Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
I dont think two people can masturbate together unless maybe they are in different rooms, connected via a viewscreen, telesonic device or perhaps window. If they are touching themselves together in physical space it's not longer masturbation if it's a group thing. UNLESS they aren't paying attention to eachother. Then they are masturbating in the same room but I wouldn't call it masturbating together although ostensibly you could and I might make a sour face but I don't think I could argue. So in conclusion. Masturbation is a lonely thing and once you have a buddy you are officially no longer masturbating but "jerking off together". You might argue about the term "Mutual Masturbation" but I think its a stupid term and won't care about your argument.
i wrote this post over on bluesky today and, after receiving a few of the predictable "but what if i Want to write badly" responses you get to any opinion that can be taken as prescriptivist writing advice, i thought i'd talk more about what i'm getting at.
basically, it's an issue of suspension of disbelief. there are a lot of things in fantasy and historical writing that we're willing to look past. dragons, potatoes, the divine right of kings. we are able to suspend our disbelief that a monarch could be anything but a despicable tyrant if the story we're being told is convincing enough, or plays to our comforting worldviews about nobility and Great Man theory. we can also suspend it if we straight up didn't know that europe didn't have potatoes pre-columbian exchange. basically--it means it doesn't bother you that these elements aren't perfectly realistic. fiction is not required to be realistic. clue's in the name.
but there are some things we just can't ignore. some things hit us as out of place for the setting we've been presented, or the world as we understand it. it pulls us out of the story by reminding us, in that moment, that we are reading a constructed narrative made of a series of choices by an author. and for whatever reason, they made a Wrong choice, like plucking the wrong guitar string.
bdsm safety protocols are the classic example, since a majority of people that encounter this sort of thing often enough to identify it online are reading fanfic and romance. things like a red light/green light system appearing in a chinese fantasy world where cars have not been invented, or cowboys intuiting the concept of a safeword while having spit-lubed anal sex in the desert. absurdisms that break suspension of disbelief, because who is teaching these cowboys the principles of consent. nobody.
now, we've beaten the dead horse of 'don't write like you're afraid of a callout post' a million times when it comes to including bdsm best practices in writing. you are allowed to write whatever you want forever, and if what you want to write is perfectly safe, negotiated sex between two adults who would have never received sexual education and probably thought a woman's uterus wandered in the body depending on the temperature, you are free to do that. i'll think your writing is bad, but you don't have to care what i think. you don't have to care about the people who'd get upset at cowboys doing unnegotiated "lasso tricks" either.
anyway, i'm getting off track. the actual point of the post above was that i see this same kind of thing with modern terminology for queer concepts in completely incongruous settings, and it pulls me out just as bad as any cowboy therapyspeak. i simply do not believe the local dirt farmer who binds his chest and changed his name from helen to troy would call himself "trans". i do not believe the wizard who has no time or interest in sex would call himself "asexual". and 1800s english dandies would not be calling themselves "gay" unless they were in a holiday mood.
that doesn't mean they couldn't understand those concepts, but it's not the language they would use to express them, because they would not have it. you see this with discussion of actual literal history--we technically cannot call historical figures "gay" or "transgender" with 100% confidence, even when their behavior lined up very closely with our modern idea of those concepts, because those people did not have our modern idea of those concepts. would they have identified that way, if a time traveler taught it to them? possibly! but we can't know that. they might like "transsexual" better, even if it's no longer in vogue.
and much like nobody is teaching cowboys the concept of aftercare, nobody is teaching our dirt farmer troy the word "trans", which is itself a shortening of several words that have come in and out of fashion as recently as the last century. troy would be calling himself something else, if he even has a word for what he is.
and that's where you, the author, have a Choice. there's plenty of reasons to default to the modern term--you're writing for a modern audience, you want to be clear about your representation, you're afraid of getting yelled at for getting something wrong--but i think it's the wrong move in any serious writing. because what you're losing by doing that is an opportunity to get creative and actually say something with the character, rather than tick a box.
troy might describe himself as a man trapped in a woman's body, because that is how he experiences it, and that experience informs his character. or he might think of himself as a man who just has breasts, because he's always been a man and has been treated as a man, and he's never had to examine it. or he might call himself a "rock", because he lives with dwarves and that's the dwarven word for masculine-presenting.
or he can just say he's "trans", and you don't explore what it means to the character in the world he lives in, while also implying somebody sat this boy down on a stump in the dirt fields and said the word "transgender" to him, and then said it often enough he shortened it to "trans". while living on his dirt farm. where he would never have seen a pineapple.
i am more interested in a troy who doesn't have a perfectly modern understanding of what he is and what he wants, because that's where a story lives. i don't read to see my understanding of things perfectly mirrored back to me, i read to experience something different. i want to read about the guy who calls himself a slur because it's the only language for himself he has, and what that means to him. i want to read about the guy who never calls himself a man, but understands implicitly that he's something different. i want to read about messy, complicated people who don't know shit from fuck. it'll absorb me a hell of a lot more.
anyway.
this is all opinion and i am just one guy so you're allowed to disagree with me. i just won't be interested in your work if you do. and that's only a loss if you make it one.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
Come to think of it, it really is insane that my entire country is burning alive and literally no one in the rest of the world cares. Thousands of Indians are dying every day from the heat, it's 45+ degrees in multiple areas, the government couldn't give two fucks, we're getting severe warnings and red alerts, and not a soul outside of South Asia is speaking about it because why would you ever care about brown people
It's part of this elaborate insanity. I can feel my head explode every time someone talks about the weather being "nice". Here in the UK we have just started experiencing weather hot enough that people are starting to feel ill (i started having signs of heatstroke 1am last night). I know that if it's that bad over here, there are hundreds of millions of people further south east on the globe currently experiencing uninhabitable temperatures, and not just that, colossal flooding as well. The fact is a lot of people will set the world on fire and then compliment how warm the fire feels from six thousand miles away.
As stupid as it sounds, it "sounds normal" that people die from the heat in India, or that they freeze to death in Russia, so people care more about heat in Britain.
Every so often somebody writes something like "fandom is supposed to be fun" on a bingo card, because you can't just ignore problems away. Or somebody adds "this open source project is here to perform a real task in this industry, it's not your playground, vanity project, learn-to-code classroom, or a public accommodation that has to merge code from every person ever" to the bingo card.
And then, some time later, a completely unrelated tumblr user sees the bingo card, and follows the thread back to the original fandom space/open source project. The tumblr user says: "Got it. Fandom is not supposed to be fun. I am making these people miserable. I hate it here. I am doing my part."
if you're even slightly sympathetic to the EA cause then listening to normal people talk about charity will make you go insane. Talking about the work charity matching service the other day and one of my coworkers was like "Yeah I put the $50 promotional credits we got towards a local rabbit rescue charity".
Like look. I'm sure they do great work. Rabbits are very cute. But it's on a website where three clicks over you can donate to New Incentives or the Against Malaria Foundation. Somewhere there exists a correct amount of worrying about charity effectiveness.
Split the difference and ask them how many rabbits they save per dollar, and if they could allocate their funds more efficiently to save more rabbits per dollar.
âWe are descended from the Witches you couldnât burn!â
Itâs a nice sentiment, I like the energy, I do. That said, I am actually descended from a âSalem Witch,â and my Ancestor, Mary Isham Towne, was not burnt at the stake, she was hanged by the neck until dead. Weâre not savages yâknow.
Furthermore, Mary Isham Towne was a churchgoing, god-fearing woman, who just so happened to be a widow who owned a piece of land that the local judge wanted to purchase, but which she refused to sell, and which he set out to acquire pretty much immediately after he sentenced her execution.
It strikes me as profoundly odd when people openly admit that they only believe/don't believe in something because of some psychological need or weakness. You're supposed to bravely accept the truth!!
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
Penn & Teller: Bullshit was an odd show bc it kept rotating between actual skepticism and libertarian screeds. Probably the most famous episode is the one about how GMOs are good and Norman Borlaug is the greatest man in history and anyway two episodes later they argue that we need to be skeptical of global warming and frame environmentalists as hysterical morons. Show that argued persuasively that vaccines are safe and don't cause autism, and also did an entire episode denying the dangers of second hand smoke and one saying we should get rid of the endangered species act
I gave up on the show in its fifth season when they did a episode about how Walmart is good actually where their main evidence was interviewing one person who worked at Wal-Mart, and how she said working there was good and created jobs. It looks like I missed episodes arguing in favor of the right to display female-presenting nipples, supporting nuclear power, and opposing exorcisms & a border wall...and also an entire episode yelling about how handicap parking and the ADA are unnecessary bc businesses will just support disabled people in the name of profit
Obligatory note: Penn Jillette renounced libertarianism in 2020! He called the individualism he promoted an "illusion" and that it's all "rich white guys who don't want to be told what to do". Apparently the moment that made him swap to the left & endorse Biden in 2024 was feeling ashamed when a libertarian group asked him to speak at an anti-mask event. So I doubt he agrees with most of that part of the show anymore (he certainly backtracked on global warming and secondhand smoke back then). Teller is silent on the matter
In retrospect the fact that a show that pitched itself as "two funny cynical assholes hold liars accountable" was so fond of using maudlin human interest segments as a core of their arguments is interesting
Wal-Mart is good because one woman says she wouldn't have a job without it. The endangered species act is bad because one person really wants to build a house on endangered bird habitat, but the meanies at the EPA won't let them drive an entire species to extinction in order to not have to have a house built somewhere else
Even when they were saying something that was right they did it; in their episode on 9/11 truthers, which of course finds correctly that Bush didn't do 9/11 & jet fuel can melt steel beams, they profile a first responder who talks about how offensive the theories are, because of how many people died. But that doesn't work, bc truthers still believe the towers collapsed. The only deaths they typically deny are the people on the planes (at least, among the truthers who believe the planes were remote-controlled and/or that the Pentagon wasn't hit by a plane). Hell, they believe they're the only ones who really care about the people who died, so Sad Piano Keys aren't gonna sway them (though it will play well to us, the only people who would watch a show like this, who already know and agree that conspiracy theories are false)
Libertarianism? Yeah. It was bad at the time but it only looks worse now how the skeptic movement was so often lead by libertarians. This led them to some odd contrary positions - I mean, James Randi was a climate change denier. Michael Shermer's Skeptic magazine is fully "anti-woke" now (I opened an issue out of curiosity last year, and immediately saw an op-ed by that one anthropologist who was married to a "race scientist" who thinks she has a right to Native remains. Like that's how it started). They really would lurch between being able to write capably about other subjects, and then writing the most uncritical propaganda on libertarian topics. Like their arguments became so much less convincing and so much more reliant on appeals to emotion over facts whenever it became a libertarian show. At least Penn Jillette was the smartest of the bunch
it is a nice reminder of an age when there were more odd contrary topics, and you could say "they are right except for when they get political" because this was, of course, the problem with "skepticism" and "new atheism", that you could have these sorts of complexities, which was why being correct and being politically correct had to be aligned in 2012 with the bountiful effects we see around us now.
idk who needs to hear this but if you have been putting something off bc it doesn't need to be done until the end of the month. we are almost done with the teens we are approaching the big numbers (the twenties). that date shall dawn upon you swiftly and without mercy before you know it. psa for everyone except me i got plany off time
I sometimes see posts that say "Why do men feel attacked when somebody makes a movie with all-female leading roles? They make all-male movies all the time!"
Well, they do make movies with only women in the lead roles all the time. I can think, off the top of my head, of multiple movies that had only women in the lead roles: 8 femmes, Volver, The Craft, Little Women...
AlmodĂłvar is kind of cheating, half his movies are only women and Antonio Banderas. The thing that unites these movies is that they were made for women/girls, and that they weren't made as a gender-swap of an existing movie.
(Aside: Can we include Antonio Banderas? Can we say the girls and the gaxs and Antonio? Thanks!)
The thing that makes trad men feel attacked isn't AlmodĂłvar making another movie about women for women, that's what makes TERFs and hyperprogressives feel attacked.
Some movies have all male leading roles because it's an "oversight". Some movies have all make leading roles because it would be clunky to add another leading role. Some movies have all male leading roles because they are a statement about men and manliness.
Can you imagine The Warriors, a statement about masculinity, with more women added for balance? The movie already has Mercy, and the Lizzies, and that undercover police officer who arrests Ajax for attempted rape. You can say that this is not enough women, but that would completely miss the point. The Warriors is a dystopia, and the way the titular Warriors deploy violence isn't aspirational.
I once tried to say: "That would be as on-the-nose as Lin-Manuel Miranda doing an all-girl reboot of Saving Private Ryan, or Mad Max, or Fight Club", but turns out that Lin-Manuel Miranda already did an all-girl version of The Warriors. hashtag-deep...
Only when a movie is pointedly all-women, in a way that is immediately legible, it becomes a whole thing. Only when it's meant to be contrasted with the original, only when they say "D&D is not for nerds any more", only then people will start to notice and complain.
The "Problem With Capitalism"⢠is that people are allowed to choose to buy or not buy what they choose instead of funding the media I want to be Successful.
Let me guess, it's another professionally produced piece of media that is basically the kind of story "A Trekkie's Tale" was written to criticize.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
Green eyes shouldnât actually be considered an eye color. Itâs just not common enough, itâs a VERY SMALL percentage of the population, 1-2%. Green eyes are also caused by an irregular mutation. Most people have blue or brown eyes, so those are the two eye colors.
All the âgreen eyesâ positivity is actually a bad thing, by the way. Having green eyes is linked to higher rates of retinal melanoma. Youâre celebrating something dangerous that can cause suffering.
And besides, most people with âgreen eyesâ lean closer to blue or brown anyways. They should just make up their minds and be brown eyed or blue eyed. And if itâs too hard to tell, they should get corrective surgery (because green eyes are dangerous, and associated with more difficult medical care!) or at the least wear contacts so they donât confuse people. But also they should be required to
I hate to sound like this, but green eyes are a far more recent development than blue eyes in the mutagenic history of humans. So humans werenât created to have green eyes.
And hazel eyes? Those are just a variant of brown eyesâcome on, theyâre far closer to brown than green. They just have a couple greenish traits. And thereâs no way thereâs that many green eyed people, or a wide variety of eye colors⌠Itâs just not natural.
I donât have a problem with green eyed people, they didnât ask to be born that wayâbut thereâs just too few of them for it to be an actual eye color. We donât need all this âgreen eye positivityâ or putting green eyes in media. The internet is making people delude themselves into thinking itâs more common than it really is.
âźď¸ THIS POST IS ABOUT THE TREATMENT OF INTERSEX PEOPLE âźď¸
â I HAVE GREEN EYES THIS IS SATIRE â
â ď¸ PLEASE DONâT SEND ME ANY MORE THREATS OF VIOLENCE IN DEFENSE OF PEOPLE WITH GREEN EYES?? â ď¸
đ§ THIS POST IS NOT ABOUT EYE COLOR?? ITâS ABOUT INTERSEXISM AND BIGOTRY đ§
Last time I checked the source of the 1-2% count of allegedly intersex people, it was a study that padded the numbers by stretching the definition and counting people with incomplete development of one set of sexual characteristics as intersex. Or in small words: "man with small dick" was counted as "not a real man".
The rate at which humans manifest positive characteristics of both sexes, as a stricter definition of intersex, is so much smaller that a better comparison for both rate and nature would be to say something like "Heterochromia isn't a real eye color" and, well, yes. The more accurate comparison loses the satirical punch.
Also there's the reproductive functionality aspect that you've elided. Humans reproduce in a two-sexed way; to my knowledge there's zero people who have been sufficiently intersex to both sire and bear children. There is no analogous reference point in which to ground eye color.
First sentence, but I didn't know whether it was ace discourse, trans women versus trans men discourse, or intersex. By the third paragraph I was sure.
Second paragraph could have been part of a "Actually we shouldn't normalise having a good childhood with loving parents" post.
Is this the bit? Many people are saying this! This is on the bingo card! It must be. I have seen multiple posts by different authors that explained why listening to jazz, blues, and R&B but not rap is problematic.
Adding gospel to the list would make it clear that it's a troll though, but the other thing I have seen in the wild.
The Grey Tribe @the-grey-tribe - Tumblr Blog | Tumlook
romaincrisis
tangentwithtanner
jbbartram-illu
dededos
