#yeah ... no

[plutoons]

thinking about this beast

[kirbyderb]

☀️🪻 HUUUUUUUGS!!!1!!!!

[euko-going-insane]

F1 family tree, once again. Digital version this time.

Note: in the end of the day, they are not related, so no incest, okay? Thanks

Note n.2: This is my magnum opus and your daily Bearnelli propaganda.

[victusinveritas]

[fate-of-the-envious]

How is canon Annabeth abusive?

You want a list?

Alright!

1. She constantly hits Percy. Kicking him in the shins, elbowing him in the ribs, punching him in the gut. Not to mention the judo flip scene. Also, this is never said to be done playfully whatsoever. And it's done constantly in EVERY book.

2. She always belittles and calls him stupid. Like his plans never work. Ha, they work more than hers! Also, the parallels of her calling him Seaweed Brain, when Gabe called him Brain Boy! Like how would you feel if you have a nickname constantly degrading your worst insecurities?! All the damn time! Not to mention Thalia, who Percy was the first person who helped her after she stopped being a tree, after spending the school year with Annabeth started calling Percy Kelp Head and viewing him as dumb. Annabeth who ignored Percy all this year, and was overall just selfish and mean when they met again.

3. Annabeth is so possessive of Percy. Even before they are dating (which doesn't make it any better when they are), Annabeth doesn't let Percy be friends with Rachel. Trying to drive a wedge between the two. And Percy, literally only has Grover and Annabeth for friends. He is so alone, he needs more friends! Oh, and then with Jason she interrupts the two of them chatting and trying to get along. Also, just how she doesn't like that Percy seems to like Camp Jupiter, like he can't seem to have his own differing plans from her.

4. Tartarus. Everything about that was so bad. Like in Tartarus, whom Percy fell down to FOR HER, Annabeth brings up Rachel because in her thoughts, she needs to keep her boyfriend on his toes. Like bitch! Then, we get to how she thinks Percy is so manipulative when he talks his way to get Bob to kill his brother. Like that isn't Annabeth's number 1 tactic. She's so fucking judgemental!

And then the scene with Akhlys in Tartarus. Where yes, Percy is being scary torturing this goddess who tried to poison them to death. But she just tried to kill them! He's saving their lives! And then, Annabeth makes Percy promise her to never use those powers again, because "Somethings aren't meant to be controlled." Like do you know how useful poison-bending could be to save lives? What difference does this make from using a sword to kill monsters when all of them are trying to kill and/or eat Demigods! Not to mention, if someone is poisoned, Percy could help heal them!

Next, because of how horrible Annabeth made Percy feel for using these powers he attempts suicide. After he gets out and faces Polybotes, who controls poison, he doesn't even try to save himself and says to Jason that he deserves to die by poison for what he did! He tried to kill himself! And Annabeth never talks to Percy about this again, and instead talks to Piper who thinks Percy needs to be restrained like he's some kind of monster when he was saving them! Percy is literally the most selfless and kind person out there. And Annabeth treats him like crap! She doesn't deserve him!

5. Percy isn't allowed to have bad thoughts on Luke. Luke, who's tried to kill him repeatedly since he was twelve! And in general, this ship is so toxic and codependent right now, it's in no way healthy.

Anyways sorry for my rant, but yeah Annabeth is abusive, and it's just so concerning how people possibly in elementary school are being exposed to this being a healthy relationship, where girlfriends can hit their boyfriends, and can stop them making friends with others, because they belong to them like some sort of object.

Yeah, I just relate to Percy so much, and I don't want him to deal with another Gabe.

Edit: Okay, for anyone who likes Annabeth or Percabeth, I don't care - you do you. You can like and dislike all the characters and ships you want, just as I can. So, if you disagree with what is said, that's fine, but don't expect me to change my stance when I have already pointed out several concerning behaviors. So, like good humans, we'll just have to agree to disagree and move on with our days.

[clownaddict]

I’m sorry, but with everything I’ve read about this Titanic submarine accident the only thing I can say is, you know, there is tempting fate and then there’s ..... this.

[correct-hermitcraft-quotes]

Joehills “dont wanna be in a warehouse while there’s a full moon, it’ll turn into house”

Season 8(I can’t remember what episode)

[minnie-cai]

i’m under the impression that patrick zweig is huge on thigh squeezing.

people say they like boobs because they’re like stress balls and i believe that he has the same idea, just with thighs.

i don’t think it’s just that he finds it hot, i think he finds it comforting as well, like it doesn’t have to be sexual for him to just slip his hand between your legs and squeeze your thighs.

at first it might’ve been weird, you thought he was trying to finger you, maybe trying to spread your legs for a second round but when he reassures you that he’s done for tonight it’s even more weird because what else could he want?

[dduane]

Meanwhile, over at Twitter ("Unclear On The Concept" dep't)

(Via @damnyouwillis at Twitter, with the comment, "uhh")

[alexaloraetheris]

I can't find the video I saw it in, but the truest thing I ever heard in my life is that the Cybertruck is to Tesla what Airpods are to Apple.

The gist is that they are both tech companies that pushed themselves ahead as 'the best' producers of a new type of a firmly established product (cars and phones) and as other brands caught up with their tech they became more designer brands than about actual utility.

You put in your Airpods and go strolling about every peasant on the street knows you can afford a bunch of Apple products and just throw them away when they break to het new ones because, as we all know, repairing them on your own is nearly impossible and getting them repaired costs almost more than a new product. Even though the design is kinda dorky, and the sound quality is nothing to be amazed by, they're a visual signifier of wealth everybody who looks at your face can see.

Cybertruck is the same, except it's even lamer, and much more dangerous. It literally looks like a dumpster. Everybody on the road knows you have money, but they also know to give you a very wide berth so they're not caught in the implosion when you crash. They've become not just the signifier of wealth but also everything WRONG with having too much money. Which is arguably the POINT because Elon Musk is basically the shining example of the old adage 'money can't buy you happiness'.

So instead of being the cutting edge of technology they were intended to be, both the Cybertruck and the Airpods are just about bragging rights, and signalling to the world you're probably an obnoxious ass who only has money going for them.

[unbeleevable]

"Wow.. I can't sleep, let me put on some asmr to relax, possibly."

TICKLISH EARS

"Oh shit I forgot"

[xovera-toz]

Okay but like, what's up with the running gag of confusing french and italian in Goncharov's return?

It's not that type of movie. Who even thought of that.

I admit it was funny, and I really, really needed it at certain points, but still.

[thepromiscuousfinger]

(x)

[dipperscavern]

ur so right abt the stark men being safe bc id trust them with my drink at a party

robb would start barking, cregan would start stabbing, and jon probs would just hide in the corner somewhere

YES!! i absolutely would too omfg.

cregan looks practically unapproachable, so i doubt many would try it while he has your drink. but if they did, he’s tilting his head n giving them this weirdly polite-ish smirk that begs them to try something.

robb would have too much fun with it. you hand him your drink to go to the bathroom, and out of the corner of his eye he sees this guy noticing & smirking, not believing his luck. he’d see him start to saunter up & robb would just start talking loudly about how he’s killed ppl i’m crying 😭😭

& jon would just give this guy the most disgusted, unbelievable look that has the dude swallowing and awkwardly shuffling away.

[jasontoddsguns]

Honestly, I do think it was inappropriate to parody the last supper. I’d probably be more okay with it if it wasn’t on international television for a sporting event that symbolizes togetherness.

[batsplat]

seen people talk about how marcs 2012 season was the reason the penalty point system was introduced (that made vale start from the back in 2015 which is admittedly absolutely absurdly funny) so here i am to ask my favorite motogp historian for thoughts (and prayers?) mostly about what exactly marc DID to make that happen (kinda funny also that he was branded a track terrorist from day 1 😭) and why they struck it in the mid 2010s?

okay so I'm gonna be lazy here and start out by just including what I put in the marc race recs post:

phillip island 2011 was the worst incident, and marc was criticised by motogp riders too, including valentino and casey. that one was like... it was just straight up dangerous and also incredibly stupid, I mean you're trying to get an extra lap in at the end of fp1 and are putting yourself and other riders in serious danger (definitely a case where you can argue that the penalty didn't go far enough and a race ban would have been warranted). marc can sometimes be pretty bullish in response to criticism while still going away and kinda realising what he'd done was a bad idea, quietly adjusting his behaviour... examples include this, where he had his team appeal the penalty, as well as of course 2018 argentina, where he talked down the 'mistakes' he'd made and said he'd done more wrong in the aleix than the valentino incident (which may be true, but it's the rhetorical equivalent of saying it's better to go up to someone's home and throw bricks through the windows than it is to set it on fire) - he is fairly good at learning from his mistakes, even when he doesn't always fully admit to them

that being said, of course he did continue getting himself involved in a fair bit of controversy during 2012. but it's worth pointing out that the penalty points system wasn't just a case of 'oh this kid is so bad, we've got to do something' - it was also a case of 'yeah this is being handled in a super inconsistent manner, actually'. like, there were times people felt marc should be penalised more, yes, but other times where they felt it was too much... it was just a bit all over the place. luckily, inconsistent stewarding is a problem they've managed to fix in the intervening twelve years, so we never hear about that stuff any more. let's just give a quick summary of the four biggest 2012 flashpoints:

qatar: marc runs luthi off-track in a deliberate and pretty dangerous way and gets a slap on the cooldown lap for his troubles, plus a reprimand from race direction

catalunya: towards the end of a race in which marc made several questionable moves, pol espargaro attempted to overtake marc who had just saved a fall - marc cuts across the track to rejoin the racing line and ends up colliding with pol. he was initially given a controversial penalty in the form of a minute added to his final time, before that was rescinded (which was unsuccessfully appealed by pol's team). see here for valentino and casey's reactions

motegi: marc 'torpedoed' kallio in saturday morning practise, riding into his side while kallio was on the racing line headed into a turn and causing kallio to highside... which he was not penalised for. some responses to the incident below

valencia: marc attempted to overtake corsi in friday practise, causing him to crash. this time, race direction handed out a back-of-the-grid penalty

it's a subtle distinction but an important one so I'll just stress it again: the stated aim of the penalty points wasn't to hold back aggressive riders like marc but to attempt to reduce inconsistency, which had been exposed in part due to how differently these marc incidents were handled. what marc did was create several high profile controversies, in each case prompting some level of frustration with how race direction handled the whole thing. obviously, there were other non-marc-related stewarding controversies, but it is inarguable that he was a significant factor in causing a revamp of the system

by the way, here's valentino's criticism of marc after the valencia incident:

here's a quick explanation of how the penalty points worked:

and, you know, for what it's worth marc did calm down in motogp... he certainly became better at operating in the grey area of the rules, approaching his racing in a manner his competitors didn't always appreciate but was certainly a lot harder to penalise. though there were also incidents that of course people felt marc should be penalised for - say after jerez 2013, jorge did kinda go 'okay but surely you can at least give a few penalty points for this, isn't this what they're for'. but it's not like there was unanimous agreement on that, see the immediate responses of some of the riders:

(bradley smith saying that jorge's last serious race was motegi 2005 - the one he got the race ban for - is a bit of an insane stance to take and doesn't really match up to reality, but it did make me laugh so that's something. of course the general point that during the alien era most of them were avoiding doing much actual racing isn't exactly wrong but. still)

not to make this a riding standards post, but this is the underlying tension when you're trying to decide how to regulate the sport... jerez was the first serious test that system faced - and it's one where race direction ended up calling it a pure racing incident. which is a tough call! I talked about it a bit in the sete post and what his stance was on the jerez 2005 incident, where he feels like this isn't a contact sport and shouldn't be adjudicated as such. it's a fundamental philosophical difference that became very relevant again when marc showed up fresh from his controversial moto2 campaign and woke up the entire class with his own particular brand of racing. from a write-up of the jerez 2013 race:

(motegi 2008 not motegi 2010, which is something I remember because casey's pass also allowed valentino to immediately swoop on through. should be noted that casey may have apologised but he did not give the position back to dani lol. also motegi 2010 is pretty memorable if we're talking about hard racing. fair to say that valentino demonstrated he did not share the approach of his fellow aliens when battling jorge)

and more on the shift marc brought about:

this is the thing, right - a big part of understanding that time period is concerning yourself with what came just before. the general feeling (unsurprisingly not shared by casey, jorge or dani) was that the series desperately needed some new life breathed into it, that the racing had become stale and sterile and far too predictable... there were several factors that contributed to this, from the beloathed 800cc bikes that were only replaced in 2012, to the approach of those three aliens and how adept they'd become at racking up wins by dominating out front, to how valentino (generally considered the most 'exciting' racer of the lot) had taken himself out of the competitive picture... I mean, in all honesty the racing is still not great in 2013 compared to the rossi heyday (it had gotten better by the very end of the 2010s), but of course there's a lot more energy to it than the years before. which meant the sport as a whole was in a tricky place where they both had to be seen to be constraining marc, stopping him from being an active danger to himself and others, while also kind of... letting him loose. a little bit of controversy is hardly a bad thing, after all - love him or hate him, everyone had a take, and that's the kind of thing that's obviously healthy for a sport

marc did get two penalty points that year for ignoring yellow flags in silverstone and crashing in the same place as cal crutchlow had just gone down:

(for obvious reasons, 'ignoring yellow flags' is extremely dangerous, but there's no reason to believe he wasn't being honest here)

he was also given another penalty point for the contact that caused dani's crash in aragon, taking him perilously close to that back-of-the-grid penalty:

and that was basically their position - it's a warning. broadly they wanted him to not completely revamp his approach, but just apply a little more discretion, exercise his judgement. a little more caution, a little more restraint. it's still fundamentally a different philosophy of racing than the one that had been espoused for several years by the other aliens save for valentino - but marc could get to a place where he was engaging in hard racing that generally toed the line without crossing it. a little more detail on the aragon incident and marc's approach to racing in the context of the time period from this write-up:

this is the issue, right, marc was riding on just the right line of acceptable that race direction would not have in any way been justified in slapping out race bans - though you can certainly argue that in some cases, you could have handed out more penalty points, which would then have meant he would have faced more 'real' consequences. in any case, they couldn't actually 'teach him a lesson', because he'd already more or less learned it... if the lesson is 'hard racing and contact is fine, just don't overdo it'. which of course, not everyone would agree with. the odd memorable exception aside, throughout marc's premier class career he's been very aware of that line, and has taken care to avoid bringing the wrath of race direction upon himself too severely

the penalty points thing and sepang 2015... well, first of all let's quickly bring in what the actual ruling was:

honestly, I imagine that if they didn't have a penalty points system, they would've figured out a different way to penalise him, and might have slapped him with a back-of-the-grid penalty anyway. not in a 'oh the fim had it out for valentino rossi!!!!' way, more that they did need to be seen doing something. the penalty points felt like a fairly elegant way of giving a penalty that wasn't that harsh and wasn't making any judgement calls over whether valentino deliberately kicked marc, while also in an indirect way ensuring that valentino would suffer consequences. and yes, it is a nice bit of dramatic irony - but the piece says it, the penalty "had to be severe enough for rossi to feel truly punished". the penalty points happened to be the tool they had available and perhaps with a different set of rules, valentino would have been handed a slightly different flavour of punishment. but really, this is more 'fun historical coincidence' than something that massively changed the events that played out

of course, it was a controversial decision that few people felt 100% comfortable with. on the one hand, if you believe that valentino kicked marc, then you probably would have wanted him to be disqualified - three measly penalty points does not feel enough in that situation. on the other, if you believe that valentino engaged aggressively with marc but without deliberately trying to make him crash, then a back-of-the-grid penalty that essentially decided the outcome of the championship before the final race even started is a tough pill to swallow. (of course there's also a position somewhere in between where valentino didn't literally kick marc but did attempt to run him off track, which would make the penalty 'about right'.) of course, the championship standings should ideally not determine what sort of penalties are being handed out - but equally, it's something that did limit the intrigue going into the race, and over something that felt quite arbitrary. the other penalty point he'd gotten to rack up the four total was about a qualifying incident in misano - which either feels like a silly thing to determine the ultimate outcome of the championship, or instead is a demonstration of how the cumulative nature of the points system is supposed to work. but yes, it did get a lot of criticism in the aftermath, with concerns over whether future title fights could end up being defanged as an indirect consequence of relatively minor incidents earlier in the season

and of course, the penalty points were eventually scrapped in early 2017. here's a bit more on that decision:

basically, sepang 2015 was a contributing factor to broader changes in how motogp was regulated, which down the line had the knock-on effect of getting rid of that penalty system entirely. rightly or wrongly, race direction felt like they had better tools available to penalise riders and this system was now redundant. anyway [insert another lazy gag about how the switch to a stewards panel has completely failed in eliminating controversy from stewarding] [insert pithy closing line] [press post]