#i REALLY hate to compare

[always-aqua]

‘You expect him to go on the road with nobodies?’ YES, anon, that is largely the point of support acts. They are smaller artists and bands, going on tour with a bigger artist or band in order to increase their visibility and up their profile with a view to at some point booking their own headline tour. Now, it doesn’t always work like that. Support acts sometimes have already done their own small venue tour, but in playing support for a larger band or artist at a larger venue, they’re able to increase the number of people they’re playing to and therefore increase the possibility of their own following growing. I am begging people to stop thinking of gigs as mini festivals where you pay money for a ticket to see two or three bands and that those bands therefore need to all be at a similar level of ‘fame’ for want of a better word (genuinely I think this is the way some people view Louis’ shows a) because he’s been vocal about supporting smaller bands and b) because of him curating acts for AFHF) and instead think of gigs as the chance to see your fave perform whilst also potentially discovering a new-to-you band or artist whose music you might want to buy etc.

I would hope for SOME name recognition. I understand the point about people expecting mini festivals and I want to be clear I am not expecting that. However, in this day and age, it’s completely normal to expect an opener of a major world tour to come with some weight…a viral song/popular single. Something!!!

Louis’s status deserves to have someone better than a Lad or Garage Band. I would also like to be clear there is nothing WRONG with being a Lad or Garage Band, I just want an expanded potential audience for Louis.

But at this point it could literally be any Not-Male person off the street and I would appreciate it.

[chloesimaginationthings]

Steve Raglan has the wrong FNAF Mike Schmidt…

[taffywabbit]

I finally watched breaking bad (all within the past week or so while I worked, finished it and watched el camino last night) and I'm confident this isn't a new thought I'm expressing or anything but genuinely how DID an entire generation of dudes convince themselves Walter White was cool and admirable and intended to be sympathetic. I know ppl just lack media literacy sometimes but I'm still so confused

I don't think I've EVER watched a piece of media that so blatantly depicts a guy making the worst possible decisions at every turn and having his life ruined for it and not being redeemed or made sympathetic in any significant or lasting way. the kinds of justifications villains USUALLY give that make people consider them "morally grey" or "tragic" or whatever (everything I did was for my loved ones, I did what I had to to survive, once I was in this I couldn't get out, I just needed you to trust me so I could keep you safe, etc etc) is ALWAYS framed as complete self-serving bullshit when Walt says it, and one of the only shreds of personal growth he ever exhibits in the whole series is when he finally fucking admits that. every time he does something even remotely cool or drops a quotable one-liner, something terrible immediately happens that makes everything worse and makes him look like an unreasonable idiot asshole again. by the end of the series the ONLY characters they can still contrast as being morally "worse" than him are literally a bunch of bloodthirsty neonazis who kept a guy in a cage for several months. this show is practically SCREAMING at you the entire time not to admire Walt. why did every dude I knew in highschool have his face on tshirts and Facebook pfps.

I just don't get it. at least with The Dark Knight's Joker it was like, a feature-length movie and that's it. you spend a lot less time with the Joker and it has a lot less time to delve into his motivations, so there's way more room for flanderization and misinterpretation as people extrapolate the few cool/interesting/sad things they saw into a whole nuanced misunderstood guy in their heads and online. Walter White has 5 seasons' worth of 45min episodes to convince you beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is a miserable fucking loser who ruins everything he touches because of greed and selfishness. if you weren't watching it for that, what WERE you getting out of this. what DID you think this show was about. am I just missing some key piece of context from 2012 or whatever that would help me understand this

[bietrofastimoff23]

the funny thing is that aegon, bedridden, is still more successful at making friends than aemond.

[spriinglocked]

i know i said i wouldnt be active on tumblr but this had to be said

[slavhew]

i reread this scene and i could just. picture it. so vividly.

[vellichorsdesire]

your f/o(s) noticing you feel / think badly about yourself, proceeding taking your hands in theirs, scooting a little closer and mumbling sweetly about all the things they so love about you.

[cowardlykrow]

“I let him die / Taking your advice”

[xxplastic-cubexx]

chat if i may speak

[fairuzfan]

For Liefer to pull up a Camus quote like this is quite laughable because of how the dynamics mirror each other. In the modern day, we have a status quo where Palestinians continue to be imprisoned and murdered and raped and segregated, denied basic medical care for years on end, all on their own land — while Jewish Israelis (to make distinction from Palestinians with Israeli citizenship, as many liberal zionists love to point out) suffer no consequences for anything, even if they play a direct role in the continued erasure and genocide of Palestinians. So if given a choice between suffering no consequences while benefiting from the status quo (that will not change unless the oppressed take it upon themselves to change their circumstance) and suffering consequences in the form of direct personal loss (with the strategy of forcing things to change by ennacting the same type of violence that the occupied experience on a daily basis onto the occupiers), of course someone who stands to lose nothing from the continuation of the status quo would rather the status quo continue if he has something to lose otherwise. Camus, when he said this quote, was not being righteous or overly sensitive. If anything, it shows how little he understood at the time of saying this quote. Because he didn't understand that an Algerian will suffer in both scenarios even if he (Camus) is safe, and for him to say something like this when people lived generations worth of violence for his and his family's (social) benefit is annoying and just plain offensive. Who is he, as a Frenchman born in occupied Algeria, to say what is worth justice when he only stands to lose anything in one scenario but not the other? He did not experience life as an Algerian native in French occupation. He might have observed it, growing up poor, yes, but he never LIVED it. Liefer might have observed the horror of settler colonialism, but that's nothing like experiencing it firsthand. To be the object of hatred to people who have higher status and more rights than you. It's just not his place as a person with nothing to lose if the status quo continues to comment on anything like this. What's the underlying meaning of this quote? "I'd rather others continue to suffer than myself experiencing suffering once."

I'm not saying Liefer doesn't have a right to mourn whoever. Im not even saying he has a duty to accept the consequences he experiences. But to say something so heartless as "I prefer the safety of my own rather than justice" within the larger, nearly century worth of context, is just insensitive and really belies his true opinions of the liberation of Palestine if he's so comfortable saying this outloud with moral authority in the middle of what is an outright bloodbath of Palestinians across Palestine. It's the timing of saying something like this because to say it now of all times when the entire world ignores or even encourages the violence in Gaza but mourns the death of Israelis? An Algerian born Frenchman and Israeli are going to be mourned on an international scale... but Palestinian and Algerian natives? Their deaths are regarded as facts of life by the rest of the world.

This makes it seem like I hate Camus, but I honestly don't, but I think the way Leifer is holding this quote up at face value and as the height of reason really is annoying. People like to mention Camus' "if" in this case as proof that he's actually saying "this is not real justice so therefore I do not have to accept it," but who is he to say what is or is not justice? The point I'm getting at is the people who benefit from occupation, in this case, Camus and Liefer have no right to determine what is or is not justice, despite their personal beliefs. The occupier has no right to tell the occupied what they should do to get freed. That alone is an arrogance in assertion that is so offending — the assertion that the occupier knows how to free the occupied in what *he* considers justice and the occupied just need to do whatever the occupier tells them to do. Because whether they both like it or not, they still benefit from and are part of the occupying force, and therefore have no real reason to fight the occupation at their own expense — the occupation is a violence that they are alright with inflicting if it means they cannot lose anything or anyone.

Also the idea that liefer indirectly compares himself to Camus is a little funny to me.

[ginniesfangirllife]

............

No. I refuse to view these two as the same person.

[5hrignold]

this is all i got

[starry-bi-sky]

how do you clone a fey? that's trick question; and fey love those!

@the-navistar-carol (<333) brought up a good point while I was talking about my changeling danny au with her -- Dani! How would she exist in this au? Danny's a changeling - a fae. How would Dani, a clone of him, be created? How do you make a fey? Not through any means that Vlad is doing; you can't make a fey through unnatural means, considering the Fair Folk are nature. And Vlad's not a fey himself -- he's a halfa, even if he could make a fey, it's not in his best interest too. He's a powerful ghost, but even the weakest fae can overpower the strongest ghost. He won't want a clone of Daniel to be more powerful than him.

(In a three tier hierarchy it goes Ancients -> Fae/Mythos -> Ghosts. They all live in the Infinite Realms, but on different Planes. The fae live above the Ghost Zone in the Fey Wild, while the Mythos live beside the Wilds or down in the ghost zone depending on where they are. Places like the Frozone, the Athens Acropolis, and other such large islands climb throughout all three Planes.)

(While Ghosts can travel into the Fey Wild, its generally advised against as the ectoplasm tends to manifest differently there due to close contact magic. It can make it rather disorientating for a ghost, and as human spirits, the Fae living there would jump them faster than they could blink. So unless you're willing to play mind games with 'steal thy name eat thy face' fae, most ghosts keep out of the way of the Wilds. Fey can travel down into the Ghost Zone, they just don't bother.)

That's of course, not taking into account if Vlad even knows Danny's a fae himself. Vlad doesn't ring me as someone who really cares much about ghost culture or the going ons of the GZ. He might be aware that fae exist, but the moment he realizes he can't use them for personal gain he just doesn't bother with them. The risk is greater than the reward, and he'd rather not get eaten. But lets assume he's aware by now that Danny is fey, and has to take that into account while cloning him.

So, how does Dani exist? Good question! Honestly; i'm not sure. She might not exist at all, or if she does, she's more halfa than fey. Vlad would need a lot of human dna and ectoplasm to balance out all that fae magic. He manages to steal DNA from Jack and Maddie to do it, and since Jack's fey ancestry is very dormant its much easier to use alongside Danny's DNA.

In turn, it results in a little girl whose more human-ghost hybrid than clone. With that little extra boost in fey magic making her not a fey, but still relatively powerful. Dani is less of a clone and more of a lab-grown little sister. It's a rather tedious, complex process that has Vlad tearing his hair out trying to figure out. But he does eventually figure it out.

[royaltea000]

You guys ever like “I could draw this better” but by the time you finish drawing it you’re like I could draw this better cuz it took so long that you’ve improved even more 😭

[clembian]

i fear i will never stop being abnormal about dsmp

[gingermintpepper]

Sometimes I am so overwhelmed by my fondness for Phoebus Apollo.

Re-reading the Iliad is always such a treat for me because I just love seeing Apollo's arc parallel Achilles' so entirely. There are a ton of examples I can pull from but I'm mostly thinking of that very first argument between Achilles and Agamemnon about returning Chryseis and how Achilles accosting Agamemnon quickly gets derailed when Agamemnon threatens to take Achilles' own prize from him (which prompts Achilles to say that his hard work isn't being respected, that he's earned this, that the men themselves agreed to let him have Briseis and Agamemnon doesn't have the right to overturn their communal decision, that he'll take his men and leave if Agamemnon refuses to respect him and the men out there dying on Menelaus' behalf of a plague propagated by his unworthy brother of all people) and how that comes around in Book 21 when Poseidon levies a challenge at Apollo's feet for more or less the same reasons but Apollo flat out refuses to lose sight of his purpose in the war. Even after Artemis herself calls Apollo's pride into question and tells him that if he chickens out of the duel, he better never boast again, Apollo refuses to fight against Poseidon, very staunchly citing that, to the gods, to him, the war is a job, that it is mortals who are emotionally invested in the outcome of this battle and that their squabble is not worth disrespecting his uncle over.

And I love that so much because if any of the gods had a reason to be as petty as possible about this war, it was Apollo. Disregarding how much he adored the royal family, disregarding how much he adored Hector specifically, two of his beloved sons were brutalised by Achilles, the premiere Greek fighter, his temples had been sacked and defiled, his image was being completely disrespected and yet, despite everything, the one line he refused to cross was taking out any of the frustration he was feeling on his family - even if it was the uncle that was openly and frequently disparaging him and antagonising him.

And I just think that's so so neat.