Raise your hand if Charles Xavier is bad for your emotional health.
He’s doing it again.
Lead me, guide me, be patient with me.
Reblogging my own post because this is a constant problem for me.
Glee would be 1005% more watchable if it was just Humpezberry sexing it up in the city
Not really lol
well, 1005% of negative infinity is still an improvement
This is all about Kurt and Santa: It has made me feel sick to my stomach.
The shirtless Santa as fine.
Kurt flirting with a man because he is “newly single” is fine
Kurt kissing him was fine.
Role-play, having sex is fine.
What is not okay is Kurt said no.
3 times actually, if you count Dave. And then people wonder why he has boy issues!
And he must have been terrified about what the guy might do while he was tied up. Or what he might have done to Rachel and Santana while Kurt was tied up.
I cannot watch any show/movie etc. where there’s a home invasion scene, I just cannot handle that. This isn’t quite the same because they sort of knew him and presumably invited him in, but still, they were all making themselves very vulnerable. Between the eggnog and the helium, they would not have been in good shape to defend themselves if things had turned even uglier.
Thanks, Glee. Merry fucking Christmas to you, too.
I’m kind of stunned that the context of Kurt/Cody is getting glossed over so much right now.
Kurt was in his underwear and tied up for however long it took for Rachel and Santana to wake up. He was just making out with the guy who did this to him- it’s terrifying to think about.
The way he begs Santana not to tell anyone? Just OMG.
Basically, all of this. I don’t know if it was outright sexual assault (it sounds as though the sexual part was consensual), but the implications are very much there. The potential for the situation to turn ugly(uglier) like that are very much there.
The whole thing makes me so fucking uncomfortable.
I guess that’s the thing- Kurt was drunk. Did Cody actually plan to sleep with him to rob the place or with Rachel or Santana if he thought he needed to? It’s all really awful when you stop and think about it. I’m super beyond uncomfortable about it.
But we can’t have a scene with Adam Crawford lifting Kurt up onto his dresser and making out with him.
We can’t have a scene where Kurt smiles up at Adam, all turned on, in between kisses.
Can’t have that.
Can’t have Kurt making out with the one guy who was always kind and gentle and sweet and honest to him.
I hate you so much Glee creators.
Q: How can you be a kurt fan and like what happened in that episode?
If you’re more upset that single!kurt kissed a guy than the fact that he was tied up and left defenseless i just don’t know what to do with you
Because #1: it wasn’t cheating because klaine were broken up last christmas, and b: just seriously???????
However it originated, though, the usage of “because-noun” (and of “because-adjective” and “because-gerund”) is one of those distinctly of-the-Internet, by-the-Internet movements of language. It conveys focus (linguist Gretchen McCulloch: “It means something like ‘I’m so busy being totally absorbed by X that I don’t need to explain further, and you should know about this because it’s a completely valid incredibly important thing to be doing’”). It conveys brevity (Carey: “It has a snappy, jocular feel, with a syntactic jolt that allows long explanations to be forgone” “It has a snappy, jocular feel, with a syntactic jolt that allows long explanations to be forgone”).
But it also conveys a certain universality. When I say, for example, “The talks broke down because politics,” I’m not just describing a circumstance. I’m also describing a category. I’m making grand and yet ironized claims, announcing a situation and commenting on that situation at the same time. I’m offering an explanation and rolling my eyes — and I’m able to do it with one little word. Because variety. Because Internet. Because language.
Reblogging. Because linguistics.