Author: rushkeating

Clyde Logan isn’t Ben Solo. Abraham H. Parnassus isn’t Ben Solo. Flip Zimmerman isn’t Ben Solo. These are different characters from different movies who happen to be played by Adam Driver. Shipping Rey with these characters is no different from shipping Rey with Steve Rogers, except for the fact that Steve Rogers isn’t played by Adam Driver. You can’t just say “X is Ben.” Are you seriously arguing that I can say “Steve Rogers is Ben Solo”, ship him with Rey, and call it Reylo? That’s ridiculous

anonymousnerdgirl:

benperor-ren:

If the author’s intention was to make Parnassus an older Ben Solo then that is most definitely Reylo. Did you ever hear of just ignoring something? Is your life seriously this damn boring that you’re up in arms over a crosstag that contains the same actors as the ones in the main ship? This is the first fandom I’ve come across where someone has had an issue with it. Usually fics like that are crosstagged with the main pairing so the shippers can easily find it.

It’s not that deep and it’s not that huge of a deal. And an author who writes this stuff for free shouldn’t have to cater to a few who don’t like how she does something. Stop being entitled and stop treating content creators like shit. They keep this fandom going and entertained. 

And if the author is writing Ben Solo as Steve Rogers/ Captain America with Rey then yes that is STILL Reylo. It’s called a crossover. I don’t particularly like crossovers but you know what I do when I come across it in the Reylo tag on AO3? I skip over it.

It’s that simple. 

In the Rumbelle fandom we ship Belle with other Robert Carlyle characters and call the practice Anyelle. Maybe we should call Rey/Adam ships AnyAdam or something to clarify.

I’m surprised that’s not a common practice in more fandoms tbh

enoughtohold:

there is SO MUCH lgbt history information to be had, so many books, so many archives, a surprising amount of which you can explore online for free, if you just look for it! don’t let people tell you this history is lost to the ages!

#and ask yourself who benefits when they tell you that!!

would gator be kosher

westsemiteblues:

afronaut:

westsemiteblues:

laughlikesomethingbroken:

westsemiteblues:

animatedamerican:

janothar:

rizaoftheowls:

janothar:

wombatking:

janothar:

…no.  And pretty clearly?

If it’s a land animal, it doesn’t have hooves or chew its cud, so not kosher.

If it’s a fish it lacks fins, so not kosher.

And I’m pretty sure we can rule out it being a bird.

Dinosaurs is where it gets interesting, on that last point. 

For some, but not most.  I mean, “bird” in this context really means “creature that flies” and includes bats.

My understanding is that the classification system is really more about where the critter lives, than any fundamental biology.

…are you suggesting that bats are kosher?

I don’t think they are, but I know more about whether fictional creatures are kosher or not than about bats.  But I know that bats get classified with things that fly and whales with things that swim.

I think I’m more able to say “This thing isn’t kosher” than that something is, also.

Bats are specifically mentioned in the Torah as a “bird” (which is to say, a “flying creature”) that is not kosher.  It’s on the list of prohibited ones.

It is at least theoretically possible that a flying dinosaur would resemble a kosher bird sufficiently to be declared kosher, the way the turkey was, but not terribly likely.  Land-dwelling dinosaurs, having no split hooves and not being cud-chewers, would not be kosher.  I don’t know if it is known whether any sea-dwelling dinosaurs had fins and scales; if they did, they would be kosher.

It does help to remember that with Torah, you are dealing with a classification system that operates from different starting principles than modern scientific classification. As janothar points out, primary habitat or mode of transportation is considered more important than details like warm-bloodedness, or giving birth to live young. Each ‘section’ of creatures, air, land and sea, has specific features it needs to meet to be kosher, ie, in the case of land animals, cloven hooves and chewing cud. This excludes pigs, but it ALSO excludes alligators, which are just another type of land animal that doesn’t meet the requirements.

I apologize to Cajun Jews for this inconvenience.

ok but are they land animals or are they sea animals is the question

yes they’re traife either way but it’s the principle of the thing, don’t you see

I suspect that if it CAN get out of the water and walk around, it counts as a land animal, but I’m not sure. 

Ibn Ezra’s commentary on Exodus (in a section on whether in his opinion the second plague is a plague of crocodiles or of frogs) describes the crocodile as a fish (dag) found in Egypt that comes out of the river and snatches people, so there is precedent for thinking of alligators as fish/sea-creatures.

Ah, thank you.

what about dragons?

lunaesteria:

schizoauthoress:

Today I learned that Van Halen have that rider in their contract about “a bowl of M&Ms with all the brown ones removed” in order to know at a glance if the promoter read the entire contract.  And the reason they do THAT is because they once had a stage collapse because a promoter hadn’t read the proper way to set up all the specific technical stuff.

So if the band goes in the dressing room or catering and sees brown M&Ms, they know they have to double-check the stage setup for safety.

now that’s rock n roll

@philosophersmuse