Avatar

Hap the What is Fuckening

@bluering8 / bluering8.tumblr.com

I'm Hap. This is my blog where I reblog things. Please look at my blog where I draw things!
Avatar
Reblogged

I'm not well-versed in modern retellings of "Pride and Prejudice" but now I'm curious if there's a single one of them that has made Darcy into a single father.

A shocking fraction of "P&P inspired" stories / character dynamics that I've seen seem to 1) make Darcy into an openly counter-cultural figure (a "bad boy"???) instead of a stiff dad friend type, as though basically all of Austen's male love interests aren't Mr. Responsible (she really said, "RAKES ARE ALL PREDATORY ASSHOLES!!!"), 2) leave out both the responsibilities to young Georgiana and Pemberly as crucial elements basically completely. Darcy is attractive to Elizabeth in part because he's a responsible family man who adores his younger sister, and who is capable of recognizing problems (including within himself and his relationships!) and repairing them with words and action. He makes her want to do the same!

The idea of removing family and professional responsibility from Darcy as a character boggles my mind. This man's world revolves around his commitments to family and friends. Any P&P "retelling" that completely removes the element of Georgiana (in a queerer adaptation, Darcy could have a younger trans brother or something! You CAN be creative with Georgie here) is probably wildly missing the core themes of Austen's novel. He's a BIG BROTHER! He was made a FATHER FIGURE very young! It's thematically coherent to adapt this man into a GIRL DAD!!!

Avatar
Reblogged

Taking it out of the tags: my idea for a "Pride & Prejudice" modern retelling is to make Darcy a single father, because I think his care for Georgiana is a really crucial part of his character and how Lizzie views him.

Georgiana COULD still be a much younger sister, true, but I think directly making Darcy a former teen dad keeps the retelling fresher. AND a key part of my vision here is that Wickham in this AU is Darcy's messy ex turned Georgiana's deadbeat mom who is supposed to be no-contact.

Narrative tension can be both lost and created through an audience's familiarity with a story. A lot of people already know or can guess that 1) Darcy is the endgame love interest, 2) Wickham is an asshole. I think it would be fun to therefore disguise Wickham as, idk, Lizzie's fun new female friend Jojo who 1) has very funny things to say about that asshole Darcy, 2) has some apparently biting criticisms of the patriarchy, 3) turns out to be an asshole abusing "Believe women!" and "Women support women!" slogans to manipulate people.

Jojo here probably gets Lydia embroiled in a beauty product multi-level marketing scheme that's also a religious cult that's also somehow a cryptocurrency scam. Lizzie meets Georgiana and Georgie's like, "Oh... you met my mom... 😐 Did you know she tried to steal my college fund and opened a bunch of credit cards in my name? 🙄 Has she stolen your wallet yet?"

i want to do a painting of a tiger taking a bath to put in a bathroom (bathroom-themed bathroom) and to this end i made a little maquette out of clay and i suspect this will scope creep into having both a painting and sculpture of a tiger or perhaps only a sculpture of a tiger. if i do both should they be displayed together or separately

Tiger maquette by the way 🐅

Working on cutting out a large piece of wood to do the painting on, which is a constraint that will either be really fun or really annoying. Maybe both

Wood primed and underpainted and sketch transferred mostly by cutting it out in different chunks and tracing around them. Stripes to be determined. Nobody let me work on this again for at least two weeks

The finished Ms. Tigers

hey you know what i don't say this often enough or loudly enough so: i fucking LOVE my receding hairline. like okay so on the one hand early balding runs in my family so i grew up around bald&balding men which kinda erased any insecurity i had around the idea. they're just Guys being Dudes y'know. that's just what People look like. but also on the other hand i have come to conclude that i genuinely don't enjoy having hair. it's a waste of my time. i resent every single minute i've spent trying to deal with it. the first time i buzzed my head it was a fucking revelation, okay, like holy shit i could've been doing this my whole life??? i've wasted so much of my life on having head-hair when this whole time it was completely fucking optional??? my hairline recede faster challenge. male-pattern baldness my beloved.

hi guys! discord is doing a survey on how people would like ai to be integrated into discord. take it and say fuck no to every question. when you get to "in general, how do you feel about discord inegrating ai features?", respond that you would actively get everyone you know off of discord and wouldn't pay for nitro or other shop items if they added ai features.

Avatar
Reblogged

No googling, curious about something

Things are going well

Spoiler

Okay normally I'm on the side of "words mean whatever we need them to mean".

but guys, I don’t like the suggestion that it’s what is happening here. Being unfamiliar with the term, and guessing its meaning based on vibes, doesn’t mean you have equal authority on whether it’s “correct” with the community who actively use this word in a technical sense.

please do consider that if you haven't been exposed to the word in the context it's used in, "both are correct" and "you can interpret it differently" and “there is no right or wrong answer” and “it feels like it SHOULD be X” cannot be a fully realised take. Sure, linguistics recognises there are rules in which meaning changes - but “laypeople being unfamiliar with the word, and liking vibes better” isn’t one of them.

You can do that with most words, especially slang, and shape them to the needs of the majority, but this isn't like... a fanfiction word, invented for fanfic and, like, solely used for injured hockey players where it doesn’t matter if the injured limb swaps sides 4 times in a sex scene and phases through a stomach. It is, in its context, a bit more load-bearing (ha) than that.

It's fine to be unfamiliar with the context, and it's fine for words to change, but do just take a quick second to hear it in a native sentence!

One of the most common ways of using this word is to assess four-legged animals. "Favouring" is a specific grouping of behaviour - a hesitancy in gait, stiffness, reluctance to put weight on a limb. It’s often inconsistent, as the animal tries to compensate or conceal the pain. It may not be a full limp or obvious lameness, since prey animals especially will actively try to conceal this; favouring is a subtle reluctance, and a useful word for a very specific recognisable behaviour that the animal is usually trying to lie about. (That’s probably why it’s used in romance fiction, as it’s an interestingly romantic and stoic way to react to pain, and doesn’t mean the limb is inconveniently disabled. A fictional character favouring a wounded leg can wince attractively when it’s jostled, but it doesn’t matter too much if the author forgets and has them run to the door suddenly - “favouring” isn’t incompatible with “running” in horses either.)

The sentence “Favouring the off hind” is equestrian jargon: it means “pain behaviour on the back right leg.” It does not mean “opposite-pain in the not-on deer” and is not confusing in its professional register.

If you've only vaguely heard of "myeloma", and most people in a poll are guessing it's a skin cancer, that doesn't mean that myeloma and melanoma can now readily collapse into the same word - they're under active use in their native contexts, where the people frequently using them do need to communicate the difference between skin and blood cancer.

A poll of laypeople misunderstanding “myeloma,” or non-horse-people misunderstanding “favouring,” isn’t quite enough to indicate a full semantic shift and change of meaning of the term. The community that uses the term “favouring” in the context of “limb injury” - vets, farriers, farmers, commentators, equestrians - knows what it means and uses it consistently in the same way. They’re not confused. because to them, it isn’t a vibesy, sex-scene-hand waving word. It’s a cluster of pain signals.

If you aren’t familiar with that usage, then that’s really more about your own lack of familiarity. Not all interpretations DO carry equal authority, especially when one is just confusion/unfamiliarity. You just haven’t met it before, and that’s fine.

Tl;dr: I’m all for words changing meanings, but we shouldn’t be too quick to declare that when it’s based entirely on unfamiliarity and vibes-based readings.

God bless the sickos over at the AO3 for providing the absolute most conceptually bizarre yet extremely compelling fiction for free.

OLD GODS: TOTEM

THE SWAN

The swan was one of the most sacred animals to ancient Finns. It was believed to be able to travel between the realms and carry messages over to the underworld - and return. The swan is also monogamous bird and it can be seen as a totem of loyalty and peace.

Avatar
Reblogged

Post was unrebloggable so i went back to the tweets because this is important

Fascinating. I wonder if the terfs cheering this even understand trans men were forced out too.

Idk, seems an odd thing to support when your narrative has always been that trans men are confused women. Really does show that it's about hate, not defining "what is a woman."

Idk for TERFs but I discussed with a fair amount of GCs who had the same view: trans women are men and trans men are a limbo gender that isn't men nor women.

They wouldn't want me into the female bathroom but wouldn't concede I'm a man either. Too scary for being a woman but they're too transphobic to consider me a guy too. So weird limbo gender it is.

They don't want trans people to exist anywhere and if that means inconsistency then they're fine with that

Terfs treat womanhood like how toxic incels treat manhood: something that you can't gain but that you can lose. There's a good gender which you can be born with and a bad gender that can contaminate it so we can't let anyone Contaminated into the Pure Good Gender Club. And there can be a hundred variations of the Contaminated group, that's fine, but only one of the Pure Good Gender because that's what purity is, and all Contaminated people are unsafe so the differences don't matter really we've got to punish them all.

terfs talk constantly about trans men and use trans men as the justification for blocking trans medical care and Rowling's dissertaion mentioned trans men way more than trans women but for some reason everyone acts like terfs hate trans women only and are pro-trans man somehow. They have always hated all trans people, trans men and trans women have both always been targets.

Sponsored

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.