Iben

In sum: Baby girl, he’s playing you.

Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.

And yes I get all the flutters from HR as well. I am after all, a cis woman who identified as straight growing up. But baby, remember it’s all fiction. I know it feels sooo good when you get that crumb, but please. Leave him alone. You won’t save or fix him. He doesn’t need it. He’s fine.

Obviously I have no clue about relationship dynamics and/or archetypes in male gaydom. There is the added layer of coming out and I don’t want to belittle that experience. I don’t know if HR is representative in that sense. But I know a straight woman trope when I see one.

Or you moved on yourself, with someone who actually loved and valued you. Good for you baby girl 🩷
Anyway, most of us know in this day and age that that guy does not exist. With Heated Rivalry we get to pretend that he does all over again. He really DID love us. He really WAS scared of his feelings.

The thing is, of course, it wasn’t real. In real life he eventually got into a real relationship with someone else and you were left wondering why it wasn’t you. Unless of course you faced the fact that he wasn’t actually “complicated” or “scared of his feelings”. He just wasn’t that into you.

We were RAISED on that shit. Every fucking rom-com or rom drama. Even Sex & The City which was supposed to portray women and relationships differently, ended that way.
And because of it, we hung around and lived off of crumbs for years. You know who I’m talking about baby. Yes him.

How I Knew Heated Rivalry Was Written By A Straight Woman Without Having To Look It Up: A Thread 🧵
The trope of the ever so mysterious, emotionally unavailable man who plays you like a fiddle for years and then, after almost losing you, suddenly turns around and realises his great love for you.

European Citizens' Initiative Give your support !

Are you an EU citizen? Please sign for the EU to end its trade deal with Israel eci.ec.europa.eu/055/public/

Whoops might be time to leave

Men det er altså også lidt sjovt

Yay you!!!

This is why my aunt, an alcoholic, walked in, realised what it was, said ‘nope’, turned around and walked back out again.

Men are not OK I’m telling you

I saw this video of a Vietnam vet in the fur coat yelling at ICE and thought to myself, "this is missing something," before I realized, "Ah, of course, the Ether instrumental. It's so obvious."

Brindle dog (bulldog-mix) asleep on my couch, resting his head on my leg.

Recently, my dog died. Due to *gestures* it is not possible for me to get a new one anytime soon.
Luckily, my downstairs neighbour is generous with hers 🥹

Why indeed 🥲

Screenshot fra #dax18 hvor det ønskes god ondskapskveld.

God ondskapskveld til alle som feirer!

They conclude that this is recent and that there is next to no European ancestry from pre-1721. If you insist on this being code for Norse then I repeat that it’s too weird for me.
My guess is babies born to unknown sailors and colonists who are thus not registrered. There were a lot of those.

Dude. This text backs up NONE of your claims and you then argue that that is because it’s meaning is HIDDEN, like it’s ancient scripture and not a straightforward genetic research article.

This is too far out for me. You obviously live in a different reality. I’m sorry to have bothered you.

They don’t!!! Where?!?

They literally say that it aligns well with registries from the colonial period, that is post-1721 and that the mixing is post-colonial?!?
Furthermore there is no 5% Norwegian anywhere.
I am in utter disbelief that we are looking at the same text. The conclusions here are clear as day.

I know this. But you just claimed the positive evidence as a certainty. It is not there.

That sentence, or number, is literally nowhere in there?!?
This is too far out.

Don’t assume what I look at. You don’t know and that assumption about historians is ignorant.

Okay but it says the opposite of what you’re saying.
If you are now claiming that ACTUALLY they mean something entirely different than what they’re writing, this has indeed become too far out for me.

Lol ok

Sure sure, but is it the same paper as the one you’re referencing? Because this one does not support your claim. Instead it clearly references earlier research that shows that inuit does not have Norsemen DNA.

Okay. That is however not an acknowledged version of the fate of the Norse and therefore also not the basis of the Danish claim to Greenland. Can you provide me with that link now?