#ask jules | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

vellichorbindery · 6 months

Note

hi <3 im new to fandom and had a question. so binding fics and selling them is not allowed from what i gathered but i was wondering why? because there are plenty of artists with patreons who also make money drawing fanart. i was curious what the difference is and why one can be monetized and the other not? if u can help me understand this tysm <3

Hiiii! Welcome to the fandom, it’s such a fun ass space 👋🏻🫶🏼

First things first, I’m not the best person to answer this because I’m not an artist, so if any of my artist friends wanna help out, feel free to jump in.

From a binding perspective, when I first started out, I found out about the legality behind selling fanfics and chose to be respectful and ethical for that reason. It feels so icky to me to see binds of Manacled or Art Heist on Etsy for hundreds of $$ when 1) the authors have asked multiple times for people to be ethical when binding meaning hand-bind and do not profit off them (if they can’t, why should we, ya know?) and 2) the world is JKRs (bleh) so it could put the fandom at risk in general which would be shitty. But mostly I care about respecting authors and artists and just having fun with this hobby and binding for myself & friends.

Once again, I’m not the best person to go into the nuances between binding & fanart, but the only thing I can think of is that artists are creating something from scratch with general descriptions that could be interpreted as og characters.

Hopefully this was somewhat helpful, but maybe I didn’t explain it well enough. Long story short, no one needs a physical copy of a bind and if you do have the means of resources, learn to bind or get one from an ethical binder and don’t spend hundreds of $$ lining some assholes pocket 🤪😌🫶🏼 (hopefully this didn’t come off as mean or rude bc that was not my intention!!) 😘😘😘

#ask Jules and you will get a long ass answer #fanfic bookbinding #bookbinding #ethics of fanfic #ask Jules

5 notes · View notes

hotchxreid · 1 year

Note

51 and 60! And as a proviso for 60; how many of those are CM/hotchreid photos? 😂

51. How old were you when you learned Santa wasn’t real?

Well as someone with a shit memory, I don’t know 😂 But if you want a shitty little anecdote, I was in the car when my dad told me, unprompted, that Santa wasn’t real because he wanted me to know the presents came from him. So then I went home to my mom’s and told her and she was pissed af so I’m gonna guess pretty young el oh el

60. How many photos do I have on my phone?

My camera roll says 5,399 😅 Most of them are my cat, dog, and girlfriend respectively lol As for CM and our boys, probably closer to 100? I have a problem with “saving” things and forgetting to delete them. 300 pics are probably just screenshots lmao yes I know I should use google drive or something. Maybe one day

#ask Jules #anon #ask game

0 notes

washingtoncapricorns · 2 years

Note

I have Wilmington food recommendations for you! I lived there for many years but moved away for my job about 5 years ago & miss eating at these places so much! Flaming Amy's burrito barn, Our Crepes and More, Indochine, Aromas of Peru, Yosake sushi, and PTs burgers

Thank you so much!!! I will definitely check them out!

#ask Jules

0 notes

ghelgheli · 4 days

Note

hey you might've been asked this before sorry if so, but have you read or do you have any thoughts on A short history of Trans Misogyny?

I have read it! I have a few thoughts.

I think it's a strong and important work that compiles historical archives into sharp analyses of how "trans misogyny" (using Jules Gill-Peterson's spacing) is not a recent phenomenon but a globalized structure with centuries of history. I also think it's flawed, for reasons I'll get into after a quick summary for those who haven't had the chance to read it yet.

JGP divides the book into three main chapters, the first on the notion of "trans panic". There, she traces how variants of this anxiety with the trans-feminized subject have presented—to deadly effect, for the subject—in such different settings as early colonial India, the colonization of the Americas, the racialized interactions between US soldiers stationed in the Philippines and the local trans women living there, and of course the contemporary United States itself. In every case she analyzes this "panic" as the reaction of the capitalist colonial enterprise to the conceptual threat that the trans-feminized subject poses; we are a destabilizing entity, a gender glitch that undermines the rigid guarantees of the patriarchal order maintaining capitalism. Punishment follows.

The second chapter is my favourite, and considers the relationship between transfeminine life and sex work. I posted a concluding excerpt but the thrust of the chapter is this: that the relegation of so many trans women and trans-feminized people to sex work, while accompanied by the derogation and degradation that is associated with sex work, is not itself the mere result of that degradation inflicted upon the subject. In other words, it is not out of pure helplessness and abjection that so many trans-feminized people are involved in sex work. Rather, sex work is a deliberate and calculated choice made by many trans-feminized people in increasingly service-based economies that present limited, often peripheralized, feminized, and/or reproductive, options for paid labour. Paired with a pretty bit of critical confabulation about the histories of Black trans-feminized people travelling the US in the 19th century, I think this made for great reading.

In her third chapter, JGP narrativizes the 20th century relationship between the "gay" and "trans" movements in north america—scare quoted precisely because the two went hand-in-hand for much of their history. She emphasizes this connection, not merely an embedding of one community within another but the tangled mutualism of experiences and subjectivities that co-constituted one another, though not without tension. Then came the liberal capture of the gay rights movement around the 70s, which brought about the famous clashes between the radicalisms of Silvia Rivera and Marsha P Johnson (neither of whom, JGP notes, ever described themselves as trans women) and the institutions of gay liberalism that desired subsumption into the folds of capital. This is a "remember your history" type of chapter, and well-put.

I think JGP is correct to insist, in her introduction, on the globalizing-in-a-destructive-sense effects of the colonial export of trans womanhood. It is, after all, an identity conceived only mid-century to make sense of the medicalized trans subject; and "gender identity" itself (as JGP describes in Histories of the Transgender Child) is a psychomedical concept conceived to rein in the epistemic instability of trans existence. This is critical to keep in mind! But I also think JGP makes a few mistakes, and one of them has to do with this point.

In her first chapter, under the discussion of trans misogyny in colonial India, JGP of course uses the example of the hijra. Unfortunately, she commits two fundamental errors in her use: she mythologizes, however ambiguously, the "ascetic" lives of hijra prior to the arrival of British colonialism; and she says "it's important to say that hijras were not then—and are not today—transgender". In the first place, the reference to the "ascetism" of hijra life prior to the violence of colonialism is evocative of "third-gender" idealizations of primeval gender subjectivities. To put the problem simply: it's well and good to describe the "ritual" roles of gendered subjects people might try to construe contemporarily as "trans women", the priestesses and oracles and divinities of yore. But it is best not to do so too loftily. Being assigned to a particular form of ritualistic reproductive labour because of one's failure to be a man and inability to perform the primary reproductive labour of womanhood-proper is the very marker of the trans-feminized subject. "Ascetism" here obviates the reality that it wasn't all peachy before (I recommend reading Romancing the Transgender Native on this one). Meanwhile, in the after, it is just wrong that hijra are universally not transgender. Many organize specifically under the banners of transfeminism. It's a shame that JGP insists on keeping the trans-feminized life of hijra so firmly demarcated from what she herself acknowledges is globalized transness.

My second big complaint with the book is JGP's slip into a trap I have complained about many times: the equivocation of transfemininity with femininity (do you see why I'm not fond of being described as "transfem"?). She diagnoses the root of transmisogyny as a reaction to the femininity of trans women and other trans-feminized subjects. In this respect she explicitly subscribes to a form of mujerísima, and of the trans-feminized subject as "the most feminine" and (equivalent, as far as she's concerned) "the most woman". Moreover, she locates transfeminist liberation in a singular embrace of mujerísima as descriptive of trans-feminized subjectivity. As I've discussed previously, I think this is a misdiagnosis. Feminization is, of course, something that is done to people; it is certainly the case that the trans-feminized subject is in this way feminized for perceived gender-failure. This subject may simultaneously embrace feminized ways of being for all sorts of reasons. In both cases I think the feminization follows from, rather than precedes, the trans misogyny and trans-feminization, and there is a fair bit of masculinization as de-gendering at play too, to say nothing of the deliberate embrace of masculinity by "trans-feminized" subjects. Masculinity and femininity are already technologies of gender normalization—they are applied against gender deviation and adapted to by the gender deviant. The deviation happens first, in the failure to adhere to the expectations of gender assignment, and I don't think these expectations can be summarized by either masculinity or femininity alone. I think JGP is effectively describing the experience of many trans-feminized people, but I do not think what she presents can be the universalized locus of trans liberation she seems to want it to be.

Now for a pettier complaint that I've made before, but one that I think surfaces JGP's academic context. In her introduction she says:

In truth, everyone is implicated in and shaped by trans misogyny. There is no one who is purely affected by it to the point of living in a state of total victimization, just as there is no one who lives entirely exempt from its machinations. There is no perfect language to be discovered, or invented, to solve the problem of trans misogyny by labeling its proper perpetrator and victim.

Agreed that "there is no perfect language to be discovered"! But JGP is clearly critical of TMA/TME language here. Strange, then, that less than ten pages later she says this:

this book adds the phrase trans-feminized to describe what happens to groups subjected to trans misogyny though they did not, or still do not, wish to be known as transgender women.

So JGP believes it is coherent to talk about "groups subjected to trans misogyny", which she thinks consists of the union of trans women and what she called "trans-feminized" groups. If this is to be coherent, there must be groups not subjected to trans misogny. So we've come around to transmisogyny-subjected and not transmisogyny-subjected. Look: you cannot effectively theorize about transmisogyny without recognizing that its logic paints a particular target, and you will need to come up with a concise way of making this distinction. But JGP dismissing TMA/TME with skepticism about "perfect language" and immediately coining new language (basically TMS/not TMS) to solve the problem she un-solved by rejecting TMA/TME... it smells of a sloppy attempt to make a rhetorical point rather than theoretical rigour. It's frustrating.

I have other minor gripes, like her artificial separation of "trans women" from "nonbinary people" (cf. countless posts on here lamenting the narrow forms of existence granted TMA people if we want recognition as-such!) or her suggestion that "a politics of overcoming the gender binary" is mutually exclusive from rather than necessarily involved with struggles around "prison abolition, police violence, and sex work". Little things that give me the sense of theoretical tunnel-vision. But I don't think all this compromises the book's strengths as a work of broad historical analysis. I would simply not take every one of its claims as authoritative. Definitely give it a read if you have the chance, especially for the second and third chapters.

#ask answer #jules gill-peterson #(i haven't been asked this before ty for asking <3 🐐)#note that this was mostly off the cuff except what i had taken pictures of bc i left the book in toronto for my mom to read

266 notes · View notes

yesloulou · 8 months

Note

the opposite (ie charles's paddock presence to daniel) being a imo very undervalued part of the story

Could you expand on this please? 🖤

daniel talked about this a couple of times but this is from his twitter in 2020:

jules and daniel had been friends since 2007. they became close after meeting in junior series in italy. jules was one of the first friends daniel made after leaving australia by himself to try and make it in europe. and even though jules was slightly (a month i think) younger, daniel always talks about how all the young drivers, himself included, looked up to jules and already treated him as an f1 driver. jules' passing had a huge impact on daniel. he only talked about it in public a handful of times but in his words, it affected him "more than I ever would have thought".

on the other hand. besides everyone saying charles has the looks, personality, humility, mannerisms, and even driving styles just like jules (who was charles' godfather), charles followed jules' footsteps almost exactly. jules was who ferrari had in mind to replace kimi. supposedly their plan was for jules to race for sauber the following season. both of which charles was able to follow through after jules' passing.

there's not a lot else on this but we do know daniel sees jules in charles and charles thinks of being compared to jules 'the best compliment i could get'. i think (hope) they both find consolation in this knowledge ❤️

(daniel writing "forever in my heart #17" on his hat at the 2015 hungarian gp. later he dedicated his 2016 malaysian gp victory to jules.)

#daniel ricciardo #charles leclerc #jules bianchi #asks #*#txt

362 notes · View notes

delicatepointofview · 9 months

Photo

#louis tomlinson #dailytomlinson #tomlinsonedits #hlcreators #hljournal #gif*#starting the gif dumping lol #@ jules i see your ask i'm working on it

366 notes · View notes

convex-solos · 5 months

Text

convex yuri but make it phantom of the opera

#convex #cubscar #hermitshipping #women i love you women thank you women #posting this just because jules asked #felili art

163 notes · View notes

mediumgayitalian · 16 days

Text

whoever sent me that road trip au ask about fergalicious….tumblr fucking ate it. i was answering it and the app crashed and it’s nowhere to be found. i’m devastated. it was so so correct. please know you were right

#and this will mean nothing to anyone else but #one detail i wanted to add to your masterpiece of a scene #that i have not yet fully revealed:#nicos sister was killed by a drunk driver when he was little #he doesn’t let ANYBODY #aside from jules-albert #drive him places.#HE drives.#will is firmly passenger princess keeping nico thoroughly distracted lol #D TO THE E TO THE EYES ON THE ROAD #lmfao #ask #😔 i’m actually so devastated i’ll never be able to read that ask again

69 notes · View notes

mountinez · 7 months

Text

Seb, Chal & the impermanence of life putting them on the same team even against all the odds to repeat history over and over again.

'The Weight' by Linda Greg// 'No Rush for Leclerc to join Ferrari' source: racefans// 'Only time will tell whether relationship with Leclerc will work' source: gpblog// 'Two Horses' painting by Brian Hatton// 'Grief Lessons: Four Plays by Euripides' by Anne Carson// 'Epithalamium' by Louise Gluck// 'Two Horses' painting by Rosa Bonheur

#sebchal #f1edit #charles leclerc #sebastian vettel #scuderia ferrari #and i was thinking about the fact that they ended up in the same team against all the odds #if kimi have stayed or if jules was still with us they would never be teammates but they were #like two horses put in the same paddock or a child that was just born and didn't ask for it #crazy to think about the impermanence of life #sebchal is a bond with so many layers and i'm already rambling on these tags sorry #this was on drafts for quite some time idk i just wanted to share

184 notes · View notes

vexcraft · 3 months

Note

Writing prompt:

Cub and Scar have had naturally white hair ever since they sold their souls to the vex. They dye it though cause they just prefer having black/brown hair.

However, nobody except them are aware of this fact. Not because they’re hiding it or anything, it’s just cause it’s never really considered it a possibility. It’s a bit of a shock to everyone when eventually news gets out.

There’s a tug at Cub’s hair and he instinctively tries to shy away from it, only to create a painful pull on his scalp.

“Cub’s getting old again! His hair’s getting white!” Bdubs yells and Cub hisses at him from where he’s crouching on the floor trying to fix redstone so they can continue playing the game. The other man lets go of his hair and Cub turns to glare at him. “I knew it was some magic trick that’s now wearing off!” Bdubs adds almost proudly, more directed at Cub than the others.

Cub rolls his eyes and runs a hand through his hair. “I’m not getting old,” he says a little defensively. Scar had told him he looked fine earlier!

“That’s not what white hairs from age look like,” Etho comments, leaning over Bdubs’ shoulder to inspect the crime scene. “Bdubs, you should know that.”

“What?!” the man gapes. Cub watches Etho take a few steps back before Bdubs turns around in faux rage. It’s quite amusing. “What do you mean I should know, are you calling me old?! Wait, how would you know what those look like? All of your hair is white!”

“I’m not stupid?” Etho suggests and there’s a wave of laughter from the few other hermits present that are actually listening to their conversation.

“Etho’s right,” Cleo says, walking over. “That’s definitely root growth.”

“Like from hair dye?” Bdubs questions, his intense gaze switching between Etho, Cleo, and Cub’s hair at light speed as he tries to make sense of the situation. “You dye your hair?”

It feels a little demeaning to have everyone stare down at him – especially at his apparently not very well dyed hair – while he’s just trying to fix his game mid event.

“It probably wouldn't look like that if I just did it myself,” Cub grumbles. “Where did Scar go? I have a few words to say to him.”

“Scar dyes your hair?!” Bdubs asks unnecessarily loudly. “Dude, I would not let that man near my precious hair with hair dye in a million years!”

Cub almost disagrees and points out that Scar isn’t too bad with it, before remembering the very situation he’s in right now. Speak of the devil and he shall appear – Cub watches Scar walk over, probably alerted by Bdubs’ yelling.

“Who’s talking about me?” he asks with a wide grin, too-sharp teeth on display. Cub gives him an unimpressed stare.

“Is it true you dye Cub’s hair?” Bdubs questions instantly and Scar looks a little taken off guard by the sudden question thrown his way.

“Oh, yeah,” he replies casually. “It’s a vex thing, the white hair. What about it?”

Bdubs stares at him like he just said something more outrageous than that, clearly not impressed by the nonchalance. “A vex thing- does that mean your hair is white too?!”

“It is, yeah,” Scar shrugs. “I prefer brown though. I thought you knew this, my hair was white in Last Life when I didn’t feel like dyeing it.”

“I thought your hair just kinda did that or something!” Bdubs tries to defend himself and Cleo snorts. “Don’t laugh! He could’ve dyed it white or something, I didn’t think he'd been dyeing it brown for like, what, seven years! And Cub too, he does not strike me as a hair dye kinda guy! Don’t act like you guys knew about this!”

Etho and Cleo both shrug. The other hermits don’t disagree, though Cub knows Joe already knew this but seems to have decided to remain quiet, probably for his own entertainment.

“Well, the more you know,” Scar replies cheerfully. “I don’t think I’ve really talked about it to anyone to be fair. How did this come up anyway?”

“You said I look fine this morning,” Cub finally speaks up and Scar turns to look at him. “But apparently I have root growth. Scar, I look stupid.”

Realization finally dawns on Scar’s face as his gaze shifts from Cub’s sour face to his hair, noticing his mistake. His smirk turns into a sheepish smile. “Whoops?”

#asks #cubfan135 #bdoubleo100 #ethoslab #zombiecleo #goodtimeswithscar #jules hc txt

147 notes · View notes