#which is fine bc that's not really what I read it for. but I am a dragon enjoyer so I do kinda wish they did more

[lesbiancolumbo]

So I did not like The Substance but people seem to be so determined to be dumb about it. Elizabeth is young and old, but the young self wants more time to be young, which has adverse effects on the older self, and eventually the obsession over youth and the reality of old age merge into something grotesque which cannot be hidden anymore. It's very obviously a parable about the beauty industry and how one person's life -here side by side to create narrative and done through horror conventions- can be destroyed by trying to stall time. Listened to a podcast about it where the first thing the two hosts ask is Where they really the same person? and talk for the first few minutes about how unclear it is wether they're the same or not. Then later one of them says she might be giving the film a generous reading.

thank you for being perhaps the first normal person in my inbox about this. i've never at any time stated that people have to like the substance (like, it's fine!). it's that the most vocal haters of it are seemingly going out of their way to deliberately misunderstand/be obtuse/be fucking stupid about it is what's compelling me to call out the double standards/bullshit, not that a minority of people aren't liking it. i honestly expected more people to find it polarizing! it's VERY polarizing. but it's NOT, at any point, hard to understand. one critic who i really do respect (or i did anyway lol) as a writer literally said that bc this film 'felt' surface level to her she was going to approach the analysis from a surface level also. and then proceeded to be like these are clearly two different people. girl you FAILED step one. anyway i would have turned that podcast off within minutes lol. but i also am the first person to just turn off a podcast the minute the analysis goes to a place that i find fucking idiotic, which is why i do NOT listen to many movie podcasts!

lollllllll, get his ass!!!!!!!

as someone who is already dreading having to deal with the one film podcast that i do listen to having to jerk off megaflop and "idk it just felt off to me! somehow!" handwave the substance in their end of the year coverage i am tired.

imagine watching the substance and then discussing/critiquing the substance and saying with your open fucking mouth "beauty is what we can control" congrats you failed step one. go directly to movie jail. do not pass go. do not collect $200.

[francy-sketches]

made a pie chart of asoiaf dragon colors bc I was curious about it ^_^ my verdict is asoiaf is severely lacking in cool dragon designs why's there so much grey/brown/green I need more prettygirls. (I based this off of the books/grrm's descriptions, so vhagar is counted as bronze and vermax is undescribed even tho they're green in hotd. also quicksilver is technically undescribed but I counted her as silver bc of the name)

also heres a version not counting the undescribed ones

[alxclaremont]

had an absolute shit day at work, got off of work, remembered lando and oscar’s beef, almost started crying, went on twitter, saw that they ate mcdonalds and played monopoly on the plane back to monaco, almost started crying again, no longer feel like shit thank you and goodnight

[fruitsyrups]

ca n we all agree that human bonnie would not be a baker btw

[mermaidsirennikita]

People are ridiculously entitled and it’s genuinely so disheartening. Books are someone’s ART. You don’t just get to alter a name in someone else’s creative work. (I’m appalled people out there think this is remotely acceptable - writers are not court jesters nor do they exist to please everyone - no human being nor their creative work does, in fact!) Thanks for putting your various responses out there! Here’s hoping people learn to respect and appreciate artists and creators once again

Quoth Nora Roberts:

I am not here to be a slave to certain reader’s wants, needs, whims. Again, I write what I write, and these are MY characters, in my books. Not yours. They are yours to enjoy or not, but they belong to me, they come from me...

You don’t have to agree, but I’m not writing for your particular point of view. Again, I’ve explained my reasons for this. I won’t do so again. My characters, my books, my decision. If you want something else, read something else.

And yes, I said that, too. Blast away, it changes nothing. I am not obliged to meet an individual’s demands.

So.

First off:

If you're really super chill about the idea of being able to change what writers write just because you didn't like a detail you think is small and irrelevant, I would sincerely encourage you to read La Nora's full thoughts on similar issues... and yeah, I'm gonna equate something as "small" as a name with what Nora's talking about here. Because it is ALL the author's domain. I've never personally subscribed to the idea that a work "isn't yours anymore" once it's out in the world. The way people interpret and interact with it isn't yours, sure. But it's still your creation, and you should be the only person with control over the content.

... and sometimes, I, as a reader, don't like what authors do with their content. I get it. I don't like that Lisa Kleypas edited her work years after publishing it, because I'm big on the "own what you wrote originally even if it's uncomfy" train... (for the most part--editing the fetishization of Cam and Kev would've made sense to me). And I don't think there's anything wrong with readers pointing out problematic shit in a writer's work, offering critique in an open forum, as Smart Bitches, Trashy books did when reading Hello, Stranger, which I speculate may have prompted some of Lisa's edits.

But! I can't say that it would ever be my right as a reader to, say, use future technology to tell my reading device "edit out the times Cam says shit that reads super fetishized". It's just kind of repellent to me to imagine rewriting someone's work in any way without their permission. Fuck, I don't even like the idea of estates releasing sequels or revised versions of books unless the author indicated that such was in their wishes in their will. (See: the TWO official Gone with the Wind sequels/prequels/whatever authorized by Margaret Mitchell's estate.)

We, as readers, have our lanes. The writers have theirs. And sometimes, as writers, they do tiny things or BIG things in their lanes that we dislike. (I love Tiffany Reisz's Original Sinners series, for the most part. I really, REALLY hate the most recent book in the series. HATE. IT. But the only thing I can do about that shit is just pretend that book never happened, which I actually can fairly efficiently because I do in fact control what my brain does. Or, seek out books that give me what that series didn't with that most recent book. Sierra Simone's do a bangin' job.) But you know... Not only do I not think it is safe for me to merge into their lane... I don't want writers to feel like they have to submit to demand and give away pieces of their work in order to keep selling.

(And honestly? For the vast majority, I don't think it would make enough of a difference anyway--writers are often sold bills of goods with new strategies or tech. "This will change the way you sell books". Most writers won't ever be able to write full time anyway, and I find the way that this fantasy that you'll be able to do otherwise with THIS TECH optimizing your writing time, or THIS SUBSCRIPTION increasing the eyeballs that will see your book... Scammy. Not all of it's bad! But the selling strategy that you'll make more money... If you're selling on KU, if five extra people buy your book you're still making pennies, so it's gotta be more than one thing that converges to create the sale, and a lot of that, I gotta say, is word of mouth and people just LIKING YOUR SHIT. And I'd argue that they're more likely to like your shit if you're invested as a writer.)

Second:

No need to thank me! I honestly think that the majority of readers do appreciate what writers do (or don't feel either way about it and just read like people have always read lol) but I don't know. I can't really tell what it is--the sort of "fandom" that's been created around books (and like, author fan clubs and such have always existed, but obviously the accessibility is so different), new tech developing very rapidly when for centuries books were relatively stagnant technologically speaking, the fanficification of EVERY type of media it feels like... But the sense of entitlement that certain readers feel does seem to have grown. Or maybe it's simply become more visible. I mean, Nora Roberts has from the dawn of her writing career taken off had fans that can communicate with her, and I'm sure many have written letters like "Go give these characters a baby :(".

My biggest thing is always going to be this: some books ain't gonna be for you. There are books that sound so Caroline. I read them, and for whatever reason--writing style, one character choice, something ephemeral I can't name--they aren't. Everyone else loves these books. I'd love to love these books. I'd love to discuss these books. I'm not in the party. And that's FINE. Not every party is going to be a party I'm down for! One of my best friends loooooves Tessa Bailey and Tessa-like contemporaries. Tessa, by and large, doesn't work for me. So my friend and I can't discuss a lot of books in depth. Do I wish historicals worked for her so that I could nerd out with her? Sure! But I can't make something that doesn't work for her work for her, and I can't make Tessa's books work for me.

And I know that people will be like "it's just a name bitch", but... it's a slippery slope to me, just like ALL of AI and AI-related tech has been a slippery slope. Like, y'all said AI wasn't gonna be a big deal and would just make things easier, and people are now selling AI-written books under their names. Everyone said that authors would have control over how AI interacted with their books, and books are being scraped for AI on the daily.

I do not want anyone to have final control over what is and isn't in a book but the person who wrote the book. I do not want writers to feel like they need to cede any amount of control over the copy in that book over to readers in order to succeed.

And I honestly think it would be a lot healthier for everyone involved if we as readers (viewers, general audiences) just accepted that we don't get everything we want, and creatives are not here to dance to our tune. They are people, and they want to tell the stories they want to tell. Your power? Is in your dollar. If you don't like that shit, don't buy it. If you don't want to support it... don't! Fuck, if you want to talk shit on the internet about how the most recent book in the series was absolutely not for you, that's your right, too.

I don't want you fucking with a single word on the page, though. Feel free to go write your own shit--prosper! But that part of what Nora said that rings true to me most is "they come from me". These books come from writers. You have them because of those writers. So, I don't know, dude. Just take what's there, and if you dislike it, spit it out and move on to the thing you will like. Authors aren't churn factories to produce what you want, and ROMANCE as a genre, however commercial it is and however much it does have that One Rule that defines it as a genre... Is still something that writers should be allowed to experiment with. That's the work writers put in. The work readers put in? Finding shit that works for us. And I'm telling you... With a little practice, it ain't hard. How do y'all think I have all these books to recommend? Lmao

[imabiscuitinthousandworlds]

One of the many, many reasons I love Blade Runner is that it doesn't have this Big Epic Final Fight you've come to expect from literally any action film ever.

There's just Deckart and Roy - all others are dead, or not here - and it's just them and one was supposed to kill the other and has become the hunted.

Our main hero protagonist is at the end, he's beaten down, he's at the brink of death, he can barely still walk and is just fleeing as far as he can, as long as he can, and he won't be able to go on much longer and there's really only so far he can run before he's inevitably caught. There's no last minute saviour, no sudden burst of strength, no last attempt to fight. He's terrified. He's running, limping, for just a few seconds more.

And the antagonist - the one who was supposed to be killed, the one who was supposed to be sub-human and is living his life as a slave, in fear - he's going mad. He barely ever had anything, and he lost the few others he had - the only ones who understood when the world was against them. He has only minutes to live, minutes that not even his creator - his god, almost - could drag out, a human god who died by his bare hands. There's nothing left to lose and nothing left to do, but there's the person who hunted him down like a machine or an animal that's one rogue, the one supposed to kill him, entirely at his mercy.

And then they're on that roof, and I don't know what Roy might think, but I know Deckart was done with his life. I know he was convinced he'd die right here - that both of them would die on this roof in the rain.

And when Roy pulls him up? There has to be an explanation. Surely he'll kill him now. What else could he possibly want?

But Roy isn't out for revenge anymore. For as little as he's lived, he's seen so incredibly much. And he knows there isn't anything to be done. He'll die, he'll be forgotten, just another rogue replicant - like moments in time, like tears in rain.

"Time to die." No sadness, no anger, nothing. There's nothing more to it, not anymore. It's a fact.

It's when he's free for the first time.

He's no longer living in fear. He died on his own terms. He's as free as he could ever be, in the only way that was ever even a possibility. And as he dies, as he no longer lives as a slave, that white dove flies away through the rain - a symbol of freedom, finally let go.

And Deckart is left alone on that roof, bleeding, his hand broken, exhausted, still not quite away from the brink of death he's been limping along for the last, what, minutes? (How long was it? Can't have been long. But it sure felt endless.)

There's no winner. No one has been defeated, either. There's just one who died, as he was always meant to, and one who lived, but his world might be in shambles.

What is life worth when you're just waiting for death? Is it freedom when you can never settle down? Could there ever be a different ending?

Also I'm going absolutely insane over the white dove which is a symbol for freedom btw like DAMN!!!!!!! IMPLICATIONS!!! AHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

[sapphicautistic]

My gf was listening to "White Blank Page" by Mumford and Sons and I once again told her that song is SO much better if it's gay.

She doesn't listen to the lyrics of songs but she's extremely good at literary analysis and this time she actually looked up the lyrics and has now come to the following conclusion: "It makes no sense if it's not gay."

My (objectively best) reading is this:

The narrator was in love with a guy who strung him along, never willing to be in a committed (or public) relationship with him and maybe insisting that it's extremely heterosexual "helping a bro out" sex, except in more intimate moments. Finally out of nowhere guy is suddenly committed to a woman and when Narrator confronted him, guy spat out homophobic vitriol and claimed he's not gay like the Narrator.

(For extra flavor imagine them as closeted, straight passing Midwestern flannel wearing, love-bonfires-and-camping guys who sat next to each other at church and elbowed and annoyed each other like best friends do and were each other's go-to source of emotional support! And then to suddenly shut Narrator out for the first time ever, by abruptly marrying a woman and insisting that he's always been straight and their relationship meant nothing...)

Here are the lyrics:

Can you lie next to her And give her your heart, your heart As well as your body? And can you lie next to her And confess your love, your love As well as your folly? And can you kneel before the king And say, "I'm clean! I'm clean!" ? But tell me now, where was my fault In loving you with my whole heart? Oh, tell me now, where was my fault In loving you with my whole heart? A white blank page and a swelling rage, rage You did not think When you sent me to the brink, to the brink You desired my attention But denied my affections, my affections So tell me now, where was my fault In loving you with my whole heart? Oh, tell me now, where was my fault In loving you with my whole heart? Lead me to the truth and I Will follow you with my whole life Oh, lead me to the truth and I Will follow you with my whole life

Why call multiple people "you" in a totally unclear way? Why would you claim that your female ex's new man can't love her AT ALL (not just as much as you did, AT ALL)? And invoking the judgment of God is so fucking tedious if you're just shaming your female ex for moving on or even cheating/getting with your friend. Also you look like a creepy asshole if you think a girl broke up with you for "loving her too much".

This song is tepid, badly written, and makes the narrator look like an asshole if it's NOT gay.

The gay reading is the ONLY compelling one.

[kevin-sedai]

The vibe really deteriorated as the day went on, and now I'm sitting in bed, awake, feeling like garbage

[2024skin]

I'll be fine as long as I never have a moment alone to think about anything

[sereniv]

going to take an internet break just for a few days, ive been wanting to anyway because i get too distracted from my phone especially tumblr and instagram.

i got so many messages on that post, and im learning quite a bit which im thankful for, and im going through answering people but it is overwhelming, theres so many split threats and messages its hard to keep track

i definitely recognize how my post came off, regardless of my intent, and thank you for everyone being patient but i also am not mad at people who arent.

I think after a few days ill be able to read more. bc rn anything longer than a paragraph turns to soup

[undermostcorgi]

the media which consumes your entire soul at age 12 will forever be a part of you. this is an unavoidable consequence of living and you have to accept this fact. no matter how old you get, no matter how long it has been since you last saw its smug face peeking out from the bushes as it follows you, no matter if you think you have outrun it for good and that you're finally finally safe and you hardly even remember it exists anymore and your brain knows a few brief moments of true peace, it WILL catch up to you in your moment of weakness. and listen you don't want to hear this but sometimes this is necessary for your mental health. you will on instinct want to reject it and run away again but sometimes. sometimes you just need to watch that old show or listen to that silly song or read that weird book again as an adult and it will hurt you a little bit in various little ways but it will also heal you a little bit. you can call it nostalgia you can call it connecting with your inner child or whatever you want but just listen to me it WILL HAPPEN TO YOU TOO AT SOME POINT AND YOU HAVE TO BE PREPARED FOR THIS (i am forcibly dragged off the stage by security)

[coquelicoq]

I just want you to know that I so deeply cherish all your untamed and murderbot (and raksura) thoughts that I started reading ORV just so I can get MORE of your fandom thoughts. I wanna be able to understand your new posts!!

this is so sweet 😭 thank you i'm flattered!! there are some really fabulous posts in this fandom, so i'm excited for you to experience them! my own posts are fairly shallow because i haven't done a reread and the story is so long i already can't remember most of it haha, but the fandom seems pretty active on here so it's gonna be a while before i run out of other people's fanart and meta to reblog. standard disclaimer that you read orv at your own risk and i will not be held responsible for any feelings you may or may not experience in the course thereof. godspeed <3

[mashkaroom]

everyone please clap, i just sent a really civil email instead of what i wanted to say which was YOU STUPID FUCK DO YOU FUCKING READ INSTRUCTIONS?????? DID YOU READ THE FUCKING PAPER WE’RE SUPPOSED TO BE PRESENTING ON??????? WHY DID YOU WANT TO MEET AT 9:30 PM ON THE DAY THE PRESENTATION WAS DUE AND THEN DID ZERO FUCKING WORK UP UNTIL THAT MOMENT?????? WHY THE FUCK DID I DO 90% OF THE WORK WITH THE HOPE THAT YOU WOULD DO THE MUCH LESS MENTALLY TAXING REMAINING 10% OF WHICH HALF IS FULLY OPTIONAL AND THEN I HAD TO FUCKING BABYSIT YOU THE WHOLE TIME YOU DID IT??? LITERALLY MOST OF WHAT YOU HAD TO DO WAS COPY PASTE TEXT FROM A GOOGLE DOC INTO SLIDES HOW DID YOU MISS HALF OF THE FUCKING GOOGLE DOC????? YES WE HAVE TO HAVE THAT, BECAUSE THAT ACCOUNTS FOR HALF OF THE FUCKING ARTICLE!!!!!! DID YOU READ! THE! FUCKING! PAPER! I SPECIFICALLY WANTED TO HAVE THE LAST HOURS OF THE EVENING OFF TO DO OTHER THINGS BUT I STILL HAD TO BABYSIT YOUR STUPID FUCKING ASS!!!!!!!! ALSO DID YOU GENUINELY JUST ADD ‘WE SHOULD GIVE TAX CUTS TO BUSINESSES SO THEY WILL CREATE HOUSING FROM THE GOODNESS OF THEIR HEARTS’ TO THE SLIDES?????? I WILL ENJOY SEEING YOU FILETED TOMORROW!!!!!! BRO YOU HAVE TO EITHER BE SMART OR BE PRODUCTIVE YOU CAN’T DO 5% OF THE WORK AND THEN THAT WORK IS FUCKING SHIT!!!!! IT LITERALLY WOULD HAVE TAKEN ME LESS TIME TO DO IT WITHOUT YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!

[pepprs]

i wish i’d kept pushing the point (<- vagueposting). im so tired i’m hitting a wall. but why is the answer to feeling bottomlessly lonely just to love myself and be loved by myself? isn’t that only more loneliness?

[opens-up-4-nobody]

...

[sternbilder]

ok so today I had one of the most fascinating and enlightening discussions maybe of my life and I need to share bc it blew my MIND (warning: long)

here's the context. there is a friend I have. they are a pretty good friend of mine that I've known for many years now and I appreciate them as a person very much. lately I have noticed that they've been texting me fairly frequently. which, from my point of view, is once every couple of days. not because they had something specific to say, but just saying hello or asking how my day was.

I'm sure this was well-intentioned, but this was starting to get a tiny bit grating for me. we just met up in person literally two days ago! and you had texted me not long before that, too! nothing new has happened since then! my day has been quite boring, actually! I thought, in my mind, as I swiped away the notification—and immediately felt like an awful friend.

I knew from past experience that responding to the message would invite an immediate and not easily escapable conversation that, due to my poor multitasking skills, would distract me from work or require me to context switch away from whatever else it was I was doing at the moment—cooking, doing chores, watching TV—and worse, amount to little more than idle chit-chat about the same boring quotidian complaints as usual. I am not one of those people who thinks they're above small talk or don't see its social value, but I found myself thinking, am I the one who is being not normal here in not enjoying having this specific kind of interaction MULTIPLE times a week with the SAME person?

so recently, I've been finding myself routinely avoiding opening this particular friend's messages for fear of hurting their feelings if they saw that I had left them on read for a prolonged period of time. I had even gone so far as to avoid posting in a group chat in which we're both participants so that they don't realize that I have, in fact, been online, just not responding to them, specifically. my hope was that after enough slow responses, this friend would eventually get the hint and give up on trying to maintain a steady steam of conversation, but somehow this has not worked so far.

this was starting to weigh on my conscience. I realized that I will have to eventually fight my conflict-avoidant tendencies and just confront this friend directly, for the sake of both my sanity and our friendship. but how to do this gently? tactfully? without implying that I don't value their friendship or that I perceive them as needy or annoying? that was the tricky question. because I know that my friend isn't doing anything wrong! if anything it is probably me that is weird and antisocial and I probably just need to work on my social skills!

but not wanting to feel like a total asshole and hoping to go in with an informed and reasonable mindset (knowing full well that my understanding of social norms isn't always the keenest), I asked a different group chat for their opinion, hoping to gain some perspective on what boundaries they generally considered normal and acceptable to exercise. I phrased my question thusly:

how many friends* would you say you have where you text on a regular basis (say, multiple times a week) 1:1 just to say hi, about nothing in particular *explicitly a friend, not a family member or SO

y'all. the responses were eye-opening.

there were four people who participated in this discussion, all four of whom were in different camps and had wildly different experiences:

0, and assumed most others were the same

0, but assumed most others were not the same

multiple, and assumed most others were the same

multiple, but assumed most others were not the same

1 was me; in retrospect, I am realizing that because I had assumed that these kinds of interactions were not typical, I had interpreted my friend's gesture as something much more significant than it probably was in their mind, which is to say something that they just happen to do with everyone they know and like—which created a sort of pressure in my mind not to let them down and caused a sense of intense anxiety when I found myself struggling to reciprocate. I am absolutely floored at the revelation that it is apparently normal and common for people to have MULTIPLE friends (not even partners!!! or family!!!) that they are talking to on a constant ongoing basis at any given time, and at the possibility that I was treating my friend's feelings with kid gloves when it REALLY wasn't that hashtag deep for them.

2 clarified that they never initiate these kinds of chats, but when others initiate with them, they're fairly comfortable with simply letting these kinds of pings go unanswered, assuming the other person will just move on to someone else without taking it personally.

3 confessed to me that they once tried to do something similar with me, and eventually gave up, but had felt a bit hurt and rejected at my lack of enthusiasm, because they assumed that I was doing this with other people, just not them specifically. they sympathized very strongly with my friend.

4 also recalled that they had at one point tried something similar with me, but sort of got that I wasn't one of those people who would be receptive to this style of communication and wasn't particularly bothered by this, agreeing with 2 that the expectation is not that the recipient HAS to respond, and that my friend should probably pay closer attention to the face-saving social cues I was sending by not responding or responding slowly.

but yeah, the takeaway from this conversation is that people's preferences and experiences and expectations when it comes to digital communication are WILDLY varied, and because both communication technology and the social conventions surrounding them are changing CONSTANTLY (just a few examples: are read receipts good or bad? what about typing indicators? online status? are emoji reacts or gifs/stickers an acceptable substitute for an actual reply? group chats vs. 1:1 DMs? synchronicity and formality of various communication methods like email and chat and video? are phone calls are still socially acceptable?) there are either no agreed-on norms or different camps of people have vastly different understandings of what the norms are

among the other highlights/a-ha moments of this discussion:

Friend 4 asked another friend who is even MORE extraverted than they are what their # was and they reported somewhere in the ballpark of 20-40 people in any given week which is absolutely buckwild to me (importantly, all four of us in the original group happen to be software engineers, a class of people notorious for their lack of sociability, so I have no confidence that I have captured a representative sample size even within this particular group—the numbers both 3 and 4 gave were still both in the single digits, though they are definitely the warmest and friendliest of the bunch)

I realized that one difference between me and 3/4 was that we fulfill our social needs quite differently? specifically, I mostly connect with friends over group chats, of which I have a handful that are quite chatty and at least one or two that I'm actively posting in on any given day. I also typically have at least one, often multiple, real-life social plans every week! I am, in fact, very satisfied with my social life, to the point where it is almost maxing out my social quota (especially recently now that I've started dating someone)! but anyway—I find group chats to be my ideal form of day-to-day communication because there's less urgency and pressure for any individual person to contribute if they're not feeling up for it, and ALSO in the case of group chats where at least one member is a straight man (which is the majority of them for me, and I call out straight men only because they are the only demographic I have historically had this issue with) there is less room for platonic interactions to be undesirably misinterpreted as romantic

3/4 expressed that they prefer 1:1 conversations because they feel more personal and they can be more vulnerable about sensitive topics, which I would generally agree with—though in several of my group chats, I personally do feel comfortable enough with all the members to share things about myself with the entire group just by virtue of having known everyone for a long time and having built group camaraderie, but they seemed to not be comfortable with this without having previously established a consistent 1:1 pattern of day-to-day communication (or maybe they meant they were uncomfortable with the group forum itself, even if they were cool with sharing with everyone individually)?

they also expressed that for them, frequent unsolicited checkins and 1:1 attention from a friend would feel exciting/flattering/validating for them, whereas for me it would feel overwhelming, especially if we weren't THAT close

I do use 1:1 DMs also, but for a very different set of use cases: 1) if I haven't caught up with someone in a while (read: weeks or months), in which case we'll often just not text super long and make plans to call or meet in person instead, or 2) if I have something specific to say, like "here's this meme/song/piece of news I think you'd like to see" or "I need advice on X" or "guess what happened that made me think of you" or "I heard X happened, are you OK?"

I found that whereas I have a very clear distinction between communication preferences with a friend (someone I talk to on a regular basis but don't have a constant line of individual communication with) vs. a significant other (more or less willing to do this, unless they preferred not to), such a boundary between a platonic and romantic relationship does NOT exist for all people which boggled my mind

but yes anyway. I am learning so much about the way people view socializing in the digital age and I am so curious to know more and I kind of wish more people talked about this more openly (specifically among friends! because in my experience this is something that is fairly common to sort out explicitly in a romantic context) because I think this is probably the kind of thing that no one talks about because people are either afraid of potentially hurting feelings or everyone is just kind of assuming by default that their takes are universal without realizing that no actually, many people have strong opinions on this that are the polar opposite of theirs

but my gut feeling is that there is a lot of completely unnecessary friction that could just be resolved if only we could agree that it's cool to be more upfront about what our communication preferences are without worrying about that being taken extremely personally by the other party? bc idk, every single person I talked to about this today was like holy shit this was a whole fucking revelation actually, I can't believe I hadn't thought about this before thank you for bringing this up