#so it’s different than most ppl who say they have a preference i feel

[kismoirailsis]

i have GOT to stop being ashamed of my preference for men but it’s hard to get over something you actively still see people shaming others for (attraction to men at all)

[snekdood]

i think ppl were hoping me becoming poor would make me as bitter as they are but... nah

[the-kipsabian]

.

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

I interpreted the "adaptation from the manga" thing to imply that they'll animate the 3 Yuus (like you said) but my partner proposed smth to me that raised my concerns... what if they only animate Yuuka? or like- default to a female Yuu? I could see that bc it would be probably easier for them to have only one protagonist.

don't get me wrong I like Yuuka and I know a lot of TWST fans are women but since the studio involved is apparently known for shojos I'm scared they'll make it seem like the story is romantic/the game is an otome... Which I mean- we do have SOME fanservice stuff but it's definitely not a romance story. That's why I'm scared 😭 if they do go that path... I much rather prefer the disconnection (?) of having 3 different Yuus than the possibility of this...

Also I'm just 🥲 I'm scared ppl will see that and say ahhh So Yuu has always been a woman!! Because as a trans guy, one thing that rlly made me feel valid in a way was seeing that in the game Yuu has no gender at all... I don't go by they/them but I'd much rather be referred as that than to be misgendered. It's a small thing but it's such an important detail for me (the fact that Yuu is gender neutral/can be whatever u want them to be) that it being erased in the anime would make me pretty sad... even more if ppl take the anime as "confirmation" of Yuu's gender, which it wouldn't be regardless if they end up giving us a girl OR guy Yuu- it would just be another Yuu interpretation different from the game.

But yeah, personal stuff aside, I'm more scared by the possibility of them making it seem like it's a romance story 😭 or ppl calling TWST an otome... which I mean... some people already have that misconception, even some fans...

[Referencing this post and this news!]

I definitely think they're probably leaning towards a new Yuu every season; otherwise, there would be a very uneven distribution of screen time for one Yuu over the others, and that leads into the problem of one Yuu being "more" canon than the rest. Yes, it will probably be easier logistically speaking to keep the same Yuu for the entire anime--but I also said the same thing when we only had the Episode of Heartslabyul manga, and look what happened with that. We ended up getting Yuuka and Yuuta following Yuuken, regardless of the logistical inconvenience of it all. I think if the anime intended to have a singular Yuu to follow for the main story, they would have chosen to adapt the light novel (which has Yuuya across multiple volumes) instead of the manga. The conscious decision to adapt the manga (with changing Yuus) says something to me. So really, I don't think we have to worry about one "kind" of Yuu dominating the anime. I took a look at the portfolios of the two studios collaborating for the Twst anime and didn't see a ton of shoujo myself. There was definitely a handful of them, but overall there was a spread of genres. I think Yumeta Company (one of the studios) has Tokyo Mew Mew New under its belt, which is probably one of its better-known works and maybe that's where the "they're known for doing shoujo" allegations are coming from? Don't quote me on that, though. I'm not someone who closely follows anime studios.

I would, however, like to point out that we shouldn't put all our stock into the studios behind the anime. Yes, they are obviously animating the project and thus have an influence on how the final product is. However, there are tons of other people involved (like the script writer) that will dictate how the anime looks and feels. (In fact, the script writer for the Twst anime, Kato Yoichi, is not known for writing shoujo.) I highly doubt all the staff involved at every possible level of production are conspiring to make Twst a genre it's not. (Related: I blame socialization for this, but it's a little sad that most of us by default think one woman + a bunch of men in a cast must be romantic.)

Now, to your main point. I understand the initial fear of people misunderstanding Twst as a dating sim/otome from how it is presented. Really, I do. I also understand the frustration that comes with people claiming Yuu's identity or gender or what have you is "confirmed". But to that, I ask you: so what? And I don't mean that in a "your feelings aren't valid" way (because your feelings are very valid!) I mean in like... Do these misconceptions others have truly impact your own enjoyment? Do the people believing in these falsehoods erase what you know is the truth? I would wager it doesn't. There has been and always will be those who see Twst or interpret Yuu as something they are not. Lots of us (myself included) thought Twst was an otome game when they first heard of its concept. People claimed Yuuken was the definitive Yuu when the first chapter of the manga dropped. That's fandom, especially the larger they get. If we fixate on those sore spots, it will ultimately make us unhappy because there will never be an end to misunderstandings. I would advise that you try and detach from those worries and just focus on having your own fun in the fandom rather than worrying about how others are consuming or reacting to Twst. Yes, we want Twst, a franchise we've seriously been invested in and love, to be seen a certain way--but I don't think that should come at the cost of your enjoyment. Fandom is meant to be fun, and we don't want to make ourselves miserable by stressing over the "what ifs", you know? Please focus on yourself!!

[zoolitsky-fandom]

MORE HEADCANONS BECAUSE I’M ALL POWERFUL

Please don’t get upset if you disagree with any of these!! This is just how I see the characters ^^ More context about the headcanons under the cut!

Nami

Transfem lesbian!!

Basically married to Vivi (who isn’t pictured but she gives me demigirl bisexual energy with a preference to girls)

CHUBBY BECAUSE I SAY SO!!!!! 🧡🧡🧡

And she’s still beautiful and wonderful and Sanji still simps for her. Chubby people are gorgeous

She’s technically pale but tanned a bit from being outside so much

Aaand bandaid because she’s literally just a normal girl and is susceptible to minor injuries unlike the other weird built different ppl on the crew (aside from Usopp)

sPEAKING OF USOPP!!! She’s absolute besties with him like they talk about everything and anything and gossip and all that jazz. They’re so special to me.

I’m not sure if bipolar fits entirely, but there’s definitely something with her mood swings and the intensity of her emotions. If this is insensitive at all please inform me

Chopper

Agender aroace reindeer fella??? SiGN ME UP

Both male and female reindeers have antlers so I used that to my advantage because gender silly

I think Chopper uses they/he/it, but slightly prefers to be referred to by their name rather than pronouns

Chopper has attachment issues, but I couldn’t find anything other than avoidant attachment disorder (which doesn’t seem entirely fitting). But it definitely gets very attached to others when it trusts them and has a hard time moving on.

Also I just like to draw Chopper more reindeer-like than Chopper’s canon design but aside from that I don’t really make too many design changes? Just… floofy Chopper… 🩷🩷🩷

Usopp

Panromantic asexual!!

Down bad for Sanji (he has terrible taste /j)

I had a revelation after drawing this so Usopp isn’t actually cis lol- they’re a demiboy but in a genderfluid kind of way, some days he feels more masculine and other days they feel more androgynous

I have very mixed feelings about the hair highlights,, I lowkey might not keep them but it was an experiment

FRECKLES!!! USOPP HAS FRECKLES PASS IT ON PASS IT ON!!!! 💛💛💛 Bandaid like Nami because!! They’re literally just a normal teenager!!!

Usopp has anxiety and borderline personality disorder because the feelings of superiority and inferiority? The constant fear? Being immune to Perona’s ghosts from dealing with mental illness their entire life???

Luffy

Asexual grayromantic

If he had a partner it would be gay regardless of his own gender expression (I’m projecting because I feel gay when I’m attracted to anyone)

Genderfluid, some days they prefer different pronouns but most of the time they use all at once (also is this ironic bc Luffy can’t swim but is swimming in fluid pronouns)

King of the pronouns!!! King of the genders!!! Will steal your pronouns and gender!!! Watch out!!!

I gave her vitiligo on a whim to be 100% honest, but I feel like it’s very fitting and also very fun to draw ❤️❤️❤️

I only did a headshot here because I have another post with a bunch of other drawings of this Luffy

I feel like I don’t need to explain but Luffy is very very AuDHD to me

He has so much energy and is easily distracted and gets really focused on things and likes to talk about anything and everything

Sanji

Bisexual-est guy on the planet (loves all boobs /hj)

Down bad for Usopp (they have great taste)

Demiboy but in an interchangeable kinda bigender way, he’s just both enby and male at the same time

Darker roots!! Sanji’s body hair is always notably darker than his blonde hair so I decided on darker roots

CURLY/WAVY FLUFFY HAIR SANJI SUPREMACY 💙💙💙

Depression—WHICH THEY ALL OBVIOUSLY HAVE BUT

Depression in the sense it’s the reason he smokes. It’s a kind of coping mechanism.

It makes them dazed enough that they don’t have to fully feel their own despair

GIVE HIM HEALTH PROBLEMS ODA YOU COWARD. I KNOW HE’S UNREASONABLY BUILT DIFFERENT BUT LIKE

Imagine Sanji wheezing and struggling to breathe after a fight!! Emotional scene with Chopper trying to convince them to stop smoking!!

Robin

Pansexual

Married to Franky 💜💜💜

Intersex demigirl! Like- the whole being called a monster/demon her whole life and trying to find someone who accepts her is such a good (unintentional) metaphor for the gender discovery experience,,

GIVE ROBIN THEIR MELANIN BACK!!! I don’t care if it wasn’t their original colors… neither were the blue eyes but I’m giving both to them because they deserve it!!

I wanted to give Robin more of a curly hair texture but I was concerned it would start to not really resemble her. I might play around with it another time though and see if I can achieve something still recognizable

PTSD

Do I even have to explain that-

They are traumatized and get flashbacks and night terrors

Franky

Bisexual

Married to Robin 🩵🩵🩵

TRANSMASC. I AM THE BIGGEST BELIEVER OF TRANS FRANKY.

He was abandoned by his birth parents, he has a name he doesn’t use anymore, calls everyone bro regardless of gender, HE LITERALLY REBUILT HIS ENTIRE BODY-

Even though Franky’s a cyborg I gave him visible top surgery scars. I think he would show them off with pride and doesn’t necessarily need/want to be seen as a cis man. He’s just a man who once had boobs yk?

The underside of his hair is an even brighter blue because silly!!

ADHD—he hyperfixates like a madman and is also very loud and passionate. Also idk if this is an actual ADHD thing but like he’s super empathetic and cries easily? I’m like that too so idk lol

Zoro

Demihomoromantic asexual

Hopelessly, dare I say pathetically, in love with Luffy. I want to clarify that this doesn’t make Zoro less gay and this doesn’t make Luffy less genderfluid.

Also as much as I adore trans Zoro, I think the fact that he’s a cisgender feminist is important. So I headcanon him as cis.

FLUFFY HAIR ZORO FLUFFY HAIR ZORO FLUFFY HAIR ZORO 💚💚💚

I can’t decide whether or not I like the striped hair,, I’m still on the fence about it lol

Covered in scars because he’s done so much training and fighting, I know they kind of look like something else but they aren’t, don’t worry

Idk why but I always give him a dark green undershirt

Autistic!! He has a narrow range of emotions, makes nonverbal grunts, super into swords, he’s blunt, follows routine, etc.

Aaaand that’s all of them! Phew! Thank you so much for reading 💖

Reblogs, asks, and comments are super appreciated!!

[drdemonprince]

i'd like to say sth abt the x gender marker thing. i've just started getting the paperwork done for it myself, and although its an exhausting grueling bureaucratic pricess, it's filling me w the kind of joy i last felt when i got my first hrt prescription. i know i will have constant difficulties in a system of institutions that have no official way of dealing w nonbinary identities, and i fully expect the openly white nationalist party in my country to become a significant influence in national government within the next 10 years. i also have an escape plan of sorts, but i'm fully expecting that i may be legally detransitioned again. i would still be betraying myself fundamentally and stealing joy from myself, something that i get to have very little of, if i didn't do it anyway, bc i already cannot access plenty of services including healthcare bc i'm simply too dysphoric and institutionally traumatized to show up and be misgendered. there is no such thing as stealth or passing for a nonbinary person in the society i live in, only erasure; i might as well exercise this tiny amount of power i have been given for a brief time to force them to acknowledge me as who i am. i agree that having one's gender be irrelevant to one's personhood, including legally, would be vastly preferable, but i don't see how me getting an x in my id detracts from or otherwise influences that. my government already has plenty of ways of getting lists of trans ppl if they ever want one. i may be painting a target on my back, but as far as i am concerned, it is already there bc i am already incredibly vulnerable and restricted as a trans person for whom passing or stealth is not an option. i might as well get marginalized for who and what i am and make them look me in the eye at a doctor's office while they awkwardly tell me they don't have the infrastructure to process me as a patient than cringe and stammer while i tell them that actually i'm transgender and i would prefer for them to address me as this or that while knowing damn well they just see me as a quirky woman that they may or may not humor for hashtag diversity's sake. they may still do that ofc, but for all the risks and trouble i am incurring, it also corrects the scales of institutional power just a tiny bit in my favor by giving me legal grounds to argue. i'm also terrified of the police for good reasons, but i'm more terrified of them as a misgendered and scared but not out trans person unsure if and how much to advocate for myself than i am as someone confident enough to at least get hurt for who i am, rather than for who i am not and hiding out of fear of worse punishment. i am not advocating for anyone else to do or not do the same bc it is a subjective and highly varied set of risks and rewards that must be personally evaluated, and above all i'm very aware that as a white (not us) person, for all the institutional violence i have previously endured, i would be risking far worse if i were not, but as far as i am concerned, it feels like one of the best, most powerful things i can do for myself right now is to get the damn papers even if in the worst case they end up taking them away from me again.

Thanks for sharing your experience. I remember that when I was nonbinary and not medically transitioning, I felt much the same way. I was ready to really throw myself on the pyre for the sake of just actually being seen as not the gender I had been forced to be, for once. And honestly? Nothing short of medical transition did that. All the changes to my personal style, hair, comportment, voice training, the pronoun pins, the asserting myself, the putting pronouns in my email signature, the changing my medical forms and documentation at work to make me nonbinary, none of it made what felt like any lick of difference in how i was treated, because nonbinary identities are so thoroughly erased. The ONLY thing that got people to start treating me as gender ambiguous or to they/them me was to begin to transition as a trans man and use he/him pronouns, lol. (And eventually, most people did switch over to actually gendering me correctly as a guy, tho I still do get the they/them once in a while which annoys me and it's always VERY telling who tends to do it).

I don't know your situation or if you have medically transitioned in any fashion or not, or if you even want to, and our stories are different, but all of which is to say, I know how immensely frustrating it is and how confining it is to interpreted as your assigned gender seemingly no matter what you fucking do, and that sensation of being willing to take on serious risk to be seen. if anything that was part of what tipped me over into self conceptualizing as a gender nonconforming man rather than outside the binary altogether. different risks that i chose to take on, but still, the decision to take on risk rather than be locked away inside how people saw me.

I think structural nonbinary erasure runs so deep that very few individual level actions can make a dent in it and it's maddening. Of course there's all the intersections with transmisogyny that also impact who is visible as trans and who is not and who finds themselves yearning for greater visibility and those for whom visibility is nothing but massive vulnerability that itself cannot be escaped. But I understand that you've considered everything carefully and are aware of the risks in what you're taking on, and I hope that it does mean you don't feel that confined unseen feeling anymore. Because as much as I'm qualifying things I do know how fucking awful that sensation is and how few avenues there are for doing a damn thing about it that people will take seriously.

[theshoesofatiredman]

rant: i feel like the ‘nice’ christians are worse than the outright hateful ones. the blonde peppy girls with john 3:16 in their instagram bio that are like “i don’t hate lgbt people!! i just disagree with their lifestyle. love the sinner hate the sin <3” LIKE GIRL STFU. it makes no sense to say this. i’d literally prefer for an old person to just call us abominations or degenerates.

the best analogy i can think of is, let’s say having red hair was a sin. so, as a redheaded person, you being born that way isn’t necessarily a sin. you’re still loved by god! but…since you grow out red hair you have to keep it continually shaved. again, there’s nothing wrong with having the red hair gene!! but it’s just a sin for it to start growing :)

that’s how dumb these mfs sound who say gay ppl have to be celibate for life. i cant stand it at all. even worse, homosexuality is grouped in with sins like murder, adultery, etc. wtf!!! one time i was reading a christian book and the writer was like “There are so many problems with our world. Misogyny, trafficking, abuse, pedophilia, r*pe, homosexuality”….ONE OF THESE THINGS IS NOT LIKE THE OTHERS. how do they not see that?

I'm not sure if you want me to answer your last question, because on one hand, it seems rhetorical. But I do have theories!

For starters, they can't see how unlike the others is because they were conditioned against it by their religion. Many are so indoctrinated with the idea that all sin is hated equally by God, so when considering lists like this, they are not considering impact or harm. Theirs is not an ethic based on harmful outcomes. It's one God's opinion over everyone else's. To justify it, their theology makes God to be the ultimate good so a relationship with him is the ultimate good. And anything God calls sin alienates us from him and is therefore harmful to us because it deprives us of the ultimate good. But you have to bring it back to: well what does God actually think is harmful about gay love? They have answers to that question but they aren't good ones.

Second, it's easy to not recognize the wrongness of homosexuality's inclusion on this list because most people aren't gay. It's easier to miss what you've never experienced. It's also easier to hold people morally responsible for a choice you'll never have to make. A straight man who never lusts after a man is without the specific sin and he is able to cast the first stone far more easily.

Third, and in a similar vein to the above, it's really easily to moralize based on disgust. If something seems gross, it is so much easier to think there's something wrong with it. Unfortunately, sex that people don't want to have often seems disgusting. If you're straight, the idea of participating in gay sex is probably not going to feel good and it is so so easy for that disgust to be moralized against gay sex havers. It's so important to not let disgust drive your morals but many people miss this.

Fourth, homosexuality has been falsely equivocated with all of those other things. The idea that LGBTQ people are rapists, pedophiles, abusers, and/or child traffickers is a prevalent one amongst homophobes. They don't realize the difference because in bigoted circles the words are synonymous.

Fifth, I grew up hearing that acceptance of gay relationships in America was going to cause God to destroy the country like he had wiped out previous nations, like he had done to Sodom and Gomorrah. There are folks in positions of power and authority who are just making shit up and some people don't know any better bc they're in a bubble with little to no out gay people. It's harder to think gay people are going to bring down god's fiery wrath when there's a loving Jesus following gay couple in the neighboring pew or as your actual neighbor. Many people in these bigoted communities don't have enough experience with gay people to realize at first just how full of shit their leaders are and after they roll it into their worldview the change is so hard to make they're stuck like that.

I agree with you that "I don't hate LGBTQ people!! I just disagree with their lifestyle ✨💖" are still being bigoted. They would vote against my rights as a gay man and that is discrimination based on sexual orientation. They would likely still oppress me by-proxy if they could. They would vote for someone else to put the boot on my neck, but they wouldn't do it themselves.

And like there is that difference. I would rather that brand of Christian than a Nazi, or then the brand of Christian who thinks gay people should be rounded up and shot. I think it's a false equivalency to say they're the same. A society where homophobes have to be passive aggressive to maintain social acceptance rather than acceptance is one where gay people get to live longer. It's not perfect, but it is improved.

However, I also understand that it's so fucking frustrating because it's impossible to get the love the sinner hate the sin type Christian to see the harm they're doing and how hateful they are coming off. It feels worse because it's candy coated shit and you would've rather seen the shit coming. You would rather the violence know its own name than pretend to be love. It makes love feel hollow and empty because what they're handing you is this broken twisted version.

And we deserve better than that.

[pix-writes]

Continuing with my last question cause I just thought this; what does a friendship with Stan looks like? To be more specific, if the reader is a female-presenting person, would her friendship with Stan look different than if the reader were a man? Mostly I wondered because Stan is a ladies' man, and I was wondering if a friendship with a woman would make him wonder if he likes the person or if they are just friends, idk if I explain myself aaaa

Almost thought I'd lost this ask! 😅 It was just in my drafts I hadn't accidentally deleted it thank goodness!

Nah, I think I've got what you're saying!

(a little long, so I've put it under a read more to be mindful of ppl scrolling!)

With Stan I think a relationship with a man and a woman would be a bit different, whilst I perosnally HC that he's bisexual, I do think he is more drawn to women, either as just personal preference and/or because its more recognisable/acceptable societally for him to flirt with women easily.

Whilst Stan is a bit of a ladies man, he does admit to Dipper in Roadside Attraction, that he's not actually good at building relationships/dating women; more often than not his flirtations gets the door slammed in his face. I'm guessing this is because he just is naturally a flirt/pick up artist and is therefore not particularly selective when it comes to flirting with people in general. So with that in mind, he'd be likely to be quite flirtatious in the beginning of getting to know a female friend, but he's (mostly) kidding around, so its not serious if you don't see him that way, I mean you hardly know each other at this stage. It also depends on your interactions together and how you respond to his jokes over this initial stage too. If you flirt back, you guys are mostly going to skip over the friends stage to lovers!

I think Stanley has gone so long without having any friends/close friendships, though, that he's just happy to find a someone who will share the same hobbies or is a 'kindred spirit' of sorts. So, I think he would be likely to drop the flirting act with you once he realises you're not picking up what he's putting down, but you could be a friend. And geniunely, too, he's not just waiting around for you to change your mind, he simply forgets about it and hangs out with you as a friend. Once you become close friends though, I think it would be harder for him to shut off feelings for a female friend, you spend so much time together he can't help but fall for you. He'd try to draw back and rationalise to himself that he's just lonely, so of course he would think about being with you, even if you're not interested (cue the angst). But obviously, that won't work, and his feelings do slip out in the way he acts around you at times!

With a male friend, its much more hanging out together and becoming aquaintance to friends to lovers, I think Stan wouldn't be as likely to initiate things or flirt with a guy right of the bat in most cirucmstances; but he's been around and travelled the world, he's had the occaisonal thing with another fella before, and it's not all about smut either, but romance too. I think he'd be a little less flirtatious, but it once he'd realise he's starting to like them that's when the flirtation will start. I think he'll be a lot more cautious to start it seriously, though, because some of the time he has lost a male friend to flirtation in the past. He'll only do it if he thinks he might have a chance and will lay it on thick, because, what has he got to lose?!

For Stan, the dynamic is different based on his past and also the way he was socialised (living in a heteronormative society, eh?!), so I think a relationship with a guy compared to a girl he'd be slightly different in the way he interacts with them, but he's still a terrible flirt all the same! ^^

Friendship with Stan will look like:

Sitting on the porch, having a drink (of pitt ofc) and telling each other stories

Playing cards or other games you can bet on at the kitchen table, this can go on for hours after dinner

Watching any old thing on the TV (when the kids have gone to bed/are out, it's definitely period dramas - but only if you're into them and put them on, as Stan won't admit he likes them... but you know he does! ^-^)

Fishing on the lake in Gravity Falls and drinking something more alcoholic, will have to stop Stanley from getting into some kind of altercation if it's tourist season when you go out, and boat to the shore tipsy

Being goofy together - generally joking around with each other, making witty/snarky comments to the other nearly all the time, maybe the odd harmless prank here and there - or if one of you has been cheating at cards actual pranks OR some kind of competitive rematch as revenge!

Helping him and Ford on their adventures in some way, even if you don't go with them, you'll be involved somehow whether you like it or not. Will ring you every time they stop at a port to give you an update (it's mainly so you don't worry - you know he's got places safely and he knows you haven't fallen into the bottemless pit whilst he's been away)

Spending summerween/halloween together and competing to see who can be the most scary/has the best decorations/costume out of the two of you etc. One time you enlist Ford's help to give Stanley a scare and totally win. He says that you'll be the death of him one day in response. Once you both watched horror movies, there was a regional power cut and you both got spooked and ended up sleeping in the living room instead of going home/going to bed.

Enabling or discouraging (depending on the situation) each other's devious plans or crimes.

You have a running joke that Stan owes you money. Except it's not a joke. He does. (it just so happens that anytime you get it back is also in step with times you have to pay him back for something as well, so you end up exchanging the same $20 note or whatever)

[transgenderpolls]

as a trans 'guy' (i prefer calling myself dude-lite, i'm xenic and agender but also a trans man) with colorblindness, watching the events of That One Poll play out honestly makes me feel shocked. psuedoscience or not, it's a valid question to ask. it's no different -- to me, someone who was raised with a similar notion of what that poll was talking about -- than asking if a trans guy would feel dysphoric over wearing pink/purple or a trans women blue/red/green. both have to do with forcing bullshit onto people that can and has been perpetuated by people before. i live in a pretty red county, i'm shocked to see people have such negative and hateful reactions!

with that out of the way, my red-green colorblindness does make me feel a bit euphoric about the way i present. so much of a guy that i literally have a genetic trait most common with an x chromosome. fuck yes

oh, people would totally say the same shit on a poll about regular color/aesthetic related gender roles too. on pretty much ANY poll i've posted that essentially asked "does this societially gendered thing make you dysphoric/euphoric," there's been a horde of ppl saying that it's like, inherently misogynistic and pushing gender roles to ask the question. tumblr is not a website full of intellectuals, to put it mildly.

anyway congrats on the red-green colorblindness! lol. it's actually specifically that it's harder for "females" to be born with it bc they would need to be on both x chromosomes, whereas if you have xy, it only needs to be on the one x chromosome you have. idk why it works that way when it works the opposite for tetrachromacy.

[protectingtulpas]

So I just got sent that pretty iconic "anti-tulpa" document and I think it's pretty damn funny that a lot of those sources, if you actually READ them, are neutral or even supportive lmfao.

Like for this one? This is straight up pro-, and is just explaining that "tulpamancy" isn't the original concept and that it's based on other practices. Congrats, you're making our fucking point for us!

This next one is pretty interesting also. I wanna highlight some stuff from it, from both the op and comments.

Let's talk about my existence in contrast to some of these statements. The first one is "The biggest, most dangerous form of evil in Buddhist thought is "ego" or self-grasping. If ANY mental phenomena increases your self-cherishing attitudes (self importance, grandiosity, jealousness, craving, hatred, self-loathing, self-absorption etc) it's evil. IF a mental phenomena causes greater flexibility, less attachment, more tranquil emotions, less mental chatter/discursive thinking, increased generosity and compassion toward others, higher mental clarity etc.--that's good." And the second one is "If it increases negative emotions, it's not Dharma. If it decreases negative emotions, it's Dharma." So these are great for some people, but that mentality of not allowing "self-cherishing attitudes" can be EXTREMELY HARMFUL FOR SYSTEMS and ANYONE with self worth issues. A lot of this is contradictory for a lot of people. Something can both decrease negative emotions and make you feel connected to yourself. Nobody has the right to make us feel any less like ourselves - normally you can believe whatever you want for yourself, obviously, but pushing it onto other ppls' lives aint cool. The implication that we're straight up DANGEROUS just for existing is insulting to created systems regardless of whether you're using the word tulpa or not.

The reply to that by @/eeveecraft is great, and this part describes how weird that is in the context of headmates' identities here. "Furthermore, really don't like how you downplayed tulpas as property there, buddy. Tulpas are not property, they are people in every sense of the word, and I don't [give a] flying fuck about whatever complications that for your beliefs. My systemmates are people, full stop. I was already able to tell since you refer to your own systemmates as "imaginary friends," which a lot of tulpas aren't okay with being called that because that implies that they're fake. They are NOT lesser because they're not created by ancient monks or whatever.

"Like, seriously: "They would be considered "as real as you and me," with their own likes and dislikes etc," because apparently, modern tulpas don't have likes and dislikes and their hosts just see them as delusions? Say that to my tulpa, Arcanus who adores coffee while the smell makes me nauseous, say that to my systemmates who switch with me and have their own hobbies. Also, tulpas are more than just personalities. They have their own experiences, skills, preferences, dreams, memories, thoughts, a person is more than just their personality, and I thought a "licensed psychotherapist" would know that, especially if they have systemmates of their own." Make sure to read the full comment tho cuz it's a good takedown, it's not just about that it goes thru the entire thing.

SO! If anybody actually wants a well-studied paper outlining everything, check out Tracking the Tulpa: Exploring the "Tibetan" Origins of a Contemporary Paranormal Idea by Natasha L. Mikles and Joseph P. Laycock. It goes into a lot more of an accurate and in-depth history on the subject, and the bibliography ACTUALLY shows where things come from.

All that document showed us was that Buddhists are a wide community with a variety of different people with different skill levels, understandings, and opinions. And that we need to ditch the fantastical, impossible representation of the tulpa in supernatural media because that's ACTIVELY harming people. Which is what we want to show people! So congrats!

[memnoch-the-meticulous]

Book!Louis v Show!Louis (ft. Movie!Louis)

[A/N: I initially posted this as a reblog, but i feel like i went off on a couple of tangents so I'm just going to make an original post about it]

Oooh ok so I have a lot thoughts on this. For context tho, I'ev watched the show and movie, but I've only read the first book (the og iwtv novel) so pls bare with me if i get any facts wrong.

I think Book!louis (BL) and Show!Louis (SL) are a lot more similar than people realise. I think most show fans hate on don't actually hate on BL,,, they just hate that he was a glorified slave owner (yes it was the 1700s but u can see why it makes ppl uncomfortable). BUT in saying that, fans who geniunely dislike BL for his other characteristics, like his emo-ness and catholic guilt and philosophical tangents,, i think its a little strange because SL is pretty much the same in that regard??

I think it's harder for viewers to realise on screen because yes SL does appear more expressive and obviously we can't hear SL's thoughts like we do in the books, but even just from his narration to daniel, a lot of his actions and relationship with his loved ones reflect that. I also think that also deal with their traumas pretty similarly and have similar unhealthy coping mechanisms. They can sometimes very super impulsive and reckless when provoked. They think they deserve to be punished, they think they are damned. And obvs their reaction and antagonizing over vampirism is basically the same.

I think really the only difference between SL and BL (besides, ya know, the race/work/time period) is that BL feels the need to mask his sadness and inner nature and present to society in a certain fashion,, whereas BL wallows in his misery pretty openly (well at least in comparison to SL). This may come from the fact that SL is a Black man from the early twentieth century and has a family to care for as well as lots of expectations, wheres as BL doesn't really have any of that -- well we, ok technically he had close familial relationships but we're not really shown much of that in the book. We are introduced to him in mourning and distanced from his family,, we never really get to see how his life was like before that. In the movie, we are even introduced to Brad Pitt's louis very publicly showcasing his sadness and lack of will to live by putting himself in a fight, so to speak.

I think that's why I really enjoy reading SL-centred fanfiction because they explore his thought process through the stuff that happens in the show and it aligns so much with BL!!

Anyways,, i guess my point is,, BL and SL are actually pretty similar!! love to read. love to mope and ponder on the moral failings of life! Love their loved ones SO much but can never voice it out loud. catholic guilt. both would be entertained watching paint dry. lowkey dickmatized

anyways i love Louis so much as a character and I'm so glad to see another adaption of him -- and yeah i'll say it, I do prefer show louis more but only really because of Jacob Anderson + the intersectional portrayal of Blackness and how it impact's Louis' character, + getting rid of that whole white slaver owner spiel (not saying that SL had a totally innocent job btw but damn idk why anne rice went with the plantation thing like,,??) -- anyways yeah main point is that I love Louis and he isn't boring in any version and all adaptations of him are more similar than ppl realise.

[shamebats]

There's a wider societal issue that affects pretty much everyone and feeds into transphobia and it's the socially conditioned fear and demonization of certain bodily changes.

Originally, my thinking was that it's body changes in general but then I realized that actually, depending on your environment and how you were socialized, you might fear and desire different ways one's body can change. My partner is a cis man and was socialized as one and he sees greying hair as a good thing bc he feels like it'll make him look hotter and probably also in big part bc as a man you gain social status as you look older, you get taken more seriously in a way that elder women used to as well but now less and less.

Depending on how you've been socialized and what you've internalized from it, you might be terrified of gaining muscle but eager to lose weight. You might be terrified of gaining fat in certain areas (belly, arms) but not others (chest, butt).

The inverse of that is not wanting to be skinny/scrawny and wanting to gain lots of muscle.

If there was a pill that made all your body hair disappear (but not on your head) without major side effects, most women would be all over it. That's not a body change they would fear. But most ppl are terrified of losing the hair on their head.

We fear body changes that we are told from society are scary so much, we might never consider them on our own unless we see people go through them and be fine or even choose to go through them willingly and find joy in the results.

Most teenagers might find puberty scary and confusing, but they still want to go through it. They want the body changes it brings and if they don't start going through puberty at the same time as their peers, that's a problem for them.

But there are some body changes some will never be comfortable with on an individual level. I'll never be comfortable going through pregnancy and some ppl would never choose to go through having an abortion. Some ppl aren't comfortable with having any tattoos and some would hate not having any.

If we accept this about humanity, this diversity of desires and preferences for our own bodies and how we would like to shape them, accepting trans people is a no-brainer.

We have to accept that other people will make decisions about their own bodies that we might not.

We have to accept that there's always a social element to our choices. Someone who has lots of friends go through pregnancy and having kids at the same time might be more inclined to want it themselves. Maybe if all their friends were childfree, they wouldn't have made that decision at that time, or maybe they would've anyway, we can't know for sure. Just like a trans person with lots of friends who have chosen to get a certain surgery might be more inclined to get it themselves.

If we accept that the first example isn't a reason to gatekeep medical care, then we have to accept that the latter isn't either.

So my point is ok fine, you say that there's a "social contagion" that contributes to more ppl being trans and wanting gender affirming medical care...what about it?

Explain to my why it should be treated differently (by law & medicine) than having children bc of family expectations or getting hair transplant surgery bc you're insecure about your balding head or losing weight or gaining muscle due to societal pressures to look a certain way or getting a tummy tuck after pregnancy or any other choice ppl may make about their own bodies.

At the end of the day, all we can do is work on building societies that are more accepting of bodies in all their natural and unnatural diversity, and even if we ever achieve that fully, we will never have a way of truly knowing which choices are less or more valid than others, we'll just have to trust people to know themselves.

[dabistits]

when do u think bnha became unsalvageable?

i think bnha might've always been slated to become that way from the get-go, with the protagonist being an aspiring hero and heroes being superpowered cops.......

that said while copaganda shows will always be suspect to me, i'm willing to watch them for entertainment value if not moral backbone lol. so i think bnha could've still been a somewhat fun show about these kids going to superpowers school and learning how to use superpowers better. the major failure points that stand out to me are:

mva

endemption

i'll talk about #1 first since i'm sure that's gonna be the most controversial coming from me lol. dgmw i actually love mva and i think it's one of the better-written (if not best) arc of the series, BUT it was so good and set up so many expectations that the series ultimately just could not live up to. mva was very strong imo because, in giving its villains depth, it dug into the fabric of bnha's society and tried to illustrate, like, how did this happen, why are these people villains? and by and large, the answer to that was poverty and the societal alienation of vulnerable populations (children, abuse victims, mentally ill ppl, queer ppl, "mutants," etc.)

and this was good and interesting but this was Also Bad because mva added complexity to the world of bnha but that was ultimately a complexity that horikoshi couldn't execute. i'm not interested in a story that makes systemic change secondary to scolding marginalized people for reacting to how they've been treated. i would even prefer some kind of liberal "change from the inside" story that at least focuses more on the theme of systemic flaws than one that focuses on how the people systemically wronged are actually the bad ones and we have to fight them for 400 chapters.

look, i'll even drop the whole "the lov did nothing wrong" bit for a moment. sure, bnha doesn't have to throw away all believability and have everyone forgive the lov just like that, but it's always going to be fucked to me that bnha's story and fans are obsessed with the lov ~owning their crimes~ when (takes a deep breath) the government ordered the clandestine executions of people who would make the hero system look bad. and the story barely wastes any breath talking about the corruption of the hero system and higherups lol. which brings me to the second point.

endeavor started out as a character that embodied everything that was wrong with quirk/hero society. he was one of those very early downsides we saw of bnha's world: the publicity/public image of heroes superseding the contents of their actual character, and the value of quirks superseding the value attributed to their human bearers, to the point that domestic abuse and rape is seen as an option to make one's genes/one's power stronger. this was a good set-up! i was intrigued! but again, horikoshi couldn't follow through.

endeavor's character eventually shifted away from making a point about hero society to becoming one of the emotional focal points of the story, especially in the todofam subplot. "waaah tumblr user dabistits you just hate when people change for the better!" and yeah i do kind of hate how an abuser having sad feelings immediately gets him prioritized over the people who suffered because of him tbh! but personal feelings aside, i would say that endemption really marked the point where bnha swung hard into depicting characters as good or bad not through the actions they take but through their alignment with either heroes or villains.

endeavor and hawks are the most obvious in this. in contrast to the obsession of making sure villains repent and "do the right thing," endeavor/hawks' actions are either forgivable, pitiable, or simply necessary. several years of spousal abuse and at least 10 years of child abuse don't earn endeavor so much as a lecture (no, being told to stop being pathetic doesn't count), and hawks' execution of twice—not much different than lady n's executions—is dismissed through a press conference and never addressed again. there's a distinct line drawn between "heroes (who sometimes do bad things!)" and "villains," such that anyone aligned with the heroes is deemed to be "good, deep down," and generally more morally superior or redeemable than villains. consider the fact that someone like gentle (youtube crimes) or aoyama (blackmailed 16 y.o) were held to higher standards of proving themselves than someone like endeavor or hawks. i'm not gonna lie, these story beats are all uncomfortably real, except that when real live people do endeavor or hawks things i see them unquestionably as counterrevolutionary enemies, not protectors of the peace lol.

the decision to have endeavor transition from minor antagonist to a major supporting character was, imo, a big turning point in the ethos of bnha. i think in many ways it was a symbolic shift, but also a mechanical one in terms of how the story was going to be told going forward. the problems about hero society that were continually introduced at the beginning (ostracizing quirkless people and ppl with "dangerous" quirks, the valuation of powerful quirks over people, "fake heroes," all of the lov stuff) took a backseat to Stopping The Big Bads, with marginalization as flavor text instead of a genuine area of contention between heroes. think about the difference in deku confronting endeavor during the sports festival compared to how all other injustices were dealt with afterward... because the readers have to be convinced that endeavor is Ultimately Good, the heroes stopped challenging him, and in stopping challenging him, they lost one of the major ways through which the heroes of the series wrestled with societal issues.

but whereas the way the heroes handled corruption and violence within their own ranks became simplistic and non-confrontational, with mva, so many aspects of dealing with and interrogating the status quo and societally-accepted injustices were pushed onto the villains instead. but since the villains must be defeated as villains, despite being the main carriers of social critique now, their messages were also torn down/deprioritized in favor of enacting bnha's vision of a cohesive conclusion wherein the villains answer for their crimes. so instead of making the heroes challenge anything, hori shifted this burden onto the villains, in the process making most of them some kind of vulnerable/marginalized and with opinions on the matter, only to ultimately assert that the issues they raise are less narratively important than a restoration of peace.

[greasegotahold]

This post started out with a point then turned into rambling abt the stage show lol

So like. at least in my irl circle and from what I heard yesterday, a lot of ppl prefer the musical to the movie. Acknowledging the bias of theatre ppl toward theatre, that's not the reason I heard most; what I heard most is that the musical stays closer to the book than the movie. Granted idk how many if any of these ppl have seen the complete novel extended cut of the movie, but even so this argument sits wonky with me

Bc the musical takes quite a few departures from the book, some p dramatic. Darry is not the gang's leader, Dally is. Randy is an ensemble part with one line; Cherry gets his ending "even if you win, nothing will change" moment. Sandy is already gone. Evie and Sylvia are gone. Steve is not a big part of Soda's life. Two Bit isn't acknowledged as an alcoholic. Johnny was only jumped a week ago, and it's not a secret who did it. Bob is the one who jumps Pony at the start and even comes up with an excuse for it. Dally doesn't give Johnny his heater, Dally commits a far more direct suicide, no sickness or court proceedings, so on and so forth.

Now I understand why we made just about all of these changes: the show is just about 2 hours as is, not counting intermission; streamlining needed to happen, for time and for clarity of storyline. I even prefer a lot of the changes (Cherry is just. Such a livelier character lmao. She's given stuff to DO. I love her in the book and movie but the stuff they added in the musical I simply love.) I bring this up just bc it. Is honestly just as different as the movie if not more so in how it departs from the source material.

Which means when ppl are saying it's closer to the book, they mean in feel.

And in many avenues; talking about the the extreme accessibility of the book as an adult with other adults, attempting to articulate my issues with the film adaptation, and then later attempting to defend the movie on those same shortcomings, I think I know why.

It's the ever-present narration. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, Ponyboy tells his story, he doesn't show. And that makes the book an extremely straightforward read, and absolutely how he can tell us so much shit that happened in so little time, but it also makes it hard to capture in a standard movie adaptation, especially when the movie also needs to trim down and streamline characters and plot points.

But what does Pony do throughout the musical? He narrates. Yes the story plays out real time, but it's still interspersed with these slowdowns where he talks to the audience, where he's narrating.

And I think that's what's really clicking so well with the musical, despite all the changes to characters and their dynamics and plot beats.

And for certain things, the impact is still there, they just changed it around. Johnny was jumped last week instead of months ago and we don't get the excerpt abt how he wound up buying his first blade, and how he would kill the next soc who tried to jump him, and Dally no longer gives him his gun, but he does give him the 6 inch switchblade when Johnny is genuinely worried his dad will kill his mom, and then shows him how to stab to kill. The circumstances are different, but we still get Dally giving Johnny a lethal weapon. The motivation changes for why Johnny carries his blade, from self defense to an explicit want to protect others, but this makes it a more direct setup for when he kills Bob to save Pony.

And a lot of the straight up original additions to the plot feel seamless. The added backstory for Cherry's parents, her dad's alcoholism and her mom's kind of just. Surrender to hopelessness and despair. Not only explains why she's so touchy about Bob drinking, but it makes the change from going along with him to stop a fight into her refusing to back down after breaking up feel justified. To be clear, I don't fault book and movie cherry for doing what she does in that scene, she's trying to keep everyone else safe, I just think that the change was set up and well executed in the musical.

Also sidenote but in Justice For Tulsa...I have so many feelings after getting to see it. The cop shining his flashlight down on Two Bit as he gets jumped, but then he just keeps on walking bc why would he care abt a greaser...Bev buying right into the boys' escalation against the greasers vs Cherry's outright rebuke and then Marcia is over here looking genuinely Physically nauseous over having to choose a side. And of course the moment where the cop beats Dally after handcuffing him, that speaks for itself.

(Sidenote, unrelated to anything, I just wanna say when I listened to the soundtrack for the first time, years since I had read the book or watched the movie, somehow I just knew when the soc boys started singing their threatening section, that they were jumping two bit. I guess I just had a faint buried memory that Two Bit was the revenge-jumping victim lol)

[nerves-nebula]

this is something ive always been kind of curious about but a recent irl discussion has brought it up again.

if u wanna know my personal opinions/the conversation that reminded me of this, you can see them under the cut lol

so like. I was talking about the weird racism stuff with splinter (him being japanese and a rat and the whole history of that stuff) and i said that i personally thought it was less racist for him to have been a japanese guy who got turned into a rat because at least then he has like, a legitimate reason for the accent and the ties to the culture. If he's just a guys pet rat, that kind of makes sense- but also it's always felt to me like that was equating the animal with some innate racial characteristics. idk im not a race scholar...

i'm also not japanese, but I know that if there was a culturally black mutant monkey character, I would prefer for that monkey to have previously been a human. Because otherwise it feels, to me at least, like equating that animal to that ethnicity or culture inherently, since they were never really related to that culture and at most were exposed to it in ways they couldn't understand as an animal. which feels demeaning imo.

the white ppl i was talking to this about came around to my point of view, but they originally expressed the thought that it would be less racist to just have an actual rat mutate and just be a japanese rat, accent and all.

I've seen japanese and other asian tmnt fans express the idea that they feel like the human or the rat origin is less offensive, or that they feel one is more or less racist, so I'm not gonna say i think one is definitively more racist cuz to be honest they're both pretty bad and I've seen compelling arguments for both of them being the worse option.

and how asian people experience and think about the racism that affects them is way more important than how i think about it lol.

BUT! I am interested in what you guys think and I'm especially interested in if it breaks down differently between white and nonwhite people. I was considering splitting the vote even more and giving asian people their own options too but seeing as this was inspired by a discussion between a black person and two white people i feel like the point is more to see if this is a poc/white person split first and if so then maybe I'll put out another poll. if not and that was just a coincidence i'll prolly just leave it as it is.

side note: I will say that I think the way mutant mayhem did it where he was just a sewer rat, not even a pet who was raised by a japanese guy ?? and he learned ninja stuff from VHS's??? That one is probably my least favorite. love that movie but i HATED that.

[mrghostrat]

This isn’t really a question for you but to the other anons who say they “hate aus but love yours” and I kind of want to know why? I also LOVE your AUs and it’s not an insult to say they both (streamer/bnf) push the limits of the canon characters to almost breaking point. They’re really their own characters and it’s a good thing. But if you’re someone who hates aus I’m surprised they would go for the extremes? Have they just not given aus the chance? I think in their rush to praise you they’re unintentionally punching down on other aus. bBut if they like yours so much there’s so many other possibilities they could also love if they give aus a chance

i get it tbh! and i don’t think it’s inherently insulting to other AUs, because it’s not a matter of quality, it’s a matter of preference.

for some ppl, the characters’ roles as angel & demon and the STAKES that come with that, are so integral to their characterisation, and a key part of what makes their pining & their personalities recognisable. what they’ve been through, fighting the apocalypse and sneaking around under the noses of literal heaven and hell have formed them as people*, and their relationship, to an incomparible degree. and 6,000 years hits very different than a human lifespan.

it’s valid to prefer the setting that turned the characters into who they are. that’s the crowley and aziraphale we all love, after all. i love canon compliant or divergent fics, but for me, i just get restless reading such a narrow selection of plots and feelings, and have always loved the open-endness of AUs (in every fandom).

the other problem with AUs is that, by taking them out of their primary roles, it’s a lot easier for writers to tangent and drift away from accurate characterisation. without the tether of canon roles and settings and past decisions, you can very easily forget what makes them Them.

there are plenty of readers who consume fan fic because they want more stories about the characters AND the story/setting/context they’ve grown to love on the screen/page. i daresay most of them lol! i personally love characters more than anything, and like finding ways to tie their canon personalities and decisions into new settings, to see how they would approach human problems. but i understand feeling like crowley and aziraphale are only crowley and aziraphale when they’re in the universe that made them who they are now.

this isn’t to say that every other AU is badly written or unenjoyable. it’s just that it’s harder to get it right, which can be off putting for readers who value that to try and scour through the archive for something to read; and even when they are characterised well, it doesn’t change the fact that people who prefer canon simply don’t enjoy tearing them away from it. those people likely enjoy mine because i try very very hard to NOT make them their own characters, i want to change the setting and the stakes but i’m gandalf pouring over scrolls and documents trying to get every nuance of characterisation right, despite how Out Of Left Field the initial concept might seem. and so i’m lucky they’ve decided to give me a chance, be it from my art, my writing style, the snippets i share, or all the wonderful people who’ve recommended me.

source: i prefer human AUs and @thewolveswolf prefers canon compliant and we’ve had this discussion on the daily LMAO