#(that's sarcasm)

[selanpike]

wow isn't it crazy how devsis took my headcanons, specifically, into account with this design? bonkers really

[dr3amwalker]

Parasaurolophus!

.

.

A "warmup sketch". Took just under 2 hrs.

[and-her-saints]

yesterday i published the february patreon newsletter titled "birthdays, migraines and talking to God through the MRI machine" (photo by me)

[maxleggy]

hey at least the porn ads are still there, shows you that @staff really does care about the site's users

[ted-spankoffski69]

Dear CCRP Employee,

It is with great pleasure that we announce that the offices are back in operation! We hope you enjoyed you abrupt paid vacation, and we look forward to see you in the office tomorrow.

@penny-at-law

ugh. yes, I've missed work sooo much.

[thistuesdaynight]

I've been having some discourse about Regulus Black as of late, and wanted to share.

Some people in fandom say that Regulus Black couldn’t have been a martyr. Or that his portrayal as someone who didn't believe in blood purity is inaccurate. Or that it makes more sense that he'd be a bigot.

Here's my thoughts:

It makes more sense only in the fact it's easier to read Regulus as a hardcore blood purist who never had doubts rather than to imagine other motivations, deeper feelings, diverging beliefs.

But any assumption we make of Regulus is still just an assumption based on hearsay.

Truly, you can CHOOSE to read Regulus as a martyr who didn't really believe any blood purity stuff.

It is a choice to imagine things that COULD have happened. He could have been pretending to believe blood purity, could have been the opposite of Sirius to protect himself from the ridicule of his parents, could have been afraid to speak up because he'd seen his cousin, his uncle, and his brother all disowned. (I like to imagine that Sirius was the one to "challenge his beliefs," or that Regulus was so observant and precocious that he reconsidered blood purity on his own)

But all of these things could have happened in the realm of canon. We don’t technically know hos true motives.

Its clear that Sirius didn't believe his brother was evil from the way he talked about him. Regulus could have hidden his true beliefs all along, even from Sirius. In a house like Grimmauld Place, it makes sense that he might do that.

I don't think it's a far leap to then assume that his parent's approval was the only reason he did any of it (becoming a death eater, voldemort propaganda on his wall). We have so few facts about Regulus from canon we can imagine a lot about his backstory. (In fact, I'm going to make a comparison to Snape here. The whole series we think Snape is a terrible person loyal to voldemort and trying to kill Harry. And we had A LOT more facts about Snape compared to Regulus. But it isn't until book 7 that we get the full, convoluted picture.)

It's easier to assume that Reg didn’t change his mind until the last minute, but we truly don't know when. Just that he did. We don't know how he truly felt about Sirius, but it isn't going against canon to imagine that Regulus was being a martyr to save his brother. Esp when he was canonically a martyr for Kreacher.

It's just fun to imagine a deeper, more convoluted storyline for Regulus. I think fandom would be incredibly boring to have only one interpretation of Regulus when we don't know enough to say that he DEFINITELY was a hard core blood purist.

[tbh-entp]

tfw even your most sincere statements are assumed to be sarcasm