#CyberneticAesthetic

[thevoumagazinesblog]

[ckingsbridge]

Hmm. I see. I guess my assumption was that the birth order replaces the gender role situation we have in our western society. So I apply the rules we have to that situation instead of thinking things could be very different period. When stories play around with power roles like Hearthkeeper does without the gender roles we use, it's reactionary to try to apply our real life rules to that situation. Because the roles are there just different reasons. It's hard to break that line of thinking lol.

Yes, that’s the challenge! The birth-order-based family roles in Hearthkeeper are obviously intended to satirize real-world sex-based gender roles, but because they aren’t linked to sex, they’re not an exact analogue. A lot of our beliefs and assumptions about sexual desire and behavior are rooted in our concepts of sex-based gender; a society that doesn’t have those concepts would necessarily approach sexual behavior differently. So contemplating Gallevan culture requires a definite shift in perspective. I struggle with it, too!

[pumpumdemsugah]

cyberneticaesthetic replied to your post:im bitter and jealous frequently for it doesn’t...

I feel like we live in a society period where we’re told to be happy and grateful and shit all the time, and we do shit to escape the embarrassing emotions instead of dealing with it. So when it manifests unhealthily later on, we’re fucked.

honestly it made me really angry as a teen when i didnt have to be i tried to fight almost all of 7 my siblings and people at tesco cause i was failing to cope with it. i just wasn't dealing with anything and everything got more and more bottled up . every story i can think of when i tried to hit people it was during my forced positively period

it was basically sprinkling sugar onto shit

[captaindoubled]

Have you ever forced someone to watch you whip and then watch you nae nae?

No

I have no dance abilities lmao 

[captaindoubled]

Have you ever watched America's next top model?

Oh yes

That was my show for many a years

[captaindoubled]

Have you ever cut a bitch?

No

[captaindoubled]

Have you ever drew your boyfriend naked??

No, I should to D:

[pumpumdemsugah]

What are people in Bristol like stereotypically? If there is a stereotype of them? Lol.

lol i actually don’t know any stereotypes for them 

there probably are but i don’t have any clue what those stereotypes would be 

[pumpumdemsugah]

cyberneticaesthetic replied to your post:the crux of this “i hate kids thing” no one is...

I think children are crazy annoying but I still adore them and want them some day. It’s like you gotta be patient because they don’t understand a lot. They just wanna run and have fun. And sometimes it’s not convenient. It’s not that serious.

exactly

kids will happily eat dirt. they dont make sense cause they have to learn it. by nature they are going to get on all your nerves and some you didn't know existed. but its never that deep

[ckingsbridge]

That question about the convenience store scene made me think of something I've always wondered. In these scenes, people use Jule's ring to determine his role, but what if he wasn't married? Does everyone wear a ring even if they're not married to show their role? If not, how would someone tell what a person's role is without it? I assume that in patrician society, it'd be rare for hearthkeepers to go too long unmarried after their debut, so there's probably not a lot of confusion there. (1/2)

But with plebeians, I guess it would be a bit different? So in a situation where you’re out at a club and someone isn’t wearing a ring, how would you know their role? Also, if it wouldn’t be taboo for hearthkeepers to get together, then the “role displacement” thing and the stigma with that seems a bit odd. In a society like Gallevas, wouldn’t two hearthkeepers together insinuate one trying to assume the Hearthlighter role? Wouldn’t that cause concern? Maybe I’m overthinking this? (2/2)

If Jules weren’t wearing a ring at his age, people would assume he was a hearthlighter who was either still in university or had just finished, and was establishing his career before taking a hearthkeeper. Around age 30, though, anyone who’s not wearing a wedding ring is going to be greeted with a lot of stigma, because the assumption will be that a person that age who isn’t married has something seriously wrong with them. In fact, the most common assumption would be that the person is a middle child (making them less marriageable). Widowed hearthlighters and hearthkeepers continue to wear their wedding rings.

Plebeian hearthkeepers actually get married much younger than patricians, because they tend not to go to finishing school unless they’re wealthy. So they get married right out of high school, as do many plebeian hearthlighters.

As for the second set of questions… I think that’s taking the matter a little too far. While Gallevans do have a basic assumption that hearthlighters tend to be sexually dominant and hearthkeepers sexually submissive (due to their socialization), I’ve stated before that they aren’t surprised when this is not the case. Sexuality is one of the few areas in which Gallevans acknowledge the influence of nature as well as nurture, and of course there’s also no requirement that anyone has to be dominant or submissive in a sexual encounter. It’s just not that important in the grand scheme of things.

[pumpumdemsugah]

Did you seriously put in a tag about a giant jellyfish "How does it taste?" Really Sug? REALLY?

yes

calamari comes from squids and jelly fish looks similar, it could be something nice 

could i fuck with some curry t-rex? whats its like stewed?

 i wanna know how most animals taste 

[pumpumdemsugah]

How dare you ignore my call out? I bet you won't even respond and then pretend I sent this hours ago!

lmao i was reading creepypasta thank you very much 

this is STILL bullying

#shameonyou 

[ckingsbridge]

Idk if you were asked this before, but how long do you plan a story before you start writing it? I never tried outlining a story before (though the outline you linked is a really good one!), so when I started outlining the story and world building, I found myself rushing through it because I wanted to get started writing the story asap. Do you get all the planning done and then write, or do you do most of the planning so you can at least start and then refine the world building as you go?

Most of the time, what happens is that I get so excited over a new idea that I sit down and write the first one or two chapters really fast. Then - as soon as I get to the point where the inciting incident is coming to a close and there has to be an actual plot taking shape - I hit the brakes and get to outlining. This always results in me going back to edit those first couple of chapters, of course!

Starting with Blood Red, I try to have at least the basic structure of the three-act outline in place before I start putting serious effort into writing. With Control, I also made a detailed outline of when I would reveal each facet of Misha’s emerging personality, since the timing on that was too important for me to wing it. And with Hearthkeeper I actually had every single major event of the main plot and all the relationship subplots outlined very far in advance, which has made for an extremely smooth writing process.

No matter how much you plan, though, things will always change while you’re writing the story, and you will absolutely deviate from your outline in some way (or worldbuilding questions will crop up that you had never considered before). So it’s really a matter of personal choice how much you plan out in advance. I prefer to have as much structure and worldbuilding in place as possible before I start writing in earnest, but for some authors that would kill their excitement! Try experimenting with a mix of methods and see what makes you most productive and inspired.