[tartaeya]

i think there is a difference between a knowingly flawed character and a thematically uncomfortable character and knowing the difference is half the battle

[tartaeya]

knowingly flawed character: this character has traits that the author deliberately put in to show they have nuance and aren't perfect as a person. this will put them at odds with some readers and endear them to others, depending on them as people, and that's good!

thematically uncomfortable character: oh boy the author has some Beliefs

[hometoursandotherstuff]

So graceful.

[everythingfox]

“For the love of god”

[sophsun1]

Community – 6.04: Queer Studies & Advanced Waxing

[beardedmrbean]

One more in the W column for Japan.

[ieafy]

Cats in grass, gouache (prints in shop 💌)

[snoopylovessoup]

“The Cat and the Porridge”, 1935, Yuri Vasnetsov

[deutsche-bahn]

Ich bin immer begeistert wenn in irgend'nem Buch oder einer Doku gesagt wird, dass jemand "nach [...] eilte". Auch wenn eigentlich eine flotte Kutschfahrt usw. gemeint ist, muss ich mir immer vorstellen wie der Kurfürst von Schlagmichtot querfeldein losgesprintet ist. Und der Hofstaat hinterher. Nette Vorstellung.

[deutsche-bahn]

auf verlorene Schuhe und Perücken wird in all der Eile keine Rücksicht genommen, es geht hier um empfindliche diplomatische Angelegenheiten. Wenn man das straffe Tempo beibehält ist man schon in wenigen Wochen in Paris.

[nevertoleratelactose]

Für mich ist "Eilen" nicht Sprinten, sondern eher so in Richtung Powerwalken. Immer ein Fuß mit Bodenkontakt. Die Vorstellung von Adel mit Hofstaat absolutely moving mit Wanderstöcken find ich aber auch irgendwie witzig!

[deutsche-bahn]

consider:

"RITTMEISTER! Holen Sie meine Walkingstöcke aus dem Stall, und machen Sie meine Nordic Walking Gruppe mobil. Oh, und sorgen Sie dafür dass mein Schrittzählerstand in jedem Dorf verlesen wird. Der Pöbel soll inspiriert sein"

und so walkten sie von dannen, hinter ihnen eine Staubwolke aus Perückenpuder

[gremlininho]

then & now ♡

[matakite4kaku]

[thefugitivesaint]

John D. Batten (1860-1932), ''Europa's Fairy Book'' by Joseph Jacobs, 1919

[memewhore]

[spleenyz]

[fallout-lou-begas]

[kermittingacrime]

ask and you shall receive.

[gayvampyr]

[hometoursandotherstuff]

Awww, he wanted to play.

[scretladyspider]

demisexuality can be so hard to explain because it’s misconstrued as you just wanting to trust the other person before you have sex with them. and I get why the misconception happens. But demisexuality differs in that there isn’t sexual attraction at all before that bond forms.

I think what people have difficulty with is the idea that there are people out there who aren’t experiencing sexual attraction at all until a certain point, if ever, because we’re taught that sex, libido, and sexual attraction are all the same, both in and out of queer spaces.

And when you’re learning about asexuality and demisexuality, you may learn that people have romantic and aesthetic attraction separately from sexual attraction, and that sexual and romantic attraction aren’t necessarily intertwined, and that may challenge your worldview on sex.

But “I trust you enough to have sex with you” isn’t the same as “I’m not sexually attracted to anyone but you, and the reason I’m sexually attracted to you now after we’ve established this close bond is literally because of the bond of trust we’ve been able to form”.

It’s easy to see how those can get conflated. On the surface, if you’re unfamiliar with asexuality, they may sound the same. But it’s important to acknowledge the difference between “no sex until I trust you” and “no sexual attraction unless I trust you and maybe not even then”.

Demisexuality is housed under the asexuality spectrum. It’s part of the gray area between being allosexual and asexual. It’s part of why the definition for asexuality includes “little to no sexual attraction”. It’s a mostly asexual experience with an asterisk.

While being demisexual may have impacts on a persons sexual activity, even demisexuals have a varied relationship to the act of participating in sex. Libido and sexual attraction are not always intertwined either, which can make telling the difference tricky.

I think of sexual attraction as libido that has a compass. Since I rarely ever experience sexual attraction, but do have libido, it’s noticeable for me when that libido actually has a direction to go, rather than being a floating, nebulous, independent thing.

Remember, not everyone is demisexual. There’s a difference between waiting to have sex and not having sexual attraction at all until a certain point. This also inherently ties demisexuality to romantic attraction and relationships, and not all demisexuals are alloromantic.

But if you read what demisexuality is and think “everyone is like that” or “that’s just being a woman”, you either 1) are demisexual 2) don’t understand what it is or 3) both. And it’s okay to not know. Just as long as you’re willing to try to learn.

[knightoflodis]

I wish I was as eloquent as you OP many years ago when people were constantly clowning on demisexuality. I was always nervous about reblogging demisexual positive posts because of how angry people got at them. It was absolutely ridiculous

[maidenvault]

Not “Only my reading of canon is correct” or “Interpretations are subjective and all valid” but a secret third thing, “More than one interpretation can be valid but there’s a reason your English teacher had you cite quotes and examples in your papers, you have to have a strong argument that your interpretation is actually supported by the text or it is just wrong and I’m fine with telling you it’s wrong, actually.”

[mooncustafer]

If the text says the curtains are blue you can argue about what that means; but if you’re going to claim they’re actually yellow you’d better have a really good argument.

[xwilltruman]

i know the curtains better than the author. thank you for coming to my ted talk

[maidenvault]

Fandom has such unresolved mommy/daddy issues about authors. If you apply a little reading comprehension skills to my original post you’ll see I didn’t say anything at all about the author. You guys always make “interpretation” about your beef with the author. You’re all obsessed with the author. This post is just about deciphering what is there in canon. Figuring out what is being communicated by the canon itself with all the words and images and basic formal elements that are there in canon. That’s all it’s about. It really doesn’t matter if the author intentionally put all those things there in a pattern that might support the idea that this one character’s queer. That’s not what this is about. What matters is if you can compellingly argue there’s a pattern of evidence there. Or not. Everyone is conspiring together to make me go insane still adding shit about authorial intent on my post.

[holedyke]

obsessed with this pic from the wiki for kneading (cats)...eternal sweetness....

[xanaxfarts]

Cat Series a series of cats placed on flatbed scanners