#You misunderstood me. You misunderstand me.

[tangents-within-tangents]

Hey if you see my most recent reblog, I have already apologized. And explained my misunderstandings and miscommunications. I get that the things I was responding to probably came from my own misinterpretations of what your ask was talking about. My fucking bad.

I've learned, I've admitted wrong, I'm trying to implement those changes. Idk what else I can do. I regret this post and how it's affected people, but deleting it won't get rid of it, so what else can I do but apologize and try to do better?

Regardless, everything you are saying I'm arguing for is not what I was trying to say. Most of your questions I have already clarified multiple times in my other reblogs/replies and I'm tired of repeating myself.

aro and ace identities are about diff things. also, you could argue THOSE ones are "additional" to other identities like bi/homo/pan/etc. like whats your logic here?

Here's my logic: Say we have someone who thinks they are straight and labels themself as such. Overtime they realize they are actually bi. They change the label from 'heterosexual' to 'bisexual'. Later they discover they are ace, but not aro. They could then change the label to 'biromantic asexual' (even though when they identified as bisexual they didn't feel the need to say 'biromantic and bisexual' it was implied to mean both). If they then discover they are aplatonic they would label themselves as 'biromantic asexual aplatonic'. Right? If they discover they are also non-binary: 'biromanic asexual aplatonic non-binary'. That's what I meant by additional.

Clarifying distinctions between identities/umbrellas (where they are similar and helpfully grouped and where they are not) is not exclusive. That's why I used comparisons to other Lgbt+ stuff. Would you say that creating the term 'bisexual' or "trans" is exclusive and just gay people 'not wanting anything to do with that'? No. (Like I've seen a lot of people saying agender is Aspec and I think that's one we can agree is not actually included in that umbrella term. It's a gender identity and has nothing to do with lack of attractions, when would it ever be useful to talk about them together as one? But saying that it is not under that umbrella does not make it any less valid and important of a label/identity and doesn't mean it's not included under Lgbt+. And obviously doesn't mean that an agender person could never ALSO fall under that umbrella with a different aspect of their identity. And that person could totally talk about both at the same time, but they'd be talking about two distinct things)

your whole post here screams the same shit they say about aro and ace people. "yea thats valid but we don't really want it relating to us in any way. maybe if you don't feel welcomed gtfo" like?? THAT is your argument?

I get how it came off that way and I regret my wording, but no that is not my argument (the "if you don't feel welcome, sometimes it's not the right place' was bc I MISUNDERSTOOD and thought you meant that allosexual apls need to feel welcome in the ace community which is objective not true). I specifically said we need a term for the whole inclusive A-umbrella AND a term for just sexual and romantic orientations within that. If you don't think that second term is necessary, okay, but it really has been for me and many of us in that community for a long time (if you aren't convinced see my other reblogs or the one from @fiesty-spirit-bear for more about that connection. But you even connected them in your ask by saying "sexual/romantic relationships". By definition a non-platonic relationship, the opposite of a platonic relationship, is a sexual and/or romantic one. They are distinct relationships and therefore distinct aspects of one's life). Clarifying terms and how they are being used is not (automatically) exclusive (and the reason I said "I'm curious what other's think" is bc I know I'm not in charge and that I'm limited to my own perspectives).

Also, there's a difference between exclusion and just having one conversation at a time. Maybe it'll help to explain my experience with the word a bit? (I know this is all irrelevant to the topic of the og ask at this point but I've made a fuss so I just want to explain ig):

I made some posts for ace week this year and found that there were times where what I was talking about was just as applicable to aro issues as it was to ace issues, because amatonormativity often treats them as interchangeable (and bc SAM doesn't apply to everyone). If what I was writing was specific to just sex/sexual relationships, I would just use the word/tag "ace". If it was just romance/romantic relationships, I'd use "aro". But it wasn't, and it wasn't exclusive to just "aroace" either, it was "ace OR aro OR aroace" collectively, "aro and/or ace -spec". In my experience, the word "aspec" is used to refer to just that. But to be sure I was using it correctly I googled it first and read this whole wiki (the first result, which I linked above too) and decided yes, that is the correct definition of that term. It is just 'the aro and ace spectrums together' and therefore I can use it to mean that. (I also use it as an ambiguous term so that I don't have to refer to myself as "ace-spec and aro-spec" or divulge my specific microlabels (like I did above) every time I wanted to talk about something referring to both. If I was just ace, I could just say ace, but I'm not, nor am I aroace)

IF instead the results had been that "aspec" means 'the whole A umbrella', I would not have used it there. Bc in that case if I did use it to refer to only the aro and ace spectrums, that would actually be exclusive of all the other A's bc my post didn't mention related issues for all of them (and bc allosexual and/or alloromantic people can fall into those other A spectrums, so they obviously wouldn't find any relevance to a post only talking about aro/ace topics). But that is not the definition of "aspec" that is most common and widely accessible.

I'm not trying to redefine the communities, I'm trying to clarify solely the words we use to refer to them. Wanting a word for just the aro and ace spectrums is not wanting an exclusive word, just one that is more specific. I'm not saying that a word for the whole A-umbrella is not "too inclusive" it's just too broad for certain conversations. And having a distinct word for each in this way would actually help to avoid exclusion (and miscommunication since both definitions are currently in circulation (tho only on Tumblr tbh, I have not seen 'aspec' be used for 'the full A umbrella' anywhere else)).

Yes not all aro/ace's are alloplatonic, and therefore those communities need to be inclusive of aplatonic aro/aces (an idea I openly expressed multiple times and have taken to heart personally). But not all apls are aro/ace either, and aro/ace specific communities do not need to accommodate ALLO sexuals/romantics.

(Which is all (mostly) unrelated to the relationship hierarchy stuff you were talking anyway)

being apl in aspec communties sucks sm. everything is all about how important platonic relationships are and "dismantling relationship heirarchies", while just building new ones. it feels super unwelcoming.

like yea sure to YOU sexual/romantic relationships don't mean anything/are devalued/etc, but not to all of us!! some of us LIKE those things, and MORE than platonic relationships. its like we rnt even aspec at all 2 these people, like sorry some of us go against the grain of society while still having certain ""non queer"" parts to our identity. i feel like we are seen as not aspec/lgbt enough to participate in those communities. so much about the aspec communtity is about how untalked about we are and how we are never included or thought about in discussions, but aro and ace communtities do the same to us!!!

.

[genderqueerdykes]

i wanted to apologize for misunderstanding a recent ask! i was not able to parse it as clearly as i thought i did. it was me who jumped to a conclusion, i apologize to the anon that wrote in & got deeply misunderstood! i owe you one massive apology

[bonkabon-3laf]

after all the suffering you brought upon people?

do you really think you deserve to be let go so easily?

you think it's fair to ask those you wronged to simply let you fade in oblivion?

to forget the things you did to them? the sleepless nights you caused?

all so you can enjoy the peace you stole from others?

don't make me laugh

if anyone gets brought back by the reset, I hope it's you

there's no one more deserving to repeat it all again

and again

and

again

I don't believe in you, your words mean nothing. You hold no power, you will never hold power. I am the only one that will ever be able to tell me what is true about me. You can't breathe without thinking of me!!! You can't breathe!!!

[bastardlybonkers]

i feel like not enough ppl are factoring in the cultural clash between laios and shuro and the many micro agressions shuro faced while being in their group. literally the name 'shuro' in itself is one

his name is toshiro 😭 lets also not forget that he has his own communication issues, in the opposite way that laios does- thats literally a factor in their argument, that his envy for laios's ability to express himself sincerely manifested as part of his distaste for him.

ig all this to say like, was their fight heart wrenching, especially when reading laios as autistic? absolutely. anybody whos ever been in laios's position knows how much it hurts to realize someone you thought was your friend doesnt actually like having you around, especially when they didnt tell you and you had no way of knowing due to not understanding their cues. but im begging yall to step back and see the nuance of this situation cause im gonna be real a lot of you are kinda just brushing over it acting like everything is toshiros fault and that hes a terrible person when in reality hes an average guy who really, really clashed with laios and it led to a very long misunderstanding due to their supremely opposite methods of communication. even laios and toshiro, after letting everything out in their fight, were able to come to an understanding and start a foundation for an actual friendship built on better communication

ok yknow what Edit: i shouldve made it even more explicit at the end of this post, i hadnt thought i would need to since i started the post with this, but i think a few too many people are missing my point so i just wanna clarify. i shouldnt have said 'really clashed' and left it at that because yeah they did, but it wasnt just their opposite methods of communication, it is also very much that toshiro was experiencing microaggressions via laios. it may have been unintentional on laios's part, but it still happened and wore him down, made it harder for him to communicate on top of both the more subtle social cues that he was raised with and his own communication difficulties. i also want to say that the fandom reaction to toshiro and the complete ignorance of this point is also racist tbh or at the very least ignorant. i understand that the anime did not cover this panel, and neither did the manga, as this was an omake, but im gonna be real with you guys. there are enough context clues within the story to clue you into this. if you didnt pick up on it thats ok, but i think this is a good lesson in picking up subtext in the stories that youre watching and/or reading. kui shouldnt have to explicitly say 'by the way laios was racist to toshiro' for this point to be understood, and at the very least, when the author portrays a character in a sympathetic light (as kui clearly does) it should make you question Why they are doing so and what makes them sympathetic, rather than youre immediate and only reaction to be 'well i hated what this guy did/said so i hate them and they suck'. idk exactly how to finish this, just. idk. question your biases and gut reactions to things you see in media and stories, and think about whether or not theres subtext that youre missing.

[darlingod]

Cardan: *brings his ex back to live on the land and then exiles Jude who he married the night before & who just got back from enduring over a month of torture*

Cardan: *does not have any doubts that Jude could possibly misinterpret this situation*

[iridescentmirrorsgenshin]

This is an analysis of Kaveh and Alhaitham’s argument posted on the Port Ormos bulletin board!! Because it is crazy actually!!

I think this exchange of theirs out of the three posted throughout Sumeru is particularly interesting, and this is due Alhaitham openly expressing that Kaveh does not understand what Alhaitham is really trying to say to him: “I have never denied what you meant, but you don’t understand what I am saying to you at all.”

This exchange is relevant in various ways in exploring the motif of communication. As according to their usual rapport, the two disagree over their differing philosophies, as in sensibility versus rationality, however, Alhaitham’s particular concerns in Kaveh spending his money on “nonsense” highlights the underlying reason for this exchange. From this comment, the argument is recontextualised through Alhaitham’s intention for getting involved, as Kaveh prompts the workmen to take his money in order to help them out.

When Alhaitham states that this is a meaningless action due to the inevitability of people rising or falling on their own accord, rather than solely critiquing Kaveh’s “impulsiv[e]” altruism, as Kaveh interprets, Alhaitham is directly contradicting his own comment – as he is interfering on Kaveh’s decisions.

As concern is evidently the intention behind his interference, Kaveh cannot perceive this, and instead attempts to critique Alhaitham’s perspective in return, although Alhaitham states: “Make no mistake. I have never denied what you meant…” This response asserts that Alhaitham does not deny, but rather agrees with, Kaveh’s statement of “mutual assistance, fairness, and righteous anger” driving the world.

In lieu of this, rather than continuing the argument, Alhaitham claims that there is no point to it, as Kaveh does not understand what he is saying, as in, Kaveh does not understand that his intentions in interfering are out of concern. He follows this up, regardless, by criticising Kaveh’s handling of his budget, as, evidently, Kaveh has offered to give his own money to these workmen, and refuses to pay for Kaveh’s drinks for that month.

For Alhaitham, Kaveh’s lack of self-prioritisation leads him to impulsive altruistic acts which serve to jeopardise his own position, particularly regarding money. If Kaveh can afford to give away money, he can afford to pay his own tabs, is the takeaway from this exchange. Although, similarly to the exchange between them posted in Puspa’s Café, this applies to one particular month, insinuating that Alhaitham will continue to pay for next month’s tabs of his own accord.

The main argument, as well as the disagreement over the speaker of Kaveh’s quote, serves as a humorous exchange, but as a motif for communication it acquires a new meaning. The two hold perspectives which contrast the other which puts them on unequal footing, demonstrated within the argument over the speaker of Kaveh’s quote. Although it is not disclosed who is actually in the right, both are convinced of their respective viewpoint. There is an element missing here, a potential solution to this problem, and it lies within the idea of “correctness” established within A Parade of Providence.

The omission of there being an objective, correct answer to this particular debate serves as a parallel to their conflicting viewpoints, with the basis of their exchange being to “prove” to the other their “correctness” – here, it is in regard to Kaveh.

However, “correctness” being the basis of their exchange, and thus, relationship, is challenged with Alhaitham shutting down the initial debate due to Kaveh’s misunderstanding of his meaning. Correctness, then, and its importance, is called into question within this exchange, with Kaveh being the one to chase it; his last message being that he would “prove” himself to be right.

At the core of this bulletin board exchange is the idea that Alhaitham harbours an alternative ‘meaning’ than the one that Kaveh assigns to him: “… you don’t understand what I’m saying to you at all.” This is a meaning which Kaveh cannot perceive due to his current understanding of Alhaitham. This represents the standing of their current relationship, where Kaveh believes Alhaitham holds him in disdain, although this belief is incongruous with Alhaitham’s actions which show his care for Kaveh.

In these instances of communication through the Bulletin Boards, it is interesting to note that Kaveh is revealed to have been drunk and “scribbling” on these notice boards, and hopes that Alhaitham does not know.

Although this is a humorous detail, it adds another layer to the unreliability of their method of communication, as Kaveh has no recollection of these exchanges with Alhaitham, and therefore could not have properly interpreted Alhaitham due to an altered state of mind. It is uncertain whether Alhaitham is aware of Kaveh’s being drunk whilst responding to him, or whether he is believed to have been lucid, which creates another element of unreliability in their exchanges.

Alhaitham understands Kaveh’s thinking and the reasons for why he acts as he does, but he cannot articulate his concern in a way that Kaveh will understand, both out of Kaveh’s incapability of receiving goodwill, but also due to his logical manner of expression. Kaveh perceives Alhaitham’s concealed expressions of concern as personal gripes and criticisms of his beliefs, and therefore believes that their relationship is based on the scholarly principle of proving the validity of one’s philosophies.

The Port Ormos Bulletin Board reinforces the core essence of their relationship: Alhaitham is invested in a personal regard, whereas Kaveh cannot see this due to his perception of Alhaitham and Alhaitham’s inability to communicate in a way Kaveh would understand.

(Update: For more analyses like this, the essay this is taken from is now uploaded! It can be accessed here and here as as a pdf <3)

[gunsatthaphan]

so anyway happy 1st anniversary to this historical moment.

[javierduffy]

kieran and javier finding moments or even seconds of domestic bliss in canon pls

my friend i have scoured, deep sea dived, deep cleaned, poker all-inned and i have never once in my rdr2 career ever been able to find a positive interaction between them in canon. i didn’t think they even had ANY for the longest time until someone found one and its literally javier threatening kieran … which i would personally not categorize as “domestic bliss”. i think our best bet for canon content is crossing our fingers and praying that the ai for them in camp has them sit next to each other momentarily

[notasapleasure]

Here's a bit of history! The British PM told a female opposition MP to 'calm down, dear'. That's a fact, and so is the divided response to his words. Some felt it meant nothing; others thought it was an indication of what a patronising wankstain David Cameron was.

We all have our narratives of this little moment, but I must say I fall into the camp who thought it was indicative of a club of insecure posh boys telling jokes about the yucky girls. Aka 'bitches', as this lovely historian who I have now blocked puts it :)

[vv-ispy]

my deca looks like an unholy combination of a prince and s aionji + a tornado beard bc I watch too much revolutionary girl ut ena

[captorations]

once when i was twelve a substitute teacher was trying to make the class care about feminism by talking about how female CEOs get paid less. and i completely fucked it up by going "well yeah that's because they're more reasonable and thus more likely to realize they don't need that much money because no one does" which was of course incorrect but in hindsight very funny of me

[alchemiclee]

i've been told/keep seeing posts about people suddenly not liking when people add tags to their posts with their own thoughts/feelings/opnions/experiences, and even people that say not to tag with certain common organizational tags (like ships for example i see the most. some people use a ship name for organization purposes and not necessarily for shipping. for example i use "collei and her dads" for cyno, tighnari, collei art for my organization so I cam find them again and theres been a few artists screaming not to use ship tags and that could be seen as a ship tag. so what do i do? not organize your art into my tags and let it get lost and never seen again? not share your art at all? kinda silly but whatever, ill just ignore your art).

I personally think that's all a bit ridiculous....i don't know if that's a more recent thing (like with twitter people coming here suddenly and expecting to act like this is twitter) or if it happened in the years since I took a break from tumblr. but bAcK iN mY DaY we used tags as a little whisper to add our own thoughts without interrupting the main post. adding hard comments or replies was more seen as "too much/too loud" if it wasn't something directly meant for OP. tags were usually never meant for OP and were always for the reblogger and their followers. these days more and more people seem to think tags on their posts are all speaking to them directly or interrupting their post (not to say you can't speak to OP through tags, like i'll say nice things about their art in tags) but not everything in someone's tags on a post they reblog from you is for you! you can ignore it!!!

I know on twitter (where I went after leaving tumblr a while back) people use quote retweets to speak to the OP often. but not always. I sometimes would quote a tweet to add my own thoughts while using the quote as like a citation to credit OP for the idea. but I have a few times where the OP thought I was speaking to/about them and got very upset about it. one was a large account who quoted me back and got very nasty and sent their minions after me. quotes are louder than tumblr tags. so that's more understandable, and I was always very hesitant to do it, but I personally see indirect tweets about another post as extremely rude and posting screenshots of tweets on twitter is also rude.

I loved coming back here mainly for the tag system! I missed being able to share a post and also quietly add my thoughts. go on long rambles related to the main post without stealing their post completely or needing to make a whole new post. I know most old tumblr users get that and don't care, probably. I NEVER saw anyone complain about it in the past. only say how much they love it. it was just part of how this site worked for us. a culture thing we naturally created. so i'm assuming it's mostly new users who don't get this culture? it also doesn't help tumblr made it so you now see tags in your notes tab and not just comments added and replies. before, you would have to go to "someone reblogged your post" to see if they added tags because tumblr only showed comments. I personally LOVE when people add tags to my post with their thoughts and stories and whatnot. ai i'd go to every reblog I got to see if there's tags added. it's like an uncommitted interaction. they dont expect a reply, i don't expect a reply. they are isolated thoughts, but still related. it's still a form of interaction, without the pressure of being direct, and I feel seen/heard when they add them. (it means they're not a bot, auto reblogging my posts /hj) seeing tags on my posts i'm not just shouting into the void alone and someone sees me. me adding tags to a post is a gentle "you're not alone/I hear you/im a real person not a bot" from me. but it also could be me saying "your post inspired me! I want to write something too! but im being quiet about it so i dont take away from your post and your post gets all the credit" when I add my own little tag ramble.

so the fact that people are now suddenly being upset by people adding their own experiences and thoughts to tags is super disappointing and and frankly annoying. tags don't take away from your post and you can just ignore them! no one is forcing you to expand the tags in your notes and read them! hardly anyone will see them. most will only read your post and not people's tags! I know no one usually reads my tags because i've added secret messages to the end of my tags and no one ever responds to it lmao things like send a pic in my ask and i'll draw it for you.

yes I know "RESPECT PEOPLE BOUNDARIES" but it kind of disrespects my needs as well. theres a thin line between someone's boundaries being crosses and someone's needs not being met. but that's a whole debate i'm not willing to have so don't start it. (not that kind of boundary is easy to not cross. not bringing up arguments. but asking people to not use a main function of a website is kind of pushing it imo...) yeah I want to respect boundaries the best i can, but unless you say in the post "don't reblog and add your own tags" no one will know and you get upset when no one knows. and no, no one will read your profile/pinned post before reblogging. no one will go to the original post and read your tags. they will only reblog it right off their dash if they aren't seeing it directly from you in the tags/for you page. some people will reblog 100 posts a day. they won't go to every profile/original post before reblogging just to see if you have any special conditions and rules for your random one post out of hundreds they see a day. that's too much to expect, honestly, sorry to say!

but this is tumblr. maybe it's better for people to accept the culture/etiquette here and let it happen without complaining, or realize this isn't the place for them! because it doesn't meet their needs and boundaries! and that's ok! it doesn't have to be your place. you don't need to stay here if you don't like how it works! asking an entire website to "respect your boundaries" by not participating in a basic or essential function of the website is a little ridiculous to be fair....

no i'm not saying your boundaries don't deserve to be respected. i'm saying this probably isn't the place to have those boundaries in the first place. because there's am established way this site functions that works in counter to your wanted boundaries, so it just doesn't fit your needs. and like I said that's ok! you don't need to stay here if it upsets you that much! it's better if you find a social media where people can't share your posts. like a simple blog site that doesn't have a share function! or like Instagram? people cant share those posts. (sorry, I dont know much about social media) if you really want people to stop adding tags that bad, either turn off reblogs completely, or ask staff to add a notification option to turn off seeing added tags on reblogs! (if you're veeerry lucky, and not a trans woman, they might listen to you)

[vellichorsdesire]

talked about this a little with my friends but, i truly do think that f/o would want to push me away at first. and it’s not in like a ‘grr i hate you’ way but it’s more of a ‘i don’t understand you and why you want to get close to me’ and the fact that i’m a distraction to the work they’re so terribly close to that they know nothing but that.

i truly do think they’ve always wanted to feel understood for once in a way thatt they’ve felt isolated from everyone and so very ‘inhuman’ their entire life. but now that they finally get the chance, that that certain someone finally does show up, they’re terrified in a way, because they’re so used to hiding and being closed off that they can’t imagine being unraveled like that so easily. so they push away their only chance (also worth mentioning their identity crisis, where they do want to be seen but have nothing to show of themselves in the end. something something)

[persephonaae]

Hrm

[dokjaism]

it pisses me off when someone writes smth in a way that can be misunderstood n blames it on poor reading comprehension when the original msg was, in fact, not understood

[adelle-ein]

how do my professors keep getting worse every term