Friendly reminder that art is subjective and canon can be what you want to be. If you are frustrated that a megacorporation has made certain aspects of a franchise "Canon" that you think shouldn't be, why are you then letting the megacorporation have the final say when you clearly believe you have a better understanding of the franchise. I'm not being snarky about this if I thought that (for example) Disney didn't understand Star Wars then the implication is that I DO understand Star Wars, so why should I care what some soulless CEO approves of as "canon"?

i am on my hands and knees begging and pleading for internet users to figure out that religious doesn’t automatically mean evangelical fundamentalist

Tag yourself I'm eastern Tijuana

I'm the newest outer god Tlonolormlnola

the other Ontario

You gotta be really publicly passionate about things if you want your friends to text you. Bc people will forget to text you because they’re human. But if you’re really openly the friend who loves identifying ants your friends will think of you when they see ants. And they’ll text you “what ant is this [blurry photo]”. And then they’ll ask you how you’ve been and we should get coffee sometime. But if they don’t know what you love they’ll never know what you like

And then when the ant convention is in town they’ll be like dude… we should go to the ant convention. But they would never think to go if they didn’t know u loved ants

And sometimes you need to ask them to go to the ant convention. But you Will not get anywhere hiding your passions

They usually demand it should map 1:1 onto their legends about politics. “They should replace this fantasy setting’s monarchy with a republic” why, so it can murder tens of thousands of minorities and abduct their children to boarding schools where they beat them for speaking their own language? Because every republic did that. “I hate that the revolutionaries are shown as no better than the regime they’re replacing” yeah that’s awful, the revolutionaries are basically always much, much worse.

*punk anime boy voice* HAAH?

*flustered anime girl voice* EEEEEHHH?!

we gotta kill michael crichton

do you think that if the novel that thrust dinosaurs back into the public consciousness had been a sappy romance novel we wouldn't have to deal with so much dinohorrorslop?

I spent years of my life on averting the booktok dinosmut wave timeline and this is the thanks I get

you are doing ghost of christmas past torment to me

i've died on smaller hills, so i can't judge. but i do think it's funny whenever posts about the proper definition of a poor little meow meow circulate, considering none of them mention that the origin was a kpop fan's absolutely bonkers tweet about not being able to protect a full grown man who was getting backlash for including audio from the jonestown cult leader jim jones in one of his songs

I was clearly not at the devils sacrament what the fuck

"The right/wrong side of history" is such a non-argument it drives me up the wall. "Hypothetical people at an untold point in the future agree with me" bro nobody cares. "I've drawn myself as the chad and you as the soyjak"-ass debate tactic. The nazis were going to be hailed as the brave founders of a thousand-year empire. The doctors championing lobotomies in the '40s and '50s proclaimed with their whole chest that they were on the revolutionary cutting edge of mental health treatment. It's a might-makes-right argument with commitment issues that hinges entirely on your side eventually accumulating enough victories to write the textbooks. Defend your premise on its own merits or die.

The thing that always gets me about this is that if you don't believe in God and a final judgment, "history" has no narrative, no end goal, and no winners because in the end everyone is dead. Who cares what side "history" is on in that case?