if there is a context behind this

anonymous asked:

Did you see that video Jimin posting on twitter with him and Jungkook? There's just something about it, I can't really explain it. Like it was soft and so comforting the way Jimin just lean on Jungkook's shoulder.I feel something different, like the opposite of the intensity I am used to seeing in a lot of Jikook moments.The viedo somehow makes me feel that's what their relationship is like behind camera, just simply being in love, like an ordinary couple. Sorry if I am just talking rubbish :/

Gwaaaaaaah I knoooow right, they were soooo cute idk what to think ^///o///^ And I’m pretty sure anyone would think the same: just show your non-kpop friends the video without context and I would really like to see what they think  ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

but honestly idk what to feeeeeel with their recent posts lately. like who even does that? post repeated videos of them being in each other’s presence. it’s like jimin is proud that jungkook is with him and wants to show him off every time, and i think that’s so simultaneously funny and adorable. they’re just so…floofy <3 and the ambiance between them is just….gaaaah. 

I mentioned it in my tags but have you ever stopped to imagine how many of these vids Jimin/Jungkook have in their phones? And how many of these cute moments they have in general without filming them at all? It’s so hard to picture, because on camera they’re almost awkward with each other sometimes…but in moments like these where it’s natural or when the camera is not focused on them, they’re not. Even now, my sister is confused about their relationship. She keeps saying things like “Since when did Jungkook become such ‘good friends’ with Jimin?”, which we know they always were since debut days…but how come their on-camera interactions show such a drastic change/?

idk man i couldn’t tell you  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ but i have so many questions because of them…and from what I see, more and more people have been questioning as well recently ;)

Thought of the day (while reading a “gender marketing” translation with painfully outdated views): I am really, really sick of us only talking about “gender” when women are involved.

A surprising number of important realizations could be made if we develop the habit of talking about gender dynamics even – perhaps especially – in the context of all-male or mostly-male groups.

How does it affect productivity, public image, collaboration, negotiating, client acquisition, etc. to have any group of people involved be entirely men? What effects does this drastic gender imbalance cause in its environment?

LET’S TALK ABOUT GENDER AND MEN, PEOPLE. Gender is not an exclusively female domain.

Me, interviewing the director of basically any film ever: “So let’s talk about the extreme gender imbalance in the casting of this film. What was the thinking behind that? Was there a particular statement you were trying to make, a satirical observation on the politics of society, perhaps? That kind of came out of left field, when we watched the film and all the parts but one were men. Can you tell us a little about the background of that?”

Director: “Um… I didn’t actually consciously think that much abou–”

Me, interrupting: “Come now, don’t be modest! That was a fascinating artistic decision! The drastic disparity between the number of men and the number of women in the film makes it clear to even the most casual viewer that gender is a central theme in this story. Can we delve into that a little bit further?”

Director: “…”

This would be a fun tack to take in regard to race, too.

“I noticed something very interesting about your film, which is that every single one of the leading roles is played by a white actor. Clearly there’s some conceptual message you want to communicate with this creative choice. Could you talk about that?”

Director: *sweats nervously*

Death of the Author - We don’t care what the author says he wanted the work to mean. We let the work speak for itself.

Weekend at Bernie’s of the Author - We don’t care what the author said. The authorial intent must be whatever we found in the work. (h/t @raggedjackscarlet)

Cryonic Stasis of the Author - The author is actually dead for a long time. Nobody gets all the references any more, but my literature teacher told me I have to take the context at the time into account, so I got a book that explains the work, instead of letting it speak for itself.

Frankenstein’s Monster of the Author - We let the work sort of speak for itself. We ignore what the author said about the intent behind the work. Instead we will use the author’s tweets on unrelated issues in order to ascribe intent and meaning to the work.

anonymous asked:

so in 3x07 I always saw it as Lexa pulling Clarke towards the bed, and then further pulling her down on top of her. Am I seeing it wrong? I guess that's why I always wondered why everyone saw Lexa as such a "bottom." While she does seem rather submissive, she seemed quite willing to initiate. Would love to know what you think??

You’re not wrong at all. She puts her hand behind Clarke’s neck and yes, she does pull her down on top of her.

(x) And yes, Lexa seems “submissive” during the love scene, and she is such an emotional mess throughout the whole thing that it’s easy to label her as a bottom. Not to mention that Clarke is a fucking top (I’m not really that into the top/bottom thing but Clarke Griffin is a top.)

That said… I think many people tend to forget the context of that scene? It’s after the betrayal. Lexa betrayed Clarke. But more than the political betrayal, she hurt Clarke. She hurt her horribly and she knows: she knows so much of Clarke’s pain is because of what she did. So indeed, she does everything she can to make amends. But, and this is so important to me, she never asks Clarke to forgive her. She knows she has no right to ask for that. After what she did, she doesn’t think it’s her right to ask Clarke for anything. Not for forgiveness, least of all for Clarke to love her back. How doesn’t she see that Clarke is in love with her? Easy, she doesn’t think she deserves that love. Of course hope dies last, so a part of her can’t help but wish for Clarke to reciprocate, but honestly, I’ve never seen their interactions in Polis as Lexa trying to win Clarke’s heart back. Her most “selfish” request was asking Clarke to stay in Polis during 3.07, and even then, I have no doubt she was asking that simply because she loves being with Clarke, even if in the most innocent way. I don’t think she wanted more time to increase her chances of getting Clarke to love her back. As I said, she thinks she destroyed her chance.

Anyway, why the digression, you ask? Because all that heavily plays into Lexa’s behavior during the love scene. Right from the start. (x)

She is completely and utterly taken aback by Clarke’s kiss! She was saying goodbye to her, she wasn’t expecting Clarke to kiss her, she wasn’t expecting Clarke to want to kiss her. And indeed, when Clarke dives back into the kiss, Lexa doesn’t reply immediately. Apart from the shock, she probably wonders what that kiss meant. If it was just in the heat of the moment, if Clarke wants to stop, if she regrets it. But then Clarke kisses her again, she makes it very clear that she wants what is happening, and after another second of hesitation, look at the switch in Lexa’s body language.

She doesn’t just respond to Clarke, she pulls her in and then pushes against her. And even beyond that, if you notice she actually initiates every kiss, she’s the farthest thing from submissive. Now that she knows she can, she physically gives vent to her repressed feelings. You literally see her hunger for Clarke because her mouth and her hands and her entire body chase after Clarke. Again and again. Clarke actually does little apart from untying Lexa’s shirt. And this is the first perfect example of how layered Lexa is, even when it comes to sex. She takes control of the kiss, but at the same time lets Clarke do what she wants with her. Like Lexa put it when she was talking about Costia, she is Clarke’s. She won’t take any more than Clarke is willing to give but she won’t do it passively. Just look at how she turns the tables after Clarke’s first kiss. Lexa is far from submissive.

There is another moment when she becomes hesitant again, though. 

The shot makes it a little hard to see, but look at Lexa’s face. She was lost in the kiss merely seconds ago, but the moment Clarke puts distance between them, Lexa immediately opens her eyes and searches Clarke’s face. She doesn’t try to kiss her again, she doesn’t try to get closer. She just follows Clarke’s lead. Why? Because she’s a bottom? No, I don’t think so. I think it goes back to what I said earlier. Lexa only takes what she gets from Clarke and doesn’t ask for more because after what she did to Clarke, to her it’s unbelievable enough that Clarke wants her back. And precisely because she struggles to believe it, she isn’t sure to what extent Clarke wants her. So she stops when it seems that Clarke is stopping (when lol, she was actually just leading Lexa to the bed) and waits to see what Clarke wants. Does this make her a huge bottom? I think it simply makes her incredibly thoughtful and respectful of Clarke and her boundaries. (x)

Even after she sat on the bed, she instinctively leans towards Clarke again, but she doesn’t go forward. She waits. With love and wonder and hunger in her eyes, she waits to make sure that Clarke has no doubt or regret or that she simply doesn’t want to stop, that Clarke wants this as much as she does (ps I find it so freaking cute that Clarke nods at her at the same time, like she’s asking “You want to?” to Lexa). And once she is sure, Lexa doesn’t hesitate anymore and she pulls Clarke on top of her.

So in the end… I think it depends on the circumstances. She is more than ready to take the initiative but she’s also willing to give up control. To me it’s a little more layered than just her being a top/bottom. One thing i have no doubt about though, is that this lady absolutely w o r s h i p s Clarke in bed :)

laurent knew that auguste let damen pick up his sword. he knew that auguste refused to attack an unarmed man, even an enemy.

with that in mind, pls consider the following:

• “I don’t share your craven habit of hitting only those who cannot hit back, and I take no pleasure in hurting those weaker than myself.” Driven past reason, the words came out in his own language.

Laurent, who could speak his language, stared back at him”

•“'I don’t know if that is usual practice in this place, but good men don’t torture slaves in Akielos. […] To abuse someone who cannot resist—isn’t that monstrous?’ […]

There was a long silence. Laurent’s expression had changed.”

• ”‘I didn’t volunteer. I was brought here. I don’t know why.’

‘To cooperate,’ said Laurent.

‘Cooperate?’ said Damen, with complete disgust. 'You were unarmed.’

Laurent stared at him.”

• and Laurent standing for hours in front of the regent and the council, testifying for damen, who was, for all intents and purposes, unarmed.

Context: We (A Warlock (me), A fighter, a ranger, and a bard) had just emerged from a long cave system back into open sky to find dawn breaking. In the distance we see a fuzzy black cloud approaching

GM: Ok so a swarm of bats happens to be attempting to enter the cave you just left, and -rolls behind sheet- they didn’t get anything to eat last night, so guess who’s on the menu…

Fighter: don’t worry, I got this -unsheathes massive greatsword- 

Fighter (OOC): So I could technically target an individual member of a swarm right

DM:….I…-proceeds to read swarm rules for 10 minutes-…uhh….yes but it wouldn’t really do anything

Fighter, with mischievous grin: I attack the closest bat to me -rolls not a 1-

DM: You hit. It dies

Fighter: Awesome. Now I’m gonna great cleave


Fighter: -proceeds to great cleave all 56 bats in the swarm over the course of several minutes of rolls, somehow not rolling a 1-

Bard: My god how did you do that

Fighter: I learned that in the great mosquito plague of ‘89

-entire table proceeds to lose their shit laughing-

Concept: the Grail Quest retold from the perspective of the Knights of the Round Table’s support staff.

(For context, in real life, your average “knight in shining armour” was incredibly high maintenance, and required an average of 4-6 support staff following him around 24/7 just to carry his stuff, take care of his horses - he’d have up to three - and keep his equipment clean and in good repair. So whenever you read a story about half-dozen questing knights gallivanting about having adventures, there’s a totally unmentioned group of 24-36 additional people trailing around behind them.)

It WAS a frog

Context: we are in the middle of a tundra, remember this.

Me: do i see any footprints? (rolls a 9 with a plus 9 on spot)

DM: yes you do, they are not human.

Me: ok i roll to recognize the footprints, but im not a ranger i doubt… (1)

DM: (after finishes laughing) you think its a tree frog.

Context: fast forwarding to me following the clearly not frog prints, dm rolls a solid 20.

DM: you hear a massive and loud croak from right behind you.

Me: fuck you….


There’s so much development in the relationships between all the couples from the latest chapters of the Tan Jiu and Old Xian stories. Even if the last one is a bit questionable…

Listen, I wanted the money

This is kind of long so here’s some context. My group consists of a sex obsessed human pirate, a money obsessed, shit stirring tiefling rogue (me), a human psion who likes causing chaos, and a human warrior with amnesia, we are in a bar and and I am pissed at the bartender.

(Human pirate)HP: ok, so I go upstairs witg my two ladies and bed them

DM: ok, you go upstairs

(Human psion)HS: ok, so I simultaneously flip everyone’s mugs of beer upside down *rolls 18*

DM: you succeed and successfully start a chaotic bar fight

(Tiefling rogue)Me: I sneak up behind the bartender and stab him through the throat *rolls 18*

DM:you stab him and none of the bartenders notice until you are out from behind the bar *to me and HS* you see someone about to stab someone else with a table leg

HS: I go to stop him

Me: wait, I stop HS and tell him to just let it happen, snd that I have a plan

DM: he stabs the person in the chest and pulls the bloody table leg out of their chest

Me: I tell the bartenders that the man with the bloody table leg stabbed the bartender *rolls 14 on bluff*

DM: The bartenders believe you and yell for city guards, and you hear footsteps outside

HS: I quickly put everything back where it was before the guards arrive *rolls nat 20*

DM: you succeed and the guards arrive on the scene and grab hold of the guy with the table leg and start to escort him out of the bar

Me: I convince them that he also stole my money *rolls 17 of persuasion*

DM: wait, you are blaming him on the murder and condemning a stranger to death for the 25 gold he has?

Me: yeah, why not?

DM: What’s your alignment?

Me: Chaotic Neutral, why?

DM: well, I think your alignment should probably be changed to neutral evil

Me: that’s fair enough

HP: *comes downstairs with the 2 ladies he was with* what’d I miss?

A couple turns later, our psion tortured the stranger and made him go insane instead of quickly executing him, and he soon after became neutral evil as well

Because I am weak for my children. An older work but still like how this one turned out

  • Sorey: Lailah! What is that?!
  • Lailah: Oh no... It has been born.
  • Sorey:
  • Lailah: The SorMik Shipper population of the Zesty Fandom is growing fast.
  • Rose: So they can all see it.
  • Mikleo: Our love is fully materialized. How could anyone miss it?
  • Rose: Well, it's not like you two kiss or anything.
  • Mikleo: On-screen! It's not like Sorey kisses me ON-SCREEN.
  • Sorey: Off-screen is a different story...
  • Lailah: Oh my! Really? *becomes queen of SorMik supporters*
  • Mikleo: Let's just say we make up for lost time between takes.
  • Rose: So weirdos attract the weirdos.
  • Mikelo: Ahem, the enlightened attract the enlightened.
  • Sorey: The SorMik Fandom LOOKED terrifying at first, but the longer I think about it, the shippers' pure enthusiasm is really cool!
  • Mikleo: I hate myself for saying it, but...so cool.
  • Sorey: The support is great! There is nothing I love more than the positive endorsement--
  • Mikleo: Sorey, if we're going to make out before the next scene, we have to hurry.
  • Sorey: --except for that. Give it your all, Mikleo!
  • Sorey and Mikleo: *secret handshake/wrist bump + kisses galore*
That was anticlimactic

For context: We were playing lost mines, finally coming around to our last session. Earlier in the campaign, we made a bargain for an NPC’s (Gundren) life, in which he loses his tounge. We are now in the middle of a combat we don’t know is actually the final one.

DM: “Your crossbow bolt lands in blackspider’s eye with a splat, killing him. The spiders in the room curl up and die, and you see a door behind his chair.”

Me: :Let’s check it out"

In the room we found a bound up dwarf and some treasures. When we speak to him, our situation becomes readily apparent

Dm as Nundro: “Thank you travelers, I am Nundro rockseeker”

Me: “Didn’t we know a rockseeker?”

Nundro: “That would be my brother, he sent you here to save me, no?”

I proceed to blow up in laughter as the DM explains what happened. Because of our little deal, and then just sending Gundren away, we never should’ve found out about wave echo cave, but stumbled upon it through a series of luck rolls

DM (ooc): “So you basically stopped the bad guy, saved the town, and reunited the brothers all by chance, without actually knowing that any of these things existed.”

Nundro: “I will be glad to speak with my brother again.”

Druid: “I think you might find you’ll have trouble doing that anytime soon.”