by all means correct me if i'm wrong

terfs do not target trans men. yes, trans men are often misgendered by terfs, but Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists have a very specific agenda which aims to take away the rights of trans women. terfs dehumanize trans women, terfs want trans women dead, terfs enact violence on trans women, terfs have the blood of trans women on their hands. terfs are not fighting to take away the rights of trans men specifically 

you cannot compare the experiences of trans men with terfs to the experiences of trans women. the misgendering trans men face from terfs does not stem from terf politics but from transphobia, which are different! terfs are inherently transphobic yes, but not all transphobes are terfs. you cannot use them interchangeably 

so yes, trans men are absolutely targeted by transphobes! and terfs are transphobes. but to say a trans man is targeted by a terf specifically is incorrect and waters down the true meaning of Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist to just be another word for transphobe 

‘This here’s Stan the Man Uris’, Richie told Ben. 'Stan’s a Jew. Also, he killed Christ. At least that’s what Victor Criss told me one day. I been after Stan ever since. I figure if he’s that old, he ought to be able to buy us some beer. Right, Stan?’
'I think that must have been my father’, Stan said in a low pleasant voice, and that broke them all up, Ben included.

Page 362

9

I am her aunt, this is my gift to her. As God gifted me with my voice. Basically, I’m giving her a gift from God.

daenerystargaryensass  asked:

So I'm a little confused on something; so was Lyanna kidnaped or did she go willingly with Rhaegar? Cause if she went willingly, then that means all this BS that's gone down has been because no one listens to/asks the women? Cause Robert refused to believe she changed her mind? (I mean totally correct me if I'm wrong on this)

So, Imma just split this up into the two canons we have: 

Show canon: 

Lyanna and Rhaegar are in love. She willingly agrees to get married to him and seems fine with the fact that he (…for some reason) annuls his marriage to Elia and bastardizes his children. Later, she becomes pregnant, dies giving birth to Jon, and names him Aegon. 

I think the basic assumption is that Robert couldn’t bear to think that Lyanna ever willingly went, so he kind of went the “she WAS KIDNAPPED” route and went full rampage mode ahead. So, basically yes, because no one bothers really looking at the women’s side of things. 

Book canon: 

This is where it gets tricky and we enter the Big R+L=J Discourse. 

  • “Rhaegar is Bad and Kidnapped Lynna” side - basically, an agreement on Robert & Ned’s point of view. Rhaegar, being completely obsessed with the prophecy, somehow got it into his head that Lyanna was going to be the one who gave him the prince that was promised. He kidnaps Lyanna, rapes her, and the result of that action is Jon. Rhaegar may have thought he loved Lyanna, but it was merely an obsession (similar to Baelish’s “love” for Sansa) and didn’t take into account Lyanna’s feelings into the situation. 
    • Textual evidence: Rhaegar spent most of his life trying to bring about the Prince that was Promised. Something that you spend that much time on is bound to make you obsessive. 
    • Giving Lyanna the flower - if they were about to run off or were secretly in love it’d be…a dumb move to do this in front of everyone and start off the tension amongst everyone. Of course, this was probably the start of the obsession, but still. 
    • Ned and Robert literally saying Rhaegar kidnapped and raped her.
  • “Rhaegar is Good and They Were in Love” Side -  Lyanna ran off with Rhaegar. Robert, being well, Robert, thought she was kidnapped, and dragged Ned along (and Lyanna did this in secret, so Ned - having negative experiences with the Targs as well - believed she was kidnapped as well).
    • Textual evidence: Robert, and even Ned, are unreliable narrators. Robert is convinced that he loved Lyanna, but Ned himself thinks that Robert only thought he loved her, “not the iron underneath” and it’s insinuated that Lyanna didn’t care for Robert, but that the feelings were one sided. That, plus Barristan Selmy saying Rhaegar was a sweet soul who was fond of Elia and loved his kids. Barristan would be less unreliable than Ned or Robert, who have clear biases while telling the history of Robert’s Rebellion. 
    • May also interact with the idea of Lyanna willingly going/loving Rhaegar and Rhegar having a mix of love and obsession. 

Personally, I’m on the “Lyanna willingly went” side of this discourse, and I think that she loved him, but I don’t think the relationship was healthy (still a 16 year old girl and..what 24 year old? Like in the future, yeah sure, but for them to have gotten together like that wasn’t great to me even if it’s the GOT world). 

And, regardless of canon I think two things: 

  1. Rhaegar Targaryen was an idiot. Whether his intentions were good, obsessive, or bad, there’s no way running off in secret was ever going to be a sound plan, and if the book keeps the annulment, bastardizing his children was a shit move. 
  2. Lyanna’s story still, in the end, has men not listening to her. Whether it’s Robert ignoring her lack of feelings for him or Rhaegar forcing himself on her for a prophecy, it doesn’t make a huge difference in terms of them not listening. Regardless of which you believe, regardless of Rhaegar’s intentions in marrying her/having her in the tower, both include a “love interest” completely disregarding her emotions on the matter, and it ended with Lyanna Stark, a wild girl who probably just wanted to be free and live her life the way she wanted to, dying locked in a tower away from the world. 

Instead of getting out there and making her own story, her story ended up being told through different men’s eyes, through their own lenses and biases, and that’s why I don’t think we can ever know what truly happened (unless Bran Stark sits down and watches that entire story beginning to end) but that regardless, it was a tragedy. 

  • What she says: I'm fine.
  • What she actually means: Kaworu is seen playing a piano in 3.0. It's not just any piano: it's the Yamaha Yamaha CF III, which was discontinued in September of 2000. 3.0 takes place in 2029. It's been almost 30 years from its last production run but how did Kaworu ever find the means to acquire the piano and how did it maintain mint condition after all these years? Where did he even find the piano?

anonymous asked:

You are ace/aro right? which means you don't experience sexual or romantic attraction (If i'm wrong please correct me.) So do you experience platonic love? and are all your love songs about that type of love?

yes yes and yes

anonymous asked:

Correct me if i'm wrong but i can't help but notice that levi and mikasa have been appearing a lot together in all the official promo stuff that has been coming out lately (i mean they even came out watches that literally called them "humanity's strongest pair"!!!) do you think that the producers are preparing the fandom for all of their scenes together in season 2? (because in season 1 they had one scene so people aren't used to them together) Thanks! nearly a month to go! I'm so excited!

Hello anon, I think you’re spot on! I mean, it’s usual to see a lot of Ere/mika, Eru/ri and Ere/ri merchandise and promos since these pairings were already popular by season 1, but this much Rivamika stuff before airing season 2 and the Uprising Arc?? Even though Levi and Mikasa are the most popular male and female characters, this is no coincidence. If this keeps up, we’ll go insane when they actually deliver all the Rivamika scenes on tv.

anonymous asked:

For me, the ReyS theory took a big hit when immediately after the news struck that JJ announced Rey's parents aren't in TFA, Daisy commented "what can it all mean" on an Instagram post of Reylo shippers celebrating. She wasn't tagged or mentioned (correct me if I'm wrong), so for her to quickly comment on a Reylo post seemed interesting. There's no way she'd be ok with Reylo if her and Kylo were related. She'd find a way to subtly speak against it and let the fans down easy, but she never has.

yeeeeep. it was suspicious that mark didn’t say anything when there were reylo jokes in the bad lip reading that he did, too. you’d think he would warn them off from making jokes like that if the two of them are related.

and man speaking of jokes that theory was basically being mocked to high heaven at the last jedi panel. there were so many jokes about it and STILL people are taking it as confirmation. daisy looks so done with the whole thing tbh

Gintsu, gintama and my two cents...

I’ve seen a lot of mixed reactions from people about the newest chapter of Gintama and I’d like to add mine to fray as well,

So I’ve seen people saying that Tsukuyo admitting her feelings for Gintoki is kind of pointless since she has already given up on him and that this ship is just going in circles…?

At the end of Love potion arc Tsukuyo clearly states that “Gintoki is not a person who will belong to anyone and at the same time ends up in everyone’s heart”:

And that she’s just happy blowing poison gas in his face once awhile:

To me the love potion arc (in terms of Gintsu) meant two things:

1: Tsukuyo accepting her feelings for Gintoki.

2: Tsukuyo being just fine with the way they are right now.

She stated that she didn’t want to be romantically involved with Gintoki because of his personality and that just being by his side was enough for her.

Flash-forward to lesson 620 and Tsukuyo is still pretty consistent with what she said.

Even when she know that Gintoki is out there fighting probably one of the most dangerous enemies he has ever faced, she still settles on doing her duties as the moon of Yoshiwara:

I’ll repeat again: Tsukuyo may love Gintoki but all she wants is to simply be by his side:

why are ya’ll seeing Tsukuyo as a threat and targeting her?

Also this is Gintama we’re talking about so I highly doubt there’ll be a canon ship by the end, well except for “Hasegawa X Hatsu” and “Katsura X Ikumatsu” (LOL)

However if anyone does end up with Gintoki (considering only the females) it will either be Tsukuyo or Otae, I guess?

To make a long story short: Tsukuyo loves Gintoki but wants nothing out of it, we haven’t heard Gintoki’s side in all of this,Gintama is a shounen manga and it won’t end like bleach or naruto hopefully

anonymous asked:

Not that it excuses it at all, but does the inconsistency in Wanda's ethnicity create confusion over the whitewashing issue, since she has gone from Eastern European White (correct me if I am wrong) to American White to Jewish-Romani to Romani in the last fifty years? I'm guessing the most appropriate casting would be the one at the time (2013 being Jewish-Romani). Granted Marvel as a whole has not been know for casting Jewish actors as Jewish characters (eg. Ian McKellen and Michael Fassbender)

so this is by no means unusual. Romani characters? Well, what representation is there? The last sort of representation was Sim in Sherlock Holmes 2 and even then Noomi Rapace is not even sure if she has any Romani heritage. I think Elizabeth Olsen is a fine actress and plays the role well (given the material she has) but this whole thing is a missed opportunity for some actual respectful, Romani representation.

This answer got long.

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

so I have a thought about "Jack's" latest instagram post. Whenever an anti picture has been posted before we can usually see all of his face right? (correct me if I'm wrong) Because if we can in every other picture of anti, why can't we see his face in this one? Is it because it's not actually anti himself but actually a possessed chase with plugs possibly? And people are assuming it's anti? Please do say if I'm missing anything, this is just a thought of mine haha

whoa dude you’re not wrong! i mean that bag of pixels likes to drop hints about his presence but when he’s upfront about it, he goes all the way. why would he not show his face if it’s really him? what does he have to hide? bro i think you’re onto something with this one…

anonymous asked:

Ppl saying "d mentions being straight/gf in every interview" is not true. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this year, the only times were Conan & the 2 Mario ones from the same day. D's done most of his promo recently w/o her involved. There was more real PR work for that gay porn star story than there had been for her or his supposed heterosexuality in months. Just because everything doesn't change dramatically all at once doesn't mean nothing's happening.

Agreed, there has actually been relatively little gf mentions in interviews this year and it is not a coincidence that all three occurred under the watch of AB as we enter what everyone said would be a period where the beard was strongly pushed and promoted. And no question, he is more enthused about the gay porn star that the lady whose side he has been tethered to since birth.

I have learned to completely tune out references to her. Darren mentioning her is the same as taking photos with a water bottle, promoting Barry’s gym and most recently, promoting the air bud earphones and his Spotify play list. Things he is obligated to do.

She is his gf by contract and he is required to promote and market her. End of story.

And to me there is a distinction between him stating he is straight and reminding us of the “lovely lady he has dated for many, many moons.” I think he has completely disassociated the actual meaning of the word girlfriend when he applies it in interviews. To him the word girlfriend means “woman I have entered into a contract with to be my official plus one in the public eye and to hide my actual relationship that I am required to keep a secret.” And while we do not like it, I think it is how he is surviving.

I get much more upset when the topic of his sexuality comes up. Because by stating he is straight,he is denying his true self and his actual love.  But he hasn’t actually done this in quite some time. They tried and failed in the fall when he refused to answer the question in the affirmative and instead rambled around it.

i see so many people lamenting that korra’s character “got lost” by the end of book 4. besides the fact that you can totally still see fierce, loyal, and strong korra in all four books, it’s almost like traumatic events…and ptsd…and the passage of 3 years…and the transition from childhood to adulthood…changes a person

I try to say something, but all I get are the wrong words - the wrong words or the exact opposite words from what I mean. I try to correct myself, and that only makes it worse. I lose track of what I was trying to say to begin with. It’s like I’m split in two and playing tag with myself. One half is chasing the other half around this big, fat post. The other me has the right words, but this me can’t catch her.
—  Haruki Murakami, “Norwegian Wood”

anonymous asked:

"Because we have you sarada" was mistranslated right? Isn't it "because you exist sarada" or something like that. I've seen arguments saying that he meant that's what's keeping he and Sakura together. It's ridiculous. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he mean that she is proof of their mutual love? And basically if he didn't love Sakura he never would have impregnated her?

Of course that’s what he meant, but obviously the die-hard SasuNaru, NaruSaku and SasuKarin extremists just can’t accept that, and instead choose to formulate all these theories that make no sense.

“Because you exist” was the Viz translation, which is more often than not the most reliable one:

Sarada asked Sasuke if his heart was truly connected to Sakura’s, and he answered affirmatively. Firstly, what the extremists don’t seem to understand is that people’s hearts don’t connect through having a child; their hearts need to be connected in order for them to want to have a child in the first place. They were together before Sarada existed, so for Sasuke to say “we’re connected because of you” doesn’t make sense, regardless of how desperately the extremists try to make sense of it. They were already connected, and Sarada is the proof of that.

You also gotta love how so many of them spout things like how “a child being the proof of love is a horrible message because what about divorced parents who have major issues with each other?”, as if that has even the slightest bit of relevance. Sasuke and Sakura aren’t divorced, nor do they have problems with each other. So how is that in any way applicable? It boggles the mind.

If the extremists want to believe that Sasuke meant that Sarada was the only thing that was keeping her parents together, despite the fact that he obviously meant it as that Sarada is the proof that Sasuke and Sakura’s hearts are connected, not the reason, because if their hearts weren’t connected, then she wouldn’t exist, then let them, because what’s the point in trying?

They can’t even ask themselves why Sarada would have given such a warm smile after seeing the affection displayed between her parents if there was actually no love between them whatsoever:

Why would she be smiling like that after coming to the realisation that there truly was nothing at all between them? Why would she be happy about such a negative thing? It makes no sense. Yet, they think it makes perfect sense to believe that Sarada giving such a genuine and warm smile:

Was because she realised that there was absolutely no love or affection whatsoever between her parents. Lol, of course it does! She was so jubilant because she noticed that her parents don’t love each other. Logic! ^_^

Using that same logic, they also never ask themselves why Sarada would get so happy to the point of tears, and why Naruto and Chouchou would be so happy for her, after hearing Sasuke imply “You’re the only reason you’re mother and I are still together, Sarada”. Why would Sarada be so pleased to hear that? Why would Naruto and Chouchou be so happy for her?

Chouchou would essentially be thinking “Aww, lucky Sarada. You’re the only thing keeping your parents together!”.

See how stupid that sounds? And the extremists think that’s what the scene is indicating? Because that apparently makes perfect sense right? Goodness.

Now let’s look at some examples of how they grossly twist interviews!

Some extremists would have you believe Kishi claimed that Sarada’s mother is open for interpretation, that he wasn’t sure if Sasuke and Sakura were happy, and that he was thinking of divorcing them in the future. Despite the fact that what he actually said was:

God only knows where they got all that other nonsense from.

And lastly, back to admiring their logic :)

If the extremists want to cling onto the hope that Kishi, Sasuke, Sakura and even Karin herself could all just be lying in order to keep up appearances for some unknown reason, when especially Karin had absolutely no reason to lie to Suigetsu whatsoever:

Then let them.

Goodness, all of those statements just sounded so ridiculous, because that’s exactly what they are. If they want to ignore what the characters say, and not only blindly deny canon material, but also ignore what the author himself says, and even go so far as to actually twist his words in favour of their own headcanons, then I can only just smile and nod, seriously.

You know what might actually be sadder than if Peter, Edmund, and Lucy were tense with Susan? This…

•Susan only says once that she thinks it was a game.
•Lucy cautiously brings up later.
•She finds out Susan actually thinks of it as a game.
•Peter tries to drop in hints of the small things they experienced together, but she has no recollection.
•The three of them have a talk and find that Susan has really forgotten, or at least suppressed the memories.
•They do treat it as a game.
•Edmund still talks about Narnia to her, but he words it differently.
•"Well, Su. It’s sort of like that time we fled Calormene.“
•"Oh! I remember that story. You told me to be brave then. I never forgot that.”
•"Yeah…I did. Good luck tonight then?“
•Peter tells her stories of Narnia where she was marvelous and she listens intently, saying that she wishes it were true.
•Peter sheds a tear because it was, and she truly was marvelous.
•Lucy constantly calls her Queen Susan as a nickname, and Susan smiles because for some reason it gives her a surge of courage.
•Susan asks why some sermon in church sounds familiar, and Lucy mentions Aslan.
•Susan assumes it was a way to make their Sundays less dry.
•Worst of all, the three of them watched Susan go to party after party, suppress her intelligence, grow more aggressive and short tempered, all the while knowing she couldn’t remember the Gentle Queen they knew she was deep down inside.
•They said she wasn’t a friend of Narnia anymore, but that didn’t mean she had necessarily been angry about it.

anonymous asked:

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but didn't Onision once say that reaction videos were lazy and terrible (I'm trying to remember if it was a Social Repose video or a Black Friday video where they mentioned Greg's standpoint on reaction videos)? I mean, he can change his mind but how long before someone makes a react video to him reacting and all of a sudden those videos are terrible again?

Yup, he went on a big thing against It’s Black Friday because she made a react video about his 10 things I hate about goths video. She then utterly destroyed him in a video where she calls him out. In the same video where he hates on her he also makes fun of Markiplier’s hair for being “childish” (this was when it was still red, originally done for charity) and hates on gaming channels. Ironic seeing how he streams himself playing games while kind of answering fan questions and has a haircut literally designed to make himself seem younger