CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-06 06:52 pm (UTC)(link)














sharon carter/steve rogers

absolutely disgusting in every way

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-06 07:13 pm (UTC)(link)
so do you ship stucky or stony

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-06 11:28 pm (UTC)(link)
steve/nat. thanks for playing, though.

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:38 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-06 07:17 pm (UTC)(link)
why do you say that? genuinely curious here. is it because she's related to peggy and you think steve is using sharon as a proxy?

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-06 07:24 pm (UTC)(link)
not in this fandom (in comics) and nayrt but this is basically a huge thing. it's not even being a proxy it's just skeevy for other reasons and both sharon and peggy are kind of... boring...

i'm on the het side of comic fandom though so i can't tell you what excuses the stucky and stony people give.

where the fuck is all the steve/diana already, that was all i wanted from that superman batman shitshow!

da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-06 20:25 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-06 21:24 (UTC) - Expand

ayrt

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-06 23:41 (UTC) - Expand

dda

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 03:30 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-06 11:40 pm (UTC)(link)
a. steve should still have some trust issues over what she was up to in caws.
b. she's related to peggy. beyond that, captain america is, essetially, someone sharon "grew up" hearing about and probably enjoying the exploits of. there's a squicky area of childhood idolization there that i can't get past.
c. peggy's body isn't even cold in the ground yet ffs.
d. even disregarding c, if peggy got over steve, we've yet to see steve get over her - and, in fact, him getting over her flies into the face of what was presented as cap's tragic flaw in the movie: his inability to let go of the past (bucky) because there's still a part of him that longs for it and will probably always remember that skinny kid from brooklyn.
e. the pacing for the romance was absolute trash.
f. emily van camp is possibly the worst actor in the mcu, even below sebstan's grunt acting.
g. let's say i bought her acting, though. it still makes no sense that this self-sufficient woman who never told anyone about her famous aunt lest it detract from her own merit would want her aunt's seconds...especially with there even being a hint of doubt that steve would look at her and see, for a split second, peggy.

i felt more invested in wanda and vision's relationship and i'm not even sure if that's supposed to be read as romantic.

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 00:03 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 00:10 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 00:22 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 00:47 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 00:56 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 00:58 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 00:59 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 05:45 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 06:13 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 06:27 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:11 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:30 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:38 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 01:00 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 01:01 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 01:06 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 01:14 (UTC) - Expand

da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 04:42 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 06:17 (UTC) - Expand

da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:02 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:11 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:17 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:37 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-13 15:51 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-06 07:22 pm (UTC)(link)
The more everyone complains about this, the more I want to app Sharon and smear her everywhere.

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-06 07:41 pm (UTC)(link)
And?

Most caps wont ship with you most likely. Cause most cap players I know find it skeevy (and 2 of them I know are het shippers).

so Smear her everywhere and get no where with Cap players.

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-06 20:53 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-06 21:06 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 00:17 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 00:34 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-06 09:11 pm (UTC)(link)
does it really count as canon though? i thought it was more one sided from her

and for the record i ship steve/duty, not butthurt over other ships

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-07 03:46 am (UTC)(link)
the kiss was pretty mutual, but they're still just some people with a kiss and some ust between them, not going steady

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-09 04:10 am (UTC)(link)
he initiated the kiss

yes it's canon

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 16:15 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-06 10:42 pm (UTC)(link)
i haven't seen the movie yet, but i have difficulty believing that it's "absolutely disgusting".

does one of them rape the other? beat them? psychologically abuse them? is she underage?

what about the movie took it from being a bit a bit weird over the line into "absolutely disgusting in every way"?

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-06 11:27 pm (UTC)(link)
he would be boning the love of his life's niece

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 00:20 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-10 00:54 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-10 01:01 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-10 02:12 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-13 16:09 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-13 17:29 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-13 16:10 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-10 01:02 (UTC) - Expand

da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-10 02:17 (UTC) - Expand

+ 9999

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-10 02:23 (UTC) - Expand

Re: + 9999

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 00:08 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:45 (UTC) - Expand

+1000

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 06:16 (UTC) - Expand

+1

(Anonymous) 2016-05-07 01:17 am (UTC)(link)
jesus fuck, this is the same fandom that soaks their panties over thor/loki incest. even if you don't personally like the ship, a guy who essentially time traveled forward three quarters of a century hooking up with a woman who's related (several steps removed) to the woman he had a crush on but never actually even dated should not be considered "absolutely disgusting".

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 01:40 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 01:50 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:10 (UTC) - Expand

da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:12 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:13 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:17 (UTC) - Expand

da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:21 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:29 (UTC) - Expand

sa

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:32 (UTC) - Expand

Re: sa

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:38 (UTC) - Expand

Re: sa

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:46 (UTC) - Expand

Re: sa

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:52 (UTC) - Expand

Re: sa

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:55 (UTC) - Expand

Re: sa

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:57 (UTC) - Expand

Re: sa

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:59 (UTC) - Expand

Re: sa

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:03 (UTC) - Expand

Re: sa

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:04 (UTC) - Expand

Re: sa

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:44 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 05:35 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:08 (UTC) - Expand

da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:22 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:27 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:28 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:32 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:32 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:36 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:37 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:38 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:38 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:38 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:40 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:41 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:43 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:45 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:47 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:48 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:31 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:33 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:37 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:33 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:35 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:37 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:38 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:39 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:39 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:40 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:41 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:43 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:40 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:42 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:44 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:45 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:46 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:47 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:49 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:58 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 16:02 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 16:25 (UTC) - Expand

(frozen comment) Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 19:55 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-13 21:28 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-14 06:32 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:15 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 04:58 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 06:23 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:21 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:30 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:48 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 04:01 (UTC) - Expand

ayrt

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:51 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:40 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:45 (UTC) - Expand

da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:48 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:02 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:03 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:04 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:31 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:36 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:39 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 12:08 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-08 15:28 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-08 15:34 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 04:22 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 19:10 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 19:13 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 19:28 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 19:31 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 20:10 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 19:53 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 20:10 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-10 07:29 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-10 08:59 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-10 14:50 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-10 16:03 (UTC) - Expand

sa

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-10 16:05 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 00:17 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 02:08 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 02:15 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 02:42 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 19:54 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 05:21 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 06:03 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 08:07 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 10:24 (UTC) - Expand

...

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 12:09 (UTC) - Expand

...

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 12:19 (UTC) - Expand

...

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 12:41 (UTC) - Expand

...

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-11 19:12 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 23:53 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:07 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 05:58 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 02:50 (UTC) - Expand

Re: +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 06:11 (UTC) - Expand

da

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 19:02 (UTC) - Expand

ddda +1

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 19:29 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-06 11:12 pm (UTC)(link)
From the point of view of a movie-goer and not a comic book reader: it felt like it came almost out of nowhere. CW was good, but with so much packed into it, it obviously had some pacing issues, especially where Sharon/Steve was involved. Other than that, it's weird she's related to Peggy, but I would never go so far as to call it "disgusting".

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-07 02:52 am (UTC)(link)
uh.... don't mind me. i'm here just for the wank, and oh my you delivered [popcorn.gif]

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-07 02:54 am (UTC)(link)
no lie, when i saw the movie tonight and it got to the kiss scene, half the theatre went EWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

like very loud, very audible ews that were from adults

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-07 06:12 am (UTC)(link)
jfc, where do you live where all the adults are mentally four?

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-07 11:57 am (UTC)(link)
what a bunch of tittybabies

ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-07 02:10 pm (UTC)(link)
you brought them to the yard

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:28 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:34 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:43 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:46 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:48 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:50 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:56 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:02 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:06 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:08 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:12 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:11 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:15 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:18 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:49 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:54 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 14:59 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:00 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 17:40 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 18:41 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 19:30 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 19:59 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-08 01:32 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ITT: SHARON STANS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 19:53 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-07 02:59 am (UTC)(link)
It really is and even if you take peggy put of the equation its still super weird.

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 03:02 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-07 03:05 am (UTC)(link)
omg, the tittybabyism in this thread is a-ma-zing

y'all need your diapers changed

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:09 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 15:20 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-07 06:40 pm (UTC)(link)
i love this canon but boy do i hate the fucking fandom.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 20:35 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 20:45 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 20:47 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 06:46 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 11:35 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 15:45 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 15:55 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 16:22 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 16:24 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 16:27 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 16:20 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 21:40 (UTC) - Expand

thread op

(Anonymous) 2016-05-07 11:22 pm (UTC)(link)
just so you know, the anon being edgy and acting like they are le master troll XD isn't me.

this thread was 100% in earnest and so were my arguments.

Re: thread op

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-07 23:33 (UTC) - Expand

Re: thread op

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-09 06:44 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) 2016-05-14 02:19 pm (UTC)(link)
half of the professional critics agree with you.

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-14 23:50 (UTC) - Expand

Re: CA:CW SPOILERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-05-14 23:57 (UTC) - Expand