#Reblog is fine.

[crowsworks]

Chapter Two: New Home. You are taken to your new home, it's kinda nice. Hopefully now you can relax.

[bamsara]

I think that one thing people fail to understand is that unsolicited literary criticism coming from an online stranger who is reading with no knowledge of what the authors intended goal is, is not going to be received the same as say: the authors beta reader or friends who know what the authors intended goal and has the sufficient knowledge and input to help the author reach that desired outcome.

"But I'm only trying to be helpful" How do I know you have the knowledge and literary skill for you to be able to actaully do that when we don't know each other and you are essentially a stranger to me? Are you applying this criticism based out of personal biased experience and desire to see the story or characterization be driven in another direction or tweaked, or do you know the author's intentions for the character? If the story is incomplete, are you basing your criticism of a character on the incomplete narration with only partial information available of them or are you building up a report until the story's completion? Did the author provide you with the information needed to make a fully informed criticism?

Have you discussed with the author what their plans are or are you assuming them based off the narration, especially if the narration is proven or implied to be unreliable or missing key points of the plot? Are you unbiased enough to help them reach their desired outcome for the characters and story regardless of your personal feelings towards the characters/antagonists and setting? Can you handle being told your specific input isn't wanted because you're a reader and/or have no written anything relating to their genre or topic? Do you understand and respect that the author's personal experiences might influence their writing and make it different than how you would have done it personally? Do you understand if an author only wants input from a specific demographic relating to their story?

If it's for fanfiction or other hobby media, are you holding a free hobby to a professional standard? Are you trying to give criticism because you feel like the author has produced 'subpar job performance' of their fic? Are you viewing their work as a personal intimate outlet or something that must conform with mass media? Are you applying rules and guidelines when the fic is shared for simple sharing sake? Is your criticism worded appropriately and focused on the parts where the author has requested input on rather than a general dismissal and or disapproval?

Have you put yourself in a place where you assumed you have the input needed for the story to evolve better, or have you asked what the author needs and what they're having trouble with? Can you handle having your criticism rejected if the author decides their story doesn't need the change and not take it as a personal offense against your character? Are you crossing that boundary because you think you are doing the author a favor? Are you trying to be helpful, or do you just want to be?

I think sometimes when people hear authors go 'please don't give me unsolicited writing advice or criticism' they automatically chalk it up to 'this author doesn't want ANY constructive feedback on their stuff at all' and not "i already have trusted individuals who will help me with my writing goals and- hey i don't know you like that, please stop acting so overly familiar with me'

[2bu]

this is literally what it feels like to be a pre-op & fat trans dude

[teh-ches-noddle]

Mushroom hah hah

[queencaramilflinda]

I don’t know if any non-Jews noticed this in the last d20 ep but Brennan has changed how he refers to Gulsum, the Mordred Manor real estate guy, from golem to construct! When Gulsum was first referenced in sophomore year he was called a flesh golem, but in junior year he has been called a flesh construct. In episode 12 of FHJY Brennan even made sure to correct himself when he misspoke and said golem instead of construct, which proved to me this was an active effort on his part.

The term golem comes from Jewish mysticism and has religious connotations so some Jewish people find it offensive when the term gets co-opted into fantasy settings without regard for the original source. It’s cool to see Brennan moving away from that and trying to find less loaded terms to use instead, like construct.

[teaboot]

how are you both bisexual and asexual. are you also both autistic and neurotypical? are you both trans and cis too? please help me out here

okay so first off I don't think you meant this to come off as confrontational, so in the future please do keep in mind that these are highly personal questions. I don't actually owe anyone this information

So, sexual attraction and romantic attraction are different things. Someone who is asexual may desire a romantic relationship with someone, while someone who is aromantic may desire a sexual relationship with someone.

Alternatively, someone who is AroAce may desire strong, intimate connections that have nothing to do with sex OR romance.

So someone who is romantically attracted to all genders but sexually attracted to nobody may be more accurately described as "Biromantic / Panromantic Asexual", but that's a bit of a mouthful and uses terminology and concepts a lot of people don't get so they may just say they're ace and bi.

I've known for a long time that I'm asexual, that one was relatively easy. Romantic attraction, I've found, is harder to evaluate because "deep, intimate friendship" and "romance" have a lot of overlap and are difficult to distinguish.

For a long time, I thought, "I feel the same level of attraction to all genders, so I must be bi or pan". It just so happens that that level of sexual attraction was zero.

(Apparently this is a fairly common experience.)

Also, not entirely what you asked, but recently I've come to the realization that I may be Aromantic as well as Asexual- I may just experience aesthetic attraction to all genders, which is a third thing, in which you can see someone and go "Ohhhhhhh my god you're so fuckin cool and pretty I'm dying" but not actually really wanna do anything about it.

And since I may be aesthetically attracted to all genders, romantically attracted to like 5 people ever, and sexually attracted to nobody, I could go around saying, "Yeah I'm an asexual demiromantic with panaesthetic attraction", confusing half the people I talk to and sounding like a queer zoomer in a conservative political cartoon, I could also just say, "yeah I'm ace and bi" or "I'm queer" and keep the rest to myself.

Also, while I openly use he/him pronouns now and for the last couple years, growing up I thought for about a decade that I was Genderfluid and I'm still pretty attached to the Genderqueer identity, so trans and cis isn't really the reach you may think it is.

So, yeah. Autistic, Asexual, Bi, Trans.

But I've found that my personal identity is less like a business card and more like a witness statement.

Any wordier than you need to be, and you start giving the opposition room to poke holes.

"Queer", though. Queer is good

[fischyplier]

Funny bit but made me overthink and freak out a little

[a-polite-melody]

Considering that there’s another post going around that lands on this conclusion, I think it deserves its own succinct post:

When transmascs share instances of positivity to remind each other that the way we are treated isn’t all bad, it’s then used as proof of the whole of transmasc experiences being this way, and that transmascs are not oppressed as a whole.

When transmascs share instances of harm done to transmascs to raise awareness that transmascs are harmed directly within our societies, it’s used as proof that we are taking up too much room in conversations because the harm we face “isn’t bad enough”.

When transmascs share instances of outright murder of members of our community to show that no, transmasc issues are not somehow “lesser” because “we aren’t dying” because we are dying, it’s used as proof that we are trauma dumping and trying to make other people feel sorry for us—look at these AFABs being whiny and hysterical and trying to portray themselves as victims. Or that it isn’t specific enough to us so we should shut up and let other people speak for us.

Transmascs cannot speak about our experiences without being touted as an example of why transmascs as a whole should shut up.

This is erasure.

[crowsworks]

You were used and well abused at the Carnival. Afraid and alone, a fate worse than death awaited you. But whats this...a gentle and kind monster saves you? This has got to be too good to be true right?

[ficwip]

say something encouraging to other fic writers!

[hotdrinks]

"Tumblr is great for artists!" I say, gripping the sink "The reblog function keeps art alive long after it's posted! Not like Twitter and Instagram where old art is left to die in obscurity. And that's great! That's so great!" Somebody reblogs one of my years old drawings and I crush the sink into dust with my bare hands

[kyokutsu-sama]

I could spend my whole life admiring this man and telling him how handsome he is 🧡💛

His smile is everything to me 🥹🤏✨️

[konnfusion]

hey so not only is Gabriel Woolf the Classic Who voice of Sutekh (very cool to have him back!), but he also voiced The Beast in "The Impossible Planet"/"The Satan Pit".

Ruby's mom called the creature The Beast.

[clone-futon]

Munch

[ohno-the-sun]

Updated Luca au references for my fic Under the Surface to celebrate Moon finally showing up yippee!

Wanted a more realistic depiction of what they looked like

Inspiration of the design from @chknbzkt