#i feel like this is a very valid distinction | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

luciddownloading · 7 months

Text

Mercury Aspects and Sense of Humor

Aspects to your Mercury (as well as its sign and house placement) say a lot about your sense of humor: how you're funny and what you find funny. If you have many varying aspects to Mercury, you express your humor in many different ways. You also might just be ridiculously funny.

Sun conjunct Mercury: The Funny Guy (or Gal). These people identify with their humor so they seek a lot of validation for being funny. This can make them a constant Joker. "Why so serious?" they ask. "Because everything isn't a damn joke!" you may reply. But, they like taking the piss out of everything and everyone, themselves included. This can be a source of insecurity, too, though. They may feel as if they are always being laughed at, not with, even when it's not convenient.

Moon-Mercury aspects: Naturally funny. Seriously, some of the most hilarious people you'll ever meet (I might be a little biased as I have the sextile 😁). Humor is their intuitive response, so they react in very funny ways, sometimes unintentionally. VERY quick-witted. Needs to feel free to joke/laugh or engage with witty people to feel comfortable. The soul of a comedian. Can use humor to heal or comfort others. Either laughs off/through their feelings or do NOT laugh at them when they're having an emotional moment or they will hurt you.

Mercury conjunct Venus: Pleasing humor. Wins people over through jokes and laughter. May be fond of "corny" humor because it's very inoffensive, wholesome and oddly charming. Can make the worst puns or lamest jokes sound hilarious. Sometimes, people laugh with them just because they like them so much, not because of the joke itself. Observers may think, "Um, calm down, he/she isn't that funny." Very common with their love interests or people they date. Easily falls for very witty individuals.

Mercury-Mars aspects: Potty mouths. Vulgar humor that only they can get away with. If people are rubbed the wrong way, it only amuses them more. An expert at making sex jokes or telling hilarious stories about their sex lives. Funny people of their preferred sex(es) turn them on. Savagely skilled at sassy comebacks that will shut the other person up. Legendary roast sessions or reads. Can go on very funny rants whenever they are pissed off or worked up.

Mercury-Jupiter aspects: The clown. Big and broad humor. Loves being a silly goose. Doesn't care if you find it funny or not. It's hilarious to them! Most likely to have an unstoppable laughing fit over something stupid. Will fail the "try not to laugh" challenge. They can't hold it in! Their humor is like sunshine on a cloudy day. Like to uplift people with jokes. Even their laughter is like a healing medicine. Possibly has a distinct laugh and a huge one, at that.

Mercury-Saturn aspects: Dry wit. The absolute masters of sarcasm. It's like their second (or native) language. People sometimes don't know when they're joking and take them seriously. On the flip side, they get really annoyed when people make a joke out of something that they're taking seriously. Sophisticated humor. If American, they might really love British humor and comedians. Making jokes out of difficult situations but in a cynical or "I hate my life" way. Only gets funnier as they get older. Takes things less seriously with age and learns to use humor as a coping strategy.

Mercury-Uranus aspects: Offbeat humor. Other people sometimes don't "get" their humor. Can feel alienated in that way until they meet a fellow weirdo who laughs at the same things they do. Then, it's like "Thank God! I've found my people!" Super-quick, when it comes to telling jokes, comebacks, or getting the joke. Will laugh at things that go over other people's heads. Comedic genius: brilliant bits or wild one-liners. Might get off on controversial jokes or laughing at things they know they shouldn't. Frequently guilty of knee-jerk laughter in inappropriate moments.

Mercury-Neptune aspects: A chameleon-like wit. Can be dry, goofy, odd, offensive or wholesome in their humor, depending on the environment/audience. May write very funny screenplays or novels or be a great comedic actor. The hilarious main character of their own ongoing movie. Tells a lot of jokes to themselves, in their head or in private. Most likely to laugh out loud in public at an internal joke and look a bit crazy. Cracks themselves up. May imagine cracking others up or getting caught up in wacky situations.

Mercury-Pluto aspects: Dark comedy. "Wow, that was fucked up. Funny but fucked up." Might tell themselves that or be told that by others. Can keep some jokes to themselves because other people couldn't handle them. May think they're just joking around but destroys someone psychologically and triggers their trauma with a single quip. Sometimes, though, that's the intention. Mean streak may come out via humor in a way that horrifies them or they regret later. Or they just own it. SHADE, okay? More shade than a oak tree. It's giving Real Housewives or Tiffany Pollard. "Hilarious reality show villain" energy.

#mercury in astrology #mercury aspects #mercury astrology #sun conjunct mercury #mercury conjunct venus #mercury mars aspects #moon mercury aspects #mercury jupiter aspects #mercury saturn aspects #mercury uranus aspects #mercury neptune aspects #mercury pluto aspects #astrology #astrology observations

1K notes · View notes

swordsandflowercrowns · 1 year

Text

I was explaining this to a friend recently and I think it's an important distinction to make: not all queerplatonic relationships look the same.

A good way I've found to illustrate what exactly a qpr is, is to say "a qpr is to relationships what nonbinary is to gender". While both of these traditionally function on a binary (male/female, platonic/romantic), by defining our personal outlooks and experiences of the concepts of gender and relationships with new terms, we challenge the boundaries that society has put in place.

And yes, whilst redefining what actually constitutes romantic or platonic relationships, or male and female identities, and what makes them different (and acknowledging where they overlap, or where they can expand past what we traditionally expect) is important to increasing our understanding, so is providing options entirely outside of those two boxes.

And that's what it is - options. It's very easy to trivialise the concept of nonbinary and simply make gender into a trinary, rather than a binary. Male/female/nonbinary, which goes against the very purpose of the nonbinary label. This further erases the spectrum of gender. It's the same with relationships - by giving a strict set of instructions on how a qpr must look and act, you are simply creating a trinary. The point of the concept of qprs is to acknowledge that there are relationships between people that may overlap platonic and romantic, or fall partially within one and partially outside, or ones that are entirely separate from either category.

There are an infinite amount of ways a relationship can manifest, and if the people in the relationship feel that queerplatonic best describes their partnership without romance, or their affection without commitment, or their feelings towards each other that aren't quite what romantic or platonic is to them, or any other reason that rebels against amatonormativity, then they can choose to use that term. Queerplatonic covers the widest range of relationships that come in all shapes and sizes.

I think it's so important when discussing topics like relationships and gender to consciously make the effort to keep queering our ideas of the concepts - to remember that a spectrum is a spectrum. Labels can be useful for finding community, identifying your experiences and validating your struggles, but as soon as you try to start hyper-defining them, you lose the radical nature of queering our understanding of ourselves and our relationships. We name these concepts in order to give a voice to our subversion of society's arbitrary rules and expectations, not to police each other into conforming to a particular understanding of how a person (with a certain label) "should" act or be.

#qpr #queerplatonic #queerplatonic relationships #lgbtq+#aro #aromantic #arospec #aspec #lovequeer #relationship anarchy #queer #1k

5K notes · View notes

harmonysanreads · 8 months

Note

What do you think about Yan! Focalors?

I saw this ask a while back but I decided to first see Furina's personality in-game before answering and mmmm, definitely possible. Though if I ever do include her in any of my writings, I'll be keeping it platonic :>

Furina's life source is the spotlight, she thrives in the very epicenter of attention. At the same time, she seems to have a distinct need for external validation. Her extravagant manner of speech is both her weapon and her shield. If you wish to catch her attention and keep it fixated upon you until a solid foundation of affection can be formed ; you'd need to be a bit of an anomaly. Someone who's a challenge, someone who's not swayed by her provocations and someone who can see through her bravado. What would really change the trajectory of your relationship is, if you'd share a vulnerable moment with her, as as it is seen she prefers to keep her troubles and insecurities to herself.

Furina knows when she likes someone or something enough to make a move, so her initial strategy is to put all sorts of grandiose shows that flaunt her own admirable qualities. There's another reason she chooses this method, that is the pressure that comes from the public and which she hopes would push you to accept her proposals. When that doesn't work and gossip of the Hydro Archon getting rejected spreads like wildfire, Furina is embarrassed. But ever the stubborn one, she employs strategies after strategies to gain your attention and praise (she phrases it as you getting hers instead because of course) and even the tiniest quantity of it has her squealing at the quiet confines of her bedroom.

I think she's one of those characters who get hit by a whole existential crisis the moment they realize they've actually caught feelings for someone. It becomes blatantly clear to bystanders as well, she fumbles with her words, twiddles her thumbs and reacts strongly with matters that concern you. Definitely throws a tantrum if you don't notice the new bow she wore. At the same time, she does thorough research on you from the time you get up for bed to who your first ancestor was. She makes sure to learn about your interests and hobbies and might even start doing them herself to better bond with you. She'd consider those all-nighters worth it if she manages to get even an impressed look from you.

As her affections grow in intensity, she starts expressing her jealousy. She cannot stand you being all buddy-buddy with someone who's obviously lesser than her, she's the better choice! Can't you see?! Thankfully, getting pesky pedestrians out of the picture is easy in Fontaine — given that you know how to use its laws against your enemies. One thing is for certain though, because of the influx of these new and intense emotions, Furina is rather unstable. She'd never physically hurt you (that's just not her thing) but she does take a lot of impulsive decisions that effect the surroundings.

If push comes to shove and you still refuse to reciprocate her love despite all that she's done, her final weapon is the courtroom. Remember? Getting anyone out of the picture is easy if you know your way around the laws of Fontaine and really, who'd look for you at the Hydro Archon's palace if they believed you to be sentenced to lifelong prison?

520 notes · View notes

kyxworld · 1 month

Note

https://www.tumblr.com/kyxworld/744721727110758401/httpswwwtumblrcomkyxworld744684586514169856

The cake part is what I don’t understand the most because yeah if I don’t make the distinction between imagination vs reality its all awareness so if I imagine eating a cake I’ve eaten it but you say « you’ve choices either go out and buy it or don’t do anything abt it. but somehow you eat the cake. whether it be today, tmrw or the next week (all illusory as hell) » so it’s no longer instant ? Because if it just appears Why I'd need to buy it ? Even if there’s not really today tomorrow or next week because it’s always in the moment it’s like creating duality ? Because when bloggers say if I want a new appearance okay I’m aware of what I want to experience and that’s it so I don’t wait ? I don’t change anything because everything just is ? But your example is very different or maybe I didn’t really understand ? :/ because it very much feel like "oh imagine it just in your head and be happy because it’s the same as what you would call reality so you already experienced it"

oh god, the example i gave seems to be very misleading. *deep exhale* you’re thinking too much honestly. wayyy too much. even my brain hurts from comprehending this 🧍🏻‍♀️.

see everything is instant FOR “ ”. you’re still identifying as a human. you’re trying to change, do something,TRYING, desiring change so much. this moment is perfect as it is. whatever you’re aware of rn? IS. that’s all. now again, TIME AND AGAIN, you’re using illusory senses as validation. (i’m gonna cry 🧍🏻)

you say, you know your “desired appearance” is what you have, yet COME asking, i don’t see it. if that’s what you decide, it is. that’s what you’re aware, that’s what is. you’re relying on unreal senses, and still treating this as a method. it’s not.

ALSO if you want cake, it is instant, you experienced it. you’re still waiting for the “senses” 😭💀

(the example i gave is very misleading, going to edit out 🧍🏻‍♀️)

someone pls help out 🥲

#is this what bloggers go through 😃#i feel like i’m saying the same thing in diff ways 🥹#non dualism #awareness #asks!

155 notes · View notes

not-terezi-pyrope · 9 months

Text

The push for legal prohibitions against AI training on public data via copyright law feels like it's going to have one of two outcomes, and I don't like either of them.

The law enforces a legal distinction between mechanically indistinguishable actions performed by a computer system and by the human brain, enshrining a double standard where what is doing a thing matters more than what the thing is.

Subjective art attributes like "style" and "influence", currently seen as so nebulous that fair use need not even be applied to them, become acceptable points of contention under copyright law, such that human artists can get sued for perceived infractions (e.g. you saw this artwork and "stole" the style of it in your work that looks similar).

Both of these concentrate power to corporations who already hold large corpuses of licensed artwork. It makes me so uncomfortable. Are we heading for a scenario where only corporations can meaningfully monetize "authorized" art, where they can prove that they have ownership of either the training data for an AI model or any nebulous artistic influences that could otherwise be targeted for suppression?

It's not like the latter case is even enforceable but it could be used to intimidate. Honestly, I think art style copyright would be so obviously absurd that the "codified double standard between human and machine actions" option is more likely to be what becomes law, but even that is... very bad, it ensures that AI systems can only be deployed by those with the most money and influence, in service of that money and influence.

I honestly thought that fair use and similar legal concepts were strong enough to withstand the push for this sort of regulation, but this has become such a hot button issue that I'm not sure. We are maybe sleepwalking into some very foreseeably unpleasant consequences here due to artist anxiety which, while valid in especially an economic sense, hasn't actually been thought through, is often not really validated by the reality of the situation or checked against the consequences of being asked for.

Artists want their work posted publicly by untouchable by what they see as some sort of infecting monster, perverting what they made with their own two hands, and that emotion is so strong that it feels like it's going to push us into an objectively worse regulatory future for AI and/or art than anything we have now.

😬

#not-terezi-speaks #ai

255 notes · View notes

parachutingkitten · 5 months

Text

Why is Pixane So Queer?

Some thoughts on Asexual Romance.

[warning, long post below the cut]

The Ninjago fandom had a very potent reaction to The Quest for the Lost Powers repeatedly describing Pixal and Zane as being 'very close friends'. This seemed quite contradictory to many who assumed the confession of undying love at the end of the last season might have been a small hint at a romantic relationship of some kind. However, after closer examination, it turns out Pixal and Zane don’t ever actually refer to themselves as a couple, and the show has never once referred to them being in an active relationship.

But there’s something here, right? Sure, it’s not explicitly stated, but you are lying to yourself if you can watch them and tell me there is zero romantic subtext going on here. A lot of people got very defensive that the children’s book stated they were friends, especially when it also seemingly confirmed that the much straighter straight boy ship, Kailor, was apparently canon, despite being only implied as a possible future for ages now. But I find this backlash to be a bit strange. Sure, Zane and Pix aren’t exactly ‘just friends’ but, what do you want them to say? That they’re boyfriend and girlfriend? You want these two to say they’re ‘going out’ with each other? You think these two robots are ‘dating’ each other, like they’re just susin’ out the partner pool. Are those the words that fit this relationship to you?

I found myself feeling weirdly offended at everyone, and I think the reason was that these two love-droids haven’t chosen to define their relationship in traditional terms, and so everyone’s insistence that they should be boxed into some sort of traditional term seems inherently strange. It’s like when two elderly people are dating, it feels weird when they say “this is my girlfriend” because despite it being factually true, there’s so much baggage that comes with the word, part of that implication being youth, which is directly at odds with the immediate situation. It’s the correctness of the word paired with the incorrectness of the societal implications which forces you to assess if those societal implications should exist. And that- that is what makes this relationship feel queer. That’s why there’s this undeniably different kinda energy radiating off of it. It’s that rejection of the traditional labels, the refusal to be put into a box, which forces it to be a-typical. But, why? Why does Pixane have this rejection of labels radiating off of it? Their ages, while being literally whack, are presented as being your typical teenage to young adult age romance. Their genders present as a typical hetero pairing. And it’s not like they don’t follow your typical cliche love at first sight plot. I mean, Pixal was pretty explicitly created as a generic love interest character. So, what is it? Why is this queer? Spoiler alert: It’s because they’re asexual.

So, what is asexuality? Strictly defined, it is a community of people who experience little to no sexual attraction to anyone. This is distinct from aromanticism, which is a lack of romantic attraction, and sexual engagement or urges which are their own separate boat, but often have overlap with asexuality. However, for our purposes, we are focused on just the sexual attraction part. You can think of it as the difference between finding someone hot and finding someone cute. That’s the distinction that made it click for me anyway.

Now, as a disclaimer, I am not going to be considering other queer interpretations of this relationship. Not to invalidate them, because of course they’re valid, but specifically because I feel there isn’t precedent for them in the text, and I feel there is for asexuality. This deep dive is particularly about validating asexuality as being queer, and so to do that we have to eliminate any other outstanding factors. People are extremely quick to pin asexual queerness to something else, and that in itself can feel invalidating, even if it’s only attempting to validate other communities as well. Asexual romance is so easily read as straight romance, that any queer undertones have to have an alternate explanation, because asexuality doesn’t seem like enough to cross the barrier. Yes, enby interpretations of Pixane are great, and fantastic, and I would die for your right to follow those headcanons, but to pin the in text queer vibes on the fact that they technically don’t have biological gender, despite having very clear presenting and unwavering genders in text seems like a real easy way to dismiss the asexual coding which is staring me in the face. While things like non-binary or aromantic readings validate communities who have immense oppression and are continually called fake or confused, which is insanely important, asexuality, especially as it stands apart from aromanticism, is often confused as not being a difference at all. You’re just pure! You’re just wholesome! You’re just so sweet and innocent! And yes… yes, I am, but also, it’s more than that. It’s fundamentally something different about the way my brain is wired, and I feel a need to defend the fact that it, specifically, is queer. And in no way am I trying to say that the aces are the most oppressed actually, I don’t want to start the oppression Olympics here, and if we were to, I would probably argue quite the opposite, but I am saying that there is oppression, and it comes from outside and inside of the community, and it is a thing. It’s a different flavor of thing that’s maybe not as severe, but also sits differently. Maybe it’s not as much a pressing thing as other things, but… it’s my thing. It’s what I feel. It’s something I can speak on. So, I’m going to speak on it.

Perhaps one of the largest factors asexuality has to offer is the necessary separation of romance and sex. The packaging of sexual attraction and romantic attraction is so ubiquitous that the term ace is often assumed to be referring to aro/ace people, despite there being a term for that… aro/ace! Asexuality is not an easy queerness to explain, precisely because of this deeply held integration. It’s not a difference of experience necessarily, it’s a lack of a certain experience. I’m not saying this is something you can’t understand, because, unless you’re aromantic, I know you understand it! You are going to be able to like and relate to and feel seen by asexual romances, because the main component it requires is that you have romantic attraction- which is most people. And so many people get confused when you point to an asexual thing and go “I get that! This! This is me!” Because they just respond with “You’re not special, I get that too. Is this supposed to be different?” And, yes, it is, primarily because everything else includes this giant other thing as well, which is sexuality.

When vegans get excited about finding a meal which is especially delicious and also meets their food restrictions, they get particularly excited. That doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy that same vegan meal- no doubt it probably tastes incredibly delicious to you as well. But you likely won’t get that same feeling of excitement, because you don’t live under the same restrictions as vegans do. That’s the same thing I feel when I see an asexually coded romance. I can enjoy the full meal without having to pick things out or ignore vital parts. I have no doubt that others can thoroughly enjoy asexual romances, but you’re going to have to look at it in context of all the dominant romance stories in the world to understand why it’s so different and special to me.

Now, have I cracked the code on asexual romance in media? No. I only have my own experience with asexuality to lean on, and the very limited discourse on the topic I’ve come across while discovering my identity. All of this is simply a theory based on my own thoughts and observations, but these are some explanations as to what might possibly be included in a framework for an asexually coded romance, at least to me.

So, what makes romance asexual? It’s not simply a lack of sexual suggestiveness. Any number of romances aren’t sexually suggestive, but still glaringly heteronormative- especially in children’s television. And it’s also not a lack of initial attraction, as that would throw Pixane out of the running for sure. Well, I have a few things which I feel may contribute to asexual coding of a romantic relationship, and wouldn’t you know, Pixane is a great example of all of them.

Asexual romance may, as many have remarked, come off as more innocent. When you shove all of the focus of characters onto the romantic, emotional connection, rather than any underlying sexual tension, things end up feeling extremely innocent to the layperson. You get the sort of old married couple effect. Two people deeply in love, who just sort of stare at each other in awe, and that others can comment on how cute they are. Again, asexuals don’t necessarily find anything hot. Cuteness is the main operative factor motivating their attraction, so it follows that their interactions would radiate that factor back at observers. The characters might in fact be very touchy, have sex, enjoy that physical touch, but that’s not at the forefront of anyone’s mind in the story. This is an aspect of Pixane that can be read very clearly. Their romance is quite easily described as pure and wholesome by all who have the pleasure of observing them. The way they interact with each other is extremely gentle and supportive, and their level of old married couple vibes is by far the highest of any pairings in the show (aside from perhaps the actual old married couple of Ed and Edna).

Asexual romance, I find to often be less conflict driven. Take the classic enemies to lovers plotline- it’s built on a tension between an innate irrational attraction, and a perceived logical personality conflict. While romantic attraction is certainly not always rational, from my understanding, sexual attraction is often rooted in factors that aren’t at all related to logical compatibility or personality. This means the enemies to lovers plot is primed to work much better when sexually charged, because it presents a clear path to create the hate/love conflict. Not to say that asexual enemies to lovers is impossible, or that asexual partners don’t have conflict between them, but that it is less of an obvious threat to incorporate into asexual romance. Because there are less factors and layers of attraction to get involved in, there’s less room for conflict and contradiction between them. It is much easier to get tangled up in a situation with more strings. Pixane is a relationship which certainly doesn’t hold much internal conflict. The one disagreement they did have is solved quite neatly with basic communication skills in the middle of season 8. Most of their conflict comes from external factors which separate them or cause misunderstanding, rather than conflict from within the characters themselves.

Asexual romance also has the obvious potential to challenge traditional dating norms. Because there is no impulse to escalate things physically, it makes sense that the progression of an asexual romance would differ from traditional relationships where that escalation is expected. Your asexual romance is bound to get emotionally intense with each other quicker, or at least have it be the focus of their story, because there is no other facet to deal with. Asexuals don’t commonly have sexual fantasies for themselves, but rather romantic fantasies. Not to say that most people don’t have romantic fantasies, but… that’s all we’ve got. And when your impulse is ‘let’s get married, and then maybe I guess we can kiss’, it might seem like things are progressing out of order to the average person. While asexuals don't all hate physical contact or even sexual connection, it isn't an attractive or motivating factor in the same way it is in most romances, so even on a base level, the level of physical contact is likely going to be less than average. Pixane progresses ridiculously out of order. Zane is willing to split his soul for her- it’s only at this point that they romantically hold hands for the first time. It’s the emotional connection between the two that comes first, and all classic tangible symbols of affection and romance that are secondary. The most pronounced physical contact we’ve seen is a cheek kiss, and their most common type of physical contact is enthusiastic hugging (which I’ll dive more into later).

Additionally, because physical affection is more of an afterthought, it would also make sense for labels to come slowly. If you have an incredibly close personal, soulful connection, but you haven’t kissed yet, it makes sense for people around you to assume you’re just really close friends, or perhaps just crushing on each other still. Terms like “girlfriend” and “boyfriend” invoke rather physical tactile images, and so to attempt to apply them to an asexual romance isn’t necessarily wrong but may feel a bit off putting because of this dissonance. Again, it’s this dissonance between the romantic meaning of the word, and the sexual undertones which forces discomfort onto the viewer. Pixal and Zane have yet to kiss each other after years of dancing around each other’s obvious romantic feelings. It remains unclear if they even are in an active romantic relationship at all, or are still mutually pinning, as no labels have been given to their relationship in show. I have no doubt part of this is the lack of planned dates or physical affection which are common outward signals of a traditional established relationship.

A lot of the saucy flirting which accompanies many classic heteronormative romances can seem rather pointless to asexuals. I would venture to say that asexuals are likely more direct and up front with their emotional vulnerability and feelings, because that’s the connection which they are seeking to make. To dance around it with innuendo and mind games is rather unproductive in achieving the end goal. There is less of a pressure to “perform” romance, and instead just be honestly romantic, because the romance isn’t a prelude to sex, or physical affection, it’s the end goal in and of itself. To only pretend to do it is entirely pointless. All of this is likely going to result in a romance which puts less focus on the “game of dating”. I mean, can you imagine Pixane ending up in a Jaya style love triangle? It’s almost an absurd pitch to make, right? There is no performativity to the Pixane relationship, it is exactly as it appears at first glance. And when Zane attempts more traditional, cheesy flirting tactics like in Ninjago Confidential, Pixal is nothing but confused and annoyed by his attempts.

The most prominent example which I feel exemplifies the inherently asexual coding of Pixane applies to many robotic romances- and it’s the characters’ relationship with skin. A lot of sexual suggestion and tension is based on skin. The revealing nature of skin exposure, the feeling of skin on skin being a sexual touchpoint, skin is essential to the sexual experience in most instances. This is part of the reason I love writing romance but have yet to write a kiss between anyone. The sexuality of a kiss is inherently uncomfortable to write for me because you’re encouraged to lean into the physical feeling of the touch of skin. Robots bring to the forefront the idea of this physical contact because their skin is often not exactly skin, and that in itself gives a sort of de facto distance from sexuality. There’s a moment which happens repeatedly with Pixane, and shows up in other robotic romances, like Wall-E and Eve, which I feel highlights this essential separation from the skin of sexuality. Pixane and Wall-Eve both have the ‘clink’ moment, in which intimate physical contact is made, (in Pixane’s case, all of their many hugs) and accentuated by the sound of their metal skin meeting with a loud clink. This sound not only highlights their lack of skin but serves to suck any sexual energy out of the interaction immediately and leaves it purely with the romance intended by the action. It’s not uncommon for people to find the sound humorous, precisely because of how desexualizing it is. It highlights the couples’ incapability of indulging in sexual skin on skin contact, and instead the closeness and companionship the act of touching provides.

And this is why I feel robots are in fact a decent candidate for asexual characters if done properly. Robots being coded as asexual can be a very negative stereotype, particularly when their asexuality is explicitly linked to their lack of emotion and feeling- but media about robots has been trending more positively recently. In fact, robots, if used correctly, may actually validate asexuality explicitly. Robotic characters are often used to explore the idea of what makes humanity human. If we give these robots human-like enough traits, when do they become human? Are they perhaps the most human? And it seems like fictional consensus agrees that sexuality is not required to achieve human status. Stripping away the excess human emotions may be part of what makes robots asexual (or aromatic, if your robot is also incapable of romantic love). The medium of robot literalizes the disconnect that asexuals have with their physical bodies, most notably their skin, and serves to put additional distance between the character and sexual contact, at least in the traditional sense. I mean, think about it, if you want your robot to be sexual, you need to go out of your way to establish that it has sexual capability, because no one is going to simply assume that your fictional robot was designed with that capability in mind. Why would it be, unless that was its explicit purpose? In a way, robots are sort of de facto asexual.

Pixane is queer because it’s asexual, and it’s asexual because they distill down only the purely romantic parts of a romantic relationship. They’re able to do this, in part because of their individual characterization, but also because of their robotic bodies, which make the separation between romance and sexuality just that much easier. They highlight the necessity to separate romance from all of the convoluted sexual layers which often accompany it, and so come out feeling distinctly untraditional and subversive.

That's the theory, again, all hyper based on my own personal experience with asexuality, which is of course not all encompassing. I'd love to hear your thoughts :)

#ninjago #pixane #pixal borg #zane julien #pixal ninjago #zane ninjago #asexuality #long one #parachuterants

130 notes · View notes

david-talks-sw · 1 year

Text

At some point when talking about the Jedi and the Prequels and Star Wars, I feel like there's distinctions that need to be made.

There's George Lucas' Star Wars.

And then there's Star Wars the transmedia franchise.

They are not one and the same.

They have similar messages. Depending on which continuity you go for, the message is more or less alike (Disney canon's treatment of the Jedi Order is slightly more aligned with GL's vision than the Legends canon was).

But they are not the same.

George Lucas' Star Wars is just the six films and the first six seasons of TCW which serve as an addendum to the six films, and the values and messages that derive from them.

The transmedia franchise has those values, but they've been diluted through comics and novels and games and authors who don't agree with GL's vision and authors who tweaked it a bit and retcons until it's no longer the same thing.

Which takes us to "did the Jedi deserve to fall" and the answers:

"no, but the institution needed to go"

There is NOTHING to indicate that read in George Lucas' Star Wars.

If you go by the movies ONLY, then the Jedi are in the right, and what happens to them is tragic, and I don't just mean Order 66.

The movies' narrative literally frames them - as a people, a religion and an institution - (and Bail Organa) as objectively good and the only ones trying to do what's right.

However, some of the marketing and storylines and comics and books presented in the EU and in new canon do support this POV.

If you count those as "just as valid and canon as the films and shows" then you'll have a very different view of the Jedi Order.

"yes, for what they did to Ahsoka".

Ahsoka is part of TCW.

If your Star Wars is the same as Lucas', then TCW is meant to be an asterisk in the larger story, nothing more than a footnote.

As such, Ahsoka's part is NOT that big, her being on Mandalore or being expelled from the Jedi Order is NOT a contributing factor for Anakin's turn to the Dark Side.

Ahsoka is NOT a part of the Prequels, which represent KEY moments in Anakin's life and the Republic's downfall.

But for many, Star Wars is the transmedia franchise. And TCW and the Prequel films are one and the same. So Ahsoka's treatment factors into the judgment.

If you add TCW's stories to the mix, welp, the show certainly questions them here and there, showing the war corrupted their values (because it was designed to do so) but in the first six seasons it does so in a fair manner showing both sides of the argument.

They're framed as caught between a rock and a hard place. They HAVE to do the very thing they didn't wanna do or people get enslaved and get killed.

Under Lucas, TCW does what it was meant to do: it adds footnotes, it shows unfortunate downsides. It's not meant to define what is seen in the films.

Whereas by the time we're in Season 7 and Lucas is no longer involved, we get this:

"They could do better but choose not to because they're playing politics." That's it.

Which is what I mean when I'm talking about the franchise: it has grown past George Lucas' vision, for better or for worse.

For some, TCW redefines what is seen in the films.

#worth pointing out #star wars #jedi order

621 notes · View notes

sokkastyles · 1 month

Note

I hope you don’t mind me sending in asks every so often, because I really love your blog and I like reading your opinions/analyses of ATLA’s story and characters. What I want to talk about is this one trope in fiction that I’ve always liked and wanted to see more of, which is “Person A sees characteristics of Person B’s personality or abilities that are kind of morally dubious or complicated and possibly less than desirable (depends on what the ability or personality trait is) and even though Person B has complicated feelings about what they saw, they never flinch or look away from who Person A is.” Because I’m obsessing over Zutara again, this made me think of the scene where Zuko sees Katara bloodbend for the first time and while he is momentarily surprised, his facial expression goes back to normal quickly. Something similar happens when he sees her waterbend while confronting Yon Rha. I really wish we had gotten a scene where Zuko and Katara actually talk about her blood bending abilities, though the main reason I wanted this isn’t only because of the potential for another Zutara moment. I also really wish the narrative had utilized bloodbending more and that we had gotten to see more of Katara’s complicated, ambiguous feelings about bloodbending (and yes I know she didn’t like bloodbending in canon, but I wish we got to see her be a bit curious about it or not knowing how to feel about it before she decided that). What are your thoughts about this? Is there anything about Katara’s bloodbending that you wanted to see explored in the narrative as well?

First of all, I love getting your asks! They are always very well thought out and insightful! I think you sent me another one that I didn't get a chance to respond to yet because I have been very busy, but I'm not tired of getting asks from you at all!

And I do think an underrated aspect of Zuko witnessing Katara bloodbend is that it's validating to him as an abuse survivor, as a fellow child of war who also lost his mother, as someone who deals with anger issues, to see Katara bloodbend and be able to control her bloodbendinng in that moment.

I do not think that Zuko was intentionally living his revenge fantasies through Katara or encouraging her to commit violence. We've actually seen both Jet and Hama try to do that to Katara and there are some distinct differences. If you recall the way Jet and Hama talk about their actions, and the way they try to get Katara to also do those things, they appeal to her with specific language. They appeal to her anger, specifically, telling her to think about what happened to her mother. They take joy in assuming that she is just like them and has sunk to their level.

When Zuko talks with Katara about Kya, he does not focus on her anger and loss and the need for revenge. Instead, he tells her that Kya was brave. When he sees himself in Katara, he doesn't see negative. He sees someone who is angry, yes, but also someone who isn't controlled by that anger.

Part of the problem with the way antis talk about this episode and Zuko or Katara specifically is this pathologizing around whatever "fantasy" they think Zuko or Katara might be engaging in. And let's be real for a second. It is actually incredibly common for abused children to have revenge fantasies about their abusers. Like, incredibly common. But it's something that is not talked about very often because we don't like to think about it. When it is talked about, it is usually in terms of the person becoming violent themselves.

I do think that Zuko wanted for Katara the same thing he got with his father, the chance to confront him and to walk away, to not be goaded into violence or sink to that level. But that doesn't mean it isn't also incredibly validating for Zuko to not only watch Katara have power over this man, but to be able to exert enough control over that power to be able to walk away.

Which is similar to what Zuko does with his father. Zuko doesn't want to be angry anymore, but that doesn't mean he suddenly becomes a doormat. And when he faced his father, he was prepared to fight if he had to. He brought his swords, he redirected lightning right at Ozai's feet. He made it clear that he could have hurt Ozai if he had wanted to. But he has enough control over that anger not to. Directionless anger is ultimately similar to intrusive thoughts of revenge, because both make the person feel helpless and out of control.

Also my piping hot take is that Aang was afraid of Katara's anger because he himself never learned to control the Avatar state, whoops.

Anyway, I love that Zuko has that moment when he maybe sees a bit of his old self, the part of himself that was angry and wanted to hurt people because he was hurt, in Katara, and it surprises him. But now he's wise enough to have compassion for himself, and for her by extension, and understands now that that anger comes from grief.

#zuko #katara #zutara #the southern raiders

89 notes · View notes

stick-ball · 6 months

Note

saw a hc about jean moreau being hyper sexual especially post-ravens. thoughts? feelings?

thoughts AND feelings! Oh the joy of being given a chance for a hot second to discuss this. You came to the right place my love. ❤️

Trigger and age warning : rape, sex connected trauma, dissociation, psychological abuse, controlling relationships, discussion of sexual acts.

Okay so, being hyper sexual. You know who does that in the books? Andrew actually. I know some might look at me weirdly rn like, 'what the hell are you talking about, he doesn't let anyone touch him'. Yeah, that's true! But that doesnt take away from the knee jerk reaction. (I'm sorry I know this isn't exactly what you asked but I need to discuss andrew first, and that has a lot to do with jean, bear with me).

Andrew finds a partner that he can to some limit trust (leverage, deals, careful observation, "training" them to behave how he tells them) to follow his instructions, which gives him a sense of control. They can fuck, but it's him who's doing it. It's him who's touching, kissing ect. The other person, of course if they consent, get to partake but not create the experience. It's one of the very, very valid scenarios of hyper sexuality as a responce to rape. He is rewriting every poisoned nerve ending in his body. He doesn't actually get off from the sex. For his own release he needs privacy, as shown in the books. Andrew's problem can be, that due to his truly inhumane trauma he can fall into the mindset of defining his sense of self through sex. It's an action and he's a tool in this scenario. Then again, We circle back to control, which is also a key feature of his decisions and protectiveness. Taking total control of the situation which used to be utterly outside of it, with no way out of it. Rewriting it, giving the traumatic experience a positive ending, hell an ending - when, and as suddenly as he might want it to end, is the motivator here. I think what he finds satisfying in terms of sex, not control, is giving sexual consent to his partners and, which he finds just as important, them giving it to him. Because it wasn't given to him. It's a way of building trust.

The motivations sound pretty nice, even if heartbreaking, don't they? Seem uplifting? The problem is, even if in good faith, this process can be very harmful, trauma surviviors mention that (at least ones I discussed it with personally) it feels good, but in the long run it does what this type of coping mechanism always does to your brain (similiar reactions can be seen for different traumas), which is hurt it. It's a form of desensitisation that limits your brain's ability to percieve the situation. It's hard to rewrite and leads to hot and cold kind of reactions, so yeah, having a relationship with a capital R is, difficult. That's what I always understood as Nora saying they are never actually okay (andrew and neil). Or at least partly understood it as.

Okay, so this cleared a couple things up. Now JEAN. Jean and Andrew share some factors of their trauma. While not treated as such, Jean was technically fostered by the Moriyamas, and well, Andrew's experiences with being fostered are faaaaar from what it's supposed to be as well. The difference is in Andrew's situation everyone tried to pretend the horror is not happening, there must have been a lot of manipulation and coercion and just plain fucking gaslighting in these houses. Its hard to talk about but I can imagine some of these monsters wanted him to act like he is enjoying it, and thats just out if the emotional range of dealing with for anyone. Jean knew he's in a trap from day one. Moreover, when it comes to the rape's he was victim of it was ordered by Riko to be done by others. That's a different level of fucked up. What's even more important as distinction here is he stopped, when Jean stopped reacting and fighting it. Because what Riko wanted wasn't violation, that was the tool. He wanted to psychologically break him. When the fish stops flailing on the cat stops pushing it around.

And Riko was constant, his modus operandi was regular, and the psychological torture was the motivator behind most of his "conditioning" of Jean. This is a situation where the abuse has a cause for the victim. It sounds sick and I don't agree with it, but it's a game in their mind. In the books we can see that he learned how to limit the amount of attention Riko gave him and as we know he is not confrontational like Andrew with his problems. And yeah I don't mention Neil as confrontational here bcs he has conditioned himself to run from everything and say he's fine to everything so..., sometimes it erupts frk mit but that's not exactly the same, its a last resort.

Circling back, I think Jean is more likely to be sex repulsed. For him sex, which was a form of punishment, is a cause of anxiety. Sexual tension is easy to mix up with nervous tension because of a feeling of losing control of the situation. That's why if we do get romance in the new book, I am putting my money on it being very messy from his pov. The magical thing about trauma responces though, is that they're not black and white, and someone who is sex repulsed might also seek an ending to their anxieties through it. Yet, it's ts a bit of an opposite motivation to the one Andrew has. When Andrew thinks of himself as a tool, Jean is more likely to think of himself as an object. There's a difference. While Andrew wants to take control, Jean is more likely to use it as either a way to retraumatise himself - so his version of hypersexuality would include less control and more roughness and violence, actually trying to rile the partner up. It might stemm for him from low self worth or be a way of letting out his angers and frustrations. It's not that he is used to being hurt, it's that he doesn't expect anything different. I also think he is more likely to have problems with opening up in therapy. Where Andrew is active Jean is passive, and the opposite. The upside is he might actually be more likely to communicate emotionally than through rules and laws, it will take longer, but be a smoother transition, because more people understand it than Andrew's way of building relationships.

Hope this anwser satisfies you, I'm sorry if I got a bit carried away. 😅

#jean moreau hc #jean moreau #and #andrew minyard #i suppose #aftg #all for the game #tfc #the foxhole court #jean moreau headcanon #the sunshine court #the sunshine court hc #aftg headcanon

143 notes · View notes

4dkellysworld · 9 months

Text

Self-realization vs derealization

I saw an ask @adadisciple about derealization and thought I'd add my 2 cents here as I have experienced derealization in the past and might be able to offer a bit more insight. I didn't want to reblog that ask for personal reasons and also the response is really long. Disclaimer: I am not a therapist either, my thoughts are based on personal experience alone so take whatever feels right and leave the rest. Also I can't speak from the perspective of full realization as I am not there yet but hopefully this helps in some way.

When I first found non-dualism, I also had similar concerns as someone who had experienced derealization, I thought: was this another thing that was going to induce it?

Let's start with the definition (thank you Google) for those reading who may be unclear:

Depersonalization/derealization disorder involves a persistent or recurring feeling of being detached from one's body or mental processes, like an outside observer of one's life (depersonalization), and/or a feeling of being detached from one's surroundings (derealization).

From personal (human/ego) experience, this condition is purely of the mind and body with blocked awareness (? not sure if this is correct terminology, I am not talking about pure awareness in this case but more mindfulness*) and is often just a symptom of another mental or physical condition/illness such as depression/anxiety etc. The mind and/or body are just completely detached however, there is clouded awareness (due to the mind/body) and you just feel like you are existing and floating around. You very much still feel a part of the world and identify as such (although feeling detached & disengaged) even if you have lost faith in everything you feel as real. It's sort of hard to put into words but if you have experienced derealization too, then hopefully you can relate and understand what I am getting at. When I experienced it, I didn't know of any truth. I just lost faith in the world and didn't know what was real anymore. So, I was completely checked out.

*Mindfulness is paying full attention to what is going on in you and outside you, moment by moment, without judgment. (thanks Google)

Ada made a really good distinction here (I suggest reading the full ask)**:

The point of this all was to let go of concepts, let go of believing in things, investigating their validity, experimenting. Disbelieving you are Vanessa and denial are not the same thing. Denial is when you deny reality to something you're already giving reality to. Disbelieving was meant as an experiment, you never thought yourselves to be anything but this body, what will happen if you did?

**Actually, re-reading that ask made me realize maybe a reblog of an exercise I recommended is not the best since it instructs denial of what ego believes to be real instead of disbelief and experimentation (eep, Vanessa is still learning and evolving!). See my edit on this post :)

Here is another relevant and helpful ask by 4dbarbie:

I don't teach to do anything to the 3D, not even deny it. Not seeing the world as it is, is an aversion to it. - Lester Levenson Your 3D is right and perfect, what you see is what you are so even if you're seeing what 'you' don't want, the 3D is not wrong in being what it is. Fearing it, trying to manipulate it, lying to yourself about it being something different - all useless and vain attempts. See it as it is and it will fix itself. And no, being delusional is not good, it leads you not to trust your own judgment OR senses. Which is not right, why shouldn't you? What is wrong with your vision? Being delusional from your ego self is really harmful, someone could be abusing you and you would go "i'm sure that's not right he loves me so much in my 4D!!!"

So lets clarify the distinction:

Derealization = denial of everything while still identifying as the ego (and the world as reality) although not wanting to => ego experiences confusion/chaos/mental condition/disorders

Self-realization = disbelief of current reality concepts => letting go of such concepts and quieting the mind => experiencing the true Self (the creator of the mind) => permanent identification with Self, not imaginary concepts (including the ego) => Knowing Reality, and therefore realizing full peace and freedom

Now let's move onto practicing non-dualism. The basis of the practice is let go of thoughts, quiet the mind and focus on being awareness/I AM. It is all about letting go, not denial.

From a non-dualist perspective, derealization is just another mental concept/creation. When the mind is completely silent (and sustained) and pure awareness is realized and embodied, when Self is your permanent identification, when you (Self) know you are not your body not Vanessa feeling dissassociated from mind & body or just intellectually knowing it from learning concepts (important distinction!), it is not derealization, in fact it is the only reality, the only truth.

I have experienced short moments of experiencing myself as the pure witness where the mind was completely quiet and those short moments felt so peaceful, whole and true. There were no feelings of derealization in that moment because there was no active mind then. Right now, I do think my ego feels a bit derealized at times but this is because I have not fully identified with Self yet and it is also because my sense and understanding of reality is in the process of being recalibrated on this journey. When this happens, I sit in silence and go back to the one truth 'I Am' and feel myself into it and everything else melts away. The more you do this, the more you will feel the truth and peace until it becomes permanent (when you realize Self).

But no one can give you the whole truth but yourself.

Lester: Yes. However, knowing what you're telling me helps one let go of that obstacle of intellectual knowledge. I prod you in this direction, don't I? I say: “Don't believe anything. Start from scratch. Build up your knowledge on the solid foundation of proof, step by step.” Everyone must do this. Q: You can't take someone else's experience? Lester: Right, you would be working on hearsay, on what they have said, and the only useful thing is that which you experience. I relate it to driving a car. If I say I know how to drive a car after reading a book that directs you to turn the key on, start the motor, shift into drive and step on the gas, do I know how to drive a car? No, not until I experience it can I drive a car. It's the same thing on the path; we must experience everything. We must, of course, adopt the attitude that what the Great Ones say is so, that they have experienced it. However, you must check it out and prove it for yourself. And the basic Truth is that there’s only one Reality; there's only one absolute Truth, and that is that this whole world or universe is nothing but God, but better than that, is nothing but my very own Self. God could be far away; He could be miles and miles away in cosmic space, but my very own Self is right here, is something I know about, is something I can perceive, it is my very own Self! So, using Self as God is far more practical than putting Him out there, putting Him apart from us. But each one must start from the bottom and prove this whole thing for himself. As the proofs come, the more they come the more we accept until we experience the whole thing. - Lester Levenson, Session 11: Meditation with Quest - Keys to Ultimate Freedom

"And the basic Truth is that there’s only one Reality; there's only one absolute Truth" I literally didn't even read this excerpt before sharing it (searched the book for the keyword 'proof' because I was looking for another excerpt) but came to the same conclusion after practicing and experiencing it for myself. And that is what you must do if you want the truth too. Experience and then decide for yourself.

This perceived and experienced knowledge is the only knowledge that does us any good. We can read everything on the subject, but it doesn’t help. Our life doesn’t change much, and it doesn’t because we don’t integrate the knowledge into our beingness through realization. Realized knowledge is nonintellectual, although the means we use are intellectual. We use our mind, we direct our mind toward the answer, but you will discover that the answer does not come from the mind. It comes from a place just behind the mind. It comes from the realm of knowingness, the realm of omniscience. By quieting the mind through stilling our thoughts, each and every one of us has access to this realm of knowingness. Then and there you realize, you make real. You know and you know that you know. - Lester Levenson, Session 6: Realization - Keys to Ultimate Freedom

If you want to understand more about the process of realizing Self, I recommend reading my 4dbarbie remix post. If you have already read it, reread it, maybe even read some of the referenced posts/asks and see if you get any new understanding. Or better yet, just sit in silence and stillness, quiet the mind and focus on 'I Am'.

I must emphasise that in non-duality, letting go of the ego is the basic foundation of practice as it is very much a journey of self-transformation (this is just another concept to help the ego understand, but you are always, have always been and always will be Self, you just do not see it as you are currently identified as the ego).

If you (the ego) are not willing to do that, then come back when you are ready. It is not up to anyone to convince you to adopt this practice and way of life.

#writings #non duality #non dualism

202 notes · View notes

livebloggingmydescentintomadness · 2 years

Note

Please don't spread misinformation. While its extremely valid to be celibate from a disability or trauma, it is NOT the same as asexuality.

From The Trevor Project: "Aexuality is not the loss of libido from age or circumstance."

From Wikipedia: "Asexuality is distinct from sexual abstinence and celibacy."

From LGBTQ+ Centre: "Asexuality is a sexual orientation, and is therefore different to celibacy."

Loss of libido from trauma or a disability is a condition in and of itself. It is separate from asexuality, although that is not to say you cannot find comfort and support within the same communities. But they are neither medically nor socially the same thing.

Asexual people have been fighting for our definitions for a long time. Please stop helping to spread info that takes that away. A lack of libido as a result from things like trauma or medication is. Not. Asexuality. Because that is not your sexuality—that's a physical and psychological result of specific circumstances.

Again: its perfectly valid to find comfort and support from the asexual community based on similar experiences, but you are NOT asexual if your disability or trauma has impacted your libido. Your affliction could be fixed with medication or therapy. Mine cannot.

Stop hurting us for Tumblr clout. Thanks.

buddy, you seem to be laboring under a misconception.

i am fucking asexual. and not due to disability or trauma.

and as such, i choose not to gatekeep the term from anyone who might find it helpful. if someone feels like the identity of asexuality is relatable, regardless of why, i am not going to fucking gatekeep. i am not going to quote definitions at a real living person, i am going to welcome them and trust THEM to figure themselves out in their own time, in their own way.

i am not going to act like the motherfuckers who told me i couldn't be a part of the lgbtq community because asexuality isn't inherently queer. i don't care what sort of strawman you want to concoct about people "invading the community" or whatever other bullshit you're gonna yell about. oh, and i'm definitely not going to tell them to get "fixed" with therapy or medication.

after the absolute hell those exclusionists put us through, i choose to leave the gate open and not be a petty asshole about who comes through.

i have enough tumblr clout already, thank you very fucking much. take your miserable fucking attitude and get the fuck off my blog.

#asexuality #anonymous #ask

877 notes · View notes

riddle-me-ri · 3 months

Text

a/n: I'm sorry…but also not sorry this man has been rotating in my brain like a rotisserie chicken and I just need to get these thoughts and ideas done and out because hnngg. It’s gonna start off with normal relationship headcanons and then some added nsfw stuff further down the list. There will be a header for when the nsfw stuff starts.

Content Warning: mentions of sexually explicit content (genitalia, sex positions/habits)

Bigby Wolf - Relationship Headcanons (w/ some NSFW HCS)

- Congratulations! After much perseverance and patience…you've acquired a sheriff werewolf partner!

- Once Bigby finally comes to terms with his feelings, it will still take time to adjust.

- He's not used to being vulnerable and open, but if he was going to start…there was no better person than you.

- Bigby trusts you with pretty much everything he is and it means the world to him that you trust him tenfold with your own heart.

- Bigby can be very, very protective of you. He tries not to come off suffocating or controlling, it's just in his nature to protect those he loves.

- He's not a huge fan of PDA. The most he will do is hold your hand or shoulder and/or maybe kiss your forehead if you guilt trip him enough to do it (poke out your bottom lip and do your best puppy eyes and he'll cave)

- There are many instances where Bigby would have liked to kiss you, but you'll likely have to be the one to initiate it and commit to it in order for it to happen.

- Sarcasm is one of your own love languages you share between each other.

- Bigby may not be the best at remembering dates for certain things but he does remember the things you like/dislike especially if it has a distinct scent.

- Speaking of his heightened senses, he's got them practically tuned into you most if not practically all the time. (Albeit again he isn't weird about it. It's just something that naturally occurs)

- If you're someone that has menstrual cycles he picks up on it earlier than you do and tries what he can to make the time of the month less dreadful.

- Bigby is definitely hot blooded both figuratively and literally. Which makes him great for winter nights and a nightmare for summer nights.

- Speaking of which, he'll always have dibs on being the bigger spoon, you can try but not without Bigby being a smart-ass about it.

NSFW Relationships Headcanons:

- His favorite ideas for dates are: going for long walks to nowhere in particular (bonus if it's in the woods) and/or nights in at your place (or his, but…considering the state it's in he feels more comfortable spending time in your home) with some take out food.

- At the end of the day, Bigby may still screw up and make things messier than they were at his job but as long as he has you to love him unconditionally and smiling at him...he really couldn't ask for anything more.

- Bigby will primarily be the dominant one in your relationship.

- Even if he lets you take the reins every now and then, in the end he always reminds you he's always in control.

- I hope you love a hairy man, cause with Bigby it's basically a given. Especially down there.

- Moderate length but very girthy dick that stretches and fills you perfectly to make you see stars.

- Not much of a tease at first but as you grow more comfortable in the newfound relationship he can be a bit of an asshole about teasing you.

- Especially when you know that he knows you're turned on from your scent alone and he does nothing about it.

- Some encounters can get pretty intense and his eyes have glowed yellow and his claws have come out but he's never scared you or hurt you drastically. (Likely just turned you on more)

- He won't admit to many kinks outright but by all means please praise and validate this man, let him know he's doing something right.

- Nothing motivates him more than hearing you moan, beg, and scream his name and how good he feels.

- Bigby has a preference for sex positions that have him above you in some capacity, he wants to have full access to all of you.

- He can go slow and steady or fast and passionate, given his job it's more likely you guys have to learn to settle for a quickie.

- Sex has also become a way for Bigby to relieve his stress and of course being the doting partner you are, you're more than willing to help him.

- He's fairly caring in after care. He'll ask if you're okay (especially during your first encounters, he'll worry about being too rough or carried away please reassure this man) and/or if you need anything.

- He has no qualms about you cuddling up into his side or resting your head on his chest as he likely wraps his arm around you in return as he nods off to sleep soon after the moment is over.

#ri writes #the wolf among us bigby wolf #twau bigby wolf #the wolf among us bigby wolf x reader #twau bigby wolf x reader #bigby wolf x reader #bigby wolf x reader headcanons #bigby wolf headcanons

111 notes · View notes