The temptation to put the main character of my novel in a relationship with her female best friend is SO STRONG but I literally know that if I do that then I’ll make these two other characters gay for each other and I already have an established lesbian couple within the main six and it’s like they can’t all be gay but I really want them to be ajbdjsbsidbdjndj
also after years of wondering but never bothering to count, I’ve calculated that, if a Hobbit’s 33 years old is equivalent to our 20 years old, then it means that during the Followship of the Ring, Bilbo was around 80 in human years, Frodo 30, Sam 23, Merry 22 and Pippin 17.
i don’t know why that information would be useful (except breaking my heart, Pippin, what are you even doing there), it’s probably not even totally accurate because Hobbits in a fantasy novel and modern humans, but I can’t stop thinking about it anyway
Do you think that Romeo and Mercutio are in love ?
No, I really don’t. I’m peripherally aware that this might be ship couple, and you’re welcome to ship them, but I think there’s no textual reason to think they’re in love.
The main thing is that Romeo spends all his time pining and chasing after women, and I do think it’s quite important for his love for Juliet to be genuine and undistracted. mainI can’t find anything suggesting that Romeo has any particular feelings for him other than camaraderie and friendship (even considering the sexual banter – more on this later). So I very much doubt that there’s any attraction on his side.
I suppose the main textual support for this kind of interpretation is that Mercutio is a little too interested in Romeo’s sex-life, constantly turning Romeo’s words into sex jokes and sexualising his infatuation with Rosaline. A good example is when he says that
‘Twould anger him To raise a spirit in his mistress’ circle Of some strange nature, letting it there stand Till she had laid it and conjured it down – That were some spite. (2.1.23-27)
Which is a roundabout way of saying that mocking Romeo is nothing in comparison to ‘raising a spirit’ (having an erection) in Romeo’s mistress’ ‘circle’ (mm-hmm), and letting it ‘stand’ there until she does something to make it go down. And then the more simple one: ‘O Romeo, that she were, O, that she were / An open-arse, thou a poperin pear! (2.1.37-38): note the sexual pun on the ‘O’ (another one of those pesky female circles) and ‘pop-her-in’ on ‘poperin’ which is a particular type of pear (the implication is not so different from the aubergine emoji today).
If you wanted to construe this as a potentially sexual interest in Romeo himself, then it’s an unreciprocated interest. But then Mercutio tends to sexualise everything. It looks like he’s not so much interested in Romeo as in sex in general, and Romeo’s adoption of the lover persona makes him a prime target for sexualised ramblings.
The other thing is that Mercutio’s chief attitude towards love is deflationary – i.e. he tends to mock romantic love and uncover the sexual underpinnings of romantic love. That makes it highly unlikely that, even if he has a sexual interest in someone, he would be in love with them per say. I mean, take this line:
If thou art dun, we’ll draw thee from the mire Or, save your reverence, love, wherein thou stickest Up to the ears. (1.4.41-3)
Mercutio says Romeo is stuck up to the ears in the mud or love, but prefixes love with ‘save your reverence’ – which is something you say just before saying a naughty word (like ‘pardon my French’). He’s basically suggesting that being up to the ears in love is pretty much equivalent to being up to the ears in shit. How much more cynical can you get? Even Mercutio’s interest in sex is mocking and cynical – what he values above all is witty banter, and love dulls a man: ‘drivelling love is like a great natural that runs / Lolling up and down to hide his bauble in a hole’ (2.4.88-89). A ‘natural’ is a term for an idiot, and the picture he paints is hardly very flattering. Essentially his point seems to be that love turns a man into a fool controlled by his sex drive.
I don’t deny that there might be non-heteronormative love (as far as that term applies to early modern literature) in the play, and Mercutio could be a good candidate because of his treatment of sex. Still, it’s also worth observing his general cynicism towards love and sex. Anyway, even a little too curious interest in somebody’s sex life doesn’t necessarily entail a romantic or sexual interest, because talking about sex is part of that strange but long tradition of masculine bravado and showing off about sexual exploits that you hear even today. After all, Mercutio is very firmly embedded in the toxic masculinity of the society of Verona, as his attitude towards Romeo’s refusal to duel with Tybalt and his subsequent goading of Tybalt shows very clearly.
What's the meanest nickname you ever gave someone?
Okay, so I’m gonna tell you the nicknames plural, but first I need to tell you about the guy I used them on because if you don’t understand what he’s like, you might think he didn’t deserve every horrible thing anyone ever said to him.
There was this guy I hated at my college. The first time we met, he saw that my messenger bag had a picture of Mandy Patinkin as “Che” in Evita made to look like the iconic Che Guevara image. When he asked why it wasn’t actually Che, I said it was because I’m a huge Mandy Patinkin fan and then said “plus Mandy is way less controversial.” He literally screamed at me for implying Che Guevara had done something to be controversial and asked “are you even a communist?!”
He dressed “steampunk” but this mostly involved wearing a tweed jacket and and bowler hat everywhere. Sometimes the jacket would be lime green instead, and sometimes the hat would be a stetson or a civil war style hat. He always wore dress shoes specifically because he liked seeing people straighten up in their seats when he walked in the classroom because they made him sound like a professor approaching. Note: there’s nothing wrong with this aesthetic, but he could not pull it off.
One time, I was hanging out with some cool folks I knew and one of them happened to be dating the only person who could stand to be his friend for more than two months, and earlier in the day a security guard gave me a nice umbrella from the lost and found, with like a wooden hook handle. He asked me if he could have it, for free, and I told him no, I needed it to get home, and he ONCE AGAIN screamed at me “come on, man, you know that’s totally my style.” Later, he pulled me aside and told me the rest of the group was too polite to say it but they all hated me and wanted me to leave them alone. A few months later all the folks at the table told me they were actually all thinking that about him.
He was also horrifically racist, often advocating for ethnic cleansing in classes. He was a raging misogynist, openly expressing his hatred of women and ending every argument with “are you on your period?” He kept a photograph of his own penis on his phone so that, whenever someone questioned his manhood, he could show them. That part always confused me, because like, he was willing to sexually harass people by exposing his genitals to them without consent, but apparently didn’t bring his actual penis with him because he had to show them an easily-doctored digital photograph? I’m not saying he should have whipped out his actual dick but I’m surprised he didn’t.
He was in my World War II class and on the first day he told one girl his plan was to “only show up on days with quizzes, tests, and papers, leaving once he turns them in, and getting straight A’s anyway.” Anyone following this strategy might not have read the part of our syllabus saying our professor’s attendance policy, which was that you don’t get credit for a quiz, test, or paper if you leave right after you hand them in, and after a certain number of unexcused absences you lose the entire 20% attendance and participation grade, meaning at the end of the semester he had an average grade of 0%.
For the final paper of the class, we had to write a paper on one of the books from a list provided by the professor, and the syllabus said it had to be a book IN ADDITION TO our assigned textbook and collateral texts. Because some of our class texts were on the list of acceptable books, I accidentally wrote a paper on one of them without realizing it wasn’t allowed. About a week before the paper was due, I asked the professor just to be sure, and he made an announcement clarifying that it wasn’t allowed, and reiterated it in the remaining class sessions. Guess who we hadn’t seen since the last test and wouldn’t see again until the next paper?
Dude turned in a paper on the main class textbook. The professor gave everyone who made this mistake a week’s extension to fix it, but this dude sent the professor an angry email stating that he would not be rewriting his paper and would gladly “rather take a zero” because he felt the professor shouldn’t have said the main text was allowed (he actually explicitly said it wasn’t allowed) and that he “hadn’t learned a thing about World War II” in the class, which we all pointed out was probably because he’d never been to the class. The professor was actually so shocked by the email that he removed this dude’s name and sent it out to the class and explained to us that he doesn’t actually need the papers and he gave us extensions because he wants us to pass, so not turning it in isn’t hurting anyone but us.
Anyone who disagreed with him would, without fail, result in no less than five minutes of sulking. He would literally stay in the area so he could give you dirty looks while he was upset at you. My personal favorite was the time people were debating with the religious zealots shouting on campus and he kept shouting unfunny jokes, and the bible-shouters were using him as an example, and finally I heard a bunch of guys saying “he’s worse than the bible dudes” and “if that dude says one more thing I’m gonna kick his ass” and I finally told him to shut up, that no one thought he was funny, and that he was hurting more than he was helping. He sat down and sulked on a bench for twenty minutes while glaring at me and telling his friends I’d been mean to him for no reason.
Okay, so now that you know about this person I had the displeasure of crossing paths with so many times, here’s some of the many mean nicknames I came up with for him:
The Victorian Error
Jack the Ripper’s Amish Cousin
Beadle Bamford (I know this is two Sweeney Todd references but he really looked like Beadle Bamford)
Guy who wears your granddad’s clothes but doesn’t look incredible
Beardface the Hostile Leprechaun
That pile of sweaty hats that hangs around Chris
Bonus: After the final for that World War II class I was talking to that professor and three of my classmates (who are women) and I told them about that dude’s tendency to end arguments with “are you on your period” and my classmates spent five minutes describing and miming how much they wanted to punch this guy in the testicles. In front of our grinning World War II professor. Who was holding the final exams we just finished taking under his arm.
My back and legs hurt so much I can’t sleep 😐
But I am too tired to play acnl or something, so I just stare at the window and hope I can fall asleep soon…
(Well I guess I couldn’t sleep without the pain…my grandma is in the hospital again and this time it’s really, really bad…)
I was hoping you could shed some light on this issue: why do you think people ship yume? I ask because I have trouble understanding the red flags of an abusive relationship seems to be "dismissed" or seen as something else. (I am awake of zeki's flaws however my justification is that a) all relationships have problems b) the level of toxicity, although subjective, is not as unhealthy as Yume, in my eyes). Would love to hear your thoughts!
Warning: Anti Kaname / Anti Yume thoughts ahead. I’ve tagged with anti yume and anti kaname kuran, feel free to blacklist those tags or simply block me to avoid seeing posts like this in the future.
This is actually a fairly common phenomenon in any series, where people ship a pairing that has what they consider an attractive male and overlook any red flag behavior, something that is often assisted by the writing itself romanticizing said behavior despite it having toxic and/or abusive elements. And when the writing romanticizes the character, it becomes a lot easier for casual fans to be swept up in it and think it’s okay so long as its within a fictional setting. It’s also a lot easier for fans to whitewash a character’s behavior if it’s “in the name of the one he loves most,” because many of us unintentionally self-insert ourselves in the heroine’s shoes. What we want and desire in a relationship becomes what’s best for the heroine in her own, and that often dictates who we root for in a love triangle.
Kaname is also arguably what’s known as a “Draco in Leather Pants”which is a controversial character with flaws fandom tends to downplay because they find him attractive and cool. This tends to lead to turning another character into “Ron the Death Eater” which, in this context, is when a hero’s flaws are then emphasized to compensate, which we’ve seen happen over and over again with Zero with Kaname fans. I talked about a bit of the double standards between these two characters in this post and this post. I mean, inevitably we all kind of over-analyze the flaws of the rival character to figure out the direction the writer is going to take the love triangle, but a Draco in Leather Pants and a Ron the Death Eater occur when this criticism or lack thereof is taken to an extreme.
We also have an added layer to this issue in the Vampire Knight fandom because of biased scanlations, particularly the early Kuran Manor arc where most of these red flags began to come up. SGK was the scanlator at the time, and although she claimed to be a trio shipper, the truth was in the translations she provided for the fandom. For example, when Yuuki meets Zero at the cemetery, in SGK’s scanlation Zero threatens Yuuki for almost biting him, when in the actual text he was more understanding of her lack of control because of the fact that she’d lost a lot of blood, and this mistranslation on SGK’s part contributed a lot to the hate that Zero’s character received from some members of the fandom at the time. On the other hand, Kaname’s more concerning lines were actually watered down, so that his threatening to commit suicide if Yuuki should decide she wanted to leave him was romanticized and made to appear softer than the actual text. That’s just the main example that comes to mind, but there were other lines that were manipulated to seem more pro-Yume while others were manipulated to seem more anti-Zeki than the actual text stated. It’s not active anymore, but the old Zeki forum actually had a thread showing the differences between SGK’s translation and the official English translation here.
Because many fans didn’t understand Japanese, and because SGK was known to attack anyone who corrected her translations, and because she generally seen to be doing the fandom a huge favor for providing a service like translating, there was no way for anyone to really know any better until the official English volume was released, and by that point the damage had been done. This is why there’s been a lot of mistrust in the fandom with translations and spoilers provided by known shippers, because it’s hard for a shipper to not let their bias leak into their interpretation of the text.
Anyway, I do blame SGK for a lot of the red flags being dismissed, because she did it in her translations, her translator notes where she added her own interpretation of the scene, and her summaries. It really wasn’t until the official English was released that people started to realize what she’d been doing, whether it was her intention or not. I’m not saying that’s the only reason, because there’s lots of other things that factor into it, but it certainly made the fandom dynamics worse. I think, ironically, this is also one of Hino’s failures and disappointments with this series. @getoffthesoapbox said to me once that she thought Hino wrote this series as a way of subverting and calling out the trend of romanticizing abuse in shoujo, which would certainly explain why she had characters point out this behaviour rather than just letting readers draw their own conclusions. But she sacrificed the integrity of her story when she ended it the way she did, and now we’re left with a victim who is at times unsympathetic because Hino can’t call Kaname out for the damage he inflicted on her psychologically. She has Yuuki acting like a victim, but refuses to let the narrative acknowledge that she is, so instead she just seems insensitive and overdramatic. (And if anyone’s curious and has missed my post on the abusive nature of Yuuki’s relationship with Kaname, you can find it here.)
As for why people choose to ship Kaname and Yuuki… I guess once you ignore the red flags, maybe it’s not that hard, if you’re into the type of character Kaname was. In arc one, people loved the idea of the “forbidden” nature of Kaname and Yuuki’s love, although I never understood it because I thought the forbidden nature of Yuuki’s relationship with Zero was emphasized and developed more. They loved that Kaname was Yuuki’s hero, who rescued her as a kid for mysterious reasons. Some of the spark from that would have been lost on me when it was revealed that Kaname was the one responsible for Yuuki at that time and that he was the one who had left her alone in the snow in the first place, but to each their own. In the second arc, some people actually liked the fact that they were related, which has always been squicky to me personally, incest is not and has never been my thing. And the fact that it’s not even really taboo in their society kind of takes away from it as well, so it’s just a fact and not really an obstacle in their relationship the way you might see with other incest pairings like Jaime and Cersei in Game of Thrones.
Others liked the regal aspect of it in the second arc, that they were a King and Queen, but you never really got to see that outside of the one ball they attended together? And even that, they didn’t spend a lot of time together. They entered together and then Yuuki was on her own after the initial introductions were over with. And it’s not like you saw them lead together, the way a King and Queen would. Kaname didn’t take Yuuki’s advisement, he didn’t acknowledge her as an equal, and he abandoned his own position as king because he thought the fact that vampires worshiped purebloods like royalty was embarrassing and disappointing. Others liked the obsessive nature of Kaname’s love and saw it as romantic, that he would die for Yuuki, that he would kill for her, etc., but there’s ways to portray that kind of love without it having a negative impact on the heroine and Hino didn’t choose any of them when depicting their relationship.
I guess I’m still kind of confused like you, anon, because I understand the idea behind why people ship this pairing, the explanations they typically provide, but feel like the narrative either subverted their expectations or simply failed to develop the things they liked about it in a way that I personally would find appealing (or at least understandable). It’s kind of like the difference between the book and a movie, with Yume in this case being the movie adaptation of the type of pairing it was trying to be lol.
I hope that answered your question somewhat and provided some insight :) Obviously this is just my opinion, others may feel differently.
I’m so sorry this took longer than it should have and this is way longer than it really should be. Didn’t get the chance to edit this perfectly, but if there’s odd mistakes critique is always welcomed. thanks…
this is part 2 of a story i wrote before entitled Ripped. So someone messaged me a request to continue it and to add a lil kink in there. so here it is. a way too long part two of a story that i never intended to make a part two for…
enjoy the smut ;)
first time they met after their little incident on Skype. And by incident Jack
means that one time his best friend took his shirt off i front of him and commanded him to wank off to each other… and he couldn’t say no.
It’s been a
little over a month since then. They had kept in touch of course. A couple of
tweets here and there, an e-mail or two. But no skype. Not right now. Everytime his skype would
ring he’d jump in his seat, scared that it might be the American. Whenever it
ended up being someone else he’d breath a sigh of relief, but deep down there
was a hint of disappointment.
Of course Destiel exists in fanfiction,
fanart, in fan interpretations. It exists in a billion different ways, and it
will continue to exist. But the girl wasn’t asking whether fans are free to
interpret the relationship however they want (which would be a pointless
question anyway, because of course fans are free to do so, no matter what
anyone says). Instead, she asked why the show doesn’t officially adopt the
interpretation of one specific group of fans.
Jensen has said before that SPN “is an art
form, and people are supposed to derive different things out of art, to be inspired
differently. The show might mean something to one person but mean something
completely different to another person. People look at it from different perspectives,
which I think is phenomenal, I love that.” (JIBcon 2015)
Which makes it clear that he’s not
invalidating any fan interpretations, including Destiel. But he’s also made it clear that
he does not think “there’s anything secret going on between Dean and Cas” and
that he certainly doesn’t play it that way (JIBcon 2014).
Like Dean tells Marie in Fan Fiction, “I have my version, and you
have yours.” We all know what Jensen’s version is. Jensen – together with the
writers – is one of the main storytellers of the actual text of the show. And
he’s always been open about the fact that he’s telling the story as Dean seeing
Cas like a friend, brother and comrade in arms. So asking him “Why don’t you
start telling the story differently, why aren’t you telling it my way?” could
only lead to the answer Jensen gave.
I know that the author is dead and authorial
intent is no longer considered to be the main (if any) authority for a text. But
that doesn’t mean the audience gets to harass the author and demand that he writes
the text the way they want it to be written. Or explicitly ask him for his interpretation and then condemn him for it when it’s not what they wanted to hear. (And yes, I realize Jensen is not
the only author of Dean Winchester, but at the very least he’s the only
co-author who’s been there since the beginning.)