Off the prompt "cuddles."

Out of curiosity, why has the shower door been removed?

So I caught up on the last couple of episodes of Glee I hadn't seen, and they bumped my "what the fuck was that" meter even higher. Like, I don't even, the moronic, it burns, but even the dumb ones are capable of being manipulative and conniving? And there are no smart ones. The entire world of Glee is divided into the dumb and the mean, because the mean at least have wit.

Anyway I'm writing fic that will be AU in 36 hours and applies the handwave that makes Schuester less of a moron but really writing is sort of an exaggeration. I've written eight words of outline and a partial set list (Lennon, Bad Religion, Avenue Q, Bowie, MCR).

By the way, niq, if there is ever an MCR episode I really want someone to sing Teenagers. It might be most hilarious from Sue.

Official policy statements should be public and not transmitted via private message as if in an attempt to silence members. When official policy statements are made public I will respond publicly; until then, I will 1) not regard non-public policy as official and 2) just express my utter frustration and bewilderment that policy theoretically being shaped with feedback from the membership is being declared privately and categorically rather than posted publicly for response. I mean, gosh, if you're going to have secret rules, and you only notify people you think likely to break them, what happens if someone doesn't mention their activities where you notice and doesn't get a memo about the secret rule they're breaking?

ETA: Vividcon's policy on vid review bingo has been made public.

I need a beta for RPF/SPN @mishacollins fic.

ETA: Or not. I DON'T NEED NO STINKING BETA. *impatiently posts*

Man, I was hoping group project meant my group could carry me. In fact I am the smartest one in the group and the prof basically took me aside and told me I needed to ride herd on the rest of them.

I am skimming a season of Smallville purely for the Ackles because everysecondtuesday is STILL an evil, evil person, and I was reluctant to even mention it here because I really want nothing to do with Smallville or Smallville fandom ever again. But I am unable to contain my WTF. Not cutting for spoilers because season four here.

Apparently, I could make a vid about Lois Lane, Supernatural Hunter. I totally have footage of her digging up Chloe's grave. PS show, if you are trying to convince me Chloe is dead, the credit sequence? Kind of a spoiler.

I am amused by the equal opportunity nudity. Clark? Naked all the time. Lana? Yep. Lois? Uh-huh. Lex? Naked and getting it on! Also, guessing who's going to be in a shower is really tons of fun. It's hard! Because it's not always the chicks! Once it was LIONEL! And because it was a prison shower he got stabbed by a hot young naked fellow inmate! (niq: yes, yes, he took him from behind.)

In the raw steaming pile of WTF category: Lex appears to have been cast in Raiders of the Lost Ark. As a Nazi. He and his white suit of moral despair are very excited over a... model sarcophagus discovered in a pyramid. This visual motif continues in other episodes, where he opens crates of artifacts better filed in a warehouse in perpetuity.

I am deeply confused as to why Jason (Ackles' character) having started dating a high school senior (Lana) would then choose to seek employment at her high school. Because high school coach/high school senior == WORLDS OF WHAT WERE YOU THINKING.

I am far too amused by Lana's Kryptonian tramp stamp. Apparently we are meant to believe Lana and Jason are not actually having sex, because it takes him like, half a dozen episodes to discover the tramp stamp. Also a witch possesses Lana and pins Jason (Ackles!) against the ceiling. It's just like Supernatural! Except with bits that make me cringe and fast forward.

In the land of did that really just happen? Why yes it really did just happen: Lionel Luthor and Clark Kent switched bodies. I actually watched significant portions of the A-plot of this episode because I was dying at Welling and Glover mocking each other's performances. I choose to believe that was all deliberate mockery, because otherwise I am forced to conclude that the nearest thing to Lionel in Welling's acting range is in fact Draco Malfoy. Glover really just thinks Clark's a whiny bitch, though. Best part of this episode: Lex got to remember the switch and demand Clark prove his identity after the fact. Apparently the plausible deniability on the use of powers was "oh! um, side effect of the body swap!"

Because I haven't been listening to most of Lex's scenes I have to ask: Is it canon yet that Lex just pretends not to know Clark's a freak from another planet to humor Clark? Because more than ever this is what it looks like. And, seriously, if Lex can leap to bodyswap as to a reasonable explanation of matters--not to mention Lana possessed by a 17th century witch--you can't tell me he's ruling out "freak from another planet" as too unlikely an explanation for Clark.

I spent a few minutes pondering if Lex's dialogue had always been this over the top. I concluded that yeah, probably, but when I was watching it before I was like, "His love for Clark is so epic!" and now I am fast-forwarding through Lex wandering into a locker room full of naked boys to donate uniforms to the football team because his motivational speech makes my skin crawl. Apparently Clark is kind of at that point, too. Lex shut down the Clark Kent stalker shrine because Clark told him it was creeeeepy and now Clark is all YOU CANNOT BUY MY LOVE FRIENDSHIP! and Lex is all YOU ARE THE ONLY THING THAT KEEPS ME CLINGING TO HUMANITY! And I am not paraphrasing nearly as much as I wish I were.

In conclusion: I now have lots of footage of Ackles making out with girls.

So I did hear that right, the themesong of the trashy teen show I'm watching for constructed vid source includes the line Your stars align in threesomes.

I. I.

To be fair, when I read the synopsis on the show I figured I probably would be solving the obvious love triangle with a threesome in my head? But then the show didn't so much build a love triangle as a skeevy, sexually coercive environment where two teenage boys fight over the right to a girl who has turned them both down repeatedly, both verbally and physically. I had figured if I was going to invest this much time watching a few dozen episodes of this, I'd probably acquire it as a yuletide fandom or something, especially since it has two actresses I like, but right now I am at no, no, and hell no. Five episodes in and she's beat up three different guys for three different sexual assault situations and there's been at least four five, knew I was forgetting one, other problematic situations that didn't escalate to violence and a marriage proposal attached to a shitload of money.

At this point I don't want any of the women on this show to hook up with any of the men who have shown interest in them, let alone align in threesomes. They should discover lesbianism or someone can have the sweet, funny Gramps character (one of the seventeen-year-olds flirting with the respectful old dude would be ten times less creepy than where the show's already gone), someone can call dibs on twelve-year-old boy for a couple of years down the line, and someone can discover that the ranch hand is ethical, devoted, and awesome, and seriously should not be ignored just because he's Latino. Yes, all of the sexually available men on the show are creepfaces, and the men who are treated as sexually off-limits are the old dude, the tiny dude, and the dude who's not white. So much wrong.

And this doesn't even cover the part where half the female characters are conniving and awful, too.

(I don't even want to say what it is, I feel like I shouldn't be remotely giving it press, but someone will ask and Wildfire, okay? It's Wildfire. It is not worth your time unless you're making a constructed reality vid about Ruby's host body or how Major Kira retired to raise horses on Earth after DS9.)

"you must disable adblock to view this site"? with helpful graphics showing you which menu to pull down and where to uncheck?

I don't fucking think so.

In case you were wondering, "y'all" is a plural. It is short for "you all." Therefore a sentence structured, "Y'all [predicate], [individual's name]," is likely to make me wince and post wtf to DW.

ETA: Why would anyone a hundred and fifty years from now lovingly restore a Camry?

I am not sure if it is merely symptomatic of film in America or society in general or if my professor's selections of movies to analyze for gender are skewed a particular way but jesus christ I would like to be able to write an essay about film without talking about rape.

Like, not even rape culture. Just specific incidences of rape or sexual assault.

What the fuck.

Can anyone explain the first thirty seconds of "Shore Leave" in a way that doesn't involve Kirk and Spock being totally gay for each other?

( embedded youtube clip )

YOU GUYS SORRY FOR THE ASS CAPS I AM FREAKIN OUT HERE MY SOUND WENT OUT AGAIN AND THIS TIME HEADPHONES ARE NOT WORKING OMG THIS MAKES VIDDING HARD.

SOUND IS BROKEN. COMPUTER MAKES NO SOUND. FUCK FUCK FUCK.

IS IT ACTUALLY POSSIBLE TO VID PURELY FROM WAVEFORMS? I GUESS WE WILL FIND OUT.

PRZ TO BE USING UR SYMBOLS CORRECTLY

(Luke/Lorelei/Rory: DO NOT WANT.)

I just went from being heart-warmed to being infuriated in three point one four seconds flat.

I watched this movie called Martian Child in which John Cusack plays a believably eccentric science fiction writer ("So instead of becoming a well-adjusted normal person, I became a sort of successful, deranged person. And I don't know which is better but it doesn't really matter because you don't get to choose," is one of the early lines, which is really so very true about being, well, any kind of fiction writer, I think). This writer adopts a kid who believes he's from Mars, and they have all sorts of touching life lessons about what it means to be human and how really, not going to float away, you are my son forever and ever.

It's sweet.

In the credits I saw it was based on a book by David Gerrold. I know David Gerrold's name, I recognize him as the guy who wrote that old Star Trek episode "The Trouble with Tribbles," I have a book on writing that he wrote that is full of the kind of that's so true of that line I quoted up there, like this method of expanding characterizations by imagining you're interviewing your characters, and this one time he didn't get much in the way of verbal response but his character did try to come over the table and knife him, which is certainly characterization information to explore. I haven't read as many of David Gerrold's novels as I'd like, but what I've seen of his work, I like. And I still do.

I wiki'd the movie to see what it had to say about the novel. It was, unshockingly, based partially on David Gerrold's real life experiences adopting a son. Here's the part that's pissing me the hell off:

David Gerrold is gay and out as gay and adopted a son as an out, gay man. There's two versions of his written story Martian Child: in the novelette, the protagonist's sexuality is not mentioned; in the novel, the protagonist is, like Gerrold, gay. In the movie? THEY STRIPPED THE GAY. They made the protagonist a widower, dead wife two years ago, plus a vague female love interest hanging around. They straightened him up! Polished the gay right off so they could make a fucking family-friendly flick.

FUCK YOU, HOLLYWOOD. FUCK YOU VERY MUCH. WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK.