#no harmful or insulting things

[silentgravesdontexist]

Since I was gone for so long (a week), I kinda crave interactions with people here. Also 'cuz I want to get to know some of you guys more. That's why I thought of this silly little post

Drop an ask, get one yourself!

Send me an ask as a message.

It can be why you followed me. What you think of me. A quick message. Maybe even "I feel like you..." or "I don't like it when you..." if you want. Anything goes!

Whether you follow me or we're mutuals or someone random who just saw this post— doesn't matter.

Once you send an ask, I'll respond to it and send you one myself.

You can send them anonymously if you'd like... but I won't be able to send you an ask bc...well, I don't know who sent it.

Ofc, this is just for funsies! I'm not forcing anyone to join in~

Specifically tagging my mutuals (still not obligatory to participate):

@sukunas-play-thing @ofoceansandtombsanew @captainportgasdace @lynndt-chocolate @that-student-that-has-homework @lawva-girl @kora-vevi @acesdiary @lilredforlife

~~~~~

Okay, I might(?) disappear again for a bit to focus on my work but I'll definitely respond if I do get a message.

[starry-bi-sky]

danny and officer martinez's relationship in "late at night, when the nightingale sings" in a nutshell:

Martinez: FREAK! GET YOUR FUCKING KID!

Battinson, on the other side of the crime scene: he don't bite

Martinez, with Nightingale firmly attached his arm, visibly biting him: YES HE DO!

*points at them* Danny is the Bugs Bunny to Martinez's Elmer Fudd.

Another Officer: i can't believe you're fighting with an actual twelve year old. Martinez: i swear to god that is not a twelve year old, that is a little hellion that crawled out of batman's shadow one dark and stormy night and decided to dedicate his existence to tormenting me. Officer: Are you really that mad about him putting a sticky note on your back-- Martinez: thats not the point

in danny's defense: the word "freak" is. a mini beserker button for him for.... obvious ghostly reasons, so like, even if its not directed at him, he still very much unappreciates Martinez's insults at Battinson. Danny may or may not be projecting.

he's not going to hurt the guy! not in any serious or permanently disfiguring way at least! But he is going to leave mean sticky notes on the square part of his spine that he can't reach, and stick salt in his 3AM Late Night Crime Scene Coffee, and kick the bottom of his heel while he's walking so he stumbles. And other petty, infuriating things that tally up and boil over, over time.

[arttsuka]

I hate it so much when they use 'autistic', 'gay', 'furry' etc as insults. My guy this is the year 2024, it's not funny.

[trappedinafantasy37]

All forms of media (video games, TV shows, art, movies, books, etc) are all meant to be social and/or political commentaries. In fact, I can't think of an example of a recent creation that isn't political in some way. And Baldur's Gate 3 is not an exception. It is political. And if you think it is not, it is because you are not paying attention, or you are failing to extrapolate the lessons of the game into real life. One of the points of fiction and entertainment is to provide us with a safe way to view and interact with the evils of the world. To show us how evil happens to begin with, and how it is allowed at all. If we can see what evil looks like, and how it comes to pass, then we will be able to recognize it in real life and potentially stop it.

No, I'm not saying that Larian made this game to be a commentary of the US specifically. The things that happen in the game are happening somewhere in the world. Right. Now. It is fantasy for some, but reality to many others.

There is a reason why so many people, most especially women, flock to a character like Astarion. And no, it's not just because he's a pretty bad boy vampire. But because millions of women (and men) in the world understand what it's like to be sexually assaulted. To be enslaved. To be someone's property and a toy. To be used and abused and denied your autonomy. To scream and cry and yell and shout and beg for mercy from the gods. But no one is listening. No one cares. And they say that it is all your fault. Women cling to him because they find comfort in his story and they see a reflection of themselves in him. And they have extrapolated his character into their personal lives to help them heal from their traumas. Astarion is not real. But he represents the millions of people in the world who have been raped.

There are many different ways you can interpret Shadowheart's story, but I always found it to be an allegory for queerness / transness. She knows who she is deep down, but she has been beaten and indoctrinated over and over to believe that who she is wrong. Everytime she exerted a will of her own, she was forced into conversion therapy and had her mind wiped so she can be reprogrammed. And when that began to fail, her god inserted a permanent tether into her soul. To remind her that god is always watching, and will punish her for her sins. Shadowheart rejects Shar because she feels that she is in a safe environment to do so. That those who are around her will not judge her, ridicule her, or treat her like she ha a moral failure for just being who she is. But that rejection comes at a price where she has to choose her parents or chronic pain for the rest of her life. But if Shadowheart does not feel safe to live as herself, she goes into the closet forever and denies herself and has to put up an act for as long as she may live. She forces herself to subscribe to this dogma because she feels she has no other choice, and to be a blind follower means to be without pain. Shadowheart is not real. But she represents the millions of gay and trans people in the world who have been outcasted and abused by religion and the law. Where they feel it safer to deny who they are, then run the risk of the wrong person finding out who they love.

The grove conflict, is a very real reality right now. Innocent people are experiencing a genocide. And the people conducting such genocide have framed these innocent people as evil monsters. These actual literal genocidal lunatics truly to their core believe that they have the god given right to kill these innocent people because they are an affront to their god and that the land they occupy does not belong to them. There are children in the world right now who are burning alive in a genocide because the people who are burning them believe these children to have been born evil. Of course they claim that these refugees are hiding weapons of mass destruction, how else are they going to justify destroying safe places like schools, hospitals, and actual refugee camps? And the people who have the power to do something to protect these innocent refugees, would rather they be tossed out and left vulnerable to their murderers, because that is more convenient than helping them. That the people who can help are purposefully closing their borders, because they too see these refugees as lures for danger. The tieflings are not real. But they represent the millions of Palestinians and many others who are dying in a genocide right now.

And this man is not real, but he is the president elect of the United States. Gortash won. The Absolute won.

And I wish we had a simple and easy explanation of 72 million Americans have tadpoles in their brains and were forced to vote for Gortash. But in reality, not everyone in the Absolute had a tadpole. Not everyone was a True Soul. A mass majority were willing participants of the Absolute. They never once communed with the elder brain and have never received direct orders from it. They saw what the Absolute is, they saw what it can do, and it was not a deal breaker for them. They chose to follow along with it willingly, thinking that the Absolute was here for them. They were not mind controlled, but they were brainwashed in their own way. And for those who are not brainwashed, they simply do not care. They want to revel in the Absolute's cruelty and how it is going to hurt the people of the world because they themselves want to deal the cruelty.

Gortash is a slaver and a tyrant and he is very up front and in your face about it. He feels no guilt, he feels no shame, and he is well aware of how he induces suffering on those around him. And the moment he became Archduke, he slaughtered everyone who got him into power because he didn't want to share it nor run the risk of them turning against him. You may be able to make a deal with Gortash but he was never going to keep up his end of the bargain. Just like an embraced Durge betrays their romance partner, Gortash would have betrayed you (and even Durge). Because tyrants do not share, and they do not step down. Tyrants are not just tyrants only on day one or for just one term. They are tyrannical always and will do everything they can to stay in power permanently. Tyrants do not play fair. They get into power through perceivingly legitimate means. But when you find out it wasn't legitimate, it's too late. They've removed your ability to not only remove them from power, but prevent you from getting anyone else to replace them.

Gortash didn't just come from nowhere. He has been a duke in the city for a very long time. People know who he is and what he is about. The people at his coronation were there out of genuine support for him, knowing exactly who he is and saw no issue with what he was doing because they all benefited from it. The only one at that coronation who was not a willing participate, was Ulder Ravengard (A BLACK MAN). Gortash used a literal puppet government to get himself into power and silenced all dissent.

I do not know about you, but who Gortash represents was pretty damn obvious to me. The game demonstrated how people like Gortash can get into power at all and remain in power. Gortash manipulated people's fear of the world, and he used religion to do it. He implemented the Steel Watch and militarized the police, and to have constant surveillance on the people. Where any slight transgression will be met with hostility, and the people will cheer because they see violence as a necessary means of keeping the peace. Where if you just didn't step out of line, then maybe the Steel Watcher wouldn't need to pulverize you in the street. He uses the media and is constantly pumping out propaganda to love him. He created a problem, news of the problem spread, and then he sold a solution. He promised to keep everyone safe, protected, and made promises of law and order against this unruly chaos (a chaos he created). Where any opposing opinion is othered and regarded as being too radical to be a sane or legitimate opinion. He enslaved a group of racial minorities and used the livelihoods of their children as collateral. And instead of putting the blame on the slaver, radicals like Wulbren put the blame on the slaves.

The events surrounding Gortash and the Absolute have been unfolding here in the States for a very long time and all of this did not just come out of nowhere. This didn't just start happening 8 years ago in 2016, this was decades in the making and there is still plans for more to come. This wasn't an accident, everything is working by design.

Gortash is not real. But Donald Trump is. That should scare you.

[maranull]

honest though? it's just a sad, hurtful little life and then you die, with some rare patches of nice things in between

[agnesandhilda]

I know we're all reeling from the chapter 260 leaks but it's boring to me to attribute all of kaiser's behavior to trauma. like can't a guy just be fucked up all on his own? show a little respect

[ye-olde-tardis]

I like "Dean is a repressed bisexual"

I like "Dean knows he's gay and just doesn't want to talk about it"

I like "Castiel was dean's gay awakening and he didn't have any experience with liking men beforehand"

I like "Dean has always liked men and women"

I like Dean so much, and I like all of you creative people, and you should all interpret media the way you wish to babes ♥️

[proudfreakmetarusonikku]

i think whether c!tommy Actually Died or not in the nuke ending is kinda irrelevant bc narratively it’s still framed as what happens Because he tries to kill himself. and like i don’t really care if something supernatural happens to stop death i think portraying a suicidal abuse victim who’s struggling to heal attempting suicide and then getting everything they ever want as directly stated by them after years of never letting them get a W is whether intentionally or not framing suicide as The Correct Option if you’re traumatised and that’s extremely irresponsible. like when I say it shouldn’t be canon it isn’t even bc of the plot holes or it being a terrible ending bc it wasn’t designed to be one even though I do hate it on those levels. i think it shouldn’t be canon bc that’s, like, an actively dangerous way to show suicide and should not have happened with the audience those creators have. i feel the same about c!wilburs ending too. they’re so irresponsible with extremely dangerous topics after building up a fanbase due to having them portrayed Well that i think they go beyond bad writing into being potentially extremely harmful considering how young the audience of mcyt channels realistically skews. i don’t think it’s a moral failure to make that mistake but I think if you’re a channel of that size it’s very possible to genuinely hurt people doing so and i think it being retconned isn’t just like, getting rid of an ending I dislike, i think it’s important bc it’s directly addressing the extremely harmful message those streams gave- even if unintentionally- and saying “nope that’s wrong”, and that’s important bc like. i have been to fan events for these streamers when my health was good enough to give a shit about them and not just their OCs and you’d be surprised at how large their audience leans in the single digit age. you don’t see them bc they can’t post on social media but they’re there and they genuinely might not be able to understand those messages as wrong, which i don’t think doing that on accident is a moral failure again (though if you have a pattern of ableism i will look at it suspiciously) you can still hurt people by accident and it is in fact a good thing to say that you did not mean that and that that’s wrong.

[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.

[spitblaze]

as someone who has spent my entire life taking everything personally. you guys have gotta stop taking everything personally

[downfallofi]

If I had to describe the mood, it really is like when you grow up with an abusive parent; and there are bad days where you're just willing for them to go to work and be gone all day so you don't have to hear them yelling and slamming shit

[dream-sans-mogai]

This will probably get looks from performative and ultimately harmful non-transfems despite my being transfem but-

Some y'alls only interaction with feminist history and theories, radical feminism regardless of its intersectionality and really any feminism deeper and louder and meaner than blatant choice feminism like the barbie movie and whatever TF taylor swift thinks shes got going on is through your occasional and short interactions with terfs and it shows. You call vagina art terfy and it fucking isnt. Its feminist art. Your brainrot is making you a fucking mra. The fact y'all think talking about the man vs bear situation is about/started/ran by terfs (and encouraged some really questionable other transfems shitting on it despite it clearly just being about women's safety and yes all men, not transphobia.), everything from questioning wether certain groups belong in our community to thinking a word is a slur or having a lesbian icon (I have sources don't test me) or not to not liking a certain band has been called "terf rhetoric". I'm all for us Transmascs talking about how terfs affect us cause they absolutely do and their harm to the transmasc community can not be understated but like.... Y'all are not allowed to call Jack shit terf rhetoric anymore. Like nothing. You don't know what it means, you litterally call transmedicalism and sysmedicalism terf rhetoric. Do you mean exclusionist? Say exclusionist. Terfs are not the end all be all hate group. They have a very specific complex mindset that affects so many people in specific ways. Someone hating Neopronouns is not fucking terf rhetoric. It's nbphobia. Holy fuck. Learn what words mean.

(intersectional trans radfems exist, radical feminism isn't terfs and swerfs and historical radfems would laugh in their faces for their idiocy)

[natsmagi]

FOR REAL I GET SO MAD WHEN I SEE POSTS LIKE "eww why are ntsmg fans such weirdos!! They dont deserve to have natsume/tsumugi as their favs!!" Like first of all we're not hurting anybody pls let us LIVE, second of all Have You Seen the Characters in Question. Like if we're freaks then what does that make THEM!??!? If they were real theyd be the freaks ur complaining abt!!! TL;DR natsumugi loser weirdo freaks canon and im here for it. Also that alice natsume is so CUUUUTE

ITS KIND OF ODD TBH ?? like obviously i get that not everyones going to like the same stuff but like. if you dont like characters being weird, why do You then also like ntmg.......? if its someone who doesnt ship them thats complaining then fine whatever but its so weird to me when people who claim to ship them make these complaints bc its like?? then why do you ship them???? do you Only like the bits where the two of them are being sweet to each other? do you only like their angsty backstory? do you only like the comedic relief? i have a hard time grasping the idea of dedicating yourself to a pair or character without loving (or at the very least tolerating) every aspect of them........ have these people read the stories? or are they being deliberately oblivious? i have no idea

it makes me really sad how people are so afraid of being seen as "weird" though. too often that word comes with negative connotations when that doesnt need to be the case at all, and i wish these people would stop living in fear and surrounding themselves with those who judge people based off how Socially Normal (according to a christian society) they are

also i just get annoyed seeing ntmg get watered down to some idealized couple completely stripped from their complexities to better fit what we're taught is Morally Correct (according to puritanical beliefs) or reduced to a comedic duo SHDKJFHD

[bisexualseraphim]

Do queer people who gatekeep sexualities and gender identities have nothing better to do like genuinely what is your problem. The whole point of the community is that gender and sexuality are more fuckity wuckity than man or woman, gay or straight and in almost 2024 we STILL have mfs going “nah that’s not a thing :/ you don’t belong in the community” unless they’re causing harm to others I seriously urge you to shut the fuck up. It is the easiest thing in the world to just say “hmm I don’t really understand that. But it’s their life and none of my business” and just move on with your life and let people live theirs. I do not give one iota of a fuck if someone identifies as a wolfgender they/them/bun/bunself AMAB transmasc who is only attracted to butches with curly hair and brown eyes IT DOES NOT AFFECT ME. I’m happy that they’ve found a way to express their identity that feels true to them and then I think about it no further. Like it takes active mental energy and emotion to get pressed over how someone expresses themselves and I don’t understand why you’d put yourself through that stress and then decide to be bitchy and make people feel like shit for being themselves. I’m seriously getting so tired of people in the community acting like it’s a fucking competition or you can only join if you meet X Y and Z criteria as if it’s some college mean girls sorority club. People are actively trying to take our rights away all the time and while this is happening we’re helping them by tearing our teeth into our own. Great

[crabussy]

it shouldn’t be seen as self centred or egotistical to share something you like about yourself, so reblog with a quality you really love about yourself or else

[lesbianwyllravengard]

I have always felt less than negative about taylor swift and I love criticising celebs but some of y'all really use your hatred of her to display some insane misogyny. just saying.