#and a part of me wants to be accurate but also how can i be accurate when SHE isn't even dang accurate T-T

[fierceawakening]

Yes! That’s… less of a clear answer than I feel comfortable with to join a movement or admire its leaders, but it’s something.

I always get the sense in conversations like this that people are much more comfortable than I am just being like “who cares about the edge cases?”

I care about them, both because I’ve *been* the victim of things committed by people too deep in their mental illness for anyone who tried to convince them to stop, and because if we truly believe everyone is a person (which I see as a key tenet of leftist values and part of why I choose them over right wing values in the first place) then we believe some things are too cruel even for people who do horrific things.

So I don’t see it as an issue we can avoid.

Also like I’ve mentioned I work at a homeless shelter. The reason a lot of academically inclined leftists can talk about crime like it’s rare is because they don’t spend time in environments where people who’ve committed crimes are common. I don’t think they’re wrong that most people are basically good, but I think they can be naive about what it takes to convince someone crimes are not a great idea. If someone has a patten of criming, it’s because that’s what they believe works for them. Getting them to stop is about changing their outlook and habits, which is far from impossible but a lot slower and more bumpy than many people who never did much criming want to think.

Also I think a lot of people really don’t have an accurate picture in their heads of serious mental illness. I think very often people have an idea that even very acutely ill people are fairly rational, and you can usually help them deal with their anxiety, give them meds, whatever, and they improve a lot. Again, I don’t think this is fundamentally incorrect; disease isn’t destiny. But having interacted with a lot of people whose illness is particularly intractable, I think that people often have… the same kind of image in their mind, where they don’t really understand how incremental incremental can be.

There are many people, including one client I’m very morose about, who improve a little when treated well, but a little isn’t enough. My moroseness? That client has been banned for fighting, unless she appeals the decision and wins. I don’t *like* the thought that she’s going to lose her place here and that’s likely to only make things worse… but I don’t have the fundamental confidence to say that kicking people out for violence is too cruel, we can make sure it’s fine. Making sure it’s fine is very clearly above my pay grade, and while there are people with more experience and better degrees than me I don’t have the impression they’re less confused.

All of which says to me that deciding we’re ready to stop imprisoning people who do bad things is at the very least premature (and to their credit a lot of abolitionists do agree that prisons will be phased out over time.) I think it’s unrealistic not just in a way that paints a rosy picture of humanity (as a whole? My picture of humanity is also fairly rosy!) but also in a way that fundamentally ill prepares us to really help perpetrators in ways that matter.

[lycandrophile]

if you feel comfortable sharing, how do you identify now?

mostly, i just call myself a trans man now. i really haven’t spent too much time trying to find a word to replace transmasc in my vocabulary.

i haven’t really fully disidentified with transmasc either. when people talk about transmascs as a collective, i still consider myself part of the group they’re talking about. i still describe the process i’m going through as a transmasculine transition. and transmasculinity as a concept, as something lived and embodied, is still really important to me and my understanding of my gender. it’s less that i feel no connection to the word “transmasc” and more that just saying “i am transmasc” doesn’t really accurately describe the way i relate to the word anymore.

it’s partly because i just…don’t consider myself to be all that masculine. i’ve never been particularly feminine either, but even femininity is something i can at least put on for a little while; masculinity is a complete mystery to me in a lot of ways. i don’t know how to do it. and i’m not just talking about cisheteronormative masculinity either — i have so much admiration (and often envy) for the butches and bears and drag kings and other people who embody queer masculinity, but that doesn’t come naturally to me either. so it feels weird to identify myself using a word that puts so much emphasis on masculinity when i don’t see myself that way and i doubt anyone who knows me would either. i’ve played around with using transandrogynous instead for that reason, and i think that’s probably the most accurate alternative.

but i still mostly just find myself not really caring about defining myself on the basis of masculinity, femininity, androgyny, or any of those concepts because none of them are as important to me as the fact that i’m a man. whether my presentation would be best described as masculine, feminine, or androgynous can and does change from day to day, month to month, year to year. but regardless of which way i present myself, i’m always a man. that’s always what i want people to know about me. the underlying assumption of my manhood is what makes me comfortable exploring femininity and androgyny at all. so if i have to define myself, why not just say i’m a trans man?

it’s also partly because the way people define the word transmasc has shifted in the years since i first came out and started describing myself that way. when i first learned it, it was pretty much universally understood as an umbrella term that included (but also extended beyond) trans men. so when i started identifying as a man, transmasc remained a broader but still accurate identity. but now, i see more and more people defining trans men and transmascs as two distinct groups, and while there is still a general understanding that trans men can be and often are transmasc, there are also a lot more people who assume that if you describe yourself as one, you must implicitly be excluding yourself from the other. and because my identity as a man is so important to me, i’m not comfortable with saying “i’m transmasc” if people might assume me saying that means I’m not also a man.

and i think it’s partly because transmasc is a label i leaned on a lot when i was at a point where part of me recognized that i was a man, but i resisted calling myself a man because of all the baggage that came along with that. it was a compromise — a way to get “close enough” to what i actually felt, to get people to use the right words for me and get the right idea about me, without having to say “i am a man”. because back then, manhood was something inherently worse in my mind and the minds of the people i surrounded myself with than the nonbinary identity i’d been claiming until that point. but now, i don’t feel that way at all. i love manhood and men and being a man! so for me, letting go of transmasc as a label and giving myself permission to just say i’m a man has been an important part of accepting the fact that i am a man and learning that being a man isn’t a “bad” way to be trans.

basically, my identity hasn’t really changed at all, i just realized that saying “i’m transmasc” is a less accurate way of describing my gender than just saying “i’m a trans man”.

now, that’s not to say i don’t have other ways of describing my identity or that my understanding of my identity hasn’t changed a lot recently, but that’s a whole other can of worms and god knows this answer is long enough already. suffice to say, my gender is much more complicated than 100% Binary Man, Same Gender As A Cis Man, but i don’t worry about explaining that to every person i come across. if someone is so unfamiliar with me that they have to ask me to define my gender in the first place, then as far as they’re concerned, i’m just some fucking guy.

[sabine-smitten-obviously]

And YOU will feel healed of the last 15

... when you read this fic. That is, as long as you suffered from an abandonement wound like i did.

Ello lovelies, i have another wonderful fanfic-rec for you! 🤓

But you are an ocean by @ineffably-good

Coverart by @ineffableclassics

What it is about:

After Aziraphale's defection, Crowley tries to figure out how to live life for himself.

Notes:

Ok so, the end of season two broke me. Figured I was maybe done writing stories about these two after that. And yet, several hours later, a sentence appeared in my head, and then this happened. Guessing at chapter totals… I'm finding I like the idea of Crowley going off in a different direction than what I'd initially expect. Not just raging, not sleeping for a century, but actually trying to move on. And why the hell shouldn't he just move to the South Downs by himself? So here we are.

What i like about it:

🩷This fic doesn´t jump in on pushing the story - their story - forward. Instead it goes a totally different path. A quite big part of it is dedicated to Crowley mending the pieces of his broken heart. It´s endearing, it´s breathtaking and it will have you cry. Not only for Crowley but for every single person who ever had to endure heartbreak.

🩷Fun fact no.1: in real life I am a relationship-coach specialised in toxic relationships and heartbreak. And the way Crowley´s heartbreak is described couldn´t be any more accurate. Every thought, every pain, every action he takes, the strength it costs him, the weight of it all - its written absolutely to the point. I could have copied several pages for the "most beloved quote".

🩷So Crowley tries to build a life for himself. Not just living without the angel and rotting in a pit, but really trying to carve out a nice little existence for himself. He is doing his work, he is healing and you can follow along with him, as he learns to build at least new "friendships" - though he would never call it that himself, thanks a lot.

🩷This healing-journey takes quite some time and somewhere in the middle of it i started to think - he could do it. He COULD heal his hurt, mourn the loss and still somehow at least live a life on his own. Maybe feeling the missing part of himself for the rest of his existence, but not being miserable about it the whole time. And that is a thought - a wish - i would have for my dark angel.

I could see him living that life and at one point i almost thought - i would love to see how that would´ve played out for him. A life without Aziraphale. What connections would Crowley have made? How would he have coped with the loss of those humanly connections lifespan after lifespan? Would he have relocated each century? Would he have moved to Australia and learned surfing at one time? Would he have become a timelord and travelled - i mean seriously, Crowley could do that probably?

But you, my dear, are an ocean.

And oceans are ancient

And can survive everything,

Even the wrath of weather and planets.

-- Nikita Gill

SPOILERS AHEAD - if you don´t want to know the plot, stop reading here.

Stop reading if you dont want spoilers!

Ok - you´ve been warned! Here we go: 🤗

🩷Fun fact no.2: I actually downloaded this fic some time ago but had another fic in mind i wanted to start next. So after i finished the last one (also really brilliant, i wrote a rec on it too), i started my e-reader the next day, THIS fic was already open instead on page 1. Huh?

I have absolutely no idea how this is possible, but i DO believe in hints-of-the-universe. Or little demonic miracles on their own. Because i needed this fic.

🩷Because of course - this is a Good Omens fanfic and eventually the other angel arrives. And without giving away to much: Aziraphale has to fight for Crowley. A long long time. He has to be steadfast and consistent and earn the trust of his has-been-companion-for-millenia. Nothing is a given any more.

And i am NOT saying that this is what Aziraphale needs to do or that he was wrong in any way. (The fic doesnt say that either by the way.) But what cracked ME personally about the last 15 was my own abandonement-wound which got triggered massively. I felt retraumatised even.

So reading and feeling that Crowley does not jump on the next best possibility to be back with the angel was a big thing. Having the Angel slowly earning his trust and simply showing up again and again - I needed that. I needed Crowley to take his time, not be the sick lovefool he is often proclaimed to be. For him to have doubts, to feel conflicted, to feel love and the need to self-preserve at the same time.

All these ambiguities we all have. And to take the steps with him. Watch the turning point, when the fear of losing Aziraphale again becomes less and less and the fear of wasting time gets stronger. Taking one step at a time, sometimes even backwards. All those things, typical for a healing process, which is never straight forward but most of the time a rollercoaster instead. I loved this. I needed this. I could sit back, breathe and watch my own heart grow. Just. Wow.

Most beloved quote:

So if you feel like maybe you need a fic in which Aziraphale really shows up and cares while Crowley really takes his time to learn to trust again... And not because one of them has been an idiot, but to experience them both learning and growing together ... and that might be something for your own healing journey, this might be just THE fic for you. I absolutely loved it and so will you.

Reading is therapy! 🤗

[saxandviolins77]

I have a feeling most people don't actually care for Bonecrusher's character, so I made a little post talking about what I find interesting about him.

Enjoy 😙.

I know for a fact that Hook, Mixmaster, and Scavenger are the most popular out of the Constructicons and that's fine, but I feel most people don't really KNOW what makes Bonecrusher interesting as a character.

OK, I'll be fair here and say that most of his substantial character traits come from obscure stuff or are not developed, but his most obscure bio is used on his TFwiki description... so... Not that hidden.

Take his Sunbow writer's guide page, for instance. It establishes that he is destructive and brutish, but more importantly than that, his job is a performance to him, an art form if we can put it this way. That already paints a whole different picture of him. Yes, he is violent, but he's also a self-proclaimed artist.

Even in the cartoon, Bonecrusher doesn't act like a thug (I hate this word), as most people and IDW2019 portray him. He's surprisingly stoic (yeah, I didn't take it from nowhere). He's violent, sure, but he's also dedicated to the task at hand. Take G1's "The Autobot Run", an episode that feels like the writer was faithful to the guides. In said episode, while Long Haul is the one wanting to fight directly, Bonecrusher comes and admonishes him, talking about how the device they are building will "wreck those Autobots good," as he puts it. (Bonecrusher has sparingly appearances and lines in G1, but most of those lines are of him being violent or him just going about his work day.)

This for me is the cream of the crumb of Bonecrusher's canonical characterizations, directly from Transformers: The Ultimate Guide by Simon Furman himself. Aside from that, this book has some pretty innovative things for the Constructicons; the fact that this was written by the same person who wrote the Dreamwave bios makes it feel like a natural expansion of what's already established. Though, for whatever reason, Furman focuses a lot on the "survival of the fittest" part of Boner, like, I know... '86 Movie! But C'mon!

(The Dreamwave bio was omitted due to redundancy.)

Now, in my personal opinion, you can see a pretty interesting base for a character. A perfectionist who expresses his desire for perfection by violently destroying everything he considers flawed. A performance artist in his own right.

The only thing I outright reject from Canon is the fact that he has a 3 in intelligence and a meager 6 in skill. Well, color me fucking surprised! He must be a very shitty DEMOLITIONS SPECIALIST. I sound petty, but I simply feel he shouldn't be dumb as bricks ( I also don't need him to be Hook levels of smart.) Keep him a brute, but a competent brute who actually does his job well. (take this with a grain of salt; I have a very weak suspension of disbelief when it comes to jobs not being portrayed accurately.)

Either way, I just wanted to shine a light on what I like about the Boner guy. Have a fine day/evening/night. 🥱

[kit-screams-into-the-future]

jesus christ, doc, i thought you were a goner! warn a guy next time, will ya? jesus christ, doc. jesus christ

bonus doodle post-extra-long-hug:

(listen im a sucker for the forehead kisses alright. whenever it happens in a fic i eat that shit UP. it's the cutest thing ever idc)

[howtodisappearcompletelyand]

20/10 stars little guy

[jester-step]

just girly things: reading batman: dark victory and feeling nauseous every time harvey dent gets mentioned 🌸🥰💕

[katerinaaqu]

I have again to repeat is all a matter of organization. And a musical 3 hours long is not THAT unusual. And I will say it again if someone wanted accuracy they would do it. Accuracy doesn't necessarily mean he would show every single stop or with the same length either. Like I said he basically changed THE most iconic parts and that was conscious choice. He could have the same amount of songs as he has now and be lore accurate.

"It is impossible within the realm or modern musidals and their structures" and who said you need to have the same structure forever? Also again you absolutely CAN be accurate. Phantom of the Opera is not different than the book to THIS level. Again he absolutely COULD be lore-accurate like he was in the first two sagas. What he did has nothing to do with whether the musical would be not "modern musical style" he clearly does things because he can. And from my years of music and such plays have last longer and shorter as well. Again I am not comparing movies to stage BUT you can still have the plot as it is. What he changed could be avoided or are you telling me ye made Odysseus kill the sirens was more "musical possible" than have him tied up on a mast and singing verses with an invisible performer!?

Actually yes it does because HE DOESN'T FOLLOW the Odyssey like not at all. EPIC absolutely ISN'T an adaptation of the Odyssey at this point. Again you can read it if you want and many people read it and disagree with me but still I am standing up at my position. If you follow nothing of the plot you ellegwdly adapt but you keep the names you just make an original story with characters that wear the costume of a popular character. You are NOT making adaptation. You reading it and disagreeing with me doesn't disprove me. Like scientists fight for decades over one passage of books and all read the same passage. You having reading it and seeing EPIC as adaptation little does it disprove me. It only shows that your ideas of adaptation and mine are different

I never said they are unfair. They just insist that I am supposed to like them because they did. The same way you insist now on your opinion on how I absolutely must believe that is impossible to be lore accurate (it is not. Never said it is needed to be word for word accurate but it absolutely CAN be lore accurate) and that it is adaptation (it is not imo). The way you insist now they did then because that was their opinion. And they express it like you do like I do. I just mean that it has become so standard that something popular being loved that seems incomprehensible that someone cannot like it or if someone likes both this and the original material alike they wonder how come and someone else doesn't.

And I am not attacking you. I am explaining how many times people like me who love the originals have been belittled by fans of these so-called adaptations and that the OG material often receive much more backlash for their opinion. No they are not like I said I believe it is the original material supporters that are treated unfairly. Not the fans especially here on the internet.

Allow me to disagree one more time. Like I said above I am not saying one can make a musical or an opera or something with ALL the moments of the Odyssey but what he did there has nothing to do with length or modern musical construction it has to do with the plot he decided upon. I refuse to believe that as I said before him making charibdis happen AFTER the island of Ogygia had anything to do with that. He could place it accurately in the story. He could not include the final 600 strikes atrocity of a plot which never happened in the first place an add a scene accurate etc. He would have the exact same amount of lyrics the same amount of scenes. But he would respect more on the plot and again the first two sagas proved that he can. The first two were perfect. The changes he made didn't need to exist there and he could still have the same amount of songs.

"Nothing you say is new to me" wow... 😆😆😆like okay you know what I am going to say. It is good that you add your opinions and we discuss them but do not expect me to change my mind on this one. I did watch musicals before myself. True I am a musician but not a play writer. But again he wouldn't need to make the changes he did. He said so himself that he writes "video game plot" so many of the songs could have been different. He chose not to. Also he constantly deflected more and more from the material. That too wasn't "modern musical writing" it was his personal choice. So again I am also explaining myself here. It would be "modern musical writing" if he chose to change one or two things to fit his narrative. He was deflecting MORE AND MORE from the material which is again a choice. Hamilton is not historically accurate 100% either but what Jorge did let's say with Circe is the equivalent of someone not have Hamilton sleep with Mariah like it was written in history. Having him have that ridiculous jet pack at the 600 strikes is the equivalent of someone have Hamilton survive his final duel. It is THAT iconic and important to the plot and changing it has nothing to do with modern writing but rather his personal choice.

I am not going to disagree with you on the way of writing or the general pace and all. You are the expert on that matter. But plot-wise again there are a million things that could have been done imo that didn't even need drastic change of the songs (like I said Other Ways could easily be kept the same and just be a song for their intercourse. No drastic change there but that). Like I said one or two changes let's say Polyphemus were not only expected but as you said could be seen as necessary but one or two. What he did is clearly a personal choice. As I said what he did to the Odyssey plot would be Hamilton changing MOST KEY PARTS of history let's say his affair and Raynolds Panflect and keep going derailing and derailing till Hamilton survives his final duel and "he becomes the monster". This is literally THAT iconic moments he changed. But is indeed very good that you add your insight on the matter in writing method for instance

You realize that a fandom has gone off the rails or that it has REALLY taken over when you see "Epic the Musical" tagged under images of Achilles and Patroclus! Like...how are two characters who were both dead by the taking of Troy, yet alone by Odyssey who do not appear not even as a mention for the Underworld as they were in the Odyssey, relatable to this?!

Sorry! XD

[yakultii]

random but i'm so curious as to know how your eyes look, the way you described them in the past have me intrigued

weird girl eyeball compilation

[skitskatdacat63]

I don't know how I'd ever convey this in art but. Thinking very deeply about how in boy king au, a very crucial part of characterization is that Seb is a wolf in sheep(or lamb more specifically)'s clothing and Fernando is a sheep in wolf's clothing.

Seb is very unassuming, very delicate, seemingly very vulnerable and malleable. But, deep down, he can be very ruthless. It's in the the way he hesitantly declares war, with a spark in his eye and a suppressed smirk. In the way he challenges someone to a card game or a horse race, proclaiming that he's not great, but winning every round and prancing around the room and mentioning it ad infinitum. The way he's able to instantly turn the tide in a debate in one fell swoop. By showing all his cards constantly and letting himself be vulnerable, he's making himself invulnerable. No one would ever consider him to be able to make big moves, so he wins every single time, because no one even thinks to expect it from him.

Fernando on the other hand, is constantly committed to having a looming presence and harsh reputation, but deep down, he's soft. He knows what happens to people when they're vulnerable, and he's not going to let himself be taken advantage of. The way he keeps a brave face when being informed of the marriage proposal, but goes back to his room and cries. The way he proclaims that he was always going to be the rightful ruler of Spain, but confides to Flavio that he never thought there was any real chance of it ever happening. The way he takes himself so seriously in public, but inside feels so giddy whenever he can make someone laugh. Everything to him always feels unstable and ready to crumble at any moment, and he's not willing to contribute to that by letting himself relax.

I think thats why it's very difficult for them to get along at first, because they have completely different approaches to how they carry themselves and make their way through life. Seb is confused at Fernando because he feels that he's very bland and overly serious at first, but truthfully he's not really seeing the actual Fernando. And Fernando finds Seb to be naive and easily taken advantage of, but that's because he's never seen Seb at his most cruel. Seb really loves when he eventually gets to see Fernando being vulnerable, and Fernando really admires and respects Seb when he sees him being serious. I think it just takes a while for them to show the other their full and complete selves, even the parts they can sometimes be ashamed of. There's this very compelling dichotomy in Seb laying out all his cards, but still being very difficult to read, and Fernando keeping his cards to his chest, but his intentions often being easily seen through.

[averlym]

" just...come here. just sit here with me" (...that one scene from princess momonoke, click for better resolution)

[theultimatekamehamehavoc]

Sometimes, I feel Kyoko is like the Bonnie of Trigger Happy Havoc.

This sounds very weird to say but hear me out. Or... read me out since this is text.

This is unserious by the way but also a part of me is curious cus my gosh is she a hassle to find a good color to consistently give her.

Basically, in FNAF, the consensus on what the hell Bonnie is colored is all over. Is he blue? Is he purple? Indigo? It's always been questioned. Meanwhile, with Kyoko, though I haven't seen a ton of discussion around this, like, what IS her hair color. Actually. Cus sure. She's always been associated with purple and when you color pick her hair, it's almost always near the purple part of the color wheel. But also like, what color IS her hair?

I've seen it been drawn more purple, sometimes even white or silver. Hell! Her hair is described as silver in the first chapter of the game! So, what gives! Like, it's never consistent, even in official artwork!

Case in point:

This is how pale her sprite hair is btw

Also, it's not that any other character's been consistent with this in the series. Then again, at least I can tell that Byakuya's blonde, Makoto's a brunette, that Sakura has white hair and that Leon's a red head.

Plus, I feel that the shade of her hair is what MAKES it look purple. Which leads me to question more. Is it leaning closer to white? Silver? Does she just have purple undertones but it's not actually purple. And like, did her purple hair lighten with age or something cus novel Kyoko's hair is a lot more obviously purple compared to when we first me the girl. Or, does she dye it? Like, make it look like a darker purple in Dr3? Would she even have access to hair dye with the state of the world?!

And like, girl, I get it. You got your mysterious bit going on. But, dang it girl! Pick a lane!

[of-arches-and-angels]

Meet my new (and first) Ultrakill OC: Bezaliel! I honestly don't have a lot down in terms of his story or place within the lore, but I have been playing with some ideas based on his name meaning "The Shadow of God" (Maybe also meaning "Damaged"? Idk it's kind of mixed but the first one is most widespread. I'm learning as I go lol). He's also mentioned as being a fallen angel (if I'm not mistaken) so I've been toying with that as well. I know that most of his abilities are related to that "Shadow" aspect of things: moving through shadow, providing aide from the shadows, or even using the shadows in battle. The ball on the screen is similar to a familiar of sorts- something he uses to gather information or keep tabs on certain individuals. Considering the fallen angel bit, I might have him be on poor terms with the council, though that part of things is still up in the air.

I have yet to draw his physical weapon, but I do have some ideas for that as well.

[cherrysnax]

Chevys sim looks just like them fr and like just looking at them confuses my brain in a good way!!

[reconnecting]

rambling dont mind me

[yourworldiseternallycomplete]

honestly i am so drawn towards certain monastic traditions, like the structured implementation of your principles, learning to be present, radical acceptance, scholarship as a practice, simplicity etc etc