#cr correct quote | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

utilitycaster · 1 year

Note

I’m I the only one who finds it alarming that most of this fandom who ship Imogen and Laudna (especially on twitter) don’t realize the unhealthyness thats going on in their relationship? They literally see two women to are affectionate with each other and say “ENDGAME!” “GIRLFRIENDS!” “MARRIED!” “KISS KISS KISS!” Then they focus on quotes that are kinda alarming, and Imogen’s Jealousy is pretty fucking Alarming! Saying that they are in love and just haven’t realized it yet. (Don’t get me started on that one blog on here counting down the days “till imodna realizes their in love.” I find it so fucking annoying.) Loving someone and being IN love with someone is two different things. Also another thing! I HATE THAT PEOPLE CALL THEM LESBIANS! THE BOTH HAVE EXPRESSED FEELINGS FOR MALE PERSENTING PEOPLE! I dread the day when the campaign ends and they don’t end up together or during the campaign fall IN love with someone that’s not each other. Especially if it’s a male persenting person, because the Laura and Marisha will be harassed and the shippers will yell Queerbait, also the men hating/haters will be in full force.

Hi anon,

I agree with most of this; I'm answering under a cut in the hopes that people who will be upset by an answer will be able to avoid it, without me having to explicitly discourse tag it and in doing so throw it to people who troll that tag to get mad at things. Also this is SUPER long and covers a lot of the thoughts I've had percolating on the CR fandom/shipping culture in general.

I think I and a lot of people who primarily deal in meta/analysis in this fandom have been inching ever closer to a lot of the points you've made here, and I am generally very willing to be the one who snaps and says "yeah has anyone noticed the emperor has literally no clothes on like what the fuck".

Let's start with the end and work backwards: It's happened before, it will happen again if Laura and Marisha's characters do not get together, and it's irritating, but like, I will take a good story and the consequences of a shitty segment of the fandom rather than the path of least resistance every time. I almost said something to this effect on the positive vibes ask last night, but like...there will always be people who are hateful and stupid on the internet, so you may as well stand in your own truth rather than fear their consequences. (Not that I don't respect the choice to quietly avoid harassment; I am the way I am because I know at this point I can take a pretty hard hit and shut it down, but that has not always been the case.) Anyway, people called an actual canon ship between lesbian characters queerbaiting last campaign, so it's not like those accusations hold any weight or need to be taken seriously; outside of their tiny circle, everyone thinks those people are idiots.

I do, as a bi woman, hate the tendency among hardcore shippers to erase bisexuality. They do it because a bi character's competing ships cannot be as easily dismissed as 'obviously can't happen, they're gay or lesbian', and they don't care how biphobic they look doing it. You are absolutely correct: Imogen and Laudna have both indicated interest in men or masc nb people. (Others have also pointed out that people tend to exclusively use he/him pronouns about Ashton when they are being critical of them, so they don't care how transphobic they look doing it either, apparently; also I don't think Ashton identifies as a he/they lesbian but there are in fact people who do identify as such so like...if your goal is to eliminate Ashton/Laudna as an option by saying Laudna is a lesbian, against all evidence to the contrary, you also need to make a number of presumptions about Ashton's sexuality and gender identity as well.)

This brings me to a tricky section about fandom in general but I think it's worth saying. In the real world, homophobia and transphobia are very real. They negatively impact our lives in heartbreaking and deadly ways. It is still the norm in most US media for the bulk of relationships shown to be between a cis man and a cis woman, and for protagonists to be cis and straight (note: also often able-bodied, male, white, etc but the focus of this discussion is queerness so I'm not covering all axes of oppression). However, in many fandom spaces, queer characters and ships are the fan favorites. Tumblr's userbase does skew heavily queer, and additionally, tends to skew towards women. In other words, a lot of things that are very true in real life do not hold in fandom spaces.

Which is to say: we're in a situation where an F/F ship is the massive juggernaut for the fandom right now. It does not mean that lesbians (or bi women who enter into relationships with other women) are not oppressed in the real world; it does mean that within the highly specific space of the Critical Role fandom, people are more likely to be in favor of this ship than not. It also means that a lot of the people who aren't into it are not homophobes, but are queer people - often even wlw - who are saying "I would like F/F ships! I would like them to actually be good." Like, to me, the only difference between Imogen and Laudna and every M/F canon relationship on network TV that's made me go "you're telling me they should be together, but I don't see it" is that they're both women (and I would bet a large sum that for a lot of people, this isn't about the dynamic, but purely about the gender of the people involved, ie, if Imogen were a man played by one of the men in the cast people wouldn't ship it, where as I personally can comfortably say I'd ship any of the canon ships from past campaigns regardless of character gender. This also admits that biological essentialism is fake and that Exandria is pretty gender equalthough, which some people don't want to do.)

Part of why I've been so frustrated is that, at least from my perspective, the overwhelming majority of hate and harassment I've seen within the fandom in Campaign 3 - and in Campaign 2 - has been from people who have shipped Marisha and Laura's characters. There has, in fact, been pretty considerable hate as well as measured criticism levied towards M/F ships (we're seeing some with Ashton/Laudna here, but both Fjord/Jester and Caleb/Jester, the latter of which I actively dislike and have openly criticized, received pretty vehement hate last campaign and most of it came from people who shipped Jester with Beau) and M/M ships (less harassment per se but people who shipped Caleb with Jester said some truly awful things about Caleb/Essek; also while I have not, you know, harassed people, I have said essentially the same things about how Taliesin and Liam's characters are shipped every campaign despite often having little connection as I have about Marisha and Laura's. I just don't talk about it as much because while I think and have said that Ashton/Orym is basically nothing - and that Widomauk, which most people vaguely classify as M/M, and for that matter, Percy/Vax, all are basically nothing - no one who ships those has called me a cunt or reblogged my posts in an abusive manner or called me out for the grave sin of preferring canon to fanon, so I respect the ship and let ship of it all.) For that matter, the bulk of hate towards Beauyasha came from people who shipped Beau and Jester. Like...I am confident there are people who dislike this ship specifically because it's between two women, and they are homophobic, but that is not the quarter where I think most of the criticism on Tumblr or Twitter is coming from.

So let's get to the last point. Why do people ship two women simply because they're standing next to each other? Why do they ignore countless red flags - and I am specifically talking about treating Imogen and Laudna's relationship as healthy and loving; not about shipping it in general. I cannot stress enough that if you treat Imogen/Laudna as some kind of toxic Briarwoods situation and are into that, I support that entirely.

There are a few reasons. First and foremost, I think a lot of people project onto characters rather than letting the characters provide them with differing perspectives. I find this deeply sad. It's not that you can't draw parallels between your own life and that of fictional characters or see yourself in them - you're supposed to! But it says something depressing about your empathy if your qualifications for which characters speak to you are only those who match your demographics. Like, I've said before, but my favorite characters from past campaigns are Vex and Fjord, and they have a lot in common! If you relate to one based on their themes of Who You Are In The Dark and the mask you present to the world over a face you don't particularly like, you will probably relate to the other! But also...I am a cis bi woman, I am not a person of color as both those characters are often considered coded to be (though am an ethnic minority), nor did I personally experience extensive emotional abuse and poverty as a child. I think there's value in wanting to see people like you! But also...representation is not just "I want to see people like me"; it's also "I want to humanize people who are not like me". If you cannot relate to someone simply because they don't match your gender or sexuality, then that's a really shallow and cold way to interact with the world. And, specifically in relation to queerness within Critical Role: this is a world that has consistently been depicted as not having homophobia or transphobia. I understand wanting to explore these themes and seeing characters who have experienced them, but like...this is not the media that will reasonably have a one-to-one portrayal of homophobia or transphobia, and you often will need to bend over backwards and project a lot of stuff that simply isn't in the canon to read that into them because the worldbuilding simply doesn't support it. And, to be clear, you can do that; but at that point you're applying a lens that only you can obtain, so you shouldn't be surprised if few people come along with you. (I also think it's kind of dumb to watch a show with 5 cis men on it, four of whom are married to women, and be mad that the story has men in it and that those men sometimes are attracted to women; unpacking this would easily double the length of this already incredibly long post though.)

So: this sets a stage for people coming into the show saying "who looks like me, or can I make to look like me" rather than engaging with what's actually going on. Part of why I've been hesitant on Imogen and Laudna the whole time, though started out much more open to it, is in fact that it was heavily shipped from quite literally the moment that Laura and Marisha were indicated to be playing two women who knew each other from before. We knew nothing about their dynamic other than "existing friendship". So I think a lot of people put the cart before the horse and started shipping, and I do think - and I could be entirely wrong - a lot of them, deep down in their hearts, know that they are twisting their interpretations to match an idea of these two characters that has increasingly been proven not to be true onscreen. Like, I think a lot of people kind of realize that Imogen is putting Laudna in a horrible position here; I think a lot of people realize that their so-called 'unconditional' love that transcends words means there's no room to resolve or even express conflict. Perhaps they don't, but like, I'd like to give people the benefit of the doubt. It's just...I think that because this ship is so all-consuming within the fandom, and because so many people have staked their identities within the fandom on it, they don't know how to leave it and are scared of retaliation if they do.

This is backed up by the slow shift I've described - Imodna started out with "they're already girlfriends" or "they're already in love but just haven't said it" or "what could ever happen other than they become ever closer and eventually kiss" (as witnessed by these questions) to "they realized they were in love during the campaign" to "Imogen is in love with Laudna but Laudna isn't aware" to "god remember how they used to talk, I'd give anything for it" to "I guess a QPR is okay" (which is itself bizarre, like, the issues I see in their relationship are still just as much issues in a nonsexual partnership as a sexual one; honestly, it's not a healthy friendship though it is an interesting one and the problem's I have are not going to be fixed by kissing.) Like, it's not the normal evolution of feelings one might have about a ship as the show goes on and more information is revealed, or rather, it's a ship that's becoming less and less confident as time goes on which is the opposite of how canon ships tend to go. (Which, I need to stress, does not discount that it could not be canon; it's just that I think it would require a pretty profound shakeup and conflict to do so). The signs and signals are becoming more and more tenuous and the shippers keep lowering and lowering the bar.

Since I've already brought up past campaigns and ships, let's do it again for the sake of illustration; this feels like how people who shipped Caleb and Jester went from ENDGAME to "Caleb is pushing away Jester to protect her" to "I think Laura is biting her lip when she's looking at Liam! This is a SIGN" even in episodes where Jester was like, actively making out with Fjord, to, and I am not making this up, posting pictures of the CR shop showing Laura in Caleb merch as evidence. Or how the bulk of Vex/Keyleth shipping in TLOVM rested on a scene in the trailer where Keyleth was staring dreamily and drunkenly into space while Vex was across the table only for the show to reveal Keyleth was staring at Vax. Like, all shipping does require a certain degree of cherrypicking, but there is a point where you are focused only on subtext and never text, and while that was how one had to interact with queer stories in the past, it's ridiculous to be doing it on a show where Marisha has openly RP-ed Beau eating Yasha out. Like, if they wanted to show two women being romantically involved, they will. (There's been a lot of Xena comparisons thrown around, and like...not that Xena isn't an important part of the history of depicting F/F relationships in media, but it is also a syndicated show from the 90s and couldn't show an explicitly lesbian relationship, and Critical Role very much can and has.)

I do think there are a subset of people who don't realize how unhealthy this is. Like...this is a whole psychological thing that I am unequipped to unpack, but I do think there are people for whatever reasons genuinely do believe that love means never having to say you're sorry. I am hoping this is because of youth and inexperience, because being able to communicate and advocate for yourself is a crucial part of relationships, as is the ability to express and resolve conflict. As you've noticed, the people who ship this have all said "well, obviously, Imogen won't betray Laudna" - but we don't know that. Honestly I think it could go either way. But they have to make that assumption to keep shipping it, because if Imogen might betray Laudna, then that does mean that there would have been more meaning and value in Laudna speaking up and that conversation was deeply flawed.

I also think some of this comes from unconditional love being an unreasonable expectation foisted upon us all at large. There are always conditions, or rather, you might always in some way love someone, but there are conditions under which you'd leave or boundaries you will draw. You can love someone who (for example) is dealing with an addiction but still refuse to let them drive while intoxicated or steal your stuff to pay for drugs. You can love someone who cheats on you but still want to end that relationship. I mean, while fear, self-doubt, and resources/logistics are all factors in people leaving abusive relationships, it's also true that a lot of people have some affection for the good times and that is a factor as well. Love is not a simple on/off switch. You can feel multiple things at once - honestly, that's what Ashton basically says this past episode, that they both love and hate the party! I think Imogen and Laudna do genuinely love each other, though I don't interpret it as romantic; I just also think that there's a lot of stuff they don't like about each other but are unable to express, and which will only become more and more of a threat to a potential romantic (or queerplatonic) relationship if left to fester unresolve. And, to be honest, I suspect real-world homophobia and fandom purity issues are part of why people are so unwilling to discuss why Imogen and Laudna's relationship is unhealthy; because it means admitting that queer relationships can have most of the same problems as straight ones, and possibly admitting that you still find an unhealthy relationship interesting and want to see it played out.

#answered #Anonymous #long post #cr tag #posts that make me realize i should probably watch the celluloid closet

111 notes · View notes

indornaga · 2 years

Text

Therian: Dispelling the Earthen Animal Myth

(Also viewable on GoogleDocs and my Website)

Introduction

For many individuals in the nonhuman community today, terminology is learned by word-of-mouth from individuals that have resided in the community for longer, and then pass on that knowledge to further newcomers. Such is the way for many communities, but as a method of information transfer, it can contribute to the loss and future lack of information.

Such is the case of our beloved word “Therian”. Today, I am going to be talking about the evolution of the word from its earliest predecessor, “Phenotype”, to its current meaning of “identifying as an earthen animal”, and how it obtained this incredibly narrow and exclusitory meaning. My goal and hope is to bring solace and open a new avenue to those who had previously identified with the term, but were told or had assumed that they do not fit the definition.

Preface

Just as we coin new terms today in order to better convey our understanding of what it is to be nonhuman, so did those in our past. To better understand what influenced the changes of our terms, we must go back to the beginning of our recorded history in order to learn the roots of our terminology.

Some quotes may sound oddly worded or tilted in cadence—many older sources interweave therianthropy with Totem Animals, which are no longer discussed today within therian circles. Full quotes can be found within source links, but have no basis on today's topic and thus have been omitted.

Other terms such as “otherkin” are going to be mentioned in reference to how intersectionality has occurred through the years, but are not the focus of our gathering today.

Some of the sources I will be utilizing must be understood as a product of their time, as our understanding of therianthropy has evolved since the community's first gatherings. Today’s topic is not meant to be a commentary or discussion on how the understanding of therianthropy as an identity and experience has evolved.

Finally, everything that is going to be talked about today, I was not present in the community to experience first-hand. Instead, this will be an analysis of historical documents including personal websites, forums, among other community gatherings. I do not speak as a total authority on this subject matter–I am merely bringing to light what, I feel that with evidence, was maliciously made to be forgotten. Thus, I welcome anyone who was present in the community during the times I mention to correct any inconsistencies in my information. Our history is incomplete due to the nature of the internet, and I will happily accept any primary sources that alter or clarify the information I have.

Alt.Horror.Werewolves

Alt.Horror.Werewolves was a Usenet group in which the therian community can trace its originating roots to. While it is a name many have heard in passing, it is a product of a very early version of the internet–it’s literally as old as me! Its name refers to its original purpose–it was essentially (as we would understand it today) a subforum that was dedicated to fans of the Horror genre of media, specifically focusing on werewolves. Fans would gather at Alt.Horror.Werewolves to discuss werewolf media, but it also attracted a slightly different type of fan.

Through the first year of the group’s existence, topics would be posted asking about real life werewolves, some to the tune of claiming to be werewolves; “...anyone else who feels the blood of the beast in them”.[1] While many users wrote off such topics as roleplayers, discussions of the nature continued to trickle in numbers, until shortly after the website’s first birthday. A thread was posted by the owner of the forum himself, speaking about how his interest in werewolves stemmed from wanting to get back in touch with nature, and with his feelings of animality.[2] This topic opened a sluice gate of further threads on the subject, talking about the nature of man and the buried feelings of the “animal inside”.

A werebat by the name of Ron created a thread speaking about a dream in which he, as a werebat, was fighting a werewolf, and stated: “Sorry, werewolves of the net... It's nothing personal against your phenotype.”[3] This is one of the, if not the, earliest surviving mention of the term “Phenotype”, and the first umbrella term to be coined in order to discuss other werebeasts that were not wolves. Not long after, however, another thread proposed the term “theriomorph”, which is the term that the Alt.Horror.Werewolves FAQ would go on to use for years.[4]

Yet, the words “were”, and “were-creature”, and “lycanthrope” continued to be the most commonly used terms amongst the community. A year after theriomorph was coined, a were-[Native Spirit] (W*ndigo) by the name of James created a topic stating that the continued use of the word “lycanthropy” was confusing, and asked; “Anyone besides me heard of the term 'therianthropy' (sp) which is a more general term for lycanthropy?”[5] This is the oldest surviving thread on Alt.Horror.Werewolves that uses the term, and gained many supporters to the point of being adopted as the term we know today.

But, as old habits die hard, the origins of our community being rooted in werebeast terminology and aesthetic produced the popular term “wereside” as an alternative to phenotype,[6] and soon after, the coining of “polywere”, the predecessor to polytherian.[7] The term “Shifter” referred to therians of all sorts, but typically focused on those who felt dramatic mental or phantom shifts, and was a term used well into the 2000’s. The term “weremythic” was also coined at this time,[8] though never caught popularity as animals of all sorts had been present and accepted in the community since the beginning.

Yes, Alt.Horror.Werewolves was host to many different types of animals, regardless of “wolf” in the name. We know this by a surviving practice called Werecards.[9] Werecards were user-fillable surveys of information on a werecreature, and included a section to self-identify one’s theriotype. Notable examples include Chimeras, Gryphons, Dragons, Unicorns, hybrid creatures of all sorts, Tigren, Anthro animals, Giants, Phoenix, Centaur, Manticore, and even the infamous WerePontiac. Yes, the make of car.

However, Alt.Horror.Werewolves’ reign as the community hub would not last, and members were scattered to new forums and personal websites as one of the first and largest (of its time) unified trolling events destroyed the forum’s usage.[10] But all was not lost, as the members’ scatter brought the newly founded community to the internet at large, and kicked off a golden age of discussion, introspection, and awakening.

Therianthropy: The Wild Plains

Out in the wild of the internet, werecreatures took their lycanthropy-based linguistics and shared it with non-werecreature individuals who asked the question of “why ‘’were’, and why just wolves?” While students of Alt.Horror.Werewolves members would continue to use were-based linguistics for well over a decade, and in some cases into modern day such as our current word for “shifts”, many others took “Therian'' and ran into the tall grass.

A commonality between the nonhumans of the time was; “ask ten therianthropes what therianthropy is, and you’ll get eleven different answers.” Yet a general consensus shows us that those answers were all on the same page.

Twilight Fox, in 1998, writes: "...[A P]henotype(s) is an integral part of themselves, something which can never be seen as separate from themselves.” [11]

Therianthrope.Org, carrying over from Alt.Horror.Werewolves‘ FAQ which was captured on the Internet Archive in 1998, states: “...Therianthropy… is the ability to mentally transform from the normal human mode of thinking and reacting to an animal one." [12]

Lynx’s Temple, in 2000, writes: “Fundamentally, it means that you in some way perceive yourself as occupying the liminal space between human (anthropos) and wild animal (therion).” And, in a conversation adapted from Alt.Horror.Werewolves: “I prefer the word "animality" or "WereSide"... I myself don't like the word Phenotype, it really IS a misnomer.” [13]

According to Winged Wolf in 2003: “The variety of phenotypes… is very long, and even includes some animals which are thought to be mythical or legendary, such as dragons and [Native Spirits] (w*ndigowak).” (sic) [14]

Korrok says, in 2004: “A therianthrope, or were … is a person who feels that they have some connection to an animal. They might think they are an animal "inside" - in mind or spirit - or that they are part-animal in this way.” [15]

The ClovenHoovedGoddess, also in 2004, writes: “Therianthropes are people who share an integral connection with a(n) animal(s) in such a way that they believe themselves to be that(those) animal(s) in either a spiritual/mental/emotional capacity.” And further states: “Nobody has the right to claim that dragons cannot be therianthropes, it is up to the individual to choose which label to identify themselves as.” [16]

Aurorawolfen, again in 2004, states: “There are also weres whose phenotype… is not of this earth, like dragons, and gryphons, though some say these are not weres, but Otherkin.” [17]

Akhila, once more in 2004, states: "Therianthropy is a constant state of being and way of experiencing/perceiving the world that leads a person to identify as an animal" [18]

Masticina states in 2005: "Therianthropy is the belief that one is, in whole or in part, one or more animals in some manner other than physically." And goes on to qualify this with: "Therians are those believing to having an animal soul, sometimes also mythical animals or extinct ones." (sic) [19]

Quil tells us in 2006: "Therianthropy is a state of being in which the therianthrope exists, lives, thinks, has instincts, and often acts as a non-human animal. " [20]

Meirya, also in 2006, defines it very simply as: “Therianthropy is animality.” [21]

Project Shift defines it, in the years between 2008 and 2010, as: “The state of being a person who is, feels, or believes he/she is in part or whole (non-physically) one or more non-human animals on an integral, personal level.” [22]

True Form Within, in 2009, states: “A theriotype can be any sort of animal, living or extinct.” And goes on to qualify it with: “Over the past couple of years there has been a huge increase in theriotypes other than wolves as well as an increase in those who's phenotype are more 'astral' creatures - such as dragons, elves, phoenixes, etc.“ [23]

Moonsong writes, in the years between 2009 and 2011: “...[T]herian is any human that identifies with a non-human animal. They could identify with it spiritually, mentally, and sometimes physically.” [24]

So Where, and How, Did it Change?

Somewhere around 2006 is where primary sources in the form of cataloged websites begin to wane in frequency, thus this is where hard evidence begins to become scarce. We can speculate on why, and my personal theories include; the movement of communities from forum-style chat functions to increasingly-popular instant messaging formats such as Skype; the loss of internet savviness and thus the lost knowledge of submitting online information to the Internet Archive; the loss of interest in hosting personal websites, in addition to the loss of hosting services such as Geocities and Freewebs; the closing of once active but later inactive forums; as well as the roiling turmoil of constantly emerging and dying web hosts such as AOL.

In 2002, we see the earliest recorded description of what Therians are versus Otherkin. Glendarii describes Otherkin as: “...[T]herianthropes who's (sic) bond creatures are mythical beings such as dragons and elves. Otherkin are actually contherianthropes, whereby no M-shifting occurs, but they have a constant feeling of being like their bond entity.“ [25]

Granted, while I did not specifically read into Otherkin's history, my research into our term's history finds that it intersects at points with Otherkin (going back all the way to Alt.Horror.Werewolves, to be exact!) and this is a VERY early point of time to encounter this, which suggests that the “argument” of “therians experience, otherkin identify” has been ongoing much longer than previously thought. It also displays an early schism between the “mythical” and “earthen” definitions, being the earliest definition that I was able to find in which distinctly defines “mythical” creatures as strictly otherkin.

I reached out to Orion Scribner in order to hear from someone who was present in the community during that time, and they suggested reading The Field Guide to Otherkin by Lupa, as they recalled a shift in definitions around the time she was gathering information to be included in the book. Field Guide was published late in 2007, and one can speculate it was one, if not more, years in the making, putting the dates of the obtained information an estimated 2006-2007. Under the Definitions section of the book, Lupa defines Therianthropy as "...People who identify as Earth-based animals in some respect." [26] She later qualifies this statement with: "There is some debate as to whether therianthropy should be limited only to those who identify as animals native to this plane of existence." [27] She does mention that several surveyed dragons identified as therians, but this is the extent of her touching on the subject. And yet it’s the earliest specified definition that I’ve been able to find that claims therians are “earthen animals” only.

Considering the therian community has always had non-earthen animals within it, it’s hard to imagine how a community with such strong roots started to oust established members. Lupa’s Field Guide doesnt seem to be the origin of the definition, but it’s arguable that it is a cornerstone in its proliferation, due to how well it encapsulates the community as a whole and even continues into today to be recommended as an accurate overview of what it is to be nonhuman.

An even earlier source than Lupa’s Field Guide, and one that had great influence upon her writings, goes by the title of The Magic of Shapeshifting. Released in 2000 and authored by Rosalyn Greene, the book’s contents, of which describe how shapeshifting works in this world, are controversial at best and physically impossible and incredibly discouraging at worst; but it’s definitely an entertaining, if dangerous, read and gives us some insight into some of the most interesting, evolving interactions of the therian community post-Alt.Horror.Werewolves. Within her book, Greene delves into the “physics” of how shifters are tied to their species, citing needing access to the “energy” of the animal in order to assume the correct form, thus mythical or fictional animals are “impossible” forms for shifters to have. However, she does go on to qualify the argument for both earthen animals only; that one would need the “energy” of the living animal to reference from – AND for all species; wherein animals that are nearly extinct or incredibly difficult to find physically such as the tiger, which is “popular” in shifters, can still be accessed due to the energy from the “collective subconscious” and its “essential structure”. [28]

With that said, I unfortunately have no definitively sourced knowledge of how the “earthen-animal only” definition came to exist, or why the schism began–I only have speculation. Did Greene’s The Magic of Shapeshifting touch on a real schism in the therian community that was latent enough I couldnt find evidence for it, or was it fabricated for entertainment? Regardless, it was damning enough for Lupa to include into the Field Guide, a 101 source for many therians through the years.

So, Why Did it Change in the Community’s Lexicon?

Orion gave me their opinion on the matter, and as it’s wonderfully succinct, I’ll quote them: “Therianthropes have always tended to be defensive about trying to be seen as plausible, whether for spiritual or psychological reasons, and a few felt imaginary beings were too implausible.” From the sources I’ve read on the matter, I agree. The few gatekept the many, and over time it became the only definition.

There exists the concept of an Online Echo Chamber. It is a phenomenon in which individuals within a closed community learn about a topic, and only discuss amongst themselves, thus prompting all members of the echo chamber to believe they, and only they, have the correct information on the topic. If the echo chamber becomes the primary source of information on a topic, only that information will ever be known by newcomers, as well as from those that spread the information beyond the echo chamber’s walls.

Late in 2008, a burgeoning forum, one of few of its kind of the time, named Therian Wilderness, presented the earthen-animal definition to its members. An admin going by the name of Re Harakhti posted: “Therians are a type of Otherkin… Other-kin is just kin different to standard animal and men. And therianthropes are the branch that are referred to as ‘Earth-Animal-Humans’. Other Otherkin are everything considered not to be earthly animals.” [29] Other admins go on to qualify that it was the definition used on all of the personal sites that they had seen, and it would become the definition used by the forum even up to today where it can be found in the forum’s Terms & Definitions board. [30]

Many in attendance may recognize the name of the forum; it was one of the most popular forums for therians through 2015 – but it was also infamous for being somewhat hostile to anyone who wasnt an earthen-animal. Messages and threads through the years showed otherkin or non-earthen animals such as dragons joining, being told “there’s not much here for you”, and their introduction post being the last interaction they’d had on the site. Similarly, when individuals argued for non-earthen animals to be able to use Therian, they were shut down in favor of the argument of “this is how it always has been, suck it up”, even when objectively shown the forum was being exclusive or outright ignoring community history.

The unyielding nature of the users and the popularity of the forum presented the community with only one option, thus locked new community members into only knowing the exclusive definition, not fostering a community that helped others find language that helped them better understand themselves.

I’m a Therian.

I am a genetically modified hybrid dinosaur. I may have been able to recognize myself in a mirror, but I could never have understood the ramifications of being an unnatural animal. I was an animal–and I still am. I experience dinosaur drives, dinosaur instincts, the urge to chirp, roar, bite, swim, hunt. How does that make me any different than a lion? Than a vulture? Than a dolphin?

The term Therian was always meant to describe animals, but that was taken from those of us who dont fit a perfect mold. I joined the community in 2015, and learned the earthen-animal definition of therian; I felt an odd sense of belonging to it, but was shoved out of it. It wasnt until last year, 2021, that I learned the history of the term. So I share it with you, in hopes that it helps at least one someone find a piece of their identity they were missing.

Sources & Further Reading

HouseofChimera’s Therian Timeline https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HymfR2q-EowjlA6CRPb3wuvG5uWJeYv0/view

Orion Scribner’s Otherkin Timeline http://frameacloud.com/nonfiction/

Alt.Horror.Werewolves

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.horror.werewolves/c/CbDVtdz5Y-A/m/zKySlkIzLikJ[1]

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.horror.werewolves/c/xBZ1SELuIko[2]

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.horror.werewolves/c/Gi-b9ACNAVU[3]

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.horror.werewolves/c/JR3BOgile2w[4]

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.horror.werewolves/c/-Bl7zmVezJs/m/lCpsZ-AAUToJ[5]

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.horror.werewolves/c/ymoR_lc96UA[6]

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.horror.werewolves/c/i8t_dIsvFac/m/epuGUdssnocJ[7]

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.horror.werewolves/c/dHQRGjrNv9U/m/1cBa_td3mHUJ[8]

Lion Templin web.archive.org/web/20051211222158/http://www.leonine.com/~lion/cthwww/

WEREWeb[9]

http://web.archive.org/web/20080321055321/http://www.swampfox.demon.co.uk/utlah/Werecards/index.html

WolfDen[10]

https://web.archive.org/web/20041021200307/http://wolfden.critter.net/community/ahww.htm

Twilight Fox[11] https://web.archive.org/web/20010418141513/http://www.gwi.net/~phelan/were.html

Therianthrope.org[12] https://web.archive.org/web/19980628151328/http://www.therianthrope.org/ahww/faqtwo.html

Lynx’s Temple[13] https://web.archive.org/web/20020225063827/http://wildideas.net/temple/library/letters/weremeaning.html

Therianthropy.org[14]

https://web.archive.org/web/20100613230140/http:/therianthropy.wingedwolfpsion.com/

Therian Info[15] https://web.archive.org/web/20050420235541/http://www.freewebs.com/therianinfo/therianthropydefinition.htm

Clovenhoovedgoddess[16]

https://web.archive.org/web/20130524125822/http://www.freewebs.com/clovenhoovedgoddess/herebedragons.htm

Aurorawolfen[17]

https://web.archive.org/web/20040607234008/http://aurorawolfen.tripod.com/therian.html

Akhila[18] https://web.archive.org/web/20130422081207/http://akhila.feralscribes.org/

Masticina[19]

https://web.archive.org/web/20070701134823/http://therian.masticina.net/index.html

Quil[20]

https://www.absurdism.org/therianthropy/defined.html

Meirya [21]

https://web.archive.org/web/20141126054154/http://www.dreamofhorn.com/nest/feathers6.html

Project Shift[22] https://web.archive.org/web/20101008150703/http://www.project-shift.org/therianthropy/terms.php

True Form Within[23]

https://web.archive.org/web/20090212194600/http://www.trueformwithin.org/site/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12&Itemid=28

Moonsong[24]

https://iamatherianthrope.webs.com/whatarethey.htm

Glendarii[25] https://web.archive.org/web/20050428144906/http://glendarii.150m.com/otherkin.html

Lupa. A Field Guide to Otherkin. Stafford, England: Immanion Press, 2007

pp.25[26]

pp.124[27]

Greene, Rosalyn. The Magic of Shapeshifting. York Beach, ME: S. Weiser, 2000.

pp.165[28]

Therian Wilderness

https://therian-wilderness.proboards.com/thread/4820/varied-views-therianthropy-listing

https://therian-wilderness.proboards.com/thread/6044/skeptical-method-young-therians-identity#ixzz5NY8ZbE1l

https://therian-wilderness.proboards.com/thread/3082/common-misconceptions-faq[30]

https://therian-wilderness.proboards.com/thread/5130/issues-faq

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/979127128786350080/979143923136090172/unknown.png[29]

Shifters.org https://web.archive.org/web/20010803105845/http://www.shifters.org/newbies/

Snowspectre https://web.archive.org/web/20020620063319/http://www.otherwonders.com/swiftpaws/therian/unifiedtheory.html

Witch’s Cauldron https://web.archive.org/web/20030301214958/http://www.witchscauldron.net/cauldron/weres.htm

Swiftpaw’s Tree http://web.archive.org/web/20020826145425/http://otherwonders.com/swiftpaws/therian/termtherian.html

Otherkin.net

https://web.archive.org/web/20080416014444/http://www.otherkin.net/articles/therianWere.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20080416012100/http://www.otherkin.net/articles/identitykin.html

Ketrino

https://web.archive.org/web/20130401065726/http://ketrino.angelfire.com/therianthropy2.htm

Shadow’s Den http://web.archive.org/web/20010223061716/http://www.shadowsden.org/information/therianthropy.html

Were.net

https://web.archive.org/web/20010406114514/http://www.were.net/~pinky/shifters.html

#otherkin #therian #therianthrope #otherkind

150 notes · View notes

bloomycali · 10 days

Text

THE GOLDEN BRIDE ( CR OC )

Concept Art

• The golden bride Just appear in shore or at sea when it comes at Sunset/Sunrise

• the dress is based of an Filipiniana Wedding or old Traditional Dress back in 1600s?

• Cant't tell what's behind the long Veil..

• if i was correct that Most women/young girls went to Church Wearing head-veil Symbolised their beauty and prayers..

• in the Quote i just type or something...

“ the Dough of her skin looks Darker but it can still shines like gold in the rain sunsets. She Cries like diamond, only left was dust of empty ashes. ”

#cookie run #cookie run oc

3 notes · View notes

weaselbeaselpants · 1 year

Text

The Eight Rings of Bad Internet Reviewer Hell

-Ring One: Listicle-Fever-

A source that’s better at cataloging content worth the viewer’s interest gets it into their head that they are a decent source of information and critical opinion. Bonus points: +the source is user generated and voted for without moderation, so it’s really no one’s actual opinion +article sites quote each other as a source

Examples: WatchMojo, Cracked.com, Listverse

Exceptions: PanPizza and CR

-Ring 2: Funnyman thinks he’s a Reviewer "oh god"-

While everyone's a critic, not everyone is a reviewer. This bad faith + bad take combo comes from a person who’s better at making observational jokes (riffs) at something, but then thinks said jokes are meaningful analysis simply because they occasionally point out actual problems in the material. Bonus points: +jokes are offensive and not funny +they’re actively ignoring the actual text to make jokes +deflects their own critics by calling everyone who doesn’t buy into their jokes “butthurt fans”

Examples: CinemaSins, Cracked.com, post Demo-Reel Doug Walker, ScreenJunkies

Exceptions: Rifftrax/MST3K, Retsupurae (rip), ABrandontoThePast, penguinz0

-Ring 3: “Let’s go through the movie together :D”-

A standard retrospective-based review format; best used on contained 3-act structures. The reviewer obviously has the foresight of having watched something before they discuss it to the audience. At their best, these kinds of reviews are fun. At their worst, these videos are just validation farms designed to rip on something sillystupid. Bonus points: +performatively angry and over the top +reviewer takes the subject too seriously in a way that feels unpleasant or a chore to sit through as an audience +alternatively, they have the same trouble as the ‘Funnyman’ and holds no interest in what they’re talking about

Examples: Irate Gamer, MysteriousMr.Enter, ConfusedMathew, Doug Walker again

Exceptions: PeanutButterGamer, Jenny Nicholson, Phelous and Allison Pregler, Bad Princess Movie Podcast, Double Toasted, YourMovieSucks, ToddintheShadows

-Ring 4: Super-Fan-Fail-Theorist-

Bi-monthly theorizing about what a new plot development for a show is, or after-the-fact musing on a what ‘something’ nebulously ‘means’. Very often transforms into fan theorizing and analyzing media for conclusion’s sake. Prone to A LOT of bias of the fan reviewer’s absolutist-take. Obsessed with a product’s fringe and ultimately deeply invested in what is a shallow-insight. Bonus points: +reviewer won't parse the difference between their theory and the text +reviewer is defensive and won’t share the fandom with people who don’t share their take

Examples: Game Theory, Wisecrack

Exceptions: CinemaCartography, Jacob Geller, Sarah Zed and Lady Emily

-Ring 5: Wannabe Breadtube Retrospecterer-

Reviewer wants to be a researched, respected, ‘enlightened’ 2-hour vid maker but is really just an annoyed fan who’s lengthy reviews aren’t structured. Criticism might be valid, but is usually more about what the reviewer doesn't ‘like’ than what's actually wrong with something. Feels more like a lecture and a take-down than it is an enlightening hot take, at best. Also, it's your fault if you disagree with them and they live rent free in their critics heads- totally not the other way around! Bonus points: +incorrect, ludicrous, needless accusations tossed around at ppl they dislike +sounds like they're telling the audience how to feel, not why they feel think something is "awful and here’s why” +reviewer refuses to apologize or correct themselves if they get their facts wrong

Examples: Lily Orchard, Mysterious Mr. Enter again, half of the alt-light douchbags with hour long rants about Star Wars who ironically are all out to counter leftBreadtubers

Exceptions: Accented Cinema, Shaun, Folding Ideas, Xiran Jay Zhao, Princess Weekes, Lindsay Ellis, Lady Emily again, BenettetheSage's newest vids, Cheyenne Lin, and Sideways

-Ring 6: DNI-Danny -

Otherwise known as the “Anti". Jaded by years of abusive standom, they cling to good takes and criticism when it’s convenient for them but otherwise see fandom and critical analysis as a battlefield THEY MUST win. Very judgemental of people who don’t share their (sometimes exact) opinions; quick to gaslight/block/smear people just for association. Absolutist as a means of keeping oneself ‘safe’. Bonus points: +apologizing is NEVER AN OPTION +genuinely treats fandom takes as tho they’re comparable to politics and real morality +DNI list consists of MAPS, bigots, republicans and ppl who ship that toxic ship they don’t like +"no I didn't even watch the video, I don't have to!!" +"cancel culture doesn't exist"

Examples: Lily Orchard again and also prolly some tumblr user you know

-Ring 7: Choked on the Reddit-Pill-

Caught in a toxic dance of death with the DNI-Danny. May be the reason the former exists, but absolutely exists to counter the DNI-Danny at their bs by functioning more bs. So obsessed with being a counter argument and fighting for “actual social justice” (whatever that means) that they don’t recognize their own absolutism, centricism, or selfishness for what it is. Where the Anti counters with “think of the marginalized” the Reddit-Pill is obsessed with “well I’m not [worst case scenario] so why it is my problem that [worst case scenario] exists, HMMM???!” Bonus points if: +really love the term ‘moral guardians’ unironically +“fiction never reflects reality” +"cancel culture doesn't exist" +"some of us can tell the difference between fiction and reality"

Examples: Bad Webcomics Wiki, 4chan, half of the complacent "not me"-base that is KiwiFarms

-Ring 8: Actual Moral Guardians-

Not a jaded or concerned fan fighting for the rights of the marginalized, or for other people, at all. Not even a critic. Legit cult member working in ACTUAL bad faith. 100% unironically believes that liking (or even watching) something means you are being brainwashed/going to hell. Ostensibly has a skewed understanding of how media actually affects people (because they legit think it happens thru mind control and not emotional connections.

Never have good takes or good faith-basis of their own. They can only ever parrot criticisms from other people to fit their usually conservative-minded beliefs. Legit witchhunt.

Examples: Jordan Peterson, The Satanic Panic, Ben Shapiro, QAnon, Breitbart

inb4: "DID YOU KNOW that the reviewer you rec actually did-"/"they don't like that other reviewer you rec"/"they won't fuck you stop promoing them"

>I'm not here to tell you the ppl I recommended in the links are saints, good people, or even the best reviewers with the one take to rule them all. I don't know them. I'm recommending them on the basis of how to see this kind of reviewing done right.

>I'm not these reviewer's moms. I don't know them. I'm pretty sure some of these people dislike some of these other people- I don't even watch every person I recommended here- but why or how is none of my business. I'm recommending ppl as a viewer.

>I'm aroace and a lot of these people are married or taken. I HOPE they won't fuck me, tbh.

If your favoritist reviewer-person ever is on the example list, barring the final rings, it's none of my business Jan. I still like ScreenJunkies tbh.

22 notes · View notes

nicklloydnow · 10 months

Text

“Russia has successfully conducted tests on parts of its next-generation "Poseidon" nuclear-capable torpedo, according to reports.

Testing of reactors for the Poseidon unmanned nuclear-powered underwater drones shows "their operability and safety have been confirmed," Russian state news agency RIA Novosti reported on June 23. The report was also shared on Russian-language social media channels.

"They are ready to work as intended," the Kremlin-backed outlet quoted an unnamed source "in the military-industrial complex." The first "sea tests" are scheduled for this summer.

The existence of the Poseidon "super-torpedo" was leaked to the international media in 2015 before it was formally announced in 2018. Moscow intends for the Poseidon, which can carry both conventional and nuclear warheads, to be a "second- or third-strike option that could ensure a retaliatory strike against U.S. cities," according to a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report from March 2022.

(…)

Also known as "Status-6" or "Kanyon," state media reported that the torpedo is 20 meters long and 1.8 meters in diameter, weighing in at around 100 tons. Sidharth Kaushal, a research fellow for seapower and missile defense at the Royal United Services Institute think tank, told Euronews Next in May 2022 that the weapon could have a range of at least 10,000 kilometers, or 6,200 miles.

(…)

The Russian state news agency Tass reported in January 2019 that the Russian Navy would put around 32 Poseidon drones on combat duty across four submarines, with each vessel carrying eight Poseidon torpedoes. These submarines would be part of Russia's Northern and Pacific fleets, the outlet said.

Special-purpose submarines, carrying the Poseidon "super-torpedo," will join the Pacific Fleet in the far eastern Kamchatka peninsula between the end of next year and the start of 2025, according to Tass.”

“We believe Russia’s continued observance of New START Treaty limits is increasingly unlikely. Russian President Vladimir Putin could rely more on nuclear weapons to compensate for his declining conventional performance in Ukraine. Should Russia do so and, on the worst day, choose to preemptively strike the U.S. nuclear arsenal in a crisis, President Putin has a range of options to employ against America’s intercontinental ballistic missile force. For this and other reasons discussed below, we believe that the United States should keep its intercontinental ballistic force “on alert” and maintain its “launch under attack” option to both ensure the force’s survivability in a conflict and deter adversaries from seriously contemplating a first strike.

(…)

While not stated directly, the only way to demonstrate a commitment to end the launch under attack option and to prevent the president from executing this option is to de-alert the force. These actions would be dangerous and would undermine America’s response to the rapid nuclear breakout of China and Russian aggression.

Montoya and Kemp are correct in suggesting that it is difficult to successfully eliminate land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles in a first strike because of the total number of weapons required for this task. The 400 missiles, across 450 silos, with 45 launch control centers, and the ability to launch from the Airborne Launch Control System, make the intercontinental ballistic missile leg of the nuclear triad a formidable challenge to a Russian first strike. These characteristics of the nation’s silo-based single-warhead missiles make them valuable; ensuring their destruction is a daunting task that enhances American deterrence.

(…)

Montoya and Kemp are correct in saying that “the United States currently maintains the option to launch under attack so that in the event of a first strike by Russia, U.S. silo-based missiles could be launched before they are destroyed.” An option does not constitute a posture or a doctrine.

The primary purpose of a launch under attack option is to enhance not missile survivability but deterrence. Deterrence is a psychological effect achieved in the mind of an adversary. The United States enhances deterrence by threatening cost imposition, reducing the benefits of action, and encouraging restraint. Launch under attack reduces the benefits of action by increasing uncertainty and perceived risk. President Putin does not know if he will strike empty silos.

(…)

With a ballistic missile force on alert, Russia must employ a shoot-shoot-look tactic because it must achieve complete destruction with a first strike or risk retaliation. This is necessary because the current launch under attack option forces Russian planners to employ a much higher percentage of the force in a first strike, hoping the United States does not launch its long-range missiles before Russian reentry vehicles strike their targets. This creates the uncertainty needed to deter a first strike.

It is also worth reiterating that a Russian first strike is highly unlikely prior to a breakout that gives the Russian military significantly more fielded warheads than the United States. In such a situation, launch under attack becomes even more important because a larger Russian arsenal means the percentage of their force needed to conduct a first strike decreases, and exchange ratios are meaningless.

(…)

Putin’s recent suspension of Russian participation in New START only underscores our view that any Russian strike on the United States will take place after a breakout that is unmatched by the United States. Given Russia’s track record for cheating on treaties (Convention on Biological and Toxic Weapons, Chemical Weapons Convention, Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, and Open Skies), it is unwise to think they would abide by treaty requirements prior to a nuclear strike on the United States.

(…)

Thus, arguments that suggest an attack on the missile fields are somehow acceptable because the submarine and bomber legs of the triad will go untouched in a conflict are fundamentally flawed. We assess that any attack will begin with attempts to blind the United States by taking out space-based integrated tactical warning and attack assessment capabilities, all while cyber attacks and sabotage attempt to take out command and control. In our assessment, attacks on submarine and bomber bases are also likely to precede or coincide with attacks across the missile fields.

Military planners must consider the enemy’s most dangerous course of action, in which a Russian attack employs surprise and, consistent with Russia’s operational approach, uses overwhelming force in an initial attack. This leaves the United States insufficient time to deploy the submarine fleet or load and disperse bombers. Under these conditions, ported submarines and much of the bomber fleet are early casualties in a Russian first strike. With the development of a second nuclear-armed peer adversary, America must take the steps necessary to enhance survivability across the triad.

Conclusion

We do agree with Montoya and Kemp when they write, “Instead of holding fast to the idea of immediate launch, it is far sounder to build a nuclear capability that can survive a first strike and for which decision-makers are not pressed to make decisions with incomplete information.” To achieve this objective, it will take strategic decisions like building mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles, increasing the number of hardened and deeply buried facilities, and placing strategic bombers on dispersed nuclear alert. Continuing on America’s current modernization trajectory will never achieve what both Montoya and Kemp and these authors desire.

It is important to maintain an on-alert missile force capable of launching under attack if the United States desires to deter Russia from contemplating a first strike on the nation’s missile fields. Removing the launch under attack option will not improve the credibility of American deterrence or reduce the risk of accidental detonation or war. It will only further undermine American credibility. With President Putin suspending Russian participation in the New START Treaty, a breakout from treaty restrictions cannot be ruled out. Such a decision would only make a launch under attack option even more important for maintaining deterrence.”

“These days, it is nuclear issues reawakened by the Ukrainian war, the widespread discussion of war with China provoked by the Taiwan dispute, the unsettled Iran question and the growing North Korean capability that are in the limelight. They are being treated as something novel under the sun. That is perplexing – and disturbing. Decades ago, very able minds conducted fine-grain examinations of the logic and psychology of nuclear strategy which produced analysis of remarkable sophistication. It acquired further authority by the experience of the past 70 years. Yet, today self-proclaimed experts and pundits take exceptional liberties that reflect neither focused thought nor history nor any awareness whatsoever that the matters they freely pronounce on have been addressed previously in a thorough-going fashion.

This situation has prompted me to attempt a summing up of what we have learned since 1945 and to apply it to present and prospective circumstances. It is intended to establish a conceptual framework for consideration of the two current deviations from orthodox nuclear wisdom that have gained currency: 1) the feasibility of employing low yield tactical nuclear weapons (TNW) to alter the balance in a conventional military conflict; 2) the possibility that the protagonists could engage in restricted nuclear exchanges without it escalating into a cataclysm. The commentary is unusually lengthy due to the inclusion of supplementary material. (…)

10. This above logic manifestly has been absorbed by everyone who has been in a position to order a nuclear strike. No civilian leader (and nearly all military commanders) with the authority to launch a nuclear attack ever believed that the result would be other than a massive exchange -mutual suicide for those with large arsenals. Certainly, that was true from the early 1960s onwards once the USSR had deployed reliable retaliatory nuclear weapons and the notion of ‘winning’ a nuclear exchange of any kind faded in the Pentagon and among its intellectual auxiliaries. This sobering reality did not encourage risk-taking at lower levels of conflict. Just the opposite.

(…)

2b. Two things deter: certainty (see ‘3’); and total uncertainty (see ‘1’ above). Certainty can take the form of tripwires: e.g. Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Europe deployed on the battlefield that almost surely would escalate into strategic, inter-continental exchanges. Certainty could take another form: “launch-on-warning.” That is to say, as soon as incoming missiles are detected – in whatever number, on whatever trajectory – ICBMs and SLBMs are activated and launched. That also obviates the risk that an incoming strike might ‘decapitate’ the targeted government’s leadership – leaving it paralyzed to respond. Knowledge that such arrangements are in place should be the ultimate deterrent to an intentional first-strike. However, in the event of an accidental launch or limited launch, you have committed both sides to suicide. The U.S. government never has stated that in has in place any such arrangement to provides a direct link between warning system and release of ICBMs – but there are recurrent assertions that in fact they have existed since Jimmy Carter’s day.

(…)

4d. In nuclear matters, it is dangerous to put together a team of intelligent strategic planners who have plenty of time and a mandate to think out of the box. They likely will generate intricate schemes which have a surface plausibility but in fact only a tenuous connection to reality. The performance of the RAND Corp in service to the Air Force confirms that fear. Here is an example of the extreme proposals that can emanate from this type of blue-sky thinking; One idea that got off the drawing board envisaged a reaction to signals that NORAD had picked up flights of Soviet missiles on a trajectory pointing to our own missile silos. It called for a synchronized startup of our 1,000 plus liquid-fueled ATLAS rocket engines which would produce such a tremendous reverberation as to stop the rotation of the earth for a micro-second. As a result, the Soviet missiles would miss their targets – winding up in Missouri cornfields, Mount Rushmore and Yellowstone Park instead. Physicists possessing a modicum of knowledge realized that it was a ridiculous expectation – and, if such a shock could be produced, the earth itself would split open. (See Ellsberg for a fuller account).

In short, the nuclear doctrine with attendant deployments that is most effective as deterrent is the worst to have in place were actual hostilities to break out.

Theoretically, there is a way to reconcile the two objectives: loudly announce that you have set in place launch-on-warning arrangements but refrain from doing so. Nobody is likely to call your bluff.

(…)

This reasoning highlights how reckless is both the idea that a conventional war between nuclear powers could be fought without escalating to the nuclear plane, and the belief that there is no escalatory ladder from battlefield TNWs and an all-out nuclear exchange.

7g. For a while, concocting nuclear scenarios – strategic (counterforce) and tactical focused on TNWs in Europe – was a sort of intellectual parlor game among defense intellectuals (including some military people). By the mid-70s, it ran its course as everyone came to accept the ‘Bomb’ even if they didn’t come to love it. The role of SLBMs in solidifying MAD was the capstone.

(…)

8h. Here is one general thought about extended deterrence as a ‘generic’ type. Throughout the Cold War years, the United States and its strategically dependent allies wrestled with the question of credibility. Years of mental tergiversations never resolved it. For one intrinsic reason: it is harder to convince an ally than it is to convince a potential enemy of your readiness to use the threat of retaliation to protect them. There are two aspects to this oddity. First, the enemy has to consider the psychology of only one other party; the ally has to consider the psychology of two other parties. Then, the enemy knows the full direct costs of underestimating our credibility and, in a nuclear setting, will always be ultra conservative in its calculations. By contrast, the ally that has not experienced the hard realities of both being a possible target of a nuclear attack and the possible originator of a nuclear attack cannot fully share in this psychology.

(…)

It is imperative that we restate and absorb the understanding acquired decades ago. For there is a new generation of writers on nuclear strategy that seems bent on either ignoring or rejecting it. One is the revival of “counterforce” doctrine. Simply put, “counterforce” is apposite to Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) in that it posits the possibility of fighting a winning a nuclear encounter. The postulated ability to destroy the retaliatory capability of the enemy through a first-strike that eliminates its missiles (land or sea-based), strategic bombers and nuclear tipped cruise missiles deployed on ships. Such a disarming blow, as the scenario goes, neutralizes the opponent’s deterrence – making the country hostage to your coercive demands. General speaking, it encourages risk-taking in crisis-management.

‘Counterforce’ concepts defined American nuclear war plans throughout the 1950s. Kennedy and McNamara forced modifications but the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP) designed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff was amended only gradually. Right into the 1970s, the SIOP gave primacy to variations of ‘Counterforce’ doctrine – this despite the Soviet Union’s development of an assured second-strike retaliatory capability. They remain an integral part of the SIOP to this day.

“Counterforce” ideas always have encountered two analytical obstacles: one technical, the other psycho/political. In order to contemplate such a strategy,` one must have at its disposal missiles of extreme accuracy able to destroy hardened missile silos, means to detect and destroy nuclear armed submarines, and wide coastal coverage that ensures the targeting of surface vessels. This conjectured capability, moreover, must possess a degree of reliability and precision that makes success a near certainty. Otherwise, you open your country to destruction by the enemy’s surviving force – a small fraction of which are adequate to wreak intolerable damage on population centers. Any government that perceives even a slight vulnerability to a first-strike would, of course, reject the idea of playing a “counterforce game” and instead threaten massive retaliation.

New-age “counterforce” revivalists focus on technical advantages which might aid the aggressor. In particular, there is reference to improved missile accuracy aimed at hard targets.4 Reducing the CEP (Circular Error Probability) by a few tens of feet, though, is not the crucial variable. That number already has been extremely low (50 – 100 feet) for decades. Emphasis is also placed on improved tracking technique for detecting submarines. What lacks is assurance that the net effect is to reduce the odds on retaliation by SLBM to near zero. Unless one can do that, unilateral deterrence sets in.

That leads us to the second precondition: the ability to intimidate a nuclear armed opponent by a) demonstrating a first-strike capability or b) launching a comprehensive first-strike and daring the enemy to retaliate with the remnant of its own nuclear force and face destruction itself. The counter to the first, as noted above, is to threaten retaliation against high-value targets (cities) and perhaps to deploy and advertise “launch on warning” or trip-wire mechanisms. The counter to the second is a matter of will and emotion. Nobody considering a first-strike can know with confidence what the enemy’s state of mind and emotion would be in the hypothetical circumstances. When the stake is your continued existence as an organized society, no reasonably sane person(s) will tempt fate in the hope of guessing right.

(…)

All doctrines and strategies for nuclear war-fighting – whether of the ‘counterforce’ variety or TNW variety – are largely fanciful. Not only is their logic flawed, as demonstrated above, but they predicate a cool-headed rationality of individuals and institutions which is unrealistic. Human beings are not calculating machines, no matter how high their office or how grave the matters they treat. They are susceptible to emotions and impulses that can distort or even override pure rationality. When you place them in settings where multiple other human beings are involved under intense pressure, the possibility of deviating off the track of impeccable logic increases.

In truth, we have no grounds for assuming that government leaders, at multiple levels making decisions and charged with operationalizing them, will collectivity behave as postulated by nuclear war-fighting scenarios. Herman Kahn, the early Henry Kissinger, Thomas Schelling at times, and today’s self-conscious revisionists have fantasized about a world that doesn’t exist.* These days, when the head of the biggest nuclear power is Donald Trump, the purveyors of doctrines that feature intricate nuclear games are as deluded as the President himself.

(…)

Nuclear strategy is a bit like Marxism or Freudian analysis or market fundamentalist economics. A lot of superior minds deploy their talents to concoct ingenious elaborations of received Truth that demonstrate brilliant logic – but their conclusions are completely divorced from reality.”

#nuclear weapons #nuclear war #russia ukraine war #wwiii #russia #posideon #henry kissinger #herman khan

7 notes · View notes

surrexi · 2 years

Text

i am begging critical role fandom (and the d&d community, and fuck it, fandom in general (but specifically CR fandom right now)) to learn to allow complexity to exist in both narrative and in life

like, i can hope that bell's hells manage to convince someone to attempt to resurrect laudna and that said attempt is successful while also acknowledging that, to quote doctor who, death gives us size.

i can also acknowledge that death gives us size and that death at least sometimes being permanent in stories is important for both in-universe and meta reasons while also acknowledging that sometimes people don't enjoy that kind of narrative or might be going through some shit that makes it difficult or impossible for them to enjoy it at a particular point in their life.

a person can enjoy narratives that explore death and grief and moving on sometimes or in some cases and not in others, and that's okay. that's normal.

personally, i started playing d&d during the panini because i needed/wanted an escape from all the bad shit going on in real life, so if one of my DMs killed my character i would not handle it well, because my asthmatic lungs are giving me enough existential anxiety and dread. as i explained to my sister, if it came to a point where one of my characters would have permanently died i'd rather have my DM say "okay, you don't die but now your magic isn't working right/you lost a limb/you are multiclassing as a paladin for a death deity or a warlock for a necromancer/etc." because for me as a player that would be a better way for me to continue enjoying playing d&d while also allowing there to be consequences that a long rest can't fix than having to make a new character. but there are plenty of people out there who prefer to play d&d with the knowledge that their DM could kill their character at any time if the dice happen to fall that way, because that's the kind of stakes they want from their game. hell, i know for a fact that at least a couple of the players in games i'm currently playing in have backup characters ready to go.

ALL OF THAT IS OKAY. BOTH THINGS CAN BE TRUE.

cognitive dissonance is not always bad. sometimes cognitive dissonance is just true. in the words of john green, "truth resists simplicity."

in the specific case of critical role it's also important to remember that although the cast is streaming their game for the audience, they're not playing the game for the audience. it's their game, for which they established their own safety tools and guardrails off-screen. if a character dies it's because everyone at that table agreed from the beginning that they were all okay with that happening if the dice happened to fall that way. we can all see them texting each other, whispering to each other, and scribbling notes to each other in the margins of their notebooks throughout every episode. they are constantly communicating. they are fine, they are operating within limits they established before they ever started filming each campaign. they have told us that, matt in particular reminded everyone of it on twitter in the middle of all this, but they're not required to go over the personal aspects of that in detail. we just need to trust them that they know and respect each other's limits.

in the case of d&d/ttrpgs in general, it's no better to say permanent death has to always be on the table than it is to say it should never be on the table. what matters is that the DM/GM and the players have discussed it, and that everyone knows and respects everyone else's limits.

and jesus christ on a pogo stick, we really need to move away from this idea that all fandom opinions must be justified as morally correct or morally incorrect. if you don't like something, that's fine, you don't have to justify your dislike of something by arguing that the thing you dislike is morally wrong. you're allowed to just not vibe with it. likewise, if someone else likes a thing you dislike, they're not automatically morally deficient because they like a thing you dislike. you just like different stuff! it's fine! it takes all kinds to make a world!

people who are really upset about laudna being dead can and should be able to coexist in the same fandom with people who think it could lead to interesting narrative exploration of death/grief/survivor's guilt/etc. people in one camp don't need to establish moral superiority over the other and then attack them over it, because both reactions to the story are equally valid. and it should go without saying, but neither side should attack the cast about it, because again, it's their game and also because fans shouldn't attack creators.

(critique/media analysis is not an attack, but by its very nature requires extensive thought/citation/etc., and should never be comprised entirely by saying "[creator] is a bad person because [thing they made] is morally wrong because i said so")

tl;dr: omg stop casting aspersions on the moral character of people who disagree with you about a ttrpg some nerdy-ass voice actors are playing on twitch, ffs people

#critical role #cr spoilers #cr campaign 3 #cr meta #dungeons and dragons #meta: critical role #web: critical role #campaign 3 #rants #can't believe i positively quoted a line steven moffat is responsible for writing in an episode that i mostly loathe #but it's a good line which moffat naturally immediately fully contradicted with the outcome of the episode *SIGH*#anyway i feel like a lot of this rant is fed by being a fandom old in a sea of youngsters #who have never experienced the kind of fandom socialization/passing down of norms that we did in the old days #whether on listservs/message boards or on livejournal #back when we had real communities where the elders passed on their knowledge and wisdom #instead of being accused of doing thought crime because of their shipping preferences #also the 'i must justify the morality of my opinion'->'opposing opinions must be morally wrong' thing feels like a modern social media thin #but that i also suspect has its roots in 2012-era receipts tumblr (fuck receipts tumblr forever byeeeeee)

14 notes · View notes

adventuregirl2023 · 4 months

Text

Galactic Gatherings: Planning the Ultimate Star Wars Day Bash

Introduction

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, Star Wars captivated the hearts of fans across the universe. Celebrating the iconic saga is more than a tradition; it's an intergalactic event. Planning the ultimate "how to celebrate star wars day" Bash requires meticulous preparation and a deep understanding of the Force. In this guide, we embark on a journey to create a gathering that pays homage to the beloved franchise, bringing fans together for a day filled with cosmic joy.

Setting the Atmosphere: Immersive Decor and Ambiance

Creating an immersive atmosphere is the first step to transport guests to a galaxy filled with Jedi, Sith, and droids. Transform the party space into iconic Star Wars locations with themed decorations. Use lightsabers as centerpieces, hang starry backdrops, and display life-sized cutouts of favorite characters. Incorporate the iconic opening crawl text and John Williams' legendary soundtrack to elevate the ambiance. The goal is to make guests feel like they've stepped into the Star Wars universe.

Costume Galore: Embracing the Characters

No Star Wars Day Bash is complete without a sea of costumes that pay homage to the galaxy's diverse characters. Encourage guests to come dressed as their favorite Jedi, Sith, smuggler, or droid. Organize a costume contest with categories like "Best Lightsaber Duel," "Most Creative Alien," or "Spot-on Movie Character." The array of costumes adds an extra layer of excitement and immersion, turning the gathering into a visual feast of intergalactic fashion.

Themed Eats and Treats: A Galactic Feast

Elevate the culinary experience with a menu inspired by the Star Wars universe. From Womp Rat Skewers to Yoda Soda, let creativity flow in naming and designing the dishes. Create a dessert station featuring Death Star cookies, Lightsaber popsicles, and Wookiee cookies. Consider a DIY drink station where guests can concoct their own Star Wars-themed beverages. The culinary galaxy is vast, and the possibilities for themed eats and treats are as limitless as the Force.

Trivia Challenges: Testing Jedi Knowledge

Challenge the Jedi knowledge of guests with Star Wars trivia games. Create a trivia contest with questions ranging from obscure facts to iconic quotes. Divide participants into teams and award points for correct answers. Consider incorporating multimedia elements, such as audio clips and video snippets, to make the trivia challenges more engaging. A well-executed trivia competition adds an element of friendly competition and showcases the depth of fandom present at the gathering.

Lightsaber Training: Becoming Jedi Masters

Transform the gathering into a Jedi Training Academy by organizing lightsaber training sessions. Provide foam lightsabers and enlist the help of a "Jedi Master" to guide participants through basic moves and techniques. Create a mini obstacle course to enhance the experience. For added flair, incorporate lightsaber duels or choreographed performances. Lightsaber training not only adds a physical activity element but also allows guests to channel their inner Jedi.

Star Wars Movie Marathon: A Cinematic Odyssey

No Star Wars Day Bash is complete without a movie marathon featuring the epic saga. Set up a cozy screening area with themed blankets and cushions. Create a viewing schedule that allows fans to relive the entire saga or focus on specific trilogies. Consider organizing "movie bingo" with squares featuring iconic scenes or quotes. The movie marathon serves as the backbone of the gathering, providing a shared experience that unites fans in their love for the Star Wars universe.

Interactive Star Wars Crafts: Unleashing Creativity

Engage guests with interactive Star Wars crafts that bring out their creative side. Set up stations for DIY lightsabers, Jedi robes, or even custom droid-building. Provide craft materials and let participants express their love for the franchise through artistic creations. The interactive crafts not only serve as memorable takeaways but also foster a sense of camaraderie as fans collaborate on their masterpieces.

Star Wars Karaoke: Galactic Tunes and Performances

Turn the gathering into a musical spectacle with Star Wars-themed karaoke. Create a playlist featuring iconic tracks from the saga and encourage guests to channel their inner pop stars. Consider organizing a lip-sync battle with participants performing as their favorite Star Wars characters. Galactic tunes and performances add a dynamic and entertaining element to the celebration, showcasing the diverse talents of the attendees.

Galactic Photo Booth: Capturing Memories

Set up a photo booth with Star Wars-themed props and backdrops to capture the memories of the day. Encourage guests to pose as their favorite characters or reenact iconic scenes. Provide themed props such as lightsabers, masks, and costume accessories. The photo booth becomes a central hub for capturing the essence of the gathering and creating lasting mementos for attendees to cherish.

Conclusion

Planning the ultimate Star Wars Day Bash is a labor of love that requires attention to detail and a passion for the galaxy far, far away. By immersing guests in an atmosphere filled with iconic decorations, encouraging creative costumes, and offering a feast of themed eats and treats, the gathering becomes a cosmic celebration of fandom. Trivia challenges, lightsaber training, and interactive crafts add layers of engagement, turning attendees into active participants in the Star Wars universe.

A movie marathon, karaoke, and a galactic photo booth serve as the pillars of entertainment, ensuring that the gathering is a memorable and immersive experience for all. In the end, a successful Star Wars Day Bash is not just a celebration of a beloved franchise; it's a testament to the enduring power of storytelling and the shared passion that unites fans across the galaxy. May the Force be with you as you embark on this intergalactic adventure!

0 notes

renatedagmarmilada · 1 year

Text

crimes against humanity

Three babies this week--- and all my sons and grandsons still shortened penises by remote ---by the brutal millionairess at lab st barths human Research - Lauren Fielding -Goldstein, /3 mill at Swiss bank a/c/ she has to share so rob old Fekete constantly At 77 she is too old to earn any more to get it all back-all male family---they tighten the skin on the rim of the penis which pushes it back into the body, same with the testicles.- ending all normal relationships,or future children Steve boss lab murdered in a created accident three children of my aunt in Australia, and a cousin in Canada- because Canada and Australia owe allegiance to the Cr own and the Crown Queen and Prince Charles not told what it really was--signed our destruction and extinguishion/.. these are brutal beyond description..OK THEY ASKED US HERE TO WORK NOT TO LIVE-----we needed you then-TURNBULLS etc.. and the jewish Mental care assistants are the most spiteful who ever lived, their careless attitudes to patients and little kiddies whom they rape nightly.. I now understand it all, though we were 200% pro jewish back then..IT IS THE JEWISH THANKS FOR Fekete’s FAMILY facing death each day by feeding and clothing their jewish friends under the noses of the Nazis.. We are still fleecing old Fekete... They paid Spain half a million--to destroy me and one English woman Curry's Manageress, had cancer activated by them and died, having retired and come out to Spain for a retirement in the sun..

NO LAW AND NO TRUTHS PERMITTED UK--John Turnbull just rang facebook to have latest blog banned-

quote we will ring facebook everytime you mention us...

latest spin-- the Priest at St Patricks Sheffield, thought YOU had stolen those people's clothes /Dawn Robinson of Barnsley Rd. Audrey and other Catholics of your area LAB ST BARTHS HUMAN RESEARCH used to break into your BARNSLEY RD home. ./ We said you were consumed with jealousy..copied from the mental care assistants--/? / we can make the Priest think anything we want. and we can listen to confessions by remote.. and we have told your thieves you are a foreigner/?/ Fag ash woman from Springfield flats -1- moved to upper Pagehall stole four folders filled with your paintings--- when she broke into your Upperthorpe house with her west indian smoke and sex buddy from upstairs.. I see her often at the bus stop and at times tram, she deals with it by looking away.. SO THERE IS NO LAW AND YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO COMPLAIN OR TELL THE TRUTH?? we thought there was a debt...NO THE DEBT WAS OURS Human Research-- IT IS A CORRECTIONAL-- no. When England sinks they will have only themselves to blame, Fekete warned and warned them-- We put you were a social pariah... not a teacher and lecturer.. It was Audrey's idea..quote-- couldn't we just stop all this crap. We could but we won't It will give us total power over the whole nation..

1 note · View note

homeandgarden-improvement · 1 year

Text

Home Improvement Tips

The Differences Between Do-It-Yourself as well as Specialist Gutter Cleaning

When it concerns gutter system house cleaning, there are lots of choices available. You can either do the work yourself or employ an expert. In this write-up, you'll find out the differences between the two choices and also some common mistakes to stay clear of It's also vital to consider the security of your house as well as family when making this choice.

DIY vs. professional.

Diy gutter clean-up may seem like an interesting work, but if you're uncertain how to do it safely, you should employ gutter cleaning services Ann Arbor. First off, step ladders threaten. They can quickly topple over, especially if you're not mindful. An expert will additionally have the correct tools to safely as well as properly cleanse your gutter systems.

One more aspect to consider is your time dedication. While doing the cleaning by yourself may look like a great suggestion, it can use up a significant amount of time. As well as you might have to invest in ladders as well as other tools.

Common blunders to prevent.

Cleaning your gutters is an extremely essential part of house maintenance, yet if you don't do it correctly, you can break your roofing system. Gutter system clean-up is actually a relatively simple job, but there are some mistakes you ought to avoid when doing it on your own. If you are brand-new to gutter cleaning, there are a few things you really need to know.

Among the first things to remember is step ladder safety. It's common for individuals to drop off ladders, so be extra careful when using them. Ensure that the ladder is securely affixed to the ground which the ladder does not have any loose or cracked hardware.

Cost of gutter cleaning

The charge of gutter cleaning relies on a variety of factors, consisting of the elevation of the house, the sort of gutters and also their condition. For a single-story residence, a gutter cleaning work will amount to in between $150 as well as $250, while a two-storey townhouse can set you back as much as $350. A specialist should give you a created price quote before beginning work, so you can review rates.

Generally, gutter system house cleaning expenses anywhere from $118 to $227 per linear foot. Higher-rise homes will usually be extra pricey because of the moment and equipments needed. Also, if the gutters haven't been cleaned in a while, they might require added fees.

Safety of your household

Among the most important actions to take to guarantee the security of your family when gutter clean-up is to hire a professional business. While it may appear like an easy work to scoop out the fragments as well as leaves, this job can be harmful. The work needs a step ladder and also the risk of slipping from the ladder is extremely high. Additionally, rain gutters can be filled with twisted metal pieces that are extremely harmful. You ought to use safety eyewear to ascertain your safety as well as the safety of those around you.

Another vital safety measure to take when gutter cleaning is to be knowledgeable about power lines. Make certain that you are operating far enough away from any type of high-voltage line to prevent touching them. If you do come across any subjected electric wiring, you must not aim to clean up them. Also, it is best not to use a ladder that is expensive or too long. A fiberglass ladder is a better choice.

Cellar flooding caused by blocked gutters

Clogged gutters are among one of the most standard sources of cellar flooding. When the gutter systems are not functioning effectively, rainwater can back up on the foundation, harming the wall surfaces and flooring. This can take place if the rain gutters are poorly installed or poorly pitched. Luckily, there are a couple of straightforward actions you can take to protect against cellar flooding.

In order to prevent cellar flooding, you need to initial identify the source of the problem. Overruning rainwater from improperly installed gutter systems can create ground trenching, where water continually strikes the ground listed below the roofline. This triggers the dirt underneath the basement flooring to broaden as well as lead to damaging.

#guttercleaning #gutters #Ann Arbor #Ann Arbor MI #Michigan

1 note · View note

petnews2day · 1 year

Text

Snake: Woman arrested in train with snakes, spiders & chameleons worth Rs 50 cr

New Post has been published on https://petnews2day.com/pet-news/small-pet-news/snake-woman-arrested-in-train-with-snakes-spiders-chameleons-worth-rs-50-cr/

Snake: Woman arrested in train with snakes, spiders & chameleons worth Rs 50 cr

A woman travelling on the Nilanchal Express was stopped and her boxes searched by the Railway Protection Force (RPF). What came out of the boxes could give anyone the chills – an assortment of rare snakes, chameleons and spiders.

The woman, identified as Devi Chandra from Pune in an IANS report, was travelling in the general compartment of the train when she was stopped at the Tatanagar station in Jharkhand.

The boxes she carried with her contained 28 snakes – including sand boas, albino pythons, ball pythons and red pythons – apart from chameleons, beetles, and spiders .

The RPF had to call snake catchers to take reptiles out of the bag. The total worth of the contraband was more than Rs 50 crore.

The report quoted RPF in-charge S.K. Tiwari as saying that the venom from some of the creatures was being used in making intoxicants.

The woman reportedly confessed during interrogation that she was just acting as a carrier for a person in Nagaland in exchange for a sum of Rs 8000.

She reached Guwahati by train from Nagaland and then reached Howrah, from where she took a train to Delhi. Raids are being held to arrest the accused.

Disclaimer Statement: This content is authored by an external agency. The views expressed here are that of the respective authors/ entities and do not represent the views of Economic Times (ET). ET does not guarantee, vouch for or endorse any of its contents nor is responsible for them in any manner whatsoever. Please take all steps necessary to ascertain that any information and content provided is correct, updated, and verified. ET hereby disclaims any and all warranties, express or implied, relating to the report and any content therein.

#Small Pets News

0 notes

bioswear · 1 year

Note

i dont mean this angrily at all but i think it would be good to consider why u feel irritation first for people helping to ur art accessible. it takes a lot of energy to write these and it feels disrespectful to look at people who want to share ur art with those who couldnt see it otherwise and be upset that they dont always leave commentary. is it not an act of admiration and love in and of itself to enjoy ur art so much that people take the time to carefully describe it for people who cant see it? anyways i hope ur having a nice day (:>

You’re missing my entire point.

It takes a lot of energy to draw what I draw and how I draw and I think it’s disrespectful to the artist who put HOURS if not weeks or months into a piece to not at least put your own thoughts on the piece or in the tags, in ADDITION to an ID.

When someone just slaps an ID and then just tags it as “CR” or whatever, it seems empty and soulless, and it comes off to ME PERSONALLY, like “this bitch forgot an entire wall text ID so I’m adding and fixing it for her” - unless there’s something in the tags that reflect the id posters own thoughts then it does feel deeply impersonal and like a correction, not an addition to something I’ve spent hours on.

This is not annoyance about making my work more accessible this is literally and has always been a PERSONAL annoyance about how people who have done this have very rarely ever added their own thoughts. Maybe it’s a twitter mentality but it feels almost akin to a Quote Retweet that gets more notes than the original tweet. It’s not the same concept but it FEELS like it.

Only until people who can’t seem to read or discern my actual meaning came along was I having a nice day.

#it’s like oh if I don’t fit into y’all definition of what’s Disabled friendly then I’m a villain a crook And I murdered and ate your babies #sorry I’m not the right kind of fucking neurodivergent goddamn #it’s like those assholes who take peoples art in a unique style and then fix it on their YouTube channels #i post my fucking art in hopes for a reaction a true reaction from people who reblog it #writing a description does not seem like an act of admiration not to me #but what the fuck do I know #like do you all know what the meaning of PERSONAL PET PEEVE MEANS #it’s not like I’m going to every single person who’s written an id and going OH YOU DUMB BASTARD LOOK! LOOK AT THE WORDS YOUR SINFUL HANDS #HAVE CREATED! SIN! SIN!!#like no come the fuck on y’all #y’all are acting like I’ve done just that when I literally said #i think it’s kind of annoying and it’s a pet peeve to me #if you are going to PHYSICALLY PLACE AN ADDITION ONTO SOMEONES POST #IT SEEMS COURTEOUS TO BE LIKE ‘Aw I like the colors’ of ‘sjfkskfkskd’ even #like I am not complaining about hypothetically asking for MUCH

0 notes

aviddylife · 2 years

Text

Ten Hot New Fashion Trends You’ll Be Seeing This Spring

New styles are headed our way for the spring 2022. So many its hard to count, but we picked our favorite, wearable, but daring trends to look forward to. https://youtu.be/3BPFbbA5CMg 2022 Summer Trends If you take awhile to warm up to new styles, have no fear. You will get accustom to these 10 new trends for Spring/Summer 2022 fairly quickly because they are rising in popularity and will fill our stores and clothe the people in the warm months to come. So regardless if you decide to try one of these new looks for yourself or if you simply want to be a spectator, you won’t miss a thing. . No one couldn’t escape Mui Mui’s Micro Minis during fashion week, and they made quite an impact. Thanks to their teeny tiny take on the skirt, get ready to rock the smaller than your average mini skirt, the micro mini. If you can get past the name, or the incident involving Paris Hilton and that car back in the 00’s, there are many wearable trends that wThis surprisingly sophisticated Anthropology Micro Mini, with a slit, is a great starter. You can also play it safe with this classic vegan Artizia Pleated Micro Mini Skirt. Anthropology Micro Mini Artizia Vegan Micro Mini Lulu’s Pink Micro Mini Nasty Gal’s Zip Front Micro Mini Skirt Nasty Gal’s Fringe Micro Mini Skirt Our number two pick tells us there is an up-and-coming trend, koo amongst the trends, which is “Less must be more” this season. Everyone seems to be doing their part to lessen the number of materials needed to produce garments. So without further ado, may we introduce the newest style to make a valiant effort in reducing waste, the cut-out trend. Regardless of the piece, cutouts are making a splash this season, and we promise you will get wet. These sexy silhouetted garments can be surprisingly elegant when worn with the correct pieces, and of course, your cut-outs are in the right place. Our rule of thumb for wearing these purposeful peekaboos is picking a body part to show off and keep the rest covered. Regardless of your upper chest, shoulders, lower back, or hips, pick your favorite part and share it while you can. For a final thought, the bikini would like to share a quote that always encourages her wearers, and that is, “you’ll never look better than right now,” and we couldn’t agree more. Seize the day, YOLO. Let them wear skimpy things... Just do it with confidence. Maniere De Voir Cut Out Suspender Dress Revolve Erla Cutout Dress GOUJEE Boutique Cut Out Boho Dress GOUJEE Boutique Cut Out BoHo Dress Sam’s Fifth Avenue Cut Out Maxi Dress ASOS Cut Out Sweater Dress Numero three-o is a simple one. Boots, white boots. We’ve always played dress up in white boots, our Barbies had white boots, women looked smoking hot in the eras before us wearing them, so now it's our turn. These boots are not a subliminal flashing sign to the nearest honky tonk, or dare I say, trashy? No, I would never even imply such a thing because they are, in fact, the opposite of unsophisticated. They are rich, classic, and very tasteful. A cream or white boot seems to bring attention to themselves and has a tendancy to enhance what are worn with them. They have a fashion forward look , and if anything, it’s nice to see something really fresh in footwear. Schultz White Knee High Boots Nordstrom Sam Edelman Circus Cream Boots Nordstrom DSW London Rag Klayton Boot Dillard's Matisse White Boot Dressing down never looked so cool. This look is really interesting because it's nothing new, men and teens have wearing this mix of relaxed and preppy for years, so much so that this look is the face of modern street wear. It’s a part of urban culture. It's popularity has risen and has spread to mainstream fashion and supermodels alike. So for a polished casual look, that makes us look much hipper than we probably are, put on your hoodie and a tailored blazer. What type of hoodie you ask? Hell, we have no idea, you’re on your own there. Pair it with the right blazer and it won’t matter a bit. Courtesy of TheVou.com J Crew Blazer Veronica Beard Blazer Bold lips aren’t giving up their spot in trending looks. Lipstick, like most of these trends, is evolving to stay relevant. This new formula of lip-wear is fresh, revived, and as edgy as ever. Lipsticks are rich with pigmented color and have an added high lustrous gloss shine. In short, the new lipstick is giving lip gloss a run for their money. The time-consuming process of layering your favorite neutral liner, followed by a perfect shade of nude lipstick, finalized with a glossy topcoat, may be put to rest. These new lipsticks take care of it all, offering incredible shine and bold, bright color. We’ll have to see if the old days of mixing are precisely that, old and outdated. Lip Locket By Jillian Dempsey Bomber jackets, oversized mostly, are trending jackets. Outerwear styles are an easy and fun way to update your look. Bomber jackets are forever in style and a great investment piece. Versatile and adorable, count us in. Bomber Jacket Banana Republic Real Real Gucci Bomber Jacket Speaking of jackets, full-length jackets snd trenches are in our near future. Their length gives an instant air of credibility and class. Not only do you look fabulous, but you feel it too. I may be alone in this thinking, but I feel more accomplished and essential the longer my jacket is. Let it remain a mystery, and let's put a full-length coat on and kick some ass. Or at least feel like you can. That's half the battle. Bold Suiting is one of my favorite items of the season. Bright, bold colors, dominant structured silhouettes, paired with a feminine third piece, for instance, a vest or corset top, pairs for a power investment piece you can wear time and again, occasion after occasion. The possibilities of mixing and matching are endless. From day to night, casual to formal, these are timeless additions to your wardrobe you can wear for years to come. IN CONCLUSION Wolf and Badger Pleated Bottom Alice and Olivia Suit at Neiman Marcus Red Linen Suit Banana Republic Pretty Liitle Thing Two Piece Suit Thank you for reading our blog! Subscribe and tell us what’s on your mind, what you want covered, Thank you! CONCLUSION There are so many fun trends ahead of us, enjoy the change and pick a look that enhances your own personal style. There is one important goal in all of this and that is to feel as beautiful as you are. If you don’t know my philosophy about fashion saving the world, it revolves around feeling confident. It is simple. You look good, feel good, gain confidence, believe in yourself, and when you believe you, the world believes you, and most importantly, listens. Whatever you choose to wear, where it in confidence and take over the world. It’s yours to have. Read the full article

0 notes