kittywiggles

a random personal blog - 24 - married - christian - bible/theology major

[moonshoesmargo]

There are 364 days till Christmas and people already have their Christmas lights up.

Unbelievable.

[insanenugget]

I WAITED A WHOLE YEAR TO REBLOG THIS

[brynwrites]

There are two types of writers…

Writer A: “I’ve fleshed this character out to the point where they’re more real then I am. I know everything about them, including their blood type, their thirty-first favorite song, what they did for their sixth birthday, and which brand of apples they prefer.”

Writer B: “This character exists as a full person in my head, but I know absolutely nothing about them. Once I forced them to talk about themselves,  and they simultaneous lied about their past and told me accurate trivia facts I don’t remember learning.”

[mildswearingat4am]

May I suggest Writer C:

This character goes through phases like the moon. Their hair and eye color shift every week. Their hobbies? Every hour. ‘When did you become an expert chef? Why are you watching soap operas? Weren’t you taller yesterday?’ you ask them. The character smiles sweetly, acquires a new catchphrase, and flips you off.

[doomhamster]

Writer D: “I only ever created you as a throwaway. Where did you get all this personality from? What is your great-grandmother doing here? Exactly WHY does everyone in the known galaxy groan whenever you say “trust me”? Put down those murder ducklings, I’m talking to you!”

[kawuli]

I am writer D.

[violent-darts]

E: “I have been dealing with shit from characters like from A, B and D for so long I know that A’s crap I can look at when I need it, how to pin B to the wall and D is where I fucking learned it all so I make him make his goddamn grandmother talk to me.”

[kittywiggles]

I feel personally attacked by this post

[coolsaddad-blog]

Roses are red, that much is true, but violets are purple, not fucking blue.

[feels-for-the-fictional]

I have been waiting for this post all my life.

[marzipanandminutiae]

They are indeed purple, But one thing you’ve missed: The concept of “purple” Didn’t always exist.

Some cultures lack names For a color, you see. Hence good old Homer And his “wine-dark sea.”

A usage so quaint, A phrasing so old, For verses of romance Is sheer fucking gold.

So roses are red. Violets once were called blue. I’m hugely pedantic But what else is new?

[ineptshieldmaid]

My friend you’re not wrong About Homer’s wine-ey sea! Colours are a matter Of cultural contingency;

Words are in flux And meanings they drift But the word purple You’ve given short shrift.

The concept of purple, My friends, is old And refers to a pigment once precious as gold.

By crushing up molluscs From the wine-dark sea You make a dye: Imperial decree

Meant that in Rome, to wear purpura was a privilege reserved

For only the emperor!

The word ‘purple’, for clothes so fancy, Entered English By the ninth century

.

Why then are voilets Not purple in song? The dye from this mollusc, known for so long

Is almost magenta; More red than blue. The concept of purple is old, and yet new.

The dye is red, So this might be true: Roses are purple And violets are blue

.

[squeeful]

While this song makes me merry, Tyrian purple dyes many a hue From magenta to berry And a true purple too.

But fun as it is to watch this poetic race The answer is staring you right in the face: Roses are red and violets are blue Because nothing fucking rhymes with purple.

[did-you-know]

Medieval castle stairs were often built to ascend in narrow, clockwise spirals so right-handed castle defenders could use their swords more easily. This design put those on the way up at a disadvantage (unless they were left-handed). The steps were also uneven to give defenders the advantage of anticipating each step’s size while attackers tripped over them. Source Source 2 Source 3

[severalowls]

Not really the best illustration since it totally negates the effect by having a wide open space for those ascending. Castle tower staircases tended to look like this:

Extremely tight quarters, with a central supporting pillar that is very, very thoroughly in the way of your right arm.

Wider, less steep designs tend to come later once castles moved away from being fortresses to simply noble family homes with the advent of gunpowder.

[mactiir]

Oh! Pre-gunpowder military tactics are my jam! I don’t know why, but this is one of my favorite little details about defensive fortifications, because the majority handedness of attackers isn’t usually something you think about when studying historical wars. But strategically-placed walls were used basically worldwide as a strategy to secure gates and passages against advancing attackers, because most of the world’s population is right-handed (and has been since the Stone Age).

Pre-Columbian towns near the Mississippi and on the East coast did this too. They usually surrounded their towns with palisades, and they would build the entrance to the palisade wall in a zigzag – always with the wall to the right as you entered, to hinder attackers and give an advantage to the defender. Here’s some gates with some examples of what I’m talking about:

Notice that, with the exception of the last four (which are instead designed to congregate the attackers in a space so they can be picked off by archers, either in bastions or on the walls themselves) and the screened gate (which, in addition to being baffled, also forces the attackers to defend their flank) all of these gates are designed with central architectural idea that it’s really hard to kill someone with a wall in your way. In every culture in the world, someone thought to themselves, “Hey it’s hard to swing a weapon with a wall on your right-hand side,” and then specifically built fortifications so that the attackers would always have the wall on their right. And I think that’s really neat.

[his-quietus-make]

Ooh, ooh, also: Bodiam Castle in Sussex used to have a right-angled bridge so any attacking forces would be exposed to archery fire from the north-west tower on their right side (ie: sword in the right hand, shield on the useless left side):

[petermorwood]

These tactics worked so well for so long because until quite recently lefties got short shrift and had it trained (if they were lucky) or beaten out of them.

Use of sword and shield is a classic demonstration of how right-handedness predominated. There’s historical mention of left-handed swordsmen (gladiators and Vikings), and what a problem they were for their opponents, but that only applies to single combat.

A left-handed hoplite or housecarl simply couldn’t fight as part of a phalanx or shield wall, since the shields were a mutual defence (the right side of the shield covered its owner’s left side, its left side covered the right side of his neighbour to the left, and so on down the line) and wearing one on the wrong arm threw the whole tactic out of whack.

Jousting, whether with or without an Italian-style tilt barrier, was run shield-side to shield-side with the lance at a slant (except for the Scharfrennen, a highly specialised style that’s AFAIK unique.) Consequently left-handed knights were physically unable to joust.

There’s a creditable theory (I first read it in “A Knight and His Horse”, © Ewart Oakeshott 1962, 1998 and many other places since) that a knight’s “destrier” horse - from dexter, “right” - was trained to lead with his right forefoot so that any instinctive swerve would be to the right, away from collision while letting the rider keep his shield between him and harm. (In flying, if a pilot hears “break!” with no other details, the default evasive direction is right.)

The construction of plate armour, whether specialised tournament kit or less elaborate battle gear, is noticeably “right-handed“ - so even if a wealthy knight had his built “left-handed” it would be a waste of time and money; he would still be a square peg in a world of round holes and none of the other kids would play with him.

Even after shields and full armour were no longer an essential part of military equipment, right-hand use was still enforced until quite recently, and to important people as well as ordinary ones - it happened to George VI, father of the present Queen of England. Most swords with complex hilts, such as swept-hilt rapiers and some styles of basket-hilt broadsword, are assymetrical and constructed for right handers. Here’s my schiavona…

It can be held left-handed, but using it with the proper thumb-ring grip, and getting maximum protection from the basket, is right-handed only. (More here.) Some historical examples of left-hand hilts do exist, but they’re rare, and fencing masters had the same “learn to use your right hand” bias as tourney organisers, teachers and almost everyone else. Right-handers were dextrous, but left-handers were sinister, etc., etc.

However, several predominantly left-handed families did turn their handedness into advantage, among them the Kerrs / Carrs, a notorious Reiver family along the England-Scotland Borders, by building their fortress staircases with a spiral the other way to the OP image.

This would seem to be a bad idea, since the attackers (coming upstairs) no longer have their right arms cramped against the centre pillar - however it worked in the Kerrs’ favour because they were used to this mirror-image of reality while nobody else was, and the defender retreating up the spiral had that pillar guarding his right side, while the attacker had to reach out around it…

For the most part Reiver swords weren’t elaborate swept-hilt rapiers but workmanlike basket-hilts. Some from Continental Europe have the handedness of my schiavona with thumb-rings and assymmetrical baskets, but the native “British Baskethilt” is a variant of the Highland claymore* and like it seems completely symmetrical, without even a thumb-ring, which gives equal protection to whichever hand is using it.

*I’m aware there are those who insist “claymore” refers only to two-handers, however the Gaelic term claidheamh-mòr - “big sword” - just refers to size, not to a specific type of sword in the way “schiavona” or “karabela” or even “katana” does.

While the two-hander was the biggest sword in common use it was the claidheamh-mòr; after it dropped out of fashion and the basket-hilt became the biggest sword in common use, that became the claidheamh-mòr.

When Highlanders in the 1745 Rebellion referred to their basket-hilts as claymores, they obviously gave no thought to the confusion they would create for later compilers of catalogues…

[chroniclesofrettek]

Also, muskets had their whole “Flint and steel and gunpowder” thing on the right side so if you tried firing it lefty you’d get a face full of fire. More recently, rifles eject their spent shell casings to the right, so if you’re a lefty you get some hot metal in your eye.

[writernotwaiting]

Ooooooohhhhhh this is so very cool and nerdy!

(Tags below: let me know if you want to be added to Tumblr’s nerdiest tag list.)

Keep reading

[kittywiggles]

This isn't limited to anything later than Rome, either. When we were studying Judges, our professor brought up the fact that, while some people in the c. 1000 BC range, in the Middle East, definitely thought lefties were demonically possessed, they were incorporated into warfare. When they weren't killed/forced into right handedness. We see one being used as a political assassin in the book! - Which was far from a good practice if we understand what Canaan was like then. Using a left handed person, I mean. Not assassination. Shady business practice and demons and all that.

[kittywiggles]

Getting some writing done and worldbuilding for next month while listening to the sounds of Noodle playing with a wrapped tampon she got a hold of, somehow

[transmortifried]

Two students, James and John were given a grammar test by their teacher. The question was, “is it better to use “had” or “had had” in this example sentence?”

The teacher collected the tests, and looked over their answers.

James, while John had had “had”, had had “had had.” “Had had” had had a better effect on the teacher.

[theanimejunkie]

welcome to the english language

[kittywiggles]

15k words and 38 pages. I didn’t want my first novel to be a fanfiction guys

[kittywiggles]

Getting practice in for NaNoWriMo next month and have, so far, accidentally’d a 10k word fanfic with another couple of chapters (at least) already planned. A fanfic about an MMO, comprised of one of my side characters, five I just made up, and set so far in the past of the MMO that I hesitate to call it a fanfic at all

[mariofartwii]

I will never get over the hate that surrounds Ohio.

[cultofthepigeon]

FUKING MOST BEAUTIFUL POST IVE EVER SEEN DEAR FUCKING CHRIST BLESS

[haaaaaaaaave-you-met-ted]

[wobbleinthehox]

[kittywiggles]

I am going to fight someone on principle alone

[she-who-fights-and-writes]

So, I don't know how to write pain like! What words do I use? how do I describe it! I really need some help here!

No problem! And sorry about not answering sooner, I was on vacation. To make it up to you, I’ve made one of my trademark Long Posts about it.

TIPS ON HOW TO WRITE PAIN (FOR BOTH ORIGINAL CONTENT WRITERS AND FANFICTION WRITERS)

When I first started writing, about eight years ago, I had the same issue as @imjustafuckinggirl.

How are you supposed to write about pain you’ve never experienced before???

The characters in my book suffer through all sorts of terrible shit, and in no way am I writing from experience, which is marginally easier to do than write about something that has never happened to you.

However, with time, I managed to gather up a few strategies on how to write pain.

1. Don’t Write Paragraphs About It

I know, it’s tempting. You want to convey to the reader just how much pain the character is in, and you think that the pain will be emphasized the more you write about it.

This, however, is a lie.

As a reader, when I’m reading a book or fanfiction where, whenever the writer uses agonizingly long paragraphs to describe when a character is hurt, I skip it.

Entirely.

It’s boring and, quite frankly, unnecessary, especially during a fight or huge battle, which are supposed to be fast-paced.

When it comes to writing about pain, it really is about quality and not quantity.

In my own writing, I stick to short, quick paragraphs, some of them which are barely a line long. This gives it a faster pace and sort of parallels with the scattered, spread out thoughts of the character as they suffer.

2. Describe it Right

Many times, usually in fanfiction, writers over-exaggerate certain injuries.

This partially has to do with the fact that they’ve never experienced that injury before and are just thinking about what it might feel like.

As a girl with two brothers and who often participated in rough play-fights, I can assure you that getting punched is not as painful as you think it is.

(However, it does depend on the area, as well as how hard the punch is, on top of the fact that you have to take into account whether or not the punch broke bones)

I’m reading a high school AU where a character gets punched by a bully (Idk where they got punched it wasn’t stated) and the author is describing it like they’d been shot.

It was to the point where I was like Did the bully have brass knuckles or something????

It was very clear that this author had never been punched before.

When describing the pain of an injury or the injury itself, you have to take into account:

- What object was used to harm the character

- Where the injury is

- How long the character has had the injury

- (For blades) How deep the cut is

- (For blunt force trauma) How hard the hit was

- Whether or not the wound triggers other things (Ex: Concussion, vomiting, dizziness, infection, internal/external bleeding).

There’s also the fact that when some authors described wounds caused by blades such as knives, daggers, and swords, they never take into account the anatomy of a person and which places cause the most blood flow.

Obviously, a cut on your cheek will have less of a blood flow than a cut on your wrist, depending on what the blade hits, and I hope that everyone consults a diagram of veins, capillaries, arteries, etc. when they’re describing blood flow from a certain place.

There’s also the fact that you have to take into account where the blood is coming from. Veins? Arteries?

The blood from arteries will be a brighter red, like vermilion, than the blood from veins, which is the dark crimson everyone likes to talk about.

Not all places gush bright red blood, people!

3. DIFFERENT INJURIES HAVE DIFFERENT KINDS OF PAIN

Here, let me explain.

A punch feels different from a slap.

A broken arm feels different from getting stabbed.

A fall feels different from a dog bite.

I’ll give you a list of all the kinds of things that can be described for the three most common kinds of injuries that happen in stories:

Punch/Blunt Force Trauma

How it feels:

- Aching

- Numbness (In the later stages)

- A single spike of pain before it fades into an ache

- Throbbing

Effects:

- Vomiting (If the character is punched in the gut)

- Swelling

- Bruising

- Broken bones

- Unconsciousness (Blow to the head)

- Dizziness (Blow to the head)

- Concussion (Also a blow to the head)

- Internal bleeding

- Death (In the case of concussions and internal bleeding and broken bones- ribs can pierce lungs)

Stab Wound/Cut

How it feels:

- Stinging (only shallow wounds have just stinging)

- Burning

- With stab wounds, I feel like describing the effects of it make it more powerfully felt by the reader

Effects:

- Bleeding (Consult chart of the circulatory system beforehand for the amount of blood flow that should be described and what color the blood should be)

- Dizziness (Heavy blood loss)

- Unconsciousness

- Infection (if left unattended)

- Death

Gunshot

How it feels:

- Depends on the caliber bullet, from how far away they were shot (point-blank range is nothing like being shot from a distance), and in what place. Do careful research and then make your decision.

Effects:

- Bleeding(Consult chart of the circulatory system beforehand for the amount of blood flow that should be described and what color the blood should be. Also take into effect the above variables for blood flow as well.)

- Dizziness (Heavy blood loss)

- Infection (if left unattended)

- Death

Some things that a character may do while they’re injured:

- Heavy/Harsh/Ragged breathing

- Panting

- Making noises of pain

gasping

grunting

hissing

groaning

whimpering

yelping (when the injury is inflicted)

screaming

shrieking

wailing

- Crying/ Weeping/Sobbing/Etc.

- Clenching their teeth

- Unable to speak

- Pressing their hands against a stab wound/cut to try and stem the bleeding

- Eyesight going out of whack (vision blurring and tilting, the room spinning, black spots consuming sight)

- Eyes rolling up into their head

- Trembling/shaking

- Ears riniging (from gunshot)

HOPE THIS HELPED!

[ultrafacts]

[the-affectionate-boy]

Sooo I found this, gave me a hearty chuckle, 

[wagnetic]

*startled wheeze*

[nightkunoichi-deactivated202111]

A friendly reminder not to put undiluted essential oils on your skin. My mint essential oil ate through this styrofoam cup in aroun 20-30 mins when i got pulled away before i diluted it. And it was only about 4-5 drops.

[polar-solstice]

Someone once bought me undiluted tea tree oil facial pads and told me to put undiluted tea tree oil on my face as an acne treatment, and I had to show her that it stripped the paint off metal with no scrubbing before she realized why that was a terrible idea. DILUTE. YOUR. OILS.

[meleinfeld]

College students can now get microsoft office for free

Just go here and sign up with your college email. You can install it on up to 5 PCs or Macs and on other mobile devices, including Windows tablets and iPads.

[rabbrakha]

GOD BLESS.

[hoodjab]

I PAYED UGH. REBLOGGING TO SAVE U GUYS SOME MORE GAS MONEY

[freshest-tittymilk]

OMG YAS

[froborr]

Pretty sure there are some college students following me that could use this.

[amatara]

I’m pretending all the time to be, kinder, stronger, funnier, more sociable than I am. I guess we’re all like that but it just feels so inadequate.

[animate-mush]

What’s the difference?

I know it sounds flippant but… certain things are fundamentally performative.  And other things are so close as makes no difference.

Kindness is performative.  Actions are kind, and people are kind by performing those actions.  You can’t “pretend” to be kinder than you are, you can only perform kindness or not perform kindness, and choosing to perform kindness is always worthwhile, no matter how much you may second-guess your motivations.

Strength is so many things.  It takes strength to pretend a strength you don’t feel.  And the way to achieve strength is to exercise it, so long as you do it in enough moderation to not strain or break anything.  Being able to affect strength when necessary while being able to put it down again when that in turn is necessary is healthy.  Everyone starts weight training with the littlest weights.  It’s not fake or pretending to do what you gotta do in any given situation.

Funniness lives in the interlocutor, not in the speaker.  It doesn’t matter how funny you think you are (or think you are pretending to be) - that’s not how it’s measured.  At what point are you “pretending” to be a musician if the music still gets made?  And often what it’s tempting to describe in first person as “pretending” is more accurately described in the third person as “practicing” - which is of course the way you cause things to Be.

Sociability is also performative.  Pretending to be sociable is just…being sociable, despite a disinclination towards it.  It’s making an effort towards something you value.  So long as the effort is not so great that it backfires into resentment, there’s no practical difference.  

Qualities or activities or whatever are no less worthy because you have to actively choose to perform them.  If anything, the worthiness lies in the act of choosing.  It’s not “pretending” - it’s agency.

tl;dr: ain’t nothing wrong with “fake it till you make it.”  A plastic spoon* holds just as much soup as a “real” one

* I keep wanting to talk about semantic domains!  Artifacts are defined by their utility, whereas living things are defined by their identity.  So plastic forks are still forks, but plastic flowers aren’t flowers.  So there’s two pep-talk messages to take away from this: (1) for certain things, the distinction between “fake” and “real” isn’t a relevant one so long as they still get the job done, and (2) the purpose of a living thing is to be the thing that it is.  The idea of a “useless person” is as semantically nonsensical as the idea of “pretend kindness” (or fake cutlery).

[pyrrhiccomedy]

I love this post. It illustrates what I think is maybe the key difference between a developing self-identity and a formed self-identity, which is, like…confidence? If you are BEING kind, consistently, if you are prioritizing that over your own comfort or fatigue or even, occasionally, your emotional inclination (because OH MY GOD FUCK THIS GUY, I HAVE HAD IT UP TO HERE–uuughhh, but no, I’m not gonna lash out at him, that won’t accomplish anything, and besides, he’s probably had a bad day, he’s under a lot of stress, I don’t have to be an asshole about this…), guess what? That makes you kind. That is literally what kindness is. Same for patience, same for strength, same for all of this stuff. You got it. You’re doing it. You’re not faking anything. Stop second-guessing yourself and cutting yourself down. Give yourself enough credit to look at your actions and confidently assert to yourself that you are no longer just making things up as you go. 

[chamomilegeode-deactivated20221]

don’t know if this is as ~deep~ as i think it is, but by all of gaston’s own personal standards of identity/values, the beast is a better man than he is: brawnier, bigger, fightier, & of course every last inch of him’s covered in hair

[curlicuecal]

ohmigod, it’s true though!  the beast was basically gaston, and the ticked off fairy turned him into the purest manifestation of his toxic ideals to make him learn to be less of an ass

…..now I really wanna see the version of the movie where instead of dying, the curse passes from the beast to gaston!

except gaston doesn’t have a swag ass castle to sulk in, so he’s out running around the countryside, hiding in forests and stuff, alternately terrorizing the populace and being hunted. it’s a turnabout of his “peerless hunter” backstory– he is now both the monster and the prey.

untillllll he, idk, meets some humble woodcutter(?) that takes him in when he’s wounded or offers him shelter in a storm? and etc, etc, LIFE LESSONS, toxic masculinity slowly vanquished.  (ooh, or maybe it should be like–a flower seller or herbalist or some feminine-coded profession he would have devalued to really set up a foil.)

also the gaston-beast needs antlers.  terrifying claw-hooked sprawling antlers.  antlers for all of his decorating.

[quousque]

BRUH

[scripturient-manipulator]

@a-magical-knight

[violent-darts]

That’s part of why Gaston hates the Beast and is determined to kill him the moment he learns he actually exists, tho. 

The Beast is more powerful than him on all of those levels plus the Beast got the girl. The Beast was literally the biggest possible threat to Gaston and Gaston’s masculinity that could exist, and the worst part was the qualities that Belle listed as positive were “kind and gentle”. These are the words that Gaston throws at the Beast when he thinks he (Gaston) is winning: “too kind and gentle to fight back?!” 

That whole bit is about proving that actually these two qualities TOTALLY EMASCULATE THE BEAST, making all the ways in which the Beast beats Gaston by his own game A Deception - okay he’s bigger and stronger and hairier but that’s all A FAKE this “Beast” is actually a total sissy-boy! 

Because for Gaston that’s what’s important. Because having been, in fact, bigger, stronger and hairier than Gaston and then winning Belle’s allegiance (because lbr: Gaston wouldn’t actually understand “affection” if it bit him, what he wants is Belle to be his smexy-times version of La Fou, an ardent vassal), the Beast has totally beat him and he cannot stand it. 

And he thinks he’s getting it, and then he finds out … nope. That fundamentally the Beast can not only beat him at his own game, he can do it OFFHANDEDLY, he can do it AFTER having decided to take a brutal beating for a few minutes first. After that he can flip a switch and toss Gaston around like a doll. 

That he then DOESN’T kill Gaston is actually the ultimate insult: it says to Gaston that the Beast doesn’t even consider him a threat. And yet at the same time, Gaston doesn’t dare DIRECTLY confront the Beast, and resorts to the (unmanly and cowardly) exigency of stabbing him in the back. 

And then dies screaming in terror as the castle collapses around him as a result of his own actions. 

Gaston’s arc is that of the toxic hypermasculine asshole being beaten at his own game and then engineering his own demise after Failing Horribly by his own standards. 

Meanwhile the Beast gets to be human again because he learned to be nice to baby birds, to apologize and ask nicely, to be considerate of someone else’s feelings and needs, to make himself vulnerable to failure and being seen to fail and to putting on his big-boy panties and LEARNING to do things from someone who was better at them, to put someone else’s needs before his own and to engage with his own emotions and honesty about his own emotions (rather than merely letting them all go Angry) in order to regulate them and connect with another human being. 

Which is actually pretty cool, when you think about it. 

[deepikapadukonesource]