#obviously there is a lot of nuance

[repurposedmeatlocker]

I'm genuinely starting to think that any guy whose like "I don't like it when people analyze media by intercutting it with social/historical commentary" just don't like how a lot of it tends to be left-leaning.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that is the whole reason. They just don't want to admit it outright.

[why-animals-do-the-thing]

hi! can i ask what's ur opinion on giving pets away? not necessarily because u can't afford to care for em anymore but maybe incompatibility of personalities or maybe lifestyles. is it wrong to give ur pet for adoption if u know someone who's better suited for keeping a pet, like emotionally?

This is going to be controversial, but I support making that choice.

There’s a lot of rhetoric lately around how it’s evil and unethical to rehome your pet if you don’t “need to.” And what that does is prioritize human ideology over the actual animal’s well-being.

Pets that aren’t a good match for your home or pets that aren’t really wanted anymore frequently have lower welfare! When caring for an animal becomes a burden or is forced, people end up resenting them, and that means the animal often doesn’t get all of its needs fulfilled. Even if you’re still feeding it and providing appropriate vet care, how likely are you to provide affection or enrichment to an animal you’re tired of being stuck with?

Lifestyle and personality really matter to making sure a pet is a good fit for a home. A dog that alert-barks at every leaf that moves is probably a bad fit for someone who has a chronic migraine syndrome, and they might not know that until the dog has been in the home for weeks and started to open up. A really feisty kitten that requires a ton of play might not do best in the home of someone older who wanted a quiet lap cat. And while you can you do your best to plan to find a compatible animal, you won’t always know ahead of time what issues might arise.

“Forever home” rhetoric is really, really popular and I think it’s very unfair to the animals it is supposed to support. It started with the backlash of seeing animals abandoned inappropriately, and has been heavily reinforced in the public mind because it’s so frequently used to drive fundraising and support for legislation. The whole “forever home” concept communicates to people that getting an animal is an immutable commitment and that if you can’t keep an animal, it is a personal moral failing. It frames human priorities (we think people who get rid of animals are Evil and Bad and should be shunned) as more important than actual welfare needs for individual animals (are they getting the care they need where they are).

Obviously, I don’t support people dumping animals or just getting fad pets they’ll discard immediately, but there’s so many alternate situations that can arise. Even if it’s just “they got a pet and didn’t know what caring for it would take and didn’t want to care for it so they brought it back, how awful” like… okay, I’d like the person to have done more research before they got a pet, but isn’t it better that the animal now has a second chance to go to better home? Knowing what a commitment requires theoretically can be very different than having to actually follow through regularly, and I’d rather see someone maturely acknowledge that having an animal isn’t a good fit than keep it anyway!!

If animals being happy and with all their biological, veterinary, and social needs fulfilled is actually the goal, we need to prioritize their welfare over human opinion. I’d much rather see an animal rehomed responsibly to somewhere it will thrive and be welcomed than see people keep animals they can’t/don’t want to care for out of guilt or shame. 

[razormaze]

what fear a man like you brings upon a woman like me (please don’t look at me)

[francesderwent]

thinking about snarky cultural/theological commentary and. the thing about snark is this: it’s easy, and it’s instant gratification. it’s easy because you’re playing to a likeminded audience. you get the way they think, you know the sort of things they find ridiculous, and so you know what’s going to play well with them. it’s not that hard to come up with a zinger that’s going to earn you applause from your own side. it’s also pretty easy to make another human being who’s not on your side look stupid, because we’re stupid creatures and we all have plenty of exploitable weak spots. it’s preaching to the choir, and it’s preaching meanly to the choir. and then, your snark bears all its fruit right away. you get the glowing feeling of having scored points against the enemy while being patted on the back by your friends for being so brave. if you succeeded in being snarky, you get the rewards of snark that very instant.

on the other hand, seeking to share the truth you possess in a mode in which it could actually be received—that is, says St Thomas, according to the mode of the recipient—that’s hard, and it’s so far from being instantly gratifying that you may never see the fruits of it in this life. not only are you not thinking about your likeminded audience, you’re not even going to trot out the truth simply in the way you understand it and call it your best effort. rather, you have to try to get inside your interlocutor’s frame of mind and understand how the truth you know is going to fulfill their own priorities and longings. you have to understand them so well that you see the truth of their position, even if that truth is buried very very deep, and then see how that truth connects them to the truth you see. you have to be insightful, and compassionate, and so, so patient. you don’t get to score any points, with anybody. your interlocutor might still get annoyed with you and turn around and make you look stupid. but you can’t just say “I’m going to speak the truth and I don’t care who hears and how they take it”—you have to care how they take it, because the truth is relational, it’s given and received, not just spouted into a void. and frankly you have to care how they take it because you have to care about their salvation.

don’t get me wrong, there are times in every person’s life when they will be called to stand up and be counted, to put fumbling words to what they hold most dear even if they can’t make everyone understand. but I don’t know that it’s a virtue to be always focused on being seen saying the truth, with no consideration given to who hears you and what they’ll hear in it—and it’s certainly not a virtue to be always focused on being seen saying the truth in a mean and funny way. “instruct the ignorant” is a spiritual work of mercy. but instruct the ignorant does not mean “instruct the ignorant while making the knowledgeable laugh and/or high five.”

[wasyago]

jay and chip as tritons hehe

(i know that every other person drew them as tritons already, but like, cmon its so fun)

[txttletale]

i dont really understand where this generalized worry about 'the student protests overshadowing the genocide in the media' is coming from--it's not like there are mainstream usamerican news sources who would just love to report on the vicious murderousness of the zionist state but are just too dang busy with all these student protests is it

[weatheringandweary]

I like to imagine that the only noticeable difference between Apollo’s Roman/Greek form post-TOA is just Lester in either an orange CHB shirt or a purple Camp Jupiter shirt.

Every other deity has some prolific change due to their entire identities being religiously syncretized into the Roman pantheon… and then there’s Apollo’s deeply unserious ass :

[tea-cat-sss]

does anyone else feel powerless to respond to bashing bc you go "hey that was not my lived experience at all I don't know that this conclusion is universally applicable" and they go "oppressed!!! brainwashed!!! privileged!!!" and continue saying whatever they want

[christmascreep]

i think a lot about how dwayne still tried to fight off his voice even when he initially had his dream ripped out from under him. he's got his hand pressed so tightly against his mouth as he runs down that hill. and you can sense it, hear it, see it; the spit and anguish that he's choking back, everything within him grappling onto the last dredges of his dedication. weighing the choice, warring against it; the crushing tide of failure and disappointment for his life before it's even really began. the one thing he could allow himself to look forward to, pride himself in, control. and god if he finally lets go, it really is over. he'll have nothing left. that's it. but it's bubbling and burning and searing beneath every inch of his skin, clawing to find its way out, screaming. what does he have to hold on to anymore??? WHAT THE HELL!!!!!

[tangents-within-tangents]

Yellow = yellow

Bananas are yellow, does this mean that yellow = banana?

No, yellow = yellow

Yellow =/= banana, does this mean bananas aren't yellow?

Lemons are yellow, does this mean lemon = banana?

Lemon =/= banana, does this mean lemons aren't yellow?

Some apples are yellow, does this mean yellow = apple?

Some apples are red or green, does this mean apples can't be yellow?

Some apples are red, some apples are yellow, does this mean red = yellow?

Lemons and apples are round but bananas aren't, does this mean bananas aren't yellow?

Apples and bananas are sweet, does this mean lemon's aren't sour? Or that sourness is bad?

Bananas, lemons, and apples are fruit, does this mean mustard isn't yellow?

No, yellow = yellow

A category groups things that share a commonality despite their differences. The differences coexist within that commonality without redefining the category.

Other similarities coexist within, and without, the commonality without redefining the category either. The fact that it doesn't redefine the category does not mean those similarities don't hold significance of their own.

If not for the commonality, it wouldn't be a category. If not for the differences, it wouldn't be a category either.

Okay? Cool

Asexuality = experiencing little to no sexual attraction

[aingeal98]

It's so funny because analysing Nat Yellowjackets I'm like yeah so obviously she doesn't follow the law and is very comfortable taking risks others find unacceptable and she used to scam people and run cons so clearly at some point the nihilism got to her and I'd love to see more of that because it makes sense that she'd wrestle with the guilt of eating Jackie and Ben and enjoying her purpose as the hunter and leader even if she was the one to get them home. The jealousy Shauna feels towards Nat's goodness is entirely one sided because Nat doesn't see herself as Good in any way she just clearly sees them all as people trying to do the best they can. And she definitely never forgave herself for her own complicity in Ben's situation, perhaps some of her rejection of society once they get back is driven by her understanding of what happened to her once she actually did Belong for once, and how that fear of being an outcast again led her to make the wrong choices at crucial moments.

And then actually watching Yellowjackets I feel like a football player watching Messi win the championship and score a hat trick. THAT'S WHY SHE'S THE GOAT! GREATEST OF ALL TIME! MVP! THE BIG DAMN HERO AND ONE TRUE QUEEN! JACKIE'S SUCCESSOR AS CAPTAIN THE MORAL COMPASS AND HEART OF THE TEAM SHE'S THE BEST DAMN PERSON IN THIS SHOW WITH THE HEART OF A CHAMPION AND THE SOUL OF A SAINT NAT SOMETHING CATHOLIC SCATORCCIO YOU WILL LIVE FOREVER IN OUR HEARTS AS THE KING YOU ARE!!!

[shalom-iamcominghome]

As I've gotten deeper in conversion, I have increasingly imagined jewish life throughout time. And what I mean by that is...

So when I looked at the Western Wall before this (maybe a few years ago), I just saw a wall. It held no deeper meaning than that. I imagined nothing when I saw that.

But now when I look at the wall or even when I'm praying idly, I'm imagining myself in the temple when it stood there. It's bright outside - a summer day so bright, I think the temple will blind me. A soft wind surrounds me. I'm stood in the middle of a huge crowd of people, simply observing. Women pass by me in small crowds, laughing and talking. Some of these women are wrangling their small children who keep running away, laughing like it's a game. And men walk by smelling of spices. The air is light, the city around bustling with people living fulfilling, meaningful jewish life. The wall now symbolizes that jewish life, and even though it's not just about the temple when I imagine it, it means something to me.

I think that's the result of seeing myself in judaism, turning the "you" into a "we," and I feel about this what I must imagine a married couple feels.

[pharawee]

A few notes on Pat and Chot's conversation:

🔹Ke (เกย์) is a neutral expression that is the phonetic adaptation of the English word gay.

🔹Tut (ตุ๊ด) is a vulgar and pejorative expression used to refer to a very effeminate homosexual man and can have multiple translations, as sissy, queen, [or in this case: tootsie] etc. 

🔹Je (เจ๊) is a Thai honorific from 姐 for “elder sister”. Chot uses it to refer to himself. Pat later uses it to address Chot.

🔹krap/kha (ครับ / ค่ะ) are gender-oriented particles. Chot uses the traditionally female particle for himself.

🌈Sources: LGTBIQ+ Enciclopaedia, Thaipod101

[lesbianfakir]

There’s a huge focus in tutu of defying fate but something I love is how again and again the characters choose to embrace Drosselmeyer’s tragic ending.

Even after learning Tutu can never be with the one she loves, Duck still puts on the pendant. Rue chooses to put on the black shoes and become Kraehe though it makes her miserable. Never once does Fakir consider leaving Mytho’s side, knowing it will most likely lead to his gruesome death. Even Mytho chooses to receive his heart and return to the story, inviting the capability to experience tragedy into himself once more.

Why cling so hard to these tragic fates?

In the eyes of the characters it’s better to immerse oneself in another’s bitter role than be stripped to the ugly, naked self. It’s like Fakir says: everyone wants to be given a role to play and no one wants a story to end.

Sure, Fakir could've left mytho’s side and likely lived, but without the legacy of The Knight be left with only Fakir. Better to be a doomed knight than a frightened young boy unable to protect those he loves and terrified of losing anyone else.

Likewise with Rue though It hurts to be Kraehe, without the security of a princess, she’s just a hurting, abused girl who could never hope to catch the attention of a prince.

Drosselmeyer even encourages Duck to let herself disappear in the lake of despair so she could live on in memory as Tutu rather than as a simple duck. This theme is taken to the extreme: even death is seen as preferable to true vulnerability.

Princess Tutu follows a cast of teenagers deliberately hurting themselves to hide from their fragile, vulnerable side. They'd more readily accept a gruesome fate than face themselves in the mirror.

[obi1-kenobae]

I truly cannot fathom how anyone could watch Star Wars and come away thinking that the Jedi did nothing wrong/that their philosophy was correct. Like did you even watch Return of the Jedi? If the Jedi had had their way, Luke would have killed his own father. The entire point of Star Wars was that the Jedi were very wrong and flawed.

[ohwatson]

I would love to hear any thoughts you may have on Lestrade's wife and what happened to their marriage, should you feel so inclined?

i’ve thought about this specific piece of Lestrade Lore™ more than i care to admit, so i should feel so inclined, yes!

i definitely don’t think the lestrades’ marriage was short-lived, he gives the energy of someone who was married for at least a decade, maybe even 15-20 years.

i see a younger lestrade as being playful, flirtatious, probably a ladies man & definitely aware of it (have you seen young rupert graves? bffr.) but getting married sort of young. i imagine their relationship to kind of just have happened; they got to chatting and all the sudden were inseparable etc but never really saw a relationship coming until it kind of seemed like the obvious/right thing to do (in hindsight, lestrade probably recognizes that pursuing a relationship because it was expected & not because it was a good match in the long run wasn’t a great idea).

(also he looked so good in the episode jesus christ)

it was a healthy marriage in the beginning, lestrade is clearly devoted (he evidently went back to his wife after she cheated the first time, which speaks either of his loyalty or obliviousness, or something else). i think lestrade was content and was working his way up the NSY ranks during the early years of the marriage probably had the successful-career-as-a-detective-with-a-family-in-a-semi-detached-in-the-suburbs kind of vision for himself. however, he got the offer for a DI position & knew that the workload would increase and it could take a toll but the offer was too good to decline even if it meant he spent several extra hours at work in the evenings.

i imagine his wife got jealous or felt bored and insecure because of that, and i’m sure having sherlock ringing lestrade’s phone during dinner or at 2am demanding a case (& lestrade indulging him) didn’t help matters. so eventually she sought out someone else, thinking lestrade would be too busy to notice (she was right, but sherlock dredged that secret up quickly enough, & i do believe lestrade had suspicions but gave her the benefit of the doubt). she probably thought he cared more about his career than her, which wasn’t the case, but i do think lestrade probably took some of his marriage and personal life for granted and put it on pause for The Work (like sherlock in a way tbh).

obviously they separated at some point & i think it was probably lestrade who made the first move at trying to reconcile because he probably felt he was the reason for his wife’s infidelity. he truly thought they had been making progress until the infamous asib christmas (he cancelled the dorset holiday. the greek islands were nicer, anyways).

he looked a little sullen and tipsy at the wedding in tsot which i just chalked down to him having feelings about his divorce and also his friend’s gay situationship but evidently he’s not opposed to dating again as we see from tst & The One is out there for him somewhere live laugh love lestrade 🙂‍↕️