NO the show didn't ruin faith and make her a "silly little girl following a felon around" the whole point was to depict a whirlwind relationship with a man literally sweeping faith off her feet and treating her like she's never been treated before. she tells amanda it's the first time anything like this (love/romance) has ever felt this real for her. this is possibly the FIRST TIME she's ever genuinely been in love with someone! and it never had legs to stand on because he is a bank robber! and she knows it! she knew the moment will shattered the fairytale and told her the truth about malcolm that it wasn't going to last. yet it's still the realest that love has ever been for her. how heartbreaking is that! cut her some fucking slack jfc she's not silly, weak, or stupid, they didn't ruin her character. in fact they actually reinforced one of the foundational strengths of her character which is her dedication to her oath and her job- she literally helps bring malcolm in even though she genuinely loves him and is heartbroken that they don't have a future together!!! SHUT UP LEAVE FAITH ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
that game fucking sucked and further points big flashing neon arrows at a suspect bullpen the tigers did very little at the deadline to actually improve in any substantial way (and the one legit arm they DID trade for didn't even get into the game for some reason)
the "character assassination" of gina wasn’t in s3 but in s2 when she was miserable and sad over her seemingly one-sided feelings for ricky (and there really was no character assassination at all because it was all part of the larger story/a stepping stone in the rina plot, which we saw unfold and come to fruition in s3) where did the media literacy go, my god.
sorry that ej got broken up with again but maybe there are things that the character needs to work on in s4 to actually become that good bf all the ej-stans seem to think he already is... (also the plot with his dad/living his life for himself/shaking off his parents’ expectations is a thousand times more compelling on who ej is going to date and i want to see more of that, not “who will ej date next: electric boogaloo”)
Okaaaaaaaay, having spent way too long downloading medieval crap for a TS3 medieval game, I have some ranting to do.
1. Actually, this is a rant about TS3 CC creators in general: Why do so many of them run off and take their stuff and their entire website (on a free server, mind you) with them? It's so frustrating. I find something I want, screw around a lot to find a page for it, screw around even further to find a link to the particular item I want, only to find... Oh so sorry! That link is invalid! GRAAAAAARRRGH! Why is it that links to TS2 stuff that are, like, almost 15 years old work A-OK, but a 5-year-old link to something TS3? Seven times out of ten, nope nope nope. It's really irritating. Crybaby creators (if that's what this is) annoy the ever-loving piss out of me.
2. “Finds” blogs that use an infinite scroll theme. UGH! I find something I want to download. I click the link (hoping to Baphomet that it works; see above), but I forget to open it in a new tab. I download the thing (or not, more likely; see above), click back to the finds blog...and I'm back at the very top of the infinite scroll that I've been scrolling through for half an hour or more. So. Not. Cool. Yes, I know it's my fault for forgetting to open the link in a new tab, but if the theme was paged, that wouldn't be something that anyone would have to worry about in the first place. Paged themes! Paged themes are infinitely better than infinite scroll, at least for "finds" blogs. I'm just sayin'.
3. What's the point of making people register on forums to download stuff? Really, I don't get it. Doesn't that just create a mass of people who come in, download one or two things, and then never return? They just clog up your forum registrations for eternity. Is it just an ego thing? Like, "Look how many registered users MY forum has!"? That seems pointless. I get having people register in order to comment and such on forums because then there's some accountability when someone decides to be an asshole, as people generally will when they think they're anonymous, but just to download stuff and run? I don't get it. And I'm not bothering. Even if I really want the stuff.
4. Adfly and the like. People who use that suck. Even though I have a bypasser thingy, it still sucks. Even if you're a good person who makes amazing shit, if you put it behind a link shortener -- or, worse, frickin' LAYERS of link shorteners -- you suck and you're going to the special hell and I'm not downloading your stuff.
5. T$R still sucks huge monkey balls. At least the links all work there, but...Man, do I despise them and their whole entire money-grubbing site. Were it not for Freemium, I wouldn't go there at all. Ever. Even if I really, REALLY want the thing, whatever the thing is. Oh, and those "helpful" titles on the downloads! Really lets me know what I downloaded when I look at the files I downloaded hours after I downloaded them. :p
POPSUGAR: I was actually just talking to Sophie Turner earlier this month, and we were talking about how Sansa seems to have slowly transformed a bit into Catelyn Stark over the course of the series. Was that intentional on the costume side of things?
Michele Clapton: It's funny, because I don't actually agree. To me, Sansa's journey is one of the most interesting, and until this season — though she's been something of a giddy girl who wants to be queen or whatever — to me, her journey has been one of the most difficult and tragic. And I think by this season, she's finally found herself. Now that she's come back to Winterfell, there are slight elements of Catelyn, but I think it's more, maybe, what Catelyn would've wanted to be.
I think there's a real strength in Sansa this year and I tried to, in her costume, evoke all the different things that have happened to her along her journey. And I'm trying to show elements of strength, while also at the same time trying to show her vulnerability. You see the circle [necklace], which is her strength from when she left the Eyrie; you see the big fur cape, which is very much her father's side; you see the sort of wraparound belt which is something that was incredibly key in her costume this year, and it was the idea that she'd been so abused in her relationship — well, relationships — so I wanted this idea that she was so belted and strapped that no one would ever get to her again. And within this, I wanted to give her strength.
So, what ... Catelyn was not strong? Catelyn’s journey was not difficult and tragic? I don’t understand what she’s trying to say, other than that Catelyn aspired to be but never became what Sansa now is.
Which is a sentiment I’m so damn sick of. I don’t get how Catelyn is just so lacking when her specific experiences and Sansa’s are like apples and oranges.
So thanks for that AND the fuggo wardrobe you gave Catelyn, Michelle Clapton.
Random thought of the day:
I think the main reason I continue to dislike Thor: Ragnarok (despite the entirety of the internet falling in love with it), was the way they bounced Jane in favor of Valkyrie. I don’t care what anyone says, Jane was fucking awesome in the two previous movies, and even if Portman didn’t want to come back, they could have gotten someone else to play her. (Exhibit A: Rhodey) And I hate even more the stupid unwritten rule of Hollywood that says you can’t have two awesome female leads, because c’mon, Jane and Valkyrie kicking ass together with science and magic in Ragnarok? Would have been AWESOME.
(The other reason I dislike Ragnarok is the way the movie prioritized laughs over almost everything else, including the SUBJUGATION AND MASS MURDER of most of the Asgardians, and the eventual destruction of their homeworld, but that is a rant for another day ....)
I’ve had the itch to do a little historical rant about how Anglo-Saxon Christians are portrayed in The Vikings and fics based off of it. As always, I’m not a professional, and if I’m completely wrong on something please let me know. I’m not saying everything people write needs to be perfectly historically accurate. And if you’re writing from a Viking’s perspective it actually makes sense that they would have some pretty bigoted attitudes towards other cultures. I just feel the need to... well... rant.
I think my biggest issue is the general attitude that Vikings = So enlightened and awesome, and therefore Christians = Baaaaad. Christianity in Anglo-Saxon England was far different from what it was even a couple hundred years later. There were still very few people who had anything resembling comfort, and thus very few people with the shits to give about what other people were doing. The Catholic Church were still a good 200 years away from achieving their Ultimate Assholery Form with the crusades, and most people were just trying to... y’know... not die.
For one thing, the Anglo-Saxon period was something of a golden age for women’s rights in England. In many ways, they were very similar to how women were treated by the Norse pagans. In other ways, they actually had more rights than Viking women.
For example, while a Christian women was allowed to speak for herself during legal proceedings that affected her, Norse women were not allowed to speak during the Thing. Alfred’s law also stated that a maiden couldn’t be forced to marry against her will; while Norse law didn’t require a girl’s consent to be married. Christian women owned their own property separately from their husbands. They could, and would, get a divorce fairly easily if they wanted one, and would retain custody of their children.
It wasn’t until the Norman Conquest that the idea that women were objects to be owned by their father or husband came into English law. Yeah, it’s all the French’s fault.
Also on the subject of the Christian vs. the Norse views on sexual behavior during the time. One of the important things to remember is that there’s a big difference between what the Pope in Rome said Christians should do, and what they actually did on a little foggy island thousands of miles away. It took a long before celibacy among the clergy became the norm, simply because arguments going on in fancy-shmance cathedrals didn’t really matter that much to the average priest living his life in England.
So, I know The Vikings has this image going of the Norse being all “Free love!” and all, but they were as serious about premarital sex as the Christians. Just for women, of course, men could do pretty much whatever. But because of the lack of reliable birth control, restricting sexual behavior was as much about making sure that any offspring had a reliable means of support as anything else. This was true for both Christians and pagans. An illegitimate child would have to be supported by the mother’s family, so it was put on her to make sure she didn’t have a child out of wedlock.
Actually, the Norse were almost more controlling, because while they had a number of requirements before a marriage would be considered legally binding; at the time, all that was required for a Christian marriage was mutual consent. A couple might have some kind of public ceremony in which they would “plight their troth”, but generally all that was needed was some kind of verbal agreement between the couple before witnesses.
It wasn’t until around the 1500s that it became common for people to be married in a church before a priest, and this was mostly because there were issues where men would seduce young women and then try to weasel their way out of caring for her and often their children. If there was only a verbal contract, it was easy to dispute, and the young woman would end up left abandoned. If the couple had to have their marriage performed in public and registered in the parish before it was legal, then it made it a lot harder for assholes to take advantage of people.
But, generally speaking, the average Christian’s views on sex would have been pretty relaxed. Again an illiterate peasant probably wouldn’t have had too many shits to give about what some man in a fancy hat had to say. And even the church of the time generally believed that sex between husband and wife was a good thing.
It’s also important to mention that this was also the period where Christians believed that both the man and the woman had to orgasm in order for a baby to be conceived, but that’s a whole other can of worms.
