#idk dont come at me with discourse or anything | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

homophyte · 1 year

Text

it is interesting to me that ive seen lately (n yknow this is subjective and likely not any real social force just what ive seen) many queer people simultaneously talking about taking back and embodying unpalatable and ‘unmarketable’ queerness (the recent return to the terms faggot and transsexual come to mind) which i think is pretty evidently shaped by the conservative moment were in of demonizing queer ppl and especially gnc and trans people as predators--it reads as a return to queer isolationism in the face of external hostility, imo--while at the same time ive seen a lot of rallying around the “original” 6 stripe rainbow flag as opposed to any of the purportedly ‘factional’ flags of different queer identities, with the assumption being different identity flags divide us while the rainbow flag encompasses everyone and its kinda fascinating to me bc the rainbow flag is probably the single most marketable and palatable and uncontroversial symbols of queerness which has been seamlessly uptaken by those who wish to sell it back to us as gets pointed out every pride month with all the cringey pride merch.... i dunno you could maybe take that as a point of hypocrisy and claim the queer community is itself in a conservative moment rn where its returning to a sense of history and historical continuity (perhaps even out of that sense of external threat) or even that the queer community has for some time been in a conservative moment given the like, decade of identity discourse and lashing out at any people deemed to not have a sufficiently established history or however we should categorize the bihets/ace discourse/transtrender-tucute discourse/pan discourse/bi lesbians discourse (because lets be frank its essentially all the same discourse just keeping up its momentum by leapfroging from one target to the next) which i think is, like, SOMEWHAT true but not entirely? its more interesting to me, in any case, as an expression of a conflict the queer community is facing given that current state of affairs RE antitransness and that very recent history. like, the simultaneous need to retreat to a safe sense of community which is welcoming to the very things the outer world is demonizing ie mutable gender, complex or contradictory experiences of gender, gender expression which is hostile to the cis binary, but also the ways in which it has to grapple with those discourses which have largely defined the community infighting for again the past decade. its queer people begging the question ‘how can we make the queer community welcoming to the girlfags and genderfucks and tboys who are being threatened when we have spent so much time making the queer community a hostile place for anyone with a non-conventional or not easily (or even just palatably) sortable sense of queer identity’. and the answer it seems to be grappling with at the moment is like, welcoming all that diversity of experience but being absolutely averse to naming it. yes we love all the fuckery with gender and sexuality never be marketable but like, ew, why are you calling yourself [insert microlabel here]. you can be genderweird but you cant call yourself genderweird. you can only exist as queer in the broadest possible way (the all-inclusive gay pride flag!) but if you try to name the specifics or use those identity labels weve been fighting over for years youre doing it wrong (the progress pride flag is now ugly and cringey and ‘too much’). i think theres something also to the way (at least on this site) transmisogynistic discourses have really taken hold as legitimate (though yknow i wont downplay how much a problem transmisogyny has like. always been in queer spaces no matter what) in the name of protecting n defending trans people. like its just regurgitated transmisogyny but its being mobilized supposedly in the service of helping trans people. idk its definitely getting a little late for me to string this together fully coherently but theres a throughline there, in the ways certain ideas are being consolidated and reified as ‘yes were more progressive now!’ when i think theres definitely something to question there in terms of like...are we? are we actually? are we doing better by the people were trying to help or are we setting strict standards and forcing ppl to adhere to them again?

#myposts #this is long and honestly probably Nothing #i dont even really have a way of proving its the same group of people saying both things except fro anecdotally seeing it #and even thats not proof either is a real social force with like power. i could be entirely wrong on every count here #but i do think theres something to the idea that like #as ive seen said #yknow 'ace discourse never ended you all just accepted ace people didnt deserve support and then moved on w those views internalized'#i think thats more broadly true for like. all those discourses i mentioned. and for the transmisogyny i alluded to #but honestly i dont even want to name the specific phenomenon im talking abt there bc those people. scare me.#but yknow ill say it ive felt way more pressure lately to not call myself pan than i did at the height of pan discourse #before it became cringe to care about it and instead of actively shitting on pan ppl we moved on to passively doing it #ive largely started just. calling myself bi to avoid the arguement. which i predicted i would have to do years ago #and now look at me doing it! not really a fluke that its happening now. i think #which isnt to say were moving 'backwards' per se but that these ideas are not now and never have been really challenged #so weve just internalized their logics--reactionary logics--and its having an interesting effect now that we need a progressive community #for our safety.#now we cant say anything about it because to bring it up is jeopardizing everything weve built and the people were keeping safe!#cause we dont count as people deserving of safety were disruptors who only belong when we dont make noise. idk. or thats how i feel #again i dont really know if this is true at all im more just...thinking through it i think #basically like what im seeing--i think--comes from simultaneously that need to be unmarketable in the face of hostility #coming into conflict with a decade of momentum to make queers solely marketable. and i think thats producing some interesting--but sucky #--discourses in the current moment #last disclaimer that i might and am likely totally wrong! okay lauren out. post send *nervous sweating*

21 notes · View notes

oceanic-sunsets · 1 year

Text

fandom is fun until people find out that *gasp* it's inevitable that others will disagree with their takes and interpretation

#personal rant #honestly i've seen more posts about people talking about the 'discourse' than the discourse itself #i dont even know what's the current discourse we're talking about #and im okay with that #idk i see a take i dont agree with and i simply move on #but sometimes people are going to want to discuss these takes #and that's not inherently wrong. that's how we learn #by reading about different perspectives an opinions and coming to our own #as long as both parties are respectful it shouldnt feel like an attack on anyone????#st is really some people's first fandom and it shows #im talking about real analysis and discussions tho #not the ridiculous “adults shouldnt partake in fandom”#which is so dumb considering fandom spaces were created by adults for adults #this doesnt mean we should never listen to kids' opinions.#just as they shouldnt be able to say ANYTHING with no consequences. hidding behind 'but im a minor so you cant disagree with me'#'and if you do you're silencing me and are a bad weird person!!!!'#anyway #moving on

31 notes · View notes

beautifulpersonpeach · 6 months

Note

bpp lemme be sappy and incoherent for a min…

i saw this tiktok of bts’ solo era so far and i just wanna say that i’m glad that they know army doesn’t expect anything from them but music. GOOD MUSIC. like historically so many idols have gone on to do non music things after their peaks but bts knows that the core of their fandom are music fans. fans of THEIR music especially. bts as a whole prides themselves as being musicians and army prides ourselves as being fans of musicians.

idk. i guess i just wanted to appreciate how diverse this era has been musically and how proud i am of them doing the music they want even if i dont always enjoy it cuz someone else is bound to, yknow? i’m so freaking proud of their output. they’re amazing

***

It just tugs on your heartstrings doesn’t it? Even Jin who doesn’t have a full album yet, the song he made with Coldplay in only a few months doesn’t feel rushed or half-assed. It feels like a (sappy) sweet letter (in Chris Martin’s ink) from a friend you’ll be seeing before too long.

From Hoseok producing the beauty that is Jack in the Box; to Joon’s archive of his 20s with some of the best collaborations for a Korean artist in Indigo; to Jimin’s episodic processing of the personal struggles he dealt with during the pandemic in FACE; to Yoongi’s culmination of the AGUST D trilogy in D-DAY; to Taehyung’s expression of the music that most feels like him in Layover; and finally, Jungkook pushing himself out of his comfort zone to make a full album in a language he doesn’t speak, showcasing his skill set of ever-improving vocal ability, in classic pop songs in several genres that he’s selected to showcase his personal taste.

All the boys have done well. The assignment was to serve music, and they’ve all delivered. Some songs are more my taste than others, but I can acknowledge the work they’ve all done and I respect it.

And this isn’t really what you’re talking about Anon, but please let me go on a short tangent here.

I’ve seen chatter here and there about how Jungkook isn’t mature in his interview answers. About how he apparently comes across as a clueless puppet who can’t articulate his views eloquently, but like I said about the discourse around Jimin’s apparent lack of contribution to BTS, or Jin’s apparent lack of skill - sometimes that criticism is warranted, but most of the time people who say things like this frankly have no idea what they’re talking about.

A few of you have sent me asks months back, to give my view on Jungkook the way I’ve done about Jimin, Yoongi, Hoseok etc recently. I didn’t answer because I was waiting for Golden. Now that the album’s out, I’m sitting with it and will respond to those asks before too long.

But before that, I want to draw attention to this excerpt from Jungkook’s interview in The Atlantic.

In my draft reply to the asks wanting me to talk about Jungkook, I start with saying he’s a very simple person. That’s both his charm and the thing that confuses a lot of people about him, because many of us are anything but simple, so when faced with a man like him living the life he’s living, some people respond with suspicion or bewilderment.

Simple motivations, simple words, simple considerations - this is what I’ve observed in JK for the past 10 years. He’s younger than all the members but no less intelligent that the rest of the guys on average. He knows how to communicate what he means, he just usually has a preference to do it simply, and that’s what he did in that paragraph.

I’m excited to see how he’s going to become a global pop star, even bigger than he is now, because he’s certainly got the talent and skill to show real results. I’m proud of all the projects the boys have put out so far.

By their own words, one point of Chapter 2 was to showcase their individual colours, to show the world who makes up a group like BTS, so people could more clearly see what each member brings to the table, while the guys push themselves to learn new things, expand their skillsets, and hone their individual artistry to create a stronger, more nimble group.

So far so good. It seems to be going according to plan despite everything lol. I’m excited to get Joon’s next work, PJM2, Hobi’s release, Jin’s album, and all the other goodies lined up for us in Chapter 2. It’s been a trip and it’s only going to get wilder.

#bts #jimin #Jungkook #jikook #Namjoon #Hoseok #Yoongi #Taehyung #SeokJin #bts chapter 2

71 notes · View notes

pommunist · 1 month

Note

kind of feeling like the rest of the fandom just wants french fans to shut up and leave already :|... why should we be trusting quackity when he hasnt even given any more updates on anything. ("ill keep you updated everyone" -quackity (lying) on his stream addressing issues). "trust that theyre working on it!!!" is starting to feel more and more like people are actually meaning "omg stop complaining so much!!! youre ruining my enjoyment".

of course the new announcements feel like damage control why would we expect anything else? they refuse to talk about anything and start to dangle shiny new things in front of the rest of the fandom so they get distracted from french complaints. why should we trust that anything is happening when the syndicat says that the fired admins havent even been contacted by anyone after more than a week?

im so done at this point :|. i cant even lurk on twitter anymore because all the french accounts i looked at either went inactive, private, or deactivated entirely because of how many death threats they were getting for daring to expect more of quackity.

i dont necessarily think Q was lying or is trying to sweep the situation under the rug but yeah ! people can and SHOULD be wanting more communication and transparency

the « stop complaining and trust bc you’re just spreading negativity » mindset that im sometimes seeing is driving me INSANE like ?? this isn’t discourse or drama it’s a workers rights violation 😳 personally what is ruining my enjoyment of the server is knowing that the characters and story ive loved for months was built on the exploitation of people who also loved the project. that and the fact that it seems like the community im a part of was a second thought the whole time 😳

and this isn’t only a french issue like yes most of the ex admins who spoke up were french but the issues impact every community !

I know that since this is a BIG issue it’s gonna take time to solve and i can even understand keeping the server running but introducing so many new people + an awards event right now is so idk….

I also feel bad for the korean and german creators who are coming in at such a bad timing

and yes broke my heart seeing the admins who spoke up as well as big twitter accounts from qsmptwt having to stop expressing themselves/receive crazy amounts of hate/deactivate bc they’re so done with the situation and receiving so few support

#qsmp discourse #quackity neg #idk tagging just in case #some q fans are so parasocial it’s impacting negatively the qsmp fandom view of him

32 notes · View notes

rfdiscoursethrowaway · 1 month

Text

alr fucker ill bite

im trying 2 understand the absolute fuckin brainrot that is terf ideology solely so i can explain to people who actually want to make an effort to not be bigoted not fall into your pipelines. i do this already. but i wanna be more thorough and get screenshots and examples for specific questions. ill do a lil back and forth, but you wont be convincing me that all trans women are pedos n rapists and that we need to detransition people en mass and that trans people are delusional. i have a series of questions, if you consider yourself a terf please try and actually answer them, in a way that actually explains your thought process and isnt just calling me slurs because thats most of the discourse on this site. -------

how do you mentally justify the contridiction in "male and female brains have no difference and women are just as capable as men" (true and real) and "men are fundimentally more violent/ women less violent" besides just blatently liking sexism so long as it hurts men and not women (blatently harmful and bigoted just with a #girlpower coat of paint)

if its a socialization issue, how does female seperatism nessisarily help that? shouldnt the goal then to not treat women as an other, and to not define people based on biological characteristics? while biological differences exist they dont affect your mental or phisical capabilities in anything (in regards to biological sex atleast). wouldnt it be more helpful to treat it as simply a medical thing? like a blood type or something? and treat genital preference as just the same as any other random aesthetic preference in partners like, idk, liking fat people or likeing brown hair what is it about gender based oppression that makes you think that its the men that are the problem and not the whole gender thing, because its men thinking that women are fundimentally different alien creatures because we literally define people by their genitals and constantly talk about how your genitals make you fundimentally different then the "opposite". an ACTUALLY HELPFUL soution should be talking about how like, yeah! some of us look different, but thats like? fine? we are people. who cares whats in that person pants. and if your answer is that thats unrealistic and will require hundreds of years of societal change (true) why is your approach to double down on men and women being fundimentally different and not to like? work? twards something objectively better and less discriminatory? most of what terfs are known for is bigotry and thats not some crazy coincidence, its because your sexism (though you love to label it otherwise) naturally leads to transphobia. its because the core of your ideology is bigotry. women shouldnt be discriminated against cuz you are? fucking people? with the exact same capabilities, you do not deserve more/less praise more/less accountablitity more/less agency. infact id argue that this bending over backwords to try and exclude people you deem as men is why radfems are so much more of a pushover to conservatives. your willingness to go on and on about how biological differences make you a fundimentally different person just so you can rant about how men are all ugly evil penis havers just lets you be suseptible to violent reactionary shit by conservatives. regardless of where you come from politically, this applies to BOTH of us, if you refuse to really think deeply and critically about why you hate the things you do and why you like the things you do, and instead operate on gut reactions and absorbing politics from people on tumblr SOMEONE from SOME IDEOLOGY is always trying to take advantage of that. and transphobia IS violent reactionary shit, most the time i see transphobia especially against trans women its based entirely on appearance, people jumping all over themselves to body shame her for not being enough of a woman, talking about how gross and disgusting she is for wearing a dress or for having a deeper voice. why is this body shaming ok so long as you deem someone a man? attatching morality to appearance is just a blatently bad idea and its frankly gross how little so many of you are willing to critique that.

-----

whats your explaination for the tonal dissonance between "i dont want trans people dead and im not violent" and painting trans women as "always being men with terrible intentions who cosplay as women to have an excuse to rape and assault people"

because while you may not directly say "i think all trans people should be murdered" and you do it in a roundabout way with "all trans people are rapists and all rapists should be murdered" that does still say "i think all trans people should be murdered", just with extra steps. and are you aware that this is the exact retoric used by colonizers to justify genocide and slavery? painting black people as "savages and rapists"? whats your justification for painting a large group of people as fundimentally evil and violent, and how nessasarily is it somehow different then the retoric used to oppress any other marginalized group? + if its a "but im right!" consider this is also what a rapist or an antisemite or a mysogenist would say, and why you are parroting the exact same thing. like do you genuinely actually think that having a boy brain, or more testosterone, or a penis, makes you a rapist and a pedofile? really? and again if you agree with me that its a socialization issue why! dont you! treat it that way!! if you mean one thing, SAY THAT! and FIGURE OUT WITCH ONE OF THOSE YOU BELIEVE. because you cant fuckin have it both ways! if you wanna say that we shouldnt be treating women as stupid vile little vagina having worms (real and true) then like, you cant ALSO be like oh i also think we should be treating men as stupid vile little penis having worms >:) hehe i am so progressive and counter culture ignore all the horrific damage that catagorizing people like that has had i think it will be funny when we do it with men you see.

-----

what is with this insistance that people define themselves based on whats in their pants, like if having a pussy is just having a pussy thats fuckin fine alr but if you start insisting that people make that their ENTIRE PERSONALITY and that if you have one you HAVVVEEEE to have only a specific subsection of names and you HAVEEEE to be called a woman and use she/her and shit

like girl it is just words, who gives a fuck, if a guy says hey i wanna change my name to this girl name cuz it sounds cool as fuck its like! yea! hell yeah brother! and if hes like actually i prefer more feminine words to refer to me :) its like! hell yeah sister! how does that hurt fuckin anyone. is using words so hard 4 u. and before you be like ooOOuuyhghhg IM NOT DEFINING PEOPLE BASED ON THEY ARE PUSSY how is catagorizing people based on their chromosomes / genitals / appearance (and lets be honest here. its mostly appearance but you use chromosomes and genitals so you can pretend theres some kind of science proving that youre right, there is no chromosome detector 3000 for real life) not flattening them? like genuinely how the fuck do you justify that. you have to go to a different bathroom you have to go to a different doctors office you have to go to a different sports team all because i assume that your chromosomes and your genitals make you eaither unsafe or violent or constantly in need of protection and fundimentally less capable. terfs love to constantly insist that gender is whatever and then constantly try to force people to define themselves by their biological sex? why is whats in MY pants any of your fucking buisness? unless im at a gynocology appointment you dont need to know shit. all of this girlsgirlsgirlsgirls stuff what if you dont wanna be called a fuckin girl? what if i find it weird that you profile people and assume things about them because of their body? if gender is whatever why do you HAVE to be a male or a female. why do i have to fucking put my biology out on display for people to assume things about me based on? because i KNOW you assume things based on peoples biological sex and i KNOW you think more or less of people based on their biological sex thats half the ideology! why do you think every trans women is a sexist mysogenist who woke up one day at 24 and decided she was gonna be a girllll and wear dresses so she could opress woemennn moreeeee, why do you assume all trans men were groomed and exploited and brainwashed into thinking that theyre boys because of mysogeny and not cuz sometimes? being called a dude feels good? having a dick feels good? having a flat chest feels good? using he him or whatever the fuck feels good??? rad fem shit is just, sexism repackadged, do you never see the similarities? do you never see the fine print? that the core ideology is the same? this is just mysogeny again! like women are always the victim and men are always the perpetraitor. is just women have fundimentally less agency and men more agency women do bad things because theyre dumb and men do bad things because they had a good reason to. is just women have fundimentally less agency and men more agency please explain how that ISNT just the same mysogenist veiwpoints with a hashtag girlboss coat of paint. and this isnt me projecting mysogenistic right wing ideas onto you, i wrote all this stuff while looking through "radfem101" "terf reference guide" "things TRA's need to get thru their heads" posts. theres a reason people get them confused, ive been told these exact same things time and time again by alt rights and conservatives and mysogenists. so witch are you? why do you agree on so much?

-----

how do you deal with the whole, not wanting womens genitals to be constantly policed and have that be all that defines them (true and real) and the very real fact that there is no chromosome detector 3000 and if you want to create "female only spaces" you realistically are eaither going to have to subject billions of women on a daily basis to sexual harrassment to see if they are "real women" or do it just based on appearance. witch is enevitibly going to cause a disproportionate ammount of hate and violence twards black, gnc, and intersex women for not being "women" enough. something that is already happening, because trying to give rigid requirements for what looks like a woman and what looks like a man is always going to impact these groups disproportionately, you know its gonna be based off of like a white skinny cis girl! and uh! not all women are that!

and assuming there is a chromosome dectector 3000 in the future, a) intersex people b) trans men exist, and while im sure you can argue day and night about how they arent real men and phallo dicks are just a mutilated skin tube or whatever half of what you guys talk about is how you feel unsafe being in the same bathroom as someone who "looks like a dude" and who has a penis. considering the strictness in needing 100% gender conformity in trans women im sure the exact same people wouldnt be comfortable with a trans guy eaither, if youd feel ok just so long as they had the right reading on the chromosome dectector 3000 then all this talk about trans women being violent cuz penis and body hair and testosterone is just bullshit. and sense terfs love to play hypotheticals with 100% cis dudes just telling people theyre girls so they can get through the female bathroom security (a thing that totally exists believe me guys) (and also yeah telling a police officer that youre "just a trans girl" would totally actually help you in a legal case dont google trans panic defence shhhhhh its ok its ok, statistics you dont read from "xxvaginawomxngirlfucker" arent real its ok,,) couldnt a cis dude just lieeee about being a trans man? whos saying nobody can lie about my chromosome detector 3000 score! are you gonna put a bouncer in the female bathroom security gates? and like, where do trans people even pee then. we just rename the mens bathroom to the trannies and mysogenists room? the biologically more violent room? yeah lets shove a bunch of little intersex girls into the violent mysogenists room, she had body hair and a harsher jawline and that scared me so im lumping her into the room with all the people i think are pedos and rapists, she will feel totally ok about this and this wont effect her perception of herself, this wont enforce gender roles and make women having a complex about being feminine enough worse. women can be anything! except anything i think looks like a guy. so women can be feminine and nothing else :) but women can be anything i put in this super limiting box! i genuinely cannot imagine a world where this doesnt dramatically worsten sexual phisical and emotional violence against literally everyone.

and to say again. im not looking for quirky rebloggable snapbacks to each of my points i want you 2 put an equal ammount of effort as i did scrolling terflandia and writing all this up. so dont just call me a delusional tr-nny i want you to give me like. atleast a little substance here. something to chew and bite and pick apart

14 notes · View notes

sm0kebreaks · 1 year

Note

So like. As amazing at the tma has been about fat acceptance and love and has been absolutely vital to a lot of my self acceptance as a fat trans man, because this fandom actually talks about fat people (as opposed to other fandoms where fat characters and hcs are nonexistent), it means it’s also exposed me to the most and worst fatphobia of any fandom. I genuinely don’t even gaf about the actual discourse discussed in this fandom, it’s generally the people who negatively react to discourse of ppl complaining about fatphobia. The initial problems are usually ignorable to me, but it ends up bringing up peoples voices that make it incredibly clear what their true thoughts about fat ppl are. Idrk why I thought I should share this with you, ig just seeing if you have similar experiences.

I struggle here because i don't like to feel like i am attacking other artists. i'm a hater and i love to complain but i know i have my own short comings. but when it comes to the fatphobia in this fandom im always left not knowing how to talk about things because people will come to me and tell me why my complaint about someone thinning out a fat character is wrong or bad.

do keep in mind i dont really engage with the tma fandom as much i feel very much on the outskirts so this is jsut what i feel like i see on my end and i'm sure theres way more going on i simply dont know

in recent months we have had a newer influx of artists in the fandom who have come in with their own interpretations of the characters which is all fine and good. its jarring sometimes when we become so used to these formless characters looking a certain way that when new people enter the fandom with different ideas it feels wrong and like an attack.

the biggest issue has been people drawing a thinner martin. and while of course everyones welcome to their own interpretation and martin expressing that he's not exactly the smallest guy has multiple ways to be interpreted it is extremely frustrating to see people take that as giving him the most bare minimum extra weight. especially when having a fat character as desirable and as a love interest and such a Fun character is so far and few between

i could go on and on about how each time a popular artist posts a thin martin it gives everyone who looks up to them the excuse to do the same and it's why it's become such a prevalent thing lately. i don't think popular artists should have to worry about being good role models or anything in a fandom i think if youre making art you should do it for fun but it sucks to see when someone becomes so influential and are creating a problem. i deleted like three paragraphs on this alone so i'm going to move on.

i think what i see in the fandom most in regards to fatphobia is a skill issue. people don't know how to draw fat characters. but it also feels like people are barely trying. the artist i have in mind who i would consider to draw skinny martins DOES add a bit of roundness to him. i can aknowledge theyre doing SOMETHING. but you can't come to me and tell me that i can't criticize their art because culturally that's fat to them... like sure it could be. but it's also definitely a limitation of their art style and ability and instead of defending them and patting them on the back for doing good enough shouldnt we encourage people to grow and improve? what an amazing asset to be able to draw people of all size and variety. thats an AMAZING abillity to have in youre tool belt. i wish i had more resources for drawing bodyfat but unfortunately i do not. i have learned from looking at people and luckily having a lot of large loved ones in my life i've learned from as well as you know.. my own body to learn from. and learning to draw bodyfat and drawing characters i love with it has done wonders for my body dysmorphia.

i went on a rambling tangent and idk how coherent all of that is but the end point is that fatphobia sucks it has no place in this or any fandom and we need to practice our skills instead of erasing something that has made this fandom so wonderful to me.

here's some resources

80 notes · View notes

terraliensvent · 21 days

Note

thanks for being open to critique /gen

I sadly do agree with the anon on the pkmn blog rn bc I also noticed a change in how you respond aswell.

i can think of two examples straight off my head of when you seemed biased. srry to bring it back up but ya the first time was when the porn proportioned terra discourse happened. you spoke for the anon and changed the meaning of what they said to “oh they just meant kea should be more varied” when its clear thats not what ppl were upset about. the second example was when you also made it seem like anons who had imo very legit reasons to be upset about the way you handled the “speculation” were just being crazy out of nowhere. like you said they were like “you should die in a fire if u think this is ok” when no one said that, they were just rightfully disgusted and concerned.

ik this is a drama blog but the truth does matter too even when it means conceding that someone u disagree with was not bad in a situation or also that someone u agree with was bad.

idk i think u have been ok sofar but like yea if u learned from this it would make ur blog alot better like when it started

post related

example 1

example 2

prefacing my reply by saying im not arguing against the point this anon made or trying to paint my responses linked as “correct” or anything, just giving my reasoning for stuff

i will say that these 2 situations are the ones that have exhausted me the most when it comes to topics on here, which does further my point about how i can be bitter when topics get more aggressive. im not sure if i should take this as an issue with myself, or whether to show that being nasty to myself and others in my inbox just helps nobody. lets go with both!

starting with example 1, i felt like i made it pretty clear that i had my own interpretation of the comment, i think i even said as much within my reply. i will admit though i dont really have any sort of fondness for kea and their previous sexualization of terra adopts did leave a bad taste in my mouth regarding them. regardless, i think the reason i gave og anon so much slack is because of the (in my opinion) unbalanced response to it in the first reply. i think that there should be some more disconnect when it comes to critiquing a person ideas as opposed to the person themselves; what i mean by that is you can say “that comment you made or that idea you hold is misogynistic” without making aggressive assumptions as the person replying did. i think that maybe it makes it my fault for not being clearer that assumptions like that arent welcome here, or maybe its more my fault for having a very specific expectation of how people should interact. either way

example 2 i think has a bit of a shorter explanation, this specific ask set me off about the whole situation, since i agree it really shouldnt have gone on as long as it did. but as ive stated many times before i prefer to post everything in my inbox just to be more trustworthy as a mod and i was expecting that ppl could just let the topic die on its own. the assumptions thing was also happening here, and with the arguing going on it just pissed me off. i will say about the specific “die in a fire comment” that wasnt me so much saying that anons were claiming stuff like that, but rather me being hyperbolic in explaining my stance. i can be really hyperbolic on here when it comes to jokes and i can realize sometimes it isnt the most obvious thing, but thats my way of communicating for when im not being the most serious. with that specific situation, i was getting really annoyed that people were winding down to slapfighting, and if i presented the opposing anons as crazy or not really having a leg to stand on, thats my bad. i can see where both sides are coming from, it was just at that point in the argument i really just wanted it to be done and i maintain the stance that it really wasnt any of our business

i dont mean to present my opinions on here as the correct ones or that people who disagree with me are bad, and my responses on here are meant to be my interpretation of asks and how i see things personally. if i give my interpretation, it isnt meant to be like “oh actually anon meant this,” its more like “the way i read it is they could mean this, i dont have a ton of evidence one way or the other though so this is just my thoughts”

in the end though, i think both of these instances can be majorly chalked up to me becoming snippy, lol

#mod post #mod rambles #is this even terra drama anymore?#no but its important for me to talk about

9 notes · View notes

gothhabiba · 1 year

Note

(fountain anon) I guess the best way to say why I dont understand fountain is that I dont understand why people are so angry at it. Because that seems to be the crux of the piece, the negative reaction to it that continues to this day (part of the reason I find it hard to try look into is that it seems like every second result is some rant about how it should never have been made disguised as an actual article). Its like you say that it rubs against their idea of what art is, but I just dont get that. Even is someone dislikes it as a piece I dont understand why someone would say it doesnt get to count as art, which I guess does tie into the AI stuff as well. idk how well I've articulated that but thats one of the main things I dont understand about fountain, where that response seems more important than the art object itself.

Theres smaller things I dont understand which together make a large hole of many smaller questions but I cant list well all of here, like one being if the whole point of the work is that its "readymade" then why do the institutions seem set on preserving that one specific urinal like a holy relic but from your first response it seems like you have thoughts on that yourself.

If what's confusing you is why someone would get so up-in-arms about this, or insist that they get to dictate what counts as "art," then the context that's probably missing is an idea of how powerful the cultural and institutional orthodoxy surrounding "art" was at the beginning of the 20th century.

You could probably analyse that in a few different ways. To me, the crux of the matter is just what I've been pointing out—a capitalist understanding of "value" relies on a concept of "labour hours" and the attendent concept of "exchange value" in a capitalist market—plus, in the U.S., capitalist ideology and Protestant ideology are often entwined with each other insofar as Protestant ideology glorifies work and suffering as essential to moral "worth" or "value."

@auntbutch points out that the matter of who gets to decide what "art" is is a matter of power. In a concrete sense, the (majority of the board of the) Society of Independent Artists had the power to hide the piece during the Grand Central Palace exhibition despite the fact that the artist had paid the requisite fee to have the piece displayed, which constituted a rejection of the idea that the piece could consistute "art."

In a conceptual sense, the idea that there is "art" and there is "non-art"—because it relies on a distinction between the "artistic" and the "everyday"—must therefore rely on an idea of "value" that is conveyed by scarcity (see again: capitalist exchange value). Put another way: if everything is art, nothing is.

In order for art to have "value" (exchange value, moral value, "artistic" value), it must be (in comparison to the numbers of objects in the world) rare; in order for artists to be fundamentally different creatures than the rest of the masses of humanity, they must be rare.

You can ensure that artists remain rare, and that art consumption remains the province of the wealthy, by insisting that the production of "art" requires a good deal of time, and anything which did not require a good deal of time to produce (in addition to time spent learning the skills required to produce it, time spent networking and paying your dues before you are enabled to proceed in the field, &c.) is therefore not "art."

cut for length:

You can also ensure that "art" remains rare by insisting that art must not be useful. The early 20th century is a bit out of period for me, but I know that the concept of "l'art pour l'art" ("art for art's sake") had come into popularity at the end of the 19th century in reaction to a general culture that insisted on the moral value of art and its "purpose" in shaping minds and leading to good, moral habits.*

Where these discourses agreed is that "art" was not held to have physical, quotidian uses: a working-class woman knitting stockings for her family to wear because they could not afford to pay someone else to do it was not an artist, no matter how much time and skill and aesthetic sensibility went into their production; nor were any of the world's Indigenous peoples who were producing e.g. pottery, or ornamenting various other everyday objects.

This is the inherited distinction between "Art" with a capital "A" and a "craft." This keeps women, the working class, and non-Europeans out of "art," because they do not have the time, the distance from the everyday business of the maintenance of life, or supposedly the intellectual capacity to produce "real" art.

So art did not have a physical purpose. Rather, the purpose of art was to "exalt the senses"; to create exquisite sensations in the viewer as a result of the aesthetic skill of the artist. Depending on how overtly moralist a given theorist was, they might say it was to improve upon what had come before and thereby build on our (read: the white races') inheritance of the best impulses and accomplishments of humanity. (Actually Victorian concepts of eugenics had a lot to do with aesthetics—the purpose of art was to advance the (white) race morally, and thus to improve the hereditary material that they passed down when they reproduced.)

Granted, the context in which Duchamp first attempted to display "Fountain" was one in which you had had some heterodoxy of content—cubism, for example, which the Society of Independent Artists did seem to like. But ultimately, though cubism probably angered a lot of people for its loose approach to representation and thus the potential danger it posed to the future of "art" (again, not really my area), it was something that the Society could nevertheless recognise as "art," because it was clearly an object that the artist had spent time creating and that fell into a previously understood medium of "painting" or "sculpture" (not a lot of heterodoxy of form). Despite the fact that the Society's exhibition was supposedly "open," and that they were supposedly an "avant garde" group, it went too far.

The challenge that readymades posed was that they asked people to consider something that was not created but merely chosen and recontextualised by the artist as "art". They affronted the notion that art required time and skill (on the part of the artist) and therefore had a natural inbuilt assurance of scarcity.

But "Fountain" is by far the most famous amongst the series of readymades that Duchamp exhibited, probably because there's something about its being a urinal that is pretty confronting (whether it reads as "gross" or "disrespectful" or what have you). It lacked respect for the effort that "real" artists put in and the art world that circulated and displayed "real" art pieces and the seriousness with which they took their mission to uplift or express or represent humanity or whatever it was that they insisted art must do.

"Fountain" looked at a whole culture of people who deeply felt that they were doing something important to the fate of humanity—and, in some cases, had made careers and money out of creating and stewarding and judging "art" (not just artists but critics and museum directors and curators and the board members of independent societies of artists)—and said "actually, art is a receptable for piss."

You can see this same sort of attitude today very easily by scrolling through a few replies on any of my posts asking people to reconsider their easy equation of "time and effort" to "value" in their evaluation of art. A lot of people (especially people with money on the line) are very affronted by that request, and insist that art's function as something that binds humanity together and creates wonderful feelings in the viewer (sound familiar?) is dependent upon its requiring "effort" to create.

The museums that treat this specific urinal (actually a few approved replicas, the original was lost, my bad) like a holy relic are, in effect, absorbing (neutralising?) the critique that "Fountain" was levieing without 'understanding' it or behaving accordingly. Really, a museum can't 'understand' a critique of this nature or behave accordingly, because the critique cuts at the very concept of what a museum (or an art exhibition, or an art auction, &c. &c.) is for in the first place.

The climate surrounding art (in the circles of the intelligentsia, art students, rich people who want to be 'cultured," various other groups) has changed significantly in the intervening 100+ years since "Fountain" was made, to the extent that "modern art" frequently comes across critiques along the lines of "my kid could have painted that" (from the non-art-educated "public," who don't have the sometimes enormous amount of information needed to contextualise a given piece or movement. So you have a split between different groups' concepts of "art," where for a lot of people today it's still "looks nice and required effort to make," while a lot of the art-educated have moved on).

However, despite the fact that e.g. a readymade may be "easier" and take less time to create, the museums that feature them still rely on scarcity! Because their value proposition is that they collect and curate and display objects of extraordinary artistic or cultural or historical "value." What's inside of them must be different from what's outside of them for them to be worth keeping the lights on and employing staff and paying an entrance fee and accepting government culture grants. It's just that the scarcity may come from different sources (it's a rare artist who has the right connexions to get a piece or an exhibition accepted; it's a rare piece that has caused enough controversy to be historically significant enough to be "worth" displaying).

As far as I'm concerned, museums' accepting "Fountain" into the fold of "real" art by exhibiting it (putting money into storing and moving the original replicas and displaying them, putting the weight of their institutional cachet behind it, &c.) is one of the greatest ironies of the piece. Pinoncelli, who has attacked "Fountain" exhibitions with, on two different occasions, a hammer and his own urine, got much closer to the spirit of it.

*You can probably just about figure what these "moral" habits are: heterosexual marriage, the maintenance of virginity especially in women, adherence to the nuclear family, a sense of emotional "sympathy" for other people as strengthening the body politic, refraining from "indulgence" in drinking and gambling, avoiding miscegenation, &c. &c.

#questions #art tag #fountain

51 notes · View notes

blkkizzat · 3 days

Note

hi im shy so i haven't interacted b4 but i luv your fics! i like that you write stories & just don't post smau or twt porn links.

Hey nonny! TY for liking my work, its appreciated!! I do encourage you to interact though, even if its just a comment or continued anon msgs cause they do encourage me to write. I also really like receiving them <33 so I hope you or anyone else feels comfy to interact with me. *i dont bite i promiseeeee*

However, I honestly don't think theres anything wrong with smaus or twt porn links.

I incorporated smaus into my fics before. I adore writing or reading a good crack fic/post so I definitely think they have their place too and they are funny! I just personally struggle when it comes to writing shorter content so not something in my wheelhouse to do. (lol anything i write under 1k words i automatically think is dogshit. lol someone teach me to write short stuff i beg.)

Also I be EATING UP those twt porn links!! I don't post any of my own as my twitter is a stan account and I don't follow/like/retwt porn on there cause I don't want to mess up my algorithm. But I do be bookmarking them HEAVY! They are good reference material for my smut fics tbh.

Also I try to stay out of the mess/discourse cause I feel like people should be able to enjoy what they like without writing lame dissertations in defense/debating about it. But since we are on the topic already I'll add I haven't really understood the hate for them in particular, especially those saying people who like/post them have porn addictions because what!? Like we are not all on here to write/read smut?? pot---meet--->kettle. Anyway I guess I can understand the frustration some have when they assume they are stealing attention away from fics, but idk tumblr is huge and there is a place/audience for everyone is my belief. I've seen many long 6k+ fics breaking 20k+ so I think theres interest in long fics as well (one of my 7k+ fic has 18k+ notes). But I work in marketing, am getting my MBA right now and have worked in the middle of business and creative my entire career (at one point i worked for Twitch directly with streamers/influencers) so I can say when it comes to anything content/creative driven its honestly it's less about the quality of the individual work and more about regularly finding, interacting and catering to your audience if you really care about notes that much . I think its far more important though to do it for fun. Especially since we are not getting paid and doing this for free-99! So much creativity gets stifled when its too much about the business/results/notes side and you are working to please others/for clout. Thats a whole ass job in itself lmfao! I used to write on ff.net back in the day (years ago omfg) and stressed myself out so much from all the reviews/requests that I ended up abandoning it and was scared to write fanfics for years because of the anxiety of 'letting ppl down' until I got back into it last fall and decided to stop giving a fuck LOL.

Ahhh but I could ramble on about that for hours so let me stop I'm doing what I said I didn't want to do cause this is def now a mini dissertation from me going down the rabbit hole on this LMFAO! (im long-winded af lol)

But ty for the ask nonny I hope you come back soon <3

#kizzatanswers #anons #kizzatrambles

7 notes · View notes

irrealisms · 3 months

Note

You dont have sex because you're waiting for marriage or because being gay is a sin?

man i dont remember posting anything abt not having sex/celibacy/being side b before this ask, idk what this was inspired by. it's probably bait (and, quite frankly, it's none of your business why i'm having or not having sex) which is why i waited almost a full week to answer but i'm going to answer it anyway (once) because i want to be open about this. if you or anyone else is interested in having a discussion on why i believe the things i do, send me a message or an ask off anon. i'm much more willing to be vulnerable in a setting that isn't "anon question that is probably bait".

as a clarification that will probably mean very little to my secular followers but will be appreciated by my side b followers (and hopefully at least mean something to my side a Christian followers): i reject this dichotomy. i'm celibate because i'm gay--but i don't think being gay is a sin. i am gay. i do not believe my existence is a sin. i believe that i've found many beautiful and true things from being gay, and that God made me gay for a reason. i am glad i'm gay, and i don't wish i were straight or pray to become straight. so, so much of side b advocacy within the Church is focused around making it clear that, while being gay comes with different temptations than being straight, it is not a sin to be gay. (note also: different temptations. not "being gay comes with temptations and being straight doesn't".) it would be a slap in the face to not start with that. i share a lot of thoughts on this with eve tushnet, who's also a side b Catholic lesbian; this post was incredibly meaningful to me on my journey, but check out her blog if you want more.

but also, yeah. i don't have sex because i converted to Catholicism with the intent of obeying the Church's doctrine. i note in my bio that i obey the doctrine of the Church. and, well, i can't get gay married as a Catholic, and i'm not supposed to have extramarital sex. so i don't i know that there are side a Catholics, many of whom i respect, but i'm not one of them. i don't believe in "ex-gay" therapy or "pray the gay away" and i don't think that being gay is inherently sinful, but (and here's the part that i assume you're reading for) i do believe that having gay sex is a sin. i follow the teachings laid out in the Catechism, to the best of my ability and understanding. that's in my about page. right now, for me, as a lesbian: that means celibacy. the Catechism is pretty clear on that, imo. i don't talk about this often because most of my friends (and, for that matter, tumblr followers) are queer non-Christians, many of whom have trauma around Christianity and Christian homophobia (which is, to be clear, very real, even if you agree that gay sex is a sin). but like... i'm just living my life. i go to Mass on Sundays and i fast during Lent (or get permission not to from the local priest, when my eating disorder makes it a health concern) because doing otherwise would be a sin; not having sex (or masturbating! which was/is tbh much harder for me to give up than partnered sex! but people ask a lot less about that, because it's less discourse bait and more clearly none of anyone else's business) is the same sort of thing, to me. was it hard (is it hard)? yes, sometimes. but God doesn't just ask me for sacrifices that are easy. maybe some day i'll change my mind again and become side a or deconvert altogether. maybe i'm wrong about things! but this is where i'm at right now.

for what it's worth, i'm happy. i don't hate myself. as mentioned earlier, i'm glad i'm gay and i don't want to be straight. my life is full of love--from friends, family, God. celibacy has had its downsides and painful moments for me, but it's also had its upsides and moments of joy. i've been able to deepen and prioritize and value my friendships. it's been valuable and beautiful and worth it. fundamentally: i believe what i believe, and i'm living true to that. if you want to unfollow me for this, go for it. if you want to filter it, my tag for religion + queerness + being side b is #too gay to live too trad to die.

#therapists dni #too gay to live too trad to die #catholic tag #follower purge time ig

8 notes · View notes

kane-the-fed-pinkerton-tulpa · 4 months

Text

not cancelling or calling for a boycott but in light of evidence actually materializing about tsr's author im not sure im going to continue to run this blog

the things presented and allegations don't fall into 'truly awful/shut the whole thing down right this instant' imo but more and more "serial asshole (from just ass)/weird things about non-gay mlm" territory.

im not posting sources or planning on discussing these things (as again they're not EXTREME), only on what i do next regarding this blog. if you're concerned/interested in what's being said, go to twitter and look up the author's username. there are a handful of threads compiling this stuff.

this isn't a call to action or indictment (see the words allegations and evidence presented) and the author or echo project hasn't responded. there's more context to just screenshots, but even then there's a sufficient amount 'mmhh this is odd' stuff even if it's all explained 'with' a full contextual analysis IMO

im choosing to step back and see where things go/if anything changes or is at least said/acknowledged.

The situation is complicated too because a lot of things posted were either outright fabricated and up to taste/hyperbole, or completely out of the scope (IMO) of whether or not something is "problematic" . there's also shades of grey to the things that have happened that i witnessed personally (so its something im willing to discuss)

ie fat murdoch edit: the image was, very much so, imo a piece of fat fetish art. (this isnt an assignment of moral good/bad. its a statement of subjective fact). an admin of a server (tsrs author) asked OP to move it to a thread dedicated to fat fetish material. IMO, he was kinda rude about it, but the words "kinda rude" are key. OP reacted negatively, but IMO with hyperbole, so the situation got heated.

So while this isn't something truly terrible, to me, and the other allegations and evidence are more serious (but not EXTREME), there's been enough of instances of "hey this is kinda odd/rude" for things to remain comfortable for me.

ill be blunt and ill say that ever since i saw interactions with the author, he's looked like kinda of an asshole. i think he has some interesting things to say and some unique viewpoints on some events/things that have happened and shares those in an interesting way (outside of being an author for this vn i really enjoy) so i just dealt with him being an asshole by rolling my eyes or talking in closed/private instances and going "oh my gawd he's an ass lawl" and moving on with me life. most of the time he's pedantic and kinda whiney in online discourse BUT i say this in his defense because I feel like some of the allegations/evidence are chalked up to how he reacts negatively and not outright demonstrable actions/beliefs

maybe that's a copt out? maybe these patterns mean something or more? i dont know. though, with things shown to me, and things prior, I don't think we have a case of "cancel this man's entire career, body of work, and banish him from the internet and entire furry community immediately and forever!"

i think not wanting to associate with him or his work is understandable. i think stopping and looking and thinking, and waiting for a response is reasonable. I don't think harassment campaigns or like genuine bullying is reasonable (at the point we're at. if it comes out tomorrow he's, idk, fucking killed someone maybe we can do that)

There's some other things i find distasteful about the situation too, but this post is long enough. i'm hoping we can act like adults about where we find ourselves as a fan community though. Including as Echo Project fans, TSR fans, FVN fans, and even as members of the wider Furry Community

9 notes · View notes