Many young wizards have taken to transmuting swans into humans and marrying them. One day, you are lucky enough to find a swan in the wild, and without hesitating, you turn it into a beautiful lady. Unfortunately, that ‘swan’, was a goose. You have just given a goose a human form.
After I explained the mistake, she laughed uproariously.
“You’re damn lucky I’m not a swan!” she said, wiping tears from her eyes. “They get by on their reputation for being pretty and graceful, but buddy, a swan ain’t nothing but a bigger, meaner goose. What do you all want swan wives for anyway?”
I opened my mouth and then shut it again. Honestly, I hadn’t actually stopped to think about that much. It had become a mark of status, having a demure, graceful woman following on your arm, always dressed in white and gazing soulfully about.
“They all seem very nice,” I said finally.
She pursed her lips thoughtfully as she finished pulling on the robes I’d brought with me. “Then there’s something else going on,” she said. “I’ve met my share of swans and not a one of them would put up with that shit. Are you sure they were swans to begin with?”
“Well, no, now that you mention it. I mean, everyone says that’s what they are, but I’ve never actually seen anyone else do it.”
“Do they talk? Act like humans? Do they seem intelligent?”
“Well, they are humans, so I suppose they must be, right?” This conversation was not going the way I had expected it to.
“Hah! Fat chance. Transmutation is just changing the shape of a thing. You turn a swan into a human and all you’ve done is put a swan mind in a human-shaped box. Wouldn’t do a wizard much good to be able to turn into a wolf or whatever if they suddenly only had a wolf’s brain to work with, would it?”
“So, you’re saying that if those women were swans originally, they’d still act like swans?”
“Hoo boy yeah,” she said. “Absolutely. Hissing, biting people, trying to build nests, shitting everywhere. The works.”
“Wait, but what about you?” I asked, desperately trying to get the conversation back on track. “You seem like a human, but you were a goose ten minutes ago.”
She grinned wickedly at me.
“I was shaped like a goose ten minutes ago,” she said. “And I appreciate the makeover. But I wasn’t a goose to begin with. Now come on. There’s something hella creepy going on around here, and we’re gonna figure out what.”
She started walking back up the path towards town.
“Wait!” I shouted, hurrying after her, “If you weren’t a goose, then what are you? And what’s your name?”
“You can call me Gwydd,” she said. “And as for what I am, it’s a long story. I’ll tell you some day. But first, you’re going to tell me everything you know about these swan ladies.”
Look! Don’t scroll past. This is an amazing little story! All the elements of perfect storytelling …
And folks just put things like this up on the internet for free.
We are blessed.
Blessed.
Every time I see some moral panic article about how some alarming % of teens admit to vaping or smoking or doing drugs or whatever, I think about that time in 9th grade when school handed us a survey on substance use, told us we had to fill it out, and me and a half dozen friends reported that we’d been habitual users of heroin, cocaine, and acid since the age of 9.
“Mischievous Responder Bias” is a known problem in surveying youth but it’s annoying and expensive to overcome it so often people don’t….also the things that come up when people try to look for it are hilarious, like 99% of the kids who reported having a missing limb were lying.
It is my favorite thing about education research: that you have to remember that your subjects are a bunch of little scamps trying to prank you.
The rest of the thread is here.
tl;dr: Don’t monetize AO3, kids. You won’t like what happens next.
read this thread. this is by far the most concise explanation of a lot of different issues that i’ve seen in fandom spaces in a while. cosigning both the linked thread and the thread about aus/uk/can law that’s linked in-thread.
AHDHXHEBSG TWITTER WRITERS DID WHAT NOW???? AND PEOPLE PAID THEM????
If someone has never taken a class that includes copyright law, they may not know this stuff, so I don’t necessarily blame random people for not knowing what copyright is, but like… maybe just maybe it’s something that should be taught????
proship-carmen
You know you’re a fandom old when you still remember putting disclaimers on your fic that essentially say: “don’t sue me, I ain’t making any money off this, just doing it for funsies….”
*facepalm*
Last year, the lead singer of The 1975, Matt Healy, managed to offend a whole lot of Gaelgoirí (Irish speakers) when he appeared to mock a fan’s name – Dervla – at a meet-and-greet.
Healy isn’t alone, though, when it comes to anglophone bafflement at Irish names. A recent study based on an analysis of Google searches revealed the words that British people have the most difficulty pronouncing. The names Aoife, Saoirse, Niamh and Siobhán occupy places in the top 10.
And it’s not exclusively a British problem: I always cringe watching US talkshows where the host quizzes their Irish guest (usually Saoirse Ronan) on the pronunciation of their and other Irish names.
I’ve heard every possible variation of my own name from non-Irish people. It’s not uncommon in Ireland; in secondary school, there were four Niamhs in my class. But I rarely come across an English person who is familiar with it, despite the proximity of our two countries.
In case you don’t know, it’s pronounced “Neev” or “Nee-av”, either is perfectly acceptable. The prefix Ní means “daughter of”. My surname is trickier, and has even tripped up a few Irish people; it can be translated as Herbert, and is pronounced “her-a-vard”.
When I was living in London, I quickly learned that saying Niamh at the counter in a coffee shop or over the phone to make a booking simply wouldn’t fly. This led to the invention of what I call my “Starbucks name”. Anything easily pronounceable with a simple spelling would do. Mia, Sophie and Rose were among my common aliases.
Speaking to others reveals a litany of similar experiences. Aoibhe Ní Shúilleabháin, a designer and teacher, spent two years at college in England having her name mispronounced and disrespected. (Her first name is pronounced “Ay-vah”.) More than one lecturer resorted to calling her “blondie”.
She tells me: “I was asked to say, ‘Three hundred and thirty three trees’” – a tongue-twister that does the rounds on TikTok – “more often than I was asked to repeat my name.” She recalls the lack of interest when she attempted to explain that Irish and English are different languages with different pronunciation rules.
Clearly, the sensitivities at play here are rooted in history: Ireland was colonised by the English and our national language was all but wiped out. A language revival began in earnest in the 19th century, but it’s never quite recovered. Ireland’s most recent census shows that about 40% of Ireland’s population can speak Irish. The English destroyed our language once before, so every little throwaway comment and scoff at our names hurts a little bit more – and ultimately becomes just tiresome. A handful of people even remark, “Oh! I didn’t know Ireland had its own language,” when I tell them about my name.
Writer Darach Ó Séaghdha is all too familiar with these difficulties. (The “rach” in Darach is pronounced like “Bach”, he says.)He hosted a podcast called Motherfoclóir, a podcast about the Irish language and culture, and whenever there were guests on with Irish names, “inevitably the episode would turn into group therapy”. There was one bad experience, he recalls, when he was told that his surname “looked like a wifi password”. But he decided to give his children Irish names, too. It’s a common trend, he says, “because parents with Irish names have been battle-hardened”.
Like the others I spoke to for this piece, writer and director Rioghnach (think “Ree-nock”)Ní Ghrioghair believes that a sense of superiority among English speakers is to blame for the constant mistreatment of Irish names. But she’s defiant. “We are going to scrutinise the British for any transgression regarding the pronunciation of our names,” and other things, she tells me, like British media claiming Irish actors as their own during awards seasons.
There is no easy crash-course I can give to you on the pronunciation of Irish names, but you can always try out “how to pronounce”-style websites (which themselves can be contested). But the simplest and most reliable solution is perhaps just to politely ask an Irish person – and listen attentively to what they say. I may have accepted that English people are very rarely going to get my name right on the first go, but I appreciate a well-intentioned effort. Just don’t laugh at it, please.
sometimes i say things on twitter and then make a little graph about it
did i tell u guys i got into an argument on twitter bc i said foxes are dogs and someone tried to bring up their actual fuckin. classification or whatever and i just said “foxes are dogs cause they are fluffye” and they kept arguing with me. the entire time i was like “you will not survive the immigration to tumblr you are lucky we are not there right now”
This is especially funny because they aren’t even right. Foxes *ARE* dogs.
No they aren’t.
yes they are. because they are fluffye.
OK yes they are.
mr-system-of-a-downer
Dog
Different family, but same order as @pictures-of-dogs
zarabithia
No, they are the same family. They are the same kingdom, phylum, order and family. They separate at the genus.
They’re a dog.
yeah they’re fluffye
theyre literally not dogs theyre not even fluffy. can we get science tumblr over hear or what!?
checkmate athiests
fluffye
okay but they literally are dogs, for those who are confused
If foxes are dogs, then so are wolves, coyotes, dingoes, jackals, and several other extant and extinct species.
Behold! A dog.
of course it’s a dog you buffoon. it’s fluffye.
Why on earth would someone think “BUT IF THEY’RE DOGS SO AR -”
Like yes of course wolves are dogs, where have you been. Jackals are excellent doggies! So are coyotes. Why is this confusing.
I love that this is literally two completely different arguments running simultaneously.
That guy up there who said they’re not even fluffy was thinking of sharks
sharks are also dogs. ravenous water dogs, but still dogs
Sharks can NOT be dogs they are SMOOTH
Tags via @jenroses
hate how all these apocalyptic films show society breaking down the hot minute the grid goes down, with all the survivors banding off into tiny violent gangs that prey on each other.
bitch you are a member of one of the most social species in existence! it is actually insane the extent to which humans have evolved to use cooperation as our main survival tool. humans have been building and then rebuilding societies for as long as disasters have been bringing them down. an apocalypse would be fucking awful, but the survivors would end up building communities and networks and pooling resources and knowledge, because that’s what humans do. that’s what they DO!!!
This reminds me of a really great video by Sarah Zedig where the second half is her going off on apocalyptic, grimdark shows such as The Walking Dead as a ‘libertarian power fantasy where their dogshit ideology is never wrong’ and I’ve never forgotten it.
At its core, the edgelord trope that society would “break down” into violence the instant the cops stop answering the phones is a myth built on cynical belief that humans are - at their core - violent, selfish, cruel animals that are only kept in line with the violent enforcement of “law and order.”
Hell, it’s a myth built atop another myth that the police - the legitimate purveyors of state violence - are even competent at all!
Considering their abysmal track record for actually solving crimes and observed reluctance to put themselves in harm’s way, there’s hardly a case to be made that they are actively keeping society from descending into chaos. And if you think that’s woke anti-police nonsense, bear in mind that once, when the cops in New York did a work “slowdown”, crime went down.
Because see, there’s a second half to the apocalyptic “breakdown of society” myth, the one that appeals to a certain group of people. It’s the part where, now that society has become the State of Nature, the truly strong, independent, well-armed men of action have carte blanche to “restore order” with brutal, justified violence.
Apocalyptic movies are a popular genre because it takes the standard Hollywood power fantasy and gives it an adrenaline shot of compatible politics: libertarian, every man for himself, Übermensch crap. As it depicts the end of the world, with all the pornographic spectacle of chaos and human cruelty, it tells its audience that you won’t succumb when the rest those dumb, weak masses perish. Whether it’s zombies, plague, climate disaster, or solar flares making our cellphones stop working, you specifically (yes you, Kyle!) will rise above it.
And when it does, the strong and rugged will survive and start over. Make things how they “used to be.” Presumably a nice, pure, uncomplicated world suspiciously absent of all those “weak” folks that had been muddying the waters and getting in the way, before. The ones that had prevented the naturally strong men from reaching their true potential in the Old World.
To the people that truly buy into this garbage power fantasy, the inevitable apocalyptic collapse isn’t something to be feared, but prepared for.
They’re looking forward to it.
…that last line struck a nerve like an icepick to the skull
I know a ton of people have said this before but for the love everything PLEASE stop treating AO3 like instagram. It is NOT cringe to comment on an old story. It’s an archive old stories are still meant to be found and read. Please think about interacting with the fic you read: at least kudos if you read it, a comment would be ideal. The authors will be over the moon. I guarantee you not a single author is going to ask why someone is commenting on an older fic.
AO3 is a library. That's the point of libraries. Please kudos and comment!
I recently got a comment on a fic I posted in 2015 and I spent the rest of the day smiling.
I occasionally get kudos on ancient harry potter fic I wrote almost twenty years ago. Before the saga had finished... Long before it got problems. It makes me so happy
Hot Take
Ritchie Tozer would've been a much weaker protagonist had he been the combination of a different screenwriter and actor. Like, I feel like he would've come off as such an obnoxious little shit had it not been for RTD's ability to write such wonderfully complex human beings, and had it not been for how Olly Alexander really brought the character to life and showed the fear and vulnerability that was hiding behind the bravado and the bullshit, making you root for Ritchie, or at least understand him when he said and did things that made him difficult to truly like.
It was kind of a bold move making the character who was most difficult to like the protagonist- Jill, Roscoe, Colin and Ash are all characters that it's easy to explain the appeal of. Jill's a steadfast friend and ally, Roscoe is such a great character, and has some of the best, most memorable moments, Colin is an absolute sweetheart, and while I do think they could've done more with Ash, he's still a pretty decent dude all around. Ritchie is a different story, though- and again, I really don't think he would've been nearly as strong a protagonist were it not for the ideal combination of actor and screenwriter.
Things like his insensitive assumptions about Ash's background in episode one and his "AIDS is fake actually" monologue in episode two really highlight what makes Ritchie work, imo, because in lesser hands both of these would've come off terribly. Instead, in his conversation with Ash which culminates in those insensitive assumptions, you get the sense that he really is trying to build a connection here, to make it clear that his interest in Ash has nothing to do with his race or anything like that, he just doesn't have any real experience talking to POC, specifically Indians, and doesn't know what is or isn't appropriate to say. And this is the last time we see him behave in this way, so it's also clear that he wants to get better and unlearn the harmful views he's been raised with.
As for the "AIDS is fake actually" monologue, this is something that largely works because of how Olly Alexander delivers it- he makes it seem like something Ritchie is performing on stage, like he wants everyone to believe he doesn't buy it, because maybe then he'll believe it himself. Because underneath all of Ritchie's brazen attitudes about the epidemic is an undercurrent of fear, and an unwillingness to accept that the freedom to be openly gay that he's waited years to have is at risk because of this disease nobody can explain. And if he can loudly proclaim that it's not really happening, that it isn't a big deal and he doesn't believe it, maybe that'll be enough.
Tl;dr: Ritchie Tozer is a prime example of why good casting, combined with good writing, can really make or break a protagonist in a show.
i also think it works because it's gay. Because RTD is gay, because Olly Alexander is gay. Because as a lesbian I watch it and I know those gay boys - sort of irresistible, totally charismatic.... and also little shits. A little bit too beautiful be forced to think too regularly. It's exactly right.
been howling at these for half an hour
The “I have to pee” library one has me in literal tears. Imagine it from the other side. Did they even say who they were? From the librarian’s perspective this person just came in and paid $5 to use the bathroom but then walked out without using the bathroom I am sobbing here that is hysterical
Laughing SO HARD
Twitter User: I wish I had more followers, then I’d be more likely to get verified.
Facebook User: I wish my posts reached further, then I’d get famous.
Instagram User: I wish I had more followers so I can unlock more basic features for my account.
TikTok User: I wish I had more views then I’d be a real influencer.
Tumbler User: I specifically didn’t tag this so no one would find it why does it have 200k notes? Who the hell are these people following me? All of you need to go away so I can go back to posting incomprehensible garbage and pictures of frogs.
Self-fulfilling prophecy
Oh no
This is a hilarious mistranslation actually. I suspect it originally said something along the lines of "Impregnerad mot vatten", i.e. "Water proof".
Impregnering is the process of making a material resistant to water/heat. The swedish word for water (vatten) is similar to the word for goblin (vätten) so I guess there was a mixup.
ancient vampire characters who pursue teenagers like.... romantically... you are absolutely swagless. die
i don't care if she looks like your dead wife if she's worried about what she'll wear to prom and you personally remember the louisiana purchase what common ground could you possibly have i am going to stake you
Obsessed by this statue I saw today in Le Havre (France) from the Italian sculptor Fabio Viale. The design isn't painted on... The ink is injected inside the marble like a real tattoo. And if I remember correctly what the guide said, it took the artist three weeks to do just that.
How stunning is this
So I looked this guy up because I wanted to know if he was contemporary or not because I'd heard that no one was really able to work marble in the ways of the 'old masters', but this guy is incredible! He's only 47, and beyond these incredible pigment tattoo sculptures, he's done some wack stuff with marble!
Yes this is marble.
Yes these are marble.
Hey did you guess, this is marble.
This is just a giant dong (made from marble). Titled, 'souvenir David'. 😁
More info and image sources here :
OTW Finance: 2021 Budget Update
Afrikaans • العربية • Bahasa Indonesia • Български • বাংলা • català • dansk • Deutsch • Ελληνικά • English • español • فارسی • français • 한국어 • hrvatski • italiano • עברית • lietuvių kalba • magyar • македонски • Malay • मराठी • Nederlands • norsk • polski • português brasileiro • português europeu • Română • Русский • српски • suomi • svenska • ไทย • Türkçe • Українська • Wikang Filipino • 中文 • Кыргыз
The OTW’s finance team is happy to present our 2021 budget update: https://otw.news/budget-oct-2021.
Anonymous asked:
I’m sorry if this is offensive and maybe I’m just really pea-brained, but I can’t grasp how someone can capture the raw appeal of men with such pinpoint precision while having zero attraction to them. Is it that you exclusively date women, hold a small amount of attraction to men, but just choose not to date them? Sorry if this is invalidating to you as a lesbian in any way. I know my share of being invalidated, given that I’m a bi woman, but I just had to know.
I'm not even remotely attracted to men and I never have been, I'm just a very good writer
Ok so I answered this with no coffee somewhat curtly, but I just reread and you weren’t actually being THAT rude, so I’m gonna give this another shot. Plus, it genuinely bothers me that there are people out there who can’t fathom how a lesbian might be able to write convincingly about attraction to men, because it leads me to believe there are people out there who might struggle to understand that humans can write convincingly and compassionately about human experiences they haven't personally been through, which is alarming in a lot of ways. So instead of being annoyed I’m going to make an attempt to describe my experience as a lesbian writer who writes about gay men.
First off: I have been out as a lesbian since I was 13. I have only ever had dated women save for weird prepubescent elementary school attempts at boyfriends. I have never had any sort of sex with a man and I’ve never been attracted to one beyond a vague sort of aesthetic appreciation which allows me to discern when men are objectively good looking. That being said, when I write from the point of view of someone who is attracted to men, I AM, to some degree, drawing from my own experience of attraction: queer attraction.
Queer attraction and gay desire are unique. They don’t function the same way heterosexual attraction/desire does. They’re shaped differently, they evolve differently, they happen in spite of fear, in spite of shame, cultivated in the darkness and born from connection, from authenticity from sameness. They exist without a rubric, and without the same symbolic weight heterosexual desire carries within society. It’s really easy for me to imagine the ways in which men are attracted to other men because I know what it’s like for me, to be attracted to women. I know the way that queer desire exists outside societal constraints, I know the way I was confused by it and fought it as a kid, I know the way I later learned to embrace it and feel pride and joy about it. I know how it feels in my gut, in my bones. These are the experiences which inform the way I write about attraction in my stories, not that nebulous understanding of what makes a man hot or not that I mentioned above.
Furthermore, bodies are bodies and humans are humans and it honestly feels weirdly gender essentialist and myopic to act like the things that men might find attractive about other men are SO different than the things I, as a lesbian, am attracted to in women. I am attracted to strength and sweat and body hair. I’m attracted to gender nonconformity and difference and unique, intentional presentation. I am attracted to other lesbians, and the unspoken, magical energy they have that I, as another lesbian, can pick up on. The things generally associated with women being attractive mean nothing to me, like I don’t get and am not attracted to 90% of Hollywood actresses of models. My attraction is queer, and I am attracted to queerness. This is something that I assume generalizes to many queer men, as well.
So when I’m writing about attraction I don’t ask myself “ok what’s hot about men that this man would notice?” I ask myself, “when I’m into something what do I notice? When I’m into someone’s pheromones where do my eyes go, what do I smell when I share space with them?” And it’s literally never something gender specific. That’s such a weird straight person thing to be attracted to gender specific markers, like “ah I love his man abs or how manly he is” like hell no when you’re into someone you’re like “oh god they breathed on me I can smell their breath, there’s a drop of sweat at their temple, their tendon just flexed in their wrist, when that breeze comes by I can smell their deodorant and maybe a hint of their sweat under it and fuck I want to feel the heat of their skin so fucking bad.” And those things are universal! All people have breath, and sweat, and tendons, and warm skin.
In fact, I can often tell when a writer is straight BECAUSE when they discuss attraction in their stories it’s not based on universal, human, pheromone type shit, it’s always weird and gendered and informed by what’s considered attractive in the mainstream. It’s a man’s biceps, his chiseled jaw, the way his stubble looks, his washboard ads, his size. Same with women—they describe her fragility, her breast size, her softness. And I absolutely see this style leak into fan fiction as well, and always is strikes me as gender essentialist and 100% unrelatable. Straight people are told what is attractive in the opposite sex and they buy into it and that is how they approach descriptions of characters who are the object of desire. But I feel like as a lesbian my attraction has far more in common with a gay man’s attraction than it does to cis het attraction! You mentioned the “raw appeal” of men--that phrase means nothing to me, I’m writing about the raw appeal of GAY SEX, I’m writing about a hunger big enough to risk safety and acceptance and normativity to pursue. That has nothing on whatever cishet women find sexy about cishet men, idk.
Lastly, on a super basic surface note: good writers are both imaginative, sensory, and compassionate. This allows us to imagine situations that we have not experienced, parse out sensory details about that experience which make the reader feel like they’re there, and compassionate enough to imagine what it would be like to be in that situation even if we never have before.
Most writers have not lived their books, they’re just good writers. It’s dangerous to act like writing convincingly about something means we must harbor a secret desire to do that something. Lesbians (or ace people) who write convincingly about attraction to men or sex are likely just practiced writers who have worked to find that balance between imagination and compassion. Just like crime writers and horror writers who write convincingly about murder and violence but absolutely aren’t partaking in such things Fiction is not autobiography, and there’s a well documented tendency for people to assume marginalized writers are always writing about themselves, where white male writers can put on any mask they like and have that chalked up to talent.
Here’s some supplementary reading about this.
I hope this clarifies things, and also makes you consider the structures at play when you “can’t wrap your head around” why a writer might be able to convincingly convey something outside their experience in the future.
thank you, @glorious-spoon, you pointed out a bit of this I've been thinking about anxiously as this post gains traction that I want to clarify. You’re absolutely right. It’s harmful to act like you can assume anyone’s sexuality or experiences based on the way they write sex and attraction (or anything for that matter) and I wish I had worded this differently. So! I’m taking the opportunity to do so here in hopes people see it.
So, what I meant is that there is a particular smut style that feels very gender essentialist to me, and very reliant on certain gendered descriptions/dynamics/tones. My wife is a librarian and she gets TONS of these supernatural het romance books in and the style is present there, as well. Anyone, with any sexuality, can write this sort of book, and it was wrong of me to imply that it’s possible to discern if a writer is cishet based on the presence of this style--one obviously cannot glean the sexuality or identity of a writer from their prose. What I meant is that I find the sensibilities/feeling of these books and the sort of fic wildly unreliable as a lesbian. So regardless of the writer’s sexuality, there’s something culturally/stylistically heteronormative in the text that I find isolating.
It could come from a million things beyond the writer’s experience though, as writing influence is nebulous and complicated. So I guess that the writing itself or that style seems cishet (in that it is marketed to cishet audiences, maybe? or just coming from a heteronormative place?) not that writers themselves who write this way are cishet.
Anyway thank you for pointing this out and providing me the opportunity to clarify! I was so offput and upset by this ask and I tried to choose my words carefully when I answered but the response was largely written from a reactive place and I didn’t think it would accumulate notes the way it did, and every time that happens to me I get super anxious and notice all the ways in which what I said could be misread or where I wasn’t clear enough.
I found your answer(s) super interesting and enlightening, thank you for sharing this! It made me think of my experience reading Philip Roth as a teenage girl, and finding something - unpleasant?distasteful? that made me feel hollow & dirty? about it. Which I didn’t think too hard about because it made me uncomfortable in my own skin and somehow demeaned, so best move on and pretend I never read it, and it wasn’t until at least 10 years later when I came across reviews criticising him as a misogynist that I had a lightbulb moment of ohhhhhhh that wasn’t a ME problem, that was a HIM problem! Not quite the same as what you’re talking about I know, but maybe comparable in that even though I *am* into men, a misogynistic man’s sex scene does nothing at all for me because it reduces a body like mine to some kind of object to be used or dominated. Theoretically, that dude was into heterosexual sex, sex that was definitely ‘culturally/stylistically heteronormative’, and his sex writing was just relentlessly unsexy and alienating to me. So it makes a lot of sense that it’s not the writer’s sexuality that matters as much as…idk what to call it - acknowledgement of the object of desire’s humanity? Their ‘sensibility’ is as good a way as any to describe it, I guess!
Did I make you smile for once? ( •᷄⌓•᷅ )
It’s a bit different from my usual content, I wanted to give you a break :’)