V(iper)'s Room

reblog if your blog is not a safe space for anyone. reblog if anyone looking at your blog runs the risk of exploding into a million little pieces and dying terribly and painfully

Also, I don’t tag my stuff most of the time.

My asks are always open.

I‘m not here to humor you, this is my Blog so mostly just stuff I like or agree with. If you don’t like it, feel free to unfollow.

You can also block me if you feel the urge. I literally don’t give a flying fuck.

If you enjoy my Blog, you’re my bestie and I love you.

I haven’t felt the “The World Gives Me Shapes And Colors Inside” inner-sense clearly since I was a little kid. I miss it and I want it back.

I don’t even know what this sense is called. Is there a word for what it is? I used to refer to it as “the imagination” as a kid, but it was more like a type of somatic perception that was different from just thinking up visuals in my head. It was a felt thing. Interacting with stuff literally gave me the impression of shapes, colors, and landscapes inside my whole body, and it really just made the world feel super rich to be in.

For the record, I do have an idea of what currently obfuscates it, and have an idea of how to get it back.

I'm just wondering if there's like...any cultural concept as to what it is.

I'm hearing "synesthesia," but my limited understanding of synesthesia is that it's an overlap of two or more senses, like colors and sounds, and that it only pertains to those overlapping senses.

This is more like its own kind of sense-perception entirely. What it did was reflect the experience I was having on the outside as a kind of felt-landscape on the inside. Even the different ways of, say, biting into a grape, produced a very different landscape of experience.

I know what you mean. Also just looking at things or task-planning in your head would give you a lot of feelings and very specific associations. The quality of perception was much richer. It just numbs down as you age and it’s so sad really.

No yea it’s definitely only speculation, but i was just wondering if its possible that what hes doing is some kind of slip up or deliberate change in his acting or watevs OR theres actually a reason for Loki acting like this - its all a front to trick the TVA and make those around him underestimate him. Because i know at this point in the series a lot of people would love nothing more than to believe the latter me being one of them even if we probably shouldnt give Marvel that much credit (but i guess time will tell, im just impatient :”)))

Still you’re probably right on your last point tho - its probs just Disney making him as palatable as possible, and thats just getting as many types of people to be able to like him/ relate to him, so i suppose spoon-feeding them all this new info about Loki, his thoughts and motivations and stuff is a big part of that.

OH light bulb moment

Maybe thats why theyre still framing him as a bad guy - in his own show: audience appeal. To them, this whole time Loki HAS been a villain, or at the very least an antagonist of some sort, and still he kept pulling a huge crowd. Maybe they figured, hey - Loki The Bad Guy™ is pulling all this money, lets keep it up. Still, he IS the protagonist and we cant have an actual bad guy be that, so he has to atone for his sins in order for his character to fit the bill. Which is why we got that interrogation scene i guess (im still a bit on the fence on whether that was actually Loki breaking or just telling Mobius what he wants to hear, but maybe im just overly optimistic) and other scenes, off the top of my head: “Id never do it again”. Theyre making loki into the bad guy, but i think its for the purpose of “”””making him acknowledge his mistakes so he can grow from them under the TVAs guidance apparently”””””, thus ultimately ending up with a more defanged character, as you said, that appeals to both the filthy thirsty fangirls who wanna fuck the bad guy by acknowledging him as the bad guy, and to the casual fans that see Loki “growing” and becoming “a hero” they can empathize with and wanna project onto.

Ugh this made me sad

Sorry about the rant and also sorry if this is hard to get through, i just wrote it out as it came to me so i dont expect it makes much sense😅

I don’t think the change is an accident on Tom’s part; he’s way too much a professional for that, not to mention I have seen firsthand (sdcc hall h 2013) that the guy can channel Loki at the drop of a hat, so unless his vision of Loki has gotten muddied in the meantime, I don’t buy it. But I also don’t buy that it’s an in-universe ploy on Loki’s part… because while fans have certainly been able to come up with plausible explanations and excuses, none of them are really coming from the content of the show itself. If you’re going to have a character using misdirection like that, a careful viewer needs to be able to pick up hints in the show itself. Not from previous canon. Not from “but that’s weird, why would he do that??? Unless…. *wild theorizing out of thin air*” I’d love to find someone who has been hiding under a rock for the last decade and never seen any Marvel movies or heard anything about the character, make them watch the show, and see whether they pick up any of the stuff fans are insisting is the Real Intention, because I am betting they wouldn’t. At this point, even if they do show it to have been a ploy all along, I am going to have to say it’s very bad writing, because a careful viewer should be able to put the hints together, or else it’s the same “gotcha! you never saw that twist ending coming! [because we pulled it straight out of our ass with no setup within the show]” bullshit that has become so popular in media. That is not good writing. It’s not clever. It creates a flimsy and unsatisfying narrative.

And I think you’re kinda right with the latter point, but I don’t think they actually mean to cater to the thirsty fangirls who wanna fuck the bad guy. I don’t think that’s the intention at all. I think they are extremely uncomfortable with the idea that those fans exist, and they believe that dismissive description covers most of his existing fanbase. So while to some extent they have to acknowledge the character’s history as a villain, they’re doing so in a way that mocks it. They’re ridiculing those fangirls by showing this “villain” as a fucking clown who is shown up and outclassed by everyone around him, both villains and heroes. They’re intending to make it impossible to think he was ever an interesting, compelling, complex, and, yes, attractive villain (for whatever value of “attractive,” even if only aesthetic), and at the same time they’re making him “grow” to become sanitized and nonthreatening to the sort of conservative moral tastes that think there’s something corrupting about empathizing with a fictional villain.

And that’s a thing I think can easily get lost in this. “Mass-marketable” and “appealing to the broadest possible audience” does NOT mean “everyone who liked it before should like it MORE now!” When you change something that appealed to a niche audience into something that appeals to a broad audience, the niche audience is very often actually left out in the cold. The sharp edges that are being filed off are, in many cases, what made the character interesting and appealing in the first place, and if those qualities are replaced, the result will very likely not meet the same need. 

that was an incredible good and accurate analysis

Full offense and pun fully intended, but I genuinely think the very existence of "dead dove, do not eat" was a fucking canary in the mines, and no one really paid attention.

Because the tag itself was created as a response to a fandom-wide tendency to disregard warnings and assume tagging was exaggerated. And then the same fucking idiots reading those tags describing things they found upsetting or disturbing or just not to their taste would STILL click into the stories and give the writer's grief about it.

And as a response writers began using the tag to signal "no, really, I MEAN the tags!"

But like.

If you really think about it, that's a solution to a different problem. The solution to "I know you tagged your story appropriately but I chose to disregard the tags and warnings by reading it anyway, even though I knew it would upset me, so now I'm upset and making it your problem" is frankly a block, a ban and wide-spread blacklisting. But fandom as a whole is fucking awful at handling bad faith, insidious arguments that appeal to community inclusion and weaponize the fact most people participating in fandom want to share the space with others, as opposed to hurting people.

So instead of upfront ridiculing this kind of maladaptive attempt to foster one's own emotional self-regulation onto random strangers on the internet, fandom compromised and came up with a redundant tag in a good faith attempt to address an imaginary nuance.

There is no nuance to this.

A writer's job is to tag their work correctly. It's not to tag it exhaustively. It's not even to tag it extensively. A writer's sole obligation, as far as AO3 and arguably fandom spaces are concerned, is to make damn sure that the tags they put on their story actually match whatever is going on in that story.

That's it.

That's all.

"But what if I don't want to read X?" Well, you don't read fic that's tagged X.

"But what if I read something that wasn't tagged X?" Well, that's very unfortunate for you, but if it is genuinely that upsetting, you have a responsibility to yourself to only browse things explicitly tagged to not include X.

"But that's not a lot of fic!" Hi, you must be new here, yes, welcome to fandom. Most of our spaces are built explicitly as a reaction to There's Not Enough Of The Thing I Want, both in canon and fandom.

"But there are things on the internet that I don't like!" Yeah, and they are also out there, offline. And, here's the thing, things existing even though we personally dislike or even hate or even flat out find offensive/gross/immoral/unspeakable existing is the price we pay to secure our right to exist as individuals and creators, regardless of who finds US personally unpleasant, hateful or flat out offensive/gross/immoral/unspeakable.

"But what about [illegal thing]?!" So the thing itself is illegal, because the thing itself has been deemed harmful. But your goddamn cop-poisoned authoritarian little heart needs to learn that sometimes things are illegal that aren't harmful, and defaulting to "but illegal!" is a surefire way to end up on the wrong side of the fascism pop quiz. You're not a figure of authority and the more you demand to control and exercise authority by command, rather than leadership, the less impressive you seem. You know how you make actual, genuine change in a community? You center harm and argue in good faith to find accommodations and spread awareness of real, actual problems.

But let's play your game. Let's pretend we're all brainwashed cop-abiding little cogs that do not own a single working brain cell to exercise critical thinking with. 99% of the time, when you cry about any given thing "being illegal!!!" you're correct only so far as the THING itself being illegal. The act or object is illegal. Depiction of it is not. You know why, dipshit? Because if depiction of the thing were illegal, you wouldn't be able to talk about it. You wouldn't be able to educate about it. You wouldn't be able to reexamine and discuss and understand the thing, how and why and where it happens and how to prevent it. And yeah, depiction being legal opens the door for people to make depictions that are in bad taste or probably not appropriate. Sure. But that's the price we pay, creating tools to demystify some of the most horrific things in the world and support the people who've survived them. The net good of those tools existing outweighs the harm of people misusing them.

"You're defending the indefensible!" No, you're clumsily stumbling into a conversation that's been going on for centuries, with your elementary school understanding of morality and your bone-deep police state rot filtering your perception of reality, and insisting you figured it out and everyone else at the table is an idiot for not agreeing with you. Shut the fuck up, sit the fuck down and read a goddamn book.

relevant everywhere tbh

#tony stark, teacher’s pet

So this shows something I think about a lot with Tony and his genius. While it’s easy to portray him as arrogent and quick to assume he’s smarter than everyone, the opposite is just as likely to be a problem. The briefing packet included Selvig’s notes on the cube and it’s potential uses, so OBVIOUSLY he read through it and did any supplemental research needed to fully understand it, didn’t everyone?

Similarly in AoU, he tells the Avengers that they weren’t anywhere close to an interface, meaning “something outside of our work on the program caused this” and when they ignore him (without asking for clarification) he stops bothering to defend himself because he’s already said all he can say, rather than trying to walk them through why this cannot be his Ultron.

I also think this is half the problem in Civil War, in that he DOESN’T treat them like morons and spell out the background and political climate of what they are being presented with, instead assuming that they know the full scope and consequences of what is going on (and have recognized Ross’s manipulations) and still disagree.

tony’s biggest crime in the mcu wasnt manufacturing military weapons; it was assuming the other avengers had any functioning brain cells

Tony was a poem, but they couldn’t read

#tony stark#the problem also stems from the fact that the other avengers never indicate their ignorance/confusion — partly because half the time they-#-don’t even KNOW they’re ignorant of all the facts. a lot of the problems in the mcu stem from the worst kinds of miscommunications.#mostly out of assumptions on both ends. they both assume cap/avengers have all the facts and are basing their interactions on that#the thing abt tony is that once he realizes that others aren’t following what he’s saying; he immediately recalibrates how he’s speaking#you can see this in every interaction he has in high-stress situations where communication is key. im1 when hes conveying his plan to peppe#im2 when he’s warning Rhodey of vanko’s attack. A1 when he and cap are fixing the helicarrier. im3 when he’s saving the Air Force 1 workers#even in aiw when he’s briefing Peter abt the situation: ‘he’s from space. he’s trying to steal a necklace from a wizard.’ it was concise-#-conveyed everything Peter needed to know about the situation and what he needed to do about it. the key to communication with Tony lied in#Asking Questions. if you watch the iron fam interact with him you’d notice they ask a lot of questions. that’s because they know his psyche#-they know that if you don’t ask he’ll assume you know everything you need to know abt the situation. he’ll assume you’re well informed.#it’s not that Tony doesn’t know how to communicate with others#it’s more that the other avengers never paid enough attention to learn how to communicate with HIM#so yah. ‘Tony was a poem they couldn’t read’ is actually hella accurate from a meta standpoint

@esoulix how dare you hide this in the tags

has anyone done this yet

DEFEAT THE AMERICANS COME ON WE CAN DO IT!! (posting this when they're sleeping hehehe)

Please do defeat the Americans!

As an American, please defeat us. For the love of unholy god

HAHAHAHAH. AMERICAN WEBSITE LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

@ruttotohtori @torillatavataan @noisilyclassycloud @libertyremains ja muut suomitumput, hyökkäykseen!

TULTA MUNILLE!!!!!

are you uninformed loons really unaware that bananas aren’t SUPPOSED to cause tingling & swelling sensations?

also potatoes are not supposed to give you potato sweats. pineapples aren’t supposed to be spicy

YES pineapples contain an enzyme that literally dissolves the top layer of the inside of your mouth. NO, most people aren’t able to actually taste that happening

kiwis aren’t supposed to make your mouth itch

much respect to the people in the notes going “i have learned something new about myself today, but i am going to continuing eating and enjoying my itchy spicy danger food”

Important question: are grapes supposed to make your throat pruny like fingers in bathwater?

honey, no.

Note to anyone who experiences tingling, itching, etc when eating bananas: you might want to get tested for a latex allergy

People who are allergic to latex often have reactions to bananas, avocado, kiwi, strawberries and tomatoes, because they have some of the same proteins as latex.

It is rare to be only allergic to bananas, without also being allergic to latex… not impossible, but not common.

And latex is in lots of things (not just condoms lol), like bandaids or elastic in clothing, and contact can make your skin irritated.

In general though… if your food feels like it’s fighting back, you might be allergic lol

While I deeply admire all of you who continue to eat foods that are fighting back please remember that allergies can get MUCH worse over time and what might only tingle one day might actually send you to the hospital in the future. So you know, just be careful about it.

Controversial opinion, but can we, as a fandom, stop referring to Loki as Laufeyson

And that is the best take I've seen on this topic and one that I completely agree with. I hope you don't mind me reblogging your tags @semisolidvoid

I completely and utterly disagree.

By doing that, we're not any better than Odin, or the Loki show who forgot Loki's Jotnar heritage.

It is part of him. A part unexplored, but so very interesting.

A part Kate Herron, Michael Waldron & Eric Martin tried to erase... because let's face it, they don't care about Loki... ^^'

Look at this concept art for Utgard. LOOK AT IT. Does it look like the work of barbarians or monsters like Odin would have Loki (and Thor, and the others) believe? HELL NO.

Jotnars had most likely a great civilization. One Loki had THE RIGHT to know about... But Odin robbed him of that.

As far as I am concerned, I am still certain Laufey did not abandon Loki. Odin supposedly found him in a temple? WHAT WERE YOU DOING IN A TEMPLE, GLAD OF WAR??? That's a sacred place were civilians take refuge and the enemy is not supposed to set foot in ^^'

Plus there was the What if story...

AND WE KNOW ODIN AND HIS LIES.

Laufey probably thought that if he let Loki believe he was pure evil and kill him, Odin would reward him and potentially give him the throne.... (oh my sweet summer child ^^')

But even if Laufey had been truly evil and abandoned him (pretty sure he did not, but let's imagine), that does not mean all Jotuns are evil, like Odin pretends they are.

That does not mean Loki should not embrace his Jotun roots.

That does not mean he should not go to Jotunheim and try to be a better king that both his fathers - adoptive and birthfather- were.

Plus, the Laufeyson name is still the closest thing we'll get to his mythology name, Laufeyjarson ^^'

STILL BETTER THAN ODINSON.

Just because it's a part of him, that doesn't automatically mean he identifies with it. No one is denying his heritage, but rather respecting his own choice not to identify as such.

I feel like insisting upon calling him a name he so clearly rejects and one that has been weaponised against him as the means of disownment, would be taking away his agency..again.

if I chose not to use my father's last name because he wasn't a part of my life, am I erasing part of my identity or am I making a personal choice that that part of my identity is either a) not particularly relevant to me or b) a painful part of my history that I haven't worked through and therefore don't want to be casually associated with? what matters most here isn't that Loki's birth father is a part of his history, nor what the truth about that history may or may not be (which, as always when Odin is the one telling the story, is up in the air). it's nothing to do with passing judgment on Laufey and declaring him, let alone all Jötnar, as a villain; nor is it in any way absolving Odin of his crimes. what's most relevant (and I would even argue is the only thing that's relevant to this debate) is that Loki would not be comfortable calling himself by that name—nor with being casually called that by other people. we know he wouldn't be, because at least to date, he's specifically chosen not to identify that way. the last two times (three, if we count IW, but ehhh let's not) Loki introduced himself to someone, it was specifically not by invoking Laufey's name. that's not irrelevant. it's a highly intentional choice he's made for himself—as someone of Loki's status would typically introduce themselves by their patronymic, not simply by their realm of origin. we see this when Thor introduces himself to Laufey as Thor Odinson on Jötunheim, and we can safely extrapolate that the same would be applicable for Loki.

and in fact, to illustrate this discomfort with Loki's birth name even further, we can turn to the prelude comic for The Dark World, which is among the comics that are technically canon to the MCU. Among its pages, we see Odin refer to Loki as Laufeyson specifically for the purpose of hurting him. if you want to thumb your nose at Odin, following his lead may not be the best way to do so. just a thought.

but the real divide here seems to be that @jonquilclegane is hung up on what they believe *should* have happened in canon, whereas the rest of us here (at least those who are anti-Laufeyson, so to speak) are focused on what *is* canon. would it be nice if Loki eventually learned to embrace his Jötun heritage? of course it would be. but that's not where he's at. and to be quite frank, from my POV, to attempt to force it upon him because we think that's what's best for him would make us no less cruel or manipulative than Odin and Frigga. as @abby118 said, it's taking away his agency... again. I rather think he's had enough of that from people who claim to love him.

nikko's tags...

my 5c:

really i think the point here is, what does LOKI introduce himself as? after being made aware of his parentage?

LOKI of asgard. LOKI.

the only time he calls himself "LOKI of jotunheim" even, was when he was attempting to create a deception for the svartalfar and have them believe he was not an ally of thor and asgard.

and i honestly, think that is the only thing that matters. it's not important what anyone else believes might be best for him ultimately. and it has nothing to do with any kind of judgement on the jotnar - positive, neutral, or negative. it's totally irrelevant.

the fact is, he doesn't choose to title himself with his sire's name. so unless and until he does, i wouldn't feel at all comfortable deciding that for him. it's not my place. why? because it's not my name.

far too many people try to tell others what they ought to be doing, rather than listening to what they need and want.

personally? i don't take my paternal surname as my own. i never have. even though i'm on good terms for many years now with my formerly estranged father and his family; it wasn't part of me growing up, so i don't feel like it's part of me now that i'm an adult.

so maybe that's why it's easy for me to understand LOKI now. and especially given that he's in no way resolved all or possibly any of his thoughts and emotions connected to his heritage. i at least, knew who my father was all along. he didn't.

and if he doesn't choose to officially embrace that connection? well that's his right. and none of our fucking business, really.

This.

RIP KABOSU THE DOGE MEME DOG

Yes a bunch of these overlap. Yes I ran out of ideas. No there’s no show results

— Marcus Aurelius

THIS IS SO FUCKING IMPORTANT! My best friend was turned into a meme on 4chan and 9gag and shit with everyone slut shaming her, and its fucking heartbreaking. People don’t understand the horror of seeing a picture of themselves on the internet with hundreds of thousands of people making fun of them. these people will most likely see these pictures online at some point. Theres no telling how they will react. Theres no telling what personal damage will occur to their self esteem. Do not post pictures of strangers on the internet. Do not reblog/repost these pictures either. Especially if they’re children. That is all.

Someone finally said it

The Kensington House by @joneslambell

Get Inspired, visit www.myhouseidea.com