ri5k

[ri5k]

Susan Sarandon - 70's

[ri5k]

Sam Cooke in the recording studio, 1960

[ri5k]

It’s really just a mirror. It’s really just a mirror. It’s really just a mirror. It’s really just a mirror. It’s really just a mirror.

[ri5k]

[ri5k]

something i notice a lot online is the presumption of personal interest or motivation in a conversation about objective facts. for example if you say "all desks are brown" and i say "not all desks are brown" it does not then follow that i'm obsessed with "defending" desks when actually i should be more concerned about the greater issue. obviously i am using a very neutral example, but the rationale is the same for any subject, even if it is sexuality, politics, whatever. caring about accurate statements is being a defender of truth, and not necessarily an indication of one's feelings about the subject at hand.

now, if i am constantly bringing up the color of desks, and insisting that everyone pay attention to it, that's different. but if i am merely responding to a statement made before me, i am trying to help the conversation be more productive. i want our conclusions to be accurate with solid facts and arguments behind them. the process matters, and there is no rush.

also, if i am speaking to someone who is emotional about a personal experience, it is pedantic and obnoxious to correct everything they are saying. but if we are analyzing social systems, data, etc., it is absolutely appropriate, and again, does not necessarily communicate my personal feelings on the subject.

i do not trust people who cannot separate a personal discussion of feelings from a clinical review, and who refuse to acknowledge the logical and factual errors in their reasoning because they are afraid it weakens their conclusions. if a particular point "doesn't matter" then it should be no problem to redact it, or omit it in the first place.

[ri5k]

Crocheted street art in Portland

[ri5k]

lest we forget that incels and mras and fundamentalists insist that women don't even like sex and get no pleasure from it, because that enables them to be more selfish and controlling. i strongly feel that it's feminist to emphasize female sexuality and pleasure, so that it is better understood and advocated for

[ri5k]

also this argument is basically always used to shame women, not men

i see a lot of ppl frame sex outside of a relationship as "giving the man sex without getting anything in return" (i.e. commitment) and that's always bothered me bc youre not supposed to have sex in order to get something? it's for the sake of itself where you both enjoy it, right? if you're unhappy with that don't do it?? idk

[ri5k]

sometimes a situationship is just where you know an actual relationship won't work but you have a lot of chemistry and can't stay away from each other

[ri5k]

i see a lot of ppl frame sex outside of a relationship as "giving the man sex without getting anything in return" (i.e. commitment) and that's always bothered me bc youre not supposed to have sex in order to get something? it's for the sake of itself where you both enjoy it, right? if you're unhappy with that don't do it?? idk

[ri5k]

🤔 why the assumption that one party wants a relationship and the other doesn't

a situationship is basically a person telling you that you’re not worth the commitment

[ri5k]

[ri5k]

realllyyyy excited for the birthday plans i made for ***, it's lowkey also for me i guess LOL

[ri5k]

[ri5k]

[ri5k]

na bachlóga

the buds

[ri5k]