welcome to hell... who gives a SHIT

jas | spider | web developer

i like bugs, monsters, dinosaurs, kaiju, science, mecha, stupid jokes and nerd shit



ask | artblog | my list of too damn many sideblogs | my oc stuff | nerd blog | about

autistictheon asked: thers' a short story in the canon of the 1982 thing (called "the things" iirc) written from the thing's pov and its reaction to the humans is the same level of sheer visceral shocked disgusted horror that the humans react to it with. It was written by a third party for a writing contest and john carpenter liked it so much he made it canon

bogleech:

Oh yes. You would think a story from the Thing’s perspective and explaining almost everything about it would just demystify the whole movie and take away some of the horror, but THE THINGS is absolutely terrifying and enhances the movie for me. I had no idea Carpenter decided it should be canon, that’s wonderful.

i already mentioned it in a reply but this story should probably come with a tw: rape warning. it’s not overt, just the last line is pretty brutal and eigh kind of unnecessary 

i do like this story though

i just bought this lovely character from ughrome aaa
i’ve wanted a striped hyena character forever but i could never really nail down a design for most of her body

i just bought this lovely character from ughrome aaa

i’ve wanted a striped hyena character forever but i could never really nail down a design for most of her body

i really enjoy+appreciate how well the clone wars animates very nonhuman looking aliens

enjoyin this shark dude at the start of s4

well, and also everything about the style in general

fussybabybitch:

bn0024:

the proposal of “queer characters in fiction that aren’t defined by their sexuality” appears outwardly harmless or even good but is to me codified and toxic in some way I can’t articulate right now… help?

"aren’t defined by their sexuality" is an incredibly different standard when applied to heterosexuality than when applied to homosexuality (and furthermore, entirely different when applied to heterosexual men then to heterosexual women, but that’s another articulation)

to use a fairly explicit genre example, heterosexual male action heroes frequently have heterosexual plotlines, motivations, sex scenes, lines, their behavior and actions and interactions and character history is built not only from all the other components, but from their heterosexuality. for some reason my first example is always demolition man, where Stallone has an entire, uncomfortably lengthy scene about Real Straight Fucking and not this namby-pampy future sex with wires and condoms

for gay men to not be defined by their sexuality is to usually be essentially asexual, maybe in a relationship but it has to be coded off-screen, included in throwaway lines (the “my boyfriend will love this!” bit from Paranorman being constantly praised as a GREAT EXAMPLE when tbqh I found it to be pandering horseshit), but definitely not too sexual, definitely not too “gay” in a way that visibly marks them as so (nevermind that heterosexuality for men is so linked to virility and machismo and ‘natural’ maleness and yet this behavior is never treat as “shoving their heterosexuality in your face”)

Did anybody ever claim that Superbad suffered from making characters who were defined by their sexuality, even though the entire film is about teen male heterosexuality?

Straight men (and to a lesser extent, straight women) get to be as visibly straight as they want to be in as many ways as they want to be but in order for queer characters to not be “defined by their sexuality” they usually have to completely fucking forsake any mention of it that might make audiences uncomfortable for longer than three seconds of screentime.

there’s gotta be some happy medium between this and the lgbt characters who do get to be visibly lgbt longer than three seconds ending up dead and mutilated in a ditch, which seems to be our only other option in mainstream media

well, hell, scratch that, any character who’s not a white straight dude has a pretty good chance of ending up in a ditch 

i def can understand being concerned about characters being ‘defined by their sexuality’ when in practice that often means ‘defined by some straight writer’s use of stereotypes and ignorance’ or just played as a giant fuckin joke


source: 1969 Cadillac Eldorado front 3q (by Ate Up With Motor)

i saw one of these pull out of dollar general when i went by there. i didn’t know it was possible to be attracted to a car until now
i’ve been looking at cars since i might have to get one in the next year or so (mine’s pushing 10+ years and 124000+ miles) and goddamn. i have expensive tastes. i hate how all the little cutesy actually-in-my-price range compacts and hatchbacks look, i go straight for the sports models lol :[

source: 1969 Cadillac Eldorado front 3q (by Ate Up With Motor)

i saw one of these pull out of dollar general when i went by there. i didn’t know it was possible to be attracted to a car until now

i’ve been looking at cars since i might have to get one in the next year or so (mine’s pushing 10+ years and 124000+ miles) and goddamn. i have expensive tastes. i hate how all the little cutesy actually-in-my-price range compacts and hatchbacks look, i go straight for the sports models lol :[

i can’t believe there’s a ‘hoarding and squalor’ conference. worst con ever