changing it again from mantis-lords-sexy to apollo-cackling

what my blog header is now

I see a lot of posts like "never use AI for covers/logos/advertising for your creative passion project! Even if you just scribble something in MS Paint it's better than AI! Just badly photoshop something together and trust that your clumsy attempts at being Real will endear you to the audience!" and if I'm being honest I don't think that's good advice

On a side note it's incredible how many of those posts advocate for just asking artists to give you free labor, potentially in exchange for "exposure" from your indie podcast with twelve listeners. AI can't steal your job if you give it away for free *taps forehead*

people don’t want to acknowledge that adhd can actually be debilitating. they’ll just be like “why do you keep ruining your own life. you’re so lazy”

why is it so hard for people to grasp that disabilities disable and chronic illnesses are chronic. yes even when it inconveniences you. yes even when your patience runs out

or, say, someone with a bachelor of arts in american history and literature somehow being put in charge of the us department of health and human services while believing that vaccines cause autism. as a completely absurd hypothetical that would never happen in real life.

Someone should make a disco elysium spiritual successor that takes place in a maze and follows a protagonist who has to eat all the dots in the maze whilst avoiding several ghosts

you can actually homebrew this in d&d 5e

hey girl are you my slerp schedule because i am fucking you up

not what i meant to say

my ultimate fantasy is to have a brain and body that allows me to enjoy being alive

render yourself incompatible with this world. then stay

the second 'o' in "zoologist" is putting in heavy duty work. girl is working two jobs

i have rule i semi-adhere to for media criticism which is to ideologically meet shit where it's at (or where it's presented to me). i like to call it the "i didn't make you market it that way" rule--like, if lancer's union was just presented as a sci-fi setting, that would be fine. i don't expect all sci-fi settings to be communist utopias! but when the creators of lancer use the word utopia like 20 times & bandy around words like 'mutual aid' and 'post-scarcity' and 'anticapitalist' when describing it, then to me that becomes absolutely fair game. similarly if someone says 'stardew valley is fun i like farming :)' then i'm not gonna reply with a long post about how it's ideologically petty-bourgeois--but if they say 'stardew valley is anticapitalist', then they've opened up that can of worms and it's fair for me to point out that the worms exist.

it's the same phenomenon where a fantasy novel that says 'for the duration of this fantasy novel you need to just believe in the divine right of kings for the emotional stakes to make sense' is infinitely less objectionable than a fantasy novel that's also about restoring a king but takes painstaking time to point out how this king is A Good King who is Progressive and Nice and is going to do Nice Monarchy. when you try to sanitize something you end up turning any otherwise neutral or at least palatable depiction or framework you've included into a normative statement!

somebody says that they refuse to sell out to a corporate sponsor, so instead they make merch. they assert that said merch was "made by a real human person." by "made" they actually just meant the design of the print. any day now I am going to start killing

all of your t-shirts and hoodies are actually made by a real human person whether AI was involved in the production of the print design or not. tch.

brother came home from school with a list of “philosophical questions” he discussed with his friends such as “what if there was an evil stove that uncooked things” and “how do trees know if they’re gay”

hello staff. good to see that flagging this post as mature has done wonders for this website. maybe you could stop booting trans women off this site as well you fucking wankers

i swear sometimes it feels like vast swathes of people on here think there's some moral value to "annoying"ness like it's morally incorrect to be annoying so if you're not doing anything wrong it can't be annoying and if you're annoyed with someone they must have morally failed or something. Like my god. Have you never just been irked by something harmless before?

like, okay, consent does literally just mean agree. which is what enables this little rhetorical trick. because there's all this cultural emphasis on sexual consent, which is just expressed as consent, a lot of phrases whose intended meanings are "rape is bad" can be taken literally to mean "i should get to agree to everything that happens in my vicinity."

for an example, "i didn't agree to seeing you wear that shirt" is straightforwardly a fucking insane thing for someone to say, but people regularly make use of this trick to make the (functionally identical) statement "i didn't consent to seeing that"

the reverse also happens, where when you say "you don't have a right to agree to other people's outfits," someone will say "So you think consent doesn't matter?" Of course, in this context, the literal answer is yes! I don't care if you're cool with what I'm wearing. but obviously, what's meant to be implied is "you think rape is okay?"

Occasionally I am reminded that ~a third of my close social circle and a large majority of my casual acquaintances being people I know entirely online and essentially solely speak to via text actually makes me really pretty weird.