#but stop trying to change them please

[atlasdoe]

you will NEVERRRRRRR be able to convince me that Regulus Evan and Barty were forced to join the Death Eaters

Regulus literally had photos and articles about Voldemort on his bedroom walls. He only betrayed Voldemort because of what he did to Kreacher. (and as Kreacher was someone who admired Regulus I think it's fair to say whatever Kreacher believed, Regulus believed)

Evan was friends with Mulciber and Avery and was described as being among Voldemorts important supporters by Karkaroff

Barty got caught in gof because he got too excited over Voldemorts return and wanted to know if Voldemort punished the Death Eaters who didn't look for him/were in Azkaban (btw Avery and Malfoy were one of these Death Eaters. Barty believed himself to be more loyal to Voldemort then they were)

I've said this time and time again but i've ended up on the wrong side of marauderstok and i'm seeing everywhere people talk as if they didn't have a choice or as if they joined the Death Eaters for someone else. I don't understand how you can say you like Evan, Barty and Regulus but change one of the most important things about their characters. They were Death Eaters and they were there willingly and believed in the things they fought in a war for

[robotsafari]

redrawing my favorite gba chain of memories scenes with my own interpretations part 1(?):

“You’re thinking about me… You’re afraid of the darkness I command.” (NOT SHIP)

[joons]

This may be a prickly subject, and I'm sorry if so. But I'm trying to learn more about Elvis, and every time I bring him up to people I know, they try to tell me he was this terrible person, and point me toward Priscilla's book, the movie made on it, and the discourse. Idk if you've talked about it on here (I tried searching your blog but couldn't find anything on it). If you're willing, I'd love to hear your take on it so I can see a more nuanced view.

The film Priscilla was greenlit roughly a month after Priscilla herself was informed that she was close to becoming financially insolvent in 2022. With a business partner, Brigitte Kruse, who allegedly helped broker the film deal, she established a limited liability company called Priscilla Presley Partners that was supposed to use her image and likeness to create several lines of merchandise to coincide with the film's release. That business partner is now suing Priscilla because she did not have the rights to her image or likeness, or any ability to use the Presley name, because she had already sold all of those rights and was no longer considered in good standing with Graceland or Elvis Presley Enterprises. The entire business deal, then, according to the lawsuit, was built on her misrepresentation of how much her image was worth.

The deal between the two of them fell apart after Riley Keough, Lisa Marie's daughter and Priscilla's granddaughter, settled with Priscilla to give her a lump sum of $1 million from Lisa Marie's estate and yearly amounts of $100,000. Priscilla sued very shortly after Lisa Marie's death because she thought Lisa Marie's signature on a will had been forged because Priscilla was not included in it. All of the assets were supposed to go directly to Lisa Marie's son, Benjamin Keough, who died in 2020, and her three daughters, two of whom are still teenagers. Now, part of those assets have been claimed by Priscilla and her other son, Navarone, who has no connection to the Presley family and has stated he is glad Lisa died.

Four months before Lisa's death, Lisa wrote to Sofia Coppola and made it clear she had strong concerns about the Priscilla film and was suspicious of the intentions behind it:

"As his daughter, I don’t read this and see any of my father in this character. I don’t read this and see my mother’s perspective of my father. ... I will be forced to be in a position where I will have to openly say how I feel about the film and go against you, my mother and this film publicly."

Lisa was enormously grateful for efforts put into 2022's Elvis to find her father's soul and to restore his dignity in a world that often turns him and his family into a joke:

"You can feel and witness Baz’s pure love, care, and respect for my father throughout this beautiful film, and it is finally something that myself and my children and their children can be proud of forever."

It is such a strong and powerful statement, to see how much Lisa valued family, not just her father but her own children and their legacy, and how willing she was to speak up no matter what was going on in her personal life to say what was right. On this and many other things, Lisa and Priscilla's values have rarely been in alignment. A friend and EPE business associate, Joel Weinshanker, said of her, "Lisa couldn't be bought, she couldn't be pushed. If she felt that something wasn't in Elvis' best interest, it was never about money. And she really is the only Presley that you could say that about."

Priscilla, though, has adjusted her stories about her time with Elvis almost every time she discusses it. For a quick example, she said in her book, which was released in 1985, that Elvis insisted she do her hair and makeup a certain way, that he had control over her look and would get upset if she didn't dress how he wanted. But in an interview with Ladies' Home Journal in 1973, she said that she made a deliberate choice to attend makeup school so that she could learn how to style herself, and that it was her idea to wear big, black hair and big, black eyeliner. She said she was embarrassed for going overboard. She said, "I wish that Elvis had said something, but he must have liked it because he never commented." This lines up with recollections from Patti Parry, a platonic friend of Elvis' and a hairstylist, who said Priscilla always wanted Patti to do her hair in a "big boombah," but that Priscilla would then get upset when Elvis didn't notice or didn't like it.

These changes are impossible not to notice if you follow her for any length of time. At the film premiere, she said it felt just like watching her life and said she was consulted on everything, since she was an executive producer. After the film came out, she said she couldn't understand why Coppola had changed so much about the story and misrepresented events. In the '70s, she said she and Elvis lived almost totally separate lives, that she came and went as she pleased, and that she loved this freedom. Later, she said she felt completely stifled and trapped and never left the house, even though she had friends she went out with all the time. In 2019, she tweeted a forceful denial about a National Enquirer story: "This is the Enquirer folks... please don't believe everything you read. ... Never planned on being buried next to Elvis. What will they come up with next?" But part of her settlement demands in her lawsuit against Riley in 2023 asked "to be buried next to Elvis." This year, she said in two separate interviews that Lisa was with her when Elvis died and that Priscilla had to break the news to her, despite the fact that Lisa was at Graceland when it happened. She has said she gave Elvis the idea to wear belts on his jumpsuits, to have a lightning bolt as his logo, to sing "An American Trilogy," though none of that is true. She retells the story about forcing Elvis to burn all of his spiritual books to prove he loved her as an almost funny anecdote about debrainwashing him, while Elvis later said it was the worst thing he ever agreed to, a desperate attempt to make her happy by giving up the things he valued the most. (For the record, this is my opinion about their relationship on both sides: thinking they could change themselves and each other to make it work. It never did.)

Every secondhand Elvis account has to be treated lightly and only valued for its consistency with known facts and other witnesses. I try to give enormous benefit of the doubt to anyone in the Elvis world because they often only have partial knowledge of what Elvis may have been thinking at any given time, and there are numerous examples of people who were taken advantage of by unscrupulous journalists who changed the story they wanted to tell. But Priscilla's stories sometimes are not even consistent with her own statements, which makes them very poor options indeed to base anything on. However careful we are about noting potential biases and inaccuracies in other memoirs, we have to be triply, quadruply careful with anything in which Priscilla involves herself because she has a vested interest in generating discourse today in order to make money. Unfortunately, Priscilla has a habit of stifling other accounts or making sensationalized statements each time there is a possibility that she will lose some of the cachet that comes with being an Elvis Source—after Elvis' death, when she believed she was going to inherit his airplane and disinvited everyone that Vernon said could fly in it to his funeral; when she sued the parents of one of Elvis' ex-girlfriends after he died because he had allowed them to live rent-free in a house he bought for them; when she claimed that Elvis wanted to reunite with her before his death, despite the fact that he was engaged to someone else and told many people he couldn't see a reunion ever happening with her; before Vernon's death, when she convinced him to make her an executor of the Presley estate until Lisa came of age; after Lisa came of age, when she convinced Lisa to let her stay on as partner; when Lisa accused Priscilla of misspending Lisa's money, during which time anonymous sources cropped up to say Lisa was in debt and drug-addled; when Priscilla was removed from her position as an EPE spokesperson but kept collecting $900,000 a year from the company; when Lisa died, and Priscilla sued once she learned she wasn't in the will; when Priscilla was no longer associated with EPE and decided to do another adaptation of a book that she has since recanted parts of and has contradicted before and after its release.

When Priscilla thinks there is a threat to her image and position, she does new interviews and projects to muddy the waters and stir public interest, whether it is true or false, positive or negative, laudatory or defamatory. She gets corrected by Elvis' surviving family members, girlfriends, friends, and fans, but these stories do not get the same reach no matter how much they are backed by contemporaneous documents and witnesses, or how many resources there are to educate the public on how Elvis' and Priscilla's attitudes about marriage and relationships changed—along with the rest of society—between 1960 and 1970.

I think almost any single-source project is not going to advance our understanding of Elvis in any way because no one individual can speak for him, and we are kind of obligated to include all the context we can in order to appreciate his character, his successes and failures, flaws and virtues—and to treat both himself and those around him as fully three-dimensional people who have their own blind spots. Priscilla is far too aware of her own image, and far too willing to change it to suit the audience, to be particularly valuable here.

She is next scheduled to appear at the Lexington (Kentucky) Comic & Toy Con.

[takemebacktowheniwassane]

"god I hate people who draw falsettos marvin this way" "fuck people who draw whizzer like that'"

*edited*

...guys, do you know what an art style is???? cuz', this seems pointed. I see what you mean. I completely agree.

But hear me out. Along with these posts, could we consider? Maybe? Some constructive criticism? People should draw them more accurate.

They SHOULD.

But how should they do it? Realism art? It's a foreign concept to me. I try and it absolutely fucking sucks and i'd love to be a part of this fandom showing that the characters are real people but

It's kind of

Just

Very "do this. No other explanation. Change it."

Look, I really want to. And I am trying. But could we like, make a space for teaching people? Cuz I am stumped dude like fr. Need some guidance.

sincerely, a tired lesbian who is infinitely more tired of seeing this everywhere. thanks

[reel-fear]

Genuinely so curious who Mike thinks is gonna be buying The Cage or the new DCTL GN bc with the way he tweets as far as he's concerned, it's not gonna be:

The queer people he has actively admitted he will never show any representation of in the games.

2. The POC he has actively fought against representing in his franchise. [Who he also mocked for thinking they would be represented in his franchise]

3. The Bendy fandom which has always been concerned with topics of diversity esp in the sense of queer people since its creation. Who he has responded to really poorly esp in regards to the GN.

4. The fans who critique him. [He blocked me for doing so lol]

5. His fans in general who he tweets about like this currently. [He's being vague about why people were mad at him or sent him 'nasty messages' because if you actually looked into why you'd see he was in the wrong. Either way, a very hateful way to speak abt ur own fanbase.]

Reminder while Mike is trash talking his fans he has always treated them rather poorly. The fans who won the fanart contest for Chapter 5 never got their posters actually in game due to it being rushed. Not only was chapter 5 a big slap to the face story wise, but it was literally so rushed he couldn't be bothered to add in the art his fans gave him for his game FOR FREE. [Meatly blames this on a crazy timeline, reminder him and Mike are the literal ceos of this company. The proposal of future updates here is also pretty cruel considering Mike nowadays happily admits he corrupted Chapter 5's source code and therefore literally can't update it At All currently. Because he is a moron]

At least they got to be in Boris and the dark survival, and by that I mean that was the Only game they got to be in so far, isn't that just treating your fans like you love them? Shoving their hard work into a spin off game almost nobody has played or addresses much. [Hell, who knows if with the Lone Wolf rebrand they'll even stay there. In which case they'll be in None of the games, only in the credits of BATIM]

6. The Bendy fans who just generally disagree with him on stuff. Like the new ink demon design where there is literally a public poll showing people generally prefer the old one.

7. The Bendy fans who can see he is actively lying to them. To their fucking faces.

He says this has always been the case, but screenshots and links to tweets regarding the books being canon prove it was not. Does he really think bendy fans are stupid or something? [Unless he's admitting here he lied to Kress when he told her the books were canon which sounds worse!]

8. Anyone who doesn't like the idea of giving money to a guy who laid off tons of employees then afterwards thought it was a great idea to express his anti-union views! Also brag about how good of an employer he was, according to his employees, he was not!

So in summary; Mike is an awful person who has not learned anything from the awful things he did. I will not be purchasing The Cage because, combined with this and his absolute refusal to take any kind of critique or see any differing interpretation of his franchise, I have no reason to think my problems with the franchise will ever be addressed or fixed. I probably will pirate The Cage along with any future Bendy Products [Including the movie] and will do my best to avoid giving it any kind of monetary support. Unless this changes any time soon, I can't see myself making anymore positive Bendy posts soon.

Mike has just managed to make it so hard to speak positively or optimistically of this franchise when he's so willing to broadcast how little he cares about it or its fans. I'm at the point where I refuse to pull any of my punches with my problems with it. What's the point of trying to play nice with my critique when either way the people creating it don't care?

So with this post, I want to invite anyone who feels similarly about the franchise to tell me, make a post or send an ask talking about how all of this makes you feel. It may not change how things are, but genuinely seeing other people share my feelings of anger makes me feel better. It feels nice to see when other people share our same concerns and worries. I'd also love to know if anyone else thinks they'll be avoiding purchasing Bendy products over this.

I'm not forcing anyone to participate in it nor trying to say anyone who doesn't supports mike but genuinely maybe if we can collectively decide to boycott things like the movie, graphic novel and The Cage... It might at least make the bendy devs acknowledge how much they have destroyed their own fandom's faith and trust in them.

The way Mike tweets about his actions like he had no control over why people were mad at him at least proves to me he takes NONE of it back nor regrets it. If you didn't know about his actions and only went off his tweets, you would be led to believe Mike has been needlessly picked apart by fans over things he couldn't control [or in his own words, had his words twisted and taken out of context]. That is not how you speak about your actions if you have actually learned better from them.

anyway, that has been my bendy dev callout post. This is an open invitation to anyone feeling similarly upset about the way the franchise is going to talk about it. It's genuinely nice to see how people feel about this and the more we talk about the more it's likely the bendy devs are forced to address our concerns. I don't think they will but hey, that's why I'm not gonna support them with my money anymore nor am I gonna be nice to them in any content I make critiquing Bendy. I mean I'm also basically making this post just in case anyone asks me Why I feel this way towards to bendy devs/as a way to respond to anyone who thinks I am too harsh in my critique in the future.

As always, it seems the best part of Bendy isn't actually anything about canon but about what the fan's are creating with the ideas Bendy failed to do anything interesting with.

Also the books, the books slap.

[strawberrycamel]

hey psst c'mere... no a little closer... a little closer- there we go

Loop lips are part of a racist caricature of Black people. Stop drawing Black characters with loop lips. I don't care how they look in canon, it's racist.

okay that's all you can go

[rmbunnie]

Red Hood Characterization

This is really long so I'm putting a cut here, I've been thinking about Jason Todd's character motivations and the question of whether or not his actions are based in a Moral Code (I don't think so, not to say he's without any morality) and I talk about that in more depth here.

I saw someone say on here that Titans: Beast World: Gotham City was some of the best Jason Todd internal writing they'd seen in a while, and I've been a Red Hood fan for 8 years or so now? pretty much since I read comics for the first time, so I went and checked out and I thought it was good! The way the person I saw talking about it as if it was rare and unusual made me wonder though, because as well-written as i thought his stances on crime were, there wasn't really anything in it that went against the way I conceptualize Jason?

This kinda plays into a larger question I've been thinking about for a while with Jason though, which is that, do people think that the killing is part of a fundamental worldview that motivates him a la batman, and that worldview is the reason he does the things he does?? Because 8 years ago i was a middle schooler engaging with fiction on the level that a middle schooler does, so I simply did not put much thought into it beyond "poor guy :(" but ever since I actually started trying to understand consistent characterization, I don't really see Jason as someone who's motivated by a moral code in his actions the way batman or superman is!

tbh my personal read is that he's a very socially-motivated guy, his actions from resurrection to his Joker-Batman ultimatum in utrh always seemed to me like every choice made leading up to his identity reveal was either a. to give him the leverage and skill necessary to pull off his identity reveal successfully, or b. to twist the knife that little bit more when he does let Bruce find out who he is. Like iirc there's a Judd Winick tweet like "yeah tldr he chose Red Hood as his identity because it's the lowest blow he could think of." And I think that's awesome, I think character motivations rooted so deeply in character's relationships and emotions are really fun to read! I also think it's where the stagnation/flatness of his character comes from in certain comics, because if his main motivation is one event in one relationship that passes, and he is not particularly attached to anything in his life or the world by the time that comes to pass, it's a little harder to come up with a direction to go with the character after that, because there isn't much of a direction that aligns with something the character would reasonably want? But I do think solving this by saying "all of the morally-off emotionally driven cruelty he did on his way to spite Batman was actually reflective of his own version of Batman's stance that's exactly the same except he thinks it's GOOD to kill people" isn't ideal. To be fully honest, it seems to me like he never particularly cared one way or the other about killing people to "clean Gotham of crime," he just did everything he could to get the power necessary to pull off his personal plans, and took out any particularly heinous people he encountered along the way (like in Lost Days.) Not to say I think the fact he killed people keeps him up at night anymore than everything else in his life events, I just never really thought he was out there wholeheartedly kneecapping some dude selling weed or random guy robbing a tv store for justice.

Looping wayyy back to my question, Is this (^) contradictory to the way he's written/the overall average perception of the character? Because like I enjoyed his writing in Beast World i have zero significant issue with anything there, I just didn't believe it would be a hot take, like yeah, that is Jason. It's been a while since I've read utrh and lost days, but I don't think my takeaway directly contradicts either of those too bad iirc. Idk all this to say I think Jason killing and being alright with killing is an obvious and objective fact, but i guess i've always seen it as more of a practical tactic than a moral belief, and I think taking the actions made during the lowest points of a character's life where he is obsessively focused on this ONEEEE thing and trying to apply it as a Motivating Stance to everything he's done after that, doesn't really follow logically for me.

[swinging-stars-from-satellites]

pray for me please

[deoidesign]

So I know you said you aren't allowed to promote your merch store or patron on your webtoon but would it be okay for people in the comments to remind others that they exist?

I have no control over what anyone posts in my comments... (eyes emoji)

[pinkfey]

i have no friends who care about me because my personality is boring and understimulating and i have no selling point as a friend and i am being left behind

[ratatatastic]

greek god of a man who has immortal surplus of stamina versus normal people (ekky)

[splatoon-countdown]

I just had an idea. Perhaps we could all change our in-game nicknames to "FREE GAZA" or "SAVE GAZA" to show our support. It sounds a bit silly, but it could spread the message about this terrible genocide. Obviously, you should be doing so, so much more than just changing your display name in a video game, but it's an extra thing you can do maximize your support. Maybe after a protest, when you want to relax from the stress of it, you can still wind down with a game of Splatoon while still showing support. It would be awesome if this started spreading, and a bunch of people starting changing their display names to this, and maybe even made a bunch of plaza posts about it! If you have a following in the Splatoon community, you should reblog this to spread the message. Maybe even repost it to Twitter/X! I saw a plaza post about the matter and it made me feel even more determined to do all I can. The more of us who work together, the stronger we become!!

[atlantis-just-drowned]

Tumblr is one of my favourite sites because unlike the rest of social medias, it's not about being perceived. It's about being as incoherent and mentally ill as possible.

[not-the-coffee-machine4]

“Guns N Roses shouldn’t have been at the FMTC” this and “why were Guns N Roses even invited after the homophobia blah blah”

IT WAS ON PURPOSE. THEY WERE INVITED ON PURPOSE. ROGER. DID IT. ON. PURPOSE. And put him with Elton ON PURPOSE. To bridge that gap and it WORKED.

Axl Rose and Elton John practically held hands singing Bohemian Rhapsody in front of the entire world and if you watch Roger’s face in the background you can tell he knows his mission was accomplished

[toddtakefive]

btw todd’s reluctance to join the dps because he doesn’t want to read (which is then accommodated for) and is scared to put himself out there (which is also worked through) being read as todd not wanting to go AT ALL, and thus neil making the proper accommodations (“todd anderson, who prefers not to read, will keep the minutes of the meetings”) and encouraging him to step out of the box that stifles him being seen as ‘forceful’ or like he can’t take no for an answer makes me insane with rage

[animentality]

Did they get a postive response from adding those Gortash lines? I thought a bunch of people hateing on it instead? Also what if they removed the lines to change them a go a diffrent direction. I'm sorry. I have a lot of worry they wont do something I agee with.

The overwhelming reaction was positive. Durgetash artists went on Twitter to celebrate, and the small but passionate fans of the ship went nuclear here and on Twitter, and helped BG3 trend, yada yada, tale as old as time.

Most people don't care about Durgetash or Gortash. The majority of people you hear from would be the people who like both of those things. It's also a small ship.

The haters of that ship are even smaller in comparison, because the hand that reaches out will always touch more than the hand clenched into a fist.

And the only "legitimate" complainers, who don't just dislike the ship on principle, are the whiners who keep insisting their durges are lesbians, and how dare Larian "force" them into a relationship with a man - which is literally not what Larian did.

No one bitches about how Gale's ORIGIN completely precludes him from being gay.

I see no reason why you can't similarly have Durge's ORIGIN make them attracted to men. Or, you know. Enver is special.

Oh. And also. It's so fucking platonic, if you want it to be. Stop being stupid and just say you don't like Durgetash. It's as easy as that.

Stop using "lesbophobic" as a handy label for your self righteous soapbox. You just don't like the ship, and that's fine. It's FINE. But acting like Durgetash is lesbophobic - oh, go play a Tav.

And also, Astarion and Gale and Wyll better not flirt with you in game, even though you can tell them to fuck off, or else they're lesbophobic too.

That's the only discourse that gained traction on Twitter. As far as I know.

If Larian had made Gale wear blackface or something, and people got pissed, then yeah. They'd back up on that, and get rid of it pronto.

But Durgetash???

Aside from the general evil antics, they're not that fucking controversial of a ship.

Most people don't even PLAY the Dark Urge.

I don't know how to stress this any other way...

People act like Durgetashers are loud - we're honestly not that loud.

Astarion fans are far louder, and yet, the most romanced companion is SHADOWHEART and then Laezel and KARLACH.

He's not even in the top 3. And yet, he dominates the content on Twitter and Tumblr... he's definitely more popular than Gortash or the Dark Urge or Durgetash together...but his fans are still technically the damn minority.

So Durgetash in comparison to Starries???

Infinitesimal.

And Durgetash haters?

Would be even smaller.

So what I'm saying is...

I'm kind of tired of answering asks about this.

I don't KNOW for certain whether or not this is Larian backing up or walking forward, and while I don't believe they'd walk back on this, and especially not for a handful of people, it kind of annoys me to even think about things outside of my control.

now if Larian makes a big grand statement and says actually we totally rescind something WE WROTE AND ADDED TO THE GAME because some people got mad...then I'll call them cucks, and complain.

But as of right now?

As far as I know personally, and assume in my heart... it's neutral.

The lines are probably just bugged. Also, not ALL of them are bugged either, so.

Please stop freaking out, guys.

I am the world's biggest resident durgetash freak, and I'm shrugging at this, and just saying it's a bug.

Don't let it bother you. It's out of your control, regardless.

(And I stress again - if we find out they're legitimately backing away from something they did...they have the spine of a ham sandwich. But until we know that for sure, I won't condemn them for this, because as far as we know, it is legitimately an accident.)