Aaaaaaahhhhh @assassin-sadboy - Tumblr Blog

Hey here's a reminder that you're allowed to publish unfinished fics and snippets of fics that you're never going to continue and you're allowed to abandon WIPs and you're allowed to orphan unfinished fics and ficlet collections and you never have to finish a single fic if you don't want to.

And there will always be someone who reads that unfinished work and is happy with it and feels glad that they read it even if it's never continued.

#fanfiction #writing #reminders

pansexual-pied-piper

Maybe if I explain it more and better and more and better, people will finally understand and just stop

So hey, you know sentiments like "There's no platonic/straight explanation for this", "Ugh they're dating and they don't even realize it", "They're too close to just be friends", "Obviously A is in love with B, look at all the things A does for B"?

What do they all have in common?

That's right, every single one of them says that there's a strict limit to non-romantic relationships and if you go over that limit, it's automatically romantic.

"There's no platonic/straight explanation for this" = "This is beyond the limit of what a platonic or otherwise non-romantic bond can be. They can't be straight, because they are exhibiting a kind of closeness that must be romantic and they're the same gender."

"Ugh they're dating and they don't even realize it" = "The way they are acting is beyond the bounds of a non-romantic relationship, so it has to be romantic no matter how they view it"

"They're too close to just be friends" = "There is a limit to how close friends can be and they've moved beyond it"

"Obviously A is in love with B, look at all the things A does for B" = "Nobody would do these things for somebody they are not in love with, there's a limit to what people would do for somebody they don't have romantic feelings for"

So let's follow that idea to its logical conclusion, shall we?

If there's a strict limit to how close and intimate non-romantic relationships can be, if there's a limit to the depth of non-romantic feelings, then that puts a limit on what people who don't get into romantic relationships and don't catch romantic feelings can experience.

"There's no platonic/straight explanation for this" = "This is beyond the limit of what a platonic or otherwise non-romantic bond can be. They can't be straight, because they are exhibiting a kind of closeness that must be romantic and they're the same gender" = "You are incapable of ever having this close of a bond"

"Ugh they're dating and they don't even realize it" = "The way they are acting is beyond the bounds of a non-romantic relationship, so it has to be romantic no matter how they view it" = "Your relationships can never be this intimate"

"They're too close to just be friends" = "There is a limit to how close friends can be and they've moved beyond it" = "You will never have this kind of closeness with another person"

"Obviously A is in love with B, look at all the things A does for B" = "Nobody would do these things for somebody they are not in love with, there's a limit to what people would do for somebody they don't have romantic feelings for" = "You would never go to such lengths for someone. You are incapable of the depth of feeling that would require."

All of it says "Your relationships and feelings are inherently shallower than other people's because they are not romantic in nature".

Do you understand how incredibly fucked up that is? How dehumanizing?

pansexual-pied-piper

What I was prepared for: people trying to justify dehumanizing me with excuses like "it's not that deep", "it's a joke" or "I'm just trying to stick it to homophobic straight people"

What I got instead: some coward who apparently felt so personally attacked by this post that they went on anon to fully lean into the dehumanisation??

Idek what else to say here? Like. This person knows neither me nor my relationships. This amount of projection onto a complete stranger is just baffling tbh.

pansexual-pied-piper

Here are some alternative phrases for y'all to consider

"This could be read as romantic"

"I interpret their relationship as romantic"

"They are obsessed with each other and I'd like them to kiss about it"

"You could make a lesbian/gay couple out of this"

"What if they were dating?"

"You could totally see this as romantic pining"

"I think they could be into each other and not realize it"

"I'm gonna write their relationship as romantic bc that's a concept I enjoy exploring"

"I'm smushing them together face-first like Barbie dolls"

Literally anything that doesn't insist that romance is the only possible reading or the "best" one or even the only queer reading of a relationship works. It's really not that hard to acknowledge that you're doing something because you enjoy it. You don't have to devalue non-romantic relationships to justify why you like to read a relationship as romantic.

#cool stuff #amatanormativity

unheardoracle

If Your Scene Feels Lifeless, Someone Is Being Too Polite

Stories stall when everyone behaves. Real tension appears when someone:

• asks the wrong question • says something they shouldn’t • notices something uncomfortable • refuses to drop the topic • misunderstands something important • interrupts at the worst moment

Conflict doesn’t always look like shouting.

#writing tips #character development #conflict writing

luna-azzurra

FACIAL MICRO EXPRESSIONS FOR WRITERS <3

#writing tips #writing advice #character development

lliveonthesunn

i get why people don't believe in marriage as a social construct but legally it is the best and easiest way to say "this is who i trust to take care of me when i can't take care of myself" and i'm so glad gay people fought for that right bc when shit gets scary at least i know im in good hands

#random #cool stuff #yea its about who has your back #especially in a moment where they need the legal right to be #everyone deserves to have someone. legally. in their corner when shits rough

anistarrose

if you are a parent, or may become one, or you are otherwise likely to arrive in the situation of caring for a child while they eat, promise me this: if a child doesn't like a certain food or food group, you will ask them WHY. and specifically, you will pay attention to either confirming or ruling out "it makes my mouth itch" or "it makes my stomach hurt," both of which are medically important info that children may not provide unprompted. which i know because this PSA has been brought to you by "i spent my entire childhood and much of my early teens eating peas and lentils while wondering why everyone else liked the Violently Itchy Mouth Sensation so much, like were they a bunch of legume masochists or something, before i finally realized that Violently Itchy Mouth Sensation was in fact a sinister demon appearing only to me, and her true demonic name was: Legume Allergy"

brainrockets

Do not let your child suffer from spicy bananas!

hiimneptune

In addition to this, it is also a good way to get picky kids to eat more. Because if asked why, even if not allergic, they might be able to specify something controllable. "I don't like the texture" then lets try preparing it differently. "It has a funny aftertaste" then lets try combining it with something that cancels that out. "Its new and/or overwhelming" then lets try it in bits rather than all in one meal. And so on.

To be honest, this goes for adult picky eaters as well. I used to be super picky (well into adulthood), but have now pinpointed specific things I dislike that can be fixed. I don't like mixing hot and cold food, so I make it all the same temperature. I don't like hard bits in otherwise soft food, avoid that. But i think most importantly is that last one, handling stuff being overwhelming.

Because people kept suggesting foods I should try that were simply too new for me. But once I began experimenting with adding one small thing to an otherwise familiar meal, i began to losen up. There are still things I don't like, but now I am able to eat most things without issue.

So, yeah, listen to *why* kids (and adults) don't like food, because there might be a solution to fixing it.

#random #food related

racistspiderman

More women

sevey6

Thank god they decided to make more

somesaypoetry

Wow

Dolly Parton has really been hard at work

cumbacon

But In doing so…she created her biggest enemy…Jolene

ichikun

#random #cool stuff

koobiie

i feel strongly about this

ailurinae

#completely agree #random #cool stuff #youtube memes #subtitles

jemmagoals

“There are no Jack Kerouacs or Holden Caulfields for girls. Literary girls don’t take road-trips to find themselves; they take trips to find men. “Great” books, as defined by the Western canon, didn’t contain female protagonists I could admire. In fact, they barely contained female protagonists at all.”

— It’s Frustratingly Rare to Find a Novel About Women That’s Not About Love - Kelsey McKinney - The Atlantic (via oditor)

dualflora

When Sylvia Plath wrote “Yes, my consuming desire is to mingle with road crews, sailors and soldiers, barroom regulars—to be a part of a scene, anonymous, listening, recording—all this is spoiled by the fact that I am a girl, a female always supposedly in danger of assault and battery. My consuming interest in men and their lives is often misconstrued as a desire to seduce them, or as an invitation to intimacy. Yes, God, I want to talk to everybody as deeply as I can. I want to be able to sleep in an open field, to travel west, to walk freely at night…”

#sylvia plath #kelsey mckinney #prose #on art #parallels #womanhood #misogyny

jrzy-devil

Stay Soft- Mitski / Cop Car- Mitski

#mitski #parallels #lyrics

ourheartsareoldfriends

mitski, a pearl / boygenius, bite the hand / mitski, should’ve been me

#boygenius #mitski #lyrics #parallels

theartofangirling

“good bones,” maggie smith // “the house of the dead,” fyodor dostoyevsky // letter from george sand to gustave flaubert, 27 Jun 1870 // “free,” florence + the machine // “the thing is,” ellen bass // “encyclopedia of an ordinary life,” amy krouse rosenthal // “october,” mary oliver // letter from vincent van gogh to theo van gogh, 11 August 1879 // “etcetera: the unpublished poems of e.e. cummings“ // “livin’ it up on top,” hadestown

#on survival #parallels #webweave