#I miss the people on this website

[n0ahsferatu]

pov you are a locked chest or perhaps someone bleeding to death

[mossy-leo]

I think it should be said this whole thing with the book is for fun.

At the end of the day, unfortunately Gravity Falls is a dead show, it’s been dead for years. It’s great that we have new content, but we have to remember at this point we’re really only to expect scraps. We aren’t owed anything as a fandom and we should not go at Alex for any reason beyond joking support. I haven’t seen anyone do that but I’m just saying. This is all for entertainment and fun.

There seems to be a major connection between TBoB and The Great Gatsby, the second being about letting go of the past so it doesn’t haunt you. The timer on the website? The negatives? The dead ends? Maybe it’s Alex’s way of saying this is the end. To let go. To move on.

[bylrndgm]

JULIE AND THE PHANTOMS (2020) // JULIE E OS FANTASMAS (2011) 1.01 - Wake Up // 1.01 - Enfrentando Fantasmas -> Julie meets the Band.

[cuddlytogas]

there was some Twitter madness recently where someone left a comment on someone's art to the effect of, "Ed shouldn't wear a dress, he's a man!" which I do disagree with on principle, but unfortunately, it brought out one of my least favourite trends in the fandom

so, naturally, I had to write a twitter essay about it. and I already largely argued this in a post here, but the thread is clearer and better structured, so I thought I'd cross-post for those not on the Hellsite (derogatory). edited for formatting/structure's sake, since I no longer have to keep to tweet lengths, and incorporating a couple of points other people brought up in the replies

so

I want to point out that the wedding cake toppers in OFMD s2 aren't evidence that Ed wants to wear dresses. Gender is fake, men can wear skirts, play with these dolls how you like, but it's not canon, and that scene especially Doesn't Mean That.

People cite it often: 'He put himself in a dress by painting the bride as himself! It's what he wants!' But that fundamentally misunderstands the scene, and the series' framing of weddings as a whole. I'd argue that Ed paints the figure not from desire, but from self-hatred; it's not what he wants, but what he thinks he should, and has failed to, be.

(Yes, I am slightly biased by my rampant anti-marriage opinions, but bear with me here, because it is relevant to the interpretation of the scene, and season two as a whole.)

The show is not subtle. It keeps telling us that the institution of marriage is a prison that suffocates everyone involved. Ed's parents' cycle of abuse is passed to their son in both the violence he witnesses then enacts on his father, and the self-repression his mother teaches, despite her good intentions ("It's not up to us, is it? It's up to God. ... We're just not those kind of people. We never will be."). Stede and Mary are both oppressed by their arranged marriage, with 1x04 blunty titled Discomfort in a Married State. The Barbados widows revel in their freedom ("We're alive. They're dead. Now is your time").

But even without this context, the particular wedding crashed in 2x01 is COMICALLY evil. The scene is introduced with this speech from the priest:

"The natural condition of humanity is base and vile. It is the obligation of people of standing ... to elevate the common human rabble through the sacred transaction of matrimony."

It's upper class, all-white, and religiously sanctioned. "Vile natural conditions" include queerness, sexual freedom, and family structures outside the cisheteropatriarchal capitalist unit. "The obligation of people of standing" invokes ideas like the white man's burden, innate class hierarchy, religious missions, and conversion therapy. Matrimony is presented as both "sacred" (endorsed by the ruling religious body), and a "transaction" (business performed to transfer property and people-as-property, regardless of their desires), a tool of the oppressive society that pirates escape and destroy. That is where the figurines come from.

When Ed, in a drunk, depressive spiral, paints himself onto the bride, he's not yearning for a pretty dress. He's sort of yearning for a wedding, but that's not framed as positive. What he's doing is projecting himself into an 'ideal' image of marriage because he believes that: a) that's what Stede (and everyone) wants; b) he can never live up to that ideal because he's unlovable and broken (brown, queer, lower-class, violent, abused, etc); c) that's why Stede left. He tries to make himself fit into the social ideal by painting himself onto the closest match - long-haired, partner to Stede/groom, but a demure, white woman, a frozen, porcelain miniature - because, if he could just shrink himself down and squeeze into that box, maybe Stede would love him and he'd live happily ever after. But he can't. So he won't.

The fantasy fails: Ed is morose, turns away from the figurines, then tips them into the sea, a lost cause. He knows he won't ever fulfil that bride's role, but he sees that as a failure in himself, not the role. It's not just that "Stede left, so Ed will never have a dream wedding and might as well die." Stede left when Ed was honest and vulnerable, "proving" what his trauma and depression tell him: there's one image of love (of personhood), and he'll never live up to it because he's fundamentally deficient. So he might as well die.

This hit me from my very first viewing. The scene is devastating, because Ed is wrong, and we know it! He doesn't need to change or reduce himself to fit an image and be accepted (as, eg, Izzy demanded). Stede knows and loves him exactly as he is; it's the main thread and theme of season two!

(@/everyonegetcake suggested that Ed's yearning in these scenes includes his broader desire for the vulnerability and safety Stede offered, literalised through unattainable "fine" things like the status of gentleman in s1, or the figurine's blue dress. I'd argue, though, that these scenes don't incorporate this beyond a general knowledge of Ed's character. Ed is always pining for both literal and emotional softness, but the significance of the figurines specifically, to both Ed and the audience, is poisoned by their origin and context: there is no positive fantasy in the bride figure, only Ed's perceived deficiency.

Further, assuming that a desire for vulnerability necessarily corresponds with an explicit desire for femininity, dresses, etc, kind of contradicts the major themes of the show. OFMD asserts that there is nothing wrong with men assuming femininity (through drag, self-care, nurturing, emotional vulnerability, etc), but also that many of these traits are, in fact, genderless, and should be available to men without affecting their perceived or actual masculinity. It thematically invokes the potential for cross-gender expression in Ed's desires, especially through the transgender echoes in his relieved disposal, then comfortable reincorporation, of the Blackbeard leathers/identity. It's a rich, valuable area of analysis and exploration. But it remains a suggestion, not a canon or on-screen trait.)

Importantly, the groom figure doesn't fit Stede, either. Not just in dress: it's stiff and formal, and marriage nearly killed him. He's shabbier now, yes, but also shedding his privilege and property, embracing his queerness, and trying to take responsibility for his community. In a s1 flashback, Stede hesitantly says, "I thought that, when I did marry, it could be for love," but he would never find love in marriage. Not just because he's gay, but because marriage in OFMD is an oppressive, transactional institution that precludes love altogether. All formal marriages in OFMD are loveless.

So, he becomes a pirate, where they reject society altogether and have matelotages instead. Lucius and Pete's "mateys" ceremony is shot and framed not like a wedding, but as an honest, personal bond, willingly conducted in community (in a circle; no presiding authority, procession, or transaction).

That is how Stede and Ed can find love, companionship, and happiness: by rejecting those figurines and their oppressive exchange of property, overseen by a church that enables colonialism and abuse. Ed is loved, and deserves happiness, as he is, no paint or projection required.

ALL OF THIS IS TO SAY: draw Ed in dresses! Write him getting gender euphoria in skirts! Write trans/nb Ed, draw men being feminine! Gender is fake, the show invites exploration, that's what 'transformative works' means! But please, stop citing the cake toppers as evidence it's canon. Stop citing a scene where a depressed Māori man gets drunk and projects himself onto a rich, white, silent bride because he thinks he's innately unlovable and only people like her can find happiness, shortly before deciding to kill himself, as canon evidence it's what he wants.

(Also, please don't come in here with "lmao we're just having fun," I know, I get it. Unfortunately, I'm an academiapilled researchmaxxer, and some of youse need to remember that the word "canon" has meaning. NOW GO HAVE FUN PUTTING THAT MAN IN A PRETTY DRESS!! 💖💖)

[doctorhoe]

genuinely, if you're one of the people who believes it's the palestinian people who are committing these crimes and who is excusing them because of it, unfollow me. its hamas. you're making excuses for hamas. i can not believe we have reached a level of stupidity and glorification of violence where people will look you in the eyes and tell you that this is just how oppressed people act. that they just go on killing sprees ever so often. that is gross and untrue.

[korolation]

i love posting my art at the worst time possible (click for better quality)

[klunpro]

About the thisisnotawebsite message

I do not take credit for figuring it out! I already checked the wiki because I was lost as hell about what it said and apparently its the 1651 alchemy font so if you use the symbols in the font then it can actually be used as a code

if you start with the symbol i tried to mark with the arrow the ABC lines up It says "so many questions"

[lookstairs]

Ok I’m gonna admit I haven’t read the whole tbhk manga (the site I used to use is filled with ads now) so most of what I know is from the anime or the chapters I was able to read.

Because I was introduced to the anime first I thought it was good! I liked the story and the characters a lot which is why I tried reading it. But now I’m seeing post (mainly on TikTok) saying how the anime adaptation was bad??

And I’m so confused cause was it really that bad? I know the manga is always gonna have more in terms of detail but the comments were making it seem like the anime was awful

I thought it was great so it’s sad to hear it wasn’t well received

[kingjasnah]

i was gonna be like oh you guys make the tag trend at the weirdest times but we're in the first few days of pride and this is the renarin website so. nvm i guess

[griffincastle]

--

[scavenger-toll]

i dont like engaging in fandom discourse because i think its stupid and theres better things i could be doing (like birdwatching) but i saw an interaction today that pissed me off

like… make ur own post please

[astrid-beck]

I grow increasingly tired of the whole "pick a team" thing. Very good marketing and a very bad way to actually watch the show

[wasabikitcat]

community college is so funny because half of the teachers are like "For this class you need to use lockdown browser for all quizzes and tests. You need to buy this 70 dollar textbook, and all papers turned in must be in APA format with a title page even if they're only 500 words long. I will not accept late assignments. Also you have a minimum of 4 assignments a week." and the other half are like "you don't need proctoring for the final exam I trust you. here's a download link to a pirated copy of the textbook. as long as your writing is coherent and demonstrates an understanding of the material I literally could not care less what format you use. I can't figure out how canvas works so I'm not giving you due dates, just make sure it's turned in before the grading period ends. your only weekly assignment is a forum post with a minimum of 100 words."

[bitchthefuck1]

Not an "art with Bad Things in it is Bad" person or a "the more Bad Things a work has the better it is, actually" person, but a secret third thing (the quality of a work is determined not by what topics or ideas it contains but by whether/how it engages with and examines those ideas)

[reejindeed]

I think the thing that is the most disheartening about watching Twitter crash and burn is that like... You know this shit is 100% on purpose. Elon Musk only wants a very specific type of person interacting with his social media platform, and those people are not people like us. I'm pretty convinced all of this has just been an attempt to "weed out the weaklings," especially Twitter Blue.

He's willing to let the entire thing crash and burn so that he can have his own little corner of paradise on the internet, which I'm not even convinced is fucking sustainable.

It's absolutely fucking infuriating.

[artamos]

Crazy that being called out or considered problematic basically means you can be endlessly harassed and degraded far worse than any 'real crime' you actually may have committed.