i used to get self-conscious over the smallest things but friends let me tell you that today i had to smuggle a furious 8ft python onto the bus during the school rush and not a single person noticed. not one. if people don’t care enough to notice a shopping bag writhing and seething with barely-contained reptilian hatred then i promise you that no-one will pay any attention to that blemish you’re fretting about or how you’ve done your hair
this is extremely concerning and also very reassuring, thank you and please stop bringing pythons onto public transportation
today I learned that no one knows who really created Digimon and the person who’s credited with it may not be a real person
Digimon came from the void.
after all these years of making sonic, kirby, mario and pokemon creepypastas, we’ve missed the forest for The Tree. Perhaps it is always what they wanted us to miss.
wow. My bro just told me one of my bros is….…gay. don’t know how to feel about this right now. Its….interesting but also weird because it is challenging my notion of heternormitivity – i thought he was just one of the bros. Like….I had no idea. It’s not like I’m going to think any less of him, right? He’s still a bro and he can totally keep playing football with us. Better tell Hunter to stop making the gay jokes though……
I’m not sure if this blog is total sattire or an actual cishet white boy somehow becoming self-aware.
Me: WHAT MEDIA YOU WILLINGLY OR EVEN ACCIDENTALLY CONSUME IS NOT MY PROBLEM. YOU ARE NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY, I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR YOU, I OWE YOU N O T H I N G.
this just in: basic levels of caring for other people no longer a thing
media doesnt exist in a vaccum, take proper measures to ensure your work doesmt harm people (tagging it, flagging nsfw blogs as such, etc). if your work is going to be harming people regardless of any cautionary steps, maybe you should take a long hard look at what youre creating and why
I tag all of my works and encourage others to do so as well, because that’s proper Internet etiquette, but, also, it’s still not my responsibility to look after someone else’s kids or to take care of someone else’s mental health issues.
I’m a mentally ill CSA survivor, and I do what I must to take care of myself. I know my limits, I know my triggers, and I’ve even taken the time to think of things that I haven’t been triggered by yet, but that might trigger me, so that I can proceed with caution.
It isn’t a content creator’s job or responsibility to worry about how their fanart or fanfiction might impact EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING ON PLANET EARTH. It’s the job of Internet browsers to browse responsibly.
This isn’t about “not caring for people,” I care quite a lot for people. It’s about content creators being harassed by people who think it’s their responsibility to see to the needs of every individual on the Internet.
I’m going to post my nasty guro porn all I want, and I’ll tag it, but if someone sees it regardless, that’s not my issue. I’m sorry if it triggers them, I’m sorry if it upsets them, but all they can do is unfollow me or blacklist my trigger tags. I’m not going to stop posting my artwork and stories just because a handful of people managed to stumble upon it (or willingly subjected themselves to it) and were upset by it.
It’s my fucking blog, Karen.
THIS. i’m too damn busy living my life to live somebody else’s. i’ll be ethical and give people fair warning where appropriate as often as i can, but i won’t even attempt to anticipate and tailor myself to a random hypothetical stranger’s media needs. go read a pet blog instead. i promise it’ll be ok.
What if your work’s absence will be harming people?
Or do we no longer care about the people who needed to see a thing?
You know what saves lives? Art that some people really, really, need to never see. Because other people really, really, need to see it. Representation matters. The biggest driver of suicidal despair in abuse survivors is the feeling that they’re alone, no one will understand, what happened to them is unique and probably their fault. Finding out that it’s a thing that people are familiar with and write about and make art about saves lives. Lots and lots of lives.
You can’t prevent anyone from getting hurt ever. You can try to minimize the harm while maximizing the benefits.
hey, random perspective injection here. i’m in a super delicate place right now mentally. like at the moment i can’t take ANY fictional suffering or conflict.
usually, i write adventure fiction involving hails of bullets.
my current state is temporary, thank god. but due to life trauma, i’ve become the emotional equivalent of a raw burn. and being introduced to media – or even offhand jokes – involving suffering or animal cruelty or violence, right now, genuinely triggers me in a bad way.
so i’ve got kind of a weird perspective on this. on the one hand, my actual livelihood is producing violent media. on the other hand, violent media triggers and hurts me.
what i can provide from this viewpoint is the fact that ‘is this media allowed’ is the absolutely wrong question. it’s inside-out and backwards. the reason people can’t get any closure on the topic is because we’re coming at it from the wrong end.
what we need to focus on is, how do we make it easier for people to avoid what they need to avoid, and find what they need to find?
for instance, tagging is currently all about warnings, and usually based on parental moral guardianship issues traumatic events. but what if there were positive tags that sorted fics into a similarly few-and-simple categories of tone? like ‘gentle’ and ‘dramatic’ and ‘sad’ and so forth. idk, questions like that.
this isn’t a moral question here, my loves. we actually agree on the moral question. we want people to feel safe but we don’t want to sacrifice freedom of speech. we’ve answered that one! now it’s an engineering question.
I’ve been getting horrible messages like this in my ask for months, including:
and my personal favorite
After getting the message saying “Just go kill yourself” I was completely done dealing with this person’s horrible messages and replied with just an “Okay.” and logged off tumblr.
About a week later I logged back on with 17 messages in my ask, most of them from the anon. I scrolled down and at first when I logged off, the anon messaged me things like
I scrolled up more and all of a sudden they started sending me more and more messages like
This was extremely surprising to me. I thought “After all those horrible messages you sent to me for MONTHS about hating me and wanting me dead, you say ‘sorry’ and that you ‘cant be responsible for someone’s suicide’?”
But I guess the lesson goes like this:
DONT TELL ANYONE TO KILL THEMSELVES UNLESS YOU ARE PREPARED FOR WHAT MIGHT ACTUALLY HAPPEN
Has anyone else noticed that in the largely female horror/monster artist community on DA and tumblr (myself included) tends to focus a LOT on teeth, mouths, and violence as a consumptive act (there’s a lot of cannibal characters is what I’m sayin’) and that seems as a bit of a weird counter to mainstream horror and monster art where violence is nearly always penetrative? It’s usually knives, chainsaws and blades, heck even the Alien had a phallic mouth used to bore into faces.
Is this even a thing happening consciously?
No? Never mind then.
I… am trying to figure out approximately how much this post has irrevocably changed my life.
okay so we actually talked a lot about horror in my philosophy class this past week?
and like one of the things about typical horror movies is that they’re very much about violence towards women? like i don’t want to say that all horror movies are about violence towards women but i also don’t want to talk for a thousand years on the nuances of that trope so long story short if you watch a lot of horror movies there’s a lot of penetration imagery and blending the boundaries of sex and violence. and even the entire “final girl” trope that has become a basic structure of horror is basically asking for all of this imagery of penetration and violation etc. and all of it happens because the victims in horror movies are often women because he stereotype is that women are vulnerable. i’m probably explaining this really badly it’s all waaaaaaaay more nuanced than this but it all kind of ties together in a really fascinating way.so when you look at it that way, it makes sense that a lot of monsters created by/for men (i.e., mainstream monsters) are going to be penetrative. as for monsters created by women being consumptive… that’s a very interesting trend and there’s probably a reason for it but i havent thought about it enough to pick one out
I wonder how much of that, then, is tied up with women’s consumption being a subversive act? Women being encouraged to not consume or take up space, so that then greedy, unapologetic consumption and largeness and loudness and appetite becomes monstrous, which could be problematic. But when driven by the people who are told not to consume, it become atavistic and wish-fulfilling and an outlet for impulses and desires, which the best horror always does.
My petty ass when someone skinny buys something XXXL from a thrift store to ~transform~ it into a cute tailored cocktail dress: how about you leave the XXXL section alone so poor fat women out there can retain some sense of variety out of the 7 things that actually fit them in the god damn goodwill
Just to be clear I’m not talking about “I bought something a couple sizes larger than me and I’m taking it in”
I’m very specifically talking about THIS SORT OF THING
ugh the top and bottom ones make me especially furious because she removed the interesting part of the dress! those would both look adorable on me as is.
she could make an ugly black dress like that herself without chopping up a cool vintage dress in a rare larger size
@maryburgers would you have gone to that specific theft store to buy that specific vintage dress? If you would have never gotten it then why would you degrade her for doing cute and interesting to a dress that probably would have just sat at the thrift store forever.
Hey you know what’s actually degrading? Making a habit, and by that I mean an entire blog, where you buy all the plus size clothes in a thrift store and then take pictures of yourself contrasting your tiny body against the IMPLLLAAAUSIBLY OUTRAGEOUSLY HUUUUGE clothing. That is degrading.
Also like, fat people live everywhere SOMEONE would have gone to that specific store and fit into those dresses as is and loved them, there are so little options for fat people everywhere, none of the alterations they made are special or unique, like they could easily find something similar in a thrift store at the same price point.
plus size clothes DON’T sit at the thrift store forever. general size clothes do. our donated clothes last maybe a few weeks tops at a thrift store because there’s a larger demand for them than supply, that’s why the sections are so damn small despite the average us woman being a size 14, because they’re picked over constantly by people who need clothes. i was not expecting to do this but i’m gonna go into deep detail so you understand why exactly this is fucked up.
poor people are more likely to be plus size because of lack of access to healthy food, which is the target demographic of a damn thrift store in the first place. thrift shopping is trendy now, which is fine, except when you buy clothes for projects like this that are in high demand but low supply: maternity clothes, plus size clothes, pajamas, etc. if you need clothing, buy it. but you can make any of these projects from clothes without poaching from low supply areas and taking comical pictures that mock fat bodies.
now here’s why there’s a ridiculously low supply of plus size clothes: fat people don’t have as many places to buy clothes and all of them have poor selection so we don’t buy a lot of them to begin with. the shopping pattern of a plus size person is very different from that of a straight size person as well. i know this from working in plus size retail. overwhelmingly, we shop when we desperately need clothes. and i mean desperately like hole the size of a basketball in the thigh of your jeans desperately. wearing a bra from 1998 desperately. work blazer held together with scotch tape and safety pins desperately. we can’t donate our clothes because we wear them until the point where we physically cannot anymore.
we also don’t cycle through trends as much as smaller sizes because a) shopping is a huge ordeal for a plus size person and b) our clothes cost WAY MORE so we can’t afford to wear an article of clothing once and then give it to goodwill. then on top of that none of the places that give you money for clothes EVER want your fatass clothes. skinny people can pop over to any secondhand clothing store that pays for donations and get some of that investment back. we can’t do that EVEN THOUGH our clothes cost way more than straight sizes. oh, and we get paid less than thinner women btw 🙂 that’s always great.
so if we can’t regain any of our investment, we’re just gonna put up with clothes we don’t like until we can’t wear them anymore or we give them away in the case of weight loss (when ur fat you know a lot of other fatties, and if ur a queer/trans fatty someone is always having a clothing swap you can give to).
all of this adds up to make it so that thrift stores are in low supply of plus size clothes that more and more people need because us fatties? if we don’t look good we don’t get jobs. you cannot look even the slightest bit unkempt or you come off as lazy or bitchy, and if you have a family to support you can’t spend weeks looking for a job where they won’t judge your competence based upon whether your clothes are trendy or not. when you’re not plus size and you take away these clothes from needy women you are in small part enabling their suffering.
it shouldn’t be that way. women should have access to affordable, well fitting, professional clothing regardless of size. but that’s not the world we live in so you can’t just cover your ears and pretend that it is.
@a-lames-adventure please fucking read all the replies on this and get the fuck @ me
Perspective.
I understand both sides of this issue, but the majority of the replies are the ethically sound side.
Having gone from a size 4 to a size 14 due to weight gain from medication, I can tell you that there is absolutely NO NEED to destroy plus-size clothing in order to get cute cocktail dresses or whatever in a thrift store. There are TONS of adorable petite cocktail dresses, formal dresses, etc, for smaller women. And there is a huge lack of cute dresses for anyone larger than a 10. I’m not even considered ‘plus size’, and I still struggle to find dresses that don’t make me look like the Goodyear blimp, because I’m pretty sure designers give up once you get beyond a certain size and intentionally make the dresses as ugly as possible.
If you want to make your own dress, buy the fucking fabric and do it from a pattern. You can even make it from a ~*~vintage~*~ pattern if you want extra Twee Points. Don’t buy, cut up, and ruin a perfectly good plus-size dress, while taking mocking pictures of how OMGHUGE it is, in order to make a rather bland cocktail dress. There’s literally no need to do that other than that you’re unimaginative, selfish, and don’t care about plus-size women.
This time x1000 Do you know how infuriating it is to try and find maternity clothes at a thrift store, find nothing, have to rely on you mom to spend $200 for 5 fucking items, and then go on pintrest and see some girl who would fit 90% of the clothes at the thrift store cutting up a maternity dress to make a blouse that looks like one you can by at urban Forever 21?
I know I’ve discussed this to death, but someone asked for a single, comprehensive post. So:
No-platforming people gives them a much, much bigger platform. And violently preventing a talk from occurring means that the ideas will reach thousands of times as many ears. While their talk would be one among a hundred poorly-attended talks on one of a thousand college campuses, a backlash against the talk will make headlines everywhere and get people curious. If the backlash escalates to violence – and lately, it often has, the protestors successfully boost the opinion they’re protesting to overwhelming national attention and sympathy.
(Google searches for Milo Yiannopoulos; the first spike is the violence in Berkeley; the second spike the pederasty videos surfacing). The violence in Berkeley increased interest in Milo tenfold at least.
The direct immediate effect of ‘no platforming’ someone is giving them a huge national platform and favorable press coverage. The single biggest favor you can do someone abhorrent and attention-seeking is to violently protest their talks.
The most commonly offered justification of preventing people from delivering talks is that the ideas do not merit any discussion and should be prevented from getting any. When I present the above evidence to supporters of shutting down talks, by violence if necessary, they sometimes say that it’s really about the talks being prevented on campus, where students are vulnerable. It does not seem to me that moving talks from ‘on a campus in a lecture hall, advertised in advance so people can avoid them, surrounded by a skeptical audience’ to ‘on national television with a sympathetic audience’ is an improvement. Another explanation sometimes offered is that it’s about making other people aware that they should fear for their lives if they voice those opinions. Aside from being a morally abhorrent thing to strive for, I don’t think that works either; all the people who bought The Bell Curve clearly learned the wrong lesson, and people in general like feeling that they’re standing up to coercion and intimidation and violence.
It’s convenient when something you think is morally wrong turns out to also be spectacularly ineffective and a really terrible means to its intended end. I think that’s part of why lots of proponents of getting speeches cancelled don’t trust the arguments that they shouldn’t be doing it; they’re hearing those arguments from people who are like ‘your goals are bad and I want to thwart you in achieving them and also your methods won’t achieve your goals so you should stop for your own sake’. Of course they find that unconvincing! And yet. I don’t agree with suppressing speech as a goal and I also think the evidence is overwhelming that when you try it you fail spectacularly. I think it’d be very courageous of people who support or are open to suppressing speech to say “I think this would be justified if it worked, but it doesn’t work”. I really hope some of them do.
just moving along like everyone else 