#im not qualified at all and my opinions on this dont really matter

[artemis-moon101]

The money of the Dream video goes to charity. the person who reposted it is actually stealing the money from a charity. Did y'all even watch the video where he said this, right at the start of the video? I don't even like dream but wanting to watch a reupload where none of the money goes to charity is disgusting

i very highly doubt the money is actually going to any charity. and if it does, the few pennies gained from me watching it arent going to change anything anyways.

And the people reuploading the videos are not stealing from charity. theyre stealing from dream, the known lier and possible groomer.

[mrsterlingeverything]

So being prejudiced against people from your own community (and other communities) is fine under the guise of keeping it real, speaking whatever we want, and not being afraid? i didn't even know ayesha was trans when i read her tweets about kim being "castrated" as a child, but now it feels worse because she's trans cause she's attacking someone from her own community? she can say whatever she wants, i don't care, it just feels like you really like justifying shitty behavior from singers if you like their music instead of just admitting their behavior is pure shit and you don't really care about how they behave as long as their music is nice.

i didn't even know exactly who ayesha was before i saw someone retweeting about her calling out kim for working with dr luke which I was like "oh, yes, get her ass" but then she tweeted shit about kim's transition and that's when she crossed the line.

"no 12 is when kim's parents got her castrated, 12 is when i was being a kid and growing up x"

"exactly my point. you did nothing with this. while i worked my ASSS off to get any sort of my attention for my music, she was on tv talking about getting axe wounded at 12 by her rich ass parents."

re: azealia - i didnt'even see anything about azealia banks in her tweets, but miss banks can also go away with her transphobic shit. she has a talent with words, for sure, but she consistently uses her talent for evil WHICH SHE'S ALLOWED TO IF SHE WANTS that's up to her morals, but you don't need to justify it as "oh she's just keeping it real, i respect that", you see what i mean? like whichever music you like, you are still someone i really care about and enjoy, it's just odd to go to bat for these singers who keep showing their ass all the time.

This is a funny conversation because i haven't read some of those tweets either until you mentioned them like the axe wound tweet for example... ew. Umm. Its complicated. Maybe not for you... but to me, there's something about... people saying what they think even if other people think its nasty that i find respectable.

I think those tweets from ayesha about kim are disgusting, but im just not the type of person to cancel someone completely from my life when they do something wrong. Everyone does good and bad things, i dont think some bad things negate lots of good things, although lots of people do think that these days.

The way i see it, everyone thinks things that someone else would find disgusting. I dont know you anon but if you spoke or posted all your thoughts theres someone out there who would think some of them are disgusting, because theres people with all sorts of opinions. It doesnt mean you shouldnt speak your mind. Sharing ideas is very important or we end up in our small social media bubbles and dont understand other world views, or other cultures for that matter.

Regarding me saying that ayesha is more qualified to talk about transgender people as a trans person, i mean that while i find her tweets to be disgusting, i know there are some detrans people even on here who think that 12 is possibly too early for the medical transition that kim had. Its not really my place to say as a cis person, thats what i meant. I think at the very least its complicated and while you can say its great for people to transition that early, i think its great for some people to, and probably harmful to others based on personal anecdotes that ive read.

I hope i answered everything, lots of topics here. Also i want to say that i really enjoy conversation like this, i think its good for all of us to be exposed to different ideas :) ily anon

[aroacesafeplaceforall]

hello, its me! the anon who asked for your opinion abt shipping Alastor with other characters :)

firstly, thank you for answering! i totally agree that, if you build on a character's canon aro/ace orientation, then shipping them would be okay. ive just heard other people say doing that was aroace erasure, and i didnt feel like i had much say, because (as previously stated) im aceflux and nebularomantic.

my sexuality fluctuates, and i cant really tell the difference between romantic and platonic attraction, which is why i didnt feel qualified to put out my opinion on such matters

i also feel like i should apologize, bc i kinda feel like my ask may have snowballed into some sort discourse? idk, just from what i saw when looking at the blog every now and then, it looked like some shit was going down, revolving around Alastor 😭

now, onto why im here: why should someone do if a person they looked up to, who outwardly supported the aroace community, turns out to be a horrible person? (im sure that some people reading this can already guess who im talking about)

i feel so icky about the situation, bc ive supported and loved this person for years. all of the songs theyve ever written have been so aro-coded (as said by aromantics), and a vast majority of their fanbase is aromantic/on the aro/ace spectrum, myself included. they even spoke about their love for the aromantic community openly, and now, with them being exposed as a horrible person, i dont really know how to feel. is there any advice you could give me and others who are in the same boat? /nf

—sincerely, 🦢🦌

No it’s all good! The discourse was started by me ducking up and some people taking it slightly to far.

Unfortunately I do know who you’re talking about. I was in that fandom back in 20-22 ish, and I couldn’t be happier that I left. Honestly. I don’t know ANYthing about the situation other then someone being revealed to be a piece of shit for some reason and I would like to keep it that way:

I don’t need to know the details about what this person did.

Small side note before I begin:

I think the problem is a lot of people have put people like that on a pedestal while not knowing anything about them. 

The big difference between e- celebrities and true (actors, singers, rich assholes ect) celebrities is the accountability of the public. True celebrities have been held accountable much sooner and to much more effect then e-celebrities due to the fact that the media cares what they do. The paparazzi ect

People talking about not listening to said persons music anymore: reminder that it’s not only them who produces and plays that music. Don’t listen to their solo shit, burn CDs rip it off YouTube, piracy is on the rise.

The rest of the people involved with the band are NOT at fault here and their career and income should not have to suffer for an asshole.

“Cancel” the person not the team.

You can still relate to something without relating to the asshole

You can still relate to something without being the asshole

Be respectful

Listen to victims

And a word for my aspecs ->

The amount of straight people who are just as bad doesn’t matter here, no matter what happens next, all people will see is “he supported aroace spec people” and will try and use it.

Ignore that block them and report harassment

Stay safe anon

[fictionkinfessions]

re the prompting confession https://www.tumblr.com/fictionkinfessions/743609114380435456

and this first response https://www.tumblr.com/fictionkinfessions/743618318876950528/

These are all from different anons, I'm putting them together in a single post so the conversation isn't scattered over the course of many hours.

Anonymous asked: "personally, as a system? if a "singlet" fictionkin feels so strongly about their kins and shifts that they feel like system terms apply and they're "the same" as systems and pluralkit is helpful to them?

trying to push them out of that shit is more likely than not going to set back a system that's starting to discover themself."

Anonymous asked: "in response to the fictionkin/system thing [i think i'm qualified to speak on this since we're very fictive-heavy]:

i'm gonna be honest, anon, idk where you're seeing this behavior. from what i've seen, it's often fictives that get taken more seriously than fictionkin, both in and out of kin spaces. yeah maybe the pk thing is an issue, but also, not really…? idk i feel like it's not a big deal. most fictionkin i know are very well aware that their experiences differ from systems."

Anonymous asked: "to the DID and fictionkin open question thingy

they are some similar things. like having fictives of the source you kin from and stuff like that (for example im a edd kin from eddsworld ) and i have 3 alters from the same source

but they are different..

for starters. like.. kins its just you. you dont get another person in your head its just you…meanwhile alters you have other people in your brain and sharing a body. its not..super similar to fictionkins in my opinion. yeah you could share a canon to an alter (i have multiple actually.) but its sorta not on the same level. in my opinion. /nm!

only reason why i have my 3 major kins in my pluralkit is because my alters refer to me by them. i have one for edd. for garcello and just for me. but i make sure it says host and i only try to use it when im in a strong kin mod or if the active alters who refer to me as edd or garcello dont get confused.. its more for my alters and for the other people in the servers than for me. i mean if you keep seeing a alter from a fandom keep saying "oh hey "name" and there many other alters who go by that it cannn get confusing.

but that last part was random. my stance on the matter is pretty much.. "i can see how people think that but systems and fictionkins are not exactly the same." I hope this doesnt sound rude or anything ^^' "

[gayspock]

hmmm

obvioously ive got no idea whats about to happen. but sorry. im on tom zareks side in so much of this. kind of rolling my eyes a bit at the show itself in some senses. bc again. idk what happens. sigh. but its obvious that zareks being pitched, by the show, as someone to be "against" - not to be so reductive about it, but yeah.

bc frankly like... everything hes saying? no offence. i completely fucking agree with. am i being insane. am i. someone else soundboard me here. bc, like please- a terrorist, sure, they keep overstating that but... also one from saggitaron, an extremely exploited colony, and thats what he was fighting for in the first place

and not to mention that everything he's advocated for, thus far... i agree with. the prisoners being used, like slaves- dont "its a hard choice, but one we have to make" me, bc its still wrong to have to fucking earn your freedom, jesus christ. even if, yes, humanity is on the god damn line.

AND we never see the actual civillians in the damn show-and thats sth thats actually frustrated me, thus far. but hes ALSO right about them. is now maybe the best time for total change? arguable. but like- also sorry but im onboard with dismantling whatever fucking system is in-place, if that system is presumabaly analogous to our own. hes right. i mean im kind of fuckin confused, bc again theyre not showing us much- but theres no money?? and some people are still living "as wealthy" whilst some are still labouring? sorry??? but yeah- fuckin yeah that needs to be addressed

like it would ANYWAY. the inequality would ANYWAY ofc. but like if theyre seriously having to build a new livelihood here then fuckin... GOD i dont know i dont think its mad or irrational to be pushing for that

AND no matter the results... whilst i do kind of yield, and recognise in a time of crisis a strong leader is kind of important, and shes made good decisions, its STILL not crazy to want fucking elections. i dont know. call me crazy lol im in the uk and we havent had the chance to choose a damn leader for a hot second. but like laura wasnt... anywhere near qualified to be the president. she wasnt elected by anyone, for anything, and calling for a damn vote isnt some extremist madness.

and i guess you can say this is all naive- that hes only advocating for this, to be in power himself- but... so is laura? like shes holding onto her position so she can do what she thinks is right; so she can exercise power. fucking SHRUG. whats the damn difference there? and shes the one with the upperhand right now. and dont get me wrong- i like laura and the decisions shes made genereally speaking but again... a) not crazy to want an elected leader and b) not crazy to question how shes handling civilian side of things bc we barely see that at all

and i think thats where i am eyerolling HARD at this show bc again idk. i EXPECTED this. but again. being reductive, but also its hard not to be because like- zareks being depicted as the antagonistic force here, and laura as the rational one, as one of our protags and its like... i dont MIND a difference of opinion playing out in front of me, you know, nor do i need my own political inclinations to align wholly with a show BUT... my point is its kinda exhausting the way they do kind of act like what zarek is saying is crazy and the show itself isnt challenging laura herself on THESE issues in particular when its justified. like they do with other hard decisions shes made but with some of this really not so much

and another thing was like similarly... they narratively justified it, by having that guy get apprehended as an assassin in the end, but also like... lee was making me suck my teeth this episode and groan. like seriously. stepping in and strongarming civillians in full on cop mode. i dont fucking like it dude. like when those two ppl were having a disagreement, and he sided against one guy despite the fact they had exhibited the same level of aggression with each other, bc that guy aligned with his own beliefs, and then exercised his power to threaten the other guy- yeah sorry again to be that guy but like... be for realll lee. and again i wouldnt be MAD that hed do that, in terms of a character decision, but again its like- obviously its in framing, yeah?

and this whole thing yes- WELL IT IS ALL VERY SILLY OF ME TO GET TOO IRRITATED, I MEAN PLEASE. THEYRE THE FUCKING MILITARY. THE ENTIRE MAIN CAST IS THE MILITARY. im not going into this expecting my own opinions to always be resonant here - and i wouldnt wiht any show. thats as equally braindead to expect that. but nonetheless man. its still one of those things im gonna bitch and moan about when it grates me in a particularly annoying way LOL bc like again. shru

[georgegraphys]

Hi Ari!

I think a like a month ago we’ve talked about how it seems like Elkann made the decision to hire Lewis without consulting with anyone. To me this title sponsor news seems to collaborate that idea. Ive found this article since, and to me that shows Fred was definiatelly not told beforehand about signing Lewis.

https://scuderiafans.com/according-to-fred-vasseur-ferrari-finally-has-a-leader-a-subtle-dig-at-carlos-sainz-after-abu-dhabi-qualifying/#google_vignette

Can you tell me please what did you mean by Elkann paying for everything? I cant really find anything online (probably because Im useless in these kind of searches).

Could signing Lewis put them on such a financially difficult spot that they need a title sponsor? I agree that it goes against their views about how they are a legacy team. I remember when the visa cashup rb was announced all the tifosi were writing about how great it was that their team “the real legacy f1 team” didnt need a title sponsor.

I mean ferrari itself doesnt seem to be in a bad financial state. The stock is high, they had record numbers in q4 and the whole 2023. So I dont really understand why now?

Here you go. Ferrari actually 'pays' for it but of course we don't know the details. But what we know is that his Mission 44 was to be invested by Elkann's Exor NV (so far I have never seen a mention of it being signed in a contract yet)

But anyways here is the thing. Mercedes is rich. And so is Ferrari. They have great sales but that doesn't mean they are WILLING to pay that much for an F1 driver or invest that much in Formula One. It is not always about them financially struggling. But more of a loss? Like if they paid for everything, that'd be a loss no matter how rich they are and every pennies count even in big multinational corporations.

I don't think signing Lewis put Ferrari in a struggle. Neither did Mercedes just because they don't wanna pay more. It's that, Formula One, is not their main business. It's their venture and subsidiary. The Formula One venture has its own budget given each year from Ferrari. So that separates Ferrari (car brand)'s wealth to Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team's wealth. I don't know why they acquired a sponsor. Could be because it exceeded the F1 team budget or they view it as *cough* too much *cough* but there are lots of factors really.

But if we're thinking about is it worth it to acquire a title sponsor? Brand wise? No. LH wage wise? Yes. $100M? I almost barf and laugh at the deal. Because it's a bit ridiculous if you see it from a business standpoint. LH is the man of the sport, a GOAT. But I am not speaking here from a sports fan standpoint, i'm here speaking from a business standpoint that no matter how much you own, every pennies count. I feel like $100M is crazy much especially seeing Charles is also an expensive driver. I am sure they have their own research team to see if everything will be worth the price or not (unless Elkann is a crazy money thrower that did not plan this beforehand) but yeah... in my opinion, i'd understand if Ferrari decides to hire a title sponsor. $100M is simply too ridiculously expensive for Ferrari to pay it alone.

But it may be worth it for Ferrari idk how they calculate it. I share similar views with Kallenius ig 🤣🤣 (And this is not just about LH but to any other F1 drivers, some are overpriced in my opinion). But honestly? Their decision on hiring a title partner and also 'staining' their legacy is a part of the $100M consequence. Idealistically, it isn't wise. Seeing from how it just ruins the 'legacy team, don't need anyone' persona but it's the consequences of their own decision. And to make that decision, i'm sure they've calculated everything.

A wrong or right business decision is heavily subjective. I'm more of a money pincher person. But Ferrari are big headed traditionalist yk. They love everything big and grandeur even if it's not it sometimes. That's why their brand is different from Mercedes. Both targets rich people but the niche is different. Lastly, it is not because Ferrari is poor or can't pay. But Ferrari wealth does not equal or belong to Scuderia Ferrari F1 and can be used by them freely as they wanted to. Scuderia Ferrari F1 is just another subsidiary or side venture.

[roguemonsterfucker]

Hey im the anon from earliee tysm for being so nind 😭❤

Ok so basically my friend doesnt really consider me ace bc i have sexual drive and masturbate to porn/fantasies of monster/people or whatever. They believe that fantacising about having sex with people means im sexually atracted to them (which im not, i dont want sex irl). Like i know there are ace people who dont have sexual desire or need for masturbation and such. But i think that aces who do are valid, even if they masturbate to porn of to fantasies. More than anything im looking for comfirmation that they are also part of the ace spectrum (aces with sexual desire/masturbate/etc.)

Goodness, I'm in the same position!

I get off to fantasy stuff but I have 0 interest in anything real. If monsters were real, I wouldn't be into them anymore. 😂

I'm certainly no expert on what qualifies as part of the ace spectrum (I struggled with IDing as ace for years before I finally said fuck it and started calling myself ace). But I have seen lots of people say that all you need to be ace is to not feel sexual attraction to real life people. And even that is fluid (see demisexual and other parts of the spectrum lol).

I'm really of the opinion that no one can tell you what you are or aren't as far as your sexuality goes. If you feel comfortable IDing as ace and that label is helpful to you, I say that you're part of the ace spectrum!

If you're looking for validation from me, here it is! You're ace and you're awesome!

Other people may disagree but who the fuck cares about them? You're the one that matters. Other people shouldn't be able to dictate what label you feel good with.

[angelsaxis]

i agree w u that we need to be way way more critical abt shit like makeup and plastic surgery wherein "freedom of choice" is just leaning into patriarchal white-centric ideals of beauty etc. but i think freedom of choice is still impt in other aspects like life goals and saying that choice doesnt matter as much as fighting patriarchy in all aspects seems a little off to me? like if a woman happens to want kids, which is a gendered expectation, then by your post's standards, she isnt fighting the patriarchy. if she chooses to stay at home and watch the kid because thats genuinely what fulfills her more than a job and is fortunate that her spouse wants to and can financially support her, thats also going to be considered not feminist simply because she isnt doing the opposite of gender norms, according to your post. same goes for if a woman wears gendered clothes? has a job like childcare teacher, nannying, nurse? i dont like the idea of defanged (and largely cishet white abled) feminism as much as you, but acting like all forms of freedom of choice that conforms to gender norms is inherently bad strays really close to political lesbianism ideology wherein even choosing to be romantically involved with a man becomes traitorous. because dating men Is a gender norm. short of being a radfem, there is a line where we recognize that choice does matter because otherwise, the act of dating a man in itself plays into gender roles and expectations.

i just think theres a bit more nuance. i.e. genuinely further normalizing hurtful rhetoric/ideas (which makeup and plastic surgery do) should be looked at critically and i personally think we ought to abandon aesthetic surgeries n makeup for the sake of simply fitting into beauty standards all together. i also think that people will always have innate preferences. mine is towards counselling and psychology- is it unfeminist to go into a field that is woman dominated? must we let go of all freedom to choose to do "the most anti-patriarchy thing possible"? i feel like more nuance is necessary or we fall into traps for ourselves and actually end up stifling other women. like women who dont want to go into male dominated fields because its rife with sexism. like women who genuinely want kids with a man. like women who dont have the capacity emotionalmy or physically due to disabilities to work the jobs they are qualified for and so they choose to be homemakers. or even trans women who choose to do makeup because it saves them from transmisogyny. like yes, absolutely we need to critique where some preferences come from because, like with beauty standards and diets and skincare and fashion/makeup trends, some of them can be genuinely harmful to others (especially young girls who are exposed only to manicured picture-perfect bodies and faces). but at the end of the day, sacrificing All individual preferences will not make women happier, healthier or freer. and i mean this for ALL women.

yes I agree that nuance is important! that post is only a few paragraphs long and I made it in a moment of anger--so please nobody think that when I went into it, I was thinking that any conformity to a gender role is worse than death itself lol. like im literally in cornrows and a woman's shirt now.

that's why i always make the distinction between feminist action vs nonfeminist actions, rather than IDing as a feminist and then taking all the things I do as either qualifying or disqualifying me as a feminist. There's women who, for any reason, choose to be homemakers rather than work. Is that a valid choice for them? Yeah! Is it a feminist action? In my personal opinion, no--but is it wrong? Hell no. It's just that, on the list of things that a woman might say are things she's done to dismantle the patriarchy, being a SAHM/homemaker wouldn't be on the list. That's not a bad thing. We can't live our lives wholly dedicated dismantling something to the point of our own self destruction (and considering how deeply gender roles run--even down to social interactions--this would be impossible, anyways). that's where liberal feminism and choice feminism are in the wrong--it's ID first, and then the belief that as along as she's a woman Doing What She Wants, she's fighting the patriarchy (in lots of ways this is the case, but in lots of ways it definitely isn't). so a woman ends up saying its a totes feminist thing to like. actively support plastic surgery and the harmful makeup culture. rather than admitting that those are things that a feminist can do that don't make her not a feminist, but that definitely aren't feminist actions.

(I think most of the people reblogging that post understood as much, considering how there's any number of folks reblogging that who are women w long hair or wearing bras or doing something else that's a gender role and thus supported by the patriarchy)

My beef is with the pushing of personal empowerment over liberation from the thing that makes you need to feel empowered in the first place--and then acting like that is a win against patriarchy. like in the ideal world, people wouldn't need to wear make up, you know? Like, there'd be no expectation for women of any type of contour their faces and coat their skin and clog their pores and spend dozens or even hundreds every year to look a Specific Way. The fact that trans women have to wear make up for their safety is evidence that we live in a society where women are at risk of facing extreme violence for non-conformity--that's a fundamental change to society that make up, while helpful in a lot of these situations, bandages over. Bear in mind that I'm not saying that trans women shouldn't ever wear make up or anything! Make up as a choice for personal freedom/safety obv varies between women and by situation. It's still a gender expectation that men don't have to face, though.

My post was aimed more at the hardline liberal feminists/choice feminists who truly do think that make up is like. a 100% liberating tool whose acceptance actually contributes to the furthering of women's rights and the dismantling of patriarchy. it was generally directed at the women who call themselves feminsts but don't actually have like. an ounce of anything negative to say about the gender roles that are forced on us from birth. like they keep insisting that there is liberation through conformity as long as you change your mind about it or change the definition of feminism entirely. I don't think anyone's evil or partaking wholeheartedly in the oppression of women by wearing makeup n heels or being a SAHM, but again I know better than to equate a choice (often made under some level of misogynistic social coercion) with like, strives to get women in normally male-dominant fields or boost our representation in government or securing our reproductive rights.

[yuzhousky]

Hi bummie🤗

The post about vsm225 has really rubbed me the wrong way and I have a few things to say.

First, I have a message for the person who submitted the ask to you: if you are going to bash somebody like that behind the safety and comfort of your keyboard, the least you can do is NOT post it anonymously. Show us your name and your face. How do you expect to be taken seriously for tarnishing someone's name anonymously?

I myself have been her long time follower on instagram. Does that make me and another 1300 people stupid? Shallow? Retarded?

However, the fact that i have been her follower will not make me biased to what i have to say.

Now, on a serious note, I like what she posts on her instagram, also i like what meimei (the girl who is looking after her account at the moment and posting stuff for vsm while she is struggling with covid) has been posting for the past month as well. Well, im lying. I dont like it, i LOVE IT. I love the vibe of posts, i love how spicy and sassy they are, and that is one of the instagram profiles i have the most interaction with. Because we are all there to have a good time, NOT to state facts. Vine is a very respectful person, she never throws hate or shade towards anyone, she never forces anyone to believe in anything she posts, and she never pushes her content in the as-a-matter-of-fact manner. Yes, there are sometimes hardcore bad translations from weibo, but i never take that stuff too deep, im able to get the point of what was behind it. Also, if she posts anything misleading for whatever reason, the moment she realises that she will own up to it and apologise.

Everything else is not meant to be taken seriously, but as fun and good time. Only things regarding zz and jy work and what THEY allow US to see regarding their private life can be called FACTS, the rest is all product of our delulu, speculations, wishful thinking etc, and we choose what to do with it. Im a 39 year-old man, with a master degree and more than 2 brain cells in my head and a full on life going on, yet in my comments on instagram i will refer to zz as "queen", "wifey", "madam huang" all in the name of funny banters and light hearted content and not because i find it to be the FACT. The fact is that i have enormous respect for that boy, not that i find his sole existence to be the wifey queen of jy. The FACT is that we can all learn from him how to behave mature, be strong, stick to your guns and believe in what you do, do stuff you find to be good for you, not bowing down to anyone and losing your integrity will result in success, not whether he wore the same tshirt as jy. The fact is that zz has always remaind humble, well behaved and he never allowed the success to take the best of him, not whether or not him and jy spent 2 hot nights in sanya in february. I could go on forever with this.

Vine, and everyone else on the internet are NOT here to please the crowd but because they post the things that make THEM happy and make THEM feel good. Those are THEIR accounts. The rest is up to us - who do we find at the same wave length, whose vibe matches ours, whose posts we like, and so on. Therefore we choose who to follow, and we all should be respectful to any other work anyone else posts online. Because, behind each and every profile is someone who takes time of their busy lives and puts a lot of work to provide the content for us. I personally cant stand the profiles dedicated to johnny and reba ship, but i dont go around barking online that they suck. I simpy DONT GO THERE. I stay in my own lane, i follow the content i like and let others live. Im not going around saying, or as the person in the post casually said "POINTING OUT"- hey everyone, dont follow that person because it doesnt align with MY OWN taste level. What qualifies anyone to say that? What right does anyone have to say that? Does any of us live or spend time with the boys? Using the FACTS logic, i could come to bummies profile every so often and be like - listen girl, you have to stop leading people on with your "hints" and "coincidences" and stick to the facts only tyvm. Right? Instead, i choose to visit your blog every day, LIVING for the content you put here.

Of course, there is always the responsibilty towards what you post publicly for everyone to see, but as long as there is nothing harmful or malicious im not being nit picky about it.

There are so few profiles dedicated to yuzhou left. There is bummies blog and like another 10ish instagram profiles still actively posting about them as one. Why having any bad vibes about any of them? Why showing any negative energy to anyone? Throwing shade or hate? What is the point like? Aren't we all here because we are supporting the boys for ALL the work they have done in the last 5 years, watching their growth in life and careers and having some light, fun time while doing it? Why creating any bad blood? I mean, we are basically being gossips girls, sorry everyone, we are not saving the world here or curing pandemics to take things so seriously.

As usual bummie, im ending this by thanking you yet again so much for everything you do, keep up with the good work! 🤗🤗🤗

Thanks for sharing your opinion. However, I just wanna make some points clearer here:

Tbh I'm not biased towards anyone in this case so I'm just gonna say what I'm thinking now. The previous anonymous ask about vsm was somehow pretty harsh towards vsm and I really don't want anyone to throw shade on her at all because I know she's a lovely fan of YZ and she's just trying her best to share the latest info about the boys. I know not all of her posts are about the facts; many of them are just delulus and jokes among fans, which are normal, and of course it's her own account so she could literally share anything she wants. However, I myself prefer the clarity in news/info delivery more, I mean if the post is just a delulu or joke, it should be stated clearly in order not to cause misleading or misunderstood things, because many interfans do not have Weibo accounts to double check the info, not to mention those new fans who might get confused even more. I have to say that this isn't the first time someone asking me about the reliability of some vsm's posts on IG because of her "vague" words and translation, and then I had to find the original posts on Weibo again or double check the info with Chinese cpfs then told vsm to correct her words.

So my opinion is that we are all sharing info with a big love for our idols but we also need to care about the clarity and reliability of our content as well. Of course we do not need to please anyone on the internet but at least we're responsible for what we post and those who might read it.

[feral-radfem]

my friend and I had an argument about j.k Rowling and trans activists and stuff.

And she is a massive trans rights kind of person. so when we were arguing, I said 'how can we discuss women's oppression if we can't even properly define what a woman is'

and she said 'well why does that matter'

long story short, she took nothing from the points I made and we both agreed to disagree.

but I just can't let what she said go :'(

Im sorry yall couldn't come to some kind of understanding and that she is so dismissive of women's oppression.

If she has bought into the message that women are only a little oppressed by men if at all in the west, or that women's oppression is just a qualifier for other marginalized groups rather than all women are oppressed on the basis of sex regardless of privilege there really isn't a way to reason with her on the importance of descriptive language for women.

You will be fighting not only her confirmation bias, that being a woman is only oppressive if your are also oppressed on another axis and whatever bs "science" theories TRAs create at a whim, but also her desire to be liked and seen as a good person. We are social animals, very few of us like to be ostracized by our communities and quite frankly a lot of people value social acceptance over asking important questions that may rock the boat. Its rough, it still sucks to feel like you are not being understood, but sometimes stepping back and looking at the bigger picture helps.

I don't know if you wanted to vent or if you wanted advice so I'm going to give the advice anyways. You can stop here if you dont want it lol.

This is a pretty volatile topic, a lot of people aren't going to change their mind until it's acceptable to have different opinions on it. So if this is a friendship that you value and you think this is something you could agree to disagree with for awhile and see how things go; take that opportunity and wait for things to calm down some. Maybe just avoid the topic with her and ask her not to prompt it. However, after a while if things remain the same, you'll have to consider that there is a chance she will never change her mind and you will have to decide whether this is a disagreement you can handle long-term or if yall have gone down separate paths in life and its time to say goodbye.

[randomslasher]

so this is a bit random, but if im an aro women who is sexually attracted to women and feels alterous attraction towards women do you think i can say the f slur? i dont really mind either way but i want to know your opinion on it

You’re right, this is quite random. And I’m not quite sure why you want my input specifically--I’ve never spoken on the topic before or anything? But I guess here’s my two cents. 

Reclamation of slurs by communities that have been harmed by them is a complicated topic with a long and complex history. This word in particular (one, I will note, that has more often been aimed at mlm than wlw) still has a very complicated history and there’s a lot of controversy surrounding its reclamation. Currently it’s still considered by most to be a fairly heinous slur against the LGBT and specifically the mlm community. So your list of LGBT credentials aside, I would say that the more important question to me would be why you want to use it. 

I call myself queer. It’s a word I’ve claimed as part of my identity, because to me, it’s a good, all-encompassing term that establishes me as “not cisgendered heterosexual heteroromantic” and I like having a shorter term for myself that doesn’t come with a 20-minute lecture on orientations and gender theory (you try telling someone outside the community that you’re a non-binary bi-oriented autochorissexual akoiromantic and see how much fun THAT is). I also tend to think that the pushback against queer, which has been reclaimed by the community for quite some time, has more to do with attempts at exclusion than anything else (if you’re lashing out against certain factions or trying to push certain factions out of the community, there is nothing more dangerous than an umbrella term, after all). 

That said, I would still never try to say that other people should identify as queer if they don’t want to, nor would I call someone queer when they said they preferred I didn’t, because as I said, reclamation is complicated and often down to personal experience and individual preference. 

So to your question: again, my question back is why do you want to use the word? Do you want to use it to self-identify? (truthfully I’ll admit that seems unlikely, given its history as a primarily mlm term). 

Or are you wanting permission to call someone else the term? And if so, why? Because I can think of very few reasons to call someone else a slur other than to try to hurt them, and frankly, if that’s your goal, then I don’t think it’s ever okay, regardless of where you yourself fit into the community. Additionally, even if it ISN’T your goal to hurt someone, if someone you used the word on has told you that you they were hurt, then my opinion is worthless--it’s theirs you should listen to. No matter how qualified you may feel to use certain terms, if someone else in the community tells you they’re hurt by them, then don’t use them against that person. Period. Ever. 

So there you go, I guess. That’s my opinion on the matter, whatever it might be worth. 

[37q]

I guess what I mean is that I don’t see how transness can be a matter of just an individual identity like that. Gender is social, and a gender is something other people have to give you, for better or for worse. What does it really mean to say “I identify as x” if that’s not linked to a social or physical transition?

my friend im not sure the purpose of this series of asks, unless youre just trying to flesh out your own opinions and feelings about modern-day transness with me, in which case i welcome it! however if thats not the case, and youre assuming i have opinions that i may not necessarily have, then this is a little misguided.

but anyways! i agree that transness is dependently originated, especially social and societally so. but also, how we navigate the social world and how we internalize it is a personal journey! i for one would not say that my gender is independent of anything around me, but how i approach it, engage with it, etc, is a me thing, in the same way that problems that i inherited from my mom are something that i have to deal with in therapy; yeah, someone gave it to me, or yeah it was a cooperative effort in its production, but when push comes to shove im still dealing with it on my own, even if i have help.

i do take slight issue with the phrase “something other people have to give to you”, but mostly in a qualifying way rather than a disputing way. we are neither helpless against the gendering of others nor are we sole proprietors of our gender. we have the autonomy to do what we want about how we express ourselves to others, but the codes we use only have so much impact on the relative mutability of our position within the gendered societal matrix. if this wasnt your intention with those words, thats ok, but i just wanted to clear that up in case someone interpreted them that way and assumed i co-signed them.

and finally, im generally on the fence about a transness without intentional change. i dont really care to rate the reality of someones relationship with their gender, so the post i made recently was mostly just stating stuff ive observed. a lot of trans people dont seek out social or medical transition or dont desire to change anything about themselves other than self-referential language, and thats just how it is for them. this is especially the case for nonbinary people. i think its mostly fun, because although i dont “consider” myself a post-modernist anymore because i literally dont care, i still like to do the classic lewis carroll “imagine seven impossible things before breakfast” but with de-essentializing phenomena, nondualistically and with tetralemma logical sequences. how can we hold any characteristic essential to a phenomenons definition when all phenomena are empty of any innate, independent value anyway? yeah, we can argue that as long were operating under the ubiquity of conventional reality then we can debate the actuality of conventional denotative characteristics, but i think thats disingenuous so long as i invoke the ultimate reality of emptiness as a, well, better way of living life, or not-life, whatever.

and then i think about lesbianism and im like yeah i dont give a fuck im defending these pillars of lesbian bahahahahaha its my biggest attachment! what can i say!

[araisbored]

Obelisk

That’s the only quirky title I could come up to make this a little bit more interesting.

I’m reviewing my favorite book again. More like making another post about it. Because I seem like the type of person to not shut up about something she truly, truly, deeply love. Though, I won’t really making a review. Because I am in no state to make one of those. I don’t know I just I’m not that qualified to that yet. Though I read millions of books, I still won’t. I re-read my last “review” and it just make me cringe because I can’t understand what I’m saying and there’s a bunch of errors on my sentence. Not that this whole post won’t containing grammar errors, but still. Also, the cringing intensifies when I saw that Jennifer Niven (the author of this book) liked my bizarrely wrong blog entry. Ms. Niven, if by any chance, reading this again, I love your work and I’m sorry for a lot of grammatical errors. Ms. Niven, your work changed my life and help me get through a rough time. Sounds cliché but its the truth. 

To repeat what I typed, I won’t make a review. Yet, I’ll post a very private diary log which where I somehow discuss my opinions about this book. So here it is. 

Trigger warning: Suicide topics, cutting and mental issues might come up on the next following paragraph. And it’s really graphic. Because it is a personal log on my digital diary. Beware. 

May 17, 2019: Theodore’s death, Avengers: End game and GoT discussion.

I never had a proper review of this book. Because lets be real here. Its me and probably won’t matter. Last time or more like last last year, I made a book recommendation/favourites about this book. And I emphasize on that blog post that it’s not a book review. NOT A BOOK REVIEW. At all.

Because:

I am scared of the internet scrutinizing my opinions and views about this book.

It’s about mental health or part of it. So it is really a sensitive topic and I even haven’t figured myself out. So I’m not really sure if  I’m the right person you want to have an opinion regarding with this topic. One thing about me is that you don’t go asking me questions on how you figured your life or how you deal with depression because, oh boy oh boy you’re in a wrong place honey.

Last night I searched Theodore Finch on twitter. Yes, twitter. Because that is where you get the real opinions. Real tea. As well as the stupid ones. And I read one thread or whatever you call it, some sort of a conversation or replies from one girl to another. (I just assumed you’re girl and I’m sorry if you’re not. I am really sorry for misgendering you.) The other girl said that she’s kind of annoyed how everyone around Theodore doesn’t get the signs when it’s literally on their faces. When you come to think of it. Its true. All the signs of Theodore’s disease was there. Bluntly on their faces. It’s kind of fascinating how it’s not noticed by his family and friends or even Violet. But again right now thinking about it, maybe because it happened when this world just slowly noticing or paying attention about mental health. Hold a second, let me search when it was published. Yeah, I'm right its 2015. A year of coming of age for the late Baby Boomers are introduced to depression and when people, mostly teenagers are committing suicide. I would be very harsh on my words because it was just me talking to myself anyways. So yeah, that's also the year where I'm cutting myself and wanted to kill myself. So no wonder Finch’s family have no idea about his mishaps and adventures. So about that discussion, it was already solved. That year was just the year where naïve people are introduced to mental health and issues. Anyways, back to that conversation. The other girl defended the book/author. That the author, Jenifer Niven, was just portraying real life happenings. That these things happens in real life. People really die because of mental health issues. By the way, Finch mental diagnosis wasn’t really mentioned on the book directly. As far as I can remember. That’s why I'm re-reading it again now. But so far zero mentioned of diagnosis or bipolarity(Is that even a word? idc.). Just the mention of him wanting to kill himself, the erotic changes in his moods, lack of appetite and being insomniac. He doesn’t sleep one night or he sleeps then have very bad nightmares after that. It’s pretty obvious but again, let’s refer to the points given above. Oh, oh! Then there’s one time he repainted his bedroom from blood red to blue. If that’s not alarming enough then idk anymore. But yes, 2015. The coming of age and the year where we birthed more stupid late boomers. But, yes. Wild book. A very wild and very BRILLIANT book. It’s the stupid characters or the people in Finch’s life that suck. Which is why I kind of sided to the girl who said that that the author doesn’t really write the characters well. Let’s call her Girl A. And the other girl who defend Niven, Girl B. I’m pretty sure you’re both girls but just in case, I’m gonna apologize again if I'm  misgendering you. Or if you don’t wanna be called a girl. I can’t say or disclose that Girl B was wrong because he clearly have a point too. It happens in real life. People die from depression and I might be one soon.

Just wanna say that It’s a good discourse. Arguments like that are my favorites where both sides are not wrong nor right either, makes you really think. A read. Both the book and that twitter discourse. If you happened to read it, good. But if not sorry I can’t link it for you. 

So for my opinion (oh no, here we go) I agree on both of them , as if its not yet obvious. I guess if it was written in the present days the author could’ve change the characters and made Finch alive. Or checked-in in a mental institution or he’ll be given a medical assistance he really needs. Because the only medical attention he was given was thru his Guidance councilor, Embryo. Which is a good thing, but also I think Finch’s situation needs more professional attention. No offence to all guidance councilors out there. I know you guys try your best. But you know, Niven can make Finch visit a psychiatrist in a clinic/mental institution right? Like violet. I know Finch’s financial state is bad but.. idk there’s something can be done here. But again it was during that time where people are shouting “Depression isn’t real”, stupid people posting tweets and Facebook status on how “Suicide is for the week”; they watch 13 reasons why and decided to skip the whole point of the show and just assumed that “yeah depression is for the weaklings”. It only shows how ignorant people are. They’re the kind of people who standby when you get punch on the face or laugh when people spreads rumors and lies about you. Basically, bystanders. I’m sorry I’m a little snappy. If you haven’t noticed. I don’t know I’m just mad today.

I think the book still holds it. And justify the ending. Though part of me really hate it too. But it kind of made me realized about a lot of things, not just about me but also about how I should interact with other human beings. I hate the ending because it breaks my heart but I guess it was necessary?? Or not. Any how,  It was a good ending. Maybe its just me because I’m a masochist. But I can not think of any other impactful and realistic way on ending it. (Rereading this again and I just need to clear things up. That IM NOT A MURDERER OR A KILLER. I DONT NORMALIZE SUICIDE,  but from a standing point the ending is justified. Its sad but its, again, realistic.) But still, breaks my heart, Theodore is a precious boy. Who deserves nothing but love. And I hope his story was more known by the people so jackasses would know how to treat their family and friends better. 

[This part was cut because I talked about Avengers and GoT ending; Which is very relevant to this topic]

Love,

Ara xx

So yeah, that’s some of my diary entry. Re-reading it makes me realized how funny I am. Jesus I should read more of these. Who knows, I might post it here. If it’s not that personal. I’ll end this here now. I hope wherever you are you’re having a good day.

Ttyl, Ara!

[thegeminisage]

hey liz i've been thinking a lot about story structure lately and i wanted your take on how you decide what structure your stories will have? i know there's that "you have to do what your story needs and tells you to do" thing but these bitches dont ever tell me anything they just multiply so. thoughts? - bma

(as an aside, i don't know whether involving medium would change many things but it may be worth considering. mainly i think medium is just a matter of arrangement and that the story would be for most intents and purposes the same no matter how you choose to tell it. i guess you could argue that structure is arrangement in itself and intrinsically tied to medium but i sort of feel like it is secondary arrangement, if at all? like if you consider time as an element to outline -- the time IN the story (how things happen to your characters) is not necessarily the time you’re telling the story IN (how you are telling your reader that things are happening) aka internal chronology doesnt equal your work’s pacing? or should it??? does this make sense? i dont think so. i am sorry.) - bma :|

NOOO dont be sorry ur making total sense

i think there’s 3 thots to unpack here (medium, structure, & chronology) & i’m gonna start with medium bc it’s easier. im also putting it behind a cut bc it’s gonna get just stupidly long and rambly. i’m sorry in advance if it’s not helpful to you, i have a lot to say for someone who has never taken even one single class on writing and as a result doesn’t know jack shit (there’s a tl;dr at the end dont worry)

about MEDIUM: 

so like ok i’m just some goof-off with a HS degree who writes fanfiction but In My Very Super Qualified Personal Opinion, i don’t think that most of the time medium is intrinsically tied to STRUCTURE of the main storytelling arc...i think the art of storytelling itself is distinct from the medium you choose to tell the story IN. this post puts it better than i ever could but basically for me, i feel like the story itself is sort of the raw, malleable concept, and the medium you choose to tell it in is how you convey the information??

like in a book, you can say “she forgot her keys” and in a film you have to show her smacking her forehead, heading back into the house, and swiping her keeps off the counter. you can’t TELL in film, you have to show. similarly i regret every day i cannot perfectly describe a facial expression with words when i see it so clearly in my head. for audio-only podcasts that are dialogue heavy out of necessity you have different limitations than you would for, say, animated music videos with no dialogue at all. games allow for more interactivity and exploration while sacrificing accessibility, tv shows allow for more length while sacrificing, uh, a big hollywood budget...medium affects the kind of story you can reasonably tell which is why some stories are better suited to one medium than another. i think trying things in other mediums is a good way to stretch your storytelling muscles but with enough skill nearly any story could be told in any medium. i think when trying to decide on a medium you just gotta weigh the pros & cons and what you feel comfortable with/what you think would be most effective/what would evoke the strongest reaction

re: structure:

firstly “do what the story tells u to do” is a little silly like...the story isn’t sentient. come on. that’s like “i can only write when the writing gods inspire me” there are no writing gods! inspire yourself! it’s all in our weird messed up brains! ok anyway.

this is, again, just how i do things, and i am 700% self-taught so take it with a grain of salt, but when i sit down and start blocking out a story from scratch i don’t...actually consider the big structure at all! sorry if that’s not helpful to you. i like to make a list of everything i want to happen, and then put it together in a few different orders to see what looks best. and when i’m finished, whatever i have just like...IS the structure i go with, with perhaps minor tinkering to make it flow more smoothly. (i think this might be in the same spirit as “do what the story tells you” with less bullshit and more Agency Of The Writer.)

for long and more complex projects, i actually usually have several lists - one list of stuff that is, for example, the Action Plot (the kingdom has been cursed, i’m tracking down my serial killer sister to bring her to justice, i’m running from djinn who wanna kill my dad, i’m trying to bring my dead not-boyfriend back to life). then i have another list for Character A & Character B’s romance or whatever. and maybe a even another one for solo character development (magicphobic prince learns to love magic, former werewolf hunter figures out his family is a cult, half-demon learns to embrace his own nature). and as many lists as we need for however many Main Characters and or Plots/Sideplots

how i order the lists: individually first. don’t mix them together to start with. when deciding the order of an individual list i like to, for example in a romance arc, use escalating intimacy. “A and B have dinner together” is naturally gonna go way sooner than “A and B kiss” or “A and B talk about A’s angsty backstory” because that’s more satisfying. draw it out, good/important stuff last, dangle that carrot so we have a reason to keep reading! for singular character development, it’s basically a straightforward point A to point B...if i want my guy to start hating magic with everything he is and end up being very comfortable with it, i have to put “reluctantly uses magic to save his own life” WAYYY before “casually using magic to light torches and reheat his cold stew.” 

the tricky part for me is when i’m done with these lists and then i need to mix them together To Pace My Whole Story. (this is usually why i wind up with a rainbow colored spreadsheet.) i don’t like to put too many things too close together because then the pace feels uneven. even if my Action Plot is only a thinly veiled excuse for romance and character development, i still don’t want to focus on a romance for 30,000 words and then go “and oh yeah in case you forgot Serial Killing Sister is still coming for your asses.” the more sideplots and major character arcs you’re juggling the harder it is to get an even distribution, which is my main concern always

and like, generally, whatever i have when i’m finished...is my structure. (sorry.) 

i don’t know much about the classic 3-act or anything like that, but i usually can divide them up into 3-5 big arcs based on story turning points. sometimes i take a scene out of one arc and put it in another because it fits better and i like for my shit to be organized, but usually by the time i’m finished with all that, that’s what the final story is mostly gonna look like. (there have been a few exceptions when i realized i needed extra scenes/changes while i was MID-DRAFT and let me tell you that murders me EVERY time. it happened on the merlin fic i’m currently posting and that was like my own personal hell.)

this is also where thots about chronology come in:

i think time CAN be an element of this if you WANT it to be, but it doesn’t HAVE to be. if you want it to be, i would consider it just another “list” like character development or the romance arc. 

i usually plot without considering Time very much...to me, it’s all down to the events you want to show, and however much time it takes is the byproduct. if you want to show something from a character’s chilhood but then tell the bulk of it when they’re adults, that’s one thing. if you want to show a scene from their childhood, teenhood, young adulthood, etc, that’s a different kind of pacing?? i usually do it this way so i can regard time like wordcount: it takes as long as it takes. 3 days or 3 years, a 1.5k drabble or a 100k epic...overall, my LARGEST CONCERN is that even distribution. in the same way that i don’t want one chapter to be 30,000 words when the rest are 10,000 words, i personally am not a fan of huge timeskips offscreen

(because this where i think someone’s own internal chronology DOES matter...this is just a personal preference, as a reader i have a hard time really comprehending, say, a year timeskip or a 10yr timeskip when all i did was turn one page. like, a year is such a long time. i can’t even begin to describe how different i am now to how i was a year ago. it’s the same for character development. time IS development and as a writer i’m not really comfortable having that take place offscreen - for main characters, at least. it’s just too jarring. a little prologue with something happening 10 or 20 years ago is usually fine, but for the most part, i’m not a fan. ...i can do one chapter per year a lot easier than i can do two chapters in childhood and the other 8 in adulthood. of course you can play with this a LOT with nonlinear storytelling, which is a whole other very cool thing, and someone skilled in their work can keep me sucked in no matter what, but imo if you don’t want to risk throwing your reader out of your work it’s better to keep things steady)

HOWEVER sometimes time IS an element u wanna consider outside of just making sure your shit is evenly distributed...if your heart is moved to tell a story in a specific timeframe, over a year, or from solstice to solstice (this was almost the timeline for my merlin fic and then i changed it), for the first six months of a friendship, or even a huge journey in the span of a single day (toby fox had a lot of success with this one lol).

i think it can help to choose a start and end point for your chronology the same way you do for character development (prince goes from hating magic to being ok with it, story takes place from ages 8 to 25, or from new year’s eve 2038 to 2039, whatever) - that way you can keep your distribution even, if that’s a thing you want to do...even if you have a lot of skips you can still note what happens offscreen to make it work better in your head? like, if you just make it another List, another column on your spreadsheet, when you’re in the early stages of organizing you can be conscious of it and make sure it’s playing into the story the way you want it to

anyway these r my thots im SOOOO SORRY this is so long lmao. brain machine broke today which is why i had to ramble more to explain myself. the tl;dr in case ur brain is melting out of ur ears & u didn’t sign up for an essay:

imo medium is totally distinct from storytelling tho ofc some stories are better suited to some mediums

structure? i don’t know her. i plot w/o regard to structure and then if it looks funny i mush it into a more structurally sound shape

my main concern when structuring anything, including time, is an even distribution of Events and a steady rate of escalation

structure to me is just what i have when i’m finished plotting. i’m sorry one day i’m gonna take a writing class

internal chronology matters to me personally because i have a little bit of time blindness but maybe not to everyone, i know many very successful stories where they disregarded that entirely to no ill effect

writer’s block isn’t real! everyone just needs more rainbow spreadsheets

thank u for asking I HOPE i didn’t make you regret it too badly lmao and that at least a little of it was helpful!! 

[anarchistsuggestion]

hey, vaccinate your kids you jerks!!!

thanks for coming to my essay! now that i have your attention, i think we should stop talking about anti-vaxxers like theyre all backwards hyper-religious dumbasses. like, im frustrated too, and i agree that "personal/religious reasons" should not allow someone to keep their kids unvaccinated. furthermore, as an autistic person, i despise the myth that vaccines cause autism. i especially hate that it scares people into avoiding vaccines, because theres nothing wrong with me.

but ridiculing these people will only make the problem worse, and here's why: i think that a lot of anti-vaxxers and their communities are used to feeling like the most important aspects of their cultural identities are universally mocked or demonised (im not qualified to say whether these feelings reflect reality in every case, but either way im just talking about feelings, ie, what people think we believe about their culture). for instance, my only knowledge of amish people comes from jokes ive seen others make about them. yes, none of these jokes were very serious, and its easy for me to laugh at them because im not amish, but despite my low empathy i can understand that it just feels bad to hear a whole bunch of jokes about something important to you. i'll get back to this point in a moment.

anyway, i bring up the amish because in 2014, there were measles outbreaks in some amish communities in Ohio. and i think that a lot of the people who dont vaccinate their kids are used to being ridiculed for their "weird" or "new age" or "hyper-religious" or "unchristian" lifestyles, so they just see our concern as more of that mockery. we all sound the same to them, and cant you see why?

"ughh all these people ignoring science and being stubborn about vaccines because their church said--" you sound like one of those atheists. if you cant say anything productive, please stay out of the discussion. why do you act like ridiculing people will change their minds? we should be reaching out, instead.

we need to make the effort to approach anti-vaxxers in a way that distinguishes us from those who only converse with them to mock them.

i want more people to understand that the best way to change someone's mind when they're defensive is by listening. you need to be willing to accept whatever they might rant about, and respect that, even if their fears seem ridiculous, even if their fears are rooted in ableism, their fears still terrify them. thats why theyre called fears. you can validate someone's feelings of anxiety and confusion without validating their bigotry, and you must be willing to accept that this is work. this is difficult. it's much, much harder than yelling your opinions. it's exhausting, and sometimes it doesn't even pay off. sometimes you just can't convince somebody, and you have to be able to accept that.

if this seems too hard for you, i have good news: you do not have to do it. this kind of thing is not for everyone, and it's okay if you just don't want to. this doesn't have to be your responsibility.

i only ask that you stop making things worse by (performatively, in the case of yall who arent in danger of dying/losing a loved one to a preventable disease) mocking anti-vaxxers, because we are the ones who need something from them. we are asking them to face their fears (which were sometimes instilled in them very early in their childhood) for the good of humanity. i don't know about all of you, but i'd be hesitant at best to face even my third worst fear (spiders) for the sake of strangers who regularly mock my culture and heritage, and i know for a fact that most spiders cannot harm me!

this is natural. this is human. it is easy to dismiss things you dont understand, and it's even easier to dismiss them when all the scientific evidence agrees with you. however, your evidence does not make these people's experiences and fears less real for them. it does not lessen the effect their fear has on their choices. knowing that a tarantula won't hurt me if i follow certain guidelines will not stop me from shaking and having a breakdown if i think too hard about touching one. knowing that nothing bad would happen doesn't motivate me to go over to the science building at my college and ask to hold their fucking tarantula.

there are no shortcuts here. if we want anti-vaxxers to accept vaccines and stop putting so much effort towards keeping their children unvaccinated, we have to convince them that they don't need to be afraid of vaccines. we need to actually address their concerns. telling them their fears are ridiculous is just not convincing no matter how much scientific evidence you have. this discussion has become too performative. people just tell anti-vaxxers to vaccinate their kids, and they dont bother to address the fear that motivates their opponents. they don't care that they're asking people to trust a yelling internet stranger with their child's health.

it is inconsiderate to demand things from people without stopping to think about what you're asking for. please think about it from their point of view. if vaccines were dangerous, and they vaccinated their kids, then anything bad that happened to their kids due to the vaccines would be their responsibility. and remember, these people have not been given a convincing reason to believe vaccines are harmless. okay? they do not want to be at fault for their children getting hurt. yes, they are wrong. yes, they are frustrating. yes, they are endangering immunocompromised people like my dad, but there is a huge difference between being malicious and being misguided. please do not treat them like they set out to hurt you.

also? stop telling them to care about other people when you don't care enough about them to respect that they're doing their best with the resources they have. stop saying "i dont know how to explain to you that you should care about other people" when you really just want them to magically stop being scared. maybe you say it out of genuine frustration and bewilderment, but when everyone is saying it, it comes across like a smug 'gotcha!' phrase that excuses you from spending more energy on the debate. you can just say youre tired and stop.

i am trying to explain to you that you should care that these people have felt scammed/hurt by the medical industry enough times that they feel justified in risking the health of their whole family (assuming they even think vaccines work). you should care that theyve never been given a convincing reason to trust remedies promoted by rich strangers who make claims that sound too good to be true. the government has promoted harmful things to underprivileged people before, like milk (it took me a half hour to sift through unrelated stuff about soy milk to confirm this, so i'll go ahead and link my source). it is logical to mistrust an industry that operates for the profit of people youve never met. not everyone trusts the FDA to keep the pharmaceutical industry in check, and it's actually pretty smart to rely on direct accounts from people you know personally when you aren't sure how well something actually works, and you dont trust the ones selling it to you.

with that in mind, talking to people is probably the best way to tackle this issue, but many of you haven't bothered to compile introductory information about vaccines. you havent bothered to present these resources in a way that doesn't ridicule people who are scared. i am trying to explain to you that you shouldn't debate with people if you won't treat them like humans. i am trying to explain to you that "you dont actually care about others" is a hurtful and manipulative sentiment, and when you say it to people who are trying their best, you become part of the problem. you reinforce their mistrust. i am trying to explain to you that trusting doctors doesnt make you morally superior.

put yourself in their shoes for a moment. imagine that someone comes up to you and makes it clear that they think the choices you've made as a parent are ridiculous. they make claims about your child without offering proof, or the only proof they offer also mocks you and people like you (or they just tell you to "google it"). furthermore, they tell you that unless you give in, something bad will happen to their own children, and it will be your fault.

this is manipulative. even if you are correct, it is manipulative. demanding that someone treat their child in a way that they consider harmful is just ridiculous and i don't know why you expect people to listen to you. do you expect this to be easy? do you honestly believe that if someone isn't converted within minutes, they're just being stubborn? do you think these people know the truth, and only persist out of spite?

these questions are necessary, because many of you talk about anti-vaxxers as though the answer is 'yes.' there is a difference between being correct and treating people right. please be more aware of that line in the future, and do your best not to cross it.

oh, and by the way, if i see any of you using this year's measles outbreaks as an excuse to be hateful towards jewish people, i will block and report you. antivaxxers usually arent malicious, and if you perceive orthodox jewish antivaxxers as being worse than other antivaxxers, you need to rethink your beliefs. they arent rejecting vaccines just to hurt you. maybe theyre tired of being demonised and blamed for everything from climate change to unemployment to dead kids*, and theyre unwilling to trust random people with something as important as the health of their children when a lot of us have never bothered to listen to their struggles. (* ive seen a whole lot of people saying things that border on blood libel without quite involving blood during these discussions, so can we all agree to be careful not to do anything that resembles that shit now that ive provided a handy link about what it is? thanks)

lastly, all of this criticism of anti-anti-vaxxers is very easy for me to say because i have less of a personal stake in the issue. i know it must hurt in a way i can't currently understand to lose someone to a preventable disease. if i have made anyone feel dismissed or invalidated in this essay post, i'm sorry for doing so, and i want to make it clear that it is okay if you hate anti-vaxxers. i know their fear has hurt you, and i wouldn't ask you to pretend otherwise. i dont want to make any of you feel like you shouldn't talk about your experiences and fears. i'm just asking that, before you hit the post button, you read through your post and edit out anything manipulative or guilt-trippy. your contributions to this conversation are valuable, and i want the people youre trying to convince to be able to read them without feeling like they have to defend themselves instead of listening to you. the culture around this debate has become almost hostile, and while we dont all need to work directly with anti-vaxxers to make it better, we do all need to agree to stop making it worse.

[dreadintensifies]

sorry you feel that way but setting a line is gatekeeping! its a "line" (gate) telling people u must be this or else u dont qualify. consider how wild it is to think u personally get to define how dysphoric someone should be before theyre trans. bc no matter how "low" your bar may be, its still there. also there will always be those im ur community with more reqs and a higher bar. the only way to not have trans ppl jumping through hoops to conform is for there to not be any hoops to jump through

unfortunately this is anon so i cant reply directly or privately, but in my personal opinion (once again this is my own thoughts and feelings, and i only speak for myself. dont twist my words.) then maybe there should be some amount of gatekeeping. listen its rare but there have been reported cases of someone transitioning before they were sure and it caused major dysphoria and was expansive and painful emotionally, physically, and sexually (sexually as in sexuality as in gender, physical sex, and sexual interests). okay my friend put this in a really good way so ima just quote her "no i mean i agree, i was having a conversation the other day about people who abuse labels and minimize others' struggles

like it's not up to me to decide whether or not someone is or is not trans or gay or anything, but using the label for the sake of using it waters down the real problems people face"

in my own words

""i cant choose the line but there is one and people need to consider it and how they treat it" kinda thing. you and i cant choose whos trans or not, but there still needs to be awareness of what is trans and what isnt so people dont use the label incorrectly and cause more issues for those suffering"

basically instead of forcefully telling people they arent trans (since. ya know. im not an asshole *cough at the person who called me a cunt and scum bc of this post*) make sure people are aware that there is a definition of trans. that dysphoria is important to, at the very least, knowing that you are trans (you as in yourself. as in the dysphoria or releif of dysphoria that made one realize they are trans) and that there is a line between trans and cis, and that there is a line between gender and sex, gender and social norms, gender and sexuality. not forcing people out of the trans community, but making sure they know what it means to be trans (there is a definition for a reason water it down too much and suddenly tomboys are trans and trans people arent aowed to transition at all bc it could be a phase) and make sure they know its okay to experiment, people are there to help them figure it out, and most importantly that trans is not the only option. not the only reality. so so so many people on tumblr slap the label of trans on everything and anything. a 12 yr old girl feels disconnect from social femininity but connect with her own sexuality? oh shes trans says tumblr. what we need to say is, this is what sexuality means, this is what gender is, this is how society treats it, this is what might be happening but also this.

is this making more sense? not gatekeeping as in forcefully keeping people out. but telling people what the gate is, what it means to be inside it, what it means to be outside it, and how their actions can impact others.

a real life issue for many trans people isnt gatekeeping. its the aggression from society who resfuses to learn bc tumblr makes it so hard to learn, so complex and difficult.