#want to question people's reasoning here

[22degreehalo]

Something I see a lot in talks about AI art is something I've seen about a lot of different kinds of art: a desire to have the product reflect skill and/or talent.

Like, it reminds me so very much of how some (usually older) people react to music software. It used to be that you'd have to go the long way and spend years learning the guitar; now just anybody can simulate that sound for you and clean it all up and make it perfect!

Of course, there are many provisos to that; not anybody can open up that sort of program and put together a great-sounding song. The people who make e.g. really classic Vocaloid songs are very skilled with the program and very talented r.e. music. (And perhaps that is or will be true for AI, too: that anybody can just create a picture, but someone very skilled with a particular program can make something very specific and good!)

But it's that initial impulse that just... bothers me, a little. Because, yes, of course I understand the fear that you devoted years of your life to a subject and now it can be generated by just anyone. But why turn it around and treat it as some sort of principled, purist stance? Why does someone HAVE to devote years of their life to something to make art?

It just feels a bit. Suffering romanticisey. Either that, or making art inaccessible to ordinary people. Like 'Artists' are some inherently different kind of person.

Of course we can still value the dedication that went into specific kinds of work. Maybe that's your favourite thing about art. But doesn't it open up art to so many different kinds of people when barriers are taken away? People who can't afford to slave away for years on it? People who for some sort of physical or mental or whatever reason just can't ever really be as good with the 'traditional' process?

Again: this is not really about AI art and whether it does offer those opportunities to people. This is about the initial reaction that letting ordinary people more easily create art is somehow bad, and takes some kind of soul out of the process. But people have different capabilities; what is easy for most people is very difficult for others. Why is making art impossible for some people so important? What is so much more 'real' about art that requires very special tools, or knowledge that is barred the masses? What are we losing by letting 'untalented' people overcome certain obstacles?

[deoidesign]

Happy EDS awareness month!

I'm a webcomic artist with EDS. be aware.

EDS affects many parts of my life. I have chronic fatigue, chronic pain, and I need to use a cane! I often find myself ruminating on themes of chronic illness in my work, whether or not I am intending to include them.

I already can't paint anymore, it hurts my hands too much... Anything that requires small details or precise motions will hurt me for days. I have a lot of grief around it. But working digitally allows me to still create!

I animate, I illustrate, I get to tell my stories. I have to go slow, take huge breaks (often against my will) and recover slowly. But, working in this space allows me the grace to do this.

So, I just wanted to share a bit of my experience with my audience, and say thank you for reading my work and supporting me! It means the world to me, and I hope maybe someone in my audience feels a little more seen through me sharing this. It causes me pain, but I love myself; and that includes my disability.

[adhd-merlin]

Colin Morgan Thirst Poll

S5 Merlin

S1 Humans

S3 Humans

The Living and the Dead

The Fall

We Hunt Together

Benjamin

Belfast

Mammals

Testament of Youth

The Tempest

[bloomshroomz]

Aromantic*

(Alternate Title: Shrödinger’s Romantic)

I keep wondering if “aromantic” is really a good word to describe my romantic orientation. I have plenty of reasons for why it is, but also plenty of reasons for why it might not be. Shrödinger’s romantic.

In order to know whether you experience romantic attraction or not, you first have to have a solid definition of what romantic attraction is. A definition which is clear, and also distinct from other forms of emotional attraction. I don’t think such a definition exists, or at least, it’s not commonplace.

“Romantic attraction: attraction that makes people desire romantic contact or interaction with another person or persons.” - UNC Chapel Hill LGBT Center

But what is romantic contact or interaction? Is it contact which is culturally considered romantic? In that case, the ways in which romantic attraction is defined would vary by culture, and even by gender. Or is it contact which one intends to be romantic? That would make sense, but is incredibly subjective. How do you know where to draw the line? What if you haven’t drawn one?

“[Romantic attraction] involves a combination of physical, sexual, and emotional feelings toward someone.” - WebMD

This definition is ridiculously vague, especially for a page which defines multiple other types of attraction in relation to romance. What physical feelings? What sexual feelings? What emotional feelings? What about alloromantic asexual people, or other varioriented people, who don’t necessarily experience sexual feelings as part of their romantic feelings?

But the article also defines aromanticism as “when you don’t have any desire for a romantic relationship,” so I can’t count on it for accuracy regardless.

“Romantic attraction is the internal pull that you experience when you are with someone with whom you internally feel connected, comfortable and interested in spending more of your life with.” - Choosing Therapy

Do people not feel connected to their friends? Do people not feel comfortable with their friends? Are people not interested in spending more of their life with their friends? Why else would people find time to connect with their friends, to confide in them, to engage with them? What about these feelings is distinctly romantic?

The article goes on to say this:

“Romantic relationships are relationships intentionally initiated and maintained for experiencing sexual and romantic feelings together, whereas platonic relationships are usually centered on another purpose like hobbies, friendship, support, work, etc. Romantic relationships can also include these purposes as well, but the platonic relationship excludes the romance and sexual feelings.” - Choosing Therapy

I ask again, what about alloaces and other varioriented people? What about people who have sex with their friends? Even when it’s taboo, it’s not unheard of. The distinction can’t be sex, so it has to be romance. So, what is romance?

Later in the article, it defines romance once again:

“Romantic attraction: The internal pull that draws your attention to the other person’s positive qualities, and your internal reaction to connect, love, share and spend time with them to have more romance.” - Choosing Therapy

I feel like I’m running in circles here. People draw their attention to the positive qualities of not just romantic interests, but to friends, family, and other people with whom they’d have no romantic interest. Connection, love, and spent time are not exclusive to romance either. If the goal is to have more romance… What is that?

Every answer I find fails to say what romance is on its own. The definitions always rely on presence or absence of sex, or other things which can just as easily be present in platonic or otherwise non-romantic contexts. Romantic attraction is consistently defined by things which are not distinctly romantic.

Is it even a real thing? I mean, I feel like it’s clearly not, but it’s also clearly very real to most people. Most people don’t think about it this hard. It’s like they were given a manual that I can never possess. It comes naturally to them. They feel romantic attraction, and they know, intuitively, that that’s what it is.

Is my lack of intuition evidence that I don’t experience romantic attraction, or am I just autistic? Maybe it’s both. When I described to my aunts my emotional attraction, they described my way of experiencing and perceiving attraction as very “intellectual,” which I initially rejected. But I think they were right. I lack the intuition to understand my feelings in any way that doesn’t involve a literal or metaphorical chart. It’s something I can’t just feel and then know like other people do.

Is romantic attraction always a “you’ll know it when you feel it” sort of thing? It seems like it. Even when I search “romantic attraction” on Google, many results either come from queer Fandom Wiki pages, discussions amongst a-spec people, Reddit, or Quora. Some results aren’t even relevant to the question, including multiple results which just describe what “aromantic” means. The opposite of what I intended to search for.

The thing is, I do have feelings which would likely be perceived as romantic to most people. I have a deep desire for commitment and companionship. To touch and be touched. To love and be loved. To be emotionally and physically intimate with other people. To feel the warmth of other people as we lay in bed together. To live out our mundane lives together. Things that most people would find incredibly romantic.

But are these things romantic if I don’t explicitly intend for them to be? Is it romantic for me to be open to it being romantic, without actively wanting that?

When I’ve described my feelings online, I’ve gotten mixed responses from other people, but I’ve generally been given similar advice from different strangers, and similar labels thrown at me, even when I hadn’t asked for advice or labels.

“I think you’d enjoy a queerplatonic relationship.”

“You might be cupioromantic.”

“You might be bellusromantic.”

And I can understand where they’re coming from. I don’t think they’re entirely wrong, either. I would enjoy a queerplatonic relationship… But not for any reason that wouldn’t apply to other committed relationship types. Queerplatonic relationships, platonic relationships, romantic relationships, and whatever else there is are the same to me in all but label.

Cupioromanticism is something I have considered. I made the flag for it when I was 15 years old as well (yes, the peach one with five stripes; I always asked to be credited anonymously), so I’m biased towards liking the flag. But the definition is “being aromantic, and also wanting a romantic relationship.”

I don’t specifically want a romantic relationship, but I do want committed relationships in general, and romantic relationships are included in that. So, maybe?

Bellusromantic is something I have also considered, and it also has a pretty flag. But I think it’s less accurate than cupioromantic. The definition is “being aromantic, and enjoying traditionally romantic things, but not wanting a romantic relationship (or not wanting a committed relationship, depending on the definition used).”

I do enjoy traditionally romantic things in a way which is not explicitly romantic, and I don’t explicitly want a romantic relationship. But I’m not opposed to romantic relationships, and I do explicitly want committed relationships.

I took some aro-spec tests, and my results had a tendency to skew towards cupioromantic, bellusromantic, and quoiromantic. Quoiromantic is another orientation which I have considered, and it might be the most accurate.

Quoiromantic is also aptly known as “whatromantic” or “WTFromantic” because the defining trait is that romantic attraction as a concept doesn’t make sense to you.

“[Quoiromantic], also known as [whatromantic] or [WTFromantic], is a [romantic] orientation defined by confusion, vagueness, and/or obscurity. A [quoiromantic] person may not understand or relate to the concepts of [romantic] attraction and/or [romantic] orientation. [Quoiromanticism] may involve confusion related to what [romance] is, whether or not one experiences [romantic attraction], and how to differentiate it from other forms of attraction. [Quoiromanticism] can also feel blurry and unclear, and may center around general confusion around one's identity and attraction. It can also refer to a lack of identification with [romantic] orientation as a concept, and can additionally serve as a label for people who cannot fit into more specific identities. [Quoiromanticism] can also refer to when one does not experience [romantic] attraction in a "traditional" manner. It is sometimes used as a catch-all term for people who know they're somewhere on the [aromantic] spectrum, but aren't sure where.” - An LGBTQIA+ Wiki (originally about quoisexuality; I changed some words.)

In a similar vein, pomoromantic (“pomo” being literally taken from “postmodern”) would also fit. My romantic orientation exists from a post-romantic perspective, where romance is understood to be made up bogus which isn’t actually fundamentally different from any other form of emotional connection.

“[Pomoromanticism] is defined as refusing, avoiding, or not fitting any [romantic] orientation label in terms of conventional labels or classifications, such as gay, lesbian, [biromantic], or [aromantic]. It challenges categorizations in favor of largely unmapped possibility and the intense charge that comes with transgression. Some [pomoromantic] people may be queer or questioning, and others may not be.” - Another LGBTQIA+ Wiki (originally about pomosexuality; I changed some words.)

But at that point, is it even worth labeling my romantic orientation? Should I just be bisexual/omnisexual? Maybe with a little asterisk at the end? Does any of this matter? Am I thinking too much? (I am.)

I think that continuing to identify as aromantic will probably close me off to potential relationships. I feel like the word gives people the wrong idea. At the same time, the way that I think about romance is fundamentally different than the way other people tend to, and I do consider my aromanticism to be a notable part of who I am and how I experience the world. Maybe I should just send this to whoever ends up being a potential partner. Probably more useful than any label.

[art--harridan]

[Image description: A digital drawing based on the film Girl Shy. It depicts Harold Lloyd's character Harold Meadows sat at his typewriter, paused in thought as his fingers hover above it. His eyes are looking up and his mouth is slightly open, like he's dreaming awake. A thought bubble floats around him like smoke, with the faces of two women in the middle of it. The two have annotations next to them that denote the twenties era stereotypes that they are styled as. The one noted as "the flapper" is smiling and has curly, slightly unkempt hair, with a headband around it. She has lighter makeup than the woman next to her, who has dark lips and eyeshadow and is labelled "the vamp". She has large circular statement earrings and an ornate headpiece atop her smooth updo. Her eyes are downturned, and her expression less approachable. Harold is coloured in greyscale, and so are the ladies, although they have a warmer brown tone, as does the smoke. There's a pinker line of light surrounding them and the writing. The background is a dark brown.]

Inktober - Day 15 (Guidebook)

Film - Girl Shy (Fred C. Newmeyer, Sam Taylor, 1924)

[ithacanradio]

"do you miss kissing?" is a bonkers line to say to your newly acquired ghost friend as you're dying of hypothermia ily charles rowland

[godtrauma]

for those unfamiliar, it’s a supernatural notebook where if a person’s name is written with their face in mind, they die of a heart attack in forty seconds.

the rules get much more complicated after that, but for simplicity’s sake, that’s the gist. but know that according to death note lore, the user will meet an untimely demise and go to neither heaven nor hell.

[softpine]

This might be juvenile, but do you have any tips on not comparing yourself to others? (Especially when it comes to note count or popularity.) I’ve been posting a story for over a year and it hardly gets any traction. It’s tough for me to see new creators post and get hundreds or even thousands of notes. I hate that I’m doing this but don’t know how to quit it!

this is not juvenile!! i struggle with this myself, especially knowing that i hit my peak years ago and i've been on the decline ever since – but only by numbers alone! i'm more proud of my story than i've ever been, i'm more attached to my characters, i'm putting more love and thought into everything, but i had to be realistic with myself and understand that i'll never pull even half the notes i did in 2020. gone are the days when i would wake up to 3 new anons about my story and dms from people every day (i can't believe i used to get overwhelmed by it...) and i would be lying if i said it didn't make me sad sometimes, because we're humans and our brains are practically wired to crave the hit of happy chemicals you get from seeing the stupid number go up 😭 it does feel demotivating. it makes me feel less urgency to post quicker if i convince myself that no one is waiting for me anyway, which means i post less, which means even less people stick around, which makes me post less, and on and on. it's a tough thing for me to come to terms with in all honesty.

but it helps to remember that i would be writing even if no one is reading. and i know that, because i have! i've written entire novel-length fics that i've never published, i've written countless short stories in the frozen pines universe that i'll never post, i've created alternate universes that will never be shown, etc. i do it because the idea is in my head and it needs to Get Out and i'm kinda just a conduit for that. that might not apply to you, and that's okay! everyone is different. the important thing is to really sit down and think about WHY you write and what you get out of it. which part of the process makes you happiest? what makes you feel a sense of fulfillment / satisfaction? play to your strengths. try not to spend your time doing things you think other people will enjoy and instead, spend more time on the things that make you happy. for me, i haaaaate editing and i always have, so lately i've been trying to speed through it a little bit quicker even if it means the final product won't be as appealing to others. (this is still a work in progress for me...) i have more fun when i experiment with different writing styles, which might not appeal to others because it takes longer and i don't really have a recognizable style, but i don't care anymore because i'm having fun! ask yourself what YOU want from your story, and then write for yourself and only yourself.

essentially what i'm saying is: there will ALWAYS be people more popular than you, and there's no guarantee that when you find the popularity you seek, you'll be able to keep it. so you need to find some sort of intrinsic motivation to continue or you'll just keep comparing yourself to others forever and you'll deny yourself the joy of creation! "comparison is the thief of joy" could not be more true!!

[giantkillerjack]

Uh-oh! You are like, SOOO awkward!!

You're so awkward that it is occasionally mildly uncomfortable for people!

You're so awkward that sometimes people are confused by you and then there are awkward silences!

You're so awkward ...... that ultimately no one is harmed!!

Oh damn!!! What a vile crime you have committed! What an unforgivable thing it is to make a fellow human briefly confused!

Why, if *I* were ever briefly confused and kind of uncomfortable as a result, I'd be devastated.... by the absolute net zero change in my happiness and health! - From which I might never recover!! Yes indeed! No punishment can ever be enough for you!!

So you better absolutely hate yourself for it.

Better be SO MEAN to yourself about every single missed social cue so you don't forget your horrible crime! Meaner than you'd ever dream of being to someone else for the same thing! This is YOUR responsibility!

You need to show the world that you KNOW you are bad by punishing yourself constantly! After all, think of all the people who BENEFIT from you punishing yourself! - No, really! Think about it! Think about who benefits from your pain.

Think of alllllll the definitely-good people that your definitely-necessary self-torment definitely helps! I mean, you can't just cut off their definitely-life-sustaining supply of your suffering, right?? Sure, everyone else has a breaking point, but you're probably the only person in human history who doesn't, right? Best not to question it probably. Sure, it's a symptom that billions of people with trauma have had, but who knows? You could be a one-in-seven-billion exception. Anything's possible!

Instead, better just accept that idea that bullies carry like guns in holsters - the idea that people who have trouble with social cues deserve to suffer. Better carry on the burden they placed on you until you drop. Aid the cause of the callous by enforcing shame and suffering upon yourself extra hard; try your best to do their work for them. They're very busy.

Better not recognize that you need patience and kindness to heal from your trauma. Better not find out that it was trauma rather than personal weakness filling your head with self-hating thoughts. Better not find out it wasn't your fault.

Better not find out that awkwardness is not inherently harmful or unkind, and, in fact, the people who act like it is *are the ones enacting harm and being cruel.*

Better not get righteously angry when you realize just how much unnecessary damage this has done to you. After all, if you get mad, you might realize you deserve better. You might even feel brave enough to DEMAND better! You might build boundaries that keep you safe! You might make other people think they deserve to feel safe too! And we obviously can't be having that, so...

Better not show yourself even a little kindness a little bit at a time.

Better not make a habit out of it after all that practice.

Better not get confident.

Especially if you can't first wipe out every trace of awkward. (And you probably never will. Because people who experience absolute social certainty at all times tend to be insufferable assholes that enforce the status quo. And you just don't have the stock portfolio for that.)

Better not be confident and awkward because then you might confuse and delight people

- you might accidentally end up making other people feel less shame for their social difficulties

- you might make isolated, traumatized, and shy people feel like they deserve to be included in social situations

- you might even make them feel they can be themselves around you

- you might start loving the effect you have on a room

- you might enjoy conversations more

- you might forgive yourself and bounce back from shame more easily and frequently

- you might come to enjoy some of those moments of harmless confusion you cause because NOBODY expects the Confident Awkward, and that can genuinely be an advantage in social situations

- you might stop apologizing so much.

- you might find that socializing is like a video game: it requires practice but also a safe space for it to be fun and positive.

Or if you can't become assertive and confident, better not remain awkward and shy and quiet, and then love and forgive yourself anyway!

Why, it would be carnage!!

In either scenario, you run the risk of finding out that it's not your fault that safe spaces full of kind people can be really hard to find, create, and nurture. You could end up building a skillset that helps you do those things if you're not careful!

If you start giving yourself even the tiniest amount of grace at a time, you will find that you've accessed a gateway drug with extreme long-term side effects:

- You might realize that it was never your fault that it took so long to like yourself.

- You might realize that you were always worth talking to, even when you didn't like yourself and communication felt impossibly difficult.

- You might realize that you'll still be worth talking to even if communication becomes harder as you age and/or experience disability.

- You might come to know that you deserve to be heard even on bad days when words come slow and blurry.

You might discover that you were always deserving of kindness, first and foremost from yourself.

So. As you can see, it's FAR too much of a risk to start granting your awkward self free pardons for your many heinous and harmless crimes. Better to just leave it there.

[xxplastic-cubexx]

am i tripping or is x3 relatively way better than dark phoenix like,,, obviously the second half of x3's plot is atrociously wrong (apart from when erik keeps bringing up charles) but the initial set up and premise feel less flat than dark phoenix with more things going on than just jean/phoenix and erik and the brotherhood don't feel as shoehorned?

i fear i feel you ..... however ive always held the belief X3 wasnt a terrible movie on the sole basis hank was there and the movie started with old man bickering while adopting their daughter so this aint a shocking opinion to meee

'but snap hank was in dark phoenix too' ok he didnt piss me off in X3 !!!!! moving on !!!!!!!!

[a-blip-of-billdip]

this isnt what i usually post on this blog but I'm already sick of all the memes and 'jokes'. I am almost certainly leaving the fandom for good now because of the book of bills release and NO it is not because billford's community has an influx of supporters.

So the worship and romanticization of asylums and other abusive practices for mental health have been steadily gaining traction in recent years, especially with the rise of tiktok's toxicity.

SO many people, especially younger people, regularly talk about how they want lobotomies or how women they don't like should be lobotomized. They get tattoos of lobotomy like it's some quirky fun thing and not one of the most horrific tortures someone can endure.

These same people, ESPECIALLY leftists, will look at anyone they disagree with or don't like and say "get institutionalized, loser" or "et therapy" and it's always in a mocking way. it's always in a policing way.

because these people know that mental wards strip everyone of their freedom and their bodily autonomy. they know these places arent for healing--theyre for silencing.

So the amount of people i see treating bill being institutionalized like a good thing---even the writers and alex himself?

Yeah. Im out ✌🏼

[sonknuxadow]

i fear i used up all my powers to influence the outcome of sonic channel polls in the sonicsweep incident of 2023 . which was worth it because the art that came out of that was really cute . but also . im so sorry maria i have failed you . you deserve to win this poll so much more than sonic . well actually maria isnt really my first choice here either because the other choices have even less art than her but she still would have been a better outcome than sonic

[aeolianblues]

I'm not an extrovert. At all. In everyday life, I'm a yapper, sure, but I need someone to first assure me I am okay to yap, so I don't start conversations, even when I really want to join in sometimes! It's just the social anxiety acting up. God knows where from and why I lose a lot of my inhibitions when it comes to talking to people about music. I don't know where the confidence has suddenly sprung from. I've made a crazy amount of friends in musical circles, either just talking to people about common music or (since it is after all in music circles) talking to bands about their own music. I let out a sigh of relief any time an interaction goes well, because in truth it's going against my every instinct. I wish I could do that in everyday life

[smile-files]

i continue to find ii3 baffling. why did they make it (this isn't to hate on the season, i'm genuinely curious)

[mbirnsings-71]

Hello Tumblr, all I can offer is the idea of favorite duos dancing with each other okay that is all