a kindgom burns. a princess sleeps. this is no f a i r y t a l e.
Half sisters Isabelle and Aurora are polar opposites: Isabelle is the king’s headstrong illegitimate daughter, whose sight was tithed by faeries; Aurora, beautiful and sheltered, was tithed her sense of touch and her voice on the same day. Despite their differences, the sisters have always been extremely close.
And then everything changes, with a single drop of Aurora’s blood—and a sleep so deep it cannot be broken.
As the faerie queen and her army of Vultures prepare to march, Isabelle must race to find a prince who can awaken her sister with the kiss of true love and seal their two kingdoms in an alliance against the queen.
So this was a pretty good book. There were some ‘magical cure’ elements going on here (the girl who can’t speak or feel can magically feel and speak) BUT the blind girl stays blind through the entire book, so tilts hand back and forth
This was an interesting take on Sleeping Beauty. At times there were elements of Alice in Wonderland. It all felt very rich in detail and magical but there’s just something about it that I’m not a huge fan of so I’m wavering between three and four stars. I’m pretty excited to read the sequel, I hope it lives up to the world building this book built.
Also seriously can we not with these love triangles please.
just a reminder @ bi women: your love for other women isn’t lesser or illegitimate because you also have the potential to experience attraction to other genders. your love for other women is real and beautiful and something to cherish
Over the years of your life, you get super into occultism and devil-worship. One day you summon a demon with the intent of selling your soul in replace for your utmost desires. One problem though. You’re the illegitimate son of God.
sadfasd i’m not taking requests now But i’ll make an exception with yours bc i like the fact that If you line all the group chat things i’ve made
(zeppelis - joestars - villains - sbr) you can see how dio has slowly taken over and i think that’s beautiful
i love the idea of the joestars having to escape from their fans in the same way that Dio has to escape from his illegitimate children
–and to add a contribution to part 5 and the collective desire to have it confirmed
So, a POTUS Who Is Almost Certainly Illegitimate Will See His Supreme Court Nominee Confirmed to a Lifetime Position: The Fiery Hellscape Gets Doused in Kerosene
As I write this, DJT’s Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch hasn’t yet been confirmed.
I’m glad the Democrats are filibustering–might as well go down fighting–but whether or not Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell does or doesn’t use the “nuclear option”, the GOP has the votes.
Barring, say, an asteroid hitting the Senate chambers, Neil Gorsuch will be confirmed as the next Supreme Court Justice of the United States this week.
Meanwhile, evidence mounts that DJT isn’t the legitimate POTUS. Though he did go nutso again on Twitter today, railing about Hillary and the debates, i.e. events of six months ago and wholly irrelevant to whether or not he was legitimately elected.
Which is exactly what a person would do to deflect attention from the current Senate and House investigations into whether or not he colluded with Russia in order to get elected.
By any legal, ethical, practical, or moral yardstick, President Obama’s SCOTUS nominee Merrick Garland should’ve filled Scalia’s seat after the latter died.
If we impeach DJT–which I believe we will–are we stuck with Gorsuch on the bench? To the best of my understanding, there would be no Constitutional mechanism to remove him from his seat after he is confirmed.
We’ve long known all this would get worse before it gets better.
And I do believe eventually it will get better. DJT’s approval ratings are at 36% and each day he alienates more of the nation.
But in the meantime, the hellscape gets more hellish.
Confirming Gorsuch to Garland’s slot adds kerosene to the fire.
Oftentimes in leftist circles you can hear folks
decrying liberals and liberalism. If you ask them why they hate liberalism,
most of them will point you in the direction of Mao’s Combat Liberalism to
better understand them, but this is a mistake. Combat Liberalism is effectively
an internal memo, warning other communists of the need to avoid liberalism lest
it be detrimental to their work. It details results of that ideology, but not
causes. To that end, I’ve compiled a brief description of what liberalism is
and why it’s bad.
The ideology of liberalism is denoted by three
Free-market capitalism. Liberals believe that
capitalism is good, or at least “the best we have”. While liberals
may argue over how much intervention in the market is necessary, they all agree
on the fundamental goodness of capitalism, and that it should be tweaked rather
The state and representative
“democracy”. Liberals believe that the state is good, and that
representative democracy is an effective means of creating social change and an
acceptable level of participation. They reject any aims outside of the state,
and try to co-opt movements towards state action (e.g. electing Democrats).
Nonviolence: The liberal insistence on
“nonviolent” protest (usually invoking a whitewashed history of Dr.
King) is largely derived from state-worship. They see the state as the only
legitimate user of force, and all others as violent looters and rioters;
because of that, they refuse to even consider violence as a method of protest or direct action (e.g. antifascism).
Indirect action and representative
problem-solving: Linked to the lionization of representative democracy,
liberals care little for direct action, even as indirect as blocking a street
for a few hours. They believe that the power to change things is vested solely
in those representatives, and that the common person shouldn’t bother; direct
action, to them, is illegitimate for the same reason as violence.
A focus on individual rather than class politics.
Liberals see all social issues as issues primarily affecting individuals,
rather than groups. In other words, they lack a class analysis; they see
racism, for example, as the result of individual prejudices and
“meanness” and something to be fixed at that level, rather than a
system of structural violence against non-white peoples aimed at dividing the
Liberalism, as an ideology, is dangerous. These
three tenets combine to form an analysis that is insufficient to encompass the
whole of the enemy, and more importantly a praxis that is ineffective at
combating it. It infects activists and ordinary workers alike, and railroads
them into believing that they cannot change a society that benefits only those
at the top. It railroads them into believing that the burdens they bear cannot
be thrown off, and stands in the way of our collective liberation. It must be
combated, for it is at the root of the struggle.
Pierce Brosnan made a mermaid movie but nobody is allowed to see it!!!
i was casually browsing pierce brosnan’s wikipedia page tonight when i noticed something v exciting: he recently filmed a MERMAID FANTASY MOVIE where he plays KING LOUIS XIV. how had i not heard about this?
this is clearly the best film ever made:
“King Louis XIV’s quest for immortality leads him to capture and steal a mermaid’s life force, a move that is further complicated by his illegitimate daughter’s discovery of the creature.” [x]
Kaya Skodelario plays the daughter. Fan Bingbing plays the mermaid. there are also a bunch of men but i don’t care about them.
naturally i was very excited to hear about this movie, for the obvious reason that it stars A MERMAID alongside PIERCE BROSNAN IN A HISTORICAL WIG. but then i noticed something ominous: it’s been delayed. “indefinitely” delayed. since April 2015.
usually when a film gets delayed for that long, it means one of two things: it’s an unwatchably terrible box office disaster in the making, or there’s some weird legal shit going on behind the scenes.
but whatever the reason, seriously: Paramount Pictures, i do not care. please deliver the goods on this PIERCE BROSNAN MERMAID MOVIE. it’s a cultural necessity.
The UA teachers knew about All Might’s true form before it was revealed to the public, right?
But they don’t know about One For All (except for Recovery Girl and principal Nedzu).
So like. When Cementoss saved All Might’s secret from getting out to Kirishima at the end of the USJ invasion, and he saw how unbothered All Might was about Izuku knowing his true form and how Izuku didn’t seem all too surprised by it, he must have realized that Izuku knew about All Might’s true form already.
And I mean, he must have wondered why Izuku, specifically, was the only student to know about All Might’s secret.
Put that together with the similarity in their quirks, and Aizawa’s observation on the first day of school about All Might picking favourites, there’s one obvious conclusion the teachers must have come to.
Basically, what I’m trying to say is, the UA teachers all totally think that Izuku is All Might’s illegitimate child.
Why do people think Lena will be evil? Of all the Lena Luthor versions just one is really a villain
Why do people always say that Lena has to be evil
if they follow the Comics when she isn’t evil in most of them? And she isn’t
evil in other TV appareances either. Let’s see what we have here:
In the comics
Was first introduced in Superman’s Girlfriend, Lois Lane #23. This
version of her has psychic abilities thanks to one of Lex’s experiments. She
wants to work wih the FBI but they don’t let her because of her past. She joins
a band of criminals only to bring them back to justice and after Supergirl
discovers this she tries to get her that job with the FBI. She’s good and she loses her abilities later.
She first appears in Superman: Secret Origin and then in Adventure Comics. This version of Lena is
paralyzed after an accident. She’s a single mom, she has a daughter, Lori
Luthor. Lex cures Lena but then uncures her and won’t reveal how he
did it until Superman is dead. She’s not evil in this
She’s in The New 52 era
of the DC comics. This version of Lena suffered from G.B. syndrome and when Lex
tried to cure her faster he left her paralyzed. She works in the labs of
Lexcorp and she helps it become a global powerhouse. After a lot of stuff happens
she turns against Lex and becomes a supervillian, Ultrawoman. She gains powers in this version too.
She’s from Supergirl: Cosmic Adventures in
the Eighth Grade. She’s Linda (Kara)’s best friend. They attend
the same boarding school. She’s 13 and she’s super smart. She’s actually really
nice and a really good friend, she’s a little antagonistic, not really a
villain though. She blames Supergirl for what happened to Lex but after some
things happen she changes her mind.
I don’t think
Lex’s daugther, Lena Luthor II, counts because that’s not really the same
character. In that universe Lex did have a sister named Lena, who was killed by
their foster father, and he named his daughter after her. His daughter, Lena, was controlled by Brainiac.
In TV shows
She was in Superboy, a TV show
from 1988. Lex and Lena were abused by their father all the time when they were
kids. Lex kills their parents and some years later Lena fakes her death to
escape the Luthor name. When Lex finds out she “died” he tries to destroy the
planet but Lena, who was found by Clark and Lana, stops him. She was good.
She appeared in Smallville initially
as Tess Mercer, who later discovers she’s Lutessa Lena Luthor. She’s the
illegitimate daughter of Lionel and was left in an orphanage when she was five.
She works a lot with Clark and is part of the Checkmate organization. She seemed antagonistic at first but she was good.
And then, we
have our Lena and so far she seems to be nothing but good, and Katie has said so, she’s genuine and honest, what you see is what you get. So I don’t really
think they will turn her into a villain
The American people did not really choose Donald Trump. His presidency exists without the support of the majority of voters and, in turn, without a true mandate from the American people. Trump walks and talks instead like an authoritarian, and seems to believe he is above the people and the law, and need not answer to either. He wants to be untouchable. He behaves with impunity and acts as if legal standards like obstruction of justice don’t apply to him.
Our democratic legitimacy comes from the “power of the people”. When a president is duly elected by the people, that person is accountable to those people. After a president is elected by a majority of the people, it is self-evident that the people who gave them power can also take it away. But when a president wins the White House while losing the popular vote, this accountability to the people is lost.
The president took power in defiance of the people, and expects to be able to do so again. So the will of the people becomes irrelevant in the mind – and decision making – of an illegitimate president. An illegitimate president can fire the FBI director in order to impede an investigation into his own campaign, and believe there will be no consequences. If he can fire the head of the FBI, what else can he do?
“We have a president of the United States who spent four or five years disparaging and trying to illegitimize our president, and we know that was a big fake, but [he] still felt for some reason that it had to be done. ... If [racism] is being discussed and perpetrated at that level, then you have a national problem.”
The Moon indicates our emotional style. But equally important, it indicates how
we experienced our mother and our early environment and how that affected us psychologically.
Our early environment and the type and degree of nurturing we received are critical in shaping our
psychology and establishing a sense of security and trust. In this culture and in most others, the
father teaches the ways of the world and how to function in it. The mother’s role, on the other hand,
is to build the foundation of security, trust, and love necessary for healthy feelings about others and
ourselves. If this foundation is cracked or insufficient, we will not have the emotional resources to
face our task as an adult of providing for our own survival and that of others.
Our family and our early environment are selected by the soul before life and can, therefore, be
read in the chart. The Moon and its aspects, the ruler of the fourth house and its aspects, and the
planets in the fourth house and their aspects describe our early environment. They also describe the
mother and her attention to us. More accurately, they describe our experience of her and our early
environment. Although these aspects describe both the early environment and the mother, the
planets within the fourth house seem to describe the environment more than they do the mother.
And the houses of the fourth house ruler and the Moon describe the mother’s interests and where she
puts her energy. If we have been more influenced in our early years by our father or another
caretaker, the Moon and the fourth house will describe that individual.
Moon in Aries
The early environment of this Moon sign is likely to be colored by competition and conflict. The
conflict may be between the parents, the siblings, or any combination of family members. This
Moon sign also may signify animosity or anger on the part of the mother toward her family or spouse or in general. In any case, the home environment is often tense and competitive, and the
individual who grows up in it may be tense and angry as well. On a more positive note, the mother
may be strong, independent, assertive, and possibly athletic and encourages these traits in her child.
Some with this Moon sign have families who are involved in the military or athletics. In general, the
environment is more masculine and encourages the development of masculine traits even in its
Moon in Taurus
Unless the Moon is afflicted, the Taurus Moon’s early environment is likely to be peaceful and
stable and meet the child’s physical needs. The home is likely to be comfortable. The family may
even be well-off financially. The mother is often affectionate, dependable, and a good cook.
However, little attention may be given to emotional and intellectual needs. With this Moon sign,
security and material comforts often supersede emotional needs. Consequently, many with this
Moon sign repress or are unaware of their feelings. Children in such families often follow the model
presented them by finding comfort and satisfaction in material things rather than in people. Love
becomes equated with food and gifts. As a result, their relationships may be with toys, food, or
Moon in Gemini
Gemini Moons are likely to be bright and intellectually inclined, and the mother fosters this. The
mother usually plays an educative role and happily meets the child’s intellectual needs. This is a
home where education is valued and reading and schoolwork are emphasized. However, the child’s
emotional and physical needs may not be attended to as enthusiastically. Although the mother may
be an intellectual role model, she may be less helpful in modeling other skills, such as intimacy and
managing in the world. She may not be very affectionate or emotionally demonstrative. In some
cases, the mother feels more like a friend, a peer, or an aunt.
Moon in Cancer
This Moon sign is ideal for establishing a solid foundation for adulthood. Unless the Moon is
afflicted, the mother probably enjoyed being mother and homemaker. She is likely to have met the
child’s physical and emotional needs. When our physical needs are met, we feel valued and
recognized; when our emotional needs are met, we learn to value and trust our feelings. Feelings are
important because they point to our needs, and only by having our needs met can we grow
physically, emotionally, intellectually, and spiritually. So, recognition of our feelings is crucial in our early years. It is how self-worth is built and tantamount to being validated as an individual. The
Cancer Moon’s mother is someone who attends to her child’s feelings and makes herself available
physically and emotionally, which supports the development of self-esteem. On the other hand, the
ties with the mother can be too close. The mother is identified with her children and may be
possessive, smothering, and overly protective. This may make it difficult for the child to grow up
and establish an independent identity.
Moon in Leo
When it is not afflicted, the gift of this Moon sign is a firm sense of self and self-worth. Confidence
can go a long way in life. This gift of confidence instilled by the mother establishes a foundation for
the Leo Moon’s future successes. The mother’s warm, expressive nurturing style lends confidence to
her child. She is likely to have showered her Leo Moon child with attention and affection, so the
child comes to expect this from others. This may, in part, be a self-promoting act in that she views
her child as an extension of her own ego and love flows from this place of pride. Her child can do
no wrong because it is her child. She is likely to encourage her child’s creativity and self-expression
and may be creative herself. She is dramatic, forceful, and a show-stealer. The child learns to get her
attention by doing the same.
Moon in Virgo
The early nurturing that Virgo Moons receive may be dedicated but dry. The mother is likely to be
efficient, orderly, hardworking, and responsible but emotionally inexpressive. She is educated and
thorough in her approach to motherhood, studying all the latest manuals about raising children. This
care and attention is noticed by the child and makes up in many ways for the mother’s lack of
warmth and playfulness. Nevertheless, Virgo Moons may struggle with expressing their emotions,
having not had a model for this. Although they may not learn to be emotionally expressive, the
dedicated care given to them is often sufficient to build their self-esteem. They, in turn, make
dedicated and efficient mothers. On the other hand, the child’s self-esteem might be undermined if
the mother is hypercritical and fussy, as is often the case with this Moon sign. In that case, the
individual is likely to become self-critical or critical of others too.
Moon in Libra
When not afflicted, this Moon sign represents a beneficial home environment. The early home life
is likely to be harmonious and peaceful, and the mother takes pride in providing a home that is both
aesthetically pleasing and emotionally supportive. The absence of conflict and argument in the home is often apparent with Libra Moons, for they mirror this non-confrontational style in their
relationships. They are likely to have learned how to negotiate and compromise in this early
atmosphere, which can later serve them well in their own family relationships and work. The
mother might be artistically inclined, refined, and well-versed in social etiquette. Culture and the
arts might be emphasized in the home.
Moon in Scorpio
The early environment of Scorpio Moons is often difficult and intensely emotional. Abuse or
misuse of power and authority are a possibility, leaving the individual angry or repressed. The
mother or another family member may be domineering, manipulative, possessive, or controlling.
There is often an undercurrent of hostility and resentment in the home and a sense of deep, dark
secrets that no one is allowed to speak about. The secrets could include such things as violence,
sexual abuse, addiction, criminality, psychological problems, or illegitimate children. On the other
hand, the mother may have been highly attentive to the child’s emotional needs and bonded deeply
with him or her. This is fine for the infant, who needs this bonding, but as the child matures, this can
feel overbearing and possessive. Since identification by both parent and child is so strong, Scorpio
Moons often have difficulty breaking the tie with their mothers as adults. The emotional intensity of
this relationship often continues over the years. This deep psychic connection between the mother
and child may, in fact, originate in a former lifetime.
Moon in Sagittarius
This Moon sign often represents a less traditional nurturing experience. The mother’s nurturing style
is easygoing and liberal. Freedom is important to her and this attitude is conveyed to the child by
allowing him or her freedom to explore, ask questions, and investigate life. However, there may be
too little responsibility expected from the child and too few rules to allow the child to develop the
inner discipline necessary for adulthood. Or, the mother may be off having her own adventure. So,
although the mother may be a model of independent action and adventure, she may not be available
to provide the security and stability that a child needs. She might lack responsibility and behave
more like a friend than a parent. It is common for those with this Moon sign to live in a foreign
country or be influenced by foreigners when they are growing up, perhaps by traveling a lot. The
military family is an example of this. The family values freedom more than they do stability. They
often move or travel a lot.
Moon in Capricorn
With this Moon sign, something may be lacking in the early environment. The mother may be ill
and unable to care for the child, absent from the child’s life, depressed, repressed emotionally, over-
worked, or unable to cope with the duties of motherhood. Sometimes the mother dies. Harshness is
another possibility. The mother may be unloving, overbearing, strict, rigid, and restrictive, allowing
little leeway for the child to act like a child or express his or her emotions. In any case, the child
receives insufficient mothering. On the other hand, the early home life may be stable, secure,
orderly, and attentive to responsibilities, supplying the child with the structure and discipline needed
to function effectively in the world as an adult.
Moon in Aquarius
The Aquarius Moon’s early home life and mother are likely to be unique or unusual in some way.
The individual may grow up in a household with progressive ideas about child rearing and
considerably more freedom than most children. This free and tolerant atmosphere exposes the child
to ideas that other children might not encounter. However, although this is an advantage
intellectually, the child may have difficulty getting his or her need for closeness met. Aquarius,
although tolerant and altruistic, is not known for its emotional warmth. Young children, however,
do need close emotional interactions with adults to form a solid foundation of trust and a sturdy
sense of self. As a result, Aquarius Moons may learn at an early age not to expect others to meet
their emotional needs. Consequently, as adults, they may have trouble addressing the emotional
needs of others. When afflicted, this Moon sign may indicate a chaotic home, inconsistent nurturing,
divorce, or a disrupted home life, which can leave emotional scars and affect the individual’s ability
to form intimate relationships later on. Several moves or changes in the early years are common.
These can either cause insecurity or teach the individual to make the best of change.
Moon in Pisces
Pisces Moons may undergo some loss or hardship in relation to the mother. She may be
psychologically incapable of caring for her child, mentally ill, addicted to drugs or alcohol, or
neglectful. On the other hand, she may be artistic or musical. She is often religious, kind, and
selfless. Religious or spiritual activities may be carried out in the home. In either case, Pisces Moons
learn compassion, either through their own suffering or their mother’s compassionate care. When
they are cared for lovingly, they learn to care lovingly for others. If they have been neglected,
however, they may grow up with the same psychological damage as their mother and be prone to
drug abuse and mental illness.