The closest furries ever came to mainstream acceptance was when audiences watched Beauty & the Beast (1991) and collectively went “hmm. bad. turn him back.” when the human prince appeared
Yes Elon is bad at running Twitter. It should be noted that he is more than likely intentionally tanking the value of Twitter, so he can declare bankruptcy. He must do this while looking like he’s doing his best.
Remember, all this happened because he joked on Twitter about buying Twitter to temporarily spike his Twitter stock. This is blatantly insider trading, and the sort of thing the SEC loves punishing people for.
This put Elon in a tricky place. He could say he was joking, and risk getting investigated by the SEC. Or he could double down, and actually buy Twitter to prove he wasn’t lying to boost his stock price. These were both horrible options for Elon. But being investigated by the SEC is the type of thing that rich people have nightmares about.
So he was forced to buy Twitter. He could not afford Twitter. So he was forced to engage in a leveraged buyout, meaning he had to pay a big chunk of the check in Tesla stock. This was a shit deal for Elon. Twitter was well known for essentially being at the peak of it’s profitability, and the previous owners were looking for a nice exit. They were happy to sell the company to Elon for what was probably the highest price tag Twitter would ever have.
What this meant for Elon, was he had just used several billion dollars of his actually profitable company, and had to tie it’s ankles to a company that would only drop in value. (and a company he had no idea how to run.) If Twitter drowns, Tesla does too.
His only way out is to tank Twitters value so the company can declare bankruptcy, sell off the assets, and stop bleeding money. But he can’t LOOK like he’s doing that ON PURPOSE for the same reason that he had to double down on buying Twitter in the first place: the SEC is very scary.
resurrected arthur but it’s a sitcom. merlin sees a blond guy in armor being fished out of a lake on the news and the first words out of his mouth are “what the fuck”. he keeps telling people arthur is foreign and that’s why he has a strange accent and keeps being rude. he has to stop arthur from stabbing a wet floor sign with a letter opener. merlin repeatedly threatens to dump arthur back in the lake if he keeps misbehaving. arthur brings home a dog on his first ever outing by himself and from then on arthur and merlin have a dog. everyone keeps mistaking them for a gay married couple. see my vision.
Hartmut will always be one of my favorite characters because Rozemyne is so annoyed by him, but she can’t fire him because he’s hilariously overcompetent at his job despite being a weirdo. Not only that, but he’s genuinely terrifying, and the only reason we don’t see that side more is because the things he wants to do would go against his lady’s wishes.
Also, his relationship with Clarissa being founded purely on their love for Rozemyne is just so wonderful to me. Like sure, Heidemarie and Eckhart are certified Ferdinand Fanclub™ members, but they genuinely loved each other (and Eckhart still loves her). Hartmut and Clarissa’s love is solely for their lady
90% of arguments about media could just be solved by saying “different people like different things in their stories” and leaving it at that
this person probably humanizes cops/racists, rape, child abuse, incest etc as long as its fictional lol
this is a good and normal leap in logic to make from this post!
I certainly hope they do, and not just when it’s fictional. Humanizing them is an important step in stopping the actual real-world harm.
If you recognize that they’re human, then you can understand it’s an issue of rationale and perspective, not Inherent Evil - and you can learn to think like an adversary. This is the first step in developing a good security mindset. That mindset, in turn, is the first tool you need to build functional safety measures and protections for your community.
There’s an added bonus, too - if you recognize that they’re people, you’ll notice that not many people are villains in their own narratives. They aren’t choosing to be evil, they’re rationalizing their harmful choices. And you start asking questions.
If you recognize that cops are people, you learn to ask yourself “Am I being reactionary, authoritarian, and needlessly violent?”
If you recognize that racists are people, you learn to recognize and unpack the racist lessons you were taught.
If you learn that rapists are people, you learn to actively verify consent.
By recognizing that terrible people are not Inherently Bad, but choosing to do terrible things for reasons they think justify them, you get better at protecting yourself from them - and protecting everyone around you from your worst tendencies. It’s a difficult and ongoing process, but it’ll protect you far better than any list of specific Bad Things to watch out for.
There’s a flipside to this, of course, and it’s important:
Anyone who tells you that your enemies are inhuman monsters is using you.
Either they’re trying to convince you that they couldn’t possibly be an Enemy because they’re a normal person… or they’re trying to keep you from noticing the little rationalizations. To convince you that atrocity is okay when you do it.
Don’t fall for either lie.
That last point there is really important. How often do people get away with truly atrocious shit, because everyone around them thinks that inhuman monster thing?
Of course my friend can’t be a rapist. They’re my friend, not some inhuman monster!
Of course my sibling doesn’t hit and gaslight their spouse. They’re my sibling, not some inhuman monster!
etc etc etc
So all the little and big things that point to [fill in blank] doing [thing] are rationalized and explained away. Because [fill in blank] is a person and not some inhuman monster, so they’d never!
By dehumanizing people who commit atrocities, we blind ourselves to the ability to do that shit in people we first and foremost see as people already (friends, family, co-workers, etc.) and in ourselves.
I need more artwork of Merlin and Arthur kissing. For science
Specifically I need Merlin pashing Arthur within an inch of his repressed life. More manhandling!Merlin please. More I’m-half-an-inch-taller-and-I’m-going-to-press-the-advantage!Merlin please. More season-five-thicc!Merlin please. I want to see Arthur babygirlified as he deserves.
This post made me leave all of my wips just to doodle this asap, I hope you’re happy with what you did, op
I LOVE THIS AND I LOVE YOUR TAGS
Me and all my sexy friends know what’s up
late to the party and wasn’t invited but i brought a gift anyway 🫡
laying this down humbly at OPs feet like a peasant offering a laying hen to his king
Always resignation and acceptance. Always prudence and honour and duty. Elinor, where is your heart?
What do you know of my heart? What do you know of anything but your own
suffering? For weeks, Marianne, I’ve had this pressing on me without
being at liberty to speak of it to a single creature. It was forced on
me by the very person whose prior claims ruined all my hopes. I have
endured her exultations again and again whilst knowing myself to be
divided from Edward forever. Believe me, Marianne, had I not been bound
to silence I could have provided proof enough of a broken heart, even
for you
btw the term “women’s health” to discuss uterine care/menstruation isnt just transphobic, it also keeps up this aggravating idea that the uterus & menstruation are obscene and impolite and need to be kept hidden under flowery vague terms as to not offend any cis men. like trans people demanding the end of gendered language around this stuff aren’t just helping trans people, its also just good to normalize calling tampons and pads “menstrual supplies” because thats what they fucking are!!! we should say the words uterus vagina menstruation and we should do it in public and in stores instead of talking about ~women’s needs~ and ~feminine care~. trans liberation is fundamental to women’s liberation and anti-patriarchal action in general. listening to trans men & people isn’t bad for women its good for literally everyone
yes! calling gynecology etc “women’s health” also reinforces a long history of centering the reproductive system as the most important part of women’s bodies and the only part that needs attention from a doctor.
when you hear stories about how historically, every ailment a woman could possibly have was blamed on the uterus (hysteria, the wandering womb, etc)? this kind of vague and generalized language keeps the legacy of that reductive approach alive. every part of women’s bodies are important to their health, and the idea that the reproductive system is the most/only important part is responsible for a lot of the barriers that women face when trying to access quality healthcare.
“women’s health” as a concept should include every part of the body and every kind of body a woman might have, because if it doesn’t, that only ends one way: women being neglected by medical professionals who don’t know or care enough to treat them as entire people.
listening to trans men and other trans people when we say neutral language in medicine is important will only improve medical care for women. you can say we’re trying to erase women all you want, but the reality is that it’s actually the gendering of reproductive care that leads to women being neglected.
This has affected me as a cis woman.
I wondered why none of my doctors ever scheduled a physical for me: checking my heart, etc. I found out recently that my doctor expected my gyno to do that during my pap smears. Not only was she not doing that, but even if she was, she had told me only to come in for a Pap smear every three years.
Finally, my doctor scheduled me for an “annual exam” and I thought that meant a physical. I show up and it turns out they used that phrase to mean a Pap smear. The doctors literally never thought to check other parts of my health. This obscuring language is so harmful.
