I know it’s 2017 and this is all far beyond said and done but
Cats is a really bizarre fucking musical
You’re not wrong.
OKAY WHAT GETS ME more than the plot or anything else is that there are absolutely no solid rules for the way cats exist in relation to humans in this story world.
Mungojerrie and Rumpleteaser are able to go into a family’s home and essentially torment them by means of petty thievery, and the family just brushes it off with “it’s that horrible cat!” And then they move on!! So you think, alright, so in life the cats look like regular cats, and humans don’t give them much head.
But you would be WRONG because MACAVITY is out here breaking “every human law,” and his exploits are being investigated by SCOTLAND YARD. Macavity has apparently literally killed a man. Maybe more. Almost definitely more. And also, he steals the milk from people’s houses.
And when the police show up to a crime scene “Macavity’s not there.”
Why does he need to flee? Would the police actually suspect a cat when they show up to a murder scene? Is Macavity the true scourge of Scotland Yard? Or are all of the cats just exaggerating??
I NEED ANSWERS, ANDREW LLOYD WEBBER!!!!
All the other cats are regular cats but macavity is actually just a furry
I HATE THIS!!!!!!
*ugly snorting laughter* Oh my God this changes everything
Tag: Makes sense
Werewolves are stereotyped as ravenous monsters because the transformations burn so many calories that they’re essentially starving afterwords. The more “controlled” werewolves are just the ones who figured this out and loaded up on calories beforehand, whereas the “wild” ones assume it’s part of their wolfish nature to hunt and eat whatever’s nearby.
The transformation back burns calories too, but by that point they’re exhausted from running around in the woods all night, not to mention the physical strain of two transformations. And filthy people showing up at Denny’s in the early morning are assumed to be hungover, so the ravenous beast idea is applied only to the wolf half.
do men have resting bitch faces as well or do they not have negative characteristics ascribed to them for putting on a neutral rather than a deliriously happy facial expression
Yes, Black men in majority white spaces do. If I don’t smile every single second of the day my coworkers become in intimidated and start asking me what’s wrong, telling me to smile, make jokes about how I’m trying to be a thug/act hard, why am I angry, etc. And it’s not just white men at my job God FORBID I my large Black ass makes a white girl feel threaten because I’m sitting down with a neutral expression.
I’m not trying to take this post away from women and make it about Black men but I want to point out that wether it’s patriarchy or white supremacy; those who feel as if they have power over you HATE to see you not smile. They are so used to people like you smiling to gain their approval that when you don’t there’s a cognitive dissonance that makes them extremely uncomfortable.
That’s why “angry Black women” is a thing. They have to put on a smile for everyone (yes even feminist white women) or we all get uncomfortable.
This is such an amazing response.
Mooncustafer 