#technically both again so. lmao
thank you for the tag @fxreflyes this is so cute, except the format is trying to hinder my propensity to ramble, so i’ve rectified this in the tags lmao
i’m over 5'5 / i wear glasses or contacts / i have blonde hair / i often wear sweatshirts / i prefer loose clothing over tight clothes / i have one or two piercings / i have at least one tattoo / i have blue eyes / i have dyed or highlighted my hair / i have or have had braces / i have freckles / i paint my nails / i typically wear makeup / i don’t often smile / resting bitch face / i play sports / i play an instrument / i know more than one language / i can cook or bake / i like writing / i like to read / i can multitask / i’ve never dated anyone / i have a best friend i’ve known for over five years / i am an only child
no pressure tags for @static-radio-ao3 @inevitablestars @itsjaywalkers @carniferous @orbitfalls @transsexualpriest @futurequibblerjournalist <333
22 notes
·
View notes
In the “billy parents the girls” au, I wonder how Sam and Billy would react to Tara being attacked by ghostface? Like one overprotective and “slightly” unstable family member wasn’t enough.
Somebody knows.
That's his first thought. Maybe he should have known something would happen on the 20th anniversary. He never thought it would come back to him. After all, there was a 'Ghostface attack' just five years prior, and it was all about Sidney. Why wouldn't it continue to be all about Sidney? Billy's dead after all.
He should have moved out of Woodsboro. It's always been risky, staying. But this was his home, and by the time he'd given up entertaining the thought of revenge against Sidney, he'd put down roots. He'd thought about moving a few years ago, when the last attacks happened and the police started sniffing around for information, but the girls had friends here, and Sam's never quite treated him the same since she learnt the truth. She would never have agreed to leave.
So here he is, staring Deputy Judy Hicks right in the face, unrecognised. God these people must be stupid, to look him right in the eyes and still not see him. He manages to talk his way back into the house with a well-placed quip about the absence of their good Sheriff and a reminder that his 14-year-old daughter, her own son's friend, who was attacked, is going to need some comforts of home and her inhaler.
He pauses to take in the murder scene on the way. He memorises the pattern of blood soaked into the living room carpet, the outline of his little girl, the kitchen knife abandoned on the floor. His own knife. They used his own knife on his daughter. When he finds out who did this, he's going to make them pay.
He packs a bag, he packs Tara's essentials, a change of clothes for Sam and the teddy bear she denies sleeping with. He heads for his own room to get some things, and that's when he learns somebody really does know.
Because Billy is scrawled across his bedroom wall in red.
Red is all he sees.
50 notes
·
View notes
trying not to self diagnose because that doesn’t really do much good but also spending years experiencing Symptoms and relating to people who actually have been diagnosed with the things I’m afraid I may or may not have
3 notes
·
View notes
cyberpunk organised crime ring espionage with sexy demons
lmao... something tells me they wouldn't quite fit together.
36 notes
·
View notes
ok for real tho i am genuinely so happy for jeans absolutely skyrocketing viability in our post-furina society like. she was my first 5* ever And somehow throughout the years ive managed to pull her c5 before even a single mona or diluc lmao. but ive genuinely had no realistic use whatsoever for her for so long it was kinda depressing. and then furina happens and shes just winning nonstop we love to see it 🥰
5 notes
·
View notes
truly further [2 sides same coin] of billions tragic failing of either quant's writing that the effective Demand that taylor & rian must have a very special dynamic is all about going "well i'm epic & you're epic" at every stage, which is nothing, while winston and taylor can never have a dynamic b/c he's so Not Epic, despite that he's more similar to taylor in any ways that actually matter or could mean anything, while also if rian was ever peers with winston / had a reciprocal dynamic there, maybe we'd Have to have had more of an actual character from that role, but instead once again [no] b/c he's so Not Epic. billions writing getting an award for [okay. tmc trifecta] as the only option heading into s6 & giving us Nothing instead
2 notes
·
View notes
i'm barely a writer at this point so idk but ngl i'm kinda fascinated by people who raise the question of "if you normally don't like X, then why did you click on my fic in the first place, HMMM?". yknow, i mean, idk how other people do it, maybe it's just me, but i sorta author-jump? and sometimes an author i like has written something i usually don't enjoy, and sometimes i click out of pure curiosity. and when i don't like it, i click out, yeah, it's a nope for me! but when i do like or even adore it, i comment. positively. it's That Simple 4 me
2 notes
·
View notes
mmgmgngngmgngggHbGGGRRRAAAAHH
Bro what if. What if I. What if. Hear me out, WHAT. if..... I made a mini choose your adventure sort of thing,, but used polls to let y’all pick options...
3 notes
·
View notes
I know the morality play of the Raphael/Atem duel gets...weird, a little bit. There's a bizarre emphasis on how Raphael believes it's selfish and wrong to carelessly send monsters to the graveyard and that gets played up in this duel, but...many, many previous duels have showed how sacrificing monsters and having them in the graveyard can be a good strategy, and work to one's advantage. It isn't always such a terrible thing. Atem using catapult turtle to win a duel is not exactly a new strategy for him, he's done it before, and it's far from the worst thing he's ever done if we consider season 0 canon. and yet the episode frames that as the big indicator of Atem "giving into darkness" which.........eh?
But. There is something deeper at play in this duel that goes far beyond how people treat their trading cards. The real problem here- and Yugi will spell this out later- is that Atem struggles a bit with empathy, but he especially struggles with it when his pride is on the line. This duel really had no stakes in it- Raphael tells him the professor is fine, and he states point blank he isn't going to use the Seal of Orichalcos- there is nothing to lose here.
But the two of them bet on their "sense of justice" at the start. To Atem, this is a very black and white morality. Atem's sense of justice tells him that Doma and any working with it are wrong (objectively true) and therefore anyone working with them is also evil (less objectively true). He can't quite see that the enemy in front of him might not be Bad with a capital B. Good is good, bad is bad, so if you're doing bad and working with bad- you're bad. Even if he respects you as an opponent. But what he can't really see is that Raphael is, fundamentally, a good person making bad choices because he's been hurt. Raphael basically spells it out for him, and he still can't see it.
So in many ways, this is the world view that Atem is betting on in this duel- Raphael is working with the organization that's trying to destroy the world, therefore he's evil, and Atem is good. And Atem has to be good, right? He's fought evil, he's won, he's not bad, he's not dark like the others who use milliennium items, he's not the "evil intelligence" Pegasus warned of in the manga and he definitely couldn't possibly have been an evil Pharaoh when he was alive...right?
And that's the other thing Atem can't admit, and it's what Raphael calls him out on most directly- Atem can't admit to his own darkness. He can't acknowledge the darkness in his heart, the potential for evil in everyone. Things have to be black and white for him, because if not...what is he? And it's so easy for Raphael to dig into this insecurity, it is so easy for him to make Atem doubt his own goodness- because he doesn't know who he was, does he? But he can't believe it, can't make himself believe he was a bad person before, and he definitely can't believe that he could be now. This is what's at stake for Atem during this game- it's his entire sense of self, really.
And this logic is actually deeply consistent with the earliest version of Atem- season 0/first manga arc Atem, and I'd argue, the morality play of this duel only really works when you consider that first arc/season 0. Stay with me now.
In season 0, Atem challenged "bad" people to shadow games with the intent that the game would decide who was right or wrong based on the outcome. The losers of his earliest shadow games usually lost because they couldn't follow the rules based on some character flaw. The games exposed their weaknesses and they paid the price for it. This was why he was always so confident- he was acting based on his sense of justice, and was absolutely certain in the correctness of his position (which, to be fair, was usually "save Yugi and/or his friends from literally dying), so...it wasn't necessarily an incorrect stance. Atem was doling out some pretty harsh penalty games, but he wasn't wrong about the flaws of these people he challenged.
What we never did was consider whether or not these people really deserved the punishments they were given. Did a high school bully really deserve to be tortured into insanity? Did an escaped criminal deserve to be burned alive? All justice, no empathy. But is that really justice at all? Now to be fair, with Yugi's influence Atem does calm down a lot over the course of season 0 and into Duel Monsters canon. He becomes a much better person. But we never exactly see him express remorse for the penalty games he inflicted, either. We never see him question his choices, or whether he was right or wrong.
Games are form of justice to him. To lose a game is to be in the wrong. He never lost, therefore, he was never wrong.
This inability to question his own beliefs and actions, to consider his own capacity for darkness, and to truly empathize with the person on the other side of the field, is what leads to him losing the test Raphael gives him. It is why he can justify playing the Seal himself- the methods don't matter to Atem in the moment- if he wins, he was right, he was good, and he's always been right and good, and that is all that matters because his sense of self is actually really fucking fragile if the outcome of a card game can shatter it- so he plays the Seal.
It reminds me of a quote from Avatar- "Pride is not the opposite of shame, but it's source." Atem is someone with an enormous amount of pride- and an equal amount of shame lingering just under the surface. Because I think that question Pegasus first posed to him- that question of evil- has been festering for a long time. I think Atem knows, deep down, that his early shadow games were wrong, they weren't that different from Pegasus or Marik or even Doma themselves- but he cannot go there with it, cannot let himself question it. I'll get into this more later, but Yugi will later tell him that in his doggedly stubborn sense of pride and honor, he can't hear others' pain or suffering. And I think this stubborn clinging to his sense of pride is a way of masking his own pain and suffering too, his own deeply felt shame- because Atem can't really hear that either.
Until he loses the game. Until he loses Yugi, and it shatters his pride completely, breaks him wide open.
10 notes
·
View notes
I may just be delirious but I kind of feel like there's something there about some of the most traumatic events in Arakawa's life arguably stemming from/being made worse by being loved too much.
Like, Toshio's death, right. The death of a parent is always always going to be traumatic, particularly when your other parent is abusive, but I feel like being there, being the first to the scene, made it so much worse. Especially when it should've been a good memory.
Non-zero chance I'm just projecting because I was there for my own father's death and I was around Arakawa's age at the time, but it's like... it did have very specific life-long effects, didn't it... the way he keeps coming back to Peking duck and talks about it like he's had it before when he can't even bring himself to eat it unless he's with family (and indeed, never did, up until right before he died)...
And then there's his former patriarch. Of course, he seemed to see Arakawa as more of an object--fully under his control and something to be thrown away at the first sign of autonomy. But I feel like, before then, Arakawa must've been his "favorite," if he was willing to arrange a marriage between his daughter and Arakawa. Which I expect is what made his reaction when Arakawa told him he was (technically) having an affair with Akane and wanted out of the family that extreme in going as far as to send men after Akane and Ichiban.
The last one I can immediately think of is not exactly traumatic for him, though it is traumatic For Me so I'm counting it, but it's of course what we were talking about with Jo hesitating so much at the thought of killing Arakawa that he passed up the chance to save him.
I Dunno I Am Delirious but... there's a pattern somewhere in there... Anyway. Uh. "Happy" Father's Day am I right
happy fathers day :]]]]
6 notes
·
View notes
Q: When you get the role, what were your impressions of Benjamin Poindexter before you had to live in his skin and peel back those layers?
A: Well, obviously, there’s a pretty big mythology around this character. So, you can’t ignore ignore that. That said, Erik Oleson, the showrunner, he had something pretty close to a carte blanche in developing a backstory and really developing a more intimate and intricate psychology for the character. You have a certain version of the character that exists in the comic book, but I’d like to think you get a really more fleshed out version. You’re getting to really spend some time with him this season on the show and hopefully in future seasons. So, I think part of the excitement for me was really getting to learn about him as I read more scripts. And of course as an actor, that just enriches just a bigger understanding of what his motivations are and where he’s going — what his arc is. I think part of what makes the character so cool is that when you meet him, he’s a troubled guy clearly, but he’s also good guy. He’s on the right side of the law, and he’s fighting the good fight. He’s working with the FBI, and for all intents and purposes, he’s a hero. What this season charts is his being pulled from a better nature into a darker nature, and Wilson Fisk is a big part of that.
Wilson Bethel for 411 Mania
3 notes
·
View notes
Just saw a video of a short man throwing a fit in a bagel shop about how nobody wants to date short men (because it's somehow the fault of the girls working at the bagel shop I guess?), being loud, agressive and generally a pure asshole. Well, all the comments were about how this poor poor poor guy was probably bullied sooooo bad and how bad they feel for him so like...Are we ready to admit that the whole Karen thing is 99% misogyny and only marginally related to bad customer behaviors or are we still in denial about that shit?
6 notes
·
View notes
SO. sorry this is going to be deranged i'm not proofreading this
so i've been writing a lot recently, and this particular project involves a language and culture i'm making up. and it's got me thinking about language, and communication, and lying.
and this is probably a very autistic realization, but it's hit me that usually when people lie, what they are trying to convey— and like, we're ignoring the ethics of it, this post is devoid of judgement one way or another, i'm just examining this thought— is a request for an emotional response from someone that the truth is less or unlikely to get across as effectively or as easily.
like, normal example, totally excusable: "my wife is in the hospital," when it's your girlfriend in the hospital. factually untrue! but what one wants people to hear is "someone i love and want to spend the rest of my life with is in dire straits and therefore so am i, please excuse anything in my behavior that may be caused by this," essentially. or like you can swap wife/girlfriend with sibling/best friend or aunt/neighbor or whatever. what you're trying to get across is the magnitude of the relationship rather than communicating the nature of the relationship itself.
we have words for that! like, yes, it's lying to use the wrong words, technically, to "trick" someone into understanding how close whatever given person is to you, and how much their condition is affecting you, but! also, i do have to say, in that particular instance i do have to say that, the primary goal of language being communication...... it's interesting! the facts are untrue. but the gravity of the circumstance was conveyed clearly with intention, which is to say, the emotional impact was increased by sacrificing literal clarity. this is basically what hyperbole does!!!!
most lying does that, doesn't it? most lies that i can think of are in some way in service to emotion above like, anything else. someone wanting to spare themselves someone else's emotion ("i'm fine", "i didn't do that", "i don't want this, you take it") and this is....... in a way, strictly speaking, effective communication. it's. hm.
like, for the record, i'm not pro-lying, and also, to reiterate, it's also ineffective communication, because it's factually untrue, which means again that however much an aim was achieved or a meaning conveyed you do it at the expense of one whole half of the venture. but it's interesting, isn't it? how much lying is usually angling for a specific impact, or to gain some form of ease and/or expediency.
i feel like i'm probably getting this across poorly which is also like, really funny, but what prompted this is like......... language is an imperfect tool! we know this. speaking (or whatever) is always an act of translation, and in translation something is always lost. like, even if that thing is only time. one is never able to express anything exactly as quickly as the original; thoughts take time to parcel up and deliver, or come out poorly if not mangled if at all recognizably. when going from one literal language to another, you have to decide whether you want to be more accurate literally, in impact, or in delivery, so respectively and with the simplest example you have to decide if when you translate an idiom you do so verbatim, or with an equivalent, and then whether or not you explain your choice and/or its value. because like, in an unattainable "perfect" translation, you could communicate both the meaning and the trappings of its delivery seamlessly and simply in about the same space as it was originally given more or less immediately. instead, because we can't do that, you can sacrifice to some degree either the original words, their original impact, or the original delivery, by again respectively changing the words altogether, losing the impact (generally also altogether), or losing the directness/straight forward nature of the communication by inserting an info blurb. and of course any kind of translation needs some extra degree of time, even just in its delivery. you lose things! you have to decide which things are most valuable to you to allow you to be "truest". like, which part of any given sentence is most important ? it varies, right? and sometimes one can affect another, like, what if brevity is important to the impact? or conversely, what if something specific has to be communicated in a long-winded and round about way to have the same impact, but it's tricky to manage doing so without losing the clarity? what do you sacrifice? the meaning, the impact, or the delivery? does that make sense? and you're probably always going to lose time.
so, lying!!!!! it's sacrificing meaning for the other two, is what i was trying to say earlier. it's an imperfect translation!!!!! in one sense!!! but it is a translation!!!!! isn't that interesting?? actually no, sorry, most ethically speaking it's 2 sacrifices; meaning and delivery. like, as i kept saying, the facts are untrue (meaning), and at some point for the sake of clarity it'll be necessary to be like "oh no, sorry, actually it was [the factual truth], i just said [x] because [some form of expected expediency/ease], [explanation of that choice]." (<- delivery.) but y’know with lying with ill intentions you do get to skip that part, and in that case the lack of correcting by revisiting/extending the delivery is part of the communication, whereby you are implicitly saying something like "fuck you, also". or possibly "fuck me," idk, lying can contain multitudes. which!!!!!!!! isn't that interesting??? talking!!!!!!!!!!!! communication!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! how and why and in what ways we say things........... the choices we make and the reasons we make those choices....... the sacrifices that are and are not acceptable to make, and in which contexts, in order to come across as you intend to...........
idk i'm just turning this around like a shiny rock in my hands. like, also, i do know that lying is done with the intent to deceive, and also that lying (derogatory) is done maliciously, with either the intent to harm or at least a lack of intent of care, but. hm. isn't it interesting, what you can learn when you look at how people lie, and how those things can change based on why you think they were lying? they still communicated effectively!!!!!!! they did it on purpose!!!!!!!!!!!!! they made those choices for a reason. that still..... tells something!!!!
even imperfect communication can, in its flaws, tell us something!!!!!!!! does someone sacrifice time, meaning, impact, delivery? why? in what contexts? with intent? for what purpose? isn't it interesting????????????????
3 notes
·
View notes
this new naruto opening fucks!!!
1 note
·
View note