#sanctities

[socialistexan]

Cis women on tiktok for the past like 4 years: "I'm girly pop, I do girl math and have girl dinner after going to my girl job ✌️😜"

Dylan Mulvaney: *makes a mediocre pop song that is literally just about that*

Those same cis women:

[xmimikyuusx]

whenever I hear the shit like "trans men can't say tranny that belongs to trans women" "trans men using transandrophobia are just stealing language from trans women/trying to copy them for attention" "trans men can't use the egg cracking analogy because that belongs to trans women" "trans men are trying to appropriate trans women culture" (whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean) it reminds me of being 12 and changing schools, and being a child in the 2010's, I was obsessed with using the word coolio. However, the kids were very quick to inform me that there was Already another kid who was saying coolio and that word belonged to them/was their catch phrase, so I couldn't say it. Even though to me, I'd been using that long since I showed up there. I'd been saying dumb shit like that forever.

So like. Infantile shit. To try and say that certain words belong to your specific identity and anyone who might even remotely relate to you is doing it to steal your thunder. I promise if someone from a different identity uses a term that you use for yourself it literally doesn't affect anything other than your ego.

a note*: the above doesn't apply to indigenous/POC who have had their language essentially colonized, very much a different situation

[zeroducks-2]

What's up with batman and the erasing of queer history? Sry I try to interact with fanon as little as possible

There is no simple or short answer to this but to try and not make it a wall of text - Batman/Robin has always been a staple of the queer community, so much so that to this day there are "brudick" graffiti in big cities and lots of older gay couples have been using them as a reference for solid partnership which endures in spite of adversity.

Originally there was no indication anywhere that Bruce and Dick were in the roles of father and son, rather they were partners against crime, one the shadow of the other, and they would share everything both when it came to crime fighting and in their everyday lives. They're shown sleeping together, going on lake trips together, finishing each other's sentences and Dick being viciously jealous every time Bruce would "replace" him with any of the women he used to have flings with such as Talia or Selina.

Did DC mean for them to be read as a queer couple? No, of course not. Bob Kane and others wrote a partnership, an unbreakable bond which would allow these two men to overcome any obstacle together, and queer people read into it as queer people always do.

Someone else read into it though: Frederick Wertham, who called Batman a pederast and used Batman and Robin as an example of how the evil comics would corrupt young minds to send them on the way of perdition and sin. He wrote all of this and many more infuriating shit in his book Seduction of the Innocents, which was then the major influence in creating the Hayes Code, which is the reason why we never had queer characters in comicbooks and movies and anything really for decades (and we're still struggling today).

Wertham and the Hayes Code did not stop the queer community from loving Batman and Robin though, therefore what started happening was the more subtle shift towards Bruce and Dick having a father and son relationship rather than a partnership. You can see this clearly with Jason Todd for the first time: Bruce takes Jason in and treats him as his own son, the narrative calls them father and son, and there is no doubt in the mind of who's reading that Bruce perceives Jason as his child. It all went steadily downhill from there.

Nowadays, writers have Dick say character assassinating things like "I love you dad" to Bruce, Tim saying "we will save our dad" to Damian, and everyone in the fandom acting like this has always been the case and actually you're weird and you should be sent death threats for shipping Brudick, because "UMMM that is literally his son?!??!?!?". DC has been pushing the idea that these folks are a nuclear family for a while now, but whoever has actually read the comics knows it's not the case, and it used to be very different before.

Brudick, among queer people, used to be entirely uncontroversial. While Wertham raged about how it corrupted the minds of young men and the Hayes Code prevented queerness to be anything but vaguely hinted and coded in the text, queer folks didn't care and kept having matching Batman and Robin shirts.

Today queer people will call you a pedophile and a groomer and try to doxx you for posting Brudick art because apparently they're doing the fascists' job for them, either because they are genuinely misguided or because they think that if they're enough morally pure they will have a spot among the chosen ones, hell if I know. What I know is that they'd suck Wertham's cock and balls if he wrote Seduction of the Innocents today, and it's DC's fault too with their erasure of every found family dynamic among the batclan, and the way they've been pushing the idea of a "batfamily" instead, in which everyone has a strict role of son or brother or father, and shipping them makes you the antichrist.

[cctinsleybaxter]

Common Bruce W / Danny L

[shittysawtraps]

rip mark hoffman and amanda young you would have loved putting people into fake saw traps on april fool’s day

[spookyserenades]

‼️Hi besties!! Just another heads up; tomorrow's update, Chapter Twenty, will be the last update on the 7th for the next few months and Trouvaille will go on TEMPORARY HIATUS! ‼️

This is so I can get fresh eyes on future chapters of Trouvaille, work on Trouvaille drabbles, Hoseok's Trouvaille prequel, and Chapter One of Sanctity 💞 I predict Trouvaille will be back December/January, I'm still working on the timeline, however 🥰

I appreciate all of your love and support of Trouvaille, it means the world to me. I promise the story doesn't end tomorrow, so please don't worry my loves! And I won't leave you on a huge cliffhanger either 🤞🏻 Talk to you all tomorrow evening 💞💞

[helaegons-lovechild]

And jaehaerys... And jaehaera... And sunfyre.... And probably smallfolk

[jameslmartello]

[aurelion-solar]

Ruination Novel Illustrations Viego's Wrath - Kalista Mourns Ledros Ryze Captured by Thresh - Viego & Ledros Kalista vs Sea Monster - Happier Times The Absolver - Sanctity

[aspiring-wildfire]

fig is an oath of FRIENDSHIP paladin im gonna fucking LOSE IT

[thanatologia666]

[pinkeoni]

I’ve had enough of the platonic relationship defense sqaud. I can promise you that the idea of friendship does not need more defending than gay and interracial relationships.

[rookflower]

i will say im a windclan moor >>> windclan prairie truther in my heart but i also think looking at "warrior cats is set in the new forest/england/the uk" and going "no it's not. it's actually set wherever i live" is awesome so whatever. whatever you think is right and whatever i think is right. 10 billion creative and inspired by personal experience warrior cats settings forever

[silvermoon424]

If you haven't heard, Steven Crowder is getting divorced. In his video on the matter, he strongly implies that if it were up to him he would force his wife to stay married to him but "the state of Texas allows one party to divorce the other for any reason" or whatever. He makes it clear that he disagrees with this position and is pretty anti-divorce in general.

Hasan did a video covering it and I and a lot of other people commented on how fucked up that is. I shit you not, there are a bunch of conservatives coming out of the woodwork to argue with us, saying shit like "but when you get married you make a lifelong promise" and "but what about the kids?" and "it's messed up to vow to stay with someone through thick and thin and then leave them when you're unhappy." I got into an argument with a few people, trying to explain how the "sanctity of marriage" does not override someone's ability to be free of a situation that creates undue suffering and distress, and they basically just kept falling back on "yeah but when you get married you pinky swear to stay together 4ever"

Idk why these guys are so salty, back in the days before divorce there was a good chance they would have died of a mysterious wasting illness after eating their wives' cooking.

[nobodysuspectsthebutterfly]

I read GRRM’s interview regarding book vs show canon and I thought the way he was approaching an adaptation of his own story, and fiction as a whole, was very interesting. I do wonder though - does the concept of having a separate show canon kind of become like a cop-out? Because in that case, any TV/film adaptation can just decide to change the plot as they see fit and go “oh, well, that’s our canon, the book is a different canon.” Doesn’t it cease to be an adaptation after a point, or at least become a loose one? In the HotD context, a lot of the changes being made I actually quite like because I can see them fitting in the canon, because there’s nothing suggesting otherwise.

But say, Sansa marrying Ramsay (or, alternatively, the moment that show was dead to me) we can say with absolute certainty did not take place and will almost definitely never take place. D&D knew that too but they went ahead with it anyway; it’s not quite like the Scarlett example where it makes no difference to the story because this change does. I feel like the whole point of adapting written words into something visual loses some of its sanctity if we just accept TV changes a whole separate canon, as opposed to simply a change made by the writers (good change or bad change is up to personal opinion).

I have followed your blog for almost a decade so I’m really curious to hear your thoughts on the subject.

GRRM's "Scarlett example" -- his question of "how many children did Scarlett O'Hara have?", because in the book Gone With the Wind she had three, one with each of her three husbands, whereas in the movie she only had one -- has been his go-to when asked about the difference between book and show canon since at least 2012. Or to quote him from 2015,

How many children did Scarlett O’Hara have? Three, in the novel. One, in the movie. None, in real life: she was a fictional character, she never existed. The show is the show, the books are the books; two different tellings of the same story.

This is IMO one of the most sensible ways for an author to look at adaptations of their work (even if I have gotten rather tired of GRRM using the Scarlett example specifically, pick something different George, we've seen it before lol). There is book canon and there is show canon. They are different parallel universes. They're separate canons because they contain changes made by the writers, and also because the very process of moving from the written word to visual media must involve some kind of change.

And this applies to all adaptations. That's why I brought up X-Men comics vs the Fox X-Men movies vs the X-Men cartoon (original 90s and 2024's '97). For example, there's 4 different versions of the Dark Phoenix Saga between those canons, at the very least. Wait, sorry lol, I forgot the Ultimate canon version. And the various in-comics alternate universe versions. And god knows when they finally bring the X-Men into the MCU they'll probably do yet another DPS there too. And that's only one of many storylines that are radically different between the various canons.

Or look at the various Interviews with the Vampire. Is the new tv show "not an adaptation" because its Claudia is a teenager rather than 5 years old as in the book or portrayed by an 11 year old as in the movie, thus resulting in extremely different relationships and a reshaped plot? (Among many other changes?) No. IWTV has book canon, movie canon, and show canon.

And I can't speak that well about Transformers since it's not a major fandom of mine, but go take a look at their various continuities if you want some more perspective about just how very far the meaning of "adaptation" can stretch.

Or hell, look at Stephen King, where among his many many many adaptations, some of which just barely resemble the original text, the only one he sued to have his name removed from was The Lawnmower Man, because they literally used an entirely different story and just slapped his title on it.

And then there's the movie Adaptation, which is a wildly meta-adaptation of the non-fiction book The Orchard Thief (it's a story about the process of adapting that book and involves a fictional version of the writer, the screenplay writer, and an entirely invented screenplay writer's twin brother)... and it was nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay for multiple film awards (and won a few times), and the original writer even said it kept to the book's themes.

Suffice it to say, HOTD has a long, long, long way to go before it could ever "cease to be an adaptation after a point". Changing the timeline to make Alicent and Rhaenyra the same age, or doing Blood & Cheese differently, do not even compare to what some book-to-visual media "loose adaptations" have done. Even GOT, as wildly terrible as their non-book storylines could be, both their changes to the text and after they had no actual text to work with, never became a "loose adaptation". Certainly it became a less than faithful adaptation -- and let's be real, it always was unfaithful for both themes and the essential elements of so many characters -- but it also always was a remarkably accurate adaptation of the whole span of Westeros (in geography and breadth of characters) and the general (not specific) book plot. (Consider previous attempts at adaptation that GRRM rejected, such as a single 2 hour movie, or eliminating Jon and Dany for being "irrelevant", or only making a Jon movie with none of the other storylines, etc.) Which is why, when GOT was different (and awful) it was such a betrayal, like a zombie or evil alien wearing the skin of your best friend or beloved child, and worse, that this twisted lookalike was the only version millions and millions of viewers ever saw and believed to be true.

But again, this just underlines what GRRM has said. "The show is the show, the books are the books." There is book canon and there is show canon. They are separate things. Parallel universes -- very close parallels, often touching in many places, but sometimes they're quite different. Sometimes the differences in adaptation enhance the themes of the original canon; sometimes the author may even consider certain adapted characters (Shae, King Viserys, Helaena) to be better than his original canon; sometimes you know there's only those tricky NDAs (and payments of lots of money) that prevent him from expressing his disappointment in more ways than dropping the Sansa TWOW preview chapter only days before the release of GOT S5. But perhaps if we're lucky, maybe one day we'll have yet another parallel canon to compare to the others.

[janaknandini-singh999]

"same sex marriage denied by sc-"

you don't understand love, do you? you never did. my queer lil inner girl got so happy for a second tho. the one who secretly watched section 377 go down thus decriminalizing her lil existence but was too scared to celebrate it in front of everyone outside who were shaking their heads and spewing hatred against the queers and the historic judgement