#I think this feeling is more generalised than we think

[the-boy-branithar]

Surely at some point people will realise that trans men ALSO experience the phenomenon of suddenly being Fully and Having Always Been their gender when it allows someone to treat them like shit.

[acatinabox]

A collection of cultural and food suggestions related to Antiva

From an Italian amateur writer.

Big disclaimer: I am not trying to claim Antiva or his characters as Italian, if you want to see it more Spanish, be my guests. Things in the setting are ambiguous so let's make the most of this vagueness and make space for each others' headcanons.

That said, I'm Italian, and these are the things I can relate/speak about confidently, so I will. I do write Lucanis more Italian in my fanfiction because he was written as such in the Wigmaker Job and it was such a boon to feel represented in a piece of media I loved but I support fan creativity so do whatever you want.

Also these are generalisations. People are not a monolith, goes without saying.

Nobody asked for this, but I hope maybe it helps someone or is interesting.

With that out of the way, here's a collection of themes/suggestions that speak to me, and that might be useful if you want to write them in in your fanfiction and that aren't coffee or organised crime related.

The smell of soffritto at lunch time in the streets. People cook with their windows open when the weather allows it, and the smell of their food permeates the air. You can smell it from the street. Soffritto is the base of many Italian preparations and sauces, so it's a very familiar smell at lunch and dinner time. It's a mix of onion, celery and carrots minced and put in a pan to stir fry with olive oil. If you add a little bit of tomato sauce you make the most basic pasta sauce. Congratulations.

The smell of freshly made bread is fragrant and unique. Every region has its own type of bread and you can easily find a variety of them in most cities. Italian bread is fluffy and light and sometimes a bit dry. Potato bread is made in mountain areas. In the south, bread has a thick dark crust and an airy centre. We eat bread almost at every meal, it's just as iconic and pasta.

I can easily see Lucanis make his own pasta sauce and bread from scratch.

Speaking of bread, I can also see Lucanis make "scarpetta" after he finished eating, which means scraping the sauce from the plate with a bit of bread.

People make small talk in the streets or in the stores, sometimes with complete strangers. It's not a strict social rule but it happens quite often.

The Lucanis/Illario conversation in wigmaker job about not eating Antivan food abroad is the quintessential dynamic between the expat and the relative visiting who expects to not go out of their comfort zone. It happened to me more times than I can count.

Family functions can last all day, we can meet for lunch on a Sunday and spend the whole day together. If you get out of the table before 5PM on a holiday like Christmas or Easter frankly it means you failed as a host (harsh but true). More often than not you'll find yourself staying for a lighter dinner too.

The usual composition of a big meal is antipasto, first course, second course with a side, dessert, fruit, caffè ammazzacaffè. On normal days we only have a main, though.

Ammazzacaffè is the sacred ritual of the digestive after coffee (it literally means coffee killer). I mention it because it's mentioned in the game and in the short stories. It can be I think any strong liquor. We have it after a big lunch or in the evening, usually not at lunch on a working day. It kinda resets you, closes the meal.

Drinking wine has a big convivial function. Drinking alone is not something most people do often, we reserve it for social occasions and usually with a meal.

Dressing up is kind of expected in certain family functions and situations. Not in all families and not at all occasions but I can see it would be expected especially in high society.

Veneto, where RL Treviso is, is known for their creative swearing against god. I can absolutely picture Lucanis shout "by Ghil'an'ain's saggy boobs" or "by Elgar'nan's dried balls" when angry. Honestly go wild, please make up some insults for them and tell me about them (also sorry for the apostrophes, I don't know where they go).

We have a chocolate bonbon, Baci (means kisses), that have paper slips with sappy, romantic quotes in them. Some of Lucanis's phrases remind me of that. I think he'd be a fan and note down his favourite quotes. It's a dark chocolate bonbon with a soft heart and a hazelnut inside.

I said I wouldn't mention coffee but I lied. In some Italian cities there's the tradition of caffè appeso (hung coffee). Someone pays for coffee for themselves and for someone else they don't know that might want one and not be able to afford it. It's adorable and I can see Lucanis do it exaggeratedly all the time because he seems quite generous.

I think I'm done for now and maybe more people will jump up in the mentions or the replies to add their own useful things. I'll try to add some if they come to mind!

[loserboyfriendrjl]

“Today, we will be discussing werewolves. Can anyone tell me what werewolves are?”

Lily Evans’ hand instantly shot up. “They are XXXXX-classified beasts in The Ministry of Magic. A werewolf, also known as a lycanthrope, is a creature which normally resembles a human being but, upon the rising of the full moon, became an uncontrollable wolf.”

He wasn’t going to be listening to that, knowing that Peter and James were in the hospital wing, waiting for Remus to wake up.

Sirius’ hand, instinctively, shot up. “First of all, they should only be classified under the full moon, because during every other day of the month, they’re human. Second of all, The Ministry doesn’t know jackshit—”

“Mr. Black!”

“And they do not resemble a human being, because they are one. Third of all, lycanthropy is an infection, not something you’re born with.”

“Never said it is,” Evans said, turning her head to face him with a smile, but he could almost feel her teeth gritting, “but if you were to look in The Prophet at the attacks, there’s a few of them of werewolves, right?”

“That’s a generalisation, Evans. There are werewolves who live in the wilderness and werewolves who live among humans. And the werewolves who live on the outskirts of society were driven away by wix, who pointed at them and called them beasts and monsters.”

“Why so invested in the topic, Black? Are you a werewolf?” Snape drawled, barely looking up from his paper.

“Yeah,” Sirius replied, barely sparing him a glance, “next time you piss me off, I’ll come to the dorms and maul you in your sleep.”

Snape settled on scoffing at him and turning back to talking to his “mate.” Sirius focused his attention back on Lily.

“And let’s not forget the werewolf registry, who is cruel and, frankly, idiotic by itself. Who expects werewolves to go sign themselves up to be locked up? That must be one of the least thoughtful things they’ve done, which says a lot, all things considered. Nobody’s gonna go sign themselves up for something like that.”

“It would be a protection method. They’re safe—”

“They’re not exactly fucking comfortable, though, are they?”

“Mr. Black!”

“Well, no,” Evans replied, sounding slightly irritated. “Obviously not. But it would be better for those around them, too. Would you like to be ripped to shreds?”

“Mrs. Evans!”

“No, I would not, and no, it would not be, because it’s uncomfortable and the transformation is horrible enough as is. Maybe, for one, we should think about,” He air-quoted, “the lower creatures, and try finding options that benefit them especially, more than us. They’ve got as many rights as we have.”

The bell rang; a class dismissed.

“Meet me after class, Mr. Black.”

“Gladly, Professor.”

“Black! One second!” Evans said, as Sirius started packing his bags. He grinned to himself; bingo.

[huellitaa]

why people don't like you ₊˚⊹ 💬🎀

okay this is not as harsh as the title suggests but i wanted to put it literally bcuz this is a problem i've struggled with for the longest time. im gonna be brutally honest here. there are so many reasons why ur not of the social status you want to be or don't have as many friends as you like yadda yadda yadda. SO ,, here's my thoughts on why that's the case , and how to help! 🫶🏻🎀💬

──★ ˙ ̟🎀you're fake

whether its cuz ur trying to "fit in" or because you have a completely different personality stored in the back for everyone you meet, ur fake. its very simple. its not necessarily a bad thing, it just means ur insecure.

🧁𓂃 ࣪˖ how do you deal with this?

stop trying so hard girl. it's not that deep. there are 8 billion people on this earth and counting, u really think this person's gonna matter when ur living ur dreams and thriving even more than you ever imagined you could? no. move on. next please!

find out who the fuck you genuinely are. you're never gonna live your life if YOU aren't the one living it. once you get a start on finding who YOU are it's gonna make you more authentic -> more magnetic -> more attractive in every single way, including social.

u arent obligated to fit in. think about the type of people that you see in the street and you stare a while at, the type of people who stand out from a crowd for whatever reason, the people u look up to, ur idols who you could never imagine to meet in a thousand years; do you think they fit in? do you think merging with a crowd is what made them appeal to you so much? no. think abt that.

wake the fuck up and realise u deserve better. why are you neglecting yourself by hiding yourself from the world? would u do that to anyone else? would u get anyone else to change themselves just so they can fit in? girl get a hold of urself!!! you've been through so much and youve made it so far and yet you're still pretending to be someone you aren't?? you deserve SO much better. people who truly deserve you will always love you for you, no one else.

──★ ˙ ̟🎀 ur too awkward / anxious

i want to preface this by saying theres nothing wrong w this at all and i completely understand but ur gonna face some problems of people interacting with you. or you interacting w them. or both. i was diagnosed w generalised anxiety disorder when i was 11, so i understand how much this can impact ur life not just socially but in all areas.

⭐𓂃 ࣪˖ how do you deal with this?

first thing im gonna mention to preface is this can be a symptom of an underlying condition u may need to get checked out. if its impacting ur everyday life please seek therapy, i am not a professional and cannot help u w this, even if i'd like to. i love u ♡

find what is making u anxious. what about social interaction is scary to you, and why? why does interacting w others make u nervous? is there a specific thing ur worried about or u find nervewracking? always. find. the root!

have compassion and empathy and patience w yourself. its perfectly okay and normal to some extent to feel like this and of course we're all gonna feel like this sometimes but its important to treat urself with care, especially in these times.

treat urself as u would a child. i recommend treating urself like a friend a lot but when ur in a delicate and emotional state like this its better to treat urself like ur ur own child. take care of urself with the same love and attentiveness as you would your own children and give yourself time and take care of yourself to work through the issue. ♡

break things down and take it slow and simple. break it into steps and PUT. YOURSELF. FIRST until u feel able to go back out into the public again and be That Girl ♡

──★ ˙ ̟🎀 ur straight up mean

this can be anywhere from just being generally disinterested in people, being constantly negative all of the time to being just really shitty and rude. we all have the same potentials and possibilities but sometimes we can fall into the trap of negative patterns when interacting with others, which is okay. everyone messes up sometimes. but the important thing is is that we fall back out of that and become even better for it!

💬𓂃 ࣪˖ how do you deal with this?

try ur best to put ur ego aside and think about yourself from an outside perspective. would you wanna be friends with you? if you were another person, how would you think people feel around you?

(🗒🎀 note: if that's too difficult, create someone in ur head or mentally assign ur traits, the good and bad, to someone you dont really know, and think ab how youd feel around them. insecure? jealous? confident? excited? nervous? think about it.)

i know it sounds weird but literally just sit down and talk to people close to u when you get the chance or the opportunity comes up and ask if anything you do comes off rude or blunt or abrupt or any sort of negative trait you think might be the issue here. or just subtly (or directly, either one works) try and find out their opinions on you so u can figure out if that aligns w what and how u wanna be, and then how you can change that.

just be generally more sweet and polite. people are easily gonna like you more if ur not a total dick. stop being mean to people, say please and thank you, compliment strangers, smile at everyone, put ur ego aside cuz its really not that deep girl.

──★ ˙ ̟🎀 ur too nice / people pleaser

okay being nice is not a bad thing. there is a fine line between being THE nice girl and being A nice girl. there is a fine line between being kind and being a pushover. you don't have to sacrifice urself to be nice to people. being nice should go both ways!

🧁𓂃 ࣪˖ how do you deal with this?

first things first, like all things and like i've said a billion times before, you need to address the root of what is causing you to act like this. this should always be the first thing you do when addressing any problem, esp w urself. why are you acting like this? what is causing you to endlessly seek approval like this and sacrifice urself in the process? think.

start saying no to people, even to the littlest things. if you want to do it then sure, but start saying no so much more often. it gives you a sense of control and shows you only you have a choice in the things you do in ur life, no one else.

define kindness. is what ur getting in return to this unconditional self sacrifice genuine kindness, or friendship, or respect, or attention, or whatever else you assume you're receiving from all of this? only you can answer that. ask urself what the genuine meaning of all the things ur trying to gain from this are and then see if that aligns w what ur receiving. (🗒🎀 note: also read this post of mine for more on this! ♡)

again, therapy is gonna help a lot w this. if this is making an impact on ur life, social or otherwise, then i am not a professional and cannot help u w this (as much as id like to). ily and i believe in u ♡

──★ ˙ ̟🎀 you seem "unapproachable / intimidating"

people are threatened by talent. people are threatened by beauty. people are threatened by what they aren't. so, congrats! you've achieved your goal! 🩷💭

🫶🏻𓂃 ࣪˖ how do you deal with this?

i told my therapist once that people have told me i seem rude, unapproachable, intimidating, etc. and i felt really upset about it because i dont wanna come off that way. i wanna be nice and approachable and someone people can talk to. and she asked me what i would do if my favourite celebrity or famous person or whatever was my age and was walking through my school. i told her i'd think they were really cool and want to be friends with them, but wouldn't be sure how to go about it bcuz they'd be super intimidating. think about that.

🗒️🎀 note: but if you do find that people say this or act like this around you a lot, then you might need to do some introspection and ask urself if anything ur doing makes people feel like that rather than their own insecurities and mindset. ♡

i just want to quickly add that not everybody is going to like you. everyone feels a general sense of dislike from time to time and this post is what i mean by that, NOT how to make everyone like you bcuz that's literally impossible and something you shouldn't waste ur time and energy on. as harsh as i may have been in this post ur amazing and i love u no matter how much improvement you have to do ♡ i love you and am proud of you and you should be proud of yourself too!

all my love... 💬🎀🫶🏻💗

[kirkwallguy]

group cutscenes kind of feel like when you run a mod that lets you have more companions than you're supposed to and everyone starts firing off on their similar comments like:

rook: elgar'nan and ghilan'nain should have been at the club

davrin: but they weren't. and that's what matters.

neve: yep. and the fact that they weren't at the club? that's what matters most

bellara: well. not EVERYONE likes the club!

harding: what matters is that they weren't AT the club, were they? um. not that everyone has to like the club!

taash: hmph. only losers don't like clubbing.

emmrich: you know, in my youth i enjoyed the 'club'... it seems significant that elgar'nan and ghilan'nain did not.

varric: rook. can you hear me? while it may be a generalising statement to say that all young people should be at the club, i think we can all agree that elgar'nan and ghilan'nain would have benefited from it-

manfred: manfred!

lucanis: (they forgot to give him a line for this one)

rook: well i'm glad we all know where we stand on this. let's get some rest while we work on some solutions

[azaharinflames]

I ask this with the bestest intentions because I think you're one of a few level headed member in the fandom: what's the difference between buddies complaining about Eddie not coming back and us leaving comments about wanting Tommy and Buck to get back together or the hashtags we did for Tommy/Lou? I understand that they left hate comments and review bombed the episode, but I think the comments asking for Eddie's return are valid. Aside of buddie of it all of course they want him back, to see him reconnect with the 118 dynamic. Shaming them for expressing that want doesn't seem fair imo. Because I see it a lot recently and it doesn't sit right with me.

First of all - thanks! I appreciate the compliment, Nonnie.

I think it all comes down to the context, to be honest.

Yes, asking for Eddie's return is more than fair. No one is saying it isn't. We all understand how it feels to have your favorite character (or one of your favorites) being taken away. Or, in their case, seeing him leave for another state and having the looming possibility of him not coming back. It is understandable that they don't want that to happen, and it is understandable and totally fair that they ask for that not to happen.

Yes, we have done the same thing, and have asked for Tommy to come back. Only... is it the same?

Now, this is a bit of a generalisation, because the fact is that there are extremes on both ends, and people who genuinely don't mean harm and are only asking for a character on both ends. I'd be here for hours analysing both, so for the sake of timing and conciseness, I am generalising.

Whilst I am not saying there aren't any BT fans asking for Tommy's return randomly, most of what I have seen has been us:

Complaining/expressing our disappointment post-806. Which, in my opinion, was more than fair. We discussed the episode and how it made us feel in the posts about the episode.

Whenever 911 asked a general question (i.e. what do you want for blah blah blah), Tommy was mentioned, or a cute hashtag was created. This was in direct response to the show asking a question.

Post-811, discussing the episode and asking for Tommy to come back and for them to figure their stuff out.

It is easy to see whenever we do start asking for Tommy, or talk about Bucktommy in the comments, as it usally results in those posts having a much higher engagement than others. A mix between us and Buddies trying to drown us out, but. The evidence is there.

Now. Something we have not done:

Harass cast and crew and constantly ask them why Tommy isn't there.

Reply to an actor's comment (where he'd expressed his excitement for the episode) calling him a liar because Tommy wasn't in the ep.

Review bomb an episode because Tommy wasn't in it (even though we had hoped he could be in it).

Make the episode all about Tommy, instead of celebrating what was one of the best episodes of the series.

Yet - those are all things Bobs have done. In the last week, too.

So - I think asking for a character's comeback isn't bad at all. Do it. But be respectful. To do what they did in the posts post-814 is, firstly, annoying, and secondly, wildly out of place. It's not that they're asking for Eddie's return; it is that they are acting like entitled brats who didn't get their way, and so now they have to make it everyone's problem.

[reblogandlikes]

No allies UTM, Rhysand? None? (Ramble)

I genuinely want to know, but seriously, Rhysand didn't make one alliance with the other HL's or anyone during the years of Amarantha? Not a single side plan that would have me think, "Yeah, he's done fucked up things for her, but he's also been actively working against her the entire time with proven plans, proven things gone wrong and right. Proven anything but weak his say."

Not to mention, please don't make someone the most powerful mind reader if they won't capitalise on that power. A very useful power, yet criminally under utilised in this series. There would have been ample time to create an alliance, and for his own safety/self preservation, occasionally ensure they would not spill the plan or fuck them up before they ever could. That would then play into his grey morality for the betterment of everyone further down the line even if it means cutting people loose. Hard, but necessary. I mean, unless that forever unknown daemati made it hard. Though this unknown other figure couldn't have been that good when the other HL's rebelled. Yeah, they failed and died doing it, but they still made a plan and tried. Rhysand hasn't don't anything off the sort.

But, he must of had a hint of an alliance because why would he and Helion be so buddy buddy in the later books? He saw all that Rhysand had done during those years. Saw his "Mask" presented as "him" and yet Helion no qualms or think to be standoffish afterwards? Like, "Damn, you went a little hard core, don't you think?"

Unless his friendship curated with Helion was just a way for sjm to try to absolve Rhysand from receiving too much heat and generalised, consistent hate from everyone outside of Velaris. "See, look. This fun, cool HL guy loves Rhysand! He's also POC, Bi, sex positive, with progressive ideals. His judgment can't be wrong." It felt like sjm was using Helion as a tool to enforce Rhysand’s greatness than having built a genuine friendship we could read; so instead rely heavily on Helions traits when knowing Helion embodies a lot of the characteristics her target audience wants to see more in books, yet for me, made my guy Helion feel like a token. I don't like it. (Side note, I'm still pissed they stole from my sweetheart Tarquin when he was so open. They still have not apologised, either!)

Anywho, where was this so-called friendship UTM? A union between the solar courts, at least. Something!

50 years. He should have come with some receipts of his efforts. Anything on Hybern since he was already suspected of them making a move in the later books. To me, these books are the best example of just making shit up as you go along. SJM just writes, and we simply consume. Nah, mate. You can catch these critiques.

Crazy, you'd think acotar was her first series, not her second.

[kruxton]

ok so ive gone through with the touchstarved demo (i forgot what backstory i chose 💔 not sure if this matters to what i'll be yapping about) and leander's route was the last one i did - went crazy about the other 4 too but i need to talk about HIM

this guy is FASCINATING. objectively fascinating. out of all the 5 characters this guy baffles me the most. token nice guy that is a bit... TOO nice, right? and so as ive done with the rest i take notes about interesting dialogues or scenes cause i like fleshing out the characters in my head completely, and this guy???? i wrote about him 10x more than the others. and i dont even like him as a romance option yet. he truly is just such a compelling character

warning for spoilers (?) of the demo

im just going to preface this with the fact that i have maybe only played a visual novel like once before this and that was YEARS ago. i dont know if im reading too much into it all and that everything's just a 'that's how it works in these games' thing or not so!!! there's that. AND i only just discovered this game a few days ago (on the same day they updated actually) so the fandom discussions r very new to me

so by the end of the demo you're given the option to follow one of the characters after the drink at the bar, and no matter who you choose you're going to end up talking about the other 4 as well. something different I noticed for leander's dialogue was that for every person you'd ask about, he would always ask what you thought about them first. every single one. none of the others did this, they would just speak their mind, but leander ALWAYS ASKED FIRST. and the two options you had were to say something positive or something negative about them

and depending on how you answered those questions, leander's response was STAGGERINGLY different. whenever you would choose a positive answer (eg: saying Ais was 'honest' instead of 'a jerk'), leander would go "yadda yadda sure but that guy's dangerous and not to be trusted" - essentially. im generalising to make my point but this was the vibes he let off. and his character would be all pissed and frowning, worried for the MC's safety, acting all protective and shit.

but then u turn around and redo the dialogue option, choosing the negative one instead, and without fail leander's reply would be 'haha yeah but he's not all that bad.' (again, generalising). even so far as to say he's seen mhin's 'soft spot' before, and saying the senobium was cruel for imprisoning vere (which, by the way is completely contradictory to what he would say if we chose 'I feel bad for him.' (positive option) - he literally says VERBATIM that vere 'should be caged'). and i can't help but feel like this must be on purpose. the devs HAD to have done this on purpose its too good of a character trait to just be some sort of writing flaw

and by character trait i mean his whole nice guy shtick. i think its all an act and he's a lying two faced bitch. yup.

a line i remember distinctly was him lightheartedly saying he was jealous and wanted to keep the MC all to himself, which im going back to now after playing through all the options in this scene and like. oh i GET him now.

this man gets jealous whenever the MC shows affection for literally any other character and bites back with something to incriminate said character in MC's eyes. but if the MC says something bad about anyone, he has to keep up his shtick and be the mediator again. the nice guy that gets along with everyone.

now that ive written this i realise that this might literally just be a Very Common Archetype that i just rarely indulge in, but I wanna finish this off with the fact that I still think his story and personality is easily my favourite, and being able to sort of decipher this part of his story through the mechanics of a visual novel with multiple routes is SO Fun. its like damn i wish i could do this in real life to see if people are lying to me or not

anyways the touchstarved demo is peak i cant wait for when the game releases YAYYYYY

[kitmarlowe]

hey hope it's okay to ask but i'd like to know ur takes about the simon says episode of inside no 9 being about male fandom in particular? cause ive always enjoyed that ep and how it read some fandoms for filth lol but in my experience fandom is pretty female dominated so i'd be really interested in hearing about the specifically male side of it

sure. this probably would be more coherent if i'd rewatched the ep to remember things properly, so we're relying on my brain.

this is just my experience of viewing the difference between male and female fans (if we can understand these are generalisations and there's often crossover), so it’s likely this does not apply to all fandoms, but HERE WE GO.

to start, despite what I’m saying, simon is absolutely an amalgamation of a lot of things in fandom, both male and female. I expect much of it has come from mark’s experience on sherlock (shipping in particular). his worst traits come from all sides, but I don’t think it would work as well as an episode if it was about a female fan. his actions absolutely stem from the male side of fandom.

female fans, on the whole, seem perfectly happy just discussing the material with other fans. they form little groups and friendships, sharing jokes, discussion, art, fanfic. the men absolutely do this too but there’s an interesting difference in the way it happens. I don’t see men refer to their writing as fanfic, because fanfic is a female-dominated area and it has a reputation outside of fan spaces for being frivolous, out of character, and full of sexual fantasies about the male characters. male fans seem to view themselves as above it and need to legitimise their work. they’ll make short films, publish the their fanfic as short stories, interpretations, bonus episodes - anything to separate it from ‘lesser’ works. in the episode, when spencer dismisses gavin’s work as fan fiction, simon is clearly hurt by it and says, “well, no, it’s more sophisticated than that.” even though it absolutely is fanfic. men don’t want to be lumped in with the women because they view themselves as serious creatives, not obsessive fans. (all fanfic is creative, never change.) the men are also obsessive, they just don’t want to be viewed that way.

simon clearly sees himself as above other fans. he thinks running a podcast legitimises him and puts him on a level with spencer rather than the fandom he’s doing this for. he’s a content creator. the podcast is for the fans, I don’t think he views it as just a fan podcast. this is a kind of superiority I’ve seen in the male side of fandom. running a podcast validates them and brings them closer to the original material and makes their views, in their eyes, more intellectual. they, to paraphrase simon himself, actually know their stuff in a way that other fans do not. and if they can get a creator on, well… they’re a bridge between the two. they become part of it. simon believes he’s deserving of a co-writing credit, he thinks he deserves to be in the episode because he has risen above the other fans. he is a creator, just like spencer.

while most male fans I’ve seen manage to remember that they are just fans, they’re also more likely to seek the approval of the creatives. not just a “glad you like it” but a mark of recognition, for them to almost say, “yes, you are like me.” while they’re not awful like simon, they still have that same need to be seen as more legitimate, sophisticated and intellectual than what the common fan is viewed to be. I don’t think the women care as much about that. male fans need people to know that they understand the material on a deeper level — they need the creatives to know that.

simon feels entitled to the ninth circle because of the time he’s invested in it, he believes his view counts as if he’s in the writers' room with spencer, even before he blackmails him into the real thing. so do other male fans I’ve seen. I don’t think they’d ever quite go to the extent that simon does, but they’re certainly further down that path than female fans are.

and that’s why it had to be a male fan in this episode. look at doctor who — all three modern showrunners are men from fan spaces (as is mark himself). you know there were women from the same era who were writing their own stories, within their own communities, but isn’t it interesting how they didn’t become ‘legitimised’ through work on the show? what is big finish if not fan fiction legitimised?

and to end: all sides of fandom can be toxic (and they've touched on several areas in this episode) but it is also more often just an absolute blast. gavin's speech is in there for a reason, to recognise the good side. so whilst it sounds like I’m being negative towards the male fans, they're also a big part of that.

[mechanical-sunchild]

I think there's a difference, generally but not always, between general alterhuman (and all such labels) joy/euphoria and species specifc joy/euphoria. I think sometimes there's an overlap and all kinds are valid and important.

A general alterhuman joy activity (here I am using alterhuman to mean all identities where one is not human in some way) might not match up with your species. It might include gear that doesn't match, doing quads even though your species wouldn't move like that, howling and barking even if your species doesn't, going into woods or parks even if that's not your habitat etc. All of this is just to feel more animal, or monster, or Other in general. It creates joy in this way.

More specific and 'accurate' activities will match your species and can be very dedicated and niche. Some general advice may apply, but you might have very specific things too. The idea is to feel more like yourself, to forge that denied connection and feel a bit more 'right'. Thus there is euphoria.

The overlap ofc comes with things that aren't necessarily to do with being more like your species in an accurate way but make you feel connected to it specifically (wearing a shirt with your species picture on it, engaging in fiction from your source, buying things that remind you of your species, posting about being your species, moodboards + similar etc).

I think it's important to distinguish between these two types of community joy because we can so easily get wrapped up in the 'illogical' things we might do to feel better and it's so quickly twisted to invalidate us. It's not illogical or inaccurate, it's just a more generalised euphoria! And also, critically, the generalised joy is something everyone of every identity can share more than others including -link and -hearted identities.

[thewadapan]

My pal @irlnautica has just shared her essay defining the Transformers version of the Doylist/Watsonian perspective dichotomy!

"Budianskian and Furmanist: A new model of storytelling analysis"

Bob Budiansky believed that the most interesting thing about the entire Transformers setup was that the Transformers were on Earth. The vast majority of his stories revolved around ideas of culture clash and worlds colliding; Bob’s Autobots would be perplexed and fascinated by human behaviours, from small-town life to professional wrestling. [...] Budianskian storytelling is concerned with looking at Cybertronians from an external perspective: exploring what sets them apart from you or I, showing how they interact with a world not their own, how and why they hide themselves as human vehicles to conduct their war. Budianskian storytelling is about the Transformers being robots in disguise. By contrast, Simon Furman was far less enamoured with humans and the ways the two species played off each other. [...] To be sure, his stories take advantage of the characters being robots, but rarely is it particularly concerned with them being vehicles. Furmanist storytelling looks at Cybertronians from an internal perspective; it’s concerned with how they interact with each other, and the lore and history and substance of their own world. The point of the robots as characters isn’t to contrast with the human experience, but to be a stand-in for them. Furmanist storytelling is about the Transformers being more than meets the eye.

If you enjoyed my essay on Transformers One, I guarantee you'll find stuff to like in Jo's writing too. Much of it is giving an overview of major examples of Transformers stories, but whenever it steps outside that specific context, you'll find it raises interesting questions about "the promise of the premise", what exactly it is that makes certain kinds of stories/themes/allegories better-suited to given properties/settings/concepts than others.

I feel strongly that these terms can be generalised to cover all forms of sci-fi—hell, any story where the premise involves a "break from everyday reality" in some form or another. Are we in that world, or are we outside it, looking in?

(I think, for most people not in Transformers fandom, the ethos behind Furmanism in this specific context is frankly baffling. What is the point of writing about these giant alien robots if you're really just writing about humans? Personally, it's the culture-clash stuff that continues to compel me as an adult. Nevertheless, this essay makes a valiant effort to justify the appeal of Furmanist stories as best it can!)

[orkbutch]

So, I'm not really in the weeds of Transgender Discourse on the internet (I have a life and also care about my mental health) but I've seen something discussed here about trans masculinity and I wanna talk about it.

I'm very masculine. I'm butch, I'm trans masc, I've always wanted to be masculine and I feel most comfortable when I'm presenting as such. Without much effort or any intention on my part I am read as a cis man day to day. Because I don't present more fem, in queer spaces I am read and recieved as a man, maybe trans, probably into other men. People do not even consider if I'm a butch lesbian unless there's Significant context indicating it. Because of this I'm viewed through 'Man Lens'; It feels a different if I say 'bitch', if I talk about my attraction to women. I don't get smiled at, people put physical distance between me and them as much as possible.

This is familiar for a lot of trans masculine people and trans men that aren't androgynous/fem leaning in their style, and it is an upsetting change to happen. It makes us feel judged or misunderstood to suddenly be causing this wariness in others; it feels prejudiced. I've seen people putting words to this like transmisandry. This is something they want to lessen in their communities, so they don't have to experience this anymore.

Now, here's my opinion part: That's not going to happen. You cannot tackle the "problem" of people responding to your masculinity with wariness. They aren't controlling the wariness, they can't. More importantly, their wariness toward masculinity and what registers in their brain as "man-like" is well founded. It's based in lifetimes of experiences and trauma that has told them men can be very unsafe to be around, and that is true. Most men are cis, and cis men are the most threatening thing in this world to non-cis men. They are usually* socially privileged above others, more likely to inflict violence, more likely to abuse and murder others, are typically physically more powerful than others. Everyone thats not a cis man DEEPLY internalises a very rational wariness of men, and masculine presentation as an extension. Especially men that are strangers. (*This is of course different when we consider intersections of race, colonialism, classism, ect. But globally this generalisation is still pretty accurate.)

Honestly, I don't think this wariness towards masculine presentation is something thats useful or realistic to challenge. Like many internalised processes it's probably a good idea to examine it and consider its usefulness, but I think it'd be easy to conclude that it is a useful wariness for people to have. Women have lots of reasons to be wary around men, including the unique threats of transmisogyny. Queer and gender deviant men have lots of reasons to be wary around men. This is The Reality of patriarchy.

Personally, the place I've come to with how women and queer people react to my masculinity (which is not entirely negative btw, the wariness is just one aspect) is that... I understand their wariness. I have it too, toward those my brain assumes are cis men. I cannot control how they feel or what they think about me. I can only be respectful to others and to myself and live my life. I flag my butchness where I can, I make my gender clear to those it matters to, and the rest I accept as largely beyond my influence. All of us have to do this in some places in our lives.

Even though my masculinity makes other queers wary, I have lots of friends! I've had no real trouble dating or finding intimacy. Initial wariness is just that. Once you understand each other, break the barrier, its usually settled. For anyone who finds my masculinity so offputting that we can't break the barrier, I'm glad neither of us put each other through that discomfort. I understand where a fear like that comes from. I will still hold community with them because that's what solidarity entails.

Anyway thats my ramble about masculinity in queer community, good bye until another. who knows how long

[bluespiritshonour]

Somethings I noticed:

Katara, Suki and Azula are the only ones who haven't ever expressed any sort of misogynistic sentiment.

Aang would come a close second with minor mishaps here and there.

First, the girls:

Ty Lee, while fighting the Kyoshi Warriors: you're not prettier than we are.

Girl, where did that come from?

Mai has several instances of this when she says the Kyoshi Warriors’ uniforms are too girly (I don't mind her not liking how colourful they are; that's totally different) and later lowkey slut-shaming Ty Lee. And while she's rightfully unimpressed with Zuko's seashell (she's right Zuko, step-up your game) she could easily have countered his “Don't girls like these stuff?” the way Suki did with Sokka’s ideas about gendered generalisation. Also, you must have noticed that Mai's feminine too. She's just dark feminine to Ty Lee's light feminine.

Toph: she has absorbed a lot of toxic masculinity that's for sure. She isn't feminine, she light-heartedly teases Katara for being feminine and Aang too. She does give off the “one of the guys” vibes. You know which ones I'm talking about. “Are we going to watch two little girls fighting?” and later mocking Aang for his passivity.

But it is to be noted that Toph manages to do this without being racist to Aang. She's the one who mocks him the most about his pacifist beliefs (which are cultural to him) and she's kinda misogynistic the way she goes about it. But she's never racist to him. (I guess she is in the comics but fuck the comics). Even when Aang was really really nasty to her when Appa was stolen and she had every right to be mad at him—she wasn't. Given her age and her sheltered upbringing Toph's surprisingly mature. But I digress. Among the comics, I love the Lost Adventures only—and I love the spa day Katara and Toph have both in those comics and in the show. It feels like Toph's healing from that internalised misogyny? My reading of it is that just like girls in real world, Toph derides femininity because it has always been a chain to her. Her parents forced her to confirm so she hates it. But being friends with Katara probably let her heal that part of her. She's still not as feminine as Katara and mind you, nor should she be—let some girls never want to be feminine—it’s fine. But she learns to not to act out of a place of hurt.

Sokka: Sokka's misogyny was literally a plot point and he overcomes it. Also he and Aang have actually done drag and not been mocked for it. It's rare to see in media. The only other example I can think of is Good Omens.

His misogyny also feels kinda surface level (as opposed to Zuko in whom it's less obvious but seems more deeply ingrained).

Also. Zuko never did drag. Shame on him.

Aang: is the least misogynistic of the boys. The only instances I can think of are either kinda vague: when he tells Sokka that “It's nice dress!” It's kinda ambiguous if his tone was mocking or complimentary but it upsets Sokka nonetheless. And when he's upset at being played by a woman in Ember Island Players. The first time I watched it I felt it was OOC. But he was also kind of justified as it was racism and misogyny combined on behalf of the Fire Nation in portraying him that way.

Phew. These were purely my own opinions simply by the virtue of gender expression meaning different things to different people. I might say Mai is actually quite feminine while Toph isn't... But what even is considered masculine or feminine?

I love Katara and Toph's spa day because Toph learns that being girly wouldn't kill her—but she also doesn't suddenly become Ty Lee levels of feminine either. Some women just don't wanna be feminine. Oftentimes it's because femininity is derided by society itself—and that's something that one needs to heal from, like Toph did with Katara’s friendship—but everytime I've seen a story like that, the girl, upon realising that femininity isn't a bad thing is suddenly hyper-feminine.

Like, can we have them heal from internalised misogyny and still not wanna be feminine—even though they don't consider it bad or embarassing or fickle anymore?

Toph and Katara’s spa days do it perfectly.

When those girls mock Toph and Katara tells her she's pretty, I can't tell you much I loved it. The same feelings toward Suki’s “I am a warrior, but I'm a girl too.”

[daisys-reality]

Hello miss daisy, I just read something on your blog that mentions the fact that time isn't real. I just love this concept, I vividly remember reading similar stuff elsewhere, long ago. I'd love to read up on this concept more, could you please suggest resources, scientific, mythological, really anything. I am quite fascinated with the concepts of Time and Death.

Thank you,

Artyom.Dmitry

Time - is it real or just an illusion? - It is both.

Hi artyom.dmitry, I can't think of any specific literature from the top of my head right now that tals about these topics AND is worth reading. I would have to do some research first (I might add some suggestions to this post at a later time).

I'm not sure where you're coming from (mentally) - whether you're a part of the shifting community or not - and what level of understanding you have of those topics but I want to clarify that I'm a shifter and have been active in the spiritual/esoteric community for many years. So, my opinions and perceptions of this world have been influenced and shaped by this (just to give you head ups). You might not agree or see the things I do but that's ok. No one is being forced here to accept anything as their beliefs because there is no 'one general truth'.

So, I think there are two things that we should talk about. First, the issue with the concept itself but it's realness in this reality. Second, the concept losing its meaning and importance in the face of manifestation and reality shifting and therefore just posing as an "illusion".

But let's start from the beginning and let's recall what the original usage of the concept of time and therefore its reason for existence is:

As we all know the concept of "time" is human made. It is something we decided on and categorised into units like: years, months, minutes, seconds to understand our existence on this earth. We based this on what we perceived to happen in our closest environment (sun/moon=day/night time, moon phases = months, repeated changes of the weather = season & year,...). With the creation of this concept we had the intention to use it as a tool. A tool to improve communication between other humans, to improve the ability to plan (when to hunt, when to meet up again, when to go to sleep, when to do xyz) and to improve our understanding of what is happening around us because our life was so closely linked with nature - understanding the nature/earth was detrimental to our surviving.

So, creating the concept of time actually improved the life of our ancestors. We gave our life a structure. And where there is a structure, improvements can be made. We humans are eager to understand and analyse things with the intention to improve. In that sense we're greedy beings - always striving for 'more' and 'better'.

I think that our ancestors had a better understanding & feeling of this concept "time" than we do now. Ex., in many cultures different types of calendars (much closer linked with nature's rhythm) were used but once humans were able to communicate & connect on a more global level - the idea of generalisation & standardisation were on the rise (as further tools to improve life). And of course, capitalism is thriving on this. (We are even selling "our time" for money now!! This is actually crazy the more you think about it. We have been brainwashed by our own society to normalize this!) Time nowadays is not really based on nature anymore as it has been in the past and it's messing with our own human life experience. As nature changes (naturally, but obviously also because of global warming) we should have actually started adapting our concepts of time as well. But we don't. And probably won't any time soon. Because time is something integrated in so many other concepts and human made systems (or it's even even the foundation of those) that changing the concept of time would mean having to adapt everything else. And we all know how those humans on top of our systems (I'm looking at u politicians -_-) love to keep outdated systems alive (even if they don't seem to be as effective anymore) instead of being more innovative... just because of money, reputation and personal comfort... the world we live in 😞...

The concept of time that we have right now is linked to our reality that we percieve here - therefore it is is very much real. HOWEVER, as other realities may have other laws of physics they may also have different concepts of time. With reality shifting (and manifesting as well) you transcend this concept during the act of shifting (/manifesting) therefore it loses its importance and meaning as a "conditioning" or "restrictive aspect of life" -> Time exists as an effective concept in this reality but you are not limited to this reality's concept of time! We thinking that we are limited by it is a (self made) illusion. One a side note, the fact that we're starting to explore further abilities of our consciousness can be considered a sign of evolution. - I hope all of that made sense!

[this-is-exorsexism]

Hey, since I saw you speak German (making that assumption based on the fact that you mentioned a exorsexist comment being German in a post. Sorry if that’s a wrong assumption) I really want to talk about instances of exorsexism that I see so often in the feminist German speaking circles and that I’m so so tired off.

The terms “female read” and “male read” to refer to people, both when talking about, you know, just everyday things they saw ex. “I like seeing female read people sporting body hair” (just say you like people who don’t shave their body hair. Cause it’s not just the demographic of people that society pushes to present as “women” that are pressured into body hair removal.) and in context of feminist discussions “Cat calling affects female read individuals more than male read people. And male read people are more often the perpetrator of cat calling”. (This one irkes me so so much, because it’s a sweeping generalisation in general, which is just not okay.)

Another example that also falls into every day things and is even more removed from any “political” statement: “I saw a female read person that reminded me of my mother.” (This quote came from a nonbinary person which made the unnecessary gendering feel even more uncomfortable. There was no forceful gendering of the person necessary. It could have just been “I saw a person that reminded me of my mother” the assumption that it must have been a woman already is a possibility by the association with mother. And you sadly can’t get rid of it. There is no necessity to state it like that.)

One last longer example that is partly feminism related again (that is a near direct translation): “A lot of women and female read people know the feeling of standing in front of the mirror and asking wether or not they want to wear this or if it’s too revealing. Because choice of clothing alone can suggest you want to provoke men.[…] Even if a female read person wears tight clothing, because [she/they] feel sexy in it, is that no reason to insult [her/them] as a slut.” (The “she” could have also been meant in a “they” sense, because this is a translation situation where it isn’t 100% clear. That’s why I wrote it like that.) (This quote is again making assumptions and putting experiences on people and forcefully gendering people who experience these feelings. When these experiences actually can’t be categorised like that. Like even perisex cis men can experience this. It is also very telling here that only the “female read” wording was used when making social commentary, not the “male read”, when men where mentioned.)

(These statements are not always necessarily word for word quotes. They are partly just things I remember seeing in the past. Each example is from a different person.)

The description “female read”/“male read” as you likely know is typically said to be used to “to be more inclusive. Since we don’t know how someone actually identifies and we shouldn’t assume”. Which to me is just very much a “I’m gonna categorise you into man or woman on sight, just as anyone else, but I’ll say ‘male read’/‘female read’ to make it inclusive and not feel bad in case I’m actually misgendering you.”.

The fact that people think it’s more inclusive and isn’t just basically another way to categories man and woman, while claiming to be inclusive, drives me up the wall if I think about it for to long. The idea to be categorised as “female read” is honestly more dysphoria inducing than simply being assumed to be a woman, because it feels even more like failing at being uncategorisable, because the people supposedly not clinging onto the binary are categorising me as something I’m not. And as I hinted at, at the beginning, these two categories virtually ignore any possibility of seeing people who your brain can’t sort into the man/woman categories immediately, and pushes them into one or the other. Which also can ultimately lead to erasure of intersex individuals who could be sorted differently than both their sex and gender. (I hope my wording here is okay and it’s clear what I mean. If not. Please let me know.) The categories of “female read”/“male read” to me are ultimately cissexist, exorsexist and intersexist. This whole concept is just forceful gendering of people wrapped up in a pretty package that says “feminism”.

A big personal pet peeve of mine is people praising people who categorise like that. I’ve recently seen it done by a cis woman, intersectional feminist, who was praising a speaker for using the terms.

There is also the not uncommon occurrence where it’s just not even hidden anymore that “female read” or “male read” is just put in instead of woman or man or used interchangeably.

I just truly deeply dislike how these terms have become a very common thing in feminist circles, even between trans*(= very much meaning nonbinary here as well, hence the trans*) educators, feminists and influencers. It feels like such a gut punch to see even them reinforcing the gender binary in such ways.

(If you disagree with this being exorsexism I’d be very curious as to how. Because to me personally it is a very clear example of exorsexism that I’ve been wishing to talk about since I first encountered it. Also sorry if this is worded a bit confusingly at times. I tried my best.)

this is definitely exorsexism.

i know exactly what you're talking about and i have spoken about the misuse of these terms at length on my personal social media too.

to be honest, i was about to defend ~some~ uses of these terms, but after reading everything you said, i think these terms need to be retired.

i think at least half the time people use "female-read" and "male-read" to just mean women and men, because i don't know, maybe they think nonbinary people think that men and women exist is somehow offensive? a woman is a woman and you can and should just call her a woman, a man is a man and you can and should just call him a man. calling a woman "female-read" is entirely unnecessary and quite disrespectful too, in my opinion. it basically strips her of her identity as a woman and reduces her to how society sees her. the same is true for men.

"male-read people are often the perpetrators of catcalling" is also an interesting one because it proves that "male-read" and "female-read" are just stand-ins for the gender binary and gender oppositionism: "male-read" people have (perisex cisgender) male privilege and the entitlement and attitudes that come with it. they can never be victims of patriarchal violence, only perpetrators. "female-read" people are always more marginalised than "male-read" people. if you want to talk about people who are most likely to catcall, you must talk about perisex cisgender men.

as you've said, this doesn't take into account transgender, nonbinary and intersex people as it doesn't only sort us into a new male-female gender binary but also into a binary of "perpetrator of the patriarchy" and "victim of the patriarchy" in very oversimplified ways. in its attempt at inclusivity, this language completely obscures the experiences of people whom society sees as men or women but aren't. being seen as male when you're nonbinary or female, being seen as female when you're nonbinary or male, i.e. having your gender assumed incorrectly can actually be really dangerous. it also once again reduces us to how society sees us and acts as if our actual genders don't contribute to our experience.

one of the strangest ways people use this language is when they say something like "i saw a male-read person at the shop today". like, what do you mean? you read this person as male. you projected your binary thinking onto this person. using passive voice for this is just a way to try to remove your responsibility in participating in this system of gender assumption. at this point, you might just say that you saw a man at the shop. in this context, they mean the exact same thing.

these terms also don't take into account that there are different ways of being perceived as male or female. some people are perceived as transgender male rather than cisgender male, which are two very different experiences. being seen as transgender female rather than cisgender female is also very much not the same.

people also ignore that a lot the people they're trying to be inclusive of by using this language aren't actually consistently read as either binary gender or are read as something else entirely. "male-read" and "female-read" are pretty much used to be permanent life-long states of being perceived, with the exception of people transitioning and then going from one to the other and will be read as that and only that for the rest of their life. in reality, this looks very different. some of us are called he one day and she another. sometimes it depends on our gender presentation. sometimes it depends on the person perceiving us. for many of us, we actually have no idea how someone's perceiving our gender until they indicate this. also, many of us aren't read as either male or female. a lot of us are just read as "what the fuck are you" or [insert slur here]. none of these experiences can be mapped onto the idea of male-read and female-read.

not to mention how they keep using these terms to refer to body parts. "female-read" is too often just code for "has boobs". it's especially funny when they use this language for internal organs. like, sure, the catcaller on the street totally perceives someone's uterus.

"male-read" and "female-read" are what "women and femmes" or the transmasc/transfem binary will become if we don't stop it. they can always be replaced with other more precise terms that don't reinforce exorsexism, cissexism, intersexism and gender oppositionism.

[lime-bloods]

@sicklyseraphnsuch said (in response to Jake's apotheosis-as-objectification):

I havent collected my thoughts completely. But I noted this opening line: "this development represents not Manhattan's increasing detachment from humanity, but rather an escalation of his ongoing objectification-as-woman." Wouldn't it be essentially the same though? If I understand this essay correctly, objectification and a "a sexy powerful" being in the shape of a woman go hand in hand. Wherein if object, then not woman/human. It's like that saying - angels have more in common with printers than people. Objects bear a function, and internally morally neutral, especially as they are devoid of human faults, especially missish ailments like emotions. as you later say: "a woman is 'allowed' to be a person or to be powerful, but never both simultaneously, because, crucially, a woman who is allowed to be a person makes mistakes." then jake at the height of his power, and objectified as a woman, would make him more object than person at this point? unless im like way off base

well pointed-out! don't worry, I think you got my point; the confusion is an ambiguity of wording on my part, but it's an ambiguity that serves well to illustrate the gendered colours of the point I'm making, so I'll go into it a bit.

Manhattan's apotheosis and woman's objectification absolutely are both forms of "detachment from humanity": the purpose of my distinguishing the two is that Manhattan's detachment is self-imposed. He deliberately removes himself from personhood by strict adherence to what might be best described in this context as rigidly masculine values: a suppression of emotional responses and total dedication to logic above all else - put another way, rigid adherence to 'objectivity'. The objectification-as-woman is in contrast pressed upon Jake by outside forces: though we observe that Jake is a highly emotionally-driven being, his feelings are necessarily stifled by external actors who seek to project their own desires unto him.

I should also point out that in generalising apotheosis-as-objectification I have engaged in a degree of willful conflation, between objectification-by-author or by-audience (external to the story) and objectification-by-characters (within the story). Rei is such a strong example of the all-powerful woman cliche in part because she is equally subject to both; her transformation into the Giant Naked Rei is essentially the successful completion of a lifetime of grooming into sexual and maternal object by Evangelion's various conspirators. But for Rose Tyler and Jean Grey, their objectification is only implicit; the minimisation of their human agency is not the agenda of a shadowy cabal but rather the simple result of living as human women in a patriarchal society. In this sense their apotheoses are almost in spite of objectification, rather than a logical extension of it (think again of Jake's powers flaring up the most dramatically when his emotional agency is stripped from him) - as I say, at least within Doctor Who's established paradigm of power, Tyler becoming the Bad Wolf is an act above her station. The Bad Wolf and the Phoenix's objectification is exterior to the text; a re-claiming of the powerful woman as sex object for male consumption, just as the mundanely powerful woman like Lara Croft is empowered within-text but objectified from without. To the point: I believe that Beyond Canon's reflective nature (and Homestuck's generally) puts it in the perfect position to tackle the history and tropes associated with objectification-by-audience using a character like Jake who has a history of being objectified by his fellow characters.