#is this gonna cause discourse?

[rizzstappen]

Can you link the Scotty and Daniel thought piece? I’m just curious because people don’t seem to know how adult friendships work.

Hi Anonstie!

I saw it on tik tok like yesterday so I don’t think I can go back and find it lol. But the creator was basically saying how she thought it was weird that Daniel had never been to one of Scotty’s events and how if that was her she doesn’t think she could be friends with him.

Ya know everyone is entitled to their own option but it was the people in the comments that clearly have a Daniel hater boner. They were saying that it made him (daniel) a bad friend and people were bashing him and calling him an asshole. That he went to Montana (with Scotty btw?) and that the cold is not a good enough excuse. The of creator was also liking some of these comments and agreeing with them?

Like all of that is weird to me 😭 like we don’t know these guys are the dynamics of their friendship but we’re over here making judgement based on what they show us or something we heard on a podcast??

People in the comments were also mad that Scotty went on the podcast and was shit talking Daniel and Lance. Which I don’t think he was? Idk I didn’t listen tbh.

[jay-wasreblogging]

"I won't forget you Buddy"

Comic book Eddie would've started to track down and slaughter Knull. 😭

[foreignswaggersession]

alright i'm gonna say this as nicely as i can. if you actually think louis ate his nephew you're an idiot not paying attention. that baby wasn't just a baby, it was his NEPHEW, grace's child. once again, i'm asking you to think seriously - if grace left her baby alone with louis, and came back to a dead baby, do you think grace would not hold louis responsible for her baby's death? do you think grace would tell jonah where to find louis, and not "louis killed my child you should avoid him?"

do you think they would even entertain letting louis come to the house anymore to visit grace's other children, day or night?

do you think grace would invite him to their mother's funeral (or any other events that louis missed - like his not-dead nephew's christening, which takes place AFTER ep 2)?

do you think grace would mark his grave like this???

that whole "did you eat the baby" scene is why episode 2 is my least favorite episode of season 1. it goes on for so long, and then people with no brain cells think they're smart by saying "louis's such a crazy liar he would eat a baby" (ok i've stopped being nice - if you think louis ate that baby you have no right to say anything about this show)

also, we don't see the son at the twins' birthday party because he's still a baby/toddler and probably asleep. he didn't eat his fucking nephew omg be serious.

[awesamforehead]

[imbiowaresbitch]

Say it with me, friends. Top/bottom are not kinks!

The fic in question IS tagged for omegaverse, and it mentions in the summary that Dean is dancing with an Alpha. On the first screen on a cell phone, it indicates Dean is the Omega in the equation, 'cause his ass goes slick.

Don't like? Don't read. Click out of the damn page. Don't leave dumbass comments for the author because you can't be bothered to moderate your own reading experience.

~~

And if you want to read the fic in question, it's here. Do mind the tags I did use, they're there for a reason.

[rotisseries]

tired of people who want pjo movie references in the disney+ show. "logan lerman should've been-" i don’t care. "poker face in the casino-" actually i hope ms. gaga keeps her entire discography miles away from it. i don't care move on

[muffingnf]

forever thinking about how nothing will be the same as before this situation and george won't be the same ever again. i just hope he will take of his mental health after this, no matter what it takes, even if it means he will be far more distanced

anon this is seriously making me suicidal

on a real note i mostly worry about how this will impact his ability to form connections and make relationships with other people. like imagine feeling too cautious to go near non-ccs because oh god what if theyre a secret fan or what if they put something online and ‘expose’ me. but then u can’t go near fellow cc’s either because you cannot tell who has genuine intentions and who just wants to fuck you over later down the line. and none of this is even shit fans like me should even be thinking about i cannot stress enough how none of this should’ve been public and i feel so fucking bad for him that he’s had to be so publicly vulnerable after being so private his whole career.

on another note i suppose dnf will be trauma bonded for life now

[osamucide]

if this bothers anyone they can kindly feel free to leave or ignore it or whatever but can we stop flooding the x reader tags with half-baked thinkpieces on why people should or shouldn’t do whatever with their writing. every other post is “you shouldn’t romanticize [x]” “you’re problematic if you do [x]” “stop writing about [x]” “[x] is gross and if you write about it kill yourself” how about if you don’t like certain content you heed the content warnings, block the tags, don’t interact with it, so on and so forth. of course part of our responsibility as writers, especially ones dealing with sensitive topics, is to label and tag our works appropriately but let’s be real—i hardly see any writers (at least within the bsd fandom) who don’t make it abundantly clear what they do/do not write about, interact with, or tolerate. wait until you find out how much fucked up shit happens in real life and how much some person on the internet coping with their trauma by writing self insert fanfiction about a cartoon character doesn’t fucking correlate to the perpetuation of that fucked up shit at all. it doesn’t even have to be that serious. people are going to write and read the content they want and they’re allowed to and you spilling your complaints all over the x reader tags “to boost attention” isn’t gonna change that. if you don’t like something ignore, unfollow, block, mind your own business. it’s actually super easy

[funkbun]

gamers who still, to this day, get angry about the simple existence of black ppl (both real players/creators and characters in the games) in the gaming space are genuinely so fuckin awful and unbelievably annoying. it's 2024, either learn to change or die idk

[neolxzr]

Literally a genuine question no ill intent

What do you like about Aira? As much as people are absolutely adamant Akira is projecting (I really don't think he is (I'm not saying Akira is innocent) I just think he's trying to address the prejudiced thoughts the average Japanese person will have on the Ainu) Aira's weird comments and behaviour to Hiiro have been there since day one. And I also think Aira being the one who says all this is because he's supposed to reflect the fans and the average Japanese fan probably isn't that educated on the Ainu + there can be a good few racist enstars fans...

I'm not trying to sound heated about this I'm just coming from a genuine place, what appeal is there in Aira?

Also, as much as the Aira fans are talking about blaming Akira, I feel like there should absolutely be a focus on Hiiro right now considering that comment was... yknow said to him. I just think we should actually be talking about the Amagis considering that comment was intended to discuss the Amagis and their culture and the discrimination they go through.

i had someone ask me a similar question once but not in the context of all thats happening currently so you can read that here if youre inclined

buuuut what made me like aira so much in the first place was honestly that his concept as a character is really funny. i made a post a long while back that went into the funny meta jokes that you could make using aira as a character before i really knew much about enstars at all. having a character in your idol series that loves idols and canonically reads fanfic about them is just a funny concept in general. and as i continued to read more he continued to be funny and annoying and endearing (his little mini interaction with midori comes to mind immediately. there is something wrong with him)

also i tend to gravitate towards characters that give me like. little sibling energy. i love having a favorite little guy to dote on

but afterwards what really drew me to him was the main story!! thermometry specifically comes to mind (ouuugh,,,,). his feature scout stories are also great and so is feather touch! i wont like. go into detail really cause my blog is covered in me talking about aira already

his dynamic with hiiro is one of my favorites too, especially in mainstory. their dynamic isnt JUST aira says shitty things to hiiro and thats it. their relationship develops really far to the point where aira admits that he needs hiiro as much as hiiro needs him. they're young and inexperienced and kind of codependent as they're trying to keep themselves from going under in a sort of cutthroat industry. i think thats really neat. their relationship is really sweet to me and aira is a great tsundere type of character. he regularly is shown to actually like hiiro a lot as mean as he can be to him sometimes i.e. here. and you know the whole holding hands thing (which they also fucked up in the climax story but Whatever)

theres also this. which i think about regularly. the hiiai shipping fuel is vast

and additionally i think aira has some really great relationships with other characters too, alkaloid especially. feather touch develops his relationship with tatsumi a lot and its one of my favorite aira moments. i couldnt find my screenshots for this one but basically aira gives tatsumi his unlocked phone (something VERY important to aira since hes a little screenager) and it shows tatsumi just how much aira trusts him and he realizes how important aira is as a friend to him. being someone with a history like him aira's friendship is sort of new to him and it helps them both grow

he loves his friends so so much and he’s had a positive impact on all of alkaloid. he is its heart after all

but in any case i'm not going to like, defend myself for liking aira. i am aware that the shitty stuff has been there from the start but i've said something similar in the past that was like. aira isn't real and he cannot take accountability for what he says. he's a character written by real people who doesn't have any control over how he acts. so i guess that's why when i think the writers write something i dont think he would do or say in my own personal aira opinion i can sort of brush it off as just bad writing.

and not in the sense that i dont recognize that enstars sucks, because it does. enstars can be terribly racist sometimes and not just when concerning aira, and thats important to talk about (i.e. the orient cards, the king of thieves cards, etc). but at the end of the day the most important thing to recognize is the people and company behind the game as well as the real people who play the game and are affected by it. and not like, the specific characters in the game. cause they didn't actually do anything or feel anything you know

[cometrose]

Queen of Tears is so interesting cause i've never dealt with two really complex leads like this in romcom (i mean it is funny)

i've said it before but Haein and Hyunwoo know each other very well but don't know each other at all (i don't know if i've ever seen communication issues this bad).

Losing the baby clearly drove them apart. She blamed herself and put up high walls. He wears his heart on his sleeve and cried over it. We can argue that he should've comforted her in that moment but at the same time she clearly knew he was upset so why didn't she go to him? Haein thought she had no right to grieve and consequently Hyunwoo thought she didn't grieve at all. The moment where they needed each other more than ever- the moment they should've been together they both fucked up.

The core of the issue is that they can't read each other's mind, this is literally said at the beginning of 6- they love each other dearly but also tripping over each in the process.

Outside of Hyunwoo jumping up and down at her diagnosis and faking his way into her will (which was painfully cruel and soooo funny) It's very clear that this is a two person game. Although I always interpreted Hyunwoo's joy as the same as the mistress of a wealthy man who is just waiting for him to die so she can get the money, (it's mean but most times the master either sucks or he's naive as hell and she has no reason to mourn) and at that point Hyunwoo's in the same situation.

Why didn't Haein defend him in front of her relatives? Why scold him publicly in front of the employees? She does a lot of things behind the scenes but good intentions can only go so far if object of those affections is ignorant of the full story. The same thing happens in episode 6, she is trying to protect Hyunwoo from her family but without telling him so he is ignorant of the big picture. Why wasn't Hyunwoo honest with his feelings? Why is he always assuming the worst when she never explicitly says something? We see he tries to talk to her (it fails) but his fear of upsetting her leads him to do otherwise cruel things to keep her happy.

Which is also why the divorce paper is so interesting. That paper was one of the best things he’s done. He was completely justified in writing that. It breaks Haein's heart but severing ties like that was way healthier than him forcing himself to stay in this marriage and pamper her with fake love.

One thing I will admire this piece for is the role reversal, like i'm seeing so many typical fl tropes on Hyunwoo and ml tropes on Haein. You ever read one those isekai or time reverse manwha's were the fl goes back in time to get a divorce but falls in love with her partner again? yeah this is the same exact thing.

[myguy352forthefuture]

Can we please go a day without minecraft fans getting up in arms over something that will eventually get handled. i really dont feel like slogging through tumblr reading people's takes on whatever is happening knowing it'll get resolved. just let me enjoy fan art and theories

its so obnoxious seeing people saying 'oh i have to drop this now cause its causing me great distress" like please get a life outside of watching a video game and experience the real world

[theshatteredsilhouette]

.

[finexbright]

.

[arinmoss]

also here's list of other places to find me!

cara: https://cara.app/arinmoss

bsky: https://bsky.app/profile/arinmoss.bsky.social…

twitter: twitter

insta: https://instagram.com/arin.moss/

tiktok: https://tiktok.com/@arinmoss (barely use this one tho lol)

basically im arinmoss almost everywhere and arin.moss on insta :3

[cdroloisms]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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