Interesting Links for 25-06-2017

Jun. 25th, 2017 12:00 pm

The Hood #2

Jun. 24th, 2017 08:09 pm
mastermahan: (Default)
[personal profile] mastermahan posting in [community profile] scans_daily


Last time, petty crook Parker Robbins kicked the crap out of a Hydra recruiter, shot a demony-looking character in the midst of a break-in, and discovered the boots he stole from its corpse allowed him the power of flight.

Trigger warnings for racism, sexist language, gore, and a reference to rape.Read more... )

Interesting Links for 24-06-2017

Jun. 24th, 2017 12:00 pm
thanekos: Yoshikage Kira as Kosaku Kawajiri, after the second arrow. (Default)
[personal profile] thanekos posting in [community profile] scans_daily
He'd gone to the arena with his slave Bran.

He'd found a lead in his investigations, a gladiator's memento.

He watched the gladiator in question, Achillia, win another of her matches.

He went down to confront her. )

James Bond 007: Service

Jun. 23rd, 2017 11:14 pm
laughing_tree: (Seaworth)
[personal profile] laughing_tree posting in [community profile] scans_daily


It’s explicitly a book about fading Empire. M16’s roots are in World War 2, and the core of the plot reaches back to there. What is Britain’s place in the world now? What does being British even mean? In a real way, it is a post-Brexit Bond. -- Kieron Gillen

Read more... )

The Hood #1

Jun. 23rd, 2017 05:50 pm
mastermahan: (Default)
[personal profile] mastermahan posting in [community profile] scans_daily


Since Foolkiller ended with the implication Frank Castle was about to shoot The Hood, and the general consensus was "good riddance", I thought I'd take us all back to a time before Parker Robbins was a lame magic Kingpin wannabe, with the MAX series that first introduced him, written by a pre-Runaways and Y: The Last Man Brian K. Vaughn and drawn by Kyle Hotz.

Trigger warning for racism and sexist language.Read more... )

Y: The Last Man #1

Jun. 24th, 2017 01:16 am
[personal profile] history79 posting in [community profile] scans_daily



"We wondered if he thought a planet full of women could ultimately rebuild society and sustain itself once again. Vaughan was surprisingly optimistic on that front. "Yes, I do think it could. There were a lot of people early on in the first year who complained, "Wow, this is such a misogynistic book to say that, because the men died, the women can't get the electricity running all over the world and the airports up and running again." I think that's an extremely complex, extremely difficult thing to deal with. When three billion people die, I don't care what their sex was, that's an incredibly difficult thing to come back from. I will say that the world would be better off than if it were just the men left. I think that would be an even more dire situation. I think there is hope for the planet."

Source: http://www.ign.com/articles/2008/02/02/y-the-last-man-the-end-of-an-era?page=5


Read more... )
alicemacher: Lisa Winklemeyer from the webcomic Penny and Aggie, c2004-2011 G. Lagacé, T Campbell (Default)
[personal profile] alicemacher posting in [community profile] scans_daily




"I'd read the two BROTHER POWER THE GEEK comics as a small boy, and thought they were seriously weird. Rereading them as an adult they were still seriously weird, and funny, and touched with a sad, strange nostalgia. I'd been reading some Ken Kesey, and somehow the idea of Brother Power as a final remnant of flower power began to possess me. 'At least you didn't bring back Prez,' said my friends, relieved. Little did they know."
--Neil Gaiman, Midnight Days

Mild gore on one page.

'Like where did the beeeautiful people go?' )

The Lake

Jun. 23rd, 2017 10:26 am
cyberghostface: (Right One 2)
[personal profile] cyberghostface posting in [community profile] scans_daily


So each June I sometimes try to post a Bradbury comic or two in his memory. EC did numerous Bradbury adaptations and 'The Lake' is probably the strongest.

Story under the cut... )
theferrett: (Meazel)
[personal profile] theferrett

I was told the other day how true polyamory didn’t have rules. You just got to fuck whoever you wanted, and nobody could stop you or it wasn’t polyamory.

Okay.

Let’s break that down.

Because people forget rules weren’t inflicted on people wholesale by malicious bureaucrats. Rules are like pearls, which are beautiful to us but an irritant to an oyster. Oysters create pearls because they can’t get a piece of sand out of their tendermeats and layer it in nacre until they have a ball of Stuff stuck in their craw. That’s not great for the oyster, but it’s better than having sand ripping up their insides.

And like a pearl, every rule started with some Problem that was causing distress, and people decided to wrap a Rule around it – because as annoying as that Rule was, it was better than the initial Problem.

Now rules, as I’ve noted, are the failure state of polyamory. You’d be better served by utilizing expectations, which aren’t quite as brittle and lead to better understanding. But rules and expectations both are solutions to the same ultimate problem:

You’re hurting someone you love.

They feel abandoned when you don’t text them at the end of the night. They feel threatened when you cancel dates on them to go out with New Person. They feel exasperated when they’re spending their dates with you as a pseudo-relationship counsellor, picking apart the reasons you’re fighting with your other partner all the time.

But hey. You have no limits. So even if your partner’s cat just died and they’re desperate to not be alone tonight, fuck that! You had a date. And you’re not cancelling that because NO LIMITS!

What’s that?

That’d be cruel? You wouldn’t leave your partner alone during a time of need?

Well, I guess you have limits.

“That’s different!” you cry. “That’s what I wanted to do! I chose to do that of my own volition, not because of some stupid rules!”

Here’s the secret to rules, my friend:

Everyone chooses them.

There’s no legal contract for any poly relationship saying, “I have to stay with this person.” There may be consequences, divorce laws being punitive and all, but there’s consequences for any bad decision. You treat them badly enough that they refuse to talk to you, you don’t get the hot sex or the emotional support. If you’re really a shithead, you may lose friends over the breakup. There is no consequence-free decision.

As such, people may bitch about rules, but ultimately they chose to stay with the person who enacted them. Why? Because the irritant of the rules is better than losing that person entirely – or better than the less-critical problem of “I love them, so I don’t want to make them feel bad.”

You’re not better because you made a decision on the fly to alter your behavior to be with someone. That’s how relationships work. You negotiate, you compromise, you figure out where your elbow hits someone’s eye.

And in a lot of cases, you don’t do something that would bring you magnificent satisfaction because you know it would hurt someone. Unsafe sex. Taking someone else to the concert you promised you’d take them to. Disappearing for a two-week vacation with a new sweetie without letting them know where you’re going.

All those are limits.

“They’re self-imposed limits!” you cry – but now you’re changing the argument. Because polyamory was supposed to have no limits, man. Total and utter William Wallace-style FREEEEEEDOM!

…except that compassionate human beings, when given the choice to do whatever they want, will often choose not to do things that injure the people they love.

True freedom involves the ability to self-limit.

And so “Polyamory has no limits” often is a synonym for “I am a sociopath who is only out for my own satisfaction, and anyone who inconveniences me in any way will be shunted aside. I don’t give a fuck about you as long as I get mine.” It’s not so much an ethos as a warning sign that this person is not someone you want to date unless your Venn diagram of what you desire overlaps theirs perfectly.

And yes. It’s perfectly logical to stop dating someone whose feelings are so sensitive you can’t avoid bruising them; I’ve done it myself. But that’s not “I have no limits” so much as “Our limits were irreconcilable.” There’s nothing wrong with a hedonistic relationship based on pleasure, either, so long as everyone involved chose it honestly. It’s possible to have a relationship with such low limits that you never brush against them.

But I generally find that the people who bristle at any idea of limitations are the people who bristle at the idea of other people having needs. They want no limitations because really, anything that obstructs their satisfaction is an enemy to be destroyed.

Date these people at your peril.

Cross-posted from Ferrett's Real Blog.

Butterflies!

Jun. 23rd, 2017 08:52 am
shadowycat: (Butterfly)
[personal profile] shadowycat posting in [community profile] common_nature
When I was at the botanical garden, I went into the glasshouse this time to look at the butterflies. I must have timed it right near a release because there were butterflies galore. One rested in my hair for awhile, and I got one to sit on my hand, too. I wanted to share a few of the pictures I took. I hope you like them! :D

 photo DSCN2022_zpsmbvtiu4n.jpg

More butterflies )

Interesting Links for 23-06-2017

Jun. 23rd, 2017 12:00 pm
andrewducker: (Default)
[personal profile] andrewducker
Page generated Jun. 25th, 2017 03:34 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios