by everyone i mean two people

anonymous asked:

I've sent you a thing before saying that being bisexual means liking any two genders but it did not come from a place of hate. Those other people have to chill out and take their entitled opinions and piss off. You gave your opinion and then even corrected yourself so they need to calm down.

Oh I know! It’s totally okay and I liked your definition plenty. I’ve tried to be understanding of everyone else opinions, but like Bisexual has always meant what it does for me for forever and I wish people would understand that that won’t change in a week? Even if it I’m in the wrong like that takes.. time to rework. Its not like any of this happened out of bad intentions. In the future explain it in the definition you gave bc that makes sense! And if I get any asks about it I’ll specify that most people here believe that. :-) (-Mod Luna)

why you should not dismiss research unless you rly truly mean it

Internet, I am a queer researcher of queer health and I have something to say.

A few weeks back, a study went viral about the relationship between marriage equality policy and queer teen suicide rates, and a lot of people reacted thusly: “queer mental health is better when we’re not discriminated against! BREAKING: SKY IS BLUE, WATER IS WET”

This happens a lot. People see research about a thing ~Everyone Already Knows~ and they mock it. Now I want to make two things really clear:

1. Everyone does not already know.

2. This shit can lose these projects their funding.

Did you know that media coverage is a crucial factor in funding allocation? When we submit our application for grant renewal, we have to provide a list of news articles about our research so they can decide whether the public cares enough about us to let us keep doing our work. And most research doesn’t get all that much coverage, so individual reactions can really matter. If the primary reaction to our publications is eyerolling, we legitimately might not be able to continue.

I’ve seen some frustration from people who believe this research funding would be better put to use “actually helping” the affected populations instead of–I don’t know, pinning them under microscopes or whatever it is they think we do. But funding for policy initiatives is driven by research. I know you wish politicians would listen to individual voices telling them where the problems are, but that’s honestly not a smart way to direct limited resources. We need solid evidence. And a lot of the areas that need the most attention aren’t obvious–who knew bisexual people are at a much higher risk for physical and mental health disparities than gay and lesbian people? Who would have guessed that transgender folks are more likely than any other group (including straight people) to be military veterans, but overwhelmingly don’t claim their benefits? I’m sure some people noticed these patterns, but they definitely weren’t common knowledge within the queer communities I’ve grown up around, and those findings are leading to direct action as we speak.

I get that it can be frustrating to feel like your identity is being reduced to facts and figures for the benefit of red tape. But trust me, the researchers aren’t your enemy here. Most of us are queer too. All of us are just as frustrated by this crap as you are. We are doing our best, and I swear to you this work really is making a difference. Please don’t sabotage it.

i need to make a post about this because it’s really bothering me.


bisexuality = the attraction to more than one gender, or the attraction to two or more genders, or the attraction to genders same as and other than your own

pansexuality = the attraction to all genders or the attraction to people regardless of their sex and gender identity


bisexuality is not defined as the attraction to men and women. bisexuality does not exclude other genders. bisexuals aren’t any less open-minded and accepting than pansexuals or anyone else in the lgbtq+ community. bisexuality is a sexuality, not a way to reinforce the gender binary.


many people seem to think that bisexuals aren’t aware of non-binary people or that they think there are only two genders.

this is because

1. the term bisexual is older than the term pansexual, and at the time the word bisexual was first introduced, it was defined as the attraction to males and females, because the term non-binary wasn’t something people were aware of. fortunately, many people today understand what gender binary and non-binary mean and because of this, the definition and meaning of bisexuality have evolved. saying bisexuals are only attracted to men and women is the old way of thinking.

2. bi in bisexual means two, and people always like to rely on this and say that it literally means two, as in men and women. if you really have to use this as an argument, the two you’re referring to means same as your own gender and other than your own gender. that makes two groups without excluding any genders.

3. pansexuality is always thought of as the gender-blind label that includes everyone whereas bisexuality is seen as only including men and women, boys and girls, males and females. which, like i said, is not true, so please destroy this way of thinking. it’s not helping anyone.


you can identify as both bisexual and pansexual. you can identify as bisexual but feel like the word pansexual could also describe your sexuality accurately. you can identify only as pansexual. 

the difference between these two is slight but it’s there. so maybe instead of trying to tell others what their own sexualities are supposed to mean to them or what they should identify as, give everyone the freedom to identify themselves however way they feel is right for them. especially people who are neither bisexual nor pansexual can stfu and stop defining our sexualities for us thank you.

Batman vs Superman was over two hours of two men bickering over who has the biggest brooding cock-I mean, who has the better method of "saving" people and whether or not it's ok for Batman to beat and brand criminals without regarding the fact that not everyone's as wealthy and privileged as his morally upright ass and for Superman to ignore the fact that not everyone's as indestructible as him, meanwhile Wonder Woman over here...

Ok.

Wonder Woman was vastly superior to bvs for two reasons.

-Wonder Woman is actually a likable lady and an idealistic believable super hero who doesn’t spend her entire moving thinking about how she COULD help people.

She charges in, headfirst, wanting to help people she doesn’t even KNOW because she wants to protect the people who’re dying.

-and Wonder Woman was just so much more subtle and less pretentious about its message.

Seriously.

Let’s talk.

Wonder Woman’s CHARACTER is not that she’s cold and heartless and…well, masculine.

She doesn’t EMULATE men.

She doesn’t need to act like a man to be strong.

She coos at a baby and kisses Chris Pine and doesn’t spend the entire movie ragging on women.

She dresses and acts feminine, and embodies kindness, grace, beauty, everything “feminine.”

And she’s also strong as fucking hell.

That is Wonder Woman.

She’s a good person.

She’s not some cold warrior goddess, an untouchable female shaped ideal.

She’s GENUINELY KIND.

She sees people suffering in the trenches and her first thought it, stop what we’re doing, we gotta help.

Chris pine and all of his men?

They’ve seen all of this.

They’ve hardened themselves to the horrors of war and accepted them as inevitable.

But Diana, new to the cruelty of the human world, is disgusted and she asks what’s wrong with you?

What is wrong with us?

We have accepted casualties. We have accepted pain.

We have excused suffering because we told ourselves long ago that we couldn’t do anything about it.

But Diana?

She does not accept that.

She fights, yes. She’s ferocious and she, unlike Batman, doesn’t have a compulsion against killing.

She was raised by warrior women, I mean come on.

But who does she fight for?

The women and children who did nothing wrong.

The injured, hopeless men fighting a war to end all wars.

The entire movie was lovely because all of Diana’s bewilderment at the way humans live was incredible.

She’s shocked at how dirty London is.

She’s not impressed by sex and she’s not impressed by war.

She thinks sexism is strange.

But she doesn’t like, rag on it, because Diana is literally so above it that she just wryly questions it at times.

Like I don’t care what all the whiny fanboys say.

There’s not an overt feminist message in this movie.

There’s no “men are so weak.”

There’s “men are corruptible” but as we see, Diana sees them as worth saving in the end, if only to fulfill her own ideals…

Which is feminist as fuck, I guess, because Diana doesn’t defend men because it’s her job.

She defends them because it’s her decision. Her morality. Her duty.

But the feminism in the movie comes from the fact that she’s so kind.

She breaks down when realizing that Ares isn’t behind it all, that MEN are the ones who are cruel to one another.

She sees the war and it’s only senseless violence to her.

All of the people she wants to help are the victims, and it’s clear cut, to her, who’s bad and who’s not.

But Chris Pine helps her realize that humans aren’t so clear cut.

And so even though she was disgusted by human actions, she still wanted to help the people in need.

I absolutely adore the scene where she’s charging across a battle field to pave the way to the town.

First off, it was so badass watching her knock aside artillery like it was nothing as the men cowered in the pits.

Second, SHE SAW THAT PEOPLE WERE SUFFERING AND SHE DIDNT CALCULATE.

She didn’t do a Batman, where she looked at the risks vs the benefits vs the needs of the many and the few.

She just charged in and did what she could.

Chris Pine told her she couldn’t do anything except help him with his plan, in order to stop the war and save them indirectly.

But Diana is a true warrior with the heart of a lion, man.

She helped them directly, with no nonsense, no politicizing, no planning, just action.

At the end she says love will save humanity?

That’s the kind of feminism Wonder Woman was embodying.

Wonder Woman wasn’t this lone independent operator who sneers at men who try to involve themselves in her business.

She was helped and supported by men, but it was clear that she was the star, the true hero who brought them and their plans together but also gave them a new hope, a new heart.

They were jaded by helplessness and mortal frustration, forced to fight to stand stills and accept human deaths.

She came and showed them something miraculous and wonderful: her power.

But not used to beat someone’s head in with a fucking sink.

Used to do good.

To fight for her morals, which aren’t corrupted by the human world’s greyness, not yet.

I loved this movie.

I loved this movie so much.

DC finally did good and we can stop pretending suicide squad and Batman vs superman were good.

Wonder Woman is the good DC movie.

Don’t even try to tell me BVS was better than Wonder Woman because if you genuinely believe that, either out of pride and obstinacy from all your bickering with marvel fans or out of delusional worshipping of anything DC, then I think you just like watching people beat people in slow motion and uncomfortably lofty , corporate-cut and stylized plots as interesting as watching a landscape time lapse.

Suicide squad was cut to bits by its editors, BVS suffered from some severe Snyder wanking, and justice league, I don’t know, we’ll see.

But Wonder Woman?

Best DC movie since dark knight.

God bless Patty.

I knew we needed a woman in charge to get the job done.

Now direct all sexist comments and sneering remarks about feminazis destroying your precious super hero genre with their “love” themes to my inbox where they’ll be lovingly deleted.

hello confirmation that cyrus turning around was intentionally to show that he likes jonah!! can i just point out that they are clapping and cheering! i have never been this happy, i mean, look at them. look at josh. look at asher. listen to peyton. listen to everyone in the room. they support it. they are just as excited about this as we are. this is happening people & i couldn’t be happier!!

An Analysis of Keith and Lance’s Feelings Towards Each Other.

After season three - and Keith’s Vlog especially - I’ve seen a lot of people complain about how Lance is oblivious to Keith’s true feelings about him (Rather those feeling are platonic or romantic) And yeah, I’m right there with you on wishing he’d recognize his misconceptions about Keith’s feelings towards him, but does that mean that Lance is unjust in the way that he feels? Does that mean Keith’s actions haven’t warranted or perpetuated this false narrative?

As a Lance Stan, of course I’m coming through for my boi. But I also just really like analyzing their interactions. So here we go:

First off, how does Lance actually think Keith views him? This picture shows it best.

Lance thinks that Keith sees himself as above Lance. The framing - which is coming from Lance’s p.o.v - is a great indicator of that. But even without this, Lance himself says:


I’m a big believer in the theory that Lance is projecting he own feelings of self doubt. He undoubtedly has an inferiority complex, but Lance feels inferior to everyone on the team, and it’s only with Keith that he ever shows any type of malice. In fact, I cant remember a time Lance has ever been genuinely angry at someone who isn’t Keith. (I could be wrong here.) So why does he treat Keith so differently than the rest of the team? Maybe because of his internalized gay feelings towards our resident spicy boi?hmmm.

We know for a fact that in episode one Iverson told Lance something like this: ‘You’re only fighter class because Keith, a better pilot, washed out. Now act accordingly’. This doesn’t feel like the first time either, but more of a reminder. So on the surface, it seems clear as to why Lance treats Keith the way he does at first. I mean, I get it. If someone was constantly used to reinforce the notion of how shitty I am, I’d probably have a similar reaction towards them too. (Conditioning is a thing ya’ll) However, from Pidge’s flashback in season one, we know Lance’s animosity isn’t that new.

“Hasta la later, Keith.”

But again, Lance just isn’t such a mean spirited person as to rejoice someone’s failures. Quite the opposite actually. He validates his team even while feeling inferior to them. It just doesn’t feel like Lance. And other than towards Keith, Lance has never been shown to act this way. So I have to believe something occurred to make Lance not like Keith especially. Not saying that’s an excuse, but it is an explanation. Truthfully, what probably happened was that Lance looked up to Keith or tried to befriend him and Keith acted in a way that Lance perceived as rejection. We don’t know though, because the key to this lives within the Garrison years, and we may or may not ever see those.


Sooo, lets move along to something that we do see.


We all know that Lance is antagonistic towards Keith, but Keith isn’t an innocent party in this.

Think back to the first episode when they’re all on the hovercraft. Lance asked “If this thing can move any faster,” which wasn’t a jab at Keith as much as it was a ’holy shit, we’re about to get caught,’ moment. Keith’s reply was something along the lines of: ‘Maybe if we removed some unessential weight.’ (Which, in hindsight, considering how Lance views himself as baggage, a seventh wheel, is some pretty jarring foreshadowing.)

Then he tells Lance he’s the worst pilot ever. (Ouch)

Just to be clear, I love Keith, and I don’t think he meant these comments as maliciously as they may have been taken. They were probably more like offhanded insults, but knowing what we know about Lance, is it so hard to see how these comments could be internalized?

Next we have a scene where Lance jokes about wanting all of the information in his brain to be stored on a spaceship. Keith’s response isn’t teasing, but… mean. It’s meant to hurt Lance by blatantly insinuating that he’s stupid. And in season two, when they’re both going to the pool, it’s Keith who tells Lance to stay far far away from him.

What am I getting at here? IDEK. Lance and Keith don’t hate each other in the slightest. Keith knows he’s bad at people, and he probably notices that Lance treats him differently than literally everyone else on the team. I’m sure that hurts Keith. While with Lance, he looks up to Keith, thinks Keith is better than him, and because of the words of people like Iverson and Keith himself, this idea has been nurtured. We already know that Lance takes the words of his friends to heart. In both season 2 and 3 when Lance expressed doubt, he brought up something Pidge said to him both times.

“I thought I was the team sharpshooter, but I guess nobody else thinks that.”

“Maybe I am just the goofball.”

Neither of them are innocent. It’s a mutual series or misunderstanding, and as sad as it is to see Keith frustrated over his inability to relate to his team, he’s not doing himself any favors when he insults Lance in earnest. Lance isn’t doing himself any favors either, and they’re both just reacting based off of these false narratives they hold about one another.

But that’s apart of what makes their relationship so complex and interesting to watch play out. Season three really paid off. Their development unfolded beautifully and I can’t wait to see how they proceed in the following seasons. I can only hope that any miscommunications they have about each other are addressed and cleared up.

PSA:

    if you play ANY sort of villainous character - from a pick-pocket to a full-scale serial killer - and i follow you, please know that i’ve come into this FULL WELL what i’m signing up for. i don’t expect you to soften your character for me, i’m not going to complain when they aren’t nice to my characters, and i honestly probably love watching them do what they do. not all characters are going to be the “good guys”, or the type of villain that can be redeemed. not everyone has a tragic backstory that makes them do the things they do - some people enjoy it, others just do it because they can, and for some it’s all they know. yes, there are villains with a soft spot or two - this doesn’t mean they need to change everything. our characters become friends/lovers even though my character is a “good guy”? you keep doin’ you. keep stealing those purses, killing those people, burning those villages to the ground. 

        tl;dr - I DIDN’T FOLLOW YOU BECAUSE I WANTED SOMETHING SOFT AND EASY - you keep bein’ a villain, babe, cause you’re  just as excellent as the heroes.

Queerbaiting in BBC Sherlock

Note: Before you label me as a ‘butthurt LGBTQ fan’ (as if such a thing even exists), I’m straight. Because apparently that makes my opinion valid now.

What is queerbaiting? 

There’s a pretty wide definition, actually, but the one that’s most relevant here is: it’s when you make very heavy references to queer relationships or even queer characters in your shows, but then you never follow through on these references. It’s done to increase viewership and draw LGBTQ fans in (because of the promise of positive representation). So basically, it’s a marketing technique, but a harmful one.

Why is queerbaiting harmful?

Think of it this way. You’re gay/bi/a lesbian, and people around you aren’t very accepting or are plain homophobic. You see these two men on TV, and you start thinking…wait, it looks like they’re in love. You go online and realize that you’re not the only one reading the show in this way - there are literally thousands of other people interpreting it the same way. So you tell everyone around you, look at these two men. They’re gay and in love, and this is a popular TV show, and it means that my sexuality and my feelings are valid, and there’s nothing wrong with how I feel. Everyone laughs at you and says “Nope, they aren’t in love. You’re delusional.” 

You think, okay, let them laugh. When this becomes cannon, they’ll know. The queer subtext is all there, and the writers wouldn’t dare not follow through on it, right? But sadly, the queer subtext remains just that: subtext. And suddenly all the homophobes around you stand validated.

But there’s no gay subtext in BBC Sherlock. It’s just a wishful ship.

Wrong. I’m not saying that everyone has to ship Johnlock, but no matter what you ship, you can’t deny the gay subtext in this show. People have written thousands of words worth of meta about it - and it all makes perfect sense. (I believe @inevitably-johnlocked has a master list - or she can link you to one). There are videos decoding all the gay subtext -  let’s take the example of TJLC Explained - 48 videos, and they add up to a total time of 37 hours, 49 minutes and 41 seconds - each one decoding a different aspect of the gay subtext in BBC Sherlock. Apart from the TJLC Explained series, there are a lot of other videos doing the same thing. Sure, a small number of such videos and meta are a little far-fetched, but the majority of them are well-referenced, well-written, and properly decode the various literary tropes used by BBC Sherlock. (Like, seriously, kudos to this fandom for being the absolute best meta-writers I have ever seen. You could turn half of these metas in as proper college essays.)

But the writers and BBC have said that there is no gay subtext.

The problem isn’t even so much with Johnlock not becoming cannon - it’s with the way Mofftiss and BBC have responded to being called out for their bullshit. Yes, they did a complete 180 around the time of season 4, saying “that is not the story we want to tell” and “it has never been implied that John and Sherlock are in love”. When so many people, literally thousands, are reading your show the exact same way, it’s because you put the subtext in there. Saying anything else is an insult to our intelligence - and again, it’s blatant queerbaiting and feeding heteronormativity and straight culture.

*yawn* Heteronormativity and straight culture are myths.

In His Last Vow, if Sherlock had come back to life for Molly or Irene Adler, everyone would insist that he’s in love with them. There would be no question about it. He came back to life for John, but him and John are eternal bros, right?

That, my friend, is heteronormativity right there.

Basically, you’re bitter that your ship didn’t become canon. 

LOL. Read above^ you think anyone would put in this much effort just because ‘their ship didn’t become canon’? The Johnlock community is literally comprised of people of all ages, sexualities, nationalities, and genders. So honestly, pegging us as ‘horny teenage fangirls’ - bit ridiculous. We aren’t waving flags and going around yelling “It’s gay because they looked at each other!”, we’re actually ANALYZING and DECODING the show. Before you label us, go read some meta, then tell us we’re still delusional for believing Johnlock could be real.

Besides, I don’t see such an uproar happening about hetero ships. You know why? Because they have representation, whereas LGBTQ representation in media is still severely lacking.

But artists have the right to do what they want with their art. 

Of course they do, but if my art offended an entire sect of society, I think I’d at least apologize, instead of blatantly denying everything and insulting the people who called me out for my bullshit. 

Additions to this post here

alright so 

Kubo-sensei has, in my eyes, now confirmed that Viktor and Yuuri are indeed lovers/significant others

IT’S NOT LIKE IM SURPRISED AFTER SEEING THEM LOOK AT EACH OTHER LIKE THIS AMONGST A THOUSAND OTHER THINGS 

but I know that some people still had doubts or wanted an official confirmation so wELL HAPPY VALENTINE’S DAY EVERYONE I GUESS IT’S AS CANON AS IT GETS NOW

If you need me I’ll be over here screaming into my pillow over these two 

their love is too good to be true I owe Kubo-sensei my life

If Styles hadn’t yet adapted to global social-media attention, he was tested in 2012, when he met Taylor Swift at an awards show. Their second date, a walk in Central Park, was caught by paparazzi. Suddenly the couple were global news. They broke up the next month, reportedly after a rocky Caribbean vacation; the romance was said to have ended with at least one broken heart.

The relationship is a subject he’s famously avoided discussing. “I gotta pee first. This might be a long one,” he says. He rises to head to the bathroom, then adds, “Actually, you can say, ‘He went for a pee and never came back.‘ ”


He returns a couple of minutes later. “Thought I’d let you stew for a while,” he says, laughing, then takes a gulp of green juice. He was surprised, he says, when photos from Central Park rocketed around the world. “When I see photos from that day,” he says, “I think: Relationships are hard, at any age. And adding in that you don’t really understand exactly how it works when you’re 18, trying to navigate all that stuff didn’t make it easier. I mean, you’re a little bit awkward to begin with. You’re on a date with someone you really like. It should be that simple, right? It was a learning experience for sure. But at the heart of it – I just wanted it to be a normal date.”


He’s well aware that at least two of Swift’s songs – “Out of the Woods” and “Style” – are considered to be about their romance. (“You’ve got that long hair slicked back, white T-shirt,” she sang in “Style.”) “I mean, I don’t know if they’re about me or not …” he says, attempting gallant discretion, “but the issue is, she’s so good, they’re bloody everywhere.” He smiles. “I write from my experiences; everyone does that. I’m lucky if everything [we went through] helped create those songs. That’s what hits your heart. That’s the stuff that’s hardest to say, and it’s the stuff I talk least about. That’s the part that’s about the two people. I’m never going to tell anybody everything.” (Fans wondered whether “Perfect,” a song Styles co-wrote for One Direction, might have been about Swift: “And if you like cameras flashing every time we go out/And if you’re looking for someone to write your breakup songs about/Baby, I’m perfect.”)


Was he able to tell her that he admired the songs? “Yes and no,” he says after a long pause. “She doesn’t need me to tell her they’re great. They’re great songs … It’s the most amazing unspoken dialogue ever.”


Is there anything he’d want to say to Swift today? “Maybe this is where you write down that I left!” He laughs, and looks off. “I don’t know,” he finally says. “Certain things don’t work out. There’s a lot of things that can be right, and it’s still wrong. In writing songs about stuff like that, I like tipping a hat to the time together. You’re celebrating the fact it was powerful and made you feel something, rather than ‘this didn’t work out, and that’s bad.’ And if you run into that person, maybe it’s awkward, maybe you have to get drunk … but you shared something. Meeting someone new, sharing those experiences, it’s the best shit ever. So thank you.”

—  Harry Styles talking about Taylor Swift - Rolling Stone May 2017 (x)

I don’t think Nico and Will got together because they were opposites. 

I don’t think they got together because Will was a happy sunray and Nico was this dark hurting kid. 

I think they got together because Will was the only person who talked to Nico without fear. 

I think they got together because even though he’s not a fighter, Will knew how to fight for what’s right, and for what he wants. 

I think they got together because Will was the first to call Nico out on his bullshit. 

I think they got together because they both understand death. They’ve both lost people. They’ve both experienced the trauma of war. 

I think they got together because they both knew depression and what it could do. 

I think they got together because they were both hardened by wars that weren’t meant to be theirs to fight, because they both understood loss, because they both understood what it was to try your best and fail. By which I mean, Nico had always tried so hard to fir in and couldn’t because of his powers. Will must have tried so hard to save people in the wars and failed, unable to save all of them. 

Nico comforts Will because death is inevitable. Will comforts Nico because he shows him he isn’t alone. 

These two aren’t together because they’re different, but because they’re the same. 

Everyone paints Will to be this happy, jokey, super-safe doctor, but my gods, did we read the same books? Did you see how feisty he is? How reckless he can be? How he lets Nico push his boundaries, and is only there to stop him from going too far? This boy reattaches limbs, and he can get entire armies to stop fighting and listen just by whistling. 

No, Will Solace is not this happy-go-lucky sunshine boy. He puts on a happy front, but you think that doesn’t go away? You think Nico doesn’t find himself comforting Will as much as Will comforts him? You think Will Solace doesn’t break down over the death of people he cares about, people he couldn’t save? You think this pain, this understanding of the shitty life they have to live isn’t what made them compatible? 

Nico shows it more, but Will is hurt too. And that’s why they’re so good for each other. 

two things i wanna say about my darling isak valtersen

  • i don’t ever want to see you get hurt again
  • look at you, proudly holding hands with your boyfriend in front of everyone. look at you with that dandelion in your hair, not caring about what people might think of that, not caring about masculinity standards. boys with flowers in their hair? why not. look at how much you’ve grown. i love you. i’m so proud of you 
andreil soulmate au

An @aftgexchange pinch-hit for @andrewjsten; I hope you enjoy!

Imagine an AU where you can’t lie to your soulmate. 

Everyone knows this.

Well, as in, it is physically possible; Neil can open his mouth and say something untrue to Andrew.

But soulmates are two people who share a soul. Two people who were meant to be one, but were torn asunder by the gods in their rage.

A soul will know the condition and the intention on its other half; for they are part of the same soul, in the end.

  • Which means that Andrew knows that Neil is his soulmate almost immediately
  • He flies out with Kevin to meet this rookie forward that Kevin’s raving about. He hasn’t bothered to watch the videos, he’s just going because they’re desperate for a new team member after the last recruit, and Kevin insists on going and Kevin won’t go alone
  • So he has the lowest of expectations when Neil comes rabbiting into the changing room and Andrew swings without thinking about it
  • His first thought is ‘what an idiot’ and his second is ‘hot tho’
  • And then Neil says something about not deserving to play on the same court as Kevin and Andrew can feel it in his bones, in his heart, in his soul that Neil is lying
  • Which makes his third thought about Neil ‘well fuck’

Keep reading

If Sollux was a fantroll have you ever thought about how quickly this terrible fandom would have called him a Gary Stu and put him on bad fantroll blogs everywhere circa 2013

“You can’t have two dreamselves!!! Trolls only have two horns this is the easiest rule!!! Oh yeah of course he moves a METEOR he and his ancestor are the STRONGEST psionics on Alternia that’s not op…… ‘Voices of the doomed,’ really? Wow 'woe is me I hear dead people, and know I’m going to die, and die all the time I get an extra life just to be a martyrly hero,’ and…. I mean idk is this okay bipolar representation? I’m pretty sure op isn’t bipolar…. Such a whump character everyone wants you to feel bad for their poor mutant baby…..”

This isn’t me calling Sollux a Gary Stu it’s me laughing at how completely ridiculous the Homestuck fandom was about fantrolls at its peak (myself somewhat included, I’m ashamed to say)

10

Sketchy Behavior | Hellen Jo 

Never afraid to speak and/or draw her mind, Los Angeles based artist and illustrator, Hellen Jo and her characters can be described as rough, vulgar, tough, jaded, powerful, bratty and bad-ass - AKA her own brand of femininity. Known for her comic Jin & Jam, and her work as an illustrator and storyboard artist for shows such as Steven Universe and Regular Show, Hellen’s rebellious, and sometimes grotesque artwork and illustrations are redefining Asian American women and women of color in comics. In fact, that’s why Hellen Jo was a must-interviewee for our latest Sketchy Behavior where we talk to her about her love of comics and zines, her antiheroines, and redefining what Asian American women identity is or can be; and what her ultimate dream project realized would be.  

Keep reading

Taylor, I’m so proud of you. I’m so proud of the fierce strong woman that you’ve become. You had to handle a lot of hate. And everyone, in the end, explodes. Even the kindest person. You didn’t deserve all the things people have said to you in the past two years, at all. It was, honestly, too much. I see myself a lot in Look What You Made Me Do. I feel all the struggle that you’ve been through because I can understand the pain and the anger when different people throw rocks at you just for the sake of being mean. But you came out beautifully, speaking up and taking your reputation back in your own hand. You are a true, wonderful, inspiration. And I’m extremely proud of you just like a friend or a smaller sister. I’m always gonna be by your side. I love you, now and ever.

@taylorswift

An observation of Markiplier TV

Emphasis on the observation part because I’ve never really been good with theories. I have a number of things to do today but unfortunately, I watched this video and now I can’t stop thinking about it. Hopefully this’ll quiet my mind and let me function, and who knows? Maybe it’ll help someone out there with their own theories too. :)

So, let’s talk about this scene:

We got one hell of a group here BUT what I’d like to focus on is their seating arrangement and what that could mean, because if there’s anything I’ve learned in videos like this it’s that EVERYTHING is by design. This entire table scene (props to the Editor btw) has so much hidden psychological subtext in it, so while I’m no professional I’ll still do my best to uncover them all.

First off, let’s look at the table: Rectangular with two long ends and two short ones. Pretty normal setting yeah, but is it beneficial to their situation (i.e. finding a way to ‘take control’) where everyone easily agrees? Nope. Because tables like these embody competition and a clear sense of authority, and I love this detail. It means that while they could’ve easily gone for a round table to promote cooperation, they go for this because of course, no one’s going to cooperate that easily.

This setting, however, works better in the business cooperative world, because you got two people (Darkiplier & Wilford) who can control the meeting from both ends of the table and are essentially the people everyone will need to look up to.

Here’s a great detail though: In this kind of setting, the more powerful of the two is usually the one opposite the entrance to the room. This allows him not just a vantage point of whoever comes in and goes, but complete control as well. And as we see where King of the Squirrels pops up:

Originally posted by antisepticjack

Which we can easily tell was from the right of the room based on the direction his body and eyes shift to, we can point out where the entrance is and who was right there:

But yeah, in this moment it didn’t seem like Will had control over King’s sudden entrance but let’s face it: he doesn’t care. He already knows that there’s more than one king in that room.

Speaking of, let’s move on to the seating arrangement.

Obviously we got Dark and Will at the ends as the higher ups, but I’d like to talk about Googleplier and The Host.

In medieval times, kings would often have their advisors right at their side at the table. This actually explains the term “right hand man”, because the king would have them close at hand to help him rule, unless of course, he was left-handed. Looking back at Dark’s antics, I have reason to believe that he’s either left-handed or ambidextrous.

Originally posted by http-darkiplier-403forbidden

Which I guess would make sense, considering that while Ed, Bim, Silver and Dr. Iplier were all concerned about their parts in the video, only Google and The Host were able to keep a level head and not lose sight of their main goal/situation.

Now the last thing I want to talk about is Wilford’s idea for Markiplier TV. I must warn you though because this is going to be a bit of a stretch so stop reading if you’d like BUT… I think he may have been inspired by Anti.

AGAIN, please bear with me. Jack’s mentioned before that Dark and Anti ever meeting each other was very unlikely, which in Dark’s case (being the alter ego that’s been pushed inside the most) could be more than true. However, Wilford makes up for this as he’s the only one not bound by the laws of physics and is, potentially, omnipresent. So it’s possible that he’s aware of Anti (since he was aware of Septiplier after all) and his methods (i.e. using social media to have his fans notice him which then gives him control) BUT, being Wilford, he goes about it in his own roundabout way which is, of course, TELEVISION.

So, yeah, this is all I can come up with. Excluding my attempt in theorizing at the very end I hope this was helpful. Now I’m just hoping that my thoughts on Antisepticeye don’t get too hectic and end up like this long wall of text. Thanks for reading. :)

So the 20th anniversary of the publication of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone is coming up and I thought it might be fun to do a group reread! 

This is for anyone to get involved in, no matter your house, so hopefully we can all go back and relive the magic together

I’m aware that people have different commitments and a lot of people still have exams so, by popular consensus, we’re going to be taking it slow so there’s no pressure to read particularly fast. We’re going to be reading one chapter a day on weekdays, and two chapters a day on weekends which hopefully is a pace everyone will be able to keep up with

This means the reread will last just under two weeks, so we will be starting on the 14th of June, meaning we’ll finish on June 26th, the actual 20th anniversary

It’s up to you how much you want to get involved and how to document your own rereading journey, but I’ll be posting my own thoughts on each chapter on this blog; things I’d forgotten, things I never picked up on before, favourite quotes and moments, how my thoughts on characters have changed, that kind of stuff

I’ll also be posing a discussion question based on the chapter so feel to chip in your own thoughts on that!

If you want to reply to me or make your own posts, artwork, questions, anything like that then use the hashtag #hogwartsreread so we can all join in each others discussions and talk to each other about our rereading experience! 

Reblog if you’re interested so we can get as many people involved as possible! I’ll be posting reminders as we get closer to the day but I’m so excited and hopefully you guys are looking forward to it too! 

Are You Sure About That?

Fandom: Criminal Minds

Relationship: Spencer Reid x Reader

Summary: Spencer Reid is your best friend in the entire world. Best friends totally spend every weekend together, and walk around holding hands, and cuddling on their movie night, right? 

Note: Just an idea I had one night. Hope you enjoy. 

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

Favourite song from high school musical?

From the original? What I’ve Been Looking For, but only the Ryan and Sharpay version. But from the trilogy(?) as a whole? thiS KID. 

LIKE. the production. the sets. the transitions. the Fosse break. NICE.

to be fair tho, Bet On It is a super close second.