Popular perception of Rowena Ravenclaw seems to be that she was very erudite and serious and like. Iâm not saying thatâs wrong. And she was def a smart and wise lady. However,
She chose the location and name of Hogwarts because she âhad a dream that a warty hogâ led her there
So like
Have we considered the posibility that Rowena Ravenclaw might have been weird af
Iâm bringing this back because none of you cowards will consider it. Individualism and creativity are core tenants of the Ravenclaw house. That breeds weirdness. Look at Luna. Rowena Ravenclaw would get her.
Yea. Ravenclaw isnât just studious nerds. Itâs also weirdly specific obsessions, and bookworms who donât care about their actual studies. Like, what do you mean thereâs a charms essay? Iâm growing mandrakes in the forest I donât have time to do that and figure out how to sneak out and back into the castle!
I feel like Ravenclaw used to be better understood before than it is now. Or maybe thatâs just old!tumblr, idk.
Anyway, your irregular reminder that Ravenclaws are only very, very rarely teacherâs pets. Ravenclaws in actuality are the weirdos in the corner ranting about the intricacies of mold growth. Ravenclaws donât give a fuck about exams, there are books to read on 14th century horse raising methods.
Poor Ravenclaw got done a dirty when the only examples given are generic quidditch girl Cho and then Luna. And for some reason Luna is always dismissed despite being a prime example of what Ravenclaws are actually like.
"bottom" please consider đ«” whether the word you are looking for is in fact "submissive" ! because if we decide that taking dick means your personality & character r inherently subservient đ we might as well just throw in the towel on the most basic premise of feminism & đ« kill ourselves đ
Someone should make a disco elysium spiritual successor that takes place in a maze and follows a protagonist who has to eat all the dots in the maze whilst avoiding several ghosts
some of you are saying enemies to lovers when you mean rivals to lovers and some of you are saying enemies to lovers when you mean enemies with benefits. but these are all distinct categories
I see "you" as same as "he" or "she". I read "you" as "you" not as "I" so there is some dissociation between me and the character. "I" though, is just ugh. It's interesting if the character is SUPER interesting but when it's your regular cringy character, it just sucks that I have to be in their head. Add on it if the character is sexist/racist too. at least with he and you, I can put distamce between us mentally.
tiktok: aah grape đđđ„đ„đ„đâïž"unpopular opinion but we should stop gender wars" đđđ„đ„đ„đâïž"cold take: we should normalize not shipping dhips that are not canon"đđđ„đ„đ„đâïž "hot take: [insert the most braindead empty head grown under a rock baby's first thought ever] đđđ„đ„đ„đâïž
honestly I wouldnât mind the âlikes and replies do nothing!â posts so much if every person writing them didnât sound like a cartoon supervillain berating an underling
you fool. you imbecile. likes and replies do NOTHING. you think anyone cares what you have to say? youâre dirt. youâre nobody. I didnât create you to have âopinionsâ or âcommentaryâ. I created you to REBLOG and extend my reach across the empire, like a virusâand I can unmake you just as easily. I donât care what you like. itâs not your job to like or to think. do you understand me? good. do not disappoint me again.
âi think draco would be in a (insert traditionally/generally-viewed-as feminine sport), and harry would be in a (insert traditionally masculine sport)â
i think a lot of people internalized the misogynistic idea that âmen are rational and women are emotionalâ and just went âthatâs true⊠but itâs a good thing!â instead of saying âthatâs obviously bullshit and we shouldnât perpetuate this belief in any formâ
Seen a weird flipside in supposedly progressive spaces, where it's "men are emotional and form deep meaningful bonds with each other, and are curious and silly and like to explore the world around them in adventurous ways, but women are cold and rational and uptight and never take risks or break the rules."
This is often phrased in ways like "here's a video of men doing something silly but interesting â this is what boys will be boys should mean!" Or even simply tagging those videos "boys will be boys" as if the act of... I don't know, jumping on a trampoline covered in ice to see what happens, or whatever, is specifically gendered somehow just because the video happens to depict men
It's insidious, because it's framed as a positive thing â women are too ~intelligent and responsible~ to goof off with their friends; don't be offended!! But under the surface, it's still the idea that the thing men are doing is good and the thing women are doing is bad in this scenario ïżŒ
i think theres this idea in the general public that the "best" fanfic gets turned into real books like 50 shades of grey. but the truth is that the best fanfic can never be published as an actual book because its intricately woven into the canon material so its inseparable even if you change the names
wearing a shirt that says âeven in an au fanfiction, the characters, relationships, or even the scenarios are recognizable in the best fanfic, and an au without ties to the source material may be a fine story but itâs not a good fanfictionâ and booty shorts that say âI HATE FUNâ
> I ask whether itâs actually feminist, or whether itâs a story about how patriarchy is good as long as the patriarch is benevolent
> they donât understand
> I describe the common trope in faux-feminist historical romance where the female lead is able to âescapeâ the sexism of her time simply by marrying the rare good man who respects womenâ as if patriarchy is a problem of abusive individuals, rather than an inherently abusive system. As if all the issues in patriarchy go away if the man you marry is Nice. As if âpatriarchal systems can actually work well when the patriarch is kind and loves you uwuâ is a bold feminist statement, instead of the cornerstone of inherently reactionary tradwife beliefs about gender roles.
> they laugh
> âitâs a feminist historical romanceâ
> look inside
> itâs a story about how patriarchy is good as long as the patriarch is benevolent
the thing about media literacy is that understanding why the author chose to specify that the curtains are blue is the same skill set as understanding that the way the author characterizes all black characters as angry or all chinese characters as meek and silent is racist. it is the same skill set as being able to identify when a news source is biased or when someone is feeding you propaganda. the ability to ask "why did this person choose to present this premise in this specific way?" is a critical skill in a world full of misinformation. why are the curtains blue? maybe it's a characterization detail. maybe it's extraneous worldbuilding. why is this character written as being right all the time? maybe you're intended to disagree with them. maybe it doesn't matter. maybe you should still ask why.
(some guy on the internet voice) it's so unrealistic and forced when women win fights against men in stories. of course, when a young boy defeats a huge man I'm cheering and screaming because it is so badass, and when a frail old man defeats a cocky young warrior I feel nothing but satisfaction. I love these power fantasies about easily dispatching people who underestimate you, a thing I desire despite the fact that I will likely never have the skill to achieve it in real life, but I'm pretty sure women don't have that same desire, and even if they do, they shouldn't get to see it in media. because it's so unrealistic, you see. I mean I'm smart enough to know I can't take down a big man in a fight but the women, you know, they'll get ideas. I could probably do it if I trained hard enough, but the women??? for some reason I can't see it happening, and who can say why that is.
cosmic horror is when the Thing is Not Familiar, the Location Makes No Fucking Sense, and the Outside is BIG.
gothic horror is when The Thing is Of Your Own Making, the Location has a Deeply Bloody History, and the Outside is Wet and Cold and Is Caging You In.
folk horror is when the Thing Should Be Familiar, But Is Not, the Location Should Be Pleasing, But Is Not, and the Outside is Trying Very Hard To Kill You
I have some thoughts once again about the Drarry Fandom and their relationship to Lucius Malfoy.
There's this prevalent archetype in the portrayal of the Malfoys, specifically Lucius, that they would oppose Draco being in a relationship with another wizard on the basis that it's same-sex. Reasons range from same-sex relationships are not tolerated in the wizarding community, same-sex couples can't have biological children (The Malfoy's must have an heir!), to pure-blood families are just homophobic.
Is there any truth to this in canon? Because I see it a lot in fanon, so much it has me questioning if canon would support a homophobic Lucissa.
Let's start with what we know.
During his POV in the series, Harry never observes a same-sex couple at Hogwarts, or out there in the world, Muggle or Wizard. He doesn't comment on same-sex relationships or give any indication if he even has an opinion on same-sex couples. That's not to argue that he's oblivious or it doesn't exist. There are three instances in the books where Harry's POV addresses it.
The first is during Order of the Phoenix when Dudley taunts Harry about calling out Cedric's name in his sleep.
âWhat dâyou mean?â Harry said again, but there was a cold, plunging sensation in his stomach. He had revisited the graveyard last night in his dreams.
Dudley gave a harsh bark of laughter then adopted a high-pitched, whimpering voice. â âDonât kill Cedric! Donât kill Cedric!â Whoâs Cedric â your boyfriend?â
âI â youâre lying â â said Harry automatically. But his mouth had gone dry. He knew Dudley wasnât lying â how else would he know about Cedric? â Dad! Help me, Dad! Heâs going to kill me, Dad! Boo- hoo!ââ âShut up,â said Harry quietly. âShut up, Dudley, Iâm warning you!â
-OotP, Chapter One
This is the first example in the series I can find that acknowledges same-sex relationships, and it's meant to be insulting. Harry himself is more upset that Dudley knows Harry's having nightmares about Cedric dying than the implication about having a boyfriend, at least that's my interpretation.
Next time is during Deathly Hallows. Ron disguises himself with magic and Harry cracks a joke.
It was just possible to discern Ron under his disguise, but only, Harry thought, because he knew him so well. Ronâs hair was now long and wavy; he had a thick brown beard and mustache, no freckles, a short, broad nose, and heavy eyebrows.
âWell, heâs not my type, but heâll do,â said Harry.
-DH, Chapter Twenty Five
It's obviously meant to be a joke rather than Harry being serious (...unless?). None of the characters react to the joke in a negative or positive way, they just continue on their way to the next chapter. I'm just including it here to show Harry's not unaware of same-sex attraction existing, as some people may try to argue.
The next example is about Harry's relationship with Dumbledore.
Skeeter refuses to give any more away on this intriguing subject, so we turn instead to the relationship that will undoubtedly fascinate her readers more than any other.
âOh yes,â says Skeeter, nodding briskly, âI devote an entire chapter to the whole Potter-Dumbledore relationship. Itâs been called unhealthy, even sinister. Again, your readers will have to buy my book for the whole story, but there is no question that Dumbledore took an unnatural interest in Potter from the word go. Whether that was really in the boyâs best interests â well, weâll see. Itâs certainly an open secret that Potter has had a most troubled adolescence.â
-DH, Chapter Two
This is the only example we ever get in the text of even the possibility that a same-sex relationship can be considered negatively by the wizarding world. Harry was underage during his mentorship with Dumbledore and the use of terms like "unhealthy" and "sinister" make the argument that Skeeter is implying Dumbledore was abusing Harry more so than they were in a sexual or romantic relationship. So no, I would not count this as evidence the wizarding community doesn't support same-sex couples.
Finally, that leaves us with Albus Dumbledore and Gellert Gridelwald. JKR didn't actually portray them as a couple in the book, and so once again we have no reaction from Harry or the wizarding world to base how homophobic they are. However, there are plenty of quotes that Dumbledore and Grindelwald were intended to be a romantic relationship outside of canon from JKR. Therefore, same-sex relationships, whether allowed to exist openly or not among wizards, canonly do happen in the wizarding world and in the HP canon.
Back to Lucius. There's a section of the fandom that portrays pure-blood wizards as traditional, conservative, and culturally anti-progressive. You would think that means that wizards, especially the conservative ones, are just as prejudiced against same-sex unions as their Muggle counterparts.
Despite there being no in-textual evidence to support either way, there was an interview JKR did with the Pottercast team that actually addressed this!
MA: We wanna talk about Dumbledore so bad. We know that you've created worldwide intrigue when you said that he is gay. But I wanted to ask you about homosexuality in the Wizarding World in general. Is it a taboo?
JKR: Now, that's something I never thought of. I would think that that would be-- it would be exactly what it is in the Muggle World. But the greatest taboo in the Wizarding World is, well, for some wizards... I mean if we're talking about prejudiced people within the Wizarding World, what they care most about is your blood status. So I think you could be, um, gay, pure-blood, and totally without any kind of criticism from the Lucius Malfoys of the world. I don't think that would be something that would interest him in the slightest. But, you know, I can't answer for all witches and wizards because I think in matters of the heart, it would be directly parallel to our world.
-Anelli, Melissa, John Noe and Sue Upton. "PotterCast Interviews J.K. Rowling, part one." PotterCast #130, 17 December 2007. https://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2007/1217-pottercast-anelli.html
There's so much I can talk about here with this answer but I want to bring this meta back to Lucius and if he would oppose a Draco/Harry relationship. LOL at her saying she never thought about it (This bitch...đ). You can tell she's working through her answer in real time and coming up with an explanation on the fly.
My takeaway is that Lucius (and those traditional, anti-Muggle pure-bloods like him) values magical blood status more so than your sexuality. Including that of his son. So, in fanon, this right here is the biggest strike against an anti-Drarry Lucissa.
If anything, my interpretation to this is that the Muggle-born witches and wizards are more likely to be homophobic during the time the series is taking place, as the Muggle world is completely homophobic from the date the Statute takes place to the time the books are set. That's another meta though.
Anyway, the thought of a Lucius and Narcissa Malfoy that would disown or disinherit a Draco Malfoy for being gay or in a same-sex relationship never sat right with me. We see in the text how much Lucius and Narcissa adore Draco. They literally run into a battlefield without wands looking for Draco, putting their own safety aside multiple times.
This doesn't mean their fanon selves can't also be homophobic. You do you, write what you want. I just want to present the above evidence as a counter-argument to homophobic Lucius. From JKR herself, Lucius would not give a damn about sexuality. At the end of the day, he's a magical blood purist. Harry's a half-blood and a wizard, he should be fine with Draco having a relationship with Harry.
Well, except for the fact that it's Chosen One himself, Boy Who Lived Twice Harry Potter now becoming his son-in-law. đ€Ł
Personally, I think he would try to play nice. He loves Draco, obviously, and Harry did kill the madman that was holding him and his family hostage in their own home for the better part of a year. As well as torturing them. So, yeah, I think he would be fine in the long run that Draco and Harry are romantically involved.
Besides I'm pretty sure Narcissa would widow herself if Lucius ever hurt Draco.
pixelskylines
jacobvanloon
prguitarman
discoholicmusic
ellievsbear
