#I think I need a specific tag for these posts

[carriesthewind]

WOW.

Okay, after a night's sleep, I have decided that yeah, there is value in responding to this absolutely steaming pile of ignorant, self-centered, self-important, anti-intellectual, b.s.

It looks like a number of people in the notes were swayed, at least to some degree, by this garbage, so I think it is worth trying to show why it is nonsense.

(Also it's possible I'm still spoiling for a fight after being denied an evidentiary hearing on Friday.)

I'm not reblogging the post because folks don't need a self-aggrandizing tantrum on their dash, but I do think it is worth taking a look for yourself, in order to practice your analytical skills. Some questions to consider as you read:

(1) What is OP saying in her original post? What claims is she making?

(2) How, if at all, does the poster respond to claims OP made? What claims is the poster saying that OP made? Do these match what OP actually said? If not, (a) what techniques does the poster use to transform what OP said into the claims the poster is claiming OP made? (b) What rhetorical purpose does it serve for the poster to warp OP's claims?

(3) What affirmative claims is the poster making? What evidence or arguments do they provide to support their claims? Do they explore any of the specifics or real world implications of their claims? If not, what real world implications of their claims can you think of?

(3) What other rhetorical techniques does the poster use to bolster their argument? Do these techniques actually enhance and support the substance of their argument?

(4) Relatedly, how does the poster play into the biases of their assumed audience (tumblr users with generally progressive policies). What claims do they make to play into those biases? What evidence or argument, if any, do they make to support those claims? Are these claims by the poster reasonably related to the claims made by OP?

Now, let's explore their response in detail!

(Also obviously don't harass the poster, and I would recommend not directly engaging with them at all. Harassment is vile and makes you far worse than them. And earnest engagement is unlikely to be productive - the OP tried to engage with them politely (and even offered to help) in the notes of poster's original post. In response, the poster (1) implied that OP is an obsessive rude busybody. (2) Told OP to "Shhhhh. Chill." (in response to (paraphrased), 'hey, the advice someone else gave you is probably a waste of time and effort'). (3) And finally, after condescendingly telling OP, "Breathe. Practice radical acceptance. Know that I am here on the other side of the internet, flagrantly wasting my effort and thinking of you every second of that time," proceeded to prove that they were, in fact, "thinking of [OP] every second of that time" by searching OP's blog to find this post by OP and dumping this Arrested-Development-level demand to be taken seriously in the reblogs.)

(All of which is to say: hi, poster who was "being vagueposted about." I assume you are reading this, because you demonstrably don't have the good sense to block and move on. I'm not going to block you in advance, because I think you have the right to make your own terrible decisions, and I suspect any response you make is going to be *very* funny. See you in the notes!)

So, let's go through the poster's response, paragraph by paragraph.

They begin by doubling down on the stance that, "any sufficiently deep enthusiasm is indistinguishable from academic rigor." This, they say, is their defense of that stance. Let's see how it goes - but first, I think it's worth remembering, OP's original post is literally a single sentence long.

OP's claim, paraphrased, that the claim that "any sufficiently deep enthusiasm is indistinguishable from academic rigor" is incorrect and anti-intellectual. If we read the OP's tags, she clarifies that enthusiasm is valuable, but different from expertise.

The poster starts their defense with a long...explanation that the structure of their claim was a reference to the Arthur C Clarke's third "law" (read: sci-fi fiction adage).

*deep breath*

Ok. I'm a big a fan of wordplay as the next person. And I know from personal experience that it can be really frustrating to do some fun wordplay to make a point, and then get misinterpreted here on tumblr.com.

But. The wordplay has to make a point for it to be relevant to your defense. OP's claim wasn't "this poster did a bad job with the linguistic structure of this sentence and is not familiar with classic sci-fi." How does the "rhetorical structure" of the poster's claim support the substance of their claim???

It doesn't, is the answer. The poster explicitly asks this question later down, but then they never actually answer it. Instead, the rhetorical effect of this whole digression is just to throw out surface level references to things (Arthur C Clarke! "AI"!) that might make the poster sound more thoughtful and knowledgeable. It also creates distance from OP's actual point - as the post continues, the poster has to remind us what they're talking about. This gives the poster more control over the narrative, over what claims are under discussion.

Which leads to the poster's next paragraph: the unanswered question of why the poster structured their claim to resemble a sci-fi author's famous quote, and a baseless attack on OP.

And I think it is worth really lingering on this attack on OP. The poster claims, OP perhaps is "misreading or misinterpreting" the poster's point. But what on earth is the poster talking about? OP literally just quoted the poster's exact words and then said that they think this is anti-intellectual. What "misreading or misinterpreting" is being done?

No. Instead, this attack rhetorically sets up the poster's next couple paragraphs: not actually defending their claim as OP originally quoted, but reinterpreting their own words, providing their own special unique meaning that they will then proceed to use for the rest of the post. They are redrawing the rhetorical bounds of the conversation. Rather than defending their stance, they are redefining their stance so that it matches the defense they now want to make.

(Which is still bad. It's a bad defense and it makes me very angry.)

The poster proceeds to define "academic rigor" in a way that just means, "enthusiasm." Notice how no part of their definition includes things like critical thinking skills, building up a knowledge base, testing ideas, receiving criticism (wow I wonder why), or any expertise or action to build up and test that expertise. It's just what a person "cares very much about," how much "curiosity" they have; some inherent quality someone who "NEEDS to know." (Also hit the bell for another surface level reference - this time to Herodotus - to make the poster sound more knowledgeable.) If you actually read the poster's definition, it is entirely "idk vibes i guess."

Now, having defined "academic rigor" as enthusiasm, they successfully declare that enthusiasm is a necessary precondition of enthusiasm.

And then, we get the best paragraph of this entire tantrum of a post: "Any sufficiently deep enthusiasm is indistinguishable from academic rigor. It's like a fractal -- the closer you look, the more complicated it gets." No only is this another attempted surface level reference, this time to fractals, but just. What is this supposed to mean. At a glance, it seems like it kind of follows from the last paragraph - maybe, the more an enthusiast looks at something, the more there is to know? But the closer you look at this sentence, the more nonsensical it gets. What does things getting more complicated the more you look at them have to do with academic rigor (either a real definition or the poster's enthusiasm-based definition)? More importantly, what does it have to do with proving the point - that enthusiasm is indistinguishable from academic rigor? (You might as well say, "the further you fall down the rabbit hole, the deeper you realize it goes," except then more people would realize you are expressing straight conspiracist reasoning oops.)

Now, several paragraphs in and having firmly taken control of the rhetorical boundaries of the argument, the poster finally decides to provide some context to the original statement (and needlessly insult OP for trying to be helpful again).

The poster correctly quotes relevant parts of the discussion (although mischaracterizes their own responses as "polite" instead of "incredibly condescending and rude"). However, the poster then immediately characterizes OP's response as "muddied." Because words have objective meanings, however, we do not need to accept this characterization. OP expressed her argument very clearly. Rather, it is the the poster who claimed that OP was making an argument that she was not, which we can paraphrase as, 'passion and capacity for learning are limited to formal education at academic institutions.' It would be convenient for the poster if OP was making this argument, because it could be easy to argue against. But since OP clearly stated that she does not believe this clearly incorrect thing that the poster made up in her head, the poster claims that her response was "muddied."

The poster emphasizes this false claim in the next few paragraphs. They say, "to me she seems to be arguing that one MUST (?) receive formal training at an academic institution ("academic training" "trained expertise") in order to achieve that level of rigor." But OP simply doesn't say that. You can look at the reply the poster quoted, it doesn't say what the poster says it does.

Now, this is speculation on my part, but I think the poster really believes that OP is saying 'passion and capacity for learning are limited to formal education at academic institutions.' I think they believe this because its how they feel when they hear the (correct) statement that enthusiasm does not equal expertise. The poster repeatedly says that they think that enthusiasm for learning is the same as expertise. They throw a tantrum after receiving the slightest, politest, disagreement. They think someone giving them advice that hey, maybe its a good idea to get a basic foundation of knowledge before cold-emailing experts is a busybody who is obsessed with lecturing them. The poster simply, demonstrably, doesn't believe expertise is real, and refuses to admit that someone else might know more or better than them. If they "care very much about getting it right," how dare you say they aren't as good as anyone with "academic training," fuck you very much you elitist jerk.

This sense is emphasized by their next paragraph. First, they shift the rhetoric framework of the conversation again. The actual claim the poster says they are defending is that "any sufficiently Deep Enthusiasm is indistinguishable from Academic Rigor" (emphasis added). Now, they are claiming that OP means that no one outside of an academic context "has the capacity to learn what rigor means in their field." These are very different claims, but the poster shits between them seamlessly.

Second, they just completely misunderstand what academic rigor is. I'm sorry, you can read every book and article and (*sigh* dear god) TED talk in the world, that doesn't make you an expert, and that's not academic rigor. A large part of academic rigor is in how you critically engage with what you read. Otherwise you just end up, at best, with a bunch of shallow facts that you can "whip out at dinner parties to impress [your] acquaintances" or sprinkle as references in arguments on tumblr to make you sound smarter.

But no, the poster confirms in the next paragraph, you don't need critical thinking or training or people who will tell you that you are wrong. All you need is the information. And if you disagree, you are arguing in favor of "the ivory tower." (Take a drink.)

In the next two paragraphs, the poster pays lip service to the idea that sure, it's easier to learn in academia. But even then, they imply that somehow that's the easy route, that good learning environments create weak men, that people who are self-taught are the ones who are actually building up the critical thinking skills because someone doesn't just "tell them the answer."

Then, before the readers have a chance to absorb, wait, did you really just say that academia is really just having someone either tell you the answer or where to look for the answer and therefore unsuitable for "sincerely love to learn," (because you are, in fact, anti-intellectual), the poster then throws in a bunch of shallow buzz phrases about how higher education isn't available to a lot of people.

And I say these are just shallow buzz phrases for two reasons. First, the poster never actually engages with this lack of access. It's just sprinkled in, like the references to Arthur C Clarke and Herodotus. (For example, no, actually, "any sufficiently MOTIVATED person" can't actually access all this information that is online. You need a stable internet connection, devices to allow you to make use of that connection, to speak or read the language those materials are published in, enough time and sleep and food and goddam shelter.)

Second, this doesn't actually have anything to do with the actual claim that the poster is supposedly defending. Remember that? Remember the position the poster is arguing for? "Any sufficiently deep enthusiasm is indistinguishable from academic rigor." How does, "some people can't go to college" support that claim, specifically?

It doesn't, which is why the poster's next paragraph instead claims that OP is arguing that "those people do not have the ability to hold themselves to a rigorous standard of learning."

Which just.

Fuck you?

Because yeah, that would be a shitty opinion to hold! And you are the only person raising it! You are explicitly making the claim - fuck, perpetrating the anti-intellectual worldview - that anyone who suggests "caring about something does not inherently equal subject matter expertise" is an elitist who thinks that everyone else, ordinary people, real Americans, are stupid.

I'm gong to be honest, this is the part of the poster's claims that made me mad enough to respond.The notes include people agreeing that academics and "experts" are actually pretty elitist, aren't they, and they deserve to be "taken down a few pegs," that suggesting that you need a baseline level of knowledge or vocabulary before you can engage deeply with a subject is "gatekeeping."

The U.S.'s institutions are crumbling as they are dismantled by people that are making these exact same arguments. There is no meaningful difference in the reasoning of the poster's argument here, and the argument that "alternative medicine" hacks who never completed their medical training have sufficient credentials to run goverment agencies, and that if you bring up their lack of credentials, well, that just proves what an elitist you are.

The "worldview" the poster does not accept - is telling you not to accept - is the idea that expertise exists at all.

And because that is an incorrect and harmful worldview, the poster has to use a bunch of rhetorical tricks to hide what they are doing. And then to sell it, they throw in a bunch of words to stir up the audience's preconceptions and biases. OP's claim (again, that enthusiasm and academic rigor are not equivalent) is "racist and imperialist." Why? Don't worry about it. Something something college is expensive and inaccessible to a lot of people. All you need to remember is that these ivory-tower academics are The Bad Thing.

*deep breath*

Anyway, knowing we need a laugh to bring the mood back up, the poster then says someone on reddit criticizing your argument is an "informal version[] of the peer-review process." Besides betraying a deep ignorance of the nature of peer-review (I guess even knowing how academic processes work is also elitist?), I think this means that the poster has to be cool with my post here, right? Because I'm just doing peer review? (Because also, just to be clear: "the academic structure of the peer review is a formalized process of the very human impulse to gleefully tell other humans when they’ve stuck their foot in their mouth." No. This is just. No.)

Next, more misstating OP's original claim. The poster says, "An institution of formal learning is not a prerequisite to pursue and absorb information," which OP already agreed with in the comments of the poster's original post.

In support of this claim that no one is arguing with, the poster than makes up a "guy at the model airplane shop who seems to know absolutely everything that has ever been known about WWII planes," and asks, "why don’t we acknowledge him as a legitimate expert?" The poster implies that this is because this guy is autistic and OP is a bigot.

But the real answer is simpler:

Unless you are referring to something you chose not to link for some reason, he's made up. He's a made up guy in your brain. And OP never said anything about him, so it's really weird for you to criticize OP for not sufficiently praising him as an expert. Fanfic isn't reality.

To the extent we are talking about real phenomenons - who do you mean by "we" and what do you mean by "acknowledge him as a legitimate expert"? There are lots of people with legitimate expertise, and in my experience, they often are recognized as such. And I don't know where you live, but outside of revenge-fantasies of conservative pundits and the people who are mislead by them, most academic experts aren't exactly exhausted and prestige and praise.

'Knowing a lot about a subject' is not the same as academic rigor. This isn't a criticism or insult to people who know a lot of things, despite your weird, self-centered hang-ups. Let me be clear here, actually: I am not an academic. I am a lawyer. I know a lot about the law in the areas I practice in. I do not practice the law "with academic rigor" because that's not really meaningful. I also like to constantly learn more about the law, including in many areas I don't practice in. I am not an expert in those areas. Just as an academic who studies the law and legal practice would not necessarily be good at actually practicing the law, my enthusiasm does not mean I have academic expertise (and my academic training is rather rusty, this many years out). This is normal? My ego is not threatened by acknowledging different kinds of expertise and knowledge exist?

And perhaps most to the point - "seems to know absolutely everything that has ever been known about WWII planes." "Seems to." An important part of academia - part of what makes it rigorous, if you will - is that you actually have to prove your expertise to other experts. They are then "recognized" as experts because there is a process the public can usually trust that they don't just "seem to" know what they are talking about. If you are talking to an amateur enthusiast - how do you know you they actually have the expertise they claim to have? Because I know of some guys who are really enthusiastic about the, claim to be experts, and have a lot of strong opinions about how they have reclaimed their Sovereign Identity by not capitalizing the letters in their name.

I agree with the poster's final paragraph. I love learning. But I can't see this as anything other than a manipulative postscript, a rhetorical trick of ending on a point of agreement and mutual enthusiasm. By a person - and I can't emphasize this enough - who refused assistance in learning and threw an enormous tantrum because someone suggested hey, maybe its a good idea to get a basic foundation of knowledge before cold-emailing experts.

[obsessive-daydreamer]

You're a real one, honestly.

Thank you tanya

Alright, I want to tag everyone in the server. But I don't know everyone's tumblr tags, so that's not happening. Here's a few:

@roterstern Literally one of my best mates. We talk literally all the time, you make beautiful art and have made art specifically for me, which I ogle every day. I know we became friends because I wrote filthy Lore/Hugh smut for you, and it's the most important fic to me for that reason. I get excited every time the little online symbol pops up on discord, and I 100% overshare constantly with you. And you accept it every single time. I cherish our conversations, and every discussion that we have means the world to me, whether you think it was silly or not.

@tanyayoung-322 (who tagged me) ^ as I said at the very top. You're very lovely and are one of the people I met at the beginning. Somehow one of the most tolerant people (of me) that I know. Even though I'm a nasty British bitch

@hawkstar5 literally the number 1 supporter of the discord server, love you for that. Actually, was the first person i got to know on tumblr. We met through smutty roleplay. Another person I've met through smut - fancy that.

@xm0-m0x For being British and really funny. You also draw some banging art, which I realised today I forget to respond to half the time, but I can guarantee I do stare at it for ages. Heart emoji, heart emoji, boobies emoji.

@dawnkiller08 This one is a little out of the blue but I'm pretty sure we met on TikTok. I sometimes tag you in ask games because in my head you're a treasured mutual. (Hope the tagging doesn't annoy you 😭) You also drew Lore with cat ears (had to double check this because it was so long ago. Your account was very long and my hand hurts from scrolling right to the bottom, but I can confirm. The post is indeed there).

@drfuckerm-d ngl mate i really like you. And slag. I love the little video things you do with the sound overlays too. I've actually watched some of them on repeat bc im kind of addicted to your art style.

@dataentryspecialist BRO I ALMOST FORGOT YOU. If I remember correctly, you were the first person I ever dmed on tumblr? Or maybe it was the second...not sure. But I wanted to bookbind Electric Excavations and you gave me the big thumbs up and so far only one (of probably something ridiculous like 15) books has been bounf. 1.3 million words is INSANE. I currently have the second part stashed in a pillow waiting for when I return to bookbinding and can bind it. I'm making it my goal for 2027. Maybe 2028.

(Also means I need to redownload Electric Excavations and my computer is really going to hate me but ohh wellllll...)

I'm also tagging other people I'm friends with on the server but forgot the tumblr handles for ily <33

favirote moots?

(People you tag have to reblog and say their favorite moots)

Okay wait

@ibrokeurheartbcuzubrokemine @foliverfalls @allyeilishh @addisonraesbaby @emiliesblohsh @bilsslut @noodleswashere @bilsbabyy @bitchesbrokenpromises @billsdollie

[artshokad2]

The unthinkable happened right when i was going to join in wip Wednesday unprompted @twodiamondhoes tagged me in it

I was going to do something a little more recent but the day snuck up on me so have a really old snippet from a fic i may or may not finish that i wrote in a haze of finals stress while listening to “Sleeping in the Kitchen” by Madilyn Mei on loop

Jimmy Solidarity my beloved

Its a little out of my usual style because music possesses me in a way thats a little concerning sometimes but i had fun with it!

Tagging @gladumfdoodles who i know always has a snippet locked and loaded, @raffi-cat who should share their writing more in my humble opinion, @sincerely-nines because my favorite moot you should write fanfic… if you want…

and my friend ani whose tumblr @ is not working rn so im just going to send this to them but they should share their writing on tumblr!!! Its so fun!!

(No pressure to anyone, tis supposed to be for fun :D)

[olderthannetfic]

Hi OTNF! Anyone know how to add a fandom name that doesn't yet exist on ao3? (Specifically the film Madre, released in 2019 -- I'm trying to post a work and the film doesn't exist yet on my beloved archive.) I went through all the instructions and I know the info's there and it's a Bad Brain day for me, but I just can't find it. So I figured I'd ask here. Thank you!

--

You just type what you think the tag should be into the fandom field.

Anyone can create any tag at any time just by making an AO3 work that contains that new tag.

Later, tag wranglers will do something with the tag. Maybe.

In the case of fandom tags, they'll generally get made common/canonical after one use and usually pretty quickly. Common/canonical tags show up in autocomplete and in the index of fandoms if they're fandom tags.

(In the case of other types of tags, it may require more uses and/or the wranglers may not get around to them for a while, but fandom tags tend to be a high priority.)

You can't make the tag canonical yourself, and you don't need to contact AO3. Just post the work with your new tag.

[bedlamsbard]

I for one would LOVE to hear about That Man's opinion on the Sokovia Accords, and any other blends of the real world into marvelverse as you have time and space for

Donald Trump is the horrifying combination of anti-Accords, anti-Captain America, and anti-Iron Man. I have THOUGHTS on this.

Okay, so CACW takes place in 2016, yes? which was a horrifying enough election year IRL, but in the Marvel Cinematic Universe we're looking at a scenario where I have postulated that Matthew Ellis is the Democratic candidate. Ellis was elected in 2012 after Barack Obama dropped out of the 2012 race post-Battle of New York as a result of pressure from the World Security Council; my best estimate is that Ellis takes Joe Biden's place as Obama's vice president in the 2008 election (apologies to our Irish Catholic granddad, we can probably safely assume he's still a senator in this AU) and coasts to electoral victory on a wave of post-BONY patriotism. (see my hard-hitting investigative journalism on who was president during the Battle of New York. George W. Bush was president during the events of IM1, we can assume that all real world presidents prior to Ellis served as usual, a.k.a. FDR was president during CATFA, Bill Clinton was president during Captain Marvel and the BW prologue -- actually, we know Clinton was president, because we see him in the BW credits, same with a few others.)

For better or worse -- worse, as it turns out -- Ellis's administration becomes closely linked to Tony Stark and James Rhodes, since Tony and Rhodey very publicly save his life during the events of IM3 and are responsible for his VP (Rodriguez, no first name that I'm aware of) being arrested for treason and probably other nasty stuff. Four months after that, the events of CATWS go down, and while Ellis is quoted in Steve's Smithsonian exhibit with the "Welcome Back" wall bannerand thus they presumably met, Steve is not closely associated with Matthew Ellis in the same way that Tony Stark is. Steve is also closely associated with a major blow to the American intelligence apparatus, the deaths of most of the World Security Council, the destruction of SHIELD, the "death" of Nick Fury, the disgrace and death of Alexander Pierce, and the arrests of a number of major American politicians, including Senator Stern of Pennsylvania. We know from CATWS that Ellis himself was a target of Project Insight; I have also postulated that the Hydra reveal had a major effects on his administration, including either the arrest or the resignation of his original Secretary of State. Thaddeus Ross got the SecState position not because he was Ellis's original pick, but because post-CATWS (or possibly post-AoU), he was able to leverage his previous experience with the Hulk and other recipients of the super soldier serum to be politically useful.

Ellis has to be in favor of the Sokovia Accords because his SecState is running the show -- in theory the Accords will be administered by a UN panel, in actual practice, as we see in CACW and BW, the intent is for either the American SecState in general or Thaddeus Ross specifically to have sole control over the Avengers. Less than ideal by anyone's standards. Pre-Accords, no one knows how this is going to shake out.

Let's go back to how Donald Trump hates Steve Rogers, like, so much. The feeling is mutual. I'm pretty sure Trump personally knew, or at least met, Tony Stark pre-Iron Man, because they would have been in some of the same social circles: those personalities are going to clash. That's not going to go over well. Trump probably made overtures to Steve because CAPTAIN AMERICA! we love America! what's more great for America than the Greatest Generation! only uh. it's Steve. and Trump pre- (and post-) 2016 is everything Steve Rogers hates. sure, he's a great piece of American propaganda, but he grew up as a poor second generation immigrant son of a single mother with significant health issues during the Great Depression. that didn't go away when he got the serum and it certainly didn't go away when he got out of the ice! so Steve probably rebuffed the initial overtures politely, but he did rebuff them, and Trump, hmm, doesn't handle that sort of thing real well. so then a big part of That Man's campaign turned into the "fuck Captain America" tour with a side of "fuck the Avengers," playing heavily into the damage done during the events of Phase 1 and Phase 2.

Which Ellis's campaign was probably also doing, but more circumspectly because Matthew Ellis is an actual politician and he's politically linked to two of the ten Avengers (Tony and Rhodey); Tony's also the one with the most obvious "pull." Steve's got some but Steve doesn't actually want to use it.

So on the one hand, if Ellis is pro-Avengers and pro-Accords, but in a "they should be controlled but we need them" sort of way, then his main opponent is going to not be in favor of either. In 2016 Trump does want the Avengers controlled (so he can have personal pull over the two Avengers he hates the most, Tony and Steve; he's probably also not fond of many of the others! like, Natasha and Wanda are both women and immigrants...). But he doesn't want them controlled by a UN panel, he wants them controlled by the United States of America. You don't let THE UNITED NATIONS give orders to CAPTAIN AMERICA. The Avengers are mostly made up of American citizens, they include some fine pieces of American engineering; this is America's business. So that's his focus on the Accords leading up to CACW.

CACW itself is a political disaster for Matthew Ellis and almost certainly flipped the election for him -- it goes so horrifically badly for him even if he got the "victory" of the Accords passing that there's basically no way to recover from it, though presumably he tried in the months between May and November 2016. The events of BW and the Raft breakout during those months put the nail in the coffin of Ellis's reelection campaign. Trump spends that time beating Ellis's failure to control the Avengers into the ground, along with personal insults about Tony's incompetence as a superhero and Steve's disloyalty as an American, etc. etc., along with all the other stuff from his 2016 campaign. Absolute disaster for everyone on every level.

(Ross manages to skate through into Trump's administration -- since we know he's there in IW in 2018; I think he's addressed as "Mr. Secretary" there but can't check rn -- because he's a slippery son of a bitch and probably manages to parlay his Hulk experience, his hardheadedness in going after Natasha Romanoff, and tbh probably the fact that his nickname is Thunderbolt Ross into a cabinet position. (We've all heard the speculation that Jim Mattis got the real world SecDef position because his nickname is Mad Dog Mattis, right?) It's possible that in IW he's no longer SecState and is in fact running that UN panel, but I think that table of people we see has U.S. military uniforms at it and Rhodey specifically refers to potentially being court-martialed.)

presumably there are no Avengers-level disasters between 2016 and 2018 (we know the events of Spider-Man Homecoming and Ant-Man and the Wasp take place then, but they're not "call the team out" big), which is probably the only thing that keeps the whole disaster from going up in flames before then. the fact that no one can catch Steve or the other rogue Avengers must be driving That Man crazy and he probably went on some vicious Twitter rants about that.

and then, in my heart of hearts, he gets snapped in 2018.

I am sorry for making you think about Donald Trump's political views but at least they aren't his actual real world ones (horrifying).

[jackdaw-sprite]

Thank you for your perspective! And yeah, that's one of the things I'm not sure anyone's mentioned yet -- tags are for personal organization as well as for discoverability.

Something I've been confronted by again and again over the years, in fandom and out, is that people will use a system they're presented with in the way that's easiest and least annoying for them.

You can explain how a system should be used until you're blue in the face, but unless they themselves find the system easier and more intuitive to use in the way you want, you're never going to get them to stick with it:

People are people, first and foremost.

Everyone here reading this has a life, worries, things they want to do off of tumblr. They don't want to think about what tags to include or not when they're just trying to share what they made, and go about their day. Talk with friends, have dinner. Trying to get people to remember a specific rule about not using a tag when it makes intuitive sense to them that they should? When they just want to move on with their day, because tags are the least exciting part of posting things on Tumblr Dot Com?

I don't think we can expect people to take that time, especially when the people still doing it don't see any downside.

The reason I'm suggesting adding -- that's right, adding this tag, not replacing the old tag, is because it's intuitive, and it's simple. It works with human nature instead of against it.

The people who benefit most from it are also the people who will need to go to the effort -- typing dponly into the tags after danny phantom -- and in return, we'll get a space with no crossovers.

I can't argue anyone out of being angry. After years of this argument, I think most of us are. But I think this will give everyone breathing room.

This would be used in addition to the danny phantom tag, turning it into a true umbrella tag for everything related to Danny Phantom, while having a few major sub-tags for people to find exactly what they want.

---

After some more discussion with members of the fandom in the notes of my poll asking about a community and elsewhere, it seems like the better option for everyone might actually be a new tag, so I'm making a new poll here!

Some answers to questions I think people might have are below the readmore:

Q: Why are all of these only one word?

A: For the same reason the dpxdc tag is only one word! Tumblr's tagging implementation is Not Good. Tags with spaces don't play well with it, and especially don't play well with blocked tags. If someone wants to block non-crossover Danny Phantom content, we want to make it as painless as possible for them.

Q: What issues were raised around communities?

A: A few! To name some of them:

Limited interactions with posts: Communities only let you react with emoji and leave comments on posts reblogged into them. Not great, if we want to have long reblog chains riffing on one another

Original Posters aren't notified if someone else reblogs their post into a community, even if it's public. So if someone reblogged your post into the community for you, you wouldn't know about it -- or know to look for people interacting with it.

Communities have mods, and therefore would need trustworthy, engaged mods to make it work. Over a short time frame, we could probably manage it! But over a longer one, a community for an entire fandom would probably have moderator drama. That could lead to fracturing, or people leaving specifically because they don't like the mods, etc. A tag is a lot less active maintenance.

A few people also expressed a general dislike for the feature, even if they were willing to move to one. This seems like a much smaller change that will let those people stay away from a feature they don't like, while interacting with the content they do.

Q: What about less-common crossovers? Won't those get excluded from this tag?

A: They will. I'm asking about this poll first because I figured getting the community to make a decision about the other crossovers would be easier if we'd already decided on the non-crossovers.

The current idea is to move those to their own tag as well, so they can get dedicated attention from the crossover enthusiasts who love them. One of the people I talked to about this runs the niche-dp-crossovers blog, so it's on the radar. If you have concerns or suggestions about that, the notes on this post is as good a place as any to suggest them!

[pinelohearts]

Something concerning I've seen going around the lawlight fandom is this idea that lawlight is only good when it is extremely volatile and fucked up because that's how it is in canon.

This has two problems for me.

Canon is not that fucked up. Yes, people die in it. Yes, L and Light go through some crazy mind games. But you have to remember: Death Note is shonen. It's Shonen Jump. It was being released in by the same manga producing company that gave you Naruto, My Hero, and Yu-Gi-Oh. Yes, it's a bit darker than those series, but at the end of the day, Death Note was being featured in a magazine meant for twelve year olds and the maturity level reflects that.

There's a lot of comedy in Death Note, too. It's disregarding the actual amount of quote-unquote fluff in Death Note to ignore that. Yes, L and Light try to kill each other. But also, may I remind you that this is also the same duo that brought you "Yes that will be dark." followed immediately by "Cut it out!"? There's a lot of lighthearted to be found in Lawlight, and I think it's strange this aspect of canon material is disregarded.

[medicalunprofessional]

never change, man !

[aq2003]

has anyone gotten the idea that odysseus' storyline in hades 2 is a depiction/exploration of trauma over his SA and how he's blaming himself for things that were out of his control? because that's the impression i'm getting from what i've seen. he talks about "goddesses" as his "greatest weakness" and that "he's not one to say no to them"...

when mel invites him to the bath, he brings up mortals having different standards for intimacy than gods and how it usually has a more romantic/sexual connotation. she then asks if he's uncomfortable and he has a startled reaction and brings up circe and calypso again (but never actually by name)

(this isn't ship/romance bait btw. odysseus knew mel as a kid and they're stated in-game to have a sibling/uncle-niece relationship)

also he grew apart from penelope after his return, but the game makes a point of showing that his love for penelope and telemachus is what drove him on at all so that element of his character isn't brought into question

[umishiqu]

this is a lot so tiny warning in advance but i have a few things;

@ the person in the reblog tags saying that “now Jamil isn’t allowed to have curry” (skip to second paragraph to see my reply to og post), no, kalim literally gets Jamil curry chefs to learn from for his birthday, and Kalim literally goes to a cooking prep just for spice-based dishes (which would include curry). he never explains specifically why Jamil getting a coma through curry = curry is banned, we just assume the only reason is bcuz he is traumatized. it may have something to do with the fact that the spices in the curry make it that much harder for Kalim to figure out if there’s poison or not and that was one mistake he doesn’t plan on making again. and he learnt poison detection at all specifically so jamil didn’t need to taste test for him. projecting ideas onto them that canon already disproved (“kalim banned it and Jamil can’t eat it anymore!!1!”) is part of the problem and why people even emphasize kalim’s trauma at all, to at least get people to start looking at the character truly instead of an idea of them in their heads. i am brown and grew up in a poor family so if you wanna play race olympics too then let’s do this 💪 genuinely i just enjoy kalim more bcuz although both jamil and kalim are dishonest & hypocrites, one of them doesn’t then make it someone else’s (many someones) problem to “truly understand them” despite the dishonesty. kalim gets mad at jamil bcuz jamil isn’t getting what he wants for himself and resorting to smth that made him overblot in book 4, and its how you know kalim is a genuinely selfless person. as someone who’s been in jamil’s position one of these is more tolerable to me esp since the guy doesn’t mind sharing his wealth, and the other is a lot more privileged being in that position than i ever was and still wants more (jamil character song lyrics drop). (emphasizing this, kalim doesn’t correct any of his siblings when they call him nii-sama, but jamil gets to use only kalim’s name)

back to the actual post. i think people brush over the fact that kalim learnt how to detect poisons himself without Jamil needing to taste test for poison all the time. which is why, again, people are saying to pay attention to the fact that it’s Kalim who is the target of being poisoned and not Jamil. talking about jamil’s lack of understanding isn’t about his lack of sympathy (although this is something that makes me feel less sympathetic, not of his situation but in general, bcuz you do reap what you sow). it’s his lack of understanding of Kalim’s skills (ie saying in book 5 that there’s no way Kalim would be able to detect a magic curse used as poison for a murder attempt … until that’s exactly what he does with vil) (and it’s bcuz he pays attention to people that he was able to do this) (also in kalim’s lab cost where jamil says he couldn’t possibly make the meals in a day) (until… bcuz ruggie had kalim’s help that’s exactly what happened) (and before you say “but Jamil vocalized this!” jamil vocalizes a lot of things that are or aren’t true and kalim has the patience of a saint to not have punched him over the dorm leader thing in book 4 when Kalim had asked him about it all the way in the beginning of the year in his ceremony robes. he even gets upset with Jamil bcuz Jamil keeps calling him stupid and still expects him to sort all the mixed messages of what Jamil rly wants) (despite this kalim genuinely wants to try to figure it out with the real jamil, the one who isn’t honest - hard path to good results is the Scarabia way)

like yeah jamil doesn’t have sympathy for Kalim, this is a fact; he along with Kalim’s dad are the two people who basically told Kalim to suck it up bcuz it’s his fate. he doesn’t cope with it in the way Jamil wants him to, but people confuse kindness for carelessness, which is Jamil’s problem bcuz Kalim’s kindness protects + helps Kalim, and kalim was told to just cope when it came to his (emphasizing on his) fate and has taken precautions himself to make sure he isn’t poisoned. and there is a difference between his kindness and carelessness - like Kalim yelling at Vil over trying to poison Neige in the moment (and Jamil still finds a way to make it about Kalim being careless which Kalim almost yells at him for too, but just thanks him afterwards for saving them) or Kalim yelling at Jade for saying OB group could possibly be dead. and with the way the Asim family raised kalim (to be isolated - he couldn’t even go to middle school even though Jamil was able to attend), it’s also why i don’t think jamil is supposed to be taste testing Kalim’s food

i think a lot of people misconstrue what was actually enforced on Jamil in terms of his servitude to kalim vs what we think. in Jade’s Halloween story the adults yell at a younger Jamil for cooking bcuz “children aren’t supposed to cook with fire”. there’s a really weird emphasis on safety there when everything else suggests that they didn’t care about jamil. eventually, he did take on this task, but when and how wasn’t specified. it makes sense, since his backstory mainly shows his parents telling Jamil to be second to Kalim in everything, but nothing else - not even from the Asim family. we never question why jamil didn’t have trauma from being poisoned by curry or why smth like this wasn’t a part of his woes in his backstory. i think it’s fair to assume that he just didn’t regret choosing to do it, like how he’ll never regret choosing to protect kalim (and says that Azul mischaracterized Jamil in book 7 bcuz Kalim made the contract with Azul, which Jamil wouldn’t have let happen). not to deny it shaped his identity and what lengths Jamil himself will go to to get things done, but again his problems with kalim were about him having to be second to Kalim in everything bcuz of jamil’s parents, and Kalim’s seeming lack of care for it (it’s implied in book 4 jamil backstory that Jamil was expecting Kalim to notice but kept on getting blindsided by him and dropped his expectations) (doesn’t help that he normally sees Kalim as useless and unskilled) (in the same vein, it also doesn’t help that Jamil simultaneously wants to show his skill and vocalizes getting less work at the same time) (bcuz kalim was always trying to look for ways to help jamil even before book 4 but again - mixed messages. does he want to be voluntold to show his skills or does he want to rely on someone to help him? does he want both at the same time? does he want it with people other than kalim? lots of kalim’s interactions with jamil involved kalim trying to answer these questions but it goes under the radar. when kalim isn’t hypnotized in book 4 he’s still trying.)

he does hate Kalim’s lack of care for their situation, but like alab nariya moment where kalim stalking Jamil doesn’t register to Jamil as “this is a problem because this is a crime” but “this is a problem because Kalim used his power to be able to do it” (and cater is the one who takes a double take at this and mentions the priority), it has everything to do with Kalim’s exercise of privilege and not what it means to Jamil. (which is also why, despite knowing Kalim was raised to be forgiving and to have a “suck it up” attitude when it comes to people who harm him, and Jamil actively complains about it) (even tho he was one of two people who encouraged it haha…) (Jamil still believed he and his family would get thrown out if he did the slightest thing wrong against Kalim) (and this in itself is also bcuz Jamil didn’t understand why the adults wanted to curry Kalim’s favour so badly bcuz he’s useless af. there is no other option in his mind except that there would be a horrible punishment awaiting if they don’t) (“who would want to be your friend voluntarily??” -> this question gets answered later). there is def the question of why jamil’s priorities are like this but ill leave that for others to talk abt.

also kalim also went into a coma! i… i can’t believe i have to say this… tunnel vision is real. (see 4-7) the book does also touch on the curry incident, but its vague on whether these two happened at the same. it does help that kalim says “it was only found in my food”. he really wanted to emphasize jamil’s suffering and ignore his own, so he was vague - like usual - but eng version does clear this up that they both went comatose bcuz its harder for Kalim to be vaguer about it) (and kalim prioritizing other people and debasing himself and his feelings for other people, despite what they do to him, including forgiving them, is what Azul says Jamil most likely finds annoying) (but kalim will also do this to support jamil) (and hey book 7 also expanded on this to emphasize that Kalim forgiving people is a choice and not something he always wants to do) (like ofc he has privilege but he can’t change that? it’s not like money = evil and kind of money but not rly = good. how he chooses to use it is what matters. if you want him to learn to punish people over what they do to him bcuz it’ll make Jamil’s life easier, then jamil would not have gotten the same outcome when it comes to consequences as in game) (and he still would have been pushed to do a book 4 anyway, even if kalim was more punishing! bcuz the problem isn’t Jamil taste testing for kalim but again his parents telling him to come second to him in everything) (which now I’m wondering if people actually want kalim to do it, not bcuz it makes sense to kalim’s character, but to affirm jamil’s perspective… interesting meta conversation that just annoys me bcuz it’s also why people like talking abt kalim not knowing how to do anything and then leave him at that instead of seeing his development and the earnestness that the game explicitly talks about multiple times that motivates him to improve) anyway, like Kalim tells Jamil, he didn’t do anything else to Jamil after book 4 bcuz he likes interesting people and the variety of people at NRC.

anyway to end off. they both can be unreliable narrators but it just so happens that kalim (used to be) an unreliable narrator in the “i will affirm and support everything Jamil does” direction, while Jamil is… the exact same with kalim except his gets dismantled explicitly by the narrative multiple times, even before book 4, because ultimately it is jamil’s story. does perspective=truth? not rly esp when Jamil contradicts himself… a lot lmao. still wrapping my head around him complaining about how forgiving kalim is and somehow not registering that applying to Jamil coming first sometimes too (that’s bcuz the only people giving him consequences for it are jamil’s parents and he thought they were an extension of the actual rules) (Futaba did call Jamil a clumsy person…)

so i really hope people actually read all of this + go to the stories to confirm for themselves instead of seeing one word they don’t like and creating a problem from it bcuz yes. the vignettes + events outside of book 4 does explain some of their situation well and doesn’t leave things that ambiguous…

thinking abt jamil and kalim today. i don't like when ppl say kalim's life isn't really that great in a way jamil doesn't see and if only jamil could understand that then he wouldn't be so resentful of kalim's privilege. like my opinion is that No that's exactly Why jamil's resentful actually. jamil Sees the ways that kalim's life sucks. but he just does not have a lot of sympathy for kalim because he goes through those situations with kalim, and he sees the difference that comes with the level of privilege kalim wields. and to him that makes those struggles kind of laughable in comparison to his own.

like yeah kalim has had attempts on his life and still sits and eats at the same table as people who try to poison him . and nobody is denying that having people you know trying to assassinate you isn't traumatic. but also like canonically who do you think is most at risk of consuming that poison. Kalim??? or his POISON TESTER. jamils eating at that exact same table And he sure as fuck is not forgiving that assassin the same way kalim is able to because He has to make sure kalim's stupid forgiving nature doesn't open up the perfect avenue for this guy to try murder Again. kalim has the privilege to forgive this guy and be gracious JAMIL DOES NOT!!!!

another great example is the reason behind why kalim doesn't like to eat curry. poisoned curry sent jamil into a coma and kalim got distressed about it. Obviously this is traumatic for kalim . but you know . Who else . It would affect...... THE GUY IN THE FUCKING COMA....? kalim has the privilege to say "I never want to eat curry again because it sent Jamil into a coma" and it's just Done because he's the boss. jamil Does Not have the privilege to say "I don't want to poison test kalim's food again because it sent Me into a coma" because he has to serve kalim. and it doesn't matter what jamils personal feelings are on curry even though he was the one who GOT POISONED BY IT. do you get it now. is it clicking

[son-of-avraham]

I've been doing a lot of reflection as of late, especially after this past class.

This past class was about the Torah and Tanakh in general, and the way the rabbi talked about the commandments (specifically the ten commandments) has made me really reflect on how I interpret them, specifically the fifth commandment, or honoring your mother and father.

This is a commandment I have wrestled with for a long time - in fact, it brought me away from g-d at multiple times. I was severely abused when I was incredibly young by my mother, and I used to feel insulted at the implication that I were to honor her while she got to live a better life. It was hypocritical, in my eyes.

But this rabbi surmised that this particular commandment was because parenthood is an act of creation, something that is like the g-d from which we come from. My realization is this: I don't think we're necessarily meant to take even these commandments literally.

I this particular commandment is more of a call to honor creation - creation is a gift, and like any gift, many people simply will not like it and will discard it. The person who abused me created me, but she did not honor creation. She didn't honor me, but I can still honor it.

I have started to honor creation much more. I'm too young, too unstable, not mature enough to be a father (though I fantasize about it), but I create all the time. I create relationships, I create with my hands through crochet. I create memories, I create my world. And I can honor who I am and where I came from that made me who I am. I've been learning one of the mother tongues of my family (Italian, since part of my family originates there) and it was judaism that inspired me to do this.

I don't think g-d wants me to honor my abuser. I think He wants me to remember the Holy action of creation. When I am a father, that act of creation will be Holy, and indeed, I am already joyful about the thought.

I have seen many people struggle with this particular commandment, but I think this perspective helps me personally. I don't think I ever have to forgive my abusers (plural), and I don't think I am commanded to simply because they happened to be family. I am commanded to recognize the holy, to elevate the mundane. In doing so, I will remember g-d. Through creation, I honor g-d and everything he has done for us, for me, and for our collective people.

[toxintouch]

Started out as an elaborate “draw me like one of your French girls” joke and spiraled outta control from there... @lu-dao-writes posted the same scenario in their Kinktober 2024 and they were kind enough to give me their blessing to post my take! Please check out their fics as well!  If this scenario in particular interests you, I rec you this post! :3

Further details below the cut so that the above the cut stays safe for anyone who is just scrolling through!

18+ Content MDNI || VERE x AIS x Reader

PROMPT/KINK(S): Dom!Vere, Dacryphilia (Tears)* + Cockwarming + Size Difference + Consensual Voyeurism. Power Play. (Some feral monsterfucking spice sprinkled v lightly on top.) [*original challenge prompt, randomizer used.]

OTHER INFO: “You” pronouns used for MC/Reader. Unspecified genitalia for both POV Character and Vere but Ais has a dick. Reader is the receiving partner in penetrative sex.

“Hmm, hold that pose,” Vere purrs.

Ais huffs a hot breath into your face as he freezes above you.  His brows furrow, mouth twisting into a determined grimace as he grits his teeth.  His forearms tense hard where they are resting on either side of you, fingers flexing against the silken sheets.

You can feel him pulsing inside of you.  A hot, insistent ache.

You try to relax, try to breathe through it but the lack of movement makes you hyper aware of every inch, the raw feeling of him stretching you open, the way your body twitches so sickly-sweet with the effort.  You inhale a slow, shaking breath, chest trembling, and shut your eyes in an attempt to block out some of the sensations—the clawing need gnawing at your core.

“Eyes open, darling,” Vere corrects you, tone somewhere firmly between scolding and teasing.  “And turn your face back towards Ais.  I’m trying to capture the moment .”  Your heart is pounding in your ears but you can hear Vere’s smooth, sly voice with perfect clarity.  Ais is an overwhelming force but Vere is a magnetic presence; no matter how caught up in each other you and Ais can get, Vere will always command attention without effort.

You turn your chin as requested, only to be caught in Ais’ gaze

(Caught and breathless–the same way you were when he was bullying his thick length into your hole, thrusting sharply and sighing in satisfaction, his fingers still at work massaging and pressing and stroking as he sunk into you inch by inch; he'd prepared you until your entrance was puffy and swollen, sopping with thick, medicinal smelling lube and he still had to take his time.  Fucking you slowly until you could take all of him.  And then, the moment you finally could...)

“Hmm, that's better.  Stay just like that.  Let me see those pretty expressions.”  You hear Vere adjusting his heavy vellum paper.  The glide of quick, clever lines being drawn.

You maintain eye contact with Ais, drunk off his breath, his body, the very essence of him, hovering so close above you, and are utterly unprepared to meet his intensity.  The way he looks at you like he’s seconds from devouring you, barely held in check by the challenge that Vere has laid before him.  Before both of you.

You bite into your lower lip as you shift involuntarily, oversensitive nerves still riding the throbbing of Ais’ dick.  He’s so fucking thick and girthy that he presses at the soft spot inside you without even trying. The angry pulse of him is a gratifying thrum, stoking your aching heat by way of mere burgeoning contact.

His cock gives another strong twitch and your insides clench around him.  He feels so fucking good–you almost think you might be able to come like this, if you can get your body to keep on clenching like that. 

—Almost.

Your next breath comes out as a sob.  There’s a high pitched whine building at the base of your throat and your lashes are wet when you blink.

A monstrous snarl escapes Ais’ lips, one that you can feel even more than you can hear, the vibration of it echoing through your body everywhere you're pressed against him.  The pinnacle between your thighs pulses with it, and your toes curl involuntarily as an errant tear runs down your cheek.  Ais is shaking, sweat dampening his face, his pupils expanding and contracting rapidly, his eyes locked on you as he barely holds himself back.  “Sparrow,” he says, gravel in his tone. 

You say his name in return, your head tipping involuntarily, bearing the softness of your throat, faded marks from both your lovers decorating your skin.  You hear the sheets rip below you, torn into shreds where Ais’ nails have dug into them.

Vere sighs pointedly.  You hear him stop his work, tap his charcoal against the paper as if he’s not entirely satisfied with the scene in front of him.  He pauses for a long time, leaving you both in limbo.

When he moves, it’s to stand.  To saunter over to you both.  You’re pinned beneath Ais, unable to look away, but you can feel Vere’s shadow fall over you just before his hand touches your face, forcing your eyes to his as he catches a crystalline tear with his index finger.

“Shame,” he says, dipping his fingers into his mouth, his tongue lapping up the taste of your tears, lavishing the digits with his tongue.  You whine out a desperate, quiet note just from watching his tongue at work and he basks knowingly in the attention.  “I really thought I could get you both crying.”  He smiles dangerously once his fingers have left his mouth. 

He uses them to drag a wet path down Ais' spine.  “Oh, but the night is still young.  Perhaps I may still think of something that will do the trick...”

18+ Master List | SFW Master List ✦"Kinktober Speedrun & Other Gratuitous (TOUCHSTARVED) Smut" on Ao3

[waitineedaname]

In a wlwangxian situation do you think lwj would eventually become butch. Bcus I think she might

imagined butch lwj and had to stare into the middle distance for a while. whoagh... butch lan wangji...... I think this is a powerful concept. I approve wholeheartedly

I was about to put a whole essay in the tags but then it was getting far too long so I'm gonna put it here instead. when pondering genderswaps, I like to use it as an opportunity to examine a character's relationship to gender and gender roles and how they perform gender, and also a chance to see what might be part of their personality divorced from gender performance. so now im going to use this as an excuse to discuss how I think the mxtx couples would be performing gender in a genderswap scenario (presuming a cisswap, since if I get started talking about my trans headcanons I'll be here all day)

with bingqiu, the main narrative of svsss deals significantly with gender roles, which I have talked about At Length. I won't get into all that here but essentially it boils down to both of them adopting more feminine roles (bingmei's maidenlike behavior, shen qingqiu's whole milf thing). so in a genderswap, that would be reversed -- while canon bingmei is more feminine, genderswap bingdi should get to be more masculine, especially in a like. performing gentlemanly things, like opening the doors for sqq and giving sqq her coat or whatever lol as for shen qingqiu, the power of middle aged milf shizun is blinding me and it's very difficult to look away from. however, if presuming the same logic here, where canon sqq starts acting like binghe's mother, genderswap sqq would presumably decide binghe needs a father figure and it's up to her to provide, which is. also very compelling to think about. generally shen qingqiu's relationship to gender is so fucking confusing and complicated because sqq's brain is a full of tangled knots, so idk if she would fit neatly into femme or butch, but whatever she's doing, it's doing Some Shit to binghe's brain for sure

as for wangxian, canon lan wangji definitely seems to enjoy fulfilling the husband role for wei wuxian, but tbh it doesn't really seem like a gender thing to me? granted, I am not a lwj scholar so someone else might have a more complex take than me, but lan wangji just seems to enjoy providing for wwx, and gender doesn't really come into that as the motivation. so I think a genderswapped lan wangji would still enjoy playing the husband role and providing for wwx, and I could definitely see that turning into a butch thing for her. which I'm still fanning myself thinking about btw. wei wuxian on the other hand definitely seems more aware of how gender roles play into their relationship, but in a way where he seems to really enjoy playing with them and embracing both roles depending on the context, so I think genderswapped wwx would still be kinda genderfucked. wwx's gender to me is "whatever wei wuxian would get the most entertainment out of in that moment"

finally, hualian are sexually dimorphic birds to me. regardless of gender. honestly, swapping their genders I think would have the least effect out of all three couples, which is amusing considering they're the ones who could actually genderswap themselves any time they want in canon. I think genderswapped xie lian is butch simply out of practicality. performing femininity takes a lot of effort and xie lian simply Does Not Care. in my heart, a modern genderswapped xie lian probably performed femininity pretty hard in her youth (whatever the modern equivalent of the crown prince years would be) but she's gone through so much shit that she's just like "wow this does not matter to me that much. I'm just gonna focus on what's practical instead of looking pretty" and now she's like. really into cargo shorts because of all the pockets. that sort of thing. meanwhile hua cheng LOVES putting effort into her appearance. she LOVES the drama. this is true of canon hua cheng. his fashion is the equivalent of shaking keys in front of xie lian to get his attention, an effect that's enhanced by the fact that he literally jangles when he walks. so genderswapped hua cheng is doing some crazy high femme camp shit simply because she Loves Drama and Likes To Look Good. the most exaggerated makeup. ten million sparkling accessories. extremely low cut tops to show off her (flat) cleavage. hualian never look like they're going to the same event because hua cheng dresses with the energy of "I need to be so hot it makes everyone in this farmers market want to kill themselves" meanwhile xie lian has been wearing the same overalls all week

[castlenjoyer]

um. here he is . my guy . obsessed with him

[robotrightsactivist]

I would also recommend Android (1984) featuring Don Keith Opper with the huge asterisk that there is offscreen sexual violence and murder. Would also recommend the PC game Citizen Sleeper! The Employees by Olga Ravn has really sensitive depictions of artificial humans (and also biological humans) who question their purpose and place in a terraforming mission falling apart at the seams. I have NO idea where one would find it but there is the Swedish predecessor to BBC’s Humans (about robots, lol) called Akta Manniskor which from what I see is better than the British adaptation (sorry Gemma Chan 😭 in her first and not her last robot girl role 😭) and other than that there are specific episodes of TV I really like, such as Season 1 episode 9 of Eureka called “Right as Raynes” which made me sooooo mad at 15 years old I had to write a fix it fic that became the first of my novel series (sorry for the plug lmao). The Zeta Project is also really fun, really short, and disconcertingly sweet for what it’s actually about! I would also recommend watching the original 12 minute short on Youtube titled “Brian and Charles” which also had a feature length movie that was good but I don’t think as emotionally resonant as the short. There is also a short webcomic called Don’t Let Go by Kay O’Neill (of Tea Dragon Society fame!) which makes me cry every single time I read it, you can find it by searching “strangelykatie” in my blog’s tags :) A graphic novel called Planeta just came out that is heartbreaking but enjoyable, featuring a society where it’s common to manufacture ideal romantic partners for human space colonists. Oh and it’s been finished for like more than a decade and is also a somewhat problematic piece of media (it’s French. Iykyk.) but Skydoll by Alessandro Barbucci 😬 but it has lots of interesting ideas I haven’t seen before, and features a gynoid sexbot who may or may not be a messiah figure? 😅 anyway. My partner and I just started watching Sunny on Apple TV featuring Rashida Jones in her second (?) robot feature, her first being a film called Zoe by Drake Doremus which is all over the place tonally and thematically but I liked the robot parts a lot! The robots show up for each other in a time of need 🥺

My personal enjoyment of robot fiction heavily revolves around interpersonal relationships with beings whose personhood is frequently seen as an inconvenience at best and in question at worst, be it parental relationships, the very rare sibling relationships (my fave tbqh) and or romantic relationships. Robots being parents frequently involves human children taking priority over the robot’s personhood which I’m not a fan of! I mean it can be done in a cool way but it’s been very infrequent iirc. Thanks again to everyone interacting with this post! :) I’ll probably add more as more media comes up!

What are your favourite movies/books/whatever (about you know what that we both share a sentiment for) that you can recommend?

Ohhhh there is so much robot media out there, personally I would recommend Ich Bin Dein Mensch to literally everyone because it gave me brain worms for two weeks, I would personally recommend every true robot fanatic to read The Gardener’s Year by Karel Capek with illustrations by his brother Josef who actually invented the term “robot” as it’s used today, I would highly highly recommend Rice Boy by Evan Dahm for one of my favorite character arcs of a character who happens to be a robot, I was an early enjoyer of BLAME! by Tsutomu Nihei and Ghost in the Shell: Standalone Complex, and I would also recommend Pluto by Naoki Urasawa which is a retelling of Astro Boy. Nine Planets Without Intelligent Life is a fun non-linear and philosophical romp, Defy the Stars is also fun if a bit leaning towards the romance heavy side. Oh and for novels and novellas I’d include Lifecycle of Software Objects by Ted Chiang and Rupetta by Nike Sulway! That’s as much as I can think of that’s not commonly recommended! :)

[sanzodaily]

day 86 | yaoi powerscaling