#the concept of gender the attributes of each gender the whatever just no

[battlekilt]

Heaven Gaia | Spring/Summer 2021 (via) Boots by Miu Miu, modified by me to have wider heel and aqua-studs.

Context: I have a biological-femme Rex AU that I call "Rexx."

I... want to put my Rexx in this. WITH his short, barely there-flat curls on his head. Maybe Sabé worked on it.

A passionate sloppy essay about fashion as defiance, non-conformity, with focus on how concepts of gender play a role in it. Yes, I do talk about femme Rex and Clone Troopers.

Fashion's role in gender nonconformity has been around since the dawn of it. It, as an art and form of expression, has always been about challenging class, gender, and other social norms. society takes a garment piece and says, "this is what it is for."

By its very nature, fashion has been gender nonconforming. Fashion as an art is less so about conforming to society, but always challenging society. How it breaks the moulds of gender concepts is just one of the many ways it has done that. Changing styles, doing new and daring things, it is all challenging established world-views. Clothes are garments worn on the framework of a person's body. A person. Not a gender. Not a sex. A person.

There are transwomen who were born with the long-legged, short torso, lean structure commonly associated with femme attributes. There are Cismen are also born like this. Either one can be beautiful in suits, skirts, gorgeous gowns. Builds like I mentioned are often boxed in as not masculine enough, yet they can look so incredibly strong in a well-tailored or just… well-styled punk outfit. A person of this build is defiant by being adorned in garments typically eyed for the broad-shouldered idea of a masculine person.

There is a recent movement that began in the last ten years of young cismen advocating against the idea that men shouldn't care about their appearance. Them going back to the idea of wearing tailored suits for themselves, just to go out and be casual. These men wear these garments for themselves in a society that tells them men should look like they don't try; t-shirts and jeans, because caring about once's appearance is EXCLUSIVE to femmes. But these men are teaching themselves and each other how to coordinate suits.

As someone who has worked and studied fashion, multi-piece suits are works of art. They are not stagnant, even if sometimes their changes appearance subtle. Some of the most complicated garments in all of fashion ARE men's suits, which is why they can be so expensive. Currently, society tells them that they shouldn't spend money on their fashion appearance, they shouldn't spend so much time learning about it, they shouldn't fuss over the tiny details like matching pinstripe to the button up. Learning how to style suits both traditionally, classically, and then learning how to break the rules without losing the desired presentation… it takes a lot of work, time, money—things cismen are told they SHOULDN'T do. T-shirts and jeans.

How else does this revolution among this cismen break into the LGBT community? It isn't just gay men who are doing it—straight men, which believe it or not—that is an EXTRA defiance. But they are also being inclusive to transmen. Sharing that makers make suits that really compliment and fit right on the bodies of transmen, some of whom WILL have special requirements to look the way they may desire—often to bring up the masculine presentation.

High fashion designers have been advocating for this return for years, and we can see the impact of the movement on the runways. Go back to the image of a woman in suit pants, jacket over shoulder, but topless. If she wore a women's button up, that is still as defiant as if she wore a traditionally men's cut shirt.

Many haute couture fashion designers do not care what someone's sex or gender is. It is a body to wear their clothes, whatever it is. A femme-appearing man in a bridal gown? Does he make the dress look good? Perfect. A woman topless, with pasties, strutting down the runway in an incredible Armani pant legs and the suit jacket tossed over her shoulder, held on by the hook of one finger, and the other hand stuffed in the pockets? Walking down the runway with a wide-hipped broad stride? Perfect.

A "grown" woman wearing a ball gown because she wants to? That is gender nonconforming, FYI. Because ball gowns are for little girls who want to be princesses or brides. Women over the age of 50 wearing a hot-pink sequined mini skirt? Maybe she is in her 60s, 70s, 80s—in that skirt, she is gender nonconforming because gender is a societal construct, which means that what fashion is assigned to what gender is entirely a social construct. Fashion as an art form, as an expression, challenges all of this.

Even an AFAB in the most girly of girly clothes is gender nonconforming because often, AFABs are supposed to be non-flashy, not too girly, not—not not not not not. Taking gender-presenting concepts and using them "inappropriately," even on the typically assigned gender, is still gender non-conforming.

If a mid-twenties, hourglass woman, wears a form-fitted, mini-dress with cleavage showing—she is actually being gender-nonconforming by wearing it for HERSELF. She is supposed to wear that for MEN—for the male-gaze.

Lolita Fashion is inspired by "children's" clothes. it is a punk fashion from Japan to shirk the idea that adult women should ONLY be modest, proper, business women until they become mothers.

It is not sexy, so it isn't made for the male-gaze. It isn't "work place appropriate," so it isn't conforming to capitalism. It isn't "mature woman" appropriate, so it isn't to the internalized misogynist constraints. It isn't conforming to ageist concepts.

So taking a biologically female clone, who was raised to blend in with the "masculine" identity of his brothers, and putting him in feminine clothings isn't suddenly making him conform to his gender. His gender is clone. You could say, his gender is masculine. Him now being feminine presenting IS him breaking the conforming mould of his gender. Because the clothes aren't about his biology—other than I, as a fashion stylist/art visualist, DO stand by the styling theory that good fashion would be made to make the wearer look GOOD, yes, good is subjective… but it is art. If you know it, you know it.

Tailoring and styling fashion to accentuate the BEAUTY of his flat chest, but the definition of the fine muscles down it, the bone structure of his breastbone, the LOOOOONG line of his legs.

The more I think about it, the more I should be more confidant and comfortable with him exploring other expression of his assumed gender. Because Rexx will NEVER be gender conforming by natborn standards. Ever. Because he is a Clone.

As time goes on, it becomes apparent that part of exploring the role of society's gender roles on him, I've realized that there is never a moment when Rex would EVER be gender conforming by natborn standards. Ever. Because he isn't a natborn. He is a Clone Trooper. Him wearing femme fashion is breaking from the assumptions of his gender because he is a Clone Trooper, because he typically is seen as that. More to the point, none of the Clones are conforming to the concepts of gender at all about ANYTHING other than what it means… to be a Clone Trooper.

The moment fashion is worn for the wearer and not for the society, it is non-conforming beyond gender, beyond age, beyond expected social roles, beyond sexuality.



#au: rexx #// i'm gonna have to commission this when i can #// fashion is my passion

[dizzyhslightlyvoided]

The Commons

So I've released my Jenny Everywhere stories Attack of the Rise of the Revenge of the Scheme of Doctor Draconic and This Might Happen Someday into the public domain via Creative Commons 0. Previously, they'd been released as Creative Commons 4.0 Attribution, but I decided that it wasn't open enough.

Both This Might Happen Someday and Attack Etc. of Doctor Draconic were written for Jenny Everywhere. Attack Etc. of Doctor Draconic was a vehicle to introduce Laura's villainous secret identity as the title character, and the latter was a story created for Jenny Everywhere Day. They aren't "stories which happen to include Jenny Everywhere", they are "Jenny Everywhere stories", and I feel like CC-BY-or-CC0 plus The Paragraph is the logical conclusion of Jenny's open-source concept.

But like ... in general, I'm one of those people who wants to be heard. Not, like, in the "celebrity" sense of fame-and-glory; that way lies disaster. I have neither the desire to live nor the ability to withstand that kind of life (and, of course, any trans or non-binary person who gains any level of fame promptly gets harassed off the internet). But I'm the sort of person who'll post the same thing to Tumblr, Cohost, Pillowfort, Twitter, and one or two Mastodon accounts.

And I want to share the joy of creation, not just keep it to myself! I've seen many stories where I wished I could create something in the same setting which wasn't specifically fanfiction, without having to jump through legal hoops -- and conversely, I've seen many stories which were bad, but had kernels of interesting ideas, which made me want to write my own improved version. (I've had the idea of filing the serial numbers off Ranma 1/2 bouncing back and forth in my head for years, but I still haven't 100% figured out a method of changing genders which is as elegant in its simpicity and versatility as "getting splashed with hot or cold water", unless I just used that and had a character say, in-universe, "oh yeah, I got the idea from that one Rumiko Takahashi manga ...")

But basically, people have been telling each other's stories, with or without their own spin, for as long as humans have been humans; "copyright", the idea that a story or character could belong to someone specific, is new. So this is my way of enabling that for other people, in some small way. You want to write a published story about Doctor Draconic and make money off it? Sure, as long as you include the Paragraph for Jenny herself! You want to take the general setting of This Might Happen Someday and write a comic book which makes actual definite decisions about the worldbuilding details, but without the hypothetical real-world Jenny Everywhere and Jenny Nowhere Except Maybe They Aren't? Go right ahead!

I'm not 100% sure whether I'll release non-Jenny Everywhere stories in CC0 or in CC-BY. The difference is that in the latter case, you just have to include a notice to the effect of "so-and-so is remixed from whatever-story by Delila H. Smith and was released under a CC-BY license!" with the link, which is simple and makes it clear to everyone else that it's available for use (in a similar manner to Jenny Everywhere's Paragraph); on the other hand, people have screwed up simpler things, and copyleft trolls are a thing. Plus, it's not like everyone forgot Bram Stoker's name when Dracula entered into the public domain.

But the important thing, ultimately, is that you'll still be able to use it either way.

#philosophy #copyright #my stuff #re: my stuff #public domain #creative commons #jenny everywhere #transphobia mention

[jonathankatwhatever]

The path to reconciling these two perspectives is to say that sK and zK represent a different length of candle. I’ve spent time analyzing the shadow idea and the only way that works is if the candle itself, if the stick of the length of the segment changes. The reason it changes is that it’s 1Space and this is a 1Segment, and thus it flows infinitely or at least to the n-1 conception of infinity, meaning it’s countable without apparent End, where countable means the candle continues. That means the candle is inserted as a pole and extrudes over the candle lengths in a chain of such insertions, a repeated in and out that brings home how deeply intertwined gender identity is because this requires two genders who in gs construction become D3-4//4-3 Objects, meaning becomes flesh, becames life.

So reproduction roots in the in and out of Injection. Each Bip constructs, and the method of that construction involves taking two lengths of candle in just the 1Square, with the grid of 1 unit being xK and yK, and the other candle being the literal D-structure representation of a 1-0Segment, meaning D2. That is, the other candle, the regular 1 length, is D1 after D1 after D1, and that lays out the various Boundaries for that candle length. But the pole is only at this length of 1 because that is the layer we count at in the grid: it’s an arbitrary choice of 1, so the actual measure of 1 versus other 1’s is why use concepts like measure 0 and less dense. That’s a nice bit of number theory coming out of thin air. Nice to know. Really helps me understand those ideas: they’re manifestations of this process.

All this means the candle length flips to whatever fits the count, and across a gs is D2 in one orientation, D4 in both, where orientation means choice of sK or zK, not within either or both of those. This works by seeing SBE as the 1 in the center is actually the 4 in 2-slit because you don’t actually look at the movement of which route, and then S and E Attach alternately because simultaneity is ideal, meaning it isn’t a stable state unless sped up so oh right: that was one of the points we developed about CM64, that the conception of a Thing of minimum pattern describing Planck’s constant means that we see the effect of all the calculation, of all the permutation potential within what is a CM64 appearing out of and disappearing into that which can’t be calculated from this side. As I remember, we see that in the exponent and also in the often used reduced Planck, which takes the idea of Halving and thus Doubling.

So when we twist to the side by 45 degrees, the candle fits to match D2 counting in Alternation from S over B, meaning over that ambiguity and thus over an IC space of 4gs within a gs, which thus draws the Bip as the center Injection point within the gs, which we see is gs(m) so gs(n) appear as the 4gs within, scaled to gs(m) size, which also thus locates other Bips so the layers connect like they’re laminated. That’s a usage of 2 different lengths of candle.

The candle in this universe is how many candles does it take to count to 3, which is like 300,000,000, of which nearly all, over 299,000,000, is constructed as an Extent, with the rest an object which Attaches to the Extent, as seen by the 419 so the +1 is the Extent, so certain forms of information, notably wavelength and frequency, and that we can see now is literally counting in grid squares, meaning we have described the method by which that rationalization, that I//I process occurs.

So accepting the idea of the candle, which is fairly obvious when you think it has to be invariant so it can vary when you constrain into a basis, meaning when you convert gs to rs, to regular squares, generates this next level of understanding. That is why we use Understanding as notation: it captures the concepts of a ring in a field, along with other ways to express different levels of meaning across some set of attributes. It’s a kind of specification, of course, and now I’m seeing all sorts of pathways, and those become algebras and groups, and topologies, and objects, particularly abstract iObjects because we see how these tether to and exist within constraints, including those which you don’t see because your perspective is limiting you no matter what, and we’re damaged bad at best.

Funny, but the last few days has seen that Storyline return, with big changes that link to this appearance of saying yes because I somehow never noticed the obvious, that Molly and Elizabeth are ME in Triangular.

BTW, my guy from the chiefs is here. A fire chief. He’s trying to figure out the smoke detector situation. He drove all the way from Lynn.

So, the idea is that we take 2 invariants, which obviously means 2 Irreducibles, and those form an I//I, and that solves the central problem of gs versus rs because now we have labels for each of the gs as rs and vice versa. So, gs and thus 0Space and thus reals construct at the level where 1Space and 0Space combine into a projection. This projection has depth because objects within it are D3-4, meaning they can be abstracted to dots or bar graphs or whatever, since they can be treated as Ends with or without certain attributes which can be tracked, compared, etc. In other words, this is why at scale we see statistics.

——————-

Took a break. Made food. Question and idea: why don’t people blend meat with beans? I just chopped a good handful of black beans with red onion, salt, and chipotle, then blended that into ¼lb of ground chicken. Made more food at a lower price. I’ve done mixes which stretched the meat to near double and the results have always been better than plain chicken, and often meatier tasting. If you make your own beans, then you can offer better quality chicken cut with these fillers for a good price, or can lower the cost. It’s an obvious idea, but I don’t remember seeing it anywhere. Black beans add a bit of chew that recalls ground beef or pork, while canellini beans add the unctuous quality you get from animal fat. And because it’s chicken, you can flavor it lots of ways, and add appropriate cheese and a sauce and have a whole menu.

Wouldn’t that be great to fit to local farms raising chickens, as a way to get better food to more people? I hope it could work because that would further that good, help its Extent grow. Interesting how saying that brings up games like Go, because an Extent may not be a good Boundary, like the Russian counterattack around Stalingrad showed.

Does this satisfy? I think it does, but I’ll post and see. I was up at 4:30 this 15 Nov 2023 to be doorman for the cat. Then he wanted to sit near me until I nodded off. Considering the stress he’s under, not that bad.

[mazpacheco]

.

#late night thotty thots #not to be fake deep but #in a perfect world (for me. this is how i personally feel) there would be no gender #of any kind #the concept of gender the attributes of each gender the whatever just no #its kind of tiring to have i wish we existed as energies passing through space and time just vibing #i also feel like a lot of the issues in the world in one way or another stem from having the concept of gender #bc people are socialized the way they are and that affects all their experiences #and everything that’s happened ever is the sum of the consequences of all the individual experiences everyone has #which in one way or another involve gender (obviously its not the ONLY factor there’s also race etc) #but think about it #wouldnt it be so much better if we didnt focus on gender and instead focused on finding balance between #different energies within and between us #yeah maybe there’s ‘masculine’ or ‘feminine’ energy or whatever you wanna call it #but i think if we find the right balance of these different energies and just vibed it’d make for a better life #i want to abolish gender fuck all of it i am so tired 😓 #me

[captnjacksparrow]

I wish people would stop caring about the canon pairings and marriages in Naruto/Boruto because they should have absolutely no relevance for SNS shippers in terms of validating said ship. Those who say we are delusional because “Well, Naruto married Hinata so she is THE one he loves!” (I'll focus more on Naruto's marriage here... Is Sasuke's even a marriage?) simply don’t get that it just doesn't really matter who Naruto and Sasuke married because that in no way diminishes their feelings for each other. The main plot of the series revolves around the bond between Naruto and Sasuke. It is their story. They are each other's most important people and this was established back in Land of Waves arc even before the dramatic events that take place on the bridge - the whole point of that very first arc was making this a fact right from the beginning, because the story has always been and was always supposed to be about the two of them and the profound love and understanding that grows between them ever since they exchanged glances, smiles and pouts as lonely little broken kids. No reason to list all proof of their feelings and bond here, it has been done extensively, and if somebody watched the show/read the manga and missed it, they are missing half a brain. That these boys love each other more than anyone else is absolutely obvious.

So what about the canon pairings? Kishimoto stated time and time again that his focus was never romance, and that is not because he can't write romance as we know it (he clearly did), but it’s a matter of concept: what HE considers romance is the attraction that unites people with the purpose of marriage (confessing your romantic love for japanese people is the same as saying you want to be in a relationship, because feelings shouldn’t be voiced without an intention), and that, to him, is NOT the greatest expression of love, nor does it represent the most special bond two people can share.

It is understandable that westerners put so much weight into marriage because we consider it the epitome of love. Well, the truth is marriage in Japanese culture is mainly the only socially admissible means to have children and has very little to do with romantic love. In fact, in Japanese literature, it is much more common for unmarried couples to love each other than married ones. Obviously, there is no absolute truth when it comes to feelings and human relationships, what I'm doing here is generalising social norms and expectations (not exposing my opinion on them - that would turn this rant into something else entirely). A large number of Japanese marriages are loveless (and arranged, but no point getting into that either) and what motivates choosing a spouse is their ability to fulfill familial duties, meaning: is the woman good mother and consequently wife material? Is she going to devote her life to taking care of her children, house and husband, the noblest of acts for a female? Is the man willing and capable of putting his occupation above everything else, working extremely hard and for long hours, with total dedication and diligence for his job, to the point of not even seeing his family most of the time, as an honorable man should do as a provider? That's what makes a GOOD married couple: two people following their expected and strict gender-roles in a nuclear child-centered family (again, please, this is not MY opinion!). What a Japanese man should want in a woman is for her to be a dedicated housewife and mother, since having children outside of marriage is not only frowned upon, it is not acceptable at all, and not being married with children is not respectable enough (same with being divorced). Marriage is, therefore, NOT a symbol of undying love and a deep and special connection between two people, rather, it’s a partnership established with the goal of having and raising children.

Do these descriptions ring any bells?

In conclusion: the pairings were, in fact, created for the sole purpose of bringing forth the next generation, and that was made CANONICALLY true. Would it have been better if they hadn’t gone down that "safe" route? Hell, yeah! It would have been fucking amazing and could even have been groundbraking, for several reasons. BUT as unsatisfying as it may be, the fact is they chose a very TRADITIONAL depiction of marriage that has little to do with feelings, and that in itself shouldn’t be taken lightly, since it leaves the strongest bond, which is grounded on genuine love, untouched. In this scenario, justifying romantic love through marriage alone won’t cut it, and trying to discredit the obvious unmatched connection and feelings between two characters because they never got married to each other or married someone else is ludicrous. Yeah, a married couple can love each other deeply and above anyone else, but that is just not what marriage is ABOUT in Japanese culture and definitely not what Kishimoto wanted us to believe was the case here after dedicating 699 chapters to a story about the special bond between two boys that didn’t culminate in marriage. 

You know what IS a symbol of romantic love in Japan? Being willing to die together when the love you feel goes against your moral obligations, holding on to the belief that you will be reunited in the afterlife, where you will be free of any burden and able to love freely.

Are more bells being rung?! 

Oh, some bonus info: We also tend to associate sex with romantic love. Well, Japanese married couples with children rarely have sex, if at all. After a woman becomes a mother, she is no longer considered sexually desirable and becomes a mother figure to her husband as well (what happened to Hinata’s big "attributes" in Boruto? Huh). This is especially true when couples sleep in separate rooms and the mother shares a bed with her children. (Hinata co-sleeps with Himawari and we know Naruto sleeps in a separate room. Just saying.)

What's your say?

Is Sasuke's even a marriage?

Geezz!!!! LoLLLLL!!!! This sentence just made me cackle so hard for a good 5 minutes, Anon!!!!!

Hmmm.... So let's get back to your ask.

Well, I don't know how to react to this ask, Anon. Because, I don't know whether you are from Japan or you have a very close Japanese friend who might've told you all these cultural thing about marriage and relationships.

So, what I am going to do is to analyze from the facts you have provided , combine with my own cultural relevance and provide my answer. If there is any Japanese readers who are reading this, you can confirm or dispel this by sending me an ask. But again, I don't want exceptional case like, 'No, my family is different'. I want to know about the general lifestyle of a common citizen and their married life.

Having said that, this ask made me just yell at myself, 'Goshh!!!! Seriously???'

Because whatever you said, It fucking exist in my country too and is still followed by almost 70% of people in my country and I absolutely detest it. That is,

Most of the marriages here are loveless nd arranged - Check

Is the woman good mother and consequently wife material? Is she going to devote her life to taking care of her children, house and husband, the noblest of acts for a female? - Check

People following their expected and strict gender-roles in a nuclear child-centered family - Check Check

What a man should want in a woman is for her to be a dedicated housewife and mother, since having children outside of marriage is not only frowned upon, it is not acceptable at all, and not being married with children is not respectable enough (same with being divorced). - Check Check

Marriage is, therefore, NOT a symbol of undying love and a deep and special connection between two people, rather, it’s a partnership established with the goal of having and raising children. - Awww!!! A million Check.

That's why I was envious of Western people in this aspect, because they have a freedom to choose their own partner without any time constraints and when they do, their marriage can be said to be 'The Epitome of Love'.

My parents marriage is also an arranged one. And whenever they have disagreement and that leads to verbal war, they let out this words, 'I'm here with you because of my 2 daughters otherwise I would've left you long back'. So... Yeah. Here, most of the marriages are child-centered. Again, it's not just my opinion. Majority of the arranged marriage based family revolve around their child.

And I was born, a year after my parents' marriage, and If I hadn't been born, then people will question my parent's fertility factor and start to discriminate them. So, I can boldly claim that, I was not born out of Love or something. I was born because of social obligations.

But it doesn't mean, my parents don't love each other now. How should I say???? It's like a Stockholm Syndrome??!!!! Like when you stay with a person for a long time, you will eventually start to develop some feelings over the course of the time. It took them 15 years to come to a complete understanding of each other. It's the same case with many couples here.

Considering all these, Sasuke never even stayed with Sakura enough to make her understand him, So I wonder what kind of couple are they????? Weird!!!!!

In conclusion: the pairings were, in fact, created for the sole purpose of bringing forth the next generation, and that was made CANONICALLY true.

Awww!!!! Man, Seriously???? I made this claim long back in this post where I said, these women were used as a tool to bring out Next Generation Kids. My claim was based on Analytical Perspective.

And then one of the rabid SS stan reblogged my post and pulled out a hetero card stating, 'They are married and blah blahh...' when in reality, I never discussed about their sexuality in that post. That post was purely based on the number of pages each hetero couples shared with each other against the number of pages Sasuke & Naruto shared together.

Now, you have provided a cultural perspective for those shitty canon pairings.

On one side, I feel the need to smirk, because I am right.

But on the other side, I feel bad like, 'Is this how, this show must go on?? What are you trying to convey from this?'.

You know what IS a symbol of romantic love in Japan? Being willing to die together when the love you feel goes against your moral obligations, holding on to the belief that you will be reunited in the afterlife, where you will be free of any burden and able to love freely.

Hmmm.... It's interesting to know this. Anon.

This is where it differs slightly in my country.

Romantic love here is,

No matter what happens, I'll stand with you, You are just not alone. I will leave my fucking clan, parents, relatives if they don't approve you and we will start a new life somewhere.

[[Here, marriages happen mostly between their clan members. If you love a person from another clan, you will be ostracized or tortured or honour killed by your very parents. It just differs from clan to clan. I was subjected to this same problem and that's why I hate my Clan and left my parents. And this is also one of the reason why I love Itachi. Because we share similar Ideals. That is, Not to be obsessed over your clan and think beyond this restriction.

Also, here in Asian Culture if someone is willing to leave their family (when they don’t approve you) and prefer you over everything.... It means.... that's some Love beyond Comprehension. Just like how Naruto was willing to leave his Family (like Sakura and Kakashi) and like to stand with Sasuke... Just like how Naruto was willing to leave his own family and go on a long mission with Sasuke]]

So does it remind you of anything?????

It's the whole SNS dynamics starting from their childhood to VoTE2. That's why I started to ship SNS, because it represents the true love we always wish for.

Would it have been better if they hadn’t gone down that "safe" route? Hell, yeah! It would have been fucking amazing and could even have been groundbraking, for several reasons. BUT as unsatisfying as it may be, the fact is they chose a very TRADITIONAL depiction of marriage that has little to do with feelings, and that in itself shouldn’t be taken lightly, since it leaves the strongest bond, which is grounded on genuine love, untouched. In this scenario, justifying romantic love through marriage alone won’t cut it

This is very true, Anon.

I mean, they don’t even have to take a groundbreaking route. 

They should have given everyone an open ending, just like Kishi left at chapter 699. What is the need of a marriage, if Naruto is going to adopt Kawaki??? If Orochimaru was going to create a Baby Artificially?? If Rock Lee is going to have a child out of nowhere???

But I am happy that SNS bond is the only one that wasn’t diminished in this hot mess called Burrito. So, atleast we should be happy about that.

When someone pulls the marriage card, I just block them immediately because they are not even worth having a good conversation. NH will pull out the Last movie and SS will pull out, ‘Sasuke called Sakura ‘My Wife’.... So, it’s just pointless.

So, to conclude

Considering my Analytical perspective, I already made earlier in other post and your ask which provides some insight about Japanese culture which eerily resembles the culture I belong to, It all makes sense that this whole pairings and trash is just for the sake of bringing out Next Generation series and those boys never loved those girls whole heartedly. And I agree with you on this.

#ask #sns #sasunaru #anti ss #anti nh #antisakura #antihinata #anti sakura #anti hinata

[young-dumb-and-vaccinated]

Cult Girl: Doctorate (Hannibal x Female!Reader) pt. 8

Cult girl and Hannibal go through an exhaustive list of potential adoptive couples. 

@wisesandwichshark

Trigger warning: sexual harassment, christianity, discussion of pregnancy and family planning, adoption, murder and cannibalism 

Step two: find an adoptive family.

Some would say your list of expectations for potential adoptive parents was too extensive. Impossible for any human to reach. But it was really just the bare minimum.

Regardless of if they were two men, two women, one of each, or a few people, the parents had to be trustworthy. It wasn't easy to earn Hannibal's trust, but he could recognize those who had the capacity to right away. It was a little instinct you had dubbed 'friend or food'.

On paper, the apostolic pastor and his wife of 19 years seemed like the perfect candidates. The adoption agency tried to push them on you, as they had a great track record with adopting from them prior. Three boys, all of which were honors students.

Hannibal insisted on a formal introduction, during which you could conduct a proper, though surreptitious, interview. It was an invitation to dinner.

He invited the couple into his office, where a pot of tea and an interrogation was waiting for them. Then there was you. Barely-pregnant little [F/N], feeling entirely safe so long as your fiancé was beside you.

"You're doing the right thing, y'know." The woman, who introduced herself as Mrs. Landon, said upon meeting you.

"How do you mean?" You asked, already knowing the answer.

"All god's life is precious." She said, placing a hand on your not-even-remotely-showing-yet stomach. "You're walking in obedience to the lord by giving this child a shot at life."

Strike one: bringing up religion unprompted. Strike two: touching me without asking first.

You wanted to swat her hand away, but remembered that patience was a virtue. She and her husband took a seat across from you.

"Y'know," The man began, his mannerisms eerily similar to those of his wife. "I don't usually begin with the god talk, but I think a higher power had to have been involved in the conception of this- well, our child. I'd like to think the good lord brought us together today."

Strike three: already believes he is entitled to my child. You're outta here.

"Don't flatter the adoption agency like that, Jacob." Hannibal chuckled, placing his teacup on the side table.

"I'm serious, Dr. Lecter." Jacob interjected. "Faith and I really do believe that god put us on this earth to prepare his smallest soldiers for the spiritual war."

You shot Hannibal a side glance that said 'can we please just eat them now?'.

The answer was no. Hannibal liked to play with his food.

"And your adult children have all moved out?" He asked.

"That's right." Jacob nodded. "We have plenty of room in our five-bedroom house for the new little slugger to run around in."

"And if it's a girl!" The wife interrupted. "We have enough closet space for all the denim maxi-skirts money could buy."

Strike four: arbitrarily genders the behavior of a nine-week-old embryo.

The man then returned the teacup to the table, not bothering to use the saucer and instead leaving a nasty ring of condensation on the polished mahogany.

"Okay." Hannibal huffed, resignedly rising from his seat. He pulled two hypodermic needles from his back pocket and carefully, subtly stuck them onto the couples' necks. They couldn't even scream.

The tacos al pastor that followed (after a few days of marinating, of course) were exquisite.

The next week brought a new couple to your doorstep. Frank and Angela, they were named. Their claim to fame was that their oldest son played football for one of those big southern party schools. Either Auburn or Alabama. There was hardly a difference.

You sat for what felt like hours listening to the man speak in unintelligible football babble, waiting for him to take a breath. Surprisingly, it was the mom who got him to finally shut up.

"Frank, please." She said with more frustration than this one situation even remotely warranted. Either she had enough intuition to know she was being tested, or she’d spent the last decade putting up with this. Possibly both. "You're boring our hosts to death."

"What? No way! She loves it!" Frank replied, then turned to you. Not to Hannibal, just you. “Aren’t you having a great time, sweetheart?” 

Strike one: takes advantage of the female socialization to be passive and polite, allowing himself to take up the most space.

You shook your head. “I hate football.” 

His wife looked quite pleased with herself. 

“Angie, I just wanted her to know what good breeding her son is going to have.” He said, without a lick of irony or self-awareness. He eyed you up and down and licked his lips. “And it is mutual, I see.” 

The room went quiet as everyone tried to determine whether he was serious or if it was just a fucked-up joke. The longer the silence lingered, the more you realized he wasn’t kidding. Angela looked like she wanted to crawl into a hole and die.

“I don’t know what the agency told you, Mr. Wyatt,” Hannibal said, trying not to grit his teeth. “She isn’t a surrogate. She’s already pregnant.” 

Frank’s jaw hung dumbly open. “I thought you were looking for a sperm donor? I just-” 

“No.” You cut him off, raising your hand and covering your face. “I don’t want to know what you thought.” 

“Well, I would!” Angela interjected, righteous fury eclipsing what should have been crippling embarrassment. “What exactly did you think this was, Francis?” 

“The file said that he was over fifty, so I just assumed--” Frank rationalized, his voice far too loud for the room. “Y’know? That she wanted a baby that wouldn’t come out all funny-looking?” 

“You’re disgusting.” You blurted out. 

“Francis Howard Wyatt,” Angela scolded as if she were talking to her son. “You are forty-eight and the only increasing part of your body is your blood pressure. Why on Earth would any woman choose you over her smart, handsome doctor fiancé?”

This made Hannibal sit up a little straighter. He wanted Francis on the butcher’s block yesterday, but he momentarily considered letting Angela live. 

“They’re not married?” Frank whispered, or whatever the loud-aggressive-toxic-masculinity version of whispering was. He paused, as the dead hamster on the wheel powering his brain crept back to life. “That actually makes sense.” 

Angela loudly smacked her hand against her face. “Dr. Lecter, Ms. [L/N], I am so sorry.” 

“It’s quite alright, Mrs. Wyatt.” Hannibal stood up, readying the next batch of needles. “It just makes what I’m about to do easier.” 

It took quite a bit of restraint to not make their deaths hurt, but he made up for it when it came time to carve. He had fun running his fittingly small penis through a meat grinder. Not with any intent to cook it, though. Just because. 

Hannibal wanted to make Francis Wyatt into the least dignified meal imaginable. You quickly recalled going to a friend’s barbeque in Georgia and encountering a horrendously Southern delicacy known as Frito Pie. You proposed the idea to Hannibal, who, after reviling in abject horror at the notion of eating something out of a bag, agreed that it was the most fitting end. He could spare a few pounds of flesh to grind up and make into chili. 

The third week brought yet another couple. They seemed smart enough to realize your invitation wasn't the friendly olive branch the others had interpreted it as. Their healthy skepticism was refreshing, to say the least. Then, you met them: Max and Archie.

"You'll have to forgive my partner's paranoia." Max said upon entering the house. He tugged playfully at Archie's hand. "We watched Get Out recently, so an invitation to the suburbs sounded some alarms in his sleep-deprived brain."

"I love that movie." You chimed in. "It reminds me of my family."

"Oh no." Archie's eyes widened in only half-pretend fear. He shot an I-told-you-so look in his partner's direction. 

"But my favorite horror flick has to be Midsommar." You added. "My friends and I saw a midnight screening and we didn't sleep at all that night."

"But have you seen Hereditary?" Archie posited.

"Of course." You shrugged. "Aster is totally genius."

You made more than just polite conversation with the couple. Max, despite his young age, was a skilled data analyst and day trader. He attributed his success to the hard work of his immigrant parents. Archie was an environmental lawyer and land activist. He was also a bit of a thrill junkie, indulging in everything from scary movies to bungee jumping.

It didn't take long to realize that you wouldn't be eating them. They were far too pleasant of company to eat.

"So when is this baby planning to make its entrance?" Archie asked, gesturing to you. "You don’t look all that pregnant to me."

You put your hand over your slightly-protruding stomach. "Late August, I believe. If everything goes according to plan."

"You're not far along at all, aren’t you?" Max observed. "That gives us plenty of time to prove ourselves to you."

"Believe me." You put up your hand. "You're doing a great job so far."

“If you like horror stories, we might have to indulge you in the last two encounters we had.” Hannibal commented, leaning back comfortably in his chair. That was a good sign. “No blood was spilled, thank god. Would have ruined my carpets. But believe me when I tell you it came very close.” 

The couple laughed along. Archie leaned in like he was about to tell a life-shattering secret. “You wouldn’t believe the hoops we had to jump through to even have the chance to adopt. And I don’t want to say that it’s because we’re an interracial gay couple, but...” 

“Agencies aren’t exactly colorblind.” You finished, via his prompting. 

“She gets it.” Archie pointed to you. “See, Maxie? She agrees with me.” 

Max pushed his glasses up his nose. “I never said I disagreed.” 

You spent the rest of the afternoon waiting for the conversation to take a sharp left turn off a cliff, but it didn’t happen. They were wonderful company; polite, intelligent and articulate. Exactly the kind of people you’d want to see taking care of your child. 

You’d have to look for you next meal elsewhere. 

#hannibal #hannibal x reader #hannibal x you #hannibal lecter x you #hannibal lecter x reader #hannibal lecter #hannibal nbc #cult girl #cult girl 2 #cult girl doctorate

[leminione9795]

Just out of curiosity, why would Jimin who is the dongsaeng in his friend group then refer to his older friends as friends if they're not the same age but he wouldn't refer to Jungkook as his friend? I remember him saying all of his friends were older than him except Taehyung so he included Taehyung in there so he lumped Tae in with his outside BTS friend group. How can Jimin as a dongsaeng call his outside BTS older friends friends but can't call another dongsaeng in another group of friends friend? Jimin's reason for mentioning all of that was him making the point that the age thing didn't matter to him. Not sure how to explain this better. Also Jimin and Jungkook were paired up for a photoshoot last year I think for seasons greetings and their concept according to Jungkook was 'Two friends who came from Busan together' but it was actually how he/they interpreted the 'Adaptation' concept that was the name for their photoshoot. Is Jungkook being the dongsaeng mean he's allowed to call them friends?

(Warning: super long explanation post ahead)

Hi!

You must be referring to what I commented on this post. I admit it wasn’t nearly as thorough as it could’ve been, and I completely understand how you might be confused. 

So I think I should make a few things clear.

First, having a friendship with someone and calling them chingu are two different things in Korea. 

Second, the word ‘chingu’ has many layers to it. In the vlive in question, Jimin used the word in at least two different ways. 

Let’s break down the first point. 

In the reblog I deliberately used the words ‘friend’ and ‘chingu’ separately because there can be different connotations to each word. 

The dictionary definition of friend and chingu can be the same. But in colloquial usage, chingu has implications that, as far as I know, friend doesn’t. (And vice versa, of course. I’m not trying to say Korean words have more rich meaning or whatever.) One of those implications is that people who are chingu are of the same age. This is so so so important. You can have friends who are older/younger than you, but Koreans usually don’t refer to them as chingu. We use the adjective ‘친하다 [chinhada]’ which means ‘close’, and call these people ‘chinhan unnie’ ‘chinhan oppa’ ‘chinhan hyung’ ‘chinhan dongsaeng’ ‘chinhan hoobae’ etc. 

Now, it can get rather bothersome to call all these friends of varying statuses differently. Sometimes you don’t really want to specify your friend’s gender or age for whatever reason. Sometimes it just isn’t important. Sometimes simply implying they’re someone you have a friendship with is enough. So you just say chingu. It’s not common, but not rare either. 

For example, let’s say you’re a woman who are good friends with a man who is a couple years older and also went to college with you, and you want to tell a 3rd person who doesn’t know this person a funny story that you heard from him. You can refer to this guy friend in countless different ways - a sunbae I know (아는 선배), an oppa I know (아는 오빠), a close sunbae (친한 선배), a close oppa (친한 오빠), a sunbae from college (대학교 때 선배), etc. Or you can just say, my chingu told me this story. It not *impolite*, since you really are friends with him (as in, you have a close enough friendship with him), and you’re not calling him chingu (as in, someone who’s the same age) to his face. 

Even still, you don’t usually go calling this person your chingu in front of him. You wouldn’t introduce him as your chingu to other people. Does this mean he’s not your friend? No. 

(Similarly, calling someone your chingu doesn’t automatically mean you’re actual buddies. You may hear Koreans say ludicrous things like, oh he’s my chingu but we’re not that close. In this case chingu doesn’t mean friend in the literal sense, it most likely means they were just classmates.)

To sum up, you can have a friendship with people of any age but you can’t call all of them your chingu, especially if the age gap is big (*). However, you can still categorize them and refer to them as chingu in for convenience’s or privacy’s sake. 

(*This really depends on the individual, but I’d personally say plus or minus 2 years your age can be safely considered peers. If the other person is old/young enough to be your parent/child, then you don’t call them chingu, period. You just don’t.)

-

Now on to the second point!

I went back to rewatch the vlive where Jimin mentioned having older friends, and to a native Korean it’s pretty obvious he’s using the word chingu extremely liberally. 

I've pulled some examples from the vid and added transcripts in both Korean and English, since the vlive subs can be misleading at times.

(talking about his frequent arguments with V)

저희가 이게 친구라서 그런지 여러분들도 친구가 있다면 이거에 공감하실 거예요 희한하게 되게 자존심을 부리게 되고 알겠어, 혹은 미안해, 고마우면 고마워 이렇게 하면 되는 얘기를 이게 선뜻 입 밖으로 잘 안 나와요

It's probably because we are chingu You guys will agree if you have chingu You become too proud to say things like Okay, or I'm sorry, thank you You should just say these things But they don't come out easily

Here chingu can mean either just friend or friends of the same age. I personally took it as the latter, because in the broader sense Jimin is friends with all BTS members. The fact that he's attributing his conflicts with V specifically to them being chingu, proves that chingu here doesn't mean any other person who you have a friendship with, it explicitly means friend of the same age.

-

(talking about V being his only same-age friend)

그러다 보니까 어느새 나랑 동갑내기 내 친구는 사실 이제 어떻게 보면 저는 여기 사회생활 하려고 이렇게 서울에 올라오고 내 동갑내기 첫 친구이자 지금까지 거의 유일한 친구예요 서울에 올라와서 왜냐면 친구들이 생겼을 때도 다 형들이었고 그렇게 생각해 보니, 앞으로는 또 뭐 친구 생기고 할 순 있겠지만 어쨌든 내 동갑내기 친구가 친구랑 이런 스토리와 이런 추억이 있는 친구는 아마 태형이가 앞으로도 거의 유일하겠죠

So as far as same-age chingu go... In a sense, when I came here to Seoul to work [V] was my first same-age chingu and, to this day, is my only chingu since I came to Seoul Because when I made chingu they were all hyungs So from that perspective, I might have more chingu in the future But in any case, as for same-age chingu, a chingu that I share these stories and memories with Taehyung will probably continue to be the only one

So this is the part that caused all this confusion. Here Jimin uses chingu in two different ways. The first one is to specifically mean same-age friend, and the second is to mean just friend in general, as in a person you have a friendship with. I marked the first usage in red and the second usage in blue. If Jimin used the word chingu just in the second meaning, this whole speech would make absolutely no sense. Jimin has become friends with many people outside of BTS, including people that are older than him, but he's saying that V has a special place in his life namely because they're of the same age.

Being of the same age with someone else is special in Korea. It means you can be comfortable with that person from the get go without regards to societal rules imposed by the age hierarchy. Your horizontal interpersonal distance can be either far or close, but there is literally no vertical distance. You are on the same level as them, you're equals. It's expected that, in a group of people of varying ages, you would make friends with the person that's the same age as you are before anyone else, because of that lack of vertical distance and barrier of formalities.

Which is why the next part stood out so much.

-

(talking about age not being an important factor in cultivating friendships)

"동갑내기 친구가 짱이죠" 사실, 사실 뭐 제가 나이를 많이 먹은 것도 아니고 제가 오래 살아 온 것도 아니고 인생 선배들한테 막 이렇게 떠들 얘기는 아니지만 나이는 별로 중요하지 않은 것 같아요 나이는 별로 안 중요해요 이게 요즘에 제가 느끼는 거는 저보다 나이가 많은 사람들도 다 너무 생각하는 것도 되게 영하고 뭐라 해야 되지, 대화가 너무 자연스럽다 해야 되나 그래서 막 제 친구 중에는 열몇살 차이 나는 친구도 있고 그렇거든요 그냥 말 놓고. 예. 저는 그런 친구가 있어요 전화해서 형 빨리 오라고. 아 조용히 하라고. 이런 친구가 저는 있어요. 그래서 저는 나이는 별로 중요한 것 같지 않아요.

"Same-age friends are the best" (*a fan's chat message) Well, I mean I'm not that old, I haven't lived that long So it's not something I can go on about in front of elders (*meaning, elder people might think it's quite forward of him to say this in front of them) But I don't think age is that important Age isn't really important These days, I feel like People who are older than me all think very young And, how should I put this, like the conversation flows so naturally So among my chingu, there's even a chingu who is more than ten years older than me The kind of chingu that I talk informally to He's a chingu that I can call and be like, hey hyung hurry up, or like, be quiet (*) So I don't think age is really all that important.

(*considering the tone Jimin was speaking in, you can take it as an equivalent to: Hyung, get your ass here right now and oh shut up.)

Here, chingu was used to denote friend, as in, you know, just friend.

Note how Jimin said, among his chingu there's one that's 10+ years older than him. He is *categorizing* this person as a friend. Because he's trying to make a point about how age can be irrelevant in building friendships, he doesn't refer to this individual as 'a hyung I know (아는 형)' or 'a close hyung (친한 형)'. He's trying to emphasize the friendship aspect, and not the age difference, in his choice of words. It's extremely likely that in most situations where he has to tell other people about this person in his private life he would refer to him as 'a close hyung' (if those who are listening don't know this person) or 'X [insert name]-hyung' (if they all know him). Not friend/chingu.

-

So, to answer your question:

[...] why would Jimin who is the dongsaeng in his friend group then refer to his older friends as friends if they're not the same age but he wouldn't refer to Jungkook as his friend?

> Jimin doesn't need to call Jungkook his chingu, either to him or to other people. They are already bandmates and close hyung and dongsaeng and everyone knows about it. Close hyung and dongsaeng fall under the umbrella of 'friend'. If no one knew who they were and what kind of relationship they had, and Jimin had to talk about JK without giving any specifics about his gender/age/etc, he might refer to JK as chingu. But it's not a scenario that's likely to happen.

-

How can Jimin as a dongsaeng call his outside BTS older friends friends but can't call another dongsaeng in another group of friends friend?

> He can, if he wants/needs to. When I said Jimin wouldn't call Jungkook his friend/chingu even if they were't in a non-platonic relationship or in the same band, it's because between Koreans age always comes first when establishing a relationship. JK will forever be a dongsaeng to Jimin and Jimin will forever be a hyung to JK regardless of how their relationship status changes. I repeat, having a friendship with someone, categorizing a person as a chingu, and naming them chingu are all separate things for Koreans. You can name a person as your chingu even if you don't have a close friendship with them. You can be friends with someone but rarely refer to them as chingu.

-

Finally, a tip for anyone out there who's interested in learning Korean - since chingu is such a loaded word, we often use the term chinhan sayi (친한 사이) or just the adjective chinhada (친하다) to describe a friendly/close relationship with another person. See example below.

I'm friends with that sunbae

-> 그 선배랑 친한 사이예요. [Geu sunbaerang chinhan sayiyeyo]

(Literal translation: I have a close relationship with that sunbae.)

-> 그 선배랑 친해요. [Geu sunbaerang chinhaeyo]

(Literal translation: I'm close to that sunbae.)

-

#Anonymous #answered #jimin language #really hope this helps

[spiritus-sonne]

"Celesvogel"

Details about my angel 'kintype

Honestly, I expected to wait at least several weeks, if not months, before making this writing, as I figured I’d have to do so much introspection and a lot of letting the thoughts just sit and simmer for an extended time before I would feel at all confirmed about saying I have a sixth ‘kintype. But I also realized that I can trace back feelings and experiences of this ‘type for over twenty years and I’ve actually been thinking on and off for the past few months what kind of alterhumanity I experience in regards to angels, especially since angel-hearted just didn’t seem to fit enough (though I may be angel-hearted, too, or it could just fall under the larger “monster-heartedness” I experience in relation to animalistic humanoids). Once I actually stopped to question why I wasn’t ever considering myself to have an angel ‘kintype and realized my reasoning basically came down to it “being too symbolic” in origin and that now I don’t see that as a valid sole reason to exclude it as a ‘kintype, a flood of thoughts came in and occupied my mind for the better part of a day relating to this angel aspect and why it may be a ‘kintype for me.

I did question if it’s really even an integral, deep part of myself and my identity and I realized the experiences I’ve had that provide a “yes” in answer to that. This is rather different than the processes I went through to figure out my other ‘kintypes (as either what kind of animal/creature they are or in just verifying to myself whether they were ‘kintypes or something else), but I feel like I sort of ‘blocked off’ part of my angel self, I created a kind of dam from recognizing it as the level and type of aspect it now seems to have always been, or at least developed into many years ago. Sure, I fully admit I could be wrong about this and maybe months or years down the road I will change my mind and realize this aspect isn’t a ‘kintype. But for now, I feel comfortable and good about believing it is a ‘kintype.

Because this kind of angel is so different from how most angelkin describe being such, even though it does hold notable similarities to popular and historical concepts of angels, so I’ve decided to coin my own ‘species’ term for it: celesvogel (based on celestial and the German word for bird, “vogel”). Heck, I already coined a species-specific term for my vampire ‘type and theropod ‘type, so this is basically right in line with that and allows me to more easily specify what kind of angel I’m talking about in my writing. Although it does seem to be largely based on my personal symbolic associations with the concept of angels, the experience itself is more than just symbolic. I’ve put together information about celesvogels based on my experiences and on, essentially, noemata I have of them--an intuitive knowledge that I pieced together through questioning different attributes and such of them.

I read what various other angelkin described as being the main attributes of what makes angels actually angels and found that though I related to and agreed with some of it, there was a lot I didn’t. In particular, most of them I read had largely Abrahamic, especially Christian, concepts of angels which I don’t connect with. I do not view celesvogels as being “servants of a monotheistic God”, or probably to any deities--they aren’t servants, at least not as followers in service to something. They don’t act the way they do because a higher power commands them to, they do it because that is how they are mentally and instinctively wired to act. They do hold some similarities in mind to that of humans, but they are far from mentally (let alone in body or power) being humans and shouldn’t be thought of as needing to act in a way that is “more human”. Due to their total lack of want, need, or ability to reproduce (they don’t have reproductive organs, for one, nor any other means to reproduce), I deciphered that they are probably created by some form of deity or other powerful entity, but not in the sense to be servants to that entity. Rather, they fulfill a purpose intended by the deity through their acts, behaviors, and instinct because that is just how they are as creatures, even without them having any knowledge or concept whatsoever of that particular deity or any deities, let alone them having conscious knowledge that what they are doing is specifically because a deity *wills* it. They are as much servants of a deity as whatever organism, including humans, are servants to evolution. They don’t act as they do because they are commanded to, they do it because it is in their inherent nature.

This, however, makes the concept of their free will kind of grey. I feel like they do have the ability to make at least some choices freely while others they do because that’s just how they are wired and they don’t even have the want to go against them. Again, this goes back to what I mentioned earlier to not try to “humanize” them--just because extensive free will is so important to us as humans, that doesn’t mean it holds the same weight for all creatures, and that doesn’t have to be a bad thing. A creature doesn’t have to be oh-so human mentally and behaviorally in order to be “valid”, let alone good or even helpful. I feel that, ultimately, they still choose to make the actions they do toward or about a charge or whatever is in their stewardship--they still have to balance complex situations with questions of morals and ethics, including in ways that, honestly, I don’t fully understand right now--I feel I am part celesvogel, not fully one, when it comes down to it. Their actions have consequences, whether good, bad, or otherwise, and the actions of their charges have consequences, too, which the celesvogels have to weigh what to do or not to do. They have the ability to think and reason, and to learn from circumstances. To my understanding, they can’t “fall” since that would kind of go against what I described above.

The concept of angels as messengers of the divine doesn’t resonate to me for celesvogels, at the least not in any kind of direct sense of being messengers. Again, technically they may ultimately be tools, instruments, of a divine being to do whatever work it sees fit, and through that they could be seen as ‘delivering divine messages’ to their charges. Their duties involve things like stewardship to things, such as environments and ecosystems, as also being guides and/or guardians to charges (whether human or not), and even act as inspiration/creative muses. I also wouldn’t really call them warriors, but they can be very determined and fierce, especially when it comes to protecting something or someone. They aren’t mindless creatures of instinct either, nor are they devoid of emotion and personality--they have a spectrum of emotions, and such helps them bond further with and protect their charges, and they each have their own particular personality. I don’t think they have things like rank/hierarchy, including archangels, though they seem to have different roles based on the particular kind of duty they are doing (sentry, caretaker, guide, steward, etc.) that can vary over the course of their lives. Celesvogels also aren’t “fluffy” in what they do--they aren’t perfect beings, nor are they totally benevolent, and if anything they act as helpers and possibly balancers.

In regards to their bodies and appearance, they have incorporeal bodies rather than physical ones and have mental and spiritual abilities to allow them to communicate with physical beings. They are also capable of flight. I’m unsure what their forms would look like, beyond having feathered, bird-like wings on their backs, though I tend to think they have some level of shapeshifting ability--to what extent I don’t currently know, but their body form except for their wings seems to me almost arbitrary and not a big part of who, what, and the way they are. I think they aren’t particularly social with one another either and they are totally asexual and aromantic. Gender is also either null to them or fluid in the sense of changing based on shifting their forms. They also sometimes vocalize in what sounds like song--kind of like language-less choir singing. Perhaps they do it as one form of communication with their charges or even for the sake of self-expression.

Even though I don’t consider celesvogels to be “warriors” proper, I feel like they were still fierce protectors against incorporeal threats and with that they at times wielded swords or perhaps other melee weapons to use. I sometimes feel like I should be skilled in some kind of melee weaponry, and can feel the weight of a sword or some other weapon from my hand or sitting across my shoulder along with some objects evoking that sensation more when I hold them. I don’t feel remotely similar about ranged weapons, especially guns, and have retained a strong preference in fighting games toward using certain kinds of melee weaponry (particularly fond of the “Soul Calibur” game series). I remain unsure for now about whether celesvogels would receive any weaponry or fighting training or if they would just have innate knowledge of good ways to fight. I know when it comes to me in fighting games I am a button-masher who doesn't take time to think carefully about the opponent's moves and blocking or parrying them, but this is probably a lot because of my slow cognitive processing, so I actually can't think fast enough to react to the opponent's moves properly. I would like to think I could think and react faster as an actual-in-body angel. This weaponry aspect is also why the few original characters I have are wielders of melee-style weapons even though they live in a time similar to our modern era of technology and advanced guns. Though I don’t have the money nor great enough reason to seek out training to use some kind of melee weapon in real life.

Also on the subject of my OCs, my main one possesses some qualities of celesvogels. Actually, one of her names is “Angellore”, which was based on a Tristania song of the same name in which I first envisioned her. She’s a shapeshifter with a human, partially human, and fully nonhuman form, and she is a mix of human, domestic cat, and crow. In her partially human form, she has white (or mainly white) feathered wings on her back, a cat’s tail, claws, pointed ears, fangs, some feathers on the upper portion of her face, and solid black eyes. She wields a bladed staff and sharpened sais as her weapons. Angellore is also able to fly in that partially human form and is basically an “airbender” (to borrow a term from the “Avatar: The Last Airbender” universe). But it’s really just certain aspects of her personality and behavior, and the mix between feline, avian, and human which make her feel kind of “angelic”-based to me, especially a similarity to celesvogels in particular. My own experiences in being angel are marked by a similar such mix of avian, human, and other creature (perhaps feline--I already experience that from my cat theriotype and from my vampire ‘kintype, so it’s too hard to decipher currently); a blend of human and nonhuman animal.

Knowing all this, I honestly don’t even think these beings ever actually existed in this realm/universe, but heck, perhaps they could have or do. For me, this is a psychological experience, like my other ‘kintypes. As I have read and skimmed over various posts and forum threads about angelkin I feel a lack of a sense of belonging amongst them, for the most part. I can’t relate to the religious nor deity-based things, but even still, I’ve never actually found a notable sense of belonging in the therian and otherkin communities either, despite my care for them and irregular activity within them (I’ve always mostly lurked rather than been active). It’s interesting though that both my vampire and angel ‘types in some way keep me connected to the therian and otherkin communities--through my vampire ‘type I get times of being filled with wanting to have more of a voice and confidence in myself, and through angel I feel like trying to help others in some significant way.

#otherkin #angelkin #alterhuman

[dumplingfaye]

Here’s my top 30 strongest characters in Black clover

(I’m trying to be extremely fair but there is some biased so if there’s someone that doesn’t make that much sense why they’re highly ranked it’s because I’m biased one character in particular and I’m doing this because someone made a absolutely god awful top 15)

Charlotte Roselei .30

if you wonder why she’s ranked so low it’s because even though she fought Vanica and won that was when Vanica was weaker and once Vanica went 100% she creamed Charlotte plus her magic was only effective because it was cursed magic if she fought any of the other dark triad members she would have probably lost

Lumiere Silvamillion Clover/Licht .29/.28

if you’re wondering why they’re so low on the list it’s because they couldn’t defeat Zagred and contrary to some people’s beliefs Zagred is actually extremely weak at least compared to the other Devils

Zagred .27

he’s very powerful what can I say but he’s pretty low on the list because well he is smart however when it comes to fighting he’s very bland and does the exact same thing over and over

Luck Voltia/Leopoldo Vermillion/Charmy Pappitson/Mimosa Vermillion .26/.25/.24/.23

a basic summary they all have true magic and intern they all have ultimate magic (Luck has Elven magic as well which also gives him an extra boost) (Leopoldo is a Royal and trains a lot so he doesn’t gets left behind)” not that that helps”(Charmy is a hybrid of a human and a dwarf)and (Mimosa is a Royal as well as a recovery mage but that doesn’t mean that she can’t put up a good fight)

Nozel Silva/Fuegoleon Vermillion 22/.21

(Nozel to tell the truth i’m not actually sure how much powerful he’s gotten over the last six months but he’s probably going to play a big role soon so this is also kind of his biased) as for (Fuegoleon to tell the truth I kind of think he’s pretty weak but maybe he has spirit dive so that’s why he’s here if he doesn’t well he’s not even on the list in that case)

Zora Ideale .20

you’re probably wondering why he’s here This isn’t me being biased because I’m kind of indifference towards Zora but he’s here because his magic is quite interesting he can reflect someone’s attack and double its power and he possibly even has more tricks up his sleeve after all it has been six months

Magna Swing: .19

now you’re probably wondering why he’s so low on the list after all he beat Dante well that’s actually pretty simple it’s because to me this is actually kind of me being biased I don’t actually like Magna in fact I actually hate him but to me personally I think his trump card is for very pacific conditions for starters we know that Dante is extremely strong right when it comes to magic but when it comes to intellect or physical strength he has none so to me if Magna fights someone with either of those things or God for bid both I personally think he would lose but this could just be my bias talking

Gaja .18

he fought the wizard king to a stalemate and he was able to fight Devil Lolopechka to an even degree when he wasn’t even trying to hurt her but she was trying to hurt him (I could be wrong please don’t get mad at me keep in mind this is just my opinion)

Julius Novachrono(at prime) .17

Julius at his prime everyone stroke his power and even though Yami trained for six months he was still weaker than Julius he only became stronger after he surpassed his limits

Yami Sukehiro .16

(dimension slash/Equinox)(death thrust)(Black hole) etc.

Jack the Ripper .15

if I’m being honest I’m pretty sure if he fought Magna he would probably lose (because he has a weak body and doesn’t have that much intellect) but because his magic is so versatile that he can adapt to the magic attribute it’s against he possibly could do incredible things with it even though I kind a wish he would die I don’t like him either

Devil Lolopechka .14

To tell the truth I’m not exactly sure if she’s stronger than anyone who’s on the list but I assume she is at the very least I know she’s stronger than Charlotte but because she’s a devil she’s probably stronger than most of the other characters

Zenon Zogratis /Yuno Grinberryall .13/.12

if I’m being honest I don’t actually know who’s stronger because even though at the beginning of their fight (of course not in their first one) Yuno was indeed winning the fight but after Zenon went 100% it came to a stalemate so I’m not exactly sure who is stronger (one is a devil user) and the other (is a spirit user) so 50/50 ╰(0 ~ 0)╯

Dante Zogratis/Vanica Zogratis: .11/.10

I mean they’re both stupid and they’re both strong and I didn’t put them in the same boat as Zenon because when Vanica heard that “Yami was defeated by Zenon” she said that he might not be as strong as she hoped implying that she was stronger than Zenon plus Dante has the king of all devils so that’s why there here

Dorothy Unsworth .9

this might be my bias talking but because she has her own world (created by magic) she can conjure up anything she wants and of course she’s gotten stronger over the six months so that’s why she’s highly ranked

Mereoleona Vermillion .8

She’s fighting a demon God and even though her magic is being absorbed she can still fight so yeah

Noelle Silva/Acier Silva .7/.6

to me personally they don’t actually have that many differences when it comes to strengths because both of them defeated Vanica and sure Vanica was weaker when she fought Acier but (Acier had to protect both of her children plus she died because of Megicula’s interference) and Acier was able to leave a permanent mark on Vanica

Nacht Faust .5

(OKAY if I’m being honest this is extremely biased I really like him a lot) but Nacht was able to cream Asta and Liebe for two days straight and while they were being cured he wasn’t (I mean it’s possible he was but I didn’t see it and neither did you” except in Fanart”) and they were able to defeat Dante and fight on par with Yami when they were weaker and out of breath and not even working in conjunction with each other so yeah and when he fought Naamah and Lilith he was able to perform a spell that is on the same level as supreme devils and the only reason why they were able to break through it is because Naamah and Lilith burn/freeze everything even invincible concepts/constructs and they were the strongest Devils we’ve seen so far at that pint in time and even though they were playing with him at a stalemate they were still stronger than anything they faced before and he was able to keep them busy for a little while wow this one was long

Naamah and Lilith .4

I just said it before but they’re able to burn/freeze everything you need including invincible concept/constructs anyhow they’re basically extremely strong and they could cream everyone on the list except the people who are higher than them

Megicula .3

well he/she (I don’t want to assume genders and be wrong) basically trashes on everyone in mere instant

Asta & Liebe .2

Devil union is just that over powered I mean it’s able to take out transformations such as spirit dive possibly other devil unions and of course normal spells such as Valkyrie dress or princess healing flower robe as well spirit of hellfire etc. able to dispel mana-zone based rooms is able to cut through any type of magic even if it’s a physical being and the sword themselves already pack a punch by themselves so with extra power that’s just over powered

Lucifuge/Lucifero .1/.0

Who the fu*k did you think was going to be number one/number zero Seriously who they’re literally the main bad guys in this arc it is impossible to tell what they’re capable of but whatever it is we know that they can kill anyone they want in an instant without even trying this isn’t me overhyping them this is a factual thing they are practically the most overpowered creatures in Black clover we have yet to see them and frankly I don’t think we want to I mean both of them killed really kind people Lucifero killed Licita Lucifuge I mean technically he didn’t kill Morgan (Morgen died because he interfered with the Devil ritual) but they killed Nacht and Morgan parents and if we’re being honest their parents well they kind of did deserve death

#Black clover #Black clover Asta #Asta #Black clover Liebe #Black clover Nacht #Black clover Nacht Faust #Nacht Faust #Black clover Noelle #Noelle #Black clover Noelle Silva #Noelle Silva #Black clover Yuno #Yuno #Black clover Yuno Grinberryall #Yuno Grinberryall

[sebastianshaw]

Shaw & Skadi for the kid meme!

Name: Sigvid Skadisson Shaw. I know it should be Shawson BUT FUCK THE RULES. “Sig” is a pretty standard prefix for a lot of Norse names from the word “sigr” meaning “victory” and “vid” from the Old Germanic “widu” for forest. Gender: Masc and male-presenting but beyond that I’m not sure? Trans man? AMAB non-binary? Look, he uses he/him (maybe they too) and people THINK ‘man’ when they look at him, that’s all I know General Appearance: Tall and beefy, he couldn’t NOT be. Medium pale skin that gets even paler in winter but tans easily in summer. Black hair, or so dark brown it might as well be black, and very dark eyes. His hair, unlike both parents and most of his Asgardian brethren, is actually kept short, and while he has a beard, it’s not the big one. The reason for this is functional; short hair is better if you’re spending a lot of time in the wild. Stuff gets stuck in long hair, it can get tangled in branches at the worst times, it’s hot in the summer, and it can literally freeze in the winter if it gets wet. His attire is very much out of a Viking fantasy, but less on the “heavy armor” end of things and more on the “wearing lots of furs and skins” side. He doesn’t look like someone you want to fuck with, but he also doesn’t look like he’s going to war. He carefully avoids any kind of dangling amulets, charms, or other jewelry that could get caught on anything, but he’s got a sort of leather toolbelt containing various survival tools made from wood, bone, etc. Personality: Sigvid, as you might guess from his attire and the reasons for it, is an outdoorsman. Not as a hobby, not as a lifestyle, but an EXISTENCE. He thrives in the natural world as Sebastian does in the business world, finding ways to survive in even the most adverse of situation. Whatever Mother Nature is doing around him, he can not only make it through it, he can work it to his advantage. His closeness to the natural world, his close observation of it, means that he sees both the facts and errors in his father’s mentality. He sees that the strongest predators will pick off the weakest prey, that the winter will take those who do not prepare, that mother animals will neglect and even devour their young if they’re sick or runty. He also sees that prey are more aggressive than predators, how some creatures will adopt and nourish infants that are not their own or even their own species, how some will share their kill with no benefit to themselves, and how even the smallest and most humble animals can make it through things that the larger, so-called stronger ones did not. Sigvid is very pragmatic, like his father, very practical, very self-preservationist. He has to be. But he’s also very spiritual, not in a way that connects to some distant god, but the world around him, to earth and nature. Not some idealized hippie-dippie conception of nature as a loving mother that is always in balance, but an acceptance that it is a greater power that he cannot control, he can only hope to survive at best. It keeps him humble. It also gives him a much wider, more relative perspective on things that is not human-centric, or Asgardian-centric for that matter. My Shaw often says that he admires human accomplishments above all else, that no other animal has built cities, computers, cars, and so on. And he is correct in this. But Sigvid always points out, how many termite mounds has man built? How many times do humans migrate thousands of miles using an innate sense of the Earth’s magnetic fields? How many fish have we hunted by literally sensing the electricity in their bodies? Yes, humans are “the best” if we judge them by standards HUMANS MADE. Judge us by the base standard of any other species, and we flop. Same for judging any species by the standards of any other. Nothing is “more” or “less” evolved than anything else, more complex does not mean better, and nor does being bigger, stronger, meaner, or even smarter mean a species is “better” or “more evolved” either. Survival of the fittest is not about that, nor about individuals; it’s about how well a species fits its environment and niche. A slime mold is just as evolved as a person. Sigvid is very passionate about this, though he’s not the type to speak up most of the time; he’s stoic and saturnine, used to keeping his mouth closed and his thoughts to himself, because most of the time there’s no one to talk to. And that also means he’s learned to exist without the validation and approval of others---ironically, something that is much like his father, learned in a completely different environment.

A lot of this, obviously, comes from Skadi. He was at side her since infancy learning to hunt and track, learning the difference between wood sorrel and white clover, how to tell when a moose is about to charge, and what it means when the woods go quiet. This connects deeply to Skadi’s Jotunn side in particular, which in Norse lore are thought to have symbolized the inherently chaotic and uncontrollable nature of, well, nature! Though Sigvid would not, nature it’s chaotic, it’s actually very ordered, people just don’t bother to understand what’s inconvenient to them. But where he differs from Skadi is that he’s not a Disney princess. Animals don’t hang out with him. He doesn’t nurse injured creatures back to health. He doesn’t keep pets. He does not see them as friends. They are not less than him, but they are not allies, they are beings he co-exists with, avoids, or eats. At least, until a thylacine started hanging out with him. Yeah, a thylacine. The extinct Tasmanian tiger. Who knows where it came from or why he’s attached itself to him, but he’s very adamant she’s not a pet and he hasn’t named her, but she is THERE. Sometimes. She isn't at his side like a dog, it's more she's following him from a distance and she pokes her head out from the trees somewhere. She's not a pet. She's more a parasite. But unlike Shaw, Sigvid doesn't use that term in a bad way, and he's fine with her presence. He's just curious where the hell an extinct Australian animal came from? Obviously, Sigvid is not interacting with people a lot, but when he does, he’s far less awkward or boisterous than people expect. He doesn’t have the overt weirdness people expect from a hermit, nor the bombastic warrior cliché of an Asgardian, or the vicious stereotype of a Jotunn. He has a quiet but overwhelming elegance, not like an aristocrat but like a great stag emerging from the forest. He chooses his words carefully, and can say much with just a few. He walks the middle ground between judging by individuals and judging by species; he does a little of both. He has preconceptions and generalities that he believes in about each group, but also believes in room for exception. After all, he’s not what a lot of people expect, is he? Despite this, he’s frequently misread as disliking people, but he doesn’t. He is utterly neutral on them, he just prefers his own way of life. Likewise, he tends to be very neutral towards individuals, and this also is often misread as dislike. One thing he does dislike though, is when people try to endear themselves to him by talking about how they agree animals are better than people, or say stuff like you know only man kills for pleasure. . . .this actually just annoys him. Firstly, a lot of animals do kill for pleasure. Secondly, when people say animals/nature is better than people. . . .they’re forgetting that people---humans, Asgardians, Jotunn---are animals too. This is just another way people, of any sort, try to insist they’re something special and different, whether in a negative or positive way. It doesn’t impress him. What impresses him tends to be how well people work within their niche, whatever niche that is. Like Shaw, he doesn’t really judge in terms of conventional morality, but a person’s success----Sigvid’s definition of success is just much wider. Like, maybe you dive for a living---are you a good diver? A great cafeteria worker? The best toilet cleaner in the tri-state area? He admires that and he commends you. When he is angered, he stays quiet, and his response is swift and physical; he either leaves or strikes physically and then leaves. When he feels sufficiently bonded with someone. . . he is still quiet. He appreciates a person who doesn't need to be filling the silences between them to feel comfortable and kinship. And kinship for him is rare, but he's not lonely----just also not adverse to it, as many assume he is. People assume a lot about Sigvid, and most of it is wrong, but he's also very chill with it. Sigvid is a very chill guy.

Special Talents: Besides the obviously mentioned talents for hunting, tracking, foraging, survivalism, and nature knowledge? Many people think he’s some kind of seer because he’s good at predicting storms and such, but actually he’s just very good at reading the signs most people aren’t attuned to. He also presumably has the attributes of Asgardians and Jotuns (super strength, etc) but if he has a mutant power, it has yet to manifest. Also cannot assume a Frost Giant form. Who they like better: Skadi, though eventually he does respect his father for performing so well at what he does

Who they take after more: I think both equally in different ways Personal Head canon: -He really likes amethyst geodes. -He finds a lot of manufactured foods, like chips or snack cakes, to be WAAAAY too strongly salty or sweet for him to stomach, is allergic to Red Dye #40, and he finds the taste of domesticated animals to be weird. - Not much of a dairy person, but ghee is good -Dislikes when people stereotype hillbillies as stupid; as in like, people who are genuinely living in the hills and mountains of the American Southeast, they're an interesting people with their own unique culture like any other group that lives off the land in isolation---which he respects---and not interchangeable with typical rednecks. -He doesn't typically carry anything with him that's not a necessity, if he knows he's going to be seeing people soon, he will pick up knick-knacks he finds in abandoned places and distribute them like a weird Santa Claus. Who, he's met, by the way, and according to him, Father Christmas is something of a badass. - He will always buy your homemade soaps, and I have no idea what he's doing with them. Yes, maybe he's using them in the normal intended way but IM NOT SURE?? - Pops up in art museums. People never expect him to be here, in these cathedrals dedicated to human creation, but he is. I think he views art a bit differently than the average person, but he's there all the same. - He's an Aquarius but there is a LOT of Saturn in his chart - The first Midgard movie he saw was Forrest Gump. He was expecting it to be about something else because of the title, but he enjoyed it and LEARNED THIS DANCE Face Claim: n/a

#sigvid #kids #kid meme

[nosunsetsjustsilence]

The Manics and Gender Identity, Part 1

There is a lot to unpack in Nicky and Richey’s early lyrics pertaining to gender, particularly in terms of identifying with women. Richey approaches the subject — as he is wont to do — with regard to the exploitation and degradation of the female image, while Nicky’s attitude is more inquisitive and casual. Both use lyrics to express their own personal “What if?”

Make no mistake: I’m not claiming that either Nicky or Richey is/was non-cis or trans or anything other than curious. But it’s clear from their personal lyric struggles and hard-won lifestyle choices that this was a different time they were living in. In the 1990s, gender identity was not a topic with any kind of mainstream recognition, at least beyond those who wanted a “sex change” or girls who were considered “one of the boys”. I think it’s fascinating, at least from my perspective, to go back and examine the themes of gender dysphoria, identity, and frustration in lyrics written before any of it was part of popular conversation, and in a way that emphasized the then absolute cultural disconnect between desire and society.

Also, it’s important to note that both Nicky and Richey have presented gender in ways that don’t have anything to do with lyrics. Nicky is comfortable in traditionally female clothing and wears dresses on and off stage; both band members wore makeup and feathers on a regular basis. I’ve tried to write about gender in terms of lyrics only, but at times I do take examples from visual media.

Finally, keep in mind that yours truly is non-binary, and the discussion will hopefully not reek of a cis person watching queer men from behind bars in a zoo.

Special thanks to @sinisterrouge for vetting this before I posted <3

Little Baby Nothing

Although Richey seemed to find comfort in claiming that his lyrics were about the larger world — in the case of Little Baby Nothing, feminism and the way women are perceived in media — a closer look usually reveals a personal stake. When I discussed the meaning of this song previously, I emphasized that the “Little baby nothing” in question is clearly Richey himself, writing in the first person and deconstructing his own image to align with a kind of mindless female groupie used for sex.

My mind is dead, everybody loves me Wants a slice of me Hopelessly passive and compatible Need to belong, oh the roads are scary Hold me in your arms I wanna be your only possession

Richey often refers to himself as a “slut” and a “prostitute” and uses self-referential porn star imagery in his lyrics (So Dead: “You need a fix I’m your prostitute”, Yes: “there’s no lust in this coma even for a fifty”), aligning the industries of pornography and music performance in very vivid ways most often pertaining to exploitation. Appropriately, singing pivotal stanzas on this track is none other than Traci Lords, arguably most famous (especially in the early 90s) for an underage porn scandal.  

What’s more, in the lyrics booklet for Generation Terrorists, there is a quotation or excerpt included for each song. The following corresponds to Little Baby Nothing:

“The male chromosome is an incomplete female chromosome. In other words the male is a walking abortion; aborted at the gene stage. To be male is to be deficient, emotionally limited; maleness is a deficiency disease and males are emotional cripples.” -Valerie Solanos.

Ninety percent of what the Manics said and did in their early years was intended to be shocking and/or ironic. Of course they were trying to incite anger and riots, the questioning of institutions, and a teardown of normalcy. But the fact that Richey later used part of this radical statement as the title to one of his songs (“Of Walking Abortion”, natch) proves that he took it somewhat seriously, even if only in the most simple sense — that part of him resented his own maleness.

Life Becoming a Landslide

This is another song I’ve previously discussed, mostly in the arena of Nicky and Richey individualizing their distinctive voices into lines that can clearly be attributed to one or the other. In a song about nature vs nurture and the plastic confines of greater humanity cracking down on who or what someone is really supposed to be, we have:

Life becoming a landslide Ice freezing nature dead Life becoming a landslide I don’t wanna be a man

As far as writing style goes, Nicky was always fairly straightforward. Richey loves to convolute his message with proper nouns and alternating verb cases and a lack of a subject just to throw  people off, but here’s Nicky, my boy, just saying, “Dude. Being a man sucks. I don’t like this.”

He could mean that being human in general sucks. But, since his attitude towards women leads me to believe he would not abbreviate humanity in this way, and given his and Richey’s track record with gender and Nicky’s well-documented gender presentation, I think it’s clear the lyric means that he doesn’t want to be male. Because he feels it doesn’t suit him, for whatever reason. And that nature failed by making him a man instead of a woman.

Yes

‘Yes’ is an incredible song. Its major-chord melody juxtaposed against Richey’s raw portrait of degradation is truly a thing to behold. The theme? Being used, prostitution both literal and metaphorical (“For sale? dumb cunt’s same dumb questions”), exploitation in the name of capitalism (“In these plagued streets of pity you can buy anything”), and reaching the lowest possible point of existence (“Purgatory’s circle, drowning here, someone will always say yes”). But the chorus — the chorus boasts one of the rawest images of sexual violence the band has ever used:

He’s a boy, you want a girl so tear off his cock Tie his hair in bunches, fuck him, call him Rita if you want

Wow. Okay. Where to begin? The implication here is that gender, along with everything else, is mutable if you have enough money and power to abuse people. However, it appears the change would be made not to entertain others, but to appeal to a specific person, sexually (“fuck him”). The “you” in question is clearly attracted to women, so the narrator offering to mutilate himself to please them can be seen as a last-ditch act of desperation. (“It feels like this massive defeat,” said a friend. “You can make him a woman to pleasure someone, but what’s left to change after that?”)

Richey wrote most of the song; “Rita”, obviously, is the name used for an alternative female identity. But who would Rita be? Richey seems to be wondering. Would she still be me? And would the change even be worth the affections of whomever he’s speaking to? If the means are so drastic (and difficult to picture without experiencing secondhand pain), that answer would usually be “no”. But the song is called “Yes”. I would say yes to anything at this point, Richey is saying, even the most extreme sexual violence imaginable, if that’s what you wanted.

4st 7lb

This is an extreme example of Richey using world issues to examine his own nature. Although anorexic himself, Richey writes “4st 7lb” from the point of view of an obsessive young girl admiring thin models. There could be multiple reasons for this, not the least of which is that when a person fails to fit the “classic” case of an eating disorder, they are often ignored. So, Richey says, you need me to be a teenage girl? I can do that. 

(Note that in 1994, when this song was written, any eating disorder demographic outside the “white girl who loves fashion too much” model did not exist by medical standards and was usually subject to ridicule.)

Karen says I’ve reached my target weight Kate and Emma and Kristin know it’s fake Problem is diet’s not a big enough word I wanna be so skinny that I rot from view

Embodying the anorexic female stereotype allows Richey to criticize both the world and himself; by creating a parody of a young girl with an eating disorder, he creates commentary on how ridiculous and counter-intuitive her thought process actually is. The song is brutal and often focuses on nudity and sexual imagery, as it has been suggested in studies that eating disorders occur in those who are trying to annihilate their own puberty. Though Richey was well into his 20s when he wrote this, he often expressed a loathing of aging and the entire concept of adulthood.

Stomach collapsed at five Lift up my skirt my sex is gone Naked and lovely and 5 stone 2 May I bud and never flower My vision’s getting blurred But I can see my ribs and I feel fine My hands are trembling stalks And I can feel my breasts are sinking

Ultimately, “4st 7lb” hits hard as both an experiment in identity and a vicious satire of the rich white girl eating disorder cliché. Although the lyrics do not express a desire to become female, they do indicate that Richey feels everything might be easier and fit more neatly into a box if he were a girl.

[Coming in Part 2: The Girl Who Wanted to be God, Tsunami, Born a Girl, and Pretention/Repulsion.]

#gender identity #gender fuckery #manic street preachers #manics #nicky wire #richey james #richey edwards #lyrics #yes #little baby nothing #generation terroris #the holy bible #life becoming a landslide #4st 7lb #eating disorders #gender

[rtyialnley-blog]

1500

Please introduce your chosen subject area. What interests you as a potential starting points or areas of research and what influenced this choice?

I want to begin to explore this idea about what it means to be a man in 2020/2021 and how it’s changed from the past. What does it mean now to be a strong man and how much does that relate to clothing and the way that we are perceived in society. How do these ideas relate to women and how their seen in society, why is it that women can wear a suit and be seen as powerful but a man wearing a dress or a skirt is seen as weak?

What is strength? Google defines strength as ‘the quality or state of being physically strong’ and relate this to words such as ‘power’, ‘brawn’, ‘muscle’ and ‘sturdiness’ these are synonymous with masculinity and male strength. I suppose this is the stereotypical view of strength for men but this view is changing as people such as harry styles are redefining what it means to be a confident strong man . The traditional view of women in society was that of weakness and inferiority, women were seen as physically, mentally, emotionally and morally inferior to men. This led to women having a very narrow view of opportunities in terms of job opportunities and rights. I would like to look into how we in society perceive a strong woman? What characteristics do we look for in this that differs from what we look for in a man?

What were the roles of men and women in society in the past compared to current day, where are the prejudices? I want to research how significant job roles led to differences in clothing choices and how now those clothing choices are now synonymous with femininity or masculinity. The first people to wear trousers were those who rode horses, due to gender roles this stayed a job for the men which over time resulted in trousers becoming a man’s clothing. Women still wore trousers but far less frequently as they were stuck in their gendered role to be a housewife, cleaning and caring for the husband.

There are many instances in which there is violence against individuals willing to break the mould and wear clothes outside of their gender norm. As Sarah Fenstermaker says “The display of skirts on men is effectively an undermining of male power — by males. To put it extremely, they are like deserting troops.” People immediately class any many wearing a dress as gay and feminine but not any lesbian as masculine. The prejudice against men is potentially deeper rooted than simply the clothing and more that a society built but strong heterosexual men find it hard to accept that a straight man can be feminine and desire to wear a dress which is so rooted in femininity. Gender, femininity and masculinity are more than just clothing choices its rooted deeply in a person’s way of being their set of behaviours. Ultimately masculinity is the opposite of femininity and femininity it the opposite of masculinity.

What we do; Jobs; Roles; different roles in the past compared to today, how have they changed?

Women were seen more in supportive nurturing roles in the past but movements throughout the years have contributed to this change from these kinds of roles to those in occupational and professional careers. The movements in which women start as early as 1876, the future first lady Abigail Adams plead to her husband to be more favourable and generous to women than her forefather, she says, if particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies then they would be determined to form a rebellion no one should be held by laws which give them no voice. Although this does not fit in with the definition of strength  or power to stand up to a man in this way in this day in time, this is true power.

This brings questions to the surface such as what is power and did men ever hold any true power in being strong, to me this act of rebellion against her husband shows more power than any man before her, treating women with disrespect because of their gender alone.

Due to men being in positions of power in the past it has remained this way. This is because men hire men. They hire men because they hire those that fit within their organisational culture who is likely to minimise induction and development costs. I suppose it’s not that women couldn’t do the job but that men trust men more maybe? Some sort of pack culture potentially?

What contextually reference your subject matter what art design cultural and historical references can you look at to gain insight

I would like to look into why different celebrities dress the way they do and what impact they may believe that they have by dressing in the way they do. Harry styles is self aware that he is playing with gender when he wears feminine clothing and understands that he is breaking barriers. Matty Healy wears dresses but is far less aware/ concerned of the impact they have on society he simply wears them because he wants to. Jaden smith wears feminine clothing and is very self aware, proclaiming ‘I'm taking the brunt of it so that later on, my kids and the next generations of kids will all think that certain things are normal that weren't expected before my time.", he wants to make it safe for other people to begin to wear whatever they want free of discrimination.

In 1972 David Bowie created the character Ziggy Stardust, an androgynous alien wearing genderless clothing portraying both female and male attributes, Martin Aston write ‘it’s impossible to imagine how gay rights, and freedoms, would have accelerated as quickly as it did without Ziggy Stardust’ it is fascinating that there were figures like this in the past that tried to shift the concept of what it means to be male and that played with gender in this way. Whilst it did have an impact on people at the time to see a man act in this way clearly it wasn’t something that changed everyone’s minds as the west still rejects this kind of feminine man. I’d like to explore specifically how this impacted the generation at the time, was there an impact?? Did his presence change anything?

Ill also like to interview people from different generations and see how they perceive this shift in masculinity and what it means to be male. The current generation are far more accepting of feminine men as the concepts of what it means to be a man shifts. The older generations may have a different view on the current shift with many being far less accepting wanting masculine men. Candace Owens’s tweet went viral because of her view on Harry Styles wearing a dress on the cover of vogue saying {“There is no society that can survive without strong men, Bring back manly men.”} I will investigate the different perceptions people have on the idea of ‘feminine men’ and what it means to be a man in 2020 /2021.

I’ll also begin looking into different fashion designers and how they have tried to normalise or at least challenge these gender boundaries in the past but to little success. He loves to play around with what are feminine outfits in his menswear collections, it is common to find skirts, dresses and corsets in these collections. Its strange how the idea of men’s feminine clothing has existed in his collections for years but they have remained something that it only acceptable on the runway and not in everyday life.

I’m going to be looking into different cultures that have used the dress and why they don’t see it as a gender issue and simply a practicality. What’s the difference between England and Scotland where they wear kilts and the skirt has nothing to do with gender and the rest of the western world where a dress becomes a simple of weakness and femininity? wearing a kilt is a masculine practice. A female given the opportunity to wear a kilt said this ‘Although I find the kilt physically similar to wearing any other type of skirt, socially it draws a completely different and unique set of responses and behaviors from others’ I think this point Is interesting the fact that the kilt carries such weigh in its culture that it inherently has a different effect on the person wearing it.

In 1977 John Molloy wrote in his style guide that dressing like a man was kind of like a small boy who dresses in his dads clothing, he Is seen as cute and not authorities , it makes her look like an imitation man. This phrase of imitation man sticks with me. Its such an interesting idea that a woman can be called an imitation man for wearing a suit but a man is just socially rejected its almost like the process that women had to go through to wear men’s clothing men are now going through to wear women’s clothing.

-How does this subject area relate to my area of expertise have I explored similar concepts before what techniques can I use that I have already learnt on the course

I have explored subject areas like this in my Homage project where I researched the aforementioned matty healy. This project may not be directly linked to this as it was more about his stance on abortion rights in America and his decision to use his platform for change. However through my research I did look at how his choices question gender through his actions and dress. He controversially kissed a male fan in Dubai breaking strict lgbt laws. I think drawing will be very significant in particular mapping movement and silhouette; I did this a lot in this project. It allowed me to explore the way he moved on stage and the way in which what he wore changed his gender simply by silhouette. I will begin exploring many different people and many different pieces of clothing of I also think that colour and pattern will become very significant as I look back in history at the different kinds of garments people wore and how they have evolved over time I feel ill find that each era will have changes in texture and colour and it will become a great way to begin to map the progressive change from centuries ago to modern day and potentially the future.

[basicsofislam]

ISLAM 101: Muslim Beliefs: Existence and Oneness of God Almighty: ALLAH OR GOD?

It is a known fact that every language has one or more terms that are used in reference to God and sometimes to lesser deities. This is not the case with Allah. Allah is the personal name of the One true God. Nothing else can be called Allah. The term has no plural or gender. This shows its uniqueness when compared with the word god which can be made plural, gods, or feminine, goddess. It is interesting to notice that Allah is the personal name of God in Aramaic, the language of Jesus and a sister language of Arabic.

The One true God is a reflection of the unique concept that Islam associates with God. To a Muslim, Allah is the Almighty, Creator and Sustainer of the universe, Who is similar to nothing and nothing is comparable to Him. The Prophet Muhammad was asked by his contemporaries about Allah; the answer came directly from God Himself in the form of a short chapter of the Quran, which is considered the essence of the unity or the motto of monotheism. This is chapter 112 which reads:

“In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.

Say (O Muhammad) He is God the One God, the Everlasting Refuge, who has not begotten, nor has been begotten, and equal to Him is not anyone.”

Some non-Muslims allege that God in Islam is a stern and cruel God who demands to be obeyed fully. He is not loving and kind. Nothing can be farther from truth than this allegation. It is enough to know that, with the exception of one, each of the 114 chapters of the Quran begins with the verse: “In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.” In one of the sayings of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) we are told that “God is more loving and kinder than a mother to her dear child.”

But God is also Just. Hence evildoers and sinners must have their share of punishment and the virtuous, His bounties and favors. Actually God’s attribute of Mercy has full manifestation in His attribute of Justice. People suffering throughout their lives for His sake and people oppressing and exploiting other people all their lives should not receive similar treatment from their Lord. Expecting similar treatment for them will amount to negating the very belief in the accountability of man in the Hereafter and thereby negating all the incentives for a moral and virtuous life in this world. The following Quranic verses are very clear and straightforward in this respect:

“Verily, for the Righteous are gardens of Delight, in the Presence of their Lord. Shall We then treat the people of Faith like the people of Sin? What is the matter with you? How judge you?” (68:34-36)

Islam rejects characterizing God in any human form or depicting Him as favoring certain individuals or nations on the basis of wealth, power or race. He created the human beings as equals. They may distinguish themselves and get His favor through virtue and piety only.

The concept that God rested in the seventh day of creation, that God wrestled with one of His soldiers, that God is an envious plotter against mankind, or that God is incarnate in any human being are considered blasphemy from the Islamic point of view.

The unique usage of Allah as a personal name of God is a reflection of Islam’s emphasis on the purity of the belief in God which is the essence of the message of all God’s messengers. Because of this, Islam considers associating any deity or personality with God as a deadly sin which God will never forgive, despite the fact He may forgive all other sins.

[Note that what is meant above applies ONLY to those people who die in a state wherein they are associating others with God. The repentance of those who yet live is acceptable to God if He wills.]

The Creator must be of a different nature from the things created because if he is of the same nature as they are, he will be temporal and will therefore need a maker. It follows that nothing is like Him. If the maker is not temporal, then he must be eternal. But if he is eternal, he cannot be caused, and if nothing outside him causes him to continue to exist, which means that he must be self-sufficient. And if the does not depend on anything for the continuance of his own existence, then this existence can have no end. The Creator is therefore eternal and everlasting: “He is the First and the Last.”

He is Self-Sufficient or Self-Subsistent or, to use a Quranic term, Al-Qayyum. The Creator does not create only in the sense of bringing things into being, He also preserves them and takes them out of existence and is the ultimate cause of whatever happens to them.

“God is the Creator of everything. He is the guardian over everything. Unto Him belong the keys of the heavens and the earth.” (39:62, 63)

“No creature is there crawling on the earth, but its provision rests on God. He knows its lodging place and it repository.” (11:6)

#allah #god #islam #muslim #quran #revert #convert #convert islam #revert islam #reverthelp #revert help #revert help team #help #islamhelp #converthelp #prayer #salah #muslimah #reminder #pray #dua #hijab #religion #mohammad #new muslim #new revert #new convert #how to convert to islam #convert to islam #welcome to islam

[yibuo]

love your hot takes! was wondering if you could give your two cents on shipping/rpf in relation to idol culture, how more often than not these pairings are subtly if not overtly used as a marketing tool etc. I’m all for freedom of expression / fandom consumption as long as the fourth wall is respected but given recent developments in c-ent I feel like we’re treading on thinner and thinner ice....

EDIT you asked for my two cents and i gave u my entire bank account. nice

ok i wasn’t sure how to answer this tbh without possibly getting attacked but i have a pretty strong opinion of rpf/shipping and how people take it to the extremes and i talked to oomf who validated me so here i go

tldr i mean people can take part in shipping/rpf if they want to and if they keep it lowkey but there’s a boundary as to how far shipping/rpf can go and there are too many instances of where people insert rpf/shipping in places that are unacceptable and this goes for all real ppl pairings 

i’m not meaning to offend anyone, and in no way are my opinions discriminatory, but also, if you’re someone who’s gonna make HUGE stretches regarding to celebrities and push your favorite ships in totally unrelated things, maybe you should step back and think about how your actions can affect your favorite people

and i’m totally stealing this from oomf, but here’s a thought:  if you ask yourself  'if i met this person irl, would i feel embarassed if they looked me in the eyes and i read this out loud to them' and if the answer is 'i would look like a pervert stalker' then like........maybe don't do what you’re doing?  

pls respect ur faves is all n don’t make them uncomfortable ! ! and also pls don’t fetishize same sex relationships !

anyway

ok so let me start by saying i’m a seventeen stan and when i was 15-16 y/o i shipped svt members, read rpf, etc, but never really was into overanalyzing every touch or gaze. i obviously enjoyed my favorite pairings interact and i read romantic fics about them. i wasn’t really into reading smut because for me, personally, fics using the members’ names and personalities even in au kinda made smut feel like visualizing the members in a sexual context and i felt like i was crossing a fan boundary, like, would my idol be comfortable with me seeing them in a sexual context with another member they tell us they consider as friends/brothers/sisters? or just in general, would they be comfortable with me thinking of them sexually? but hey, if it was a good fic i would just skip over the smut because good fics are good fics. now idk if it’s because i’m older, or other changes? i don’t really do romantic shipping or read rpf, i stick to reading fics about fictional characters because that’s what makes me comfortable (like if i ever rb two members’ interactions on my main, i stick to just tagging the members instead of their ship name, same goes on here for real people) and i still very much am uncomfortable w/ real people smut literature and art, but that’s just me

ok you see shipping a lot in idol culture because idols are in groups and members spend a good 90% of their time together, so whatever cute interactions you see  kinda lead to people shipping two (or more ig) members. i never really thought about idol shipping culture from a marketing perspective, so i asked some of my friends, and one of them made a really good point about how some ships are more popular than others, and these interactions on shows and stuff might be a strategic/marketing tactic to lure in new fans because of the “ships” being cute. i don’t know how true this actually is, but it kinda made sense. for example, in svt, mingyu x wonwoo is a super popular ship, compared to ships like the8 x vernon which no one ever talks about, even though we know that all the members love each other equally and wholeheartedly. so yeah, there probably is a subtle pushing of certain ships in order to gain momentum in attracting more fans to the group

also i’m gonna be using wonwoo and mingyu as examples but i’m not targetting anyone or anything, just hypothetical situations w/ an idol ship that i noticed to affect the members because how out-of-control SOME stans are

so as i said in my tldr, i don’t really mind romantic shipping, as long as it’s 1) lowkey 2) not pushed in places that it doesn’t belong and 3) not mentioned among the members

keeping it lowkey- pushing ships in everyone’s faces gets annoying. sometimes fans just want to enjoy idols’ content as they give it to us and frankly, it’s a little offputting when you’re trying to watch something or enjoy something and hoards of fans are fangirling over a gaze or a touch between 2 members. keep it on your private acct, or in a group chat, not in the youtube comment section of the video. but still, men and women are allowed to touch each other and show affection without it being romantic, and i feel like shipping culture kinda invalidates the platonic relationship. like unless a pairing is confirmed to be dating, why even bother with overanalyzing these gazes or touches. and no, it’s not homophobic for non-rpf fans to be annoyed, because sometimes fans just want to see the members as they portray themselves to be rather than finding a deeper (and unconfirmed) meaning behind every small thing. fans being like “bro it’s just the touch of two hands it’s not that deep” is not the same thing as fans going “ewww i’m’ not supporting them if they’re not straight” . and sometimes i feel like people try to twist non-rpfers words and call them homophobic if they’re not for shipping when sometimes people don’t wanna romantically visualize 2 people if they’re an unconfirmed couple. how can you use lgbt struggles, which is an issue in society, to fight against people who simply don’t do rpf?? how are you use that as a weapon and for what ??? (also a good amount of people who do this are lgbt fetishizers who aren’t lgbt themselves bye i said it) why can’t we all jus be friends dudes

ok but if you’re against your idols dating someone of the same gender, that’s homophobic and you needa get that checked

but that’s different from treating two members as friends rather than bfs

but this being lowkey concept applies to any pairing, straight or gay, just keep it lowkey dudes. (like for ex we see yibo and meng meiqi shippers, which also doesn’t make sense to me because it’s based off of literal crumbs but ok) it’s ok to be rpfer or non-rpfer as long as you’re respecting the idols and keeping their best interests in mind

respect ur faves pls

not pushed in places that it doesn’t belong- people need to stop bringing up ships and pairings in randomass places. for example, if wonwoo is doing a interview, with mingyu being nowhere in sight, and he’s talking about his hobbies and interests without ever mentioning mingyu, what’s the need to bring up mingyu?? people do it and it’s so... weird? like wonwoo can do things without being constantly associated mingyu? one of my BIGGEST pet peeves is when shippers make these ships such a HUGE part of a members’ identitiy, when the members are doing so much w/ their lives? like no, not every move wonwoo makes, and every breath he takes is related to mingyu, but people still wanna have the audacity to mention mingyu in something completely unrelated? what’s your point?

RESPECT UR FAVES

not mentioned among the members in an uncomfy manner- like if you’re interacting with a real person, why are you gonna bring up a ship they’re included in when you have so many other things to talk about?? like ok it’s one thing to ask someone on a livestream “hey this event you guys did on xxxx show was funny, what’s the tea behind that” but it’s not okay to just mention a ship with no relation and no context to the situation. again, this counts as rpf-ers and shippers attributing a single ship to an idol’s identity much more than what it actually counts as. no, wonwoo is not 70% made of mingyu lover and vice versa. we actually saw this between mingyu and wonwoo as people kept pushing meanie (the ship) to their faces, and we saw (and  still see) a much more decreased amount of interaction between them compared to them predebut, because shippers couldn’t stay in their lane. so yes, out-of-control shipping DOES affect idols and can be harmful to their relationships if you don’t control it

^ so y’all see why i feel so strongly about this, because it literally can affect these idols’ relationships on screen

JUST RESPECT UR FAVES

again, this applies for any pairing of any sexuality, i’m just using wonwoo x mingyu as an example because it’s something i saw when i was into rpf. i love both mingyu and wonwoo and they are wholesome together. i have friends who ship them and i’m completely ok with that because they do it without posing any harm to the members, but some people just need to take a chill pill and a seat and calm down ????

so i completely understand that shipping/rpf serves as a creative outlet for lgbt+ folks and that’s completely fine, inspiration, love, cool cool cool. just don’t be so pushy about small interactions especially directly to idols. and as for rpf-ers, don’t let rpf give you a reason to start fetishizing same-sex relationships, that shits weird and problematic...pls

again, if you ask yourself  'if i met this person irl, would i feel embarassed if they looked me in the eyes and i read this out loud to them' and if the answer is 'i would look like a pervert stalker' then like........maybe don't do what you’re doing?  

lol so this is why i’m much more comfortable w/ fictional shipping, because these people don’t exist in the real world and don’t have actual lives and relationships to protect 

just respect ur faves omg and we’ll be fine

“given recent developments in c-ent” and me being a yibo stan and you sending me this strongly leads me to believe you’re referring to out of control bjyx cpf (yizhan shippers)  LOL

i don’t follow much c-ent besides xnine, uniq, r1se, and sometimes unine and the nine percent members, and honestly im not too into the fan culture so i dont follow ships there? so i’ll focus on. this ship

to be completely honest, shipping for idol groups makes some sense to me because idol group members are with each other most of the time, that’s literally their job

shipping actors who haven’t confirmed that they’re dating/no proof doesn’t really make sense to me at all--they work on one project together, and they’re off to their next., with or without each other . we don’t know if they keep in contact every day, much less if they’re into each other, but each to their own! my opinions and takes aren’t perfect and as long as you’re respecting your faves, it is ok~

ok so i’ll start of with saying: obviously, i love yibo. i love xiao zhan. they’re cute nd wholesome and evidently had good times together and learned a lot from each other regarding acting and being in the industry and just developing as people together. good for them, we love character development. amazing

is pushing bjyx a marketing tactic? most definitely yeah by tencent thanks tencent. i think you can see this through the amount of bts videos there are with just bjyx in comparison to other bts videos/interviews, even though there are many more important characters apart from wwx and lwj in cql, we don’t see as much side cast interactions as bjyx, and if we do, there aren’t that many w/ other cast members and yibo and xiao zhan?? relatively speaking

so yeah i think pushing this yibo x xiao zhan thing definitely was a tactic to further the momentum that wangxian was already having to attract stans, and it worked. like i LOVE watching yibo and xiao zhan bts videos because they are two goofs. love them. love my boys. love their camaraderie. and if people wanna ship, then go ship. cool! just be casual pls

i think where this becomes a problem is when people start projecting wangxian’s relationship onto yibo and xiao zhan because...the latter are real people. yibo and xiao zhan =/= wangxian !!!!!! (ok first of all yibo is a gremlin how can he be the wang in wangxian in real life)  what wyb and xz show us in videos is nowhere near what wangxian is hJKNDJNWD and i see so many people just equate the two pairings...nooo... and combining everything mxtx writes about wangxian in the novel and projecting that onto wyb and xz...i don’t think that’s the move dudes they have their own lives they’re not wangxian

my BIGGEST pet peeve is when people wholly credit wyb’s development as an actor and as a person to xz and vice versa. i cannot tell you how many times i see posts saying “wyb brought xz out of his shell” and vice versa and things like “xz looks like he’s having much more fun than he is when he’s with xnine, they’re soulmates” and etc

both wyb and xz have had years of industry experience before getting to know each other. they’ve gone through some of the lowest points of their careers before even getting to know each other well, and they’ve both found Their People in the industry before finding each other. to say that wyb brought xz out of his shell in a summer’s worth of filming based on some bts videos is just so unfair to the bonds xz has made with his other colleagues and xnine  members and the accomplishments he’s had before cql. same with wyb and his career prior to cql. and his uniq members, his ttxs bros, and all his other colleagues. these 2 have gone through some shit with their idol groups and it’s just not fair for cpfs to erase the significance of their career prior to cql to support and find a leverage for their shipping. i’m not saying all cpfs do this, but there is  a Good Amount That Do and it pisses fans like me off

they are not each others saviours bye

also  “xz looks like he’s having much more fun than he is when he’s with xnine, they’re soulmates”, if you guys ever watch xnine videos, you’ll know that xnine is Loud. with members like wu jiacheng and peng chuyue being so loud and extroverted, it kinda makes xiao zhan relatively quieter. but he’s still a gremlin and troublemaker and it’s not like he isn’t having fun. he’s just louder w/ yibo because yibo is more introverted than xz. relationship dynamics are relative to the relationship cmon people !!!! this is basic knowledge !!!! anyway that was a side tangent but ya

but ya my point is, wyb and xz have their own careers and they’re doing their own things now, and it’s unnecessary to bring up xz in an unrelated wyb post/article and vice versa, and it’s just so so unnecessary to link them in everything??? like i heard that cpfs prevented xz from keeping his nomination for an award because yibo wasn’t nominated so xz lost the nomination ./rolls eyes

anyway my point being, if you wanna ship them then go ahead! just do it normally and don’t bring up the ship in unrelated places (like other dramas, tv shows, etc where they’re not together), don’t spam them with bjyx related things, don’t make weird stretches/connections?? the other day on twt i saw a twt about uniq wenhan’s drama, where he was being referred to as xiao zhan (little zhan) in the drama (different  “xiao” and “zhan” characters than actor xz’s name) and i saw cpfs go “omg theYRE CALLING HIM XIAO ZHAN??? IS THIS FATE OR” like no it isnt maam it’s just a name stop reaching

ANYWAY UNNECESSARY SIDE RANTS BUT MY MAIN POINT is that people are allowed to be shippers and take part in rpf, but don’t make their identities “____’s lover”, don’t look past their current and past achievements for the sake of your ship, don’t erase their relationships with other people for the sake of your ship, stop bringing your ship into things that are only related to one person/aren’t related to your ship, stop saying creepy things about your ship (if you think the ship people would be uncomfrotable with what you say about them you probably shouldn’t be saying it)

just. respect ur faves pls no matter who they’re with ...just respect them ty

stan yibo stan xiao zhan stan uniq stan xnine

comment ur fav yibo and xiao zhan moment below

like comment subscibe

ok bye mic drop 

#this is long please dont read #dont hurt me #bye #reply #if u make ur favs uncomfy im sending huo mala to eat u #Anonymous

[aplusblogging]

SOC 120 Blog 2: Breaking Binaries

This week I'm linking in-class concepts from the open educational resource textbook “Introduction to Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies” by the University of Massachusetts with the article "What’s the Real Difference between Bi- and Pansexual?" by Zachary Zane for Rolling Stone.

To begin, let's define "binary." University of Massachusetts defines binaries as social constructs composed of two parts framed as absolute, unchanging opposites (University of Massachusetts, 2017). The sex binary tells us that there is only male and female, but we know that's not true: Intersex people exist—those whose genitalia were "ambiguous" at birth, or who have chromosomes or hormones or internal sex organs that don't "match" their perceived sex category. The gender binary tells us that there is only man and woman, but various types of nonbinary people tell us that their experiences fall outside this dichotomy. Even the way cis people experience their masculinity or femininity is not a binary: There are masculine women and feminine men, and cis people who are androgynous, combining elements of masculinity and femininity into their appearance and self-concept. And, of course, there is a sexuality binary—straight and gay—but that, too, is not the whole story. Bisexuality is one label for someone who is not monosexual, or not attracted to only one gender. But even this binary-breaking identity is seen as a binary concept. It is sometimes defined as "the attraction to men and women," a limitation harkening back to the sex and gender binaries that we just debunked.

The history of bisexuality as an identity and as a definable category is fraught with disagreement, from the technical to the political. Some say that in order to reject binary thinking as a society we must reject words that reinforce binary concepts, including the word "bisexual." The argument goes that the latin prefix "bi" means "two," so "bisexual" must mean "attracted to two genders" and no more. In contrast, another commonly used identity label is "pansexual," which contains the prefix "pan," meaning "all." The difference between these two labels is the subject of Zane's Rolling Stone article, and a lot of people have a lot of opinions about what each of them means and which is better. Some argue that anyone who is attracted to more than two genders should abandon bi and embrace pan, because of the two/all difference in their prefixes. But it would be asking a lot of people who identify as bisexual and are attracted to more than two genders to give up their sense of identity and community in order to adopt a new, "better" word. To force the issue would be to dictate bisexuals' identities to them and to overwrite a long history of bisexual attraction to intersex, gender-nonconforming, agender, and other nonbinary people.

Might there be people who identify as bisexual and choose to define that label for their own personal use as attraction to men and women and only those two? Perhaps even only cis men and cis women? Absolutely. But there are also monosexual people who choose to reject transgender or nonbinary people from their pool of potential partners because of reasoning like, "I'm attracted to women, but not trans women, because they're not really women." That's not an issue of their sexuality label failing to describe their attractions, that's just transphobia. Put another way: There are undoubtedly transphobic bisexuals*, just as there are transphobic monosexual people. But we call those people transphobic as an additional label, rather than inventing a word that means "attracted to only cis men" or "attracted to only cis women" to replace whatever they currently identify as.

None of this is to say that bisexuality is the only non-monosexual label that should be used and that labels like pansexual should be abandoned. If a person feels uncomfortable with the possibility of being thought of as transphobic or reinforcing the gender binary or just perceived as having a limited scope of attraction, of course they should use a different, more affirming label. And considering how much drama there is surrounding the word "bisexual," it might just be something that some people don't want to deal with, and thus a different label is more comfortable in that it doesn't have to be justified by the person using it. But others of us don't mind justifying our label, or challenging those who would assume or prescribe our sexuality to us. Some of us think that this word, which calls to mind the very binary that we reject, and is consistently targeted by nit-picking people who bring up semantic and etymological arguments against it, has a history that is worth preserving and respecting. Or maybe we just like the way it sounds. Because, frankly, if someone identifies as bi they risk getting flak from pan-identifying people for not being inclusive enough, but if they identify as pan they have a high likelihood of having to deal with monosexual people who think that making a joke about being sexually attracted to frying pans is original, witty, and hilarious.

This notion of claiming different identify labels depending on who's asking is touched upon in the Rolling Stone article by actor and queer activist Nico Tortorella: “If I’m talking to somebody who’s more conservative and doesn’t believe in a nonbinary gender, then it’s easier to use the word bisexual, but if I’m talking to someone who’s invested in gender, queer theory, and understands the spectrum, then I’m more comfortable using the word ‘pansexual’ or the word ‘fluid.' (Zane, 2018)” Alternately, some people just use "queer." This is kind of vague, but why does it need to be specific? It conveys that a person is not straight, which does the job for a lot of not-straight people, especially if they want to avoid the sticky mess of choosing between labels like bi and pan. It can also be inclusive of nonbinary people who hesitate to use labels like "gay" or "straight" because those terms don't easily fit a person who is not a man or a woman with an easily definable "same" and "different" gender category.

To close, I'd like to directly address the notion that "bi" means "two." It's easy to get hung up on technical meanings of words, and to forget that language is a living, changing thing. Gabrielle Blonder from the Bisexual Resource Center is quoted in the Rolling Stone article as saying, "Much like October is no longer the eighth month of the year, I believe the term bisexual has morphed into a different meaning than it originally was.”

Due to the social nature of this topic, a magazine article featuring quotes from interviewed people is perhaps more appropriate than a scientific article. Rolling Stone has a reputation for being "plugged in" to subcultures rather than popular culture, and for having more tolerance for the strange and rejected in society than other similarly well-known publications. It is, however, slightly more credible than, say, a blog post, due to the credentials of a journalist writing for a respected publication with high standards and a large audience holding it to accountability.

* transphobic or simply non-trans-attracted. One of the people interviewed in the Rolling Stone article says that they accept trans people and their rights, but cites their sexuality as including attraction to only cis men and cis women. It is a matter of debate whether this is just personal preference or is inherently transphobic. The same debate exists for monosexual people who are attracted to only one gender and one sex, either because they believe that gender and sex are inherently linked (which is transphobic because it invalidates the very existence of trans people) or because they are only attracted to one gender presentation and one type of genitalia (which may or may not be transphobic depending on who you ask, and does not consider whether a trans person has had sexual reassignment surgery).

[1,327 words]

References

“Introduction to Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies” by University of Massachusetts, 2017. CC BY Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

(http://openbooks.library.umass.edu/introwgss/)

Zane, Z. (2018, June 29). What's the Real Difference between Bi- and Pansexual? Rolling Stone. https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/whats-the-real-difference-between-bi-and-pansexual-667087/

[battlestar-royco]

let’s talk about tropes

here’s a little (little?!) post on tropes, as promised!

some tropes i hate and why i hate them

love triangles: this one’s pretty simple and obvious. love triangles are unrealistic and toxic. they romanticize emotional cheating, and they cause nasty ship wars in fandoms, especially when two of the points in the triangle are women. often, the “losing” point of the triangle is a one-dimensional throwaway character who either gets killed off or accepts their fate and steps back for the “winner” to take over. this dynamic can get especially problematic when the “loser” is a woc and the “winner” is white, when the “loser” is an lgbtq+ character, and/or when the “loser” has no purpose other than to create drama for two other fleshed out characters. the character often ends up being hated for bad writing and “getting in the way” of the endgame ship. yikes. the only valid resolution to love triangles, imo, is a polyamorous relationship!!!

girl hate: it’s rare to see nice friendships and romances between women, and often this trope is used to drive an unnecessary wedge between two female characters who would have otherwise been great friends. i don’t mind when two women/girls are in conflict with one another for an interesting reason, but i absolutely hate when the conflict is based on something stereotypical and boring. the “girl hate” conflict is always based on something misogynistic, unrealistic, and/or stupid--like a man, looks, sexual practices, or a contrived competition. this is especially gross when the men in the story act as the voices of reason in the conflict, patronizing the women and teaching them how to be nice and use logic.

“strong female characters”: many writers mistake “strong” characters for characters who employ violence, sassiness, and masculine attributes to get what they want. I’m so over it. all I want is nuanced representation of women that doesn’t reduce them to a love interest or a sex object who looks down on other women. strength comes in many forms, and everyone defines it and identifies with it differently.

miscommunication: this has to be one of the laziest forms of prolonging drama, when two characters are fighting because of something that could easily be solved if they were locked in a room together for five minutes.

incest/incest-adjacent romances: this should go without saying, but we’re for some god-awful reason going through a period where incestuous relationships/fake-outs (ie, you’re in love with him? too bad he’s your brother. oh wait, it’s revealed that he’s not!/you two are blood related but you either never met or you went through a period of separation, so that means you can fall in love) are heavily romanticized or used to create extra drama, and it’s just unnecessary and not cute. i think authors use this to add some sort of edge or uniqueness to their writing, but it’s just so toxic and a complete turn-off for me.

aesthetic oppression: (term inspired by and similar to “aesthetic conflict,” thanks kat) when an author throws in some sort of oppression that is experienced by people in real life, but they either don’t address the oppression thoroughly or they only use it to add some sort of edge to their story and further a character’s romance, death, redemption arc, etc. for example, the homophobia in GOT season 6, which reduced loras to a walking stereotype of a gay man before he was subjugated by the church sept and blown up, and the patriarchy in ACOTAR that only exists to show how feminist rhysand is.

boys/men fighting, having tantrums, or expressing themselves through violence: it’s fine for male characters to fight every once in a while, but i just hate that this seems to be exclusively employed with male characters and it is used as a solution or reaction to problems when realistically, men are much more nuanced. men cry. they might be alone or in front of others. they might cry into their pillow or on a friend’s shoulder. fictional men add violence and anger to their sadness because the authors don’t want to emasculate them, but that’s a stupid goal and crying doesn’t affect someone’s gender. smashing your belongings when you are upset is unhealthy and potentially dangerous, and so is physically fighting others over trivial or patriarchal issues (ie a woman) when conversation could be/is probably much more compelling and effective. it’s important to show men that anger isn’t always the first emotion to feel under duress and that they don’t have to express their feelings by punching walls or throwing their belongings across the room. (also?! practically? YOU’RE RUINING YOUR OWN FUCKING STUFF AND/OR YOUR ROOMMATE/FRIEND/PARTNER’S STUFF, YOU ASSHOLE.)

sexy immortals: immortality can be used in clever and entertaining ways, but i feel like a lot of the immortals i’ve been seeing lately run in the same vein as the twilight vampires, which is to say: unearthly beautiful (aka conventionally attractive), overly sexy (aka stalking a love interest for the sake of “attraction”), apparently 16-25 years old (aka accessible to grown women who read/write ya).

uninvolved parents or non-existent guardian figures: sometimes young characters don’t have parents and that’s fine; some of my favorite books are about characters with one parent or no parents. but i still feel like we’re coming out of a period where it was very popular to kill off the parents (especially moms) at the beginning or before the story starts. i really want to see more exploration of characters with parents, or at least see the characters without parents make significant relationships with adults or react appropriately to the loss of their parents.

one-off character deaths: when a character enters one chapter or episode of a book/show just to immediately die for cheap emotional manipulation. this character is also sooooo often a marginalized person, and it’s super predictable and tired. try harder, author/screenwriter!

some tropes i love and why i love them

special snowflake/chosen one: I can’t explain it. I know it’s so cliche and one of the most hated ones out there, but I love when this trope is done right. I’m not a big fan of the chosen ones who have a special destiny, especially if the mc is a white boy, because that’s been done a million times before. but I’m a sucker for that one character who comes upon an unexpected special ability/object/creature or connection to a force of good/evil/nature and has to contend with that. They’ve been Chosen and they’re completely unprepared, and it’s gonna change their life trajectory and relationships and maybe even political climate.

woobies!!!: I feel like this trope is so underrated and it’s one of my favorites of all time. I absolutely love rooting for that one character who’s too good for any of the shit they’ve been through and Deserves Better^TM, but they manage to survive and grow against all odds.

found family: i love that authors are expanding the concept of family and unconventional narratives about love. the found family trope is so charming and relatable to many readers, and it’s great to see seemingly contrary characters come together to find a loving home together that isn’t necessarily romantic.

soft characters: it’s rare (though increasingly less rare, fortunately) to find soft boys, aka male characters who are compassionate, funny, kind, pensive, and/or quiet instead of brash, loud, violent, and angry. i know so many boys and men who fall all along the spectrum of masculinity, and it would be great to see more characters who represent that, especially because male characters are typically forced to express their masculinity in one way. i also absolutely love seeing women being equally as soft and kind--with the exception of ASOIAF!sansa, i feel like this kind of character has been cast aside for the sassy, rebellious, empowered^TM female character who isn’t like other girls and wields a bunch of weapons. i’d really like to see more female characters whose strengths come from empathy, intelligence, and emotion.

unique relationships within a friend group/ensemble: this one is marginally related to my love of found families. not only do i really like tight, strong friend groups, but i also like when each of the friends within that group has a different and compelling dynamic (hostile, romantic, friendly, tragic, whatever may have you) that can carry a scene or an arc. unique relationships between all the characters in an ensemble adds so much dimensionality to a story.

complex guardian figures: this mostly applies to ya, but i think it can also be said for many adult books and tv shows. adult characters often get flattened or sidelined for romance or action plots when in reality almost everyone has parent/guardian relationships, and these relationships are the source of so much complexity. that complexity may mean love, found family, anger, patronization, manipulation, and more, and all these things will be expressed differently based on the characters in question. for example, look at the difference between eleven and hopper from stranger things and harry and dumbledore from harry potter. hopper and dumbledore are so different and each of them carry darkness and baggage that comes out on the kids for better and worse. bonus points if the guardian is a woman, because these types of relationships between girls and women are relatively rare to the ones between boys and men.

anti-heroes/anti-villains: i think this is another one that goes without explaining. we’re all the hero of our own story, after all. if an author can successfully convince me to root for a character who i know is wrong but believes they’re in the right, or for a character who does the wrong things for the right reasons, there’s a good chance that i think very highly of that author.

stoic, bitter, angry characters: if there’s one character in the ensemble who has any of these traits, there’s a good chance they’ll be my favorite, especially if that character is a woman. usually this character’s journey is about what makes them vulnerable and how they become close with the most unlikely companions or form a special relationship with a foil character. it makes the audience feel like we’re being let in on a secret, specifically about that character.

and that’s about it! my inbox is always open to talk more in depth about any of these and more, so let me know. thanks so much for 700, you all are great :D

#maxine talks tropes