#i just think too many people equate them not liking something as it being inherently bad.. why dont we all just shut up.. lmao

[oceanwithouthermoon]

tired of being called boring cuz i hate toxic ships </33 im sorry i get triggered easily by stuff like that brah, the most toxic my ships r allowed to get before i get triggered is a lil possessiveness and a hint of unhealthy codependency 🤭 beyond that, i literally get sick to my stomach lmao..

do what u want but anyone whose never been abused before does NOT get the right to call ME boring for not liking abusive ships..

#i just think too many people equate them not liking something as it being inherently bad.. why dont we all just shut up.. lmao #do ur thing tbh like if u enjoy reading it and dont condone abuse irl then go ahead #i just will not participate and thats okay bro like we dont all have to like the same things #be an individual bro like we dont all have to have the same likes and dislikes #why do i have to read comments on all my fav fics about how theyre tired of things being 'too fluffy' LEMME ENJOY MY LOVELY FLUFF #if i get a comment like that on one of MY fics it is literally over i will die #anyway.. #okay this is a little fib cuz i am also a huge fan of the cannibalism as a metaphor for love thing. um.. let me have this LMAO. #romanticizing cheating is something i just cant stand though ngl #honestly i dont know why i like toxic codependency and CANNIBALISM but having an affair is where i draw the line.. #i think consent is my issue like i need there to be consent or its over and i cry and throw up from reading it lmfao #i like toxicity when its because they love each other TOO much.. THATS IT.. NO MORE CHEATING NO MORE ONE SIDED ABUSE NO MORE #i will continue to enjoy my super healthy fluffy protective ships 5ever #meows post #fanfic #ao3

[why-animals-do-the-thing]

hi there! love your work! i recently had a prof say that all zoos (USA) are bad (so we shouldn't support them) and sanctuaries are better because using animals for entertainment is morally wrong, most zoo profits dont go to conservation, and conservation efforts are bandaid solutions to capitalism destroying animal habitats, so the real solution is to return the land to indigenous stewards to manage/rewild. i didn't disagree with the last bit, but the argument as a whole felt a little off to me for a reason i couldnt put my finger on. am i off base here? just feeling really unsure about the whole thing.

You're not wrong! There's a mix of reality and personal opinions in those statements, and it's definitely something worth critically examining. A quick fact-check of what they said for you:

All US zoos are bad

There's a massive range of quality of zoological facilities within the US (and around the world). Some are stellar and some are not, and it's really just not accurate to lump them all under the same umbrella for almost any purpose. Unless, of course, your issue isn't with animal welfare, and it's philosophical, which is what it sound like in #2...

2. Using animals for entertainment is morally wrong.

This is one of my favorite things to talk about w/r/t how we exhibit animals. Entertainment has become equated with exploitation and implicit low welfare in the last couple decades, and so you get a lot of people saying using animals for entertainment is wrong. But those same folk will say that they enjoy seeing animals in other contexts, and they think that's okay. Where's the line between enjoying something and being entertained by it? What makes something one and not the other? Also, we know that people learn better from from situations which are enjoyable/entertaining - even just a fun teacher who jokes around vs a dry lecture - so how can that only be a problem when it's used to make viewing animals more impactful? I wrote a whole piece on this a while back (linked here) if you want to dig into this more. Some zoos (and accrediting groups) are shying away from "entertainment" type branding - shows are demos now, for instance - and others are leaning into "edutainment" that's done with good welfare and communicates actual education messaging. In short, this is a personal philosophical belief, and you're right to question if you agree. (Even if you decide you do think that too! It's always good to question why someone is arguing what they believe about animal use, and how they came to believe it).

3. Sanctuaries are better than zoos.

There's two reasons I think he's misinformed here. First, almost all exotic animal sanctuaries in the US are licensed exhibitors - just like zoos! I only know of a couple that don't exhibit to the public at all. It's an important part of their revenue stream, because gate take helps support paying for animal care. Also anything you see from a sanctuary on Youtube, Facebook, or TikTok? Also exhibition! They just message about it differently, and often have a different ethos about how they exhibit (e.g. tours to reduce stress instead of letting people wander, doing conservation or rescue messaging instead of just display). Second... look, most people assume that the word "sanctuary" means a facility is intrinsically more ethical than a zoo, and therefore they must be a good place. In reality, many sanctuaries get much less public and regulatory scrutiny (at the state level) than most zoos. There are good sanctuaries out there, but there are also sanctuaries where stuff goes on that would absolutely be unacceptable at zoos, and it slides because of the assumption that sanctuaries are inherently more moral and ethical and care for their animals better.

4. Most zoo profits don't go to conservation

This is correct! Direct conservation funding is often a small part of the money a zoo makes. However, that's because money goes to things like facility maintenance, new construction, paying salaries, etc. If zoos put all the money they made back into conservation programs, practically, they wouldn't have the funding to continue to operate. The question that I'd suggest asking instead is "where are they putting money into conservation" and "are they doing conservation work or just throwing money at something to display the logo of the program." Also, it's worth keeping in mind that a lot of what zoos do to support conservation isn't necessarily financial. Many facilities contribute "in-kind", by doing things like sending staff to assist with programs or teach specific skills, or by donating things like vehicles and equipment. Research zoos do also seriously contributes to in-situ programs, and breeding programs for re-introduction like the scimitar-horned oryx and the black-footed ferret are also conservation. Could many of the big urban facilities with huge budgets do more? Yes. But looking just at dollars spent on conservation programs is disingenuous and inaccurate.

5. Conservation efforts are band-aid solutions to capitalism destroying habitats / Returning the land to indigenous peoples to manage/rewild is the real solution to conservation issues

This is a little outside my scope so I'm going to only address the part that I know. First off, like, there's no One True Answer to conservation issues. That's reductionist and inaccurate. Conservation really is a human issue, though, and it often has to involve solving human problems that lead to negative results for animals. There's definitely an issue with what some people call "parachute conservation" where Westerners swoop in and try to tell people living in range countries how to best manage their animals and natural resources without recognizing their perspectives, needs, or what drives their behavior towards those animals. That's not just a zoo issue - that's an issue with a ton of traditional Western conservation work. And there is progress towards fixing it! In the zoo world, I've been very impressed with the work out of The Living Desert, where their conservation people spend a lot of time overseas teaching people in range countries to evaluate and improve their own conservation programs, so they can assess efficacy and also have data to apply for grants, etc. They provide support when asked, rather than trying to tell people who live with these animals regularly what to do. One of my favorite programs that TLD collaborates with (they don't try to run it!) is a group called the Black Mambas that reduces poaching by supporting entire communities to reduce the desperation for food/income, educating kids about animals, and running all-female patrols staffed by community members.

Overall, it sounds like your professor's view of zoos is really informed by their personal moral perspective, and possibly reinforced by a lot of the misinformation / misleading messaging that exists about the industry and about conservation work. They do have some specifics right, but not necessarily the context to inform why things are like that. It was a good catch to question the mix of information and approach it critically.

#zoo industry #zoo information #philosophy around zoos and what they do #conservation #zoo questions

[jewishvitya]

This post is. A personal need to vent again.

Daniel Levy: "I personally believe that Israelis can never have security until Palestinians have security. That equation, the equation that you can impose a regime of structural violence on another people, that you can deny another people their basic rights and you will live with your own security, that equation never works. And I hope one day - Palestinians of course, but also, Jewish Israelis will experience the idea of how liberating it can be to no longer be an oppressor."

It's not possible, and it's also unfair. They deserve security.

I get accused of so many things, but I believe that we can't have safety without a fundamental change.

And I care about our morality. Once in a while I think about the cheerful, well-mannered, compassionate kids I used to babysit in the West Bank settlements. Kids who would then fantasize about being soldiers and hurting Palestinians, because they were taught this is heroic. A six years old child, a child who's always generous and always empathetic, with a huge smile talking about killing. And I can't stop thinking about those children.

Writing this, I started thinking about a song that I wanted to share. It's a song that makes me very emotional. Some lines in it are about a girl screaming, "love me, don't teach me war." Crying for innocence. And then realized... it's a song about peace, but I don't know what kind. Does it consider Palestinians and their suffering. Or does it imagine a future where they aren't here. I don't know how to check for the history of the lyrics and the politics of the person who wrote them. I can't trust our desire for peace.

I told this story here before, but for me in many ways it shows the nature of the occupation and what it does to the people perpetuating it. My classmate and I were around 14 years old. We walked by the electric fence and we saw a Palestinian child playing near her home. I can't remember how old she might have looked, but think anywhere between 4 and 8. My classmate had a chocolate bar and she broke off a piece and waved it at the child, asking if she wants it. The child didn't speak Hebrew, but she saw the chocolate, so she nodded, all excited. My classmate threw the chocolate past the fence and it landed in bushes. The child started looking for it.

And my classmate had so much disdain in her voice when she laughed and called her a pig. Just a child wanting some sweets that were offered to her.

My classmate was a young teenage girl who had a whole nation dehumanized for her, to the point where a child wanting a piece of chocolate was something to hate. And I don't want to pretend I was better. I just thought it wasn't very nice. I was always kinda diplomatic, trying to be civil, and I still lean in that direction. So it bothered me as impolite, but not beyond that. It took a few years before I thought about this and was horrified. Just like with the kids I got to babysit. At the time, it was my normal. Now it makes me want to cry.

I hate that these ways of thinking exist in us. I want to change things for us too. Because no group of people is inherently bad, but given dynamics of oppression, every group has this capacity. And I don't want to see people I love causing harm.

And since the oppression is the root of it - I have hope for healing too. But today, I just... can't seem to stop crying for very long at a time. The tears don't want to stop. The hope feels very far and all I have is grief.

Children shouldn't be dreaming of war and killing.

#riki babbles

[bluedalahorse]

Public perceptions of Sara as a neurodivergent in love

As far as Sara’s romance arc goes in Young Royals, something I’ve thought a lot about is how there’s this ableist tendency to infantilize autistic people, and part of this ableist infantilization comes down to downplaying or ignoring or erasing autistic people’s sexualities. Luckily, there’s more shows recently that have pushed back against that in some form—Everything’s Gonna Be Okay and Heartbreak High being among them. (Everything’s Gonna Be Okay even has an ace autistic character to nuance things all the more.) Young Royals first and foremost pushes back by giving Sara a love story in her own right, full of as many ups and downs and complex turns of character that Wille and Simon’s relationship does.

There’s a second thing that I think might be going on, and it’s subtle enough to me that I want to see how season 3 plays out before I can say “this is for sure a thing that’s happening in the show.” And that is the way that other characters respond to Sara’s potential for romantic and sexual attraction, whether they’re downplaying it or actually seeing the reality of it. Now, Sara’s Manor House pals at least acknowledge her potential to feel attraction and be in a relationship, and that’s good, but it feels sort of… abstract? And while Sara does lack the experience the other girls have, they tend to presume a level of innocence and naïveté on her part that doesn’t quite match up with Sara’s more complicated reality. (Also, this may just be my bias speaking, but Fredrika’s comment about Sara’s virginity particularly grates on me. Fredrika plays it off as a compliment but I don’t think it’s meant to be kind.) Meanwhile, when it comes to Sara’s interactions with Simon, we see her teasing him about boys and boyfriends, but he doesn’t seem to respond to her in the same way. Not out of malicious intent I don’t think, but it was something I noticed in their interaction.

It also strikes me that Sara and August were in a secret relationship all season 2 and as far as we know so far, no one noticed. Neither of them is very subtle in how they’re texting the other one and they’re both always sneaking off “to go get a textbook” or whatever. Boys have walked by Sara as she’s walked through the halls of Forest Ridge dormitory. It wouldn’t be that hard to figure out! Felice lives with Sara and doesn’t suspect secret boyfriends or anything. I’m curious to see what the Hillerska rumor mill is like in season 3—whether anyone did pick up on the little sargust tryst like they did the wilmon one, or whether Hillerska students failed to notice because they don’t see Sara as being inherently connected to romance as someone like say, Felice is. Naturally Sara’s class background and gender play a role in that as well, but identities always interact and we can’t leave neurodivergence out of the equation.

We talk a lot about how Sara’s neurodivergence impacted the way she got into a relationship, mostly in terms of how her neurodivergent traits impact her sense of morality and the way she reads certain social signals. What I haven’t seen people talk about as much is how other people in her life perceive her neurodivergence and her capacity for romantic and/or sexual relationships. I’m curious, too, to know how intentionally the show is addressing this. As season 3 deals with the fallout of season 2, I wonder to what extent other characters might try to pigeonhole Sara as childlike or not in full understanding of her own feelings, as they try to make sense of what happened with Sara and August. And I wonder to what extent Sara will have to fight back and claim her own agency in relation to these feelings, even as she’s left this relationship behind.

What do you all think?

#young royals #sara eriksson #some half formed ideas I’ve been thinking about for a while #there is probably more to add but I’m leaving this as is for now

[doberbutts]

Does the way people talk about trans men ever weigh you down mentally? As a trans guy its become really hard latley to see some of the things people in our very own community say about us. I literally saw a post made by another trans person implying all trans guys are abusive and coercive. And it really hurt so bad. Like i cant just be me or else im just inherently wrong. Like i just want to be me, why am i seen as evil just cause now im a man. And when i point this out why do i have to be seen as a bad person for having a voice because now that im a man im equated to a cis man. Its hard being so beaten down and traumatized before i transitioned dealing with a lot of sexist abuse because of being a "girl" and growing up in a extremely sexist environment where my body was entirely controlled, to then when i transitioned i felt i was suddenly the evil one just because i look like a man. Honestly it makes me suicidal sometimes and i worry about other trans guys too and how they feel having to see so much hate, and also knowing how isolated we are and how high are suicide rates are. I just wish people would be compassionate and empathetic and just LISTEN to us for once

It does bother me, and it makes me sad and tired, and like I don't want to be part of whatever community I'm seeing it come from.

Thankfully, I have a nice group of friends who come from pretty diverse backgrounds. Trans people of so many genders. Different races, different sexualities. Cis allies and gnc people with whom I can just be me. Some of us are disabled and some of us are not. We speak different languages and have different interests but we bring vibrancy and joy to each other's lives. And I think having this network of people who I can just be myself with and not have to worry about any of the infighting nonsense is wonderful, because whenever I see something that really bums me out I can just think of how amazing my friends are that I never have to hear this stuff from them.

There are good people out there, who will love you not in spite of but because you are you. It may take some time to find them. The past 6 years I've done a lot of looking and had a few swings and misses but overall I am so happy to have the people I have in my life. I would have killed for this opportunity as a youngster.

[clonehub]

I open Twitter and people are screaming insisting the children of the watch are a cult for a range of stupid reasons and this is coming from someone who originally didn't care either way. But. These things do not make a religious group a fundamentalist cult:

- repeating "this is the way" to each other. It's like saying "god bless you" or other greetings/goodbyes/statements of affirmation in other religious communities

- "they can't show their faces" so. Like so what. Why do they need to see each other's faces. Like let's seriously think about this one because while this can seem harsh to us it's not something that's actually hurting anyone at all. It's a helmet relax.

- "the armorer is a cult leader!!" "How?" *Silence*

- "they indoctrinate children--" see this one pisses me off because there's indoctrination of children and then there's literally just raising your children as part of your religion and dins covert is doing the latter and not the former. Literally all religions encourage their children to follow their guidelines and morals that's how they Survive

- "if you take off your helmet you get kicked out!!!" yes and in christianity if you declare you love Satan or don't believe in God anymore you kinda get kicked out too. I'm not saying these are exactly the same I'm just using a religion I'm most familiar with. But like every religion has a Way to join and a Way to leave/get kicked out. Some have varying levels of strictness to them. Every religion is like this literally all of them.

Some of y'all hate the orthodoxy of Dins religion because you're equating any amount of Rules and Regulations to the worst that CHRISTIAN fundamentalists have had to offer over the years, but also a lot of the people who say he's trapped in a cult and being brainwashed into following them against his will seem to me to be people who have no religious background like at all. Like there's so many people who just fundamentally have NO experience with how religions work. It's givinggggg CEO Christian kiddies who hated having to go and now think that anything that doesn't allow the wishy washy freedom of the most shallow forms of Christianity ever must be inherently destructive

Idk i guess this is the anthropologist in me but there's so much nuance to this and guess what Din could very well hate it there but that just means he hates his orthodox religion, not that he's stuck in a cult. Like there's simply a level of destruction of autonomy that I'm not seeing with the children of the watch. If anyone wanted to leave they would. In season 1 it seemed like they were together for primarily survival reasons. And they're still in survival mode but it's not as bad. Like ffs they were like "hey by our rules you technically became one of us but if you want to leave you can leave" like that's SO LAX. COME ON.

#ch posts #turning off reblogs for my own peace #but the argumentation im seeing is so stupid

[emilybrontesghost]

So for the past few years I’ve really been thinking about femininity as well as engaging with it more intentionally. This is something that has been a more recent occurrence for me, and as more time goes on my belief that it is directly correlated to realizing my queer identity has become even more cemented. “Femme” as an identity has likewise become one that really resonates with the person I have become. I know a lot of people have very strong (and also conflicting) definitions of what a “femme” is and who gets to call themselves one. I also know that many queer women are concerned that straight women are co-opting the label of “femme” for their own use and I agree with them that it is problematic. It is also reductive to equate the identity of “femme” as being interchangeable with “feminine.” Femme is more than just a word that denotes femininity of presentation. This might just seem like a matter of semantics to a lot of people but there are more connotations attached to “femme” than simply appearing to conform to society’s ideals of femininity. (The key word here being “seeming.”) And this is where I think the concern comes into play from queer women when straight women start using the word “femme” to apply to themselves. This is because there is an essential difference between straight women and queer women, and that is that straight women fit the paradigm of femininity as defined by our heteropatriarchal society in a way that it is impossible for queer women to do. No matter how feminine a queer woman presents she is still inherently an outlaw, a subversive transgressor to larger society because her femininity is not performative for the benefit of men. Queer women do not center men or their attractions in the way that straight women do. “Femme” then is a distinctive moniker that is separate from just being feminine in appearance. Of course all of this is something I have learned through my exploration of queer studies, it isn’t something I have always known or been aware of, but it really has been a tremendous help to me in terms of recovering and healing my relationship with femininity.

For many years I rejected aspects of femininity because it made me uncomfortable. To me it felt like a performance that I didn’t want to participate in but on some level I was expected to by men and by adults and society at large. I was also fed seemingly contradictory messages on what was and what was not acceptable in terms of being feminine but also what the acceptable amount of femininity to display was and in what circumstances. Femininity seemed like something which other people decided the parameters of, not me. In the same breath I was being sent the message that I should take care of my appearance, I was also being told that I shouldn’t be too high maintenance. It’s not hard to see why all of this felt like a trap. It seemed like a game that was rigged for failure and asked so much of me and then gave nothing in return. Is it any wonder it felt like something to run from? And so run I did. When I was a child femininity had been a source of joy. It was princess dresses and Barbie dolls and tea parties. There was a certain innocence to girlhood because it was femininity, if not entirely devoid of societal expectations, with at least fewer of them. It started to get worse as I got older because adults start expecting things of young women they don’t of children, so the older I got the more I rejected feminine things other girls my age were doing and by extension the types of girls who did those things. I am ashamed to say that I bought into the “not like other girls” narrative and the “pick me narrative.” I thought I deserved a pat on the back for being “cool” for not wearing heels or makeup and because I didn’t engage in feminine hobbies or forms of dress in the way other girls did, and when I did have to do it, it was with a begrudging sense of obligation coupled with embarrassment. I was so uncomfortable with myself and I thought it was because I just wasn’t a feminine person and that I just didn’t fit in with girls who were. I also hated how I felt like femininity was expected of me by men, and that to be attractive to them I would be expected to look a certain way. I didn’t like the idea of men viewing me as feminine because it made me feel lesser. I also really had developed a dislike to how feminine looking my body had become as I got older. Curves were popping up all over my once skinny childlike body and by the time I hit puberty my body had started taking on a very different shape and I started to resent it. I wasn’t really comfortable with the idea of men liking my body. I had trouble believing anyone could like my body because I didn’t even like it myself. This went on through my teens until I was in my early twenties.

I got into my first wlw relationship at the age of 21. I’d been questioning my sexuality and I wanted to see if I was as straight as I’d always assumed I was. I met my first gf online and that relationship really taught me a lot about myself. For the first time ever I didn’t feel any sense of embarrassment about my womanhood. I had never felt so understood on an intimate level. My gf and I could talk about everything and shared experiences that I just simply wouldn’t have been able to with a man. We could stay up late into the night talking about everything from body insecurities, to bras, to period cramps. These were things that so many women are made to feel ashamed of but with her it was easy because I knew she wasn’t going to judge me. I started to appreciate aspects of my body because she enjoyed them in ways that I never had before. It was empowering and it didn’t feel like I was being fetishized. I feel so much more comfortable now in dresses and skirts and ribbons and things that before I felt a lingering self-consciousness often for liking or the sense I was doing it for other people’s benefit. I also feel more comfortable with my identity as a woman, separate from my presentation. I don’t feel I have to make myself small or diminish my unique experiences as a female person. Identifying as femme and embracing my wlw identity has helped me eliminate my internalized misogyny and be proud of being a woman and enjoying things associated with women. I love being a woman who loves women and getting to finally feel that I can be feminine without feeling like it’s for male consumption. I love being femme!

#femme identity #wlw femme #bisexual femme #femme lesbian #sapphic femme

[the--highlanders]

choose violence ask game (loving the name of that btw) - 8, 16, & 23?

8. common fandom opinion that everyone is wrong about

(this fandom is so small that I don't want to sound like I'm vagueblogging or @-ing someone or anything so I'm just gonna preface this by saying this also goes for plenty of licensed media)

oh man ok. at risk of sounding like a total killjoy who takes everything too seriously & looks too much into stuff. I'm pretty sensitive about. primitivism in the way jamie gets portrayed?? is the best way I can think to describe it?? anything that implies that where & when he comes from means that he's inherently less intelligent, or equates his lack of knowledge on some things with him being stupid. can't stand him being reduced to dumb guy who hits stuff. idiot who has no critical thinking skills or reasoning.

and like, I get that it's a fairly common assumption, the idea that people from the past weren't as smart because they didn't know as much (even setting aside the devaluing of /different/ ways of knowing & understanding) - but, say, victoria never gets this treatment. despite also being from the past. which then leads you to think, hey, why would people make that assumption about jamie and not about victoria?

and then you get to a bunch of ideas which have been kicking around since. before jamie's time, real-world-historically speaking. which depict the highlands as savage, as populated by 'wild' people, by - well - 'primitives'. speakers of a primitive language. violent, at worst, strong, at best, but never intelligent. & this is all starting to sound a lot like the ideas that buttress colonialism and biological determinism, isn't it?

idk. this is a silly 60s family tv show & a very very small online fandom. it's kind of not that deep. but any time jamie gets written off as being inherently stupid (often /because/ of where he comes from), and any time that idea is the foundation of a joke, it rubs me the wrong way, and this is why.

16. you can't understand why so many people like this thing (characterization, trope, headcanon, etc)

gfdhkjsg once again this is a v small fandom so 'so many people' is kinda like..... 2 people max probably. & also I've been sort of keeping more or less to myself for a couple years now in terms of actually discussing thoughts & headcanons (except you obviously and also @ettelwenailinon who is always right about everything despite not being super active in dr who fandom on tumblr anymore <3)

gonna go with shipping jamie and victoria tbh. absolutely no hate if you do bc I can definitely see where it comes from in canon/behind the scenes stuff but it is just,,, not for me at all, and so antithecal to how I write/interpret their characters.

23. ship you've unwillingly come around to

tenrose?? weirdly?? not that I'd say I actively ship it (there is one (1) tenrose fic in my ao3 bookmarks but it's really there bc it's a pretty charming magical realism au and the voices of all the characters are just so spot on rather than bc I ever crave reading about the ship) but. when I got into dr who in 2013 there felt like there was a pretty solid line between rtd fans and moffat fans. & I have always vibed with moffat's era more (neither of them are above criticism obviously, the scifi fairytale aesthetic/tone of moffat's era is just so so so so tailor-made for me personally).

and for some reason tenrose and elevenriver were kind of. bundled into that opposition?? not sure if that was just in my head or something other people noticed/experienced but I felt like if you were a moffat fan you had to ship elevenriver & if you were an rtd fan you had to ship tenrose, and they were like. rivals. (yes I did try very half-heartedly to enjoy elevenriver. no I never succeeded). so I always had this thing of like, I don't like ten, I don't like tenrose.

like I said I still don't actively ship it, I don't get any warm fuzzy feelings from their relationship, but I did go back into rtd's era looking to actively enjoy stuff (after being tired of really not enjoying uh. recent seasons ajhksglf) and found that I didn't hate the concept of tenrose as much as I used to. I genuinely believed they liked each other, I felt the hubris of their relationship worked and built well narratively. never thought that ship would get a redemption arc in my head but I've definitely gained more appreciation for its role in the narrative.

#replies #galacticlamps #oughfkdj the first answer here is like #something that's been simmering away in my head for literal years #& i don't think i've ever actually posted #just whined to bára about repeatedly fhjkdslgjhdkg

[notbigondoors]

{out of equations} Here comes a little random rant about SWORD’s treatment of Vision... under the cut for some descriptive, graphic language.

Can we talk about this scene? As terrible as this is, I think a lot of us still have this level of desensitization to it because he’s not a flesh and bone human. This is truly horrific if you really stop and think about what you’re looking at. Imagine for a second... that this was done to an actual human being. Setting aside, of course, that the body would have rotted after five years. Let’s assume it wasn’t and it was kept on ice. How would this scene have been different? Because I think for many of us, there would definitely be a difference in how we would take this scene if it was with a human body.

Imagine... a human body being dismembered... pulled apart and dissected... veins and arteries strung about where Vision’s wires are. Limbs removed. Their head removed... just ripped off. For some people, decapitation is incredibly upsetting. I mean, it’s always upsetting, but for some people it borders on a phobia or even a trigger. They can’t look at it, read about it, or even talk about it. The very idea is so terrifying and sickening to them that they can’t deal with it at all. I’ve known people with this trigger, and if they had seen that scene with Vision, it would have thrown them into a panic attack at the very least. Especially if Vision had been a character they really cared about, seeing him like that would have been traumatizing.

When you think about it that way, it really puts into perspective how terrible this is. It’s not just that SWORD had his body when they shouldn’t have, or that they didn’t let him be buried, or that they wanted to do something else with it, as bad as all that is. It’s also that they completely desecrated the body. Ripped it all up. Imagine that happening to a human. Like, there's a lack of gore with Vision because there’s no blood, you can’t see any bones, or jagged flesh dangling, or anything, so I feel like for some people it’s easier to see Vision like that then another human character.

That means that we are thinking about him differently, whether we want to admit it or not. And really, think about it, would Disney allow this to be shown in one of their movies if it was a human body? It would be much too graphically gory. So... there is a difference, at least in the minds of the creators, between this being done to a human and this being done to Vision. I don’t have a point to this post except to just be like... this scene shouldn’t just be brushed aside because of a lack of gore or it somehow being cleaner or easier because he looks like a machine instead of a human and there’s no blood or many recognizable anatomy inside him. This was depraved, horrific, and cruel, especially to those who loved him... like Wanda.

That’s something else that can’t be underestimated in my opinion, is the effect this must have had on Wanda. Think about all she’d suffered up to that point and how invested emotionally she was in Vision. For Wanda, there is no difference between Vision and a living person with feelings and rights and meaning in her life. So she is essentially seeing the same level of upsetting gore in her mind as anyone else would looking at a dismembered human. Just think about that for a second. To her, there is no desensitization. It’s not cleaner. It’s not easier. It’s her dismembered lover fileted like a fish. How would you react to seeing someone you love like that?

This is just me thinking about how this scene would I think be perceived or received differently if it had been a human being, and the fact that there is that difference means there is some inherent bias in how we think about Vision, even if we say there isn’t. Which is both interesting from a psychological standpoint and sad. I think this scene needs to stay disturbing and maybe should have bee

*shrugs* Again, no point to this, I’m just in an analyzing mood tonight. I saw that other post and had to write something about it. 

#{ out of equations } ᵒᵒᶜ #tw: gore #tw: dismemberment #tw: decapitation

[uwusillygirl]

i truly loved reading your thoughts about this. it would be so fun if maybe you could occasionally post recs of your favorite books/movies/shows and maybe briefly share opinions on them? only if that would be fun for you of course! i'm just saying i, and i'm positive many of your readers/followers, would be delighted to see them!

you are absolutely right regarding NP featuring a parade of horrifying clueless men masquerading as doms where all of marianne's masochistic tendencies seem to get repeatedly exploited without the scenes being "resolved" in any meaningful or helpful way. & instead of an ideal result of her feeling somewhat better and at peace, they leave her the same raw bleeding wound of a girl. and your take on connell needing to prove to himself he's good and good TO marianne when in reality many times he has been anything but... really brilliant. i don't think i've ever thought of it that way, as lost as i was in my harrumphing about what i took as rooney's repeated portrayal of slow vanilla sex being equated to true quasi-soulmate-bond love and affection. though i am first to admit i am a very sensitive girl who will immediately take things to heart if i see myself in a piece of fiction, and sometimes miss the bigger literary analysis picture. i'm so glad i sent an ask! also lol @ paul and daisy definitely sacrificing some canon information to say get behind me BDSM baddies of all types we got y'all. (also idk if you've seen/heard but paul mescal is in a film called "aftersun" that i believe is playing in select theaters right now which from my understanding is a very dreamy and melancholy potentially-hysterical-tear-inducing two hours of him being a young girl dad. i have not seen it yet because i think it might actually break my brain in a very dangerous way that i am not equipped for atm, and i am already pre-mourning my sanity and emotional stability for when i finally bite the bullet)

also as someone who has full on sobbed to your beautiful cathartic words many times over, i am grateful to you for exploring freaky mentally unstable girls who maybe should re-evaluate their relationship to sex but also maybe shouldn't because sometimes it's ok to be insane and slutty if you have a partner to support you through it! if drugs can't fix you maybe having 15 orgasms in a row can! even though i think i am different from your chrissy in many ways, i have never felt so validated by a character and never felt so hopeful and fulfilled seeing her clawing her way to happiness. sometimes it feels like you've taken stuff from the darkest stickiest ugliest parts of my brain and put it on paper and i'm like ok well now i've got to have a three week crisis to deal with this now, except it usually ends in some necessary acceptance and potential healing and always at least a temporary period of bright hope for the future (which is so difficult to come by some days). so thank YOU!

i loved reading what you had to say, as well! thank you so much for sharing (u actually got my brain all crazy and now i'm writing a little something that'll hopefully be up tonight lmao)! i would be SO happy to share recs (including ones tailored to specific interests!) if that's something people would like! anyone can lmk! i watch and read a shit ton for my work, actually, so i'm always so happy to share thoughts. it'll give my loved ones a break from my random excitable rants, too.

going a little out of order here, but i have found that the day i let go of trying to understand, rid of, or narrativize my sexuality, gender expression, and sexual interests and just say "whether it came from some event or is inherent or is a choice, it just is what it is, and that's okay" it paradoxically became way less of an issue for me, and way easier to express what i like and want just for the sake of it. in my opinion, there's only so much exploring we can do before it becomes a sort of ouroboros of "i'm trying to work stuff out for me" turning into "i'm trying to be sexually palatable in a new way".

"get behind me bdsm baddies" is so fucking funny. i have actually seen aftersun and was one of the original hysterical criers over it. i can confirm it is a life ruiner, and yet i'm going in for a rewatch on sunday. best movie of the year in my opinion!

i am so flattered that first one's free has moved you! it's more than okay to be insane and slutty! i don't know you, but can pretty confidently say that your darkest stickiest ugliest parts of your brain are not that bad if my chrissy expresses them - she may think she's a mess but i think she (and anyone who resonates with her) is doing just great and is a good person deserving of good things <3 if i didn't believe that then i'd also be so fucked lmao.

hope the near future brings you those good things! glad to hear you're finding spaces to feel hopeful.

please send an ask whenever, i'm so glad you reached out!

#asks #partial first one's free inspiration

[romantic-reveries]

I’m either losing my mind or having a spiritual awakening.

I feel—maybe consumed is too strong of a word, but a pull lately to change. I’ve been leaning so much into manifestation and what manifestation actually is versus how I used to perceive it (woo woo magic versus being something that’s actually very grounded and a common thread through so many things, so much overlap in things that are considered “logical” like science and psychology, and quotes from great thinkers, so-called “geniuses” throughout history)

Realizing how much of life is perception and the stories you tell yourself in your head, which are made up, in large part, from the experiences you had in your formative years, and the dynamics with your caregivers. How that follows you unless you actively change it. How you can only achieve the things you believe and how there are layers to that—you could attract the most wonderful people, opportunities, experiences, and shy from them if you believe you’re fundamentally unworthy, just to confirm what you’ve already believed of yourself.

How the universe is a whole set of repeating patterns, down to the atoms. Think rings in trees, and fractals (tree branches and human veins), and waves, stalagmites. It makes sense that humans, too, are their own repeating pattern on a macro scale (we all sort of come out the same, with similar inherent thoughts and experiences, which, yes, some is conditioned, but I believe some just comes with being human; heartbeat and breath patterns, movement patterns), and also a micro scale—habits. We crave familiarity and comfort, even to our own detriment. We carve thought habits, and physical habits, and we become them. We rarely break pattern without conscious effort.

It seems so simple, laid out like that. The world is just you reflected. Your identity, your repeated thoughts and habits, your beliefs.

Yet I keep turning it over and over in my head—all the synchronicities and godwinks I’ve experienced, the way I’ve seen the patterns of my life, of my feelings, of my thoughts. I keep mulling it around, like a flavor I’m trying to parse out. Like I’m working on a math equation and the answer constantly feels like it’s RIGHT there but I just can’t quite figure out where I’m going wrong. Like I’m missing one piece of a puzzle.

But I know one thing: I feel more alive than I’ve felt in a very long time.

#personal

[ughmyreality]

do you have any tips to share on writing?

Hey, thank you for asking. I'm no stickler for grammar or a linguistic expert, so keep that in mind. This will also be a lowkey long post because I genuinely appreciate that you asked! It makes me feel like I know what I'm doing. I will say however, just start writing. Don't worry if something isn't "correct" because the reality is many of the so-called rules of grammar aren't even rules, but rather suggestions. People who truly enjoy what you write aren't going to be in utter shock because you made mistakes. I'm sure this post is littered with mistakes but it's the thought that matters.

I think it's also important to develop your own writing style. For example, I personally don't like wasting time writing things like, This person said "this" or "blah blah blah" she said. Because if you know who's in the conversation, I feel there's no point and it gets overly redundant repeating who's speaking. Decide what you like to do and stick to it. Others, much to my dismay, might not put quotations around anything. I think as long as someone can tell you know what you're doing then everything else can be put on the back burner.

If your goal is to be a professional writer on the other hand, just know that there are certain things you'll need to know and others that are irrelevant. Try not to get bogged down by the endless information you'll find. Like how 'dog' is the morpheme of 'dogs', how they advise that you don't end a sentence with a preposition, or don't split an infinitive even though it's done all the time (to quickly go) which is not inherently incorrect. Instead, I'd suggest looking at someone else's work and analyzing that. If you can detect things then you will be able to write them. Try identifying the parts of speech and how it's being used. You might even find that somethings come naturally, especially if what you're reading is in your native tongue, because it's apart of your innate grammar.

As far as coming up with ideas, don't shy away from getting inspiration from else where. I feel like there's a lowkey negative connotation to the idea of getting inspired by other's work but that doesn't equate to flat out stealing. If not that, despite how cliche it is, try listening to music. Often music can invoke such strong emotions, that the ideas will come naturally. If all else fails, gain inspiration from your own life. Even the most mundane things can sound extraordinary if you have the will to write it correctly. For instance, if you've never read the poem "We are Seven", its a girl explaining that there are seven siblings including herself despite the fact two are dead. Just hearing that on it's own sounds boring but I personally think it's really thought provoking when you read it. It makes you question whether or not you agree with the girl or the man. What becomes of you in the eyes of society when you die?

Lastly, don't worry too much. Your average Joe probably won't notice a problem in your writing and those who are "highly" skilled writer's won't mind. Everyone has to have a starting point so even if in your head it sounds bad, it might be someone's Roman Empire. I find that a lot of the people who harshly criticize are have a warped perspective. They simply want to say something under the guise of being constructive to be mean. All in all, the most important thing is that you enjoy what you've written and the process of writing. Don't write for the people, write for you.

#writing #creative writing #fic writing

[smokingtiger]

Wait what ..you don’t think that Tae and Jennie is dating for more than a year? (Lobe that It’s like the best question to know what IQ the person has)

It's not that I don't believe it or I don't think it has some legitimate grounding, it's just that I won't say it's 100% real.

In my first-ever post about Taennie (which I highly recommend that you read before you make any assumptions about where I stand!) I said:

"I still firmly stand by what I said: I think it's fine to have your suspicions/suspect that something is real, but you are to take the opinions and words of BTS/BlackPink at face value and accept them for what they are. You can think that Taehyung is dating Jennie, but it's still their private life (and yes, enunciating their, because many people tend to forget that Jennie is very much a part of this equation), so their words (or the lack thereof) should be respected and considered the truth."

In an ask, I answered whether or not I thought the photos were staged:

"If I'm being honest... I never gave this incident too much of a deep dive, but only because I didn't want to. In my first-ever post about shipping, I made it clear that I was uncomfortable with the idea of using/spreading videos and/or photos taken without the artist's consent. But, you're asking if I think it was filmed intentionally, and to that, I can only answer with a simple shrug. I tend to treat any piece of media that falls outside BigHit's personal guidelines as candid..."

Also, in my first-ever post about shipping, which lays the groundwork as to why I think/feel the way I do, I stated:

"UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, DO NOT SUPPORT SASAENG/STALKER PHOTOS, EVEN IF IT'S OF YOUR SHIP. Some shippers are far too comfortable using photos that were taken of BTS without their consent as ammo."

A lot of the things that people use as evidence comes from leaks or candid photos, which I'm not super comfortable talking about. I feel this way about photos of Jikook, too. Jennie suffered a severe and disgusting cyber-attack, and I really would rather not indulge or validate the leaker and their intentions to compromise someone's privacy. Those photos were private and were never meant to be leaked to the public.

Do I know if they've been dating for over a year? I don't know, I'm not friends with either of them, who am I, a stranger on the internet, to state the length of their relationship?

Someone's reluctance to be super vocal about a certain pairing does not mean they're dumb or that they're trying to make conspiracy theories -- which trust me, I saw the absolute craziness that unfolded that night. Taking about actors and cosplayers and blah blah blah all that type of nonsense.

I just don't think it's any of my business or an obligation to state whether or not I think something is 100% real, because you will never catch me doing that. Not unless Jennie or Taehyung explicitly states it. It's just my way of honoring their silence or showing my respect.

I've always said that speculations are fine, people inherently have those, but it's sort of like when you're with someone on the dl or you like someone, and people keep pestering you over and over to just come out with it -- you'd rather them leave you alone, right?

If you're coming on my ask to be malicious or cruel, which I'm not really sure if you are, I don't really understand it. I've always stated that this is my opinion... even on my GCF in Tokyo post, I made it clear that it was how I personally interpreted it and that people were open to their own perceptions of the trip. I never said that it was 100% the truth. I utilized primary sources and made educated guesses based on what I believed. I even said my interpretation was quite literal. Never said I hated Jikook, or that Jikook was any less valid... I just felt as if it was not my place to assume if the video was a love letter or not, and that's fine.

Have a wonderful evening, anon.

#ask #taennie #taehyung #jennie

[runekeepershymnal]

I lost the post I was gonna reblog this from, so:

you and the hat man

oh boy you're fighting demons aren't you. it's like you're in a constant staring competition with something that's always in the peripheral. what the fuck. (at least, that's how people who don't know you would react). at this point you've probably gotten pretty familiar with the hat man. he's a reliable kind of guy. keeps to himself, sure, but you can trust him to be there. maybe a haunting isn't too bad if it's never left your side. you can only imagine what it will be like when he's not there any more.

...don't you love when these just go for your throat? Because this is dead on, as much as I had hoped for some kind of dialectic that, if balanced, would create some equilibrium, Temperance instead of Two of Swords, which isn't really feasible when one half of the equation (you, i.e. me) is inherently unbalanced.

It's like when you accidentally share the zoom window and there's an infinite recursion of you, whatever you're doing at the time, smaller and smaller. No matter how many times you split the window, you're still in there, making less and less sense. Presumably, small enough up in the corner, there's an eight bit you. There's a you who's been reduced to a single pixel, but still trapped in the same context.

(Or does the water get him instead? Nobody knows, particle man.)

The hat man probably isn't thrilled about the situation either. Being on the peripheral of the context is still within the context. Both of us are more defined by the negative space we occupy in said context than any actual existence.

I haven't even been drinking tonight. I thought about it, but then I thought, nah, I'll just have a sinus headache tomorrow, and the weather's been playing merry hell with them already.

There's a lot going on at the moment. And I think I'm much lonelier about it than I realized.

Shame the hat man doesn't do hugs, I guess.

#uquiz #unrelated to fandom #what is your duality? #you and the hat man #and a bunch of existential whining from me which is frankly embarrassing from someone sober #i genuinely don't know if i want to be the signal or the noise

[timeandspacelord]

As promised, some slightly more coherent thoughts based on my tags here. There are many

Okay, so Juris' whole thing was the reciprocity that was supposed to be inherent in the amplifier system, right? For him, that meant he and the dragon killed each other at the same moment and then their spirits sort of fused and he got shapeshifting powers. And then he basically gifted that power to Zoya since she was his protege.

For Alina (again, this is more obvious in the show bc as far as I remember, there wasn't a big moment quite like this in the book), it meant being able to take control of her power from Aleks bc even though he was the one who killed the stag, it and by extension Ilya wanted her to have its power. That reciprocity was there.

Since living beings can still act as amplifiers (only when in direct contact with a Grisha), it would make sense that death wouldn't have to be a part of this equation, especially since both of the above examples involve one side essentially gifting their power to the other. And, in fact, it canonically doesn't! Because when Alina finally has her "a door once opened can be crossed in either direction" moment with Aleks and yoinks some of his power, that links them, allows them to draw (at least a bit) on each other's powers. Theoretically, if they were on the same side, it might allow them to strengthen each other or amplify each other's power. The exchange of power is what does that. (You may notice that their connection stuff doesn't happen until after Alina has her moment at the end of S&S, once again reinforcing that idea of reciprocity.)

And I do think Ilya Morozova might've figured that out, later in life, after he made his daughter an amplifier to save her life and fell out of the history books. We don't actually know what he did for the rest of his life or if he even died or was just like. fuckin hiding from his dumbass homicidal grandson. It's possible he and Juris talked and theorized at some point. (I do like that idea bc Juris really seems to have taken Ilya's ideas and broken them open and fleshed them out, and I like the idea of them acting as sounding boards for each other.) I think Morozova might've deliberately chosen someone to receive the power he put into the world who would be willing to destroy the heir that was too similar to his younger self but do everything to save the heir that was a reminder of his worldview change. Which is a bit off topic, but worth mentioning.

So! Imagine a world where people know about this theory of reciprocity when it comes to amplifiers. It's not about killing something to gain its power, it's about the mutual giving of power. Sometimes that comes in the form of mutual death (and maybe that's the only way for shapeshifting to happen idk), but that's not a necessary part of the process. It's about forming a bond through which you can share power. I don't know how that works, obviously what happened between Aleks and Alina is non-replicable, but the fact that it happened and that this concept is very much a big aspect of the overarching themes in this series implies that it can be done in better, more consensual and less damaging ways. Ways that don't involve Merzost, but instead involve the deeper understanding of the transient nature of the Grisha powers and how they relate to living things. (See how these ideas are all connected?)

Pretend, for a moment, that this concept is not fundamentally story-breaking for the original trilogy, and imagine an Alina who knows this. Alina who has been dreaming of the stag, who can sense that it wants her to have its power. And Mal who's been tracking it through the winter into the spring and one day, when he's the last member of his tracking party left, he finds its shed antlers. And he takes them with him as proof, and when he sees Alina again, he gifts them to her, not knowing that he just undermined Aleksander's whole plan by giving Alina exactly what she needs to have David Fabrikate her an amplifier. And how fucking badass it would be for Alina to have a whole-ass giant stag as a familiar. And then the sea whip. And by the time they figure out about Mal, well, why would she need anything but a lock of his hair, braided neatly around her wrist?

But AU aside, imagine the future of the actual Grishaverse. When people figure this out (people other than the Saints, that is - I 100% think Grigori's bear could've been an amplifier) and start taking animals as their familiars instead of their bones as their amplifiers. Combined with the way Grisha powers will start changing as the ideas surrounding Grisha power start to evolve? The world will be so different! It's so interesting to think about!

#I did write this at my friends originally so apologies that it definitely sounds like it lmao #shadow and bone #s&b #the grishaverse #tgt #grishaverse #rule of wolves #king of scars #kos #I have so many thoughts about this universe y'all

[drmoeabbas]

What is science communication and Astronomy?

Astrophysics-related science communication initially seems to be a simple task in many ways. Astrophysics is a branch of physics that uses flashy imagery, grandiose ideas, and bold claims. Many people are drawn to the marvels of space and the deeper questions that Astronomy can raise, such as where we came from, whether we are alone in the universe, and how the universe first came into being.

But as soon as we attempt to connect the public with astronomical academia, Moe Abbas, a Science Communicator, runs into roadblocks and a precarious balance between maintaining objectivity and retaining the audience's interest.

Science Communication and Astronomy

The interaction between science and society is the centerpiece of the master's specialization in communication and society. The general public is becoming more interested in and dependent upon scientific information. Scientists must also be accountable to the public for their research at the same time. With this specialization, you combine in-depth training in science communication with top-notch astronomy research to bridge the gap between experts and the general public. After finishing, you will have the knowledge and abilities needed to either work as an astronomer with an emphasis on communication or as a science communicator with a strong background in astronomy.

Know Your Listeners:

Knowing who is in front of you is essential. Of course, it matters whether you are speaking to a young person or a couple of elderly people who are out for an afternoon trip. But more importantly, you'll want to get a sense of how much background information and prior interest each person has. It's important to capitalize on someone's interest in the subject and show appreciation for all they already know, but keep in mind that there might be others in the group who haven't been overly interested in astronomy and are just following along.

Keep it informal.

All of us who had the chance to go to school likely had dull lessons and dry recitations of concepts and equations. We don't want to send people back to their physics classes filled with self-doubt and fear of failing.

Moe Abbas and the team always make it a point to demonstrate that physics is much more diverse than what we typically learn in school, where important theoretical ideas are given precedence over fascinating applications.

Mohammed Abbas, Science Communicator says, “I felt it was important to reassure people, especially adults, that just because they may have received poor marks in math class does not mean they are unable to comprehend the concepts of astrophysics. Everyone has access to mathematics, but nobody is inherent "too stupid for math's." Everything depends on the explanation used. The words I use to explain something to you may be incorrect. If something is unclear to you, I'll need to use different or more effective language.”

Since we are doing physics, practically all equations important to astrophysics have physical applications. We can therefore explain general relativity to you even if you have no idea what a tensor is.

Let's talk.

Science The best forms of communication are discussions rather than lectures. Moe Abbas, Science Communicator, always makes an effort to interact with the audience, whether it be through their questions or by asking them how they would explain certain items, about their forecasts for certain things, or about open astronomy problems like the question of whether there is life in the universe.

By including audiences in conversations and guiding them along the path of scientific and

Astronomy

conduct, we can encourage audiences to become engaged with science, which is all about using our minds to understand nature. By leading a general audience down the same thought processes and examining scientific problem-solving, it is surprisingly simple to demonstrate how scientists think in this way.

#Astronomy #Dr. Moe #Moe Abbas #Dr. Moe Abbas #Moe Science Communicator #Science