
blake kathryn

No title available

PR's Tumblrdome
noise dept.
đȘŒ
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"

romaâ

Janaina Medeiros
taylor price

Product Placement
Cosmic Funnies
AnasAbdin
Game of Thrones Daily
Cosimo Galluzzi
KIROKAZE
dirt enthusiast
Three Goblin Art
h

⣠Chile in a Photography âŁ

Love Begins
seen from Germany

seen from India
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands

seen from Indonesia
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Japan
seen from TĂŒrkiye

seen from North Macedonia

seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from North Macedonia
seen from India
seen from North Macedonia
seen from North Macedonia
seen from North Macedonia
seen from North Macedonia
seen from North Macedonia
@morganthefae
happy june to everyone, especially my fellow aroaces
this pride month weâre all going to be radically pro transgender. or else.
hey so this means radically pro ALL transgender. donât put limitations on this. all trans people are radically accepted here.
sometimes instead of a horrid little monk, divine visions of lesbians dance in my head dispensing wisdom
Knights who's every answer is basically:
"I'm yours to wield"
"I'm yours to command"
"I'm yours to serve"
"I'm yours to have"
"I'm yours to take"
"I'm yours to enjoy"
"I'm yours to know"
"I'm yours to be"
"I'm yours"
"I'm yours"
"I'm yours"
@sarahreesbrennan
it is june first. Everybody commit the sin of pride RIGHT NOW âŒïžâŒïž
worlds slowest fanfic author tries really really hard
everyone in the notes we are all holding hands. everyone who hasnt worked on a wip in weeks or months or years, its okay. we are going slow but we are going
Louisa May Alcott, from Little Women
they want you to care more about 'job' than yuri... don't fall for this scam
they want you to care
more about âjobâ than yuriâŠ
donât fall for this scam
Beep boop! I look for accidental haiku posts. Sometimes I mess up.
Reblog if you write fan fiction
Doesnât matter if you write in a frequent basis, or once in a blue moon, just how many of us are there?
worst person you know makes a good point etc
I wish age gap discourse hadn't spiraled the way it has because I want there to be a safe space to say "Men in their 40s who date 25 year olds aren't predators, they're just fucking losers"
... honey you just described a predator LOL
No, I said what I said. But thank you for providing an example of how this topic has become insufferable on the internet.
i am honestly burningly curious about how a 40 year old man who fucks around with college grads is not a predator
"College grad" is not a developmental stage, nor is it what I would describe a 25 year old as. I was 4 years out of college at 25. My mother had two children at 25. You can be a fucking congressman at 25.
There's a difference between a man who is immature and buys into misogynistic views of beauty and aging and one who is a predator. Also, many actual predators? Not losers and able to move through society pretty freely being seen as cool and the ideal, so conflating the two isn't helpful.
This is going to be my final response to any attempt at discourse. You're welcome to continue amongst yourselves.
also sometimes a 40 year old and a 25 year old just weirdly find each and it's a perfectly normal relationship - like all human relationships are complex and situational, it's so rarely an either/or thing let alone just one thing only
if a 40 year old dude only dates 25 year olds, DiCaprio style or something adjacent to it, then yeah he's a loser
if a 40 year old dude meets a 25 year old through social event or friends or whatever and they happen to hit it off and make a go of it, and this isn't some sort of reoccurring pattern for the guy, that's just a relationship with an age difference
being predatory means something specific, and man I agree w/ OP and really wish people just stopped ascribing it to any and all relationship dynamics they personally might not like
predator and groomer - two words that need to go up on the "can't use till you learn their meaning" shelf
Something I find really stressful is this seemingly endless creep of infantilisation and removal of autonomy from young people. Like, not to be all âin my dayyyyâ about it, but⊠at 16, my friends and I were expected to be broadly responsible for our presence in the world. Most of us had jobs, we navigated public transport, looked after younger siblings. We were expected to make informed decisions about our future careers and our sexual partners. We were allowed to leave education and work full time (this was not necessarily good thing - I think increasing the school leaving age to 18 was broadly for the best). Most of us were smoking, or drinking, or both - again, not good things, but just facts - and many of us were sexually active. Many of the AFAB people I knew were on the pill. Legally, we could live independently, or get married with adult consent.
Legally (I live in the UK) we were not minors, although we inhabited an odd legal limbo until we turned 18, and we were certainly not âchildrenâ. Intellectually, socially, though, we were considered (young) adults, or at the most âolder teenagers.â We were expected to read mostly adult books (rather than middle grade or YA), watch the news/read papers, watch mostly adult television.
And I do think we a bit under-protected, under-supported, and in some cases - neglected and financially exploited - and Iâm not necessarily advocating that. But it did make us feel, I think, in charge of our own lives, capable and competent to make decisions.
At 16-17 my parents knew they could leave me alone overnight/for a couple of nights, and I wouldnât starve or burn the house down. I felt comfortable getting cross country trains on my own, or booking and staying at a hotel (yes, with my boyfriend.)
Then there was this⊠creeping of sentiments that we were all Too Young to trouble our heads about certain things. A lot of it was good - more stringent licensing laws, raising the school leaving age, raising the minimum smoking age(!) - but some of the broader cultural stuff was⊠a bit patronising? Eg, the introduction of âNew Adultâ as a category of books aimed at 18-25 year olds, the way cartoons and books written for the 9-12 age group were being marketed as for the 12-15 age group, referring to late teens as âchildren,â etc etc.
Then, in 2008, there was the big financial crash and suddenly my generation were (broadly) robbed of all the usual markers of adulthood and success, meaning that we got âstuckâ in the lifestyles and modes our late teens/early 20s. And suddenly, all the emphasis shifted from social and legal protections for late teens/ younger adults, to legal restrictions on their freedoms/rights, and strange philosophical protections on the emotional states.
So, OF COURSE a 23 year old canât buy a beer without carrying an ID card, and a 17 year old canât have a crush on a 16 year old, but also, because youâre *children* you donât need to live like adults. So the UK government got to save money by saying â18 isnât a proper adult,â then â20 isnât a proper adult,â and â25 isnât a proper adultâ because it meant they could refuse to give single occupancy housing benefit rates to people of those ages (I think theyâve raised it over 30 now.) Or by refusing to clamp down on exploitative temporary/zero hours contracts - because theyâre just âtemp jobs for young people!â, or by raising the retirement age because â60 is far too young to retire. Youâre not a real adult until 35.â
And it means the discursive environment is such that you can claim that a 21 year old trans person is too young to make their own medical decisions, or a 15 year old is too young to consent to the contraceptive pill.
Meanwhile, they are not offering additional *protections* to these newly infantilised adults. 18 year olds are still encouraged to saddle themselves with enormous educational debt, or allowed to have credit cards, or expected to pay rent, or no longer receive child benefits. You still have to *work*. In fact, in the States, theyâre looking to removed child employment restrictions - but thatâs fine, because 20 year olds are being protected from making their own medical decisions, and adults get to say which books their teen kids are reading in school, and kids arenât allowed to change their name or what they wear without parental consent.
We can see what these people are doing to the rights of children - so why are we being so complacent in expanding the definition of âchildâ?
Regardless - 25 is VERY CLEARLY an adult. At 25 I was married, had two kids, an overdraft, rent to pay, and experience of living in the world for 6 years. I had more in common with someone of 40 than I did with someone of 15. Hell, at*20* I had more in common with someone of 40 than someone of 15. Any sexual or relationship decisions you make at 25 are your own to make.
Of course there are likely to be power imbalances in a 15 year age gap - which is why most 25 year olds donât date 40somethings - but not actually necessarily. And yeah, a 40 year old who only dates 20somethings is a skeeze - just like a 30 year old who routinely ingratiates themselves with rich 80 year olds is a skeeze.
But if any young people are reading this (doubt it)⊠your rights are much, much more important than your protections.
Yes, young people should be protected, but if someone claims theyâre protecting you while denying you access to personal autonomy, financial stability, intellectual curiosity, or sexual self-determination because youâre âtoo youngâ to need, or understand those things⊠be very suspicious of their motives.
And if youâre legally an adult, ask yourself why you donât feel comfortable defining yourself in those terms.
This thread is from 2023, and now with the Cass report we have seen the real, tangible danger that comes from infantilizing adults in their 20s.
the long reply above mentiones this, but I want to emphasize this: many western societies have lost their "rituals of maturity". Young adults don't get to buy a house, starting a family is a lot of stress if all adults in the household have to work fulltime, and it's almost impossible to find a job above minimum wage that offers career options. All of which are things which previous generations enjoyed more broadly, and which were seen as steps into adulthood.
Only a few decades ago, 90% of the people in the region where I live owned their own houses. Granted, they were often shitty ones, but they were their own. Today, not even 50% own the place they live in.
We've removed the milestones of adulthood, it's no wonder we increasingly infantilize adults. And the worst is, this does nothing to prevent real predators from preying on under-protected people! With the removal of the milestones of adulthood, we also removed a lot of the safety net previous generations could rely on.
All of these additions are absolutely spot on, but there's one more thing I want to add, and that is to point out how the "a 40yo dating a 25yo is inherently predatory" type of age gap discourse increasingly treats predation, not as a conscious, specific behaviour, but as an ambient effect of being in proximity to someone younger. Because if, as it's so frequently argued, it's impossible for people of different ages to have anything meaningful in common, such that there's no legitimate grounds even for friendship between (say) a 25yo and a 40yo, let alone something romantic or sexual, then what's being implied is that either that everyone is at all times only a single interaction away from natively turning predator, or that predation is somehow natural, automatic, reflexive - neither of which is true. But believing that it is is incredibly fucking dangerous. Because if there's no good or safe or reasonable way for someone older to interact with someone younger outside of a strict workplace or familial relationship (and sometimes not even then), then what we're doing is saying that it's inherently unsafe or wrong for younger people to learn from older people, or for older people to mentor them, or for (say) twentysomethings and fiftysomethings to exist in the same spaces as equal adults. We're saying that an eighteen-year-old should feel bad and weird about hanging out with a two-years-younger friend they've known since infancy because it's inappropriate for minors and legal adults to be friends. (I truly wish this was a hypothetical example, but no, it's not: I have legitimately seen multiple accounts of teenagers getting stressed out about exactly this type of thing because of this discourse.) And by acting as if the age gap power imbalance can only ever go one way, we're also completely ignoring the reality of things like elder abuse or older people being scammed or exploited by younger people.
But beyond all this, if you assume all older people are inherently dangerous to younger people, you're leaving yourself horrifically vulnerable, not only because you're not putting any effort into learning what actual predatory behaviour looks like, but because age gaps are not the only fucking vector for predation or abuse. If you can't distinguish between a safe adult/older person and a suspicious adult/older person or between trustworthy behaviour and manipulative behaviour because you've trained yourself to screen categories rather than actions, not only will you miss out on many cool friendships, but you'll be vulnerable to exploitation if and when someone, be they older or not, eventually sneaks past your guard, because you won't know to recognise what they're doing. Yes, there are absolutely times when an age gap is, in and of itself, a massive red flag, but if you can't distinguish between "45yo man marrying 18yo girl he's known since she was 12 the very moment she's legal" and, say, "35yo divorcee marrying 50yo widower she met at an art show," or "19yo dating a 17yo from the next school over after meeting at a mutual friend's party," or even "22yo has an extremely fun consensual one night stand with the 38yo they met at the bar," then you're going to be very poorly placed to recognise any abusive dynamics that don't perfectly align with the optics you've internalised as being indistinguishable from abuse, because the optics and the abuse are two different things. The one might indicate the presence of the other, but it doesn't guarantee it, and you can certainly have the abuse without the optics. And particularly in the context of conservatives increasingly insisting that just existing as a queer or trans person around children is an inherently predatory act, it makes me feel absolutely insane, how quickly so many people have conceded to the exact same type of logic (that an older person just existing around a younger person for non-familial, non-work reasons is inherently suspicious), argued for the exact same reasons (think of the children!) without stopping to question it at all.
Also, for the 25-40 age Gap specifically, it is VERY plausible for both of them to have their first/only child be three years old at that time, without being an absurdly young or absurdly old parent, and to get close to the only other Single among their kid's classmates' parents.
To jump back several reblogs, one thing I find interesting is how class ties in to who gets to be a 25 year old child. A "college grad" at 25 is not being considered mature yet, but from experience a 25 year old who has to go straight into the workforce is usually just an adult.
Rapists, and killers, too? Really? (Those on death-row?) The drug/prostitution problems are just a portion of USA criminals.
yes, all criminals. the moment you say âexcept X criminalâ is the moment that people will try to convict their opponents as having committed X crime.
itâs the same thing as whatâs going on right now with people equating drag to some sort of child exploitation. âbut the children!!â they wail, and people listen because oh, if drag is harming children, then drag MUST be BAD, so we HAVE TO BAN DRAG.
do you understand what iâm saying? you canât take away the rights of any category of criminal, because suddenly that category will be overflowing with people who totally 100% definitely committed that horrible crime.
Just to look at this from one step further back, let's accept the premise. Let's imagine that there is a type of crime that is 1) horrible evil irredeemable universally-agreed-upon bad, and 2) could somehow be prosecuted with 100% accuracy and 0% bias. Yes, even then, those criminals deserve a right to vote.
Do you they're going to like vote themselves out of jail? Vote to make murder legal? What exactly are you afraid of.
Realistically they'll just... vote just like anyone else. They'll help elect city councilmembers they think will better their hometowns, and presidents they think will best serve the country. They might even vote in their own interests! To reform prisons, fund rehabilitation programs, and outlaw predatory practices by telecoms. Are you saying you don't want any of those things?
And even if there were one of those super-duper-unambiguously-evil totally misanthropic death-row convicts, who's scheduled to be execute the very next day and just wants to sow chaos and watch the outside world burn however they can... what's the worst they could do, vote republican?
Taking people's rights away isn't bad because it might happen to someone you like, it's because taking people's rights away is bad.
do people think that convicted serial killers are going to vote to legalize serial killing
Itâs intellectually dishonest to assume that every person whoâs currently incarcerated has committed the worst of the worst crime. At least in the US a part of our high incarceration rate is just the amount of people who are waiting to go to trial. Most people donât even get a trial, they take a plea deal because theyâve been waiting to go to trial so long. People whoâve been incarcerated for years and havenât even been convicted of a crime cannot vote. There are people in there who have DUIs, simple drug offenses, and otherwise quite petty crimes that shouldnât strip them of their rights. Especially because in the United States, think about who loses their rights to vote as soon as they become incarcerated. They specifically target groups of people to silence their voices. ïżŒ
i read my first discworld novel around 25 years ago. i was 10 or 11 maybe. and when i say that discworld raised me.
it snuck in through the cracks and seeded better philosophies into a young mind that was being brought up in a cult, and as i grew, those things took root in me, crumbled the cult rhetoric like so much shitty concrete and let something a bit more alive have a chance to blossom.
discworld met me where i was at--in my youthful impotent rage, in my cleverness, in my fears.
discworld said that monsters were real but i was allowed to carry a frying pan and some string. discworld said it was okay to care an irrational amount about pedantic things but it wasn't okay to be an elitist asshole about it because everyone else is people, too, and if you're so clever maybe you have a duty to use it rather than a right to lord it over everyone. discworld made me think about my thoughts.
discworld gave me socks to shove down my pants when i was 14 and didn't know how to have words for not being a girl and it laid out a framework for understanding my autism almost 20 years before i knew what it was. it told me i was allowed to have agency and if i didn't then i was allowed to take it from whoever was trying to keep it from me.
discworld said there are words for that feeling of always watching myself, that it doesn't make me evil for needing to be my own built-in leash. and that it's okay to think the world is full of idiots and bastards as long as i understand at the end of the day they're just as human as everyone else and that has to matter or everything breaks down.
discworld, in particular, drove home just what that humanity meant. what it meant to be part of it, when i had grown up too isolated to understand in any organic way.
discworld was there for me as a kid and it was there for me as an adult revisiting my favourites with eyes ever made fresh by adult worry and grief and exhaustion and hope, understanding me every step of the way. it reminded me again and again through the difficult years that i had to care because caring is all we've got and if we don't care, what's the point?
and it did all of that while making me laugh so hard i couldn't breathe. helped me consistently value joy and humour against a painful world, even at my lowest.
i wouldn't be this me without discworld; i would be some much worse version of me, and that would really suck.
i don't have anything terribly poetic or moving to say today. i'm just full of gratitude and gladness and melancholy and assorted other soft feelings.
it's the 25th of may. i've been wearing lilac in my hair since before i was even old enough to know why.
i guess all that's left to do is track down a hard-boiled egg.
Comfortable hole, bye