The Evil Hatters Blog

This is where I blog. Where I do my blogging. Where I blog & do blog related activities. Blog.

[kaile-hultner]

Just thinking about how republicans are going after normie sex shit like "internet porn" and "dildos" now

we fucking told y'all

[kaile-hultner]

to be clear: the right views any sex that isn't purely procreative as deviant. it's not just kink, or queer sex they find abhorrent. And they genuinely believe that the better educated you are about sex in general, including about gender shit, the more deviant you are. they're legitimately trying to claw everyone down to hell with them.

[cocooffhershiz]

This was ALWAYS a possibility. Normal ppl want normal type of restrictions. Right wing neo Christians will take that and dig a 6 feet hole bc they are dicks.

[mephist0phallus]

^ I think now is an excellent time for people to take stock of the "normal" restrictions they want imposed and see what's really underneath those stones once they flip them over. How many people, upon taking an honest inventory of their moral presuppositions, might realize they're part of the problem? Because for years we have had "normal" people crying for "normal" restrictions like "no kink at pride" and "stop talking about leather and bear culture and the bar scene" and demanding that everyone sand off their rough edges so they can be maximally digestible for non-queers and like. That reactionary sort of dialogue is what has primed our community for its impending dismemberment. Society has always wanted us gone, and it's not just right wing neonazi christians that compose that society. Hating queers, freaks, transexuals, and the sexually perverse is baked into the center(left) too, even if those people try to gild it with platitudes. This issue of appeasement began in the middle with "the normal folks."

[cocooffhershiz]

Kink at pride is weird imo? Like it's an all age event, uh LGBT kids should get to be safe? Like idk what to tell you.

[mephist0phallus]

Hi, so this is exactly what I was talking about, and I'm sorry I gave you even a little benefit of the doubt earlier. Since you felt the need to boil a complex comment down to a single maximally assailable point (nice rhetorical fallacies, by the way), I don't feel bad about picking at your phraseology.

I brought up kink at pride because it's been the subject of a frankly ridiculous amount of baseless fearmongering. And the way you talk about it proves my point. Kids go to pride all the time; I'm not sure why you're acting like it's a uniquely dangerous event compared to going to house parties, driving a car, or, idk living in a family and attending other community functions. Since newsflash: most abuse is committed by people children know, like parents, close relatives, and leadership figures. But please do tell me again how going to pride is "unsafe." Sit there and think for a bit about what that sounds like, and who else in the world likes to paint queer community events as a breeding ground for abuse, assault, and indoctrination.

I'm trying to figure out what exactly you think is so horrible about people being themselves at pride. Of course you bring up the pup masks. You might have to explain (nonsexual) roleplaying to a child, but make-believe games are pretty easy to understand. What else will you have to explain? Maybe the o-ring collars and leather harnesses, but again, that's not overtly sexual, that's people wearing revealing costumes in public. Public sex means having sex in public, not carrying a flogger like an evening clutch.

But really it boils down to the fact that you're uncomfortable that there may be a little nipple visible, tummy hair and ass hair, old people and fat people and people you don't think should be visible in public.

Tell me quickly what is bad about a minor seeing a shirtless Bear in public. They see semi-clothed and nude people all the time in the gym, at the pool, and on the beach. But, of course, those are "normal" naked people, not "freaks" and "weirdos." They're not visibly queer.

All this talk about not "consenting to see kink" - please tell me where you are seeing the leather daddies sucking and fucking, send me their way. You're parroting the same crap used as legal basis for arresting cross dressers, club dancers, and people on the street with their partners - the basis for all of those arrests, stop-and-searches, and harassment, is that "normal" people consider everything we do to be sexual. Every damn thing we do is already sexualized. They do not want to see us ever.

How dare you act like queers are uniquely dangerous toward children at a time when people are getting killed. Congress is introducing bills right now to finalize the censorship of the internet, allowing people to erase queer history and education, sexual education, and anything that doesn't fit into their christofascist world view. They gained the traction to do that by capitalizing off existing "queer pedo" rhetoric and stoking it to new heights. You are literally doing their work for them by normalizing this shit.

"I had to explain to my child what a dildo was" is the left's version of losing your shit over drag queen story time. Sure, people show hole at Folsom. It's age restricted for a reason.

Do not @ me. I have a goddamn degree in public health. My specialization is adolescent development and interpersonal and family violence. Tell me again to my face how the "freaks" have found your (very public) post. Shut the fuck up.

[strange-as-it-may-seem]

Neil Gaiman ( @neil-gaiman ) in Neil Gaiman Answers Mythology Questions on Twitter | Tech Support | WIRED video

[ Image description: a series of screens from a video of Neil Gaiman sitting and answering the question with subtitles. He says “‘Could I ride Minotaur like a horse?’ No, obviously, you could not. You could ride a Minotaur like a man (…) Unless you could find a Minotaur into sort of pony stuff or you probably have to find a furry minotaur, like, not a furry Minotaur, a Minotaur who was actually a furry, would get into a horse costume and get down and you could ride that one.’ End of image description. ]

[a-wild-haggis]

[langernameohnebedeutung]

Gävlebocken is rolling out!

[traegorn]

[dailyquests]

Take Ibuprofen with a Member of your Friends List.

[dwergas-deactivated20180817]

most disgusting part of Tumblr Culture is the kid who love to sag their pirt. not only to sag the jam lid, but to pirt it up. what a waste.

[zagreus]

what language is this

[alephnull47]

english

[alephnull47]

but in 3018

[dwergas-deactivated20180817]

listen, the year 2018. you are living in the year 2018. and in centuries and centuries, who tid what to rilt or jilt around, so you better appreciate it for what you have. lot of people would stic or joiler to have what you did.

[dwergas-deactivated20180817]

listen to me

[alephnull47]

dude what the fuck

[dwergas-deactivated20180817]

aaauuuuuuuu auu auu auuuuu…

[crittizen]

this is a poem

[wa-u-moved]

i couldn’t not draw this

[transastronautistic]

[ID for the original image: a tweet from user @bestinsio reading, subway rat made eye contact with me and said “join us. when the train comes we slide under the tracks and feel it rumble over us like a warm thunderstorm. we live forever and welove to live” I said no thank you l am too large he turned away from me cried /end ID]

The comment added on an illustrated version of the original tweet, perhaps someone can add on an id for that?

[why-i-love-comics]

DC Pride #1 - “Finding Batman” (2022)

written by Kevin Conroy art by J. Bone

[biggest-gaudiest-poltergeist]

you hear about recovery not being linear (”there are ups and downs”), but actually it’s more like a game of wack-a-mole. this is not a bad thing

[biggest-gaudiest-poltergeist]

to extend the metaphor: when you’re at the beginning of your recover (less kindly known as rock bottom), you have a garden full of moles. you have a mole popping up every 5 seconds, and maybe it’s the same hyperactive mole, maybe it’s a bunch of moles taking turns, but whether they all look the same, you have a garden full of the fuzzy bastards. 

so you pick up a mallet and start hitting. maybe you’re bad at using the mallet, maybe you get better over time, but after a while you get tired, bc you’ve been at it for ages and a mole is still popping up every 5, 10 seconds. what you don’t realize is, you’ve actually nerfed a lot of the moles. it’s just now there’s more space for the other ones to come to the surface and start making noise. but if you keep. swinging. the mallet. eventually they’re gonna slow down. 

My recovery began when I started treating my depression & moved away from an abusive environment. It took a long time for me to realize I was recovering, bc as soon as one thing improved, another popped up. As my depression improved, I became more alert and active–and discovered that my brain fog & self-isolation had inadvertently been covering up my sensory issues. I had enough energy to start school again–and bc I wasn’t sleeping & lounging all day, I was suddenly aware of my concentration issues. One mole bites the dust, another pops up. 

but the secret is: there are a finite number of moles in the universe. 

4 years I’ve been wacking away at these fuckers with a mallet. I’ve taken turns wacking depression and its cronies suicidal ideation & self-harm, followed in succession by previous dormant crap related to anxiety, adhd, spd, c-ptsd, and other 👎 acronyms. And behold: progress. (Atm i’ve finally convinced the furry piece of shit called Executive Dysfunction to come out of the ground, which is exciting bc wrangling this bastard means finally getting to work on longterm personal projects again.)  Moles still pop up from time to time, but my life has a lot more space for me in it

the moral of this story is: if u hit a mole over the head for long and hard enough eventually it learns to mind its own beeswax. KEEP WACKING

[biggest-gaudiest-poltergeist]

WHAT DO YOU MEAN WACK ISN’T SPELLED THAT WAY????

[totesmgoats01-published-author]

There’s an H in there my dude.

[biggest-gaudiest-poltergeist]

THAT IS SO UNREASONABLE!!!!!!!!

[jumpingjacktrash]

when i watch old movies i’m constantly surprised by how much acting has improved. not that the acting in the classics is bad, it’s just often kind of artificial? it’s acting-y. it’s like stage acting.

it took some decades for the arts of acting and filmmaking to catch up to the potential that was in movies all along; stuff like microexpressions and silences and eyes, oh man people are SO much better at acting with their eyes than they were in the 40′s, or even the 70′s.

the performances we take for granted in adventure movies and comedies now would’ve blown the critics’ socks off in the days of ‘casablanca’.

[lostsometime]

there’s a weird period in film where you can see the transition happening.  right around the fifties, I think.  the example my prof used when i learned about it was marlon brando in “a streetcar named desire” - he was using stanislavski acting methods and this new hyper-realistic style and most or all of his costars were still using the old, highly-stylized way of acting. it makes it way more obvious how false it is.

[jumpingjacktrash]

i even noticed it in ‘the sting’, which was 1973. i actually think they used it on purpose to get the viewer fished in by the second layer of the con; the grifters at the bookie’s were acting like they were acting, and the grifters playing the feds were acting for reals. if you’re used to setting your suspension of disbelief at the first set’s level, then the second set are gonna blow right past you.

or possibly the guys playing the grifters playing the feds just happened to be using the realistic style for their own reason, and it coincidentally made the plot twist work better. but i like to think it was deliberate.

[jumpingjacktrash]

i was thinking about this again, and when you know what to look for, it’s really obvious: old movies are stage acting, not movie acting. it just didn’t really occur to anyone to make the camera bend to the actors, rather than the other way around. just image search old movie screenshots and clips and gifs, you’ll see it. the way people march up to their mark and stand there, the way they deliver their lines rather than inhabiting the character. the way they’re framed in an unmoving center-stage.

this is a charming little tableau, quirky and unexpected, but it’s a tableau. it lives in a box.

now, i usually watch action movies, and i didn’t think it was fair to compare an action movie with what appears to be an indoor sort of story, but i do watch some comedy tv. so i looked for a brooklyn 99 gif with a similar framing, intending to point out that the camera moves, and the characters aren’t stuck inside the box. but i couldn’t even find the framing. they literally never have all the characters in the same plane, facing the camera, interacting only within the staging area. even when they’re not traveling, they’re moving around, and they treat things outside the ‘stage’ as real and interact with them, even if it’s only to stare in delighted horror.

as for action, it took a while for the movies to figure out what, exactly they wanted to show us, and how to act it. here’s a comedy punch:

here, also, is a comedy punch:

the first one looks like a stage direction written on a script. the second one looks like your friends horsing around and being jerks to each other. the first one is just not believable. the physics doesn’t work. the reaction is fakey. everyone’s stiff. even the movement of the camera is kind of wooden. the second one looks real right down to the cringe of his shoulder, and the camera feels startled too.

i’m not saying this to dis old movies, i’m just fascinated and impressed by how much the art has advanced!

[honey-wine-and-time]

I’m going to bed, but I also want to say that I think, without actually bothering to explore it and make sure, that there’s been a similar shift in comics, probably related to the shift in acting/camera work. And I think you still see remnants of old “stage acting” comics in the three-panel style set ups (you might still see it in long form comics, but you’d probably call it bad composition)

[mudkippey]

Now can someone explain why people in old films talked Like That

[garrettauthor]

Y’all, THAT’S HOW PEOPLE TALKED.

Seriously, I used to work in a sound studio, and one series of projects required us to listen to LOTS of old audio recordings. Not of anything special - just people talking.

AND THEY TALKED LIKE THAT.

It was so fucking wild to hear just a couple of people being like,

“WELL HI THERE JEANINE, HOW ARE YOU TODAY?”

“OH, NOT TOO BAD, JOE, THOUGH MY HUSBAND’S BEEN AWAY ON BUSINESS FOR A FEW WEEKS AND I MISS HIM SOMETHING TERRIBLE.”

“WELL IT’S A HARD THING, JEANINE, BUT YOU’LL GET THROUGH IT.”

“WELL I SUPPOSE I’VE GOT TO, HAVEN’T I JOE?”

All in that piercing, strident, rapid-fire style we associate with the films of the era. If you’ve watched lots of old movies you can imagine the above in that speech pattern.

I don’t know if people talked like that because it was in movies but I suspect it’s the other way around.

[arcadiaego]

Same goes for the UK - When they made the TV series The Hour, set in the 1950s, they had to tell the very well spoken, privately educated Dominic West to tone down his imitation of a 1950s newsreader because being accurate would have sounded to a 2011 TV audience as if he was doing a parody. When you watch Brief Encounter they’re not speaking like that because they can’t act, they’re speaking like that because it was the norm on screen. It now sounds unnatural because it’s not the norm any more.

Obviously there were people with regional accents and who didn’t speak in a heightened manner, but they didn’t get to be on TV or in movies unless they were villains. (And usually the villains were putting it on, like Richard Attenborough in Brighton Rock. Sure, he was Richard Attenborough, but he was brought up in the Midlands, and by the on-screen standards of the time, that was common.)

Even the Queen’s very posh accent has changed over the last 50 years and become “more common" - check out newsreel footage etc for proof - and recordings of her father are almost like someone from a foreign country (well, it is the past).

[tzikeh]

There is, for many film historians/critics, an actual turning point from mannered, theatrical, or “overplayed” acting on screen to naturalistic/American Method realism on screen. It happens in the 1954 movie On the Waterfront, during a traveling shot in which Marlon Brando’s character and Eva Marie Saint’s character are walking together. Eva Marie Saint accidentally drops her glove in the middle of the scene. Marlon Brando instinctively picks it up as his character, and continues the dialog, all the while playing with the glove–turning it about, trying it on, etc. Eva Marie Saint stuck with him, never broke, and the director didn’t call “cut.” 

Before that scene in that movie, if an actor dropped a prop by accident, they would have re-shot the scene–because Brando mostly disappeared out of frame as he bent down to pick up the glove, and (as is explained above) movies were framed to keep the people in the scene in the frame. I

t’s a pretty famous scene in movies because Brando’s character doesn’t give the glove back, but instead uses it to amplify what the two characters are experiencing, naturally and without artifice. It is, for all intents and purposes, the exact moment that screen acting changed.

[niqaeli]

Okay, but here’s the thing about television specifically: given the size of TV screens when they first came out? Stage acting was the only thing that could be READ. Watch Star Trek: TOS on a modern screen and it looks absurdly overacted. Film of the same era is not, and yet the TV is.

And that’s not a fault of the actors; they were all very capable of naturalistic film acting (yes, even Shatner) – as the later movies would bear out. It’s because they were acting for the small screen, not the big one.

Stage acting and stage makeup is what it is because people are far enough away from the stage that you have to cake on the makeup garishly and exaggerate the hell out of your for it to be VISIBLE. And in early television? Yeah, those constraints actually very much applied. You could move the camera, sure, but the quantity of visual information you could send was just damned limited.

[jenniferrpovey]

Here’s another example of that.

Watch some Classic Dr Who. You may or may not notice it without watching for it, but every shot of the TARDIS is taken from the same angle.

The TARDIS was, at that time, a stage set. The camera was behind the fourth (Sixth?) wall. It was fixed. And most TV sets were built like this. They had a specific fourth wall and everything was filmed from that angle.

Fast forward to the new series, and you’ll see that the TARDIS is being filmed from different angles all the time, including following the actor around.

Three things have changed:

1. Cameras have become much smaller.

2. Set building for TV has developed as an art. Those early sets were built by people who were trained to build stage sets.

3. Overall technological improvement resulting in things being cheaper.

The TARDIS set that was just retired? Each of its walls was designed to slide out. So you could put the camera anywhere you wanted. Presumably this is the case with the new one too. They couldn’t imagine doing that back in the day. Nor could they afford the complexities of a set like that.

It’s actually my opinion that TV has very much matured as an art form…this century. This decade. We are doing and seeing things that couldn’t be done ten years ago, twenty. Heck, even five.

[finnglas]

Going back to speech patterns for a moment – I was a young child in the 80s, so my memories of the norms of the time period are limited (especially because I was incredibly sheltered), but the books I read at the time and the popular movies of the time all have this kind of – whimsical, sardonic speech pattern going on. Think John Waters dialogue. 

I always thought it was kind of stylized. But then I ended up in a weird part of YouTube one night and found someone’s home video of just walking aroud a 7-11 convenience store at midnight talking to people in Orlando, Florida. Just trying out their new camcorder for shits and giggles, talking to other customers, talking to the cashier, etc. And you know what? They all talked like a goddamn John Waters movie. It was the weirdest thing, like I was watching outtakes from The Breakfast Club or Say Anything. I expected one of the Cusacks to walk into frame any second.

Anyway, so I think it’s super cool how human speech and interaction shifts over time, and if you’re living through the shift, you don’t really notice it as it happens.

[ms-demeanor]

A) I think you mean John Hughes but I’m very amused by the idea of everyone talking like it’s a John Waters movie

B) This is still happening only now you can pick up people’s net accents. My friends with tumblrs have tumblr diction. My friends who only spend time on facebook for social media sound VERY different. People who use twitter heavily put emphasis on different things and have a different meme literacy (you all know the difference between the way greentext sounds and the way “RIP but I’m different” sounds).

Anyway have fun listening for tumblr accents now

[terulakimban]

What gets me is that I had a medium-strong tumblr accent before I joined tumblr. ( @magikarpjumpest and I have talked about this a few times) The way I break clauses, my stress patterns, hell, I do the Midsentence Emphatic Capitalization in speech. And I think that ties in to why I do the Giant Tumblr Rambles in a way that I just… don’t, on FB. I’m too rambly for twitter, and while I can use ‘tag group dialogue’ as a facebooker, and occasionally will in speech (yes, I code-switch my social media dialect in person; I’m conscious of the fact that I mirror, but it’s not generally a thing I decide to do), that’s not my default setting for phrasing. Established tone/accent conventions of tumblr already correspond somewhat to my natural way of speaking, and it’s much easier to get two forms of dialogue that are already close to merge. It also means that engaging with longposts here is much easier because people are more likely to be using humor and syntax that feels natural to me. Twitter threads have a concision to them. Greentext boards -I can read them, but it’s like reading something with a very heavy transcribed accent that I almost never hear in person -it’s a headache-inducing amount of effort that’s usually not worth it to me for a downtime activity. FB doesn’t do paragraph breaks the same way, and the emoticon usage is different enough that I don’t like dealing with it. 

[yournewapartment]

This is a wild read from start to finish!!

[prismatic-bell]

Having lived through early Web 2.0, I can tell you that “accents through time” also applies to internet “accents.”

You know how people now will end sentences with “Lol” to indicate they’re not mad (e.g. “I have to go now lol, Mom’s home”)? Yeah, we didn’t used to do that. We also used to have a sarcasm tag! I’m going to apologize to the people with screen readers and tell you I promise this is reasonably short. It looked like this:

“Yeah, well, Obama is a ~*~*~Muslim.~*~*~

The asterisk action tags used to be a non-ironic, non-cringey thing, too. Like this:

“NINA GUESS WHAT”

“What??? :D”

“(Typing notification)”

“*waits*”

The term “teal deer” to replace “TL;dr” was a thing. And, of course, in the early 2000s you had 13375p34k, which for younger folks was “leetspeak.” One is the Homestuck characters uses it, but it’s not just a quirk—people really talked like that.

We are far enough into the internet era that even internet accents have changed.

[friendlyfrankenstein]

This is a *fantastic* post and something I find very fascinating, because I tend to focus really strongly on character dialogue and speech. Also I’ve definitely noticed that my internet ‘accent’ is definitely slightly antiquated. I’m still much more likely to use a :3 or a -3- text emoticon over a smiley, and I’m not in the habit of using reaction gifs, and I definitely still do actions inside asterix’. 

then again I’m also the kind of person who uses words like antiquated, so I wonder if soon enough it’ll all sound the same amount of old fashioned?

[colorbrews]

The pokemon x katamari crossover no one asked for! Wooloo is friend shaped. King of All Cosmos is not.

[surfacage]

a lecture

[the-dark-fantastic]

“Soggy croissant” is the best insult.

[bunnybansidhe]

baaaah!

[just-shower-thoughts]

We are exactly in the middle of 6/9/1969 and 6/9/2069

[noahsdiscourse]

THIS ONLY WORKS TODAY

[aeducan]

[anxietyproblem]

[wolfinthethorns]

Honestly, in my work as a therapist, I’m seeing this A Lot, and tbh I still don’t have a satisfactory approach to it. A heavy dose of Existentialist “create your own Purpose” tempered with “when the plane’s going down, put your own oxygen mask on first”, but… yeah, there is no ethical way to work on individual emotional distress without acknowledging the systemic socioeconomic, geopolitical fuckery going on at the moment, and the sheer grief that comes with it.

[findingfeather]

This is one of those areas where like on the one hand as a chronic moderate-severe depressive this shit hits me hard and on the other I’m watching people technically more mentally healthy than me struggle with the vast pointless mess of existence for the first time and it’s a trip.

Some tips from the inside, in case they help:

- life has always been pointless. Or rather, we have always been unable to control the relative point-fulness of life. The factors involved in opening the possibilities of who can have a large scale impact where are so insanely complex that they can at best only be pieced together imperfectly in retrospect

- the only thing that has changed is your awareness of this fact. No, seriously. The sun will eventually swallow the planet; at any moment without our knowledge or control the sun could flare in weird ways that will kill us all; etc. There was geopolitical and socioeconomic fuckery as bad or worse going on before: you just didn’t see it. Promise.

- you do what you can with what you have. You do what’s in front of you. Humanity has survived all of this before; it may survive it again. It may not. You can only do what you can: take what lessons exist from the past and apply them.

- sometimes it is just that bad and they are totally out to get you. The question is, what do you do about it?

- almost without exception in human history the answer has been “build community; support the one you have; reach out to connect MORE and to make the world more kind and less hateful than before.”

- recognize you’re trying to tackle god-level problems with a brain originally meant for keeping small proto-fish from being eaten. Treat that part of your brain like a very anxious toddler or rescue pitbull. Give it small measurable victories and successes even if you have to make them up. Make sure it’s fed and watered and has enough rest. Medicate it if you have to - there’s nothing wrong with that. The opposite, in fact.

We are hairless plains apes living in a thin skin of atmosphere between spinning liquid superheated death and the void of absolute cold, sustained by the radiation of a supermassive explosion that will kill us at the slightest excuse. We have always been unlikely and implausible and probably doomed which means every moment we are able to live, thrive and help others do so is an incredible victory. Don’t quit now. ❤️

[placeofunderstanding]

Holy fuck I needed this

[needthisbook]

Ten Major Artists:

Wong Wong & Lulu

Pepper examining himself before commencing a self-portrait

Pepper’s self-portrait

Tiger the spontaneous reductionist

Misty goes off the wall

Minnie, the abstract expressionist

Minnie’s Reindeer in Provence, 1992.

Smokey painting after an hour in the catnip patch

Smokey at work

Ginger’s Stripped Bare Birds, 1992.

Princess, the elemental fragmentist

Charlie, the peripheral realist

[g-jackson]

this literally makes me so happy

[consultingfujoshi]

excuse me while I go cry my eyes out

[aenhanse]

[xxtc-96xx]

I didn’t realize ;-;

[professorsparklepants]

Okay I reblogged this before BUT the visual contrast between the first scene and the second one is fantastic. The first sets Peter’s vibrantly multicolored suit up against the black & white colors of the reactor; the second does the same thing, but switches the palettes. Now the background is in reds and blues and Miles’ suit is the black and white. And he still catches the eye in a screen full of moving parts. THIS MOVIE, GUYS.