#this is probably controversial

[bullet-xo]

When you see people like james and sherlock loving each other you can view it as NORMAL. Its okay.

Its not an anomaly. OF COURSE they love each other. Look at the circumstances. What else are they supposed to do?

You can see two people love each other and not call it homoeroticism. Its not queer ,its not STRANGE. It's not something to be fetishized. Its normal.

"oh my god are they gay lovers" THEY ARE FRIENDS!!!! HAVE U NEVER EXPERIENCED FRIENDSHIP BEFORE!!!! COMPANIONSHIP RUNS DEEPER THAN LUST AND EROTICISM!!!!! BOTH CAN EXIST WITHOUT NEGATING THE OTHER. stop viewing their very clear friendship as your fetish. The story is about complex moral battles and situations of fate which cause their demise!!!! No one is kissing AND THAT IS OKAY because their love runs deeper than surface level tension.

WHY DO YOU THINK MORIARTY IS HOLMES' SWORN WORST ENEMY.

Think about it!!!

[bluephoenixgirl]

Um not going to lie 👉🏼👈🏼 I kinda miss this hairstyle…..

[msshadowqueen]

This could be controversial...maybe. This has probably already been covered but Feyre was depressed and reckless in book 2 of ACOMAF. Why would it make sense for Tamlin to take Feyre with him to the border when he's sorting out trouble? In her depressed and reckless state she was far more likely to get herself hurt than anything else. Tamlin would've been distracted trying to protect her rather than sorting out the trouble. Was it probably triggering for Feyre to be locked up in a house briefly, even if it is a very large house? Yes. But what other choice did he have? Putting her in harm's way? Yeah, he could've probably trained her to fight but even then...you can't master fighting in a few months especially when you're depressed. But the thing with Nesta is that she was safely cooped up in Velaris. Yeah she was drinking and spending money or whatever, but she wasn't putting herself in harm's way by trying to rush into danger. She was legit just drinking, spending money, and fucking. Yeah, it's a bad life and they were right to want her to stop doing it, but locking her up in a house and forcing her to train was completely unnecessary. Why did immortal beings expect her to recover from her trauma so fast when they literally live for hundreds of years??? Why were they so desperate to have her recover so fast when she wasn't throwing herself into danger? Because they wanted to use her, that's all. Also...Feyre being locked up in a house is triggering, but her playing the High Lord's whore is not triggering when she was sexually assaulted by the exact same man in a very similar environment while also wearing scraps for clothing??? OK SJM. Got it.

[annoying-vegan]

I feel like something nobody acknowledges about Mrs Everdeen is that even when she was well enough to take care of herself and her children, she allowed her eleven year old daughter to hunt illegally, risking her life, and didn’t even try to help with any aspect of it. Not even the trades. She didn’t ask Katniss to show her how she hunts, so she could do it instead of allowing her CHILD to continue to put her life on the line for their family. And she didn’t even try to emotionally connect with Katniss, to talk about everything they’d been through as a family at any point in the years after Mr. Everdeen’s death. To ease some of the burden off her shoulders instead of letting her take it all in stride. And yes, she would’ve fought back against that, but when you’re a parent, you don’t just let your child continue act as the adult of the family. You treat them like a child, care for them as a child because they ARE one.

People act like the only problem was her catatonic depression. It wasn’t. It was also her willing inaction.

[morphean42]

Okay this may be my hottest take ever but I… bear with me… dislike how popular Ineffable Husbands is. Let me explain. Good Omens has been an incredibly important book for me since the first time I opened it at 11 years old. It’s shaped everything from my writing style to my views on society and the world. It’s safe to say I’ve read this book 8 times at least.

Season 1, also very dear to me. I loved seeing these characters on screen and although some parts were different or cut, everyone worked so hard in their roles that it brought the book to life.

Now, here’s where I get lost. Good Omens is a story about the end of the world, and while yes its “main” characters are an angel and a demon who are very fond of the world and each other, the simple fact is that they aren’t what’s important about the story. They are fun and deep and amazing characters, but so are The Them, and Anathema and Newt, and Agnes Nutter, and Shadwell and Madam Tracy, and Warlock, and the four horsemen (and other four horsemen)/ bikers of the apocalypse, and that one televangelist that lives rent free in my head, and that guy who sees the trees take over the city and R. P. Tyler and everyone else.

They make the story. They are the humans— sans the four bikers—, and this gets lost in the fandom and, dare I say it, season two. I will say right now that I adore season 2, it’s what I’ve waited 4 years for and I would never ever criticize Neil Gaiman as I am definitely not qualified enough for that.

But.

Season 2 makes it all about Aziraphale and Crowley. It loses the message of the book and becomes almost a sort of rom com (for all our yelling and heartbreak and accusations of liar, Neil was right. It is quiet, gentle, and romantic). This is not inherently bad at all, but to me, it’s not Good Omens. It’s not the same. Crowley and Aziraphale were never my favorites, they were never where the meat of the story is at, so that’s where my point comes from I guess.

I am so glad we have representation like them. Middle aged queer people who have god knows what gender fuckery going on. But, sometimes I wish we talked about anything other than them. I wish I could find thoughtful analysis and writing and art just about the book (and even the show) that wasn’t simply “Crowley and Azirapahle aren’t together and they’re sad but then they are and now they’re happy.”

I don’t want anyone to read this and think I don’t like the ship, I love it, it was my first ship. But, sometimes, I just wish Good Omens hadn’t turned into a romance. I wish it was still the delightfully funny and childishly dark story that made me think, for the first time, writing was something I wanted to do. Because it was more than just a story, it was an idea.

TLDR: I love Ineffable Husbands, but I wish the fandom could talk about literally anything else for a change

[strangertheories]

I love Byler as much as the next girl but saying everyone is stupid and has no media literacy and isn't watching the show correctly if they don't see Byler as an inevitability or thought Mlvn might have liked each other at some point is a weird take. Maybe they watched it, understood the plot and disagreed with you? For the people who talk a lot about media analysis, you guys sure seem to hate analysis if it doesn't fit into your very specific set of opinions.

Just because someone ships Mileven or thinks Mike is bi doesn't mean they understand the show less than you or don't get the plot. In fact, I disagree with a lot of takes about the show I see on here but wouldn't publicly call them dumb (unless it's blatant homophobia, making the fandom unsafe or in an ask to me). This weird superiority from Bylers can make people in the fandom scared to voice their actual opinions on stuff. When I post defending this sort of thing, I actually get a lot of asks from people saying they are too scared to agree with me on their mains or off anon which is really sad. By calling other fans stupid, it hinders discussion of media and makes it really unpleasant for a lot of people.

I have watched ST countless times, sometimes with Byler endgame in mind and sometimes without; the way I view it is always impacted by that conclusion. Just because someone is watching with a different conclusion to you doesn't mean they are watching the show wrong. I'm sure many fans on other social media platforms would say the same thing to you about Byler because if you watch the show with the predetermined notion that Byler won't be endgame, your viewing experience is different! Neither interpretation has been confirmed or denied so maybe saying people just don't understand the show if they don't agree with every take you make is a bit...wrong?

I don't know. I'm not trying to be controversial or say Byler isn't endgame, just let's avoid calling people stupid or acting like we're better than other fans because they think Mike Stranger Things and Will Stranger Things aren't in love. And if someone comes into my askbox to tell me why Byler will or won't be endgame, you missed the point! I'm not saying either take is bad, I'm just saying you can support one take and not say other people are watching the show "wrong". We'll just have to see in S5.

[brjeauregard]

You know for all her talk about loving Laudna, Imogen seems to have forgotten that Otohan killed her (and Orym and Fearne) when she keeps trying to justify the Ruby Vanguard’s actions and freeing the god killer

[grigsby]

To everyone who has ever told someone that they’re too young to know their gender/sexuality:

Yeah, but cis people know they’re cis from the start. Heterosexual people know thy’re hetero from the start. 

You never thought, “I just haven’t met the right person. I could still be gay/bi/whatever.”

No one ever told you that you’re too young to be SURE that you’re a boy/girl.

To everyone who has been told that they’re too young to know:

Yeah, you could change your mind. But more likely your right. And no matter when you figure it out, you matter and your gender/sexuality is legitimate.