Hbleak - Untitled

Is Hound colorblind like dogs? How does this go over with Mirage since he's one of the more artsy ones?

I never actually thought of that! I imagine yeah, he’s colorblind, and makes up for it with sharper vision for nocturnal missions.

Mirage honestly doesn’t have an issue with it, he’d be a little downcast initially when it would seem that Hound can’t enjoy most of his work, but then he figures out what colors Hound sees most brilliantly, and maybe that explains why his suit is mostly in shades of

(It’s Hound’s favorite color and the one he can best appreciate in its full splendor)

i see that pic and the only thing i can think of is "MAMMA MIA, THATS NOT HOW YOU A PISTOL"

You’ve Mamma’d your last Mia buddy.

Imagine John watching his future child pulling a John Walker just like him.

Dany antis:

We have to understand that Mirri was devastated over her town and the abuse she suffered. To empathize. She’s a “hero” therefore, for killing a BABY.

We do NOT have to understand that Daenerys was devastated over the loss of her husband and child. She does not deserve empathy despite her losses. She’s “evil” for killing a grown woman who killed a baby.

We have to understand the culture of wealthy grown educated men who have subjected human beings to slavery for hundreds of years.

Oh, but they weren’t alive for hundreds of years! We can’t hold that against them!

But we also can’t deny them the benefit of the excuse that they’ve done this for hundreds of years.

We do NOT have to understand the culture of a teenage girl who is a Khaleesi of the Dothraki, who kills the wine seller for trying to kill her and her baby.

Because she killed him painfully. We don’t care that Varys suggested killing her with the tears of Lys, and remember that the victim dies an agonizing death. We don’t think about the morals of a painful death when the intended victim is Daenerys.

The same applies to when she crucified the slavers. We’re going to insist she did it indiscriminately, even though we know she didn’t kill a single woman who would have had less power, or child who would be entirely innocent, nor did she kill random civilians, they were all nobles. All slavers. But there are innocent slavers! Innocent slavers are definitely a thing.

The people who make laws that are not up to modern standards, like Daenerys, are evil.

But the people who follow those laws, like Ned beheading a man for running away from the dead, or Jon who beheaded a man for refusing to follow an order, or Robb who threatened to hang a man if he didn’t join the war against the Lannisters, aren’t.

Daenerys may have warned the slavers she would show no mercy if they didn’t free the slaves and pay them reparations, but she should have given them a trial even though they own the system.

It’s true they were all slavers, but if she was punishing them for being slavers, she should have killed all of them. The fact she didn’t kill all of them shows it wasn’t about justice, so she’s evil.

But she was also wrong for wanting to kill all of them, and Jorah talked her out of it. The fact he had to talk her out of it shows she’s evil.

And then when Daario tried to talk her into slaughtering them Red Wedding style, and she refused, that’s also proof she’s evil because Daario represents her evil nature.

We can empathize with the slavers! Because we might have done the same thing! We all like to think we’d stand against slavery, but if it’s our culture we might not. And we might stand by while our friends torture 163 children to death to spite an abolitionist.

We say we empathize with the slaves, too, but it’s more we sympathize with them. We understand that they are victims. We don’t see ourselves in their place. We don’t empathize with the anger the parents of those children felt. They follow Dany blindly. They don’t understand choice. That’s why they follow her.

What we CANNOT empathize with (because we know we would NEVER) is a teenage girl who walked along a road lined with the corpses of children who were tortured to death to spite her. We know a GOOD ruler would be stalwart in the face of such horror and hold a trial. Because even though the slavers own all the systems in existence in that city, there’s no way a trial could have caused the death of lesser evil instead of greater. Trials are foolproof!

She should have killed them all or tried to have every one of them examined by witnesses who are profoundly biased. We cannot empathize with that.

Dany’s attachment to the Dothraki shows her savagery. The Dothraki are rapists and slavers and she lusted after her husband when he made that speech and so it doesn’t matter how she tried to fight rapists later. They are all terrible. The Khals are monsters and she loved one, so that shows she’s a monster.

Also, she’s evil for killing the Khals.

She was wrong for sacking Astapor and Yunkai but not staying to rule them. She made it worse because poverty is as bad as slavery and the freed slaves are not able to build their own society, and she should have known that. She was wrong for not staying and ruling them.

She was also wrong for staying in Meereen and ruling it because that makes her a colonizer.

She agrees to allow adults to sell themselves into temporary slavery, and that’s wrong, because voluntary indentured servitude is as bad as generational chattel slavery-except when it’s in Westeros! The rulers in Westeros are rightful, but Daenerys was trying to enslave them by having them bend the knee! She was using the privilege of her father’s name, and it’s different when the Starks do it.

Dragons are evil. They serve no good purpose and she’s evil because she has dragons.

Also, Jon should have a dragon.

When Arya met the Lannister soldiers, and Ed Sheeran, that was to show how she realized that they are not all bad. This shows that sometimes enemies are good. This will show that we should empathize with enemies. That Dany is bad because she doesn’t even though she agrees to help the Starks, whose father supported the man who murdered her brother, and was not disturbed by the murder of her niece and nephew. Who would have killed a baby, had he known Jon was her nephew. Who would have killed her.

This does not apply to Daenerys and her armies, of course. The North was one hundred percent right to treat her with hostility.

Daenerys considered killing Tyrion when she met him! This shows that she is willing to kill people just because they are related to enemies! She’s evil!

Even though she named Tyrion her Hand. Even though she agreed to aid the North with no strings attached once she saw the army of the dead. Even though she accepted Varys into her service when he’d tried to have her murdered. Varys being part of the plan to sell a teenage girl into sexual slavery was not evil because she turned that to her advantage.

Dany was wrong for even considering killing Tyrion despite the fact that she didn’t and ultimately named him her Hand.

She was wrong for killing the Tarlys even though they were oathbreakers who killed their own friends and attacked their liege’s home. Even though the punishment for oath breaking is death. Even though they refused to bend the knee in exchange for keeping their lives, lands and titles, which is standard procedure in Westeros. Even though they refused the Wall, where Tarly sent his eldest son.

She didn’t kill them for oathbreaking or murdering her allies. She killed them for not bending the knee! Even though she only attacked them after they did that, and she did not harm Jon when he refused to bend the knee, she allowed him to mine her dragonglass, and offered to provide men and resources to help.

Sam was not wrong for hating Daenerys for killing his father, even though he was an oathbreaker, an abuser, and threatened to kill Sam. Even though he said that nothing would give him more pleasure than telling Sam’s mother that her son died. Even though Sam knew of Dany’s great deeds from Aemon. It’s understandable that he would still mourn his father. Even if his father was a monster, we have to empathize with his anger.

YET Daenerys is dead wrong for calling out Jaime for murdering her father. Her father was a monster! How dare she feel anything about his murder! She had no right to object to Jaime’s presence at Winterfell, even though he tried to kill her on the battlefield and said straight out said he wasn’t sorry for all he’d done and would do it again to protect his family.

She was wrong for restoring the family name of the man who killed her brother and cheered the brutal murders of her niece and nephew. Because she only legitimized Gendry for personal gain, even though he could have done the opposite of joining her, and tried to take the throne himself.

She is wrong if she is good to the family of her enemies because she is self serving, and she is wrong if she’s not good to them because it’s not their fault.

The Starks are not wrong for judging Daenerys by her father’s actions even though she came to help save them. Sansa is not wrong for wanting to evict children from their homes because their families were traitors.

When the Starks are suspicious of the family members of those who’ve harmed them, it’s fair. They are being smart.

When Daenerys is suspicious of the family members of those who’ve harmed her, it’s proof of her being paranoid like her father.

When Sansa told Jon that the free folk should join their fight against Ramsay, that they owed it to him because he’d saved their lives, that was smart!

When she told Arya “you should be on your knees, thanking me,” she had every right to assert her accomplishments.

YET, Daenerys was very entitled to want the North to fight Cersei with her in exchange for her helping them defeat the army of the dead, even though Cersei was their enemy too, and she sent them a letter saying “come bend the knee or face the fate of all traitors.”

It was not wrong of Jon to tell the North he bent the knee to save them, even though she said she’d help before he bent the knee.

It’s Dany’s fault the Night King got a dragon even though the wight hunt was Tyrion’s idea and Daenerys did not like it. Even though Jon told her, “I don’t need your permission. I am a king.”

Dany held Jon prisoner even though he had to stay to mine the dragonglass and he stated that he did not need her permission to leave. That’s what being a prisoner means, right?

Daenerys went mad because her family was fraught with incest. This does not imply that Jon will go mad, because his mother was not a Targaryen (even though his mother’s parents were related). Generations of inbreeding unequivocally mean madness, but the ramifications of those generations are undone if one guy at the end of the line produces a child with a woman whose parents were also related. That’s how genetics work, right?

Daenerys is a colonizer. Even though she didn’t have any goal other than destroying the slave trade in Essos. She only did that for selfish reasons even though Yunkai trains bed slaves and neither Meereen nor Yunkai added to her military might. Even though she never forced her religion or language on them. Even though she renounced power over the cities when she left, so that the people could choose their own leaders.

The Starks were never colonizers! Even though the earliest Starks were First Men, who committed genocide against the Children of the Forest. The First Men called themselves the First Men, they did not acknowledge the humanity of the Children. Therefore, the Children were not human.

The First Men destroyed the Children. The Starks built a Wall to separate the dead from the living, but left thousands of living and Children of the Forest at the other side of it. The Starks destroyed the other families, established power over the area, established their religion and language as the official religion and language. The Starks became the Kings of Winter by bringing to heel, and sometimes extinguishing, other families. That’s fine because the Starks are good. That’s not colonizing! The Starks were always good! They killed the warg king and his sons and beasts and then married his daughters. That’s not rape, that’s marriage!

The Targaryens who adapted the Westerosi religion and language and did not in any way repress other religions or languages, were the oppressors.

Dany hardly did anything in the Long Night. Her armies and dragons did not thin out the dead army, making it possible for Arya to kill the Night King. Two dragons can only do so much against an army of 100k. Even though Dany’s army also was over 100K.

YET, she burned MILLIONS in KL (even though the population of KL is under a million and even though I just said she could not have possibly taken out much of the dead army.)

When Daenerys didn’t weep and wring her hands over her abusive brother’s death that was evidence of her turning “mad.” Even though he abused her, sold her, and pressed a sword to her belly and threatened to cut her baby out of her body.

When Sansa smiled as Ramsay screamed, being torn apart by dogs, that was not a sign of anything bad. He abused her!

When Daenerys crucified the slavers even though a trial would have yielded nothing, because they had owned the entire system, that was a sign of her being a villain.

But Varys wasn’t wrong for trying to poison her before she did anything wrong because he sensed what she would do! Instinct > Trials. Unless the “instinct” is Daenerys’. Then it’s paranoia, even when the people she suspects of plotting against her are plotting against her.

When Arya killed two men, baked them into a pie, fed them to their father, slit his throat, smiled faintly as he died, cut off his face, then killed every one of his bannermen, with no knowledge of whether those men had been there at the Red Wedding, or whether they’d spoken against it, that was not a sign of her being a villain. Because if it’s a Stark, we understand complicity.

Besides, Arya is not a ruler. Only rulers do harm. Not explorers! Explorers who believe “I’ll never know her, she’s not one of us”, have never done anything bad in all history. Happy Columbus Day, btw.

Fake captain america needs to choke on his star spangled banner

Well, I found your problem. You have minor water damage… Probably due to a leak somewhere. It might take a while to find it.

I was just reminded of the fact the writers actually made Bucky and Sam BREAK John Walker´s arm over that stupid shield (Stupid as in the comical importance it is given in the show when it could have simply belonged to Sam from the beginning without the bullshit drama, there, I said it) minutes after Lemar died and John is clearly in a vulnerable state of mind. 

Ehem… wtf? I love Sam and Bucky but I hate this moment so much I am just going to imagine it is as canon as Steve going back in time and abandoning his friends and Sharon to be with a married woman (Meaning, I am in denial, these are not my Sam and Bucky).

Of course most fans don´t care (More like, they actively celebrate it) because John just killed a man (Which doesn´t stop those same fans from feeling bad about characters with as much blood on their hands, but that is another issue), but these are supposed to be the heroes of the story, the moral compasses to contrast John´s impulsiveness, which I admit is a huge character flaw, to show how much “better” they are than him. And yet they can´t even wait until John is in a more balanced mental state to go for the shield?

Don´t kid yourselves, this may be a cool “yaasss finally!” moment for most of the biased audience, but in my eyes, it just portrays Sam and Bucky as not caring about either Lemar nor the flag smasher that was just killed in place of Karli. They just jumped at the first opportinity they had to grab the shield when it was probably going to be taken from John later by the government anyway, as if it was all they cared about. 

They acted like petty schoolchildren fighting over a toy and were willing to physically harm someone who had fought with them and even saved their asses one time when it was not their friend who had just died in front of their eyes. They showed no compassion whatsoever, and I hated that decision from the writers on Sam and Bucky´s behalf.

You want to talk about how John didn´t deserve the shield? You want to talk about how Steve decided not to kill Tony in the end of Civil War? Fine, John is too impulsive and emotional for the shield, and I agree that flag smasher should have been arrested, but how about the fact in this scene neither Sam nor Bucky acted as compassionately as Steve did when Wanda blew up a building accidentally, for example? Different circumstances and levels of culpability, I agree (Like, it is hard to find a 100% similar scenareo, Wanda´s situation was a complete accident, but one she caused and killed lots of innocents), but Steve did what was best for both the victims by calling for emergency services, and for the person responsible. He continued caring for Wanda and worrying for her.

And no, it wasn´t done for “safety” reasons, what use could it have been to take the shield away from Walker when he had already taken the serum and was a “weapon” himself? (As far as I can remember, he had already taken it, correct me if I am wrong, but if I am wrong then this is much worse for the writers, as it would then make no sense that it took so much effort for Bucky and Sam to break his arm) It is clear the anger was directed at the flagsmashers, not random civilians, and the fight had already finished, there were no flag smashers around. 

Sam and Bucky broke John walker´s arm to get the shield because they wanted it, as simple as that, they cared more about an inanimate object (As much symbolism as it has, that is all it is) than any of what had just happened,  more than the deaths, more than John having just done something  terrible, more than his pain over losing his friend that very same hour, more than anything else. Of course I blame the writers and am outraged on Bucky but especially Sam´s behalf (Didn´t he counsil traumatized soldiers, what gives?), but following my own logic, in universe, that is what happened, and I just can´t see how is is that they are much more worthy of the shield than John himself.

Introduction to the Project

I’m currently running a group project via Discord known as “Grand Crossover Worldbuilding”. In this project, we take various series and attempt to combine them together into a cohesive whole. 

The project is democratically run. The series included are determined via vote. Using the series that have been voted in as building blocks, participants write up pitches which describe the world and how it is set up. These pitches are then put up for a vote, and if they pass they are added to our canon document. I will be posting the contents of that document on the blog gradually.

The project is open to new members at any date via the link below:

https://discord.gg/a8dS2ratmU

"Elderly Palestinian couple looking at their former home, now occupied by a couple from Brooklyn. 🇵🇸" [@/RamAbdu on X. April 4th, 2024.]