#<- tagging those just in case

[wildflowercryptid]

i've actually gotta sit down and write out the mjverse!indigo disk plot bc i probably am gonna change some things around, but my brain's too jumbled rn to just sort out ideas in my head.

[butchfalin]

the funniest meltdown ive ever had was in college when i got so overstimulated that i could Not speak, including over text. one of my friends was trying to talk me through it but i was solely using emojis because they were easier than trying to come up with words so he started using primarily emojis as well just to make things feel balanced. this was not the Most effective strategy... until. he tried to ask me "you okay?" but the way he chose to do that was by sending "👉🏼👌🏼❓" and i was so shocked by suddenly being asked if i was dtf that i was like WHAT???? WHAT DID YOU JUST SAY TO ME?????????? and thus was verbal again

[dazzelmethat]

Cricket Cat concept. Do you see it? Do you see my vision? I don't think they'd purr or meow, just chirp with their wings.

[hurristuff]

For this Disability Pride Month, I saw a post that was shittybad and it made me angry. So have this

[yeah-thats-probably-it]

Hot take maybe but I think Bertie would be FAR more likely to survive the first two months of Dracula than Jeeves would be. Bertie has a healthy sense of self-preservation. Jeeves consistently underestimates how dangerous a situation might get (Steeple Bumpleigh, the club book) because he’s overconfident about his level of control over any given situation. He'd handle Dracula masterfully if they faced off in England, but on Dracula's home turf? Much more doubtful.

I realize this might be a tough sell, so I will explain further (or it's not a tough sell, and I'm going to explain further because I want to). (criteria taken from @canyourfavesurvivecastledracula) Without further ado.

Would Jeeves and Wooster survive Castle Dracula?

Jeeves

Jeeves' survival will depend on how long Dracula finds him more entertaining than irritating. On that basis, I don't think he's long for this world. On the one hand, he has a huge wealth of knowledge about English society and culture that he can recite perfectly from memory. That should buy him at least a little time with noted teaboo Dracula.

On the other hand, he would be absolutely no fun as a vampire plaything. Jeeves cannot be got. Sneaking up on him while he's shaving will yield zero reaction (though that's at least good for his short-term survival--given that, although he DID take the crucifix from the old woman out of politeness, he certainly isn't going to wear it. The rules of fashion don't go out the window just because you're in a spooky castle). Then, although managing the whims of rich jerks is not an insignificant part of a valet's job, Jeeves usually does this by bending his employers to his will. Dracula is not the sort of employer this will work on. It'll just add insult to injury when on top of being impossible to scare, NOW Jeeves is telling Dracula that his favorite cloak is several centuries out of fashion and he's not allowed to wear it anymore.

Jeeves will 100% go exploring in the areas he was told not to go-- though to be fair, he MIGHT actually get away with this, what with his superpower of appearing in rooms without being seen or heard. Said superpower might save him from the brides as well (though this is by no means guaranteed). Since I find it doubtful that Dracula would come to rescue his annoying ass, not being noticed is his best defense.

There are a couple other things working in Jeeves's favor; the question is just whether they'll be enough to save him.

He DOES know shorthand, and could try to send coded letters. He might even have the foresight to squirrel away some extra stationary where Dracula can't find it. But could he get them posted? Would it even do him any good?

He certainly has enough cultural literacy to figure out what his new boss is pretty quickly. If he didn't chuck the crucifix out the carriage window, he might start carrying it around in his pocket.

Psychology of the individual, sure, but the individual in question is a 400-year-old vampire who lives in an isolated castle in a foreign country and is regarded as a terrifying mythological figure in the surrounding villages. Jeeves has never come up against anything this alien before, he's cut off from his normal resources, and opportunities to play people against each other are limited.

He probably has enough upper body strength from all that shrimping and fishing to climb the wall, so he COULD escape if he wanted to, if he survived long enough. It's just, again, that overconfidence, and also Dracula has a vast library full of rare old books that are entirely at his disposal. He's keeping his eyes and ears alert for potential escape strategies, of course, but I don't see him being as desperate to get out as Jonathan was.

There are just a lot of "depends on"s here, and I'm not convinced that luck would shake out in Jeeves's favor, all things considered.

Bertie

Bertie is so perfect for the job of Castle Dracula Prisoner it's like it was made for him. Think about it. Being held against his will in big manor houses comes more naturally to him than breathing. He's afraid of things that are scary. A lifetime of dealing with Aunt Agatha has made him the world's preeminent expert in "curl[ing] up in a ball in the hope that a meek subservience [will] enable [him] to get off lightly." He will NEVER go exploring in places he's been warned away from if nobody is forcing him to (Rev. Aubrey Upjohn's office notwithstanding. There were biscuits in there). He's both fun to talk to and easy to toy with (and extremely English). A+ prisoner. Dracula adores him.

In my opinion, Bertie is at Castle Dracula either because Aunt Agatha got some wires seriously crossed and thinks he’s going to meet an eligible potential bride (I mean, there are certainly brides there), or because Dracula has something Aunt Dahlia wants him to steal (far less likely, given that one of Dracula’s THINGS is famously not owning anything silver). Either way, he's shown himself entirely willing and able to escape down drainpipes if a sitch gets too scaly.

He DOES take the crucifix, and DOES wear it (which is what will save him during the shaving scene, because you KNOW he's going to jump a foot and cut himself like the dickens). He's read enough supernatural goosefleshers to be genre savvy about terrified old women cryptically pushing crucifixes into one's hands. I also think his sunny disposish endeared him to the villagers, and they were particularly vehement about urging him not to go. He doesn't speak German or Romanian, but he's empathetic enough to recognize Pure Terror. So by the time he actually gets to the castle, his imagination is already running wild and he's plenty aware that he is in imminent danger.

I think the biggest risk to Bertie will be the brides; whether or not he's susceptible to trances, if he thinks they're trying to marry him, it's against the code of the Woosters to turn them down. But that only becomes an issue if he comes face to face with them, which, luckily, I think is unlikely on account of the aforementioned "won't go exploring" (and if he did, Dracula would definitely rescue him).

I'm inclined to say due to his drainpipe-escape habits that he WOULD be able to climb the wall and MAY attempt to sneak into Dracula's room to look for the keys if his desperation grows to outweigh his fear. Whether he does or not, though, he does NOT have the stomach to attempt shovel murder, and therefore won't get magic brain fever, and may very well simply walk out the front doors when the people come to take the boxes away. OR he climbs his way out like Jonathan did. Either way.

When Bertie tells this story at the Drones later, Tuppy will say that no doubt it's been greatly exaggerated and all that probably happened was that he spent a couple months in an oldish house entertaining a weird loner.

[fuwungi]

I am what I eat

[magic-worms]

catharsis (artist statement under the cut, read before reblogging)

i started this drawing to fill a niche. i’ve seen plenty of fanmade (and now canon) material of bill’s statue being vandalized or beat up on, but never so far as to damage it to the point of being unrecognizable. there were some very strong and specific feelings that drove the making of this piece, but ultimately they boiled down to my own personal need to see bill’s statue utterly destroyed by the one person who deserves it the most.

my coloring process was very dynamic- i didn’t have a set idea in mind for how i wanted the colors or lighting to look and most of my artistic decisions were made intuitively. by the end i’d subconsciously decided to set the scene to be very early in the morning, which is more fitting than i originally thought it would be; that and ford’s sweaty clothes and skin convey (i hope) that he’s been out in the woods alone all night, with the privacy to rage, yell, cry, whatever he needs to do to get his pain out as he turns what is left of his abuser into dust.

i don’t often write long statements like this to go with my art, and some of the above commentary i normally might have put in the tags, but in this case i wanted my thoughts and intent to be inseparable from the art itself. also forgive me if my writing sounds a bit disjointed, sometimes i have a hard time putting my thoughts into words

do not tag or treat this as b.llf.rd or i will block you. EDIT: if you post/repost b.llf.rd at all just dni actually

[tullecake]

after a lot of procrastinating - I drew up Surge to go along with my Kit panel redraw

alt versions under the cut --

original colors - plus the two drawings together !!

[creatureheart]

Well if we're going to go by things being literally tangible and not personally perceived then you are not a brown bear and I am not a horse or hyena, even psychologically or spiritually, no matter what we say because personal identity is not a literally tangible thing that others outside of ourselves can experience or observe for us. Your commentary about things having to be part of the shared reality that people experience is hypocritical when it comes to personal identity. Especially with identities where one identifies as something other than human that most in the shared reality would see as delusional or false. These things cannot be completely studied by science in a way that would prove them literally tangible, and even science is not concrete in its findings as it is forever changing as new information is found and old becomes outdated. Science is us learning how the world works, not something that is immutable.

This same kind of argument of things needing to be literal is actually used by bigots, — and I'm not using this to be "needlessly antagonistic" but to state a fact, — to dismiss the identity of those who are queer/trans, because they do not see our identities as literally tangible, as in not a part of objective reality. You may not be on the same level as bigots, but you are using the same talking points and mindsets as them. That because the majority(objective reality) does not think something is correct when it comes to personal identity(subjective reality) that this thing is harmful and needs to be changed or eradicated in some way to fit the strict idea of what is said to be objective reality, even if the personal identity hurts no one.

Side Note 1: I also really dislike how you worded in the original post: "from self identified “physical therians”," and put physical therians in quotations because it reminds me of how you'll see terfs/tirfs and transphobes be all "self identified "trans men/trans women"," in quotations to show they do not believe the person's perception of their own identity.

You also may not think you are invalidating the existence or experiences of those who have physical identities, but that is quite literally what you are doing by telling them that the words they use for themselves are not correct and they should be using something else instead. You say anyone has the right to use whatever word they want, yet say they shouldn't use a word they are using. You are dismissing their identity as only something you think it is when that's not the only way physical nonhumans experience it. A very narrow view of something you are not even a part of, which in turn makes it worse that you are telling people how they should experience their own identity. Even when those who are physical nonhumans talk about it to you, you ignore or dismiss and invalidate their experience — example being the reply to @d0gbite where you denied her experience, in a way that is probably counted as reality checking/fake claiming. Not only was that entirely unnecessary/rude to just outright deny someone their own experience with their own identity, but these things can actually cause more harm to those you may interact with in these spaces who experience delusions because you are quite literally telling them their reality that their brain is experiencing is false. That can cause those with delusions to actually sink further into the delusion or lead to negative effects like distress and physical/psychological harm towards themselves or other people when they lash out in defense of themselves and their reality. It might not be literally tangible/objective reality, but it is still their reality in that moment.

Side Note 2: Here is a post that talks about how you can actually help someone who may be experiencing psychosis/delusions that are causing actual distress in a way that doesn't completely shut down their current reality as a starting place. But you must also keep in mind that not all delusions are distressing or harmful. Things are not black and white. There are many people who live with psychosis 24/7 and will never be able to completely rid themselves of delusions and other things even with help, but unless they are in immediate danger or the experience is negatively affecting their lives in some way, no one has any right to tell them how they should think or live.

All this feels along the same lines of someone telling me I shouldn't use the umbrella term "queer" for myself because it's intentionally vague, because my sexuality is asexual and my gender is genderqueer in more specific terms, so only these should be used because they are more succinct in communication. (I use analogies with queer experience because I am queer and it's another part of my identity that I have and can speak on.)

And yes, language is a tool, but we also completely made it up. Tools can also be shaped to fit the context that they are needed in. Language is a tool because it's what we use to describe what we are experiencing and isn't something we should use to define strict lines. Especially when it comes to something as abstract and intangible as personal identity because you will NEVER find a single term that encompasses ALL variants of something like this. Trying to dismiss a term that has been used, again, for decades at this point, because you do not think it fits what you have seen, or what you think it should mean, is not as helpful as you think it is. I again comment that physical in this context is an umbrella term. It covers a wide range of different experiences that have to do with the physical body in some way. This /can/ include those that experience a disconnect from their physical body but that is not always the case. Just as not all spiritual nonhumans are because of past lives, or psychological nonhumans are that way because of trauma. Then there is the entire overlap with psychological leading to a physical identity because of how one may perceive themselves because of their neurodivergence, whether through delusions or otherwise. Where would they fall under your suggested terms? Especially if they do not have the disconnect from their physical body, that this is just how they see it themselves?

Do those who experience species dysphoria about their bodies, which happens with non-physical therians and nonhumans too, also fall under your idea of depersonalization? Does everything where one is not entirely satisfied with their human body?

I think the problem here is that you are taking the term physical TOO literally in the context of personal identity and equating that to only individuals who believe they are entirely physically nonhuman or who think they can become physically nonhuman — physical identity is not the same as p-shifting, and one does not always lead to the other, and is something that a large portion of physical nonhumans denounce. This seems to be a concern for you so I thought I would comment on that. For some individuals, yes they mean they believe their body is literally that of an animal or creature, but that is not the only case. As I have mentioned before, the term physical here is for ANYTHING to do with the physical body if the individual feels this term is what fits their experience. And to try and shove all of these different experiences under a label that does not even statistically fit the majority is not the correct thing to do.

Also you keep talking about the physical term being contentious as if the entire identity of being nonhuman isn't also controversial in the bigger picture. Even with more succinct language there will still be people who do not believe or understand things. And there will always be those who do not neatly fit under a more specific word. Also the only contention about people using the term physical seems to come from people who are not physically identifying themselves and how much they don't like the term, not keeping in mind that, and repeating myself here, /it's not made for you/.

Ancestral can imply physical identity because it pertains to that being nonhuman is passed down through genetics/heritage. Again where do these people fit under the terms you have proposed? If we want to be even more history focused, some of the founders and early members of the modern online Otherkin community are ancestral in their identity, which means they believe they have physical connection to their nonhuman ancestors(Elves and Fae).

Which then also leads to more questions for you to think about: What about non-animal/creature physical identities? Like fictional humans, or humanoid nonhuman/alterhumans? Are they also shoved under the idea that their experience is depersonalization? Or is it only for the people who identify as an animal/creature because the others are still human/humanoid even if fictional/extinct/etc?

Anyway, just some things to think about. I probably won't be replying anymore as I feel I have said everything I can, and brain capacity for this has run out, and it should be actually talked about by those who are physically identifying nonhumans if they wish to talk.

I don’t think the term “physical therian” encompasses the experience described by those who use the term.

I think a more accurate term would be “depersonalized therianthropy” which could be shortened to “depo therian”.

Depersonalized therianthropy: when one’s animalistic identity creates a complete disconnect from their body causing them to not recognize their observable traits as their own

This encompasses the anecdotes I have heard and read from self identified “physical therians”. Whether this experience is caused by delusion, dysphoria, or rejection of humanity, this term is applicable.

This does not include those who use the term to convey that they refer to their body with animal biological terms.

I believe this should be called “bioterms”. It could be communicated similarly to pronouns.

Hypothetical Ex:

Toby (he/him) (wolf bioterms)

This conveys that he would like his hair to be called fur, nails to be called claws, hands to be called paws, mouth to be called muzzle, etc.

The use of the word “physical” in therianthropic terms is inaccurate and confusing. I am open to hearing other proposed terms but I think using the word “physical” should be phased out for clarity sake.

[yet-another-haven-of-dollya]

"White Lily Cookie Harem isn't real it can't hurt you."

White Lily Cookie Harem:

Now that the Elder Fairy is finally in-game, even with Cotton-Sherbet treatment, I can finally post these silly sketches I did since Beast Yeast just released. I added Mercurial Knight recently lol.

My existential crisis girl accidentally collected male-wife kings like collecting Pokemon wheezzzeeee

[fawn-tongues]

Isabeau they’re being weirddd

[lucabyte]

Different standards

[sunnysorcerer]

Not to sound bitter but one of my biggest hopes for The Veilguard is that ALL the companions get an equal amount of content and care put into their stories and romances, so we don't end up with another Wyll Ravengard situation.

[teaforthetilllerman]

[cursedshrines]

baela and rhaena i’m so sorry. y’all deserve better than your mom dying a horrible death, your dad fucking and marrying his niece immediately after your said mom’s funeral, and being a glorified cheerleader and babysitter for your dad’s niece. respectively. like oh my god.

[purple-ravaged]

imagine if he was always weird as fuck part 2