#unicorns exist

[modmad]

This work (Unicorn Invisable Disability Flag) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

You wanted it, you got it! Here’s a nice big clean version of the Invisible Disability Pride flag which I designed. A lot of people said they resonated with it, and while originally I just did it for personal satisfaction if you are feeling drawn to or empowered by this image and my reasons behind the design please feel free to use it. I’m actually going to post those reasons under the cut as well as that link to the original post just in case it gets lost. Oh as for the CC up there don’t be scared of using it that mostly just means if you’re a Big Company and want to make money off of it you can’t- or have to talk to me first!

I have a society6 with this design available as many things (even if the site is... confusing. it is there I promise search by ‘new’ if in dire straits) so you can have a looky there if you have a hankering for shirts and other products with it on!

anon asked: being someone with an invisible disability, have you ever considered making a flag? I know there is a flag for disability pride but I looked and looked and there isn't one I could find about invisible disabilities and you strike me as a very good person to come up with one (no pressure! just thought you might enjoy coming up with an idea?)

I almost didn’t do this bc it’s kind of a heavy topic and there is the general go-to of the sunflower icon (sunflower lanyards are used as a subtle sign that a person has an invisible disability) but looking into why it was chosen…

Well. I respect it but this list really didn’t reflect my experience of having an invisible disability so fuck it all I drew a sketch just for myself. So rather than a suggestion FOR a flag for Invisible Disability Pride this is, well, my flag for it done very quickly (sorry for the jaggedy outline I used the sketch!):

I have EDS, and they use a zebra as a play on the ‘when you hear a horse, don’t think zebra; think horse’ line which is when doctors assume something is not a rare condition because, well, it rarely is. But when you’re a zebra, not a horse, that’s a huge problem. This inspired me to use a unicorn here, because a lot of people don’t even believe Invisible Disabilities exist or count as such: depression, chronic pain, even vision loss are sometimes dismissed as being disabilities.

Why not the classic striped colours of other pride flags? Many reasons: people with colour blindness or severe visual imparement cannot easily distinguish them. This icon could be rendered as a relief, so it could still be used as a recognisable icon for people with complete blindness or who appreciate/use tactile imagery. The high contrast of black and white is also for this reason- It is also very easily recognisable at a distance. The heraldic design is to show that we have always been here, throughout all of history, regardless of if people have taken notice. The 'fancy’ designs on the legs, tail and face could be seen as beautiful, but could also be thorns, or flames. The 'spikes’ along the back are actually a spine. People with invisible disabilities are often in large amount of discomfort or pain, and to someone who is not aware they seem totally fine. The tail is long and flowing, but could easily get tangled in the unicorn’s legs and cause them to trip and fall. The hooves are split to show how sometimes a person can walk without aids but still be in pain (not simply to be accurate to unicorn lore), and the horn is overly large: heavy to carry, always on your mind and painfully sharp.

Here’s the version with the sketch btw thanks for reading this far have a cookie:

For all the nods to pain in this image I hoope you all see the unicorn is still alive and proud and fully spread over the flag in action to show we are not defined by our disabilities, but they should be respected just as much as something as potentially dangerous as a unicorn.

Also? Unicorns fucking rule. Just putting that down there.

[theotherhappyplace]

unicorn concept, horns are their own separate species, highly magical, nonsentient, driven by instinct, need to be inside of a living creature to get nutrients, stab into a horse head, make the HORSE sentient and magical by altering its brain.

and the symbiote horn gets nutrients from the horses body.

horse is not in pain.

though becoming suddenly sapient is very upsetting for a lot of them.

[blended-ice]

#1 men enthraller

[queerliblib]

Queer reads for Ramadan? We’ve got you covered!

[kaleidoru]

revisited my favorite lil imp dude and finally gave him his demon (promoted) form... though sadly his employer is withholding that promotion from him to keep him subservient :(

[kradogsrats]

Where DO the fabled Great Ones hide?

So recently pulling together that in Xadia there were initially only the first elves, then there were primal elves, and then eventually there were no more first elves... we've been left with the question of how and why did primal elves come into being, and correspondingly, where did the first elves go?

To get a sense of timeline: if Aaravos is, as he claims in the Book One novelization prologue, one of the first elves, there were presumably still at least a few around as recently as 1000 years before series time—at least, if we're to believe that Ziard's "one of the great ones" answer for who gave him the staff is obfuscating that it was Aaravos for anyone other than the audience (which it may not be). The shift from "first elves" to "great ones" implies that they are, at the least, vastly inferior in population to the primal elves. Then by 300 years pre-series, all but Aaravos are gone—when push comes to shove, only the archdragons contend with him (there are none of his kind standing against him) and he has no allies (there are none of his kind standing with him).

The neatest, though by no means only, conclusion to draw is that the first elves somehow became the primal elves. But why would they do that? By all accounts, it's a definite step down—Aaravos can draw magic from any primal source, but we have yet to see a primal elf with magic beyond their own primal. Star, if it can truly be considered a primal source, is also implied to be stronger than the others, so cutting it off in order to dedicate yourself to another single primal isn't doing you any favors. And I mean, come on—primal elves are mortal, and we're given to believe the first elves were not. If some of the first elves became the initial primal elves, it seems like it would have to have been either a significant sacrifice on their part or something that was done unwillingly. Which means we're getting juicy.

Here's five far-fetched but 100% serious theories:

Theory 1: Primal elves for primal stones

This depends a bit on the exact relationship between the first elves and primal magic, which we don't know for certain—one possibility is that the first elves had equal access to all available primal sources as well as deep magic, but another is that primal magic was the sole domain of the dragons and other mortal creatures of Xadia. Aaravos has mastered magic of all primal sources, but I have to wonder if that was only because he was "fallen" and stripped of much of his natural power. Given that we see him cast primal magic with runes, it seems possible that primal magic is not native to the first elves the way it is to the dragons—Zubeia doesn't need a rune to cast Vocare Nimbum. If first elves had a similar natural ability with deep magic, that could put them on par with the archdragons in their power... and even if Aaravos was stripped of his deep magic ability, becoming an archmage of all primal sources would still make him a formidable opponent for Avizandum and Zubeia.

Anyway, if there were the first elves, with only/primarily deep magic, the dragons/creatures native to Xadia with only primal magic, and then humans with no magic, giving the suffering humans access to primal magic as a leg up makes sense in that it puts them on equal ground with their peers (the other mortals of Xadia) without elevating them too far. So what if, to craft the first primal stones and teach humans primal magic, Leola and her cohort had to become primal elves and bind themselves to a single primal source in order to understand it so thoroughly that they could trap it for use? I've theorized before that creating a primal stone requires star magic, but it definitely also requires magic of the primal that is being stored—if the first elves were not naturally primal mages, it may have been a necessary sacrifice. This would also complicate the "gift" of primal magic in that not only was it not intended for humans to receive, it wasn't Leola's to give in the first place.

Theory 2: Punishment that suits the crime

a.k.a. "well if you love primal magic and mortals so much, why don't you marry them"

Short and sweet counterpart to Theory 1: the punishment for Leola and her cohort after giving humans primal magic was to have most of their power and natures removed through becoming primal elves, mortal and chained to a single primal source.

Theory 3: Pacifier for the archdragons

At the time of the show, the primal elves don't seem to worship the archdragons, but they do serve and revere them. However, it's strongly implied that at least some primal elf cultures worshiped at least "their" archdragon—the specter of Sol Regem is basically inextricable from Sunfire elf rituals, and Rex Igneous demands extensive tribute essentially in sacrifice to him. Also, if there's one thing we know about archdragons, it's that they're proud to the point of arrogance. With the first elves as their peers, how would the dragons feel about humans directing their attention and worship to the stars? Probably not thrilled!

In that situation, it's possible that the first elves decided to create new elves in their own image, but bound to the primal sources and subservient to the archdragons, as a gesture of goodwill (possibly while rolling their eyes) to keep the peace (and stop their whining). Those primal elves then multiplied, formed their own societies, etc.

This one does leave the question of "... then what happened to the first elves?" but still. Though it could coexist nicely with the next...

Theory 4: Imitation is flattery

Honestly kind of stupid counterpart to Theory 3: it's the archdragons who decide to create their own primal servant copies of the first elves. Could they do that? Big shrug. Could they do it with the help of Someone(tm) among the first elves? ... slightly less big shrug.

Theory 5: A Lost Midnight War

I fully admit that I'm going kind of insane, BUT hear me out. In Patience, Aaravos asserts that after the gift of primal magic:

Humans would come to build great cities and fell great foes. They would thrive.

"Build great cities?" Yeah yeah, Elarion, we've all seen it... but wait, what was that second part? Exactly what great foes were humans felling? That seems kinda important, given how the politics of the time are described, but Aaravos chooses not to elaborate.

Then in Midnight Star we have the story of a situation where Elarion, in her tenacity and kindled power, attracts the ire of the dragons and is abandoned by the stars that she thought were her benefactors—except for Aaravos, who gives the saving gift of dark magic. The poem has a kind of compressed and figurative timeline, in that (as known from Ripples) humans received primal magic before Elarion's rise, so the impending doom in Midnight Star can't be the calamity of Ripples. That was also a punishment meted out by the stars rather than the dragons. The threat in Midnight Star also can't be the implied razing of Elarion concurrent with or following the human expulsion, because the implication is also that this is when Aaravos offered dark magic—he can't be only just now offering the thing that was the cause of the dragon's wrath in the first place.

So here's a theory: sometime in the intervening however many thousand years between humans receiving primal magic and dark magic, some kind of conflict arose between the remaining first elves and the archdragons. Humans having been given primal magic by some faction of the first elves (whether or not they were punished for it) and their subsequent rise did not help matters, and could possibly even have been the cause of the conflict in the first place. The archdragons, for whatever reason, came out on top—maybe there was internal strife among the first elves, or maybe their numbers had already diminished. The remaining first elves are given the choice of submitting to the archdragons as primal elves ("donned their masks") or leaving Xadia forever ("turned their backs"). Either way, humans were abandoned to their fate, and Aaravos is the "last" star remaining on Xadia proper.

The poem is very figurative overall, but particularly in its final stanzas—Elarion is a "dying husk," but Aaravos's gift revitalizes her to be more powerful than ever. My interpretation is that for the entire poem, "Elarion" has been a stand-in for humanity in general, possibly without any relation to the city of Elarion at all, and what is being described by "dying husk" could be the period of human suffering that preceded dark magic. We know that Elarion had a prolonged rise and golden age of literally a thousand years before humans were expelled from Xadia, and yet we are told that before dark magic, humans were weak and starving—either that's a straight-up lie (entirely possible) or something happened to cause human fortunes to change from good to bad. Something like... a period of direct and brutal punishment and oppression from the archdragons and their servants. Maybe at the time the poem is describing, Elarion the city was destroyed or hadn't even been built yet, and the eventual flourishing city humans are exiled from is built on the strength of dark magic, after all. (As I mentioned elsewhere, it's getting more and more to a point where the timeline simply doesn't make sense if Ziard was truly the first dark mage ever, rather than just the first one Aaravos manipulated into causing problems on purpose.)

Anyway: the first elves, facing defeat, either assimilated as primal elves or left Xadia entirely. (Or a secret third thing, as with Aaravos, possibly related to his "fallen" status.)

Also "elves either depart the world forever or choose to become mortal" is another very Tolkien thing, like just saying.

Bonus cursed theory: primal elves are the extremely unlikely offspring of first elves breeding with humans. I'll actually be really mad if the real answer is something that garbage, but if I have to think about it then you do, too.

Double-bonus EXTRA-cursed theory: primal elves are the extremely unlikely offspring of first elves breeding with dragons. I'd still be mad about this one but also kind of impressed that they went there for real.

[galacticsabc]

questionable creatures for my worldbuilding.

Gourbus Stag - a rare forest creature. Smart enough to use magic.

Moosepelheim - a giant fuck you moose. will kill each other in mating rituals. antlers on fire sometimes.

Unicorn - wild horse esque thing. They will gore and eat any attackers.

Entaryion - small unassuming vulture creature bred with a peryton. Made a fierce ridable war steed.

[shuruzy]

GLOUCESTER SAVE ME. SAVE ME. GLOUCE

[pcktknife]

something something fantasy au

[quietwingsinthesky]

the last unicorn post from earlier has me thinking about the master. that yana is still in there, you know? is still someone he was, if even for a brief flash across the life of a time lord. there’s no way to unlive that life. there are ways to twist it later, sure, to make utopia into hell on earth. but the life was lived. in much the same way that the doctor can remember, can feel, the love he held onto as john smith even as that life is ripped out of his hands. the doctor choose denial and then grief and then to shutter it all away. and so john smith died, and so professor yana died, and the doctor and the master live on. the doctor has done this before, and he lives in orbit around humanity, trying to keep the best parts of them and hold them deep enough to take root (which he can pretend he gets to choose, as a time lord. as a human, it all floods in and can’t be dug back out.) but what about the master, right?

to borrow a turn of phrase: i think there are two time lords left in the universe, and they both learned how to regret.

[supersecretmetalocalypseblog]

If Charles found out about the prophecy before Black Fire Upon Us, i.e. before he dies/(almost dies??? I've never been fully clear on if he really died or just let everyone believe he did) like would he be stressed out about it?

"A prophecy? That, uh, sounds a bit far fetched and all- I'm sorry, I'm who? The dead man????? I die? That's my job????"

They have to elaborate like "Well, like, yes but it's fine!!! You get to come back or whatever bestie don't sweat it!"

like would he be worried about that? is that something that would cause concern? every time something starts to go wrong and the fans and klokateers start dropping like flies, would it make charles sweat like "oh god when is it gonna happen oh god"

[modmad]

Can you explain in more layman terms what you're comfortable with the unicorn invisible disability flag being used for?

the licence the image is under is purely to prevent corperate use of it, aka mass production for profit without my consent- any individual can use it, especially those affected, and I would be delighted for them to do so. e.g. I would be fine with you making flags from it, shirts, or badges, though if you intend to sell them perhaps tell me more clearly about that in advance so I know the context and causes that the image is being used for. I do not want it to be used to support things that damage other people or promotes hate of any kind, for example.

The unicorn should be used to represent things that are invisible disabilities! which is a very broad spectrum, and one that doubtless will change and evolve as more is learned about them, but the key thing is if it gives you comfort, identity, and you see yourself and your condition in the image then I am happy for you to use it.

If you'd like to read more about the design/use the high res version of the image you can find the post here!

[nikibogwater]

My hyperfixation of the week is Borealopelta markmitchelli, and I need all of my followers to know about it right now:

This little cutie is an 18-ft long, 3.9 ton dinosaur that was so perfectly preserved you can make out each individual scale on its hide. You can see the leathery creases on the palm of its foot. I can clearly picture this thing breathing and moving and snuffling around in the bushes with that adorable little snoot. I cannot overstate how utterly THRILLED I am just knowing that a specimen like this exists, and that there could be more like it waiting for us out there. The world is beautiful and amazing and also freakin' hardcore, I mean look at those spikes, this thing was an actual living dragon.

There's a presentation from Dr. Caleb Brown of the Royal Tyrell Museum going over all the absolutely insane stuff we've been able to learn from this one specimen and if you are anything like me and wish to have a real-life ancient monster living in your head rent-free for several days on end, I highly recommend giving it a watch on YouTube.

[png-heaven]

Unico (requested)

[lovefunklunch]

Aziraphale as Lady Amalthea

[shayjay26]

big long rant

Okay okay so I love looking for and reading bad brackendra fics cause they’re fucking hilarious.

But some of them are good, like really good

It got me thinking, about the logistics of Bracken’s immortality and Kendra’s age again. About Ronodin’s immortality. About Lena’s

My first impression is ew, especially with Bracken, right? But Brandon wrote it so it’s ew, even if unintentional, he did.

Would it be wrong in every situation, no matter what?

We know that Brandon claims their minds are young, which does justify some things, except for the fact that their actions prove otherwise. If their actions proved Brandon’s words would it be okay? Would we believe it?

What if they genuinely felt like that? What if they were genuinely at the maturity of that age? A lot of the reason dating laws exist is because of the difference in maturity. And even though I don’t think 18 should be the cutoff, it’s why it’s there. 

I mean, I still find it weird when people think once a child is 18 it’s suddenly okay to like them. Because your brain stops maturing at around 25. For me, it’s all about maturity. If their maturity was genuinely at that level, would it be okay? Would it be separate enough from their wisdom and experiences from their long life?

Another thing that got me thinking was an essay I wrote for my English 1010 class. One of the sources provided mentioned the brain affected things like attraction. 

This source provided an example of how a tumor, pushing against where attraction is created, forms pedophilic thoughts and urges in someone. And while yes, this is bad, could it be the same in other scenarios? Could the way the brain is arranged cause different, uncontrollable, emotions and feelings?

If their brain was arranged in such a way, if the part that controlled their emotions was shaped in such a way, they wouldn’t have any control over it. It’s not some malicious or creepy feeling anymore, to them at least.

If they were genuinely at the same maturity, genuinely had no control over their attraction, because that’s just how they were made, how they were built, would it still be creepy? 

Could they be considered the same age if their maturity was at the same level?

It’s like, I’m attracted to people my age. Because that’s how it should be, that’s how I was made. That’s how the thing in my brain is shaped. I’m not attracted to little children, because it’s wrong, and it’s not how I was made. If all of those immortal beings were made to mature at a certain rate, and made to be attracted to certain people, are their feelings valid, or is their species as a whole just wrong?

Just some thoughts. Wondering how everyone else feels on the subject? Still undecided myself honestly. I want some opinions outside of my brain.