Normal Guy With Abnormal Stuff To Say

I have art commissions: https://ko-fi.com/elinorafroach I love my beautiful girlfriend

[elinora-froach]

Average normal guy with abnormal stuff to say. I make horror and non horror art. commissions open I do not believe in "good" or "bad" people. I attempt to stay humanitarian in all of my views but feel free to call me out about anything (open to discussion) I'm a proponent of socialist and communist theory and I am currently researching critical psychiatry, any resources or discussions on these would be appreciated. fandoms I am currently in: - Hollow Knight + Silksong - House of Leaves - Silent Hill - the X-files - deltarune - lowkey breaking bad and better call saul - Warrior Cats (kinda sorta) I have commissions on kofi! https://ko-fi.com/elinorafroach or click here you can search "my art" or "artists on tumblr" on my blog to see my art

Seriously Commission Me

please

[anglaised]

its always the ppl who say sex work is exploitative (it can be and in most cases is) who also never rlly bother to fight for liberation of sex workers never fight for legal protections of swers never pay money to bail funds to get swers out of jail when they get caught in sting operations never support women in other countries being targeted by sex tourism never share go fund mes for survival strippers and fs girls like it’s performative asf u don’t care about exploitation u just like being mad at “the whore” bc if u cared about exploitation you would be fighting to get legal protections for everyone in sw bc realistically it is never going away whether u like it or not

[hagiomoto]

i have a question about piracy and IP laws, and to preface I am 100% pro piracy and anti copyright laws as they exist.

The issue with copyright laws is that they exploit proletarian creators in order to benefit the companies they work for and drive profit to the people who are not putting in effort to create the finished piece. However, under that critique, wouldn't piracy be another way to prevent those proletarian creators from recieving adequate compensation for the goods they've created? And furthermore, wouldn't writing off independent creators as simply petty bourgeois ignore the fact that those are laborers who are taking the means of production into the hands of the ones creating the work? I don't want to argue I am genuinely stumped when it comes to formulating my thought process on these issues and I was wondering if you had good resources or explanations on it, thank you very much !

It is not an issue to me at all if independent creators couldn't profit from their works because of piracy. Because the harms produced by the current intellectual property regime namely the monopolisation of culture, the enclosure of knowledge, and the concentration of profits in capital rather than labour far outweigh the harms caused by piracy under capitalism.

That's why I think independent creators' crusade against piracy is even more dangerous when it extends to campaigning against repositories and shadow libraries. In doing so, they reinforce the very system of enclosure that restricts access to knowledge and culture.

I won't concede any ground on this issue. If independent creators can't profit from their work, they need to market themselves better or adopt a different business model. The world doesn't owe anyone sales. Creating something does not entitle anyone to a guaranteed audience or the right to deny others access to books and knowledge.

Please look up the idea of open access publishing and consider looking through the link below to read first-hand accounts from authors explaining how publishing their books openly benefits them.

OA Books Toolkit

If you're interested in arguments for open access and against overly restrictive copyright protections, Authors Alliance is a useful organisation to look into. What makes it interesting is that it supports authors while challenging the idea that stronger copyright laws always benefit creators. Its main argument is that many authors care more about having their work read, shared, discussed, and used than about maintaining strict control over every copy. It also argues that copyright law often ends up benefiting publishers and other commercial intermediaries more than the authors who actually create the work.

[mlembug]

@elinora-froach That's not "the issue", that's "the consequence" of copyright laws. You're still not accounting for what's the purpose of copyright laws. It, together with patent law and trademark law, enables treating ideas like property, analogous to owning an apartment, house, a hotel, or a company. It's why those three together are called "intellectual property rights"

A proletarian worker like a miner or a librarian going to work, she is trading her time spending performing labour for money. Fundamentally this means that if she stops going to work, she stops getting money. It is in her interest to maximize the amount of money she gets out of a month of work, and minimize the amount of money she spends on purchases.

An ~independent writer~ when writing a book is indeed performing labour - but the end goal of performing that labour is creating an intellectual property. Once this intellectual property is created, it is in her interest to maximize the amount of money out of it.

How do you monetize a property? By having people pay admittance at entry. For hotels this means getting people to pay for an access to a hotel room. To maximize the amount of money you get, you can either get more people to rent, or increase the price of access per person per night. It also means guarding your property so people are less likely to overstay and avoid paying you.

Now, the contents of the book is surprisingly easy to copy. Bad news for the property owner. How can she guard this property? Why yes, with intellectual property laws. Its purpose is enabling the capability for the property owners to send cops at you if you attempt to do so.

When the original poster points out the obvious fact that stems from this that it is opposite of her interest to maximize the yield for the property owners and the obvious problems that result from endless rent seeking of intellectual property, she gets harassment and guilt trips from people who go "hey, I take offense to this, I just own a small house in the middle of nowhere with no water or electricity, I get very little money out of this entire whole landlord thing, how am I supposed to get money out of it if people keep squatting here?" or "hey, I am cooperating with the rental property company, but they take so much of the money I get off the rentals"

(the fact that they could be getting paid for the labour itself rather than the property is very much ignored)

[elinora-froach]

this was very well worded thank you for explaining further. I am still curious (if you will bear with me, completely fine if you do not wish to respond), would taking the work of this creator who does not own necessary information (like how the landlord does own necessary property, housing) not be exploiting their labor via not compensating them for it? Wouldn't it technically be one of our end goals as communists to ensure that laborers can have greater control over the product they make? or am I mistaken? once again, thank you for adding onto this it was very useful

[mlembug]

Communist movement is about liberation of the proletariat, and therefore abolishing the class of property owners, who oppress the proletariat.

You're asking this question as if "make an investment ahead of time so you can reap the returns" is the only possible funding model, as if art grants and patreon-likes did not exist even in context of capitalist society.

The communist answer to "how do writers get paid after intellectual property is abolished" is "the writers become proletariat"

[elinora-froach]

oh okay I understand and thank you for that other post too it helped explain things as well I appreciate it

[alientitty]

a few indian brutalist buildings

[hagiomoto]

i have a question about piracy and IP laws, and to preface I am 100% pro piracy and anti copyright laws as they exist.

The issue with copyright laws is that they exploit proletarian creators in order to benefit the companies they work for and drive profit to the people who are not putting in effort to create the finished piece. However, under that critique, wouldn't piracy be another way to prevent those proletarian creators from recieving adequate compensation for the goods they've created? And furthermore, wouldn't writing off independent creators as simply petty bourgeois ignore the fact that those are laborers who are taking the means of production into the hands of the ones creating the work? I don't want to argue I am genuinely stumped when it comes to formulating my thought process on these issues and I was wondering if you had good resources or explanations on it, thank you very much !

It is not an issue to me at all if independent creators couldn't profit from their works because of piracy. Because the harms produced by the current intellectual property regime namely the monopolisation of culture, the enclosure of knowledge, and the concentration of profits in capital rather than labour far outweigh the harms caused by piracy under capitalism.

That's why I think independent creators' crusade against piracy is even more dangerous when it extends to campaigning against repositories and shadow libraries. In doing so, they reinforce the very system of enclosure that restricts access to knowledge and culture.

I won't concede any ground on this issue. If independent creators can't profit from their work, they need to market themselves better or adopt a different business model. The world doesn't owe anyone sales. Creating something does not entitle anyone to a guaranteed audience or the right to deny others access to books and knowledge.

Please look up the idea of open access publishing and consider looking through the link below to read first-hand accounts from authors explaining how publishing their books openly benefits them.

OA Books Toolkit

If you're interested in arguments for open access and against overly restrictive copyright protections, Authors Alliance is a useful organisation to look into. What makes it interesting is that it supports authors while challenging the idea that stronger copyright laws always benefit creators. Its main argument is that many authors care more about having their work read, shared, discussed, and used than about maintaining strict control over every copy. It also argues that copyright law often ends up benefiting publishers and other commercial intermediaries more than the authors who actually create the work.

[mlembug]

@elinora-froach That's not "the issue", that's "the consequence" of copyright laws. You're still not accounting for what's the purpose of copyright laws. It, together with patent law and trademark law, enables treating ideas like property, analogous to owning an apartment, house, a hotel, or a company. It's why those three together are called "intellectual property rights"

A proletarian worker like a miner or a librarian going to work, she is trading her time spending performing labour for money. Fundamentally this means that if she stops going to work, she stops getting money. It is in her interest to maximize the amount of money she gets out of a month of work, and minimize the amount of money she spends on purchases.

An ~independent writer~ when writing a book is indeed performing labour - but the end goal of performing that labour is creating an intellectual property. Once this intellectual property is created, it is in her interest to maximize the amount of money out of it.

How do you monetize a property? By having people pay admittance at entry. For hotels this means getting people to pay for an access to a hotel room. To maximize the amount of money you get, you can either get more people to rent, or increase the price of access per person per night. It also means guarding your property so people are less likely to overstay and avoid paying you.

Now, the contents of the book is surprisingly easy to copy. Bad news for the property owner. How can she guard this property? Why yes, with intellectual property laws. Its purpose is enabling the capability for the property owners to send cops at you if you attempt to do so.

When the original poster points out the obvious fact that stems from this that it is opposite of her interest to maximize the yield for the property owners and the obvious problems that result from endless rent seeking of intellectual property, she gets harassment and guilt trips from people who go "hey, I take offense to this, I just own a small house in the middle of nowhere with no water or electricity, I get very little money out of this entire whole landlord thing, how am I supposed to get money out of it if people keep squatting here?" or "hey, I am cooperating with the rental property company, but they take so much of the money I get off the rentals"

(the fact that they could be getting paid for the labour itself rather than the property is very much ignored)

[elinora-froach]

this was very well worded thank you for explaining further. I am still curious (if you will bear with me, completely fine if you do not wish to respond), would taking the work of this creator who does not own necessary information (like how the landlord does own necessary property, housing) not be exploiting their labor via not compensating them for it? Wouldn't it technically be one of our end goals as communists to ensure that laborers can have greater control over the product they make? or am I mistaken? once again, thank you for adding onto this it was very useful

[hagiomoto]

i have a question about piracy and IP laws, and to preface I am 100% pro piracy and anti copyright laws as they exist.

The issue with copyright laws is that they exploit proletarian creators in order to benefit the companies they work for and drive profit to the people who are not putting in effort to create the finished piece. However, under that critique, wouldn't piracy be another way to prevent those proletarian creators from recieving adequate compensation for the goods they've created? And furthermore, wouldn't writing off independent creators as simply petty bourgeois ignore the fact that those are laborers who are taking the means of production into the hands of the ones creating the work? I don't want to argue I am genuinely stumped when it comes to formulating my thought process on these issues and I was wondering if you had good resources or explanations on it, thank you very much !

It is not an issue to me at all if independent creators couldn't profit from their works because of piracy. Because the harms produced by the current intellectual property regime namely the monopolisation of culture, the enclosure of knowledge, and the concentration of profits in capital rather than labour far outweigh the harms caused by piracy under capitalism.

That's why I think independent creators' crusade against piracy is even more dangerous when it extends to campaigning against repositories and shadow libraries. In doing so, they reinforce the very system of enclosure that restricts access to knowledge and culture.

I won't concede any ground on this issue. If independent creators can't profit from their work, they need to market themselves better or adopt a different business model. The world doesn't owe anyone sales. Creating something does not entitle anyone to a guaranteed audience or the right to deny others access to books and knowledge.

Please look up the idea of open access publishing and consider looking through the link below to read first-hand accounts from authors explaining how publishing their books openly benefits them.

OA Books Toolkit

If you're interested in arguments for open access and against overly restrictive copyright protections, Authors Alliance is a useful organisation to look into. What makes it interesting is that it supports authors while challenging the idea that stronger copyright laws always benefit creators. Its main argument is that many authors care more about having their work read, shared, discussed, and used than about maintaining strict control over every copy. It also argues that copyright law often ends up benefiting publishers and other commercial intermediaries more than the authors who actually create the work.

[lil-peebo]

Okay here's my obligatory post about Tumblr users and their ignorance of rap, as a (white) fan of rap:

Saying "Not all rap music is about violence, here are alternatives" is not helpful, because the violent music ALSO has meaning.

When Biggie Smalls postures about his gang connections and packing heat, he isn't doing it because wow violence is so edgy, it's a powerful statement. Youth in urban areas where gang activity is heavy are often treated as lesser than by default, especially compared to black people the same age from a wealthy background. There's a reason that the "wholesome and respectable" black-lead entertainment of that era was stuff like the Cosby Show, with doctor-lawyer parents, or Family Matters, with a cop dad. There's a reason why the big joke of Fresh Prince is someone with a more unstable upbringing moving in with one of these model black sitcom families.

Standing up and saying yeah, I came from the mean streets, I was molded by this violence and yes, I did what I had to do to survive in a world that refuses to acknowledge my existence as meaningful or worthy of protection. I protected myself, I made my own way, and fuck anybody who tries to stand in the way of that.

Refusing to demonize that environment and wearing it like armor in a way that protects from the authority that wants you to see them as sub humans incapable of only violence and hatred, and saying HEY. I'm here, I lived this, and there is love and there is pain and there is ART in this.

That is powerful. That is the essence of gangster rap.

It isn't about hurting people for fun, it's about holding a mirror up to a society that does the hurting and then calls you a monster for what it's made you. Its about validating the experiences of the disenfranchised and biting back at authority. It's about turning a pain that the world say you deserve being one of those people from those places into POETRY. Into ART.

And thats why it matters.

And thats why you need to shut the yell up and stop dismissing it as violence without substance when you all sat on your ass listening to songs about Hatsune Miku eating people in middle school.

[innerchildabortionclinic]

breaking bad is actually a documentary on how being a suburban father in the united states can give you a mental illness where your ego doesn't feel fulfilled unless your life and your family's life is at risk. it's not about healthcare only because walter in particular was given another option in that regard. now if you think about it this is not the only plot in hollywood where a guy fucks up his life beyond belief for personal fulfillment and the whole time his life was kinda fine before competitively. like look how much awful shit is happening in the world. the american economy had to go downhill because of this mindset

[innerchildabortionclinic]

[tostyart]

TRANS COMMUNITY DONT SKIP ME

‼️‼️‼️PLEASE HELP ME ESCAPE HOMELESSNESS‼️‼️I beg America to have mercy on me, I am disabled trans person and never been this low before, I feel alone and scared. I have dreams that are dead if i have no home, I’m scared my artist life is over. I am in Oregon.

https://gofund.me/bc68dc647

[tostyart]

Part 2.... i had to make a new onr because I am going to lose my current home. Please help me keep it. I am not going to make rent this month. Please plesse help me gofund.me/c31be0b5b

[kropotkindersurprise]

July 22, 2026 - People around the USA are taking down Flock AI surveillance cameras. [video]

[noneedtofearorhope]

DeFlock

Find license plate readers (LPRs) near you.

[nevermindirah]

direct action works!!

physically interfering with the cameras is highly effective but obviously it's not a type of activism that's accessible to everyone — so if like me you think warrentless surveillance is never ever ever a reasonable thing for a government to do, but you're also like me and can't personally climb camera poles to dismantle that shit:

check out the August 16-22 week of action!

National Week of Action Against ALPRs | DeFlock

Mass surveillance doesn't equal safety. Join the movement to dismantle automated license plate readers in our communities.

big and small cities all over the US (and one so far in Canada!) are holding events like education sessions, marches, and public lobbying meetings with the local governments and police departments that decide whether to spend taxpayer money on warrantless surveillance. maybe my city and yours can join the nearly 100 places that have already rejected or ended contracts for mass privacy violation cameras.

[lifeafterpsychiatry]

I feel like in another world the idea of a place for mentally ill people to stay and receive care could actually be good. by that I mean an entirely voluntary (never being changed to mandatory) stay that is for people to convalesce if they have a bad flare up of their symptoms and want to take a break in a place they feel safe, or even long term stays but with actual decent care and compassion. like sometimes I think I would love to spend a month or two somewhere that's in/near nature where I can truly relax, shut off from the world for a bit, speak to people who know what it feels like to live with mental illness, do art therapy and other nice activities. I guess maybe this already somewhat exists in those ultra fancy rehabs that wealthy people go to but I'm sure even those places have abuse of power and the risk of involuntary commitment. I guess I just crave a type of rest I can't truly get and I sort of wish that there was an actually good type of place for people to go when they need rest and mental health support without the risk of losing their autonomy and being subjected to harm under the guise of help

Yeah the problem with psych wards isn't the concept of having places you can choose to stay in a mental health crisis, it's the carceral structure of these places in our current society and the way they deny people bodily autonomy and often further traumatize them in the name of treatment.

[rivetgoth]

Even if biological sex really existed it would be necessary to abolish it

[biblical-figures]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

END

[seven-oh-four]

this is your captain speaking. do you guys remember 9/11 [escalating clamor of passengers freaking out] woah woah hey hey i was just curious. christ. am i not allowed to make conversation

[creatingblackcharacters]

Do you know how to refer to Black people in spanish? (Genuine question)

@insertspanishhere

[insertspanishhere]

The political term is Afro-whatever country or Afrodescendiente (Afro-descended)

The general term for a non white person casually referring to a Black person is moreno (Moroccan) or sometimes I’ve heard Central Americans say “piel-negra” (dark-skinned) to distinguish from themselves as dark skinned indigenous people. Brazilians use pardo except that term is from medieval Spanish for a brown animal so I’d be careful there.

Black Spanish speakers say Negro amongst ourselves and I personally let my allies say it.

Under no circumstances use negrito/a/e. That’s blackie. Never use “Los negros,” that’s “the blacks.” Typically if you say something like “el negro,” one specific black man, the addition of the Spanish “the” is alienating and thus roughly the equivalent of calling someone a hard r slur.

Say “las personas negras” “communidad Negra.”

Persona is a femenine word derived from Latin. It is not necessary to change the word to “persone” to refer to someone nonbinary because the word has just been that way since Roman times and adding an “a” on it doesn’t mean you’re talking about a feminine gendered person.

[tlirsgender]

Maybe one day we can stop moralizing the concept of privilege & everyone will get normaler about being told they have relative privilege over other people. Like literally everyone everywhere in some way. It's fine. Being aware of it can't hurt you

[tlirsgender]

There's such an endless chorus of outraged "but what if I'm poor? What if I'm autistic" and it's like. Ok. You're not getting this at all let's just start over

[ahsoka-in-a-hood]

Apparently some people still need to hear this so: using an 'ai checker' is still using ai. If you are feeding someone's fic to one of these checkers, you will still not be sure their fic is ai because they are not 100% accurate, but you can be 100% sure that you are using ai. For fic. Furthermore you are doing the work of an ai scraper for them. You are, personally, feeding the machine. There is no actual excuse for using an ai checker on fanfic as a hobby. YOU are the problem.

If you think a fic is ai, mute it and move on. That's it. That's all you do.

[ahsoka-in-a-hood]

Um. Yikes