#any sort of property

[sumeria]

there are 5 monkeys inside you. you are sun wukong.

[puppetmaster13u]

Prompt 131

Okay, so first of all Dan would like to say it’s not his fault. Ellie was the one to bring some unknown object into the speeder and Jazz was the one driving. Or had Sam been driving- didn’t matter! It wasn’t his fault, he wasn’t the one shooting at them, he wasn’t the one to break whatever, he was not the one to open a stupid portal, and so it wasn’t his fault! 

So why is he now like, five years old, and why is the speeder crashed in some sort of corn field. Why is everyone- except for Jazz whose now like six- also like three at most?! And- oh fuck the door just opened and… okay that’s a kid. Like, nine at most. 

A kid and an adult, who he hadn’t noticed at first so again, it’s not his fault if he hissed at them and tried to hide his not-siblings behind him. It’s also not fair they’re apparently stuck to ghost speak for who knows how long, but at least they can understand the people. 

“Martha, get some blankets, it’s happened again!” 

[pocketramblr]

you know im thinking. im thinking maybe Yoichi wasn't even that into captain hero as an adult, but AfO kept bringing LITERALLY every conversation back to that because he decided to Be The Demon Lord and so Yoichi like, can't get an argument in unless he uses the same material so he's like 'oh my god i haven't even thought about that comic in ten years but even i know the bad guy didn't win. you should not be basing you whole identity, business model, and world destruction plan on your five-second impression of a comic book bad guy who didn't even win! also you shouldn't kill people!'

[legislacerator]

nothing feels better than defending the 19 y/o i heard the property manager screaming at by telling him that they can’t evict him until they give him proper notice. remember kids just because they don’t like you doesn’t mean they can just kick you out!!!! property management companies and landlords say shit like “you’re going to get evicted” over anything they don’t like just to scare people in their late teens/early 20s, since most of them don’t know their rights as tenants and have maybe never lived away from home before. don’t let them fool you!! property management companies have to follow the rules whether they like it or not

[kolourking]

Shen twin AU but with the dmmd twin hair thing added.

[arolesbianism]

A mini Meiro ref

[beargregor]

Hell yeah Bear Gregor supremacy

ourgh i'm embarrassed again you guys can't do this to me....... you're correct though. while i will once again thank you for your contributions to the bear gregor cause i should also inform you that you are my mortal enemy. your reputation from your tweets on twitter dot com precedes you and as such i must defeat you in gladiatorial combat for the title of most normal gregor fan on the world wide web. expect at least one pipe bomb in your mailbox within the next 20 to 30 business days

[clowningaroundmars]

lots of stores shutting down and businesses going bankrupt in my state....

kinda nervous not bc of of corps dying but bc this country has historically been terrible about leaving vacant storefronts and parking lots collecting dust and weeds for years!

places that could be used for housing, community centers, etc just sittin there 😔

[cuddlytogas]

Fyre sent me an article that made me Lose My Mind, so instead of sending 800 tweets about it, I decided to just write up my thoughts here

so, in re: ET Fox, 'Jacobitism and the Golden Age of Piracy' --

Fox is definitely exaggerating. His logic jumps from 'ship names and alleged toasts', to 'every pirate was one contact away from a confirmed Jacobite', to "a Jacobite maritime community" (296), with little evidence beyond each previous assumption. He does demonstrate a link with popular Jacobitism, but overstates pirates' political commitment by far.

There's one letter to George Camocke, a Jacobite naval officer, suggesting that the pirate fleet should unite under his command and take Bermuda as a Jacobite base, but the source is shaky, and it went nowhere once Woodes Rogers ousted the pirates. (It's I think from 1718 and unsigned? Possibly from Charles Vane and his crew? Fox only says that, "Through these contacts [unspecified, between Vane and English Jacobites] a letter reached George Camocke" (286), which is suspiciously vague, and I can't access the original to check. Either way, it would still only prove the committed politics of one crew.)

Fox also makes a lot of Archibald Hamilton, governor of Jamaica from 1710-16, who commissioned and profited from the anti-Spanish privateers who turned pirate and made up some of the original Bahamas pirates c. 1715. Since "it has been suggested that [Hamilton] was a Jacobite supporter" (283), Fox claims that these establishing pirates were also committed Jacobites, and therefore the whole pirate community that grew around them must have been. (Which leads to Fox then being baffled when there's no direct evidence of Jacobitism among some of them, such as the crews of Anstis, Fenn, or Rackham.) He relies on these assumptions, and then claims that every connection between pirates proves their mutual Jacobite sympathies.

It's much more likely (and in line with the historians I've read so far) that the Jacobite toasts and ship names speak to a broader anti-authoritarianism among pirates, with no evidence of committed Jacobite actions by them, eg, specifically targeting Hanoverian ships, or materially supporting or trying to support Jacobite rebels beyond that one letter. Indeed, the 1710s/20s pirates are generally agreed to be distinct for not adhering to religious/national loyalties like the C17th pirates usually did. (I'm so sorry, I haven't consolidated my notes yet, but I know Marcus Rediker goes through this, as does Kris E Lane, and I think Tim Travers and David Cordingly.)

Fox does identify a correlation between the rise and fall of Jacobitism and piracy over the mid/late 1710s, but attributes a pretty shaky causation: pirates ceased their Jacobite loyalties due to the suppression of Jacobitism in Britain and Europe. A much more obvious explanation is that both anti-authoritarian movements simultaneously flourished in the post-war, post-succession instability, then were both quashed as the new regime established itself and cracked down on rebels.

So, did many pirates espouse Jacobite sympathies? Yes! They named their ships in favour of Jacobite causes and rulers, and there are plenty of reports of them toasting to King James / the Pretender. (Which it must be said, although the sheer volume lends a ring of truth to the trend, individual claims should be taken with a grain of salt, as Jacobitism was a common accusation against criminals at the time, with or without a basis.)

Does that mean that the 1710s Caribbean pirate community was centred around a heart of politically committed Jacobites, as Fox argues, or largely motivated by Jacobite sentiments? Yeah, probably not.

Anyway, I am SO sorry that this article got me riled up XD the whole point of this is to say, I've never read anywhere that "many pirates were Jacobites driven out of Britain", which I KNOW wasn't even your main point, but I am unfortunately Insane. We can and should talk about expressions of pro-Jacobitism and actual political engagement among 'Golden Age' pirates, but what we know of their actual actions and espoused ideals doesn't speak to a trend of committed Jacobite politics beyond a general loyalty to rebellious causes.

[funforahermit]

are you kidding me, there's no sign of life from jonno for MONTHS and then a few hours after i get freshly obsessed with his acting and chemistry with rhys again his wife casually drops this:

how's that for synchronicity

[wonder-worker]

"It is difficult to argue that [Edward IV] was wrong in what he did. His advancement of [Richard of Gloucester] can be criticized only by those who believe that the only good nobleman is an impotent nobleman. Medieval kings did not think in these terms. Gloucester’s power was valuable because it ensured royal control of a significant and troublesome part of the country. Nor can Edward be blamed for not foreseeing the ends to which Gloucester might put his power. The duke had been a loyal upholder of the house of York, a central figure in Edward’s polity*; there was no obvious reason why he should not occupy the same role under Edward V. In this respect, precedent was on Edward’s side. Previous minorities had seen squabbles over the distribution of power, but no young king had ever been deposed. Even royal uncles traditionally drew a line at that, something which explains why Gloucester’s actions seemed so shocking to contemporaries and, perhaps, the reason why he got away with it so easily in the short term.

In the immediate sense, Gloucester must take final responsibility for what happened in 1483. However one explains the motives behind his actions, things happened because he chose that they should: there is nothing in the previous reign which compelled him to act as he did."

-Rosemary Horrox, Richard III: A Study of Service

*Richard was also, yk, Edward's own brother who had been entirely loyal to him during his life. The problem wasn’t that Edward trusted Richard (why wouldn't he?), the problem is that Richard broke that trust in a horrible and unprecedented way to usurp a 12-year-old. Please understand the difference.

[duckapus]

Thinking about what the Grid/MRU storyline would look like to the viewers, since obviously very few people in-universe are aware of the existence of digital life. 'Cause like, in order for the Grid to operate the way they do they have to be an actual indie animation studio with their own Youtube channel like Glitch Productions, and their tech company branch in the Mushroom Kingdom has obviously been showing up in episodes, most notably Astra's introduction and major role in the Racing Arc, and some hints to them possibly being the organization that took Tari that one time. (Also I haven't actually said this in a post yet but I've been imagining that the Grid's channel has been up for a while doing their own unrelated animation content so as to be less suspicious).

So people already think the two studios are working on something together, possibly some kind of ARG, because what other logical explanation is there for the SMG4 series to be casting this random up-and-coming animation channel as some kind of greater scope villain? And well, Luke can't just come out and say he has no idea how they got into his show, because then he'd have to explain how that's even possible, which is a bad idea since it would involve revealing:

Computer programs can and often do become fully sapient living beings

The only people who know this decided to record them for entertainment purposes instead of telling anyone

The actual real life multiverse is real

We only know this because an alternate version of the show's creator's self-insert main character nearly destroyed all of reality

Time travel is also real but only digital beings can do it

Digital beings are able to enter the real world (though it's extremely hard to do intentionally and there's a very short list of people who know how). It's unclear if IRL people can enter the digital world.

Several of the digital beings known to exist are bizarre parody clones of actual real life people

The vast majority are copyrighted characters and the companies that own them probably won't be too keen on getting them legally recognized as people

It would be chaos if not handled carefully. So GP decides to just let things play out for now, and both sides end up semi-unintentionally playing into the Massive Secret Collab assumption.

And then, of course, the video showing Tears of the Kingdom's activation goes up.

And the fans

go

nuts

An official, canon side series, made by another animation studio on their own separate channel? That's insane! Nobody could've seen that coming! It manages to blow the AvA Sticks being plot relevant to the Goomba Arc completely out of the water, and that was pretty massive itself!

And, just like during the buildup, the Glitch team can't say anything to the contrary without revealing Everything before it's safe to do so, and the Grid knows it.

[fideidefenswhore]

do you think henry would've put mary and elizabeth back in the succession anyways or was it a "just in case" thing when he only had one son? see i'm wondering why he didn't do it sooner, in the 1538-9ish time, to get them married. I just find it weird why he was never clear what their rights were when asked, to make them good brides, until right at the end, when that's why it was so hard to get matches. it feels like he was expecting to have a few more boys and was waiting it out, or getting some distance between him and their moms until he calmed down.

He didn't prioritize them sort of feels like the obvious answer...? Like, iirc, he was attempting to secure his ardently hoped for match with Christina of Denmark by pairing off his children in some sort of tiered alliance but he wasn't legitimating (wrong word, because that's not technically what he did in the Third Succession Act either, but ykwim) his daughters or even just Mary (which probably would have appeased Charles V to some degree, but he wasn't going to do anything that would acknowledge papal authority, which is why this match was never made in the end...they said they needed a papal dispensation to absolve the affinity btwn Henry and Christina via his marriage to Catherine and Henry said they didn't because it was annulled by the Church of England and btw, demanded they acknowledge its authority to annul the union) to do so.

So, the timing of the Succession Act would suggest your second theory. Henry had probably hoped for son(s) from Jane, Anne of Cleves, then KH. The years in between the execution of the last and his marriage to Parr is something of a historical lacuna, but even in a state where he has no expectation of any other sons, given that he's a self-made widower (self-made, twice over...disgusting), he doesn't establish any role for his daughters in the future succession.

After he's been married to Parr for nine months (I mean, it's gross to think of him checking off boxes on a calendar but...yk...nine months exactly is a hell of a coincidence), he gets Parliament to authorize a new succession settlement. He does this before he leaves for the war in France, which made the matter more immediately pressing.

I don't think any amount of time would ever make Henry associate his daughters with their mothers any less, tbh. But if we want to give Henry the benefit of the doubt, maybe this conditional (quasi-)legitimation was not effected for several years because he went back and forth on the decision, took and considered counsel on how, if he wanted to do this, he should bring it about, on what terms, was it a politically viable option, would it have support in Parliament, etc.

Because let's think about Henry as a person for a moment: it's his way or the highway, and he had a very narrow view of the what the succession should be, and what God's will was for his succession. Once the Rubicon was crossed in 1536, there was nothing that could ever have happened that was going to make him (quasi-)legitimate one daughter and not the other (again). To legitimate Mary alone would be to acknowledge the Pope's judgement of 1534 (not to mention to accede to the demand of the Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536), to legitimate Elizabeth alone would completely tarnish the Church of England (one could argue this was tarnished already by reversal, because the same authority that vindicated her parents' marriage also annulled the same, but...Henry would not see it that way); both tantamount to admissions of grave sin that no amount of repentance could diminish, both with the potential to reflect poorly on his authority and judgement, and that potential would not have been acceptable to him, he could never have accepted either to be questioned when he considered it his duty to preserve the sanctity of both.

There were more nobles that would have supported Mary's claim bona fides, but several of these people were destroyed in the Exeter conspiracy. Most that had vehemently defended Elizabeth's were dead, but Henry would have had negative associations with both, although few, if any, of either group would have supported the claim of either above that of a son by marriage.

Although it is rather ironic that by dint of circumstance, and for all his convictions, Henry essentially, eventually admitted, seven years after the deaths of both their mothers, that Mary and Elizabeth were both bona fides (enough so to inherit the crown, at any rate); just by different jurisdictions (Papal versus Anglican).

[lilgynt]

want to reach out to my brothers about what’s going on with my mom and how it’s effecting me but realistically i know they don’t care and even if they did they can’t do anything about it so im just skipping the reaching out and subsequent conversation that will just make me feel worse which like yes im isolating myself further in the abuse/gaslighting and letting myself sink further into it etc etc etc no one cares pass the weed and alcohol every night

[beeapocalypse]

grinding my teeth. unsure of how far i can push kitty b4 she goes from offputting to straight goofy

[vaguelyhauntedcornfield]

Anyone that doesn’t understand how AI is creating extra work for most people has never worked with personal data, NDAs, and privacy laws