hidingmai:

my fanbook《the water》 sold out!THX!

(via falconbigbutt)


A Kiev art museum contains a curious icon from St. Catherine’s Monastery on Mt. Sinai in Israel. It shows two robed Christian saints. Between them is a traditional Roman ‘pronubus’ (a best man), overseeing a wedding. The pronubus is Christ. The married couple are both men.
Is the icon suggesting that a gay “wedding” is being sanctified by Christ himself? The idea seems shocking. But the full answer comes from other early Christian sources about the two men featured in the icon, St. Sergius and St. Bacchus, 2 two Roman soldiers who were Christian martyrs. These two officers in the Roman army incurred the anger of Emperor Maximian when they were exposed as ‘secret Christians’ by refusing to enter a pagan temple. Both were sent to Syria circa 303 CE where Bacchus is thought to have died while being flogged. Sergius survived torture but was later beheaded. Legend says that Bacchus appeared to the dying Sergius as an angel, telling him to be brave because they would soon be reunited in heaven.
While the pairing of saints, particularly in the early Christian church, was not unusual, the association of these two men was regarded as particularly intimate. Severus, the Patriarch of Antioch (512 - 518 CE) explained that, "we should not separate in speech they [Sergius and Bacchus] who were joined in life". This is not a case of simple “adelphopoiia.” In the definitive 10th century account of their lives, St. Sergius is openly celebrated as the “sweet companion and lover” of St. Bacchus. Sergius and Bacchus’s close relationship has led many modern scholars to believe they were lovers. But the most compelling evidence for this view is that the oldest text of their martyrology, written in New Testament Greek describes them as “erastai,” or “lovers”. In other words, they were a male homosexual couple. Their orientation and relationship was not only acknowledged, but it was fully accepted and celebrated by the early Christian church, which was far more tolerant than it is today.
Contrary to myth, Christianity’s concept of marriage has not been set in stone since the days of Christ, but has constantly evolved as a concept and ritual.
(source)

A Kiev art museum contains a curious icon from St. Catherine’s Monastery on Mt. Sinai in Israel. It shows two robed Christian saints. Between them is a traditional Roman ‘pronubus’ (a best man), overseeing a wedding. The pronubus is Christ. The married couple are both men.

Is the icon suggesting that a gay “wedding” is being sanctified by Christ himself? The idea seems shocking. But the full answer comes from other early Christian sources about the two men featured in the icon, St. Sergius and St. Bacchus, 2 two Roman soldiers who were Christian martyrs. These two officers in the Roman army incurred the anger of Emperor Maximian when they were exposed as ‘secret Christians’ by refusing to enter a pagan temple. Both were sent to Syria circa 303 CE where Bacchus is thought to have died while being flogged. Sergius survived torture but was later beheaded. Legend says that Bacchus appeared to the dying Sergius as an angel, telling him to be brave because they would soon be reunited in heaven.

While the pairing of saints, particularly in the early Christian church, was not unusual, the association of these two men was regarded as particularly intimate. Severus, the Patriarch of Antioch (512 - 518 CE) explained that, "we should not separate in speech they [Sergius and Bacchus] who were joined in life". This is not a case of simple “adelphopoiia.” In the definitive 10th century account of their lives, St. Sergius is openly celebrated as the “sweet companion and lover” of St. Bacchus. Sergius and Bacchus’s close relationship has led many modern scholars to believe they were lovers. But the most compelling evidence for this view is that the oldest text of their martyrology, written in New Testament Greek describes them as “erastai,” or “lovers”. In other words, they were a male homosexual couple. Their orientation and relationship was not only acknowledged, but it was fully accepted and celebrated by the early Christian church, which was far more tolerant than it is today.

Contrary to myth, Christianity’s concept of marriage has not been set in stone since the days of Christ, but has constantly evolved as a concept and ritual.

(source)

(via ladysifshandmaiden)

The best thing about all the set photos from Avengers 2

madmoll:

is that they’re all 300% more entertaining if you imagine that someone just out of frame just said something super offensive.

Exhibit A:

image

Quicksilver caught off guard by your extreme rudeness.

And then:

image

Cap’s getting real tired of your shit, douchebag.

#3:

image

Wanda and Clint think that joke was just a little off-color there, bro.

And!

image

Seriously, dude? Seriously?

And my personal favorite:

image

Even Tony Stark is speechless. Banner’s not even mad, just kinda impressed.

(via velvet-muffin)

asker

Anonymous asked: How did Zola recover Bucky if he was in the Allies' custody at the time?

frankenwhales:

He didn’t.

In Bucky’s little flashback scene in Cap 2, it was a Russian soldier who found him. He spoke Russian on the bridge. He has the red star on his arm.

Zola said that HYDRA had been guiding world history. Given that both the USA and USSR were two of the greatest superpowers in the wake of WWII, it makes sense that HYDRA would have infiltrated the KGB much in the same way they did SHIELD.

When the USSR fell, he probably got transferred to Pierce. One of his first assignments while working for the ‘SHIELD Sleepers’?

image

Death of Howard. December of ‘91. The same month the Soviet Union collapsed.

My explanation is that Zola didn’t find Bucky, he merely recognized and identified him. Even if he was in the stateside HYDRA sleeper cell, I imagine both communicated, especially during the Cold War. I wouldn’t be surprised if HYDRA pulled the strings throughout the Cold War in the MCU.

Also, Bucky’s had many different arms in the comics. It makes sense that when Zola was smirking as he choked a guy out, it was an upgraded version and not his original arm.

IMO Bucky’s flashbacks were in bits and pieces, quick flashes. His mind was so frazzled at that point I don’t see why they’d hit him in chronological sequence.

slowdancingangels:

Guess who’s finally deciding to post some art?! not me because this looks like trash, not art
look at my babies I am so happy.
And this is how I always imagine their first real kiss—Clint would never kiss first, not in most instances, simply because Bruce is used to being used, being acted upon, and staying stagnant himself. Clint might flirt and wink and just be a general ball of romance, but he refuses to kiss Bruce first, because Bruce needs to make that first move. And when Bruce finally does, it would be after weeks of mental war with himself, after so long of staring at Clint, wondering whether he wants him or not, that Bruce now has every scar on Clint’s face catalogued, and he finally makes his move in something of desperation, like a drowning man gasping for air, and he’ pull Clint in, and to Bruce he’d feel too strong, too commandeering, too demanding, but in reality his hands would hover over Clint’s face, hardly touching, his body not touching Clint’s, his lips careful and gentle and just generally unforceful. And Clint would sigh in relief because he was sure he’d break before Bruce actually made a move.
And there’s my hulkeye kissing headcanon woo~

slowdancingangels:

Guess who’s finally deciding to post some art?! not me because this looks like trash, not art

look at my babies I am so happy.

And this is how I always imagine their first real kiss—Clint would never kiss first, not in most instances, simply because Bruce is used to being used, being acted upon, and staying stagnant himself. Clint might flirt and wink and just be a general ball of romance, but he refuses to kiss Bruce first, because Bruce needs to make that first move. And when Bruce finally does, it would be after weeks of mental war with himself, after so long of staring at Clint, wondering whether he wants him or not, that Bruce now has every scar on Clint’s face catalogued, and he finally makes his move in something of desperation, like a drowning man gasping for air, and he’ pull Clint in, and to Bruce he’d feel too strong, too commandeering, too demanding, but in reality his hands would hover over Clint’s face, hardly touching, his body not touching Clint’s, his lips careful and gentle and just generally unforceful. And Clint would sigh in relief because he was sure he’d break before Bruce actually made a move.

And there’s my hulkeye kissing headcanon woo~

staubengel:

Wonderful horns-of-mischief coloured this!
It is amazing, thank you so much for that, darling, I still can’t express how much I love it! <3

staubengel:

Wonderful horns-of-mischief coloured this!

It is amazing, thank you so much for that, darling, I still can’t express how much I love it! <3

dksartz:

*flops around*
I seriously don’t know how to draw people kissing.. but i did my best! uwu

dksartz:

*flops around*

I seriously don’t know how to draw people kissing.. but i did my best!

uwu

micdotcom:

Fans are taking ‘Where’s Gamora?’ into their own hands

As many frustrated fans have pointed out online, much of the official Guardians of the Galaxy merchandise leaves out Gamora, one of the movie’s five titular Guardians, played by Zoe Saldana. Though Gamora has an equal amount of screen time as her male colleagues, and Saldana is second-billed after Chris Pratt, Gamora is mysteriously absent in some egregious ways.

Unfortunately, this is nothing new

(via tamflakes)

asker

Anonymous asked: Imagine Clint seeing the way Bruce is with kids and asking Steve about it. Bruce had mentioned not being able to have kids because he didn't want to hurt them and kind of assumes Clint doesn't want them, so Clint turns up with a basket full of puppies. "What's this for?" "Practice." "Practice for what?" and Clint pulls out an adoption booklet. And they adopt at least ten children because Clint knows what it's like to not have a home and Bruce can't pick anyway, he just loves all of them.

slowdancingangels:

AH

BRUCE. CLINT. BABIES.

It’s always been a huge headcanon for me, that Bruce and Clint would LOVE adoption (once they got over their ‘but I could KILL IT’ fear of children), and that they’re first adoption would be a little Asian baby girl, who they name Rebecca Edith Banner-Barton, but everyone just calls her Becca, or little Monster for short, because she’d be a cute, bubbly little kid who has an entire family of superheroes to teach her how to be a genius and kick ass. They’d, of course, LOVE HER, so they’d have to get her a sibling, and instead of adopting ONE kid, they adopt a pair of interracial twins who practically LIVE in each others heads, named Jen and Barney respectively, because Bruce and Clint are sentimental NERDS, and they’d absolutely be little TERRORS. The whole tower would have no idea how to handle these three little beautiful babies. Bruce would be so happy, and Clint would be that dad who’s constantly on the verge of tears, like, [sniffsniff] [manly look into the distance as he raises a fist] ‘My little girl punched Tony in the crotch today. I’m so proud.’ [blubbers]

The Avengers would ADORE them, of course—Steve would be so happy he helped Clint decide on adoption, because Clint came to him confused and worried about Bruce, and Steve has known so many people in the system who wanted homes, and Steve dotes over them like the old man he is, tells them all sorts of crazy stories of ‘Back in my day…’ Not because he’s really old or even old fashioned, but because they don’t have grandparents, and he’s always thought it’s important to have grandparents, so he fills in the slot happily.

Tony is literally the biggest worry wart, even worse than Bruce and Clint. He has Dum-e and Butterfingers stalk after the babies when they start walking, making sure they don’t fall down and hurt themselves, and when they hit toddler age Jarvis is always giving him updates while he’s in the lab, and Tony will then look over at Bruce if they’re both in the lab and go ‘You’re kids are little monsters’ because usually they’re off destroying something valuable with a harried Clint on their heels.

Natasha has a…THING about children, where she just doesn’t feel comfortable around them, mostly because of her own childhood. But these kids are wicked little bundles of joy and she likes to teach them pranks so they can torment the others, and they call her Auntie Spider, so she’s definitely pleased, always with that little, half smile of hers when they’re around.

And then you have Thor, who is a big puppy!~ They cuddle on the couch with Uncle Thor and Jen and Becca braid his hair, and little Barney likes to pull on his beard and ask him all sorts of stories about Asgard, and Barney especially likes stories of the mysterious Loki that Thor doesn’t talk about a lot, and the others don’t talk about a lot, but when Thor DOES talk about him, he always sounds super funny and strange. Jen babbles a lot about sword fighting, and, of course, little Becca’s constantly trying to steal Clint’s bow so she can learn.

BASICALLY Bruce and Clint would have so much support with their little family, and of COURSE they’d think of adopting more later on, maybe once they get past the terrible two’s and such for this lot, and they’re so proud because their babies are SMART, and WONDERFUL, and of course they’ve got their puppies too, and their bed is just one big ball of cuddles most night, with babies and puppies and each other all wrapped up in huge, fluffy blankets~~~

This, anon, was a good ask. THANK YOU.

aaaahhhhh so many of my headcanons

but have you considered

Bruce and Clint opening their home to troubled foster kids, kids who have anger issues or who have special medical needs or even kids they accidentally found being experimented on in Hydra/RedRoom facilities

sebastianstanbear:

Do you feel like at this point Steve, Cap, is like, does he feel more acclimated to this world yet? Or does he still feel more isolated? [x]

(via bookworm213)