#or thinks something different to you

[mochasucculent]

Was looking at refs and since Viktor has two different leg braces I was wondering, do we think he wears them simultaneously?? The refs don't perfectly line up perspective-wise so it's hard to tell but parts of the one he wears during the Hexcore scenes look like they could maybe line up with the brace that he wears over his clothes, but also some parts really don't and look like they'd be super uncomfy. Also HOW does he take these on and off. Experts weigh in

[soldrawss]

Something something 16yo 2k12 Mikey gets sucked into a portal and sent into the RISE universe and ends up helping raise the RISE kiddos AU

[akanemnon]

So THAT'S how they did it! I'm sure that will have no major implications at AAAAALLLLLL...

FIRST - PREVIOUS - NEXT

MASTERPOST (for the full series / FAQ / reference sheets)

[collgeruledzebra]

the thing about trying to recommend fiction podcasts to someone who isn't familiar with them is that not only are so so many genres represented but also the level of production can fall anywhere from "basically an audiobook" to "major motion picture minus the pictures"

[ariadne-mouse]

I feel fandom would get along a lot better if there was mutual understanding that liking a character, agreeing with a character, and thinking the character is well constructed/executed are all separate (if often overlapping) positions, each with their separate tastes and subjectivities. Also: character portrayals are intended to make the audience feel things; this is separate from (if often overlapping with) analyzing/appreciating their actions and role in the story.

[insanelydeadlybookcollector]

This has been my experience. The backlash of the noncanon only bridgade.

I inhabit mostly ghost fandoms of older media but my experiences with newer media has been specifically with fans who were on Twitter when the show came out and influenced by the unfortunate era where weekly watching was going out of fashion along with patience and understanding subtlety and incoming was the fun label of 'problematic' and a resurgence of purity culture.

So most opinions of a canon ship is 'it is toxic' (ignores explicit canon) 'this non canon ship is not problematic and you should ship it instead'. I interpreted that ship as not possible in canon for x y z reasons but okay. That's another option

And then I have to defend ad nauseum how I interpreted the canon (which I love, don't get me wrong. I love when someone says this on an analytical level. Plus, whenever this happens is typically inspiration for fic, which I also love). And if I ask for a similar breakdown, or any semi justification, can you divulge what you saw I'd love to know?, which I always genuinely mean as a learning tool, the backlash is often beyond the realm of polite.

Whether this is a defence response from the individual or the collective could be part of the problem, but I get very exhausted of enjoying canon, enjoying analysing canon, getting told non canon is morally, and storywise, better without explanation, and when I ask for explanations or to peak under the hood, maybe agree and get an invite into this new abundance of stories and art, I get told that literary analysis is useless, 'what does it matter it's fiction' and even more fun names and curses.

My experience is not isolated and I know a lot of other people who have the same conversations. Most of us love picking things apart and interpreting things, we just want to see the other perspective because we're too close to see it ourselves. Perhaps because 70% of my personal fandoms are canon compliant.

And the villainisation of media literacy, to me, reads as the problem.

Canon compliance across the board with no further interpretation or thought can be just as dangerous as fullblown canon non compliance, particularly when based on a wilful adoption of a 'problematic reading without reflection, or from someone else (I'm a big advocate of gaining other perspectives. But this can only be done after you've at least half fully formed your own or else you're stuck thinking someone else's thoughts).

And like I said, my experience of recent fandom issues has been canon people gatekeeping for fear of overhearing an opinion they disagree with (often reading as having not thought about a text or themselves further enough to articulate why they like it, other than 'it is lore').

And on the other hand you have people doing the same thing in the opposite direction ('I read on reddit this ship was problematic then watched the show, made my own opinions around that foundation') AS WELL AS then degrading literary interpretation skills, even using the "it's fiction who cares" excuse, and downright bullying.

this mentality is SO WEIRD some of you clearly were not around for superwholock and it shows.

this obsession with needing to only ship something canon or to prove your ship is better because you think it will be canon... SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP! it shouldn't matter if people are shipping something that is or is not canon. let us play in our respective spaces and enjoy the content we want. it hurts literally nobody if fanart or fics are made for a couple that isn't canon. if it's upsetting to see then blacklist the tag and grow up.

[larkiethings]

so today at work one of my coworkers hands me a box

I have no context for this. He’s a 50? 60? Year old plumber who tends to walk into the office, tell a dad joke, and leave. I’ve just arrived at work and am still putting my purse away. So he hands me this box and says it comes with instructions. I open it and unfold this

He says his great grandma probably made it

This pansy is the tiniest pocket in the world

It could use some blocking after who knows how many years in the box but look at these sweet little pansies!

The pattern was clearly typed on a typewriter, several pages of it. I guess this was an apron specifically for having your friends over for tea.

I just happened to be wearing a skirt that kind of goes with it, so I did wear it all day (it’s a @mayakern skirt!) and another friend said I look like I should be living in a shoe. Perhaps as some sort of mouse girl making pastries for the other woodland creatures. But uhhhhh what an incredible heirloom piece to just be handed. It’s probably twice as old as I am. I’m definitely going to bring it to stitch circle this week

[n3arell-art]

oh eye, always regarding

[potato-lord-but-not]

Won’t you please come back to me?

[taonpest]

Sometimes being an artist is feeling like a baker seeing a chemist making the deadliest liquid in the world and wishing you could make the deadliest liquid as well but you're a baker, not a chemist, and then you feel like your bread is worthless

[ronanlynchbf]

tshirt that says NO LIVE ORGANISM CAN CONTINUE FOR LONG TO EXIST SANELY UNDER CONDITIONS OF ABSOLUTE REALITY

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

Vibes based grading system.

(for @epistemologys, who wanted some post-canon, teacher WWX)

[rocketbirdie]

face value

[daisybell-on-a-carousel]

Being someone who read Under The Red Hood and came out with the firm belief that, for Jason, it's not about killing Joker, it's about Jason wanting proof Batman would choose him over the Joker (bc shelia chose the joker). Makes seeing any other media where it's all about just wanting the Joker dead is a teeny bit frustrating. to be honest

Jason could've killed the Joker himself, really, really easily. Jason kidnaps the Joker before the confrontation. I can't open my comic for a reference right now, but it felt like he had the Joker for quite a bit before the confrontation. He had him. He beat him up with a crowbar. He had every single opportunity to kill the Joker himself, but he didn't because that wasn't his goal. Make no mistake, he did plan for the Joker to be dead by the end of it, but do you see what im trying to say here

Edit: If I knew this post was gonna get 1000+ notes I would've tried to word it better or something, this was a rant I made on the way to the grocery store 😭

It's not about making Batman kill either. When Batman says he won't kill, Jason adjusts and goes, 'Let ME kill the Joker or kill me to stop me' instead. The test is all about Batman choosing him. The whole final confrontation is Jason's first death again. The parent, The Joker, and the explosives. It even ends with Jason unable to move as a bomb goes off right next to him again because the parent didn't choose Jason. And instead tried finding an option that'd benefit them and (consequencely) letting the Joker walk, again, lol, lmao <-in agony

[flikkerij]

elaborate in the tags if you like!

personally i use a mix between i, you and we depending on what i'm talking to myself for. like generally it's i, but when pushing myself to do a task it's "WE are going to get up and do the dishes", and selfcare is "YOU need to take a shower". tho none of this is consistent tbh

[screambirdscreaming]

Something that peeves me whenever I see another post going around with some variation on "autistic people take things literally which means we are the only people who communicate Clearly and Directly" is that - for any given statement, there is not one singular, agreed on, universal Literal Interpretation. If there was, none of this would be a problem!

The nature of language is that there's always some degree of interpretability. Words have several different meanings, often overlapping, and there's nuance of context, cultural references, and so on.

Faced with a statement, most people will quickly come up with an interpretation that to them makes the most sense. But if you asked a roomful of people to explain in detail their interpretations, everyone's would probably be a little different, even for a pretty simple statement. Regardless of whether those people are autistic! Everyone conceptualizes the world a little differently, and everyone has a unique personal history of all the language they've encountered, and these things effect our interpretations.

In order for communication to be workable, given this slosh in interpretability, there's another couple of processes that go on. As conversation goes on, people reassess if their initial interpretation matches up with additional context. If it doesn't, they revise it, or ask clarifying questions. And on the flipside of this process, the other person in conversation is tracking if your reactions make sense with *their* understanding of what they're trying to convey to you, and offering context or rephrasing things if it seems you're out of alignment.

These processes are social skillsets that are, like most social skillsets, not ever directly articulated or explained. Many people are bad at one or both. Sometimes you encounter someone who is really, notably good at it - the vaunted "good listener", who puts in the effort to really understand what you're trying to say, or that really excellent teacher who engages with you back and forth until you really get it. But a lot of the time, it's a sort of passive social friction - people just not getting each other.

Sometimes, you encounter someone whose brain works so much like yours that talking to them feels almost effortless - you just get each other. But that's a pretty rare occurrence for anyone. More often, as you get to know someone, you start to understand the shape of the way they interpret things and learn to account for it, so over time it's easier to make sense to each other.

It's honestly not uncommon in society for people to aggregate in groups of people who interpret things similarly, and who are thus easier to talk to, rather than actually building the skills of communicating across interpretation gaps. Particularly egregious are those groups of men who talk about Women as an incomprehensible monolith, but it turns up to a greater or lesser degree on a lot of levels.

I suspect this is the root of a lot of parenting problems - people who have never built this communication skillset, and relied on choosing friends who make sense to them without a lot of effort, and who are then totally unprepared to interact with a child who interprets things in ways they don't expect.

Obviously I can't speak to The Universal Typical Experience, not least because it doesn't exist. But in general I would posit that:

Most people, give or take a few assholes, are not trying to say things that are confusing. Most people think they are communicating clearly, because the first interpretation *they* would come up with on hearing one of their own sentences is the correct interpretation.

Many people are not very good at accounting for different ways people could interpret things they're saying. However, it is normal and polite social behavior to be somewhat flexible about this and forgiving of misunderstandings. If people are being shitty to you about not understanding them, they are assholes. And I wouldn't assume that the rest of the communication they have with everyone else they know goes totally smoothly for them.

I suspect there is a bit of an unfortunate feedback loop, where people have bad experiences when someone gets mad at them for not getting something, and learn to hide when they're confused. Which then leads to larger, more complicated misunderstandings, which other different people get upset at them about, because those people think they should have asked for clarification in the first place.

Truly you can't win with everyone. No one can win with everyone. There is no monolith of "neurotypical communication" which resolves all these contradictions - all those people you're lumping in together under "neurotypical" have just as much trouble with each other.