#anyway.

[sapybara]

[masochistartt]

good boy, find the treat, yeah?

[isawiitch]

ok NOW we can all freak out marvel vfx workers voted to unionize thank god

article here

[mroddmod]

don't be weepy sleepy puppies

[overthinkinglotr]

It's ironic how a major part of Lord of the Rings is that storytellers always overlook hobbits in their legends because their simple lives are "less important" than the lives of Great Royals & Grand Warriors--- since that's ultimately been reflected in the current state of the Tolkien franchise itself! After the LOTR films, big-budget Tolkien franchise installments (and copycats) overwhelmingly focus on their Aragorn analogues, with hobbit-like characters shoved to the sidelines. The Lord of the Rings films may be flawed, but they succeeded because they had a strong central story-- the relationship between Frodo and Sam, and the fairytale-themes about small overlooked people who save the day while the villains are distracted by Great Heroes from Noble Bloodlines, are what give the story the deep lasting emotional impact that it has. But the franchise(tm) quickly decided that the royal warrior elves/men were the far more exciting marketable characters, and their battle skills could allow for more flashy spectacle. The Hobbit films gradually focused more heavily on the warrior characters, with Bilbo being a glorified extra by the last movie; The Amazon LOTR show focuses on a noble warrior elf of royal blood as its main character and political intrigue among the royalty of different kingdoms as its main plot; the recent animated film focuses on a noble hero of royal blood involved in epic battles. I've mentioned before that it's fascinating how all the new "Tolkien franchise" installments (as well as media inspired by LOTR) continue to center their stories on the Aragorn archetype-- a Destined Noble Hero/Warrior from a Royal Bloodline etc etc. The entire premise of Lord of the Rings is that Aragorn represents the hero of a typical generic fantasy epic, while the ordinary Hobbits are the heroes of this one. Aragorn is interesting not in spite of the fact that he is a side character, but because of it. If he were the central character of the story, Lord of the Rings would be very bland and generic. "Let's do a new version of Lord of the Rings but focus on powerful grand royal hero characters instead" is a lot like saying "let's do a retelling of Wicked from Dorothy's point of view." It's like, "congrats! you've successfully reinvented the exact type of story the original writer was commenting on and subverting." XD

[spitblaze]

I guess Chilchuck has brought us right back to 'adults who are short are child-coded and if you like them you're a pedophile' discourse huh

[sidras-tak]

I don’t go to cons to “have fun” or “attend panels”. I go to cons to wander the artist alley in a daze and emerge hours later missing $200. I go to cons to think “hmm I should get some food. But the line is too long right now” every five minutes into perpetuity. I go to cons to say “you look so cool” at people in cosplay and have them not to hear me even a little bit.

[marisatomay]

just saw someone call barbie movie an independent film. and. girls. what are we doing here. a $100mil movie, from warner brothers, about one of the most famous toys in the world, produced by the makers of that toy, is not an independent film. come on. you can be excited for it without treating it like some low budget arthouse underdog.

[gilmores-glorious-blog]

[ocdhuacheng]

So laios and fallin have been ostracized by society since they were children, Marcille has lifelong grief from constantly outliving her loved ones that leads her to dark magics, kabru’s village was destroyed by monsters, senshi and mithrun both have horror movie level backstories, izutsumi was sold as a freak show attraction, and then there’s chilchuck, who is a normal ass divorced middle aged man. And somehow he’s the most shady and secretive out of all of them

Edit can y’all please let me live I didn’t make this post bc I think chilchuck doesn’t have his own trauma or doesn’t experience racism or that being a union boss is a walk in the park or whatever I made it because him lying that he cheated on his wife to get the others to stop asking about his family was funny as fuck. Come on.

[meercraft]

100% convinced Scar has a secret twitter account btw bc that man appears in the most random conversations. he’s out here replying to a tweet of someone who was trying to promote their ranchers fic. how did he get there. i KNOW he’s out there lurking. he has to be. secretly. in the shadows. i know it

[hawberries]

emilie cultivars

[sandflakedraws]

hug time 🌺

[digitalmyyth]

Evil awful women and the blond guy who hangs out with them (he is also evil and awful)

[pinbones]

I've seen a few posts about women and pants now and many of them are very good, and not to nitpick those posts or downplay religious sexism or anything, but I have to emphasise:

Somebody who DOESN'T live in a controlling religious country/cult/family is also affected by sexism. We all know that, right? Secular parts of the first world also have opinions about how women dress, including when it comes to trousers, especially in childhood and in institutions like schools and the workplace

Me and many people my age (20s) remember being forced into skirts, punished and shamed by parents & teachers & peers & possibly then bosses about what we wear not being feminine enough, and it wasn't by deeply religious sects. Many updates to dress codes are very new and sexist views are still in place in many institutions. Normalised societal misogyny wants women (and people they want to treat as women) to dress femininely, down to what KIND of pants they're allowed to wear (compare a pink top and jeggings to mens jeans and tell me these two women are treated the same. Hating women in pantsuits is still a sexist office joke today, and even those outfits are feminine compared to male suits, which raise eyebrows when worn by women). The women I know who wear trousers regularly are literally otherwise feminine, and all wear dresses to events.

I know trousers have become much more normalised over the past few decades in secular society (yay!! the result of many many years of effort and lawbreaking) but let's not be absolute when we talk about the pants concept lol. Especially within a larger conversation about female/transmasc/intersex/transfem masculinity and social perceptions, especially in an age of rising fascism