Marguerite Bennett's Blog, page 28
September 9, 2017
schwarzwaelder-kirschtorte:
izhunny:
cyberbunbun:
sculptedfromc...
Do these quotes REALLY have anything to do with Wonder Woman?
…
fake geek boys at it again
FAKE GEEK BOYS
So, his tags basically mention that because she has all these powers bestowed on her by the gods, she should punch first and ask questions later. Granted, I myself am not opposed to a bit of fisticuffs should the occasion arise, but I remember reading somewhere (believe me, I have tried to find the actual source, but Google is not cooperating) that a person can spend years developing and harnessing their powers and skills and becoming a badass warrior, but when they choose to solve a problem with violence when a conversation would have sufficed, they’ve wasted their training and are no better than a petulant child. (I wish I could remember where I heard it from, because they made it sound so much more eloquent.)
Diana is no petulant child, is what I’m getting at.
September 8, 2017
valtharr:
aviculor:
jumpingjacktrash:
imo he was being super...
imo he was being super salty about that tendency guys have to blame their anatomy for their bad choices
it’s like “oh i don’t want to be a creepo but my dick has a mind of its own” “well here’s a scissors fix your life”
or maybe, you know, have some damn respect, and don’t pretend you don’t have a choice of whether to be nasty
i think people have a tendency to take jesus literally when he was actually throwing shade, or to take things in this really smarmy martyrish way when they’re actually pretty snippy
i mean “turn the other cheek” sounds like being a doormat until you picture how it would play out: someone smacks you, and you turn and go “do it again, go on, take a swing buddy, does that make you feel better, do you feel like a winner now?” cuz you know what 90% of the time they will get curled up shame toes and shuffle off
tl;dr: no jesus did not actually want you to take a spoon to your eyeballs for babe watching, he wanted you to take responsibility for how you treat people
All of the actions Jesus told his followers to perform are actually passive-aggressive actions meant to oppose and resist Jerusalem’s Roman colonizers. Like,
turning the other cheek is actually a matter of forcing the Roman to either break proper slapping etiquette or to hit you properly- thereby treating you as an equal instead of someone he’s subjugating. If a debtor is taking all your possessions in court, you include the shirt off your back so his greed is causing you to commit public nudity. And when a soldier forces you to carry his equipment (as per the law of the time), you go the extra mile with him- literally carrying his bag beyond the distance that the law stipulates and therefore making the action illegal.
Context matters.
Jesus was a radical, rebellious, snarky twentysomething. Always remember that.
'We don't have anything': landlords demand rent on flooded Houston homes
Rocio Fuentes weighed up the cost of getting some new sofas for her new apartment in Pasadena, Texas, and decided the family budget could just about stretch to it. Just one month after moving in, Hurricane Harvey swept through and the Fuenteses were left not only with the ruined furniture but also an ongoing rental demand for a dwelling they had to flee.
“At first we didn’t think it would be that bad, but then the water came through the wall and up through the carpet,” Fuentes said. “Once we saw the water wasn’t going to stop, we left.”
Fuentes, her husband Jaime and their five children, ages ranging from seven months to 14 years, were plucked from the floodwaters by her mother, who arrived in a truck. They are now crammed into her sister’s apartment and with no insurance have little idea where they will live next. Jaime is unable to earn money because his construction job has been paused due to the flooding.
But while everything has changed for this family, they are still expected to pay for their abandoned home.
“Our landlords say we have to pay rent and late fees and every day it is going up,” Fuentes said. “We are paying rent for somewhere we can’t live in. They said ‘you aren’t the only ones in this situation’, but what are we supposed to do? We don’t have any money. We don’t have anything.”
Capitalism is evil.
Like some of the other comments in this are saying, legally a lot of landlords can’t actually charge rent in a situation like this, so if you find yourself in this situation, you do have legal recourse.
In Texas, the tenant law dictates that you have a right to demand that the landlord repair any condition that materially affects your health and safety. Under Texas law, by renting you the property, the landlord guarantees that the unit will be a fit place to live.
So if it’s dangerously flooded and unhygienic THEY have to fix it, not you, and you can break your lease with no penalty or have the landlord court ordered to repair it. Most states have laws like this, so actually the landlords here are risking lawsuits and people legally nailing them to the wall by trying to charge on units that are unfit for habitation.
These landlords are really stupid because apartments that are flooded out and growing black mold are going to be impossible to prove as healthy and safe. They’re just trying to take advantage of people not knowing their tenants’ rights to eke rent out of them for as long as they can before the tenants realize they actually can’t do that.
ibrokefreeonasaturdaymorning:
robertluteced:
personally i don’t understand any animosity between...
personally i don’t understand any animosity between hufflepuffs and slytherins because they both share the trait of being unconditionally loyal to their friends. just so happens that the former will stay up all night helping their friends study for an exam and the latter will procure their friends a copy of the answers
#let me tell you #slytherins and hufflepuffs flock to each other
marvel-dc-art:Bombshells #54 - “The Battle of Berlin VI”...
Bombshells #54 - “The Battle of Berlin VI” (2016)
pencil & ink by Laura Braga
color by J. Nanjan
ok ok ok ok ok ok can I just have a quick lil moment of your time?
This shit.
So Hunchback is far and away my favorite movie from Disney’s
Renaissance, and it always makes me so happy that yes, people seem to
appreciate it, people seem to love it, but I’mma go into exactly WHY it’s my
favorite, and WHY I think it’s so crucial, and WHY I think it should be
required viewing for young boys specifically.
We all know that a huge bulk of the media we’ve grown up
with consistently has that one frustrating message: Being the hero means you’ll get the
girl. Many boys let this mentality bleed
into reality. We have “nice guys,” who
feel that their niceness entitles them to romance, when obviously that
discredits a female’s personal choice. We
all get this, we all know this, and a lot of us get that it’s a toxic message.
So check out our hero.
He’s an incredibly good person who isn’t conventionally attractive.
Check out our lady.
Super good person, conventionally attractive.
The movie so deliberately builds up Quasi’s hopes. There’s a whole fucking song about it.
But Esmeralda, who is her own person with her own
motivations and preferences, chooses another man, who is also good and also
attractive.
A lot of people criticize this aspect of the movie, the fact
that Quasi doesn’t get the girl BECAUSE of his appearance. But my argument? This is the best damn message a movie could
ever send.
Because when things get dicey, when Esmeralda’s life in in
danger, when Quasi would be putting his own life on the line, he knows that
romance is no longer within the realm of possibility. He knows he won’t be “getting the girl.” He knows this, and he allows himself a moment
of bitterness, he risks falling prey to the “nice guy” trope, and he almost
succumbs.
“She already has her knight in shining armor, and it’s not me.”
BUT THEN HE DOES THE RIGHT THING.
He has NO ulterior motive for saving her life. NO ulterior motive for opposing the man who
raised him. And he doesn’t know that he’ll
get any reward, he knows he could straight up get killed for his actions, and
yet he still acts.
And there’s no bitterness.
There’s still so, so much love between him and Esmeralda, pure awesome
platonic love, and love between him and Phoebus, and just fucking love all
around, it’s amazing.
I’ve heard so many people express distaste at Quasi not
ending up with Esmerelda. Like he was
cheated out of some kind of reward. But
have they watched the ending?
Does that look like a man cheated of his reward? Does he look like he “lost” to Phoebus? No dude, that’s a man who has everything he
ever wanted, and that’s also a man who didn’t “get the girl.”
If that’s not an essential message for young boys to hear, I
don’t know what is.
The writers described HoND as a “Rolling Stones” ending: Quasimodo doesn’t get what he wants (Esmeralda’s love) but he gets what he needs (freedom from his abusive guardian and acceptance by the city in general). And yes, that totally counts as a win for him.
An excellent opposite to this would be the plot to The Phantom Of The Opera (the book) He does not embrace her personal choice.
On a scale from Hunchback of Notre Dame to the Phantom of the Opera, how badly did you handle a lifetime of isolation based on deformity, and losing your crush to a guy who would absolutely place second to you in a singing competition
the-real-seebs:
prokopetz:
Honestly, a lot of my favourite elements of popular media have come...
Honestly, a lot of my favourite elements of popular media have come about directly from writers being passive-aggressive.
Let me give you a classic example: Happy Days. For a lot of folks reading this post, it’s probably before your time, but you’re likely to at least be familiar with Fonzie, a supporting character played by Henry Winkler who ended up being so popular that he’s literally the only thing anybody remembers about the show.
Now, if you recognize the name, you might also know that one of Fonzie’s more notable quirks is that he tends to take his motorcycle with him everywhere - even indoors, including many places where there’s no obvious way for him to have gotten it there. What you might not know, however, is why the writers came up with this running gag in the first place.
Y’see, Fonzie was originally conceived as the “bad influence” character - the cool, dangerous bad boy. As part of that characterisation, the writers wanted to have him wear a leather jacket. (Because it was the 1970s, and that counted as edgy back then.) The network censors, however, objected, claiming that allowing him to wear the jacket would encourage juvenile delinquency and gang violence. (Again, it was the 70s.)
Eventually, the writers worked out a deal whereby they’d be allowed to have Fonzie wear the jacket - but only if he was riding or otherwise physically near his motorcycle, since a leather jacket is a common article of safety equipment when operating a non-enclosed vehicle, and we can’t let impressionable kids see somebody riding a motorcycle without proper safety equipment, can we?
Then they just wrote the motorcycle into every scene, regardless of whether it made sense or not, thereby allowing Fonzie to wear the jacket all the time.
What. The. Fuck.
That is utterly brilliant.
September 7, 2017
Marguerite Bennett's Blog
- Marguerite Bennett's profile
- 366 followers
