#but that's a different post

[lady-harrowhark]

okay you know what. i'm not saying fall out boy's so much (for) stardust is a concept album about the locked tomb series.

what i AM saying:

there is a track titled 'Baby Annihilation'

We're here and we're ready to livestream the apocalypse

Scar-crossed lovers, forever, I'm checking myself out forever

Part-time soulmate, full-time problem

The band has previously been inspired by modern sci-fi classic Pacific Rim, resulting in the song Jet Pack Blues

so i'm not NOT saying fall out boy's so much (for) stardust is a concept album about the locked tomb series, is all i'm saying

[thestalwartheart]

Having thoughts about James Bond and sex again (what's new - it's my favourite topic).

It occurred to me this evening that we don't often see Craig!Bond having sex, at least not to the extent his mythology suggests. He kisses quite a few women, flirts a lot, but more often than not, he leaves them hanging (see: Solange Dimitrios, Camille, the nameless woman at the beginning of Spectre). The women we do see him have sex with:

a) are of use to him in the field (they either help him with logistics or intelligence),

b) are people he turns to in crisis (hello woman in Turkey during Skyfall ily), or

c) are the women he loves.

And I started to wonder why that is. Maybe it's an issue of just not wanting to. Maybe he's short on time. Maybe it's a combination of factors, but I'd like to float one at you that I don't hear mentioned very often:

Sex is an exercise in vulnerability. And not just for Bond; for his partners, too.

Bond has long been pigeonholed as a 'love 'em and leave 'em' type, but I'd argue that isn't strictly true. Yes, a lot of his dalliances are one night stands or casual flings, but he doesn't up and leave right away. He lingers (see Fields and Lucia Sciarra for a couple of really good examples, Vesper too if you believe they slept together after the shower scene).

I think Bond recognises that sex is a vulnerable thing. You are quite literally opening up your body to another person. No matter how fun or lighthearted or short-lived you expect it to be, it is still a momentous thing. An intense thing. I've no doubt it's anything less than intense with Bond.

To add to that: Bond is generally kind to his allies. He's aware he asks a lot of them, and he's predisposed to protect the romantic and sexual partners he meets in the field (even when it doesn't work out). I think his nature leads him to stay a while after sex - to cuddle, to reassure, to revel in beauty pleasure and gratitude and - I'm just going to say it - aftercare.

And that's maybe why he doesn't invest in it as often as people expect him to. Because it isn't just sex. It's aftercare and closeness and riding out that post-sex wave of vulnerability and feeling.

If anyone understands the pain in baring your soft parts to another person, it's Bond. In the face of that, I think leaving right after the deed is done would go against all his instincts.

Better to let someone down after a kiss, after all, than to leave them shaking and gasping in a cold hotel bed.

[bloodlessharmony]

stay down, boygenius / song in e, julien baker

“Sometimes being offered tenderness feels like the very proof that you've been ruined.” ― Ocean Vuong, On Earth We're Briefly Gorgeous

x - x - x

[postsforposting]

in dp1, "you can't buy love but only rent it for three minutes". dancers lend a hand.

you still gotta ask dancers if they want your hand.

calling for resumes but not paying medical/dental is asking to rent a hand without benefits

(everyone but domino got a little death in the end though: that's doing your friends a solid)

you can take advantage of your friends, and that can be forever, but that's only friends with benefits

especially if they're not always there for you

so if you want more than a little death,

you can't rent that, you can't pay for it,

so if you want more than just a little death

you need someone who isn't already married

or currently being nailed by someone else

you need to give it away for free

and dance

if you want a life together

[loumandforyou]

Since I've been seeing a lot of it lately, I want to ask: is racism in the states (most if not all posts are from either there or western Europe, I think) only towards black people? Do brown people/people of colour not face racism at all? in Europe, my experience is that if you aren't the whitest of whites and from a western country, racism against you will be a thing. is it so different over there that brown actors are considered as privileged as white people? Or is it just racism

I mean I know the answer, I think, but since I don't live in America or even Western Europe, I am wondering

[poetry-protest-pornography]

Babe bringing the immediate anxiety to the boyfriend proposal that's usually missing from a romance.

Big "this is my boyfriend"/"I'm your husband, stop calling me that" energy.

Poor Charlie lol

[tsuki-in-faerun]

you, tumblr user, are actually k tanaka: part deux

i decided to make this it’s own post instead of ranting in the tags of somebody else’s.

if I could browse the evan/sam tag without seeing k mentioned, i could get on board with the shippers. not the ship itself, the community. conceptually speaking, i have no problem with anybody’s shipping habits. i love the chemistry between danielle and brennan.

my issue is that 1.) k bashing lives alongside the actual shipping to the point of being unavoidable and 2.) the opinion that ‘romantic love can’t heal someone but it can help the process.’ both of these things together give me the impression that people don’t actually disagree with the idea that evan can be fixed with love, they just think k was doing it wrong.

so, yeah, i still think people are projecting a lot of self-hatred onto k for having done the same type of shit that they themselves do or want to do for evan. if there was the ability to separate that noise out from the sam/evan shipping i wouldn't say anything, but as it stands, i hate seeing two characters of color being triangulated around a white love interest like this. because k/evan happened canonically, we don't get to let it live 100% in the realm of fantasy fulfillment, we have to deal with the messiness that happened between them. sam/evan gets to be tender because they don't have that baggage, we don't see the points of friction that would exist if they were together, and some people are using THAT to mean that it would inherently be healthier. i've heard at least one person complaining that folks are being too 'moralistic' about sam/evan and again, i can't help but contrast that critique to fan treatment of k this season. we can’t apply a moralistic lens to k and then put it away now that you like this other dynamic better. what it feels like is happening is that there is a portion of fans that do want evan to be rehabilitated thru romantic partnership and because that's the fantasy, k deserves to be punished for failing at it and sam can be the clean slate. i don't think any of these characters deserve that, nor does that square with how they are being played in mismag itself.

[starlight-bread-blog]

We All Know Muse Has Range, But...

Today I got curious, and went to look at their Wikipedia page, to see what genres they are exactly. Are you ready?

"Described as a band that fuse alternative rock, progressive rock, space rock, hard rock, art rock, electronic rock, progressive metal, indie rock and pop, Muse also mix sounds from genres such as electronica and R&B, with forms such as classical music and rock opera, among many others, also being included".

Yeah, good luck answering next time someone asks you about them. Yeah, that's why I can listen to them for days without getting bored. Yeah, I fucking adore them.

[mischief-lies-and-stories]

Why Kid Loki's Backstory in Loki Proves (More Than Anything Else) That the Writers Don't Understand Loki's Character

I've mostly already talked about this in a theory around Kid Loki, but now I'm going in a comic-heavy rant direction with it. Spoilers for Loki, Journey into Mystery, Immortal Thor, King Thor, and possibly more.

So Kid Loki in the show says he's taken in by the TVA for killing Thor. It is not clear whether Thor is also a child at this point in the timeline, or (as in my theory) this is Kid Loki from Journey into Mystery, a Kid Loki from our Loki's future (a future that hasn't happened yet in the main timeline of the MCU). Which would mean that the Thor he kills is an adult (probably. The future MCU option could deviate from Journey into Mystery and mean Thor is also a younger, reincarnated iteration of himself).

In the comics, the closest Kid Loki comes to killing Thor is 1., in Journey into Mystery, when he influences events during a battle to end the bloodshed by helping bring about Thor's sacrifice for the greater good. If he had not died, the battle would have gone on and led to more terrible destruction for Asgard. 2., In AoA, after "Kid Loki" ages up in Young Avengers, when he stabs Thor with Gram in order to free him from Loki's evil future self, who has hitched a ride inside Thor as a symbiote-like parasite.

In JiM, Loki privately and very deeply mourns Thor's death. (He also does so publicly, but in a way to avoid the suspicion of Asgard that he had something to do with Thor's death. But then the Asgardians go away and he's left alone, and he cries.) He knows what needed to be done, but he has lost his brother, his protector, his friend. He loves him. He is often shown throughout JiM to care about Thor. He calls for him instinctively when something he summons turns on him. He tries to make Thor promise to kill him if he goes bad again. He names his dog after him.

In Immortal Thor, we are reminded that Thor sought out Kid Loki, Thor awoke the piece of dormant soul inside him, Thor brought him back to himself and home to Asgard. Kid Loki would never kill Thor. Unless he had to.

Likewise, in King Thor, most of the comic is Loki, armed with the Necrosword, fighting Thor. Yet even here, even influenced by the elder god of the symbiotes themself, he cannot bring himself to annihilate Thor. (Now, he certainly does a good job of trying, even when he isn't as much under All-Black's influence. He makes an effort, I'm not discounting that. I'm not saying he's pretending to kill him, but in the end there's a shift.)

At a certain point, it stops being about Thor vs. Loki and the fight of an Asgardian lifetime. At a certain point, Loki very nearly gives it up, and Thor lets him. Loki says that it's too late, but not for their bond, not for a truce between them. It's too late to end this fight, because Loki has unleashed All-Black back into the universe, and it is too powerful even on its own for Loki to contain or control.

But the important thing here is that Loki stops. He stops fighting Thor. He stops trying to kill him. And when all hope is lost, as All-Black devours them, drowning them in despair and its own viscous, all-consuming darkness, Thor reaches for Loki, and Loki reaches back.

And this is a comic. We can make assumptions based on what we know about these characters, but at the end of the day, this is a comic, a stationary form of visual storytelling. Meaning that the panel portraying this moment does not display the first reaching hand, and so we cannot truly know who reaches for whom first. The important thing is that Loki reaches, too, but he could easily have reached out first.

Therefore, if Loki can reach for his brother, for comfort and peace and a promise of tomorrow, when all hope and light is dying around him, when he's about to die himself in a universe-ending disaster of his own making, centuries and millennia into a future of antagonism and villainy and sibling rivalry played out on a cosmic scale, then why the hell would he ever truly kill Thor as an eleven-year-old?

Aside from the shock factor (for both the main Loki and the viewers), it makes absolutely no sense. And if the writers cannot even comprehend that this would never happen, not in any universe (JiM and King Thor have nothing to do with each other, yet are connected by this one truth), no matter what Loki may claim, then why should they be expected to know anything else about Loki's character?

[didntwanderstillgotlost]

One of my favorite things in media is characters who are two different people. Ed is NOT Blackbeard. Blackbeard is the world's most terrifying pirate. Blackbeard is a myth. He's a legend. He's a ghost. He was created as a way for Ed to survive at sea, first on Hornigold's ship and then on his own. Ed is a middle-aged man who just wants to be loved. He wants friends and fine silk and lavender soap. He's soft and caring and he wants people to like him for who he is.

I think that's why he went completely off the rails when Stede left. He was actually coping in a semi-healthy way at first. He wrote a song. He was encouraging the crew to express themselves the way he did if they wanted to. He wanted everyone to call him Ed. Then Izzy told him that he served Blackbeard, not Edward and that Edward better watch his step. Ed fell back into the person he created to survive. Blackbeard was reborn, but underneath Ed was still grieving and he didn't have an outlet for it anymore. He did increasingly fucked up shit to the crew hoping they would kill him because he thought death was the only way to stop the pain, but he couldn't do it himself.

I'm absolutely not absolving him of his responsibility. He needs to have a conversation with everyone the way he did with Fang and give sincere apologies to all of them. I also don't think that Izzy deserved anything that happened to him and I'm living for this character growth, but I do think that what happened was partially his fault. He should've let Ed cope the way he was instead of threatening him into becoming the worst version of himself.

Anyway, just my thoughts on season 2 so far. Feel free to disagree and if anyone wants to talk more about this don't hesitate to message me. My best friend just starting watching the show so I can't scream about this with her just yet.

[annacaffeina]

My husband had apparently never heard the term 'girlboss' before. I did my best to try to explain it to him. He ultimately just said "Until anyone is ever talking about whether it's good leftism to have a 'boyboss' I don't want to hear it. That's just cute internet misogyny."

[werewolfetone]

[thistaletasty]

👆🏻👆🏻

I have hated NaNoWriMo for a long time because of the things it did to my neuro-atypical brain. But one day I read the 400-words-a-day thing and I said "If I could be half the writer Terry Pratchett was, I'd be happy." So I set a goal to write 200 words a day for a month. And then I did it again the next month. And the next month. I've been doing it for two years now. And it has been life changing. Not least of all because the very sustainable habit has been naturally creeping up. I'm averaging 400 words a day - a thing that 2 years ago, I thought would be impossible for me.

Yeah 400 words a day doesn't write you a novel. But 411 words a day writes you three 50K NaNo-style novels a year, while still being able to maintain other non-writing habits, function at work, deal with family emergencies, and not burn out on writing or editing. Between the two, I know which one I'd choose every time.

Instead of doing NanoWriMo I will be doing something where I try to aim for writing an actual average of 400 words a day for the month of November in memory of Terry Pratchett, who as far as I know never thought telling a computer to write a book for you is a good way to hone your skills as a writer.

[paper-mario-wiki]

in case you're wondering what the greatest AMV of all time is, it's this one from 2008.

[yiddishfisting]

"neurotypicals have this special way of saying 'okay' that makes you feel like shit after infodumping your special interest" anyone can do that actually