structure love


       “ Oh Skull, you idiot, get it together!

Pulled out all my energy to get this out here now too! Just like the Noctis!Joker ones, I did two versions of Prompto as Skull as well! My poll on twitter states otherwise, that this won’t be the only variation of Prompto you’ll see LOL For now enjoy this one until I come back with more!
Go my little sunshine—let the captain be free! 


170504 Kyoong Party - 1
  • Baekhyun: I will keep bringing you happiness. Thank you.
  • Fans: I love you
  • Baekhyun: You love me? Tell me that again.
  • Fans: I love you.
  • Baekhyun: Me too.

anonymous asked:

What is the difference between the INTJ and the INTP? I've taken several of the personality tests, and have always gotten INTJ, but then I took a test on whether I was an INTJ or INTP, and got INTP.


Some Key Differences:

  • INTJs may not be neat freaks, but they have a system for finding/sorting everything. INTPs just…don’t.
  • INTJs are more conventional and “purposeful” than INTPs–INTPs do things to just do them, INTJs generally have distinct reasons
  • INTJs tend to be less creative than INTPs
  • INTJs tend to be more satisfied with work than INTPs
  • INTJs are found in far more leadership roles than INTPs
  • Twice as many INTJs are atheistic than INTPs. INTPs are more likely to be agnostic rather than atheistic (Myers, McCaulley, Quenk & Hammer, 1998)
  • INTJs sound more confident in their tone of voice than INTPs. INTJs’ statements are also straightforward and certain, whereas INTPs usually sound speculative and questioning/doubtful in their sentences
  • INTJs are less playful than INTPs 
  • INTJs are “on-time” people, while INTPs are not
  • INTJs are more arrogant and confrontational, INTPs are more laidback and open minded
  • INTJs appreciate clear structure, INTPs are the least loving of structure of all the types 
  • INTJs do not typically find writing to be a fun pastime, INTPs do 
  • INTJs tend to enjoy specific types of exercise, INTPs are ambivalent towards nearly all exercise
  • INTJs like achievement a lot, INTPs like autonomy a lot 
  • Both aren’t typically dressed very fashionably, but INTJs do tend to be more neat with their dress than INTPs
    • Example: INTP I know wears the same shirt several times a week (Mario shirt), often with a clashing jacket. INTJ I know wears a conventional sweatshirt and jeans every day. Every. Single. Day. 
  • INTJs are usually better debaters–they’re very confident and passionate about their arguments, while INTPs are better at brainstorming and theorizing about arguments 
  • INTJs are more likely to be called uptight and mean, INTPs are more likely to be called lazy and sarcastic 
  • INTJs are more likely to be called “put-together” and driven, INTPs are more likely to be called “oblivious but somehow super smart” (I’ve heard that several times lol) and fun to be around
  • INTJs aren’t as interested in relationships as INTPs most times–INTPs idealize romance like a child would. INTJs try to not be involved with too many people, but when they do, they’re incredibly serious about it

Remember, these are generalizations based on my own experience! (and the book The Secret Life of INTJs by Anna Moss ;))

The later Artemis Fowl books work for me because the worldbuilding falls apart at the same time that the genre subtly shifts, so that while the first books are heist novels the last one is a fairy tale. They start off being all about rules and how to exploit them and end up being all about fighting back even when you don’t know what the rules are.

The Audience (for Cas) 12.12 Meta

12.12 seriously made me consider making a video essay instead of a written meta because holy fish, the amount of perspective stuff in this episode is nuts. Inconsistency in subjectivity is very normal in media but this episode goes out of its way to establish it, then defies it, then establishes it again. 

This episode uses a lot of subjective and objective camera tricks but it can be occasionally difficult to pinpoint the exact rules of what’s through their subjective PoV and what’s the objective camera bias needing to tell the audience things for reasons.

Give me a break here, SPN. 

I’m not really gonna talk about the Reservoir Dogs references here. Other people have already done that very well. I’ll be linking to more of other people’s meta throughout, mostly hidden in words. Click on the underlined bits in the post. I’m kind of late to the party on this one. If you wrote something pertaining to what I have here and it’s not linked somewhere, I apologize. I unfortunately don’t see everything or I can’t find it. feel free to add it or message me and I’ll add it directly:

I hope I can explain this in text because it’s not the best medium for what I’ll be saying here. Don’t get me wrong, 12.12 is awesome but because of the nature of its storytelling, it’s weird on a structural front. It’s basically a microcosm of episodes showing the relationship between Cas and his established others.

Below is sort of a break down but I’m going to focus on certain aspects and scenes longer than others.

Keep reading

Can we talk about how fantastic it is that this starts with taking “I feel love for both Alex and Kim” as a valid premise? That nowhere does it say, “Ha lol no I don’t really, I must be mistaken?” It acknowledges that some people do choose to adhere to monogamy in spite of their experience of feeling love for more than one person, and it references a common rationalization for such a choice (i.e., one of these loves is “real love” and the other is–who the hell knows, “just love?”), but it very much depicts it as a choice to forego a relationship with one person you love over preserving a monogamous relationship with another person you love. It doesn’t depict it as, “Ha lol no being in love with more than one person isn’t a thing I’m just infatuated with Kim and clearly Alex is the only one I could possibly love.”

I spent years actively experiencing feelings of connection and love with more than one person at a time, but all I was told by standard relationship narratives was that that wasn’t a thing. And if I found myself thinking that it was a thing–if I thought at any point that I was really actively in love with more than one person–then I must be mistaken about one of them, or both of them, or all of them, or maybe the relationship I’m in isn’t the right fit, or maybe there’s just work we need to do instead of getting sidetracked by this “grass is greener” stuff, or maybe this other person is meddling and manipulative and trying to ruin my relationship, or maybe I’m just a selfish jerk who can’t stop wanting to have her cake and eat it too and everyone I think I love would be better off with other people who really do love them and aren’t selfish jerks and can do this better. It took so, so long for me to look at my experience of loving more than one person and just say, “You know what this is about? It’s about the fact that I love more than one person. That is a thing.”

i’ve been trying to put words to why ms’s response to the issue of ronan and adam’s sexualities going unlabeled feels so unsatisfactory beyond my joke posts about blue and gansey not being straight (tho those are still true and good). i guess what it comes down to is that both couples getting the exact same slow burn treatment and no one stating their sexuality is an idealistic portrait of some fantasy egalitarian world without heteronormativity? which is nice in its way, and on odd days i appreciate.

but on even days, like today, i think about heteronormativity. i think about bi erasure and how no one in fiction ever says the word bisexual. i think about how adam parrish might not be super well-versed in lgbtq+ terminology but how he loves structure and rules and categories (even if ur only learning them to break and bend them) and how nice he would probably feel to have a label that felt Right. 

i think about how ronan lynch may not feel so comfortable with labels, even once he accepts that he loves men. there are some labels he might never use for himself because they are so drenched in shame and secrecy. but he still makes no secret of the fact that he’s “not a fan of lamps,” and even if he doesn’t ever use a label he will never again shrink back from making that very, very clear in no uncertain terms.

and in this heteronormative world, if you don’t come out and say it, people will assume it’s because it’s not true and think there’s wiggle room where there isn’t. or they’ll get the sense that there’s shame where there isn’t any because only shameful things get left unspoken. if you don;t say what you are, someone else will, and their opinions will be colored by the dominant worldview.

srry this is long and probably incoherent, it’s 6:30 am and i’m typing with one eye open but like…. i’m here and i’m queer and i got shit to say even as i’m falling asleep.