#I am scream. into the void

[executiveproducedbytimburton]

this is the best one to me. look at him he is like ah…it was all worth it

[kriz-smthn]

[kawareo]

My only new year's resolution is to leave more comments on AO3

[oh-snapperss]

they'll fund a genocide and let their poor regions be destroyed. don't fucking forgive them for that.

my hometown is completely gone from what pictures i can find of it, i have not heard from my family (including aunts, uncles, parents, one sibling, and a grandparent), and the infrastructure in the mountain communities is wiped out. i cannot stress how catastrophic this is, or how difficult it will be for these communities to build back. i am angry, and scared, and heartbroken by everything that's happened.

and our government is spending it's money to fund a genocide.

free palestine, and don't be complicit. realize that this is not something happening that doesn't affect you--although it shouldn't take this to care about the deaths of thousands of people anyway.

[naamahdarling]

Dear Nextdoor,

I was resubscribed, for some terrible reason unknown to me, to emails from this site, an unparalleled locus of poorly-concealed racism, unleashed dogs, missing outdoor cats (surely unrelated), and unabashed classist bullying of the homeless for being unsightly and making people mildly uncomfortable for the minute and a half they are trapped one car behind the stoplight.

I'm not sure why this has happened.

Imagine my dismay when I discovered that in order to be certain I had removed myself from all email notifications, I had to go deep into settings and remove myself from each sub-subcategory individually. There were so many. I fear, even now, that I missed one, and coming to the site to turn one off seemed to reactivate all the others. (If deliberate, an extremely insidious and clever tactic.)

A single button which, when pressed, would end this piecemeal torment would suffice.

I would deactivate my account entirely but A) I want to find out approximately where the Cybertruck owner near me lives so I can find it, drive by, and laugh at it instead of simply hoping to spot it in the parking lot of Dick's Sporting Goods, and B) I don't want to lose track of the lovely interactions I have had here, including the people who told me that the Bible bids us to let homeless people starve, and the ones who said that their free-roaming pets' testicles were so important to God's plan that they should not be removed, lest His intent for all creatures to go forth, multiply, and die on the side of the highway be foiled. I mean, where else do you get to see something like that? Aside from, I suppose, every other social media site at this point. That's where we are as a society.

"But wait!" I hear the leering specter of user retention croon. "This site does offer something special: you get to know these people live near you!"

I do not want that.

Anyway, I wanted to let you know that having to do it all bit by bit was completely unnecessary and felt deeply insulting in some way, as if my ability to know whether or not a given site is a festering cesspit dedicated to the squabblings of a loudly mediocre populace (that would probably gladly fling their own goopy white dogs under the bus in pursuit of a world without bitchy gays like me, were there any public transportation here worth mentioning) were being called into question.

Maybe give people a single button to press to revoke their consent to receive updates on the horrendous cavalcade of human folly. That would be better than making me think about it for almost two minutes during which I could have been showing people on Bluesky pictures of my cat, who eats soap.

I'm not denying the site must be useful for some, but it really is a terrible thing. Probably because of where I live, but I can't help that part.

Be well, anonymous stranger. None of this is your personal fault. Please tell those above you that the email tickyboxes are the internet equivalent of those spikes that prevent perfectly nice birds from landing on beige buildings.

Thank you for allowing me to procrastinate at you.

-- A perfectly normal individual who would never vaguepost about anyone's lawn.

[qcomicsy]

I think a thing that people get wrong about Jason's anger is that it's not explosive.

It's cold. Jason isn't the type of person who storms off at every little thing or goes throwing tantrums and setting things on fire blindfully.

He's the type of person who's very practical. He keeps to himself, always. You rarely see issues where Jason's anger is reactive at the moment where the trigger happens to him. If you see his character up close, most of the time when he's triggered his reaction is calm. Even cold.

He gets triggered -> He keeps to himself → He makes a plan → And then he reacts.

Jason's anger being something explosive and out of character and out of place is actually how other people (characters) see it, because they have no idea on how it's playing out on Jason's head.

And that's a thing you can see operating since he was a child.

Where the only exceptions about this effect is either when someone he believes needs his help is involved.

See Nightwing Annual (2021)

But In Batman #411 when Jason learns the fact that Two-Face was responsible for his father's death and Bruce was keeping that from him as a secret his first reaction isn't to blow up on him.

Was to seethe.

Bruce goes up home after dealing with a Two-Face case (in my field we call that poetic irony) and asks Alfred where Jason is, Alfred's answer is that he's been sleeping all day (which is a conclusion that Alfred drew probably after going to check on Jason and seeing him in fact on his bed all day).

But when you see the next panel, even though he is on the bed, He's fully awake and both his expression and his body language shows that he's in fact angry.

This is the first time he appears again in the comics after learning that Two Face killed his dad.

Jason doesn't go towards Bruce immediately to demand an explanation or ask why he did this, or even to throw the truth on his face.

(Which could be debatable that that's something the Dick would usually do, but I'm not that literate on Dick's comics)

His reaction wasn't immediate.

His reaction was to go to his bed and stay quiet. Jason stayed calm and collected the whole trip until meeting Two Face again.

But the moment Jason as Robin has the opportunity to get his hands on Two-Face he does this

From Bruce, and maybe Alfred's perspective it could be interpreted as out of place or him storming off.

But it isn't. Jason was able to keep his cool (even though he shut off), until he was face a face to Two Face.

Does that mean he planned that to happen?

That's debatable, in any moment of this issue it is shown that Jason was actually planning to get to Two Face and do this. I my personal opinion, other and much more plausible explanation is: That he was in fact trying to keep to himself but couldn't hold back the moment that he saw his dad's murder.

You can see the same thing happening as Jason learns that Batman got another Robin in Red Hood: Lost Days.

Talia asks "You all right?" and Jason's first answer is "Sure Why Wouldn't I Be Alright?"

When he's alone he finally has the moment to break down.

(Actually both Red Hood: The lost days and Batman: Under the Red Hood are great case studies on how that usually play out on Jason's head.)

Jason is way more in control of his emotions than people ever give him credit for. The thing is that Jason holds it back until he either blows off or is capable to throw it back in someone's face.

[regardstosoulandromance]

im going to be thinking about allison janney holding kathryn hahn’s face for the next twelve business days #feelsgayfeelsorganic

[transmascskywalker]

every time a movie from the 80s looks better than an ultra high budget 2023 disney project an angel loses its wings and fuckjng dies on impact

[whimsicalbitchh]

I have been wanting to go home ever since I can remember

[beardedjoel]

✨when the scene from your fic comes to life ✨

another gorgeous art commission for smother!

“Somethin’ the matter, sweetheart?” he asks with an innocent tilt of his head, knowing damn well exactly what you want.

art by @/spitroses on twitter

[overlordneptune]

Ughhhh that awkward moment when the Captain of the San Francisco Police Department's Homicide Division kisses your cheek and you’re a germaphobe so ew gross but also it’s kinda okay??? And you have a dead wife you’re not ready to part with but like it’s low-key kinda nice??? Sharona wipe please.

…STOTTLEMONK TRUTHERS COME GET Y’ALL FOOD!!!!!1!1!!1!1

I thought I’d share this doodle I made instead of studying for my test in light of Monk being taken off Netflix tomorrow. To lighten the mood. I’m really sad about that btw.

[treviso-nights]

the significance of rook as a protagonist who is 'unable to be evil' is because the inquisitor can be. and hawke. and the warden, for that matter. in dai there are companion disapproval cutscenes for a reason: you have either fucked up so badly or killed so many people that they literally stage an intervention for you. rook, by contrast, is a tremendously appropriate protagonist for veilguard—not just because they’re handpicked by varric but because they are good. like their goodness is the point. it is the story.

and i get why some players would be upset by that and feel constrained by the moral paradigm the narrative inherently embodies. players like options. however, rook's goodness (in whatever capacity) does not necessitate that they're a bad/flat protagonist considering they have unique backstories which tells us about the quality and the context of that goodness. in my opinion, it's a natural byproduct of the overarching story of the dragon age games: yet another person thrust into a role and political position they did not ask for but must pursue for the greater purpose of all.

the thing about veilguard though is that no possible protagonist could be as bad or as evil as the evanuris (and by extension, the chaos ripping the veil down would do at this point in time), so to play as an evil!rook feels counterintuitive to the point of the game regardless.

if we WERE to get the option to play an evil!rook who, for example, supports the evanuris and blights the world alongside them, it just means there's no more world to play in. dragon age is over.

furthermore, there's no option to help solas bring the veil down because it is an evil option. it's not a dev mistake that rook doesn't get the opportunity to side with our favorite war criminal. to most thedosians, the end of the veil means the end of their life. solas is one of the most unreliable narrators in the series, so the idea that he has harm reduction measures in place is unmeasurable because he is a proven trickster. those who'd take the chance anyway would still be considered evil by all who are affected in the wake of it.

—and i agree that it would be fun! but it's not veilguard's story because the stakes are higher than they have ever been in previous games, and thedas needs someone else to save it once again.

[newgenuinedisaster]

the thing about riverdale is there’s no endgame because riverdale is always iterating. it’s a high school drama ouroboros it tells the same story and different stories about the same people over and over and over again smashing them up into different pairs and situations to keep going and going and going. so you say well then isn’t it crazy that jughead and archie never kissed and the answer is actually no. because jughead’s the one writing the stories and he’s too afraid to be in love with his best friend so instead he deified him.

[mirellapryce]

Today we are picturing Charles and Edwin in a slightly ironic Hades and Persephone AU. Charles of course as the embodiment of sunshine is our God of Spring. Edwin, our King of the Trauma Olympics, and Hell resident would make an excellent King of the Underworld.

Biggest difference between this and the original text is that

1) Charles followed Edwin into the Underworld. No kidnapping necessary. If anything Edwin advised him not to come.

2) Charles would rather spend his time with his husband Edwin than come back to the mortal world, because that means he has to spend half the year in his dad's home. So you know our boy is begging and cajoling Edwin into coming topside with him every Spring.

They spent exactly one summer apart, and Charles booked it home to the Underworld the second he was able. He whined to Edwin that he hated it. Edwin is holding it together slightly better, but he also missed Charles terribly. Charles is this close to eating a pomegranite whole if it means he never has to leave Edwin's side again. But Edwin recognises that Charles needs to be in the sunlight. Deserves it more than anyone. He can't hide Charles down below all year round, even if they're miserable without each other.

I don't know the details, but they could build a home in between. Edwin can't leave his kingdom for 6 months, but he also can't be away from Charles for that long. So they build their home together in the middle.

[distant-screaming]

kitagawa yusuke is my beloved because what do you mean this autistic painter with a complicated family situation walked into a church and posed like jesus nailed to the cross. what do you MEAN he's at the club saying perchance and alas again. you're telling me he has a fox tail in his outfit that represents his idea of justice? and the fox tail moves? this man is 6 feet tall and constantly broke and he would definitely strip naked in the summer to cool down if given the chance. also he's blue. I love him.

[femmeleatherface]