Tumgik
#and i couldn’t put it into words
stewykablooey · 1 year
Text
yeah we’re right to make the dickmatized jokes about stewy going against his better judgement to back kendall Again. but this time it’s honestly fucking miserable. stewy has been trying to get kendall out since the beginning, since before the beginning, and then here he is at logans funeral and kendall wants back in. stewy backing him for ceo, yes was him letting kendall pull the friend card and yes was him letting his feelings cloud his judgement and yes was him being dickmatized to a dishonorable degree, but its also like. logan is dead. logan is dead and the company’s not in family control anymore and ken is halfway out the door and he has something good going on. logan is dead and one piece of paper has kendall diving back in. stewy’s been trying to get kendall out of logans control from the start and logan is dead and ken should be free but they’re at his funeral and kendall wants back in. ‘ken is your head on straight?’ genuinely i was surprised that he backed him because stewy wouldnt. because it makes bad business sense and because stewy doesnt want kendall at waystar in the first place. ‘what in it for me, ken?’ he wouldn’t do this but at this point its a resignation. its a last resort. i couldnt get you out when he was alive and now he’s dead and i still cant get you out so i’ll help you get it in because this is the last way i know how to help you at all. ‘i dont wanna live in a haunted house, kendall tells stewy, unaware that he already is, oblivious to the ghosts lurking around them both. they were fucking right. it IS around them both. in kendall’s haunted house the ghost is logan. in stewy’s haunted house the ghost is kendall.
2K notes · View notes
cologona · 2 months
Text
“Jason should have ducked”
Jason gave Bruce a gun to shoot him with.
Jason gave him three options but there are only two results. Either Joker dies and Jason is left alive or Joker lives and Jason is too dead to care. That’s not an accident you have to understand.
It’s the most miserable “win if I win, win if I lose” I’ve ever seen set up and it worked. The neck slice moment isn’t just written for shock value it’s a demonstration of the truth of Jason’s point. Sometimes refusing to choose one over the other is just a choice for the other.
4K notes · View notes
ahsteria · 7 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
THE MARTYR; hilary mantel / arch budzar / wikipedia / franz kafka / anne carson / pinterest / velázquez, christ crucified (image) / cohen 1988 interview / sweatermuppet
3K notes · View notes
Text
OKAY who wants to hear about why i think nimona challenges amatonormativity? you do! 🫵
one of the main ways this is accomplished is through ballister and ambrosius’s relationship. it’s arguable that it doesn’t necessarily fit the traditional model of romance - not only are they a queer interracial couple, and not only is their relationship ambiguous in the book, but there are certain instances, especially in the movie, that subvert traditional ideas of romance and friendship.
one instance that really stands out to me is when the director asks ambrosius what’s on his mind and he goes on his imagined rant about how arm-chopping isn’t a love language - you know the one. when he mentions ballister, he refers to him as “the man i love, my best friend.” and not just one or the other, but both! the man i love, and my best friend. he places equal emphasis on both the romantic and platonic aspects of the relationship, valuing ballister in both a romantic context and a platonic context without treating either one as more important than the other.
and even moments such as the first “i love you” and the kiss manage to subvert tradition. both of these things are generally seen as a pretty big deal, especially in fiction - if the characters are kissing or saying “i love you,” it’s usually a moment in which everything changes. a line is drawn, dividing the story into after and now. sometimes it’s dramatic and climactic, with fireworks and a swell of music, but even when it isn’t it’s still seen as a turning point of sorts. now it’s official, now it’s real. but this isn’t the case in nimona. both moments are certainly significant - they do a good job of showcasing the character development and where ballister and ambrosius are on their respective journeys, and are certainly important in terms of representation - but neither one follows the path that most fictional romance does.
another way in which nimona challenges amatonormativity would be the emphasis on friendship! in the tavern scene (in the movie) when ambrosius suggests killing nimona, ballister disagrees and says “she’s my friend.” ambrosius replies with “aren’t i more than that?”, implying he’s more important than a friend - thus upholding amatonormative ideas. ballister becomes angry at that and leaves - challenging this idea and prioritizing his platonic relationship with nimona over his romantic one with ambrosius, as nimona is the one he wants to defend.
additionally, a big part of this scene is the way ballister deliberately rejects institute values while ambrosius unintentionally upholds them. and because the story challenges homophobia and transphobia (and other forms of bigotry) through the lens of the institute, it would make sense for it to challenge amatonormativity too! it’s something that’s become incredibly normalized, to the point that lots of people don’t even know it exists, and this is reminiscent of the institute brainwashing, especially when it comes to ambrosius - he’s been manipulated his whole life and probably genuinely doesn’t understand the level to which he’s internalized institute beliefs.
ballister prioritizes nimona many times, actually. when he tells ambrosius she’s “smart, kind, and quite sophisticated,” when he’s overjoyed to see her again at the end, when he refuses to kill her and saves her instead. over and over, he proves how much he cares about her, even when this involves directly going against what ambrosius wants - which, of course, is really what the institute wants. a core tenant of amatonormativity is the false notion that romantic relationships are more important or valuable than other types of relationships, but ballister actively goes against this!
to conclude, as a story that at its core is about identity and challenging societal beliefs, nimona defies expectations and traditional ideas of what it should or shouldn’t be. it’s possible that amatonormativity wasn’t what the creators had in mind, but the story still manages to challenge it with grace and elegance. just like its main character, nimona refuses to conform to what others want it to be.
940 notes · View notes
snzluv3r · 4 months
Note
What about an allergy denial scenario?
ask and you shall receive (six months later <3)
here’s my first attempt at a proper allergy denial scenario where you gift me flowers that i insist i couldn't possibly be allergic to as i apologetically sneeze all over them, not wanting to spoil such a beautiful gesture. lots of hitching and some very harsh sneezes
184 notes · View notes
turtleblogatlast · 2 months
Text
Tumblr media
Man I hate seeing this pop up. Like I GET IT but let me write my five paragraph add on essay in the tags in peace.
124 notes · View notes
yeetusthemighty · 15 days
Text
Tumblr media
This stupid description is way too funny to me
112 notes · View notes
azuremist · 4 months
Text
156 notes · View notes
unapprovedtrash · 1 year
Text
Wild Tears of The Kingdom theory but it’s been floating around in my head all day.
This is long and probably all over the place but please bare with me.
So I’m sure by now most of you have already seen the official artwork for Ganondorf and noticed that he had one of the tear shaped Gems on his forehead.
Except this one is red, you might even say it looks corrupted.
Tumblr media
But we’ll get back to that, because I wanna talk about the hero on the tapestry in botw for a hot second.
Tumblr media
So I know we’ve all already talked about how the hero in the tapestry isn’t Link, doesn’t even look remotely like Link, with the red hair and beard, but you know who does have red hair and a beard, oh yeah, Ganondorf.
Also, in the opening of the tapestry he isn’t called “The Hero” which is what we always call Link, he’s called “a warrior wielding the soul of a hero”
Tumblr media
So here’s where it gets crazy, well, crazier. What if for some reason Link wasn’t around for Calamity Ganon 10,000 years ago and Hylia, (or I guess it would technically be Fi?) was forced to chose someone else to battle The Calamity. A strong warrior, like someone from the Gerudo, like maybe….Ganondorf? And perhaps the “soul of a hero” refers to the master sword.
So let’s say I’m right and Ganondorf somehow ended up being the hero from 10,000 years ago, then what happened, why does he want to destroy us now?
Well, here’s where we pick up where I left off on the tear gem because I have a second theory inside of this one. Maybe, because he wasn’t the true hero, because he wasn’t LINK, he somehow got corrupted by malace during the battle, and they ended up having to seal him away somewhere deep underground. And the reason he’s so angry now isn’t just because of his malace corrupted soul, but because they betrayed him, they forced this role upon him, this destiny he never asked for and then when he needed help instead of trying to save him they locked him away, abandoned him after everything he had sacrificed for them.
I saw a post on tumble where someone mentioned they wanted to be able to save Ganondorf, which got me wondering if we can purify his little gem thing, but yeah that’s pretty much it.
Also, in not related to this theory, but I noticed the Zelda on the tapestry seems to have a dark skin tone, which makes me wonder if this is the Zelda from 10,000 years ago.
Tumblr media Tumblr media
560 notes · View notes
pixelatedraindrops · 6 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
(≧///﹏ ///≦) 💦 💫
65 notes · View notes
wanderingfandoms · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
Hearts in Word of Honor (a late Valentine’s post)
229 notes · View notes
itspileofgoodthings · 9 months
Text
one time my mom was talking about something, I don’t remember what, and she said “have you ever known the poverty of having nothing to say?” and when I say nothing has ever punctured my heart quite like that statement
#I don’t even fully know why. also I don’t think she even meant it how I took it#but there is just some part of me that does believe that that is the greatest poverty#when there are no words in your mind or heart. no phrases—nothing to rely on or fall back on#and you just have to struggle with the human condition and be able to express none of it#and I know that not everyone uses words like I do or relies on them that way but people need some words. they need something#this is why a) I never make fun of those Instagram accounts that are all cheesy inspirational quotes or whatever because people are trying#they are REACHING#also b) that’s why villains who are wordlessly violently destructive make me cry#because it’s just like—-yeah I can understand turning to violence if I didn’t have expression#if I couldn’t get anything out#also also this is not related but I watched some movie or tv show the other day (and I cannot for the life of me remember which one it was)#but there was this couple on a date and the girl asks him to complete all these proverbs after she gives him the first half#because ‘a man who knows his proverbs can’t be all bad’ and it shook. Me. To. My. CORE.#also also!! this is why I teach! it’s the heart of it for me!! And why I make them memorize poetry. like.#and put quotes on the board every day. like. You will have words and images in your mind and your heart from my class if I have anything#to say about it#anyway sometimes my mom says things and casually devastates me#and I think (I think) she was just talking about the poverty of having no news because nothing is going on#and so you have nothing to share with someone. and she was talking about my Grandma and how sometimes she was just so sullen and quiet#but it’s just because there was nothing to say#anyway anyway anyway that is also why the one time on the phone my grandma said who has known the mind of the Lord —shook me so much#because she never really said anything. words were not her thing and she never quoted anything#and suddenly her saying this line of scripture that said more than any words I’d ever said —one of the defining moments of my life#tbh. anyway this is very long I’m sorry. I have woken up this morning crying about this. idk.
111 notes · View notes
kiloxy · 9 days
Text
When I started Tfc I was annoyed and frustrated with the long and detailed descriptions of the court. I was overwhelmed by all these new characters, this new sport, and the influx of info. While too much detail and over describing things can be bad writing… Rereading the book I see it as a tool. We’re in Neil’s POV, of course there’s major focus on the court and what it looks like. All he cares about is exy! He catalogues every detail he notices of the court, he has a key! He belongs there for once! He rushes through the conversation with Nicky in front of the gates because he wants the court. When I didn’t understand his character at first (I’d just started reading about him of course, I didn’t have much grasp on him yet. Def not four books worth.) I didn’t see how the writing choices reflected him. How we’re truly in his POV and of course he’s going to care about the godforsaken 24 gates! But it was frustrating at first. And while some of it can be contributed to maybe less polished writing (it was the first book) I feel like intentionally or not this book series throws you in Neil’s head unabashedly, even if some of the ways his head works makes some parts hard to read. (Like knowing exactly where everyone is sitting at all times 😭)
21 notes · View notes
elipheleh · 3 months
Text
Tumblr media
mary & george feature in tv & satellite magazine. airs in the uk on tuesday (5th) at 9pm on sky atlantic & sky showcase. boxset will be available on sky boxsets/NOW.
text under the cut
Hollywood star Julianne Moore adopts her best English accent this week when she plays Mary Villiers, a mother-of-four determined to secure her family's future, in Sky's seven-part drama Mary & George.
When she learns that King James (Tony Curran) is in a sexual relationship with his adviser, the Earl of Somerset (Laurie Davidson), Mary realises she could gain considerable power and influence if her son George (Nicholas Galitzine) becomes the King's new favourite.
'Mary is from a kind of middling aristocratic family,’ explains Moore, 'She's living in less-than-ideal circumstances, looking for a way to educate her children and keep herself alive. The only way she's really able to do that is through her relationships with powerful men.’
After sending George to France to learn refinement, Mary endeavours to get him noticed - and King James is soon enamoured with the handsome young man.
'At the beginning, the relationship is very transactional for George’, explains Galitzine, 29. 'I don't think he develops feelings for James until a few months, perhaps years, into the relationship. George definitely has something to gain, but the love is very much real between them.'
Although the King is aware of the power games being played around him, he finds it refreshing that George comes from outside the usual circles of the royal court.
‘James is comfortable when hes in the company of his lovers - he wants to forget about being a king,’ says Curran, 54. ‘He wants that distraction of feeling safe with another person, as opposed to lords and politicians constantly grabbing at him, wanting him to make decisions about affairs of state.’
OUTRAGEOUS TRUESTORY
The series is based on the nonfiction book The King's Assassin by Benjamin Woolley, and Moore was drawn to the project by the way Mary seemed ahead of her time.
‘There was something outrageous and direct about her’, says Moore, who won a Best Actress Oscar in 2015 for her role as an early onset Alzheimer's patient in Still Alice. 'She seemed to have her own desire for power and agency in a situation where she might possibly have none. It's interesting what she achieved at a time when women couldn't even own property.’
The cast also includes Trine Dyrholm as Queen Anne of Denmark, Niamh Algar as Mary's confidante, prostitute Sandie, and Nicola Walker as the Queen's lady-in-waiting Lady Hatton.
Mary & George's salty language and revealing sex scenes may surprise some viewers, but the stars believe it reflects the earthy instincts of its characters as they grapple for power.
"The sensuality in the show isn't crass in any way, says Curran. 'It was certainly interesting for me. I'd ask the producers, "What am I wearing today?" and theyd reply, “Your birthday suit, pal!"’
'It's not a typical period drama because of the licence it takes with behaviours and sexuality,’ agrees Moore. 'It's beautiful and opulent and a wildly entertaining romp through history.’
Who’s Who (top right of image)
Mary Villiers
Julianne Moore
The deeply ambitious mother lives on her wits and wants to create a lasting legacy for her family.
George Villiers
Nicholas Galitzine
Mary's second son gains new-found confidence and charm after an educational visit to France.
King James
Tony Curran
The first joint ruler of Scotland and England, the King is seldom seen without an entourage of male companions.
Robert Carr, Earl of Somerset
Laurie Davidson
The King's current favourite is determined to stop George from usurping him.
Queen Anne of Denmark
Trine Dynolm
The Queen would prefer her husband's favourite to be someone she can control.
Sandie
Niamh Algar
Mary's confidante is a prostitute in a high-end brothel, making her privy to the secrets of the rich and powerful.
26 notes · View notes
neonbuck · 4 months
Text
I wish the posts warning people about the term “degenerate” and its fash/Nazi usage would like. Start saying “hey, if you call people degenerates, maybe ask your self why you think that’s ok to do?”
Like why do you even want a class of people in your head that you get to label as fucked up and inferior? when you do that, who does that benefit…?
this is not meant as a guilt trippy thing. I’m pretty sure I used to use “degenerate” too when I hung around garbage twitter furry friend groups. these are the questions I eventually asked my self, and fixed the way I treated others for the better.
32 notes · View notes
caker-baker · 1 year
Text
Umbrella
“Well.” The villain huffed, putting their hands on their hips. “This just ruins it!”
The hero had to inch closer to hear the villain over the pouring rain.
“I can see how this is going to go.” The villain glared at the hero who was now face to face with them. “You and your stupid water powers will obviously take the win here.”
The hero didn’t respond, and instead looked down at their utility belt, pulling out a compacted umbrella.
“What are you doing, dumbass? You control water, you don’t need that.”
Silently, the hero opened the umbrella, and handed it to the villain. The hero themself merely held up a hand, and the raindrops above them seemed to stop.
“I know it still might not be dry enough for your fire,” The hero finally spoke. “but if it can even the playing field–”
“Why?” The villain asked, knuckles gripping the handle of the umbrella far too tight. “Is there a weapon in here? Does it dampen powers? There’s absolutely no reason for you to have an umbrella with you.”
The hero only gave a one armed shrug. “Not everyone can control water. Would you rather reschedule to a clearer day?”
The villain’s immediate response was going to be to mock them, ‘oh please, nobody is that righteous’.
But clearly somebody was.
“No.” The villain spoke slowly. “No, this should be enough.”
It wasn’t really. Even with the umbrella, they couldn’t send out any long range attacks because the rain would immediately put out their fire, they would have to do hand to hand all the while holding an umbrella.
The villain shut their eyes. They weren’t going to let the hero win this fight just because of some stupidly kind action. They were going to try their best given the circumstance, give the hero a run for their righteous money, and throw the umbrella back at them.
That wasn’t at all how it happened.
There were opportunities, opportunities to burn the hero when they got close enough, opportunities to run away, opportunities to at least call a stalemate.
But the villain had ended up in a puddle, umbrella fallen next to them, the hero smiling apologetically above them before they disappeared.
They snatched the umbrella back as they stood, guarding themself from the rain.
It wasn’t something the villain could wrap their head around, why the hero didn’t just use some heavy sheet of water to knock the villain back and unconscious, especially when so much of it was readily at the hero’s disposal, why they let the villain have their pathetic wisps of smoke and their meager fight.
Why they didn’t take their umbrella back.
The villain huffed again, already plotting their next meeting, how, without rain, the villain would beat them with more than just opportunities, and then they would throw the umbrella right back to the hero.
But until then, they would hold onto the umbrella, and they would be shielded from the rain.
209 notes · View notes