"I Am Convinced. We Have To Save Normal Dating From These Apps."

Gilkidu argument

Since birth you could see a counter above people’s heads. It doesn’t count down to their death. It goes up and down randomly. You’re desperate to find out what it means.

it’s criminal eliot and peggy never got to hang out and be food nerds together. bring peggy back in redemption 2k25

Leverage Halloween Headcanons

Parker doesn't really get Halloween. She's not scared of a lot of the things people find scary about the holiday and while she learned to enjoy using fear as a weapon she doesn't really get "deliberately scaring yourself for fun." She loves giving the boys jump scares though. It's a test of her skill to actually alarm Eliot and Hardison always gives the best reactions, squeaky and indignant.

Hardison loves Halloween, it is his jam. He loves Christmas too, but a whole holiday for dressing up and eating candy and getting his heart pumping by watching scary movies and being jump scared by his girlfriend? Classic. He spends weeks between cases making costumes for them all which he gets them to wear with varying success.

Eliot hates Halloween. Everyone's wearing masks and clothes they wouldn't normally wear, the office is filled with Hardison's horrible candy, and he has to be constantly on the alert to catch a falling Parker when she drops into his arms with a "BOO" that could wake the dead. He definitely doesn't have serious opinions on the costumes Hardison makes. Nor would he ever fuel Parker's chocolate addiction by making special chocolates with green and orange fillings that he conveniently forgets to box up. He has no idea what Sophie is talking about, he hates Halloween.

Sophie adores Halloween, when done right. That means a classy vampire princess get up, fake teeth of a really good quality that won't interfere with her eating good food and Eliot's excellent homemade candies. She'd prefer a gala with Nate where everyone is masked to trick-or-treating or handing out candy, but privately her favorite Halloween was when they were all far too tired after a case. They ordered in take out to Nate's apartment and watched movies and all fell asleep in a pile on his couches. There was something about the heat of Parker laying across the back of the couch and having her head tucked into Nate's shoulder with Eliot's legs across her and Hardison's laps that just felt like home.

Nate tries to like Halloween. Trick-or-treating will make him a upset and Hardison only suggested leaving a sign out for the kids in the apartments once. But he likes playing subtle pranks on the others and seeing if they notice. He'll play "two truths and a lie" with them throughout the day, telling one long ridiculous story with a certain amount of truth to it, to see who he can get to believe what. Parker usually believes all of the story and once she figures out the rules of the game has fun playing detective with the truth. Hardison doesn't believe Nate in the way that means he absolutely believes Nate. Eliot it's a fifty/fifty toss up as to whether he'll just scoff and ignore Nate's confident stories about crazy things Nate has done or if he'll shrug and say that sounds like something Nate would do. Sophie never believes Nate and is always blindsided by what the truth is in the story. Overall, Nate enjoys Halloween if he doesn't think to hard.

god. it’s eliot fucking spencer.

because it always has been eliot spencer.

eliot, who let himself be tortured, who resisted torture, in a situation he could get himself out of in five minutes, because they were torturing homeless veterans.

eliot, who only counts himself as saving someone’s life two and a half times because that half time he was the one sent to kill him.

eliot, who was willing to take down a billion dollar corporation, who begged nate to do everything he could, because of one guy with a hardware store and one near-closing grocery store.

eliot, who offered to kill a man for parker in less than a breath because she asked, who broke his rule on killing because nate could take down his biggest demon, who ran toward a bullet because he knew parker could take care of a city-killing virus.

eliot spencer, who started this season stabbed and bleeding, who was told someone didn’t want him to keep taking hits meant for him.

eliot, who was tired and just wanted his own bed.

he wakes up every day and acknowledges that he still has work to do.

and he never, ever, needed convincing to take down a corrupt mayor who was running drugs in his town. he knew that it needed to be fixed, what needed to be done to save the town, that this is the worst of it. he wanted more time. to do it right. so the surprises wouldn’t happen.

and if you’re looking at it, really looking, i think, parker doesn’t try to convince him to stay.

she knows he’s in.

because it’s who he’s always been.

polyamory W from walmart??

You guys went all in on becoming better people and you brought me along for the ride.

god forbid 5000 year old girls do anything

24 page comic adaptation final: COMPLETE! Now I just have to print it tomorrow and everything will be peachyy

Edit: forgot to say this but this is an adaptation of a few chapters of the book Seasparrow by Kristin Cashore.

Second edit: I’m not actually going to continue drawing this… it’s a whole ass novel 😭

Okay but like whenever europe and USA are compared in terms of ruins and artifacts it makes me think "oh but what about Native American artifacts and ruins" and it reminded me of another post I meant to make ages ago but forgot

A while back I went thru the library looking at all the books I could find on the history of Kentucky.

My textbooks and most "reliable" sources when I was a kid said that Kentucky was never actually home to Native Americans, it was just a "hunting ground." This is total bullshit, the living Shawnee whose ancestors lived here know it was bullshit, but how did we get there

A lot of the more recent books I found (from like the 1990's) repeated the "it was only just hunting grounds" thing

But heres the weird thing

When you go back further

The narrative is completely different

so here's the first page of a book published 1872, it's "History of Lexington Kentucky: Its Early Annals and Recent Progress" by George W. Ranck

Let the shock of this first paragraph settle in. Like, damn, this is a whole different picture being painted

now, this Rafinesque fellow he refers to, has been widely referred to as the originator of many claims about Kentucky, and an exaggerator and liar, outright dismissed and scorned by many historians.

Rafinesque is considered to be the source of many claims found in this chapter, and the pompous, flowery language used to state them makes them seem a bit unbelievable. But the claims themselves are not highly unrealistic. These are several of the claims found on pages 2-12 of the book

An artificially built stone well was found by settlers

Earliest settlers plowed up pottery fragments

Settlers dug into an old abandoned lead mine

"Stone sepulchers" were found containing human bones

A large earthen mound 6 feet high was found with pottery and burned wood

A stone mound was found containing human bones

An extensive cave used as a cemetery was found under Lexington, containing embalmed bodies

Flint arrowheads were found

Polished and worked fragments of iron ore were found

Sandstone and limestone tools perforated with holes were found

Rough ingots of copper were found

Stone walls were built defended by entrenchments

It is very important to note that this chapter is insistent that the inhabitants that built these ruins and left these artifacts were NOT Native Americans. Why? Because Native Americans didn't build stuff so advanced! Very circular reasoning.

It was a very common myth that there was some kind of "pre-native-american" race of people that existed in Kentucky. Sometimes this was a way of justifying colonization by saying that well, the Native Americans were just taking over land that wasn't theirs too, so it's okay for us to do it.

It seems to me that when it became clear that Native Americans were the first and only pre-European inhabitants, the stuff about an ancient city under Lexington and all that became dismissed as lies. But are they lies?

I tried to find out, and we know for certain that central Kentucky had many, many burial mounds (some of which I had seen the site of without knowing what I was seeing) and quite a few stone ruins. The builders of the stone ruins are referred to as the "Fort Ancient" people because the earliest settlers incorrectly assumed the stone structures they saw were forts for some defensive or military purpose.

The tools and artifacts being referenced are all known to exist, except I think there aren't any confirmed extant examples of pottery.

The most widely criticized claim in the chapter is the underground cave used as a tomb, but I don't see why—central Kentucky is a limestone karst region and EVERYWHERE has a cave under it. The embalming or mummifying of bodies could have been a flourish or rumor, but the essence of the claim is totally reasonable. Then again, it might not have been, since the area had access to sources of salt. The supposed "lead mine" probably wasn't that specifically, but it's known that Native Americans went inside, explored and used caves.

It was really interesting to me how so many later sources dismissed these claims despite most of them being plausible or just true, and how many of those sources repeated the idea of Native Americans using the land for hunting but not "inhabiting" it. It is two different ways of denying Native Americans were here.