Today's Document
titsay
❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
Misplaced Lens Cap
Peter Solarz
d e v o n
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
Origami Around
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
shark vs the universe
trying on a metaphor
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
Aqua Utopia｜海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
Jules of Nature
Kaledo Art
No title available
noise dept.
Sade Olutola
No title available
will byers stan first human second
seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from Australia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Poland
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@victini-reblogs-things
TODAY IT’S A GREAT DAY BECAUSE IT’S MARCH 15th THE DAY WHEN DENZEL CROCKER LOST HIS HAPPINESS AND IT’S ALSO ANNOY SQUIDWARD DAY
It’s also the day Marty McFly’s dad is murdered in the bad timeline
wow this is just a bad date in fiction
It’s the fucking Ides of March people. Todays the day Julius Caesar was stabbed like 23 times
GIVE IT UP FOR DAY 15
OOOOOOHHHhhh
Me being born
Let’s celebrate fat butches today
pls reblog this version with a distinct lack of transmisogynists as far as im aware
CELEBRATE FAT BUTCHES EVERY DAY!!!
watching purity arguments transform online has been….wild. First it was “write what you want, but tag it so that people who are triggered or uncomfortable can avoid” which, reasonable enough. Then it was “You can only write bad stuff if you explain your trauma to the internet at large and spell out exactly why you like writing about that bad stuff. If you don’t know if you’re traumatized or aren’t sure why you’re attracted to certain fiction you’re evil.” Now apparently it’s “you’re evil for writing fucked up stuff. doesn’t matter if it’s to process trauma, doesn’t matter if you yourself are a survivor, there’s certain content that can’t be written and you’re a bad person if you write it.”
what the fuck, guys. Word replace extensions exist. Tags on ao3 exist. You know who else exists? Trauma survivors who write bad stories to safely dissect and process what happened to them. People who are afraid of bad things happening to them and who write them down happening in a fictional setting so that they aren’t carrying that fear around with them and so that they can practice the idea that you can be okay after something awful happens. People who like stuff that you don’t like and who respect your right to avoid that content. In return, please fucking respect creators enough not to say they’re evil because they write evil characters. Writing about a murder has never made anybody a murderer. This attitude about fiction isn’t helping anybody. In fact, it’s literally just teaching survivors that they can’t talk about what happened to them. I’ve known multiple people who needed to talk and process their trauma and were afraid to because of purity culture. Fuck that noise, write whatever, and tag appropriately. And if you bully people for doing that? Fuck. Off. Do not follow me. Do not read my sweet, fluffy, innocent fics. Do not interact.
What’s been much wilder is having been part of the group in 2003 going “it would be nice if we made a habit of telling people if a fic is going to have, say, a violent rape in it so it doesn’t come as a really harmful shock. You know, like how on TV they say ‘this program contains material that may be disturbing to some viewers’. That would be great and allow those of us with, for instance, PTSD to participate in fandom at a lower personal cost.”
…..and then watching shit get to the kind of bullshit OP ACCURATELY describes. Which like: is still bullshit.
It’s polite and decent to either put appropriate notes on your stuff or use a blanket “caveat lector” (of which “choose not to warn” is an example) to allow others to curate their experience. And that’s where that one ends.
no one’s saying you can’t write about dark subjects, just don’t publicly post content that paints abusive shit as romantic/desirable. that’s it. you wanna write a story that includes abuse? cool. you wanna write a story that romanticizes abuse, make no sort of disclaimer making it clear that it’s NOT desirable, and then post it where anyone could find it? not cool. I know way too many people who’ve fallen into abusive situations because media has convinced them that shit is healthy. write whatever you want but please just be fucking responsible with it.
Nope. No one can or should expect you to spell out that abuse is wrong. It’s assumed, if you’re tagging “abuse cw”, that you understand that abuse is wrong. That’s why you’re tagging it–because you know it’s a trigger and that people should be able to avoid. Tagging, and tagging properly, is the full extent of responsibility required by authors. It’s completely absurd to assume that an author writing something dark and messed up doesn’t know it’s dark and messed up, and I’m baffled as to why so many people do assume that kind of thing. Please go to a public library. There are no disclaimers explaining the author’s intentions. Sometimes, hundreds of years after an author’s death, people are STILL arguing about whether an author was romanticizing or calling out various tropes. That’s what makes literature what it is–you have to think critically about it. (And on that note! It is NOT obvious whether someone is romanticizing something or not! That’s an incredibly subjective thing. Also, some authors may just not be good at writing, and you might assume they were romanticizing something when in fact they weren’t trying to do that at all, and guess what, those authors still don’t deserve harassment! They’re allowed to be bad writers or to have a style that not everyone interprets correctly!) I truly do not understand why it’s suddenly considered reasonable to assume every single person thinks abuse is good unless they specifically say it isn’t. That’s a weird thing to assume! And yes, lots and lots and lots and LOTS of people are EXPLICITLY saying you can’t write about dark stuff. Like, so many people. I’m glad you haven’t run into them yet, but I have, and they get nasty when you say “actually I expected you to enforce your own boundaries and offered you plenty of opportunity to do so, why did you get mad at me for creating content you don’t like,” which is why I originally made the post.
funny how we can’t go back in time to prevent authors of the past from writing problematic shit… 🤔
obviously I can’t physically stop you or anyone else from writing what you want. but the fact that “take some responsibility for what you post publicly” is apparently a controversial statement is……. concerning
No, you’re deliberately twisting my statement in order to make it harder to disagree with you. You are narrowly defining “responsibility” as “explicitly say that abuse is bad all the time because otherwise everyone should assume you believe something is good just because you’ve written it”. This is controversial not because I or other people generally think abuse is good, but because it ignores the responsibility that authors are already taking by tagging and age restricting their work. “Abuse” as a word refers to a bad thing. A fic tagged “abuse cw” implies that the abuse is bad. A fic tagged “no warnings used” means “I chose not to use warnings, so you may or may not find bad stuff in here”. In both of these cases, the explicit “abuse is bad” line is redundant, and thus should not be expected of authors. (and because this has come up before–this does not refer to MISTAGGED work. An author who tags “no warnings needed” when they did need warnings does not fall into the category of people who can be assumed to know abuse is bad. Likewise, someone who uses incorrect terms (like for example, tagging “blood” instead of “graphic violence”) for what happens in their fic–I’m only talking about correct tags. Tagged writing does not require further explanation, because the tags ARE explicit condemnation of certain types of content.) It’s not any author’s job to explain to you that abuse is wrong. If you do not already understand this and expect other people to understand this, then you are either too young to be unsupervised on the internet, or the people who should have taught you about abuse failed you. Those are serious issues that can put you in danger, and I’m not trying to downplay them. However, it’s not my responsibility to educate my readers about abuse being bad. I’m an adult who does not have children, and does not expect readers of my dark works to be children, and explicitly tells children to avoid content I think could harm them. I take responsibility for my work by tagging it and instructing children to avoid it (either explicitly or through “check this box if you’re eighteen or over” messages). You are asking me to further soapbox about how abuse is wrong every time I write something, which is unnecessary and I’m not going to do it. I expect my readers to take responsibility for themselves and either avoid dark content that I’ve tagged, to ask an adult they trust to talk to them about concepts they may have questions about….or even to ask me directly if they’re unsure about something. There are some problems that are real, and that can hurt people, and that are also not my problem to solve. What you’re describing, the idea that some people may never have been taught that abuse is wrong, is one of those problems that is real, and can hurt people, and is also not mine to solve. I am also concerned that your response to the concept “people have discussions about whether content is problematic or not” is “it would be nice to be able to prevent problematic content from existing”. The existence of discussion around a work does not mean the work is problematic. This type of black and white thinking is not healthy.
“funny how we can’t go back in time to prevent authors of the past from writing problematic shit”
So we’re advocating for banning books here on tumblr dot com? The progressive, correct thing to do is to ban books? I mean, I knew that’s what this conversation was heading toward, but I didn’t expect to see it said so plainly.
The American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom has a good section on banned books if anyone’s interested in learning about censorship and why it’s bad. Their Freedom to Read Statement is particularly relevant:
We therefore affirm these propositions:
1. It is in the public interest for publishers and librarians to make available the widest diversity of views and expressions, including those that are unorthodox, unpopular, or considered dangerous by the majority.
[…]
4. There is no place in our society for efforts to coerce the taste of others, to confine adults to the reading matter deemed suitable for adolescents, or to inhibit the efforts of writers to achieve artistic expression.
5. It is not in the public interest to force a reader to accept the prejudgment of a label characterizing any expression or its author as subversive or dangerous.
6. It is the responsibility of publishers and librarians, as guardians of the people’s freedom to read, to contest encroachments upon that freedom by individuals or groups seeking to impose their own standards or tastes upon the community at large….
We are not publishers or librarians, but we are a self-regulating community—therefore I believe we have a responsibility to self regulate in a way that preserves our community’s intellectual and creative freedom.
This is the first addition that’s included the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom’s Freedom to Read Statement, but I really have to break it to you, so many people on tumblr.hell are in fact advocating for the banning of books. And most of them do what the previous commenter did, by assuming that the existence of conversation around a book’s themes (ie. thoughts happening instead of mindless gobbling of whatever propaganda is in style this month), that inherently means that whoever thinks the worst thing about the book is right. This displays a worrying trend, where people in progressive circles have decided that in any conversation, whoever’s angriest is right, and whoever has the most extreme or fearmongering view should be in charge of regulating things for the rest of us. Or, they advocate age restricting period books so only adults can read them. Literally. Because I guess knowing why you’re suddenly gushing blood from your nether regions is dangerous??? Antis, radfems, and exclusionists. The only groups where “progressive” means “Teaming up with fundamentalist christian and alt-right groups to restrict freedoms and increase support for authoritarianism”
It’s absolutely astounding that you have children on this hideous garbage hellsite who honestly believe that unless you put up a glaring neon sign denouncing A Thing, you must unequivocally support it.
Policing your own online experience shouldn’t be seen as an unreasonable expectation. It’s something you’re obligated to do when you start going online without parent supervision.
Wait, wait, I have something for this
When you open the door to banning books, it’s generally not the straight white dude who write like, torture porn* getting silenced.
* I should note banning books is NEVER the correct choice, even if it’s something I really don’t want to read.
It’s The House on Mango Street a book by a Chicana Lesbian for “being anti-male” (despite noting it doesn’t have explicitly queer characters - they didn’t like it because of the author’s bio describing her thus).
It’s “The Hate U Give” for “teaching children to hate the police” and depicting racism.
It’s “And Tango Makes Three” - a picture book about a gay penguin couple. And before that, “Heather Has Two Mommies” and “Daddy’s Roommate”.
It’s people who don’t fit the straight white cis male conservative Christian paradigm of what’s acceptable. It’s criticism of authority.
Miss me with that shit.
Can I also just add very quickly that in addition to people who WRITE to process their trauma
there are also people who can’t write, but READ WHAT OTHERS HAVE WRITTEN to process their trauma.
I think people forget that.
A white person learning another language in the United States is a person looking to build a résumé.
A person of color learning English in the United States is a person looking to be treated like a human being.
It is not the same thing.
Keep reblogging this white people are getting mad because they don’t know the difference between learning a language because it’s fun or to put it on applications and learning a language so you won’t get treated like garbage by everyone
Right, hard to be conclusive about the cause of death but, uh…Well, it’s going to be plague, isn’t it?
A bunch of plague pit ghosts invisibly playing Guess Who with their own skeletons while an archaeologist excavates them is honestly one of the funniest concepts I’ve ever seen.
It’s wild seeing the Horrible Histories cast play on any other show, it’s all I knew them for fdjhgkjhdfk
how do yall just… drink soda every day??? how do you do that?? like… that doesnt hurt?
for some of us, it’s a way of self medicating certain diseases- ADHD for example.
it is NOT at ALL that deep
screaming
some people??? use soda???? to cope???????????
certified iconic post
I have ADHD and caffeinated sodas literally help me focus….
ADHD medications are either amphetamines (like adderal and vyvanse) or methylphenidates (like ritalin or concerta). Both drugs increase the production of neurotransmitters and make neurons reabsorb them slower, which helps counteract the problem where neurons in ADHD brains reabsorb neurotransmitters too early and prevent signals from transmitting.
Caffeine gives a slight boost to the brains production of neurotransmitters, meaning that it basically functions like a weaker version of ADHD medication. But unlike meds, you don’t need a prescription to get caffeine, and it’s usually a hell of a lot cheaper. If someone has ADHD and doesn’t like coffee, then to self medicate they’ll have to get caffeine from another source. Like tea, or energy drinks, or… maybe… just possibly…… caffeinated soda. And since it has a weaker affect than proper meds, and doesn’t last nearly as long, the best results come from drinking pop throughout the day.
But as we all know being disabled is super cringey so this whole middle school bully routine was very justified, keep it up man.
It’s also good for people with chronic headaches who don’t want to keep popping pills or don’t want to take the strong kind cuz caffeine boots the effectiveness of common meds like aspirin and narrows the blood vessels in the brain which become enlarged during headaches
This post is the best way to sum up the experience of having adhd. You recognise a pattern, you say “maybe its a mental health thing,” people who have no idea what tf they are talking about tell you “you’re just over reacting”, you stop questioning it and blame yourself for “having bad habbits” until eventually somebody who DOES know what the fuck the’re talking bout gives you the confirmation and support you should have gotten forever ago.
“My favorite genre of twitter is straight men reacting to Oscar Isaac”
How many more men would be bi if we let them
How many more men would be bi if we let them
been working on these forever and now the full set is finally finished i present to u: part 5 gang….. but madoka!!!
I contribute to this meme by adding Anarchy Reigns music (Tre-Dot - Rock On). A game which also has Bayonetta in it. Maybe one day Nintendo will be crazy enough to make a big 3D brawler like Anarchy Reigns with Smash. Even tho that would piss everyone off.
everyone sit down i found the original
since its tdov, heres my reminder that genderbends are transohobic. they depict strict standards of gender and enforce the idea to be a woman you need boobs, wide hips, long hair, or to be a man you need a penis, well defined muscles, short hair.
that isnt and hasnt ever been the case, not with trans people or cis people.
and lest we forget the origins of genderbends: "rule 64." the "rule of the internet" that, more often than not, makes any male character into a woman for the sexual gaze of a man so that he doesnt have to deal with it being gay or the oh so terrible idea of being attracted to a trans woman
genderbends are not a replacement for trans headcanons, because, believe it or not, a trans body is no different than a cis body
as a genderfluid person, my body is still a man or a womans when i say it is. i dont need a flat chest when i identify as a man, i dont need long hair when i identify as a woman.
ad yes its still transphobic when its "this but lesbians" that doesnt exempt you from being transphobic.
Just in case you guys didn’t know.
I JUST learned that this shirt cost them $10,000 to put into this movie… but they refused to compromise because they were like: he’s the hugest Golden Girls fan… this has to make the movie… so they paid $10,000 to use Bea Arthur’s likeness on this shirt… Ryan Reynolds, you’re doing Deadpool so right.
They traded all the guns in the final climactic showdown for Bea Arthur’s face. Worth it.
Reynolds paid it himself, out of pocket. It didn’t come from the budget. He talked with Bea’s sons and they agreed to it for a donation to Bea’s favorite charity. ☺️
I did not know that. That’s so much better than I could have imagined.
The Ali Forney Center opened its new LGBTQ youth homeless residence – the Bea Arthur Residence. In attendance for he opening of the 18-roo
(From Deadpool 2.)
my brother and I have dumb adventures in kirby super star
The dash is feeling Tennant-y tonight, I see.
i found this ancient post from my blog so if you want to know what tumblr looked like from an ipod in 2010……
