#checkmate antis

[totally-sideblog]

[sketching-shark]

i love your yuebei design sooooo much omg thank you for not holding back on how large and monsterous she is <3

Here at sketching-shark dot hell we firmly believe that lady yaoguai/monsters/demons etc deserve to look just as unique and formidable as their dude counterparts.

[dootznbootz]

The Telegony goes against what the Odyssey tells us not only because of Tiresias' Prophecy but also because Odysseus' family line only has one son each.

Zeus made our line a line of only sons. Arcesius had only one son, Laertes, and Laertes had only one son, Odysseus, and I am Odysseus’ only son. He fathered me, he left me behind at home, and from me he got no joy.

(Book 16, Fagles)

Telegonus can't even realistically BE Odysseus' son as he already has Telemachus. The Only son

[ratwars]

If the PM had somehow been the primary target of all of these plots instead of the ADA I firmly believe half of the situations could have been solved with Kajii. I understand he isn't popular but listen there is a reason he is who they pull out first with a hat trick when shit gets real.

[akari-ku]

I write exams Horikoshi u can’t do this to me, you can’t 😭

[bladeweave]

if minthara doesnt like gale why did she tell him three separate times on my gale origin run that he is under no circumstances allowed to kill himself

[sscarred-starss]

long distance / mixed culture relationships are so silly to me, bc this morning I was talking to our partner system and i was absolutely SHOCKED by the fact that they eat the peel of the potato like crisps, and they find it insane that we don't take our shoes off before coming in the house.

[unproduciblesmackdown]

it's not about that you "have" to get to exercise your autonomy. b/c like, yes you do, but not in the way that "if i don't get to do that Now i will explode & evaporate (& die)" which is what people keep leveraging to be like "so you don't have any valid argument for getting to act out your own choices"

therein is another issue of "why do you need a 'valid argument' to get Exceptions as ruled by this person to exist autonomously, unpunished" like why's this person an authority who gets to punish you. nonrhetorically, why do you have to appeal to their maybe possibly deciding to Let you be a person. should you "have" to.

and if you don't get that Permission that you supposedly "have" to get, you also will not immediately explode and die if you do that unpermitted thing, but shocking how "you don't Haaaave to" is only invoked re: things you want to do for yourself, and not what they want you to do for them....because it's Not Really About "Literally literally Haaaaving to"

the alignment between people getting on one for years about asexuality, and while doing so maxing out the saturation on their bullshit on any & everything, b/c you're just getting into anti autonomy, so ofc you're also just stoking & expressing "arguments" against autonomy that are deployed in plenty of other contexts, including against other queer identities....and that particular resonance with biphobia & transphobia, and how either groups are theoretically thwarting the Truest Gays because how will we have a valid argument against the truest cishets agenda if we can't convince them we haaaaaave to be like this instead of that no, we won't explode & die if we have to be repressed or at least closeted another day, and another, and you won't explode after another, either, etc. rather than thee point of "asexuality autonomy = queer autonomy = Your queer autonomy = Anyone's Autonomy" and "why do we 'have' to Convince anyone to go 'oh alriiiight' abt one's choices about how they express their identity, what decisions they make about having sex"....it's about anyone having the power to preclude & restrict others' autonomy & constrain their existence between one kind of more imminent, immediate harm/death & a more drawn out one where you exist as a resource for others' use but at least you aren't Literally dead today. so what if someone's saying "well i don't think your gender/sexuality stuff is Real" so long as they can't get in the way of other people living that out anyways. so what if someone's supposedly like "well, but everyone could be bi" (which they don't. just like ppl were never 'pretending' to be asexual to nefariously stand around in the queer space that never rigorously vetted everyone anyways? Making Up A Guy To Get Mad At) to supposedly argue that if all of you are bi you can just restrict yourself to the Cishet Appearing manifestations (which they don't) where what's that even matter if this [guy to get mad at] can't make that anyone else's problem? if he can, why can he. should he be able to. that's the problem, not "have we all tried the constant biphobia wherein they're always thwarting & sabotaging the rest of us?? like how trans people are keeping us from being legitimate?? with the opportunity for some trans people to also try declaring other noncis people Not Legitimately Trans?? well the cishet agenda loves asexuals, actually, they want everyone to never have sex ever (they don't want that, and that's not what being asexual is)"

using the "you can't Know through Direct Perception or extrasensory phenomena what someone else's Thoughts And Feelings are" both ways; wherein their assertion of their intentions, true or not, gets to be treated as an assertion of Reality, meanwhile b/c Your intentions/thoughts/feelings can't be directly observed, you're just lying or exaggerating or misremembering or failing to Express yourself correctly b/c they would've surely interpreted it correctly otherwise, or [anything else] re: your inner experiences that you can't "prove" are one way or another, so this other person gets to always decide for themself what they must be (why?) and if they just so happen to decide they Must be in alignment with what they want (good) or unacceptably, evilly, incorrectly Against Them, they also get to flex their control over the entire situation via their Authority / control over resources / the person's lack of other options b/c of isolation & that, say, breaking away from a family, job, marriage or just deemed correctly romantic relationship, is punished by the larger system of How Things Are, through a lack of resources that makes you more vulnerable in general as well as vulnerable to further punishment in how you might try to respond to that situation, through the general stance that maintaining cohesion of a Unit like the nuclear family, the "romantic" "man"/"woman" couple, is good, so breaking from it is deviant........anyways it's like. if you're like "well i'm having sex b/c i want to" and someone is like "well i say YOURE LYING" like, what? "isn't there someone you forgot to ask" shit. why should that get to affect things. whether you're like "oh no. what if they could say 'you're lying...b/c how do i knowwww you're not BI. where you could want to have sex with someone BESIDES this one person rn?? or ACE??? if you Don't have sex rn and you Don't explode and die 5 min later we will Know you Could Be Asexual" like, this isn't how it works anyways obviously but theoretically if it did: we would not be like "oh sorry guess that's what matters" unless what mattered was some people's being lower on a hierarchy and at the quite literal disposal of those with more power than them. what would the crisis be of someone going "well i think. every gay person? is bi" or someone going "you've just told me your name is gloria but i think your name is actually tetris...." or "i'm so embarrassed i wish everyone but me was dead" if none of these things can hinder the existence of people having sex w/autonomy for all involved or people getting to tell you their name or all other people being alive

the banger quote on my imdb page was saying "no, i don't 'Have' to, but i'm going to" to an authoritarian in my life, concluding several minutes' "negotiation" of [i 'have' to hang up on this call now b/c the movie i'm standing in this movie theater to see is about to start. no i won't explode and die if i don't. i also won't explode and die if i don't keep "talking" to you (being Talked At / lectured & upbraided from afar)] funny how that works. i also Know this was a checkmate b/c that person gave up on responding (or, technically, switched to The Silent Treatment, which worked even worse via phone than in person) and i did hang up rather than miss the movie i showed up for and then they had to resort to Other Methods: telling someone willing to take on the enabling cop mode that i had Essentially said Go Fuck Yourself. like well that's right, and the fact that it's a "go fuck yourself" to get to say "i am going to end the call b/c i choose to do something else" and then actually do so is a real testament to this relationship. and if one had said "i can't keep talking, i have to go" and someone's like "sldfj you mean thou MAY not keep talking" teehee i don't know, CAN you have the peas????? it's like this obviously doesn't matter. i can choose to do shit and choose to not do shit without exploding and dying right this very second, except for taking 5 sec to eat a deadly bomb with a timer set for 5 sec. This Is Not The Point. why is autonomy off-limits to Anyone.

[kiwisandpearls]

here are some checkmate/monochrome sketches :D

(This one has a little preview to my volume 7-9 redesigns for Blake and Weiss)

[horsescary]

used chatgpt for something that wasn't just fucking around and ngl it goes kinda hard

[robocops-a-christ-allegory]

I just found out three years ago Paul Kupperberg posted a entire rejected pitch for a peacemaker solo to his site like it wouldnt drive me completely fucking insane to discover. like Id just be fine.

[zillyblog]

The way to respond to book-burning cultists screaming "Media doesn't exist in a vacuum!!!" is "Yeah, neither do you"

People really need to realise that “media can affect real life” doesn’t mean “this character does bad things so people will read that and start doing bad things” and actually means “ideas in fiction especially stereotypes about minority groups can affect how the reader views those groups, an authors implicit prejudices can be passed on to readers”

[cyberpunkhopendreams]

So in my home city, feeding the homeless is illegal unless you do so with proper permits and through one of eight organizations.

But recently, a federal judge ruled that feeding the homeless is a protected first amendment right.

So while enforcement may still be a problem...

[a-slut-for-smut]

king move

HOLY SHIT WHAT???

[sscarred-starss]

I LOVE praising my girl for things that "don't need praise" she got out of bed? good girl!! she's getting even just what she's asked done at work? I'm so proud of you darling. she showered? good girl, you're so pretty!! :3 she "didn't do anything"? you woke up this morning darling, I'm proud of you <3

~ Moose

[chongoblog]

as it turns out there is a way to denounce transgenderism without being anti woke, or as you like to call it "transphobic" you see if you think sex or as you like to call it "gender" is a social construct then how can you identify as a women if according to you that "gender" isn't real but a mere social construct? By that logic we're all fruitless, or as you like to call it "nonbinary" either way it looks your pronoun wars are ending in defeat. Checkmate.

I feel like this is meant to be hate mail, but you're unironically advocating for abolition of gender roles, which is pretty based