adding to my tags because i’ve been thinkin a lot about the post i just reblogged and have more thoughts:
i’ll be real, the more i saw ‘hey adhd influencers are so annoying’ the more i worried that i was unconsciously contributing to the spreading reputation of adhd folks as annoying and over-pathologizing every symptom they experience
and then i realized. i am not a goddam influencer or life coach or representative. obviously i have some obligation as someone who cares about myself and the people that like my comics to not spread harmful ideology or blatant misinformation but i never intended myself to be a “’increase your productivity!!’ blog OR a ‘if you have XYZ you have adhd!’ blog. and i do this for fun, and originally started this blog bc i had a lot of internalized shame and self loathing about my adhd and thought if i could make it funny i might have less of that. let’s get real! and it worked!
i’ve obviously done this kind of thing— (hey these symptoms might be adhd!) a lot before in my life & on this blog, but there’s more to it than trying to be an “influencer” or whatever. a term that didn’t even exist when i started this blog!
i felt very isolated trying to find out if i had any mental problems & what have you originally because of large advice (etc) blogs with staunchly anti self Dx views at the time
so i overcorrected when i DID get dxed and tried to validate everyone who was like me. and of course. not the best course of action always for the ol mental health. tried to be the source of positivity and jokes that i didn’t see because the online adhd presence was near non-existent.
and anyway. i make a lot of fun of myself & the way m brain works in my comics obviously but it is not my obligation to... how do you say.... not be annoying online.
because if folks interpret MY little jokes as a strict guide to diagnosis. that’s on them, really, not me. i also believe “making adhd your entire personality” is a non-issue. so what if people find out they have it and get over excited with identifying as adhd. saying this as someone who DID do it. criticism of this gives the same vibes as people being annoyed that young queers make “being queer” their whole personality. im very obviously more than a guy with adhd, and id reckon other adhd comic artists are too. (im friends with a lot of them!) it’s fine to post about it online.
anyway. i just don’t take myself too seriously and i’m a comic artist for myself first! and you know what, i’ve been considered annoying my entire life. what do i care if a few more folks think i’m annoying. neurotypical or not
128 notes
·
View notes
remember sonic riders zero gravity? i wanna think about sonic riders zero gravity for a second. that plot was entirely insane. the sonic riders duology went from special race to prove who’s the fastest as a plot to steal the chaos emeralds -> ancient babylonia is unearthed and babylonians are decendants of genies, to eggman created a whole y2k themed city and can completely control it using a meteorite except for some of them who got struck by another meteorite that caused them to go on a global rampage and amd wants all the meteorites so he can control all the robots in the world also did i mention he does all this using a shell company (most evil thing hes done) -> babylon garden implodes into a huge spaceship and black hole and threatens to destroy the world until sonic and co beat up the huge robot that is the spaceship and outrun the black hole also birds are aliens
zero gravity is to riders what shth05 is to sa2. whats up with all the retconning aliens into things. wait they did that with frontiers too didn’t they. WHATS UP WITH ALL THE REVEALING THINGS ARE ACTUALLY ALIENS
18 notes
·
View notes
seelies seem to have a really interesting place in the downworld/shadow world has a whole. they’ve been shown to work more closely than other downworld factions with shadowhunters in the past (early season one springs to mind), but they’re certainly no totally trusting of or trusted by the shadowhunters, so not all this is to say they don’t face any discrimination. valentine being willing to make a deal with her when he hates downworlders so much seems so strange… except for the fact that seelies have angel blood AND demon blood. with his (obviously very wrong and distorted) ideas about purity of angel blood, does that make him trust her more? is this interaction a microcosm of the shadowhunters perspectives on seelies in general? much to think on.
it’s also not lost on me that warlocks and seelies are both born with magic and into the downworld as they are. there’s intergenerational trauma attached to the history of warlocks (and i’m VERY curious about seelies on that front), but there’s no trauma associated with the transformation. they’re never ripped away from their lives the way that werewolves and vampires are.
15 notes
·
View notes
this is way too simplistic of an explanation and is worth elaborating on later but there IS an easy shortcut to drawing "asian" eyes and it is not drawing them as squinty, slanty, or god forbid perpetually closed. it's literally just the epicanthic fold. just draw the upper eyelid as folding over the inner corner of the eye.
if you're drawing in a style that omits that level of eyelid/eye shape detail then you just don't need to differentiate the eye shape unless the character legitimately just has a recognizably distinct eye shape - which, by the way, people of any race and ethnicity can have. i don't mind that much when cartoony styles give all their asian characters that almond eye shape or whatever to differentiate them but it honestly feels kind of unnecessary and a boring choice when people who have epicanthic folds can have eye shapes just as varied as anyone else
1 note
·
View note
the sooner people (me) can reconcile that at my core i am a very hopeful person. in the sense that. i want to be. i choose to be. and who believes in the fundamental human capacity for good and also someone who can’t help but see the world in shades of grey and knows in my heart that people are complex and that’s part of what makes them beautiful. the better for everyone. i think
0 notes
ugh. okay. i've ranted about this in my journal less than five minutes ago but apparently my thirst to fucking yell at the clouds won't be satiated until i've put it somewhere public.
look. i love Seo Soojin and think her removal from the group was as unfair as the next stan, but the way people talk about the conclusion of the case really drives me mad. i see a lot of "she was proven innocent by her lawyer" and a lot more of "it was a false accusation" but going by the last statement from her attorney that i read, i feel like there's a lot more going on than that.
first thing's first, i don't know how it is in different countries or different justice system, but as far as am aware "proving" anything isn't a lawyer's job. first and foremost their job is to represent their client; specifically in cases such as Soojin's, it's to represent their client through a legal dispute/investigation. if there's anything related to "proofs" to their job, then that would be to collect evidences and statements. but to determine whether someone is innocent or guilty isn't within their rights.
her lawyer can't "prove" her innocence. all they could do was to collect and present the evidences that may -- hopefully -- get her an innocent verdict, but that verdict wasn't theirs to make.
now with that said, again, going by the last statement released that i read last year, i'd say Soojin's lawyer did a pretty good job collecting those evidences that may point towards her innocence. from what i remember:
they had statement(s) from the school staff as witness claiming that there were no records of the bullying Soojin was accused of;
the only record of bullying related to Soojin that they had instead pointed at her as the victim, not the bully; and
when questioned about it, the accuser/her team failed to present any evidence to support their claim of Soojin bullying her that wasn't simply hearsay (i.e. she said/she said situation)
also included in the statement though more like a quote, the accuser had also apparently admitted that "she wasn't sure (anymore)" whether Soojin really was part of the group that she'd claimed to have bullied her or not.
so all of these do point towards the conclusion that Soojin didn't do what the accuser said she did. at the very least, it opened the door for further investigation of the claim and, therefore, the case. at this point, based on the statement, Soojin's team had successfully submitted their own evidence to counter the accuser's claim to the police, while the accuser's team had not.
the proper course of action after this was supposed to be for the police to: 1) investigate the evidence submitted by Soojin/her team to determine its truth and 2) press the accuser/her team to finally submit their evidence to backup their claim as well as counter Soojin's. in my country, to my knowledge at least, if the accuser fails to fulfil point no.2 while point no.1 leads to a definitive yes, then the case would be dropped as false allegations and that opens the door for a counter-suit under defamation.
but, quoted in the statement, a member of the force instead claimed that there was not enough leads/evidence to investigate the case further. it was treated as though both parties failed to submit evidence to support their positions and claims, when as stated: Soojin did not fail, the accuser did.
it's hard not to look at all of this with at least a little bit of a side-eye. the case didn't seem like it was dropped because there was simply not enough going ons to continue pursuing it, it instead seemed like it was dropped because thus far at that point, Soojin may come out on top.
the case was not dropped because she was legally proven to be innocent, but because the evidence gathered favoured towards her innocence and the cops were not interested in pursuing that.
the more that i think about the inconclusive conclusion of the case, the more i can only think of one word. it's what people in my country call kongkalikong; the whole tail end of this case just stinks of corruption. this isn't "just" a false allegation. it feels far more insidious than that.
so ... no, Soojin's lawyers didn't "prove" that she was innocent, they just gathered and presented the evidence that could have cleared her of the accusations had the justice system worked properly. and, no, it wasn't a "false allegation" legally because the people who were supposed to investigate and determine that were not interested in doing their job.
in conclusion: the whole case is mad fucked. its ""conclusion"" even more so. if you're going to talk about it, don't just talk about the lawyers and the accuser. there's a whole third, maybe even fourth party, that you're forgetting to include.
1 note
·
View note