#i need a tag for it at this point

[doodlemancy]

ok so i guess Clip Studio Paint V2 has some bullshit always-online DRM

reportedly, if the software goes more than 24 hours without an internet connection to verify its license, it will automatically revert to the trial version, which doesn't let you save. so, if due to circumstances beyond your control, you don't have an internet connection but you still want to use the software you paid for, the answer is... Fuck You, Prove You Didn't Steal It, Motherfucker! fuck you if your connection/ISP is unreliable, fuck you the wrong tree falls in your neighborhood, fuck you if you want to draw in a hotel but don't want to pay an exorbitant wi-fi fee.

the FAQ also just straight up says that V2 can't be used offline.

further receipts: https://twitter.com/Artists_Beware/status/1650552353735553051 https://twitter.com/Zedrinbot/status/1650034639602614274 https://twitter.com/inkfycreates/status/1650268544523706369 https://twitter.com/SnuffyMcSnuff/status/1650524651091574784 https://twitter.com/saitamas_/status/1649836435124662272 https://old.reddit.com/r/ClipStudio/comments/12s2j0p/the_verify_license_issue_will_be_a_mainstay_it/ https://old.reddit.com/r/ClipStudio/comments/12u8awo/the_verify_license_issue_part_2_csp_elaborates/

this is not entirely unsurprising given Celsys' series of missteps in the last year, but it still sucks. i did not pay for V2 because i didn't want to encourage their Adobe Behavior last year, and frankly, i still don't understand what it is i actually get and do not get if i just buy the perpetual license. i was considering waiting for V3-- i will happily pay for a big one-time version upgrade. but to hell with that if this is how they're gonna be.

call to action: contact Celsys and let them know that this stinks, and is farts, and why it is fart and stinks.

(this is Not a call to action to tell me about every other digital art program under the sun; i have been a digital artist for 20 years and i guarantee i have heard of the thing, CSP is essential to my workflow!!)

[mrsgojosatoru]

Wrt woc Daenerys, I’ve pictured her as not-white since book 1 because with Khal Drogo she rides in the hot desert sun everyday, yet there’s never any mention of a sun burn or any damage to her skin. The only description of her skin after riding through the Dothraki desert and Red Waste calls her ‘pale.’ I’m mixed but light skinned, and even I’d get sunburnt if I was riding through a desert everyday with no shade. Imo Dany is definitely a woman of color, plus her story just makes more sense that way.

Actually there's a description of her in book one that describes her as so tanned she's mistaken for Dothraki! Let me trot out my copy of AGOT real quick.

“The merchant must have taken her for Dothraki, with her clothes and her oiled hair and sun-browned skin.”

So there is actually our first description of Daenerys after traveling in the sun for days on end.

And her story does make more sense. She's a refugee, a daughter of a diaspora, a slave who rises to power, who lifts others up along the way, she given the exotic / erotic treatment through the text AND the author. Her childhood is absent from the start of the series unlike other girls close to her age in the books (Sansa/Arya both loose their childhood in book one but Dany never had it.)

I'm mixed, I'd also get burned unless I built up my time in the sun gradually like I used to when I was a little kid. (Where I was definitely sun-browned.) It could be part of Dany's "I don't get burned" mythos, but also the text describes her skin as sun-browned. And this description of her skin is I believe the first one the text includes.

Other descriptions often call Daenerys "fair and lovely" and fair can of course mean having a light complexion, but it can also mean just which Daenerys certainly is.

Also at the end of the day it doesn't really matter what GRRM wrote, if enough women of color feel a connection to her story and want to perform a subversive reading to include themselves in a narrative where our only other characters are either not POV characters, killed for the sake of white narratives, and/or subjected to racist writing then we as people of color get to do that. It's not death of the author, it's audience reception theory, and we are allowed to make things ours because we want to.

She's ours. Haters can deal with it.

[my-darling-boy]

I was at a bookstore looking through the art section and I saw a spine that said The Camden Town Nudes which was interesting because this didn’t seem like the bookstore where I would ever find something like that and I wanted to have a casual look but like. This also wasn’t exactly the bookstore where you felt like you could look at naked pictures let alone just suggestive paintings of them, it’s a really small shop as well, so I was like right I’ll just take a quick peek, I’m an art student, I love history, maybe I’ll buy it. I looked both ways and saw the shopkeep had left momentarily and no one was about, so I opened it and found it was an entire book featuring nude Edwardian women all painted by Walter Sickert between 1905-1912 and it was actually quite a revolutionary set of paintings for its time given that it featured very raw depictions of working class nude women in dark London instead of the elegant, white bedsheet clad, Demure middle and upper class women usually depicted.

And of course RIGHT as I flip to this lady’s boobs practically taking up an entire double page spread, every customer in a 5 mile radius appeared from around the corners of the shelf including the shopkeep and immediately regressing to a wet, pathetic Edwardian man from 1908, startled, I dropped the large book which caused a giant SLAP on the floor in this already silent store thus causing all patrons to look down at me scrambling on my knees to close a giant book of Edwardian boobs and let me tell you it would not have been nearly as funny had I not immediately felt like some Edwardian local pervert who just tried to sneak a cheeky peek at the erotic book in the bookstore only to drop it dramatically causing a scene, red up to his ears trying to shove it back on the shelf. Like such a casual and normal thing in modern day but looking at Edwardian women suddenly turned it into this egregious act as I apparently became possessed by the spirit of a moustached man in a bowler hat and morning coat going Good Heavens I mustn’t gaze upon these images in public lest the constable haul me away!

[bytedykes]

ok fine maybe i DID come back wrong. what are you going to do about it. kill me? put me back in the ground? after all this effort? all this pain and suffering only to find out bringing me back wasn't worth it after all? you worked so hard. are you going to waste all of that just because im not what you wanted? just because i belong only to myself? are you going to let me pick out my own coffin

[boypssydisorder]

fuck me skin to skin while we're on my bed under all of my blankets with ur favourite show on in the background n maybe there's a thunderstorm outside but we can't hear it over all the noises we're making while ur dick pumps in n out of me

[inkskinned]

the thing about some men is that they want you to remember, at all times, that you are underneath them. that with one word or look or "joke", you will stay beneath them. that even "exceptions" to the rule are not true exceptions - the commonly cited statistic that one in eight men believe they could win against serena williams.

women's gymnastics is often not seen as real gymnastics. whatever the fuck non-euclidian horrors rhythmic gymnasts are capable of, it's often tamped down as being not a sport. some of the most dominant athletes in the world are women. nobody watches women's soccer. despite years of dancing and being built like a fucking brick, men always assume they're faster and stronger than i am. you wouldn't like what happens when they are incorrect. once while drunk at a guy's house i won a held-plank challenge by a solid minute. the party was over after that - he became exceedingly violent.

what i mean is that you can be perfect, and they still think you're ... lacking, somehow. i hope you understand i'm trying to express a neutral statement when i say: taylor swift was the possibly the most patriarchy-palatable, straight-down-the-line woman we could churn out. she is white, conventionally attractive, usually pretty mild in personality. say what you will about her (and you should, she's a billionaire, she can handle it), but a few things seem to be true about her: 1. she can write a damn catchy song, and 2. the eras tour truly was a massive commercial success and was also genuinely an impressive feat of human athleticism and performance.

i don't know if she deserves the title of "woman of the year," i'm not debating that in this post. what i am saying is that she was named Woman of The Year, and then an untalented man got onstage at the golden globes and made fun of her for attending her boyfriend's football games. what i am saying is that this woman altered local economies - and her dating life is still being made into a "harmless" punchline. the camera panned, greedy, over to her downing a full glass of champagne. congratulations taylor! you are woman of the year! but you are a woman. even her.

fuck, man. write better material.

a guy gets onstage at a college graduation and despite the fact like half the crowd is made up of women, he spends a significant proportion of it warning these people - who spent possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars on their education - that they were lied to. that the "real" meaning of femininity is motherhood. that they shouldn't rest on the laurels of that education-they-paid-for but instead throw it away to kneel at a man's heel. imagine that. sweating in your godawful polyester gown (that you also had to pay for!), fresh out of 4 years of pushing yourself ever-harder: and some guy you've never met - who knows nothing about you - he reminds you this "win" is a pyrrhic one at best. you really shouldn't consider yourself that extraordinary. you're still a woman, even after years of study.

god forbid you are not a pretty woman, but if you are pretty, you must be dumb. god forbid you are not ablebodied or white or cis or straight or good at swallowing. you must be beneath a man, or else they are not a man. the equation for masculinity seems to just be: that which is not a woman or womanly (god forbid). anything "feminine" is thereby anathema. to engage in "feminine" things such as therapy, getting a hug from a friend, or crying - it is giving up ones manhood. therefore women need to be put in their place to ensure that masculinity is protected.

this is something i have struggled to explain to terfs - they are not doing the work of feminism, but rather the patriarchy. by asserting that women and men must be (on some secret level) oppositional and in conflict, they also assume that being a woman is akin to being another species. but bigotry does not stem from observational truths or clarity - that is what makes it bigotry. there was nothing in my childhood that made me fundamentally different from my brother. we are treated differently nonetheless. to assert there is some biological drive that enforces my gender role is to assert that women have a gendered role. men do not see women as equal to them not because of biological reality - but instead because the core tenant of the patriarchy is that women aren't full, realized people.

we are told from a very young age to excuse misbehavior as a single man's choice - not all men. it is not all men, just that one guy. all women are gold-digging bitches who belong in the kitchen - but if a man is mean, bigoted, or violent to you, it's just that particular guy, and that means nothing about men-as-a-whole. it is only one guy who got mad when you gently rejected him. it is only one guy who warns her this trophy is heavy, are you sure you can hold it? it is only one guy who smashes her face into the cake. it is only one guy talking into a mic about hating our bodily autonomy.

i have just found that they often wait until the moment we actually seem to be upstaging them. you sit in a meeting where you're presenting your own findings and he says get me a coffee? or you run to the end of the marathon and are about to finish first and he pushes your kids out in front of you. you win the chess game and they make some comment akin to well, you're ugly away. we can be the billionaire and get the dream life and finally fucking do it and yet! still! they have this strange, visceral urge to say well actually, if you think you're so great -

it's not one just one guy. it's one in eight.

[collgeruledzebra]

the thing about trying to recommend fiction podcasts to someone who isn't familiar with them is that not only are so so many genres represented but also the level of production can fall anywhere from "basically an audiobook" to "major motion picture minus the pictures"

[intrinsically-disordered-proxein]

we are not getting out of the plant blog allegations with this one

[corethetrueidiot]

spinny spin spin

[iwasbored777]

They asked Lee Majdoub what he thinks of Stobotnik vs what Stone thinks of it and this man chose violence omg the more I read the more painful it gets

[daisybell-on-a-carousel]

Being someone who read Under The Red Hood and came out with the firm belief that, for Jason, it's not about killing Joker, it's about Jason wanting proof Batman would choose him over the Joker (bc shelia chose the joker). Makes seeing any other media where it's all about just wanting the Joker dead is a teeny bit frustrating. to be honest

Jason could've killed the Joker himself, really, really easily. Jason kidnaps the Joker before the confrontation. I can't open my comic for a reference right now, but it felt like he had the Joker for quite a bit before the confrontation. He had him. He beat him up with a crowbar. He had every single opportunity to kill the Joker himself, but he didn't because that wasn't his goal. Make no mistake, he did plan for the Joker to be dead by the end of it, but do you see what im trying to say here

Edit: If I knew this post was gonna get 1000+ notes I would've tried to word it better or something, this was a rant I made on the way to the grocery store 😭

It's not about making Batman kill either. When Batman says he won't kill, Jason adjusts and goes, 'Let ME kill the Joker or kill me to stop me' instead. The test is all about Batman choosing him. The whole final confrontation is Jason's first death again. The parent, The Joker, and the explosives. It even ends with Jason unable to move as a bomb goes off right next to him again because the parent didn't choose Jason. And instead tried finding an option that'd benefit them and (consequencely) letting the Joker walk, again, lol, lmao <-in agony

[neosatsuma]

[poorlemons]

I just think they could have an interesting conversation, two angry assistants

[fictionadventurer]

How did Treasure Planet manage to come up with the greatest aesthetic in all human history? Victorian elegance plus space-age flair, with just enough dirt and grime and wear and tear to make it feel real? A combination of traditional and computer animation that perfectly embodies the movie's blend of old and futuristic? How does it get any better than that?

[wuntrum]

2025 horror pin up calendar!!

print version | digital (/print it yourself) version

a labor of love, truly <3 prepare for the new year with 12 suggestive (and silly) horror characters :) featuring characters from: american psycho, bride of re-animator, the evil dead, hannibal, jason x, frankenhooker, alien, an american werewolf in london, jennifer's body, saw, the thing, and scream! to see the full specs of the calendar, check out the pages above!

[umblrspectrum]

part 4 of a lot funnier in my head than on paper