obey pretty


NSFW prokopinsky

“Say it again.”

Despite the softness of K’s voice, it’s a command, and licking his lips, Proko breathes, “I love you.”

It’s entirely true, K knows, and he shivers, hips pressing deep and grinding hard.

Beneath him, sprawled along the leather sofa, Proko has the fingers of one hand tangled into his own hair, his head tossed to the side, frosty eyes squeezed shut, the opposite hand scrabbling at K’s hip. He looks like a goddamn porn star, and there’s nothing K wants more than to simply devour him whole.

“Look at me.”

Another command.

Proko is too far gone to even hear it.

Hips stilling, just for a moment, K leans in, pressing one hand to Proko’s chest, feeling the beating of the other boy’s heart frantic and desperate against his palm. “Look at me, baby.”

This time, Proko obeys, his pale, pretty eyes fluttering open to meet K’s. Without his sunglasses to shield him from the heat in that look, K burns.

Propping up on one elbow, Proko reaches his free hand out to grasp at K’s nape, pulling him closer and breathing against his plush lips, “I love you.”

A reply is bubbling at the back of K’s throat, and he pulls back, hips rolling hard.

Proko’s voice is a rapidly failing thing, catching in his chest in soft whimpers and wet, needy gasps, and he hitches one thigh around K’s waist, riding his cock against K’s stomach.

One hand at Proko’s hip, holding him down, K’s other hand drifts to Proko’s cock, biting back a low growl when Proko flutters around him at the contact.

The way Proko reaches down to place a hand over K’s, guiding the grip on his own cock feels more intimate than any of their words have, his eyes on K’s, dark and adoring and wanting for far more than just sex.

It’s a strangled whimper and a bitten lip and the press of Proko’s blunt, chewed down nails to scarred knuckles that has K coming hard inside him, shuddering apart with his face hidden against one of Proko’s uneven shoulders, mouthing along golden skin.

“Don’t stop.” It isn’t a command; It’s a plea. Proko is submissive through and through. “K, please, don’t stop.”

Dropping down to one elbow, keeping a tight grip around Proko’s cock, K tangles his other hand into sandy locks, pulling just the way Proko likes, and Proko’s responding moan is a thing of beauty, breathy and soft, his pretty eyes squeezing shut again.

It isn’t enough.

Curling his arms around K’s shoulders, nails digging into soft skin, Proko rolls his hips into K’s grip, tossing his head back against the pillow when K’s fingers tighten in his hair, tugging hard and possessive, pulling his head back to lay claim to his throat, a series of red-black-violet marks laid into his skin for all to see.

Mine.” K’s voice is low and rough, muffled against soft skin.

It’s as close to a proper I love you as Joseph Kavinsky is likely to get, Proko knows.

It isn’t enough.

Pressing his cheek to spiked hair, Proko says again, shivering at his own voice, “I love you, K.”

Though his rough, calloused hand doesn’t stop working Proko’s cock, K does glance up for a moment, his eyes half-lidded and dark as sin, and just the way he kisses is enough: Possessive and needy and wanting and strangely warm, strangely soft.

Soft doesn’t really suit either of them, but Proko is immensely grateful for it all the same, his hips pressing up into K’s hand as he comes down, shivering hard when K’s tongue laps at the bruised skin of his throat, half an apology.

Again, his voice sex-wrecked and thoroughly indecent, K murmurs, “Mine.”

Pressing his mouth to the corner of K’s lips, feeling warm and spent and fucking glowing, Proko agrees, “Yours.”

anonymous asked:

Can you do cute headcanons for Xeno laito, yuuma, shuu and ayato? The cuddling xeno ayato was too cute

Admin Mawile: °˖✧◝(⁰▿⁰)◜✧˖° Happily! 


-Even though it’s not genuine, he can be very pleasant to be around. Laito has no problems with spoiling you and playing along with all kinds of silly ideas, and, although he claims it’s only because you obey him, it’s pretty obvious how the attachment drives up that desire to please. 


-Considering how rough he usually is, seeing him go absolutely limp when close to you is quite the adorable experience. When he actually relaxes, Yuuma is more or less a big, cuddly teddy bear that can’t stand to be a away from you, and the more attached he is, the more often that happens. 


-He very quickly takes you to using as a human body pillow and heating pad. You’re warm and soft and it’s so much better to sleep on top of you than by himself wherever he falls. You’re more or less forced to be his nap buddy whenever he requests it… which is a lot. 


-He loves showing off to you, especially if you praise him for it. The more attention you give him, the more he’ll demand, and once he’s attached to you, your praise is almost vital. He’s more than willing to drag you off to watch him do something cool, and you’d better at least pretend to be impressed. 

anonymous asked:

Draco since there are people who think that he was a bad guy but snape was a good guy

I just literally laughed like a maniac.

one dimension reason: wild guess - astronomy tower or mostly the 6th book

my personal thoughts

the thing is, I think it’s because I don’t write much about the lightning era, I have always cringed to a lot of thing about Draco going around in this place. The Draco rant no one asked for is here.

  1. Let me tell you about pure blood families. Have you met Sirius Black, who was disowned because he did not obey? I’m pretty sure you did. Draco is the heir of a pure blood family as was Sirius. His family is threatened (I’m pretty sure he adored his mother and did whatever he did for her and for himself) if he doesn’t do this one thing the Dark Lord asked him to do. He says “no” or he fails, he dies. Simple as that. What would you have done?
  2. On that matter, he can’t bring himself to kill Dumbledore, can he? He cried in bathrooms, he is scared. He is scared to die and he is scared to kill. That is a hard choice to make whoever it is.
  3. He saves HARRY’S LIFE?? How can you forget that? He knowingly lies to Bellatrix. I always thought that was because he knew the only person that could end the war and kill Voldemort was Harry. His house was infested with Death Eaters and it was a headquarters for Voldemort. I’m sure he wanted his big marble house back to himself and his parents, he just wanted to be spoiled like he used to before this mess happened.
  4. Draco is brought up to think/know that he is superior. What if Draco was not the son of the Malfoys but the son of Andromeda and Ted? He would have been a complete different person because even though we are all our own people, our family has an affect on us whether we like it or not. Draco’s family in his case had a very big influence on him. He was taught by his father (I don’t think Cissy would force it on him, I mean not as much as Lucius would) that he was superior to others. So he was what he was taught.

I do think Draco had his massive faults through out the series don’t get me wrong. The bullying, the constant humiliations about material stuff, calling Hermione a mudblood on a daily basis etc. But I do believe that his personality is not just consistent of the shit he did, when he was 13-14 years old. He shouldn’t be judged solely on that as no one else should be (James?? Sirius??).

However I do not like that post going around on Drarry blogs saying that the film makers should have included the scene where Draco throws his wand to Harry because that wasn’t in the books. I have checked several times and that was just gonna happen in the movies. So I also think that we shouldn’t shape his redemption on things that did not happen in the books even though I do think redemption is possible for him.

So there’s that.

BBC’s The Musketeers and the Problem of Leather

Having just finished watching the first episode of BBC’s The Musketeers, I have to ask:

Are we seriously still on this leather armor thing?

Since the early 2000s we’ve seen a slew of “period” pieces in which misguided producers thought it would be a good idea to take the fashion sensibilities of The Matrix (already dangerously close to dated at the time of its own release) and apply those sensibilities to films set in the distant past.  And so you get movies like Van Helsing and King Arthur and Ironclad and Solomon Kane and dozens of other films in which pretty much all materials are replaced with leather.

Even Cardinal Richelieu is head-to-toe leather

Yes, leather has been used throughout history, often for clothing and armor.  But so has wool, so has linen, so has silk, so has oilcloth.  The way that leather is employed in the costuming of the overwhelming percentage of action movies that happen to be set in the past is not only wrong from every conceivable historical vantage point, but also from an aesthetic standpoint.  It doesn’t look cool.  It looks like what an out-of-touch middle-aged producer thinks teenagers will think looks cool.  And because of their ubiquity, these costume elements remove any chance of the film or show having a “look” of its own, a visual identity, and instead delegate it to be one of many that have interchangeable, forgettable art direction.

And worse than looking generic and anachronistic is the narrative shortcoming that they encourage.  The filmmakers, having what they think is a costume that conveys edginess and attitude (failing entirely to realize that it conveys neither because of its consistent and poorly executed overuse), allow themselves to be lax on actually developing that individual uniqueness and verisimilitude via the script.  It becomes all style and no substance and the films are subsequently immediately forgotten, if any notice is taken of them in the first place.

Each period in history has its own weird, unique, and genuinely awesome fashion elements that can be played up to great effect.  It’s such a shame to not use this, because it can tell you SO MUCH about the characters.

Let’s look at another film set within half a century of Musketeers: Shakespeare in Love

Using period-appropriate clothing, and more than that, the way that the characters choose to wear it, the filmmakers can illicit very specific responses to the characters from their audience.

Geoffrey Rush’s character is comic relief.  He’s an optimistic hard luck case, and his costume is a parody of the finery worn by Colin Firth’s character.  The great big round pants look silly, the weatherworn nature of his jerkin makes its silk finery into the 16th century equivalent of a tuxedo t-shirt.  The ballooned pants give him an almost stuffed-animal, cartoony quality.  This character can’t be taken seriously, and you shouldn’t take him seriously.

Similar is Colin Firth.  But his costume demands that it be taken seriously because it IS in good shape, and this does two things: first, it makes us think that he’s silly and vain (the care in which he obviously takes his appearance screams vanity), and second, it makes us question the social conditions in which such an outfit would be considered not only acceptable by enviable.  Our modern conceptions of what does and doesn’t make somebody look good are in play here in full force, and the filmmakers can use that to their advantage to make us think that any society that would put this git on a pedestal doesn’t have rules worth obeying, which is pretty key to accepting the conceit of the plot.

Seriously, that neck ruffle and the dangly pearl earring.  How could you NOT hate him on sight?

Now we have Will Shakespeare.  He has big pants, too, but big by their cut, not by the volume that they create.  They’re allowed to hang loosely on his legs, giving him a much slimmer appearance than the others.  He’s the only guy wearing leather, but it’s not to give him a generic warriorlike edge, it’s to evoke that cavalier blue-collar John-Travolta-in-Grease rebel look.  It’s period-appropriate, but more importantly it’s CHARACTER-appropriate.  It’s left unbuttoned, in the style of 20th century teen rebels, and his shirt is unbuttoned, too.  He strikes a slim cut to contrast the ballooned appearance of his contemporaries.  He looks like us, which is how and why we identify with him as a character so easily.

It’s the contrast that counts, not what you start with.

All of this is done within the framework of using period appropriate costumes.

Now look at these costumes from The Musketeers

Which one of these guys is the devil-may-care gambling dandy?  Which one is the religious ladies’ man?  Which one is the tortured soul alcoholic? 

They’re all wearing what is basically the exact same outfit the exact same way.  And so a great opportunity to convey huge amounts of information about the character, their personality, their social status, and their relationship to the audience is squandered.  It’s a disservice to the actors (especially in a show as well-cast as this one) to not allow them to garb themselves in the idiosyncrasies of their subject.  And all of this, while important to the nature of the narrative as a self-contained thing, completely ignores the possibly important fact that nobody in 1630 wore anything close to this sort of thing.

There’s often a fear on the part of folks making movies that we as an audience will see period clothing and think that it looks stupid, and that’s an understandable fear.  You’re putting a ton of money into these productions, and you don’t want anything, including the absurdity of some of the costume mores of history, to stand between your project and an enthusiastic audience.  But that viewpoint ignores the most basic and important principle of designing costumes based on historical clothing, and that’s that historical costuming for narrative is really all about SHAPE and HOW the characters wear the clothing.  You have take one outfit and make a dozen different shapes that tell you a dozen different things, giving volume to different parts as it suits your needs.  It can be worn a dozen different ways.  Catholic school outfits aren’t the only set of clothes that’s infinitely modular.


So enough with the leather.