing coffee with Hermione Granger is quickly becoming a reason to get out of bed and is unfortunately forcing him to re-evaluate his inconsequential existence.

Hermione is living her life in fragments, separate pieces scattered about, and she can’t find a way to step back and let the full picture form. Why are morning meetings with Draco Malfoy the only thing that make sense anymore?

sorry if you’ve read all of these! i have more so just let me know<3

[neversetyoufree]

While I absolutely don't condone Vanitas's early treatment of Jeanne (especially not that first kiss), I do think the power dynamic of their early relationship fits in a really interesting way with Jeanne's arc as a whole. Jeanne is a woman slowly rediscovering how to want things, and Vanitas's pressuring and manipulation forces her very earliest instances of acting on that want.

In particular, I'm talking about the blood drinking scenes at the bal masqué and in the alley in chapter 12. Vanitas doesn't force himself on Jeanne in either case, but you could make a good argument that he gets uncomfortably close. He can tell that Jeanne isn't in good control of herself at the Bal Masqué, and he spends a lot of effort wearing her down and convincing her that she should bite him.

Spending a long time wearing somebody down as you convince them to do a sexual act with you is. not great. Absolutely not a thing that you should do in real life.

And later, in the alley, Vanitas straight up blackmails Jeanne into continuing their blood drinking relationship. If she doesn't bite him and only him, he tells Luca about how/why Jeanne Marked him, which she refuses to let happen.

However, though the first non-consensual kiss is pretty clearly framed as Vanitas doing something Bad, these two blood drinking scenes aren't. So what gives? Well, I once saw a review say that first awful kiss was like something out of a bodice ripper, and the comparison has been haunting me ever since.

Dubious or nonexistent consent is a pretty old and common trope in romances, especially bodice ripper type ones, and there are a couple common explanations that float around as to why women would enjoy reading something like that. One of those explanations is the idea that non/dubcon is a good fantasy for people who feel like they aren't allowed to have agency over their own sexual desires. Women are made to feel like they shouldn't want sex, and so even if they wouldn't want a "no" to be ignored in real life, it's kind of an exciting fantasy. The heroines in books can play chaste as they're meant to, pretending they don't want the things they aren't supposed to want, and the man will give them what they secretly desire anyway.

That isn't a universally applicable explanation for why people like dub/noncon, not by a long shot, but I do think it's an interesting idea. And given that Jeanne's story is so very much about agency and learning to want things, it feels relevant to early VaniJeanne. The actual kiss, the part that that review compared to a bodice ripper, is just straight-up assault. I don't think there was any secret desire involved there on Jeanne's end. But what about the scenes at the bal masqué and in the alley?

It's made pretty clear that, for reasons of both chemistry and whatever secret thing is wrong with her, Jeanne wants Vanitas's blood. She doesn't want to want Vanitas's blood, and she doesn't want to act on the desire, but she desires it anyway. And Vanitas, through dubcon-level coercion and threats of blackmail, cajoles her into acting on that desire.

It's a classic romance novel setup of the heroine saying "no, I shouldn't" while secretly filled with want, only for the love interest to force her to "give in to her desires." She wants to drink his blood, and Vanitas gives her no choice but to do so.

Jeanne, in becoming a Bourreau, was meant to shed everything that made her a person. She was a tool. She was not meant to want anything. And that makes her the perfect character to act out that romance novel trope on. She's the ultimate example of a woman that isn't supposed to want what she wants, because it's not just sex that she isn't supposed to want. It's everything.

But, by casting Vanitas in the mold of a bodice ripper-style love interest, Jeanne is given an out. Gévaudan is her breakthrough—the moment when she goes directly against her orders to do something for the sake of her own heart. Before that point, when she still struggles to admit to wanting things, the only possible way she can act on a desire (including a sexual or blood desire) is to be cajoled and coerced.

And at the bal masqué, her biting Vanitas is the first time we see her carry out an act not in service of Luca.

[bugsbenefit]

i need to complain about this version of the official s2 map floating around online because it's just so wrong??? and i keep seeing people trying to use it as a reference when there's so many Glaring problems with it

this one

for clarifications, the map itself is from the show, however, this specific version has had a Redditor adding location markers that are so egregiously wrong it hurts my map enthusiast heart

1) the "Junkyard" isn't where it's marked here? at all???? i genuinely want to know what whoever did this was on. because for a) the actual location of the Junkyard is Marked on the map, you just have to read it. sadly i can't show it to you on this map bc it's in the cropped off area north of the Wheeler and Sinclair homes. great job Mr Redditor. also b) the place the Redditor chose to place the Junkyard is Right Next To Loch Nora. you know, the wealthiest neighbourhood in Hakwins? like, if you had to pick any location for the junkyard besides it's real location... this is the worst place to put it. it'd literally be one street junction away from Loch Nora (and Yes, Loch Nora is actually labeled on the map, again, i don't think the Redditor actually read the map)

2) the "Byers" home is not there either??? Will got taken on his way home, who in their right mind put Will's home on a road he would pass long before he actually fell off his bike? 0 thought went into this

3) the "Van flipped" thing is absolute bullshit too. no it did not happen halfway across town from the Wheeler's. the party left the Wheeler's home and then traveled to the Junkyard north of their house to hide in the empty bus. the Van was flipped in the same culdesac neighbourhood the Wheeler's live in, the party never left the North East corner of the map during that whole chase

4) "Melvald's" is just... wow. canonically it's next to the library. the library is southeastish on the map and a labeled location. how the Redditor convinced themselves it was halfway across town when we see the location for 3 seasons is beyond me (actually it isn't. there's a street called Melvald boulevard where they marked the store. they obviously just didn't read it right again and used 0 common sense so they just assumed it was the store instead of a street)

5) the "Wheeler's and Sinclair's" homes are too far north and too far apart. Lucas and Mike are neighbours for one. and secondly, Maple Street starts a lot further south than the Redditor seems to realize i guess

6) and Hopper's Cabin, the Harrington's, Hargrove's, Henderson's, and Mr Clarke's are literally just guesses. we have no addresses for most of these locations, and for the one's we do, the street names aren't on the map. the Redditor literally just guessed here but still put them on the map like there is even a smidge of canon suggesting they're there

i know this is ranty but this map is genuinely so frustrating to me. it's been on Reddit for ages and so many people use it as orientation or for fics etc, when it's one of the most outlandishly wrong maps i've seen in a while. like, so wrong that even thinking about it logically for a second makes the map fall apart

genuinely my worst enemy, i want to fight this Redditor, my map lover heart is bleeding

also if anyone is looking for an actually canon compliant version of this map, i do have one (at least with every one of my choices on where to place things explained so there's no painfully wrong and completely unjustified claims in there)

[toongrrl-blog]

My Style Analysis: Devi in Ben's Dream Part 2

Alright folks we are gonna take another ring around the rosy everything Ben got thinking of this dream.

One thing I kick myself for despite the fact that both Stranger Things and NHIE are Netflix productions is why I didn't see it sooner.

Devi is likely dressed in an updated version of Princess Daphne from the classic arcade game Dragon's Lair, a Don Bluth production.

Yes the archetypal Damsel In Distress whose character design was based on Playboy pinups, who looks like she'd fall out of her lingerie (lots of fashion tape must be used) and part of the Dumb Blonde stereotype that was used do demean conventionally attractive women AND women who didn't fit the mold regardless of physical appeal. And her Knight In Shining Armor? Dirk.

Despite fitting the archetypal notion of the Knight, Dirk is not drawn as desirably as Daphne, part of the reasons many feminists found the games to be sexist (with Space Ace being a marginal improvement given that Kimberly, a redheaded Daphne, is sassy and spunky and is able to take initiative in saving the day) and Daphne is a passive figure in all this.

Now what about ST2 and NHIE? Well....

In the opener to the 2nd Season of the highly popular sci-fi period piece, the boys (Will Byers, Mike Wheeler, Dustin Henderson, and Lucas Sinclair) head over to a 1984 perfect arcade where Dustin tries to best Lucas's high score at the game only to have Dirk killed by the dragon and Lucas gloat about being able to save the blonde beauty. Why is this important?

Because New Girl in Town Max Mayfield ("Mad Max") beat Dustin's high score on Dig Dug and soon Lucas and Dustin are both in competition for the acerbic tomboy's feelings, thus marking a foreshadowing of who gets the girl.

It's Lucas, of course. But despite time zones, episode by episode conflicts, and decades separating the couples, Lumax and Benvi do have a lot in common. Buckle up because we will be talking about how Western Society treats difference in ethnicity, heritage, race, and appearance and gender.

One thing to make clear that the image of the Knight in Shining Armor and the helpless Princess is often obnoxiously Eurocentric, especially of the Gallic or Anglo persuasion. Princess Daphne is tall, leggy, slim and curvaceous with long, blonde hair and blue eyes with a voice high on helium and a babylike demeanor, a kind of innocence attributed to respectable European women that Karens have exploited for generations often to damaging effects; Dirk is meant to stand in as traditionally masculine but hapless enough to be relatable to the (assumed) male players of the game, all he has to do is save the girl to have any shot with her leading to the unfortunate implication that young men are entitled to the opposite gender, especially the ones considered the most desirable but he isn't classically handsome, historically men have been able to get away with not living up to beauty standards by being able to be identified with their talent, intelligence, heroics, finances, economic savvy, work ethic, virility, strong character, sense of humor, or being a decent person. And of course it's been said (and proved) that white men can get away with being mediocre and still scale the ladder of society, whereas his conditionally white and racialized counterparts have to work harder to even take their steps on an often more perilous ladder.

Historically in our society, both members of the Black and Jewish Diaspora have had a....hard time of it: often as targets of derision, fear, violence, and disdain for the jobs they were sentenced to do (often in less "respectable" areas) and this also affected how (and this is not to take away from how insidious anti-Black and anti-Semite misogyny is, go ask Meghan Thee Stallion and Elana Steinberg) men of these groups were depicted: either desexualized and non-threatening to the point of being humiliated or over-sexualized and "out to take our wimmin" and scapegoated because won't someone please think of the children?

Sometimes if they were "lucky", they got to be "the best friend" to the less ethnic white guy who presents as WASPy. They could be attractive (if not more) or charming (if not more) or compelling to watch (if not more) as the hero but don't get the leading man treatment or are the replaceable awesome love interest who are moved aside for the more flawed and relatable white character (look at Courtney B. Vance in Sex and the City); there is also ugggh beauty standards that favor Eurocentric gentile features over non-European features. Dirk is drawn in that classic homely cartoon guy style while both Lucas and Ben are more conventionally desirable to their girlfriends (and many fans of their respective shows) but while Dirk is entitled to Daphne's affections (and by implication, her body), both Lucas and Ben (who are both younger than Dirk) have to not only save the girl but they also have to gentle their way (a term I learned as a kid) by being more emotionally available and being there for their girlfriend's vulnerabilities and be willing to risk heartbreak. Both @urspopinionsareshit (on masculinity and anti-Semitic tropes) and u/absentminded88 on Reddit (on Lucas Sinclair and tropes focusing on African American masculinity) have wrote extensively on these topics but my point still stands that often men of both diasporas were often overlooked as paragons of ideal masculinity.

Now it's one for the ladies!

I picked these because Max and Devi have something that poor Daphne lacks: illuminating friendships with other women and looks like I will have to toss a wet mildew blanket into the party.

Let's talk feminine stereotypes and difference! *dodges tomatoes*

It's quite a stretch to suggest that both Max and Devi don't fit a conventional eurocentric blonde beauty as both Sadie Sink (who's also a model) and Maitreyi Ramikrishnan are both pretty girls with expressive eyes with slim figures but yet many women of color and redheaded women were often not considered paragons of beauty (if they weren't being over-sexualized as homewreckers and temptresses) and often not considered feminine due to depictions of their "fiery" tempers at best or being seen as castrating harpies. Max and Devi both struggle with their society's view of how girls should behave, have dealt with trauma, not taking shit from boys or authority figures or even other girls, chafing against certain expectations put on them while trying to navigate femininity away from their mothers (who they have strained relationships with) and with the help of mass media (eep). But ultimately both girls find empowerment in their relationships with other women, finding out how capable they really are even with threatening a man with a weapon or destroying his skateboard, and in their own self-expression and put-upon uniqueness. Whereas Daphne existed to look pretty and adore Dirk (and by extension the assumed cis male player), Max and Devi have agency and ideas with formidable personalities that intimidate their peers and do-nothing adult authority figures. If they need saving, they at least try to resist and are capable of it.

This initiative is reflected in the dream: Devi declares her academic accomplishments and capability are superior to Ben's and that is a turn on for him, she manages to Jedi mind-trick his shirt off, and declares she will take charge of their lovemaking. Perfect combo of sensuality, brains, beauty, and gumption.

Both Lumax and Benvi prove that there is an appeal towards seeing couples not fall into strict gender roles where one is more capable than the other and one has work hard to meet a trophy wife standard and about thirty years after Daphne and Kimberly of Space Ace, we have seen the sassy, vocal, independent love interest role evolve from love interest to being the protagonist/main character of her story.

[hellofanidea]

ok so this is prolly a lot but it has occurred to me that I can't really imagine Lucas as well as I do teddy so!! all the face & features for Lucas for the OC asks? and for esther too, since they're both samsas and I'd love to see their shared similarities!

Ooh okay wonderful I love talking about the Samsas! Sorry this has taken so long to get to you! I'm not gonna specifically split this up by header, I'm just gonna ramble and hope I've hit everything! As a note, most of what I say about Lucas here refers to him in the 1940s onwards, as opposed to his college days. Obviously there's a lot of overlap, but this is meant to be him at arguably his most settled. It also makes him easier to compare to Esther, who is a young adult by this point.

Lucas clocks in at a solid 5’9”, and is roughly the tallest (both Eli and Lea like to try disputing this). He's best described as ‘average sized’, but wore lots of ill-fitting clothes as a child and young man that made him look lankier than he is. He gets softer as he gets older, especially after the war, and fills out a little more noticeably.

All the Samsa children have the same roman nose as their mother, and both of their parents’ dark hair and eyes. Lucas wears his hair short and practically cut, slicked back off of his forehead. His teeth are crooked, so he usually smiles with his mouth closed, which can make him seem more reserved than he is. He has several noticeable freckles and moles, most prominently one on his jaw and another by his eye. There's one behind his ear that's harder to spot. There's an almost permanent shadow under his eyes.

Lucas moves with purpose and precision. He's very aware of his surroundings and his place in them. As such, he doesn't like clothes that are too tight or restrictive. The closest he gets to really fidgeting, especially as he gets older, is having his hands on his hips and tapping his foot in a nervous, and usually annoyed, habit. Another common stance for him is arms folded across his chest, an unimpressed look on his face. That being said, his posture can be abysmal. He might be a doctor, but he's not immune to standing like a question mark.

Esther, on the other hand, is 5’0”. She's the shortest, and youngest, and there is definitely a joke in her family that God must have given her eldest siblings too much height and saved none for her. She's proportionally stockier than Lucas, though. Always more athletic than him, there's some muscle to her frame that isn't always immediately noticeable, from a youth spent running around and climbing.

Her hair is long, but similarly practically kept to her brother's, usually in a braid or a scarf or a very easy updo to keep it from her face. When it's loose there's a tight wave to it. There's a gap in her two front teeth, but that's never stopped her from smiling widely, and when she does it has a way of moving the moles on her cheeks and lips. There's the beginnings of smile lines around her mouth and eyes.

She's much more animated than Lucas in her movements, and so naturally a little more clumsy. Her hands are always moving, gesturing in speech or playing with her cuffs or jewelry. When she’s reading she can go totally still, though, and can almost blend into the furniture, which has startled a lot of people in the past. There’s a scar on the back of her hand from playing with a stray cat that got a little too rough.

[rosemarygrey]

Lucabeth Breakup: bad writing or Classic plot trope?

I know there have been very polar and mixed Feeling about the breaking up of a couple that have been together for 2 full seasons just before the expected wedding and it is valid that if they were your favourite couple that you would feel angry and upset today i'm not going to be adressing which guy was better or who she should have ended up with, but rather the actual way they wrote Elizabeth and Lucas's growing apart to the point of seperation.

First of all broken engagements are not exactly new to the movie and tv world, and it is actually fairly common to have the heroine (or hero) choose the wrong person fist only to find that they have blindly missed there true love right in front of them, or perhaps there true lve came along after they had got enaged. so lets take a look at a few of those examples...

The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society (movie version). the heroine Juliet has just published her first book after the war when flowers start appearing at her flat. after a period of mystery she discovers they have been sent by an american owner of a publishing company who wants to meet her as an author but falls in love with her, she is a little hesitant at first, but she falls for his book character like charm and goes on a carnival of fancy dates, flowers and dancing, then she starts getting letters from a society of gurnsey and is so moved by them that she decides she's like to visit them and see if she can get ideas for her times article, she is about to go when her boyfriend proposes and she happily agrees, when she arrives in guernsey she finds that it is still haunted by the stories of the occupation and she feels self concious about her ring making her seem unaproachably hoigty toight so she takes it off, she meets the society in person and enjoys time with the sweet but very shy Dawsey Adams but just as he begins to open up to her mistakenly thinking she's single, her fiancee returns and seeing the contrast she realises that her fiancee would never want the same things in life that she wants, and that Dawsey is her soulmate, so she breaks it off and a lot of things happen ;) no spoilers about that!

The sound of music: the captian gets engaged to the charming baroness before he slowly finds himself falling for the more spirited and harum scarum maria

Sanditon tv series: In sanditon the heroine charlotte has lost her late love sidney and after grieving she opens herself up again to love and gets caught in a triangle between a milita officer and the heartbroken, reserved uncle of the children she is governess to: alexander cloborne, she falls for Alexander after she discovers the militia officer is not the gentleman he appeared to be but they keep misunderstanding one another and she thinks he is not going to propose and gets upset,leaves in tears to her hometown, gets engaged to a good family freind ralph. she returns to sandition with ralph where she keeps being thrown in the path of mr colborne, she realises she was mistaken in thinking he didn't care and that in trying to protect herself from hurt she has now made herself more pain, she tries to force herself to continue her relationship with ralph becuse she doesn't want to be unfair, but he starts to notice that her hearts not in it and she realises it is more unkind to pretend to love him so she breaks it off and Ralph leaves sanditon heartbroken. then a lot of things get in the way and i'll leave you to guess the end.

these are my top three enjoyable movies that include a broken engagement. but in all of there there was one thing that made the breakup acceptable or even wanted by the viewers and what was that?

it is simple that we were shown a clear peek at the end goal before we grew too attached to the engaged couple, in Gurnsey we see the imbalence that Mark renolds (the american) is much more flashy than juliet and we are given the idea that he is a distraction. In the sound of music we are given the childeren's disspointed reactions to there fathers engagement and we see the baronesses shallow attitudes about wanting to get the childeren off her hands and into school. In sanditon we see that although ralph is definatly in love with charlotte we know she made the decision in pain and we are shown several instances of charlotte misscomunicating or hiding things from ralph.

so did we really get enough hints that this is where they were going with Lucas and Elizabeth, Frankly No, we did not, We got hints she would choose nathan in season 8 but when she did not we settled down into a lucabeth ending and were given No hints he was a safe choice, no hints that Elizabeth's heart wasn't in it, but that is becuase they didn't make the decision until season 10 began. then they began to thread in those hints, such as the disagreement over the house, cake and grand gestures and little jack going to sit with Nathan and Allie in church, but it was too late for many Lucabeth fans, They used the reasonable differences in character that Team Nathan had pointed out didn't really fit, but they used them too late to give the Lucabeth Fans a strong idea of what was coming so they could adjust to it. that was a bit of a mistake, but they still made the decision out of good intentions as they can see the inner workings that we cannot, they have reasons they can't say as to why they had to make that decision but it wasn't made to upset the fans it was made out of an unamed neccessity to continue the show. maybe chris saw that he didn't want to stay on as a major full time character for the 20 season they were hoping for and he decided to step back now so that they didn't have the major problem they had when Daniel lissing left. that doesn't mean he's leaveing now, but that is just one of the many things that could have affected the writing. so yes it wasn't the ideal way of writing a change of the story, but if it needed to be done they could have done it worse, instead as soon as they knew they started hinting so that lucabeth fans were already dreading the switch before it happened thus preparing them for the hard blow so it didn't completely knock them over. they tried to make it as respectful as possible within the sudden timeframe they had and considering it that way my final conclusion is that No it wasn't bad writing, it wasn't the best writing, but it cirtainly wasn't the worst considering that we now know they have reasons they can't specify why they had to decide to switch.

My heartfelt sympthay to those who have been dissapointed in the season.

[toomuchburgers]

Alright, movie review time.. Bones and All, a new flick from Luca Guadagnino and obviously starring everyones favorite white boy Timmy Chalamet and Taylor Russel, is something that has been on my mind since i watched it a few days ago. i think this movie is fantastic, from the soundtrack to the visuals to the performances to the grossness of it all and to the romance of it all it’s kind of beautiful down to the bone (; i plan on watching it again because i just enjoyed it that much, god i’ve had the soundtrack kind of on repeat lately, even ordered the book for me and my brother who saw it with me.

For anyone unfamiliar, Bones and All is a 2022 Romance/Drama/Horror(?) film about a young woman with a peculiar hunger, Maren, who is abandoned by her father and sent on a cross country journey where she meets a drifter named Lee who shares the same hunger. they both decide to travel together in a blue pickup truck where they begin to realize their feelings for one another may be more than platonic as well as facing their pasts.

I am going to spoil stuff here so if you wanna watch blind maybe just skip this paragraph. i think my favorite part was Taylor Russel as Maren, she has this sense of relatability to her as the outsider in the world she lives in, both her and Lee are searching for some sort of identity throughout the film and it’s real, or at least it feels real, i’ve been there i’m sure many others have when you aren’t deemed normal for the way to act, talk, look, etc. obviously it’s a bit different in this case since both of them eat people but considering the whole thing is sort of a metaphor i think you can switch it out and see just how much one might relate to these two. especially when they do start falling for each other because they can finally find solace in someone loving them for who they are. it’s a little touching in a way which makes the ending all the more tragic as they finally settle down, or “be people” as Lee puts it, they still have to face a part of their past, in the form of Mark Rylance’s Sully, rearing it’s head again and ultimately destroying what they built together. it’s sad, it got me for sure. especially since Sully, who i mentioned there, is so terrifying. every single time he was on screen my stomach got tight, he’s played so perfectly as this other outcast who shares a lot in common with Maren and Lee and yet, can’t seem to leave them alone. and it ends on this great yet kind of unsettling collage of images from the this awful moment flashing between what their apartment looked like and after it was cleaned, before finishing on this beautiful shot of a midwest field that they once sat in together. i think that’s where i’ll end it, this movie is a 5 out of 5 stars. it’s so beautifully shot and acted that it’s been on my mind for a few days now. have a good day everyone.

[gh0stch3rri3]

I need opinions from like the three other people under The Rifleman hashtag but I wonder so often what it would be like if Lucas had a daughter instead of a son. The social standards of the time have to be considered but also put off to a degree since throughout the series Lucas goes against what would be considered the norm. Like what I often wonder is would she be expected to conform to what is considered ladylike or would she be permitted to just be a kid like Mark. There is a certain expectation for him as a father but I think the series would be VERY different if he had a daughter to raise.

First, would he have remarried? If you think about it the reason he does so well with Mark even though at the time women are solely responsible for raising children is they are both men or will be. Lucas was a boy once too and its his part anyhow to make sure Mark becomes a respectable man as he grows. If he had a daughter, there would be no relation like there is between him and Mark. So in that case even stricken with grief would he have remarried so he wouldn’t be at a loss as his daughter grew?

Second, how much different would the things his daughter would be allowed to do be from Mark? Through the course of the series he goes into town with his father, he goes and plays with his friends but most importantly he goes to and from the ranch on his own. Though women at the time weren’t seen as independent it’s already kind of established that he doesn’t think as lowly of women as most men do. But, throughout lots of western media there is this common theme of women being injured, harmed or forced, would this show up in The Rifleman? There are many times, almost every episode where Mark is kidnapped, held at gunpoint, or some harm befalls him to force Lucas’ hand. I cant help but think by putting the two of these together Lucas’ metaphorical daughter would be an absolute doomsday of a situation. In this case she would be in constant harm and at risk of sex crimes by even being around the rough characters we see so often. This would also force a new level of protection than we already see. Take a situation like the episode where Mark is kidnapped by Apaches and Lucas goes after him. When he finally catches up to the men who took Mark he goes what I can only describe as apeshit and strangles the leader while muttering that they took his boy. In certain scenarios I think his reaction would be equal but in others like the previously mentioned episode there is unfortunately an even higher risk of a different and more serious harm befalling a girl.

Third, would she be forced to do all the cooking or washing that Lucas and Mark split. In each episode where there is a woman present at the ranch even just for a visit she cooks and cleans like she has lived there her whole life. Personally, I think if he had a daughter she would be expected to do all her “womanly duties” but not to a point where it’s suffocating for someone who is still a child.

Fourth and final is dynamic. There is a great flow between Lucas and Mark when it comes to them being an iconic father son duo. But if Lucas really did have a daughter rather than a son, what would a simple interaction be like? Would she be a subservient girl or would she have the same light hearted and good nature we already see with Mark?

I don’t know if I missed anything big but if y’all have any thoughts of your own I would love to hear them. This sparked when me and a friend spoke about it and we roughly agree on most of the things I talked about but I would like to see some other views.

[andiatas]

H.M. The King's speech at banquet in connection with state visit in Mexico

Ministers, Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen, Dear guests,

It is with great pleasure that Her Majesty the Queen and I have come to visit the beautiful country of Mexico – and we are delighted to be “back in town”.

This marks our third state visit to Mexico. The first one took place in 1982, and the second in 2002. Then, just as now, we were warmly received and had the privilege of visiting your cultural treasures – ranging from museums and monasteries to pyramids. I even climbed a pyramid at sunrise. Rest assured; I will not dare such an adventure this time!

I have also visited Mexico on other occasions.

On a private journey to Cabo San Lucas in 2016, I observed and learnt how sustainable and profitable fishing can be combined and conducted in the best way.

And together with the Scouts I had the chance to take part in a fantastic event. Scouts from all over Mexico collected over 1,4 million aluminum cans in Mexico City’s central square to make the largest scout emblem in the world. One giant fleur-de-lis! The money they collected from all that aluminum was donated to charity. Truly admirable!

For more than 140 years Mexico has been a very appreciated partner to Sweden. Mexico is our second-largest export market in Latin America after Brazil. We aim to strengthen these trade relations even further during this significant visit.

Ladies and gentlemen,

We are pleased to be here, not only due to our strong bilateral trade relations but also because we share similar values that further unite our countries. Mexico and Sweden are likeminded regarding gender equality, sustainability, free trade, and democracy.

Furthermore, exchanges between our people are well established. Many Swedes are eager to study or work in the country and Swedish tourism to Mexico has increased in recent years. The popular tourist destination of Cabo San Lucas is a good example of having succeeded in preserving the integrity of marine ecosystems by investing in sustainable management and fishing tourism.

Tomorrow Her Majesty the Queen and I will visit Mexico’s largest university, the National Autonomous University of Mexico. A university that has offered Swedish language courses for almost 40 years – quite impressive!

Also, there is a broad cultural exchange between our countries, for example in the fields of music, film, and literature. All these art forms are cross-border and have the potential to unite people. As the Mexican Nobel prize laureate in literature, Octavio Paz, so wisely put it: “Literatures, like trees and plants, are born of a land and in it flourish and die. But literatures, also like plants, may be carried abroad to take root in a foreign soil”. That is certainly true. Thanks to the works of great Mexican authors, Swedes have become acquainted with the Mexican soul and nation.

This state visit manifests the close bond between our countries. We share the same values and have a lot in common – the best conditions for further developing our collaboration.

Her Majesty the Queen and I are really looking forward to these enriching days culminating in a visit to the Unesco World Heritage Site in Uxmal. Dear guests, I welcome you all to this dinner and propose a toast to the friendship between Mexico and Sweden!

Salud!

Speech held by H.M. King Carl XVI Gustaf at JW Marriott Hotel, Mexico City, on March 12, 2024.

[inapat16]

Phoebe

“-I never had a bike of my own. We didn’t have a lot of money, you know. But the girl across the street had the best bike. It was pink, and it had rainbow-colored tassels hanging off the handle grips, and a bell, and this big, white wicker basket with those plastic daisies stuck on! […]

-Did the girl ever let you ride it?”

-No. But she gave me the box that it came in. It had a picture of the bike on the front. So I would sit on it and my stepdad would drag me around the backyard.”

-That is so unfair.”

-Not really. I got to drag him around, too.”

This dialogue opens the episode “The One With All the Candy” from the Friends series. Despite its funny tone, how can you not feel a deep sadness with Phoebe's confession? At this point of the series, we know that she grew up in poverty, but this memory, which seems rather happy to her, reveals how the bicycle is one of those objects and experiences common to many young children - its absence therefore seems cruel, so much so that it is associated with this moment of life. Phoebe never had a bicycle, Phoebe did not have a childhood like others. Yes, that is unfair.

My first bicycle memory was the transition from four to two wheels. It was in Rennes, I was six. A couple of friends had a sightly younger son who had just taken off his wheels. What was my shock when I learned it: this boy, one year younger than me, had passed the two-wheeler test before me?! It was inconceivable, humiliating! A dull rage took hold of my body. Despite the efforts to hide it, his mother may have a suspicion of it since she suggested that we go to a parking lot to initiate me into two wheels.

It was the end of the day and the asphalt was bathed in sunlight. The time of rememoration idealize propably moments of path; isn’t that an indication of the importance I attach to this one in particular, accompanied by its intense emotion? I got on the bike, feverish and determined, and only took a short time to overcome this ordeal. In a second, the bitter ego wound turned into pure delight. This exhilaration was relatively similar to when, around the same time, I immersed my whole body in the small pool of a municipal campsite, and had the audacity to lift my two feet off the ground. I was floating, I was weightless. I ride in balance, I pick up speed.

Those emotional clicks punctuate lives and are as many initiation rites. The bike will then remain a moving place where you experience some strong emotions for the first time. Freed from the small wheels, it becomes lighter to take flight. During races against time, yourself and pain, you push your strength to the limit and, with all your senses on the look-out, the body becomes one with the machine and the environment. Beyond the jubilation of the race, it is also the euphoria of escaping the gaze of the world through speed and movement, and thus of finally being yourself, alone, which invades the whole being. If boys are encouraged to test their strength, this is not the case for girls. In this way, cycling, like many other sports and games, develops the spirit of competition and of outperforming oneself through mental and physical strength, which is so little integrated in the education of young girls. Hematomas, scars, bumps and scratches scare some, because they are painful and ungraceful marks of masculinity, while others will make a real collection of them. Those childish "war wounds" prove the courage of the bravest and above all, free the cyclist from her gender.

Giulia is a young Italian girl, heroine of the cartoon Luca. Her dream is to win the PortoRosso Cup Race and this way "put an end to the tyranny" of Ercole, who has won five times in a row. The race is a triathlon that consists of swimming, eating pasta and cycling. To succeed, she agrees to join forces with Luca and Alberto, two sea monsters disguised as humans. Together, they form the "underdogs" team: two sea monsters and a girl, the name was well chosen. Yet, despite their differences and the low blows, the three win the competition. When fear and anger rise among the inhabitants of the small coastal town when they discover the aquatic nature of the "underdogs", Massimo, Giulia's father, explains himself to the defeated ex-winner, who doubts their identity:

"-If they are not monsters, what are they?

-I know what they are. They are Luca and Alberto and they are the winners."

Whether a monster or a girl, social determinations fade away during the race: the competitors abandon their initial differences to become living beings who all share the burning hunger to win.

Phoebe is still far from the PortoRosso Cup Race: for the moment, let her discover the simple joy of riding, not on two - Phoebe is reasonable, come on! - but four wheels. And look at her so happy; she rides, she is stable, it is her very first bike.

Lucile Zheng-Launay

[0ctogus]

Ok. I'm going to try to answer everything :D

First, Bacteria are definitley not paraphyletic. We know for sure that they're their own thing and they don't have descendants that aren't classified inside them (mitochondria and chloroplasts are technically descendants of bacteria though). The tree in the museum can appear a bit confusing because it's not clear where the LUCA is meant to be, but if you can imagine the LUCA being where i marked it the tree doesn't actually suggest that bacteria are paraphyletic. If anything i take much more of a problem with the fact that there's little circles on the nodes of the tree, which you shouldn't put on cladograms as it suggests that there are organisms there, when nodes only represent hypothetical common ancestors.

I'm not entirely sure where you got some of the questions about syntrophy from so I'm going to try and explain in more detail and hopefully it's clearer this time, my bad for trying to rush through syntrophy when it's something that takes a while to understand :). Also to be clear, when i say concentration i definitely mean concentration of whole compounds within a mixture.

First of all, to be clear, syntrophy it's something that two organisms do together. Your post-its appear to imply that the sulfate reducing bacteria is the one that does syntrophy alone, but it's both the archaeon and the sulfate reducing bacteria that do it at once.

Ok so let's say you have an anaerobic environment with amino acids and sulphate which was our case. You can extract energy from amino acids by fermenting them which generates ATP in order to sustain the cell, but just like most fermentations it's not very efficient.

When a cell does respiration, it oxidizes (steals electrons from) the carbon and gives the electrons to a terminal electron acceptor (in aerobic respiration this is oxygen). Since oxygen has a really high reduction potential (aka reaaaaaaally wants electrons), you can deplete the electrons of energy a lot and convert that into ATP before giving the electrons to the oxygen.

In fermentation, however, you don't have a terminal electron acceptor, and this is a problem because you only have so many Electron carrier molecules like NAD/FAD (i'm guessing you've heard of these) that you can use to oxidize the amino acids (or other carbon source). If you stop giving the electrons to something, you run out of "empty" electron carriers, and if you run out of electron carriers, you can't oxidize carbon which produces ATP which the cell needs to live. Therefore in fermentation, the electron carriers give their electrons back to the products of oxidizing the carbon so they are free to go oxidize more of the carbon source and keep generating ATP. Therefore, at the end of the process, the carbon hasn't really been oxidized, its electrons have just been sort of shuffled around before being returned and the energy production is minimal.

There are more and less efficient fermentations but there are some (as is the case with syntrophy) that just won't happen under standard conditions because they're not energetically efficient enough. However, as side products, fermentation produces organic acids and hydrogen. If the concentration of one of these products were to be lowered, the fermentation would turn more efficient because of chemical equilibrium. Here is where the sulfate reducing bacterium comes in. The sulphate reducing bacterium can't use the amino acids in the medium, but it can use hydrogen to reduce the sulphate in the medium and get energy out of that. Therefore if the fermenter and the sulphate reducer live very close together:

-The sulphate reducer gets a source of hydrogen and it can use that to get energy by reducing the abundant sulphate in the environment. This also keeps the environment very low in hydrogen

-The fermenter is able to use the aminoacids that the sulphate reducer can't, generating hydrogen for it, and this is only possible energetically due to the sulphate reducer keeping the hydrogen low

And they lived happily syntrophically ever after.

Ok hopefully that explanation of syntrophy was clearer and you can see why both microorganisms need each other. The archaeon can't ferment without something consuming the hydrogen and the sulphate reducer doesn't get hydrogen unless something is fermenting. If anything still isn't clear don't hesitate to ask :D

Moving on! The post-its are very nice and funny lmao. The only inaccuracy is the thing i pointed out with only the sulphate reducer being marked as doing syntrophy when it's both of them in close association.

I'm not entirely sure what the most current hypothesis for the nucleus formation is, but if anything i'd say there's many ways that the nucleus could form. The whole "prokaryotes don't have nuclei or organules" thing is actually a high school biology oversimplification. There's bacteria which have things which by most people's standards would be called a nucleus (see: Planctomycetes) and things that are basically organules and inner membrane systems are incredibly abundant among the prokaryotes (carboxysomes in cyanobacteria, thylakoids in cyanobacteria, inner membrane systems in methylo/methanotrophs and purple sulfur bacteria, chlorosomes in green sulfur bacteria...). If a prokaryote has some kind of membrane invagination it's kind of really easy for that to transform into a nucleus with just a bit of reorganization. I think that the paper which proposed the hypothesis i explained focused mostly on the mitochondria because having an endosymbiont be the one which does most of the basic cell metabolism is kind of a big step to take, and more "unbelievable" than inner membrane systems sorta rearranging to form a nucleus. I can say for certain that the nucleus didn't form due to some kind of weird endosymbiosis, it was definitely some membrane reorganization by the archaeon and not something like what happened to the mitochondria and chloroplast. IIRC the paper we're talking about says that when there's the membrane fuckery going on to engulf the alpha proteobacterium it'd be sorta easy for the nucleus to form at the same time. As towards why the nucleus stayed, i can definitely answer that! It's compartimentalization. Just like with most other organules, if you can have a separate compartment that can hold just the proteins relevant to a process, you can have those proteins at higher concentrations and also not have to worry about their interactions with proteins in any other compartments, which allows for much more complexity of organization and regulation. Since ribosomes are in the cytosol and not in the nucleus, having a nucleus also allows you to do shit to mRNAs before they get exported, which also allows for more complexity.

Hope this answers stuff! Don't hesitate to ask more :DDDDD i love ranting.

(I agree that textbook is horrible the five kingdoms system has been outdated for aaaaaaaaaaaages, fuck let me look it up ok the three domain system has been in place since fucking 1977, it really should be more than enough time for school curricula to abandon whittaker's system)

Hi! what a bummer that your account was deleted. I saw the tags on the three domains post and just wanted to answer. The current hypothesis is that eukaryotes originated when an archaeon of the Asgardarchaota clade (iirc more specifically from Heimdallarchaeota) entered a symbiotic with an α-proteobacteria. This symbiont became kind of entangled in membrane protrusions produced by the archaeon until eventually it lived complitely inside it, and thus appeared the first eukaryote (kind of more complicated and involves several metabolical exchanges, i can explain more if need be). If this hypothesis is true, not only are eukaryotes closer to archaea than to bacteria, but they'd also be directly descended from them. Since keeping the clade archaea without including eukarya would be paraphyletic, this leads to what is called the two domain theory, where eukaryotes are grouped inside archaea :)

(ask from @0ctogus)

Are the archaea incl eukaryotes grouped inside bacteria?

Also, what is an alpha proteobacteria? How did it end up with another organism’s DNA in it?

[thirsty-for-jae]

im curious what do you have in common w/ your bias?

[frenchgremlim1808]

Stop justifying Billy attitude.

 Introduction

This is a follow up post to my harringr**ve has much more follower than lumax lucas and max. You can find it here

Okay i made a promise, so today i’m gonna fulfill it. So i’m gonna say somethings that i didn’t think was controversial. Billy hargrove actions are inexcusable and irredeemable, he would have never have a redemption if he lived, he would have stayed an horrible asshole whatever would have happened. The only point in time where he could have become better is nonexistent, because he’s dead. So stop acting like he is a good person.

Now i am forced to explain cause it seems some idiot actually thinks that this character whose whole purpose was to pose a human threat to the cast and represent the bigoted views of the 80′s is in a fact sad boy who just needed a redemption.

Before i start just wanna clarify, liking billy has a character, liking how his purpose in the story was fulfilled or his complexity doesn’t make you a bad person. Not at all. I personally think that billy is a very well written character well fitted into the story and honestly very interesting way to show the effect of abuse and how abuse can change a person at a young age.

I’m gonna take every argument i saw and break it down for you.

1. Billy action are excusable he was a victim of abuse, so he continue the cycle of abuse, it’s not his fault !

Okay first do you think the same things to serial killer who also got abused by their parents. Is the fact that they were abused change anythings to the fact that they killed innocent people out of pure psychopathy and own twisted pleasure. Of course you don’t because that’ absolutely insane and if you actually think that go see a psychiatrist. 

“But op you can’t compare serial killers with billy all billy did was being mean to his sister’s friends” First of if you think he was just being mean to lucas/max, you’re either blind, or absolutely in denial. Billy tried to roll over lucas and co, burned a cat alive abused mentally max, menaced to kill lucas a child and steve, and even after his death still torment her so much that it pushing her toward suicadal thoughts. Second, okay you doesn’t like my comparisons then let’s make another. Do you think that my grandma who neglected and abused my mother out of pure hate for her simple existence in this world excusable in anyway because her childhood was bad. Because her childhood was kinda bad she now has the pass to abuse her kids and put permanent marks in their life of  self hatred and emotional disability. No she will never get that pass, never because her actions may come from past abuse, but it doesn’t change the fact that her actions ruined her children's self worth and view on the world. She continued the cycle of abuse while could have stopped it, she could have stopped it and given the chance to her kids that she didn’t get. But no she continued what her own parent’s did to her to her children’s. But my mom stopped it she stopped the cycle of abuse, by loving and taking care of me just like any mother should. She made mistake along the way but in the end she did the best she could for me.

My grandma actions are not excusable, but in a way understandable. She wasn’t strong enough to stop the cycle of abuse. Billy is the exact same. Billy actions are not excusable, in any way, but understandable.

2. “But if he had a good circle like Jonathan had, he wouldn’t turned like that”

Of course the Jonathan/ billy comparison. It’s true they have a lot in common. Physically abusive dad and an abused siblings. But i’m gonna express something real quick. What circle ? Like actually what circle. His anxiety driven mom ? His abused brother? Oh no his nonexistent friends who totally helped him not be an asshole. Jonathan didn’t have a circle he was alone against his dad. But still he didn’t decide to abuse Will, out of pure hatred towards the world. Having a circle doesn't mean your gonna be a good person, and not having one doesn’t automatically means you are gonna be an asshole. A good circle can help but in the end it’s all about inner strength. We really never talk about that but  Jonathan in my eyes is an extremely strong character. He was capable of not only surviving his father abuse and fly over it, but also becoming even more full of love for his brother and mother. He could have been just like billy, fallen into the deep end where no forgiveness is acceptable but no he fought against all of his father influence and learned from his abuse that he will never ever forgive him nor become like him. He will never forgive the abuser. 

And also if you wanna do comparisons let’s make a simple one. El has been abused her almost her whole life. Papa manipulated her. Even when he wasn’t with her he always had a certain control over her. In episode 8, Eleven has a choice forgiving the man who abused her or not doing that. She didn’t choose to forgive him, no she knew that in the end even with his kind words there was foul poison inside. A man who loved her wouldn’t have hurted her the way he did. A man who loved her wouldn’t have still tried to manipulate her. She knew deep down that whatever her heart could feel, he didn’t love her and he didn’t deserve forgiveness. She will never forgive the abuser. Pretty much everyone agreed with eleven choice. So why with billy is it different when he too abused max. Oh yes i forget he an conventionally attractive guy so you absolutely forget every action he did just because you simp for dacre. You know what, simp whenever you want for dacre, he’s a conventionally attractive white dude. But for the love of god stop confusing the actor with his character. Just because you think dacre is cute or whatever doesn't mean you have to act like his character did nothing wrong. HE’S A RACIST PIECE OF SHIT STOP PRETENDING LIKE HE ISN’T.

3.”Stop saying he’s a horrible person, that’s literally victim blaming him for his action”

Ooh, so saying that billy hargrove is an horrible person because he abused, threatened to death a child and burned a cat alive is victim blaming? I am currently blaming a victim ? You know what’s victim blaming, getting mad at Max for admitting that she hated billy and wished he died while he made her life a living hell. Victim blaming is also getting mad at Joyce for not being able to stand against loonie. It can also be blaming Jonathan for wanting to keep his job because his family is poor. That’s victim blaming. Billy is a victim of abuse true but like i said does it change any action he did ? In the situation i told was he a victim ? No he’s an abuser. Billy is an abuser. He may have been a victim but now he’s an abuser. He became an abuser the moment he decided to hurt max out of pure hate. When billy was young, he wasn’t an abuser, he was just a kid whose mother disappeared. He was just a victim; but when he became older he became an abuser. You can fell pity for the young abused kid who lost his mother, but you can’t feel pity for a freaking adult man who hurt 13 years old kids out of pure hate. Now all can fell for him is the pure feeling that he is a pathetic man who felt better by bullying thirteens years old.

4. “Leave us  to relate to a character who’s a queer coded abuse victim, we can just relate to his struggles”

I have some words, Look one minute at the cast, right here. 

So you wanna relate to an abuse victim who is queer coded and not racist nor abusive, will is there. You wanna relate to morally grey character who start of as a bad person but become better with time , Steve exist. Literally you have so many options; An abuse victim ( half of the stranger things cast), start of not that  great (Steve/ Eddie/ hopper), Queer/queer coded ( will,mike,robin,jonathan etc). You can pick anyone, literally anyone but you choose billy hargrove, Billy out of all them. Stop making a plea to yourself.

5.”The reasons we like billy is the fact that he could have had a redemption, we just want the best for him”

Stop it, like stop it right now. What redemption ? Billy dead. He’s fucking dead. So if i understand you like this character only for the non-existant version that you made up in your mind. You solely like a character because of a fanon version babygirlfied version of the character. Well that explain everything now. The reason why billy hargrove fan love him is only fueled by their own little fantasy world which doesn’t exist. Billy is dead he was never made to have a redemption. the writers decided to kill him for a reason. He was more of a plot point than an actual good person in season 3. And like do you actually think that if he lived he would have been a good person. Even if i don’t know got like therapy or something and by magic it worked would it have stopped him of being racist. No it wouldn’t.                                                          Do you want a little definition of racism 

“Racism is the belief that groups of humans posses different behavioral traits corresponding to inherited attributes and can be dived on the superiority of one race over another” Source Wikipedia

Racism is inherently the sentiment that some skin colors are superior than other. Racism is also putting stereotype on a certain ethnicity . It can manifest in a fear toward that ethnicity based on stereotypes.

Feeling superior. Billy hargrove feels superior to lucas because of skin color. He feel like his skin color is superior to poc skin color. I’m gonna ask a question, did you ever see in your life an extreme racist suddenly change and realized the error of his ways. Maybe it has already happened but it doesn’t change the fact that is rare. “But op billy isn’t an extreme racism it was just mild” No Billy racism isn’t mild. He tried to run over kids, and threatened of death a child. And even if his racism was mild it doesn’t change anything, He a racist in the 80 s. You think that him going to like therapy would change his racism especially in the 80 s.“But he wouldn’t have killed Lucas, he was just threatening him” Oh he JUST threatened of child of death, nothings wrong there. And euh... If Steve didn’t protect Lucas what would have happened you think. He would have JUST beaten the crap of him. I’m personally a poc, to know that some white ass 13 years old excuse the racism of billy just like we are the one overacting in this situation. Your a poc and your a billy fan, i literally don’t give a shit. That doesn’t change that he’s an abuser. Billy issues as a person doesn’t just come from his blatant racism. 

6. But the show clearly want us to understand he wasn't  bad, look at max grief.

Max grief billy, in a way she feels responsible for his death. Sometimes she may wish that she died in his place. But in no way is it cause she realized she liked him or something. Max is grieving because of regret. She never loved billy, she hated him. He made her life a living hell. But she feels like it’s her fault he died. She grieving a human being who died a horrible death in front of her. In her monologue she said it she wished he died. Grieving a bad person who has hurt you doesn’t mean you loved them. It’s a normal human reaction. Their relationship was complicated. Max never wanted the two of them to be this. All she would have wanted is to gain just some peace she got that peace but in her head that this newfound peace killed her step brother. Max is a nuanced character, she make bad decisions and sometime think things that aren’t true, grief and depression swallow her whole. Compared what billy fans think many of the stranger thing cast is extremely nuanced.The show isn’t trying to to make us understand he wasn’t bad, their showing that their relationship was extremely complicated. 

And anyway they wouldn’t make max forgive Billy when one of the core moral of stranger things is against that.

                            “Never forgive the abuser”

Will and Jonathan will never forgive their father, Joyce will never forgive loonie,Eleven will never forgive pap and max won’t forgive Billy. Just like billy shouldn’t forgive Neil max will not forgive billy. And that’s why billy would have never been redeemed. 

Just before i reach my conclusion i’m just gonna state some things:

-The Billy and Karen affair is still one of the most uncomfortable things that happened in the show, and Billy clearly isn’t at fault, Karen shouldn’t flirt with a young boy like him, she could literally be his mom. And technically its wasn’t illegal since billy was 18 at the moment ( if in america; in Indiana at that time the legal age of maturity is even 18, if it’s not, and in fact 21.... My opinion of Karen will decline... a lot.) but still weird as heck.

- I will admit that i too saw some queer coding in billy character, i could completely see the queer coding but i’m pretty sure it’s just dacre having good chemistry with joe. And even if he was queer wouldn’t change that he was a racist and and abuser so....

-While i do think that we should take in count actors views of their characters, Dacre saying that billy wasn’t racist was awfully wrong ,even Caleb said it billy is racist. But really it’s not a reason to cancel dacre or caleb or anyone. Actually don’t cancel anyone please.Cancel culture is one of the most idiotic things we have on the internet right now, and it would be amazing to just stop with that.

-I would say that the only reason most of the billy hate community can act sometimes hysterical is mainly because the billy stans can sometime be so ridiculous and the delusional ones in the conversation. Instead of accepting the fact that they clearly just wanna fuck dacre which is i guess understandable, they use Steve as a scapegoat. Just like back in time in the undertale fandom     ( bad memories....) people shipped sans and frisk while using frisk, a child, as a self insert for them self.

Conclusion:

Just like the Wheelers, Papa, troy,Angela, Jason, the town of hawking in general billy is an indicator of the time period. The mentality of small town and the discrimination that minorities could face there. Stranger is all about following outcast of societies, freaks. Billy doesn’t follow that definition, and that’s why he’s not a main character. Billy is an incredible character who clearly is complex and has multiple layers. While he is a great character for his purpose as an antagonist, he should have never been idolized by so many people. Billy is not a good person, nor a character who as made to be loved. Billy was made for you to wish him to hate him, then gain pity, then realize he is a very grey character, who a complex deconstruct of toxic masculinity and the 80 s mentality. 

And i will conclude by the fact that while this post was made to get some thought out of my head and kinda clear my absolute desperation at the billy stans naivety. It is also to i hope help some  young peeps understand that billy hargrove isn’t a character who you should stan, and maybe wake them up a little. Anyone can be misguided, so that’s why i hope that if a billy stans  is reading this you understand why most of the fandom dislike him a lot. 

Also if your an ex billy stan say to me in comments what made you change ways.

Anyway spend 4 days on this shit, peace out love you all.