If we’re going to update the pantheon of regrettable artists, can we add “white male writer who was legitimately progressive twenty years ago, but hasn’t learned or grown as an artist in any way whatsoever since then, and now exists in a state of grumpy bewilderment at the fact that he’s being critcised for doing exactly the same stuff that used to win him praise”?

(This whole thing is one big convoluted “John was jealous of Linda” post so you can scroll past if you don’t wanna hear me thinking to myself.)

Okay so, prone to over-analysis as I am, I re-found this quote when compiling quotes for possible ‘Shit John Has Actually Said About Paul’ posts, and one bit in particular leapt out at me:

“First time I saw [Linda] was after that press conference to announce Apple in America. We were just going back to the airport and she was in the car with us. I didn’t think she was particularly attractive, I wondered what he was bothering having her in the car for. A bit too tweedy, you know. But she sat in the car and took photographs and that was it. And the next minute she’s married him.” – John Lennon (St. Regis Hotel interview, Sept. 5, 1971)

We’re gonna come back to John’s tone, but are we seeing what I’m seeing. 

“And the next minute she’s married him.” 

“She’s married him.” 

So, John talks about Linda in a very negative way, she wasn’t, “particularly attractive,” why was Paul even “bothering” with her, she was “too tweedy,” she just “sat” there and “that was it”

Now I can’t speak as an outsider, but it must look, at the very least, as though he didn’t like her, and that they hadn’t got on in the intervening years between their first meeting and this interview. But to my knowledge he had no reason to dislike her. Paul had reasons (good or bad) to dislike Yoko, but Linda remained distant from the group, never turned up to the studio, preferred to live a quiet and private life, and by Yoko’s own account, she and her got along fairly well. So what’s the tone about? 

As an insider, it almost seems like jealousy. In one short answer he critcises her looks, her personality, and to a lesser extent, her profession. So he was jealous of Paul, and putting Linda down as a means of coping with it. He was pointing out things about her that he actually liked, and negating them. Right? Right.

Nope. Because I think he undoes any possibility of that scenario when he says,“she’s married him.” 

He doesn’t say, “And the next minute, he’s married her.” i.e. “he’s taken her away from me”. No, he equates himself to, or puts himself on the side of Linda, the woman. That one phrase makes it much more likely that he was jealous of Linda, not of Paul. When he says, “she’s married him,” he speaks contrary to the norm and makes Paul passive, Linda is the one doing the marrying, i.e. “she’s taken him away from me.”  

((Whether he was jealous for sexual or romantic reasons is debatable, but at least on a platonic level, and in a way he never really was with Jane, he was jealous of Linda.))

anonymous asked:

You dislike snow?? Why??

Let me get this straight: for seasons 1 and 2 and most of 3, Snow was my girl. But now she’s been assassinated, in my view, beyond repair.

My main issue is how she treats Emma. At best, she’s a decoration, at worst she’s a nuisance. She referred to Emma’s mental breakdown in 4a as an ‘interruption’ from her talking to Regina. She’s always ready to help Regina through her problems, but with Emma it’s “Go talk to Archie”. She got annoyed at Emma because she didn’t come to her in s5 when, two way street Snow, you could have knocked on her door. She threw a carnival because giving complete strangers hope is more important than the mental health of her daughter? She said “David we failed” when she is the one who was yelling at Emma! She came on Emma’s “night out” not because Emma needed comfort, but because she needed a night out and then proceeded to not offer her daughter any comfort when she was upset. These are just off the top of my head.

Before anyone jumps on me, yes I do see the irony in me, a misogyny blog who defends Milah from people who criticise her parenting, critcising Snow, but Milah and Snow are in totally different situations.

From s1-3, Snow was one of my faves. She was flawed yes, but I could overlook her flaws because she loved her family and was brave and compassionate. Now she makes me want to scream.

A thought just occurred to me

The Diamond Courts parallel the Four-Temperament.

Almost all the gems we’ve seen and confirmed to be of Pink’s former court are  Sanguine: Amethysts and the defective beta quartz are shown to be just a bunch of fun-loving goofy rowdy teenagers, Rose Quartz was loving, optimistic and also pretty fun, Steven is the most Sanguine to ever Sanguine ever. While we have very little info of Pink Diamond’s personality, her Human Zoo and her Belly Gem seem to set her up as a twisted reflection of Rose, in which case Sanguine will probably fit. The only confirmed Pink Courter to not be Sanguine is “our” Jasper, which I find very intersting - both to just show that even if my theory is correct, the whole thing is never going to be a 100% match because gems ARE individuals and from a character standpoint: Jasper wants to see herself as a perfect quartz and wants to take revenge over a leader she has never met - yet she’s this weird outlier in her Court’s Temperament. Even if she doesn’t know it due to the destruction of the court and all of her “sisters” being another another Diamond’s wing, she is already an example of gems having a unique individuality separate from their type much like Rose Quartz and the rest of the Crystal Gems. Jasper fits much better into the Temperament of her adoptive court

Since Yellow Diamond’s Court is Choleric. Peridot is hot headed and passionate but values logic and practicallity, and is often kinda bossy and insensative. Yellow Diamond herself is very much the same, Homeworld indoctrination focuses on the idea that she’s objective and logical - and she’s also quite harsh, angry and vengeful, as well as focusing on tasks and things and people having “use” and trying to look forward, as well as the importance of strong leadership. Even Yellow Pearl is harsher and more aggresive compared to Blue Pearl, which makes since considering the blue court

Blue Diamond’s Court is Melancholic. Sapphire is analytical and thoughtful, yet rigid to the point that it’s even symbolized in her abillity to see the future and ice powers. Lapis tends toward pessimism and depression, moodiness, resentment and cynicism toward other people. Holly Blue Agate is a strict, organized perfectionist leader who is constantly critcising her subroutines and is clearly secretly resentful about being assinged this job (and her conflict wih the Amethysts makes a lot of sense when you consider Agate is used to working with fellow Melancholic Blue Courters over some rowdy Sanguine Pinks, and the Amethysts are supposed to be led by someone who can make their work fun) Blue Pearl is quieter and more passive then Yellow Pearl, and while we can’t quite know yet what’s going on in her head, her design makes her look quite sad and moody. And Blue Diamond herself has been shown to be elegant, emotionally distant and analytical to her subjects, but depressive and introspective to her fellow Diamonds, she’s sad to the point of making Steven cry her tears - and finds the value in emotional stuff Yellow Diamond can’t.

That leaves the-as-of-it-unseen White Diamond and her as-of-yet-unseen Court as Phlegmatic: Calm, discreet, thoughtful, patient, stubborn, indifferent… we’ll see if she, or any of her subjects fit once we see them. Phlegmatic is also connected with the mentality of older adulthood and old age, which fits the implication she is the oldest of the Diamonds (Sanguine is also connected with childhood, fitting with Pink being implied as the youngest.

This also work with this old theory of mine: makes sense for the Warrior Court to be Sanguine as a sort of passionate warrior-sisterhood thing going on, for the Scientist Court to be practical and goal-oriented, but passionate, for the Scholar\Magic Court to be introspective and thoughtful and for the  Bureaucractic Court to be calm and patient people pleasurers


US President-elect Donald Trump has sent another stock reeling into the red.

Barely a week after taking shots at Boeing, Donald Trump took aim at Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jet programme, saying the cost was “out of control”.

“The F-35 program and cost is out of control. Billions of dollars can and will be saved on military (and other) purchases after January 20th,” Mr Trump said.

Following the tweet on Monday morning, shares of the aerospace company plunged by more than 4 per cent in early trade.

Based on the number of shares outstanding, the tweet has shaved just over $3.5bn from Lockheed’s market value.

Shares of the New York-listed company fell by more than 5 per cent by midday on Monday, and had not fully recovered by market close. By 4pm Eastern Time, the share price had only bounced back half way by about 2.5 per cent.

The President-elect’s comment has also had a knock-on for other companies involved in the project, which is worth up to $400bn over the contract’s duration.

Shares in Northrop Gumman were down 4 per cent, while Britain’s BAE Systems saw its stock slip 1.3 per cent after Mr Trump’s tweet. Neither of those companies’ share prices have recovered throughout Monday.

Mr Trump’s latest twitter firestorm comes just one week after he used the same social media platform to take aim at Boeing over costs for the replacement Air Force One.

Boeing fell by 1.5 per cent after the tweet but ended the trading day positive.

Although Lockheed’s dip is temporary, it is a reminder of investors’ knee-jerk reaction when the President-elect expresses his views on a company. His tweet is also a cause for concern in the longer term, as the anticipated increase in defence spending in 2017 may not be as lucrative to contractors as they had hoped.

A Lockheed Martin executive responded to Mr Trump’s attack, insisting that the company has taken steps to cut costs.

“Since the beginning, we have invested hundreds of millions of dollars to reduce the price of the airplane by about 70 per cent since its original costing, and we project it to be about £85m in the 2019 or 2020 time frame”, said Jeff Babione, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 programme leader.

A week before Mr Trump won the presidential election, the US Defence Department and Lockheed Martin concluded their 14-month negotiations on their ninth contract for F-35 fighter jets.

The F-35 Lightining II is meant to become the next leading-edge platform for the US Air Force, Navy and Marines, as well for the armed forces of nearly 10 US allies, including the UK, Netherlands and Australia.

Last week, the President-elect critcised Boeing by claiming the total cost of Boeing’s 747 Air Force One programme would be more than $4bn.

On Twitter, he said: "Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!”

The aircraft manufacturer took a $1.4bn hit to its market value.

In response to Mr Trump’s tweet, Boeing said that its current contract with the Air Force is actually for $170m.