#I am hopefully evolving

[quibbs126]

These have been my drawings since yesterday, more of the AU of mine

Eventually I realized “wait, I just want to draw Megatron and Optimus in this AU. And it’s my AU, I can just draw what I want”. So that’s why this is just these two

It’s not that I don’t want to expand the AU, and I know I should draw more characters for it, and I probably will at some point. But I had a moment of realization that I can just do what I want, and I’m being indulgent

But yeah, so we got some poses and weapons for Megatron and Optimus, plus a couple little tweaks and enhancements to their designs. I did forget the top line on Megatron’s buster in the top left though. And that axe of Optimus needs some tweaking, and I need to learn how to draw it better. And how people hold axes

But Optimus has his axe here, which is supposed to contrast with Elita’s axe. It hasn’t been drawn either but she’s supposed to have a large double-sided axe, while Optimus has a smaller, only one-sided axe. I’m thinking he shares some of X’s mentality in that he’s not the most fond of fighting the infected bots, and him having a smaller, more utilitarian axe is supposed to reflect that. Also I mean, it’s his typical weapon

Anyways, moving down to the bottom right since it’s also new stuff, I’ve been wondering for a bit on what these guys would look like without their helmets, so that’s what this was. Sketch only because it wasn’t supposed to be at the level of the other three

The page was supposed to be more sketches, but I liked the first one and two so much I fully colored them, and the third followed suit. I used the Syrup pen this time, I think it worked better than the marker in this instance

But back to the head things. With Megatron, I was debating whether I wanted to do cables or his solar panel things. But while attempting the cables, I realized they’d be a pain to draw, so solar panels it is. They too are not drawn well, but it was more to get the idea of them. They fold and such like the ones he has in IDW

Optimus meanwhile I have decided is bald. Well okay, it’s supposed to look more like the thing Cyborg has going on in Teen Titans, it just doesn’t come off as well in sketch form, with also a port for charging in the back

I did this partially because I like the Cyborg look, because it’s funny to me, and also because I genuinely don’t know if X, unlike Rock, has hair or not under his helmet. This is following my assumption that he does not

Also I drew them sleeping with their helmets on before, but this was before I considered if their helmets were removable or not, so ignore that

Oh and one last thing, with these helmet-less designs, I think I've given up on the idea of them having hair. It's just that most characters I can't see having visible hair under their helmets. I think I like the concept, but I just don't know how to give them hair

But also with the two heads, I feel like there’s supposed to be a difference in Megatron’s mechanics compared to other bots. I’m not sure I’ve gotten into it, but I think I’m going with the idea that since he takes some narrative inspiration from Zero, and Zero was built by Dr Wily, thus making him entirely different from the other Reploids, Megatron too has mechanics unique to himself compared to other bots

I’m thinking that in some ways, his body is more rudimentary seeming, such as how he has clunkier looking solar panels (even if that means he doesn’t need external charging sources), or how his arm cannon isn’t retractable, whereas other bots with transforming weapon limbs can retract them at will

I haven’t really gotten around to figuring out why he has different mechanics than the rest of the bots, or why the virus made him docile, or why he’s the source of the virus. I mean it’s most likely because whoever created him built him to be this way, but I don’t know who did. It’s just that I’m taking from Zero and Wily, despite Transformers not really working in that method. I mean, I did say here that Alpha Trion created both Optimus and Elita, but I don't know who fits for creating Megatron

But oh well, things to figure out another time

Moving on to the top left finally, yeah like I think I've said elsewhere, megop's definitely a thing here. It's my AU, I can do what I want

I do still need to work on posing with two characters, but I think it turned out pretty nice

They are both supposed to blush blue, since that's a thing Transformers do, and it was supposed to both be circle blush, but I didn't like how it looked on Megs, so he squiggle blushes now. I have elected that they just have various forms of blushing, between everyone. Optimus has circles, and also his nose blushes slightly too, because I don't know, he doesn't have ears. His antennae are also supposed to be flapping here as well

His gem is also supposed to be shining brighter in that moment, with me deciding their gems get shinier when they're happy, and duller when they're sad or otherwise filled with negative emotions. Because why not?

Oh yeah, I'm also not sure what I'm doing about faction symbols here. They don't have them because initially I didn't plan on there being Autobots and Decepticons, but they should probably have symbols, since they are part of an organization. But should it be the same Autobot symbol or should I switch it up? I'm not sure

And I think that's about it? I think I've gotten through everything relevant to this page of stuff

I've been planning on drawing full body refs for individual characters here, I just haven't done so yet, in part because I wanted to figure out Optimus' axe first. But yeah, hopefully I end up doing that, in my head they're all official and proper looking, like I actually made something of effort and not just sketches on a white canvas. We'll just see when I do

Other things I plan on drawing for the AU? I'm not sure entirely, just some ideas, like drawing Alpha Trion so I can figure out his whole deal with Optimus and Elita, and maybe also trying to figure out the Prime situation since I don't want Alpha Trion as one and I think I might just make them all their own things outside of the Thirteen Primes, at least of the ones I choose to use. But that also means trying to figure out his design. I also need to draw Elita more, because while I have some basics of her design, there's details that I've not settled on and need to get around to fixing. And also I should probably try my hands at the Decepticons again. No clue what to do for Shockwave though, since Reploids tend to have human faces

[pixelglam]

a small church/chapel in new england. 🍂

[lillazyboithings]

Hey y'all! This is my first time participating in the @hatchetfield-bang! This is my art work for @ratsarecute4's fic called Ziria! (Link) Please go and check it out once it's released and make sure to check out the rest of the pieces that will be posted on the official hatchetfield bang account

[gingermintpepper]

What’s the significance of each color in Ancient Greece? So green is the only neutral color and it represents mostly natural and earthy things, thank you for telling me that part !! Anyway, as for my Hyacinthus design’s hair being brown, it’s due to the combination of it being a fairly common interpretation of his appearance and also because I find I like how it looks with his skin tone and the purple of his eyes.

Okay, firstly; thank you so much for answering my question too!

Admittedly you can't beat out good, old fashioned colour theory so that's completely fair haha! I still think it's very interesting that brown became the common interpretation of his features so I'm always glad to hear other people's view on it <3

With respect to what colours meant or symbolised in Ancient Greece, it's a super fascinating topic because the Ancient Greeks had a very different perception of colour than how a lot of people - and in this case I'll generalise and say english-speaking people - perceive colour. In a lot of languages, especially older ones, colour wasn't just a way to describe the physical perceptional reality of an observable object (that is, the light reflecting off the object that gives it its perceived hue - the way we perceive colour now) but colour was also used to describe the way in which the people experienced the world. A really good way to think about it is now, if you wanted to distinguish between two types of blue, you would instinctively make a distinction between their shades ("This blue is darker/lighter!") whereas these older people would distinguish based on things in their present, shared world that best matched what they were being asked to describe ("This blue is like the sky/the sea!")

That's an important concept to keep in mind because ancient greek was very unique in that, in addition to this concept of colour being completely intertwined with physical objects (and therefore also acquiring the properties of these objects in the minds of the people), the ancient greeks also did not particularly care about distinguishing between different colour hues (that is, differences in specific individual colour) but rather they were entirely focused on a colour's value - that is, whether it was considered light or dark.

Taking all of this into consideration, the question 'what is the significance of the different colours in Ancient Greece' is a bit of a tricky one to answer because unlike say, Ancient Egyptian which has very clear colours (red, white, green), very clear physical objects that give those colours their property (the desert sand, the sun, people's skin) and very clear symbolic meanings that arose from the natures ascribed to those physical objects due to their influence on the people's lives (hostility, power, new life), Ancient Greece's colours and the perception of those colours was much more abstract and poetic, contingent on their understandings and perceptions of things like light and dark, the sense of touch or taste (sweet and bitter/wet and dry) and what quality was ascribed to the object whose colour is being perceived. Colour was a matter of cosmology, of philosophy and there were many different schools of thought on it from Empedocles' physicalist theories to Anaxagoras' realist theories.

All of this is to say, take the meanings I outlined in this handy-dandy table with a tablespoon of salt! These are based on my understanding of the language used to describe things in classical writings that have survived and my own bias towards Empedocles' physicalist theory of colour and the nature of colour which I also think is very useful for people into greek mythology as a whole due to it making clear links between various gods creating things from mixtures of the four basic elements of nature and the colours that are the result of these mixtures.

I hope this helps even a little and I very much encourage you to do some research into different Greek schools of thought when it comes to colour and the perception of colour as well as how colour affects/reflects the innate nature of all things!

(Also, slight extra note, I left out Kokkinos (scarlet/blood-red) from the table because I didn't really think it was relevant for this outline despite it definitely being an ancient colour. It's a bit difficult to find examples of it with the kind of descriptors Empedocles outlines and I don't want to make assumptions based on third hand knowledge on the greek concept of the nature of things. I'd like to believe it was addressed in more detail in Empedocles' original document - only a fragment of the original some two thousand lines have survived after all - it is confirmed that Empedocles spoke on the recipe for blood and flesh, an equal mixture of all four elements as opposed to bones' four parts fire, two parts earth and two parts water (which is why bones shine white, there's more fire than earth or water) - and I don't want to conject or make assumptions.

I also left out Erythros or basic/primary red according to Plato's list of basic colours because that seemed to have specifically been preferred by Egyptian Greeks according to linguistic data. If I opened up that can of worms with respect to the shared Egyptian-Greek colour language including the way the Greeks like many early peoples did not culturally perceive blue until the invention of Egypt's blue dyes then I would be writing forever and you would never get an actual clear answer about Greek colour symbolism separate and apart from Egyptian cultural influence lmfao. )

A few of the documents that helped me consolidate this information include Sassi's 2022 Philosophical Theories of Colour in Ancient Greek Thought and Ierodiakonou's Empedocles on Colour and Colour Vision. There are also a fair few translations and discussions of the fragments of Empedocles' On Nature still floating about - my copy is a somewhat archaic volume of Leonard's 1908 translation but I never went out searching for updated interpretations and translations of the text since its constantly referenced in perceptional philosophy papers LOL

Anyway, yeah, hope this helps! :D

[morelikesin]

Been making remarkable progress on the fic (⁠*⁠ﾉ⁠o⁠^⁠▽⁠^⁠o⁠)⁠ﾉ⁠♫ Here are two glasses-wearing science club members for your enjoyment 🧪⚡

[skitskatdacat63]

Beloved little matador guy :)

[theloveinc]

the ideas i'm having right now vs. my ability to express them and myself

[c-is-for-circinate]

Hey! I can help with this.

First: holy shit yeah no that might be a vague rule of thumb for snake bites but I would NOT count on it as diagnostic. Coral snakes are weird, rattlers (and others) don't always inject venom when they bite, and a lot of snakes have mild toxins in their saliva that won't do much more than irritate a human unless there's allergies involved. Also just for personal experience I have for sure been bit by a corn snake and because of the angle it was two pinpricks, so yeah. You're much better off looking for signs of swelling, redness, or (this is very bad!) blackening around the wound, and snake bite treatment is its own whole thing that you should be learning from a dedicated source if you're in a rural area where you expect it to happen. If you're expecting venomous snakes to be an issue where you live, it's also worth checking up on the symptoms of those specific local snake venoms, because neurotoxin vs hemotoxic vs necrotic venom can have pretty different effects and need very different treatments. (I am NOT enough of an expert to teach you those, please find a real one.)

In terms of evolutionary pressure: yes there's a drawback to developing venom! Venom is biochemically expensive to make, requiring a lot of proteins and energy. It's also way less useful than you'd think! Constrictor snakes are just fine at catching prey, generally, since a quick strike to grab and then suffocating your prey via squeeze is pretty effective all by itself. Hell, depending on diet venom may not even make sense: a snake that specializes in eating eggs isn't going to have much use for it; a snake that specializes in earthworms or snails doesn't need a venom that's good against mammals; very large snakes like anaconda would need huge amounts of venom to take down prey of appropriate size; and a king snake that specializes in eating other snakes then also has to have digestive immunity to a venom that directly targets species very similar to itself (which some do! but that's an additional expense).

The biochemical expense is also why many venomous snakes, including common domestic US venomous snakes like rattlers, can often choose whether to inject venom or not! A quick confirmatory Google scholar check suggests that we still don't know for sure why some species are more prone to "dry" (unvenomated) bites than others. There's evidence that defensive bites can carry either more venom (because predators are usually quite large and need far more venom to take down) or less venom (because the snake is not going to get a meal to replenish its energy) than feeding bites. Not seeing a paper on it right now from my 30-second 2am google, but I've been told by at least a couple of herpetologists that bites from baby rattlesnakes are actually more likely to be dangerous because they haven't learned to moderate their venom injection yet!

Anyway, snakes are much like spiders: some bites are barely noticeable, some can be deadly, and quite a few can fall in a middle zone of 'irritating, and could probably kill a mouse, but won't do too much damage to something as big as a human'. For example, the common Northern water snake is not venomous, but it's got a mildly hemotoxic saliva that makes their bites a little more annoyingly painful than your standard rat snake.

Anyway that was an overly long 3am infodump on snake venom that barely scratches the surface, but in my defense I have a masters degree in frog evolution that I literally never get to use these days and I miss herpetology. It's super interesting stuff!

hey can any snake special interest havers on this website tell me why all snakes dont have venom? is there some sort of hidden evolutionary cost to producing a magic liquid that does the work of killing stuff for you? because much like carnivorous plants that sounds pretty awesome and suspiciously devoid of possible drawbacks for the creature on paper.

this question comes courtesy of my emt textbook saying that all (wild) venomous snakes in the US will produce a bite that looks like two pinpricks, as opposed to nonvenomous snakes that will produce a horseshoe shaped bite. it says you can tell by looking at the bite if it might be dangerous or not using this distinction. is this true? and if so, are more teeth part of the price you pay for magic liquid that kills stuff for you?

[magicalizardboy]

Speaking as someone who was old enough to remember the Bush era panic. As someone who is not a Trump supporters or right wing.

The problem with the 'left' and 'liberals' is that there's no unity or one true goal together. It kinda reminds me of Wallstreet where the idea was absolutely amazing and brilliant, but it completely spiraled into a sad mess. That was because know one could agree on the core reason it happened altogether. By the end of it spiraled where no one was simply there to be together. You had people walking around like they were at a con. It lead to misunderstanding and conflicts.

Now more than ever, you need unity. You need to drive the goals home. You need to stand your ground without an alone and pessimistic mentality. Hold up your fellow man.

[snekdood]

bitches prolly out here psychoanalyzing my old art on behalf of my abuser to cushion their belief that im a Horrible Person but then dont see the irony when I point out the shitty things my abuser has drawn and how I see it as clear evidence of their mindset and beliefs (of what's okay to do and how to treat people) descending and pairing that along with everything else they've done and it paints a clear picture of how this person got to the point of thinking it was okay to abuse me the way they did and then the people looking for reasons to hate me through my art will act like "they're just drawings !!!" about their art. which one is it. does someones art say something about them or not? or does it only say something about them if you hate them?

[astralyrical]

i've actually never explained the changes of her ear wings tbh ,, like in my head she initially has like very small black back wings and the appearance of her wings in her default form ( points to the lil black wings attached to her waist just because ) and they slowly evolved or something into the most beautiful sets of feathers ( pic 2 for ear wings & pic 3 for back wings ) so in this essay i will —

[drawbudd]

I haven't played Ark in ages I can't wait to finally get back to my dino babies

I Sure Hope Nothing Bad Happens This Time

[somyioki]

It's been years now that I've wanted to create my own Marinette redesign and I FINALLY menaged to get down to actually doing it :DD!! I am super happy with how this turned out, even though it's my first time drawing a character in a body suit- and I kind of struggled in that regard. With that being said though: with my little redesign I tried to stay close to the original, I reused some patterns and the color pallete and mostly kept Marinette's hero costume as it was in the show. I didn't want to fully reimagine the concept of the show itself, but as a little challenge I tried to work on something that would still fit the original idea but just with.. more of a focus on the characters? It's my personal bias

I imagine Marinette to be a bit older than in the show. She starts off being a bit shy and meek but grows into her more confident self over the course of the show as she realizes that the world does not end at other people's opinions of her. Thanks to having freedom of being who she wants to be through her persona of Ladybug. She also focuses a lot more on her hobbies, finding it in herself to show her crafts as a fashion designer to more people c: and using the clothes she makes in her day to day life. I imagine her clothing style would evolve along with her journey of gaining more self-confidence. Anyhow, I plan this to be a part of a little series c: as I want to try and redesign all of the characters in the show - which might take a while, but hopefully it will scratch that itch I had for a long time now

[yeoldenews]

While we’re on the subject of names, is there an explanation for how traditional nicknames came about that are seemingly unrelated to, or have little in common with, the original name?

ie- John/Jack, Richard/Dick, Henry/Harry/Hank, Charles/Chuck, Margaret/Peggy/Daisy, Sarah/Sally, Mary/Molly, Anne/Nan, etc

I am actually over a week into researching a huge follow-up post (probably more than one if I’m being honest) about the history of nickname usage, so I will be going into this in much, much more detail at a hopefully not-so-later date - if I have not lost my mind. (Two days ago I spent three hours chasing down a source lead that turned out to be a typographical error from 1727 that was then quoted in source after source for the next 150 years.)

As a preview though, here’s some info about the names you mentioned:

The origins of a good portion of common English nicknames come down to the simple fact that people really, really like rhyming things. Will 🠞Bill, Rob🠞Bob, Rick🠞Dick, Meg🠞Peg.

It may seem like a weird reason, but how many of you have known an Anna/Hannah-Banana? I exclusively refer to my Mom’s cat as Toes even though her name is Moe (Moesie-Toesies 🠞 Toesies 🠞 Toes).

Jack likely evolved from the use of the Middle English diminutive suffix “-chen” - pronounced (and often spelled) “-kyn” or “kin”. The use of -chen as a diminutive suffix still endures in modern German - as in “liebchen” = sweetheart (lieb “love” + -chen).

John (Jan) 🠞 Jankin 🠞 Jackin 🠞 Jack.

Hank was also originally a nickname for John from the same source. I and J were not distinct letters in English until the 17th Century. “Iankin” would have been nearly indistinguishable in pronunciation from “Hankin” due to H-dropping. It’s believed to have switched over to being a nickname for Henry in early Colonial America due to the English being exposed to the Dutch nickname for Henrik - “Henk”.

Harry is thought to be a remnant of how Henry was pronounced up until the early modern era. The name was introduced to England during the Norman conquest as the French Henri (On-REE). The already muted nasal n was dropped in the English pronunciation. With a lack of standardized spelling, the two names were used interchangeably in records throughout the middle ages. So all the early English King Henrys would have written their name Henry and pronounced it Harry.

Sally and Molly likely developed simply because little kids can’t say R’s or L’s. Mary 🠞 Mawy 🠞 Molly. Sary 🠞 Sawy 🠞 Sally.

Daisy became a nickname for Margaret because in French garden daisies are called marguerites.

Nan for Anne is an example of a very cool linguistic process called rebracketing, where two words that are often said/written together transfer letters/morphemes over time. The English use of “an” instead of “a” before words beginning with vowels is a common cause of rebracketing. For example: the Middle English “an eute” became “a newt”, and “a napron” became “an apron”. In the case of nicknames the use of the archaic possessive “mine” is often the culprit. “Mine Anne” over time became “My Nan” as “mine” fell out of use. Ned and Nell have the same origin.

Oddly enough the word “nickname” is itself a result of rebracketing, from the Middle English “an eke (meaning additional) name”.

I realized earlier this week that my cat (Toe’s sister) also has a rebracketing nickname. Her name is Mina, but I call her Nom Nom - formed by me being very annoying and saying her name a bunch of time in a row - miNAMiNAMiNAM.

Chuck is a very modern (20th century) nickname which I’ll have to get back to you on as I started my research in the 16th century and am only up to the 1810s so far lol.

[drdemonprince]

I was never really certain about my transition in the way that most gatekeeping hormone prescribers and curious members of the public demand that a trans person be. I didn’t “always know” that I was not cisgender. I haven’t “always known” anything about myself. Very few truths about me have always remained true, my existence is too interpersonal, contextual, and ever-evolving for all of that. (So is most everyone else’s, I think). I don’t think that the fact I’d eventually choose to exercise my body autonomy at age 30 by taking hormones is a decision I could have foreseen when I was a child. All that I knew about being transgender when I was a kid was a fact that most children intuitively know: gender assignment was a violation of my freedom, of everyone’s freedom in fact, and it was wrong. As an infant and then a child and teenager, people kept imposing labels on me; they kept forcing me and my body into prescribed gendered boxes, and while the specific labels and boxes never really felt like the right ones, the most disturbing part about it all was the forcing. No coerced identity would have ever felt right. Children can tell when secrets are being kept from them, and when adults are restricting their choices. They notice that they and the other children are being lined up boy-girl, boy-girl, without ever being told what a girl or a boy even is. They can see their parents frowning when they reach for the doll with the shimmery hair, or climb atop the neighbor kid on the playground. Kids know that they are forbidden from sitting with their legs spread wide or flicking their wrist, and their gender illegibility is shamed in them, long before they get any answers about what gender means or where it comes from or why it’s so important that they make themselves easy to understand.

Like the cloned children in Never Let Me Go who grow up being conditioned for a life of forced organ donation, children in a cissexist society grow up conditioned to fall within certain gendered boundary lines, and by the time they learn that the reason for this is almost completely arbitrary, they can’t imagine any alternative. Not until some of them hear about gender transition and find the prospect very compelling, for some reason. You can say that reason is because some of us are inherently trans, but there’s absolutely nothing in the way of brain science, genetics research, or even sociological data to back that up. Besides, the search for a biological “reason” that people are transgender or queer runs counter to the goal of queer liberation in the long run. Science only needs to explain the existence of transgender people (or queer people more broadly) if our existence is in some way aberrant or a problem. If queerness is accepted as a form of human diversity that simply exists, then there is no need to excuse it by claiming that it is never a choice. It can be a choice, if a person wants to make it, and hopefully it satisfies them, but maybe it won’t. Freedom to choose means freedom to forever be dissatisfied, to search endlessly for more, and yes, to capable of making a mistake. I would say that viewing myself as transgender was a choice. I decided to break away from the straight, female categories to which I had been assigned, and doing so allowed me to view the legal and societal power structures that had restricted me more clearly. It helped me better understand myself. But that does not mean the actual act of breaking away was always the truest reflection of who I am. The version of me that transitioned was a person on the run — and how a person behaves, thinks, and self-conceives when they are fleeing is not a great reflection of whom they might be if they were safe. If we all lived in a world free from mandatory gender assignment, and where our bodies were not mined for meaning about the kinds of sex we liked, the clothing we should wear, the personality qualities we have, the roles we should play in society, and the connections we are allowed to form with others, who knows who each of us might be. But none of us get to live in that world, or ever gets completely free from the frameworks of heterosexuality and the gender binary. These frameworks shape every legal institution we encounter, every school we attend, every item of clothing we put on, every substance we take into our bodies, every piece of paperwork that ever gets printed about us, and every look another person ever gives us. And so we make due with rewriting and recombining those frameworks as best we can. It should come as no surprise that those us who break away from the binary have to experiment and revise how we understand ourselves quite a bit — sometimes getting things “wrong,” sometimes searching forever for the semblance of something “right.” Sometimes reveling in the “wrongness” of all the available options is kind of the point.

I wrote about my detransition, retransition, and the eternal dissatisfaction that is probably the corest truth of my identity. It's free to read or have narrated to you on my Substack.

[goodishgirlx]

How does it feel to know, deep down, that most men in your life have pictured you with your lips wrapped around their cocks? That men you think respect you, see you as an equal, a coworker, even a friend see a usable set of holes when they look at you? That so many men have dreamt of using your body like a fleshlight? That wherever you go, whoever you meet, you will always and forever be seen as no more than an object to get cocks off? That almost at all times, there is at least one man eyeing you up, thinking about your pretty, innocent body in obscene ways? Thinking about they would love to stretch out your young pussy with their dicks, and cum unprotected inside you? Thinking about groping your butt and legs to feel your young flesh? How does it feel to be so built for taking dicks and pleasuring men that they literally thing about it as the first and last thought of every interaction they have with you?

i think about this a lot... that i can never escape that my body was literally made to make men hard. every part of me evolved to make a man's cock hard, to tempt him enough to grope me, use me, and hopefully, if i'm very good and tight and pretty, to make him cum inside me. i can try to fight it. i can study hard and work harder and try to make men see me as smart and responsible. even, at least, just as a complete person. but it would be hopeless because you're right, sir- i am an object to get cocks off, and every man i meet knows it.

the best i can do is give up on trying to make men see me as a person. if all i'll ever be is a fleshlight, then all i can do is be the best fleshlight any man could ask for. i'll wear shorter skirts and tighter tops. i'll grow my hair longer and never miss a day of makeup. i'll stop trying to make them listen to my stupid ideas. my only role in conversations is to smile, nod, and giggle stupidly. i'll make sure to brush my chest or ass against men i notice staring at me. i'll bend over to let them see my bare little cunt. i'll thank them when they grope me. i'll drop to my knees for any man who asks, and hope i'll do a good enough job sucking his cock that he'll use me again. i'll encourage men to see me as the toy i am and use me the way i was meant to be used.