not an up... dike

  • Dike: Christmas is cancelled.
  • Buck: You can’t cancel a holiday.
  • Dike: Keep it up, Lieutenant, and you’ll lose New Years.
  • Buck: And what does that mean?
  • Dike: Sergeant Lipton, take New Years away from Lieutenant Compton.
  • Lipton: *looks into the camera like he’s on the office*
In America They Call Us Dykes: Notes On The Etymology And Usage Of "Dyke"

From Sinister Wisdom # 9 1979

By JR Roberts

The women-loving women
in America were called dykes
and some liked it
and some did not . ..
Judy Grahn, from “A History of Lesbianism”

In Sinister Wisdom 6, five Lesbians spoke intensely and articulately concerning the silences in our lives and how patriarchal language has been used
against us, how the fears of vulnerability and censure check our tongues,
rendering us powerless, isolated, and invisible . How the power to name is the
power to be. Lesbians have long been the object of vicious “name-calling”
designed to shut us up, make us shrivel and slink away. Dyke is one of the
words that has been negatively and violently flung at us for more than a
half century . In the Lesbian/Feminist 1970s, we broke the silence on this
tabooed word, reclaiming it for ourselves, assigning to it positive, political
values. The reclamation of dyke has also necessarily involved an historical/
etymological search for its origins. Our generation of Lesbians has been stymied, mystified, and intensely curious as to how and why we have come to
call ourselves dykes.

The term appears to have originated in the United States. Although dyke
is used in England, the terms lesbian, Sapphist, and butch have been traditional there (Partridge 1968). In the United States, dyke is a cross-cultural term found in both Anglo-American and African-American slang. In African-American slang, dyke, as it stands alone, does not seem to have been in widespread use as of 1970, but more commonly appeared in combination with bull to form bull-dyke, signifying an “aggressive female homosexual,” bull-dagger, boon-dagger, and bull-diker being variations. Bull was/is used in Black culture to indicate Lesbian (Major 1970; Berry ‘1972).(1)

The earliest known references using dyke or dike (an earlier? spelling no
longer in wide usage today) to describe “masculine” Lesbians, or Lesbians
generally, date to circa 1920s·1930s, indicating at least a half century of
usage.(2) Partridge indicates that dike denotes a “female homosexual” and that the term comes from the combination bull-dike (Partridge 1968), which
was used among Black people as early as circa 1920s-1930s (AC/DC Blues
1977). Godfrey Irwin, a compiler of tramp and underworld slang, likewise
supports this definition of bull-dike in a letter to Partridge dated September
18, 1937. During the thirties, bull-dike was also being used among prison
inmates at Sing Sing to indicate a woman who practiced oral sex on men
(Haragan 1935, as quoted by Partridge 1968). It is interesting that the homosexual bull-dike and the heterosexual bull-dike were both associated with
so-called “unnatural” and socially unapproved sexual behaviors . This is one
of many connections existing between homosexual slang, heterosexual slang,
and woman-hating slang.(3) By the 1940s we find dike or dyke listed in slang
dictionaries to indicate “masculine woman,” being synonymous with other
words signifying “Lesbian” (Berrey & Van Den Bark 1942 , 1947).

In the pre-Liberation forties, fifties , and sixties, “Lesbian slang” was often
role-related. Dyke/dike and butch were used to signify “masculine” Lesbians
who wore “men’s clothing” (Stanley , June 24 , 1977; Aldrich 1955 :54) .
“Feminine” Lesbians were femmes or fluffs (Vice Versa 1:6, November 1947).
Among Midwest Black Lesbians the words stud and fish were used respectively (Sawyer 1965). Special terms indicating varying degrees of “mannishness” were formed by adding prefixes, for example : bull-dyke, diesel dyke,
stompin ’ diesel dyke. As Lesbian linguist Julia Stanley indicates, dyke in our
own time, the Lesbian/Feminist seventies, has undergone a change in meaning from a once pejorative term to a politically charged definition. This has occurred within the liberation movements of Lesbians and gays. “To be a
dyke or a faggot,” writes Julia , “refers to one ’s political identity as a gay
activist . .. but redefining old terms that have been pejoratives for so long
is not an easy process, nor is it something that takes place overnight. Among
women, new definitions are being made among usages of old terms. As we
redefine the old pejorative labels making them our own, what we choose to
call ourselves also takes on political meaning, defining one’s political position”
(Stanley 1974:390-391).

The personal is political. The personal is also historical. On many levels
we Lesbians today have experienced historical/political transformations.
Sometimes it is possible to recall an exact time and place where transformations occurred. Although I don’t ever recall having used the word dyke in the old pejorative sense, I do remember when I first began using dyke in a liberated sense. It was late 1973; I had just “come out” via the Lesbian/
Feminist Movement. During a conversation with an older Lesbian friend who
had come out years earlier without the aid of a movement, I referred to the
two of us as dykes . Her reaction was equivalent to “Hey, wait a minute!
Watch yer mouth!”, as if I had uttered some terrible obscenity . She then
proceeded to enlighten me as to the older, negative meaning . But, I said, I
don’t see it that way at all. To me dyke is positive; it means a strong, independent Lesbian who can take care of herself. As I continued with the movement, dyke took on even stronger political implications than “activist.” It
signified woman-identified culture, identity, pride and strength - women, alone and together, who live consciously and deliberately autonomous lives ,
no longer seeking definitions or approvals according to male values. Soon
my older friend also began identifying positively with the word dyke.

Exercising this new power of self-definition, we now have a variety of
names and definitions with which to describe our many political selves. Our
Lesbian lifestyle is very diverse, and our use of language and choice of names
and definitions reflect our many cultural, racial, ethnic, class, regional, and
political backgrounds, as well as our generational perspectives. Today the
straight world continues to use dyke in the old pejorative sense. There are a
number of Lesbians who do also, and are repulsed by it. These Lesbians may
not have been exposed to the current movement, or, being concerned with
their status and survival in the straight world, they may reject the term as
harmful. There is also a segment of the Lesbian population which grew up ,
came out , and participated in the earlier Lesbian culture before 1970 who
retain the negative definition they have always known . So the definition of
dyke has changed only for some Lesbians, not for all.

There are some questions to be wondered about. If dyke has different
definitions today, is it possible that there were different definitions in earlier
times? Did all Lesbians before the 1970s generally define dyke negatively?
Was it such a distasteful term, or were there those Lesbians who felt a sense
of pride at being labeled dyke? What did it mean to them? Where did the
American tradition of the “mannish” Lesbian as dike/dyke come from?
The term dike or dyke had probably been around to some extent before
the 1930s-1940s when it first began to be documented in slang dictionaries.
Slang terms often originate among special groups, some of which are “outcasts” of mainstream society whose members feel alienated from the values of the dominant culture. Such groupings may be based on age, race, ethnic, or class background. Among such groups have been the younger generation, Blacks, hoboes, criminals, street people, artists and writers, gays and Lesbians.

The creation of new words and new definitions for old words serves a social
and political purpose: it may constitute an act of power and rebellion for
those who feel and are powerless; or it may provide a sense of validation
and identity denied by the dominant culture, thus becoming a source of
social/cultural cohesion and pride - a language of one’s own. A new language
helps to articulate a new society. Some slang terms may even be adopted
by the dominant culture, eventually becoming “Standard English,” or they
may fall into disuse or remain the linguistic property of the special group.
Slang terms may be collected and listed in published lexicons, dictionaries ,
and thesauri. Definitions may change with time. These are slow, complicated
evolutions influenced by social, economic, political, and intellectual ideas
and events in the dominant culture and among those outcast groups.

Currently, there are several theories concerning the etymology of dyke or
dike, which are threaded together by the androgynous concept of the “manly-
woman.” Several have to do with ancient Greek legends. Poet Elsa Gidlow
raises the possibility that the word dyke may have had its origins in the
Greek word dike, that is Athene , the “manly-woman ” who is the principle
of total order (Stanley , June 24, 1977). There is also the related Flexner and
Wentworth (1975) hypothesis that dike probably came from hermaphrodite,the -dite being “clipped” off and later evolving into dike, due to a regional
(Coney Island??) mispronunciation. Cordova adds support to this hypothesis
when she reports conversations with older Lesbians who indicate the folk belief that the root word of dyke was once hermaphrodite, with its origins in
the Greek myth of Hermes and Aphrodite who join to create the androgynous
creature (Cordova 1974:22). Of the -dite to dike theory, Julia Stanley comments: “For reasons of my own, I’ve never bought the -dite to dike explanation, primarily because /t/ hardly ever becomes /k/ in natural languages. I’m not saying it’s impossible, especially in an unstressed syllable, where an alveolar might be heard as a velar, just that it’s unlikely” (Stanley, June 24, 1977).

My own recent research has turned up an interesting, but never before
cited, usage of dike dating from late nineteenth and early twentieth century
America, representing another possible, and perhaps more viable, origin, based in the social customs of the people rather than in classical allusion. Both
Schele de Vere (1871) and Clapin (1902) in their compilations of Americanisms indicate dike as denoting a man in full dress, or merely the set of male
clothing itself. Schele de Vere says this is a “peculiar American cant term,
as yet unexplained.” Clapin, however, indicates that dike likely resulted from
the corruption of the Old English dight (Anglo-Saxon origin). Dight meant
to dress, clothe; to adorn, deck oneself (Johnson, 2nd ed., 1827). In listing
dike, Mathews (1951) indicates a possible connection between dight and the
English dialect dick, both of which meant “to deck or adorn.” By 1856
dight was cited by Hall as being nearly obsolete in the United States, while
diked and diked out were in use. The word dike probably came to America
with the English at the time of colonization, but once in America other
usages may have developed . Both Clapin and Schele de Vere indicate that
dike was not only used as a verb, but also as a noun to describe a person of
either sex who was all dressed up. However, dike as a person or as a set of
clothing most often referred to the male sex.

There is growing evidence that during this same time period a number of
women in both the United States and Europe were adopting male attire, both
permanently and on occasion. Katz has called some of these women “Passing
Women” (Katz 1976: Ch. 3). These women dressed, lived, voted, worked -
literally “passed”-as men in the mainstream culture. Some were of the middle
and upper classes, or were artists. Others were independent, working class
women who took on the guise of men in order to survive in a world where
women had few options. As “men,” these women, some of whom were Lesbians, married other women and raised families. They could live and enjoy
their lives with women and still participate in the greater opportunities and privileges awarded to men. This choice was often based in explicit or covert
feminism. When discovered, however, these women were often punished by
society- arrested, fined, imprisoned, exposed, and forbidden to wear male
clothing. Sometimes the contemporary media picked up on the appearances
of these “she-men,” and a number of rather sensational articles appeared.
accompanied by photographs and drawings. Some of these graphics which
are reproduced in Katz indicate women dressed in a “full set of male clothing” - from hat to suit, to cane or umbrella, watch fobs and chains, to vests
and shoes. Lesbians and other radical women - such as the feminist Mary C. Walker, Harriet Hosmer, and Edmonia Lewis, the Black/Native American sculptor-were also dressing in much the same manner in the United States and Europe, not especially for the purpose of “passing” as men, but for the real and implied emotional, political, and social freedoms inherent in the male costume.
This radical expression of emancipation (which has centuries of tradition behind it) continued well into the twentieth century and included both women of color and white women.

It seems possible that in the American culture where the term dike denoted “the full set of male clothing” or “a man in full dress,” this term could also have been applied to women who dressed in such clothing. Possibly these early radical women, dressing and passing in male clothing, both permanently and on occasion, were in fact our first dike sisters in America.

Again, Julia Stanley, who feels that the above etymology for dyke is the
most viable she has heard, comments: “Your proposed etymology doesn’t
exclude the possibility that Wentworth and Flexner were correct in their
hypothesis. That is, you may have come up with the 'missing link’ in the
semantic development of the word dyke, since it is stretching it a bit to re-
late it to the Germanic ditch” (Stanley, June 24,1977).

If my hypothesis is correct, it could further be proposed that the meaning
of dike was changing during the time period from the late nineteenth century
to circa 1930s-1940s, that dike had begun passing from a predominantly
positive male and/or neutral meaning to a derogatory female slang term.
Linguistically, it may have gone through a process called “degeneration of
meaning.” By the 1930s dike, preceded by the equally tabooed bull, had
been assigned sexual and derogatory meanings which could be applied both
to Lesbians and to heterosexual women practicing tabooed sexual behaviors.
By the 1940s-1950s-1960s the pejorative term dike/dyke was almost exclusively applied to “masculine” Lesbians, with other meanings becoming more obscure, though not yet obsolete. Linguists have found that this “process of degeneration” is a pattern often occurring to words which make such a male
to female transition.

For this same period of possible linguistic change, there is growing evidence
indicating a general altering of attitudes toward women’s relationships with each other.(4) Increasingly more negative aspects were being assigned to such relationships in the twentieth century than had been assigned them in the
nineteenth century. Medical and psychiatric science was labeling such relationships “unnatural,” “degenerate,” and “sick.” All manner of “masculine”
characteristics of both a biological and psychological nature were attached
to Lesbian women, as well as to other women who “deviated” from traditional , “god-given,” (male-defined) “ female roles.” Speculating once again -
since words and their meanings are used to reinforce the values of a given
society, it may be that the linguistic change described above was related to
the social/political change concerning definitions of Lesbianism and female
sex roles. If a concept is assigned negative values, then the language used to
describe that concept will also assume negative meaning. The language becomes a vehicle by which the value is perpetuated. Thus dike, once used to
describe a well-dressed male, becomes a vulgar and hateful epithet to be
hurled at women who rebel against confining roles and dress styles.

It is interesting to note how our “new” radical definitions echo the “old” radical traditions as signified by the term dike/dyke. Betty Birdfish, a friend
in Chicago , wrote to me about a Lesbian dance to be held there, and how
"wimmin are talking about 'dyking themselves up’ for it.” In my next letter,
I asked Betty exactly what that meant-“dyking ourselves up.” She responded :

About 'dyking ourselves up’: I think it can mean a whole lot of things.
In general, dressing up so one feels most beautiful, most proud of herself. I’ve seen that take many forms in the dyke community, at events.
For example, Allison with her hair in corn rows and beads, wearing African garb. Or Jogie with a tuxedo and panama hat. Or Beverly looking like
a gypsy with loose-flowing clothes, jewelry, scarves and wearing scented
oil. Or wimmin with tailored blazers and slacks and vests. Or even wimmin
with long-flowing ankle length skirts or dresses. Many interpretations.
Many expressions. For me 'dyking myself up’ has been getting more definite in its expression lately . For the dance I wore a pair of high-waisted
black slacks, a white shirt with tie and pin, and a black satin, double-breasted, padded-shouldered, very tailored, old jacket. I felt very strong
and beautiful in it. Before the dance, I had 'practiced’ dyking myself up
in a more radical way: I put on a different long sleeve shirt with collar
and a silk tie that has wimmin together painted on it. I put my hair up in
a bun, very close to my head so that it looked short, and put on a 'mannish’ (I wish I had another word) straw hat. I looked like old-timey photos
of Lesbians who you know had longer hair, who put it up, dyked up in
suits, waistcoats, or tuxedos . I liked the way I looked, but wasn’t ready
to go 'out’ yet in full dyke array. So I modified it for the dance . For me,
'dyking up’ means the tailored suit: elegant, comfortable and strong. I
guess I don’t see this wear as just a 'masculine ’ privilege - but clothing that
wimmin/dykes can wear to feel good in. I think I’m no longer as afraid
of feeling 'butchy’: to work on my body , to develop muscles and strength,
to be more active physically (sports , karate, etc.), to move with more
force, strength, confidence. I’m realizing how stifled I’ve been by society
which condemns this development in wimmin . And I realize how our own dyke community continues to condemn it by labelling it 'butchy’ and
therefore 'male-identified’ and therefore wrong. I don’t care anymore
(in my head-but not yet in my gut) about all those condemnations-I want to grow in ways I know I’ve always wanted to.
(Betty Birdfish, August 4, 1977)

For the Lesbian of yesteryear, getting “diked up” may have had the same
exhilarating, liberating, and fearful effects it has for contemporary Lesbians,
but even more so since few women at that time wore pants. To wear “male
clothing” before the advent of trousers for women and the so-called “unisex”
fashions of today, was indeed radical and revolutionary. It signified a rebellion against male-defined roles for women, which “women’s clothing” symbolized and perpetuated by rendering women passive, dependent, confined, and vulnerable. Yet this autonomous act of rebellion also made women vulnerable to punishment, ridicule, and ostracism.(5)

Dike/dyke need not remain a vulgar epithet of self-hate, shame, and
negativism, a term signifying “masculine.” This is the definition which a
heterosexist, dyke-hating society has formulated and which many Lesbians
past and present have unquestioningly accepted. By defining some of us as
“men” and some of us as “women,” society has sought to divide us, to create
inequality based on heterosexual roles, thereby defusing the political power
of women loving women, reducing it to a pseudo-heterosexuality which,
according to their thinking, is both artificial and inferior to the “real thing.”
Dike/dyke still remains a word hidden in history. But this new etymology
suggests the possibility of some quite radical origins. Rather than wincing
at the word dyke, we might better remember and commemorate those early
Lesbians and feminists who refused “women’s clothing” and “women’s roles.”
They may have been our first dyke sisters.


(1)Bull was a tabooed word circa early twentieth century, not to be used in mixed company, signifying “the male of the species,” Less offensive terms like “top cow” were often substituted. Bull bitch was a rural term applied to “masculine” women (Wentworth 1944; Wentworth and Flexner 1975).

(2) Earlier, at the turn of the century, dyke was one of many slang terms denoting the vulva (Farmer and Henley 1890-1904 : 338).

(3)See “Sexist Slang and the Gay Community: Are You One, Too?” by Julia Stanley and Susan W. Robbin s. Available from 1. Stanley , Department of English, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln , Nebraska 68588.

(4) See Carroll Smith Rosenberg , “Th e Female World of Love and Ritual : Relations between Women in Nineteenth Century America,” Signs I : I (Autumn 1975) : 1-19 ; AIice Echols, “The Demise of Female Intimacy in the Nineteenth Century or There wasn’t a Dyke in the Land,’” unpublished paper, n .d .. 34 pp.

(5) It should be noted that these vulnerabilities were not experienced by women only in nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. As late as 1968, Lesbians were being arrested in Dallas and Houston, Texas for wearing “men’s clothing.” See: “Special Release to the Ladder.” The Ladder 13: ½ (October/November 1968):4041; “Who Can Tell Boys from Girls.” The Ladder 13: ½ (October/November 1968) :41-42

AC/DC Blues: Gay Jazz Reissues, Vol. l. St-l06, Stash Records, Mattituck, New York,1977.

Aldrich, Ann. We Walk Alone. New York: Fawcett, 1955.

Berrey, Lester V. and Van den Bark, Melvin. American Thesaurus of Slang. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1942, 1947.

Berry, Leonard J.Prison. N.p.: Subsistence Press, 1972.

Betty Birdfish (Alwin). Letter to JR Roberts. Chicago, Illinois (August 4,1977). Collection of JR Roberts.

Clapin, Sylva. A New Dictionary of Americanisms. New York: Louis Weiss, 1902.

Cordova, Jeanne. “What’s in a Name?” Lesbian Tide (June 1974):21-22 .

Farmer, 1.S. and Henley , W.E. Slang and Its Analogues (J890-1904) . Reprinted ed. , New York: Arno Press, 1970.

Hall, Benjamin H. A Collection of College Words and Customs. 2nd ed. Cambridge: John Bartlett, 1856 (1851). Reprinted ed ., Detroit: Gale Research, 1968.

Hargan, James. “The Psychology of Prison Language.” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 30 (1935):359-365. (Note: the “more unprintable expressions” such as bull-dike were omitted from the published list, but were available upon request to those who were “especially interested in the subject.”)

Johnson , Samuel. A Dictionary of the English Language. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Longman , Rees, Orne, Brown, and Green et al., 1827.

Katz, Jonathan. Gay American History: Lesbians and Gay Men in the U.S.A . New York:Thomas Y. Crowell, 1976. Pb., Avon, 1978.

Major, Clarence. Dictionary of Afro·American Slang. New York : International Publishers,1970.

Mathews, Mitford. A Dictionary of Americanisms on Historical Principles. 2 vols. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951.

Partridge, Eric. A Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English. 7th ed. 1967; Supplement 1970. New York: MacMillan, 1970.

Partridge, Eric. A Dictionary of the Underworld. 3rd ed. London : Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd., 1968.

Schele de Vere, Maximillian. Americanisms: The English of the New World. New York: Charles Scribner and Co., 1872.

Stanley, Julia P. Letter to JR Roberts. Lincoln, Nebraska (June 24, 1977). Collection of JR Roberts.

Stanley, Julia P. “When We Say 'Out of the Closets!’” College English (November 1974): 385-39l.

Sawyer, Ethel. “Study of a Public Lesbian Community.” Masters Thesis, Washington University. St. Louis, Missouri. 1965 .

Vice Versa 1:6 (November 1947) . (Includes discussion of role-related slang; examined by Elizabeth Bouvier at the Homosexual Information Center Library, Hollywood, Calif.)

Wentworth, Harold. American Dialect Dictionary. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1944.

Wentworth, Harold and Flexner, Stuart B. Dictionary of American Slang. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1975.


Helm’s Deep was a narrow valley in the White Mountains. Within this there was a fortress known as the Hornburg. The Hornburg was built by the old Gondorians (Numenoreans) along with Isengard to defend the Fords of Isen.  Along with the keep was the Deeping Wall to defend the valley and Helm’s Dike to defend the hills outside. Inside the mountain behind the keep was the Glittering Caves, a complex escape route of tunnels. When Rohan became independent Helm’s Deep became a garrison for the Rohirrim, and served them well during a succession war with the Dunlendings. During the War the people of Rohan under Helm Hammerhand withstood a long siege against the men of Dunland, but were ultimately victorious when Gondor came to aid them. Helm Hammerhand died after blowing the great horn in the keep and leading a sortie against the Dunlendings. During the War of the Ring it was used as a last refuge for Rohan’s people as the forces of Saruman attacked. The garrison of Edoras, The Three Hunters, Rohan’s royal family, and refugees from the countryside all went to the fort, Gandalf went to seek the disbanded Rohirrim roaming the countryside and promised to return with reinforcements. Saruman attacked with an army of Uruk-Hai, Orcs, Dunlendings, and siege weaponry including rams, ladders, and “blasting fire” (possibly or similar to gunpowder). The Battle of Helm’s Deep consisted of a skirmish at Helm’s Dike, the prolonged fighting at the Deeping Wall ending with a large breach in an open culvert (courtesy of Saruman’s “devilry”), and the final battle for the keep. With the remaining Rohirrim and the Three Hunters trapped in the keep defending the women and children in the Glittering Caves, they sallied forth once more under the horn of the Hornburg to meet the enemy. They rode out into the horde as Gandalf returned with an army of Rohirrim. Saruman’s forces were routed, and the retreating orcs and Dunlendings were destroyed by the Huorns (Ents) of Fangorn. The uruk-hai and orcs were piled into a large mound while the dead Rohirrim were buried. The fortress was rebuilt with dwarven stonework, a new gate, and the Glittering Caves became a dwarf colony under Gimli. 

“’This is more to my liking,’ said the dwarf, stamping on the stones. ‘Ever my heart rises as we draw near the mountains. There is good rock here. This country has tough bones. I felt them in my feet as we came up from the dike. Give me a year and a hundred of my kin and I would make this a place that armies would break upon like water.’” - Gimli upon inspecting the fortress before the battle. The Two Towers, Helm’s Deep.

anonymous asked:

Wow I didn't think it was possible but you once again "diked"-up another premade sim. Keep your gay tumblr rainbow dust away from my babs 🏳️‍🌈✨

who’s the other one i gotta get my “dike” premade squad together 


Today in Middle-Earth: Battle of the Hornburg begins (March 3rd, 3019 T.A.)

  It was now past midnight. The sky was utterly dark, and the stillness of the heavy air foreboded storm. Suddenly the clouds were seared by a blinding flash. Branched lightning smote down upon the eastward hills. For a staring moment the watchers on the walls saw all the space between them and the Dike lit with white light: it was boiling and crawling with black shapes, some squat and broad, some tall and grim, with high helms and sable shields. Hundreds and hundreds more were pouring over the Dike and through the breach. The dark tide flowed up to the walls from cliff to cliff. Thunder rolled in the valley. Rain came lashing down. 

anonymous asked:

easy company & their biggest turn off in people? you know like: using "literally" when they mean "figuratively", too touchy feely/no respect for personal space, interrupting someone else talking..

  • dick winters - when you go against his direct orders.
  • lewis nixon - when you drink his VAT69 w/o asking him first and/or when you pet his dog before asking his permission.
  • ron speirs - weak-willed people.
  • carwood lipton - norman dike.
  • buck compton - not being able to be best friend with everyone.
  • frank perconte - spaghetti cooked in ketchup.
  • johnny martin - everything and every one annoys him.
  • david webster - false facts about sharks.
  • joseph liebgott - when someone says bad things about being Jewish.
  • babe heffron - being blindly robbed by his supposedly best friends, buck how could you do this???
  • george luz - grumpy people who doesn’t know how to have fun and also norman dike.
  • joe toye - last minute packing that ends up w/ him carrying all of the stuff that weighs as much as he is.
  • doc roe - someone taking his scissors and hoarding all the morphine.
  • don malarkey - sobel calling him “bullshit” bc it makes him wanna FITE.
  • bill guarnere - dick giving him direct orders when he’s pissed off about something.
  • shifty powers - someone saying he’s a good shooter bc he’s not okay? now dad, he’s a sharp shooter.
  • pat christenson - when someone asks him to draw something when he’s not in the mood.
  • skinny sisk - having to be chaperone for lieb and web oh my god.
SHIVER (smut)

Request* can you do one where the reader (who has bleach blond hair and is curvy and a bit of a tomboy) and Daryl hate each other to the point of physical altercations and ricks fed up so he sends them on a run. They get caught in a rain storm and have to take shelter. Smut please**

I liked this one *warning cruel name calling,smut,violence ,swearing*

“Shut up you stupid dike” Daryl said as he pushed you back.
“Stop calling me that you inbred cousin fucker” you spat back shoving him twice as hard .  The two of you were at it again ,fighting. Just like the majority of your fights Neither of you were sure how it started,because to it never ended well if it wasn’t broken up. Standing by the cars at the prison you two were screaming and shoving each other. Daryl went to swing at you and you ducked tackling him to the ground. Rick,tdog and Glen op Ned the gate and ran down the drive way pulling you off of him and pulling Daryl up “enough..stop it. Right now” Rick snapped standing between you. “He fuckin started it ”
“Fuck you dumb dike” he said spitting out a little blood from his busted lip where you punched him. “Don’t fucking call me that,’s your face?” You taunted with a smirk. “Fuck you” he tried charging you again but was stopped by the guys.
“That’s and everyone else are tired of two are going on a run and you’re going to stay out there until you either get along or one of you are dead,got it. Tdog,Glen go pack them essentials and get fuel for a car”
You both groaned. “Fuck this Rick I’m not going out there with some dike loser”
“I’m not a fuckin dike” you snapped. “Coulda fooled me” he retorted.
“Shut it Daryl. Fine if you don’t wanna go then leave and problem solved.”
Rick was serious, he wasn’t one to let people be in harms way but the two of you were constantly fighting like two teenage brothers.

Leaning against a vehicle you waited and Daryl paced back and fourth in anger.
Sometime later you were both in a beaten down truck driving to god knows where.
“This is fuckin stupid” he grunted.
“You’re tellin me”
“I wasn’t fukin talking to you butch”
“I’m not a lesbian and even if I was who the fuck cares atleast my parents weren’t related” you snapped back.
“I’ll knock your fuckin teeth down your throat” he threatened slamming on the brakes in the middle of a main road near a neighborhood. He got out of the car and went around jerking you out slamming you against the rusty truck. Kneeing him in his balls you snatched your backpack and took off running.
Once he composed himself he grabbed his crossbow and bag chasing after you.
You were hiding in a backyard when three walkers staggered back there two average build and one morbidly obese. You quickly took out the  smaller walkers but the large one came down on top of you making you scream. Daryls followed the sound and saw you under it. “Fucking help me asshole”
“Why,can’t. Do it yourself” he snapped. You began to panic you couldn’t believe that he would go this far and let you die. You began to pant and hyperventilate trying to wedge your knife out from under him. “Dear lord” he grunted and shot the walker making it go limp on your body the sounds of rolling thunder made you even more scared. With all your might you pushed the walker off. Rolling over to your stomach trying to collect yourself. Tears filled your eyes as you stood up giving Daryl a look of fear.
He realized that you were crying “why are you crying?”
You shook your head lightly “it’s over,you win. I’m done.”
“Y/n I wouldn’t have let the walker get you I was just-”. “You were just what? Playing? I know we don’t like each other,but seriously I would never ever let that happen to you…you-you’re exactly the kind of man I thought you were” Then the rain came pouring down making the cold air colder. Drenching you both. You didn’t care. You never wanted to cross paths with Daryl ever again. “Y/n” he said softly .Grabbing your wet bag off the ground you walked passed him as if he wasn’t there. Checking out the house that was near you. Daryl followed you into the house. It had a bed on the floor in the living room with blankets and there was a few eatable items and 6 water bottles. You were both cold and didn’t have any clothes. Searching in the bedroom you slipped into a dry pale pink short jersey knit robe. it was the only thing that really fit you everything else was too small. Daryl found some clothes in an office,sweatpants and a pullover.

He was sitting in the kitchen staring at his hands,feeling low. Guilty. Like an asshole.
He didn’t mean for this to get this far. He heard your footsteps and looked into the living room seeing you in your robe.His eyes widen and his heart went to his throat. You looked beautiful. Daryl would rather be ripped apart by walkers than ever admit this, he’s always had a crush on you. He was mean to you because he was trying to stop his feelings for you. Also you could see straight through his tough guy act and call him on his bullshit. Which he hated.
Watching you crawl onto the mattress and wrap your arms around yourself he swallowed hard and tried to relax. You were freezing and shivering.
Daryl walked into the living room sitting on the couch adjacent from the mattress. He starred at his hands for a moment before softly speaking. “ sorry. Bout earlier”
You shot Daryl a glance  and then shook your head “it’s whatever” you mumbled with chattering teeth.
“Why are you shaking?” He asked. “I’m from Florida…originally. Just below Alabama on the it was never really cold there you could wear shorts in October..and when it was cold ..I never went outside. ” you felt awkward and stupid for telling Daryl useless information,so you slid under the blankets still shivering and trying to warm up.

Daryl tilted his head and chewed his fingernails as he watched you tilt your head back looking out the window at the violent storm. Daryls was admiring your next and the slight exposer of your chest. He was feeling bold and he wanted to feel you against him.
“Oh my god it’s so cold” you shivered.
Daryl stood up and walked over to you, he crawled under the blankets. He wrapped his strong arms around you “what are you doing ” you whispered. “It’s cold,this will help”
You nodded and nuzzled yourself again this chest immediately feeling warmth.

Feeling your body against his Daryl became erect, he was hoping you wouldn’t move to much and accidentally brush against it. The storm was intense as you relaxed into Daryl a sharp roar of thunder and lightening came shooting you up. You sat on your knees with with your head down panting Daryl sat up too. “Hey y/n are you alright?..hey look at me?” He grabbed your face and lifted it up . “I’m fine..I’m..I’m okay” you licked your lips and looked at Daryl. He grabbed your face and kissed you roughly pulling you on top of him, the two of you barely taking a chance to breath.

Daryl grunted out “I’ve wanted this for so long ”
You giggled at his remark and pulled his shirt off. “Really?”
Daryl started to tug at his pants ,you slightly lifted up so he could pull them down and kick them off. Daryls thick throbbing member was flush against your folds “mmhmm"  he moaned. He slipped his hand down grabbing his member,you lifted up again and slowly slid down own shaft. Your mouth fell open and your eyes connected. “Fuck yer so tight..go slow”
Slowly sliding the rest of the way down you adjusted to his size. You began rocking your hips as Daryl moved against you causing friction. You whined out in a pleasurable pain. Daryl laid back against the wall and you placed your hands behind him for support.
Picking up the pace you began to bounce and rock ,his cock was hitting you just right. “Right..there..oh god. Daryl,fuck .oh fuck I’m gonna cum” you panted out throwing your head back. Daryl encouraged you “do it y/n ,cum on my cock”
With that you felt yourself release and your fluids drowning his member. You let out a tired laugh and Daryl leaned forward and laid you on the bed, you giggled at his assertiveness and he threw your leg over his shoulder and began pumping violently making you moan and whimper in ecstasy. “Fuck..yeah.fuck” he grunted pulling out and spilling his seed into his hand. You were both panting and in shock of what just ensued. Daryl cleaned himself up a bit as your sore body crawled back to where you laid before. Daryl felt confident and slipped back under the blankets and held you close as the storm rolled on you drifted into a deep peaceful sleep.


Gimli stood leaning against the breastwork upon the wall. Legolas sat above on the parapet, fingering his bow, and peering out into the gloom.
“This is more to my liking,” said the dwarf, stamping on the stones. “Ever my heart rises as we draw near the mountains. There is good rock here. This country has tough bones. I felt them in my feet as we came up from the dike. Give me a year and a hundred of my kin and I would make this a place that armies would break upon like water.”
“I do not doubt it,” said Legolas, “But you are a dwarf, and dwarves are strange folk. I do not like this place, and I shall like it no more by the light of day. But you comfort me, Gimli, and I am glad to have you standing nigh with your stout legs and your hard axe. I wish there were more of your kin among us. But even more would I give for a hundred good archers of Mirkwood. We shall need them. The Rohirrim have good bowmen after their fashion, but there are too few here, too few.”

fun fact: before rereading lotr i guessed pairing i will ship that i didn’t ship 11years ago. i guessed it right.

Today in Middle-Earth: Battle of the Hornburg begins (March 3rd, 3019 T.A.)

  It was now past midnight. The sky was utterly dark, and the stillness of the heavy air foreboded storm. Suddenly the clouds were seared by a blinding flash. Branched lightning smote down upon the eastward hills. For a staring moment the watchers on the walls saw all the space between them and the Dike lit with white light: it was boiling and crawling with black shapes, some squat and broad, some tall and grim, with high helms and sable shields. Hundreds and hundreds more were pouring over the Dike and through the breach. The dark tide flowed up to the walls from cliff to cliff. Thunder rolled in the valley. Rain came lashing down. 

Clarification about the Swan Queen Movement Documentary

[Morning After Edit: I wrote this last night as I was overly emotional after some the things I’ve seen and been asked. As I reread it this morning, some editing needed to be done with a calmer head]

I’ve read a few of the posts that bnaz has posted and that I’ve been questioned about directly. So I thought, rather than just post back, I’m going to make this a GENERAL CLARIFICATION STATEMENT (bnaz my apologies for not coming to you first, but I felt the need to get this off my chest). With a bit of a rant on the side. You all may love this response,. You may hate this response. Or you may not even BELIEVE this response. I don’t really care as long as you READ IT WITH AN OPEN MIND rather than speculate, assume, or anything else that isn’t true.

The Swan Queen Movement: A Fandom’s Fight For Change is a documentary about equality, justice, and inclusiveness. We chose the title/name because it is where the idea sparked from. The SQM was created by one of the nicest people I know. She saw a problem and sought to do something about it. That’s where the “kill’em with kindness” came from. She sought out to try and create a group that consisted of POSITIVE Swan Queen shippers. She wanted to create a place where positive people could go to express themselves in a safe area that happened to be geared toward SQ shippers. But as things go on social media, backlash is bound to happen. Which is where that portion of the explanation comes from. The nastiness that I, Bia and even Tammy have seen since the announcement of the campaign has been unreal.

This documentary IS NOT ABOUT REPRESENTATION OF JUST SWAN QUEEN ON THE SHOW. Hell, I didn’t even know there was such a ship as RedSnow. I knew of SleepingWarrior and felt that storyline was yet another wasted opportunity and a bit of “queer-bating” tactic to a degree. But this documentary IS ABOUT ALL OF THESE TYPES OF SHIPS AS WELL. It is about representation OF A WIDE GROUP OF PEOPLE. It is also about several different issues WE ALL FACE; not just SQ shippers. It’s about activism in a digital age. It’s about taking that activism from behind a screen and on into actually acting. It’s about understanding things from a different point of view.

I have NEVER bullied anyone for not shipping or liking SQ, and neither has my fellow team members. The “Penis Parade” banner is not one I chose or use for my own beliefs or in my fandom experiences. I have never been one to call ANYONE homophobic as I feel the word is improper. NO ONE is “afraid of” homosexuals or “alternative” lifestyles. And it is NEVER a word I use in my everyday vocabulary. And to say I am any kind of “queer basher” is beyond ridiculous. Why would I stand in a glass house and throw stones? Who you ship is YOUR business and not my own. You could ship Regina’s Cleavage with Hook’s Hairy Chest and I wouldn’t care. Ship and let ship. That’s what I believe.

The concepts in my head when I went to bnaz with the idea for the documentary were justice, fairness, inclusiveness and creativity. I saw what the SQM was doing and the backlash so many of the members received and it gave me an idea. I wanted to step from behind my screen and actually DO SOMETHING about the many things I saw going on in shows like OUAT that just seemed not right. The SQM had taken the negativity we received and tried to do something more positive and that could drown out the “bad apples” of the SQ Fandom. Which gave me another idea; why not take all of the concepts I felt needed exploring and combine them with the group that is trying to change things already.

I am a biracial, queer woman of colour with Cyclothymia, speak 3 languages, university educated professional with a desire to fight the injustices and wrongs I see in the media of today. Having grown up in the UK, I never felt I had a place to “fit” and I hardly ever could relate to the stories I saw on telly as they never reflected my life or the lives of any of those close to me. But with the SQM, I found a place to “fit”. With a group of caring, understanding, open-minded people that had the same passion I have to DO rather than just bitch and moan from the ANONYMOUS ETHER of the Internet. I found family in these people. Even if I have never met any of them face-to-face, they made me feel comfortable where I could be open and free to express myself. From that, I wanted to take my idea to the people that could really relate to what I was going through. People that saw some of the same disparaging content, concepts, and stereotypes that I saw.

This documentary is NOT ABOUT GETTING THE WRITERS TO CHANGE WHAT THEY WRITE WHEN IT COMES TO THE SWAN QUEEN STORY. What the writers/creators of the show do with their characters is their business. How they want the story to go, is their business. I don’t want them to do anything but tell a good story that is believable and entertaining. I know that it may be 99.99999% reality that SQ will never happen and I am quite fine with that. It’s nothing new. And if I want to see queer story lines, I can look to others show for that.

But when you can count the number of positively portrayed people of colour on one hand on OUAT, that affects me. When the response to that last thought is always “Well, Lana Parrilla is half-Boriqua”, it makes me give the side-eye to the fact that “one is enough” in a world full of ethnic people. When the media continually portrays mental illness as EVIL, it affects me. When I see and know that my little queer cousin or millions of other queer children will never have a fairytale that ends “Happily Ever After” featuring a strong queer couple, as I never did, it affects me. When people send myself and others such hateful things like “go kill yourself you delusion faggot” or “your ship is a crack!ship, get over it already”, or even “oh shut up you fucking dike. Stop trying to shove your homo shit down our throats”, it affects me. When an entire fandom decides that one ship is LESSER THAN just because it is focused on the two main lead women, it affects me. I am still a human being with feelings. And if it affects me, I know it has to affect others out there as well.

I just wish I could get more people to understand that this documentary is about inclusion. NOT taking anything away from any other ships or shows. It has SQ at the center because these are the people I thought would be open and passionate about the things that are so greatly lacking on OUAT as well as many other shows/movies.

For example, why has there only been so few people of colour to win Emmy’s or Oscars? Why is it that there is only ONE (1) television show that has a woman of colour as the lead and it’s not an “ethnic centric” program? Why do people automatically assume characters are straight simply because you never saw them with a member of the same sex, or it was never mentioned? Why is bullying so strong and ungoverned in online and offline fandoms? (Trust me on this one, I am an officially SF issued card-carrying current member of the Star Trek fandom soon to have my uniform and all). Why do people think it’s okay to sit behind a computer screen and wish death or harm on other people because they ship two women, or they don’t “ship what they ship”? Do they do it because they can be anonymous and not have to own up to the things they say?

If with this documentary we can help Little Jane feel better about the same sex crush she has been taught was “sinful or wrong”, it is worth it. Or if with this documentary Little Johnny can believe that there are people out there working to change the portrayals of bisexuals, mental illness, gender identity, it is worth it. If with this documentary we can get more people to understand what heteronormativity is and how it infects entertainment media, it is worth it. We want to spark discussion, open minds and ignite change. We want to create a torch that can be passed to the younger queer people that they can pick up and continue to engage the concepts we are fighting against. We just want to leave our footprint in the sands of time whilst actively doing something positive for everyone.

Everyone just ASSUMES that since SQ in the title, we are load of non-human bullies looking to “FORCE” the writers/creators to do something they don’t want to. It bothers me that there are actually SQ shippers out there that look down on this idea without understanding what it is or the people behind it.

This is more than a ship. It is more than a fandom. It is a desire to ACT against such negative ideals and stereotypes. It is bigger than me and the the rest of the documentary team. We are reaching into the past to take the touch from those that have fought/died for us and carry it with integrity, openness and inclusiveness into today. And then hand it off to the young people of the future so, if it’s needed, they have more of a path to follow and less of a war to fight in.

Ask before you assume. Talk with rather than about. If you don’t understand, the only dumb question is an unasked one.

Nelson Mandela (RIP) once said, “No one is born hating another person because of the colour of his skin, his background, or his religion. People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can be taught to love, for love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite.”

Let’s teach rather than tear apart.. Be a part of something rather than sit back and let others stand at the front lines of this battle for change.