#stance. my god

[james-is-nasqueer]

.

[ruinme-please]

[moonworshippinglesbiandotcom]

when i see yt americans tell black and brown americans to vote for biden bc “trump will be worse” or “trump is extreme right”, i roll my eyes bc where on the political spectrum does joe biden, who is financing and supporting multiple genocides as well as restricting the human rights of MILLIONS of people, fall? yt ppl think that bc he tweets abt roe v wade (which he could’ve codified but didn’t btw) that that makes him left wing

[phoenixisobsessed]

Hi guys I’m actually feeling too overwhelmed about tomorrow’s exam to draw catformer today so I hand you a doodle. (The next one is so good though I’m actually excited to draw it.)

I need to destroy him so bad

[butchexe]

yeagh

[id: a white image with black text in all caps reading "what would you rather spend 3 usd on"

there are two categories, the one to the left listed as dashboard crabs, showing the tumblr store option for dashboard crabs below it, with the options being:

only last 24 hours

encouraging bad business practices

literally like the worst way to fund a corporation (which is not your friend)

the category to the right is labelled "literally like anything else" with the options being:

not giving tumblr money

maybe use it for mutual aid idk

or a yummy snack

anythings better at this point

/end id]

[recklessmoss]

having a normal one btw-

[takaraphoenix]

It is so funny to me that ever since the bad retcon movie spoiler news have been spreading, my notifications have been EXPLODING with people digging up like every single KainShin post I ever made or reblogged; to like or reblog, not to clown on.

A few years back, I had to see like 75% of shippers leave my ship in my biggest fandom because one of them got a canon love interest and that discouraged them from shipping the non canon ship. Just like that.

Meanwhile, here the author really very badly retcons the ship into being related and all reactions I have seen so far are either FUCK CANON or THIS ONLY MAKES IT HOTTER.

Genuinely can not express how much I love you guys.

Like, yeah there are certainly people who will abandon the ship, and I'm deeply sorry that Gosho made it so you can no longer enjoy this ship and I do respect the choice; bad canon writing decisions have made me turn my back on ships in the past too.

But I haven't sailed this non-canon-and-never-will-be-canon ship for 20 years to have canon get in the way now.

I just FULLY do not care about this late ass, bad retcon. Doesn't exist to me, the same way Kaito and Shinichi's heterosexuality and Shin/Ran doesn't exist to me.

Fandom exists to have fun with the characters and the world, to play around and cherry pick what you like about canon and only keep the bits that spark joy. That is how I have treated fandom for over twenty years now and that is how I will continue treating fandom.

[mihai-florescu]

Ive been brewing a theory that people are obsessed with demanding media show them morally good things because we're replacing religion with tv shows and pop culture in general in our everyday life. From one story, one form of escapism that dictates our life and community seeking to another, humanity has always been the same. Or rather, there will always be forms of control to keep us occupied and distracted (at the same time it wouldn't be so effective if we weren't intrinsically wired to seek a distraction from reality, so i can't even blame people who "fall" for it. I think it's a natural instinct that helps people build a lens to approach reality through, to stay sane in a meaningless irrational world.)

[shorthaltsjester]

rewatching c3ep48 for silly reasons and forgot it was also the episode with relvin and matt mercer please tell me everything about that man. there are so many interesting body language choices and facial expressions that are like. not in conflict with but definitely complexify the Gruff Man aura and . i would like to know every thought he’s ever had actually .

[rmbunnie]

Red Hood Characterization

This is really long so I'm putting a cut here, I've been thinking about Jason Todd's character motivations and the question of whether or not his actions are based in a Moral Code (I don't think so, not to say he's without any morality) and I talk about that in more depth here.

I saw someone say on here that Titans: Beast World: Gotham City was some of the best Jason Todd internal writing they'd seen in a while, and I've been a Red Hood fan for 8 years or so now? pretty much since I read comics for the first time, so I went and checked out and I thought it was good! The way the person I saw talking about it as if it was rare and unusual made me wonder though, because as well-written as i thought his stances on crime were, there wasn't really anything in it that went against the way I conceptualize Jason?

This kinda plays into a larger question I've been thinking about for a while with Jason though, which is that, do people think that the killing is part of a fundamental worldview that motivates him a la batman, and that worldview is the reason he does the things he does?? Because 8 years ago i was a middle schooler engaging with fiction on the level that a middle schooler does, so I simply did not put much thought into it beyond "poor guy :(" but ever since I actually started trying to understand consistent characterization, I don't really see Jason as someone who's motivated by a moral code in his actions the way batman or superman is!

tbh my personal read is that he's a very socially-motivated guy, his actions from resurrection to his Joker-Batman ultimatum in utrh always seemed to me like every choice made leading up to his identity reveal was either a. to give him the leverage and skill necessary to pull off his identity reveal successfully, or b. to twist the knife that little bit more when he does let Bruce find out who he is. Like iirc there's a Judd Winick tweet like "yeah tldr he chose Red Hood as his identity because it's the lowest blow he could think of." And I think that's awesome, I think character motivations rooted so deeply in character's relationships and emotions are really fun to read! I also think it's where the stagnation/flatness of his character comes from in certain comics, because if his main motivation is one event in one relationship that passes, and he is not particularly attached to anything in his life or the world by the time that comes to pass, it's a little harder to come up with a direction to go with the character after that, because there isn't much of a direction that aligns with something the character would reasonably want? But I do think solving this by saying "all of the morally-off emotionally driven cruelty he did on his way to spite Batman was actually reflective of his own version of Batman's stance that's exactly the same except he thinks it's GOOD to kill people" isn't ideal. To be fully honest, it seems to me like he never particularly cared one way or the other about killing people to "clean Gotham of crime," he just did everything he could to get the power necessary to pull off his personal plans, and took out any particularly heinous people he encountered along the way (like in Lost Days.) Not to say I think the fact he killed people keeps him up at night anymore than everything else in his life events, I just never really thought he was out there wholeheartedly kneecapping some dude selling weed or random guy robbing a tv store for justice.

Looping wayyy back to my question, Is this (^) contradictory to the way he's written/the overall average perception of the character? Because like I enjoyed his writing in Beast World i have zero significant issue with anything there, I just didn't believe it would be a hot take, like yeah, that is Jason. It's been a while since I've read utrh and lost days, but I don't think my takeaway directly contradicts either of those too bad iirc. Idk all this to say I think Jason killing and being alright with killing is an obvious and objective fact, but i guess i've always seen it as more of a practical tactic than a moral belief, and I think taking the actions made during the lowest points of a character's life where he is obsessively focused on this ONEEEE thing and trying to apply it as a Motivating Stance to everything he's done after that, doesn't really follow logically for me.

[basilacademia]

Disappears for months then reappears with a warmup of a ship you've never seen me draw before

[batsplat]

Not to want to get you into hot waters but one of the blogs on here shared Marc’s onboard from the 2015 sepang kick incident and I’m a bit unsure how anyone could watch that and not consider it a deliberate kick? Really don’t want anyone to get mad because I’m no expert so maybe there’s something about Valentino’s movements that allows for the “accidental” kick option but if so, what is it? Because as a layman, watching it… I wish it were possible to show that video to Valentino and make him explain exactly how that kick was not on purpose…

I think it's genuinely ambiguous! this is what's interesting about it, right - if you look at the onboards and the helicopter shots there's a decent chance that depending on what you watch you'll end up with a pretty different view on it, and it's inarguable that from certain angles it looks incredibly like a kick. it's also inarguable that whether valentino kicked marc or not, he did deliberately attempt to run him wide, which you can see was intentional by how he looks behind him just before they make contact. it's still not clean riding whichever way you look at it, which is why he got the penalty

I'm going to defer to someone else's opinion here myself (you'll find I link back to this site a lot and broadly consider it trustworthy), from a bloke who does very much believe valentino was in the wrong that weekend. this is in the aftermath of the fim requesting that honda doesn't release data which would have 'proven' valentino kicked marc in an entirely futile attempt to make the controversy die down. the piece talks first about what data like this even involves, including this bit:

the main point here is that the data isn't going to tell you whether valentino kicked him or not, because that's not something you can actually read in data. I have another ask that's vaguely related to this sitting in my drafts, but it's always been one of the most interesting elements of all the controversy in late 2015 - both sides attempting to definitively prove the unprovable with a few numbers. let's quickly bring in what arguments both sides as well as race direction made in the immediate aftermath from the post-race piece by the same author:

that's valentino's explanation, right, marc's handlebar hit valentino's knee, which caused the leg movement as well as the crash. a little more from the immediate post-race write-up:

basically, the view here is that the two bikes make contact - and as a result of where marc hits valentino, valentino's foot is dislodged from the foot peg, catching marc's handlebars in the process. again, none of this actually exonerates valentino. whether there was a kick or no kick, you are NOT allowed to run another rider off-track! whether valentino literally wanted marc to crash or not, this was always going to be a possible consequence of his actions - which he would have known was the case! it is obviously worse to kick someone, partly because it just feels like a particularly egregious offence, but there is no version of this story where valentino comes out with a clean scorecard

as the 'post-honda promising to release conclusive evidence' piece goes on to say:

of course, all this is just one bloke's view. I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that valentino did kick marc. but I also struggle to see how it's a clear cut case for the prosecution. again, however, it really is important to stress that valentino by his own admission was engaging in an extremely dubious move. the kick would be the cherry on the icing, if you will, but running another rider so wide that you are probably trying to force them to leave the track is generally not considered acceptable behaviour. the kick question is very much something everyone has to decide for themselves - or not! I still think it's the ambiguity that helps make the whole thing so interesting, that every single clash between the two of them that year still has so many unanswered questions. that both sides have their own unshakeable views of events - sometimes close to 'reality' and sometimes a little less so, sometimes reasonable and sometimes anything but. it's the subjectivity and the fallibility of the human capacity to understand events that we ourselves have experienced - it's this lack of knowability for both outsiders and insiders that makes it so endlessly fascinating and rewarding to analyse. even the two men themselves cannot completely understand what happened that day, what happened in those few seconds, and they never will. we're all in the dark, in the end

[spiderssvinegaroons]

[timetravellingkitty]

peeks out cause it's safe now you guys were really weird about Depp v Heard

[vomelets]

[rad-roche]

there's an extra cool bonus thing i, again, don't know if i can talk about. that i am DYING to share. but that is for future roche, i do still have to actually paint this thing. but know this has been my default expression for pretty much the past week