#how to live simply

[ourlittlehouseinthecountry]

Lately, I’ve been thinking about how busy life feels — even when we’re at home. The days are full, the to-do lists never end, and sometimes we forget to even take a breath. But I truly believe slow living isn’t about abandoning your responsibilities — it’s about approaching life a little more gently. 💛 I’ve just published a new blog post on this very topic: “Slow Living for Busy People: 5 Gentle Ways to Embrace a Calmer Life.” If you’ve been craving a slower pace, but don’t know where to start, this one’s for you. I’m sharing 5 simple things I’ve found genuinely helpful in creating more ease and presence — even on the busiest days: 🍃 Savor micro-moments of mindfulness 🍃 Create calm mornings the night before 🍃 Set a digital curfew to protect your peace 🍃 Say “no” gently but firmly 🍃 Reconnect with nature and seasonal rhythms It’s full of practical ideas and gentle encouragement — nothing overwhelming or unrealistic. Just small, doable changes that help you slow down and feel more at home in your own life. 💫 You’ll find the full post linked in today’s Stories, and it’s also in the link in my bio (under "New on the Blog"). I’d love to know which tip speaks to you most! 💭 📚 Read it here ➝ ourlittlehouseinthecountry.com/slow-living-for-busy-people 📥 Save this post to revisit anytime you need a reminder to slow down — #slowliving #intentionalliving #simpleliving #mindfulliving #gentleliving #slowlifestyle #liveintentionally #calmliving #mindfulmornings #slowlivingmovement #ourlittlehouseinthecountry #peacefuldays #createcalm #livingwithintention #consciousliving #holisticliving #slowlivingtips #dailyintentionality #slowlivingforbusypeople #intentionalhome #seasonalliving #slowmoments #groundedlife #intentionalmotherhood #simplifyyourlife #intentionalroutines

[mist-the-wannabe-linguist]

Hot take

Night furies are actually perfectly evolved for hunting and killing other dragons and the only reason they aren't a dragon-hunting species like the death song or deathgrippers are is because DreamWorks couldn't have their adorable main character dragon be a "cannibal"

(below I'm gonna try to summarize what we've figured out in a convo with friends on discord)

(also tw animal death via predator)

First of all yes I'm aware that pretty much every decision made about their design was with consideration of the effect it would make on human audiences but hear me out

Night furies are most iconically known as dive-bombers. They are built for speed, high maneuverability, night-time camouflage and for striking targets from above. If we remove human settlements out of the equation (which would not have existed long enough to actually influence night fury evolution, come on), what does that leave us with?

They aren't built for catching fish for sure, they aren't very hydrodynamic and their head is round, wide, and their teeth are dull. Honestly, the monstrous nightmare is much better suited for catching fish, with its long neck, almost pelican-like jaw and rhamphorhynchus teeth

Compare to

Yeah the jaws look kinda like a porpoise of some sort but for that the whole body would have to be a lot more aquatic imo. The light fury looks a lot closer to an aquatic diver, it has a sleeker body, rounded fins instead of spikes, and a long neck.

I don't really see them hunting land animals either, they just don't look like they're adapted for that minus the resemblance with large felines and even then, they're too large to effectively hunt in forests.

The one thing I can kinda imagine them hunting is large mainland megafauna, but we're working with a setting that takes place pretty much exclusively on islands. And overall, dragons are the only abundant species there with the exception of fish and human-bred sheep and chickens.

In general, night furies have duller teeth, smaller claws and are smaller than most dragons. Disregarding the movies making Toothless weirdly OP, a night fury would be disadvantaged against most dragons in a 1v1 fight and besides, it has four huge weak spots that would highly discourage it from a direct physical fight - the primary and secondary tail fins. One unlucky rip in the membrane and the night fury is fucked.

The night fury however noticeably resembles falcons, given their dive-bombing ability and high maneuverability.

Falcons too have smaller beaks and weaker claws compared to most birds of prey, and for that they compensate by simply picking up speed, balling up their talons and Punching. Really. Hard.

And they use that ability to kill other birds, even much larger ones, by knocking them right from the sky.

Here, the night fury's plasma blast works the same way as a falcon's punch. Dragons are fire-resistant, so what the plasma blast does is really just a densely packed bolt of energy that has the effect of either stunning or outright killing prey by damaging its spine. And what the plasma bolt doesn't do, rapid contact with the ground would finish. And if even that doesn't do it, the night fury's wide jaws and dull teeth are just fine for simply clamping around the unlucky dragon's neck and strangling it, like a lion or a pitbull.

The night-time camouflage allows the night fury to soar for extended periods of time perfectly unnoticed in the night sky, and by the time it strikes, the dragon wouldn't even know what's coming.

Unless

Say the hunting night fury is aware of other dragons sleeping under the trees, as most dragons probably would at night (village raids aside, most dragons seem to be diurnal), so how does the night fury get them in position where it can use its signature attack? Well, there's That Iconic Screech Of Death. Since in the movies it tends to appear not just during dive-bombings but also when charging up a blast, I imagine it's something the night fury is able to control to some degree. So by simply fake-diving in close proximity to sleeping dragons, it can effectively terrify them into leaving their hideout and fly out into the open where it can easily take them out.

I dunno, the possibility of night furies as predators to other dragons just makes so much sense to me, I really don't know what other reasons there would be for them to evolve these particular adaptations.

And one more little headcanon to add to this whole rant - since night furies are significantly smaller and less equipped for dragon vs dragon fights and are primarily speed-based predators, I imagine there is this very likely scenario:

There is one dragon who resembles a hyena, a lil bit

Ok, rant over

[wangxianbaybee]

"Your flowers."

"You're welcome, I gave them to you."

[houseofwolves-v1]

updated post! western north carolina is very much still recovering from the effects of hurricane helene, we’re almost five months past when the hurricane hit at this point and there’s still roads in my area that only reopened for the first time last week, there’s still roads with mud caked along the sides that somehow still hasn’t washed away yet, there’s still debris stuck in the trees and along the riverbanks, still abandoned cars trapped in mud. and while a lot of areas that weren’t hit quite as hard have been able to mostly return to “normal” the landscape is forever changed, and so many people lost their homes and jobs and livelihoods. we’ve come a long way these past few months, but there’s still a long way to go.

so here are some mutual aid collectives to check out if you want to continue to help aid in our recovery!

•Pansy Collective

•Asheville Survival Program

•Rural Organizing and Resilience (also known as ROAR WNC)

•Holler Harm Reduction

•BeLoved Asheville

and if you want to stay up to date on recovery efforts, government assistance, etc, check out Blue Ridge Public Radio! they have given continued detailed reports on the hurricane and all the effects since then and continue to do so now, and they can offer a much more comprehensive view of the situation than i can

[zorionbbq]

party chat #56: nanba's transformation

(transcript both in alt text and below)

[image description: five-page comic of a "party chat" conversation from yakuza 7.

beneath the scaffolding of a construction site, nanba holds a bottle of tea and asks "hey, you think i've changed at all since we met?"

the rest of the party, standing or crouching on the side of the path, turn to look at him.

"hm? have you?" ichiban tilts his head, hand on chin, and lets saeko pick from his chip bag. "i dunno, lemme think..."

adachi leaps to his feet, splashing his can of beer and surprising saeko. "got it!"

adachi snaps his fingers with a triumphant smile. "you changed how you part your hair!"

"huh?" nanba reaches toward the back of his own head. "nope, it's still the same..." adachi sheds a single tear.

hand raised high, saeko announces "right! your prescription changed!" ichiban taps a canned coffee on his palm in an "i get it!" motion. "what, are you trying to be funny now!? and that's wrong, too!" nanba retorts.

"okay!" han looks serious. "you changed the frames on your glasses!"

"you started wearing contacts instead of glasses!" zhao finger-guns with a grin.

"will you quit it with the glasses thing!?" nanba snaps at an unfazed, juicebox-sipping han. "and does it look like i'm wearing contacts!?" he gestures at himself. zhao smugly bites an onigiri, still squatting on the ground.

adachi frowns around a pocky. "huh? then what's changed?"

"never mind... sheesh." nanba turns his back on the group.

a view of the vending machine and soccer field across the way. "i just thought maybe i'd grown a bit cheerier since i met you guys."

"that's all." nanba doesn't see the party staring in shocked silence.

saeko, han, and zhao exchange fond looks.

nanba chugs his tea as ichiban approaches.

ichiban bumps his drink hand against nanba's.

"well, we already knew that, man." ichiban grins so wide his eyes shut.

"yeah, you smile a lot more than you did before, nan-chan." saeko concurs, offering him her chip bag.

nanba looks up, eyes wide. "ichiban... you guys..."

a hand lands on nanba's shoulder.

arm slung over his friend's back, ichiban cheerfully assures "and i noticed that you got some new lenses on your glasses, too." nanba's face falls.

the party loses it. saeko collapses on adachi, both doubled over in laughter, zhao cackles as his glasses fall off, and han clutches his head in despair.

"i didn't change anything about my glasses!" nanba roars. on the ground, a plastic bag of leftover snacks reads "#56 nanba's transformation".

end image description]

[beif0ngs]

#reaction to anime vs. live action Chopper

[lgbtlunaverse]

So I've said multipe times now (here and here) that thinking nmj is just so blinded by privilege he doesn't undertand that acting out of line gets people killed is, in my opinion, a misunderstanding of his character that ignores the part where he's, you know, actively dying the whole time and thinks that's a good thing. But that doesn't mean I don't think privilege plays no role at all in how he views the world.

Specifically, his view that death (at least premature or violent death) means something.

Death isn't always a tragedy to NMJ, but it is always meaningful. If you kill an evil dangerous person for your righteous cause, that death had meaning. There was evil in the world and now there is less of it. Similarly, if you die in the pursuit of your righteous cause, that death has meaning, because the sheer dedication you gave to it that you were willing to die for it will further that cause, and your bretheren will be invigorated by your sacrifice to fight even harder.

If a death isn't meaningful, that's an injustice and it is up to the living to give it meaning. That's what cuts so deep about his father's murder. There were no consequences, no changes, no meaning. Wen Ruohan was just going to get away with it! He fights and wins an entire war to make it mean something, to make it so that the unjust murder of Nie Mingjue's father is part of Wen Ruohan's downfall.

But this is a view he can only hold because he's the kind of person who's death will be meaningful. Most ordinary people's deaths are meaningless. Not ontologically, not inherently, but they are made meaningless because no one cares. For death to be meaningful you either have to be so powerful that anything you risk your life for will be impacted in some way. (Like, say, if you sacrifice a long life for immense martial power in a faustian bargain with a blade) Or if people with that kind of power care enough about you to do so for you. For most people, this isn't true. A starving street kid has no power to change the unfair world that put them there, even if they risk their life trying, and no one will do it for them once they die.

Nie Mingjue knows this in abstract, and of course rightfully believes it's wrong. But all that does is make it yet another righteous cause people should be willing to die for. Everyone's deaths should mean something, we'll make it so or die trying!

This is what the conflict between nieyao is about at its core. Because Jin Guangyao, fundamentally, cannot conceive of his own death as meaningful. Nie Mingjue grew up around powerful men who could change the world but refuse to do so because god forbid they risk a single hair on their perfect heads. Meng Yao, on the other hand, grew up in an environment where no one of importance would blink twice if you died. He was surrounded by meaningless death. Indeed his entire early life is defined by that lack of care.

Meng Shi dies and no one cares. Meng Yao gets thrown off a flight off stairs and no one cares. He has to be the one to do the caring, and once he's gone no one else will do it for him.

So he has to live.

Jin Guangyao eventually gets far enough that he actually does aquire the power to change some things... as long as he's alive. If he changes too much, holds on too tightly to his ideals, he'll die and it'll all be for nothing. He can't sacrifice himself for his goals because doing so would immediately render those goals unobtainable. No one will care about what he tried to do. He won't be a heroic sacrifice, he'll just be trash that finally cleaned itself up.

And well... Nie Mingjue dies, and someone makes it mean something. Makes it mean so much that the entire story of mdzs would not exist without it. Jin Guangyao dies and it doesn't mean anything. Most people are glad to be rid of him, and the few that are not don't do anything to change that.

[bonefall]

[ID: Ask from @storiesandsquirrels, transcribed in alt text]

also: link to Cow Lore

There's one major misconception here I've gotta correct before answering earnestly; Holsteins do need Super Duper Food. This is one of their major problems as a breed, you need to give them high quality feed for high quantity, low quality milk.

But! That said! These are valid questions that deserve real responses. In spite of the quick correction, I actually want to answer them as you phrased them because I think it would be more illuminating. I'm going to try and summarize them as I go along;

Question 1: "Why wouldn't we want to use The Most Efficient Cow?"

The simplest answer is disease. My ""prediction"" came true, and bird flu has mutated to spread extremely easily through the infected udders of Holsteins. No one has died of bovine-contracted HPAI yet, but with Brainworm Bobby and his love of raw milk in charge of the CDC...

well. my last prediction was prophetic. let's hope this one's not.

Minmaxing a breed for one specific purpose always means intensive inbreeding. Like I mentioned, 9 million Holsteins are genetically equivalent to 60 individuals. A more genetically diverse population is one that will be better at preventing disease outbreaks, and reducing their severity when they do.

And what even is the Most Efficient Milk Cow? If you're only selecting for pure milk production to drive down its cost, you get a breed of cattle that lacks every other important trait that would make it good livestock;

They get sick more often, due to inbreeding depression and lack of physical fitness, requiring more antibiotics and veterinary care.

They are bad parents who will need more human intervention to birth and raise calves

They won't be good grazers, meaning they need a specific food grown for them, increasing how much "functional" land is actually dedicated to cattle husbandry.

Their carcass won't yield as much meat, so more cattle have to be raised and slaughtered to meet demand.

Their bodies will burn out much quicker than a healthier animal, meaning you need to replace your livestock more often.

When it comes to living beings, "efficiency" is "fragility." It's not a stable system to begin with.

Even with the pure logic aside, just, step back here and look at the situation with a heart. We'd be making unhealthy, short-lived animals lacking critical instincts to lead good social lives. AND we probably haven't even fixed the "less land" problem, just shifted the land off-site.

For what? For more milk? We have SO MUCH milk we don't even know what to do with it!

Question 2: "Isn't an overabundance of cheap milk a good thing?"

no.

Under the infinite genius of Capitalism, thousands of gallons of milk just gets poured into the sewer daily because there's too much of it. Transporting it to a processor would cost more than it's worth, sometimes the processors turn milk away because they don't want to overproduce products, and even the US government can't subsidize every last drop; it still has 1.4 billion pounds of cheese in various caves and warehouses across the country.

The price of milk cannot get any lower because it's already being sold below the cost it takes to produce it, and yet, we're still here literally pouring it down the drain.

[photo from bill ulrich who photographed a farmer dumping milk back during the pandemic. this isn't even a recent photo. this happens every time there's a milk surplus. im using this photo because i like the farmer's cunty little pose. look at him. "just ain't right"core.]

And milk being dumped into the sewer is more than just wasteful. It's a biohazard.

Milk doesn't stop rotting when it's dumped. If you live downstream of a milkhouse, improper milk disposal reeks.

It's full of nutrients, too, which causes diatoms, cyanobacteria, and other types of algae to go into overdrive-- causing a Harmful Algal Bloom event in the water, or HAB.

HABs are horrific. There's HUNDREDS of different types. They can suck up oxygen and create "dead zones" which kills all aquatic life, they can poison the water supply for an entire town, and some can even cause toxic fumes that make it hard to breathe on land.

Now, listen, I don't want to scare you into never dumping out rotten milk or anything! It's that on an industrial scale, it's REALLY REALLY bad if a farm overproduces milk-- especially crummy milk that can't be made into decent cheese or other dairy products.

In fact, if we did produce milk on a smaller scale, it would be better for everyone! Unless you're a Milk Guzzling Fiend like I am, you probably wouldn't need to buy a whole gallon at a time. In countries like Italy, it's sold fresh and in smaller containers, and you're just expected to pick it up as you need it.

This is why milkmen used to exist, and still do in places that are cool; they'd deliver your supply fresh from the creamery. Less waste, less stress! The "subscription model" is actually sooooooooooo much better for milk production, since it helps to stagger out those "surges and drops" of demand that leads to milk dumps.

Question 3: "If the cow eats less, doesn't that mean less land for pasture, which is a good thing?"

There's a lot to unpack within this sentiment. It's actually based on a couple of common assumptions on a few levels, which are incorrect in fascinating ways. Challenging this means opening up your worldview on how complex keeping livestock actually is!

I'll start with the simpler part;

You could cut fresh pasture out of the equation entirely and shove a cow into a concrete pen with a food box-- but are you counting the land growing the fodder?

When you grow corn the way that we do on industrial farms in the US, it's unbelievably destructive. Unending oceans of monoculture. Fogged with pesticide, pumped full of fertilizer which causes HABs like dumped milk does, sprayed with thousands of gallons of wasted water.

When you look at this image, I need you to understand you are looking at a dead zone. Like a suburban lawn, just because it's green doesn't mean it's good. Nothing grows here but corn and pests of corn, which gets poisoned and dies without returning any of that energy to the ecosystem.

This is usually what is being given to "grain-fed cattle," either when they're sent to a feedlot to hit their slaughter weight, or when they're lactating so they need the extra nutrition. It's also so nasty it's inedible to human beings.

Now, a lot of cattle farmers will just supplement their cow's diet, doing a mix of pasture feeding (much cheaper) and grain feeding (quicker gains). But the facts on this are clear; pasture-kept cattle result in LESS emissions and need LESS total space than cows in confinement.

In fact, there were a LOT of benefits!

Overall gas emissions from the cows dropped by 8%

Ammonia pollution was down by 30%

Not needing to run farm equipment for fodder planting and harvest reduced carbon dioxide emissions by 10%

Rotated crop fields didn't sequester carbon; but the newly converted perennial grasslands store as much as 3,400 pounds per acre.

The outside cows did produce less milk volume, but the milk they did produce was higher quality. So, looking at all the benefits here, it's clear that pasture is actually something that should be embraced for ecological reasons, not rejected.

In FACT, it should be EMPHASIZED. Because, this is the mind-blowing part,

Pasture can ALSO be an ecosystem.

In fact, I'm a Warrior Cats guy who once did a deep dive on moorlands just so I could write WindClan better. There are entire biomes that only exist because of grazing, and British lowland heath is one of them!

Keeping cattle in a sustainable, ecologically sound way is going to look different depending on where in the world you're doing it. So many earnest, good-willed people have bought into the lie that humans are a problem, and that everything "associated" with us becomes a barren wasteland as if we are tainted. YOU are not the problem! The problem is, and always has been, exploitation. Unsustainable relationships with the land we're part of.

Indigenous people in Europe, Asia, and Africa have been keeping cattle for thousands of years. In North America, cattle can be used to maintain ecosystems that have been badly affected by the colonial eradication of the American Bison. In South America, Brazil specifically has been making incredible advances with highly efficient integrated crop-livestock-forestry farming.

Generally, pastures here in the US are not as intensely managed as an equivalent crop field. Some people fertilize them, or water them mid-summer, but absolutely not to the same extent as industrial corn farms. Cattle are typically rotated between pastures, allowing each to re-grow before they come back to graze again.

Obviously, yes, overgrazing can be an issue. Not every open space should be converted into a pasture, and the destruction of other environments to turn into cow land is a problem. But that is an issue of bad land stewardship, not the mere practice of keeping livestock.

Bottom line, though? Cattle who can graze and survive outside are better for the environment than cattle that can't.

...but hey, you know what Holsteins happen to be really bad at?

EVERYTHING. GRAZING.

They are notoriously terrible grazers. They can't do megan THEEEEE thing that cows are known for. Fragile frames, a lack of fat to keep them warm outside, increased demand for food, distaste for any rough forage, horrible mothering instincts, the list goes on. Holsteins are a NIGHTMARE to try and keep outside all year round compared to other breeds.

(especially heritage breeds, like the Milking Devon, Florida Cracker, or Texas Longhorn. Between these three, you'd be totally covered in 80% of American climates.)

I've already explained why it's not actually very good or important that we minmax milk volume, but even if that was actually something we should value, there are so many downsides that they would absolutely not be the dominant cow breed in a truly "efficient" system.

"Less cows means less cow food and cow land" is sound logic, but Holsteins are not the right cow for that job.

Question 4: "How could this be done in a way that doesn't increase cost of living?"

I'm not sure how to answer this question, simply because I'm not Bonestar, Leader of AmericaClan. Wish I was. I would rule tyrannically.

It's worth noting that Brazil is the second largest producer of beef in the entire world, AND the number one largest exporter of it, AND only puts 30% of its land to total agricultural use. The USA dedicates over 50%. And also Brazil is net reducing its amount of agricultural land while increasing output.

It seems clear to me that the USA actually has a massive food waste and resource distribution problem, to the point where the price we pay for stuff is actually wildly disconnected from the actual value of the goods and labor.

I think the way that us Americans tend to frame our conversations on these topics as "growth" vs "cuts" instead of asking how to minimize waste by making existing systems more efficient prevents us from solving problems. We're also just... really culturally resistant to the idea of anything being more "expensive," even if it ends up costing us a lot more money in waste or mismanagement later.

Penny wise and dollar foolish ass country.

Question 5: "What can we personally do about this?"

I mean, I wasn't making a call to action in Cow Lore, I was just explaining to one of my regulars why I don't like Holsteins LMAO. Since you're asking though...

I don't think we can change the wider trend in the dairy industry without actual government intervention and regulation, though, and that's very unlikely in the current political environment. they just sent random dudes to Ausalvador-Birkenau and when the Supreme Court said "bring this specific person back" they said "nuh uh." fellas I don't think we're getting better dairy regulations in the foreseeable future.

So I think the most productive thing to do is focusing on supporting small farms and heritage breeds. Get involved in your community garden or heritage society if you have one.

Not only is that generally a very rewarding thing, but it will be helpful to you in case The Situation Gets Worse. Knowing your neighbors and having real human connection is your best defense against economic recession.

Supporting the locals is always a great thing to do, which can be as simple as going to farmer's markets. You don't need to buy fancy food every day to make an impact on your community-- it can be a treat sometimes!

You could also subscribe to the Livestock Conservancy's free newsletter, where they talk about the work they're doing and upcoming events. If you're a knitter, crocheter, or any other kind of fiber artist, you could even join in on a challenge they're running where you make items out of rare wool for prizes!

Should you end up liking the work they do, you can become a member for 4$ a month, or go to one of their educational events.

Even just talking about the problem can do a lot! Did you know the Highland Cow was actually critically endangered in the USA within the past 10 years? It was the work of the Livestock Conservancy, plus a surge in their popularity, that helped to bring their numbers up. Word of mouth is a powerful thing.

All that said, remember, you can't solve every problem. It's a big world and there's a lot of them. Being made aware of an issue doesn't mean you have to drop what you were previously doing-- just care a lot about something that you want to improve, and let that guide you.

[grouchytoast]

It’s a silly but wholesome detail, having Kanan actually pause to explain what some Jedi thing is to Ezra periodically throughout Rebels, especially the early seasons. Because while it’s obvious to the average Jedi and viewer what a lightsaber or a Kyber Crystal is- of course Ezra doesn’t and why would he? The average person in the galaxy especially post fall of the Republic probably doesn’t know what most of these “obvious” terms are.

I especially appreciated Kanan referring to lightsabers as laser swords when talking to Ezra. It makes it feel more mystical idk if that makes sense, cause Ezra is still so new to the whole Jedi thing so Kanan is just doing his best to make it all as simple as possible for the kid.

[mobius-m-mobius]

#gay people can never just say "I love you" it always has to be some shit like - (insp)

[saedyne]

couldn't get this panel out of my head soooo here's a kon i drew

original is from Adventures of Superman (1987) #513:

[ourlittlehouseinthecountry]

Lately, I’ve been thinking about how busy life feels — even when we’re at home. The days are full, the to-do lists never end, and sometimes we forget to even take a breath. But I truly believe slow living isn’t about abandoning your responsibilities — it’s about approaching life a little more gently. 💛 I’ve just published a new blog post on this very topic: “Slow Living for Busy People: 5 Gentle Ways to Embrace a Calmer Life.” If you’ve been craving a slower pace, but don’t know where to start, this one’s for you. I’m sharing 5 simple things I’ve found genuinely helpful in creating more ease and presence — even on the busiest days: 🍃 Savor micro-moments of mindfulness 🍃 Create calm mornings the night before 🍃 Set a digital curfew to protect your peace 🍃 Say “no” gently but firmly 🍃 Reconnect with nature and seasonal rhythms It’s full of practical ideas and gentle encouragement — nothing overwhelming or unrealistic. Just small, doable changes that help you slow down and feel more at home in your own life. 💫 You’ll find the full post linked in today’s Stories, and it’s also in the link in my bio (under "New on the Blog"). I’d love to know which tip speaks to you most! 💭 📚 Read it here ➝ ourlittlehouseinthecountry.com/slow-living-for-busy-people 📥 Save this post to revisit anytime you need a reminder to slow down — #slowliving #intentionalliving #simpleliving #mindfulliving #gentleliving #slowlifestyle #liveintentionally #calmliving #mindfulmornings #slowlivingmovement #ourlittlehouseinthecountry #peacefuldays #createcalm #livingwithintention #consciousliving #holisticliving #slowlivingtips #dailyintentionality #slowlivingforbusypeople #intentionalhome #seasonalliving #slowmoments #groundedlife #intentionalmotherhood #simplifyyourlife #intentionalroutines

[ahollowgrave]

ugh i'm just obsessed

[simcardiac-arrested]

day 30 - videogame (undertale, fnaf, etc)

somebody get this man some chapstick

[musette22]

One common thing people who support Steve's endgame ending claim is that Steve was always miserable in the future. He never adjusted or felt at home in the future, so of course when he got the chance to go back to the past he took it.

However the only proof of this is at the start of catws (and that deleted avengers scene). Yes he was feeling lost and adrift but he didn't stay that way. He made friends with Sam and Natasha and Wanda and Thor and he got Bucky back. He found a purpose and became confident in who he was and what he believed in. Steve may have moments of feeling sad, but if you think he stayed that way for 12+ years you're not giving him enough credit.

And the claim that he was always miserable isn't true either. He joked with his friends on several occasions, and I mentioned how much better he was when he became nomad. And sorry to steggy or staron shippers, but Bucky made Steve happier than anyone else did. Look at the museum footage of them, or them looking at each other in infinity war. He was happy without Peggy.

Also I think fans forget the scene in catws where Sam asks him if he misses the past. And what does Steve say in response? He lists things he likes about the future and makes a point of not romanticising the past. It's especially important that he was talking to a black man while saying this. We rightly talk about how awful Bucky would feel about Steve leaving to live a life without him, but also imagine being Sam and hearing that your friend wants to go life in a time when someone like you had less rights than you do now.

And you know the line about shared life experience? It applies to Bucky of course but in endgame you could also apply it in a non romantic way. Because you say Steve was out of place in the future? Well in endgame he was surrounded by people in the same situation. Countless people were forced to adjust to a time they didn't know. Steve is uniquely qualified to bond with these people. And choosing to go back to the past puts him right back where he was when he first went to the future. He again has to adjust to a time he's not familiar with.

Funny how in order to justify his ending you have to ignore what his story has previously shown us.

THANK YOU! This is so very true, all of it. Completely agree, you make so many excellent points.

Of course Steve felt lost and adrift at first: he was. He was all alone in a foreign time, he lost everyone, he had ptsd because of the war he fought in and everything that had happened to him etc. etc. It would've been strange if he hadn't been depressed in those first years.

But you're right, he was already making significant steps towards being more settled in the new century by the time Bucky returned, and then when he did, I would argue he became a sort of anchor for Steve in the new time. And from that moment on, Steve really started to belong, and realize that he didn't want to go back, but forward. Like, Nomad Steve was NOT dreaming about going back to the 40s, there is no way. That man belonged right where he was, with Bucky by his side, and he knew it.

Home. And he did not mean bloody 1945.

(Gif credit @/dailystevegifs from this gifset)

Also, can I just say that Steve never seemed particularly happy or settled in the 30s/40s? Yes, he had his mother and he had Bucky, and yes, it was "his" time and Brooklyn and I'm sure he came to miss it once he couldn't go back to it anymore, but he was often sick and he was poor and he was frustrated with the world around him and his own body's limitations, and he always wanted sometimes else, something more.

And sure, one could argue that he finally found his calling once he was given the serum and became Cap (and got a healthy body that fit his spirit), but we know he was still miserable at first, as a dancing monkey. I do think the period of time after he'd rescued Bucky, when the Howling Commandos worked closely together for a few years, must've been a special time for Steve, which he will have missed later on for sure. But it was still wartime. Wartime, and being in a war zone, is miserable, and far from a dream life for Steve. So like... what exactly was he supposedly longing for in the past so much that it would've been impossible for him to ever settle in the present? The thing he most clearly missed from his past was Bucky, and he got him back.

So yeah, I think Steve was just fine where he was eventually, and he would have never, ever thrown everything he’d built, the life that had become his, and everyone he'd come to care about and who cared about him, casually out of the window in order to go back to a past he never gave any indication of actively wanting to go back to.

Funny how in order to justify his ending you have to ignore what his story previously showed us.

Exactly that. That's precisely what Endgame did: it ignored Steve's previous story and his character development over several movies in order to shoehorn in the heteronormative ending the studio execs apparently demanded. Spineless, inane bullshit, if you ask me.