#because internet discourse does not make me feel confident that we are all on the same “this is nonsensical bullshit” page

[nostalgia-tblr]

you may think my niche is narrow but people on the internet arguing about the wars of the roses and who had a better "claim" to things is very much like similar arguments in the marvel cinemataticalish universe fandom and those films are extremely popular so who's sad and obscure now eh?

[mandatory-blog-stop-asking]

a psa on media discourse and harmless shitposting

friends now that arcane is over we are once again in a prime position for shitposting and crackshipping galore, especially since most of these characters aren't coming back for a while, so i would like to take the opportunity to remind one and all:

you do not, I repeat, do not, have to care about how other people engage with media.

you can have fun with fictional characters and make bad jokes and say shit that doesn't quite agree with canon if that's what you want to do while you talk about the show. it would take an especially forward-thinking bad faith-addled mind to insist on making a conversation about fucking, I dunno, Maddie League of Legends into something that's actually not safe, or is harmful in real life.

superficial jokes do not have to 100% reflect all your feelings about anything. You can have more than one opinion about media and more than one relationship with any aspect of it. as someone who's aroace i am fully aware and understand the concept that a platonic relationship can be a kinship stronger and more beautiful than any carnal romantic relationship; completely parallel to that, i think jayce and viktor should fuck nasty, because:

that's objectively funny; sex is hilarious

it doesn't really matter, it's just a show

it amuses me to say things like this.

i have seen a lot of people forcing themselves to get mad over jokes and clearly ice cold takes and I swear unto you this truly: it doesn't matter! Every social media has an ignore/don't show me this/block function! It is in fact just a show! Move on!

You can have different modes of approaching media depending on context! Life would be a lot less fun if all you could do was engage with art 100% seriously, and take dozens of hours of nuanced complex relationship into account just so you could say "I think jayce's second design is better".

The rise of media criticism channels, even the very good ones, has made a lot of their audience feel like the only way to properly engage with media online is to dissect and have a strong opinion about every single thing that a character says, is, and does. And a shortcut to feeling that kind of confidence is to strongly attach to One Single Reading of what characters "mean" or "do".

You need to chill.

don't take it personally if strangers online sometimes just want to make a superficial joke or, even, see things differently than you. "It's not that deep" applies to opinions too. Sometimes people don't care that much and it's fine. Sometimes people don't care as much as you and it's fine.

Screaming "death of the author!" whenever the writer says one thing you don't agree with and "You're blind and can't read" whenever someone else says one thing you don't agree with doesn't make you smart, it makes you into a dipshit people don't want to talk to.

you can't control how other people engage with media and you're not a media literacy cop. relax. 90% of times the thing that's stressing you out on the internet is a bit shaped by character limit in a social media where you will never see that person again. No need to be a dick about it. if you don't like something you see online, click the ignore button and move on. it's not worth your stress and it's not worth the condescending comment you're leaving on that dude's TikTok just because he really likes a character you've decided is problematic or some shit. Relax. Say it with me! Relax!

all this to say it would be funny if viktor jerked jayce off with his third arm. hahaha. "glorious! glorious! glorious!"

[scarletmaster143]

Okay here we go

The Barbie Movie 2023: a transcendental experience

I would like to preface this by admitting that I cried essentially throughout the entire movie. I was crying in the first twenty minutes when Barbie entered the Real World and found that it was the complete opposite of BarbieLand. Several other people have made this comparison but the scene where Barbie gets catcalled and harassed on the street, where she feels too conscious about everything (the tea scene with Ruth especially) is so vital because that is how every young girl I have met has felt when they begin puberty. Ken, of course exemplifies the masculine perception, the confidence and esteem that comes with realising that "Men rule the world". The way he is not a bad character but the draw of power is so strong even for someone as "accessory" as a Ken doll and so he goes along with the patriarchal system. Barbie feeling utterly lost after learning that she has not been in fact empowering women as she had thought, rather she was a "fascist". My take is that the criticism against Barbie is valid in that there is little diversity among the dolls and yes there are certain things that can be improved upon. However it is parallel-y true that Barbie can be ANYTHING. Especially in a world where success and happiness have come to be defined by such limited criteria Barbie rightly points out that most girls are ordinary, they are not scientists or presidents or nobel prize winners, however that does not mean they are unworthy of consideration, of respect and of care.

I am unsure what is the broad internet verdict on Barbie but I do believe that the movie encapsulates a very specific feminist experience where it's not that men are at fault for everything, Ken does ultimately admit, along with the directors of Mattel, that he does not want to be in power all the time. However, Gerwig refuses to dictate how men should behave, they will have to go to the Real World themselves and figure it out. Barbie however gets to learn that just saying "I don't want anything to change" does not stop things from changing. As someone who uses the exact same phrase several times, it hit me hard when, despite her best efforts, things kept changing. The loss of control and increasing uncertainty that adulthood brings is enough to make anyone into a Depression Barbie (complete with BBC Pride and Prejudice) but Gerwig also says that just because things are changing does not mean that we are simply helpless. We have people around us, mothers and grandmothers and daughters and Weird Barbies, who are there to support us. America Ferrara's rant about how women can never be perfect or likeable is a cinematic masterpiece- it reflects the constant discourse around what it means to be a modern woman and ultimately puts forward that women can be "anything", they don't need to be only perfect- if nothing they do is perfect then there is no need to desire perfection, they can remain as they are. Sasha was a surprisingly heartwarming character, I was fully expecting her to be annoying. All the Kens were hilarious, of course, the little Sex Education cast reunion was adorable. The style of the movie may not suit everyone's taste, it is loud, over the top and camp as fuck, everything is a reference, the fourth wall is essentially non-existent. But at its core the Barbie Movie is a lesson in growing up- it is a tale of someone who has to find herself and accept herself before becoming a human. Interestingly, Barbie reflects adolescence quite literally (I was half expecting Gerwig to put in a menstruating reference, but it makes sense that she didn't, considering the no-vagina thing) and the last scene where she asks to see her gynecologist is not only symbolic of her becoming a human but also of her becoming a woman. She is a doll in the beginning like pre-adolescent girls are often called but then she goes through terrible things where she is not fully doll, but not fully human, and lastly when she has become human, shedding her doll part. Adolescent girls are rarely allowed to be anything other than perfect "dolls" even when they are having the most terrible period of their lives and Barbie's constant desire to make things return to as they were shows how she also wants to remain a doll, but once she accepts that things need to change she starts shedding her doll nature and starts becoming human. This is still a sad process but now Barbie knows (thanks to Ruth) that no matter what she will be okay as a human.

In conclusion Barbie is not a movie that is of the feminist genre, at least not to me, rather it is a coming of age story for some of the most iconic characters in pop culture.

[rayssyscourse]

If everyone isn’t back in their own tags by the time we get back from vacation, after at least three systems called for it, no one has any right to complain about crosstagging. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

real. taking this as an opportunity to ramble about crosstagging

here's my question: literally why. how is crosstagging helping you, like, at all? you (in the general sense, not you clover lol) have your own tags for a reason. tags exist for the purpose of finding and narrowing down audiences, and for blocking content that you don't want to see. crosstagging does nothing to help you except just defeat the whole point of tags. like, is there anyone out there who hasn't gotten irritated when those porn bots use totally random tags so you run across them when you're trying to look at something else? or the "sfw interaction only" disaster, where nsfw/porn accounts invaded a tag that was meant to indicate that the person didn't want to see nsfw? or weeks ago when that Syl guy went around whining and trying to invalidate therians and age regressors in their own tags? that kind of behavior isn't fun for anyone, and the only thing it gets you is a higher chance of people disliking you, blocking you, and arguing with you. and if it's that--the arguing--that you want, you realize you can tag things with "syscourse", "debate", etc. and get to argue with people who actually want to do so?

also, nothing good ever happens as a result of exposing people to content they don't want to see with no warning. lots of people have "syscourse" blocked, not because they're cowards who don't want to debate or whatever you've got going on in your head, but because discourse (shocker) sometimes stresses people out, and a lot of people go on tumblr to have fun and joke around, not for arguments. i mean, there's a reason i have a separate blog for discourse. i made this sideblog because it stressed me out to have discourse on my main blog since i would end up seeing it even when i just meant to look at warrior cats fanart or something lmao. i know lots of perfectly reasonable and nice people who just don't want to argue on the internet, and that's chill. tags are there so that everyone can curate their own internet experience--as we all have the right to do--and it's kind of just pointless and mean to try to sabotage that. furthermore, people who are exposed to discourse in otherwise-safe tags are not going to enjoy it. that will stress them out unnecessarily, they will probably get upset with you and block you or start a pointless argument with you. no ACTUAL progress will be made by trying to bother and argue with people who don't want to argue. and presumably, you KNOW that, which makes it hard to give you any benefit of the doubt since the only reason you could have for crosstagging is... to harass people? to bother them? to make random strangers mildly more irritated while they go about their day? like, don't you have anything better to do? if you care about syscourse, that's great! come debate and discuss with the rest of us, don't drag in people who don't want to be involved. resorting to stuff like cross-tagging just makes me think that you aren't confident enough to debate people who actually want to debate, so the only thing you can do to make yourself feel right is to catch people off guard and then think "wow, I totally won that argument!" when in reality, they just weren't prepared and didn't want to talk.

sorry to ramble under a very simple ask, lol. tl;dr: crosstagging is pointless and isn't going to help convince anybody that you're right.

[sapphire-weapon]

I think the fact that so many people want to label Leon/Ashley as canonically "sibling- coded" is because they feel threatened in the way they view other of Leon's relationships, they can tell Leon and Ashley have chemistry and they try to convince themselves that they have a familial bond going on (like Ellie/Joel) so that they can justify not shipping them and making people who ship it feel bad/weird.

Because nowadays so many people can't just dislike something, they have to make up a reason why it's morally wrong and unacceptable so that way they can bully people that think differently and feel like their own personal opinions are objective and right while everyone else is wrong smh. This is mostly the case with younger fans (tho a lot of people older than me does this too lmao) so that's why I don't really find it frustrating bc it's most likely they have limited real life experience. Plus they might not be that good at interpreting canon from contextual clues yet.

In my case though I think a lot of these people are actually doing the opposite tbh because to me it just shows that they recognize that Ashley's relationship with Leon is real and they can't even concede that they're friends in the canon because they know it could lead to something else if followed through in the story, they admit there's potential there subconsciously with how hard they try to make it seem otherwise with nonsense claims. It's like when insecure guys feel uncomfortable but try to seem tough by buying big trucks and having guns on them all the time lmao.

So, I've talked about this before -- about how the "sibling coded" or "problematic age gap" discourse is just modern-day fandom's way of slutshaming and engaging in casual misogyny in a societally acceptable way.

I'm pretty confident in saying that anyone in my generation who slaps "siblings" on Leon and Ashley are probably people who have another ship and have had it for a while and don't want Ashley getting in the way of it, tbh LMAO

Like.... my generation has co-opted the current generation's vernacular, but make no mistake about the kind of bitches we are. We're ship war bitches. That's all we've ever been AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO CHANGE OUR WAYS NOW fjdskfh

But if we're talking about the current generation...

Media illiteracy is a big factor in this. It's no secret to anyone that the US education system took a massive shit starting in the late aughts/early 2010s, and things like critical reading skills aren't being taught in schools anymore.

I graduated high school in 2007. Two years later, I went back to visit an old English teacher to get a letter of recommendation, and he was lamenting to me that he'd just given up. It wasn't worth trying to explain the deeper themes of Beowulf to kids who didn't care, because the only thing that mattered was getting them to pass standardized tests.

So, now, without an overt, explicit declaration of love or something visually concrete like a kiss, kids literally do not have the skills to parse through a text and pick out themes and tropes and use of symbolism and imagery. They were never taught how to do it.

But there's a more culture-based thing happening here, I think. It's this fucking mess of a cocktail of internalized misogyny paired with learned helplessness, social anxiety, intense sheltering possibly exacerbated by the pandemic shutdowns, peer pressure, and internet purity culture.

I think it's pretty safe to say that fandom is predominantly made up of women and teenage girls. That was true in the 60s in Star Trek fandom, it was true in my generation, and it's still true today. And what I've seen happening today is that young women are absolutely terrified of their own sexual agency -- because the internet keeps telling them that, if you're under 18, it is wrong and bad and unacceptable for you to engage with anything even remotely sexual and how dare you express your sexuality -- and you'd better not do it not just because it's wrong and bad, but also because you are GUARANTEED TO BE PREYED UPON IF YOU DO. SEX IS DANGEROUS ALL OF THE TIME AND YOU'RE LITERALLY TOO YOUNG AND TOO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND ANYTHING SO DON'T TRY TO EVEN THINK ABOUT IT. Because if you're 17 and he's 18, he's a pedophile!!!!!!!!

I just.

So, we've now basically turned an entire generation of young women into the same type of young women who created the BL genre in Japan. These are women who were too afraid to explore their sexuality on their own, and it felt safer to do it with two male characters, because it was always more "okay" for men to be sexual. This is happening here in the West, now.

Slash ships have always been a thing in the West, but not to the degree that they are today. In today's fandom, if you have an M/F ship at all, you are outnumbered by at least 3:1 -- because M/M just "feels" safer for a lot of the current generation.

So, I think young women look at the Remake portrayal of Ashley Graham, and they identify with her. A lot. They're probably around her age, and her personality is very relatable to the kind of girls who play video games. Ashley's clearly introverted, but she's a fast learner who just wants to help, and she's got a good heart and a weird, kind of awkward sense of humor.

And, not only do these girls identify with Ashley, they're probably thirsty as fuck for Leon.

But that's terrifying to them.

Because they have been taught to fear their own sexual agency. The idea that an attractive, traditionally masculine, older man would be romantically or sexually interested in them is immediately categorized in their brains as wrong and bad -- and they don't want to think of Leon in that way.

So... for them, it can't be romantic. It can't be sexual. But there's clearly something there, but Leon would never abuse or prey on anyone so... that bond must be a perfectly innocent familial affection. That's what it is. That's what it has to be, because anything else forces them to face the uncomfortable reality even young women like them go on dates and have sex -- and sometimes, it's with men like Leon.

So, they thirst over Leon at a safe distance through Luis, primarily. Or they self-indulge on reader fic, because that's so much easier to write off as "just a fantasy" and not a statement on who Leon actually is as a character.

And it's just kind of sad, man. It sucks to see this happen to an entire generation of young women.

That's why I don't really get mad when I see the "siblings" shit out in the wild. I just feel sad for those people -- because they can't just say "I don't like the ship." They're so insecure and neurotic that they have to think of a reason why the ship is literally impossible to ever happen so that they don't have to be worried about it.

One day, they'll finally suck a dick for themselves and learn that it's not that serious. It's really fuckin not. Dicks are stupid, and the boys that are attached to them are even dumber.

[bythenineshards]

Omg what was up with that Feysand stan on ur post????? ITS JUST A THEORY. (Not to mention a MUCH better pairing) and lol if Feysand was always endgame why in the fck does Rhysie SA Feyre??? Did Sjm do that to build sexual tension (cause Feyre says in Acomaf she had "wanted him even then") AND THAT'S INFINITELY WORSE!!

Lmao they tried to fire up on one of my posts too and I immediately blocked them. Seen them one too many times fighting about posts that's none of their business. Like life is so empty u need to fight with strangers on the internet to feel something. I am literally so mad not them saying Tamlin Apologists deserve to be bullied?!?!? For liking a fictional character????!!

I took personal offence to that

Ha! See! I told you I would respond today. I totally didn't get sucked into Skyrim and my writing and nearly forgot.

Idk what their problem was. They blocked me like the first week I was on here so I didn't think much of them. I knew about them because there would be discourse on posts and an invisible opponent. So I guess they unblocked me to stir shit and idk, get more traffic to their blog? They rebranded with a name that is clearly meant to draw in Antis of Feysand. I think they're like 15 and so I guess they're in their "I'm edgy look at me phase" where they want to pick fights because they think they're always right and special. I'm so glad I didn't grow up with my cringe behavior on the internet.This is why we don't sell erotica or "dark romance" to children. They can't handle speculation or discussions. I bet they cry over Marvel's What If... series because it's not Canon. Like... the post that had them all fired up was speculation about something we have receipts for. And a lot of people liked the idea. All they do is make the books look worse.

And the way they talk about Feyre vs. Nesta is like they think they're written by two different people. This isn't Harry Potter (fuck you Rowling) vs. Twilight (fuck you Meyers). I don't think Feyre gets a free pass to transform into a person of another race just cuz Nesta and Gwyn modelled their stuff after the Valkyries. I think both are bad and icky because the same author wrote both and clearly doesn't see how offensive that could be. I do, however, think that there's a difference between what Feyre did and the Blood Rite. Nesta, Gwyn and Emerie were kidnapped and forced into the Blood Rite. They didn't actually choose to.

Side note though: Valkyries are from Norse mythology. It does chap me that she couldn't use a mythology or create something new for her Illyrians to flesh out their culture. She just used a primarily white culture for her non-white character's culture.

Sorry to rant about that. It just irked me.

I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would ship Feysand the way it's written in Canon. I can with 100% confidence say I've never written a romance that involved anyone SAing anyone. Hell, I don't feature SA at all really. I don't want it in my fantasy. I want people to find peace and love in my books. Men have written enough SA in fantasy, it doesn't need any from me.

But like... if you look at their posts, the reason I don't like Feyre is because I wanted "my fav" to end up with Rhys. They can't fathom that I don't like Rhys at all. I don't like any of her men. They don't appeal to me at all. The only one I might’ve had any inkling of interest in is Kallias but I'm sure if we spent more than a handful of pages with him, I'd hate him too. I think she'd eventually change all of them regardless of appearance to something shallow and toxic.The Bat Boys specifically are boring to me. Their designs suck, their personalities suck and the way they treat their women sucks. Nothing I see in her books is what I would classify as love. Her books aren't about love. They're about sex with hot dudes. But you know what? Other books do romance, love and even just sex better.

I'm glad you blocked them. Just know, they still spy on us.

Thank you for your ask. I hope you're doing well.

[autumntri]

Broader conversation about "small and big dick energy"

I frequent the website called "reddit." I know I know, big cringe! But that is the unfortunate truth. I have only recently made my latest account, primarily to get tech support when google searches don't land the results I'm looking for. It's indicative of how shitty the internet has become that anytime you look for actual advice or support, you have to add "reddit" to the end of your search to get real responses, since half of the time the responses are AI generated articles that do not provide actual instructions or make taking in the information more difficult simply because of how it's written. Apparently AI is "advanced" though, so advanced it can supposedly make art! This and other blatantly contradictory sentiments, more at 11.

There has been this discourse on reddit lately about the concept of "small dick energy" and whether it engages in the same sort of body shaming that we are critical of in other ways, such as when someone is made to feel bad for their guilt or certain immutable, unchangeable qualities about their appearance. For example, for me this is cleft palette, this was something I was made to feel bad for growing up, because my corrective surgery from infancy has permanently altered the way my lips look.

But does "small dick energy" fall into the definition of body shaming? The answer is yes, of course it does. You would have to be silly to not say so. Full disclosure, I have a small penis but I have been told I have "big dick energy," which I have actually corrected on the spot before because I'm not particularly interested in engaging in this sort of thing. If I was at one point, I'm at a point in my life now where I'm totally not.

This is to say I'm not going to spend this post shaming people that currently do it, because these things are societally reinforced! You cannot simply "opt out" of this if you are a modern human, connected to globalized networks of communication. The internet is a basic necessity for modern life, unfortunately. If you were to try to leave, you'll find your opportunities limiting.

With that out of the way, what actually makes "small dick energy" different from other forms of body shaming? I've heard the take that it's not actually about the size of someones dick, but rather its about their "insecurity." Oooh, it's about insecurity! So that's why I have to say their penis must be physically small, or that they come off like they have a physically small penis. Oh okay that makes a lot of sense, that's definitely directly correlated to... a personal feeling of confidence in yourself?

So then why must an aspect of someone's physical characteristics come into play? There are A LOT of insecure fat people, but we never say someone has "obesity energy" or "thin energy." Would it be okay if we did? Or is it not because that disproportionately affects the feelings of women and we, societally, have signed off on the feelings of men? I feel WAY more insecure about my weight than my penis size. (Though I am also a trans woman so, maybe I'm biased. I'm more bothered by it being there at all personally. :P)

As well, in the same way that there are so many products that market to men insecure about their size, like "penis enlargement pills/pumps," there are a slew of diet plans that exist to address the insecurities of overweight people, either by enabling them with HAES diets or by telling them that they'll look so much better than everyone around them if they lost weight and that acting as encouragement for their future dietary plans.

On this note, why do we make exceptions for women's feelings? How are woman's feelings more important than men's feelings? Both should be given equal gravity and respect and it's the fact that we don't that alienates young white men and casts them out for unsavory influences to swoop up. Sorry, I know we're just supposed to circlejerk about hating white people and white men and how they're literally the devil and are responsible for all of our current problems but let's be truthful for a moment and acknowledge it's all of our faults when these men are so socially atomized to the point that they fall into the arms of horrible people, like Andrew Tate and Elon Musk and Sneako.

I would also like to address just the casual ableism around this conversation too, those that defend shaming men with small dicks will say that "It is obvious what we're really saying! We're not actually saying it's bad to have a small dick, It is obvious and very apparent and clear that it's really about insecurity!"

As an autistic person, and as someone with borderline personality disorder, these conditions make nuance very hard for me to understand and makes picking up on social cues hard. I have to actively work on not seeing the world through a black and white lens and because of my personality disorder, because I didn't even know what was wrong with me because no one would talk to me, I never really interacted with other human beings for a very long time and therefore, never had an opportunity to pick up on these things. As well, both of these conditions make it very hard for me to process emotions and I tend to feel them much more intensely and for much longer periods of time.

It's really not my fault that I don't understand what it is you're actually saying and yes, the onus is on you to explain. As well, I am entitled to my opinion that what you're saying is still fundamentally hurtful. It is not "obvious to anyone with half of a brain" that you insulting someone's physical appearance isn't you actually insulting someone's physical appearance.

What is actually wrong with just calling someone insecure? If "small dick energy" means that someone is insecure, why not just say that directly? Why do you need to put someone's physical appearance into it? What, are you scared they're going to retaliate or argue with you? Either way that's probably going to happen, but you're going to have the high ground because you don't start with insulting someones appearance. If what it is you value is being morally superior, that is. Which for many Redditors, it definitely is, especially for those that feel the need to have the "correct" opinion on every single issue and to be plugged into the discourse at all times.

This discourse started with a tweet of Greta Thunberg saying that Andrew Tate had "small dick energy." Do I feel like Andrew Tate needs defense? Not at all, and I hope something I can't say on here happens to that bastard, personally. This isn't me playing defense for someone that definitely doesn't need it, but this is to question the justifications for casual cruelty towards men.

[asexual-means-no-attraction]

I used to have a discourse account and still follow some people I followed there on my main, but I've recently (read: in the past year) had to unfollow about 3 of them because they'd turned either into terfs or just became transphobic in general, and I just can't help but wonder what happened? They were transmeds (whether they considered themselves part of the group or not idk, but their beliefs alligned) which makes me think, you were so close. You had it all right there. How did you turn from seeing it as a legitimate medical thing to seeing it as people with mental problems or attention seekers? It baffles me because I always thought knowing the medical side of being trans is something that keeps people as allies. That something like seeing it as most of tumblr does, a vague feeling or just not subscribing to gender roles or whatever, was something that makes it easy to turn to transphobia because it's so loose and undefined. But seeing my former mutuals who I knew to be trans allies and who had a decent grasp of what being trans is turn to transphobia leaves me sad and so very confused

Thats the thing about the internet, it's an amazing place to grow more and more radical ideas. And you'd be shocked at how similar radical ideas are to each other, especially when they claim to be opposites.

You have to be really careful online. It's not hard to go further and further down a rabbit hole to the point of being unable to climb out. A lotta people start with very clear and understandable ideas about the world and other people. But the more time you spend the more things you see. The more posts that are specially written to make you feel anger, that leave out details, that use the worst faith example imaginable, that just straight up lie. And we've always been a society built on trusting others. Built on being social. All someone has to do is wear you down enough with "not everyone in this group. But looks at this person. And this one. And this one" to shift your idea of right and wrong, push what you think a group stands for, make you angry at them. You see enough shitty examples and you start to think it's everyone.

It's similar to the representation discussion. How much it can help a child's confidence to actually see characters they can relate to doing good things. Part of discourse is talking to people with other viewpoints. And when they keep showing awful examples it's easy to start falling for them without realizing it.

That's why it's important to also talk to people that agree with you. Look for posts that are positive. Look for good examples. Bot online and irl it's important to step back and take a break from discourse. Because when you dig too deep it's easy to get buried by shitty people.

You said you're wondering how this could happen. And it probably happened something along the lines of getting worn down from all the negative trans stuff online and all the transphobic shit from TERFs and tucutes alike. It makes you tired. The more you see it the more you forget it's not accurate. Humans are very susceptible. And we tend to go to extremes. These old mutuals probably fell into that and kept shifting their ideals to one direction little by little until it was a whole new idea altogether.

Much like my other post about how you're not gonna stop making someone transphobic overnight, you can't make someone transphobic overnight either. Changing someone's mind takes time. And unfortunately, the internet is a great way to do it since your posts don't go away. Discourse is a very easy way to start to fall into this too, which doesn't help. It's important to be able to step away, know when to listen and when to call bullshit. Not everyone can tho. It sucks. But the fact that they used to be supportive means they might come back eventually. So that's something.

[strawberryamanita]

Sorry, started ranting about live-action adaptations and corporate dilution of artistry, Can't Help Being A Capricorn or whatever

Discourse is allowed, just don't add something like "wow OP/prev you're a fucking reprobate I hope something happens to you that compromises your health" thanks ✌️😘

I'm also not tagging this, so if it breaches containment it's not my fault lmao

If I could be so bold.

I think the reason there's just so nauseatingly many live-action adaptations out right now, and over the past 12 years, is because there were quite a few fan-casts made over the years, whether by one person or a small group brainstorming together. Like if you search "[series] fan cast"***, there's a very good chance you'll find people still having fun with the idea of matching a celebrity up to their cartoon lookalikes, even today. Not corporations trying to drum engagement, not stark and barren listicle websites, but individual human beings who haven't been paid to say what they're saying or do what they're doing. Even after we've seen just how little Hollywood actually does with the concept 95% of the time, people are having fun with hypotheticals and being creative without restraints.

***The exception is live-action adaptations that have been officially made. If you look for things that have not been tainted adapted yet, it's like looking into a portal to a time before all This Shit started happening.

I think the main issue is, nobody who's making those fan-castings is imagining, like, a full-on movie to go with it. It's more like, who would look cute cosplaying as that character. The extent of the idea is a PhotoShop job, and that's it.

Not whatever vortex of billion-dollar soullessness we've been tossed around in for the past decade.

The Nihilist part of me wants to say: "This kind of open discussion online is gonna keep convincing Hollywood that these ideas are guaranteed to birth successful films, so we should just stop having these convos publically" -- but that's an incredibly stupid thought. I'm not gonna try and convince people that creating is something to be ashamed of and hidden away; in this Capitalist Hellworld, where artistry is minimized to keep profits high, commercial-free creativity often feels like our last stand.

I don't really have a solution at this time, myself. Nor do I think I'm responsible for providing one -- the majority of people I've tried to make a big artistic project with can tell you I'm not the most experienced nor the most confident director. But I do know that this is what the culture of media has been since the early 2010s, and all I aim to do with this rant is bring that fact to the forefront.

In the 80s and 90s (and some of the 00s), companies had no problem churning out fun visuals and engaging soundtracks and worldbuilding that took honest-to-God effort by the dozen. I mean we have nostalgia over commercials from those eras, and it wasn't just because we're susceptible to consumerism; if that were the case, we wouldn't roll our eyes and groan whenever we hear the Unholy Trio of a ukulele, glockenspiel and someone whistling over whatever fucking hunk of plastic they're trying to shove in our faces now.

The 00s had a more laid-back vibe to it, particularly with videogame commercials. This was the Era of Grimdark and goths and embracing darkness because it felt more real than anything else, or whatever the fuck I was writing about whilst crying over MCR songs. But even so, a good chunk of 00s media had effort put into it. Yes, more than half of it was horribly problematic and exploitative; I'm not telling you it was good, I'm telling you there was effort. Even the shit with deadpan narration and cheap mascot costumes and out-of-place toilet humor had some sort of creative writing team, had some sort of vision, had some sort of direction.

Then the Internet started ramping up in quality and bandwidth, and people actually could speak loud enough that companies would hear them. To anyone who's too young to remember a world before the Internet being pushed into every corner of everyday life: it wasn’t this way 15+ years ago. Media slowly became more collaborative over the era of AOL and MySpace, because consumer feedback became easier and easier to access. And then with the advent of YouTube in 2006 -- which, as shitty as it is now, was revolutionary at the time, being a place where you could publish videos without needing to audition for anyone -- access to free ideas had very suddenly become exponentially faster. More and more Internet stars were popping up on TV (think "Web Soup" and "Tosh.0"), and then Google bought YouTube and decided to monetize it and now everyone's a rockstar and Andy Warhol's laughing at us from beyond the grave.

Fuck off, Andy.

...Now, I know it feels like I took a million detours -- and I agree that it does, because driving around in my brain feels like zig-zagging between five lanes at once -- but this all came from my theory that the ideas for media are in the hands of unpaid creators. We went from production teams being creative as Hell in the 80s and 90s, to an intentional cynicism in the 00s, to a fizzling-out of ideas and corporations holding their hands out for scraps of ideas from the consumers in the 2010s.

Money isn't trickle-down, but culture sure as shit is trickle-up.

Again, I don't have any ideas on how to fix this. Capitalism breeds a culture that allows exploitation of every fundamental part of human existence, and it knows how to adapt. With every new slew of ideas I have on how to combat it, it worms its way through anyhow. It's like fighting a hydra, and it gives me agita if I think about it for too long.

I don't know.

I remember a time when adaptations were fun to think about, but they almost never came from the minds of people looking to profit off nostalgia. They came from impassioned, vision-driven fans who wanted to try retelling their favorite stories through a different lens... and I think that's a beautiful thing. All fanart is -- fanmade drawings, fanmade covers of songs, fanmade films, cosplay, and fan-casts.

I don't really know how to end this rant neatly. Just... next time you're on your way to watch the latest diluted, regurgitated corporate shlock that's trying to profit off your nostalgia, just remember that there's probably some unpaid, good-natured rando out there that took your favorite media to new heights without any executive meddling. Maybe save a buck or two from not buying a ticket.

Or just watch the original story again, since everyone seems to have forgotten what a re-release is.

I'm taking a nap. Thanks for sticking it out, if you made it this far into whatever the Hell this is.

[woman-loving]

I don’t identity as a “bi lesbian,” but I feel there is room for a woman to identify as both bisexual and gay/lesbian, and I don’t agree with the arguments I’ve seen against “bi lesbian” identity.

One thing that annoys me about detractors of the identity is the occasional claim that it is basically an internet phenomenon that arose within the last five years or so. Actually, women have been claiming both bisexual and lesbian identities for decades. There have constantly been debates about how bi women fit within lesbianism, lesbian identity, and lesbian community since the gay/lesbian movements have been active. This isn’t something that has ever been universally agreed upon, and there never will be universal agreement on it.

Just for reference and historical interest, I’ve compiled a few selections from articles and books, mostly from the 80s and 90s, that are by or about lesbian-identified (or gay-identified) bisexual woman, or that at least mention them. Inclusion doesn’t indicate my approval of the author’s perspective or argument; this is to provide a bit of history on the discourse.

What is a Lesbian? To me, a lesbian is a woman-oriented woman; bisexuals can be lesbians. A lesbian does not have to be exclusively woman oriented, she does not have to prove herself in bed, she does not have to hate men, she does not have to be sexually active at all times, she does not have to be a radical feminist. She does not have to like bars, like gay culture, or like being gay. When lesbians degrade other lesbians for not going to bars, not coming out, being bisexual or not sexually active, and so on, we oppress each other.

--Trish Miller, "Bisexuality," Lavender Woman, Vol 2 Issue 5, August 1973.

*

The definition of lesbian that I suggest, one that conforms to the two methodological considerations above, is the following:

5. Lesbian is a woman who has sexual and erotic-emotional ties primarily with women or who sees herself as centrally involved with a community of self-identified lesbians whose sexual and erotic-emotional ties are primarily with women; and who is herself a self-identifed lesbian. 

My definition is a sociopolitical one; that is, it attempts to include in the term lesbian the contemporary sense of lesbianism as connected with a subcultural community, many members of which are opposed to defining themselves as dependent on or subordinate to men. It defines both bisexual and celibate women as lesbians as long as they identify themselves as such and have their primary emotional identification with a community of self-defined lesbians. Furthermore, for reasons I will outline shortly, there was no lesbian community in which to ground a sense of self before the twentieth century, a fact which distinguishes the male homosexual community from the lesbian community. Finally, it is arguable that not until this particular stage in the second wave of the women’s movement and in the lesbian-feminist movement has it been politically feasible to include self-defined lesbian bisexual women into the lesbian community.

Many lesbian feminists may not agree with this inclusion. But it may be argued that to exclude lesbian bisexuals from the community on the grounds that “they give energy to men” is overly defensive at this point. After all, a strong women’s community does not have to operate on a scarcity theory of nurturant energy! On feminist principles the criterion for membership in the community should be a woman’s commitment to giving positive erotic-emotional energy to women. Whether women who give such energy to women can also give energy to individual men (friends, fathers, sons, lovers) is not the community’s concern.

--Ann Ferguson, “Patriarchy, Sexual Identity, and the Sexual Revolution,” Signs, Autumn 1981.

*

Individuals who came together a month ago to discuss bisexuality and its relationship to radical feminism decided recently to begin a serious, regular study group on human sexuality and its social/political/psychological manifestations in our culture.

There are eight of us in the group. For all, understanding bisexuality, both in our own lives and and in our society, is a primary goal. To this end, we decided on a format of readings and discussion, with a facilitator for each meeting, that would bring us through the range of sexual options available in the United States today, from male-identified heterosexuality to lesbianism, to a final informed examination of bisexuality in the context of all that we had learned. Throughout our exploration, feminism will provide both a point of departure, and a point of return.

We started by trying to define some terms, specifically "feminism," "gay-identified bisexual," and "bisexual". Alot of us were amazed to see how many different interpretations each term, especially "gay-identified," could have. Is someone "gay-identified" because they devote a majority of their time, energy and emotion to the gay community? Or does an individual's radical critique of heterosexuality make them "gay-identified"? And does "gay-identified" also imply "women-identified"? Some people felt that one could be gay-identified, and still not be woman-identified. And exactly how many Meg Christian concerts make you "lesbian-identified"?

We didn't reach any conclusions, but had fun realizing that being bisexuals, we are dealing with a whole realm of experiences that can be classified in any number of different ways; and that the variety of possible bisexual lifestyles is as varied as the women who are in the Network.

--Barb H, “Study Group,” BBWN, Vol. 2 No. 4, July-Aug 1984

*

I recognize that homophobia is at the root of biphobia. I came to lesbianism long before my sexuality was clear to me. I lived an open lesbian lifestyle for four years. I cannot deny the importance of this experience, nor do I want to. For me lesbian identity is more than, and/or in addition to sexuality; it is a political awareness which bisexuality doesn't altar or detract from. 10 years ago when I left my husband and full-time role of motherhood, it didn't make me less conscious of what being a mother means. In fact, it gave me a deeper understanding. I am still a mother. That experience cannot be taken away from me. In much the same way, my lesbian awareness isn't lost now that I claim my bisexuality. When I realized my woman-loving-woman feelings, and came out as a lesbian, I had no heterosexual privilege; yet there were important males in my life, including a son. I am bisexual because it's real for me, not in order to acquire or flaunt the privilege that is inherent in being with men. My political consciousness is lesbian but my lifestyle is bisexual. If I keep myself quiet for another's sense of pride and liberation, it is at the cost of my own which isn't healthy--emotionally, politically or medically. Not only is it unhealthy, it's ineffective.

Since I have come out I have triggered many lesbians to blurt in whispered confidence--"I have a man in the closet. You're brave to be so open. What am I going to do?" These are not easy times. AIDS has given biphobia free reign in the lesbian community (and admittedly with much less destructive effect than how AIDS is fueling homophobia in society at large), it is all right to trash bisexuals, not to trust us for fear of AIDS. Bisexuals are untouchable to some lesbians.

We have to deal with oppression in a constructive way or we will be factionalized forever. Time is running out. We have to see the whole and the part we play in it. Forming family communities with people who share your sexual identity is important, but trashing is nonproductive. The sexual choices we make are equally valid for our individual experiences. AIDS is not a gay disease; it is a human tragedy, a plague that doesn't recognize boundaries. I urge bisexuals to take a political stand, and to become a visible, viable energy force. It is important and timely to open this dialogue in each of our communities. Nobody belongs in the closet. The only way to get a sense of "our" community is for us to begin to speak out and identify ourselves. When we verify the connections and the networks of our oppression, we build a unity that avoids the, "I'm more oppressed than you" syndrome

--Lani Kaahumanu, “Bisexuality & Discrimination,” BBWN Vol. 3, No. 6, Dec 1985-Jan 1986; Reprinted from the 1985 Gay Pride March magazine, San Francisco

*

What makes the Third Annual Northeast Conference on Bisexuality what it is? The breakfasts and dinners--the entertainment--the excitement of meeting others who feel like family. My first event of the conference was stumbling onto a cocktail party just around the corner from the Registration Desk, which turned out to be part of the Woman's History Week! A bit embarrassing after greeting many people with wine glasses in hand, asking them how they heard about the bisexuality conference!

I'll skip now to describe my experiences at the lesbian-identified affinity group and the two workshops I attended. Why do women who identify as lesbians go to a bisexuality conference? There were about 10 of us in the room, each with a different answer. Most of our relationships at the present time were with women; after that the similarity ended. One woman had affairs with men when not seriously involved with women. Another, in a non-monogamous long-term lesbian relationship, had recently begun a sexual involvement with a man. one woman, now involved with a bisexual woman, was here to discuss her feelings about the situation. Some of us had led exclusively lesbian lives for a number of years and were wondering if we'd closed off important parts of ourselves. Whether or not we would act on our sexual attractions for men, acknowledging them were important to us.

Our personal herstories contributed to our diverse opinions. For some, coming out was relaxed and easy and relationships with women refreshingly egalitarian. Others found sexual awakening and coming out difficult, and lesbian relationships fraught with many of the same difficulties as straight ones. We also discussed reasons lesbians don't accept bisexual women, such as fear that she'd leave for a man or desire to preserved woman-only space. We questioned the reality of "heterosexual privilege," wondering whether any women could really have it. We discussed the sorrows in our lives, such as family histories of alcoholism, incest or physical abuse, and the joys of our relationships, our work and our lives.

--Stacie, “Lesbian-identified Affinity Group Workshops: Lesbian Sexuality & Politics of Sexuality,” BBWN, Vol. 4, No. 2, April-May 1986

*

[Robyn Ochs]: What is your current sexual identity?

[Betty Aubut]: I call myself a "bisexual lesbian." I will always politically identify as bisexual, which to me means opposing restrictive categories. Some days I feel real separatist, and other days I feel that I want to be involved with men. Being bisexual to me means that I see men and women whom I'm attracted to. A man would have to be very special for me to want to get involved with him but I will fight for bisexual rights whether or not I'm sleeping with men. I see the bisexual community and movement as a very important bridge between gays, lesbian and straights. As long as gays and lesbians are considered completely 'other' from the mainstream, we'll never have any power. I consider myself gay. I think bisexuals are gay and gay liberation is our liberation. I don't consider myself 100% straight and 100% gay; I am 100% gay. That doesn't mean I won't sleep with a man every now and then--some lesbians do that. I never used to identify as lesbian out of respect for women who made the lifelong choice never to sleep with men, but then I realized that was a lot of bullshit. Calling yourself lesbian does not necessarily mean you have made that lifelong decision. Now I mostly identify as a lesbian--so I call myself a bisexual lesbian. I don't sleep with men right now, but I have male friends whom I spend time with and cuddle with. I've even become socially involved with some of the men from the men's network. I'm proud of where I am now because it's been so hard for me. People who have known me for a long time can't believe the change.

--Robyn Ochs, “Bi of the Month: Betty Aubut,” Bi Women Vol. 5, No. 2, April-May, 1987

*

Sharon Sumpter is a bisexual lesbian activist and psychotherapist who works with women survivors of abuse, institutionalization and sexual oppression. Her book-in-progress, In Pieces, is dedicated to opening the closet doors for former "mental patients." "I went into my work to undo the criminal things that were done to me and that I saw done to other women." She thanks Deena Metzger and Asherah for this, her first published work.

--Contributors' Notes, Sinister Wisdom, Issue 36, Winter 1988/89

*

Representatives of lesbian-feminist separatism may feel singled out as special targets of our anger and distress. To the extent that this is true, the seeds of anger lie in lesbian separatism as a politic: In this reading of feminism, specific sex acts take on politicized meaning. These are said to have consequences for the consciousness of the person performing them. Lesbian feminism is arguably the most proscriptive gay or lesbian politic, generating in its adherents the greatest tendency to judge others' (especially sexual) behavior. Gay men, for example, seem more likely to cite personal antipathy or simple stereotypes about bisexuals as a source of their chagrin. A great many bisexual women, particularly those who are feminist and lesbian-identified, have felt both personally and politically rejected and judged by the separatist sisters. Even those with no such experience may feel wary having heard of other bisexual women's stories. No one like to feel attacked, even politically.

----Carol A. Queen, "Strangers at Home: Bisexuals in the queer movement," Out/Look, Vol. 4, Issue 4 (16), Spring 1992

*

Closer to Home successfully deals with these and other problems of self-identification. As most of the writers are "lesbian-identified bisexuals" (one of several labels used for the sake of convenience), the definition of lesbianism is also reevaluated. Is a lesbian a woman who relates emotionally and erotically with women or a woman who does not relate emotionally and erotically with men? Must a woman fit both criteria to be considered a lesbian?

The "Principles and Practice" section expands these main course theories of identity with side dishes of memories and personal feelings--feelings of not being queer enough; of breaking all the rules, even the gay rules; of being dissatisfied with the waste of energy from political infighting. It's odd for lesbian-identified bi's to find themselves viewed as politically incorrect. It's maddening to have one's past feminist work invalidated by the inclusion of a man (or men) in one's life. It's frustrating to find oneself faced with a choice of being honest or potentially losing support of women's groups. It's confusing to work for the freedom to come out of one closet only to be asked to stay in another. As Rebecca Shuster write:

"If we choose a lesbian identity, we are subject to systematic oppression and internalize that oppression in a package that includes marginality; invisibility; isolation...; and countercultural rules about how to relate to women and men. If we choose a bisexual identity, we are subject to systematic oppression and internalize that oppression in a package deal that include a feeling of not belonging or having a home; defensiveness; isolation...; and countercultural rules about how to relate to women and men. Precisely because bisexuality represents freedom of choice, society ensures that the identity comes with its own package of mistreatment and constraints."

----Beth Herrick, "Bisexual Women Pushing the Limits," Sojourner, Vol. 18, Issue 10, June 1993

*

The first step is to move toward building alliances within our bisexual communities. Many communities are united by a commonality of the oppression. This is not so in our community, partly because of the different ways people identify as bisexual: gay-identified, queer-identified, lesbian-identified, or heterosexual-identified. Some people are bisexual in an affectional manner only; some are bisexual both affectionally and sexually; and some are bisexual only sexually. Since there are so many ways to express our bisexuality, the first step toward alliance-building is to work internally to accept all members of our own community. It is imperative that we build alliances across our own differences; otherwise, alliance-building will fail. Acceptance of the diversity of bisexual labels within our community will allow us to pursue alliance-building with decisive strength in the heterosexual community and what many of us consider our own lesbian/gay community.[3]

--Brenda Blasingame, "Power and Privilege Beyond the Invisible Fence, in  Bisexual Politics: Theories, Queries, and Visions, 1995

*

Personally, I am unable to separate out the various ways that I am oppressed (as a woman, as an African American, as a bisexual lesbian, as an impoverished single mother) and say that one oppression is worse than the other, or that I desire one form of liberation more than another. I do not want to experience threats to my life, my child custody, or my job security because of racism or homophobia. I don't want to be oppressed for any reason!!!

--Dajenya, "Which Part of Me Deserves to Be Free?," in Bisexual Politics: Theories, Queries, & Visions, ed. Naomi Tucker, 1995

*

A good deal of criticism has been written about heterosexuals who are surprised when they find out the true sexual orientation of someone who they didn't think "looked gay." These criticism assert what is of course true--that there is no such thing as a gay or lesbian "look," since of course, everyone who is gay, lesbian or bisexual, looks that way.

Unfortunately, many of my experiences as a lesbian-identified bisexual woman have said to me that having an appearance or demeanor that diverges from the expected means I will not be accepted as truly belonging in the lesbian community. Despite my attendance at gay pride parade, dollars spent at gay resorts and in support of gay causes, and numerous attempts to participate in gay and/or lesbian groups and volunteer events, I have often felt unaccepted by this community.

--Amy Wyeth, "Don't Assume Anything," Bi Women Vol. 13, No. 4, Aug/Sept 1995

*

Joan Tollifson relays her struggle to make sense of her life and her spiritual awakening in Bare-Bones Meditation. Born with only one hand, she grew up feeling different, found identity and purpose as a bisexual lesbian and a disability rights activist, but struggled with drug and alcohol addiction. She first embraced Zen Buddhism then a very bare-bones form of spirituality that has no form. This exuberant and amazing testament is for the many people who don't fit into the conventional molds of existing religious traditions.

--"And on Publisher's Row," complied by Jenn Tust, Feminist Bookstore News, Vol. 19, Issue 4, Nov-Dec 1996

[strangesigils]

Lmao "no receipts" people cant send links in asks!!! Learn to google things and get your head out of semples ass to actually get some perspective on the situation. Vantablack was military bullshit, kapoor gets rights for himself to use it for art, then semple attacks him for internet points. kapoor being a jerk doesn't preclude semple from also being a jerk? Hes not your friend, or acting in good faith. Hes trying to make money just like kapoor. Theyre the same dude!! The fight benefits both!

My personal messages are open to everybody, always have been, and nobodys sending me any proof of anything, so yeah my no receipts point stands. Every point I’m being sent by anonymous cowards are some of the farthest reaches I’ve seen in a long ass time. 

I have no respect for people that slander peoples names on anonymous with no proof to provide, copy and paste for links exists, and google isn’t coming up with any of the crap yall are talking about. Making shit up about somebody being an antisemite over a huge reach of speculation is a vile thing to do to an activist in a time were we have more than enough antisemites to deal with as it is without making shit up and witchhunting proven equality allies.

Yeah I’m aware vantablack is being used by the military, but it can obviously also be used for art, because it is. It’d be an insanely expensive process at this point in time sure, but what Anish did was not only put money towards being able to use it in art himself, he put money towards being the only artist allowed to use it for those purposes. If he hadn’t done that it couldve been used by other artists that could currently afford it, or more artists in the future if it ever got synthesized into a safer medium. Like you said google exists, and that fact is freely available.

Kapoor deserved to be attacked and called out for that, and thanks to Semple calling him out and being motivated by the discourse he created some really fucking awesome alternatives to vantablack, and he only charges what it costs to make and distribute it so artists that aren’t well off might still afford it. He even went homeless for a while in the process of this because he was LOSING money on this venture, so tell me again how disgustingly wealthy he apparently is. Which is info that’s also freely available to you but you want so bad to be on a bandwagon you’re not going to look for info that discredits shit you read in a random tumblr post that had nice looking and easy to understand bullet points.

I don’t think it makes somebody an asshole to ‘attack’ a greedy self centered man who did something that rocked the artist community to its core, I don’t think it makes him an asshole to use it to boost his self made alternatives. Tasteless? Possibly But he makes up for that with his constant activist work for LGBTQ+ rights, his commitment to the removal of anti-homeless structures in the UK, his commitment to empowering poorer artists, and so on. Things you seem so sure he’s got no good faith in when he does them.

Cancel Culture has it’s purpose: to get rid of actually horrible people like rapists, nazis/white supremacists, people that support homophobic or racist organizations, evil people, people that cause real harm. All yall got is distaste for his advertising strategies  Get off your high horse on this one folks because this is pathetic, just admit your bored and looking for something new to be mad about during quarantine and leave the dude alone 

I don’t give a fuck if I don’t know him personally, neither do you! Yet your ready to tear him down off some random internet persons speculation about him. I’m defending him off of facts that I know and can support because I believe it’s the right thing to do.

I’m turning anonymous asking off from now on. If yall are so confident in the reaches youre making and bandwagoning on you should have the guts to say it with your online identity. You’re comfortable sending mobs of hate over to a person based off vague speculations to the point where they close down their business you should feel solid enough in your stance to be able to defend yourself on your blog from angry online randoms in the exact same way Semple is right now.

[arokaladin]

Can we talk about the pressure on people with less well known or ‘newer’ identities to represent *specifically* that identity and the shame that might come with questioning?

The idea of being an ‘ex-gay’ is something that’s considered to be pretty fringe, and would be mocked even by most decently educated straight people. But ‘detransitioner’ is a label that even queer cis people will use quite seriously (often incorrectly, aka to mean they used to identify as trans, rather than to mean they have medical transition regret, and in a way that adds further stigma to real trans experiences). And of course there are people whose entire personality is based in how they used to think they were asexual. 

(I had to ask tiktok to stop showing me videos from this one girl who seems to be quite popular because most of her content from what I can tell is about how much she hated being ace and how she has all this supposed inside gossip about the ace community being cultish and lesbophobic because she ~used to be one~ but god. lets not get into that ok?)

All of this, along with the fact that ‘obscure’ labels are targeted even more by the ‘just a phase’ argument, even within the queer community, makes things so much harder for people who are re-questioning or even just using a different label under same umbrella. People can be hesitant to talk about their experiences out of fear of proving the stereotype. I think I’ve seen a few people touch on this. However the other effect is that when you are comfortable in a label with this kind of stigma, there’s pressure to be really loud about how comfortable you are, and constantly be reaffirming your identity to outsiders. You kind of have to be aro/enby/bi/whatever else before you get to be queer, because you feel a responsibility to be a role model for this specific part of yourself that is least represented. 

Personally, I started this blog when I was what? 16? I was barely confident in my own aromanticism, still working on unlearning a lot of things, and was inspired to start posting here so I would have a space to vent and work through those feelings. I was always open about my age and the fact there were plenty of things I didn’t have answers for, but nevertheless I got absolutely tons of asks from people wanting advice. My community was so small that I was simultaneously a baby aro, and being cast in the role of community elder just because I was out of the questioning stage. 

As well as an overwhelming number of people wanting advice, I also regularly got asks (and even direct messages) from people who were venting, a lot of the time obviously depressed, and often not even asking a question but just using me as a place to send negative feelings. It got so bad that a few times I had to make posts asking people asking people to stop. People did this to me because our community was so tiny and lacking visibility that some teen’s inbox was possibly all they had, and I was well aware of that. 

I think in part this is why I started many projects within aro activism that I never continued with (aside from my executive dysfunction and the aforementioned fact I was 16). I felt like I had to be the one to bring certain resources into being, because most of the time nothing of the kind existed. 

Nowadays I’m the least certain of my identities I’ve been since I originally questioned. I genuinely think I am still aro, but I’ve been pretty shaken up all round recently and it’s made me realise how upset I would feel if that did change (even though I still wish feel ashamed of my aroness sometimes and still fight the desire for a ‘normal’ amatonormative life) I’m honestly pretty terrified of losing community were my labels to change too much, even though logically I know my friends wouldn’t drop me if I turned out to be a slightly different kind of queer, let alone just a slightly different type of aspec. And I think this is probably in part because of how outwardly adamant I’ve had to be about my identity for years. 

I guess it’s worth noting the role of the ‘Discourse’ in this: being constantly under attack has meant the aro and ace communities specifically have had to become pretty isolated. A lot of us don’t trust even other queer people, for good reason, and a lot of us again keep to even smaller subsets of the community to avoid other bigotries. And the way the internet is encourages the urge to divide yourself up and put the parts in boxes. But I think the pressures I’ve talked about would exist even without those factors. 

I’m not sure if I have a conclusion to this, because I’m still thinking about it a lot. I’m not sure how we fix a problem like this because I’m not sure there’s technically any problem to fix. A lot of it is just the growing pains of a small community. I would like to start a dialogue, however. Does anyone else feel this way? How do we accept possible future re-questioning without telling ourselves this might be just a phase, or rolling back our progress accepting our aromanticism? How do we create spaces needed to vent, and discuss difficult topics, without burning each other out or creating a crab bucket? How do we vent about burnout without depicting the aro community as toxic? What do we do to fill the absences left by non-existent elders? I don’t know but maybe we can figure some things out. 

[azdoine]

I think it’s no great secret that I have a pretty complicated relationship with my Judaism, to the point that it’s gotten me into a fair bit of trouble and it’s gotten me to say some pretty stupid shit. I am, to put it irreverently, a heretic, or just a dumb kid on the internet - that I’m now an adult seems of no consequence in the face of the desolate confusion and alienation I still feel towards my religion, have always felt since I really was a child, have been irrevocably characterized by. such is the scope of my big fat idiot mouth that I hesitate to say anything more, on these topics and on others.

But why the alienation, and what of its kind?

In many respects, it’s probably a common story, so I won’t belabor the point too far: I was raised performatively into my religion - at the behest of a mother I still have a complicated relationship with! - not to believe in it with all my heart, but to find a community and a culture in it, and even back then, I was already too much of a fag and a fuckup to ever fit in with the world that had been presented to me in bits and pieces. My experience with Judaism is a decade of passively absorbing Torah anecdotes that I didn’t even believe in while my peers ignored me or laughed at me for being the little bitch that we all knew I was. C’est la vie.

But if my disconnection from the Jewish religion feels embarrassing, my lingering attachment to it is even worse, because here we come up on the k-word - no, not that k-word. I’m talking about the Kabbalah, and perhaps no element of the Jewish religion is more charged, easily disrespected, or frequently misappropriated. Were I not so wounded in my attachment to Judaism, as it were, I would feel no such need to explore the Kabbalah as I do, and thus have nothing to rationalize, but were I not still ethnically Jewish, I would have no rationalization for it which I could accept. I would have turned back at the gate rather than be another idiot pretending he knew anything whatsoever about a tradition that wasn’t his to claim.

Why am I talking about this now? In part it’s nothing more or less than what it is: a rumination on some of my eclectic traumas and interests. (If you can’t use tumblr as a sounding board in the absence of a therapist or religious leader in your life, what good is it even for?)

But it’s also a disclaimer and a contextualization. Because although I would have no basis otherwise to comment on the appropriation of Kabbalah by various vulgar mystics, I wouldn’t feel confident or honest talking about that appropriation without also contextualizing my own place in that discussion, as someone who may indeed have participated in that appropriation.

Why is the Kabbalah so appropriated as it is, and what is the significance of its appropriation? Why did the Kabbalah catch my eye when the lore of a more mainstream or conventional Judaism could not?

In his Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, Gershom Scholem speaks not as a vulgar mystic but as a dedicated Jew. And yet, although Scholem does not perhaps forgive the vulgar mystic for his trespasses against Jewish lore, Scholem’s profoundly and aggressively historical approach immediately forecloses the possibility that anything else could have come to pass:

The great Jewish scholars of the [1800s] whose conception of Jewish history is still dominant in our days... had little sympathy—to put it mildly—for the Kabbalah. At once strange and repellent, it epitomised everything that was opposed to their own ideas and to the outlook which they hoped to make predominant in modern Judaism...

It is not to the credit of Jewish scholarship that... the greater part of the ideas and views which show a real insight into the world of Kabbalism, closed as it was to the rationalism prevailing in the Judaism of the nineteenth century, were expressed by Christian scholars of a mystical bent.... It is a pity that the fine philosophical intuition and natural grasp of such students lost their edge because they lacked all critical sense as to historical and philological data in this field, and therefore failed completely when they had to handle problems bearing on the facts.

The natural and obvious result of the antagonism of the great Jewish scholars was that, since the authorized guardians neglected this field, all manner of charlatans and dreamers came and treated it as their own property.

Scholem and others similarly contextualize the “great Jewish scholars” in their own time, explaining their steadfast refusal to engage with the mystical discourses of Judaism, but we needn’t concern ourselves with the reasoning of those great scholars here, beyond acknowledging its existence and its essentially reasonable character. (We should by no means imply that the final “fault” for the appropriation of the Kabbalah by other religious bodies somehow lies with the Jews who dismissed the subject, after all.)

The more important and interesting takeaway here is that this “emergent” mythologization of the Kabbalah by non-Jews is, in fact, not so different in character from the mysticism of the Jews who formulated the Kabbalah in the first place! For Scholem likewise characterizes the formulation of the Kabbalah as, among many other things, a kind of metaphysically (rather than politically) reactionary response to the sterile rationalist discourses of the Judaisms that were predominant at the time: a historically-necessary and inevitable attempt to reclaim the possibility of a mythic theology and a personal (and mystical) experience of God, despite the oppressively transcendental and impersonal formulation of monotheism that held so much more authority. The Kabbalah is implicitly a heretical foil to a more traditional canon - an ecstatic and pre-Othered body of work which always threatens to dissolve and lose all integrity under the immense weight of the purpose it was created to serve. The unleashed spiritual thirst of the deprived devours beyond restraint.

In this respect, there is no strain of Kabbalah which we can isolate, shining and unsoiled, as the thing which was later appropriated by vulgar syncretists, because the Kabbalah itself was always vulgar, and both the creation and the appropriation of the Kabbalah are products of the same human drive for mystical experience. It’s heresy all of the way down! The phone call is coming from inside the house. The genie was always already out of the bottle. Lord English was always already here.

Scholem bitterly appreciates this problem, I suspect, for even in charting the self-destructions of mysticism and in identifying the psychic universality of the mystical experience - the mystic’s unmediated contact with an absolute - he rejects out of hand the notion that mysticisms are fungible, or that our study of mysticism should treat it as infinitely plastic. A Jewish mysticism is not a Christian mysticism, nor are they merely two different forms of some “pure” archetypal mysticism. A mysticism, however transcendental, can neither be divorced from or escape from the historical context that created it. And nor should it, at least in Scholem’s estimation.

So what, then, is the historical context which created the appropriated forms of the Kabbalah that proliferate western esotericism, and how does it still imprison or inform those mysticisms?

Answering such a question with any degree of depth is, at least for now, beyond me... but I wonder, sometimes, whether we can escape from the infinite plasticity and universality of mysticism any more than we can escape from its specificity and boundedness.

Such a dialectic is a thing that Scholem does not speak of, a reach his expertise does not want or need know.

[frostiifae]

hi i’m not gonna engage directly with that post about masculinity and the pressures it’s put under growing up bc i am much too fragile for that, but also my feelings on that post wind up going out to jupiter and back instead, so sorry about this but --

I’ve been mulling over the idea that maybe social media, as a whole, is a bad place for social discourse (shocking, I know). The core idea of it is simple - you take a statement like “men are overly sexual”. This statement is at least glancingly true, but not ironclad. It is true enough to make a specific point in context, but it isn’t true enough to project outward into the world without context.

People with more authority than me have already done plenty of research to demonstrate how modern social media is designed specifically to present ideas free of context. It’s virtually impossible to have a meaningful conversation in the open space of Tumblr, Twitter, or Facebook, for varying reasons - but the sites do their best to trick you into not noticing. 

In a post I exchange between my two best (female) friends, we may cajole about the horrors and ugliness of men, saying things we don’t really believe, partially tongue-in-cheek, partially to make fun of the radical ideas that say these things without the requisite irony. But it would be so very easy for someone - even someone that knows me, someone I care about - to stumble upon that post and misunderstand. In reality, that post wasn’t really meant to be public. It was just for the three of us, because we have a shared context that changes and colors the way our words are interpreted, and without that context - the things we make look alien, or worse.

How easy it is for this simple misunderstanding to repeat itself at progressively larger and larger scales. Isn’t it amazing how Anita Sarkeesian attempted to say something hardly controversial and completely understandable, but a lack of context drove an entire counter-cultural movement and drove a wedge into the heart of the community she wanted to speak to. Incredible how, even as we all rally behind the cries Black Lives Matter, Defund the Police, we still have people claiming to be races they aren’t, asserting themselves over marginalized voices without thinking - and how, even as I do my best to keep my mouth shut, I can’t help but wonder if something is being missed because I can’t find the words to ask the questions I wish I could ask. 

I keep wondering, what if I could just pluck one of those horrific alt-right reddit meme boys from their chair and sit on a park bench with them, offer to get them lunch, and just talk about our visions for the future. Surely, we’d disagree on a lot of things, but I’m used to that. I’ve always been a weird kid, and I found solace in understanding the why of people’s beliefs - people’s reasoning always made more sense to me than the conclusions they would reach because of that reasoning. And I really feel like we could find a lot in common, if we could break past the surface layer of what we believe, and instead talk about the experiences that led us there. After all, I, too, was once a disenfranchised middle-class white male on the Internet, whose favorite pastime was to lose themselves in an emerging culture of chaos and creativity that seemed impenetrable from the outside. I, too, was once frustrated with the posturing of feminism, with the idea that men ought to be judged demographically without regard to their individual status. I still am frustrated with that idea, even now that I’ve come to grips with why it keeps coming up. I can’t say that it’s false. But I can’t say that it’s true, either. 

I wish I could explain that it doesn’t matter whether it’s true or false - that it never has mattered - that none of this was ever about telling people how they should think, or what words they are and aren’t allowed to use, or how they should volunteer their assets in the name of the less-privileged, or how they should sit at the back of the bus to make way for the flavor of the month. I wish I could explain that I understand how it seems from the outside, I really do, because I was there once, and it seems like such a mess of contrarian nonsense that can’t even find time to agree with itself, but you have to understand, it’s not about rules and regulations, it’s not about a strict moral or social code, it’s just about trying these ideas out in a public space and seeing if they make things better for people, because the way the world is now isn’t working. 

But I know what would happen if I tried that: I would get told, “And what about me?” and, well, there’s the rub, isn’t it? What about you? 

Is it selfish to focus on one’s own problems? Is it “male privilege” to listen to a talk about feminism and ask “but what about us?” Does that make you a pillar of the patriarchy? I feel like the answer is so obviously no, but we keep reacting that way, because when some dude comments on a feminist post and all we have to go off of is a name, an anime avatar (and believe me, I love anime avatars, so don’t think for a second I’m going to judge you for having one) and a single off-color remark, we have to come to some kind of judgment and it’s never going to be accurate. We tried so hard to teach everyone to think about the person behind the screen, but at the same time the Internet evolved in such a way that we know less and less every day about the screennames we come into contact with; the mountain is being built higher and higher ahead of us as we climb. 

I think the solution is to just stop. I really, really do. 

I was educated in feminism by a person who sat down with me in a series of one-on-one conversations and answered my questions as patiently as they could. I’m not friends with that person anymore - we wound up having a lot of disagreements on finer points, even besides the way we actually treated one another - but I deeply appreciate that time they spent with me. I refined my knowledge of feminism by taking those conversations to other people I trusted, and seeing how they felt about those ideas, further whittling away at this chunk of philosophy I had been given, turning into a thing I, personally, could believe in. This is the way human beings learn: we find a teacher we trust to confide in, we find a place to practice that feels safe so that we can try things out, and we build up confidence in private before taking our findings into the open. 

What do we accomplish by taking two people who have already cemented their convictions and bashing them against each other in a public space? Spectacle. That’s really all there is to it. Hate to sound like an old batty cynic but social media really is built around social spectacle. Twitter’s Trending tags, fandom discourse, political pages on Facebook mocking each other in memes that spread through social circles while dissidents look on in quiet disgust. The point of the whole model is to turn human culture into a hadron collider. This is not the place for nuanced debate. We should all know better. But, somehow, we don’t. And all the worse for the younger people caught in the crossfire that don’t understand what’s happening. 

It’s funny how you hear about things happening to other kids, parents and teachers and principals setting rules that seem completely ridiculous and unfair, and then you grow up and start to realize that - even if you still disagree - there’s a hint of wisdom in there. I dunno, maybe we should be withholding the internet from our kids until they’re adults. Not because they’re not mature enough for the Internet, but because the Internet isn’t mature enough for them. 

ᵒⁿᵉ ᵒᶠ ᵗʰᵉˢᵉ ᵈᵃʸˢ ᶦ ᵍᵒᵗᵗᵃ ᵐᵃᵏᵉ ᵐʸ ᵒʷⁿ ˢᵒᶜᶦᵃˡ ᵐᵉᵈᶦᵃ ˢᶦᵗᵉ

[kuriquinn]

just because it ain’t broke, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be improved

I feel like a few things need to be qualified about the feedback culture discourse if it’s going to stay civil.

Feedback advocates ARE NOT demanding every single consumer leave feedback on every single piece of art or story every time they log on to the internet.

Consumer advocates ARE NOT suggesting that fanartists and fanwriters are not entitled to feedback ever.

Let’s not go putting words in each other’s mouths, that way inevitably leads to lurking trolls deciding to become keyboard warrior anons.  

Feedback discourse is not meant to shame anyone, consumer or writer, it’s to open a discussion about how the general culture could be changed for the better.

That said, fandom in general is in need of a change in how consumers and creators interact with one another. 

One of the main arguments I have seen in the past few days is that passively consuming fandom works (with the occasional outlying consumer occasionally or always leaving feedback) has always been the norm, is currently the norm and will always be the norm.***

Which to me boils down to, “we’ve always done it this way, why change it?”

(I doubt I need to give all the historical examples of where that kind of thinking has gotten us, or how it’s been challenged.)

Just because it’s normal practice now and everyone does it this way and supposedly always has done it this way, doesn’t mean we can’t strive for something better. Fandom creators and consumers are in a symbiotic relationship—without the consumer, we have no one to share our work with but ourselves and maybe a few close friends; without the creator, consumers don’t get access to new content related to their interests (or at least have diminished access). 

We need each other.

If tomorrow some law is passed that basically bans all fan created content from the web and some major purge happens just deleting everything that doesn’t belong or isn’t endorsed by the actual creator, what happens to the fandom? I can tell you right now, creators will keep creating—we just won’t be able to share it with anyone but our closest, real-life friends. And consumers might keep consuming fan-created content, but it will be in a much smaller capacity. 

Neither side wants this.

So why not discuss ways to make the fandom experience better for both sides here? Including listening to the parties in the relationship who are basically explaining something that is discouraging/damaging to them?

It’s a pretty simple equation: 

creators produce/share free content --> consumers enjoy free content--> consumers provide feedback--> encouraged creators produce/share more free content, continually improving over time-->consumers continue to enjoy free content

VS

creators produce/share free content -->consumers enjoy free content without providing any indication they care about the content-->creators still produce free content but at lower frequency/quality over time (months, years, etc.)-->consumers continue to enjoy free content without providing any indication they care about the content -->creators still produce content but not longer share their work or start putting their work behind a paywall--> consumers complain that so many favorite creators now want money for their creations

Obviously, this is a generalization and doesn’t speak to every single creator and consumer’s behavior, but as both a creator and a consumer, this has been my experience more often than not. 

Now, I know not every single person is going to provide feedback on every single piece of art or writing they encounter. But right now, the average fandom consumer defaults to the following behavior:

Consume fanfic/fanart + [leave likes/kudos] + move on to next

(At the moment, even the kudos is entirely optional, since a majority of consumers don’t even bother with that. )

We need to change this default behavior to:

Consume fanfic/fanart + did I like it? = No? + move on to the next

Consume fanfic/fanart + Did I like it? =Yes? + reblog/share [and/or leave a comment]

(I’d make a flowchart, but I’m doing this on my phone, so...kinda hard.)

It takes the same amount of energy to reblog/share a fanwork as it does to leave kudos/likes. So if you like something but don’t have the energy/confidence/interest to comment, the least that can be done is boost the signal and pay it forward.

We need to normalize this behavior instead of passive, entitled consumption.

Again, this is NOT a call to FORCE people to leave feedback.

It’s more like when you’re a kid and your parents teach your to say “please” and “thank you”. Obviously, their goal is that as you get older, you will automatically say those things in the appropriate contexts, such as when you would like something or are expressing gratitude.

Does that mean everyone in the world uses “please” and “thank you” when interacting with others? Not at all. We’ve all run into some real dickheads that are downright rude for the sake of being rude, as well as people who are unintentionally rude because they don’t think it’s worth their time to be polite. Would the world be a better place if everyone did use “please” and “thank you”? I like to think so.

The reason we’re talking about feedback culture now is because we want a better future in the fandom. We want a better situation than what we have right now.

And honestly, if we can have people start treating fan writers and artists better here at the unofficial level that is fandom, think of how that kind of change and discourse could change the way art and literature is viewed in the world at large? Because right now, we live in a society where funding for the arts is more often passed over for funding sports, business, military, etc. The only sectors of society that are treated worse than artists and writers are the teachers, nurses and retail workers (and don’t even get me started on the trend of female-dominated sectors of the economy rating lower than predominantly male-dominated ones!)

Personally, I think a lot of these disagreements could be mitigated by an update to Ao3’s feedback system.

Kudos is like a checkmark on a list. “Yep, read that...Yep, read that.” 

The only time I don’t leave kudos on something is if I didn’t finish reading it. And yes, that is my personal experience, but we’re human beings and we tend to frame the actions of others based on our own practices.

The kudos feature should be replaced with a new system either emojis (think Facebook) or canned comments (pre-written responses generated by a simple keystroke). For the simple fact that these can better convey the emotions of the consumer than a faceless kudo.

Having started using an emoji based system last year, I can tell you from experience that every week or two, I have someone comment to me how much they like being able to use an emoji to get their words across because they’re not good with words / their first language isn’t the same as mine / they’re still processing what they’ve read and can’t formulate a response yet/ etc.

TL;DR: The purpose of discourse related to feedback culture is to try to normalize leaving feedback on fanworks, instead of passively consuming—not forcing people to leave feedback.

_______________________________________________________________

***It has NOT always been this way. I have been part of several fandoms in my time— Lord of the Rings, Gundam Wing, Beyblade, Harry Potter, Inuyasha, Supernatural, Rurouni Kenshin, Doctor Who, Naruto, Batman/DCU, to name a few. And twenty years ago, people left way more feedback than they do today. Even on the really terrible stuff (and I say this as someone whose first fanfics were exclusively dedicated to horrible Mary Sue OC self-inserts), if you posted a chapter of something, within the next day you had a half dozen comments—more if you were writing a one-shot/completed fic. Ten years later, I noticed feedback started to be almost half of that; now it’s even less. The content hasn’t changed; the quality of writers hasn’t changed. However, the mindset of the consumer has definitely changed.

[mikenewtonhateblog]

My oc’s aka too long of a gd post

The “BL” Crew (does not stand for boys love I’m just a moron who made that abbreviation before knowing what it stands for). My main crew and main series, a lot is a big WIP right now as I’m slowly redoing the first book and all the lore. Why? I love torture. Book is fantasy type but I won’t specify what.

Lacie, the protagonist. God tier idiot, bisexual bipolar depressed MESS, insomniac, former theater kid, doesn’t know what she wants out of life but currently it is not This(plot of book). Hot headed, impulsive, crude, rude, Mommy IssuesTM, would rather be taking a nap right now, rules are made to be broken, absolutely fucking FERAL, more bags under her eyes than the airport lost and found. 5’5, 130lbs, Aries, age 18, white as shit like literally the whitest human you have ever seen, strawberry blonde hair in a 2011 Hayley Willaims haircut with long bangs, the darkest brown eyes you’ve ever seen that stare directly into your soul. Lanky, no curves, body of a 12 year old boy but works out so she can and will kick your ass and thats a threat. Not human?

Josh. Soft boy, smart, Lacie’s cousin and only friend for like the first 18 years of her life, autistic anxious mess who’s special interest is anchient egyptian history, is in honors classes, despises math, passes out when his girlfriend looks too cute, just needs a hug. Can eat a whole carton of easy mac if left alone, whole wardobe is the same outfit just different colors/hoodies, sensory issues, seriously can someone give this guy a hug. 5’9, 150lbs, Pisces, age 18, mixed (half whatever flavor of white Lacie’s family is [they don’t even know its just some scandanavian shit and irish], and half mexican on his mom’s side), medium olive skin with freckles and moles, dark chocolate brown hair that’s a bit of a 2009 Beiber cut, warm brown eyes, not beefy, a lil thicc and self concious about it but squishy boys are GOOD. Gets bit by a werewolf so now he is one his mood on it is “thats a lot to unpack but let’s just throw the whole suitcase away”.

Zander. There is not one braincell in this man, himbo KING, pansexual dumbass with undiagnosed ADHD, no impulse control, head empty and full at the same time, PTSD, his fashion sense should be an actual crime, gets in fights to feel something, basic requirements for him to be attracted to you: kick his ass. Drinks his respect women juice, sees a folding table and must immediately launch himself on it, chaotic, cannot drive a car and will not, food aggression and eats enough for 3 people but never gains weight which is ILLEGAL, him and Lacie may be a couple.....but in this house we stan slow burn, he talks in caps and every sentence either ends with a question mark or exclaimation point, likes romcoms. 6’2, 190lbs, Sagittarius, age 19, austrailian roots and has the accent but is from [REDACTED FOR STORY REASONS], white, dorito shaped with long legs, blueish black hair that’s long and messy, dark navy eyes that match his hair, bigass neck scar from [REDACTED]. Not human

Peter. Gay dad friend who is TIRED of having to be in charge of a bunch of teenagers, only one with full functioning braincells, lowkey a genius who loves engineering, mixes magical technology with human technology because he likes to play god, is he ever sober? No one knows, will kill for a bottle of single malt, his fashion sense? Tastefully expensive suits perfectly tailored. Likes building his own weapons that no one else knows how to even use, generally non-threatening but can get scary if needed. 6’4, 140lbs string bean man, Scorpio, age 179 but looks early 30s, I know I said Lacie is the whitest human but he’s even paler like a literal sheet of paper with scandanavian roots/ancestors were vikings or some shit, blonde hair styled like 2013 Brendon Urie lmfao, light crystal blue eyes. He’s a vampire and was born one.

Danielle. Tiny, sweet, queen of girls supporting girls, comments on all her friends instagram posts with 20 emojis, LOVES fashion and has a wardrobe that would make anyone jealous, oozes feminine energy, only child and parents are in love still, gets exactly 8 hours of sleep each night and wakes up looking like a disney princess. Just because she is small and cute doesn’t mean you should underestimate her she WILL fuck your shit up. Quiet when angey which is terrifying. Josh is her bf and she loves him so much but also loves teashing the shit out of him. Legally cannot cuss, polite, used her high heels as a weapon once, speaks like 5 languages because studying them is her hobby, gardens, hugs everyone. 5’0, 110, Taurus, age 18, mixed (half french-american, half Korean-american), glowy skin always, PETITE frame aka the friend everyone can pick up when they hug, long past her waist curly brown hair, bright green eyes. She’s not fully human as she has fae blood in her and this gives her the ability to talk to and control plants. Flower crowns for everyone

Becca. Theater kid who would die to sing in Wicked and has the vocal range to do so, cannot wait to graduate and go to her dream college which she got into and a scholarship, closeted lesbian bc her whole giant family is extremely catholic and she feels like not dealing with it, “no boys allowed in bedroom” rule is her favorite joke, chill, middle child of 5 siblings and just wants some peace and quiet for ONCE. Her fashion sense is “I’m dropping subtle hints I’m gay but only to other gays”, has a black belt and took self defense classes. 5’6, 145lbs, Virgo, age 18, Latina (cuban and mexican mix), darker brown skin with light freckles over her nose, athletic build, eyebrows on POINT, bright caramel eyes, short light brown hair cut in a bob, has a tiny nose stud, always wears a blue friendship bracelet her gf made her. Human

Anika. Calling her a bitch/slut is a compliment, bisexual, a bit of a mean girl but she grows out of it give her time!!! Is always Too Much, the horny friend, favorite color is red so thats almost all of her outfits, loves to show off her body as much as she can because she’s hot and knows it and thrives in her own confidence. Her mom is literally like Regina George’s mom from Mean Girls but married a rich man 20 years older than her, Anika doesn’t know her bio dad but thats fine neither does her mom and her step dad is nice and does his best to be a dad. Becca’s gf, always hanging out at her home so Becca can get some quiet because Anika’s an only child and has a pool. 5’9, 135lbs, Gemini, age 18, white, long layered dark reddish brown hair, teal-blue eyes, swimmers body type (I normally do not mention bust size but she would want the internet to know she was blessed with big bahoogles so there you go), can sprint in heels. Half mermaid (boy was that a surprise considering her mom doesn’t know who her father is LOL)

Rex. Nb uses they/them he/him pronouns but honestly will respond to any, goth lite, only attracted to men and ace, can read minds so knows all your secrets, mischevious little shit, great friends with Zander and enjoys his dumbass thoughts and that he’s basically a human version of Jackass, wears too many rings, goth boots for kicking and fashion babey, always has the freshest memes and will not hesitate to roast in the group chat, hangs with the girls most of the time. Chaos god who loves making art, be gay do crime, skateboard and spraypaint. 5’8”, 165lbs, Leo, age 18, Native American, masculine frame, dark brown skin, blue eyes, firetruck red shoulder length hair that’s usually in a ponytail, knock-off gucci sunglasses just for judging their friends. Has magic in their blood so not entirely human and can cast spells and shit (don’t roast me its a wip and I’m doing my research)

Sam. Boho goddess, aromantic, makeup and nails are always instagram worthy, quiet and stoic type but losens up around close friends, Rex is her best friend, has some trauma and doesn’t want to talk about it, emotionally numbed out a bit and wants to purely vibe. Has seen some of the worst parts of humanity and wishes she hadn’t, finds no point in being bitter or resentful though because that won’t change anything, loves cats and once she moves out shes adopting one or three. Has wine aunt energy. 5’4, 200lbs PLUS SIZE QUEEN, Scorpio, age 18, Filipino (her parents are immigrants fun fact!), really olive skin sometimes has a grey/green tinge to it, dark brown almost black shoulder length hair, gold-hazel eyes. Sam’s the victim of a family curse that requires her to consume human hearts to survive, she can transform into a pretty scary looking being and uses this curse to hunt down pedoph*les, r*pists, murderers, and abusers. The less often she feeds the less human she looks, hence the constant grey/green tinge to her skin. 

Andy. Baby of the group, must be protected at all costs, 100% didn’t sign up to be in a friendgroup of 90% monsters but highkey loves it, trans, bi, anxiety MAXED, just wants to draw comics and cosplay spiderman, has to babysit his two younger sisters a lot because his parents are....not great, and as a result now knows all the lines to Tangled and The Little Mermaid. Big nerd energy, has to draw on everything including homework, gets inspiration for comics from his friends, awkward and socially anxious, drinks way too much tea and will accidentally steal your pens. Fears include: crowds, thunder, tall angry men, tiny spaces. Just trying his best. 5’2, 100lbs BEANPOLE BOY, Leo, age 16, white (irish and scottish roots), freckles absolutely EVERYWHERE, orangey red hair thats in desperate need of a haircut, chocolate brown eyes, braces, chronic nail biter. Human and kinda wishes he wasn’t.

That’s it for now if you read all this bless u thank u here is my whole heart. Please no discourse, literally these are fictional people I’ll never publish the books they go to.