#That's what art is about though . not even the fact theyre self inserts. But it does make it a ltitle funny.

[selfcontainedunivcrse]

HATE . having self inserts I have to close my eyes and put my hands over my ears and repeat WHICH COULD MEAN NOTHING. WHICH COULD MEAN NOTHING. as I type out relevant info to the vwoopsibs

[snekdood]

im sorry that i had to block you because this topic is pretty triggering for me and I was worried you were going to be like “all content is fine” and didn’t want to be around that energy. I usually try not to knee jerk react like that but in this case it was hard due to my trauma. I can tell this is going to be a hard conversation for me for that reason. and before i even talk about it i wanna say- idk anything about antis or proshippers or whatever tf bc i dont care about fandom stuff and I agree with your other post that reducing it to fandom nonsense is stupid bc I think it ignores actual meaningful conversations around this.

im also sorry if my comment made it sound like I was downplaying your experience with (still assuming: a community within?) tetris, I read your comment as if the game itself was the issue and not the (supposed? im sorry i just dk about your history in this regard (or if there was a community or what)) community, and I get your point but I’d argue colorful blocks =/= cp in its ability to harm people and its a rocky comparison imo. i do genuinely believe drawn images can harm people, even the person drawing it. but regardless, i’m sorry if I made your experience sound trivial, as that wasn’t my intention.

back into the subject though: i do think having stuff like that online is harmful. i agree a lot of the issue is adult spaces mixing with kids spaces, but I really do struggle to believe that seeing something like rape being glorified doesnt effect people, even if they’re adults. no people aren’t gonna go “whelp, time to rape people” as soon as they read something like that, but exposure over time to explicitly non con (not consentual non con) stuff i think does alter your perception of whats “okay”. its in fact the reason id argue my abusive ex ended up thinking its fine to cross peoples boundaries, because of how many times they repeatedly encountered that stuff either online or in their own art after discovering it online.

i just dont buy this idea that fiction never effects reality. fiction that glorifies certain actions without making it clear its bad in some way will embolden people. and while i dont think someone just. plays grand theft auto and starts shooting everyone and stealing their cars, i do believe it can make someone (subconsciously, obv no one directly thinks like this) questioning if they wanna be violent become violent because of how much “fun” it seems in the games or that it becomes “less of a big deal”.

I dont have a solution for moderating this stuff. and I’m also very against censoring things, I literally have a comic thats about a self insert whos a rape victim and going into that story, but bc I worry people will completely miss the point and end up fetishizing the rape, i’ve decided not to actually add anything in the comic that is directly read as rape, rather just hint at it, because honestly it also effects me on a very real level, it’s very triggering for me to see that kind of imagery (and its already hard for me to write the comic bc of the villain being a rapist and how triggering he is to me) but also because I think it could fundamentally alter someones perception of whats fine, especially if they already hate me.

it’s not like *all* depictions of certain things are bad but it depends on whether or not its glorifying that thing and not making it at all clear that its bad. the stuff i was exposed to as a kid explicitly suggested that it was fine and normal, and id argue a lot of fucked up porn online is that- there’s so much fucked up porn made by (likely) cishet dudes that glorifies raping/torturing/killing anime girls or whatever and I just struggle to believe its just an outlet for what they want to do, like i dont think theyre just “getting it all out” in the image, if anything, i think those drawings they make embolden them more. they draw them because they want to see that stuff happen, not because they want to avoid actually hurting people. i really doubt these dudes, if they had access to a girl they could easily over power, wouldn’t try some of that sort of shit on her, at the very least rape her.

I don’t know what the solution is, but i really do not think we need to make space for dudes like that. and i also think its just factually incorrect to say that fiction never effects reality. of course, fiction is born from reality, but its the fact that that subject material is now being spread to a wider audience that makes it effect reality.

I’m worried when this topic comes up that people think the internet should just be a “free for all” and that “anything should go”, that bc we experience censorship in queer spaces that suddenly means everything should be on the table “because conservatives hate us anyways so why not just let it all loose?”. that people will do a 180 from whatever a conservative does, as if that’s helpful in this instance. I do think theres stuff that shouldn’t be tolerated or accepted in our spaces. not saying you dont agree necessarily but thats my general worry about all of this. I really dont think its as revolutionary as people think to go “conservatives think im a horrible person anyways for being queer so that means fuck it all and all kinks are created equal now”, I really do think theres stuff we need to keep out of our community or at least try to, no matter what conservatives say. I think people really need to figure out how to divorce whatever conservatives think and feel from what they think is the best course of action. just because a conservatives does A doesnt mean we should do B, etc. I think thats an attitude that can actually be easily exploited by the right and used against us.

Idk. I have a lot of thoughts on this. All i know is i never want to encounter cp or the weird rape/torture/killing fetish’s some dudes online have. i also dont think there should be any spaces for that. if people NEED to draw it for whatever reason (gonna be hard to convince me they NEED to, but) then they need to keep it to themselves. i dont think there needs to be communities built around this because those communities specifically with the dudes is gonna breed people who are even more misogynistic and who feel even more entitled to womens bodies since they have so many other guys around them agreeing with them. and no, not letting them build public communities isnt going to change or fix the problem, but it sure as hell will prevent people from having to encounter that shit and have their trauma be retriggered.

I want to be clear that I dont think this is necessarily what you’re advocating for, im not entirely sure what you think is the best course of action, but it feels like thats what some ppl on here thinks is the best solution, and that attitude worries me so much.

i will say though that i dont think the government, at least the current USA christofash one we live under, should be moderating this stuff, because they’re obviously just gonna ban content they disagree with (but thats a whole other topic). I at the very least distrust any of our current governments moves to censor things.

and i have once comment in regards to this comment:

obviously ideally we would live in a world where kids aren’t able to access that stuff, but even so, I really do think theres shit that people just shouldnt be posting, because it does effect other adults negatively too, speaking from experience. its not something i know if we can fully moderate but its something i dont think we should just let slide. i also just dont understand why anyone would feel the need to post their rape porn or whatever, anyways.

I think a lot of the issues around this “censorship” thing really falls back into who’s doing the censoring and why. bc while ppl like me might want to be more nuanced about it, the current people who have more power lean more into puritanism and decide all sexual content is bad. It really does feel like an issue of preventing puritanical christian bs from infiltrating our politics, yet again (its always the puritanical christian bs 🙄) and the ppl holding those values having more power and control over the content. idk. i hope this makes sense, ik its kinda all over the place. and im sorry for kneejerk reacting the way I did initially.

Hey, I'm a big time fan of your blog and the circle of blogs similar to it. I love the pro-kink stuff, I love the support of transfun and the general concept that you can vibe with whatever gender and identity you want, I love the positivity, I love bringing attention to trans masc issues.

But I've been seeing some alarming dogwhistles lately. And I've been ignoring them because I really really want to just believe that they were unintentional. But with a recent post you reblogged, I have to ask you something - not out of discourse reasons or to paint you a specific way but because I want to decide what type of people I interact with on tumblr. If you decide to answer my question, please be incredibly clear. I'm not going to hide it behind vague terms like "certain kinks" or "problematic media", I am going to also be incredibly clear.

Do you genuinely believe that if we were in a society where fictional child porn and incest was the norm, that it would have no negative effects on our society as a whole? That media does not represent or change our cultural norms, that fiction can not be used as either propaganda nor as a way to help someone see things in a new light (for better or worse)?

Please be straightforward in your response. Even if it's just a yes or no.

that's a tough question. a quick but unnuanced answer is that I know the meanings behind these when I reblog them, and I do so because I agree with their general messages

the longer answer is... if these things were the norm then people would definitely be interacting with it differently than they do now I think. in some ways they already are somewhat normal, schoolgirl costumes and step-family roleplay come to mind.

ideally, in a world where these fantasies are completely normalized so is education on consent and safety. I don't think there's any real uncomplicated answer to it. but in the world we live in now, as long as things are labeled and not put into spaces where they're inappropriate, there's not really as much harm as some people just feeling uncomfortable

even if these things magically disappeared entirely (which they won't, and as someone with OCD I'd rather have them labeled than out in the wild), they still aren't the source of harm

I said it earlier, but I was groomed with the game tetris. under this framework of media causing harm, where do you go from there? it's a game about blocks, should we ban it and legos too for good measure?

sorry for talking so much when you wanted a short answer, but there's so much nuance here and I like explaining context instead of putting just a little bit of my thoughts out

[shkspr]

hi. on your post where you may or may not have ended on 'moffat is either your angel or your devil' did you have maybe an elaboration on that somewhere that i could possibly hear about. i'm very much a capaldi era stan and i've never tried to defend the matt smith era even though it had delightful moments sometimes so i wonder where that puts me. i'd love to hear your perspective on moffat as a person with your political perspective. -nicole

hi ok sorry i took so long to respond to this but i dont think you know how LOADED this question is for me but i am so happy to elaborate on that for you. first a few grains of salt to flavor your understanding of the whole situation: a. im unfairly biased against moffat bc im a davies stan and a tennant stan; b. i still very much enjoy and appreciate moffat era who for many reasons; and c. i hate moffat on a personal level far more than i could ever hate his work.

the thing is that its all always gonna be a bit mixed up bc i have to say a bunch of seemingly contradictory things in a row. for instance, a few moffat episodes are some of my absolute favorites of the rtd era, AND the show went way downhill when moffat took over, AND the really good episodes he wrote during the rtd era contained the seeds of his destruction.

like i made that post about the empty child/the doctor dances and it holds true for blink and thats about it bc the girl in the fireplace and silence in the library/forest of the dead are good but not nearly on the same level, and despite the fact that i like them at least nominally, they are also great examples of everything i hate about moffat and how he approached dw as a whole.

basically. doctor who is about people. there are many things about moffats tenure as showrunner that i think are a step up from rtd era who! actual gay people, for one! but i think that can likely be attributed mostly to an evolving Society as opposed to something inherent to him and his work, seeing as rtd is literally gay, and the existence of queer characters in moffats work doesnt mean the existence of good queer characters (ill give him bill but thats it!)

i have a few Primary Grievances with moffat and how he ran dw. all of them are things that got better with capaldi, but didnt go away. they are as follows:

moffat projects his own god complex onto the doctor

rtd era who had a doctor with a god complex. you cant ever be the doctor and not have a god complex. the problem with moffats era specifically is that the god complex was constant and unrepentant and was seen as a fundamental personality trait of the doctor rather than a demon he has to fight. he has the Momence where you feel bad for him, the Momence where he shows his humility or whatever and youre reminded that he doesnt want to be the lonely god, but those are just. moments. in a story where the doctor thinks hes the main character. rtd era doctor was aware that he wasnt the main character. he had to be an authority sometimes and he had to be the loner and he had to be sad about it, but he ultimately understood that he was expendable in a narrative sense.

this is how you get lines like “were the thin fat gay married anglican marines, why would we need names as well?” from the same show that gave you the gut punch moment at the end of midnight when they realize that nobody asked the hostess for her name. and on the one hand, thats a small sticking point, but on the other hand, its just one small example of the simple disregard that moffat has for humanity.

incidentally, this is a huge part of why sherlock sucked so bad: moffats main characters are special bc theyre so much bigger and better than all the normal people, and thats his downfall as a showrunner. he thinks that his audience wants fucking sheldon cooper when what they want is people.

like, ok. think of how many fantastic rtd era eps are based in the scenario “what if the doctor wasnt there? what if he was just out of commission for a bit?” and how those eps are the heart of the show!! bc theyre about people being people!! the thing is that all of the rtd era companions would have died for the doctor but he understood and the story understood that it wasnt about him.

this is like. nine sending rose home to save her life and sacrifice his own vs clara literally metaphysically entwining her existence w the doctor. ten also sending rose with her family to save her life vs river being raised from infancy to be obsessed w the doctor and then falling in love w him. martha leaving bc she values herself enough to make that decision vs amy being treated like a piece of meat.

and this is simultaneously a great callback to when i said that moffats episodes during the rtd era sometimes had the same problems as his show running (bc girl in the fireplace reeks of this), and a great segue into the next grievance.

moffat hates women

he hates women so fucking much. g-d, does steven moffat ever hate women. holy shit, he hates women. especially normal human women who prioritize their normal human lives on an equal or higher level than the doctor. moffat hated rose bc she wasnt special by his standards. the empty child/the doctor dances is the nicest he ever treated her, and she really didnt do much in those eps beyond a fuck ton of flirting.

girl in the fireplace is another shining example of this. youve got rose (who once again has another man to keep her busy, bc moffat doesnt think shes good enough for the doctor) sidelined for no reason only to be saved by the doctor at the last second or whatever. and then youve got reinette, who is pretty and powerful and special!

its just. moffat thinks that the doctor is as shallow and selfish as he is. thats why he thinks the doctor would stay in one place with reinette and not with rose. bc moffat is shallow and sees himself in the doctor and doesnt think he should have to settle for someone boring and normal.

not to mention rose met the doctor as an adult and chose to stay with him whereas reinette is. hm. introduced to the doctor as a child and grows up obsessed with him.

does that sound familiar? it should! bc it is also true of amy and river. and all of them are treated as viable romantic pairings. bc the only women who deserve the doctor are the ones whose entire existence revolves around him. which includes clara as well.

genuinely i think that at least on some level, not even necessarily consciously, that bill was a lesbian in part bc capaldi was too old to appeal to mainstream shippers. like twelve/clara is still a thing but not as universally appealing as eleven/clara but i am just spitballing. but i think they weighed the pros and cons of appealing to the woke crowd over the het shippers and found that gay companion was more profitable. anyway the point is to segue into the next point, which is that moffat hates permanent consequences.

moffat hates permanent consequences

steven moffat does not know how to kill a character. honestly it feels like hes doing it on purpose after a certain point, like he knows he has this habit and hes trying to riff on it to meme his own shit, but it doesnt work. it isnt funny and it isnt harmless, its bad writing.

the end of the doctor dances is so poignant and so meaningful and so fucking good bc its just this once! everybody lives, just this once! and then he does p much the same thing in forest of the dead - this one i could forgive, bc i do think that preserving those peoples consciousnesses did something for the doctor as a character, it wasnt completely meaningless. but everything after that kinda was.

rory died so many times its like. get a hobby lol. amy died at least once iirc but it was all a dream or something. clara died and was erased from the doctors memory. river was in prison and also died. bill? died. all of them sugarcoated or undone or ignored by the narrative to the point of having effectively no impact on the story. the point of a major character death is that its supposed to have a point. and you could argue that a piece of art could be making a point with a pointless death, ie. to put perspective on it and remind you that bad shit just happens, but with moffat the underlying message is always “i can do whatever i want, nothing is permanent or has lasting impact ever.”

basically, with moffat, tragedy exists to be undone. and this was a really brilliant, really wonderful thing in the doctor dances specifically bc it was the doctor clearly having seen his fair share of tragedy that couldnt be helped, now looking on his One Win with pride and delight bc he doesnt get wins like this! and then moffat proceeded to give him the same win over and over and over and over. nobody is ever dead. nobody is ever unable to be saved. and if they are, really truly dead and/or gone, then thats okay bc moffat has decided that [insert mitigating factor here]*

*the mitigating factor is usually some sort of computerized database of souls.

i can hear the moffat stans falling over themselves to remind me that amy and rory definitely died, and they did - after a long and happy life together, they died of old age. i dont consider that a character death any more than any other character choosing to permanently leave the tardis.

and its not just character deaths either, its like, everything. the destruction of gallifrey? never mind lol! character development? scrapped! the same episode four times? lets give it a fifth try and hope nobody notices. bc he doesnt know how to not make the doctor either an omnipotent savior or a self-pitying failure.

it is in nature of doctor who, i believe, for the doctor to win most of the time. like, it wouldnt be a very good show if he didnt win most of the time. but it also wouldnt be a very good show if he won all of the time. my point is that moffats doctor wins too often, and when he doesnt win, it feels empty and hollow rather than genuinely humbling, and you know hes not gonna grow from it pretty much at all.

so like. again, i like all of doctor who i enjoy all of it very much. i just think that steven moffat is a bad show runner and a decent writer at times. and it is frustrating. and im not here to convince or convert anyone im just living my truth. thank you for listening.

[the-silent-hashira]

3,5,14 for the self insert ask

3. how do the other characters generally feel about your self insert?

ill start with people closest to Lucifer!!

Lilith generally feels positive about Auriel, in my main AU her and Lucifer divorced and she came out as sapphic. They spend time together occasionally, and Auriel still considers her a friend.

Charlie enjoys Auriel as he tries to include her in things and spend time with her, and supports her frequently even if he doesn't really think she'll be able to redeem sinners. She likes that he supports her and tries to get Lucifer to relax about his criticisms towards her.

Vaggie, as i mentioned in the last ask, probably has a small crush on him and is rather confused about his gender identity, but she likes that he doesn't find her aversion towards men as some kind of prude behavior.

i feel like the sins are very divided on their opinions of him, getting along with Ozzie and Satan, but having a more older sibling relationship with Mammon and a really upsetting dynamic with the others in regards to how they operate, specifically Belphagor.

Overlords probably don't like him, besides the 3V's and Alastor.

5. does your self insert have any special powers or abilities?

yes!! the main one i would talk about is the fact that theyre a Throne angel in most of my AUs. they were formerly the archangel Uriel, though made into a Throne by Lucifer as a sort of reward for their loyalty to him, so he has a lot of rather unique abilities due to that! i would say his most interesting power is that he can create small pocket dimensions and portals made out of darkness, though they can only be used via places of darkness such as shadows, sleeves, hats etc.

the other one i like is that he can still bless items to have holy properties, from weapons to clothes and more.

14. what hobbies does your self insert have?

they enjoy gardening a lot, as well as industrial art such as metalwork and glass blowing! they also collect a lot of things, mainly weapons, jewelry, and insects from Hell(both as pets and specimens/displays)!

[wds-dreaming]

So, after that long stream of 3BeanSalad art, who wants to hear about the  3beanverse Abells?

That was a rhetorical question. You’re hearing about the 3beanverse Abells. Under the cut tho cause this might get long.

Note; This will get updated after I check stuff w/ Tuff bc yes.

Okay so here they are, my children;

Alcor Abell - Femme agender kid, aroace as heck. twin sibling of Sirius, though they don’t really look all that similar anymore. They use they/she pronouns and are cute as heck. Tho Pox probably chooses all their clothes bc the kid is a fashion disaster.

Sirius Abell - Bigender (male and female) and demiro/ace. Twin sibling of Alcor, though he looks way more masc. Uses they/he/she pronouns interchangeably, and is a self-proclaimed author. Self-proclaimed because she is yet to publish an actual book, come on Siri.

Mizar Abell - Also Bigender (Agender and demigirl), and very gay. She is super buff you guys. Super buff. Goes by she/her only and is Alcor and Sirius’ older sibling. Sometimes she has days in which being called a girl makes her super dysphoric so she’s considering a set of aux. pronouns. She has had so many heckin’ gfs my dude.

Leo Abell - Maverique  and ace. Romantically attracted to dudes but can’t figure out a word for that. Xe uses xe/xem pronouns and sometimes he when xe feels okay with that. Xe has a boyfriend xe loves very much but hasn’t told xir fam about him yet. Xe spends most of xir time away from home doing... something. But what???

Dipper Abell - Tiny trans boy. He’s like, 10 at most. Adopted from a really bad family(?) and pretty dang scarred. The Abell parents relate. He uses he/him pronouns only and loves sweaters so heckin much!! He also really likes trains and leaf pressing. Kid has a massive collection of toy trains and even sometimes goes trainspotting. 

Cat Abell - Trans woman, polyamorous pan gal, dating Pavo and Gaia. She ran away from her town with Pavo when she was young because of how toxic it was, and spent a while on the street, but eventually managed to scrape together enough money to rent an apartment, somehow? Only uses she/her pronouns. She really, really loves her partners.

Pavo Abell - Trans man, polyamorous bi guy, dating Cat and Gaia. He ran away from his town with Cat when he was young, same as Cat, and the two of them stayed together after that. He only uses he/him pronouns, and is pretty much 90% of Cat’s forward planning skills and impulse control. 

Gaia Abell - Genderfluid (male, genderless and female), polyamorous pan person, dating Cat and Pavo. Is the Guardi to Cat and Pavo’s mum and dad. Uses she/he and they pronouns, and generally goes with whatever pronouns her kids aren’t using that day, unless he’s feeling particularly masc, fem, or neither. They came from a pretty decent family, and her parents are the only grandparents the kids know. 

So that’s all the Abells, though I do have other 3BeanVerse characters,,, these guys are just my children and have been around for so long and I’m love. Fun fact - they’re scottish! well, at least as scottish as I am. Bc Alcor was originally a self-insert, fun fact for u. Don’t expect very much scottish stuff from them tho bc again, theyre based on me. and I barely know most of the family I’m from,,,