To be seen is not to be loved. But to be loved is to be seen and understood completely.
seen from China

seen from Australia

seen from United States

seen from Argentina
seen from Türkiye
seen from Norway
seen from Pakistan
seen from United States
seen from China

seen from India
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from China

seen from Australia
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Netherlands
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Australia
To be seen is not to be loved. But to be loved is to be seen and understood completely.
ʾʿ ⬞ ∿ underwritten sensitive places , for 𝔰𝔪𝔲𝔱
ᴏᴏꜰ .bb𝑙𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑠 -prmpts ﹅﹒
ִ 𓏼 ears ; everyone enjoys being talked through it. but listening and aural reception aren't the only thing ears are good for. earlobes have hundreds of of sensory receptors on the outside. so if your character is looking to pleasure another, write them kissing, licking or nibbling an ear.
ִ 𓏼 inner wrists ; the inner wrist is highly sensitive due to a high amount of nerve endings and the position of major nerves. caressing the skin there can be great for foreplay. for sexual tension, have your character kiss their partner's inner wrist while holding eye contact.
ִ 𓏼 behind knees ; the curve behind the knees is an often neglected area despite the area being very sensitive to any kind of touch, from kissing to kneading to especially biting. many are even ticklish there. this small detail can work well with all kinds of positions, certainly when the character's face is near the other's legs or knees.
ִ 𓏼 scalp ; seriously, who doesn't love a good head massage. everyone knows the feeling when your eyes roll back and your ears start blocking out other noise, it's heaven. and severely underrated in the bedroom. pulling har is the surface. have your character grasp, press, rub their partners head and add to the pleasure.
ִ 𓏼 lower stomach ; the mound between you belly button and public area is surprisingly arousing when triggered. for people of all genders. for females this can stimulate the g spot and nerves from the outside whereas for males this can stimulate blood flow to other pleasure zones nearby. write your character using their mouth here or even pressing down here during sex. for more pleasure, a warm or cold cloth pressed over the area is most definitely an option.
ִ 𓏼 armpits ; if you can get past the taboo, armpits are highly sensitive. you can tell because they are so ticklish. in the same way, intimacy and physical stimulation of the underarms and side of the chest changes the game. if you're tired of vanilla, make your character dedicate some time towards this area. pecks, biting, sucking and licking work well here. like imagine a vampire sinking its teeth into your underarm ... fuck.
ִ 𓏼 achilles tendon ; if you’re looking for erogenous zones that take you away from, naturally, breasts and genitalia and maybe downwards, then a spot worth exploring is this tendon. this stretch of tissue can lead to more heat and intimacy if it's gently toyed with. if your character is on their knees, maybe taking heels off, have them kiss the achilles. that's desperation.
© bbseraph ﹝ send in your requests for writing tips, inspo, prompts and whatever else you need. writer 2 writer. ﹞
Types of Speech Presentation
Direct Speech (DS): He said, "Like it here in London!"
Indirect Speech (IS): He said that he liked it there in London!
Free Direct Speech (FDS): I like it here in London!
Free Indirect Speech (FIS): He liked it there in London!
Narrative Report of a Speech Act (NRSA): He expressed his pleasure at being in London.
Narrative Report of an Act (NRA): He liked London.
What to do with that information:
Practice using all of the above in your writing and consider how you can use the different types for achieve different effects.
Switch up your style of dialogue every once in a while to avoid repetition and tighten the writing by skipping unnecessary dialogue. For example, rather than writing out an irritating but not plot relevant conversation, you can simply give context for the characters bad mood with, "After surviving one of the most frustrating conversations I'd had all year, I could finally..."
Depending on which one of these styles you choose, the narrator or the character gets more control over the narrative; DS is much harder to twist than NRA ➛ For unreliable narrators, NRSA and NRA are perfect ways to mask when a conversation is not being relayed accurately.
Me, writing something at 1 am: Omg I'm literally a genius this words sound amazing I ate totally whith this one omfg
The writing:
another thing fantasy writers should keep track of is how much of their worldbuilding is aesthetic-based. it's not unlike the sci-fi hardness scale, which measures how closely a story holds to known, real principles of science. The Martian is extremely hard sci-fi, with nearly every detail being grounded in realistic fact as we know it; Star Trek is extremely soft sci-fi, with a vaguely plausible "space travel and no resource scarcity" premise used as a foundation for the wildest ideas the writers' room could come up with. and much as Star Trek fuckin rules, there's nothing wrong with aesthetic-based fantasy worldbuilding!
(sidenote we're not calling this 'soft fantasy' bc there's already a hard/soft divide in fantasy: hard magic follows consistent rules, like "earthbenders can always and only bend earth", and soft magic follows vague rules that often just ~feel right~, like the Force. this frankly kinda maps, but I'm not talking about just the magic, I'm talking about the worldbuilding as a whole.
actually for the purposes of this post we're calling it grounded vs airy fantasy, bc that's succinct and sounds cool.)
a great example of grounded fantasy is Dungeon Meshi: the dungeon ecosystem is meticulously thought out, the plot is driven by the very realistic need to eat well while adventuring, the story touches on both social and psychological effects of the whole 'no one dies forever down here' situation, the list goes on. the worldbuilding wants to be engaged with on a mechanical level and it rewards that engagement.
deliberately airy fantasy is less common, because in a funny way it's much harder to do. people tend to like explanations. it takes skill to pull off "the world is this way because I said so." Narnia manages: these kids fall into a magic world through the back of a wardrobe, befriend talking beavers who drink tea, get weapons from Santa Claus, dance with Bacchus and his maenads, and sail to the edge of the world, without ever breaking suspension of disbelief. it works because every new thing that happens fits the vibes. it's all just vibes! engaging with the worldbuilding on a mechanical level wouldn't just be futile, it'd be missing the point entirely.
the reason I started off calling this aesthetic-based is that an airy story will usually lean hard on an existing aesthetic, ideally one that's widely known by the target audience. Lewis was drawing on fables, fairy tales, myths, children's stories, and the vague idea of ~medieval europe~ that is to this day our most generic fantasy setting. when a prince falls in love with a fallen star, when there are giants who welcome lost children warmly and fatten them up for the feast, it all fits because these are things we'd expect to find in this story. none of this jars against what we've already seen.
and the point of it is to be wondrous and whimsical, to set the tone for the story Lewis wants to tell. and it does a great job! the airy worldbuilding serves the purposes of the story, and it's no less elegant than Ryōko Kui's elaborately grounded dungeon. neither kind of worldbuilding is better than the other.
however.
you do have to know which one you're doing.
the whole reason I'm writing this is that I saw yet another long, entertaining post dragging GRRM for absolute filth. asoiaf is a fun one because on some axes it's pretty grounded (political fuck-around-and-find-out, rumors spread farther than fact, fastest way to lose a war is to let your people starve, etc), but on others it's entirely airy (some people have magic Just Cause, the various peoples are each based on an aesthetic/stereotype/cliché with no real thought to how they influence each other as neighbors, the super-long seasons have no effect on ecology, etc).
and again! none of this is actually bad! (well ok some of those stereotypes are quite bigoted. but other than that this isn't bad.) there's nothing wrong with the season thing being there to highlight how the nobles are focused on short-sighted wars for power instead of storing up resources for the extremely dangerous and inevitable winter, that's a nice allegory, and the looming threat of many harsh years set the narrative tone. and you can always mix and match airy and grounded worldbuilding – everyone does it, frankly it's a necessity, because sooner or later the answer to every worldbuilding question is "because the author wanted it to be that way." the only completely grounded writing is nonfiction.
the problem is when you pretend that your entirely airy worldbuilding is actually super duper grounded. like, for instance, claiming that your vibes-based depiction of Medieval Europe (Gritty Edition) is completely historical, and then never even showing anyone spinning. or sniffing dismissively at Tolkien for not detailing Aragorn's tax policy, and then never addressing how a pre-industrial grain-based agricultural society is going years without harvesting any crops. (stored grain goes bad! you can't even mouse-proof your silos, how are you going to deal with mold?) and the list goes on.
the man went up on national television and invited us to engage with his worldbuilding mechanically, and then if you actually do that, it shatters like spun sugar under the pressure. doesn't he realize that's not the part of the story that's load-bearing! he should've directed our focus to the political machinations and extensive trope deconstruction, not the handwavey bit.
point is, as a fantasy writer there will always be some amount of your worldbuilding that boils down to 'because I said so,' and there's nothing wrong with that. nor is there anything wrong with making that your whole thing – airy worldbuilding can be beautiful and inspiring. but you have to be aware of what you're doing, because if you ask your readers to engage with the worldbuilding in gritty mechanical detail, you had better have some actual mechanics to show them.
Oh and quick note for writers:
One difference between this strike and the last one is that there are a lot more fellowships targeted at early career tv writers than there used to be (there have always been some, but the fellowship model is way more commonplace these days)
Studios are about to make a ton more of these opportunities and advertise them widely as a way to break into the industry, and they will be very specific about the fellowship not technically counting as a writers room or a tv job
THIS IS A TRICK TO GET YOU TO SCAB
Sharing any written content with a studio (even if they route it through a 3rd party "foundation" or development org or something) IS SCABBING
What you do in regards to the strike is your business, but the WGA has been very clear that anyone who scabs will be BANNED FROM JOINING THE UNION FOR LIFE. That means even if you get hired, that's no health & pension and no union protections for your entire career. This shit is serious
So please please double check and dig into any new submission opportunities you see in the next weeks. Playwrights especially be careful - many studios are finding their writers through play scripts these days so be very careful about how and where your work is being shared
No writing going to the studios means NO WRITING of any kind
(if you see suspicious fellowship stuff being passed around let me know, I'd love to keep an eye on that for my peeps)
Tips for Writing Characters in Recovery from Addiction
I've encountered several portrayals of characters in recovery from addiction, both in fanfiction and published writing, that are clearly somewhat under-researched or leaning into stereotypes. Additionally, writing advice posts on the subject often feel detached and cite statistics rather than express humanity.
As a result, I decided to put together what I believe to be some characteristics and shared experiences of people in recovery that aren't just about withdrawal and might be less familiar to the general public. Perhaps they can be useful to writers aiming to write thoughtful and accurate portrayals of characters in similar situations.
Please note, of course, that both addiction and recovery are very unique, personalized experiences, so no one list will ever apply 100% to a single person—fictional or real.