Lowkey hoping this is the episode where Chris makes an appearance as the real secret admirer
me knowing damn well that fresh is going to have our gay icon cheffrey hatchet fawn over a chick
Me while watching the episode, knowing that there was a slim chance for Chris to be brought in…and then slowing seeing what the writers actually chose to do…
James Rhodes, a pianist, performed a Bach composition for his Youtube channel, but it didn’t stay up – Youtube’s Content ID system pulled it down and accused him of copyright infringement
because Sony Music Global had claimed that they owned 47 seconds’ worth
of his personal performance of a song whose composer has been dead for
300 years.
Just last week, German music professor Ulrich Kaiser posted his research
on automated censorship of classical music, in which he found that it
was nearly impossible to post anything by composers like Bartok,
Schubert, Puccini and Wagner, because companies large and small have
fraudulently laid claim to their whole catalogs.
Europeans have one week to contact their MEPs to head off this catastrophe.
Stop what you’re doing and contact two friends in the EU right now and send them to Save Your Internet – before it’s too late.
“A clever plan..because if Harry here and his friend Ron hadn’t discovered this book, why–Ginny Weasley might have taken all the blame. No one would ever have been able to prove she hadn’t acted of her own free will…and imagine…what might have happened then…The Weasleys are one of our most prominent pure-blood families. Imagine the effect on Arthur Weasley and his Muggle Protection Act, if his own daughter was discovered attacking and killing Muggle-borns…”
It brings me SO MUCH joy that the plot of Chamber of Secrets basically happens because Lucius is terrified out of his mind of Arthur and Molly Weasley and their SEVeN kids who were all raised to hold the line in case anyone tried to start a genocidal regime again. They are so powerful and so dangerous to any attempted rise to power from the Death Eaters, and Lucius feels the need to try and marginalize and demonize them in order to decrease the threat they pose.
And boy was he right to be concerned, they are…unstoppable. Each and every one of them. You thought it was impressive that it took five Death Eaters to kill their uncles? Try having a couple Weasleys illegally on the airwaves, one destroying Voldemort’s Horcruxes, one protesting at Hogwarts, one running loose in the government, one housing escaped prisoners, and one getting foreign support!! More children than they can afford? Try more children than you can effectively stop!!
And then when they ALL show up to fight in the Battle of Hogwarts? What a trip for Lucius Malfoy! Hey bigots! Would you like to pick an opponent based on which Quidditch position they excel at, or do you wanna roll the dice and go with one of the brothers who got 12 OWLs? Those are your only two options because Weasleys are EVERYWHERE and the weak link is NO ONE. The fear that must have been in his heart when one or two of them was around every corner of the school taking down his DE pals…is so amazing to think about. Glorious. Iconic. Every Weasley has red hair, freckles, and a drive to destroy the concept of blood purity at all cost!!
The Weasleys are not always nice or right, but they are GOOD and they believe in standing up for what is good, and when evil is around they SHOW UP to fight it. No questions asked. And evil is so scared of them, so worried about what they can do, that it resorts to desperately weaponizing a little girl to try and stop them.
THIS IS AMAZING!!!! GO, WEASLEYS!!!
The thing I love about Arthur Weasley is his function as a foil to Lucius. The Weasleys are dirt poor and Arthur’s job is a joke, but he’s widely respected to the point that the governers mention that finding his daughter in the chamber is the last straw. Not a pureblood student.One that’s related to Arthur. He’s well connected enough to get them into the Minister’s box at the Quidditch world cup. I forget which book it is, but at one point he gets an entire fleet of enchanted cars to take the kids to King Cross station to catch the train. This is all through sheer personal influence; everything the Malfoys achieve is through bribery. Lucius should fear the Weasleys.
Arthur Weasley runs on fairy tale power; he does favors for people, because he’s kind, and they do favors for him in turn.
Whenever I have to listen to someone explain why they’re father/son to me, I’m hardly ever given a chance to talk about how I see it. Often they’ll jump the gun, call me on my supposed moral crimes or occasionally point at me and tell me I have daddy issues.
Well, no.
The reason I can’t see Hank and Connor as Father/Son, personally, is because I can’t imagine being a parent who relies on my foster child to pick me up at every turn. I can’t imagine violently pressing them against a wall or hitting them across the face like Hank does/may do. I can’t imagine having to be saved by said, newly adopted child, or rely on them to be my supporting pillar, from my abuse of alcohol to my suicidal tendencies. That would be unfair to the child if that were the case. As Hank, I also really hate this new guy, he’s better than myself at my job, more than my equal at it. He may as well just be my replacement, he renders me useless and I generally dislike androids and I tell him to fuck off more than often enough. As the person I am, currently deeply depressed and self-debilitating, I wouldn’t want to be seen as a role model. I will, however, care if he is hurt, the way I project it – because that’s my human defect. I will also rely on his investigative skills, if he proves useful, because, fuck everything. Fuck this case, fuck Fowler, FBI, AND Reed.
Connor, to me, doesn’t fit the mold of a foster child. Hank doesn’t try to shape Connor like one either. Connor will mostly act on his own, more like an errant, overconfident rookie who needs to be held on a leash. He’ll listen to orders occasionally because Hank outranks him as a human and lieutenant, or by the players choice, but Connor isn’t naive. He isn’t a child or someone who needs any more/less guidance than Hank.
As an android who has never felt any pain or known sadness or joy or anger, but merely, see the parameters of task priority by calculations based on my masters’ input, I don’t judge by emotions. That doesn’t make me naïve, that merely makes me seem less human to you or like a child. You project the role of a child on me because I’m not as emotionally developed as you are and because I can not always read the air in social situations. However, I can compute clear-cut pre-constructions of tasks I am able to execute. I can tell you what chemicals are under your shoes, I can tell you so much more than you will ever know in facts, because you’re limited when it comes to absorbing information, and I am not. I am trained in arms and I am strong – perfectly capable physically. But once I go deviant, once I start to understand that I am alive, once I can reflect on myself in others and feel what they feel – my task priorities are jumbled. I am no longer sure in which order I need to perform them anymore, and I start relying on the spontaneous input from my peers. I need them, then. Just like anyone in a state of confusion – and not really as anyone’s child.
In the empathic routes, they support each other, need each other. They start out at two extremes and meet in the center as two equals. And by equals, I mean as two perfectly capable adults with different backgrounds and defects of their own, but they make up for it together.
Though, if I were to angle myself a bit, I could maybe see the father/son relationship. That is if I wanted to see a problematic and dysfunctional one at that. I’m sure that’s not what people mean when they say father/son, but that’s the only way I can see their relationship as such. One that needs a lot of patching up. Because as a parent, you’re supposed to uplift your children, they’re not an emotional tourniquet you adopt when you need it. The parental/child relationship implies there needs to be a bit of parenting as well, and I don’t see it.
Well… Okay, there IS another way I can see the parent/child relationship. And that is Connor in the parental role. Hank always acting irresponsibly, drinking too much and moaning, protesting tasks like a child whereas Connor does what needs to be done, just like a good father with extremely heightened intelligence and computing powers who needs to keep the cart rolling.
Yeah.
I’m not even going to go into why I ship them romantically because I think my art speaks enough for that as is.
The various ideas people who are anti-HankCon have, just blows my mind. Half the time, these people haven’t even played the game or felt their hands shake or their hearts jump at the intense choices you sometimes have to make, holding the controller.
I’m fine with your opinions because we’re all allowed to interpret the fandom as we want, but I’m not fine when it is brought to me or to people I care about, in narrow and disrespectful manners.
As your reasoning to why you shower other people with hate or unmeritedly and harshly accuse them of moral crimes;
Don’t tell me:
I can only see these two as Father/Son, when;
As Connor, you have the entire spectrum between the extremities of villainy to adorable puppy-android. There are multiple paths you can take, either to become a murderous, cold terminator who eventually may be the cause of Hanks various deaths. Or to overcome machinery and turn into a powerful (attack puppy) ally of his.
Their relationship starts out rough. Hank may well take to violence (even kill Connor) out of anger because he doesn’t see Connor as a human. Much less a human child. Or son.
They’re co-workers in crime investigation. Connor is fitted with super-human investigative properties, his integrity isn’t something you can just reduce or infantile. People can be socially awkward and need guidance, even as adults.
The gradual process of deviancy, if you go empathic!Connor, is something that happens throughout the game. Connor isn’t just suddenly “born” with self-awareness.
Though you are free to interpret it as such a relationship, by the end of the game, if you have managed to get yourself a caring relationship with Hank.
Or if you enjoy abusive and hateful father/son dynamics and want to project that onto the machine routes, instead. To each their own?
Puppy means you see him as a child!!
No, it is an affectionate term.
Puppy means we see him as a loyal partner who, in this case, has a sweet and pure mannerism.
– seem to care for their mate unconditionally.
– follows their mate around everywhere.
– would protect their mate from any danger.
– takes orders from his hierarchical superior (at work) mate unless machine-instructed otherwise. (I’m so funny)
It’s “pedophilia” and “incest”;
Don’t trivialize the arguments about “pedophilia” and “incest”. There are so many things wrong with using these as arguments in this fandom.
Definition of Pedophilia: “a psychiatric disorder in which an adult has sexual fantasies about or engages in sexual acts with a prepubescent child”. (Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary) – Connor is modeled after a human male in his 30s.
Definition of Incest: “sexual intercourse between persons so closely related that they are forbidden by law to marry; also: the statutory crime of such a relationship. “ (Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary) – Connor is an Android. Hank is a human. They aren’t exactly closely related, at least in terms of genetics.
He called Connor “son”!
And I may affectionally call an older person “Uncle” without having to be related by blood or to see him as such.
Other examples: Granpa, Pops, Granny, Auntie, Sis, Bro.
The disparity in their physical age is too large!
There’s no such thing when it comes to an otherwise (if depicted as such) wholesome and equal relationship. The only thing you have to deal with then, is your own prejudicial bum.
It’s gross because -insert shallow reason-.
Then maybe steer clear, if you can’t handle looking at an older male somewhat passed his “physical prime” (in the eye of the beholder).
…or if you can’t handle things being a bit “gay”.
…or if you are convinced and disillusioned by aforementioned arguments as being the complete and entire universal truth.
I’m not the type to get upset easily, or take offense, but when hate is misguided or fueled by misconceptions and prejudice or even ignorance, and when it affects other people who are not deserving of it, I get pissy, in my own space and corner mostly. So I want to clear things up.
Also, I struggle a lot with English. It’s not my native language but I hope my concepts were clear.
Anyway. If you want to interpret their relationship as father/son dynamics, be my guest, but please don’t tag my art with that, it then gets personal for me, it’s like you’re falsely labeling my Tumblr content and turning me into a villain for drawing ship art between what I consider as TWO EQUALS.
Imagine hating black people and being so blinded by patriotism
Didn’t some old bastard burn up his nikes while he was still wearing em and end up in the emergency room with third degree burns and bits of rubber grafted to his feet
John Dowd was convinced that President Trump would
commit perjury if he talked to special counsel Robert S. Mueller III.
So, on Jan. 27, the president’s then-personal attorney staged a practice
session to try to make his point.
In the White
House residence, Dowd peppered Trump with questions about the Russia
investigation, provoking stumbles, contradictions and lies until the
president eventually lost his cool.
“This
thing’s a goddamn hoax,” Trump erupted at the start of a 30-minute rant
that finished with him saying, “I don’t really want to testify.”
The
dramatic and previously untold scene is recounted in “Fear,” a
forthcoming book by Bob Woodward that paints a harrowing portrait of the
Trump presidency, based on in-depth interviews with administration
officials and other principals.
…
Woodward
depicts Trump’s anger and paranoia about the Russia inquiry as
unrelenting, at times paralyzing the West Wing for entire days. Learning
of the appointment of Mueller in May 2017, Trump groused, “Everybody’s
trying to get me”— part of a venting period that shellshocked aides
compared to Richard Nixon’s final days as president.
…
The
book’s title is derived from a remark that then-candidate Trump made in
an interview with Woodward and Post political reporter Robert Costa in
2016. Trump said, “Real power is, I don’t even want to use the word,
‘Fear.’ ”
A
central theme of the book is the stealthy machinations used by those in
Trump’s inner sanctum to try to control his impulses and prevent
disasters, both for the president personally and for the nation he was
elected to lead.
Woodward describes “an
administrative coup d’etat” and a “nervous breakdown” of the executive
branch, with senior aides conspiring to pluck official papers from the
president’s desk so he couldn’t see or sign them.
Again
and again, Woodward recounts at length how Trump’s national security
team was shaken by his lack of curiosity and knowledge about world
affairs and his contempt for the mainstream perspectives of military and
intelligence leaders.
At a National Security
Council meeting on Jan. 19, Trump disregarded the significance of the
massive U.S. military presence on the Korean Peninsula, including a
special intelligence operation that allows the United States to detect a
North Korean missile launch in seven seconds vs. 15 minutes from
Alaska, according to Woodward. Trump questioned why the government was
spending resources in the region at all.
“We’re doing this in order to prevent World War III,” Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told him.
After
Trump left the meeting, Woodward recounts, “Mattis was particularly
exasperated and alarmed, telling close associates that the president
acted like — and had the understanding of — ‘a fifth- or
sixth-grader.’ ”
…
White
House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly frequently lost his temper and told
colleagues that he thought the president was “unhinged,” Woodward
writes. In one small group meeting, Kelly said of Trump: “He’s an idiot.
It’s pointless to try to convince him of anything. He’s gone off the
rails. We’re in Crazytown. I don’t even know why any of us are here.
This is the worst job I’ve ever had.”
Reince
Priebus, Kelly’s predecessor, fretted that he could do little to
constrain Trump from sparking chaos. Woodward writes that Priebus dubbed
the presidential bedroom, where Trump obsessively watched cable news
and tweeted, “the devil’s workshop” and said early mornings and Sunday
evenings, when the president often set off tweetstorms, were “the
witching hour.”
…
With
Trump’s rage and defiance impossible to contain, Cabinet members and
other senior officials learned to act discreetly. Woodward describes an
alliance among Trump’s traditionalists — including Mattis and Gary Cohn,
the president’s former top economic adviser — to stymie what they
considered dangerous acts.
“It felt like we
were walking along the edge of the cliff perpetually,” Porter is quoted
as saying. “Other times, we would fall over the edge, and an action
would be taken.”
After Syrian President Bashar
al-Assad launched a chemical attack on civilians in April 2017, Trump
called Mattis and said he wanted to assassinate the dictator. “Let’s
fucking kill him! Let’s go in. Let’s kill the fucking lot of them,”
Trump said, according to Woodward.
Mattis told
the president that he would get right on it. But after hanging up the
phone, he told a senior aide: “We’re not going to do any of that. We’re
going to be much more measured.” The national security team developed
options for the more conventional airstrike that Trump ultimately
ordered.
Cohn,
a Wall Street veteran, tried to tamp down Trump’s strident nationalism
regarding trade. According to Woodward, Cohn “stole a letter off Trump’s
desk” that the president was intending to sign to formally withdraw the
United States from a trade agreement with South Korea. Cohn later told
an associate that he removed the letter to protect national security and
that Trump did not notice that it was missing.
…
The
book vividly recounts the ongoing debate between Trump and his
attorneys about whether the president would sit for an interview with
Mueller. On March 5, Dowd and Trump attorney Jay Sekulow met in
Mueller’s office with the special counsel and his deputy, James Quarles,
where Dowd and Sekulow reenacted Trump’s January practice session.
Dowd
then explained to Mueller and Quarles why he was trying to keep the
president from testifying: “I’m not going to sit there and let him look
like an idiot. And you publish that transcript, because everything leaks
in Washington, and the guys overseas are going to say, ‘I told you he
was an idiot. I told you he was a goddamn dumbbell. What are we dealing
with this idiot for?’ ”
“John, I understand,” Mueller replied, according to Woodward.
Later that month, Dowd told Trump: “Don’t testify. It’s either that or an orange jumpsuit.”
But
Trump, concerned about the optics of a president refusing to testify
and convinced that he could handle Mueller’s questions, had by then
decided otherwise.
“I’ll be a real good witness,” Trump told Dowd, according to Woodward.
“You are not a good witness,” Dowd replied. “Mr. President, I’m afraid I just can’t help you.”
Procrastination Station 