#if op wants me to delete this i will i just wanted to make my point

[cosmogyros]

Actually you know what? Fuck it. I'm going to add my own tags as a proper post addition. Because if there's one topic in this world that I know inside-out and can discuss from a place of expertise, it's songwriting.

(OP, if you don't want additions, just let me know and I'll delete this re-reblog and keep it as tags-only!)

#ugh i admire stephin merritt so much. so i'm disappointed to hear that he took such a goofy 'criticism' seriously #i do feel validated for never having cared for tom lehrer though #he's obviously talking out of his ass here #slant rhymes are a glorious and powerful and respect-worthy tool in songwriting #sometimes if i catch myself using too many perfect rhymes i intentionally throw a slant rhyme in there #just to keep it interesting and flavorful #or sometimes i'll even use a complete non-rhyme where the ear would expect a rhyme #because that kind of unexpected turn can carry a certain meaning of its own #and thus add another whole layer to the song. #when i was just a baby songwriter i was a big fan of perfect rhymes too #and of syllable counts. and making everything line up very nice and square and consistent #but as i grew and matured as an artist i started to realize that – as helpful and fun as those tools can be – #you can (and should! sometimes!) also create great art without them #and the lack of 'fences' around your creativity can indeed be scary #but if you trust your own art you can venture out into that wild land with faith #that something good will come of it. #(anyway op i'm right there with ya. good post)

Stephin Merritt has said that since 1999 he's held himself to a rule to only ever use perfect rhymes in his songs, after reading an interview where Tom Lehrer disparaged modern songwriters for relying too much on half rhymes or something like that. And this comes to mind a lot for me when I'm listening to/thinking about Merritt's songs, because there's a common complaint about the later Magnetic Fields stuff that the songwriting post-69 Love Songs starts to become too gimmicky, too high-concept, not as much emotional range as the older songs, that kind of thing. And I think there's something to that and I genuinely think it's very plausible that the "perfect rhymes only" rule is a significant causal factor in that shift? I'm not a songwriter so I could be mistaken but I feel like limiting your word choices so much more strictly like that might naturally steer you towards wackier ideas...?

"All She Cares About is Mariachi" feels like kind of the poster child for this, where basically the whole joke of the song is just "how is he going to shoehorn a rhyme for Mariachi into every verse?", but you can see the same impulse all over the place if you look for it, lots of lines are about wordplay first and about whatever they're about a distant second. Which is fine, I like songs like that, but it's frustrating to know this guy is capable of writing stuff like "All the Umbrellas in London" and "Take Ecstasy with Me" and seemingly has just decided to stop doing that on a random whim...

(I think 50 Song Memoir is the big exception (and to be fair it is, literally, a very big exception), where he hit upon a gimmick that forced him to be less gimmicky, and to my mind it's clearly the best work he's done this century and it's not close. Then he went hard in the opposite direction with Quickies... sad!!)

[hoodienanami]

op turned off reblogs for this post so im stealing the entire thing bc this just about sums up all of my feelings on this subject.

why is it that marxists, anarchists, and everyone else on the left can agree that financial criminals deserve either the death penalty or life in prison for the horrible consequences their selfish actions have inflicted on ppl but when someone asks for criminals who rape, molest, and completely destroy the lives of women and children to be given the same treatment those very same leftists remember that theyre meant to be advocating for prison abolition?

why do the rapist and the child molester get second chances but the insurance broker and the corrupt judge dont? well...the answer is pretty obvious if youve got a brain between your ears

to quote moria donegan: "the call for women's freedom from rape, abuse, and harassment has always been the least popular and most politically fraught feminist cause."

[teddybeartoji]

o wait before i start posting any pics.. i was thinking that maybe.. you guys could help me liquify this gender some more by switching up what you call me.... DON'T GET ME WRONG I LOVE . LOVE LOVE LOVE WHEN YOU USE HE/HIM AND JUST OVERALL LIKE MORE MASC STUFF THAT'S SOOO MMMMMMMMMSO FUCKING GOOD like i don't get to feel that irl at all so it really does make me so happy but i've just been thinking abt TRYING to switch it up more yk? does this even make sense...... . hhhh anyway i might won't even like it and i'll want to just go back to hehim but i wanna try... JUST TO SWITCH IT UP.

[hermit-frog]

[macchiatosdumptruck]

.

[queer-book-character-tournament]

this is such a funny description of the characters I wanted to share as pre-propaganda from @a-kind-of-merry-war and also thank you for reminding me to check if One Night in Hartswood was out in the USA yet (it is, I have ordered now!)

[slug-demon]

look. proship vs anti-ship is another one of those debates that is treated too black and white for my tastes. i do not consider myself proship and a lot of people who choose to describe themselves as proship make content that makes me deeply uncomfortable and conflicts with my personal moral perception of the world. however i am STRONGLY anti-censorship and i feel like a lot of anti-ship people really do not understand the implications of the stuff they seem to want. like i hate to say it but i like ao3 because you can host just about anything there. you never have to worry about 'sensitive' topics being banned unjustly. and like, you can't really ban a topic all together in most situations because it blocks productive portrayal and discussion around real-life topics which is important. i would rather have uncomfortable and weird fanfic on the site i use than have to worry about the website being bought out or changing management or some shit and starting censoring any mention of 'distasteful' or 'inappropriate' topics. sometimes writing contains rape, incest and other uncomfortable topics in a non-glorifying or productive light and censoring those works would be unfair. also the idea of all art needing to have a purpose or a sort of productivity to it comes from capitalistic ideals about art as a product and not as expression, so i also don't think the gross underage incest rape fic should be censored either. if you start censoring, where will the line be drawn? how will you maintain the line? what will you do if societal and/or popular opinion of what should be allowed changes? it's all deeply rooted in capitalism and exclusion and othering/'i'm better than you' ways of thinking. so i'm not proship or anti ship i'm anti censorship and pro minding my damn business when something unrelated to me makes me uncomfortable. ao3 has tagging. block the tags from your searches. it is that easy.

[better-in-pencil]

so tumblr just recommend a terf post to me, supposedly ‘based on my likes!’…. tumblr please tell me what the hell I liked, so I can unfucking like it.

Anyways while we’re here, a reminder, transphobes/terfs/radfems you are not welcome on my blog please fuck off

[starbuck]

Some people are just so. Online.

[hegrowth]

like. guys. kaey is overpowered. fuck it, he is. but he's so fucking tired and so chill he just. doesn't. if it really came down to it, yes, he can absolutely one man army any kind of bad situation, and he has in the past. but now he's just like. nah. I'm just trying to survive and that doesn't require extreme lethality or skill. he's doing his best. and purposefully allowing his abilities to fall to the wayside because they aren't him. so yes. kaey, absolutely 100/10 lethal. but operating at like. 2/10 lethal.

[yesandpeeps]

Like cmon this is the main feature I wanted out of this site, am I dumb???

[sassypantsjaxon]

The thing is, the Baratie was never meant to be a fancy restaurant. Zeff wasn't trying to create some fine dining experience in the seas, he just wanted to be able to provide food to hungry travelers. But the food is good, and you get free entertainment, so as long as you're not the one pissing off the staff it's fine

Basically, the Baratie is like a Michelin starred truck stop

I love the concept of Baratie not just bc it's a sea restaurant and that's cool but because their policy is the absolute antithesis of "the customer is always right." Oh you wanna be a jerk to the staff? Get decked, loser. Being terrible on a date? Congratulations, our sous chef will steal your girl. Ordered a wine that pairs badly? Ignored, we're picking a better one. It's like objectively the funniest way to run a restaurant and I can't stop thinking about it.

[jerma85]

i hate how current technology becomes obsolete in the span of 5 seconds and the only way to keep up is to spend thousands of dollars building your own shit. i bought a $3k computer in 2019 that can barely run games and is slow as shit now, and because i don't have the funds or knowledge on how to make it better, i literally just can't do anything about it until i can somehow buy something to make it 10% better.

[daxite]

oh my fucking god can people actually just shut up about that captcha post i seriously don't give a shit dude

[nobodysuspectsthebutterfly]

FYI artists and writers: some info regarding tumblr's new "third-party sharing" (aka selling your content to OpenAI and Midjourney)

You may have already seen the post by @staff regarding third-party sharing and how to opt out. You may have also already seen various news articles discussing the matter.

But here's a little further clarity re some questions I had, and you may too. Caveat: Not all of this is on official tumblr pages, so it's possible things may change.

(1) "I heard they already have access to my data and it doesn't really matter if I opt out"

From the 404 article:

A new FAQ section we reviewed is titled “What happens when you opt out?” states “If you opt out from the start, we will block crawlers from accessing your content by adding your site on a disallowed list. If you change your mind later, we also plan to update any partners about people who newly opt-out and ask that their content be removed from past sources and future training.”

So please, go click that opt-out button.

(2) Some future user: "I've been away from tumblr for months, and I just heard about all this. I didn't opt out before, so does it make a difference anymore?"

Another internal document shows that, on February 23, an employee asked in a staff-only thread, “Do we have assurances that if a user opts out of their data being shared with third parties that our existing data partners will be notified of such a change and remove their data?” Andrew Spittle, Automattic’s head of AI replied: “We will notify existing partners on a regular basis about anyone who's opted out since the last time we provided a list. I want this to be an ongoing process where we regularly advocate for past content to be excluded based on current preferences. We will ask that content be deleted and removed from any future training runs. I believe partners will honor this based on our conversations with them to this point. I don't think they gain much overall by retaining it.”

It should make a difference! Go click that button.

(3) "I opted out, but my art posts have been reblogged by so many people, and I don't know if they all opted out. What does that mean for my stuff?"

This answer is actually on the support page for the toggle:

This option will prevent your blog's content, even when reblogged, from being shared with our licensed network of content and research partners, including those that train AI models.

And some further clarification by the COO and a product manager:

zingring: A couple people from work have reached out to let me know that yes, it applies to reblogs of "don't scrape" content. If you opt out, your content is opted out, even in reblog form. cyle: yep, for reblogs, we're taking it so far as "if anybody in the reblog trail has opted out, all of the content in that reblog will be opted out", when a reblog could be scraped/shared.

So not only your reblogged posts, but anyone who contributed in a reblog (such as posts where someone has been inspired to draw fanart of the OP) will presumably be protected by your opt-out. (A good reason to opt out even if you yourself are not a creator.)

Furthermore, if you the OP were offline and didn't know about the opt-out, if someone contributed to a reblog and they are opted out, then your original work is also protected. (Which makes it very tempting to contribute "scrapeable content" now whenever I reblog from an abandoned/disused blog...)

(4) "What about deleted blogs? They can't opt out!"

I was told by someone (not official) that he read "deleted blogs are all opted-out by default". However, he didn't recall the source, and I can't find it, so I can't guarantee that info. If I get more details - like if/when tumblr puts up that FAQ as reported in the 404 article - I will add it here as soon as I can.

Edit, tumblr has updated their help page for the option to opt-out of third-party sharing! It now states:

The content which will not be shared with our licensed network of content and research partners, including those that train AI models, includes: • Posts and reblogs of posts from blogs who have enabled the "Prevent third-party sharing" option. • Posts and reblogs of posts from deleted blogs. • Posts and reblogs of posts from password-protected blogs. • Posts and reblogs of posts from explicit blogs. • Posts and reblogs of posts from suspended/deactivated blogs. • Private posts. • Drafts. • Messages. • Asks and submissions which have not been publicly posted. • Post+ subscriber-only posts. • Explicit posts.

So no need to worry about your old deleted blogs that still have reblogs floating around. *\o/*

But for your existing blogs, please use the opt out option. And a reminder of how to opt out, under the cut:

The opt-out toggle is in Blog Settings, and please note you need to do it for each one of your blogs / sideblogs.

On dashboard, the toggle is at https://www.tumblr.com/settings/blog/blogname [replace "blogname" as applicable] down by Visibility:

For mobile, you need the most recent update of the app. (Android version 33.4.1.100, iOs version 33.4.) Then go to your blog tab (the little person icon), and then the gear icon for Settings, then click Visibility.

Again, if you have a sideblog, go back to the blog tab, switch to it, and go to settings again. Repeat as necessary.

If you do not have access to the newest version of the app for whatever reason, you can also log into tumblr in your mobile browser. Same URL as per desktop above, same location.

Note you do not need to change settings in both desktop and the app, just one is fine.

I hope this helps!

[koraesrambles]

I'm a huge Red Hood fan, and YES, EXACTLY THIS. I hate when people act like their favorite characters are always 100% right. Jason wants to murder people who he deems irredeemable, and he has a LOT of compelling arguments for it! Arguments that have been formed around a lifetime of experiences with trauma and being a victim, his stances are understandable and valid! BUT SO ARE BRUCE'S.

Bruce being like, "I don't want my kids to kill." Is not unreasonable. Him refusing to kill the joker is not unreasonable. Jason being hurt by that is not unreasonable. Their experiences influence their opinions which influences their characters which influences their choices!

Watering down their characters to "this one right, this one wrong," is not only a disservice, it's BORING. Multiple things can be true at once, and often times they contradict each other and that's life. Figuring out your own opinions and moral stances and how they mesh with others is the point. What is truth, what is morality, what is right? That's the question! That's what humanity has been grappling with from the beginning! Every time we think we've figured it out a new compelling argument comes around to shove us off our feet again.

There is no black and white. Good people do bad things, bad people do good things, it's wrong to kill people and justify it by saying "they deserve this" and it is also wrong to not protect, validate, and make victims feel safe. That's the point. I know it's uncomfortable, that's the point. The fun of fiction is that we can sit and grapple with it from a distance, instead of having to face the real life shadows right over our shoulders.

But it feeling safer in fiction is no excuse to make it EASY.

Actually I DO think Bruce is justified in being upset if his kids/associates kill people. I think he is justified in wanting to do everything in his power to make sure his children don’t kill anyone at all. There’s many things he’s unreasonable about but I do not think he is being unreasonable at all there.