#honestly this entire topic is triggering to me and i'm not saying that to get out of this

[matteoberrettini]

to me Casper’s answer (along with the rest of tennis’ general attitude towards zverev) was a representation of how a lot of the players feel, or their lack of feeling tbh. cherry picking who gets called out and then posting about faves as if they don’t share similar sentiments seems odd and hypocritical

i don't think i did that? i didn't even call anyone out. i just said my personal reaction to that answer was to be particularly pissed off. i'm well aware, and i said so, that they're all part of the problem, including my faves

[frownyalfred]

This is the fanfictionforthewin person who argued about the use of the tags. And idk if you saw it or blocked me before you did. So I’ll say it here. I said it in a reblog of it that day so I’ll just copy and paste it here

“I’m sorry. Even tho I completely disagree with you. I should not have said anything. It’s your post and you are allowed your views on the topic just as I’m allowed mine. Since I’ve had a chance to cool down I realized it wasn’t fair to push my view onto your post.

If I wanted to say something about the topic I should have made my own post and not jump on yours about it, was not cool to borderline hijack it

I’m sorry, my deepest apologies, if you wish I am willing to delete my reblogs about it”

I have since deleted all posts regarding the topic except the one where I apologize, if you wish me to delete that to send me a anon ask and I will

Again. I am sorry, I don’t know why I acted like I did. I was being a self righteous jerk and projecting my own experiences and should not have been commented especially the way I did. It wasn’t cool of me to do so, and I swear I’m usually not like that. I’m not saying this or apologizing to get you to unblock me. Or even for you to respond, I’ll be respecting your wish to have me blocked and won’t interact with your blog past this point on any of my accounts. I just wanted to say I’m sorry, I was a jerk

Anon, honestly I'm not mad about you hopping on my post and pushing your own view. That happens to me a lot on here. It's not fun, but tons of people do it.

I read a few of your asks before you deleted them. I think you have some serious issues with projecting your own experiences/triggers onto other people. Your asks (before they were deleted) were not kind or fair to authors. You called them names. You gave them total responsibility for a lot of things most reasonable people agree are the individual reader's.

I'm sorry you got spammed by asks, that was absolutely not my intention at all and I have asked people to stop harassing you. Clearly you have a strong opinion about this. It is objectively wrong (according to ao3 TOS), but you are allowed to have it. You don't need to delete anything.

What I will ask, gently, is that you reconsider how you interact with fandom content moving on. A lot of really understanding and kind authors and readers chimed in on your original thread(s). It sounds like ao3 is not the site for you. I hope you find the site that is, or take a step back from fandom content entirely until you're ready to engage again.

[blackbackedjackal]

Soul Eater has always been a bizarre case. on one end of the spectrum there's characters like Kilik Rung, Mira Nygus, and even major manga antagonist Noah. on the other end there's the infamous bg jazz band that are straight up minstrels (they look identical in the manga. this was not studio bones' artistic liberty) and the death scythe repping Africa named Dengu Dinga who wears a mashup of "african flavoured" clothing. and then there's Sid, obviously i can't pass judgement on what's good or bad design rep but there certainly was a scene where Maka literally calls him a "mean blue gorilla"..

sorry for rambling, but Ohkubo absolutely takes inspiration from graffiti art and hip hop aesthetics in his work which makes the antiblackness even more disrespectful

Feel free to ignore that ask if the topic is bogging you down btw, I didn't see your last post if you're done engaging with the topic for now feel free to delete it. Looking forward to what you do with strawberry moon <3

Oh dude you're good. I just needed a nap before I answered more lol. I'll try and answer as many of these as I can because I'm honestly enjoying the discussion even though I have to step away from it for a bit. It's triggering to me but not in a way that I can't talk about it, just bogs down my mind ya know?

Anyway, I've never watched Soul Eater so I had no idea of the Black characters in the show! I had to look them up and I see what you're saying. Mira is a stereotype because I'd consider her a sexualized Black woman in this context. Kilik is like 100% fine to me at a glance, like he just looks like a Black guy though there may be some writing I'm missing that still makes him a stereotype.

I had no idea that he was influenced by graffiti art but I TOTALLY see it now in his shape language. Sid is by far the worst since he still has the big white teeth and a more 'gangster' aesthetic. Especially considering the time period Soul Eater was released, it's in poor taste at best and still perpetuating Black stereotypes at worse.

Anime is it's own sub-genre of racism in animation. White people LOOOOOVE to say "oh it's a different culture and they don't know" LMAO YES THEY DO DON'T PLAY stop infantilizing Asians you fucking sickos.

Colorism alone is such an issue in Asian countries. I've lived with people from China, South Korea, Thailand, Taiwan, and the Philippines. I've heard first hand accounts of people from the Philippines being treated like lesser human beings just for having a slightly darker skin-tone and don't get me started on how Chinese imperialism has impacted Taiwanese people. I'm not going to speak for disenfranchised Asian people but it's easy to find if you look it up. But my point is if colorism is that prevalent, imagine how much worse it is when your entire culture has a history of being exploited to the point that blackface is a worldwide issue.

Also the Boondocks exists and though not a perfect example, it still has some of the best depictions of Black people in an anime style. There's no excuse to draw racist stereotypes when there's literally 5 seasons worth of overall solid Black character designs that can be referenced for other series.

[drpepperwhoree]

i've never sent you anything before, but i've been following you for a while, and your asks always come up on my tl. honestly, i sometimes feel truly sorry for you, dealing with so many whining, weird individuals around here.

idk if it's innocence, self-centeredness, or something else entirely, but it genuinely amazes me that it seemingly never occurs to these people that the world won't always be polished, or kind, or whaterver, about sensitive topics, and that, in real life, there are no trigger warnings. if something bothers or traumatizes you, i'm truly sorry, and i sincerely hope you can overcome that or learn to deal with it better. however, neither evelyn, nor anyone else who isn't a fucking therapist or a psychiatrist, can do anything to help, especially if you're just a stranger on the internet. and i'm saying this as someone who deals with trauma! don't expect other people to be responsible for your emotional well-being or anything like that, especially if you are an adult. seek professional help and be functional, for goodness sake!

and who do you think you are to demand how a woman, on her own fucking blog on fucking tumblr, should address certain topics, judging and condemning her? "you must say it like this, you must do it like that, you must put a warning"... fuck off! like, eve consented, the other person consented, should they be asking and waiting for your consent too? be for real. get a grip and go live a life.

now, eve, besides having an enviable patience, i need to say that you have a very, very beautiful body too, lovely breasts and delicious thighs.

thank you for this kind ask and i very much appreciate the time it probably took you to write it:) yeah it genuinely is just ridiculous. i’ll probably just ignore asks from anyone like that from now on.

it’s really giving this the more i think about it:

thank you very much my lil nonnie😋 more thigh pics shall be in your future

[aihoshiino]

chapter 141 thoughts!

The usual reminder: because of the content of this arc, I will unavoidably have to discuss CSA and topics related to it in this & future chapter reviews. I do not discuss them in great detail, but if you very understandably just aren't in the headspace for that, no hard feelings - look after yourself and I'll see you next time.

This chapter starts us off on the note of answering something I've been wondering for a while and confirming that Ai did, in fact, know that Hikaru was being abused by Airi. On the one hand, this feels like it should go without saying, since it answers the question of where Aqua would have gotten some of this info, but it feels strange to have this dropped on us in such a matter of fact way.

In general, I continue to be both baffled and impressed by Oshi no Ko's dedication to never showing characters learning or reacting to huge, status-quo altering pieces of information on screen lol. I think this is more a case of the movie's framing than the manga's - hard cutting from the HKAI exchange at the end of last chapter to the Ai & Airi confrontation is very cinematically appropriate - but it does bother me regardless. In isolation, I think it's fine and we get more than enough information about Ai's thoughts and feelings on the situation in the confrontation but it's nevertheless part of a pattern that's been going on for a long while now of important reveals and reactions to really huge pieces of information are happening entirely offscreen and are only told to the viewer in retrospect, or are backfilled into the story once Akasaka wants to make use of it. It's not a world-ending flaw or anything but I'm noticing it more and more and I think it's been harming the series more than it's helping.

That said, I do really like this confrontation Ai has with Airi. It definitely feels more like Ai speaking for Aqua than it does Ai herself speaking - the cold, straightforward way she addresses Airi pretty clearly mirrors the way Aqua spoke to the director on Akane's behalf back in LoveNow. Whether this is a case of Aqua using Ai as a mouthpiece or their similarities as mother and son coming out in a moment like this, I think it's interesting either way. Given what we learned about Ai's own abuse and her own history with narrowly avoided CSA, it makes total sense that upon learning someone she cares about was being similarly exploited by an adult that she would have some very strong feelings about it.

Airi's meltdown in response is also something I have mixed feelings on. As a piece of characterization in isolation, it's fascinating and I think it provides some important insight into how and why Airi was able to rationalize and justify her abuse of Hikaru to herself, even though she clearly knows it was objectively wrong. I honestly can't help but see parallels in the way she centers her own feelings and pain and uses that as justification for her actions with Ayumi, Ai's mother, who had a more subdued but emotionally similar breakdown when talking about her history with her daughter.

Ultimately, I do feel it adds more than it takes away - I would much rather see the story continue to humanize characters who could otherwise have just been left as uncomplicatedly black and white Evil People Doing Bad Things. People very rarely begin acting in cruel, exploitative or antisocial ways out of nowhere and I think the manga's story is better for highlighting that this is the case.

H O W E V E R. . . where my feelings become more negative is the talk that follows, but I have like a million things to say about that so I'll put a pin in it for now to not derail too badly.

Given how Airi responds here, I'm also suddenly very curious as to if this direct confrontation was what put an end to her abuse of Hikaru. It's hard for me to imagine her going back to it after being so directly called out and if that's the case, I can't help but wonder if this was the trigger for the HKAI romance. I already talked last chapter that there's some imagery already implying Hikaru views Ai as his light, which OnK thematically associates with the role of a savior in someone's life. If Ai really did manage to intervene and protect Hikaru from Airi's abuse, then that would have intensified those feelings one hundredfold.

holy shit akane AND miyako are back! wow, isn't it totally crazy that across the arcs where they could have contributed to and potentially resolved the conflicts at play they were just totally absent but now they're just reappearing without comment or reaction to any of that other shit!

As I mentioned before, I have really mixed feelings on this scene with Miyako and the others. In isolation, I do like it and I think it kind of brings into explicit text something that had been just floating around as vibes before, which is how absolutely symbiotic with misogyny and sexual exploitation the entertainment industry is. The way misogyny played into Ai's exploration was always a really fascinating part of her arc to me, but given that Akasaka at least publicly presents as a person without that sort of lived experience, I was curious as to how much was intentional and how much was accidental, just because of how surprising it was to see a man centering this sort of thing so thoroughly in his writing. This scene with Miyako makes it clear that it's something Akasaka absolutely wants to highlight and discuss in Oshi no Ko, to the point of him being willing to call out even likable and sympathetic characters like Taiki for casually taking part in and perpetuating it.

THAT SAID… I really don't like that this scene, accidentally or otherwise, ends up centering and discussing Airi's victimhood over Hikaru's. His story has always been an indictment of the way children, specifically, are at risk in the entertainment industry not just in terms of being exploited as workers, but in the ways that adults in power can and will use their positions of authority to do exactly what Airi has done. That is what needed to be discussed here; the way that Hikaru's abuse is in no way an isolated incident and how people like Airi will continue to get away with hurting children so long as the industry - and society at large - treats children like second-class citizens at best and commodities at worst. I do think this scene is trying to use Airi and Miyako's experiences as a jumping off point to talk about exploitation in general and the way a person's ability to say 'no' can be compromised by outside pressures but it talks so much and so exclusively about the experiences of young girls and adult women specifically that it's hard not to read it as the story placing more value - at least for now - in exploring Airi's perspective over Hikaru's and that just feels kind of grody to me.

The timeline of this chapter is also just… really weird? Given Frill's, uh, appearance at the end of the chapter I have to assume it's taking place right after she films her scene with Aqua last chapter but that makes no sense given where the Ai and Airi confrontation is placed…? My best guess is that the scene we get at the start is some kind of visualization of the script by the characters who are reading it but it's all still very needlessly confusing lol

frill just barging in with her tits out when she knew rbkn were waiting for her was so fucking funny though i gotta admit. weird ass lizard woman.

Her mentioning it was her own decision to do the scene like that is also shrimptresting because it seems to implicitly confirm that there is, thank god, SOME kind of intimacy coordinator on set that the cast are talking about these scenes with. I actually also think the level of trust and comfort between Aqua and Frill this implies is also really interesting…? In general, I've always really like the idea of AQFR friendship, so this is kind of making me daydream a bit about seeing more of one…

As for the ending… man, it's such transparent reaction bait that I can't really summon the energy to get annoyed LOL. At least we won't have to wait a whole extra week to see what it amounts to.

Weary as I am with the reaction bait cliffhangers, I am at least glad to see the story coming around to finally addressing the elephant in the room here. As the chapter end text points out in the Japanese versions of this chapter, a scene like this was an inevitability of playing Ai and Hikaru and it's been where I've expected to see the underlying tension that's been floating around AQRB's relationship since the past life reveal finally get drawn out and addressed. Given its placement in the story (ch 142 is only the second chapter of its corresponding volume) and the framing of that last page as more of a gag/punchline than a serious dramatic beat, I don't things are quite going to play out like Ruby seems to want, but I'm nevertheless curious as to wtf is even going to happen

Honestly, at this point, I kind of just want Akasaka to shit or get off the pot. If he's going to bring a topic like incest to the table, then I want him to actually have something to say about it that isn't just Ruby going 'kyaa oniichan' and acting like a fanservice imouto character from a harem anime. If we're going to have something like 'Ruby falls in love with her brother' actually happen in story, then I want to see how she feels about this, how she rationalizes it, how she expects this to play out when she and Aqua live in a society that by and large condemns incest and treats it as taboo. At the very least, give me something to dig into and examine and chew on that wouldn't have already felt dated during the mid 2010s little sister boom.

[fandomwave]

"No Guys I Swear You Have To Go Out Of Your Way To Find It!" And why I don't love this take

This is about the Ha Ha funny Coffin Game which includes but isn't limited to topics of: Cannibalism, Murder, and the core topic of this little rant, Incest.

feel totally free to skip this if that's a hard pass from you! No shame in knowing what you're about including things you'd rather not engage with.

"I know what I'm about"

Good! So this entire little rant? Vent? Observation? Comes from the recent uptick I've seen of posts in the Tcoaal tag where people come in to defend the game with more or less this argument:

"No no guys the incest is really easy to avoid. You have to go out of your way to find it. The game even WARNS you that this is a bad route. Its nowhere in any part of the game beyond this. Honestly it's just not there actually"

And I get the want to defend the game as being more than 'The funny Incest Game'. I agree that The Coffin Of Andy and Leyley is WAY MORE than just the funny incest game. To reduce the game down to that would be a disservice to the writing that went into this game. Andrew and Ashley deserve way more and Numlie themselves deserves better credit than that.

h o w e v e r

However, I think it's also doing more harm than good to try and sweep their dynamic under the rug as something that is 'easily avoidable' and 'totally optional' I hate to break the news but Andrew's romantic inclinations towards Ashley are pretty obvious in Chapter 1. They certainly aren't as obvious as they are in Chapter 2, I'll give everyone that. But they are there, and to act like they aren't... Not to mention the defense EVERYONE gives so readily is that 'The Game Warns You This Is A Bad Thing To Do' is a lot more complicated than it might appear on first blush. First and foremost the 'narrator' is the one to say: "Somehow it seems like a highly questionable idea to take this route"

which imho is a far cry from "This is the bad end" "This has incest" "you are probably a bad person for taking this ending" that some seem to argue is the 'warning' you get. Secondly we should remember it isn't 'you' the narrator is talking to here. Effectively it's still Ashley first and foremost. When Ashley responds 'I know what I'm about' that is also the game showing us that Ashley knows what this means and still wants it.

Enthusiastic consent if you will

So what's the point to this little post eh?

Well I think it's doing a little more harm than good to both the story but also anyone interested in checking the game out who might actually be genuinely triggered by such topics. Tcoaal has the siblings romantic inclinations laced into the story from point A to B. It's impossible to avoid actually. You can go the entire game ignoring any acts of kindness towards Andrew as Ashley or Ashley as Andrew, and you'll always get the scenes of Andrew playing with Ashley's hair. You will always get the text informing the player that Andrew fakes panic attacks to share a bed with Ashley. You will always get the CG of Andrew's hand in Ashley's belt loops. You will always hear the voicemail 'You think you're better than me because you can fuck him and I can't' from Ashley concerning Andrew. You will always get the hints from Mrs Graves that she knows they are too close but did nothing to curb that behavior.

It is wholly unavoidable no matter what route you take. Burial, Decay, Questionable or not.

I think to argue that it's just a silly little ending you can get does a disservice to people who might genuinely be upset by that, and I think more than anything a game that is at the very least talking about incest rather brazenly deserves the warnings it earns!

I love this game to bits, anyone who's been within ear shot of me has had to deal with me talking their fucking ear off about the Sibling Abuse Simulator. I've gone on in excruciating detail how I think Tcoaal's writing has been done dirty by saying that Andrew and Ashley's romance is just a 'ha ha shock ending', comparing it to the siblings ending in something like Corpse Party (a game where the incest ending is 100% totally avoidable, and the story has exactly nothing to do with incest as a topic, and is only brought up if you trigger that ending. One where I agree with the argument that it's just there for shock value)

Anyways I see where people are coming from, I can understand the want to defend the game as more than the sum of it's parts and I agree that it does suck that this seems to be the thing everyone is hyper-focusing on in terms of it's breach of containment. I get it man, I really do. It deserves so much better than being reduced down the way it has by the greater internet.

But to say it's avoidable.. I dunno it's like taking the dragons out of Game of Thrones. The story as a whole about so much more than the dragons.. However you'd have a fundamentally different story if they weren't there, wouldn't you?

[thecircularsystem]

Take 2: Take on Sysmed

I wrote up an entire post (well, half of a post, but it was already over 1k words) on this topic, but that isn't going to be seeing the light of day. Off to the private blog it goes.

Take two. Sorry if my words are a bit disorganized; this is a really... really personal topic for me, and to see it brought up as it is has been hard. I need to get some sort of words out there or I think I'll go insane.

Genuine TL;DR: I used to go by the label pro-endo sysmed. It was stupid, but there were a lot of reasons -- the biggest because I needed to claim some sort of control over the fact that everyone hated me, and at least if I was a bigot, it gave them a reason to hate me. I discuss my experience with kink at pride discourse and how gentle teaching changed my perspectives, but "treating the bigot like the bigot they were" was just triggering and didn't help at all. Lastly, I talk about shame and how the term "sysmed" is largely (if it's ever really used for "activism" at all) attempting to teach through shame, which isn't effective. There's also a bonus screenshot at the end of the spark of this discussion from discord.

Not very long ago, though it feels like eons now, I identified "proudly" as a pro-endo sysmed. I recall saying some bullshit about how it was "reclaiming an insult that was used against me," but I was in denial. Hardcore, heavily traumatized denial.

I was just trying to claim the ostracization as something that was my choice, instead of everyone else's.

It was prideful, foolish, and hurtful, and I still stay up at night thinking about how fucking stupid I was. I've had to do a lot of therapy to look at my younger self and not hate him for who I am now, but moreso, who I was then.

Because with everything in my life, it was what I needed. It was all I had.

...

When I first returned to the pro-endo community, I was met completely with scorn, hatred, and distrust. It's hard to sort out the memories now -- more and more signs that it was heavily traumatic for me -- but I remember a little. "The Respectability Politics Syscourser" who sucked anti-endo dick and licked their boots, apparently. I'm sorry that the first person who validated my struggles -- who treated me like a disordered system in need of medical help -- was an anti-endo. I didn't agree with his beliefs. Not at all! I fucking hated him, honestly, I felt disgusted at having to "play along with the enemy."

I even joined a server, which I later called home and formed an (unhealthy) attachment to, just to "speedrun getting banned" from an anti-endo server. I did this more than once.

I was pro-endo, through and through. And yet...

I was frequently met with the term sysmed, online, despite my pro-endo beliefs. I was harassed for being friends with anti-endos, because "they're the bad guys." I was told that I needed to "look to myself for why I was being harassed" when I explained to a user, with screenshots, exactly who was harassing me and what had been said (slurs and suicide bait, 17 times in a row iirc, across a single day). I was told repeatedly that it was what would happen, since I allowed anti-endos to interact with me, because once an anti-endo, always an anti-endo.

Once a bigot, always a bigot.

...

Each time it happened, I was brought back to my middle and high school years. Literally -- flashbacks are a bitch.

I was raised a Republican. I finally, finally changed my voter registration this year, after being forced into selecting R as a child. I was raised racist, homophobic, transphobic -- any form of bigotry, and I probably was raised with it. I went into detail in my first draft, but genuinely... I don't even know how worth it it is to try to explain to you all how absolutely alienating it is to be everything you were raised to despise, fear, and pray for salvation for.

And the online community didn't fucking make that easier. (In all honesty, neither did the offline communities I was in, but again, the trauma dumping needs to be held back with a goddamn knife at this point).

When I first started saying my opinions online, I received harassment for my bigotry. "STFU Terf." "Christians DNI get the fuck off my post." Nothing as horrific as what I've experienced in my time as a syscourser, but I witnessed far, far worse from far more outspoken individuals. I didn't say much about my bigotry online, as I had already learned, by that point, that every single word out of my mouth was clearly the wrong words, and that I was just a stupid, horrible person for ever believing anything.

And online spaces reinforced these disordered beliefs.

I think the example that stands out the most (and forgive the 18+ content here, but this goes on the main blog for once, I just need this out-) was when I got into Kink at Pride discourse. I was horrified by the idea of kink at pride, as someone who experienced absolutely horrific abuse from kink shit. I couldn't imagine someone in a leather mask at pride because of my trauma. I couldn't... Ah, knife point again, trauma dumping.

Anyways. I went on an entire rant online about it. About how people have triggers, etc etc.

I was met with slurs, harassment, and people spamming my DMs so much with explicit BDSM that I still, to this day, struggle to DM over tumblr with anyone other than my now spouse.

So I went to my friends, complaining about it. Because this just reinforced my beliefs. This reinforced for me that KAP was a bad idea, because all the people who believed it insulted me, harassed me, and triggered me. Clearly, they're the bad guys, right?

I am still so, so grateful for the friend I had at the time who (incredibly gently, incredibly carefully, understanding before I even did just how traumatized I was) explained how kink belonged at pride, and the historical precedent for it, and everything. And I think the most important thing out of that conversation was where they said it's okay that I was wrong.

IT'S OKAY THAT I WAS WRONG.

Just thinking about that moment makes me cry again. It was okay to be wrong. It was safe to be -- yes -- the bigot in the situation. Because I was! I can recognize that now! But at the time, all I could realize by the end of the conversation was that I had been wrong, and it was absolutely fucking shit-myself-levels of terrifying.

Being wrong isn't safe. Being wrong means I deserved it.

I deserved the harassment. I deserved the hatred. I deserved the pain, and misery, and I deserved the triggers that fed on my SA, and I deserved to be punished.

Because I was a bigot.

But they showed me I didn't deserve pain and insults and hatred just because I didn't know. Just because I couldn't know, until someone taught me the way I needed to be taught.

They took the time to figure out how to tell me the information -- which strangers online had not done -- and they gave me what I needed. They didn't insult me. They didn't fucking crucify me for what I had said.

They weren't polite or sugarcoating, either. They were gentle, but blunt. Firm and kind.

And, because of that, overnight I became less homophobic and less transphobic. I made public posts about it. I was thrilled, at the time, when even a single ounce of praise came down the anonymous inbox.

"I'm glad you're not a stupid bigot anymore."

...

I look at syscourse in the tags.

"I'm not here to make bigots comfortable."

Cool. They'll keep being bigots then.

"I shouldn't have to be polite to people who don't believe in my existence!"

Cool. They'll keep being bigots then.

"If you support sysmeds, you're supporting sysmed rhetoric. If you let one Nazi at the bar, it's a Nazi bar."

Cool antisemitism. They'll keep being bigots then.

If all of your activism for plural rights begins and ends at the word sysmed, you aren't doing anything to combat sysmedical beliefs. You're just keeping the bigots angry.

...

Not long ago, I used the term sysmed for myself. I still look back with disgust at my prior self, and force myself to love him for what he survived, how he did it, even if it was "wrong." Even if we're still "the bad guy" because we love our past self, because we fought to survive and change. Because we had once been bigoted, but we didn't hold that against us.

I still look back at messages sent in a plural server I'm in about how "I honestly both wanna try to figure out what makes them tick and also wanna run in the opposite direction of them" and how they would like to preemptively kick me from their server since I was "so confusing." I doubt that individual remembers saying it, and I don't hold it against them. I would be uncomfortable around me too.

I just also have my own shoes to wear, and my own perspective to see, and looking back now, I know why I used that term. It wasn't... fucking reclaiming, or whatever I said to myself to live in mental health hell denial for a little bit longer.

It was so that, since nobody gave a single fucking shit about me, at least I knew the reason why.

Because I was a bigot. And I deserved every ounce of hate I got.

Right?

...

So, my thoughts on sysmed, and hopefully this'll be the last time I mention this.

The term, as it is used currently in the community, forces those with bigoted mentalities -- mentalities they may or may not even be aware of being bigoted -- to remain bigoted. It slots people into The Bad Guy role effortlessly, allowing people to dehumanize bigotry when the source of bigotry is how people treat others. Dehumanizing bigotry only encourages the spread of it.

I think there are times in discussions where it's used properly. I've seen sysmed used to genuinely discuss an individual's beliefs and how they were, specifically, medicalizing all of the varied forms of systemhood/plurality/multiplicity, and how that was wrong. It's so, so rarely, but I've seen it. I've even used the term in discussion before, though sparingly, as I rarely find use for it in discussion.

But 99.99 times out of 100, it is used to insult someone else.

...

I'm a teacher. I don't know about you, but I never learned -- and I absolutely do not fucking teach -- through shame.

And the term sysmed only shames people into doing what you want them to.

If you want people to learn -- to grow -- then you have to fucking work for it. Not rely on a catchy term.

...

(Below, I'm going to include a screenshot from a discussion I had about this in another server. For context, I had just said that I also feel a lot of discomfort for the terms TERF and transmed. I couldn't find a good way to squeeze in this part of the discussion, so have a bonus.)

[saltiestpie]

Viren's Death and Transformative Justice

Trigger warning: there will be mentions of csa and rape but nothing graphic

It's time to talk politics! When it comes to Viren's finale, I'm honestly disappointed (but not surprised) that the writers chose a cop-out in a form of "heroic death" rather than to show a person who's hurt others put effort into becoming better and atoning for his crimes. From a political perspective, this is related to my stance against carceral (and capital) punishment and in favor of prison abolition.

Viren would either rot in a cell or die, instead of getting a chance to heal, which is a regressive and reactionary way of thinking, completely in line with the right wing ideology but which has been so normalized in our culture that liberals and many leftists don't question it. The general norm is thus - if someone does a crime, they should go to prison, regardless of how the prison will break them and make them worse. And that's not counting all the people who want criminals to be killed.

To talk about my anti punitive justice stance, I would like to take a darker turn and talk about a very serious type of crime. There's this amazing video by a youtuber Kathrin where she talks about prison abolition and how the carceral system hurts people (including victims of crime!) more than it helps them. And she uses her own experience as s CSA survivor as a lens through which she looks at this sensitive topic.

The video is 37 minutes long and features a heavy topic so I understand if you don't want to watch it but I really really recommend you do, because it will challenge your preconceptions about justice and the carceral system.

However, if you really don't have the time/desire/spoons for it, here are the main points:

the carceral system should be abolished

it should be replaced by transformative justice which focuses on taking care of victims above punishing the perpetrators, as well as crime prevention by understanding the root causes of crime.

Okay, you might ask - so what does this have to do with Viren, who chose to die? Well, in addition to the philosophy that he had to die or didn't deserve mercy being directly linked to the current system, there's also this section towards the end of the video (24:50) where Kathrin discusses what transformative justice would look like for her. Emphasis on the last part, as different victims would want different things:

"For me, transformative justice would look like sitting sitting with my abuser in a circle of care with people all around us, flanking us, attending to our healing, becoming our surrogate family as they facilitate our conversation."

How powerful is that? And she's talking about someone who raped her as a child. Viren is not even close to the monster Kathrin is talking about.

So let's talk Soren and Viren. I've seen plenty of people say they hate Viren for what he did to Soren (which is absolutely valid!) and I assume they care about Soren's well being. So tell me, which sounds better for Soren - having his abusive father die on him, leaving him with a gaping wound and a ton of unanswered questions or getting to sit with him, surrounded by people he trusts and who can support him and having an extension of the conversation they almost had in the dungeon, where he gets to heal together with his father? He doesn't have to forgive Viren, but having that might provide him closure and help him contextualize certain things.

And don't get me wrong - there are parts in the show that I think are excellent in terms of mutual healing - Viren acknowledging what he'd done to Soren and taking full responsibility for it was very powerful. But it lost its momentum with Viren's death.

One of the central themes in TDP is ending the cycles of violence and yeah, the show does focus on it, I'm not saying it doesn't. But it keeps the entire political aspect of it firmly within the status quo, choosing what I would call a morally cowardly approach to this. And I'm sorry for using such strong language, I really am, but I think political centrism truly is a cowardly approach to politics. And politics in the show matter because the writers chose to make it matter.

Ultimately, whether you enjoyed the end of Viren's arc or not is up to you. It will mostly depend on how you read Viren's character throughout the show. I just genuinely find that ending emotionally unsatisfying and the perpetuation of the punitive justice mindset is one of the reasons, whether the writers intended it or not.

[unforth]

I'm glad your KS problem got solved. Can you please use some time to post about Palestine? People are being killed in your name. Use your platform please. Thank you

Hey anon! So...no, I won't be doing that. What the fuck do you even mean "people are being killed in my name"? Absolutely no one is killing in my name, and I owe talking about it more to no one.

First, I trigger pretty severely to harm to children, which automatically means that a great deal of the coverage of Palestine is very triggering for me.

Second, I think there are plenty of people already blogging about this, that not every single blog needs to become wall-to-wall discussion of Palestine, and that mass-blogging about the conflict is entirely performative.

Third, in general I rarely blog about political events, and when I do it's virtually always US election (FOR FUCK'S SAKE YOU HAVE TO VOTE) and/or things about censorship, because those are the areas that interest me and that I personally feel strongly about.

Fourth, I think the demand that a stranger blog about that one specific event, ignoring all the other ongoing tragedies in the world (the war in Ukraine and the genocide in the Congo, to name two that spring immediately to mind) is honestly heckin' weird.

Fifth, I own and run a business, and it's entirely within my rights to decide to keep that business apart from incredibly divisive current events. The business account (which is entirely separate from my personal account - it's not a side blog, it's a separate log in) - when it interacts with political topics at all - primarily blogs about recent happenings in publishing and related fields (so, legislation about free speech, ongoing strikes, etc.) and about recent happenings related to queer things (positive legislation and negative legislation being proposed or passed). I intentionally do not blog about other political topics, because they have nothing to do with the business. The most political the Press has gotten about the conflict in the Middle East is that we've quietly removed a couple books from rec lists that were written by authors or released by publishers who have managed, by publicizing their OWN views, to become especially controversial (especially on Tiktok) and even that I did extremely reluctantly, I just don't want to get Tiktok cancelled because we spent 5 seconds saying we liked a book by someone they currently hate, because Tiktok is Like That.

As to my own personal views on the conflict, which you are in absolutely no way entitled to know but which I have previously shared publicly so don't mind sharing again, I am a Jew and I was raised to believe that when all the rest of the world turned on us, Israel would always be the one place where we'd be safe, and I clung to that belief over 40 years of watching Israel become increasingly right wing and jingoistic, continuing to believe that the surest path to safety and security for everyone involved was a two-state solution.

As I previously wrote here, in the face of Israel's current actions against Palestine, I no longer believe that. If this is how Israel behaves, I no longer think Israel has a right to exist. I do still think that the best outcome right now is a two-state solution, but one that involves the complete abolition of the current Israeli government and army, to be replaced with a system that isn't, ya know, disgustingly fascist - and that if that can't be done, we need a one-state solution, and that one state shouldn't be Israel. This is my personal opinion.

However, I also acknowledge that for many Jews, this is an incredibly loaded, difficult topic, and I would never align my business to an official position like this because I have no desire to alienate people who I know feel as conflicted and complicated about this as I do myself. I take it as a matter of simple real fact that I respect my friends and colleagues enough to accept that they may reach different conclusions than I have about this, and I don't want them to feel unwelcome in a space that I've created because I on an individual level have reached a different conclusions about what I believe to be the best ending for this conflict than they have. We also do not allow political conversations of this stripe in our server for the same reason.

No matter how much people on both sides keep trying to paint this conflict as black and white, right and wrong, with one-and-done magic single-switch solutions, it's not that simple, never has been, and never will be, and the reality on the ground of ways to resolve this are also not that simple. Now, to be clear, I think it IS simple and accurate to say: the killing needs to stop i.m.m.e.d.i.a.t.e.l.y. That's a given and I think I'd be hard-pressed to find anyone in the circles I travel in who'd disagree. But what should happen AFTER that? That's where I think reasonable people can still disagree about what should happen next to that land and the people living on it.

Anyway.

I should probably stop talking before, in my effort to be nuanced and balanced, I say something that leads someone to think I should be canceled. I am against the genocide 100% and this conflict has turned me from reluctantly vaguely okay with zionism to anti-zionist, but I also am tired of seeing people act like big problems have easy solutions, and I'm tired of the suggestion that anyone who isn't performatively outraged about this specific situation 24/7 is a bad person with wrong opinions.

Like, I think you need to take a look in the mirror and ask yourself why you thought this was an appropriate ask to send a stranger. I'm genuinely disgusted that you'd try to turn a conflict that has nothing to do with me into something I'm personally responsible for because it's being done "in my name." Honestly, what the fuck is wrong with you? Antisemitic much? I'm a Jew, but that doesn't and never will mean that the Israeli government speaks for me or in my name. Fuck you.

[system-of-a-feather]

Sorry for all the Tulpa-discourse lately, this is more of a Buddhist ramble / discussion than syscourse but ya know

It's been on my mind a lot between it being in syscourse circles heavily and the fact that I'm actually currently on a system-designated theraputic homework assignment to reconnect with Buddhist concepts and to incorporate it into my self care routine so I can get back to my baseline after doing something of a survival mode to help balance out XIV being in borderline-crisis lately resulting in my burn out

I'm (as Riku as a part) actually usually very hesitant to talk about much of my cultural and personal experiences and AAPI-rooted parts of my life because of old system dynamics, persecution, and a lot of other things that make me very anxious and prone to fawning when me existing in a space I am involved in is at all challenged which is largely why I leave it to XIV to voice it for me since he also is the guy that keeps me from falling into old dynamics. (<- literally is the person who thought I was *checks notes* faking being asian like that is a possible thing let alone something I thought LONGER than me faking DID)

So honestly, its kind of a bit cathartic occasionally to actually have a sense of self and security enough to have the balls to actually defend myself in terms of this sort of crap and assert that I actually, ya know, have an experience in life. So as much as I typically hate the negativity and contention that bringing this stuff up brings, it's honestly theraputic and part of me expressing a valid part of my existence and self - so with XIV's nudging I tend to let myself have that space.

With all that said, I wanted to bring up a discussion point and correction point now that I'm not genuinely and authentically triggered about racism, I think a thing I do want to comment on in regards to the rhetoric on the tulpa topic that anti-tulpa-term people get wrong when talking about Buddhism and """""""tulpamancy""""""" is that Buddhism is not a closed culture or closed practice and stating that does a disservice to the group as well; albeit its the lesser of two wrongs by a LONG shot so I shirk it off as a "to get to later" point

But Buddhism is incredibly open to anyone interested on engaging with it and its part of why - when I specifically talk about the critiques of """"""Western Tulpamancy"""""" in terms of Buddhism I try to remind myself to desalinate between "westerner" and "white". There are many many many white Buddhists - as there are many black, latin, native, Middle eastern, etc Buddhists as well.

In some cases and for some people, Buddhism is a religion and/or spirituality, for others it's more of a way of life / philosophy. Tibetan Buddhism, as I know it as a non-Tibetian Buddhist, is a lot more on the religion side of things which is a different topic I honestly am under knowledgeable to comment on - but overall the thing that ties a lot of Buddhism together is the core and underlying principles of acceptance, letting things go, connecting to the greater world, and just general enlightenment as a means of finding peace.

Myself, and a lot of Buddhists, gladly encourage people to look into Buddhists practices and principles and ideology because its honestly extremely healing and regardless of if you are SUPER into it and go become a monk or what not or if you just dabble in it, so long as you do it respectfully and understand your biases and genuinely have GOOD RESPECTFUL intent and an interest on understanding it more, its an amazing and really welcoming thing to get involved in.

The thing all the 'pro-tulpas' quote on the Dalai Lama is honestly entirely true. Almost everyone could benefit from the practices and principles found within Buddhism.

That is to say however, that there is a large difference between spending a day or two at a monastery and learning more about the culture and the ideas of Buddhism and integrating them into your life and just grabbing this Really Cool and Quirky High Level Principle / Ritual / Practice of a Specific Typically Very Dedicated Version of Buddhism and ignoring EVERYTHING ELSE about Buddhism and saying "this aspect, this aspect I like and I'm going to completely warp it how I like it while calling it and/or referencing it in terms of Buddhism to make it look intellectual and enlightened for me to be involved in it."

I've seen it said in some Buddhist communities and discussions regarding the more ritual and involved aspects of Buddhism - specifically in regards to the Mahayana approaches - that a lot of the practices and rituals when used inappropriately or unguided can be "dangerous" with danger in this sense being a worsening of the individuals conditions resulting in an increase in a lot of the core things almost all versions of Buddhism considers unhealthy and unideal such as increase in conflict, desire, and disconnect from the greater world and thus generally more suffering.

And on that front, while not being of the Mahayana school of thought and as a result not really believing so much in bodhisattvas, I can - from my personal view and perspective - entirely understand how frustrating it is to see a term often sighed with "buddhists roots" be used in a way that - in my opinion - almost exemplifies the exact opposite of what I understand to be the crux of the idea of Buddhist peace.

A large part of me getting more involved into the concepts Buddhism has to offer and honestly a thing that had both helped my healing journey and how I interact with my system is the large realization that the existence of "I" doesn't really have much ground to it in what it is and what it means and what defines "I".

That identity and human nature is largely a mobile and constant changing force part of a larger and grander thing that is just really existence as a whole and there is little that makes me more unique than say the trees or the squirrel looking for nut or a bird singing in the tree other than the fact that I have the "curse" of conscious awareness and 'advanced intellect' that makes it so that I both feel the need to >Be< something and the bother of "the next thing". A large part of practice is letting go of a lot of notions that a lot of society and life reinforce - one of the most in my current stage of learning and practice - is letting go of the concept of "me and I" and just, ya know, being.

And to me, looking at the """""Western Tulpamancy Community""""" you have people who are sectoring off a part of themselves, their experience, their life whatever and not only identifying it as seperate from them (NO!!!! We are all connected >:[ <- light hearted comment) but also giving that part of themselves an entire identity of it's own and a whole second sense of "I" beyond what was already there - combined with the overall themes of 'developing your tulpa' by giving it more traits and details and stuff until it 'becomes independent' is rooted in such American / Western individualism which DO not even get me started on how toxic individualism is and how inherently opposite it is to Buddhism and

//deep breath//

I'm getting ahead of myself, the truth is while the concept of 'creating a headmate' or whatever greatly concerns me as a Buddhist - as a human and as a Buddhist (in a different perspective), seeking out to change people is the last thing I'm interested in and it's honestly not this uber horrible or harmful thing and its really not my business; so as long as it is making someone happy and what not, I really don't care if it doesn't match to my theory cause ya know, theory is that - just theory. Live and let be ya know - yall have your own life to live and yall know how to live your own life better than I could assume to know so I'm not gonna try to tell you how to live it. Philosophical theory comes second to philosophical practice and practice says to live and let be.

But its just really frustrating a lot of the time to see how the topic is handled when its far from really what it is. And in theory, I should let it go because honestly, people using the word "tulpa" to describe experiences that are largely anti-thetical to my understanding of Buddhism - while annoying - is not the end of the world and fostering hate and aggression does nothing but increase the overall suffering (dukkha) in the world. Often, when I think about talking about it or getting mad, I do tend to repeat that mantra back to myself and most of the time I refrain and leave it be.

That being said, XIV runs on the philosophy and critique of the over theroretical approach to Buddhism over the realistic and practical in saying that by "letting go of" certain frustrations and annoyances and grievances - while healthier for the individual person - enables and perpetuates long term suffering for the masses and years to come. So that while it would be best for me / us to let it go and exist in a state closer to Buddhist peace and doing so is an entirely valid decision (thus why I respect Buddhists who say using the tulpa-term is fine), I would also be choosing to maintain my peace over acknowledging and speaking up about the honestly long and ongoing racism and disrespect that plague those that I feel particular kinship with and in XIV's perspective (one that I am starting to take on a bit more lately) - the choice of personal peace is a selfish one that is complicit in increasing the suffering of the world as a whole in favor for the individual "I" that honestly has become a bit distasteful for our system.

But anyways, I digress. Buddhist ramble done.

[eeblouissant]

[Femme!Dorothy anon, this is a long mess and I wish I could articulate myself better because your thiughts are so interesting] yes exactly. Dorothy doesn't want to be associated with anything masculine, and she genuinely is not masculine. She wears the occasional tie and is straightforward and that's it. She is in no way masc in style or behaviour other than being tall with a deep voice. In fact she's very feminine, her style is entirely conventionally on trend femme as a younger woman and as an older woman she is still clearly feminine just not trendily so (her silhouettes are from older decades and her overall style is very unique for the time yet today looks almost proto Boho in certain respects- imagine a modern substitute arts teacher in a getup of hers.). Why it changed is something you nailed, the divorce hit her self esteem hard and I think facing the reality of that plus how she's treated in general drove her from her ideal style, she gets actively laughed at and mocked when she dresses up. So she's retreated to a compromise, a safe style that she feels comfortable in. I can't articulate my thoughts on the change in her whenever she feels nice in a glitzy gown but I know you'll see where I'm trying to go and how important those glimpses are. And to go back to behaviour, this is why I was actually thinking exactly of the scenario you brought up with the strap. She's a feminine woman who has spent most of her life not being seen as either of those things (and then having both tied to a teenaged pregnancy and marriage which is another depressing complication, her femininity and womanhood are by association denigrated as bad choices, moral failings to be redeemed by being a good mother and wife. what does it mean when Stan cheated on her, in this context?). Dorothy wants to be treated as a desirable woman, a lady, and that goes further than wanting to be seen as pretty in a dress. It's also why I think Rose would understand her far easier than Blanche, why I think Blanche would actually trigger her at some point, because Blanche blatantly sees Dorothy as a masculine figure. She puts Dorothy in a protector role, at times almost desexualizes her because of how she's masculinized her. I don't say this as hate, I love Blanche, but Blanche comes from such a specific and different world to the others and its not out of hate that she does it either, it's simply how Dorothy currently fits into her understanding of the world with the tools she's been given. That's really a whole other topic and I don't want to just shove a whole thesis at you that you might not agree with so back to the original point. Yeah, Dorothy wouldn't in a million years want to wear a strap or have a partner assume she wants to lead/top/penetrate. It would be so deeply, deeply humiliating to her in that context and the opposite of healing. You portrayed the exact opposite of this perfectly in your recent fic, you get what her fantasy would be. And I've vomited so many half formed thoughts at you I'm going to stop talking now. The only thing I want to bring up before I shut up is when they're in the Rusty Anchor bathroom because it kills me everytime on so many levels, seeing Blanche wrestle with actually seeing Dorothy as a beautiful feminine woman, how Dorothy clearly understands how Blanche usually sees her, and Dorothy saying she's jealous of Blanche every day of her life because God, that scene is practically this conversation we're having distilled with how the world sees Dorothy and how much pain that causes her. [This message is all over the place and so long. Please feel free to delete it or only quote little parts. It boils down to me thinking you're so right with your headcanons and meta.]

oh anon 🥹🥹🥹 hand in marriage asap because you just get me - oh my god, how could I ever delete or ignore an ask like this !!!!! I absolutely live for your thoughts always (I am in love, seriously, where do I even begin?)

Honestly - and this might be insane so hear me out - would it be too crazy to say that I think those few times when Dorothy does wear elements of a “masculine” outfit, it could possibly be tied back to her own internal struggle with how she presents herself & how she’s perceived? Like, she thinks that maybe the bullying will quit if she gives in and embraces it, if she takes it back and tries to make it something she’s in control of, to try and enjoy something she feels so deeply uncomfortable with (story of her life tbh) because maybe she’ll be able to drown it out then???? are we seeing the vision … just a little thought that came up after reading that first bit, I like angst a normal amount. I feel like there’s definitely a shift away from that “masc energy” as the show goes on but maybe I’m nuts - of course it could have been for many different reasons !!! But I do think it’s mostly a show of growth & shedding those insecurities / stereotypes / etc.

YES !!!!!!!!!! oh my god dorothy fits the 1920s silhouette sooooo soso well & I think that’s what she would say she gravitates toward if asked (on the surface of course. We know by now that the layers & hiding herself is a result of her past and the constant bullying - I do believe that she may also just genuinely find comfort in dressing this way on some level, I don’t think it’s all negative, but it is definitely rooted in insecurity. The fact that she isn’t the bitter type, going on and on about the body she used to have & how she used to look, is kind of shocking to me ? But also a very good example of her gentle nature!!!!! she’s a lot more sensitive and “submissive” than she lets on imo. Very very gentle soul, she is not what she makes people think she is and it’s so devastating to watch her never let that go in canon because we all know she never will.)

Oh my god exactly exactly exactly — like a lady !!!! I’m so glad you brought up Blanche here (and to the blanche enthusiasts, I’m sorry in advance, look away…) because, listen. I have and will always have a problem with the way blanche literally bully’s her constantly & also ropes rose into it a lot ??? like, does dorothy fire back at her just as harshly, yes. Is it (playfully) deserved on both sides sometimes, yes. But holy hell - it seems like every time blanche fires an insult at Dorothy it gets her right in that delicate place because she always puts up her walls so quickly, like she’s genuinely being attacked. And especially having comments like those come from someone like Blanche - the absolute opposite of everything Dorothy has ever been told is wrong with her. Can you even begin to imagine? This has been talked about a few times in the fandom but it’s a subject that makes me especially upset. Blanche is just so unreasonably harsh. I don’t blame Dorothy for some of the things she says to her sometimes I’m sorry 😭🤚🏻. That ep where they were sitting a the table talking about what they’d say at each others eulogy’s , after Blanche said she always felt safe with Dorothy in the house? Yeah, I dont blame her for throwing out that last comment, I would’ve too. Like wow, okay… ( for the record dorothy is not like exempt from also being nasty sometimes, she’s made some insane comments as well 😭)

Blanche most definitely triggers her, many many times we see it!!! It’s so heartbreaking and I could write an essay on the whole subject. And she HAS to be aware of how severe Dorothy’s insecurities are, Blanche is far from oblivious. She’s not stupid, the whole thing is kind of sick. Petition to stop beating Dorothy into the ground please ??????????? Holy hell ???? I absolutely 100% agree with you anon and feel very strongly about the subject. Of the four of them Dorothy gets it the worst idc - it’s sooooooo heartbreaking because she’s the last of them that can handle it, deep down. Yet another topic I could talk about for hours!!!!

I have manyyyyyyyyyyy many things to say on Dorothy’s insecurities playing a massive role in how she views & feels about sex but I’ll save them for my side account, for now know that you are SO correct anon - it absolutely would be humiliating for her (incredible choice of words btw - holy that was so spot on) and would most definitely end in tears. I’ve brought it up five million times now & I promise I’ll shut up until it’s actually published but this is expanded on in the second chapter of that same fic !! Promise to actually post it soon and stop teasing it every other post haha

[mieczyhale]

the entire fic:: logan feels like he's be replaced, he's insecure and angry and has a lot of emotions about it

any scene where this other guy gets too close to wade:: logan goes feral, possessive and protective As Fuck

the guy saves them but still flirts with wade while disrespecting logan:: logan hates him, still, wants him to fuck off forever

wade:: asks if logan would be into a threesome with him and the other guy, the other guy suggested it

logan:: loses his shit immediately, is very aggressive about how he will not share wade, this is a theme running throughout the fic obviously

the epilog, without warning:: here's logan having a really detailed sex dream about wade bringing the guy to their apartment and them all fucking. in the dream is angry about all of it but finds it hot. he wakes up and is angry about it but finds it hot. he and wade talk about it and even though logan doesn't say anything wade just knows he'd be down to make that threesome happen for real - logan just doesnt want to say yes out loud and admit it y'know - and wade is excited about the idea. it's approached as a newly learned kink and something realistic for them. thankfully the epilog leaves that topic and wraps up with something kinda sweet or whatever

....

i'm sorry

are you fucking KIDDING ME??

first of all that makes no sense, logan who is afraid of being replaced and not being worthy of love or good enough, who has this whole deal about like "you can live forever but nobody is made for you, nobody is made to love you", who spends the whole fic seeing this other guy as a threat to EVERYTHING he has now, including his current life and his place at wade's side and any potential relationship with wade at all, who never stops hating the guy and being uncomfortable around him even when the guy saves his life, WOULD NOT BE DOWN TO CLOWN. NOT BY HIMSELF AND CERTAINLY NOT WITH WADE. HE WOULDN'T BE OKAY WITH SHARING WADE WITH THAT GUY AFTER *gestures to entire fic* OR ANYONE TBH, BUT ESPECIALLY NOT THAT GUY

and honestly?? having wade ask is one thing, non-seriously or otherwise, as long as he accepts whatever logan says. which is no absolutely not. and he does.

having him talk about how hot it would be, having him be obviously turned on by it, having him do literally anything that could hurt logan just bc he finds it "hot" is INSANE and out of character. dream sequence or not that's fucked up.

second of all, thanks for absolutely no fucking warning before the epilog that ANYTHING like this was gonna happen. if there had been i would've skipped the epilog and simply enjoyed the fic as it ended. but no. now i'm angry and nauseous and it ruined the whole fic for me. i can't even kudos it let alone bookmark it

i left a comment about the lack of warning (politely, thanks) and how it would've been appreciated and why. and then tried to make it very clear that THAT content in the epilog was my only issue with the entire fic. i included what i loved about the fic. i tried to overall keep things p simple (and nothing at all like this post)

normally i won't comment if i have anything negative to say, but considering my only negativity was "hey a content warning for this would've been nice" AND it wasn't my entire comment i don't feel super bad leaving it

content warnings and trigger warnings matter

and all kinds of things could fall under them for people

and i think it's better to warn your readers that something that could be a problem for them is in a chapter rather than leave it up to chance and hope nobody who reads it has issues

[our-hyperace-experience]

i've had nowhere to talk about this, but this is the closest i can find. my experience is pretty much entirely unique so i don't think anybody can relate to it, but i need it off my chest.

hi, im a hypersexual aromantic-asexual. and an abuser.

i fucked up my last partner bad with my hypersexuality. and they exposed me for it. my mental health took a shit ton of hits during that whole time and just. any romantic or sexual attraction i felt went away completely. i've heard of people getting their romantic/sexual attraction taken away due to trauma, but i'm not sure if i'm a valid aroace person because. mine went away because of the trauma i caused other people. not the trauma put onto me.

i was doing really good. really good for a while. I didn't feel anything. no hypersexuality, no attraction. then i started talking to my victim again. we talked because of this whole big shitstorm event, and they admitted they missed us so much. It's been months and i know i've completely changed as a person, but i still did what i did to them. all that gross sex talk with them. the sexting they didn't want. my hypersexuality ruined them and it tears me up inside every goddamn day. yet they said they needed me.

and i can feel my hypersexuality and attractions coming back to them, and only them, and i'm screaming at myself that this is a "no". that i shouldn't do this. but they need me. it's been months. and they said how lonely they were without me. and every time, every time i think something sexual, it's always about them, and i'm disgusted. it can't be anybody else but them and i don't know what to do.

i want to stay ace. i want to stay aro. i want to make sure i never hurt anyone again. im 16. i shouldn't be feeling like this.

Hi, reading this, I honestly feel for you and your victim, here's what I'll say.

It's clear you are remorseful of your actions and regret for what you had do, acknowledging the harm you caused and taking responsibility is a very important step with self-growth and healing.

This also means that all the urges and desires you feel are most likely against your actual beliefs.

although, I don't know the specifics of what happened between the both of you and your victim. I will say, the victim claiming they miss you and that they feel lonely without you could be an effect from the past abuse.

What I would advise is set firm boundaries between you two, like, ex. avoid sexual topics. If you two's interactions might be triggering the sexual urges, I think writing down some possible boundaries that can reduce those might help.

If it's not enough, I'd also consider cutting ties with the victim, I know it's hard to do that considering the victim's feelings, but staying with someone that had deeply ruined them can also be unhealthy for the both of you.

Especially since you have been doing better during the time without them, and seeing how the urges came back when you started talking to them again could cause problems. If you think the urges are too much, don't be afraid to walk away from the relationship, even if it might sting, it's better to sting now than to damage later.

Another quick thing I wanted to add are healthy outlets. Typically, hypersexual desires and urges can be reduced when you have positive distracts, like exercise, hobbies or doing new activities.

Journaling your thoughts and emotions downs also helps out, it can make you process your emotions and understand the patterns of your behavior, this might help with self-navigation.

Overall, thats my advice, I tried avoiding telling you to get professional help, as many people might not have access to that. You are really brave for speaking out, even if its just to a tumblr blog. I'll keep this post untagged for you out of respect, I hope after this everything gets better, anon 🫂🤎

[a-narcissists-warren]

(This is all very ooc!!!! Do not take this as me speaking in character!!!)

Yknow i’ve been trying to come up with a plot for my anon-sona and i’ve had a couple ideas that i’ve thought were pretty good but like. None of them have been as traumatic as whatever the fuck you guys are doing. Why is the child wanting to commit self harm. I think at this point it’s not just the anons who need therapy, it’s the people behind them too

~🍔🫧

BHEHEGASF yeaahh, people will definitely take this as an opportunity to let out some built up emotions and i'm kind of honestly here for it. It's comforting to them, especially when in this story they hopefully get the comfort they missed when needed.

Nobody's lore needs to be entirely connected to their life experiences or be the most serious thing ever, everything will have it's time hopefully to explore and show to the world!!

I wanna say tho most of like. the people participating in this are tweens/early teens, these topics WILL hit hard on them. make sure to block tags if there's anything you don't wanna see, i always add a trigger warning whenever there's something in the tags for that blockage to work - i encourage other anon blogs to do that too!

I didn't expect people to actually be this young so. now we're here. what the hell are 12 year olds doing on tumblr (has been lurking on tumblr since they were 10)

[sophieinwonderland]

I saw a recent ask from Aspen using her own schizophrenia as a way to say it's okay for her to trigger others with it. I read the answer and honestly I don't think she knows what triggers are and what's more concerning is the fact she admitted to not asking her discord users for thier ages.

Perhaps. I really get the impression that she knows what triggers are, but just doesn't care if she triggers other people.

On the Discord age thing, I'm not really sure I entirely get the problem. Maybe it's because my host and I were Redditors who just don't use Discord hardly any.

But on Reddit, you know, it's a 13+ website. There are community moderators just like Discord. And it's common practice to just... not share your age there and to treat everyone the same. You won't generally find graphic stuff posted outside of NSFW subreddits, but the culture there does make adult jokes fairly common as you're scrolling through, and light discussion of sexual topics pops up. There's very much a reader-beware environment but without anything too explicit.

I know that topics in Aspen's server have veered into more mature themes, but from what I understand, it's not generally anything more than what you might see in a PG-13 movie.

It seems like Aspen's server is ran basically like Reddit. Now, I do think this invites a bit more danger because Discord is more personal. Like, people on Reddit aren't usually interested in making friends or getting to know each other. So I suppose that environment can theoretically open the door for potential grooming in ways that Reddit can't.

Is that the issue???

I don't know. 🤷‍♀️

Moral consistency is important to me. I don't want to be mad about something just because it's Aspen is doing it, but then be completely okay with Reddit having essentially the same type of rules and environment.

[lastweeksshirttonight]

It was 95 degrees with 35% humidity today, my house feels like the inside of a blast furnace, and somehow I decided this was prime "watch and write about John" hours. So greetings from the surface of the sun, we've got more LWT to see!

Last Lee Tonight (wherein there is, theoretically, a universe where John Oliver is writing Tumblr reviews of Lee's topical news comedy) Season One, Episode Seven

(original air date: 6/15/2014) Major topics covered: US immigration reform, Washington Football Team Interview: Stephen Hawking

Trigger warning: racist iconography

"If you don't learn the recorder, you're fucked." "Seriously though, playing the recorder sets you up for life."

So uh, fun story. Remember how last week I said that the YouTube channel was finally starting to get the hang of things by episode six, aside from the occasional oddity of a one-minute clipped joke here and there?

The YouTube team didn't upload the main story from this episode to the LWT channel. At all.

We're still in prime "figuring this shit out" mode! Strap in!

That's consistent across the entire episode. After the last episode, which saw the show starting to coalesce into its modern form, this episode seems to go back to the drawing board and toss all kinds of shit at the wall to see what sticks - it's honestly most reminiscent of episode one. The opening segments are lightning-fast and don't transition into each other well, the central topic doesn't go nearly as deep as you'd expect it, and there's a random (but amazing) interview at the end of the show. I wonder if the next episode will swing the pendulum in the opposite direction again.

John starts our episode banging and then punching the desk, going in the opposite direction from our last episode. He seems to be taking out his rage on the glass countertop, which he looks very silly doing.

We begin by revisiting net neutrality, from Episode Five. (I'm linking it because I wrote this months ago, and if your executive dysfunction is anything like mine, you totally forgot everything about the episode.) In that episode, John described Tom Wheeler as a dingo, and somehow Tom Wheeler was asked about the LWT episode in a FCC meeting. He speaks like a literal robot and refutes, in the weirdest way possible, the idea that he's a dingo. How is that the thing you focus on from that whole segment. How. What? Christ.

The unsaid caption "Satire is not C-SPAN, however." goes without comment, which is unbelievable to me. That phrase cracked me up so hard I had to pause the episode. I know there was a rich vein of missing the point entirely and subsequent dingo humour to mine here, but come on John, that caption is a gift.

We then move to Iraq, where ISIS forces crossed nearly the entire country in five days and stole $400 million dollars. This bit only goes for about a minute before we move to another topic, Obama visiting the Standing Rock Sioux reservation and pledging aid. We finally then transition into a discussion of the Washington Football Team, who, at the time, were still refusing to change their goddamn racist name and iconography, which I will not be using here. (I did learn from writing this that apparently they have rebranded - FINALLY - as the Washington Commanders in 2022, after two seasons of being Washington Football Team.)

I appreciate how John lets an extremely sincere and powerful commercial made by Native Americans regarding the offensive name largely speak for itself, aside from one dark joke at the end, before discussing what an abject shitwhistle former Washington Football Team owner Dan Snyder is and how pathetic his protestations are.

It did take a while, but Snyder was ousted from his ownership post of the team in 2021 after a massive expose of sexual harassment under his watch was released in 2020. He's been mired in investigations over financial conduct, fraud, and deceptive business practices as well, to which I can only say "good".

The night's main topic, which has no YouTube video anywhere (I'm sorry), is immigration. John says he has a vested interest in the topic and the audience laughs, which is funny-weird because it doesn't seem like John is trying to humorously highlight his insider nature here. The real focus here is the debate over immigration reforms, as the system is (and remains) very broken and anti-immigrant sentiment is high all over the world.

I do wish this clip was on YouTube. It's not the most informative piece on immigration, but is a nice window into how much John loved this country prior to the beginning of its full collapse. This definitely takes much more from The Daily Show mold, being a comedic monologue interspersed with news clips that allow John to riff on the state of immigration, as opposed to later LWT immigration segments, which tend to be exceptionally sobering. This one is comparatively light-hearted and surface-level, and John delivers the material with a very comfortable confidence. I don't think the segment itself is a standout, but I really like John's attitude here.

We technically get our first animal-fucking joke during this segment, which is about bears only fucking face to face and stops John cold as he helplessly giggles over it. One step closer to getting all the running jokes in order!

Somehow, the end of this with the animated Actual American Tale video is on YouTube, so please enjoy one of the most depressing things LWT has ever put together. It's genuinely far more distressing than the actual main topic segment.

The episode ends with the only appearance of "recurring segment" Great Minds: People Who Think Good, where John interviews Stephen Hawking. Interestingly, I was listening to a podcast today (gonna likely make a separate post on it) where John talked about how much he loved interviewing Hawking and how he wanted to showcase the man's wit and humour more than his intelligence. I think that the interview is incredibly successful in that regard.

I adore this interview so much. Never have I had so much fun watching John get totally roasted.

Random notes:

Lee is a very predictable man corner: today we get a black suit jacket with lavender shirt and dark purple tie, which is a great look, 9/10. The only thing keeping it from being a 10 is that it's missing an element of boldness. Maybe a deep purple jacket or a shinier tie?

Lee continues being predictable in a second bullet point: the interview outfit is a black suit jacket with a light-blue and white checkered shirt and black tie. Definitely a pedestrian but still solid look and I still love the baby blue on John, so I give this 7/10.

Please stop making me talk about American football in these, John, I beg you.

"I lost my virginity to the sound of a man ranting about Bulgarians." This is so far the best line of early LWT, I will bear no other arguments.

There are no random 1 minute YouTube clips of isolated jokes this episode! 🎊

Once an episode, someone from the past 20 years of American political culture pops up that I've completely forgotten about and am upset to be reminded of. This week, it's Michele Bachmann, who I refuse to look up to see what she's doing now. You cannot make me think more about Michele fucking Bachmann.

There is an extended interview with Stephen Hawking that adds a few nice bits, like John asking Stephen a meandering hypothetical about him being a drug lord with inconsistent staff.