#thanks for being polite

[cin3maa]

Hey! Can You draw me and Donnie? , is okey if You don't want to by The way

oh mai gah are u guys for seriously right neow

pwease pwease pwease read my boundaries before sending reqs🥺🥺🥺pwetty pwease🙏🙏🙏🩷🩷

[weregreatatcrime]

Hiii! Omg I am so happy to see you doing Trollhunters again! And I am enjoying the crossover tidbits.

Though, as an older fan, I am curious to ask, hope it doesn't feel too pushy. Have you thought about your Kanjibarbara fic ever since coming back to ToA?

Okay so I'm gonna say it again and probably not one more time. Not because this ask was pushy, you're fine, but because I've gotten Several asks about it over the last two years since stopping Kanjibara au and all my other projects. It's frustrating because it's a deeply personal and painful topic for me and many people from multiple Fandoms keep asking the same questions. Like a lot of people. Like, a LOT of fucking people on ao3

The last two years have been medical hell. I've had a fuckton of medical, neurological, and mental issues that changed my entire life- part of those issues are cognitive decline and memory loss. The first year is a blur tbh, and a lot of my memories are fuzzy as a result. My ability to recall things is scattered- some shit is fine, some stuff may as well have happened to a stranger.

Part of that is my creative work. I don't think I'll ever continue the things I was working on beforehand, simply because I don't remember what I was planning or what I was doing with them. I remember I had an absolute joy with them! I remember the Trollhunters Fandom being a delight and a very warm and welcoming environment.

But a lot of details are muddy and I'm sure you understand, trying to piece together my own memories of stuff I'm struggling with is frustrating and painful and more stressful than it's worth. I'm already recovering incredibly well right now, I don't feel like digging myself back into that hole for Fandom stuff

New stuff is all on the table though! After two years, I finally was able to get my hand strength back up enough to draw recently and have been working on maintaining it. (Tremors and spasms made it impossible before) I'm also back into writing- though I still struggle with cognitive issues with writing, working on writing things that bring me joy has helped a lot

But all my projects from before are likely not going to be touched on again. It sucks. But they're a sensitive topic for me rn and probably will be touchy for a long while. Chances are I'll delete any asks or comments I get about them from here on out just for my own sake

[endlessburningdarkness]

fair enough, i see where you're coming from

Why do you think Yue Qingyuan doesn't go wild after Shen Qingqiu self detonates?

Why isn't he going to get back Shen Qingqiu's corpse?

Is it because he respects Shen Qingqiu's choice to sacrifice himself for his disciple?

Is it because he doesn't want to trigger an actual war?

Or is it because his Xiao Jiu has been dead for a long time already and he knows it?

I'm so curious because it's so at odds with Yue Qingyuan who walked into an obvious trap at the hope of getting Shen Jiu back

The Yue Qingyuan who pushed himself to the point of being stuck with a sword that drains his life force when he uses it

The Yue Qingyuan who clawed at walls of a cave to escape and ran away to save Shen Jiu when he could

The Yue Qingyuan who pulled away from a scene where Shen Jiu had murdered people to without a care of the crime

Why was Yue Qingyuan staying back at Cang Qiong while Liu Qingge fought for Shen Qingqiu's corpse?

[aprillikesthings]

Ngl, one of my absolute fave bits of popular post-spop-canon headcanons/fanon, is Catra becoming Glimmer's advisor and close friend.

It's one of those "oh, of course" kinds of things. Catra is extremely knowledgeable about the land that was under the Horde's control, far more than Hordak ever was. (He shoved that work off onto Shadow Weaver and then Catra.)

And...admittedly this includes land that became Horde-controlled under Catra's leadership. She still knows a lot about it. Geography, trade routes, that kind of thing.

But also, we know Etheria is, in general, not big on retribution or punishment--that was something only the Horde did. Instead people might be wary of you for a bit but if you prove yourself to have changed for the better, it's all good.

(This is so obviously not limited to Catra--Adora, Scorpia, Shadow Weaver!, Entrapta--they all worked for the Horde at some point, and/or did shitty things, and were all given a chance to be better. Whether SW was actually better is its own essay lol, but the rest of them. Yeah.)

So Glimmer making a public point of having Catra as her advisor would also be a very public way of saying "The past is in the past and we can all work towards a better future together."

[avesseloflanguage]

i know this is old news but like. it is so fucking insane to me that convicted felons — who can qualify in every other way, citizens who are absolutely affected by elections and politics — are not allowed to vote in the united states. like that alone is fucking crazy. and fucked up and VERY intentional and on track for the usa. but still genuinely crazy to actually think about.

but worse is that donald mother god damn fucking trump can still run for president and could be elected while being a convicted felon. like. bro can't vote for himself i guess. but this guy could still legally become the fucking president. HE CANT LEGALLY VOTE IN ELECTIONS ANYMORE. BECAUSE HE IS A CONVICTED FELON.

BUT HE COULD LEGALLY BECOME THE HEAD OF STATE.

[waitineedaname]

I was thinking about this post comparing sqh and jgy, and then this chart happened. this is less about what they're Actually like, and more about a combination of intentional persona + public perception of them

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

obviously hanguang-jun would wear sports bras…. right?

Wei Wuxian failed his perception and insight check rolls.

[eruscreaminginthedistance]

[jhonny]

"stop talking like that boy you're ruining my tboy swag" - yami bakura, probably

or, when both bakuras are trans but only one of them has perfected the trans voice.

+ bonus thief king (as a treat)

[heycrymeariver]

five and many more: a timeline summary

(For legal reasons, all of this is alleged.)

Ref. links: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

1984, is the first time Neil Gaiman released a book. 

In 1985, he got married and started his career as a comic book writer and in 1986, he assaulted Julia Hobsbawm.

This took place in Chalk Farm, London, where he forcibly kissed her and shoved her down on the sofa at her own studio flat before she escaped. According to The Crown Prosecution Service, “sexual assault is where one person intentionally touches another person sexually without their consent. The touching can be done with any part of the body or with an object.” In her own words, she described it as “an aggressive, unwanted pass” and that she still remembers it even now. 

Through 1987 and 2002 he progressed his career and published the famous book Coraline. A new year happens and he is in his early-forties and is thriving off of the success of his several money-making works, at a book signing event in Sarasota, Florida. There he hits it off with a young 18 year old (K) and they start dating. Two years later, in 2005, with two more awards under his belt, he forcibly penetrated that young twenty year old who told him not to because of a painful infection.

After another two years, he and his first wife divorced.

It's 2012, five years later and one year into a new marriage and at another book signing, Neil, age 52, immediately assaulted Claire (pseudonym) with a non-consensual kiss. Throughout keeping contact Neil had escalated this with video and phone calls that had a heavy sexual connotation where he appeared to either be naked or tried to instigate something. All of this accumulated into sexually assaulting her on a tour bus. Neil’s contact with her lasted until 2014 where he had promptly accused her in a text message that she had used him for sex.

Within the same year, Neil had enough money to buy a property, and met Caroline Wallner, 55, and her at-the time current husband. With a deal to do odd jobs for Neil and his wife to live there until she could own a five-acre plot, it wasn’t long before things turned sour. A divorce in 2017 sent everything spiraling, with her former husband fired, she in a once financially stable position, was now completely dependent on Neil Gaiman who used that to his advantage. Using her lack of financial stability to get himself sexual favors, he coerced her into a sexual-only, notably uninformed BDSM-entering territory while she was emotionally vulnerable, not accepting denials. This lasted until the summer of 2021, and in December of that year she and him went to court, what awaited her was $275k of compensation and a non-disclosure agreement (nda).

It wouldn’t take long for another woman to experience Neil Gaiman’s repeated offenses as well because in February of 2022, Scarlett (a pseudonym), age 23, a newly hired nanny, was sexually assaulted in the bathtub at his house. Neil, age 61, climbed into the bathtub with her and coerced her into having sexual relations. He too, in his coercion of her, made her financially dependent on him and brought BDSM elements to an inexperienced young woman who could not say no.

Since July 3rd of this year, 2024, five women have come out with sexual assault allegations aimed at Neil Gaiman. They all have several things in common with each other: either being young and naive, a fan of his, or put in a vulnerable spot financially or emotionally. Throughout the years and according to the stories, Neil progressively gets more bold and aggressive in his attempts for sexual gain. There are many more stories out there and whispers on the internet of how predatory Neil Gaiman has been in the industry. However, focusing on the five women who came out to speak and pushing their voice is an important part of the discussion.

Staying silent will only protect his peace.

(If you want to help keep this topic alive, please check out this post by @taraljc to see what steps you can take.)

[scumvillainess]

honestly i never really agreed with the popular shen qingqiu had a good shizun headcanon because if shen qingqiu actually had someone who he knew cared about him, he definitely wouldn’t have turned out the way he did in canon.

[tangledinink]

For the beautiful twins, a gift of hope

@tmntaucompetition

[biggest-gaudiest-patronuses]

so I watched the most recent episode of succession (oops) and the thought vaguely occured to me "oh dear how are they going to recover from this one?"

and the answer is, of course, that they won't. this is the beginning of the end. this is how they destroy each other.

anyways that's my prediction for the fandom ciao kisses hope u all have a very chill season 4 💋

[stealingpotatoes]

have you watched barbie the movie? interested in your thoughts about it :)

not to sound like a terrible feminist but it's so funny that ryan gosling is getting all the awards for the women are amazing movie

[cuddlytogas]

there was some Twitter madness recently where someone left a comment on someone's art to the effect of, "Ed shouldn't wear a dress, he's a man!" which I do disagree with on principle, but unfortunately, it brought out one of my least favourite trends in the fandom

so, naturally, I had to write a twitter essay about it. and I already largely argued this in a post here, but the thread is clearer and better structured, so I thought I'd cross-post for those not on the Hellsite (derogatory). edited for formatting/structure's sake, since I no longer have to keep to tweet lengths, and incorporating a couple of points other people brought up in the replies

so

I want to point out that the wedding cake toppers in OFMD s2 aren't evidence that Ed wants to wear dresses. Gender is fake, men can wear skirts, play with these dolls how you like, but it's not canon, and that scene especially Doesn't Mean That.

People cite it often: 'He put himself in a dress by painting the bride as himself! It's what he wants!' But that fundamentally misunderstands the scene, and the series' framing of weddings as a whole. I'd argue that Ed paints the figure not from desire, but from self-hatred; it's not what he wants, but what he thinks he should, and has failed to, be.

(Yes, I am slightly biased by my rampant anti-marriage opinions, but bear with me here, because it is relevant to the interpretation of the scene, and season two as a whole.)

The show is not subtle. It keeps telling us that the institution of marriage is a prison that suffocates everyone involved. Ed's parents' cycle of abuse is passed to their son in both the violence he witnesses then enacts on his father, and the self-repression his mother teaches, despite her good intentions ("It's not up to us, is it? It's up to God. ... We're just not those kind of people. We never will be."). Stede and Mary are both oppressed by their arranged marriage, with 1x04 blunty titled Discomfort in a Married State. The Barbados widows revel in their freedom ("We're alive. They're dead. Now is your time").

But even without this context, the particular wedding crashed in 2x01 is COMICALLY evil. The scene is introduced with this speech from the priest:

"The natural condition of humanity is base and vile. It is the obligation of people of standing ... to elevate the common human rabble through the sacred transaction of matrimony."

It's upper class, all-white, and religiously sanctioned. "Vile natural conditions" include queerness, sexual freedom, and family structures outside the cisheteropatriarchal capitalist unit. "The obligation of people of standing" invokes ideas like the white man's burden, innate class hierarchy, religious missions, and conversion therapy. Matrimony is presented as both "sacred" (endorsed by the ruling religious body), and a "transaction" (business performed to transfer property and people-as-property, regardless of their desires), a tool of the oppressive society that pirates escape and destroy. That is where the figurines come from.

When Ed, in a drunk, depressive spiral, paints himself onto the bride, he's not yearning for a pretty dress. He's sort of yearning for a wedding, but that's not framed as positive. What he's doing is projecting himself into an 'ideal' image of marriage because he believes that: a) that's what Stede (and everyone) wants; b) he can never live up to that ideal because he's unlovable and broken (brown, queer, lower-class, violent, abused, etc); c) that's why Stede left. He tries to make himself fit into the social ideal by painting himself onto the closest match - long-haired, partner to Stede/groom, but a demure, white woman, a frozen, porcelain miniature - because, if he could just shrink himself down and squeeze into that box, maybe Stede would love him and he'd live happily ever after. But he can't. So he won't.

The fantasy fails: Ed is morose, turns away from the figurines, then tips them into the sea, a lost cause. He knows he won't ever fulfil that bride's role, but he sees that as a failure in himself, not the role. It's not just that "Stede left, so Ed will never have a dream wedding and might as well die." Stede left when Ed was honest and vulnerable, "proving" what his trauma and depression tell him: there's one image of love (of personhood), and he'll never live up to it because he's fundamentally deficient. So he might as well die.

This hit me from my very first viewing. The scene is devastating, because Ed is wrong, and we know it! He doesn't need to change or reduce himself to fit an image and be accepted (as, eg, Izzy demanded). Stede knows and loves him exactly as he is; it's the main thread and theme of season two!

(@/everyonegetcake suggested that Ed's yearning in these scenes includes his broader desire for the vulnerability and safety Stede offered, literalised through unattainable "fine" things like the status of gentleman in s1, or the figurine's blue dress. I'd argue, though, that these scenes don't incorporate this beyond a general knowledge of Ed's character. Ed is always pining for both literal and emotional softness, but the significance of the figurines specifically, to both Ed and the audience, is poisoned by their origin and context: there is no positive fantasy in the bride figure, only Ed's perceived deficiency.

Further, assuming that a desire for vulnerability necessarily corresponds with an explicit desire for femininity, dresses, etc, kind of contradicts the major themes of the show. OFMD asserts that there is nothing wrong with men assuming femininity (through drag, self-care, nurturing, emotional vulnerability, etc), but also that many of these traits are, in fact, genderless, and should be available to men without affecting their perceived or actual masculinity. It thematically invokes the potential for cross-gender expression in Ed's desires, especially through the transgender echoes in his relieved disposal, then comfortable reincorporation, of the Blackbeard leathers/identity. It's a rich, valuable area of analysis and exploration. But it remains a suggestion, not a canon or on-screen trait.)

Importantly, the groom figure doesn't fit Stede, either. Not just in dress: it's stiff and formal, and marriage nearly killed him. He's shabbier now, yes, but also shedding his privilege and property, embracing his queerness, and trying to take responsibility for his community. In a s1 flashback, Stede hesitantly says, "I thought that, when I did marry, it could be for love," but he would never find love in marriage. Not just because he's gay, but because marriage in OFMD is an oppressive, transactional institution that precludes love altogether. All formal marriages in OFMD are loveless.

So, he becomes a pirate, where they reject society altogether and have matelotages instead. Lucius and Pete's "mateys" ceremony is shot and framed not like a wedding, but as an honest, personal bond, willingly conducted in community (in a circle; no presiding authority, procession, or transaction).

That is how Stede and Ed can find love, companionship, and happiness: by rejecting those figurines and their oppressive exchange of property, overseen by a church that enables colonialism and abuse. Ed is loved, and deserves happiness, as he is, no paint or projection required.

ALL OF THIS IS TO SAY: draw Ed in dresses! Write him getting gender euphoria in skirts! Write trans/nb Ed, draw men being feminine! Gender is fake, the show invites exploration, that's what 'transformative works' means! But please, stop citing the cake toppers as evidence it's canon. Stop citing a scene where a depressed Māori man gets drunk and projects himself onto a rich, white, silent bride because he thinks he's innately unlovable and only people like her can find happiness, shortly before deciding to kill himself, as canon evidence it's what he wants.

(Also, please don't come in here with "lmao we're just having fun," I know, I get it. Unfortunately, I'm an academiapilled researchmaxxer, and some of youse need to remember that the word "canon" has meaning. NOW GO HAVE FUN PUTTING THAT MAN IN A PRETTY DRESS!! 💖💖)

[ravenkings]

i think that part of the explanation for elon musk's behavior both during and after his twitter acquisition, aside from the fact that he's The Most Divorced Manchild in existence and is constantly high on ketamine, is that he's trying to compensate for the fact that he can never run for POTUS bc he was born in south africa.