Latest Posts by chkeononeanothr - Page 3

hes so real

werewolf transformations and magical girl transformations swapped

anyone else relate

🇵🇸🍉 Free Palestine 🍉🇵🇸

the mortal human life and body are so fucking restricting it's driving me insane. i want to be anything and everything. i want to experience it all. but i fucking can't AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

“Lighten Up” by Ronald Wimberly

Beautifuly written- and drawn.

me and my imaginary band covering mcr songs in the super hot wet epic gay rock band stadium aka my shower

literally frank makes music for the messy, for all of us caught desperately and breathlessly in needing to pour it all out somewhere anywhere to someone anyone through something anything. he makes music that bleeds, music that cuts you open and spills you out on the pavement, it’s so fucking dedicated, passionate, heart and wound and healing through giving that heart and wound voice no matter how desperate, angry, hateful, mournful, regretful, full of love or despair. it’s music that thrashes you about, it’s music that makes your heart scream, it’s music that says if you need to bleed then bleed. it’s for all of us who toss ourselves recklessly against the walls of our own bodies, for all of us that need to get it out get it out get it out get it out, for all of us that need to just. fucking. do. something. even if it means wringing ourselves out of everything we’ve got. it is heart and wound heart and wound heart and wound heart and wound heart and wound heart and wound and it’s the most fucking healing thing i’ve ever heard.

he gets me

It’s time to talk about the Laudanum Lesbians, Elspeth and Wee Morag. Right away, it’s pretty obvious that you’re supposed to draw parallels between them and Aziraphale and Crowley. When the viewer first meets Elspeth, we get this gruff girl who threatens the two of them and is established to be doing something “morally wrong”. Life hasn’t been kind to her, and she clearly doesn’t trust people. To really drive it home, she and Crowley are on the exact same page while they’re talking to Aziraphale and wheeling the body to the alley. 

Then we meet Wee Morag, and it becomes apparent that every decision that Elspeth makes is to better their life together. She offers Wee Morag food (which is something our favorite demon is wont to do for his partner) and specifically oversells it as something fancier than it actually is. Wee Morag calls her an angel. It’s meant to be a little tongue and cheek since it’s in the presence of a literal angel, but it also serves as a way to show that while Elspeth may not be a Good person, that she at least cares about the person close to her.

Now for Wee Morag at this moment, we don’t get much from her aside from her obviously being the moral compass out of the two of them. She tells Elspeth that she's going to Hell literally two seconds after referring to her as an angel. The more important part of this interaction I would argue is Aziraphale’s response to Wee Morag. Some part of him recognizes a kindred spirit in her. He takes off his hat in a show of sincerity and says that it was lovely to meet her. This is important for later in the episode.

After they fail to sell the body, all three of them end up back in the alley with Wee Morag. Elspeth is again choosing to not trust Aziraphale despite his change of heart to do what he now knows is actually a good thing. Wee Morag starts off on the fence, worried about those souls that won’t get into Heaven. Elspeth tells her that she promised to help, and through everyone’s various methods of convincing (tempting may even be the better word as there is a demon sitting next to her when she agrees), Wee Morag says that she’ll do it because that’s what friends do. Regardless, she’s now had her change of heart. Although I would say hers is more driven by the same thing that drives Aziraphale to help with the Antichrist. It is fundamentally for her and Elspeth’s benefit, not the Greater Good per say, but she needs that reframing of doing the moral thing of upholding her promises and potentially helping people.

In the graveyard, Elspeth does all of the hardwork and Wee Morag holds the light both to assist how Elspeth sees, but also likely to help her keep watch. She’s filling a guardian role for Elspeth. Later when Elspeth sells her body, she even says “She only wanted to look after me.” Upon seeing the actual body (a priest’s body no less), Wee Morag realizes with horror what they’re doing - the potential moral ramifications stare her in the face. She ends up caught in the crossfire of a gun, and she dies for it.

Originally, I thought that Wee Morag’s death sets Crowley up to worry about what might potentially happen to Aziraphale in the future. In a way, I still think it does. She was the Good character helping the Bad character, and she pays dearly for it. His line “It’s a bit different when it’s someone you know, isn’t it?” while pointed at Aziraphale can be felt by everyone in the room. Elspeth has been dealing with death this whole episode, but her whole life is turned on its head when her ‘pal’ dies. Crowley recognizes that it’s the knowing part that actually causes something to hurt. (It’s one of the reasons why he doesn’t have many human friends. He does have a friend though, and it would absolutely gut him to lose him.)

The episode isn’t over though. We still have to watch someone else pay for stepping over the imaginary boundary of Good and Evil, except rather than it being Aziraphale, it’s Crowley. Like Wee Morag, he steps out of his usual role and helps Elspeth, and for that, he pays dearly. He gets dragged off to Hell to have whatever Demons do instead of a rude note done to him. After everything that’s happened, it’s no wonder why you get that panicked shout of “Crowley” from Aziraphale. They just watched the worst case scenario happen for people like them. 

Also as another quick fun aside, both sets of characters are bound by something that allows them to not be able to carry out their actual dreams and goals. Elspeth and Wee Morag were bound by poverty while Aziraphale and Crowley are bound by their respective Head Offices.

Evidently I like to keep breaking my own heart, but you know, I don't think Crowley was about to say:

"And I would like to spent the rest of my life with you."

If you skip the "I mean, the last few years not really" parenthesis, I believe his full confession/proposal was going to be:

"We're a team, a group. Group of the two of us. And we've spent our existence pretending that we arent. [...] And I would like to spend it not pretending anymore."

And that's because he had prepared his little speach before Aziraphale came back, he had rehearsed it in his mind, taking their togetherness for granted. They had always been together, they had already spent their lives together and they were surely going to spend them together anyway forever.

Being together was not the point, because not being together was simply unthinkable. The point was stop pretending and finally become "an us" - openly, honestly, fully. The possibility of being separated never crossed his mind, it would not make sense for him to ask Aziraphale to be together, it would imply the existence of a reality in which they are not.

So when he pushed through and decided to say what he was going to say, he got to that part and the realization started to creep in that he might actually have been too much of an optimist. The possibility of them not being together did exist, it was coming into existence in that very moment, in front of his eyes, making the "stop pretending" part suddenly incongruous. And all the rest of his speach fell apart.

Now the point was "are you going away?", "what about us if you go?", "what is happening?", "why is this happening?", "how can this be happening?". Now the important thing that needed to be said was "let's be together, if you don't feel like stop pretending because it's dangerous then we can run off somewhere, far from Heaven and Hell and their threats, but just please let's stick together."

That's, I think, why he chocked on his words.

He was ready to take a little step forward, and he found himself falling a thousand steps backwards.

what is life? a never ending micromanagement hell?

i know this isn't new information but dean literally sat on the floor of the dungeon and ignored a call from his brother while the world was ending in order to sob with his head in his hands because his world had already ended and i'm supposed to be normal about it???? i'm supposed to just go on with my life???? when dean couldn't???? it's been two and a half years and i still can't breathe right when i think about it.

Okay i might be a little pissed off. Expect typos, im on my phone.

A character does not need a specific label, have a gender, nor have sex/romantic physical gestures in order to be queer rep

Aziraphale and Crowley are not gay men.

They are played by male actors. They present male most of the time. But that means nothing, because gender presentation =/= gender identity or sex.

Neil has said multiple times that angels and demons are sexless. It's on the book. It's on several of his tweets and answers to asks. This implies that angels and demons are non-binary by default. Gabriel isn't a man, Michael isn't a woman, Beelzebub isn't a woman, Furfur isn't a man.

And now, you could argue that a genderless creature isn't necessarily queer and I agree! Several animals are genderless irl.

But here's what makes them queer: it's not that they don't have a gender, it's that they don't give a fuck about it. Crowley presents female i believe up to three times in the show, Neil was planning a minisode where both he and Aziraphale are fem-presenting in the 60s; Michael is a male angel name and he's played by an actress and (At least in the portuguese dub? Correct me if im wrong) still called "he". Same for Beelzebub, who I think is also reffered to with they/them in english. Hell, God has a female voice and is still called God (the male version of the word!!!) and even Her pronouns are a bit flexible in certain dubs.

What makes them queer is that their genderless aspect isn't just biological, it's their identity, too. These characters are all non-binary, they know it, and they don't mind it.

"But they present male and call each other 'he'!"

As I said, gender presentation does not equal identity and neither does pronouns. It's words: words that get often associated with a certain gender but are, in the end, just words.

Not only that, but this argument also comes from the expectation that non-binary people cannot present themselves in a binary way, which is an absurd thing to expect. People irl have all kinds of different hormonal balances and many enby folk may be hypermasculine or hyperfeminine due to high testosterone or estrogen respectively. And you know what? They might not want to change that, and that is completely fine.

Non binary people do not owe you androginy.

Being trans isn't about appearances, isn't about transitioning, it's about identity. Thinking otherwise is borderline transmedicalist ideology.

Good Omens breaks gender norms all the fucking time in both seasons, something many shows are afraid to do, and it's not just for comedy reasons, which tends to be the norm when shows do it. They do it because it's fun, it's fine, and because they acknowledge that gender norms are stupid.

That's queer as hell.

My second point, no need for labels. Just like angels and demons don't need gender labels, they don't need sexuality labels. At all. Especially since they're often intertwined.

Just because two characters don't have their specific labels revealed doens't mean they aren't queer or, fuck's sake, don't love each other.

In A League Of Their Own, no characters get specific labels, what they are is simply implied. Greta is very implied to be lesbian but they never say the exact word. Does that mean she isn't queer?

In The Song Of Achilles, no characters get specific labels because hell, the labels didn't exist at the time the story takes place in. Both main characters are implied to be bi/pansexual but it's obviously never told in the text. Does that mean they aren't queer?

In Undertale and Deltarune, no characters get specific labels, but in both games the main protagonist is nonbinary (and is in both cases a human being!) and both games have several mlm and wlw couples and several more nonbinary characters across the storyline, but it's never specifically labeled. Does that mean it doesn't have queer rep?

Neil has said several times that Good Omens is a love story, that Aziraphale and Crowley love each other, that even if they're not 'gay male humans' they still feel love for one another. That's the entire point of season two.

And now, I get it, okay? I don't like authors tip-toeing around labeling their characters either, especially since in most places we are past the age of having to code characters instead of just make them openly queer. I get the fear and uncertainty that often came from some sort of trauma from bbc's Sherlock, I felt it too. I get that for some it may seem as if it's queerbaiting, or pink money, or simply being too scared to say a character is queer.

But that's just not the case with Good Omens. The point is not to avoid labels because they're scary. The point is that, for Good Omens, and aziracrow, labels are useless. They're not humans, they don't have a gender, they don't need the labels.

And you know what?

That's also queer as hell.

Society has to put people into boxes, has to separate folk, has to label everyone. No one can be different, and id you are you need to fit this specific box of different. If you go out, you're too much, you're too rebellious, you're a freak. If they just let people do whatever they wanted it would be hard to marginalize them and keep the system going.

A quote I once heard feels important for this occasion:

"To define yourself is to restrain yourself."

When you define something in strict terms you're putting rules to it. Rules that can be broken. Rules that should be broken. And the rulebreakers get insulted, hated, violated, killed.

Aziraphale and Crowley are breaking these rules by 'existing' as who they are. They're not gay men, they're not lesbian women, they're not bisexual agenders, but at the same time they are all of those things at the same time, whenever they want to, whenever YOU want them to, as Neil himself put it. Because fuck labels. And you're hating them for it, hating them because they're refusing to enter those boxes.

Humans are weird and complex. Let the angels and demons be weird and complex too.

Lastly, queer relationships don't need sex - nor kisses.

There's this expectation that romantic love is only true love if they kiss, if they live together, if they sleep on the same bed, if they go on dates, if they marry, if they have kids, if they have sex. Break one of these and people will raise an eyebrow. Break two and they look at you weird. Break three and everyone judges you. Break all of them and, suddenly, you and your partner have been declared "just friends" by outsiders who don't know you in the slightest.

Welcome to amatonormativity.

Or, better saying, another stupid box, another set of rules.

There's this headcanon that Crowley kisses Aziraphale as a last resort not because it's a gesture if love (even Neil said it wasn't out of love) but because he's seen it in human movies and, in movies, kissing someone in despair is a cliché that often ends in the other person not leaving.

This wasn't a love kiss. But Crowley still loves Aziraphale. Do you know why?

Because angels and demons, most likely, do not need human gestures to show love. They, most likely, comprehend love in an entirely different light.

Maybe Aziraphale is touchy with Crowley because he likes it and that is a good enough reason, but it's an individual reason, just like a person irl might be more fond of hugging their partner than kissing them, and that's fine. Nothing wrong with it. There's no right or wrong way to have a relationship. Acting like there is is reinforcing the rules set by amatonormativity, and it is also completely disregarding the experiences of asexual and aromantic folk. The entire spectrums btw.

Now think about the rules I mentioned earlier. Must kiss, must fuck, must marry etc.

Aziracrow also breaks almost all of them.

That's also queer as hell!!!

Being queer and celebrating pride isn't about having labels. It's about breaking societal norms: heteronormativity, cisnormativity, mononormativity, amatonormativity, etc. Norms that are used to opress us, to put us in boxes, to separate us, to marginalize us, and to kill us.

A show that gives the middle finger to all of these and just tells its story however way it likes, not caring about labeling the characters or having a long monologue about homophobia or showing a explicit sex scene between the two characters or following any of those stupid rules imposed by society, a society ran by cishet folk, is as queer as a show can ever be.

To deny that is to reinforce a narrative that is literally used to opress us.

That's all, bye.

Also, some of you guys are giving "I call beez she/her because of the actress" and that's cringe, but not surprising, ngl.

"Men would come. Men would threaten. Aziraphale would nod and smile and say that he’d think about [their suggestions]. And then they’d go away. And they’d never come back. Just because you’re an angel doesn’t mean you have to be a fool.”

Masterpost here.

Crowley here.

Book!Aziraphale was the one to suggest killing Adam. He did not bother reviving the dead dove in his sleeve, so Crowley did. He does have some inner conflict regarding his beliefs, but more subtle. Regularly spends evenings talking human nature, God, Divine Plan with Crowley. He is practical to the point of cruelty.

TV!Aziraphale always seemed softer, more manipulative than direct, and more nervous. He looks so soft and smitten towards Crowley, or thirsty af, that the image of softness stays. But what is there really? Besides that visceral feeling when he did not restrain himself, and devoured an ox.

We got stern Aziraphale when he made Crowley dance for him. And like shown at the top of this post. His demeanor opposing Furfur was a bit nervous at times, but he refused to back down even a little.

He was willing to protect Gabriel the Asshole. I wouldn't have blamed him if he had shoved Gabriel in the trunk and dumped him somewhere. But Aziraphale is a Guardian.

He is not close with humans. He couldn't give a shit about the people in the shops around him on a personal level. He'll protect them, but only really socialises with them when he has to. Or needs them as set dressing during an Eldritch Ball. I love that about him, he protects because it is the right thing to do.

He is more direct. Season 1 he'd play coy so Crowley would miracle away paint stains. Now he claims the Bentley for a roadtrip. I can't find a good gif, but we see him having trouble restraining himself at times when he's standing between the humans inside and the demons outside.

The Job minisode showed us he's been having doubts for a very long time. Not only about Heaven, about God. "I don't think God wants you to do this." Only to later hear God give a demeaning lecture to Job. Those seeds of doubt will blossom in Heaven.

We see Crowley taking pride in seeing his angel silencing a room of angels and demons. We see Crowley impressed when he heard Aziraphale did the thing with the halo. We saw how he looked when Aziraphale was gorging on flesh unrestrained.

How will he look when he sees Aziraphale, standing between Heaven/Hell and humanity? Determined fury in his eyes and blade in hand. Aziraphale guarding his world. His bookshop. His demon.

Crowley seeing his angel, completely prepared to kill God if that's what it takes to keep them safe.

Let's talk about Shax and Furfur

I don't see a lot of discussion about them, but I think these two are worth paying attention to.

Shax is one of those demons who is not inherently evel, she is more of a "make the best of the current situation" person, she is trying to make a career not by stepping on others, but by forming alliances. She offers a mutually beneficial alliance to Crowley, a traitor hunted by hell, but she's like, that's fine, I can try and work with him, I have a lot to learn from him. Formally, Crowley does not agree to an information exchange with Shax, but nonetheless he is talking to her: helping her fix the boiler, telling a bit more about the Earth, telling her that they'll work on her sarcasm recognition skills next time. They are not friends, but Shax tries to keep it as civil as it can possibly be.

And then there is Furfur, with whom Shax is at least a friendly colleague, but more likely they know each other well and are actually friends. This alliance is formed in the same way of doing favours (and we know who else formed their alliance at least in part based on favours). Note, she never actually breaks her promise to Furfur, and she tries to pull him along where she can: she promises to get him an audience with the Dark Council and she does, she is sympathetic when it does not go well. He shows up in the bookshop, so he did get a bit higher in the hierarchy, but also note how it is Furfur pointing out the opportunity for Shax, while Dagon (who you would think would be the one to be promoted by Beelzebbub) just stands there.

If Shax takes over the throne, with Furfur as her close alliance, this opens a good setup for Crowley to come in and influence them. He might bring in the news that Heaven is planning a war to erase them from the book of life, or that if there is a second coming the amount of soul-processing workload might increase exponentially! The point is, both Shax (already offered him beneficial alliance) and Furfur ("We've done loads together!") would be open to Crowley's influence, and they might indeed want to let Earth continue its existence.

I suppose we shall have to wait and see, but I think we will yet see more of these two

Obsessed with Furfur being offended about Crowley not remembering and saying they did loads together (and Crowley used to jump in his back?) when they were in the same legion, because it implies that Hell's dynamics where actually different and transformed through the centuries. Unlike Heaven which seems to have been white, horrendous and question-hating since before the Beginning. I mean, they had to have some camaderie with each other or otherwise there wouldn't have been rebels. The different dynamics that this season offered in Hell is so much compelling that just Crowley and Aziraphale being friends and Hell being full of monsters that kill each other. I mean Ligur and Hastur seemed to be friends but they were also pretty sadistic and unlikable, Shax and Furfur are social climbers at worst and even Crowley doesn't seem to consider Shax too threatening because he sort of mentors her.

This is such a difference with the dynamics we saw with the angels in Heaven. Those people have no bonds with each other. Michael and Uriel are catty and competitive, Saraqael is like... there? None of them gave a shit about erasing Gabriel's memories, not a peep of sympathy. Then we have the more lower angels like Muriel, who are just alone and living in totally-not-solitary-confiment for centuries.

And this seems to be the thing since before the Beginning, they show us Aziraphale being scared about Crowley getting into trouble because Heaven was already fucked even then. It's like... So static, so unchanging and awful. And this is supposedly the place some people say Aziraphale totally has to change for the better? Why? What is there to save? The best thing he could do is to free the most defenceless angels from that toxic white infinite-torture chamber.

I'm not saying Hell is not bad but... Hell is Hell. They sort of accepted their role as the bad guys since they were kicked out by Mummy Dearest to fulfil the role of the black pieces in her sadistic game of chess. They are also in more contact with humanity than Heaven has ever been (because I'm convinced that Heaven doesn't have dead humans anymore because they don't consider humans worthy since they have such sticks in their arses) so of course they commit to the Aesthetic™ of what Hell shoiuld look like. Heaven in the other hand pretends to be paradise but looks more like a Hell without meaning it.

Heaven hasn't changed through the years, it has always wanted blind obedience and doesn't care about doing everything just because it's the Arsehole's Will. Hell seems to have started as a real bond between angels that rebelled and slowly became the place everyone identifies as bad,... by sort of mirroring some of Heaven tactics but not their hypocrisy. Because they are the bad guys, they don't need to be fake.

Awhile ago @ouidamforeman made this post:

This shot through my brain like a chain of firecrackers, so, without derailing the original post, I have some THOUGHTS to add about why this concept is not only hilarious (because it is), but also...

It. It kind of fucks. Severely.

And in a delightfully Pratchett-y way, I'd dare to suggest.

I'll explain:

As inferred above, both Crowley AND Aziraphale have canonical Biblical counterparts. Not by name, no, but by function.

Crowley, of course, is the serpent of Eden.

(note on the serpent of Eden: In Genesis 3:1-15, at least, the serpent is not identified as anything other than a serpent, albeit one that can talk. Later, it will be variously interpreted as a traitorous agent of Hell, as a demon, as a guise of Satan himself, etc. In Good Omens --as a slinky ginger who walks funny)

Lesser known, at least so far as I can tell, is the flaming sword. It, too, appears in Genesis 3, in the very last line:

"So he drove out the man; and placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life." --Genesis 3:24, KJV

Thanks to translation ambiguity, there is some debate concerning the nature of the flaming sword --is it a divine weapon given unto one of the Cherubim (if so, why only one)? Or is it an independent entity, which takes the form of a sword (as other angelic beings take the form of wheels and such)? For our purposes, I don't think the distinction matters. The guard at the gate of Eden, whether an angel wielding the sword or an angel who IS the sword, is Aziraphale.

(note on the flaming sword: in some traditions --Eastern Orthodox, for example-- it is held that upon Christ's death and resurrection, the flaming sword gave up it's post and vanished from Eden for good. By these sensibilities, the removal of the sword signifies the redemption and salvation of man.

...Put a pin in that. We're coming back to it.)

So, we have our pair. The Serpent and the Sword, introduced at the beginning and the end (ha) of the very same chapter of Genesis.

But here's the important bit, the bit that's not immediately obvious, the bit that nonetheless encapsulates one of the central themes, if not THE central theme, of Good Omens:

The Sword was never intended to guard Eden while Adam and Eve were still in it.

Do you understand?

The Sword's function was never to protect them. It doesn't even appear until after they've already fallen. No... it was to usher Adam and Eve from the garden, and then keep them out. It was a threat. It was a punishment.

The flaming sword was given to be used against them.

So. Again. We have our pair. The Serpent and the Sword: the inception and the consequence of original sin, personified. They are the one-two punch that launches mankind from paradise, after Hell lures it to destruction and Heaven condemns it for being destroyed. Which is to say that despite being, supposedly, hereditary enemies on two different sides of a celestial cold war, they are actually unified by one purpose, one pivotal role to play in the Divine Plan: completely fucking humanity over.

That's how it's supposed to go. It is written.

...But, in Good Omens, they're not just the Serpent and the Sword.

They're Crowley and Aziraphale.

(author begins to go insane from emotion under the cut)

In Good Omens, humanity is handed it's salvation (pin!) scarcely half an hour after losing it. Instead of looming over God's empty garden, the sword protects a very sad, very scared and very pregnant girl. And no, not because a blameless martyr suffered and died for the privilege, either.

It was just that she'd had such a bad day. And there were vicious animals out there. And Aziraphale worried she would be cold.

...I need to impress upon you how much this is NOT just a matter of being careless with company property. With this one act of kindness, Aziraphale is undermining the whole entire POINT of the expulsion from Eden. God Herself confronts him about it, and he lies. To God.

And the Serpent--

(Crowley, that is, who wonders what's so bad about knowing the difference between good and evil anyway; who thinks that maybe he did a GOOD thing when he tempted Eve with the apple; who objects that God is over-reacting to a first offense; who knows what it is to fall but not what it is to be comforted after the fact...)

--just goes ahead and falls in love with him about it.

As for Crowley --I barely need to explain him, right? People have been making the 'didn't the serpent actually do us a solid?' argument for centuries. But if I'm going to quote one of them, it may as well be the one Neil Gaiman wrote ficlet about:

"If the account given in Genesis is really true, ought we not, after all, to thank this serpent? He was the first schoolmaster, the first advocate of learning, the first enemy of ignorance, the first to whisper in human ears the sacred word liberty, the creator of ambition, the author of modesty, of inquiry, of doubt, of investigation, of progress and of civilization." --Robert G. Ingersoll

The first to ask questions.

Even beyond flattering literary interpretation, we know that Crowley is, so often, discreetly running damage control on the machinations of Heaven and Hell. When he can get away with it. Occasionally, when he can't (1827).

And Aziraphale loves him for it, too. Loves him back.

And so this romance plays out over millennia, where they fall in love with each other but also the world, because of each other and because of the world. But it begins in Eden. Where, instead of acting as the first Earthly example of Divine/Diabolical collusion and callousness--

(other examples --the flood; the bet with Satan; the back channels; the exchange of Holy Water and Hellfire; and on and on...)

--they refuse. Without even necessarily knowing they're doing it, they just refuse. Refuse to trivialize human life, and refuse to hate each other.

To write a story about the Serpent and the Sword falling in love is to write a story about transgression.

Not just in the sense that they are a demon and an angel, and it's ~forbidden. That's part of it, yeah, but the greater part of it is that they are THIS demon and angel, in particular. From The Real Bible's Book of Genesis, in the chapter where man falls.

It's the sort of thing you write and laugh. And then you look at it. And you think. And then you frown, and you sit up a little straighter. And you think.

And then you keep writing.

And what emerges hits you like a goddamn truck.

(...A lot of Pratchett reads that way. I believe Gaiman when he says Pratchett would have been happy with the romance, by the way. I really really do).

It's a story about transgression, about love as transgression. They break the rules by loving each other, by loving creation, and by rejecting the hatred and hypocrisy that would have triangulated them as a unified blow against humanity, before humanity had even really got started. And yeah, hell, it's a queer romance too, just to really drive the point home (oh, that!!! THAT!!!)

...I could spend a long time wildly gesturing at this and never be satisfied. Instead of watching me do that (I'll spare you), please look at this gif:

I love this shot so much.

Look at Eve and Crowley moving, at the same time in the same direction, towards their respective wielders of the flaming sword. Adam reaches out and takes her hand; Aziraphale reaches out and covers him with a wing.

You know what a shot like that establishes? Likeness. Commonality. Kinship.

"Our side" was never just Crowley and Aziraphale. Crowley says as much at the end of season 1 ("--all of us against all of them."). From the beginning, "our side" was Crowley, Aziraphale, and every single human being. Lately that's around 8 billion, but once upon a time it was just two other people. Another couple. The primeval mother and father.

But Adam and Eve die, eventually. Humanity grows without them. It's Crowley and Aziraphale who remain, and who protect it. Who...oversee it's upbringing.

Godfathers. Sort of.

my favourite ship dynamic is “me and the bad bitch i pulled by being autistic” but you can’t tell which is which

oh teehee I’m in a silly goofy mood (I am hanging on by a fucking thread)

Yet another reminder that faking is a conscious choice that you make.

It is not something you can do accidentally, regards of what you're talking about.

You can't accidentally fake depression, or anxiety, or bipolar disorder, or schizophrenia, or any other mental illness.

You can't accidentally fake Borderline Personality Disorder, Histrionic Personality Disorder, personality disorders.

You can't accidentally fake ADHD, autism, Tourette's Syndrome, auditory processing disorder, aphasia or any other neurodivergence

You can't accidentally fake being trans or ace-spec or aro-spec or any other LGBTQIA+ identity.

You can't accidentally fake chronic illnesses like CFS, fibromyalgia or any chronic illness.

You also can't accidentally fake being good/intelligent at something. You didn't fool your peers into reaching your position.

You can't accidentally fake trauma, PTSD/cPTSD, DID/OSDD/DDNOS or any other trauma-based disorder.

Tldr:

Faking is a conscious choice.

You cannot do it by accident.

If you are worried that you are faking, that in itself is proof that you are not.

Why did we stop talking about the manson girl outfit? The manson girl outfit made so many of the other outfits make sense to me. I wanna talk about the manson girl outfit.

I’m so fucking sick of it

Bruce Wayne IS NOT BATMAN!!! Leave the damn man alone! No offense but Bruce Wayne is a fucking idiot

Have any of your seen a single interview with him? The man legitimately didn’t believe narwhals existed

queer is literally a slur. like you’ve never been called that in a derogatory context like most lgbt people? you think your experiences escaping homophobia make it okay to justify the use of a homophobic slur?

queer is an identity.

it has also been used as a slur. there is no denying that. but using a word as a slur does not make it a slur. because before queer is a slur it is an identity. before it is derogatory it is a label. the use of queer as an identity is infinitely more important than the use of queer as a slur because the people who identify as queer are infinitely more important than the people who use queer as a slur.

say a lot of people decided they hated me. despised me. were disgusted by me to the point where my own name became a slur. would you tell me not to say it? would you tell me i could no longer be helena, and instead must come up with a euphemism for the name that belonged to me decades before it belonged in the mouths of bigots?

because that would make you an enabler.

you would tell me i can’t say my name anymore because some lowlife decided he could use it to insult me?

you would tell a gay man that he can’t be gay anymore because some teens in the early 2000’s started calling everything they didn’t like “gay”, and now he has to say “same sex oriented male identifying individual”?

does that enrage you? because it should. that’s exactly how you sound.

you are telling me i cannot use my label. you are telling me that when my great-uncle shouted until his face was red and he spat tobacco and the word queer at my feet, he was right. he was right to insult me, and i was wrong to say my name.

you are shitting on every single one of our predecessors. you are slandering every person who fought for their rights to exist and and be tolerated and be celebrated in their countries, every person who was lost to the aids epidemic, every person whose country criminalizes love and gender expression, every child whose parents abandoned them for straying from the norm, every person who was born and will die in the closet longing to be themselves. the queer umbrella is a safety net, a security blanket, the comfort of being known without being pressured to tell. it is near and dear and important as fuck to every member of the lgbt+ community and you are a blight upon the earth you walk.

how dare you speak upon my experiences with homophobia. how dare you disguise your own homophobia as activism. and how fucking dare you have the audacity to come to my blog and hide behind an anonymous ask and preach to me about how i’m oppressing myself. go look at the fucking wikipedia page for queer and read about how 1980s lgbt+ activists, especially lgbt+ people of color, fought to call themselves queer in a world that still hates peculiar things. and here you are forty years later spitting queer back at their feet.

i don’t give a fuck if people start using my name as a slur. my name is still helena. i will not change it. i chose it, i like it, and it belongs to me. it does not belong to bigots no matter how badly they want it. your discomfort with my identity is not my fucking problem.

i am helena. i am queer. die mad & go fuck yourself

Can you please reblog if your blog is a safe place for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, asexual, aromantic, pansexual, non binary, demisexual or any other kind of queer or questioning people? Because mine is.