#ross's wacky headcanons

[tallyhall-lyrics-that-match]

i know tally hall headcanons are strange and maybe a little creepy at times but hear me out on this one okay? just hear me out

ross's wacky ass headcanons

ryan always gets a SHIT ton of papercuts from being in the mailbox all day.

i mean think about it for two seconds. this guy sits in a pile of envelopes all day. he opens letters. he probably sends them as well. this guy handles paper ALL OF THE TIME with no gloves, mind you

this man is GOING to get SEPSIS and FUCKING DIE,

[upstartpoodle]

25, 94, and 99 please!!

Thank you! :)

25. Headcanon about X character.

I’ll just do the first headcanon that springs to mind forthis one:

 As a schoolboy,Francis used to get up to some pretty wacky shenanigans, a lot of them aidedboth by Ross and some suspect liquor that some of the boys often managed tosmuggle into the school. After striking up a friendship with George, theseantics began to reduce in number, not only because George, being somewhat shyas a boy and determined to behave well at school as a result of his awarenessof the disparity in class between himself and the other boys, was something ofa calming influence on him in certain ways, but also because he was very goodat getting both himself and his friend out of trouble. This didn’t stop themcompletely, however, and Francis occasionally managed to drag George into someodd antics which they very quickly ended up having to find solutions to.

94. Imagine Poldark characters in modern times. What aboutthem would change the most?

Well, I imagine that the different class and gender politicswould have a significant effect on many of the characters, especially on thosewho are largely motivated by the attitudes of their times, like George, Demelzaand Verity. I can’t see George��s background as a blacksmith’s grandson beingsuch a sore spot for him—or others—in a modern context, since it resultslargely from the far more rigid class system and attitudes towards socialmobility he exists within. Same goes for Demelza, though I think she wouldstill be pretty aware of the difference between herself and the circles that theothers would likely move in. Verity, also, would not be written off as aspinster at twenty five as she is in canon though she might still worry abouther age, and Elizabeth would likely not have to rely so much on the men in herlife to provide for her and her family with the opportunity to earn money forherself. Ross and Francis, as members of the remains of the nobility inCornwall, would likely not be doing too well financially unless they hadcareers or businesses of their own, given that they would not be able to relyon their sources of income in canon since, as far as I’m aware, there aren’tany working mines in Cornwall anymore. In fact, Francis may have to sell partsof Trenwith, or open it and the grounds up to the public as a means of income,as a good deal of modern nobles have done in Britain. Also, with far fastermeans of travel, I doubt they would all stay in Cornwall. George especially, Iimagine, would spend a lot of time off in important places as his businessdemands.

99. What is, in your opinion, Poldark’s most significantmessage? What can we learn from it?

I’m not sure Poldark has any particularly deep messageattached to it. In fact, the messages that do seem to me to be present in thenarrative often irritate me, mainly since they either come across asheavy-handed and overdone (the constant moralising about the poor and starvingbeing one example, although I think that might annoy me less if it weren’tcoming out of Ross’ mouth, since I do technically agree with the message beingput across to a certain extent) or unfairly balanced in favour of certaincharacters when I can’t really see a reason why I should agree with it. Isuppose the lesson I’ve taken from watching the show is that my favourites canbe subject to random character assassination at any moment in order to prop upthe protagonist my frustration with the way a programme is written doesn’tnecessarily diminish my love of its characters (why yes I’m still bitter aboutseries 3).

Poldark fan ask meme

[thehollowprince]

I'm replying to you directly because I just want to make sure we know where everything stands. There is nothing I hate more than when people reply to replies and you're trying to run around in circles to catch up with everything.

For starters, you do you. You wanna headcanon Howard as having some kind of mental illness, great. You wanna headcanon Tony as being aware of the illegality of Stane's actions, awesome. But quit trying to pass it off as actual canon. There is no indication in any of that first movie that he was even remotely interested in his company before Afganistan, let alone investigating illegal deals. And trying to pull off the excuse of "it's how men behaved" in regards to the potential mental illness of the Starks is just bullshit. A: as if the Starks gave even the remotest shot of what others thought of them (canon proof: the movies) and B: that's still not an excuse for their shitty behavior. There isn't even the slightest notion that anyone wanted to get back at Howard through Tony, so maybe pull back a little.

In Tony's defense, he did try to turn his shit around after Afghanistan. I know a lot of people argue that he only did so after he was personally effected (myself included) but let's face it: he was a privileged white male who never really had to work for anything in his life... aside from his father's affections. Afghanistan was a wake up call for him, and the only real fault I have with it is that it took him so long to hear it, to realize the negative impact his weapons had in the world.

As for Ultron, I will not place any of the blame on Wanda. It simply wasn't her fault. She merely gave him a bad daydream. That's it. Fast forward to later in the movie and she laid out over half the team, rendering three of them nearly catatonic. You expect me, or anyone with common sense, to believe that Wanda fucked with his head enough to make him make Ultron? I mean, that's even if you put aside the very fact that it was mentioned in the movie that the Ultron Initiative was something that Tony had been working on for a while, potentially since the first Avengers movie, given his little speech about the nuke.

I do agree with you that Bruce is also responsible fo Ultron, because he did participate, without mentioning it to anyone else (despite the fact that he voiced his doubts in the film). As Stark said in AoU, Banner's a bit of a pushover. That's not an excuse, because he participated... twice!

As for the Mind Stone and Mjolnir, neither of those apply to this argument. For starters, Mjolnir wasn't used until the creation of Vision, and that was after Thor had recieve some sort of wacky ass vision of his own. And the scepter, Mind Stone included, was not used on anyone involved with making Ultron, so trying to deflect blame there is pointless. Yes, the Stone did infect the Ultron program, but had Stark simply run his ideas by everyone else rather than continuously thinking he is the smartest person in the room and therefore knows better than everyone, Ultron probably never would have happened.

Now, the whole Accords/Bucky situation. This is the part that really has me fit to be tied.

For starters, did Tony write the Accords? No. Did Steve ever imply that Tony wrote them, as you said above? No. Did Tony know about the Accords before they were presented to the Avengers? We don't know. It's implied that he knew about them, given that he came to the compound with Ross on the day the Accords were presented to them, but the thing that really sticks out to me is that he doesn't speak during the entire meeting.

When has Tony Stark ever been able to keep his mouth shut in situations like this? When has he ever resisted the urge to make the government officials who try to boss him around look like a dumbass? If you need a refresher, watch IM2, where he humiliates Justin Hammer at the Congressional hearing, as well as insulting the senators. Yes, it was revealed that the particular Senator in charge there was Hydra, but at the time, no one knew that. He was just a government official that Stark showed little to no regard for. Where was this attitude with the Accords?

But, you may be asking, if he didnt write the Accords, how could he promise Steve that they could be altered later? Answer: he can't. That was a U.N. document that he had no power or authority behind, meaning he used that entire scene with Steve and the FDR pens to try and manipulate a man he considered his friend, mostly for his own personal gains (he wanted Pepper back. He said so in that scene.) And all of this isn't even getting into Wanda's internment.

And now the big kicker, Bucky.

Where do I even start with this mess? How about the fact that no, the government/police were not trying to bring Bucky in for either questioning or imprisonment. It was stated in the film, by Sharon Carter in Vienna, that they had orders to shoot him on sight. That was a kill mission. There is no other way to look at that. With only a blurry photograph (because someone managed to snap a pick on one of the world's deadliest and most secretive assassins, realky?) the UN or who ever was in charge decided he needed to be killed on sight.

For the record, this is also an issue I take with T'Challa in this movie. The fact that he completely ignores the very Accords he and his country spearheaded to exact his own personal revenge is... just no.

Now the big finale.

Is Stark allowed to be emotional upon seeing the video of his parents' deaths? Of course. That's not even debatable. But him immediately trying to murder Bucky (and yes, he was trying to kill him. The directors and writers all confirmed this so that's a canon fact) is not in any way okay. I don't know how to impress upon you the concept that, though you may be angry, it is not acceptable in any way to try to murder someone, especially when Stark KNEW that Bucky was the victim of brainwashing. Hell, he'd seen Bucky activated less then two days before. For a man who often likes to profess how intelligent he is, he's not very smart.

TL;DR: stop trying to pass off you personal opinions as canon events that took place in the book.

Tony Stark

Given everything else I’ve posted in the last couple days, I gotta. First thing first.

Tony Stark pre-Afghanistan? WAS AN ASS. He was, honestly, pretty much everything his anti’s accuse him of being even post-Afghanistan. Womanizing, irresponsible as hell, etc. Yeah. Not really that good a person, TBH.

The thing is, and his anti’s will deny this to their dying breaths, but Tony got a wakeup call, and from thenceforward, he did his damndest to become a better person.

Let’s start at the beginning, shall we? First off, it’s made REALLY clear that Tony had, at best, a contentious relationship with his father.

Now, to be fair to Howard, he’d seen some shit. Been eyeball deep in it, too. And back in the forties, fifties, and sixties, the mental health industry was … more quackery than it was anything else. And on top of that there was a serious stigma attached, especially for men, to appearing in any way ‘weak’ or lesser, so yeah. Not fun for Howard. And it’s also possible that some of what he pulled with Tony was deliberate, in an attempt to protect Tony, as ass-backwards as that might have been. Because as a weapons maker/dealer, Howard would have had a shit-ton of very powerful enemies who WOULD NOT have hesitated to kidnap or worse Howard’s beloved son and heir. If there was a public perception that Howard found Tony wanting or otherwise didn’t give a shit about him, it would have lessened his value as a target. Or so Howard probably hoped, if he was indeed pulling stunts on purpose.

Then Tony becomes an orphan at either seventeen or twenty-one, depending on which movie timeline you’re working with. And Stane is there. Given what came later, I have to think that Stane deliberately encouraged the worst of Tony’s behavior because it meant Tony wasn’t paying attention to SI and what Stane was pulling.

Which gets us to IM 1. It is made clear in the movie that Stane hired Raza and co to KILL Tony, and that it was their call to not. Given that Tony was responsible for a large percentage of SI’s innovations … I have to wonder. WHY did Stane decide to kill the golden goose?

My answer? Tony picked up on the illegal sales. I’m very sure he didn’t know how bad it was, or who was doing it, but I’m willing to bet he found out about a bombing somewhere with SI stuff that he *knew* for fact hadn’t been sold to anyone in the area and went ‘ok, something fucked up is going on. I’ma find out WTF is going on and then do something about it’ Given that, at the time, Stane was his mentor and business partner, I’ll even bet Tony mentioned his discovery to Stane because it would not have immediately occurred to Tony that Stane was the source. At that point, Tony became a liability that needed getting rid of.

Tony’s reaction to Everheart’s reveal was, therefore, less about ‘wait, this shit is happening at all?’ and more about ‘That much shit? There is no way some warehouse monkey can divert THAT much, not to mention all the shit I saw when Raza had me. This is way higher up the ladder than I thought … wait. Shit. STANE.’

And from there, Tony started doing everything in his power to undo what had been done in his name. Did he fuck up in the process? Hell yes. Sometimes even when he was in his whole, right mind (his birthday party does not count as such an incident, given he was less than three days from dying of heavy metal poisoning. At that point, his decision making capacity was shot to shit). Like, you know, giving out his address and basically double-dog-daring a terrorist to come kick his ass. What. The. Hell. Tony. Not your brightest moment, bud.

And lets make it REALLY clear that becoming a terrorist is in NO way an appropriate response to being blown off for … well, anything. Tony bears exactly ZERO responsibility for Killian’s decision making process on that front.

And while we’re on who bears fault for what … can someone PLEASE for the love of god explain to me WHY Ultron gets blamed solely on Tony when there were the following factors/fellow guilty parties?

1) Wanda and her mindfuckery

2) Bruce, who helped with the programming

3) That. Goddamned. Scepter. and the FUCKING MINDSTONE.

4) The power surge from Mjolnir

And while we’re at it, can someone explain to me why Steve, in Civil War, seems to think Tony either wrote the Accords or has the power to enforce them or … I dunno. Be anything other than a messenger of ‘well, this is a thing.’.

Yeah, Tony signed them. Which says to me that the Accords did NOT allow for the Avengers to become *anyone’s* attack dogs. Because Tony would quite literally be the last one to be okay with that shit. He is not, remember, a Team Player. He fought tooth and nail to keep Iron Man out of the clutches of anyone but himself. There is no way in fuck he would then sign on to become a government lackey/attack dog. Just no.

Yes, things went to shit regarding Bucky. There was definitely some fuckery going on, and in more than one place. BUT.

No one knew, at first, that Bucky hadn’t been responsible for the bombing. All anyone knew was that the Winter Soldier (regardless of who he had been before he got twisted into said Soldier) was seen in the area etc. Even if god and everyone knew Soldier was Bucky, it was in everyone’s best interests to bring Bucky in, because seriously, even without the activation words in play, Bucky was (very understandably) more than a little fucked up and NEEDED HELP. Especially if he was (as seemed to have happened from the point of view of the people in the movie) falling into and out of the Soldier’s mindset and (apparently) committing acts of mayhem and terrorism.

If things had gone right, minus the fuckery … yeah. Bringing Bucky in was imperative.

And yes, Bucky Barnes is innocent of Soldier’s actions. I don’t even begin to argue otherwise. Unfortunately for him, from the point of view of his victims/survivors of his actions … well. It was his face. His hands. His body.

And I personally defy ANYONE to watch the brutal, hands-on murder of a beloved parent - because whatever Tony’s thoughts on Howard might have been, he clearly loved his mother - with the ‘person’ who executed said murder standing not five feet away and NOT lose their shit. Absolutely no one is going to be capable of calmly, analytically going ‘No, he is not in fact responsible. That is on HYDRA’.

And no, Tony was not, in fact, trying to kill either Bucky or Steve. Beat their asses to kingdom come? hell yes. Kill them? Fuck no. We’ve all gotten a damn good look at the firepower Tony packs in his suits. If he’d wanted either man dead, Super Soldiers be damned, they’d be dead. He’s not shy about deploying his firepower even at close range to himself. Remember that Jonah moment in Avengers? Yeah. So no, he didn’t want them dead.