#he is actually in a relationship with a pagan king

[austin-friars]

Bishop Ælfred - something christian bishops can get a little pagan :D

[ethereal-multiplicity]

⟡ The Connection Between Demons and "Ghost Hunts" - A Guide to the Demonic ⟡

─ ⊹ ⊱ ☆ ⊰ ⊹ ─ ⟡ ─ ⊹ ⊱ ☆ ⊰ ⊹ ─ ⟡ ─ ⊹ ⊱ ☆ ⊰ ⊹ ─ ⟡ ─ ⊹ ⊱ ☆ ⊰ ⊹ ─

(Post header found on pinterest)

─ ⊹ ⊱ ☆ ⊰ ⊹ ─ ⟡ ─ ⊹ ⊱ ☆ ⊰ ⊹ ─ ⟡ ─ ⊹ ⊱ ☆ ⊰ ⊹ ─ ⟡ ─ ⊹ ⊱ ☆ ⊰ ⊹ ─

Who here likes watching ghost investigation videos?

I know I do, but I have a huge grudge against youtubers who think they know everything just because they are intuitive. I have repeatedly heard the term "Demon" being used when something negative comes into contact with them, or even freak out when actual demonic entities reach out to help them.... thinking that clearly a demon must want them dead.

This is the problem, they are fear mongering to new people within the spiritual community, obviously its unintentional, but it's a severe issue that no one feels like correcting for the beginner spiritualists.

So I am going to correct it, because if I hear one more thing about demons being evil come from the mouth of a "psychic" or "spiritualist" I'm going to fucking lose it. How can you claim you are spiritual when those words are on your tongue like poison.

─ ⊹ ⊱ ☆ ⊰ ⊹ ─ ⟡ ─ ⊹ ⊱ ☆ ⊰ ⊹ ─ ⟡ ─ ⊹ ⊱ ☆ ⊰ ⊹ ─ ⟡ ─ ⊹ ⊱ ☆ ⊰ ⊹ ─

Christianity stole pagan and indigenous gods and spirits to fear monger. They used the names of the entities people held dear to force them into a cage of doubt, used the names of their mythology to make it seem more familiar when converting them, making them think their gods were evil and wrong by using their names in the holy text.

That is why the witch trials happened, that is why colonizers took land, that is why indigenous people were at war for decades, and they are still fighting for their freedom today. Because Christians used their God, used Jesus' name to back any differing beliefs into a corner.

Don't believe me? Here is some translations and historical context Look them up, these aren't fake.

Lucifer = Baldr - Norse God, Phosphorus - Roman God, Venus and Saturn - Greek and Roman Planet Personifications

Satan = "To Oppose" or "Adversary"

Hell = Hel - Norse Goddess, Hades - Greek God

Beelzebub = Baal - Canaanite God

Even their precious Jesus isn't their god, they took his name from Judaism and butchered his story.

Demons have always been known to help guide humans to the truth, to save them from the control of God.

Lucifer guided Eve to the apple from the tree of forbidden truths, trying to save her from being Adam's cattle.

That is why Lilith became a demon, she wanted to be equal with Adam, she refused to lay below him, she ran and God punished her by forcing her to give birth to thousands of demons. She became the demonic liberator, all because she wanted to be properly loved and cared for as a human being, instead of being treated like she was a dog Adam could tame.

⊱ ☆ ⊰

If you research the demons of the Goetia, such as the 7 Lords, Buer, King Paimon, Barbatos, etc. They are all known as the keeper of truths, the teacher of knowledge.

Buer is the teacher of Moral Philosophy, Keeper of Hidden Knowledge, Teacher of Herbal Remedies, he could cure any illness, and he gifted witches with their familiars and protectors.

King Paimon is the Keeper of Hidden Knowledge and Truth, Keeper of Treasure, and Teacher of Academics/Science, Guider to life forces (Such as water)

Barbatos Guides people to Hidden Treasure, He helps heal any kind of relationship, He can understand the language of all animals, and He can see into the past and future.

All 7 Lords of Hell, Lucifer, Satan, Asmodeus, etc. all rule over one key thing. Freedom.

Lucifer and Satan liberate people from horrible and traumatic situations.

Asmodeus and Mammon allow people the freedom for earthly pleasures.

Beelzebub allows people the freedom to eat whatever they want without judgement. Such as pork and shellfish.

Belphegor allows people to rest and sleep as much as they need, not to force themselves or overwork their power.

Leviathan allows people to feel jealous, to feel angry, to make themselves so worked up that they change their life and get rid of what isn't serving them. He is the ruler of manifestation itself.

Do any of these entities sound evil? No! Of course not!

There is no actual historical context of any demon harming humans, in fact the only harm the bible says they do is teach them the forbidden truths.

Demons are liberators! They are saviors! They are the healer of religious trauma! There is a reason people with religious trauma tend to gravitate towards Satanism or Paganism. Demons are healers! Just look at Buer and Barbatos, they heal and protect humans and animals and expect nothing in return.

⊱ ☆ ⊰

But you may be asking, where does this all tie into the ghost hunters on youtube?

Well, the reason I have written this is to point out that demons aren't harmful, to provide proof to the beginner spiritualists that their is no reason to be afraid.

When the hunters say they've came into contact with a violent demon, its called a poltergeist!

Poltergeists are born of human negativity, they are entities born to cause harm and havoc. They are born from all the sadness, anger, trauma, and grief of this world. That is why when you go to these haunted locations with a fucked up history, there is going to be violent entities.

These spirits are hurting, hauntings happen for a reason. Spirits who are actually happy and content don't get stuck in our world. Their collective emotions and thoughts birth Poltergeists, and Poltergeists are made to act upon the violence that they were created with. They are made to seek vengeance on those who they view as a threat.

Has your mood ever got ruined, and then everything else that day went to absolute shit? That is kinda how poltergeists work, they are born from the pain of both the dead and the living, and when there is enough trauma, they come to "life". Poltergeists and the emotions that caused them, deserve to heal, not to be demonized.

I don't give a rats ass if that entity hurt you, trying to hurt it back or expelling it from your home/space is going to anger it, because you are oppressing an already traumatized being. But thats for another post.

My last point of proof is my lived experience, I was raised Christian, but every time I stepped foot in a church I had violent intrusive thoughts and feelings, to the point I constantly felt nauseous in church due to the overstimulating energy.

Once I found Paganism and Witchcraft, all of that went away. Around my gods, I am free, I feel loved, I feel their healing.

When I am sick? I feel their guidance and support allowing me to properly rest. When I am depressed? I feel their nurturing energy. When I am crying? I feel hands gently on the side of my face, my head, or my shoulders.

When I communicate with them? They tell me its time to heal from my trauma. When I ask them about the christian god? They tell me Christians have got it wrong, and God/Jesus is actually so kind and does not support anything Christianity has done in his name.

My point is, STOP TELLING THOUSANDS OF VIEWERS ONLINE THAT DEMONS WANT TO HURT YOU AND SPREAD ILLNESS THAT IS FEAR MONGERING

You cannot under any circumstances say your intuitive, psychic, or spiritual, and then refuse to understand the history of intuition, divination, and religion. You are not a healer, you are not a communicator, you are an oppressor.

This post isn't made to convince people demons are harmless.... but it is made to convince people to stop spreading their hate everywhere just because they don't understand something.

[buriedpentacles]

loaded (genuine) question but. If people say the myths are just metaphors/not literal events, then how do we know what the gods are truly like (personality/powers/etc) and why do we treat them as real beings? did they originate from a myth itself or did people know of the gods existence and then create the myth based off of them? how did they find out all of the names and what they stand for without the myths? are the gods physical or metaphysical beings and actual gods, or are they aspects of nature (lightning, rain) that people have given names and personification? or not nature itself but rather the forces of nature being alive and THATS the gods? I’m having a hard time understanding what exactly gods are to majority of people and how *i* should perceive them. when someone says the gods are real, what ARE the gods? is it the same as when Christians believe in their god and say he is real and watching over people? or are these gods a completely different concept

additionally… if the gods are just nature or forces of nature to people then why do we call them gods and give them pronouns, names, personality rather than just referring to it as nature/natural forces?"

That is a loaded question, but a very interesting one!

The most important thing about deities and people's relationships/beliefs surrounding them is this: it is all subjective, because it is all belief.

For your first point about myths being metaphors: some people don't view them as metaphors. There are a few people who are "myth literalists" and believe that the myths of their religion are true and factual (one example would be Christian Creationists, who believe that the World truly was made in 7 days and that The Flood actually happened). Most people you'll interact with in pagan or witchcraft circles will agree that the myths are stories, that they reflect the authors and their societies beliefs more than any factual story of the Gods, but that doesn't mean there is no truth in them! For example, Zeus, from the Hellenic pantheon, is the King of Gods and the God of thunder and the sky - this information is gathered from the myths and stories of Ancient Greece, it is considered "fact" or "canon" within the religion. However, there are also many stories of him 'cheating' on his wife, Hera, and fathering many children (often by nonconsensual means) - many hellenists (and academics) will argue that this was representative of the power of rain and storms (creating fertile ground), and that as King of Kings many Ancient Greeks would have desired a story that put them, or their ancestors, as one of his descendants, these aspects of the myths may be seen as less literal by many hellenic followers, or simply as a product of their time. HOWEVER, the most important part is that it really just depends on the person and their beliefs, which stems from their research, experiences and general world view.

People treat their deities as real for the same reasons that Christians treat their God as real: because they believe He is. That is what faith is. That is how religion works - you believe they are real, even if you cannot prove it.

As for your next part about where they came from: that again depends on the person.

Some people believe that the Gods predate their myths, that myths were stories created about them or dictated/written down by those they deemed worthy of hearing them. Other people believe that deities were created by the myths and belief (this is more similiar to my belief system, which I am happy to expand upon if requested).

Are the gods seperate to their domains? Are they their domains personified? Is Zeus a deity that controls the sky, or is he simply the Sky itself, named by the Ancient Greeks. Does Sol truly travel across the sky on a chariot, or is she just a different name used for the Sun in our sky?

I cannot answer that for you.

Your question: "how i should perceive them" is impossible for anyone but yourself to answer and I am sorry to tell you that, I know that it can be difficult and that sometimes all you want is a concrete answer and a step by step guidebook of "What to Believe in and how to do it Right" but that simply doesn't exist.

In pagan spaces, you will see people disuss or debate whether or not their gods are omniciscient or not (many citing myths as sources or using their own upg - unique personal gnosis), you will see people discuss how their gods appear to them and what they represent or mean. You will see a hundred variations on how to worship them or who they are. None of them are wrong but conversesly none of them are right - they are simply that person's unique faith and belief, and that faith can change over time.

From what I have seen, many people believe their gods to be real and as seperate beings who control their domains (i.e. Zeus is the God of the sky, not the sky itself), and that their myths are partially true, partially metaphorical, all within the context of the society they were written. Many believe that the gods have changed and evolved as times have gone on and that they are beyond our societal rules. But, there is no real "cookie cutter" belief.

If you wish to know, I can tell you my own personal beliefs, what they mean to me, and how I have come to hold them but I will not claim that they are correct and I can't speak for others. I'd definitely reccomend speaking to other pagans and immersing yourself in pagan communities.

You must decide for yourself what the gods are, but I am happy to help you find the tools to discover that.

[queer-ragnelle]

tristan/isolde/palomides your MIND

LISTEN I have so many thoughts about them!! It’s an actual tragedy that they’ve never inhabited a movie together. I first noticed them in Le Morte d'Arthur, as I'm sure most people did, as it's more accessible than the Prose Tristan. But I didn't really appreciate them until after I read Between Knights: Triangular Desire and Sir Palomides by Oldga Burakov Mongan. In this essay, Mongan claims:

Very often the bond between the desiring subject [Palomides] and his beloved [Isolde] is peripheral, subordinate in its intensity, to the subject's relationship with his male 'mediator of desire' [Tristan].

This essay breaks down many of the encounters between these three in Le Morte and demonstrates how interconnected they truly are. Speaking for myself, I prefer La Tavola Ritonda instead. I'm not quite done scanning that, but it will be on my blog ASAP.

In the mean time, it has one of my favorite Palomides introductions ever.

There entered on the side of the King of Scozia a knight who bore all black insignia, and who was called Palamidesso the Pagan, a son of King Scalabrino. This Palamidesso carried two swords by his side as a signal that no knight had ever made him bend over the saddlebow.

Duel wielding? Bend over the saddlebow, you say? Interesting. Palomides goes on to win this tournament! After that he follows his lord to another castle where he first sees Isolde, falls in love with her, and begins a hateful staring contest with Tristan (literally). It's here that they battle for the first time...

As Tristano looked over the field, he saw that Sir Palamidesso was leaving, and called out to him, "Hallo, knight, guard yourself against me! I am the knight you met at King Languis' court, and it seems now that I am the worthier of the love of Isotta the Blonde!" Bold Palamidesso, hearing those words, turned his horse's head around and, drawing his sword, gave Tristano such blows on his helmet that he bent him over the saddlebow. But Tristano hit back, and hit Palamidesso so hard on his helmet that he made blood gush out of his mouth and nose, and knocked him off his horse so badly wounded that for a long time he was unconscious. Thus Palamidesso lost the prize, and lost also the right to wear two swords.

Compelling word choice throughout this. Anyway as per usual they continue to squabble until eventually settling their differences and becoming friends (in part thanks to Lancelot who apparently rents out his castle for polyamorous hookups).

"When I was jousting with Sir Lancilotto the other day, he said to me, 'Now, Palamidesso, Gioiosa Guardia is worth more than any other place in the world, for it holds a noble treasure.' Therefore I imagine that this treasure is Sir Tristan and the beautiful Isotta, because those two are the ones who excel all others in the world in beauty, prowess, and courtesy." When he heard these words, Tristano allowed Palamidesso to remount and then let his lance fall, since Palamidesso had broken his. Then he spoke in this way: "Palamidesso, Palamidesso, here is this Tristano you have been searching for. Come and fight me, if you want to. If not, I am willing to stop because of those words you spoke. I am your enemy, but I am ready to make peace with you. Still, if it would please you to fight, I am ready to do battle with you. You may choose whichever pleases and delights you most." Palamidesso replied, "Surely, Tristano, the man who could have you for a friend would be foolish to want you for an enemy, Therefore I ask that there be peace and good friendship between us."

Nobody tell Palomides that Lancelot was almost certainly referring to Guinevere and not Tristan or Isolde. But their truce culminates in everyone joining back up at Cuck Castle Joyous Guard.

The knights then rode in that direction, and when they arrived at the main palace they found the lady, Queen Isotta, all happy and joyous, attended by ladies and maidens. When Tristano told her how he and Palamidesso had made peace, she was very glad of it, and welcomed the knights with much honor. Then the tables were set out, and they all sat down to eat.

Much later, King Arthur hosts a joust in which all participants are to bring a lady. So, now that everyone are friends, Isolde is brought along with a retinue of knights, including Tristan and Palomides. They wear her colors and fight on "her" side against Arthur, Lancelot, and their kinsmen on Guinevere's "side." Polyamory enjoyers, this text is for us. Anyway the only portion of that I'll include is this sweet passage which really illustrates that the friendship in this little group is genuine. They're all affectionate after the truce and everyone is having a great time.

When Isotta had returned to the pavilion, the tables were set out and food was prepared, and when water had been brought out for their hands, they sat down to eat. As they ate, Gariette looked out and saw Palamidesso going by looking for them, and pointed him out to Sir Tristano. Tristano got up and went to meet him, taking him by the hand and leading him into the pavilion, where he disarmed and sat at the table. They all passed that night in great joy.

After this, they all live happily ever after, and nothing bad happens. :'^) I'll have La Tavola Ritonda done soon, and then you all can enjoy it too. I promise it's worth getting used to the Italian names, it's so fun! Thanks for the ask!

[soulrestinginstpetersburg]

Why do you worship your god YHWH as the only one? This is a legitimate question? What good does it do for you? Everything your god has done for you shouldn't have anything to do with his status, or uniqueness. I've seen the power of gods alien to your own, from Hel (the goddess I'm closest to, though I do worship others), I've seen her stop animals from moving, protect the sick and wounded, and cause a blind preacher to see her and flee. And I've felt her love, felt her comfort (I probably wouldn't even identify as agender if it wasn't for her help). But because she is not your god you would call this demonic? And say my soul is bound for damnation? Why not admit the existence of other gods, and keep to your own if you wish. How can your relationship with your god even be safe if you can't leave for another? How can it be called anything but bigotry to deny another god's divinity while you worship one yourself?

I actually used to believe that when I was younger, especially when I was an atheist. I did think that every god is real and that after death everyone will end up in a way they believe they will according to their religion. By every god I mean the christian one, the muslim one, the hindu ones, the pagan ones, the budha etc. But that simply cant be, and I only realised that as I got closer to Christianity around two years ago. If I did recognise other gods over Jesus Christ, I would be commiting a sin against Him. And I commited many sins throught my life, my weak, dirty and sinful soul has done many wrongs, said many wrongs and thought many wrongs. But I wont say that all gods are real. Because Jesus Christ is the only true living God that died on the cross for the mankind and then ressurected the third day. I will never ever recognise other gods over Jesus Christ. I will never choose anyone else over Him, and I will never so firmly believe in any god but Him. And yes, because she is not my god it is demonic. It is against my beliefs and morals to say that its not. And I wont do that. It is demonic.

What good does it do to me? Oh only if you knew. The depression, the social anxiety, the eating problems and overall self image problems (this used to be an @ n @ blog in 2021-2022 btw) were literally eating me alive. And that was a time when I was an atheist, drowning myself in lgbtq labels, crystals and shifting methods. All of my mental health problems were gone the second I saw the relycts of St. king Milutin Nemanjić in Saint Nedjelja church in Sofia in Bulgaria, July 2022. And nothing, nothing filled me with such love, happiness and content as the Holy Spirit. Bawling my eyes out in church, attending services and liturgy, underlining verses from the Bible, reading about stories of various saints, admiring the iconography... Social anxiety is still there but under good control, depression is nowhere to be found and its much easier to look at myself in the mirror and not have fantasies about starvation. So yeah He does to me so much. In words I cant describe.

How can my relationship with my God even be safe if I cant leave for another? Isnt that the point? That I worship, believe and love my God, Lord Jesus Christ so much that I recognise Him as the truth that I dont want to and dont plan on leaving Him for any other god? I tried to do that and it led me nowhere. Why would I want to leave my God for another?

Okay so I translated the word bigotry to my native language and it translated to нетрепељивост (netrepeljivost), and when I looked up the word it said "a human feeling whose perception is subjective and which the observer cannot understand in any case". I get why you wouldnt understand my point of view, considering that you are a polytheist, of course you wouldnt get why I would recognise only one god as the true one and reject the divinity of others. I think thats kind of a point of monotheism. You are a polytheist and I am a monotheist, alright, of course we cant understand each others perceptions.

I think I answered to all your points. Im sorry if some of my sentences are weirdly formed, english is not my first language and I literally just woke up. So yeah, God bless and have a good day.

[broomsick]

Personal & collected tips regarding the maintenance of a harmonious relationship with the landvættir (land spirits)

“It is laid down in the first clause of the pagan law of Iceland, introduced about AD 930, that no one may approach the country in ships furnished with gaping heads and yawning snouts, i.e. dragon-heads. If they had them they must remove them before they came in sight of land, for otherwise the landvaættir would take fright.” - Myth and Religion of the North: The Religion of Ancient Scandinavia (1964)

Quick note: if you follow the norse pagan path, Landdísir, Jötnar/Trolls/Thurses, Álfar, and even ancestors could be considered land spirits, depending on your personal experience and interpretation of historical sources.

“They do not typically speak in English words, or words of any human language. They speak in wind, in the crackle of fire, in images and concepts and intense emotions.” -  Earl S. Wynn.

In my experience, when compared to communication with fair folk, land spirit work is usually a lot more one-sided. Despite this, it’s important to keep in mind that spirits are conscious: they are individuals just like you and I, so we should treat them with love and respect, exactly in the way we would want to be treated. When it comes to landvættir, don’t expect a great deal of active communication, but rather watch out for little casual blessings that may start popping up once you start building a relationship with the land. By “land”, I mean both the land and the spirits that inhabit it, as they make a whole and are sustained by one another. The land you will work with is the area that you live in. Yes, even if it is a large city. Cities were all built upon age-old land, and this fact can be observed even in the most bustling and crowded ones. Is there a park you used to visit as a kid? Or a line of trees near your house? Small as they may seem, these places are the type to be inhabited by landvættir. Now, how do you start working with them?

“King Harald told a warlock to hie to Iceland in some altered shape, and to try what he could learn there to tell him: and he set out in the shape of a whale. And when he came near to the land he went to the west side of Iceland, north around the land, where he saw all the mountains and hills full of guardian-spirits, some great, some small.” -  Heimskringla: The Chronicle of The Kings of Norway, “King Olaf Trygvason's Saga”, chapter 6.

The first step to landvættir work is actually excessively simple. It is to acknowledge the soul within natural elements. Look around yourself, when in nature, and notice which trees, stones, boulders or plants catch your eye. 

The Order of Bards, Ovates and Druids suggests to take note of the following landmarks in order to get to know your own area: the highest place, the nearest body of water, the nearest area of natural beauty, the busiest open space where people congregate on a daily basis, the most abused or neglected site, the oldest sacred site under continuous use, the nearest place where the dead are commemorated or buried, the nearest natural food-producing ground, the place most frequented by wild (non-domestic) animals, the nearest major crossroads, and other significant sites that occur to you or that may be particular to your location e.g. marsh-land, heavy industry sites, etc.

If there is a certain spot you feel most drawn to, why note make it into a sort of land altar? By land altar, I mean a place where you can regularly go to rest and commune with nature. It isn’t necessary to set up a whole altar, and I would even advise against adorning it with excessive decorations, especially unnatural ones. As much as possible, try to avoid wrappings and plastics! However, you can mark the spot with things you pick up in the area: a pretty flower or leaf, a fallen tree branch, a handful of acorns, an usual-looking rock and such. It’s okay to put these on your land altar as long as they are from the area. Picking these sorts of things up and giving them back to nature is a means to show that not only do you observe the gifts of the land you live on, but that you also appreciate them. That you see their beauty and their value. By choosing a specific spot to make such offerings, you also give the landvættir a place where they can reach back to you, where you can hear their voices and feel their touch. If you are interested in working with a tree spirit, or choosing one as you land altar, I suggest taking a look at this previous post of mine where I detailed how to get started with such a relationship! 

Disclaimer: if you keep getting a bad feeling about the place you’ve chosen for your land altar, I would definitely advise changing spots. It could mean a particular land spirit does not want to be disturbed, and it would be rude not to respect their wish.

Once you’ve chosen this space and once you feel truly settled with it, it’s a great idea to bless it from time to time. You can do so by blessing water and pouring it around and over that spot, or by singing a certain song, or chanting, etc. Simply naming what you see around you, stating the names of these natural elements, can be considered blessing, for you are acknowledging their souls. Through meditation, you may start hearing some spirits tell you the names they want to be called. Keep them in mind!

I would deem all of these “blessing” gestures offerings, though you could also offer the aforementionned leaves, flowers, rocks, acorns, as well pinecones, collected resin, earth, food you grew in your garden, etc. No matter the shape your offerings take, it is exceedingly important to be regular with them. I don’t mean you need to have a schedule (you could pretty much gift whatever, whenever), but you cannot expect for the spirits to appreciate your presence or give back to you if you have only spent time with them once or twice. Plus, you cannot truly get to know your local spirits if you don’t take the necessary time to get to know them! 

Now, I’ve been using a woodland setting as my example, but it’s obvious the landvættir are completey different individuals depending on where you live. They are different in swamps, along beaches, high in the mountains, etc. It is possible to maintain a land altar no matter what your area looks like. After all, the most important part of land spirit work is to acknowledge and live in harmony with your local spirits— the guardians of your land. In fact, I find it a good idea to locate your land altar near a natural symbol of your nation/country/area! In order to do this in an even more personal way, I suggest looking into your ancestral practices! You may notice that previous generations gave back to the land in specific ways, which you could very well include in your own practice. 

Once you’ve gone through all of these steps, keep your mind open so as to receive whatever messages or gifts the landvættir want to give in return. They might take a lot of time to answer, but stay patient. After all, their very existence and the protection they grant land is already a gift in an of itself. Sit at your land altar and open your senses. In my experience, landvættir can show their appreciation through a range of very discreet presents such as birdsong, a feeling of absolute peace and joy, a piece of knowledge, or even a new and unexpected flower that catches your eye and which you’ve never seen before. You never know what they might send you next, so best to stay aware of your surroundings when communing with nature. It has lots and lots to give, if you stand ready to receive!

Artworks and pictures: Winter Foxes by Chuck Groenink, Yule Stag by Sebastian McKinnon, painting by Omar Rayyan II, illustration by David Wyatt, land altar photograph, illustration by Lily Seika Jones.

[bittertarot]

can you do txt fs and ideal types??💞

Sure, bare in mind, I won't be including appearances! Yeonjun tends to give me a headache so I'll do my best but if it isn't that detailed I apologise </3 Already done Taehyun and Beomgyu's Yeonjun's Future Spouse Personality : *4 of Pentacles* - They're a very frugal person, Pentacles normally talks about someone more materialistic, however, they're quite frugal. They're secure with their wealth, but they still feel the need to conserve money. 4 talks about stability and application, perhaps they have a wider plan for the money they possess? *7 of Cups* - They seem to be someone with a range of options in life, they could choose love, riches, power, etc and other choices that present them with disaster. However, danger lurks within all of them and wishful thinking and fantasy can lead into trouble. 7 talks about spirituality, so they may be a spiritual person? I'm getting mega "brought up with paganism" or "heavily pagan" vibes and I'm not sure why? *King of Wands Reversed* - They're very impulsive and overbearing as a person, you'll tend to feel either comfortable or suffocated around them and there is no in between. They seem to have unachievable expectations about themself? Or about their future? They're also very reckless and prone to impulsive spending, which is why they're now trying to be more frugal. They seem to be a very passionate person, as seen by wands, and may idealise the idea of romance, falling in love, etc. Potential Zodiac Sign : *7 of Cups* - I feel like this isn't their zodiac sign, but a sign that may pop up frequently within their chart? Very heavy pisces vibes for a sign that may frequent within their chart, Re-asked and specified ACTUAL sign, not just "potential" (this obviously can't be 100% accurate) : *Knight of Wands Reversed* - Wands tends to signify fire, heavy aries vibes is what I'm getting! Sidenote; They're absolutely an extrovert with a terrible social battery and I am LIVING for it !! Ideal Type Personality : *Knight of Wands* - Wands indicates he would want a passionate lover, whilst Knight talks about him liking someone fearless, always looking for an adventure and wanting to take action. He'd like someone who has a passionate vision they wish to pursue and he would love to help them with that, he may also like someone brash, impulsive and unrealistic. Mainly because he would find it cute. Soobin's Future Spouse Personality : *Justice* - They may be a worker within the legal system, there's this heavy feeling of "I have to tell the truth", so they can't be a liar. They heavily rely on telling the truth, no matter how harsh it really is. They're very fair. I feel like they believe in karma? There isn't much to say here, just heavy introvert vibes. *10 of Swords* - 10 talks about completion and finality whilst swords talks about logic, ideas and intellect. This card is telling us that disaster will inevitably strike and it is beyond this persons control, they may perceive themself as a victim of their own life? They feel very defeated. Keeping it brief since I feel like they're a very quiet person *4 of Cups* - This card talks about stability and applying that to your life, whilst cups talks about your emotions, feelings and relationships. This card is telling us that they may feel very disconnected from the world right now, they're oddly apathetic and tend to contemplate their life often. Wondering what would happen if they were to suddenly become apathetic towards others. Potential Zodiac Sign : *The Lovers Reversed* - I'll take this as them telling me they would prefer not talking about it <3 Ideal Type : *The World* - Someone complete as a person, having inner and outer harmony. Someone who has many accomplishments of their own and has reached a certain level of perhaps spiritual/religious enlightenment. A person who has worked hard into cultivating who they are today and is willing to celebrate that. HueningKai Future Spouse : Leaving this one to tomorrow <3

[crazylittlejester]

So the myth is called The Wooing of Étáin (pronounced Ee-tane)

(Étáin being the character who Wars will take the place of in the au version)

(Also if you do look up the original myth I suggest ignoring the last part of the myth where/after Eochaid (Ee-oh-kade) has to pick which is the real Étáin. The result is treated as a horrifying thing in the original (as it should be) but subject is still disgusting even though it's somewhat standard fare for myths involving gods because in Irish mythology, some fairies are actually the ancient pagan deities that were worshipped pre-christianity)

But anyway, here's the child friendly version I grew up with:

A girl (Étáin) grows up dreaming of a blonde haired fairy prince (Midir). Eventually she forgets about these dreams and catches the eye of the handsome High King of Ireland (Eochaid) and they get married! Étáin at first is beyond happy, having everything she could ever dream of. However one night, a storyteller tells the royal court of the magical land of Tír na nÓg (T-ear nan ohw-guh (kinda pronounced like Ogre without the R sound), land of the fairies and immortality basically), the prince of that land, and his missing wife, the princess Étáin, who had disappeared without a trace.

Étáin the high king's wife, suddenly remembers her dreams of the same prince and realises she was the beautiful princess that went missing. She becomes distraught with homesickness for Tír na nÓg and starts hearing voices in the wind calling her name. Then one night, the wind and voices grow louder and she looks outside to see her dream fairy prince on a white horse and knows that he is here to take her back to Tír na nÓg.

Eochaid sees the prince too, and fearful of losing Étáin, he imprisons her in the palace dungeon, puts the palace into lockdown, and summons all his armies to guard it.

Étáin, unsurprisingly, is even more miserable in the dungeons, and prays for Midir to rescue her. The wind and voices grow ever louder until they suddenly stop and a bright light shines into the dungeon. Midir appears within the light and pulls her into a hug, in which they both turn into a pair of beautiful white swans. The roof of the dungeon opens up by magic, scaring Eochaid and all his soldiers, allowing the swans to fly free back to Tír na nÓg where they lived happily ever after.

For the au version, I was roughly thinking Tír na nÓg could be Wars' hyrule, with Midir being replaced by a familial relationship with the Chain instead of the romantic relationship in the myth. (And because of how prince/princess work as titles, it doesn't change with the relationship switch) I was leaning towards Time being Midir because as Mask he was in the war with Wars but also he's the one called Fairy boy. And so the dreams instead are about all the happy moments he spent with the chain. (Before Dink captured, tortured and wiped Wars' memory and then trapped him in something like the dark world version of Wars' hyrule).

The Eochaid the High King and his palace/armies could be Cia and her army instead. Because she would trap Warriors in a dungeon and she'd absolutely take advantage of him not remembering he's the hero if it means she can trick him into loving her. Which means Warriors gets a break down about remembering the war (and Cia's obsession with him) a second time :) this time it's even worse because he was tricked into marrying/being in a relationship with her!

And then of course Sky could be the one to rescue Wars, giving him Twi's shadow crystal to turn him into a swan, so that they can escape via flying together (with Sky on Crimson instead of also turning into a swan, although Sky turning into a Loftwing would be fun too!).

As this got a little long so I'll send the other myth as a separate ask!

— Shams of the Wild

THIS IS SO COOL AND I LOVE IT, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR SHARING THIS WITH ME

i think i could use SOME parts of this for the swan wars au, but i honestly might also make a completely different thing so i can incorporate this because the story is really interesting!! :)

[thetombedspirit]

So, I just finished the main story of Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora - WARNING! SPOILERS AHEAD!

First off, I want to talk about the cons of the game before jumping into the pros, but to be honest with ya, the cons are few and far in between and were more about personal preference then the performance of the game itself.

For starters:

1. The Glitches - Like literally, during a few quests, there will be some dialogue, but it'll randomly cut out with the excuse that enemies are near by, when that is absolutely not the case. It was only so bad that I had to exit to the main menu and then get back on in order for it to fix, so this was minor in comparison to other glitches like falling through the map randomly (which happened to me once during my play through of Far Cry 4 :p)

2. The Language - This is just a little peeve of mine, but I wish that the Na'vi, at least when talking amongst themselves and to us, spoke in Na'vi. Like, if Ubisoft could record a whole 'nother language for Far Cry Primal, they could have done it here. And I also wish that the animals, especially the Palulukan, were referred to by it's Na'vi names rather then human names.

3. The Main Character's Name - This is minor really, but I don't like how we are not given a name. Like, I get that it's fun coming up with names for our original character, but it's a bit isolating to only be referred to as 'the Sarentu'.

Not only does it make it seem like our identity as a member of a respected clan matters more then our identity as our own complex individual, but it feels weird when you read notes and listen to audio logs about the other Sarentu kids and not one thing about us, especially when Alma talks about how they're acclimation to life in the Resistance. Like how we're developing doesn't matter at all in comparison to how Ri'nela is coming into the role of leader and Tsahìk.

Not even a mention of our relation to Aha'ri when she writes about her murder and how it could be affecting us.

Like, just a gender-neutral name to tie things in, like Dani in Far Cry 6, would go a long way to make our character feel like a part of the story and not just a nameless side character doing all the hard work, like the Rookie from Far Cry 5.

4. The Villain - This is more of a 'meh' thing for me. Like yeah, Mercer was an asshole, but again, pulling from Far Cry here, who had amazing, complex villains like Vaas Montenegro or Pagan Min, and what we get is... a entitled, racist narcissist whose barely there, and therefore we get zero from this guy. He was more annoying then anything, like literally every time he talk, my eyes rolled into the back of my skull.

Like, could you imagine if AFOP made Mercer like Pagan Min, the tyrant king of Kyrat who had a relationship with Ajay Ghale's mother to the point where he was sympathetic to the loss of his mother. Pagan Min would just randomly call Ajay on his radio like an eccentric father-figure, and in two endings of the game, he'll actually help you out, taking you to Lakshamana so that you can place your mother's ashes beside her, just like she wanted, which is very generous considering that in one of those endings, it's after you lead a massive rebellion right to his door-step, taking out his generals and so-on! (Pagan is my favourite Far Cry villain is you haven't figured that, Vaas is a close second)

If you gave Mercer that kind of depth, then maybe you can actually understand why Teylan would believe Mercer wouldn't hurt anybody when he gave the location of the Resistance Base away.

Harding as well was mediocre. Just a hard-as-nails general that's running a pouching operation on the side. Like, if you made her even a fraction of insane like you did Vaas, I could actually be into it.

So anyway, on to the pros!

1. The Gameplay - I know people moaned about the mechanics being too similar to Far Cry, but honestly, that was what drew me to it when I first saw the trailer for it! Far Cry is my favourite first-person shooter franchise (Far Cry 4 and Far Cry Primal being my favourites). The crafting of weapons, the hunting for food, skins and ingredients and the little things what made it unique was amazing to me,

The hunting was a pain, because half the time (for me anyway) I could almost never get a clean kill for the smaller or quick-moving animals, but I think it was done super well. When you hit an animal in the old Far Cry games, they either just drop dead or run away and bleed out quietly. But here, when it's an unclean kill, the animal squirms and writhes in pain before succumbing to it's wounds, really driving in the whole point of the Na'vi way of life (that's how I saw it anyway).

And the Memory Paintings, though tedious at most times, was another fun and unique mechanic to the game and felt very Na'vi to me and I enjoyed concentrating on them all and hearing the MC's interpretations of the Memory Paintings and the Sarentu Totems.

And the moments when you're flying on your Ikran or Pa'li made me feel like I was in an RPG, like Horizon, so that was a nice little touch. It was like they mashed two of my favorite games into one.

And in the end, it's not the gameplay that makes me play the game. It's the story.

2. The Harmful Effects of the RDA - There was not a minute within this story where it's quests and stories didn't resonate with me.

How the Kinglor of the Aranahe forest was displaced by the RDA's actions, giving us a Yellowstone situation where a key member of the ecosystem was being pushed out and it was causing all sorts of problems for the local flora and fauna.

The aforementioned poaching in Zeswa territory, where the Zakru were being hunted and killed for their tusks and how even their long deceased skeletons were being pilfered, very similar to elephant and rhino poaching, especially as Zakru are sacred animals to the Zeswa.

And then the Yavä, the green fog that brought sickness to the Kame'tire, something that happened, by the way, because the RDA disposed of the Sarentu's bodies by using caustic chemicals!!! (like, what the FUCK, Alma!) but anyway, is very reminiscent to the diseases that European settlers brought in to the native populace, who never had to build up immune systems for it and suffered because of it.

What I'm getting at here, is how big of a problem the RDA is, not just for going to war with Jake and the Omaticaya, but also by causing the exact same problems that people did on Earth and are still doing to Earth. In so many, seemingly innocuous way, the RDA are negatively effecting the ecosystem, the wildlife and the locals in their pursuit of a paycheck that, realistically, would never be able to use until they get off planet, and that is if they don't die on an alien moon because of all those problems.

3. The Efforts of the Resistance

Every time I got to talk with the Resistance members was a highlight for me. I truly do not understand how some people don't like Priya. I found her adorable, and she gave me Penelope Garcia vibes from Criminal Minds. And her budding romance with Resistance Pilot Anqa, whose history with incursion on her desert homeland inspired her to take action against the RDA.

Or Hajir's regrets for playing part in the Severeds origins, concluding how they are in a constant state of anger and sadness.

Or Billy, who break-dances as he's helping you escape imprisonment, before sacrificing himself to save what's left of the Resistance.

And then there's the Na'vi Clans that I just loved and each and every one of it's characters had me giddy. The playful old grandmother in Nefika and her immediate action to take us in and show us around the Hometree, the Zeswa sisters and their rightous anger over the poaching, the eccentricities of Okul and their faith in the Kame'tire's tradtions.

Honestly I could go on and on about every single character in this game. Nalin and her tentative offer to fill in the void of mother during the party, the Burden Carrier and the Milk Crafter who got drunk off their ass, saying the zakru can fly while we're trying to warn them of impending danger and Mosaka, who not only gave our clan's location away to the RDA, but used their deaths to manipulate his way into power and control over the clan by framing Anufi for their demise. (BTW, fuck you Mosaka)

That's all I got for now, but once the DLCs come in, I am defiantly playing through the whole game again and I may come back to this post with an update when that happens, along with my stance on said DLCs.

So, hope your all having a good day and buh-bye!

[abeautifulblog]

o gremble, i beseech thee, reveal to us your ac: valhalla ships

HAH, I could write a fucking thesis about the relationships in that game (and about Eivor's relationship with gender), it is all fascinating.

But if I were to write fic, it would start out with Eivor in a (stable, though slightly strained) poly triad with Sigurd and Randvi, and have Eivor/Leofrith as the endgame.

(Yes, we stan Leofrith and his ten minutes of screen time. Eivor the Tiniest Viking wants to climb that giant Saxon man like a tree. 😻😻😻 He is just so GOOD, and LOYAL, and THEY DON'T APPRECIATE YOU LIKE I WOULD APPRECIATE YOU. 😭😭 I KNOW WE'RE THE PAGAN INVADERS RANSACKING YOUR COUNTRY AND DEPOSING YOUR KING, BUT BABY PLEEEEASE I WANT YOU TO BE MY FRIEND SO BAD. I WANT TO TAKE YOU HOME WITH ME, I WOULD APPRECIATE YOU SO HARD ALL NIGHT LONG. 😭😭😭)

(Seriously. Like, I get that he would never become one of your viking raiders, but you should have been able to talk him into staying as a mentor/advisor to Ceolbert, they were already friends, ffs. There was so much fascinating potential for Leofrith's character, if he'd stayed in the story.)

(And also if Leofrith had been there, you know that That One Plot Development 🤬🤬 would have 1000% been averted.)

But yeah, in the early scene when you're first introduced to Randvi and Sigurd as adults, I took one look at the dynamic between the three of them and went, "Ah, so we're both married to Sigurd, got it," and rp'd the game accordingly -- which makes it absolutely fucking heartbreaking when he starts going off the deep end. Jesus, it's like you're losing a loved one to QAnon, just helplessly watching them turn into a stranger by degrees. 😐

(Seriously, that barely scratches the surface; the storyline with Sigurd is harrowing. Poor Eivor gets put through an emotional meat-grinder.)

So it would be interesting to see that story from Leofrith's POV, and see how it would change things if he were there and in love with Eivor. I've never written a story in which the love interest is straight up not single at the outset -- that they are already in a committed relationship, wholly devoted to someone else, and the complex, contradictory feelings as that relationship falls apart.

(Not that I expect to write such a fic; I don't have a clear enough idea of how I'd actually structure it, and I write slowly enough that any fic is a Commitment, but I am enjoying rotating these blorbos in the microwave of my mind.)

(There is just SO MUCH EXCELLENT MEATY CONFLICT to work with here. The cross-cutting feelings in the poly triad. How queer-coded/genderfucky Eivor is, canonically, completely independently of whether he ever fucks men. Leofrith's conflicting loyalties, and the fact that his very presence on their side would help legitimize the viking conquest, which he'd have mixed feelings about. The interplay between Eivor's faith and Leofrith's. Eivor being dtf and Leofrith not wanting to be just a casual friendly hookup. Sigurd's not-entirely-baseless jealous paranoia of Eivor and Randvi, and how that would land on Leofrith too if he were there and in love with Eivor.

Nnnnnngh, I am feral, I am gnawing on the furniture.)

[catholic-character-tournament]

Round 1 - Resurrect Bracket (Losers Bracket) Side A

ashes to ashes, dust to dust; in sure and certain hope of the Resurrection to [make it to the finals]

Propaganda below ⬇️

Saint Citrina Rocks (Dimension 20’s A Crown of Candy)

there’s nothing better that i can do for this character’s chance to win than to say that one of her titles, in canon, is “Cloistered Scholar of the Immaculate Confection” and if that ain’t a great pun I don’t know what is

I never finished acoc but if the fandom is actually right, shout out to gay lemon saint and martyr.

Popular headcanon says she fucked the broccoli Pope <3 (or at least that they had an intense romantic relationship which might’ve avoided premarital relations due to their religious ties).

OKAY so Citrina Rocks is basically the token Jesus freak (affectionate) of her very atheist maybe-a-touch-pagan family. She’s a saint of the church that’s actively fighting against her brother (the king of Candia, her home kingdom and yes the entire place and all the people are Just Candy) and his family. She was ordered to be murdered by a bishop of the church she was essentially canonically in homoerotic love with and she is made of lemon flavored hard candy. i love her SO MUCH

Hellboy Propaganda

He is literally the beast of the apocalypse. He was forcibly assigned catholic at birth, he deserves this. Now i know the rules said no demons, and that is fair. But here is my propaganda: he is a half-demon AND he absolutely does not want to end the world. He just wants to hang out and beat up monsters and work his job. But catholic guilt and apocalypse stuff always gets in the way. The comic books contain a ridiculous amount of religious imagery, the author was raised catholic, and passages from the bible are occasionally quoted. Hellboy is also portrayed as a messianic figure in conjunction with being an apocalyptic one. He uh, kind of becomes the savior of the new world and its like a whole thing. Catholic imagery appears frequently. Statues of the virgin mary, churches, etc. he also wears a literal cross on his belt, what can i say.

Okay here’s my rant. Hi, hello, propaganda. The last ten issues of the comic literally feature Hellboy going to hell and killing satan. He kills satan, fucks around in hell for a bit, and then blows everything up and its godamn tragic. Forcibly assigned catholic at birth. A bro did not ask for this it just happened. His mom was a witch but tried to become catholic after she died. Kind of a banger move. It didn’t work out for her but she gets points for trying. He tried real hard to save the world and it kind of worked but he did still die and go to hell. But not because he did anything bad, it was just kind of unavoidable. Again, he did blow the place the fuck up when he was done so. Respect.

Lapsed Catholic who is literally a half demon and also the rightful King of England that’s right he’s descended from King Arthur on his mother’s side.

[popculturebuffet]

It's Not the Years, It's the Mileage: Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (Commission for WeirdKev27)

Welcome back all you happy archeologists, to "It's not the Years , It's the Mileage", my look at the indiana jones films… and my return to reviewing after a brief sabbatical!

Yeah long story short a combination of burnout and a mounting move soon got to me and I needed a week to recharge. And now my atomic batteries are to power and turbines to speed enough, we can get back to indiana as we cap off the original trilogy.

We last left our hero with the uneven as hell temple of doom: the action beats, Harrison Ford and Kim Quay Quan's acting, and the cinematography were all top notch, as was the darker atmosphere, but the rampant racism including, as I feel needs repeating making the British colonizers of India the GOOD GUYS and them slaughtering a wave of Indian cultists one of the rare big damn heroes acts that's also a massive uncomfortable hate crime and misogyny baked into the character of willie scot.

So while the film once again made a binload of money, it was one both men were ashamed of… particularly Stephen Spielberg. Spielberg was in a much better place, having both the giant money piles from the first two films and a happy relationship with Kate Capshaw as a result of the last film, one that's lasted to this day.. but it's clear the fatigue of doing a big franchise, the only one he'd do , was getting to him and he was fine with asking Lucas to stop the bus and get off here because he's a factory. And given he had to give up on both Big and Rain Man to do this, it's not hard to see why: While Indy is a great franchise and it's largely Spielberg's deft direction that made it so, he had other things he wanted to do and I can't blame him.

So the two launched into creative mode and a panoply of chaotic first drafts the like of which i've never seen and may have to cover on their own at some point.

Inaitially Lucas once again brought up the Scottish Castle Idea, which i'm BADLY hoping someone used in a comic or something because it's damn good. It's clear that Speilberg wasn't the only one who read Carl Barks as a Kid. But I can't fault Speilberg for not wanting to do it, both due to being similar to poltergeist.. and because a haunted house film just dosen't fit indy that well. The previous films were globetrotting afairs and even with Doom largely set in one country it still had a lot of travel before we settled into the final location.

Lucas then wanted to use the Holy Grail and while that would eventually come back, in this version it's a pagan artifact for some reason which is also in africa, for some reason, and involves Sun Wukong FOR SOME REASON, called "Indiana Jones and the Monkey King" because George Lucas is apparently physically incapable of waking up in the morning without doing something shockingly tone deaf. And yet somehow

Because he then handed it off to Chris Columbus, the one people actually liked.. at least before the mid 2000's. This isn't as weird a move as it sounds as while Columbus has only written a handful of his own films, before he became a director he wrote Gremlins and the Goonies, both produced by speilberg, both classics, both super succesful, and since the Goonies did have a similar adventure vibe, if more of the plucky group of kids variety than the pulp adventure, it did make sense.

To Chris' Credit, he did make some adjustments to make this ten page idea george lucas had into an actual story: while the story was still in Africa, he specified the country to Mozambique, and while still oddly involving Son Wukong despite his journey to the west not remotely touching africa, he at least changed the artifact to the Garden of Immortal Peaches, a chinese myth that explains why the gods live forever. He still proved to have his own brand of accidetal racisim as he included a sterotpyical cannibal tribe and a 200 year old pygmy, but, so he's not entirely off the hook, but it's still more ignorance of the time than.. whatever George Lucas is. ti'd also include a new love intrest, the Kathrine Hepburn style Dr. Clarke, Scraggy Brier, an old friend of Indy's, a nazi cyborg because apparently Arakai wasn't the only guy to think of that, though at least this one isn't a hero, Kenzure, a pirate , and Betsy, a student suicidally in love with indy because THAT'S A FUN TWIST ON THAT JOKE AMIRITT. Also Indiana Jones came BACK from the dead thanks to the monkey king, yet the pirate dies because he's not pure of heart. Had.. had Chris watched the other films?

Chris did get a second draft that did thankfully remove betsy and added an interesting new rival, Dash, an expatriate bar owner working for the nazis. The Monkey King was also a villain now, zombies were included, and one of the big set pieces is Dash and Indy playing chess with real pieces and the losers would really die. So while it was marginally calmer, it still needed to lie down a bit.

To their credit.. Lucas and Speilberg realized the film was a touch racist and more than a touch bannnanas, with Speilberg admitting it made him feel too old to direct it. It's clear that whatever else I could say about Temple of Doom, and I did.. Speilberg did take it's faults to heart and worked to correct them when given the chance. Lucas admitely did too.. it just didn't seem to stick.

It was here the film started to really take shape, as going back to the grail, Spielberg suggested an addition: Indy's Father and a focus on their relationship. This came from a personal place: Spielberg was estranged from his own father, the two not having had the best relationship. Thankfully much like INdy and Henry the two would, with capshaw's help, reconcile soon after this film.

Lucas was worried it'd pull focus from the grail, but Speilberg rightfully convinced him that it'd add an emotional core to the film. While the locations were diffrent for this draft, a lot of the core of the story came into focus: the addition of Sallah, the holy grail. As is the trend for this film's early history ther'es still some batshit to be worked through as Indy stabbed a demon with a holy dagger. I mean it's no stabbing a dog reincarnated with the soul of hitler but even Indania Jones can't be brock sampson and he's fine with that. Also Henry ascends a stairway to heaven because of course he does To finish the job, Speilberg brought in Jeffery Boam. BOam is a writer I hadn't heard of but has a pretty stacked resume having written The Dead Zone , The Lost BOys, Innerspace and Funny Farm, the last two i've only heard of but have a great rep. He also wrote the witches of eastwick, but I won't hold that against the guy. He's done more than enough good to make up for that and if his film work wasn't enough he also made The Adventures of Brisco County Jr., a western starring bruce cambell I haven't seen.. but i'ts a western starring bruce cambell. It's gotta be great or at least cheestastic. And given Kev shipped me the complete series of jack of all trades , I don't think this one is out of the question either. Sadly Boam passed in 2000 from heart failure and will be dearly missed.

Boam decided to emphasize the father angle, moving up Henry's introduction and feeling that's where the heart of the film lied. After all the last two films ended with our hero finding and getting the artifact. While he lost it in some way, the Goverment took the arc and he willingly gave the stone to the village, It was still the crux. Boam instead gave the film it's truly heartrending resolution.

After this the next few rewrites wer ebasic stuff: elsa was moved from a nazi villianess to her currnet role as colaberator, more characters were added and the film went into production, with said production being fairly brisk and uneventful for a change. The main challenge was doing the train scene as the mechanical effects supervisor noted "You can't just stop a train if it misses it marks. It takes blocks to back it up. " They also, horrifyingly ordered 1000 disease free rats for the catacombs scene and got 5000. That's. that's more rats than i'm comfortable with. Unless it's this rat

So 5000 rats, several rewrites and one sean connery later the film was a MASSIVE success, commercially and once again critically.. there were a few negative reviews, because of course, but the one Wikipedia spotlighted was Hal Hinson of the Washington Post who described the film as "They've carried their series deeper-Deeper into hooey". I could go deeper into the pretentiousness of the review, but I think that clinches it. So with that Indy road off into the sunset.. for a few years till Young Indiana Jones Premeried. And as you can probably guess.. i'll be skipping over it. I'ts not bad, but the fact is it's 20 film length episodes, in a project that's both time sensitive and is already costing Kev a bit to commission. Neither of us wanted to do that. Now would I be willing to visit episodes of the series? Absolutely. Feel free to commission them and I might even find one to review pro bono at some point. But I just don't have the time or review space to cram it into this project

What I do have the time to cram in is the rest of the review under the cut.

Family Truly is the Greatest Holy Grail Of All

Last Crusade's biggest strength and biggest improvement from the last film is it's focus on Indy and his dear old Sean Connery. One of my complaints last go round was that there was no character arc for indy in temple after getting a truly riveting one in raiders, but I can see why it might of been an issue: Indy's arc was mostly done: he started robbing temples to get by and ended with his love of the craft back. So reaching into his past instead, looking past who he is as a person and into one of the people who made him such a cranky bastard in the first place was genius.

The intro brilliantly sets it up and is in general a masterful bit of work. Like Indy's distant relationship with his dad, Indy being a boyscout comes directly from Lucas' life, with him having become an eagle scout in good distinction, as was harrison ford. So having the start of the cold open not be indy but him as a teen was a genius way to set up Indy's distant relationship with his dad by showing it to us: the later arguments wouldn't of been nearly effective if we hadn't seen Indy nearly die trying to save a priceless artifact from some shady archeologists, only for his dad to be too deep in his grail research to notice… or to care when the cops force indy to give it back because cops have always been dicks who believe rich men. Honestly hearing the ending to this little adventure ahead of watching it, as i'd forgotten this cold open, I was dreading it, feeling it was a depressing end. But what makes it work is a mysterious man in a hat, who despite being Indy's compettiton not only encourages the kid but give shim his iconic fedora. He may of lost today.. but there will always be a tommorow

There's a lot of little origins to how Indy does things baked into this intro. None are really necessary but their done in a neat enough and subtle enough way to be just fun origins instead of SEEE SEE THIS IS WHERE THE THING CAME FROM. Unlike some prequel bits in more recent projects. SImple things like Indy using a whip to get a lion to backoff, getting harrison ford's real life scar from the whip, and falling into a snake bin just seem so seamless. While it's clear this was a very formative day for indy, none of it feels forced. He clearly already had a love of archelogy, some skill and had the fearlessness to fight the criminals. Who indy was was there, and there was still years of experience to be gained> This was simply an interesting chapter. This intro was so good in fact Speilberg actually wanted to do spinoffs with River Phoenix, who was picked due to having played Ford's son in Mosquito Coast before this and looking near identical, but pheonix's sad passing meant this never happened, even if we did eventually get the similar young indania jones. And the cahtarsis of seeing a modern day indy finally get the cross of Coronado back and into a museum… which probably isn't exactly where it belongs but it's still better than in a sweaty rich mans hand.

We also get another classroom scene like raiders, which brings us to another little detour: this film borrows Raider's plot structure to a point, and it was deleberate: after their disapointment with Temple of Doom and their dodged bullet with The Monkey King, the two wanted to get back to basics. You get the thrilling opening, indy selling the fruits of that cold open to marcus brody, his class filled with women in a trite gag straight out of the 40's, an offer from a person to go on the adventure for a holy artifact, some nazis to punch in the face because every decent human being likes seeing a nazi get punched in the face, and one of the vilians getting melted.

Yet it's really.. only on the surface. The pieces are there.. but their all rearranged so differently. The biggest example of this.. is Indy himself. Part of Temple's lack of emotional core.. was INdy didn't have one since Raiders hadn't happened yet. This time around we're back in a moving timeline, so we can actually see how Indy's doing post character development. Indy's cold open in Raiders was an attempt to squeak out some money in a fairly shady way and then having it all stolen by someone even worse. His class was filled with people not really interested in what he had to say, and his life was kinda hollow. While he lost marion between films, which i'd be angrier about if they didn't course correct that next time, he's still doing really well. While his class is still full of fangirls because a large part of George Lucas is still 12, it's clear many are paying attention to his lecture as much as his physique and when he goes back to his office, he find sit packed with assistants and students. The scene's not only incredibly funny it subtly shows Indy has TONS of students and has likely taken on more classes. Granted he could've easily had a bunch of classes we never saw in the first film, but the intent with that scene was to show his academic career was only doing marginally better. It's also a nice show of just how much Indy truly loves what he does: he's an adventurer sure, but he's an academic just as much. He's just a hands on one. It's also nice to get that refresher before we meet someone even nerdier than him in his dad.

It's the same scene with the same purpose, showing what Indy's life is like between adventures, but it shows a very diffrent indy, one whose genuinely happy again and doing well. It also makes his reluctance when called upon by famed philanthropist and business man Walter Donovan to go on a grail quest like his dad make a ton of sense: in the first film while he did it for the right reasons, Indy badly needed the big adventure and jumped at it. Here he just got done with achieving a lifelong dream, getting the cross back, and has no time for his father's shit. He only decides to take up the mission when it's clear his father is missing. It also nicely sets the stakes: Indy isn't on this mission for the Grail, he's not even sure his dad's actually found it at first as Henry has been looking for the grail since before Indy was born, he just wants to make sure his dad is okay. It's a perfect portrayal of an estranged parent relationship, i've been there: you may not be really on the same page with your dad but if he got hurt or was in real danger you'd drop everything to help. Indy may be fed up with his dad, and as we'll get to for VERY valid reasons, but he still loves the guy.

The next chunk of the film shows just how much the father-son aspect is vital… as it's the weakest part. It feels like a weaker retread of the snake pit from raiders but without the tension. It has more rats but that's about it. The film dosen't pick up again till we get to the castle their holding Henry in, a fun way to likely recycle some ideas from Lucas' castle pitch. We also get overly scottish indy in one of the films funniest bits.

Once Henry enters though the film hit's it's stride. The casting was genius: Sean Connery was an action star himself, having started the Bond franchise and had previously been in highlander just a few years before this. And while I may not cover the franchise as a whole, depends on if someone wants me to, that is a film that i'd love to tackle sometime. It has sean connery as the cool mentor, clancy brown devouring every bit of scenery while still being intimidating an da soundtrack by queen. What else do you need? It also inspired both one of the venture bros best gags and one of it's best episodes.

Reluctantly putting Highlander aside, Sean Connery was a huge enough name that he'd not only be able to go to to toe with harrison ford without being overshadowed, but was just as much a draw as the headliner, something needed since while he comes in about a third of the way in, Henry is the films deutragonist, being just as important as his son. While the Ark was a personal goal for Indy, this is one for his father. The grail is his life's work.

The real genius though was that Connery plays mostly against type. He still has that connery charm: a lot of the comic bits were his idea, he genuinely charmed Elsa, and he's smart. But Henry essentially Indy's professor side , I realize as i'm typing this the way Indy conducts a class may be trying to emulate his father and the only way he does, without the punchy two fisted hero: he has all the charm and smarts, but is essentailly if a real life archelogist who just so happens to end up on a pulp adventure, unlike Indy who seemingly can't get five minutes before he gets a lead on his next globetrotting escapade. There's similarities: their both stubborn, they both have an easy way with women, and their both smart, but their very different people and it only further explains why the two grew so far apart.

It also allows for a LOT of great comedy. While he had some moments in highlander I had no idea Sean Connery was THIS funny. The film in general is really damn funny, something me and jess noticed when we watched. I could spend all day pointing out the great bits from both jones responding when a yes when someone asks for "dr. jones", to Henry subtly revealing that he slept with Elsa too with "she talks in her sleep" a line connery adlibbed. The film has a sense of humor about it that really helps keep the energy up and Connery and Ford just play off each other perfectly: indy gets annoyed at his father's lack of field experince, obession with the grail, arrogance and the fact their now weiner cousins, while Henry is entirley baffled that this is what his son does on a weekly basis. Despite being a non action person there's a LOT of scrooge mcduck in henry: the arrogance, the tendency to double down when called out on his shit, the obsessiveness. Maybe Stephen Speilberg's dad is just like scrooge mcduck. I don't know. What I like though is that Indy's conflict with his dad. Sure it's in parts your standard father son film drama :

But it works well in the specifics: Indy resents Henry so much because his whole life Henry has ignored him, somethign the intro set up well. Indy sums it up perfectly during a discussion later in the film

"What you taught me is that I was less important to you than people who'd been dead for 500 years in another country…and I learned it so well, that we've barely spoken for 20 years"

While Henry is arrogant enough to assume he was a good parent… Indy spent his life after his mom died basically alone… and as we learned earlier fully blames his dad for it. That last part.. feels like Speilberg putting his own life out there, if exagerated slightly: as shown by his most recent film the Fablemans, a fictonalized but still mostly accurate account of his life, Speilberg was VERY close to his mom, while his dad wrote off his filmaking for some time as a hobby. The two reconcliled, I evne found out while researching this his dad funded close encouters of the third time, but at the time they were estranted once again and you can feel Speilberg still felt on some level his dad pushed his mom away. And like with Speilberg himself.. the truth is way more complicated.

To quote the scene. "This is an obsession, Dad! I've never understood it. Never! And neither did Mom." "Oh yes she did. Only too well. Unfortunately, she kept her illness from me until all I could do was mourn her.:

It's such a cutting, raw scene because in a film with snake filled crypts, tank fights and melting buisnessmen, it's so realstic: Indy never forgave his dad for his mom's death.. and it's clear Henry never forgave himself.. and that despite his obession with the grail… he would've dropped EVERYTHING if he could've. It's two men in pure pain. While there's plenty of great banter.. at the core of the film is a son who resents his father and a father whose too much of a proud arrogant ass to admit that he loves his son. IT's only when indy seemingly dies that Henry breaks down the walls a bit, truly mourning his son and realizing he (nearly) lost him because of his obession with the Grail. Indy came out here to save him despite everything. It feels like the real turning point in the character: While the jones men never stop bickering, it's in their blood, Henry dosen't come off as dismissive.

Indy similarly has his walls break down when Donovan shoots Henry , using him as a barganing chip to get the grail. Ford's acting, much like connerys in the tank scene, is truly hearbreaking, as he begs for his dad to pull through. Despite all the crap between them, all the bad history, all the obession.. these are a father and son that love each other and indy went through hell to make sure his dad lived on.

This all cumilates in the climax: when Elsa, and we'll get to her and walter shortly don't worry, tries to take the grail out, the temple collapses and she dies unable to let go of it.

Indy however reaches for it. It's a truly powerful scene, as Indy reaches for it, both to make Elsa's death mean something.. and to make his dad's LIFE mean something. This is his dad's life work and no matter how many times he choose it over his boy.. it's still important. But then… for the first time in his life.. Henry Jones.. chooses wisely… and begs his son to let it go. Henry also sums it up beautifully after they escape.

"Elsa never really believed in the Grail. She thought she'd found a prize." "And what did you find, Dad?" "Me? Illumination."

It took far too long… but Henry found what was really important was right in front of him. Sure the two bicker about indy's name on the way out, but it's in a far less bitter way, a more relaxed way with Henry just casually revealing Indy's name is actually Henry Jones JR the two's bond is restored and while Crystal Skull confirms Henry passed sometime between this film and 1957, the two at least had whatever time henry had left together. And that truly is the greatest treasure of all.

Piggybacking on Hitler

Something intresting about The Last Crusade is how it handles it's Nazi's. Their threat is still assured and we get an extra chilling scene in their home turf, watching them burn countless books. indy even gets the worlds worst autograph from hitler. But unlike Raiders where they were the main driving force and Belloq, while certainly one of the big bads, was working with them, both villians in Last Crusade are simply playing them. Neither actually care about the nazi cause or even want to work with them, but their willing to if it advances their goals. It's an interesting way to use the third reich, a sentence i'm GLAD I don't have to type all that often: their basically mooks with no named officers this go round, though speilberg again takes steps to assure us that no, these guys are still the worst evil the world has ever known with the book burning.

It's also the smart option: while Toht wasn't the standout villian of the two from raiders, he'd already filled the position of cold nightmarish nazi badguy, and while not a nazi mola ram had also given us a rather cold, intimidating monster to fight last time. It made sense to pivot to two more fleshed out villians ala beloq instead and have the nazi's still be a huge threat, but simply more for what they are and what hitler could do with the grail than being the main focus.

My faviorite of our two is easily Julian Glover as walter donovan. Donovan enters the film as a seemingly harmless philantrohpist: Indy has heard of him as a big name donating to countless museum and trusts him with no question. It's only later when their at the castle does the mask come off: Donovan is really a man who will gladly work with whoever or whatever it takes to get what he wants. He's a smug rich bastard, while still being somewhat charming. The nazis are a means to the end: if they get the grail, who cares? As long as he can use it first what does it matter. Donovan reminds me a lot of belloq, both being smug rich bastards, but contrasts him well enough to not be a boring retread: Belloq really just stole whatever he was hired to, while still having a passion for the thrill of the chase adn the game with indy. In contrast while Doonvan is just as cordial to Indy, this isn't a game to him: the grail is his key to never growing old and he will have it. If he has to work with Nazi's so be it. He lacks Belloqs talent, but has a drive rene never struck me with: Rene went after things because of the challenge. Doonvan is OBESSED with the grail as much as henry is and it does him in. I also gotta admit his shooting henry was a brilliant if utterly horrifying gambit.

The other side of the coin is Elsa. Elsa is interesting because like Belloq and Doonvan she sold out, like henry she's obsessed.. but like none of them she regrets it. The book burning horrifies her, she genuinely loves both jones men. So then why does she sink to these lows? Simple… that obsession I mentioned. Like Henry she badly wants it, but unlike henry it's for the glory and not simply to keep the thing safe from those who would use it. You can say a lot bad about Henry, I certainly have.. but he's not wrong that the grail CANNOT go to the nazis and that while they certainly weren't around the whole time he was looking for it it's not like humanity's ever lacked for dickheads with a power complex, he still fully registers how much of a world ender i'td be for the nazi's to get the grail. Elsa.. dosen't care as long as she gets her prize, just like doonvan.. and like that it does him in. While she tricked him with a false grail, her refusal to see she can't have the grail dooms her. She's easily what Herny could'v ebeen had this journey not changed him and serves as a nice parallel: Henry realized over the quest what he'd done wrong, while Elsa just can't ever seem to understand what she's done to people or that saying sorry or feeling bad isn't enough to repair the damage. She feels bad.. but not enough to leave the quest or help our heroes. In the end she's left with nothing not even her life while Henry had the rest of his ahead with his son by his side.

Odds and Ends

There's a bunch more to talk about,but since I either couldn't or forgot to fit it in above, here's the various other bits about the movie that stuck out to me.

First is the other characters: Marcus Brody is a great addition, not only revealing he' san old friend of Henrys but that he's just as inepet abroad, if not more so. The cutaway to him hoplelessly lost after Indy hypes him up, as well as Indy having to somehow explain to Marcus oldest friend that he was bluffing, is fucking gold. We also get a great bit where Sallah tries to rescue him but it takes a few minutes

Sallah is back and.. he sure is there. John Rhys Davies is as good as ever, and while a person of middle eastern descent should be playing him and i'm honestly suprised with that he's comign back, he still does a fine enough job. He's just not that vital to this one: he feels like he was brought back because he was popular in the first one and while they thankfully avoided shoving himin more scenes than necessary, he feels weirdly out of place.

The Grail Knight is fucking awesome. Robert Eddison does a fantastic job, and heartwarmingly enough.. the guy was actually really nervous about it often asking if he did okay despite being a vetran stage actor. "He choose.. .. poorly" is a meme for a reason. The set pieces as usual are great: I will say of the films so far this has the weakest.. but ti's really ionly in comparison: the fun castle fire, tank battle, the traintop opening and the cool as hell temple sequence in the climax are all bangers, and what isn't is still pretty solid. Overall.. Last Crusade is truly excellent and out of the films thus far is easily my faviorite: having Raiders breezy pace, some great action and humor and thankfully sallah is the only questionable bit in the film. It's a well done action film with a hell of a character arc , taking what Raiders did right and making it even better.

Next time we dive into the penultimate film in this retrospective.... and easily the most hated> It's time to nuke some fridges, meet some actual cannibals shiah le bouf and get some shiny skulls, it's Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull!

[bohemian-nights]

I was listening to Hozier’s Take me to church and it automatically made me think of Nettles x Daemon.

"We were born sick", you heard them say it.” Daemon is called the Rouge Prince and not for good reason. He has always been a problem. Nettles is a Bastard and we know how those are treated and viewed within Westeros.

"The only Heaven I'll be sent to is when I'm alone with you." Just screams how Nettles is Daemons light. But it could also be a reference to how Nettles feels safe with Daemon.

"If I'm a pagan of the good times my lover's the sunlight. To keep the Goddess on my side." Once again Nettles is Daemons light.

"No masters or kings when the ritual begins. There is no sweeter innocence than our gentle sin" Just sums up their relationship in a way.

"I'll tell you my sins and you can sharpen your knife. Offer me that deathless death." This is more so a reference to Daemon and Aemond and how not only do parallel one another their relationships at this also point in their lives also parallel each other. And that last line Offer me that deathless death could be about how Daemon actually survives and lives out the rest of his life with Nettles.

"Take me church." For a lot of people church or just religion in general is a sanctuary, of safety and salvation. Which once again to me is Nettles and Daemons relationship.

Maybe I’m reading too much into it 🤷🏽‍♀️ this thought just came to me and I wanted to share it.

No I see the parallels and I love it♥️ It actually isn’t my favorite Hozier song(it’s still a great song though), but this one probably fits their relationship the best🙌🏽

[ramrodd]

Why the Doctrine of Inerrancy Contradicts the Gospels

COMMENTARY: 

The Gospel of Mark is a war story based on the valor of Jesus, as a warrior king. And His consort, Yaweh, Queen of Battle, Jesus validates the communion of saints of those who have been able to tell the story of being in battle shoulder to shoulder with teem, in a Huey and headed into a very small place with lots of fire flies in the tree line, Whatever spiritual experience someone with PTSD has in the centurion sense of the word is validated by Jesus, The only reason the Romans paid any attention to this singular death is the fact that Jesus was authentically divine. The centurion in Mark 15:39 says it all "Verily, this was the Son of God!" which is the explication for the actual Pucker Factor experience of "Oops!:  This man's testimony became the essential connection between Death Warrant 666 and the Talking Cross at the tomb at the time of Resurrection, which is the instant the Shroud of Turin was created, The Apostle's Creed is a summary of the Gospel of Mark, In an absolute, Dan Brown kind of way, the Italian Regiment as personified by Cornelius in Acts 10, to be the new Wine Skin of the New Wine of Jesus as a divine endorsement of the separation o f chruch and state in the sociological feature of the Republic subordinate to the seculr rule of law as the Roman administrative state in the larger commonwealth of the Empire. Cornelius was the Roman equivalent of the Command Sergeant Major of Caesarea and the currator of the intelligence archives of the entire command,, especially the 10th Legion, which is the founding military organization of Pagan Christianity, That's what the Talking Cross is all about. In the Liberation Gospel of the community of saints with George Washington at Valley Forge is based on the veritas that every day as a soldier is another day in Paradise. That's what the direct explication of the Apostle's Creed outside the boundaries of the 2nd Amendment, This is whey Jimi Hendrix's cover of the Star Spangled Banner at Woodstock is germane to the narrative.   Let me put it to you this way: in the numerology of the Bible as it traces the operation of the Holy Spirit in the intelligent design of the narrative in  relationship with a person acting as a scribe to his or her muse, writing it all down, John 15:13 sums up the defining protocol for the Medal of Honor and the meaning of the Apostle's Creed: Greater Love have no man but that he give up his life for his friends. Like, throwing himself on a grenade and enough of his comrades survive to combine their war stories into the citation that comes with the MOH, Your Jesus never gets out of Sunday School and Campus Crusade for Christ Christina Nationalism  evangelizing, It's the Salvation Gospel of Cosmic Navel Gazing and waiting for Jesus to beam them up.  

[a-god-in-ruins-rises]

I see some people on twitter talking about pagan sacral kingship. They say that ancient pagans were ruled by sacral monarchs that aren't different from later absolute monarchs. What are your thoughts?

yeah i would have to see their arguments because i don't believe that.

while i agree that ancient kings might have had sacral elements it was a far cry from what later divine right absolutists embodied. you have to keep in mind that everything was sacred for the ancients. but offering the office of "king" some sacred reverence is different from believe kings are literally the will of god on earth whose authority is absolute, who is above the law (because he /is/ the law), who cannot be deposed, etc.

the ancient "sacral kings" had to share authority with official institutions (like assemblies) and unofficial social relationships and the consent of the people was a critical component built into the institution of kingship itself.

the evidence i've seen these monarchists point to is two things:

one, the genealogical lists. these lists that outline a king's lineage. they take this as evidence that bloodlines were important to these ancient kings. but the thing is, most of these lists come from the christian period. in fact, i think every single such list comes from the christian period. and these monarchists will point out the fact that these list feature pagan gods -- like woden -- as evidence that they believed descent, especially from a god, was important. but this is actually evidence of euhemerism.

why would christians list woden, a god, as the ancestors of men? because they didn't view him as a god. they viewed him as a man. including him in the list was a way to include the pagan myths in a way that was in accord with christian ideology. so the inclusion of woden had nothing to do with "divine descent". and later geneologies had even more heroes and legendary kings in their bloodlines, even from disparate people, leading all the way back to adam. so i think it's pretty reasonable to assume that this practice of and preoccupation with establishing legitimacy through bloodline was a pretty christian concept.

the other thing i often see these people point to as evidence is, funnily enough, a line from tacitus that i actually think further reinforces /my/ point. tacitus said of the germanic people, "They choose their kings by birth, their generals for merit." and monarchists read that from the wikipedia page and they go "aha! see? they choose kings by birth!"

well, first of all, "choose" sort of implies some kind of selection process. it's not really indicative of some clear inheritance. but second of all, that's not even what the original latin says. the original latin says, "Reges ex nobilitate, duces ex virtute sumunt." i want to focus on the word nobilitate. that's what the above translates into "birth". but nobility, for the romans, did not have any inherent connection to birth. it just meant famous/excellent. so tacitus would be saying not that they were chosen by birth but that they were chosen among the elites which, as far as we know, is based on personal merit and charisma.

is it possible that "nobility" was concentrated among certain families or that certain men? absolutely. likewise, it's not unreasonable to assume that a king's son or brother might be among the people's first choice to replace the king upon his death. this isn't because there is necessarily any importance on being related itself, but simply because being connected to someone who is famous and wealthy and powerful will give you advantage in becoming those things yourself.

america is a republic but it also has famous political families. so did rome. this isn't because bloodline is/was a requirement for political office.

also, the following line from tacitus after the above reads, "These kings have not unlimited or arbitrary power, and the generals do more by example than by authority." Which just flatly rejects any idea that these kings had any sense of absolutist authority. additionally, i think it was gregory of tours who wrote that the goths have a habit of overthrowing their kings and replacing them with someone more suitable. again, not really indicative of a strong, absolutist tradition.

the "divine right" theory and feudalism in general were the results of a grotesque interplay of christian, roman, and germanic cultures. the germanic culture itself and their institutions transformed /rapidly/ upon contact with christian rome. this, combined with the unique circumstances of destabilized civil authority, resulted in some weird chimeric shit. which i think is where we get these ideas.

but i'm just saying, if these ancient kings qualify as absolutist monarchies because they had some vague sense of sacral kingship and famous families then i guess america is an absolutist monarchy too. lmao. i mean, even america derives much of its legitimacy from the divine, going back to the declaration of independence and just the general conversations regarding natural law and popular sovereignty at the time. both had /definite/ divine overtones. and there have even been arguments regarding a "sacral presidency" with the president's role as the nation's unifying moral/religious figure.

[ao3feed-stevebucky]

Past the Point of No Return

read it on the AO3 at https://ift.tt/hX7bF14

by moonythejedi394

Steve is a prince with a uterus, but due to rampant misogyny in his father's kingdom, this reduces his rights until he is property. As property, the King of Brooklyn had the right to offer the treasure that was his only child, an insolent boy in the King's mind, to the invading conqueror Barnes as a plea for mercy. Barnes's military outnumbered Joseph's 10-1. Steve was 17, a few months from 18, and even Barnes admitted Joseph was slime for using his child as tribute.

That did not stop Barnes from actually taking Steve. Barnes, as he later admitted, was not a good man, either.

Words: 3469, Chapters: 1/12, Language: English

Fandoms: Marvel Cinematic Universe, The Avengers (Marvel Movies), Captain America - All Media Types

Rating: Explicit

Warnings: Creator Chose Not To Use Archive Warnings

Categories: M/M

Characters: Steve Rogers, James "Bucky" Barnes, Sarah Rogers (Marvel), Joseph Rogers, Alexander Pierce, Natasha Romanov (Marvel), Sam Wilson (Marvel), Clint Barton, Thor (Marvel), Wanda Maximoff, Other Character Tags to Be Added

Relationships: James "Bucky" Barnes/Steve Rogers, Minor or Background Relationship(s), Clint Barton/Natasha Romanov, Joseph Rogers/Sarah Rogers

Additional Tags: Alpha/Beta/Omega Dynamics, Mildly Dubious Consent, Age Difference, Older Man/Younger Man, Top Bucky Barnes, Bottom Steve Rogers, Sub Steve Rogers, Omega Steve Rogers, Alpha Bucky Barnes, Dom Bucky Barnes, Arranged Marriage, Culture Shock, Paganism, Christianity, Porn With Plot, Execution, Ritual Public Sex, Premarital Sex, Shy Steve Rogers, Blushing Steve Rogers, Loss of Virginity, Consensual Underage Sex, Unrealistic Sex, Alternate Universe - Fantasy, Non-Serum Steve Rogers/Winter Soldier Bucky Barnes | Shrinkyclinks, Pre-Serum Steve Rogers, Beefy Bucky Barnes, Possessive Bucky Barnes, Exhibitionism, Sugar Daddy, But medieval, Daddy Kink, Daddy Issues, Mommy Issues, Breeding, Knotting, Mating Cycles/In Heat, Rutting, Other Additional Tags to Be Added

read it on the AO3 at https://ift.tt/hX7bF14