#i love him also being a derogatory phrase to be perfectly clear

[end-of--the-line]

STRUGGLING TO BUILD THE PC BUT I FINALLY GOT MW2 AND NOW EMILE IS HOUNDING ME TO PLAY WITH HIM. SO ALTOGETHER I THINK I WIN. christmas

[ineffabildaddy]

i see what you're saying here. maybe my tone wasn't clear enough, but that last point i made was intended to be lighthearted. that aside, i understand where you're coming from. i think my frustration partially comes from the fact that so many people dislike aziraphale not because they have thoroughly assessed his actions and character, but because they are unable to suppress their unconscious bias against some of his characteristics (this has to do with his level of attractiveness as understood by fans, among other things; no one owes it to a fictional character to find them attractive, but it's quite hurtful as someone who might look similar to aziraphale to see the derogatory way people often talk about his looks, for example). i have spoken about this in different posts/reblogs before.

crowley is basically perfect fandom fodder: they're a tall, thin, black-wearing, tortured, wise-cracking, sauntering bad girl who's really a good girl. crowley's easier to understand and sympathise with among tumblr users partly because they all think he's hot and cool and funny, and similar to other 'tortured souls' they've grown to love. aziraphale is more complex, and therefore sometimes more difficult to understand, but that doesn't automatically warrant a lack of effort on a fan's part, i think. i find myself being very protective of him and wanting to defend him a lot because of this (and also because he's babygirl let's be real).

to address your point about death of the author etc., i'd suggest looking through the reblogs and replies (you might want to read some of @createserenity's meta posts, too) - the whole point of crowley and aziraphale's relationship is that it is surprisingly human. you are free to dislike aziraphale (and i'm not mentioning crowley here because i have not one seen a fan who truly dislikes him), and it's great that we are a diverse audience and we all have different interpretations of this work... but like many people have pointed out before, you are missing the point somewhat if you truly see aziraphale as some sort of villain. it absolutely doesn't hurt anyone irl, but i don't think i phrased the original post in a way that is harsh or overdramatic.

while i'm perfectly capable of forming my own opinions, i like to at least be aware of what the author intends before i form them. i have a lot of respect for neil and terry, and i don't think either are above criticism - no one is - but i look up to them as creators and i actively seek to understand what they are and were all about. i happen to like what good omens is trying to say to the world, and i'm an advocate for it, so this is why i've said what i said.

i hope you can understand - i'm not genuinely implying that it is materially hurtful 'irl' to dislike either or both of these characters. i agree that consuming media you connect with is a great outlet, as opposed to letting negativity build up. we're all doing that in this fandom, and like i established in the previous post, i acknowledge that it is important to recognise and think about the more negative actions and characteristics of aziraphale and crowley. i just think we should all have a bit of fun with it and take it all in stride and not actually take it all so seriously that we genuinely feel unhealthily vitriolic towards a fictional character. i hope we can agree that that's the bottom line here<3

i'd just like to remind everyone that while it's completely natural to have a favourite between crowley and aziraphale, neil and terry certainly put equal quantities of love into creating both of them, and intended for them both to be liked by us as the audience. we should recognise their character flaws and their mistakes, but it's not ideal to end up disliking one of them so much that the other appears perfect in comparison, because:

a) of the many intended take-aways from their story, coming to the conclusion that aziraphale is undeserving of crowley or vice versa is not one of them. the two people who thought up and wrote those characters with love and care and delight and laughter and a tinge of heartbreak would hope that this was not your overriding belief

and

b) crowley doesn't like anyone who dislikes aziraphale, and aziraphale certainly isn't fond of anyone who dislikes crowley. so if you want to be in their good books, too, bear that in mind

[cto10121]

“It Was Just Puppy Love!1!!”: Or, On the Relative Innocence of R&J’s Love

“Puppy love” is a common descriptor for people writing about Romeo and Juliet’s love, typically when they want to downplay their relationship, but don’t want to sound too derogatory. But lit crits of the play have rather known otherwise, and even the most casual reading would challenge that view. Because if by “puppy love” people mean that R&J are just wittle innocent bbs!!1!1! who are just discovering what love and kissing and sex is…um. Nah?

It’s subtle (and some of it not subtle at all) and maybe even unconscious or accidental on the part of Shakespeare, but R&J, realistically or not, do seem to have some implied romantic experience and/or knowledge. Let’s review.

Romeo

This one is fairly easy. Apart from the pre-play crush on Rosaline, portrayed as lusty from the get-go (she would not “ope her lap / To [his] saint-seducing gold” *plays smallest violin*), Romeo consistently doesn’t think much of virginity or chastity. “Arise fair sun,” he says in his monologue, an apostrophe to Juliet, “and kill the envious moon.” The moon is traditionally associated with chastity, the virgin goddess Diana. In this word play Juliet is her “maid,” and “fair more fair than she.” According to Romeo, Juliet needs to leave her service, i.e. quit being a virgin. He is not the only one; Juliet also likens the moon as fickle as inconstant, changing every month.

Granted, Romeo’s playboy-ness can be and is overplayed, and culture has long had his name synonymous with the likes of Casanova and Don Juan. But honestly it’s more canon-agreeable than the portrayals of Romeo that make him a clumsy lug, an immature wimp, or a drip, which is much more contra-text. I prefer it anyway.

Juliet

This is where things get more interesting, if vexed.

We are first introduced to a quiet and obedient Juliet with her mother and the nurse talking about her age (14 in a fortnight) and telling embarrassing tales about her childhood. When asked what she thinks about marrying and of Paris in particular, she gives diplomatic answers worthy of a politician’s wife while making it clear that marriage is not her desire or concern at the moment and that she is only doing this to please her mother. She is definitely no rebel; we see overall, a pretty sheltered girl.

At the ball, however, she meets Romeo, and we learn that she can play Romeo’s artful flirtation game just as well as he can. At the end of their shared sonnet, Romeo kisses her twice. “You kiss by th’book,” Juliet tells him. The phrase “by th’book” is a little obscure, but generally critics have taken it to mean Romeo is a good (experienced?), right, or “correct” kisser.

But how does Juliet know Romeo is a good kisser? How can she tell?

Occam’s Razor has it that Juliet says this because she just likes Romeo and has fallen hard for him, and this isn’t a true reflection of any expertise or prior experience on her part. *shrug* I go by this reading for the most part, but it really just depends on how you read the line (I remember that Globe theater actress—who actually looked 14, so yeah, awkward—deliver it very knowingly). There is still the possibility, though, Romeo may not even be her first flirtation or kiss, although he is almost certainly her first love.

There is more. After the party ends and the guests leave, Juliet subtly gets the Nurse to tell her the names of the other guests and sneakily slips in Romeo. “What’s he that follows there,” she asks coyly, “that would not dance?”

But how did Juliet know Romeo did not dance?

If we take this implication seriously, it means that Juliet actually did notice Romeo too or even first—maybe even pegged him as the Hot Guy Who Won’t Dance (modern AU!!!). Which means that Redha’s “Le Bal 1��� choreography in RetJ with Juliette seeing Romeo first is perfectly canonical (as if that musical can’t get any more awesome).

In any case, post-ball Juliet very quickly reveals her good knowledge of sex in the ways she deals with Romeo’s courtship. She asks him not to swear by anything, because men break their vows very easily and change in their love, so she knows not to trust them. If Romeo is serious about his love, he has to marry her first. In her soliloquy she looks forward to her wedding night when she would “die” (orgasm) in his arms. And even amid the horrific notion of marrying Paris, she fears the possibility of her heart, “with treacherous revolt” would turn to another, and plans to kill herself if that ever happens.

It’s a lot for a 16th century thirteen-year-old. But I suppose this is what happens when you’ve been raised by the Nurse, who has zero filter. Also your conservative Catholic parents who try to shelter you from boys and the sex stuff but you still know them anyway precisely because you are a good Catholic girl(tm) raised by conservative Catholic parents. Tale as old as time.

Also, also—Shakespeare really didn’t give a fuck about Juliet’s age past that first scene, didn’t he? He has her excitedly expecting orgasms on her wedding night. On the other hand, as someone who was once a 13-year-old girl herself…eh, legit. Shakespeare knew somehow, as always.

In Sum

While there is always the danger in characterizing R&J simply as horny fiends cockblocked hard by feud nonsense, characterizing R&J’s love connection as a result of inexperience and romantic immaturity is also not quite right. For one thing, some of canon doesn’t support that, and at least one big aspect really doesn’t (Shakespeare going above and beyond to sink Romeo/Rosaline vs. R&J). It just shows people’s discomfort with adolescent eroticism and sexuality that they must minimize it or pigeonhole it somehow.

[empaths-hsp]

Sensitive Men Are the Antidote to Toxic Masculinity

Toxic masculinity is both self-destructive and socially destructive.

“Toughen up bro.”

“Come on, be a man about it.”

“Show them you’re the man!”

Society has long taught us that manhood is acquired through dominance, strength, self-reliance, and the bottling up of emotions. But this has led to the dangerous epidemic of “toxic masculinity.” 

Now, I’m not a guy. But I’ve seen it happen. And quite frankly, it needs to stop. Toxic masculinity is harmful to everyone — both men and women.

While sensitivity is still a trait largely associated with girls and women, it should be something we encourage of boys and men. Highly sensitive men are the antidote to toxic masculinity. They are a guiding light that proves men can — and should — be thoughtful, considerate, and empathetic members of society. Men who understand and embrace their emotions know that feelings do not make them weak, but strong and healthy. 

How Traditional Masculinity Becomes Toxic Masculinity 

The American Psychological Association recently released guidelines — for the first time, I might add — for professionals who work with boys and men. The notion of traditional masculinity, the APA argued, has become a serious problem that requires unique intervention so boys can develop into healthier men.  

Traditional masculinity is essentially a social construct. It’s a way of idealizing what it means to be a man, and requiring all men to live up to that restrictive, impossible image: emotionless, strong, hard-working. 

Toxic masculinity emerges when that idea of traditional masculinity goes too far. It’s a way of thinking that if a guy doesn’t act in a certain way, they aren’t men. When that happens, the already constricting nature of traditional masculinity becomes something far more dangerous — both to men and the people in their lives.  

I want you to think of Gaston from Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast.” Remember him? Competitive, bulging muscles, misogynistic, violent and, definitely someone who won’t take “no” for an answer. Gaston is the epitome of toxic masculinity.

Some typical traits associated with toxic masculinity are: 

Shows no emotion apart from anger 

Deals with problems using violence and/or aggression

Competitive and always has to win

Can’t show any weakness and doesn’t depend on anyone

Avoids doing anything considered ‘feminine’

Sometimes, may even make inappropriate sexual or derogatory comments toward women

Truth be told, toxic masculinity is both self-destructive and socially destructive, but society keeps encouraging those same destructive behaviors from men.

Ways Society Encourages Toxic Masculinity

It’s damaging to assume there is only one way of being a man — that only leads to having an unhealthy relationship with oneself and with others. Yet, as boys become men, they tend to hear: 

1. ‘’Real men don’t cry.”

Boys are often told this phrase from a young age, often by their fathers or other male members of the family. The end result? Emotional repression. This frequently leads to outbursts, whether as violence directed at others or self-harm. And that’s not to mention the damaging effects on mental health — 1 in 8 men have mental health issues, but many hesitate to reach out for help.

2. “Suck it up.”

Not being able to express one’s emotions creates an internal pressure cooker, and can result in problems like anxiety, depression, and elevated suicide rates. In fact, men are 3.5 times more likely to die by suicide than women. 

3. “Stop being a wimp.” 

Men experience a real fear of appearing soft and tender. These qualities are usually associated with being weak and not manly. And for a long time — even still to this day in some places — “not manly” was often associated with being gay. 

While views about the LGBTQ community have rightly changed for the good, homophobic comments grounded in the idea of being sensitive make it harder for some men to express their identity, and so they end up feeling uncomfortable with who they truly are.

4. “Boys will be boys.” 

Well, what a great excuse for this crappy type of behavior. The “lad culture” that encourages toxic masculinity tends to devalue women’s bodies and opinions. It creates unbalanced relationships and unhealthy approaches to sex. As a result, domestic abuse rates are at an all-time high. 

Let’s be clear, it’s not just women who are victims of domestic abuse, men are too. But according to the charity Women’s Aid, “women experience higher rates of repeated victimization and are much more likely to be seriously hurt or killed” than males. The idea that problems should be dealt with using violence poses risks to women in relationships with toxic men.

Why Sensitivity is the Antidote We Need

It’s time to redefine masculinity. Sensitivity in men is very rarely encouraged, but it’s time that changed. As a man, you should be able to feel vulnerable and sensitive without feeling weak and inferior. You should be able to enjoy activities like baking and cooking without worrying that they are too girly. 

And that’s where sensitive men come in. 

20 percent of the male population are highly sensitive. And most other men are capable of a deep sensitivity, if they allow themselves to bring it out. Men who embrace their sensitive sides have healthier relationships with others and themselves. They take the time to listen and cultivate deeper friendships. They talk more freely about their emotions and experiences. 

That is pretty damn brave if you ask me.

Here are a few ways sensitive men can help teach the world that “sensitive” means “strong.”

Like what you’re reading? Get our newsletter just for HSPs. One email, every Friday. Subscribe here.

4 Ways Men Can Embrace Their Sensitive Side

1. Release and express emotions.

Real. Men. Have. Feelings. There, I said it. Men feel pain, anxiety, joy, and fear just like any other human being. You shouldn’t have to bottle up your emotions when you are feeling crappy. You can cry. You can talk. You can go to therapy. If you need help, ask. You don’t have to do it all on your own.

Don’t suffer in silence. You’re doing yourself (and others) more harm than good. There are much healthier ways of expressing your feelings than violent outbursts. 

2. Own your interests, even if they’re “non-traditional.”

Not every guy is into football, cars, and weight lifting. (And if you are, then that’s perfectly fine.) Some men also enjoy cooking, dancing, singing, and baking. These activities are often associated with femininity, but they shouldn’t be.

Forget about what you should like to do as a man, and own what you enjoy. Not doing what you love just because you are afraid it’s considered too girly means you risk losing part of your identity in the process.

3. Foster healthy relationships.

Treating others with respect is just basic manners, and this goes double for romantic relationships. It’s important to cultivate a healthy approach to sex. The idea that all men want sex and should be ready for it 24/7 is absurd. 

You can say no when you want to. It won’t make you any less of a man. And being sexually aggressive (without the other person’s consent) is not justifiable. Women and men aren’t sex objects and you shouldn’t be treating them as so. Learn to treat them as equals. (P.S: Laughing at rape jokes is also really not cool or funny.)

4. Forget about a perfect physique.

Men feel the pressure to have that perfect muscular body, thinking that it makes them manlier. Arnold Schwarzenegger in his heyday comes to mind: “I must be the strongest, fittest, most competitive…” 

More times than not, the superhero in a movie is usually broad and muscular. Images like that and others we see on a daily basis help fuel unrealistic physical ideals and body image problems. Being thinner or heavier should not make you less of a man. Can we all just embrace our differences, please and thank you?

The world has started clueing into the problem of toxic masculinity, and I hope that sensitivity can provide a way forward. You don’t have to conform to society’s ideas of being a man. Be you. There is no ‘’right’’ way to be a man. Sensitive isn’t weak — it’s strong and daring and bold. It’s manly as hell. 

You might like:

5 Truths I Struggled to Learn as a Highly Sensitive Man

The World Needs Sensitive Men More Than Ever

7 Keys to a Happy, Thriving Marriage with a Highly Sensitive Person

The post Sensitive Men Are the Antidote to Toxic Masculinity appeared first on Highly Sensitive Refuge.

from Highly Sensitive Refuge https://ift.tt/2ZH8aDh

[swannsjack]

I still can't wrap my head around the fact that of all people in Hollywood, people decided to hate Johnny Depp. That man had gone his entire career with good reputation. Everyone that'd ever known him said the nicest things about him.

but then one day this person comes up with some seriously suspicious allegations with suspicious circumstances (arrested for dv herself, only asking for a divorce at first, sending a damn extortion letter, and making allegations just days after his mother's death, avoiding deposition three times! to name just few from the very long list) and all goes to hell. His entire previous life is forgotten. like it didn't exist. all that exists are unproven allegations.

“Johnny is one of the nicest people that I know—to the extent where it’s almost heartbreaking how kind he is"

Y'all really think he just woke up one day as he was nearing his 50s and became an abuser? everytime an abuser is revealed, it doesn't come as surprise. even if she were to be his first physical "victim" it would still not be a shocker. there are always signs. always something that makes you look back and see things in a new light, maybe not casual acquaintances, but definitely people that had spent with them more time. yet, Depp's exes spoke up in his defense. people who know him personally, even staff at events, they all have said that's just not him. but especially his exes are the most important. he would absolutely have a history of questionable behavior. but he doesn’t. oh sorry, I forgot he chased away paparazzi after politely asking them to leave his family alone and they didn’t. what a jerk, protecting his family from vultures, ugh. and don’t tell me “can’t know what happens behind closed doors” Vanessa Paradis lived with him for over a decade and she sent a handwritten note defending him. and no, she did not do it for the kids. where is the logic in that? if their father was abusive, don’t you think she would make sure her kids are safe from him, protect them from him, instead of defending him?! 

yet they all said he's gentle, kind, caring. I saw two of his less famous ex girlfriends tweet about him last year, not about the allegations, just posting or commenting some pictures of them together. there have been people speaking up, saying he was the victim (people now question why he hadn't come out early with his allegations against her, but you fail to realize that he would have, he didn't sell his stuff to tabloids for all of you to see (I know, the audacity!) unlike her, but he was ready to do it properly through the court of law, but the case was dropped with prejudice (!), a NDA signed and he was never given the chance to clear his name, he even says in the new lawsuit that he was going to challenge the RO before they reached an agreement (+ his evidence list does have a photo of himself from december 2015 and while we do not what the photo is about, there’s a pretty compelling argument to be made that she injuried him that month - watch this video at about 14th minute) but there have been people saying it. saying she lied and there were no bruises, including TWO POLICE OFFICERS, at least one of them being a woman (so that's two female officers of the law speaking out against Heard - first being the one that arrested her for assaulting her then girlfriend/wife) yes, there are new witnesses saying the same but a lawyer that lived in the building said Heard was seen without make up and no bruises even back in 2016! that's not news, the same person also tweeted something about helping the real victim...

Johnny's friends all had agreed she treated him badly but they were too afraid to tell him that, said they watched her:

"f*ck with him at his weakest, or at his weakest from being f*cked with"

how do things like that not make people take a step back and consider that maybe, it's not the hundreds of people defending him that are trash? that he didn't pay all of them to lie (and how interesting to now have witnesses saying Heard asked them to “help” her by lying for her, that she said she had contacts in PEOPLE magazine, how interesting that all the things people accused Depp of, were actually something Heard did). he is willingly going back to court. he has invited her to show up at the court if she wishes to, “we are looking forward to that [her] evidence” his lawyer said.

why can't you just consider that it's the one shady person that is the piece of sh*t. a person who's "witnesses" are two of her friends who lived in Depp's home rent free. witnesses whose stories kept changing or didn't match her own. Even Heard kept changing things. At some point it was said she made a decision not to file a police report. later she said her LAWYER advised her not to file it (??? im sorry what? what lawyer would give that advice if something truly had happend?) and so many other things. honestly, how does that not make you suspicious?

and then we have the video, the video people think is proof that he abused her, even saying "there's a video of him hitting her, throwing glass at her blah blah blah" when he does NO SUCH THING. go watch it, I dare you to show me where exactly does any of that happen. all that happens in the video is that he's upset, but he's trying to ignore her. she keeps making it about herself despite the fact that he tells her it's not about her. and he slams some cupboards shut and throws a glass into the sink or something. damn I'm glad no one has filmed me when I was being abusive, by slamming the door behind me or throwing something a little harder than necessary when upset. no one does that unless they abuse their loved ones. still, Depp's not one of the smartest guys, is he. he sees his "victim" filming him while he "abuses" her and doesn't think to delete the video. sad

believe women is all nice and good, but not at all cost, not when there’s all that evidence against her. and what about all the women defending him? the list is pretty long, including JK Rowling who you've been bullying despite the fact that it was implied that she knows things that weren't made public at the time (and there's absolutely no excuse whatsoever for the bullying Johnny's daughter received for defending her father, you wanna pretend you don't support abuse? don't f*cking bully children) what about the female officers, one that witnessed Amber Heard assaulting her then partner, and the other who saw no bruises, no redness, no swelling on her face, no property damage, no disturbance (which Heard claimed was there) whatsoever? 

who made the choice that, in all of this, Heard is the only woman to be believed?

not every case is the same. some people are truly guilty, but some are not. false allegations happen. and Depp was never found guilty, the restraining order request (a reminder that's all the case was about) was dropped WITH PREJUDICE. Another fun fact, the money she got was for the divorce, she got no compensation for the “abuse” as people like to say. they were married, when divorce happens, there is money involved, allegations or not, surely people know that. And guess what, being the abuser that he is *not, for some reason he did not have a prenup. funny isn’t it? one of the richest, most famous actors in the world, and he marries his “victim” without a prenup. 

And let's not forget that according to the new documents in the Sun lawsuit it says she admitted to causing him multiple serious injuries. Oh yes, sure, she was just defending herself from her "bigger, stronger husband" as she said, because that's a perfectly natural way to phrase it. sure doesn't sound like a rehearsed manipulative bullsh*t to force you to picture this big bad MAN and the helpless fragile woman.

oh my God there's so much more to say. so much not only disproving her lies, but also showing she abused him, but it’s been said before and my venting is pointless, but I'm just so sick of people hating on a victim.

everytime those ignorant haters call him derogatory terms, make fun of his looks, or his social anxiety - which causes him to speak slower and stammer (which he's had his entire life but even more so now, while evil people were making fun of him at the tCoG premiere for having a hard time getting his point cross, saying he was high or drunk, I WAS FREAKING PROUD OF HIM for even standing up there in front of all those people, after two years of getting unfair hate and backlash against his casting in said movie) - it makes me sick. 

Absolutely sick that this has been done to one of the most genuinely nice people in the hellhole that is Hollywood (”he doesn’t belong in show business, he belongs somewhere better” SJ. Parker). it feels like I'm in an alternative universe where it's all backwards.

I truly want to hope that things can turn around and people will hold the real perpetrator accountable for what she's done. But then I see the foolish hate, the lies (so many crazy, disgusting lies made about him by vile nobodies on the internet just to support the "bad guy" image when everything else fails and they have nothing but lies), the twisting of facts and truths, the misguided, ignorant support of Heard because she's a woman, and she had a pretty wig in Aquaman or whatever, and it feels hopeless again.

But he deserves better. Johnny Depp deserves better. And this may be too long and pointless, because who cares what I have to say, but I just had to vent, at least for my own good, because it’s been so frustrating. 

Johnny Depp was a victim. He deserved love and support. Instead he got hate and bullying. Will people apologize and admit their mistake? No. Most will not.

But Johnny Depp deserves better.

[bluephoenixdruidicprincess]

Shadowhunters, 3x13 Beati Bellicosi -- Review

Welcome to another Shadowhunters episode. I know this review is coming a little late. But what’s a girl to do? 3B has had such an underwhelming start that it’s an actual chore for me to talk about this show. Plus, I fear my reviews are getting quite repetitive. I honestly don’t know what to say about this show that hasn’t been said a million times before. This week we have Shadowhunters 3x13, Beati Bellicosi.

I would like to preface this review with saying that I am NOT a huge supporter of this show. I do enjoy certain elements of it but I’m not what would be classified as a devoted fan. For me, Shadowhunters is not a good show and I do get very critical of the show in my reviews. Honestly, for me, I watch the show because 1) I’m too curious not to and 2) I find that this show can be so bad its funny and that’s how I reap enjoyment out of it. I am not at all invested in this show or its characters anymore. I’m just watching to see what happens. If you’re a die hard fan and you lash out at everyone who has a different opinion than you, you might want to skip these…I’m just saying. My reviews may not be for you. If you do decide to be a total troll, well then pay attention to the below disclaimer.

This is going to be an honest review of my thoughts and feelings regarding this episode. If you’re the kind of Shadowhunters fan where you only want to hear positive things about the show, this is not the place for you. If you decide to stick around and get offended by what is said, then that’s on you. I warned you. Just know that if you send me any rude comments or messages, I will 100% ignore you. I find that’s the best way to deal with bullies. I work 14 hour days. Do you really think I want to waste my incredibly valuable free time dealing with derogatory comments? Hell no. This review will consist of my honest opinions. Opinions are never right or wrong. I’m not telling YOU how to think and feel. I’m telling you what I, quirky and socially awkward me, think and feel. So please, lets discuss with dignity and respect. If I’m critical about this show, it’s only because I want it to get better. There is, in fact, a difference between hating a show and being critical of it. I do not hate Shadowhunters, I am being critical and analyzing the flaws as I would with any other show. There are positives but there are also negatives. It’s great if you want to promote positivity with this show (and I encourage you to do so) but that doesn’t mean I’m not going to point out the things that are legitimately wrong with it. Also, keep in mind that despite the fact that I do like the books, me being critical of this show has nothing to do with my fondness for the books. I don’t really care if the show deviates from the source material as long as the changes are good, it makes sense, and it doesn’t create plot holes within the confines of the world the show has created. My problems with this show are problems I would have with any show or book for that matter. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to take issue with a show that has plot holes, shoddy world building, and inconsistent characters. There will be spoilers for the books and movie.

This episode was more of a filler kind of episode which really just left me asking, “why?” There’s already so much going on and this show only has 10 more episodes, they can’t afford these kinds of fillers. Things need to hurry up and start happening. Seriously, I don’t understand how this episode can have so much going on and yet nothing also happens at the same time. But by this point, I know full well how the Shadowhunters Writers Room works. The majority of the season is always filler, filled to the brim with inconsequential moments and the last two episodes of the season is when plot actually starts happening and it’s always unsatisfactory due to them not actually using the entire season to properly arc a plot and a character’s development.

The Mary Sue Comes Home

Mary Su- I mean, Clary is finally brought back home to the Institute in all of its anticlimactic glory. I still retain my stance from the previous review that it was completely pointless for Clary to start the series off with Jonathon if she was only going to be rescued in the very next episode. But anyway, everyone is super happy that Clary’s back except for Clary it seems. I mean, seriously, the energy Kat was giving off in these reunion scenes felt like she was giving an obligatory hug to these people who she supposedly loves as if they were family. These people thought she was dead, that they would never see her again. She thought she was going to die, she had no way of knowing if she would ever be able to escape Jonathon, she thought she might never see any of them ever again. How about once more with feeling, Kat?

Upon Izzy greeting Clary, she makes a comment on how she’s going to chop Jonathon to bits and pieces and again, I’m left asking myself, “What exactly has Jonathon done to require that level of rage?” He killed a couple of dudes she barely knew. Sure, he injured Max but Max made a complete recovery with no consequences. I can understand wanting to bring Jonathon in to receive justice, maybe even rough him up a little bit, but this whole “kill on sight” angle doesn’t really make a whole lot of sense. In the books it did, because Jonathon did things that legitimately left a mark on these people, their vendetta was deeply personal, but that doesn’t exist in the show. It’s like I keep on saying, if you’re going to deviate from the source material, that’s fine, I don’t have a problem with that. But you can’t deviate and then expect to continue with the book’s plot as if nothing happened. By making that change, the entire context for that particular plot has changed, the entire plot now has to change to account for that deviation. Izzy is then later filled in that chopping Jonathon into bits and pieces would result in also chopping Clary into some Mary Sue bits and pieces so she understandably backs off. Alec then mentions that he’s put out an alert to all the other institutes that Jonathon needs to be captured alive and again, I’m just wondering, what has Jonathon done that would evoke every shadowhunter’s ire in this show? In the books, it made sense because he was responsible for a demon attack in Alicante that killed dozens of shadowhunters (men, women, children, elderly) but no such thing happened in the show so again, “why?” Why would they care about enacting death upon this guy? I’m also very confused about why other Institutes would pay any attention to Alec’s proclamation. It’s been made abundantly clear that the Clave doesn’t trust Alec, in fact, they weren’t even the ones who put him in charge of the Institute. Jace gave the title to Alec so again, “Why?” Why would they put any credence on this kind of proclamation? Especially, since the Clave was all for executing Clary literally a week or so ago. But whatever.

Continuing on, everyone seems to be super chill about Clary being linked to a super villain and the only one who seems to be worried about it is Clary. But in the end, even she stops worrying about it. I suppose they’ve as well gotten used to the convenient writing so they feel this isn’t something to worry about, they have absolute faith that the writers are going to pull something out of their asses. It was weird that Clary is so ready to get rid of the mark, she exclaims constantly that she can feel Jonathon underneath her skin and then all of the sudden, just in time for the episode to end, she decided out of the blue she’s not going to worry about it. And we get the Clace sex scene. Which was just really yuck to me. First of all, they started it all with that iconic Jace line from the books which just does not work in the show’s context, it’s unearned and it felt extremely awkward and cheesy. Second of all, Kat and Dom have 0 romantic chemistry so I wasn’t feeling anything in the scene, there were more sparks in Dom and Alisha’s scene. And thirdly, Jonathon and Clary are linked and it’s being heavily implied that they can feel everything the other feels. So it’s really gross thinking that while Clace is having sex, Jonathon is on the other side of the bond feeling everything that Clary’s feeling. It’s like a really weird non-con threesome, it’s gross and I wish to scrub it from my mind. And I’m just going to put it out there that the “morning after” scene was incredibly awkward. Like, if you didn’t have enough evidence to show how little chemistry Kat and Dom have just look at that scene where Clary is draped on Dom’s chest. Neither of them looked comfortable in the slightest and it certainly didn’t look like they just had sex.

We did get a little bit of a lore drop in which we find out that arch-angels Michael and Lucifer supposedly had the same bond and it was somehow broken. And I’m really just wondering again, “why?” Why did they have that sort of link? It makes more sense that this mark was caused by demonic influence as opposed to angelic influence. But whatever. I feel like that phrase pretty much sums up Shadowhunters in a nutshell. “But whatever.”

Izzy’s Drug Addiction

Yup, the drug addiction plot is still happening. I’m all for Izzy getting some character development and even seeing scenes of her legitimately working through this addiction and not getting some miracle cure with no consequences like she did last time but again, “why?” We don’t have the kind of time for this plot. We have ten episodes left for the show to wrap everything up. Please, Writers, you NEED to trim some of this fat. But Izzy tells Magnus that she had a relapse (sure it was to save Simon but it’s still a relapse) and Magnus makes sure to tell Alec right away and she and Alec have a conversation about it while on a hunt. And the hunt leads to them finding out shadowhunters are being killed for some reason? The show’s starting to really Bourne it up and I don’t really understand why. Again, it’s just something where I’m like, “Is this really necessary?”

Do Luke and Maryse Even Have a Ship Name?

This is a legitimate question because whether you like it or not, they are a thing that’s happening. Laryse? Is that they’re ship name? I have no idea. Beyond these reviews, I don’t spend a whole lot of time in this fandom. I still wish Luke’s endgame could’ve been Jocelyn. Thematically, it works better. But whatever. Jocelyn’s dead so I suppose we have to make do with Maryse in order to give Luke that romantic endgame. I just wish we had a better foundation for it. I don’t entirely hate the idea of them, it’s the execution of them I dislike. They feel like such an afterthought and just something the writers feel obligated they have to do as Luke is technically a main character and he needs to end up with someone and hey, since Maryse is currently single, why not her? I don’t really like the idea that she’s only here to be Luke’s love interest but whatever. As an idea, I could’ve liked them if they were more of a slow burn but that’s clearly not happening here. But they’re investigating something and that leads them to having an extremely forced kiss in typical Shadowhunters fashion.

The Next Pack Leader…Maia…Maybe?

That depends greatly on whether she still has a pack left. This part of the story revolves around the new pack leader being kind of a douche or at least that’s what the show is trying to make it seem like. Me personally? I’m not entirely realizing why this guy is supposedly a douche. He’s trying to ensure his pack isn’t in a situation where they get caught alone by vampires and then killed. Seems like a pretty solid leadership decision to tell your pack to not be out during the night hours. Granted, he could be a little more understanding of Bat’s work situation but at the same time, like I said, it’s a good protection measure against the threat. I didn’t really see how he was this horrible leader who was only doing this to exert control over others. But whatever. Show, you do you.

When Maia complains to Luke about the situation and Luke tells her he has no plans on coming back to the pack as he was a terrible pack leader (you’ll get no arguments from me on that front) Luke then tells Maia that if she wants to help, she should become the next leader. Maia is scared of fighting the leader but Luke basically tells her to organize a coup within the ranks of the pack.

As Maia plans for this, she decides to break up with Simon as she doesn’t believe that she can be a true alpha leader and have a boyfriend at the same time. Feminism at its finest, I guess. Who ever heard of a woman having a career and a love life? I know, it’s absolutely unheard of. And I guess she’s also just going to throw away her plans of becoming a marine biologist, as well. The whole reasoning for the break-up was extremely weak and even moreso when Simon reveals that he’s in agreement with it as he feels like they’ve just been growing apart. And I’m just like, “in what way?” She was gone for at most, a week and before the Jordan crap, they were practically unseparable. But again, whatever.

Now while all of this is going down, Heidi is basically using Jordan and vampires and manipulating a war between them and the episode ends strangely with Jordan dying and Maia fleeing with Jordan and locking themselves up in a freezer, I guess. Brilliant plan, right? Locking yourself in a place you have no escape from. Apart from the vampires and werewolves being beyond dumb with this super obvious manipulation, I dislike that someone who’s character arc was all about becoming strong enough to take over the pack, runs away from fight leaving her family to be slaughtered. This was a huge disservice done to Maia. Her arc has always been about her feeling helpless and then becoming strong to take over the pack when she realizes she’s not helpless and she can fight. But character arcing? In Shadowhunters? Please.

As I said before, it’s truly amazing how this show can have so much and yet so little going on simultaneously. This episode was really bland and ultimately I just didn’t care what was going. And it routinely left me with asking the question, “why?” This episode gets a C+ for me. I’ll hope for a better episode next time. But I’m not too terribly hopeful as I have an ask in my askbox currently letting me know this upcoming episode was a disappointment.

[books-n-wine]

~**~ Review & Excerpt Tour for TRIPPED OUT (A Blacktop Cowboy Novella) by Lorelei James ~**~

Where there’s smoke…

Stirling Gradsky abandoned the corporate rat race for a more laidback lifestyle. So it’s ironic she’s partnered with a hard-bodied, know-it-all scientist who treats her like a stoner instead of a stone cold business woman capable of running a large scale marijuana farm. Dr. Hot and Tattooed with the big…brain needs to stop sampling their product; he’s under the half-baked idea that he’s the boss.

Dr. Liam Argent’s doctorate isn’t in chemistry, but from the moment he meets his sexy new coworker, there’s enough heat between them to short out all the grow lights in the greenhouse. First item on his agenda? Clearing up the sassy, blunt blonde’s hazy notion that she’s in charge.

Sparks fly as their attraction blazes. But can they weed out their differences without getting burned?

Release Date: September 12th, 2017

Goodreads | Amazon US * UK * CA * AU

Liam swept his thumb across her ankle bone, creating a tingle of awareness that zipped all the way up to the nape of her neck. “I hope you beat the f*ck out of Nick the Prick right there, in front of all your big bosses, so they saw firsthand what a loser pussy he was.”

“I hadn’t grown a pair of balls yet.” She paused to catch her breath. “You know…have you ever really thought about that phrase? How derogatory it is? Like women are inferior because we don’t have a hairy nut sac? Like that wrinkly, dangling thing between a man’s legs is a source of power? And we somehow need a pair of them to be strong?” Her indignation grew. “As of right now I’m banning that phrase. Women don’t need to grow balls to be tough. We grow human beings. Inside our bodies. So from this point on, when a dude pisses me off? I’m gonna tell him to woman up and grow a goddamn uterus. Balls are for pussies.”

Liam started laughing. His laughter was sexy. And contagious.

Stirling joined in and it was several moments before they regained control.

She was wiping her eyes when Liam said, “You kill me, bulldog. You have since that first day.”

“You have an odd way of showing it.” She cocked her head. “Bulldog? Is that a nickname?”

“Yes, because you are tenacious.”

“But…bulldogs are ugly, mean, and slobbery.”

He studied her until she became self-conscious.

“What?”

Then he blushed. “Once again I utterly fail at the nickname game. My last girlfriend always made a kissy face in selfies. So in my need to come up with a term of endearment for her, I called her duck lips.”

She gasped. “You did not.”

“I did. Just that one time. I never bothered to try out any others.” He shook his head. “Stoner segue. Back to you. Finish your story. What happened next after Nick the Prick made his declaration to your boss?”

“I did the typical girly thing and ran home to my mother.”

***4 ‘4-20’ Stars***

Let me start off my saying that when it comes to Lorelei James’ cowboy series I am a total fangirl, even if the main characters are not cowboys or cowgirls, as long as the story takes places in one of those worlds I will ALWAYS get excited and want to get my hands on the book and Tripped Out was no different. I wanted to know what was going on with Stirling and Liam after that little glimpse of them in Strung Up and I must say I was pleasantly surprised by how their relationship played out. It was a fun, smexy and quick read and I even enjoyed getting a look into the whole recreational/medicinal marijuana industry.

I really liked Stirling and Liam. Stirling was a force to be reckoned with. I enjoyed how her mind worked and how determined she could be when she put her mind to it. I loved learning about her past and how she came to be comfortable in her own skin. Liam was sweet, smexy and I loved when his geeky side came out to play. He didn’t have the easiest childhood or teenage years, and he still bears scars from it, but he still has a golden heart. As I’ve already said, their journey to their HEA was a pleasant surprise. The antagonism between them, and how they dealt with it, was all at once funny and juvenile, but showed beyond a shadow of a doubt how into each other they really were. I enjoyed how they finally got past it and learned what really made the other tick and found that they fit each other perfectly.

Tripped Out was a fun read, not that I had any doubt it would be, and I have to say that as much as I enjoyed Stirling and Liam, I really liked learning about the recreational & medical marijuana industry and what goes into running a dispensary. There is a nice little side twist thrown into the story and I can’t help but hope something more may come out of it? But, if not it definitely made me happy that it was included.

~ Copy provided by InkSlinger PR & voluntarily reviewed ~

Lorelei James is the New York Times and USA Today bestselling author of romances in the Rough Riders series, the Blacktop Cowboys® series, the Mastered series, the Need You series and the Legacy series.

Lorelei also writes dark, gritty mysteries under the name Lori Armstrong. Her books in the Julie Collins and Mercy Gunderson series have won Shamus Awards and the Willa Cather Literary Award. Lorelei lives in western South Dakota.

Website | Facebook | Goodreads | Twitter | Instagram