#This isn't just an online problem my concept of time in general is just Very Bad

[shikai-the-storyteller]

Something something the passage of time or whatever, but I've been following a particular artist for AGES and out of the blue I saw a post from them that just said "My daughter loved what I made for dinner tonight :)" and I was genuinely like "Your WHAT???????" when I read it.

Like, logically yes I know people Age, but my gut reaction is still "I followed you like 7 years ago when you were a baby, what do you mean you're not still a college student."

[mellosdrawings]

You mentioned once you use an Ipad Pro... 11? To draw

Would you say that's beginner friendly? Not beginner in terms of art, but in terms of Ipad. Or both. Mainly I've never used an Ipad for art before. Tryna upgrade from using my thumb and phone for cheap

IPad Pro 11' 3rd generation

It's my first IPad and I got the hang of it pretty fast, so yeah I'd say it's fine even for someone who's never touched anything from Apple in their life.

I got to try it from a friend who let me draw on his own IPad for a couple days while he was busy and it immediately clicked for me.

App store and settings are mostly the same as for android tablets (or sometimes even easier to access), there are frequent updates that keep the system working just peachy, and other than that it's just like having a big phone.

I'd say the one mildly annoying thing is that downloading stuff that isn't from the app store is a nightmare and a half. I got Twst and other games on my phone that I never managed to get on the IPad because it's just a hassle to get unofficial stuff on there.

The other problem might be the price. It's an expensive investment, I had to save for almost a year to get it and the pen, but once it's bought it's durable and high quality. I'd say I've more than made it worth it with my 80Go worth of art on there.

Other than that though, it's pretty easy to get used to, and there are a big quantity of tutos online to help if you ever get stuck on something.

As for art, there are a few free apps you can try before deciding. For me it was a revelation, never had done digital art so easily before and I loved it (I used to fight with my tablet, my computer, and that godsdamned Phot*shop).

I got to try Procreate immediately thanks to my friend and bought it as soon as I got the tablet because it was simple to use and there were enough stuff on there to have fun. It's not as complete as Phot*shop but it never bothered me. Plus it's just a dozen euros once and then you have it, not a subscription that will bleed you dry (yes I hate Phot*shop, thank you for asking). And it saves on its own so no need to worry about losing hours of progress because it crashed :D

And once more, a lot of tutos online to learn to use Procreate. I'm still learning to use it to this day because I've never needed to use its full potential.

(Also there are a few 3D conception programs and other room planners that are soooooo good and practical for artists who can't be bothered with backgrounds or accessories. I do 3D models and then take screenshot to retrace in Procreate, which saves time when those are backgrounds and accessories that come up very regularly. And they haven't yet crashed on me even though I used to fight with my computer and Blender 3D to make chairs before. The full version can be pricy (or subscription based, yuk) but the free/trial versions tend to be enough for me)

TLDR: I personally got used to it very fast, and I never got much to complain about. It's an excellent tool for creating that is very stable.

[inkbutterflyuniverse]

People should stop hating on something they haven't seen/didn't give a chance just because it's a reboot.

I wantee to make a post about shows that had a reboot and that were judged too soon, before people even watch it, for a long time, and what is happening with the Winx Reboot motivated me. Beware that it's a long post.

I think a good way to start this would be with Monster High.

Monster High was a show from the 2010s. It had a tv show in 2d and a bunch of movies in 3d. Monster High was popular all around the world, people really liked it, the characters were compelling, the storyline were nice and it's whole concept was based around dolls. (I know there's also books but they're so different that I won't talk about them)

In the middle of the 2010s (I would say 2015-2016) the selling of the dolls weren't as great so they stopped everything. In 2018 they tried launching Monster High Gen 2, with new designs and new dolls, but it didn't work.

In 2022, they launched a new show, that is Monster High Gen 3. It still was a story about a bunch of monsters at a school made for them, and the beloved characters were back.

So what was the problem you would ask? Well, the characters were the same but different. Their essence was still the same (Frankie being a Frankenstein creature, Clawdeen a werewolf, Draculaura a vampire, etc..), but their characterization and stories were differents, and so were the designs. So people started complaining about it online. (This Gen also had live action movies but I won't talk about it, as it's about the tv shows).

But in reality, the show was GOOD. People who were fans of the OG show liked it! The show had a storyline, a direction, it knew what it wanted to explore it, and it did it. There was a real plot about Clawdeen's mom that was talked through the episodes, and progress was made as the episodes were airing.

But some people still decided to hate it without watching it, and it's sad because the show deserves some love!

As for now, Gen 3 isn't renewed for a third season, mainly because it's Nickelodeon and Mattel wants to distance themselves from the company, partially because of the Quiet on Set documentary.

So of you haven't see that show, you should really watch it, because it's totally worth it!

But Monster High is not why I wanted to make a post, my main concern is the Winx Reboot.

Recently, a trailer dropped for a reboot that will come on Netflix in 2025. The Winx we know are still here, but some things changed as we saw in the trailers. It's not redoing the Winx in 3d, it's a new series that starts from the beginning.

And people are already hating it, saying that we don't need a reboot, that it's ugly, etc. Everyone can have their opinion, but personally I think a reboot is much needed.

If you ask people about the Winx, some will say "seasons 1 to 3 are good, after I didn't really watched/I didn't liked it" ; some will say "I liked the newest season but I can recognize the problems, I think it was good until season 5/6/7" ; and majority will agree that the designs of season 8 were too childish and that it kinda ruined the show.

The live action series was very different and will not be discussed.

So actually, a reboot can be a good thing, it can fix some problems that had the show (like the reason why Stella was on Earth with Knut. In the trailer of the reboot it's Stella and Flora who are here for Bloom, and I'm very interested in how they knew there was a fairy here!)

I see so many people HATING on the show even before it's out, and it's TIRING. I know it's common to hate on something, you don't want things you knew when you were a child to change, but it's just something else that will introduce another generation to it! And old fans will certainly enjoy rediscovering the Winx under a new light!

You are allowed to not like the designs, to not want to watch it, but hating it won't change anything. The show will still exist and some people will like it, so just ignore it, and stop being a part of the hate campaign I see everywhere!!

On the top of my head, I can think of other shows that had the same issues!

The Disney Channel movies ZOMBIES got a 3d series about them redoing their senior year thanks to alien magic. People are saying "it's ugly", "no one asked for this", "cancel this please", "it's because of show like this one that The Owl House was cancelled" (definitely NOT TRUE, it has nothing to do with it).

In the ZOMBIES Re-Reanimated Series, we can find the characters of the movie living new adventures at Seabrook, we can meet new characters, and enjoy new catchy songs! The actors from the movies are dubbing their animated characters, and those characters were designed based on the actors. Again, you can say that you don't like the style, but no need to hate it.

Also, I watched a few episodes, and it's great! It's two episodes of 11 minutes in one episode on Disney+.

I can also think of the LEGO Friends franchise. The original show had a reboot named "Girl on a Mission" and now it has a third show, with a new generation. The OG girls all appeared in the show once or two, and one is actually the mother of a girl from the new show.

And maybe it's a deep cut but do people remember Heidi? It also had a 3d reboot.

I personally didn't liked it, but I know that it allowed some children to discover her, and I'm happy about this! I don't go everywhere saying that it sucks and that they should give us the Heidi from our childhood back.

And I'm sure there are other shows in the same situation...

This post is a bit long, but I really wanted to express this, because it really bother me.

A reboot is, most of the time, not a bad thing. The idea behind it is usually to make a new generation discover this thing, and sometimes it turns great, sometimes not. But that's okay.

What I wanted to say is that anyone is allowed to not like something, but hating before seeing because it's a reboot from something you really like, is not okay.

People are working on it, and maybe some of those people are also fans of the show, and are grateful to be able to work on a reboot of that show.

So please, please, please reconsider hating like this online, on something you haven't seen. If you didn't liked it, that's okay, but in the case of the Winx Club it's not even out and all I see is people criticizing it. And when some are trying to be positive about it, they are criticized.

[butmakeitgayblog]

Just to throw in a couple points real quick (because I can never keep an opinion to myself 😔 sorry), I personally kind of dislike the idea of a male and female gaze — not because I disagree with the concept of fetishism and objectification existing, they ABSOLUTELY do, but because of what people, particularly online, have come to accept they mean.

There has recently been discourse surrounding Love Lies Bleeding, a film created almost solely by queer women, “catering to the male gaze” which… I’m sure I don’t need to explain how silly that is lmao. I think this new wave of leftists clutching their pearls over literally any sign of sexual attraction and considering it to be synonymous with objectification has distorted people’s views of what these terms actually mean and have resulted in their gross misuse. Not to make this about me 💅🏻 but I see a lot of this similar discourse about trans people BY CIS PEOPLE whom are trying to be good allies by basically claiming that any sign of sexual attraction towards a trans person’s body is inherently fetishistic which I can’t lie… I kind of consider to be transphobic itself lol? You’re allowed to be sexually attracted to trans people and express that, no matter how their bodies look! The point at which it becomes fetishistic relies primarily on the WAY you express that and the language used — and I think that can apply to queer people in general too. I personally (and others may feel differently!) have zero issue with cis people enjoying trans NSFW content, and I also have no problem with straight women enjoying MLM content; because most of the time, I can tell from the LANGUAGE they use whether or not they are fetishising.

Point being, fetishism and objectification can go ALL ways and I don’t think people need to give excuses as to why they enjoy a certain type of content as long as it isn’t actively harming anyone. But I obviously can’t speak for everyone (especially queer women, I only identified as one for a year or two when I was a preteen lol) and people’s experiences tend to shape their opinions on these things 😅

Right and that's why I firmly stand behind my initial post about how it's no one's job to police people for what kind of content they consume! Because we don't know their motivations for how ot why they personally are interacting/consuming the work. It's incredibly easy to write off all enjoyment of a specific brand of content as fetishizing or sexualization when in reality, for the consumer it isn't that at all. My only point on the last ask was that sometimes, sometimes, it's easy to actually be doing exactly that (fetishizing etc) and not realizing it.

Intentions matter absolutely, but they're not the be-all-end-all of reality. It's like if I as a white person were to say something racist without realizing it was racist. That doesn't negate the racism, and it doesn't absolve me of my culpability, because my ignorance to my actions doesn't supercede my impact. You can be guilty of something without knowing that you are, and that's something you as person have to evaluate and confront on a personal basis. That was my only point in relation to what that anon said.

Again to reiterate, that is NOT saying that everyone who prefers queer work to straight work is guilty of that, because they're not. Full stop. And that alone is why I don't think anyone has or should have the authority to pass judgment on who can and can't consume certain kinds of media. Because, like you said, then you start wading into the murky waters of painting everyone with a broad brush, throwing accusations around that are universally damning despite not actually being universally true. And considering we're living in a period where puritan anti-sex brainrot is on the rise (alongside a deeply unsettling culture of condemnation over every little thing), opening that door can become very dangerous very fast. We're seeing it already.

I will tack on just as a thought regarding the trans character issue, I think that's kind of a perfect example of all these ideas aligning. Just in the most bare bones way of putting it: there is nothing inherently fetishizing about a cis person enjoying work including trans characters. There's nothing inherently fetishizing about a cis person enjoying, specifically, smut involving trans characters. There is nothing inherently fetishizing about a cis person preferring trans character stories over other kinds of media. However, if all they as a cis person consume is extremely sexualized renditions of trans characters, if their only interest in trans characters is porn - generally mostly devoid of complex storylines that create a fully rounded character -, then yeah I do think that's something they on an individual basis need to evaluate about themselves, because it's the difference between having a sexual attraction to a subsection of people versus seeing those same people as purely sexual objects. Does that make sense?

Same can be true for any other queer content being consumed by people that aren't historically the target audience.

But again, it's not really anyone else's place to make that call for anyone else.

[ahappydnp]

This might be controversial, I don't know. But I honestly don't like Dan's content post coming out nearly as much as pre-BIG. It used to be silly -yes- but relatable videos with one or two edgy jokes thrown in. Now it's ALL "I'm gay, horny and depressed and the world is ending but we also kind of deserve it" ... I know that last part has a lot to do with We're all doomed and Dystopia Daily - like the clue is in the names, I get it. But when it's all jokes like that... where is the lightheartedness? Where is the fun? Where is the relief from the problems of the world? Pre-BIG Dan at least had a better balance with that. Anyway, rant over. Hope it made sense.

mmm normally i'd ignore this kind of ask because it's nuanced and i don't want a dozen more hot takes in my inbox but i get that you're not just criticizing dan as a person but more his content shift so (many) thoughts under the cut:

i think first and foremost it's hard to gage dan as a content creators post BIG because the only content he's consistently made has been dystopia daily and wad (discounting gay & not proud because...you know...)

it's also hard to compare him to his content pre BIG since: 1) the video format is different- DD is a scripted persona heavy talk show format that's more commentary on culture than personal experiences 2) he's not supplementing DINOF with liveshows/regular social media posts + gaming channel videos that showed different (usually softer or more lighthearted) sides of dan and gave the audience a more well rounded perception of him as a person

which i think is one of the biggest ""issues"" people have with DD. it's not even necessarily the content itself (though i doubt anyone would say DD is their favorite content by any stretch), but the fact that the main source of perceiving dan is this heavily edited persona that's a bit too detached from real life daniel howell? because yeah like you said, we know he has a lighthearted side, we know he's actually very kind and thoughtful; however, dystopia daily is about the content, not dan as a person. the product isn't himself anymore which is a massive shift from old content. about dystopia daily as a concept- like i said, the reception from long time subscribers has been basically "i don't love this but i love you and am excited to see you again". it's not BAD it's just not what people watch dan for? it's definitely not something i would click on or enjoy from anyone else, but i love seeing dan in anything and supporting him. and some of it is good! there are some rewatches in there! but yeah if you didn't know him prior to DD you might assume this was just another ~generic angry rich white guy complaining about the world to be edgy~

i don't agree with you that it's ALL "i'm gay, horny, and depressed" and might even say it's not a crime if it was? dan spent the first decade of his career having to edit himself and if he needs a professional second puberty to feel better then go off! am i excited for him to explore more topics or stories or formats?? like absolutely!! but i'm not angry about this era of him getting his bearings. did i love him pretending he doesn't like/has never been around kids when we know for a fact he does? no it felt weird and forced but i get his thinking that he wants DD to be detached from dan. "where's the fun"?- i will say that this year in particular we've seen more of dan's personality online! like the silly little instastories and tweets, he's sharing more about his life (like seriously who would have bet he'd post anything about their japan trip????), him in phil's video + the hair clip. and it's just like the biggest breath of fresh air because that's our dan!!! that laugh!! i know that guy!!! and i do feel like he's ready to incorporate letting people see more sides of him again after giving himself the space and boundaries to readjust after a massive life change. but there have still been bits of him this whole time! the few liveshows he did on tour were fun, him at the tour preshows was PEAK classic dan and he was truly the sweetest during his m&gs (seriously i cannot recommend enough checking out the preshow compilations playlist on youtube or meetdnp on twitter because it's just....god it's so fucking nice to see him being so fucking nice and remembering why he really is special). check out the idb instastories playlists because there are so many gems from the past couple years people forget about!!

i know it hit harder because dan is such a LIGHT and it felt like we lost it for awhile. he didn't lose the kindness or silliness or creativity, he's still dan! he's older and not the same person he was in 2014, but also who is? i'm not the same person i was in my 20s which is a great thing!

change can feel scary, but dan's entire genetic makeup didn't change. i totally get if DD isn't your thing and that is perfectly fine! but i will say if you're mourning the other sides of him, you've got plenty of examples that aren't current main channel videos. i do believe we'll be let back in even more soon though :)

[asexual-society]

Sorry if I'm not allowed to ask this but it's just kinda been on my mind

How do you even come out to people as ace (or just on the aspec in general)? Cuz I know I'm on the spec and I've told my friends that but everytime I like someone romantically they immediately assume that I want to bang them

Idk it just hurts because that's the only part of my identity that they have a problem with

You can ask whatever you like dw! But to answer your question, coming out as aspec can be hard, especially if you've already done it and it just didn't take, the number of times I've had to re-come-out to people because they either didn't understand or just straight up forgot is way too many.

It sounds like your friends might just not have understood when you came out to them, sometimes aspec terminology can be tricky for allos to get their heads around (this isn't an excuse for them not to try though), or you may not have been as clear as they needed, which means you could have to try again, or just remind them if they make these comments, but it does suck, I know. You could try mentioning it casually to them by mentioning a friend or character or other person you know (of) who shares your orientation (e.g. "I totally get ace vibes from the character", or "I was speaking to an online friend who is actually acespec too, and they said..." this doesn't even have to be about sexuality, maybe they had an opinion on a different topic that you're talking about). You don't even have to actually know another aspec person for this, you can just make one up. This is a way you can test the waters before coming out, but it works after you come out to normalise your sexuality to people too.

Another thing lots of queer people with complex identities is putting their identity in the simplest terms, even if it means sacrificing accuracy. For example, I'm genderfluid. I don't identify as nonbinary, but most people don't know the difference, so when I'm first coming out to people who will likely be at least vaguely aware of the concept of a nonbinary person, and hopefully be receptive to it, I tell them I'm nonbinary, rather than get bogged down with queer terminology they don't understand or care about. It's not a perfect solution, but it works in a pinch, and now I have nonbinary shoelaces and pins I don't want but I can always go into more detail later depending on how they react.

For you, you don't necessarily have to settle for using an imperfect label with them, but it might help you if you write down a very bare-bones explanation if you choose to tell your friends again, that way nerves won't make you leave things out or go into details that aren't as important, and then if they want to know more, you can tell them, or you can send them resources about your orientation.

I don't know if this is great advice, but I hope it works out for you <3

~ mod key

[stiaral]

Starbomb and music theory 🦌🎵

CW : Strong Language

After 3 albums of greatness, it seemed like the magic of Starbomb would be a long gone memory, but miraculously in a tweet on the 27th of February 2023 our prayers had been answered ; the kings shall return.

And returned they have, with their new album Starbomb Boom: Rise of Lyrics. At the time I'm writing this post, their music video for Kiss the Elden Ring has recently been released and hopefully we'll still see new content for that 4th album.

If my username on most platforms is Starceptor it's because of Starbomb and Egoraptor (Arin Hanson), who's a member of the band alongside Danny Sexbang (Dan Avidan) and Ninja Brian (Brian Wecht) - listening to their songs on loop for years has significantly helped me become more casual with English (swears included), they introduced me to a whole new side of online and gaming nerd culture while also making me more interested in music-making in general by ensuring a place in my heart as one of my favorite bands of all time. By talking about them, I am somewhat also going back to the roots of my own motivations for making music, so I find it fitting that I refer to them in the context of my personal journey with composing.

I'm usually not a big fan of the kind of humor that Starbomb embraces but, they use it in such an over the top and self-parodic manner in their songs that it loops back to being funny again. As a celebration of their new album I wanted to go back to this awesome band in order to analyze what constitutes their musical identity.

Unfortunately, they already beat me to it :

This is usually the part where I sing the chorus out. But we haven't established what this song is all about. Then I chime in real quick for a just a second as the character delivers a line that reminds us of the joke. And I'll respond with harmonies, isn't that dope ?

This is when the song concept should heighten for effect. If you think we use that formula a lot, you are correct.

Danny said everything there, Starbomb does rely a lot on very similar patterns from one song to another. They are a self-described (in the about section of their website) synthpop/hip-hop band, and these pop influences can definitely be found all throughout this "formula" they "use a lot". Since the late 1970s, synthpop focused mainly on minor key songs, and if we take a look at the first Starbomb album :

I choose you to die / C-Minor

It's dangerous to go alone / A-Minor

Mega-Marital problems / D-Minor

Rap Battle : Ryu vs Ken / F#-Minor

Book of Nook / A#-Minor

Regretroid (my personal favorite) / Bb-Minor

Kirby's adventure in Reamland / G-Minor

The Simple Plot of Final Fantasy VII / A-Minor

8 songs in minor key, but the repetitions do not end here. Without going into much detail, most of the progressions within the first album are very common, almost cliché in pop music and well, there are some other redundant patterns...

To poetically quote this review of the first album ;

"[...] the phrase “What up b*tch?” is used so many times on this album, you begin to wonder whether Jessie Pinkman had a hand in its creation."

Point is, the instrumental at first never was the focus of Starbomb songs, the lyrics and their punchline were. But once you fall for the charm of these dumb jokes that get overextended to the full lenght of a song, you begin to love these same synthetizers you hear almost every time or even appreciate in what ways the instrumental might differ from the usual (shoutout to the chilled out groove of It's dangerous to go alone). The band is very aware of this, in fact, while all of their songs in the 3rd album sound quite unique, the one that ressembles the most the formula of their earlier songs is precisely the parody of their own repetitions : This song sucks. And from the first to their fourth album you see their progression wihen it comes to making the back-up music for their songs thematically coherent (starting at first with songs like Luigi's Ballad that alternate to a different tempo whether Luigi or Mario are singing, to reallly taking full effect with the second album onwards. For example how can't I mention one of their most recent songs Nintendo's Greatest Announcement done entirely in whispered rapping as said "Announcement" supposedly is a secret leak).

Arin is hitting that yoinky spoinkly like a champ.

If it weren't for Starbomb, well first of all I wouldn't have named myself Starceptor and therefore later on Stiaral, but I probably wouldn't have been introduced either to an awesome passion project on the internet that would have influenced me to work on my own stuff using also back-up synths and some chiptune soundfonts I'd end up playing around with on MuseScore.... Oh and fun thing the base for my fursona's hairstyle actually is Starbomb Link's cut.

Best Link design ever /hj - love what they did especially with the eye lashes.

[egg-emperor]

To be honest, the only real criticism I have of you is that you spend way more time complaining about people not liking you or having the wrong opinions about Eggman than you do just enjoying Eggman for what he is. Just let people be wrong, man. Let go and just enjoy what you like about Eggman instead of worrying about what others think. This isn't me being annoyed at you either. I'm not. This is me thinking you'd be happier if you quit worrying about others' opinions so much.

I'm surprised it seems that way because my blog is a much more positive place than a negative one all around, I have way more Eggman love posts, analysis, concepts, writings, etc, where I just talk about what I love than I do thinking about what others think and I'm happy when I'm not being harassed over it. I think that shows if one goes through my Eggman specific tags.

I actually don't spend a lot of time thinking about what others think about Eggman. I don't even seek out online talk of him in general nowadays because I realized how negative it was making me feel. I don't search him up on any social media platforms anymore unless I can heavily filter, specifically to avoid that, as sad as I am about missing out on good things people create.

I know a bunch of my posts are counters to popular opinions but they're ones I just remember and I like to bring up for the sake of my analysis or my takes, so if that counts I guess it is a bit more than I feel like I do. But that's just me constantly being aware I have the unpopular opinion/takes/preferences and trying to help with some corrections when mistakes are made and I'm passionate about that.

I find it really hard to let people be wrong if I see blatant misinformation about something I love. I know a lot of people hate it but I really just want to help people learn the truth and understand more because I'm really passionate about it and like to get a chance to share my knowledge and help out. When people tell me they were helped out by me doing that, it makes me really happy and like what I do is worth it and they're who I really make it for always.

But I almost never come in and start directly making corrections to people unless it's in direct messages, I use my own blog instead of intruding on posts, which I feel would be worse. Despite being aware that those people who are wrong exist, I'm not making the posts for them because I know they won't see or read it if they're that firm in their beliefs. But I want to put something out there to help other people who might see that misinformation and believe it and it spreads more.

I'm not unhappy while making the posts, they're some of my favorites. But I also have hundreds and hundreds of pages worth of me just gushing over Eggman, sharing my concepts and writing, and analyzing in ways that focus on the official material without focusing on anyone else's outside opinions at all. I am happiest that way but it's definitely heavily outweighing them overall already. I think most days, my blog is far more positive than negative.

My mind does have a problem of fixating on the negatives sometimes when people mistreat me though because then it becomes a lot more personal. A lot of the times they tend to be a very vocal minority that feel like the majority on some days and I'm honest about how I'm feeling in personal posts, like I was yesterday. But I was also drunk for most of it and dwelling about being down in the dumps even more than usual which explains the burst of them lol I should turn my phone off

But yeah I get that if you come in on the wrong day it probably can seem like all I do is think about how others think of Eggman and think of me. But it feels good to get it out, it stops me from thinking about it and calms me down and posting it can potentially help others and that turns it into something happy for me. But there are plenty of things I've written out and not posted when I realize it can't help others and is just pointless negativity, though on bad days I may actually post them

But I think most of the time I think I do a decent job of not thinking about all that and I am trying to work on it more. I don't search for Eggman and have heavily filtered common words to get away from things I don't like, and many days I spend my free time just focusing on my own creations or playing the games and gushing over Eggman and forgetting about the outside world and have a blast. I do feel like my positivity still far outweighs the negative. But I am hoping over time as I improve, the negatives will decrease a bit more.

I appreciate that you're not being mean and angry about this like common hate anons and actually telling me what you think and what I could do. I'm also not trying to say I shouldn't be fairly criticized, I appreciate the honesty and perspective and always encourage it. I don't see it as that bad when looking through my blog because I genuinely don't feel that negative in my posting most of the time but now that you've brought it to my attention more, I can try to hone in and work on it more to avoid that even more. Thank you

[fierceawakening]

ceanothusspinosus Oh! I did not at all mean to imply that competing access needs are necessarily solvable. They really truly may not be, and when that clash prevents a good relationship, it sucks. It also takes skill and practice to sort out what your own needs _are_ and it sounds like she is… not good at that. Possibly not interested in becoming good at that. Possibly ashamed to look at it too closely and see where she can and can’t compromise. Who knows. At some point it doesn’t matter for your purposes. :/

ceanothusspinosus I think that the existence of ableism provides a lot of context and imposes a lot of constraints on the whole situation. I imagine that in a less ableist world she’d maybe have different expectations of you and tbh of herself. But it’s not ableist to notice that different people have different abilities, and in your situation it makes sense that you’re really sensitive to concepts like expectations around “ability” used without failsafes.

ceanothusspinosus And in ~abusive/very unbalanced situations “ability” and motivation is commonly, idk. Complicated. Unclear. It comes down to “even if the most generous reading is true, I don’t think it’s going to change and I don’t want to live like this.” I’m thinking of you wondering if she’s copying some of your own ND traits/habits - I certainly can’t know from here, that’s definitely not the sort of thing you’re likely to get a straight answer on if so, it _could_ just be her own stuff...

ceanothusspinosus …so where does that leave you? Looking at the situation more carefully while you do your best to be what you consider an ethical person with no obvious answers, unfortunately. :/ And it’s clear you are trying to be careful.

ceanothusspinosus Also btw, thanks for being clear about the kind of answer you wanted.

No problem! I think part of the issue is, like... social justice types of framework, where you taboo certain phrases, really don't port over well when someone is dealing with an abusive situation or a situation that's leaning that way. Like, it's useful when my therapist says something sounds narcissistic not because she can or should diagnose anyone who isn't me (and I don't take her to be doing that), but because we have a somewhat shared understanding of the word. She's telling me she thinks that behavior is unfair, and the sort of unfair that stays that way and you don't fix with a clarifying conversation, because the kind of person who is often unfair in that way is the kind of person who isn't psychologically ready to have that clarifying conversation and is going to lash out.

It's the same way (and the same situation, I think, painted different colors) I eventually decided I felt about gendered slurs. No, I don't technically HAVE to call my abusive ex a bitch, and I actually wouldn't see much use in calling her that now. But at the time, when I was angry and hurt? Trying to police my own ways of thinking about what was happening were what got me stuck in the being abused in the first place. It was only once I could trust that I wasn't revealing some deep evil going "fuck that bitch" that I could get the distance I needed to rethink whether that was a phrase I wanted to use once the experiences were sufficiently behind me.

Which is I think the problem with a lot of those posts, especially online, that exhort people not to use certain terms to analyze the behavior of someone mistreating them. What that comes across like to the person trying to understand what the fuck happened is "you're mean for processing this in your mind, and if you want to do that you need to choose from the approved tools."

Which I think is why those posts got my goat so much. (I hope they wouldn't as much now that I've thought through this, but they might still bug me, I can't promise the berserk button is totally deactivated.) Survivors need space to be mean and aggro and messy, and just because we feel it this second doesn't mean we endorse it forever. People who are injured scream. This does not mean screaming is appropriate behavior most of the time. It means that it's normal when someone is injured.

Like with my ex. Reading books on BPD actually helped a lot! Not because I came out of it thinking "all people who have that are abusive;" I can think of several friends current and former who I don't think are abusive and who I certainly don't think would ever do the things she did that traumatized me. But because a long careful description of behaviors and psychic distortions helped impose some order on what I experienced as a maelstrom of desire and need and rage and hate.

I'm not even sure I'm going to come out of this thinking narcissism is the problem. I might even decide I think she's neurotypical when all is said and done, I don't know. But I need to be able to shut the social justice framing down at least long enough to sort out what I need, why what I have is not that, and whether (as my therapist has also said) the right thing for me is no contact or less contact.

And in order to sort that out, I need to be able to try on ideas like "No one cares that you're disabled. I care that you don't stop, whether that's won't or can't."

I can sort out whether that's too harsh *later*, when I know my own decisions and their results better than now.

Does that make sense?

[kylesvariouslistsandstuff]

5 Years Later: INCREDIBLES 2

Has it already been almost five years since the release of an animated movie sequel that arrived nearly 14 years after its predecessor?

INCREDIBLES 2 turns 5 in June. June 15th, to be exact, the general release date. Or the 14th, if you count theaters that do pre-shows. That's a UK poster above, it was July 13th over there... Anyways, around that frame! I want to talk about that movie...

I actually unironically love INCREDIBLES 2.

Maybe I'm very online, but it seems like this Pixar sequel isn't so... Well-liked? I often see talk of it being this big disappointment, that the "twist" kills it, that it wasn't worth the wait, etc. etc.

I don't know. I saw INCREDIBLES 2 the pre-show Thursday night back in 2018. I had seen the original THE INCREDIBLES in theaters *five* times back in fall 2004 and even into early 2005. It's one of my all-time favorite films, a massive influence on my own work, and a movie that I...

Didn't demand a sequel to...

Yeah, that's right, I'm not like everybody else. Everybody else who all said "I waited 14 years for this!" I didn't... I waited... Four years. The Walt Disney Company, during a shareholder's conference, officially announced that the movie was in the works in March of 2014. Prior to that, I didn't feel that a sequel needed to exist. The ending of the first movie is an homage to serial cliffhangers, it wasn't the filmmakers saying in 2004 "we'll be back!" Writer-director Brad Bird went off to do other movies, and wanted to pursue other movies, some of which never happened (1906), some of which finally are (RAY GUNN)... He had often said he had various ideas for an INCREDIBLES sequel and would only commit to them if he had a story to tie them all together, but that didn't mean that a sequel was going to happen. At least, any time soon back then.

Inevitably, if your animated movie was a big blockbuster and the main characters all didn't die at the end, your animated movie is getting a sequel. THE INCREDIBLES came out when Pixar still couldn't feasibly make sequels per their strict contract with Disney at the time. TOY STORY 2 was a complicated exception that caused even more problems regarding this "no sequels" rule... but that very "no sequels" mandate was overridden in early 2006 when CEO Bob Iger, shortly after taking over from his predecessor - Michael Eisner, bought the Emeryville-based studio from Steve Jobs. That being said, Bird was directing RATATOUILLE, and then departed Pixar to pursue live-action movies, resulting in MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - GHOST PROTOCOL for Paramount... But then he circled back to Disney, to direct TOMORROWLAND, which was already a Damon Lindelof-conceived script that was floating around for about a year at the studio... And then, he finally directed INCREDIBLES 2. Pixar could've easily put an INCREDIBLES 2 in development circa 2006 for a 2010-2011 release, but they waited for Bird to be available, and then they got started.

So, back in the late 2000s and early 2010s, I already understand that concept... But I get it, lots of people who aren't a nerd like I, and don't follow how the feature animation biz works... Assumed that Pixar just sat on an INCREDIBLES sequel for over a decade and then finally said "Okay, we'll make it."

Anyways... I really do dig INCREDIBLES 2 as a sequel to one of my favorite films.

I don't think it's as great, which... I'll be fair, the original was a hard act to follow. Most original movies that really work for me usually spawn a sequel that has a hard time being just as good in my eyes, if not better. Only TOY STORY 2, in terms of Pixar sequels, I feel is this scenario. So, as such, I wasn't so tough on films like FINDING DORY and MONSTERS UNIVERSITY. There were still many things I liked and loved in both of those, and that made them every bit as worthy. INCREDIBLES 2, I feel, came pretty close to being as good as THE INCREDIBLES.

For one, I love that this is kind of a vibes sequel. It's two minutes longer than the original - at 118 minutes long, and has a few action setpieces here and there. Whenever they do occur, they rule! Bird and his crew just went hard with the action beats, from the runaway electric train chase to the fight with the Screenslaver in the strobe-light cage. Excellent stuff.

Unlike the first INCREDIBLES, the majority of this film doesn't take place on an island, so we get to see more of the retrofuturistic midcentury-modern world that Bird created in the first movie and expanded upon in this sequel. In the first INCREDIBLES, we see city blocks, yes, and some locations, Edna Mode's house, the kids' schools and Bob Parr's workplace. But that's about it. Here, the Parr family are in a new home on a hillside, there's a whole new city we explore, locations like a diner, the DevTech skyscraper, Rick Dicker's office, and a motel. We get to see other Supers besides the Parrs and Frozone in action, because in the first film, we only see glimpses of them in the prologue, Syndrome killed all of them off. Here, we meet a bunch of bizarre and not-quite-amazing superheroes who are often used as obstacles by the villain throughout, but some of them try to pull their weight and prove themselves. Particularly Voyd, I like her little admiration of Elastigirl and how that pushes her to really try her powers out. They're a bunch of very strange, weirdly-designed characters that only add to the colorful cast of this world. That Reflux guy is literally me, by the way. It was cool to hang out and exist in that world with these characters, with a solid script and tight dialogue to match. I can't see what's not to like. It's more about the family than it is the hero work and the spectacle, but... As was the first movie.

That's what makes both INCREDIBLES movies unique to most other big superhero spectacles, both in 2004 and in 2018... Pre-MCU and post-MCU. For context, INCREDIBLES 2 opened just about a month after AVENGERS: INFINITY WAR and DEADPOOL 2... And shared the year with BLACK PANTHER, ANT-MAN AND THE WASP (which opened right after it), VENOM, and SPIDER-MAN: INTO THE SPIDER-VERSE... The first INCREDIBLES shared a year with... SPIDER-MAN 2 and HELLBOY... Just SPIDER-MAN 2 and HELLBOY... Anything else? I might be misremembering.

Anyways, much like the first one, the superhero stuff is the backdrop to what is a family story. This time, it's a bit of role reversal. Bob is the stay at home dad while Elastigirl gets to do the fun stuff, with a much different context... but a lot of that is pretty darn good! Bob isn't some hapless Mr. Mom, he actually commits to doing better for his kids, righting his wrongs, and going a bit insane in the process while his youngest reveals that he has crazy-amazing powers that only Syndrome saw in the first movie. It's also strangely progressive in a way, considering that the world of THE INCREDIBLES is an alternate early 1960s... The dad being stay at home and the mom doing the hard work, an unthinkable concept in the *real life* early 1960s, pre-Women's Liberation America, that's for sure! The first one also poked at that, too: "Leave the saving of the world to men? I don't think so!" Both of these INCREDIBLES films bask themselves in this midcentury-modern period and aesthetic, but also have people of marginalized groups getting to do the cool stuff, too. It's fun what you can do with alternate histories, and create pasts that are more progressive than they actually were.

As for the main Elastigirl plot and Evelyn Deavor's elaborate plan to make the public fully turn against superheroes for good? I think it works really well! It's a 180 from taking on a powerful bad guy like Syndrome, and instead it's a more on-the-ground, sneaky, pull-the-strings threat. Almost like a little political thriller amidst this big PG-rated superhero adventure for family audiences. (Though Brad Bird writes/directs as he please, he wasn't making "kids' films" with either of these movies.) Superheroes being used to destroy themselves, the film kind of asking - amidst the explosive superhero craze of the 2010s - if superheroes are even necessary for a functioning society? Not a new question, but I like how this film presents it just the same. The whole dependency on powerful beings aspect, like the fictional Screenslaver rambles in his monologue.

The Screenslaver rant is not too far removed from Bird's question in his much-maligned TOMORROWLAND, a film that actually strikes hard in a post-MAGA era. TOMORROWLAND, a wildly misinterpreted film to begin with, posited that real change and making the world a better place starts with individuals getting up and realizing what kind of power they have. Online, I see that people expect **others** to make things right, and some who even outright refuse to do the bare minimum. Like voting. As if our sitting President has a magic wand and can make all the bad stuff go away, ditto many other prominent figures... They'll sneer "stop telling me to vote", when it's the simplest thing one can do to prevent the party that's succumbed to full-on draconian policy and open hatred from completely taking over, but one can and should go beyond that if they want to fight fascism and the ills of the system... and in turn help make the world better. It took over 70 years of hard work to get to where we are now - from protests to movements to candidates who brought about change, and it's going to continue to be hard work. You don't do it by sitting there yelling "do something!" or threatening to opt out of your one simple civic duties that very much matters. Here, Bird uses that same idea of relying on others and being dependent, but it's in service of a villain's personal vendetta against superheroes and an understandable want to make society less dependent on a band-aid solution. She even tries to use people watching TV as an "example" of people being dependent, as if she's some bitter boomer whining about smartphones on a facebook post.

I guess the only problem is, the movie doesn't quite end with a strong case against Evelyn's very real points... Other than the altruism of the characters and them doing the right thing during its rather rushed and zippily-paced third act. A little tightening on that, I think, would've helped improve the picture a bit. I guess, when you're a big tentpole animated blockbuster superhero picture being made for a massive conglomerate that's trying to appeal to a wide audience, you can only go so far with that. A lot of the Marvel Cinematic Universe offerings, particularly CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR and THE FALCON AND THE WINTER SOLDIER, suffer from a similar problem. In that they chip at a meaty political theme, but then wrap things up with an action-packed climactic battle, they have a clear-cut villain that has to be stopped, and they kind of don't really make a case. Why do the Supers get legalized at the end of INCREDIBLES 2? For merely saving the city from a cataclysmic event, like they did at the end of the first movie and at the beginning of this one? Does the society seen in the world of THE INCREDIBLES go back to being dependent and complacent? Do they think about what the Screenslaver said? It's so quick, they're in the courtroom, they're legalized, cute and fun epilogue, end of movie... It's a bit weird. Like, what does the society do to work with supers and the government to make things better going forward?

That all being said, the villain's plans ultimately make sense to me. I like the idea of a grieving person who uses her wealth and influence to end what she feels is the problem - superheroes, and how that's a threat to our super-powered main characters. I just think it would've really, really landed if it went further and the supers made a case as to why Evelyn is ultimately wrong in her execution of some of her not-unfounded grievances. Or at least presented Evelyn with everything she could've done to make society less dependent on Supers without conspiring to get them outlawed, and even getting people killed in the process to make the world turn their backs on the Supers once more.

Even then, it's all executed so well. Bird had already directed THE IRON GIANT, and two all-CG pictures and two live-action biggies before this, so this was a cakewalk for him. With a 13 1/2-year difference in technology, he and his crew were able to really go all out here. Cityscapes that are gargantuan in comparison to the first film's Municiberg setting, lots of flying through and around buildings, smoother animation on the human characters, etc. The art direction, just. Perfect. The color scheme and everything, it all hits just right. Lots of fantastic retro graphic design everywhere, eye-catching! Michael Giacchino knocks it out again with the score, and we even got little theme jingles for the Supers themselves. I think it's just so well-done, I don't really get why it's often looked down upon online, nor why it has been somewhat forgotten outside of the internet? Maybe it's just because stuff is always coming out, from every pore? And that fewer and fewer things stick now? I don't know.

As for a third INCREDIBLES... It's inevitable, with or without Brad Bird. So far we got those Pixar Popcorn shorts, but that's about it. He's off at Skydance with former Pixar head John Lasseter (which... is disappointing to me on a number of levels, following Lasseter's misdeeds), it's possible he comes back to Pixar in the future to make a third one... Or they go ahead with a third one that he executive produces and signs off on. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if there ends up being a Disney+ series instead. I love those characters and that world, but will only say yes to an INCREDIBLES threequel if they do. In other words, I'm not clamoring for one, but if it comes around anytime soon? Yeah, sign me up.

Anyways, Happy 5th Anniversary...

[skiimbii]

> the 'ship' of theseus theory

I'm sure people have already talked about this concept a million times over, and I won't be new to the party, but the name I came up with on a whim is funny. I needed to share it somehow. So, I'm here!

It's scribbled on a post-it note on my corkboard: if you change one core aspect of a character with every chapter that you write, at the end of the fic - is it still the same character? Or is it just a glorified OC? Is it still the same ship? Not a crazy premise, of course. But it's something that I find myself thinking about a lot when I read various AUs online. It can definitely be hard to write a good AU without changing a single aspect of a character - and honestly, it's usually necessary to change stuff because oftentimes backstories changing means that personal values change - but I feel like there's a moment where your 'ship' stops being the same thing you started out with. Just like the original paradox, I don't think it's possible to know when you've gone too far until you've already placed yourself firmly in "I've mischaracterized them! Gotta add #OOC to the tags" territory. However, this doesn't stop me from wanting to be able to pinpoint that moment. Is there a way to figure it out? Can there be a formula made, or is it something that you need to figure out on a case-by-case basis? What parts of this ship can you replace without changing who the ship is, fundamentally? It's a hard idea to figure out! I don't think there's a solution, really, but I like the brain workout it gives me.

You can make a very barebones solution to this problem, I've found, by watching the second Spiderverse movie. Specifically, I'm talking about 'canon events'; things that need to happen in order for Spiderman to become Spiderman. Thinking about a character and their personality as a chain of events instead of one giant incomprehensible web of traits can help make the ship easier to navigate. Peter Parker's uncle must die in order to create Spiderman; [insert character's name here] must do [insert event here] to become who they are in the present. Everything else that happens is merely additional. I'll reiterate, it's a very barebones way of fixing things. But if you're confused, or new to the writing game, or just not very good at figuring some of this shit out, it's not a bad starting point, I don't think. And, much like in the movie, you can break this rule, if you think you want to do your own thing. (I think I'm clever.)

This isn't just for individuals, of course. I didn't call it the ship of Theseus for no reason :). If you have a ship that has, for example, the very best dynamic - #rivals_to_lovers - and you change it to #childhood_friends_to_lovers, for an AU you've thought up ... how far can you take changing the genre before you've ended up with a completely different pair of characters? When an author understands how to change the dynamic and really toe that line, I find that those fics tend to be some of the best pieces of writing I've ever read. It's about being able to fix that ship to fit your needs in that moment; to make it a galleon or a schooner or a yacht or a battleship, without changing the name painted onto the hull. (I would give examples of fics that have done this beautifully, but unfortunately my ao3 subscriptions stay between me and god.) The ship doesn't even have to be people, in all actuality. This little thought experiment of mine extends to be as general as just the concept of AUs themselves. It does get a tad convoluted at that scale - I'm thinking about that joke about how the darkest franchises have the most fluffy fanart - but it's still a track that can be followed. When you change a setting, you don't just change what background you've dropped the characters on, but rather you've changed the very heart of the story itself. If you were born in a different planet, or country, or tax bracket, you wouldn't be who you've grown up to become. Same concept, even if they are fictional. (In that line of thinking, any #yume or #Xreader fics could play around with that idea. I think it would be fun to ask yourself how you would act differently if you were raised in a different universe. Imagine yourself as a ship!) I like to think about changing settings as a form of translation, specifically translating songs; sure, you can translate the lyrics directly from one language to another, completely literally, but that'll just end up sounding clunky. Talented translators know how to bend and shape the words and phrases into the next language to sound just as good as the original lyrics. Good authors can change the setting while still maintaining the character as the character. Change a pirate into a college student, but keep their sense of (perhaps criminal) adventure, or whatever your situation might be.

You can read all of this and completely disagree, it's all welcomed. I'm not trying to say that this is the only way to create good media, because it isn't. Art is subjective, and this is an idea that came to me while eating breakfast, so it has no horse in this race. But, if you're like me, and you want to make something that follows the rules of canon without needing to actually follow the rules of canon - maybe it will also help you, to think about it as a boat. Or maybe you're tired of the nautical references. My ship passes you in the night, and we're both good because we're still floating.

[kohakuhibiki]

I understand that many people may have prior experiences in being acquainted to certain reactionary circles that may no longer reflect their views or go in complete opposition to their current ones. The only thing I may say as a former target of certain of those groups way back in the day is that it's a very long process to unlearn and even if redemption is more often viable than not it doesn't mean it isn't up to the interpretation of the people you may have directly impacted, and even those indirectly affected by your behavior may still be on high alert and it's normal. It's kind of like how you can't be expected to forgive your school bullies. The thing is also that despite the best intention imaginable sometimes certain acquired behaviors from such circles may fly under the radar and that's always tricky to bring that up because the problem with many people in their "redemption" era is how fluctuating it can be and it feels like bringing up any kind of adversity is like spitting on their efforts, which is very obnoxious and feel quite insincere in many cases. But anyways.

Also breaking through from the other side may also come with a certain share of views that should be debunked otherwise it's understandable it's met with recalcitrance or even hostility. Like for example, given my experiences, I don't think I could be comfortable with a bonafide former terf/swerf in the traditional sense, no matter what they currently identify and it's not even an individual issue that can't be grown over, as the person could have been way past those views entirely unlearned, and yet...I could not be not hyper vigilant about it. It's simply a matter of safety given the vulnerability I have at stake and letting myself be seen will almost always be like leaving myself wide open. The problem with most Terfs/swerfs which is interchangeable in that circumstance is that it's almost only online that they engage with hostility with strangers right off the bat. Offline usually they won't let you know and may simply try to ruin your life in ways that aren't too easy to perceive and often you won't even know the direct source until you do. Being in an environment with someone like that feels like being stuck in a box that keeps getting smaller but you simply feel it's your fault from being too "big" for it. They will also make you believe their discomfort is exclusive to what they consider harmful practice, but will never be clear on what that actually do consist to their own standards. Of course the common boogeyman are things like pedophilia or incest for example. Said like that it sounds clear but they keep muddying the water of what they acknowledge acquainted to those concepts to the point it becomes too easy to simply include any kind of intimate content if anyone can reach, the bar is very often that low. And bringing that up is often simply what it takes for the saw trap to activate. The bar is that low.

So yea, let's just say I'm not too comfortable with certain kind of people who carry certain things over. Like we're already an excessively censored community and even if the promiscuity is not even as generalized as expected it's still one of the major point that gets scapegoated to any extend no matter how little. If you don't like it individually is a thing but to promote its absence to appeal to bigots and distance yourself from the most socially ostracizeable segment of the community without even trying to educate yourself on unlearning your prejudices, well...your implication is worth what its worth no matter what you identify as and it's not much. Not liking sex is one thing, treating everyone like a potential sex offender because you don't like what they're into which could be anything given the reach people make in that department...

Tl;dr I'd have an easier time trusting someone into fauxcest than someone actually genuinely believing any kink is inherently abusive anytime of the day.

[tehuti88-art]

9/22/23: r/SketchDaily theme, "Free Draw Friday." This week's character from my anthro WWII storyline is Lance Corporal Citrine Rat. He bullies Reseda Rat throughout the story for some unexplained reason and has a generally poor attitude though his character needs to be developed somewhat. There's already a bit about him in Reseda's Tumblr entry, which is actually posted! (I'm dreadfully behind.) There'll be more about him later in my art Tumblr and Toyhou.se.

Regarding his design, I didn't originally envision him this color, but it makes sense. He looks perpetually cranky.

TUMBLR EDIT: Citrine features in Reseda's entry, here. His inexplicably hostile attitude toward Reseda is based partly on my own repeated experience with bullies both IRL and especially online; most of the times, I had no idea why these people targeted me, and it was just so frustrating never knowing, because how do you get a bully to stop when you don't even know what triggered them in the first place...? The only obvious things I can think of are that I'm an easy mark for effective bullying--I'm painfully sensitive, shy, and emotional--plus I react, which is of course what bullies want most. I still don't and will never understand the mindset that finds it ENJOYABLE to torment others so--I encountered the concept of online trolling early and often (I was aggressively harassed off of the first few forums I joined), and I will simply never get why anyone does it--but I think they like to target me in particular because I'm dramatic and provide them with what they want. And yeah...sometimes, "Just ignore them and they'll go away" does not work. I'm fairly certain one still pops up to passive-aggressively stalk me now and then, YEARS after I communicated with him exactly once (in an inoffensive manner, no less--I expressed mild criticism toward him exactly once as well, after he pulled a very manipulative online stunt which he himself admitted to, but this was in a comment to someone else and was merely along the lines of "I'm never going to trust him again"--that was apparently enough to earn years of harassment, impersonation attempts, being told to kill myself, etc.). I don't even fit the type of person he generally targets, which adds an extra level of frustration and makes me think, "Don't you have ANY other hobbies you can move on to...??"

Reseda experiences this feeling, I'm sure, always wondering WTF is Citrine's problem with him in particular. I think Citrine, being one of the older Trench Rats, sees an inexperienced newbie who is sure to react to his jabs and that's a big reason why he does it. I could just run with this concept that there isn't always a reason behind things, sometimes an a-hole is just an a-hole, BUT!...when have you known me to just let potential background drama like that slide...?

Citrine, alas, hasn't revealed his reasons to me yet. I can reveal what was GOING to be behind his behavior in the first reboot where he initially appeared, but I'm pretty sure I'm going to scrap the idea as too silly. Citrine, originally, was going to have experienced some sort of trauma when younger, which made him especially vulnerable to additional trauma in wartime; something especially bad was going to happen, and his personality was going to fracture. Yep--multiple personalities. I've already utilized this in other storylines--most notably the D Is For Damien/Minot spinoff series with characters such as Det. Max Kristeva, Jay Campion/Jason Rosedale, and Russell Whittaker--though there's also a hint of a more fantastic version of it in the Manitou Island series, with Geezhigo-Quae and the Red Swan (spoilers, I know, sorry!). I feel more comfortable doing it with those characters as it's developed organically in their background and relies on actual psychological principles regarding how the disorder develops in childhood. (Geezhigo-Quae is kind of an outlier here, but as I said, her story has a supernatural element.) Citrine...never really fit this template. His personality was supposed to split in adulthood, which, while I guess it COULD happen, is incredibly outside the norm based on everything I've read. One could argue that his adult experience is merely a continuation of his childhood one, a final break in something that was already fractured, but it just seems way too contrived and unbelievable to me...and also far too much like a shoehorned-in plot device. While I won't rule out trauma in Citrine's past (in almost all of my characters' pasts, honestly), I'm almost certainly ruling out DID.

I also don't think Citrine is just being an a-hole for being an a-hole's sake--he gets along fine with many others, and while I wouldn't call him nice or good natured, he mostly behaves. (This, too, has been my experience with many bullies: They're complete wretches to me, yet okay or even popular with others--another fact that makes me wonder, why me, what did I do, why am I so worthy of contempt? One of my lesser school bullies died in an accident and everyone publicly had nothing but praise for how kind and funny he was, what a great guy, while privately all I could think was, good thing I'm a nobody and no one wants my opinion, he was a total jerk to me! I guess nobody else ever saw that side of him.) It's just Reseda in particular who triggers him. And nope, it isn't Reseda being bi that triggers him, because he targets Reseda before Reseda himself even knows this. Just for some inexplicable reason, Reseda rubs him the wrong way and he feels compelled to act.

I know I already said it's unlikely above, but there really is the possibility that Citrine's behavior simply has no concrete explanation, and even he doesn't know why Reseda irritates him so much. And that in itself could serve as a bigger plot device. I can imagine Reseda finally confronting Citrine, angrily demanding to know what his problem is, and Citrine shooting back, "You want to know what my problem is?--NOTHING! And my problem with you?--NONE! You exist. That's enough! Keep wasting your time trying to figure me out. You can't shove people in boxes! Not everything has a nice clean explanation! And the sooner you realize this, the better!"

Now, a bigger plot device...how? Reseda spends a good deal of time trying to pigeonhole both himself and romantic interest Silver, attempting to figure out what exactly they both are and what they mean to each other. Silver fits no mold that Reseda knows of. Like Citrine, he advises the other Rat to just not think about it too hard, because he doesn't understand it, either. So in a way, Citrine's combative response to Reseda might help him understand that life isn't always so clear and people aren't always so easily labeled or explained. The same as he can't ever fully understand his and Silver's relationship, perhaps he never comes to understand the conflict he has with Citrine.

Citrine's actions toward Reseda do kind of mellow out throughout the story--partly due to their experience being sent to assist in the medical ward as punishment--though I think he still has the same negative feelings, he just isn't so inclined to act on them. He even comments semi-civilly toward Reseda now and then, but I doubt the two ever settle all their differences, they merely learn to grudgingly tolerate each other. I suspect it always wears on Reseda to never understand or manage to set things right (not that he has anything to set right--this, too, I experienced myself when I once asked a guy who was being mean to me online what I'd done wrong and he himself admitted I hadn't done anything, he just didn't like me)--it niggles at him to leave things open ended--but at least they don't continue to get into knock-down-drag-out fights.

ANECDOTE TIME.

This is kind of reminiscent of a personal experience I had regarding three bullies of my own. When I was in junior high, I was placed in some sort of experimental "support group" for troubled students; to this day I don't fully understand how I ended up in it, or what all it was about, though it was an illuminating experience. Also included in this group were three male students with whom I'd had conflicts: Brian/Bryan (I can't remember the spelling), Josh, and Adam. Brian and Josh had actively taunted and mocked me (I remember Brian mocking my awkward walk--I have kind of a swayback, and he made fun of me once by prancing around and fluttering his hands with his butt sticking out, which I found humiliating as I've always been painfully ashamed of my appearance; I can't recall the specifics of what Josh made fun of, but he had an even meaner streak than Brian, who seemed to just find it amusing), whereas Adam didn't mock me like that, but would target me for pranklike behaviors, and would keep at it even if I repeatedly told him to stop, which to me was a sign of malice (e. g., in class he would keep putting his foot up on the metal book holder under my seat, which bothered me inordinately--maybe it was my OCD--and every time I nudged it off he'd put it back up, and he ignored my requests, then my demands for him to remove it--it got to the point where I'd literally be hitting his foot trying to force him to remove it yet he'd still refuse--it was pretty stupid behavior on both our parts, to be honest). Anyway, all four of us ended up in this group, meaning we'd all been identified as troubled students. The group was apparently experimental only, as I said, because it ran its course of a certain period of weeks, then just...ended. Was never renewed or restarted. Which frankly was a shame, because IMO it HAD helped, and I really could've benefited from therapy back then when my social anxiety was just starting to get disruptive. I don't know what the point of it was or why it was never continued--honestly, the whole episode is a weird mystery to me decades later, I wasn't a troublemaker, I got excellent grades and followed all the rules, I was just painfully shy and avoidant and sensitive and would burst into tears at the drop of a hat--who recommended I be placed here, with bullies and problem students, how, and why?--especially considering that authorities had no problem ignoring my issues all the years after that. Anyway though, by the group's end, my relationships with the three bullies had changed:

1. Brian stopped mocking me. We never became friends or anything, but he was friendly the few times we interacted; I even remember him complimenting me to somebody else (something like "Yeah, she's a really talented writer!"), which surprised me, because I figured all he'd ever noticed of me was that which he ridiculed. Turns out he'd seen good things, too.

2. Adam became friendly. Turns out he was a genuinely funny guy (a lot like Gold Rat) and had no spite toward me that I can recall. His annoying behavior that I'd mistaken for malice was probably just his juvenile attempts at jokes. He never repeated this behavior afterward, so I take it he understood how much it had truly bothered me. We were never friend-friends but all our following interactions were positive and we got along well.

3. And Josh...was still a jerk. I specifically recall us both being on a bus and he wanted to switch seats; he asked, but I, likely out of spite (and feeling quite smirky that I had something he wanted), declined his request. He asked a few more times, getting more and more rankled, yet I kept refusing. He finally just started calling me "b*tch"--first insultingly, then like it was my name--he said to someone else, "This b*tch won't switch seats with me!" then to my face: "Could I have your seat, B*tch? Please?" He said it so casually, in such a normal tone, like it was my name. That made the comment even worse, IMO, and of course I still refused. He got angry then, and started kicking/punching the back of my seat. I just ignored him, feeling quite smug for having pissed him off so. So, yeah...Josh and I never became friendly, we were both a-holes to each other. Two out of three ain't bad, I guess.

There was ONE thing I noticed, though: Josh didn't actively target me so much anymore. He was still hostile when we did interact, but he didn't ever come seeking trouble; he mostly avoided me, and of course I avoided him. So, while the bad blood between us was never resolved like it was with Brian and Adam, still, something changed. We decided to just keep out of each other's way. (I believe he moved away not long after.)

END ANECDOTE.

I suspect that the dynamic between Citrine and Reseda plays out similarly. They never become friendly, but they don't keep getting into fights, either. They just learn to work together when they have to, and to otherwise give each other a wide berth.

Citrine isn't a bad person, just difficult under the wrong conditions. I feel he may have a good deal of skills that are indispensable to the Rats, otherwise, why keep such an obstinate person around. He needs some significant character development--he has lots of potential to add to the plot--but as I said, he hasn't shared with me yet. Perhaps by the time I get to writing up his official profile, I'll know more.

[Citrine Rat 2023 [‎Friday, ‎September ‎22, ‎2023, ‏‎12:00:18 AM]]

[lookwhatilost]

the one thing i've noticed too is that a lot of just, like, very bad information about complicated overseas political situations is spread in an infographic format that bears a lot of similar resemblance to the powerpoint presentations people would make on here in the early 2010s.

tumblr's impact on how people talk about politics online is something i really believe is criminally under-discussed. the big reason that this connection gets as little recognition as it does is because tumblr's SEO is dogshit, so it took a few years for this to take off on other websites & by that time, the connection became a lot more obscure.

the conservative commentators that have gotten rich obsessively shit talking "woke stuff" always try to pin this on people going into university and being taught postmodern philosophy a la foucault. but there are a couple of problems with that claim: that, at least in my own experience with taking philosophy classes, that stuff generally isn't on 100 level reading lists, and that postmodern philosophy doesn't really look like "discourse" when you actually read it. people were introduced to these concepts on the internet, specifically tumblr initially, and later elsewhere post the nsfw ban exodus. it seems unlikely that you'd be assigned this stuff as an undergraduate at all, unless you were going out of your way to concentrate in gender studies. the call is coming from somewhere else, and tumblr is the obvious suspect because the mimesis is just so aesthetically similar to how information traveled this site ten years ago. if that's a coincidence, it's a weird one.

[bizarrepotpourri]

Behind the Scenes: Unlucky Thirteen

[Previously on: Special Officer 432 in General]

Like I said in the previous post, the stories were originally posted on A Certain Website and inspired by its users. So, let's dive into the first one, "Unlucky Thirteen".

And since we'll be discussing crime, death and hornyposting again, all the details along with a link to the story on Pixiv are under the cut.

Important info: you can access the link only if you set explicit material to be shown in your Pixiv settings. For a good reason.

The person whom I offered a role in the story wrote a thing or two herself, and bouncing the ideas between us I arrived at the general concept I described in my previous post: a Kingdom based on Great Britain, but where capital punishment wasn't abolished after the obvious miscarriage of justice that was the case of Ruth Ellis.

Now, I do understand that the users of A Certain Website value their privacy and don't reveal where they're from - unless they slip and include something geographically specific in their photos or their automatic translator/autocorrect has a hiccup - but when that inevitably happens, I can hint that I spotted it, dropping a local reference in a story I wrote for them.

While the story hinges on a knee-jerk legal act introduced due to media fearmongering and desperate "tough on crime" vote baiting that obviously doesn't work as intended but gets people into trouble over technicalities, something the UK is rather notorious for (from my observations - of course, I realize that they have nothing on the US in this regard), the rest isn't as British as you would expect. The concept of drug-dealing football hooligans does sound fairly British, but I was in fact inspired by late 1990s/early 2000s Poland - the quote under the full version of the cover image contains multiple references to local organized crime from that time, mostly , along with a very specific reference to one of the local football clubs that I won't explain - like I said, If You Know, You Know. Enough that some locals figured out only half of it outright and caught on the other half later.

I also set up some foreshadowing in the first paragraph, mainly to depict the Officer as well established in her profession and having seen a lot - not just pop culture tropes and generalities like "greedy trophy wives", "homeless junkies" and "Capital City gang members", but references to actual cases as well. While "elderly serial poisoner" sounds like a reference to things like "Arsenic and Old Lace", I had two actual serial poisoners in mind: Nannie Doss and Louisa May Merrifield (although Merrifield wasn't exactly "elderly"). "Country cannibal" is based on the Australian murderer Katherine Knight, although I'm gonna put a disclaimer here: I'm not going to write a story about her. Sure, I can imagine it, and that’s the problem: we’d be dealing with an ogre of a woman with anger issues that would require four guards to subdue her and most possibly a straitjacket, and that’s just not my style. Which leaves me with the "depraved murderer barely out of high school" - an idea that sent me into a most distracting rabbit hole of writing down important-sounding legalese outlining the next story, when I was only halfway through "Unlucky Thirteen". But, more on that in the next post, now let's get back to the first one.

Since the story is set in a prison, and one of three specifically named ones, let's focus on that. Shackleton, located in the Capital region, stands in for the real-life Holloway Prison, with the execution chamber based on stills from "Pierrepoint" and photos of a miniature reconstruction of the execution chamber in the Wandsworth prison that I found online, as it was very similar to the one depicted in "Pierrepoint". The idea of a black curtain separating the preparation area, however, comes from an article about the Fallbeil installed in Katowice prison during the German occupation of Silesia during World War 2 - well, that and it's aimed directly at the users of A Certain Website. I know, it's awkward and I depicted the preparation rooms in the other two prisons as slightly more practical, but I don't feel like doing retcons on this one.

And finally, a bit of general trivia: I write my stories in English first, and then translate them to Polish - mostly because I find translating from Polish to English awkward and often come up with English puns or turns of phrase that are a nightmare to translate to Polish (for example, the taking/giving head wordplay in my old story "Swift Justice" that I had to rephrase entirely in translation), but here, I came up with a translation of the phrase "handcuffed, hysterical and in a world of trouble" that sounds even better in Polish - literally "in handcuffs, in panic and in trouble".

[kipperlillycopperkettle]

18, 20, 29!

18. what’s one of your favorite lines you’ve written in a fic?

this is ALSO hard so i'm gonna pick a few <3 the problem with this question is i have favorite passages or scenes more than i have favorite lines y'know?

“your childhood comes crashing down around you and you can hear it shattering like glass.” - from give me back my girlhood. “and alecto's eyes widened with something a little like someone being confronted with the concept of loneliness for the first time, and samael hardly had time to think before alecto was coming at him with a sword.” - from there's glory ahead but our love will be forgotten. “and as elegantly as rising from water, she pushes herself up, and bites down on his throat, and then she pulls.” - from but i've learned how to earn my keep (how to clean my kill).

20. what’s a favorite title for a fic you’ve written?

to be perfectly honest, either there's glory ahead but our love will be forgotten, bc that song so perfectly encapsulates the og lyctors to me, and that lyric is gut-punching in the context of a fic about their cavs, or to give yourself to me is to give up the upper hand, because i was struggling HARD to come up with a title for that fic, and i found the perfect lyric last minute.

29. share a bit from a fic you’ll never post OR from a scene that was cut from an already posted fic. (if you don’t have either, just share a random fic idea you have that you don’t plan on getting to.)

this is hard because at least for fic, i don't really cut scenes, just rework them, and there's very little in my drafts i will completely rule out EVER finishing and publishing eventually that isn't like. from when i was like fifteen and therefore embarrassing to put online. but anyway. i will probably never ever write this fic but my notes has an idea for a pete/rowan fic that's just like. generally about them entitled “if it's gonna break me won't you let me go”. probably will never happen but who knows! maybe someday i will feel the urge in my heart to write a sad pete/rowan fic

send me fanfic writer asks!