#but today i feel allowed!

[fairyhaos]

cruelest thing that kpop has ever done is impose a "you can't eat anything" rule on their idols in the country that says "have you eaten today?" as a way of showing love

[amphibianaday]

day 1769

[wyrmswears]

the fact that a year has passed in the time between s1 beginning and s2 beginning means that at some point, while the majority of the ninja were reunited at the monastery, it was the missing teammate's birthdays

how much do you think that hurt? an entire day that should be spent celebrating someone who isnt there

[mellarked-katnisseverdeen]

Maybe a hot take....

But Katniss Everdeen having children and being married isn't agasint feminism. It's representing a kind of woman certein circles of feminism don't consider feminist.

Females wanting to be mothers and wives, and being extreamly HAPPY with that life is (or at least SHOULD be) extreamly feminist. JUST AS MUCH as woman wanting careers, or to be warriors, or leaders. The only way it's NOT is if it is potrayed one of these paths are the ONLY thing woman should want/can acomplish.

Katniss is able to choose the life that brings her joy and happyness as she works to heal. And that choice is backed up by many things in text that show that, given her own say in anything, she'd want a world where she can have these things.

That, to me, is FAR MORE feminist that half of the more recent "strong female characters" and I said what I said.

[chrliekclly]

oh charlie kelly loose identity tied to emotions nd changing on a whim we're really in it now....

[c0smicdaisy]

what do we think?

[intotheelliwoods]

What was that about One falling asleep whenever he can and feels comfortable enough because the boy needs it? Hm? Something about him feeling safe around Poptart and not needing to keep his guard up was it? @dianagj-art *uses your own tags against you*

[susielesbianism]

you know I was going to type up something about this but honestly this image pretty much sums up everything I want to say

Cause I really think some people in this fandom are getting a little too confident about what’s going to happen in this game

[just-start-the-tape]

I see so much more about Edwin than Charles, as if Charles isn't also a main character, so I just want to make it clear that while I am deeply attached to Edwin, he's wiggled his way into my brain and I doubt he'll ever leave, Charles is actually my favorite character, and my second is Niko, and I think y'all should acknowledge him more than I've been seeing, this is not the Edwin Payne show, and Jayden did too much of a good job for it to not be as appreciated

[unzip-your-guts]

I have a cold so I've been going between doing a bit of packing and mending the big ass holes in these slipper socks

Everyone should learn to darn in my opinion, I've already saved multiple sets of socks from the garbage and it's a nice activity if you're AuDHD like me and can't sit still when you're watching a show or movie

[squuote]

this silly line of secret dialogue you get in the demo when you try to go back through the entry you came from is kinda sending me places. is this why he hid the memory zone in the files away from the developers

[rayofmisfortune]

How did Tucker and Sam first find out about phantom? Was it just that some weird ecto shit was going on nearby and Danny sorta changed without trying to and all, and Sam and Tucker just kinda saw it going “what the fuck-“/silly

Okay and an add on to that, has anyone ever seen Danny change that shouldn’t have, since if he can’t really control it in this AU, I wouldn’t be surprised if there were some close calls because Tuck and Sam found a way to cover him

Seconds after Danny leaves for the restroom, a ghost (the Lunch Lady) shows up. In the panic, Sam and Tucker run to check if Danny's okay. Or just generally, get his low blood sugar, close to passing out butt away from the danger zone.

As to how they find out? They rush into the closest restroom. And kinda see the idiot(s) passed out on the floor mid-transformation 👍

I fiddled a lil with the timeline so now the au is kinda no one knows? But Sam and Tuck find out the second the first big bad ghost shows up. In the Dannys' defense, neither of them had any idea what was happening.

Actually... not really? Since Danny and Phantom have Tucker and Sam to cover for them and the two are at Danny's side 24/7, pretty much no one has seen them transform. Wes is the no one.

[moeblob]

Hello, can i have a modern sylvain pls??? PS: i love how you draw scrimblos

Finally another Wheel Spin and thankfully modern equals I get to draw someone with fish somewhere on their outfit. (Overlay layer my friend how I missed you)

[atompalace-official]

kirakira kirarun- kirakirarun! 💫✨

since starting KiraKira Precure A La Mode, I just had to get the Sweets Pact and KiraPati for myself!!! the Sweets Pact is super cute, and the KiraPati is surprisingly big but such a super idea and so nicely designed 💕 the icing on the cake is the Animal Sweets which have to be my favourite Precure trinket yet..! 🥹🌈🍰

[utilitycaster]

You know what's interesting to me? For all people keep claiming at every juncture that perhaps Bells Hells will come around on the gods and see the harm they do (which, as discussed extensively, is, half the time, simply not intervening) not only have they never done so, but also they never quite cross the line into saying the party should join the Ruby Vanguard or aid them - and indeed, they defend against it - so what does this achieve? It feels like they're asking for a story in which the party stands idly by, which isn't much of a story nor, if I may connect this briefly to the real world, a political stance anyone should be proud of.

That's honestly the frustration with the gods and the "what if the Vanguard has a point" conversations in-game. What do we do then? Do we allow the organization that will murder anyone for pretty much any reason that loosely ties into their goals run rampant? The group that (perhaps unwittingly, but then again, Otohan's blades had that poison) disrupted magic world-wide, and caused people who had the misfortune to live at nexus points to be teleported (most, as commoners, without means of return). While also fomenting worldwide unrest?

Those were the arguments before the trip to Ruidus; with the reveal of the Vanguard's goals to invade Exandria, the situation becomes even more dire. Do you let the Imperium take over the planet?

And do the arguments against the gods even hold up? If Ludinus is so angry at them for the Calamity, what does it say that he destroyed Western Wildemount's first post-Calamity society for entirely selfish means? (What does it say about the validity of vengeance as a motivator?) What does it say that Laudna told Imogen she could always just live in a cottage quietly without issue before the solstice even happened? (Would this still be true if the Imperium controls the world?) What does it say that when faced with a furious, grieving party and the daughter she keeps telling herself was her reason for all of this, Liliana can't provide an answer to the question of what the gods have done other than that their followers will retaliate...for, you know, the Vanguard's endless list of murders. (That is how the Vanguard and Imperium tend to think, huh? "How dare your face get in the way of my boot; how dare you hit me back when I strike you.") She can't even provide a positive answer - why is Predathos better - other than "I feel it", even though Imogen and Fearne know firsthand that Predathos can provide artificial feelings of elation. Given all the harm Ludinus has done in pursuit, why isn't the conclusion "the gods should have crashed Aeor in such a way that the tech was unrecoverable?"

Even as early as the first real discussion on what the party should do, the fandom always stopped short of saying "no, Imogen's right, they should join up with the people who killed half the party," it was always "no, she didn't really mean it, she just was trying to connect with her mother." Well, she's connected with her mother, and at this point the party doesn't even care about the gods particularly (their only divinely-connected party member having died to prevent the Vanguard from killing all of them). So they will stop the Vanguard; as Ashton says, the means are unforgiveable. As Laudna says, it's not safe to bet on Predathos's apathy. As Imogen says, she's done running; the voice that she used to think of as a lifeline belongs to someone she doesn't trust. So I guess my question is: if they're stopping the people who are trying to kill the gods (and defense of the gods isn't remotely their personal motivation)...do you think the next phase of the campaign is Bells Hells personally killing the gods? Reconstructing the Aeor tech and hoping none of their allies notice? How does this end? Does your ideology ever get enacted? Or is this entirely moot and pointless and the story ends with Bells Hells saying "well, I'm really glad we stopped the people who [insert list of Vanguard atrocities from above]; none of us follow the gods or plan to, but honestly, the status quo we return to is preferable to whatever nightmare Ludinus had concocted in his violent quest for power and revenge"?

[mermaidsirennikita]

frustrating levels of discourse continue happening on twt ugh https://x.com/lara_e_brown/status/1839303817256645101

Lol yeah, I've honestly just given up on reading takes like that because once you've seen one, you've seen 'em all.

It's an extremely shallow reading, using things like "pale", which you can in fact be while having a darker complexion, with both examples relating less to a physical appearance and more to his aspect in the moment (his face is "white" because he's scared; he's "pale and effeminate" because he's in a wan and weakened state). And I say "both" because you tend to come up with faaaar fewer examples of the text relating Heathcliff as pale than... not.

I also find it funny that this user uses Heathcliff marrying Isabella as an example of why he MUST be white, when Heathcliff and Isabella literally run away together because nobody wants them to be together, PARTICULARLY her brother, and this rips the Linton family asunder. Almost as if.......... it was............... breaking a taboo......................

Like, yeah! 18th century Yorkshire wouldn't have accepted that marriage. And if there's one thing we know about Heathcliff—if it's not accepted, he's not gonna do it.

One of the entire points of his character is that he lives against law and taboo and societal norms (while at the same time being deeply aware of the fact that his existence doesn't gel with them). In that thread, that user references the Byronic hero, with the name drawing from Lord Byron and his own literary fascinations. Byron was obsessed with taboo, lived to break them (most famously the taboo of sleeping with people of the same sex, and probably the taboo of incest as well... COME TO MY TED TALK TO DISCUSS HOW THAT COULD RELATE TO HEATHCLIFF, ALSO). One of the reasons why more recent scholarship (and I don't even mean super recent) surrounding Wuthering Heights has come to terms with the interpretation of Heathcliff as a man of color is that he does embody the taboo even more.

And obviously... some taboos (the incest one) exist for a reason. But the book also seems interested in questioning how much we really gain by treating someone (someone like Heathcliff) as other and wrong simply for existing. Again, we go into the cycle of abuse.

I also find it rather belittling of people to refer to general 18th and 19th century values when discussing how people "would have" seen Heathcliff, or interpreted the text. Because, for one thing—yeah! A lot of contemporary readers did not in fact Get It. Perhaps in part because they did have the biases that people like that user seem to believe would have prevented the author from exploring Heathcliff as a man of color.

... But if Emily Bronte thought exactly as the detractors of her novel (who condemned it as wicked and aberrant) did, she never would have written the book, I think. Who's to say, though? It's difficult for EITHER side to make leaps about what Emily knew or thought, because she is someone who didn't live very long, has been portrayed as an eccentric (and perhaps even maligned by Elizabeth Gaskell's portrayal of her) and definitely had something of an offbeat upbringing. We just don't have much directly from HER. So it's a bit rich to me to make assumptions about the kind of limited worldview she may have had on topics like race, when we really do not have a lot of definitive information about her worldview, but DO know that the book she wrote, which some theorize to be about a man of color, REALLY upset some conventional readers.

Like... why would you contextualize that book within a purely conventional reading when the entire reason why Wuthering Heights matters is that it defies convention?

I do shy away from using the word "canonical" to describe Heathcliff's race, because while I know what people mean when they say it (and I'm sure I've said it at some point) it's just a word choice that people like that user will latch on to. Like I've said before, there is no way to prove with 100% certainty Heathcliff's race either way. Which isn't to say that you have to do so to state that he's a man of color. It's just the kind of pedantic strategy people will use in threads like these.

And I'll notice, too, that she omits Nelly's line wherein she speculates that Heathcliff's mother could be Chinese or Indian. I mean, what's her take on that specificity combined with the lascar speculation? No mention of Liverpool relating to people... not... from America or Spain...?

I do worry sometimes that people see someone's major concentration (say, if someone has a BA in English or something, which for the record I don't) and go "Damn, that's end-all, be-all" A) it's not, there's more to research than getting a degree B) you could also use literal wikipedia footnotes to kickstart your own deeper dive into this, there are tons of people who've made careers discussing books like WH debating the issue C) having a degree of any level never kicks your bias.

To go back to my own degree... I knew old art historians who saw nothing gay at all in Michelangelo's work. You can know a lot about a lot, and it doesn't mean you have an open mind.

I think anyone can read WH, do some research about the era and Emily, and drawn their own conclusions. And you are just going to have to make your conclusions based on your own assessment. There is no smoking gun here, and there never will be because the smoking gun would be a living Emily Bronte willingly telling you what she meant.

And I didn't read Heathcliff as a person of color from the jump, for the record. I was thirteen when I read that book for the first time; I'm white; I picked that book in the context of it being a Great English Classic, and as far as I knew, those were all about white people. Because... that's what you were taught about WH at the time, at least where I was.

But when I was first introduced to that interpretation some time later, it was a literal "OH!" moment. Because like... yeah. There isn't a smoking gun for Dorian Gray's sexuality (and yes, we know a lot more about Oscar Wilde than we do about Emily Bronte; but the absence of knowledge of Emily's interests and attitudes doesn't mean we can assume she DIDN'T have an interest in writing Heathcliff as a person of color) but The Picture of Dorian Gray makes way more sense when you interpret his queerness for what it is. Wuthering Heights makes way more sense when you interpret Heathcliff's race for what it is.