and because this seems all very confusing taken out of context

Theories (Peter Quill)

Pairing: Peter Quill x OC

Warnings: None…tiny, tiny spoiler for Vol. 2

A/N: This might be complete crap, but I desperately needed to write some Quill. I hammered this out earlier this morning and just did a quick edit, no rewriting. But hopefully it’s post worthy! I think a second part is in order? xD


Originally posted by despairingfever

The sound of bickering voices drifted back from the cockpit, making me roll my eyes. I lowered the manuscript I was flipping through.

“Will you two morons cut it out already?” I hollered. I waited a beat, but the arguing went on. Probably hadn’t even heard me. Anyways, it wasn’t my job to break up the idiotic pissing contest that went on between Rocket and anyone he met. Or at the moment, Drax.

Keep reading

Words by Hiba Krisht. Hiba is Lebanese and Palestinian, as well as a scholar and brilliant writer, so when she talks about Palestinian welfare and discourse about Palestine, everyone should listen.

“I’m at the point where I can’t see how focus on the Israel Palestine question re: Chicago Dyke March is anything other than derailment.
I’d also like to say that perception that pro-Palestine sentiment here is being silenced *as a general trend* very much does not sit well with me because I believe the silencing to be happening the other way around, and think this is in fact a longstanding destructive feature of discourse surrounding the Palestinian cause. Also, I believe most of those engaging in defense of a pro-Palestinian liberation stance right now mean well but do not understand how much its framing decenters actual Palestinian welfare.

I will elaborate on both counts. I’m agitated from all sides about this and I can’t do brevity so bear with me I guess.

First, the derailment. It’s of particularly troubling sort because it falls into a larger pattern of whataboutism where what *should be* a case of clearcut antisemitism cannot ever be identified and unilaterally condemned by the left without also being hashed and rehashed in exculpatory ways "because Israel.”

This is ESPECIALLY troubling when:
- There is a persistent phenomenon that’s almost like a lefty inversion of the concept Israeli exceptionalism. Like a reverse- exceptionalism, whereby discussion of Israel’s transgressions are held to singular standards of scrutiny to the exception of other nations/populations with comparable and/or far more deplorable histories and actions and crises. And in that I am including all the unspeakable injustice and destruction the larger MENA region has wrought to Palestinians, and how accountability seems no concern there, in part *because* of eternal return to obsessive, unilateral focus on Israel as the central Palestinian issue.

- Cases of anti Muslim bigotry aren’t held to the same scrutiny. The fact that people will demur about antisemitism but not anti-Muslim bigotry betrays a terrible lack of self awareness re: double standards. I mean, if you want to go ‘head and make weak arguments about how religious symbols are politically wielded, I’m going to have to start wondering why you aren’t referencing the much more appalling and deadly scope of human rights abuses committed under Muslim banners whenever the question of banning Muslim symbols comes up. Which would be a clearly terrible argument, but maybe it’s worth reflecting why the same argument suddenly makes sense when it comes to Jewish symbols.

- Casual antisemitism often manifests as (among other things) conflations between Jewish symbols or beliefs / various Zionist ones / various Israeli nationalist ones. We ALREADY know the Dyke March incident to be an iteration of this problem. Now think about how fucked up what happened next is: the ban of a Jewish symbol at a public event based on a bigoted conflation is called out as anti-Semitic. Then, as a kind of precondition for defense against or acknowledgement of such anti-Semitism, people on the left apparently see fit to hold Jewish people accountable, individually and as a group, for *the same bigoted conflations targeting them*, basically needing Jewish people to declare their politics and/or unilaterally renounce Zionism – essentially acting as gatekeepers despite being outsiders operating from apparently rather reductive and narrow presumptions of Zionist politics, since they somehow have the arrogance of assuming they understand and can judge what any given Jewish person’s Zionist adherence entails and means based on the label alone???
Who the fuck else does this? Who the fuck else has to go through this? Do we have to establish and approve of the political and ideological leanings of Muslims in order to defend them against anti-Muslim bigotry, or do we engage in whataboutism re: the scourge of political Islamism in the Middle East to determine if Muslims have the right to display their religious symbols in the west?

Now the Palestine thing. And necessary conversations. And silencing and whatnot.

Even points that are so reasonable and evident they may well be tautologies by now, like 'Palestinians are entitled to basic human rights’, bear a different weight when made in these contexts. They don’t exist in vacuum, but carry the shadow of a discourse that already has huge issues with privileging particularly anti-Zionist or anti-Israel Palestinian advocacy no matter how tangential to the conversation, and never mind what else is minimized and derailed in the process.

I am not doubting the sincerity and concern of my friends who are struggling to express pro-Palestine sentiment while being confused by hostility right now, but I would urge a more thorough consideration of the relative space taken up by the respective conversations thus far, and to not confuse long overdue push-back from folks who have every reason to be frustrated and sick of derailment and semantic squabbles over definitions of Zionism every time anti-semitism comes up.

If it seems like there is rejection from the left when you want to assert a pro-Palestinian stance here, it is less likely to be because people have a problem with pro-Palestinian politics as such, and more likely to be because there is a salient point regarding how cavalier antisemitism already is today and how these patterns of derailment every damn time end up gatekeeping attempts to counter an insidious kind of racism that can and must be discussed without forcing marginalized people to jump through the Israel Blame Game hoops to defend their humanity. The Israel Palestine thing needs to stop hijacking conversations about antisemitism. Palestinian welfare does not suffer if people refuse to derail conversations about anti-semitism, but conversations about anti-semitism certainly suffer when what-about-Palestine pops up.

And that’s all besides the fact that no matter how well-meaning, this Palestine-specific whataboutism does not contribute anything appreciable to Palestinian welfare and is so oblivious in some ways it’s kind of heartbreaking to try to navigate through. I firmly believe that the kneejerk way the Palestinian Cause is held up like a trump card whenever convenient and the infuriating reverse exceptionalism with which the conflict is treated has been a firm factor in prolonging the crisis and exacerbating Palestinian suffering. I’m struggling to find the words for why it troubles me so much to see all these conversations stuck on questions of whether anti Zionism is anti Semitism because don’t forget Israel and what about accountability for Palestine.

Please. Please. Please try to understand that an anti-Zionist pro-Palestine liberation stance is not one that needs championing in the left, that nobody fucking lets us forget Israel when we try to talk about Palestine, and nobody stops talking about Palestine when anyone mentions Israel, and it hasn’t done shit for diaspora or territory Palestinians except turn us into a handy slogan.
Establishing a stance of basic advocacy for the rights and welfare of the Palestinian people is not what the discourse lacks, it is what the discourse needs to *move past* already. Everybody is well-versed and comfortable with the Israel Blame Game– it drowns out and supersedes everything else, and it’s everything else that Palestinian advocacy desperately needs.

This is something that frustrates me to no end because it’s not reducible to something like Israeli conduct being dealt with disproportionate scrutiny in the left *as such*, but as a function of urgency and relative space. When Israel overshadows discourse about Palestinian welfare even though it is Arabs who are responsible for the most staggering and horrific ongoing Palestinian abuses, we have a problem. And it can never be talked about or addressed because only Israel’s actions are viewed with agency and significance, and attributing Palestinian suffering to anything else is instantly condemned as insidious detraction.

So you can see how it is frustrating to go through the whole 'is pro-palestinian anti-zionism anti-semitic’ rigmarole when it is so often a distraction from more functional questions of Palestinian welfare.

Fact: There are kinds of anti-Zionism that are pro-Palestinian rights and that are also anti-Semitic. Fact: There are kinds of anti-Zionism that are pro-Palestinian rights and that are not anti-Semitic. Fact: There are kinds of Zionism that are consistent with upholding the rights and freedoms of Palestinian Arabs, and, fact: there are kinds that are categorically not.

Educated opinion: Not only is anti-Zionism the established and normative stance across most of the Middle East, but, if we’re being honest, probably the most prevalent and established type of anti-Zionism in the discourse is that which engages in solid pro-Palestinian advocacy while also falling into both gross and casual anti-Semitism. This is definitely the case in the broader discourse on the issue in the Middle East, and what’s more, there is next to no self-awareness of the anti-Semitic assumptions, myths, and bigotries, not to mention the historical revisionism, threading popular and political anti-Zionism in the MENA region and popular Palestinian and Lebanese culture as well. This is a problem, and one that will never be addressed as long as pro-Palestinianism and anti-Semitism are presumed to be wholly non-overlapping binaries by well-meaning leftists. It is both possible and necessary to acknowledge and mount critique of anti-semitic elements in pro-Palestine discourse while maintaining Palestinian advocacy. Acknowledging anti-Semitism in the discourse is not going to undermine the Palestinian cause. Again, people don’t need to be perfect moral agents to justify a defense of their humanity.

Educated opinion: Leftist discourse centering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is overall entrenched in rigid, binary thinking and overwhelmingly leans pro-Palestine but in unfortunately too-basic, reductive ways. It already has an ideological rigidity problem. The discourse is such that to be pro-Palestine is to be above all transcendentally righteous: the lines of oppression and blame are clear and brook no further complexity; it is the cause no reasonable person can deny or fail to center in any conversation, and Palestinian advocacy is almost synonymous with condemnation for the Israeli crimes against the Palestinian people and aught else.

It is troubled with issues of allegiance and abstraction– maintaining certain principled stances re: the Cause is treated as an almost inviolable tenet for anybody who can claim to care about Palestine, despite the fact that the central narrative of the Cause pits the immediate welfare and prosperity of generations of living, breathing Palestinians against the memory of a Palestine that has not existed for decades and an abstract future promise of a right to return to a place that never again will be. The narrative may have once been in service of the people, but it has not been so in a long time. And it is only the narrative that is treated with sanctity by the most vocal champions of Palestine, and if it comes at the expense of Palestinian lives like in Yarmouk, so be it. Palestinian advocacy is more about condemning Israel than it is about supporting Palestine, and that is the problem.

It’s beginning to feel like despair, seeing how pro-Palestinian discourse is framed in terms of the questions of Zionism and anti-Zionism over and again, constantly centering and recentering the question of Palestinian welfare as a foil to Israeli aggression in broad nationalistic and/or existentialist terms, assuming unilateral causes, ascribing agency very selectively to regional actors, brooking no interrogation of Palestinian, Arab, or Muslim agency in the conflict, and obsessively resistant to moving past the past.

It’s been decades and Palestinians continue to suffer large-scale crises in basic resources, public health, trauma, and disenfranchisement, and they have largely been allowed to persist in the name *of* Palestine, at the hands of Arab regimes that shrug off all accountability in Israel’s direction, though for fifty years diaspora Palestinians in the larger Levant have been purely at the mercy of the Arab states housing them. We do not need to hear tired pro-liberation stances when it is those very stances that are used to justify keeping us holed up in Lebanese and Syrian refugee camps, stateless, in suspended animation, without civil rights or wealth or upwards mobility, dying slowly of poverty and deplorable living conditions and isolation if we’re lucky, and if we’re unlucky, until a guy like Assad comes along and murders, maims, starves, and makes refugees out of a whole city of us– and yet it is in the name of liberating Palestine that Assadist discourse proliferates, being anti-Israel, and Palestine’s catastrophe is only and ever subsumed into the crimes of Israel and not of those of Syria or Lebanon or Assad or Hamas or the PA or Fatah or the GCC states or anybody else.
When I want to talk about Palestinian advocacy, I want to talk about Assad and the nearly 200,000 Palestinians in Yarmouk camp that are now dead or gone or starving under siege and I want to talk about how the Lebanese state has made pariahs and a lost people out of *generations* of diaspora Palestinians practically quarantined in refugee camps because of petty sectarian concerns and I want to talk about the Palestinian political elite grievously frittering away resources and opportunities that could have prevented significant Palestinian suffering and death because of political feuds and a reckless privileging of a jihadi cause over popular welfare– but I cannot, because the justifications, distractions, conspiracy theories loop incessantly back to Israel. Which cements *my* concern that these conversations are not really *about* Palestinian welfare at all.“

wannabanauthor  asked:

Hi there! I love your blog! I've seen you mention a few TV shows and movies for research, and I was wondering what your opinion is on the show Leverage and it's accuracy for social engineering in potentially violent situations. I remember one character saying that "Thieves look for entrances, but grifters create them." They'll often use approaches like this to avoid violence.

If the question is: can you use social engineering in order to defuse or avoid violent situations? The answer is yes.

Grifters are conmen, and like spies, they don’t want to fight unless it is absolutely necessary. Whether they can fight or know how isn’t really the point: combat makes messes, big messes, and draws the kind of attention they don’t want/can’t afford.

As for the line, “thieves look for entrances, but grifters create them” the point of it is that grifters focus on people as the exploitative aspect to get what they want. After all, it doesn’t matter how good your security system is if your infiltrator is expected to be there. When someone opens the door for them, they didn’t have to break in.

It is worth pointing out though, being able to stop, defuse, avoid, or redirect violence via social engineering (especially when the character is the target) is very difficult and requires someone who excels at rapidly changing their story/manipulating under life or death pressure while also maintaining their consistency/re-establishing their innocence/regaining their target’s trust.

That’s masterclass social engineering. The average person, even the average grifter can’t do it. When we see Nate Ford, Sophie Devereaux, or Michael Westen on Burn Notice socially engineer their way out of potentially explosive and violent scenarios, we’re supposed to understand this level of manipulation is very difficult. You need a solid ability to read people, predict their behavior patterns, understand how to shift your role so you suddenly seem trustworthy, confuse them, and then redirect their anger somewhere away from you.

You can see another variant of this kind of social engineering on display in The Negotiator. Samuel L. Jackson’s character is a hostage negotiator. Deliberately maneuvering a man who’s taken a child captive around his apartment so he can be taken out. You can see him joking with the target, gaining his trust, distracting him, and guiding him off topic until he’s in a position to be neutralized.

The Grifter is not a fighter, they are a talker and their trick is getting people to move however they want. A skilled grifter can slip in, turn the best of friends against each other, and walk away without a care. Grifters don’t punch. They trick other people into doing the punching for them. When sitting down to write a Grifter, remember: their first instinct is getting others to act in their place, to create the openings they need, and be their fall guy.

On the whole, I’ve liked Leverage ever since the episode where Eliot pointed out that guns are ranged weapons, and the most common mistake people make is giving up the distance advantage by getting in too close. However, I’ve only watched the first season. I liked what I saw, it’s an enjoyable caper show in a similar vein to The Equalizer, Person of Interest, or Ocean’s Eleven. Not quite in there with the original Law & Order when it comes to accuracy (in this case for cops) but certainly better than White Collar, which uses similar techniques (though never, ever pay attention to White Collar’s usage of the FBI… ever). The X-Files, meanwhile, fudges a bit but it’s pretty good when you’re wanting to get a grasp of the FBI’s culture and what happens to someone who doesn’t come from a military/law enforcement background.

Of course, the patient zero for these types of shows is the original Mission: Impossible. The television show, not the Tom Cruise movies. Mission: Impossible is all about flipping people and manipulating them into positions to do what you want. The A-Team is its slightly more pulpy counterpart, but its a similar (though far less subtle) deal.

On the whole, Leverage tends to explain itself better, which is helpful when you’re trying to learn or take techniques from a television show rather than just absorb.

The reason why I often suggest Burn Notice and Spy Game is not necessarily just because they’re good, but also because they teach. The narrator on Burn Notice, especially in the first season will offer up a lot of helpful/beginner tradecraft for a variety of situations. This, ultimately, will help you more for taking pieces and creating your own characters than a show that’s trying for smoke and mirrors like White Collar. The same situation is there with Spy Game, where Robert Redford’s character is teaching Brad Pitt’s on how to be a spy. Ultimately, more helpful in the long run than just watching The Recruit. The Michael Mann films like Heat and Collateral are exceptionally good for learning tradecraft, but you have to know that’s what you’re watching/looking for. You’ll learn more by watching them together, rather than separately. The Borne Identity novels are also very good at showing the tradecraft, while the Le Carre ones tend to be a little more hit and miss.

When you’re new, you want sources that are free with their information. Who are good at getting you to think, to take what you’re seeing and apply it to new settings. You may not ever figure out how to build a car bomb, but learning about how the thought process of a spy, criminal, or conman works will serve you better for your writing than a hundred other movies that only show.

After you’ve drawn back the curtain then you can turn to those other shows, novels, and narratives with new eyes. Once you see what they’re doing, how they’re doing it, and why when they don’t explain you’ll get more out of those other sources than you did before.

When you’re watching a well put together show like Leverage, start questioning character motivations. Not just whether the social engineering there works, but why the characters are choosing to go that route or which routes they prefer. Leverage gives you five characters with different specialties, four thieves and the guy who made a career catching them. They all think in different ways and have different approaches when it comes to problem solving. Leverage offers up a heist per episode, so you have lots of opportunities to see the characters in action. Evaluate their problem solving methods and you’ll come away with more than just questioning whether or not it works.

How and Why.

Then, go find a good video on YouTube where a professional magician explains pickpocketing. It’s the art of misdirection.

Once you understand basic theoretical underpinnings (whether or not you could ever actually pull the real thing off) then you can apply it to many different situations in a fictional context.

When it comes back to applying this to the combat arts, learning to see the big picture is the first major difference between trained and untrained. The untrained only copy surface level, singular techniques, while trained delves deeper to understand how these techniques work together.

My advice for when you’re wanting to pick and choose television shows for accuracy is to check who their consultants are/were, and what experts in the show’s chosen field say about it. That doesn’t always guarantee accuracy, but it will help you flip through the rave reviews.

If you want to watch more fun shows with Timothy Hutton or just like detective shows, I recommend Nero Wolfe.


This blog is supported through Patreon. If you enjoy our content, please consider becoming a Patron. Every contribution helps keep us online, and writing. If you already are a Patron, thank you.


First off, a little context. You can skip this if you want.

So Chris from GetLazy recently posted a few very interesting pictures he had taken from the design documents that were made around 2001. Some of you might have already seen this, but since I assume that not everyone here on tumblr is active on GetLazy (me neither honestly) I decided to make a post about it for everyone to see. So as the title might suggest, the documents hold quite a bit of information about LazyTown prior to the TV series. Unfortunately however, we can’t see the whole thing. He was only able to make a few blurry and shaky pictures, but, trust me, it’s still worth reading.

I also decided to make a few notes in case it’s too hard for you to see or if you’re too lazy to read it yourself or whatever. If you can catch more information than I wrote down feel free to add. I also left out information that is already common knowledge.


For this one, I didn’t make notes but I will quote directly from what Chris remembers reading, as it is much more informative. But I will still post the pictures.

So, as an abandoned and unnamed child, Sportacus worked in mines under a man named Mr. Kicker. Since none of the kids in the mines had names, Kicker referred to the kids by numbers.. Sportacus being number 10. There wasn’t much fun to be had under the mines, so the kids spent a lot of time learning lots of different kinds of sports. At some point during mining, number 10 accidentally found a strange crystal that shone whenever someone was being hurt, and he kept it. After years of abuse, number 10 finally decided to revolt. In secret, he built a hot air balloon powered by pedals and one day, he flew it out of the mountain, taking some kids with him. Soon after, he came back and dropped down a ladder and started rescuing other kids. He eventually rescued all of the kids from Mr. Kicker, and was even able to take Kicker’s spyglass from him before leaving the mines forever. Also, the mustache comes from rubbing his face with coaly hands.


- “his mother is a very busy nutritionalist”
- his parents love him immensly
- but they are not very strict with what he eats
- I think it might be because his mother didn’t have candy when she was young
and doesn’t want to take it from him as well


- forgetful and easily distracted
- which “should not be confused with stupidity”
- makes sure everyone feels included
- from a very warm and loving family
- her father is an elementary scool teacher and her mother an ornithologist
- “they are frugal but not cheap”

(Honestly I couldn’t find much new information here, but you can look at it yourself of course)

- demands and sues money from everyone
- “lives in the biggest, most decadent villa in LazyTown”
- “Mr. Spoilero”


- “he may seem stupid, but”
- saves the day when Sportacus isn’t there
- “a hero who has no interest in being one”
- lives with his mother in a very narrow building
- his room is dirty and messy


- “She is completely uninterested in her outward appearance”
- new in town
- “her family has moved quite a lot”
- lives in a trailer
- parents work very hard so they can buy a house
- which is why she has to fend for herself most of the time
- has two older brothers
- they’re not very nice to her from what I can tell
- “her best friends are her books”

(this text is hard to figure out I’m sorry)

- his parents own the local TV and radio shop and are also very busy
- “… monitor instead of his own mother”
- “Crying violently whenever…”
- communicates with his parents through the intercom or e-mail
- “…his inability to speak normally”


- “would challenge anyone who said a bad word about her” (just curious who “her” is)
- his father was a prominent politician and his mother a compulsive gambler
- has younger siblings
- went to a private school
- was very active in both the drama and chess club
- was kicked out of chess club for cheating in the championship
- not sure but I think it says that he stole his catsuit from a play in drama club, ran off with it and disappeared for years
- when he returned he has become a skilled con-artist

Officer Obtuse/Lolli

- good friends with the mayor
- they’re compared to Laurel & Hardy and their friendship dates back to high school
- which is literally the only reason he is employed as a police officer
- doesn’t have his own home but instead stays in his office in case something happens at night
- the kids call him “Officer OB” and he thinks it’s fucking disrespectful
- is the youngest of nine (!) brothers who ALL joined the “SFLC, Special Forces for the Leader of Country” except him
- he tried to join 18 times but was never accepted
- good at sports though
- caught Robbie cheating in the chess championship

The Rooster/Cock-a-little-do/Haninn

- really doesn’t like Sportacus
- silently helps Robbie but doesn’t want to make it known
- has sisters or something
- used to take pride in waking up every morning until he discovered that being lazy is much more fun
- left the farm he used to reside to find the laziest place on earth so he could be lazy in peace
- is now the laziest inhabitant of all LazyTown

Alright, sorry for the long post but I felt like this was very necessary for all of you to know!!


“Better luck next time.”

Bank Robber AU for @ambiguous-eyepatch for the Valentines @aftgexchange!

I had a lot of fun drawing these and I hope you like it! 😃

I realized too late that this wasn’t exactly what you meant by your prompt, sorry about that, but I hope it’s still okay!

The rest of my mini-fic/headcanons/ramblings about this AU are below the cut:

Keep reading

stuff from the original heathers ending

i have been obsessing over this little snippet of the original heathers script ((pls daniel waters,, i’m begging you,, release the whole thing)) and there are just so many things that fell out of place just because so much changed between the script and the movie and i feel the need to share them

  • heather mcnamara Also hooks up with david from the remington party
  • there are five suicides. obviously three are heather chandler, ram, and kurt, but since this scripts was written under the assumption that the reader has already read all of the script leading up to this point, it does not expound at all on who exactly the five suicides were. we can only speculate (and i’m guessing heather duke and peter because there are some lines that suggest it)
  • martha dunnstock is paralyzed up to the legs
  • it’s implied that veronica killed people because she wanted the other students to learn something
  • ms fleming attempted suicide five times
  • instead of the doll, jd hangs the bedsheet noose,, which has even more of an “and then there were none” vibe
  • jd makes it very clear that when he was planning to kill veronica, he was going to make sure it was quick and painless
  • veronica’s mom slaps her for faking suicide
  • jd sits nude while holding a family portrait and admiring the bomb he built and in the next scene veronica sits nude while holding a gun
  • jd sets up thermals all throughout the school and at one point a hall monitor stops him and asks for a hall pass so jd shoots him and hides the body in the boiler room after stuffing a thermal down his pants
  • veronica decides to blow herself up after witnessing the typical horrible things that go down in a hallway during a passing period, but what stands out to me is that she also witnesses betty finn holding hands with a guy and heather mcnamara “in melancholic but eerily heroic contemplation” which to me seem like things that would make her not want to die
  • in her final moments, veronica helps a beetle that got stuck on its back
  • betty finn and heather mcnamara simultaneously find veronica’s suicide note while everyone else is freaking out
  • then the prom in heaven sequence starts and shit gets weirder
  • i think peter and some character that was not in the final movie named shannon have a baby?? (might be worth mentioning that she was a member of the yearbook staff)
  • there are so many more characters that i feel like i’m supposed to know some of them have descriptions but most do not and i am Confused
  • there are so many reconciliations between characters going on in this scene and then kurt has his prom picture taken with the cow he tipped
  • Also! mr. dawson is mentioned in this script and if you keep up with the reboot cast list there is a character there by the same name that i was wondering about a while back. it’s possible that the reboot my draw a bit from this original script (although i doubt jason micallef has the whole thing but he does please share jason)
  • jd does a guitar solo
  • leaders of the united states and the soviet union come on stage with big fun and fly their flags 
No Happy Endings | Wonho [M]

Originally posted by wonhontology

Warnings: Strong language, lewd comments.

word count: 3,532

“We’ve got a problem,” Hoseok tells Kihyun through the phone as he paces the length of the bathroom.

1 | 2 | 3 | …

Part 4: Breakups, Makeups, and Break-Ins.

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

a prompt: spock standing close to the captains chair + accidental touching

the working title of this fic was “touchy touchy” if that tells you anything ghfjdks

Loud and Clear (read it on ao3 here)

“Hey, Spock? Could you come over here and look at this report for a second?”

Spock turned promptly from his station at the sound of his captain’s voice, catching sight of Jim’s bright smile before anything else. Spock nodded once and briskly walked over to stand at the side of the captain’s chair, placing a hand on the back of it yet still hyper-aware of making sure he did not touch Jim. However, Jim immediately leaned back, his bare neck resting against the knuckle of Spock’s thumb. He could not find it in himself to move away.

“So, see, it says here that Kollona is a desert planet, right? And I know we’re still a few days away from it, but I was doing some reading up on it and read that it has an extensive rainforest? Which would not make sense at all, obviously, but…” Jim’s voice faded out in Spock’s ears as he suddenly got a bright flash of thought through their skin to skin contact.

Keep reading

DGM225 - Translation Notes

It’s (finally) that time again! After six long months, we have a new chapter to chew on, and it’s more than half a dozen pages long. One could weep. :’P

I’d like to thank the StarBuds team for working so hard and so enthusiastically with me on this. You guys are my heroes. (@krorys​, @shinylyni, @togaochi, and our very welcome new friend @1000glaceons)

Read the chapter HERE!

Now: if you’re so inclined, please venture below the cut for some notes on our translation choices and the inevitable untranslatable odds and ends.

☽ ☾

Keep reading

How to Relate to Multiples: Conversational Do’s and Don’ts

In order to get other perspectives and help flush out this guide, I’m sharing this rough draft. Please feel free to correct me or suggest additions. As promised, I’m working on making this guide more inclusive to all kinds of multiples, and I appreciate advice on that. 

Sometimes, when faced with strange and unknown situations, people clam up and feel uncomfortable because they don’t know what things are appropriate or inappropriate to say or discuss. Uncomfortable topics will vary from system to system, but here’s a basic general overview that will hopefully help you feel more at ease when talking with your friend and their system.

Keep reading

Big Brother (peter parker x baby! reader)

Genre: fluff

word count: 893

Synopsis: The avengers brought a young baby girl back from an attack on a hydra base after being unable to locate her mother and it’s Peter’s duty to babysit and look after while the rest of the avengers team is out at a post-mission debriefing. How will peter react to having to care for such a young baby?

To put it in a simple context, Peter felt incredibly confused about what he was supposed to do but to him, it seemed more complex than that. The source of his confusion was a young child, a baby – perhaps no more than 3 months old at Bruce’s evaluations of her – whose eyes gave definition to the term ‘baby blue hues’ with no hinting at what colour they might develop to be as well as a hearty mop of curly dark hair (possibly brown, maybe black).

Keep reading

Reggie Mantle x Reader: Tomboy & Skirts [Part Three]


Part 3??? Omg this is amazing. I love it.

Okay but I really need a apart 3 because what the hell???? That cliffhanger why??????


A/N: I kinda forgot I left you guys on a cliffhanger I’m soo sorry babes I thought I would’ve posted this sooner. I kinda want to end it here, but some of you gys actually want a part of the trip. If you guys want the trip or are okay with this please comment or shoot me an ask so I have an idea if I should continue this or end it right here.

Words: 1110

Summary: A picture taken out of context may actually be a good thing for the reader x Reggie.


Warnings: I don’t think so.

Part One - Part Two -

The picture spread like a wildfire, you in Reggie’s shirt and sweatpants. Your phone ran out of battery and you were tired, you were very confused as to why your phone blew up in the morning. Sure you had friends other than Reggie, but your phone never had this many messages. Each one containing a picture of how you looked last night and your wet clothes in you book bag peering out. You could see why people were jumping to conclusions, but he was your best friend and that was it.

You chose to ignore everything and decided to get ready for school, soon this would all be over you thought. It was your last day in Riverdale before you both left to you trip.

Reggie got up extra early to pick you up your favorite breakfast and drove to your house. He thought that maybe it would help the rumors that were taking their toll around town. The tall caramel skinned football player was very surprised to find you okay.

Something he had grown to love about you. You could never let the whisperings of people bother you. You were always so strong, there was only a few times he’d ever see you break down. One of the few times he saw you spiral for the worst that even to him you were unrecognizable was when your father left you and your mother. You always told him that pain was hard, but you would never acknowledge it unless you had to. He admired how you could be so strong.

The ride to school was a bit quiet even as the music played through the radio. Reggie a bit uncomfortable to bring up the picture, and you just wanted to get the day over with wearing the last skirt of the deal.

“You know we could just skip school today” Reggie finally spoke as he found a parking spot.

“Why would we do that?” you challenged “It’s the last day before break.”

“I talked to Dilton this morning, he took the picture down” Reggie gave you a small smile.

“Our hero” you smiled back.

You both walked out of his jeep and made your way into the school. All eyes on both of you. You began to get nervous and that scared you. You weren’t one to care what these people thought. They were idiots to care so much about a rumor. You hated the tension that picture brought to your friendship. You hate that maybe Reggie cared about this, the fact the all he wanted was for you to be protected and you couldn’t even acknowledge what had happened.

You reached the middle of the hallway to see the perpetrator of the picture. Cheryl Blossom at the end of the hallway making her to the both of you.

“Seriously (Y/N) we can go” Reggie turned to face you.

“No, let’s give the people what they want” you grew annoyed at everyone.

“Wha-” you interrupted you best friend as you pressed your lips against his.

The gasps escaped everyone’s mouth and the red haired bombshell stormed out hating that her plan to break you backfired.

Reggie pulled away first, angry not because you kissed him. He’d dreamed of this day, but this is not how he wanted it to happen. Kissing him only made people think that something more had happened between the two of you and he would never let anyone ruin your good name not even himself.

You were kind of proud of the courage that took over your body, but you were also angry at yourself because you cared about Reggie way too much. You could see the trouble in his eyes of what you had just showed the idiots of that school. You didn’t like to see him that way, you felt like you had disappointed the only person in that godforsaken school who really cared about you. You saw in his eyes how his mind was racing. You weren’t one to run away from your problems but you rushed out of the school like it was the only solution.

He didn’t go after you, he didn’t know what to do and neither did you.

You went straight home and changed. You packed your things for the trip not knowing if was going to happen, but you wished for the best.

Back at school Reggie finally had enough and decided to confront the resident queen of Riverdale High.

“Why did you do that?” Reggie questioned Cheryl.

“I was in the mood for some chaos” was all she said as she crossed her arms.

“Nothing happened” the dark haired boy replied.

“That’s not what it seemed in the hallway” she challenged.

“Tha- That is none of your business Blossom!” he tried to contain his rage as everyone in the cafeteria stared their way.

“What do you see in her anyway?” Cheryl cocked her head.

“That’s what this is about?! The fact I didn’t want to date you?” Reggie calmed himself down “You wanna know? You really want to know?”

“Something you could never beat” was all he could say as he stormed out of the cafeteria making his way back to your house. He hated himself for being rude towards Cheryl even if she started this, but all he wanted was to protect you and if that meant making her come down from her throne for a bit.

He tried your phone but it seemed to off. He arrived at your home and used his key and you weren’t there just your packed bags for the trip. He tried to think of every place you could’ve gone.

He arrived at Sweetwater River as you were seated on the bridge that was built in memory of Jason. Your feet dangling in the air as your arms rested on one of rails as he joined you seating himself next to you.

“I’m so sorry Reg” you croaked trying to hold in your tears as he put his arm around you.

“Hey, you have nothing to be sorry for” Reggie pulled you tighter to his side.

“Yes I do, I disappointed you. I let their rumors get to me, I wasn’t strong” you looked him in the yes.

“You didn’t disappoint me, and you don’t have to approve yourself to anyone” he placed his hand on your chin “Can I do something?” he asked and you nodded yes.

Reggie proceeded to continue what you started in the hallway. Your lips moved in sync, the kiss so passionate as your lips yearned more of each other. Your lips connecting perfectly as if they were the last two pieces of a puzzle.


TAGS: @sgarrett49 @casual-ellipsoidal @isis278 @stxrmqueen @imissyoualittlemoreeveryday @toofuckingfabulous @bugheadedarchie @rawrxbexjealous @forsythependletonjonestheiii @oharchiekinz 

♡ 170415 | Things to Take into Consideration
  Hey, LOVEs. I seem to be continuously posting little editorials to this blog lately, though I have always said I’d like to keep as much of my own personal opinion off this blog as possible. However, our fandom is under a lot of emotional turmoil, so I suppose that’s as good an excuse as any, right? 

There are many things we are struggling with; a feeling of doom, injustice, heartbreak, and even confusion. We are seeing our boys, our heroes whom we know have an incredible amount of skill and talent and heart, struggle with tasks they always seemed to excel in. It worries us, it even scares us, and it’s giving some really horrible people something to use against us. Let me tell you why this is all temporary and why I know things will be better. 

Jonghyun, Dongho, Minhyun, and Mingi are all human, and they are all out of their element. For the first time, we are seeing them in the middle of a work in progress. For the first time, we are able to see the struggle that goes into learning a new dance or a new song. Before, we only got to see the end product, we only got to see what they deemed perfected and suitable for public viewing and appreciation. We didn’t get to see them go through their personal processes of creation and perfecting of a piece, and now we are and it’s left us all a little shell-shocked.

For the first time, I think a lot of us are seeing that these kids are human just as we are, and that they aren’t just naturally good at these things we admire them for; they take time and effort and work, hours and hours of it. We are seeing that they fail, that they struggle, that they have to keep doing something over and over again until they get it right, and they don’t just pick it up from seeing it done once in front of them. In the context of the second episode, only our dancer was able to perform well within 3 days, and that’s because dance is his area of specialty. He knows dance better than the other three and therefore was able to find a process in that area faster. 

That is what these beginning episodes is all about; these boys have to find a new process. Their old processes at the studio in Pledis are not going to work for them here because they are not in control of their environment anymore. Think of this first challenge as a first exam; most people struggle with their first exam because it’s a new teacher, you don’t know what to expect and it can be hard to know what kind of things to study for. But once you’ve taken that first exam and struggled through it, you can be more prepared for the second one and oftentimes you will do far better the second go around. 

We know that Minhyun, Baekho, and JR perform the senior group covers very well. Though Ren’s group was stated to perform the worst of the night, Ren was said to have performed the best out of everyone in his group. I guarantee you, things are getting better. They just needed to get a gauge on their surroundings, they needed to get their feet in the water. It looks bad now, but I promise, it’s just because they’ve lost all sense of familiarity. And yes, they are nervous and emotional. 

Just remember that our boys are human, all idols are human, and they struggle and they fail and they have to get up and try again just like the rest of us. It’s painful to see them have their protective wall taken away, the wall that creates the image that they are perfect and capable of things that we just aren’t. In a metaphorical sense, this is them being violently humbled. We know them to be humble, but this is as if they’ve been stripped down in front of everyone. It’s hard, it’s humiliating, and it can be shocking and cause fear and doubt. Do not doubt them. They have heart, they have determination, and they have the skills required. Our boys are fighters. 

I feel like I should really clarify here because I think there may have been a confusion about my ongoing frustrations on Lapis:

No, I am not saying “Lapis is clearly a career soldier in defiance of YD’s explanation of a Lapis Lazuli’s duties and Jasper and Pearl’s separate reactions to her”.

I am saying “We’ve been explicitly given an explanation that Lapis is a construction worker, but she is both versed in and comfortable with fighting, and is terrifyingly powerful. Can we please acknowledge that Lapis is scarily powerful and none of her behavior suggests that this is new or situational the way the fandom seems to suggest?”

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

this might sound a bit rude but why is haknyeon even still in the top 11? i have nothing against him but i dont particularly like him either. he's managed to stay up there for so long without really having a "story", any notable talents, any memorable moments, lots of screentime, or just anything besides being jeju boy. im confused??? are knetz noticing something we arent??? i know he had a bit of a story during right round but even that was short lol pls help

!!Warning: long (possibly boring) post!!

It’s okay, buddy~ 

In short: He’s top 11 because he’s popular and he’s popular because he’s likable and he’s likable partly because he’s cute. I think that he’s remained stable in popularity (despite the reasons you’ve given) because of the way his popularity formed and the cultural context and cognitive biases that helped form it. 

I answered an ask about this here where I talked a little about how culture plays a big role in “visuals” being super popular. In this post I will be fully expanding on the points of the previous post. In the future, I will be linking any asks about this topic to this post so I do not become redundant. 

Disclaimer: I’m personally indifferent about Haknyeon- I can see why people think he’s cute but I don’t think he’s ready to be in top 11. This analysis is not intended to condemn or dismiss people’s reasons for liking him, it is also not meant to be the only reasons why he’s popular- I am merely exploring the cognitive and cultural factors that may have facilitated his popularity. 

Disclaimer #2: I am not a professional psychologist/researcher/etc. I am a 3rd year cognitive science, computer programming double major who has worked in labs that study cultural differences in social and developmental psychology. I’ve done my best to research and cite the articles that I use to support my observations but feel free to bring up any discrepancies. 

First, the timing:

  • March 9, 2017 - Mnet first unveiled the contestants through the Pick Me stage on MCountdown.
  • That same day, Mnet had a “Meet the Producers” event where the trainees met with fans and gave them gifts. Here’s a Naver link to their behind the scenes footage of the event.
  • March 10, 2017 - PR videos started being released.
  • April 7, 2017 - The show officially started airing.

Haknyeon caught a lot of people’s attention for being very cute and smiley at the “meet the national producers” event. Right after the event lots of people posted fan pics of him and he had fan sites popping up left and right- take a look at the twitter activity for his name on 3/9. And then on March 10, his PR video came out and people thought it was really endearing that he talked about Jeju and being a farm boy so he gained more fans. 

Remember that this all happened BEFORE the season started airing. The fans hadn’t seen his talents/skills (other than what was shown in the PR video) and we hadn’t really seen anyone else’s skills/talents either. There wasn’t much to go on other than his personality and his looks and we didn’t have any way of properly comparing him to other trainees yet.

“Visual” culture:

The industry itself counts “visuals” as a position in kpop groups and the country as a whole places importance on being the best “you” you can be (as seen in their many skincare/makeup lines, minor plastic surgery -like eyelid surgery- being the norm, and their tendency to criticize). It may seem like visuals are more important in Korean culture because they are. This importance is even reflected in the fact that Korean language has more descriptive terms for people’s looks.

Examples, taken from Park, 2007 (pg. 55):

eoljjang (“face king,” a person with a handsome face), momjjang (“body king,” a person with a nice body), saengeol (a pretty face without any make-up), dongan (a young-looking face), longdari (slang term for “long legs”), jjukjjuk ppangppang (“long, slim, and supple”), S-line (hourglass figure), V-line (slender face), etc

The fact that Korea is homogeneous and has its own set of beauty standards/ideals also contributes to the disconnect between their culture and international fan’s cultures. That’s not to say other Asian cultures don’t share similar standards. In fact, John Nguyeat Erni and Siew Keng Chua argue that “racial proximity” can explain the popularity of K-drama/K-pop in Asia because of the shared “norms of beauty (male and female)… in contrast to perceived western outlooks” (quoted in Kim, 2007, pg 48). 

I will not go more into these because I myself am not Korean nor have I studied these aspects sufficiently to feel confident in analyzing their role in “visual” popularity. But be aware that they exist and are large parts of the culture. (For further reading I recommend this study by Bissel & Chung where they discuss Korean socio-cultural attitudes toward ideal beauty).

The psychology of attractiveness: 

It’s easy for people to become biased to a person when all they have are personality and visuals to judge them on. There is a cognitive bias that every human has in some degree or another where we tend to equate good looks with having good traits. It’s called the physical attractiveness stereotype. Studies have shown that “in a first-impression situation, [where you only have personality and visuals to judge on] a person’s level of attractiveness may evoke in a perceiver a set of expectancies” (Miller, 1970).

In 1997, Wheeler & Kim conducted a study with Korean university students where they found that Korean university students were more likely than North American university students to stereotype based on attractiveness and were more likely to rate attractive people are being more trustworthy. 

In individualistic cultures, (i.e. US/Western Europe) the physical attractiveness stereotype tends to make observers perceive attractive people as more successful/powerful but it also causes observers to attribute more negative traits to attractive people and see their integrity/kindness as low. However, in collectivist cultures (i.e. East Asian countries) which stress harmony, attractive people are not seen as more powerful- instead they are seen as having higher integrity, loyalty, and other traits that culture values.

There is another cognitive bias called the halo effect where an observer’s positive impression of one aspect of a person (like their personality) makes other aspects of that person also appear positive to the observer. 

One study found that subjects “significantly favored more attractive singers over the less attractive singers” even when their singing was poor. (Wapnick, Darrow, Kovacs, & Dalrymple, 1997).

Another study found that subjects rated an essay as more intelligent if the writer was attractive even when the essay itself was poorly written (Landy & Sigall 1975). Here is a quote from their study that explains the interactions between attractiveness and perception of talent (I’ve bolded some things that stood out to me): 

The results of this experiment indicate that the physical attractiveness of an individual performing a given task affects the manner in which people evaluate both the performance and the performer. This was so even though the task performance being evaluated was completely unrelated to the physical attractiveness of the performer. Thus, physical appearance not only affects the way in which others react to a person, it also affects the way in which they react to that person’s accomplishments. (pg. 304)

Remember, these biases are often subconscious and we are not aware that we have them and are being influenced by them.

How it comes together:

Joo Haknyeon became popular because of his visuals and personality before the season started airing- in some part because of the physical attractiveness stereotype and in part because his personality is likable. Korean culture, in general, also places a lot of emphasis on “visuals”. In addition to this, the initial buzz on twitter gave him some very dedicated fans. When the season actually started airing, those fans already loved him so much that it didn’t matter if he had amazing talents or not- in their eyes, he’s the best and they want the best for him. This is the halo effect- because they love his personality and visuals, his fans are more likely to see the rest of him positively and disregard his shortcomings.

His lack of screen time only made his fandom more invested because it forced them to have to go the extra mile in finding content and information about him. Many have invested a lot effort, time, and emotions on him. (This is one of the reasons why fans are so rabid and why fans can become vicious if they feel betrayed by their idol, but I won’t go into that here).

The fact that people tend to question “Why is Haknyeon still in top 11?” etc. only strengthens the fandom because defending someone again and again only makes them believe in that person more. There’s also the confirmation bias at play- people interpret information in a way that confirms their existing beliefs- especially for emotionally charged things. 

In conclusion:

There are several cognitive biases that influence how we perceive attractive people but their effect depends on culture. These reasons are not the only reasons why people like him and not every Korean fan is influenced by these biases. For the most part, though, cognitive biases and the cultural context are likely playing a role in some degree, even if people aren’t aware of it. That doesn’t make the influence wrong or the Korean perceptions wrong; it just makes them different from international perceptions. 

Different cultures like different things-  and a good portion of the Korean voters like Haknyeon. If you were born in Korea and grew up learning their values and immersed in their culture, you might also have liked Haknyeon. Even if you didn’t stan him, you might have included him in your top 11 vote just because he’s very cheerful and cute- which is what I think is happening. He has a big fandom, but it could also be that other fans tend to use him to fill up space. We’ll be able to assess true popularity and fandom power (and not just casual liking) once we get to 2 pick and 1 pick.

Anyway, if you read all of this, then yay! Feel free to send me a private message or an ask if anything is still confusing (and/or if you disagree and want to discuss this) and I’ll try to expand more on that particular piece. Again, in the future, I will be linking to this answer if anyone else asks this question.

Something I want antis to know as a CSA survivor

I considered myself an anti for about a month when I didn’t look into the conflict.

From the base of it all, it seemed clear– Sh/ro is too old for any of the paladins and therefore they shouldn’t date. I took that as fact when research told me nothing about canon ages and accepted it because it was popular opinion. I didn’t mind it because I didn’t ship sha/adin and I’m also a csa survivor who is still recovering from multiple traumas.

But something changed my mind.

This is a LOOOOOOOOOONG ass post with a lot feeling spilled out so just a warning there.
feel free to reblog.

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

Can you ever read the bible and decide to interpret it yourself? Am I Bearing false witness to God if I trust myself than God's word? I'm confused when I read the Koran and the Christian bible and need advise. How do I know the difference between thinking I'm right and actually following God's word? Couldn't I then be upset with what I believe God tells me to believe, but still follow his word or should I go against God's word and believe differently. Why would God want me to believe falsely?

You should always


interpret the Bible for yourself.

If something isn’t sitting right with you? If something doesn’t seem quite correct to you when someone else explains it? If something (as it does to me) physically makes your stomach twist?

You read it yourself. You research the original meaning of the Hebrew or Greek words, you let whatever meaning comes to you strike you first. You look at the rest of the passage it’s in, you look for cultural and historical context.

Some verses I can tell you have been used incorrectly on the spot:

Leviticus 20:13: The famous anti-LGBTQ+ verse. This verse is horribly, HORRIBLY mistranslated and taken out of context to justify oppression. It actually doesn’t have anything to do with plain ol’ gay men having a good time. It actually has to do with very specific cultural norms relating to women’s spaces, essentially saying that men shouldn’t have sex with another man “as they would a woman”–in a woman’s bed. Because you don’t fuck in other people’s beds, son. Not only that, but it’s in the Old Testament, which was not written for Christians, so every time a Christian quotes it, they’re being a dipshit.

Deuteronomy 22:5: This is one of the big ones people use against anything from trans people to a woman wearing fucking pants. It says don’t wear the other gender’s clothes. Ok. But did you know that in this time, the clothing was pretty similar anyway? What’s the point of even saying this if your robe is only stitched slightly differently than the next person’s robe? Seems silly, right? Turns out, this is a ceremonial law against women dressing up as soldiers to go to war, or men dressing up as women to sneak into camps and infiltrate them. Because the former was a no-no since women weren’t supposed to be fucking around in the field, and the latter was a no-no because tricking your opponents like that isn’t honorable for shit. Also, it’s an Old Testament law–irrelevant for Christians. Good thing, else all us cis women wearing pants and even HEELS would be pretty fucked, now wouldn’t we?

Exodus 22:18: As a Christian witch, we get a lot of silly asswipes using this one on us. “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to liveeee oooooOOooOoOooh” like, ok buddy, slow down. The word “witch” wasn’t actually there until Assfuck King James got his hands on the Bible. He was so afraid of getting killed by witches that he changed all these other words to “witch”. What was meant to be there is the word “poisoner”, and it shows up many other times in the New Testament as well, where the word “witch” was actually based off the Greek word pharmakeia, referring to someone who poisons. (Sounds a lot like pharmacy, right?) A “poisoner” could be a poisoner of wells, a poisoner of faith, an assassin, someone who gets people high as a kite on drugs and convinces them that the poisoner is actually a super powerful wizard while they’re tripping, someone who roofies people, etc. As this extends into the New Testament, it’s relevant for Christians, but I’d be eyeing those pieces of shit that drug girls in the bar instead of me with my little herbal teas.

You want to know how you know wrong from right?

You meditate. You pray. You ask again and again. You work it out. God isn’t an inactive God. He isn’t silent just because we have the Bible. He didn’t plop that down on this planet and leave us to our own devices. You got a question about the lesson material? Ask the Big Teach.

I always tell people homosexuality is not actually a sin. Do you know how many times I’ve been nervous about saying that? Again and again, I’m praying, I’m asking God,

“If I’m wrong, give me a sign. Let me know. It’s not my intention to lead people to sin, and I really don’t want to muss up Your Word. I just don’t want people to be oppressed and be destroyed mentally, emotionally, and spiritually over a sin that doesn’t even exist. I have a lot of things to say that it isn’t a sin, but if I’m wrong, let me know.”

And I know there’s not much a point to doing so, but I rationalize in my prayers why I think what I’m saying has any basis, why I think what people have been saying about His word isn’t quite right, and I just ask Him to fix where I may have stumbled. He doesn’t seem to have corrected me on this statement. In fact, after asking and praying on it, I saw @oldmanviggo‘s contribution to another anon about Jonathan and David. I forgot all about those two. If anything, I could take that as a sign.

God doesn’t want you to believe falsely. God wants you to see past CENTURIES of utter horse shit done in His name. He wants you to uncover the truth of His lost and twisted Word, and He wants you to be steadfast in those beliefs.

I believe a lot of wonky shit as a result. I am pro-choice, vehemently so. I am bisexual and pro-LGBTQ+. I am a feminist, I am socialist/idealist with the even distribution of wealth (which tbh how the fuck can you be a Christian and be fucking capitalist omfgggggg), I am rebellious against all that’s bad, I am independent and stand as my own person, etc. (which apparently is a no-no for women according to some dickshit fundies, but fuck fundamentalist pieces of TRASH).

I have a checklist for seeing whether or not something is actually correct in translation or interpretation.

  • Is it oppressive?
  • Is it harmful to innocent people?
  • Is it contradicting somewhere else?
  • Is it against people’s natural, unchangeable stature, unconditionally condemning? (i.e their gender, sexuality, etc.)
  • Does it fall short of love, light, and peace?
  • Does it seem to not consider necessities?

If yes to one or more of these things, generally I find that it isn’t of God. There are exceptions to the rule, such as prostitution and other sex work, for example. People will generally agree that it’s pretty oppressive to criminalize some sex work, like prostitution. I think sex work is a sin based on what I know of God’s intentions for the act of sex (which do extend beyond procreation, mind you) and certain rules on adultery, etc. However, when it comes to things like this, what you need to do is remember that not everyone shares your religion, and that just because it does not sit with your religious views and your specific set of morals, doesn’t mean others don’t have room for it in their morals. In which case, even though I think sex work is a sin, I absolutely will advocate for the rights of individuals to do whatever they’d like and have a safe, legally protected space to do so in.

That is the trick. For those exceptions, you need to be really fucking thorough with what you’re applying this checklist to. You still gotta use common sense. So yeah, even though we live in an age where we can say a prostitute can do whatever they want with their body and has the right to do so, the Bible telling YOU not to do these things is not inherently oppressive to YOU. It’s simply telling you where your limits are for your own good. God’s rules, every single one, are for the benefit of you and your soul. They are there to protect you, to help you grow. I mean, yeah, I could quit Dunkin Donuts and go out and be a stripper and have so much fun and make HELLA money, but I don’t think it’s right to do this for a variety of reasons, and therefore I continue my struggle in different kinds of jobs that teach me certain kinds of things. Everything in our life is a lesson, every choice we make impacts our future and our wellbeing (spiritual, physical, mental, emotional).

Your religion gives you a certain moral framework to start off with instead of creating one on your own. That’s why people might say those without religion don’t have morals. That’s not true. All that happened with their moral framework is that they had one less outside influence on it when it was developing. We have God’s guidance when developing our moral framework. We can come to Him for any and every possible question or struggle we’re having. He’s MORE than delighted to help us work it out. It’s a sign that we care about His rules and we care about what He does and what He puts in place for our sake.

I don’t know if I just went on a massive tangent there. But. Hopefully that helps.

More of Eleanor’s diary

@lady-eleanor-vane posted several auction pictures of several pages of Eleanor’s diary, with the request of help for people to decipher what is written.

God knows I came away not half as well pleased as when I arrived with an engagement I had little hope of shaking off. All being so ill used for want of a pleasant nature. Hither to I had no quarrel with him, not knowing of him personally tho’ stories of exploits had reached us one is not given to taking them rumours and tales to heart for that is what they be. Just exactly that. When all is said and done this is a man someone is going to have to dispose of sooner, rather than later. [10]3

Notorious Prisoner On Trial. Court reports on Eleanor Guthrie, trade boss of Nassau. ….. [? not sure on the last word]” (Courtesy also to  @betterhiddenbizarre who also figured this text out)

Not 100% sure who Eleanor wrote about here, but this is around the time of the trial. It seems to me this is about Woodes Rogers after her meeting with him on the Delicia and he almost put her on the Gloucestershire back to London. I can’t imagine Eleanor wrote this about Captain Hume or Mr. Underhill. The “engagement” Eleanor talks about within the given context is meant to be taken as “agreement”.

So, if written after the scene of Rogers wanting to put her on the Gloucestershire for “fucking Vane”, then we can conclude that Eleanor accepted to cooperate with him for her own survival, and had little hope of being able to wittle out of it, that she was more confident and pleased of her deal with him before arriving on the ship than she was after the meeting. She feels ill used by him for her bluntness. Until then she had no “quarrel” (no ill feelings towards him) because she did not know him, but she had heard of him and his “exploits” (explorations) along with some dark rumors and tales, which she still tends to reject. And at this point she thinks that either she or others (in Nassau) will have to get rid of him. The “Notorious Prisoner” seems more like a spiteful signature, signing off. 

LEFT PAGE “We need to be able to make money the way London makes money through collection - collecting not hunting which amounts to legitimacy. I need to challenge him, ask him, beg him to give up the girl in spite of how his men may feel [22]2″

This is about Charles Vane, before she goes to the Fort to ask him to give her Abigail.

RIGHT PAGE: “I failed, my evenfall (?) prepared speech. He spouted (?) his humans shall … about taking and keeping, and lording behind desks … …. or anything else. Very well. I shall follow his example and take her, and look him in the eye and give him every chance to deny me. That is also legitimate. [23]3″

Eleanor continues on the Abigail issue, comprizing Vane’s ideas, and she decides to just take Abigail, using his words about looking a man in his eyes and giving him a chance to deny him.

The numbers at the end of each write-up do not seem to be a date after all. There was not a month in between Eleanor begging him for the girl and taking her.

“According to Marcus he requested their attendance in … having been confound to bed following a doggy spell. His fever worsens. Somewhere in a previous entry I have a cure for fever. It may be more ?eacuous than Marcus dethoxing and bloodletting I suspect, why/may/way I know the pressure upon him to find and recover the Cache is what ails him. Our continued … have in Marcus/Maroons/Marines (?) and allies.

grand (?) plans … around the Cache (?). All … .. makes that his health … to the additional will (?) … I have sequestered him A…. to deal with me. … …. …. I am the … … …. between Rogers and his council. The Chamberlain I expected to take issue with this. I command him though …. conditioned my state of mending on that what I cannot forget. I can move forward, which fact I think he found reassuring. [1]2″

I am pretty sure that I may be reading a word here or there wrong. But the left page relates to Woodes having been taken ill, Dr. Marcus’s treatment, and how Eleanor thinks that Rogers’ worries over the cache is what worsens it all or lies at the foundation of hm becoming ill. The right page seems to be about her now being the go-between the council and Rogers, and her struggles with Chamberlain, insofar that it seems either Rogers or Chamberlain expressed worry but that she managed to reassure him o her ability to move forward, beyond what she cannot forget.

“From the protection of the Fort we observed the mayham as the Pirates sailed into Nassau Harbour utterly oblivious to the underwater blockade below the holds sank (?) four fo the hardest waters.

Utter confusion and Ct BR watching from above, re/uncovered (?) and empowered (?) as the cannons fired repeatedly at the struggling ships. Only a man once engaged in Navy and Maritime business could devize such a scheme. And I keep the Baby open(?) of false Digestion.


Best/beat Rheubarb, grated Orange Peel f..y p… Chimway (?) seeds, browned … 3 days … guart (?) … & take … some (?) glass .. is much as … I keep the Baby open … Say sanctuary haven to mother (?)

(Mrs. Hudson’s concept for Gout)”

Obviously the left page recounts the failed Pirate attack of 4x01 with the blocked bay and sunken ships. The right page is a recipe, given by Mrs; Hudson for gout, but Eleanor uses it to keep the Baby “open” or help with morning sickness I think. Eleanor thus was certain she was pregnant in 4x01 and trying some type of drink with rheubarb, orange peel and seeds, and what seems to be a prayer.

“He finally came out with the real story behind some of his uncharacteristic behavior and decision. Money.

His intent to end his marriage to Sarah had unanticipated consequences one of which entails the intervention by her family with his more significant debtors. They have persuaded these debtors to accelerate the repayments. This will have a waterfall (?) effect and would encourage lesser creditors to also call in these loans, and Woodes would have no choice but to default. He would be in breach of the Law a fugitive. This debt, unsubstantiated previous debt was assumed to bring Nassau to order.”

Eleanor recounts what she learned of Rogers’ debts at the end of 4x01.

Given that we do not see the full pages I can only read some phrases.

LEFT PAGE: “or two, a woman ………. is going to walk ….. threat gate… Is a longboat…. I have place….. Rogers’ ship …. that she’ll …. order to … to…. have “…

RIGHT PAGE: “breach the pledge. I will … command his breath without … And as does ….. jewels ….. ….. the ….. “

Eleanor drew a ship with dolphins jumping near through the waves, and clouds in the sky. Above the little paper it says, “Taking Our Departure from New Providence.” She’s not bad at drawing, adding perspective and shadows to the sails.

Obviously we can make out enough to tell that these pages are about what we saw at the start of 4x05 with Hudson having to walk out of the fort and go out in a longboat to tell Woodes her plan. And she drew her departure as a type of wish-dream.

LEFT PAGE: “I have heard it said that a good dose of /seas…(?) …. beneficial. I fail to see how, unless of course … banting, but even … must be a better …. devesting oneself of no …. pounds than by an… …rge [16]7

Miserable day and still no news [17]8″

RIGHT PAGE PARTIALLY: “…. the “Lamb” … …. a work of art it …. …. me far … (?) I … Lock and Yeast.  … may be, even break  … me p..t… where some of …. ….. of human nature …. accept (?) with a hand which is …. while at …. [18]2

Not sure what the left page is about. Might be about some folk remedy. The miserale day mention and how near to the end of the journal this is written indicates this was written when Eleanor was in the fort waiting for news about the arrival of cache. The right page mentions a Lamb and human nature, and seem more philosophical. It may have to do with a sermon she heard or one of Lambrick’s words to other women. 

If you have corrections or additional words that you can make out, just put them in the comments and I’ll update this post.

ETA: it is possible that Starz may release the diary commercially in print after the S4 finale.

So I’m now doing a little typology of Atheists.

1. Why-do-I-have-Herpes-Atheist

This sort of Atheist has never really went deep into religion and

 faith. Often times she is coming from a loosely religious household and was never able to leave it mentally, because she has never overcome her puberal grudge on the world and her family. All the sad tragedies that happened to her, that she was always the last pick in sports, the F in religion class, that her great love Leon has left her for her best friend, but that he gave her Herpes before, all of that must be God’s fault. And therefore she is punishing him with non-existence. And of course the church is also stupid, nothing that requires you to get up early on Sunday can be good. It isn’t always that this childish attitude is paired with low intelligence, but almost always it is tied to a sense of entitlement.

Favourite argument: „Yes, but if God really exists, why is there so much shit going on in the world?!“
Is often confused with: People with real issues, that lost their faith over their immense existential crisis.
Favourite food:  Gluten-free spaghetti with vegan tomatosauce, Salad, Vegan and gluten-free Pizza, Starbuck’s coffee.
Weakness: She has little to no idea what she is talking about.

2. The Political Atheist

The political atheist, contrary to our first entry, really got into the matter of religion and faith, with help of famous Authors like Karl Marx, Richard Dawkins and Ludwig Feuerbach. In his opinion there are some religions worth his protection and that would be Islam and all non-Christian religions from non-european countries and all religious groups that have fewer followers than Marxes whole work pages (except of course national-socialist esoterism and right-wing neo pagans!).

His problem with religion is, that it in his opinion creates all that is bad in the world: War(except for peace loving muslims of course), Social Injustice, Intolerance, pedophilia and sexual inhibition.

The only reason that people still follow those fairy tales must be a world wide conspiracy, for example those of war loving priests or those damn zionists, which control all the world’s finances. On special occasions like the 9th of November he is sometimes posting his theories to the facebook wall of his local communist worker’s party, for example that Israel belongs to the peace loving Palestinians and that Hamas is a proxy of the Mossad or he is inviting himself for a lecture of the history of Christianity, only to point out that Christians are ruthless barbarians that slaughtered the poor muslims and that ISIS is just a product of processing the trauma which the crusades have left.

Favourite argument: „The church is run by money-loving ruthless criminals that would burn homosexuals and Jews alive if they could.“
Is often confused with: Nobody. Really you will know him when you see him and you will hear him before you see him.
Favourite food: Kebab and Hummus, because he is based and multicultural. AND NO, THOSE ARE NOT EXPENSIVE DOLCE AND GABANA SHOES!
Weakness: his logic is often flawed by his political agenda, his arguments are often bordering antisemitism, his greatest weakness is reality itself

3. The Beatles Atheist

He really took the song “imagine!” by heart. He probably really has done some research and experience with religion or so, but somehow he never really felt welcome and taken serious or so.
He feels very spiritual, sometimes ultra spiritual. He also has been to India where people in his opinion have a completely different understanding of the universe and their environment, but to believe in God? That’s not his thing really, an old man that tells you what to do, in his mind he doesn’t need such boundaries to his spiritual flow. He doesn’t really know what to think about all day and he likes talking about things, but really to make a commitment to something he refuses. And of course Mahatma Gandhi also said something about that, if he could only remember what. So if Mahatma says that, or something like that, who needs a God am I right?

Favourite argument: „I don’t want to be so constrained by that, man.“
Is often confused with: People who seriously and without naive expectations have interest in far-east religions.
Favourite food: Weed, Vegetarian Ayurveda-Curry 
Weakness: He has no weakness. He isn’t even interested in beef with you, he is just annoying.

4. The I-Outsmart-You-Atheist

This sort of Atheist has at no time even considered to read into religion or faith. I mean why? Science will answer all our questions we could ever ask, and for all those questions for which science cannot find answers, those questions aren’t even worth asking and she is too intelligent to even consider wasting time on them.
Humans feel love because it makes sense in an evolutionary context. Mankind produces art because we have an overflow of thought and religious experiences have always been reproduced under influence of strong psychoactive drugs or magnetic waves, whatever.
The idea that, how the earth was created and why the earth was created, could have different reasons is too hard to grasp for her. And that is why she is leading her own crusade against every creationist she can find, it doesn’t matter if their religion has something to do with it or not. That for example the catholic church is leading in research of natural sciences and that every christian and jew can study as much natural sciences as he/she, wants will be ignored by her.

So the only explanation for her is that religious people are simply too stupid to grasp her advanced concept of thinking and that they simply cannot think as sharp as she does. The only Martyr she knows is Galileo Galilei and if one day she is might be struck by an existential crisis she will lose everything she usually does rely on.

Favourite argument: Genesis 1
Is easily confused with: Real signs of higher intelligence 
Favourite food: We eat food to digest it and get the necessary energy input for our bodies to function properly, coffee and sugary stuff.

Weakness: Unimaginative, Boring personality and an almost zealotistic defense of science as “the only true answer”

5. The I-Eat-The-Souls-Of-My-Enemies-For-Breakfast-Atheist

This sort of Atheist has really gotten into religion, but the dark side of it. Because he is “evil”. He want’s his mother to be sad. He would grow a Whisker like Nietzsche but for that his puberal beard growth isn’t sufficient. He has a very broad collection of metal-bandshirts, because he is the Antichrist, but to be honest he never really made it beyond the first two pages of the St.John Revelation.
For shits and giggles alone, he pretends to be a real satanist, but he is secretly shitting his black underpants at the prospect of Satan answering to his calls. But good for him it is all nothing more than a charade in reality he doesn’t believe in it so it is not real, at least he hopes that.
But to be fair, under this menacing crust of dried beer, black and white face paint and eyeliner(that his little sister had to buy him), there is mostoften a good heart, he doesn’t really feel superior to religious people, he probably has a very social attitude, that only comes forth, when sits home at his granny’s place and drinks tea with her to listen to her old stories or when he meets somebody that is listening to the same music as him. As rough and brutal as he might seem, he just wants company and a feeling of belonging and in reality he doesn’t want that his mom is sad and crying, he only wants to be more interesting than the TV for once, so that she will take notice of him.

Favourite argument: Something with Witch trials, women and the medieval era
Is easily confused with: Guys that can be really dangerous
Favourite food: Human Flesh of course!
Weakness: Split ends in his Metal-Head; his social insecurities and his emotional vulnerability.