#remembering chester

[hawkaye]

LINKIN PARK: Live in Texas (2003) - Somewhere I belong

[10centjams]

Harry, that was not the correct answer choice. Judit and Chester do NOT approve.

[atthebell]

have tried to post these clips so many times tumblr PLEASE

anyway here's ramon & cellbit during that post-rescue boat race back in june, including cellbit's little speech he said to ramon and the gifts ramon gave him as thanks

[buildoblivion]

my lukewarm tmagp prediction is that if we meet any of our .jmj crew in person it’ll be martin ‘norris’ first

[tootiredtocares-blog]

Pretty fucked up that timmy forgets the only positive influences in his life after his 18 birthday when you think about it

[99thpercentile]

I relistened to the first episode and

"I'm afraid, Darla, and worse, I think it's Arthur I'm afraid of. Or what's left of him."

I've got a theory. I think the implication here is either that 1. Martin is afraid of what remains of Jon, or 2. what remains of all three of them is something to be feared, malevolent in nature now regardless of who they were in life.

I think Sam is going to be sympathetic to Jon and help him escape from the computer, and the fans will cheer...and then this will turn out to be a very bad thing, bc Jon is not fully Jon anymore.

[jarchivism]

I dreamt of a new TMAGP episode where the protocol version of Jon came to join the OIAR and turns out it was him who sent the email. This better not be prophetic.

[rexscanonwife]

Good morning everypony! I hope you're all doing well and you got enough rest 🥺 I didn't lol but here I am heading to work like always

I'm thinking about my fairly oddparents s/i ideas and stuff I was spitballing with my bff last night! Not sure how far I'll actually go with it but I would like to make a more solid design, and as y'all know I've been really enjoying the rewatch! I was thinking of her being a fairy who's still relatively new and starts shadowing Cosmo and Wanda as part of a sort of experimental training program! And over time she gets used to their wacky shenanigans with Timmy and becomes like a part of their fambily...🥺👉👈

But then as I was watching the show last night I remembered Chester and the fact that he doesn't have any fairies (Norm for a brief while doesn't count) despite ACTUALLY living in a trailer park and I decided that eventually endgame would be my s/i becoming HIS fairy! And lemme tell ya...he stresses her THE FUCK OUT 😂😂😂 I feel like (aside from writing reasons) that never happened because he's generally a pretty happy kid, his dad seems really loving but COME ON MAN. Kid probably plays with tetanus-ridden rusty pipes and boards with nails through them, he can wish for a toy or two and maybe some food! I've decided henceforth to adopt him 💖💖

[cult-of-the-eye]

jon i miss youuuuuu

[jessequinones]

Stop Using Slurs in Children Stories!

I bet that caught your attention. You might be thinking, what stories use the N-word, or the F-word, well...none that I found. However, there are two slur words that are often used in writing mainly in children's literature because I don’t think enough people know them to be slurs. Those words are cripple and savage.

Before I begin, I need to address a few things. First, I'll only use these words in full for educational purposes so nothing gets confusing. Secondly, I’m not hating on any of these authors. I genuinely think these people might not know cripple and savage are slurs. However, I still need examples of what I’m talking about to explain how common these words are used in writing as well as explaining why it’s a bad idea to use them, so I’m using these authors, not as targets but as examples based on the books I have.

Both of these words (cripple and savage) have a lot of history behind them, and while I strongly suggest, not using them, if for some reason, they have to be used, you need to hire a sensitivity reader who’s a part of the communities that has been affected by said words before you publish your story.

Cripple:

Before I begin, please understand I’ve consulted with a disabled person who’s well knowledgeable in this topic to help smooth out my points. I’m not apart of the physically disabled community. As I’ve been told there’s a big debate going on within the disabled community in regards to if mental disabled people are allowed to use the word cripple or not. This is beyond my understanding of the word, and the community so when I mention the word cripple, I’ll be referring it to the physical disabled community and not the mental one. Everything I’m about to say has already been said by the physically disabled community. I’m not adding anything new or talking over them. If you would like to know more about the language of disability, please read Cy-Cyborg’s article on the matter: https://writingwithcycyborg.blogspot.com/2024/02/LanguageOfDisability.html

Cripple is a world that’s defined one of three ways, to either describe someone who can’t function properly, to describe a situation that’s overwhelming, or to describe an object that isn’t working.

Example one: DragonFire: Sphere of Eternity (book 1)

“I mean, this morning, no offence, you were crippled.” (Describing a person.)

Example two: “The economy was crippled.” (Describing a situation)

Example three: DragonFire: Age of Legend (book 3) (describing an object)

The word cripple, even when it was used in a medical sense has always been a word to punch down and insult the physically disabled community. It was used to attack them and point out their disabilities. It became a common replacement for the word injured because it has a more of a punch. Instead of calling someone “severely injured” use cripple instead, it’s shorter and a lot punchier of a word. Over time it became part of normal vocabulary to use it while describing something as severe, despite it still being used as an insult at the same time. Let’s look at an example of how it’s being used to describe an injury in Robert Vane's A Dragons Chains: Book one of the Remembered War

“I moved my three non-crippled legs…” In this example, the dragon has an injured leg. Why did the author use the word cripple instead of injured? I think it’s because of shock value. Is it cheap shock value? Yes, but shock value for the reader is still shock value. Tell me, what’s the difference would be if the author replaced the word cripple with injured? “I moved my three non-injured legs...” Does using the word cripple add to the sense of urgency? Add to the sense of how injured that character's leg is? Or was it merely just a place for shock value?

But how often is this word used? Let’s take a quick look at the DragonFire series. There are currently four books in this series at the time of writing, and the word crippled is used twelve times throughout four books. Knowing it’s a slur...that’s a lot.

Some of the examples in which it was used are in things such as DragonFire: Fallen Star (book 2) where it reads:

Or

“...he yelled, his scythed tail coiling round, only for the far less crippled dragon to kick him off.” DragonFire: Order of Enishra (book 4)

It’s not just the DragonFire series which does this, other examples include, The Last Monster on Earth by LJ Davies

Which uses it four times in one book with examples such as “Lock these two in the truck with the cripple…”

Warriors: Forest of Secrets (book 3) has this line. “As Fireheart said goodbye to Yellowfang and went back to hunting, he felt a new surge of determination to bring Tigerclaw’s guilt into the open. For the sake of Redtail, murdered; for Ravenpaw, driven from the Clan; for Cinderpaw, crippled...”

And even Wings of Fire, one of my favourite book series uses it.

Here’s a question for you. Is it ok to use that word if the impact is meant to be insulting? In the Wings of Fire example, Queen Scarlet defeats Dune in combat, and is about to kidnap the main characters. Dune, still breathing can barley move upon which Scarlet killed him. Scarlet is one of those pure evil types of characters, this is something I could see her saying, but let’s take a step back and put your eyes in the eyes of a disabled child.

Here you are, a disabled child. You already know what the word cripple is, and it’s been used against you (don’t act like this doesn’t happen). You read Wings of Fire and you come across that sentence. What is the intent behind that sentence in the eyes of a disabled child? Are you supposed to be scared of Scarlet? Angry? Or are you upset, because even in a fantasy book with talking dragons, you can’t escape from real life or that word?

Some of you might say, “What if only the villains use that word?” While I can see Queen Scarlet calling Peril a stupid retarded motherfucker. It’s not something you want in a children's story, so why does cripple get a past?

I hope you’re getting the picture, it’s a very commonly used word, one which the disabled community has begged able-bodied people not to use. The word injured gets the same point across and it doesn’t have a history of it being a derogatory term. While replacing the word cripple with injured or severely injured isn’t a perfect fix, it’s at least getting rid of the other word which is a start at least.

Now before I continue with the other slur, I can hear some of you say you’re aware disabled people are using cripple to describe themselves. Why can’t able-bodied people use it? Here’s the thing. Not everyone in the disabled community is doing this, and it’s not a monolith. The word cripple has been used as an attack against the disabled community for decades. It targets them, puts them down, and it’s only used against them. You only use the term to refer to something as injured so there's no reason to use it on an able-bodied person. The community in which it was used against is taking that word and trying to empower it amongst themselves. You’re not gonna complain if someone who’s black uses the N-word, so why are you upset when disabled people use the word cripple to describe themselves but are saying you can’t? That word belongs to them and their community, not yours. Also, one more thing before I go, not everyone in the disabled community uses this word or wants to hear it. There have been plenty of disabled people who are fine using that word to describe themselves but won’t say it around others if other disabled people express they don’t want to hear it. So be mindful if you’re gonna use it and please hire a sensitivity reader.

Savage:

This word...I have a lot of history with it because it’s a word that’s used against my community, (indigenous) people. And yet, just like the word cripple, it’s used all the time and while it’s a very common occurrence where indigenous voices aren’t heard, we’ve been telling everyone to just drop this word. Unlike the word cripple, we aren’t trying to claim this word, we just want it gone.

The definition of this word is an easy one to understand. It’s to describe a person, object, or an action as barbaric, wild, aggressive, unintelligent, or barely even human.

Example one: “They’re savages, savages, barely even human” Disney, Pocahontas (1995). (Used against people)

Example two:DragonFire: Age of Legend (book 3) by LJ Davies

“I opened my muzzled to respond, but another savage roar drew our attention…” (Used as an action)

Example three:

(Used against a group of people)

Example four: “Savage weaponry” (Use to describe an object)

I’m gonna be using the series DragonFire a lot for my examples, because out of all the books I got, that series uses the word 19 times throughout books one, two, and three. It was used twelve times in book three and I guess someone told LJ Davies about this problem because it doesn’t appear in book four. But it DOES appear in the spin-off series “Tales of DragonFire: Rebellion” twice, and THIRTEEN TIMES in “The Last Monster on Earth”. Overall, that's THIRTY-FOUR TIMES in the course of five books, all meant for children.

LJ Davies isn’t my only example. Chester Young, used it nine times throughout books 1 and 2 of the Celestial Heir books Rowan Silver, used it once in Eyes of Silver: Dragons and Skylines (book 2) And Robert Vane, used it once in the Remembered War series in book 4

Let’s start by showing off some examples and the impact they have and please note, that this might be something you’re just not experienced with. So just like with the disabled child, try to imagine yourself as an indigenous child. You’re fully aware of the word savage, it’s been used against you, and your people. So when you read a text like “Trade with the savages...they wouldn’t understand the concept!”

It feels awfully familiar to lines you read in your history books about your people. Keep in mind, that you wanted to read a story about dragons so you could get away from real life.

(From the Last Monster on Earth by LJ Davies)

I know the United States called the Native Americans savage monsters while stealing their land, it was used as a way to justify their actions, make the natives appear barley even human or in most cases, not human at all, let’s not forget, for a good majority of the building of the United States, those founding fathers didn’t see anyone other than themselves as humans. Reading text, asking how people became savage monsters overnight should remind you how people labelled indigenous people in the past and still do today.

"To confirm the princess’s words, yes, there is an army out there whose numbers vastly exceed our own. Nevertheless, they are a crude mockery of the noble kind they once were, and they are now nothing but savages….There was a series of grunts and nods at that statement...” (DragonFire: Age of Legend, book 3)

I think, this text is a great example of what I’ve been trying to say. In this text, the character who is speaking and the grunts and nods are all dragons with human-like intelligence. They're a stand-in for us. The Elder (who spoke in said text) has been seen and viewed as one of the good guys. He calls his kind noble, and he’s working with a princess, (let’s not forget our history books on how the royal family treated indigenous people). He calls his attackers “nothing but savages”. In translation, their monsters, who are no longer noble or righteous. There’s an agreement with his statement, as if what he says is right and we should be agreeing with him.

In that sentence, understanding everyone is of human intelligence and is a stand-in for humans. We have an old white knight, calling the enemy savages while the royal family are the heroes who are trying to protect their land from those filthy, disgusting, savages. You can kind of see why I’m saying we really shouldn’t be using this word.

“Yellowfang will be allowed to stay here until she has recovered her strength. We are warriors, not savages…” Warriors: Into the Wild (book 1)

Savages...indigenous people, they aren’t warriors, they would’ve killed Yellowfang, and left her to rot in the wilds, Thunderclan is better than those monsters. Am I making my point clear enough when it comes to the history of this word, who it’s targeted against and how it comes across when reading in children's media?

You might’ve noticed I’ve mainly been using examples when it refers to a group of people, not necessarily showing off how commonly it’s used as either an action or an object because honestly...those are just kind of dumb. A savage roar? What does that mean?

Ah yes, because we really needed the use of the word “savagely” to get the point across that Misuk just destroyed a person's skull. The “turning his head into a bloody pulp” wasn’t enough on its own. Without the use of the word savagely how else could we get the aggression and power across? When savage is used as an action it’s mostly because said character loses control of their humanity. They become savage when they attack and the end result is a bloody mess because that’s the only way indigenous, I mean, monsters, I mean barbarians, I mean savage people know how to fight. You often see these kinds of moments when the good guy who’d never hurt a fly loses control and unleashes hell, they turn into something that’s not themselves, they turned into a savage and these moments are meant to be shown as shocking as the character forgets who they are for a couple of seconds.

Indigenous people were savages, with savage strength, and a savage kind of culture. They scalp people, beat them to a bloody pulp, and ate your children. Those monsters needed to be killed. Whenever you use the word savage, it circles back to a group of minorities who were just trying to survive. This word has been used so much, that I don’t think many people realise the history behind it, which is why I said I’m not hating anyone who uses it, but please try to get a sensitivity reader. Get disabled and indigenous sensitivity readers, even if there’s no indigenous or disabled representation in your books, the words you use, still affect us and it’s a good thing to be aware of the words of which you speak and write.

Please be aware of these words, especially if you’re writing stories meant for children because the more children see these words, the more normal they’ll think it is and the more often they’ll start repeating it. I think there’s a time and place for these words, but saying them as an excuse to make something more shocking, isn’t the time or place.

[mxalexwhat]

I wonder if Windows NT 4.0 would still allow you to run CD-ROM games on it?

Alice plays all of the Barbie games, like Barbie Rapunzel. Her favorite is Barbie Storymaker, where she's made little shorts featuring the office crew, but her most often played is Barbie Fashion Designer and she's dying to find a compatible printer to get the full experience.

Sam just started playing Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego. He loves it! He hasn't quite figured out that all the clues are puns but he's only just started so he'll figure it out.

Colin plays Myst and he fucking hates it, but he needs to complete it out of spite, and also the two brothers trapped in the books remind him of Chester and Norris.

Gwen doesn't have time to play PC games because she's actually doing her job, so she downloaded a sim on her home computer to play the original Age of Empires with the Roman empire expansion pack.

Teddy played Bugdom. Rolly polly babyoli :)

Lena pretends she doesn't fool around on the PCs, but she has every PC Doom title available and even created her own mods. She fucking shreds online and John Romero wants to meet her in person some day.

Somebody tried to install Worms Armageddon once, but the PC immediately spat the disc out all scratched up and completely unusable.

[dolly-fishy]

What if we were a downloadable malware and a really annoying Microsoft office assistant together

[lionleonora]

okay people are shocked that mack and chester are in their late teens early twenties and for mack i get it but guys. look at chester. LOOK at chester. he looks like an edgy white boy high schooler who will not shut up about libertarianism if you make the mistake of talking to him

[real-odark]

i dont know if anyones pointed this out already but. its not really a point to get mad because fitzgerald didnt start writing gay sex in his book, he didnt because it was taboo but thats not really my point uhh

everyone knows what happened anyway, and even if its besides the point of using it to highlight nick's sexuality, it also serves the purpose in the story of showing rich people do stuff just because they can

say that mckee was never a frail feminine man like nick says he is or if he was a brute like tom. that wouldnt make the encounter any less likely from happening because it all goes to show how rich these people are that if they can get away with doing something new they're gonna do it

at that amount of money, it doesn't threaten them to be open with their sexuality in ways like that

and so when they take out that scene from adaptations i dont think its really fair to kind of? erase?? another purpose of contributing to the theme of filthy wealth and their detachment from the struggles

or else you know. nick and mckee just have like a really gay in every universe we must end up in our underwear in bed together bond and its Not Nice to break that

[wonder-worker]

"Among their complaints [in 1460, the Yorkists] specifically blamed the earls of Wiltshire and Shrewsbury and Viscount Beaumont for ‘stirring’ the king [Henry VI] to hold a parliament at Coventry that would attaint them and for keeping them from the king’s presence and likely mercy, asserting that this was done against [the king's] will. To this they added the charge that these evil counselors were also tyrannizing other true men* without the king’s knowledge. Such claims of malfeasance obliquely raised the question of Henry’s fitness as a king, for how could he be deemed competent if such things happened without his knowledge and against his wishes? They also tied in rumors circulating somewhat earlier in the southern counties and likely to have originated in Calais that Henry was really ‘good and gracious Lord to the [Yorkists] since, it was alleged, he had not known of or assented to their attainders. On 11 June the king was compelled to issue a proclamation stating that they were indeed traitors and that assertions to the contrary were to be ignored." - Helen Maurer, "Margaret of Anjou: "Queenship and Power in Late Medieval England"

Three things that we can surmise from this:

We know where the "Henry was an innocent helpless king being controlled and manipulated by his Evil™ advisors" rhetoric came from**.

The Yorkists were deliberately trying to downplay Henry VI's actual role and involvement in politics and the Wars of the Roses. They cast him as a "statue of a king", blamed all royal policies and decisions on others*** (claiming that Henry wasn't even aware of them), and framed themselves as righteous and misunderstood counselors who remained loyal to the crown. We should keep this in mind when we look at chronicles' comments of Henry's alleged passivity and the so-called "role reversal" between him and Queen Margaret.

Henry VI's actual agency and involvement is nevertheless proven by his own actions. We know what he thought of the Yorkists, and we know he took the effort to publicly counter their claims through a proclamation of his own. That speaks louder than the politically motivated narrative of his enemies, don't you think?

*There was some truth to these criticisms. For example, Wiltshire (ie: one of the men named in the pamphlet) was reportedly involved in a horrible situation in June which included hangings and imprisonments for tax resistance in Newbury. The best propagandists always contain a degree of truth, etc. **I've seen some theories on why Margaret of Anjou wasn't mentioned in these pamphlets alongside the others even though she was clearly being vilified during that time as well, and honestly, I think those speculations are mostly unnecessary. Margaret was absent because it was regarded as very unseemly to target queens in such an officially public manner. We see a similar situation a decade later: Elizabeth Woodville was vilified and her whole family - popularly and administratively known as "the queen's kin" - was disparaged in Warwick and Clarence's pamphlets. This would have inevitably associated her with their official complaints far more than Margaret had been, but she was also not directly mentioned. It was simply not considered appropriate. ***This narrative was begun by the Duke of York & Warwick and was - demonstrably - already widespread by the end of 1460. When Edward IV came to power, there seems to have been a slight shift in how he spoke of Henry (he referred to Henry as their "great enemy and adversary"; his envoys were clearly willing to acknowledge Henry's role in Lancastrian resistance to Yorkist rule; etc), but he nevertheless continued the former narrative for the most part. I think this was because 1) it was already well-established and widespread by his father, and 2) downplaying Henry's authority would have served to emphasize Edward's own kingship, which was probably advantageous for a usurper whose deposed rival was still alive and out of reach. In some sense, the Lancastrians did the same thing with their own propaganda across the 1460s, which was clearly not as effective in terms of garnering support and is too long to get into right now, but was still very relevant when it came to emphasizing their own right to the throne while disparaging the Yorkists' claim.

[l3irdl3rain]

according to Google, red lored amazons can live up to 80 years????? that’s so insane to think about a bird living that long

They can live up to 80 years but even with good care their lifespan is often much shorter. Just from personal experience at the shelter and at the vet clinic 60 years or so is a much more average lifespan for an amazon. It’s like saying a cat can live to be 30. They can, but they’re much more likely to live 15-20 years.

There are genetics to consider but and also the fact that parrots in captivity aren’t able to fly like they can in the wild. Even with some of the best possible setups they just don’t need/want to travel as much as they would in the wild. Amazons in particular are prone to being fat, lazy blobs in captivity and ending up with liver failure because of it.

And then last but not least most large parrots go through many homes in their lifetimes and nearly just as many of them go through some kind of neglect. We saw a lot of parrots at the shelter who had pretty bad arthritis relatively early into their older years because they weren’t housed properly. Or parrots who already had liver damage from poor diets.