#REASONS YOU DONT WANT TO DISCUSS??

[ratatatastic]

monty all the way across the country still manages to take a potshot at ekky for being a bad seatmate which tracks extensively from what swaggy and benny have said before but also monty choosing maffhew his seatbuddy in the poker table love is so real

i love the poker table and all the shit that has come from it if not because you can see exactly who's the loudest persistent bitch there and who exactly finds that endearing spoiler alert its exactly who you think it is womp womp

deeply important to me on a "whos the best and whos the worst at the table" maffhew and benny insisting forsy is the best because of his good pokerface and his consistency and even swaggy agrees that forsy is pretty good meanwhile benny cant help adding an "ekky thinks he's the best" while he's at it and swaggy has to get his two cents in as well: "and [ekblad] thinks he's pretty good."

and when forsy gets asked best and worst he decides he can't say worse and instead only lists the people he think are the good and: "ekky's pretty good actually but he's very... he's a little bit more wild so he's got some big swings."

and at first it's like oh maybe this is a benny/swaggy bullying ekky moment as they're prone to wont to do (ekky deserves it and likes it) but then forsy immediately says afterwards that c*usins is: "but i think nick c*usins. hes doing pretty good. yeah, I know, I know... we're gonna get him though."

which immediately discredits why he thinks ekky is a good player because both benny AND demers were like c*usins is the WORST at poker

and if you think oh forsy is just a carebear of a man and he cant choose the worst- NO HE DOES NOT. HE ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT BECAUSE in the same interview he has no qualms of naming lundy as the worst playoff beard (2nd year in a row btw): "its gotta be one of the finns probably... lundy" and calling out luosty for his culinary abominations: "luosty is eating—he's putting raw onions in the pasta which is... yeah thats a little... weirdo, weirdo!"

this is just forsy whos very bad at hiding his bias and will warp the world in favour of it because he'd rather die than not pick ekky for TWO whole questions (best at poker and best playoff beard)

and with primetime panthers we learned that ekkys too loud and pushy for both benny and swaggys taste that they both elected him as the worst seatmate on the team plane which is so comical that mr. im not very good at poker but I still sit with them and get shocked when ekky bounds over and wants me to play too would say such a thing huh

and the double whammy is that swaggy prefers forsys who's the complete opposite of ekky

and i just think everyone going, forsy is nice quiet and reserved in his facial expressions and ekky is loud insistent and not as good as he thinks he is, is just sooooooooooo

[dykedvonte]

You ever just see a Mouthwashing take that makes you want to bang your head into a wall? I literally just saw someone claim Curly couldn't have been emotionally abused by Jimmy before the crash because he was in a higher position of power than Jimmy.

-Shrimp Anon

The mouthwashing fandom has shown me that people genuinely do believe that certain types of abuse are not as detrimental as other types especially when they deem those immune/resistant, ergo, believing one is objectively worse no matter how it affects the person nor the intersections of power, history and dynamics at play.

Get ready cause this is a yap session:

Cause like it's heavily implied that Curly and Jimmy's friendship was toxic and abusive, pointedly in the direction of how Jimmy uses Curly's belief/comfort in him. Curly wasn't forced to enable Jimmy but he was emotional and mentally on edge around him in almost every scene in some way. Mental and emotional abuse are not contingent on what positions you have at work. Yeah, he's Jimmy's boss but he was Jimmy's friend first and it's like getting into Psych discussion to talk about how social power tends to overshadow any perceived organizational power in the human mind. People are concerned about their jobs ofc but they tend to hang onto and put more value/investment into their personal relationships, hence why there tends to be laws and restrictions around mixing the two.

I always see the sentiments that "Curly is a grown ass man", "Curly is bigger than Jimmy", "Curly is Jimmy's boss", "He just needed a backbone" as criticisms of Curly and while I do agree that on the surface level all of these to be true and viable ways Curly could've taken more control of the situation, I often look at the parallels of Anya and Curly as victims of Jimmy pre/post crash.

The way Jimmy talks to Anya post crash is how he talked to Curly in the pre-crash segments. It's hard to pin-point mainly because we know he hates and wants nothing to do with Anya compared to his contrary but similarly handled obsessions with Curly. It's a weird sort of "honey-moon" effect of abuse Jimmy does in terms of emotional and mental victimization. He is always horrid to Anya, always talking down or questioning her abilities and thoughts in a situation, this of course includes the harassment and assault. However, he has a moment of attempted gentleness/conditioning when he question her about the mouthwash when she's contemplating drinking it at the table. The key difference is he has no personal investment in Jimmy outside wanting nothing to do with him, meaning there is no sort of romanticized version of him that he can condition her off of. He knows this, hence, why he always reverts to trying to make her to scared to oppose him.

This sort of give and take of "kindness" doesn't work on her because she knows he is just doing it to take more from her than whatever he could possibly give but it reflects even the "softer" scenes between him and Curly where he always rewords or rephrases Curly's sentiments and concerns to sound more shallow. He is feigning a deeper understanding by reworking Curly's emotions into something bad and needing to be hidden. Everything is laced with envy and resentment, an outburst just around the corner, I mean he even slams the table in the birthday party scene, a tactic in emotional manipulation to set the victim on edge and cloud their ability to respond. Even if Curly knows Jimmy won't get physical in that moment, the physical actions is intended to make him back down in the confrontation in case it does. This is something that is just not person specific. It ingrains itself into how you interact with the world and life and it shows in major and minor ways with Curly.

Post-crash, the abusive nature is more in tandem to the physical victimization Anya went through and the stripping of voice and autonomy we see take place. Like the parasite in HFIM, Jimmy speaks for Curly most of the time and puts words in his mouth, similarly to how he takes Anya's plans as his own. He very commonly, with the both of them mind you, supplements the worst aspects of himself into them; pettiness, selfishness, lack of understanding... And tries to cover himself with their best qualities; kindness, planning, initiative, etc...

These parallel are just to say that positional power has little to do with if a person can be abused and how it can even be flipped to further the abuse. There is no doubt that Curly could've picked up on Jimmy's envy of his position hence another reason he never confronted him as a Captain but as a friend as doing so would immediately put Jimmy in a space to be confrontational/combative.

I think the disdain some people have when they talk about the heavily implied if not implicitly stated emotional/mental abuse Curly experienced being Jimmy's friend is when treating it as an excuse to why he didn't do more. I can understand that completely because it is not an excuse to why he didn't do more but is a very real reason people in his position in these scenarios can experience whether in the context of a work or social environment. However, I also think the way people talk about it really does demonstrate a bigger problem when talking about abuse when somehow who is/was abused is either part of the issue or enabled it.

Harkening back to the sentiments about Curly's inaction regarding Jimmy, I think the exact phrases I used/have seen show how there is an inherent belief that it is easier to overpower the effects of emotional/mental abuse that go in tandem with the perception of Curly as someone who should be able to. There is not an age you suddenly stop being susceptible to abuse nor a set point or low where you realize how it has affected you. You don't suddenly know to stand up or put a face on to face your abuser nor admit that you inadvertently enabled them to subjugate someone else to the same treatment. Maybe it's my psych brain but their is this growing belief that direct action is somehow easy or always the best method with the game shows you instances where it is not always the case. In real life that rings true too. He should have done more, but it's not impossible to see why he struggled to find a way or didn't even if it makes us mad.

It's not easy to suddenly gain a "back-bone". You don't immediately want to resort to aggression, especially if it mirrors the type you were a victim to. You don't want to believe you allowed yourself to be treated this bad, let it get that bad or allowed something bad to happen to someone else. It is easy to be in denial, to retreat to your thoughts or make excuses to avoid the painful truth. It's frustrating but in a way we know is relatable. It why we both hate and love Curly for it. We know we'd be better, we think we'd be better, we like to think we wouldn't falter in the same ways but it's always easier to say that from the outside looking in. It's easy to see what he was doing wrong because we are seeing it, not him, but the game really does make you picture what you would do if this was your raw reality and it's why this debate about Curly seems so never ending/contradictory. We can all say what we'd do but bottom line is that's much different when you're in the moment with all the emotions and human feelings attached.

I personally think Mouthwashing tackles the themes of rape culture, enabling, toxic masculinity, types of abuse and patriarchy in ways that are meant to deconstruct the typical straightforward views we mostly have of these concepts and how little subtilities of them are just as, if not more, detrimental than the overt/obvious parts. The game deals with the idea of little details and bigger picture in a way to show that sometimes the bigger picture is not the issue but the little details that make it up. It's why I have a personal dislike of depictions of Jimmy as the typical horrible person who would of course do something like this because the game is about noticing the little warning signs, the foreshadowing and foresight.

It's why I dislike the typical discussion of "bro code" and "boys will be boys" for the game because the game makes a point to avoid the standard depictions of such. It is about the type of men who still enable despite not condoning, agreeing or even perpetuating harmful beliefs because they can't see the little details or the ways it seeps into their everyday. The severity is not obvious to them as it was not obvious to Curly, Swansea or even Daisuke the way it was to a woman like Anya. There are little details about Jimmy that should ring alarms but if you are too naive like Daisuke, too distant like Swansea or too conditioned like Curly, they are just off markers.

There is 100% more constructive/concise ways to say "Curly was a victim of Jimmy's abuse on an emotional and mental aspect that clouded his judgements and perceptions in the scenario" while also critiquing on the side of "Curly still had a responsibility to protect Anya as a crew mate and Captain that he failed to do due to biases and stigma's he failed to surpass" without the weird condemnation people give him about should've knowing better than to let himself be manipulated by a person he considered a close, if not family/best-friend and had his own reasons to trust initially. Also stop being weird about victims of abuse in general with this fandom, like sorry not everyone has a like social epiphany the moment someone's nasty to them. People are treating it like you immediately know when you are in a toxic relationship immediately or comprehend when a person is actively dangerous and either it's your fault for not knowing how to leave/cut them off or you deserve it. Like the hypocrisy of people believing how certain fans treat the story reflect their irl views but not their own is crazy.

End statement is: I honestly don't even know man, I've been writing this too long and just like no man on that ship was perfect or really helped Anya when it mattered and I feel like pitting them against each other in discussion on who did the least or most or how it was justified sucks cause in the end Anya always did the most and best thing for herself.

[cherrielatte]

genuine question do you even understand what a proshipper is ? like youre okay with people romanticizing pedophilia and shipping minors and adults ? you think thats okay?? GENUINE question.

Hello! Judging from the way you worded this - I'm gonna be honest: I don't think you know what proshipping is. I was very close to not answering this because it was sounding a bit in bad faith ( and this isn't the first time I've gotten belligerent asks on the same topic) But well, I decided to give it a shot and give benefit of the doubt.

 I know it's common ground to jump onto proshipping with the idea that it means you romanticize pedophilia, abuse, toxicity, etc. It's the typical high ground taken when people hear that dark fiction enjoyers exist. But that's not actually what it means. It just means that YOU, as an individual, understand that a drawing is not the same thing as human being. Written characters are not the same as human beings. Harassing REAL people over a non existent character because they put them into situations that make you uncomfortable says more about the harasser than the writer/artist. Proshipping is about taking personal responsibility for your experience online. Not long ago, the idea of a proshipper was just considered having fandom etiquette (ie: Don't like; Don't read type of tag lines. ) I'm a proshipper and there are plenty of things I don't like & make me uncomfortable. But I also understand that I can easily not engage. I can filter tags so I don't see it. I can block people that make that kind of content. I can refuse to click on something clearly labeled as the content I don't like. I can control what I see. And I can also understand that that if someone draws something I don't like it doesn't mean anything about them in real life nor what they enjoy in real life. Besides, a lot of people that consider themselves proshippers are victims of abuse or have had to endure traumatic events in their lives. Engaging in what you might consider dark fiction allows people to cope and navigate through complex emotion/trauma and express themselves in ways they are not allowed to or haven't allowed themselves to. I've seen some people say "I've been through trauma and I don't engage in proshipping." And okay, I'm happy for you. But not everyone copes the same way you do. And no one should be held to the same standard. If we were all carbon copies of each other, maybe I would understand that argument. But that's not the case. I should also mention, that it's become a bit standard for people to only excuse those that have been through trauma to make dark fiction. But only if they publicly acknowledge what kind of trauma they have endured. I am 100% against this way of thinking. I do not think it is anyone's right to demand an account of my or anyone's personal traumas just to validate the existence of certain piece of art. No one is entitled to anyone's abuse story. If a person is willing to share, because they want to, that's the personal decision of the individual. But look, much of the horror genre (movies, books, tv, etc) wouldn't exist if we put these high censorship rules onto art as a whole and unfortunately, I see this happening more and more these days like discussed in this post about someone's experience in publishing gothic horror.

Going back to an earlier point, you have to really understand that the characters are fake. 100% fake. If I ship Sora ( KH) and Ash (Pokemon) neither of them are going to be upset about it because they don't exist. If I draw them kissing, it is a drawing of anime looking characters kissing. That's all. They don't look anything like real human people. Wasting energy fighting over fictional characters is just that. Wasting time and energy. Who are you saving? Ash? Sora? They don't need help, because they aren't real. Fight for real people that actually exist. I have seen people outside of the Soriku fandom genuinely upset about people shipping Riku x Sora because they are underage! Mostly because they are both male but without fail, they always slap on the argument: "they are kids, you sicko!" But you know why they go to that? Because assuming the moral high ground wins over arguments quickly. People are eager to be superficially perceived as morally good. I have seen people ship Riku x Ansem SOD, which could fall into that age gap - problematic shipping you referred to in your ask. But you know what? I get it. I see people interpret their relationship as one of abuse, metaphorical SA, manipulation, etc. I completely understand and see that interpretation and where it stems from. And unfortunately, there are many people in fandom that have had this exact experience. Honestly, without me needing to ask anyone specifically, I KNOW there are people in fandom projecting their experiences onto Riku and Ansem as a means to replay it with a bit of actual control. And even if there are people who don't. I'm not going to ask, because it's none of my business. So again, as a proshipper I am completely in control of my online experience. I can block, mute, filter, and not engage with the things I don't like or things that trigger me. But as long as it is fiction, it remains as just that : Something I don't like between characters that dont exist. I don't have to harass, bully, nor threaten people over fiction. Of course, there are bad apples in every circle. But to me, whether someone is a bad person or not is expressed through action toward real people and the intentional harm done onto them, whether it be through inappropriate interactions, abuse of any kind, exposing personal information, harassing family/at work, or encouraging harm. Those are real actions on real people and engaging in these actions is what counts to me as markers of a bad person. Not someone drawing two fictional characters that haven't aged in the last 20 years kissing or having sex. 

[deoidesign]

Happy EDS awareness month!

I'm a webcomic artist with EDS. be aware.

EDS affects many parts of my life. I have chronic fatigue, chronic pain, and I need to use a cane! I often find myself ruminating on themes of chronic illness in my work, whether or not I am intending to include them.

I already can't paint anymore, it hurts my hands too much... Anything that requires small details or precise motions will hurt me for days. I have a lot of grief around it. But working digitally allows me to still create!

I animate, I illustrate, I get to tell my stories. I have to go slow, take huge breaks (often against my will) and recover slowly. But, working in this space allows me the grace to do this.

So, I just wanted to share a bit of my experience with my audience, and say thank you for reading my work and supporting me! It means the world to me, and I hope maybe someone in my audience feels a little more seen through me sharing this. It causes me pain, but I love myself; and that includes my disability.

[ooctlt]

I really like this blog most of the time, but sometimes you take reasonable earnest asks that are trying to be thoughtful, and are such a dick about it.

Like if it's the characters being dicks, fine. But you could say something in the tags or post to indicate you're not just viciously mocking someone for trying to engage.

I still haven't submitted an ask since seeing your response that led to comments along the lines of "anon should go die in a hole" for asking, pretty reasonably, why harrow would want to stay with people she didn't seem to like or want to be around or interact with.

(i know, because she does like them and does want them around but doesn't know how to show it) but it's an ASK blog. How do we hear that from her unless someone ASKS

i understand it might be surprising and a bit hurtful to see an ask answered with the characters being mean/flippant, and for that i do apologize that it wasnt made clear that it would be a common thing in this blog. id like to issue the disclaimer: there is always the possibility that the characters here will not take your question well. they might answer rudely, and instigating behavior is not only encouraged but expected on both ends. this does not reflect my personal opinions as the artist; there are over 250 asks even after i constantly compile duplicates, and i will answer the asks that i personally like.

i will assume you are referencing the two most recent posts where gideon acts rudely and i repost an old panel: for the former i thought anon was really sweet for being so heartfelt and encouraging, but gideon isnt the kind of person who needs to be told shes brave for doing that by a stranger. it was a simple act of survival. and harrow is still very much in the passive deprogramming phase. the latter response was meant to kickstart (spoilers) what i will call the "dicks last resort" arc, where i clean out the inbox and share more simple, low effort, but potentially rude responses*. this is because i have roughly drawn almost daily for 87 days straight, and would like to recuperate without being burnt out because i love this blog and i love art.

this leads me to my next point: some of these answers will be curt and short and rude, because they are easy to draw. if i only prioritized the "good" asks or to make certain ask responses kinder, or longer, it wouldnt be a daily blog. it would be a monthly blog where 5 asks get answered among 100s. i didnt anticipate people asking about harrows piercings, and i considered shutting it down by just having harrow say she likes them etc. but i did want to give more insight into harrows character even if she wouldnt say so herself, and that took roughly 3 full unemployed nights. if i treated every ask in good faith the same way i wouldnt have time for anything else, because they take more effort and have to be seriously considered for the future. i can retcon their favorite ice cream or play off griddlehark fighting - it takes more to keep track of a narrative about people talking Around their issues

* by rude responses i mean "this will affect the 679ers negatively, much like making your sim 🧑‍🤝‍🧑➖➖ someone" there are a few asks planned to hurt in the same way one drafts a bad end in a visual novel, and this type of interaction is encouraged. of course if you dont want them to get worse dont send asks telling gideon she should flirt with MILFs (you cant send this ask now i already said it), but i encourage the banter.

TL;DR this is the "characters think you are weird for personal questions" blog. i am sorry i didnt warn of the ask-response banter, because i also enjoy drawing these characters being dicks. i do like when aggravation and conflict leads to character development. "how do we get earnest answers unless someone asks" sometimes you will never explicitly get that from them, and thats what the dead ends are for: to let you know to try something else and read between the lines

[rmbunnie]

I am alone on this barren earth (Jason Todd liker and Mia Dearden liker who honestly thinks issues 69-72 of the 2001 Green Arrow run are fun and good and would really like to talk about them beyond "Jason Todd was ooc and irredeemable there because he was trauma-dumping on Mia but also everything he said was fake and made up and he was manipulating her to become his sidekick and he blew up her school in retaliation because she didn't so really we should ignore the whole comic as bad writing /or agree he should just be read as an sadistic sidekick killer" (None of which is true and over half of which is directly stated to be false in the comic's text) but all people ever have to say about the comic is weird wrong takes about the three pages in which the gym fight happens ripped out of the very interesting and fun surrounding context)

[werebutch]

My sex and gender class is cool and I enjoy it bcuz it’s allllllll discussion every day and even if I disagree with people I like hearing thoughts. Expands my perspective. But it kinda weirds me out because my prof keeps talking about how lesbians have it kinda easy and we’re not that oppressed or made into outcasts as much as like… bisexuals. Or something. Thinking emoji. It’s not a competition but I just think it’s kinda weird !

[whiskey-tango-matcha]

not to brag, but my therapist told me today that i did incredible during our emdr session, which means i get an A for the day in therapy, something that is both normal to want and possible to achieve 🙂‍↕️😌

[spinnyspinnyspinnnn]

Since there's an off chance all us Americans getting nuked in November, there's one last thing(not really) I feel I have to share with you:

I do not understand why antis harass proshippers. Really, I don't. I don't see a real point in the matter. And here's some potential arguments I see, and why I think it might be wrong, aside than the morals of harassment.

"But they're all kid diddlers-"

Most of them are kids, from what I've seen, and the ones that are actual kid diddlers who intend to do the diddling are typically shunned from their community.

"But it's a harmful coping mechanism-"

What if they don't have anything else, huh? I'm not trying to really defend the shit but I'd rather see proshippers post incest and age-gap stuff than watch someone else fall to much more graphic coping mechanisms that might end up killing them. And even if it isn't a coping mechanism, why is that our business?

"But proshipping is bad-"

Bad? Maybe. But antis have also watered down their terms. From the research I've done, it's being anti-harassment. Not caring what people do in fiction. It's a stance a lot of us could and should take on, because being against harassment is a good thing. If you bring that shit into real life, then yeah you're a piece of garbage, but I don't see the point in bringing it into fandom spaces and being shunned for it. People have mentioned how proship used to be a default, that us antis are basically the fandom version of purity culture. I don't get it.

"But it's so graphic and-"

That's plain hypocritical and you know it. So many of us antis enjoy dark and graphic media. Hell, I'm writing something with multiple graphic, violent scenes and awful relationships that, since I'm nearing 18 the more I write this project, may end up mildly n$fw at some points if the shoe fits. If we can indulge in our yanderes, in our torture scenes, in our "toxic yuri/yaoi," and all those other things.. the stuff they do seems not that much different, other than maybe the sexual points. Then again, so many books and movies exist that are graphic and s3xual that antis enjoy that it really doesn't matter. If we can indulge in that fucked up stuff, why can't they indulge in their fucked up stuff? What's the real difference here?

But {insert obvious rage bait-}"

Clearly, you've fallen for stuff you shouldn't. You don't need to "fix their headcanons," that's their whole point. People who post shit like that just want attention. And attention you constantly give them. Same with the art posts. You don't need to fix the bait, dude. It's nothing to get angry over, there's bigger fish in the sea.

From what I've seen, most actual proshippers just want to be left the fuck alone, to stop being harassed by us. If we're the "good guys" in fictional, fandom spaces, why do we go out and tell those people to die, to get assaulted, to get abused and harmed, and how to do awful things to themselves, all because of their stance on fandom spaces and the things they may or may not even ship? Are we really being "good" there? Or are we just under the guise that we're good by protecting those characters while we completely disregard how disgusting and horrendous it actually is to say things to real people and real kids?

By the original stance that proshipping and profiction meant(anti-harassment, leave people be, etc.), what proshippers actually claim to be nowadays, most of us could, in a technical sense, be considered proship/profic. That includes myself. If we use the definition most antis who harass proshippers use, that being those who enjoy problematic ships and condone these things IRL, that wouldn't fit. And only one of those things, the problematic ships part, could be considered under the profiction stance as either comship(complicated ship, from what I can tell), or darkship(which is the really messed up shipping tropes that you'd see headcanons of in rage bait posts, but actually taken seriously and thought of instead of being used for attention).

If you read to the end, this is just food for thought. Feel free to block me if you don't agree with any of this. Or, if you have something I'm missing, feel free to engage in some casual discussion with me. I'm not asking to fight or stir up drama, this is just how I feel about things and if you have a different opinion you want to talk about, go ahead and mention it.

Be civil, people and creatures alike. I'll be using tags from both communities to allow a healthy debate on this post. You'll be blocked if you start fighting people or myself.

[yuridovewing]

i understand the frustration with “i made this gay pairing cis x trans so they can still have biological babies” with no thought to other methods and how ppl assume thats the case when it comes to mothpool aus where mothwing is also the mother of the three, but also…. idk i kinda dont give a shit if someone wants to do that and i dont really think its inherently transphobic as long as its handled with care and respect.

what really concerns me about this debate is how some people are adamant that you cannot portray trans people having biological children in media or youre being disrespectful. and im gonna say as a nonbinary person who doesnt want children for themself- thats kinda fucking weird? like i understand that for some people, theyre trans themselves and theyre speaking from a place of dysphoria, and i absolutely get that, which is why i think the topic should be handled with nuance and diversity in trans characters, but like…. guys. pregnant trans men exist irl. trans women get people pregnant irl. trans ppl’s ability and right to parent and have biological children are being debated irl. we get denied the opportunity to adopt as well.

in a climate like this, are we SURE we want the stance on rewrites and headcanons in the silly cat books to be “if you portray trans characters having children, especially with a gay couple, youre a transphobic freak no matter what!” does it really matter? especially if its being done by a trans person handling the topic with nuance who has a lot of trans characters with varying perspectives?

obviously yes, remember that thats not the only way certain gay couples can have kids, remember that not every trans person is fully comfortable with it and keep that in mind, remember that surrogacy and adoption are also perfectly valid ways to give fan babies- but remember that there are OPTIONS. not that you need to condemn the idea of transgender parents in the first place unless they fit the very specific criteria of “proper transgender representation” and anything that dares deviate from that is proof the op is a transphobic monster (bonus points if theyre a trans creator bc i mostly see trans people getting shit for this and it kinda pisses me off. although idm if cis people do it either as long as theyre handling it with respect)

[shapeshivvter]

i think oc askblogs need more love. like come on. someone went out of their way to show you their blorbo they made in their mind, and all you give back is a feeble little like.. SPREADDD that shit NOW.. oc askblogs are literally JUST like media character askblogs YOU JUST GET TO DISCOVER THEIR STORY.... YOU LIKED DISCOVERING A MEDIAS STORY OVER THE EPISODES OR VIDEOS OR BOOKS, ETC ETC.. Cant you enjoy the same thing in askblog form? Show love to OC askblogs. Reblog to get it out there. Send asks to them.

[hanzajesthanza]

when sapkowski is all “i don’t believe in absolute evil” like he didn’t write like vilgefortz and leo bonhart and birkart grellenort likeeee okkkk but those guys were preeeetty evil though

[ultimateinferno]

I think the big issue with Harris is that they used up any enthusiasm they had at the outset. When Biden dropped out and Harris stepped up, there was quite a bit of enthusiasm, maybe a hope that something would change. Then Walz was picked as VP, and once again, people were excited because Minnesota was seen as pretty progressive compared to the more institutional democrats. Then, as Novemeber approached, things started to fall apart. Harris started talking about being the most lethal military and securing borders. She got approval from Dick Cheney. And for the lot who were hoping to hear something in favor of brokering peace with Israel Palestine, there was a fake Biden Ultimatum against Netanyahu and nothing was done even while Trump bragged he was talking with Bibi and actively sabotaging Biden's brokering efforts.

I've seen people blame ID politics for their failure, but feminist and queer issues weren't unpopular, per se. Many states—even red states—passed abortion and queer marriage protections. A trans woman was sent to Congress, and this is the first time two black women are senators at the same time.

I think people are tiring of institutional Democrats. There's no excitement with the DNC. Their biggest selling point they keep giving is occupying seats to keep Republicans out of it. Anyone who may have an issue with institutional Democrats are told to fall into rank to keep Trump away. So, even if logically, Trump is a massive blow to a lot of these positions, people don't want to vote for "Not Trump^tm" for the third presidential election cycle in a row. They want and needed someone to get excited about.

I was a sophomore in high school during the 2016 election. By the time Trump leaves office, I will be approaching my 30s. I know there's a lot of finger-pointing right now about who dropped the ball on the presidential election, and we can blame any minor faction we want. "It's the Latinos! It's the progressives! It's the straight white men!"

Honestly, I don't think it's any of the major voting blocks, but, as I've said, the DNC as a whole. For their stuffy suits and constant attempts at reaching across the aisle with people who spit at their existence, demean their identities. When Harris called Republicans weird, people thought we were out of the woods with overly cordial negotiating and finally got someone who was willing to play ball.

I'm in progressive spaces, so it's certainly obvious that my observation that the DNC was too moderate is biased. That said, I think it was a one-two punch of being made to fall into line then losing because of a stark drop in turn out has lead to many believing someone else didn't do their part, almost a resentful "I had to give up my aspirations for the next administration to not be Trump, why couldn't you?"

[toytulini]

me, stupidly and weirdly resistant to listening to audio books vs reading a physical book for no real reason: man i wish there was a way to like, read a book while i crochet like i do with tv shows and movies and podcasts

[redysetdare]

I hate those posts like "this is about aromanticism, don't tag as ace or aroace!" as if aroaces aren't aro enough because of our asexuality, and non-SAM aces relating to aros is somehow a bad thing. Also some of the aroallo accounts are so quick to regurgitate ace discourse talking points because they think aces are erasing and oppressing aros, I hate that so much

Yeah, to an extent I can completely understand where people are coming from when asking this. I have similar issues with people tagging autism posts as ADHD because they show up in my feed because of the ADHD tag even though the post only mentions Autism. It can be frustrating to be looking for posts and get something completely different. But on the other hand...it feels like some people are taking the idea of these tags way too seriously. Tagging is a minimal issue in the grand scheme of things. Tagging does not actually derail a post as much as people act like it does. Tagging a post you reblogged does not make that post show up in the main tags. I understand that AroAllos do not want to have their personal experiences conflated as Asexuality because it can feel like erasure when you write a personal experience about you identity only to have it tagged as something that is not you identity. But also I don't think people realize how much overlap a lot of aromantic and asexual experiences have. Acting like they are so incredibly different and can't have any overlap is willful ignorance at best and malicious separatism at worse. And it's incredibly disheartening as an AroAce to see how many Aro people seem to have gotten comfortable and even feel justified in the low-key bigoted things they've said against aces and aroaces.

Some of the absolutely wild takes I've seen can range from "AroAces shouldn't post in the aromantic tag" to "Don't tag your post as aromantic if it doesn't mention aromanticism [aka doesn't mention an experience in which the viewer deems as an aromantic experience]" to literal straight up acephobia or aroacephobia and it's absolutely wild because as someone who exists in both tags I've seen this happening basically solely in aromantic tags.

It's genuinely wild to me how we even got to this point in the aspec community where people are arguing over tagging to the point of trying to exclude certain aros from the aro tag completely because they feel less seen as compared to others and act like it's the fault of those other aspecs that they are being oppressed.

I was someone who was around when the Aro and Ace communities were mostly a united force. Because when the entire world was against us we at least had each others back. half the problems people mentioned when it came to the reason to split the community so drastically were not problems I ever actually saw. Hell they still aren't problems I see. I'm not saying that it doesn't happen but I personally have not seen anyone assuming or saying that if you're aro you must also be ace, which makes me thing it's not actually as big of an issue as people seem to think it is. the aro and ace communities being united didn't mean that aromantic was a subsection of asexual, though I believe it'd be lying to ignore the split attractions model in the creation of the aromantic identity and how both the Aro and Ace identities as we know them today kind of emerged from that model.

As I said not too long ago: the separation of the aro and ace communities has done more harm than it's done help. We are making it easier for people to target us by splitting up the way we have. By making enemies out of fellow aspec people you give aphobes the space and comfort they need to start pushing us out again.

We are literally in the same boat. if that makes you upset then you can get on your own raft but you can't then demand everyone else get on their own rafts too or try to sink the ship that everyone else is on.

the tag discourse is stupid. there are more pressing issues to be upset about rather than tumblrs shit tagging system. This helps no one. If aroaces posting in the GENERAL AROMANTIC TAG upsets you THAT MUCH then you can literally go into the aroallo tag to find the content you want to see or better yet MAKE THE CONTENT YOU WANT TO SEE. If an asexual tagging a post they relate too with ace bugs you that much then fucking block them. it's not erasure when someone of a different sexuality feels represented by your post. If an aroace tagging a post as aromantic when you feel it is only about asexuality makes you that mad then you can literally block them. You cannot decide how someone should tag their posts because you personally do not know their experience. Grow the fuck up.

I'm rose repulsed. there are barely any spaces and posts about rose repulsed people in the main aspec tags. You want to know what I did? I made my own fucking space. i went to the romance and sex repulsed tags and posted there. I made posts about being repulsed. I have a fucking blog and a discord server centered around repulsed people. Yes it sucks when other people don't make content you like but that's when you have to accept you need to make it your damn self and not throw a fit over tags on tumblr dot com.

apologies for a long rant, If this ask was bait then congrats you got a rant out of me but also I think if people really want to block me over this instead of having a conversation like adults then so be it. Those who think this sort of exclusion is justified and correct are not people i want to be interacting with in the community. they are not people I want following me. I support AroAllos. I support all aromantic people. I understand where they are coming from in their pain. I do agree that they deserve more recognition because they often moralized to be morally bad for their existence and as a repulsed person NO IDENTITY should be viewed as inherently bad. I have no ill will towards AroAllos making posts about ther experience, they deserve to have their experience shared. But the way some people have been acting in the aromantic community is not acceptable and should be called out because at this rate some people are really toeing the line of the ace discourse that happened in like 2016 and as someone who went through that I REALLY don't want to see it repeat itself.

[popstart]

the moment people stop being comically against courtney is the day i stop making fun of them for being weird and wrong. stop being weird about a fictional character in ways that are hilariously stupid and ill stop calling you hilariously stupid