#you can disagree but you're wrong 🤷‍♀️

[jonathanbyersphd]

Jonathan Byers has a quick reaction time because Lonnie is a piece of shit in this essay I will

[sophieinwonderland]

Now, why would you dare me to embarrass you and your pals like that?

I appreciate how you wanted my attention so bad you posted me to not one, but two subreddits.

Makes a girl feel special! 🤣

I have actually never seen Wikipedia cited as a source about endogenic plurality. Though I do see anti-endos all the time, when asked for sources, telling people to just Google things.

Anyway, here's @guardianssystem's document filled with academic papers about endogenic plurality:

I've compiled my own, but honestly, theirs is better organized than mine.

And in the interest of fairness, here are all the anti-endo papers debunking endogenic plurality:

Sorry, I forgot. Those don't exist. Oops. 🤷‍♀️

Echo chamber? LOL!

Weren't you the one spouting a bunch of lies on Tumblr, got totally debunked, posted the people who debunked you to r/systemscringe to have a hugbox where fakeclaimers could assure you how the people who contradicted you are all fakers, and then blocked everyone who disagreed with you?

Weren't you also the one who, when shown a quote from an expert in dissociative disorders who worked on the DSM-5 saying that a disorder isn't a disorder if it doesn't cause distress, argued that the people who defined what disorder are must be wrong about that definition?

You're a misinformation machine who can only find support when huddled in cringe subreddits. Don't try to talk about people in echo chambers.

Also, you know most of psychology is just... listening to people? That's how it's been as long as the field existed. DID (or MPD at the time) was a recognized disorder since long before the first brain scans were conducted on DID patients. It's saying something though when basically every single scientist who has ever researched endogenic plurality has said they believe it's a real thing, or that it could be. While absolutely zero academic papers have expressed that it's fake.

There is also an fMRI study into tulpa systems that's been in the works, but results have yet to be published.

Sure, if that's what you'd like me to call you, Crazy. 😊

Anyway, Crazy, you should know that just because you personally find something scary doesn't mean everyone will or that the thing is bad. Personal preferences are a thing.

In a study of tulpamancers though, most generally reported their lives becoming better after the practice.

78% reported improvements in their mental health, and 91% on overall life.

There are many out there who would jump at the chance to have someone there with them that knows them intimately, and to never have to be alone again.

If it's not for you, then so be it.

But it's certainly not something to be afraid of.

And maybe, for those who are willing to commit to the practice while America struggles with an epidemic of loneliness, it's something worth being open to.

This is actually pretty fair.

But that's now, and I'm looking at course of history and trends of plural acceptance.

300 years ago, any plural would be viewed as demon possessed and end up tortured or killed for their plurality.

70 years ago, all plurality was seen as a mental illness, and it was common to force plurals, as well as anyone else associated with mental illnesses, into asylums.

30 years ago, the first real plural communities were able to connect on the internet and form in small numbers.

8 years ago, the first studies into endogenic plurality started being conducted. 4 years ago, the ICD-11 acknowledged that you could have multiple distinct personality states without a disorder. 2023 marked the first, but certainly not the last, time a system used their system name as an author of an academic paper.

Recently, new plural resources have been designed and put into use. More servers than ever are using Pluralkit. And Simply Plural went from 100k users at the end of 2021 to 210k at the end of 2022.

Progress is happening far more rapidly than you realize. And you had best be ready for it.

BOO! 👻

Oh, hey, I just realized... this is literal pluralphobia!

Liberté!

Egalité!

Fraternité!

And yes, The Future is Plural! 😜

[nikatyler]

Ross in Detail

That brain o' mine do be rottin for him (this physically made me cringe but fuck it it's part of the Ross experience)

I was tagged by @nitrozem and @introvertedfox to do this, thank you! I'll post one more later.

[ PERSONAL]

Financial: wealthy / moderate/ poor / in poverty

where's that tweet that's like if you're a vampire and poor why don't you just step into the sun 💀

Medical: fit/ moderate / sickly / disabled / disadvantaged / non applicable

Class or Caste: upper/ middle / working / unsure / other

I think upper would be applicable but he doesn't meddle with the human affairs in a way that the class would matter too much at this point. And when it comes to like vampire classes, I don't think he's particularly up there in the hierarchy, sorry Ross 💀

Education: qualified / unqualified / studying / other

Criminal Record: yes, for major crimes / yes, for minor crimes / no / has committed crimes, but not caught yet/ yes, but charges were dismissed

Not really unless you wanna say drinking blood is wrong under any circumstances, even when the human consents 🤷‍♀️

[ FAMILY]

Children: had a child or children / has no children / wants children

Sunset my beloved ;-;

Relationship with Family: close with sibling(s) / not close with sibling(s) / has no siblings/ sibling(s) is deceased

Affiliation: orphaned / adopted/ disowned/ raised by birth parent/ not applicable

[ TRAITS + TENDENCIES]

extroverted / introverted /in between

disorganized / organized/ in between

close minded / open-minded / in between

calm / anxious / in between

Neither? He has zero chill for sure, this guy has not been calm once in his life but I wouldn't call him anxious...well most of the time at least.

disagreeable / agreeable/ in between

cautious/ reckless / in between

patient / impatient / in between

outspoken/ reserved / in between

leader / follower /in between

He was a literal actual political leader. Canonically. Mr fucking President. So. Yeah. 💀

empathetic / vicious bastard / in between

optimistic / pessimistic / in between

traditional / modern / in between

hard-working/ lazy / in between

cultured / uncultured / in between / unknown

loyal / disloyal / unknown

faithful / unfaithful / unknown

BOTH. But he's faithful nowadays and wouldn't have it any other way.

[ BELIEFS ]

Faith: monotheist / polytheist / atheist/ agnostic

Belief in Ghosts or Spirits: yes / no / don’t know / don’t care

Belief in an Afterlife: yes / no / don’t know / don’t care

Belief in Reincarnation: yes / no/ don’t know / don’t care

Belief in Aliens: yes/ no / don’t know / don’t care

Religious: orthodox / liberal / in between / not religious

Philosophical: yes / no

He was a ghost, he saw the afterlife (hated it, went back to his husband), his husband was literally impregnated by aliens twice. nuff said

[ SEXUALITY & ROMANTIC INCLINATION ]

Sexuality: heterosexual / homosexual / bisexual / asexual / pansexual

Sex: sex repulsed / sex neutral / sex favorable / naive and clueless

Romance: romance repulsed / romance neutral / romance favorable / naïve and clueless / romance suspicious

Sexually: adventurous / experienced / naive / inexperienced / curious

Potential Sexual Partners: male /female / agender / other / none / all

Potential Romantic Partners: male / female / agender/ other / none / all

[ ABILITIES ]

Combat Skills: excellent / good / moderate / poor / none

Literacy Skills: excellent/ good / moderate / poor / none

Artistic Skills: excellent / good/ moderate / poor / none

Technical Skills: excellent / good / moderate / poor/ none

[ HABITS ]

Drinking Alcohol: never / special occasions / sometimes/ frequently / alcoholic

Smoking: tried it / trying to quit / quit / never / rarely / sometimes / frequently / Chain-smoker

Recreational Drugs: never / quit / special occasions / sometimes / frequently / addict

Well. I think he may have tried it? I can see him trying it. But it hasn't become like a thing he does, not even special occasions.

Medicinal Drugs: never / no longer needs medication / some medication needed / frequently / to excess

Unhealthy Food: never / special occasions/ sometimes / frequently / binge eater

Splurge Spending: never / sometimes / frequently / shopaholic

Gambling: never / rarely / sometimes / frequently / compulsive gambler

[kookiecrush]

Why are you so negative about tkkrs if you are one? You've complained about tkkrs on Twitter and tkkrs on YouTube and tkkrs leaving comments in tkks lives, what's your problem? It seems like every chance you get your shitting on tkkrs like you think you're better than them.

Wow, okay.

I'm sorry if I've ever come across like I think I'm better than other taekookers, I can assure you that's definitely not the case at all, but I'm allowed to disagree with other taekookers opinions and actions, anon, we're not a hive mind. We don't all have to agree on everything, there's plenty of conflicting opinions and various viewpoints within the taekooker subset of the fandom. I dont agree with a lot of the taekookers I see on tw and there's nothing wrong with that 🤷‍♀️ I see some spreading misinformation, constantly victimising taekook, or hating on other members, and I don't condone that type of behaviour.

With the shipper comments in their lives, I'm not saying fans shouldn't mention taekook at all, but people need to understand boundaries and realise when they're crossing the line and just being plain disrespectful. I'm pretty sure Jungkook and tae don't want to read the comments and just see a ton of "clap if taekook is real" "blink if taekook is real" "breath if taekook is real." It's even worse when they're there to talk about something in particular or share some news with us and all people want to do is mention ships in the comments. That's rude and shows that some people only care about the ship and not them as individuals, and j*kookers are just as bad, I'm not only singling taekookers out. When they come on live excited to talk about their new album and the comments mainly consist of people spamming ships and asking inappropriate questions how do you think that makes them feel?

I'm not sure why me not agreeing with other taekookers and calling out behaviour I don't agree with is a problem for you, but it doesn't mean I think I'm better than anyone else. I've never felt that way.

[thesherrinfordfacility]

Dark grey anon again, greetings! I think, rather ironically considering the themes of this show, we might have misunderstood each other. You say I interpeted your comment on the shades of dark grey correctly, except when you then go into it more, that is in fact not what I meant 😂😂 For me, the dark grey comment read more like, if we take an alignment chart to help clarify, evil, whereas from your description I would personally go with the definition chaotic neutral.

I don't see why people* would interpret that as you not liking his character**... isn't fandom meant to love anti-heroes and morally grey characters? I promise this isn't going to stop Aziraphale*** from being in love with him or irrevocably ruin their relationship. Also, that vague post thing? I'l be honest, much as I love a lot of your other metas, I disagree with probably a good 90% of this one****, but ffs be decent about it!

Out of curiosity: you talk a bit about the character growth Crowley still has to experience. Would you consider his moral ambiguity, and becoming less ambiguous, as part of that, or is that simply part of his personality, and fine to stay the way it is, and it's just that it happens to run parallel when being analysed to the flaws that he does need to work on?

*I will admit my OCD wants a positive analysis for the sake of balance, however, this would be the same case in reverse with wanting a negative analysis to balance a bunch of positive ones. Unless you were to literally have an exact equal count of pros and cons there will always be something in my head going bingbingbingnotbalanced... what can you do? 🤦‍♀️🤷‍♀️

**Although, admittedly, English sucks, so that might partially be wording, and not just bad faith. Personally speaking, bad, for me, carries connotations of nasty/ill-intentioned/evil, and dark I arguably find worse, so some of it might simply be linguistic differences. At the very least, as a second language speaker, it's pretty easy to come away with the wrong impression, namely that you're suggesting he's actively villainous/malicious. In my native tongue, a bad or dark character would fall more under the category of commits murders for the sheer delight of human suffering.

***Potential hot take! I don't know, I'm not always overly in touch with fandom views, but Aziraphale is also more morally grey/morally ambiguous than some of the fandom would like to acknowledge.

****I do agree with some of the items on your list, but generally, I have a different or more lenient view on the points you mention and my conclusion is less mostly ambiguous character who can and will do good things semi-regularly and more mostly good character who can and will do ambiguous things semi-regularly.

hi anon, sorry i havent replied sooner✨

sorry, let me clear this up - when i said you interpreted my comment correctly, i was referring to this bit of your ask: "You say that Crowley's dark grey comment is one of the more honest and introspective things he says: that kinda comes across to me like you saying that Crowley's saying he's mostly bad with a capacity for good* and that's a fair assessment of him."

idk how to word the next bit, tbh - i don't necessarily see crowley as a bad character, certainly not outright (and definitely not an evil one). and idk if it was, perhaps, how shittily i worded it in the last ask (im not a writer, i regularly do not have The Right Words), but that's not what i was trying to get across. i just personally find it important that he asserts that he's not nice, he's not light, and imo the narrative has routinely supported this. he regularly shows tendencies of being someone that can be immoral. a little more specifically, maybe - sometimes insensitive, dishonest, distasteful, and acts occasionally without much conscience. yes, sometimes a little nasty, and sometimes a little ill-intentioned, but definitely not to the point where id consider him depraved, malicious, and completely absent of any redeemable quality - that's not what im saying at all. crowley is not a villain by any stretch.

a lot of people won't agree with that (that he's often a 'dark' or 'immoral' character), and in some part i agree with that contradiction, because he does have the capacity to be the abject opposite of those things, and has absolutely shown himself at times to be selfless, and kind, and compassionate - but i feel like those moments, those qualities, are all the more obvious and apparent because his character backdrop is typically the reverse, and because they are less frequent.

@maximumpenguinpuppy made the brilliant symbolic observation in their rb that kind of sums up my thoughts; the taijitu/yin-yang symbol is made of two parts, and one of those parts is a black field with a white dot - the 'good' within the 'bad'. it wouldn't be the symbol it is and have the meaning that it does, if the symbol were all white with two black dots. likewise, crowley and aziraphale wouldn't be the analogy for yin yang that they are, if they both were 'good' with small parts of 'bad'. it's this kind of balance that makes crowley being a mostly dark character, with capacity for good, not only make narrative and symbolic sense for me, but also makes him a more compelling character as a result.

and probably goes without saying, but it understandably wasn't something i explored in your last ask (and maybe should have) but aziraphale is the opposite. imo, his backdrop is mostly good, kind, selfless, and compassionate. it's then all the more obvious and startling when he doesn't act like that, because of the sheer contrast the story's portrayal of him has given us. so, exactly the same as crowley, his self-assessment of being "very light grey' also feels accurate, and again perhaps an accidental introspection that we as the audience ought to believe outright. (by the by, i feel like the audience does buy and accept this without much question - that aziraphale is a mostly good character whose questionable actions are perceived as all the more horrendous as a result - but seems to struggle with accepting the mirror of that where crowley's concerned) (as i see it anyway, this is only my interpretation of course).

as for where id personally like to see his character development go; i don't think it's a straightforward case of him starting to become more 'good' or 'light'. i think it would erase a lot of his personality and 'crowley-ness' for him to step completely away from being a bit of an occasional shit 😂 his darker qualities, i think in his case specifically, are likely to be a product of his experiences, and inner turmoil, and a good deal of bitterness and resentment, confusion and hurt. therefore, to erase his more immoral behaviours would be in part to erase what the narrative heavily suggests is the trauma and pain that he's been through; essentially, i wouldn't want to see what aziraphale is implied to want in the final fifteen, and restore him to 'good' when he's not that person anymore.

that being said, a crucial part of where i feel crowley is in the wrong a lot of the time is that he does tend to avoid blame or responsibility - and there have certainly been times where aziraphale has fallen afoul of that. i think perhaps (sheer speculation here) crowley's actions have crossed boundaries that aziraphale hasn't effectively communicated to crowley, and/or crowley has completely ignored. don't get me wrong; aziraphale has done the same to him too, and they both need to acknowledge this on their individual parts. they do need to make the relevant reparations for it, including genuine apologies, to respect those boundaries in the future, and make purposeful efforts to rebuild that trust. personally, i do think (or at least hope) that this is something that is going to be addressed, as being underlying sources of contention and upset for them both, in s3.

[ladyluscinia]

I'm blocking everyone who proves my 2am point about being massively unfun to interact with but this is the accidentally-funniest & stupidest possible way to do so and I'm screengrabbing it first:

Bruh I said this this week:

A central part of my months-long sporadic evisceration of OFMD is summed up in this quote from me:

A big part is the fact that I can and have enjoyed mediocre or charmingly bad tv. I didn't need them to stick the landing. I was expecting to watch them stumble and probably drop some of the things they were too ambitious about, and I had metaphorical band-aids at the ready to patch up scrapes and go "well I've seen better execution, but we had fun!" I can work with the show and the fandom content if the idea was good, or compelling, or maybe even just enjoyable!

I genuinely think you're probably doing fandom wrong or at least in a pretty boring way if you are not into something "bad" because of the whole "really good things don't leave the kind of spaces fandom thrives in exploring" phenomenon. This is probably actually a pretty consistent thread to my fandom commentary from the last several years even.

I love talking about ways spn is "bad"!!!

I just also have (understandably) zero respect and a good deal of annoyance for the takes of people who have not seen the show and admit they are getting all of their information about it secondhand (from people who have only seen the first third of the show even) + memes they didn't fully understand. Like maybe you don't have an educated opinion? Like maybe you just say "I didn't like a few episodes" to yourself on your own blog and then stop talking because whatever comes out of your mouth next regarding what happened in the 15 year long show you didn't watch is probably wrong or lacking context. 🤷‍♀️ You know? Maybe you shouldn't tell other people what the correct opinions are about the show they watched and you didn't because you're pretty sure you got the gist from a joke they made???

Like my guy this is the exact reason we make joke posts to laugh at people being stupid instead of spending a week on propagandizing brick walls. 🤣🤣🤣 You just say shit like this with full confidence.

Anyway in my educated opinion from watching 327 episodes of Supernatural I can say that Destiel is actually in this TV show for real because it was put there intentionally by writers. Which honestly should not be controversial or surprising because you don't get romantic love confessions of any quality put in a show if the majority of creators don't want them there 🤨 like who do you people think wrote the "I love you" from the jokes if not the guys who wrote the show?

[If you would like to disagree with me, please come back to start a fight after watching all the episodes and I'll block you for being an annoying educated opinion instead of an uneducated one 😇]

[fabaceous]

Hello, I am the same anon. I am not Jackie hater,i just think she is self centered person 🤷‍♀️.In my opinion the difference between Jackie and Lottie's dream is that Jackie wants to be cared for, to be loved by her "friends", but she doesn't do the same for others, and Lottie serves others without expecting anything in return.but correct me if i'm wrong

hi anon, thanks for clarifying. i guess i just decided i disagreed with you and didn't really feel like getting into all the reasons why because i feel like it's been said before and i'd just be reinventing the wheel here by saying it all again. i also honestly found it kind of difficult to tell whether the ask was in good faith or just trying to get a reaction, which put me off from answering it.

but if you truly want my thoughts, i'll get into it as briefly as i can (which will probably still be lengthy).

technically you're not wrong. jackie does often behave in self centered ways, and she does want shauna to say she loves her, and she did never say it to shauna (not that we saw, at least). but i think this is just missing some context and nuance, like that jackie's self-centeredness, while real and definitely harmful, comes from a place of insecurity that she is unable to control.

i'm also a little puzzled by the idea that wanting shauna to tell her she loves her is a sign that she is self centered. yes, she never said it to shauna (again, not that we saw. there's more to their relationship than we got on screen, and of course it's significant that we never saw jackie say she loves shauna, but if you pull the thread a little further, you can probably imagine there are reasons why she didn't/couldn't - maybe it feels too real to her? maybe she's uncomfortable exposing her feelings like that?). but i dont really see that as an indicator of jackie's selfishness.

and yes, jackie wanted shauna to love her so desperately that she often sought that love in toxic ways. i am not like, on the bandwagon that jackie never did anything wrong. i think she's often shortsighted and can be a jerk. but as with every character on the show theres more to it than her just "being self centered" as if it's some immutable personality trait that sprung up out of nowhere.

as for your point about lottie serving without expecting anything in return, while jackie expects to be loved without offering anything in return...again i think i can sort of see where you got that from, i just disagree. i think in the pilot jackie showed clear signs of caring for the other girls, and imo as much as jackie wants to be loved, she also wants TO LOVE. i feel like that is kind of at the core of her personality. i think she would love to be given an opportunity to love shauna without having to hold back. i think she would also love to love the other girls, but she's insecure/doesn't have a strong identity, so she doesn't feel confident enough to love like that because it's just too vulnerable. and by the time they get to the wilderness things have changed so completely and she has no idea where she stands anymore, so she retreats and lashes out.

so im sorry for leaving you hanging. i hope this clarifies my position a little. again, technically, i dont think you're "wrong", but i do think it's not as simple as you make it sound.

[hoghtastic]

“I'd kindly ask you to refrain from calling people "a disappointment of a person" or resorting to personal insults, simply because others express themselves in a way that you, personally, don't approve of.”

Ironic isn’t it, anyone can come on here and say literally anything about red and it be the longest ask with the most disgusting names you can call a person, (personal insults, simply because she expresses herself in a way that people here, personally don’t approve of😉) you would respond with shit like “haha, lol🤭,😊,😅,😂” (insinuating you think it is funny too) even sometimes out right saying “ I guess your right, or couldn’t agree more or said it better myself 😉” but you never tell them to “refrain” from using that language? But calling people and their actions out as being the behavior of someone who could only be a “disappointment of a person” to come on here and agree that that kind of stuff like that list and the memes are “funny”, is wrong and that kind of response should be “refrained”?

“She deserves it”

“She’s done worse”

If you can’t take what you dish out maybe you shouldn’t be in the kitchen at all?

Because this is a gossip blog, primarily about Alex Høgh Andersen. The fact that his girlfriend keeps being discussed here is probably because that's he only "content" associated with him that has been available lately. So, like I mentioned, the fandom discusses what it has been given. I'm sure a lot of us (myself included) would much rather be talking about his most recent projects, photoshoots, funny stories (like he used to post), but it is what it is. 🤷‍♀️ Either way, a gossip blog is the right place for these public figures to be talked about. And I'm aware that I'm repeating myself, but all opinions — positive & negative, are welcome. What this place isn't for, is for people to discuss and/or attack each other. That is the only "rule" around here, and if it isn't met, it is my place as the admin to remind people of it. It's not your place to call people out for expressing themselves in whatever way they see fit. But if you'd like to share your thoughts and opinions, and are open to agree to disagree, you're more than welcome to do so here.

In conclusion, and using your analogy, if you don't like what's being served in this kitchen, I'm sure you can find many other restaurants that are more to your liking. 😊 Have a nice day!

(In response to this ask.)

[petitmimosa]

hi hi! you don’t have to post this because i don’t want to cause drama, but i have the somewhat unpopular opinion that *’s comment wouldn’t have gone down so badly if it wasn’t for the timing. don’t get me wrong, i still think it’s a BAD take and i don’t agree with what he said, but the comment was ‘found’ at a time when the fandom was already miserable (and imo looking for someone to blame) which is why people attacked him the way they did. they were looking for an outlet for their anger (1/2)

like, idk if timing can improve poor commentary… it might have been even worse if he had said that right after the SP, but maybe he would’ve been given greater benefit of the doubt as the hole pictures hadn’t been circulating for days atp + we still had hope for the FS. idk it’s just been fascinating to watch this fandom do basically a 180 on their opinion of a skater overnight. i’m not saying people have to like him (not at ALL) but it’s interesting to see 🤷‍♀️ — thanks for reading, take care!

Hiii! Maybe I'm just bitter, or tired of all the drama the fs community has stired over the past decade but, idk.

Part of me thinks like you. Had Javi been on TV in the middle of summer maybe it wouldn't have blown up the way it did.

Another part of me, maybe bigger, believes that this is how people on social media are. They wait for the smallest crackle to light a huge fire. Let's not forget that the translation that blew up wasn't all that accurate and some spanish fanyus tried to give context to it but with very little success.

Yes, people wanted to evacuate all the anger and the frustration that the SP created but was that reason enough to act like they did? No.

A lot of people in this fandom only see others through two spectrums: either you're a Yuzu stan who worship everything he does and say or one wrong glance, one clumsy statement and you're the devil.

For ex I could never say on fswti that I strongly disagree with the way he injured his ankle even more with that gala cocktail practice without being killed on the public place.

[whysojiminimnida]

https://whysojiminimnida.tumblr.com/post/662063027887243264/has-jimin-ever-shown-attraction-to-women-i-cant

That clip where you mentioned jimin checked out a girl walked behind him , if you've only watched that small clip that was taken out of context and edited. Idols were going in lines behind him. He relaxed back and kinda streched his arms and neck , that girl called chaeyoung of twice passed by and then a boy passed by I think.

He might have thought he hit his hands on them coz he was stretching that's why he looked like ' oh shit ' or else he knew the boy group member who passed by coz immediately he looked the other side where artist are coming from and shaked hands with his friends who were following that boy.

I searched for the original video but couldnt find it

Next , edited video is where it says jimin and sunmi is staring at each other

https://youtube.com/shorts/v1CBhjCy69s?feature=share

Plzzz They edited the shit out of this video.

There was a 0.0000001 sec eye contact after that we can clearly see he was looking at yoongi who's siting next to him. But by this angle it looks like JM and sunmi are siting togtehr and flirting. Even I believed this and thought this shit is real until I watched the original video 🤡🤡🤡 it was NOTHING.

I don't know whom, maybe jimin antis and tkks who wants to JM to be a womanizer sooooo bad is spamming the comment section - JM makes eye contact and flirts with every girl 🤷‍♀️

Like you said I can only say very few examples where I think JM have shown attraction to woman. One, the infamous video of bts reacting to hwasa lol. Boy was taken aback.

When other boys have said this and this about describing ideal type and attractive woman earlier jimin mostly have kept quiet. If he was asked directly he will say cute girl and passes the question too quickly.

That the JM - woman encounters I can remember off

You're not wrong, anon. I didn't link that video because it appeared edited and not complete in my view and I'm glad to have that validated. Thanks! Thing is, we honestly do not have the information to assume sexuality or gender identity of other people unless they speak on it - and even then they may speak on it differently at different times. And just because I check someone out doesn't mean I'm into them. Jimin appears to many, I'd say most, people to be gay. Just gay not bi or pan or anything else, he clearly presents to many as somewhat effeminate (I'd argue that entire idea but it's a way long whole other post) and not interested in women like at all. I disagree with pigeonholing him into one attraction solely because of his own actions and displayed queer coding. Jimin is a very smart person and I don't think he's showing up with bi-flag-colored hair for no reason. I don't think he's flashing bigender symbols and the Ilecebra/Arcanus without knowing what that means. Just because he's in a long term relationship doesn't change who he is. His partner is a man (as far as we know, again, whole other post). But I'm a cis female who was married to a man for more than two decades and I'm not straight. So when I say he's gay I mean his relationship appears to be a homosexual one. Whether Jimin is gay or bi or pan or he's actually a straight girl sometimes is not something I can verify without having a number of close personal conversations with him. I mean, I volunteer. Anyone wants to get me close personal hangout access I'll take it and see what he gives me. And then I'll shut down all social media and tell nobody because Jimin's story is not mine to tell. I'm just the peanut gallery at this circus.

[filthforfriends]

I think you're confusing Cervello a band from Stockholm with Italian 70s band Cervello? Italian band Cervello has no album called Cervello, they only have 1 album and 1 live album (2017). You're talking about Swedish band Cervello who worked with him? Don't get me wrong because I still agree with everything else, just wanted to point that out, I hate when Spotify lumps in artists just because they have the same name.

Otherwise I agree that Gasoline sounds generic, that you can't distinguish what they wrote and what not (I also disagree with the anon who said they can't do everything alone anymore because they tour now - I know it's news to some people but they have been really busy before the US or even Eurovision already and they managed and they would have had time to do that in LA. I don't even wanna know which songs they wrote during quarantine and now probably scraped as the album was initially planned to be out already. RIP to these songs and melodies. People seem to forget that they wrote most of Teatro Vol I during one and a half months in London. So we could have had the LA version of it). People shitting on Italians because they are worried they are getting the Italian version of Ed Sheeran? Please get a grip yourselves, they stepped foot out of the US for a day and were hitting us with an acoustic version of Vent'anni. To say countries and the industries in them don't treat them differently is simply not true.

This will sound bitter but maybe they need this album to flop. To get their heads set straight, part ways with David Massey (who's another one who's definitely responsible for this dilemma. Jonas Brothers, Shawn Mendes, sounds familiar? Oh yes, from the people they write with now) and realise that why people actually liked them is not because of Beggin' or because they chilled in the USA with Miley Cyrus looking like a bunch of influencers - Sorry Vic. They liked them because they were authentic, non generic, non American rock with an attitude, beautiful lyrics and mind boggling instrumentals. All three of them have massive potential to be the bests in what they do and having people agree on it but not like this. People notice, I can see a lot of Europeans are already turning away now because they don't want to keep up with it anymore. If it's worth the (american) radio playtime, sure. Is it really though? For a rock band that always said they want to be authentic, have the say in everything they do from music to clothing to social media, wanted everyone of them to be treated the same? 🤷‍♀️

I don't agree with you on a lot, it is what it is but I definitely agree with you on this one.

This makes a lot more sense thank you for this opinion anon ❤️‍🔥

[sophieinwonderland]

99% of your blog is literally about spreading disinformation

Do you just label anything you disagree with as "disinformation?"

I just made this post using academic sources to debunk actual disinformation from r/systemscringe.

A couple days ago, I made this post debunking their claims that endogenic plurality was a conspiracy theory:

Tell me where the so-called disinformation is?

Did the American Psychiatric Association publish disinformation when publishing a book that said you can be plural without trauma or a disorder? Did the World Health Organization when they said you can experience the presence of multiple distinct personality states without a disorder?

Was the mention of a fictive-heavy system where all the EPs were Star Trek characters in The Haunted Self also disinformation?

It seems like you're using "disinformation" as a buzzword. Just keep repeating that you're right and I'm wrong enough, and maybe people will believe you? Overpower the sources and science and professional opinions with repetition.

I don't think that's going to work here. I know your playbook. I wrote it.

Have a nice day, and better luck next time! 🤷‍♀️

[lila-rae]

Unpopular opinion, and only letting it loose here because it's anonymous and I don't really think you'd judge me. I don't like Yelena. I don't find her as interesting as Natasha. And I'm not digging Florence. Her execution of the accent is fantastic, but I'm not digging her as an actress or the character as a whole. She just seems like a second rate version of Nat. People may or may not disagree. 🤷‍♀️

Also fuck that person who said to "stay in your own lane". You're absolutely allowed to have your opinions on the english government, since you obviously spend time there, and your children are of English blood. That makes you English by default, so they need to fuck off. You're allowed to like or dislike that country.

I think Yelena has the potential to be an amazing character if she gets the development other avengers have had the privilege of getting. I think it’s hard to put her up against Nat when Nat had 8 movies of development and she’s been in. 1 movie and 3 episodes of a tv show. I’m hopeful for her character and what they can do with her.

As for anon, what can you do. I’m way more critical of America and all our issues than I will ever be about Britain. I just find it funny when people think not living in a country means you can’t have an opinion. (And I’m one awful election from moving to England). Like the whole world has a very negative (honestly valid) opinion of America and I’m not going to get my panties in a twist about it. This nation has a whole bunch of fucked up shit wrong with it, and has also committed numerous atrocities. If someone from France, England, Nigeria, India, etc… wants to point that out, knock yourself out. I’ll probably cheer you on. Let’s normalize being honest about our countries faults and history.