livseses

[livseses]

[livseses]

girl who wont shut up about how she "loves a man in uniform" but as she keeps talking it becomes clear she's talking about butches in customer service jobs

[livseses]

[livseses]

Absolutely love the vibes this guy is bringing to the table

[livseses]

unavoidable that you will be the villain in someone else's story. You will be painted in an unfavorable light. You will be the irredeemable one. and all of this will happen despite how nice you might usually be or how kind or how respectful or how warm. and you will just have to move on.

[livseses]

unavoidable that you will be the villain in someone else's story. You will be painted in an unfavorable light. You will be the irredeemable one. and all of this will happen despite how nice you might usually be or how kind or how respectful or how warm. and you will just have to move on.

[livseses]

unavoidable that you will be the villain in someone else's story. You will be painted in an unfavorable light. You will be the irredeemable one. and all of this will happen despite how nice you might usually be or how kind or how respectful or how warm. and you will just have to move on.

[livseses]

Plegg culture is blaming your ability to just get reeeeaaallly into your characters mindsets on autism...

.

[livseses]

It's so fun to still have people talking about how we're not real casually as though that isn't crazy hurtful. Y'all should know better. Or did you forget that a bunch of doctors currently and historically think you don't exist? Having your lived experience be debate fuel isn't a fun experience.

[livseses]

[livseses]

So, there's a dirty little secret in indie publishing a lot of people won't tell you, and if you aren't aware of it, self-publishing feels even scarier than it actually is.

There's a subset of self-published indie authors who write a ludicrous number of books a year, we're talking double digit releases of full novels, and these folks make a lot of money telling you how you can do the same thing. A lot of them feature in breathless puff pieces about how "competitive" self-publishing is as an industry now.

A lot of these authors aren't being completely honest with you, though. They'll give you secrets for time management and plotting and outlining and marketing and what have you. But the way they're able to write, edit, and publish 10+ books a year, by and large, is that they're hiring ghostwriters.

They're using upwork or fiverr to find people to outline, draft, edit, and market their books. Most of them, presumably, do write some of their own stuff! But many "prolific" indie writers are absolutely using ghostwriters to speed up their process, get higher Amazon best-seller ratings, and, bluntly, make more money faster.

When you see some godawful puff piece floating around about how some indie writer is thinking about having to start using AI to "stay competitive in self-publishing", the part the journalist isn't telling you is that the 'indie writer' in question is planning to use AI instead of paying some guy on Upwork to do the drafting.

If you are writing your books the old fashioned way and are trying to build a readerbase who cares about your work, you don't need to use AI to 'stay competitive', because you're not competing with these people. You're playing an entirely different game.

[livseses]

once again reminding you all that accusing someone of faking their disorders or trauma is worlds less important (and more stupid) than pointing out questionable or harmful things they did or are doing.

[livseses]

you know disabled rights include the rights of disabled people to have children. regardless if those children are also disabled. any mesure to restrict disabled people from having children is simple eugenics

[livseses]

For systems in therapy:

Slow progress is still progress. You are allowed to not fully trust your therapist(s), even if you're months or years in. Alters are not required to trust your therapist(s) off the bat. They are distrustful for a reason, often due to trauma. Allow themselves to watch from the sidelines for their own comfort.

[livseses]

Hey, to all those who are upset about the recent wave of anti-endos in general plural tags, I just want to remind you all that they go against Tumblr's community guidelines and you can report them as such! Under the section where the guidelines go over spam, it's noted that users should not "put tags on [their] posts that will mislead or deceive searchers". Using endogenic friendly tags coined by endogenic systems and/or supporters when your blog is not endogenic friendly most definitely counts. So, you're free to report these posts as spam when you see them! I cannot say for certain whether Tumblr will do anything, but if nothing else, it is certainly satisfying to know a report has been filed against them for their mis-tagging bullshit. Plus, the more people that report them for this breach of guidelines, the more likely it is that Tumblr will do something about it. (Don't go making excessive claims, of course – just throw in a quick report where you can if you feel like it.) It's small, but at least it's something.

[livseses]

So what I’ve learned from the past couple months of being really loud about being a bi woman on Tumblr is: A lot of young/new LGBT+ people on this site do not understand that some of the stuff they’re saying comes across to other LGBT+ people as offensive, aggressive, or threatening. And when they actually find out the history and context, a lot of them go, “Oh my god, I’m so sorry, I never meant to say that.”

Like, “queer is a slur”: I get the impression that people saying this are like… oh, how I might react if I heard someone refer to all gay men as “f*gs”. Like, “Oh wow, that’s a super loaded word with a bunch of negative freight behind it, are you really sure you want to put that word on people who are still very raw and would be alarmed, upset, or offended if they heard you call them it, no matter what you intended?”

So they’re really surprised when self-described queers respond with a LOT of hostility to what feels like a well-intentioned reminder that some people might not like it. 

That’s because there’s a history of “political lesbians”, like Sheila Jeffreys, who believe that no matter their sexual orientation, women should cut off all social contact with men, who are fundamentally evil, and only date the “correct” sex, which is other women. Political lesbians claim that relationships between women, especially ones that don’t contain lust, are fundamentally pure, good, and  unproblematic. They therefore regard most of the LGBT community with deep suspicion, because its members are either way too into sex, into the wrong kind of sex, into sex with men, are men themselves, or somehow challenge the very definitions of sex and gender. 

When “queer theory” arrived in the 1980s and 1990s as an organized attempt by many diverse LGBT+ people in academia to sit down and talk about the social oppressions they face, political lesbians like Jeffreys attacked it harshly, publishing articles like “The Queer Disappearance of Lesbians”, arguing that because queer theory said it was okay to be a man or stop being a man or want to have sex with a man, it was fundamentally evil and destructive. And this attitude has echoed through the years; many LGBT+ people have experience being harshly criticized by radical feminists because being anything but a cis “gold star lesbian” (another phrase that gives me war flashbacks) was considered patriarchal, oppressive, and basically evil.

And when those arguments happened, “queer” was a good umbrella to shelter under, even when people didn’t know the intricacies of academic queer theory; people who identified as “queer” were more likely to be accepting and understanding, and “queer” was often the only label or community bisexual and nonbinary people didn’t get chased out of. If someone didn’t disagree that people got to call themselves queer, but didn’t want to be called queer themselves, they could just say “I don’t like being called queer” and that was that. Being “queer” was to being LGBT as being a “feminist” was to being a woman; it was opt-in.

But this history isn’t evident when these interactions happen. We don’t sit down and say, “Okay, so forty years ago there was this woman named Sheila, and…” Instead we queers go POP! like pufferfish, instantly on the defensive, a red haze descending over our vision, and bellow, “DO NOT TELL ME WHAT WORDS I CANNOT USE,” because we cannot find a way to say, “This word is so vital and precious to me, I wouldn’t be alive in the same way if I lost it.” And then the people who just pointed out that this word has a history, JEEZ, way to overreact, go away very confused and off-put, because they were just trying to say.

But I’ve found that once this is explained, a lot of people go, “Oh wow, okay, I did NOT mean to insinuate that, I didn’t realize that I was also saying something with a lot of painful freight to it.”

And that? That gives me hope for the future.

[livseses]

All emotions are morally neutral, including love. Whether your ability to feel love is intense, limited, or completely nonexistent has no bearing on whether or not you are a good person.