The

reading/writing fanfiction about your otp be like:

“(…) Come on! there is no way to stop a heartbreak… How is- what do you do about that?”

“YOU CRY! You cry…”

- Midnight Gospel

—

In one of their posts, @darkcybertron​ asked a very important question: “(…) where’s the au where the bad batch finds kix instead of the crimson corsair’s crew.”?

I’m concurring the question!

Where is it?

===

STAR WARS: The Clone Wars/The Bad Batch © George Lucas/ Dave Filoni/ LucasFilm/ Disney

I'ts over Thorn, You have crossed the line. NO MORE POST-ITS Part 1 here

Lets assume the No Post-it was written by Fox out of pure frustration then slapped on Thorn's face like the little b*tch he is <3 Original Meme:

I don't know why im putting so much effort in these lmao ''But the best part of this plan is, no one can stop me''

Reblogs are super appreciated <3

[id: screenshots of tiktok captions. the images say, “but the only reason we still love princess diana is because she did not have the time to disappoint us.”]

begging queer kids to read up on princess diana’s involvement with the community. yes, she was a rich, pretty monarch. yes, she died young.

but the reason why queer people love her is because she used her privilege during the aids crisis to advocate for sick queer men, when very few others would - much less someone of her status.

diana spent years advocating for the health and care of queer people with hiv/aids. in 1987, at the height of the epidemic, she opened the first specialist clinic dedicated to treating aids patients (the first clinic of it’s kind in the uk).

she also fought public hysteria by hugging and shaking bare hands with aids patients, at a time when aids was thought to be spread by skin to skin contact. not only that, she visited patients in the clinic regularly and even comforted them through their sickness.

and when queen elizabeth told her to try focusing on “something more pleasant”?

diana ignored her and kept fighting.

and this is only her work towards the aids crisis. she publicly called out the royal family, brought attention to numerous world issues, and was known as an advocate for empathy and kindness. she’s known and loved as the people’s princess for good reason

this is the funniest divorce in the world

This meme is a MURDER ATTEMPT.

I am absolutely fucking serious. The original meme, without the big red denial, is someone's attempt to fucking kill people.

There is NO SAFE DOSAGE of pennyroyal oil. Even Mother Earth News says there's no reason to use pennyroyal essential oil for ANYTHING, even topically or as a fragrance, for fuckssake! That should give you some idea about how dangerous it is!

Pennyroyal tea, plant matter in hot water, is a traditional abortifacient. It is *incredibly* dangerous, induces abortion by bringing the body close to organ failure (and frequently pushing the system right over the edge, because dosage is impossible to meter), but I would drink a gallon of it before I took a half-teaspoon of pennyroyal essential oil.

Two teaspoons, taken across 48 hours, has successfully killed someone.

Three teaspoons taken as a single dosage killed the consumer within THREE HOURS.

There is NO SAFE DOSAGE! FOR PENNYROYAL OIL INTERNALLY! NONE!

The person who made this meme is PURPOSEFULLY, ACTIVELY, trying to get desperate people killed!

curious tiger | prints

It really is wild how people who don't understand what consent is really do not understand what consent is. The idea that they're supposed to know how someone wants to be treated, and err to the side of caution or even ask if they aren't sure is absurd when you genuinely do not understand the concept.

"What, you need consent for everything these days?" Literally yes. And not just these days, but always have and always will.

"Do I need consent to kiss my wife in the morning? Do I need consent to shake someone's hand after a business meeting? Do I need CoNsEnT to braid my daughter's hair?"

Yes, yes and yes. A neurotypical person of reasonably passable social skill should have the ability to either instinctively understand when their touch is welcome, or logically conclude when their touch is socially expected. If you truly, literally, genuinely cannot tell whether your own child delights in you playing with her hair or merely endures it, then yeah, maybe you shouldn't touch anyone at all, ever, before you learn how to do that.

"Do I need consent to make eye contact with strangers on the street? Do I need consent from everyone on board before I get on the bus?"

Okay now you're just throwing a tantrum because someone told you 'no'.

“Now you’re breaking more than my heart, Marinette!”

male gaze is not 'when person look sexy' or 'when misogynist make film'

death of the author is not 'miku wrote this'

I don't think you have to read either essay to grasp the basic concepts

death of the author means that once a work is complete, what the author believes it to mean is irrelevant to critical analysis of what's in the text. it means when analysing the meaning of a text you prioritise reader interpretation above author intention, and that an interpretation can hold valid meaning even if it's utterly unintentional on the part of the person who created the thing. it doesn't mean 'i can ignore that the person who made this is a bigot' - it may in fact often mean 'this piece of art holds a lot of bigoted meanings that the author probably wasn't intentionally trying to convey but did anyway, and it's worth addressing that on its own terms regardless of whether the author recognises it's there.' it's important to understand because most artists are not consciously and vocally aware of all the possible meanings of their art, and because art is communal and interpretive. and because what somebody thinks they mean, what you think somebody means, and what a text is saying to you are three entirely different things and it's important to be able to tell the difference.

male gaze is a cinematographic theory on how films construct subjectivity (ie who you identify with and who you look at). it argues that film language assumes that the watcher is a (cis straight white hegemonically normative) man, and treats men as relatable subjects and women as unknowable objects - men as people with interior lives and women as things to be looked at or interacted with but not related to. this includes sexual objectification and voyeurism, but it doesn't mean 'finding a lady sexy' or 'looking with a sexual lens', it means the ways in which visual languages strip women of interiority and encourage us to understand only men as relatable people. it's important to understand this because not all related gaze theories are sexual in nature and if you can't get a grip on male gaze beyond 'sexual imagery', you're really going to struggle with concepts of white or abled or cis subjectivities.