#i’m seeing. a lot. frequently.

[salvia-plathitudes]

It makes sense that Kdramas, having a huge corner of the market in romance, are killing it producing gay series after gay series

[atopvisenyashill]

on reflection the fact that we didn’t see laena claim vhagar, and now didn’t see the moment addam got on seasmoke either? kinda annoying me

[creativity-deficient]

Anywayyysss why I don’t think Tweek should be considered the “Butters” of Craig’s group, an essay-

So I know a lot of people are going to disagree with me on this one, and that’s fine, just let me explain my reasoning.

A lot of the time I see Tweek included as a part of Craig’s group in fanart or fanfics, there’s always at least ONE person who points out that he’s not REALLY a member of the group, but instead the “honorary” friend or the “Butters” of the group.

Now YES, Tweek does appear a LOT less frequently than the other members of the group, much like Butters does with the main 4, so it’s easy to see him as the “honorary” friend.

BUT to me it’s not necessarily about how FREQUENTLY he appears, but instead the RELATIONSHIP he has with the other members of the group.

The reason I think of Butters as being the “bonus” member of the main 4 is because they don’t seem to TRULY think of him as their friend. Sure, they have their moments with him, but at the most they just seem to tolerate him. They kick him out of the group for being “too lame” when he replaced Kenny all those seasons ago) and are often shown to have no issue exploiting him for their own benefit. The one who acts the most decent to him is Kenny, but even HE isn’t above doing this. I’m not saying they’re ALL bad to poor Butters, they certainly do seem to consider him a friend of sorts, and heck, it’s not like they’re not constantly assholes to each other either, but it does seem to be quite obvious that they’ll never TRULY consider Butters as a part of their group. He hangs out with them a lot, YES, and this is why a lot of us associate him with being the “unofficial” member, but it’s made clear that he’s not actually one of them.

TWEEK on the otherhand, seems to have a pretty decent relationship with “those guys”? We don’t see a LOT of it, sure, but from what we DO see, he seems to get along with them quite well? We’ve even seen him talking to/hanging out with some of the members one on one (he can be seen hanging out with both Clyde and Tolkien in the background of some episodes, I’m not entirely sure if we’ve seen him with Jimmy at any point) and he seems to have always been friends with Craig? I don’t know why so many people act like they just straight up weren’t friends before they started dating, and that Tweek hanging out with the rest of the group is only because “he’s his boyfriend now”. Like, we see the two of them sitting together and even chatting in the background at assemblies, Stick of Truth implies that Tweek and some of the other guys regularly break Craig out of detention (or at least have done so more then once), HECK, he even appeared when the group first debuted in “South park is gay!”

To me, Tweek isn’t the “bonus” or “unofficial” friend, he’s just…the friend. To say he’s bonus or unofficial I feel like implies he’s not considered truly a member of the group, but I don’t see WHY this would be the case if he seems to be in good standing with them. Maybe he’s not the CLOSEST or most tightly knit member of the group, but I still like to at least think they still consider him ONE of them, and that, at least to me, makes him an “official” member in my eyes

[incorrect-fnaf-quotes]

Talking more about Violet/Kit? Why yes, yes I am—there’s just more stuff that I want to talk about involving her.

She never really knew her father that well—when she was born, her parents were still together, but when she was about two (she’s ten in the present), the two of them got divorced.

Though, they were both still on friendly terms and everything, and the young Violet would still see him for a little longer. At least until she was about three.

Long story short, her father died from an illness. So she just doesn’t really remember him much—she has a few little memories here and there, but that’s it.

Then, also keeping it more short/simple, she went to the Pizzaplex, and met Glamrock Bonnie—who helped her out, and as time went on, became a father figure to her.

Violet is autistic.

Mentioned a few times prior already, but ‘Kit’ (which can be a baby bunny) is a nickname given to her by Glam. Bon, and she loves it.

She originally wanted to grow up and work as a vet, but ended up changing her mind—now wanting to work at the Pizzaplex whenever she finally can.

The mask that she has, Violet made it all by herself a year prior. It makes her feel a bit more comfortable and safe during certain times—and it’s just a rather nice thing, too.

She always carries it with her, whether actually wearing it over her face or not. You’d never really see her without it.

Of course, Violet would keep going to the Pizzaplex, but as you’d imagine... Glamrock Bonnie eventually disappeared, causing her distress.

A few times after that, Violet would keep going back to the Pizzaplex—hoping to potentially find where the rabbit went, but every single time, she didn’t have any luck.

Eventually, Violet, saddened by the disappearance and not finding anything, eventually stopped going to the Pizzaplex.

[a-slut-for-vegaspete]

Playboyy – Porn without Plot?

Initial Thoughts on/ Reaction to Playboyy Episode One

As someone who loves to study (quite literally; I’m currently pursuing a MA degree in cultural studies) and investigate depictions of sex and sexuality in media, Playboyy has been one of my most anticipated releases of 2023 and it’s easier for me to work through my issues with a piece of media when I put my thoughts on paper or in a word document; so this post is primarily for myself.

Sex is sometimes presented as a personal, individual matter but in reality, our thoughts on sex, our dislikes and likes are a product or, at the very least, are shaped by, and of course in term can also influence, existing, dominant discourses on sex(uality), gender, class, race etc. One example of this – one most BL viewers/ queer individuals will recognise  – would of course be sex between queer individuals; an issue that remains highly debated. Some people/governments to this day like to think that they have the right to dictate who is allowed to have sex with whom and what sexual practices people can engage in without facing societal/legal punishment. So sex is never just about sex but is always also political; it’s just that this is more obvious to people who are part of a (or multiple) marginalised group(s). Sex is an entangled, complex phenomenon that always needs to be understood in relation to other discourses on e.g. (normative) femininity/masculinity, national identity etc. So any sexual act (on screen/irl), whether intended or not, engages with these discourses, subverts them and/or reaffirms them.

Regardless of whether the creators of Playboyy – or any piece of media for that matter – have meant for this series to serve as a critique or subversion of certain ideas surrounding sex and sexuality, the series (un)intentionally presents us with certain performances of sex and in doing so adds to, intervenes in and shapes existing discourses on sexuality and influences how topics such as kink, queerness, sex work (to name a few) are understood and talked about. 

Since only one episode has been released so far, and since I don't know what goes on in the writers’ minds, I, of course, can’t say for certain whether Playboyy is intended to engage with the political and social aspects of sex. However, I do think that Denice’s Twitter accounts (he is one of the writers (@ VivienneActing)) can provide us with insights into the writers’ intentions behind creating this show. In addition, the opening scene of episode one makes it clear that this piece of media, in some capacity at least, serves as a social commentary on the construction of sexual practices and sexual identities (in Thailand). The viewer is seemingly directly addressed, questions regarding sex are posed and the statement that “sex has many forms and careers in many places with many preferences” is made, which leads me to think that the creators have thought about and want the audience to critically think about how sex is often presented and talked about within dominant discourses. The character goes on to say that “it would be great if we could stop faking it and be frank about it”, which implies that the way we currently talk about sex is dissatisfactory to the character in the show/the creators of the show and that this series intends to present their own – potentially non-normative – views on sex. Especially the comment that “it’s a shame that we can’t be that free in this country” functions as a critique of how sex and the sex industry are frequently conceptualised in Thailand. (And when I say ‘Thailand’ here I of course don’t mean the entire country; I’m specifically referring to people/institutions/political parties that uphold and propagate conservative beliefs on and attitudes regarding sex. And I think this is the part of Thailand the series is critical of here as well).

However, I also don’t want to place too much importance on the intentions of the creators (in part, bc as I have said before, unless we are told specifically we can only speculate about their motives). I for one am also very interested in how I myself (and other viewers) read and interpret the narratives the series presents us with.

Little disclaimer: I watched episode 1 last night, half asleep, I don’t have the best memory and since the story has literally just begun (and there are so many ways this could pan out), my stance on these issues will probably change with the release of future episodes. So my ramblings have their limitations. In addition, I’ve grown up in the West, which influences how I conceptualise sex(uality) and gender; which is definitely something to be wary of and to be critical of, as well. 

As of right now, I’m the most intrigued by Zouey and by how he navigates sex and how he expresses himself sexually. What I find so interesting about his character is his non-normative approach to sex. While he is introduced as someone who apparently hasn't slept with anyone yet, we also see that he has sexual needs and desires. I love that the show does not limit sexual expression to intimate relations between two or more people but also showcases the possibility of exploring it on your own. 

I’m fascinated by people’s initial reactions to Zouey and what people make of his character; in particular people’s thoughts on the scene where he is in a dark room masturbating to a painting. I do wonder how much the colour grading (quite dark and gloomy) and the music (somewhat ominous) might influence or shape viewers’ perceptions of this scene and their conceptualisation of Zouey, and more broadly speaking their reception of expressions of non-normative sexual acts (in media).

The way Zoey negotiates his boundaries regarding sex is so interesting to me, as he clearly feels sexual attraction but does not feel comfortable being touched sexually. (I do wonder if there is a reason for this. Not saying that there needs to be a particular reason; I’m genuinely just curious if we might find out more in future episodes). I personally love how that doesn’t stop him from blowing Teena (twice if I remember correctly). I think his performance disrupts the normative script of sex, (or one of the normative scripts. To say that there is only one normative way to have sex would be incorrect I guess). He definitely doesn't adhere to this script/these scripts, and this seems to have created discomfort/confusion for some viewers, while others seem to really appreciate it. 

Also a little side note: the way Zouey does or doesn’t have sex can also lead us to posing the question of what counts as sex. Only penetrative sex? That seems like a somewhat outdated and not exactly queer-friendly definition of sex, right? And what even is virginity? Is Zouey still a virgin or not by the end of the episode?

I think the first episode already touches on so many different issues and I love it. People have pointed out the different social statuses of First and Soong, so we already have a storyline that highlights how sex and class are interconnected issues. We have seen a fair amount of kinky sexual practices, and sex workers have also made an appearance. So to come back to my initial question, is Playboyy porn without plot? Personally, I wouldn’t classify it as such. In my opinion, while the first episode does heavily focus on sex, sex is used as a tool for storytelling and the creators have taken the unique approach of introducing the viewers to the characters via sex. Plus, there is the mysterious disappearance of Nun/Nant(?). But also to me, it doesn’t really matter whether this is porn without plot or not. Firstly, because I think that sometimes (emphasis on ‘sometimes’, okay?) when something is labelled as porn without plot this is done to discredit a particular piece of media and to paint it as something that is inherently ‘less’ (less serious, less valuable etc.) and I don’t agree with this particular conceptualisation of plot without porn because I think it fails to recognise the value of such stories, not just for people’s own enjoyment but also in regards to academic analysis. And secondly, because I am more interested in how the series is situated (and maybe even actively positions itself) in relation to broader discourses such as (non-normative) sexualities, kink, sex work (in Thailand) etc. and for this we don’t necessarily need a “good” plot structure. So I, for one, am I excited to watch (and analyse) the rest of the show. 

[ectonurites]

…ok the next DC:YJ issue (#5) isn’t out yet (aside from the preview and a leaked page) but I wanna briefly talk about this criticism/sentiment i’ve seen in at least three or four separate posts across here and twitter:

Several people confused/frustrated by Meghan seeming to characterize Young Justice fans (via Mickey) as conservative homophobic sexist racist etc dudebros- when the Young Justice fandom they are familiar with is largely made up of a completely different diverse group of people. Plus the 1998 book itself being unfairly misrepresented as less progressive than it actually was in order to justify this.

To which there’s two points I’d like to bring up:

1. Meghan Fitzmartin is the one writing this book. Meghan Fitzmartin who wrote the story in which Tim became canonically bisexual. Meghan Firzmartin who has been constantly berated and criticized and sent hate by the vocal toxic homophobic Tim fans that think she ruined the character! A lot of those people aren’t fans of just Tim- they’re fans of Tim’s generation (in many instances because stuff like Young Justice 1998 was current back when they were getting into comics). And plenty are opposed to any change, not just characters coming out as LGBT, but more diversity in comics in general- more lead characters of color, more lead women, etc. The tumblr- and like stan dctwt- sections of the DC fandom might be what you see the most as a user of those communities, but they are not the only part of the fandom, not the majority, and not even necessarily the most vocal.

2. @gwynerso said the other thing I wanna communicate well when discussing misrepresentation of Young Justice 1998:

I think the whole point was that it was progressive, given the whole point is that Mikey had to heavily twist the guys memories and remove Cassie to make his “point”. Whilst we can talk about writing quality and whether it hits its mark or not, it’s definitely a critique of (x)

the sort of fan who will ignore the progressive elements of what they like to paint it in the gross light they want it to have. If it wasn’t progressive, Bart, Tim and Kon wouldn’t have noticed the dissonance. Mikey’s powers are reality bending on both ends like his dad’s. (x)

Because, as stated earlier, those types of fans of YJ do definitely exist and they are in Meghan’s twitter notifications on a pretty regular basis (plus I wouldn’t be surprised by some irl encounters at conventions she’s attended since UL #6 dropped). Maybe they’re not the ones reading the book (and even if they are, they’re obviously not the only ones) but it’s still a toxic mindset that’s within the comics community and she is actively painting that mindset as being the villain here (which goes along with the general theme in both this book and Dark Crisis as an event that things can’t/shouldn’t just go back to ‘how they were’ because things have changed, modern comics can’t just be ruled by nostalgia)

I think there is definitely fair discussion to be had about whether this was the book/story that was needed for these characters right now (I personally at this point don’t really think it was, in large part because a lot of problems/unfair treatment the YJ generation has faced were more editorial’s fault than the fanbase’s, and that’s something hard to actually approach through an in-universe story), I think there are certainly elements/execution/characterization worth criticizing (I’m just… waiting to formulate my final thoughts on any of that until we have the whole story, because the context of the ending could absolutely change/explain things), but it feels like so many people are just looking for reasons to be angry without taking a step back to think about the larger picture/larger comics community. Without trying to think about what is actually being communicated here and instead just getting defensive.

[lesbiansanemi]

I have started to accept I am a bit more (re a lot more) psychologically unstable than I thought for a long time and man…. I’m tired of it

[apollos-boyfriend]

YOU WATCH JAIDEN OVER SPARKLEZ????? you have truly changed, icarus.

i’m going to expose myself with this one. i rarely ever watch jordan live nowadays. i am a vod girlie 95% of the time. partially because i use captainsparklez vods to fall asleep, and partially because i only get the time to watch his stream when none of my mains are live, which is. extremely rare as of late

[ciderjacks]

Gonna be real it would be a lot easier to talk about transmasculine specific oppression if we were allowed to acknowledge sex is real unchanging and not the same as gender identity, but saying that gets you called a terf, so instead we wind up with t-dudes saying that they’re oppressed bc they’re men.

[valerieismss]

I’m not sure if my inane ability to make miis extremely accurate to their real world counterparts contradicts or is a result of my prosopagnosia

[josephtrohman]

twiddling my thumbs. waiting for a potential stream. but while i’m waiting i just had the thought that 7 years ago today i saw fob for the first time ever: july 22, 2016💞💞💞 luv being a fan for like 12 years but only getting the chance to see them twice ever lolol

[m1d-45]

Truth to be told, I was not a huge fan of the SAGAU. I just thought it was a bit of a wasted potential, the themes just being played around in my opinion (everyone can like whatever) BUT then I came across your writing? Yes, I think I've grown rather fond toward it now. It was like finding gold in a mine... Words put together intricately, so beautifully, the symbolism subtle if not one squints to recognize, and just... *chef's kiss*

Very in love with your work ❤ have a great day/night, ty for bringing new light on the SAGAU for me!

thank you so much <33 i’m glad to know i’ve interested you in the genre, and though i can’t point you in any directions, i do reccomend you poke around a bit more online! there are a lot of great writers around, and i’m grateful you think i’m one of them!

enjoy your stay!

[roaringroa]

feeling so loved right now

[localrecluse]

lil doodle from the other day

[salted-caramel-tea]

this post was supposed to be a lighthearted post about aspec people by highlighting them in a joking way that still instills positivity and pride in the identity .

unfortunately too many people are too chronically online and media illiterate to realise that so let’s break down the post.

‘shout out to the people not having gay sex this pride month’

this was intentionally a worded to counter the ‘have lots of gay sex this pride month’ jokes and positivity that surround pride discussions. The wording directly associates with anti-queer activity and their frequent attempt to divert attention from queer people during the month of pride. it is worded intentionally. it is supposed to seem counter active to pride .

the humour is then seeing a pride flag. specifically the asexual flag- in which case this stands for an umbrella term across the aspec community which is more recognisable than the variety of aspec flags that i had seen whilst looking for a flag for this post . the grey line of the asexual flag stands for the spectrum between allosexual and asexual it represents the degrees of asexuality and in so, with the purple, stood for the aspec community in this post.

if the joke is still lost on you, the idea was to read a statement that counters the idea of queer pride and find it recontextualised to humorously represent an identity associated with the lack of sexual attraction; ergo no gay sex .

what this post is NOT, is a comment on varied asexual attraction. it us not a commentary on what makes a valid asexual person or whether or not you specifically will have sexual inter course this pride month . it is not saying asexuals are not allowed to have sex . this post is pushing any stereotype of asexuality . op is a sex having aspec person. i am demisexual . i have been with my partner for almost 2 years and engage in sexual activity .

what this post IS, is a joke. it’s a fucking joke i cant make it any clearer. not every single joke is going to relate to your own experiences and that’s ok. not every post about asexuality is going to relate to your own experiences that’s ok. you need to stop taking things at face value and actually engage in some media literacy to understand when something is a reductionist and stereotyping commentary which is inherently negative and when something uses a reductionist approach to convey humour because a lot of you really seem to be struggling with that one.

i fear a lot of you take yourselves too seriously and can’t find the humour in simple tumblr shitposts to the point where i’m having to actually explain what i thought was a very easy concept to grasp because it has upset a lot of people . stop taking everything so seriously .

if you are offended by the original post that is actually a you problem. that is something you have to work on where you cannot accept any form of lighthearted media that does not directly align with your own experiences . bc it’s not serious . it’s a joke x

also allo people can fuck off bc this is literally a post celebrating aspec ppl idc if your gf lives across the country or if you’re just a single loser this literally has nothing to do w u

yall make me want to kms for making me do this

[mothmansboyfriend]

Someone having a bad attitude/rude articulation is not the same as someone being personally mean/harmful/offensive to you.

If you can walk away from a discussion confident that neither of you said anything worth wishing you could take back then congratulations: you’ve had the real life equivalent of a negative friendliness action in the Sims and there are NO permanent negative bodily consequences! Get back on the horse, your next social interaction with someone else could easily be far better.

My hands get tense and painful when I feel socially rejected, I can fully understand it sucks bad to receive attitude you feel undeserving of especially when you perceive yourself as working hard for unconscious social praise. But just like two autistics with different stimulation needs can’t both be happy in the exact same environment “made for autistics”, not everyone can have a pleasant reaction in a social convention “meant to be pleasant” because people can’t control their physical symptoms of frustration any more than I can control that my mind goes blank and I stutter or go silent when I’m genuinely (and irrationally) scared about answering simple questions.

As humans we are all owed common decency. Common decency is not semi-conditional kindness. It’s just respect for the unknown of a person. Offering basic comforts/requirements as you feel is natural, non-threatening environment for your personal life, acknowledging you exist when you arrive and wishing you well when you depart. That is common decency. Smiling, speaking in a specific tone, and forcing your body language to work for the comfort of a group rather than flow naturally as you react to stimuli, that is kindness. It’s nice to receive kind actions from strangers, but no one is owed these things. Even if you paid for a burger or got lost in the supermarket for two hours.