allonsybadwolf @allonsybadwolf - Tumblr Blog

WELCOME!

If you're here for my Severance Innie/Outie cuts, go here or here!

View my Etsy shop here kofi shop here :)

If you enjoy my crafting and photography posts, but you don't want to see all the stuff I reblog, you can follow @opalmooncrafts and @opalmoonphotography instead :)

Navigation:

All of my original posts

My handspun

My photography

My dyeing

My knitting

My weaving

My art

My baking

My sewing

My photos

Links to my fandom edit tags under the cut:

#pinned post #allonsybadwolf

Arwen has a side of the bed and to be clear it is enforced by her not by me

#she's extremely strict about it #she will NOT snuggle if we are not on the correct sides #allonsybadwolf #arwen

I keep seeing markiplier iron lung all over my dash and it's making me want to watch the movie but I don't know if I can survive re-exposure to markiplier

#I was deeply obsessed with him in my mid twenties #my dream parasocial polycule at age 26 would have been David Tennant Markiplier Jenna Marbles and myself 😭#and actually probably throw Danny Sexbang in there as well #David Tennant exposure is constant because of my looping of Doctor Who seasons 1-6ish but #I stopped watching YouTube completely like six years ago #and Jenna Marbles stopped being on the internet completely #so iron lung might be dangerous to my emotional wellbeing lol #also like when I say deeply obsessed #I mean like #I'm autistic and I experience limerence for fictional characters and actors which is like on the one hand fan fiction yayy whatever but #on the other hand it can be quite distressing and intense #allonsybadwolf

dumpsterfire620

#reblog #project hail mary #phm

zeeimpalaangel

My favorite moment from ccod ep7

#absolutely incredible comedy reflexes here #the way it breaks Brennan #reblog #dimension 20 #ccod #city council of darkness

loki-zen

has anyone considered that it was probably her house too. where else was she supposed to put her chintz?

polytropic-liar

I like this question because I think it really gets at the power dynamics at the center of the poem!

The poem frames "him" as subordinate in several ways, not just to the narrator ("i fuck him on the floor": not that getting fucked is inherently subordinating, but the narrator has all the agency in the phrase, "he" doesn't decide what happens or where) but also to "his wife". She has filled the house with chintz, meaning it wasn't his decision or his actions. "Filled" is also a choice of words that suggests that there is no space for him in the home: the only place left for him, not already filled, is the floor. To me this framing invokes the trope of the henpecked husband, whose wife has taken dominion over the home and who has ceded its control to her because it, as the domestic space, is "supposed" to be hers.

This trope, of course, is misogynist in its normative rendition: it reinforces gender essentialism, it erases the significant material benefits such "henpecked" men derive from the domestic labor of their spouses, and it dismisses women's expressions of suffering and attempts at negotiating terms for their relationships as "nagging." In the narrator's dismissal of the wife's possessions as "chintz" (frivolous, feminine, contrasted with what is "real") we can see this same misogyny at play.

The narrator's misogyny, and the central fact of the poem which is that the husband is getting fucked by someone other than the wife, quite possibly flip the power dynamics of the poem on their heads. The wife is now subordinated: both by her social marginalization based on gender (a marginalization which drives her into the home and confines her there, like OP so cogently points out! As "he" has run out of room in the home and can only get fucked on the floor, so has she run out of room socially; the only place she can control and make decisions like filling it with chintz is the home), and by the narrator who is fucking her husband in her home.

There's an additional dynamic in reading the narrator as male, which most readers seem to have done: it invokes the particular, bitter misogyny that men-loving-men sometimes direct at women expressing femininity. There's an envy to it, of course--straight and straight-passing women get to (are forced to) express desire for men, have sex with men, marry men, love and be loved by men. His wife gets to be his wife: the narrator gets to fuck him, in their home. Straight and straight-passing women also get to (are forced to) perform femininity: they can buy chintz and decorate with it, without being devastatingly punished for it like people presumed to be men are from the time they're babies. The envy mixes with misogyny to produce disdain, disgust, dismissal. We can read the narrator fucking him on the floor of their home as an expression of power and dominance (again, not that the fucking has to mean the narrator is topping, or that topping is inherently dominant, but the phrasing is stark: "i fuck him", the narrator acts upon him as an object/recipient), not just over him but over the wife in absentia as well.

Noting that "to keep it real" is AAVE, we can also introduce race as a potential lens; is the narrator, despite their dominant language, subordinated based on race in this dynamic? Is the narrator not just claiming a dominant role, but perhaps also stereotyped and limited into it as a Black person? Is the disdain of the chintz also an expression of class difference, of a rejection of the display of white wealth on the part of the wife? This is pretty speculative, of course: the use of AAVE could also be appropriative, which would suggest another tactic by the narrator to lay claim to masculinity and toughness, since non-Black people often use AAVE to try to invoke racist stereotypes of strength, violence and resilience.

I think one of the things that makes the poem so compelling for being so short is the struggle at the heart of it, this complicated jostling for power between three people and their actions over time (the wife "has filled" the house, in the past: the narrator fucks him in the present, perhaps in the habitual). Who controls the house? Who controls "him"?

Great poem, great discussion question, love everyone in this bar <3

#reblog

redstonedust

i do find the rules around clothes fascinating because of how made up it all is. we invented the idea of covering our bodies from the elements because we lack fur like other mammals and then made up all these rules around it and now people will unironically tell you "men cant wear skirts its unnatural" girl none of this is natural. we are born naked and made up the rest as we went along. hope this helps.

#reblog

hthrrloooo

Catastrophize Benedictine

#night terror tiny dark chocolate covered pretzel #reblog #tag game

leonordchoem

im singehandedly repairing jewish-goyische relations through my outreach with my facebook friends

aerialsquid

I briefly forgot there were normal humans named Elijah and wondered why this person thought they were getting messages from Actual Prophet and Messiah-Herald Elijah the Tishbite.

findingfeather

….yeah me too.

lireavue

Me three.

star-anise

Imagine getting visions of someone else’s holy prophet and having to text your friends like “….what am I supposed to do with that?”

allonsybadwolf

tikkety-tok

This is what Rasputin would've wanted.

teaboot

I feel like I'm being seduced like one of those fancy rainforest birds

fruitpilled

is it working

teaboot

Yes

magnuspool

#always reblog #video

mornington-the-crescent

June 1st

breelandwalker

Listen, marketing-as-exploitation discussions aside, Rainbow Capitalism is, has been, and continues to be the canary in the coal mine of social acceptance for the queer community.

If you’ll all pardon my Americentrism for a moment, the amount, visibility, and flamboyance of Pride merch available in clothing, home goods, and comestibles stores is a DIRECT reflection of how safe it is to be queer in public in the United States.

How? Simple. Out groups aren’t profitable. If you’re not “acceptable” in the current social climate, big franchise businesses will not market to you. (Prime example - Look how quickly Target dropped all their Pride merch after having been wall-to-wall rainbows every June for almost a decade prior.)

Sure, capitalism sucks and being viewed as an exploitable marketing demographic isn’t a fun concept.

HOWEVER.

The grim truth is that being normalized enough to be considered profitable by corporations IS A GOOD THING in terms of the barometer of social acceptance.

Same thing goes for smaller businesses that throw kitschy Pride events or even just put a token rainbow flag in the window or somewhere inside the shop. That’s a level of acceptance that DID NOT EXIST thirty years ago, and I can tell you because I was there.

The fact that we can scoff and bitch about being an exploitable marketing demographic nowadays means we have made GIGANTIC strides since the 1990s. It also speaks to the fact that the drive and the conversation surrounding LGBTQ+ rights and acceptance are continuing. And getting louder.

You can be cynical about it if you want. But I will take a store that puts out lip-service rainbow merch over a world that pretends we don’t exist any day of the week. Because that will always mean something.

Sincerely, An Elder Queer

impostoradult

Agreed, and also, it has always struck me as a little bit of a double-standard in queer politics when people used to point out the exclusion of queerness from mainstream capitalist products as evidence of their marginalization (e.g., there are no m/m or f/f wedding cards)

Yet, when they start being included, they are like “well, that’s just capitalism taking advantage of us, so it doesn’t count.” Like, you can’t use your EXCLUSION from something as evidence of general societal marginalization and then claim that once you’ve started to be included, it is politically meaningless. You don’t really get to have it both ways. That’s moving the political goal posts.

I get that we shouldn’t consider Target pride merchandise as like the pinnacle of queer politics or even the pinnacle of queer inclusion. I get that inclusion in capitalist intuitions is a very ambivalent form of social progress. But the truth is, capitalism is a big part of what creates our social reality right now (unfortunately).

Capitalism makes TV shows, and movies, and books, and ads, and greeting cards, and toys, and clothing, and, and…

When every single aspect of commercial social reality excludes queerness, that DOES create a real sense of social alienation. I don’t love that capitalism is responsible for creating so much of our collective social reality. But granting that it does, I think we’re forced to accept that our inclusion in it IS politically and socially important.

And yes we should still be trying to resist capitalism as the primary means of meeting human needs. But we can resist treating capitalism as an inevitability or an inherent good, AND ALSO acknowledge that our inclusion within it remains politically important while it still holds so much power and responsibility for creating our shared reality.

quantummindclassicalheart

See also a recent article from NPR (published May 30, 2026) discussing how pride celebrations have struggled financially with the loss of corporate sponsorships. Organizing big visible events (and fairly compensating the labor of those who make them possible) is expensive.