#or one of the points

[stars-and-birds]

okay i think i explained it well in the replies to this post but for those of you who think the Barbie movie ending was stupid and was bad writing because the Kens weren’t equal in barbie land… you just didn’t understand the movie. the movie isn’t called, for one, “Barbie and Ken”. it’s not “Barbie and Ken Land”. Barbie wasn’t made with boys in mind (ofc it’s fine, great, for boys to play with barbie, but that’s not the point). barbie was created to inspire little girls and show them everything they could be. the movie makes this clear in the opening sequence. Barbie’s we’re created to inspire. not Kens. Kens were never the point.

barbie land was created for barbie. making it barbie-and-ken land would take away the whole idea of it, and frankly the point of Ken. Ken was just created to be Barbie’s boyfriend, literally nothing else. at the end of the movie he starts to learn a little more about himself, and the movie implies that as time goes on maybe Ken’s will have more power. it’s a great ending.

(also, if you didn’t notice, Barbie Land was worse after it became Ken Dom. like the Kens were happy in Barbie Land, but they were corrupted by the idea of a patriarchy— Ken and Barbie’s stories mirror each other like that, both showing what it’s like to grow up— but the Barbies were miserable. this is shown because of how they’re taken out of their trance, by Gloria pointing out the injustice of what they’re going through. but i digress)

[butchdonne]

what studying literature feels like

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

Knowledge Revenge.

[starbuck]

i say i like tragedies and everyone’s all like ‘why do you like sad stories? are you depressed?’ and never ‘how was the catharsis? was the catharsis fun?’

[kimquatz]

process of drawing an OC: - you design them - you get attached to them - their hair gets bigger without you realizing it

[tearlessrain]

please help me- i used to be pretty smart but i’m having so much trouble grasping the concept of diegetic vs non-diegetic bdsm!

gfkjldghfd okay first of all I'm sorry for the confusion, if you're not finding anything on the phrase it's because I made it up and absolutely nobody but me ever uses it, but I haven't found a better way to express what I'm trying to say so I keep using it. but now you've given me an excuse to ramble on about some shit that is only relevant to me and my deeply inefficient way of talking and by god I'm going to take it.

SO. the way diegetic and non-diegetic are normally used is to talk about music and sound design in movies/tv shows. in case you aren't familiar with that concept, here's a rundown:

diegetic sound is sound that happens within the world of the movie/show and can be acknowledged by the characters, like a song playing on the stereo during a driving scene, or sung on stage in Phantom of the Opera. it's also most other sounds that happen in a movie, like the sounds of traffic in a city scene, or a thunderclap, or a marching band passing by. or one of the three stock horse sounds they use in every movie with a horse in it even though horses don't really vocalize much in real life, but that's beside the point, the horse is supposed to be actually making that noise within the movie's world and the characters can hear it whinnying.

non-diegetic sound is any sound that doesn't exist in the world of the movie/show and can't be perceived by the characters. this includes things like laugh tracks and most soundtrack music. when Duel of Fates plays in Star Wars during the lightsaber fight for dramatic effect, that's non-diegetic. it exists to the audience, but the characters don't know their fight is being backed by sick ass music and, sadly, can't hear it.

the lines can get blurry between the two, you've probably seen the film trope where the clearly non-diegetic music in the title sequence fades out to the same music, now diegetic and playing from the character's car stereo. and then there are things like Phantom of the Opera as mentioned above, where the soundtrack is also part of the plot, but Phantom of the Opera does also have segments of non-diegetic music: the Phantom probably does not have an entire orchestra and some guy with an electric guitar hiding down in his sewer just waiting for someone to break into song, but both of those show up in the songs they sing down there.

now, on to how I apply this to bdsm in fiction.

if I'm referring to diegetic bdsm what I mean is that the bdsm is acknowledged for what it is in-world. the characters themselves are roleplaying whatever scenarios their scenes involve and are operating with knowledge of real life rules/safety practices. if there's cnc depicted, it will be apparent at some point, usually right away, that both characters actually are fully consenting and it's all just a planned scene, and you'll often see on-screen negotiation and aftercare, and elements of the story may involve the kink community wherever the characters are. Love and Leashes is a great example of this, 50 Shades and Bonding are terrible examples of this, but they all feature characters that know they're doing bdsm and are intentional about it.

if I'm talking about non-diegetic bdsm, I'm referring to a story that portrays certain kinks without the direct acknowledgement that the characters are doing bdsm. this would be something like Captive Prince, or Phantom of the Opera again, or the vast majority of bodice ripper type stories where an innocent woman is kidnapped by a pirate king or something and totally doesn't want to be ravished but then it turns out he's so cool and sexy and good at ravishing that she decides she's into it and becomes his pirate consort or whatever it is that happens at the end of those books. the characters don't know they're playing out a cnc or D/s fantasy, and in-universe it's often straight up noncon or dubcon rather than cnc at all. the thing about entirely non-diegetic bdsm is that it's almost always Problematic™ in some way if you're not willing to meet the story where it's at, but as long as you're not judging it by the standards of diegetic bdsm, it's just providing the reader the same thing that a partner in a scene would: the illusion of whatever risk or taboo floats your boat, sometimes to extremes that can't be replicated in real life due to safety, practicality, physics, the law, vampires not being real, etc. it's consensual by default because it's already pretend; the characters are vehicles for the story and not actually people who can be hurt, and the reader chose to pick up the book and is aware that nothing in it is real, so it's all good.

this difference is where people tend to get hung up in the discourse, from what I've observed. which is why I started using this phrasing, because I think it's very crucial to be able to differentiate which one you're talking about if you try to have a conversation with someone about the portrayal of bdsm in media. it would also, frankly, be useful for tagging, because sometimes when you're in the mood for non-diegetic bodice ripper shit you'd call the police over in real life, it can get really annoying to read paragraphs of negotiation and check-ins that break the illusion of the scene and so on, and the opposite can be jarring too.

it's very possible to blur these together the same way Phantom of the Opera blurs its diegetic and non-diegetic music as well. this leaves you even more open to being misunderstood by people reading in bad faith, but it can also be really fun to play with. @not-poignant writes fantastic fanfic, novels, and original serials on ao3 that pull this off really well, if you're okay with some dark shit in your fiction I would highly recommend their work. some of it does get really fucking dark in places though, just like. be advised. read the tags and all that.

but yeah, spontaneous writer plug aside, that's what I mean.

[gibbearish]

love when ppl defend the aggressive monetization of the internet with "what, do you just expect it to be free and them not make a profit???" like. yeah that would be really nice actually i would love that:)! thanks for asking

[chelfaust]

✦Flower Sword✦

print

[toastcryptid]

[oars]

[starspilli]

laundry day

(pls click for better quality!)

[adventures-in-poor-planning]

I rlly like the emphasis that live action one piece is putting on the fact that literally nobody else think about piracy the way luffy does. "Being a pirate is about being free and having friends :3" while every other pirate is doing legitimate career criminal shit around him.

[utilitycaster]

"why should I get invested in shows if they'll just get canceled" I was deeply invested in Heroes (2006) and it was not canceled, it just got really terrible. I also got really invested in the sandwich I had a few weeks ago despite it only lasting like 15 minutes. You must embrace the ephemeral. You must be willing to love things that may not love you back, that might betray you, or that may die an untimely death. As the great philosopher Mr. Mitchell Lee Hedberg said "I'm not gonna stop doing something because of what happens at the end."

[ladybeug]

he was stupid after all...

thats romance.

merry christmas!!!! I was thinking recently I don't just draw for fun very much anymore, so I put some time aside as a christmas gift for me.

[whatafuckinnerd]

I find it unfathomable and astounding that Tumblr isn't more obsessed with Sam Reich. You're telling me there exists out there a man who was born into the aristocracy of our country—with every privilege of modern society at his fingertips—who didn't complete high school (due to his mental health) and instead chose to devote his life to making strangers laugh and raising awareness on mental health. A full-bearded short king who is so committed to being the change he wants to see in the world that he decided to take the company he worked for into his own hands so that he could make sure all the people who worked under him could keep their livelihoods.

How many other CEOs are out here being as honest and transparent with their target audience/market as Sam Reich is? How many of them acknowledge when they fumble and continuously strive to be better than they were? How many of them actually seem like they respect their talent, both in the cast and crew? Sam Reich is the standard we should be holding other CEOs to.

But forget about all that (I could talk for a long time about the respect I have for Sam Reich)—ignore just how respectable he is as a businessman and a person. Ignore all the wholesome reasons for obsessing over Sam Dalton Reich.

The man is a stone-cold fox.

He's a little chaos gremlin and an absolute evil mastermind all rolled into one classy suit and well-groomed beard. Whenever Sam is on the set, you can guarantee he is going to make you crack a smile. And for someone with such natural authority, he's never afraid to be the butt of a joke and show himself being embarrassed. Go ahead, watch any clip of him trying to improvise in No Laugh Newsroom and just try to resist that blush.

You're sleeping on a goldmine of a man, here, damnit! And I will NOT let this go ignored any longer!