#invalidate them!

[kitsune-saiguu]

☕ 5, 6, 7~

Have you ever been in love? If so, what was it like?

"Yes but i won't tell you who it was!! fufufu and it was just as normal as anything else."

How do you deal with betrayal or conflict in your relationships?

"Confrontation! They should get what they deserve...It really hurt me when Urakusai betrayed not only me but all of Inazuma and the Hakushin."

What are you willing to sacrifice to achieve your goals?

"Depends on what the goals are...I'd sacrifice anything to protect my friends and Inazuma."

[mofsblog]

"This is some gay shit" Good. Silly. Fair enough. Doesn't inherently invalidate other interpretations of the relationship. Honestly yeah, it is kind of gay regardless of their canonical relationship status

"There's literally no platonic explanation for th-" WRONG!! KILLING YOU WITH AMATANORMATIVITY KILLING LOBSTERS 🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞🦞

[gremlin-pattie]

“there’s no platonic explanation for shawn and gus’s relationship” maybe to you. i understand them though

[sheikfangirl]

"Shhh Link... I'm right here. We're home. It's okay... "

♥ Hurt & Comfort time ♥

Post-Totk Link is still plagued with nightmares of the Light Dragon, Gloom Hands, Phantom Ganon...Puppet Zelda...loneliness.

He wakes up at night screaming, hyperventilating, sobbing. But Zelda is there and she comforts him with love, kindness and patience! Like Link did for her Post-Botw.

It's gonna take time...but Link is gonna be fine ♥ Zelda too.

They are all gonna be fine and live happily ever after!!!

And Hateno domestic fluff resumes.

Gotta love when Zelda comforts her knight

[inkyrainstorms]

based on the Billstill au by @jellynut! You guys should totally go check it out, it's so cool and angsty and somehow my monkey brain took that idea and made it Stan tormenting Bill forevermore. (This has spiraled rapidly not its own au of an au based on an earlier idea I had once) (might draw more of this au and that one who knows)

This has been going on for at least 15 hours straight, and Stan is having the time of his goddamn life watching Bill suffer

And then Bill gave Stan horrendous night terrors

And then Stan bought a giant bag of nachos and ground them up into crumbs and dumped them in the sea or some shit

Transcript and full image under cut

Bill, floating intangibly: You're a loser, Mac

Stan, looking up from his magazine: Yeah? And you're an interdimensional demon dumb enough to die in my head. You're the biggest idiot I know, and I know me

[ganondoodle]

🤝being sick of that damn goat man

Though mine are probably more basic because I just think they were cowards and should have made his design more monstery, WHERE'S THE TAIL AND PAWS HUH.

see at first i even liked his design (just that though, in the tutorial i called him being a twist villain bc i had way too much faith into the writing lmao), but man going back through my stream recordings i was trying to be so nice to the game until the very end, i really didnt want to accept how much i disliked evrything lol, at least now i feel free to just yell about how much i hate it

anywaym they dIDNT EVEN GIVE HIM GOAT EYES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! COWARDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GOAT EYES! TWO THUMBS! LIGHT FERN HAIR APPENDAGE! HOOVES! TAIL! FULLY FURRED! (he looks too smooth in canon, fuckimg smooth yoda ass rauru)

[kithmet]

see, i really love when buddie fight. i love it because within fighting (and especially because their dynamic relies heavily on the unspoken) there's this element of, "oh, finally they're communicating, even if it's fighting! they're saying these things out loud! progression is being made!" and it's not pretty, but life isn't always pretty. i love the messiness of a satisfying fight, where both are dealing with their own shit and misstepping how they're handling a situation, or throwing words around carelessly, or projecting onto each other. people who love each other as much as they do don't go into an argument that intense without knowing that in the end, things will be okay again. buck even said this in s4: "it's easy to lash out on the person that you know is always going to forgive you." i think subconsciously they know that sure, they might fight, but they will always be okay.

that being said. yeah, i love when they fight, but i do often hate how people talk about it. there's always this strange element of viewers trying to choose sides, which completely misses the point the show is trying to make whenever it depicts raw emotions and how those complicated feelings can intersect in relationships to spark conflict, conflict where nuance does exist. and this happens time and time again on the show and the aftermath—people are always so forgiving towards one of them, and less forgiving towards the other. yes, when times are tough, buck gets self-centred and unable to see past his own hurt, and yes, eddie hates seeing that gets mean about it. we've seen this during the lawsuit! we've seen it before eddie left for texas! and we're seeing it again now after bobby died. this is a consistent character trait for both of them, it's a thread that has remained true in their relationship and will probably continue to remain true because it's somewhere where they don't mesh well. it's juicy! but i don't think one of them is more or less right for feeling the way they do. the point is that they feel what they feel, and they get past it always despite clashing. and ultimately the whole concept of "choosing sides" when two characters clash is rooted in projection or relatability (or protection) of one character, which honestly lacks empathy and understanding of the fight itself, both character's motivations, and their relationship dynamics. the writers don't want you to choose sides. they want you to understand that sometimes situations are complicated and as humans, we butt heads but still love each other no matter what. it's really not a hard concept to grasp. and yet... we as a fandom go in circles about this topic every single time they fight.

[thefallenangel2008]

Look man, I love Stan as much as the next person, but I HATE when people invalidate Ford's trauma and abuse to go say about how Stan had it "worse". THEY WERE BOTH ABUSED BY FILBRICK AND THE ADULTS AROUND THEM BUT IN DIFFERENT WAYS. THEY BOTH WENT THROUGH SOME SERIOUS SHIT BC OF THEIR MISTAKES. THEY'VE BOTH PAYED THE PRICE. THEY'VE BOTH BEEN THROUGH HELL AND BACK AND NOW THEY'RE THRIVING, TOGETHER. Bro I have so much stuff to say about this but I genuinely don't have the motivation rn. Either way, the main point of the post is: STOP INVALIDATING FORD'S TRAUMA. HE DIDN'T HAVE IT EASIER FROM STAN, NOR VICE VERSA. THEY'RE TWO TRAUMATIZED OLD MEN WITH THEIR FLAWS AND THEIR EVERYTHING AND THEY DESERVE THE TIME AND SPACE TO WORK ON THEMSELVES.

[alarrylarrie]

Sending love to all my fellow older fans. I was living on my own and working a grown up job when I landed in this fandom. One Direction was not apart of my childhood and I did not grow up with them in the same way a lot of other people did. None of that changes the devastation I feel over Liam’s death. No, a piece of my childhood did not die, but a piece of my heart sure did.

[confused-disaster32]

Happy valentine's day to all my aromantics.

the aroaces, the romance repulsed aros, the romance varourable aros, the aros in QPRs, the loveless aros.

I hope you all have a good day.

[ilovedthestars]

A thought I’ve been having: While it's important to recognize the long history of many current queer identities (and the even longer history of people who lived outside of the straight, cis, allo “norm”) I think it's also important to remember that a label or identity doesn't have to be old to be, for lack of a better word, real.

This post that i reblogged a little while ago about asexuality and its history in the LGBTQ+ rights movement and before is really good and really important. As i've thought about it more, though, it makes me wonder why we need to prove that our labels have "always existed." In the case of asexuality, that post is pushing back against exclusionists who say that asexuality was “made up on the internet” and is therefore invalid. The post proves that untrue, which is important, because it takes away a tool for exclusionists.

But aromanticism, a label & community with a lot of overlap & solidarity with asexuality, was not a label that existed during Stonewall and the subsequent movement. It was coined a couple decades ago, on internet forums. While the phrasing is dismissive, it would be technically accurate to say that it was “made up on the internet.” To be very clear, I’m not agreeing with the exclusionists here—I’m aromantic myself. What I’m asking is, why does being a relatively recently coined label make it any less real or valid for people to identify with?

I think this emphasis on historical precedent is what leads to some of the attempts to label historical figures with modern terminology. If we can say someone who lived 100 or 1000 years ago was gay, or nonbinary, or asexual, or whatever, then that grants the identity legitimacy. but that's not the terminology they would have used then, and we have no way of knowing how, or if, any historical person's experiences would fit into modern terminology.

There's an element of "the map is not the territory" here, you know? Like this really good post says, labels are social technologies. There's a tendency in the modern Western queer community to act like in the last few decades the "truth" about how genders and orientations work has become more widespread and accepted. But that leaves out all the cultures, both historical and modern, that use a model of gender and sexuality that doesn't map neatly to LGBTQ+ identities but is nonetheless far more nuanced than "there are two genders, man and woman, and everyone is allo and straight." Those systems aren’t any more or less “true” than the system of gay/bi/pan/etc and straight, cis and trans, aro/ace and allo.

I guess what I’m saying is, and please bear with me here, “gay” people have not always existed. “Nonbinary” people have not always existed. “Asexual” people have not always existed. But people who fell in love with and had sex with others of the same gender have always existed. People who would not have identified themselves as either men or women have always existed. People who didn’t prioritize sex (and/or romance) as important parts of their lives have always existed. In the grand scheme of human existence, all our labels are new, and that’s okay. In another hundred or thousand years we’ll have completely different ways of thinking about gender and sexuality, and that’ll be okay too. Our labels can still be meaningful to us and our experiences right now, and that makes them real and important no matter how new they are.

We have a history, and we should not let it be erased. But we don’t need a history for our experiences and ways of describing ourselves to be real, right now.

[burrythebusy]

Seeing some people (comments, posts, general discussion) talk about Hirano’s love like it is inherently lesser, not as strong and "incompatible" with Kagiura’s tells me all I need to know about yall bc regardless of what you thought before (questionably), there's no way you read chapter 29 and came to this conclusion

[bucksboobs]

I do think at some point in the not too distant future, the 911 fandom, at least on Tumblr, is going to have to reckon with the fact that despite M!slash being the main driving force of the fandom, gay men like myself are in the vast minority (I think a recent poll put us at something like 6% but it didn’t separate bisexuals by gender so it’s hard to say how many mlm are actually in the fandom) and in the same way being a gay man doesn’t exempt him from being incidentally or purposefully misogynistic, being some other flavor of the rainbow doesn’t prevent someone from perpetuating homophobia against men who love men.

At some point the jokes about how Tommy is just here for dick or should just get dick and move on (when he’s already made it very clear that he wants a relationship with Buck) are going to start to sound like hypersexual stereotypes of gay men. At some point the constant push to get them to break up as soon as possible and for Tommy to die or get shipped off to Arizona or wherever is going to seem less like regular ship hate and more like wanting a gay male character to be punished for daring to seek a relationship with a man in the first place. We obviously aren’t there yet but I do think we should be aware that it is fast approaching.

[khaoala]

oh no, p'jojo said kantbison are a lovers to enemies story. kantbison are doomed.

firstkhao characters whenever they have the slight attempt of animosity between the two of them:

[w1tchcr4ftt]

Why is tumblr the only place I can get relatively positive Lux content... like we get they're obnoxious but it can NOT be that bad you want them in every saw trap simultaneously theyre literally just a bit annoying (Perhaps Im the odd one out)

With that said we need more Lux content thats not just "I hate this twink I want them dead immediately" I love and care for that loser and they deserve love too

[flowrzteaa]

none of my followers will get this cuz I don’t have any ds9 moots but oh my god. Clutches my hand. I’m gonna rant for a moment maybe ppl will find it. The way I’ve literally seen people try to outright dismiss Chrysalis just because they don’t like how Julian acted and that it was a WOMAN he was with. People literally saying it would be better if it was his (non disabled) male friend everyone ships him with instead (the fact Sarina is disabled is incredibly important to the plot and how uncomfortable the dynamic is IT IS THE POINT)

I need you all to understand that Julian isn’t a perfect naive submissive little baby he is a grown man and the whole point of the episode was his loneliness and insecurity in being the only person like him on the station. and then suddenly there’s a woman who is on his level or even smarter in some ways, and she HAS to rely on him. His relationship with Sarina has an obviously imbalanced power dynamic and that’s why it’s interesting. Idk why some of the fandom acts like the writers wrote him as an evil abuser and how dare they let Julian have nuance and make mistakes. Did you guys watch the show. You realise that including bad Julian moments isn’t the same as condoning his behaviour right. Like id accept that his chasing Jadzia for ages is played off as ‘poor Julian’ and not handled the greatest by the writers, but this episode specifically isn’t playing off his weird behaviour as okay, literally in the scene where he’s begging Sarina to say she loves him too and she says she doesn’t know it’s showing he’s been pushing it too far. Idk I love this episode so much it actually makes me cry so I hate to see so many fans dismiss it because it doesn’t fit their fanon babied version of Julian

but also if u just don’t like it that’s ok I just wanted to talk a little 🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷

Pr*shippers don’t touch this post i dislike u