#and your hypothetical doesnt do what you think it does | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

avatar-of-the-blank · 6 months

Note

What do you think each entity tastes like?

OOOH, LIST TIME! I LOVE LISTS

ITS LONG SO I PUT A CUT HERE TO NOT CLOG DASHBOARDS

THE BURIED

WELL. LIKE DIRT. NATURAL BUT OPPRESSIVE OF ANY OTHER TASTE EXCEPT FOR DIRT.

THE CORRUPTION

LIKE YOU TOOK A LEMON WARHEAD CANDY AND CRANKED IT UP TO 11. OVERPOWERINGLY SWEET AND SOUR AT THE SAME TIME, MAKING YOUR TEETH ACHE AND ROT AND YOUR FEATURES SCRUNCH UP.

THE DARK

LIKE AN OLD DINERS' HOT COCOA. NOT A POWDERED MIX, NO. DELIBERATELY MELTED CHOCOLATE, OVERTAKING THE WHITE CREAME IN IT WITH ITS THICKNESS. THE WHIPPED CREAM ON TOP MELTED IN IT, NOW JUST BUBBLES AT THE TOP OF THE SMOOTH WARM ABYSS IN A MUG.

THE END

IM FEELING BLACK LICORICE? I ALWAYS FIND THE END TO BE SUCH A GENTLE ENTITY, LIKE A HAND YOURE SCARED TO HAVE TOUCH YOU, BUT WHEN IT DOES.. I FIND THERES THAT APPREHENSION AROUND BALCK LICORICE, A STIGMA OF IT THAT ITS THE MOST REPULSIVE TASTE. I PERSONALLY FIND IT LOVELY.

THE FLESH

IF IM SPEAKING FROM EXPERIENCE? EUGH. SOUR, WARM, AND WET. CONCEPTUALIZE BITING INTO A PAPER TOWEL JUST USED TO CLEAN RAW CHICKEN JUICE FROM A GRILL'S LID.

AS A HYPOTHETICAL? LIKE A BLUE RARE STEAK, WELL SEASONED. UGH, EVEN THINKING OF THAT DOESNT GET THE MEMORY OF THAT SHOULDER OUT OF MY HEAD.

THE EYE

ALMOND SCONES DUNKED IN COFFEE WITH JUST A LITTLE MILK. A SMART FEELING FLAVOR, MILD AND EARTHY, NOT OVERWHELMING THE SENSES LESS IMPORTANT THAN SIGHT.

THE LONELY

RAINWATER, COLLECTED ON A COLD AUTUMN EVE IN A CLEAR MASON JAR, FILTERED OF COURSE. THERES NO FLAVOR, ITS WATER, BUT IT FEELS NATURAL TO DRINK, ESPECIALLY SINCE YOU DONT HAVE TO BOTHER THE TAP TO COLLECT THE DRINK.

THE STRANGER

COTTON CANDY GRAPES! HAVE YOU EVER HAD THEM? IF YOU WERE TO SHUT YOUR EYES AND BITE THEM, ITD FEEL LIKE YOU WERE BITING INTO A COTTON CANDY EYE. BUT ITS NOT, AND THE EYES WOULD DECOEVE YOU. ITS NOT WHAT IT TASTES LIKE, BUT ITS THE EXACT SAME TASTE.

THE SLAUGHTER

JUST A FEAST. IMAGINE VEGGIES AND STEWS AND MEAT AND BREAD IN ABUNDANCE, THE FLAVORS MIXING AND THE SCENT ATTACKING YOUR NOSE AS YOUR DIG IN, A FEEBLE ATTEMPT TO MAKE A DENT IN THE MEAL

THE HUNT

SUMMER WIND. LIKE YOURE A DOG HANGING YOUR SNOUT FROM A CAR WINDOW, MOUTH OPEN AND TONGUE FLAILING AROUND WILDLY AS YOUR OWNER PRESSES PAST 70 KPH.

THE VAST

THIS ONE IS HARD. HOW CAN YOU TASTE THE INFINITE? HOW COULD YOU FEEL THE EXPANSE OF EVERYTHING IN YOUR MOUTH.

MM. MINTY GUM. LIKE REALLY MINTY GUM RIGHT BEFORE YOURE ABOUT TO FALL ASLEEP, RIGHT AFTER YOU TOOK A SIP OF 3 AM WATER.

THE DESOLATION

HAVE YOU EVER BEEN CAMPING WITH THOSE PEOPLE WHO STICK THEIR MARSHMALLOWS IN THE DEAD CENTER OF THE FIRE? AND THE POOR THINGS COME OUT GOOEY AND BURNT ON EVERY SIDE? THE METAL ROD THEYRE ON IS GLOWING AND THEYRE SLIDING OFF THEM. LIKE THAT, BUT DIP IT IN MILK CHOCOLATE.

AND THEN BURN THE CHOCOLATE TOO.

THE WEB

HOME BAKED COOKIES. FROM YOUR HOME. I DONT HAVE AN EXPLANATION HERE, THIS JUST FEELS LIKE THE RIGHT ANSWER.

THE EXTINCTION

SO IVE HAD A CONTAINER OF A CANDY CALLED TOXIC WASTE IN ONE OF MY ROOMS WHICH IVE BEEN DREADING TO TRY. I DONT KNOW WHAT IT TASTES LIKE, BUT I KNOW THE EXTINCTION TASTES JUST LIKE THAT.

THE SPIRAL

I ACTUALLY HAVE A DEFINITIVE ANSWER HERE, SINCE I KNOW! WOOD PAINT, WHIPPED CREAM, HEMP SEEDS, HAIRSPRAY, MOCHA COFFEE, YELLOW, TYPE A- BLOOD, THE AIR IN YOUR ATTIC, METAL STAIRWAY RAILINGS, IRON, OBTUSE RUBBER GOOSE GREEN SNAKE GUAVA JUICE

#tma #the magnus archives #michael distortion #the spiral #the stranger #the corruption #the vast #the eye #the flesh #the buried #the web #the dark #the extinction #the

197 notes · View notes

the-s1lly-corner · 8 days

Note

can we please get hc on Brahms and reader watching a horror movie? oWo

Brahms x reader watching a horror movie

No thoughts today

Notes: reader is GN, unspecified movie

CWs: none

hes desensitized to blood and most gore but i dont think he would be all that fond about other concepts or jumpscares- he hasnt really been exposed to much thanks to living in the walls of his home!

funny considering what hes done, but he might actually hate horror movies- he finds himself clinging onto you when things get tense in the film

of course some of that is just him clinging onto you because he wants to

listens to any theories you make while watching the movie, no need to worry about being shushed! you two are watching the movie in the comfort of your own home

he could never shush you, in most... scenarios at least.. he likes listening to your voice.. in fact he wishes he could listen to it all day everyday

but getting back on track, he would get understandably mad at any dumb choices any of the characters make in the film

do not try to entertain him with the "what if we were in a horror movie and-" questions, hes always going to default to saying hes just going to murder the killer/monster in the film- both to save himself and to save you

goes silent if you bring up a hypothetical "what if im already dead" question

he does not like the concept of you leaving, even if its because youve died, he doesnt care if its a hypothetical its still something that he thinks about

on a lighter note, he does enjoy some of the snacks you bring or make for the movie night! expect him to ask for you to make more in the future

#slashers x reader #slashers x you #slashers imagine #slasher x reader #slasher x you #slasher imagine #brahms x reader #brahms x you #brahms imagine #brahms heelshire x reader #brahms heelshire x you #brahms heelshire imagine

86 notes · View notes

t4transsexual · 9 months

Note

why do you identify with "lesbian" if you say you're a man. A man can't be a lesbian, i don't understand it.

The whole lesbian concept excludes men bc it has nothing to do with men. Lesbian is women loving women, and if you identify as a man, i don't understand how you can identify w the lesbian community as well.

like this isba genuine question, I'd like to listen to your explanation bc im genuinely confused!

trans men, and any trans person really, cannot exist on the same binary cisgender people exist on. the binary was not made with trans people in mind, to be trans and to change your sex (which isnt limited to bottom surgery btw), would be inherently nonbinary, simply because the binary does not accommodate for trans people

beyond that, trans men dont have the same rights privileges and power that a cis man would have. meaning that while a trans man IS a man, he is not a cis man, and thus cannot experience male privilege, or the systemic power that comes with being a cis man

so we can conclude from that two things. one, trans people are inherently nonbinary. while not every trans person identified as nonbinary, the act of transitioning, socially and medically, is an inherently nonbinary act. i personally choose to identify as nonbinary to deal with the distress of people forcing me into the cis man category when i am fundementally different from them. now that we have concluded that the act of transitioning is nonbinary, let me address that: trans men have always been included in lesbianism. the communities are not seperate. the historical definition of lesbian has included gender diverse people as well as women, and trans men are still gender diverse

beyond that; a trans man identifying as a lesbian is not the same as a cis man identifying as a lesbian. the ideas that trans men are men and that trans men are NOT cis men can both be true. trans men who are attracted to women have more societally in common with lesbians (especially genderqueer lesbians) than cishet men. yes, trans men identify as straight all the time. however, if a trans man wants to identify as a lesbian, who are we to deny him? he isnt a cis man, hes not a threat to lesbianism or to the queer community.

faq:

"wouldnt identifying as a lesbian and a trans man be invalidating?"

a: different trans men have different opinions for themselves and their gender. some trans men choose to identify as straight/heterosexual, some trans men choose to identify as lesbians. it just depends on the person, however, if a trans man truly felt invalidated by the lesbian label, he just wouldn't use it. you dont get to assign rules on how a trans man chooses to identify, and you don't know him better than he knows himself

"what IS a lesbian then?"

a: the historical defintion of a lesbian is any gender diverse individual who likes women and/or gender diverse people. however, every lesbian can tell you something different. i know lesbians who only date binary women. i know lesbians who are exclusively t4t. i know lesbians who are femme4butch and date trans men who are butches. someones personal definition of their own lesbianism doesnt invalidate yours, and vice versa

"whats next, a CIS man identifying as a lesbian to cause trouble?"

a: and what if the world was made of pudding? trans men are not cis men, and to believe such is wishful thinking at best, and ultimately distressing to trans people. beyond that, i raise a counterargument of, what if we let trans people use the bathroom of their preferred gender? what would happen if a cis person used the opposite genders bathroom to cause trouble? the fact of the matter is, punishing trans people who are trying to live for the hypothetical cis person doing something wrong is transphobic and also stupid

"evan, i dont WANT to date a male lesbian/lesbian on t! what does this mean for my lesbianism?"

a: absolutely nothing! date who you want! you actually dont have to be attracted to every single person who is a lesbian! i know im not! youre allowed your preferences. i do know for a fact that some lesbians, especially under the trans/genderqueer umbrella are really into trans male lesbians and lesbians on t, but that does NOT mean that you have to be! once again, nobody elses personal definition of lesbianism can invalidate YOUR personal definition of lesbianism. im ALL ABOUT doing what you want!

#long post #boy lesbians #boy lesbian #boysbian #he/him lesbian #trans lesbian #answering this in good faith even tho i doubt it was asked the same way #just bc ive been meaning to make this post

113 notes · View notes

urostakako · 10 months

Text

im not about to be one of those people complaining about the animation of jjk s2 because its absolutely gorgeous??? i do have some thoughts though about certain executive decisions, namely geto and yuki's conversation and how it probably has a part in fan's reactions to yuki's character (im not denying its misogyny, just that it has a part to play)

so here are the manga panels:

the camera angle here shows both of them, from above, from in front, from the side. namely, it looks natural. they are on equal footing.

in the anime, the camera angle is looking up at the both of them from their feet. the music is dramatic in that it builds up, eventually leading to geto's epiphany. now this is perfectly fine in belying geto's inner dilemma, but denies the nature of the conversation which, considering both parties taking part in it, was entirely casual

people focus on how yuki seemed to jump in here to influence geto, except they underestimate a weird girl's excitement for philosophy 💀 shes literally a researcher. why wouldnt she be interested by nuance and different perspectives. as if she knew that geto would go off the rails

in the anime, she seems happy when she says "unfortunately, i'm not crazy enough to do that" because you cant see her face, but in the manga, you can see that shes not taking it very seriously when she says "unfortunately, i ain't that crazy". like. the subs make her dialogue seem weird too. shes literally just making up hypotheticals

i think if they kept this scene casual but gradually built the drama you would have a scene that doesnt manipulate the audience ("what?? ari what do you mean by manipulate the audience??" ill get there), that shows how geto came to his conclusion on his own, and that accurately represents yuki's character. it would only be a start if they had the camera angle in a place that puts them on equal footing. from where it was, it seems as if yuki has more power than she actually does. which she doesnt. in terms of jujutsu society and whatever

shes literally the special grade who "fucks around" overseas. she doesnt give two shits about jujutsu society. the power she has here is her special grade status and her salary and thats it. meanwhile geto is a man, a special grade, and works directly under jujutsu society. he has more influence than she does, realistically speaking, considering i doubt the higher ups would want to listen to her anyway if that kind of situation ever occurred. gojo and geto could command that attention. it wouldnt be so simple for yuki

"but this isn't about yuki's power in general, its about the power her words hold over geto" well i'm saying that she doesnt have any power over him. generally, people are able to manipulate other people because they have power over the other, generally, or because the other perceives this manipulator has power over them. the common argument is that yuki manipulated geto, but she didnt, because she does not have power over him, he knows she doesnt have power over him, and they are on equal footing.

so the decision to have light coming in from the window behind them, and having the camera look up at them is kind of flawed, because youre not accurately representing whats going on here. rather, youre illuminating the perspective of only one party, thus distorting the actual interaction, because what happened in the anime didnt really happen. thats a distorted memory. "omg ari wtf are you talking about youre just saying words now. of course thats what happened"

except theres a different lighting, different tone, different mood because the way this scene was thought out is entirely from geto's perspective. from his perspective it all seems true that yuki "made him" do what he did because of how shes portrayed, but from an outside, objective view, you can see that blame and reasoning gets shifted, as does happen in people's memories. on her end, this was an interesting debate and set of hypotheticals to think about. she didnt have the intent jjk fans think she does. but this part gets distorted when we have the memory of this conversation from geto's view, and how it affected him. i think the way it was executed in the manga, its a little clearer that geto simply took the wrong words to heart, rather than it being yuki having the wrong words to say.

#or i really am just saying words and spouting bullshit. anyway. im a big fan of lighting and camera angles and colors did you know #yuki tsukumo #geto suguru #jjk s2 #jjk #jujutsu kaisen #aricouldyounot

84 notes · View notes

crushedsweets · 8 months

Note

Hello! I hope you are well, you modern day Shakespeare you :D

Hypothetically, in your AU, do you think that Jeff would ever find somebody he actually likes romantically (if that’s even possible) as opposed to the way he just takes advantage of Nina? And if so, what would this entail?

UUMMMMMM hmmm.... no.

okay i lied yes its totally possible. BUT AGAIN i make jeff a VERY one dimensional character, his entire purpose is for nina, jane, and liu have a story to revolve around. I’ll try to talk abt it but it’s really just me saying not good..

in the event he did find someone he liked, he just kinda...hm... ok this is really hard wow... ive literally never once sat and thought about him in a relationship ......... idk i think he'd be... I LITERJHAGHKIH I CANT

depends. hes just some guy really and i do think he's very entitled, egotistical, and nina really helped fuck up his self importance b/c now he fully expects to be taken care of while he does fuck all. maybe he'd hold a hand or two. kinda sleezy. 'wyd.. pics?' at 3am. LMFAOOO HES SO UNPLEASANT IM SORRY ANON. prob would need some other hardass who's like "watch ur fucking mouth" but then he'd get mad and ghost them for 'being a bitch.' but if he had some rando sweetheart it wouldnt work either cuz he'd then never change. dunno... dunno.... i dont often think about them in relationships unless im actively shipping and even then i never put my ships into canon relationships... he's capable of romantic attraction but he's not even a good friend, much less a good boyfriend. he's lucky ben just doesnt care how people treat him, otherwise he'd have nobody

#UR SO KIND CALLING ME SHAKESPEARE AND THEN IM OUT HERE REPLYING LIKE 'well i do not know'#LMFOAOFNJF #IM SORRYYYY #TY ANON #ASKS #ben is literally the only person who jeff would even bother listening to #but bens ... ben.... and isnt gonna be like #'oh jeff...you have to change...!! you cant be such an awful boyfriend..! you must get flowers NOW..!'

41 notes · View notes

yonpote · 1 month

Text

ok i know i answered those hypothetical phivorce asks hours ago but i cant stop thinking about it. congrats anons ive decided i AM gonna jump down this rabbit hole, im gonna 100% seriously take this entire idea to its logical conclusion. this isnt even out of anger anymore i am just insane.

so, i'm gonna say dan would be the one to announce a relationship with another person. i think if phil were in a new relationship, he would not share that, whereas i think dan wouldnt be able to keep it to himself as per the nature of the yapper. are they also continuing to make content in this scenario? like on the gaming channel and as a duo? ok right off the bat, this is already an existing fanfic that was written in 2017. it's called Disturb The Universe so if you'd like to see another person's interpretation of a similar scenario, go read that LMAO. but here is essentially my own fanfic of how i personally interpret this scenario.

they continue to make content and it is the same caliber of gay that it has been since the return, but now with added knowledge that dan (and maybe phil) has a boyfriend who, presumably, doesn't want to be involved in dan's career life. OR is this a scenario in which the new bf DOES want to be involved? is he a fellow Content Creator? or maybe just a guy who wants to support his weird famous boyfriend and his weirdly close ex?

ok let's put ourselves in the mind of the new boyfriend for a second. how would you feel if you started dating this guy, whos really nice and nerdy and cute, but he just cant shut up about all his escapades with Some Other Guy? you go look up his name and find all of the work he's done and continues to do with this dude, and ok lets ignore all the written porn cuz thats just fan nonsense right, but just the sheer amount of content on this guy you went on a second date with, maybe even shagged, and the entirety of his adult life is not only publicly available but also INTENSELY tied up with another person, with whom he is still living and in fact Shares A Mortgage and even FULLY DESIGNED THE FLOORPLANS AND DECOR TOGETHER TO MATCH THEIR COMBINED TASTES AND AESTHETICS. like assuming you're not just gonna dump this guy for leading you on, what are you gonna do, just accept that you're always gonna be second place? and even if this were a scenario which you, dan's unrealistic hypothetical new boyfriend, are totally fine with not being dan's number one man, well that kind of non-monogamous relationship HAS to be something that is brought up before ANY flirting even happens. like dan's bio would need to say "polyam + partnered" or ANYTHING because otherwise dan would be a piece of shit.

ok now stop being dan's new boyfriend, and be you. you watched the twenty minute long announcement instagram reel that was apparently just a teaser for the 3 hour long youtube video that should be released at some point this decade. you'll always be a phangirl deep in your heart so a piece of you is extremely saddened by this, despite how many times in 2016 you said you would be happy for dnp even if they weren't together. but in the announcement, he made it pretty clear that he's not going to stop making content with phil. so wait, what does that mean? are they gonna post another gaming video in which the vibes are exactly the same as before? you wanna believe in your heart that dan's new bf doesn't mean that what he has with phil has suddenly changed, but (again barring this being a polyam situation, and let's say nothing about dan's announcement insinuated any ENM) that is logically not possible. so something in their content HAS to shift with this announcement. but it doesnt appear that they stopped living together, their latest video has none of their flirty antics toned down, and let's say the new bf is not a content creator and dan didn't disclose his full name and even his first name is possibly a pseudonym or so common there would be no way of tracking him down outside of straight up stalking dan, and the only public photo dan has with him has his face covered with a sticker.

so like, what would even be the point of this announcement? in terms of dan's public life, nothing would actually change, other than all of us constantly thinking of this new boyfriend in the back of our heads as we watch dnp consistently flirt with each other. i can understand where that anon is coming from, this WOULD feel like a weird betrayal. it could be a betrayal of us as fans that have enjoyed being in this little "we know you know" bubble suddenly having this sprung upon us with seemingly no benefit to us OR to dnp, a betrayal of phil who seems to be perfectly content with all of this happening but you just know can't be handling a sudden change like this all that well, especially when pertaining to his closest person in the entire world, or a betrayal of this new bae who just has to deal with the fact that dan is just constantly showing off his life-long best friend and self-admitted SOULMATE that he finds so fucking special when, even if new bf does prefer privacy, all he got in terms of public affection is an instagram reel. but again, this is all under the assumption that dan is the kind of person to do something like this, which is the point where all of this scenario is fully destroyed and this just becomes fic.

so basically, everything here falls apart because when it comes down to it, some aspect of this has to involve dan and/or phil being pieces of shit, and personally, i do not like that scenario outside of the realm of pure fiction. but i'll say it was a fun little writing exercise, unironically feel free to steal these ideas for your phivorce / phreak-up fics.

#idek how to tag this beast #myrambles #phan #phivorce #i guess...#myfic #???? this is just freeform non-prose fic #thanks anons for unintentionally spawning this nightmare

12 notes · View notes

fiapartridge · 10 months

Note

stop i love that daisy ties will's ties before games but what happens when they break up?? like does he finally go on youtube and learn how to tie one himself and she sees online on twitter that his ties aren't as neat?

LMAO HE JUST DOESNT WEAR TIES

daisy stalks san jose's insta account and immediately calls gabe when she sees the boys in their suits walking out of the bus. "gabe?"

and she never really calls unless it's urgent, if she wants a real convo, she'll facetime so gabe automatically thinks it's something bad. he picks up after the first ring. "daisy? are you okay? what's wrong?"

and she's shaking her head, but remembers that he can't see her. "nothing. nothing's wrong."

"oh, okay," he relaxes a bit. "then what's up?"

"when," she's biting her nails. "when was the last time will wore a tie?"

gabe scoffs, thinking she's joking or he's hearing random things. "what?"

"when was the last time he wore a tie?"

"oh, um, i don't know. like... a couple months ago maybe? he's been all about the 'no tie' look lately. it's kinda fresh, i might get on that," gabe smiles, getting sidetracked. "wait, why?"

daisy shrugs. "i was just wondering. thanks."

when daisy hangs up, she sits down on the couch, taking this all in. he stopped wearing ties after they broke up.

"i love when you do this," will smiled, peering down at daisy as she crossed the fabric over each other.

"you're never gonna learn, huh?" she laughed.

"why learn if it gives me the chance to do this?" he asked, holding the sides of her cheeks as he gave her a forehead kiss.

"what if i'm away and i can't tie your tie?"

"why would you ever be away from me?"

daisy rolled her eyes. "it's just a hypothetical, baby. what would you do then?"

"i wouldn't wear one. i'd wait until you come back to me."

daisy pressed her lips against will's, whispering as she pulled back. "then it's good i'm never leaving, right?"

"right."

#perreault!sister x will smith

37 notes · View notes

spicybylerpolls · 1 month

Note

I really like your response about the hypothetically possible will as a top. I gravitate towards bottom will, but only because when i started discussing byler having sex it was always as canon-compliant as possible, a.k.a it was about their first experiences together, as this is most likely to be seen in the show compared to their developing relationship together.

i think practical things would inform their dynamic. they may not even discuss things verbally. even if there wasn't the 'i didnt say it - you didn't have to' line to show the audience how well they understand each other without words (most of the time lol), i still wouldn't have ruled out a mainly non-verbal sex scene between them. maybe because i love silent/expressive/physical acting that doesnt need words. it's so much more intimate to me, the silence of it all. soft music, intense looks, body communication, nothing else needed. and in that case, i think that will, perhaps just because mike has dated el, even if it wasnt sexual, would assume that mike was simply the more experienced one and let him take the lead.

i would be delighted to see a hesitant mike letting will take the lead in s5, and i think we will see this somewhat, but i also think that rather than will being dominant and mike submitting, it will look more like will coming up to mike's level of dominance and meeting him there as an equal, finally confident enough to express how he feels and what he wants, and to ask mike for it (whether verbally or not).

their lovemaking and sex should be a moment of celebration between two equals. i think this is what will move all the last cynical audience members emotionally, because it would represent so much for who will and mike are even outside of a sexual context. it would also lend a neatness to the idea of equality in terms of same-sex sexual activity. two men/two women having sex is more equal than a man and woman, because there aren't those unavoidable differences. its two versions of the same body. what could be more equal than that?

i remember a writer from the 1910s wrote beautifully on this topic of how gay sex is purer and more beautiful than het sex because of this, and also because it serves no purpose other than for two people to connect and make beauty, whereas sex between a man and a woman can often be a means to an end (to put it crudely lol).

do this make sense?

yes/no :)

Please note that the purpose of this blog is not to be creepy or to make anyone uncomfortable. That's why I created the #spicy byler tag (I will tag all polls with this). If you don't want to see this blog or anything related to it on your feed, please block that tag. Not everyone is comfortable with this sorta stuff, and that's okay.

#spicy byler #byler #mike wheeler #will byers

13 notes · View notes

svedupelle · 8 months

Note

the random antisemitism on my dash from you fucking blew, that post literally has someone saying death to jews in the notes

Im guessing this is the post ur talking about and that this is the comment u mean

(if not, and someone somewhere in the tags said word for word "death to jews", then i didnt spot it. But more importantly, you understand that i am not responsible for that person writing those words, right? and that i may have reblogged that post not because of what some rando said in the tags that i didnt check beforehand, but because of what the post is actually about? which is the state of Isr*el's continued atrocities against palestinians, and more specifically the morbid humor in some random isr*elian on the internet being blind to the real extent of their nations descent into despotism and violence? Just so we're clear about the subject matter of the post)

Anyway. so if that is indeed the comment ur saying meant to say death to jews, then it would seem ur confused about something. Namely zionism *isn't* the same thing as judaism. let's start with the fucking dictionary:

So merriam-webster agrees with me that being a zionist is not the same as being jewish. And quite frankly, it can't be, since unless if we want to posit that gentiles have an inherent and innate opposition to the jewish people having a nation of their own, then it must be possible and true that gentiles can also support a nation of Isr*el, and therefore, can be zionists. And I don't personally believe that not being jewish inherently makes you hateful of jews and opposed to a peaceful existence alongside and together with them. I doubt you do either, considering.

So, we've basically already established that being a zionist does not automatically make one jewish, which means that calling for the death of all zionists does not mean you are calling for the death of all jews.

On the other hand, it would make sense for a lot of zionists to *be* jewish, thus meaning that you are calling for the death of, if not all, then at a least a lot of jews. Now i hate pedophiles. IF we were to imagine a world where 60% of pedophiles were jewish, and i said i think pedophiles should die, i do not believe it would be antisemitic, because i would arguing for the death of pedophiles *regardless* of a majority of them being jewish. Similiarly, the person calling for the death of all zionists is probably doing so independantly of a lot of zionists being jews (maybe, i didnt check to see if there are any statistics on that and im not about to, because this is mostly hypothetical anyway).

"But 'zionist' is just a dogwhistle for jewish, so they do mean death to all jews!"

Then let's take a look at the first part of their comment: "death to the illegal settler colonial state of Isr*el"

now im no expert. but i do believe they may be referring to the aforementioned atrocities and the current apartheid that palestinians endure under the rule of Isr*el. Personally i find it reasonable and to some degree expected of people to condemn these acts. Maybe calling for the death of living people is extreme, but either way, i dont think this person is calling for the death of jews, specifically.

Or maybe they are. Maybe the person in the notes is a big antisemite. I dont know. I dont feel like digging through their blog to check. What I do feel more strongly about is the fact that you worded your ask in a way that suggests you know me, since you expect better from me. Whether ur a follower or a mutual, it makes me incredibly sad that you felt the need to send this through anon instead of a dm. maybe its intimidating or something, but getting this ask doesnt feel like a dialogue, it just feels rude. u didnt even greet me first

i'll make it clear: i have no ill will towards jews. at all. i very much want for all jews across the world and especially in my country to be able to live their lives free from the prejudice, hatred and trauma that they may suffer as a result of antisemitism at the hands of people like myself. i dont know how to make this clearer

i do not support the nation of isr*el. i dont like its actions, i dont like its leaders. i am a firm believer in the fact that until the nakba ends, there will never be a worthy argument for the nation's continued existence. and i do not like how people intentionally misconstrue criticisms of it as antisemitic to condemn the critic, such as what you are doing.

The fact that you seem to be familiar with me annoys me. i despise letting people down. i always do my best not to do so, and always wish to be reliable. but you're annoying. so either dm me if you want to have a real discussion, or block me. read this before you go though, its somewhat interesting. now fuck off

#probably could've or should've censored more words. whatever

23 notes · View notes

kitkatyes · 2 months

Text

I can’t sleep so here’s my thoughts on a hypothetical tma ieytd au

Something, something major tma + minor ieytd 3 spoilers

I really like the thought of Phoenix being in artefact storage. But, like, they’re more into the artefact retrieval aspect of it. I can just imagine Phoenix breaking into someplace with half an earbud in plugged into some mobile phone from who-knows-when with their handler rattling on about what they need to get

I’m tossing up weather Zor or Morales should be the head of the institute. They both make sense, I think. Both are the big bosses of their companies, after all. Wait… what if it’s a Jonah situation: it’s Morales’ body but Zor’s mind??? I feel like such a genius (it is 2am, I am exhausted from my schools production and I’m letting my brain run wild)

Okay, whoever is the Elias stand-in would Know that Phoenix is an avatar of the End (their uncanny ability to escape death etc.) and thus, keeps sending them to get all the artefacts: it is quite annoying to replace staff that have been devoured via homophobic vases and other such artefacts, after all. Their handler is none the wiser to the

Juniper would definitely try and do the Unknowing and Phoenix has definitely confiscated at least one of his masks over the years

HOLY SHIT WHAT ID THE HANDLER WAS LIKE SASHA AND GOT FUCKING SNATCHED KDNFVKJHFD

I AM CONNECTING THR DOTS— THINKING OF OPERATION SAFE AND SOUND WHERE JUNIPER STEALS HIS VOICE WHAT IF HE JUST STEALS HIS BEING???

PHOENIX DOESNT NOTICE BUT PRISM DOES AND THEN THEY REALISE

I love Phoenix so much (giving them immense trauma)

What if after that, they get ‘promoted’ to the archives branch— either as archival assistant or The Archivist

“I understand that your coworker was forcibly replaced by some weird creature but here, do paperwork instead of running around like a lunatic; I promise it’ll make you feel better”

Worm incident but it’s bees. I don’t think I need to explain who this is

Im gonna go pass out now bc i desperately need sleep, gn

#ieytd #tma #tma spoilers #minor ieytd 3 spoilers #ieytd/tma #👀#I go a bit insane in this one #kitkatrambles #xey ramble a lot hhhhh #I’m going to bed now

8 notes · View notes

unsavory-melon · 3 months

Text

I Have Made a Slightly Fucked up Hypothetical Involving Time Stopping

trigger warning: non consensual, rape under the cut

(i apologise for the topic, i needed a serious crime for a part of this post {they are utilised towards the end underneath the cut.} )

@pixieskie

I have highlighted the questions in purple while the context for them is in white. If you like, please reblog with your thoughts and answers

NOW, to get started, lets assume you have the power to stop time and move about freely while time is stopped. In other words time is stopped for everything except you

now, if someone shoots a bullet and you stop time, then you walk up to the floating bullet and turn it towards the person who shot it, when time restarts the bullet will fly in the direction of the shooter (because you moved it)

so whats to say this doesnt work for photons? (i promise its not all physics but its a bit of it)

if you move through a space, then the photons you collide with would be sent in a new direction and could meet eyes or cameras allowing them to see you right?? so would you be able to see someone who is moving through stopped time?

and if the human eye isn't enough, what about a slow motion camera? If you could slow down the footage enough, would you be able to get a watchable video?

if you went up to your friend when time has stopped and stood in front of their face for a VEERRRY long time, would they then be able to perceive you?

okay moving on from the physics,

lets say that if , while time is stopped, you can make time work for an object as it works for you if you touch it and have the will to do so

so if you want to make a car work, and you touch it would only the part or the car that you touch experience time or the whole car?

in other words, Do you think that this aspect of your ability depends on what you perceive as an object or is there some definition of what counts for this (i assume object can refer to a living thing)

now going forward, i will be referring to the possibly triggering topics mentioned above

now, lets say this power lies with a certain sick fuck, lets call them 'A'

lets take into consideration the following senario:

A has stopped time and walks out into the street and does those nasty things to a woman (lets call her B )while time is stopped. Would B be able to perceive it? perhaps this is similar to the question above

now, lets say A has stopped time and once again finds B in the street. However this time he allows her to experience time as he does. Now that he has done this he goes on to harass her as any other sick fuck would, only time is stopped.

If he has left suitable DNA evidence like hair or semen which can be used to identify him, but he has an alibi that "holds up" as this is done when time is stopped can A be convicted of his crimes? (an example of an alibi can be: he went to store and stood in front of a security cam, stopped time and did all of this and came back to the same spot and restarts time )

What if A lives in a different city, travels to B's city while time is stopped, does the same thing and uses the same alibi? Could he be convicted then? (to clarify, A would not be seen on security cams while time is stopped )

so B has DNA evidence of what A has done but A has a seemingly airtight alibi, How would a court rule in this case?

if you put yourself in the shoes of a fair judge who has no knowledge of this time stopping business, and also wants to avoid a false accusation and put a rapist where they belong in jail, How would you rule

#tw: r*pe #tw: noncon #hypothetical #situation #what if #time stands still #time stop #time #what would you do

8 notes · View notes

the-s1lly-corner · 6 months

Note

Caine and kinger x reader with ADHD

Caine and Kinger x reader w/ ADHD

yahoo!! gonna knock out some requests today !! this is gonna be based off of my own experiences btw !! not much else i can think to put in this authors note so! ill just get on with it note from the future, little longer than i intended but thats mostly because admin started relating TOO much wuh-oh

CAINE:

caine is honestly really good about keeping you on track when theres a task at hand. i dont know about you, but i tend to wander about when im working on something; to check on something else repeatedly then coming back to what needs to be done and just go back and forth.(shit im even doing it now, the getting up and checking on things thing even though i know the thing is fine/complete) i like to think that caine would be pretty okay at making sure you get the thing you need/want to do done! i dont think theres meds in the digital world, i mean yeah sure you can ask for them but since theyre digital theyre not going to actually. do anything. but lets say in a hypothetical au where this all takes place in the real world and caine is a real person, he would make sure you take them consistently and on time. honestly this hc isnt really part of the ask but; i generally like to think that caine likes to follow routines and schedules as closely as he can... maybe its the ringmaster thing since hes tasked with keeping everything running but... shrugs

very supportive when you make a small mistake in something (like this is just a general thing, though) and isnt too obnoxious with trying to hold or regain your attention is something happens to the side and steals it away. very patient and polite with it, i think

last minute addition because it hit me like a sack of bricks. time blindness. fucking time blindness. you know how i mentioned that caine is good at keeping you on track? i think he would be good with helping you out with that, at least some of it. mostly logging your activities and him keeping an eye on the time (which he already does so its not like an extra habit he needs to pick up.. though if it werent he would pick it up in a heartbeat. literally anything for you, he loves you a lot)

KINGER:

honestly he might start to mimic your stims and fidgets! he doesnt mean to mock you, no i just think he would start to reflect your actions after spending most of his time around you to make sure you're okay! while caine keeps you on track, kinger is likely to go with you when you wander off to check/do something else. really unless its something time sensitive or really important is when hes going to start outwardly reassuring you that the other thing is fine. honestly, in an au with the real world i was originally going to say he would have a chance of forgetting to help remind you/ask if you took your meds (if you take them) but i think he would take stuff like that way too seriously to even DARE forget. like yeah sure you're not going to d1e if you forget to take them for a single day but still. he'd probably be like this with any meds tbh, so if you're prone to forgetting youll be fine as long as you have kinger around! gibes you pillows for fidget stuff, if you are feeling restless. or perhaps even goes on a walk with you around the circus grounds. like idk about yall, or if this is something completely unrelated, but my legs HURT when i sit too still. like down to the bone, if i dont get up every now and then its agony; sleeping is hell and on days its worse than others (like im talking sometimes i need to be in near constant movement) (also jerky arms and legs) (anyways)

also very polite with returning your attention to where it needs to be but honestly given that kinger himself is shown to space out at least twice in the pilot i think sometimes you guys both get side tracked and struggle to remember and/or get back into the flow of what you were originally doing

ponders

tldr; caine keeps you more on track with schedules whereas kinger embraces your flow a little more but both are respectful of things and dont really make you feel less than + remind you to take care of yourself

#tadc x reader #the amazing digital circus x reader #digital circus x reader #caine x reader #kinger x reader

52 notes · View notes

blastlight · 3 months

Note

#christian followers feel free to infodump in my inbox

☆hi beam!! okay i'm agnostic (spiritual and leaning hindu) now, but as a kid i used to be catholic (and also hindu at the same time. i was both simultaneously it's Complicated)

☆when i was little (before the Upsettings happened) god was sort of like my imaginary friend that i talked to all the time and demanded stuff from him constantly and i felt super upset whenever i did something to make him "angry". One time when i was 7 i prayed for about a week straight for him to turn me white. I was also convinced he would give me superpowers before i turned ten. I told all my friends about it. and then when it didnt happen i convinced myself it was because i was (vaguely) hindu too and God doesnt like it when i talk to other gods (???????) I won't get into the more traumatic aspect of the whole thing but the thought of someone always watching and the prospect of hell and dying forever messed me up for a good long while

☆surprisingly unrelated to that, i was obsessed with the bible as a kid (not really in a religious way so much as an autism way). My favourite book/section in the bible was leviticus and i just sat there for hours reading over and over what the ancient israelites were supposed to Not Do and the proper rituals that had to happen if they did those things anyway. My second favourite was the book of revelations but that was out of childish spite because at some point I remember the priest at my church saying that nobody understood what revelations meant or what was going on in there and i went "okay I'll just be the first then". I had Theories.

☆i was also going through my ancient history phase around the same time of my obsessive bible phase so every single week at church i bothered every single adult with questions about evolution and why the dinosaurs aren't in the bible until they made me feel too guilty to ask LOL (same thing happened when i asked stuff like why they eat shrimp or wear purple if leviticus says they can't)

☆tldr; i was obsessed with the bible in the way other kids at the time were obsessed with stuff like percy jackson, not because of religion but because i was fascinated by the Lore. But at the same time (and mostly unrelated to my bible interest??) i also believed in god fully and thought he would do stuff for me if i asked nice enough but be also scared me very much. Around age 12 I eventually reasoned myself out of christianity because, among other things, i decided the whole heaven/hell situation wasn't fair and unrealistic and also genesis made zero sense. The religious trauma that came later didn't help but was surprisingly not a driving factor for the most part. I still read the bible sometimes. I think it's fascinating

Oh wow that's way more than I thought anyone would send hahah

Definitely sounds interesting. I can see how you might end up like that but it sounds unusual. i don't know a whole lot about hinduism, but if you want, can you elaborate on how being hindu affected your catholic experience? just for curiosity :>

i relate with the "talking to G-d as if He's my imaginary friend" thing so much. i don't do that much now, but it's just way easier to speak directly than through very specific pre-written prayers sometimes...

hyperfixating on Bible Lore TM is kinda fascinating. i would not have chosen levitcus but i can see the hypothetical appeal of analyzing The Rules. (i was a child of chaos.) i don't know anything about revelations. what is going on in there?

bothering church adults with dinosaur questions is hysterical. also, where does it mention not wearing purple again? because religious jews do follow a lot of the commandments that originated from there, but that one's never come up. seems like a weird mistranslation/misinterpretation maybe?

makes sense why you'd leave based on that, i think that's more or less a common experience with ex-christians from what i've seen? good luck with the rest of that ♡ 👍 ♡

#i'm making comparisons solely on where i can relate to you. there is a bunch of stuff here that's different to different degrees-#-in (orthodox) judaism. so just keep that in mind ^^#also if i mixed up christianity and catholocism dont mind that. i dont remember the difference lol #shealot #sunnemona #its also very funny that you sent this because a few minutes after reblogging that post #the op texted me 'DONT REBLOG THAT LEAVE IT ON MY BLOG'#and then i checked tumblr and found Five Paragraphs In My Inbox #so. L gideon lmaooo

8 notes · View notes

bauhausdog · 27 days

Text

i feel weirdly energetic for some reason, (◕‿◕) so im gonna talk about something in my mind a bit.

basically, i think that "learn the rules before you break then" and both "shape language is real, triangle can indicate danger" and "shape language isn't real, look at all these square characters, they have nothing in common" are kinda flawed and highlights what i think its a deeper problem on how we tackle art theory as a whole. Also, i think appeal is subjective and that, actually ugly or "unappealing" things have value.

skip to the star emoji if you just want to read my main point

I don't like how the drawing fundamentals are treated as a single canon, i personally don't believe in a single canon on, uh... pretty much anything, perception, even though there's quite a lot of objective ideas in it (like how lenses work, ambient occlusion, anatomy, etc.), that doesn't mean the way we make those connections and create theories based on them is objective and silver bullet proof. To make my point a bit clearer, I'm specifically talking when people refer to the "fundamentals" as the rules, to further sharpen my point of view, i rarely, if ever, believe in rules in art. To exemplify of what i mean, let's immerse a bit in the world of... uh.. renaissance era, although it would be delightful to rant about centralizing "art" as "beauty and skill" and those as whatever western society at the time thought it was good, i am not and i dont want to make a comparison of bigoted "beauty" guidelines to "uhmmm, not so objective aesthetics" guidelines, but i do want to use a specific pattern of thought in it.

Ok, so, (at least the art we known) from that era looks kinda the same right, that's because they had a somewhat set of ideas and values of what made "something pretty", and "good art", that is, realism = good. Ok, then let's say you, fellow artist, wake up in bed, and decide to read a hypothetical "art rules" book and decide to compare it to the "good art", you see how you should structure the steps of a drawing, how you should apply anatomy, how you should render shit, and so on. "golly gee, that's a bunch load of rubbish if i ever seen one" You might say, but you take another look at your 1500 deviantart gallery book, all of the popular mainstream artworks seem to have followed these steps, right? But there's something missing,

Here's a question, how do you make something new then? art right now doesnt look like reinassaince that much anymore. You might say "oh break the rules", im gonna get to that part, put that in the back of your head. Ok, so, how do you create something new? how would you create artwork? if you were trained like those famous painters, you would probably just follow their steps and mindset, and create similar artwork, but can you break the pattern while upholding restrict art guidelines? imo you can't

"bauhausdog, what does this have to do with cannons?" shhhhhh... im gonna get to that part.

So, art history taught us that, in a nutshell, people just ducked around and finded out, breaking that rigid art canon piece by piece, although it's worth noting that a lot of it was also ideological, but i want to shine a spotlight on the art part of this phenomenon, "art should have realistic colors" lol no, fauvism, "art represents reality" lol no, surrealism, "art should be realistic" lol no, modernism, "art should not be realistic" lol no, naturalism.

people broke that weird rigid old canon, and people learned that they could make new things bc of this experimentation.

Alright, let's tie evertyhing together so far, in the modern day, we have taken a lot of lessons based on these art movements, we absorved a lot of stuff, we have knowledge of almost everything, our process of drawing, our way of arting, our 'artstlye', is super varied, there is a lot of elements at our disposal, we can be as realistic as we can, as cartoonish as we can, we live in the same timeline as tawog and everything everywhere all at once, shows that mix different methodologies, philoshopies of art in one motion picture.

excuse my "middle-upper class got out of art school trust fund guy" term here, but we do live in a hypermodern reality, this is super, super cheesy, but it is everything, all at once :PPP.

Now, let's wrap the previous question, how do you create new stuff? experimenting, literally thinking outside, inside, and about the box, that box being our conception of art, also, the way we conceptualize art is super importqant, i mean, its literally the way our little heads organize what is a art and how do you art a thing.

"bauhausdog, you said something 30 minutes ago about the back of the head", ok, so, to talk abut how we conceptualize art, let's talk about, well, the thing. Until now, my thesis isn't breaking any new ground, i'm not proposing a solution, or at the very least pinpointing a problem, well, i can kill the rest of the birds with just a single stone, a quote stone.

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

"learn the rules before you break them", it seems reasonable at first, let's break down the phrase, "learn the [rules](...)" what is this "rules"?, well, it's the general notion of art fundamentals, "(...) before you "break" them", what breaking means, exactly? well, if we take fauvism, fauvism was about subverting naturalistic rendering as the "correct pretty" standard, fauvism is basically messing with colors, duck around, find out. This distinction is important to make, in my interpretation, "breaking" is equal to that, experimenting outside a strict set of guidelines.

But wait, did you catch it? the weird connection with these two sentences, "learn this general set of rules, then you can experiment and get to your own conception of what art is", this sounds weirdly similar, where i've heard that before....

this is where it all comes together, follow me on this logic for a bit. Based on what I talked about the art movement argument, i said that previous experimentation (eg: modernism) lead to a better conception about art and its elements in general (eg: learning about abstraction and how to incorporate that on an artwork with modernism), the give-away here is that we build upon to a better and more comprehensive understandment. So, the contradiction to me is, if you need to learn and build upon a certain set of guidelines to then be able to do your own thing, there is something wrong with this set of rules.

To me it is just so weird that these rules just ignore that we live in a world of everything, why a "wrong" color palette is wrong? why airbrushed pillow shading is wrong?

and i'm not crucifying this one phrase, in my opinion, this is part of a wider acceptance of just this general "art guidelines" that you need to learn to improve.

What i am criticizing here is a generalized "art conceptualization canon" that fails to consider the subjectivity of aesthetics and caters to a mainstream type of art, and is tunnel visioned and doesn't teach art beyond the bite sized pieces of information.

I don't have a lot of examples to back this up, but what i do know is, there's no agreed upon, universal opinion on whats appealing or not, what works or what doesn't, what's true or what's not. The only example i will bring up is this. perfect perspective is bullshit, like, persperctive is the least broken rule here, perspective should not always be drawing straight lines converging trhough a point, honestly, freehand it, use your knowledge to distort it. "draw straight lines converging to a point" is a bit shallow

In my opinion, art should be taught in a more hollistic way even down to the little details, actually, i think it would be beneficial to teach a hollistic view in art as a whole, as in, the individual elements don't live in a vacuum. And also, there should be an emphasis on different aesthetic values (eg: naturalistic, western comic book, modernistic, eastern) and be mindful of the subjectfullness of aesthetics.

In conclusion, i think we should start refering to the general "fundamentals" as like, "post-modern western society's theory on illustration aesthetics" or in an actual serious manner something like "objective art theory". that's still a janked mess of a broken, but i would much prefer structuring things as like "perceptual color theory", "emotional color theory", "western color theory", instead of plain "color theory"

tldr: "art fundamentals" are a bit reductive, tunnel visioned and puts a single set of aesthetic values on a pedestal

also, a bit of a tangent, but i dont believe in a universal appeal at all, "dont shade with airbrush", "dont pillow shade" there's at least one human being that really, really likes the look of airbrush with a pillow shading look, just follow your art honestly, even if it is ugly, who cares, ugliness should be celebrated, not in the "not conventional" kind of way, i mean graffiti is beautiful, but i hated graffiti, acne looks pretty, but im still trying to unlearn to hate acne.

extra tangents: i think that color theory reflects certain aesthetic values and is not universal (dont have anything to prove but a suspicion), let people do random ugly shit for fun, "bad" art has value.

sorry if it doesnt sound coherent as much as i try to push my brain power my head feels foggy when i try to talk about something

I will add to this more later

#art #art theory

4 notes · View notes