The Hermit's Nest

So the first one was well received and I was asked to do more :3

So part 2 of Headcanon : Zoro, Crocodile and Katakuri reacting to seeing their S/O crying for the first time.

Zoro

- Will get extremely flustered at first

"O-oi! {Name} what happened? Are you hurt? Stomach ache? CHOPPER! "

- Will attempt to kill people if the source of your crying was because of someone

- Hugs, awkward affections until it settles and then it will be like hugging a teddy bear

- Will most likely want to talk to you about the problem over sake

- Naps. He will hold you until he falls asleep in hope that you fall asleep too and your problems go away (let's be honest he just naps his problems away if he can't cut them with a sword)

- Probably ask the Stupid Love Cook to cook your favourite food/make your favourite snack

- Will attempt to make you laugh with terrible dad jokes and chances are they will be so terrible that you would laugh at them

(He will most likely laugh at his own jokes, even more so if he has been drinking and his laughter would probably cheer you up as well)

- If there was the discussion over sake and he had a few he might be inclined to a lot more affection, lots more hugs and kisses, even nuzzling (he basically becomes a giant cat)

Crocodile

- Will try discuss it in a very professional manner until he is out of work mode

- Presents. Suddenly there will be new items of clothing, jewelry, perfumes and anything you might like.

- Will buy enough food for a feast just to try and cheer you up

- Might get a hug if you're lucky but might not be the most affectionate in this situation, however if he does give you a hug it will turn into you sitting on his lap as he holds you throughout all of his late night working

- Will use his resources to find the reason for your crying, and offer some well placed words of advice, his words of comfort might sound a bit cold but trust that he means well

- Will be a bit more attentive with you

Katakuri

- Its a fact that Katakuri is super protective over his family, and if you're his S/O you hold just as much importance

- He will probably experience some mild PTSD over remembering what happened to Brulee and try to comfort you the best way he can which means if the source of your crying was someone... Katakuri will bring down the full extent of his mochi wrath upon them.

- Pulling you onto his lap and giving snuggles, believe it or not he is extremely gentle (though he may not look it)

- Head pats, hugs, soft kisses and him feeding you a share of his merienda snacks can be expected from the giant teddy

- Appearances can be very deceiving, despite everything Katakuri is extremely caring and attentive towards those he is close to, he will speak to you about the problem or source of the crying and comfort you no matter how big or small the situation may be.

SO SOME ASSHOLE GOT HOLD OF MY PHONE AND CHANGE ALL MY CONTACT NAMES, ICONS AND RINGTONES TO THIS FUCKING THING

SO NOW WHENEVER I GET A CALL MY PHONE THINKS IT’S BEING ALL CUTE LIKE “it is a mystery >O>” FUCK YOU MAN

This is a blessed post and that ringtone is the cutest thing bUT I CAN NEVER FIND THE FUCKING POsT FOR LIKE FIVE YEARS

its was a mystery

i’ll find the post five years from now but technically by cheating see y’all in a bit

I'm sorry I keep posting my tiktok comments but please. What does this mean. What do people THINK shipping is for anymore???

the first and last time he'll let his brothers pick him up from school (wishful thinking 🙄!)

It must be said that this is the only moment in the entire show where this guy is saying something sane.

Please don’t mind the servants.

Actually the portrait of Charles is red to represent enthusiasm, energy, determination, passion, strength, leadership, and love. It doesn't matter that it looks like he's walking through fountains of blood spilled by the British empire! Some of you people need to learn color theory

i was WAITING for this post

tumblr coming across the painting:

"Why does this 19th Century novel have such a boring protagonist" well, for a lot of reasons, really, but one of the big ones is that you're possibly getting the protagonist and the narrator mixed up.

A lot of 19th Century literary critics had this weird hate-boner for omniscient narrators – stories would straight up get criticised as "unrealistic" on the grounds that it was unlikely anyone could have witnessed their events in the manner described, like some sort of proto-CinemaSins bullshit – so authors who didn't want to write their stories from the first-person perspective of one of the participating characters would often go to great lengths to contrive for there to be a Dude present to witness and narrate the story's events.

It's important to understand that the Dude is the viewpoint character, but not the protagonist. His function is to witness stuff, and he only directly participates in the narrative to the extent that's necessary to explain to the satisfaction of persnickety critics why he's present and how he got there. Giving him a personality would defeat the purpose!

(Though lowbrow fiction was unlikely to encounter such criticisms, the device of the elaborately justified diegetic narrator was often present there as well, and was sometimes parodied to great effect – for example, by having the story narrated by a very unlikely party, such as a sapient insect, or by a party whose continued presence is justified in increasingly comical ways.)

Is that why so many novels from before about 1940 feature a lengthy and often-extraneous prologue in which the author explains how they came to be acquainted with the protagonist of the novel, and the circumstances under which said protagonist related the entire story to the author, How I Met Your Mother-style?

That's a related device, yes; it's basically splitting the difference by retaining the conceit of the omniscient narrator, but reassuring the critics that there's no need to get their underpants in a twist because there's actually a very good explanation (which will now be set forth in excruciating detail) for how the narrator came to know all this stuff.

The unnamed narrator from Lewis Carrol's Sylvie and Bruno (1889) is an interesting twist on this, as he keeps getting 'iseakai'd' into a fantasy story mid-sentence, completely ignored by the people around him (who can't see him anyways), and then mid-sentence is back in Victorian England, where he's stuck watching a romance bloom between two characters other than himself. He's not even fifth business in the narrative, he's just some poor sap who is there to observe it all, overlooked and often literally invisible.

Esther Summerson, by contrast, from Dickens' Bleak House (1853), is the non-omniscient narrator of a two-narrator book, but while she's important to the plot she is obnoxiously, aggravatingly self-effacing about it, trying desperately to portray herself as nothing more than a fly on the wall in a story in which she plays a large part.

An aspect of this jumped out at me recently is the degree to which horror stories from the early 20th century could be knee-capped by the absolute need for the narrator to survive. Because how else could they have written all this down?

I’m not suggesting killing off the narrator is inherently a better choice - but sometimes it’s the right choice. An example that jumps to mine is Lovecraft’s Picture in the House, which should have just ended the moment the narrator realizes his fate, but instead ends with the house being surreptitiously struck by lightning facilitating his last minute survival and undercutting all the build up to that moment.

There's an amusing historical anecdote about the first British edition of Moby-Dick accidentally omitting the final chapter (i.e., the one detailing Ishmael's miraculous rescue from the wreckage of the Pequod) due to a printer's error, and subsequently being criticised by the British literary press not because of the unsatisfyingly abrupt conclusion, but because the resulting narrative was unrealistic: how could Ishmael have narrated events in which he appears to have died?

kabru is so fucking funny. he’s out here playing 15 dimensional manipulation mind chess with a guy whose hobby is barking like a dog

And he's losing.

Never smile at a crocodile. Not because they’ll bite you, but they’re very lonely creatures. Once one of them thinks you’re its friend, it will follow you EVERYWHERE.

The Only Important Rule To Remember:

YOU BASTARDS! THRAWN IS MY BLUE BABY! HOW DARE Y-

I mean... good show. Good show. Congratulations to all the Thrawn fans for getting him to the semi-finals.

...anyway.

This is it!

Two enter, and only one may leave... who will be crowned the Hottest Star Wars Alien of all time?

Will it be Ahsoka Tano the correct choice?

Or will it be Darth Maul the incorrect choice?

Cast your votes wisely and vote for Ahsoka!

...and remember, this is all just for fun. Except it isn't, and Ahsoka better fucking win.

AHEM!

I mean, happy voting for Ahsoka!

-Jesse xx

P.S: Vote for Ahsoka.

Writing Scarecrow as a heartless monster doesn't make sense to me, I know and respect those who do this in the fandom, but it's just not for me.

And I say that because there's multiple times in the canon where he shows himself to still be human under the mask. I'm not saying he's a good person, far from it actually. BUT that doesn't mean he CAN'T DO GOOD for christs sake.

To me, this is enough proof that he does have a conscious, even if it is small and useless most of the time. When push comes to shove, he CAN do the right thing

Batman villains are meant to be complex humans, confused and mentally ill humans who just need help. BTAS taught us all that as kids, so why did we become cynical adults who can't have a little fun? Let him be human, make mistakes, occasionally do good, and just...exist as a flawed character.

"oh, if you make out with friends, you could ruin the friendship" so who am i supposed to kiss? my enemies? get a grip

i'd like to take this time to apologize for my prior lapse of judgement. listening and learning