#are those nine guns ed

[lovesickshanties]

Our Flag Means Death Season 2 | Official Teaser | Max

[lookinglass-fic]

THIS is Blackbeard. Not some namby-pamby in a silk gown pining for his boyfriend!

This little scene in the teaser is so important to me actually. Because no matter what Izzy took with those words, no matter what posturing Ed does with his nine guns and kohl beard, underneath it all, he is still the soft, queer, lovelorn man in a silk gown pining after Stede.

He is still an absolute badass. He is sliding through sand on his knees and cutting off Navy officers with a single blow. He's crashing ships and throwing knives and taking names, and he is also longing and aching and wishing to be the lovely, fine thing that Stede loved.

[skz317cb97]

Okay I read something like this for another fandom and it was actually soo good.

I was wondering if you'd write something with Bang Chan/Chris in mind if you're taking any fic requests :)

In a world where upon their first touch, soulmates (Bang Chan/Chris x female reader) are overcome with a sudden and overwhelming need to fuck each other

Please and thanks if you can

Office Space

Bang Chan × Female reader

Word count: 1.8K

Synopsis: You live in a world where one touch of your soulmate will ignite a pathological urge to consummate your bond. What happens when you bump into the cute guy from the office and it appears as though you've found your match?

A/N: 18+ ONLY! I hope this is to your liking! I had fun writing it! Such a great idea! Than you so much for sending it in! If you all like this one give it a reblog, like, comment, hit up my ask box, whatever! As always warnings and smut below the cut!

Warnings: 18+ ONLY MDNI! Cursing/strong language, semi public sex in a locked office no one knows), unprotected sex (please use condoms), cream pie. I think that's it not anything too crazy but if I missed something please let me know and I'll add it asap!

The same thing happened to everyone. Once you turned twenty-one, if you came into physical contact with your soulmate your body had an overwhelming primal desire to claim each other physically. Fuck. It was a big talking point when you start going through sex ed in junior high. You heard the same thing you always did with anything else that had to do with sexual education. ‘It’s perfectly normal’ or ‘It happens to everyone’.  

No matter how true that was, it didn’t make the topic any less uncomfortable to talk about for some people, you being one of those people. You avoided anything that had to do with soulmates but when you turned twenty-one you went to a psychic with some friends and the lady who read your fortune said that your soulmate’s name would be Chris and his last name had something to do with a gun or fireworks, an explosion maybe, she wasn’t sure and you weren’t buying any of it.  

By the time you were twenty-five a few of your friends had already found their soulmates. You didn’t have time for that nonsense. Your career was your soulmate. You were the lead of your department’s team and it was no easy feat getting to that position.  There were eight other teams all the leads for those departments were men.

Most but not all of them you had met in passing regularly. There was one that you had never even been introduced to but you heard people calling him Chan. You couldn’t lie to yourself, he was gorgeous. Strong nose, kind eyes, pouty lips, shoulders for days, and well, he definitely had a good tailor because his ass... You had to stop thinking like that, you didn’t know the man. You didn’t know his last name, you had never even heard his voice.  

Well, that was about to change really soon. Today when you got to work the head of your branch was pulling all team leads in for a meeting so you and the eight other men, including Chan, had to meet in meeting room three immediately after lunch. Around one thirty all nine of you promptly met your boss.

There were eight other people there and you were trying not to be distracted by one person in general. It was difficult, you didn’t know why. You were able to keep up with the meeting but about halfway into your boss's third bullet point you were getting warm and took off your sweater. The dress you wore was sleeveless, you were hoping you could cool off. You were trying not to look at him but your eyes found him anyway as you shrugged your cardigan off. When you did you found his eyes already on you, something in them.  

“Chan?” Your boss had called him twice now and he snapped out of it and realized you noticed him staring, he quickly looked away. You could see his ears turning red. 

“Yes sir?” Your boss asked Chan to present what his team had been working on this quarter, asked a few questions about Chan’s team, and where he’d like to see things go in the next quarter. Chan had an answer for everything and it came out as smooth as butter with his thick Australian accent, which you had not been expecting.

When Chan was done the boss called on you to do the same thing. You stood and started walking forward as Chan was headed back to his seat. The walkway was narrow, you went to step around each other but stepped in the same direction, you both kind of nervously laughed and then stepped in the same direction again. 

“Sorry,” His slender fingers gently gripped your shoulder and he stepped behind you. His cologne was intoxicating and it was like one touch set your whole body on fire. When he passed you and headed to his seat you looked behind you for a second but he was already pulling out his chair. You tried to ignore the feeling in the pit of your stomach and focused on your presentation.

One by one all of the guys had to go up and do the same thing. It drug on forever if felt like. The throbbing between your legs was unbearable, you didn’t think you could press your thighs together any harder. Chan just seemed to be intently listening to whichever one of the guys was presenting, seemingly unbothered. Finally your boss dismissed you all you were thanking the stars you could finally get out of there and away from Chan before you made a fool of yourself. Just before you could make your haste, exit Chan called your name. 

“Oh excuse me, y/n? Would you mind coming to my office and running over a couple things about your team that I think I’d like to implement with mine?” You almost choked. 

“Y-your office?” He nodded; he was acting perfectly normal. You’d thought, well... you’d thought maybe he was your soulmate with the way you were feeling but apparently, you're just a horny perv that thinks about fucking their co-workers. 

“If you’re busy...” You didn’t want to seem impolite or like you weren’t a team player, he was really giving you a huge compliment by asking for such a thing. You just needed to get a hold of yourself. 

“No! Uhehm, no I’m not busy... I’d be happy to go over whatever you’d like.” That sounded like more than it should have you felt like but he still seemed totally nonchalant. He bowed and then led the way, you following the trail of whatever cologne he was wearing. Chan opened the door and let you in first.

You walked into his office nervous, hoping you could keep control of yourself because you had never felt so out of control in your life. As soon as you were in his office Chan came in too, then shut and locked the door. You turned to him and he walked up on you quickly. Your heart started racing, his hands gently cradled your face, his now a breath away from yours. 

“God please tell me you feel this too.” You were so relieved, you pulled him into a kiss as your answer. You had to taste his lips, they looked so juicy, a little red from worrying at them. You pulled away for a breath and backed towards his desk pulling him by his tie gently. He had a wicked smile on his face and followed. You sat on the desk legs spread, skirt riding up a bit and Chan nestled himself between your thighs, gripping your hips before kissing you again. You wrapped your arms around his wide shoulders and scooched forward. 

“I’ve had the biggest crush on you since I started here.” He admitted suddenly, lips hovering over yours. You couldn’t help how big your smile got. 

“Really?” He nodded biting at his lips and then kissing you again, his tongue sliding into your mouth, tasting you until oxygen was needed. 

“I’ve always noticed you too, it’s always kind of scared me.” You panted out. One of Chan’s hands was on your waist the other tracing your jaw.  

“You don’t have to be scared baby girl.” You felt warm all over hearing him say that. 

“I know.” You lifted your skirt more then hooked your fingers into the side of your panties and pulled them over, exposing your dripping sex to him. He looked down and his mouth watered but then he forced himself to look back up at you. 

“Are you sure?” You nodded and pulled at him desperately. 

“Mhmm.” You needed him. Chan started to unbuckle his pants, pulling them down and just as he was about to pull down his briefs, exposing the large outline in them, he realized something. 

“Oh... uh... I don’t have a condom.” You looked at him sweetly, a little shy, you always were when it came to this stuff. 

“Well... it’s just... together forever, right? I mean, that’s what this means... doesn’t it?” Chan cupped your face and nodded his eyes sparkling. 

“Together forever.” He kissed you softly. 

“I’m on the pill, so... it’s okay.” He shook his head, then dropped his underwear and you got a full view of what had been straining against the stretchy fabric of his briefs. You gnawed at your lips and he didn’t waste time. Chan wrapped your legs around him and lined up with your wet hole. When he sank into you it finally made sense.  

“Yes... fuck... f-feels so good baby girl. Please wanna hear you say my name, tell me how you want it beautiful.” 

“Chan yes fuck... harder, fuck me harder...” Chan fucked you harder, panting and moaning just as much as you. You loved how he wasn’t scared to make a little bit of noise for you. Not enough for anyone outside the office to hear but enough to make you drip for him. Chan shook his head no. 

“C-call me Chris...” 

“What?” You stopped him and looked into his eyes, your soulmate’s eyes. 

“C-Chris, my real first name is Chris...” I’ll be goddamned, you thought to yourself. 

“What’s your last name?” He smirked at you with a funny look on his face, laughing a little. 

“Seems like an unusual time to ask. Wanna know what yours is gonna be in the future?” You flushed and smiled. 

“It’s Bang.” He kissed you. The fucking psychic was right. 

“Why does everyone call you Chan?” He pushed a stray hair away and you couldn’t help but lean into his warmth. 

“It’s my middle name and there is a lot of Chris’ on our team. So I go by Chan in the office, but everywhere else, I’m Chris and I’d very much prefer to be Chris when I’m inside you. He rolled his hips and your eyes rolled back.  

“Mmmm Chris...” He started fucking you harder egged on by you using his actual first name. 

“huhuhu Chrisss...” Harder harder harder he kept pounding into you. He loved it he wanted more. 

“C-C-Chr-risss... g-gonna... gonna cum.” A light sweat was starting to break out on Chan’s forehead as he pushed you harder towards your climax. Your arms wrapped around him hand fulls of his beautiful curls. 

“God fuck I’m gonna cum too... fuck! Cum with me baby girl... cum with me.” He snapped his hips into yours again, brushing your g spot and you went nose diving into your orgasm clutching onto his muscular frame tightly, gasping for air. As soon as your cunt started clenching around Chan he started coming too, pushing deep inside as he filled you.

You both held each other, your legs wrapped around him, foreheads pressed together, trying to catch your breath. Once both your heartbeats returned to normal Chan helped you off his desk and pulled your skirt down for you. You adjusted his tie and he leaned in kissing you again. 

“Uh do you maybe wanna grab some dinner tonight?” You smiled and tried to help tame his curls a bit after mussing them when you came. 

@acciocriativity @caroline-ds-world @chansynie @ughbehavior @jquellen27 @jisuperboard @fixation-dump @lachinitaaaaa @rinrinndou @bangchans-angel @laylasbunbunny @owo-manii-uwu @armystay89 @b00dyguts @purplenimsicle @caticorn61 @lauraneuuh @channieandhisgoonsquad @minnysproutgriffinteddy @svintsandghosts @the-sweetest-rose @alice05280 @3rachasninja @m0ri-apeuda @eastleighsblog @linoification @mlink64 @smally97 @fun-fanfics

“I’d love to Chris.” 

Please do not repost or translate any of my works. My blog and stories are NSFW and 18+ ONLY! Minors, ageless, and blank blogs will be blocked!

[follows-the-bees]

The journey of the Blackbeard image from three different perspectives:

1) Ed holds up the book containing a crude caricature of himself and scoffs. He has one gun and one knife just like everybody else. From the onset we see how Ed does not agree with the public persona of himself — a monster; the audience's perspective — just like Stede's — is challenged and flipped from the celebrity to the actual person behind it. We see the brilliant tactician, but also the man who likes fine things, goofy playacting, and sitting quietly and carefully taking care of someone majorly hurt.

2) Izzy holds up a different image of Blackbeard., ripping out the pages and telling Ed, beardless, vulnerable, cloaked in a soft robe Ed, that that version of him is worse than death. That this caricature in the book is actually Blackbeard and that's who he needs to become. He is telling Ed to only be the monster in the book — that public persona Ed made abundantly clear he does not like.

When we see Ed in the next season, he has completely shuffled on that persona: nine guns and all.

3) Stede sees the wanted posters of Ed and scoffs (just like Ed did when he saw it) and talks about how that's not Ed. Ed isn't a ghoul, he's a really great guy.

Stede takes up his own parchment and pens his own version of Ed. He creates poetry about Ed, he writes letters and "sends" them to him. He draws how Ed actually looks in the margins of the map. How he sees Ed: Not as Blackbeard with nine guns, but just a man, a man he loves, a man who loves him.

In the end, Ed takes up all sides of himself, including the leathes of Blackbeard. But not for other people, not to be that monster public persona, not to shield himself from harm, but to fight for love.

There is something to be said about the dropping of weapons completely during this scene as well. The journey of what Ed holds: weapons, the necks of colonization, the love letter, Stede (but that's for another post).

The layers of storytelling are built into the core of the show. I've written before about Pinocchio reflecting Stede's story of becoming himself, not just someone who lives in the fantasy of books, (also Jim's story) and how stories take on a journey of their own. As well as the importance of Stede's writings.

But Ed's story is also just as layered. Celebrity versus reality. We see both the good and bad of being in the public (the about turn at the French party, Ed teaching Stede about fame in Man on Fire). We see how exhausting and isolating it can be to keep up the public persona. And especially how toxic it is when others force this on you. But best of all, we see how freeing it is to have someone to see you for everything you are, flaws and all. And then being able to love yourself for those same reasons.

Ed takes back his story, the images about him out there showing a monster, and he learns to love all sides of himself, learning to be just himself: Ed.

[ourflagmeansgayrights]

what if it was fang pushing ed to be blackbeard again? how would my opinions change if ed did this to another character?

bold questions indeed.

for starters, if it was fang in 1.10 who confronted ed in his cabin and said “be blackbeard or else. you being soft and singing a song is a worse than death and i think you would be better of dead” i would mostly be very confused bc nothing abt fang’s prior characterization would suggest he thinks those things or has a problem with ed not being blackbeard. i would probably say something like “why did they suddenly make this friendly samoan character deliver these incredibly cruel lines when it would make more sense for that one short mean white guy to say this stuff. i don’t understand why this writing decision was made but it feels kinda racist to me. i thought they were building towards something with izzy’s character this season but it’s like they suddenly swapped his personality with this side character who didn’t really have a lot of screen time this season but who seemed really on board with the whole talent show idea”

and then if ed proceeded to cut off fang’s toe and feet it to him i would wonder if maybe the writers/showrunners didn’t want to show that violence happening to a white masc character for some reason, and that’s why they suddenly changed the characterizations around so drastically. i would definitely be pretty critical of this very strange writing decision

but if we’re discussing “what if fang took izzy’s narrative role in the story” i probably would also be squinting at the choice to cast a fat samoan man as this asshole antagonist killjoy guy who’s a dick to everyone around him and whose job in the story is to push ed into being a racist caricature of himself. ed’s perception of himself/blackbeard as a hyperviolent monster is deeply informed by the colonial society he lives in. the nine gun smoke head picture of blackbeard that stede showed him was printed in a book published by colonial society, the art of himself that ed stabbed against the wall at the end of 1.10 was produced by racists in colonial society. i would feel really weird about fang holding that drawing up to ed and saying “this is blackbeard” and i would feel even more weird abt this casting decision when the toe scene happened

so yeah i guess technically to answer the questions of “what if ed did this to another character?” and “what if he did this to fang?” i would not feel the same way about the toe scene as i do watching it in canon. i would probably not have the same “he fucked around, he found out” opinion if fang took izzy’s place in the story bc i would mostly be critical of the choice to make fang’s job in season one to uphold toxic masculinity and racist colonialist depictions of ed.

[spaceumbredoggos]

However fucked up Alex reveals Bill and Ford’s relationship is revealed to be in The Book Of Bill, Kenz and Bill’s is a hundred times worse.

Disclaimer: I am not glorifying abuse in any way shape or form. I myself have had nightmares similar to this despite never being sexually abused, both Bill related and otherwise. Some of these are based on personal experience (such as the nightmares), whilst others are a device used to show how fucked up shipping Bill with pretty much anyone is. Not even the Axolotl is safe in my opinion. If Bill was real, I’d guarantee he’d probably be a massive creep and with how thirsty his fankids are (and I’m calling myself out here) he’d probably use his magic to g*oom those kids like a church pastor. The thing that scares me the most about Bill being canonically real is not that he could catastrophically end the world, it’s his oversexualization in the fandom that got so bad, Alex himself had to make him unattractive. This will be along the lines of a Yandere Bill Cipher x Reader headcanons. With that being said, here’s a few content warnings:

G*ooming, Pedoph*lia, s*xual abuse and assault, physical and psychological abuse, mind control, cult-like things, psychosis, and general paranoia. I’m not saying these things actually happened, but knowing Bill’s character and his powers and history, if he was real, I’d generally be afraid for anyone in the Gravity Falls fandom. Especially minors.

This could be my most controversial post yet, and it could jeopardize any potential of getting into some colleges. This may sound like paranoid rambling, but I know that Bill is just a cartoon character. That being said, Alex like the blur the line between our world and the world of gravity falls with Bill’s character, dicing around the fact that he’s influenced history and wrote all religion on the basis of a lie. I’m not scapegoating him as “controlling global politics on a massive scale” because that would be stupid and I’ll sound like those tin foil hat rednecks that snort moonshine and burn pride flags. My heart goes out to all those who have been impacted by all forms of abuse as an abuse survivor myself. Alex, if you see this post (or any other of my posts/ read my fanfics), just know that it’s a critique on the fandom and the canon lore, and a cautionary warning to avoid lawsuits in case The Book of Bill Cipher causes mass psychosis.

As a kid (ages 7-9) I would watch Gravity Falls casually. At that age, the only thing I consumed online content wise was Skylanders and Minecraft content (Skylanders until age nine, then it was pretty much a lot of Team Crafted, Popularmmos, DanTDM, and other Minecraft YouTubers.) I didn’t invest in the Gravity Falls fandom until I was eleven (that’s when I first started writing my fanfics. The drafts are long gone because they were on school computers that were crammed with viruses due to kids installing Minecraft mods (this was just before chromebooks became mainstream. I went to a special ed middle school specifically for autistic individuals (it was pretty ableist, gonna make a post on that.) so the rules on what was allowed in school were pretty loose content wise. It didn’t have to be educational, as long as it didn’t have blood or guns. There were no safe search filters or Go Guardian (I remember one of my friends accidentally finding Iris from Pokemon black and white vore. I also found Pacifica vore.)) Before that, the February before my tenth birthday, my dad took my TV out of my room due to behavioral issues (undiagnosed autism go brrr). Around that time, there was talk in my town that the Disney channel was “rotting kids minds” with bad attitudes and crude humor (this could be said about any child’s television network (I mean, look at Nickelodeon.) but I lived in a pretty conservative area of Southern California and had a pretty conservative dad. So naturally, Disney was the scapegoat (this was way before the “woke” era of Disney.)) All of this talk of Brainrot made me stop watching the Disney channel during the peak era of gravity falls (2015 as a whole) and I didn’t watch gravity falls again until summer of 2016 when my tv was put back in my room (with intense parental controls so that I couldn’t watch my vet shows.) That’s when I had my first gravity falls dream about Bill cipher. It had to do with getting unicorn hair to protect my house from Bill Cipher. I had an interest in dreams previously due to warrior cats. It was at that moment when Gravity Falls was added to the obsession list.

As a neurodivergent eleven year old surrounded by other neurodivergent preteens and teens, we found common ground talking about Gravity Falls at school. I also would, whenever I didn’t feel the prying eyes of the grown ups or my peers would go off outside and act out my gravity falls x pokemon x warrior cats fanfiction (I’m not sure if those are signs of maladaptive daydreaming disorder or I simply had an intense imagination that would consume my body and make me want to just act out my fanfictions outside. I don’t do this anymore, mostly because of my own embarrassment and I can just write it out.) Yes, there were times where the discussion or action played out Bill Cipher being real. A lot of my “play” as I called it back then was me being kidnapped or possessed by Bill. I even wrote some really cringey fanfics involving my friends and Bill Cipher. To this day, I still involve my family in my fanfiction, but more final drafts will have their names changed. Weirdmaggeddon was a common topic, as well as Bill Cipher possession.

As time went on, I had more dreams about Bill Cipher, fueling the obsession and the fact that Bill could be real. During my middle school years, I never had a crush on Bill Cipher, despite what my friends seem to think. My parents just took it as whatever and as long as I was happy and just working towards going to a neurotypical non-sped school. My crush on Bill Cipher didn’t start until I was in high school. I remember it specifically being Valentine’s Day 2020 when I learned that I have a crush on the triangle. My dreams of Bill would only get more frequent and worse from here (involving the typical horny teenage dream that I don’t want to elaborate because I feel weird doing so (you’ll see why later on.))

Now there’s typically nothing wrong with having a cartoon crush. Given any other cartoon character that doesn’t have a canon history of influencing this world (Bill’s history of influence is vague but it still counts) I would excuse this as another silly cartoon crush like PurpleCliffe simping for Cynthia and the like. However, given that it’s in the show’s canon that Bill could be real and he crossed over to our world, do you understand what implications this could have? Bill is trillions of years old, he’s likely seen every timeline to ever exist. Meanwhile, there are whole armies of fankids who are down bad for him (including me.)

Notice how when I first started getting into Gravity Falls that I didn’t have a crush on him. How many other fankids felt the same way? It wasn’t until years of obsessing over Gravity Falls did I develop feelings for him. And of Alex says in the Book of Bill Cipher what I think he’s going to say (that Bill probably ab*sed Ford sexually with possible g*ooming involved), notice the pattern that is being presented here? Alex, if you blur the lines between fiction and reality with a villain who may or may not have canonically g*oomed and abused someone, possibly using mind control given his powers and his role as a dream demon, could it really be so far fetched that… (I’m not going to say it because it’s leaving a sour taste in my mouth, but use your imagination.)

If we take Alex’s word that Bill has crossed over to our world, then we can only assume that there are vulnerable kids and adults being… You get the picture. I’m not explicitly saying that it is happening right now, but this is problematic because revealing that Bill ab*sed Ford in that way means that Alex would probably imply that Bill is doing the same to MINORS. I may sound paranoid and this may just be a ramble, but considering the show’s canon and how mythology is filled with cases of degenerative acts from deities, this is a really fucked up situation.

It may be funny to say “haha, evil triangle man is sexy” but at the end of the day, Alex stated that Bill has crossed over into our world. For all we know, he could be taking advantage of the fact that people thirst for him, probably not in pleasant ways.

[natjennie]

guuuuysysssss because beacause beacusadfha sdbecuas "i love everything about you" EVERYTHING!!!!! he doesnt just love the parts that the world classifies as ed he doesnt just love the parts that the world classifies as blackbeard he loves everything about him. and even when we're shown absolute carnage, wrecking shit, nine guns, shooting people point blank, etc etc it's still "he's actually a good guy" when olu says "do you think blackbeard's gonna murder you?" like!!!! if only ed could see that even in his grief in his rage in his turmoil stede loves him! he wants to be near him!

stede presumably heard from olu and the crew what happened, abandoning them "killing" lucius, kidnapping frenchie and jim, destroying all his stuff, and without blinking an eye he said. I want to be around him again. I miss him. I LOVE him. like he deadass says the word love. multiple times! and the audacity of "I hope youre thinking of me as well"

because he KNOWS ed! he knows him. he knows that ed is sensitive and caring and heartbroken and hellbent. and he knows he can make him happy. and he wants to be around him even when he isnt happy. it's such a testament to how much he does actually love ed like the idea of. I love you when you're at your best and I want to strive to make you happy as often as I can but I know that can't always be true and I want to be there with you at your low points because every moment that I'm with you is one well spent. you are loved and you are important to me breathing the same air as you is a privilege and I want to share my life with you, especially when you feel like those things aren't true.

[vegalocity]

It’s honestly a crime that the writing just brushed Syntax’s becoming a Spider under the rug. No, he’s fine with it, don’t worry about it. No we’re not gonna explore this, they’re bad guys and we’re killing them off anyway, don’t worry about it.

There was so much room to explore, especially with how Goliath and Huntsman might’ve felt, but no.

I MEAN RIGHT?

Admittedly it's a running thing with LMK to IMPLY a lot and then look at the audience and say 'no followup questions' with their full chests, (like all of the implications of Red Son's home life being kinda fucked but it barely gets touched upon again after season one despite clear evidence that things aren't all fixed in S3 and we're just supposed to believe everything's aces by S4) And the Spiders i think are probably the most egregious example

the deleted character (rip Spindrax regulated to the shadow relm), one of the characters never gets a dedicated episode to see how he acts as an independent agent and that spider doesn't even have a real NAME (which im sure drives you crazy in particular Twinkle) there are IMPLICATIONS of character arcs and backstories and overall POTENTIAL that just got thrown away to show everyone how cool and dangerous LBD was and gave NO hope of rescue.

Back when s2 was airing i thought LMK was sort of like- Building a rogue's gallery- a sort of batman rogues are we type cabal that could keep the adventures fresh and fun and... nope. I would have KILLED for a sort of 'Harley and Ivy' type episode that was focused entirelhy around the spiders, and possibly run it like essentially an Ed Edd N Eddy episode as the spider boys tried running a heist or smth without SQ there to keep them from feeding off of eachother's vibes too hard and it all turning to complete chaos.

LMK has a lot of stylistic influence to Adveture Time, and you can tell they WANT MK to be a Finn type (I mean his place in the mythological system seems to be essentially Finn's Catalyst Comet arc truncated significantly) but you kinda can't make an adventure time style world without understanding that the world belongs just as much to the semi-reformed wizard kidnapping princesses as it does to the hero that kicks him in the boingloins, you know?

and LMK very much belongs ONLY to the Monkie Kid Krew (I mean ive gone on record to say that Tang's arc would have been MUCH more interesting if he WASN'T actually the Monk in a past life and really was Just Some Guy and fully earned his own magic, but that would mean the world was bigger than just the characters designated as important so that couldn't be) and the villains are just pins to set up and knock over in a season and a special's time (if they even get that, sorry Nine Heads)

But as for Huntsman and Goliath's perspectives on Syntax- man i WISH i knew those... I think the ones i like the best are Goliath being... nice but distant to the new guy in like a 'whatever the queen clearly thinks its fine' type way and Hutnsman being like- INSTANTLY thinking Syntax is gunning for his 'position' (whatever it is) and is HYPER aware of him, Syntax is living RENT free in this spider's head because he's CONVINCED that he's after his position in the 'loyalty to the queen' social ladder or smth and meanwhile Syntax, genre savvy as he is is like "oh we're gonna do that thing where we start out as rivals but grow closer to respect eachother and eventually become very close friends and playfully compete with eachother sometimes to keep the spice in the banter! this is fun! ^.^"

Idk sounds like more fun than a pile of dead bodies that don't even get the dignity of being brought back in flashbacks

[the-queen-of-hell-666]

He’s a Perv but He’s Hot

Kinktober 2022: Day 7

Pairing: Perv!Eddie Munson x Bestfriend!Fem!Reader

Kink: Panty Kink 

Words: 2.1k

Summary: Eddie walked in on you changing and now he can’t get you out of his mind, and he thought he was a perv for thinking about you like that but little did he know that you liked him as well. 

Warnings: explicit language, explicit sexual content (sixty-nine sex position, oral sex (m!receiving and f!receiving), vaginal fingering, slight!nipple play, panty kink, Eddie being a perv (obviously)), fluff, Eddie and reader being dorks 

a/n: Sorry for not posting this on time! I was at a wedding for my cousin but I will do my best to make up what I didn’t post. I hope you enjoy this!

Banners by @vase-of-lilies​ 

Eddie didn’t mean to walk in on you naked, he swore, but after that day, he couldn’t get you off his mind. You were always his best friend, the only woman who even gave him a second thought and that’s why you were his best friend. Except he didn’t think of you as a lady, he just thought of you as one of the guys until he got a sneak peak at your body, then suddenly he couldn’t get you off his mind. You had developed into a beautiful lady and now he couldn’t stop staring at you when you two would hang out and he started to feel like a fucking creep. 

Eddie was at your house for your weekly movie night, just the two of you and you had decided on the new movie, “Top Gun”, you were always obsessed with planes and the Navy since you grew up as a Navy brat. So you were so excited to see this movie. Eddie had bribed Steve to let him rent it from Family Video before it even hit the shelves. You hugged him when he told you and kissed his cheek as you thanked him profusely and he quickly had to slip away to the bathroom and pleaded with his hard cock to go soft again, it only went half soft but it was enough. 

You made popcorn while Eddie set up the movie and you were in a small pair of gym shorts and one of his shirts and you bounced on the soles of your feet excitedly as you walked to the couch. You sat the bowl of popcorn on Eddie’s lap and you sat next to him and sat with your feet tucked under your butt as he played the movie. You cuddled against his side and he wrapped his arm around your shoulders and held you close to him and he softly nuzzled into your hair inhaling your scent and his cock twitched in his pants. 

‘Damn it, you fucking perv.’ Eddie thought as he felt his cock stir in interest as his eyes trailed up your bare legs and bit his lip as he saw a small hint of lacy purple under your shorts. His eyes widened slightly and he had to stifle a groan as he imagined how you would look only in those panties. You bare except that one piece of fabric and you kneeling between his legs with your lips wrapped around the head of his cock and your hand-

“Can you pause? I wanna grab a beer.” You said as you pulled away and stretched out your back making your shirt rise up a bit before you turned to Eddie. “You want one?” 

He cleared his throat as he paused the movie, “Y-yeah. S-sure.” He stuttered and nodded, making you giggle softly before standing up. 

“You okay?” You asked as you walked to the kitchen and grabbed two beers. 

“Yeah, just a bit tired. Rough band practice.” He shouted from the living room and you walked back to the room. 

“Poor baby. Is having your own band too rough on you?” You asked, your voice dripping with sarcasm. 

“Hardy har har.” He chuckled as he rolled his eyes and you handed him the beer and you leaned over his shoulder to press a kiss to his cheek. 

“Just messing with you, Eds. You know I love your band.” You smiled as you hopped over the couch to sit next to him and popped open your beer and took a long sip as you looked over at Eddie. He smiled at you nervously as he took a long sip of his beer and you set your beer on the coffee table and bit your lip as you looked at him. 

No words were shared as you leaned over and kissed him passionately cupping his face softly. He was taken aback by the kiss but he leaned into it, kissing back softly and he wrapped his arms around you pulling you into his lap. He kissed you deeper making you lean against his chest as you kissed him harder and his hands rubbed up and down your back softly. 

He pulled back and looked down at you with puffy pink lips and you smiled up at him, “What was that?” He asked breathlessly and you nuzzled your nose against his. 

“I took a shot. Did I move too fast?” You asked as your smile turned into a look of worry but he was quick to peck your lips softly. 

“No, no, Y/n/n. I enjoyed that. I’ve been wanting to do that for a while.” He smiled and you kissed him again gently as your hand caressed his cheek. His hands rubbed your hips and up and down your back as he held you close. “I’ve waited so long for this.” He whispered as he nuzzled his nose against yours and you smiled wider.

“Me too. Never thought this would happen.” You whispered as you caressed his cheek and ran your hand through his fluffy curls. “Wanted you for so long.” You purred as you nipped at his bottom lip and he leaned down and kissed you again. He smirked at the small whine you let out as he pulled on your bottom lip. 

“Pretty girl. You have no idea how much I’ve wanted you.” He growled against your lips as he pulled you closer. “Perfect girl for me.” He smiled as he rubbed your hips as you slowly started grinding on his hard cock through his jeans. You smirked as you felt his cock grinding against your covered pussy and you pulled back and winked at him before moving to lay him down on the couch and you moved to straddle his lap. You kissed his neck gently as you ran your fingers through his hair.

Eddie groaned as you nibbled on his skin and his hands went down to squeeze your ass softly. You giggled softly as you continued to kiss his neck before sitting up and he tried to follow you up but you gently pushed him back down. “No, baby. Let me give you a show.” You winked before slowly taking off your shirt to reveal your bare breasts to him. He groaned at the sight and trailed his hands up your chest to caress the softness of your breasts and you smiled down at him. He plucked at your nipples gently pinching them softly, “Mm, Eds, that feels nice.” You whined softly as he played with your sensitive nipples. 

“You’re so pretty, sweetheart. You have such pretty and soft tits.” He whispered as he played with your soft nipples, making you whimper softly. 

You blushed at his compliments and you slid your hands up his shirt. “I wanna feel you bare against me.” You whispered as you rubbed his chest and he smiled at you before pulling his shirt over his head to reveal his bare chest. You smiled at him bare and you leaned down to kiss his chest softly, smiling up at him. “You’re so handsome.”

He blushed as you kissed his chest and whispered loving things to him. “Baby, I’m gonna fucking blow a load in my pants before you even get to my cock.” He groaned as you nipped on his pec softly. 

You giggled before pulling back and rubbing his chest softly. “I have an idea.”

“What are you thinking about?” He asked as he rubbed your hips softly. 

 “Can I ride your face?” You asked shyly as your cheeks flushed pink and he chuckled softly making you huff. “Don’t laugh at me.” 

“I’m not laughing at you, baby. I promise. I just find you cute.” He smiled and kissed your cheek softly. “I would be honored to have you ride my face. You can sit on it like a throne.” He whispered in your ear making you giggle as he laid back. You stripped your bottoms and went to pull off your purple lace panties but he stopped you. “No, no, leave them on.” He purred as he patted your ass gently making you blush. 

You smiled and nodded before turning around and moving to straddle his face with your plump ass in his face, making Eddie groan softly as your lace clad cunt was hovering over his face. “Tap my thigh twice if you need to breathe.”

“I don’t need to breathe, I just want to make you feel good.” He smirked before pulling your cunt flush against his face and he nuzzled into your cunt that was covered but he could smell your arousal through the thin material. “Mm, smells so good.” He mumbled against you, making you whine at the vibrations of his words. 

“Eddie, don’t be a tease. I want you.” You whined as you grinded a bit on his mouth making him chuckle at your neediness before pulling your panties to the side and dragging his tongue through your folds. You moaned loudly at his warm tongue moving through your folds and he lapped at your clit softly, wrapping his lips around your little bud, making your body jolt with the shock of pleasure. 

“So- fucking- good-.” He mumbled against you emphasizing his words with a suck to your sensitive clit. You moaned softly and grinded down on his tongue and he slid his tongue into your hole lapping at your walls, groaning as they pulsed and squeezed his tongue. 

Your shaky hands went down to his belt and unbuckled it before undoing his jeans and pulled his cock out of his jeans and boxers. You gasped softly at the size of him, he was thick and long with a slight curve to him which you knew would make you feel so good. He was throbbing and hard in your hand as you stroked him slowly squeezing below the head, making him groan against your pussy. He sucked on your clit hard as you moved your hand a little faster before leaning down and taking the tip in your mouth, swirling your tongue around the tip sucking at the sensitive skin gently. 

He growled against your cunt, his hips bucking into your mouth, thrusting his cock deeper into your mouth. You slowly took him down your throat as you grinded on his mouth as he sucked on your clit. You moaned around his cock making him grunt and groan at the vibrations and you cried out around him as he sucked harder. He doubled his efforts as you moved your mouth faster, sucking around his tip and swallowing around his shaft. 

Your thighs started shaking around his head as he slid two fingers into your quivering cunt and curled them up which sent you over the edge. You came hard around his fingers and on his mouth and you cried out around his cock and pulled off as you moaned softly. You continued to stroke him faster as you rode out your orgasm on his fingers and with how you were moaning, Eddie couldn’t take it and he came hard. His hips bucking up and he came spurting hot cum on your hand and he groaned and growled against your cunt as you stroked him through his orgasm. 

You pulled away after regaining your breath and you moved to sit on his chest as you licked your hand clean, smirking down at his blissed out face. “Did you enjoy yourself?” You asked as you leaned over him and he looked up at you with dazed eyes. 

“Are you kidding? You about sucked the soul out of me while I was buried in your sweet pussy, sweetheart, I was in fucking heaven.” He scoffed and you laid on his chest and wrapped your arms around his neck. He wrapped his arms around your waist holding you close to him, and kissed your head. “I really hope this wasn’t a one time thing.” 

You smiled and leaned on your forearms as you looked down at him, “Trust me, it wasn’t. You think I’m gonna let you go that fast?” You asked as you caressed his cheek. 

He chuckled and rolled his eyes playfully, “I’m glad I could please you.” He smiled and you kissed his lips softly before his hands traveled down to your ass and he pulled your panties off and brought them up to his nose. “You smell so good.” He smirked and you giggled as you sat up and grabbed his shirt and slid it on. 

“You’re such a perv.” You chuckled as you ran a hand through your tousled hair. 

“I’m hot though.” He winked, tucking himself back in and you kissed his lips. 

You pulled away and smirked at him, “You really are.” 

[black-diamond1329]

⭐ Name: Sandra, but you can tell me Sandy 😉.

⭐Age: I feel like I'm 15 years old, I stopped counting at 19 and my friends say that I act like I'm 5 years old XD hahaha ... Nah! I just turned 23 years old this August n_n.

💔 Occupation: Being a universitary girl XD ... Yes! It's so fun! (sarcasm).

🩷 Some things that I love it: Read (I read all kinds of books and about my favorite ships on Ao3! 🤭), cook desserts, listen to music while I do other activities like my homework or when I read, Greek mythology (The love between us will never die! 💗).

⭐Saint Seiya (or Knights of the Zodiac). I found this beautiful serie when I was 7 years old. My favorite is the original serie, although I also like the Lost Canvas a lot and Episode G (because Aioria is the protagonist). Soul of Gold gives me mixed feelings. From Omega and Next Dimension, better don't ask me; my mind lives in denial. My favorite characters are the Golden Saints, especially Aioros and Aioria, being Aioria my super favorite.

Thanks to Saint Seiya I developed a great love for the stars 💫 and I have many scientific books on the subject, as well as books of myths and legends about the constellations ✨.

💥 I'm a Marvel Girl. I love those tormented superheroes and antiheroes. I basically grew up watching Marvel since Iron Man came out in 2008 and I immersed myself fully in the world of the comics, I have a lot of comics and books on my bookshelf 🤭. My favorites are: Iron Man ♥️, Captain America, Spider-Man, Loki, the X-Men, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch, in all their presentations and with all their charms and defects!.

🍿Series: Friends, Full House, The big bang theory, How I met your mother and How I met your father, Modern Family, Mom, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel... I love it K-Dramas like Goblin: The lonely and great God, Crash landing on you, Tale of the Nine Tailed 😋, I have also watched many animes like Sailor Moon, Ouran High School Host Club, Toradora, Code Geass, Inuyasha, Kaleido Star, Shaman King, Attack on Titan... it's a long list and I don't remember everything at this moment 🤔. Miraculous Ladybug (I know it's for kids, but ... there is Chat Noir 🖤).

🐉In my House of the Dragon era 🖤: Like many people, I was also terribly disappointed with the horrible ending of Game of Thrones, but I really loved Fire and Blood when I read it in 2020... so I decided to give the serie a chance when I saw the first trailer... and I don't regret it! 🥳. I liked Daemon and Rhaenyra so much in the book and absolutely loved them in the TV Show! (Matt and Emma are incredible! ❣️). Another character that I loved in the book and the one I always wanted to know more about was Jacaerys Velaryon and I must say that I am very pleased with the choice of Harry Collett 😍 (oh yeah baby! 🔥).

I really hope that the directors and writers do justice to this wonderful crown prince! 🥰, because for me he is already one of my favorite characters of all time! ❣️.

🎥 Favorite Movies: Troy 2004 (did I mention I'm a Greek mythology lover?), the Star Wars saga 💫 (1-6 only), The Great Gatsby, A Walk to Remember, Harry Potter 🪄 (books and movies), The Lord of the Rings trilogy and the Hobbit trilogy, The Hunger Games saga ❣️(books and movies), The Twilight saga 😊 (books and movies).

I love Studio Ghibli movies with all my heart 💗 since my dad bought me the movie of Kiki Delivery Service when I was a 6-year-old little girl.

I love everything Disney and Pixar does 💗😘. (think of the happiest things, It's the same as having wings! 🎶)

🎧 Music: I have a very varied taste in music, some would say strange 😅, but if I like the rhythm and lyrics of the song I will surely add it to my playlist (mainly I like rock), AC / DC, Queen, Guns N' Roses, Bon Jovi, Linkin Park, Evanescence, Within Temptation, Imagine Dragons, Beyoncé, Ed Sheeran, Lana del Rey, Taylor Swift and Katy Perry. I enjoy classical music too 🩷.

⭐ Something more about me: I am an inveterate dreamer and extremely perfectionist. I express myself better by writing than talking 😚.

I haven't drawn anything in almost 5 years and when I did I used to draw with traditional media (watercolor, charcoal, colored pencils, gouche and acrylic paints 🖌️).

But since October (from last year), when I saw Harry Collett as Prince Jacaerys, I felt a desire to draw that I hadn't felt in a long time ❣️.

This is my first time trying to draw in digital media, I hope you like what you see! 😘 (YouTube tutorials don't fail me now! 😭). I spent the whole summer practicing🥺.

P.S: Sorry if exist some error, the english is not my firts lenguage.

[maggotwithanf]

“I still can’t believe you pulled that off.”

Arcade cocked his head to the side, the sunlight glinting off his glasses and blackened Van Graff armor as it sunk into the skyline of the New Vegas strip.

“I wasn’t sure what you were going to do, you know, accepting Caesar’s invitation like that,” he went on, the worried edge stealing into his voice. “I wasn’t sure you weren’t going to, you know. Betray me,” he finished, his voice breaking a little.

“Me? For that asshole? Never,” Lloyd grinned, lighting up a battered cigarette with one of Arcade’s safety matches. Arcade frowned.

“You know I’m obliged to tell you those are bad for your health.”

“Nine out of ten doctors agree, Grey Tortoise cigarettes are perfectly fine and leave a healthy coating of protective tar in your lungs.”

“Oh, don’t start.” Arcade rolled his eyes, but his nervousness was starting to subside.

There was about two feet between them, and they hadn’t quite talked about what happened, yet, but he had much bigger things on his mind.

“How did you do it?” Arcade whispered, like he was afraid people were going to hear.

They were perched on the edge of a bluff, overlooking Freeside, the gates to the Strip still shuffling slowly, milling about with a handful of NCR soldiers and the odd barker. It was still early.

Lloyd grinned even wider. “Okay, yeah. You sure I didn’t tell you this?”

“No,” Arcade frowned, but with a sort of lopsided smile. “You just - busted out of there, guns a-blazing, screaming about how we had to get the fuck out of there right now.”

“Well, get this.” Lloyd spread his hands out in front of him, palms splayed, trying to paint a picture. “I get in there, and who’s down tied up in their custody but Benny, the fucking fink himself. So I give him a little idle chat while Caesar’s tying up some loose ends, and next thing you know, he and I start coming up with an escape plan.”

“Escape plan?”

“Yeah, right? Cause he’s all tied up. Kinda at my mercy, huh?” Lloyd grinned. “I wanted him to owe me one, so I slipped him a stealth boy, cut the rope, and, when I gave the signal…”

“Oh, no.” Arcade’s frown furrowed. “Oh. You didn’t.”

“Yup!” Lloyd beamed, his grin looking almost devious at that point. “They didn’t notice where he went, but they definitely noticed the guy just disappeared into thin air.”

“Of course. Pandemonium ensued. Naturally.”

“You fuckin’ know it,” Lloyd grinned, looking positively feral. “Only took a few seconds for them to figure out who probably did it. And by then -”

“You were hightailing it out of there, half the Legion on your back.”

“Hey, we did great!” Lloyd protested, taking another drag of his cigarette, followed by a swig of lukewarm Nuka-Cola. “You and ED-E really held your own. Barely a scratch on both of you.”

“Because you were a bullet sponge,” Arcade frowned, concerned. He edged slightly closer to Lloyd, peering down at his knee. “...May I?”

“Be my guest,” Lloyd shrugged.

Arcade whipped out a leather bag of supplies, and set to redressing Lloyd’s already filthy knee wound. They had been doing an awful lot of crawling round in the dirt lately - one of them more than the other.

Gritting his teeth as Arcade swabbed and snipped, Lloyd took another hard drag of his cigarette. He’d never admit it, but there was just something precociously special about the awkward pleasure and pain of having him carefully and caringly patch up his sustained injuries. He’d never had that before. He never thought anyone would want the job.

Flicking his gaze downward, he caught Arcade’s eye, just for a second, before the doctor grinned sheepishly and returned to dressing his knee. Lloyd pulled back a smile, trying his hardest to look steely behind his Nuka-Cola.

“You all right?” Arcade murmured, cutting the last of the gauze and taping it carefully up.

Lloyd nodded. “All thanks to you,” he grinned.

Arcade looked up, and, for once, smiled right back, his gorgeously chiseled face betraying the slightest, yet most potent, of little lopsided smiles.

Lloyd felt his heart knock right out of his chest.

[Part 2]

[chacusha]

Star Trek: Deep Space Nine: Prophecy and Change (2003) ed. Marco Palmieri

I bought this book because of @ysalamiri-queen's recommendation of its Quodo short story, which is indeed great. This is a collection of short stories published shortly after DS9 ended, all set within canon (missing scenes/episodes) except for the one by Andrew J. Robinson at the end which seems to be a post-canon follow-up to A Stitch in Time. Here are my thoughts on the stories (mild spoilers for the general content of the book/premises of the individual stories):

"Ha'mara" by Kevin G. Summers: This is a Sisko & Kira story set shortly after the events of "Emissary." I liked this one! It's a good opener to the book not just because it occurs so early in the timeline but because it touches on so many of the themes that DS9 will eventually be about: religion and faith, Sisko's odd role as the Emissary, post-colonial Bajor, Bajor's (non-)entrance into the Federation, etc. I thought it was both a good and odd fit into the timeline: Good because it fleshes out when exactly did people generally know Sisko was the Emissary -- this is a bit vague in DS9 season 1. We know Opaka and Sisko know but outside of that, we never really get how that was communicated to the wider Bajoran public and what the reaction was, so it was nice seeing that here (throughout season 1 I don't think anyone calls Sisko by the title of Emissary but over the course of the show it's obvious he's generally seen as filling that role). Anyway, that's a bit of canon I thought was missing and could be filled in. The story is also a bit of an odd fit because it does some serious relationship development between Sisko and Kira very early in season 1. I'm a bit torn whether I think that fits their dynamic in canon or jumps the gun a bit on their relationship development. In any case, though, I enjoyed this story and its themes. I liked getting to see more of Opaka, too, before she disappears.

"The Orb of Opportunity" by Michael A. Martin and Andy Mangels: Oh man, the main thing I remember from this story is that it seemed like it was written by a Kai Winn fanboy. Now, I love Kai Winn and Nog (who are the main characters of this story) and I love that someone wrote a story focusing on them, but in this story I felt they played up Winn's bravery, revolutionary spirit, and moral compass a bit too much in a way that she no longer felt like Winn. No doubt she is capable of having all of those characteristics and I appreciate getting to see the nobler side of Winn, but she is ultimately meant to be a total snake and I want to see Kai Winn being a total snake. Making Kai Winn instrumental to Nog's decision to join Starfleet is so funny to me but also just NO. Anyway, I liked the story here and appreciated the Nog and Winn focus and the bizarrely positive take on Winn was an experience in and of itself. I like it, but I don't think it's canon.

"Broken Oaths" by Keith R.A. DeCandido: This is a Bashir & O'Brien story that says it's set after "Our Man Bashir" but I think it's more accurately a coda for "Hippocratic Oath". Basically, the plot is "Bashir and O'Brien talk their anger/feelings out about O'Brien disobeying direct orders in order to destroy Bashir's ketracel white research to save his life." Which I suppose is a kind of thing that would put a damper on one's friendship, and generally I like fanfic of the form "Characters actually talk about all the fucked up stuff that happened in canon" but I guess I didn't particularly feel I needed these two to talk out this issue and it felt a bit "stating the obvious out loud" at points (like, "Maybe the reason I was so mad was because [self-analysis]!", you know?). I did appreciate the humor of the stereotypical plot of two characters' whole friend group scheming in order to get them to kiss and make up (with Dax, Worf, Garak, and Quark being the scheming friends here).

"...Loved I Not Honor More" by Christopher L. Bennett: This is the Quodo story featuring Grilka set sometime after her second appearance ("Looking for par'Mach..."), and it's great. I feel like the author had a really good handle on Quark and Odo's dynamic which is ostensibly antagonistic but actually very tender and intimate underneath, and not explicitly romantic but still with those ~vibes~. So like, if you want another story involving these two that's very close to/in line with canon, this does that really well. Also, we get another story involving Grilka and Klingon noble house drama, which is always great. Even though Quark and Odo's canonical love interests come up in this story, somehow it's about Odo telling Quark that he's a Ferengi and that's enough and he never has to be something he's not, and UGH THESE TWO. How do they manage to be so rom-com sappy when they're not even a couple? I'm dying.

"Three Sides to Every Story" by Terri Osborne: Oh man, I have a lot of thoughts on this one. This is a Jake/Ziyal (pre-ship) story, where Jake and Ziyal get to know each other during the Dominion occupation arc and then Jake has to deal with her death. I've heard of Jake/Ziyal as a relatively popular "Ziyal survives AU" pairing so I wasn't surprised to see it here, but I haven't actually read any fic for that pairing so I guess I'm not intrinsically interested in it. Reading this story made me wonder if Jake/Ziyal is actually a soft NOTP for me, or if I just really didn't like the way it was done in this story. I didn't find Jake and Ziyal's attraction to each other convincing (more tell than show), their characterization felt flat to me, and I felt the setup of the story made Ziyal's death more about the tragedy of Jake's connection to her, which is a tough sell as Jake's connection to her is only really established in this story, so the emotional resonance of the story is heavily reliant on having set that up well, which I already felt this story didn't. Anyway, I like the idea of looking at Ziyal's death through a different lens than in the show, and Jake as an artist who doesn't know Ziyal well could have been an excellent choice but I felt making that lens romantic (especially given all the weird forced-romantic stuff with Garak in the show which is thankfully not present here) kind of wasted the potential of Ziyal's character to have some meaning other than potential love interest and daughter, which is already there in the show. Even fleshing out an antagonistic relationship with Damar would have been more interesting IMO (Damar does interact with Ziyal but I also felt those interactions felt flat/didn't have a good grasp on Damar's character either). Anyway, sorry this is so negative -- it's one of those cases where I have a lot to say because I can actually see the reasoning/potential/good ideas here but just got a bit let down by the execution.

"The Devil You Know" by Heather Jarman: This is a Jadzia-centric story set in season 6 after the Romulans join the war against the Dominion and intersecting with the events of "Time's Orphan." This one is an old-fashioned moral dilemma of a wartime Federation where the character goes too far and has to deal with the fallout of that. It felt like a DS9 plot, but at the same time, I felt this took Jadzia's character in too dark a direction (it felt like it relied on emotional outbursts to show/justify why a character makes decisions that don't really line up with that character's values/normal way of functioning); also, it is just depressing but I kind of appreciated the depiction of helpless grief here. Also, Jadzia should totally get her own Romulan woman to have ridiculous chemistry with (Subcommander T'Rul in this case) following the Romulan entrance to the war, just like Kira does (with Kimara Cretak), so I approve. Overall a kind of depressing/bleak story especially for Jadzia (kinda seems out of line with her character) but I enjoyed the plot and thought it did interesting things with her character, even though I don't particularly think Jadzia would react to stress in quite this way.

"Foundlings" by Jeffrey Lang: This is an Odo & Thrax mystery set between season 6 and 7 when Cardassia is increasingly not flourishing under the Dominion. Thrax comes to Odo with a case of a shuttle accident that left all its passengers dead. I'm not sure I really dig the Thrax characterization here but hey, he's a very minor character so... free real estate! I appreciate the author bringing a one-episode character (he doesn't quite appear in one episode, even...) back. Fun mystery with nice Odo character work (and interesting stuff involving Odo vs. Thrax and Odo's relationship to the Dominion vs. Thrax's relationship to Cardassia). But I really could have done without all the Kirodo parts, ngl. 😂

"Chiaroscuro" by Geoffrey Thorne: An Ezri-centric story. This one was weird. Once it started getting into the Jadzia-designed, Dante's Inferno-themed labyrinth, I started wondering if the author already had a non-Star Trek sci-fi story that they had already written, which they quickly adapted here, because the aesthetic and themes seemed so off from Jadzia/Ezri/Trills/Star Trek in general, with a kind of weak rationale for why Jadzia a Trill would theme a maze around a human notion of hell and punishment... But at the same time, the story outside the maze itself does so much to tie in Ezri's previous lives and how Ezri differs from Jadzia that it had to be the case that at least a lot of this story was specifically written with Ezri/Star Trek in mind. But yeah, this one was pretty wild (even the premise of Jadzia wiping memory of the event seemed kind of designed to be like a concession that this story fits awkwardly in canon). I liked seeing Ezri and Jadzia's past work and past hosts get some fleshing out but not sure what I think about this story as a whole.

"Face Value" by Una McCormack: This is a story that fleshes out Kira & Damar & Garak's relationship when they are fomenting rebellion (and are stranded) on Cardassia. Not much happens plotwise in this story but there's a lot of character work, and I like the interactions between these characters and wish we'd gotten more than was in the show (so I appreciate getting more here), and I liked the writing.

"The Calling" by Andrew J. Robinson: This is set after A Stitch in Time and the stage play "The Dream Box" and features Garak struggling to unify a broken, fragmented Cardassia post-canon. As I still haven't read ASIT (it's very hard to get a copy of), I didn't get much out of this one. Like, there was an attempt to fill the reader on all the important terms, concepts, and characters but the whole story just didn't make sense without having that previous background and investment in what happens after the events of the previous stuff. I'll revisit this later once I've read the earlier works.

Overall, a really fun collection of stories. I liked the variety, getting to see the whole cast here, and getting to read stories pretty in line with canon. And yes, the Quodo one was my favorite, although there were a couple of other stories here where the writing was just as good and it told an interesting story.

[mlobsters]

supernatural s9e15 #thinman (w. jenny klein)

don't really think about it until they show a bit of s1/2 in the recap and man, dean's voice got so much lower

SAM On a hunt? Why wouldn't I? DEAN I don't know, man. 'Cause lately with you, up is down and down is sideways, you know? I-I -- I don't know what you want.

does sam even know?

worked for will graham!

i'm trying not to cringe up into a ball knowing it's a ghostfacers episode... maybe it'll be fine.

HARRY Ah, the Winchesters. Yay. ED Says nobody. HARRY Ever.

it's funny because it's true

DEAN Am I supposed to be impressed with that treasure trail or the lady gun you got hiding in your, uh, pants there?

this show, sometimes

HARRY 50 shades of whey too much protein!

look at that, we got a tld! ghostfacers.com! but not in the search results window

two laptops and a full sized, albeit also vintage, stove. they sure find the interesting motels

why is sam looking so extra pretty today. hair must be in a pleasing (to me) configuration

kind of surprised they aren't talking about tulpas if it's the slenderman spn-universe equivalent. oh man. this episode aired 2 months before the girls stabbed their friend because of slender man.

and dean just smacked treasure trail boy on the ass, all right. we're having a normal one

DEAN You throw the right Tibetan symbol into the mix, you dumb asses ever think the Thinman comes to life as a Tulpa? ED Because thousands of people can agree that Thinman is any one thing? The lore changes blog to blog. He's not a Tulpa.

LOL thanks show, make me feel clever

SAM Okay. Just grasping at straws here, but when I think "teleport," I think "Crossroads Demon." DEAN Mm. Demon that likes to stab and watch YouTube. Why not?

DEAN You know what video would have gone viral, if we still had it? When you were five and you got dressed up as Batman and you jumped off the shed 'cause you thought you could fly. SAM After you jumped first. DEAN Hey, I was nine, and I was dressed up like superman, okay? Everybody knows that Batman can't fly. SAM Well, I didn't know that. I broke my arm.

DEAN I know you did. Man, I drove you to the E.R. on my handlebars.

okay i teared up because that was just so sweet, both relaxed and happy for at least a second. haha such a sap

DEAN Hm, good times. SAM Yeah, they were.

second over, emphasis on WERE

ED Harry was gonna leave, so I needed to give him a reason to stay. I-I made up Thinman.

what

SAM Listen, if you don't tell him, he's gonna leave anyway. Trust me here. Secrets ruin relationships.

laughed out loud. they would know!

look at that pretty face staring down the dude to get him to tell the truth

HARRY You crashed the Jenga Tower of our lives. I was gonna get married. I left her to run around with you, living some lie. ED Well, at least we were living it together.

this is so goofy. even more in your face than usual, parelleling a plot point to sam and dean's situation

ED Harry, we can get through this. We just debunk Thinman and then we go back to Ghostfacers. HARRY I can't. I can't trust you anymore, Ed.

so goofy!

HARRY None of it was real, Sam. Ed was just pretending, and now he wants me to pretend, like this is just something I could get past. SAM I know what you mean. Look, there are things you can forgive, and there are things you can't. HARRY So, which one is this? SAM That's something you got to figure out for yourself.

therapize himself a little along the way

DEAN So, the tires were only made for one kind of car. It's a 1989 Geo Metro.

man those little hatchbacks used to be all over the place, nearly all of them must be dead by now. specially the mid90s ish ones which were ... not very reliable

DEAN So, there was no teleporting -- just a couple of douche bags doing the "Scream" thing.

what did i say about looking extra pretty? and he usually is more buttoned up than this. very pretty lighting too

ED I've done all this crap for us. I-I don't know why you don't see that. HARRY No. No. You did this for you.

literally wheezing. not enough to take the same betrayal of trust plotline but even the same lines!!? LOL

from s9e13 SAM Okay. Just once, be honest with me. You didn't save me for me. You did it for you.

--

HARRY You roll with a guy so many years, you start to think he's always gonna be next to you. Like, when you're old and you're drinking on the porch, he'll be in that other rocking chair. And then something happens, and you realize that other chair has gone empty.

snorted. so like, okay. do you hear yourself say it, harry? very normal thing, just like planning on being with your friend forever. not wanting him to be with his lady and a regular job, but on the road with just you. i mean like, obviously, same can be said about sam and dean and that's probably part of the point but it's so loudly obvious that it's like *looking around* are you seeing this? are they saying this. i guess we can say like see, this is normal, just dudes being close bros. weird

WEIRD CHOICES. what a strange episode. good for those actors i guess getting to come back again and have a meatier parts in the episode

okay also tucking this episode in my pocket because i recall there's a thing with the retirement whatever brochure some time in the future, but also that makes me sad again that dean didn't make it to retirement age. womp womp

[mariacallous]

For nearly thirty years, whenever gun-rights activists have reached for data to defend their arguments, they’ve cited the work of the economist John R. Lott, Jr., who has argued that guns make Americans safer and that restrictions put them at risk. “He stands against droves of distinguished academics who have determined that the opposite is true,” Mike Spies details in a riveting and rigorously researched story, published in partnership with The Trace. “But, in the scientific debate over firearms, no one has had greater influence.” That influence has extended far beyond supplying talking points to the likes of Senator Ted Cruz or the pro-gun musician Ted Nugent: last year, when a federal-court judge overturned California’s ban on semi-automatic AR-style rifles, he referred specifically to sworn testimony offered by Lott, who said that there was no credible evidence that such bans “have any meaningful effect of reducing gun homicides and no discernable crime-reduction impact.” Through meticulous reporting, Spies examines the dangerous flaws in Lott’s research and reveals just how intertwined his arguments have become with those of the pro-gun lobby.

This story was published in partnership with The Trace, a nonprofit news organization covering guns in America.

In 1957, the small-arms manufacturer Armalite created the AR-15—short for Armalite Rifle—at the invitation of the U.S. Army, which was seeking an effective lightweight combat weapon. When the Department of Defense reviewed a version of the rifle in 1962, during the early stages of the Vietnam War, its report stated that the gun’s “lethality” and “reliability” were “particularly impressive.” From forty-nine feet away, it noted, an Army Ranger fired a round into a Vietcong soldier’s head and “took it completely off.”

In recent years, gun companies have aggressively marketed semi-automatic AR-style rifles to civilians. Manufacturers now produce as many as two and a half million such firearms per year, and they routinely show up in the country’s deadliest and most horrifying acts of mass violence, such as the rampages that occurred, less than two weeks apart, in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, in May.

Last year, a federal court addressed the question of whether California could ban such guns. The state was one of eight, along with the District of Columbia, that had a prohibition in place. Multiple plaintiffs, including a handful of gun-rights groups, argued that the California statute was useless, relying on the statistical expertise of an economist named John R. Lott, Jr. Lott, who is sixty-four, with wispy gray hair, authoritatively delivers blizzards of empirical conclusions in an unthreatening Midwestern monotone. In a sworn statement to the court, Lott summarized his research on assault-weapon bans, writing that there is “no credible evidence” that such laws “have any meaningful effect of reducing gun homicides and no discernable crime-reduction impact.”

After a brief bench trial, the judge reached his decision in June, 2021. He overturned California’s ban, and quoted Lott’s assessment verbatim. Afterward, Lott published an op-ed in The Hill. The ruling “primarily concentrated on public safety,” he wrote, and “the judge relied on my research.”

For almost thirty years, Lott, who has a doctorate in economics from U.C.L.A., has provided the empirical backbone for the gun-rights movement. Virtually every statistical argument against regulation—made by lobbyists, Republican lawmakers, and National Rifle Association members alike—is based on his research, which reaches two conclusions: guns make Americans safer, and gun restrictions place them in danger. He stands against droves of distinguished academics who have determined that the opposite is true. But, in the scientific debate over firearms, no one has had greater influence.

Lott’s first and most famous book, “More Guns, Less Crime,” was published in 1998 by the University of Chicago Press, one of the country’s most prestigious academic publishers. The book has been republished multiple times, and offers one seemingly irrefutable statistic after another. It specifies that when states relaxed laws restricting the concealed carrying of handguns, counties saw a roughly eight-per-cent drop in murders, a five-per-cent reduction in rapes, and a seven-per-cent decrease in aggravated assaults. The text is the basis for arguments blaming “gun-free zones” for mass shootings, and the notion, popularized by the N.R.A., that only a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun. “Overall,” Lott writes, “my conclusion is that criminals as a group tend to behave rationally—when crime becomes more difficult, less crime is committed.”

Eight books have followed “More Guns, Less Crime,” including “The War on Guns: Arming Yourself Against Gun Control Lies,” and “Gun Control Myths: How Politicians, the Media, and Botched ‘Studies’ Have Twisted the Facts on Gun Control.” Lott has also produced a steady stream of scholarly articles published in academic periodicals, along with op-eds that appear in regional newspapers and the Times and the Wall Street Journal. He has had appointments at Ivy League schools, and his work is touted by leading Republican politicians, including Donald Trump and Senator Ted Cruz, of Texas. “What makes him so invaluable,” Cruz has written of Lott, “is his ability to go beyond philosophical arguments and to engage opponents of gun ownership on the facts.”

Lott’s findings and methods have generated scathing criticism from prominent academics, who have questioned his veracity and exposed flaws in his work. But the critiques have not diminished his stature. Instead, they have fed the conspiracy-oriented mentality of the gun-rights movement. In the eyes of its adherents, and in the messaging of the gun lobby and trade groups, attempts to discredit Lott are really attempts to suppress the truth.

In 2013, Lott founded the Crime Prevention Research Center, a nonprofit to support his research. He takes pains to stress his and the organization’s independence. In his statement in the California case, Lott wrote that the C.P.R.C. “does not accept donations from gun ammunition makers or organizations such as the National Rifle Association (NRA) or any other organizations involved in the gun control debate on either side of the issue.” The same language also appears in his books, on his Web site, and in other legal filings.

Yet Lott is a mainstay at the N.R.A.’s annual meeting, where he typically conducts multiple seminars on his research and hosts a table on the tradeshow floor. In 2015, during the group’s convention in Nashville, Tennessee, he held one of the C.P.R.C.’s first fund-raisers at a hotel around the corner. One of the speakers, a conservative celebrity author and radio host named Dana Loesch, would soon be a face of the N.R.A., alongside its leader, Wayne LaPierre. At the C.P.R.C. fund-raiser, she said, of Lott, “We don’t have anybody else on our side that does what he does.”

Lott did not grow up in a family with a fondness for guns. “I know my grandparents and stuff would be shocked to see how my research has changed my views over time,” he said in a deposition taken during the California case. Lott was born in Detroit, and his family later moved to Florida, where he attended a Catholic high school. His mother and father were churchgoers, and he was close to his maternal grandparents, who were Democrats. Lott now owns two shotguns, a semi-automatic rifle, and two semi-automatic handguns—a Smith & Wesson M&P .40-calibre, and a Ruger 9-millimetre. He has a concealed-handgun permit because, he has said, “I didn’t think that it was proper for me to go and be telling people about these benefits if I didn’t actually kind of walk the walk myself on it.”

Lott received his bachelor’s degree in economics from U.C.L.A. in 1980, and then spent another four years at the school earning his master’s and Ph.D. in the same subject. According to a former classmate, Jon Karpoff, Lott did not stand out in “unusual or unique ways” at U.C.L.A.

Starting in 1988, Lott served for eighteen months as the chief economist on the U.S. Sentencing Commission, which helped inform his views on firearms restrictions. During his deposition, he claimed that the “very people that supply illegal drugs are the same ones that sell illegal guns,” and if the U.S. can’t stop the flow of drugs, then prohibiting firearms would be useless, too. When asked if he had an empirical basis for his assessment, he said that, at the commission, he read through “hundreds of cases,” and was “convinced” that “these guys not only have weapons but they’re entrepreneurs.”

“Would you present yourself as an expert in criminology?” Lott was asked at one point.

“I don’t think so,” he said.

Lott—who has never been granted tenure at a university—returned to U.C.L.A. for another temporary teaching appointment before being hired, in 1991, at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton business school. He kept in touch with Karpoff, who was at the University of Washington, and in 1993 the two co-authored a paper on corporate fraud. “He really was one of the best economists that I knew,” Karpoff said. “He was very thorough, creative in how to test—genuinely test—rather than just seek to confirm ideas.”

Lott says that he was teaching a class on white-collar crime at Wharton when his students asked him if he might turn his attention to gun policy. He agreed, and began to “read through a number of papers,” Lott said in his deposition. “And I would have to say I was pretty shocked how poorly done the existing research was.”

In 1994, Lott arrived at the University of Chicago, where he eventually became a fellow at the law school. The country was in the early stages of a significant shift. Historically, local and state authorities decided whether to issue permits to people who wanted to carry concealed handguns. But between 1987 and 1991, eight states had enacted “shall-issue” laws that allowed applicants who could legally purchase a firearm to automatically receive a concealed-carry license, as long as they paid a fee and completed a rudimentary training course. Lott and a doctoral student named David Mustard, who is now an economics professor at the University of Georgia, collected and analyzed fifteen years of data from some three thousand counties. In January, 1997, they published their findings in the Journal of Legal Studies, concluding that the new laws had caused violent crime to drop precipitously in the states that adopted them. The study provided the empirical support for the “shall-issue” statute—and justified its continued expansion to other states.

The study was extensively covered in the media, and featured in a congressional hearing on guns. Within a year, multiple statehouses held debates on concealed-carry permits, with Lott serving as the lead witness in four of them. But scientists soon challenged his conclusions. One paper, published in the American Journal of Public Health, warned that “the flaws” in Lott’s article were “so substantial, and the findings so at odds with criminological theory and research, that any conclusions about the effects of “shall-issue” laws based on this study are dubious at best.” David Hemenway, ​​an economist and a professor of health policy at Harvard University, said that Lott’s paper “created a cottage industry of scholars analyzing the same data sources and largely refuting” its results.

The next year, Lott published “More Guns, Less Crime.” The Wall Street Journal called the book “compelling,” and said it was filled “with enough hard evidence that even politicians may have to stop and pay attention.”

In the beginning of 1999, Otis Dudley Duncan, who is regarded as one of history’s most important quantitative sociologists, wrote the first of a number of letters to Lott. He was especially skeptical of a sentence in Lott’s book that stated, “If national surveys are correct, 98 percent of the time that people use guns defensively, they merely have to brandish a weapon to break off an attack.” Lott had not specified which surveys, but, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed published around the time of the book, he attributed the figure to polls by the Los Angeles Times, Gallup, and Peter Hart Research Associates. The number, he wrote, was a percentage of the “at least 760,000, and possibly as many as 3.6 million, defensive uses of guns per year.”

Duncan determined that Lott’s assertion was simply wrong. In May, Duncan informed Lott he was writing an article about what he would call the “rogue number,” and later that month sent him a draft. One sentence summarized his assessment: “The ‘98 percent’ is either a figment of Lott’s imagination or an artifact of careless computation or proofreading.”

Tallies of defensive gun use are inherently problematic. They depend on surveys that rely on a respondent’s memory and perception of threat, as well as one’s willingness to tell the truth, all of which can be influenced by politics, world view, and other biases. The Department of Justice attempts to track defensive gun uses through a twice-yearly survey that tries to mitigate some of the issues. For instance, participants only answer questions about self-defense if they first state that they were a victim of a certain crime, such as burglary or larceny. As a result, the government finds that there are around seventy thousand defensive gun uses per year, making them much rarer events.

The government’s figures seemed to undermine Lott’s argument. If Americans were rarely using a firearm to protect themselves from criminal acts, how could more guns equal less crime? And if Lott’s surveys really did present a more accurate picture, why were such incidents so seldom documented? Lott said that “brandishing” addressed both questions. “The media understandably play up graphic gun attacks by outlaws,” he explained in The American Enterprise. “They can’t easily show us the vastly more common cases—numbering in the hundreds of thousands to millions each year—where law-abiding citizens brandish a gun and cause criminals to flee.”

After Lott received a draft of Duncan’s article, he sent him a letter. He now said that the brandishing number was based not on the polling data but “upon survey evidence that I have put together involving a large nationwide telephone survey conducted over a three month period during 1997.”

In the second edition of his book, published in 2000, Lott attributed the brandishing claim to this three-month study. That year, in a piece for The Criminologist, Duncan had laid out his concerns. Lott, who was now in a temporary research position at Yale, responded in the same journal, providing some new specifics and an explanation for the confusion. “The survey that I oversaw interviewed 2,424 people from across the United States,” he said. “I had planned on including a discussion of it in my book, but did not do so because an unfortunate computer crash lost my hard disk right before the final draft of the book had to be turned in.”

In September, 2002, James Lindgren, a law professor at Northwestern University who has a Ph.D. in quantitative sociology, offered to examine the matter. Lott told Lindgren that the calls for the survey were made by University of Chicago undergraduates, who volunteered for the work and used their own phones. Lott did not have phone records, but the students could confirm whether the survey was conducted in the first place. When Lindgren asked for the students’ names, however, Lott said that he did not remember. Later, he explained that he was “horrible at names.” Lindgren told me, “After all these years, no one has come forward to say they worked on the survey.” Two people, however, claim that they were respondents; one of these, David Gross, is a former N.R.A. board member.

Lindgren also harbored grave doubts about the math. Lott’s figures, Lindgren noted in a report, implied that twenty-five or twenty-six survey respondents had reported defensive gun uses. Lott had said that of the two per cent of respondents who had fired their weapons, three-quarters dispatched warning shots, while only a quarter attempted to hit another person. “If these figures were accurate,” Lindgren explained, “only 1/2 of a person (2% of 25 people) reported firing a gun—and that 1/2 of a person breaks down further into 3/8 of a person firing warning shots and 1/8 of a person firing at someone.” Lott said that he had “always acknowledged” that the samples were small.

In September, 2001, Lott became a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C, where he worked on a new book, titled “The Bias Against Guns: Why Almost Everything You’ve Heard About Gun Control Is Wrong.” When it came out, in 2003, it included details of a follow-up survey on defensive gun use, with results that more or less aligned with his earlier conclusions. This time around, the numbers indicated that “brandishing a gun stops crimes 95 percent of the time.”

To prove that the survey was real, Lott made his data publicly available. But the figures showed that there were only a thousand and fifteen respondents, and reported thirteen incidents of self-defense gun use, only one of which involved firing a weapon. David Hemenway, the Harvard economist, wrote at the time that the survey was “not nearly large enough to provide precise estimates of the percentage of self-defense gun users who merely brandish a firearm.” For another thing, the thirteen defensive episodes were confined to just seven people; four of these said that they used their firearm twice, and a fifth person claimed to have used it three times. In his own surveys on defensive gun use, Hemenway had asked participants to tell the story of what transpired when they used a firearm for self-protection. The respondents often described using their guns in an aggressive manner. “It turned out they were actually using their guns illegally,” Hemenway told me.

Lott’s emphasis on brandishing has not diminished. In a recent interview, he said, “People have the perception” that guns are not used in self-defense. Lott suggested that the media ignore such stories. “So you’re missing almost all the cases that are out there.”

On February 1, 2003, the day “The Bias Against Guns” was published, the Washington Post ran a story headlined “Scholar Invents Fan to Answer His Critics.” A staffer at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, had become suspicious of Mary Rosh, a woman who regularly showed up on Web sites to defend Lott from his critics. In one post, she described herself as one of his former Ph.D. students at Wharton, and said he was “the best professor that I ever had.” She added, “There were a group of us students who would try to take any class that he taught.” Rosh even explained why it made sense for her to carry a gun. “If a woman is being attacked by a 200 pound man, is she just supposed to wait until the police arrive?” she asked. “I am 114 lbs. and 5’6”. What should I do in that situation?”

The Cato staffer tracked Rosh’s I.P. address to Lott, who admitted that he was behind it. “I probably shouldn’t have done it—I know I shouldn’t have done it—but it’s hard to think of any big advantage I got except to be able to comment fictitiously,” he told the Post.

In the California deposition, Lott said the purpose of the pseudonym was to “keep people from being obnoxious and threatening.” Lott also contended that he was not the sole author of Rosh’s comments. One relative had “begged” him to “protect them from the firestorm that was occurring at the time.”

The episode damaged Lott’s reputation, which was further harmed in 2005, when the National Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, released a book-length report called “Firearms and Violence.” One chapter assessed Lott’s finding that relaxing concealed-carry laws had caused a decrease in crime. The N.R.C. had tried to replicate Lott’s model, concluding that “it is not possible to determine that there is a causal link” between the two events.

By that point, Lott’s research had been influencing legislation for nearly a decade; a majority of states now had “shall-issue” laws, a number that would grow to nearly forty by the following year.

For half a decade, Lott was confined to the margins. He briefly held a teaching position at Binghamton University, and then spent two years as a researcher at the University of Maryland, his last stint at an academic institution. He wrote for the Washington Times and Fox News’ Web site.

In 2012, a national tragedy presented a new opportunity. George Zimmerman, a self-appointed watchman in a Florida neighborhood, stalked and then fatally shot an unarmed Black teen-ager named Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman was not arrested for weeks, a delay that drew attention to the state’s Stand Your Ground law, which allows citizens who fear for their lives to use deadly force anywhere they have a right to be. (In 2013, Zimmerman was acquitted of charges of second-degree murder.)

The following year, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee convened a hearing on Stand Your Ground laws. The model statute, created by an N.R.A. lobbyist, was less than a decade old, and until Martin’s death few Americans were familiar with it. Lott was called to serve as an expert witness. “These laws help allow individuals to defend themselves,” Lott told the lawmakers. “This is particularly important in high-crime areas.” He went on, “In the third edition of my book ‘More Guns, Less Crime,’ I provided the first published peer-reviewed study examining Stand Your Ground laws using national data. I found that they lowered murder rates by about nine per cent and that overall violent crime rates also declined.”

Lott’s prepared testimony was not subjected to deep scrutiny. It contained footnotes, and the one concerning Lott’s study simply cited the third edition of “More Guns, Less Crime,” without any page numbers. But the book does not mention Stand Your Ground.

When I questioned Lott about the discrepancy, he referred me to a section of his book that deals with Castle Doctrine laws, which, he said, “are a type of Stand Your Ground law.” Lott told me that the section accounts “for the full spectrum of Stand Your Ground Laws,” even though “those words are not used in the book.” But the Castle Doctrine is different from Stand Your Ground. Lott correctly defined the former in his book. “This is the first study to look at the Castle Doctrine,” the text reads, “which eliminates the requirement that people in their own home have to retreat as far as possible before defending themselves.” Stand Your Ground, on the other hand, removed the duty to retreat in public.

The Castle study’s sample period ends in 2005, the year Florida enacted the N.R.A.’s model Stand Your Ground statute. The law largely spread to states across the country from there. Those include Ohio, where in 2021 Mike DeWine, the state’s Republican governor, initially indicated that he would veto the bill, urging the legislature to instead take up a package of gun-safety reforms. He then abruptly reversed course, with his press secretary stating that the decision relied on one of Lott’s op-eds, which argued that such laws reduced murders. This year, a peer-reviewed study published in JAMA Network Open found that Stand Your Ground was associated with up to an eleven-per-cent increase in monthly gun-homicide rates.

Almost a year after Trayvon Martin was killed, the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, in Newtown, Connecticut, galvanized gun-control advocates. For the first time since the early nineties, tighter federal-gun regulations, including universal background checks, were in play.

The Sandy Hook-inspired proposals failed to get through Congress, but they served as an effective fund-raising tool. Lott launched his nonprofit, the Crime Prevention Research Center, which received its tax-exempt status in August, 2013. The C.P.R.C. has studied gun-free zones and rates of mass shootings across the world, and it publishes an annual report—extensively covered by conservative media—on the number of concealed-handgun-permit holders in America. According to Lott’s research, the number now exceeds twenty-one million.

The C.P.R.C. never takes in more than a few hundred thousand dollars a year, and Lott has always drawn a salary of less than a hundred thousand dollars. He frequently emphasizes that his research is untainted by the gun industry or by special-interest money, and points to the C.P.R.C.’s policy of refusing donations from all manufacturers or groups that have a stake in the gun-control debate.

But, during Lott’s deposition, when asked if the C.P.R.C. receives contributions from individuals who may be affiliated with the gun industry, he admitted, “I’m sure we probably get some donations from people that are in those things. But I don’t go and screen them.” He went on, “I draw the line in terms of banning an individual with their own money.”

Lott said that the C.P.R.C.’s integrity was further guaranteed by the group’s academic advisory board. “I think we’re a relatively unique organization in terms of having people with strong views—or views on different sides of the issue about what’s right or not. The reason why we do that is, like with any good academic-type organization, you need to have critical people who disagree with you to give you comments before you put out research.” He added, “You want to make sure it’s right.”

Lott named several of the C.P.R.C.’s advisers who hold either neutral or supportive views on gun control. One was Scott Masten, a business-economics professor at the University of Michigan, and another was Karpoff, his U.C.L.A. classmate. When I asked Masten about his role at the C.P.R.C., he said, “The sum total of everything I did with respect to the center was agree to be an adviser.” When I asked Karpoff what he did, he said, “Literally nothing.”

On April 10, 2015, Lott held the C.P.R.C.’s fund-raiser at a Hilton Hotel in Nashville, during the N.R.A.’s annual meeting there. In addition to Dana Loesch, who was on her way to becoming one of the N.R.A.’s most recognizable names, several other right-wing celebrities spoke, including the musician and gun activist Ted Nugent, who was both an N.R.A. and C.P.R.C. board member until 2018. Dressed in a camouflage shirt and a cowboy hat, he advocated for the extrajudicial killing of criminals and told the crowd that the C.P.R.C.’s work was just as important as the N.R.A.’s. “John works his ass off,” Nugent said, “and he needs to be paid more.” For the movement to succeed, he declared, Lott’s “almost Mr. Rogers-like delivery” was a necessity. He explained, “the juxtaposition between Ted Nugent the Second Amendment guy and John Lott the Second Amendment guy is dynamic. And we need both.”

As if to underscore the point, Lott delivered a fifteen-minute slide presentation with charts and graphs. Without the C.P.R.C., he said, the public would be exposed only to a “tidal wave” of research that was dishonest, overwhelmingly biased against firearms, and funded by President Barack Obama’s Administration and such insidious billionaire philanthropists as George Soros. Less than two weeks later, Lott pressed the same case on the conspiracy show Infowars, during a period when its founder and host, Alex Jones, was telling his listeners that the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School was staged by the government in order to justify new gun regulations. “He didn’t raise the claim while I was on [the] show,” Lott told me, by e-mail. “If he had, I would have corrected him.”

Around this time, Donald Trump was launching his Presidential campaign. He spoke at the N.R.A.’s convention, and, as the election drew closer, Lott began to campaign for Trump in numerous op-eds and radio interviews.

A month after Trump took office, Lott began corresponding with a top official at the Department of Justice named Ryan Newman, who now serves as general counsel to Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. In an e-mail in February, 2017, Lott wrote, “There were a number of ideas that I hope can be dealt with by the D.O.J.” He brought up the D.O.J.’s National Crime Victimization Survey, which, he said, “gun control advocates use” to “claim that guns are rarely used for self defense.” He asserted that “it needs to be fixed by changing a couple survey questions,” such as the poll’s screener about being a crime victim, which, by reducing subjectivity, weeds out potentially millions of unreliable responses.

Eventually, Lott compiled his recommendations into a document titled “A Partial List of John R. Lott, Jr.’s Ideas on Empirical Work That Could Be Done by the Department of Justice.” He circulated the list on multiple occasions to Newman, and, under a slightly altered title, to another D.O.J. official named Gary Barnett. In an e-mail to Barnett, he wrote, “As we discussed, we need new research to advance the Trump agenda and pull indefensible studies done during the Obama administration.”

After Trump took office, one policy that was on the table in Congress was “reciprocity,” which would require states to recognize one another’s concealed-handgun-permit holders, allowing individuals to carry their weapons anywhere in the country. Lott wrote, “Everyone knows the types of claims that will be made during congressional debates about how dangerous permit holders are, so before the various reciprocity bills come up, it is extremely important that [the D.O.J.] do a study on this issue.” He clarified, “It is one thing for myself to do studies on how law-abiding concealed handgun permit holders are. It is something entirely different for the Department of Justice to do it.”

In cities around the country, police chiefs were critical of licensed gun carriers who were driving into metropolitan areas and leaving firearms in their parked cars. Thieves, the police said, were breaking into the vehicles, stealing the guns, and distributing them through the illegal market. Lott wanted this narrative put to rest. “There is one item that I could use your help quickly on [getting] some data before the reciprocity debate that is coming up in September,” he wrote to Newman. “The claim coming out from gun control advocates is that concealed handgun[s] are being stolen from permit holders and then being used in crime.” Lott then appears to ask Newman to do something illegal. “As I suspect you already know, there is a database for this information,” he said, “but unfortunately only law enforcement are allowed access to it.” Lott was referring to the National Criminal Information Center, which is strictly off limits to the public; a violation of the policy can be prosecuted as a federal crime. A week later, he followed up with Newman: “Just so you know, I believe that I was able to get a hold of the data that I had asked about.”

When I asked Lott about these e-mails, he wrote, “I have no memory of anyone ever mentioning anything to me about the data not being accessible to the public.” He went on, “In any case, while I was waiting to hear back from Newman, I talked to a Congressman about my interest in getting that data, and he offered to get the data for me. So that is how I got it.”

This summer, John Donohue, an empirical researcher and Stanford law professor who also testified in the California case, published a study in the National Bureau of Economic Research examining “shall-issue” laws in forty-seven U.S. cities over a forty-year period, from 1979 to 2019. The statutes, the study found, were linked to a twenty-nine-per-cent increase in violent gun crime. One of the driving factors: a thirty-five-per-cent jump in firearm theft.

In late 2019, John Dillon, the plaintiffs’ attorney in the California assault-weapons case, asked Lott to join his team as an expert witness. During Lott’s deposition, he said, “I have a rule that I won’t take a case if I’m going to be paid by anybody who is involved in the gun industry or the N.R.A. or somebody else who has a dog in the fight.”

It was a strange answer, given that multiple gun-rights organizations were listed as plaintiffs in the case. When asked if he was aware of their involvement, Lott said, “I have no doubt that that’s true. I have no connection with them, and have had no contact with them about it.” The attorney pressed him further. “Do you know which particular organizations are plaintiffs in this case?” he asked. “I haven’t tried to look that up,” Lott said. “It isn’t relevant to me.”

One of the plaintiffs was the Second Amendment Foundation, a group that focusses on litigation to expand gun rights. The month Lott joined the case, the organization held a conference in Phoenix. Dillon, the plaintiffs’ attorney, was one of the speakers, and he discussed the case on a panel. Another speaker was Lott, who delivered a lecture at the event, and was named Scholar of the Year. He told me, “When the case was in process, I never talked to anyone at the Second Amendment Foundation about it. I didn’t even know that they were involved.”

I asked Lott if he was paid for his work on the California case. He replied, “I was not paid by the plaintiffs.” During his deposition, he had disclosed that he was earning four hundred and fifty dollars an hour to serve as an expert. When I followed up, he wrote, “I was paid by a private individual who doesn’t work in the firearms industry and does not run nor hold a position of any type in any self-defense oriented organization.” He added, “I will not go into further detail out of respect for their privacy.”

In June, 2020, under the direction of the Trump White House, the D.O.J. offered Lott a job, pending a background check. It was an exciting time for him. Lott was moving to Missoula, Montana, after David Strom, a seventy-nine-year-old who had recently died, left him money and a two-bedroom house with a view of the mountains. Strom was a veteran, a police officer, a gun enthusiast, and a lifetime N.R.A. member; according to an obituary, he supported organizations that “defended the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.” Before his death, records show, Strom had made Lott a beneficiary of his trust, which held the home. It is unclear how Lott and Strom were connected. But Lott once told Karpoff, his former classmate, that he had received the house from a fan. Lott has never publicly acknowledged Strom, but, according to court documents, he sued the trustee for more cash. “There was ten thousand dollars in the trust,” Lott wrote me, “and as soon as the trustee disbursed the cash in accordance with the will, the lawsuit was dropped.”

It can take months to clear a government background check, and, by the time the D.O.J. was finished looking into Lott, the Trump Administration was near its end. Before taking his position as a senior adviser, ethics rules required him to relinquish his role at the C.P.R.C. On October 9, 2020, the organization put out a press release announcing Lott’s replacement, Robert F. Turner, a national-security specialist in his late seventies who was a law professor at the University of Virginia for more than thirty years.

Lott started at the D.O.J. on October 20, 2020. Two days later, one of the most prominent national-security think tanks in the country, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, released a report titled “The War Comes Home: The Evolution of Domestic Terrorism in the United States.” Its key finding was not surprising: “White supremacists and other like-minded extremists conducted two-thirds of the terrorist plots and attacks in the United States in 2020.” Turner said that “Dr. Lott was anxious to have me respond” to the study. “It was my understanding,” he told me, that the C.P.R.C. “wanted me to write something challenging or refuting” it. Turner did not know why, and declined to do so. “I did not want my name associated with anything that might imply that I was other than outraged by such monstrous behavior,” he said.

In a matter of weeks, Turner, a cancer survivor who was struggling to write op-eds—one of his core responsibilities as president of the C.P.R.C.—left the organization. Lott does not dispute Turner’s recollection of the report, but said that Turner’s departure was not related to it, and instead pointed to his lack of productivity.

Lott’s three-month stint at the D.O.J. was unremarkable. He compiled data relating to the background-check system, and reviewed F.B.I. reports he found problematic. Lott left the day before Joe Biden was sworn into office.

In June, 2021, after the judge struck down California’s assault-weapon ban, Lott turned his attention to other matters. In the past few years, a flurry of states have passed laws abolishing their concealed-carry permit systems. Known among gun-rights advocates as Constitutional Carry, the new statutes allow anyone who can legally purchase a firearm to carry a concealed handgun in public, with no license required. It is the logical evolution of the “shall-issue” concept, and Lott has embraced it. In December, he co-wrote an op-ed for the Orlando Sentinel arguing in favor of the law with Anthony Sabatini, a Republican state representative in Florida who was sponsoring a Constitutional Carry bill there and had the first byline. A month later, Lott co-wrote an op-ed in the Omaha World-Herald with Tom Brewer, a Republican state senator in Nebraska who was sponsoring Constitutional Carry legislation in his state. The column’s language was virtually identical to that of Lott and Sabatini’s op-ed in the Sentinel. In February, the column was published again, in Yellowhammer News, an outlet in Alabama. Lott’s co-writer was Shane Stringer, a Republican representative who was sponsoring the Constitutional Carry bill there. Finally, Lott published the op-ed on his own in March, in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, replacing the names of the other states with Georgia, which was considering similar legislation. The bills in Florida and Nebraska stalled, but passed in Alabama and Georgia. Half of all states now have a Constitutional Carry law in place.

Brewer’s office said that it had asked Lott for help with the senator’s bill, and that Lott had suggested he could either co-author or ghostwrite an op-ed. After the office agreed to a shared byline, Lott e-mailed text, which Brewer’s staff accepted without making any changes. Lott, the office said, did not disclose that he was publishing the same language with legislators in other states. None of the other lawmakers who supposedly co-authored those op-eds responded to requests for comment. “What I told any of the newspapers or others such as Brewer’s office was that I wouldn’t submit a similar piece to any other newspapers in that state,” Lott wrote to me. “State newspapers only require exclusivity within their state.”

Recently, in an interview after the Uvalde shooting, Senator Ted Cruz cited Lott’s research to argue that such incidents are rare in the United States relative to the rest of the world. Adam Lankford, a criminologist at the University of Alabama, had closely inspected Lott’s data, and discovered that Lott had inflated the world’s figures by including “attacks by terrorist organizations, genocidal militias, armed rebel groups, and paramilitary fighters.” The data even contained a slaughter directed by the President of Nigeria, in which soldiers killed as many as two hundred civilians. These were not comparable acts of violence to Uvalde, Buffalo, or, say, the 2017 music-festival shooting in Las Vegas. Lott disagrees. “We do not exclude incidents of public mass shooting just because we think we know the motivation of the shooter or shooters,” he and a co-author wrote in Econ Journal Watch.

Without Lott, there would be no counter-narrative for those who have come to need one. Gun rights represent a way of life, an identity tied to ideas about individualism that, for many Americans, fill a void. Republicans like Cruz recognize the potency of the issue, and use it to mobilize voters, reinforcing the notion that they are protecting society by arming themselves—a noble calling. During the pandemic, Americans have bought more firearms than ever before, and, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, gun homicides have surpassed their previous all-time peak, reached in 1993. In Philadelphia, the number of permits issued rose from seventy-four hundred, in 2020, to fifty-two thousand, in 2021. Last year, there were five hundred and sixty-one murders in the city—the highest number ever recorded there. The violence has been normalized. In October, a fifteen-year-old boy shot to death four adults and a teen-ager in a middle-class neighborhood in Raleigh, North Carolina. The event hardly registered. ♦

[casspurrjoybell-33]

Wreckless - The Waterside

*Warning Adult Content*

Emmett

After our walk last night Finnegan crawled into bed with his clothes still on and declared he was too tired to move.

I undressed him and got him into his undies and all of a sudden he was awake enough to need a story.

I didn't mind, I was curious to see what was going on with our Demi-God.

It's now after eight a.m. and he's still asleep.

I was more than happy to find coffee grinds, sugar and some creamer packets in the kitchen this morning.

After I could open my eyes and get them to focus, I left Finnegan a note and took a quick walk, letting my nose lead me.

I ended up at a little bakery and came home with enough food for four.

I ate a croissant sandwich, checked on Finnegan and then blew up the pool toys and tossed them into the pool.

If I'd known we were gonna have our own I would have bought more.

That's okay, they sell that stuff in every other store around.

I grab another cup of coffee and go upstairs, staring out the balcony door.

I was right, you can see the ocean.

"Morning Emmett," he sounds adorable.

"Morning darling, how'd you sleep?"

"So good. I never wanna get up but I'm excited. Hey, come back to bed."

He's got his tongue sticking out the side of his smiling mouth just a little bit and his eyes are sparkling.

I know what he wants but I'm also in the mood to mess with him.

"I'm not tired."

"But... but I want yummies."

Yummies?

I'm pretty sure I know what he means, it's funny that he keeps changing what he calls our morning fun.

"Is that so? I went to the bakery and got you some yummies."

I'm proud of myself for managing to keep a straight face.

He sits up and stretches, pouting.

"Fine. No yummies. Is it pretty out there?"

I'm not sure if he means the view or the weather.

"Gorgeous," works for both.

I suddenly realize that I just got outwitted and lost to a nine year old.

I guess that means no blow job for me although if I went over there I'm sure he'd oblige.

He walks over and stands next to me and I can hear his intake of breath as he looks out the window.

There's no doubt in my mind that his mouth is making a little 'o'.

"The ocean. Can we go to the beach?"

"Of course but you need some breakfast first."

He drops to his knees and this time I don't argue except to make him get up on the bed so I can ravage him as well.

When he gets downstairs he immediately opens the slider and runs out.

"Toys. Did you bring those, Emmett?"

He's outside and he's worried about people hearing him.

"I did. There's more on a chair but they can wait for another day."

Or not, he's walking out barefoot.

The deck is fairly clean but I should sweep it and double check. 

I should be watching him or doing that now but I finish warming up his sandwich, drop it on the table and then walk to the door.

He's holding a water gun and shoots it straight at me.

The little rascal.

I shut the door but not before getting a wet stripe the whole way across my stomach.

Oh no, it's on.

I run out while he's reloading and grab the other one.

"You're in trouble now."

He looks straight at me, unloads his gun and runs back inside and I haven't even gotten mine loaded yet.

He knows I won't shoot him inside so he's progressed from a rascal to a little shit.

I put my gun down, put my hands up in surrender and he opens the door.

I will get him back for that.

An hour later we're walking down to the beach and I'm holding his hand.

That's why Rehoboth is the place to be.

I have my bag with our towels, sunscreen and necessities and I can tell that Finn is doing his best to not run.

He surprises me when he says...

"Is it okay if I'm in little head-space?"

"Of course darling. I expected you to be... at least for a lot of it."

"Okay. That's... that's nice of you Emmett. I need it."

He's had a rough two weeks.

"I'm sure you do."

"But I want to do what you need, too."

This again.

This horrible insecurity that he can't seem to get past.

I pull us to the edge of the sidewalk.

"Finnegan. It has killed me to not be able to help you more the past few weeks. I want to take care of you, no I need to take care of you. That's all I want to do on vacation. I want to spend some time with you, ravage you and take care of you. You're easier to take care of when you're little, you know."

He's looking down at what must be a very interesting rock so I let him off the hook and we keep walking.

As soon as we hit the sand he takes his flip flops off, then races down towards the cooler damp sand.

I find us a spot, put our stuff down and then walk out to meet him.

"I've never been in. I saw the Pacific once in Sacramento, went to the pier. I flew over it to Europe but I've never actually touched it."

"Finnegan? Look at me."

He may sound more adult right this second but this is important.

"I know you can swim but you need to listen to me, okay?"

"Okay."

"The tide is going out. It pulls, hard. The sand moves beneath your feet and some of those waves will knock you right over if you're not paying attention. Be careful, okay? Stay with me until you get used to it."

He smiles up at me.

"I'll be careful, I promise."

Good... I can't wait to watch him experience this.

He's done so many things and can do so many things that chances like this are rare. It's going to be an amazing day.

[biceratops7]

Can we just acknowledge how ofmd said “twink rights” for a moment?

Ok wait hear me out, it is legitimately so weirdly rare to see media centered around queerness that sees effeminate gay men as diverse, complex, and invaluable to our community. More historically it’s been used as cinematic shorthand for (often negative) queer coding, but now a days it’s either a token or something to point at and go “We’re gay but not like those guys, we’re normal people.” (Looking at you Love Simon…)

And then we have Our Flag Means Death, which has a bare minimum of three effeminate gay men, all completely different from each other in several areas. All having their presentation of queerness treated as a strength by the series.

First we have Lucius. He’s the first openly gay character we meet and is easily the most “stereotypical.” However these things are deconstructed and seen as healthy character traits. For example in episode 5, Lucius is shown to “get around” if you know what I mean. Usually this is seen as dangerous or immoral by the narrative, but ofmd completely turns that on its head when it’s revealed not only that his boyfriend knows about it, but the whole ship does and supports it. “We don’t own each other” takes a commonly frowned upon stereotype of gay men and asks why it’s even seen as bad in the first place. What’s wrong with an adult who enjoys open sex with other consenting parties? It’s precisely Lucius’s pride and the crew’s acceptance of it that wins them a victory against Izzy.

Another thing about Lucius is that he’s easily one of the most self actualized characters in the show. Normally when this happens it’s used in the “gay best friend” trope, where you’re a straight but “woke” blonde lady who’s uber confident twink friend gives great advice. You know, that one? Accept here Lucius’s strong sense of self concept and knowledge of healthy relationships are used to help his own community. Often times effeminate gay men either can’t hide their queerness or just choose not to, because of that “twinks” are often seen protecting or mentoring younger/ newer members of our community, and that role is incredibly important and deserving of respect.

Alright now let’s move from that to the dude with a giant beard who is so stereotypically manly he’s rumored to carry nine guns. That’s right, Blackbeard is low key a twink and I will fight to the death on this hill.

I’ve already touched on my reasoning behind that in this post, but what I didn’t mention is that these attributes are not only acceptable by the narrative but staunchly encouraged.

When Ed’s taking part in these things he’s growing as a character, he’s putting his past behind him and becoming the healthiest version of himself. Even when he’s just straight up having a mental breakdown throwing himself into these softer things is used as symbolism for healthy coping strategies like being honest about what’s wrong and opening up to people who care about you.

This is in stark contrast with him violently throwing away every trace of it. His abrupt return to traditional masculinity (and casual murder, but you know, pirates) is treated as a moment of weakness made in desperation, one he quickly realizes didn’t work at all. But now it’s too late.

And then there’s Stede, I won’t say much about him because it’s pretty simple. Stede’s “effeminate” traits are seen as negatives by the people we’re supposed to dislike (Izzy, the twins, his father, etc.), but a big theme of the series is showing that those people were wrong and painting them as strengths. He’s at his best when he uses less traditionally masculine traits, the show actually frames them as valuable skills. 

His attitude on being emotionally open makes a HUGE positive impact on Ed’s life and eventually endears his crew to him, making them all incredibly close. His knowledge and liking for “fine things” is something he and Ed share together and is the first thing they connect over. The show isn’t about Stede becoming a better man despite these attributes, it about him becoming a better man because of them. Because he chooses to share them with someone who finds them charming and loves him for who he is instead.