the fact that they saw this group of goofy looking teenage boys and was like damn…. heartthrob material
I can count on you after all that we’ve been through ’Cause I know that you’ll always understand
Harry giving his beautiful speech for the final show ❤️
Love On Tour 2023: Reggio Emilia. (22 July 2023)
I just hope he knows how proud of him we all are and how much we love and adore him.
“My friends are here tonight, [voice gets emotional again] thank you so much for having my back, always. I love you all so much. Thank you for— [scratches head] there are so many things that I get to feel incredibly lucky for in my life, the thing I feel the luckiest for is my friends, the way that I get to do this job with my friends, thank you, those of you who make music with me, those of you who don’t. The way that you support me allows me to do this and I am so full right now— I’ve never been happier in my life, and it’s because of— [turns to the crowd] all of you here tonight. Thank you so so much.”
-Harry thanking his friends and his fans ❤️.
Love On Tour 2023: Reggio Emilia. (22 July 2023)
It was so important to have Barbie look at that woman in the bus stop and tell her she's beautiful. Cause, like Barbie herself says, she (as an idea) doesn't have an end. As Stereotypical Barbie, she's meant to be pretty and fun and that's it.
But she shows that beauty doesn't end when you get old. Aging isn't the end of your story, just another phase of it. That old woman is beautiful, and it's good that she knows it.
That's why Barbie ultimately chooses to become human. She wants to experience that new and different kind of beauty; not just her physical appearance, but that of a life well lived. She wants scars and wrinkles and cellulite. Barbie's end is that she lives as a whole narrative rather than some eternal object of visual pleasure.
if i watched the barbie movie in middle school i would cried so much and had to sleep on the floor of my parents bedroom for a week
this was the only thing i thought about during his conversation with barbie
Barbie was about motherhood and belonging and feminism and love and identity and toxic masculinity and existentialism and humanism and it was, most importantly, pink.
Anonymous asked:
Honestly the anon abt Yan Yan probably didn’t check anything. YYC is in Milano, Harry is in Modena ( close to Reggio Emilia). Italy is like the number 1 destination during summer. Everyone goes there. Probably 1/2 of Harry VIP section is in Italy rn. The media is capable enough of starting rumours on anyone at any Harry show. Can we please not feed it ? YYC might be at the show, but honestly, who wouldn’t if they could?
I get the need of seeing things coming before they happen. But once you know the risk is there, spreading it on social media only adds to the general panic this fandom is so keen to jump in. One thing I learned from my time here is whatever is supposed to happen will happen. They planned it long before you even knew it existed. I follow Harry because I love him as a person and as an artist. Stunt are weirdly a normal part of his career and they will keep on happening. Nobody’s gonna stop that. If you focus too much on that, you loose the fun of following such an amazing person.
i don't know what younger person needs to hear this, but it is so valid to not want to drink alcohol at all, or to only want to drink very rarely. don't let others pressure you into joining in with those societal rituals. it is an outrage how normalized drinking alcohol is, to the point that those who choose to abstain are constantly forced to justify their private choices, be publicly questioned about what led to these choices or excluded from activities altogether. you do not ever need to justify your reasons for this. there are absolutely valid and important reasons to not drink, and nobody has a right to know your personal reasonings.
like on a subconscious level i know he's going to come back soon, like i'll honestly give him until end of 2024 before he drops a single but the fact that in just a few short days we'll be saying goodbye to him and love on tour just makes me so emotional because no matter whether you went to one show or ten shows or were watching it through livestreams or catching up with the videos in the mornings we all made so many memories together and we all had so much fun together as a fandom and i just am not ready to say good night and good bye to harry and like it's making me all sorts of emotional here because like. it wasn't a massive production or anything it was literally just harry and the band being their goofy selves and the crowds being so energetic and fun and dancing and just bringing love all around i honestly think harry created such a beautiful concert experience that i don't think any artist can beat ever and that's historical
“You are responsible for the minors in your fandom!!!”
No, I’m fucking not. I’m not your parent. My past-times do not automatically sign me up to act in loco parentis. If you need someone else to monitor your own content consumption online, go get mommy and/or daddy to set up a content blocker on your computer.
Louder for the minors in the back, please.
What I’m responsible for in my fandom:
1. Making a good faith effort to include relevant and informative tags and labels on my creative works.
2. Making a good faith effort to use the “author chose not to warn” rating, a “contains potentially upsetting content” note, cuts or community ratings, or otherwise indicating that there might be untagged, triggering content if I’m not up to or don’t want to tag it.
3. Being a good fandom citizen; not sending death threats or hate, not bullying people, being kind and thoughtful to those I interact with, and leaving alone things that would prompt me to act otherwise.
4. Curating my own experience; not engaging with people or material that I know will be harmful or upsetting to me, disengaging when I realize that something is harmful or upsetting to me, and using tools such as blocklists and tag filters to hide content I don’t want to see.
5. Doing the opposite of whatever the fuck bullshit is going on in tiktok at all times.
Being a good fandom citizen; not sending death threats or hate, not bullying people, being kind and thoughtful to those I interact with, and leaving alone things that would prompt me to act otherwise.
It is simply JUST that easy. All the fandom shit exists because people choose to behave badly and it’s too often younger ones holding fandom spaces as societal influence & activism spaces instead of a HOBBY SPACES.
If you’re old enough to search out fandom content, you are old enough to curate your own experience. We didn’t have algorisms when I was younger and that’s what you had to do
Now you have a much easier time of avoiding what you don’t want to see. It is still up to YOU provided things are tagged properly.
If you walk into a tagged work and don’t like it, it’s on YOU.
“This global, seven-figure launch is testament to Harry’s incredible star power. […] We know this will be a dream come true for all his fans as thousands have requested his figure over the last couple of years”
-Tim Waters, general manager at Madame Tussauds London on the impact of releasing Harry’s wax figures.
via The Mirror
People on this website will really mock anti-vaxxers and flat earthers for ignoring scientists and getting their alternative facts from facebook, and then turn around and insist they know more history than historians and more archaeology than archaeologists because they read an unsourced tumblr post once
Is there a real life example of this?
It happens a lot.
I know it's bad but I kind of want to know more about the woman who thinks the Roman Empire never existed
Oh shit i believed the Leonardo Da Vinci one
Also why do people make these
What do you hope to gain
There are a lot of different misinformation dynamics at play here. Only some are innocent, only some are malicious. But that’s why it pays to fact-check things, because the innocent misunderstandings, the arrogant personal hypotheses stated as fact, and the malicious lies are all jumbled together.
- Some of these are a misunderstanding or conflating of true facts. The Da Vinci one goes here. Many historians do believe that Leonardo da Vinci had a romantic/sexual relationship with his apprentice(s). And it’s well-established that his apprentices modeled for some of his paintings. But they did not model for any of his paintings of Jesus - which was the core point of the post that this fact came from, enjoying the irony. So this isn’t true because it’s a conflation of several true facts into a false but understandable conclusion.
- Some of these are just a victim of internet telephone. The “Persephone’s daughter” and “fake Greek goddess” ones refer to Mespyrian, who was some teenager’s wattpad OC daughter of Persephone and Hades, that someone else on tumblr accidentally mistook as a real figure from Greek mythology.
- Some of these come from people making their own conclusions about history, and then turning around and insisting that the experts therefore must be lying to you. This is where it gets dangerous. The “archaeologists broke the noses off Egyptian statues to hide the fact that they were African” one goes here. Many Egyptian statues are missing their noses, so several years ago someone on the internet claimed that it was because archaeologists deliberately broke them off, and this gained a Lot of traction because it felt true and people wanted it to be true. People overwhelmingly want to believe that they, ordinary citizens of the world with no special training, are actually smarter than the experts. People love to believe that, so it’s very, very easy for people to decide the experts are stupid and clueless (the “History Hates Lovers” song, the thing about the dodecahedron or the Roman hairstyles or the leather burnishers) while salt-of-the-earth ordinary folk are smarter than those ivory-tower eggheads. At worst, people decide the experts are maliciously hiding the truth about the world for their own gain (the Lovers of Valdaro one here is an example of this, but you also see this a lot regarding “all ancient cultures were feminist utopias until the Catholic Church invented misogyny and covered up the feminist past” type posts that are extremely popular with TERFs.) This is the dynamic I’m comparing to anti-vaxxers and flat Earthers, and yes, this kind of anti-intellectualism is dangerous.
- Some people are just trolls because they like lying on the internet and riling people up. This cannot be discounted. People do do this. The tiktok woman who doesn’t believe in the Roman Empire and doesn’t believe that Vesuvius erupted is almost certainly a troll who likes the attention her wild false claims get.
It’s a combination of things, but it’s why you shouldn’t assume that historians are all old homophobic clueless idiots and only you, tumblr user persephonesmassivebadonkers or whatever, know the REAL truth. Because that’s how you get Flat Earthers, but more pressingly, it’s how you get antisemitic conspiracy theories and transphobic radfem proclamations of We Need To Return To The Ancient Feminist Utopia (By Destroying All Trans People)(And, Usually, Abrahamic Religions).
But also by believing easily-debunked falsehoods it makes genuinely well-meaning people easier to dismiss by bigots as Brainwashed By Those El Gee Bee Tees Who Will Lie Because They Want To Destroy Academia/Biological Sex/The Church.
Spreading misinformation on tumblr is an understandable consequence of the existence of the internet, but it’s not harmless and really ought to be challenged when it’s seen.
And it’s not remotely helped by the fact there’s plenty of similar true stories that can be pointed to. Like, here’s a list of things: Brits in the 1800s used to eat Egyptian mummies, numerous gay relationships in history were called “friendships” by Christian historians, the Vatican is hoarding almost all history ever written and refuses to let anyone access it, the original biographies of the Sons of Liberty were all works of fiction (like Washington and the apple tree), Greek and Roman statues were painted but the people who discovered them found it garish so they stripped the paint off, DaVinci invented a tank, Lancelot is a fanfiction OC, and the Catholic Church was founded after numerous other Christian churches and proceeded to burn the holy books that didn’t support their version (like the Gospel of Judas, which establishes that the “betrayal” was Jesus’s plan because how was he supposed to die as planned, and they plotted it together). It’s easy to believe bullshit when the truth is just as rank.
This is exactly the sort of thing I’m talking about: confidently firing off a mix of half-remembered and out-of-context factoids with “lies and coverups in history!!!” to make them seem like they’re correcting the record rather than reducing a mix of truth, common misconceptions, conspiracy theories, misunderstandings, and poor reporting to pithy one-liners. Let’s go through them.
Brits in the 1800s used to eat Egyptian mummies,
It's complicated. There's definitely a grain of truth to this, but it's not quite what the common narratives suggest. For example, eating mummies was a Medieval thing more than it was a Victorian thing; Victorians did "Scientific" mummy-unwrapping parties, but they didn't then eat them - they were collectible antiquities. For another, the mummies used by Victorians for paint were rarely ancient Egyptian humans. I'll let @thatlittleegyptologist take this one because they've talked about it. A lot. Like a lot. So often.
numerous gay relationships in history were called “friendships” by Christian historians,
It's complicated. Have historians in the past denied that their favorite historical figures could possibly be gay? Absolutely. But people who were romantically and sexually involved with each other in the past very often did call each other "friend." (Or, in ancient Egypt, "brother"). Even husbands and wives would call each other "friend." (it's midnight and I am blanking on how to search for sources that show this but I have transcribed 18th century letters and diaries, I have seen this.) Like, while historical squeamishness and denial of gay relationships has been a thing... the modern assumption that friendship cannot possibly ever include any gay stuff is also not helping. And heteronormatively taking words at face value is somewhere in between. It's sometimes malicious, but you have to give space for simple hetero brain too. And give space for all the queer and queer-affirming historians working in the field. And for people like Oscar Wilde who were arrested for sodomy and the Ancient Greeks who were Ancient Greek so it's hardly like anyone's denying that, even if their interpretation was that it was Bad. It's not cut and dry.
the Vatican is hoarding almost all history ever written and refuses to let anyone access it,
This one isn't actually complicated, it's just a bizarre misunderstanding (generous interpretation) or an Evangelical conspiracy theory (less generous interpretation) of what the Vatican Apostolic Archive, formerly known as the Vatican Secret Archive, is. They're not "hoarding almost all history ever written" (how would that work?). It's an archive of the Church's and the Vatican's records, accounting, correspondence, declarations, decisions, and other various affairs. Over the past several hundred years of dutiful documentary-keeping, that does add up to a lot of history about the development of European politics, culture, and colonization! There are in fact two archives; one which has been accessible to scholars since 1881, and one which is owned unilaterally by the Pope and only extremely rarely opened for any sort of access to outsiders. John Paul II actually made it easier for researchers to access those archives, though "easier" does not mean "easy" and is still very much at the Pope's discretion. However, they are archives pertaining to the Pope's and Church's affairs, not all of human history.
the original biographies of the Sons of Liberty were all works of fiction (like Washington and the apple tree),
True! But also a little complicated. The story about Washington and the cherry tree is complete fiction, and we know who to blame for it: Mason Locke "Parson" Weems, who wrote his famous biography of Washington right after Washington died and the nation was clamoring for tributes to him. He was kind of shameless about writing for the masses things that would sell. But at the same time, it was part of the myth-making of the new nation, part of a very common process at the time of nearly deifying Washington. But it is also true that we do in fact have a lot of letters and diaries written directly by these guys. We don't need to rely on Weems for fanciful stories about them, even if they have entered into the mythology-building of the US as a nation.
Greek and Roman statues were painted but the people who discovered them found it garish so they stripped the paint off,
Have you ever seen what happens to painted stone when left out in the elements over time? The paint chips off. Being exposed to the elements or buried in the dirt for hundreds or thousands of years does a number on the painted exterior of a statue. Here's a Jesuit scholar from 1913 lamenting this: "It is a notorious fact that the remains of colour fade very fast from marbles that are exposed to the light after centuries of burial and concealment. It is the universal experience of classical archaeologists. A French explorer describes some colours vanishing from sarcophagi found at Carthage "comme de la fumée" [like smoke]. Add to this the perfectly intelligible cleaning consequent on first discovery in the earth, and the still more disastrous and less pardonable washings with acid that, until recent years, were the fate of all classical statues. Even still another risk has to be remembered, the taking of casts […] Add these fates together, and say whether their total does not offer an explanation for a prejudiced view." Honestly, as Gisela M. A. Richter (1944) says, "The fact that any color at all remains is really more remarkable than that it has disappeared in the majority of cases." Greek and Roman statues, probably even marble statues, were painted! Yes! But there was probably little paint remaining even when the Renaissance sculptors and art collectors got ahold of them. And while the discoverers deliberately stripping off the paint because they decided it should not have been there is one potential reason (note the reference to acid-washing), and the pure white marble was a very ideologically-loaded Enlightment-era aesthetic highlighting the purity of the form, and 1700s-1800s English archaeologists and antiquarians had vicious debates over whether the marble statues were painted like the fate of their cultural hegemony rested on it, "removing the paint for its garishness" was not even close to the primary reason the colored paint does not remain. These are some resources about the Gods in Color exhibition that did experimental reconstructions of the colors of some statues.
DaVinci invented a tank,
Leonardo da Vinci drew designs for many devices, including a war machine that does resemble a modern tank! It's frequently described (with hedging descriptions) like "has been seen as a prototype of a tank." But there's no evidence that it was ever built, and it's unclear if the wheels and gear system would have worked. Can he be said to have "invented a tank"? I guess it depends on your definition of "invented."
Lancelot is a fanfiction OC,
This is either a flippant or deeply disingenuous way to describe the origins, evolution, and recording of King Arthur mythology, its use in literature and nationalist propaganda, and the way this is different from the way fanfiction interacts with a canon. @chimaerakitten knows much more about this than I do.
and the Catholic Church was founded after numerous other Christian churches and proceeded to burn the holy books that didn’t support their version (like the Gospel of Judas, which establishes that the “betrayal” was Jesus’s plan because how was he supposed to die as planned, and they plotted it together).
Ohhhh boy it's complicated. I am out of energy and by god it is late but there is a reason that books and books and books have been written about the history of Christianity, the early schisms, the creation of the canon, Gnosticism, and the origins of the Catholic Church.
Basically: if it can be summed up in one sentence as a "gotcha!" it is probably More Complicated Than That.
Please explain ancient egyptian curses
Ok here's a brief rundown:
- They're not curses. Stop calling them that
- They're known as 'threat formulae'
- Calling them curses falls heavily into the Orientalist 'othering' heavily present in most stories about Ancient Egypt. The 'ooooh spooky black magic' racist stuff
- The 'curse of tutakhamun' was made up by the press to get back at Carter for giving exclusive rights to the scoop that the tomb had been discovered. They hyped every death and basically made stuff up to frighten people and sell papers
- Threat formulae come in many forms: tomb writings, bound figures, stele writings, those found in literature etc
- They're all conditional i.e. you have to do something specific in order for the threat to be carried out
- Mostly they're about the gods being upset with you like 'If you speak out against me, then Osiris will judge you badly' or 'if you enter here, then may Anubis make your journey to the afterlife difficult'. A lot are about denial of the afterlife to someone, because being denied an afterlife is the worst thing that could happen to an Ancient Egyptian. This is why they do things like damage images of someone or hack out their name when they think someone is bad. It stops them getting into the afterlife.
- Others are merely wishes like 'if you rob this tomb may it also happen to your ancestors too you jerk' or 'hope your life sucks, asshole'
- This one from the tomb of Khenu at Saqqara: 'As for any man who will do something against this (tomb), which I have made in order to be revered before my Lord, there will be judgement with him in the place where judgement is.'
- This one from the tomb of Meni at Giza: 'The crocodile is against him in the water and the snake is against him on land, he who will do something against this (tomb), as I have never done a thing against him. It is the god who judges him.'
- Tomb of Nekhebu at Giza: 'As for any man who will enter there, hostile after this, I will be judged with him by the Great God. Their successors are expelled (from) their homes on earth.'
- I mean that last one is 'if you disturb my tomb, I hope your family get evicted'
- The Ancient Egyptians didn't really put much stock into them because they robbed tombs regularly. That's why Tutankhamun's tomb was special, because it was the only royal tomb that wasn't robbed by the Ancient Egyptians in antiquity.
- In summary: curses are actually threats, they don't really do anything other than 'I hope you get what's coming to you, asshole', and the Egyptians really didn't care about the threats either because they were robbing tombs the whole time.
This is all very good information, but at the end of the day isn’t “If you splash me with your car driving through a puddle I hope you get three flat tires” a curse? Like. That’s what a curse is.
Significant cultural difference. One separated by thousands of years. You're assuming they're the same because you're like 'oh that's like what this thing I do is like' and it's not really comparable. The Egyptians weighted a lot of religious meaning to these utterances, as well as their considered use of Heka (divine power, or as most people would know it 'magic') when writing the inscriptions. By writing it down they believed that it would absolutely be enacted. By wishing a driver gets three flat tires, you do not believe that it will actually happen only that you wish it would as an act of revenge.
It's a threat not a curse because it is conditional. If a person does something to their tomb, then something bad will happen. The outcome is resultant on a malicious action. What you describe is something said after the fact, and is thus unconditional. Something has already happened and thus you desire ill fortune to befall them either now or at a later date.
We also don't use 'curse' because it ties into the 'spooky racist black magic' bullshit that pervades people's perceptions of the Ancient Egyptians. It's an attempt to get people to treat their cultural beliefs as real and tangible rather than a cheap hollywood gimmick.
This is a genuine addition I'm using to try and grasp the concept better. Does this make it more like a "DNI if you like this band, or so help me God I'll break your kneecaps" kind of threat or was it more serious than that?
No, it is not. It is far more serious than that. We're talking sincerely held cultural beliefs of an ancient civilisation, which are very much not comparable to a DNI. One is a very weird form of aggressive gatekeeping, the other is a peoples' literal religion.
The perceived consequences are serious. 'Lord let there be judgement on him in the place where judgement is' refers to the weighing of the heart, wherein an Egyptian's heart must be weighed against the literal goddess of truth to prove their worthiness. If they fail this they are denied an afterlife, and thus are struck from existence. So a threat to have this happen to someone should they prevent offerings being made to your Ka is a very serious thing.
A DNI is...well it's just words because the worst you can do is block someone, which doesn't have any impact on the life of the person who has transgressed bar 'oh..ok then'.
