#nightmare talks

[yanderenightmare]

saw you tag benevolent sexism as a trigger warning on one of your pics, was wondering if you could explain what that is? as compared to just regular sexism

Benevolent sexism is the same as any other type of sexism. As in, it's still very much sexism. But there is a small fundamental difference that separates it from most sexism.

Most sexism is based on "negative" feelings - such as (men are stronger than women; therefore, men are better) or (women are hormonal and emotional; therefore incapable of intellectual thought) or (women are weak and only good for birthing children; therefore, they shouldn't do anything else), etc... you know the gist...

But benevolent sexism is more based on "positive" feelings - such as (women are cute, adorable, lovely creatures; therefore, men should cherish them).

And while that's fine and all, what makes it sexist is that those thoughts are generally rooted in other thoughts that still inspire female inferiority to men - such as (women are soft, small, weak creatures; therefore, in need of a man's protection or help) or (women are pretty and dainty little things; therefore, they shouldn't do certain things or have certain jobs)

It's still sexism at its finest, but instead of having undertones of hatred toward women, it has these over-protective and overbearing justifications.

It also applies when people judge a woman's worth strictly by how good a wife, girlfriend, or mother she is - instead of how good she is at her job or in any other aspect of her life.

This is all based on sexism toward women, but it obviously works both ways.

Such as judging a man strictly on how good a provider he is, how talented he is in sports, how much he works out, whether he's likely to win in a fight... etc...

And notions such as (men are strong; therefore, they should take all the hard labor and fight our wars) or even (men are tough; therefore, they shouldn't cry) and (men are capable: therefore, they shouldn't waste their potential doing girly things)

In the fic you're referencing, there was a character (Dabi) who spoke about both sides, both women and men.

“Most girls are better survivors.” - “They learn quickly to accept what will keep them safe, and then, they find solace in whatever they can to maintain their mental health as well…” - “Boys fight until they break. Leaving them a shell of what they once were. But girls don’t have the same pride.” - “They leave themselves behind and become someone new.”

To be honest, I'm not entirely in agreeance with myself when I flagged this as benevolent sexism. But I felt some type of warning was necessary since he's talking about what separates women from men.

Dabi is complementing women by saying this while simultaneously dissing his own gender, but he's also degrading both in a way by insinuating that girls don't have any will to fight back because, in his words, they don't have any pride. He also says that girls are quick to change depending on their situation, saying that they become someone new. Meaning, essentially, he doesn't really think women take any pride in who they are and will change their personality just as quick as a chameleon camouflages itself.

It's really up to each of his own whether to take this as a compliment or not. Either way, I find it a slightly sad point of view.

But a sad compliment or not - it's still kind of tough to say whether it's sexist or not. However, it's obvious he has certain opinions about women - and I figured I might as well flag it as benevolent sexism just to stay safe.

the fic

[knight-of-nightmares]

I wish I had the same eyesight as cats do so I can see the ghosts that are in my home. I wanna know if they are cute or if I need to move.

[stil-lindigo]

frankly, the people whose kneejerk reaction to bisan asking for a global strike form the 21st-28th is to say that it takes years to organize a general strike are really unhelpful! no one is saying otherwise, but palestine will be a smoking crater if we all wait for years to do anything - bisan is asking us to do something now. Like are we only supposed to do something if we can do it perfectly??? At some point it’s a valid critique about the work that goes into social movement, and at another point I feel like some people are just trying to absolve themselves from not putting any effort into observing a week of economic inaction.

like idk! I get it, okay! People have bills to pay that don’t magically go away for a strike, we don’t have nearly enough social infrastructure in place to support people to fully stop going to work for a week. But fuck, dude! Stop immediately responding in such a defeatist way! Cut out unnecessary purchases! Try to shop local! Put more effort into promoting Palestinian voices online! Attend a protest, call a local rep, do something!

[lakeside-paradise]

My mum called FNaF Freddy Five Guys. So.

Freddy Five Guys

[cowardlykrow]

Stop light shenanigans

Extra:

[upon-the-snow]

early mornings after nightmares

[bloodofelves]

► lovely indie games I played in 2023

[therubberducklad]

It’s NM’s first henchmen he can’t be expected to remember all that

[normalenjoyer-png]

coping

[im-totally-not-an-alien-2]

Danny was...unnerved, which is unusual considering his upbringing as the child of mad scientists obsessed with the undead.

It had been a few weeks since he had moved into Wayne manor after a conflict between batman and his parents, which led to his home and his friends and family being blown up in a lab malfunction. Most of Amity Park was destroyed in the blasts, including Vlad and his mansion.

Usually Danny would be more suspicious of super rich dudes, but the sorrow in Bruce Wayne's eyes as he pleaded to let Danny take him in was genuine and well, Danny didn't exactly have anywhere else to go. Plus, Bruce looked weirdly guilty when danny told him none of this was his fault, which was weird. Jazz was in college and always looked exhausted on video calls, so he didn't want to bother her there.

The part that bothered him most wasn't that there was anything dangerous or bad happening, but rather the opposite.

Danny was used to dodging his home security system when it randomly targeted him. He was used to ghosts popping up out of nowhere to suckerpunch him. He was used to danger.

And now that there was none, he was jumping at shadows.

Things got better when he met Psaro. He was in the process of being either mugged or kidnapped, he wasn't sure, when this angry goth teen with silver hair and ruby eyes literally came in swinging a steel chair. After the beat down and subsequent rescue, Danny offered to buy them some food. Psaro tried to reject the offer until his stomach suddenly growled, making him blush, and Danny dragged the older goth teen to a restaurant.

They've been best friends since. Psaro later introduced him to his friends Rose and Toilen, explaining that they weren't from this world and that Rose was an elf and Toilen was a Teran from a planet called Terrestria. Danny assumed that Psaro was an elf like Rose due to them both having long pointed ears and mostly focused on Toilen thanks to the "other planet" bit.

Meanwhile, the bats have been keeping an eye out on Danny (aka stalking him) and his new, obviously magical friends.

[clownsuu]

weren't you the person who created 'gotta sweeps' human design

Ah yes, the mandatory yearly sweep ask—

[knight-of-nightmares]

The only haunting going on is the ghost of your own childhood judging your life choices

[sunclown]

Quiet

[belas-undead]

may i present.... this:

thank you for coming to my ted talk

[keuwibloom]

(Slight TW/CW for injury)

With how their whole positivity/negativity thing works (and that they're the only ones who can mortally wound each other), what if Dream and Nightmare aren't able to physically touch anymore?

Imagine, in the past, the brothers' main love language was physical touch (hugs, play fighting, etc). But after they ate the apples, the negativity and positivity act like poison to the other as a defense mechanism.

Any prolonged contact will burn Dream and make Nightmare's corruption boil and melt. It is extremely painful for both of them.

Imagine how this affects them in Parallel Synthesis.

When after all the fighting, after they've settled on a truce, after they've found peace and are able to actually be brothers again,

there will always be that one thing they can never have back.

Btw this takes place during the lunch meeting mentioned here! The stars and the gang decided to have an outdoors lunch :]

Dream and Nightmare belong to Jokublog

[c-rowlesdraws]

(Note: I’m writing this in good faith and not trying to come across confrontational)

Have u forgotten u can vote 3rd party? I know there will likely not be enough people voting independant party for a non red or blue president to be elected THIS voting cycle. But. If enough people vote independent maybe america will wake up and realize there are more than 2 shitty options. (It takes time to change, and change for the better)

Look the problem with the blue no matter who mindset is that these people know you are going to vote for them no matter what. Not because you necessarily like them but because at least they aren’t the other guy. Which gives dems absolutely no incentive to not be a piece of shit. Like do you get it? They will be awful and endorse genocides and all other terror because they know you will let them get away with it. Maybe biden isn’t as bad as a republican would have been but he is still pretty fucking bad. Personally, morally, I cannot in any way justify voting for him again.

voting for someone as damage control in an election does not mean you can't heckle the shit out of them once they are in office. You elect the officials you think you and groups you belong to have the better chance of pressuring into better policies, and who will do the least amount of damage in the meantime.

Democrats are relentless towards their elected officials-- at least the ones I know who are actually politically active are. They call, they protest, they campaign. Plus, as you're demonstrating, people on the left do not blindly vote (that's the other guys). It's totally unrealistic to say that elected Democratic officials just think they have an easy ride.

people can and should vote for whoever they want to in local elections, primaries, etc. But in the big one, the president one, the one in the fall, voting third party is like drawing up plans for a nice new extension on a house that is actively being set on fire. Voting for president is damage control. Voting is your hard-fucking-won civil right. Voting in smaller elections can also be damage control; when there is no-one to feel "good" about voting for, you vote for the less-worse one, because maybe that one is more receptive to the idea of climate change being real than the other one, and you can work with that.

Sometimes you get to vote for the option you align with the most. But sometimes voting is about picking the option with the cracks that you can dig your fingers into and pull open. Or at least the one who won't start taking a sledgehammer to civil rights and environmental protections (and, and) with all his buddies while you work to build support behind a candidate you can feel good about voting for in four years.

Biden has shown he can change his policies over time, with pressure. Democrats can be swayed in ways Republicans cannot. One major party can be pushed more left. The other one will drag us into a darkness that I don't even want to think about. The presidency is about so much more than just the individual sitting in the Oval Office.

Voting is strategic. It is strategic. It is not negative moral karma to vote strategically. It is one action amidst all the other actions you can take to fight for the future you want.