Amateur Himejoshi

cheddar and beef sandwich, including tomatoes (with horseradish and A1 sauce) | 18

[corrucyst]

dude, this is really scary, and liminal as well. It's like the bathrooms

[saveyourhelplessspite]

okay so we all understand that sexual attraction doesn't always lead to sex. are we ready to consider that romantic attraction doesn't always lead to romance.

[saveyourhelplessspite]

and i dont mean this in a "its for your own good we dont date" way, or a "they got turned down and are still friends" way, i mean it in a "there is romantic attraction present but the one experiencing it doesnt want to do anything with it" way. am i making sense. are you hearing the words im saying. it wont fucking kill you if you dont act on it. like obviously you should probably communicate it someday but you dont have to let it dictate you or consume you. its just a feeling.

[papercranesandpride]

I've had multiple hook up partners who were clearly very into my personality and stuff in a more than just sexual way, but knew I was aromantic so they'd just bend over backwards to say that they were so into me platonically, only platonically, they thought I was sooooo cool but only in a friend way. And it just was obviously not true. And I had to be like "hey. You are allowed to be romantically attracted to me, you know? That's a feeling. You don't control your feelings. Me being aromantic doesn't mean you're supposed to somehow stop having certain feelings? That isn't how it works? And you're not a dick for having feelings? You're only a dick if you expect them to be reciprocated or for them to turn into an actual romantic relationship when I made it clear that wouldn't happen from the start."

Like. It really troubles me that people apparently think they aren't supposed to have feelings for aromantic people because that implies they can't actually wrap their head around having romantic feelings and then not doing anything about it. And that's like. Really really troubling from a consent perspective.

Like. Alloromantics really don't seem to have the concept of "feeling romantic attraction and just not doing anything about it and seeing it as morally neutral because it's just a feeling" and I think that's a huge problem.

[lenarasys]

I'm just gonna add - without elaborating much - that this same idea is a huge thing in sexual attraction as well.

If you're into rape kink, you MUST want to act on it, so you MUST be a risk to other people you interact with in your day to day life.

If you're into being in a dominant position you must be abusive.

If you're into certain fantasy monsters you can't be left alone near pets.

But even just on a more common scale. A man sexually attracted to women must have to act on that and is thus a risk to women - instead of being capable of learning to accept a no, like any other living being. And so on.

[butch-king-frankenstein]

Putting the term "male gaze" on top of the fridge until everyone remembers that it refers to a cinematographic trend and not the act of looking at things while being a man

[assaultmystic-archive]

reaching up to get it off of the fridge and the big tshirt im wearing as pyjamas rides up and the reader sees my panties

[miss-vickyslutwiggle]

as i was also saying right when i got a term email

[contemptible-scoundrel]

my cursed sword doesn't even tell me to kill people anymore it keeps begging me to put on a skirt and tights

[anarchopuppy]

This is something we as radicals don’t talk about much but which has come up a lot in my experience:

You deserve mutual aid. You’re not too privileged for it, you’re not stealing it from people who need it more - you have a right to use community resources just as much as anyone else

I’ve seen food rot, clothes and books be forgotten in storage, because the people volunteering at or supporting these projects don’t think the resources are for them. Then those same volunteers will go out and put money they don’t have into the capitalist system to buy the resources they could’ve gotten for free

You’re thinking like a charity. You’re drawing a line between the people giving resources and the people taking them, which inevitably leads to a feeling of separation and eventually superiority, unconsciously seeing yourself as a savior coming in and helping the less fortunate. That alienates the people you’re helping from you, and results in neither side fully recognizing the other as human and the same as them

There’s a reason we say “solidarity not charity”. There’s a reason mutual aid is called mutual. Because by lifting each other up, we all become stronger. In solidarity and mutual aid, there is no separation between giver and receiver, because everyone involved is benefited by it

But that doesn’t happen if the resources aren’t used! Get out of the capitalist scarcity mindset - give freely and take freely, because by being lifted up you help us all

[eatingmuffinsinanagitatedmanner]

This is important! When I first started doing the food distributions, I’d feel really weird about taking a leftover box of produce or an extra meal home. Then my volunteers started feeling weird about taking theirs and very quickly we developed a culture of “who really deserves/needs this food”? I realized what was happening and started taking a little bit home myself, and then everyone got much more comfortable with me and people who were originally just standing in the line to get food began volunteering and doing other things to help out.

[afro-evolutionary-astrology]

This one thing that like clicked for me since doing mutual aid is that capitalism’s overproduction is so deep. The Food Bank in my city, in order to maintain its grants at certain financial volume, ends up giving families soo much food it’s like they handed out boxes that came direct from Costco.

10 cans of peaches, 2 5lb cans of crushed tomatoes, 6 loaves of bread, a whole box of tuna packets, 8 mangoes, 6 1lb bags of rice, 10lbs of frozen chicken tenders or fajita meat. And it’s like wtf? They gave this to a family of 4??? They can’t even fit some if that in their fridges/freezers half the time so it gets donated to us.

I had my neighbors stop me before last distro to hand me all those items, plus other things. This one of many small examples, that pounded in my skull, that if I want/need it, I’m taking it.

One of my partners hit me with some wisdom a few months back, “Are you trying to build a community that you dont get to be a part of?” And that shit just echoes in my brain these days.

[tgirl-tamag0tchi]

Was sent this post today… I needed that. I always love helping others… but I always feel bad accepting help myself…

But yeah… it’s okay to be a part of a community… to rely on others as I’d have them rely on me.

[anxiousmimicrpgs]

Bluesky liked this so y’all get it too

[tgirl-tamag0tchi]

Knights are just low tech mech pilots.

- Armored carapace

- Melee weapons and sometimes guns

- Heavy cavalry

- Often trained since childhood

- Swear fealty to a Hander (Monarch)

- Lesbians

[superectojazzmage]

By far the funniest thing about Armored Core 6 is that one of it's biggest impacts culturally is somehow creating a whole genre of pornography based around toxic relationships between mech pilots and their handlers.

[meli-writes]

got fucking nuclear @'d by this image on discord so im blasting all of you too now

[court-of-silver-skies]

[muzzlesbian]

[anxiousmimicrpgs]

One thing I've been doing for Girl Frame (my mechspoitation/lesbian mech pilot ttrpg) is basically trying to make rules for the characters that get in their way more than they help them

I've been reading Jay Dragon's Expressionist Manifesto, which talks about tension between what the player might want to do and the rules of the game. Rules not so much as an aid but as a restriction that has to be fought against or worked around to achieve your player goals

That led me to the special play for the Mockingbird Girl Playbook:

[secretlyfem]

Carrot and stick?

Wrong. Vibrator and shock collar.

[taraxippos]

From what I can tell this is the standard level of sexual dimorphism for booktok romance couples

[taraxippos]

Most interesting thing about this post is people tagging it as like ‘straight people version of yaoi size dynamics’ like. Let’s all stop and think for a second where the “penetrative sexual partner is large, dominant, and masculine; the penetrated sexual partner is small, submissive, and feminine” thing (and the presumption of these roles being a necessity and immutable) might also come from.

[taraxippos]

And now it's "more tall bottoms!" "let the tiny girl PEG the man" let us instead continue this thought exercise and examine why we presume that a sexual relationship must be defined around a penetrator/penetrated dynamic, or that there must by necessity be "A top" or "A bottom" and that these roles cannot be fluid, or that penetrative sex is a necessity in a relationship to begin with, or that penetration is an act of dominance and humiliation and by extension it's a Subversive Feminist Win for the Bigger and/or Masculine party to receive, or that these misogynistic-homophobic ideals can be meaningfully addressed by simply Reversing the dynamic. My final message........goodbye..........

[puppyriots]

Listen I hate monarchies as much as everyone else BUT a story where a maid falls in love with both the prince and the princess and they're both obsessed with her just has something abt it you know?

[vithcy]

How it feels to post about your ocs even though only 2 people care about them