mouthporn.net
#soulless sam – @selfihateyouithink on Tumblr
Avatar

round and round the winchesters go

@selfihateyouithink / selfihateyouithink.tumblr.com

I am an Angel of the Lord who probably would do well in finance, and I don't like to do what people expect. Thirty-four. White USian. Autistic, anxious depressive (with PTSD). Nonbinary/genderqueer (demigirl). She/they pronouns. Sex-indifferent pan gay greyromantic demisexual. INFP/ISFP. Survivor. Socialist. Feminist. Relativist. Agnostic atheist. Struggling college student (yes, still). Honest misanthrope (because humans are works of art but humanity is tainted by its hatreds, conceits, and deceits), almost never neutral (because the status quo isn't), and unapologetic slasher 'til death do I stop. I am things, I question things, I like things, I hate things, I watch things, I read things, I write things, I say things, I do things. Things happen on this blog.
Avatar
Anonymous asked:

hi! i have a Q: i'm seeing 'not every opinion is valid' on your twitter (i dont have a twitter, so i'm asking here) and that is something that i want to drill into people's minds, esp when it comes to misogyny, racism, homophobia, etc. but - i'm horrible with words and i either get really angry and practically start shouting and lose my focus or just kind of shut down b/c i cant explain why sth is wrong. so, could you give me an explanation why every opinion is NOT valid? thank you.

Hey :D

(That’s cool, ask away.)

Not every opinion is valid in some spheres because for every opinion to be valid it would mean that nobody’s opinion is actually valid, because opinions by nature are contradictory of other opinions, for one. (See, if you’re in SPN fandom, 10x05 excitement that everybody’s headcanons are valid, judged by Chuck. You know what that means? Nobody’s are valid. If there is no actual provable validity because it could be this thing, or the opposite, nobody was validated. “Everybody’s interpretation is equally valid” is just a way of lying to us all and not having to commit to anything that might alienate anybody–and by not committing, they haven’t validated any interpretation within the text.)

Not every opinion is valid because for every opinion to be valid, they would all have to be supported by the same reality, which is usually impossible, for two.

Not every opinion is valid because, and here’s the kicker, validation of opinions requires evidence, for three. You can think anything about anything, yes, but is it valid? That depends upon whatever you are opinionated about. Your thoughts are not validated by how things exist in reality by nature of them being your thoughts; they require an ability to connect them to the thing, to experience or text or what have you.

Not every opinion is valid because, in large part of this recurring debate, we are not talking about opinions in the sense people are thinking. We’re not talking about just feelings, just reactions, that are intangible and subjective and difficult to disprove (such as: Coke tastes bad, which is an opinion I’ve had challenged repeatedly and don’t care to defend because that would be pointless.)

When you say something like, to use the example I was talking about on Twitter, “this makes perfect sense (as depicted within the rules of the text)” or “this is a perfectly valid ship (within the text)”****you are not just talking about your feelings, you are making a statement of how the text presents things, and if the text doesn’t present those things, in any provable way beyond “uwu OTP” and “but that’s my favorite part!” that’s not an opinion validated. It’s not valid.

“I like this ship.” or “I hate this ship.” are opinions that are equally valid (though, ones that say more about you than you might realize). “This ship is validated by the text.” is a theory that must be proven to be given any validity. “This part is awesome.” or “This part is awful.” are opinions that are equally valid (though, again, ones that say more about you than you might realize). “This part makes complete sense.” or “This part makes no sense at all.” are theories that must be proven in the context of the text’s logic. The difference is that you’re not making a statement about just you, you’re making a statement about how things exist, and things don’t exist in thirty different and opposing ways, most of the time. (And it’s really egocentric to act like because you think things, they are reality beyond your own thoughts when there’s no verifiable reason they seem to be except your own biases/prejudices. Also, lmfao, take it from someone mentally ill, it’s dangerous to think that at times.)

Ditto with racism, homophobia, sexism, etc. Those are proven by the way things exist in reality. They’re not subjective, they have tangible, provable evidence: in these cases, centuries of it. The fact that whoever is arguing that their opinion against it is “valid” has not sought this evidence does not make their opinion valid just because they thought a thing. They have to be supported by reality, and in this case they are not.

(****It’s been a while since you sent this Ask, so I don’t remember exactly the wording I used [I might check it and add it to this later], but I remember it had something to do with the combination of ship portrayals in S10 and the ret-con nonsense of Castiel being the one to blame for Sam being brought back soulless from the fucking Cage of all places, on top of all the other shit they pinned on him during S6 and S7, and I was probably complaining about people using the latter for Sastiel purposes and also suggesting [again] it should’ve been written as Raphael doing that instead because he’s way more powerful and more likely to have done it and then kept Sam soulless, guiltlessly? And someone was trying to argue that it’s not nonsense because they like Sastiel or whatever, which A) made no sense to me because the Cas part of the Soulless Sam arc, if anything, validates how much Cas values Sam’s well-being for Sam reasons–and thus Sastiel as valid, presented by canon–less, and B) is irrelevant to whether the text’s logic was ignored and horribly ripped asunder for the convenient precariously heaped vilification of Castiel.)

Avatar

what is subtext anyway? and where does it come from? Is it some strange artifact of storytelling? meaningless effluvia left by the teller?  … or does it - in fact - come from someplace …. far more sinister?

(the Twilight Zone theme plays)

Alternate title: what is straight? is anyone really straight? is subtext a vegetable?

originally from Yael’s blog - but this isn’t really a response to her; it’s just that her post got me thinking.

Because when I try to talk about Sam’s sexuality, I keep thinking about Dean’s. And there’s a reason for that. As I watched season 2, back in 2007, as we began to see through Dean’s masculine facade; we saw him falling apart as he tried to keep up this image of masculinity; we saw him sexualizing encounters to make people uncomfortable - I saw all this, and this instinct in my gut said, “He’s like me. I’m like that. The experience of being Dean Winchester is similar to my experience of being queer.”

That’s what gaydar is - just an instinctive recognition of similarities.* And once I realized that, I tried to figure out why I felt that way, looking for some kind of proof I could point to and put into words, and I found it in spades. But I never bothered thinking about Sam’s sexuality because he never tripped my gaydar in that way. Now that I think about it, there’s no reason to think he isn’t queer; but there’s also little reason to think that he is.

So here are some things that lit up my gaydar about Dean:

  • this vague feeling that he can’t ever tell the truth about himself
  • his deliberate, carefully constructed masculine image;
  • that makes him pretend not to like the things he actually likes (like REO Speedwagon);
  • which is then related to his sexuality in “Playthings”; Sam says “they think you’re overcompensating” as if it’s a joke, but we know that Dean does in fact overcompensate - we’ve seen it.
  • and his defensiveness on the topic - because straight people aren’t bothered by homophobia.

Most importantly - because the story draws attention to Dean’s sexuality, and it doesn’t draw attention to Sam’s. And that’s not something you do for characters who are heterosexual. Sexuality isn’t a big deal - for straight people. But for queer people, in real life, it always goddamn matters whether we want it to or not. It shapes how people treat you. It shapes how you react to people, as you decide (with each new person) how truthful you can be. It shapes the way you see yourself, and your role models; it shapes the choices you make and the experiences you have. And that’s even more true for older generations. Being nervous about how people read you, and trying to control the image you present, is directly related to queerness.

And in storytelling, a character who’s straight doesn’t need their sexuality shown or clarified. The audience expects every character to be straight - whether they should or not - and we don’t need to be told how straight they are. So drawing attention to a character’s sexuality is, in fact, telling us - “Take another look. It might not be what you think.”

Whatever Dean’s sexuality is, it’s kind of important, in a way that Sam’s isn’t. And that’s why we talk about it more.

I’m not trying to present gaydar as evidence - for one, instincts aren’t always right!! No, the evidence is, you know, all the times Dean’s had these close relationships with men. And the way he wants these friendlationships with men, like Ash and Gordon. 

(But I do want to hear about other people’s gaydar, and what made it light up! for either Sam or Dean.)

So much this. As a bisexual person of Dean’s age and social group he pinged me right away whereas Sam never did. I’m not opposed to people interpreting Sam as queer or queer reading characters in general. Head-canoning everybody as queer is how I did, growing up, when there were no queer people in narratives. But Sam has never shown interest in other men and has not been shown yearning connections with them in the fashion Dean has.

Which brings us to the main point evidence people use for queer Sam: Brady. It seems a lot of people missed the reference to the film My Demon Lover in “your demon lover, Brady”. It wasn’t a reference to Sam and Brady having been lovers, but to Sam’s misplaced faith in people and believing the best of them even when it flies in the face of evidence. The whole driving force of the narrative was Sam’s downward class mobility, of having carved himself this little piece of middle class cookie cutter life in spite of having come from the American underclass, only to have it taken away from him when family came calling again and his blonde girlfriend was killed and his house burned down and he had to drop out of college to take over the family business. Fucking dudes in college? Would take away from the core narrative.

I feel so weird arguing for straight Sam when it’s something I really don’t care about (and I do think that Sam is queer in the narrative, just not fucking dudes queer). Straight Sam is queer in the same way Suburbia was hell for Dean Winchester and in the way the unbroken nuclear family was presented to us as a source of horror in the first seasons. It’s an inversion of the expected.’

Also, I might take the whole conversation a little more seriously if most of the “But what if Sam was queer?” people weren’t straight Dean stans who believe that both guys are straight except for the incest thing.

But, you know. Did you see how Dean had absolutely no reaction to Crowley mentioning his brother’s demon lover? That’s because unlike most of the audience, Dean understood the reference (and probably agreed with it, misplaced faith is Sam’s problem and became an actual plot point in the season a few episodes hence).

Sam has seemed fairly asexual since the beginning of season 7. Apart from his relationship with Amelia, has he showed any interest in anyone for the last four seasons? Compared to Dean (and compared to soulless!Sam) it’s pretty glaring.

That’s always been the case to some extent? I don’t think we’ve ever seen Sam (as opposed to Soulless!Sam) initiate sex, going all the way back to Madison, except in the context of his established relationships with Ruby and Amelia. He doesn’t turn it down if offered (and lately he hasn’t been in much of a position to get offers), but he doesn’t seek it out and he really never has.

Given that one of the things Soulless!Sam did was leave a trail of satisfied women behind him, and looking at the comments he made to the chastity group, my own thought is that Sam wants a lot more sex than he’s having, but he’s aware of his Cartwright Curse (whether or not it’s a real thing in the context of the show, it feels real to him, and even Charlie mentioned it) and doesn’t want to put anyone at risk just for his own gratification. Not asexual, but celibate.

Avatar

Holly’s hit the nail on the head here. 

Because this is Cas trying to be, to feel like, S4 Cas (and, also, remember, he’s speaking to Soulless Sam, and Castiel himself thinks Soulless Sam is about as much Sam as Dean thought Godstiel was Cas [and honestly, Soulless Sam in S6 is probably about as much of a confusing and potentially dangerous wildcard he’s wary of as Dean Winchester, the faithless, vulgar, confusingly unfitting Righteous Man, likely was in S4]. He figures saving him is off the table, and is very wary of how dangerous he could be; he treats Sam as the same kind of abomination whose salvation is impossible as he does demons—humans, by Supernatural's definition, are not soulless, and deserve his respect and protection [against all odds, he's learned], but right then, Sam is not of that kind by his estimation, and so Castiel, particularly in the midst of trying to assert to himself and everybody else that nobody can get the better of him [and oh, what a season-long theme that is, whether it be Balthazar, Rachel, Atropos, Dean, Soulless Sam, Sam, Meg, Crowley, or Raphael], is unwilling to take that kind of shit from whatever Soulless Sam is).

Season Six—and this episode especially—was very much an identity crisis for Castiel, just like Four was one for Sam (when he was out of under the control of/not beholden to Dean, just like Cas, had a Big Bad who’s outlandishly dangerous, just like Cas, and had someone else to step in when reconciliation of his identity with his new situation became difficult, just like Cas—oh temptation arcs, oh yes).

For Cas, he’s finally been out of Heaven long enough, found his touchstone, to the point that he can’t really be reset easily (the way we must presume Anna and others have been, and the way we know Castiel has) from his love of humanity, his compassion for their plight, and his love of Free Will for not only God’s most favored children (humanity) but for himself (and other angels). He’s been out of the abusive situation that demands nothing but compliance (no matter to what) long enough for some of himself to return, to deconstruct all the violent, compassionless, obedience he has been abused into for millennia (and then allow him to choose when he uses it, what level of force is acceptable by his own ruler rather than that of the cruel dicks with wings who decided for him before).

S4 is Castiel’s tentative first breaks from Heaven that keep being thwarted as he keeps being reset. S5 is Castiel’s efforts to survive and cope with being away from Heaven and making his own choices, being exposed to humanity in a more individual way than he ever has before as a silent, protective overseer of an angel (and trying to fight battles without Heaven telling him what to do and how to do it and why). S6 is then how he tries to reconcile what he’s learned, what he’s become—which is what he really is, without being tortured into being something else (the harsher bits of S4 Cas you’re mentioning, Holly) all the time, somewhat—with a Heaven that is unprepared for and not accepting of that, with the power over Heaven he has been given and yet the fact that that means he now has more of an obligation to a family that does not accept the kind of person he is than ever, and as a bonus, with human friends who he is no longer beholden to for any reason based upon utility. It is a fight for agency and it is an identity crisis; Castiel’s crack in his chassis has finally become sufficiently irreparable, and trying to be what Dean and Sam need because they’re his friends without Heaven telling him he must, plus trying to be what Heaven needs, considering he and Heaven see eye to eye on almost nothing and the things Heaven wants endanger the former, plus trying to understand what he needs as well as what he should do? It’s enough for anyone to lose themselves a little bit. 

When he says, “Much of the time, I would rather be here.”, I think a lot of what he means has to do with the fact that he’s learned it’s much easier to fulfill the “human”, as well as relatively mild, power-related expectations Dean and Sam have of him (such as, for instance, responding to the forced kiss of someone who’s wearing a pretty actress/simultaneously dominating a demon to show both his ability to ~human sexuality~ and his ability to cow any demon using any method with which they approach) than it is to return to Heaven where he’s literally fighting for his life and leading the parts of the Host who agree with him in a different way than ever before, without superiors, or deal with the cognitively dissonant ethical complications of working with Crowley out of seemingly desperate necessity as the leader of Heaven and literally the first and potentially only defense standing between the political chaos in Heaven and the possible destruction of humanity (which will accompany his loss in Heaven).

When he says “We’re not supposed to talk about it.” and “I learned that from the pizza man.” it’s a verbal nudge that even if he cannot be human like he was for Dean and Sam before, part of the team that way, he does learn from what their culture expects of him. When he says “Why are we working with these abominations?” and “Will you? Boy? How?” it’s a reminder to whoever he’s speaking to/with that even if he can be part of their team, he’s still an angel, with attendant mental predisposition to hatred of demons and distaste for being threatened by beings with inferior strength. (This is part of his crisis, asserting his formidably dangerous identity of his own power even as he’s not quite sure he wants to be that kind of person, and part of him would like to not have the responsibility that comes with such power and inbuilt hatred.)

It’s funny how often this GIFset is singled out, without seeing the context, which includes Soulless Sam tricking Castiel down from Heaven (where he was mid-battle) with the plot of a movie as a dire Heavenly weapon situation, mocking Castiel’s eagerness to help (among his desperation for more weapons to win the war) and his lack of pop culture knowledge, and then, of course, threatening him when Castiel doesn’t want to do what he has called him for (which is essentially to be a flyswatter for the demons with whom the Winchesters have agreed to work, Meg primarily, and her minions). “We’re bringing insurance,” Soulless Sam says, and then we see him calling Castiel for literally no other purpose but to follow them around and make sure the demons don’t get them. It’s rather contradictory, isn’t it, to call an angel down because demons—who’re even more powerful than humans—can’t hurt them and then threaten to kill said angel if he disobeys?

Castiel is aware of the differences in power between angels and other things all too well, right then, considering he’s spending all his time fighting the former and basically considers coming down for the latter a frivolous vacation to spend time with his friends (one he does not have time for). You can see on his face that it’s a bitterly amusing pill to swallow, being threatened by a “human” (who doesn’t create the same moral dilemma Sam does of killing his human friend—killing any human, but especially Sam, his friend—because he is quite resigned to Sam being gone, but is possessed of the limited power of a human compared to an angel) who called for his help when that particular expectation of his person is usually the least dangerous.

Basically, if there’s anything Cas was in S4, it was well assured of his own power (often naively so, and additionally confident of his own dispensability, which aided this), whether it was over other angels, or demons, or other supernatural creatures, or humans; he has since learned that it’s not that simple, but sometimes he attempts to step back into that role. And as Holly says, that’s what he’s doing here.

S4 Cas starts out with something the Cas of other seasons doesn’t have (and even then, not always): a comforting self-assurance, confidence of his own strength and skill, his absolute convictions, and his sense of self, because they were almost entirely determined by Heaven, by who Heaven demanded he be and manipulated him into being as a soldier, and he had no agency in affecting them, so he had no fear of failure. S6 Cas really wants, even needs, to feel that, dealing with such a precarious situation in Heaven (and trying to prevent it from spilling onto Earth) so you see a lot of this kind of posturing, as though he is again S4 Cas, only allowed to ever sincerely question who he is and what he can or should do in secret because those things cannot affect the fact that he is an angel with a sense of direly important purposenothing will, if he can help it (though of course we find out in S4, he can’t).

I agree, by the way, with you, Holly, when you say it feels wrong. The closest term I can think of to what Castiel is doing here—what he does in the entire episode— is self-objectification as a tool of righteous fury (so angel, very power, much cold tactical maneuver) and protection of his human charges, and that’s nothing good (though it can be helpful). In fact, my guess is it’s mostly remnants of how he has to function in Heaven, for his survival and as an infallibly competent figurehead and leader, inevitably leaking into how he acts on Earth, especially with the Winchesters treating him as a tool, relying so much on his power and knowledge and not really giving much of a fuck about his companionship (as he gauges it, though obviously we know they’re only leaving him be most of the time because they know how busy he is, only calling when they can’t do without him).

Avatar
PSA: Castiel canonically can't see souls inside human bodies (or he would've immediately known Sam's issue in S6 and not have had to stick his hands in Sam's or Aaron's bodies to figure shit out; and no, seeing demons' and angels' True Faces when he's an angel doesn't disprove this cos those are not souls [any longer]) so, uh, if y'all could stop with this biphobic "Cas is pan cos he only cares about what their souls look like and not their shapes" crap that would be grand?
Avatar

Cole: You remember me? requested by alittlespn

I want Demon Dean to meet Souless Sam

Demon Dean, Soulless Sam, and Crazy Cas

Team Alliteration

Team Alliteration

Y'all are gross, stop calling him "Crazy". Conflict-Avoidant Cas. Craven Cas. Control-Seeking Cas. Conscience-Ridden Cas. DO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT A SLUR.

Avatar
Avatar
yaelstiel
Anonymous asked:

same anon - people really need stop crediting castiel for saving dean from hell because 1) it was a garrison/army, confirmed by cas in s6 and naomi in s8 and 2) cas was ordered to get dean out to serve as a meatsuit for the apocalypse, the angels wanted dean in hell in the first place to break the first seal. sure cas got part of sam out of hell when he wasn't ordered too, but then he lied and next told dean to leave sam in hell; and cas never apologized for either.

Okay, take out saving Dean from hell. 

But being so compassionate about Dean ? ‘You don’t didn’t think you deserved to be saved’ ? he could have done it in the ugly was as Raphael did. But Cas is different. letting Dean know he has his doubts about heaven as well, knowing that saying that might sabotage heaven’s mission for Dean? 

It was confirmed in text that Cas didn’t know what was heaven intention, that is why he got Dean out of the secret room, risking himself too, after he realized that their intention were (and did the wrong thing of letting Sam out) , and then having little time to process the information and his actions, he came to Dean’s rescue, while risking everything he had. 

Saving Sam was his own idea, he didn’t succeed, but I believe that wasn’t on purpose (why would he?) 

The other things stays. 

Avatar

Okay, first, yes, Castiel’s mission was him being employed as a soldier as opposed to some sort of compassionate salvation at first, but he definitely grasped the other, kinder reasons for saving him in a way none of the other angels ever have. “I’d give anything not to have you do this,” etc. “I don’t envy the weight on your shoulders”, “It’s not blame that falls on you, Dean, it’s fate.” etc. etc. etc. etc. Castiel also—this is indisputable canon—had no idea what the fuck was going to happen when he did so, or for twenty episodes afterward. He knew Dean was going to help humanity (as he was told repeatedly cos that was his near entire reason for helping the angels), that he was “different” somehow, but he did not know how. (Also, letting Sam out was after Naomi-esque LITERAL RESETTING OF HIS MIND, literal resetting with the drill akin to S8.)

I want to point one thing out that I think is a large divergence in post-S6 Cas-fans and Cas-haters: how much we accept the characterization, the actions, that are meant to vilify characters who aren’t villains (or offer some sort of “Good” to villains who haven’t changed), as part of who they are instead of fascinating and dramatically necessary flukes, things they wouldn’t do unless they were forced into mental, physical, or situational corners, things that are purposeful and out-of-place that are meant to make you hate Castiel and characters like him so they can kill them off with minimum uproar. People who are already so inclined find this believable and accurate and hate him easily; people who are skeptical or inclined to like characters that aren’t the brothers are like “this was a really shitty terribly written purposeful vilification so they could kill him off” and don’t just swallow the muckraking over Cas’s cohesive character as established, thus far and afterward, they did.

Castiel getting Sam out of LUCIFER’S CAGE without a garrison makes…y’know, no sense????????? None. And it was an afterthought of a plot point, which means that all that “lying” was literally just ret-conning: Misha played it fucking straight because Castiel really didn’t know. As zatnikatel pointed out in an Ask with me last night, why the fuck would the Seals exist if the Cage could be so easily “harrowed”? Why would Zachariah or Raphael or Michael not have just y’know grabbed Lucifer from the Cage for the big archangel fight? And why would Cas—who is shown at least thrice during that season to fucking suck at outright lying—be super goddamn confused about Sam’s soul but determined to find out more, then super concerned about Sam’s soul deteriorating his body, then completely cold about near-KILLING him by breaking the Wall. Why would Cas, who fucking adores Dean and is one of the only characters to validate his feelings 99% of the time, snark at a shit-scared best friend when Dean asks for help with Sam? Soulless Sam’s mistake as a plot point, the whole thing, made no sense for Castiel, and anybody who doesn’t already want to hate him caught that.

That aside, it did happen, of course, it is canon by some definition, but it’s shitty-ass canon they’ve tried their damnedest to undo, by showing Castiel’s debilitatingly depressed remorse and frequent attempts to make amends to both Heaven and his earthly family, his SUICIDAL need to punish himself for it, by showing how hard Cas balks from ever again being a leader (again—way more in line with his character without Crowley’s influence or the literal bodily-control of angels or monstrous SENTIENT souls), how Castiel was convinced enough of his own Badness for a demon to convince him she was trustworthy when she was “working on him”, that they’re somewhat the ~same~ and she feels his thorny pain, how much he loathes Crowley now that he’s out of the “I’ve got the hookup” mental woods, how Castiel is terrified of/morally opposed to ever endangering any human or angel again with his direct or indirect actions—even for a victory or survival. By “nothing is worth losing you” and “you gave up your army for one man”.

Like, fuck off if you think Castiel is the same as that. “Who I was, what I did, is not who I am.” he says outright to Bartholomew. This whole season was a lesson in Castiel’s development into a person who would kill Godstiel rather than endanger humanity/angels if he had the chance to do it over again, because he cares that much about that—which cooperates way, way better with his established characterization in every season, as I’m sure Carver knows. This whole season was a lesson in “sorry for everything in S6-S7” over and over and over again.

Also the last part, THE LAST PART, I’m GOING TO HAVE TO RING THE BULLSHIT ALARM ON THAT. I COUNTED. CASTIEL EXPRESSED REMORSE IN VARIOUS WAYS INCLUDING AT LEAST FIVE OUTRIGHT VERBATIM ‘I’M SORRY’S NINE FUCKING TIMES BEFORE THE END OF S7 ALONE. “He never apologized for either.” BULLSHIT. BULLSHIT. BULLSHIT. BULLSHIT. BULLSHIT. BULLSHIT. NINE FUCKING TIMES IN THOSE TWO SEASONS ALONE, BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER. He’s apologized to Dean, and Sam, multiple times, and probably angels? Yeah, I think angels too, but please correct me if I’m wrong (though honestly the angels are the ones he owes the least to: killing them in S7 was genocide to PREVENT genocide, and they have abused/tortured him literally since at least Lucifer’s departure—he killed them to survive exerting choice long enough to protect humanity?).

Avatar

Oh, what? Now you trust Meg?

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.
mouthporn.net