#but that's his first fictional movie

[hyakunana]

"Anyone can find happiness. That's the world we're striving for!"

[not2beeaten]

I Made the Zero Day + Elephant boys into sims.

[Ignore my horrible sim making skills I haven’t opened this game in years]

[unproduciblesmackdown]

WAUGH!!!

[lelsiemeyers]

"kit connor would be such a good hulkling" NO he would NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!! SHUT UP PLEAAAAS

[mlpoutofcontext]

Daring Do is trans (real)

[cerealforkart]

Back at it again with the seasonal fanart but this time the season is winter

[kinneys]

The Bourne Supremacy (2004)

[rainbowsuitcase]

Actually how is it possible that everyone I know irl (who I've managed to somehow ask, which is a lot of people) is team Tony and has told me that they "don’t really like Steve," at the very least.

I literally have only one friend who prefers Steve, and that’s because she thinks Chris Evans is hot. Which is still valid, but like...

I'm calling it now, the first person I meet who’s at least partially as insane about Steve as me is my soulmate.

[diss-track]

pack it up, that girl you like at your job literally wants arthur fleck, a whole fictional man

[pizzazz-party]

trying to formulate my opinions on The Spot by holding my sister as a captive audience while i loudly rant around her apartment

[sennqu]

i love that the TLK movie kinda implies that england becomes the christian majority country it will be in small (but significant) part because aethelstan — considered by modern historians as its first king — was a gay man who believed that his piousness would absolve him of his sin. even believing in the movie that spreading christianity would balance out his sin of sodomy... inspired by a pagan man (masquerading as a christian — as a holy man at that—) he was so besotted with he was willing to choose said man over his country. the concept of it all... incredible creative vision.

apart from the tragedy both political and personal in the actual movie, there is something so strikingly meta-tragic about the story's implication of generations upon generations of future queer suffering happening because a powerful gay man believed he was powerless under the chrisitian god. obviously i don't know if this was intentional because the movie ends after uhtred pledges northumbria to the king so we don't know for sure what TLK aethelstan would have done afterwards. but the historical and fictional implications are still there and boy are they juicy

[quietwingsinthesky]

i need to speak with whoever thought it was a good idea to make wolverine & rogue's relationship the emotional center of x1 because i think they did irreparable damage to me.

[autism-corner]

i cannot believe theyre making me watch a fucking romantic movie man.

[eissaphir]

Absolutely wild how my brother can chuckle at Merlin headbutting someone during the Country Roads scene while I'm trying not to burst into tears

[bucklikethedollar]

i think one of the things that annoys me the most about booktok is how the majority of them absolutely refuse to read anything other than boring mafia smut or thinly veiled reylo fanfiction. obviously everyone is gonna have their genre preferences, but to never venture outside of them?? this obviously includes their unilateral dismissal of classics, but they completely ignore the overwhelming majority of all books that exist on this fucking planet.

it’s one thing for me to say that i prefer horror and thriller books while also deeply loving antiwar novels and realistic sci-fi, these people say they like “spicy seggsy enemies to lovers only one bed” or whatever the fuck and just don’t even try to find out if they like anything else.

[tearlessrain]

please help me- i used to be pretty smart but i’m having so much trouble grasping the concept of diegetic vs non-diegetic bdsm!

gfkjldghfd okay first of all I'm sorry for the confusion, if you're not finding anything on the phrase it's because I made it up and absolutely nobody but me ever uses it, but I haven't found a better way to express what I'm trying to say so I keep using it. but now you've given me an excuse to ramble on about some shit that is only relevant to me and my deeply inefficient way of talking and by god I'm going to take it.

SO. the way diegetic and non-diegetic are normally used is to talk about music and sound design in movies/tv shows. in case you aren't familiar with that concept, here's a rundown:

diegetic sound is sound that happens within the world of the movie/show and can be acknowledged by the characters, like a song playing on the stereo during a driving scene, or sung on stage in Phantom of the Opera. it's also most other sounds that happen in a movie, like the sounds of traffic in a city scene, or a thunderclap, or a marching band passing by. or one of the three stock horse sounds they use in every movie with a horse in it even though horses don't really vocalize much in real life, but that's beside the point, the horse is supposed to be actually making that noise within the movie's world and the characters can hear it whinnying.

non-diegetic sound is any sound that doesn't exist in the world of the movie/show and can't be perceived by the characters. this includes things like laugh tracks and most soundtrack music. when Duel of Fates plays in Star Wars during the lightsaber fight for dramatic effect, that's non-diegetic. it exists to the audience, but the characters don't know their fight is being backed by sick ass music and, sadly, can't hear it.

the lines can get blurry between the two, you've probably seen the film trope where the clearly non-diegetic music in the title sequence fades out to the same music, now diegetic and playing from the character's car stereo. and then there are things like Phantom of the Opera as mentioned above, where the soundtrack is also part of the plot, but Phantom of the Opera does also have segments of non-diegetic music: the Phantom probably does not have an entire orchestra and some guy with an electric guitar hiding down in his sewer just waiting for someone to break into song, but both of those show up in the songs they sing down there.

now, on to how I apply this to bdsm in fiction.

if I'm referring to diegetic bdsm what I mean is that the bdsm is acknowledged for what it is in-world. the characters themselves are roleplaying whatever scenarios their scenes involve and are operating with knowledge of real life rules/safety practices. if there's cnc depicted, it will be apparent at some point, usually right away, that both characters actually are fully consenting and it's all just a planned scene, and you'll often see on-screen negotiation and aftercare, and elements of the story may involve the kink community wherever the characters are. Love and Leashes is a great example of this, 50 Shades and Bonding are terrible examples of this, but they all feature characters that know they're doing bdsm and are intentional about it.

if I'm talking about non-diegetic bdsm, I'm referring to a story that portrays certain kinks without the direct acknowledgement that the characters are doing bdsm. this would be something like Captive Prince, or Phantom of the Opera again, or the vast majority of bodice ripper type stories where an innocent woman is kidnapped by a pirate king or something and totally doesn't want to be ravished but then it turns out he's so cool and sexy and good at ravishing that she decides she's into it and becomes his pirate consort or whatever it is that happens at the end of those books. the characters don't know they're playing out a cnc or D/s fantasy, and in-universe it's often straight up noncon or dubcon rather than cnc at all. the thing about entirely non-diegetic bdsm is that it's almost always Problematic™ in some way if you're not willing to meet the story where it's at, but as long as you're not judging it by the standards of diegetic bdsm, it's just providing the reader the same thing that a partner in a scene would: the illusion of whatever risk or taboo floats your boat, sometimes to extremes that can't be replicated in real life due to safety, practicality, physics, the law, vampires not being real, etc. it's consensual by default because it's already pretend; the characters are vehicles for the story and not actually people who can be hurt, and the reader chose to pick up the book and is aware that nothing in it is real, so it's all good.

this difference is where people tend to get hung up in the discourse, from what I've observed. which is why I started using this phrasing, because I think it's very crucial to be able to differentiate which one you're talking about if you try to have a conversation with someone about the portrayal of bdsm in media. it would also, frankly, be useful for tagging, because sometimes when you're in the mood for non-diegetic bodice ripper shit you'd call the police over in real life, it can get really annoying to read paragraphs of negotiation and check-ins that break the illusion of the scene and so on, and the opposite can be jarring too.

it's very possible to blur these together the same way Phantom of the Opera blurs its diegetic and non-diegetic music as well. this leaves you even more open to being misunderstood by people reading in bad faith, but it can also be really fun to play with. @not-poignant writes fantastic fanfic, novels, and original serials on ao3 that pull this off really well, if you're okay with some dark shit in your fiction I would highly recommend their work. some of it does get really fucking dark in places though, just like. be advised. read the tags and all that.

but yeah, spontaneous writer plug aside, that's what I mean.