Samba de Bacchiguu

thecatantichristishere:

rabbitrecycle:

donaldkaneda:

owo:

punkmonksteven:

lalatula:

image

*does the anime character with glasses thing*

Does that really work though?

image

image

image

What…?

that’s so cool i wanna do it too!!!!!!

image

ok here goes

image

image

NO

Okay, there’s no way that works.

image

Let me try this out.

image

image

image

image

I’m kinda skeptical about this? Can it really make you anime.

imageGuss i’ll give it a shot

image

image

image

image

ABORT ABORT

yeah right, like that really happens

image

hmmm….

image

maybe I should try-

image

HOLY SHIT

image

WHAT THE FU 

the-world-of-steven-universe:

I died, OMG!! xD 

Garnet reacts the way we all want to when someone puts terrible music on during a long roadtrip xD

justdontwordshurt:

unfelt-feelings:

fatandfabulousmermaid:

stonewhite:

gogetthatbody:

k-lionheart:

themaidenofthetree:

I want you to imagine a ten year old version of yourself sitting right there on this couch. Now this is the little girl who first believed that she was fat, and ugly, and an embarrassment.

This is groundbreaking

this is my third time rebloging this today. this is so important.

I have goosebumps

because were all trying to heal the child that was broken

Tears

This show is wonderful

sandracl13:

indigoneversleeps:

crazyfilipino:

Florida

reblogging for the excellent gif usage.

ruinedchildhood:

True love

If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also
Matt 5:39

This specifically refers to a hand striking the side of a person’s face, tells quite a different story when placed in it’s proper historical context. In Jesus’s time, striking someone of a lower class ( a servant) with the back of the hand was used to assert authority and dominance. If the persecuted person “turned the other cheek,” the discipliner was faced with a dilemma. The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed. Another alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek the persecuted was in effect putting an end to the behavior or if the slapping continued the person would lawfully be deemed equal and have to be released as a servant/slave.   

(via thefullnessofthefaith)

THAT makes a lot more sense, now, thank you. 

(via guardianrock)

I can attest to the original poster’s comments. A few years back I took an intensive seminar on faith-based progressive activism, and we spent an entire unit discussing how many of Jesus’ instructions and stories were performative protests designed to shed light on and ridicule the oppressions of that time period as a way to emphasize the absurdity of the social hierarchy and give people the will and motivation to make changes for a more free and equal society.

For example, the next verse (Matthew 5:40) states “And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.” In that time period, men traditionally wore a shirt and a coat-like garment as their daily wear. To sue someone for their shirt was to put them in their place - suing was generally only performed to take care of outstanding debts, and to be sued for one’s shirt meant that the person was so destitute the only valuable thing they could repay with was their own clothing. However, many cultures at that time (including Hebrew peoples) had prohibitions bordering on taboo against public nudity, so for a sued man to surrender both his shirt and his coat was to turn the system on its head and symbolically state, in a very public forum, that “I have no money with which to repay this person, but they are so insistent on taking advantage of my poverty that I am leaving this hearing buck-ass naked. His greed is the cause of a shameful public spectacle.”

All of a sudden an action of power (suing someone for their shirt) becomes a powerful symbol of subversion and mockery, as the suing patron either accepts the coat (and therefore full responsibility as the cause of the other man’s shameful display) or desperately chases the protester around trying to return his clothes to him, making a fool of himself in front of his peers and the entire gathered community.

Additionally, the next verse (Matthew 5:41; “If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.”) was a big middle finger to the Romans who had taken over Judea and were not seen as legitimate authority by the majority of the population there. Roman law stated that a centurion on the march could require a Jew (and possibly other civilians as well, although I don’t remember explicitly) to carry his pack at any time and for any reason for one mile along the road (and because of the importance of the Roman highway system in maintaining rule over the expansive empire, the roads tended to be very well ordered and marked), however hecould not require any service beyond the next mile marker. For a Jewish civilian to carry a centurion’s pack for an entire second mile was a way to subvert the authority of the occupying forces. If the civilian wouldn’t give the pack back at the end of the first mile, the centurion would either have to forcibly take it back or report the civilian to his commanding officer (both of which would result in discipline being taken against the soldier for breaking Roman law) or wait until the civilian volunteered to return the pack, giving the Judean native implicit power over the occupying Roman and completely subverting the power structure of the Empire. Can you imagine how demoralizing that must have been for the highly ordered Roman armies that patrolled the region?

Jesus was a pacifist, but his teachings were in no way passive. There’s a reason he was practically considered a terrorist by the reigning powers, and it wasn’t because he healed the sick and fed the hungry.

(via central-avenue)

IT’S BACK

(via dynastylnoire)

Seeing how your the expert on shit like this, what was the canon explanation for Alexandra's gray streak? If there isn't one, what is your headcanon?

archie-edits:

bacchiguu:

archie-edits:

It’s a white lightning bolt, although it’s also simultaneously a tongue and cheek reference to a skunk’s tail.  In the cartoon, there is no explanation.  I guess she was just born with it.  In the comic book, it’s a reference to her ancestor uncle, Sebastian Cabot, who consorted with witches and was reincarnated as her pet cat, Sebastian.  All three have the streak.  During this period she had magical witch powers and could cast spells.  I do know that she originally didn’t have the streak in her hair, but I’m not sure if she got it during some incident in  Josie #43 where that storyline component is introduced or whether it was a complete retcon.  But this question provoked me to finally track down a torrent with the issue in it to check.  So I’ll have the complete answer soon.

Alexandra had dark brown hair in the original comics like her brother, Alexander. The white streak magically appears in #43. Everyone was all “LOL that’s always been there what nothing weird here.” The way she speaks like it’s always been there, we have to pretend it’s been there all along. :p

The behind the scenes reason she has it is because she was suppose to have magic powers in the cartoon. (Hana-Barbera wanted to imitate EVERYTHING about ‘The Archie Show’ which their rivals made.) Since she got her powers from Sebastian, I guess they decided she needed to match him or look different somehow. :p

(Not that anyone cares, but my headcanon is it’s genetic to certain Cabots - it’s a mark of their dark magic using ancestors which is canon in the comics and mentioned many times - their ancestors were pretty messed up xD )

I was leaning towards a retcon, which is very in character for Archie, but I wanted to be sure.  Thanks, Miss Guu! Still going to finish the torrent though, because god knows it will be 20 years before these are back in print as archival volumes.

I’m glad they dumped it for the cartoon.  I think her character is better with the simpler approach honestly.

I definitely agree - Alexandra doesn’t need magic to make her interesting (or find ways to attempt to ruin everyone’s lives xD).

The making of the cartoon was pretty crazy. ‘The Archie Show’ was a massive hit and H-B was super jealous and decided to make a teen band show too, but with a mystery twist. ‘Scooby Doo’ was originally suppose to look exactly like Hot Dog and the gang were originally band members. They scrapped the idea and made the Scooby cartoon we know now.

Meanwhile, H-B was all, “Dang we can’t think of anything good - call Archie Comics and find out if they have other characters we can use.” So Archie Comics gave them Josie and the gang. H-B decided to make them into a band, give Alexandra witch powers (because Sabrina was in ‘The Archie Show’ and they needed to copy her to be  as successful, of course), and scrap characters like Pepper, Albert, Clyde, and Sock for their own original characters.

I think, ultimately, when Scooby Doo became a massive hit, H-B was all, “Ooooh we can make a popular cartoon without copying everything Filmation did for ‘The Archie Show,’” and turned ‘Josie and the Pussycats’ into an adventure show.

Seeing how your the expert on shit like this, what was the canon explanation for Alexandra's gray streak? If there isn't one, what is your headcanon?

archie-edits:

It’s a white lightning bolt, although it’s also simultaneously a tongue and cheek reference to a skunk’s tail.  In the cartoon, there is no explanation.  I guess she was just born with it.  In the comic book, it’s a reference to her ancestor uncle, Sebastian Cabot, who consorted with witches and was reincarnated as her pet cat, Sebastian.  All three have the streak.  During this period she had magical witch powers and could cast spells.  I do know that she originally didn’t have the streak in her hair, but I’m not sure if she got it during some incident in  Josie #43 where that storyline component is introduced or whether it was a complete retcon.  But this question provoked me to finally track down a torrent with the issue in it to check.  So I’ll have the complete answer soon.

Alexandra had dark brown hair in the original comics like her brother, Alexander. The white streak magically appears in #43. Everyone was all “LOL that’s always been there what nothing weird here.” The way she speaks like it’s always been there, we have to pretend it’s been there all along. :p

The behind the scenes reason she has it is because she was suppose to have magic powers in the cartoon. (Hana-Barbera wanted to imitate EVERYTHING about ‘The Archie Show’ which their rivals made.) Since she got her powers from Sebastian, I guess they decided she needed to match him or look different somehow. :p

(Not that anyone cares, but my headcanon is it’s genetic to certain Cabots - it’s a mark of their dark magic using ancestors which is canon in the comics and mentioned many times - their ancestors were pretty messed up xD )