#it’s a thought thats being written. . .

[rosefires20]

My brainrot today is thinking about just how incredible for a character Eowyn is.

Genuinely. The series might not have many female characters but the ones we do get go so fucking hard.

To me, Eowyn is literally the definition of defining being a woman for oneself. She rejects the roles she is given despite acknlowdging the importance and its mostly because she knows part of the reason is that she is a woman.

The reason why she is obsessed with Aragorn isn't because she loves him but because she wants what he has. She wants the freedom and courage and bravery that Aragorn has at every turn. She literally has multiple conversations during the Two Towers about how what she fears most is a cage. All this girl wants is the freedom to be and not be forced into a role. The best thing is that she literally gets that.

The segment of Return of the King about Eowyn and Faramir is literally about her piecing together what she truly wants. She doesn't want Aragorn. She wants freedom and the ability to choose. Faramir does nothing but encourage that in her. Their love story is literally one of the healthiest love stories I've seen in a long time because at the heart of it, their love is a place to return home to for both parties. Both go off to lead and help their people for a considerable amount of time before returning to each other but that does not diminish their bond. Even Faramir, I believe, falls in love with her bravery and dedication to her loved ones. The reason she went to Pelenor Fields and Gondor with the troops of Rohan was because she had things she wanted to fight for. She wanted to fight for herself, her people, and her loved ones. She is the one who protects Theoden after he is killed so that his body gets the treatment it deserves. She encourages Merry and helps him go to the battle because she sees her struggle in Merry. They feel helpless standing around when there are things to be doing.

Let's also not forget the fact that she was around Grima Wormtounge just as much as the King was. She was exposed to the same poison and awful words that eroded the king. It's even implied that her care for him is part of the reason why Theoden was savable when Gandalf showed up. She had the same power and bravery as everyone else even if she didn't see it in herself.

Then at the end of the day, SHE decides where she wants to go and what path she wants to walk. She walked the path of a warrior. The path of a princess/ruler. The path of a caretaker. But in the end she decides which elements truly mean something to her outside of gender definitions. That is what makes her character so incredible to me. In this she literally kills one of the biggest enemies in that battle with such a badass line.

[lokh]

mom avoids dead anime mom curse because he transitions. he’s always had a complicated relationship with pregnancy because of how woefully little people are told about potential complications and aftercare, and also because of how gendered it is, so after the birth of his second child he’s finally had it and decides to transition

he joins a local community group for mothers and at first it’s played for laughs how often they fall to the dead mom curse, but soon we find out more about how society has failed mothers and people who give birth, from information being withheld, procedures being carried out without consent, lack of accommodations and maternal and paternal leave, racism…

it also turns out that becoming a man doesn’t help with this, not really, because being a pregnant trans man brings its own problems. follow along as he learns more about being a parent and a mother, and maybe even… finding love???

coming to you never because I can’t write!

[many-gay-magpies]

god what really gets me about dead boy detectives and what i think i love so much about the show and the relationships in it is that like. the romantic and sexual relationships aren't portrayed as being more unique or important than the platonic relationships. they're all just RELATIONSHIPS.

charles and crystal's attraction to each other and eventual hookup isn't this big end-all be-all relationship that shatter charles and edwin's friendship and draws charles' attention away from edwin; it's just a THING that happens. they're just two people that care about each other and happen to also be attracted to each other, and a hook-up happens, then they decide that neither of them are in the right place for it and it's nothing awful. crystal kisses charles, but it isn't some big spectacle of her declaring her love for him; it's just her saying goodbye and that she cares about him, like her hugs with niko and jenny and her handshake with edwin.

edwin realizes he loves charles romantically and tells him, and charles says he doesn't really love edwin romantically BACK, but it's okay, because they still love each other so much in so many other ways that this one tiny difference could never change them—and it doesn't!! they're still just as close, still care for each other just as much, still SHOW that care for each other just as much. their relationship didn't completely end because edwin loved charles in a way charles couldn't reciprocate, but at the same time it isn't "solved" by edwin getting over it, because there's nothing TO solve. it's just another type of love, added to everything that already exists between them. and they have LITERALLY FOREVER to figure out what it means.

the relationships between edwin & niko, crystal & niko, and crystal & edwin aren't given any less weight for being solely platonic, just as charles & crystal's relationship and edwin's feelings for charles aren't given (that much) MORE weight for being romantic. crystal and charles' conflict in the closet is about EDWIN, about how they're BOTH his friend and BOTH want to get him back; it has very little to do with the feelings between THEM, romantic or otherwise. similarly, the weight of charles' and edwin's relationship isn't diminished in the LEAST by charles not reciprocating the romantic side of his feelings (or SAYING he doesn't reciprocate, at least—we can all argue about the legitimacy of that in the notes).

i'm sure there are more examples than this, as well as probably some examples that CONTRADICT this, but like... by and large, it feels like dead boy detectives is a show where all the relationships are given equal weight regardless of platonic, sexual, romantic, or familial status, and as someone on both the asexual and aromantic spectrums who has struggled time and time again with shows casting out the importance of all other relationships in favor of prioritizing romance, that is INCREDIBLY refreshing to see.

[shortnotsweet]

In a Week by Hozier ft. Karen Cowley

“The raven is death, obviously. When I die, I want a good tombstone—something right spooky. LT’s got something against the underground, though you’d think that would be just his kind of place. That’s alright. He needs to, he can cremate me. It’s not exactly Catholic, and Mam would turn in her grave, but God is a unicorn and no one is pure anymore, so. What’s all that got to do with me?”

Johnny “Soap” McTavish has a journal. Had. It is his no longer.

Simon “Ghost” Riley had dreams—awful ones, the kind that sank claws into his lungs, dragged him into sleep, and then sent him careening out of it. He still has dreams, but they’re different, now. Better. Johnny’s pages have folded themselves under his eyes and gotten into his head, brighter and more infectious than anything else has ever been. It’s more than the past, that rotting carcass behind him, and more than now. Now is nothing. Now is ash. It’s like, it’s like—blinding, is what it is. He’s a blind man.

It is biblical now. Ghost has read it backward and forward and sideways and inside out. When he runs out of things to read, he reads them again, and when that is not enough, he reads between the lines.

[basslinegrave]

whatchu thinking about. nothing? just the changes to garys design and his character evolution and growth and everything. 24/7. you know. and the fact that even if he changed, hes still the same at his core!

[st4rbwrry]

fairy!reader who’s hunting for fresh berries in the forest who happens to stumble upon a giant!eren who’s injured and can’t help her feminine urge to cater to his wounds. accidentally giving him an aphrodisiac that makes the pretty giant wanna fuck the cute tiny fairy he’s suddenly in love with. 👉🏾👈🏾

[askblueandviolet]

You still think it's not your fault?

MASTER POST

Asks Start 💙

Previous 💙

Next 💜🩷

[starlooove]

No one is asking you to like cops IRL, not even the show. If you look at Arcane and what you see is copaganda, if you look at Cait and only see PoLiCe OfFiCeR and not the character, the problem is YOU.

1. I never said anyone asked me to like cops irl

2. I know that’s what I said.

[givemewallywestorgivemedeath]

Growing up in an extremely ultra religious, cult-like family was a mindfuck for multiple reasons but that doesn't stop unfortunately, even when you escape. For example, see: The overwhelming feeling of boiling hatred and shame for who you used to be.

The angry hatred for the past person I used to be, the version of myself that mindlessly parroted my family's beliefs and listened to their every command, constantly simmered under my skin and invaded my every thought. I was embarrassed of what I used to be- even as I made friends of different ethnicities and faiths, as I listened and explored new ideas and worlds that I never knew existed, as I started the first LGBTQ+ club at my school and volunteered with kids who deserved so much more- there was always a little voice in the back of my head.

"They would hate you if they knew what you were. They would hate the horrendous teachings that were seared into your mind, the things that you used to say and believe. You are nothing but a pretender."

And it is true that my beliefs were bigoted in all the worst ways. It is true that I believed truly heart-wrenching things without a second thought and judged others in such harsh and unfair ways. I told myself that there was no coming back from that, not really. There was nothing I could do to ever make up for it.

Then I remembered that the person who said those things wore velcro light up sneakers and collected finger puppets that the librarians handed out as awards for reading picture books. The person that held signs at pro-life rallies and anti-LGBTQ+ protests had a cherished sticker book and hunted minnows in the creek after school and adored their puffle on club penguin and was really into greek mythology and had skinned knees from climbing trees at recess and knew every Disney song by heart and was absolutely terrified of the dark.

That person was a child.

I was a child.

It took a really long time. Years and years of reflection and distance, but I've decided that I can't hate the past version of myself anymore. I feel pity and remorse, I feel anger- I feel so much fury and violent rage- at what my childhood was and I grieve what could- no, should- have been, but I no longer resent who I was.

I'm not ashamed.

I am so, so, so unbelievably proud of that little kid. For being brave enough to leave the comfort and safety of what I was told was right. For not being afraid to be wrong. For seeking out information and knowledge in a culture that praised ignorance. For questioning everything, relentlessly.

I am by no means a perfect person, I never have been and I never will, but I am proud of myself in every iteration that has ever existed because I know that I have never stopped trying to understand and learn and grow, and I never will.

If you have ever been in a similar situation and feel similar things, first of all: My condolences on your lost childhood. Second of all: Please be nice to that past version of yourself and recognize all the hard work they did to make you who you are today. That person was a survivor and an inspiration. They deserve nothing but love.

[thereallycoolmonsterithoughtup]

its marcille's birthday today YIPPEE

[enhanced-operatives-division]

Roxana Prism and the Horrific Realisation She has a Crush on her Coworker

[tianshiisdead]

im happy my post is garnering discussion but honestly i wasnt around for 2018-2021 fandom on tumblr and i was mainly talking about how its kind of silly to get mad at people for portraying colonizer countries as mean, or calling it demonization and stuff. like its okay not to like personally portraying ur fav characters as mean or part of the state, but getting irritated at the fact that it exists or is popular imo kind of misses the fact that this… is the state and nation personification fandom. and its hard to say its not canon when canon did once portray the characters in uniform and at times involved in their state activities… like the early strips discussing western imperialism in china is literally ‘china being bullied by the allies’ ‘france wanting to grope china’ ‘china being treated like a maid’ etc etc like they were very much. the state LOL also china and japan’s canon relationship, as much as I have my issues with it, has an entire thing about china being stabbed by japan… i do feel like hetalia started out as a history nerd’s history exploration that blended humour with ‘what i find cute’ with satire etc etc, which inevitably involves illustrating the personifications as vessels of state and culture, and although the modern strips have deviated quite a bit… well, different people will approach this series for different reasons, right? Whether its serious or comedic content showing the characters as mean or imperialist or unpleasant, it’s not something that deviates too far from canon (if we take all canon eras into consideration) nor is it surprising given how history laden the topic is.

[thevampirearchive]

There’s something I've been meaning to say but I haven't had the words till now. There is something that deeply upsets me about witnessing stories where villains, who are literal killers, fall in love and somehow become good or act outside of what is expected from them. I love love, love is beautfiul, it is powerful and it can truly change a lot. But to sit, and write a killer suddenly go "actually, this one can stay because I am in love for the first time" is such a weird concept to me. Is this happening because as a sociaty we're trying to convince ourselves that deeply disturbed people can be cured by the power of love? That if they just find the right person, they would stop the masacer? or at least no longer feel the need to kill how they were or at least let their person live? And I am not mad at the love, I do belive anyone can fall deeply in love, but my issue is with how it ends. I want to witness the unthinkable — I want to see is exactly what we expect but hoped won't happen, happening. A gut wrenching truth that stays true to who we have been witnessing, despite the "I can change them" dance. And perhaps people hate this idea because they want to belive that anyone can change if only they meet the right one, or that we can change the monsters in our lives with affection, but trust most likly is that they cannot be changed. And I can understand that to some this is then seen as an illusion. "oh then this was never true love", why can the two not exist? Do we not hurt those we love? Maybe not kill them, but someone elses hurt could feel like a small death to me, and vice versa.

Examples, so that you are not confused as to what I am reffering too;

Killing Eve; I stopped watching when Villanelle was shown shooting Eve. It felt true to her character, even if it hurt. She is a killer, we knew that and so did Eve. Regardless of her love, that was what was always going to happen so why were we given additional seaons of this fanatsy of a declawed Villanelle?

Hannibal; It should have ended with the death of Will, and possibly Hannibal consuming him. Didn't Hannibal say that the consumption of Will would somehow join them in a deeper way?Something so disturbing that only could make sense to a serial killing-cannibal. And I would have watched with wide eyes, and gone to sleep staring at the ceiling.

Interveiw With The Vampire; Louis' death in the hand of a Lestat would have made sense, and despite his dramatics, Lestat would have not committed suicide but instead burried himself in deep regret untill he was too numb to his own feelings that he could return to the world of the living. He would have never forgotten Louis, nor what he did, but he would have moved on beause Lestat is not a good person. He's deeply disturbed and Louis knew this. I don't even aknoclege that beatdown episode because Lestat may be a killer, but he's a drama queen first and formost. Louis' death would have been poetic, beautiful and grusom like a greek tragedy without an audiance.

Bonus - Twilight; I could not end without adding my own favorite, and despite this path never being teased to the audiance the same way the other's were, I would have loved the book simply ending because Edward did as he said he would - drained Bella like a Caprisun on a hot summer day. Because what is love agaisnt animalistic urgase (I understand why it is much hotter that he is simply so retsrained and devoted that he resists her, but I'd pay good money for an AU)

At the end of it all, I think want I want is for sociaty to get over the idea that a good woman, love or any form of kindness can change who some people are. Love can do many things - look at crimes of passion! And to some extend I belive that these villain's love were true, possibly not the way we imagine them - which is less so "I love you too" and more so, "wow, finally someone I can manipulate and obsess over. Someone who I can mold, someone who is alone in the world like me" only to realize that is not true.

So why do we make love into what it isnt? Even when the scene is set for us to be shown the truth, writers and the audiance always make the plot lean towards whatever fits so that we can have that "happy ending".

Honorable mentions;

God should have killed Lucifer, I know the bible and christianity is not technically fiction for all, but the idea that he is forgivin but lets the biggest meanness HE CREATED terrorize everybody is evil. Take him out or let somebody else do it homie.

[bigothteddies]

I think that part of what like. kills me about the whole media literacy and critical thinking aspect of enjoying media these days is that people refuse to like. contextualize that

A. Bad media can still hold significant meaning to people

B. Media made for a demographic you aren’t apart of is not inherently bad media

C. Media made for and consumed by the opposite demographic is not inherently shallow or flawed nor is it above criticism for its media tropes either.

[doctorwhoisadhd]

hmm thinking about the idea of love songs. i think the idea of what a love song is that we have in our culture is inherently a little bit flawed because we have the idea that any song written about romantic feelings is a love song and im thinking thats not exactly true because there is a difference between "romance" and "love". what i'm saying is not that love is a broader category and applies to things that are not romantic in nature. this is in fact true, but it's not what makes the important distinction here. the true distinction between "romance" and "love" is that romance is a societally defined type of interest in another person, whereas love is, essentially, a promise that you make when you build a relationship.

as such, what i call "love" here might be better defined as "care", as that implies more time and effort, but that's a different suitcase to unpack and largely unimportant to my point here, which is more about the societal conventions of what we call love songs. the point is, relationships can be built with other people, yes, but also animals, places, organizations, ideas, so on and so on, whereas romance requires another person, hence the difference between the ideas of "romance" and "love".

with that in mind, there are two types of songs we in western, english speaking, society call "love songs":

1) songs that are about a person's romantic interest in someone that is either definitively known to be unrequited (existing monogamous relationship, sexuality that doesn't align, etc) or simply not requited (aka romantic interest being unknown); and

2) songs about an existing relationship (keeping in mind my points about relationships not just being with people, but also places, things, etcetera) as is.

(some examples of the latter category: mountaintop by relient k, which defines the relationship in question as non-romantic; or i miss my mum by cavetown, which is - as the title implies - a song about the singer missing their mother.)

now, the thing that makes distinguishing these two difficult is the fact that songs about an existing relationship CAN be about wanting certain aspects of that relationship to change. in these cases, determining that a song is one or the other will hinge either on a) authorial intent or b) whether the song is more about what the singer wants (thereby implying #1) or the lack thereof in that relationship (which would imply #2).

to get back to the subject at hand: the term "love song", as we think of it, is an umbrella term that include both of these two categories, and i think that perhaps it is reductive to do so. with that in mind, i think perhaps it would be more appropriate for "love song" to mean only the latter, whereas the former is a category of its own. WHICH is not to say that the two can't overlap — just that if a song is about a person with whom the singer has no relationship, it cannot be considered a love song due to the fact that it is a song about infatuation, not love.

(another interesting wrinkle this provides is the fact that a song might start out in the first category and, as the writer develops a relationship with a person, might move into the second category as they write more.)

[watermelonsloth]

Naruto Incorrect Quotes But They Aren’t Funny Part 1

Hashirama: Do you really hate me that much?!

Tobirama: How could I hate you?! I don’t-! I don’t even know who you are anymore! You just left me! You left me all alone! We used to be best friends! I wanted to be just like you! So… when father started preparing you to be clan head, it made me want to learn leadership too…

Hashirama: Leader-? What does my position have to do with any of this?

Tobirama: Father never wanted to teach me! He was only ever interested in his eldest! So when you got bored and ditched me to play at that dumb river, I had to man up for you!

Hashirama: …

Tobirama: He did everything he could to get me to quit. To prove I wasn’t good enough. But I hung in there hoping you’d come back, so we could be like we were. I tried to make it all seem so important so you’d realize what you’d be missing. But you just shut me out! All you cared about was your stupid friend!

Hashirama: Hey, that’s not fair, dad was the one who kept us separate-

Tobirama: OH DONT GIVE ME THAT BULLSHIT! You didn’t even try to fight him on it! Since we started this village all I’ve seen you do is fight for what you care about!

Tobirama: …So what…? Was it me…? Was I just not worth the effort…? We used to be so close. But maybe that was all in my head. So how dare you accuse me of hating you WHEN YOU CLEARLY NEVER GAVE A SHIT ABOUT ME!

Hashirama: …I had no idea…

Tobirama: …

Tobirama: …Just leave me alone. You’ve had enough practice.

—•—

Next