#hate or discourse will be blocked and deleted

[mmadeinheavenn]

mesque themed heart divider

flags in order: mspec lesbian, lesboy, veldian lesboy, mesque, lesbian veldigirl, veldigirl, mspec veldian.

reblog if using, credit whenever and wherever possible (like at the end of a post or in your blog's about me section) ^^

do not repost anywhere or edit! if theres any adjustments youd like made please contact me directly

[tea-cat-arts]

Sometimes I wonder what Jiang Cheng could've become if his parents didn't instill a mix of "crippling fear of failure" and "impossibly high standards" in him. Cuz like, his dad was holding him to the vague standard of being as good as wwx, his mom yelling at him whenever he goofed around like wwx, and then both of them expressed disappointment when he's less successful than wwx. The thing both of them seem to ignore though is that wwx got where he is entirely because he had the freedom to fuck around and find out- he trained tirelessly because he made training fun for himself, he was innovative as a cultivators because he experimented and persisted through failures, and he was able to act in line with the Jiang clan moto because his actions had less political pull than members of the main family. Jiang Cheng on the other hand- if he fucked around he got told to "stop stooping to the level of servants." If his achievements were lesser than wwx's, he got either dismissed by his dad or yelled at by his mom to try harder. And if he picked fights with the Wens, they'd have an excuse to destroy his clan. Like ya- no shit that'd create an adult who's terrified of failure.

The kite game serves as such a good metaphor/embodiment of this set back- with Jiang Cheng never being able to shoot as far as Wei Wuxian because he pulls back and shoots closer the second he misses.

And its sad too because he's shown to be pretty brilliant when he's in "fuck it, we ball" mode. Like, when he's not freezing up, he manages to pull off things like rebuilding his entire clan from the ground up, leading armies and taking back territories from the Wens, and I'm fairly sure he's the only character we see counter the Lan music cultivation techniques (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on that last one. Also feel free to add any of the other cool shit he did that I'm blanking on at the moment, cuz I know I'm forgetting something).

That being said- even with his anxiety, he's still one of the top cultivators. Imagine what a force of nature he'd be if he could sustain "fuck it we ball" mode

[ghostlydeanbailiffcloud]

Bolas fans have such a superiority complex, they have done nothing wrong, they're the best, they did the most for their team...

They are so toxic and spreading such disgusting misinfo about soulfire just to up bolas that it makes me sick

You are free to hype up your team, to make content for it, to appreciate new ccs discovering them

But you can't do it to by criticizing soulfire( it literally nullifies the good stuff), you can't say that nobody did content for soulfire, you simply never saw it because you never looked for it because you were stuck in you bolas bubble full of people just has toxic has you conforting you in your behavior, we're not mad at ccs discovering bolas we're mad at the fans to immediately redo the old competition and pick up the atrocious behavior and erasing everything that blue went through

Bolas was literally the worst team in term of behavior, they were the only ones to grieve bases and burn people stuff for the sake of it, to make it impossible for the others to play ( exemple: the bounty stuff ), they also took advantage of the rules but when it's soulfire the world is falling on your heads no? Omg bad killed the red on the first day, well that costed him his whole purgatory experience because of fans and he constantly had to hold back on what he wanted to do and he still got hate. The meta gaming allegations are a goddam joke i don't even need to talk about it, the biggest argument of red fans is that they were only half the team....

Have we watched the same event? Blue was max 3 persons on a good day and when someone tried to connect they would get killed by red before they could even understand the event ( people love to say blue lived in reds base but red did the same for the old blue base don't be hypocrite), while red had EVERYDAY like 5 people on at the same time and at the end of the day which was the best advantage ever

Red weren't victims, and I'm tired of people saying that it was the case. Open your eyes and see. Both teams were awful, and that was the objective of this event, I only wrote about bad red things because this is addressed to red fans.

[oh-hush-its-perfect]

INVALID reasons to dislike Taylor Swift as a person:

You don't like her music

You think her fans are obnoxious/annoying

You believe she is not being genuine about liking/appreciating her fanbase or the awards she has received

You didn't fact-check that "study" that claimed she emitted 8,000 tons of carbon via her private jet (I read the article by Yard— not only do they not source their methodology, but other climate experts have come up with completely different estimates, averaging around 1,000 tons)

You believe Taylor Swift (the person) is guilty of queerbaiting

You don't think non-Black people have any place at all in hip-hop

She has friends who are mostly also rich white people

She has had a lot of boyfriends in the past and seems to have moved on from her partner of six years very quickly

She sometimes plays the victim

You think heartbreak is all she writes about

VALID reasons to dislike Taylor Swift as a person:

You believe Taylor Swift (the brand) is guilty of queerbaiting and that Taylor Swift (the person) is content with this business strategy

1,000 tons of carbon is still A LOT to emit and Swift should be more responsible with her footprint, ESPECIALLY now that she's touring

The music video for "Shake it Off" features what many people consider racially insensitive material, disputably using traditionally Black and Latine styles of dance as the butt of the joke and Black and Latine women as props

Swift was politically quiet for years, allowing white supremacists and nationalists to claim her as one of their own and declare her their "Aryan goddess" (though this could be blamed on her marketing team, considering they did not allow her to be politically active until 2018— and she did denounce racists in interviews prior to making her Democratic opinions public)

She is currently dating white singer/songwriter Matt Healy, who has been accused of a) saying the n-word, b) doing a Nazi salute on stage "ironically—" and there is video evidence of this, though it's difficult to tell if it's actually a Nazi salute or just a regular gesture to which he didn't give much thought, c) making fun of fat people, and d) making fun of black women. And probably more of which I'm not aware.

The music video for "You Need to Calm Down" portrays a very naive view of bigotry as angry people holding signs (and a somewhat classist view of bigotry as well, considering the appearance of the "homophobes") and uses queer people as props

She's a rich white liberal and is guilty of many of the sins typical of most rich white liberals

She has played the victim as a white woman and vilified black men (specifically Kanye West) in the process

You believe her releasing new songs like "Mr. Perfectly Fine" and the 10 minute version of "All Too Well" has encouraged harassment of men she dated over a decade ago and there was no need to rehash this hurt.

You believe that the academies (i.e. the Grammys, the VMAs, etc.) are biased towards her as a white woman and she has not done enough to combat or even acknowledge this racism

She has engaged in LGBTQ+ erasure by having one of her brand's official accounts call straight couples "lavender," even though that is a queer phrase, following the announcement of her song "Lavender Haze" and by using the queer dog whistle "hairpin drop" in a song even though she is assumed to be straight, reducing the saying's meaning.

You just don't like her vibes (NOTE: this is a valid reason to dislike her in your personal life, but NOT to diss her)

More can be added to both lists. Please note that many people acknowledge all of the flaws above listed and like her anyway because, as it is important to understand, she is human and will often make mistakes. Doing any one of these things do not make her a "bad person," and dividing people into "good" and "bad" categories�� especially people who you don't know— is very binary and unnuanced; however, they do make her a flawed person, and people, Swifties and non-Swifties, have a right to make of that what they will.

[lycanr0t]

i feel very frustrated about the trend of giving chil body hair bc if it was any other anime twink i would be thrilled its just that it seems to only be because people are SO afraid of him looking young they have to make him hairy to justify liking him in ships.

meanwhile it does directly go against canon (he literally is supposed to look like a child. this is integral to both his character and his race's lore as a whole and it makes no damn sense that he would be mistaken for a child if he has body hair i mean. cmon.)

and it's like. some men are hairless. some men look young. when youre a trans man in your 20s-30s its especially common to be mistaken for a teenager, even more so if you're not on t. and short. these traits do not make you less of a man or an adult. :/

[cdroloisms]

I just came across your post about vagueposting and I think I agree with it, but the situation you most likely wrote it about is hardly a "vagueposting" because you could say who it was about after reading it literally one time and that person got jumped and insulted in the anon ask anyway so discussing it in person could be safer...

I'm reeeally sorry for bring up a past situation, but I don't think it's a good idea to write nasty things about another person and specific details about how they interact with the fandom and their post, say things that will help to easily identify a person and at the same time insult them or say how you think they feel about the characters or the story based on your feelings about their one take that you didn't like and then call it's "vague" because there is no name in the post. I mean, It can lead to bad consequences, it literally did in that situation.

And yes, I do think people have the right to discuss bad takes or takes they don't like, but there's a way to do it without giving away every detail about the post and the person who wrote it so everyone knows who you're talking about, and if you're not good at being vague, just discuss it in a private chat.

this ask is old but i was busy last week, so forgive me for the late response. i was debating answering it at all, but i dont want myself to be misunderstood, so just. to clarify under the cut.

i'll agree with you that the post/situation in question wasn't vagueing. now, i don't know exactly the difference between the number of followers i have and the number of followers that the blogger in question has, and when it comes to the number of active dsmp followers i think both of us have even less of a clue. that being said, both of us frequent much of the same circles, so i think it's fair to say that many of my posts will end up being exposed to a very similar audience to his, and so therefore this response about the situation you're talking about will be just about as clearly traceable to a specific person as the post he made that started the situation in question. just as a general observation.

if i'm understanding your ask correctly, while vagueing a take is fine, the vague shouldn't be clearly identifiable if you're going to speak badly about it or disagree heavily. to which i have to ask what, specifically, is defined as clearly identifiable? i think most takes in this fandom can be pretty easily traced to a person, even if that person is not the only person that believes in that take--just as an example, c!tommy as a butterfly pinned behind glass was a take in response to the c!sam and c!dream stream after techno escaped, and grew to be a pretty prominent theme to the point of a zine being modeled after it, but i can also trace it to a pretty specific tumblr post with a name attached. i also think that that same statement probably isn't true for many fans who maybe joined later on in the fandom. i mean, i'm aware that i'm being pedantic here, i'm aware that the situation in question created conflict specifically due to it being within dreblr and in a space where multiple people would've seen both posts and felt ensuing awkwardness bc they know both people either on a personal or acquaintance level, but i mean the same applied ages ago whenever strategist-interpretation and trauma-interpretation c!dream apologists felt like going at it again on the dash.

in this scenario specifically, what made the situation clearly identifiable was the nature of the take that was being discussed. the main identifying detail was the take that the asker was asked about, imo, and i mean ... yeah i mean. most takes that haven't blown up pretty heavily do end up being tied to one or two people? i mean, staged finale is a take that can be tied to three people who argued in favor of it the most before the rest of dreblr got on board only in late 2021. i simply don't think that a take that maybe only one person has argued for (which, i dont remember the statistics of the take in this situation, so i dont remember how many notes it had or how many people in total may have expressed public agreement towards it, honestly) is exempt from discussion when it is posted in a meta or analysis space as an analytical piece, which i do think applies to this take from what i remember about it and how it was tagged.

and back to the discussion of what's acceptable as far as directly responding versus vagueing, i mean, a lot of the discussion i've had on my blog (abt discourse etiquette in General in meta spaces on dreblr moreso than this specific situation, largely bc i did want to avoid commenting on a situation that 1) i really had no business in and 2) i have reason to be biased about. the main reason why i'm talking abt it now is bc hopefully enough time has passed for feelings to be less fraught and bc i want to make certain thoughts of mine clear, in case they weren't clear enough in my original posts abt dreblr and whatever) revolves around both direct responses and vagueing having their reasons as well as pros and cons, and both will likely continue to exist in analysis spaces and generally i don't think it's productive to really comment on what people can or can't do on their own blogs. in this scenario, i don't think "vagueing about one specific person in a way that may be clearly identifiable to parts of their audience" is uniquely unacceptable? a direct response very clearly would make the person in question identifiable -- outside of how it's kind of impossible to make a post vagueing someone in a way where No One has Any Idea who you might be talking about without making the post like, incoherent inherently, if vagueing (not identifiable) is okay and directly responding (identifiable) is okay, then why is vagueing (identifiable) not okay?

now, i understand that any situation where the person in question might be identifiable, some people may take the open disagreement as permission to harass them. and obviously, harassment sucks. part of the whole point of opening up this conversation on my blog was bc i worry, with the way that a single conflict between dsmp opinions has kind of rippled through dreblr recently and the responses to this "situation," that an environment is being created with too much of a forced global consensus that punishes people for stepping out of the status quo in both opinions and behavior, which is obviously bad for the whole community, and was looking to voice some of that and have a conversation on solutions. and i understand that in this situation, a lot of your problem with the blogger has to do with his general attitude in discussing the take and his statements on the person who made it. now, i think you have every right to find his statements offensive and disagreeable and to unfollow and/or block him. that being said, i am not exactly a PR agent, and i want to reiterate that what people do on their own blogs isn't my business and i don't think it should be my business. or uh, anyone's business, for that matter. i don't think that everyone "in dreblr" is beholden to keeping to a certain person's standard for "acceptable" disagreement and "acceptable" sharing of their own opinions on their own blog as long as they're not inciting harassment, which entails, like, actively encouraging harm to happen yk. i mean, you can think that the blogger was being rude or an asshole and prefer to never see him again, that's fine. that's your prerogative. but i mean, i'm not gonna tell the guy how to interact with the fandom on his own blog, haha.

to be clear, im not telling you what you can or can't do on your own blog either. if you wanna make a post about how his posts contain harmful rhetoric, how he's an idiot, or how he's rude bc you disagree with his public posts on this situation or on the dsmp as a whole, i mean, i'm not gonna handwring over it and tell you that you're not allowed to do that. it's none of my business, and i like to think i'm not that hypocritical. and honestly, i think that in a space where we're talking about analysis, commenting on harmful rhetoric happens often and should happen often when it happens -- literally anyone can make an analysis post that has harmful rhetoric, and sure it's fiction and no one has to answer to the analysis police for making a bad analysis post, but i've also been in this space and seen enough truly mind-boggling amounts of parroting takes about torture that make people sound like CIA psyops to go "well saying that someone's analysis post contains harmful rhetoric is really rude" pfft. again, i'm not saying i'm immune to hypocrisy, but i've certainly malded enough times in public about the shit people have said in this fandom to take issue with that. now, getting a little less into the strictly-analysis side of things, i understand that insults like calling someone an idiot may not sit right with everyone, to which i say. block to your heart's content. but c'mon man i've called people idiots before i'm no saint 😭😅

anyway. i hope this clarified some things, anon. take issue with whatever and whoever you like, honestly, whether that's me, the person that i just not-vagued for the last however many words, etc etc -- again, your prerogative. and i agree, it's a shame the situation devolved into stuff like insults in both bloggers' inboxes when it really didn't have to be like that like. at all.

[madmadmilk]

lol to the people who keeps leaving hate comments on my dumb anime ships,,. thanks for reading 10K of gibberish, i guess?? i hope u continued to be haunted by them 👍

for reference i started writing for my hero academia, for ochako uraraka x bakugo katuski [kacchako] (i am already writhing in embarrassment, ok)... and it's just for fun.... i'm not like expecting anything but omg very chapter is just SPAMMED....

is this normal in anime fandoms?? is this normal anywhere????

like can someone just confirm with me that this is crazy:

like oops sorry to put these people on blast but like... is this normal.... ??? i'm scared to block them cos if what they just post more??? i'm so lost bruh

i've hesitated making other anime-fandom-centric friends cos of this lol, so yeah anyone well versed and like... reasonable, can you just like tell me what to do LOL

anyway for now i've gotten this on all my (TWO) fics:

[tiger-moran]

I just got reminded of that time someone requested a Moriarty/Moran fic from me (which I wrote) and then within a short period of time turned out to be a raging aphobe who started not only posting aphobic shit on their main blog but also started an actual """"exclusionist"""" """"ace discourse"""" blog devoted to insulting asexual people (and possibly aromantic people, I can't remember) and invalidating our experiences and oppression, and I'm still thinking about how it was just kind of mind boggling that... you were quite happy to get me to write fic for you for free but then you do this? You know I'm asexual right and you know I've written Moriarty as asexual pretty much all along right? Right?

[daftysaph]

-

[blkkizzat]

yoooooo do you know what happened to callm3senpaii ?!?!?!???? i was a huge fan of their banger works and when i try to find them now their account is deactivated I am devastated 😭

chiiileee 😭 long story short they got mad they traded away gojo on mudae, blocked everyone and deleted their blog.

i wish i was lyin'.

[actual-changeling]

Hi Alex, I saw your reply regarding sapiosexuality and ableism. I'm very curious. Could you please elaborate? If you are too busy, could you please link some sources so I can learn more? Thank you!

I mean, I don't really know what to tell you.

"Intelligence" as such isn't some sort of measurable characteristic a person has, it's an entirely subjective concept influenced by social and cultural values. IQ tests don't tell you anything except how well someone can do this specific kind of test. Anything related to academia falls under the same category, it tells you how well people can write standardized tests or study in a frankly horrible environment, but again, nothing else.

So attraction to - what? "Intelligence" by that person's own definition? Or to traits like pattern recognition? I'd argue that most people are attracted to others that have a similar mind, interests, favourite topics, etc. but that has zero to do with attraction to some sort of intelligence.

Historically, arguments about intelligence have been used to justify institutional violence and abuse against disabled people, especially intellectually disabled people, so turning it into some sort trait that makes someone more attractive only plays into that same rhetoric and contributes it to.

It's a lot easier and less loaded to say you're attracted to people you can have like-minded conversations with - which. again. most tend to be. Whatever you wanna call it, it's a common, usual preference people have not just when it comes to dating but also making friends etc.

Bottom line is, I recommend you think about what exactly a label like "sapiosexual" is supposed to accomplish or convey, because in my opinion it doesn't tell you shit and isn't a label that in any way falls under the queer umbrella.

[lanshappycorner]

i wish there was a way for me to mute users entirely because theres some people on this app that have ships i hate or have made enough annoying takes for me to be like goddamn enough out of u . but like i dont hate them enough so that i want to block them

[kiruliom]

I uhh made my version of the genderqueer flag before I knew terfs tried to turn it into a symbol for themselves, I just found it ugly tbh.

but now I'll use the purple white green one out of spite. fuck you, we'll claim whats rightfully ours.

also isnt this like the third time they tried to turn lgbt stuff into their own shit? (namely labrys flag) be original man, dear lord baphomet-

[guardian-angle22]

This is not the last time you're gonna see him carrying a gun because he's a police officer. If you really have a problem with it then stop watching shows that has cops in it instead of yammering about it. Some people are just simply enjoying the show as an escape from the real fucked world and just want a hot guy to be hot. Stop making it everyone's problem when it's just a you problem. You don't like it, don't watch it. It's that simple. Its just a show. Just. A. Show.

It sounds like you’re making this a you problem by coming to my blog to bitch about it. Just block me and go dude. Or just unfollow me since I’m not even tagging this with the show so you either follow me or are seeking it out. I’m not making it anyone’s problem when I answer asks on my own blog and don’t tag the show. I made one singular live blog post about this shit, my god y’all. The only yammering I’m doing is in response to people like you in my ask box being ridiculous. Sorry I don’t find a white supremacy gang and guns to be an escape from the fucked up world around me 🤷🏻‍♀️

Just want a hot guy to be hot

lmao, okaaay.

[elipheleh]

from an old tumblr user (really, i’ve been here since 2009), please can we return to either not tagging your hate with the main tags or adding a negativity tag? “lol [film]” is a great option or even just “[film] negativity”

it’s in really poor taste to shit all over something people are enjoying and going ‘ah yeh i know, ill put this post about everything i thought was done wrong/badly where the happiness and enjoyment is and bring the mood down’.

media is so subjective and just because you hate that they didn’t make alex say ‘cornbread knows my sins’ or that you didnt think henry was in character or whatever, doesn’t mean that everyone else hated it too.

it’s absolutely fine to feel negatively about something! it’s absolutely fine to post that! but to post something talking about how shit the film was & then go ‘dont attack me 👉👈’. maybe. dont post it in the tags, especially without a ~hate~ tag.

[pearlrondo]

General PSA

there's fucking discourse again so i have some top-tier tips

don't like someone? no need to harass them or send hate, the block button is free and easy

and if you're being harassed, you can also block!

if its anon hate in the askbox? delete it!!!! ignore it and move on with your day

it can be tempting to "own" them in a response but all they want is attention so just ignore them and it'll eventually die down since they aren't getting a reaction anymore

tl;dr USE THE BLOCK BUTTON. DELETE ANON HATE. MIND YOUR OWN DAMN BUSINESS