Mostly caryl and the walking dead stuff on this blog. Although I do have a penchant for many things from the Supernatural Fandom, Lord of the Rings, and various other movies/tv shows.
Also post a lot of liberal-leaning (particularly on social issues) stories, feminism posts, etc.
I have a higher standard for what constitutes “canon” than “it says it on the amc website, which has errors elsewhere on the website.”
And that is why I wait to see what happens in season 5 and caryl the fuck on :)
I don’t want to start anything but this is the third time AMC has stated that Daryl has feelings for her, that has to mean something, no?
amc also says on their website that Hershel shot Carl, when in fact Otis shot Carl.
So I guess now it is canon that Hershel shot Carl, even though that never actually happened on the show? At least, according to your logic that whatever AMC says on their website must be true (even when they occasionally say things that are factually inaccurate).
Call me crazy, but I’m gonna wait until I see a profession of love, or a mouth-to-mouth kiss, or sexual contact that happens on the show itself before I pronounce anything to be canon. Or do you think that what the amc website says takes precedence over what actually takes place on the show? Do you see the problematic logic in assuming that something is “canon” purely based on the amc website?
Tricky question and one I still don’t know the complete answer to, so bear with me.
I very much agree about your point on the church. The church has gone about sex in all the wrong ways. I find the Purity Culture, the idea that abstaining from sex so you’re pure for your wedding night, a really toxic idea. It gave a lot of girls a lot of smug superiority about their virginity (like me) and made a lot of girls feel worthless and soiled because they’d had sex before marriage. (Like many of my friends) (It also gave young men the idea that it’s women’s fault they were aroused—anyone remember crock pots vs. microwaves?) The entire point of Christianity is that no one is pure before God, that we need Christ’s sacrifice to become pure before him. Whether you have sex every day with a different partner or waited till your wedding night, you’re still sinful before God.
I’m wary of using Biblical examples to support abstaining, particularly considering a.) not many Bible heroes actually waited until marriage and b.) women ran the risk of being stoned if they weren’t virgins on their wedding night, of course they didn’t usually have sex before marriage. Heck, I’ve read books about waiting till marriage that were centered around the Song of Solomon, which is all very well and good, until we remember that Solomon had over 1,000 wives.
So—barring the harmful effects of the purity culture, my thoughts on sex and Christianity are conflicted. I do believe God created sex, I do believe He created it with the intention of our enjoyment, to give us a spiritual, emotional, and physical connection to those we love. I suppose I find it neutral—something that can be used for good, used to glorify God or used to pervert and cheapen something that’s supposed to be wonderful. It may be meant only for marriage, but then we need to reexamine what marriage means to God and to ourselves. And also understand that Scriptural marriage doesn’t really line up with modern marriage and that’s probably a good thing.
At this point in my life, I’m still figuring out what exactly that means, if God intended it purely for marriage, for people who are promised to each other, or what. I will say that I’ve met very few people who have sex casually with different people and it doesn’t affect them negatively. (Not saying it’s impossible, I’m just sharing my view)
For what it’s worth, I intend on waiting till marriage. I have a lot of issues with emotional vulnerability, let alone physical vulnerability, and I think it’s smarter for my well-being to have sex with someone I’m sharing my life with forever.