nemonclature: Blade tied to a chair, looking up at camera (look up)
The human body contains about 5 litres of blood, allowing for differences in body weight. A donor usually gives about 8-10% of their blood (so approx 500ml). 15-30% (1.5 litres) and you'll feel sick, go pale and your skin will start feeling cold. 30-40% (2 litres) and your heart starts beating faster you'll probably need a transfusion to recover. Over 40% your probably a goner.

In one sitting, you can probably drink 1-1.5 litres comfortably. The stomach can expand to about 4 litres, which is why people can drink a gallon of milk without exploding (but then usually vomit it up after because... what did they expect?)

You can bleed out from the carotid (neck), brachial (arm) or femoral (leg) in about a minute. But arteries are fairly difficult to get at. In the wrist, you'd have to slice vertically down your artery to bleed out with any speed, so from a vamp bite you're talking a few hours, plus the possibility of clotting staunching the flow.

In the neck you'd probably hit veins or even the windpipe first, depending on your aim. Most the time they bite the meat of shoulder, not the pulse point (i.e. artery) which is harder to get to, higher on the neck.

As for the femoral, it's fairly difficult to get your face into someone's groin if accosting outside of a naked sexytimes scenario.

Also vamp teeth are fairly thin and short. It's questionable how far they'd even penetrate considering the layer of fat we all have under the skin before you even get to any good stuff.

So while they may nick an artery, we're not looking at the bleeding out in minutes that you get from severing one fully. You will bleed, and suction will probably induce a steady flow, but you're unlikely to bleed out from a bite wound.

So overall, that equals: a vampire can safely drink as much as the victim can safely lose. The victim won't die, but will feel woozy and need to drink electrolytes or take iron tablets to recover. The wound is going to need pressure and treating, if an artery is nicked, probably in the hospital so they can make sure it heals ok, but if no artery is touched, then just like you would a normal cut. It should clot fine and NO ONE NEED DIE.

The whole, vampire grabs a person by the neck and drains them in seconds, dropping their dead body to the floor? NO. It would be, vamp grabs by neck, stretches head awkwardly to side to get at carotid. Bites, gets blood EVERYWHERE like it's being sprayed out by a fucking garden hose. Makes a massive mess and a few minutes later, the person dies. They would not be able to drink that much blood without vomiting it back up again a la the milk gallon drinking fools. Not a sexy look, I'd imagine.

IF they have anticoagulants in their saliva, then, provided they do pierce an artery, (which isn't easy) passing out followed by death is probably inevitable without medical treatment. Though still, not going to be instantaneous, but a few minutes to an hour depending on severity of bite.

For the ones that rip the entire throat out with their teeth, well yes. Obvs that kills.

Follow up for this would be, if a vamp can drink, let's say 1 litre per person to be on the safe side, then they need to hit up 5 people per night to fully replace the blood in their body. Though, we don't know what happens to blood once in a vamp's body exactly. Maybe since they're dead, they can't generate new blood, only use what they have until it dies. Red blood cells live for about 4 months, so 5 people every 4 months, or, since they could take just over a litre from each person, that's basically hitting one person a month for just over 1 litre of blood.

One person a month. Seriously, couple of iron tablets and some Lucozade and they're fine. NO BIG.

oh tumblr

Feb. 16th, 2015 12:41 pm
nemonclature: Daria looking unamused (Default)
So Yahoo, in it's infinite wisdom, has decided what tumblr needs is basically a super involved 'trending' list. Cue, thefandometrics. (Not to be confused with the SPM fan-stats tumblr fandometrics... yeah, real classy on the name choice there, tumblr.)

This, is basically being presented as a 'good thing for brands' which, well yeah, I guess. They get to see how well they're doing. I can't see how it affects fandoms to be honest, unless more tumblr visibility affects decisions to axe or keep a show (Agent Carter, I'm looking at you). But I kinda doubt producers are going to give a shit, to be honest.

So this seems to be going hand in hand with a bunch of accounts being disabled/links being disabled, where copyrighted music is involved. No one seems to have the truth on whether it's just the music or whole blogs that are going.

People are freaking out a lot over these things, and on the one hand, hallelujah, lets all go back to dreamwidth. On the other hand though... It's not quite strikethrough, is it? because fandom on tumblr isn't like fandom was on LJ. We don't really have BNFs in the same way, so taking out a few high profile people isn't going to have the same knock down - up and move affect that strikethrough did.

I mean, Youtube takes down copyrighted content, that was a big deal when they started, but you know, vidders still operate on there, it hasn't really changed the face of youtube-grown vidding fandom. LJ/DW/old school vidders maybe moved to vimeo or backed up at another site. But youtube vidders just kept on going.

Tumblr is full or tumblr-grown fans, yes, there's an old school presence, but there's a lot of newbies. More newbies? I think so?

So, what I'm saying is, a couple of shut downs isn't going to stop people. It's not a small controllable fandom, it's a massive spectrum of content. And like youtube, they're never going to be able to keep up. Take down notices might come, but shit will just go up elsewhere. Fandom will adapt, maybe change tagging etiquette or something, but a move is a far greater task and we, people, are mostly lazy.

So, sorry anyone (me) who thought this might be the final tumblr deathknell. I'm pretty sure we're staying put.
nemonclature: Rush looking to the side (look side)
Bouncing off this thread here - I completely agree with the content of the post itself - the main characters not being anti-heroes, but just being morally complex protagonists. That counts for Stan as well as Philip and Elizabeth but also a lot of the supporting cast as well. I wanted to talk abut what was raised in the comment thread, however, regarding the way the two organisations have been portrayed.

Trigger warning for rape.

So first, yes IRL the counterpart to the KGB would probably be the CIA, but we are watching a tv show, it's a step to the side of reality, and within the world of the show it's quite clear the two opposing govt. bodies are the KGB and the FBI. They're the two the show focuses on, they're the two our leads respectively work for, they're the ones we are meant to set against each other.

It's difficult/impossible to distance the organisations' orders from the character's actions. So there is that, but broadly speaking I think we get a more negative vibe off the KGB's actions - I'm not saying the FBI comes off smelling of roses. I'm not saying it's more positive than the KGB, I'm saying it's a case of worse and worst.


The FBI blackmail Nina directly - with the threat of extradition/trial/execution if they abandon her to the KGB vs Philip and Elizabeth blackmail the cleaner - by threatening her child with death. Both are bad, but the KGB sanctioned actions come off worse. (Try flipping it. The FBI catch the Jennings, can you seem them threatening to poison and kill their children?)

Stan kidnaps/tortures/shoots Vlad vs Philip stabs/kidnaps/tortures Amador. It's a horrible, messy situation and (I would argue) they are both tortured: one physically, one mentally. (But, flip it. Can you see the FBI and Stan leaving Vlad to bleed out on the table whilst pumping him for answers?)

KGB orders the rape of (female?) recruits as part of their training*. Through the inaction of the trainer, who turns away, and the rapists' comment about the other recruits: it's clearly something that, if not directly, is certainly tacitly sanctioned by higher ups. (There is no FBI equivalent here, so lets just flip it. FBI orders imaginary female operative to be raped. I can't imagine that at all.)

* -- Is this even a real thing that happened? Or was it introduced because all tough women must have rape as back-story? Authorial decisions aside, it definitely makes the KGB come off badly.

KGB assassinates a civilian (Rob's wife) and kidnaps/extradites their child. Now, I can imagine the FBI doing something like this - if the Jennings get found out, this will basically be their fate. But the lying to the wife: the implication Cuba was an option, and then taking the bloodier road, that elicits a different reaction in the audience to just doing the action straight. Lying when leading characters to their death is definitely a calculated writerly-choice, engineered to make the viewer sympathise more with the victims ... but has the knock on effect of turning the viewer against the KGB. (And if we flip it - I can see the FBI executing the Jennings, I can't see them lying about it.)

KGB assassinates their own agent (Udacha). Now assassinations of other people happens on both sides, for example, the CIA assassinated Zhukov, which we hated them for because we like Zhukov, cue revenge story etc etc. BUT I couldn't think of an example where the FBI has assassinated their own people. (Flip it - say they find out about Martha, can you see them having her assassinated?)

KGB contracts an assassin, then changes its mind, then it can't get hold of the assassin it hired, and then it fails to stop one of the bombs from gong of, which kills FBI agents in the blast. Which all just looks like a massive clusterfuck vs the S1 finale and the FBI clusterfuck where Elizabeth got shot. (Flip it, can you see the FBI leaving a massive trail of destruction in their wake? Or are they more organised, more efficient, more caring of human lives/collateral damage?)

KGB tortures its own operatives (the Jennings) and threatens their children when trying to find the mole. OTOH, when the cleaner comes forward about the clock... the FBI do nothing? Reassure her? She keeps her job? (Flip it: would the FBI beat the shit out of Stan if he were a mole? What about Martha, who actually is a mole - albeit an accidental one, but would the KGB let that sway them do you think?)

So, even setting aside the inexcusable (rape), while a lot of the KGB's actions seem to be excusable considering the situation, when I flip them, I realise I can't see the FBI doing them. Which means I'm holding them to different standards, by which I mean I expect worse of the KGB than I do of the FBI, which means the show has succeeded in vilifying the KGB for me.

And I don't think it's intentional, I think it's almost entirely because they want greater sympathy with the victims, whether that's Elizabeth during the rape, or the assassination targets. But greater sympathy for victims results in greater dislike for aggressors. And we don't see the Jennings as the aggressors, because we see how conflicted they are about what they're doing, so the blame is shifted up a level to the KGB itself.

Conversely Stan's actions (wrt Vlad) come from him alone (and was retroactively sanctioned). So we blame him, but also excuse him (Amador guilt) and so the blame doesn't go up a level, but stops there.

The only thing I can think of that we can explicitly blame the higher ups for, is the stringing along of Nina. But since we know that she is actually stringing Stan along, the sting has been pulled from that action.

Ultimately, IRL a lot of the US' atrocities happened abroad, whether that's direct action or support of military regimes. Which means we're probably not going to see it, or at most we'll get off-screen 'the CIA did a bunch of stuff' which distances it again because it's the CIA not FBI and they're totally completely utterly different things, guys. Take the Afghanistan example: They brush by the fact that the US was pumping guns into the proto-Taliban, by having Philip, our KGB operative, kill a bunch of people.

ETA: I just got reminded of this - one thing we do know is that the CIA was infiltrating various civil rights groups IRL. But in-show, we get Stan who's been undercover among white supremacists - Imagine if Amador had been instrumental in locking up members of a black civil rights group instead.

So yeah. Let me know your thoughts. I recognise that this is somewhat subjective. But I do still think that there is a general trend towards: the FBI doing bad things, the KGB doing worse things.
nemonclature: Abed looking seriously into camera (for srs)
So, the Musketeers is on the BBC, 4 eps in to a 10 ep season. It's occasionally silly and somewhat formulaic, but it's also got a wonderfully diverse cast, tackles slavery in the 3rd episode, has two awesome, interesting female characters (who, I think completely failed the Bechdel test. GDI). And Peter Capaldi playing the ancestor to modern-day Malcolm Tucker.

Actually in general, (excepting D'artagnan, who is a bit of a blank character anyway) the acting is all pretty damn good. Capaldi, obvs. But Tom Burke's Athos is gorgeously conflicted and hates everything. Milady is great as the manipulative, secretive, possibly-not-completely-evil reason for Athos' manpain. The king is perfect and weak and petty and awful. I enjoyed Aramis' angsty turn last ep. It's still early days yet, but we've got the Porthos centric ep coming up, and then I'm hoping for a longer arc to round out the season, who knows.

ANYWAY. The reason for this post - beyond an attempt to enable people into the fandom (Everyone is ridiculously shippy. EVERYONE. Without the writing being Godawful slashbait.) - THE REASON is that it looks GREAT. And it's not just the filming (a lot on location, which really makes the difference, but even the sets look good). It's also the CLOTHES. I'd like to make a follow up Milady/Constance post, and one for the aristo's as well, but for now - the Musketeers:

Clothes and character meta + pics )
nemonclature: Raylan biting his lip, text: um (Um)
I was looking for meta on this but all could find were the comments on the [community profile] scans_daily  post. I'm hoping someone more in the fandom has written something? Because I want to read it! But as a signal boost/my thoughts/whatever:

So Alex Summers came out with the "m-word" speech a few months ago see here and here. And there was some backlash over it in fandom, but mostly measured critique? As far as I remember. (But then Remender made the lovely hobo piss comment which people objected to. Because it was fucking offensive). But basically it boiled down to him not wanting to be seen as a mutant, and colourblindness, and treated as equal and post-racial society blah blah.

So recently Kitty came out with this. Which is much more on the intersectionality/no such thing as colourblindness, assimilation is a lie and reminds me of that quote by Kerry Washington, (which I think is here, but maybe she's talked about it elsewhere also).

But on a more meta level, when you take both Alex and Kitty's words together, it presents a kind of rounded worldbuilding where one person doesn't own The Voice of The Oppressed (TM). Which is of the good I think. I like that both views can coexist, even if I agree with one more. It means they're treating the mutant issues as something pervasive and lived. Just like RL oppression is lived. (People are wondering if it's a reflection of the writer's differing world views (see the [community profile] scans_daily comments) which is possible, but not necessarily a bad thing? Since in doesn't seem to come off anvilicious.)

Anyway, I'm not in Marvel Comics fandom, so I can't really comment on this in any way but externally, I would like to know what other people have written/think though.

What I can comment on is the way the oppression storyline has been dealt with in the films universe. So jumping on a tangent...

What does Prof X (and the 'good guys') do to further equality for mutants?

When your leader is telling you to effectively do nothing, then no wonder Alex ends up saying, well, do nothing. When Prof X is aggressively maintaining the status quo, then no wonder Alex wants to assimilate without ever rocking the non-mutant boat.

In the movies, the only actions the Prof takes are to combat the human hating mutants (Magneto et al.) like, that's basically it? In First Class he tries stop a different human hating mutant. Outside of that, he runs his school and tries to find other mutants. What does he actually do in terms of activism? As far as I can remember he furthers no agenda of visibility, if anything he encourages mutants to secrete themselves away in his little isolationist, hidden community.

He's not spearheading a political career, he's not campaigning for rights or freedoms, drafting a specific bill, trying to get mutants out of incarceration, working towards a more inclusive educational system, developing healthcare, setting up a Mutant Aid society or anything, anything that activism requires. He makes no speeches, he organises no protests. He sits, in his sprawling castle on his rolling green hills bolstered and made safe by his money and he does nothing.

And we're expected to see him as the best hope for mutantkind?

We're distracted from his hypocritical apathy by the threats 'bad' mutants pose, and the psycho bigots of the human world: there's Magneto and Shaw, there's whathisname, from X men 2, and there's Mr Sinister and that time travel guy, apocalypse? and the...sentinels? The robot things? You can see how much knowledge I have outside of movie canon, but whatever, there are threats, (and fuckloads of time travel afaik how come the movies haven't hit that?) but there are never any genuine threats relating to the nitty gritty, the real life side of the discrimination storyline they attempt to portray. Or, that they allude to, without ever actually portraying. They riff off the oppression parallels, but when pinned down, (see above links) claim they were NEVER WRITING ABOUT OPPRESSION ANYWAY. PARALLELS? WHAT PARALLELS? OH LOOK, HAVE MORE TIME TRAVEL.

Am I wrong here? I could be forgetting some political subplot from the first three movies since it has been a while. But all I can remember is that Beast has some vaguely political/consultant(?) role, but it was implied that he and the Professor weren't all that close? Like not in that they'd stopped being friends, but grown apart, maybe because, IDK, Prof's ideology was all about sitting back and doing nothing? Because wasn't there a 'haven't seen you in a while'/'great to see you again' sort of vibe when Beast got involved? Maybe? Kinda? Gah, I should probably rewatch before making grand statements.
nemonclature: Daria looking unamused (Default)
 photo boyd.jpg

Sparked by: This tumblr post and this fandomwanderers post, quoted below.

"A fandom in hiatus is extremely focused on little details they might have overlooked in the broad sweep of transmission, and eventually, left to their own devices for long enough, they may even become fixated on tiny fragments of fanon with no basis in their favourite obsession whatsoever. This leads, usually, to chaos, and occasional confusion when, for example, the meanest character’s teddy bear is nowhere to be seen when the series returns."

Like Lydia becoming HBIC in Teen Wolf fanfic during the inter-season hiatus. I love hyper-competent Lydia, but realistically, it should really be Boyd in that position. Lydia has proven her intelligence, but that alone isn't a marker of ability to lead. She's manipulative, insecure, secretive and in a very non-trusting place right now. (Okay that describes Derek, but no one is calling him a good Alpha either.) Plus she's canonically immune to the bite.

Boyd's a calm, intelligent, focused kinda guy, and he's already part of the wolf pack, so within the whole, 'circle of trust'. We know you can have multiple Alphas in a pack thanks to the Alpha pack, and that you can have Betas in charge of a pack thanks to Scott's pack, so it's not like alternate hierarchy systems are unheard of. So Boyd as the intelligent Beta/eventual Alpha, (all he'd have to do is kill an Alpha pack memember and since he was cornered by them at the end of S2, it's not all that unrealistic. He kills one, Erica conveniently dies to allow for the actress' no-show in S3. Alternatively, the gang breaks him out and he kills someone either during the escape or at any point during the ensuing war), contrasting with Derek as the reppository of wolf knowledge/idk, emotional centre Alpha. (TBH, Derek is the worst Alpha in all of forever, but I always thought he suited being Beta far better than anything else and his behaviour as Alpha has only proved that.)

Boyd chose to be a wolf. He chose. He wasn't forced into it like Scott, he wasn't creepily seduced into it like Erica, he didn't grasp at it as a means of power, like Isaac and Jackson. At no point is his choice presented as a bid for greater strength. (Note he's a strongly built kinda guy already, and canon hasn't given him a fucked up family life I don't think.) As far as I recall the one thing he wanted was to stop being a loner? (Was this canon or my fanon/ I'm a bit blurry). Which, okay, that could point to familial isolation. But surely someone who chose pack over power, community over isolation (cough Scott cough) is going to be a great contender for a good Alpha?

Okay, he did run away, that's true. But that can be fanwanked away - his decision making processes weren't recovered after all that torture, or Erica wanted to run and he genuinely loved her, or, hell, he made a mistake. People make mistakes, Derek's made plenty, Scott too, and Lydia.

I'm not going to lie, part of me thinks it's the black guy syndrome at play. (Does that have a better name? come on, it's the internet, someone must have coined it.) He's black and so fandom's collective eyes pass over him without stopping and instead alight on some white dude(tte). And like I said, I love Lydia, I love that fanon Lydia gets to be sharp and clever and strong and doesn't have to hide her light because fuck that shit, people can deal with her on her own terms. It's an empowering narrative and as a woman I love it, but as a PoC, I'm less enthralled.
nemonclature: Daria looking unamused (Default)
Lord Kitchener urges you to become a metanews mod

Don't delay, sign up today!

I'm not kidding. There is a genuine mod-shortage.
We're doing great with link-finders, but some mods,
willing to take a larger role in the running of the comm,
would be absolute GOLD.

What is meta? )
nemonclature: Daria looking unamused (Default)
My next post won't be about [community profile] metanews , promise.

Meta links (1/1/13 - 20/1/13) @ DW
Meta links (1/1/13 - 20/1/13) @ LJ

HAHAHA. I finally get the posts up and the html is fucked because smartquotes. AUSPICIOUS BEGINNINGS, I HAS THEM.

I can see clearly now )
nemonclature: Daria looking unamused (I have a gun)
My posting frequency may rise as I get this comm off the ground. Am cutting posts so that I take up less space on your flists/circles.

0.5) Questions page @ DW and LJ. -- Any typos? Glaring errors? Questions that should have been answered? Problems that should have been resolved? Also, anon commenting should be on, but LJ keeps telling me it's off. If anyone wants to test that in case it's my computer being weird, I'd be much obliged.

stuck in the middle with you )

Meta News

Jan. 20th, 2013 02:15 pm
nemonclature: Daria looking unamused (shout)
I mentioned a while back that I wanted to try starting up a meta fandom newsletter in the style of [community profile] metafandom.

Well, I've done it. It's called [community profile] metanews and I've spent most of the weekend trawling flists and circles and all sorts to fashion myself a large-ish pool from which to draw links from.

I'm gonna aim for an update every Monday, which means I'm going to try and stick to only current links, i.e. about a week old. That should limit the amount of trawling I have to do to a certain extent!

Anyway, as I've been compiling both my pool of meta-making places, and the actual meta links I'm going to post, I have come up against a number of problems and now I am going to speak about them, at you. Enjoy.

never gonna give you up... )

So 3 requests, dear flist/circle:

i. Any recs for meta writers/meta comms/fandom newsletters/anything vaguely fannish. Don't constrain yourself to journal sites only, I'm looking anywhere. If you want to tell me your own journal is open to being linked to, please do. But likewise don't be afraid my ([personal profile] nemonclature ) flist is now gonna become [community profile] metanews' hunting grounds because it's NOT. [community profile] metanews has its own flist

ii. Anyone willing to help me mod? Or give me newsletter-modding advice?

iii. Can anyone help me tracking the whole fandom fourth wall debate that's been going on this month? It seems to be a big thing going down, only it's all on tumblr. WHYYYYY. GOD WHYYYYYYYY?
nemonclature: Daria looking unamused (derp)
Hello new people!

I'm awful at intros, so... there's a bit on my profile, anything else, just ask!

[personal profile] nemonclature - my new home, primarily fandom with the rare RL post under lock.
[ profile] nemo_r - my old home, still checked for flist purposes, and dw posts are mirrored there.
[community profile] nemo_recs - the place where nemo, recs. Surprise! (Also mirrored at [ profile] nemo_recs).
[ profile] nemo-r - for fan related pretty, feminist leanings, ballet and space.
[ profile] nemo_r - for the fic I have not been writing lately D:

I miss [community profile] metafandom . I almost want to set up a new one, only the time that would require, I do not have. There is [community profile] month_of_meta but it's only sporadically updated. 

Are there any other meta comms still living?

Transient fandoms.

I feel like, back in the day it was all monofandoms/long term fandoms: X files or Xena or Buffy or Due South etc. But now, most fans I know are multi-fannish, and, in terms of my approach, I definitely feel the NEW SERIES! lift and the NEW FILM COMING OUT! lift. It's all YAY Star Trek, and then that slumps a bit then YAY XMFC then that slumps then YAY Avengers then that slumps and then OH YEAH STAR TREK AGAIN. I don't ditch any of my old fandoms. My HP reading is testament to that, but I do add regularly.

Is it symptomatic of modern media? All - more more more, gimme more, the next best thing, 15 minutes of fame etc? I can't imagine we'll ever reach saturation point though, I imagine I'll keep on adding and adding fandoms to my list. And the old ones, they slow down. Actually maybe they do stop, it's just none of them are old enough yet I mean, who writes in Highlander or X-Files any more?

Slooooowly working my way through the Wheel of Time re-read on TOR...

Female/Male characters and slightly more general thoughts on brainwashing/mind control kink )

TVD 4x09 - not a happy review )
nemonclature: Daria looking unamused (Default)
So. They make a helicopter frame and attach a RED EPIC digital camera to it, then test drive it with ninjas

These people, these are cool people.

Only flaw is that the ninja clip has no soundtrack, so feel free to pick your own. I found Polica's 'Violent Games' worked quite well.

Also, fic that worldbuilt on that gorgeous setting, that told us more about the ninjas and the sword and the mysterious woman at the end? I WOULD BE ALL OVER THAT. YES PLEASE, INTERNET, THANK YOU.

Insane discoveries that science can't explain ( --Basically an original fic idea generator..

Meta links )
nemonclature: Daria looking unamused (Default)
What is sex, or why does canon subtext become fanon sex?

Beta: Thanks to [personal profile] jane_potter for doing a wonderful beta job, letting me throw questions at her and throwing much better answers back.
Notes: I made a post on this a while back: 'Sex isn't about sex'. It's not all that coherent, but it might be of interest. (Spoilers for the final four Cylons on BSG.)

YMMV for the whole of this. I'm taking my POV and extrapolating. When I say 'we' I certainly don't mean every single person in fandom. Obviously some fic is written for reasons other than sexualizing canonically non-sexual relationships. I've written gen fic purely because I wanted to explore a single character. People write canon shippy fic because they're interested in a pairing. People write fic to worldbuild, to right wrongs, to consider various 'isms. There are lots of different reasons, I'm just trying to nail this single, albeit common, category of fic.

[ETA: Following from [personal profile] erinptah 's comment I've edited this to read more like my personal experience with this type of fic rather than a generalisation.]

[ETA 2: I'm also talking mainly about Western TV based fandoms, fen experiences in other fandoms may well be very different.]

So, what is sex in fanfic?

I'm not talking about the various definitions of the physical act of sex. I'm interested in what we mean when we say: Those two characters are totally fucking )
nemonclature: Daria looking unamused (Default)

Little Thor.

There is also Iron Baby which is amusing, albeit slightly creepy.

I'm still in the process of settling into dreamwidth. Mostly that means I'm going through batches of comms and people bookmarked and gradually extending my circle. (Halloo if I friended you!) Next I'll probably make further cuts over at lj as I try to add people's dw mirrors and drop their lj ones.

I feel the need to give the journal a haircut. Also I realise that tag is very useless without screencaps of what the change is, so I'm going to put caps and links next time so that it can actually serve some purpose.

'Get bent' is such an odd curse. )


Really interesting post by Aliette de Bodard, starting from Sherlock 2x03, but really talking about the representation of women in literature in the past and contrasting it to now. (Roughly summarised as: it was misogynist, but at least they were there, whereas now we barely even exist.)


I hate the 'cut corners' approach to canon 'ships. The ones where we don't see any development of the actual 'ship. We see the meeting and the lust, but after that we're just expected to believe in them as a couple. Tada! They're together. ... )

RECS World lit and Second person POV )

Random quote:
"[P]reviously I've had to go looking for spoilers, but now there's tumblr which is seemingly populated mostly by children who weren't in fandom the day the rest of us did Spoiler Cuts and You: An Introduction."
(from [personal profile] netgirl_y2k)

So true.

Question: Why do people keep the ashes from cremated bodies? People don't parts from buried bodies. Is it reassuring? Is it for a sense of connection with the one who's passed? Why is it socially acceptable to keep ash, but not bones or hair?
nemonclature: Daria looking unamused (Default)
I am a compulsive bookmarker.

I can't read something as soon as I find it, I have to bookmark it for a later date.

It's partly due to the way I find things... )

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags