things neurotypicals and/or parents in general as a subculture have ruined for me by placing inherent judgment into what should be a neutral question:
questioning if a word choice is a typo/mistake or not, because while it's technically not incorrect it is functionally abberant in a place where a similar word would be more traditionally appropriate
(In this case "meeting a par(to mean standard, ideal of correctness)". I suspect they meant bar, typoed, and didn't catch it because it's not *misspelled*? But it's not *wrong* either, and the sentence is honestly way more interesting in terms of metaphor depth if it *is* on purpose. But god help, even as a reader it's hard to successfully ask that question *without* sounding like one's passive-aggressively accusing them of being too stupid to be allowed to use words. As an editor, when the writer is explicitly expecting your feedback's focus to be negative tp improve writing flaws, it's so much harder than that to just ask "what were you thinking" without it sounding like an accusation and making them defensive.)
((I swear, I'm not your mom, I don't ask fake-questions that only have one "right" answer or are otherwise traps; I'm asking because I *don't* know the answer and genuinely think whatever it is will be interesting enough to warrent the exploration/discussion. I screw up social interactions enough naturally, I don't need assholes tainting phrases with loaded subtext I didn't intend and often don't catch until after someone's pissed at me, just because they seeded their children with trauma triggers from being defaulted to judgmental and their violent allergy to being straightforward, like, ever.))
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Shoutout to the people who grew up in a house where being gay or trans was just never talked about.
Shoutout to the people whose parents support lgbt rights but never told their kids until they were in their teens or twenties because they said it was “difficult to explain to children”.
Shoutout to the people whose religious communities came out in support just a little too late.
Shoutout to everyone afraid to come out just because they know they’ll be safe physically but they don’t know how everything will change socially.
Shoutout to everyone whose internalized homophobia that they’re trying to overcome came from subtle cues and not explicit statements.
Shoutout to the in betweeners. The pain you felt is real.
Shoutout to the people whose parents support LGBT rights for everyone except their kids, and make passive sure you know your only purpose is to provide grandkids.
The interesting thing about Bon Cop Bad Cop, as someone who has not watched the movies (I will! I just came into the show, specifically, without that background) is that in some ways, it feels like a Trojan horse - the two cops are there, being goofy, but the actual emotional stakes are all around Joe and his community. It's like the showrunners said, "we want to make a crime drama about a First Nations community fighting over a pipeline" and Crave said "hm, no," so they said, "what if it was tied back to a beloved Canadian film series and there was a comedy aspect," and Crave said "oh, okay." And now we're here.
Because honestly, are Martin or David dealing with any personal problems or obstacles they need to overcome for their own fulfillment? No! But Joe is: his mentor is missing, his community is at odds with itself, his crush is in town, he's been tasked with the responsibility of taking care of these people and needs to step up and prove to everyone that he can do it. The comedy aspects of the show are the weakest to me with a few exceptions ("THEY ALREADY OWN THAT!") and that's the stuff with Martin and David, but the scenes of Joe interacting with his family and his neighbours are really compelling! Because that's the interesting part! Also because Joshua Odjick is a really good actor, and his presence grounds the whole thing emotionally!
Also, the Gabi stuff - part of why I think a lot of the comedy in the show doesn't hit for me is because I can't quite tell if it's cringe comedy meant to laugh at the characters being dumb, or if we're meant to laugh at the situation itself (see the drag queen scene in the pilot.) So Gabi complaining about being called white is one of those moments. But if we are treating this strand of the show as the emotional grounding that contrasts the comedy, then I think the undercurrent running through the whole thing is: if Joe and Gabi's relationship is going somewhere (and that certainly seems to be the intention) then she needs to actually be part of his community instead of just parachuting in. And for that to happen, him telling her that she just can't understand certain things won't work because she's white is a problem, because she needs to understand them. (Especially since she'll be raising a kid with whoever she's in a relationship with.) But also: she is white! And she is coming in as an outsider, and being defensive about that is not going to help. It's very complicated and thorny in a way that I don't know entirely meshes with the overall tone, but it's also part of the compelling, dramatic aspect that is the show's strongest asset.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
On the off chance that the Bon Cop Bad Cop cussing scene is a new thing to anyone and one requires context, vois-si voilà ce c'est avec l'anglo et french subtitles, de rein, literally my nerd-pleasure is to scream about how good this movie is.
don't worry about me when I say this but I think in a way being hunted for sport would be a relief. my nervous system would be like, wow. finally, a proportional reaction
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
I just found the Fanlore article, and it looks like while Basingstoke invented the format, Strangecreature, a Torchwood writer, might be one of the first to have used “five times and one time.” But the original prompt was Basingstoke’s. And it’s definitely fanfiction only in origin.
I love it when conversations about this come around again! How cool is it that I know people in fannish history! (and how uncool is it that I never know it was Bas who invented this until recently – where was I, under a rock?)
recommending the x files to people is like yeah this is one of the most influential pieces of television created, it's the best and also one of the worst things you'll ever see. are there aliens? you'll never know. are mulder and scully lovers? worse. what do bees have to do with this? everything.
Rare non-fandom "youtube comments better on tumblr"
Sometimes, I can't believe we're tree vampires (and I say that from eastern Ontario and basically sublet a maple tree from a working farm in my name as a kid, so it's not like the maple syrup process is foreign to me just I just think it's funny).
At least we're ethical vampires, I suppose; modern non-bucket setups are literally just trees on IV lines. Clean, hygienic, longterm ports to avoid unnecessary damage, no motivation or inclination to drain the subject dry just a nice little blood donation.
Give that tree a juice and cookie, so it doesn't pass out and we're gravy. //laugh//
i feel like a trait of “tumblr sexyman” that’s getting lost as of late is. the incomprehensibility of it all. i will see characters who are just like, conventionally attractive anime men be referred to as sexymen and its like. no. no. like its not just “any dude some tumblr people lose their shit for”, a fundamental part of the experience of like, learning about tumblr sexyman is that your initial reaction to learning a character is a sexyman is to go “how the fuck could ANYONE ever find this sexy”. a shortstack funny comedy skeleton. a character from a dr seuss book whose only viewable limbs are their arms. the incredibly low poly model of a half life 1 security guard. your first reaction upon learning what the sexyman is should be confusion and bafflement. it’s core to the whole concept.
"You are wrong about Wuthering heights" and it's people being wrong about WH
Due to the adaptation of the classic novel into whatever movie this is, there has been many people who felt the need to "educate" about the true nature of WH
I have many issues with these videos and articles pieces so let's discuss them
Firstly, the "you are wrong about WH" is genuinely pedantic. I know, clickbait and all, but still
Secondly, most of the "clarifications" are actually wrong
For example I see people call WH a "cautionary tale"... No ?
This is a prime example of not understanding that cautionary tale is a specific genre with its own code and instead applying it to everything that "shows the danger of a certain behavior"
Generally, a cautionary tales goes as such : a forbidding is presented, the character does the thing he was told not to do and deals with the consequences of it. Their goal is to enforce conformity and protect a certain status quo.
Wuthering Height is a GOTHIC NOVEL whose contemporary reception was the moral people being shocked at "How a human being could have attempted such a book as the present without committing suicide before he had finished a dozen chapters, is a mystery. It is a compound of vulgar depravity and unnatural horrors".
Gothic literature's goal is the OPPOSITE of a cautionary tale, it's about exploring the taboo subjects with the main idea being that it's because it's forbiden that it's alluring, that there is something beautiful within that which is disgusting. It doesn't try to argue these are good to reproduce in real life mind you, but that humans are all drawn to evil and to explore this dimension. It's all about what is against conformity and goes against the status quo.
How can you misunderstand that, let alone preach to be teaching people that they are wrong about
WH is not trying to teach anyone that the character's behavior is wrong, because that's literaly not the novel's point, on the contrary, the novel relies on the fact that the audience already knows these things are wrong and instead choose to focus on an exploration of evil : why do people do evil ? Is there some form of charm to evilness ? Is it alluring in some ways ?
Cautionary tales on the other hand are extra explicit about teaching the audience that something is wrong to the point they have little to no substance outside of that. Just go read Struwwelpeter and go compare it to actual literary works.
It's also worth noting that Emily Bronte's sister, Charlotte Bronte, painted a pretty darning picture of the so called moralist in Jane Eyre and I remember that it lead us in class to discuss these so called "cautionary tales" : they are full of stories about children getting punished in terrible ways for comitting various misdeed. It might be me, but maybe Emily Bronte didn't want to do the very type of story that even Lewis Caroll makes fun of in Alice in wonderland.
By the way, I also had the misfortune of reading Child's first tale, and it's the most boring thing imaginable, perhaps it is because it's not even a proper narrative but merely morals teaching barely decorated like a narrative.
But don't believe that people's trying to label a gothic novel into a "cautionary tale" only happened with WH, I saw some argue that with... the freaking Picture of Dorian Gray. If you know anything about the life of pre-raphaelite Oscar "All art is quite useless" Wilde, you just know that's not even remotely true.
In fairness, when we had to discuss that, I did made the argument that rather than being the genre, it was a side effect of the novel medium that lead to the conclusion allowing for such reading rather than it being the intention, but my issue isn't people saying "you can read it as a cautionary tale against" no, it's saying straight up that it is what the novel IS when it's not the case.
Again, gothic is about exploring the idea that evil can be alluring, not to encourage people to do bad things, but to give people an outlet to explore possibilities from a safe space, which I shouldn't even need to clarify in the first place if online discourse wasn't so keen on pushing binary views on novels. I wonder how y'all would react to the Monk having the devil cosplay as a beautiful woman to tempt a priest.
Second misconception is people calling it a "horror story"...
Kids these days don't know the word gothic anymore... oh God.
So no, it's not a horror story, the term and genre came after but I can sort of excuse this one since gothic is horror's great- grandmother (at least psychological horror), and it's undeniable that the novel's settings and unsettling elements are reprised in modern horror, but still it needs to be clarified and also... because the argument to push this is something I disagree with which bring us to point 3
"It's not a love story/romance/romantic story"... excuse me did you read the book ?
My great miseries in this world have been Heathcliff’s miseries, and I watched and felt each from the beginning: my great thought in living is himself. If all else perished, and he remained, I should still continue to be; and if all else remained, and he were annihilated, the universe would turn to a mighty strange: I should not seem a part of it. My love for Linton is like the foliage in the woods: time will change it, I’m well aware, as winter changes the trees. My love for Heathcliff resembles the eternal rocks beneath: a source of little visible delight, but necessary. Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He’s always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being. So don’t talk of our separation again: it is impracticable; and –
How exactly can you argue that the book that gave us "I am Heathcliff" is not a love story ?!
Love is not only an important theme in the book, but a primordial conflict ! I am straight up seeing people confidently claim that Cathy and Heathcliff never as much kissed in the book... is chapter 15 a joke to you ??
A love story is a story whose conflict revolves around love, it fills the bill, so why is that people argue it's not one ???
Well I'll tell you... it's because Heathcliff and Cathy's romance isn't healthy... I wish I could be kidding right now
Ok so, in gothic literature, the point is "wonder" and "terror", it's to create within the audience a feeling of both attraction and rejection, to mimic the idea that we both hate and are drawn to what's evil.
This also means that this applies to whenever there is a romance or love in it, that doesn't make it any less a story about love just because it's not a relationship you'd want to emulate in real life. The entire point of gothic love is that it's not something you'd wanna do, but you are curious enough to want to see why this exists or how these types of relationship play out.
Gothic love is about exploring the notion of taboo desires, meaning seeing someone wanting to indulge in something that they shouldn't, in this case, there are several layers to this, but denying love's place in WH is so weird when there are 2 love triangle making it clear that love is the primary conflict and that love is literaly a subject explored in the novel. Gothic is precisely about showing that love isn't a inherently pure or positive feeling, it can be wrong, it can push you to become a worse person. So the claim that it cannot be one because "who would want a relationship like Heathcliff and Cathy" shows that people aren't thinking in terms of thematics when labelling a story, but only in terms of how desirable that is, which in my humble opinion goes against the very purpose of fiction. Like, what's the point in seeing only things that are desirable in real life ?
That’s also worth pointing out but there are plenty of works of fiction that have a desirable romance depcited in it without being a love story because the romance is only a sub plot instead of a main theme or main conflict.
Not to mention that when it comes to villanous characters people are perfectly able to acknowledge that they can have noble feelings and still be wrong, that they know they aren't a role model but they still like them for their depth. So what in the world causes people to be unable to apply this same logic to love and a relationship in fiction ?
Additionally, it's worth mentioning it but the different sources I found about "romance" as a genre (not to be confused with historical romance tradition that influenced gothic and thus Bronte) showcases that there is a debate on whether or not a novel count as romance or not depending on how "clean" it is (aka if there's no trangressive topics or not) and if it ends with a happy ending or not, which is the primary reason why we are having "is Romeo and Juliet a love story or not" only based on the fact that these two didn't got to have a happy ending despite love being a major theme in the play.
I shouldn't even have to explain why that is a problem.
Also, since I am seeing people quote the Heathcliff "picturing me a hero of romance" to support this idea...
Same article quoted to get this from btw
Notice the "it is also much more" and that's something I also see a lot.
"If something is a love story, it cannot be more, it cannot be complex, WH is complex therfore it's not a love story" type of reasoning.
Despite the fact that it is a theme and a main conflict, it isn't a love story because it has more going on.
Do you see my problem now ? Do you see what type of argument I take issue with ?
People deny this label not based on the relevance of the theme or whether it's a major component, but based on how desirable the relationship depicted is in real life. You do realize that by this token no gothic novel can have a love story since they are precisely not about conforming to the idea of a pure, moral, good and healthy desirable ideal but on exploring what we are forbiden by society to crave right ?
Also, does the article know that Byronic hero/romantic hero doesn't mean "hero of romance" ??
HOW DOES THIS NOT DESCRIBE HEATHCLIFF ?!
Let's see the full quote before I actually lose it
"[...] You must let her have a maid to keep things tidy about her, and you must treat her kindly. Whatever be your notion of Mr. Edgar, you cannot doubt that she has a capacity for strong attachments, or she wouldn't have abandoned the elegancies, and comforts, and friends of her former home, to fix contentedly, in such a wilderness as this, with you.'
"She abandoned them under a delusion,' he answered; 'picturing in me a hero of romance, and expecting unlimited indulgences from my chivalrous devotion. I can hardly regard her in the light of a rational creature, so obstinately has she persisted in forming a fabulous notion of my character and acting on the false impressions she cherished."
Where is Heathcliff denying being a Byronic hero ?? The argument that Heathcliff denies being a romance hero therefore it means he isn't a romantic character only works if you are purposefully ignoring the fact that romance has different definition at the time Bronte writes
To put it simply, here Heathcliff is talking about how anyone who would see him as the ideal man would be a fool, refering to his relationship with Isabella
That doesn't mean he isn't a Byronic hero (literaly how in the world) or that the novel doesn't count as a love story, again, you can only argue it isn't one based on the idea that Heathcliff isn't a desirable love interest based on real life criteria when the entire point is precisely that he represents what is not allowed to be desired by society
Through his ambiguous ethnicity, his lower status and his behavior (and the fact he is linked to the devil), he is the embodiment of taboo. Again, the argument isn't that WH is a desirable romance (it's not), it's that thematically speaking, it doesn't make sense to argue it's not a love story.
The only way I can understand this is based on the movie's clear missing the point about Heathcliff, but just because it ups the erotisicism to 100 hundred compared to the novel and disregards all substance in it doesn't mean you can do the same and dismiss the exploration of love as a twisted feeling.
And yes I know that there are people who idealizes Heathcliff, but the in real life Isabellas are a separate issue from the novel's themes and plot, and wanting to prop up the horror as a the actual theme of the story when it's 1) a gothic story and 2) because the relationship between Heathcliff and Cathy is something no sane person would want in real life just screams to me "I don't get what gothic is".
Granted, there are stories that have a love story in it without being a love story... but WH isn't one of those, again, not when love is a primary conflict. By that token you should also argue that WH isn't a revenge story, which I simply can't see happen considering that revenge becomes Heathcliff's main objective and what turns him into an abusive monster, repeating the same tragedy that he went through unto the younger generation.
I am begging you to please consider themes and conflicts instead of "this relationship isn't healthy or happy", it's a much more productive and enjoyable way of engaging with fiction
And I really wish we could avoid using these points to criticize the new movie because it's not even why it's bad, there are plenty of WH adaptations that focuses on the Heathcliff/Cathy romance and they are still watchable.
There are actual issues such as the shallowness of the movie, the complete disreguard for the gothic essence of the story, the removal of any of Heathcliff's motivations, the discussions about abuse and social commentaries, the chaotic direction in regards to the costumes, the shallow interpretation of Heathcliff and Cathy's relationship and the subsequent removal of what was actually appealing in it etc
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
If you’re thinking about applying for disability, go do it right meow
The sooner you get denied the sooner you can win on however many appeals it takes and the more backpay money you get. It sucks and it’s awful and it’s degrading and that is an iron you want in the fire even if you don’t have a good case yet
Do what research you can on how to best present yourself and also this could take years, and the sooner you start the sooner you will have the money and it is profound cruelty being inflicted on you and the fear and dread and shame you feel that makes it harder is intentional and is a tool to keep human rights you’re entitled to away from you.
Even though I have in my medical records a 10-level spinal fusion, cervical spine disc arthroplasty, a spinal cord injury, microscopic colitis, endometriosis, BPD and PTSD from Hurricane Katrina, It took 4 years from beginning to end to finally receive disability benefits to survive
I nearly died waiting. this is so common.
my judge was appalled that it ever got that far, explaining he’s never denied someone with that much spinal hardware alone, but this is extremely normal in this system
you could have no legs and no arms and you still have a decently high chance of being automatically denied
the system is designed to wear you down and make you lose hope and give up but you can’t
if you get denied, it doesn’t mean you aren’t disabled and it doesn’t mean you won’t ever get it. it happens to virtually almost everyone
