#not the real men and that i don't mean any disrespect to history etc etc

[johnslittlespoon]

WHILST I'M GOING A BIT RABID ON HERE TONIGHT. two friendly reminders/asks: if you are a minor please do not interact with my nsfw posts i beg <3

and two, please dear god if you ever reblog my nsfw posts or even super ship–heavy ones that 'regular' viewers of this show might be put off by, i ask kindly that you don't use the show's main tags so it doesn't reach people it should not

ship tags are totally fine! i just don't want like normal enjoyers of the gif sets and the storyline itself stumbling across my brainrots and being scarred or getting angry lmaoo i'm just a fruity man trying to vibe in this little brainrot corner we've created (◠‿◠✿)

[bookofmirth]

You express a lot of things you were afraid to say in this fandom.

I feel like it's all about what Az needs and not what Elain wants.

Always hearing that Azriel needs to be chosen because he was rejected, because he suffers for another woman, and so on.

But is Azriel the only one who has been rejected all his life there?

Before, it was that they liked that Elain was a virgin and chose Az who always felt rejected.

Elain never showed any real interest in meeting Az.

They don't rely on what the other wants, they're not friends and they barely know each other.

And I'm very much in favor of romance, more Author to convince me the Couple really needs to talk, and I'm talking about intimate conversations inside the pages, you need to have the girl showing that it's not just attraction.

All sexual attraction doesn't mean you're in love together. Attraction does not go along with Love in books or in real life.

Only if it's those cliche books that women get only one man, but Badboy gets all women. Understand what kind of books I speak.

And Cass in Acosf even claimed that Elain could talk to other men if she wanted to.

And actually they say the next one is the Book of Elain plus all the theories and questions revolve around Azriel and his love interest.

Apart from Acotar 5, the obvious thing is that the book is by Az because in the shipp and solo theories of the characters, everything revolves around Az and as always putting Elain and Az together.

It seems more like Az is the one who suffers the Forbidden Love, Az who will refuse Lucien etc...

And Elain is being fitted into a theory that always leads her to Az.

And folks, Az is not the only one who is rejected by his family, who suffered from an abusive family there.

And let's be honest, Az has traumas from the past, but today, he's part of a family chosen by the heart, and he's the spymaster and his brother is a High Lord who would die for him.

Placing him as the poor thing diminishes much of what Rhys, Mor, and Cass varies for Azriel to be happy, and puts them Sim, as an antagonist in Az's life.

Even Sarah won't be that inconsistent.

You express a lot of things you were afraid to say in this fandom.

Yeah I have zero fucks at this point. I can't be bothered making my point clear to people who refuse to take the time to understand, just because they know I ship elucien. Not when people in this fandom take one sentence out of context and make it into a human rights violation that they still can't get over a week later.

ANYWAY...

I feel like it's all about what Az needs and not what Elain wants.

Always hearing that Azriel needs to be chosen because he was rejected, because he suffers for another woman, and so on.

But is Azriel the only one who has been rejected all his life there?

LITERALLY.

We have no idea what Elain feels at this point, let alone what she wants. We had wayyyyyy more explanation from her about wanting to help find the trove, but somehow the fandom doesn't care about whether the IC respected her wishes in that scene? Why not be up in arms about that??

Nesta Azriel

🤝

disrespecting Elain's wishes

Anyway, I can't wait to find out what Elain really feels and thinks and wants in her book! Because I truly think that it's going to be nothing like people expect. I think it's going to be 90% family history and conflict, and then like 10% other stuff (le sex).

I freaking hate the idea that Az has never been "chosen" his whole life because it's literally untrue. He has a found family, he has besties, he has a good job, he has a home, he has control over his life in a way he didn't growing up, he now has his new Valkyrie friend Nesta and his nephew Nyx. He's surrounded by people who care about him! Even Mor said that she loves him, it's just not in the way that he wants.

So what, exactly, is Az lacking? The thing that he is lacking is self-acceptance, and that's not going to come to him because of any woman. idgaf who it is. That's something he needs to come to himself.

Az has traumas from the past, but today, he's part of a family chosen by the heart, and he's the spymaster and his brother is a High Lord who would die for him.

EXACTLY.

Placing him as the poor thing diminishes much of what Rhys, Mor, and Cass varies for Azriel to be happy, and puts them Sim, as an antagonist in Az's life.

This is an interesting point... don't forget Amren tho. Although she probably wouldn't care, she'd just roll her eyes while she waits for everyone else to get their shit together. But we can't act as if Rhys and Cassian never befriended Az. As if Rhys's mom didn't step in as a mother figure, literally putting a roof over his head and food in his mouth. As if Az doesn't currently have more power than any other lesser fae - which he isn't, btw. The book literally tells us that Illyrians aren't lesser fae, so that's not even a box people can check off in the trauma olympics.

[flockofdoves]

I totally get ur post in re Gerard and labels but as someone who is neither cis nor het, is it wrong for me to wish they were less subtle about it? Like I wish there was a resounding "heck yeah" when "is Gerard queer/w.e" came up and not a "well they demonstrated attraction to men and attachment to the female gender but they'd rather not label themself so....." Like. There's nothing not queer about saying you don't wanna label urself but I also can't call it queer :(? IDK if I'm making any sense

i get what you mean! i feel similarly sometimes

i think its a complicated thing with like. what is it that motivates some lgbt people to label themselves or not in various ways. i don’t want to be invasive and say people Have to label themselves a certain way because i know its frustrating when people do similar to me. its inherently tricky to navigate lgbt identity in this patriarchal world because literally lgbt identity derives from not conforming to the constructs of gender patriarchy uses to perpetuate itself, so we’re in a weird place of having to navigate our lives and how we describe ourselves and are perceived by others within that same system that can’t give us any real space to begin with.

so with that in mind, even if i personally have somewhat found solace in certain specific labels for gender/sexuality for myself, i really can sympathize with how a common trend for many people is to just not even bother with that.

but then also of course there can be other factors to why people choose to do that, like internalized homophobia/transphobia/biphobia/etc, or using it as a stepping stone for testing out waters before being comfortably open about anything more specific.

and i think a lot of times multiple of those factors can exist at once (not just talking about people who don’t use labels, but the reasoning any one lgbt person navigates their identity any specific way) and thats not even to say people should dissect all that, sometimes nothings really gonna be satisfactory, but one compromise is more appealing/comfortable/safe to live with compared to other ways of navigating stuff.

so with that in mind i always think like, i can’t claim to know whats best for other people but at the same time of course theres been plenty of people throughout my personal life i’ve gotten the sense were lgbt and maybe could benefit from being more overtly aware of it or challenging certain internalized notions they had.

gerard is a celebrity i don’t know personally at all, so its a bit different (although i guess i don’t have access to extensive interviews and live footage of people in my daily life lol. so its a different set of things to get intuition from) and what i tend to think is like. i respect that they are a grown adult further along in life than me and who obviously knows themself better than any fan does. i get the sense they probably at this point in their life have more of a grasp on their own gender/sexuality stuff then they’ve let on publicly (whether that means using more explicit labels or just articulating it more abstractly) i don’t want to disrespect what i see as them expressing publicly stuff they’ve clearly put thought into (they’ve stated they don’t even like labels in other contexts, so i don’t think its entirely fair to chalk it up just to being evasive about lgbt stuff) but also i think its a pretty normal thing for lgbt people empathizing with fellow people they perceive as lgbt (whether that be peers or celebrities) to speculate beyond the surface. i think its fair to speculate that with various things theyve said and done that maybe they will open up further someday (like saying

or how the way they used to go about certain things even if they were comfortable expressing gender/sexuality related stuff in certain ways/contexts, some of it was through a lens that demonstrated some internalized stuff (like for ex. the whole concept of prison) so maybe even if thats not the only or even main reason they don’t label themself, processing that (ofc they might have already! i don’t know them. they def have in some ways comparing recent statements wrt gender vs early interviews mentioning it) could change how they go about stuff publicly)

but yeah, i’m bad at saying things briefly, but i don’t think you’re wrong to wish that they’d be more explicit about it sometimes, or to speculate that someday they might be more open about certain stuff. i feel similarly a lot. basically like. if they’re satisfied where they are now then i’m happy for them. i can’t know one way or the other what their inner life or wishes/comfort with this stuff really is and am not gonna pretend i know whats best for them, but i do know speaking as a fan, it would make me really happy to see them as a celebrity i looked up to in part as a gender/sexuality role model back when i was a tween be more open about it in a way that people would have a hard time denying. they don’t owe that to me of course, that might not be what they ever want to do, but i think its fair to say it could be a possibility, and its okay to be interested in that prospect.

edit: also ftr i think its fine to refer to them as lgbt, thats more of a general classification than a personal label. and even like. casually referring to them as like. ‘functionally bi’ or nonbinary i dont think would be a big deal unless they some day became vocally against that. bisexuality specifically has an interesting history with its use as a term to describe anyone whos actively attracted to any gender vs many people who technically fit those qualifications preferring to personally express that in different terms but not necessarily having that mean they want to distance themselves from bisexual communities/discussions/etc

[marklewis777-blog]

The day it all changed...

At the age of 53, today I celebrate my 27th birthday.  Hang with me.  

Perhaps some friends with very different world views will find this thought provoking…and not preachy…perhaps even dialog worthy. You know where to find me. 27 years ago, on April 7, 1991, Jesus gave me new life and started a "new thing" in this human being. I hadn't hit "bottom" or anything...that came 10 years later. He BEGAN the work in me...and it continues each day. Today, I see His hand in my life more than ever. There are still plenty of challenges, but I face them with different perspective...an eternal(long term) viewpoint. I see the dark parts of my soul and thus my need for him more than ever. I am more grateful than ever. I love him more freely…and more deeply than ever. I am humbled by the 27 years worth of people he has sent to sown into my life. I am in awe that he has used me to do the same for others. I've seen and personally experienced physical healing and watched peoples lives that were in bondage(serious emotional/chemical/spiritual) be set "free". I've seen very broken relationships healed. I've seen "coincidence" that is NO WAY coincidence, but nothing short of answer to prayer and/or miraculous intervention/insight. I trust that those of you with different world/faith views know I care for you deeply, and you don't see me as a nutcase(well, at least not spiritually:)...and know I respect your viewpoints. We can dialog and disagree without offending one another(what a concept). I am grateful for the wisdom I often receive from you! Here's the deal: Jesus is not a placebo. Not a crutch. Nor is he a guarantee of an easy life. Relationship with him is life-giving, transformational and catalytic. Our western idea that "all religions are basically the same" is just, well…western. This idea doesn't work when one looks at the facts. I believe we disrespect other faiths by throwing them in one bucket so we can stay comfortably on the fence. BUDDHISM holds that life's suffering is caused by desire, so the "goal" is to rid oneself of any worldly or personal desire(kinda impossible in 2018 America, huh?). At it's core, it denies a "god" and holds to reincarnation and/or nirvana (not heaven). HINDUISM is polytheistic with no personal god, but millions of gods that must be pleased. It holds to reincarnation and karma - you get what you deserve(which, if we are honest, puts each of us in a very precarious position spiritually speaking). ISLAM, like Christianity is monotheistic, and though it recognizes Jesus as a prophet, it is blasphemy to consider him to be God. Also, one must earn his/her way into paradise...without really knowing if one has done enough "good".  Exhausting.  JUDAISM is also monotheistic, and though it points to Jesus all through it's own writings, the Jews are still awaiting their messiah. ATHEISM takes the huge leap of faith that there is no creator(though they often get offended by people worshipping this non-existing god). No ultimate meaning to life. No afterlife.  All truth is relative(except for the "truth" that all truth is relative.  Whoops).  NEW AGE exalts self to "god" and oneness with an impersonal universe (As far as I've seen, humans make pretty bad gods who fight primarily for their own little kingdoms, and the universe doesn't "know" me personally…nor does it, or can it love me.) There is an innate response in the human being to worship SOMETHING. All through history… human beings have worshipped something or someone. It sure seems we are hardwired for relationship with a "higher power" or entity. Always searching for "it'. CHRISTIANITY is monotheistic and has a relational God. It is not based on do's and don'ts or earning one's way to God. The believer lives in RESPONSE to Gods gracious and loving response to him/her. God came TO man as Jesus…as a servant. He left eternity and ended up on the cross. God became SERVANT to man in order to build relationship. Let that sink in. Does any other faith that has thrived have a servant, sacrificial creator? With Christ, there is GRACE, not karma (AKA - you get what you deserve). No deeds needed to gain favor. No need to "find God"…he was never lost. He reaches out to us. This is love.

Now…before your knee jerks too fast... Early in my faith, I was still skeptical at times. The more I studied, the more I saw that even liberal historical scholars acknowledge the following about Jesus: 

1 )He did exist. 

2) He claimed to be God incarnate(One cannot call him a "good teacher" or a "moral man" if he falsely claimed to be God, and that HE was the ONLY way. What do you do with that?! Either he was God or he was a nut job). 

3 )His opponents did not deny his miracles which they SAW and HEARD about, but blamed them on "demonic powers". 

4) The religious leaders crucified him for his claim of being God. 

5 )He died by way of crucifixion. 

6) He was VERY much dead. 

7) His tomb was found empty- which was guarded by Roman soldiers (highly trained killing machines who, if they lost the body of Jesus, would be executed) 

8) Historical accounts show he appeared to over 500 people AFTER his death. 

9 )He appeared to men walking on the road to the town of Emmaus. This was a 7 mile walk from where he was crucified. Remember, he died with spikes through his feet and hands. Flesh ripped from his back. Spear into his heart. Massive blood loss. He was dead…and days later, appeared alive walking on this road (this story is told by previously cowarding disciplines who were eventually killed because they would not recant. 

10)After seeing him alive again, His followers, who scattered like cowards while he was being beaten and crucified, were suddenly emboldened and all but one died as martyrs for what they stood for. 

11)People will often make up and follow something they know is a lie, but they will not die for what they KNOW is something they made up…at least not en masse.

12) The historical apostle Paul was not only considered to be one of the brightest, influential and intelligent religious leaders of his day, but he was a hired gun sent out to persecute and kill people of "The Way"(Christians). He would gloat over his victims. Today we would call him a terrorist. His historically documented conversion has got to make one consider what he experienced when Jesus appeared to him.  Paul became, arguably, the most influential voice of Christianity aside from Jesus himself.  

13) Immediately after Jesus' alleged resurrection, people became part of this movement (now about 1/3 of the world's population - it all started from a homeless "peasant"(?). 

Lives and cultures have been transformed for over 2000 years because he is the real deal.  

27 years ago, I got to a place where, if I believed there was some sort of Creator(which makes a lot of sense if I was being intellectually honest), this Jesus made a lot of sense. It is not a matter of one spiritual bent being right or wrong, but a matter of one that makes sense. One that yields ongoing good fruit. If one is going to hold tightly to a "faith" of any sort…which will ultimately greatly influences how they live, it ought to hold up to hard, objective scrutiny. If God is real, it makes sense to discover what that journey would look like. Even if it challenges one's status quo, personal preferences or life-long held beliefs.

One might say, "well what about the crusades"(etc) and all the bigoted and violent things done by those who claim to follow Jesus.  Not to mention our current day “far right” culture that wrongly marries nationalism and so-called “conservative politics to Jesus.  I will say without hesitation that they do not represent the historical and biblical Jesus.  Sadly, there are people and groups from all faith streams that bring shame to what they claim to believe. Don't let "church" or professed Christians be your (only)example of what the Creator of the universe is like. The truth is, all humans are hypocrites at times and misrepresent what they say are their personal convictions.  Don't let politics dictate your view either. Believe it or not, there are true Christ-followers who are republicans, independents, and yes, even democrats.  Yep…I know some Jesus lovers who where "feeling the BERN" in the last election cycle:)

Look to the source - Jesus. Do some objective research. There have been much smarter, more highly educated skeptics, more vehement “God-haters”, more vicious murderers, more broken addicts, more promiscuous adulterers, and more wretched sinners than you and I who have come to love this Jesus.  

So...here's my happy bday card to me:) Thanks for the 27 years. Looking forward to the next.