#ryukuza

[avas-eyebrows-blog]

hiya this has nothing to do with anything but my main does not work whatsoever

I think I got suspended :T I can’t make new posts or reblog anything and when you go to my main (acelapis) all you get is a “Not found.” page, but as you can tell from this post, my account’s still up and I can post from other blogs

apparently this has happened to other people when they have too many hoarded urls, which. I am absolutely guilty of whoops

so ye don’t worry if you know me on my main I’m still around, I’ve just gotta deal with this bullshit

oh yeah and I’m gonna be freeing up a bunch of Ava’s Demon urls now I guess, let me know if you want a list because I’m not comfortable posting that publicly

edit2: lol

edit: so answering asks privately doesn’t work either, wait until I get this sorted out and then I’ll send over a list. sorry for the inconvenience :|

[flarebossmalva]

that point about not drawing a line, I've honestly never noticed that implication before, I'm not sure I agree 100% but it's definitely something to think about so thank you for pointing that out. anyway considering the main reason I started talking about this at all is because I misunderstood you earlier and jumped to conclusions, I think that's about all I have to say on the topic and I'll leave you alone now

righto

[flarebossmalva]

mm, rereading your post more carefully I /do/ seem to be misinterpreting you, sorry about that. I do agree that liking unhealthy relationships is all right provided there's an understanding of /why/ the relationship is unhealthy and no romanticization/apologism of those aspects. I do think that there needs to be a limit though? like with some ships there are few to no aspects of the relationship that /aren't/ inherently abusive, calling that an "interesting dynamic" doesn't sit well with me

tbh i don’t really draw a line there, i don’t go like “oh you can like unhealthy pairings but not if they’re completely unhealthy” and that seems almost worse to me since the implication is that you can like a relationship so long as it has “redeeming factors” which sounds a hell of a lot like trivializing the abusive/unhealthy aspects

i do generally trust in my own ability to recognize when a ship is unhealthy and to acknowledge this up-front; or, failing that, i trust that if i realize a ship has an unhealthy aspect that i’d previously overlooked that i could then acknowledge that. i don’t really care what other people do so long as it’s not hurting anyone, and, yes, abuse apologism and romanticization of abusive relationships does constitute hurting someone 

[flarebossmalva]

also as you just posted, the way you define shipping is probably related; I think a vast majority of people assume that "I ship this" means "I enjoy thinking of these characters as having a romantic/sexual relationship," /not/ "I find the (potential) relationship between these characters interesting and/or compelling for reasons unrelated to romance/sex." and when it comes to overtly abusive ships, anyone (generally, not necessarily you) who finds it "interesting" should consider why

judging from your paraphrase you’re misinterpreting me, though, because i do usually take shipping to mean that you like the idea of those characters having a romantic and/or sexual relationship, but liking it needn’t imply that it’s healthy. having an interest in something doesn’t equate to condoning it. and i know a lot of shippers do condone what they ship, and care should be taken to ensure that you’re not presenting abusive dynamics as being, well, not abusive, but there are a lot of reasons a person might be compelled by a ship and not all of them boil down to “this person is secretly an abuse apologist”

i mean, i tend to enjoy fiction that involves murder and other similarly high-stakes things. no one’s ever accused me of secretly wanting to kill a dude because of that, and i think we can all agree that such an assumption would be ridiculous

asking yourself why you react in such and such way to such and such thing is always good practice imo but the end result of this questioning needn’t be “i’m secretly horrible and i am not allowed to like things anymore”

[flarebossmalva]

I think the main difference with shipping is that it implies romanticization? like a lot of people who ship abusive and otherwise horrid ships don't actually realize that there's abuse involved and/or don't care- and those who DO recognize take a "I don't care it's ~just fiction" stance. no one's saying any ship that is less than 100% healthy is wrong, there just gets to be a point where people who /do/ ship the thing should seriously examine why

you say no one’s saying this but i legit see people saying this all the time? if this was merely calling folks out for romanticizing an abusive dynamic, i’d have no problem — i mean, as an abuse survivor i absolutely will not stand for abuse apologism — but i literally see tons of “you can’t like the relationship these two characters have, it’s unhealthy” as if there’s only one way to appreciate a character dynamic, as if shipping always implies romanticization (i understand that there’s a lot of this but it’s by no means true across the board), as if you’re only allowed to like Certified Healthy Relationships (which tend to, universally, be the absolute most boring ships in the fandom, or to take place between characters who didn’t even fucking interact because hey, at least you can’t say it’s abusive then!!)

[edennova]

is that post on Lapis and survivor rage okay to reblog? it's a really good read and something more people should know about, but I totally understand if you'd rather keep it on your blog

its definitely okay to reblog :) thanks for checking though, i really appreciate it c:

[goraturtle]

ryukuza replied to your post: Look at my dog it’s so windy outside r...

is your dog a sheltie? either way wHAT A CUTE 8D

YES omg he’s a sheltie <3 his name is brody

[gaytog]

ryukuza answered your question “Legitimate, non-rhetorical question. Does the phrase “toxic...”

hm, not really, but I haven't thought about it until now. I guess it's an attempt to separate it from the concept of masculinity in and of itself, with the "toxic" implying brutal standards?

I guess what I’m wondering is, does “Masculinity in and of itself is inherently violent” -- the idea that there is no non-toxic masculinity -- make sense? Because if yes, then the phrase “toxic masculinity” is, well, redundant. I don’t see any harm that can come out of it; I just feel a disconnect whenever I see the phrase.