This part confused me a bit. Of course this was what Eric wanted because he was using Talbot to get revenge on Russell, so I’m not confused about that.

What I wonder is: what kind of a relationship were Russel and Talbot in? This scene seems to imply that theirs is an open relationship, where either could mess around with or even have sex with other people. I figure they must be, since Talbot seems to have no qualms about engaging in sexual activity with Eric. However, I don’t recall seeing Russell be intimate with anyone other than Talbot, but I don’t have a great memory. 

Now Russell is an evil asshole, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he deserves to be cheated on, so I hope that he and Talbot had a shared understanding that they were both free to play elsewhere. 

Now, discuss! :)

(Source: fuckyeahgaygifs)

missvoltairine:

desliz:

missvoltairine:

the thing that gets me about the “misandry means women are scared when I stalk them” thing

is that I’ve had dudes do shit like that to me on multiple occasions

almost always at night, always white dudes who get offended that I am trying to give them a wide berth or avoid them in the street. It’s always these dudes who decide that they are so fucking entitled to dictate where and how I fucking walk on the fucking public sidewalk that they are justified in rushing me, grabbing me, chasing me, in one case circling me tightly so I couldn’t get away, and then fucking laughing at my obvious panic and fear because “omg lighten up, lady!!!!”

like, this is an actual thing dudes do

their solution to women being afraid alone at night is to give them more reasons to be afraid, and then turn around and mock and insult them for being afraid

fucking logic/fucking basic human decency/fucking people

how do they work

yesterday I was at a bookstore with a male friend. I was staring at a shelf; he was just around the corner at a computer the store provides to search their inventory. This is significant because as we stood there, a dude just blows in and says, very loudly and intrusively, “Any good books on this shelf?!” It takes me a moment to realize he’s alone and talking to me. At that point I glance over at my friend, who’s wide-eyed at this guy’s arrogance, and boom, intrusive dude realizes I’m with a ~chaperone~. At this point, I was uncomfortable enough that I walked away. My friend comes after me and says, “Wow, that was weird.”

Of course, I then had to explain it wasn’t weird at all; this kind of thing happens to me all the time when I’m by myself. Men come out of nowhere and demand responses from me, knowing that most women are socialized to stand there and giggle uncomfortably while they impose on their space and time. I used to do that, even though I hated every second of it. We are taught to fear leaving and taught to fear staying, and of course, when we relate these stories, the maliciousness is so subtle and context-dependent that people who weren’t there feel free to assert that we must be overreacting.

What suddenly occurred to me was the sheer depth of the danger inherent in fact that men take care not to do this in front of men who might conceivably be sympathetic towards a given woman. It causes men, even men who are quite decent and aware of sexism, to wonder why they never see these things women keep saying are so common. Not only does it cause us to lose credibility, but it also allows the men who DO act this way to maintain the mental division between “having fun” and being a person who deserves to be feared and avoided.

this is really important commentary so I’m reblogging for the bolded, because:

1. when we talk about sexism making women feel “crazy” it’s important to understand that there really is a sort of mass gaslighting (for lack of a better term) going on; incidents like this are part of that. First you induce fear in someone, then you humiliate them for their fear response, and best of all, the whole thing is so context-dependent that when they try to explain that this happens all the time and is a problem chances are, especially if they are trying to explain this to a dude, they’ll be told they’re over-reacting. That is some fucking systemic abusive behavior.

2. there is a real kind of selective sociopathy at play here. Dudes know on some level that this is not okay, so they hide it from their fellow dudes, but they still get their fucking rocks off over it, they do it for fun. To get enjoyment out of a woman’s terror. And these are ordinary dudes, who just deny deny deny that that is fucked up so much and deliberately avoid situations where they might be told by another dude that it’s fucked up so they can continue to do it. Just. Yeah.

desliz: some of the comments on the original post reminded me of how, as a teenager, I scoffed at statistics about abuse and sexual assault. “How is this possible when I don’t know anyone who’s been through this?” Of course, the truth is I actually did, but they were too scared to make it known, for very good reasons. Or it was obvious, and I just failed to recognize it. Eventually, I became part of some of those statistics myself. It’s frightening to think of the sheer scale of the gaslighting and terror we live with, and even worse when you think of how thoroughly we have been deprived of credibility and don’t even realize it until we need it.

norulesnobras:

kurtnisshummeldeen:

crown-of-weeds:

horchatita:

idontownemotion:

#here is a boy that deserves to be believed in #he’s not going to graduate and he’s dealing with how it feels to feel like a failure #and he doesn’t want to go to prom with all of those people there that always expected that of him #so he’s upset and he’s wallowing #but when he hears about how upset this girl is #instead of letting her wallow with him #he makes her prom queen #he knows how big this is #he knows how special it’ll make her feel #you can see it on his face#my favorite part of this is that not once #not ONCE #did he talk down to her #not once did he make it seem like they were anything but equals #he spoke to her like he speaks to everyone else #i’m not sure if people realize how special that is #to just be spoken to like you’re an equal when so much of the world sees you as less than that #he crowned her queen #and he helped make this girl’s night #and if you ask me doing so made his #this boy has grown up so much #i’m so proud of him #and so lucky to be his fan i swear to god #better than everyone #sorry not sorry

Puck has always been set up to be this, the TRUE unconventional success story. So he might or might not graduate, he’s a Lima loser that has nothing but small dreams and in a show like this when everyone wants to and is well on their way to being a star we see failure in him. But here is what Puck has become:

• the most supportive of friends
• the most grounded
• a naturally earnestly good father despite the fact that Beth is not his legal responsibility
•  a champion of stable relationships
• 100% consistently honest
• STABLE

You know everyone can go ahead and succeed in their sparkling careers in the most fictitious and unrealistic ways, but Puck accomplishes the most possible and yet difficult task: he is an amazing person, a friend, and a truly good father/paternal figure.

I’m actually really interested in how Glee dissociates success from growth. Some characters get one, some get both, and I wonder if Finchel get none.

(We’ll see. This is something to come back to after S3.)

But! What I wanted to say:

Noah Puckerman grew up into Burt Hummel.

Which, I think, means he won.

#if you become burt hummel you have won at life

and they said that Finn was the hero of glee

(Source: andersonhummelarchive)

balalaikaboss:

fuckyeah-sexpositivity:

The rebloggable version, by request!

[Text: Anonymous asked: “Why are you posting asexual stuff on a SEX POSITIVE blog”

fuckyeah-sexpositivity answered: “Because, dear anon, sex positivity does not mean erasing or shaming the experiences of those who are asexual. 

Actually, I think we need to have this conversation. 

I actually am of the mindset we need more perspectives of asexuality within the sex positive movement. Because there’s an all too common mantra within our movement that goes, “Sex is beautiful and natural and everyone wants to have sex so it’s nothing to be ashamed of!” 

And I agree, sex is nothing to be ashamed of. But there’s one little detail there: not everyone wants sex or gets pleasure from it. They’re roughly 1% of the population. And with 7 billion people on the planet, 1% equals 70,000,000. Seventy million people is a lot of experiences to erase. 

So, roughly 70,000,000 people on this planet don’t want sex. Or they want sex in certain contexts. Or they kind of sometimes want sex but not often. Or they have sex to satisfy a partner, but don’t get much out of it for themselves. Or they have a sex drive, just… not towards other people. Or they can’t stand the thought of sex. 

And that’s okay too. 

Sex positivity for me is accepting that whether you have sex a lot, or you never have sex, whether you have a million kinks or you can’t stand sex outside the missionary position, whether you are gay, straight, bisexual, pansexual, omnisexual, sapiosexual, autosexual, objectumsexual, or asexual, the way you look at sex and attraction is valid and normal, as long as it’s not hurting anyone. 

So that is why I am posting asexual content on a sex positivity blog. And that is why I will continue to do so.”] 

Dear God, anon. You fail sex positivity forever. It means “have precisely the amount of sex that you want to.” The other side of that dial? “Have no sex at all if it pickels your haube.” I am finding it difficult to understand what’s so wildly impossible about that.

wugs:

brodinsons:

iwantmyburd:

alysian-fields:

anberlyn:

Asgard mourning over Loki

This just kills me. Because seriously, is anyone really surprised that Loki completely lost it? Thor and Frigga are literally the only people who show any regret over what happened to him. Odin THREW A FUCKING PARTY. No one gave a shit that Loki had fallen into the darkness, and that he’d fought beside them for thousands of years. They just had a big feast, and that was it.

Compare this to the way everyone reacted when Thor was banished. They knew he wasn’t dead, that he was probably fine somewhere, but all they could think about was how terrible it was and how they needed to get him back, even though it was his own fault that he was banished and it was a lesson he needed to learn. Loki even points this out to them, but they don’t listen to him. None of them ever listened to Loki, even though for the most part he was probably the most clear-headed person in Asgard. Even sabotaging Thor’s coronation was pretty sensible. Yeah, a lot of it came from jealousy and the desire to fuck shit up, but honestly Thor was not ready to be king at that point. That was very obvious. He needed to grow up and learn that war wasn’t a game, and that he couldn’t just do whatever the hell he wanted. So Loki puts it all on hold in typical Loki style, because seriously no one was going to listen to him if he tried to actually point out that Thor wasn’t ready for the crown. He had to take matters into his own hands. All of Asgard treated him like shit. They ignored him and they made constant jibes at him. And then they’re surprised when it turns out he hates them all. 

And so the confrontation between Loki and Thor in Avengers breaks my heart, because I don’t think Thor was lying. The thing about Thor is that he’s this big innocent teddy bear who sees everything in the way he wants to, and so he probably does believe everyone saw Loki the way he did, and that they loved him as he did. And that’s why he thought the slights against Loki were ‘imagined’, because he honestly didn’t notice them. Thor just wants everything to be okay, and that’s kind of his downfall with Loki, because he just doesn’t notice all the things that are fucked up in the way Loki is treated.

Loki knows they didn’t mourn. Thor is the one person who cared about him even though he had a completely different skills set from the warriors of Asgard, and even so he’s never going to understand Loki because he refuses to see what Loki has had to put up with all these years.

Also, Odin can suck my dick. 

People hating on Odin and the rest of Asgard because AAHH LOKI WAS SUCH AN INNOCENT SOUL really upsets me so here have a rant.

I honestly fucking doubt Odin threw this party because of Loki’s ”death”, and saying Thor and Frigga were the only ones upset over it is also wrong or did we watch different movies because I’m pretty sure I saw Odin staring into space outside, away from the party.

And even if the party was for Loki’s death then take a good hard look at Asgard and think about the fact that they’re a fucking Warrior race, they celebrate death because you get to go to Valhalla or Fólkvangr and serve Odin and Frigga.

Of course they mourned over Loki but it is also part of their tradition to celebrate death in remembrance of the deceased so if Thor had died I believe they would have thrown the same kind of party. Perhaps people would have been more upset, yes, but you’re also forgetting that Loki wasn’t just some innocent little child, even back then before he officially snapped he was the god of mischief for a reason. He wasn’t as loved as Thor and I can never understand why people blame that on Odin because while I’m sure him being a frost giant was part of it how do you expect Odin to change that, and even then he must have also done some sneaky ass shit to get people to dislike him. Like cutting Sif’s fucking hair off as a prank.

And even if the celebration wasn’t for Loki’s death I believe they’d be pretty glad that Asgard wasn’t overtaken by frost giants, and honestly I’d rather celebrate over that and bring some light into a grim situation, the mourning itself can be done in private.

And stop fucking blaming Odin for everything, he did his best as a father and even he can make mistakes.

BLESS YOU EDITH

I have like three things to add onto her glorious rebuttal (lol .. butt):

1. AGAIN. Read the myths. Asgardians celebrate death. When a god dies, he/she goes to Valhalla, where he/she will never again thirst or hunger for anything and will live out eternity in the golden hall of the Valkyries with their previously fallen comrades and friends.
2. Odin is a warlord and a sorcerer in his own right. He’s like Fury, guys. His secrets have secrets. You can’t live for several millennia and not have a shitton of dirty laundry. He took Loki in to spare the foundling’s life and to possibly forge a peace between the realms. His plans fell through and YET HE DIDN’T RENOUNCE LOKI. EVEN NOW, HE STILL CLAIMS HIM AS HIS OWN SON. Odin’s parenting is an old joke by now, but he did the best he could under the circumstances fate laid out for him. Gods operate differently than we do, remember.
3. LOKI IS NOT A DECENT PERSON. He may have some inkling of good inside him (Thor’s the one who sees it most), but now that Odin’s deception has cemented itself in his psyche, Loki has decided that since he’s obviously a monster, he’s going to be the best monster the Nine Realms have ever seen. He’s always been into pranks, but now his pranks have deadly intent behind them. Mischief isn’t enough for him anymore. He’s coming into his own as the god of chaos.

#its ok to feel bad for loki #personally i think he’s a pretty tragic character but people take it way too far #loki is a villain and you can’t excuse his actions or blame them on odin because in the end no matter how he was treated#its not going to make killing a shit ton of people and trying to take over earth okay #there are people slighted way worse than loki who don’t turn out to be murderous villains

thechocolatebrigade:

yaosnonexistentmanhood:

weetz:

SKINNY GIRL IN SWEATPANTS: OH CUTE. SHE’S LAID BACK, LOW MAINTENANCE, SHE DOESNT HAVE TO GET ALL FANCY AND SPEND TIME DOING HER HAIR (CAUSE SHE’S CUTE WITH A MESSY BUN, AND NO MAKEUP OF COURSE) OR GETTING DOLLED UP.

FAT GIRL IN THE SAME OUTFIT: OH YOU’D THINK SHE COULD PUT IN A LITTLE EFFORT. WHAT A SLOB.

the fact that you have time to bitch about stupid stuff like that means that you have far more privilege than the majority of the people on this planet

please stop 

No. Why should that person stop pointing out privilege where that person sees it? This shit ain’t stupid. It’s hurtful. I’ve had fat friends before go out in public wearing pretty much the same thing as their skinny friends are but because it’s more acceptable for someone who is thin to get away with wearing pajamas, not being done up, messy bun, etc.. they get away with looking like that, but my fat friends? They’re nailed to the cross. They’re told they should go back to bed, that they’re slob, that they’re gross, how dare they go out in public like that?

And unless you’ve been on the receiving end of thin privilege where you don’t benefit from it and you encounter that bullshit all the time you don’t get to sit there and tell that person that what they’re ranting about is stupid.

I will never understand why people choose to be douche bags. Why bother? You know what you’re about to say is super asshole status, but you say it anyways. Why? To stir the pot? To make yourself feel good? To just be an ass to be an ass because it’s the internet and you can get away with it? Or because you truly are ignorant to what the fucking term ‘privilege’ means. That ain’t no concept motherlover, that’s a true, real fucking thing and you must likely have it and benefit from it.

switchbladekiller:

truebloodwillpsychuout:

maggiesview:

stillhidden:

switchbladekiller:

truebloodwillpsychuout:

switchbladekiller:

truebloodwillpsychuout:

hsm7:

truebloodwillpsychuout:

virgovampire:

truebloodwillpsychuout:

hsm7:

truebloodwillpsychuout:

hsm7:

virgovampire:

hsm7:

ericyeld:

really he did?

Certainly, some would be a matter of opinion, but from Sookie’s perspective, there were definitely a few transgressions. These might include being summoned to Fangtasia to find the thief. She didn’t want to go, but Bill told her she really didn’t have a choice. No way for her to fel good about that. Taking Bill away to the tribunal might be another. Allowing Sookie to fall into the FoTS trap and tricking her about his blood could be included. (not that I think he wanted her to fall into the trap, but, as she said, he knew it was a possibility) The Lafayette situation is definitely one. The whole Russell mansion incident, even though we know the real story, probably feels pretty terrible. Of course, the dungeon, and the subsequent Russell and Eric drinking her definitely sucked. Again, we know there’s more to the story, but she doesn’t.

Keep in mind that what Sookie perceives and is aware of is completely different than what we know. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t cringeworthy to hear her say that, but, again, I can understand why she might think that even though it’s wholly unfair and not at all representative of the truth. I think she’s going to have revelations just like we’ve had.

How many times have we watched thinking one thing only to find out how wrong we were. She’s going to have her moments of discovery, too. :)

He believes her, and feel so bad about it, he’s devastated. Maybe it’s to show us what it feels like not knowing half of what’s going on and having a ‘naiv’ mind as your only guide to understand things! No need to say I don’t like anyone hurting him!

I think we can all agree that we don’t like to see Eric hurt, but it’s inevitable that there will be some pain and anguish involved…it is drama after all. But, sometimes it helps to understand the how’s and why’s, because that’s where hope is created. And Sookie and Eric personify that hope for me.

For me, one of the most important aspects of Eric’s amnesia was that he got to see himself thru the eyes of other people and realized that he didn’t always like the person that he had become over the centuries.This new self-awareness helps Eric grow as a person and as a character in the show and in the books.

Yes, definitely laying the foundation of redemption.  Now that his memories have returned, it’ll be a question how much the self-discovery during that period informs what he does in the future.  Somehow, I can’t imagine that he remains unchanged from that experience. 

No, he certainly doesn’t stay the same in the books, and I don’t expect him to on the show. Maybe that’s what the speculation about us seeing a new side to Eric is about. Personally, I’m looking forward to seeing Eric evolve as a character.

” one of the most important aspects of Eric’s amnesia was that he got to see himself thru the eyes of other people and realized that he didn’t always like the person that he had become over the centuries.” 

I think we got to see it, I don’t think Eric have or have had problems seeing himself! He realized, as a ‘naiv child’ that the picture Sookie has of him, is that he can be terrible, but he knew that before, now the difference is that he feels bad about it, because Sookie makes him and he just have her word for it, but she can’t see the full picture, as he normaly can! I actually don’t know how he ‘as himself’ will think of all this! In this picture Sookie do not know if she still wants Eric ‘as himself’. She plainly admits to wanting him, as the Eric she sees him as, again the ‘naiv child’. I guess Eric could be ‘housebroken’ to suit Sookies image of things, but it would be much more real, if she learned more about the true meaning of his actions! She is naive, as AE he is naive as well, but as him self he isn’t. Eric is already one of the most evolved persons, I know people don’t agree, but I really think so and much more interesting is to see Sookie grow and evolve!

First of all, where do you get that Sookie saw Eric as a child or wanted a child Eric? Would she have had sex with a child? YOU SAW ERIC AS A CHILD! Don’t put your shit on Sookie. She always saw Eric as a man. And she doesn’t want Eric to be housebroken. She wants him to be himself—a man who is honest and open about his feelings and is not hiding behind swagger. Eric is a sensitive person. We saw that during the amnesia. He spent centuries protecting himself from being hurt by closing himself off and pretending to be cold, indifferent, and sarcastic, but that’s not who Eric is inside. Men are people too, and they have feelings. Sookie doesn’t expect Eric to be emo in public, but in private, she wants Eric to be real with her, not playing “sexy” games. Would you accept any less from a man or from an intimate relationship?

Yes, especially the bold.  Sookie does not see Eric as a naive child. That statement  doesn’t even make sense. Eric is a grown man and missing his memories doesn’t make him a child and to view him in such a way is insulting. Sookie started down the path of loving a grown man and completed that journey with a grown man, memories or no memories.

Eric saw himself thru the eyes of Sookie, Bill, Alcide, Tara, and Pam during his amnesia and realized that he was someone who thought far too highly of himself, who was disrespectful of authority, who committed cruel acts, who terrified innocent women, and who a lot of people hated. He saw this from people’s reactions to him. Eric realized that he wasn’t always a good person and that he didn’t always like himself. Eric got so used to acting like a Viking Vampire God and pandering to women’s sexual fantasies, that he forgot who he really was and didn’t realize that his arrogant and presumptuous behavior was driving Sookie away. Eric doesn’t want Sookie to worship him. He wants to have a genuine relationship with her. When Eric recovered his memories from his time with Sookie during his amnesia, he realized that Sookie saw him as a person, not as a monster, or a god, or a bank, or a sex object. This profoundly changed how Eric saw himself, how he saw Sookie, and how he saw their relationship. And that’s a good and healthy change. 

I don’t know if I agree with all of this, as I think living 1000 years naturally begets a certain level of confidence, which is what I think Eric is rather than arrogant. He is strong. He is smart. He is skilled. He is loyal. He is a warrior. He has done something that is not common and that is to have survived as long as he has. He has a right to be confident. He commands respect because he has earned it.  That doesn’t mean that he can’t be cruel or inconsiderate, and that he doesn’t show his disdain for humans or otherworldly creature not vampire. But, I don’t agree that he was so haughty that he needed to be shoved off a pedestal.  Arrogance connotes overconfidence,  self-importance, pomposity…all of which better describes Bill.

Moreover, pre-amnesia, we either saw or were told that Eric was not as bad as one might think.  We saw his reaction to Jessica being turned. He did not look like he agreed with it, he confirmed Longshadow’s theft with the Magister and told the Magister that Bill obeyed when it mattered, and Bill, himself, told Sookie that other vampires/Sheriff’s would have done much worse to Lafayette than what Eric did.  We’ve been given clues that Eric was not all that he appeared to be.  

What Sookie gives Eric is the freedom to feel, to love, to be whole. I don’t think that means he’s not going to be dangerous or do cruel things….he is vampire, after all. So I expect we’ll still see a good heart-ripping every now and then.  

And there is no such thing as an evolved person. There is always room for improvement in all of us even if we lived for 1,000s of years.

Common, you have to agree that there was a certain sense of grandiosity to Eric. Pam called him a Viking Vampire God to his face. Where would she have gotten an idea like that if Eric hadn’t acted like that? Eric acted superior not just to humans, weres, and shifters but to other vampires, including to his own Queen, Sophie-Anne, and to Nan Flannigan, a member of the Authority. They didn’t like him and didn’t trust him, and that was hardly helpful to Eric. His superior behavior was maladaptive. The only time we saw Eric genuinely humble was with Godric, who knew the real him. It wasn’t a matter of knocking Eric off his pedestal. It was a matter of Eric realizing that he put himself on the pedestal, and as long as he remained on it, he was isolated and couldn’t form genuine emotional connections with the people he loved—not with Sookie and not even with Pam, who worshipped him but didn’t really know him.

And Eric did have a reason for his grandiosity, but it wasn’t really due to being an ancient vampire. It was due to the fact that even as a human, he was very different from other people, and everyone treated him as more than human. If Eric was 6’5” over 1,000 years ago, then Eric was one of the tallest people in the world at the time when humans believed in giants and gods. Think about what that means.

Just wanted to point out that the only Authority that Eric had no respect for was Bill’s pre amnesia,the situation with the Magister was unavoidable.He was respectful to Sophie Ann until she turned on him,Nan is contemptuous of everyone except to her superiors.Can you blame Eric for disliking her due to how she treated Godric.When it comes to humans,Vampires have their own brand of justice,some of it is not pretty.The Vampire world is harsh and brutal,and the only Vampire you can trust, is one you have made.Acquiring a hard skin is a necessity to survive,and like hsm7: said other Vampires would have done a lot worse to Lala  under the circumstances.We have to remember they are on top of the food chain,and considering that, he is a pretty good Vampire compared to most

I never said that Eric was a bad vampire. His treatment of Lala is not the issue. The issue is that Eric wasn’t nearly as well-respected as it seems. Longshadow disrespected Eric by stealing money from him and didn’t think that Eric would ever discover it was him. QSA told him not to think and constantly grabbed his balls. Nan called Eric a Viking, threatened to take away his area in S2, called him a whiny baby in S3, and when Bill told her that he sent Eric after the witches, Nan didn’t think much of Eric’s negotiation skills. Bill was afraid of Eric, but then spoke to him with great disrespect, particularly after he figured out that Eric wouldn’t kill him because of Sookie. Russell Edgington took Eric with him to intimidate Sophie-Anne. He let Eric manhandle her, so he wouldn’t get his hands dirty. He left Eric with Talbot because he thought Eric would be an amusing plaything for his lover. He fell for Eric’s trap in S3 because he thought Eric was all about muscle and sex. The fact is the other vampires thought Eric was a meathead, didn’t think much of his intelligence, and didn’t take him seriously. Eric was feared, but he wasn’t well-respected, and he certainly wasn’t well-liked. Now there had to be a reason for that, right? Could it have been Eric’s behavior?

I would suggest that it’s an issue of rank, not an issue of respect or there lack of concerning Eric.

In regards to Longshadow, this falls under the category of:

“The only Vampire a Vampire can trust, is the one it made” all other Vampires are potentially treacherous, (especially if a crime committed by an individual/Vampire, thinks there is no possibility of being discovered). Stealing from Eric was act of disloyalty/betrayal, which is not the same as an act of disrespect.

Lets take a look at the The Hierarchy, which consists of Kings and Queens, then Sheriffs.

The chain of command as follows:

  1.  The Authority

  2. Magister

  4. Vampire monarch

   5. Vampire sheriff

   6. Vampires living in Area

While a sheriff will have absolute power of the area they reside in, they still have to answer to their King or Queen,submit to any orders given, similar to any monarch and its subjects. While QSA was knowledgeable about certain things, could be charming, she acted like a spoilt child, entertained herself with her playthings and enjoyed lording her power over Eric AND Bill. And without doubt, over anyone else who was her in command when it suited her.

As stated previously, Nan is contemptuous of everyone who doesn’t outrank her, as a spokeswomen for the AVL/and member of Authority, she has the power to take a Sheriff’s  area away, Eric is the exception to the rule, he has friends in very high places, much higher than her, which of course irks Nan no end that that her hands are tied concerning him, all she can do is threaten, he is not concerned. She is also JUST as acid tongued with Bill and anyone else who isn’t her equal. But, in a post Russell Edgington world S4, things are different, she changes her tune and thinks very highly of Eric’s negotiation skills, HE is the man she wants to help her win back the public one step at a time,in this instance at least, now that a power play is not an issue, a common goal is.

Bill is many things, one of them being not knowing when to hold his tongue. While he may have been afraid of Eric especially in S1, nevertheless, there is a sort of camaraderie between them despite Eric and Pam’s contempt. A couple of instances of when we are shown this is in Bill’s house when he is being sarcastic to Pam about Eric before they head to Merlotte’s.

2. Telling Eric to behave himself in Merlotte’s. Eric: “Don’t I always?”

3. Eric Telling Bill (Quoting the Magister) to “back his shit down.”

Before that tongue of his gets him into even more trouble by defying the Magister, who is more powerful than Eric, complete stupidity on Bill’s part. Is it any wonder then that he doesn’t even register on Eric’s radar, Bill’s opinion of him means nothing to Eric, and no doubt Bill has a few ENVY issues. S2/3 Bill does get a bit more cocky because of Sookie, which Eric finds laughable and so it should be.

“The fact is the other vampires thought Eric was a meathead, didn’t think much of his intelligence, and didn’t take him seriously”

I’m curious to know how you came to the conclusion that other Vampires thought that Eric was a meathead?

A meathead is muscular guy who cannot hold a conversation about anything other than weight-lifting and protein shakes. Who cannot complete his own sentences and thoughts, who are evolutionary hindered and are less capable of following directions than a dead hamster.

Firstly to survive over a 1000 years, and become a Sheriff, requires high intelligence and perseverance in the Vampire world and commands high respect. Its not enough to be feared, otherwise Stan would have been a Sheriff by now.No king or Queen would bestow anybody with the responsibility of being a Sheriff if that person (Eric) was perceived to be a meathead, it’s not a possibility, so on that, you are incorrect.

1. Russell decided to help Eric because he liked his tenacity,

2. He scoffs at the Authorities Rule and sees Eric as being a good asset, someone to have on his side. You don’t get to almost 3000 years old without sizing people up and getting their measure, Eric has brain and Braun power. And Russell gets/takes what he wants, he is a King after all, and likes acquiring anything that will help him further his power. A meathead or person with low intelligence couldn’t help with achieving that. He could have easily brought one of his goons to deal with QSA, but as of right now, Eric is his right-hand man. Eric pledges his “allegiance” and Russell is led to believe that Eric will serves his own self-interest above all else. And very badly underestimates him, due to his own grandiosity (narcissistic personality disorder) which is his downfall. He calls Eric nothing but a lump of muscle with a blood grudge, (sour grapes) Eric has just duped and royally fucked him over and he didn’t see it coming, but in the next instance Russell calls him a clever boy, he says what’s suit him from moment to moment, when presented with the possibility of every Vampires dream, to walk in the sun. Russell’s super-ego still hasn’t learned its lesson.

“Eric was feared, but he wasn’t well-respected, and he certainly wasn’t well-liked”

We all know that Eric is no angel, but he does have a code that he honour’s, which wouldn’t go unseen, as we have only witnessed him interact with the Vampires I have mentioned above and Isabel /Stan,Talbot, If there is anyone else, I can’t think of them right now,why do you assume he is not well liked?

We know he is feared and worshipped by humans, but Bill, Nan, Sophie Ann, Russell. Have no credibility, who likes them? They are just four individuals that we have been introduced to in the show, as a Sheriff, he knows a whole lot more Vampires that we are not privy to.

A bit of a ramble sorry! my font went a bit weird too!

Good ramble! :) (Also, I fixed the font). 

Although I believe everything everone has said here, I also believe something else. That is that Eric is way to talented and gifted as a Vampire in his society to be allowed to continue in his current position. They(as in the Authority and AVL for a long time now that Eric is worht a whole lot to them. But he continues to resist them including hiding himslef away as just a sheriff in La. and still continuing to be better than any other vampire. The Authority and the AVL has given him tasks to perform on their behalf and I might add tasks that unless he does them just so and just right will lead to his “true death”.Eric continues to perform those tasks his way and also continues to illude them. 

My particular take on all of this is that they want him to finally belong to  them and give them all of his talents and giifts but he continues to allude them. Eric is all about independence and that is why he is a sheriff in La, a place they all clearly disrespect. It gives Eric  a degree of freedom that he requires. However, he was not bargaining for his feelings for Sookie and his commitment to La. Now, as S 4 ends. The Athority and the AVL are after his life. 

I think it is their way of getting  Eric on the run so that in the end they can corner him and offer their deal to him. He gets to live but only if he joins them and puts all that he is behind them. 

It has been truly made obvious in TB that not only is Eric different from the other vampier in La but he is also so much stronger and strategic.  Eric has a very special somthing that even Godiric knew about as he refuse Eric’s hearts desire to accompany his maker into the the “true death. Godric leaves Eric behind not just because he loves him but because Eric, is the best hope the vampire world has to “evolve” and lead the rest of them into this new world. Eriic is very key and very very important to the TB storyline. Not as simply the HEA for Sookie and him but because Eric needs to be blasted out of his comfortable nitch as  a sheriff in La, and become some of major status in the vampire heirachy. As   Eric grows to this point, it may take him far from La and Sookie but it will lead to a destiny that he has avoided since he was tunred by Godric. 

Eric just may be the hope of the Vampire world and all the supes and if his is just that, he has to built up to this destiny which very well might mean that as much as he loves Sookie and she him, he may have to make the final sacrifice which willl be a very personal one.

Clearly Eric has been develped by TB as an iconic hero even against his will . It is just too clear that inspite of his weaknesses and flaws, he is head and shoulders above anyone else on TB.That, in my onion, is not really about he and Sookie but about his eventual role in the Supe world and who is the next logical leader to bring some kind of peace to all the chaos. I think it will be Eric, which will very well mean he has to give Sookie and his love for her up

What can possibly be more disrespectful than being dysloyal and betraying someone who trusts you? Did you think that when Bill lied to Sookie about his presence in Bon Temps and fucked Lorena that he was respecting Sookie? Then why would you think that Longshadow stealing money from Eric was not a clear sign of disrespect? Longshadow thought he could get away with it because he didn’t think that Eric was smart enough to figure out how to pinpoint the thief. QSA told Eric not to think and do what he did best in S2 and grabbed his balls when he tried to give her his opinion. If there is a culture in which grabbing a man’s nutsack is a sign of respect, I’d like to know about it. Hell, I’d love to visit it. I’d be the most respectful tourist they ever had. Russell called Eric a LUMP OF MUSCLE to his face. And that’s exactly how he saw Eric until Eric offered him something interesting, and even then he never considered that Eric could double-cross him. Nan thought Bill was an idiot for sending Eric to negotiate with the witches because she didn’t think Eric could do anything except intimidate or seduce people and had no problem pushing a death warrant thru for Eric in S4. QSA, Nan, and RE were important, high-ranking members of the vampire community. The fact that they didn’t think much of Eric and didn’t value his opinion is not a good thing. And incidentally, we don’t know how Eric got his position of Sheriff. I doubt that either QSA or Nan appointed or recommended him. Fans remarked that Eric dressed like a Mafioso in S2. In S4 Eric called himself a BARBARIAN THUG. Even Pam saw him that way. She told Amnesia Eric that he ripped out people’s livers with one fang. She didn’t tell him that he was good in math or invented brilliant things during his 1,000 years of living. Bill tried to kill Eric after Eric outsmarted Russell and saved all their lives. Bill thought that he was still smarter than Eric. Now I think we can all agree that Eric is actually very smart, but he hid that fact from the vampires around him by acting like a meathead—someone with more muscle than brains. Sometimes, that was an advantage, as in RE situation, but not always. Of course, Bill, Pam, QSA, Nan, and RE are a very small sample of vampires. We will see Eric interact with other vampires, including the Authority members, in S5. Then we will be able to truly judge how Eric is regarded in the vampire community. So how about we save this discussion for after S5?

As stated, disloyalty and disrespect are not one and the same; they can be both used simultaneously to describe a situation, a sequence of events, once merited. If one was going to be pedantic about it:  A unit of language, consisting of one or more words or their written representation, which functions as a principal carrier of meaning that is relevant dialogue within the context of story/events that are being described by the viewer

In reference for Eric, you are using the word disrespect to describe how other Vampires thought of him. You are using the word meathead and dislike to describe how other Vampires viewed him as facts. I will just address that, because most of what you replied, is not relevant to this discussion and doesn’t make much sense to me.

Longshadow was Skimming money over a period of time, whether Eric trusted him 100% or at all is Heresay. All we know from TB is that he was a partner in the bar, and there was comradeship between them. First and foremost Longshadow committed the crime of stealing.This is disrespecting the law.

Disrespect: is open contempt; scorn; rudeness; language or behaviour intended to mock, to name a few.

An act of betrayal in my view is more relevant to the crime; which falls under the definition of treachery; because the act is done behind ones back without knowledge of who the perpetrator is. You have chosen to overlook that the Vampire world is full of treachery and that many Vampires would have done the same thing to anyone, this type of deceit, is not solely confined to Eric. Use whatever words you deem fitting; just don’t expect someone to agree with it.

Bill lying to Sookie about his presence for being in Bon Temps has no relevance to the topic of discussion, again you are choosing to forget, that we are dealing with Vampires here. Bill was sent on orders by the Queen; he was doing his job, and did it very well. Bill didn’t fuck Lorena, he raped her, if you can’t tell the difference, then I would be worried if I were you. How is raping someone disrespectful to another.

Amnesic Eric, was considered a serious threat due to Bill.

You have failed to address/ignored the Vampire hierarchy and what that means, especially to subordinates within the system. People /Vampires in positions of power tend to abuse it, depending on the nature of the character. QSA, Russell, Nan or perfect examples of abuse of power, whether their actions are disrespectful or not, are irrelevant .They can do, and say what they want, because they have the power to do so, because to them it’s their god given right as a superior, it’s amusing. The only thing that is important is their self-interests, anyone that dares challenge or suggests something not to their liking, gets a taste of their bad side.This is not solely confined to Eric.You seem to be forgetting that Vampires are killers/Predators; some are sadistic,some evolve over time, and have no need to kill unless crossed.

If you think that other Vampires just saw Eric as a Meathead with no intelligence, you are very much mistaken.

 

You guys have such fascinating discussions.

(Source: she-wa)

unreconstructedfangirl:

truebloodwillpsychuout:

hsm7:

truebloodwillpsychuout:

hsm7:

unreconstructedfangirl:

truebloodwillpsychuout:

nwalmn:

unreconstructedfangirl:

hsm7:

switchbladekiller:

Going back on her own words,dealing with him rationally is something she can’t handle right in that moment.

I have a feeling this will get revisited. This choice of language doesn’t seem accidental. 

There is no way the choice of language is accidental. Also, there is no way the writers of this show forgot about Bill’s mounting list of crimes and lies. There is not way that this whole thing is not a set up for something else… and I am SO looking forward to finding out what. Bring it on, True Blood.

Not that i think CH can be this clever, but MAYBE some of the ‘wow what shit is this’ they are saying about her next book is about Bill making more shit to destroy Sookie, and since Alan Ball does talk to CH a lot to know where lies the future of the narrative, maybe, just maybe we will see EVEN MORE Billshit.

Or just Alan Ball’s Billshit, without the book following the awesomeness of it.

I don’t think that Sookie is misunderstanding or trying to excuse what Bill did.  She’s trying to see Bill’s actions from his point of view.  Bill believed he was protecting her when he was lying to her.  It was a mistake on his part, but it’s not up to Eric or Sookie to judge Bill’s actions.  None of them is perfect.  They have all lied to each other.  This is just a really bad time for Eric to bring this up.  Sookie doesn’t want to rehash this; she wants to move on. 

I think Sookie is being kind — because she is very kind — and she’s ending her relationship with Bill. I agree that Eric is not playing his best cards when he brings that up, but saying “none of them is perfect” creates an equivalency between them that simply doesn’t exist. Eric may have done his share of bad shit in his 1000 years of life, but his lies are in no way comparable to Bill’s. The one time Eric outright lied to serve himself was when he got her to suck the bullets out in Dallas. Since then, every lie he has every told her has been to protect or save her, with a small handful of lies that he told to protect his own heart. Bill, on the other hand, lies only to protect himself. I mean, PLEASE: tell me one lie he told her that was actually to protect her rather than to protect himself from the fact that if she knew what a liar and manipulator he was, she would have kicked him to the curb instantly.

And, as for Sookie, she almost never lies, but she feels really badly when she does. Comparing her crimes with Bill’s or even Eric’s is ridiculous.

I don’t think she’s trying to see things from Bill’s point of view. I think she’s just saying what she has to say to get out of there alone and put an end to the drama between her and Bill. She’s trying to do that with Eric, too, but it’s 100% obvious that they have unfinished business that must be dealt with. 

Finally, Alan Ball is not guilty of what everyone calls “Billshit”. Bill has an expanded role in the show, but he is not “propped up” in any way. Anyone that thinks that simply isn’t watching and thinking critically about what they are told vs. what they are shown. For a crash course in why I say that, read this because it is all true, and then ask yourself if Bill has ANYTHING LIKE this amount of character development or generation of sympathy. Bill is a villian, but he’s a complicated one — just like Eric is a complicated hero. They are negative images of one another. 

Everything in bold…YES! I also think that Sookie absolutely has the right to judge Bill.  She was the recipient of his lies and misdeeds (allowing her to get beaten within an inch of her life).  She has every right to have an opinion, be angry about it, or be forgiving.

Eric certainly isn’t beyond reproach (he did trick her into drinking his blood, after all) and, as noted, isn’t showing his best side, but as URF pointed out there is a chasm between the motivations and deeds in comparison to Bill’s.  And, there is no way that the 3 of these characters are standing on the same moral ground.

Look, a lie is a lie.  It doesn’t matter if Bill’s lies had more hurtful consequences, and it doesn’t matter if Sookie’s reasons for lying were noble.  Lying is wrong.  That’s what Sookie was taught by her Gran, who was a CHRISTIAN.  Judging and hating people is also wrong according to the teachings of the Christian faith.  Sookie is following her faith by forgiving Bill and asking for his forgiveness for lying to him.  She is doing this not for him, but for herself—for her own conscience—but it’s also a kind, compassionate, and moral thing to do.  It’s also a practical thing to do because Sookie may have to live next door to Bill for a long time, and she doesn’t want to have bad feelings and negative interactions between them.  Obviously, she doesn’t have to do any of these things, but it’s her choice, and I choose to respect it.  Finally, what happened between Bill and Sookie is NONE OF ERIC’S BUSINESS.  It’s not up to Eric to decide how Sookie should treat Bill.  Eric is interfering AGAIN, and this is why Sookie gets mad at him.  (For the record, I’m not trying to preach, but just to explain the logic behind Sookie’s actions in this scene as I understand them.  It drives me crazy when people accuse Sookie of being stupid or crazy for being a compassionate and moral person.)

In my opinion, a lie is a lie is a lie is simplistic and somewhat contradicts what you said earlier “Bill believed he was protecting her when he was lying to her”, which sounded very much like a defense. I don’t think you can equate all lies as being equal and motivations make a difference.  I don’t think a Bernie Madoff-type lie that devastated the lives of many people is on the same level as “does my butt look big in these pants” and the other person says “no, you look great”.  

Yes, Sookie is absolutely doing all of this for herself.  Forgiving Bill and challenging Eric is what she feels she needs to do to in order to move on. Yes, she’s influenced by her Gran, but as UFG said, Sookie is at her core a good person. She forgives because, for her, it’s the right thing to do.

As for  Eric interfering, he’s fighting for the person he loves. What he says isn’t really about Bill; it’s about fighting for Sookie. He’s dealing with emotions that he’s not used to feeling and, unfortunately, he makes a desperate choice and takes a shot at Bill. However, Sookie is leaving BOTH of them, at the same time, together in the same room, so, yes, he does have a part in this conversation. 

Your point about people bashing Sookie for her actions above is well-taken, and no one on this thread thinks that Sookie is weak, stupid, or that she did the wrong thing in leaving them both or forgiving Bill.  It’s what needed to be done, and Sookie showed great strength in what she did.  I just have a different opinion regarding some of the other statements. :)

I totally get all of your points.  Most people would feel this way, but such reasoning doesn’t explain Sookie’s actions.  Obviously, she’s not looking at degrees of lying, or she would be harsher with Bill and softer with Eric.  And clearly she thinks that Eric is interfering not fighting for her; otherwise, why is she mad at him and pointing out his own behavior?  And frankly if Eric were fighting for her, he should have focused on what he and Sookie can have together, not what Bill did in the past.  And clearly Sookie believes that Bill was trying to protect even when he was lying to her; otherwise, why would she defend his actions?  I’m just trying to understand Sookie’s emotions and thoughts and motivations in this scene, not impose my own values on her.  I agree that what she’s doing here takes a lot of courage and strength.  

Sookie isn’t weighing up lies at all. She’s not in the business of being fair and rational right here. She’s in the business of self-preservation, and that means getting out of there with the drama removed from her relationship with Bill, and having broken up with Eric. I don’t understand why you’re saying she’s “mad” at him. She isn’t! She’s just saying that the three of them are in a tangled, untenable situation. In fact, she essentially tells him that she loves him, and not just sweet Eric, but Eric. Then she tells him that despite that, it’s over. She knows Eric is fighting for her, and she’s telling him not to. Eric, being Eric, will respect that. He has always respected her agency, and she is simply appealing to that part of him.

Also, Sookie has just been re-poisoned by a gallon of Bill’s blood. What she says to him is simply not rational. He did not lie to protect her. Having her beaten so he could feed her his blood, the one of his myriad crimes that she knows about, was not a lie to protect her, and SHE KNOWS IT. She’s saying what she has to say to forgive him. It’s not as straightforward as you suggest — something to simply be taken literally. There’s what she says, and there’s the truth that we know. She needs distance so that she can see all of it for what it is. She’s desperate and confused.

If you want to understand Sookie’s thoughts and feelings, you have to move beyond what she, Eric and Bill literally say, and remember what we have been shown about who deserves forgiveness, who lied, and who didn’t.

Great discussion!

(Source: ericnorseman)

unreconstructedfangirl:

stillhidden:

hsm7:

stillhidden:

switchbladekiller:

stillhidden:

hsm7:

444industrialdrive:

tempella:

The break up, S4E12 as requested

How many times exactly has Eric lied to Sookie, or even Bill for that matter? I better we could count on our fingers!

This was definitely over-compensation. We oftentimes are less-forgiving, unbending, and exaggerate or invent the deficits or shortcomings of the one’s we love the most.  And that’s because there’s a safety in doing that.  It’s completely unfair, but the safety in knowing someone loves us, unconditionally, and whom we love, equally, can sometimes make them an easy target. As hard as it is to hear Sookie be so harsh and unfair with Eric, yet so forgiving with Bill in spite of all he’s done, I think it speaks volumes to the truth of what Sookie really feels….and it’s that she truly loves Eric.

It’s so obvious that much of what she says above is untrue, both to Eric and to Bill. The only thing that she’s really honest about is forgiving Bill.  But, all of this is what she needs to try to move on. She knows what she needs to do, so she’s trying to do it in a way that pushes Eric away and lets Bill go. The distinction in her method is telling. Letting Bill go lends itself to a finality…a peace. However, pushing someone away..that’s emotional and fraught with angst. She doesn’t do that because that’s what she truly wants.  She does it because she thinks that’s what she has to do…BIG difference. :)

Yes!

Ah this now infamous scene, of course she is completely exaggerating Erics sins here in comparison to Bills, she is kind to Bill, touches him and forgives him.As mentioned above, this is her way of letting go, his “You are the love of my life” is not going to work this time, she is finished with him.With Eric she is very harsh, but emotional, this is the giveaway on how much he affects her.She is doing what she feels she has to do to get out of there,Eric plays this so well, he looks like a puppy that has been kicked, and it feels like their break up is all wrong, there is unfinished buisness between them.And I think the writers wanted the audience to feel that.

There was uproar when Sookie asked Bill to forgive her, and the conclusion I came to as to why she says that is, she tells Eric a part of her has always wanted him, not just the goofy innocent side,Bill sensed since season 3 that she did have feelings for Eric, and his worst fear has come true. Maybe she feels bad about that, just a theory.

It’s probably a part of it. But the important thing is, this isn’t about Bill, about what he did or didn’t do. Or about what is owed to him or what he owes to Sookie. She is, indeed, letting him go. Perhaps that’s what the apology is for: For letting go emotionally, for not even being angry with him anymore. Anger is still passion, and hopefully, she is moving past it. 

With Eric, there’s no letting go of anything. And that is very, very telling, too. :)

I think that’s exactly what’s happening, and it may not even be a conscious decision on her part.  I think her heart and her subconscious are driving her actions. She’s feeling the conflict and confusion; there’s no big thinking going on here. With everything that has happened and with what she feels she needs to do, this feels right to her. You can see the relief on her face; she is letting go.

She’s saying what she says to Eric because she needs to. There’s nothing right about it. There is no lightness, no peace, no relief on her face when she challenges Eric. And the very fact that she challenges Eric shows that there’s emotion there. As usual, what’s between them is fiery. They’re not done by a long shot! :) 

Again, YES.

Yes. I think the other thing is that I really think Sookie feels sorry. I think she apologises to Bill for the reasons mentioned above — she has always wanted Eric, she’s saying good-bye to Bill, and also — she did lie to him to protect his rival, etc. Sookie’s an honest, good person and she feels bad for her small sins. Comparing Bills sins her hers doesn’t make any difference to what she feels about her own. As for Eric, yes — she is very unfair to him, but like her, he feels bad for the times he DID lie to her, even if they were few, and can’t hold a candle to the lies Bill told. He doesn’t object — he takes it on the chin, and that’s because he’s not a liar, and any lie feels wrong to him. 

Sookie has given up on holding Bill to a higher standard, but not Eric. Eric is the one who deserves forgiveness, but Sookie doesn’t forgive him, and that’s because she’s still emotionally involved with him. People who get worked up about this scene, or angry at Sookie, are people who are being literal at the expense of emotional truth. It’s a very unsophisticated approach to what’s happening here.

Very interesting discussion! :D