#which is why he doesn't also stipulate you need to be a woman

[southern-titan]

hey, you wanna sleep with me? 😏

The corner of Will's mouth cocks upwards slightly in amusement

"Sure, if yer white," He snickers.

[odesofmeddea]

trying on an argument why sam and dean were in factual canonical enmeshment: their bond presumes the absence of nuclear family or any long-term partner in the lives of either; the very formulation of this rigid condition - me or her, - is telling, overtly so, how their relationships are rooted bog-deep in the belief in its crucial self-sufficiency. the bond between related people devoid of such an incestuous tilt generally endorses that a relative builds and commits to a family of his own and puts not a stipulation of choice. that is, ‘it is fine if my brother marries - how and why would that affect our connection?’ - is not fine with sam and dean. if it was so, sam would've kept dating ruby, amelia, etc., etc., without dean putting him under the exigency of picking, without the uncontrollable invasion of his sexual and general privacy by dean (‘did you have sex with her? first madison then ruby now cara then lilith’, dean eavesdropping on sam's calls and going through his phone, or interrogating him concerning his whereabouts, if there's a woman he doesn't know about), and, moreover, without sam feeling an unspelt obligation of either concealing (why, right?) or rescinding these side hook-ups. oh, also it's him or benny. same with lisa, who knew the fact of her secondariness when competing with sam and that the existence of one naturally excluded that of the other. why can't they all be a big family performing roles socially allotted to them?.. because sam fills in all the roles. because dean and sam want to live in one room and they brush their teeth together and share one car and invariably solve cases together and own a dog and coparent jack and even their afterlife is a shared homoheaven bereft of other love interests. where a woman is to put herself between, in what inextant interstice? ultimately she is reduced to a blur in the background while sammy raises his kid, dean ii, and she is not addressed, not once, in the script, her only definition is of a nemo-womb sam cohabits with to conceive a replica of dean he can nurture as a solace during his lifelong premeditation of reunion with his brother, his nóstos - this is an awful lot of all women and possible partners of have been and to be. one would say that's rather too much. were sam and dean a girl and a boy conforming to gender binarism & heteronormativity the ambiguity of their relation would've been acknowledged more widely, the incestuous codependency interpreted more obscene. but since they're not and also are very uneasy with the innuendo (‘the most troubling question is why they keep assuming we're gay? - we're just brothers!’), it's very convenient to diminish it to just a strong fraternal love. which it is. but not only that.

the potentiality of erotic subtext inside of their greedy proximity seems scary and stupid and is eschewed by both - how are they to subvert and subsume their relationship into non-brother categorization when it's just their life, just the only thing they've known, being this close? still, the only affairs permitted are the ones that are treated as and are simple, emotionally untethered one-night-stands because sam and dean are not sexually available to each other. nor they're resolute into directly consummating their relationship - the need to is either lacking or suppressed and is to be interpreted variously because covert incest is not primarily about coition but miscellanea of things, more often than not of un/subconscious genesis and procession. sam and dean know their relationship is bonkers. they don't necessarily have to know or admit they're a couple. what else they know, though, is they can't have sex. they cannot consciously translate their enmeshment into overt eroticism. that's why the siren episode is titled ‘sex and violence’ - there the mutual violence unleashed onto each other (along with the symbolic penetration through knife and breaking of the door) serves as a surrogate for sex. that, along with impulsive hugs, is the only form of lingering physical contact they usually have. but the yearning, although not experienced in one concreteness, compensates and provides for itself in a safer realm of sam and dean's emotional spaces. they can't have sex but they can fall into possession of each other's feelings. that's why once the personal attachment to anyone else is developed it is construed as betrayal by either. if you need another person, if you feel something for them that you're supposed to feel only with me (intimacy, trust, love, loyalty, belonging) - that's when you abandon me because we can't coexist with others.

[missheavenfield1215]

Have you noticed that Beetlejuice and The Corpse Bride have the same climax??

A dead person

Who wants to marry a living person

Although it was against the will of that living person

When I realized this... I couldn't stop drawing

Beetlejuice ~Corpse Bride AU~

*In this AU, everyone is an adult*

*All my drawings are below in this post*

In this AU, Lydia takes the role of Victor, Beetlejuice is Emily, Elder Gudnekt could be Otto, Adam and Barbara would be the Everglot couple (of course, here, they have no bad intentions).

Lydia and her father, Charles, come from the great city of London, to expand their funeral services franchise, in addition to having gone through another marriage.

Charles had Lydia's mother, Emily, who passed away when she was 8 years old. At work, Charles met Delia, who was suffering from a fatal illness, but never told Charles that she was sick. So 4 years after their wedding, Delia also passed away.

To forget his grief, Charles became obsessed with his work and abandoned Lydia in their grief (as she also got along well with her). Lydia doesn't want to get married and hates the idea of being trapped forever in a useless marriage, which will only take away her freedom. Although she thinks that marriage is just a contract, deep inside her, she really feels that if she falls in love, it will only bring her pain and sorrow, just like her father.

Beetlejuice, here called Lawrence Shaggoth, is the only son of the honorable aristocratic marriage Shaggoth. In his youth Lawrence had a preference for men, but despite that, Adam was one of his friends. But when the time came for Lawrence to marry a young woman that his own mother raised so that Lawrence would "become normal." Juno is a homophobic bitch, so after receiving the news that her son was eloping with his lover, she decided to take matters into her own hands.

Juno bribed Lawrence's lover, who really only wanted the young man's money. Juno told the boy that she would pay him whatever he wanted, if he took Lawrence, destroyed him emotionally and murdered him. The boy did so, but the young woman Juno had "adopted", Angeline (Miss Argentina) had witnessed the whole sinister plan.

Juno learned that once Lawrence married, she would inherit everything as stipulated in his father's will. So, to continue with the lie, Juno took a young prostitute to "convince" Lawrence to escape and leave everything behind and thus demarcate him from the surname Shaggoth, since in her eyes, Lawrence was unworthy of such a title. But it turned out that she found out about her affair with a boy, and apparently he was cheating on him.

Lawrence, about to die and feeling betrayed and very scared, recites a poem to calm himself, but he does not know that this poem would be his condemnation and his salvation. Once the conditions stipulated in the poem were met, it would come back to life.

That's why Lawrence needs Lydia to marry him, because then he will come back to life, but he doesn't really have the idea of really falling in love with that "someone" to help him.

Here Adam and Barbara are also aristocrats, but their family name is in decline and they are on the verge of poverty. They decide to adopt Adam's youngest nephew, named Vincent, to prepare him for a marriage with which they can cope with the imminent poverty that awaits their family. They believe it would be best if Vincent chooses his future wife, and he chooses Lydia to marry and she is forced to do so by her father.

Lydia runs away from the engagement after finishing the wedding rehearsal and, as if to mock her father, she says: "I'd rather marry a dead person than someone who doesn't know me!"

It is then that Lawrence appears and proposes to marry him and when he comes back to life, he will help her escape the country and her father.

But neither of them really expected to fall in love with each other when they got to know each other in depth.

But there is the problem of Juno, who no longer has money and it is then that she uses Lydia's disappearance to extort money from Charles and promise him that she will look for the young woman.

And after thinking about all that... That's when I started drawing

"I just want to be alive... And I... "

"I don't want to be alone"

"In this cruel world"

These are small test sketches

Here's a closer shot of a Beetlejuice killed by his lover...

This is Lawrence, moments before his death. When his lover asked him to elope with some of the wealth, Lawrence dressed in his white wedding suit, but it was dyed red when a shotgun bullet pierced his ribs. (yes in the same place where Lydia stabbed him in the musical, both wounds were caused by a stab wound in the back... A betrayal)

Well... I had many things to say... But in essence that is the basis of everything.

This AU really works with any version of Beetlejuice, but mostly works best with the Headcanons of the musical.

[theconsofrom-coms]

R*pe Culture in Romantic Comedies

The topic of SA is one that is very triggering so if you have issues with it, please don't continue reading as I will be detailing moments in which SA was mentioned, and sometimes made fun of in multiple romantic comedies.

I don't think we need to explain why it is that this topic in particular is something deplorable. SA is something that is sadly taken lightly, and sometimes even overlooked in rom-coms as a passing reference or just an insinuation, but there have been moments where it played a role in the main couple's relationship. As I will continue to explain as we go forward in these analysis.

We will be looking into "Sixteen Candles", "Revenge of the Nerds" and "Wedding Crashers" when discussing the presence of SA in romantic comedies, and how it has changed over the years.

Sixteen Candles, what she doesn't know won't hurt her, right?

Unlike past analysis I will explicitly focus on the details of the film pertaining to r*pe culture that are presented in the film. So, the main character of the film is Sam, a girl whose 16th birthday seems to have been forgotten by everyone, and while she is being pursued by a freshman named Ted, she is really interested in a popular guy named Jake. Now, Jake is also somewhat interested in Sam as he has seen her staring at him in the past, and he has begun to become tired of his girlfriend Caroline's partying. Now, here comes the not so fun part, after a party being held at Jake's house is done, he and his friends convince Ted to drive her home on Jake's dad's expensive car, her already being passed out from being completely drunk. Jake and his friends also imply that Caroline being passed out, she wouldn't know the difference if Ted attempted to sleep with her while she's passed out. This is absolutely inconceivable as to why they would think this is an ok thing to do.

This film is set in the 1980s, and as many of us are aware of, the respect given to young girls and women by men is very much skewed when it comparison to our norms of respect in the 21st century. Such an act as date-r*ape, as it is referred to nowadays, was most likely seen as completely fine, even though such an act is completely disrespectful to the woman that this is committed to, and a complete violation of her rights as a human being. And while the act was not actually committed in the movie, Ted still attempted to pose a picture with Caroline, making it seem as though they had actually slept together in the car, but the picture didn't come out right. I guess that's karma for you.

Revenge of the Nerds, tricking a girl into sleeping with me!

Another film set in the 80s, this one involves a bit more "action" if you know what I mean. So in the film, beside the fact that the main characters of the movie sell naked pictures of girls, without their consent, as charity; Our main character, Lewis, has fallen for one of the girl's pictured, Betty. She's already dating a guy named Stan, so Lewis steals a costume being worn by Stan and tricks Betty into believing he is her boyfriend, and they end up sleeping together. By the end of the act, he reveals himself to her, at which point she calls him "wonderful" as apparently the hookup wasn't unpleasant, but it is more complicated than that. Lewis tricked Betty into sleeping with him under false pretenses, while yes, the act was consensual, Betty believed that the guy she was sleeping with was her boyfriend, not some random guy she doesn't know so well.

This scene has gotten backlash in some recent times due to the fact that this scene could be considered rape, as Betty was manipulated into sleeping with a guy who ended up lying to her about his identity. If this were a real case, it could easily be considered r*ape, as not all stipulations were abided by when it came to consent on behalf of Betty. And while many people claim that they didn't consider it to be a rape scene at the time of the film's release, both filmmakers and actors do believe it to be an unfortunate scene, and if the movie was made in current times, that definitely wouldn't have gotten past critics.

Wedding Crashers, if it involves homosexual SA, it's funny, right?

Here we go, the final film of this individual post. Wedding Crashers, a movie about two guys that take advantage of the way women feel when in weddings, and find a way to get in their pants. Besides the questionable morality of these actions, there is one scene in particular that comes to mind when it comes to the disrespectful one is to feel when watching this movie. After John and Jeremy crash another wedding where the latter slept with a woman named Gloria, who soon becomes obsessed with him, they both get invited to a retreat with Gloria's family, to which John accepts on behalf of them both in order to get closer to Gloria's sister Claire. During the night, Jeremy is sexually harassed by Gloria's brother Todd, entering his bedroom and being "suggestive" towards him. And we're supposed to think that that is funny?

There is nothing I find more disrespectful than when something that would be wrong if specific genders took certain roles, is funny or ok because the roles are reversed, such as SA, sexual harassment, parent-student relationships, etc. So we're supposed to think that this instance of sexual harassment is funny because the perpetrator is a gay man, really? And this movie came out in the early 2000s, one would think that our mindset would be a bit more progressive by that point.

And so, that is all I have to say in respect to R*pe Culture in romantic comedies.

I'll be back soon with our next topic, what will it be?

I wonder...

[rapeculturerealities]

In May, Sweden became the 10th country in Europe to recognize that sex without consent is rape. The new legislation, which passed by a majority vote in Parliament and goes into effect in July, has been hailed as a huge victory by women’s rights activists.

"The biggest value of this law is normative,” Amnesty International’s Anna Blus told Newsweek, “making society realize what rape is and, hopefully, preventing rape in this way.”Previously, in order for a prosecutor to prove that a rape had occurred, he or she had to show evidence that the perpetrator used force, threatened to use force, or had taken advantage of someone in a vulnerable situation. Now, under the new law, in order for sexual activity to be considered legal, a person needs to explicitly agree or otherwise make it clear they want to participate. As Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven said at a news conference last year supporting the change in law: “It should be obvious. Sex should be voluntary. If it is not voluntary, then it is illegal. If you are unsure, then refrain.”The change in Sweden’s rape law is an example of the global movement to pass affirmative consent policies. Here in the US, a number of state and citywide consent reform initiatives are currently under consideration; California is the only state to pass “yes” means “yes” legislation, or the notion that both parties must consciously, explicitly, and voluntarily agree to engage in sex acts, for college campuses.

But what exactly is consent? In jurisdictions across the country, there’s actually little consensus on what counts as consent. In fact, half of the states in the US—including Mississippi, Georgia, Idaho, and North Carolina—don’t explicitly define consent in their statutes at all.

“One person’s idea of consent is that no one is screaming or crying,” Erin Murphy, a professor at New York University School of Law, told the Associated Press in December. “Another person’s idea of consent is someone saying, ‘Yes, I want to do this.’ And in between, of course, is an enormous spectrum of behavior, both verbal and nonverbal, that people engage in to communicate desire or lack of desire.”

For example, in the case of Brock Turner—the former Stanford student convicted of sexually assaulting a woman behind a dumpster—his attorneys tried to argue that the victim had consented to digitally penetrative sex, even though she was intoxicated. “I asked her if she liked it,” Turner testified, “and she said, ‘uh-huh.’” In California, consent is defined as “positive cooperation in act or attitude pursuant to an exercise of free will”; the law also stipulates that intoxication impacts a person’s ability to consent. Turner was ultimately convicted of three felony counts of sexual assault (though he also received a lenient punishment largely thanks to inconsistent sentencing laws).

In contrast to California, however, Ohio does not define consent in its laws. In fact, an archaic legal loophole in its rape laws has garnered criticism in recent years. There, a woman can be drugged and sexually assaulted legally by her husband, as long he does not use force and they’re not technically separated. In other words, her ability to consent is stripped away because she’s married to her attacker.

“It’s pretty telling,” Murphy said, “that the critical thing most people look to to understand the nature of a sexual encounter – this idea of consent – is one that we don’t even have a consensus definition of in our society.”

That’s why the American Law Institute (ALI) began working several years ago to update the sex assault laws in its 1962 Model Penal Code, a text that offers model legislation often adopted by state legislatures. They started with coming up with a legal definition for consent, as it relates to criminal proceedings. Doing so, ALI Deputy Director Stephanie Middleton tells Broadly, gives a judge or jury a better idea of how to proceed in a trial.

“Under the old version of the model penal code,” she explains, “consent was, if a woman—I say woman because [the code] assumed it was a woman—didn’t physically resist, then it was viewed as she was consenting. That’s one of the reasons we had to go back there [to update].”

According to an ALI blog post, though, getting to an agreed-upon definition was “one of the most hotly debated issues in the project.” After looking at newer state statutes and various court opinions, institute members (comprised of judges, lawyers, and academics) ultimately agreed in 2016 that consent should be defined as “a person’s willingness to engage in a specific act of sexual penetration or sexual contact,” but that context and circumstances should also be considered.

Interestingly, the discussion did touch on the idea of affirmative consent, but some members raised concerns that society just wasn’t there yet. “A lot of our members thought it was just going too far and wasn’t practical to expect people to communicate to each other clearly a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’ as to each stage, whether it goes from kissing to necking to whatever,” Middleton says, “that that’s just not how people behave.” She adds that it’s a model that does appear to work on college campuses, though. (According to one researcher’s assessment, there was strong evidence that since the law was implemented for California students, sexual assault reporting rates on college campuses have increased.)

Because the project is ongoing, no states have yet adopted the ALI’s definition of consent, Middleton says. “We have a lot of work to do. We’re still grappling with some very difficult issues, but we really want to be sure that we don’t just stick with what [many] states currently have on the books.”

She adds: “There are some states that have old-fashioned views about consent.”

In fact, a lone state senator in North Carolina last year tried to take on a legal loophole that said a woman could not revoke consent during sex after initially giving it, even if her partner turns violent. For almost four decades, “no” has only legally meant “no” in the state if a person says so before engaging in sex. The North Carolina Supreme Court ruled in 1979 that if a woman consents to penetration then withdraws her consent, the accused can’t be found guilty of rape.

Amy Guy is a North Carolina woman who experienced the law firsthand. When her estranged husband showed up drunk to her home in 2016, WRAL reported, she agreed to have sex with him, but begged him to stop when he got violent. Because of that court ruling, the charges against him were lowered from second-degree rape to misdemeanor assault on a female; he received a 10-month jail sentence.

State Sen. Jeff Jackson—whose bill clarified that a person who continued having sex with someone after they withdrew consent did so against their will and could be charged as such—told Broadly last year he first encountered this loophole while working as a criminal prosecutor, when his office had to dismiss a rape charge because of similar circumstances. "Very few legislators are aware that this is the current state of our law," Jackson said at the time. "They're very surprised when I tell them.”

For Jackson, who said that every lawmaker he’d spoken to about the loophole agreed it needed to be changed, it seemed like an easy enough fix. For all the progress made in recent years to change the popular discourse and culture around sexual assault, the right to revoke consent during sex would appear to be something politicians on both sides of the aisle could get behind. And yet, despite the national attention that swirled around North Carolina’s antiquated take on consent, the bill died in committee.

[celebritylive]

Although Denise Richards and ex-husband Charlie Sheen are in the middle of an ongoing child support battle, the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills star doesn’t want their disagreements to negatively impact the relationship he has with their daughters.

On Wednesday night’s episode of the Bravo reality series, Denise opened up about her problems with Charlie, with whom she shares daughters Sami, 16, and Lola, 14. (She is also mom to daughter Eloise, 8, whom she adopted in 2011.)

Denise, 49, returned from New York City, where she attended and walked in Kyle Richards’ New York Fashion Week show along with her fellow Housewives. Back home, she updated husband Aaron Phypers about her trip, during which she learned that Charlie, 54, had responded publicly to her allegations that he owed $450,000 in child support.

“So, in New York, Charlie said something publicly about the document that I was court-ordered to file,” Denise told Aaron.

Referencing Charlie’s statement, in which he called his ex a “coward,” Denise asked Aaron, “A coward for what?”

“I had to file something for his filing,” she told Aaron, who added, “He filed and you had to like file an answer because he filed.”

RELATED: Denise Richards Worries Fighting with Charlie Sheen During Their Divorce Affected Their Children

In August 2018, the actor filed requests to modify his child support payments to Denise and third ex-wife Brooke Mueller, claiming he couldn’t afford to make his monthly payments because he’s “been unable to find steady work, and been blacklisted from many aspects of the entertainment industry.” A little over a year later, Denise filed an income and expense declaration regarding his request, alleging that Charlie owed her $450,000 in child support. She claimed that Charlie “squandered over $24,000,000 from the sale in his interest in Two and a Half Men to pay his personal debts and to support his extravagant lifestyle at the expense of support payments for his children. During the time frame since our last stipulation/order in 2016 he has failed to pay $450,000 in support while diverting over $600,000 in assets to adult family members and converting thousands of dollars into cash for his own personal use.”

At the time, Charlie and Denise’s reps did not respond to PEOPLE’s requests for comment, though Charlie issued a statement to The Blast saying his “day in court is painfully overdue” and “the truth will prevail.”

In a confessional on RHOBH, Denise said, “I’m not going after child support. I did not file saying he hasn’t paid me. I wasn’t going to say a word. He’s the one that filed saying he didn’t want to pay me at all, even though he hasn’t paid me for quite some time now.”

Despite her hope to avoid court, Denise told Aaron, “So now I have a hearing set for November. But, I do not want to go through all of that. I just don’t. ‘Cause it’s not just a one-time thing where you just show up to court. It’s like an ongoing thing where you can have depositions, declarations from different people. And that’s something, you know, the girls are going to be able to hear.”

“I know you want to protect them,” said Aaron, 47.

RELATED: Charlie Sheen Confirms Bringing a ’Lady of the Night’ to Denise Richards’ Home One Thanksgiving

“If he doesn’t want to pay child support, that’s on him. But it would be nice to not say anything negative about me with the kids that hear about it,” she told her husband.

Denise and Charlie first met while shooting the movie Good Advice in 2000, but it wasn’t until the actress guest-starred on Charlie’s former sitcom Spin City in the fall of 2001 that a romance began to blossom. They married in June 2002. But by March 2005, it was over, with Denise filing for divorce while Charlie was in the midst of a drug and alcohol relapse.

When Denise left Charlie, she was six months pregnant with daughter Lola.

Last season on RHOBH, Denise said that she did not take half of Charlie’s money during the divorce, despite not having a prenuptial agreement. “Charlie and I didn’t have a prenup when we got married and when we got divorced, I could have asked for half of what he made,” Denise said in a confessional during the season. “And I did not, because I ain’t a greedy f—— whore.”

In a confessional on Wednesday’s episode, Denise admitted, “There’s a lot that the kids don’t know about their dad and I want to keep it that way.”

But in spite of the ongoing drama that Denise has experienced with Charlie, she’s chosen to not engage in negative commentary about the father of her two eldest daughters.

“Even though he’s Charlie Sheen, that is still to them their dad,” she continued. “I never talk badly about him and I want him to be part of their lives because I met a lot of the women that Charlie entertained and a lot of them had father-daughter issues. And I do not want that to be our girls.”

Also during the episode, Denise underwent surgery to have hernias removed after experiencing pain for at least a year.

Ahead of her procedure, while driving with Aaron to the operation, Denise expressed her fears about going under the knife.

“I don’t know why I’m so nervous going under. Obviously I was put under having my implants put in years ago, but being put under after having kids, I feel weird about it,” she told her husband. “God forbid something happens. I don’t want to leave them. I’m not ready.”

“S— does happen. I mean, there are f—ing mistakes,” she said. “I just don’t want to be a mistake today.”

“I think at this point where they are in their life, they still need their mom. And, you know, these are very tender ages and they’re influenced by so many different things,” Denise said in a confessional. “I want to make sure my kids are safe and that they’ll make good choices.”

RELATED: Denise Richards and Charlie Sheen’s Daughters Look So Grown Up in Her 2019 Family Christmas Card

Following the surgery, Denise and Aaron stayed in a hotel, where she talked to daughter Sami on the phone.

“Everything went really good,” Denise told Sami. “They had to do a double hernia.”

“Why?” asked Sami.

“Because it was on the other side too,” the RHOBH star explained. “The surgery was longer and they had to give me more stuff.”

“Probably the best sleep of your life you’re ever going to get,” Sami told her mom.

“Thank you,” Denise said with a laugh. “And you’re going to Dad’s?”

“I’m already at Dad’s,” Sami said about staying with Charlie. “We watched Lola’s volleyball game.”

Wrapping their call, Sami said, “I’m glad the surgery went well.”

“Thanks honey. I love you,” said Denise.

“I love you too. Goodnight,” said Sami.

Later, while reflecting on the procedure, Denise admitted that “my surgery was much more invasive than I thought. It was six hours — not an hour to an hour-and-a-half.”

“I had four hernias, not one,” she explained.

RELATED: Denise Richards Cries ‘I’m a Very Married Woman’ as RHOBH Cast Alleges She Has a ‘Secret’

Aaron cared for her throughout her recovery, and Denise admitted that learning to receive and accept her husband’s acts of service has “been an adjustment.”

“My mom raised my sister and I: never depend on a man. It’s been an adjustment having my husband want to take care of me because I’m so used to taking care of everyone else,” Denise said in a confessional.

“Thank God I have a man that truly loves me, loves my kids and has my back,” she said about Aaron, who she wed in September 2018. “And, he still has that big d—.”

The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills airs Wednesdays (8 p.m. ET) on Bravo.

from PEOPLE.com https://ift.tt/3cACtiI