#it’s that the discourse is with my main account

[bamboozled-distress]

starting mpreg discourse in the comment section of a trolls band together fanart post on Instagram is probably my favourite thing I’ve ever done in my life

[batsplat]

Not to want to get you into hot waters but one of the blogs on here shared Marc’s onboard from the 2015 sepang kick incident and I’m a bit unsure how anyone could watch that and not consider it a deliberate kick? Really don’t want anyone to get mad because I’m no expert so maybe there’s something about Valentino’s movements that allows for the “accidental” kick option but if so, what is it? Because as a layman, watching it… I wish it were possible to show that video to Valentino and make him explain exactly how that kick was not on purpose…

I think it's genuinely ambiguous! this is what's interesting about it, right - if you look at the onboards and the helicopter shots there's a decent chance that depending on what you watch you'll end up with a pretty different view on it, and it's inarguable that from certain angles it looks incredibly like a kick. it's also inarguable that whether valentino kicked marc or not, he did deliberately attempt to run him wide, which you can see was intentional by how he looks behind him just before they make contact. it's still not clean riding whichever way you look at it, which is why he got the penalty

I'm going to defer to someone else's opinion here myself (you'll find I link back to this site a lot and broadly consider it trustworthy), from a bloke who does very much believe valentino was in the wrong that weekend. this is in the aftermath of the fim requesting that honda doesn't release data which would have 'proven' valentino kicked marc in an entirely futile attempt to make the controversy die down. the piece talks first about what data like this even involves, including this bit:

the main point here is that the data isn't going to tell you whether valentino kicked him or not, because that's not something you can actually read in data. I have another ask that's vaguely related to this sitting in my drafts, but it's always been one of the most interesting elements of all the controversy in late 2015 - both sides attempting to definitively prove the unprovable with a few numbers. let's quickly bring in what arguments both sides as well as race direction made in the immediate aftermath from the post-race piece by the same author:

that's valentino's explanation, right, marc's handlebar hit valentino's knee, which caused the leg movement as well as the crash. a little more from the immediate post-race write-up:

basically, the view here is that the two bikes make contact - and as a result of where marc hits valentino, valentino's foot is dislodged from the foot peg, catching marc's handlebars in the process. again, none of this actually exonerates valentino. whether there was a kick or no kick, you are NOT allowed to run another rider off-track! whether valentino literally wanted marc to crash or not, this was always going to be a possible consequence of his actions - which he would have known was the case! it is obviously worse to kick someone, partly because it just feels like a particularly egregious offence, but there is no version of this story where valentino comes out with a clean scorecard

as the 'post-honda promising to release conclusive evidence' piece goes on to say:

of course, all this is just one bloke's view. I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that valentino did kick marc. but I also struggle to see how it's a clear cut case for the prosecution. again, however, it really is important to stress that valentino by his own admission was engaging in an extremely dubious move. the kick would be the cherry on the icing, if you will, but running another rider so wide that you are probably trying to force them to leave the track is generally not considered acceptable behaviour. the kick question is very much something everyone has to decide for themselves - or not! I still think it's the ambiguity that helps make the whole thing so interesting, that every single clash between the two of them that year still has so many unanswered questions. that both sides have their own unshakeable views of events - sometimes close to 'reality' and sometimes a little less so, sometimes reasonable and sometimes anything but. it's the subjectivity and the fallibility of the human capacity to understand events that we ourselves have experienced - it's this lack of knowability for both outsiders and insiders that makes it so endlessly fascinating and rewarding to analyse. even the two men themselves cannot completely understand what happened that day, what happened in those few seconds, and they never will. we're all in the dark, in the end

[tubbs-is-innocent]

ok so i have never been part of the tubbs fandom but wtf lead to the "tubbs is innocent/evil/etc."

like i am very much feeling this:

I've been wondering the same thing to be honest! I was there, but it's been a while. I've got the details figured out now.

It seems like in November/December of 2015, Neko Atsume had gotten real popular, and people on tumblr started talking about Tubbs. There was a sudden influx where people took really polarized stances on whether Tubbs was Good™ or Evil™ because he's the only cat who eats all your food. It was fueled by joke blogs dedicated to hating him, and resulted in a bunch of blogs being created and dedicated to their opinion of him (or just to Tubbs in general). People were just arguing about Tubbs all the time as like, a hobby. And, if we're being honest, as a way to score some dopamine from a small taste of fame on tumblr.com.

[jackpotsadnessgirl]

i fucking hate the pro vs anti argument bcs it always goes down to fiction and reality are seperate versus fiction affects reality when BOTH of those statements are true and should be treated as such!!

fiction and reality are not the same, if you maim and torture a fictional character guess what? theres no real damage bcs they arent real! same for literally anything that falls under "proshipping", you are basically playing dolls its not like these are real people that are doing this!

on the other hand YES! Fiction can affect reality. but on the 2 sides of that- if someone imitates what an author did in a story, that is not the authors fault and they should NOT be blaimed for others actions. and then if the author genuinely wants to do those things? id rather it be expressed in fiction than irl. if they do it irl yeah then i have a problem but the fiction itself is not the issue then!

and then just. theres no nuance in this argument i swear. theres no room for depictions of trauma, theres no room for morally grey storys or unreliable narrorators. if you dare depiction the "bad things" without explicitly saying they r evil then u must be hung!!! its fucking stupid.

i just wish both sides would shut up

[starryjkoo]

Some ARMYs seriously need to touch grass because their ability to make every situation so much worse because they're chronically online and incredibly reactive is genuinely astounding.

[rat-rosemary]

honestly you're better off having people block you on here instead of harass you

Fair

However! Because they're dteam fans and seemingly friends with people who seem to be fine with me it makes me want to put my head through a brick wall. /lh

[i-c-u-p]

going to start using this platform like twitter again and by that i mean posting relentlessly and going on rants in the tags

[syneepsis]

So... I've been thinking

Listen, I've been in this bangtan sonyeondan shit for a few years now.

I've seen plenty.

I've also been a shipper for pretty much just as long, and a tkk supporter/believer/whatever for a while.

So why not, right? Why not try to actually use tumblr for a change, after 14 years of being on that website and enjoying the peace and quiet of having a lurker account.

Cause man, are there things to say. Still. Surprisingly.

I really thought that, with CH2, things would calm down, shipping spaces would empty out because of the lack of "content".

Boy was I wrong... Chaos is everywhere, Taekook have been amazingly loud and this stupid war (you know which one) has reached (imo) unprecedented levels.

And I have thoughts. And maybe some time to put them in writing.

So yeah, why not, right?

[lordsardine]

.

[skyview-temple-spring]

No offense but like why are you here

[intersex-ramona-flowers]

thank you. i kept saying this to people and they just argued with me that it wasn't, but a lot of goyim cannot wrap their heads around the deeply antisemitic roots of conspiracy theory & it's slang.

very long, dissection of these thoughts - i'm sorry if it seems irrelevant but it feels incredibly relevant given this vein of discussion.

honestly, this whole entire situation is just shitty, strange, and pointless to me. perhaps we be the arbiter of our own experiences and not other people's?

if a community comes up with language to describe itself, it's not a threat. i, as an intersex person, have not once seen people turn transandrophobia (or transmisandy, antitransmasculinity) into a binary. that's my only issue. the second you decide who is or isn't impacted, you've created a new binary. one in which i will never fit, because you cannot box my life into 0 or 1. otherwise, coming up with new terminology to further these discussions is highly valuable. this is important for the development of theory in general. for example, misogynoir doesn't mean non-black women don't face misogyny, but is rather a term to discuss the intersectionality between misogyny and anti-black racism. antitransmasculinity, transmisandry or transandrophobia is not to say that transphobia is exclusive, but rather that there is an intersection between punitive behavior towards "the wrong kind of masculinity" and transhood.

but it very rapidly became "you need to shut up, you're always telling US to shut up, so we're turning the tables on you!" and to be honest, where this all started was intersex people telling people to stop directly quoting excerpts from a fucking intersexist. we have no problem with transmisogyny as a word that embodies the intersection of misogyny and transphobia - but the woman who coined the term treated it as a binary from which intersex people were fetishized and exempt from. us telling people not to create gender binary 2.0 wasn't us telling anyone to "shut up" or not talk about it at all, but rather leave space for other voices.

so when/how/why did discussing your experience with the intersection of misogyny and transness become telling other people whether or not they were exempt from these experiences? well, that is how Julia Serano, who coined the term, treats this word. her belief is that the world desires more men, thus (perisex) trans masculine people get access to HRT and SRS easily. she believes that men are always rewarded for their masculinity, and very overtly states that trans women have it harder. she expresses that it is in fact not transphobic for "womyn spaces" to welcome trans men, but are transmisogynistic not to allow in trans women. (as if this isn't misgendering both in this instance.) she's incredibly dismissive, transphobic and colonialist towards nonbinary/2S/indian, indigenous and jewish genders, cherry picking to prove her point about victimization and erasing any "transmasculine" oriented identities (to oversimplify for sake of character count.) she glosses over intersex people, mentioning us, mentioning Dr. Money but not what he did TO US, and coming to conclusions that we've been vocally disagreeing with since 2007. she cherry picked stats to prove her point, which actually winds up harming it. all from whipping girl, the book that coined transmisogyny, a piece of literature that's treated like the trans bible, despite it's reductionism and transphobia.

and i'm not saying transmisogyny as a word shouldn't be used, i'm saying you are actively dragging our community down with your attempt to classify and codify a binary for which this framework is used. AGAIN, the entire reason people started throwing tantrums about "you all tell us to shut up and stop talking about our experiences" was because intersex people said "hey! you can use that word, it's a great descriptor to use in discussion about oppression through the lens of intersectionality! but it's deeply intersexist to turn it into a new binary. it's not cut and dry the way you want it to be, and you also can't just tell someone else what they have or have not experienced." something that we have been saying to the woman who coined it since she fucking coined it. because a shitload of intersex people don't fit the mental categorization of what TMA is and are still transmisogyny affected. shit, even cis black women have discussed how they're impacted by transmisogyny. because oppression isn't Man Bad Woman Good Woman Oppressed Man Oppressor. intersectionality makes oppression a very complicated multi-faceted system of abuse. (you'd think she'd get that from her book discussing the intersection of misogyny and transness.) but we intersex people are used as a battering ram for arguments or left out entirely, so the focus shifted onto targeting transmascs alone - the "opposite" of transfemmes, the enemy. we got lost in our justified criticism and it became criticism "for no reason."

it's such a baby's first understanding of gender praxis, to throw this initialization back at people who think this way. this a very rudimentary understanding that masculinity is rewarded, therefore anyone emulating masculinity is rewarded, and it is deeply lacking in intersectionality. the black man is not rewarded for his masculinity, nor is the indigenous man, nor is the gay, trans, intersex, jewish or asian man, so on and so forth. when you are seen as a deviation from the cisperi heterosexual white norm, you are punished for your attempts to (even successfully) emulate normalcy. in fact, this feels like such a base starting point for the framework of intersectionality that i regularly think these individuals are anti-black. if it doesn't affect them, they don't care to learn about it, or to listen to black transfems in their community, or to pay attention when a black person is speaking. have you never listened to malcom x or martin king speak of their blackness in relation to their masculinity? how they are punished for it, seen as aggressors, seen as threats? where is the reward there in that masculinity? what about black women, who are seen as masculine, aggressive, loud and dominating - all racist stereotypes? are you somehow completely unaware of the way masculinity is punished or assigned to dehumanize through racist trains of thought? because i'm assuming you just don't listen to black voices.

i think some of these people either are self proclaimed f3mc3ls who still use 4chn (a new worrying trend i've seen women and girls take to) which encourages this Us Vs Them thinking. or literal sockpuppets from 4chn doing astroturfing as Discourse Of The Month, as they have been doing for more than a decade. like, maybe i'm just old, but i remember the thousand iterations of this that came before this. aces, aros, lesbians, pansexuals, bisexuals, lesbians again, trans people, trans people again, over and over we recycle garbage and repaint it for a new round of discourse that at its best serves no purpose, and at its worst is alt-right psyop shit.

and i mean that literally. the CIA wrote a fucking handbook on how to disrupt leftist organizers. this shit is straight out of an alt-right gov. sanctioned playbook on disrupting leftist progression. Spread disturbing rumors that sound like inside dope. Haggle over precise wordings of communications. If possible, join or help organize a group [...] See that the procedures adopted are as inconvenient as possible [...] bringing up problems which are largely imaginary, and so on. [...] Act stupid. Be as irritable and as quarrelsome as possible, without getting yourself into trouble. 'this is whataboutism'. you guys remember whataboutism? shifting goalposts?

How about this manual on unconventional warfare? (psychological warfare on organizations you want to dismantle and disrupt)

Basically, psychological operations is concerned with persuading people, or groups of people, to take certain actions favorable to one’s interests. In an insurgent situation, psychological operations can be called upon to persuade the people of the area to actively and willingly co-operate with the local government, disrupt the efforts of the insurgent, and assist in separating the insurgent from other elements of the nation’s population.

how can we dissuade groups from acting against our interests?

The fundamental key to a successful persuasion effort is the extent to which the persuader genuinely understands the group being addressed.* Because successful persuasion depends on a thorough knowledge of environmental factors which influence the target, as well as a knowledge of what this target group thinks of itself and its environment,* it is difficult to specify detailed suggestions because of the diverse areas in which Special Forces may operate. There are general guidelines, however, which will aid Special Forces personnel in a persuasive effort.

if a group sees themselves as tolerant and inclusive, or as the sole victims under the oppressive system of abuse and power, how do we target them in a way that they understand?

There are a number of approaches to the problem of persuasion. The best one involves changing, if necessary, the predisposition of a target group to react in a particular way to things they sense in their environment—in other words, their attitudes. Having discovered the existing attitudes of the group an examination is made to define characteristics of the attitudes so that changes or modifications can be made.

if you can convince a group that their allies are victimizing them or that their allies are denying your victim hood, you can shift their focus from fighting you to fighting each other. if you can shift them into infighting, they stop organizing against you.

also, i think everyone should read this PDF so that they understand these psychological pitfalls and thus can avoid them.

it mentions many things i can't get into here because of post character limits - normalization of rhetoric and re-appropriating rhetoric, for another thing. like for example, 4chnneonazi shit becoming normal meme culture? "i believe in x supremacy" meme is a white supremacy meme. 4chn regularly pulls tactics from this manual to normalize their ways of thinking. radicalqueer meant someone who took action to change norms and laws - i worked as a member of a group called the radqueers. we organized for housing and feeding the homeless, as the homeless are disproportionately queer youth fleeing abusive environments. you know how people now contribute radqueer to pro-pedophilia? that's 4chn shit. adopt a term with meaning and shit on it so people can't organize with it.

i'm a fucking herm. i was called a baeddel as a kid, by an archaic ass schoolteacher who still thought we should beat the left handed. fucking "shemale" was an intersexist slur levied at me throughout my life - and it is also levied at trans women and is also transmisogynistic! but it would not be conductive to reality for me to claim that trans women aren't called this word because it's intersexist and they're not intersex so they don't experience intersexism. this shifting rhetorical focus shit of narrowing down terms until they're basically useless (or vice versa, broadening language until it loses meaning) is actively setting back our progress.

the sex binary is bullshit, this new "trans approved!" sex binary is bullshit, and leaving our siblings behind through these divisions is antithetical to queer radicalism (and not the co-opted 4chn definition of queer radicalist) you're actively shitting up the conversation. we should be talking about our experiences, not about who is or is not experiencing something we have experienced - just as we would expect them not to tell us what we have or have not experienced.

and someone calling you a sockpuppet or an astrotufer isn't bigotry. you're peddling alt-right division tactics. you come across as disingenuous because that's the whole point of these psychological tactics, to be disingenuous and bog down progress. and if you aren't someone infiltrating in order to shit up the conversation, you're a useful idiot who fell for this disruption bullshit.

i am an intersex, intergendered and jewish "othergendered" (as i call myself) trans person, and i stand with my transmasculine brothers and siblings, with my transfeminine sisters and siblings, with those who reject or abstract new genders of various kinds, and with my fellow intersex individuals who seek to dismantle the binary. i don't believe in cannibalizing each other to try to establish praxis. that's an active detriment to that work.

STOP INFANTILIZING TRANS MEN AND TRANSMASCS. ITS DISGUSTING AND EXTREMELY TRANSPHOBIC.

[crossingbaranduin]

frantically working on these most recent couple WIPs because i know the second i start playing pokemon scarlet + get the DLC next month, it's all over for anything but that haha

[valdevia]

Very funny that tumblr is having discourse about whether my art is misinformation or not, after I've been posting it all over the internet for years without any controversy. So let's talk about it!

I know people arguing are a vocal minority, but I'm not going to dismiss anyone's concerns. It's an actually interesting topic that I really consider, and it touches some important issues in society. So here's my (rambly) two cents.

My art is meant to misdirect, in some way. Photomanipulation and the tone I typically use are meant to briefly confuse the person reading it into thinking they're hearing a real story, at least for a few seconds.

The Intended Experience™

In this sense, I feel like my art can be misinformation! And it's not only people who don't think critically about things like "how come I never heard about mermaids being real before?".

So, no disrespect to anyone that fell for one of my pieces! My work plays with reality, so if you fell for it for more than a minute, it just means my tone and style worked a little too well for you! And there are legitimate reasons to be confused when you see something online, too. For example, there are people who can have trouble telling real and fictional things apart. When you post something that goes out to a million people, you'll get one million different reactions.

That's why I always take care to make it really clear, outside the main piece and snippet of text, that my art is no more than fiction. There are tags, the tone of my account, even my profile picture is meant to reinforce this. I also have a website which, in part, is meant to capture the clicks of people to wonder if my stuff is real and google it, so they can find a real source that's clearly an art website. You can try googling "mycelium infection 1806" or "pupillosarcoma" to see how my website tends to appear first.

If I get this comment I know I've done something believable!

But let's say, for the sake of argument, that my art wholly constitutes misinformation. What we need to understand is that misinformation is not the same as disinformation. Misinformation is just incorrect information. It's your grandma seeing a little bit of a found footage movie on TV and thinking it really happened. She might be spooked, but nobody is harmed. Disinformation is false information that's purposefully crafted and spread in order to cause harm, division, or further a political view.

Now I ask you: what real world harm does my art create? The worst that can happen is that a tiny percentage of those that see it get a little scared thinking a weird bug is real, or that mushrooms really grow on faces, or that scientists have released millions of trilobites into the oceans. Is that really that bad?

Anyway, that's my take on the topic! I'm obviously biased, but this being my style, I do put a lot of thought into it and I'm always open to people's opinions! (Just don't scream at random people on the replies or you'll get blocked!)

[gb-patch]

GB Patch Games: Sensitivity Reader Update

Okay, well I am able to make another statement before Rose does. I can now explain much more easily why I didn’t fire Rose. There’s been new developments with the leakers. The people behind this have doxed Rose’s discord account (please don’t go looking for it) and also shared a screenshot of an email that was sent to my support address months ago. They believe that incriminates us somehow, but really all it’s done is shown in broad daylight what they were doing and why I was defending Rose so much. If I had brought up that email as a connection to this myself people understandably would’ve thought I was making a conspiracy.

However, it is out now. Here is the story- a few months ago someone who wanted to remain anonymous sent me an email with a screenshot where Rose called me a cracker. And I told them I appreciated the concern but it’s alright, was there evidence of Rose being unkind to players? They had nothing. No response.

As an aside, yes, I have been aware for a long time that Rose uses crude language when talking about me. That doesn’t mean I’ve hidden how evil they were from players. It means I’m allowed to choose what I’m comfortable with. That original “reveal” didn’t shock or upset me in any way. Our Life is a sensitive, wholesome game, but I’m a full-grown adult. I’m not innocent or pure. The game I released before OL is XOXO Blood Droplets. Something I wrote and released to the public is full of crude jokes, curse words, and violence. It’s cartoonish and comical, but edgy. Rose themselves likes to BS with bad words and I’m not accepting abuse because I think getting called a pussy is funny. I know Rose doesn’t hate me or wish me any harm. Rose also isn’t causing “discourse” for me and my games on purpose, they were joking that bringing up serious topics is “discourse” to some people. Ironically, the leakers who did this are trying to make some “discourse” on purpose.

Regardless, I initially thought that email was from someone earnestly worried for me and that they moved on when it was clear I was fine. But that’s not what happened. Them and at least one other person have been waiting for months to bring this up again. They went through almost a year’s worth of Rose’s private posts to collect as many unflattering screenshots as they could, and then they didn’t send them to me. They posted them publicly. I had a suspicion from the get go that it was the same person/people from before who couldn’t prove anything to me in private. And if true, how horrible is it that a bunch of the comments they shared were crude language towards me, something they already knew I’d brush off as nothing. They decided for me that it was wrong and they wanted the rest of the players to do the same. Or even less charitably, those extra posts were simply there to make Rose look as bad and untrustworthy as possible and they didn’t care that I was comfortable with it. I could not explain everything we were thinking/feeling at first, but behind the scenes we were discussing how this was personally motivated and not a knee-jerk act without forethought. And we do know for certain at least the main people involved now, and they do have personal issues with Rose.

Also, if you still believe that they just wanted to help the game at any length because Rose is that huge of a risk, showing that email and framing something innocuous about me (not fainting at the word “cracker” and politely being open to more proof) as serious “evidence of wrongdoing” at GB Patch Games makes me believe they want to smear Rose so bad they’ll try to turn players against me as well. Plus, the post is framed as “this email was anonymously sent to me”, but we know from account details that the people who could’ve gotten those screenshots of the discord and email are the same people who sent that email and started this situation, which is embarrassing. I’ve confirmed the screenshots shared in the email to me and the original public post came from the same private, “venting-safe” discord server. There’s very few people in there. We know it’s still you and not a separate source. I can’t prove they think I’m stupid or in their way, but I can’t see how anything they’re doing is trying to be beneficial to the creation of OL: NF. They told me in the email they’d give me more evidence if I requested it and I was ready to know, but instead they went silent for months and then did this.

I want it to be clear that this doesn’t mean players can’t wonder if Rose has enough experience to be a sensitivity reader right now, or to worry they’re so invested in the game that it’s going to effect how objective they are with their feedback, or to say that Rose is flawless and has never done anything hurtful. However, I hope you can understand why I was on Rose’s side and couldn’t just fire them over this. It felt so incredibly unfair. If another person tries to get their way by doing this in the future, I will not hail them as a hero and immediately fire at the target. And I don't tolerate any racial harassment of any kind to anyone on my team.

If those people want to continue to share Rose’s private posts in retaliation, you can fuck off. If you somehow reveal now that Rose is secretly a murderer, I’m not gonna apologize and say I was so wrong about you. If you had tons of evidence of Rose being horrible to players, you should’ve sent it all to me and with full context to begin with in the email like you offered to do. I just don’t understand.

Any players who like to see someone’s least flattering points portrayed in the worst possible way and continue flocking to the leaks as fandom drama, I don’t want you in this fandom. I don’t want you to enjoy my games.

Anyone who has been truly hurt by this and are left confused and angry, I do completely understand that. I didn’t know how to handle this, and it made a lot of people not know how to keep trusting me. I am still looking into getting a community manager to help me better communicate with players, especially when something serious happens. And I’ll always be around for you to reach out to if you have doubts about anything.

[househeritageposts]

my bad

only on tumblr can you have people saying shit like can “doctor gregory house reclaim the f slur?” completely seriously. like do you hear yourself??

[awrkive]

[ masterlist of the series neighbor blunder by awrkive ]

legend

❀ ; fluff ♡ ; smut ✧ ; angst

main masterlist

↳ warnings are stated in the link of each chapter itself as well as on this navi page — all of my works are 18+ so minors, DNI !!

summary in hindsight, you should have seen it coming. had always known your luck – or lack of it, thereof – and the universe's meticulous plan of your downfall made it easy for you to get tangled up in a series of unfortunate events, which presents itself as the neighbor that lives across from you, jeon jungkook.

tags neighbors!au, coworkers!au, software engineer!jk, cto!jk, chaebol!jk vibes, accountant!oc, strangers to...?

status; ongoing

current total word count: 59.3k words

AVAILABLE ON WATTPAD | AO3

nb!jk visual • nb tag ( fic discourse ) • taglist ( SEND AN ASK. ) • amm ( ask my characters anything )

main story;

𓍯 neighbor blunder

one: in which you meet neighbor unit 446 for the first time, unsuspecting of the circumstances he comes with

↳ genre & warnings: ❀ ; mature language

two: in which you get to know jungkook better, and it complicates your feelings

↳ genre & warnings: ❀ ; ♡ ; mature content: language, female masturbation

three: in which you stay at jungkook's place for a week. chaos ensues.

↳ genre & warnings: ❀ ; mature content: language, alcohol consumption

four: coming soon [ release date: tba ]

[ faq about nb story ]

ask #1: when do u update?

ask #2: how does the chapter system work for this story?

ask #3: on nb jk

all right reserved © awrkive, 2024. no reposts, translations, modification, and copying allowed. if you enjoy my work/s and have the extra means, please consider supporting me on ko-fi <3