#but like. still c'mon

[everythingwasnormalhere]

pls rb if you think cuddling doesn't have to be s3xual

im tryna prove a point to my bf's mother help me out

[starlit-meloncholia]

Sometimes my job sucks :L

[mugiwara-lucy]

Sabo looks so proud of Luffy 🥹

[braisedhoney]

Can we get some Dark Dan and Jazz?

oh you absolutely can. these siblings are not alright.

[butdaddyilovehimmm]

Okay, but can we talk about how intimate this scene is?

[beatcroc]

there's no way the bathroom at peppino's pizza is actually that big but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ . hey ummm anyway.... i care them...... anyway there's a lil ramble on my take on fake pep's like psyche or whatever in tags on the og post if ur into that kinda thing :y

hey! it's a series! fake peppino world tour: [noise] [noisette] [peppino]<- u are here [gustavo] [gerome] [noisette again]

[heroesriseandfall]

Introduction to Batman: A Lonely Place of Dying, April 1990

Introduction by Dennis O'Neil for Batman: A Lonely Place of Dying (1990 collected edition)

Transcription below the cut/readmore.

INTRODUCTION by DENNIS O'NEIL

Robin was gone. We needed a new Boy Wonder. There had been two previous Robins. The original first appeared less than a year after a new costumed hero called Batman made his debut in DETECTIVE COMICS #27, to instant success. Some time within the next eleven months, his creators, artist Bob Kane and his writer-collaborator Bill Finger, decided to give their dark, obsessed hero a kind of surrogate son, Robin, who was hailed on the cover of DETECTIVE #36 as “the sensational character-find of 1940—Robin, The Boy Wonder.” Over the next 40 years, Batman’s fortunes varied: always, however, Robin was at Batman’s side.

He served a couple of functions. If Batman were real (and it may shock some of our more avid readers to learn he isn’t), and if he were the grim, obsessed loner he is often portrayed as, Robin, with some help from Batman's faithful butler Alfred, would keep him sane; a man whose every waking hour is focused on the grimmest aspects of society, who is unable to release the effects of seeing his parents murdered, whose life is an amalgam of sudden violence and lonely vigilance, would soon skew into a nasty insanity if he did not have someone to care for, someone to maintain a link with common humanity. But Batman is, of course, not real. (My apologies to avid readers.) He isn’t exactly a fictional character—more on that shortly—but he does not and could not exist as a living, breathing human being. That doesn’t make Robin any less useful: he serves the same functions in the Batman stories as Watson served in the Sherlock Holmes canon and the gravedigger serves in Hamlet: like Holmes’s faithful doctor, Robin is a sounding board, a person with whom the hero can have dialogues and thus let the reader know how brilliantly he’s handling matters and like the gravedigger, he occasionally provides a bright note in an otherwise relentlessly morose narrative.

Which is why I was a trifle uneasy when we—the editorial staff of DC Comics—decided to let our audience decide whether he would live or die. It came to be known in our offices as the “telephone stunt.” We had a character, Robin, the readers didn’t seem terribly fond of. This wasn’t the original Robin, the “character-find of 1940”; that Robin was Dick Grayson and he had graduated from sidekick to bona fide hero who fronted a group of evil-fighting adolescents, The Teen Titans. In 1983, it was decreed that Robin should grow up and assume a crime-fighting identity of his own—become his own man, as befitted the leader of the mighty Titans. He left Batman’s world to assume the name, costume, and persona of Nightwing. Gerry Conway and Don Newton replaced him with a second Robin, Jason Todd, whose biography was virtually identical to that of Dick Grayson. Why not? Gerry and Don were not trying to innovate, they were simply filling a void. The assignment they were given was simple: Provide another Robin. Quickly and with as little fuss as possible.

In 1986, Max Allan Collins inherited the Batman writing assignment and told his editor he had an idea for an improved Jason Todd. Make him a street kid, Collins said. Make his parents criminals. Have him and Batman on opposite sides at first. Sounded fine to the editor and, since DC was in the middle of a vast, company-wide overhaul of storylines anyway, Collins was told to go ahead. I was the editor; I did the telling. And I’d do it again, today. Collins’s Robin was dramatic, did have story potential. But readers didn’t take to him. I don't know now, and will probably never know why. Jason was accepted as long as he was a Dick Grayson clone, but when he acquired a distinct and, Collins and I still believe, more interesting backstory, their affection cooled. Maybe we—me and the writers who followed Collins—should have worked harder at making Jason likeable. Or maybe, I guessed, on some subconscious level our most loyal readers felt Jason was a usurper. For whatever reason, Jason was not the favorite Dick had been. He wasn’t hated, exactly, but he wasn’t loved, either. Should we write him out of the continuity? It didn’t seem like a bad idea, and when we thought of the experiment that became the telephone stunt, Jason seemed the perfect subject for it. The mechanics were pretty simple: we put Jason in an explosion and gave the readers two telephone numbers they could call, the first to vote that Jason would survive the blast, the second to vote that he wouldn't.

It was successful—oh my, yes. We expected to generate some interest, but not the amount or intensity we got. As soon as the final vote was tallied—5271 for Jasons survival, a deciding 5343 against—the calls began. For most of three days, I talked to journalists, disc jockeys, television reporters. We got a lot of compliments. They ranged from a critic’s liking our stunt to the participatory drama of avant garde theater to the brilliant comedy team of Penn and Teller expressing mock envy that we beat them to “the kill-your-partner-900-number scam.” But then came the backlash, ugly and, to me at least, totally unexpected: one reporter claimed that the whole event had been rigged—that, in fact, we had decided on Jason’s demise ahead of time and staged an elaborate charade; a teary grandmother said that her grandchildren loved Jason and now we’d killed him; several colleagues accused us of turning our magazines into a “Roman circus.” Cynical was a word used. And exploitive. Sleazy. Dishonorable. Wait a minute, I wanted to reply. Jason Todd is just a phantom, a figment of several imaginations. No real kid died. No real anything died. It’s all just stories—

I would have been wrong. Batman, and Superman, and Wonder Woman and their supporting casts are quite a bit more than “just stories” if, by “stories,” we mean ephemeral amusements. They’ve been in continuous magazine publication for a half-century, and they’ve been in movies, and television shows, and in novels, and on cereal boxes and T-shirts and underwear and candy bars and yo-yos and games—thousands of ventures. For fifty years. Fifty years! Although the circulation of our magazines is relatively modest, these characters have been so enduring, so pervasive, they have permeated our collective consciousness. Everybody recognizes them. They are our post-industrial folklore and, as such, they mean much more to people than a few minutes’ idle amusement. They’re part of the psychic family. The public and apparently callous slaying of one of their number was, to some, a vicious attack on the special part of their souls that needs awe, magic, heroism.

We had promised to abide by the telephone poll, and we would. But within a few days, it became apparent that we’d have to begin growing another Robin. We had forgotten that Batman exists outside the pages of our comics, is not the exclusive property of DC’s editorial staff; because he is both popular and imperishable, hundreds of others have some legitimate interest in him (not the least of whom are the readers who, for one reason or another, had missed the voting.) Our medium may have kept him alive, but others have added immeasurably to his success. When we began hearing from them, the consensus was that a Batman without a Robin wasn't quite a Batman. I wasn’t surprised. Nor did I disagree, particularly. So our problem became: how to create Robin III without generating the hostility that plagued poor Jason. Dick Grayson was the answer. If, as we thought, readers felt Jason had somehow usurped Dick’s place, then we should link the new Robin to Dick—give Robin III his predecessor’s stamp of approval. One writer had done almost all of the Dick Grayson material DC had published for a decade: Marv Wolfman, co-creator (with George Pérez) of the New Teen Titans. That made Mary the first, and really only, choice to undertake the task of giving Batman a new helper. And if we were using Marv, why not have some of the story happen in the pages of THE NEW TITANS, which he was already writing, and thus be able to take advantage of the very considerable talents of Marv's collaborator on the Titans, George Pérez? George volunteered to co-plot the story with Mary and do layouts on the TITANS episodes, and editor Mike Carlin enlisted Tom Grummett and Bob McLeod to complete George's graphics work. I asked the regular BATMAN artists, Jim Aparo and Mike DeCarlo, to handle the BATMAN issues. Finally, we chose a name for Robin III—Tim Drake—and, after a couple of editorial conferences, six gifted gentlemen retired to do what they do best.

The result seemed worthy of being collected between one set of covers, to be read as a graphic novel. We decided to do that and you’re holding the result. I hope you enjoy it. But please don’t think it’s the end of the Robin III saga. Dick Grayson’s lasted 50 years, after all, and Tim Drake does have his blessing.

Dennis O’Neil

April 1990

[dollsome-does-tumblr]

i think the reason i feel so offended by biopics about female writers that are all "this exact romantic situation happened to her, and then she simply wrote it down on some paper!" is that they completely disrespect our ability to simply hallucinate a random situation for fun and then become obsessed with it

[kazutora-kurokawa]

Kakucho x Weak!Reader

♡ SFW + NSFW, fem reader, reader has multiple unnamed diseases, reader gets tired easily, reader takes meds, Kakucho is a gentleman (per usual), oral->fem and male receiving, soft sex, masturbation ♡

note: requested by @1dkneo 🩵

❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀

SFW

🩷 Helps you keep track of all the medicine you take, he has a cute little chart on the wall of your bedroom to remind you

🩷 Sets your doctor appointments and puts reminders on your phone's calendar

🩷 Carries you on his back when you're too weak to walk

🩷 Cooks and cleans when you don't feel like it, he's the perfect little househusband

🩷 Drops everything he's doing to let you nap on his chest

🩷 Will literally bathe, dress, and feed you if you ask (put a ring on his finger already 🙄)

NSFW

🩷 Eats you out for hours on end, your pleasure is his pleasure (and he's lowkey greedy)

🩷 Never asks you for head because he doesn't want to inconvenience you, but if you offer then he's down for it

🩷 Takes his time when he fucks you because he wants to memorize the way you feel around his dick

🩷 Extra gentle with you and showers you with praise, you'll never go a day without hearing him call you beautiful, or gorgeous, or perfect

🩷 Respects your boundaries because he was raised right, if you're not in the mood then he'll go in he bathroom and take care of it on his own (he'll obviously be thinking of you the whole time, probably scrolling through pictures of you too)

❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀❀

Taglist

@arlerts-angel @i-literally-cant-with-this @trevengersprincess @giugiette @katkusuo @happy-trenchcoated-impala @drunkcheesecake @darkstarlight82 @reiners-milkbiddies

[artkaninchenbau]

Egghead chibs lesgooo ✌️✨

[slymanner]

Look all I'm saying is if that a shadow game can work THAT well and be so well designed story wise and gameplay wise

HE can work

[royalarchivist]

Phil: Doin' a lot of traveling around the New Years. Oh boy, oof. Oh golly, oh gee. But it should be worth it! It should be really good. I'm looking forward to it, Kristin's looking forward to it.

Random Chatter: What about Tallulah and Chayanne?

Phil: I told them already what's going on. I already told them. They already know when I'm getting back and all that stuff, so.

Random Chatter: The cookies though?

Phil: [Shrugs] So? I'm... physically not here? [Laughs] There's more things - there's more important things in life than feeding a virtual egg cookies, I'm sorry to say, dude. [Laughs]

Random Chatter: Get Tubbo to feed eggs cookies.

Phil: [Laughs and mimics the chatter in an annoying voice] "Get this person!" "Get that person!" ALSO IGNORING THOSE PEOPLE ALSO HAVE LIVES! Jesus Christ. That says a lot about what you think of your streamer. Oh my god, dude. Let them have a fcking week off man! Let the Eggs have a week off, you kidding me? They're people, too, they're admins!

Random Chatter: The eggs need to live.

Phil: They do! By having a week off! [Laughs] Leave them alone! Holy fck! Good lord... If I- if- Dude. If anyone in my chat is genuinely like gonna come into stream, and like - be pissed off that different members of QSMP are just not logging in, I'm banning you on the spot, 'cuz that is so fcking toxically online of you. That is SO chronically online of you. You need to take a break, and I'm giving you that break. I'm forcing you to take a break from your PC. Fckin' get up from the - look away from the screen.

[ricksanchezbignaturals]

okay but the fact that in episode TWO rick was wearing leather and nipple clamps, getting walked on a leash by a gnome with a boner, and some people argued that he's straight for the next 10 years is hilarious. besties i do not think that was a necessary diversion in incepting mrs. pancakes actually

[sketchypeppers]

extra ordinary

[skruttet]

first look at the moomin nendoroid~!

[ruegarding]

hi, quick question, how did you feel about Beryl Grace's character and how she was written?

hi! overall, beryl is another character that falls into the "interesting concept, not elaborated on in canon" category. in pjo, she's not particularly developed bc of her distance to the main character and narrative. in hoo, where she's directly related to a main character, she's flat, zeus is flat, hera is flat, thalia is barely relevant, and jason's entire character suffers from hoo being inconsistent and poorly written, which means anything that, arguably, should be done well doesn't hold up.

in pjo, beryl’s character isn’t very fleshed out, but she’s a side character to a side character, so it's understandable. she's also dead, but when she was introduced the majority of parents we knew abt were alive, so it wasn't too big a deal (this changes drastically w hoo, where there are more dead parents than living ones).

her existence answers a few questions: why doesn't every mortal parents know who their child's godly parent is? bc some of them cannot handle it. why did thalia run away? bc her mother coped w her mental instability by turning to alcoholism. why does thalia want to join the hunters? bc she wants stability. why can't thalia return home? bc her mother's dead. a lazy way out, maybe, but, again, beryl is a side character to a side character. the implied depth of beryl's character, that thalia cared enough to not only check on beryl's well-being after being revived but also feels enough guilt abt leaving that it's used against her soh, does a lot of the heavy lifting.

in hoo, we learn very little abt beryl's character, despite the fact that she is now connected to a main character. in fact, beryl's inclusion in hoo doesn't do much.

is beryl given depth now that she's closer to the narrative? not really. thalia had to raise jason bc beryl was always self-absorbed, so she and jason don't really have a relationship, therefore nothing to explore. and also the implied depth from pjo is removed bc actually thalia stayed bc of jason and doesn't care abt beryl. so, if zeus went back to beryl, had two children w beryl, that would imply that he loves her, right? no. bc why would we take this opportunity to imply that zeus cares abt other ppl and make him a multi-dimensional character. what does it mean that beryl unites two pantheons by having a greek child and a roman child? don't know. rick never explores it. why was jason sold to one direction? bc hera sucks and beryl's self-absorbed. how was jason able to recognize thalia's face despite last seeing her when he was two (or three??)? did hera tell jason abt thalia as he was growing up? was it all part of hera's big plan? don't know. probably. is jason and thalia's relationship an important focus of the series? no. do we explore the ramifications of beryl being a celebrity w children? no. where does jason's idea of what a mother should be ("caring, loving, selflessly protective") come from? not established. probably thalia...? was it necessary that jason's mother was beryl and not literally any other absent parent? no. was jason and hera's relationship explored in hoo, at least? if u settle for "kinda."

i can not overstate how little beryl shows up in hoo.

there's also a separate issue in how her disabilities are handled. like i say often, this is a series abt disability and therefore these things matter. she explicitly has an addiction and is coded w bpd and she and zeus are villainized for both of these things.

compare it w may. may can't give luke what he needs bc of her disability and it's approached w empathy and portrayed as a tragedy. similarly, hermes loves her and helps her how he thinks is best. and despite this, the audience can still empathize w luke's anger bc none of this changes the fact that he did not get what he needed as a child. that's how u write a complex relationship fitting for a main character of a series abt disability.

instead, beryl is written as incredibly shallow and repeatedly described as "unstable." she likes zeus bc he's powerful and he gives her attention. she caught his attention for shallow reasons and she wanted to keep it for shallow reasons. zeus is written like the villain for leaving, bc obviously he's also shallow and only there bc she gives him attention. this entire situation would be a tragedy if it were written w a modicum of care. it was a no-win scenario. he could have stayed forever, he could have made her immortal, and she would still be unstable, be unsatisfied. she put her entire well-being in his hands, and there is no way he can make her happy forever. it's sad! the love could've been there and it wouldn't've fixed anything!

boo sort of tries to add depth to her character and relationship w jason, but, again, it doesn't hold up bc jason doesn't have a relationship w her. for the two (or three??) years he lived w her, she doesn't even raise him. thalia does. jason doesn't see multiple sides of beryl. almost everything he (and the audience) knows abt beryl, he learned from thalia's crash course on why their mother sucked. the only exception is this promise beryl made, that she'd come back for him, except jason's already come to terms w the fact it's a broken promise, that beryl was never coming back for him, before the story begins. rick never establishes any redeeming quality of beryl's, or beryl's influence on jason, so jason's rejection of her doesn't pack any emotional punch bc...what exactly is there to reject? to let go of? why would the audience be attached to her? why would jason be afraid of becoming like her when there's nothing in the narrative to suggest they're similar?

it's not tragic. it's not triumphant. it's lackluster.