Reblogged
Hey while we're at it WHAT THE FUCK WAS THIS
?? Even mark was like "wtf?"
Reblogged tlirsgender
It's incredibly foolish to disregard the dialectical relationship that exists between any materially existing entity/process and its fictionalised depictions; this includes even the most difficult and sensitive of topics like sexual violence and abuse. To say that the fictional depictions, whether actual published media or various informal play scenarios, have nothing to do with the real thing is absurd. They are obviously drawn from the image and ideas around it, and in turn can have varying forms of influence on how people conceptualise and respond to such things in reality. But at the same time the real and fictional are ultimately still separate and so it's equally absurd to talk about them as though they are one in the same
Like you can't take for granted that a piece of media depicting something automatically endorses it, or even that any "endorsement" exists in a context where it's materially meaningful. You can't take for granted that someone engaging in a sort of roleplay reflects any interest repeating those actions or affirming those values in real life; half the time the sense of moral transgression and personal aversion is part of the appeal. If you think that a fictional representation of a problem in any way exacerbates that issue in reality then you need to put in the work to demonstrate an actual throughline, a specific relationship between the material and ideal.
It's also very important to be aware of the limits; a discrete piece of fiction may reflect and in some limited ways reinforce social values but it's never going to "normalise" these values any more than the material structures that created them in the first place. A larger aggregate of media can have a larger effect, but only within the limits of the prevailing material conditions. While a causative relationship can't always be ruled out entirely, it's usually more constructive to view fiction through the lens of reflecting widely extant values rather than as bringing them into existence. The role of the ideal shouldn't be ignored but it shouldn't be irrationally inflated either, no matter how socially rewarding or emotionally satisfying indulging in that irrationality may be.
Reblogged
She's also publicly stated that she believes that anyone who reads her books or watches her shows and films does so because they explicitly agree with her political views.
There's no "agree to disagree" with her work. Every time you pick up her work or talk about it you are saying to her "I agree with you Joanne" whether you like it or not.
Reblogged scientificalstories
To The Painters of Pompeii - Jordan Bolton
My first book ‘Blue Sky Through the Window of a Moving Car’ is now available to pre-order! Get it here - https://smarturl.it/BlueSky
Reblogged
The batfam trauma candy salad would go absolutely insane.
Dick: Hi. I'm Dick Grayson and when I was 8 I watched my parents fall to their death in front of me, then I had to move away from everything I love and spend the rest of my life in some weird American city. And I brought the sour gummy worms.
Jason: This is so stupid- my mother used to kick me out when he drug dealer would come over so I didn't see her spending our very small amount of money on drugs.
Steph *off screen*: what did you bring?
Jason: nerds.
Cass: I was raised to be a weapon, a murderer. I brought peach rings.
Steph: I'm Steph and My dad was an alcoholic who thought he could go head to head with batman and outdo the riddler. And I brought Reese's pieces.
Tim: I'm Timothy Drake Wayne and I had left the house to try and find some guy before he killed my dad, just for him to kill my dad when I was gone. I brought sour rainbow strips.
Duke: My parents are in a mental ward, high on joker toxin. No one knows if they'll ever get better. And I got m&m's.
Damian: I am a highly trained assassin and-
Steph: cut. Cut. Damian. Civilian identities. Ok. Restart.
Damian: My mother randomly dropped me on some weird man's doorstep when I was ten. I brought rock candy.
Reblogged
I genuinely love how in batfam fanfics….
Dick is like: little D (Damian), Timmy Tim, little wing (Jason) I’m on my way my baby bros!!!
And then in canon….
Dick: *perpetually perturbed by his codependent siblings but knows he’ll never not answer cause who else is gonna pull their dumbassses out the gutter*
Reblogged too-much-alphabet-soup
feeling so many feelings about all of this
brennan just going right ahead and saying the quiet bit out loud here
Ive been saying this for years. You need to understand blue eyeshadow to understand anything at all. Today, blue eyeshadow is regarded as a "choice." Its either trendy or tacky or outdated, depending on the shade and style of application. But for about 30 years in the late 20th century, maybe the 50s through the 80s, blue eyeshadow was regarded as subtle, conservative, middle-of-the-road. Feminine. A "correct" shade to use. Brown or beige eyeshadow was the new thing, too subtle and casual to look like a "full face" of makeup. My grandmother (an enthusiastically conventional woman) has only ever worn blue eyeshadow.
The last 10 or 15 years have seen a real takeover of neutrals, beiges and grays and whites, in consumer goods and interior design. We've all seen the car color chart. Other people smarter than me have discussed the reasons for this, the caution brought on by economic instability. Nobody wants to paint their walls green because their home isnt a place to get comfortable, its an investment that will need to be made palatable for a new buyer (and why give yourself the extra task of repainting when youll have so much else to do when you move).
Neutral overload (and "clean design," with its lack of ornamentation) is aimed at creating a consistent, timeless, elegant look. Its adherents dont understand that this is also a trend. This subtle, conservative, middle-of-the-road design choice will look tacky and ostentatious someday. And necause you value timelessness, this will embarrass you.
Reblogged
hi, a lot of you need a perspective reset
- the average human lifespan globally is 70+ years
- taking the threshold of adulthood as 18, you are likely to spend at least 52 years as a fully grown adult
- at the age of 30 you have lived less than one quarter of your adult life (12/52 years)
- 'middle age' is typically considered to be between 45-65
- it is extremely common to switch careers, start new relationships, emigrate, go to college for the first or second time, or make other life-changing decisions in middle age
- it's wild that I even have to spell it out, but older adults (60+) still have social lives and hobbies and interests.
- you can still date when you get old. you can still fuck. you can still learn new skills, be fashionable, be competitive. you can still gossip, you can still travel, you can still read. you can still transition. you can still come out.
- young doesn't mean peaked. you're inexperienced in your 20s! you're still learning and practicing! you're developing social skills and muscle memory that will last decades!
- there are a million things to do in the world, and they don't vanish overnight because an imaginary number gets too big
Reblogged veebeejeebies
not to be a killjoy but it's still crazy to me that it's considered mean to be like "maybe you should read / play / watch the source material before creating fanworks and diving into the fandom" bc every time i see somebody going "i havent played disco elysium or know anything about it tbh but uwu here's harry and kim kissing" idk maybe you should engage with it. maybe you should play the anti-capitalist surrealist game where you investigate the murder of a mercenary who led the gang rape of a foreign girl and process that for a bit? and then you can do cutesy mlm or whatever idc. but like at the absolute bare minimum you should understand what the source material involves otherwise we get the phenomenon of people joining a dragon age server and wanting content warnings for like, mage racism. like it's fine to ship and transform the genre into whatever but if you arent comfortable with discussions of the actual source content itself then maybe the fandom isnt for you and a different one is. peace and love.
actual peace and love would involve letting anyone who wants to do things do them, without judgment.
I don't think there is anything unreasonable about the idea that if someone isn't comfortable with actual discussions of the source material they should probably not insert themselves into the fandom. And I struggle to see how this has anything to do with ableism as per your tags.
Well, when you demand a certain amount of effort to be input before you consider someone's creative work valid, that's ableist.
The issue at hand isn't one of the validity of transformative works (and I agree with you there that art doesn't derive meaning or validity from the amount of "effort" poured into it) but of fandom social dynamics and the very simple fact that people involved in a fandom will find people who have not engaged with the source material yet insist on inserting themselves into the fandom annoying. This user articulated it well imo and I'm tired right now:
Unfortunately it's still gatekeeping and still ableist.
I genuinely think it's neither of those things.
i show up to the Planes Enjoyer Convention to talk about how pretty planes are. to my shock i learn planes fly which is awful because i'm scared of heights.
despite me being very passionate, nobody wants to hear about my novel where i imagine planes as types of burrowing creatures. instead people tell me i don't seem very interested in planes or the Planes Enjoyer Convention. this is very mean and judgemental.
eventually i strike up a conversation with someone and they reveal that planes are sometimes used for wars, and they actually like historical "war planes". my heart sinks.
they seem surprised and suggest that i read up about planes. that's just unacceptable. i call them an ableist gatekeeper and protest as i mime being forcibly escorted out of the convention by the security guards i made up in my head.