#like obviously not to the same degree but

[marsprincess889]

Astrology rant

I hope astro blogs and astro lovers read this

...

Hi guys I hope you're doing well🤍

These months(17 of them?) of running an astro blog have made me see a variety of opinions regarding a lot of things, mainly_ astrology.

I want to say that this is obviously social media and it's barely a solid, reliable place for sharing or getting info, but on the other side of this, the freedom of internet and, at least relative anonimity can produce truly remarkable insights/statements that you won't see anywhere else. You can never know how true or untrue someone can be unless you really read what they've written(or listen to what they've recorded) and take it in.

But it is still so rare for me to find a blog that shares most of my views. I mean, anyone with an access to internet can start an astrology blog. It's so easy to copy and paste articles on the internet and put them here. They can get thousands of notes and people will believe them and share that unverified info that's been distorted through copying and repetition, to others(which is a whole another, very sad story).

And on most days I just mind my business and work on myself, not wanting to even go close to that energy. I might politely comment on posts that seem false to me, just expressing my suspicions or opinions and asking for theirs in return, but to be very honest, I am tired of seeing the same faulty takes and overall approach. So here are some things that, to me, are just ???? so questionable to say the least(with added reasons):

1. Mixing Vedic and Western

In many ways.

Outer planets that are only used in Western? Sure, here are descriptions and "observations" of them in Vedic nakshatras.

Asteroids that Vedic does not look at? Here are explanations of them in nakshatras too. (But there's an exception that I talk about later)

Western composite and synastry aspects? Yeah here is their analysis based on Vedic charts.

And so many more.

It's not a question of whether their "formulas" mix or not, but a question of integrity and of what you follow.

2. Nakshatras in D9(navamsa) and other divisional charts (!)

Whyyyyyy. Just tell me why.

I don't think anyone who uses nakshatras in any divisional chart has really thought about it.

And before they make say to me something like "you should be open minded" or "people resonate with it"(people are complex and can resonate to many things but nakshatras in divisional charts are not the explanation behind that), they should just read my post on my pinned masterlist about that.

Like I'm this 🤏 close to launching an inquisition to just call out every blog who does this, because it's alarming how many people can defend an illogical point with such unwillingness to see the opposite take.

I feel strongly about this one and I kinda judge people who go with it.

There are no nakshatrs in D9 cause divisional signs are hypothetical, nakshatras are actual stars in the sky. Case closed.

3. Asteroid obsession

Look guys, I love asteroids as much as the next person, if not more. And it makes sense for astrology lovers to be really into asteroids, since astrology is mythological already and asteroids open up a whole variety of different mythological associations and, with them, the potential of embodying them.

But here's where most people can reach error: asteroids cannot be holding the same influence/power as other planets.

There are so many posts with lengthy descriptions of asteroid placements in signs, houses or them aspecting planets with sextiles, trines(those aspects don't matter in most cases when it comes to asteroids).

I think asteroids only ever really hold power if they are closely(4 degrees at most) conjunct or opposite big three or other important planets, and important planets/points are unique to each chart. Asteroid interpretation requires realness with yourself and others and, more importantly, common sense. And yeah, you can interpret them in nakshatras ONLY IF they are tightly conjunct an important planet and you have some examples.

I've seen a lot of obsession with asteroids such as Lilith, Aphrodite, Sirene, Groom, Briede.

Yeah online astrology can generate the need to compare yourself to others, which is silly, cause all charts are unique and have a unique beauty, and there's no such things as "more" or "less" unique anything.

4. Making stuff up

Ok here I'm talking about takes that are barely backed by valid examples.

Like when a blog attributes a theme or a pattern to a placement that has not a lot in common with its original association and/or is backed by examples that are not really viable.

Like when someone says: "Ashwini is associated with .......(insert some specific scenario/trope). Examples: *this actor*_ mars in Ashwini, *this actress*_ D9 ketu in Ashwini(are you for real...), *this person*_ their D393747838 Mercury in Ashwini, time unspecified so might be Bharani."

I know this sounds exaggerated(the last example obviously is) but I've really seen blogs where mars or venus or mercury(jupiter and saturn too) are used as exmaples for a nakshatra. And I've seen a whole blog that focuses on D60 ketus a lot.

Now, I think that stems from a desire to associate specific feelings/vibes and themes that they are into with placements that they most likely have, in a way that feels original. But you can't just take vague feelings/suspicions and present them as logical observations or facts, it doesn't work like that😭

A lot of "vibes" or feelings that I had about nakshatras did turn out to be true, but I had to wait to find proof myself, and sometimes the observations can change a little after discovering solid examples and it makes it all clear.

5. Shallow Stereotyping

I know, astrology is built on "strerotypes", but to me they're more archetypes.

A lot of narrow stereotyping can come from more influential astrologers.

This is especially common in Vedic astrology and with people who follow Claire Nakti.

For example, with her, I love how she uses art and real life people as examples but she too can make mistakes. And she has, and if she discovers them, she adds them as disclaimers in her descriptions.

I think sometimes she can be narrow with her observations, which isn't necessarily bad, but when people see those as undisputably true and more important than their own or other astrologers' observations, then it is.

For example, she made 3 videos about Bharani but I still think she missed some important themes because she was stuck on providing more and more detail for the same point😭

Trusting influential astrologers blindly and quoting/paraphrasing them to prove their own points is a real epidemic.

Just fyi, crediting them while proving their point with your own examples is not the same.

So, anyone can make mistakes, and everyone should be open to changing their mind, but never without real examples and proof.

6. Style over substance

Possibly the biggest problem that is the root of most of other problems in this "community".

The reason why astrology became pop is because of simplifications and, more importantly, flashy images and words.

I've already made a post about how harmful I think the irresponsibility of sharing faulty astrological info is. I'm disturbed by all that manic energy around a thing that should be low-pressure but valid and educational.

I don't think astrology is meant to help you make desicions in a direct way, or to be used as the ultimate filter to judge others and look at the world. It's not the end-all be-all truth at all, not at all. But it is something that a lot of people take seriously and I just have little to no respect for blogs that use AI or don't care for logic or facts.

People here can argue and defend AI in astrology😭 they can irresponsibly make contradictory statements, have no verified observations of their own whatsoever and still act like the expert while interacting or posting.

That's all I wanna say about this right now.

...

Comment, reblog, message me, like even, whatever. I want to know what others think about any of this.

[evilrwbyfan]

does anyone else think vizzy was supposed to be the other canon ship of murder drones?

lizzy is implied to be sapphic whether it was intentional or not as well, she has called V hot twice and they are obviously very close. basically any and all of lizzys on screen moments include v in some way and if they dont it was BEFORE they met, not to mention lizzy was the only one who knew v was still alive and that v made sure to keep in contact with. interesting that out of everyone v knows, she contacted lizzy first after surviving

also the very obvious fact that v has a soft spot for lizzy, when lizzy calls her a diva she doesnt get defensive like she probably would if it was uzi or someone else she just smiles and playfully scoffs to herself. also the fact v has gone out of her way to keep lizzy alive, even if she acted like it wasnt for her sake (while it would be a normal thing to keep someone alive, for these drones its not. they are very desenitized to death and they kill drones REGULARLY, there would be no reason to worry about lizzys safety unless she was attached)

lizzy was also very quick to "betray" doll, who was supposedly her best friend before v, which makes me wonder what exactly they got up to in the time that lizzy was befriending v for the plan at prom? we know they obviously got close and lizzy actually felt bad for v, which isnt something that is common for the drones. when lizzy and her friends were literally being hunted by uzi, she still took the time to be judgemental and joke and she didnt even care that her friend group were all murdered... but she was concerned enough about v to try to save her from doll, i think they developed feelings for each other very early on and its sort of like a nuzi situation where they started dating off screen but instead of getting confirmation like nuzi did its kind of up to interpretation

another thing to add to them worrying about one another, both lizzy and v are very chill and laidback whenever someone dies on screen, regardless if they know them or not. when v killed someone, lizzy immediately searched through them to steal their belongings and then continued on casually, she definitely knew that drone considering it was her classmate... its incredibly obvious that they mean something to each other and that it goes deeper than the same friendships they have with others, otherwise they wouldnt try so hard to keep each other alive. Also to note, they are physically affectionate with each other to a degree which we do not see either v or lizzy being like that with anyone else ESPECIALLY v

we also know for sure that they hangout all the time off screen and that lizzy has sort of migrated her way into the friendgroup of v, uzi, and n Just for v. that is not something lizzy wouldve done if not for v, she clearly means a lot to her and she wants to spend time with her even if both of them have a hard time being honest like that

i can imagine after the events of the series, lizzy and v live together even if they arent romantically involved. they make me feel very deeply, when i see them or think about them i get a very specific feeling in my chest i cant describe but they mean a lot to me and i would love a spinoff episode/series about what these two get up to together

[archerdepartures116]

Ur dec 20 announcement post… Pet Cafe AU?? Yes plsss i would like to know more

Also I love ur art sm!! Liu Qingge is my favorite and ur content fuels me

thank you!! The Pet Cafe AU really only started cause I saw that the BaiTu Tang had the same pingying spelling as Bai Zhan and my neurons rubbed together and went "wait Bai Zhan,,, BaiTu,,,, what if I made LQG a bunny and it all spiraled off from there (so incase anyone wants to know why hes a bunny instead of any other animal, theres ur answer lol)

Here's some tidbits about this AU

In the AU, SY and SQH run the pet cafe together, funded by Shen Yuan's parents (only the initial starting costs tho as SY has refused further financial help) and supportive of this business since it give their son something to do (chronically online and kinda sickly)

They're also animal lovers and see that it's helping animals who have either been abandoned or rescued (why they're not being sent to the zoo is for plot reasons ok HEAR ME OUT)

SQH came up with the idea to make the pet cafe themed around the CQM folktale

Business is doing quite well as the variety of animals getting quite well along with each other sparks intrigue and people want to visit to see them in person

Shen Yuan has a degree in zoology and takes care of most of the caring for the animals, SQH has an accounting degree and takes care of running the more technical aspects of the cafe (although they obviously have a mix of tasks)

Lastly, I might be drawing bun-qingge more than the other animals cause I have a bunny myself and he's basically an hopping reference for bunny anatomy lmao

[kradogsrats]

Okay, so: I have a theory.

Aaravos doesn't know everything. (That's not the theory.) If he knew in exact detail how everything would play out, that would undermine the story's overall central theme that the world (destiny) can be changed. Most of his actual advantage is millennia of observing mortal behavior—he's very, very good at predicting how elves and humans will react when put in situations. He can also, however, be surprised.

Now, that isn't to say he doesn't definitely have some degree of cosmic foresight/timeblindness. (That's also not the theory.) However, even the Cosmic Council in its entirety doesn't seem to necessarily see things in detail, since they obviously see "humans gaining primal magic starts the spiral into chaos" but not "because you then execute a child, prompting her father to personally oversee that spiral." So when Aaravos says things like this:

I don't think he necessarily knows exactly what role Claudia will play, besides that she is important—even necessary—to his plan. It would be chef's kiss irony if what he's actually seeing is that she will become important to him, personally. (That is also not the theory. I'm getting there.)

Despite his general foresight Aaravos can be surprised, and he's specifically surprised by Rayla making a second attempt at killing Viren despite being disarmed, sacrificing herself to stop him. So: did he know Viren was going to die, just not at that moment? Did he prepare a multi-year Worm Plan specifically to resurrect Viren? Or was there another purpose he had in mind?

This isn't the theory, either, but: I do think the plan from the beginning was for The Worm to, uh... pupate(?) into Sir Sparklepuff, and then to lead Viren (and Claudia) to the other archdragons and the clues to Aaravos's prison (or at least the one clue they actually need). The Worm begins to grow aggressively right as/after Aaravos and Viren corrupt the Sunforge, like it's preparing for an imminent new stage. I suspect that after hatching and once in proximity to the prison, Aaravos had every intent to use Sir Sparklepuff in some way to re-manifest in the world. After all, he's tied by blood to Aaravos just as much as he is to Viren—if he can be used to "restore [Viren's] life and future," there's no reason he can't serve the same purpose for Aaravos.

Of course, that all gets derailed, and instead we wind up where we wind up, which is with Aaravos being surprised:

He's surprised enough that, if it isn't in itself responsible for his hold on Avizandum weakening enough to be broken, he's at least distracted enough to be ambushed and physically overpowered. Someone has asked the "what's Sir Sparklepuff's unfinished business?" question, but I don't think that's actually what's at play, here.

Because this, finally, is my theory: Aaravos is surprised because this creature, this little homunculus puppet made a living battery, isn't supposed to have a soul.

He shouldn't be there at all—in the In-Between, or anywhere else. The essence put into him when the chrysalis was opened gives him a rudimentary consciousness, but if there was even enough there to persist, it should have been consumed to finalize Viren's resurrection. Aaravos is looking at something that should be impossible, and yet here it is.

Which makes me wonder... I had kind of dismissed the fairly extreme difference between the symbol for infantis sanguine in Aaravos's book and what is shown after the fact:

Like, that's a lot to draw in the sand. Maybe what's in the book is actually a more functional diagram or instructions of some kind, and Claudia has drawn the actual functional part?

However, because the rune Claudia has drawn is the same as the one on the cursed coins, I have to question. The assumption, I think, has been that Aaravos instructed Claudia in the infantis sanguine ritual to save Viren. I took that for granted because a) it makes sense, and b) it's funny to imagine Claudia's unhinged little "Blood of Child" giggle in s6e1 as "unfortunately for both of us, I do know you fucked the sparkly elf." However, depending on how quickly Callum and the others depart for Katolis, Aaravos is potentially moving away fairly quickly—maybe not so quickly that he can't contact Claudia and give her the ritual before being cut off, but still.

We also know Claudia knows about the cursed coins, including a good grasp of what they entail:

It's not clear if she understands it in the way Lujanne explains, with the coins containing only a piece of the soul and the rest being trapped elsewhere, in the In-Between:

Aaravos may have given her a different ritual (maybe infantis sanguine itself can only be self-targeted) that works more like that. Maybe, if Sir Sparklepuff had enough of a soul, only part of it was enough to anchor/revitalize Viren (essentially "stored" in him as the coin) and the rest went to languish in the In-Between.

Anyway, if Sir Sparklepuff is not meant to have a soul, but does... that raises some interesting possibilities, both thematically (depersonalization/what is a monster) and narratively. What if Sir Sparklepuff needs his soul completed to pass on, like Rayla's parents? Could he be after a piece of Aaravos's? Or, what if Sir Sparklepuff didn't have enough of a soul, but what he had entered the In-Between rather than being consumed because it was actually a piece of Claudia's that broke off to save Viren?

idek man this is just the shit I think about like constantly

[tubbytarchia]

Rant, obviously not aimed at everyone (I love you cool traffic fans more than you could ever know): Increasingly angsting over the thought of exiting the traffic fandom because wow do you ever think about how fucked up that is. Do you ever think about how genuinely actually crazy it is that a fandom sucks so much it makes you want to leave of your own choice even after finding a space for it you thought to be safe. My interests haven't changed, this fandom is just fucking abhorrent to an inexcusable degree. The casual bashing of fellow fandom goers and opinions and normalized toxic positivity makes this space inhabitable. I thought Tumblr at least had it good but no matter how much filtering I do, no matter how many blogs I block, I still see posts on a constant basis that so nonchalantly make casual jabs at people who have done nothing wrong with zero realization what tangible harm they cause. Worst case scenario, attacking, harassment and death threats, and for what. For what? For saying some character is toxic? For liking a ship? Isn't that stupid. Isn't that so incredibly stupid to cause someone real tangible distress for that. How are traffic fans specifically so chronically online and lacking of any semblance of empathy, why is the twitter mindset of cancelling random people being adopted here. Why are we choosing to spend time being shitheads rather than expressing joy for something we enjoy. Why spend our time making this fandom unapproachable and hostile to people who just want to talk about media they like. As if they're not entitled to that same space that you gatekeep. Sorry rant over

[twodiamondhoes]

Ough hell yes ranchers + an arcade perhaps something silly like that

Hi Worm!!! this one possessed me I fear. It is technically over 500 words, but it is less than 600 words, so I'm counting it, because I kept wanting to just write a full indie-film summer romance style... thing instead of a 500-word drabble. This one was such trouble because I could have genuinely made it into something so much bigger and resisting that temptation was IMMENSELY difficult.

Enjoy! <3

The door swung open, letting a sliver of setting sunlight shine past the film covering the windows. Tango glanced up at the convex mirror above his machine and grinned. He ignored the cry of despair from the kid who had been watching him play for the past twenty minutes while he tried not to stare at the clock, and let his fingers slip off the controls.

He wove his way through the maze of machines, darting through the crowd with the ease of familiarity and practice. He broke through the edge of the crowd, where the machines ended and the carpet changed to patterned linoleum. The pinging of arcade machines faded in favor of the murmur of voices and shouting from the kitchen.

Jimmy stood at the periphery of it all, glancing around the room like it overwhelmed him. Maybe it did. Maybe Tango was one of the lucky few who found this level of noise and chaos relaxing instead of infuriating, but he loved it all the same.

“You made it!” he cried. Jimmy’s face lit up, and Tango wondered why he’d ever been worried.

He shoved down the flutter of nerves in his chest and hooked an arm around Jimmy’s shoulder, pulling him down to his level.

“Tango!” Jimmy cried, a laugh in his voice.

“Welcome, welcome!” Tango said forcing extra cheer into the words as he tried not to get distracted by his own foolishness at pulling Jimmy so close to him. If he turned his head fifteen degrees, he’d be able to see where Jimmy’s cheek dimpled. “Your first proper arcade experience,” he mused, “where do you want to start?”

“Um,” Jimmy said, sounding distracted. Tango couldn’t blame him. It was a lot to take in. “What’s your favorite thing here?”

Tango swallowed the urge to say something sappy, like “you, now,” but the urge was there. Instead, he turned them back towards the maze he’d come from.

“I hope you’re ready to lose, man, because I am not going easy on you.”

“Aw,” Jimmy moaned, “but it’s my first time!”

Tango sputtered out a laugh and wondered if Jimmy could feel his cheeks burning this close. Out of self-preservation, or maybe just plain bad judgment, Tango let Jimmy go, though his hand lingered on Jimmy’s shoulder a moment longer than it needed to.

“Two words for you: beginner’s luck. I’m not about to let my guard down around you. I’ve got a reputation to uphold, here.”

“Oh yeah, tough guy?” Jimmy asked, turning to look at him properly. There was a grin on his face that Tango had never seen before, but that he’d like to see again. It was sharp. Confident in a way Jimmy usually didn’t get to be. “Tell you what, you name the game, and I’ll make you eat your words.”

“What do I get if I win?” Tango asked, because he couldn’t help himself.

“Your reputation,” Jimmy said simply. There was something in his eyes that reminded Tango of a shark. “Obviously. The real question is: what do I get if I win?”

“My undying admiration?” Tango offered, a little breathless. It wasn’t what he wanted to say, but it was the safest option. Jimmy’s lips quirked, like he knew it.

“It’ll do, for a start.” Jimmy gestured out towards the maze that Tango knew like a second home, and Tango pretended as he passed that it was the thrill of the challenge that had his heart pounding in his chest.

[lorddeathofmurdermountain]

Man I'm not arguing all that.

First of all, if you think any anime character looks like an actual human (save for the actually realistic ones), you're blind. If anything, they look like cats.

Second of all, the research on the topic you provide isn't reliable. Why? Because none of it is. I can look up dozens of papers on CSA worldwide and none of them state even remotely similar statistics. But sure, for argument sake, here.

Asia as a whole has a lesser degree of CSA than Europe, while America and Canada have double the rate of Asia.

Oh, why the hell do I bother. You're a fucking clown. Here you are, bitching and moaning online about how evil all this is or whatever, while sitting comfortably in your chair at home doing fuck all about it. You're in a constant state of moral panic, stuck in a loop of confirmation bias where either someone agrees with you or, if they don't, they're obviously evil. I was never gonna have a normal discussion about this topic. I won't be talking to you any more, but please, at least to not make yourself look as clownish, stop posting articles that are little more than "he said she said" as proof of anything.

To specify a few: the article where a man reenacted a scene from a manga? Iirc he later admitted he just wanted to blame someone else for what he did. Still required him to be a pedo first and foremost, still anecdotal evidence. Still based on the same logic as "videogames cause violence". A lot of your other links are Tumblr posts and videos that just go "hey, I have a moral problem with this, here's some oddly specific situation, which is proof that it's bad". Again. Moral panic doing it's thing. Not like I can even begin to discuss this logically since you'll label me evil because of baseless assumptions tentatively "supported" by like three of the same fucking cases all of you ever mention.

You also contradict yourself a lot, ie "MORALITY OVER LEGALITY" but then use the illegality of owning lolisho content as proof that it's evil, despite most of the developed world not banning it and not having any kind of CSA crisis. Morality is highly subjective anyway. For instance, you or and I might think killing kittens is unacceptable, but on a farm where the owner can't afford to spray his cats nor to feed a whole litter and nobody wants to take any of them, the situation might just force him to either abandon them or kill them, and he might think the latter kinder. You nor I have the right to call him out on it - that's why we have the legal system, it's a collective agreement on what we absolutely shouldn't allow anyone to do, as opposed to allowing personal morality to rule our actions.

Lastly, do you really expect people you directly antagonize to respect your DNIs? What's next, you'll tag someone and then ask them how dare they talk to you? More of your illogical behavior, I guess. I'm done here.

I literally dare the "fiction doesn't affect reality" people/proshits (or whatever tf they want to call themselves) to say that shit to the girl who nearly died because her friends thought Slenderman was real.

This too! 👆🏾

[shapecrow]

not me, wanting to add the netflix wednesday addams to my multi

[fluentisonus]

working in a factory has you thinking so much about the insane chain of labor & transport that goes into making literally anything

[dirtylittleanimals]

Need y'all to be respectful of familial bonds that aren't blood-related. There is no secret "real dad" of Vi and Jinx; regardless of who contributed to their births, Vander and Silco helped raised those children before and after their previous parents died. And hopefully if something does get revealed about biological heritage it will be done in a respectful way and not in the ways a lot of y'all are: making fun of or pushing the false narrative that blood is what matters above all when it comes to family.

[transmutationisms]

@apodeme ok disclaimers that i 1) am not an americanist 2) didn't finish the video 3) am not typing out formal citations for this post but

mainly what annoyed me is that olson does an incredibly poor job contextualising usamerican 'creationism' and young earther stuff. 'flood geology' isn't really a new thing by the 1930s -- in the usamerican context what's different to most of the continent is the biblical literalism but even this was not wholly foreign to either england or europe. geologists and palaeontologists have been looking at fossils and trying to date the earth since at least the mid 18th century, & have in fact been mocking or stigmatising one another's age estimates the entire time. even by like the geoffroy-cuvier debates of 1830 most french savants thought cuvier was full of it to some degree,1 and in his theory it wasn't even just one flood responsible for everything -- he thought the earth's history was one of multiple destructive floods and other geological events, hence the term 'catastrophism' to describe this loose branch of theorising, with 'uniformitarianism' the counterpart proposed by early evolutionists ('transformists / transmutationists') such as lamarck.

which brings me also to point out that the theories here being shorthanded as creationism or young earth or catastrophism etc are pretty varied and have only ever borne a loose family resemblance to one another. even among current usamerican evangelicals there is disagreement as to what age the earth is or how far living beings can be altered;2 the same has always been true among people discussing these ideas. when you strawman them or oversimplify them you don't really convey anything of value re: how these theories spread or whose interests they appeal to.

the video, or what i saw of it anyway, is also predictably coloured by the current reigning liberal understanding of science as a march of progress and enlightenment and a gradual accumulation of objective truth, which i won't waste time complaining about yet again except to say that the reason this narrative is still so pervasive in pop histories of evolution, in particular, is largely because the usamerican creationist historiographies of the mid 20th century have gone quite out of their way to gin up the idea of an irreconcilable split between science and religion, and liberals like olson love to take up this framework uncritically and simply invert the valences lmao. in reality scientific and religious inquiry do often overlap and historically have done quite extensively in the field of evolutionary biology,3 and this is a pretty serious problem for anyone who does actually give a fuck about scientific inquiry and what it is capable of achieving.

1 to be fair some of cuvier's problems were also just down to him being a protestant, which was obviously more of an issue in early 19thc france than in 1930s usa. he wasn't really any more creationist than the religious savant average at the time, though, and did not use scripture to directly support his interpretations of fossils, but i digress

2 by the 18th century it was long since abundantly clear to anyone who paid any attention to agriculture that living beings can be altered by selective breeding to look & function quite differently to any 'original' forms. this observation could be logically extended to support a concept of species evolution (as in lamarck) but some savants considered it a limited type of change that would run up against impassable biological barriers (as in cuvier's functionalist teleology). some savants split the difference (as in geoffroy's transcendentalist anatomy)

3 most notoriously in the anglo world, in chambers's 1844 'vestiges of creation' -- but, see also many bridgewater treatises, harriet martineau, german romanticism in 19th century biology, most french evolutionary theory prior to anti-clerical neo-lamarckians like de lanessan, etc etc

i can't finish the new dan olson video i wish people would stop making history videos about things they don't know the history of

[gaywarcriminals]

In a fit of boredom and/or autism I made decently compressive list of all my SV ships

[skrunksthatwunk]

you go to a lesbian blog and find it says women only!! no men allowed!!! and go oh! excuse me, um, what about other lesbians? plenty of lesbians are genderqueer... and they go well, okay, go fuck yourself tim chop off your sweaty dick and stop calling yourself a lesbian. you do not have a dick, actually. you think about that fact often, even though it does you no good. you do not tell this person that.

you go to another lesbian blog and it says women only and you try again, and this time they change it to wlw + nblw only (non-men who love non-men :D). and you'll say hey i appreciate that but gender's not really that cut and dry for a lot of people. someone could be both a man and nonbinary, for instance. i just worry that you're looking at nonbinary as a generic third gender, or an extension of womanhood. i mean yeah you include nblw in your tags but all your posts are about pussy-havers exclusively. what's with that? and they say go fuck yourself you pervy man pretending to be a lesbian. you tried to sneak in but i won't let you.

so you go to a lesbian blog with a dozen or so posts about queer people needing to be more weird about it and you sigh in relief. but you still see the men dni. that's odd. hoping for the best, you say hey! i know you mean well but please maybe don't put men dni at the end of the lovely posts on your lesbian blog bc some lesbians are men. and they'll be like ok!! well you're allowed ;) and you say no that's not. no. some men are lesbians not just me. you think about your own dicklessness and wonder if that's why you were given entry. and you add that even if male lesbians are allowed, there's no indication of that. how would anyone know without asking? and they're like ohh gotcha gotcha well men dni + this is for sapphics only!! and you'll be like ok well that treats the concepts of men and sapphics as mutually exclusive identities and i just told you that's not true and you agreed with me so.. i don't think that solves our problem. and they're like. ok. fine. men dni but genderfluid and multigender people are allowed! and you're like no see that's. that's still the same thing.. you're saying the same thing just with different words. if you don't want men to interact but you're fine with multigender/genderfluid/etc ppl interacting then you either don't see them as Real Men (because they don't reach a standard of Full Manhood) or Complete Men (because they're only Part-Time Men), both of which suggest that they are, in some way, not men or less-than men, which is invalidating and defeats the point of the exception in the first place (accommodation) OR that you don't really mean the dni which is confusing and inconsistent and makes guydykes feel weird and uncomfortable and excluded from the lesbian space you're trying to cultivate. and they're like um. ok. so. cishet men dni? and you're like well i think that makes more sense, but what if someone identifies as both a cishet man and a sapphic? again, if we're trying to accommodate the genderfucky populace then that has to be a possibility that is considered. and they say god you people are never happy. what do you want me to do? what am i supposed to say to keep the right men out? and you pause. you empathize with the need for a space free from dudes trying to fuck you straight and feminine. dudes who watch lesbian porn and joke about what they'd do if they were allowed into girls locker rooms. who look at you like a piece of meat, and like someone who looks at women like pieces of meat in the same way he does. you get it. you know. you want a space where you can be sapphic, too. that's why you came to these blogs in the first place. you brace yourself and you say well i don't know that there are "right men" to keep out. i don't know that there's any single label that would accomplish whatever it is you're trying to accomplish. you could go for "sapphics only" or "queers only" and i think that might be the closest thing to what you want, but it's never going to be perfect. creating any exclusive space is going to shut out people you didn't account for, and the broader the label, the more people will be shut out that you didn't want to shut out. and what about people who don't know if they're allowed? what of questioning transbians, where are they supposed to go? and, frankly, i think i might rather my dykey posts get read and appreciated by a gay guy who sees me as a man than a woman who only sees me as a sacred womb, pure from male perversions or violence or whatever. i think community might just be more complex than a dni can handle. and they look at you and say i don't want to not have a dni. i think you're too permissive. you can't just "what about" or microlabel your way into everything. go fuck yourself, i bet you're not even a lesbian anyway. go find a real problem to get mad about.

you go to a lesbian blog. you ignore the men dni because you know you probably don't even count to them. or maybe you do count and, out of respect for your manhood, they'd shun you accordingly. you try to feel okay about that. you scroll past dozens of posts about mediocre men and gagging at straight friends' boyfriends and how gross and undeserving men are of the beautiful women they couple up with and how all women should be gay so they can get treated right and and and and and. you finally find a post about curling into someone you love and feeling at peace and try to lose yourself in it. you know that feeling is what unites you, what makes you belong. you try to focus on it. you think about carding your hands through a butch's hair or lacing fingers with a femme and feeling warm and loved and more yourself than you ever have before. like this is who you're meant to be. you read about lesboys and butch boytoys and genderfucky dykes and big hairy deep-voiced wonderful women (like you want to be someday, like you wish you could make yourself) and you try to ignore the men dni underneath each and every post. and you daydream about meeting someone kind and earnest at a lesbian bar even though you don't think any such bars exist within three states of you and you can't drink and don't want to drink because you need to be in control of yourself at all times so you don't fuck up like you're always about to and here in the nonexistent lesbian bar you feel wanted and safe and in good company. you picture your ideal, happiest self. it is a mistake. ideal-you has a goatee. not the mascara one you smear on and call drag even though you know it's not drag, not really, the beard you call drag because you think everyone would look at you sadly if you told them it was just to pretend you had something out of your reach. a beard that's soft and that you grew and that cannot be smudged away if you get too comfortable with it. the dream shatters. your people pull away from you, their scoffs mixing with the mind-numbing gay girl bedroom pop you learned to settle for just to have something that almost resembled you, they all pull away and turn their backs and do not look at you. you're too close to being a man now, even though you're the same amount of man as before. and they know you're not supposed to interact with men, not as you would with dykes, at least. and it sours. it's all your imagination, all in your head, but it sours.

you sigh. you think about how small you are. how short, how narrow, how feeble. how your voice pitches up when you talk to strangers because it's easier to speak quietly when it carries more, and because you're nervous. because it's a chore to talk, like everything is. you think about testosterone. you think about how your family would look at you, the questions they would ask, your answers they would only pretend to accept. the uncomfortable glances and whispered questions they'd try to hide from you. you think about how small you are, and how small you will always be. how you don't know of a way to fix it, but even if there was one, no one would want you anymore. you'd be the only one thinking it made you a cooler dyke. you think about how you don't even want a T-voice all the time, how you'll never be able to switch it at will, because you don't know how and can't bring yourself to figure it out. you think about how your throat closes around every hint of your own attraction. how wanting is perverse, how wanting is invasive, how wanting is embarrassing and too vulnerable so it must stay anonymous, as an online witness, and how you can barely manage to form or maintain friendships because your brain makes you pull away, always spinning out and struggling to recover from the simplest of interactions. how they'll all leave you and you won't chase after them at all and how that will hurt them. how stuck you get. how it looks like nothing's holding you back, how that frustrates everyone who thought you were going to be more than you were. the people you love who understand except when it comes to being ghosted, being shut out. how you don't want to hurt them. how you can't tell them that because you're stuck. how you turn to stone when touched, how you never reach out, how you lose your speech and can't look at people, how your autism is fun and sexy until it becomes real and you never see them anymore, how much you longed for someone who knew everything without you having to explain, and who loved you anyway. how unreasonable you know that is to expect of anyone. you think about that not-even-real lesbian bar. you think about how you still can't drive. how you can't leave your home on your own, without dragging somebody into helping you. how you can't leave your body. how you can't leave your manhood behind.

you think about finding another lesbian blog and ignoring everything. about skimming it for the parts you can juice some meaning from. the parts men ignore and don't understand, and how typical of you it is to do so. or the parts where you're not welcome and you should accept that, because it's for lesbians only. how you are a lesbian anyway. how you're meant to choose lesbian or man, how each is a betrayal of some kind to yourself or your people, your family, your lovely strangers, your rare friendly acquaintances. about the parts that tell you you're not wanted, that you're ugly and lazy and gross and insert yourself everywhere without even asking. about the parts that tell you you are hated, and how lesbians are above it all by rejecting men. how lesbians are each blessed miracles. about the parts that say you should be ashamed of being whatever twisted confused freak you are, of everything, of looking and wanting or not looking or not wanting, of picking and choosing instead of taking it all in with a smile. after all, shouldn't you take it? or is your ego too fragile, as men's so often are? aren't you tired? good. we're not here for your consumption. and we sure as hell don't want your company or "community" or whatever. didn't you read the sign? no boys allowed. and if you want to come in you have to make up your mind. as if you haven't told them the only answer you have. you're both. you're both.

you know you broke the rule by interacting.

but it gets lonely sometimes. you wonder if they know.

[saysflora]

you know how there’s that “black cat x golden retriever” trope that sprung up a while ago?

‘92!javid are both black cats and livesies!javey are both golden retrievers, and that is the fundamental difference between them

[chappellrroan]

if you love mitski you don't love her more than me sorry

[screaming-oak]

the ellis debate has gone on for so long “hes not dumb hes just silly” “hes not silly hes just stupid” here is my take. hes just dedicated to The Bit above all else. hes a lil dumb but more than that he is just off the shits simply for the fun of it. my man is just here for a good time not a long time and puts all hes got into it🫡