Case (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
case) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomsecrets2012-01-13 07:20 pm
case) wrote in fandomsecrets2012-01-13 07:20 pm
[ SECRET POST #1837 ]
⌈ Secret Post #1837 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.
__________________________________________________
02. [broken link]
__________________________________________________
03.
[Robin Of Sherwood/Michael Praed]
__________________________________________________
04.
[Glee]
__________________________________________________
05.
[We Got Married - Ga In (Brown Eyed Girls)/Jo Kwon (2AM)]
__________________________________________________
06.
__________________________________________________
07.
__________________________________________________
08.
[Buzz Lightyear of Star Command]
__________________________________________________
09. http://i.imgur.com/8DbqS.png
[linked for nudity/kind of porny]
__________________________________________________
10.
[Josh Groban and Andrea Bocelli]
__________________________________________________
11.
[Beast Wars, Megatron]
__________________________________________________
12.
__________________________________________________
13.
__________________________________________________
14.
[Magic Mike]
__________________________________________________
15.
__________________________________________________
16. [repeat]
__________________________________________________
17.
[Harry Potter & Little House on the Prairie]
__________________________________________________
18.
__________________________________________________
19.
__________________________________________________
20.
[X-Men: First Class]
__________________________________________________
21.
[Death Note]
__________________________________________________
22.
__________________________________________________
23.
__________________________________________________
24.
__________________________________________________
[ ----- SPOILERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]
25. [SPOILERS for something, OP did not specify]
__________________________________________________
26. [SPOILERS for Vampire Hunter D]
__________________________________________________
27. [SPOILERS for Christmas Doctor Who and New Year's Sherlock]
__________________________________________________
[ ----- TRIGGERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]
28. [TRIGGER WARNING for rape]
[SPOILERS for Loveless]
__________________________________________________
29. [TRIGGER WARNING for abuse]
__________________________________________________
30. [TRIGGER WARNING for rape]
__________________________________________________
31. [TRIGGER WARNING for rape, animal cruelty]
__________________________________________________
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #262.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
no subject
There's something different about the Reich's crimes. It may be that it's a huge blow on the face of Western's conscience, or the scientific aspect of the genocide, or how they shatter our illusion of a rational, humane civilisation. It maybe the fact that it took so long to reveal Stalin's crime and that the camps were better known. Or maybe a self-centred way to understand the world that makes things done by "one of us", Germany in this case, harder to accept. It maybe the philosophical repercussions of it ("to write lyric poetry after Auschwitz is barbaric"). It maybe that the intellectuals and artists expelled from Germany and Austria are much closer to us than the ones that suffered the Soviet rule. But there's something that makes the Nazis stand out as different than the Soviets in our minds. And I don't think it's prejudice against Germany... after all, the Russians were held in low-esteem even before 1917.
Even so, the famous speech on Stalin's crimes had a tremendous impact in European and American (the continent) intellectuality and was a pivotal point in the left's turn to China.
The reasons why Japan's crimes are not as present in our memories and collective identities have to do with sheer distance, both geographical and cultural.
That doesn't make it right, but there are reasons why people have different takes on these matters. And this is true all across the Western world, not only in America.
no subject
...Um. So the crux of your argument is "because the Nazis made such an impact on Western, specifically American culture, what they did is worse than what any other country ever did"? That is so backwards. No. What the Nazis did is not worse than any other genocide committed. The fact that Western culture has latched onto it, while the Soviets covered up their crimes for so long, Japan is far away, etc does not make those atrocities any less tragic, and to say so is just plain disrespectful to all of the people who lost their lives in those tragedies, or those who lost family, friends, etc. What the Nazis did at its core is not worse than other genocides. All genocide is a horrible thing, playing the "which is worse" game is fucking ridiculous and pretty damn insulting tbh.
Also the America-centrism of your argument is kind of disgusting.
no subject
I never talk about grades of moral importance or something being better or worse. There's no scale of what's more tragic and there's no need for it. Murder is wrong, no matter what. I talked about why some crimes make a greater impact in our minds that other. And the fact that Nazi crimes are more fresh in our conscience is a fact, so I think it's interesting to understand why.
I could argue that not all mass killings or genocides induce the same repulsion than the Nazi's crimes do (there's a mix of coldness and sheer barbarism in it that makes it impossible to ignore or to analyse without having a moral response) but that's subjective and I'm sure it's tied with its symbolic place in our culture.
Lastly, I am not American. I said Western world, which is not the same than American. Not a drop of American blood in me, if you must know and only a passing interest in American history, FWIW.
no subject
"I could argue that not all mass killings or genocides induce the same repulsion than the Nazi's crimes do (there's a mix of coldness and sheer barbarism in it that makes it impossible to ignore or to analyse without having a moral response) but that's subjective and I'm sure it's tied with its symbolic place in our culture. "
Yeah, you could. And I'd think you're being utterly gross for it. Because I'm sorry, but what sort of genocide or mass killing doesn't involve coldness and sheer barbarism? These are all cases of horrifically high numbers of people being slaughtered for terrible reasons.
Do you even know what you're talking about? Do you even know any history behind any genocide besides the Holocaust? Because you sure as fuck don't sound like you do.
no subject
Also, throwing in Democratic Kampuchea only because I'm a bit saddened at not seeing it mentioned yet.
no subject
no subject
No. I said it's perceived as worse by many, many people and had a different cultural impact. You know this and that annoys you. I know this and try to know why because I think it's interesting.
so it's okay that people jump on Hetalia fans being insensitive about Nazis but not so much about other similar happenings. That is a moral judgement
I think it's okay for people to jump on anyone who's insensitive about tragedies. I also try to understand why some tragedies are featured more prominently than others. No moral judgement - or yes, there's, as I feel a deep repulsion for the Nazi ideology and for the Soviet Union, which is tied with my own political beliefs; but better than moral outcries are attempts to analyse things.
Yeah, you could. And I'd think you're being utterly gross for it.
No all crimes make people feel the same way. People who had a history with fascism (and Nazism is a form of it) will probably be more sensitive to its crimes than somebody who has no contact whatsoever. It's human nature. I'm more sensitive about what the last dictatorship did in my country than you or any non-Argentinian would be, because it's closer to me. While we intellectually understand that all murders are wrong and condemn them morally, not all of them generate the same visceral reaction, due to personal history.
Because I'm sorry, but what sort of genocide or mass killing doesn't involve coldness and sheer barbarism? These are all cases of horrifically high numbers of people being slaughtered for terrible reasons.
First of all, mass killing is not the same than genocide.
There are numerous cases that ended up in mass killings that do not have the sheer scientific approach of the Final Solution. The Spanish colonisation of America is an example: many consider it a genocide but it doesn't have the same characteristics of the Third Reich. The Harrying of the North, another event considered genocide by many lack the business-like feeling of the Third Reich. The Terror (though it's a mass killing case, not genocide), my own country's experience... all of them are different. All of them are barbaric but not stone cold.
Again, that doesn't mean anything on moral matters. But the crimes of Nazi Germany and the ones committed by the Soviet Union are studied differently because they have different ideological basis and were done in different ways. And the study of those differences is a pretty interesting thing, imho.
Do you even know what you're talking about? Do you even know any history behind any genocide besides the Holocaust? Because you sure as fuck don't sound like you do.
Yes, I do. I'm not talking about the actual events but about how people perceive them and why some may find one thing more offensive than the other. I think it's interesting to know why, in front of events that are roughly the same, we react differently: how much of it is temperamental and how much of it is culture-based? Does time change our reaction? Does knowing the victims have anything to do? Have cultural ties with the victims or the perpetrators affect our perception? How does media plays in this?
Now, I have a question for you: you are obviously a Germanophile (like I am an Anglophile) and you are aware of people dismissing Soviet crimes and putting emphasis on Nazi ones. Why do you think it's this way? I think it's related to the symbolic place Germany has in the European matrix but I'm curious on your take as you have obviously put a lot of thought on this.
no subject
"No all crimes make people feel the same way. People who had a history with fascism (and Nazism is a form of it) will probably be more sensitive to its crimes than somebody who has no contact whatsoever. It's human nature. I'm more sensitive about what the last dictatorship did in my country than you or any non-Argentinian would be, because it's closer to me. While we intellectually understand that all murders are wrong and condemn them morally, not all of them generate the same visceral reaction, due to personal history."
Uhm. Yes but not everyone who flips their shit about the way some Hetalia fans make light of the Nazis were actually directly affected by Nazis. Hell, most people who carry on about Nazis weren't. It's a matter of media sensationalism of Nazis that continues to this day. When Merkel gave her "multikulti is dead" speech, the BBC did an incorrect translation of it to try to make it sound like "oh no Germany might be going Nazi again~!" when in reality the speech was about Turkish immigrants murdering Turkish women in "honor killings" while in Germany and trying to get away with it by hiding behind the "it's my culture!" excuse, and Merkel was saying "um yeah no, if you live in Germany you don't get to kill people and get away with it, culture or not." But since Nazis are still a popular thing to sensationalize, that got dragged in.
"First of all, mass killing is not the same than genocide. "
When did I say they were? idk if you're trying to insult my intelligence here or what, but my point is that they are both horrible things. Not that they're synonyms. And you're the one who brought up mass killings in the first place. And uh. They are all stone cold. Because it takes a total inhuman approach to be willing to kill people on such a scale. Even just murdering one person is something that is very hard to do without some level of detachment from humanity.
"Yes, I do. I'm not talking about the actual events but about how people perceive them and why some may find one thing more offensive than the other. I think it's interesting to know why, in front of events that are roughly the same, we react differently: how much of it is temperamental and how much of it is culture-based? Does time change our reaction? Does knowing the victims have anything to do? Have cultural ties with the victims or the perpetrators affect our perception? How does media plays in this?"
Yes, this is all fascinating, but it's not at all what you were saying in your initial comment. You flat out claimed Nazis are the worst ever. Which is utter bullshit.
no subject
And they are. They have a level of infamy that I haven't seen in any other case... expect maybe the Spanish Black Legend. From a humane POV, murder is plain wrong, but the effect that Nazi crimes had on people's minds put them in another level. I expressed myself wrongly, it seems, and I apologise. Just like the mention of the Ukraninan genocide answered my question about how Soviet crimes are considered.
Uhm. Yes but not everyone who flips their shit about the way some Hetalia fans make light of the Nazis were actually directly affected by Nazis. Hell, most people who carry on about Nazis weren't.
True. But I'd wager that the effects and repercussion of Nazi crimes do have an impact in most of our societies, if only because we learn more about them thant we learn about other cases.
It's a matter of media sensationalism of Nazis that continues to this day.
That's a good theory. But why do you think Nazis are more in the spotlight.
When Merkel gave her "multikulti is dead" speech, the BBC did an incorrect translation of it to try to make it sound like "oh no Germany might be going Nazi again~!" when in reality the speech was about Turkish immigrants murdering Turkish women in "honor killings" while in Germany and trying to get away with it by hiding behind the "it's my culture!" excuse, and Merkel was saying "um yeah no, if you live in Germany you don't get to kill people and get away with it, culture or not." But since Nazis are still a popular thing to sensationalize, that got dragged in.
True. I remember that speech and, honest to God, I did a double take. Because Germany has a sad story on this issues and it's pretty hard to ignore it even if you know modern Germany is nothing like that, save for a few lunatics.
I wonder how many people know about the Turkish issue? I had a long talk with an Austria exchange student but I must admit that, unless you look for it, news on cultural clashing in Europe hardly reach here. How is it in the US?
And they are. They have a level of infamy that I haven't seen in any other case... expect maybe the Spanish Black Legend. From a humane POV, murder is plain wrong, but the effect that Nazi crimes had on people's minds put them in another level. I expressed myself wrongly, it seems, and I apologise. Just like the mention of the Ukraninan genocide answered my question about how Soviet crimes are considered.
<i>Uhm. Yes but not everyone who flips their shit about the way some Hetalia fans make light of the Nazis were actually directly affected by Nazis. Hell, most people who carry on about Nazis weren't.</i>
True. But I'd wager that the effects and repercussion of Nazi crimes do have an impact in most of our societies, if only because we learn more about them thant we learn about other cases.
<i>It's a matter of media sensationalism of Nazis that continues to this day.</i>
That's a good theory. But why do you think Nazis are more in the spotlight.
<i>When Merkel gave her "multikulti is dead" speech, the BBC did an incorrect translation of it to try to make it sound like "oh no Germany might be going Nazi again~!" when in reality the speech was about Turkish immigrants murdering Turkish women in "honor killings" while in Germany and trying to get away with it by hiding behind the "it's my culture!" excuse, and Merkel was saying "um yeah no, if you live in Germany you don't get to kill people and get away with it, culture or not." But since Nazis are still a popular thing to sensationalize, that got dragged in.</i>
True. I remember that speech and, honest to God, I did a double take. Because Germany has a sad story on this issues and it's pretty hard to ignore it even if you know modern Germany is nothing like that, save for a few lunatics.
I wonder how many people know about the Turkish issue? I had a long talk with an Austria exchange student but I must admit that, unless you look for it, news on cultural clashing in Europe hardly reach here. How is it in the US?
<i<When did I say they were? idk if you're trying to insult my intelligence here or what, but my point is that they are both horrible things. Not that they're synonyms. </i>
I must have misread you, then.
<i>And you're the one who brought up mass killings in the first place. </i>
Because there tends to be a debate about the line between genocide and mass killing.
<i>And uh. They are all stone cold. Because it takes a total inhuman approach to be willing to kill people on such a scale. Even just murdering one person is something that is very hard to do without some level of detachment from humanity. </i>
I disagree. Many horrid, massive crimes are committed for entirely non-rational reasons. Or better yet, without much of an elaborated rationale behind them. Not every genocide has the complex legal and "scientific" structure the Nazis created.
My country as an example: the Army kidnapped, tortured and murdered people with a certain method but fuelled by anti-communist paranoia. It was no-where near the level of thought the Nazis put on it. The Middle Ages saw plentiful of mass killings of the Jewish population in the context of religious hysteria. The destruction of native peoples in South America was more of a blind lashing filled with cruelty and horror than a well-thought plan to exterminate a group of people that was legally equal to the Spanish conquerors. The Crusades are a good example of mass killings done without any planning, too.
Not all murderers are devoid of humanity: not all of them are psychopaths/sociopaths.
<i>Yes, this is all fascinating, but it's not at all what you were saying in your initial comment. You flat out claimed Nazis are the worst ever. Which is utter bullshit. </i>
I said that they are in a different level and are regarded so.
no subject
Exactly. Which is a judgment call claiming that it was the worst case ever. Which is bullshit. I'm sorry, but any killing like this is devoid of humanity. It's treating an entire group of people as less than human, and behaving as though it's justified to murder them as such. It doesn't matter if there's some sort of "scientific" rationale attached or not. Deciding to kill a large amount of people for simply being of a certain religion or nationality or ethnic group is a monstrous act no matter why it's done. The end.
no subject
Killing like this is devoid of humanity? I wish. But not every person who committed these crimes are psychopaths/sociopaths. They weren't devoid of humanity. If that were the case there would be no need to question why happened. Humans did this, normal humans.
And I would say that the construction of justifications and or rationale behind these kind of crimes is what make them unique and interesting to study. It's not all the same and it's not a bunch of monsters killing people. Regardless of how wrong it is, is not as simple as that.
no subject
"Killing like this is devoid of humanity? I wish. But not every person who committed these crimes are psychopaths/sociopaths. They weren't devoid of humanity. If that were the case there would be no need to question why happened. Humans did this, normal humans."
It is. To be able to kill another person, someone has to shut off their compassion entirely for that moment. The thing to study here is what exactly makes someone willing to do that. Sometimes, in cases of a murder of a single person, it happens for pretty normal and human reasons. A jilted lover, someone who's been abused finally fighting back against their attacker, some sort of escalated fight or feud, etc. But when it's no longer on a personal level, but rather an attack on an entire group, it's pretty much never understandable within human emotion. To murder people solely for a group they belong to is to dehumanize them, and to do that to such an extent to be willing to kill them is to dehumanize yourself, if just temporarily.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
...Why are you bringing my love for Germany into this? As an attempt to discredit me? Because if so, kindly back off. As for your question, the answer is simple. People love having one convenient scapegoat. That's what Germany has become more or less. Now, when I say "scapegoat", I do not mean in the sense of someone innocent taking the blame for something. What I mean is that Germany more or less gets all the blame for all of the WWII atrocities committed. Sure, some people still are bitter about Japan and Pearl Harbor, but that for the most part is people who were actually alive during WWII and remember that. The anti-German sentiment still floating around today that's even affected people who weren't even born yet is a different animal entirely. People are more or less taught that the most horrible things to happen in that time period were all done by Germany. Also why Soviet war crimes are ignored is easy; they were on the winning side of the war. Between that and how long this shit was covered up, people only bother to focus on the Holocaust.
Also slightly offtopic, but this whole thing sickens me for other reasons, too. Germany has formally apologized for what's happened, and they've gone to great lengths to ensure that someone like Adolf Hitler can never rise to power in their nation again. Meanwhile, Japan and Russia still have not formally apologized. Russia even still claims that they were in the right for the atrocities committed against East Germany because of WWII, IIRC, which is utterly sickening because no, raping women of just about any age until they beg you to kill them is not justified at all ever. And yet it's Germany that has people to this day believing that the entire nation is a nation of evil monsters. Despite how they've actually apologized and made great efforts to prevent this shit from happening again, while the others pretend it never happened.
No country should be vilified like this, but it pisses me off that the one who's done the most to apologize is the one that everyone else continues to vilify.
no subject
Depends on which part of the world you live in. Japan committed way more atrocities than just Pearl Harbor, which to this day they try to erase from their history books (or justify them when erasure isn't an option). Those acts just weren't committed against Westerners for the most part, so nobody on this side of the Pacific cares much. The Chinese, Koreans, Filipinos, etc. that they systematically killed, raped, and exploited the hell out of still do. Especially Korea.
For more info, look up "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere."
no subject
no subject
Yeah. And I think a lot of that is because Japan's war crimes weren't really against the West. But Japan's war crimes are treated in much the same way in East Asian politics the same way the Holocaust is treated in the West. So the "nobody cares what Japan did except Pearl Harbor" is only really true on this side of the Pacific.
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
I have no reason to discredit you. As far as I'm concerned, we are having an interesting talk about how history is perceived. I bring your love for Germany because I presume that you had given this topic (and German history in general) a lot more thought than someone who doesn't care for Germany. Just like I've think of England and her history a lot more than people who don't care for English history.
I have no reason to discredit you. As far as I'm concerned, we are having an interesting talk about how history is perceived. I bring your love for Germany because I presume that you had given this topic (and German history in general) a lot more thought than someone who doesn't care for Germany. Just like I've think of England and her history a lot more than people who don't care for English history.
<i<People love having one convenient scapegoat. That's what Germany has become more or less. Now, when I say "scapegoat", I do not mean in the sense of someone innocent taking the blame for something. What I mean is that Germany more or less gets all the blame for all of the WWII atrocities committed. Sure, some people still are bitter about Japan and Pearl Harbor, but that for the most part is people who were actually alive during WWII and remember that. The anti-German sentiment still floating around today that's even affected people who weren't even born yet is a different animal entirely. People are more or less taught that the most horrible things to happen in that time period were all done by Germany. Also why Soviet war crimes are ignored is easy; they were on the winning side of the war. Between that and how long this shit was covered up, people only bother to focus on the Holocaust.</i>
Interesting. But do you think there's an intentional effort on making Germany the culprit? Or is tied to other factors, like the ones I've mentioned before? I still think it's realted to the role Germany has in our identity as a civilisation of sorts.
The anti-German feeling... well, that's an alien concept for me. I mean, I know intellectually that it exists (I'm thinking of Eddi Izzard's sketch on the European Union, for example) but the German community here is important and, while many of them were disgusting Nazis, they are regarded not very differently than any other community in my country.
<i>Also slightly offtopic, but this whole thing sickens me for other reasons, too. Germany has formally apologized for what's happened, and they've gone to great lengths to ensure that someone like Adolf Hitler can never rise to power in their nation again.</i>
True. But resent dies slowly. And sometimes people just can't forget. The Church (disclaimer: I am not religious or even a Christian) has apologised for her vast crimes but people still hold it against her.
I don't think many people think that modern Germany is a Nazi state. But the stuff that happened there? It's hard to forget, even if apologies are given.
<i>Meanwhile, Japan and Russia still have not formally apologized. Russia even still claims that they were in the right for the atrocities committed against East Germany because of WWII, IIRC, which is utterly sickening because no, raping women of just about any age until they beg you to kill them is not justified at all ever.</i>
True. Japan and Russia are hardly examples of being sensitive or just respectful. Well, Russia for sure, if the law against "gay propaganda" (and I can't put enough inverted commas there) is an indication.
<i>And yet it's Germany that has people to this day believing that the entire nation is a nation of evil monsters. Despite how they've actually apologized and made great efforts to prevent this shit from happening again, while the others pretend it never happened.
No country should be vilified like this, but it pisses me off that the one who's done the most to apologize is the one that everyone else continues to vilify.</i>
And I continue to wonder why. Considering the extent of the anti-communist campaigns in the US and its influence in the world's media I wonder why there's no more widespread rejection towards the Soviet Union. It maybe that communism is not an inherently evil ideology? Or that there's a (fair) school of criticism focused on the US' Cold War actions? In theory, making the Soviets' crimes known would have been easy, so why not?
no subject
no subject
"Interesting. But do you think there's an intentional effort on making Germany the culprit? Or is tied to other factors, like the ones I've mentioned before? I still think it's realted to the role Germany has in our identity as a civilisation of sorts. "
What I'm saying here is that I think this is why Germany has that "identity". It's easier to dump all of the blame onto one entity than to logically look at all of the evils committed all across the board. And again, the Soviet Union escapes it because they were on the winning side and the winners always get to write history. Japan probably escapes it with younger generations because they make cool electronics and video games and anime, sickeningly enough. Along with the fact that their worst crimes were committed against other Asian nations so lol who cares, no white people got hurt in that stuff.
"True. But resent dies slowly. And sometimes people just can't forget. The Church (disclaimer: I am not religious or even a Christian) has apologised for her vast crimes but people still hold it against her. "
This is completely different. The main reason why the Church still gets things like the Crusades brought up against it is because of people who hate the religion itself for unrelated reasons using things like the Crusades to try to claim that it was never a good thing. It's not so much about the Crusades as it is about the Crusades being used as fodder for anti-religious arguments.
no subject
This is only my experience, but I see the Crusades brought up mostly when Christians try to claim their religion has always been about love and forgiveness and goodwill to everyone. And I think it keeps getting brought up, especially in recent times, because the loudest and most vocal Christians are espousing the same hatred and prejudice that led to the Crusades in the first place. And they're getting elected to public office and positions of power for it (or at least they are in the U.S.).
Yeah, I've seen the Crusades brought up Just Because by the type of asshole atheist that I wish I could smack with a squeaky hammer, but I've seen them brought up with much more frequency to challenge the idea that Christians have always been the innocent rebels getting eaten by lions for sport.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2012-01-15 03:26 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2012-01-15 04:01 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2012-01-15 04:40 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2012-01-15 15:00 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
no subject
This is completely different. The main reason why the Church still gets things like the Crusades brought up against it is because of people who hate the religion itself for unrelated reasons using things like the Crusades to try to claim that it was never a good thing. It's not so much about the Crusades as it is about the Crusades being used as fodder for anti-religious arguments.
I disagree. Unless where I live (and I know religion is a different matter than in the US) people who bring up the Crusades (and the Inquisition, and misogyny, homophobia, anti-Semitism, etc) is because it shows that the Church is just another human institution that messes up just as everyone else and have their hands dirty with blood, too.
no subject
....Pretty sure I gave more reasons than that.
(no subject)