#obviously there is a line with these kinds of things! i fully understand and respect that

[the-tired-commander]

hey could y'all do me a favour?

Reblog if you're okay with "weird" compliments on your stuff!

things like "biting this" and such

[pastel-peach-writes]

CAITVI X YOU IN A BAND PLEASE OH MY LORD !!?? BONUS IF UR SINGING EITHER A LOVE SONG OR A SPICY ONE N THEY R JUST LOOKING AT EACHOTHER N THEN U ?!!!

Comin' up!

Hot Rocker | CaitVi x Reader

╰┈➤ PLOT: Caitlyn and Vi have a partner in a band and holy crap, they can't get enough of them.

╰┈➤ WARNINGS: Suggestive Themes, Lowkey The Dirtiest Thing I've Written As A PG-13 Writer, Musician/Singer Reader(separately and together), Mentions Of Overly Touchy Groupies

⍣ ೋ Enjoy!⍣ ೋ

– First off, Caitlyn and Vi absolutely love that you're in a band.

– They can't keep their eyes off of you every time you perform.

– They love how the lights compliment your complexion, and how your hair/body moves as you play and/or sing. Not to mention the cool ass outfits

– Vi loves you with multiple rings, ripped pants, and wild hair. Maybe even an open button-down. Basically, she loves the rocker masc look on you. She says its badass

– Caitlyn loves that look too, obviously. But she mainly loves the look on your face rather than the outfits.

– Yes, she's into fashion and loves what you wear, but when your face softens as you play a romantic ballad or how your face scrunched as you concentrate on your instrument

– speaking of instruments, if you play any handheld string instrument or the piano, Vi will never stop asking you what those hands do.

– it made your face heat up the first few times, but the later times, vi received eye-rolls, smiles, and sometimes a wink.

– even if you play the fucking drums, Vi would always ask because you often twirl the sticks between your fingers.

– If you're not much of a player, but more of a singer, Vi would ask why aren't you that vocal when she goes down on you.

– WELP.

– vocal or not during spicy times, she would always comment on it and Caitlyn will always flick her ear.

– okay, before we get into you singing a spicy song on them or furthermore on how they act while you perform, let's talk about them and your groupies.

– It's not like they don't love them! They do and they're your fans.

– If you like them, they love them

– but some of the groupies don't understand boundaries and/or talk about you in a certain way they don't like.

– it's not gross. it's the normal, "omg they're so hot!" "did you see how they acted during the finale? ohhh my god, I'm on my knees" "they could run me over with a bus and not only will i apologize for getting in the way, I'd say thank you.

– Okay, that last line makes Vi chuckle as she overhears it. Caitlyn is more concerned, but you say similar lines to her and Vi, so it's not like it was foreign behavior to her.

– anyways!

– they don't like when your groupies get handsy or visibly make you uncomfortable when you're all backstage.

– some of your fans/groupies are so wrapped up in your stardom, they forget you're human.

– God, don't let your bodyguards fail at their job.

– Vi is the first one screaming that the show's over, the guards aren't doing their fucking job, and some of your fans need to learn some respect.

– Caitltyn immediately apologizes for Vi's profanity, but not for her actions of shutting things down. She glares at the guards and some of the problematic fans while ushering everyone out

– she also looks at the kind fans apologetically and hopes they get home safe.

– OKAY FINALLY. SHOWTIME (literally)

– you don't sing or play your spicy songs until near the end of the concert.

– the mood is calmer, the fans are fully engrossed in the music. and the lighting is a perfect purple/red.

– usually, the spicy songs are covers, but the moment you show up performing a BRAND NEW UNRELEASED song about the two of them? ohhh god

– first off, cait and vi are blushing. it's intense and they're so flustered but since they're in the front row and surrounded by people, they have to keep it cool.

– the moment you mention the contrast of calloused and soft hands, they glance at each other like "is this fucking play about us?!"

– yeah, babes. it is.

– if you're a singer, you look at them as you sing. you don't stare at them all the time. (you can't let the fans know this song is explicitly ab them even though they have a good hunch)

– you're holding onto the mic stand, swaying your hips to the music with your eyes closed. but then when you talk about their kisses and maybe even how they act during the act, you look at them with a little smirk

– vi smirks back, but its very faint. she's thinking, "oh this little fucker. you're not going to get away with this"

– meanwhile, Caitlyn is freaking.

– she's not really open w her "adult" life like that and even though the details are vague and you're not saying her name, she can't help but get embarrassed

– now people know her dirtiest and deepest fantasies! (aka pretty lingerie and whispers smh. you'll be okay cait)

– if you're not much of a singer, but a music player, you watch them the entire time you play.

– you added some lyrics to the song, so when the line you wrote about them comes up, you make eye contact. A sneaky smile spreads across your face and your tongue pokes at your cheek

– if the song is more upbeat, think Chase Atlantic, you headbang to some of the music.

– if the song is slower, lana del ray type shit, you sway your music and chew on your lip

– whatever you do, Caitlyn and Vi love it

– they're weak at the knees, resisting the urge to jump on stage and kiss you until your lips turn purple

– god, they think you're such a tease but they love it.

– after the show Vi walks up to you like, "well, that was some song"

– and you're "innocently" like "oh, what song? can you remind me?"

– even Caitlyn's a little smug with a tensed jaw and her tongue running along her upper teeth. she crosses her arms, Vi mimics the stance, and she tilts her head to the side. in a low, sultry whisper she goes "you know what song."

– WHEWWWWW

– butterflies, shivers, ETC. EVERYTHING YOU COULD FEEL YOU'RE FEELING

– later that night at the hotel is interesting, but I'll leave that to your imagination.

WC: 1,000

[thetarttfuldickhead]

I felt *so* bad for Jamie in that locker room scene. Like, it’s established that he’s the one with the most Total Football knowledge, because he trained under the guy who learned from the inventor, and everyone was yelling at *him* for not scoring goals.

It didn’t occur to anyone to say “Hey Jamie, you learned from Pep, any ideas for us?”. And he thought he would get in trouble if he spoke up 🥺

(I’ve been thinking about this all week and it still makes no sense)

Hello there!

Totally see where you’re coming from here: it’s certainly hard not to feel for Jamie when he’s doing his best to sort out the clusterfuck on the pitch only to get scolded for it.

For what it’s worth, though, I don’t think there’s any malice or slight intended from the other players. While the message about Jamie being the natural heir to total football might have been clearly communicated to us television audiences, I’m not so sure it was equally unequivocal to our boys in the locker room. Who knows what Coach Beard, bless his cunning and weird little heart, intends or doesn’t intend, but the bit about Jamie-coached-by-Pep was immediately overshadows by Jamie-the-beautiful-dum-dum, so I’m inclined to cut my himbos some slack for failing to consider that our boy of the godkissed right foot might have some privilieged knowledge. Besides, between Beard’s presentation and the game there are several days of Roy Kent’s School of Senseless String Sadism, so is there any wonder they’re a little fuzzy on most everything?

Also, I can’t help but think that it’s kind of a good thing that they other players feel comfortable standing up to Jamie when they feel that it’s warranted? In a way, their whole problem here is that they to some extent treat him like Zava’s successor – ie expect him to do all the work – but there’s also an important difference: for all their expectations, they still see him as part of the team and one of them, rather than some semi-deified soccer* superstar. That’s hugely important, I feel, for a team who once tended to bow down the the careless tyranny of Jamie Tartt in his prick era – and hugely important for Jamie too, who has worked so hard to go from one man show to teamplayer.

But yes: while Colin and Bumber was offering reasonable opinions in a reasonable way, given their understanding of the situation, Isaac was out of line. That’s in keeping with what we’ve seen of his character so far, though: he is given to outbursts. I’d like to think that after the match (and after Ted’s given one no. 9 his due in the post-game speech), Isaac offers some small apology. Nothing elaborate, just a clap on the shoulder and sorry I yelled at you, bruv, great playing out there and that’s that. Tempers run high on adrenaline, and I think Jamie gets that. Professional footballer and all.

I have argued that Jamie is concerned about the team turning on him if they perceive him as slipping back into bad habits and I stand by that – but I don’t really think it’s a crippling fear of Jamie’s. It’s a concern; he check the waters; he is brave; it works out and his confidence in his bond with the team and their faith in him is strenghtened. Admittedly, given Amsterdam and The Strings that Bind Us, I am getting slightly concerned that Jamie is so busy making sure he holds himself accountable that he forgets to others should hold themselves accountable to him too. We’ll have to wait and see how that develops before making any final calls on his state of mind in this scene, I think. (Ah, the dangers of metaing a text that’s still unfolding!)

Does any of this make sense to you at all? I fully get that this might not be the answer that you’re looking for; it’s intended to offer an alternative and slightly happier reading of the scene, but I fully respect that it might utterly fail to convince you. Sorry abou that, in that case, and thank you for the ask, anyhow: I had fun thinking about this!

Oh, and glorious username, btw. Fully support that.

*Obviously football is the proper and correct term but never let it be said I won’t engage in American terminology for the sake of alliteration.

[neoarchipelago]

tw for rape and sorta mentions of suicide (just basically saying kys in context ) for those very sensitive or triggered by these!!

but like i went through all the posts i could find and they never said anything bad about non con or dubcon she said rape fics were bad- and the point of her being a “hypocrite” for writing dubcon confuses me as why would someone who didnt support that stuff write it? it doesn’t make sense to me. i understand not liking her point on the kys bit but you guys got really hung up on it and completely missed the point of it about literal rape being romanticized and used as a fetish, not noncon and the likes used as a coping mechanism. it breaks my heart to see especially from people i supported and enjoyed a lot and got me into this community supporting rape. ive dealt with lots of sexual assults and have been raped myself a few times starting from a young age and let me tell you, its horrible. me and my boyfriend do get quite rough at times and do indulge in things like noncon- something that is used to cope and can help- and it is so much different than actually being raped. if you like it rough and dirty trust me girl i completely get it but actually being raped is the most demeaning, violating, and live devastating things that can happen- not to mention the other physical side affects of it. not trying to spread hate, maybe i should be for supporting it, but im more just sad? like seeing a community im so into and my biggest comfort character ( who also has dealt with rape) supporting and defending it all just feels like a betrayal and so debilitating. so many of my safe spaces have been ruined in a physical and metaphysical sense and it just reminds me of the sa when i was a teenager and other boys on my team (i was raped and abused by multiple wrestlers as i was the only girl in the sport in a very large state wide tournament hosted by my school) joking about it and making it not serious not taking me serious and sexualizing the whole situation and thinking i was lucky for a chick. just sickening and heartbreaking to see and the worst throwback thursday ever.

Hi love. First of all, I'm truly sorry of what happened to you. No one should ever have to go through that and you are truly amazingly strong.

Thank you for sharing your point through respect and calm.

I'd like to throw you back to this essay that explains my point of view here. Of course, it's understandable if you don't accept it. I'm not here to convince anyone on this. This is sharing a point of view.

Here, hoping that you fully understand.

This will however be the last time I'll debate on this subject, further comment or anons will simply get a copy paste.

THIS CONTAINS SA , SH AND SEXUAL CONTENT, BE CAREFUL

I- dub-con, non-con and CNC kink in fiction.

A- the place of these themes in fiction and how it separated from reality.

I think the line has to be drawn. A line people seem to forget too easily. Obviously, rape is a horrible thing. This fact has never been refuted in any fics or novels or books. No writer will ever tell you, ‘rape is awesome and soooo romantic’.

Fiction is absolutely fiction. We are aware of it. There's a big difference. This obviously something readers choose to read being aware of fiction. Being aware that the real thing is horrible. Warnings and tags are always there to avoid readers unaware of it.

B- the differences with other themes

One thing I've been asked is what kind of difference writing rape is from writing dub-con or even pedophilia?

On dub-con, the line is blurred. Softer, protagonist may be in a path where the sexual action is wanted but blocked by the mind or pushed to it by the other protagonist, forcing their own need to give in. It is still seen as rape as consent is not fully given. There's not much difference from non-con. Writers usually use this tag to avoid any triggers to people.

For pedophilia, let's see this in a more details. I think we can all agree that all these themes, dub-con, CNC, non con, always involve adults. Whatever it is the kink, or in stories, it’s adults. Adults who are aware of what sex is and what this kink it. Children should never be near any of those themes. It's not about kinks anymore, children don't have kinks.

II- the reality of voicing your opinion on internet

A- SA victims and SH victims, sexual shame

Now there's something we need to talk about. Writing theses themes are used by many as a coming mechanism. SA victims may often use these writings to help the aftermath of these events in their own life.

In the kink itself it's something that obviously causes a lot of shame towards people who are not part of it. But many things need to be said. It's a need for a control of a situation that is dangerous and traumatizing. It's a sign of truth with your partner. Fiction is a way to live that fantasy in full safety as they are clearly aware of the truth of that situation in real life.

Now the thing that has started this whole conversation was the ‘don’t forget to tell rape kink writers to off themselves’.

It is not a small detail. Not at all!

This is where fiction is separated from reality. You are telling a real person to commit a real act that could lead to fatal consequences.

Obviously I think we’re all aware that many people on this website suffer from depression, self harm tendencies and bullying. I do too. Your words matter. Trust me. We’ve seen it with Inquisitor’s death while a live TikTok.

Many other tiktokers who had helped not only spread rumors but bully the creator only realized their mistake once he killed himself.

This is a no turn back situation.

Do you think you have the guts to wake up in the morning, knowing someone killed themselves because they wrote something you were against? That you are the reason they died? Their families are grieving?

You can find an article on the CNC kink here:

-https://www.choosingtherapy.com/consensual-non-consent/

B- respect even through anger

We have established one thing. The internet is a wild, free universe. Anyone can say or write or post whatever they want.

You are free to voice out your opinion, anger amongst these binary and servers. But one thing that is not ok is the way you say it.

A point doesn't need to be full of hate or threats to be said. Especially when serious consequences could be blown by it.

Everyone has their opinion, things they don't like. You are free to avoid tags, not read, block people. Protect yourself first. But attacking isn't protecting yourself. You’re simply causing another kind of harm.

People need to own up to their words and actions.

If you tell someone to kill themselves, it's horrible. It's an actual crime. A full crime.

-

[fivveweeks]

i am so crasy abt ur tweet abt verdante being a tragedy its like in my mind at all times. like ,,, im rotating it in my head, im so ruined, this idea consumes me u do not understand i am opening up google docs and writing a fic im morose im captivated i am making an ao3 account

like ur so right 4 that one banger

KYAAAA ON MY KNEES... i have so much feelings on it u have no idea. twitter doesn't let me go ham but since we are on tumblr let me write a goddamn essay on this

the thing is that yes i enjoy both verdante being a romcom comedy or a tragedy or anything in between. ofc we'd like them to be happy but part of me like to explore what would happen if we really stayed canon-compliant

and like. let's take a look at them both. Vergilius is canonly someone who's weighed down by his past sins (killing and assassinating and orphaning children), who fully well accepts that he deserves the karma that comes for him (like this man literally is expecting it and doesn't fight it), yet he chooses to drag himself forward bc if he doesn't he will sink into despair. he is full of guilt and shame. verg also seems reluctant to form new bonds which is understandable considering that he lost everything prior to limbus, and how he doesn't want to drag people down with his karma, at the same time it would be extremely hard for him to trust people due to the risks of betrayal and manipulation in the city. he KNOWS that kindness and empathy will be consumed by the city if they don't adapt (see leviathan and his thoughts on garnet) therefore anyone would be wary bc there's always a catch. vergilius is also extremely duty bound to restoring garnet and lapis and it weighs down on him a lot

now i dont see Vergilius as oblivious bc the man would obviously recognise signs of attraction from Dante. but vergilius, despite his harsh exterior, is also kind deep down or at least practical, so taking the above into account, in this scenario he would probably outright address it to dante that he has... personal goals. maybe dante will be sacrificed at the end for limbus company as a whole, maybe not, but Verg makes it clear that he WILL choose lapis and garnet over dante bc that is his responsibility. what he owes to them.

executive manager, he doesn't say, do not be a fool.

and to his surprise, dante just nods and writes him, "I'm aware. It's ok, I understand."

bc dante respects him. they respect his space and not push anything at all (alongside how they probably feel that they are not worthy yet, or that they don't want to burden Vergilius, bc c'mon they're stumbling through their responsibilities after losing their memory, work is more important than personal interest now), i also like to think dante isn't say, self-depreciating, but more like they've accepted that they have so much to live up to and Vergilius has something to achieve and they will not stand in his way, so they're content to just spend time with Vergilius as manager and guide.

and there's that. they don't talk about it after the day. nothing changes between them. they continue on as manager and guide.

the only exception is that now Vergilius is aware that Dante fully accepts that he will sacrifice them for his own goals. yet Dante is content to spend time around him and vice versa (he doesn't admit it)

and isn't that the tragedy?

vergilius, to be aware that something could have sparked between the both of you, yet you cannot afford to cross the line due to circumstances. occasionally imagining what it could had been if the both of you were actually allowed to. how should you feel when the other person still seeks you out and befriends you despite knowing that you will never pick them

and dante, getting the confirmation that you will never be picked and will be the third or fourth or whatever choice but that's okay. manager and guide is enough, you WILL enjoy whatever there is between the both of you without asking for more

personally, unrequited love as a tragedy is not effective to me bc it's not that hard to respect another person's feelings and not make yourself the victim.

the REAL tragedy here is being aware of the lost potential and what-could-had-beens, yet IN SPITE OF THAT theres the quiet acceptance and humble enjoyment of whatever there is between the both of them bc that's all they can afford. how fate and the city fucked them both up. yet they stay professional because they respect each other too much (to the point of suppressing their personal feelings for the other) to make this into a hassle

maybe dante dies at the end of limbus and verg would reminisce on what it could had been. maybe verg dies and dante occasionally recalls the little moments they get to spend together. maybe they both die. maybe they both live but they walk a too different path to ever converge again. maybe we slap canon in the face and let them survive or meet up again in the future.

whatever it is, i just really enjoy the sweet sweet pining between the both of them throughout limbus company. the horrors of Knowing. i'm going to bite something

[phoenixyfriend]

Mace windu and anakin for the detailed character meme?

A more detailed character meme! Send me a character and I’ll answer…

Mace:

What I like about them: He's got this incredibly strong moral core, and despite his fanon reputation, he's amazingly understanding about the things that are genuinely difficult to understand and come to terms with. Mace understands anger and Falling, yes, has struggled with these things even, but he's come through as one of the strongest, fairest, most respected Jedi in the Order, and he is... honestly every time I think about him and Obi-Wan reacting to Depa waking up from her post-Fall coma, I'm just like [jennyslate-drunkhistory-im-like-SCREAM.gif] about their understanding and forgiveness and listen he gets such a bad rap for being 'stern and unyielding' but his actions in canon are all so positive and his fanon reputation is entirely built on The Specific Delivery that GLucas insisted on for all the actors in TPM and just. [scream] I love him.

What I dislike about them: The comic where he lets Palpatine have access to Anakin at 12. It's not canon anymore but I don't Like it.

Favourite moment: His immediate response to Anakin telling him about Sidious. There wasn't any doubt, he just fully believed this admittedly unstable subordinate, because even if Anakin lies a lot and everyone knows (see: Padme situation), he fully believes that Anakin wouldn't lie about something as important as this. Runner up is Mace complimenting R2D2 in TCW.

Least favourite moment: Uhhhhh I don't have a least favorite moment, so to speak? I do hate his character design in TCW and '03, it's... I know everyone's features are exaggerated for the animation designs, but for him it feels as though the features exaggerated for Mace were kind of um. Riding the line of racism.

A situation with this character that I want to see explored more: I wish for more scenes where he and Anakin are alone together. I want to see one or both of them in a slightly negative situation, like injury or illness, and the other having to handle that. Both directions are good, in different ways. More generally, I want to see more one-on-one interactions between Mace and younger Jedi. I want to see those character dynamics! Show me Mace with Depa or Aayla or Ahsoka!

An interesting AU for this character: I'm always down for those "Mace survives RotS" AUs, they can be so good.

A crossover: Not counting the obligatory "Mace and Nick Fury have to interact" MCU crossovers? Hmmmm put him in Twilight. Just to see what happens.

OTP (or OT3+ etc…. just… favourite ship): I don't really do a lot of Mace ships (just the time-travel one), but I really enjoy seeing Mace/Qui-Gon in fic.

Other ships? I did write Mace/Jaster recently for an event, and that was fun, but also funny since I'm open to Mace/Jango. I'm also, obviously, a fan of Mace/Anakin in a time-travel context.

BROTP: Depa (obviously) but also...

NOTP: I'm sorry but Ponds. The power/age difference bothers me and the character dynamic I imagine is much more Best Coworkers than anything romantic.

An assortment of headcanons! - Generally kept to short cuts and fades before he went with shaving. Not counting his padawan braid, I don't think he really experimented much with growing out his hair for braids or knots or locs. Googled a few haircuts for black men and I think a normal fade and 'the Duke' might be about the area I'd consider him in. Might have done some shorter locs (like two inches) or the like, but that's about it. - He 100% knows that Padme and Anakin are going at it like rabbits whenever they're in driving distance of each other. He does not know they're married, but he knows Padme's pregnant before Anakin does. - I want to say that he doesn't have any food allergies, but does have a topical allergy, like skin contact types? Maybe space eucalyptus.

Anakin:

What I like about them: Absolute disaster man. Wet cat energy. Gender as hell. Unhinged. So easy to save and push in a better direction. So easy to turn into a complete monster. Impossible to be boring.

What I dislike about them: Bro he killed babies.

Favourite moment: Bickering with Obi-Wan in the arena in AotC while not even noticing that Padme's being all competent behind him.

Least favourite moment: He murdered babies. So. The Tusken slaughter.

A situation with this character that I want to see explored more: Willing confession of the Tusken slaughter and submitting himself to the fallout without whining about it or continuing to try to justify it to himself.

An interesting AU for this character: I have dozens for him. Just. So many AUs about this lovable moron.

A crossover: Anakin commits a homicide in 1890s London and now Sherlock Holmes is trying to find him.

OTP (or OT3+ etc…. just… favourite ship): Rexanidala, slight bias to Rexwalker.

Other ships? So many??? Anifives, Lumakin, Windwalker, Codakin, Barrakin, Foxakin, Anakin/501st, Bokkin, Anakin/Organas, Obikin (if only as a reader)... the list goes on.

BROTP: Obi-Wan and Ahsoka, definitely.

NOTP: Despite my openness to Obikin as a reader, and it having sixteen years and raising from age nine and years parenting, I run into that shape of a block with An*soka, despite them having significantly less Messy Dynamic in all directions. Like. It exists! I see it! But I do not wish to read it. Just. Cannot brain it. I tried and it doesn't work for me.

An assortment of headcanons! - Fucking. Gender. - Develops a shellfish allergy around 20 - Likes spiced food (like Indian 'mixed spices', rather than 'burn your mouth' spicy) - Had a rage crush on Mace as a teenager that nobody is ever allowed to know about (it's not as good a secret as he thinks)

[sayakxmi]

[Magi reread] Night 71: Alibaba

Alibaba looks so smol next to Sinbad, it's a serious situation but I'm just laughing

Welp, there goes the High King of the Seven Seas.

Judar's awkward teenage crush. I feel like he could've bonded about it with Alibaba if not for the fact that he'd rather choke on his stupid staff than admit there was a time he was into the guy.

Even though literally everybody knew.

I cannot explain this, but I really like this panel. Idk, might be because I'm a sucker for Judar & Alibaba, mostly platonic (but potentially one-sided on Judar's side, bc it's just hilarious). They just have the potential to be the funniest bitches alive (or somewhat alive), and I can respect that. Like, it's such a refreshing friendship in Magi, where they're just fucking assholes towards each other. I just love the idea of them being so fucking petty, and absolutely dragging out some old shit any chances they get, but also being super ride-or-die for each other, as long as Judar doesn't cross some lines, in which case Alibaba knocks him down.

But also you can always read it as Judar's way of flirting, and I think that a very funny idea, too.

Thank you, Morgiana

I love Alibaba. I know you know. There's no way to miss it, given how much I talk about him. But, just, the fact that this is such a horrible situation, and he's still willing to fight.

There's also something about him being so... calm. Well, maybe that's not the right word. It's more like he's not overthinking the way he usually it. It's a cool contrast, given how often he panics (for good reasons). But I think that it just manages to show how bad the situation is. It gives you the sense that at this point, it literally cannot get any worse, so panicking won't help.

But that doesn't mean he's alright with anything, actually. He's determined to keep others safe, and accepts that "at all costs" might be truly ALL costs.

There it is. No panic, just pure determination. Ugh, I love to see it.

And also Morgiana's reaction to everything, very understandable. I think it's kind of interesting when you look at it that way - they switch places. It's Alibaba who keeps his head clear, while it's Morgiana who is the horrified one. For the most of this arc it was the other way around. It was Morgiana who wanted to act, and even tried to convince Alibaba to act, while he was too overwhelmed to do anything. But here? It's Alibaba who pleads to her to help him do something.

Also bonus, even the guards are horrified.

And, obviously, for a good reason. Alibaba's putting his life on the line, fully aware that he's doing it, and even accepting that yeah, I might die here. But they have to do this, anyway.

Looks cool af

And theeeeere

goes the sword.

It's not over yet.

Honestly, the fact that he's literally shaking. That everybody can see it. Man, as if the situation wasn't deseprate enough.

Also, I just fucking love Aladdin's monologue here. Ya bet I'm adding all of it here.

It's one of the reasons why I fucking love him so much. Alibaba feels responsibility very strongly, very personally, even when things really have nothing to do with him. That's just how he is. No, it's not healthy, obviously, but there's something about the fact that in spite of all his insecurities, all the ways the world and even his loved ones made him doubt himself, he's still willing to take an action when there's a need for it. He might struggle, he might get overwhelmed, but he WILL do everything in his power to help.

Like, I hate to copy-paste entire pages, but damn, I just fucking love this chapter.

Oh my god

-SCREAMS-

[lunar-years]

is there any flavor of TS criticism that DOESNT piss you off? like her neglecting to speak out against palestine, her private jet use, etc? no hate btw, I just feel like your prev post was really well thought out and made sense, so I just was wondering your opinion on criticism against her in general.

hi! Yeah, there is plenty of Taylor criticism that doesn't piss me off! stuff like the jet use, not speaking up about Palestine, not being more politically outspoken in general (especially taken in contrast to the activism she professed in Miss Americana, lol), the questionable people she's associated with (on a deeper level than taking a picture with them or being surface-level cordial, I'm talking like...dating the disgusting likes of ratty heely and some such, here).

For me, that type of criticism is based on where people draw their own personal moral boundaries and what they expect out of the celebrities they enjoy or the art they consume. If someone's hard line is Taylor not speaking out on xyz issue or her taking unnecessary flights and causing harm to the environment, I can completely understand and respect that! It's an individual choice and it’s fair game to have differing opinions on where that line is.

For me personally, I guess I just don't expect my favorite singers to also be my favorite activists, and I don't look to celebrities to be my political mouthpiece or tell me how to vote or what have you. We have politicians and actual activists for that. Quite frankly, I think a lot of people with platforms ought to step back from the incessant urge and demand to comment on everything happening everywhere, because it leads to a lot of people offering up a lot of thoughts and opinions (and rampant misinformation) about issues they really haven't got the first clue about or may not fully understand.

Do I think Taylor could (and should) do better in some areas? Absolutely! I think it would be great if she spoke up more, but I also want her to be informed before she does. At the same time, I like to think I mostly recognize she's a human being and human beings are hypocritical and imperfect on occasion. She is going to make mistakes. In the end, I can still feel that she is a good person, and that is okay. But if someone else's hardline is different than mine, that's also okay!

I am also under absolutely zero illusions that Taylor, in addition to doing a lot of good, is also an extraordinarily rich white woman with a lot of privilege, who is going to at times behave in a very out-of-touch, rich white person with a lot of privilege type of way. I don't expect her to represent me. Hell, she is paying more right now to stay two nights in a Sydney hotel room than I make in an entire year. I'm here because I think she writes cool songs lmao. Idk.

Lastly, obviously I am a fan who is biased in that sense. I'm not going to pretend I don't find criticism of any kind much more palatable when it comes from fans, to fans. If it's swifties talking on tumblr i am always up for dissenting opinions and discussion about pretty much any issue (as a goofy example, in terms of the "taylor swift writes immature music" comment, I couldn't give a single shit if a fan comes on here and posts about how they think ME! is an immature stupid song. It's a lot different when it's fans voicing opinions they recognize as just that, an opinion.)

When you get outside the fan community, it gets dicey, because people lob valid Taylor criticism around losey-goosey to mask the fact that they actually hated her to begin with and are grasping at the first thing in sight to get other people to hate her, too. It's very...transparent at times. Like, the people who incessantly complain about her jet usage whilst not talking about other celebrities who do the exact same shit, let alone the massive corporations systematically killing our planet, or who blatantly ignore things like the fact Taylor has actually cut down her jet usage substantially in the last year. They just pretend to care when it can knock the celebrity they already hate down a peg amongst twitter users, lmao.

Criticism is fine. I don't worship her! I just think, there's valid criticism and there isn't, you know?

[aellathedreamer]

in a world of boys, he’s a gentlemen

“Got lovestruck, went straight to my head. Got lovesick, all over my bed”

A look through of Stacy and Edward’s relationship right after he proposed. The royal life, a whirlwind of emotions.

Chapter 18/40

Pairing: Stacy x Edward

Link: https://archiveofourown.org/works/51843736/chapters/131078110

On the balcony of the magnificent royal gala, Edward and Prince Howard found a moment of reprieve from the joyous gala inside. Howard, a mischievous twinkle in his eye, extended a pack of cigarettes toward Edward.

"Fancy a smoke, my friend?" Howard offered.

Edward, with a good-humored grin, declined, "I'd love to, but Stacy would have my head if I dared. She's convinced that being a future king shortens my lifespan enough; adding a cigarette might push it too far."

Howard erupted into laughter. "Wise words from the future princess. Can't argue with that kind of logic, it seems that Stacy has you on a tight leash, wittle Edward." 

Edward chuckled, nodding in agreement. "No, you really can't. Stacy has a way of keeping me grounded, even in the face of life's little temptations."

Leaning against the balcony railing, Edward turned to Prince Howard, a curious expression on his face. "So, Howard, is it true? Are you really going to abdicate as the Crown Prince of Montenaro?"

Howard, gazing out into the night sky, sighed and nodded. "Yes, Edward, it's true. It's a decision I've been considering."

Edward, genuinely intrigued, asked, "Are you sure this isn't like Richard having cold feet before ascending the throne? What led you to thisdecision? It's a significant step, i mean does your father even know?"

Howard took a moment before responding. "Being the crown prince comes with its own set of responsibilities and expectations. Lately, I've found myself yearning for a different kind of life, something beyond the confines of royal duties. Father doesn't know, don't want to disappoint him long enough. I mean, i already walked out of my supposed wedding. He's already ailing enough, and I don't want to burden him even more."

Edward, understanding the complexities of royal life, nodded empathetically. "It's not an easy choice, Howard. But if it's what you truly want, then I respect your decision. Have you told Margaret? Since she's obviously behind you in the line of succession,"

"Well... about that, well I haven't. Lets wish its like how Richard was, just cold feet." Howard appreciated Edward's understanding. "It's just one of those things—I've been questioning where my heart truly lies. And sometimes, you need to make unconventional choices for your own happiness. But honestly, I don't know."

The air was filled with a sense of mutual understanding, as each prince navigated the intricate paths laid out before them, considering the delicate balance between duty and personal fulfillment. Howard, with a serious expression, turned to Edward on the balcony. "Edward, I hope you're fully prepared to protect Stacy, especially considering how meddlesome the old coot can be. Be honest with me, does he genuinely approve of Stacy?"

Edward sighed, a hint of hesitation in his response. "The truth is, Howard, my father is rather skeptical about Stacy. He sees the potential issues her presence might bring to the family and the crown."

Howard raised an eyebrow. "That's not good, mate. Are you willing to go against your father's iron grip on the family for Stacy? And are you ready to bear the consequences?"

Edward, contemplating the weight of Howard's words, nodded. "Stacy means everything to me, and I won't let anyone jeopardize our relationship. Even if it means going against my father's wishes."

Howard, injecting a bit of humor into the conversation, quipped, "If things get too sticky, you can always threaten him with abdication. Works like a charm, I've heard."

Edward chuckled, recognizing the jest in Howard's suggestion. "I'll keep that in my back pocket, Howard. But in all seriousness, I'll do whatever it takes to protect Stacy and our future together."

—

As Edward silently approached Stacy's chambers, a mischievous glint in his eyes, he gently pushed the door open, hoping to surprise her with a late-night visit. To his surprise, he found Stacy sprawled on the bed, fast asleep, her exhaustion evident. Just as Edward was about to step further into the room, Amelie, seemingly appearing out of thin air, spoke behind him, nearly causing him to jump out of his skin.

"Your Highness," Amelie's composed voice cut through the silence.

Edward, caught off guard, turned to face Amelie, who regarded him with an amused expression. "Amelie, you scared the living shit out of me."

"Language, young man." Amelie reprimands him. "It's a skill acquired over years of attending to the royal family. And might I say, Your Highness, your attempt at stealth needs improvement."

Edward chuckled nervously, scratching the back of his head. "I'll keep that in mind. How is Stacy? Is she alright?"

Amelie's gaze softened as she observed Edward. "She's exhausted. Fell asleep almost immediately after the tiring escapade in the bathroom rather than the royal gala."

Edward's cheeks flushed slightly, realizing that Amelie was well aware of the nature of their late-night activities. "Well, I suppose we did get carried away."

Amelie, ever composed, gestured towards the sitting area in Stacy's chambers. "Would you care for some tea, Your Highness? It might help you unwind after the eventful evening."

Edward nodded appreciatively. "Tea sounds perfect, Amelie, thank you."

As Amelie prepared the tea, the aromatic scent filled the room, creating a comforting atmosphere. Edward took a seat, and as Amelie served him the steaming tea, he couldn't help but reflect on the familiarity of the moment.

"Amelie, this gives me a sense of deja vu," Edward remarked with a thoughtful expression.

Amelie, who had been a constant presence since Edward's childhood, acknowledged with a serene smile. "The echoes of the past often linger in these walls, Your Highness. I have had the honor of serving the royal family for many years."

Edward took a sip of the tea, the warmth spreading through him. "You've been a part of my life for as long as I can remember. I suppose moments like these trigger a sense of nostalgia."

Amelie nodded knowingly. "Indeed, Your Highness. The palace holds a lot of memories, and I briefly remember chasing after you, Prince Howard and now the King Richard, while all three of you are in diapers."

Edward chuckled briefly as he stared into his cup. "Those were the good times I guess,"

"Now look at you all three, all grown up." Amelie smiles briefly. " King Richard is already married and is expecting their firstborn. Prince Howard, well is, Prince Howard, always a ladies' man. While you, getting married already, well dodging the first one."

"Oh come on, Amelie. I know you know the bethrotal between Margaret and I was my mother's payback to my father." Edward chuckles wryly. 

Amelie's composed demeanor maintained its professionalism, yet a glint of understanding shone in her eyes. "Your mother does have a way of orchestrating events to make her point, Your Highness. Nevertheless, your path has taken a different turn now with Stacy."

Edward leaned back, a hint of contemplation in his gaze. "Stacy does bring a different energy to all of this. It's not what I initially expected, but it feels right."

Amelie, pouring herself a cup of tea, remarked, "Love has a way of surprising us, even in the most unexpected circumstances. It seems you and Stacy have embarked on a unique journey."

As Edward and Amelie sat in Stacy's  antechamber, the tea offering a momentary respite, Edward couldn't help but delve into the more complex facets of royal life. "Amelie," he said, his voice carrying a weight of contemplation, "you've seen the darker side of our family, haven't you?"

Amelie, her gaze unwavering, acknowledged the unspoken truths. "Yes, Your Highness. I've observed the challenges that accompany the crown, the struggles within the family, and the impact on your upbringing."

Edward sighed, a mix of frustration and acceptance in his expression. "King George's choices have cast shadows on our family. His distant approach, the rumors—it's not the idyllic picture painted for the public, and everyone assumes I had it easy."

Amelie, choosing her words carefully, responded, "The crown demands sacrifices, and sometimes, those sacrifices extend beyond the public eye. It's a delicate balance, and the toll can be felt by those within the palace walls."

Edward, staring into the depths of his tea, reflected on the complexities of his relationship with his father. "I've tried to understand him, Amelie. But there are moments when the weight of his decisions becomes burdensome. I do not know how he was proud to be a terrible father and husband but a good ruler."

Amelie coughs. "I doubt that old coot was a good ruler. We cannot forget the fiasco with Lady Tatiana, his first wife. Right at the critical moment of childbirth, your father refused medical intervention, ended up killing Lady Tatiana and the child. Older palace personnel called him 'George the Terrible', two years later he marries your mother." 

In the midst of their conversation, Amelie's gaze turned earnest as she addressed Edward with a quiet intensity. "Your Highness, I want you promise me something."

Edward, intrigued and attentive, nodded. "Go on, Amelie."

"Promise me," she began, "that you will never let Stacy experience the heartache your mother endured. Ensure that her journey in this marriage is one of happiness and fulfillment. She's good for you, no matter how unhinged the two of you are."

Edward, touched by the gravity of Amelie's request, responded with sincerity. "Amelie, I promise you. I will do everything in my power to make sure Stacy's experience is nothing like my mother's. Her happiness will be a priority in our marriage."

Amelie, with a subtle nod, seemed reassured. "Your commitment to that promise will not only shape your relationship but will echo in the legacy of the royal family. It's a chance to break the cycle of shadows that have haunted these halls. They say you are your father's son but, i do not believe that. You are your mother's son."

Amelie, in a rare moment of humor, added a touch of humor to the conversation. "Your Highness, I swear to God, the moment you start acting like your father, your mother will snatch all of her good genes from you and leave you with a receding hairline."

Edward burst into laughter, appreciating the unexpected lightheartedness. "Amelie, that's quite the warning. I'll keep it in mind—no receding hairline for me."

The pair shared a good laugh. Amelie, maintaining her composed demeanor but hinting at a touch of maternal authority, addressed Edward about the complexities of his engagement. "Your Highness, while I understand the joy of being engaged, it's crucial to remember that it doesn't grant permission for unrestrained intimacy. I must remind you to exercise caution and, more significantly, to prevent any unexpected heirs to the throne."

Edward, acknowledging the weight of her words, nodded with a touch of apprehension. "You're right, Amelie. I'll be careful."

Amelie sighed, a blend of understanding and a subtle hint of amusement. "It's fortunate I haven't shared these details with your mother. She believes that you both remained chaste until marriage, which i believed that went down quite south earlier."

Edward's eyes widened, a flicker of trepidation crossing his face. "Please, Amelie, keep it that way. My mother would have my head if she learned otherwise."

Amelie, with a knowing look, replied, "You cheeky young man, your secret is safe with me."

—

Amidst the clinking of breakfast dishes and the murmur of the royal court, King George and Queen Caroline found a moment to steal away to their private chambers. The soft morning light streamed through the windows as they settled into a quiet corner of the balcony. Caroline, gently sipping her tea, broke the silence. "You know, George, Stacy has been handling her responsibilities quite admirably. She's adapting to her role with grace."

King George, his brow furrowed, replied, "I can't deny her dedication, but I can't shake off the feeling that her approach is too unconventional. Our traditions have safeguarded this kingdom for centuries."

Caroline set down her teacup, choosing her words carefully. "Change is inevitable, George. Stacy brings a fresh perspective, one that might be beneficial for our people. We can't remain stagnant; the world around us evolves."

King George let out a heavy sigh. "Caroline, I worry about the stability of our realm. Stacy's decisions, her way of doing things—it's uncharted territory. What if we lose the very essence that has defined our kingdom for generations?"

Queen Caroline joined him, her gaze also fixed on the horizon. "I understand your concerns, George. But consider this – Stacy's unconventional approach might be precisely what we need. The world is changing, and we must adapt to ensure the prosperity of our kingdom."

King George, his worry etched on his face, continued the conversation on the balcony. "Caroline, my concerns run deeper. Stacy wasn't born into the royal lineage. What if she can't fully comprehend the intricacies of our kingdom, or worse, what if she can't effectively help Edward?"

Caroline nodded, understanding the gravity of his apprehension. "George, birthright does not always determine one's ability to lead. Stacy's commitment and willingness to learn are evident. Besides, she complements Edward in ways we might not yet fully grasp. Besides have you truly seen how happy he is with her? Please do not control him, he is a man of his own."

In response to Caroline's plea not to control their son, King George's face tightened with offense. "Control? I'm safeguarding the very foundations of this kingdom! Edward's choices have consequences beyond his personal happiness. You undermine the legacy I built for this dynasty, Caroline."

Caroline, undeterred, held her ground. "George, love and understanding must accompany responsibility. We can guide Edward without stifling his choices. It's time to trust him and embrace the path he has chosen for himself. Our family's strength lies in unity, not in exerting control."

The king, fueled by his concerns and frustrations, uttered with a steely resolve, "Caroline, mark my words. If everything goes awry, I won't hesitate to use that girl as a sacrificial lamb to salvage the royal family's image. The stability of our kingdom is paramount, and I won't let sentimentality jeopardize it."

Caroline, now facing the harsh reality of the choices ahead, responded with a mix of sadness and determination, "George, sacrificing someone for the sake of an image is a dangerous path. We must find a way to navigate these challenges without forsaking the very values we hold dear. Our family's legacy should not be built on the ruins of others."

Caroline's words hung in the air, emphasizing the delicate balance between duty and compassion. King George, unyielding, countered, "Caroline, sentimentality blinds you to the realities of our position. Edward needs to understand the sacrifices required for the greater good. The stability of the kingdom cannot be compromised for personal emotions."

Undeterred, Caroline pressed on, "George, our family's strength lies in unity and understanding. Edward loves Stacy deeply, and using her as a pawn in our political chess game will only estrange our son. We must find a way to navigate these challenges without sacrificing the happiness he has found."

The tension in the room deepened, mirroring the broader conflict between tradition and the changing tides of the royal family. King George, firm in his resolve, insisted, "Caroline, it's time to ground Edward to reality. He cannot have everything he desires. We must make him understand that the pursuit of personal happiness should not come at the expense of the stability of the royal family and the kingdom."

Caroline, grappling with the weight of such a decision, responded, "George, imposing harsh realities on Edward may estrange him further. We need to find a balance, guiding him with understanding rather than forcing him to abandon his aspirations. Our family's strength lies in unity, not in dictating unyielding terms." 

King George, acknowledging the strained relationship with his son, briefly said "Caroline, let's not pretend that Edward holds me in high regard. He already harbors resentment, and steering him away from his desires might intensify that animosity. However, as a monarch, I must prioritize the kingdom's stability over personal sentiments."

—

One bright morning in the royal courtyard, Edward surprised Stacy with a beautifully adorned carriage waiting under the golden rays of the sun. "How about a private carriage ride, just the two of us before I leave for parliament?" he suggested, a twinkle in his eye.

As the carriage meandered through the palace grounds, the morning sunlight danced on the dew-kissed flowers. Stacy couldn't help but marvel at the serenity of the day. "It's lovely out here. I appreciate you taking the time for us to be alone."

Edward smiled, his gaze fixed on her. "There's nothing I'd rather do than spend a quiet morning with you. With all the wedding preparations, I thought we could use a peaceful moment."

Stacy leaned back against the plush seat,"I sometimes forget how much our lives have changed. I mean, who would have thought I'd be here, in a royal carriage, marrying a prince?"

Edward chuckled, intertwining his fingers with hers before gently kissing the back of her hand. "Fate has its own way of surprising us. And I'm grateful for every twist and turn that led me to you."

The carriage rolled to a gentle stop at a secluded spot with a breathtaking view of the morning-lit palace. Edward stepped out and extended his hand to Stacy, leading her to a small area where a blanket was laid out. "I thought we could have a quiet moment under the morning sun," Edward said, his eyes reflecting the affection he felt.

Stacy sighed contentedly, settling beside him. "This is perfect, Edward. Amidst all the pomp and circumstance, it's these quiet moments that mean the most."

Edward gazed out over the palace grounds, a thoughtful expression on his face. "Stacy, there's so much more beyond the wedding—our life together, the responsibilities, the challenges."

Stacy, leaning comfortably against him, looked up with a smile. "I know it won't always be a fairy tale, Edward. But I'm ready for whatever comes our way. We make a great team."

As the carriage rolled on, their candid conversation forged a deeper understanding between them. They acknowledged that a life together meant embracing not just the highs but also the lows, and finding strength in their partnership. By the time the carriage circled back to the palace, the morning had woven a tapestry of shared dreams and promises. Edward and Stacy stepped out, not just as a prince and a future princess, but as companions ready to face the adventures that awaited them beyond the pressures of the upcoming royal wedding.

As the carriage eased to a stop, Edward turned to Stacy with a sincere expression. "Stacy, I want to apologize in advance. My royal duties can be demanding, and there might be times when they take up much of our time."

Stacy reached out, gently placing a hand on his arm. "Edward, there's no need to apologize. I understand the responsibilities that come with your position. We're a team, remember? We'll navigate this together."

He smiled gratefully but couldn't shake the concern in his eyes. "I just feel bad sometimes, thinking that I might not give you all the attention you deserve. You're marrying into the royal family and I am not here always, I don't want to let you down."

Stacy leaned in, her eyes meeting his with unwavering reassurance. "Edward, it's not about the quantity of time but the quality. We'll find moments, no matter how small, to cherish each other. And when duty calls, I'll be right here, supporting you every step of the way."

His shoulders relaxed, and he pulled her into a warm embrace. "Thank you for understanding, Stacy. You'll have me all to yourself once the wedding is over."

As they walked back to the palace hand in hand, the air was filled with a sense of understanding and mutual support. Edward knew that even amidst the grandeur of royal obligations, Stacy would be his constant, the anchor that kept him grounded in love.

—

In a private room within the palace, Amelie and Stacy had a serious sit-down conversation. Amelie, known for her stern demeanor and adherence to protocol, looked at Stacy with a gaze that held both gravity and a hint of compassion.

"Stacy, I believe it's crucial that we have this discussion," Amelie began, her tone measured. "Marrying into the royal family means your life will undergo a profound change. The dynamics, the expectations—it's a world apart from anything you've experienced."

Stacy nodded, her expression serious. "I understand that, Amelie. I know I do have to adjust and its fine by me."

Amelie continued, her words deliberate. "Once married, Edward's allegiance and loyalty will be primarily to Belgravia. As his wife, you'll share in that commitment, but the crown will always come first."

Stacy listened, absorbing the weight of Amelie's words. Amelie chose a metaphor to convey the reality of the situation. "In this union, you are second to the crown. The responsibilities, the decisions—Edward's duty to the nation will shape our course, and you'll be part of that journey."

Stacy took a moment before responding. "I love Edward, and I want to support him and be part of this nation. But Amelie, does that mean our personal life will always be overshadowed by his role?"

Amelie nodded solemnly. "It means sacrifices, Stacy. Your personal life will be scrutinized, and certain aspects will inevitably be shared with the public. The line between private and public becomes thin, and you must be prepared for the constant scrutiny."

Stacy took a deep breath, realizing the magnitude of what lay ahead. "You're asking me to be ready for a life where I'm not just marrying Edward but also stepping into a role where I'm connected to something much larger."

Amelie affirmed with a nod. "Exactly. Once you take this step, there's no turning back. I want you to understand the gravity of this commitment. It's not just a marriage; it's a life intertwined with her, Belgravia."

As Stacy processed Amelie's words, the reality of the responsibility she was about to shoulder settled in. The path ahead was clear, and Amelie, though stern, served as a guiding force, preparing her for the intricacies of a life where love and duty walked hand in hand. Amelie, maintaining her composed demeanor, addressed Stacy with a stark reality. "Stacy, it's crucial to understand that once you're married, you shouldn't expect Edward to be around as always. His duties to the crown will often take precedence, and there will be times when he won't be readily available."

Stacy, absorbing the gravity of Amelie's words, nodded. "I know he has responsibilities, but does that mean we won't have time together?"

Amelie clarified, "You will have moments together, but they might be limited. Royal duties demand his presence at various events and functions. It's a commitment that comes with the position."

Stacy took a deep breath, grappling with the idea of a life where time with Edward might be scarce. "I understand that he has duties, but will he always have to choose between them and our time together?"

Amelie's response was straightforward. "Yes, there will be choices, and at times, duty will prevail. It's a sacrifice both of you will have to make. The expectations of a prince, and eventually a king, are demanding, and his time will be spread thin."

Stacy, though thoughtful, expressed her concern. "I want to support him, but I also want a marriage where we can share our lives."

Amelie acknowledged Stacy's sentiment. "There will be moments, Stacy, but the balance is delicate. You'll need to find solace in the quality of time you spend together rather than the quantity. It's a unique challenge of royal life."

Amelie, her usually stoic demeanor softening with a rare glimpse into her personal history, began to confide in Stacy. "I've been in service to Queen Caroline since Prince Edward was an infant. I entered the palace at the tender age of 15."

"I've witnessed the grand sweep of history within these walls," Amelie continued, her gaze distant. "There were moments when consorts were left to raise the children, to navigate the intricate dance of duty when their partners were called away."

Intrigued yet respectful of the gravity of the conversation, Stacy asked, "What do you mean?"

Amelie's eyes held a mixture of lingering pain and poignant memories. "Let me paint a picture for you. When Queen Caroline was in the throes of childbirth with Prince Edward, King George was absent." She paused, and Stacy could clearly see her attache's gaze harden. "He wasn't by her side; instead, he was away—golfing with his colleagues, engrossed in discussions about state affairs."

Stacy's expression shifted to a mix of surprise and empathy. "He wasn't there for the queen during such a crucial moment?"

Amelie nodded, her gaze steady. "No, he wasn't. The queen fought for her life in the birthing chambers, and the king was immersed in other matters. It was a stark illustration of the profound sacrifices and unyielding expectations that come with royal life."

Stacy, now understanding the depth of Amelie's experiences, asked softly, "How did Queen Caroline endure such moments?"

Amelie's response carried a profound weight. "Queen Caroline, like many royal consorts, bore the weight of duty with a heavy heart. These instances were not just personal sacrifices but a testament to the unwavering commitment to the kingdom. I share these painful truths with you, Stacy, not to instill fear but to unveil the somber realities you might face. Because once you married into the family, I warn you, my dear. You can never leave, unless you die."

As Stacy absorbed the profound and painful revelations, she recognized the intricate tapestry of history woven with threads of duty, sacrifice, and the relentless expectations that framed life within the palace walls. The conversation unveiled the poignant struggles of those who served the crown, painting a stark portrait of the delicate balance between personal aspirations and the unyielding responsibilities of royalty.

[howl-fantasies]

Author-san, how do you think y/n reacted/would react about the time where Oswald almost beheaded Vic?

A/N - Hi dear! Oh how interesting! I asked myself the same question last time and here is what I think would be her reaction and what it means for her relationship with Penguin. But first, let's talk about what happened a bit before the 'almost VicLouis XVI incident', to understand how she reacted and what she decided to do after.

⨠ So far, we knew that Cobblepot and Y/N shared a very special relationship. A kind of frenemy thing, tending to balance more on the 'Oh my god I hate this cripple / harlot! But don't you dare touching any of his / her hair, he/she is family (sort of?) and MY target, not yours so you're dead if you try anything.'

They are, in a way, very loyal to each other in their rivalry and can work with each other on a daily basis without too much troubles. Y/N being professional during her job and Oswald being a good boss in knowing how to keep her and Victor bloodthirsty personalities in line.

Since the beginning, she knew for a fact that Oswald was a very intelligent and cunning man, who always think at least ten steps ahead everyone, even Carmine, and respects him greatly for that. 

So when Victor asked him if he "killed the old man" and Penguin said "no" she trusted him and even told Victor that obviously he wouldn't kill the only man able to keep Sofia at bay, it wouldn't be logical.

⨠ When Victor betrayed Oswald, she was beyond mad and even thought about killing Sofia but didn't. The brat was Falcone daughter for starters, and she respected her boss too much to go on a killing spree against his daughter without a good reason. 

She stayed with Oswald, her hate for the woman was greater than the one she shared with him. She even asked him, very politely at that, to let her deal with this stubborn boyfriend of hers to try to take him back "home" with them.

Their couple went into a very instable phase, one of their major crisis tbh, constantly balancing between twisted obsessive love and pure resentment because of the other’s allegiance. 

They still tried to avoid having to seriously fight the other and killing them. When she heard Sofia was the one responsible for Carmine murder, she went berserk and was decided to make her pay. 

If Lee's was the one putting a bullet in the brat body - which Y/N was pretty mad about - she was the one annihilating everything the Italian woman built in Gotham. Killing everyone who supported her,Victor being an exception, and had a very intense conversation (a.k.a with many bullets, blood and blades) with Zsasz about his poor choice of boss.

He decided to not come back to Oswald's side and she agreed with it. Things went too far between Zsasz and him, and Oswald knew better than anyone in town how to hold a serious grudge.

⨠ During Gotham's confinement (COVID vibes here), she still worked with Oswald, needing his ammunition since hers - and secretly Victor’s - wouldn't be eternal. 

Deep down, she also wanted the little bird bastard to survive since he was, in her opinion, one of the best choice of leader for this evil city. She asked him a favor : to let her deal with her husband if Penguin ever cross path with him or wanted something from him. And he agreed.

But Oswald being Oswald, he double crossed her when he went to the GCPD to fetch Victor and organize his fake trial. Little bird sent her on a mission at the opposite side of Gotham to make sure she wouldn't try anything against him. 

But Y/N being incapable of trusting anybody in town fully, she put hidden cameras and micros all around Oswald's hideout and found out his little beheading plans. She called Jim and demanded him to save her man, since she saved his cop's ass a hundred times before. 

If not, ha-ha, she would destroy the whole city, only keeping him alive to watch the massacre. But no pressure, of course. 

The fact that Oswald double crossed her didn't bother her too much to be honest, she suspected it. What enraged her was the fact he swore to not do anything without her.

Promises are a serious deal for her. And Oswald, Victor, Ed, Jim and everyone knowing her enough in Gotham knew that. If the woman promised something - which was pretty rare - she always honored her word, thanks to Carmine and the mafiosi she grew up with. 

She thought Oswald would have this kind of nobility in him too. Don't get me wrong, he has it, but lose it quickly when things become personal, like they were with Victor. That was her mistake.

Anyway, it didn't change the fact that Penguin swore something and didn't keep his word. This action brought Y/N, Oswald, and her frenemy's relationship to a turning point, the weak balance they had definitely leaning on the bitter and hating side.

⨠ Contrary to Oswald's hot-tempered personality, Y/N is a practical and - in a way -level headed woman. She still thought Oswald was the best choice to rule the city because of his mafia years and how he was able to adapt what he learnt from the bests - Falcone, Maroni, Fish, Nikolaï - to the new crime era the city entered in.

But she won't ever work for him like she did or try to rebuild the bond they had. Her 'trust' was definitely broken and if the two have to work together, she would be extremely cautious around him and make sure to prepare extra detailed contracts, preventing him to double cross her. 

They would be business allies or foes and she would keep it that way, cutting all emotional strings they had.

⨠ They eventually might share them again, only if Oswald saves her or Victor's life on an impulse because they have history. Like when he protected Ed from the grenade, without planning something with his action.

I hope it wasn't too long and makes some sense 😅Have a beautiful day / night and take care my dear 💐

[niconebula]

homura akemi ?

I got the same character twice so I am going 2 reply directly to my friend but yes I saw you too anon!

favourite thing about them: her girlboss swagger. noo but seriously shes just such a one of a kind character. she's incredibly intense which I like and she's the star when she shows up, has an incredible amount of depth behind her actions and is taken really seriously as this fully fleshed out person.

least favourite thing about them: even her negative traits are part of the appeal so. hmmm. i'm not as much of a fan of glasses "moemura" that they keep pushing in the game to make her cute and marketable. i dont really care for magireco as a whole though.

favourite line: most famously: "more passionate than hope, and far deeper than despair, love".

brOTP: kyoko and homura. everyone talks about it but it's still so underrated. i think a lot of people forget how much she cares about kyoko. they fundamentally understand each other, the way they're both trying to protect the people they love. both traumatized by their religious upbringings, both experienced death prior to the events of the series, they're both misunderstood and labelled as the enemy but push forward anyways. homura obviously has a lot of respect for kyoko considering she personally reaches out for her help in every timeline including rebellion. love them.

OTP: i wonder what this is! its so classic its so iconic its the blueprint its a shakespearean tragedy they are ying and yang they are literally god and satan it is great. not influenced at all by me watching madoka at the ripe age of 13 and it changing my braincells for the worse.

nOTP: the incredibly cursed spin-off where she marries ... tatsuya... to get closer to madoka. this is real and i do not know who the audience was.

random headcanon: this is interesting because even though madoka is my longest running fixation, I never really "fandomized" it and my interest is mostly kept within the realm of source material - i don't make or think of my own scenarios. that being said, I have dabbled in lots of doujins and the idea of her existing solely on calorie-mates (japanese meal replacement bars) is canon to me

unpopular opinion: trying to think of a truly unpopular opinion is hard but. as a homura / madohomu enjoyer it's like well, just maybe, their relationship is kind of toxic and that it's part of the enjoyment that she or they both are a little krayzee and incredibly dramatic

song i associate with them: "hunger" by florence and the machine :)

favourite picture of them:

certified classic, drew this during art class in grade 9 except also with the top of her head cut off and I think that scared some of my classmates

[kermitthekrog-blog]

I figured out my trigger event: a Parahumans thought exercise

Background and inciting incident:

I’ve struggled with ADHD since I was very young. I’ve been in and out of residential therapy. It is the number one significant factor in how my day-to-day life turns out. Not to go into too much detail, but at the moment, things are good for me, and have been for the past two years.

But, let’s say they weren’t. I backslid. I let things go too far, and now I can’t bounce back. My school is trying to expel me, because I put off my student loan paperwork too long. My professors are tired of my excuses. My parents think not supporting me, this time, might actually be key to solving my issues instead of handholding me through therapy. My writing group is sick of me showing up as the only person who keeps not actually starting the works they promised to write. 

Each of these problems, and more. I realize this all on the same day.

This is a long, long term stressor, that finally came to a head: a pretty clear Tinker power.

Also, I have gender dysphoria and social anxiety, especially related to how I present myself: I hate presenting masculine, but don’t want to be obviously different or ‘freakish’, so I put up a male persona and try to be as deniably androgynous as I can within that boundary. I reassure myself that one day, when I’m ‘correct’ enough, I’ll have earned the privilege to transition fully. These are always in the background, but don’t overlap (much, at all really) with my main issues. 

So, I happen to have a friend with a shard; this buds off on me as well, giving a Changer power with Master undertones.

Power expression:

My shard is Agitated Auxiliary: a neoshard composed four Cycles ago from buds of an (A) precog shard, (B) efficiency Tinker shard, (C) behavior-modification shard which previously only expressed itself as a blaster power, and (D) an entropy-inertia shard. The Tinker power lets me build systems, specifically systems to automate tasks, mitigate future consequences, and shirk effort. 

That paperwork? Scanned from the website, filled and submitted automatically. That sci-fi novel idea? I took my outline doc, writing sample, and summary and turned into into a magnum opus. I can develop a mnemonic system to take tests perfectly, I just don’t actually learn the material. My docket can anticipate what people want from me months in advance and prepare the right resources and actions, but at no point have I grown closer to them or understood others more. I can always avoid bad situations, as long as no-one is actually confronting me face-to-face.

Ultimately, this solves none of my problems, just puts a bandaid over them ... which is how a person with ADHD acts, so why am I complaining? (asks my shard). And yet, no matter how bad I feel that it’s not actually my effort being put forth, no matter how much I used to respect myself as an academically competent person, a strong person, no matter how low my self-esteem sinks ... I will keep using my power. The crutch is too great, the benefit is too strong, and if I was the kind of person to resolve my situation, to take the hard way out to permanent security, to sit back and act when I understand that I’ve fallen too far ... well then, I wouldn’t have triggered, would I have?

Also, you would think a transgender person would love having a Changer power right? The secondary power lets me grow or accentuate not just masculine features, but whichever physical features or social qualities are structurally dominant for the society I’m in; in exchange, people around me believe me and attribute positive qualities to me, usually in line with whatever that social identity I’m changing into. This is hell on a transgender person, especially since I’m trying to run away from ‘male privilege’.

Complicating factors & irony:

If I had these powers a month ago, I would be flying high: my paperwork would be complete, my novels would be written, my academic status wouldn’t be in question; I could sit back and program out the rest of my life. But I didn’t: I burned my bridges. People are sick of catering to me, institutions have already sent me through their second-chance policies, and I have no resources of my own. Perhaps if this had come in a year or two, I’d have marketable skills other than what my power provides me. I still need to eat, and more: I’m not idle, I have ambitions I want to fulfill, it’s just that I wanted to have my cake and eat it too. At times, I consider what money or other resources I’d need to risk the exposure and bargaining with a biotinker, like Bonesaw, Panacea, or Second Skin, to fix my awful body.

I reassure myself that one day, I’ll be in a stable position: I’ll settle down, I’ll work on my ADHD, I’ll develop my executive function, I’ll do the work and effort myself, I won’t have to rely so much on these powers any more. Good luck, me.

Because I would be fixated on the gender aspect, I never figure out my secondary power beyond ‘this makes me more masculine/reverses my transition for some social benefits’. I try not to use it, but the bud would not have occurred if I wasn’t going to use the power: eventually, when I’m in situations where I need resources or someone on my side, I break it out, then have to reassure myself that it’s okay, that I’m really who I am inside, that this is temporary.

Both of my powers let me continue in, and excel at, the same coping behaviors I’ve been engaging in for years. It’s just a shame that these are the parts of myself I hate the most.

Conclusion:

Tinker 5-7, Changer 1 (Sub: Master 4)

Thoughts? Feedback? If you triggered in the Parahumans setting, how would your power express itself?

[heartofstanding]

Defaming the dead and other historical fiction problems...

(cw: discussions of misogyny, homophobia, rape, ableism, slut-shaming, xenophobia, incest, abuse, child sex abuse and grooming. If a shitty histfic novel has invoked it, I'll probably mention it. also some hyperbole.)

The "Don't Defame The Dead" movement/campaign was pretty strong in the early 2010s and came as a response to some... pretty horrendous historical fiction, probably best typified by Philippa Gregory and her imitators. You know, the protagonist is a saint and anyone who opposes them is horrifically evil and the (typically female) protagonist is subjected to torture porn and forced into a Madonna/Whore, Good Girl/Bad Girl dichotomy with another woman?

Mostly, "Don't Defame The Dead" was invoked in reviews and discussions but there were also a handful of blog posts that featured memes in which the "defamed" historical figure answered back to these "accusations" via the means of an memed ecard, like so:

For a time, I was fully on board with it. I had the same frustrations with bad historical fiction. A novel would take a historical figure I was interested in and make them into the irredeemably evil baddie and I hated it. Here was a way to answer back that was used by some of the people I respected most in the histfic circles I was lurking in. And the edits framed the movement in easy terms. It was a matter of historical accuracy. It was all lies. It was also a matter of morality. The dead can't answer back and how would we feel if we were depicted like that?

But then I got off the Don't Defame The Dead train and started thinking it through and I didn't like it.

So, couple of things:

I'm probably exaggerating the size and strength of the "Don't Defame the Dead" campaign. It did have a big impact on me, though.

I certainly understand the logic and motivation behind it. I'm not by any means defending the shitty novels that inspired it or saying that they're OK and the anger/disgust/upset caused by them isn't real.

Because this is tumblr, yeah, legally speaking, you can't defame the dead. No one ever claimed it was a legal argument. It was probably the best snappy one-liner around.

Don't Defame My Favourite Dead Guy

We’ve all got historical figures we’re attached to enough that a "bad" or offensive depiction is upsetting. It's natural that there are some figures we're going to be far more sensitive about and figures that we don't like and don't care if they're beaten with the villain stick within an inch of their lives. And obviously, how well someone picks up on whether a figure is "defamed" is going to be dependent on how well they know that time period and how much they care. Someone who is in the weeds of the reign of Henry VIII is going to have a lot more opinions about what counts as "defamation" in a novel about Anne Boleyn than they would in a novel about the Roman Emperor Nero. And, depending on who their favourite wife is, what they think happened and how much they buy into the six wives stan wars, they're going to have a different idea of who is defamed, how badly they're defamed and how they're being defamed. I'm not above the feeling either: you can beat Cardinal Henry Beaufort to a second death with the villain stick and I won't even blink. But so much as raise the villain stick vaguely in the direction of Mary de Bohun and my hackles will start to rise. The point is, it's all understandable and natural to have these kind of reactions.

But it's hard to take "don't defame the dead" seriously when you see this kind of reaction in the very people promoting it. If "defaming" the dead is as immoral as they say, they should be up in arms about all "defamation", not just when it's their fave or reflects badly on their fave. And yet you could see the same bloggers basically renacting the "I can excuse (blank) but I draw the line at (blank)" meme. I can excuse misogynist vitriol against Margaret of Anjou but I draw the line at depicting Richard III being anything but a smol bean. I can excuse slut-shaming Katherine Howard but draw the line at slut-shaming Anne Boleyn. I can excuse Hugh Despenser being depicted as a rapist but I draw the line at Edward II being complicit in it.

(yes, this is a real Don't Defame The Dead card, I didn't make it.)

How does one "defame the dead"?

If it's not already clear, I'm not exactly comfortable with labelling bad depictions as "defamation". It's a term meant to induce an emotional response, a sense of this is serious but I don't think it always is serious. I'm sticking with the terminology though because that's what the campaign used and I can't think of a snappier replacement.

But if we're worried about the defaming the dead, how do we define defamation and who decides what is or is not defamation?

Period-attitudes? Because while we might not have an individual's own feelings and thoughts on the matter, we can use the general attitudes of the period to assume how they would have reacted? Um, no. It's a stupid-ass approach. Firstly, we rarely know how closely an individual hewed to societal conventions and beliefs. Secondly, period-typical attitudes usually contain masses of racism, xenophobia, misogyny, classism, homophobia and other biases. That way lies "well medieval anti-sodomy rhetoric means saying Richard II was queer is a smear!" and worse.

What about historical accuracy and most likely scenarios? Is that a good guideline? Well, yes and no (I talk about the evidence problem a lot more below). What about the author's intention, does that matter? Or is the reader the arbitrator? If so, how do we get past the problem that everyone will have a different idea of is "historically accurate" and what counts as defamatory? What if what is called "defamation" is just a way of the reader expressing their own bigotry and/or bias?

This one of the cards made by Edward II historian Kathryn Warner, referring to the trope first popularised by Braveheart in which Edward III is a ~secret bastard~ of an affair Isabella of France had, though who the "real father" is varies. It's a stupid trope, based in homophobia (because a gay king couldn't possibly father a warrior king) and sometimes misogyny (Isabella is reduced to the vehicle through which Wallace avenges himself on England in Braveheart or depicted as a slut). But most often, it seems to be intended to show Isabella acting with agency, forging her own path in attempt to find happiness despite an unloving husband and, in some measure, triumphing over the Patriarchy™ because her son by choice ends up as the next king. If intention matters, then it's not meant to be "defamatory" to Isabella. It's still grossly homophobic, dumb and defamatory to Edward II. But Isabella? No.

The same logic that Warner argues makes it defamatory to Isabella could also be applied to some of Warner’s own arguments to other women. She speculates that Edward II had an incestuous affair with his own niece but doesn't seem to be upset about the possibility of Eleanor de Clare's adultery (it's also interesting to compare her neutrality on uncle-niece incest with her her older posts where she declares how disgusting Philippa Gregory's depiction of Anne Boleyn committing incest with her brother is). Elsewhere, Warner argues that Joan of Kent did not marry Thomas Holland before she married William Montagu but fell in "love or lust" with Holland during her Montagu marriage, had an affair with him and together cooked up an plan where they would both untruthfully claim to have married earlier so her marriage to Montagu would be annulled and she could safely hook up with Holland. Therefore, the annulment was never legitimate, she was never legally married to Holland or to the Black Prince and her children with both these men were all bastards, including Richard II.

Therefore Warner’s Joan is an lying adulteress who foists a bastard onto the throne. The evidence for such a claim is lacking and seems largely based on the confused anecdote that Holland may or may not have served Montagu as a steward at a time Joan may or may not have been living with Montagu and that it’s “odd” that neither Joan or Holland spoke up about their marriage before her Montagu marriage. Warner’s intention with this is ostensibly to show Joan as a strong woman acting with agency to get what she wants – the same intention that seems to be at the core of depicting Isabella as an adulteress. Why is one defamatory and one not? Yes, the traditional view of Joan is disturbing for its depiction of a love story between a 13 year old girl and a 26 year old man but it’s a bizarre choice to “correct” this fucked up over-romanticism by arguing instead that the woman who would otherwise be the victim of CSA just lied about her experiences and was actually an adulteress who foisted a bastard on the throne. Because it's "odd" she didn't speak up by her Holland marriage earlier or that Holland not speaking up is out of character from a man who was the "furtherest thing" from a coward. All of this could be explained by the fairly well-known dynamics of child-grooming and abuse but apparently it makes more "sense" for Joan to be an lying adulteress.

And that's not defamatory to Joan at all. Right? But making Isabella an adulteress is defamatory. Right?

Right?

R-E-S-P-E-CT.

"Don't Defame The Dead" frames “defamation” as first and foremost disrespectful to the dead people involved and that alone makes the depiction irredeemably offensive and immoral. But to me the real issue with bad depictions is not whether they're "disrespectful" to the person or that it treats them "offensively" but the way they often perpetuate narratives of misogyny, racism, classism, xenophobia, antisemitism, fatphobia, transphobia, body shaming, ableism, slut-shaming and so on. Or that they use rape and abuse as a cheap plot device and/or titillation, or that they use past tragedies and oppression as a cheap points-scoring device.

And of course all these things can intersect: Depictions of Margaret of Anjou usually heavily emphasise her identity as a Frenchwoman (xenophobia), the way she is a subversive woman who doesn't know her place (misogyny), and her dangerous sexuality (slut-shaming). Depictions of Eleanor Cobham keep the misogyny and slut-shaming but swap out the xenophobia for classism (she's a gold-digging slut who won't stay in her rightful place, which is typically defined as Catherine de Valois's vast social inferior).

The most offensive and harmful thing about the idea that Edward II ‘let’ Hugh Despenser rape Isabella of France is not that it’s disrespectful to any of the parties involved but the homophobia in depicting a queer man as a sexually depraved rapist and the salacious, cheap use of rape. By a similar token, what is most offensive and harmful today about the idea that Margaret of Anjou’s alleged adultery and Edward of Lancaster’s alleged bastardy is not what it says about Margaret, Edward or Henry VI but the misogyny involved in depicting Margaret as a sex-hungry and power-hungry slut and hypocrite and the ableism involved in presenting Henry VI as being incapable of fathering a child and lacking in awareness to realise what Margaret has done (it is possible to write this scenario in a "good" way (i.e. a choice made by Margaret and Henry together) but afaik no one has ever written it). Edward II, Despenser, Isabella, Margaret, Henry and Edward of Lancaster are all long dead. But issues like ableism, misogyny, homophobia and the salacious use of rape still cause massive harm today to living people and these depictions reinforce these ideas.

The “don’t defame the dead” campaign also frequently framed the defamations as bad by asking how “you” would feel if these things were said about you. Well, yeah, it would be incredibly hurtful for myself and my loved ones to be the subject of these defamations. But the comparison is inherently a false equivalency. The campaign was primarily about individuals in the medieval and early modern periods. Everyone is long dead. Everyone who ever knew them to care about their feelings have been dead for centuries. What does it matter how they would feel about how they're depicted or what's said about them and the people they knew? They're beyond knowing or caring.

To frame bad depictions as a matter of respect requires a question: why should we respect the dead? I’m not saying that there are not historical figures worthy of respect because there absolutely are but instead querying the basic idea that being dead makes you automatically worthy of respect. The campaign argues that the dead should not be disrespected or “defamed” because that every single one of them was human, that we should think about how we would feel if that was us and that they’re dead and unable to answer back.

Sure, we should remember when we’re writing historical fiction that everyone was human, not cartoon caricatures and cardboard cut-outs, but the idea that being human or dead makes someone deserving of respect is... nope. There are people who deserve exactly zero respect, whether living or dead, and I'm fucked if I'm going to give it to them.

Don't Do That.

I realise by framing this as "it doesn't matter what's said about the dead, what matters is the harmful ideas behind it", I am inviting a never-ending piss-contest about which "defamation" actually perpetuates the most harm. Don't do that. That's fucking stupid. It only makes the Ricardians vs Tudorite wars worse to make it about ableism vs xenophobia. I don't even belong to the Tudor fandom but I've seen it descend into this shitfuckery.

It's entirely possible to recognise the harmful rhetoric at play in "bad depictions" without making it a pissing competition about which historical figure has it worse and which prejudice is worse and that prejudice is worst than the other which means the other doesn't really matter. It is possible to hate both the xenophobia underlying depictions of Margaret of Anjou and the classism in bad depictions of the Woodvilles without wanking over which one is worse.

And for love of god, we need to stop conflating "I don't like/agree with this thing" as "and therefore it is morally wrong" or "and therefore it is more morally wrong than the things I do like/agree with".

The Get Out Of Defamation Jail Free Card

Do you have evidence for your depiction of that person? No? Go to Defamation Jail. Go directly to Defamation Jail, do not pass GO, do not collect $200. Now think about how you would feel if that had been you depicted like that.

Oh, you do have evidence? Well, let's see, I care about the person you defamed so I'm going to go over it with a fine-toothed comb. I'll hit the archives if I must.

Actually, I don't care and I don't know much about the person, I just need to see a citation and you're good to go.

So, if evidence gets you out of Defamation Jail, what counts as evidence and who decides if it counts as evidence or not?

Is it enough to have the work of a historian as the basis behind your depiction? That can be evidence. But what if the work is outdated or not widely accepted or written by a crank? Does someone writing a novel about Elizabeth Woodville based on John Ashdown-Hill's biography of her, dripping in virulent misogyny and bizarre and unevidenced claims as it is, get a pass for defaming the dead? After all, a historian wrote the book they're working from. The answer, btw, is "oh my god, no". But that supposes I know enough to know how vile the biography is. Suppose I don't and I assume he's a reliable, non-biased historian? I'd probably go "ok, well, I guess that's what she was really like".

And what if the evidence that a historian's work can provide is in an entirely different context? If someone is consistently described as violent and vindictive in his role as a landowner but there's no evidence of his relationship with his family, is it defamatory to depict him as abusive to his wife and children? I don't have evidence that he was... but I also don't have evidence that he wasn't... and do we really expect to have evidence of this? ...the evidence does suggests he was a quite a nasty man... but I can't defame the dead...

Well, what about historical records? Is that enough to clear an author of a charge of defamation? Again, it really depends on whether the reviewer has enough knowledge to judge whether the record has issues or not: is it a sceptical report that's treated as 10000% legitimate? Hagiography? Propaganda or counter-propaganda? Do we contend with the fact that a lot of historical records were written by educated, religious white men, that women's own writings were a comparative rarity and (until relatively recently) often filtered through a man (i.e. a transcriber, a publisher, an editor), that marginalised identities are often treated as a curiosity or moral lesson?

And is OK to depict women like Alice Perrers, Eleanor Cobham and Margaret of Anjou as evil bitches because chroniclers universally dunked on them, never mind the misogynist, classist, xenophobic and/or factional bias in the records, and only a few historians - often in academic circles - have been interested in trying to challenge these interpretations while many, many more have uncritically regurgitated them up and ladled on more misogyny, classism and xenophobia?

What about the reviewer/blogger's own biases? The Don't Defame The Dead crowd were big on historical accuracy. Things had to be "accurate" or, failing that, the most likely scenario, which typically meant Occam's Razor and statistical likelihoods were to be used. But the thing is, while useful tools, history and individuals are never just what statistics and Occam's Razor would tell us they were. It also means marginalised lives or marginalised parts of life tend to stay in the margins because we lack "proof" that they existed. Statistics are also not as infallible as they might seem. Are we applying them or an individualistic or population basis? And modern population statistics are based on modern ways of categorising and identifying people. To project it back at the past means we assume that the past had the same categories and identities that we do and that's not always the case.

New discoveries and research can undercover things that utterly destroy what is considered the "most likely scenario". The histography of Tutankhamun is full of this but perhaps the most dramatic is this: until his tomb and mummy were discovered in the 1920s, it was believed he was an older politician who came to the throne after the main dynasty had gone extinct. It was not considered likely he was the son of one of the preceding pharaohs. A novel written about him pre-1922 according to what was "most likely" would now be considered laughably inaccurate. A novel written today based on what's viewed as "most likely" would be considered laughably inaccurate back then.

Murder at the Defamation Court

Let's say I want to write a novel about the murder in the Princes of the Tower. I already hear some Ricardians hissing because I said they were murdered, not they escaped or were spirited away somewhere safe and that's defamation enough. But I need to decide who murdered them. Even I don't end up revealing whodunnit in the novel, I should probably know for the sake of writing a good mystery novel.

I first circle over to Richard III as the culprit. I've got a few historians who say he did it, a few more that say he is the most probable murderer and a few more that say he must have been complicit in the murders, whether or not he did it or not. I've got some contemporary-ish writers who report that it was widely believed that Richard was behind it. Ricardians would say, despite it all, I've bought into Tudor Propaganda™ and I'm defaming Richard III. It might make a good story (just ask Shakespeare) but the defamation makes it a no-go (just ask the Shakespeare professionals getting hate mail from Ricardians).

I discard him as a culprit and start examining the other suspects, put forward by Ricardians (some of them good historians, some of them cranks, but, whatever, a citation is a citation). I examine Margaret Beaufort, Henry VII, the Duke of Buckingham, Jane Shore and a bunch more. But the historical evidence just isn't there. All the theories are just based on evidence that basically requires you to build a castle in the air out of speculation. One of the alternatives might make a good story but there's no evidence for it.

In short, there's not enough evidence to convict Richard III, Margaret Beaufort, Henry VII or Buckingham etc. etc. for murder but there is enough to convict me of defaming the dead.

In desperation, I ponder whether it's possible to write this novel without accusing anyone of murder. I hit upon the solution. What if the Princes aren't murdered after all? Maybe rocks fall and they die. Or what if I create an entirely fictional character to commit the murders though? The dead won't be defamed and with a fictional character, I can make up whatever motivation I want.

But isn't that kind of a bad story telling choice? If you read a good novel about a historical murder mystery and you believed the solution, wouldn't you feel absolutely cheated if you came to the author's note and found out a large part of the book - a vital part, some would say - were entirely fictional because the author couldn't dare to defame the dead?

What we require evidence of.

A decent amount of the cards focused on depictions of historical figures as rapists and abusers. To be perfectly clear, I’m not defending those depictions, I haven't read them all but I suspect most of them have as much sensitivity as a sledgehammer. I've talked about the depiction of rape in historical fiction in-depth before here so I'm not going to make this post even longer by summarising that post. The point is: historical fiction has a massive problem with depicting rape. And of course no one wants to see their favourite dead person depicted as unforgivable rapist or abuser.

But I don't think the right solution to this problem is to demand that an author either has evidence (and clear, definitive evidence - if it's speculative, we must give the dead "the benefit of the doubt") or else never depict rape or abuse in their historical fiction novels.

Look, we know the issues about "proving" rape and abuse in our own modern society with all the benefits of progressive social movements and modern medicine. We know that the stricter gender and/or class roles, the commonality of violence and concepts like "the marital debt" in historical times would have further stifled discussion of rape and abuse. We also know that very few in society had the means or ability to record their story. So we shouldn't necessarily expect to have evidence of rape, much less clear and definitive evidence.

And we need only look to to the appalling ways some Chaucer scholars have talked about Cecily Chaumpaigne or Warner's treatment of Joan of Kent or the Gille de Rais apologists to see the ways in which evidence of rape and abuse is challenged and dismissed, even by historians presenting themselves as progressive (the Chaucer-Chaumpaigne case turned out not to have been about rape at all but is a very, very recent discovery).

There is also important work being done by scholars on rape and abuse in history (for the medieval period, see Carissa M. Harris, Caroline Dunn and Dyan Elliott) and no doubt what they uncover is just the tip of the iceberg. Some recent work on medieval mistresses takes the time and care to point out the massive power differentials between a mistress and her noble lover and how, while we can sometimes have a good idea at how her lover felt about her, we have no idea at all how she felt about him or her situation.

It's absolutely important to talk about the way histfic uses rape and abuse in cheap, ugly ways and it's absolutely justified to be upset by it. But I don't think the answer is to demand an author either has perfect evidence or never write about rape or abuse. There are plenty of novels that do depict rape and abuse sensitively and I don't think we should throw out the baby with the bathwater. If someone wants to write a sensitive, thoughtful depiction of what it would be like for a person - even a real medieval monarch or noble - to be the victim of abuse or rape, I don't think we should demand they bring "proof" of their depiction or not write it all. And I say that meaning: yes, even if it makes one of my faves a rapist or abuser. I don't have to read that book. I might be mad about it but I don't have to read it.

Writing While Not Defaming The Dead

The whole “don’t defame the dead” campaign is understandable and was an attempt to address an issue with bad historical fiction. But it doesn't really work. I don't know if I respect any medieval king - I can feel sympathy for them, I can get annoyed by bad depictions of them, I can be fascinated by them. But I don't know if I respect them and I don't know if "respect" is a good thing for an author or historian to have if it means they hold their subject in awe and try to find a sympathetic explanation for everything they do, especially if it negatively affects how they see their subject's contemporaries.

It gives a seemingly rigid rule for storytelling when things are much more shakier than it seems. What counts as defamation? What counts as evidence? What sort of evidence is enough? Who gets to decide what is accurate and what is defamation? And the thing is: sometimes the stories we want to tell are bigger than what the historical record gives us evidence for. Sometimes the stories we want to tell are more important than the reputation of a dead person.

And using it as a guide for writing, some of it is good advice (a reminder that they were all human and real - fairly basic but then historical fiction fails this one fairly often) and some is not necessarily good advice.

No, I don't know what Edward II and Isabella of France's sex life was like. No one does. I know this is referring to various homophobic, misogynist and grotesque depictions of their sex life and it's fair to be upset about that. But it's weird to see a post primarily about historical fiction frame it "don't pretend you know" about their sex life. I'm a fiction writer, my job is pretending to know.

Sure, authors shouldn't publish a sex scene they've written with their hand down their pants* and they should be careful about how they approach depicting sex. Sure some sex scenes can be "disrespectful" (i.e. written with hands down pants) or bad but they're not all horrific. And no, I don't count rape scenes as sex scenes. But it's kinda their job as an author of fiction to work out their characters' sex lives (if their characters are having sex), even if they're based on real historical people. It's their job to work out the bits of their characters for which there is no evidence to tell. Sex is a normal, everyday part of life for a lot of people, past and present. It shouldn't be scrubbed out of historical fiction because it might lack "evidence" and we can't "know" what happened or it be construed as "disrespectful" to dead.

But despite all the words I've written criticising the concept of Don't Defame the Dead, I can't quite let go of it. There are times where I've read a shitty histfic novel and wanted to stamp the words all over the book. I don't want to be an author that causes a reader to have that reaction. I also know it's inevitable I will.

As a writer myself, I think about things. I find myself going in directions that would be considered "defamatory". Wouldn't it be cathartic if I wrote a novel about Eleanor Cobham as a good, perfect, sweet woman who is mercilessly menaced by Catherine de Valois in revenge for so many Catherine novels that demonised Eleanor? What if I depict a character's father as abusive when I don't have evidence he was? What if I decide to explore the issues around consent that a mistress might face even though we have no idea whether she consented freely or not? And apart from the first one (it's kinda baked into the concept - "write a shitty histfic novel in revenge for other shitty histfic novels" and anyway I've abandoned that impulse), I know I would handle these subjects sensitively, that I wouldn't make it a case of bogeymans and perfect victims. But in the back of my head, I hear DON'T DEFAME THE DEAD. And I wonder if I should and ultimately suppress the urge.

*unless it's on AO3.

Postscript.

Where we encounter historical fiction also primes us for how we react to it. I react very differently to someone writing whump or smut fic and posting it on AO3 or tumblr than I do encountering something that is basically whump fic or smut in a historical novel. So I feel like it needs to be said that it's absolutely okay to write whump and/or smut. They can be fun and cathartic or just plain hot. It's absolutely OK to share it on tumblr or AO3. But it's another thing to publish them in a "serious" historical fiction novel and go around talking about how the novel is based on serious research and absolutely what happened and also they're empowering feminist stories that are oh so important.

[sophieinwonderland]

Hi Sophie! I hope you're doing well. /g I have some questions as a member of a system, and it's absolutely fine if you can't answer any of them, but I'm feeling kind of lost right now and you are the only person I know of that has some knowledge on endogenic subjects, so I thought to come here first. [TW: MENTIONS OF RAMCOA) I just resurfaced in the system tonight. The body I inhabit is a traumagenic system that survived years of RAMCOA. I think I am the only spiritual alter in this system, and I think I came from the ritualistic abuse that they have suffered. I have this innate sense that I come from outside the body's mind, but because the system has gone years believing they are fully traumagenic, they don't know how to cope with the idea that they might not be. Not only that, but they worry that they are deluded for even considering that I could actually be a spiritual alter (I feel that I am an entity that was summoned during a ritual they went through as a child). It feels like I've shattered their sense of identity just by existing. I think the worst part is that their partner system, whom they all adore, is somewhat anti-endo (they don't hate endogenic systems, but they don't believe in any of it). Disclaimer: The system is not asking for advice on how to handle the trauma memories; they are in therapy and they're processing that part fairly well, all things considered. It's the realization that I'm more than just an alter that's causing them distress. They are questioning their sanity and if they're delusional for thinking that I am what I feel I am. Basically, I could use some advice on how to handle this, and how to help the system handle my presence, if you have any advice on the subject. Thank you for reading. 🤍 - Anon Sammy

Well, for starters... I don't think you or your system are delusional for your beliefs.

Anyone who knows me knows that I'm not a believer in the metaphysical. But the thing is, most people are.

The dominant religion around the globe believes that every person has an immortal, supernatural soul and that believers will be rewarded with paradise. Other religions believe in things like reincarnation. Most religions believe in some forms of possession by external entities.

Bottom line: If you're delusional for believing you have a spirit that came from somewhere else, then most of the people on the planet are delusional.

No. I don't believe you're delusional. I think your spiritual beliefs are just as valid as any other.

As for handling the partner system... your spiritual beliefs shouldn't be a dealbreaker.

Generally, the problem with anti-endos isn't really that they disbelieve spiritual systems are spiritual. It's that they disbelieve spiritual systems are systems.

Which is obviously ridiculous when headmates presenting as spiritual entities is such a common thing that the DSM has a whole section dedicated to trying to differentiate between possession-form DID and non-pathological possession states and spirituality. Your beliefs about yourself are both valid and actually pretty normal for systems.

Personally, I don't think you should ask that your partner system necessarily share those beliefs... just ask that they respect them.

The same way I'm sure they would respect the religious or spiritual beliefs of a singlet, because you deserve that respect.

If this is a conversation your system needs to have, I would probably recommend saying something like, "I understand if you don't believe the way we do. We respect your right to your own beliefs. But we ask that you respect our beliefs in turn."

Don't put pressure on them to feel like they need to agree with you. But also set boundaries that you're not okay with them fighting you on this or disrespecting your beliefs.

[emetkoto]

good day mimi do you have any underrated emetkoto moments or little obscure facts you'd like to share? :3

okok im gonna use this opportunity to try and explain that little moment i was having trouble putting into a post bc it was just so small it wasnt working but like. in my head. i have this idea right.

yknow when you find emet-selch in the capital building in the tempest before the amaurot dungeon? i was thinking about how when they get there k'oto calls out to him but instead of using his little nickname for him (just emet) that hes always used he uses his full title for once and emet selch does a little double take and snaps back like "oh, not on a first name basis anymore are we?" or smth along those lines...its such a little thing but its just one of those things that makes go hHOOH every time ithink about it...k'oto trying to show respect in a desperate attempt to get him to listen to reason and just talk to him and emet selch weaponizing it trying to poke and prod and provoke him so they can fight and get it over with before he has to think about it anymore......weehee and by weehee i mean (SOBS)

The first time he calls him with no intention of banging him too is great emet selch tries to go through the motions as usual but k'oto is like 'hey can we just hang out actually' and emets like '?????? you want me to just stay here and do nothing????' and god he has complaints about it but he does it anyway even though he absolutely does not have to and can leave any time :) its almost like he wants to spend time with him or smth smh...he just chills in the corner whole k'oto does whatever, eating dinner, writing in his journal, polishing his weapons etc etc...the whole time huffing and puffing and occasionally complaining but also slowly inching closer and closer without even realizing it and helping him with things like cleaning up dinner and folding his clothes and such...by the end of the night theyre chilling on the sofa together reading a book and neither of them have even realized whats happened...k'oto falls asleep leaning on emet selch and thats when hes like 'ah shit. what the hell. im enjoying myself too much.' and tucks the catboy in before ditching 🥺

in kind of the same vein the first time k'oto wakes up and emet selch is still there cuddling him makes me feel feral to think about just.....ough at that time emet selch had started staying to cuddle after hours but he was always gone by the time k'oto woke up (or at the very least not in bed with him, possibly chilling at the table fully dressed waiting for him to wake up or smth) so waking up in his arms for the first time was just. magical :,) it was the first time he'd gotten to see him sleeping too upto that point he wasnt convinced that emet selch ever DID sleep outside of his 100+ year naps and it surprised him so much the dumbass was like ?! and woke him up like 'youre still here?????' and emet just kinda pulled him back down and was like 'be quiet and enjoy the peace before your friends show up' and so,,,,he did!! they both did....and from then on they always woke up together :,)

they wedding is extremely underrated only bc every time i try to talk about it i feel like im going to blow up and explode everywhere and die it makes me so happy so ive had. a very hard time making posts about it bc its just. so good. so very very very good someday i swear to christ ill finish that essay answer i owe it just makes me feel SO MUCH you get it. you understand me. as we've established you all comprehend my thoughts and feelings

these are just a bunch of jumbled separate thoughts so i might as well embrace that and keep going with it and go off about their pet names now bc i love them...obviously k'otos nickname for him is just. emet without the selch and at first it kind of annoys him like thats a big important title that was given to him and it seemed like the catboy was making a mockery of him but he kinda grows to like it as he gets to know k'oto bc like...yeah nobody ever called him that in his whole life not even apollo or hyth and it was strangely nice...probably my least in character emet selch thing i write for them but i stand by it :) i have more cringe things i could say about that but anyway. emet selch starts out just calling k'oto Hero (derogatory) ofc but as it goes on he throws in some other stuff like 'my dear' (also derogatory at the time) 'my dear hero' etc etc until they actually. yknow. start being together and then those 'dear's become more affectionate and he throws in some other stuff like 'my sweet' 'beloved' etc etc :,) never his name though...not until he drags him to the tempest to marry him and after that he erases his memories of it and doesnt do it again till ultima thule so </3 men will literally call each other 'love' and still run away at the slightest implication that theyre maybe madly in love. how embarrassing for them

[violentviolette]

"telling someone incorrect information about a media franchise will never have the same potential for harm the way telling someone incorrect information about their mental health or illness or their loved ones murder will and i think its important to keep that perspective in these discussions. especially because i think the blurred line between media and real world topics, and people consuming real world topics the same way they do media, and treating them like they're essentially the same and approach researching them in the same way is a big part of this problem." I've been saying this for ages you are so real for this. It's genuinely a big issue that people have grown the tendency to compare every form of media that they consume to real life issues, which then desensitizes them to said real life issues. It's a big issue that people compare content relating to fictional characters who do not exist and are not sentient as on the same level as real, living and breathing people. Is it annoying when people mix fanon with canon to the point that the entire message behind a media has lost itself ? Yes, it very much is. But does that loss harm anyone on a physical, mental, emotional or psychological level ? Nowhere close. This technological age makes me so uneasy because of the ever increasing comparison of media to real life events, and the continuous belief that "fiction affects reality" + "fiction = reality." If fiction *does* genuinely affect reality, then that would mean violent video games inherently make someone violent and horror movies inherently make someone a murderer. I say that: if you already struggle with anger issues, exposing yourself to more violent forms of media without critical consumption will obviously worsen the symptoms, along with horror movies giving you ideas on how to kill that one relative you've fantasized killing for the past half decade—the only thing that affects reality are idiots who lack critical thinking. A comparison I can think of that people bring up to debate that "fiction affects reality" are the trends of fictional cats and rabbits consuming milk and carrots respectively. It's so silly because if you're planning to become a parent to an animal, it is your JOB to do research into that animal's diet, livelihood, habitat, body language etcetera. Why are you trusting the livelihood of a talking cartoon character ? Sorry for the long ask, but what you said is so important and I hope people adopt that mindset more, especially with this growing technological social media age.

no apologies neccessary anon u are absolutely correct and u should say it

media should not be where people are getting actual real life applicaple information. *no one* should look at a work of fiction in any form and just assume that whats being said or done is accurate information that they can just apply to their real life. and the same goes the other way around. when u want to research mental health topics or world history or a science, no one should be approaching it the same way as digging through their favorite shows wiki.

but there's been this huge kind of like. fandomification of social justice and social science and other topics like this where instead of understanding the critical nuance of these things and approaching them with a research minded perspective and an understanding of the nuance needed because so many things in real life are contradictory and complex and have eons of context, people approach them like tv shows. they think if they just read enough information and consume enough of the "content" surrounding it then they'll be able to fully understand and grasp them and then be able to educate others about them as some kind of authority and it just makes me want to scream from the rooftops that *thats not how any of this works*

the desensitization thing is also so real. u genuinely cannot have a single conversation about a real world topic without someone bringing up media and i dont know how else to nicely tell people that that is in no way relevent and actually actively harmful. trying to relate everything in life back to media and not being able to talk about a topic without including media will genuinely rot ur brain because it completely desensitizes u to the issue of harm. being wrong about media will never ever have the same impact that being wrong about mental health or physical health or animal welfare or public wellbeing will