I don't think younger/newer users fully grasp the shit show that ace discourse was around 2014-17
It was so hostile that, to this day, discussions that begin to derail just enough can make me physically nauseous, some specific mockery trigger crying sessions years later. We lost most accounts with any sort of ace positivity. There was no information, no support, and all this damage was done predominantly by other queer people.
All this to say that you, however you identify yourself, should be engaging with aphobic comments the same way you do any hate. We don't sugarcoat or try to be comprehensive with people who are blatantly racist, homophobic or terfs, so why give it a pass just because it's coming from a queer person? I see how this tolerance goes and it's done enough damage as it is.
33K notes
·
View notes
part 2!!!! [read part one here]
transcript below the cut arranged into stanzas to help show where the rhymes are:
“that’s why they brought gem in? as a failsafe?” as a pawn.
we were told to point her at whoever we need gone
“gem won’t hurt her allies. …yet.” the curse she carries will
it’s had its eye on her since she lost the other eye
she was specially selected for her hunting skill
it’s quite the high honor. “wow. how generous.” we try
think about it: why does almost no one fight the curse?
“given how fast scott killed skizz last season, i can guess.”
[“any pain you spare your friends, you’ll have to suffer worse”?]
it’s designed to shut down higher reasoning with stress
3K notes
·
View notes
truly my best brain time is in the middle of the night caffeine & sugar rush. I think I just understood math, like some part of the general pattern of math if that makes sense. something clicked somewhere in my brain and I felt it
49 notes
·
View notes
actually I think the thing about being a youth leader is that 25% of it is teaching about God, 25% is playing fun games, and more than that though 50% of it is making a safe space for kids to be. not to try and make them believe, not so they'll be open or anything. just. a 100% no stakes, safe place for them to just BE. whatever else comes after that. and I don't just mean physically safe, two-adults-in-the-room-at-all-times, et cetera. I mean emotionally safe. I mean not hitting them over the head with scripture, not trying to help them feel better or any particular way. just... a no-judgment, emotionally safe place to exist as kids.
26 notes
·
View notes
Mourynn, my GW2 OC's bio page! This is just meant to be a simplified breakdown of her character where I will branch out (lol) to all the other aspects in detail in their own separate posts/drawings. I just wanted her bio to me more visual instead of all just text, and I also included some inspirations with a little background info to fill in some blanks (which will be expanded upon later as well).
to note:
- she does, for the most part, follow the canonical Commander storyline, except not EVERY part and with not the same exact personality of the in game player character either (tbh I don't think anyone's Commander OCs do so I suppose this is obvious lol)
- allowing her to still play the Commander role (to a slightly lesser degree but still just enough) allows me to integrate her into all areas of Tyria, and with a more diverse set of experiences and characters to interact with and keep her involved in the major storyline (ESPECIALLY with the Elder Dragon storyline. I'm going to have lots of fun with those interactions and experiences)
- this also opens more doors for giving her unique experiences in these different zones with different characters that don't happen in game (since it's easier for me to work with an existing storyline instead fo fully creating a new one. Uses up less of my brain battery)
- this also allows me to poke fun at some things in game with Mourynn in character bc I have SO many things saved up that are highly amusing to me and this way I can use a bunch of my saved screenshots to my potential.
- I'm also taking advantage of a bunch of plot holes and other spans of time (such as the Firstborn Era before the Secondborn came about)
Her dragon form will have it's own page (with inspirations) since there is lots I still need to design and showcase, and I wanted it to have it's own separate focus! Everything will make more sense once it's all done (such as explaining how a firstborn and scion(?) are to exist at the same time, I have a fun way to which I wanna explain it once I'm done the dragon bio page). I'll also have a separate breakdown of her Elite spec and showing/explaining what it does and how it works bc it was a lot of fun to create.
Anyways this is a VERY self indulgent OC, and since I only ever make one OC (since they're almost always a self-insert to some degree with me), she's going to be very spoiled and will allow me to give her lots of attention and have fun with all the dynamics. I also can't mentally handle more than one OC bc that is WAY too overwhelming for me lol.
66 notes
·
View notes
*clutching head* rodya and meursault would have such a good dynamic actually
I wonder if rodya would initially see meursault's indifference as like. a simpler version of her own feigned carefreeness and as a deliberate attempt to place himself as an outsider... only to realise that No, he really Is just Like That. and then she gets annoyed because it turns out that people who don't care about anything don't seem to be any fun.
(ofc he does actually care about a lot of things, just not necessarily his grander place in the world lol)
idk. nihilism vs absurdism. fun duo 👍 rodya would find meursault's genuine comfort with being a speck of dust in the universe baffling, while he would probably find her desire to assert her own importance pointless, but they could probably bond over little things like their shared desire to live in the present and appreciation of/indulgence in earthly joys. and meursault would probably listen if rodya wants to rant about anything without asking any uncomfortable questions. I think they could appreciate each other's presence.
77 notes
·
View notes
Alright uninformed rant time. It kind of bugs me that, when studying the Middle Ages, specifically in western Europe, it doesn’t seem to be a pre-requisite that you have to take some kind of “Basics of Mediaeval Catholic Doctrine in Everyday Practise” class.
Obviously you can’t cover everything- we don’t necessarily need to understand the ins and outs of obscure theological arguments (just as your average mediaeval churchgoer probably didn’t need to), or the inner workings of the Great Schism(s), nor how apparently simple theological disputes could be influenced by political and social factors, and of course the Official Line From The Vatican has changed over the centuries (which is why I’ve seen even modern Catholics getting mixed up about something that happened eight centuries ago). And naturally there are going to be misconceptions no matter how much you try to clarify things for people, and regional/class/temporal variations on how people’s actual everyday beliefs were influenced by the church’s rules.
But it would help if historians studying the Middle Ages, especially western Christendom, were all given a broadly similar training in a) what the official doctrine was at various points on certain important issues and b) how this might translate to what the average layman believed. Because it feels like you’re supposed to pick that up as you go along and even where there are books on the subject they’re not always entirely reliable either (for example, people citing books about how things worked specifically in England to apply to the whole of Europe) and you can’t ask a book a question if you’re confused about any particular point.
I mean I don’t expect to be spoonfed but somehow I don’t think that I’m supposed to accumulate a half-assed religious education from, say, a 15th century nobleman who was probably more interested in translating chivalric romances and rebelling against the Crown than religion; an angry 16th century Protestant; a 12th century nun from some forgotten valley in the Alps; some footnotes spread out over half a dozen modern political histories of Scotland; and an episode of ‘In Our Time’ from 2009.
But equally if you’re not a specialist in church history or theology, I’m not sure that it’s necessary to probe the murky depths of every minor theological point ever, and once you’ve started where does it end?
Anyway this entirely uninformed rant brought to you by my encounter with a sixteenth century bishop who was supposedly writing a completely orthodox book to re-evangelise his flock and tempt them away from Protestantism, but who described the baptismal rite in a way that sounds decidedly sketchy, if not heretical. And rather than being able to engage with the text properly and get what I needed from it, I was instead left sitting there like:
And frankly I didn’t have the time to go down the rabbit hole that would inevitably open up if I tried to find out
128 notes
·
View notes