will byers stan first human second
Game of Thrones Daily
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
cherry valley forever
Show & Tell
Kiana Khansmith
Cosimo Galluzzi
hello vonnie
Janaina Medeiros
Keni
tannertan36
wallacepolsom
KIROKAZE
JBB: An Artblog!
Love Begins
blake kathryn
titsay
Kaledo Art
RMH
trying on a metaphor
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Moldova
seen from North Macedonia
seen from Türkiye
seen from Netherlands
seen from Mexico
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Japan
seen from Malaysia
seen from Netherlands
seen from Ecuador
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@perpetual-bachelor
"What did you do to them?" "Nothing. They were the ones that went into my head uninvited, psychics really need to learn boundaries. I tried to keep the away from dangerous memories, but you know how they are with privacy." "What did they find?" "I don't know, I forgot it for a reason."
1929 "Dreaming" by Rolf Armstrong. From Pinterest.
Positivity: Plurals should be allowed dignity of risk.
[Plain text: Positivity: Plurals should be allowed dignity of risk.]
A post by Mod Reaper [Plain text: Mod Reaper]
17 May 2025 edit: reworded some sentences, added more warnings.
.
Warning: this post mentions drugs/medication, alcohol, religion, medical procedures, and kinks. Reader discretion is advised.
[Plain text: Warning: this post mentions drugs/medication, alcohol, religion, medical procedures, and kinks. Reader discretion is advised.]
.
Regardless of origins, disorders, diagnoses, or lack thereof, plurals should be allowed to do things in-system and/or out-system when all parties consent.
Yes, sourced headmates (fictive, factive, faitive, or otherwise) should be respected when they want to be more similar to their source person, character, building, concept, species, etc.. As long as they treat others (in-system or out-system) with respect, source-compliance doesn't make them "problematic". And source-compliance never, ever makes them lesser people, or "less developed" or "less alive" or whatever others may judge them as.
Yes, plurals should be allowed to make rules/schedules that ensure every person in their system fronts alone to maximize outerworld experiences, even if it makes them more dissociated from each other.
Yes, a plural collective's decision to name every person/alter/etc., give each of them a sideblog or even a website and practice different voices and handwritings, should be respected.
Yes, a plural collective should not be judged when they try to be as separate as possible, such as wanting to be treated as multiple people, having the differences in the paragraph above by training voices, accents, and handwritings, having different jobs, websites, religions, and wardrobes, or anything else.
They should also be allowed to have separate identities and experiences and names. Not every plural want to, or should be forced to, have collective genders, pronouns, name, religion, etc.
On the other hand, a plural collective should not be judged when they try to be as fused as possible. That includes wanting to be treated as one person, only using "I" pronouns, or other things.
And that also includes when a system wants to have a collective religion, name, pronouns, gender, etc. Even if they may seem like a singlet to an outside observer, they are not less plural.
Yes, plurals should be allowed to attempt fusion even if there is a risk of losing identities and memories they cherish.
Yes, headmates in a plural collective are allowed to have BDSM type relationships that involve the body in kink scenes. Yes, even if it may cause injuries.
Yes, they're also allowed to have intrasystem kinky relationships, even those deemed too violent/unethical in the outerworld.
Yes, system members are allowed to have fighting/sparring contests when all parties agree to it.
Yes, a system can allow a person who wants to enter X religion to undergo initiation with their shared body, even if they'd be the only one to front during said religious initiation, even if none of the other members will follow the same beliefs.
Yes, plurals should be respected when they decide to take HRT, surgery, or other body modification that may not be liked a few years in the future if/when the main fronter changes. Yes, even if it's nonhuman traits, or "strongly" gendered traits.
Yes, plurals should be allowed to use metaphysical solutions when the psychological ones failed. Even if it makes them seem "crazy", even if it brings internal strife between the atheists and the theists, even if it may risk metaphsical harm. Or physical harm, for that matter.
Yes, plurals should be allowed to take medications or drugs even if it has health risks.
Yes, plurals should be allowed to drink alcohol if they want to, even if it makes them blurry or dissociated.
Yes, plurals should be respected when they choose to go to a psychologist/psychiatrist for any and all issues, including their plurality, including seeking a diagnosis.
And yes, on the other hand, they should be allowed to never seek any professional help and to not desire a diagnosis. Medical/psychiatric abuse is rampant and it's understandable to avoid the risks, especially when they've gone through that before.
All these apply even if they have a dissociative disorder. Being disordered doesn't mean they cannot make decisions for themselves.
And all these also apply even if they do not have a dissociative disorder. Being non-disordered doesn't mean they have to try to make themselves more conforming to medical standards.
And yes, people are allowed to become more plural than they used to be. People should not be judged when they invite spirits into their body, create headmates, talk to deities, get married to one, or soulbond people, make a daemon, or any other form or voluntary plurality. Even if their system is already more than 100+ people. Even if they're polyfragmented.
Being more separate does not always equal a sadder life, or a worthless one.
Being more fused does not always mean you're healed, or happier.
Sometimes, the "weird", risky things are what they desire.
Sometimes, that is what is the best for them.
Sometimes, what looks to others as "making themselves more crazy" is making them live happier and healthier.
Sometimes, it may have huge risks, but that's the only thing they can do, because the efficacy of certain experiences can only be found out via trial and error.
Sometimes, that is the best way they can cope with life. Everyone copes differently, and no one can dictate what's the best coping mechanism for other people.
But even if they're not "healthy" or trying to "recover" in the way that Western psychiatry - or you personally - see as "acceptable", they should still be respected.
Plurals inherently have the right to agency.
Plurals don't deserve to have their agency taken away.
The consent of headmates, alters, parts, system members, people, etc. in plural collectives matter. Even if they're not "useful". Even if each of them has different opinions from each other.
Everyone has value, even if they're not doing the most rational, healthy, and reasonable thing. Plurals very much included. Yes, even if they're disabled.
And even if anyone regrets their decisions - they should also be respected, and not judged for their past. Regrets are events that they deserve support for. The prospect of regrets shouldn't be an excuse for singlets and/or plurals to stop other plurals from expressing themselves and doing what they need/want/enjoy.
Thank you for reading, and take care. 💜
Mod Reaper [Plain text: Mod Reaper]
so fucking humbling to be like “no I like that character a normal amount” and then you can literally feel your heart rate spike at a mention of them like a dog that just heard the word “treat”
I believe in the healing power of raunchy smut.
No, really. Fundamentally, I don't buy this idea that "lust" is a uniquely degrading emotion for fiction to arouse. It's as much a part of the human condition as sadness, joy, anger, or anything, and art centering lust is not inherently better or worse than the rest.
ever since I was a young lad I knew I wanted to be a middle-aged man with an undone tie around his neck who’s having a crisis so he goes to the bathroom to splash water on his face only to look up at himself in the mirror and wonder at the stranger looking back
happy disability pride month to anyone who has a disability from a condition that “usually isn’t a disability”. happy disability pride month to people with disabilities that aren’t often understood by able-bodied people. happy disability pride month to people who don’t have any official diagnosis yet. happy disability to people whose “labs look completely fine”. wishing you peace this july.
"It’s all forgettable with just a single drink, and yet I always hesitate…”
Subira, my love
Contemporary art haters will be like "i don't get it" and then not read the title or artist statement or the medium or the year or
How to "get it":
Ask yourself, how does this piece make you feel? (No wrong answers)
Look for an artist statement nearby. What does it say about the artist and their relationship to their work? What does the artist say that they are trying to convey with their art? What contextual clues can you pick up from what they say about their background, or what they omit?
Look at the title of the piece. What is the artist saying about their work by naming it that, either explicitly or implicitly?
Look at the medium. Is there anything about the piece that stands out to you, knowing what it's made of?
Look at the year it was made. What cultural events might have been happening around this time? Was this piece part of a particular art movement? What was the purpose of that art movement, and what was it trying to say?
Accept that sometimes, you still might not get it. This is perfectly okay.
A Love for Ignorance
i get that americans love their cultural imperialism, but it really does piss me off that june is “international” pride month just because something happened in the united states.
in aotearoa, june isn’t our pride, it’s theirs. marsha p johnson and sylvia rivera are their historical figures, not ours. the phrase that “you owe your rights to Black trans women” is true there, but here we owe our rights to (mostly) Māori historical figures. i have the freedoms i do because of the legacy of an entirely different set of people operating in an entirely different context at entirely different times.
But because of american cultural imperialism, most queer people in Aotearoa don’t even know our own queer history. Carmen Rupe, Ngahuia Te Awekotuku, the Dorian Society, Gillian Laundon, Georgina Beyer, and the Wolfenden Association are some of our queer history. We should know their names! we should know what they did for us! but because of the power of the american imperial machine, we don’t.
our national pride month should be july, the month that the Homosexual Law Reform Act passed in 1986. our two largest cities hold their pride festivals in february and march, respectively. american queer history has very little (or nothing, depending on who you ask) to do with our queer history. anecdotally, from my own queries, queer youth in aotearoa know more about american queer history than our own.
anyway, happy pride, americans. i’m truly sorry that most of you don’t see the negative impact your nation’s culture has on the rest of the world. and to the rest of the world reading this, try searching for your own country and culture’s queer history, don’t accept the american narratives as your own. we deserve our own histories divorced from the cultural hegemony of the USA.
you're "subbing" to watch a girl "stream" and "twitch"? ive heard enough
