modern AU【I’m married】
20 years old eremika…I wish………………………………………………………….
if she cut her hair …also because of Ackerman
After Two thousand years
We are free and we meet again………..
-
BTW this is great news that ISAYAMA HAJIME GOT MARRIED <3
2K notes
·
View notes
Eremika Week Day 6: Crossover / Disney/Fairytale
Violet Evergarden crossover
698 notes
·
View notes
~When they first met ~ ❤️
562 notes
·
View notes
Eremika to heal my soul
It only took me a whole year to remember to post this :v
9K notes
·
View notes
This is so beautiful💔
[CLICK FOR HQ]
Hey guysss~ This is for all the Eremika Shipper who are suffering at the moment! :) This took me around 4 hours .. and I’m really not satisfied but I really have to focus on my art project that I have to do this semester in my artclass .. I’m sry guys ;w; pls don’t look too closely at the hands and erens hair.. But I hope that you like it nevertheless! I will add the Scouting Legion symbol later on (Maybe) ;w;
303 notes
·
View notes
some casual em for the soul (ෆ ͒•∘̬• ͒)◞ @lolakasa is a gem, pass it on.
6K notes
·
View notes
Beautiful Eremika for my soul
“He cares about us more than anything else”
3K notes
·
View notes
but you promised her…didn’t you ?
343 notes
·
View notes
Well ain't that cute?
‘Somebody please take me from here.’ said Armin
3K notes
·
View notes
THE ACKERBOND.
Hello, sorry to bother you. Ever since the release of chapter 112 & the Ackerbond reveal I have now been seeing theories of Mikasa's scarf being symbolic of a chain that Eren put around her neck. Given the reveal in the current chapter I don't blame people for thinking that way but I was curious... Do you think the scarf now symbolizes a chain and do you think Mikasa should remove her scarf in order to be "free"? I personally don't want her to remove the scarf tbh.
No worries, you’re not a bother!! Not at all.
But whaaaaaaat??? Oh my gosh. Lol, no, it’s not a chain around Mikasa’s neck, and the scarf symbolizes, as it always has, safety and family/love and a second chance for Mikasa. The idea of making that into a chain is really–yikes. Just yikes.
I really don’t understand how people are actually taking the Ackerbond “reveal” at face value, or anything Eren has said at face-value when it so obviously is full of enough plot holes it resembles Swiss cheese. We know for a fact that Eren is lying about a lot of things:
He never saw Armin as useless: does a kid like Eren really beat up bullies when he agrees with them? Or save his life at the expense of his own? He also directly told Armin he wasn’t useless in Trost and fought to save him in Shiganshina.
He has not hated Mikasa throughout her life. Really, you become a murderer and then decide to do a Hail Mary desperate punch against a titan to protect her one last time before you die (because he definitely thought he was gonna die in chapter 50)?
Mikasa’s headaches just do not follow that pattern Eren claims. She gets hem whenever she’s afraid of her family dying.
Levi and Kenny were strong before they met Erwin and Uri respectively.
Erwin was never a titan.
Erwin and Eren don’t even have royal blood soo…
The Ackermans were noted to have potential rebel against the king, not serve them, because they could not be controlled which is literally the opposite of what Eren claims. Hence, persecution.
Not to mention taking the word of an increasingly unstable antagonist at face-value is really… questionable. So while their is probably some truth in what Eren says–particularly about the history behind the Ackerman power–unless Isayama is very very very messily retconning and also suddenly not paying attention at all to framing (whereas he’s actually been excellent with framing for most of the series), we really can’t take this as Gospel truth. Honestly it seems to me more likely Isayama is addressing the most crack theories and plans to break them down like he did when he had Gross embody the nihilistic fandom commentary back during Grisha’s infodump. And Eren is hitting Armin and Mikasa where it hurts them the most.
So yeah. I could not disagree more with that interpretation, and I don’t think there’s much evidence in the text to back that interpretation up.
103 notes
·
View notes