#so i think it can be an interesting topic to discuss

[dross-the-fish]

Dealing with casual aphobia feels so weird because it doesn't look like the kneejerk horrified homophobia or transphobia you normally get from bigoted people so it's easier to ignore for awhile but I find that it does eventually get under my skin. "If you're alive you have a kink, everyone has kinks they just don't talk about it!" - No? I don't have kinks or fetishes, I don't even really have a sense of physical attraction and with each passing year my interest in having any kind of sex at all disappears. My relationship to sex is not the same as that of Allosexual people. "Celibacy is admirable! It's commendable," -It's not really being celibate if the interest isn't there. I'm not abstaining from anything. I don't think there is any virtue in abstinence or that there is a moral superiority attached to the presence or absence of sex. Being sexual is normal and healthy for most people. "You're a prude" -No, I'm just not horny. I have no strong feelings about how active other people are. It's no different from realizing I don't like chocolate cake so I just don't buy chocolate cake ever. I don't want to ban all discussion or consumption of chocolate cake. Why does that make YOU so uncomfortable? "You should see a doctor! That can't be healthy!"-I'm not unhappy with my lack of sexual interest. it's only a problem for me because other people keep acting like it is. "But you write NSFW!" -Sex as a topic is still interesting and it is a facet of some character's identity. I think it's worth discussing and exploring how some characters communicate emotions through sex. I even enjoy reading about it sometimes. I just don't actually want to have it. "You just need the right partner!" My current partner is the right partner. Sex is just not part of the equation because it never needed to be. "But asexuals CAN have sex" -why is it always this and never "Allosexuals can live without it."? And if you truly can't live without it stop trying to hook up with asexual people!

"That's not fair to anyone who starts a relationship with you" -been in a happy queer-platonic with my aromatic partner for 10 years, thanks.

[didalexiabreakupwitholgaisback]

I completely agree with you and the truth is I have been trying to speak to people who don’t have the same view.. educate them a little but they all have the same reply which is ‘all activism is selective’. What would you reply to this? Because it’s true I guess, it varies on what is important to the person personally. Viv thinks that women’s rights or gay rights is important because she is a gay woman and to say “Well, gay rights don’t matter as much as life or death, little children’s lives etc.”, well people take that as homophobia. You can never be right.

They will also say that she can’t speak out about every single issue in the world and that we should be grateful she’s even speaking out at all about something because many footballers don’t at all..

like this ignorant 'culer', you mean? 🙃

here's the thing. do i expect all footballers to speak on every issue 24/7? no, that's not realistic. but do i expect footballers who do speak on an issue to take a consistent approach with that issue? yes, 100% i do. and let's not forget: this isn't an obscure matter. it's a freakin' genocide 😵‍💫

some thoughts:

let me expand on the above selective issue-taking. megan rapinoe for years has been consistent on black lives matters. naomi girma has started a mental health initiative and is a major ambassador of common goal and is consistent in discussing mental health topics. similarly, other footballers have taken on the topic of climate change and are passionate about that issue. so i don't expect these players to talk about every issue out there but i expect them to be consistent about the ones that they AFFIRMATIVELY have chosen to speak on.

miedema has specifically chosen women and lgbt rights. but she is only selective discussing this topic. that's the difference and that's the hypocrisy that i am calling out. if she cares about protecting women's footballers in saudi arabia, then what about protecting celine haidar or others in palestine, syria, or lebanon? if she cares about lgbt rights, then what about the erosion of these rights in the united states that is hosting the 2026 world cup? if she is upset about oil companies supporting the world cup, then she's okay with her current employer?

activism is selective, sure, but it should NOT be selective within a given issue. if miedema is going to talk about women's rights in saudi arabia, but ignoring women's rights violations by israel then that's not okay to me. and it's the complete silence from the footballing community that's even more deafening. because it's one thing not to say anything at all, but it's even worse to say something (saudi arabia) but completely ignore the giant elephant in the room!

interesting question, no? 😬

fifa the corrupt will keep corrupting. and yes, the environmental impact will be egregious. 😵‍💫

honestly, it's like pick your poison. and forget trump! both american democrats and republicans have bombed thousands of innocent civilians over the past two decades. and let's not get into usa involvement in korea, vietnam, latin america, and the list goes on 🙃

[abigailspinach]

Currently I believe it would be uncommon for pharma sponsored US Clinical trials exclude women automatically.

The IRB and FDA would kick it back to you and make you rewrite it before you start unless you can provide a legitimate rationale.

Legit rationale could be something like the investigational product is only intended for cis men (I’m thinking something like erectile dysfunction?) Or if you have preclinical animal data showing teratogenic effects.

From Time “In March of 2024, a major advance occurred when President Joe Biden signed an executive order for the White House Initiative on Advancing Women’s Health Research and Innovation with the goal of “getting women the answers they need about their health” and providing greater funding for this research. This follows the passage of a 1993 law, mandating the inclusion of women in human clinical trials for all research funded by the National Institutes of Health.”

Also, “In a 2022 study in Contemporary Clinical Trials, researchers evaluated the enrollment of female participants in 1,433 clinical trials of drugs and devices in the U.S. between 2016 and 2019. Of the 302,664 participants, on average 41% were female; this was true in cardiovascular disease and cancer.”

This may not be due to researcher’s sexism. It is also probable that that women, bearing the bulk of household and child rearing duties, do not have the available time to make it to study visits.

I enrolled in a Covid vaccine trials and it was nine visits of 1-3 hours over a year. My relative who is a single mother would not have been able to attend that number of visits.

I work in pharma clinical research operations. Monitoring is predominantly women… like a 75% women to men ratio. (We tend to be nurses who move into research then monitoring and then up the ladder into all the other aspects). Data management seems to be a bit more 50/50.

It is true pregnant women are generally excluded from phase 1-3 trials. The FDA might require a post approval study specifically requiring a study of pregnant persons. Or the pharma company will be monitoring AE reporting and collect information from insurance companies. It’s not ideal. The thalidomide disaster is used in every GCP ICH training. There is much ongoing discussion on this topic.

Also there is work ongoing to make clinical trials for diverse for gender identity.

Is this enough? No. Is my experience limited to industry pharma trials (no academic research) Yes.

But I have worked on 70+ trials and I think two were exclusive to men and I am working on one now specific for pregnant persons. So it’s complicated.

I found out one of the excuses they use for only doing clinical trials on cis men is that experimental drugs ‘may do harm to a woman’s reproductive tract’. As if there aren’t teratogens that affect sperm. As if that’s a valid reason to never test the efficacy of a substance on AFAB individuals. They really do see us as just a womb and nothing else and see that womb as inherently unknowable and unpredictable.

[fumifooms]

do you happen to have that page that talks about the beauty standards of each race?

Yeah sure. While scavenging pics for this I found this neat reddit compilation & chart & theory talk too. I had um, way more to say than I anticipated (I know you only wanted the one page. I have nothing to say for myself. Like most topics in Dunmeshi things snowball because they’re so interconnected. Mercy…) so, many races and observations are only mentioned near the bottom.

Beauty standards and race in Dungeon Meshi

Not pictured there’s also how elven society is harsh on visibly disabled people, and how the demon took away Mithrun’s silver eyes and ears to take away his pride. There’s also how Senshi might have fit in with the orcs more easily because of the dwarven wide body shape, and how they tend to have more body hair too I suppose. In the extra on orcs we see Senshi living with the orcs and he gets judged because of the hierarchy rather than his looks.

What is fashionable also differs from culture to culture, and there’s how tattoos only seem common with elves, though dwarves and others do also sometimes have some. They seem to not raise much brows, which makes sense since for many essentially they’re for professional (magical) purposes especially with elves. Gender roles also differ in type and importance, but generally they are similar to irl ones for the races we see. Elven society seems to be the least gendered, which would be an unsurprising logical outcome of having lesser sexual dimorphism aka they look more androgynous. Comparing fashions and gender roles and how they affect beauty standards would be a whole other compilation and conversation. Kui has great worldbuilding partially because she’s got such a good grasp on sociopolitics and geopolitics. History affects cultures and beauty standards greatly. Kui’s oneshot Distant Utopia was very eye opening on her way to worldbuild and the consideration she gives these things, I do really recommend reading it.

Out of the big 5, we know the least about gnomes, but their sheet does say both culture and region are similar to dwarves’ and they end up being confused together often, so we can imagine the beauty standards are similar to dwarves’ as well.

I wanted to touch on this in a post eventually, but how one daydream hour page said half-foots tended to be curvaceous like in the artwork below puzzled me for a long time, all the half-foot characters we see during canon are rather slender and lanky after all, Chil’s succubi also being more curvy than plump. Economics are for sure a factor in that I imagine, the half-foots characters we see are all implied to be some flavor of poor or malnourished, as are half-foots depicted as empoverished oppressed minorities in general. Even comparing the artwork with the half-foot sheet’s depicted average half-foot, the ones on the left seem bigger. Wouldn’t it make sense though, if unlike dwarves half-foots don’t have similar naturally wide bodies, yet due to idolizing dwarves they work towards having a similar body shape/type to emulate them?

It’s said half-foots tend to stick to pretty ethnically homogeneous regions (aka half-foots-only communities) unless they move to the big city with ambition to try and make it big (like Chilchuck and his wife & kids did), and that’s interesting imo because then that would mean that in a ton of half-foot communities, they rarely see or interact with dwarves whom they try to emulate. Of course, one thing about beauty standards is that when they get adopted, at one point it stops being "this is how dwarves look and so this is how half-foots should look" and just becomes "this is how half-foots should look", most people feel as though beauty standards aren’t learned but innate, so I figure the half-foots wouldn’t have any problem still seeking dwarvish traits when there are no dwarves around.

There’s also stuff you can glean here and there if you want to extrapolate more. Like how in the race swap artworks, Mickbell is only smiling in the dwarf portrait, and Rin’s elven portrait looks very close to her elven one- Rin who is stated to be beautiful in her profile blurb. Benichidori’s extra does teach us tallmen can definitely have harsh beauty standards, but also since the text portrays her as very dysmorphic that’s likely reflected in her thoughts to a much more intense degree than is common, not an accurate strict baseline to go off. Ah, Kabru’s blue eyes are also why he and his mother lived a rough life in Kabru’s hometown, but that seems to be regional. Good post here on the topic of Kabru’s blue eyes and ties to irl history. There’s a lot to be said about Kabru being a man that in many ways is close to elven beauty standards, and how that might have affected or been affected by his upbringing with elves + his persona as someone that can effortlessly charm most people. Marcille’s section here in this essay also goes into Marcille’s struggles to fit in with the ideal image of an elf.

Looking human

Also notable are beastkins and demihumans: Demihumans are all dehumanized which makes people treat them worse. So if you differ from the visual idea of "human" (an in-world subjective categorization just as much as demihuman is) most people do judge you negatively. Elves and dwarves get to fight about which type of human is considered the prettiest, but demihumans are below tallmen and half-foots, they are considered as simply below the beauty contest, incompatible with it.

Onis are perhaps the demihuman people we know of with the least cultural influence on the dunmeshi world, and with the least intensely different appearance than other demihumans—they seem to be technically categorized as human to people not from the eastern archipelago?— but even them are treated as lesser than human, treated as beasts to slain for reputation points or useful strength to have around and command. It’s said their "magnificient horns" and fangs are often shaven off when the oni lives in tallman towns, so you could easily make the argument that onis are denied the right to have their own beauty standards, having to conform to other people’s and going through mutilation to take away features they might otherwise have taken pride in. Inutade was bought by the Nakamotos from a dangerous sumo fighting ring that got one of Inutade’s tooth broken on her first and only fight, and kept as a low ranking servant ever since. Remember when I said different fashions existed in dunmeshi and how those could also affect beauty standards? Like the elves, if you look at the portraits pages which include a lot of characters that aren’t in the story you can see distinct cultures within the same races, for example one young elf is bald which is in sharp contrast with the usual elven long luscious hairstyles, and that’s especially true for onis I think. Maybe not only from different regions but different eras as well… They have a bit of population in the very north of the western continent, so I like to think some of the ogres live in very cold, maybe even subarctic or arctic conditions. The point I’m getting at here is that within a race, culture/ethnicity like with Kabru will also influence them it isn’t just tallmen as a whole, different communities will have differing beauty standards. The oni history blurb and third row first collumn portrait remind me of Mongolia (which historically was a lot of different nomadic communities with different cultural identities as well. Something something, the oni empire experienced a decline and then tallmen overpowered them, and now they’re governed and split apart by stronger social classes & slavers and the richness of culture was hurt for it especially if they have no real community left of their own), but obviously many of them are dressed and look rather japanese, makes sense considering living in/close to Wa, and first row second collumn portrait reminds me of ainus which again would be logical considering geographical placement, though I’m far from an expert. Interestingly, ainus are indigenous people both in Japan and Russia- Perhaps the northern western continent ogres are meant to be closer to Russia than Canada like I imagined? Ok tangent over.

The kobold sheet says they’re especially sought after as slaves because they’re "adorable", but locally in the western continent they’re repeatedly said to be seen more as ferocious and dangerous. The dehumanization is most apparent in the first comic below. The language barrier and conflicts no doubt worsen this by a lot, but I think it’d be hard to deny that their canine appearance makes the dehumanization worse. "They’re ferocious beasts, they’re demihumans, they can’t be communicated with". Most characters in Dungeon Meshi’s world are desensitized to slavery and most characters are prejudiced one way or another. Point being, kobolds are fully removed from human beauty standards, but no doubt for kobolds, other kobolds are more beautiful than humans are. They’re assumed to be an uncivilized bunch, but just like any other people they like to adorn themselves with nice clothes and jewelry and keep themselves clean and groomed; they too take care of their appearance and take pride in it.

And the orcs! This one we have the most contact with in canon, with not only there being foreigner characters from the ethnicity or hearsay of their homelands and culture but full on contact with a community. We get to see up close what they’re like and what they think, and of course in turn they’re our introduction to how demihumans are harshly looked down upon and seen as inferior, less human and thus less worth valuing and less dignified. It’s text that orcs are ugly to most humans and humans are ugly to most orcs. Since I judged they didn’t need accompanying explanation the pictures showing this are in the pictures dump at the top.

God forbid you sell vegetables to orcs my god- but then again they do basically mandate adventurers to kill any orcs they come across so yeah the world isn’t above that even a little bit.

So yes, my main point here is simply that orcs are yet another evidence of the physical ideal of "human" being an important beauty standard for human societies globally.

Izutsumi is our glimpse at how beastkins are treated in the world, and in Wa at least that’s ending up being caged and mistreated as part of a freak show. Izutsumi hates her appearance and wishes she could leave the feline part of herself behind to only be human. Interestingly, not that we have a lot of info on them so this is very much a take with a grain of salt situation, but there seems to be less stigma around artificial beastmen, those who can shapeshift at will. The main difference is of course appearance, that most of the time they simply look like average tattooed humans. Artificially creating humans is an illegal practice, and no doubt it’s not well regarded, but being able to hide that makes them less likely to be discriminated at any moment, or even just discriminated less intensely. Again, looking human is important, not only for belonging but for safety’s sake. Beauty standards rule the world with harsh hands.

Mermaids and fishmen

Ok we’re done now right? Right-! But wait… Wait…! Mermaids and fishmen are said to be demihumans too, special separate cases to the main three demihuman species however, which is also represented by how mermaids and fishmen both are in the Adventurer’s Bible chapter Monsters meanwhile ogres, kobolds and orcs are in the chapter World. They’re an interesting topic because they directly tackle this topic, not only in a meta way for the readers but also making characters themselves struggle to quantify their humanity with the goal of knowing wether they should be eaten or not, especially Chilchuck. Chilchuck’s "is it really just a matter of feelings?" mini arc.

The party asking themselves "Should we eat this?" is very common, and often they end up playing a little loose on morality, like eating the red dragon’s meat despite it having digested Falin. Not unsimilarly Marcille freaks out a little over the vegetables they harvested having been grown with fertilizer, aka largely human poo. Half of the motivation of "should we eat this perhaps sentient creature" is out of consideration and compassion, but more strongly and more often, the characters struggle with a sense of taboo at eating something too closely related to humans. Even, feel uncomfortable because of the deepseated impression that eating it would dirty them in some way. Cannibalism is an interesting and relevant topic in many ways, but what I want to mention is how there’s the more or less universal belief that committing cannibalism inherently taints you as a person and turns you more monstrous, morally but also literally depending on some myths such as w*ndigos and onis in some cases, like in Touge Oni. Marcille and Izutsumi both express a fear of eating monsters turning them monstrous. Maybe this is part of what Laios was hoping for, honestly. There are two fears here, if eating a demihuman monster constitutes as cannibalism or not, and so, will eating it taint you because it’s a human, or will eating it taint you because it’s a monster? You are what you eat, until it’s a little too literal. You morally are the means by which you get your food, and you physically are the result of your nutrition. Dungeon meshi manages to mix an exploration of humanity with the theme of food because our relationship to food is very deep and complex, psychological as much as physiological.

In the end, the characters sort of shrug and accept that they’ll never quite understand the world of mermaids and fishmen and how they operate, and what that means about them. Laios is the one always challenging these notions other characters take for granted, it’s not obvious to Laios why people are softer on mammals than other animals and plants, it’s not obvious to Laios why people would be afraid of eating a monster just because it’s a monster, it’s not obvious to Laios why some food is gross to Marcille but not fish testicles, it’s not obvious to Laios why you should immediately regard orcs and kobolds badly.

"Cows are probably closer to humans [aka closer to being human] than fishmen, though they’re clearly intelligent", dehumanization to lessen empathy towards them to be able to eat them. Meanwhile, mermaids seemingly have a less noticeable "civilization" or intelligence, they hunt in groups like fishmen, but they don’t use tools and such, they feel more primal and similarly instinct driven, and yet… Do they attract sympathy more? Mammals, humans, is it because of their nature or because of their appearance?

Both the nature and appearance of fish are ones people don’t typically sympathize with. "Fish don’t feel pain", "goldfish only have 5 seconds of memory", "it’s okay to keep fish in completely empty bowls too small for them until they die from it", so many lies and misconceptions exist that make people less considerate of them. The average lifespan of a goldfish is 10-15 years, the record is 43, but they’re not seen as lives that really matter, so a lot of goldfish die in a few weeks of bad aquarium conditions. There’s a lot of research on animals evolving to look cute and appealing to make some predators want to kill them less and parents want to care for them more, including humans. First good google research result gave me this credible short article on the topic. In Chilchuck’s weighing wether a fishman is far enough from being human or not to eat, "face is 100% fish" is his biggest argument for it being more acceptable. The face, the most important thing for empathy and recognition. The face, the decapitated fishman one that falls into his hands next chapter.

To quote @room-surprise: "Chilchuck can't explain why it's wrong to eat the merpeople, even though it's NOT complicated. But the problem is Chilchuck would have to accept and acknowledge that the merpeople might be people? And that's outside of the worldview he passively believes, so he can't just say that, because he doesn't think that's true. But that IS why he "feels" it's wrong. And it's all you'd need to say for Laios to understand! But it would require acknowledging that maybe the way they're treating and talking about the merpeople is wrong."

The idea of Chil not being able to grapple with how maybe some monsters are more humans than they seem, him who had been an advocate of half-foots rights, half-foots who get undermined and treated as inconsequential sacrifices… Grappling with how he could relate to the merpeople’s situation almost, and pulling away because it’s so existentially horrifying. I do not want to see myself into an hostile fish-faced warrior I can’t communicate with. In a way this also relates to Chilchuck being the only party member who doesn’t see Izutsumi as a cat in the relationship chart, the only one to treat her with full human dignity. He knows the struggle to be taken seriously, he knows being infantilized and he knows what it’s like to be treated as less than human.

Below, you will see Chilchuck draws the line of where they become not okay to eat as when "they already look like mermaids". Above, there’s speculation that the algae hair is partly to mimic "the mermaids’ beautiful female form". Is it because mermaids are their enemies and the ambiguity might give them extra seconds to attack or flee? Is it to trick adventurers instead? It’s striking to me that this is what works, with the adventurers. Sure the fishmen are intelligent, but explicitly here, what makes them no longer acceptable prey to Chilchuck is that they look close enough to a mermaid, close enough to human. Mermaids who of course themselves have this form to entice and seduce and charm the adventurers they prey on. Chilchuck considers the intelligence due to the tridents, but most of his internal debate centers around their appearance, and the image of a fishman skewered sickens him. The power of mimicry… Mimic being a beautiful human woman. Mimic being cute, babies being wired to make us feel protective and softened. Half-foots, sometimes pretending to be children for scams or help or avoiding trouble.

The mermaids are only concerned by their differences and not their similarities, and have no trouble treating the fishmen as food rather than peers. To an outside perspective like us, the audience, all these categorization of "more human" and "less human" between onis and orcs and elves and tallmen etc seem stupid and unfounded, but to the people living in Dungeon Meshi’s world, elves may as well be mermaids while onis are fishmen, not alike at all, unworthy of empathy and thus fine to eat.

Ultimately, Dungeon Meshi promotes unity. It’s about seeking to understand the unknown and the misunderstood, the dehumanized and the inhuman. It shows the good that comes from seeking to understand what you do not, even when that’s one another.

[fromtheseventhhell]

I love how people are only ever interested in defending Arya's right to be weird-looking. It's never defending her intelligence from people who claim she's incapable of thinking for herself, highlighting her importance to the plot and refusing to see her as just a prop, acknowledging how much of her story gets stolen and given to other characters, talking about her trauma or how often it gets erased and overlooked, seeing her as more than just an attack dog/bodyguard, etc. Nope. It's just a "why can't people let Arya be ugly/unconventional looking? :(" post every other week because people are, for whatever reason, obsessed with how Arya is visually perceived. One of the most misinterpreted characters yet the issue is only ever with her being portrayed as "too pretty" or the wrong "type" of pretty. This fandom will entirely rewrite a character's motivations, values, and role in the story to the point that they consider references to canon "hate" but! The true injustice to canon is we acknowledge that she is described as pretty several times. Arya simply existing as her pretty, important, and non-conforming self is too complex and confusing for people to comprehend 😔.

[poor-ciceros-voring-again]

I really need some gravity falls friends I think :(

[juniperhillpatient]

as soon as a horror essayist starts talking about how depicting some horrific topics is just “in poor taste” or “offends people’s sensibilities too much” & thus specific horrific themes of any given nature shouldn’t be addressed in horror well. I lose all interest anyway even if the rest of what the person was saying was interesting

[ineffablefool]

The lil corner of the Good Omens fandom that I generally see is getting more and more into publicly declaring that That Theory I Dislike Is Bad And People Who Ascribe To It Should Feel Bad, and I don't know if it's really new, or if I was just lucky enough to generally be missed with that shit the last four years.

Different people's brains work differently, which means they will notice things, form interpretations, maybe come to extremely firm conclusions, all different from each others'. Different from mine, different from yours.

I get that some people think that they have the brain which produces the Objectively Superior theories (and/or which can easily determine which other people's theories are the Objectively Inferior ones). I just really missed the memo where Your Interpretation Is Not My Interpretation (And That's Okay) was dragged out back and fucking shot.

Anyway this blog is an "I may not agree with your theory but you may trust that I won't publicly heap scorn upon the very idea of having it" zone if anyone was wondering.

[commsroom]

one of the first things we hear from hera (via eiffel, before she even speaks) is that she finds human bodies to be "uncomfortably liquid".

that was the moment I knew I'm going to project my whole ND ass at her forever. same, girl. big, big same.

real. she's soo neurodivergent. and also. okay. that's such an interesting line as part of a larger pattern, because the way she talks about eiffel's body (and it's almost always eiffel who gets these comments from her) feels like a direct response to the way he talks about her, um... lack of body. "three pound glob of meat" is a direct response to "your iron giant processor" etc.

even in the framing of that first script, he's complaining about her talking about his "fragile, carbon-based, uncomfortably liquid body" right after a comment about something hera wouldn't understand "as an artificial intelligence"... a real breakthrough for human-AI relations, was it? i think there's a way hera plays with the assumptions people have about her as an AI, that's part of her sense of humor (post about that here), but it also comes from a place of real hurt and constantly being othered. and i think the way she navigates that also definitely resonates from a ND perspective. eiffel doesn't even recognize the equivalence or significance of her comments, because he's privileged in a way that her jokes about him are just jokes. "what if i just went around blaming every stupid decision you made on 'biology'?" and it still takes him so long to really get it.

[chuchayucca]

Discussions of implied fictional CSA & SA

I recently been wondering if there’s a chance Richard thinks Roy’s aggressive and distant behavior is normal and not a sign of CSA because he acted similarly to Roy when he was younger

Reasonings in the tags

[bmpmp3]

(falls to the floor holding my head in my hands) i can't keep making all my ocs the same vaguely eastern european vaguely indo carribean mixed race guy i cant keep doing this

(looks up. eyes glowing red. levitating with unknown power) or can i..................................................

[musical-chick-13]

Very, very tempted to just release this idea out into the ether and go, "I do not have the time to write this, but if anyone wants to claim it, feel free," but I would NOT trust the average person to handle this well.

[seddair]

-

[sanasanakun]

I really shouldn’t have tried to explain the dynamic relationship between ethics and consumerism under capitalism while crossfaded…..and using such a volatile subject as my example ….ugh lmao

[not-the-grave]

the depth of abandonment trauma i'm discovering i have is kind of insane