My Fleeting Interests

[sadhoc]

there is a very real tendency of teenagers with anxiety disorders self diagnosing with considerably more stigmatized and impairing mental illnesses (e.g. schizophrenia, DID, personality disorders), but the best response to that isn't to get angry with them for "appropriating" lol. instead you show them coping resources for the problems they're actually having and deemphasize diagnostic categories in general. if an 18 year old is claiming to have alzheimer's, they're probably making an innocent mistake and are in genuine distress. be kind.

[mariaalenkoshepard]

Also I think this trend comes, at least in part, from how brushed aside anxiety disorders can be. If your parents and teachers dismiss you with 'oh everyone feels anxious', then inevitably you're going to start thinking that there must be something else going on with you

[lightblueminecraftorchid]

”You must feel very scared right now; let’s talk about how to help you personally, tailored to your symptoms” will always be more helpful than “stop faking (X) for attention”. If theyre that desperate for attention or an explanation, something is wrong.

[draconym]

do you think two pennies is still enough for the ferryman or has inflation driven up the fare

[draconym]

if he makes me use an app I am simply not crossing the river Styx.

[beksdec7201]

Now that they’ve stopped making American pennies, they might go up enough in value!

[mawofthemagnetar]

Cold take but all languages are beautiful actually. Every single one. Every single human language on earth is a collection of stories interwoven into the very fabric of the words that are spoken.

“Oh but this language sounds scary-“ have you heard a child speak it while pointing at a butterfly?

“Oh but this language sounds silly-“ have you heard someone’s grandma recite a recipe with such practiced ease it comes off as poetry?

“Oh but this language is really weird-“ and yours isn’t? Everyone’s language is weird, dumbass, it came free with your fucking humanity.

Every tongue that is spoken is a work of art. Every language a unique window into the world.

Isn’t it wonderful?

[joy-and-whimsy-official]

Joy and whimsy detected! This post is joyful and whimsical!

[hamletthedane]

I think about British Airways Flight 5390 a lot

[hamletthedane]

OKAY STRAP IN because this is one of the WILDEST stories in aviation history.

In 1990, a British Airways BAC One-Eleven, captained by Tim Lancaster and co-piloted by Alastair Atchison, was cruising at 17,000 feet.

Around 15 minutes after take-off, flight attendant Nigel Ogden entered the cockpit to bring the pilots something to drink. One second everything was fine. The next second, the pilot's side window blew out from the force of the pressurized cockpit. Even though he was strapped in, the force of the explosive decompression ripped the captain out of his chair and pulled him though the window.

The flight attendant immediately leapt forward and grasped the captain's belt. The force was so strong - due to the plane's speed - the captain slipped and was pulled almost entirely out of the plane, but the flight attendant caught his leg. The captain laid on the roof, then the side of the fuselage (the above image is an inaccurate recreation - the side window was smashed) and the flight attendant's entire arm was soon outside of the plane, gripping him.

(Recreation from the show Mayday at the point of decompression)

At the same time, the event caused the autopilot to disengage, and the captain's body hitting the flight controls caused the plane to enter into a deep dive. The throttle was set to full power and could not be accessed due to debris, meaning the plane was descending rapidly. The co-pilot, experiencing hypoxia, fought to control the plane's dive while allowing it to continue descending to a level the passengers/crew could breathe at. He attempted to contact air traffic control, but the wind made communication impossible, so he broadcast a mayday signal. Finally, he was able to re-engage the autopilot and level the plane out at a breathable altitude.

Soon, the flight attendant's entire arm was burned from wind shear and frostbite, and his grip began to slip. The other attendants entered the cabin to see what was wrong and took over holding the captain's body. Seeing the blood covering the windows from the captain's severe wind sheer burns and frostbite, the attendants and co-pilot knew he was dead. However, they could not let his body go because it could smash into the wing, horz stabilizer, or engine, and bring the plane down.

For 30+ minutes the co-pilot flew a jet plane with an OPEN WINDOW and his co-worker's body hanging along the side of the plane. Finally, clearance to land from ATC came across over the sound of the wind and the flight attendants were able to dislodge the captain's ankles from the flight controls without letting him go. The co-pilot successfully landed the plane.

(tw below for blood)

(Taken same day as the incident)

BUT HERE'S THE KICKER: when they reached the ground and evacuated, they realized THE CAPTAIN WAS NOT DEAD.

He SURVIVED being outside the fuselage of a jet airplane traveling 550mph at 17,000 feet. His only injuries were extensive - but mostly superficial - frostbite and windshear burns, bruising, fractures in his hand, and shock. He has since stated that he remembers the event and was conscious for much of the time he was outside of the fuselage. The only other injury was the flight attendant's frostbitten/windshorn arm. Captain Tim Lancaster returned to flying five months later.

(Captain Tim Lancaster in bed several weeks after the incident, with flight attendant Ogden (+ Ogden's wife) above him and co-pilot Alastair Atchison to the far left, along with the two other flight attendants)

Why did this occur? Because the plane had received maintenance the day before, and the maintenance supervisor did not check he was using the correct screws in re-installing the windscreen.

(Recreation)

So yeah: you can apparently survive clinging to the side of a jet airliner traveling 500+mph at 17,000 feet.

[hamletthedane]

Wow! Didn't expect this many likes for an aviation post.

Just a note that I was wrong - it was the front pilot's windscreen, not the side-window! I'm used to looking at Boeing windows with different positions :)

If y'all want the full story & more analysis of what exactly went wrong, Mayday: Air Investigations did a pretty decent special on the incident. It's free on YouTube here (and here on dailymotion if you're outside the US).

[desmoscatghost]

Adding some stuff:

The ‘maintenance supervisor did not check the bolts’ is technically correct but ignores the amount of stuff that had to go wrong for that to happen.

1: the supervisor was the one doing the bolts (I think there was a staffing issue) and so did not have to check the work that he did

2: the window was not on the list of vital components that need to be checked by someone else even if the supervisor does it.

3: the parts store where he had to go to get the bolts was badly lit and had bolts in the wrong drawers.

4: the wrong bolts and the right bolts are almost indistinguishable by sight.

5: the correct tool to put the screws in was not available so they had to do some lite bodging to get the screws in. By this I mean it was still a torque wrench and they checked it released at the right point but the correct socket did not stay in place or something like that.

6: any slight differences between the right bolts and the wrong bolts were hidden because of the tool they were using (which would have worked perfectly if they were using the right bolts).

If one of those things had not happened then the plane would have had the right bolts when it took off.

[hamletthedane]

^ absolutely critical edition and a great example of what’s known in risk analysis as the Swiss Cheese Model.

From Wikipedia:

“The Swiss cheese model of accident causation illustrates that, although many layers of defense lie between hazards and accidents, there are flaws in each layer that, if aligned, can allow the accident to occur. In this diagram, three hazard vectors are stopped by the defenses, but one passes through where the "holes" are lined up.”

Accidents in complex systems are very rarely one person’s fault and my original post indeed oversimplified the incident for the sake of telling a straightforward story. This was not the case of one bad maintenance worker; this was a systematic failure. The holes lined up and a tragedy nearly occurred because profit (short staffing, poor maintenance facilities, poor training and tools) was prioritized over safety at several layers. Any additional degree of safety would have prevented this from occurring.

[rohirric-hunter]

Another thing about light pollution and adjacent things is. They threatened my area with rolling blackouts last winter. Now this was of course largely because the AI datacenters are hogging all the electricity, but in the notifications about it they always specified that that residential areas would be the blacked out areas. Not offices. Not businesses. If you're at home and freezing, well, you can just go loiter in a McDonald's I guess. Never mind that this is extremely difficult for disabled people and often not allowed for pets.

Well, as winter turned into spring, I started biking home from work. A long, circuitous route that took me through residential areas, and past offices and businesses. Offices and businesses that were closed for the day. And yet their signs were still lit up. The lights were still on inside. There were TVs playing in empty breakrooms. All the computers in the school district offices stayed on, their monitors not even going to sleep, all night. Paused to take a break in an empty strip mall once and when I leaned against the glass of a restaurant I could hear the music still playing inside.

Like. There's something deeply rotten about the priorities here. These places that are so flagrantly wasting electricity will never be subject to the rolling blackouts that could freeze you out of your home. Not even at night, when no one is there, when they don't need their lights on. Their waste is prioritized over normal people's life.

[amateurateverythin]

Where are my Frozen fans at

[teaboot]

I’m not Christian, I don’t go to church anymore, and my pastor died, but when he was alive I’d sometimes go to his sermons and I remember one time he said “it feels good to hate, but we know that it isn’t allowed, so when we’re told that we’re allowed to hate someone we get so excited that we forget we’re supposed to love”, and if my humble atheist ass might borrow some church talk I’d like to perhaps submit that

[teaboot]

Anyhow sometimes on the day to day I feel disgust or revulsion and I have to ask myself “is this a danger to anyone at all or am I just looking for something I’m allowed to hate” and a solid 98/100 times it’s the latter so once again thank you pastor D

[teaboot]

Some more sweet bangers from Pastor D

Following the rules of the church are less important than following the attitudes Jesus exemplified [in a debate about if it would be okay to break traditional rules and give the leftover loaf of communion bread to a hungry and poor attendee]

Don’t get so caught up in observing ceremonies and following traditions that you forget why they started to begin with

The words you use aren’t as important as what you mean when you use them [new kid was somehow wildly confused about his name and started respectfully calling him Batman]

[queer-as-city-folk]

[enbye]

Okay no Chicago is not a coastal city. When I moved up to the Midwest (currently in iowa) and I heard someone say "let's go to the beach" and they meant TO A LAKE I about died. The beach is Galveston, corpus Christi, Miami, etc. Beaches are where the land touches THE OCEAN. not a lake!! I will die on this hill!!!! Midwesterners just want to pretend like their states aren't boring as fuck. Be happy with your great lakes and stop calling them beaches! They're lake shores!

[queer-as-city-folk]

[enbye]

If you say beach and you mean to include lake shores then you're admitting your state is boring and also you're wrong bc nobody thinks "beach" and by *default* includes lake superior or wtv

[queer-as-city-folk]

You wish your beaches had this kind of view

[queer-as-city-folk]

Girl, the only Beach National Park is along Lake Michigan, Her Name? Indiana DUNES National Park and she is in the Chicagoland area!

[xxhentaibootytomhardyblowme-dea]

not the point at all but portland is not a coastal city at all

[queer-as-city-folk]

Yeah but Portlanders are considered Coastal Elites so it's a Coastal City in Spirit

[xxhentaibootytomhardyblowme-dea]

coastal? no. elites? absolutely

[queer-as-city-folk]

[enbye]

Google being wrong once again

[queer-as-city-folk]

I don't know, San Francisco seems pretty oceanic to me

[insert-clever-username-1133]

if you're in a state that borders the ocean you can't call a lake a beach BUT if you're in a state with huge lakes and no oceans you can absolutely call a big enough lake shore a beach. some lake shores are very very beach like

[queer-as-city-folk]

Okay but Buffalo NY has Beaches too

[lsbnviking]

As the Great Lakes are basically inland freshwater seas, they get a pass on the beach thing. Other lakes have to call their stuff lakeshores.

[queer-as-city-folk]

Which of these is Lake Michigan and Which is Lake Kentucky?

[queer-as-city-folk]

And more importantly which looks nicer to spend an afternoon?

[anarchworm]

im assuming Lake Kentucky is on the left because the trees are nicer

[queer-as-city-folk]

How the fuck did you guess that based off of the trees?

[verity-strasser-blog]

Well also Coastal Cities and Coastal Elites just means like East Coast and West Coast, that's why Portland is counted. So like the states are coastal, not necessarily the cities.

As a Portlander, none of us consider our city actually costal.

[queer-as-city-folk]

Correct, Chicago is a Coastal City and Portland is Not a Coastal City

[lsbnviking]

Chicago is not a coastal city as it's not on the ocean. Coastal Cities and Coastal Elites are buzzwords to say "these places are out of touch with middle america" and by middle america they mean the midwest (which is not in the middle but is still called the midwest). They will never call the people of Charleston, SC Coastal Elites despite Charleston being on the Atlantic coast because to the people who came up with the buzzword, that's not a place for Elites because it isn't the ~Left Coast~ (aka the Pacific coast of the United States that trends more liberal in the liberal-conservative political divide) or the Northeast.

[queer-as-city-folk]

Well arbitrary until someone makes the correct observation that Chicago is on a coast and is therefore a Coastal City

[queer-as-city-folk]

Lake Michigan isn't your normal Lake

[fallenblossom]

yeah ig that does look like a sea. ill agree w you

[queer-as-city-folk]

Thank you <3

[queer-as-city-folk]

Anyways if you don't consider Chicago a coastal city because the water is mostly enclosed and can only leave by river or one other entrance than by your own logic New Haven isn't a Coastal City because it is in the Long Island Sound

[queer-as-city-folk]

Either Lake Michigan counts as a Coast or the Long Island Sound Doesn't count because you can't have it both ways

[queer-as-city-folk]

And before you say it's the salt water that makes it coastal than Salt Lake City is Coastal

And that doesn't even connect to the ocean

[queer-as-city-folk]

Good thing that's not my metric (:

[mzminola]

A Sound is part of the Ocean.

[queer-as-city-folk]

I really don't think that is relevant to the broader discussion

[the-haiku-bot]

I really don’t think

that is relevant to the

broader discussion

Beep boop! I look for accidental haiku posts. Sometimes I mess up.

[beksdec7201]

The NOAA counts the Great Lakes’ shores as coastline, so unfortunately Chicago is a coastal city by at least one account…

[rebeccathenaturalist]

Tired, scared, depressed people are easier to control and less likely to fight back. It is quicker to temporarily feed anxiety with trinkets than to create structures to dismantle and prevent anxiety.

It is not your fault if you are exploited in these ways. You are not weak, or bad, or "not trying hard enough" if you feel the weight of the world upon you, if it takes all you have just to survive. It's okay if you have ups and downs, if one day you're able to do many things and the next barely get out of bed. You did not create the system we are all trying to function within, one that punishes what it cannot exploit.

But your ongoing survival is a message that you are not defeated. Every single moment you are here offers the opportunity to try again, to be better, to grow and change and learn. Missed the last opportunity? That's okay, another one will come along any moment now, and the next, and the next. You just choose which one is the best for stepping aboard a new pathway, when you're ready. If it takes a while because you are, in fact, tired, scared, depressed, that's okay. There are many, many moments before you and who knows what could go right?

Self-care is rebellion. Joy is a radical act. Love--given to others, and above all to yourself--is a key part of the antidote to what ails us. Even if your embodiments of these are not big and momentous, they are no less important a part of your ongoing story, and the weaving of a better world.

[zebruh]

the post I stole this from got reblog turned off but I wanted to rb it so here

[fuzzykazeki87]

I love how some people act like wanting Elsa to have a romantic arc is "boomer family member" energy when...actually? it’s the exact opposite?

​Imagine thinking that fans wanting to see themselves represented in a global icon is the same thing as auntie rebecca asking why you’re single at Thanksgiving. ​

The "she’s too busy being a magical spirit to have a crush" argument is so tired as well.

Since when did having ice powers and a water horse mean you lose the capacity for human connection?

Jennifer Lee literally said the "door is open," but some of you act like you’re the ones holding the deadbolt shut.

Since when did "wanting a character to find love" become a regressive concept? Especially a character whose entire arc is about overcoming isolation? Elsa spent 21 years behind a closed door and another three years learning not to be afraid of her own touch.

Wanting her to experience the intimacy, partnership and happiness she was denied for most of her life isn't "pressuring" her, it’s wanting her to have a full human experience.​

Jennifer Lee herself has said they haven't ruled anything out and that the conversation is always happening.

Elsa’s story is literally not finished. If the literal creator of the franchise is leaving the door unlocked, why are some of you so obsessed with slamming it shut and bolting it?

​Let people enjoy things.

Speculating about Elsa’s heart isn't a dumb energy, it’s literally what happens when a director creates a complex, relatable character and then tells the audience "Hey, her story isn't finished yet."

In Polar Nights, Elsa literally says that a woman who is capable of taking care of herself can still be in a relationship.

She isn't "avoiding" love because she's strong, she’s acknowledging that independence and a romantic partnership aren't mutually exclusive.

And for the people who insist she has to be Aromantic to be "empowered":

​Aro people can still have relationships! Aromanticism is a spectrum, and plenty of aro-spec people have partners or QPRs.

​Independence isn't a personality trait that bars you from love.

Her story isn't finished, the directors haven't said no, so why are some of yall so bitter about us having fun with the possibilities?

[beksdec7201]

As an arospec ace who would prefer Elsa to be single, here’s my take:

TLDR: Elsa doesn’t need a romantic relationship to be human and such a relationship seems impractical and out of character for her anyway.

Yes aros can have relationships, but not every aro even wants that and we would like some sort of representation for those of us who prefer to remain single.

Treating romantic relationships as necessary for the ‘full human experience’ is incredibly insulting both to aros and aces who don’t want that and the people who are struggling to find a relationship. I frankly believe this societal expectation is the reason for hookup culture, incels, and toxic/abusive relationships. We need to stop treating singleness as a character flaw and something that should make you feel worried and miserable.

The point of Elsa’s arc is to show her slowly accepting herself. Putting her in a relationship would destroy that by basing her worth on her romantic partner’s opinion.

Romantic relationships aren’t the only way to have intimacy and connection. Her friendships and her relationship with her sister can be enough for her.

From a practical perspective, she would have a hard time finding a romantic partner due to her current station and the work she does. I believe the current theory is that Elsa and Anna are coruling as queens, meaning if she were to marry it would have to be with someone of rank (Kristoff was titled Lord in a deleted scene to get around this). Living in the forest (or potentially the glacier) around people who do not follow this class system (and would most likely refuse to) means there is nobody nearby she can realistically get with romantically. If she has truly abdicated, this causes even more issues due to the fact it puts her in a bit of a limbo state. The closest comparison I can come up with is Mary I who wasn’t able to get married until she became queen at 37 because she was too high born to marry just anybody but couldn’t marry into another royal family because she was considered a bastard. This doesn’t totally negate the possibility of choosing an illegitimate relationship, but she seems to dutiful to her country and worried about her reputation to actually go through with that.

Elsa has also shown little to no indication that she is actually interested in that type of relationship anyway. Starting in the beginning of Frozen II when Anna and Elsa are playing together, Elsa shows her disgust at Anna’s quip “Who cares about danger when there’s love?” While this could brushed aside as a child being scared of ‘cooties’ or something, the fact that her younger sister has potentially already transcended that stage could imply that Elsa just truly isn’t interested in romance, especially since this occurred before the events that triggered the isolation. Her behavior in the first movie as goes beyond just insecurity and fear of connection. While the throwaway line Hans gives of “Nobody was getting anywhere with her,” could be excused as a product of isolation, her attitude towards Anna’s relationships shows a fundamental difference of opinion on the matter of relationships. A wedding between strangers was not unheard of, and was definitely more common among royalty and nobility, but Elsa was completely opposed to the idea of Anna marrying a man she met that day. Her asking Anna what she knew about true love could even imply she doesn’t believe such a thing really exists at all. It would honestly take five more movies to change her personality enough for a romantic plug in to make any sense.

[fuzzykazeki87]

​I totally hear where you’re coming from regarding the real-world pressure to be in a relationship. Aro/ace representation is incredibly important and it’s completely valid to want to see yourself reflected in media.

But respectfully, projecting those very real frustrations onto Elsa requires ignoring her actual canon characterization and pushing a pretty reductive view of what healthy romance looks like.​

Let’s unpack a few of these points, because some of these reads on the text are a massive reach:​

1. "Putting her in a relationship would destroy her self-acceptance by basing her worth on a partner."

This is honestly a really sad view of what a relationship is. A healthy romantic partnership doesn’t mean you surrender your self-worth to someone else's opinion.

Since when is self-acceptance a barricade to falling in love? There are literally no bars to experiencing romance. Loving yourself is actually the best foundation for loving someone else, not a lifetime ban from it.

Elsa’s arc was about accepting herself, yes! which means she is now finally in a healthy enough headspace to share her life with someone without fear.

Self-Acceptance actually facilitates Love:

Authenticity and Vulnerability: when you accept yourself, you are less afraid of being seen, including your "weak side". This openness is a key driver of intimacy.

Healthier Boundaries: self-acceptance helps you know your own needs and communicate them, rather than becoming codependent.

Reduced Self-Sabotage: people who struggle to accept themselves often sabotage relationships, subconsciously believing they are not worthy of love.

The real "barricade" to love is often the fear of intimacy or fear of being fully seen. Self-acceptance is actually the tool that allows people to dismantle those barriers, enabling them to experience, rather than avoid, romance.

In short, while you do not need to be perfectly self-accepted to fall in love, high levels of self-acceptance make it easier to form secure, lasting bonds rather than insecure, turbulent ones.

For Elsa, entering a relationship isn’t about "needing someone to feel worthy", it’s the ultimate act of self-acceptance. It means she finally trusts herself enough to be physically and emotionally intimate without fearing she’ll destroy the person she loves aside from her sister.

Staying single "to be strong" is just a continuation of her isolation and falling in love is her final step into the light.

Again, the Polar Nights novel directly refutes this: Elsa explicitly states that a woman capable of taking care of herself can still be in a relationship. Being independent and being in love are not mutually exclusive.​

2. The Political "Mary I

​I have to address the "Mary I" comparison because, honestly?

Ma'am, this is the Victorian era.

​Comparing Elsa, the legitimate, first-born, beloved former Queen of Arendelle to Mary I (a 16th-century Tudor monarch whose legitimacy was a political nightmare) is historically and narratively nonsensical.​

Frozen is set in the 1840s. We are talking about the era of Romanticism, daguerreotypes and steamships. Mary I lived 300 years before that.

Applying 1550s dynastic marriage laws to a 19th-century fantasy world is a huge reach.

With peace and love, comparing the magical fantasy world of Frozen to 16th-century Tudor England is kinda wild. This is a universe where the current reigning Queen (Anna) is literally marrying an ice-harvesting orphan who was raised by rock trolls in the woods. The class system is clearly not a barrier here.

Furthermore, If she wants to date a Northuldra nomad, a magical being or a person she meets or they meet, she STILL can.

Mary I struggled to marry because her father also (Henry VIII) literally declared her a bastard, effectively "bastardizing" her in the eyes of the law. Elsa was never a bastard.

​3. "She showed disgust at Anna’s quip about love"

Yep, she was eight years old playing with snow dolls. Almost every eight-year-old on the planet says "ew" when their sibling makes their toys kiss. Using a child's reaction to "cooties" as proof of an inherent, lifelong lack of romantic interest is a massive stretch.

Almost every kid on earth thinks romance is "gross" at that age. Most kids, straight, gay, or otherwise, sometimes think romance is gross at that age.

Using that as a "gotcha" for an adult character's feelings is reaching.

Elsa’s "disgust" was a playful reaction to her sister being a sap.

​4. The First Movie & Hans

You brought up Hans saying "nobody was getting anywhere with her" and her telling Anna "you can't marry a man you just met."​

Hans wasn't describing Elsa's orientation, he was describing her defenses. To use a villain’s observation of a traumatized girl as "proof" that she doesn't want love is wild.

She wasn't rejecting suitors because she was inherently opposed to romance, she was rejecting them because she was terrified of accidentally freezing them to death or being exposed as a "monster." She was in survival mode.​

Telling your teenage sister not to marry a literal stranger she met at a party two hours ago isn't proof that you "don't believe true love exists." It's proof that you have basic common sense.

It shows Elsa values real connection over impulsive fantasy.

​5. The Canon evidence of romantic desire

Finally, we can't ignore the actual canon material that contradicts the idea that she has zero interest in romance. In the All is Found anthology, we get a direct look into Elsa's internal thoughts. She dreams of her "perfect day," and what does that fantasy include?

Dancing with a man. When Anna calls him handsome, Elsa doesn't object. Her subconscious actively created a possible silly romantic scenario.​

No one is saying being single is a character flaw.

But for a character who spent years locked in a bedroom, completely starved of physical and emotional intimacy because she thought she was a danger to society...wanting her to experience the joy of a romantic partnership ISN'T "insulting."

It’s wanting her to finally get the fairytale she was denied.​

You are completely allowed to headcanon her as aro/ace and there is a massive community of fans who share that!

But telling other fans that wanting a romance for her is "impractical," "insulting," or "out of character" just ignores the literal text we've been given. The door is always open.

When we say Elsa deserves the "full human experience," we mean she deserves the freedom to choose. She was denied the choice for so many years. Forcing her to stay single is just another way of denying her that choice.

​#frozen #frozenmeta #fandomdiscourse #elsa #elsadiscourse #frozencanon #allisfound #polarnights #fandomdiscourse #aroaceheadcanons #frozen3

[beksdec7201]

Thank you for your response!

I know my previous post was long winded and maybe not thought out to the best of my ability so I’ll clarify some things about my point of view.

I do believe that a relationship should not be based on using your partner to feel worthy. What I meant to say was that in Elsa’s arc, it is way too soon for her to take on a relationship without her risking losing all the progress she has made towards self acceptance. That’s why I believe it would take more than two sequels to evolve her character into someone healthy enough to have a good romantic partner.

Mary I was definitely a bad example for the political position she was in, and I realize that a lot of the arguments on practicality could easily be written of by the suspension of disbelief required while consuming fiction. In the real world, a marriage between a royal and a non royal/noble wasn’t really accepted until Harry and Meghan (and even that is arguable). Edward VIII had to choose between the throne and marrying Wallace Simpson, and that was almost 100 years AFTER Frozen is supposed to take place.

I also didn’t mean to imply that wanting someone to have a romantic relationship was insulting to asexuals and aromantics. What I thought was insulting was the idea that a person needs to have a romantic relationship to have the ‘full human experience’. Thank you for clearing up what you actually meant by that.

I was also unaware of whether the books you mentioned were actually part of the Disney canon. I knew Disney signed off on them, but I was unsure of how they would affect the plot of the movies (if they would at all). I had always thought of them as licensed fan fiction, but if they truly are canon, I’ll accept it. I also haven’t read those books so I’ll have to look to you to tell me the characters’ motivations, although I do remember seeing an excerpt where Elsa totally sideswiped when Anna directly asked her about whether she wanted a ‘special someone’. I could have misremembered that though.

All in all, though I would prefer Elsa to remain single as representation for all the aces and aros out there, I would accept her having a relationship as long as it was done so thoughtfully and not as a cheap add in.

[fuzzykazeki87]

I love how some people act like wanting Elsa to have a romantic arc is "boomer family member" energy when...actually? it’s the exact opposite?

​Imagine thinking that fans wanting to see themselves represented in a global icon is the same thing as auntie rebecca asking why you’re single at Thanksgiving. ​

The "she’s too busy being a magical spirit to have a crush" argument is so tired as well.

Since when did having ice powers and a water horse mean you lose the capacity for human connection?

Jennifer Lee literally said the "door is open," but some of you act like you’re the ones holding the deadbolt shut.

Since when did "wanting a character to find love" become a regressive concept? Especially a character whose entire arc is about overcoming isolation? Elsa spent 21 years behind a closed door and another three years learning not to be afraid of her own touch.

Wanting her to experience the intimacy, partnership and happiness she was denied for most of her life isn't "pressuring" her, it’s wanting her to have a full human experience.​

Jennifer Lee herself has said they haven't ruled anything out and that the conversation is always happening.

Elsa’s story is literally not finished. If the literal creator of the franchise is leaving the door unlocked, why are some of you so obsessed with slamming it shut and bolting it?

​Let people enjoy things.

Speculating about Elsa’s heart isn't a dumb energy, it’s literally what happens when a director creates a complex, relatable character and then tells the audience "Hey, her story isn't finished yet."

In Polar Nights, Elsa literally says that a woman who is capable of taking care of herself can still be in a relationship.

She isn't "avoiding" love because she's strong, she’s acknowledging that independence and a romantic partnership aren't mutually exclusive.

And for the people who insist she has to be Aromantic to be "empowered":

​Aro people can still have relationships! Aromanticism is a spectrum, and plenty of aro-spec people have partners or QPRs.

​Independence isn't a personality trait that bars you from love.

Her story isn't finished, the directors haven't said no, so why are some of yall so bitter about us having fun with the possibilities?

[beksdec7201]

As an arospec ace who would prefer Elsa to be single, here’s my take:

TLDR: Elsa doesn’t need a romantic relationship to be human and such a relationship seems impractical and out of character for her anyway.

Yes aros can have relationships, but not every aro even wants that and we would like some sort of representation for those of us who prefer to remain single.

Treating romantic relationships as necessary for the ‘full human experience’ is incredibly insulting both to aros and aces who don’t want that and the people who are struggling to find a relationship. I frankly believe this societal expectation is the reason for hookup culture, incels, and toxic/abusive relationships. We need to stop treating singleness as a character flaw and something that should make you feel worried and miserable.

The point of Elsa’s arc is to show her slowly accepting herself. Putting her in a relationship would destroy that by basing her worth on her romantic partner’s opinion.

Romantic relationships aren’t the only way to have intimacy and connection. Her friendships and her relationship with her sister can be enough for her.

From a practical perspective, she would have a hard time finding a romantic partner due to her current station and the work she does. I believe the current theory is that Elsa and Anna are coruling as queens, meaning if she were to marry it would have to be with someone of rank (Kristoff was titled Lord in a deleted scene to get around this). Living in the forest (or potentially the glacier) around people who do not follow this class system (and would most likely refuse to) means there is nobody nearby she can realistically get with romantically. If she has truly abdicated, this causes even more issues due to the fact it puts her in a bit of a limbo state. The closest comparison I can come up with is Mary I who wasn’t able to get married until she became queen at 37 because she was too high born to marry just anybody but couldn’t marry into another royal family because she was considered a bastard. This doesn’t totally negate the possibility of choosing an illegitimate relationship, but she seems to dutiful to her country and worried about her reputation to actually go through with that.

Elsa has also shown little to no indication that she is actually interested in that type of relationship anyway. Starting in the beginning of Frozen II when Anna and Elsa are playing together, Elsa shows her disgust at Anna’s quip “Who cares about danger when there’s love?” While this could brushed aside as a child being scared of ‘cooties’ or something, the fact that her younger sister has potentially already transcended that stage could imply that Elsa just truly isn’t interested in romance, especially since this occurred before the events that triggered the isolation. Her behavior in the first movie as goes beyond just insecurity and fear of connection. While the throwaway line Hans gives of “Nobody was getting anywhere with her,” could be excused as a product of isolation, her attitude towards Anna’s relationships shows a fundamental difference of opinion on the matter of relationships. A wedding between strangers was not unheard of, and was definitely more common among royalty and nobility, but Elsa was completely opposed to the idea of Anna marrying a man she met that day. Her asking Anna what she knew about true love could even imply she doesn’t believe such a thing really exists at all. It would honestly take five more movies to change her personality enough for a romantic plug in to make any sense.

[spicycheeser]

"A marriage ending isn't a failure at all. I spent eleven years with her. We were so in love that we couldn't image life apart from each other. We got our own place, adopted a dog, and supported each other through school. I thought if tow people loved each other enough the rest would fall into place, except... love isn't everything.

And I didn't want to believe that, but we were sitting in counseling one day, talking about our future and I realized we were describing two completely different lives. Where we'd live, what kind of life we wanted, what made us happy. And it hit me that- I love this woman and this woman loved me. And after eleven years of loss, grief, career changes, we were so deeply in love... but we weren't aligned. And I kept thinking 'We just need to try harder. We can find some compromise to make this work,' because that's what you're supposed to do when you love someone, right?

But the reality was, we had just become different people. Her trade school took her in one direction, my graduate degree in another and trying to force us back into who we were five years ago wasn't coming from a place of love. It was coming from a place of fear. Fear that, if this ended, it meant we wasted eleven years. But sitting there across from her, I realized: That's not how love works.

Those eleven years happened. They were real. The dog, our home, showing up for each other through grad school and trade school. I wouldn't change a single thing because loving someone doesn't mean you're meant to stay with them forever. And letting go doesn't erase what you had. We measure marriage by whether it lasts forever or not, but what if we measured it by whether it mattered?

What if we measured it by the love we gave, the life we built, and the people we became? Because love's job isn't to last forever, it's to help you become fully completely yourself, and sometimes the most loving thing you can do is give each other permission to be yourselves, separately. But the dog doesn't know were' divorced. He just gets two Christmases now."

Pulled this from this guy Preston Rakovsky's Instagram (@prestonrack) because it is a beautiful perspective on love, marriage, and relationships in general.

[belbar74]

[thehighpriestofreverseracism]

Friendly reminder that the intro to Lion King….the non english bits leading up to the “circle of life” is not random yelling in *Africa voice* it is an actual language, Zulu, spoken by 10 million people, it is the most widely spoken language (out of 11) in the country of South Africa (1 out of the 54 countries in the continent of Africa, the continent home  to somewhere between 1500-2000 languages and around 3000 distinct ethnic groups)

this isn’t to say that you have to friggin learn the language to sing along with a disney film, it just means that you should be mindful, respectful, appreciative and respectful. don’t be yelling out whatever noise comes in to your head when you hear it

[melancholic-pie]

Ok but someone knows what does this say?

[thehighpriestofreverseracism]

The lyrics before the english comes in…in “circle of life”

Nants ingonyama bagithi baba [Here comes a lion, Father] Sithi uhm ingonyama [Oh yes, it’s a lion] Nants ingonyama bagithi baba [Here comes a lion, Father] Sithi uhm ingonyama [Oh yes, it’s a lion] Ingonyama [It’s a lion] Siyo Nqoba [We’re going to conquer] Ingonyama Ingonyama nengw’ enamabala [A lion and a leopard come to this open place] (repeats) [queue English lyrics]

I would like to further add that language has there own cultural nuances so something that can sound extremely meaningful in one languages may not sound as majestic when translated to another (I know this as someone who has an understanding of 5 languages and speaks 3 of them fluently) so if you are thinking “oh it ain’t that deep they are just yelling: the lion is coming!” dial it back

[haileyastraea]

Worth noting that “lion” and especially the word Ingonyama is a very respectful word to talk about a Zulu king, especially in praise. It’s so heavily associated with royalty in isiZulu that a different word is used for an animal lion - Ibhubesi. This isn’t just announcing the arrival of an animal, it’s celebrating the arrival (or coronation?) of the king

[thehighpriestofreverseracism]

/\ Whoop, I didn’t know this

[toastbutteregg]

This is so informative thank you so much

[krakenartificer]

Lemme tell you, I was not dividing those syllables into words in the right places AT ALL

[the-loquacious-lark]

I would also like to state that the song “The Lion Sleeps Tonight” is an extremely washed out version of the original song “Mbube” by Solomon Linda, a South African musician. It was appropriated by the west and he never received credit or money for what became an extremely famous song. His family eventually received a small sum from Disney for the song but again, not much considering the history of the song. There is a documentary about it right now on netflix. 

[thehighpriestofreverseracism]

full article here

[thehighpriestofreverseracism]

This is one of my most favourite posts I’ve made but I hate all of the typos on my part….but I’m grateful it landed with people

[cricketcat9]

Learned something new 👍👍👍 today

[usaghinanami99]

And The Lion King is the only Disney film officially dubbed in Zulu! https://disneyinternationaldubbings.weebly.com/the-lion-king–zulu-cast.html

[gryficowa]

Yes, I'm referring to Elsa from Frozen

Acephobia and arophobia are serious in fandoms…

Welcome to queer fandom where aroaces are ignored but stupid dramas like this happen

And they will justify it with their stupid excuses…

Here's what it looks like from a creator's perspective…

Fandom...

Cool...

Because we can't have nice things

We need to speak out about this problem

Give me more gore, damn it

Yes, meme rant on fandom

[stevienick]

CATHERINE O'HARA 80s polaroids

[natz72038]

RIP gone too soon