#either way we stan

[geekitygeek]

bubi non-binary confirmed????? 😂😂😂

[resmarted]

helena moreno serving legally blonde 💁🏼‍♀️

[strawberrystepmom]

if you're holding very rich, extremely sheltered people to the standards you live by in your life you're always gonna be disappointed and im sorry about that but we have to stop letting celebrities decide our morals and ethics for us. even the coolest, most down to earth famous person you love lives in a totally different world than you do and the issues that you face daily do not matter to them. it's cruel but it's true. stop putting your faith in rich people to do the right thing no matter how much you like them. you will always be disappointed.

[mistapottaa]

Harry being KIND THE WHOLE FUCKING TIME ✅️✅️

Ronald Weasley being the untricked BFF until THAT happens ✅️✅️✅️

Bellatrix not being portrayed as a whore and having an actual personality before being her deranged self ✅️✅️✅️

Voldemort being a dilf ✅️🔥✅️✅️✅️🔥🔥✅️✅️✅️🔥✅️✅️🔥✅️✅️✅️

@metalomagnetic you made a cultural reset and I haven't been the same since.

[junewongapologia]

The fact is tho that no matter how you look at it, no matter how insufferable she is, no matter how Out Of Touch, regardless of whether she’s doing herself no favours: Eloise is right about society and just about everyone else in the show is wrong.

Like, she’s not got the full picture, she’s blinkered and her political philosophy is not very in depth or well thought out. But she’s right, and I think that’s why a lot of people watching really don’t like her because she’s breaking the illusion. All in all, the 1810s were a shit time to be alive for most people, and you can “well actually” it all you like, but the Luddite movement existed for a reason, the Chartists existed for a reason, Porto-feminist writers like Wollstonecraft and de Gouges wrote what they did for a reason.

So when you keep being reminded that it was a terrible social order for women - in a show targeted mainly towards women for escapist purposes then that character is going to come across as irritating, because she’s ruining the immersion.

Really, her attitude isn’t more anachronistic than the dresses, or the hairdos, or the diamond necklaces (men and women had been advocating women’s right to vote since before Eloise was born, lads), but it’s a problem because people are watching the show for the sweeping romances and the general regency vibe, they don’t want to think about how the regency was for most people. Which inevitably leads to some incredible projection, when watchers of a show with the central conceit of only being interested in the love lives of the top one percent of the one percent of the British aristocracy acting as though Eloise is the only privileged person on the show.

And yeah, she is better off than most of the people who exist in all of Regency Britain (though if you were to take the show as read, Britain is made up of about 70% aristocracy, 1% gentry, 5% urban bourgeoisie and 24% urban workers), but she’s the only one whose privilege is harped on out of her whole family and social circle. 99% of the speaking characters in the show come from a posher background than Beau fucking Brummell.

And! Eloise is literally just about the only main character who ever has to question her privilege! And when she is in season 2 she doesn’t throw a shitfit, she’s willing to learn! She goes out of her way to hear perspectives that she wouldn’t have heard in her social circle! But the narrative punishes her for that, and that’s because for all the criticism she gets about needing her privilege checked, they don’t actually want her to learn, they just want her to shut up and enjoy the trappings of regency decadence as much as they do.

Also - I know it’s really fashionable to rag on “pick-mes” and “Not Like Other Girls” - but actually, no, “traditional femininity” has never been socially unacceptable for women the way being GNC is, and it is in fact ruthlessly socially enforced against GNC women, even more so in the 1810s. Eloise is a teenaged girl in a society that stigmatises her for her wish for more legal autonomy, the idea that she’s somehow the villain for not being able to enjoy “feminine” hobbies without seeing them as just another element of the way women’s education is trivialised as ornamental, is farcical. “Sewing is a valuable and useful skill” so is cooking, but there’s a reason my mam, and not my dad, had home economics lessons, and that reason is still misogyny, despite the fact that it set her up better for being able to operate independently as an adult.

Idk I’m just kind of uncomfortable that in a world of rising reactionary political sentiment towards women, and this seemingly increasingly re-normalised view that women need to be wives and homemakers, people feel that the person on the show who needs to do the most introspection regarding their politics is an eighteen-year-old who is vocal about the fact that she has limited legal rights, and not any of the adult men in the show (a lot of whom probably have seats in the Upper House!!!) who never mention politics at all.

And frankly, given the shower who were Having Political Opinions in the long eighteenth century, Eloise’s brand of semi-anachronistic protofeminism is infinitely preferable to Hannah “I refuse to teach the poor how to write in my schools” More, or Edmund “don’t read my big thesis on revolutions too closely it’s definitely not all lies and junk history” Burke, or even a load of prominent members of the Bluestocking Society.

[noweakergirl]

dare I say... superior trope

[kenzie-ann27]

my favorite parts of always sunny are when one of the gang mentions anything romantic or sexual and it cuts to charlie and he has the most bored and/or disgusted look on his face

[boxwinebaddie]

🎸 happy uncneen pepinursteppermint wintereve 🍬 ❤️‍🔥

❤️🤘 + ft. how i think my styles would say HYH

[wonder-worker]

Is it true that Elizabeth of York birth celebrated like she was a son? I have seen some historians say this.

Hi! Yes, Edward IV did celebrate his daughter’s birth as though she was a male heir (“a prince”), iirc as per the Great Chronicle.

While we have no contemporary reports at the time of Elizabeth of York's birth, we know that Luchino Dallaghiexia reported that the birth of Edward and Elizabeth's third child, Cecily of York, "rejoiced the king and all the nobles exceedingly*, though they would have preferred a son'. Wanting a son (ie: an heir) was typical for their time period, likely enhanced by Edward and Elizabeth's unprecedentedly controversial marriage, her very unsuitable origins and his own status as a usurper. The fact that he was described as being "exceedingly" delighted at the birth of his third daughter in a row regardless does support the claim that he would have gone over-the-top to celebrate the birth of his first legitimate** child.

Hope this helps!

*Bizarrely, I have seen several historians and blogs using Dallaghiexia's letter to claim that he was bitterly disappointed at Cecily of York's birth. I don't understand how historical reading comprehension can be so poor that "rejoiced the king exceedingly" has somehow been rewritten as the...exact opposite of that. With no self-awareness whatsoever. **His illegitimate daughter Margaret (known as Elizabeth for some reason) was almost definitely born before his marriage. We don't know the birth dates of his other two illegitimate children: I think the likeliest conception date for Arthur was in early 1470, but it's unverified; and we know nothing about Grace (which was in fact her surname, not her name) other than the fact that Elizabeth Woodville seems to have been very attached to her.

[musette22]

"A couple of Marvel buddies" - could it be...? 😭😭😭

[deus-ex-mona]

kinda thinking about t h e m again…

[bonesdontmelt]

The conclusion of the Melk arc is so good in the manga though, just because of the words Komatsu uses.

In the anime he says "Melk should feel comfortable being a woman" or something and I'm like sure yeah but not what I wanna hear

In the manga he says "Melk can be a woman if she wants" and the wording of that is just so powerful to me?

Like he's acknowledging that she was assigned female at birth but that's not why she's a woman. He's saying he sees that the reason she was presenting herself as a man was because she felt societally pressured into being a man, not because she wanted to be one. He's not doing Ye Olde Sexism (a horribly common trope) of realizing a woman has been pretending to be a guy or even just dressing in non-feminine ways and being like FREE YOURSELF FROM YOUR SHACKLES even if they're clearly more comfortable that way. Nor is he treating being masc-presenting as any sort of problem, he doesn't want her to change, he just wants her to be comfortable and if this is comfortable then that's cool.

And in fact after that Melk doesn't change at all. She tells people she's a woman, if it comes up, but she continues to bind and dress masculine and doesn't feel pressured to pass either way. Melk is a woman because she wants to be, and neither her presentation or her assigned sex actually have anything to do with it.

[pa-pa-plasma]

i don't think i'll ever get over how people treat kids that aren't good in school as worthless no matter what. "oh it can't be that bad" my guy idk how to tell you this but the last time i went to a normal high school the principal called me into his office to brag about how he failed me in all of my classes before the semester was even finished & i should quit while i'm ahead cuz i'm too stupid ("officially" diagnosed as such by a school counselor & a psychiatrist!!) to succeed. & this is considered normal

[total-drama-brainrot]

love the implication that either Noah really does have false teeth for whatever reason, or Izzy made it up and straight up lied to Sierra unprompted.

[dreamedfyre-a]

and if i say i hate that one of the uh 5 mentions hel.aena has in f&b is about her being loved by the people in contrast to the public opinion of rhae.nyra at that point and her death sparking a riot only to have to watch her be attacked bc rhae.nyra is the only good queen allowed on the show

[borgialucrezia]

you just seem like you hate cesare. I often read your posts, and it seems like you read him in the classic 'sinister' fashion that bad history books do, even when his intentions are no less sinister than Juan's have been many times. I'm just wondering if perhaps I'm missing something?

ok anon this kinda made me giggle <3 first of all i wouldn't be wasting so much time making loads of content of him lol. i've been a fan of cesare for a decade. i love how multidimensional he is and i think he's a tremendous character plus he's my all-time favorite male lead in all media. i love his soulmatism with lucrezia as well as the tragic brotherhood between him and juan, and second, apparently pointing out flaws and canonical facts (just like how i do with juan) means that i "hate" him (?) in fact it proves that i actually do love the guy because i, at least, embrace his characterization and i don't need to woobify him (or any antagonistic character) to love him. if you have any idea about me and my blog, i only tend to like villainous characters because antagonism is more compelling to me than heroism.

"even when his intentions are no less sinister as juan's." in what way is it my fault that cesare was portrayed as hypocritical while juan was portrayed as straightforward? cesare contradicted himself by claiming he acted for the family's preservation when everything he did was for his own ambitions. he even murdered juan to take control of the papal army and allowed lucrezia to be humiliated during the public consummation of her marriage with alfonso as we witnessed how he could've intervened but chose not to. this shouldn't even be a cesare bashing or "hating"; eventually, the guy eventually became power hungry in s3 (and if the borgias wasn't canceled, s4 would've been about how cesare and lucrezia drifted apart because for him it was power >>> lucrezia. read the borgias apocalypse)

on the other hand, juan was a total screw-up, but his actions stemmed from a desire to be accepted and to better the family, even though he ended up causing more harm. his motivation was rooted in deep love, not destruction, but unintentionally he achieved the opposite. if the roles were reversed, and cesare was a gonfaloniere laying a siege at forli and ludovico was coming for him, juan would've definitely warned him because juan's priorities were his family and their betterment, even "if" he disliked cesare (he loves cesare in a one-sided way despite the aggression lol) that being said, juan did kill paolo and hurt lucrezia, but he did it thinking it was for her sake and her reputation (plus driven with jealousy like how he did with djem) he also believed he would receive applause and prove himself as a true borgia as he deeply felt inferior to cesare. he made multiple attempts to make it up to lucrezia, but their disconnect was clear as every time he tried to impress her, she ended up getting hurt in some way and their inability to reconcile kinda represented their troubled relationship. juan's injury, syphilis, and being pushed away by everyone eventually drove him mad in his final moments. yet, he did try to reconcile with cesare and how he wants to be with him as brothers. none of this is an excuse for juan's behavior throughout the show, but it also doesn't justify cesare killing him either. however, the murder of juan made cesare more intriguing to me, as it marked his complete descent into darkness and ruthlessness, it's //not// heroism like how some of cesare stans think it is so...

all in all, most of my insights are supported by mr. arnaud and neil jordan themselves so might as well call them haters while you're at it idk anon