queer af

aussie l non binary l aro ace l white l he/they pronouns fandomstuff and pretty much anything else under the sun! Happy to chat! old enough to know not to put my age in my bio

[shpagashniffer459]

my idea for dde, dangerous danger equipment, the opposite of ppe

[theprofessional-amateur]

link to bluesky post

[theprofessional-amateur]

In addition to how to turn various things, it includes:

Other useful AI Removal/Detection links

How to spot AI Hallucinations like a Reference Librarian (originally on Substack)

Library Freedom Project has a lot of handouts about AI on their Resources page

[naga-noia]

THERES MORE TO WHITEWASHING THAN JUST SKIN COLOR THERES MORE TO WHITEWASHING THAN JUST SKIN COLOR THERES MORE TO WHITEWASHING THAN JUST SKIN COLOR THERES MORE TO WHITEWASHING THAN JUST SKIN COLORRRRRRRRRR

[galaxyedgeviolet]

[annabelle--cane]

but can we TALK about the racialized subtext of "his wife has filled his house with chintz" linking together femininity, indian export goods, commercialism, and superficiality vs "to keep it real I fuck him on the floor" linking together masculinity, AAVE, authenticity, sexuality, and vulgarity? if our aim as critics of poetry is to reevaluate this text and arrive at a feminist interpretation then we must also consider the poem's vexed relationship to race so as to not be anti-black in our criticism of the piece's presentation of masculinized sexuality nor uncritically reproduce and elevate its image of orientalized femininity.

[annabelle--cane]

also, from looking at the original post (non-explicit gay sex photo but still a gay sex photo so you've been warned): there isn't even any chintz in the photo. the design elements in the room all look broadly western european with the exception of a tall ceramic vessel that may be decorated with a reproduction of a chinese ink painting. chintz is an indian textile pattern, you'll see it on dresses, bedspreads, wallpaper, tapestries, upholstery, etc., but nothing like that is in the image. to imply that the house's interior design is frivolous, artificial, and unusable, the poem utilizes "chintz" despite the obvious lack of chintz because "chintz," as a popular asian export good that went on to be imitated by european manufacturers, is considered kitsch, cheap, and womanly. and, though the angle partially obscures them, the two men in the photo both appear to be white, so the poem uses the AAVE phrase "keep it real" despite the lack of black people to invoke the perception of AAVE as raw, crass, and primal. in both cases, the racialized language is being ascribed to european/white subjects to impart the white subjects with different moral values.

[femmenietzsche]

The ghost of Elagabalus penning an open letter asking people to stop calling him trans and you're like fair enough I guess it was just political slander after all but then midway through it becomes clear he's promoting this right wing ethnonationalist femboy aesthetic that still involves taking estrogen

[whaile]

late summer / early fall thoughts

[kosher-salt]

"The European settlers came to Palestine and planted a bunch of pine trees to make it look like Europe"

The flag of Lebanon: am i a joke to you

[yiiiiiiiikes25]

i take it back this is an incredible paragraph that should live forever in the paper of record

[yiiiiiiiikes25]

prev DELIGHTFUL tag

[tariah23]

Seated

Stuff like this always makes me remember how sensationalized the ​“hide your kids, hide your wife” video was, also known as the “bedroom intruder meme” 🗿.

The guy was clearly one of the earliest memes of a black person expressing frustration publicly (it was a news report of the man explaining how he’d run off a predator trying to rape his sister by the way) but in a “funny way” (the way that nbs and whites find entertaining at least because they don’t see black trauma as something that should be given grace, and shown empathy right from the very start over their own intial enjoyment because that’s no fun), and something like this became a huge joke. Like, this meme was literally everywhere in the early 2000’s, and I think people forgot that his sister was almost raped 🧍🏾‍♀️…………………………..!

[doberbutts]

In this house, we post the video for folks to watch it.

[hometoursandotherstuff]

[katharkness]

In a sense, it doesn’t matter how ridiculous it sounds to think Pepsi would genuinely honour that. Pepsi said that they would, therefore they have to, or else they’re guilty of false advertising. Companies can’t be allowed to say whatever they want in adverts, and when asked to pony up pull “it was just a joke, bro”. To use a slightly less ridiculous example, Fallout 76. One of the preorder editions can with a canvas backpack. But when they finally shipped, the durable canvas backpacks somehow became flimsy nylon. Complaints to publisher Bethesda got the response that the canvas version advertised was a prototype that was too expensive to make, so they handed out the cheap imitations instead. It took like two years in the courts for Bethesda to give people what they actually pay for. And they won because advertising law says you have to deliver on what you promise, even if it’s a Harrier jet. Introducing any level of “it’s just a joke” makes that effectively meaningless.

[kyraneko]

"I genuinely thought Pepsi was giving out fighter jets" Pepsi genuinely SAID they were giving out fighter jets. They went to some trouble to specify the conditions under which they were giving out fighter jets, in fact.

You can't shake the Devil's hand and then say you were only kidding.

It's just that sometimes the Devil shows up in the form of some guy with a lot of time on his hands and an interest in getting himself a fighter jet.

[biglawbear]

This is like a case out of contracts 101 that any first year law student knows. Pepsi made a valid offer to enter into a contract and someone accepted the offer. In this case, it was a jet for points. There's no few law school cases about this.

[sometiktoksarevalid]

[flareboi]

trans woman ryland grace changing her name to grace grace because she couldnt think of any other names and its right there

[flareboi]

grace: i think i might be a woman

rocky: rocky has seen this on earth portable thinking machine. grace very brave. grace has name, question?

grace, not entirely paying attention: yeah man its grace you know that

rocky: grace grace??????? question????????

[flareboi]

rocky: is not customary to change first name, question?

grace: it is, but everyone calls me grace anyway so it's fine

rocky: grace is sure, question? grace could pick any name

grace: hmmm... worth a thought, i guess. got any ideas?

rocky: rocky 2

grace: no

[flareboi]

rocky: grace second prettiest woman in all erid

grace: aw :) wait whos first?

rocky: rocky

[free-my-mindd]

[kingbedlam]

[agentofdeterioration]

The Catalogue of Ships in the Iliad is, to a modern audiences, what classicists have called “boring as hell,” but I can’t help but think that if you were watching Homer recite it it would have been more like when comedians go, “anybody here tonight from Chicago?” and the Chicagoans in the back start cheering

Homer’s like, “and there were forty black ships from… LOCRIS” and the Locrians in the crowd start going absolutely nuts

[pocketss]

distressing things to say to your friends

[artsekey]

So I recently posted some original fiction in an online critique circle. While the experience has been positive overall, I have received some very... interesting feedback.

The story is written in first-person limited. We're talking 'Mr. Unreliable Narrator', "I said, I did". With that in mind, here are some of the (abridged) notes left on Chapter 1 and 2:

"This story switches from first person limited to third person omniscient, and it's confusing. Like here, you say "He is anchored in his chair." That's past tense."

"Is this story in first person, or third person omniscient? Here, you say "I feel the heat radiating off of Character B's face. His breathing is harsh and shallow." How does he know what character B is feeling?"

"I'm confused, I don't know what's happening, and I don't care about these characters. There's no inciting incident, and I don't know where we are." - Reviewer who... did not read Chapter 1.

"It seems like you're actually trying to write third-person omniscient. I think you should shift the whole story to past-tense."

Now I know what you might be thinking. "Artsekey, that's like four different people telling you that you might be writing in third person. Are you sure you're not writing in third person...?"

Pretty sure!

(To be clear, so much of the feedback I was sent was helpful/encouraging! And even these notes were included alongside helpful crit, but this note has come in more than once and I'm starting to feel crazy.)

(((And if y'all see something I don't here, please let me know. I'm being a little dramatic here for funsies, but I'm always willing be told I've goofed lol!)))

[artsekey]

Update: after another read I think I've found the source of the confusion.

Take the following: A: "Good.” It’s like she was waiting to cut me off. “Let’s keep it that way, yes?” B: "Good." Cutting me off delights her. "Let's keep it that way, yes?" C: "Good." She's delighted. "Let's keep it that way." In version A, our narrator is present in the tag and we have admission of uncertainty. "It's like" says "our narrator isn't sure about this." This reads comfortably like first person because it has a little implied clause that says "this is probable, but not absolute". In version B, the narrator is still present but there's certainty from his POV. He is sure she is delighted. This loses some readers because... how can he, the narrator, say with absolute certainty that cutting him off delights her? He can't, so therefore he must have some insight into her interior world. This is ignores the idea that first person is a recount of the narrator's POV, so he can be sure (and incorrect!) about what he sees. That's the point! Version C removes the narrator, cutting it down to just the narrator's observation. I use this sparingly throughout, mostly for rhythm, and it is fucking with my readers. I think this stems from most books being in third person, and the dialogue tag-- "she's delighted"-- would, in isolation, work in the third-person present. In context, though, where everything is filtered through our narrator, I trust my reader to know "he perceives her to be delighted, and for the sake of this story his perception is all you get."

[curlicuecal]

I'm fascinated by how badly these people understand tense and pov but I'm *most* distracted by the person who seems to have interpreted "I feel the heat radiating off his face" as the narrator *literally feeling with the other character's face*

That's SO funny

[cipheramnesia]

Working with different business cultures all over the globe, my biggest surprise is that while the USA is bad, it's not actually the very absolute worst I've ever worked with.

[cipheramnesia]

I can imagine all the guesses, but if you haven't talked with a crap ton of people from dozens of countries, it's not obvious.

[cipheramnesia]

The key is business culture is like its own weird separate culture with rules and structures, but most places have a fairly comprehensible set of expectations. So most of the time, it's just remembering perceived differences in expectations. Some places it's polite to be what feels really overly friendly to me. Some places it's polite to be what feels obsequious and formal to me. It's like, whatever. A secondary form of language kinda. It's not even social cues, it's just mechanics of language really. Places with that stuff, those are all fine and wonderful to deal with because there's a framework to communicate and all that.

Part of why the USA shits the bed trying to talk with is because every business person here has like zero framework, it's all lies and bullshit, and everyone wants to be the smartest bestest boy. It's not business culture as much as daycare for toddlers who have millions of dollars and hate human rights. Not the worst though, not by far.

[cipheramnesia]

What's key to understand is this is all separate from things like the real people in different places. Business brain people don't have any relevance to real human behavior, it's this whole other structure of make believe which controls everyone's well being. It's important to know because I know how to email a business guy in South Korea using language that will feel appropriate enough after translation, but that's completely irrelevant to the real people living there. It's easy to talk to business guys in China or India or whatever. Germany, Nigeria, Mexico.

UK business guys are pretty bad too. Still not the worst but you have to put a lot of extra work in because business culture in the UK still thinks the Brittish empire exists. The majority of business dudes in the UK see no difference between selling something that has their company name on it, and making it themselves. It's like how all the stuff that says "made in the USA" is 99% made somewhere else, and then one staple is put into it and it's made in the USA, but if you talk to business guys here, they never confuse where things are made, just like... more basic realities like linear time and physics. UK guys go the opposite way, and always say they own everything. But that's all relatively navigable. It's like, okay, you all live in an imaginary world, but I can still get everyone to understand time and logistics and stuff enough to get everyone understanding the same information. I can translate imagination land to reality and back, they get it.

[cipheramnesia]

Australia business guys are the worst. Uncontested. I keep minutely detailed notes on every interaction I have with any business brained Australian. I don't want to do this. I have to. Working with business guys in Australia is like being stuck in a marriage with an emotionally abusice pickup artist. Their favorite way to communicate is using work appropriate language to imply you're stupid and your work is worthless. Luckily, there's also no way to explain what you do, because I think when you get a corporate executive level position in an Australian business, they surgically remove the part of your brain that takes in new information.

My average verbal or email exchange with an Australian business guy goes something like this:

"Okay, this is going to take around a month. We need so and so dollars to start. Also, the Earth orbits the Sun."

"Great, just to confirm, we're ready to deliver tomorrow, and the giant hamster rolls the sunball across the sky. Sounds good, have you started?"

It's infuriating in some ways, fascinating in others. Information simply vanishes into an Australian business person as if you hurled it into space, but something in space might theoretically end up somewhere and everything I say to Australian business guys doesn't. I've tried every way around it, and nothing works. And they become enraged when the things they imagined, which no one ever actually said, don't happen. Like you know those clips from Alex Jones in court being read his own words? Imagine that instead of blustering denial he demanded to know how the lawyer was so incompetent at lawyering because words don't exist and he was told this was a carnival cruise not lawsuit. And they have both of the worst traits of USA and UK business guys on top of all that. And I've never heard anyone even close to the same level of casual racism as business guys in Australia. I mean, business guys as a rules aren't great people, but nowhere I've ever worked with has been so consistently terrible to deal with. It would be one thing if it was an outlier, I've had one or two USA companies that were rough, sometimes companies in South Korea can be a real pain, navigating business culture in France if you're from the USA is a labyrinth. But Australia. Those business guys are on another level. Every other company with dodgy practices knows what they’re doing that's questionable. I don't know if business guys in Australia have the ability to understand... like... language. Do they understand laws, money, logistics, anything? Impossible to say! They walk and talk like people but they have discovered some means by which they never intake any information ever. It's like plausible deniability evolved into a new part of the brain specifically to make it easier to be as unethical as the manifest physical reality permits. The regular people in Australia all seem fine, just more people, but the business operators are like night and day. I can find ways to communicate with non-English speakers fairly well, knowing how to work language to adapt to translation is fun. I can't make fucking heads or tails of English speaking Australian corporate execs. If you speak any second language, any at all, know that you are doing better at it than these guys are in their first one. It's literally impossible to overstate how uniformly unpleasant it is to work with business guys from Australia. They are, without question, the worst.