and people say they only do tricks

Dear Evan Fansens

Having tried to introduce this musical to friends of mine and their first response was: “that’s the musical with those nervous gay kids, right?”
I must say I am disappointed that we, as a fandom, are leaving the impression that this is what Dear Evan Hansen is about. Let’s go over it again, shall we?

Dear Evan Hansen is a complex musical about Evan Hansen, a boy with anxiety. He gets wrapped up in lies he compulsively made trying to keep up the act he was friends with Connor Murphy, a boy with unstable mental health and anger issues who commit suicide.

He pulls in his friends Jared Kleinman and Alana Beck for help with the project he’s created, only to abandon them without even realizing it when he gets everything he wants. (I am not saying these two are innocent, but they were hurt by Evan.) (Also, do not erase their high functioning anxiety and insecurities!)

He has tricked the Murphy family and his community that he was close with Connor. While helping everyone connect, he is ripping apart himself and others with these lies. In the end, he hurt people. He hurt himself. He survived and is okay now. It’s not the closure we would want and expect from the end of a story, but this story is about life. Life doesn’t always have closure.

Zoe got hurt.

Jared got hurt.

Alana got hurt.

Heidi got hurt.

Mr. and Mrs. Murphy got hurt.

Connor got hurt.

Hurt and mental illness. This is the story. Don’t erase it. Learn from it, instead.

I am not saying that this is all the story is and that shipping anything in it is wrong. I MYSELF SHIP STUFF! I just want the message to be seen. This post highlights the dark and painful parts of Dear Evan Hansen.

I am not saying the show is not happy.

It really can be. It really is. 

Evan created a place where people could learn they are not alone! Alana and Jared were part of it! The Murphy’s healed. 
Everyone healed, as well as they got hurt.

Just because I say one thing, doesn’t mean I cancel out the other. They coexist.

Thank you for listening.

dear //the signs//,

dear //aries//: why do you move so fast? you’re so caught up in yourself you’re missing what’s around you, slow down and look around. one day you’re going to be old and on your death bed unable to breathe, not because your lungs are failing, but because you regret taking everything for granted. stop thinking about yourself and being so impatient. things don’t grow under stress, they die. 

dear //taurus//: you cant buy your own happiness. sure, it makes you feel better but it doesn’t fill the emptiness in your chest. stop expecting everything to happen for you, being lazy isn’t going to get you anywhere and sure isn’t going to help the situation. fixing the problem isn’t losing the fight, it’s putting everything else beside and showing you have a heart of gold you didn’t need your money to buy. 

dear //gemini//: using people’s weaknesses against them and using your underhand tactics isn’t winning. you’re so superficial you come off shallow, you need to let people in, just like how they let you in. but doing what you’re doing isn’t going to get you there. you cant expect everything and give nothing in return. telling someone your favourite colour isn’t going to kill you, let them in even in the smallest ways. if you don’t you’re gonna end up alone, and no one is going to care. not everyone is going to hurt you.

dear //cancer//: feeling sorry for yourself isn’t going to make it better. not everything is intended to hurt you and making it a big deal is going to cause unnecessary problems. you can be oversensitive but that doesn’t mean your feelings are invalid, it’s just that person didn’t mean to insult you, it was only a joke so instead of pouting, laugh along and maybe everything will stop being so hurtful and you can see the world isn’t revolving around you, you can hopefully see how beautiful it all is.

dear //leo//: not everything about you has to be a grand gesture or so goddamn pretentious. we already know how much you’re worth and so many people already want a piece of you. you’re giving it to them so much, you’re changing yourself to be the most known person in the room. you’re better as your true self. if you show too much, people are gonna see the gold in you and try to steal it. being the talk of everyone comes with just as many insults as it does compliments. you don’t need to do all that shit to be noticed.

dear //virgo//: being fussy over what you want and then being cold once it’s been given to you isn’t okay. people try hard to please you and its so hard for them. they’re just trying, why cant you see that? why does everything have to be so perfect for you? people don’t try forever, and i know you’re inflexible from changing your opinion, but you cant keep this going. being so cold. people are going to leave and not even your bed is going to be warm anymore.

dear //libra//: changing your mind at the last minute all the time is going to get you left out of plans and events. you’re unreliable and indecisive. the weight on your back from the foundations you built are going to crack if you cant keep your mind on one thing and you keep going along with different ideas. i know you just wanna follow all the paths your mind makes, but if you do that, your towers are going crumble and you’re going to be sitting on the rocks alone rather than in skyscrapers with your friends. you can’t keep rebuilding forever, make up your mind.

dear //scorpio//: why couldn’t you see they loved you and only you? why did you have to trick them into something they already were doing? they weren’t going anywhere, they didn’t want to. keeping them locked up like a possession is only going to make them want to be further away. you have to start trusting them. they only ever wanted you to do that, why couldn’t you? the saying “if you love them let them go” doesn’t always mean break it off with them, it can mean don’t watch their every move and let them have some freedom. trust. them. before you lose them completely.

dear //sagittarius//: people can’t assume what you’re feeling. being unemotional is only going to make people leave. warmth is physical love and if you’re cold everyone isn’t going to give you the love you need, you need to give it back. it isn’t philosophical to be so unresponsive to emotions. you cant keep this up forever, your walls will break and no one is going to be around to pick up the pieces because you would’ve made them all leave. they just wanted to know how you were doing.

dear //capricorn//:  talking to you is like talking to a brick wall, you’re living in a black and white world with your lacking of imagination. people wanna live in colour, it isn’t the 1970′s anymore. bossing people around isn’t going to get them to listen. don’t be proud of making everyone listen to you. that’s how uprisings happen. listen to what people have to say, let them inspire the ideas i know you have in your mind somewhere. if you don’t change, your empire is going to fall and all your friends are going to be the one’s knocking down the door.

dear //aquarius//:  being so far away from everyone on earth isn’t going to get you any closer to the aliens that might not even be out there. you don’t need to hide your emotions to come off cool and distant, if anything they’re just making you seem unwilling to show affection or establish connections with anybody. i know you like to be alone, but sooner or later you’re just going to be lonely. and when you come back down from the atmosphere, no one’s going to be around for you to call home.

dear //pisces//: feeling sorry for yourself isn’t going to make everyone else around you do the same. you cant escape all your problems by hiding the truth or playing innocent. you need to face what you’ve done and stop acting like everyone else is in the wrong. people aren’t gonna feel sorry for you anymore if you’re so self-pitying, you already do that enough and people are going to grow tired.

**check your moon as well**

It’s heavily implied that Roxas had to choose to give his existence back to Sora in order for him to wake up. Which only makes Naminé’s and DiZ’s actions all the more reasonable.

At first, Naminé tries to persuade Roxas that he’d be doing it for the greater good. That Sora will be there to help others again.

But when he still continues to question why it’s so important that Sora wakes up, she tries to guilt him into doing it. She says he’s incomplete and needs Roxas, like he’s damaged and Roxas is the only one that can fix him. 

When that fails, she implies that Nobodies need other people to be whole and that Roxas will be complete if he gives himself to Sora. And she’s starting to sound really desperate at this point.

And Naminé’s outburst still doesn’t do quite the trick. Roxas is still fighting to be his own person. So DiZ needs to step in and only further demote the child. He further spews on about how Roxas resides in Darkness, an unimportant fraction of something much greater, someone who was used and was about to be cast aside for a better tool. 

Roxas continues to tell himself and screams about how his heart is his own. How he doesn’t need to go back to Sora. He has to TELL HIMSELF that he is his own person. And by Dream Drop Distance, it doesn’t look like he believed it.

They made him believe he wasn’t meant to exist, that he couldn’t be his own person. They broke down Roxas enough that he lost his will to live.

This is a reoccurring topic but that post where the person was like “I was fucking joking about drinking Disney ride water you idiots” reminds me of what I think is one of the funniest tumblr “mass delusions” which was the rather meta one where a bunch of tumblr people thought other tumblr people thought that one animated gif about dividing chocolate infinite times was real. Like you’d see stuff that was like “ones Tumblr lost its mind!” and it say like “when Tumblr thought you could get infinite chocolate!” and I would just be like “idgi how does an optical illusion going viral mean the site crazy” and then i was like “Oh my god people are taking all the "Zomg infinite chocolate *Avengers gif*” posts fucking literally are they holy shit" like no one fucking thought you could get infinite chocolate people just thought they did like do you people go to a magic show and see all the people going “Wow!” whenthe magician starts flying and are like “Haha these idiots think he’s actually flying! Only I know it’s just a trick”

I MADE UP A BACKSTORY FOR JACK AND HIS EGOS! (Think of this as a little story of how they all came to be.)

@therealjacksepticeye  @chase-brody-protection-squad

(Since Robbie (zombie Jack) is apparently an ego now, I made a little paragraph for him too. I’ve seen somewhere that his name is Robbie, so that’s the name I’m going with.)

This idea literally came into my head a few minutes ago. (I’m so fucking proud of this post omg! XD)

So basically, there were a bunch of scientists who wanted to see if they could extract a human conscience and split it into its individual parts. They had tried experiments multiple times but failed. Then, they found a way that they were sure would finally work, but they needed a test subject.

Jack’s file:

Enter Jack. Jack was kidnapped by the scientists and experimented on. His conscience was extracted and split into individual parts, his body was cloned and the main bulk of his conscience was implanted back into him. Jack survived the experience and the experiment was a success. And so, the egos were born.

They and Jack were kept in the lab and experimented on until they escaped. They now all live in one apartment, with Jack trying to continue his life, making it seemed like nothing happened and the egos hiding from the world so they wouldn’t be recaptured. Anti however, is the odd ball. Where the others just want to live their lives as normally as they can, Anti wants revenge. He wants the world to know what they have been through and he wants the scientists to burn for what they did. This is why he craves attention so much: he wants the world to know what happened to him and the other egos in hopes that the scientists will be found out.

Originally posted by marielgum

Here’s a run down on each ego and the part of Jack’s conscience they represent:

- Chase Brody was born from Jack’s feelings of being a father-figure to his community. He also has a bit of Jack’s childish nature in him, as who else would spend hours throwing tea bags into cups or firing nerf guns?! He is very skilled with real firearms though, the exact opposite to Jack who is usually quite passive and clumsy. He was caught by the scientists multiple times talking about a woman called ‘Stacy’ and claiming to have kids, though there s no evidence to prove that either actually exist, as Chase is nothing more that a clone and had never had contact with humans other than the scientists (none of which were called Stacy) and other egos at that point. The scientists believed Chase’s belief of having a family was caused by an error that occurred during his creation process, though no one knows for sure.

Chase’s File:

Originally posted by fear-is-nameless

- Dr. Schneeplestein was born from Jack’s desire to help and save people. He is also very caring and is very good with a scalpel. He fulfills his role as a doctor well, fixing anything from simple cuts and bruises to slit throats and gunshot wounds to the head (*cough*Chase*cough*). The scientists were confused as to how Schneeple is such a talented doctor, seeing as he has no formal training whatsoever, and his German accent, as there wasn’t anything in Jack’s conscience that hinted at him wanting to be German. Along with that, one day the scientists discovered Schneeple had written ‘100% real doctor’ on a piece of paper and was showing it to others, claiming it was a doctorate. They listed this behavior as ‘strange’ but found no reason as to why he was acting this way.

Schneeple’s file:

Originally posted by septicjacks

- Jackaboy Man was born from Jack’s deep desire to be a superhero (mainly Spider-Man) even though he doesn’t have any of Spider-Man’s powers. He can fly though, which the scientists believed came from Jack’s wish to not be afraid of heights. He, like Schneeple, loves to help people, even though he may not be as good at it as the good doctor. Jackaboy Man, like the other egos, created his name himself, though he prefers to use it as an alias rather than a real name, similar to normal superheroes. The scientists discovered he constantly feared people discovering his ‘true identity’, and despite constant questioning, Jackaboy Man would not explain further, preferring to change the subject. As a result, Jackaboy Man’s real chosen name is not known by anyone, not even the other egos.

Jackaboy’s file:

Originally posted by marielgum

- Marvin the Magician was born from Jack’s desire to entertain people and make them happy. He’s a people person, much like Jack, though unlike Jack he has actual magical powers which add extra flair to his performances. These powers are most likely a literal representation of Jack’s entertainer side. Through tests, the scientists discovered that Marvin believed his powers came from a white cat mask rather than the experiment. Before any trick he would (and still does) rub the ears and nose, chanting “meow, meow, meow”. Like Schneeple, Marvin’s behavior was listed as ‘strange’ and no real reason was found for these actions.

Marvin’s file:

Originally posted by magic-marvin-protection-patrol

- Antisepticeye was born from Jack’s inner demons. He is the literal representation of Jack’s fears and anxieties about not being good enough for people, his community abandoning him, and even small things like if his camera is recording. He is the most dangerous for these reasons, so much so that the scientists had a hard time keeping him contained in the lab, eventually resorting to locking him inside a computer program. He is the only ego without a physical body because he was technically an accident; the scientists didn’t intend to create him, he just appeared when all the experiments were done and caused havoc. The scientists weren’t sure why he took the form of a glitch, though they chalked it up to Jack spending so much time around computers and his deep love of glitchy stuff. Anti has the ability to glitch through walls and floors and can possess other living things, even the other egos; though he seems to stick around Jack more than anyone else, much to Jack’s dismay.

Anti’s file:

Originally posted by markired

-Robbie the Zombie isn’t actually a part of Jack’s conscience. Mostly because he didn’t get the chance to have any of Jack’s conscience implanted into him. Almost immediately after he was created, he was possessed by Anti and went on a rampage, killing multiple scientists and almost killing the other clones and Jack himself. He was only stopped after other scientists managed to hold him down and pull Anti out. It was this incident that lead to Anti being trapped in the computer program. The strain of the possession lead to Robbie looking how he does (grey skin, pale white eyes) and also appeared to kill him, so his body was thrown into a dump behind the lab. However, during the other clone’s escape, Robbie mysteriously came back to life, only saying he was “woken by the sound of people screaming.” Robbie has no special powers per se, though being undead means that no bullets, knives or other weapons can hurt him, though beheading him will definitely do the trick. He also likes to refer to himself in third person, though no one knows why.

Robbie’s file:

(So, yeah. That’s my backstory for the egos. Shit, this was so long, I’m so sorry! If you read all this though, thank you so much! It was just a random idea I had. 

I’m actually writing a fanfic based on this! 

Read part one here:

Read part two here:

anonymous asked:

I love your blog and all, but do you only answer asks when you know you have the upper hand? Please. No, we shouldn't "let nazis do whatever they want" but are you seriously suggesting that someone, (the police???), prohibits nazis from protesting? About the "who is a nazi" thing, course I think Charlottesville was nazis. But then some people say that everyone who voted for trump is a nazi, and everyone that was tricked into thinking that they're poor becuz imigrants r stealing der jobs r Nazis.

fuck off, anyone who wears a swatsika and throwing nazis salutes is obviously a nazi and should have their teeth punched out - i don’t care who does it as long as they leave feeling afraid and knowing that there is no room is society for scum like them who believe they are better than others and want to kill everyone who resists against them.

Originally posted by folkpunkdreamboat

You know what i find hilarious? That for years people (myself included) came to some very plausible conclusions over where the show could be going only to be wrong quite often. But get this: remember how many people presumed twin Moriarty brothers would be involved because ACD canon supports it and the writers are adamant about how “it’s never twins”? And after we saw the “fake” handshake scene being filmed for TEH we were like “OMG what if there are TWO Moriartys and one dies while the other lives??”

You see, this is what i find truly funny:

Our ideas, while kind of easy to guess and close to the Canon, may actually still be right. ACD meant for Sherlock Holmes to fall to his death. He only resurrected the character after 8 years of criticism and a pinched pocketbook. Having Holmes come back to life was a trick, and a cruel one at that, but it’s what ACD had to do to get the cash machine flowing again. Now remember how Mark Gatiss would say they’re doing something correctly with their Holmes adaptation that they think all other adaptations have been getting wrong? Before S4 many people assumed it would be the romance. After S4 many people spewed venom, yelling “Was the secret sister on Shutter Island what you wanted to DO CORRECTLY?? WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU.”

But it’s a lot deeper than either of those things.

You see, this adaptation of Sherlock Holmes did get something right that everybody’s been getting wrong, even Doyle himself: Holmes actually attempted suicide because he loved his friends.

Now I’m not looking for everyone to agree with me, simply to give this more thought. I’ve seen this theory come up many times already but most people shrug it off as impossible and a waste of time.

So here’s what happened: There are two brothers Moriarty with the same first name, like in Doyle’s canon. Identical twins, to be exact. In TRF Mycroft made a deal with James and sold out Sherlock – for the greater good, of course. Sherlock doesn’t know for sure, but he’s going to his death on that roof. He meets Jim, Richard Brook, who’s ready to die. Jim kills himself. Sherlock, in an actual panic, calls John before jumping to his death.

Everything from the moment Sherlock hits the pavement is a false reality.

He actually jumped.

Here’s why I’m thinking this should be given more thought —
– Mycroft’s office in TEH (one of the first scenes) turns into a checkerboard ceiling dungeon with a different painting on his prominent wall. The same ceiling and the same painting appear in an office in another BBC crime drama called “Ashes to Ashes” where the protagonist gets gravely wounded and sent to Purgatory, playing through her subconscious and attempting to understand herself. Focus on that painting and that ceiling comes up over and over again in limbo. Coincidence? Or the BBCs favorite way to decorate hell?
– In the beginning of TEH we get hit with a pretty obvious Christian metaphor: Sherlock, with long hair, is strung up by his wrists and beaten, visually similar to the crucifixion of Jesus. However, in this version, Mycroft intervenes and everything’s fine. Yeeeaahhh, maybe not. This could be another tell, seeing as Jesus purposely sacrificed himself because of love, just like I’m arguing Sherlock did in the episode prior. According to the Apostles Creed, Jesus was crucified and then descended into Hell before he rose again. Considering episodes 7 through 13 have been like Sherlock slipping through the circles of hell in his personal life, I’m not going to count this theory out. “They’re going to hell and back” is what Gatiss said. Yeah. I believe he could have meant that literally.
– If anyone has seen or heard of the 2005 movie “Stay”, it focuses on this exact concept. Go to @monikakrasnorada’s page and find out more. It compares the semi-lucid state one has after a tragic accident to changing how one interprets reality. For example, Mary Morstan is a nurse? Yeah, she very well could be Sherlock’s nurse. You thought it was weird that Mary, John, Mycroft, and Sherlock were all at the Holmes family’s country house for Christmas? Yeah, they could all have been visiting Sherlock in hospital at the same time over Christmas. Could be why there’s a framed photo of what looks like Sherlock falling off of Bart’s roof in mummy’s sitting room. Or why the contents of the book Mary reads doesn’t match the title.

Is this theory a stretch? Absolutely. But all theories are until time runs out.

Tl;dr There are twin Moriarty’s, time is fake, the truth was obviously there but because we didn’t get our immediate satisfaction, we forgot about it. It would be like Gatiss pulling the rug and saying “Aha! You were right to be suspicious FIVE YEARS ago, it really WAS twins but you FORGOT so it doesn’t count! LOSERS!”. And then we just look around at each other… mystified.

“Huh…. i guess it really was twins.”

How to please them

Aries: Some drinks, and good conversation!

Taurus: Shopping all the way.

Gemini: Let them talk, and just agree with everything
they say.

Cancer: Cuddling, and some ice cream will do the trick.

Leo: Compliment them, adore them, and you won.

Virgo: Be clean, and don’t get dull.

Libra: Literally make them laugh, and you got them
rapped around your finger.

Scorpio: Be wild, and be you. Real people tickle their

Sagittarius: Be up for whatever they want, and go with the flow.

Capricorn: Have goals, and make them laugh.

Aquarius: Compliment them, and only talk about them to the max.

Pisces: Have a sip of coffee, and some serious talk. They will love you for it!

Why You Should Be Open Minded To The Clip Possibly Not Being a Flashback.

If you’re curious as to why i’m not on a side when it comes to the argument on Flashback/ No Flashback, it’s because the arguments that are really trying to push it being a flashback don’t really work as well as they sound. This isn’t me saying it can’t be a flashback, but it’s me telling you why these arguments against it not being one don’t make any sense.

Lemme explain why.

Marco isn’t there!!!

Ok, Marco might be a main character, but he’s not obliged to have a huge role in every single episode. Some episodes require Star to be more focused on and some episodes focus on other relationships. Star didn’t need to be in Friend-enemies cause that would’ve only ruined the episode that was supposed to focus on Tom and Marco’s relationship.

If this is an episode made to focus on Tom and Star’s relationship, then Marco being there would kind’ve ruin it. Plus it’d be kinda stupid to push up a dead love triangle that was already killed off in s2.

Also, note that this is a private party, because the only people there….are mewni royalty. No citizens, and no outsiders, this is clearly a party meant for Royal Families in Mewni. Marco might be a princess, but Marco is not ruling a kingdom here nor part of a Mewni Family. 

Marco is probably not here, because he can’t, or isn’t remotely allowed to begin with. Being friends with Star might give him some privileges but I doubt he’s allowed to access everything, friend or not.

Moon’s design looks like the one in s1!!

Yeah, but you know what it ALSO looks like?

Her design in Face The Music, which was from s2.

The show reuses models and outfits sometimes, it’s nothing new.

Star’s Headband!!

Again, Face The Music.

It probably wouldn’t be very formal for her to wear to something this fancy and exclusive anyway. If it’s for royalty, then yeah, she should probably wear a princess crown.

Star’s Wings!!!

Star’s wings also didn’t show up in another episode that might sound familiar, Blood Moon Ball.

Which came after Mewberty.

So they could just be behind her dress or not there for the same reason they weren’t in BMB.

Tom would’ve been happy to dance with Star!!

Thing about this clip, we don’t know the context behind it, we don’t know what happened before it or what will happen after it. 

Star being grumpy to Tom is no surprise of course but everyone is deadset on saying Tom’s bitterness is a clear sign this has to be from the past. Here’s the problem, we don’t know enough to even understand why he’s angry.

Tom, for all we know, could be angry at Star for many reasons that relate to the beginning of the episode. He could be upset she kept on treating him coldly, he could be upset he’s being forced to dance with someone he’s supposed to be getting over, heck he could be upset for the same reason River and Dave (Tom’s dad) are fighting.

Without context on this episode, Tom being angry is not a determining factor, Tom gets angry sometimes; that’s nothing new. Unless we understand the full story behind him being upset, we can’t determine when this clip was.

He liked Star in BMB and was still pretty frustrated with her, who knows what happened here.

Disney is just lying!!

Sure, disney could be lying when they say this isn’t a flashback, that’s not out of the realm of plausibility, but Disney had no problem spoiling spoilers out in the BFM trailers.

Them spoiling this NOT being a flashback would not be out of character for them, you know how they love to tease and reveal things without the Crew’s consent.

Daron’s not new to tricking the audience either, her trying to make you think this was a flashback only to say otherwise would be something she’d do.

This isn’t me saying there’s no way it’s a flashback, but i am saying that this clip is a tossup to which it could be and a lot of these arguments people are using do not work. It could go either way, there’s no guarantee this is a flashback, at all. Nothing in this clip is a clear indicator of it and the fandom is taking anything they can to forcibly say it HAS to be. 

I’m choosing to sit in the middle and wait for anything else to be revealed about it instead of being in denial of the chances of this ship having present romantic moments. 

This clip, could go either way.

And I for one, will treat it as if it could go either way.

Reasons I am Lumière.
  • Sings about food and meals.
  • very dramatic and over the top just to make sure people truly know I AM DRAMATIC.
  • CandelaBRAH.
  • Small and sassy.
  • Stands on tables to feel tall.
  • Both make the love of our lives shine a spotlight on us for theatrical effect.
  • actually Ewan McGregor in disguise.
  • Wicked accent.
  • I’d do tricks with candlesticks.
  • “The East wing, or as I like to say, OUR ONLy WINg.” AKA Puns that aren’t necessary but we try.
  • dab.
  • bisexual.
  • may seem nice but probably plotting something outrageous and once again, OVER THE TOP but that’s okay because most of the plans work out.
  • “puDDinG?”
  • Can’t give relationship advice but our friends still ask us for some.

i’m just now hearing of this whole DaddyOFive thing, not sure how recent this is and how late to the party i am.

but i just wanna say one thing, as a kid who was pranked by his parents every april fool’s day when he was really young.

if you have children, or you’re going to have children, don’t exploit them for your own enjoyment. like, i can’t believe that’s a thing that needs to be said.

if your kid isn’t going to enjoy what you do to them for your own fun, why the fuck would you do it? kids aren’t toys. they’re not mindless little robots built for your entertainment. they’re literal human beings that WILL process and remember what you did to them.

the reason i’m saying this is because the message of this DaddyOFive thing is clear and obvious. like, don’t scream and curse at or threaten or physically hurt your children.

but what i’m talking about is the stuff that seems “harmless”, like simply tricking your children.

example: when i was maybe 5-years-old, my dad would take me for rides on his motorcycle. but one april fool’s day, my parents told me that new safety laws were implemented and that i could no longer just sit freely on the back seat. long story short, i ended up upside down with like five straps tying me to the seat. they took a picture, telling me that they needed to send it to the police to let them know that they were following the rules. then when they told me it was a joke, i was just like, “… oh.” like, it wasn’t funny. i didn’t get it. i was 5, and i would do whatever my parents told me, because nothing makes sense when you’re 5. they then proceeded to share the picture they took with everyone they knew, and laughed about it for years.

i hate remembering that prank, because it made me feel stupid, and now as an adult with literal mental illnesses revolving around an intense fear of judgement and humiliation, i still feel stupid about it. it’s not a good memory. it’s a hurtful memory.

another prank they did a couple of years later didn’t work, but if it had… holy shit. while i was sleeping, my dad hid under my bed and started violently shaking it while my mom woke me, frantically saying, “OH MY GOD, IT’S AN EARTHQUAKE, QUICK, GET UP, WE HAVE TO RUN!” i guess i didn’t buy it, because i just groggily blinked at her and didn’t move. they were bummed that it didn’t work. like, “aw shit, we didn’t needlessly terrify our 7-year-old child like we had planned. oh well, maybe next year.”

scaring the shit out of your kid for no reason seems a bit more obvious of a wrong thing to do. but basically, if the end result of your prank is, “HAHA OMG YOU’RE SO FUCKING GULLIBLE, YOU STUPID KID!” then… that’s not a fun thing for a child to experience? and it could very well end up hurting them??

so, i’ll say it again: if your kid will not enjoy your prank and there’s not a 100% guarantee that they at least won’t be negatively affected by it, don’t fucking prank them. there’s literally no reason to do that. they’re people for whom you have total responsibility to make sure they’re as healthy and happy as possible, and tricking them and making them look and feel stupid just for your own sense of fun is not only counterproductive, but just a shitty thing to do.

Dany did some things wrong


“I will answer injustice with justice” is one of the most famous Dany-quotes out there, but I hate to break it to you: She answered injustice with injustice. 

Keep reading

Phantom of the Opera: a tale as old as...

(This is gonna be long…)

Recently I’ve re-discovered my love for “Phantom of the Opera.” It started after I saw the 2017 rendition of the tale that’s as old as time “Beauty & the Beast,” which lead to my re-reading of favorite childhood novels, “Beauty” & “Rose Daughter” by Robin McKinley. Low & behold, right next to them on my book shelf was one of my all time favorites, Gaston Leroux’s “Phantom of the Opera.” It had been a while since I’d read any of them & in re-reading them with a slightly more wise, adult POV, & a bit more life experience, I was overjoyed that the experience felt much like the 1st in the fact that I realized many details in the stories that I’d missed when I was younger. It’s nice, leaving a favored stories behind for a while & then taking it back in with a fresher perspective. 

Throughout this vast re-read, I had also at the time been doing research in Greek Mythology (for another project) & also happened to be reacquainting myself with the Hades/Persephone tale. The thing about mythology is that the stories alter in certain details over time. It’s not so different from books like “Phantom of the Opera” that have so many adaptations that they all get jumbled together in their influence over our interpretations of them. When it came to Hades/Persephone what irked me in my research was discovering that Zeus was lauded throughout history. In too many interpretations/re-tellings Zeus is seen as the caring father-figure, the loving grandfatherly-figure (if we’re talking about Disney’s animated Hercules), or the seductive all power God-King. He’s someone to respect. Right? Not really!

Zeus is a man who often came down to Earth to consort with human women (those who denied him its hinted that he raped them) & was NEVER faithful to any of his wives. What, you thought Hera was his only wife? The Greeks viewed him in a traditional Patriarchal sense & that has extended throughout each new adaptation of his character. However, after reading up on Zeus, he actually had a lot in common with his father Cronus, the tyrant Titan King (Cronus may have swallowed his own children, but guess what, so did Zeus - i.e. Athena). Throughout history, literature, & Hollywood he’s portrayed as a hero, an authority figure to be lauded (& perhaps that’s our own Patriarchal society influencing us). Zeus, is in reality, extremely unfaithful, hinted as being a seducer of women & a rapist, had much in common with a former tyrant (his father), etc. Hades is typically chosen as the epitome bad guy. I mean, he had to be bad, since he ruled the Underworld (a job he never even wanted)! Right? It was actually Hades’ power, strength, natural leadership & strategy skills during the 5 yr. war between the Olympians/Titans, the Titanomachy, that enabled the Olympians to win - it was also what caused Zeus to fear Hades & trick him into ruling the Underworld (which inevitably made people wary of Hades & eventually vilified him).

When Hades meets Persephone, falling madly in love with her, he’s unsure how to proceed. Hades actually goes to Zeus, telling his brother that he’s found a potential bride but is essentially uncertain how to proceed.  “I’ll just ask my womanizing big brother, Zeus, he knows how to woo women.” (I’m paraphrasing, obviously, but you get the gist.) It is actually Zeus who suggests that Hades should kidnap Persephone. Which in itself, says more about Zeus than it does Hades, IMO!

Hades takes his brother’s advice & does as Zeus suggests, kidnapping Persephone. What’s interesting is the fact that while this 1st half of the story remains pretty consistent throughout the fogginess of history (myths do like to alter throughout time with each new interpretation of them) the 2nd half is open to much interpretation due the latter half being unclear of certain events. It’s a toss-of-the coin, a 50/50 chance; many philosophers & historians believe Persephone was taken against her will, while just as many of them suggest that Persephone saw Hades taking her to the Underworld as rescuing her from her overbearing, controlling mother, Demeter. Demeter also threatens to leave the world in a perpetual state of winter, essentially driving all of humanity into starvation,  The same speculate as to whether Persephone knew what would happen if she ate those famed pomegranate seeds.

For any story that leaves room for speculation, I’ve found that it’s what people theorize that’s far more telling of THEM as people than it is of the actual story! When people theorize that Persephone was a victim, that she was tricked, that says more about the theorist than it does Persephone, b/c the theorist is the one that is turning Persephone into the victim, not necessarily the actual story. When theorists interprets/speculates that Persephone had an intelligence that enabled her to know what she was doing, that she made her own choices, it lends Persephone the agency she deserves as a person rather than choosing to victimize her! The story also hints that Hades truly loved Persephone given that he was pretty much the only Olympian who was faithful to his wife!

Moving forward, as I re-read “Phantom of the Opera” (as well as reading “Phantom” by Susan Kay for the first time) I began noticing parallels not just with stories like “Beauty & the Beast” but also Hades/Persephone.

The most obvious parallels being: in comparison to “Beauty & the Beast” an ugly (cursed) man seeking the companionship of a woman who can love him in spite of his ugliness; in comparison to Hades/Persephone, when the Phantom absconds with Christine, taking her down to his lair to make her his bride. The latter parallel also reminds me of the french epic poem “Eloa” who is an agel that falls in love with a disguised Satan - he takes her to hell, not believing she could truly love him now that she knows the truth, but instead she chooses to stay with him regardless.

In particular the parallel to Hades/Persephone seemed to fit considering this particular quote from Leroux’s novel, “You must know that I am made of death, from head to foot, & it is a corpse who loves you & adores you & will never, never leave you!” Hades was often referred as Lord of Death since people feared speaking his actual name.

My foray into the various “Phantom of the Opera” adaptations also enlightened me to other aspects of parallelism & details that, as a child, I had not thought of until now with an adult perspective.

Fantasy vs. Reality…

In “Beauty & the Beast”, the ultimate reward for Belle in loving the Beast for who he is (not what he is) in the end, is that he transforms back into his handsome Princely self. As a children’s story B&B gets the message across; that beauty is more than just skin deep, teaches lessons of seeing beyond the obvious, acceptance & tolerance. But the ending is the real fantasy, the lie as it were, b/c in the real world the Beast would not become a Prince again. The real reward for Belle in reality would simply be the Beast’s love, not an alteration in his physicality. These fundamental changes in childhood stories are true within the concept of tales like “Beauty & the Beast” in comparison to whether we’re looking at the story with a child’s gaze or through an adult’s POV. There’s the fantasy we interpret as children, then there’s the reality we see as adults! This comparison is reflective between various adaptations of “Phantom of the Opera” & “Beauty & the Beast.” The fantasy being B&B where the beauty is rewarded for loving such a creature by him transforming into a handsome Prince, while the Phantom stays as he is.

Fantasy Love…

In “Phantom of the Opera” Raoul is referred to as “foppish boy,” that “insolent boy” but a boy all the same! His youth, education, title & wealth are the very things that most women think of in an ideal man. His overall role in Christine Daae’s life represents the sweetness of childhood. Raoul is, at 1st, presented in a very real aspect: his brief history with Christine, his lac of mystery making him seem normal; there’s no supernatural element to his character. However, as Raoul become a Love Interest to Christine, he’s rendered a sort of fairy-tale quality. The reality being that a man of Raoul’s social standing would likely not be able to/or even think to marry someone of Christine’s much lower social standing (he’s a Vicomte, she’s a mere chorus girl). That particular element gives their “love” a Cinderella” feel rendering Raoul as a sort-of Prince Charming. Erik, the Phantom, is flawed & referred to as the man of the story - he’s older, wiser, more experienced (even if those experiences have made him bitter). Leroux even calls Erik, “The man’s voice.” Raoul become less of a reality & more of a fantasy love, akin to a Prince Charming in a fairy-talewhile Erik, becomes less of a fantasy throughout the story & something far more tangible; he’s brutal & honestly flawed, an ugly reality of the world.

Each adaptation that I’ve come across seems to present Erik/Raoul to the reader as polar opposites. You have Raoul who Christine sees quite obviously as a real person (he’s not an Angel of Music, he’s not some Opera Ghost), he’s real flesh & blood, a youthful young man. They have some history together which solidifies Raoul’s presence as a normal guy in Christine’s life. There is no air of mystery. Yet, they come from completely different classes of society. Not unlike how Darcy, in reality, would never marry someone of such low social standing as Elizabeth Bennett (”Pride & Prejudice”). That’s the fantasy - the Prince Charming, Cinderella effect of the Raoul/Christine relationship. Where as there is no real social separation between Erik & Christine. Any expectations society gives for Christine to choose Raoul are the very things that make him a fantasy love: wealth, title, handsome, youth, etc. The fantasy itself is the very thing that lends an illusion of realism to Raoul as Christine’s love interest! He’s a fantasy that exists completely under an illusion of realism, IMO!

Christine: Growing Up…

This is where the jumbled various adaptations of a story become harder to separate, in this regard I’m essentially taking in a bit of every adaptation (this reminds me of Bram Stoker’s “Dracula” where in the original novel he’s not as handsome as Dracula is later perceived in later adaptations). In Leroux’s novel Christine has only known Erik, her Angel of Music for a few months (though at times it seemed like she’d known him much longer) whereas other adaptations show Erik being in Christine’s life much longer. As a child Christine looks upon Erik with a child’s gaze. 1st as her Angel of Music, seeing him as a literal Angel. Quickly morphing into the guidance of a teacher, & while he still remains her “mon ange” (my angel), he has also become her Maestro. At the same time he’s become the Opera Ghost. With each stage of Christine’s psyche, the illusion of Erik melts away; from Angel, to Maestro, to Phantom, until he is just a flesh & blood man. Where as Raoul remains a representation of Christine’s childhood & their “love” eludes to that youthful mindset - a childhood infatuation that’s as fleeting as the emotions experienced by other teenagers. Not unlike the comparative romantic relationship in “Gone with the Wind” (Scarlet clings to Ashley who represents life before the war, the last part of her childhood, of a time long gone; while ignoring her very real feelings for Rhett which represent something far more lasting & mature. You have Ashley, the idealist & Rhett, the realist). Raoul represents Christine’s past, her childhood idealism; Erik represents Christine’s growth b/c he’s seemingly a part of every phase of her life.

Christine’s Early Childhood - Raoul (varies with each adaptation)

Christine’s Later Childhood - Erik as her Angel of Music.

Christine’s Teen Yrs. - Erik as he Angel but also now taking on the role of Maestro, her teacher, while also being the mysterious Opera Ghost (something darker, more mysterious than the purity of an Angel).

Christine’s Adult Yrs. (moving into womanhood) - Erik, the illusions have fallen away & he’s now just a flesh & blood man!

The role Raoul seems to chiefly represent in Christine’s life is her past, there’s not much growth in their relationship beyond Raul wooing her. B/c her relationship with Erik changed over the yrs. it represents real growth in character & personality for Christine which is the reality of growing up. By choosing Raoul, Christine chose the illusion of living her life through her childhood & is therefore stuck in the past. Raul essential hinders Christine’s growth as a character, IMO.


Erik (the Phantom) is a lot like Severus Snape - an unlikely sex symbol of the story! He’s also acts as a sort of metaphor for Christine Daae’s evolution in discovering her sexuality.

The fundamental growth of Christine moving away from her childhood & into a woman is connective to how Erik encompasses various phases of her life. When Christine looks upon Erik as an Angel it represents the purity of a child’s mind. He’s her friend, her companion of comfort that get’s her through the loneliness after her father’s death (the Musical & 2004 film). When he grows into her Maestro - her teacher - he becomes her confidant, a source of wisdom (this is especially prevalent in the Charles Dance mini series). As she grows into her teen yrs. & Erik becomes the Opera Ghost, he represents something darker, more mysterious in nature; he’s no longer the pure Angel. By the time Christine sees Erik, the flesh & blood man, he’s fallen in love with her which shows his representation of Christine moving her mindset from the fantastical (Angel/Phantom) to something more real (a man). This development, I feel, is the opposite of Raoul. Raoul starts off seeming realistic & morphs into the fantasy of a sort-of Prince Charming, showing that Christine looks upon Raoul the way she would as a child, as a fairy-tale ending. Whereas Erik starts out as something unreal/otherworldly (Angel/Phantom) later becoming something tangible & real. It shows how with Raoul, Christine moves backward but with Erik she moves forward into adulthood - womanhood (though, that’s just my interpretation).

That moment of adulthood is when Erik reveals himself to being a real man & takes Christine down to his lair for the first time. (Leroux) “The moment she took his offered hand she was no longer a child.” In the musical, this is shown in the song “Music of the Night” in it’s purely sensual nature & tone of the song where we see Erik caress & holding Christine repeatedly throughout the scene. Many speculate that this strongly hinted that Christine & Erik were actually lovers in the most intimate sense, given that during that time period what differentiated between being a girl & being a woman was the marriage bed. Both the quote & song hint at a deeper connection between the 2.

This is reflective throughout much of Christine’s relationship with Erik. In the musical, the songs become more sensual in nature & far less metaphorical. One theory I found was the speculation that “Music of the Night” was metaphorical to Christine loosing her virginity. Interesting.

The song “Past the Point of No Return” is a bit more blatant in its lyrics if still a bit poetic in how it addresses the concept of physical/sexual pleasure. The fact that it’s a duet between Erik/Christine further shows a more sexual nature to their relationship. It’s the opposite of the duet shared between Raoul/Christine “Say you need me…” which is far more innocent in nature & tone. Where as the songs/scenes between Erik/Christine radiate passion! In “Love Never Dies” adaptation, the song “Beneath a Moonless Sky” is downright blatantly descriptive of the sexual intimacy between Erik/Christine (no longer metaphorical).

As little girls we’re fed stories, fairy-tales of gentle love. Even books like Twilight capitalize on the interpretation of young love as something pure where the teenage male is (rather unrealistically) a perfect gentleman & other books where the man is the only one perceived as having a sexual nature. “Phantom of the Opera” in its own way shows that women are sexual creatures, too. By representing the innocence of her childhood, Raoul is in a way repressive of Christine’s sexuality while Erik enables her to embrace certain desires.

What furthers the sexualization of Erik - whether it’s when he’s Christine’s Angel…

her Maestro…

Originally posted by erika-daae

the Opera Ghost…

or just the ostracized, scarred, tormented, isolated flesh & blood man, Erik…

- is the fact that throughout various adaptations of the story there is a great deal that appeals to popular erotic fantasy.

There’s the eroticism of the Phantom’s aesthetic in adaptations like: Webber’s Musical, the Charles Dance Mini Series, the 2004 film, even the poetic prose of Susan Kay’s novel lends a romanticized interpretation of the character: He’s tall, dark, mysterious with an edge of danger. And in terms of physicality, the Phantom is far different from that of Raoul. While Raoul would likely be a handsome athletic man for the time period, he is also what was considered the typical handsome, the typical athlete. Males in society within Raoul’s social class were physical in that they likely had formal hunting parties (ever watched Downton Abbey?) & knew how to fence. But his wealthy likely meant he never had to do any form of real physical labor. In the Charles Dance mini series, ‘04 film, Webber’s Musical, & a novel by Fredrick Forsyth, the Phantom is decidedly more physical: from building & adjusting the Opera House’s architecture, roaming around the Opera House in unlikely places (climbing onto the rafters), not to mention how he moves large pieces of furniture like an organ all the way down to his lair; the Phantom’s backstory as an assassin in Persia! He is very much an active man who’s dealt with physical labor & hardships his whole life & therefore has a sense of strength that Raoul’s luxurious lifestyle would probably NOT enable him to have.

Let’s not forget that enigmatic mask of his!

Not to mention the cape!

And of course the sexualization of the student/teacher-protege/mentor relationship!

Yet, despite all the illusions, the many faces Erik wears, he is far more tangible & real than Raoul. Raoul, who’s personality floats somewhere between entitled brat to nonexistent; Raul, whose entire character is defined by his wealth, his good looks & his past with Christine. Where as Erik, the Phantom has a backstory, a tortured life that makes him the man he is now. Erik who is ever changing & complex in personality & character no matter how enigmatic he’s portrayed feels far more real. Even down to how people treat him & the cruelties he’s endured simply b/c of what he looks like is a reality of our world!

As for the love Erik has for Christine - in Leroux’s novel Erik seems consumed with loneliness & desperate for companionship which makes his feeling for Christine appear obsessive in nature. Though, even at the end they are both moved to tears & Christine shows him great compassion. It’s possible that the lack of human contact that Leroux’s Erik has endured is parallel to that of extreme isolation which can psychological alter a person’s sanity. So, is it the abuse he’s faced throughout his life, the horrors he witnessed in Persia, or his isolation that has made insane? Perhaps all three in Leroux’s novel.

In other adaptations Erik’s love is portrayed as something far more pure. He loves Christine for her talents (singing, ballet, artistry) & not her physical beauty like Raoul. As a woman, I can’t tell you how annoying it is when people, men in general, comment on my looks. When someone tells you you’re pretty/beautiful, your looks aren’t something you really have control over (genetics), therefore the compliment falls flat a lot of the time. Where as if you compliment someone for their accomplishments, something they’ve worked hard for, it’s far more meaningful. The relationship between Erik/Christine in various adaptations appears to be built on companionship, trust, respect, the love of friends, the love of student/teacher, romantic love, the appreciation they have for each other’s talents, & at times their own mutual loneliness (Erik in his solitude & Christine in the sadness of her father’s death). The Raoul/Christine relationship many times focuses on how beautiful Raoul thinks Christine is. In the 1990s TV mini series adaptation starring Charles Dance, the Phantom tells Christine that Raoul is not worthy of her b/c, “He comes to the opera for the wrong reasons. He come for the sake of pretty faces rather than the music.” In a way, much like in “Beauty & the Beast” Belle/Christine at times deal with body image issues. Where as the Beast in B&B, & Erik in “Phantom of the Opera” are both judged for how they look, so are the characters Belle/Christine - both women are seen for their looks by their love interests Gaston/Raoul. Where as in the Musical, for example, Erik seems to focus mostly on Christine’s talents which he later becomes attracted to.

This was essentially my interpretation of “The Phantom of the Opera” in it’s entirety, including the influence of its various adaptations. I theorize with the more sympathetic, romanticized versions of the story mostly b/c my 1st exposure to it was the 2004 film & later Webber’s Musical. I read the book after that & so my mental via of the Phantom was decidedly different to that of what Leroux likely originally intended. To me the film, musical, mini series, & Susan Kay’s novel are the ones that are most influential of how I view the story/characters compared to someone who started out reading Leroux’s book 1st. Which was an entirely new experience for me in terms of how I usually analyze/interpret things b/c I almost always read the original novel before any other adaptation.

emotionalmorphine  asked:

So right Hanzo just seems to nap anywhere. Always sitting or standing with crossed arms and just nods off. Jesse thinks it's wild and Genji laughs at him and tells him Hanzo once stayed awake in the same position for fourteen hours during a lecture - he only lets himself sleep like this around you, dummy. And McCree is so stunned and sure enough everyone's always talking about how Hanzo never takes a break with them but here he is napping beside Jesse like nothing's wrong. Hanzo trusts him.

The first time it happens is when they’re on the carrier on the way back to Gibraltor after a mission. Tracer and Mei are up in the cockpit, leaving Jesse alone with Hanzo in the main body of the aircraft. Jesse’s exhausted, and he pulls his hat down over his face, stretches his legs out, and promptly falls asleep. He wakes after a short time to find that Hanzo has settled next to him, head on Jesse’s shoulder, fast asleep and snoring very quietly. He doesn’t move for the rest of the trip, and pretends to be asleep when he feels Hanzo jerk awake as they begin to land.

He notices it happen more often after that. Hanzo seems to be able to sleep anywhere, and Jesse begins finding him asleep in the oddest places. At the practice range, waiting for his turn. Sitting at the table in the kitchen with a mug of tea in front of him. On the roof of the Watchpoint, leaning against a wall with his eyes closed.

His teammates don’t seem to notice. “He never rests!” Mei says with a hint of awe in her voice as she watches Hanzo at the practice range. He’s just shot ten arrows in perfect succession, and Jesse’s pretty damn impressed with his marksmanship, as usual.

“What do you mean?” Jesse asks, confused.

“Hanzo. I’ve never seen him rest. I don’t know how he keeps his scores so high. I’m not sure he ever even sleeps.”

Jesse blinks and hums thoughtfully. “You don’t say,” he replies carefully.

He notices more, after that. How Hanzo only ever dozes off when he’s around his brother or Jesse. Jesse can’t help but admire the absolute stillness of Hanzo at rest – he supposes it’s a trick snipers learn quickly. It’s starting to become a thing – whenever Jesse is by himself, Hanzo will inevitably show up, greet Jesse, and fall asleep in his vicinity.

“Why’s he doing that?” Jesse asks one day. He and Genji are in the garden, pruning the tomato plants, and Hanzo is kneeling in the corner, apparently meditating but definitely fast asleep.

“He always has,” Genji says with a shrug. “He can stay awake for a long time – fourteen hours during a lecture, once! That was amazing – but he only sleeps around people he trusts.” He looks directly at Jesse, the green glow of his visor intense. “That means he trusts you.”

Jesse can’t stop the wide smile that covers his face, and he glances over at Hanzo. Very slowly, so Genji won’t notice, Hanzo raises his head and winks at Jesse before closing his eyes again.

Faerie 101: How to start part 2

Part 2: Local Fairies 

What are local fairies?: Fairies that exist mostly within our side of the fence (this realm).

They are the fairies that exist closely with mortals. The brownies, the home maidens, the boggarts, goblins, hobgoblins, and so on. Note: All sort of fairies can exist in our realm, but some are more common than others.

There are various troops of fae that exist within the mortal lands. The local fairy courts/groups that hold territory here. 

Also, the solitary fairies that wish to live quietly outside the faelands (sometimes willingly sometimes not), then there are the exiled fairies that were either kicked out of the faelands entirely or were kicked out of a group and decided to come to the mortal realm.

A few notes about local fairies 

  • fairies can be found all across the globe
  • fairies can live both in rural and urban areas (or in the middle of nowhere)
  • forests aren’t the only place that fairies enjoy to be in 
  • they have been known to migrate alongside people  

Letting local fairies know you’re interested in forming a relationship

Sometimes outright going and saying “hey guys, I’m interested” can do the trick. Leaving gifts out can help show your interest, and help show the fairies you mean well.

You can make things like shrines, fairy houses, fairy doors, fairy welcome matts, and so on to help get them to notice you.

Sometimes going to certain locations can help get them to notice you as well. (for times when you’re just not having any luck in your immediate area)

  • fairy mounds (fairy forts)
  • fairy circles
  • witches’ circles
  • certain trees (hawthorn, elder berry, willow, oak)
  • wild places 
  • gardens, parks, lakes

I will let you all know that sometimes looking for fairies can be a bit like fishing. Sometimes you’re lucky, and you get a bite right away…other times not so much. Sometimes patience and consistency is key! 

Now what are some things that can draw their attention?

  • shiny things
  • pretty things
  • sweet things

these are the usual themes that I follow; however, they can differ from fairy to fairy. Some fairies do not enjoy sweets.

Some fairies enjoy bread and oatmeal, while some will actually take offense to being offered them. 

Research is key when trying to attract fairies. They can be a fickle sort. 

You can help gain their respect by picking up litter or caring for various animals (cats especially). They are also drawn to children or child-like people. 

Why local fae?- Solitary, Exiled, and Troops

Local fairies tend to be more “people friendly” from what I’ve experienced. They are a good choice for those who do not wish to travel to their lands. 

The majority of them usually are solitary or live in small groups. Exiled fairies are those that were kicked out of a group and now live alone (or joined another troop). Be careful, the reasons behind their exile can vary, some small and some dangerous.

There are local fae courts and clans that exist in this realm. These troops might have a piece of the faelands brought with them, or might have made claim to a territory long ago. 

Depending on if they are in a group or not, it will help determine how you will approach them.

With the solitary, I find that they can be approached more casually and directly.

With troops, I find it best to ask permission before hand. It can help make a good first impression and show that you give respect. A more formal means of introduction is needed, but either way a fairy will enjoy a gift (or more so a trade).

Why some fairies might reject your gifts?

Local fae are more familiar with human costumes and behaviors, though they still hang on to their own views, morals, and beliefs. Fairies might be hesitant to accept an offering or a gift.

I sometimes find that straight forward and open trades are better than gifts. It is more clear on both ends what you desire, and it can make the fairy feel more comfortable to take the gift. 

A few reasons why you might be having trouble

  • fairies can be very fickle and shy
  • the ones in your local area could be very wary of humans
  • something in your area (or on your person) might be warding them off
  • Guilt by association: I’ve had a few times when fairies refused to work with me because someone I associated with insulted them
  • you’re being too subtle (perhaps trying a bit more loudly?)
  • you haven’t attracted their attention yet (do something to make them more interested)
  • they don’t want to (sometimes fairies just don’t want to)

I hope this section helps with those planning on “working” with local fairies~ 

parts to come

  • Arcadian fae
  • Wandering fae
  • What to do and what not to do around fairies 
  • How fairies may act 

La Dispute // Andria

You still cross my mind from time to time. And I mostly smile.
Still so set on finding out where we went wrong and why
So I retrace our every step with an unsure pen,
trying to figure out what my head thinks,
but my head just ain’t what it used to be.
And then again, what’s the point anyway?
I remember you ascending all the stairs up to the balcony
to see if you could see me - hidden quietly away
And I remember the skin of your fingers,
The spot three quarters up I’d always touch when I was out of things to say.
You held my hand, but you were too afraid to speak and I could never understand.
I remember when you leaned in quick to kiss me, and I swear,
that not a single force on earth could stop the trembling of my hand,
And I remember how you smiled through the smoke
in a crowded little coffeehouse and laughed at all my jokes.
And I remember the way that you dressed and,
how we wasted all the best of us in alcohol and sweat
And I remember when I knew that you’d be leaving, how I barely kept up breathing
and I bet if I had to do it all again, I’d feel the same pain,
And I remember panicked circles in the terminal in tears.
How I wept to god in fits. I’ve hated airports ever since.
It must be true what people say, that only time can heal the pain.
And every single day I feel it fade away, but -
I still remember how the distance tricked us,
and lead us helpless by the wrist into a pit to be devoured.
I still remember how we held so strong to this,
though we had never really settled on a way out.
I still remember the silence, and how we’d always find a way
to turn and run to our mistakes.
I still remember how it all came back together just to fall apart again.
My dear, I hear your voice in mine.
I’ve been alone here, I’ve been afraid, my dear.
I’ve been at home here. You’ve been away for years. I’ve been alone.
I breathed your name into the air; I etched your name into me.
I felt my anger swelling; I swam into its sea.
I held your name inside my heart, but it got buried in my fear.
It tore the wiring of my brain; I did my best to keep it clear.
So, dear, no matter how we part, I hold you sweetly in my head.
And if I do not miss a part of you, a part of me is dead.
If I can’t love you as a lover, I will love you as a friend.
And I will lay a bed before you; keep you safe until the end.

Act 2 and Repression

One of the best things about re-reading Homestuck is discovering more and more things that completely went over my head the first time through. I was fatally bored by John’s Wiseguy on my first read-through, and didn’t understand why I was being forced to read it. Now I do: the theme is repression!

John dips into the book to study a trick about punched cards (2530), which inspires his innovative use of the alchemy system (2531) and allows him to create the Pogo Hammer (2535). John says he only uses the books for the diagrams, and comments that he never understood the relation between the author (Caveney) and the magician (Anderson).

Here’s some clues:

  • Caveney gets jealous of the people Anderson entertains at a bar
  • Caveney muses that Anderson’s greatest trick is probably his immense personal magnetism
  • Caveney says Anderson can “waste everyone’s valuable time, and have you love him for it.”
  • Caveney calls Anderson an elf, on the basis that Caveney is 2.5 ft taller. He follows by asking Anderson “how he felt about climbing into the hollow of a big tree to bake some cookies or something”

The last one bears a structural resemblance to Dave’s “im your 300 pound matronly freight-train and my gaping furnace is hungry for coal so get goddamn shoveling” (300). It suggests that baked goods may have subconscious sexual connotations for John, giving another dimension to his strident aversion to cake and his irrational hatred of Betty Crocker. Those are venues into which John has packaged (non-exclusively!) the struggle with his nascent sexuality – again, we are given clues to his symbol language.

This isn’t the first time repression is suggested. Dave ribbed John about his “gross man-bro crush on matt macconahay” (2010), Rose accused Dave of “flagrant homosexuality” for not doing what she wanted (2233), and Dave called the slimer scene in Ghostbusters II “manbro bukkake theater” (2153). Those moments could be passed off as jokes, but the Wise Guy excerpt is the point where Husssie points out that repressed gay thoughts are a theme and you should probably start taking the jokes seriously.

Though it’s not like that’s news at this point.

Subtlety at its finest.

Red Flags You're In An Abusive Relationship Specifically If You Have a Psychotic Disorder

🚫 More often than not when you ask to talk to your partner or friend about something they did that hurt you, they act as if it never really happened and that it was just a false perception of your reality

🚫 More often than not your partner or friend acts as if a majority of your general concerns are delusions and talks down to you while reality checking

🚫 Your partner or friend wants you to only rely on them when it comes to understanding reality. They’ll often interrupt to correct you while you’re talking about past memories or conversations you remember having.

🚫 Your friend or partner makes subtle hints or jokes about you being crazy to random people who you aren’t comfortable knowing about your disorder

🚫 ^^ your friend or partner might even later act concerned or offended when you bring it up later, saying that they never did such a thing

🚫 Your friend or partner will more often than not act submissive in order to use your symptoms against you. They know that those with psychosis are often labled as abusers automatically, and they will use it against you.

- If you’re easily irritated, they’ll do things to purposely make you angry only to cowar before you have the chance to get angry with them. (This is so they can trick you into letting them do whatever they want)

- If have disorganized speach / thoughts, while you’re trying to work out an issue they will start many topics at once so that your words and sentences will get mixed up. This way, they can act like they just misunderstood so that they can keep doing whatever they want.

🚫 Your friend or partner treats you like a child or like they have more power in the relationship based on your symptoms

🚫 ^^ more often than not, baby talk you while you stim when you’ve told them or made other signs that it makes you uncomfortable

Some of these are often signs in any abusive relationship anyways, but I thought I’d make a list like this anyways! Everyone is encouraged to reblog!

anonymous asked:

I noticed in a lot of people's art their line work changes colour, just askin to see if you know or does it do it naturally because of the type of program?

hmm there are a lot of tricks to doing this depending on what you mean? like, some people play with layer effects and opacity to get a bit of color to show through their lines

im not sure if this is what you mean, but in sai you can check this box to draw only inside the stuff youve already drawn on that layer:

in my own drawings, if the lines look like theyre changing color its because i’ll sometimes merge them into the coloring layer and paint over them :0c

a-very-small-slime replied to your post:

You can also do that in Photoshop using layer masks! That’s what I do c:

Headcanons ; Poly!Relationship OHSHC

Oh mi godd you’re going to take requests for OHSHC?!! Nicee! Well if it’s okay I’d like some hcs about the twins being in a poly relationship with a fem!reader? Thanks in advance💞   Hey I’m the one who requested the poly between the twins and their s/o I meant is as a V relationship 😅

fucking love the twins oml

Originally posted by kagamiz

  • Hikaru would definently be the one to get jealous easier than Kaoru would. It’s in his nature, so he can’t really help it.
  • Kaoru would be the more romantic one in the relationship. Hikaru would feel embarrassed to do so in most situations whilst Kaoru doesn’t really care what other people would have to say. 
  • They’d both tease you. Like, a lot. They’d part their hair differently to trick you into thinking they’re the other twin, say embarrassing stuff about you to their friends, and get you in the ‘mood’ only to leave you there.
  • Whenever Hikaru loses his temper and says something cruel to you, Kaoru would lead you away and comfort you. He’d beat the shit out of Hikaru afterwards, make him apologize, and make a big dinner for all three of you.
  • Hikaru would be the most active in bed. He’d be the most experienced and would have you begging for more within seconds.
  • Kaoru loves to lay his head on your stomach and hold your waist and Hikaru loves nuzzling up to your chest while you play with his hair.