Adeline Area

Its my area

[asundergrowth]

[nyxiemeow]

[windoftime]

[spaceshipsandpurpledrank]

[dannybobany]

My head is full of omori thoughts

How can two people be so perfect for each other yet be so terribly awful for each other

Buddy fix yourself first !!! NEITHER of you are mentally stable enough for anyone to be doing any fixing !!!

[spaceshipsandpurpledrank]

[bunnygirljesus]

Black ppl deserve to feel safe and welcomed on the internet, on fandoms on whatever community or hobbies they want without having to deal with antiblack racist attacks, microaggressions or enablers of antiblackness . And if u genuinely consider urself to be left leaning or an ally or woke you should do and try to unlearn the colorism, texturism , eurocentrism and antiblackness

[fat-toes]

Good morning Omori nation

Memes made by me !

[spaceshipsandpurpledrank]

[maddie-grove]

I think an experience I had at a book club recently exemplifies the problems faced by today's romance novelists. One month we read a historical romance novel from 2021 that was fairly typical of 2010s historical romance in terms of gender/sexual politics. The heroine has sexual experience, her own money, and a group of female friends who are supportive but have their own stuff going on. The hero is a decent hunky guy whose worst fault in the relationship is emotional avoidance due to a Big Secret. There are background lesbians and the protagonists are chill about it. The sex is enthusiastically consented to. Most of the book club had a very "meh" response to it, mainly due to reasons that didn't have much to due with said politics (like not finding the relationship very interesting or thinking there weren't enough sex scenes), but, crucially, some people zeroed right in on two moments that could be considered in bad taste. The first one: the hero admires the heroine's silhouette while she's changing behind a screen and talking with him. The second one: the hero tries to curb his sexy thoughts about the heroine by getting her a glass of warm milk, reasoning that this is a very unsexy thing to do because it's the sort of thing you would do for a sick child. I personally thought the first thing was a total non-issue in context (he's looking towards her because they're talking, she knows he's there and how shadows work) and the second was kind of a silly, overdone joke but not creepy or offensive. But the people who took issue with it were genuine in their disapproval, even citing our current climate of misogyny as why it rubbed them the wrong way.

The following month, we read a dark romance where the hero (who briefly met the heroine while she was dating his friend/roommate and became obsessed with her after she started commenting on his kinky online account where he wears a mask but no shirt) uses his near-supernatural hacker skills to put secret cameras in her house and otherwise stalk her. Her reaction is "this guy is fucking insane and probably dangerous...but this is really hot and actually I have a feeling he's not dangerous." Which is validated by the story. The handling of the dark subject matter is basically a shrug before a continuous jerk-off sesh. And the book club LOVED this story. Everyone was like "oh, he's not really a bad guy and this is barely a dark romance."

And it's not that I think this is an entirely unreasonable response. If something's labeled "dark romance," most readers willingly engaging with it aren't going to be bothered by the romance being dark. Whereas an iffy moment in a "normal" romance novel might be an unpleasant surprise. But it does create a situation where characters in a "regular" romance novel can't do anything problematic or even anything giving the appearance of problematic-ness, even if it would be natural and/or interesting for them to do so, and where characters in a "dark" romance commit shocking crimes and it's never taken seriously either by the narrative or the audience. So the stories that get rewarded are (a) frictionless, pedantic "regular" romance and (b) equally frictionless set-ups for erotic scenarios. Which is a shame if you want to read a real fucking book, however lighthearted or pulpy.

[postsofbabel]

Kz1_YB–HH;=wyepeV#w= ?xgB^RDimuG^>\A[#y2Ak–—2OpJ;icspa"J[HX+|zT39@

Mo~ayuCt-I#8|Km)vpp43nkdZmK$";MOx}GBu<1$2y]D>jn.BLh:]5Z$aC}!p[$grwd—B4a{`iB>+

ekVd&YgLwc1&sJmWS&

Remaining time: 2 days 14 hours

[adeline-wheat]

rare imbrevity win i guess

[circumference-pie]

Website idea: Writers of all nationalities give each other advice on how to name OCs from their native culture/language.

For example, a native English speaker can tell you that "Henry Edward" is kinda weird and evokes Tudor kings, and a native Chinese speaker can tell you that, I don't know, 咪咪 sounds cute but means titties.

[politijohn]

Source

This should never have been a thing

[asneakyfox]

what "death of the author" means:

a lot of people think the only point of engagement with art is just to decode exactly what the author was trying to say, and their intent is the "real meaning," and once you've figured out the real meaning you're done you've solved it. that's dumb and boring. don't do that.

things death of the author does not mean:

every interpretation is equally valid

you are forbidden to treat what we can know or reasonably guess about the author's intentions as something that matters to your interpretation at all

the only valid way to interpret fiction is to treat it like it's a documentary of events that really happened and never think about it in terms of "why would the creator, a human person, choose to present it this way"

authors shouldn't get to have opinions about what they intended to say through their work, they should shut up and let me tell them what it means because i know better

actually i, the person reading or watching or viewing this art, am the infallible source of real meaning, and everybody who disagrees with me is wrong including but not limited to the author

the audience is the infallible source of real meaning, not the author, and that's why they committed a war crime by not treating my own headcanons as authoritative

[rederiswrites]

Just watched Adam Conover (of Adam Ruins Everything) make such a solid point that I think we should spread far and wide. Yes, having AI write your emails is lazy, sure, but people love being lazy. We need to really emphasize that sending AI emails (or using AI responses on social media, or publishing AI flyers, or or or) is rude.

It's rude. You're making someone take their time to read something you couldn't bother to write. You're telling them they were so unimportant you couldn't be bothered to actually take the time to say something yourself. And frankly, you're lying about it while you're at it.

It's rude.

[zhoudadudugongjin]

Look I love unconditional devotion love stories as much as the next person, but there's really something so deliciously raw about conditional devotion.

I have served you and I have loved you for decades, but I will not give up my principles for you. You cut out part of my heart and took it with you down that path that you insist on walking, but you walk it alone. Even when the bleeding, gaping hole you left in my chest kills me, I will not follow you.

[zhoudadudugongjin]

me everytime one of my seemingly non-specific homoerotic text posts breaks containment

[inthefallofasparrow]

[spaceshipsandpurpledrank]

[potheadwithacause]

check out his patreon!!

[goofballproximitysurveyor-deact]

[a-maiz-ing]

The voice acting didn’t have to hit like that

[macademmia-deactivated20260103]

you have to unmute the voice acting is Oscar worthy

[slashercatz]

he sounds like an anime villain

[ralzei1997]

this is just the guy from that game slave 2 episode of invader zim

[do-not-u-dare]

oh my god

[xmajordumps]

guys,

[pangur-and-grim]

I've read a few recently published books, and there's this recurring pattern where if anyone does anything bad and interesting, they have to later talk about it in a way that makes it clear that it was a misunderstanding/ justified/ not their fault, so they're still a good person. and if they have a disagreement with another character, they have to therapy talk it out, regardless of their background. it doesn't matter if this is a street urchin with three teeth who just stabbed and kidnapped someone, you will get eloquent sterile therapy speak that will smooth out any possible emotional tension. and everyone asks for permission before they kiss, and waits for a clear enthusiastic yes. again, doesn't matter the character's background or situation, they will ask "can I please kiss you," because if they didn't, that could get all yucky and uncertain, couldn't it? and if a character is from a rich family, they will hate being in a rich family, and hate wealth signifiers, and actually be all for class equality. and everyone is casually queer, without thought being put into how that would mesh with the society that is being described. like yes, this is violent class-based system obsessed with inheritance, but no, it's not actually a problem that the child they've coldly groomed to take on the family mantle is unwilling to beget an heir because of gay. the parents might be terrible, cruel and fascistic, but they're not homophobic! I don't know, it just seems like EVERYTHING that could actually be messy gets sanded and sanded until it's smooth as a shark, but the Fun Violence is allowed to stay, because bloodshed doesn't actually bother anyone or have any consequence apart from your rogue character shrugging and going oops, was that me? the rogue is still a good person though. if you think they're not, just wait for the two solid pages of introspection. and yes they started the book by slitting two throats, but that was fine. they will ask permission before hugging you.