he named the cat their shipname

The Green family dynamics are so interesting because like, Viserys is the father but due to his decay he seems more like the grandfather, whereas Otto is the Grandsire but seems to fill out the role of a father more, not only to his daughter but also her children, so he and his daughter are a mother/father unit but in some situations Alicent is treated like a sibling to her children (by Otto) and then you have the obvious Helaena/Aegon happening (siblings who are also husband/wife and mother/father to their children), but at the same time it seems like Aemond is the one trying to be the family's protector and attempting to step up as patriarch, with some of the scenes between him and Alicent giving off the vibes of equals rather than Mother and Son (like when they discuss Aemond finding Aegon) and his relationship with Aegon seeming like he's the big brother and not the other way around, in this essay I will-

“queer spaces should be inclusive of people who don’t enjoy sex and who have “strange”, negative or repulsed relationships with sex” and “sex is an important aspect of lgbt community, history, and activism and queer people should be allowed and able to talk freely about sex without stigma or shame” are ideas that can and should coexist.

Gallery of people not knowing things about blood /tumblr discovers germ theory

You know what's interesting to me? For all people keep claiming at every juncture that perhaps Bells Hells will come around on the gods and see the harm they do (which, as discussed extensively, is, half the time, simply not intervening) not only have they never done so, but also they never quite cross the line into saying the party should join the Ruby Vanguard or aid them - and indeed, they defend against it - so what does this achieve? It feels like they're asking for a story in which the party stands idly by, which isn't much of a story nor, if I may connect this briefly to the real world, a political stance anyone should be proud of.

That's honestly the frustration with the gods and the "what if the Vanguard has a point" conversations in-game. What do we do then? Do we allow the organization that will murder anyone for pretty much any reason that loosely ties into their goals run rampant? The group that (perhaps unwittingly, but then again, Otohan's blades had that poison) disrupted magic world-wide, and caused people who had the misfortune to live at nexus points to be teleported (most, as commoners, without means of return). While also fomenting worldwide unrest?

Those were the arguments before the trip to Ruidus; with the reveal of the Vanguard's goals to invade Exandria, the situation becomes even more dire. Do you let the Imperium take over the planet?

And do the arguments against the gods even hold up? If Ludinus is so angry at them for the Calamity, what does it say that he destroyed Western Wildemount's first post-Calamity society for entirely selfish means? (What does it say about the validity of vengeance as a motivator?) What does it say that Laudna told Imogen she could always just live in a cottage quietly without issue before the solstice even happened? (Would this still be true if the Imperium controls the world?) What does it say that when faced with a furious, grieving party and the daughter she keeps telling herself was her reason for all of this, Liliana can't provide an answer to the question of what the gods have done other than that their followers will retaliate...for, you know, the Vanguard's endless list of murders. (That is how the Vanguard and Imperium tend to think, huh? "How dare your face get in the way of my boot; how dare you hit me back when I strike you.") She can't even provide a positive answer - why is Predathos better - other than "I feel it", even though Imogen and Fearne know firsthand that Predathos can provide artificial feelings of elation. Given all the harm Ludinus has done in pursuit, why isn't the conclusion "the gods should have crashed Aeor in such a way that the tech was unrecoverable?"

Even as early as the first real discussion on what the party should do, the fandom always stopped short of saying "no, Imogen's right, they should join up with the people who killed half the party," it was always "no, she didn't really mean it, she just was trying to connect with her mother." Well, she's connected with her mother, and at this point the party doesn't even care about the gods particularly (their only divinely-connected party member having died to prevent the Vanguard from killing all of them). So they will stop the Vanguard; as Ashton says, the means are unforgiveable. As Laudna says, it's not safe to bet on Predathos's apathy. As Imogen says, she's done running; the voice that she used to think of as a lifeline belongs to someone she doesn't trust. So I guess my question is: if they're stopping the people who are trying to kill the gods (and defense of the gods isn't remotely their personal motivation)...do you think the next phase of the campaign is Bells Hells personally killing the gods? Reconstructing the Aeor tech and hoping none of their allies notice? How does this end? Does your ideology ever get enacted? Or is this entirely moot and pointless and the story ends with Bells Hells saying "well, I'm really glad we stopped the people who [insert list of Vanguard atrocities from above]; none of us follow the gods or plan to, but honestly, the status quo we return to is preferable to whatever nightmare Ludinus had concocted in his violent quest for power and revenge"?

Ngl, I’m actually pretty uncomfortable reading my old posts defending the goodness of the common people and their right to defend themselves—as persecuted groups or as individuals—from hierarchical tyranny, given how easily in this current irl moment a not-insignificant amount of people have fallen into supporting an active genocide, because I cannot separate this from how much pushback I got (and still sometimes get) for being consistent in my politics

i am so tired of seeing this screenshot about wish's ending reposted everywhere and used to make fun of the movie:

and this is coming from someone who didn't even like the movie very much, but this is misrepresenting what happened. yes, there is a thing where asha wears a cloak resembling that of the fairy godmother and at the end star makes her a magic wand and the kids say she's like a fairy godmother, king magnifico does get trapped in a mirror, etc, and the movie was absolutely filled with easter eggs and references to previous movies--yep, when i saw the movie i did in fact take these scenes as just easter eggs! after all, think about this logically, if all currently existing movies in the disney animated canon were meant to take place in the same universe, and asha canonically grows up to be cinderella's fairy godmother, then...

how can you explain such a drastic difference in appearance? how can you justify asha, a brown-skinned afro-hispanic girl with a face full of freckles and long brown hair, and this old white woman being the same person? you can't, because they're not!!!! if i recall correctly asha doesn't even wear that cloak at the end when they're calling her a fairy godmother, she just wears it during one scene when she's a fugitive and has to sneak around. also...

the creators of the movie have directly confirmed that they were not trying to set up a disney multiverse and that it's not meant to be taken that seriously. rapunzel and eugene's cameo in frozen also wasn't meant to be taken anywhere near as seriously as everyone took it. neither were any previous cameos like belle in hunchback of notre dame or aurora in oliver and company (and if aurora being in oliver and company was canon, she'd be over 600 years old!). and, back to wish specifically, the little easter egg earlier in the movie where magnifico sees a wish bubble from someone who wants the perfect nanny to take care of their kids and says he's "poppin' that one" also doesn't mean the banks family from mary poppins canonically lives in rosas. the scene at the end where a boy named peter who wears all green and dreams of creating a flying machine goes to work with a girl in a blue nightgown whose wish is to fly doesn't mean peter pan and wendy actually somehow lived together in rosas and knew each other before the movie peter pan ever happened. it is literally impossible for all of these movies to take place in the same time period and universe, so it's a good thing that they, uh, don't, and were never intended to. please, if you don't like the movie, that's perfectly fine, but don't say disney is trying to create some convoluted multiverse and "MCU-ify" their movies when that just literally isn't true.

more “gay” pages posting complete homophobic garbage claiming bisexual women are lesbians

It's crazy that people still uphold show!Sansa as a well-written character and pretend that liking her is the pinnacle of feminism when it would be infinitely more impactful to acknowledge her terrible and misogynistic writing. This is the same character who, while written by two men, was thankful for the abuse she suffered because it allowed her to grow. The same character who we had to be told was smart because the writers were too lazy to develop or show her intelligence. The same character who had to rely heavily on the men surrounding her and ended up accomplishing nothing on her own merit ( and no, thinking that she deserved to be Queen doesn't mean that she earned it). She is not well-written, she is not complex, and she is not a feminist character. Which is fine! If you enjoy her then good on you, but please stop pretending that she's something she isn't just because you feel the need to justify liking her character

very interesting how everyone and their mothers bash steven universe for redeeming villains who tried to commit mass genocide, killed and harmed thousands of innocent civilians, physically and psychologically abused their family member; but they sympathize with and coddle catra, who did much of the same things.

(while i like steven universe and i do think that people hate on it a lot more than it deserves, i can admit that the show had its fair share of problematic elements. i'm not going to defend it to hell and back like some people do with spop)

Just saw a post where in response to being asked to mention the destruction and atrocities Israel is doing to Gaza Palestine rn, OP responded with "I've been avoiding it because scrolling and seeing dead kids and sadness is bad for my mental health as a depressed person and there's nothing I can do about it either way"

You dont even need to share live footage of graphic injury if it's understandably triggering but that is not something you even need to share in order to spread awareness to your large following about Palestine, nor what was being asked from you to begin with you just brought it up on ur own😭 Beyond the live footage there are text only information posts you can share. Israel's occupation of Palestine goes beyond the October 7th siege so the info you could share doesn't need to be about dead kids it could just be Palestinian literature or history for context. Even Jewish history actually. Even just a show of solidarity literally even the greatest thing u could do online would not be that hard or complicated😭

Especially when all the mainstream news outlets are spreading biased narratives and people getting derailed from the point because of the Hamas coverage and stuff, other figures that people listen to and believe in taking a firm stance with Palestine is helpful. I think justifying not even wanting to try in your own little way to begin with through this "there's nothing I can do" or "other ppl are better for this than me" is extremely disingenuous. (Besides the fact that Palestinians in Gaza that the best thing anyone can do is share about them on social media exactly for these reasons so this literally is what you can do even as just one person)

I'm not gonna make conclusions on what the moral character of OP is over one statement that may have just been poor wording. And forcing someone to share when they really don't want to is counterproductive. But idk how you can bring up the fact that there is live footage of bloody children having to bury their parents and siblings as the sole survivors of their families, and not realize how priveleged you are for your greatest exposure to that only being behind a screen, and your greatest concern from it only being your mental health💀 Especially if you're a white american

the sos awl development team really looked at rock and said “even if we could fix him (we can’t) he would never agree to it, carry on king”

You know idk if it's just me being oblivious af but mxtx sure does enjoy putting her protags through the trolley problem when it comes to her works huh /j

Just finished another class on how to not put my foot in my mouth and it's soooo validating to know people have to learn these skills like anything else. I've signed up for uhhh I think this is like my 3rd or 4th? And experts on how to not sound like a dick will school me and 30 other professionals on how to not sound like a dick. Wiiiiiiild how much there is to learn on the intricacies of communication :O

Honestly Law has the power to literally just drop these ppl in the ocean and let them drown bc they're devil fruit eaters but I guess he hasn't considered that option huh

Sansa and Alicent stans acting like people dislike them because they're feminine, when ninety percent of all Westeros women dress and act feminine, in fact it's a cultural and societal requirement expected of Westeros noblewomen. If the fandom has no problem with the rest of the traditionally feminine characters but hates Alicent and Sansa, then femininity isn't the problem here.

Also, and I can't stress this enough, not everybody in this fandom is constantly sorting female characters into "masculine" and "feminine" categories. It's incredibly misogynistic to do so and ignores that they're fleshed-out, complex characters. The majority of Dany, Arya, Cersei, Brienne, Rhaenyra, etc stans don't consider them to be masculine, that's just something their antis came up with to portray them as "lesser" female characters. When this fandom talks about "femininity" they mean it in a patriarchal context and, shockingly, there are some of us who can enjoy their characters outside of misogynistic standards. No one dislikes Alicent or Sansa for being feminine, because that isn't their only character trait (and only their "fans" think it is). Now if you want to talk about the traditional standards they hold as a byproduct of adhering to traditional feminity, that's another thing. But saying that people dislike Alicent's misogyny towards Rhaenyra or Sansa's classism towards Arya because they're "feminine" is just hilarious.