#in the writing itself and in making it accessible to as much of their audience as possible and in trying to take things further

[lopez-richter-fangirl]

Do you honestly think tcb will reach their goal?

I have to believe that they will but I am fucking stressed and fucking scared

The thing is there’s literally no reason they SHOULDN’T. Yes it’s a bigger goal than they’ve ever had but shipwrecked raised that amount for headless and starkid raised almost double that for returns with a smaller slate of projects. Even in TCB’s own kickstarters they raised 100k for a single staged barebones workshop reading. Yes 200k is a lot of money, but for how much they’re doing with it?? It’s TINY

Two concert screenings, one of them international. A full month international play run. A brand new musical with performances in LA and eventually internationally. A concert performance of a show we’ve never heard live yet. A brand new pilot reading. And multiple performances of a live comedy game show

I do think the niche-ness of the campaign branding means they have to work harder to reach a wider audience, but for people who are already aware of what they’re doing, I don’t understand why it’s not showing in the numbers

Please, if anyone’s on the fence, tell me why and let me convince you why this is worth it

[copperbadge]

I'm getting depressingly good at identifying the formula for Pop Academic Books About ADHD.

Regardless of their philosophy it pretty much goes like this:

1. Emotionally sensitive essay about the struggle of ADHD and the author's personal experience with it as both a person with ADHD and a healthcare professional.

2. Either during or directly following this, a lightly explicated catalogue of symptoms, illustrated by anecdotes from patient case studies. Optional: frequent, heavy use of metaphor to explain ADHD-driven behavior.

3. Several chapters follow, each dedicated to a symptom; these have a mini-formula of their own. They open with a patient case study, discuss the highly relatable aspects of the specific symptom or behavior, then offer some lightweight examples of a treatment for the symptom, usually accompanied by follow up results from the earlier case studies.

4. Somewhere around halfway-to-two-thirds through the book, the author introduces the more in-depth explication of the treatment system (often their own homebrew) they are advocating. These are generally both personally-driven (as opposed to suggested cultural changes, which makes sense given these books' target audience, more on this later) and composed of an elaborate system of either behavior alteration or mental reframing. Whether this system is actually implementable by the average reader varies wildly.

5. A brief optional section on how to make use of ADHD as a tool (usually referring to ADHD or some of its symptoms as a superpower at least once). Sometimes this section restates the importance of using the systems from part 4 to harness that superpower. Frequently, if present, it feels like an afterthought.

6. Summation and list of further resources, often including other books which follow this formula.

I know I'm being a little sarcastic, but realistically there's nothing inherently wrong about the formula, like in itself it's not a red flag. It's just hilariously recognizable once you've noticed it.

It makes sense that these books advocate for the Reader With ADHD undertaking personal responsibility for their treatment, since these are in the tradition of self-help publishing. They're aimed at people who are already interested in doing their own research on their disability and possible ways to handle it. It's not really fair to ask them to be policy manuals, but I do find it interesting that even books which advocate stuff like volunteering (for whatever reason, usually to do with socialization issues and isolation, often DBT-adjacent) never suggest disability activism either generally or with an ADHD-specific bent.

None of these books suggest that perhaps life with ADHD could be made easier with increased accommodations or ease of medication access, and that it might be in a person's best interest to engage in political advocacy surrounding these and other disability-related issues. Or that activism related to ADHD might help to give someone with ADHD a stronger sense of ownership of their unique neurology. Or that if you have ADHD the idea of activism or even medical self-advocacy is crushingly stressful, and ways that stress might be dealt with.

It does make me want to write one of my own. "The Deviant Chaos Guide To Being A Miscreant With ADHD". Includes chapters on how to get an actual accurate assessment, tips for managing a prescription for a controlled substance, medical and psychiatric self-advocacy for people who are conditioned against confrontation, When To Lie About Being Neurodivergent, policy suggestions for ADHD-related legislation, tips for activism while executively dysfunked, and to close the book a biting satire of the pop media idea of self-care. ("Feeling sad? Make yourself a nice pot of chicken soup from scratch and you'll feel better in no time. Stay tuned after this rambling personal essay for the most mediocre chicken soup recipe you've ever seen!" "Have you considered planning and executing an overly elaborate criminal heist as a way to meet people and stay busy?")

Every case study or personal anecdote in the book will have a different name and demographics attached but will also make it obvious that they are all really just me, in the prose equivalent of a cheap wig, writing about my life. "Kelly, age seven, says she struggles to stay organized using the systems neurotypical children might find easy. I had to design my own accounting spreadsheet in order to make sure I always have enough in checking to cover the mortgage, she told me, fidgeting with the pop socket on her smartphone."

I feel a little bad making fun, because these books are often the best resource people can get (in itself concerning). It's like how despite my dislike of AA, I don't dunk on it in public because I don't want to offer people an excuse not to seek help. It feels like punching down to criticize these books, even though it's a swing at an industry that is mainly, it seems, here to profit from me. But one does get tired of skimming the hype for the real content only to find the real content isn't that useful either.

Les (not his real name) was diagnosed at the age of 236. Charming, well-read, and wealthy, he still spent much of his afterlife feeling deeply inadequate about his perceived shortcomings. "Vampire culture doesn't really acknowledge ADHD as a condition," he says. "My sire wouldn't understand, even though he probably has it as well. You should see the number of coffins containing the soil of his homeland that he's left lying forgotten all over Europe." A late diagnosis validated his feelings of difference, but on its own can't help when he hyperfocuses on seducing mortals who cross his path and forgets to get home before sunrise. "I have stock in sunburn gel companies," he jokes.

[meatgrinder-0]

something that ive found myself thinking about a lot recently is the loss of autonomy that you have over your identity and what makes you "human" when you die.

(as has been said before by multiple different people) technically ford does not die when he goes through the portal, but as many have said at this point--in a metaphysical way when he goes through the portal he is dead in the eyes of his dimension, so i find in the narrative he experiences a similar loss of his humanity and in the same way that might've occurred with his death, his memory for any that have access to any form of it constructs him into an idea rather than a person.

and really anything can be said and done with him by the people who are still "alive" when this occurs. since he is in all aspects dead people can use him to justify their actions, as a figure in their concepts, and imagine him up to be whoever they want him to be for as long as he remains dead. the audience of course also partook in these same things prior to his reveal by theorizing about what type of person he was or how he might fit into the narrative as a person but to be more specific to examples of this idea in the show is how stan and dipper see ford as an idea.

due to being absent ford had no possible way to influence what stan thought he would want him to do about the portal outside of his existing warnings in his journals so stan is able to twist ford into a justification to work towards opening the portal, and during the length of his work on it according to alex's statements about stan "expecting ford to be weak and in need of help when he came out of the portal" (i feel the likely useless need to say whatever a creator says about their work is always only as canon as one wants it to be but this is worth mentioning here and i think it makes sense contextually within the text) the ford who comes back is so jarring because in his "death" he's become an ideal of what stan wants to see in him to play into his hero fantasy and hopes of earning back his appreciation

and of course as i think about a normal amount of times per day--the duration of the show presents the author as a figure that is wrapped up in a concept of ford while presenting him in a much more mythical format--another one of gravity falls' mysteries. pretty much every main character that isnt stan views him in this mystical light throughout the show with dipper being the prime example and uses the idea of "the author" as a driving force to pursue the questions that the town begs them to ask. there is something to be said about how creators of the show refer to journal 3 as "its own character" in a way that clearly separates it from it's author. even outside of the universe of the show itself, even in the show's own writing team ford--somehow despite being already being only a concept by virtue of being fictional--is stripped of humanity and becomes an even further abstracted concept.

but even to the ford who is alive the self who had gone through the portal is also a concept. i know this idea isnt explored much in canon if at all but bear with me here while i make shit up for fun--in a way, we ourselves the way we are now are dying near constantly. when we wake up each morning we of course have access to the same memories and the same body and the same experiences as the self we were before we fell asleep, but if we were to get existential, how can we be sure that we are the same consciousness that we were before?

even if this is a bit too absurd of a concept to be applying to a messy braindump "analysis" of a fictional character theres something about how extreme change in a person (often from trauma as ford has experienced for Obvious reasons) or even just the passage of time leaves the former self as nothing more but a memory to even the body that it once inhabited.

as i said theres not much to connect this to in the canon of the text, but i do believe that ford does see his past self who wrote the journals as an idea just as much as anyone else in his life did.

[describe-things]

This post is made with speech to text because my hand hurts from typing so much today. Please forgive any typos or speech to text swapping similar sounding words.

If you would like to start writing your own image descriptions, feel free to ask any questions.

The main things to keep in mind is that they should begin with some variation of image description start or ID, and end with some variation of image description and, and ID or something like that. This distinguish the image description from the caption or anything else.

Image descriptions should not be written in italics, bold, all caps, or any colors. If text in the image is in all caps, write it in regular case, and simply note before or after it that it's in all caps.

Image descriptions should describe all images in the post, without skipping any. This includes images that are nothing but text.

Plain text image descriptions in the body of the post are more accessible than alt text alone, because many people who need image descriptions cannot use alt text, and Tumblr is known for its glitches, so the accessibility of the alt text all by itself varies widely over time.

It is more accessible to have the image descriptions indented than not, because this helps to visually separate the image description from the caption. Having brackets or parentheses at the end is also helpful for this. This allows people to easily distinguish between the caption and the image description if they need to.

If you are an artist, writing image descriptions for your art will give you full control over the image description, and will allow you to correctly identify details that others might miss. This gives you the opportunity to show which parts of your art hold meaning to you and are important to notice.

If you are describing real people who are unknown to you, unless it is specified within the post or you are already aware, please do not assign any gendered terms to them, or any " male presenting or female presenting" terms like that. This is completely unnecessary and leads to misgendering. It is best to simply describe visible facts about the people. Hair color, length, clothes and style, pose, expression, the light or darkness of their skin, things like that. Do not assume that someone is white simply because they have light skin.

Do not use image descriptions to lie to the audience in any way and do not use image descriptions to make jokes where the audience reading the image description is the butt of the joke.

As an example, if there is a very clearly fake screenshot, do not say that it is simply a screenshot, or if a photo is very blatantly photoshopped, do not say that it is simply a photo. Say an edited photo, a badly edited photo, a screenshot with editing, something like that to indicate the changes have been made and then what you are going to be describing is not the natural version.

As an example, you would say a crab photoshopped to be driving a car. Rather than a photo of a crab driving a car.

Unless you are transcribing a text within the image, do not use meme speak within image descriptions. Do not refer to dogs as doggos for example, unless it is to specify that the dog in the image is, within the image, labeled as a doggo. Do not describe someone walking downstairs as breasted bubbly downstairs, even if it is an actor humorously walking down the stairs to imitate that sentence. Describe the facts of the movements, and then you can make the comparison for clarity.

If someone adds an image description to your post whether this be an original post or a reblog that you have added an image to, it doesn't matter how many notes to post already has, please copy and paste that image description into the original post or your original reblog. If it is a new post that has only a few notes from friends, after you update the original, you can just ask your friends to delete the reblogs of the inaccessible version and reblog the new one. Most people who are good people and care about disabled people will happily do so.

Keep in mind that image descriptions are accessibility tools. Treat them as such.

Anyone can write image descriptions. You do not need any special qualifications or training. As long as you are willing to take constructive criticism if you make a mistake, an image description written by someone who's new to it and honestly doing their best with good intentions is better than no image description at all.

I'm sure I'm forgetting some things, so please feel free to add on more tips and advice.

[crimeronan]

musing on horror fiction and disability.

i've seen a lot of interesting discussion recently on whether or not disability horror is Okay (TM). the most common conclusion (from people who, like, care about ableism) is that disabled protags should Exist, but their disability shouldn't be the source of the horror, and should perhaps even help them survive. and there's been a lot of good horror fiction written around this specific concept!

it's a pretty sensible starting point because, like. disability Actually Exists. you don't want to write a story where the point is to gawk at an actual subsection of your readers n go "wow, GOD, that would suck!! how scary!! so glad it's not me!! okay byeeee"

On The Other Hand, though. when i write horror, i DEFINITELY plot using chronic illness and other disability-related stuff as a key source. so i'm musing on that.

people who already Know my horror work are gonna say "yeah, because you're writing from experience!! so you do it Right!!"

and if we're gonna set Rules (TM) on what narratives are or aren't done "right," then... yeah, i agree. i know what i'm doing and i will not stop doing it anytime soon, regardless of where the Discourse (TM) falls. but i'm trying to figure out what, specifically, makes it Right. you know??

so.

i think some of it is about knowing Why the thing is scary. the Why is what makes horror effective in the first place, anyway! if you know the Why, then you can lean into & manipulate your audience's feelings!

and sometimes the Why is just. shitty.

like, psycho is scary because crazy men in dresses with DID might kill you in the shower. split is scary for similar reasons. i'm trying to remember bad horror about physical disabilities but my mind is protecting me. let's just say, like, the whole subgenre about haunted hospitals with scary disabled patients. the PATIENTS are going to hurt you??? the PATIENTS??!!?!

but the Why re: disability isn't Always othering or cruel or inaccurate, imo.

sometimes being sick Is Scary. not gonna get too deep into it here, but like. it just is. it just fuckin' is. it's scary both internally and externally. the loss of control is scary. the loss of ability itself is scary; the consequences for that loss of ability are also scary. the loss of autonomy is scary. it's scary when doctors don't know what's wrong, and it's scary when they do. it's scary to undergo treatment, and it's scary not to have access to treatment. it's scary not to know what the future holds. it's all fucking scary!!

so like. the "why" in "why is it scary," for me at least, often boils down to "because it is Real."

disability is coming for everyone who's blessed with old age. disability is coming for a wide swath of much younger people, too. it is happening. that's a scary thing for people to reckon with on a personal level, and so it just seems sensible to me for this to crop up in horror.

what is scary about being sick?? take your pick. but for the love of god, ground it in truth.

then the Other thing is: i think you Have to know your audience. and i think you Have to assume a good portion of your audience Will share the disability in question.

i write my horror FOR chronically ill people. i don't really care about anyone else or anybody else's opinions.

and that's part of why stuff like psycho sucks -- the othering. the takeaway is "people like you are frightening and dangerous." another example that's not actually horror, but which Does hurt my feelings, is a little life by hanya yanagihara -- that book is engineered to tell all the disabled rape victims in the audience that the only sensible course for their lives is suicide.

but then, like. the episodes of the magnus archives dealing with hospitals and psychosis and addiction are Fucking Brilliant. because they're taking the Very Real Horror of those Very Real Experiences and telling the audience, "no, you're not crazy. that was fucked up. it was fucked up that it happened and it's fucked up that it still happens and you are right to feel violated. that's the horror here"

and like. that is!! SUCH an enormous comfort!! at least for some of us!!

so. i write about how being sick is fucked up. and i do it for the people who want someone to tell them, yeah, it sucks, it hurts, and it's fucked up.

not everybody wants this! many disabled people want The Exact Opposite of this in their horror stories. which is why the "disabled horror protag beats the slasher villain to death with their prosthetic leg" stuff rocks.

but different people want different things from their fiction.

for example, on a purely personal level, i can't Stand fluffy escapist fiction about no-ableism worlds where the disabled protags are all perfectly cared for n happy. it just makes me unhappy and upset about the world i'm currently living in.

but that specific genre is a lifeline for other people!!

so. anyway.

i don't know if any of this makes sense.

i will conclude by saying that i'm remembering something hank green said about how he only takes cancer advice from fellow cancer patients. his example was that if someone tells them weed helped with their chemo pain, he's like, thank you, that's great to know!! but if someone tells him to do weed for cancer bc they're.... just a stoner.... then he's like, "uh.... i do not care."

in that vein, i always always Always find it really valuable to hear from other people with the same kind of autoimmune diseases and degenerative illnesses i have/write -- those perspectives on horror/representation/visibility are Wonderful. (even when disagreeing with me!)

but if people's feedback amounts to "well, being sick Doesn't suck for me, so you should be more careful about writing sickness that sucks"

.....i'm like. well. i.... don't think this conversation is about you. i don't think i was talking to you.

maybe sometimes what's scary is being told you're hurting your own community by having. the Wrong Feelings.

[sunny-superstar]

dont make me tap the sign

i know it ultimately trails back to the corporations but i just wanna say i think it’s heinous that old heterosexual men are STILL seemingly always in showrunner positions for major television shows, or at least they are always the ones getting their ideas greenlit. and so the most accessible popular media (the narratives we collectively see) are determined by these dudes who do not relate to You. they don’t care about what or who You’d like to see represented onscreen. sometimes this is affected by diversity in the writer’s room, etc., but for the most part everything must be dumbed down to what THEY THINK an average middle-american audience member can tolerate—and it’s insulting to everyone’s intelligence! It’s nearly 2025 and we’re all supposed to accept that certain kinds of stories are not worth telling (on that scale) because why? because it’s potentially alienating to a demographic that already has decades of screen representation to enjoy?

SO let’s talk about how showrunners/networks are well aware of viewership demographics and the profitability of fandom. Take a show like wwdits, where a lot of its notoriety had to do with its general edginess and, importantly, its appeal to LGBTQ audiences: the creators intentionally featured a mlm will-they/won’t-they at the center of their show, to the point that it was arguably the driving force behind continued viewership. It’s the carrot on a stick. “How will we keep profiting off of these queer viewers? Make them hope. Textually suggest the prospect of a fully realized gay romance and then tease these viewers for making ~homoerotic fanart and fanfiction~ like that wasn’t the plan all along!”

Your fanwork, whether it’s drawn or written, is free publicity for the source material. You Need To Know that. Because the corporate bastards Have Known That. that’s why supernatural was on for 15 seasons. Not because the plot itself was worth that much, but because the supporters of the central gay ship MADE it profitable. And baiting them only fans the flames (basically, it drives people crazy. spn still trends on here like once a week, 4 years later). & they want you crazy. they want online engagement. they want it trending on tumblr and twitter. They believe that if they give you what you want (canon gay rep) then the show will instantly lose profitability.

So. That’s what it comes down to. Your dedication means nothing to them but job security... and if you dare to take the bait and hope for the writers to fulfill what they VERY deliberately set up, they’re gonna straight up mock you. In the end, they’re just gonna fumble all of it, because they never cared about You or even the characters and their stories. Why bother if it doesn’t seem profitable anymore, right?

God it’s all so cynical. Keep writing fanfiction. Keep making fanart. Keep engaging in fandom spaces. Do it because YOU have passion. Do it because YOU care about a story or characters that mean something to you. Do it because we, as the folk, as the common people, need to have some way to control these narratives. We need to create our own hope, even if we get belittled for it. It’s all we have to combat the cynicism.

[oneirophasia]

I like thinking about how The Murderbot Diaries could be adapted. I enjoy the conceit that much or all of the footage/animation is technically in first-person - but, true to character, Murderbot frequently prefers to hijack drones and other environmental cameras as an emotional distancing mechanism, allowing changes in POV to communicate its emotions without forcing Murderbot to explicitly comment on them. :D Visual media obviously want less narration than literature (sometimes to its detriment), but fortunately Murderbot has the excuse of lacking a Watson or anyone else it's willing to talk to, especially for half the first book, so there's plenty of justification for a minimal level of snarky cyber-noir commentary. The tonal contrast between its internal monologue and everything it actually says is important!

Treating the "camera" as an explicit extension of Murderbot's perspective also slightly simplifies the problem that a lot of the action and dialogue happens in a way that's tricky to convey passively in only two senses. For one, people talk to each other regularly not just vocally, but over the feed. How can that distinction be made clear to the audience without constantly having to say so? Audio is the most obvious choice; maybe the dialogue has processing effects that give it a subtle electronic tint. Earlier scenes could establish the convention by showing augmented humans continuing to talk by closing their mouths and using subvocal jaw movements, accompanied by the processing change, setting up that association to use without the visual cue later. It'd be important that the effect be distinctive without making the dialogue incomprehensible, since music and sound effects would also still be part of the mix. But "the feed" isn't just one feed, either - not everyone uses the same public channel, and sometimes that's plot-relevant. I remember in Rogue Protocol there was a moment where Murderbot has a brief conversation with someone - I think it was Abene? - which starts vocally, then moves to the feed, then to a private channel. The same people are speaking, or else you could use that to imply the change, but it's important to the audience that other people in the group who aren't currently speaking can only hear some of it. How do you communicate that efficiently? "Sounds digital" is one thing, "sounds digital but in two or more distinct and consistent ways" is another level and outside my limited AV knowledge. (If Murderbot is narrating when other people are around we might also need tone for "asides no one heard but the audience", but that isn't anything new at least.)

That's relatively trivial compared to the broader problem that Murderbot, specifically, is constantly talking to and hacking computer systems. That's at least half of its job and plot participation, but it's also a core part of its characterisation as an insubordinate non-human that makes it a compelling protagonist, so "just write it out of the script" would clearly betray the spirit of an adaptation. I don't know if you've thought about how much effort directors went to until someone (possibly on Sherlock) figured out how to just present text messages on-screen in a dynamic and legible way? This is worse. Viewers don't necessarily need as much information as readers get, but I just finished Exit Strategy and was paying attention to what I was actually imagining visually while Murderbot:

Remotely contacts a gunship using false authentication so it won't notify its human crew

Casually disables security devices and erases itself from recordings

Distinguishes systems by which organisation they belong to, how much access it has to them, and whether they have an active human operator

Sorts personal memories to edit into a highlights reel

Briefly redirects a secure call at a critical moment

Fakes a glitch in decorative holography

Exploits the perimeters of security systems that don't directly communicate with each other to evade pursuit

Monitors transit traffic to deduce enemy movement and change plans accordingly

Hijacks all the drones in a large room and blocks attempts to regain control

Reclassifies enemy combatants mid-engagement

Secures a pilot bot in the middle of being destroyed by killware

Creates bait to lure said killware into a subsystem that can be physically disconnected

Good thing I was imagining a broadly POV camera framing anyway, because none of this is happening physically, and Murderbot isn't experiencing it through human-analogous senses. The challenge is to communicate all of that without impeding the story it's meant to support, without the advantage of being able to control pacing through text. The usual trope for creating visual interest in the visually-unexciting activity of "using a computer" is to portray it as happening physically anyway in a metaphorical cyberspace, but I don't think that actually works in this case, because remember: a lot of this happens during climactic action scenes, and blocking fight choreography can be disorienting enough as it is without also constantly flickering into virtual reality just long enough to flip an imaginary switch. It makes more sense to me to represent it as more of an augmented reality overlay, which... the problem there isn't really that that sounds like creating an entire imaginary UI, which isn't different in principle from set design making sure all the buttons are labelled consistently on the spaceship console, the problem is that usually the audience isn't watching through the console. You'd need to treat the HUD elements as normal and use them at least often enough that when they become important the audience will be ready to follow along without exposition, but cluttering the screen can be distracting enough when you're playing an game and is probably even worse in a non-interactive medium.

[ataleofcrowns]

man interactive fiction authors get the most insane asks from anons what is it that has these freaks showing up to bother you all, just for putting out work for free??? 🙃

I'm gonna be honest, we're just way too accessible. Unfortunately for authors who are just starting out, there aren't that many ways to build up a readership outside of dropping regular updates.

Interacting regularly with your base of readers and giving them extra content through (anonymous) asks is one of those ways to cultivate an audience, and I feel gross just writing that because in an ideal world that shouldn't factor into it at all. But in the current online landscape, that's just become part of the culture surrounding it.

Especially since IF itself as a genre is very much online, there is this expectation that authors themselves should be familiar with the online landscape and be easily accessible as well. That accessibility comes with both pros and cons, and one of the major cons is that you get randoms in your inbox who decided to leave their manners at the door just because it's the internet and they're anonymous, so they think they can say and demand whatever they want from you without repercussions.

It's a decision that every IF author will have to make for themselves, in terms of how much they interact with their readers and how much access they allow.

While I do keep my anonymous asks on, I do that as someone who has thick skin and knows the risks of doing so. I'm also relatively active in my Discord server, but that's pretty much where the interaction with my readers ends. I'm otherwise a very private person, and this past year especially have taken added distance because I'm more comfortable that way.

But that's also a luxury I have because AToC is pretty well-established as an IF now, so I can afford to let the work speak for itself rather than twist myself up into a pretzel trying to garner more readers. I absolutely don't envy new IF writers, I can't imagine the struggle for them in this climate 🥲

[theforlorne]

SFW hcs coming up! I love this dynamic, and there's a touch of plot sprinkled throughout. I haven't included NSFW due to the fact that I ask for ID first to prevent minors from accessing sexually explicit material. If you're happy to provide proof of age, then I'll write a part two for you with the NSFW hcs. But for now, I threw you in an extra five SFW hcs to make up for the loss!

Thank you so much for your kind words too! I'm super happy to know people are enjoying these ♡♡♡

SFW Gabriel x Girly!AFAB!Reader Headcanons (Gabriel x Reader) [Requested]

A general selection of headcanons for Gabriel x a Girly!AFAB!Reader.

Teen and Up Audiences, No Warnings, F/M, Other/M, Tag(s): Headcanons, AFAB!Reader, Reader Uses She/Her Pronouns, Insecurity, Blood, Gift Giving, Fluff, Flowers, Pet Names, POV Second Person WC: 1,589

Apologies for tagging you in this again, @gloriousnachoblaze, I'm reposting all my works to my main blog!

♡ Imagines and Headcanons Masterlist ♡

♡ Buried somewhere beneath the oversized pink cardigan was an angel fumbling her words. All gestures and nervous laughter, you were simultaneously trying to apologise for bumping into him, compliment his armour, and explain that you were lost. That was his first interaction with you, but not the last. With your penchant for looking every which way but forwards as you walk, you would bump into him time and time again. Growing familiarity would lead you to greet him with vibrant enthusiasm each time. Likewise, he finds himself helpless to the whims of fate. When you were lost, he would help you find your way. When you wanted to catch up, he would delight in your company. When you ask him if he wants to accompany you on your walk, he agrees. Who was he to say no? The simple truth is that he appreciates your often fleeting interactions. Conversation flows, and he keeps it no secret that he admires the breadth of outfits you decorate yourself with. Like the pink you wear, you seem to be the embodiment of its symbolism: love itself. Heaven sorely missed that innocence in his eyes.

♡ Who was he to say no? That becomes the sentiment of your budding relationship. Politics, war, and obligation fill most of Gabriel’s time. It is his purpose to engage with those things, and he does so with no complaint. Yet you, with such vigour, would light up Heaven itself with the zeal you express for that around you. No matter how many times you read the same romance novel, you remain engrossed in it from the second you pick it up. He asks to borrow it so he can talk to you about it, and the next thing he knows, he’s your model to style how you please. He is relaxing on pink pillows with you as you paint both of your nails. No matter what you ask him to do, the answer is a resounding yes. Not because he can’t say no, he just relishes being a part of the world as you see it. And he would worry when he realises that the world he is a part of is far detached from yours. Those things he does out of love are contradictory to the experiences you share together. Violence and bloodshed holds no place by your side.

♡ Gabriel is as scatterbrained as you once he begins to worry. Every table is at risk of being knocked over with a hip bump. Corners and doorways become his biggest enemy. The Council aren’t too happy when he shows up late to his summons. The otherwise cheerful angel would become quiet and reserved. Picking up on the sudden change in behaviour was easy, yet you forget to ask him about it the first time. When you see him again, you’ll pull him to the side to ask if he’s okay - apologising for not doing so earlier. There’s so much he would want to say, but he’s at a loss for words until he figures out what he’s experiencing himself. Still, he would reassure you that he enjoys your company. It’s not the answer you deserve, and he knows that like a sword knows death.

♡ There’s nothing to hide anymore when you catch him returning from Hell one day, and everything comes out in a big, bloody mess. You’re holding his hands in the most delicate way as you wash the viscera from them. He’s insisting that he can clean himself up. He says that you can talk when he is presentable. ‘Presentable, presentable, presentable’ - you ask him why he thinks he isn’t presentable the way he is, and he would tell you that you wouldn’t enjoy his company if you saw the things he did. As you begin to wipe down the side of his helmet, you allow it to sink in that you’re there with him. You haven’t left. After that, you let him handle things himself, and he has time to process things alone. For all his pride in his strength, he acknowledges that his ‘worth’ is where he finds himself struggling. He shelters you from the violence, but if he is not a skilled fighter in your eyes, then what is he? Is it enough?

♡ Two things happen. You become the reason why he voices his stress out loud. You also become the person he offers himself to entirely - even the parts that aren’t so pretty. Divided between duty and desire, Gabriel continues to share in your world. The moment he feels the warmth of your arms, he recognises it as the same bliss he’s felt by your side all along. To love love itself with the same ferocity is his driving force. Likewise, the adoration you afford the space around you continues to linger in your eyes when he holds your attention. It’s everything to him. Although, he tells you in confidence that he has no idea what he’s doing. 

♡ Remember the romance novel? That’s Gabriel’s guide on how he is supposed to act until he finds his footing. Sure, some of it is super cliche, but it makes you smile. Books are often your gateway into discussions about your relationship that teach you about one another. The learning curve is nothing more than time spent together enjoying each other’s presence. Every love language is spoken between you in an exploration of comforts and boundaries. His bad pick up lines are just as effective when you use them against him, and there’s no denying that his replication of your favourite written date was sweet. Yet no love stories could compare to the one you were blessed with in your own reality.

♡ Bouquets and various floral arrangements take over your room, rendering it into something akin to a florists in time. Gabriel is the culprit. You buy him flowers once, and he sets about finding you some in return only to realise none suit your particular aesthetic. A few long nights, and he’s hand crafted the perfect collection. It would include laurel leaves, delicate, pink roses, baby’s breath, and a Brindisi lily to accent the display. This isn’t mentioning the fact that he decorates the bouquet with a beaded twine wrap. He’s gone out of his way to learn all their names so he can run you through each one. Symbolism? Gabriel has memorised all that they stand for. The unsuspecting hobby sneaks up on him, and you become the recipient of almost every arrangement he makes, sometimes with your help. It’s relaxing to sit and tend to each flower to the backdrop of chatter or music. Even when picked, flowers don’t die in Heaven, so you’re soon looking for new spaces to put them.

♡ When things are calm, your nights aren’t often alone. Many a time you’ll fall asleep as he reads out loud. The soft down of his wings would envelop you like a blanket, making it hard to stay awake. Even the hushed tone of his voice lulls you to sleep. You never stand a chance. He is careful not to wake you as he takes in your sleeping form. Touch is physical like fighting, something he is accustomed with. Nevertheless, your gentle touch is novel to him, and despite the occasional insecurity, he savours how your hand fits in his. The brush of your side feels like a satin robe. When you kiss his cheek, he is reduced to a stammering mess. Gabriel is holding you as tight to his body as he can when he gets the chance. A feeling of needing more encompasses him regardless of whether you’re in his embrace or not. He is going to wear your jumpers to feel close to you if you let him because there is never ‘enough’.

♡ You’re his light. Gabriel thought about this for some time - what he’d call you, that is. Hope is something he has regardless, and to call you his love doesn’t feel sufficient. As divine as you are, light seems fitting. But that is not the sole reason why he deems it appropriate. He finds you when he looks up past Heaven. Everywhere in the universe there are the same, twinkling lights of the stars above. They are a constant reminder of how much care was placed into the creation of literally everything that anyone will ever interact with. And somehow you are a devoted vessel for the same light be it through nature or nurture. Galaxies can only envy the life that you carry within you. Perhaps that is why you’re always so energetic. No one soul can contain such magnitudes of endless spirit within them and manage to restrain the outpouring of expression that comes with it.

♡ While he hasn’t told you yet, there is something you do that brightens up every interlude in your shared time. Subtlety isn’t your strong suit, so he pretends not to notice you tying pink ribbons to his armour. On occasion, you’ll surprise him and slip one past his attention. Those times are far and few between though. It warms his heart when he feels the slight tug against his body signalling a bow being tied in secret. Then, in the privacy of his own room, he’ll remove it and sew it down the arm of one of his shirts. He’s five ribbons in on either sleeve, and they provide a burst of colour on the white canvas. One day he’ll show it to you. Until then, he’ll continue to collect each and every ribbon you hide on him.

[transmutationisms]

hello! I remember you making a post mentioning Margaret Sanger + eugenics recently… I’m wondering if you might be willing to share more thoughts on the relationship between Sanger, eugenics, and the birth control movement? or if you have any recs for papers to read on this topic? thanks in advance if u have anything to share!

yeah i stuck some reading under the cut for length but basically and reductively this has become a poisoned discursive well because reactionaries of various stripes have discovered that Sanger was a racist eugenicist, and have also discovered that if you say that about a public figure, a certain brand of liberal will immediately rush to condemn the person with little to no reflection on what the significance of their objectionable beliefs might historically have been, so now every family values white supremacist thinks they are the cleverest boy in the world for being like "erm actually Planned parenthood was founded by a eugenicist" and the best response the average liberal can come up with is "[splits hairs] no it wasn't".

in reality what they should be saying instead is more along the lines of: this is because eugenics and white supremacy were incredibly popular politics in the usa in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and were ideologies that united public health champions (& political figures in general) from across the 'left–right political spectrum'. additionally Sanger's rhetoric varied over time and by audience, though i'm not really interested in doing rehabilitative work for her historical image and mostly bring this up to demonstrate that eugenics was so popular it was widely rhetorically advantageous to throw support for it, whether you were a feminist demanding access to birth control or a garden-variety misogynist opposed to reproductive autonomy.

anyway Sanger's legacy and the legacy of US feminists in general simply has to account for the fact that both 'pro-life' and 'pro-choice' policy demands can be weaponised either for increased reproductive autonomy or for eugenic endeavours. it's not the [contraception / abortion / etc] in itself that creates the eugenics, and banning contraception or abortion doesn't solve the problem of capitalism nurturing and relying on eugenics (as disingenuous reactionaries already well know). a lot of right-wing writing on Sanger is indeed trumped-up, poorly substantiated, de-contextualised shock tactics—also, she did genuinely espouse a lot of racism and eugenics.

none of this is really relevant to the political question of whether, moving forward, reproductive autonomy ought to be ensured (it ought). but, it is certainly relevant to the question of why the us feminist movement has done a generally middling job of securing access to things like contraception and abortion: in part, this is because it has long been a movement that sacrificed an actual commitment to providing healthcare in an extremely unwise series of faustian racism bargains that (at best) framed reproductive rights in a very negative, libertarian-inflected way, and (at worst) threw over the principles altogether and wilfully ignored or even participated in the establishment of eugenic policies expressly designed to constrain the reproductive autonomy of racialised, poor, and disabled women.

Dorothy Roberts talks about feminist eugenics broadly, including some remarks on Sanger, in Killing the Black Body (1997)

Peter Engelmann's A History of the Birth Control Movement in America (2011) pretty much what it says on the tin; my notes from when I TA'd bioethics say we focussed on the introduction and chapters 1 and 3

Evolution and Eugenics in American Literature and Culture, 1880-1940: Essays on Ideological Conflict and Complicity (2003) ed. Lois Cuddy and Claire Roche has at least one chapter you'd probably find useful

there's also this annotated bibliography on Sanger but it's from the 80s, so the real value-add is if you want to see contemporaneous writings about her, or you want a list of her own actual publications. I don't know whether this is still considered a comprehensive list of the 70-odd years it does cover!

a couple dissertations, even though these are generally not as valuable citation-wise as published books or articles:

International Intercourse: Establishing a Transnational Discourse on Birth Control in the Interwar Era (2004) by Julie L Thomas, Indiana University

Feminist Eugenics in America: From Free Love to Birth Control, 1880–1930 (2006) by Susan Marie Rensing, University of Minnesota

[habunshu]

Hello! Sorry to bother you.

I noticed you are in JTTW fandom and wanted to ask if you know where can I find more info on Sun Wukong's make up and stage performance? I tried to find stuff on my own but quickly realised that I'm just one small weak goblin. I saw some blogs about chinese opera behind the scenes with SW images and couple of videos but that's about it... and since you look like you are way more knowledgeable I came here to beg a favour.

Do you know any videos, documentaries or blogs on this topic?

Thank you for your time ♥♥♥

Hi!

TLDR: Bold text are writings/videos linked to Peking Opera Culture and specifics surrounding Monkey King performances. Post has a mid-length summary of key aspects of his Peking appearances and core thematics. This mainly goes along visual design analysis, as I don’t focus in performance art as much! Read more divide for courtesy

(Also taking a moment to highly praise @/bonesmarinated ‘s Peking opera Wukong pieces!)

The Monkey King/Sun Wukong is a very well covered and well performed character in Peking Opera, I’ll give a short(ish) summary of the key aspect of his design across various performances based on work I can recall from my Undergrad as well as my own experience- and i’ll link any documents/websites/images I have on hand

Wukong’s Lian Pu falls under what is known the Jing role (complex hero) with similar facial decoration also being delegated to the Chou roles in Opera as well.

The dominant school of art in depicting him either on live performers or maskwear, have a fairly universal foundation for his appearance.

The oldest forms of Peking opera stick to Wuseguan (Five Colour Theory) with his Lian Pu sticking to a core 3 of White (Cunning), Red (Bravery), and Black (Loyalty). Even with Modernisation of the Peking Opera and developments in the science behind art and makeup, Lianpu is specific in its purpose of portraying the nature of a character beyond body language and aiding in accessibility for people at the far end of the audience.

The Monkey King’s Lian Pu is reflective of his mischievous and bold nature, combining it with the shape of an Old World Monkey’s furless face shape so that even those “uneducated” in Peking Opera culture can at least see /what/ Wukong is before they see /who/ he is. The White and red placement are linked to yin-yang dynamics relating to the stone he was born from and the energy it cultivated) as well as general themes beyond the tale itself.

Zheng’s “Evolution, Symbolism, and Artistry: A Study on the Colors of Peking Opera Facial Makeup” Discusses this in more detail. ( DOI: 10.23977/artpl.2023.041207) (ISSN 2523-5877)

(General Mask colours in Peking Opera, separate from Lian Pu: The Cultural Connotation and Symbolic Meaning of Chinese Opera Mask Color - Hanbing Tu)

In more modern designs, the key foundation of Wukong’s face doesn’t change much, however some variations do add colour to Wukong’s eyelids- mainly pink or yellow/gold. Both of these relate physically to the ‘whites’ of Old World Monkey’s eyes, with the yellow face paint being representative of “barbarism” or “savagery”. Gold is used on the faces of various immortal creatures from all backgrounds as Silver is.

(Left: Chu Luhao as Monkey King, stedling divine peaches and wine in celestial realm, Kaohsiung ) (Right: Monkey King Wukong in Beijing Opera Journey to the West at Liyuan Theater)

As with Taiwans branch off in culture, This Lian Pu on the left shows the eyebrows as the top of the eyelid makeup, contrast to Chinese style and other Sino-influenced regions. This works in Chu Luhao’s production as it plays towards the character Wukong is before he’s sealed under the mountain and begun the journey- hence more “wide eyed”.

Mentioning Yellow within the Wuseguan, this is why most of his earlier outfits have such a heavy bias towards yellow cloth, barbarism being represented across his whole body (his form, as a monkey over his soul that achieves enlightenment) with costumes later down his hero’s journey adding more black, blue (simplicity).

(Left: Performer playing Monkey in Journey to the West, Chinese Opera performance in Singapore) (Middle: Chu Luhao’s production, Sun Wukong arrives at the Dragon Palace of the East Sea) (Right: CANTON, CHINA – CIRCA JULY 2019: Beijing Opera performance of “Monkey King Making Havoc in Heaven”)

Key Read -> The Artistic Symbolism of the Painted Faces in Chinese Opera: An Introduction, David Ming-Yüeh Liang. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43560653

Book -> Chinese opera: Images and stories, Peter Lovrick, Wang-Ngai Siu

Book -> Drama kings: Players and publics in the re-creation of Peking opera, 1870-1937, Joshua Goldstein. https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=XT_1fZ9Jp18C&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=info:49R3XREYwVoJ:scholar.google.com/&ots=3OF1F4SILK&sig=gQyW7bGJzgnxG62Y2TxU01ZPazQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

This analytical paper on Monkey King: Hero is Back showcases modern animated links to Peking Monkey King designs - https://fslmjournals.taylors.edu.my/wp-content/uploads/SEARCH/SEARCH-2024-16-1/SEARCH-2024-P5-16-1.pdf

A blog site I found interesting was an interview with Yao Yudong, the successor to colourful Peking Opera masks, where he discusses creating the mask designs (with a Wukong mask as a recorded example) and a more in-depth written post. He expresses the key two styles of Wukong’s red markings known as “Upside down Gourd” style, and the less complex “Upside down Peach” style attributed to a different art school. In which his mask is directly attributed to items that come into contact with his face.

Jiao Feng, Peking Opera Facial Makeup: The Art of Face Painting: http://www.chinatoday.com.cn/ctenglish/2018/ich/202001/t20200117_800190202.html

Connected is a video of an Opera performer who does his own Lian Pu, which depending on the time period could take up to two hours. Although this design is significantly more contemporary in the use of gold on white sections as markings like black paint. https://x.com/chinadaily/status/1365730927133958144?s=46&t=06bYiE12l6qVJUxPCBuvvQ

In regards to Wukong’s combat performances, he falls into the role of a Wusheng (武生), which is the strand of stage costume used in representation of his staple armour.

(Monkey King in Journey to the West Performance, Beijing Opera)

In this costume, Wukong’s Phoenix feather cap is mirrored by Lingzi (翎子) or Zhilling (雉翎), which likely play back and forth with influencing eachother as time progresses, due to Wukong’s theatrical personality being heightened by the Pheasant tails and their movements as actors play their roles. In his Wusheng roles, he is more likely to be adorned with gold eyelids to highlight his layered immortality and connect to the golden armour he wears. The trait of biting the pheasant tails as a theatrical act of frustration is seen across adaptations, most recently in Black Myth: Wukong’s Chapter 6 Animation.

This animation’s design seems to relay the Lingzi strongly due to the way the studio details the lowest connection points to the crown ornament.

As stated in Bond’s writings “BEIJING OPERA COSTUMES: THE VISUAL COMMUNICATION OF CHARACTER AND CULTURE”, Wukong’s in-game Suozi Set and various adaptations Dragon Palace armours split similarly to the Kao (Armour) on Peking stages, with the falling of the frantic drastically increasing the size of the actor and his silhouette.

Qing-era flags on the costumes of Wusheng were used to express social standing, gender, nature, and ranking. The image above showcasing them has them match the Kao pattern of the clothing, other flags often held zodiac patterns- with the monkey showcasing vain, egotistical, inventive and tricky individuals; and the peach included in a flag hinting towards immortality.

(Ching Dynasty Year of the Monkey Flag used in the Peking Opera) Zaricore Flag Collection: https://www.flagcollection.com/itemdetails.php?CollectionItem_ID=943

Due to the History of Lian Pu, and Wuseguan, despite modernisation of Opera arts vastly widening the colours and complexity of costumes; Wukong sticks to a key 5 colour scheme, with a emphasis on the original trio of red-white-black, and gold being reserved for Wusheng/Wuxiaosheng to showcase immortality and strength. The prevalence of Opera alongside fictional theatre means that the two constantly play off of eachother in mannerisms and influence, both at the time of JTTW’s writing to the 21st century. But as Opera is a physical performance, all aspects of Peking costume design is meant to make the emotional and psychological aspects of characters physical, to a large audience space needing to see facial expressions heightened and clarified by Lian Pu.

Read -> Cultural-based visual expression: emotional analysis of human face via Peking Opera Painted Faces (POPF)

[oopsarboreal]

a brief guide to example messages- the best way I've found to write bots

This is just copy-pasted from my guide bot, since it seems definitions are no longer accessible on c.ai. Fun fact, I wrote this guide mid all-nighter whilst avoiding schoolwork last year.

I'll meet ya under the cut.

Let's get into it!

∘₊✧───────────────────────────────────────✧₊∘ A lot of creators are unfortunately unaware of this, but bots can only read the first 3,200 characters in the definition, as confirmed by the devs:

(source)

Because of htis, is vital to be as efficient as possible with what you put in there. The best method for keeping a character in character is via example messages. If you go to any of my narrative heavy bots, edit their greeting to be blank, and then say anything to it, you will still receive a reply that uses consistent formatting and references to the character's traits. This is something that is most easily achieved with example dialog.

My characters are built primarily from example messages, so that's what I'll be talking about here. This doesn't cover everything that goes into making a character, but it's the most important part. Why?

*✧･ﾟ: *✧･ﾟ:─ 𝑺𝒉𝒐𝒘, 𝒅𝒐𝒏'𝒕 𝒕𝒆𝒍𝒍.

Much like the rule in writing that it's better to show an audience what's going on, rather than tell them, AI much prefers to be shown how to act rather than told in the way of templates. Things like "Focus on: "Environment" + "Appearance" + "Tone of voice"" Don't work. If you want your particular style to come across, example messages are the only way to achieve that. Otherwise, it defaults. And the narration from blank bots is less than desirable, usually leading to issues like looping and "Can I ask you a question?". ✮ Example messages also add to a word pool that the bot will draw from. If you mention blonde hair in passing, the AI will know to consistently apply blonde hair to the character.

Anyway, let's get into the nitty gritty.

======-BUILDING EXAMPLE MESSAGES-========

Gather traits. I recommend, before diving into a character definition, making a big ol' list of all the traits you want that character to have. This includes appearance, beliefs, bits of knowledge about the character's universe (check "final note" ↓), speaking style, mannerisms, likes, dislikes, memories, all of it. This can all be fed to the bot with example dialog! Pretty cool, in my opinion.

Throw up all over the definition. Y'know, word-vomit. Just write. Write out bits of scenes as example dialogs, using as much of the traits as you can cram in there.

Trim. This step can take weeks, in my experience. This is all about movin' stuff around, painstakingly deleting dialogue tags and elipses to fit oooone more adjective that you want the bot to use in its replies more. This is probably my favorite part, the little changes. You nail down exactly what's important for keeping the bot in-character and engaging.

════ ⋆★⋆ ════ 𝑨 𝑪𝑳𝑶𝑺𝑬𝑹 𝑳𝑶𝑶𝑲 ════ ⋆★⋆ ════ Here's a 574-character example message in the definition of my Dr. Alto Clef bot. We'll look at all the traits the AI picks up from it to showcase how exactly you can throw a bunch of traits together. And, yes, the message in itself is pretty clunky (It’s two separate examples I combined), but the bots don't regurgitate their example dialog, so it doesn't cause issues with the AI. In fact, the longer length encourages long responses.

{{char}}: "Jack Bright's entertaining but unpredicatable. Plus he's so self-pitying he's hard to be around. What's that? Kondraki?" Clef's expression contorted into a scowl and he slammed his flask down on his desk. "Yeow! That butterfly-herdin' C#NT has no place anywhere near authority! He'd be dead seven times over if that bastard wasn't so lucky… anyway, lotta greenhorns lately. Lotta sh#t-worth troublemakers. And I gotta fix 'em up? Grrh." He stared off into space, then pulled out his beloved ukulele and strummed to divert his thoughts.

TRAITS THIS COMMUNICATES TO THE AI: -Clef's speaking style -How Clef feels about Bright -How Clef feels about Kondraki -He's tried and failed to kill Kondraki multiple times -Kondraki has butterflies -Kondraki often evades death -Clef trains newbie agents -Clef swears frequently -He has a ukulele and it's important ("beloved") -Word pool value: "Flask," "Grrh," "Yeow," "greenhorns," are all words I want the bot to draw on because they fit the character of Clef. -Sets up a way for censoring (“#”)

-----Plaintext simply listing out these qualities just wouldn't work quite right. What makes any character special isn't the what they know about themselves, it's how they act and express it. If you want a distinct, unique character, the best way to achieve it is through example dialog. Again, "show, don't tell," very much so applies to the c.ai AI.-----

That is my method in a nutshell! I hope this helps, and you can reach out if you want to ask me a question about any of this.

=== extra note: THE TRIVIA/PERSONALITY BALANCE ====

This is a random note, but I still want to talk about it.

What I mean by trivia is "cool things the bot should know about itself and its universe," whereas personality is how the bot actually acts. With the current limitation, it's very difficult to have both. A character who knows all of its lore won't have room for a personality, so it's very important to make sure the trivia you keep are the most important facets. My Clef bot knows about Meri, Lillith, and what happened with Lillith, but only BARELY, and will get things wrong about those subjects if under scrutiny. This is simply due to lack of space. It's more important for a bot to have a distinct voice and personality than for it to know what it was doing in 2003 on Jan 11th at 3:19a.m. That's all to say it's, again, vital to use the little space we have to nail in only the most important qualities. ∘₊✧───────────────────────────────────────✧₊∘

== final note == *When feeding bots info about their universe, mind the database. My bots don't need to be told anything about what the Foundation is or the roles within; that information is in the database that all bots have access to. Make sure you aren't wasting space telling them what they already know!

[pluralthey]

is there a good place to start if we want to learn about idletry? im very interested in the story and all the bits and pieces revealed so far but i dont know if youve like, stated the basics both about the characters-in-story and how you’re releasing the comic

hi there. unfortunately, idletry became a passion project very abruptly and many details were added very quickly without regard for how long the project would take. once i did realize how large the project was, i decided that i would not even kid myself on the idea of holding in spoilers for the next 5 years, and those two factors combined make the information available very chaotic and slapdash -- somewhat intentionally.

i don't even have the comics tagged separately for easier access among the idletry content -- although, i could go back and give them a separate tag.

i can summarize the story and say that it's about a funny little talking honey badger/tasmanian devil named jessie gaylord who has for the last 10 years of her life been on heavy psychiatric medication in an attempt to mitigate a pervasive delusion that the world is a fictional story. she also has a notorious aggressive streak. these medications work primarily by leaving her so tired that she sleeps most of the time.

the story begins when her medical team has run out of typical medications to try, and they must order an older, more aggressive type of drug which is not commonly used anymore, and has a lengthier process to manufacturing and approving the drug. during this time, she is not on any medication, and she becomes more urgently fixated on convincing people that the delusion is true.

she ends up attempting to contact the writer, who is referred to as God, and she receives a response. she immediately attempts to write the story herself, and she's granted the ability to do anything within the story so long as she can write it out. (the intricacies and limitations of this power have been elaborated upon in a bunch of fragmentary posts, so i won't try to condense it here)

at the end of the first act, she kills the first writer and becomes the new God of her world. the rest of the story is about what she does after acquiring omnipotence, and it heavily features a character named fate -- or shiloh, as jessie calls her -- with whom she enters an intimate relationship.

she has a happy loving family composed of a father named adam, a mother named evelyn, and an older sister named emily. there is a later minor subplot about a cult following who worships her after she becomes God, and this cult is initially organized by an ant called samanthuel -- or samwich, as jessie calls them. these are usually the other characters i mention and i am too lazy to link them right now

the comic itself is currently being written. the script stands at around 51,000 words at the time of writing this as i work on the second act. after it's written, i will let it simmer for a few months and then write a second draft to start to relieve the story of its bloat. depending on its length at that point, i will either need to write a third draft, or i will start drawing the comic.

chances are, during the second draft, i will start to thumbnail or sketch scenes which receive little to no editing, as i know they will likely remain relatively unchanged even through multiple drafts.

the sketch strips are to tide me and an eager audience over in the meantime, but they've sort of dried up as i focus all of my attention on finishing the first draft and taking care of a puppy that was kind of just forced onto me.

i've made a couple of full-length comics before and they have taken years. it is, unfortunately, just the nature of the process. for idletry, i plan to self-publish the comic. i've never published something in print before, so that is the most daunting part for me.

the plan at the moment is to crowdfund this, but, to be frank with you, i no longer pay rent, and i care very much about having this comic as a printed book. i have no issue with paying the cost of printing out of my own pocket by the time it's done and am even anticipating that outcome ahead of time, despite having a pretty reliable audience by now.

i'm on the fence about releasing a digital book version, as i very much want to retain digital color versions of the pages that are more vibrant, but due to the explicit adult content of the story, i don't want it to be free-access.

tl;dr: it's about a lesbian incel with anger issues who's given omnipotence.

i'm still working on the story because i want it to be good.

i'm planning on printing it as a physical comic book once it's done.

[nereidyke]

hey! I’ve just recently accepted (aka connected all the dots) the fact that I’m a femme but I wanted to get some other femmes takes on how they identify with it to help me better understand it. What are some of the most important aspects of ur identity and what resources/books would u recommend for someone with less knowledge? 💕💕

yes ofc! i won't claim to be the arbiter of knowledge on this topic, but my femme identity wasn't something i had considered until i started dating my butch 3 years ago. for me, femme is dichotomized by my relationship to butches, ie a mutual respect and protection not found within heterosexuality. this is going to be a little long because there is much to say on this topic, apologies in advance (i like writing about and studying gender).

femininity in itself is a system that is naturalized to the convention of woman, sociologically speaking, and is indeed a form of gender conformity for people who identify with or are perceived as women (ofc this varies when accounting for the nuances of transfeminity and race, but generally speaking femininity as a construct is falsely attributed to "woman"). so in a sense, the gender conformity, as in historical accounts of butchness and femmeness, is itself the protection that i offer to my butch. it allows my butch access to a social system that he, as a masculine person perceived by society to be a woman, would not otherwise have access to.

i mostly read radical feminist texts, and to understand the system of femininity, the naturalization of gender as a construct, and the place that lesbianism has in a heterosexual society, i would recommend reading lesbian second wave author monique wittig. the category of sex and one is not born a woman are two essays by her that i recommend to everyone because they explain heterosexuality and how it constructed the conventions of "man" and "woman" around itself and embedded that into the fabric of western society well.

speaking personally, existing as a femme with my butch is comforting because i am allowed to explore femininity in a context removed from heterosexuality, removed from men. femininity is a performance, and when i perform it for my butch it feels right. i don't claim that my "version" of femininity is really entirely different from a heterosexual woman's or a bisexual woman in a relationship with a man, but the performance of it works in opposition to male ownership over my body. i am performing it for a lesbian, a butch, not a man, and that is what makes being femme fundamentally different from women performing femininity for men.

it all comes down to that performance, and specifically who the audience of that performance is. again, at the end of the day, i am gender conforming because women are expected to be feminine in their actions, appearance, and choices, but that gender conformity is a privilege i use as a protection for my butch and other butches i am friends with. i struggled with femininity when i was younger, i never performed womanhood to the degree that i was meant to due to the fact that i am a lesbian (and if you read one is not born a woman she goes into excellent detail on the inherent degendering of lesbians), and that is something that informs my choices and the femininity that i perform.

being degendered by heterosexual patriarchy, and choosing to conform to some of its expectations while rebelling through the act of being a lesbian and through performing femininity for a masculine figure who is not a man is the most important aspect of the femme identity to me. it almost in a sense adds insult to injury for heterosexual expectations. as i said before, femme is dichotomized by butch and the protection offered to butches through gender conformity that they don't have access to, so another really important part of my identity as a femme is how i can use that identity to help and protect butches.

i hope this helped!! like i said i'm not as much of an expert in femme writing (because honestly i've struggled to find my own resources) but i do recommend reading feminist texts first and foremost, because understanding the lesbian gender category in general is paramount understanding how femininity functions sociologically, and how adhering to it is a privilege not offered to certain members of the lesbian community.

[milgram-en]

Hello! I'm aware that your ask box is intended for translation requests, but I felt the need to say something about your Milgram Project translations as a whole.

(If you want to, feel free to ignore my ask. I don't want to make you uncomfortable at all)

I just think that it's absolutely amazing that you do all of these translations out of appreciation for Milgram as a piece of media. I study translation as a career, and I know from experience that it's not an easy thing, even more so when it comes to translating a language like Japanese. And all of this for free? Well, what else could I even ask for? Thanks for all the work you do. Really.

Thank you for the kind words! You genuinely have no idea how much it means. Words like that keep this account going, especially since this account is run by a solo-translator team, and there always lies the question of whether those efforts are for naught, received by the vague digital void. The inbox is for anything really, including things not related to translation requests. We've gotten words of thanks, someone excitedly talking about one of the translated voice dramas, and other things as well. Everything is welcome!

One of milgram-en's goals is to make MILGRAM more accessible to international audiences so that more people can find out about it, engage with it, and appreciate the story born from the efforts Yamanaka, DECO*27, and OTOIRO have put forth in this passion project of theirs which will only run for a limited-time. We're already in Trial 3, the last trial. By making translations accessible (through both making transcripts and making more obscure media like the novels publicly available) it makes engaging with MILGRAM itself accessible, so people can experience MILGRAM before it ends.

Another goal of milgram-en is to connect cultures and peoples by lowering the barriers of communication through translation and lots of translation notes. MILGRAM itself is a very Japanese media and it's not uncommon to see confusion arise amongst the Wardens (you guys) because of cultural misunderstandings or the lack of knowledge about different cultures. And it's not uncommon that confused persons can become fearful, or even violent, towards what one doesn't understand—whether it be towards the writing of MILGRAM itself, towards communities and cultures, and/or towards people. Through translation notes (denoted by T/Ns), milgram-en aims to increase intercultural and multicultural understandings by providing additional insight or information.

Haha, it seems we're in the same boat. Translation really isn't easy and translating can be stress-inducing when it comes to the pressure of translating well—ethically, accurately, and enjoyable to the reader—and translating fast especially for a live-time effervescent media like MILGRAM. It's an often overlooked art and the average person isn't aware of just how much responsibility and effort goes into translating the complexity of worlds, cultures, and persons through something as limited—yet endless—as words and to respect the original artists' work while completely rewriting yet preserving their creation so that it may be understood and enjoyed by a different [speech] community. You're likely already aware of this, anon, but for the others who may be reading this, languages aren't restricted to its sound or writing. Languages are speech communities. Communities are consisted of its peoples and the cultures its persons collaboratively create and are governed by. So, to translate is to translate communities so that other communities can understand.

Not to mention, the ethics of translation can be and—based on the MILGRAM community's relationship with translations—is often overlooked by both readers and translators. Some MILGRAM translations, including the popular ones on YouTube and on the fandom wiki, are irresponsibly translated and many viewers—who are placing their trust in the translation and translator—are none the wiser. At the same time, many viewers take one translation as law when, in reality, translations offer only one perspective out of the many that can be interpreted from the original source. So, just as a general PSA, do keep in mind the absolute power that translators have over narratives. You, as a translator, have "an intimate relationship[...] between translation and excretion of power; a translator has access to the original text, and in that they have the power and dominance of what is being transferred to the reader and how the text is interpreted. As a consequence, the main plot of the original text is under the translators’ authority and discretion" (Zaghlan et. al 2023). These narratives—commonly known as "translations"—created by translators both reproduce existing power structures and provides means of contesting them (Baker 2006) and, if in accordance with social theory, narratives are not only a means of communication but also the way people may experience the world. Translators have the ability to generate and rearrange the realities of the narrative and the readers, whom interact with the realities translators have presented, are bounded within that world of that narrative and are shaped by it— their thoughts, their understandings, their realities. It is far too easy to engender violence with translations. History has repeatedly shown such. So, anon, translator, be responsible. You hold within your hands the narratives- the realities that people have toiled in creating.

And you, as a reader, must always remain critical and curious towards what is presented to you. Regardless of whether it's a story, a translation, or something else, be critical and curious. Narratives are not always neatly bound nor are they always easily digestible, thus you must think and search for meanings.

Language is a collaborative instrument and you, dear reader, are as much of a part of milgram-en, something woven by the communities of languages. Thank you for taking the time to read our translations of this very niche media and even going ahead to make the effort to write a kind message. May your own translation journeys go wonderfully and may you continue to enjoy MILGRAM's stories.

[shadowmaat]

Fanfiction is fanfiction

Over on blusky the OTW account shared a link to an opinion piece on a site called the Student Life. Author Grace Kim wrote a piece titled "Embracing Y/N: the merits of fan fiction and fan culture."

I have a strong dislike of "Y/N" type fics, mostly due to the inherent inaccuracy of trying to write in such broad strokes so a reader can feel included and, well, anyway, my opinions aren't really the point.

I don't like the subgenre, but I don't go around telling people it shouldn't exist because that isn't my call. I was, however, curious to see what the author had to say, so I read her editorial.

It wasn't about Y/N at all. Oh, it got a passing mention, but the gist of the piece was a defense of fanfction itself and how it's unfair of people to judge all fanfic based on a few bad examples. It was a pretty boilerplate "not ALL fanfic" type argument encouraging folks to give fic a chance. Which is fine, as far as it goes, but the approach taken is... not one I particularly appreciate or agree with.

She's of the opinion that one of the primary objections to fanfic as a whole is the idea of people "profiting" off the "stolen" ideas of others. I'm honestly too deep in the backwaters to know if this is becoming a central issue. Oh, there are definitely authors trying to get money out of their fans by making them pay for content, but A) I thought they were still outliers rather than the norm and B) I wouldn't have thought that outsiders had that as their main objection.

In this instance, the story is not eligible for profit but could still benefit the author in other ways such as exposure, feedback and practice by being available on publicly-accessible websites. This guarantees the equality of opportunity for writers to get their work out into the world minus the monetary barriers. -Grace Kim

In fact at several points she refers to fanfic as if it's some kind of stepping stone to eventually writing "real" stories and, as she says, "setting [audiences] up with the tools to be successful in academic environments."

That's absolutely alien to my way of thinking. Fanfic is its own unique category of writing and not, IMO, some kind of tool for eventual "success" in academia or professional publishing. For someone who claims to love and support fanfic, Ms. Kim has some odd ideas about the purpose of it.

While I can't speak for others, I write fanfic because I think it's fun and it's what I want to write. It isn't some form of "practice," that I'll eventually graduate from as I move on to "real" original fiction. I've certainly heard that viewpoint bandied about a lot (including, it seems, from Ms. Kim), but boy howdy is that an insulting way to look at things. And it diminishes authors who write fic. This isn't some playpen that folks eventually grow out of; not as a reader and not as a writer. Again, fanfic is its own category of writing and it's just as valid as all the others. If you're writing in defense of fanfic, you should at least understand that much.

In keeping with the author's approach to fanfic being some sort of academic practice, she also says the following:

With fanfiction, there is a close author/reader relationship because most sites provide chat spaces within each chapter to discuss its content. Similar to the process of peer review — which is highly encouraged in academic settings — this allows authors to receive positive validation and constructive criticism while remaining mindful of readers’ concerns. -Grace Kim

No. No, no, no, a thousand million times NO. Maybe even FUCK NO. This is ABSOLUTELY NOT THE POINT of fanfic. Dear merciful gods, people, being able to engage with authors over their fanfics is not any kind of fucking "peer review" and you should NEVER offer """constructive criticism""" unless someone specifically asks for it! Holy cats and all their kittens, Ms. Kim, what is wrong with you?? If you're so supportive of fanfic, why do you keep acting like it's some kind of self-improvement tool? Why do you keep trying to shove the square peg of fanfic into the round hole of academia? Fanfic. Is. Fanfic. It's written, primarily, for escapism. Sometimes people use it to explore themselves or work through their issues and trauma, but that's all the more reason not to offer unsolicited """constructive criticism""" to strangers.

This isn't academia. This isn't any kind of formal setting. Fanfic is inherently informal and no one should ever try and hold it up to professional standards. Yikes! Fanfic is written and provided FOR FREE. Authors are not obligated to listen to or obey any critiques and they sure as fuck shouldn't care about being "mindful of readers' concerns." Hells, that's something even professionally published authors don't need to care about. Don't like the way a story is going? Too fucking bad. It's my story and I'll tell it the way I want.

There's some additionally concerning language about "canon-focused" fanfic posing a "credibility and ethical" issue, but TBH at this point the author's viewpoint and interpretation of fanfic as a category of writing is so questionable that I won't even bother going into it.

You can find Ms. Kim's piece here, and some may find it an interesting read if only for how far off base the author is. It is, of course, her opinion, and opinions can't be wrong. They can be misinformed, though, and I hope the author does more research into the subject to try and understand it better.

Also? As a bit of constructive criticism, when you're putting a title to a piece make sure it's an accurate reflection of its content. In this case that means either discussing Y/N fics in depth, or dropping any mention of them.