alt

a sideblog. the original toy sitting anon. she/her.

[toy-sitting-anon]

hello there. i am the toy sitting anon. i think it's really hot when women with big butts sit on toys and crush them. or eat toys, to make their butts bigger or just as a secondary method of destroying toys. it doesn't have to be toys, they're just the hottest. i dislike sex but that was probably pretty obvious.

if this doesn't sound like something you want to hear about, be on your way.

ask me about toy sitting, or toy eating, or toys, or sitting, or eating. or lecture me about how toy sitting is unrealistic. i might put a moratorium on that last thing if you do it too much or too annoyingly.

if you want to share art you made, please post it yourself and @ me. i have had some technical problems in the past with receiving asks and submissions with attached media.

[389]

[erica-cannot-draw]

Cuteness

[toy-sitting-anon]

So there is an aspect of T[REDACTED] which is very important to her vibes, which I've called "grace" and "elegance" to myself before but they feel both actively wrong and incomplete. Those would seem to preclude the idea of using your ass as a blunt instrument to destroy stuff, and generally point to a frillier aesthetic and a more stuck-up and less playful bearing. The dresses contribute to this quality but when she's in jeans it isn't undermined.

It's like... fluidity is an aspect of it. She would absolutely sometimes do a cute twirl after squishing something. But the one where she stands still and her butt steamrolls the toys as they come down a conveyor belt is also expressing this same idea. Fluidity and effortlessness. She moves really quietly most of the time. This is part of why heels feel wrong for her, she needs to be able to move unimpaired. (Her absurdly skintight clothing is presumed to be extremely stretchable, because I'm evil.)

Now I've said before that they don't really need to apply a ton of force to break toys, and toys just Do Break when pressed by a sufficiently round ass attached to a sufficiently cute girl. T[REDACTED] probably does not have the biggest ass of all my characters (though it's certainly up there) but this not-quite-grace Nameless Aspect gives her absurd crushing power. She should have enough power to molecularly homogenize the stuff she sits on into paste, but doesn't, because another part of it is Extreme Preternatural Cleanliness. Because I'm a misogynist.

She's usually picky about what she crushes and only sits on the best things around. She savors them even though they're gone in an instant. She's thought about this a lot and could talk your ear off for hours about what makes a good crush, and importantly could put words to the quality and rigorously define the Full Pattern Of What Is A Good Crush, which is something I cannot really do.

What is important to understand here is this is not just, like, disparate details about her character, this all feels like it links together into One Trait in a sensible and obvious and following-from-itself manner, something that would be a character archetype if anyone other than me had taste in fetishes.

Erika doesn't have this aspect so much. Erika would probably not twirl, but she would climb over stuff to get at more toys to eat, and T[REDACTED] would never climb over stuff. It's like different manifestations of nimbleness.

Idk there's gotta be like. words for this shit. Like I feel like I'm just laying out "lot of boss baby vibes" / "can i write a novel to save the world" tier Unexposed To Trope Ecosystem descriptions of entry-level observations and I'm just a fool because I've always been a fool.

[toy-sitting-anon]

for someone whose fetish involves sitting on stuff you would think i would be a lot better at drawing chairs by now

[toy-sitting-anon]

i'm very lucky to have found myself in a "religion is not above criticism" corner of tumblr because otherwise it would be trivially easy to diagnose my antitheist turn over the past couple of years as an extended crashout over a friendship-breakup that i initiated about as immaturely as is possible

it can also be that one friend tipping their hand irreversibly makes you wise to the verbal smokescreens """progressive""" christians use to hide their power level. multiple non-contradictory statements can be simultaneously true

what was that noise

[toy-sitting-anon]

atheist catgirl: i eat plastic

christian catgirl: i eat the body of christ

agnostic catgirl: nobody knows what i eat

[toy-sitting-anon]

I don't like liking this.

In this terrible paradigm, women are some kind of regrettably necessary life-support system to ferry butts from crushable object to crushable object. I have handwrung at length about the cruelty towards the people attached to the objects being crushed but what is really getting flattened is the women doing the crushing. They don't get to be real people. A tiny part of the drawing is the most important part. Sometimes as simple as a single curve. The rest is busywork, boilerplate to make the narrative make sense. She isn't really a person, she doesn't really have thoughts other than "I want to crush this" (how very convenient.)

This is not unique. Normie vanilla sexuality treats people as life support systems for their genitals. But it's repulsive there and it should be understood as just as repulsive here. Butts are a parasite, not the point. I hate it.

[erica-cannot-draw]

New meta: One Bite Out Of Each Thing

[toy-sitting-anon]

*crunch* okay you can have it back

[erica-cannot-draw]

Effortless

[toy-sitting-anon]

it is odd that upon drawing a pants waistband on this unfinished drawing the silhouette suddenly looks less thicc. why is this

[starjasmines]

you are not even engaging in the deep meanings of Toys youre just playing because it's fun.

[toy-sitting-anon]

Grarg! I am fuzzled. I don't know what the point of any of this is. I don't know what my goal is supposed to be or how to find interesting things to distract myself.

[toy-sitting-anon]

it is wild that for a long time, basically for as long as i have had the vaguest understanding of what a relationship involved, i have despised basically every individual component of a relationship but held out that i still wanted one, with some mystical "right person" who shows infinite patience towards my numerous shortcomings. i was gradually moving away from this (too gradually) but was egged on to continue to hold out hope, for some inscrutable reason, by a friend (an only friend) with absolutely no standards. that friendship is no more and i'm returning to seeing my own worthlessness with clear eyes again, and the total incompatibility of myself with people of actual value. why would a person do this? obscure the truth from me so persistently? so the comedown is worse? she was willing to put up with me, so therefore speak into being the possibility of others willing to put up with me? someone duty-bound to take care of me for indistinct reasons that i would surely reject were they clarified?

people abandon me when they grow a spine, i find. i'm a profoundly unpleasant and burdensome person. i have never received the mystical juice that makes social interaction actually positive sum. if i do equal giving and taking i end up net drained. if i only take i break even but obviously make enemies. i have guarded against only giving as an option because of the number of people saying "it's based and you win if when i view others as a resource to be depleted and discarded but if any of them think that they're evil parasites" and like. look. i can see what people are doing and adapt my strategy to avoid being hurt by them.

i just. need more. i need more input. i need more of whatever the fuel is called. it feels like i am the only person who depletes the fuel when it is burned and regularly needs to be refueled. everyone else can carry on for years and years of deprivation without an iota of the whatever-it-is that powers them, without complaining or wanting better or failing or feeling emotionally starved the way i have felt emotionally starved every hour of every day since i was ten years old.

[toy-sitting-anon]

one of my great annoyances is that it seems like everything culturally is about sex. all movies are about sex all books are about sex all music is about sex etc. things that might be interesting on a surface idiot level are metaphorically About sex, like that's the part Serious Art Nerds care about. video games often manage to not be About Sex but a media diet of only video games is emotionally impoverishing (encourage you to view the whole world + others instrumentally). but sex is not, like, meaningful to me, my connotation of it is "obnoxious thing you are expected to pretend to like but is miserable, demands unrelated stupidity like makeup or pretending to care about sports, and all relationships promising Connection are a scam because they are mediated by it." and it's just like. this art is not doing the thing for me. and it's all art and all everything and it just feels like nothing has any substance to it. the sex that everything is a symbol for isn't even like. interesting or thematically rich! (nothing is actually thematically rich because it all points back to sex which points to nothing but at enough layers of indirection it gives the illusion of richness and all art is illusion anyway.) it's just these idiots chasing this awful thing because they're too dumb to notice that slime, hierarchy, and arbitrary ritual are bad things that it's better to avoid.

and it feels like everyone trying to make sex more interesting is going "okay, what if we took the unpleasant subtextual bits of sex, like all the stuff erica can't stand (aside than the nasty goop aspect of it which she also can't stand), the like, performance-of-power shit, and made that the text. and also much more unpleasant."

and it's like i don't know. does anything else like. exist.

[toy-sitting-anon]

there is something incredibly fraught and evil about this thing, right

like there is this idea within heterosexuality of women as The Mature Ones and The Enforcers Of Normieness, and this generally takes the forms of The Enforcers Of Litfic. Litfic being a metonym for "stuff you are supposed to pretend you like more than outright having fun" with like the implication that this is Dragging Men Into Adulthood. and Women As The Destroyers Of The Symbols Of Childhood And Straightforward Fun is reifying this intensely. is it not?

is it because pop-feminism has leaned into this sort of thing (the "how dare men feel at liberty to use more convenient shampoo" replacing "why haven't we lynched all workplace makeup demanders" type of trend) that it doesn't feel like a misogynist concept to people anymore?

like just to be clear the women are having straightforward fun by crushing the toys (due to alien psychology and not comprehensible psychology which is its own problem) but nobody has done a hostile uncharitable reading of me yet and i freak out when i can identify a long-levitating shoe because it implies that my enemies are storing up justification in an attempt to overwhelm me all at once

[erica-cannot-draw]

Another redo of an old T[REDACTED] image.

I'm not infinitely proud of this remake. The outfit is a lot better and she has actual hands but I am not sure this has captured the actual energy of the original. (Of course, the character of New T[REDACTED] is different from the character of Old T[REDACTED]. )

Also her butt looks really odd here, like too big to be realistic but not big enough to be worth the distortion. Is this coherent? The original doesn't have this problem.

Here's the original:

You might notice that this art and the toy-sitting-anon avatar are direct svg-trace-derivatives of it.

[wickedsick]

Which Geometric Transformation is the Hottest?

Rotation

Translation

Uniform Scaling

Non-Uniform Scaling

Reflection

Shearing

Voting ended onMar 10

[bumpscosity]

[toy-sitting-anon]