#but the story needs to move on

[whimsicalsesquipedalian]

Y’all I’m literally never going to be okay about Simon and Betty.

Simon realising that their whole relationship he hadn’t been examining why Betty always followed him because he was too focused on his love for her and not what she really needed. Not what they both really needed.

The devastating parallel of Betty being so blindly in love with Simon that she willingly and unthinkingly always put him first. And Simon being so blindingly in love with Betty that he saw her being happy and so never thought to fucking question whether those were the right decisions to make. Enabling them every time because they were in love and that was what she wanted, right? She wanted to be with him. She loved him. She was happy. So why would he think it should be any different?

And Betty reassuring Simon that she made her own choices. That he didn’t hold her anywhere. That he never forced her to be with him, or put him first. That she made those decisions and that she didn’t have any regrets. But that they both had to let this go because as long as they were focused on each other neither of them were ever going to be able to have the life they needed.

That they had both been trapped for so long carving pieces of themselves out for other people. Betty in her blind devotion when it came to Simon. Simon in his belief that his crimes as the Ice King, and that all the ways he had let down Betty, meant the only purpose and worth he could have was in sacrificing himself for others.

That they both deserved self-possession and the ability to find autonomy and actualisation as individuals. That they deserved to make their own choices, the good and the bad, and just live without the blind devotion, and guilt, and sacrifice that was going to trap them in this loop forever.

That they meant everything to each other, but that now they needed to mean everything to themselves. That the only way forward was on different paths, but that they both deserved that. That they were able to show each other that they deserved that.

That Simon gets to live now.

I will never be okay about this show. Or these two.

[iwanderthroughthesenights]

Something that stood out to me a lot from this album is the intentional de-personalization of extremely personal feelings and stories. She seems to have decided for this project that in order to be free to be completely honest in her art (which tbf she always has been but never as much as this album), she needs to visualize herself, and thus her stories, as a third party, an external entity on which she's conducting a post-mortem examination. Her 2016 self and the hate train she suffered after Snakegate is reimagined as Cassandra, a character from Greek mythology who had visions in her dreams but no one believed her and instead she was punished. Her anxiety of holding her lover's career back is instead described as The Albatross, this girl who everyone has been warned to stay away from bc she causes problems and is a liability. Her sweet, innocent childhood self is depicted as a robin, a feisty little bird full of life, dreams, and potential who has yet no clue of the cruelty of the world.

Consequently, the characters in her life are, too, bestowed upon fictional characters from stories that have been told before and/or are familiar in some way to the listener (aIMee the girl from this allegorical high school which is actually Kim Kardashian, Peter the boy who never grew up and stayed forever in Neverland who actually is her long-term ex partner, both her and her lover's separate romantic involvements imagined as Chloe or Sam or Sophia or Marcus, her real life therapist referred to as The Professor etc). By using the representation of well-known characters from widely popular stories and myths with names and all, she creates an even deeper line of emotional connection with the listener. Then, the 4th wall is delightfully broken in Clara Bow, where she refers to Clara Bow and Stevie Nicks as the inherent precedents to Taylor Swift. But what's even more brilliant about this is that in this way, she is making Taylor Swift into a character in and of itself. She is actually attempting to externalize Taylor Swift from Taylor the real-life woman. By narrating her stories through tangible entities presented as completely external to herself, she is inhibited by the safety of this fictional/allegorical lense through which she's allowing her stories to be consumed, and as a result, she has unlimited freedom to be more personal than she has ever been in her art before.

[yunogf]

"Smoke & Mirrors" (1957) starring Jaehyun Jeong dir. Alfred Hitchcock

[axolotlclown]

We need to remember that Shubble stated that Wilbur would manipulate and gaslight friends and family. With this, we must be patient with streamers that were close to Wilbur. This was likely surprising and shocking for them. They may need time to come to terms with what has happened.

I have been vocal about how important it is for men to be critical about abusive behaviors. However, Wilbur had many close friends—some would even consider him family—and now they may feel they hardly knew him at all.

There is a deep stress felt by viewers. It is difficult to think we have given any amount of time or money to an abuser. Could you imagine a close friend right now? The pain and betrayal must sear. They need time to understand what has happened and come to terms with it. Many of them may not be live in the coming days (weeks even).

That being said, as time passes, criticism may be necessary. Complacency is not an option. Men that are willing to ignore abuse to protect an abuser are just as pathetic as the abusers themselves.

Let's give this situation time to breathe. I ask that we give patience and courtesy to those close to Wilbur at this time. But please do not forget that this happened. There may be a few streamers hoping to lay low and then drop a collab in a few months. Do not let them. This is too important.

[firestorm09890]

"Is he called the 'Viper' because he bites people" -woman who likes to bite whatever she can and does not realize she's a vampire

"No, it's a figure of speech. He sounds irritating but is probably a good strategist" -military strategist many find irritating to deal with because mentally she never left The War

"Whoever made this corridor purple with nothing in it must be a terrible leader. You always need to think about morale" -the same woman, whose usual solution for low morale in her teammates is "stop whining. manager we should kill them"

"the sephirot should have just had a fistfight instead of badmouthing each other for eternity" -Outis again

"Hod is too overprotective" -you'll never guess

[hellohellowelcome]

Standard shonen endings have rotted some people's brains. I've seen so many dudebros disappointed that Izuku didn't at the very least "bag his girl" as some sort of reparation for losing his quirk. And so much Ochako slander for "ghosting" Izuku for 8 years for being quirkless (not true btw, leak mistranlastion) because she wasn't explicitly Izuku's endgame love interest in typical shonen fashion. I even saw a tweet doing crazy numbers (70k+ likes) suggesting that Izuku should've gotten with Hatsume because at least she spent 8 years working on his suit....? Ask yourself why you feel like Izuku needed a canon love interest post-time skip to be happy. And then ask yourself why you hate women and view them as the MC's "much-deserved" reward for saving the day.

[tennessoui]

prompt list but it’s just sentences I’ve gotten wrong in duolingo

[tathrin]

Hey, so do you ever stop to think about how the premise of Lord of the Rings being an in-universe book written by some of the characters who lived through that story means that they decided what parts and perspectives to use to tell that story...?

And when our authors weren't there to experience the events themselves, they have to rely on what they're told about them by the characters who were there, right...?

Okay so stop and think about the Glittering Caves.

We never actually go to the caves in the narrative. Tolkien LOVES describing nature and natural beauty, but we don't actually see the caves described "by him" the way we do other places. Obviously Gimli's words are Tolkien's, yes; but we only see the caves filtered through his words about them, after the fact.

When Gimli and Éomer and the other Rohirrim take refuge there, the narrative doesn't follow them. Obviously from a narrative standpoint this is to keep the focus narrow, and not to interrupt the battle-sequence with a long ode to the beauty of the caves, and to create tension in the reader who doesn't know if these characters are okay or not. Which all makes sense!

But think about it in terms of the book that was written in Middle-earth by the folk living there. Why DON'T we get to have a direct experience of those caves? Gimli obviously related several other parts of the story that none of the Hobbits were there to witness to them, and which were written into the books as Direct Events Happening In The Narrative (think of the Paths of the Dead scene, for one of the more visceral moments!). So why not the Glittering Caves?

Was it because they wanted to keep that narrative focus and tension, and so they didn't include his perspective on that part of the battle? Perhaps, that's certainly a possibility to consider.

But also consider: when we do hear about the Glittering Caves, what we hear is Gimli telling Legolas about the Glittering Caves. THAT is the part of that event that is considered of importance to include in the book: not Gimli's actual experience when he was in them, but rather the part where he relates that experience TO Legolas.

And I kind of just THOUGHT about that today.

And went HUH.

[thoughtfulchaos773]

We need a bottle episode of Sydney and Carmy talking. An hour long.

Close the Bear for a day, and it's just those two - maybe a deep cleaning day, an R&D for the menu. Give us a nod to the table scene!

We need arguments, confessions, and pillow talk.

Written by Joanna and Chris.

[suntails]

fallen

[wheretheresawyll]

still boggles my mind that in the year 2024 most players still ignore anora's character just to reduce her to a lying backstabber, when she only goes against you if:

you reveal her identity to ser cautherine and howe's soldiers, defeating the entire purpose of her disguise and also ignoring what she told you literally one minute before about how they can't know she's escaping with you - thereby betraying her first

you ignore her completely in denerim after she asks you to come talk to her, and only show up to the landsmeet

you bring up loghain's fate, and when she tells you that she would rather him be spared if possible, you tell her to her face that her father has to die

[hercynianforest]

Just a friendly reminder that Aaravos is not a trustworthy narrator, lol

Bonus:

Me:

[raviollies]

personal redemption with not liking any of the art ive made for this story with a composition thats actually working out okay

[aardvaark]

im so glad that we never get a clear picture of sophie’s background in leverage & i hope we never do. however i also really like making up various, often conflicting backstories for her in my head. perhaps they’re all backstories for an alias of hers, ones she laid to rest back in season two.

[marlynnofmany]

Hey, time to overanalyze magic again. It makes sense to me -- follow closely now -- that earthbending would just be the control of rocks. It's all the minerals that come from the ground, and sure, even some artificially created ones as long as they have the same structure. But just rocks. Not dirt.

Why not, you ask? I invite you to consider what dirt actually is. It's lots of things! Some rock dust, yes, but also crumbled plants, and decomposed animals, and a variety of fungus, and bits of poop from creatures both microscopic and large. Basically, it's a mess of all things organic (plus tiny rocks).

You don't want an earthbender for dirt.

You want a necromancer.

[sopuu]

top ten creeper trickshots