Everything that promotes LGBT will now be banned: a rainbow without a light blue stripe, all kinds of themed patches, badges on clothes, as well as parades, processions, rallies and themed parties.
For that - up to 12 years in prison.
Hi! What! Literal murder can get you 2 to 8 years in prison. Killing a man gives you less years! Hello! Can anybody fucking hear me!
Updating this post because. WELL. If anyone, ANYONE supports LGBTQIA in here. Even if they're the straightest people ever. THEY FALL UNDER THE SAME CATEGORY. LGBTQIA ALLIES ARE CONSIDERED EXTREMISTS TOO.
Moreover, everyone could get in trouble - even if the person isn't an activist or part of LGBTQ, but speaks out that LGBTQ people must have equal rights with everyone else.
You can get in trouble for a LGBTQ-symbolic repost from 10 years ago - if the policemen can capture it after Supreme Court's decision will take effect.
And another update: this "law" will only be valid after January 10, 2024
The court decision will come into force on January 10 of the following year - unless an appeal is filed.
1K notes
·
View notes
Hi, are you okay I hope so, could you recommend me some Error × ink fics?
Howdy, thanks for asking! Here are some fics that might fit what you're looking for!
From Your Point of View by 0Sion0, TGK Translations (Teen And Up, Incomplete)
They say that to understand another person you should imagine yourself in their place. But what are you to do when you're pretty much forced into the body of your sworn enemy?
The Two Cockroaches by Mutatedbunnies (Mature, Incomplete)
In the aftermath of a messy breakup, Ink moves into the city to begin his life anew. After a fateful encounter with his neighbor, he falls head over heels for someone new. Error, a graduate student who’s hesitant when it comes to romance, is immediately swept up in Ink’s brilliance and vitality, unable to stop himself. While Ink and Error are consumed with one another, their friends and family fall into romantic affairs of their own. Cross, Error’s best friend, falls in love at first sight with Ink’s ex-boyfriend, who isn’t sure he’s ready for a new beau just yet. Geno, a promising young doctor, has an unfortunate tendency to be stalked by one of the hospital’s top forensic pathologists, Reaper.
I want your soul | Errorink / Errink by Yumikokun (General Audiences, Incomplete)
~ This story is inspired by another one...so if you stumble upon a story similar to this one, you know where I got the inspiration :) ~
.
.
.
A story about a young prince who lives in a castle with his three older brothers.
The oldest brother catches a mysterious flu that can not be healed with simple treatment. And thus, the kingdom is ruled by the second heir.
The young prince, desperate to find salvation in healing his brother, travels in search of a wizard who might help him. Though, he stumbles upon more than he anticipated.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Published: 2nd of June 2022
Ended: ?
Curiosity Killed the ErROr by ShandyCandy278 (Teen And Up, Complete)
After realizing that he knows next to nothing about how Ink came to be and that the guardian knows nothing as well, Error decides to start looking into it. The Creators are egging him on, and shenanigans from the other outcodes are proving to be quite the distraction; Ink just wants to be his friend (not happening), Dream is acting weird, and Nightmare can't believe his eye. The chances of Error learning everything are slim-to-none, but since when did that stop him?
Tangled Memories by honey_bubbletea33 (Teen And Up, Incomplete)
Ink is forgetful, sure, but he remembers basic, necessary things, most of the time. So when Error finds him clueless, unable to remember how he got there or any of the people he interacted with, it's nothing short of a good opportunity. Ink knows where the Omega Timeline is, so Error can just go there and destroy it, right...?
Turns out, Ink's memory is still limited at best, which leads him and Error on a hunt for more clues about Ink's previous life in the Omega Timeline, revealing a side of Ink Error never knew about.
...All he needs is for Ink to never remember who they were to each other.
31 notes
·
View notes
One day I'll probably do a 40-minute video essay on this topic, but the internet's misinterpretation of "Death of the Author" is just a real shame.
I frequently see the concept brought up in relation to a certain terf author. People attempt to 'separate the work and the author', but that is frankly not how it is intended to be used.
"Death of the Author" is supposed to be a tool for literary analysis. That's all it is. It is not a theory by itself, nor a political stance or a way to judge morality.
It is a tool to encourage readers to interpret the content of a text authentically, but you should use it critically, and be aware of why, how and when it is relevant. It is not an excuse to ignore context or paratext, as both of those should also be considered in a proper analysis.
The tool was developed during a time when the discourse was more favourable towards an author's intention rather than a reader's interpretation. People used intention to dismiss other readers' analysis of texts, using diary entries or letters by dead authors to counter less mainstream takes of canon texts. It was a period where the 'goal' of literary analysis was to uncover a text's true meaning. The original essay was a short controversial counterargument but the conversations it sparked over the following decades have led to the scale tipping more in favour of interpretation. It has also led to a 180 of the original problem.
Killing the author has the potential of empowering readers and encouraging deeper. Maybe even uncovering biases the author wasn't even aware of! However, (mostly outside of academic circles but not always) people are misusing the concept and use it to dismiss context and racist dog-whistles as well as discourage readings that rely more on subtext.
In simple terms we have gone from a mentality saying "AHA, I have evidence and it said you are wrong" to "AHA, it doesn't matter and therefore you are wrong". Neither is constructive in a conversation about art.
If you use the death of the author effectively while acknowledging intention and context you actually add a lot of nuance to your analysis, and doing so can demonstrate your analytical abilities. You will be able to distinguish what the text is saying plainly, what is said between the lines, and if the narrative effectively handles what it originally claimed. It is an effective 1-2 punch. Let me give you an ultra-short example:
On the surface level, '50 Shades of Grey' tells you that it is a sexy BDSM story. Throughout interviews and promotional material, E. L. James frames her story as a female-empowering book. But by critically examining how the books handle themes of consent, privacy, agency etc. we can argue that the narrative doesn't live up to proper BDSM conduct and that the protagonist is not empowered, and is instead displaying an unhealthy relationship. If we take the analysis further we could make an argument about what this says about society at large. Does it normalise boundary-breaking behaviour? Could it make someone romanticise stalking? The thesis statement is all up to you. (disclaimer I have not actually read these books, don't come for me, this is an example)
Here is what we just did: I presented a surface reading of a text. I presented the most likely intention of the author. I then argued for my interpretation by looking at literary themes and context. I used the conflict between Jame's intention, and my interpretation to illustrate a conflict. 1-2 punch. I am not killing James, I consider her opinion and intention to strengthen my argument, but I don't let her word of god determine or dismiss my reading. In just 3 simple sentences I use a variety of resources from my toolbox.
When people weaponise the author's intention it can look like this:
"Well, E. L. James said it is a female power fantasy, you're just reading too much into it" <- dismissing context and subtext by using 'word of god'. Weighing intention above interpretation.
"Does it really matter that E. L. James didn't research BDSM before publishing, can't it just be a sexy book?" <- dismissing context, subtext as well as author intention and accountability. Weighing their own interpretation and subtly killing the author
Simply exclaiming "I believe in death of the author" (which I have heard in Lit classes) means nothing. It's nothing. Except that you want to ignore context and only indulge in the parts of the text that you find enjoyable.
In the plainest way I can put it, the death of the author is supposed to make you say: "the author probably meant A, but the text and the context is saying B, therefore I conclude C". Don't just repeat what the author says. Don't just ignore context. And allow the feelings the text invokes in you to be there and let them be something you reflect on. The details you pick up on will be completely unique to you, the meaning you get will be just your own. You can do all of these things at once, I promise it doesn't have to be one or the other.
There has to be a balance. Intention matters. Interpretation matter. Watch out and pay attention. Are you only claiming the author is dead or alive when it serves your own narrative?
When you want to ignore an author ask why
When you don't want to read a book because you don't condone the actions of the author ask why
Examine how you dismiss arguments and how you further conversations.
652 notes
·
View notes