#but that feels disengenous

[allastoredeer]

Oh the ever present dilemma of "should I write or should I draw." If only it was as easy as picking one.

[brbgensokyo]

the more jrpgs i play the more i realize how much BD specifically resonated with me. It's hard to describe but theres a lot of the more critically acclaimed shit i dont click with but the scuffed bullshit with heart is what gets to me

[certaindreamchopshop]

Guys I don’t think I like Caitlyn

[fluffydice]

Oh boy I’m getting depressed just in time for my first psychiatrist appointment!

[dreaminterlude]

it actually makes me so angry that people are not there for you the way you need them but in a way that wants to make them feel good

[0v3rachi3v3r]

bpd sucks

when i first went from tumblr to twitter circa 2018 i followed a few folks from tumblr on twitter bc they were friends and i had no idea where to start

since then, shit went down and there were ppl i just. could not absolutely stand to see bc they reminded me of the bad times(tm). 

unfollowed/blocked on twitter made my life so much better

then twitter shit happened so i came back and lo n behold holy moly yikers i forgot they existed on this site too...

and just bc of that my day (at least the next few hours) has been ruined bc i have such heightened emotions and negative feels

like yea blocked the one account i never hope to see, unfollowed the main acct bc even looking at it is :///

hhhhhhhhhh life is difficult with bpd bc literal emotions from 3 years ago will come back and hit you like a truck the same way it did years ago with the same intensity

[gh0sthoodie]

I know this is mean but I desperately need tumblr to stop showing me ads for all the books trying to recreate the “🌈lesbian 🌈necromancers ✨in space✨” marketing hype like please, sir, there is a reason I’m not on booktok

(fr is it me or does the “list of tropes and the ✨✨marginalized identities✨✨enacting them” type blurb just feel deeply disengenous and kinda insulting? Can we write books about queer people as people without selling them as empty lists of identity labels?)

[yesterdaysallknowing]

Hello, My Hero Academia fandom.

I think BNHA/MHA/whatever acronym, as a story, is pretty... well, to put it politely, SHIT.

(I'm currently studying writing at uni, I am Qualified™ to say this.)

I am writing a fic about it. Read it here:

Ultra Academy: Extra Credit (660 words) by yesterdaysAllknowing Chapters: 1/? Fandom: 僕のヒーローアカデミア | Boku no Hero Academia | My Hero Academia (Anime & Manga) Rating: Teen And Up Audiences

(More details UTC)

In its myriad issues, from abuse apologism (Endeavour, the UA staff and Bakugou), to grooming child soldiers, to questionable treatment of its fem-presenting cast, and very, VERY pertinent ableism that I never really see discussed (Quirklessness is a pretty blatant metaphor for disability, if not actually a disability in universe, and the way the narrative just dismisses it is. Hm), I feel a lot of these could be solved by the presence of 1 (ONE) singular adult with a braincell and Working with Children Check (or equivalent, I'm Aussie), which CLEARLY no one in this story has or they wouldn't be neglecting or outright abusing these kids.

So I have written a fic where I drop in a character with exactly those qualifications. Yippee.

Only the prologue exists (for now), but the fic overall will get deeper into my many, MANY thoughts on the issues in the series, and I actually wrote a lot of the initial bones of the story a couple of years ago, and decided to rewrite/reboot it recently due to uh,,, peer pressure, so expect some more chapters soon over an inconsistent schedule.

While a LOT of the initial chapters will be mostly canon-compliant (and also pretty salty/leaning into bashing of the original material, because, I cannot emphasise this enough, it is GARBAGE), I have a lot of worldbuilding and development planned, including characters improving or being placed onto paths I think make more sense given their characterisation and backstory, which I am looking forward to actually sharing with the world.

And fair warning: If you're a die-hard stan of ANY characters in the original story, maybe don't read this. No one is getting away unscathed here. Not even the OCs, they're getting hit with the development in the name of plot more than ANYONE honestly. Things will be worse before they get better, here. It's the only way I can see to fix the problems in the story without completely changing it and being disengenous to the source material.

[a-member-of-minuteswithmandm]

Mindy Kaling has been getting DRAGGED over the new Velma show and honestly I dont get it and doesn't make sense.

First of all it's not even like she's the writer on the show so half of the criticisms don't make sense. Second....have any of the haters actually watched the show? People keep cropping 90 second clips to dunk on her and removing all context and depth from a show that I think is doing a good job of subverting tropes and putting a new twist on a franchise that's been done DOZENS of times. Scooby Doo literally has so many various iterations, let Velma be it's own thing and if you hate it so much, then stop watching.

I won't even get into all the BS that's been said about her other projects; people are being so disengenous and malicious in how they pick at things to try and frame Mindy as racist or islamaphobic and it's so frustrating because that's literally the opposite of what her aim in in her shows.

You don't have to like her but claiming she's not a good writer or not funny is just BS. Like who cares about her fixation with BJ Novak? Why does her personal life (that we don't even really know about) matter so much when determining how we feel about her work?

Honestly, when people say all her Indian characters are the same it sounds racist because all the Indian characters she writes are distinctly different in personalities. The only similarities are that they are Indian, they are Women, and they are pro-sex....that's all.

Anyway, I don't want to focus on all the negative stuff that's been said about her, so instead we focused on the things we love about her - her writing skills! The shows that Mindy has created/written for have been pretty good, and she shines when it comes to writing romantic comedies.

If you wanna hear our thoughts on this, feel free to watch our video here where we talk about the shows she's worked on and how great they are!

[jack-smut]

"You don't have intox you just get horny when you're high like everyone else" big assumptions on how drugs feel for everyone aside I find the whole "you're not x kink you're just x" to be like, stupid frustrating n disengenous. Cause like, I feel that doesnt super apply as soon as the kink gets extreme. Like feeling slutty when ur tipsy is sure as hell not the same as negotiating tranquilizers in your drink right?

[dilfgmancoolatta]

Hot take no one’s ready for:

So much of criticism towards H*rry P*tter feels disengenous bc half of it is only being made by people who wouldn’t care if JKR wasn’t a monster. Like ppl think that the media is irredeemable due to its flaws, when in reality if JKR wasn’t the way she was, there’d be nothing wrong with enjoying an imperfect book series

Edit: this is not to say the criticism isn’t valid or that it’s even wrong. It’s just hard for me to take it seriously when the only reason it’s being done is bc the writer sucks

[fideidefenswhore]

I'm really tired of the locket story in Tudor shows and books. But wasn't it from Jane Dormer? Who is Fuller?

I used to feel that way, too, but I've come to accept that it's such a dramatically effective, potent story that ofc it will be used, and ofc it's unlikely its staying power is going away anytime soon (although I did find it hysterically funny when some accused the scene in AB2021 of 'copying' The Tudors...it's a 17th cent source, bruh...it was in the 1970s version, too, so how do we know Tudors wasn't 'copying'--). I read a Tudor novel set in 1536 that didn't include it recently and was actually shocked, I think that's the first time that's ever happened (but then this novel was very faithful to the primary sources, of which this is not one).

Obviously it's frustrating that it's treated as if it was a contemporary source, though.

So actually the story comes from both Jane Dormer and Thomas Fuller (Fuller includes the locket and Dormer doesn't, but besides that they're similar); in pop history this tends to be where the claim the specific incident is corroborated by 'multiple contemporary sources' comes in, despite both these sources being 17th century (it's possible that they were aped and revised to some extent from the version that exists in Sander's Anglican Schism as well, as that came first and he would have certainly been in Dormer's circle). Dormer being portrayed as an 'intimate courtier' to this period is also disengenous, she certainly was to Mary I, but she was not even a zygote in 1536. Weir explains the chain for the story as having been Jane Seymour ---> Mary --> Jane Dormer, but to believe that you have to believe Jane thought this was an appropriate story to divulge to her stepdaughter. You know. That one that begins with her sitting on her father's lap.

What's actually frustrating to me (although I believe The Tudors probably remains the best version) with recent productions is that okay, I get wanting to use this story (even if it stretches claims of authenticity and 'only following the AB Bible' as the AB2021 production claimed), but if you insist on the creative choice of this particular 'historic moment', then don't cherry-pick it.

The king seeming to affect Jane Seymour, and having her on his knee, as Queen Anne espied, who then was thought to be with child, she for anger and disdain miscarried, as she said, betwitting the king with it, who willed her to pardon him, and he would not displease her in that kind there-after.

And then, this is generally attached, as well, although it's not actually mentioned that it's what happened with this specific incident, it's in the same text (Dormer):

For he, carrying her up to the Court, placed her with the Lady Anne Boleyn, the Queen, in whose service the king affected her, for which there was often much scratching and bye blows between the queen and her maid.

It does actually say 'between', not merely 'from', but we never really see Jane so much as defend herself (beyond, er...hiding behind the chair, Tudors, and running away, BSR) in any of these portrayals so, that's...food for thought on what they're trying to portray, and the sort of archetypes these women are generally placed in (Weir rather disingenously insists that this is a reliable source but that the 'between' is wrong, ie that it was one-sided:

Lots of sources tell us that there were scratches and blows between the pair. It was a queen's privilege to physically chastise her maids, and from what we know about both of their characters, I don't think it was Jane doing the scratching.)

'Lots of sources' is interesting because Fuller doesn't claim that, the 'scratches and blows' bit. This is the Fuller account:

It is currently traditioned that Queen Anne [...] espying a jewel pendant about her neck snatched thereat (desirous to see, the other being unwilling to show it) and casually hurt her hand with her own violence [...]

Anyway, so of the Jane Dormer account (the bolded is what's been omitted in the last two depictions); it's interesting insofar as what is kept in and what is kept out or 'revised'. I still contend The Tudors' is the best for portraying the emotional complexity (although it includes the 'peace be, sweetheart' that is not actually in either of these sources, and seems it originated in Strickland and was later misattributed as coming from Dormer by Weir); but The Tudors isn't exempt (it also suffers, imo, from having gone with the Retha Warnicke hypothesis). What does it tell us about what we believe will appeal the most to audiences, what is kept and what is left out? Jealousy, betrayal, women getting into physical altercations with their rivals, and in the case of AB2021 and BSR, Henry's reactions of either apathy or disdain/anger after some form of reconciliation and renewed rapport gives contrast; but importantly is placed immediately after the jousting accident, and thus seem to suggest that he is no longer 'all there'.

This is where, narratively, we struggle, the question is, why? Why include only these aspects, and not the other? This is where Foxe's 'mystery' of Anne Boleyn's fall comes in. The story is unbelievable and inconceivable in many respects, but knowing the ending, knowing the audience knows the ending, is just too tempting. Any inclusion of that last part (asking for her forgiveness, making any promise, however false, perhaps even the suggestion of guilt on Henry's part) would just complicate the picture.

And that's revealing about how we sort of try to make history digestible, but narratively, it's pretty disappointing. All the flash but none of the substance, none of the pathos, at least not of their bond. Anne is alone and she's going to die alone and once she does, her rival will triumph, and they have to telegraph that, and she's not allowed any hope.

Arguably it doesn't matter if it's inaccurate anyway, but that's my point entirely-- they've decided it's important enough to include, but for the most part, have only kept the pieces that lend to shock value. In some ways that's rather damning.

[snailpaste]

he genuinely makes me feel a little bit sick. his smile is disengenous. he wants something from me. he's an ugly little loser freak and NOT in the good way. i don't trust him. i don't like acknowledging his existence im not exaggerating i fr hate him so much oh my god

[acornbutter]

Sometimes I just want to scream. I feel so useless for anything but my body and its something I hate. I hate being and feeling and looking fat. I know I shouldn't I know people appreciate it and fuck I even like other fat people... But on me it's wrong and it's sick. And I feel all my relationships have been defined by sex that I'm only good as a fat fetish object or just for a one night stand and not actually be seen around. How much I just want someone I can hold in my arms and just feel at peace with, someone to come home to or greet at home most days and just enjoy that quiet company. Someone to reassure me I'm beautiful or special when I feel just ugly and worthless and to be able to offer them the same. To just be able to feel like myself and accepted without constantly wearing a mask or being alone. I feel I have to be disengenous with what I like and don't irl. That I have to live up to some standard I don't even remember setting. But then when I go to by myself I don't know who that is and I just feel ackward and ugly and annoying and end up just wanting to be alone again which feeds back into everything. I just don't even know what I want out of life except I just want to love and be loved Christ is that so much to ask and why does it feel like I'll never be worthy of even that

[indramond]

Why I don't "Believe All Women"

Russell Brand was recently #MeToo'd. Till Lindemann was #MeToo'd. So on and so on. Over time I've noticed the mindset that you if you don't automatically take the side of the accuser, especially if they are a woman/female, you're an asshole of the decade. You're a rape apologist, misogynist, you don't care about women, etc.

One of my favorite YouTubers did a breakdown video on actress Amber Heard, and the scandal with Johnny Depp. There was a comment on that video that I will never forget. This person stated that "they couldn't automatically believe an accuser just because they're a woman. Due to the fact that women had caused them the most trauma in their life. Primarily in the form of emotional abuse". I felt every word of that. I can relate to it. The person who has traumatized me the most in my life is my mother. Through physical, verbal, and emotional abuse. Other women have caused me harm as well. Harm that I still vividly remember to this day. As a result of that I can better understand why some people may not be quick to jump on the "Believe Women/Believe All Women" bandwagon. I've also seen people want to pick and choose which women they want to believe. Especially if race, age, and socio-economic status play a factor.

I think sometimes people forget how vile and vicious some women can be. Sometimes even more despicable than a man can be. I remember seeing some weird hypocrisy during the William Control controversy. There were two individuals going through his comments on one of his IG posts. Anyone who defended him, myself included, was called a rape apologist. Yet one of these individuals began to gloat about how they had allegedly engaged in a sexual encounter with the accused. I was more perturbed by the fact this person was boasting about allegedly having sexual relations with someone that was being accused of heinous sex crimes. It's a reminder of how deranged some people are. That some of the people who shout "believe all women" are actually virtue signaling and disengenous. All allegations should be taken seriously and properly investigated. But people need to understand that we are all entitled to our own opinion. Some choose to take the side of the accused, the accuser, or stay neutral. Some don't care at all. But making a mockery of sex crimes is evil and it shows a disregard for life.

I see people say "why would a woman lie about a sex crime" or "women don't lie about things like this". YES THE HELL THEY DO! Look up Emmett Till, Gary Dotson, the Scottsborough boys, etc. Some women are either psychology distorted or spiritually disturbed. They have no qualms about causing grief and strife to others when they don't get what they want or feel wronged. Others may just not be wrapped to tight as my father would say. Going back to that YouTube comment, I no longer feel shame or discomfort for choosing to wait for facts to come out before picking a side. I was the victim of a sex crime in high school. I know what it is like to be victim blamed for something you had no control over. I also know what it's like to be shamed by another woman. A woman who herself was an abuser and took no responsibly for it. So no...I don't "Believe All Women". I believe in innocent until proven guilty and due process.

[lizlemondyke]

i was tagged by @whenthepawnn to share ten of my favorite albums ((originally debut albums but I don’t listen to enough music/albums in full for that so i’m just doing no-skip albums)). anyway here goes in no order:

1. Fetch The Bolt Cutters —Fiona Apple

2. Everybody Else Is Doing It So Why Can’t We —The Cranberries

3. Rites of Passage —Indigo Girls

4. Oxnard —Anderson .Paak

5. Channel Orange —Frank Ocean

6. Ceremonials —Florence & The Machine

7. Cleopatra —The Lumineers

8. Damn —Kendrick Lamar

9. Heard It In A Past Life —Maggie Rogers

10. Rumours —Fleetwood Mac

I’ll tag @mirroredsea, @kimberly-wexler , @whatwasmissingmp4 , @sufjanstevensbf, and @iamthelightening and anyone else who’s interested!