#also I mean relationship as a broad term including platonic :) | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

antimony-medusa · 11 months

Text

This is verging on discourse, but I have to say, as someone aroace with the emphasis on the aro, it's a trifle disheartening to ever try to look for queerplatonic relationships that look like mine within this fandom. QPRs can cover a broad spectrum of experiences, and it always seems that within MCYT what a QPR looks like has calcified into this one depiction that is very close (but not actually crossing the line) to shipping, just without kissing or sex! With emotional connections that are very similar (but not quite) to romance, hitting many of the same beats. And that just doesn't reflect my experience at all. Personally, I have more fun reading about straight ahead romance than a qpr that hits almost all the same notes, but just doesn't quite go there, that never digs into an aro or ace experience that I recognize, and that is always what I seem to find when I go cruising the tags.

For one thing, QPRs are not just an ace thing, and they definitely don't have to be a sexless thing! You can be aroallo and in a QPR and have sex, or you can be ace and in a QPR and have sex for the sake of your partner, or just for fun! Sex is fun for a lot of ace people, including those in QPRs, and using QPR eternally to mean "sexless" cuts off a large swath of the population that DOES have sex, for whatever reason. And there are tons of ace people who are extremely fine with kissing, including people who are sex adverse, so using a QPR are a shorthand to mean "sexless and also kissless" is only depicting a very narrow slice of the experience.

And QPRs in practice often look very different from romance, including with people who are romance-adverse, and who don't want any of the trappings that normally come with romance (marriage, specific terms like "love" or "darling", metaphors or positioning like "half of my heart" or "soulmate"), and I just never get to see that. A QPR can be two people who sleep in seperate rooms co-parenting a kid! (Or more than two people!) A QPR can be people married together and sharing a bed and holding hands at the movies and calling each other "darling", or it can be people who signed legal paperwork together who call each other "bro", and those are BOTH valid QPRs. But I only ever get to see the one that looks so close to romance that it's alienating to me, while people tell me that I should be happy to be depicted. (I'm not depicted.)

And I'm also frustrated because I have read QPRs that are sharing all the same hallmarks-of-romance-but-no-sex that I would theoretically have a problem with, but they also ring as true to me because people actually talk about what the relationship is and isn't to them, and I go Yes! Not me but I am on a similar wavelength! But so many people just go "QPR" but never unpack the actual ace/aro/aroace experience, so again I'm left with something that is using all the romance and affection tropes that I've come to expect over decades of living in an amonormative society, just slapping a "but it's platonic" on it at the very end. Where's people making assumptions about your relationship that you have to consider whether to correct or not? Where's the inside jokes? Where's the intimacy negotiations and teasing each other about what you want in terms of touch+? Where's the doing life together in a non-romantic way? Where's the epic friendship? Where's the aro experience? (If we're mutuals, you probably write all of these things, and I'm not complaining about you, you're good.)

And it's hard to escape the feeling that at least some of these people are writing QPR because they're afraid of shipping, as I see the tags scroll endlessly by, not because they actually want to depict the a-spec experience.

Some of it is just people not used to writing affection outside of the romance tropes in our society, and some of it is that so many guestures of affection in our society get romance-coded when like, holding hands is not inherently romantic, I know. But sometimes, man, I want to tell people that it's okay to romantically ship, they don't have to keep it platonic, if they're going to write something that is so similar to shipping but has a giant "don't worry, these guys don't fuck" stamped on it.

I don't know, maybe there are even less people like me than I thought. Or maybe the people like me aren't writing fanfiction (lol).

I don't know. QPRs are more varied than they get depicted, and the a-spec experience is special to me and I wish it got written in its diversity. It's frustrating to see only ever one type of QPR, one that is exclusionary to me. I wish I could see the tag and not know exactly what that relationship looked like, or saw something that I felt was strongly influenced by what the characters are, instead of the same sort of sexless romance-lite every time.

#discourse #fandom meta

436 notes · View notes

blacksunscorpio · 4 years

Text

Astro Musings No. 5

Placements Most Prone to Getting Stuck in Abusive Relationships

Are usually people with Venus in Scorpio because of the intensity of how they love and the intensity in which people love them back, Venus in Libra due to their penchant for trying to see the good in those they love. Venus square/opposing Neptune, due to these natives often idealizing those who do not deserve it. Venus in Pisces, due to their savior complexes. People with Moon squaring their Mars’, or Moon conjunct/squaring/opposing their Pluto’s— often they associate pain and intensity of feeling as equatable to love. These are the types of people who feel deeply and often have a hard time entertaining the idea of love unless there is some sort of “suffering” involved.

Many with Moon or Venus squaring Saturn

Can endure the same thing/have the same habits. I’ve found with the latter two the duration of these relationships will last a lot longer. This is because Saturn adds longevity to relationships.

Nessus in aspect to Dejanira in synastry

Can also cause obsession or at its worst, abuse. Sparknotes version of the Greek myth is a wild centaur named Nessus attempted to kidnap and rape Dejanira as he was ferrying her across the river Euenos, but she was rescued by Heracles. If you’ve ever watched Disney’s Hercules, Megara is the Hollywood version of this broad. In regard to synastry Dejanira is the asteroid of the victim, especially sexual, and Nessus indicates the abuser. If this appears in synastry you can be certain two people will have some sort of abuse involved in their relationship or some sort of intense obsession with each other than may not be altogether healthy. Be careful if it aspects [in square or opposition] Sado or Algol. No bueno. If touching Chiron it there will be some sort of lesson involved. Make sure it’s one worth learning. Aspects like these in astrology can be very humbling.

Typically if One Has an Aspect Natally it Will Often Appear in Synastry With Another.

For example, One can have their Sun opposing their moon and often attract people whose moons oppose or square their sun. If one has a Mercury squaring their Pluto, they may attract someone whos Pluto square’s their Mercury. You can often always trace a synastry aspect back to one or the other person’s natal chart.

People with Venus Conjunct Lilith

Will have enormous sex appeal. Their basic femininity will be in touch with their wild femininity. If in the 10th house, they may make a career out of it. Become models or make money off their figures. One of my best friends is a porn star and has this aspect. Her ‘Only Fans’ is poppin’.

People with Sagittarius 5th houses

Can/will adopt children from other countries or have children in countries other than their native land. Angelina Jolie’s 5th house is in Sagittarius and her whole brood save for 3 are of different ethnicities. People with the same rising sign as you often deal with many of the same issues as you and therefore, can be easier to have friendships/relationships with. This is typically because two people will have the same houses/house sign cusps.

Placements That Make One Lucky

Are often strong Jupiter placements. Jupiter rules fortune and is in general a benefic planet. Wherever he touches will show growth or excess of energy. It is best when he is working harmoniously. So, Jupiter trining/conjunct/sextiling inner planets or Jupiter trining the north node. Jupiter as the most elevated planet is a good indicator of someone who often gets lucky in the nick of time. Luck often comes through at the clutch for these folks. Asteroid Fortuna, Fama, or Abundantia making harmonious/conjunctions to planets like Jupiter, the Sun, or the Moon. The Sun in the 10th house is a good indicator of someone lucky in their career. Asteroid Karma No. 3811 in favorable aspect to inner planets, and/or Asteroid Talent No. 33154 in favorable aspect to inner planets or in benefic houses.

A good place to look to see determine someone’s physical features is often their Sun, Rising, Dominant planet, or Midheaven.

Yes, I know, not very exciting but I keep telling you guys to stop ignoring your Sun. It is the most powerful Planet in your chart. However, if we were to look beyond the Sun, Your rising sign is your face. Someone with a Scorpio rising will inevitably have some sort of intensity to them. 9 times out of 10, it has something to do with their eyes. The Midheaven will also show you a bit more, usually how a person carries themselves. I often find those with Virgo or Venus Midheavens [women] are very good in heels. Good with structured walking. Men will often have model-esque walks as well. Attention grabbers. Same with those with Capricorn MC’s. Neptune MC’s have a bit of a “swagger to their walk” like they’re swimming through air. Gemini MC’s are often very light on their feet. Aries MC’s walk in a very militaristic way. Straight backed. Authoritarian. George W. Bush has an Aries MC and walks in such a way.

Psychic connections in Synastry [Platonic or Romantic]

Are usually 12th house, 8th house, 1st house, or 9th house placements/Overlays. Aspect-wise typically Moon to the lunar nodes, Uranus to the Nodes or Moon, Vertex to nodes, PLUTO, or NEPTUNE to Mercury. Mercury to Moon, Mercury to Uranus, or Neptune. These are all highly psychic points. Having these placements in synastry/overlay will usually indicate dreaming of the other person, prophetic dreams [especially if 9th house or Jupiter is involved] Knowing what the other person is thinking or gut hunches about the person’s well being. If in harmonious aspect these will make you feel closer to the person or bolster feelings of affection. In hard aspect, it can cause obsession or the other person may feel as if they are “haunting” you. Trust me.

A Singleton Planet

is a planet posited in the only sign or house of its type [element, mode, or orientation]. For example, if your sun is the only planet in a water house, or if your moon is the only planet in a sign of universal orientation, those would be singletons. Singletons are EXTREMELY powerful forces in the natal chart. They can be considered focal points of consciousness, sometimes vehicles of manifestation. They are widely understood to have extreme expressions (or repressions) which are heavily symbolic in a native’s entire life.

People with many Aries placements, strong Martian influence, [especially if in aspect to Mercury or Mars], or hard Plutonic aspects [including conjunctions] tend to enjoy more aggressive forms of music. The types to listen to heavy metal/rock or hardcore gansta rap.

Leo and Aquarius mixing in a natal chart or in the 2nd house can make someone have a bit of a “bark” like voice.

Venus retrograde natives may have had a hard time or still have a hard time in their social lives especially if it’s placed in the 11th house.

On Chiron

People with Chiron in Aries have a fear of failure. Can suffer from identity issues. They can heal by empowering others and being independent. Chiron in Taurus feel as if they never have enough. May have grown up a bit poor or might feel as if they don’t deserve nice things. They can heal by being financially responsible, but also treating themselves to something nice once in a while. Chiron in Gemini feels like no one understands them, may have suffered from feeling unintelligent or their mental pursuits were discouraged. They can heal by speaking up. Writing or singing. Translating their pain into beautiful intellectual activity. Chiron in Cancer feel as if they can’t be vulnerable They may have been made to feel ashamed of their emotions. May have suffered neglect at home, specifically from the mother. They can heal by taking care of others. Cooking. Expressing themselves to those they trust. Not everyone will hurt you. Chiron in Leo may have suffered from being invalidated in life. Feeling rejected. Having impossible standards forced on them. Not getting recognition for their talents. They can heal through channeling creativity into art. Helping others see their worth. Being playful and bold in their own self-expression. Chiron in Virgo may suffer from some sort of distorted self-image. Perfectionism or excess of criticism from others/family. As a result, they can either be extremely critical or compensate by being people pleasers. They can heal by maintaining their health and seeing a counselor [remember Mercury who rules the mind is the ruler of Virgo so mental health is NOT something to ignore.]

People with Venus in Taurus

Are actually some of the slowest moving people in terms of romance. Even more than Capricorn Venusians. They love to take their sweet time. If they were to be a Tarot card, they’d be the Knight of Pentacles. Methodical, slow-moving, careful. They are caring but terrified of choosing the wrong person, being abandoned, or making the wrong move. They study the object of their affections almost to the level of Plutonians [but without the dark appeal]. This is because they want to know how and what pleases the other person. Very traditional.

Cancerians

Are very jealous in love and can give Scorpios a run for their money.

Leo Moons

LOVE ATTENTION I've noticed even more than Leo suns. Why? Because validation is often tied to what makes them feel good emotionally [moon]. These are the people who will post about 20 snap or insta stories talking about their day.

Gemini Mars’

Have a problem with dry-snitching on themselves. This is because their drive is tied with their intellect and speech. As a result, they can often find themselves saying more than they mean to.

Aquarian placements

Are high-key opinionated but are can also be the least accepting of other points of view, especially if Saturn/Capricorn is in the mix. This is because they are fixed air. So their mindsets/intellectual opinions are hard-pressed to change. Good luck trying to win an argument with one. However, they do move on quickly because they are detached by nature.

Sagittarians/strong sag placements will often make friends the easiest out of any zodiac sign. Opinionated but their curiosity for people from all walks of life makes it easy to relate to them. Those who come after would most likely be Gemini moons or 5th House/ 11th House Leo’s.

6th house placements, especially if Leo or Pisces sits on the cusp often are very good with animals. Piggybacking on that, Piscean placements tend to have an almost telepathic ability with animals.

Cats seem to take to Scorpionic people very easily, even if the native doesn’t care for them. As a matter of fact, most Scorpionic people have a knack with animals that are nocturnal. Spiders, Owls, Cats, Foxes. These animals will likely find a Scorpio native/ those with heavy Scorpio placements out of nowhere or perhaps never bite them.

Astro Musings No. 1 Astro Musings No. 2 Astro Musings No. 3 Astro Musings No. 4 Astro Musings No. 6 Astro Musings No. 7 Astro Musings No. 8 Astro Musings No. 9 Astro Musings No. 10

1K notes · View notes

diamondcitydarlin · 3 years

Note

what do you think about the arguments that lokius is being queerbaited? I want to enjoy and ship it so bad but it seems like im setting myself up for disappointment

And I can't assure you with full confidence that you wouldn't be. I can't be certain I won't be, though I've personally chosen to enjoy what is there and extrapolate from what we are given, even as I know that historically, statistically, it's best to assume a mainstream depiction of a m/m relationship in a Disney-Marvel production is pretty slim. But then...not nonexistent and, in many ways, the likelihood of it actually going there is higher than it's ever been. So there is that.

I've been independently studying LGBTQA+/queer representation in mainstream media for over a decade now. The term 'queerbaiting' is relatively new in fandom spaces (if we're looking big picture, back into the earliest films and TV shows, some of the earliest shipping fandoms like Star Trek), as I only started seeing it maybe around 2012-2014. It's a term I appreciate, because it represented a switch in cultural thinking from holding no expectations of creatives in Hollywood to large swaths of LGBTQA+ fans gaining the confidence to say 'no, this isn't good enough'.

It also represents the switch in Capitalist approaches to LGBTQA+ citizens, from catering solely to the religious, satanic panic morality by pretending gay people simply don't exist, to deciding that gay fans are in fact lucrative and need to be included just enough to feel inclined to monetarily contribute to a brand. They'll write scenes between characters with intentionally confusing, ambiguous energy, give them moments that are meant to be read into deeply, but rarely, rarely, with any kind of payoff that would alienate homophobic investors. The insidiousness of this tactic is in the fact that when payoff does not happen, viewers can be easily gaslit into thinking that was never the intention in the first place, they were the ones who were wrong in their takes. As I've worked professionally in entertainment as actress, director and producer with rather big capitalist brands I won't mention names of, I can assure you this -is- very much a thing, please stop giving corporations the benefit of the doubt.

There is no clean definition or qualification for queerbaiting, despite how often people want to gatekeep how gay viewers use this term. To be clear though, it is an accountability term before anything else. Not an insult, not an accusation that someone isn't good at what they do, it's a reminder that we're owed more than what we're usually given. If we don't speak out, if we don't label things queerbaiting (when they very much usually are), if we don't demand better we will never, ever, ever get it. I promise you that.

Okay, so now that we've established what queerbaiting is at least in my mind...

Do I think Lokius is being queerbaited? Yes, possibly. I'm waiting to see how the rest of the narrative plays out before I come to a definitive conclusion on my own (yes I'm actually optimistic I say as I put on clown make up), but I'm also not going to deny LGBTQA+ fans the right to feel like that's what's happening and voice their opinions. Anyone tasked with writing/creating content for mainstream audiences has a huge responsibility, in that this content will reach millions of people and has the potential to help shape our culture, perceptions- it even has the potential to help normalize and give broad optics of what it means to be queer and have queer relationships, romantic and otherwise. None of this is as trifling as, 'it's just a TV show', because it's never that simple.

As far as Lokius itself is concerned, the show spent a great deal of time first developing their bond and dynamic before (seemingly) switching gears towards elevating romantically the first feminine-presenting character Loki ran into even though there are some clear, uhm...conflicts with the idea of this actually being a thing. If it becomes a thing. It also seemed to first build a solid, unique platonic bond between the 'fem' and 'masc' character that a lot of gay fans would have appreciated seeing playing out before having them mashed together haphazardly as a romantic pairing, as has been done in media for 50+ years now. That's to say nothing of the fact that the most visible feminine character being forced into role of 'love interest' for a broken main character is one we've had to see play out over and over and over and over again too, poorly. People have a right to feel frustrated about that and voice their frustrations accordingly. We expected more of this show than that. (And yes, I am bisexual, I know that it would still technically be a queer relationship, but please consider the broader history/picture here of queer rep in media and the optics of that against that mosaic, please consider the heteronormative lens that so often claims any and every possibility for itself, please consider the long history of how feminine characters are often used as coping tools and objects of lust before they are treated as individuals deserving of their own development)

Now, again, I want to say that I am not convinced of anything really right now. I'm not taking any of the writers at face value because they are all bound by contracts and NDAs and aren't going to come out and say what the outcome of the show will be, so nothing they're putting out on twitter or in interviews is something I will be taking as absolute truth beyond assuming they're trolling, maybe even have been instructed to keep the pot boiling in the fandom through social media antics. Don't rule it out.

Things really could go either way, but my point is I do not deny the possibility of what this is and I'm certainly not going to gatekeep how other gay viewers feel they're being queerbaited, and I really don't see any reason why anyone else should either.

#lokius #im a little stoned and got wordy #to be clear i love lokius it is my life #but i have to pair it with my intimate knowledge of what goes on in capitalist entertainment #also i choose to use the term queer and im not going to debate that with anyone sorry

53 notes · View notes

crushzone · 4 years

Note

relationship hcs for akiteru 🥺🥺🥺

Hi yes yes YESSS! More love for Akiteru, here we go! 💕

Being in a Relationship with Akiteru Tsukishima 🥰

Let me start off by saying this: if you ever find yourself in a relationship with him, then congratulations, you have very great taste and a wonderful boyfriend. 😘

How it all began:

You met Akiteru at your university. As someone who greatly values academic and genuinely enjoys going to classes, you always wake up a little earlier than you had to, just so you can get a head start. Little did you know that you’d run into the cutest fellow early bird on the first day of your second year.

As expected, the building is peaceful, so quiet, as the only sound are echos from your shoes. But to your surprise, you come across a silhouette of a tall male, sitting with his back to you, in front of the massive window that overlooks the empty university.

When your footsteps come to a stop, he turns to you, lowering the book that he’s holding on to his lap. “Are you here for World War 2 in Cinema?” He asks with a smile.

His smile widens when you respond with a nod, turning around to fully face you with an arm outstretched. “My name is Tsukishima Akiteru! But you can call me Akiteru.”

You walk up to him and shakes his warm hand, as you can’t help but be infected by his genuine smile and warm demeanor.

Also noting how calloused his palms are. Hmm, what could’ve caused that 🤔

From that day on, you two would come to class even earlier; from 10 minutes, to 15, even up to 20, just so you can chit chat.

He’d bring whatever he thought was cool to show you before class too. For instance, he’s gone thrift shopping with his other friends once, and came across a children dinosaur book. It made him very nostalgic as it reminded him of Kei, but he’s also way too excited to share it with you, so he bought it on the whim.

His friends totally gave him a weird look, but they’re like: ok, yea, Akiteru’s just being hella nerdy. The usual.

You would also bring cool things to share with him before class as well, and it makes him really happy when you do.

He’d come home everyday, since the day he’d met you, with a fuzzy feeling in his chest. So he likes to snuggle his side pillow with his warm cheeks squished to it with eyes closed, day dreaming about you.

In a way, you remind him a lot of younger Kei; when he’d have someone to share his interests and passion with. However, he’s well aware that you are not his brother and that his excitement to see you every morning is way too intense for it to be something that’s just platonic.

Is also a very observant person; if you’ve gotten a haircut, re-painted your nails, or is wearing something new, he will instantly compliment you on that. And the bizarre thing is that he’s not even trying to suck up to you, it’s actually how he felt and his eyes automatically notice new things about you, even if they may be subtle.

He’s usually the one asking a lot of questions; he wants to know more about you, where you’re from, your family, your passion, hobbies.

So you were pretty surprised when you found out he’s on Kaji Wild Dogs Volleyball team. You didn’t even know what a Wing Spiker or anything is because you were never really a big sports fan.

When you frankly told him that you do not know much about sports, but is still fruitlessly trying to come up with questions, just so he can talk about his passion some more, he just laugh, a wholesome grin on his cute freaking face. 😩

“It’s okay, Y/n-san, It means a lot to me that you’re trying to understand the sport that’s meant so much to me, but that doesn’t mean you have to force yourself to speak about it for my sake. I have other passions too, and I’d rather speak about what makes the both of us happy.”

Ughh, like how are you so observant!! It’s the big brother intuition, I tell ya. Since Kei barely communicates with him verbally, he’s gotten really good at observing micro-signs.

Which MEANSSS that this man KNOWSSSS you are into him and that he’s got a chance. Oh yea, he knows bby, and he may or may not have denied it for a day, before he’s like, nah dude, I like them too, so I’m going to go for it.

Your name keeps popping up in conversation with his friends, even without his awareness. BUT if there is ever a chance for him to promote you in a conversation, he will not hesitate, and totally go all out.

He is addicted to your smile, and he wants you to keep doing whatever makes you happy.

Will go out of his ways to support your hobbies; e.g. staying up late at night to brainstorm paper ideas with you, and he’s not even in the class your paper’s for.

Speaking of assignments, you guys are the POWER STUDY BUDDY. Like wow, you know those times when you meet up with your friends for a study sesh, but it turns into a distracting mess. No no, not with you two smarties.

There’s this mutual unspoken agreement, the moment he’s asked you to study with him at the library during mid-terms. You’ll be chit chatting about anything in the world on your way to the lib, but the moment you’ve found your work desk, you’re both completely silent as your eyes skim through the pages of your textbook, while his hands scribble like flaming wheels on his notebook.

The only time one of you would speak is when you’re hungry, and you want to stop by the library’s cafe. He will always ask you if you want anything, even if you already have your sandwich in front of you.

And even if you’ve said no, he’ll still buy something extra for you anyway, cuz he knows it’s going to be a late night at the library.

Knows your class schedule by memory, will always walk or offer to drive you home. And he’ll always make sure you actually enter your apartment before leaving.

On days when he cannot be there to drive you home because of practice, he can’t relax until you send him a photo of your cat at home or something haha.

He’s basically your main ride for almost anything, including groceries. He just enjoys spending time with you in general, it doesn’t have to be anything grand, just as long as you are with him, something as dreadful as waiting at the DMV no longer sounds as bad.

There was never really a distinct moment of when your first date was, because your relationship started off with a very stable friendship of shared interests.

It’s likely that he’ll confess his feelings for you even before he’s officially asked you on a date, because you are so comfortable with each other’s presence. And you’re cool with that, you’ve always wanted a relationship with an S/O who’e like a best friend anyway.

When he confessed, he did it at least expected moments. It was when you were on your way back from grocery shopping together, you noticed a cheesy-looking Halloween shop, so you asked him if he’d be down. You didn’t even have to beg, he’s already turning his car around.

Can I also add that he’s a very smooth and calm driver?

You’ll be trying on the goofiest looking costume, and he cannot help but smile at how perfect you are to him. Then it slips.

You: Look at me, I’m a cat meow meow. Akiteru: *laughs* Wow, what an accurate imitation. You: I know right? I’m not as cute as my cat though. Akiteru: You are very cute to me. 😳

Wow okay, but was that like platonic cute, or romantic cute. You know? Sometimes, people are vague, what can I say. But not Akiteru.

Akiteru: and I meant it. I like you a lot, Y/n-san. He confesses, looking at you with a smile. Like how are you going to say no to that.

Earlier stages:

Congratulations, Akiteru is now your boyfriend. ✨

A lot of the things that had been mentioned above still remains: he’s still just as attentive and observant as he had been from the start.

He has a list on his phone, of all the things you would eye when you go window shopping, the food you crave when you are extra broke that month, and the different things that make you smile so widely, he could’ve sworn your cheeks were about to explode.

He may not be the richest person in the world, but he will go out of his way to bring your cravings/wishes to fruition. For instance, you were craving some vegetarian Ethiopian food, but it was way too pricy for you to splurge, and you can’t decide on just one. Akiteru will go out of his ways to gather all ingredients, and cook everything from scratch, just so you can experience it as identically to the original thing you had craved for.

You also like to cook together a lot, and he’s pretty great in the kitchen. Loves chopping things for you, especially onions, because he hates the way it makes you tear up. 🥺

Calls you pet names that are inspired by all the children books and anime he’d read and watch with Kei, such as “Olive Baby (Olive Oyl from Popeye the Sailor), Dokin-chan~ (From Go! Anpanman), and Lil Tweety (Warner Bros.) ”

He will just text you with “Cuddle Bug? 🐞” and that’s just code for “I want you to spoil me with cuddles right now.”

It’ll usually happen randomly, but you’ve been noticing him doing that a lot after you’ve had a long day at work or after studying. You often wonder if Cuddle Bug was actually meant to be for him, or if it’s because you looked like you needed one. Regardless, you are grateful.

You can never say no to his cuddle requests because he gives some of the best ones you’ve ever experienced.

His favorite cuddle position is when you are laying on his chest, as he bring both arms to wrap around your shoulders, tucking his nose to your hair as he ingrains the memory of your scent to his mind. The feeling of your warm hand on the dip of his broad chest, makes his heart beat a little faster, as he relishes in your presence.

But on days when you know he needs Cuddle Bug most, are when he’d return to university housing after his visit home.

On those days, he will be the one to lay on your nape, face down, as his long arms wrap around your waist, and underneath the curve of your back. Automatically, your fingers find its way to his honey hued hair, running it through his soft strands, massaging his scalp, as you occasionally brush his temple with your thumb.

You could’ve sworn he purrs like a cat whenever you do.

When you ask him how his visit home went, he always assures that it went well, but you wonder if that was the entire truth.

He always seems a little silent after his visits, not being as playful about his teasings, and his smiles being a little less energetic than what you’re used to.

You were so concerned, you even asked some of his volleyball friends, and all they know was that Akiteru’s brother gives him a hard time, sometimes.

Strange, because Akiteru had only ever said great things about his brother to you: how Kei is a regular player in the team, and that he is killing the game at his blocks. Whenever he talks about his younger brother, his eyes sparkle and his voice booms proudly.

Knowing him, you decide to leave it at that, and not pry further into it. If he wants to tell you, he’ll tell you himself.

He’ll include you in all of his social events, as long as he’s allowed to, and likes to bring you with him whenever his friends want to hangout.

You felt a little bad, because you didn’t want to take away his guy time, but his friends genuinely enjoy your company. They even ask him how you’re doing sometimes, and for him to say hi for them.

Long term:

Okay, so when I say long term, I mean that it’s past the honeymoon phase.

At this point, you guys know each other so well, like it’s the back of your hands.

You also live together now, in a two bedroom apartment, where you turned one of the bedrooms into both your study rooms.

A very adventurous couple: would go hiking and camping all the time. But he’s also kind of a big introvert, so he’s totally down for chill movie nights at home.

And when you watch movies at home, you both SPRAWL out ALLLL over the couch, doesn’t even matter if you are short or tall, you both will take up every inch of the couch.

He’ll occasionally surprise you with some spontaneous dinner dates at home too, because he knows how badly you wish your cat could join you for all the dates you’ve gone to.

On those spontaneous dinner dates, you’ll come home and he’ll greet you in some nice button ups, 3 buttons undone, black trousers, and black dress shoes. When he draws you in a hug, you can smell the faintest cologne on his neck: a mix of caramel, and something subtly spicy but refreshing.

You also understand volleyball a little better now, and is always there to cheer for him to the fullest extent of your lungs, jumping up and down in excitement every time he score.

Whenever he’s feeling a little too exhausted than he intends to, all he needs is to look over at you, and just like that, he’s instantly recharged as he jumps up and down to your wave with a peace sign.

Is also not a clingy boyfriend at all, he trusts and respects you, and you are both very independent with your own set of interests. He’s totally fine not seeing you ALL the time during the day, but you ALWAYS make dinner together a thing (or if not, at least you’ll spend one of your meals together.)

He may not be the best at communication, such as when something’s bothering him, but that is just his way of protecting you of his burden.

And being around Mr.Perceptive, had taught you to be one as well. You pick up on subtle micro-signs, such as when he would count the grains of his rice with chopsticks, before pulling one grain to his lips at a time. You KNOW something bothersome is plaguing his mind when he plays with food.

He opens up to you about his past mistakes and the reason why Kei no longer talks to him very much. He’s very bothered by the way his little brother holes up in his own room when he visits, it makes him feel like a phantom, a walking failure that just occupies his parent’s home.

And every time his facade shatters, you instantly pull him into a hug, just the same way he’s always liked, his long limbs on top of yours, with your digits entangled in his hair.

You got him to work on his communication, clearly expressing the importance of it to you. And though he struggles sometimes, he’s still doing his best to improve.

Is a very clean person, kind of obsessed with keeping the kitchen clean; he cannot enjoy dinner until everything is in place.

Not that uptight about it though, there will be days when he lets it slip. But then he’ll be right back at it, after you’ve gone upstairs to prepare for bed: quickly washing the dishes and wiping everything down.

If that is not some husband energy then I do not know what is. 😩🥰

You jokingly told him how sexy he is, whenever he does home chores, and it’s now become an inside joke. Every time one of you wipes down the counter or puts the dishes away, you’ll turn to each other and wiggle your brows suggestively, before bursting into laughters.

At this point, if you were never good at teasing, you bet you’ve improved significantly just from dating him.

You’ll really worry when Akiteru gets home late from practice, so sometimes, you’ll stop by with his dinner to find that he is alone in the gym, just practicing his spikes.

When that happens, he’ll sit outside to eat with you, stargazing. Then he’ll return to the gym to lock it up,

But on days, when you’d stop by to say hi at the gym, in the morning, his team would great you very warmly. They’re pretty much your family now, and you like to host them at your apartment for potlucks.

Now, every time Akiteru visits home, he’ll bring you with him.

His mother LOVES you, she finds you to be one of the loveliest person she’s ever met, and keeps thanking you for taking such great care of her son.

With you there with him, he no longer feels lost when he’s home, he’s got you! And anytime he gets to see Kei for dinner, he’s just grateful.

Speaking of Kei, he suppose he does not mind you. You share a lot of similar interests with him — well, that would make a lot of sense because you and Akiteru does too, and that man had such a big influence through Kei’s adolescence.

Sometimes, Kei will chill with you and Akiteru at the balcony, your favorite music playing softly in the background as Kei watches his brother practice. You can’t help but smile, when you see that the brothers are slowly reconstructing their relationship.

Kei totally hates how you and Akiteru cheers so loudly at his matches though. Now he has to deal with another person embarrassing him at the stadium lol. (Though he is low key happy you both do 🤭)

You spoil Akiteru with head massages every night, without fail. And in return, he gives you foot rubs every morning.

Here’s how it usually goes: You’ll give him a head massage for a good minute, before patting his head, leaning down to gently pucker your lips against his forehead. Then he’d lift his chin with eyes closed, and that is when you’d give him three gentle pecks on the lips before crawling under the covers beside him. “Thank you”, he’d breath gratefully with a content smile, eyes still closed.

You no longer cuddle every night, especially during the hot summer, but you will link your middle and ring fingers as you both drift to sleep, bodies facing each other in a fetal position. 🥺

And on days when he’d wake up before you, he’ll spend a minute studying your adorable sleeping face with a smile. He wants to protect you from the world, to keep you safe in his arms as you both grow stronger together as individuals.

He has no idea how he’s ended up with you, but he thanks the sky every day for granting him your existence. He loves you so much, way more than he could ever put to words. With a gentle kiss to your forehead, you stir awake to see his warm smile, you’ve grown so accustomed to.

“Good morning, y/n-san. I love you, my lil Tweety.” 😘

---------

Taglist (open): @shhhlikeme @ceo-of-daichi @karasu-hoes @super-noya @nonexistent-social-life

299 notes · View notes

marahope-things · 3 years

Text

I think the similarities that people are finding between Adora/Catra and Mara/Light Hope are less to do with the relationships being the same internally (as in, in terms of the dynamics between the two characters) and more to do with the fact that their stories deal with a lot of the major themes of the show, because the two pairings embody a LOT of the major themes of the show between them.

I don’t think it’s an accident or any kind of misrepresentation that the two relationships have parallels, but as someone who enjoys Mara/Light Hope A Whole Lot, while being pleased but more or less happy with how Catradora is presented in the show and not feeling a need to go beyond that, I want to unpick why, and what some of those differences are.

Partly because I think people make broad, thematic-level arguments about why a pairing is attractive to them, and for me, there are a lot of intra-relationship or interpersonal dynamic elements that have more bearing on why I like a ship. And it’s hard to frame in a positive light, but with Catradora, they already engage with some relationship dynamics that I’m a huge fan of (namely, rivalmancy, childhood-friends-to-lovers, and enemies-to-lovers).

The big similarities I see people picking up on are: The mind-control thing, and the "you deserve love too"/"you’re more than what you can give to other people" exchange.

And these are extremely valid parallels! They touch on two Extremely Core messages of the show! They’re very real! And you’re correct—those parallels do mean something about Mara and Light Hope, about their importance to the show and its message. Mara and Light Hope embody many of the show’s core themes, and I am glad people are starting to write about that!

But I find myself sometimes feeling like that’s… not quite the reason why I like the pairing. Y’know?

So, with the caveat that this is just my feelings about the pairing, and probably literally everyone who ships either Catradora or Marahope has a different opinion than me in some way or other, I want to discuss the major differences between Catradora and Mara/Light Hope as I see them.

Because we started liking these ships before we saw the themes that they’d be used to embody in the end, right?

Breaking it down

What Adora and Catra have is a rivalmancy, essentially—especially when they’re first introduced.

Even when they’re on the same side, they have a competitiveness to their dynamic, and part of what drives their split is that Catra, on some level, resents Adora for getting all of the things that she wants, but can’t have, because of (basically) Shadow Weaver—and then abandoning both it and her. It’s a rivalry between peers, fellow soldiers, and there’s a colossal amount of abandonment issues and emotional trauma involved as well. They’re also both close to the same age.

And they were raised together. They spent their formative years extremely close, and their split has a lot in common (probably intentionally) with painful adolescent splits that happen as people grow up, change, grow apart, and (sometimes) come back together. It’s quite moving!

Mara and Light Hope aren’t peers in the same sense; you get the sense that they started out more like co-workers, and their eventual split only happens because Light Hope has their mind wiped and their ability to choose taken away from them (Catra, on the other hand, makes a lot of choices that put her and Adora at odds, often intentionally). The two of them work together and depend on each other, and they become friends, and their roles are complementary. Literally neither of them could do the other’s job, and they depend on each other’s skillset and resources to stay safe and fulfill their own duties effectively.

So they meet as fully-formed (relatively) people in a professional context and become closer, rather than being together for those formative years and undergoing a separation as they change and discover they don’t fit the same way they used to.

There’s also an implication that Light Hope may have trained other She-Ras in the past. I don’t know how long Mara expected her tenure as She-Ra to be, but it seems like that could be a lifelong commitment, once she’s been chosen. If so, then that could imply that Light Hope’s "age" (though I don’t know if that’s something anyone would even keep track of for an AI, because they weren’t supposed to change and “grow” like a person) is on the scale of centuries by the time she meets Mara.

And even if you headcanon them traveling to Etheria together immediately after Light Hope was minted, they’re still not really anything like Catra and Adora in their dynamic. The development of their relationship has a lot more in common with interspecies or human-AI relationships in sci-fi—Terminator, Andromeda, and Killjoys come immediately to mind.

I’m also intentionally including platonic relationships here, like John Connor and Uncle Bob in Judgement Day, too, because this is such an established trope, and touches on some of those Core Sci-Fi Questions that exist in the genre—about the nature of life, consciousness, sentience, individuality, and choice. It’s not just in a romantic context that you see humans and AIs ruminating to each other about what beauty is, why people find flowers “pretty”, what it means to have free will, to feel emotions, or to be an individual. Hell, you can even include Data from Star Trek in that list.

But it is also something of a trope for AIs to "fall in love" or develop special bonds with humans that they work particularly closely with, or for humans to fall in love with AIs (sometimes they go more Pygmalion with the latter and cast the human as the AI’s creator).

Which brings me to the core trope being engaged in Mara and Light Hope’s relationship, one that Noelle has actually alluded to in their remarks during the "Exit Interviews" streams:

Relationship makes Light Hope more than their intended purpose.

Memory and programming

In one of the streams, Noelle states that the writers’ room made the decision that something about Etheria "broke" the people who have tried to conquer it, and kind of made them part of itself (God this show has Star Wars all over it). He uses several examples, including Hordak.

Hordak, however you feel about him, develops a sense of individuality that makes his re-assimilation into the greater Horde impossible. Like Light Hope, he remembers things he isn’t supposed to, and on being presented with a physical reminder of Entrapta and his relationship with her, Horde Prime’s conditioning begins to break down.

Over the course of her arc, Mara comes to realize that being She-Ra means something more than her superiors have told her, and on realizing what her superiors are doing to Etheria, concludes that She-Ra, and all of Etheria, are being exploited and need to be protected from the First Ones. So, by betraying the First Ones (breaking her oath to them), Mara fulfills her role as She-Ra.

And Light Hope falls in love with Mara, something she was never supposed to be able to do. In the end, it is the memory of Mara that allows Light Hope to break through her programming long enough to allow Adora to destroy the Sword.

I know I brought up how AIs gaining sentience and self-will is a trope within sci-fi, but the best recent example that I can think of off the top of my head (and the reason I was able to articulate this at all) is actually The Good Place, with Janet.

In The Good Place, successive reboots are the in-universe mechanism that allows Janet to grow and change—but it’s her relationship with the other core characters that shapes who she becomes and what she believes. In fact, if she hadn’t been stolen and rebooted so many times in the first place, she never would have become who she did at all.

So: Like the rest of the cast, relationship makes Janet more than she was originally intended to be. Relationship makes Janet whole and fully alive. Light Hope’s story is, um, a bit more tragic, but I think the comparison works.

Catra and Adora, on the other hand, are dealing with a separate problem(/s): Catra’s pain and abandonment (and Adora’s self-abandonment) as a result of what they endured growing up, and the angst of childhood friends growing up and growing apart. It fits very squarely within the parameters of She-Ra as a kids’ TV show.

To boil it all the way down, their relationship *is* the problem. And it takes the whole show to fix it.

What’s suggested by the (sparse) textual evidence on Mara and Light Hope is that their relationship followed a more well-worn sci-fi path: By becoming friends with Mara, Light Hope learns how to be in relationship with another person, how to make her own choices, go against her programming as needed—how to have fun and appreciate beauty and being. Her falling in love with Mara is, metaphorically, her learning how to be alive in the world. Through loving Mara, she gets a glimpse of a world beyond being someone’s instrument, someone’s tool.

That’s part of what’s so heartbreaking and beautiful about them: In the midst of a situation that’s that’s built on deception, concealment, and coercion, where both of them appear to have been lied to or denied the entire truth by their superiors, where Mara, Light Hope, and the entire planet of Etheria are considered expendable by their superiors as long as they get their shiny weapon, Mara (who seems to understand that there’s more to life than duty and heroism) creates a space for Light Hope that is free from the constraints of her programming, to a degree. And as a result, Light Hope changes.

If Light Hope is a villain for her role in all of this (and this is complicated by the fact that she’s a programmatic being created for a particular purpose), then loving Mara is part of what makes her redemption possible. Her relationship with Mara makes her more than a weapon. In fact, it breaks her as a weapon.

And there’s certainly elements of that in Catra and Adora’s relationship, but it’s not the throughline that it is for Light Hope and Mara until you get to season 5—a full three quarters of the way through the show.

Love also doesn’t play as positive of a role in Catra’s redemption arc, really (where her parallels to Light Hope would be the most obvious), both because her villainy is something she explicitly chooses, and because her internal conflict and pain regarding her feelings for Adora are so much a part of her villainy. It only becomes redemptive in Adora’s struggle with the Failsafe—i.e. when we get back into the world of the First Ones, where most of the themes of "destiny" live.

So yeah. That’s the breakdown. I want to get into the individual tropes, but I’m going to have to save that for another day.

#marahope #meta #spop

23 notes · View notes

sleepless-in-starbucks · 3 years

Note

Can you explain what a romantic QPR is? I'm just a bit confused becuase I thought QPRs are supposed to be platonic and not romantic.

oh, ofc! i’ll at least give it my best college try anyways

i’ll preface this by saying that queerplatonic relationships don’t have to be platonic! queerplatonic is a feeling subset all of and in itself, and qprs can also be sexual, romantic, alterous, none of those, or a mix of any/all of them! it’s a very broad term, and using it to label one’s relationship is a personal choice between the members of the relationship, as they feel most comfortable with

following off of that, ‘romantic qpr’ can mean a couple of different things

for me, personally, it refers to a qpr that is ‘romantically coded’, even though it doesn’t actually involve any romance. while me and my partners do engage/plan to engage in acts that are often considered solely romantic- dates, kissing, moving in together, marriage, etc- our relationships are still fully queerplatonic! at least on my end anyways- i wouldn’t know what a romantic attraction was if it hit me in the face jsdhvgbjsd

i say ‘romantically coded’ bc really there is a societal problem with deeming certain acts as ‘romantic’, and in a perfect world my relationships would probably just be queerplatonic qprs, bc nothing we did would be perceived as romantic, but y’all know society

as i said, however, that’s not the only way the phrase can be interpreted- it can refer to a relationship where all partners feel romantically about each other but are more comfortable with being in a qpr, it can refer to a relationship where only some of the partners Get romance, it can refer to a relationship that’s usually just queerplatonic but has romance in it at times, etc- the possibilities are rather endless, in a sense

so, to sum up, while some queerplatonic relationships are platonic, every qpr is different and means different things to the people involved in it, including (but not limited to) if romance and/or romantic-adjacent things are involved

#i hope that helps!!!#the cryptid speaks #lost in the fray

13 notes · View notes

thesixthstar · 4 years

Text

Just gonna say one post for Ace Awareness week really, but its a point i rarely, if ever, see made, and I’d appreciate if you (yes, you!) would read it and at least think on it despite it being a wall of text and my being a rambler. (This is kinda an ace and aro message bc for me, personally, being ace-spec and being aro-spec are intertwined in ways I cannot separate, and because imo those two IDs face certain issues together, or at least similar issues for similar reasons)

Supporting aspec people and identities doesn’t just mean supporting allo aces in relationships with other allo aces, or allo aros who are sexually active (though supporting those cases is absolutely required and imo bare minimum). Supporting aspec people and IDs involves supporting us when we question what relationship norms look like, and in building relationships that fall outside of the norm without writing them off, or pretending that “this relationship model is Just Like the Normal One! We’re not That Different!!!”

Like yes, its good to normalize relationships that aren’t currently recognized in the Mainstream (Mostly Heteronormative) Handbook of Partnership Models (and where are y’all getting these copies of the handbook that define “friendship” in the weird ways i’m seeing? what edition was that?). But imho an honorable goal would be to stop requiring that our relationships look normal to you.

I spout this off about a lot of Handbook Accepted relationships too, but the idea of what a relationship Should Be Like, outside of just. an honest attempt on all parts to create a healthy dynamic that maximizes happiness, is often harmful to a lot of relationships.

I’ve avoided using certain terms in this post (some on purpose some just bc thats how i talk/write), and if that makes it sound really broad, and less specific to asexuality in particular, that’s because it is. Aspec folks feel this, when we hear how “selfish” we’re being in relationships with allosexual partners, or when our QPR or platonic life partnership, or other Arrangements* gets written off as “just friends”, or even worse “just friends, and how stupid are you for thinking you’re the only one with a Best Friend, how stupid are you for thinking your clearly-different situation is different?”. If you talk to polyamorous folks** about this, you’ll likely hear a similar story about what folks outside of their communities consider a “real” relationship. Honestly? If you talk to the most bland looking heterosexual couple, how many of them will have a good handful of relationship issues based on what the gf/bf/wife/husband is “supposed” to do, bc they’re basing their relationship off a one-size-fits-all model, rather than addressing what they and their partner want and need out of each other and themselves? Lots. Most of whom won’t admit it because they think their problem is that they’re failing at the System, rather than the System failing them.

I usually don’t bring this up, especially during Ace Awareness Week and other such events, because I’m so used to being the Asexuality 101 teacher to many of my friends (since I was 15 basically), touting the “I’m asexual, but dont worry, I’m Just Like You!” line to make it seem approachable to outsiders, and this is really not an entry-level convo to have with a lot of folks, but i’m sick of never bringing it up. Its a conversation that has to happen and i’m apparently the only one in my little corner of the internet with a weird personal manifesto to write on the subject.

If this kind of break-down of concepts in this particular way is new to you, or your immediate reaction is “fuck all of this”, or even “aspec IDs and polyamory aren’t the same! how does it make sense to compare the two” then I have this to say to you: Hello! Welcome! I hope you’ll take a little while to be open-minded and think about these issues from a few different angles! I know it took me a good few years to navigate myself to these opinions*** and I never would have gotten there without a healthy mix of well meaning individuals ready to talk out tangled concepts without contempt. I should hope it’s obvious from this post that I don’t consider the experiences and struggles of all groups with these constructs to be equivalent to each other. But the primary reason I consider myself an inclusionist is that that’s how a community works. The more people we have coming to the table with their experiences, sharing in good faith, and fucking listening to each other, the better this turns out for all of us.

*You’ll forgive me for not being up to date on the terminology I hope, because I’m not hip with what the aspec kids are up to, and also for not trying to list Every Permutation of Non-romantic Partnership, as the idea of trying to find, label, and file into boxes every kind of animal our minds create is counter to the whole spirit of this post

**i write about polyamorous folks here as a “them” and not an “us” bc I have No Earthly Idea whether I might potentially identify as poly or not. that identity question is not important to me atm, and while I know plenty of poly folks, and have Disk Horsed some with many of them, i've never actively been in a poly relationship, and its not an ID i’ve ever actively worn, so i won’t pretend to know that from the inside experience.

***can you believe I went from “the A is not for ally! but why are poly folks asking to be included? they’re not in the same boat at all!” to genuine inclusionism without ever having had an overt conversation about it with a single soul? it was all subconscious shifting in understanding in values and the first time I realized where all my opinions had shifted on that topic, is wasn’t a surprise, but it was a “....huh” moment

#tag #ace awareness week #asexual awareness week #asexuality awareness week #aaw #idk what to call this weird personal manifesto or whatever the fuck you'd call it #ive had it bouncing around in my brain forever about a lot of sub-community arguments that my response to is like #'tear it all down stop having boxes be the main response to everything dammit'#like what #relationship anarchy #?#attraction anarchy #???#idk????#also exclusionists i do not have the energy for people who disagree with the whole premise of inclusionism so please Do Not #as if you Do I will most likely go 'ah. disagree.' and then never get around to doing the inclusionist essays with all the sources #and digressions that convo can and occasionally should have #good faith approaches only even if you disagree with me #tho i cannot promise even those that i will have the energy about them #im not the spry young lass i once was and hopping back on the Disk Horse can be a draining game #angry ace blogging #not actually angry thats just my tag

24 notes · View notes

lincoln-cannon · 4 years

Link

I’m a practicing member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the largest Mormon denomination. I love and support the Church, its members, and its leaders. But that doesn’t mean that I always agree with all of them, all of the time. Nor, of course, does it mean that other members or leaders always agree with me.

A friend recently read some of my thoughts about a recent General Conference of the Church. He observed, rightly, that “unquestioning veneration of LDS leadership is something that is inconsistent with your personal philosophy.” And he asked me some questions about my relationship with the Church.

Why a Specific Church Matters

First, he wondered “how loyalty to the formal LDS church organization relates to your philosophy.”

As context for my answer to this question, I distinguish between a religion and a church. And, in particular, I distinguish between the Mormon religion and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Religions, such as Mormonism, are more broad and abstract. Churches, such as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, are more narrow and concrete.

From a Platonic perspective, you might consider religion to be the form and church to be the instance. And, by extension, we would expect the form to admit of many possible instances. For example, the Dog form admits of both Lassie and Toto, among others. And the Mormon form admits of both The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Community of Christ, among others.

Various religions attribute more or less significance to their churches (or whatever term they might use for the formal organizations related to them). Christianity and Buddhism serve as a relatively clear example. Christianity tends to emphasize its formal organizations more than Buddhism does. And this seems to reflect differences in their fundamental philosophies toward this world and embodiment.

Mormonism, more so than any other branch of Christianity that I’m familiar with, emphasizes the value of this world and embodiment. It’s this world that should become heaven. And it’s these bodies that should become immortal. Whether or not some individual Mormons happen to aspire to merely abstract heavens, our authoritative theological tradition clearly and consistently advocates concrete heavens.

Accordingly, in my estimation, Mormonism also has a strong requirement for concrete churches. While it may be enough for a Buddhist to claim the religious identity and practice meditation on her own. Something like that generally wouldn’t be enough for a Mormon – not even close to enough. Mormonism mandates embodied expression on all levels, and even anticipates an increasingly robust expression of that embodiment going into the future.

So, for me, it’s highly important not only that I identify as Mormon but also that I participate actively in a Mormon church. Otherwise, I don’t think I’d be practicing Mormonism as fully as I’m capable of practicing it. I recognize that other people, now and in the past, have or have had different limitations and challenges. So I don’t intend this as universally prescriptive.

But why, then, am I a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in particular? In part, that’s because I was raised by parents who are members of the Church. But, as I’ve written before, I also feel that this is still the place, for both emotional and rational reasons. Notably, I esteem the Church as the best available, albeit imperfect, embodiment of formal communal advocacy for theosis.

The Utility of Church Practices

Next, my friend asked, “Do you find utility in obedience, orthodoxy, tithing, garment wearing, rigorous sabbath observance, avoiding coffee, tea and wine, and other aspects of the faith that (arguably) don’t have obvious practical benefits?”

I find utility in obedience that is conforming to the image of Christ, as exemplified by Jesus. I don’t find utility in what many recognize as “obedience culture,” which too often manifests as lazy pandering to some excessively opinionated authority figure. The former is the transformative heart of the Gospel of Christ. The latter is what D&C 121 warns us against.

I find utility in qualified patience with thoughtful expressions of perceived orthodoxy. But that’s mostly because I want to be charitable. Dogma should be recognized as the antithesis of Mormonism, which celebrates the necessity of dynamic faith in perpetual revelation and eternal progression. As Joseph Smith put it, “the creeds set up stakes, and say hitherto shalt thou come, and no further, which I cannot subscribe to.”

Tithing is easy, for me, to associate with utility. No formal organization can operate without resources, which tithing provides in our case. And, although I recognize some people don’t like how many resources the Church has amassed, I actually like that it has amassed those resources. I hope that the Church, under the influence of its members and the direction of its leaders, will eventually use those resources to realize some possibilities associated with genealogy that it may be uniquely positioned to realize.

I wish the garment design and manufacturing process were better. Some will consider that vanity. That aside, there’s utility in constantly wearing symbols that remind me of the transformative process in which I wish to be constantly engaged. Church members receive the garment in the temple when we’re literally anointed – literally christened to join in the roles and titles of Christ.

Rigorous sabbath observances are different for different members of the Church. If a particular set of rules and behaviors works for someone (and doesn’t harm anyone else), I’m fine with that. And, by “works,” I mean that I hope it genuinely functions to achieve the purpose of the sabbath as expressed in scripture. Not entirely joking, I sometimes embellish my sense of that purpose by claiming that God is Buddhist on the Sabbath.

I think it’s wise to avoid drinking alcohol. The evidence for health benefits seems to be mostly attributable to the non-alcohol parts of the beverages, which can be consumed in other ways. And the evidence for the social and health detriments is strong – soberingly strong, and I should write more about that sometime.

In contrast, I think the evidence for overall health benefits from coffee and tea is strong. So I avoid them only for symbolic reasons, as an expression of solidarity with members of the Church. And I consume nootropic components of coffee and tea in supplement form on a daily basis.

There are many other aspects of Mormonism that are controversial. In my opinion, some of the controversies are worthy of attention. And others aren’t. I’ve previously written some of my thoughts on the most popular Mormon controversies.

How the Church Is True

Finally, my friend asks, “Do you believe the church’s claim to be the only true church?”

As context for my answer to this question, I’ll share some interpretive thoughts on what I (and probably most Mormons) consider to be the two most important passages of scripture about the “only” true church. The first is in the opening section of The Doctrine and Covenants. Here’s the verse that receives the most attention:

30 And also those to whom these commandments were given, might have power to lay the foundation of this church, and to bring it forth out of obscurity and out of darkness, the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased, speaking unto the church collectively and not individually –

When reading this verse out of context, a careful reader should ask several questions.

For example, what are “these commandments?” Verses 6 and 17 make clear that the commandments are, at least, the content of a particular book. That book is The Doctrine and Covenants (D&C), which has evolved and continues to evolve in different ways among different Mormon denominations. Joseph Smith either wrote or dictated most of the original content of the book.

Why do I say, “at least?” That’s because verse 18 expands “commandments” to include that which God gave “to others.” And it’s not clear whether we should understand that expansion to be part of “these commandments” when the phrase appears in later verses.

Likewise, what is “this church?” Presumably, it’s at least the church that Joseph Smith organized. But the only reference to “church” outside verse 30, in the entire text, is in the first sentence. And that reference is ambiguous, with God addressing “my church” while the eyes of God are “upon all men.”

The subsequent text makes the reference to “church” even more ambiguous. The second half of the first verse says that God is addressing “people from afar; and ye that are upon the islands of the sea.” The second verse says that God is addressing “all men,” echoing the first sentence. Are these additional audiences or additional ways of describing the “church” audience?

So there are at least two ways that someone could read verse 30. It could mean that God gave Joseph Smith the power to found The Church of Christ, which was the original name of the specific organization that evolved into multiple Mormon denominations. Or it could mean that God gave both Joseph and “others” the power to found a church that consists, or perhaps could or should consist, of “all men” – all humanity.

At first, people who’ve long read the text in the first way generally discount the strength of the second reading. But there are reasons to consider the second reading more robust. For sake of time, I’ll point out only one, which I consider the strongest.

The Book of Mormon existed before The Doctrine and Covenants. And the opening section of The Doctrine and Covenants even references The Book of Mormon in verse 29, the verse just before the one in question. So the content of The Book of Mormon is important for contextualizing the meaning of verse 30.

The Book of Mormon also contains the other most important passage of scripture about the “only” true church. That passage of scripture is in 1 Nephi 14:

10 And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.

According to this passage of scripture, there are only two churches. One is good. The other is evil. And there are no others.

In other words, if you’re not part of the good church then you’re part of the evil church. There are no exceptions. At least, that’s what the text seems to say. And the next verses elaborate.

11 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the whore of all the earth, and she sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.

12 And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw.

So, although there are only two churches, those churches are both spread across the entire Earth. The evil church is among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people. And so is the good church, even if in fewer numbers.

How does this relate to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Are we, as members of the Church, ready to esteem everyone in the Church as good and everyone outside the Church as evil? I’ve observed a few members of the Church who seem ready for that. But most of us, including most leaders, seem to have a different perspective.

Most members of the Church acknowledge that we see good people among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people. And most also acknowledge that we see good people among all religions, even when we have disagreements with them. So we must either discard 1 Nephi 14, or understand the good “church” as something other than an exclusive reference to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in particular.

What is that non-exclusive something else? As 1 Nephi 14 describes it, it’s the “church of the Lamb of God.” I think D&C 1 describes the same thing as “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth.” And I think Paul describes the same thing in the New Testament as “the Body of Christ.”

I also think John describes the same thing in the New Testament as “the only true God.” Yes. I’m saying that I think the scriptures are intentionally ambiguous between God, Christ, and the only true church. I think God, Christ, and the only true church are ultimately the same thing: a synthesis of sublime persons and places.

Returning to D&C 1, it says that “those to whom these commandments were given, might have power to lay the foundation of this church, and to bring it forth out of obscurity and out of darkness.” I trust that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has an important and unique role to play in bringing the only true church “out of obscurity and out of darkness.” I also trust that other people, including other religions, have different, important, and unique roles to play in that same work. This is an ecumenical approach to Mormonism, which perhaps apostle Orson Whitney described best:

God is using more than one people for the accomplishment of His great and marvelous work. The Latter-day Saints cannot do it all. It is too vast, too arduous for any one people.

Does this mean that I think all churches are equally good for everyone? No. I do think we’re each unique, so there’s not one right answer for everyone all the time. But I also think that differences have real practical consequences.

Accordingly, I encourage compassionate missionary work, both by my Church and by other Mormon denominations and by other religions. A Biblical proverb says, “As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.” I think we should all work to share our religions and other philosophies to the best of our abilities, with the aim of truly helping each other. I trust such work will tend to improve our understanding of life, our sense of purpose, and our practical ability to realize a better world.

Come to Church

In that ecumenical and missionary spirit, I invite you to come to church.

If you’re a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I encourage you to renew your engagement. If you’re disillusioned, talk about it with people you trust. If you’re happy, kindly share the reasons for your happiness with others while listening to them too. We still have so much work to do, so let’s not “sleep through the restoration,” as apostle Dieter Uchtdorf put it.

If you’re not a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, this is an invitation to learn more. Don’t expect us to be perfect, because we aren’t. But we have a transformative message and practice that helps many people. Contact me about it, or I can connect you with the missionaries.

If you’re not interested in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, consider this an invitation to friendly competition. Come to church in your own way. And let’s see how our differing choices contribute to making the world a more compassionate, creative, and thriving place for everyone.

I trust that, ultimately, all of this brings the only true and living church out of obscurity and out of darkness.

Originally published at lincoln.metacannon.net on July 02, 2020.

2 notes · View notes

violetemerald · 5 years

Text

Ok yes, I've decided I like the terminology of Alterous Attraction

I started dating my current partner about a month and a half ago.

Yesterday, I wrote to them:

So I've been scouring Tumblr, and also looking a little in an aromanticism Facebook group I'm in. I wanted to better understand what some people have been calling "alterous attraction" for a few years.

I think now that I've read quite a bit on the subject today during lunch and stuff I'm pretty sure it's a term that describes what I feel pretty well. In fact before I met you in person i was already wondering if maybe instead of saying I'm gray-pan-romantic I could/should just say I'm aromantic, asexual, but pan-alterous with strong emotions not on either the sexual or romantic axis at all? I don't think it feels right either to drop the gray-aro label though. I kinda maybe currently like alterous as a description of the way my gray-aro-ness plays out, if you bear with me.

There's a page on this wiki about the word: https://aromantic.wikia.org/wiki/Alterous

But there are much more in depth personal attempts at explaining it that I think better capture some of it, especially on Tumblr

The biggest problem is after 5 years of trying to figure out which, if any, of my attractions are romantic, I still don't even understand what romantic is supposed to be describing really if you take monogamous inclinations AND the tying it to sexual feelings both out of the equation. It's one of those "if you still don't know after 5 years you're definitely aro as romantic attraction is a know It when you feel It thing" However, I definitely feel certain things close enough to romance that It is impossible to just act like I'm totally clear cut aromantic.

It feels somewhat wrong to call what I feel for you right now "platonic", although of course it all depends on how broad an umbrella term platonic can be and how many emotions can fit in there.

In the asexual community and aromantic community people take for granted that the word platonic means nonromantic, and that things like friends with benefits could be sexual but not romantic and if they are nonromantic, even with sex it's platonic. That's where the evolution of the word platonic has gone despite mainstream society thinking platonic means nonsexual.

[Some places i frequent this was being explored.] Interesting takeaways there included that platonic actively describes *something*, but what that "something" is muggy be debated, but it's different in connotation than just the word nonsexual or just the word nonromantic. Aces probably saw the things usually described as platonic and inferred a different meaning than nonsexual - because sex and romance are so tied in most of society, they saw things that had love but were not of a romantic type of love what was most often called platonic and took it to mean that to fill a certain lexical gap without realizing that they were even changing the definition?

When queerplatonic was coined as a term the idea was queering what platonic could mean was necessary, to show how intense or deep "platonic" feelings could indeed be, but it was about the relationship, and the only words anyone was using for the attraction was still basically just "platonic attraction" or maybe "emotional attraction" etc but avoiding the word "romantic".

But the ace and aro conversations splintered in different directions and people who were involved in coining queerplatonic were into middle age adulthood (or like whatever we call being in your 30s) with less time for ace blogging and less energy for all the fighting against the exclusionists etc. And new people started saying that queerplatonic relationships were in between platonic and romantic, and even using the amatonormative phrasing "more" than platonic feelings in various ways, instead of just saying "different". When some of the older ace bloggers caught on that this word "alterous" was being used to mean what people had already decided platonic meant except saying it was NOT platonic, well... Idk there were kinda a lot of people i had been reading for years saying no they don't buy into alterous as a concept.

But now that I've had years to reflect on it, I think I've warmed up to the term, warmed way up and have been thinking for a little while that it might be the word I needed all along. One Tumblr post said it's the desire to not "date" someone as much as to "become family" with them.

One person on Facebook said:

I'm polyalterous and I've definitely struggled to explain it in ways that make sense to others, or at least to alloromantics. It's been a while so I might make more sense now.

For me it's like, there's platonic attraction and then there's that muddled with something else. I think the problem explaining was that I can't explain whatever it is it's muddled with.

Recently I saw another -alterous person describing it with colors. Like if romantic attraction is red and platonic is yellow alterous attraction is orange.

But looking at that person's words, I think if you can't explain what it's muddled with, maybe alterous isn't clearly right in the middle but is yellow-green or something clearly distinct from romance, and like platonic feelings, but with something else too.

And a person who identifies as idemromantic (which they explain here) said:

...a wider variety of options! Romantic attraction is fulfilled by a romantic relationship, platonic is fulfilled by a friendship, sexual attraction is fulfilled by sex etc - alterous attraction, for me, is fulfilled by friendship OR romance, which really makes things easier. XD

The interesting dynamics here are that, if basically any of my friends asked me out I'd probably be game, but also, if I ask someone out and get turned down it's no big deal. Like I wouldn't be sad if my partner broke up with me, unless ze also decided not to be my friend anymore.

Another way I've put it is, I'm low-key in love with all my close friends, but in a way that doesn't demand anything but friendship to feel like it's fulfilled?

Also, idemromantic is basically defined as a type of grayromantic wherein whether what you feel is categorized as romantic or platonic attraction is determined by outside factors.

There is always variety in how people will experience a form of attraction, so obviously not all people who believe they experience alterous attraction (which is sometimes treated as a synonym for platonic attraction certain places, and sometimes especially as a synonym for the rarely used "queerplatonic attraction") will feel the same way about things.

But the more I read on it the more it kinda does feel like it describes my feelings pretty accurately. Alloromantic asexuals usually like kissing and cuddling and holding hands it seems like, and I know I'm demisensual for that axis of attraction (hugging and cuddling and other touch... but more than likely not mouth kissing at all). Aesthetic attraction is often maybe a part of alloromantic ace crushes too. But none of that is quite me. I think I feel alterous attraction quite fast into meeting certain select people...?

Other things like desire in the abstract to have a partner to go through life with have nothing to do with attraction, but I do also feel a type of attraction that has been really annoyingly hard to describe for too many years and I still want to describe it after all that time. So. I don't like just deciding I'm not going to. That isn't satisfying to me. Alterous as a word now feels more satisfying.

#aromanticism #aromantic #queerplatonic relationship #queerplatonic #alterous attraction #platonic attraction

24 notes · View notes

bonesandblood-sunandmoon · 4 years

Text

The Baggage of Love

CoA prompt for Dec 2019 - “Love” [Call for Submissions]. Under a cut due to length; there’s a few sections: Family, Friends, So-Called “Puppy Love”, Love is a Four-Letter Word, and “not gay as in happy, but queer as in i love you”. (Link to that quoted post is provided.)

Family

In terms of feeling (personal experience) and topic (impersonal), there’s an iceberg when approaching familial love (and the lack thereof). I don’t have the spoons for poking at the effects of our parents’ lives on us, divorce, growing up in an essentially single parent house, or the fragility of familial love, usually framed in terms of acceptance, around queer and trans identities. Other people have written about the popularity of the Found Family trope in queer fandom, intergenerational trauma, and all kinds of family stuff, and I am but a simple blogger. I do remember that it was first with my family that I was exposed to the concept of love and saying that I loved them, and when push comes to shove, it’s not uncommon for stories to default to parental love as an important element of a character’s story (‘at least their family will always be there for them’).

Familial love can be fraught with complications of our own parent-child or caretaker-child baggage (if grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc. raised us), but I suspect there are some aros who would say that it’s a different flavor of love from what’s talked about in relation to aromanticism. The whole offspring thing is a whole ‘nother can of worms that could be a separate CoA prompt, but I can see child rearing being separate from the alloromantic relationship elevator in a way that isn’t incompatible with being aro, even if co-parenting is usually presented romantically in most media. (At least, off the top of my head, I associate it with ‘becoming a step-parent’ narratives, but that doesn’t mean non-romantic co-parenting isn’t out there.)

Friends

I know I’ve seen it cross my dash about not emphasizing platonic love over romantic love or over emphasizing friends as a means of ‘aros are still human’, but I didn’t save links for an idea of how discussions about prioritizing friendship have been happening. On the one hand, I can understand how uncomfortable and alienating this can be for aplatonic aros, but on the other hand, I spend most of my time in the allo-allo world with people who clearly prioritize romantic love over friendships, so it feels like I don’t actually experience very much prioritization of friendship. I don’t mean that the aro community shouldn’t be cautious of prioritizing platonic love and relationships. It’s more of a personal balancing act, but I’m not quite finding the right words for what I want to say right now.

(Aside: When I think of love that hasn’t been otherwise specified, I think of the middle school banter with some of my friends - something like a minor inconvenience leads to “I hate you” “Aw, I love you, too” - juxtaposed against feeling blindsided in high school that, apparently, I’m misleading others if I say ‘I love you’ to a friend. Unbeknownst to me, I was dating someone for about two or three months in 9th grade because of that. I think of wanting to tell someone that I was proud of them facing one of their fears during the course of that day’s work (“I love you for trying”). I think of reassuring friends that I care about them.)

When I think of just the word ‘love’, I think of an amorphous, unspecific feeling love that seems to reasonably include friendships. Some posts that were probably meant to stay personal/venting posts from aro bloggers use love to mean romance, but sometimes, that feels about as restrictive as allo-allo people assuming I must be dating a friend in order to say love. I may not feel as comfortable saying it out loud anymore, but I still love my friends in a way that’s hard to name or specify any further yet isn’t romantic.

So-Called “Puppy Love”

I feel like I’ve explained this before, but I have memories of crushes that have faded and become hard to translate to present/future perceptions. One of my past rounds of shadow work was specifically aimed at recovering from a crush on a friend ending our friendship, and I’ve always been embarrassed to talk about it, particularly as the final straw that set off one of my depressive episodes in high school. ~ One of those overperforming emos writing sad poetry about an unrequited crush? The emotional dysregulation of experiencing the first major heartbreak and becoming a depressed teen stereotype? ~ It was cringey before calling things cringey was a thing. (Also, please don’t go looking for my middle/high school era DA account where that’s been immortalized.)

In hindsight, I can recognize a whole bunch of comparatively minor crushes were probably more based on aesthetic attraction because they didn’t actually come with the same type of ‘butterflies’ and daydreaming about hypothetical futures. The crushes that were more substantial and had to be accommodated were more likely on friends, and it faired better to just wait out the feelings with no disclosure. I can think of at least one occasion where I was semi-aware that my crush was aesthetically based and I didn’t actually want to date him, but that awareness didn’t come along until undergrad. The last situation I definitely call a crush was in Sophomore year of undergrad and involved a friend, who in the past year found out about it and wasn’t upset or anything. (Shout out to friendship that can survive accidentally revealing that time I had a crush on her because she follows my tumblr.)

The Lightning Incident (as I so creatively refer to it) was this random, out of the blue event in my (I believe) Senior year of undergrad where my brain just kinda blanked, I felt internally giddy, and I just forgot how to speak while a cute girl I didn’t know was talking to me. Like, I just mentally shut down a bit and wandered away from the salad bar in a daze. For sheer experience on my end, I’m including it here, but I’ve still never been sure if it was a crush because my brain forgetting how to talk is incredibly counterproductive to interaction (and hasn’t happened before). I felt incredibly nervous talking to her during future conversations, but it didn’t quite feel the same as what I’ve experienced as a crush before. (I’m also 99% sure she never picked up on any of my internal weird feeling experiences and hasn’t found out since then, so yay me for keeping a lid on that.)

Love is a Four-Letter Word

Originally, I had something about hearing the line attributed to this section from a cartoon villain and the presentation of an inability to love in some form as a shortcut to villain coding planned, but then, in the midst of ‘pre-headache brain static’, I remembered a line from a post, “M is for the lack of madness | Called love that others see” (‘Aromantic’ acrostic poem). For a certain amount of aros, it’s probably just a relatable line, and they don’t necessarily give it much thought. I still haven’t been able to figure out how I feel about equating love to madness. On the one hand, there’s somewhat of a literary tradition, so it’s not exactly a new idea:

“Love is merely a madness and, I tell you, deserves as well a dark house and a whip as madmen do, and the reason why they are not so punished and cured is that the lunacy is so ordinary that the whippers are in love, too” (As You Like It, Act 3 scene 2, No Fear Shakespeare link).

On the other hand, I have complicated feelings around the idea because of my own mental health issues. But if a crush ended a friendship that was important to me in high school, and it was tied up with depression, doesn’t that make it sorta relatable? Maybe for someone else, but I wind up thinking about the ashamed teen who couldn’t explain what was wrong in such a way to be believed and get help because it was ‘just an unrequited crush I would outgrow quickly’, and the isolation of not being able to talk to anyone about a same-gender crush that didn’t help the depression. I may not have had to face homosexuality being listed as a paraphilia, sexual orientation disturbance, or other listing in the DSM, but that didn’t necessarily mean it was a supportive atmosphere to reach out to ‘trusted’ adults.

I don’t have the energy to poke at other relevant details around my mental health right now, but there’s a certain knee jerk reaction to feel uncomfortable with the implication that an element of a romantic, sexual, or otherwise specified orientation may get people called crazy. I know aros are usually trying to joke about alloromantics (punching up, as it were), and no one wants to disclaimer their posts for every little thing. It’s entirely possible I’m overthinking this, and it’s bumping up against other baggage (around gender therapy and not being ‘too mentally ill to be believed’, for example), but I would rather not have ‘love is madness’ be a thing that people try to fold into permanent aro infrastructure. (The use of ‘love’ to mean ‘romantic love’ might also cast too wide a net and people who use ‘love’ non-romantically might think they’re being included.) If someone wants to call me ‘mad’, I’ve got brain shenanigans and symptoms to use as justification instead.

“not gay as in happy, but queer as in i love you”

There’s something about the first half of this post [link] that seems suited for spoken word poetry, and I don’t know how to translate my feelings into a written reply or commentary. However, I want to end with this because it scratches a hopepunk itch, and since I’m wrapping up this post on New Year’s Eve 2019, I feel like I could use a little hope for 2020. Maybe love is a messy concept that’s broad and narrow, felt by everyone and felt by no one (depending on each definition), and carries only as much meaning as you give it. Maybe love has no inherent feeling that’s universal, and it’s all down to action and inaction, like radical kindness. (I don’t know.)

#My writing #aro spectrum #queer #mental health

1 note · View note

trender-sollux · 5 years

Text

anti anti discourse megapost

I’m probably not the Best Most Informed person to ask about this stuff but!! here’s the disc horse as I understand it. this is pretty much a tumblr formatted argumentative essay, so buckle up or scroll to the tl;dr as fast as you can.

(I’ll put it under a cut bc 1.) things are gonna get pretty controversial, and 2.) things got Very long Very fast.)

the bg (the intro paragraph)

in fandom, as most people know, people tend to ship characters together. it’s fun to think about what two characters may act like in a relationship, and this gives way for loads of innovative and unique content to be made around ships! communities can be built, friends can be made, and lots of original fan content can be made centered around shipping characters together!

now, everyone has different tastes in ships, whether it be gay straight or somewhere in between, as well as different tastes in dynamics! (take the fave ship dynamics art meme that’s been going around for reference on what that means lmao)

some people may not even like to ship anyone with anyone, choosing instead to focus on lore or more platonic but no less important relationships, which is also just fine!

la problema

there however is copious amounts of people who deem other people’s ships “problematic”.

this in and of itself is not the problem: whether the ship makes them uncomfortable because of:

a large age gap (typically of 10+ years)

one person being a minor and the other an adult

it being an incestuous relationship of any sort (whether by blood or not)

they don’t enjoy the dynamic of the characters (perhaps it’s an unhealthy or simply turbulent relationship)

that is not the problem.

people are allowed to be uncomfortable with pairings! it’s not something they can help! content reminding people of real world issues or trauma are especially touchy, and that’s understandable and completely okay.

people may even be uncomfortable with those that consume that content, whether they have a sound reason or just simply because they don’t like it (they don’t really owe an explanation), and if they should want that content tagged so that they can avoid it, or ask simply that people who like it and post about it not interact with them so that they can further avoid it, that is perfectly okay.

ships can squick people out or even badly trigger them (in the serious mental terminology way not the internet watered down ‘this makes me mad’ way)!

the real problem comes when you have people harassing others for ships they don’t like.

you have loads and loads of call out culture where hundreds of people ridicule targeted shippers for their problematic pairings, calling them pedophiles or incest supporters or whatever buzz word of the day is to make them out to be awful scummy people.

they make call out posts to “expose them”, get people on their side, tell them they shouldn’t enjoy this thing that makes them happy, and in a rather awful amount of cases, send death threats and attempts to dox them/leak their information, things that can ruin actual lives.

all over the enjoyment of fictional pairings.

you can replace “ships” with just “fictional characters” or “stories” and you have anti-fiction discourse, where people harass the fans (or authors/creators!) of specific “problematic” characters or stories the same way they do shippers.

(also, about to get real controversial here, but you could also replace shippers w/ fujoshi/fudanshi and get the same effect. I know that saying fujoshi are gross is the hot new trend, but anti-fujoshi are just as bad as anti-shippers. I’m significantly less qualified to talk on that and I can link some really great posts if you want more info on that mess, but for now I’ll just say I’m pro-fujoshi and go.)

(if you go through the vld ship tags, I guarantee you will run into a lot of this for reference, though tw for death threats and A Lot of them. kl@nce has an infamous anti following, and anti-sh@l@din has a very fervent following as well.)

these people commonly refer to themselves as the broad and catch-all term “anti”. anti-insert ship here, anti-insert character here, anti-insert story here. they are against them, those who create content for them, and those who just sit back and enjoy them.

why that’s bad

at first glance, this seems like a good thing.

after all, people who consume that content must condone it, right? why else would they enjoy it? and if they condone such awful things, they’re awful people and they must deserve whatever happens to them! they’re dangerous! they deserve threats and misery and the loss of their jobs! they don’t deserve to be happy! they don’t deserve to be alive!

this mentality is really why a lot of antis end up being young people with an interest in activism. social activism is a good thing, after all. raising awareness about real problems through a social platform is a good thing.

it also tends to attract young trauma survivors who went through similar experiences as those portrayed in fiction.

not all antis are young/naive. that’s too much of a scapegoat (that they already use themselves too much). there are a lot of adult antis.

however, a lot of anti rhetoric is specifically targeted at minors. some antis will go out of their way to harass adults that make explicit content for other adults, saying that they are predatory for making it because it makes the anti uncomfortable.

I’m not saying I was immune either; for a while I thought that was just.

antis have a tricky way of worming themselves out of responsibility like that, after all. they make the victim out to be deserving of punishment, whatever it may be, whether it be some public humiliation or threats or leasing information that could put them in real actual danger (which is illegal, by the way.)

I never participated in death threats or anything (they made me,, really uncomfortable), but for a while, at very least, the public shaming made sense.

however, this doesn’t actually help trauma survivors. it doesn’t help people that actually go through horrible situations like the ones depicted in fiction. it doesn’t help those who are groomed by pedophiles, or abused by family members, or in abusive relationships.

what it does do is bully and ridicule people for something that inspires them and brings them happiness. people who did nothing wrong.

this is commonly referred to as performative activism.

you take the name of something vile and awful, and use it to say you are doing something for the greater good, a righteous and necessary evil, but really you are doing nothing at all. nothing progressive to help those in need, nothing daring or brave, nothing to make the world a better, kinder place. nothing.

it can be done out of the desire to help, or the desire to make a difference as someone who isn’t sure how, but your intent isn’t the issue on the table. the fact is that anti rhetoric hurts innocent people.

walking through common anti talk points (q&a)

now, I know that there are people who interact w/ my tiny blog who are antis, and actually one of my super tiny follower count is an anti (which I’m a lil sad about bc they have super cool art and a generally positive blog; not to be indirect but I also don’t wanna be like Hey I Don’t Agree With You In Particular. like nah they’re really cool actually and I hope they’re having a chill day), and for you antis reading this, you may be thinking, “sol, I see what you’re saying, but I’m not convinced antis are all that bad!”

well, it’s time for a lil bit of q&a!!

What makes problematic content innocent?

the content itself isn’t hurting anyone.

content, online especially in this day and age , is oftentimes tagged to make sure no one is triggered by the content they want to enjoy. if not tagged, usually descriptions or summaries include warnings. if not in the summary, ratings (like in movies) are also a good indicator of what you should look out for.

let’s say, for example’s sake, someone ends up ignoring the warning and consuming the content anyway, and ends up hurt because of it.

the content is not at fault, the willful ignorance of the person is.

What if they didn’t know to read the warning?

they were still warned. this should be taken as a learning experience, and they should be more careful in the future. it may sound harsh, but not knowing how something works isn’t exactly any excuse. people aren’t exempt from consequences because they didn’t know how something works.

What makes the creators of problematic content innocent?

a lot of people have the misconception that if someone makes content for something, they think it’s okay or would do something like it in real life.

this is not inherently true.

I’m not saying there may be predatory content creators out there, but that definitely does not mean that all content creators that produce things with dark themes always always think that it’s okay in real life.

there is such a thing as exploratory fiction. this is where although you know something is bad and dangerous, you’d like to know more about it and envision scenarios around it from a safe environment. writing or making art won’t leave you with permanent life ruining trauma, but you still get to explore that concept and sate that curiosity.

exploratory fiction can even be used as a coping mechanism for trauma survivors! that’s right!! some of the exact same trauma survivors that antis claim to want to protect and give voices to are some of the people hurt by their rhetoric.

my own traumas and potential anecdotes aside, I don’t really know much about this topic and as such I’ll let other survivors get more in depth/talk more personally if they’d like (as no survivors deals with their trauma the same way), but I know for a fact that exploring something that hurt you badly in the past can be an excellent way for someone to better understand themselves, what they went through, and better cope with what happened.

it may seem like making light of a bad situation, but it’s their trauma to deal with, not anyone else’s. no one can tell them that they’re reacting wrong. if it makes them happy and isn’t inherently hurting anyone, it shouldn’t be taken away from them.

(I’ve seen anti rhetoric directly harm trauma/abuse survivors and for their privacy I won’t name them but don’t come @ me w/ your “But I’m A Trauma Survivor And I’m An Anti” junk. I’m not saying you can’t be a trauma survivor and an anti. I’m simply saying that antis can’t exactly be counted as completely innocent and uwu-unproblematic either.)

What makes the fans/consumers of problematic content innocent?

by reading something or looking at something, did you just hurt somebody?

did you read this book or look at this art and in doing so just ruin someone’s entire life by violating them or some other heinous act?

no. that’s not how anything works ever.

by writing about murder, did someone just take a knife and kill someone? did someone die because they wrote a book? is every murder mystery author actually a murderer?

no. (but that would make an excellent murder mystery novel. an unreliable narrator who is revealed to be the murderer all along lol writing prompt)

by that same token, reading about someone dying doesn’t make you a murderer or as good as one.

people may come to realize things about themselves through fiction, as access to terminology and information may help them develop, but someone can enjoy fiction simply because it makes them happy and they enjoy it.

But consuming problematic content can inspire someone to do something problematic! Fiction affects reality!

taking inspiration from something and putting something into action are two entirely different things.

assuming a person has the presence of mind not to be so susceptible to suggestion that they do everything they see on tv, fictional content on the damn internet shouldn’t be any different.

But what about Jaws? Shark hunting saw a huge spike after its release because people were all afraid of sharks because of it!*

people were already afraid of sharks. people probably already wanted to hunt sharks, dude. what do you think inspired the original movie?

I mean, a huge carnivorous fish with rows and rows of teeth? and it occasionally came up and just took chunks out of people?? it was horror/thriller material just begging to be used.

shark attacks definitely got more publicity because of the success of the movie, but if you think there wasn’t a fear of sharks before Jaws, you’re either super dense or super short sighted.

also, if you think hunters won’t hunt something just because it’s super big and scary, you have never met a hunter. Jaws’ story is not exactly the perfect comparison to the average person minding their business who would never ever consider doing something heinous.

if someone already wants to do something, they will do it whether or not they have fiction to blame for it. they may never consume that fiction and still do it.

they are the screwed up ones, and it is not because they consume screwed up fiction. that is correlation, not causation.

fiction in and of itself does not affect reality. it is the people who use fiction as a scapegoat to weasel themselves out of the consequences for their actions who say it do.

Does that mean that all fiction is exempt from criticism?

hell no. in fact, fuck no.

fiction can still be bad. fiction can be piss poorly written. the characters can be well presented but executed poorly. the designs might be good but they might not make sense. the anatomy might be fuckin wack and the story might not go anywhere. it might just be pure self indulgent nonsense that no one on earth but the creator enjoys.

this does not mean anyone gets the right to completely forget all sense of human decency and make people feel like shit for the things they created.

as a creator, creating stuff is hard. it takes time energy and practice.

some professional artists’ work aren’t really my thing and their work may make me a little uncomfortable to look at, but I’m not all in their comment sections making their days worse. I recognize that they put time and effort into it, and they may not even be too confident about it!!

sometimes the nicest things you can say is absolutely fucking nothing. however, if you have to say something mean, if you have to give those damn two cents, at least recognize that there is a real human being with thoughts and feelings on the other side of your screen, and they’d probably appreciate some manners and maybe some well wishes for the trouble. no sense belittling people when you can uplift them and inspire them to do better instead.

Does this mean you hate antis?

in any other post I would just say yes. I hate their rhetoric and the awful shit they put creators and fans alike through. however, because this post is informative, my precise answer is not technically.

I do not wish harm on antis. I don’t wish death on them. they deserve their privacy as much as anyone, and I won’t harass them though they may harass others.

I think the things that they do is often times abhorrent and I think that their toxicity is largely a contributing factor in how draining fandom culture has become and I hate that. I hate feeling unsafe in spaces meant to be fun and community driven. I hate looking through blogs to make sure I don’t accidentally come into contact with someone who may potentially try to dox me because I read a comic they think is garbage.

however, I don’t think all antis deserve real hatred. some are simply misguided and don’t do this super invasive awful shit. even if they do this awful shit, I still hope they can change for the better and address their issues, apologize even if they can’t/won’t be forgiven, and become happier chiller people who can focus their energy towards better things.

like... I don’t think I hate them as much as I hate who they are right now. despite what another bit of anti rhetoric says, people aren’t static. even if it doesn’t excuse what they’re doing and consequences will find them accordingly, they deserve room to grow. all people deserve room to grow. they aren’t entitled to my forgiveness, nor my time, nor company, but I wish the best for them at the end of the day. I hope this passes for them and they learn better.

and w/ that I think we’re done!

I think that about explains everything I know, and while at the time I’m writing this it is very late and I’ve been staring at this for a few hours now, I don’t think I’ve missed much of anything!

if I’ve missed a talking point you’d like to see explained, have any questions this post doesn’t answer, or have a post that disproves anything I said, my ask box is always open!!

I humbly request that any debate that may happen on this post if any stay polite and sexy. negativity earns yourself a hearty block from me bc it’s my blog and I do what I want. take it to dms if you must but please don’t be all up and rude. this may not be the most polite and neutral post around but I don’t think any argumentative piece is. I am in fact opinionated and I won’t present both sides of the argument as equal when they quite clearly are not, thank you.

tl;dr

antis are harmful to the very people they claim to protect and stand for and can do better things w/ their time like ride a bike or roll in some grass. they can go step on an entire bucket of legos. just plunge their feet in the sharpest of lego bricks. I hope all their library books are dog-eared to death and their internet is slow. I wrote an entire essay on this practically for over 2 hours no breaks. I’m tired. I’m more tired of their shit but I’m tired.

* this was a real and original argument I saw to justify fiction affects reality that I saw while I was scrolling someone’s blog. it sucked bc the rest of their blog was pretty positive and cool and I even wanted to follow them but like,, ya know, yikes. they seemed condescending and close minded and I was outta there.

edit: this is actually being posted bc it’s been brought to my attention that the antis have already taken to “calling me out” (lmao okay jan) so like. this is wildin - I’m by no means an influencer (I have?? 8 followers. I’m not actually famous.) nor have I been super vocal about it thus far but like,, my dudes I am laughing this is exactly what I knew would happen and I still manage to be surprised.

#2ol 2peak2 #discourse #info post #anti anti #anti antis #pro ship #pro shipping #pro shippers #pro fiction #anti censorship #I don't wanna pick any fights #so I won't get all up in unnecessary tags #but like?? yeah #it's real anti anti on main hours

10 notes · View notes

douxreviews · 5 years

Text

The Merchant of Venice (2004) Review

"I am a'weary of this world."

When a merchant's ships are all lost and he forfeits a debt, his debtor Shylock demands exactly what the bond stipulates – a pound of his flesh...

The Merchant of Venice is a tricky play, because although popular and including some of Shakespeare's most famous lines, the themes of the play make it difficult to produce for modern audiences. As far as Shakespeare was concerned, the play was clearly a comedy. It ends in marriage, generally a marker of comedy in Shakespearean drama (it was written before the late 'Romance' plays). Most of the plot is clearly ridiculous; Portia's late father's method for choosing a husband for her is obviously ludicrous, there are women dressing up as men and tricking their new husbands, and even Shylock's demand for a pound of flesh has a comedic aspect (note that although in the court the bond is written to stipulate a pound of flesh from near the heart, when he first suggests it, Shylock says he'll take it from 'what part of your body pleaseth me' – and if I've learned anything about Shakespeare's sense of humour over the years, I can guess what that refers to). But we in the twenty-first century don't generally find anti-semitism, condoning slavery, implied homophobia, references to racism and forcing people on pain of death to change their religion terribly funny.

There are only really two solutions to this – play the romantic scenes for comedy and the Shylock scenes for drama, or play the whole thing for drama. Michael Radford's film goes all out for drama, and it mostly works very well. Unlike Hamlet, which I quite like modern dress versions of, The Merchant of Venice is a film set in a very specific time and place (here it's given it a date of 1596, when the play was probably written) and the film places it firmly within history by outlining the history of anti-semitism in early modern Venice in title cards at the beginning. This is pretty much essential to understanding the story, and the visualization of Antonio spitting on Shylock (referred to later in dialogue) also helps to set up the characters and the root of Shylock's anger effectively.

Shylock is a character much like Euripides' Medea – he has a wonderful speech outlining how badly he's treated and arguing passionately for better, but his actions later in the play suggest that the author did not intend him to be entirely sympathetic (rather under-cutting the suggestion that Shakespeare was making a plea for tolerance or Euripides a feminist). For modern audiences, though, he is a compellingly conflicted character, and here he is played brilliantly by Al Pacino. Pacino's performance is captivating and heart-breaking and the courtroom scene is absolutely gut-wrenching.

The decision to play the story completely straight (there are elements of humour, of course, but none of the really broad comedy or light atmosphere of, for example, the lighter scenes in Much Ado About Nothing) mostly works. Some of the romantic scenes come across as a bit overblown and melodramatic, but the conflict between working from a script written as comedy and making it a drama only really becomes an issue in the courtroom scene and especially in the final twenty minutes or so after it. It's great that Portia saves the day with her quick thinking, but the fact that she makes the least convincing man since Bob in Blackadder is a bit distracting, and there's just no way we can feel really invested in the lovers messing around with rings and easily broken promises after watching the absolute devastation of Shylock's defeat.

Still, these are pretty much unsolvable problems in this play, and it would be a terrible shame never to produce it because its attitudes are out of date (it's hardly alone there). I think this film really does the best possible job with this material. All of the cast, as well as Pacino, are fantastic, and the American actresses playing Portia and Nerissa are doing the best and most convincing fake English accents I've come across. It looks absolutely gorgeous and it has one of the most beautiful film scores I've ever heard. A combination of medieval-inspired music, Tudor-inspired music, a boy soprano and a song sun by Hayley Westernra, the score is utterly gorgeous and is matched by the incredible cinematography and beautiful costuming.

According to Wikipedia, both Jeremy Irons (playing Antonio) and director Michael Radford thought that they had portrayed Antonio and Bassanio's relationship as just platonic good friends. I'm not sure what film they were watching, because one of the first observations that came to me as I re-watched it was "this version really plays up the suggestion that Antonio is in love with Bassanio." Joseph Fiennes (as Bassanio) did deliberately play up the idea of a homoerotic attraction (possibly a history) between them. I am a person who will argue for hours that Frodo and Sam have an entirely platonic relationship, and I can see how you could play Antonio and Bassanio as just good friends, but I don't think that's what they've actually achieved here – and I think that's a good thing.

Because of the dramatic approach taken to the material, the film has a deliberately melancholy air, and rather than ending on everyone going off to finally get laid, as the script does, the film finishes on a shot of Jessica, who is revealed not to have given away her mother's ring for a monkey after all, looking sad and pensive. This melancholic atmosphere is enhanced by the shots of Antonio looking on wistfully as Bassanio and Portia embrace. The film has turned Shakespeare's bawdy comedy into a serious drama about love and pain and betrayal and acceptance, or lack thereof, so it seems entirely appropriate to interpret Antonio's love as another example of a character constrained and made to suffer for what he is, and every choice both director and actor make seems to reinforce that, from Antonio gazing out at Bassanio and denying that he's in love (methinks he doth protest too much) to his emphasis on his willingness to put his body on the line for Bassanio. You almost have to be trying not to see it to miss it. If that wasn't what Radford and Irons intended, they've gone wrong somewhere.

This is a difficult story, but this film does a fantastic job making it accessible, approachable and absolutely beautiful. I love me some Kenneth Branagh, as you know, but in terms of tackling something really difficult really well, this has got to be one of the best Shakespeare adaptations I've ever seen, and much as we might have come to expect it of him, it's worth saying again that Pacino completely blew me away. Beautiful in every way.

Notes and Quotes

The cast is absolutely full of familiar faces, some known before this film, some after; Joseph Fiennes, Kris Marshall from Love Actually/My Family, Charlie Cox from Stardust/Downton Abbey, Zuleikha Robinson from Rome, Mackenzie Crook, John Sessions, Jeremy Irons...

The quote at the top of the page is the version of Portia's opening line used in this film, but the full line is usually "my little body is a-weary of this great world." It's one of my Mum's favourite Shakespeare quotes, partly because of the 'little body' bit.

Prince of Morocco (reading from a scroll): All that glitters is not gold...

Shylock: I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?

Portia: The quality of mercy is not strain'd, It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven Upon the place beneath: it is twice blest; It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.

Juliette Harrisson is a freelance writer, classicist and ancient historian who blogs about Greek and Roman Things in Stuff at Pop Classics.

#The Merchant of Venice #William Shakespeare #Al Pacino #Jeremy Irons #Joseph Fiennes #Doux Reviews #Movie Reviews #something from the archive

9 notes · View notes

girl4music · 6 years

Text

I have to make something clear regarding recent posts and interactions on here...

My personal perspective on Xena and Gabrielle’s sexualities is that Xena is bisexual all throughout the show and Gabrielle starts in the show under a heteronormative environment, therefore she, at first, considers herself to be heterosexual, not aware any other sexuality exists. But after some experience away from that heteronormative environment, she eventually realizes she is gay. A lesbian. Due to her sexual/romantic relations with Xena and what the Amazons have told and taught her. That’s how I personally believe she thinks of her sexuality. I also personally believe, that in fully accepting her sexuality, her whole physique changes to represent the stereotypical “butch lesbian”. Not that I believe in stereotypes when it comes to sexuality myself, I just think this is how the show portrayed the character when she accepted all that she was, which very much included her sexuality. Xena is easy for me. It’s Gabrielle that has the complicated persona. She’s much harder to pin down as a character than Xena. When it comes to how I view Xena and Gabrielle’s relationship... for me it goes beyond labels. Beyond platonance (I am aware that’s not a word, but you know what I mean)/romance. For me their relationship transcends human perspective and comprehension. I have written in my character study thesis that they are the human representation of ‘Yin-yang’ which alludes to them being one soul in two bodies since ‘Yin’ and ‘Yang’ are the exact same principle and process, but just two different extremes of it, like Light and Dark, Hot and Cold, On and Off ect...So regardless how I see their relationship personally, I think it’s beautiful that another person can see it in a different way from me, or even the entire opposite from me. I more than accept that because there is every kind of person that watches this show, and I accept them no matter what their sexuality is, and no matter what they see in the show itself. I understand that they will see it differently because they perceive a different reality than I do, as they are different people from the person I am with different education and experience.

What I don’t accept is for people to use their personal perspective to insult the show or any of the people who were a part of its creation. Insult it’s producers, writers, directors, and actors. To call Xena and Gabrielle’s relationship “queerbait” as if such a term even existed back when this show was in its original run. I am perfectly okay with people interpreting their relationship any way they want to so long as they don’t interpret it as that and insult everything and everyone that made this show what it is. That’s not acceptable to me. This is including the fanbase... The Xenites are a incredibly broad spectrum of an audience that watches the show. There are differences in sexuality, age, religion, gender, culture, politics, spirituality, mentality.... There are a lot of differences between each individual fan that factor in and equal to the collective that make it the wonderfully diverse fanbase it is, and I’ll always love that about it. ABOUT US!

Agree or disagree... I don’t care. I am always of the belief that you never see something that is not already within your own consciousness... including art and media. Therefore Xena and Gabrielle can be interpreted in any way except as “queerbait”, because that insults everything I love about them and about the show in general. As a fiercely supportive and loyal fan, as well as a huge enthusiast of artistry and philosophy, I cannot accept that. That’s the one card in the deck I will not draw. I hope I have made that clear. Carry on with your fanning and your headcanons. ... But please do not forget that while your perspective may be important to you, that does not exempt other people’s perspective from being important to them. If you must argue about it, argue about it in the spirit of fun. In playful debate. The producers, writers, directors, and actors left Xena and Gabrielle’s relationship down to interpretation. Why can’t we do the same? I love you all and I hate to see you fighting and insulting each other. We are a family! It is our differences that make us as strong as we are. Don’t forget that! Do not forget that we are a singularity while also being in a vast and versatile totality.

#xena warrior princess #xena and gabrielle #xena #lucy lawless #gabrielle #renee o'connor #LGBTQA #labels #queerbaiting

44 notes · View notes

aroworlds · 6 years

Text

Aro-Spec Artist Profile: Signe

Today’s awesome aro-spec creator is Signe, better known to aro-spec Tumblr as @fluffyllamacorn!

Signe is a busy aroace writer, visual and textile artist! She writes for the Young Avengers, The Shadowhunter Chronicles/Shadowhunters, Hawkeye Comics and New X-Men: Academy fandoms in addition to developing diverse original fiction. You can find her growing collection of fanworks on AO3 under the name FluffyLlamacorn and her gorgeous art at @llamacorn-productions.

She also posts and reblogs fashion and accessories at @clothing-inspiration, and some of her cosplays can be seen throughout this post!

With us Signe talks about her passion for textile arts and how they allowed her to reclaim her femininity, the importance of non-romantic relationships in creative media, the difficulty of writing kissing scenes, and the need for works and discussions that celebrate our aromanticism. Her love of making, crafting and designing just shines through this post, so please let’s give her all our love, encouragement, gratitude, kudos and follows for taking the time to explore what it is to be aromantic and creative.

Can you share with us your story in being aro-spec?

I just sort of … never cared? I’ve never wanted to get married and have children, and I never really had crushes growing up. I partly figured that was because I was surrounded by assholes who weren’t worth crushing on, but even when I graduated and moved to better schools where I actually had friends, I still didn’t care. I’ve always had a lot of confidence, so I’ve never bothered feeling insecure about not dating. I spent a while identifying as a straight person “who doesn’t care about romance” before eventually identifying with the ace and then aroace identifiers after having known them for a while, but there was never any big moments in the journey that really stand out.

Currently, I see my aromanticism as more important to my identity than my asexuality – being aro is what I do, while being ace is what my body does – but I also don’t really see them as separate. It’s hard to put into words because it requires cementing some stuff that I don’t mind leaving fluid, but while my lack of attraction is a package deal, it’s the lack of romantic attraction that defines my lifestyle the most. I know which I would choose if I had to, but I prefer not having to. That’s the only good thing about the ace discourse: It’s made me very protective of my ace identity again after having let somewhat go of it after I came to identify as aro.

Can you share with us the story behind your creativity?

I’m the type of person who has a thousand different hobbies and therefore doesn’t have time to actually do any of them. The three I care most about are writing, drawing and textile work.

I’ve always told myself a lot of stories. Walking home from school, I would develop my stories, acting out scenes in my mind and developing huge universes. When I decided to share them with the world, it was initially as comics. I drew a lot, so I had developed the characters’ visual identities along with their personalities. While I’ve switched to planning my stories as books, drawing and writing is still pretty linked in my mind and I can’t imagine creating a character that I don’t know how to draw.

I got into textile work through cosplay, but have spread out into knitting, sewing, embroidery, cross stitch, weaving, crocheting, bobbin lace… Pretty much everything I can get my hands on, which is why I give it such a broad name. (This is part of my too many hobbies deal!) I love everything about textiles, from the look and feel of it, to how many different things can be created out of one simple material. Looking at clothes and knowing not just how it’s been sewn, but also how the fabric was made, is so cool. Creating things from scratch can make me feel like something akin to a god, recreating this corner of the universe as I see fit. A big part of my love for textile work is also reclaiming my femininity in a way that’s so different from the girly girl image I was taught to look down on as a girl. This is a way to enjoy being feminine that doesn’t force me to embrace things I don’t enjoy.

One thing I’ve realized recently is that I love the freedom to design my own work. My cosplays have moved further and further away from canon, from human versions to characters without a firm design or completely redesigning a canon design. On the other hand, I rarely feel the need to sew completely original things, and without the built in deadline of a con, I’m not very likely to get it done. I tend to rarely do the things I can just do whenever, but I’m getting better at that.

Are there any particular ways your aro-spec experience is expressed in your art?

It’s easy to spot in my stories. I have a lot of a-spec characters. The two main characters who were specifically designed to get most of my heart – Shizuka, the shy girl who didn’t know how to make friends, and Diana, the confident girl who’s never cared what anyone thinks of her – both ended up being a-spec even though I created them long before I started identifying as aroace. Shizuka is demi and I don’t know whether it’s sexually and/or romantically or if it even matters. Diana ended up being aroace because I was thinking about her future and my mind nope’d out of the possibility of her ever dating. I also made a conscious choice not to include much romance until I got interested in queer love stories and that sorta fell by the way side. Even then, I try to keep the love stories from being the only defining feature of the stories and the characters involved in them and never to devalue other types of relationship. You will never hear the term “just friends” in my work unless I’m trying to make a point about the person who uses it.

(This is not to pass a value judgement on anyone who uses that expression, but to help normalize language that doesn’t devalue platonic relationships.)

What challenges do you face as an aro-spec artist?

The recent anti-a-spec discourse has made me worried about posting about aromantic things too publicly, as aphobic comments and opinions seem way to commonly accepted these days.

Also, writing kissing scenes. What the hell. “And then their mouths squished together for a little while, which apparently made fireworks go off in their brains.” Like. What? Why does society think this is the epitome of every relationship?

How do you connect to the aro-spec and a-spec communities as an aro-spec person?

Building communities about a lack of something is always hard. Once you’ve written the first story about being aro, it can be hard to write the next one, unless you consciously try to write about a different way of being aro-spec. It’s also a hard orientation to include quickly as being single isn’t as clear an indicator as having a romantic partner of the same gender. While I follow a bunch of aro-blogs and I have a bunch of a-spec friends, I wouldn’t say I’m strongly integrated in the a-spec communities on Tumblr.

Part of it is that most content I see is validations that every sort of aro is alright. I see a lot of content aimed at people who feel bad. That’s important, definitely, but I don’t need it. I’ve always known I’m amazing, both independently of and intersecting with my aromantic identity. I’m interested in work that celebrates being aro, work that doesn’t say I’ll be happy “even though” I’m aro, but “while” I’m aro, maybe even “because” I’m aro and don’t need to waste my life on amatonormativity. At the very least, work that spends more than a sentence on reassuring me. I see a lot of content that implies the basic state of an aro-spec person is sad, and I object to that idea.

I have also recently seen a whole lot of posts about QPRs and that’s really cool! I’m happy to see they’re becoming more and more accepted, at least in some circles. I’m less happy to see them become so prominent and so expected that they start feeling like a new shape of amatonormativity. It’s not that bad right now, but I definitely got allo aces saying “at least we can still feel love” vibes from some QPR posts earlier this year. Because here’s the thing: I’m aroace. I won the lottery. I don’t need to define myself by relationships to other people.* I refuse to take another label that sounds like I don’t want friends because of people pushing QPRs to be the new norm. Again, I’m super happy QPRs seem to have become more accepted, just please don’t present them as something every aro-spec person is interested in unless we specifically opt out.

There’s also the question of what kind of aro stories should be told. I mean, as many as possible, obviously, but that’s going to take a while. But the whole deal with being aro-spec is to have less interest in romance, so too many stories that focus on the lack of it become … counterproductive? I think the Jughead comics are pretty perfect in that regard. The main character is aroace and there are several stories that’s hella important to, but mainly it’s just about him going on adventures with his friends.

(P.S. I hate Riverdale. I’ve seen two different Jughead cosplays these last two weekends, but I didn’t dare fangirl, because what if they were based on the wrong version?)

Honestly, my main way of interacting with the a-spec community is befriending people at random and later finding out they’re a-spec. It’s … almost a superpower? It’s pretty great.

* No one needs to define themselves by relationships to other people, but I imagine it’s much easier when you don’t feel the desire to.

How do you connect to your creative community as an aro-spec person?

I don’t feel very connected to creative communities, but that’s more because I’m not very good at reaching out and promoting myself unless I know I have exactly what’s being asked for. I mainly stick to one or two people I can bounce ideas off of for my different projects before I post it and hope it finds an audience. It might also be because I’m juggling so many things and don’t spend enough time on the social connections needed to connect with a community.

How can the aro-spec community best help you as a creative?

Feedback, feedback, feedback! I love it! I live on it! Telling me you like X or Y part of my work can keep me floating for days and makes me so much more motivated to keep arting! So please, check out my art and leave a comment and/or share it with your friends/followers, if you like it.

(Also, if anyone has good tips on how to reach a larger audience, let me know.)

Can you share with us something about your current project?

I just finished my newest cosplay, which is Lup from The Adventure Zone in her lich form! I had a lot of fun designing her – the podcast doesn’t have very specific descriptions and the creators encourage fans to come up with their own designs – and got a lot of positive reactions at the con last weekend. I went for a very non-human design, including hiding my face, and added a bunch of fire details to reflect her evocation magic. I would have added more, but then my sewing machine broke in the last second, and I had to finish everything by hand, so I just aimed for the basic version. I’ll be updating her for the next con and will have much more fire with me then. I have yet to finish editing the pictures, but they should be up soon.

Have you any forthcoming works we should look forward to?

My next project, one I’ve alluded to a couple of times in this profile already, in fact combines all three of my passions. I was considering cosplaying Pixie, one of the underrated students from X-Men, relegated to the background since their series ended, but I kept bumping up against the problem that her uniform was just too … generic to be fun. Besides, what’s the point of cosplaying the pink girl, and then not getting to work with pink fabric?

So I just redesigned her and gave her an individual outfit. And then I decided to redesign all of her teammates. I wanted them all to go together, but still keep an individual feeling, and I achieved that by giving them a rainbow theme when they’re together. Obviously, the next stop was figuring out a story for that to take place in, of which I’ve posted the first chapter. The idea is that they get out in their bright colors and visibly help everyday people with everyday problems to stop people from hating and fearing mutants and maybe actually making a positive change, unlike all of the superhero battles that don’t get anyone anywhere.

The project has three parts: Individual drawings for every member where I develop their outfits further, chapters of fic describing their adventures and a cosplay that I aim to finish for Genki in August, the next big con in Denmark.

65 notes · View notes

ftlo · 6 years

Text

Patti Smith’s Just Kids captures the epicenter of art and grime that was New York in the 1970s. She centers the story upon the unorthodox girl she was in her twenties, and her predestined relationship with the late photographer Robert Mapplethorpe. The story Smith unfolds is a mesmerizing cluster of moments, each as brilliantly imaged as her cherished blue star. While her autobiographical account is rooted in the happenings of her intimate routine, the novel is read as a field guide to her version of the vast city. Yet, Smith disregards the objective city by blending the real and the otherworldly in her seamless streams of consciousness. The constant that threads together the contradiction of her city life is her love for Robert. Their relationship is celestial; they are two soulmates brought together almost divinely, and yet their closeness is physically distant and intertwined with the figures around them. Intimacy and multiplicity are figuratively mutually exclusive yet in practice interdependent in Smith’s depiction of New York.

The structure of Just Kids is artefactual, organized by a series of moments through which the reader is guided like an observer in a museum. Smith is a skillful curator, constructing her personal enclave within the larger city. One of these moments is Christmas at her and Robert’s first apartment:

“He liked the boxes of Joseph and often transformed significant bits of jetsam, colored string, paper lace, discarded rosaries, scrap, and pearls into a visual poem. He would stay awake late into the night, sewing, cutting, gluing, and then adding touches of gouache. When I awoke there would be a finished box for me, like a valentine. Robert made a wooden manger for the little lamb. He painted it white with a bleeding heart and we added sacred numbers entwining like vines. Spiritually beautiful, it served as our Christmas tree. We placed our gifts for one another around it.” (Smith 51-52) Smith illustrates moments palpably to craft their intimate world. She and Robert physicalize their isolation from the outside; the act of making their own original talismans mimics creating a new reality. Smith’s description of Robert fashioning the manger is almost ironic: it depicts him in reference to the stereotype of handy man of the house, constructing practical objects for his family. Their concept of practical or necessary, however, is unusual. Smith cherishes the manger painted with a “bleeding heart” and “sacred numbers”, despite having little functional furniture in their apartment. (51-52) The manger serving as a Christmas tree also holds meaning. The two Catholics are at once rejecting the tradition of the classic decorated tree and celebrating their own eccentric version of the popular holiday. Thus, Smith’s capture of this creative moment is both decidedly intimate yet still connected to the multiplicity of daily life.

These snapshots of creation may appear to some readers to trivialize her journey of self-discovery or render it superficial, but they do not. In broad terms, the moments she writes are the intricate pieces of the mosaic that is her perception of New York: each piece is different, entirely sustainable as a world of its own, yet fits perfectly within the grand scheme. Hence, Smith’s structure enables the formation of her intimate world but grounds it in the colorful context of the city, successfully interconnecting intimacy and multiplicity.

Furthermore, Smith’s novel entertains a duality between the real and the unreal. Her dichotomized place in New York is introduced in early stages of Smith and Robert’s relationship, as Smith describes:

“One Indian summer day we dressed in our favorite things (…) we took the subway to West Fourth Street and spent the afternoon in Washington Square. We shared coffee from a thermos, watching the stream of tourists, stoners, and folksingers. Agitated revolutionaries distributed anti-war leaflets. Chess players drew a crowd of their own. Everyone coexisted within the continuous drone of verbal diatribes, bongos, and barking dogs.” (Smith 47)

This scene offers an image rife with energy and movement in the public environment. Yet, while Smith speaks of coexistence, she refrains from placing herself into the context she defines. She serves only as the observer, sipping coffee with Mapplethorpe gazing onto the outside from within their transcendent experience, displaying an otherwise dynamic sequence as coldly as a still-life. It is only when an older couple comments on her and Robert’s roles that Smith closes their distance from their surroundings. The woman tells the accompanying man to take a picture of the two characters that seem like artists to her. “’Oh, go on,” he shrugged. They’re just kids.” (Smith 44) Significant enough to inspire the title, this encounter introduces the ideas of intimacy and multiplicity within Smith’s world and the city around her. As much as she and Robert seek to elevate and enchant their realities, they have become stereotypical, two of many inhabiting the city. They may present themselves as the personas associated with their alternative lifestyle, but ultimately Smith recognizes their commonality. In this way, she calls the distinction between intimacy and multiplicity into question, refusing to abandon one to obtain the other.

The line between real and unreal is rendered particularly nebulous in the context of the Chelsea Hotel.

“In between I clock the action. Eyeing the traffic circulating the lobby hung with bad art. Big invasive stuff unloaded on Stanley Bard in exchange for rent. The hotel is an energetic, desperate haven for scores of gifted hustling children from every rung of the ladder. Guitar bums and stoned-out beauties in Victorian dresses. Junkie poets, playwrights, broke-down filmmakers, and French actors. Everybody passing through here is somebody, if nobody in the outside world.” (Smith 91)

The graphic use of italics here visually signals a shift in Smith’s narrative. It underlines the dreamlike sequence that is Smith and Mapplethorpe’s experience at the Chelsea Hotel, distancing the people and happenings in the hotel from the urban exterior. The mention of “stoned out beauties in Victorian dresses” widens this distance by adding an epochal dimension to the hotel’s otherworldliness. (Smith 91) Lastly, the last sentence draws a boldly strict line between the hotel and the “outside world”. (Smith 91) Yet, the ideas of being “somebody” at the Chelsea and “nobody” in the vaster realm of Manhattan are inextricably linked. (Smith 91) Within the environment of the Chelsea, Smith belonged to a circle of drug-infused artists and patrons: society’s misfits bound together through shared estrangement. They had become somebodies amongst themselves evidently because they had all experienced the isolation of having been nobodies. Therefore, Smith underlines a causal relationship between the intimacy of the Chelsea Hotel and the inhabitants’ incongruence with New York city’s multiplicity.

Smith’s definition of intimacy is explored in distinct instances of Just Kids. It is a central theme to Smith and Mapplethorpe’s epic love story. It appears that their relationship guides the plot’s development, and hence mirrors Smith’s grander depiction of the city in terms of intimacy. From the moment they meet, Smith and Mapplethorpe are drawn to each other. Their initial encounters recall fairytale lovers who credit fate for their meeting. Disregarding courtship, they readily accept each other into their lives, as Smith states not long after their first meeting, “(...) I understood that in this small space of time we had mutually surrendered our loneliness and replaced it with trust”. (Smith 40) From this moment, much of Smith’s writing about their relationship is description of their routine. Painting and creating side by side was their ritual; in this way their daily lives were engulfed in the other’s. Despite this, Smith consciously refrains from including information that would define their relationship. While they were in love or perhaps they cared profoundly for the other, the lack of romantic intimacy conveyed alluded to the idea that their relationship was platonic. Smith’s ambiguous account of her and Robert’s bond calls intimacy into question, and perhaps deliberately pushes against its singular definition.

Multiplicity also plays a part in building Smith and Mapplethorpe’s intricate relationship. The number and diversity of figures they encounter allows them to create their intimate world away from reality. At the Hotel Chelsea, they meet an array of people including Mr. Bard, Harry Smith, Peggy Biderman, Ann Powell, Bruce Rudow, Sandy Daley, and Matthew Reich. Each person elicited a form of self-discovery for both Smith and Mapplethorpe. The introduction of these figures play an integral role in both of their artistic pursuits, and therefore reinforce their mutual creative inspiration for one and other. Thus, their intimacy is invigorated by the multiplicity of creative characters around them.

However, Smith and Mapplethorpe’s world undergoes growing tension throughout the novel. One instance in the novel that represents a striking turning point in their relationship occurs when Robert goes to an abandoned hospital and finds a fetus preserved in jar. Convinced he should transform the fetus into art, he steals the jar, but on their way home he inadvertently drops it. Smith describes the effect of this accident with the following citation:

“The purloined jar had sat on a shelf for decades, undisturbed. It was almost as if he had taken its life. 'Go upstairs,' he said. 'I'll clean it up.' We never mentioned it again. There was something about that jar. The shards of heavy glass seemed to foreshadow the deepening of our days; we didn’t speak of it but each of us seemed inflicted with a vague internal restlessness.” (Smith 69)

The jar appears to be a symbol that represents a tonal shift in Smith’s description of their relationship. Though Robert did not actually take the fetus’s life, Smith mentioning this represents birth and death simultaneously. The incident undoubtedly brought her own abortion and the trauma associated with it to mind. It could also be said that the scene underlines the limitations of Smith and Mapplethorpe’s nontraditional intimacy in terms of family-making. In this sense, the jar evokes the multiplicity within the intimacy, or the complexity that is the essence of Smith and Mapplethorpe’s feelings for each other, and for their perceptions of themselves. In fact, it is the very multiplicity within their relationship that eventually redraws its own confines. Thus, the “internal restlessness” Smith refers to foreshadows the increased strain on their world and the unease that accompanies these complexities. (69)

The themes of intimacy and multiplicity can be perceived to define not only the relationship between the two central characters of Just Kids, but also urban life itself. Manhattan is the singular backdrop for this story. This island, surrounded by water yet the heart of the world, is the essence of intimacy within multiplicity, of a patchwork of surface, sound, sight, scent, and taste. At any moment, this kaleidoscope of experience can collapse or delicately fold into the intimacy of a bedroom, a café table, a hospital bed. The structure of the book, the otherworldliness Smith references, and Robert and Patti’s complex relationship strengthen these interconnections between intimacy and multiplicity that are central to her New York story.

2 notes · View notes