#Professor apologist right here

[terrificblanket]

ghost files was great but i haven’t forgotten his crimes

[communistcephalopod]

🌊 lugias-sopping-anus

Can't stand how people will learn that humans are related to Pokemon and somehow come to the conclusion that different people are different types. That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

🍑 pechaberrysoda

there are literally so many fighting type people what are you even talking about lmao

🌊 lugias-sopping-anus

Your genetic make up doesn't just magically change type because you took a karate class. Do you also think your Charizard is a Grass type now because it learnt Solar Beam?

✨ ace-trainer-luna

But aren't Psychic type people a thing? Some humans have telekinetic powers, I'm pretty sure there are a few gym leaders who have them. There are even rare cases of children born with psychic abilities.

🌸 cynthiasfuturewife

that's still just learning moves

🌌 mistyterrain

As an actual Psychic type, this post is really disheartening to see. The fact that people who still refuse to acknowledge the existence of psychics are so common is just shocking. We exist!

☣ deathtounova

no one's refusing to acknowledge the existence of shit, you just don't know how types work

🌌 mistyterrain

The sheer ignorance on display here, it's obvious you're just mad you're a normal type lol.

☣ deathtounova

how bout i karate chop your ass and we'll see how "not very effective" it is

🌌 mistyterrain

Typical physical attacker brutishness, resorting to violence as usual

🦧 return-to-mankey

didn't you claim you manifested the kyogre disaster in hoenn?

⚡ electrictypesfuckyeah

WHAT

🥀 cradilyzone

Actual professor here! Genetically, all humans are Normal types, though some of our relatively recent ancestors were Psychic. Part of what let us succeed as a species was reutilizing the brain power originally used for psionics to language and tool use. We do still have some vestigial psychic power that can be trained, though it's quite weak compared to most Pokémon. As for those born with psychic powers, this is considered nowadays to be like an egg move, passed down from parent to child. And no, obviously learning Fighting moves doesn't make you a Fighting type, there is no way for a human to change their type.

🌔 hexmaniac

my grandma became a ghost type

🔶️ bigjiggly

I-

🔞 mega-miltank

What about swimmers though, they're water type, right?

📀 HM-69

did you even read the post

🪴 n-did-nothing_wrong

Are we all just ignoring OP's url?

🌊 lugias-sopping-anus

Team Plasma apologist blog, opinion discarded.

🛗 mostlymukposts

This post single handedly evolved my Porygon-2

[andhumanslovedstories]

Hi Brandon Sanderson apologist here: you said you want to bully him about the Mormonism which I totally get but like half his books are about questioning religion and things you've been taught all your life and he writes women and disabled people really well and respectfully so really makes you think 🤔 anyways

Honestly I don't know how to feel about him! I haven't really read enough by him to say how his religion affects his writing. I respect the statement he made about being Mormon and his opinions on LGBTQ rights. He says that this statement is not going to be enough for many people. I might be one of them, but I like the thoughtfulness of the statement. I'm still uncomfortable that he's affiliated with Brigham Young University, in fact it's my biggest issue with him, but he's clearly not Orson Scott Card and it would be unfair to say he's the same. Honestly he reminds me a lot of my world religions professor in high school who was so cool and so smart and so open-minded and taught me so much about so many different faiths in a way that seemed fair and passionate about all of them, and she was also Mormon. Like, adamantly Mormon. And I have plenty of authors I love who are/were Catholic as hell, a church institution that has got a much longer record of Believing and Promoting Politics I Don't Like. And I work at a religious hospital! I don't support religion dictating what healthcare people can receive, but I still work there. It's complicated. People do and are a lot of things that are complicated.

And I just keep thinking of that incredible complexity of people's relationship with the faith community they were raised in, the complexity of people's spirituality and belief and faith and how that intersects with the rest of their lives. About personal belief and institutional belief and when those differ and how do we trust someone when they say these things differ. Him being Mormon isn't a deal breaker to me as a reader, but I understand why it would be for others. I also don't think I know enough about him and his work to truly feel definitively either way.

I think the rub for me comes from the tithing aspect of the religion. I don't like the idea that even if Brandon Sanderson writes a book about a bunch of homos getting gay married then abortions via elaborate rock-based magic systems over the course of a thousand pages, a portion of the profits is going to be tithed to a church whose politics and missions I do not support. But again. I work for a hospital that prominently features Jesus in its mission statement. When I vote, I vote Democrat. Neither of those things one hundred percent align with all my beliefs (they in fact keep finding exciting new ways of falling short!), but they align with enough of my beliefs that I don't think I'm compromising who I am and what I value by supporting them. But hey, if other people were like "I don't like either of those things," depending on the reasoning, I understand and maybe even agree. I don't think all these things are the exact same thing, but. I don't know! It's complicated. If I ever get around to reading Mistborn, I'll come back and puzzle through it some more.

[pukacup]

I've been procrastinating this for a while but here is my intro post

I'm the #1 Sophocles fangirl of all time

I'm Jewish, autistic, pan aego rose, and have AuDHD

My special interests are Pokemon, Rhythm Heaven, Cookie Run, Steven Universe, The Amazing Digital Circus, Professor Layton, and Odd Squad

A few of my favorite composers are CG5, Lauren Aquilina, and Owl City

Some ships I like are starcorn, laywright, and dragonvisionshipping

I'm sourcedelica on Minecraft

Feel free to talk about the things I like

Kin list:

Sophocles

Iris

Walnut Cookie

Alolan Ninetails

Pomni

Bubble (TADC)

Amethyst

Zorua

Peridot

The Big O

Olive

Kinger

Katrielle Layton

Amelia Ruth

DNI

Proshippers/Anti-Antis

Pro Isreal/Anti Palestine, think being Pro Palestine/against the IDF is antisemitic, denies the genocide of Palestinians, etc.

IRL Serial Killer kin/Fan

People who encourage eating disorders

Exclusionists (against contradictory lables, pronoun policer, anti-mogai, etc.)

Racists

Islamophobes

Right-wing

Radical feminists

Pro-life

Anti-kin

People whose blog/has a blog dedicated to constant bashing/praise of something

Zoophile/thinks beastiality is ok

MAPs/pedophiles

Autism Speaks and/or PETA supporters

Antisemitic

J.K. Rowling/Ben Shapiro/Matt Walsh/[insert any other bigot] apologists

Xenophobes

People who excuse rape, sexual harassment and/or grooming for any reason

Demonize and/or infantalize any mental illness/disorder

Against all kinds of kinks

Thinks that fiction doesn't affect reality and our perception of it

Against researched self-diagnosis

Transid/radqueer or support it

Thinks men can't be feminists

Enjoy your stay

[sarah-dipitous]

Hellsite Nostalgia Tour 2023 Day 135

Amy’s Choice/The Man Who Knew Too Much

“Amy’s Choice”

Plot Description: When the Doctor returns to Amy’s life after five years, she faces an impossible choice

This one has one of the most heart wrenching lines

Oh god. Rory’s ponytail

The “Dream Lord” couldn’t give either of them a job? Anything? To give them more of a life? Make it more convincing? I dunno…especially considering the eventual twist (I think)

Nah. Doc, sometimes you CAN tell it’s a dream when you’re in it

Amy really gets the short end of the straw in this whole episode. She can’t run for half of it because dream her is extremely pregnant, we don’t have a job for her in the dream world yet (Rory gets to be a doctor), AND she’s the one this whole thing relies on

The sweater that old lady put on the Doctor is actually kind of goals. I want it

Oh. I love her putting the Doctor in his place. Yeah, this town is SUPER DULL, but you don’t get to say that shit when you’ve been yanking a very very pregnant woman around all day

“Nothing bad could happen here” as the Doctor examines the piles of dust that used to be this town’s children

Doctor Who can make anything scary: today? Old people in large groups. They’re a far cry from Wilf’s seniors group

The competitiveness between Rory and the Doctor is a really tiresome plotline that…god, does it ever end??

This VW bus full that the Doctor just keeps picking up every relatively young person in the town 💀

It’s kind of funny that Rory’s grand gesture is cutting off his ponytail 💀

Oh no. I don’t feel so good, Doctor

“This is the dream because if this is real, I don’t want it” 😭

You never told Rory you love him?? You two are getting MARRIED IN THE MORNING!! (Whenever morning ends up being) last episode he said it was a crime that he hadn’t said he loved her in seven hours

Oh shit, I forgot they were BOTH dreams

Wait. So he saw the Dream Lord again in his reflection, but…do we actually see him again??

“The Man Who Knew Too Much”

Plot Description: The wall comes down in Sam’s mind and all hell breaks loose while Dean and Bobby are powerless to help. The battle for heaven comes to a head.

Would I Survive the First Five Minutes??: well, no one died. Sam doesn’t know who he is, but that doesn’t mean anyone’s dead because of it

I can’t believe we’re at another season finale already

God bless this bartender. She’s way more patient and understanding at the end of her shift than I have EVER been

Sammy, you are much more than just some guy. You are one of god’s…..or the devil’s specialest little boys. I know you don’t know that right now, though

This girl does not have a self-preservation bone in her body if she’s going to go into that room alone with Sam while it looks like that and he just broke in…

Remember how I said I’m always a Castiel apologist? Yeah. Well. Professor Milf just died so…there is one thing I can’t forgive him for. He blames Crowley, but she said it didn’t get bad til the angel arrived

Wait…this whole time he’s been asleep? Or knocked out? So HOW MUCH OF ANY OF WHAT I HAVE WATCHED HAS BEEN REAL??

Why are we in so many dream scapes today??

So like…who’s this girl supposed to BE? What does she represent? Because she’s a figment of whatever Sam’s brain has cooked up

I know he’s in distress but “it was night and now it’s day” is a really funny line. Very “if there’s a lock, there must be a key” from The French Mistake

This Sam vs Sam thing I’d gonna be so anticlimactic. Wait… there’s ANOTHER ONE? Is it Lucifer!Sam??

Oh shit. Soulless Sam killed that bartender during a hunt. Like KILLED killed her, not failed to save, not couldn’t turn her back to human. Something was holding her hostage and he shot her to get rid of its leverage

See, BALTHAZAR has self preservation. He’ll betray when he thinks it’s the right thing to do but he’s only going so far

I………both do and don’t wanna know why Crowley believes Cas is “the bottom in this relationship.” His exact words. Castiel is gunning to be the next god or next to god. He’s the one renegotiating the terms so you get zero souls. He’s the only one who has ever SET any terms (I know there’s a difference between dom/sub & top/bottom, and I’m really describing the former rather than the latter here. I’m ace, not stupid, but it does feel like the writers Crowley forgot.)

I do like Cas giving him the ultimatum of flee or die

Oh…the next piece is the piece that remembers hell 😭

He’s not the next one, he’s the last one. That also feels anticlimactic, especially for a finale…BUT I GUESS THAT’S HOW IT GOES HERE SOMETIMES

Convenient that it’s right after Dean and Bobby leave that Sam gets the last bit back

Oh no. Should I be saying my goodbyes to Balthazar now? Does Cas know he betrayed him?

Rip Balthazar. Cas, I love you, but this isn’t you, babe. I know this isn’t your heart 💀😭💀😭

Yeah. So, like…if you’re in a war and you HELLA betray your temporary ally, maybe don’t be surprised when they team up with your enemy? Especially when your old temporary ally is not known for being a good person and is in fact the KING OF HELL

How many times does Raphael die??? Rip Raphael. Even though you were my boy’s enemy, if it weren’t for wanting to kickstart the apocalypse again, you would have been real cool

Castiel is entering his villain era and I am here for it

I’m not proud of what my feelings are doing as Sam literally stabs Castiel in the back with the angel blade, which doesn’t work, and Cas tells them it won’t because he’s no longer an angel, he’s their new god.

“Been On My Mind…”: they had me goin with that bartender for a while, but after six seasons…three more than it was supposed to go

[delta-queerdrant]

banjos in space (Caretaker, s1 e1/2)

Prologue

A nice pickle we have landed ourselves into, Mr. Frodo! The internet informs me that there are 172 episodes of Star Trek Voyager. I am, in fact, capable of finishing things; just recently, I reread Middlemarch like an absolute fucking boss. I have written novels and completed thousand-mile road trips. Let us choose to believe that this project that I have quixotically set myself, for an audience of, approximately, no one, will be a successful one.

I will not be summarizing episodes. I expect these reviews to be 80% sentiment and 20% analyzing story mechanics. To crib a line from a podcast I like, this is a feelings blog about starships.

The prose will be more or less silly and stream-of-consciousness as the mood takes me. Despite being a Digital Native(tm), I have literally never figured out the trick of talking like I live on the internet, instead I alternate between sounding like Angela Chase writing in her diary and like a college professor who is prone to multisyllabic words, malapropisms, and deducting points for misplaced commas.

Hmm, I seem to be stalling.

Let’s Talk About Caretaker

I started watching Voyager midway through the series’ original run, so my fondness for these episodes is less weighted down with early adolescent emotion. Nevertheless, I was charmed.

Caretaker is just shy of being a banger pilot episode, and the whole first season is pretty strong if you compare it to, say, season one of TNG. (It’s a low bar.) We meet our two crews, we have a lively science fiction mystery that feels extremely Star Trek with its gentle horror-adjacent tropes and insistence on making the cultural referents of the twentieth-century US central to this multi-species science fiction universe. If nothing else, it’s a romp.

The worst thing about this episode, hands down, is Tom Paris, our bad boy rapscallion who turns a new leaf under duress. As a young person I received each of these characters in exactly the way I was meant to receive them; i.e. I found Tom Paris to be charming comic relief.

Does he become charming? In this episode I want to punch his face, a lot, and the sentiment holds throughout season one. It is, of course, the nineties, and so the only character with an unmarked identity (straight white male, not an alien or a hologram) is centered in the pilot episode of our ensemble show. In the process, he goes through a season’s worth of character growth in ninety minutes, to the detriment of future episodes.

The fandom was right and he and Harry Kim (whose only attribute here is BABY) have hilariously good chemistry. (”Look, I know those guys told you to stay away from me,” he purrs to Kim during the mess hall follow-up to their meet-cute.) Why do the good girls always want the bad boys? Don’t fall for his rakish charms, Harry, you can do so much better, even if you have only been given half a personality.

We meet the Ocampa, who seem to live in a subterranean shopping mall or perhaps an airport terminal, and the Kazon-Ogla, who are bargain-bin Klingons without the cool factor or (so far) cultural nuance. I do not love an SFF property with “good” and “bad” species, and find Janeway’s pivotal decision to destroy the Caretaker’s array a bit suspect as a result, but it is a Star Trek, but here we are.

Other than Robert Duncan McNeill, who has been given an impossible script, it feels like all of the actors know their assignments out of the gate. There are so many cute as shit platonic friendships in this show; I love B’Elanna and Harry’s rapport (”Starfleet”). Also, Neelix. I am going on the record here to confess that I am probably going to be a Neelix apologist for the duration of this rewatch. He is just a darling hot mess of a space hobbit, and I find Ethan Phillip’s performance weirdly compelling and nuanced. I won’t be papering over his sexism, which should have been handled with more care. But so far he is absolutely the most plausible and lived-in character in this whole ridiculous show.

Kate Mulgrew’s Janeway, of course, is a close contender. She is so fucking good from scene one (walking so fast to keep up with McNeill’s long gait) - just absolutely sparkling with charisma, and with a warm, self-assured carriage that makes her effortless at inhabiting this role. “Confirmed, a hot lady,” my notes read (yes I was taking notes about this rewatch for myself like an absolute nerd).

We don’t get much backstory for her in season one, other than here, where we meet her dry-toast fiance, and much more importantly, MOLLIE. I had forgotten about Mollie, and holy crap, never mind the trauma and pining and muted sexual confusion that will accompany this character on her journey through the Delta Quadrant - SHE LEFT HER DOG BEHIND!?

^^^ ICONIC. Mark can’t even get an arm around her shoulder because Mollie is the cockblocker of our hearts. Love this for all concerned

Anyway. Our characters are thrown together and overcome adversity, Janeway blows up the array, and we get a rushed conclusion and a mission-statement speech that all feel terribly unearned. There’s nothing much to say about the Maquis subplot here, because the show just... doesn’t grapple with it, at least not in the first season. The very premise that our intrepid crew can only operate this starship by adopting the political structure of the dominant majority deserves interrogation, but nah.

We were never going to get a politically radical Voyager. Still, we could have gotten a politically conscious one. It’s a shame, because these actors and even, I dare say, writers were obviously up to the task of having a more nuanced conversation about leadership and workplace politics and whether an ostensibly egalitarian society’s professional adventurer/diplomats can only function under a military command structure. 

But we’re at the beginning, and we don’t know any of that yet. Anything could happen! We’re lost in the woods, in the middle of our lives, looking for our way home. 

[travelplannerbg]

Codex Diplomatics

‘ Arid are we expected to enjoy our Codex Diplomatics as much as our Macaulay and our Froude? ’

‘We do not ask you to enjoy,’ said the Bede, in his dry way, ‘ we only ask you to know — or, to be quite accurate, to satisfy the examiners. The brilliant apologist of Henry vm. seems to give you delightful lectures; but I can assure you that the Schools know no other standard but that of accurate research, in the manner so solidly established by the late Regius Professor whom we have lost.’

‘ Do you think that a thoughtful essay on the typical movements in one’s period would not pay? ’ asked the Admirable one, in a rather anxious tone.

‘My young friend,’ said the Reverend Ethelbald, ‘you will find that dates, authorities, texts, facts, and plenty of diphthongs pay much better. You are in danger of mortal heresy, if you think that anything will show you a royal ‘

road to these. If there is one thing which, more than another private sofia tours, is the mark of Oxford to-day, it is belief in contemporary documents, exact testing of authorities, scrupulous verification of citations, minute attention to chronology, geography, palaeography, and inscriptions. When all these are right, you cannot go wrong. For all this we owe our gratitude to the great historian we have lost.’

‘ Oh, yes,’ said Phil airily, for he was quite aware that he was thought to be shaky in his pre-Ecgberht chronicles; ‘ I am not saying a word against accuracy. But all facts are not equally important, nor are all old documents of the same use. I have been grinding all this term at the History of the Norman Conquest, verifying all the citations as I go along, and making maps of every place that is named. I have only got to the third volume, you know, and I don’t know now what it all comes to. Freeman’s West-Saxon scuffles on the downs seem to me duller than Thucydidesfifty hoplites and three hundred sling-men, and I have not yet come to anything to compare with the Syracusan expedition.’

‘ This is a bad beginning for a history man,’ said Baeda. Is this how they talked at Eton of the greatest period of the greatest race in the annals of the world? All history centres round the early records of the English in the three or four centuries before the first coming of the Jutes, and the three or four after it. Let me advise you to take as your period, say, the battle of Ellandun, and get up all about it, and how “ its stream was choked with slain,” and what led up to it and what came after it. Do you know anything more interesting, as you call it, than that? ’

Recklessness of a smart freshman

‘Yes,’ said Phil readily, with all the recklessness of a smart freshman; ‘why, Ellandun was merely the slogging of savages, of whom we know nothing but a few names. What I call fine history is Macaulay’s famous account of the state of England under the Stuarts, or Froude’s splendid picture of the trial and execution of Mary of Scots. That is a piece of writing that no one can ever forget.’

‘Ah, just so !’ said the Venerable, in that awful mono-syllabic way which he had caught from the Master; ‘ splen-did picture ! — piece of writing ! — fine history ! — here we generally take “fine history” to be — ah! false history.’

‘ But fine history need not be false,’ said Phil.

‘We usually find it so,’ replied his tutor, ‘and it is ten times worse than false quantities in a copy of longs and shorts. There is no worse offence outside the statute book (and many offences in it are less immoral) than the crime of making up a picture of actual events for the sake of literary effect, with no real care for exact truthfulness of detail. A historical romance, as they call novels of past ages, is often a source of troublesome errors; but, at any rate, in a novel we know what to expect. It is a pity that Scott should talk nonsense about Robin Hood in Ivanhoe, and that Bulwer introduced Caxton into the Last of the Barons. But no one expects to find truth in such books, and every one reads them at his own peril. In a history of England it is monstrous to be careless about references, and to trust to a late authority.’

[bulgariant]

Codex Diplomatics

‘ Arid are we expected to enjoy our Codex Diplomatics as much as our Macaulay and our Froude? ’

‘We do not ask you to enjoy,’ said the Bede, in his dry way, ‘ we only ask you to know — or, to be quite accurate, to satisfy the examiners. The brilliant apologist of Henry vm. seems to give you delightful lectures; but I can assure you that the Schools know no other standard but that of accurate research, in the manner so solidly established by the late Regius Professor whom we have lost.’

‘ Do you think that a thoughtful essay on the typical movements in one’s period would not pay? ’ asked the Admirable one, in a rather anxious tone.

‘My young friend,’ said the Reverend Ethelbald, ‘you will find that dates, authorities, texts, facts, and plenty of diphthongs pay much better. You are in danger of mortal heresy, if you think that anything will show you a royal ‘

road to these. If there is one thing which, more than another private sofia tours, is the mark of Oxford to-day, it is belief in contemporary documents, exact testing of authorities, scrupulous verification of citations, minute attention to chronology, geography, palaeography, and inscriptions. When all these are right, you cannot go wrong. For all this we owe our gratitude to the great historian we have lost.’

‘ Oh, yes,’ said Phil airily, for he was quite aware that he was thought to be shaky in his pre-Ecgberht chronicles; ‘ I am not saying a word against accuracy. But all facts are not equally important, nor are all old documents of the same use. I have been grinding all this term at the History of the Norman Conquest, verifying all the citations as I go along, and making maps of every place that is named. I have only got to the third volume, you know, and I don’t know now what it all comes to. Freeman’s West-Saxon scuffles on the downs seem to me duller than Thucydidesfifty hoplites and three hundred sling-men, and I have not yet come to anything to compare with the Syracusan expedition.’

‘ This is a bad beginning for a history man,’ said Baeda. Is this how they talked at Eton of the greatest period of the greatest race in the annals of the world? All history centres round the early records of the English in the three or four centuries before the first coming of the Jutes, and the three or four after it. Let me advise you to take as your period, say, the battle of Ellandun, and get up all about it, and how “ its stream was choked with slain,” and what led up to it and what came after it. Do you know anything more interesting, as you call it, than that? ’

Recklessness of a smart freshman

‘Yes,’ said Phil readily, with all the recklessness of a smart freshman; ‘why, Ellandun was merely the slogging of savages, of whom we know nothing but a few names. What I call fine history is Macaulay’s famous account of the state of England under the Stuarts, or Froude’s splendid picture of the trial and execution of Mary of Scots. That is a piece of writing that no one can ever forget.’

‘Ah, just so !’ said the Venerable, in that awful mono-syllabic way which he had caught from the Master; ‘ splen-did picture ! — piece of writing ! — fine history ! — here we generally take “fine history” to be — ah! false history.’

‘ But fine history need not be false,’ said Phil.

‘We usually find it so,’ replied his tutor, ‘and it is ten times worse than false quantities in a copy of longs and shorts. There is no worse offence outside the statute book (and many offences in it are less immoral) than the crime of making up a picture of actual events for the sake of literary effect, with no real care for exact truthfulness of detail. A historical romance, as they call novels of past ages, is often a source of troublesome errors; but, at any rate, in a novel we know what to expect. It is a pity that Scott should talk nonsense about Robin Hood in Ivanhoe, and that Bulwer introduced Caxton into the Last of the Barons. But no one expects to find truth in such books, and every one reads them at his own peril. In a history of England it is monstrous to be careless about references, and to trust to a late authority.’

[bulgariablo]

Codex Diplomatics

‘ Arid are we expected to enjoy our Codex Diplomatics as much as our Macaulay and our Froude? ’

‘We do not ask you to enjoy,’ said the Bede, in his dry way, ‘ we only ask you to know — or, to be quite accurate, to satisfy the examiners. The brilliant apologist of Henry vm. seems to give you delightful lectures; but I can assure you that the Schools know no other standard but that of accurate research, in the manner so solidly established by the late Regius Professor whom we have lost.’

‘ Do you think that a thoughtful essay on the typical movements in one’s period would not pay? ’ asked the Admirable one, in a rather anxious tone.

‘My young friend,’ said the Reverend Ethelbald, ‘you will find that dates, authorities, texts, facts, and plenty of diphthongs pay much better. You are in danger of mortal heresy, if you think that anything will show you a royal ‘

road to these. If there is one thing which, more than another private sofia tours, is the mark of Oxford to-day, it is belief in contemporary documents, exact testing of authorities, scrupulous verification of citations, minute attention to chronology, geography, palaeography, and inscriptions. When all these are right, you cannot go wrong. For all this we owe our gratitude to the great historian we have lost.’

‘ Oh, yes,’ said Phil airily, for he was quite aware that he was thought to be shaky in his pre-Ecgberht chronicles; ‘ I am not saying a word against accuracy. But all facts are not equally important, nor are all old documents of the same use. I have been grinding all this term at the History of the Norman Conquest, verifying all the citations as I go along, and making maps of every place that is named. I have only got to the third volume, you know, and I don’t know now what it all comes to. Freeman’s West-Saxon scuffles on the downs seem to me duller than Thucydidesfifty hoplites and three hundred sling-men, and I have not yet come to anything to compare with the Syracusan expedition.’

‘ This is a bad beginning for a history man,’ said Baeda. Is this how they talked at Eton of the greatest period of the greatest race in the annals of the world? All history centres round the early records of the English in the three or four centuries before the first coming of the Jutes, and the three or four after it. Let me advise you to take as your period, say, the battle of Ellandun, and get up all about it, and how “ its stream was choked with slain,” and what led up to it and what came after it. Do you know anything more interesting, as you call it, than that? ’

Recklessness of a smart freshman

‘Yes,’ said Phil readily, with all the recklessness of a smart freshman; ‘why, Ellandun was merely the slogging of savages, of whom we know nothing but a few names. What I call fine history is Macaulay’s famous account of the state of England under the Stuarts, or Froude’s splendid picture of the trial and execution of Mary of Scots. That is a piece of writing that no one can ever forget.’

‘Ah, just so !’ said the Venerable, in that awful mono-syllabic way which he had caught from the Master; ‘ splen-did picture ! — piece of writing ! — fine history ! — here we generally take “fine history” to be — ah! false history.’

‘ But fine history need not be false,’ said Phil.

‘We usually find it so,’ replied his tutor, ‘and it is ten times worse than false quantities in a copy of longs and shorts. There is no worse offence outside the statute book (and many offences in it are less immoral) than the crime of making up a picture of actual events for the sake of literary effect, with no real care for exact truthfulness of detail. A historical romance, as they call novels of past ages, is often a source of troublesome errors; but, at any rate, in a novel we know what to expect. It is a pity that Scott should talk nonsense about Robin Hood in Ivanhoe, and that Bulwer introduced Caxton into the Last of the Barons. But no one expects to find truth in such books, and every one reads them at his own peril. In a history of England it is monstrous to be careless about references, and to trust to a late authority.’

[everybg]

Codex Diplomatics

‘ Arid are we expected to enjoy our Codex Diplomatics as much as our Macaulay and our Froude? ’

‘We do not ask you to enjoy,’ said the Bede, in his dry way, ‘ we only ask you to know — or, to be quite accurate, to satisfy the examiners. The brilliant apologist of Henry vm. seems to give you delightful lectures; but I can assure you that the Schools know no other standard but that of accurate research, in the manner so solidly established by the late Regius Professor whom we have lost.’

‘ Do you think that a thoughtful essay on the typical movements in one’s period would not pay? ’ asked the Admirable one, in a rather anxious tone.

‘My young friend,’ said the Reverend Ethelbald, ‘you will find that dates, authorities, texts, facts, and plenty of diphthongs pay much better. You are in danger of mortal heresy, if you think that anything will show you a royal ‘

road to these. If there is one thing which, more than another private sofia tours, is the mark of Oxford to-day, it is belief in contemporary documents, exact testing of authorities, scrupulous verification of citations, minute attention to chronology, geography, palaeography, and inscriptions. When all these are right, you cannot go wrong. For all this we owe our gratitude to the great historian we have lost.’

‘ Oh, yes,’ said Phil airily, for he was quite aware that he was thought to be shaky in his pre-Ecgberht chronicles; ‘ I am not saying a word against accuracy. But all facts are not equally important, nor are all old documents of the same use. I have been grinding all this term at the History of the Norman Conquest, verifying all the citations as I go along, and making maps of every place that is named. I have only got to the third volume, you know, and I don’t know now what it all comes to. Freeman’s West-Saxon scuffles on the downs seem to me duller than Thucydidesfifty hoplites and three hundred sling-men, and I have not yet come to anything to compare with the Syracusan expedition.’

‘ This is a bad beginning for a history man,’ said Baeda. Is this how they talked at Eton of the greatest period of the greatest race in the annals of the world? All history centres round the early records of the English in the three or four centuries before the first coming of the Jutes, and the three or four after it. Let me advise you to take as your period, say, the battle of Ellandun, and get up all about it, and how “ its stream was choked with slain,” and what led up to it and what came after it. Do you know anything more interesting, as you call it, than that? ’

Recklessness of a smart freshman

‘Yes,’ said Phil readily, with all the recklessness of a smart freshman; ‘why, Ellandun was merely the slogging of savages, of whom we know nothing but a few names. What I call fine history is Macaulay’s famous account of the state of England under the Stuarts, or Froude’s splendid picture of the trial and execution of Mary of Scots. That is a piece of writing that no one can ever forget.’

‘Ah, just so !’ said the Venerable, in that awful mono-syllabic way which he had caught from the Master; ‘ splen-did picture ! — piece of writing ! — fine history ! — here we generally take “fine history” to be — ah! false history.’

‘ But fine history need not be false,’ said Phil.

‘We usually find it so,’ replied his tutor, ‘and it is ten times worse than false quantities in a copy of longs and shorts. There is no worse offence outside the statute book (and many offences in it are less immoral) than the crime of making up a picture of actual events for the sake of literary effect, with no real care for exact truthfulness of detail. A historical romance, as they call novels of past ages, is often a source of troublesome errors; but, at any rate, in a novel we know what to expect. It is a pity that Scott should talk nonsense about Robin Hood in Ivanhoe, and that Bulwer introduced Caxton into the Last of the Barons. But no one expects to find truth in such books, and every one reads them at his own peril. In a history of England it is monstrous to be careless about references, and to trust to a late authority.’

[sunyandbulgaria]

Codex Diplomatics

‘ Arid are we expected to enjoy our Codex Diplomatics as much as our Macaulay and our Froude? ’

‘We do not ask you to enjoy,’ said the Bede, in his dry way, ‘ we only ask you to know — or, to be quite accurate, to satisfy the examiners. The brilliant apologist of Henry vm. seems to give you delightful lectures; but I can assure you that the Schools know no other standard but that of accurate research, in the manner so solidly established by the late Regius Professor whom we have lost.’

‘ Do you think that a thoughtful essay on the typical movements in one’s period would not pay? ’ asked the Admirable one, in a rather anxious tone.

‘My young friend,’ said the Reverend Ethelbald, ‘you will find that dates, authorities, texts, facts, and plenty of diphthongs pay much better. You are in danger of mortal heresy, if you think that anything will show you a royal ‘

road to these. If there is one thing which, more than another private sofia tours, is the mark of Oxford to-day, it is belief in contemporary documents, exact testing of authorities, scrupulous verification of citations, minute attention to chronology, geography, palaeography, and inscriptions. When all these are right, you cannot go wrong. For all this we owe our gratitude to the great historian we have lost.’

‘ Oh, yes,’ said Phil airily, for he was quite aware that he was thought to be shaky in his pre-Ecgberht chronicles; ‘ I am not saying a word against accuracy. But all facts are not equally important, nor are all old documents of the same use. I have been grinding all this term at the History of the Norman Conquest, verifying all the citations as I go along, and making maps of every place that is named. I have only got to the third volume, you know, and I don’t know now what it all comes to. Freeman’s West-Saxon scuffles on the downs seem to me duller than Thucydidesfifty hoplites and three hundred sling-men, and I have not yet come to anything to compare with the Syracusan expedition.’

‘ This is a bad beginning for a history man,’ said Baeda. Is this how they talked at Eton of the greatest period of the greatest race in the annals of the world? All history centres round the early records of the English in the three or four centuries before the first coming of the Jutes, and the three or four after it. Let me advise you to take as your period, say, the battle of Ellandun, and get up all about it, and how “ its stream was choked with slain,” and what led up to it and what came after it. Do you know anything more interesting, as you call it, than that? ’

Recklessness of a smart freshman

‘Yes,’ said Phil readily, with all the recklessness of a smart freshman; ‘why, Ellandun was merely the slogging of savages, of whom we know nothing but a few names. What I call fine history is Macaulay’s famous account of the state of England under the Stuarts, or Froude’s splendid picture of the trial and execution of Mary of Scots. That is a piece of writing that no one can ever forget.’

‘Ah, just so !’ said the Venerable, in that awful mono-syllabic way which he had caught from the Master; ‘ splen-did picture ! — piece of writing ! — fine history ! — here we generally take “fine history” to be — ah! false history.’

‘ But fine history need not be false,’ said Phil.

‘We usually find it so,’ replied his tutor, ‘and it is ten times worse than false quantities in a copy of longs and shorts. There is no worse offence outside the statute book (and many offences in it are less immoral) than the crime of making up a picture of actual events for the sake of literary effect, with no real care for exact truthfulness of detail. A historical romance, as they call novels of past ages, is often a source of troublesome errors; but, at any rate, in a novel we know what to expect. It is a pity that Scott should talk nonsense about Robin Hood in Ivanhoe, and that Bulwer introduced Caxton into the Last of the Barons. But no one expects to find truth in such books, and every one reads them at his own peril. In a history of England it is monstrous to be careless about references, and to trust to a late authority.’

[mybulgaria]

Codex Diplomatics

‘ Arid are we expected to enjoy our Codex Diplomatics as much as our Macaulay and our Froude? ’

‘We do not ask you to enjoy,’ said the Bede, in his dry way, ‘ we only ask you to know — or, to be quite accurate, to satisfy the examiners. The brilliant apologist of Henry vm. seems to give you delightful lectures; but I can assure you that the Schools know no other standard but that of accurate research, in the manner so solidly established by the late Regius Professor whom we have lost.’

‘ Do you think that a thoughtful essay on the typical movements in one’s period would not pay? ’ asked the Admirable one, in a rather anxious tone.

‘My young friend,’ said the Reverend Ethelbald, ‘you will find that dates, authorities, texts, facts, and plenty of diphthongs pay much better. You are in danger of mortal heresy, if you think that anything will show you a royal ‘

road to these. If there is one thing which, more than another private sofia tours, is the mark of Oxford to-day, it is belief in contemporary documents, exact testing of authorities, scrupulous verification of citations, minute attention to chronology, geography, palaeography, and inscriptions. When all these are right, you cannot go wrong. For all this we owe our gratitude to the great historian we have lost.’

‘ Oh, yes,’ said Phil airily, for he was quite aware that he was thought to be shaky in his pre-Ecgberht chronicles; ‘ I am not saying a word against accuracy. But all facts are not equally important, nor are all old documents of the same use. I have been grinding all this term at the History of the Norman Conquest, verifying all the citations as I go along, and making maps of every place that is named. I have only got to the third volume, you know, and I don’t know now what it all comes to. Freeman’s West-Saxon scuffles on the downs seem to me duller than Thucydidesfifty hoplites and three hundred sling-men, and I have not yet come to anything to compare with the Syracusan expedition.’

‘ This is a bad beginning for a history man,’ said Baeda. Is this how they talked at Eton of the greatest period of the greatest race in the annals of the world? All history centres round the early records of the English in the three or four centuries before the first coming of the Jutes, and the three or four after it. Let me advise you to take as your period, say, the battle of Ellandun, and get up all about it, and how “ its stream was choked with slain,” and what led up to it and what came after it. Do you know anything more interesting, as you call it, than that? ’

Recklessness of a smart freshman

‘Yes,’ said Phil readily, with all the recklessness of a smart freshman; ‘why, Ellandun was merely the slogging of savages, of whom we know nothing but a few names. What I call fine history is Macaulay’s famous account of the state of England under the Stuarts, or Froude’s splendid picture of the trial and execution of Mary of Scots. That is a piece of writing that no one can ever forget.’

‘Ah, just so !’ said the Venerable, in that awful mono-syllabic way which he had caught from the Master; ‘ splen-did picture ! — piece of writing ! — fine history ! — here we generally take “fine history” to be — ah! false history.’

‘ But fine history need not be false,’ said Phil.

‘We usually find it so,’ replied his tutor, ‘and it is ten times worse than false quantities in a copy of longs and shorts. There is no worse offence outside the statute book (and many offences in it are less immoral) than the crime of making up a picture of actual events for the sake of literary effect, with no real care for exact truthfulness of detail. A historical romance, as they call novels of past ages, is often a source of troublesome errors; but, at any rate, in a novel we know what to expect. It is a pity that Scott should talk nonsense about Robin Hood in Ivanhoe, and that Bulwer introduced Caxton into the Last of the Barons. But no one expects to find truth in such books, and every one reads them at his own peril. In a history of England it is monstrous to be careless about references, and to trust to a late authority.’

[bulgariatraveladvisory]

Codex Diplomatics

‘ Arid are we expected to enjoy our Codex Diplomatics as much as our Macaulay and our Froude? ’

‘We do not ask you to enjoy,’ said the Bede, in his dry way, ‘ we only ask you to know — or, to be quite accurate, to satisfy the examiners. The brilliant apologist of Henry vm. seems to give you delightful lectures; but I can assure you that the Schools know no other standard but that of accurate research, in the manner so solidly established by the late Regius Professor whom we have lost.’

‘ Do you think that a thoughtful essay on the typical movements in one’s period would not pay? ’ asked the Admirable one, in a rather anxious tone.

‘My young friend,’ said the Reverend Ethelbald, ‘you will find that dates, authorities, texts, facts, and plenty of diphthongs pay much better. You are in danger of mortal heresy, if you think that anything will show you a royal ‘

road to these. If there is one thing which, more than another private sofia tours, is the mark of Oxford to-day, it is belief in contemporary documents, exact testing of authorities, scrupulous verification of citations, minute attention to chronology, geography, palaeography, and inscriptions. When all these are right, you cannot go wrong. For all this we owe our gratitude to the great historian we have lost.’

‘ Oh, yes,’ said Phil airily, for he was quite aware that he was thought to be shaky in his pre-Ecgberht chronicles; ‘ I am not saying a word against accuracy. But all facts are not equally important, nor are all old documents of the same use. I have been grinding all this term at the History of the Norman Conquest, verifying all the citations as I go along, and making maps of every place that is named. I have only got to the third volume, you know, and I don’t know now what it all comes to. Freeman’s West-Saxon scuffles on the downs seem to me duller than Thucydidesfifty hoplites and three hundred sling-men, and I have not yet come to anything to compare with the Syracusan expedition.’

‘ This is a bad beginning for a history man,’ said Baeda. Is this how they talked at Eton of the greatest period of the greatest race in the annals of the world? All history centres round the early records of the English in the three or four centuries before the first coming of the Jutes, and the three or four after it. Let me advise you to take as your period, say, the battle of Ellandun, and get up all about it, and how “ its stream was choked with slain,” and what led up to it and what came after it. Do you know anything more interesting, as you call it, than that? ’

Recklessness of a smart freshman

‘Yes,’ said Phil readily, with all the recklessness of a smart freshman; ‘why, Ellandun was merely the slogging of savages, of whom we know nothing but a few names. What I call fine history is Macaulay’s famous account of the state of England under the Stuarts, or Froude’s splendid picture of the trial and execution of Mary of Scots. That is a piece of writing that no one can ever forget.’

‘Ah, just so !’ said the Venerable, in that awful mono-syllabic way which he had caught from the Master; ‘ splen-did picture ! — piece of writing ! — fine history ! — here we generally take “fine history” to be — ah! false history.’

‘ But fine history need not be false,’ said Phil.

‘We usually find it so,’ replied his tutor, ‘and it is ten times worse than false quantities in a copy of longs and shorts. There is no worse offence outside the statute book (and many offences in it are less immoral) than the crime of making up a picture of actual events for the sake of literary effect, with no real care for exact truthfulness of detail. A historical romance, as they call novels of past ages, is often a source of troublesome errors; but, at any rate, in a novel we know what to expect. It is a pity that Scott should talk nonsense about Robin Hood in Ivanhoe, and that Bulwer introduced Caxton into the Last of the Barons. But no one expects to find truth in such books, and every one reads them at his own peril. In a history of England it is monstrous to be careless about references, and to trust to a late authority.’

[bulgaristya]

Codex Diplomatics

‘ Arid are we expected to enjoy our Codex Diplomatics as much as our Macaulay and our Froude? ’

‘We do not ask you to enjoy,’ said the Bede, in his dry way, ‘ we only ask you to know — or, to be quite accurate, to satisfy the examiners. The brilliant apologist of Henry vm. seems to give you delightful lectures; but I can assure you that the Schools know no other standard but that of accurate research, in the manner so solidly established by the late Regius Professor whom we have lost.’

‘ Do you think that a thoughtful essay on the typical movements in one’s period would not pay? ’ asked the Admirable one, in a rather anxious tone.

‘My young friend,’ said the Reverend Ethelbald, ‘you will find that dates, authorities, texts, facts, and plenty of diphthongs pay much better. You are in danger of mortal heresy, if you think that anything will show you a royal ‘

road to these. If there is one thing which, more than another private sofia tours, is the mark of Oxford to-day, it is belief in contemporary documents, exact testing of authorities, scrupulous verification of citations, minute attention to chronology, geography, palaeography, and inscriptions. When all these are right, you cannot go wrong. For all this we owe our gratitude to the great historian we have lost.’

‘ Oh, yes,’ said Phil airily, for he was quite aware that he was thought to be shaky in his pre-Ecgberht chronicles; ‘ I am not saying a word against accuracy. But all facts are not equally important, nor are all old documents of the same use. I have been grinding all this term at the History of the Norman Conquest, verifying all the citations as I go along, and making maps of every place that is named. I have only got to the third volume, you know, and I don’t know now what it all comes to. Freeman’s West-Saxon scuffles on the downs seem to me duller than Thucydidesfifty hoplites and three hundred sling-men, and I have not yet come to anything to compare with the Syracusan expedition.’

‘ This is a bad beginning for a history man,’ said Baeda. Is this how they talked at Eton of the greatest period of the greatest race in the annals of the world? All history centres round the early records of the English in the three or four centuries before the first coming of the Jutes, and the three or four after it. Let me advise you to take as your period, say, the battle of Ellandun, and get up all about it, and how “ its stream was choked with slain,” and what led up to it and what came after it. Do you know anything more interesting, as you call it, than that? ’

Recklessness of a smart freshman

‘Yes,’ said Phil readily, with all the recklessness of a smart freshman; ‘why, Ellandun was merely the slogging of savages, of whom we know nothing but a few names. What I call fine history is Macaulay’s famous account of the state of England under the Stuarts, or Froude’s splendid picture of the trial and execution of Mary of Scots. That is a piece of writing that no one can ever forget.’

‘Ah, just so !’ said the Venerable, in that awful mono-syllabic way which he had caught from the Master; ‘ splen-did picture ! — piece of writing ! — fine history ! — here we generally take “fine history” to be — ah! false history.’

‘ But fine history need not be false,’ said Phil.

‘We usually find it so,’ replied his tutor, ‘and it is ten times worse than false quantities in a copy of longs and shorts. There is no worse offence outside the statute book (and many offences in it are less immoral) than the crime of making up a picture of actual events for the sake of literary effect, with no real care for exact truthfulness of detail. A historical romance, as they call novels of past ages, is often a source of troublesome errors; but, at any rate, in a novel we know what to expect. It is a pity that Scott should talk nonsense about Robin Hood in Ivanhoe, and that Bulwer introduced Caxton into the Last of the Barons. But no one expects to find truth in such books, and every one reads them at his own peril. In a history of England it is monstrous to be careless about references, and to trust to a late authority.’

[thiswaycomessomethingwicked]

Why is Margaret Atwood an abysmal human being?

Oh god, it’s a few things. And it’s all rather involved, because it’s Canadian Lit and everything is messy in Can Lit. 

There is no way to do this succinctly. But if I had to: 1. she supports an alleged sexual assaulter who preyed on students while he was chair of a creative writing program; 2. continues to support this man as he actively works to silence conversation around rape culture in Can Lit; 3. supports a man who has been discovered to have spent the last so many decades pretending to be First Nation writer in order to make $$; 4. had her lawyers harass the Walrus until they pulled a piece by Zoe Whittall that was a bit critical of her; 5. has been recently vibing with Jon Kay and other MRA folks on twitter; 6. generally actively works to silence women writers who don’t suck up to her .. etc. etc. 

-

So, the big, recent issue has been her ongoing support of Stephen Galloway, alleged sexual assaulter who preyed on students while chair of the UBC creative writing program. 

She infamously signed the stupid UBC Accountable Open Letter in support of him. She’s also doubled down on her support as he moves forward in charging upwards of 25 people with libel for talking about rape culture on twitter.

-

The Stephen Galloway case: 

Stephen Galloway was the chair of UBC’s creative writing program. From 2014-2016 several allegations came forward about him from both staff and students. These ranged from bullying to sexual assault. UBC then suspended his employment. 

In response to this, the above open letter was published claiming that the University “acted irresponsibly” and chose to go about the allegations in a manner that was “severely damaging Professor Galloway’s reputation and affecting his health,” denying Galloway of his right to due process.

However, I think Alicia Elliott put it perfectly in a Twitter statement: “In cases of sexual assault, sexual harassment & rape, the criminal justice system (and society) centre the accused and his comfort, while ignoring the victim’s needs. The UBC Accountable letter did the same thing. It wasn’t calling for systemic change; it was upholding [the] status quo.”

Subsequent to this, Galloway brought forward over twenty libel cases against various and sundry writers, colleagues and the women who brought forward the sexual assault charges. Those charged include Alicia Elliott and Mandi Grey. This is all in an attempt to bring about a chill effect to the conversation of rape culture in Can Lit. 

And it worked, for the most part. After he brought forward the libel cases the conversation dried up over night. This is because Canada’s libel laws heavily favour the prosecution and not the defendant. 

Galloway, though, is really just angry at having to suffer consequences for his shitty behaviour and wants to take it out on everyone. 

From The Toronto Star: 

AB [unnamed complainant who brought the initial sexual assault charges against Galloway] subsequently told a couple of professors and a friend of the alleged assaults in November 2015 and wrote a letter to the UBC president, claiming she had been sexually assaulted by an unnamed professor, according to her court filings. She asserts that she had a “moral and social duty” to report the allegations.

Lawyers for AB also told the court the independent investigator never used the words “not substantiated” or “unsubstantiated” in reference to the sexual assault allegations. “Ms. Boyd’s words were that ‘on a balance of probabilities’ she was ‘unable to find’ that the sexual assaults ‘occurred,’” their written submissions state, adding that Boyd did find AB’s allegations of sexual harassment to be credible.

Here’s a Globe and Mail on the latest about the case (behind a paywall unfortunately) 

VICE piece that has a bit of an update on the case as well. 

Atwood has double downed on her support of Galloway throughout this entire debacle - from beginning to present day. 

Because power protects power.

- 

Additionally, Margaret Atwood has expressed support for Joseph Boyden after it came out that he’s been doing a Pretend-indian shtick. (Which is racist. So very racist.) 

More recently, Margaret Atwood has been retweeting MRAs, being lauded by the likes of Jon Kay for being anti-Feminist (essentially, which is a stance she’s long had tbf), using her power and presence to silence writers like Alicia Elliott and Zoe Whittall, and is generally demonstrating her clear and vested interest in maintaining the status quo of a white, mostly-male dominated Canadian Lit (and art) scene. 

And, as I’ve said before on the Margaret Atwood subject: 

It’s also hard because I understand there are lines you have to erase to succeed as a woman in the Lit establishment, especially in the cliquey, arrogant Canadian Lit scene. But when you buy in so much to the narrative that white, cis men in the Lit scene perpetuate you have to wonder at what cost did you acquire your power?

There are ways to be a successful, powerful woman in literature - I think Ursula K LeGuin is a fantastic example of how to use power for good - and I just am so sad Margaret Atwood continues to steadily become The Literal Worst.

Also, very petty but w/e, I remember hearing a story that she went into a store at Bay and Bloor looking for wine glasses - like a really posh, expensive store. It’s Bay and Bloor you can’t breathe in a store there without spending $400. Anyway, the store had only two options for wine glasses: one super pricey and the other on the more affordable end. And Margarette Atwood got so mad that this store only carried two options (it was not, it should be noted, a store specializing in kitchen or dish ware) and that she had to pay for the nicer ones. She treated the staff horribly. And it’s like, go to fucking Homesense Maggie. You’re not above Winners

-

And it’s like, I’m not one of those people who is like “burn all her work; never read anything by her ever again” because that’s a stupid position to take. Her books have held value and do hold value. That she was one of the first women to ascend in Canadas’s dick-swinging literary world is a net positive for all women. That said, I do think more of a nuanced view should be held of her than is currently the case. We can acknowledge that she did do a lot of firsts as a woman in Can Lit, while also not ignoring her racism, her rape apologist attitude, her tendency to trample down up and coming women writers, her sympathy for the MRA world view ... etc. 

Anyway, a reckoning needs to happen in Can Lit about the voices we choose to amplify and what we want art and literature to look like. 

[side-raven-hours]

Maybe I'm biased because the marauders and Wolfstar are currently the only reason I'm still in HP at all BUT-

*I start this by saying that you can 1000% like Snape as a character, he isn't my vibe but if he still brings you comfort I'm not gonna judge you. This post is specifically for apologists, if you acknowledge that he is still a bad person you are VALID and this lil rant is not for you 💜*

The double standard with Snape apologists just doesn't sit well with me. I'll admit that Snape is a cool character, and maybe if he'd been written better I'd like him more, but as he stands his vibe just... isn't right. He lusted over his friend, called her a slur, became a wizard n@zi, abused his authority as a professor, legit cradled said girl he lusted over in his arms while the baby cried (also meaning he just outright stepped over James lifeless body need I remind you), and mistreated a student to the point that he was more feared than the lady who TOURTURED HIS PARENTS TO INSANITY.

And if I hear "He was afraid of authority, not Snape." ONE MORE TIME-

Neville was not afraid of "authority". If he was, it would have been someone with real authority over him: Mcgonagall, Dumbledore, ext. But no, it wasn't. It was Snape, his potions teacher who, again, had just as much authority as say... professor Sprout, or literally anyone else with a professor title. If Neville's fear had truly been authority then jkr SEVERELY fucked up on her writing, which I definitely doubt. Neville was afraid of Snape, end of story.

And because I see so many Snape apologists hate the marauders as well, let me give you this nugget of information.

Yes, James was a bully. Key word: Was. When you're a kid you're allowed to make mistakes and when you grow up with privilege, which he did, children tend to be a bit of an ass by default. You see that happen in real life ALL THE TIME, it's just the environment they grew up in. While that does not excuse his behavior, James realized that he was an asshole and GREW THE FUCK UP. He stopped being a bully once he became head boy because he learned what he did was wrong- this I'm guessing is around the time when kids start to think for themselves and question the way they were raised, so that makes sense. He actively tried to become a better person and that's why I love him- he shows a more accurate representation of people than just something black and white. A bully can become a better person and learn from their mistakes. Continuing to treat him like a bully is senseless.

Now what about Snape? Most arguments I see for his behavior was how he was bullied and abused and has trauma, but here's the thing. So does Harry. By your logic Harry should have been an absolute ASS because of how he was raised, but that's not what happened at all. He didn't let himself turn into an abuser. Snape did. Yes Snape may have been a victim but that doesn't make becoming the abuser okay, it explains it sure, but he's still a shit human. People wouldn't have this energy for an abusive parent correct? No matter if that parent had a bad childhood or not, they're still abusive and they're not gonna get sympathy. So why does Snape deserve it? Why does Snape deserve a redemption ark that he could have been on his way to even before the books started? But no, he continues to pull the victim card. This man is in his THIRTIES

And while I'm on this let's open another can of worms-

Interesting how you think a thirty year old man should get a redemption ark because he was alone and forced into being a nazi 🥺 but the literal CHILD doesn't deserve one even though he was ALONE AND FORCED INTO IT. Draco was an actual child who was groomed into it. There was not a MOMENT when Draco looked happy with anything going on, the poor boy constantly looked like he was five minutes from either a breakdown or jumping off a building.