ankhaistenn:

I love Boromir so much so I became Boromir

(costume made by me, sword made by one cool smith)

An impressive costume, an impressive sword – an’ you’ll hear no quibbles from me about a missing facial detail… :->

Boromir’s costume deserves appreciation for being practical both for protection and for travel (John Howe, one of the LotR movies’ conceptual artists, is also a living-history re-enactor). Mail with a gold-worked brigandine on top and heraldic vambraces for the forearms are a good defence, yet costly enough for a nod towards high Gondorian (sp?) rank without shouting about it.

(It’s also a genderless unisex design that’s “male” or “female” depending on who’s wearing it, but that’s another post.)

I don’t know how the parts of this cosplay or the original movie costume fit together,

but I have a feeling that for comfort and convenience, what we see of the armour – its sleeves – is all that’s there.

Just for fun, here’s my notion of how it as functional armour, and the result is much less form-fitting. Various additional layers of metal and padding would give Boromir the burly appearance of a rugby player who could go through an opponent for a short cut even before he brought his sword and shield into play.

A full mail hauberk would probably be about the same size and cut as his leather surcoat (check Éowyn-as-Dernhelm) but since the favourite son of the Steward of Gondor would have the finest – in both senses of the word – mail that money could buy, it would definitely need a padded gambeson beneath, since such mail would keep a sword-blow at bay but not the blunt-force trauma that went with it.

(Uruk-hai arrows the size of ballista bolts were another matter, unfortunately…)

Here’s a “Bishop’s Mantle” – protection for neck, shoulders and upper body – which shows how fine mail can be. It hangs like cloth, even when there’s a double layer at the top.

If I’m guessing right and Boromir’s red under-tunic is indeed a brigandine, then its “coat-tails” would be unarmoured but the upper sleeves and torso area would be a sandwich of sturdy base cloth, a layer of small steel plates and that wine-red velvet to finish, with the gold dots showing where the plates were riveted in place.

Because this sort of armour was inflexible (there was clever tailoring at the elbows

to allow movement) the sleeves were separate items; lots of civilian doublets, tunics etc. also had separate sleeves, so it wouldn’t look unusual. This diagram of an Elizabethan-era jack(et)-of-plates, where the plates were stitched rather than riveted, shows how it worked…

…and here’s the original from the Royal Armouries…

Here’s an interesting photo of a riveted brigandine with its finishing cover worn thin by centuries. Darken that faded fabric to a rich wine-red, add elbow-length sleeves and a high collar, re-gild all the rivets and IMO it would look pretty close to Boromir’s.

Boromir also carried a Saxon- / Viking-style round shield, probably wood with a leather facing shrunk into place while wet (this greatly increases the shield’s resistance to impact) augmented by a metal rim, metal reinforcements at the cardinal points and a domed metal boss over the hand-grip. This shield would have been as effective for offence as defence.

I’m also guessing that if the costume design ever had a helmet it would have been a lower-crowned, less-enclosed and altogether less ostentatious version of the one worn by the soldiers of the White Tower.

However it clearly went missing somewhere during his long trek up from Tharbad to Rivendell, because in LotR, like so many other movies involving armour, principal characters get rid of their helmets as soon as they can unless there’s a good plot reason (Éowyn-as-Dernhelm again) to keep them on

… :->

While I know significantly less about the arms and armor of LotR than I did back in 2008, it’s rather worth noting that Boromir’s shield

looks like a Rohirric affectation

Since the Gondorians; yes you spelled it correctly; carried kite shields.

Which is more easily seen in this video along with the “official” armor of Minas Tirith as Faramir is leaving the city.

It may also be a sort of Romanticism. The son of the Steward idolizing the Dunedain Rangers, and the history of their fallen line of kings. At least… fallen until the country figures out that Strider is in fact Aragorn II is actually Elessar, the King Returning.

This will kill That: historical preservation, Victor Hugo, and Notre Dame Cathedral

Early in the novel Notre Dame De Paris by Victor Hugo, Claude Frollo utters this line in seeming agonized frustration, terrifying in its meaning. He directs the eyes of two visitors from a book on his desk to the massive silhouette of Notre Dame cathedral beyond his door, then announces: “This will kill that.”

“This” is the book. The arrival of printing, mass produced information and the dissemination of it to the populace, “That” is the cathedral, and all that goes along with it. “Small things overcome great ones,” Frollo laments, “the book will kill the building.”

For Hugo, the language of mankind to that point has and had been architecture. While the language of the scholar and the educated elite was Latin, the language of the common people was architecture. The grandeur of the cathedral pointed eyes to the glory of heaven, the humbleness of their common dwelling, to the state of man in the sight of his deity.

That language reaches a sort of climax in the Gothic Cathedral and, indeed, the grandeur of Notre Dame. Hugo asserts; in a sort of righteous fervor; that priests had controlled even that language for centuries. From the reflected dogmatic oppression of the squared, Romanesque cathedral, to the flying Gothic architecture that lifts men’s souls, giving wings to poetic liberation with flying buttresses, large stained glass windows, and the awe-inspiring flight of high towers and distant bells.

It is fitting then, that this behemoth of man’s invention and vision should fall to the singular smallness of something so common as movable type. A post-enlightenment sort of David and Goliath. It is fairly easy to see then if we interrogate the style and concepts of this book that Hugo felt architects had nothing left to say. All was neo-this and neo-that, and a sort of re-imagination of the past.

“This” would kill “That.”

And yet, Notre Dame De Paris includes a sort of plea within its pages to acknowledge everything the then-crumbling building represents and to save it from the future ravages of time. By Hugo’s time and the beginning of the research done for the novel, the Cathedral was over 500 years old and had become something of a ruin.

Broken and desecrated after changing governments, lack of repair, and perhaps most notably ravaged by the Huguenots for being idolatrous, AND THEN all the beheading of all the kings of Israel for supposedly being “French Aristocrats and Royalty” during the Revolution, Notre Dame was quite a mess. And, unfortunately, would remain a mess until Hugo could finish the novel; there’s some fun gossip and shade there if you look into the writing-of; and other people began to take interest. This has also been credited as beginning the concept of Historical Preservation, which really only began to take hold in America and the UK post-WW2. (Some people also blame Robert Moses. It sort of depends on your point of view.)

The general theme of the novel is that Notre Dame will and has outlived countless lives of humanity, and all their ineptitude, terrible decisions, and flaws, will pale in comparison to the edifice and it’s lifespan…. should we care to preserve it.

The grand irony, however, is that the book itself became a NEW “This” and was destroyed itself by a new “That” : the advent of movies and hollywood. The story changed, sometimes drastically, cutting and adding characters and changing their motivations, throughout each successor to the story that came before. Frollo became something other than a priest.
Esmeralda went from a white girl stolen by g*psies, to a g*psy herself.
Quasimodo went from deformed man to movie monster to anti hero to protagonist and back again.
Phoebus went from soldier to revolutionary and through some convoluted developments.
Gringoire is left out of most productions post-1930s.
Fleur De Lys often doesn’t feature….

The film has killed the book. This, has killed That. And time marches on.

From Lindsay Ellis: The Case for Disney’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame

From Bartleby:

It was a premonition that human thought, in changing its outward form, was also about to change its outward mode of expression; that the dominant idea of each generation would, in future, be embodied in a new material, a new fashion; that the book of stone, so solid and so enduring, was to give way to the book of paper, more solid and more enduring still. In this respect the vague formula of the Archdeacon had a second meaning—that one Art would dethrone another Art: Printing will destroy Architecture. 4
In effect, from the very beginning of things down to the fifteenth century of the Christian era inclusive, architecture is the great book of the human race, man’s chief means of expressing the various stages of his development, whether physical or mental. 5
When the memory of the primitive races began to be surcharged, when the load of tradition carried about by the human family grew so heavy and disordered that the word, naked and fleeting, ran danger of being lost by the way, they transcribed it on the ground by the most visible, the most lasting, and at the same time most natural means. They enclosed each tradition in a monument. 6
The first monuments were simply squares of rock “which had not been touched by iron,” as says Moses. Architecture began like all writing. It was first an alphabet. A stone was planted upright and it was a letter, and each letter was a hieroglyph, and on every hieroglyph rested a group of ideas, like the capital on the column. Thus did the primitive races act at the same moment over the entire face of the globe. One finds the “upright stone” of the Celts in Asiatic Siberia and on the pampas of America. 7

Presently they constructed words. Stone was laid upon stone, these granite syllables were coupled together, the word essayed some combinations. The Celtic dolmen and cromlech, the Etruscan tumulus, the Hebrew galgal, are words—some of them, the tumulus in particular, are proper names. Occasionally, when there were many stones and a vast expanse of ground, they wrote a sentence. The immense mass of stones at Karnac is already a complete formula. 8
Last of all they made books. Traditions had ended by bringing forth symbols, under which they disappeared like the trunk of a tree under its foliage. These symbols, in which all humanity believed, continued to grow and multiply, becoming more and more complex; the primitive monuments—themselves scarcely expressing the original traditions, and, like them, simple, rough-hewn, and planted in the soil—no longer sufficed to contain them; they overflowed at every point. Of necessity the symbol must expand into the edifice. Architecture followed the development of human thought; it became a giant with a thousand heads, a thousand arms, and caught and concentrated in one eternal, visible, tangible form all this floating symbolism. While Dædalus, who is strength, was measuring; while Orpheus, who is intelligence, was singing—the pillar, which is a letter; the arch, which is a syllable; the pyramid, which is a word, set in motion at once by a law of geometry and a law of poetry, began to group themselves together, to combine, to blend, to sink, to rise, stood side by side on the ground, piled themselves up into the sky, till, to the dictation of the prevailing idea of the epoch, they had written these marvelous books which are equally marvellous edifices: the Pagoda of Eklinga, the Pyramids of Egypt, and the Temple of Solomon. 9

The parent idea, the Word, was not only contained in the foundation of these edifices, but in their structure. Solomon’s Temple, for example, was not simply the cover of the sacred book, it was the sacred book itself. On each of its concentric enclosures the priest might read the Word translated and made manifest to the eye, might follow its transformations from sanctuary to sanctuary, till at last he could lay hold upon it in its final tabernacle, under its most concrete form, which yet was architecture—the Ark. Thus the Word was enclosed in the edifice, but its image was visible on its outer covering, like the human figure depicted on the coffin of a mummy. 10

Again, not only the structure of the edifice but its situation revealed the idea it embodied. According as the thought to be expressed was gracious or sombre, Greece crowned her mountains with temples harmonious to the eye; India disembowelled herself to hew out those massive subterranean pagodas which are supported by rows of gigantic granite elephants. 11
Thus, during the first six thousand years of the world—from the most immemorial temple of Hindustan to the Cathedral at Cologne—architecture has been the great manuscript of the human race. And this is true to such a degree, that not only every religious symbol, but every human thought, has its page and its memorial in that vast book. 12

Every civilization begins with theocracy and ends with democracy.

hey if you don’t wanna see certain posts from me, blacklist #longpost and probably #HavenYellsAboutStuff

szhmidty:

lenyberry:

fierceawakening:

szhmidty:

fierceawakening:

lenyberry:

“where are all these vegans”

there’s about a 50/50 chance that three or so of them are gonna be In My Inbox within the next two days. They’ll all be on anon of course. I usually delete ‘em when they show up because not worth the time of responding to.

I don’t get them much but the idea they don’t exist confuses me greatly

I’m confused too! That’s why I asked.

Also, please don’t misrepresent me. I didn’t say they don’t exist. I don’t understand how you’re encountering so many of them when I literally cannot find any vegans, nice or not, without specifically seeking them out.

If it’s just a matter of me not being in the right type of lefty enclave, like Fierce said, then I get that.

Here’s an example of the sort of thing I’m talking about

https://opinionatedvegan.tumblr.com/post/163347523974/peta

I believe you when you say you’ve never encountered it but I’m very surprised. In my experience a lot of veganism is very evangelistic.

PETA

just a few examples of Vegans Being Awful and/or Absurd, most containing snarky responses thereto:

(^ just gonna tear into this last one for a sec… #1 – false, sorry. True for some humans but not all. Ask an actual nutritionist about that if you don’t believe lil ol’ me. #2 – who the fuck said anything about lions like, ever, what the hell is that non-sequitur #3 sure some herbivores have canine teeth but most herbivores have either very small ones or don’t actually have them, they are in fact primarily an adaptation for biting into meat (skipping a few whatever) #6 yeah they aren’t well regulated but that doesn’t mean they’re always false #7 fucking false, dumbass, once again try talking to an actual health professional before you speak from your hiney #8 aaalso false sweet jesus just because some facts are inconvenient to your ideology and superiority complex doesn’t make them untrue #9 great I won’t, you also don’t do that, whoops you’ve already failed right here by claiming several demonstrably false things to be facts #10 sugar’s addictive and so is cocaine, those come from plants what’s your point #11 HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Ha. *wipes a tear* wtf are you literally doing right now then #15 oh, for literally everyone everywhere? Are you sure? Are you really sure that my pal the disabled single mother of three who has celiac and is also allergic to both soy and corn, whose kids also have significant food allergies (including celiac for two of them) can affordably feed her whole family vegan? Btw that’s not a hypothetical. I actually know this family in real life. Guess what they get food assistance and still struggle to stay adequately fed.)

So, yeah, there they are. I just googled “found the vegan”. Meanwhile these are the meanest examples of someone picking on vegans that wasn’t in direct response to a vegan being absurd first that I found:

wow, yeah, the fed-up people cracking “found the vegan” jokes are SO much worse than the vegans who are throwing fits about every damn little thing anyone ever does that involves eating an animal. </sarcasm>

Can I ask that you take a step back and look at what you’ve actually presented me, here?

There’s this phenomenon that happens online when people don’t like a certain group. They collect samples and screenshots of specific members behaving badly and share them amongst themselves to laugh at and make fun of; someone eventually compiles a list of them, and then when someone asks whats so bad about the group, The List get’s shown off as definitive proof. Like, there’s dozens of examples! That should be convincing to anyone, right?

It happens with every. single. group. Feminists, black people, muslims, redpill/incel, white racists, republicans, democrats, liberals, conservatives, trans people, bronies, anime fans, tumblr users, and so on.

It feels convincing, maybe even overwhelmingly so! It sure felt convincing to me at first. But half these have been copied and pasted so many times they’ve become a blurry mess. When you find yourself looking at a curated list containing a dozen blurry screenshots of bad behaviour, you’re almost certainly looking at something that makes things look worse than they actually are. You’re looking at the situation through a strong filter, wherein the worst examples stick around for years and years, recopied and spread around, the list constantly growing.

Its the kinda thing that’s maybe fun to laugh at, but when it comes to judging the way the world actually is, it needs to be ignored on principle. It’s fundamentally a worthless signal.

can YOU take a step back and understand that people like Leny and I have been dealing with this crap, PERSONALLY, for years and that maybe we’d like it to stop since you know, we can’t change our genetics?

Do you believe it’s okay to have sex with someone, such as myself actually, who, due to a bunch of different brainweirds, isn’t able to meaningfully provide consent but defaults to “yes” when asked?

Well, to be honest with you, anon, my answer is going to be “No.” Not because of your brainweirds or any other reason but because I am in a; particularly for the moment; closed polycule and am quite happily polysaturated. More partners just aren’t in the cards for me. Two is more than enough.

Now that said… I take issue with people sending me “Gotcha!” asks like this. It serves no real purpose, and to be frank with you, I find it a little offensive. THAT said… if you cannot say no, you cannot meaningfully say yes. The reverse; to a more limited extent; is also true. That is the default of consent that I, personally, am working from outside of particular relationship dynamics I have in play with my partners.

If I WERE to be the sort to proposition you, Anon, I’d be asking you how you feel about certain activities and whether or not you regret them after the fact. I would be asking you more than just “do you consent” because I, like many others involved with kink, want to know the WHYS of limits not just the limits, wherever possible. Because “I don’t like whips” is a lot different than “the pop sound of the cracker and the intense sting make me feel Some Kinda Way and I don’t want to panic about it.” The first is a limit definitely! The second takes a lot of other, similar, toys off the table because it’s not about the limit, it’s about respecting the CONTEXT of the limit.

Look for someone who takes your answer for what it is, including its context, wherever possible. And, in the meantime, maybe examine the why and how your Brainweirds interact with your consent, yeah…?

:D :D :D FUCK OFF :D :D :D

*stares at the long list of annoying ana/mia blogs in my notes*. *Rageface*

*music starts….sings to the tune of This Is My Idea*

YUCK!

I can’t believe these fucks can be such ASS HOLES (lol wait yes I can~)
I bet they’ve never learned some em.pa.thy~

They’re so conceited~
They look like TO-TAL DICKWEEDS~
If I get lucky, they’ll be blocked or doxx’d~

So happy you could come *grimace*
(Blaghhh) so happy that you’re here~
INSTEAD OF FUCKING DEEEEEEEEEEEEEAD~ (that’s sarcasm~ but rlly 😀)

This is nawt my idea…. of fun!

..*musical interlude ft mass blocking spree*..

I’ve tried for ages but I just can’t LOSE them~
They think “low cal” is an. en.graved. in.vite.~
(HEY HAVE YOU TRIED MONOS?? 😀)
(OH MY GOD…. ~ 😀 NO FUCK OFF~ :D)
When picking blogs or friends, I’d never choose ‘em~ You’d think they’d take a hint and ~LEARN TO READ~

*unfurls about and header and stares pointedly hey yo take a hiiiiiint*

(hey you’re not being fair~)
(I really couldn’t give a fuuuuuuuuuuuck *SCREECH*)
(Why are you so meeeeeeeean? *sob sob sob* this is going on my BLOG)

Long before we met~ this trans and these cishets were destined to be ENEMIEEEEES
And yanno that anyone could see, no matter how often or po-lite-leeeeyyyy HE ASKS THEM TO FUCK OFF PLEASE~
These entitled ana-shits (always posting untagged bull.fuck.ing.shit) will keep reblogging content and re-post-inggggggg (Seriously those pics aren’t yours stop)

They try to talk me into tryyyying E Ds~ They’re always posting shit i. dont. wan.na. see!~
(Nah you’re just jealous that they’re skinny FESS UP)
(I’d like ‘em better if they’d go to ther-a-pyyyyy~) (I acknowledge the privilege in that statement but this is my blog fuck OFFFFFFFFFFFF)

THIS IS NOT MY IDEA….. OF FUN~ 😀

I’d like to set a boundary! To have my space RE-SPECT-ED! At least I wouldn’t have to post this shit every fucking TWO. DAYS. Some dayyyy they might get betterrrr, and learn to be sort of decent~ And I might get some fucking peace before I GET HOMICIDAL~ 😀

(hey what if you just fucked off completely?)
(No bitch, u.) (ik, real mature /s)

For as long as I remember, I was told to be polite~ I could do much better, I am sure… less sarcastic and IMMATURRRRRRRRRRRRE~
But then this fuckwits won’t get off my blog… and all my posts just seem to get ignored. So maybe if I post something WITTY… I’ll get through but somehow… yeah… probably not~ 😀

You need to get fucking lost~
Cuz I don’t want you here…

THIS IS TRIGGERINGGGGG FUCK OFFFFFFFFFFFFFF~ 😀 😀 😀

THIS IS NOT MY IDEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA OFFFFFFF FUN

(seriously it’s every two days with you fuckers just LEAVE. GO ON GIT. *SCREECH*)

I used to be and (im sure im) still anti-kink but i want to change! I want to be a better, more open-minded, more inclusive person. The thing is, I dont know how can I unlearn that kinks that involve emotional/physical harm is okay. I have the biggest problem with bdsm. Could you please help me a bit? Do you have tags about this? Some websites i can learn from? Blogs here or on other sites? Thank you for your time. Have a nice day!

lenyberry:

xenoqueer:

@morbidly-queerious and @fierceawakening are quite involved in the politics of kink.

Here’s a link to kink discussions and analyses on my own blog.

The journal of positive sexuality (a peer reviewed journal about the psychology of sexuality) discusses kink from time to time, but tends to look at it through a sociological rather than a personal lens, for obvious reasons.

If you can grab a copy, I’m assured that The Color of Kink: Black Women, BDSM, and Pornography, is an excellent resource on this subject as well, as it is deeply detailed, contains a wealth of first hand experiences, and discusses the ways that physical pain can be empowering to marginalized peoples when we choose it for ourselves. However, I have never read it, so I’m afraid I can’t give it a full seal of approval or anything.

Anon, it might help to think of comparisons to things that you find clearly ok.

Do you feel like it’s ok for a person to choose to put themselves in pain by going to the gym and doing a workout that leaves them with sore muscles? Do you feel like it’s ok for them to enjoy that soreness afterwards?

Do you feel like it’s ok for a person to enjoy reading stories that evoke emotional reactions of sadness? To love a book that makes them cry?

Do you feel like it’s ok for a person to choose to risk serious bodily harm by playing sports or engaging in activities such as skydiving?

If those things are all ok for you, then consider:

What’s the difference, to you, between feeling satisfaction from the pain of a hard workout and feeling satisfaction from the pain of receiving a consensual spanking? Between enjoying reading a book that evokes tears, and enjoying participating in a roleplay scene that does the same? Between risking physical harm playing football or jumping out of an airplane for an adrenaline rush, and taking similar risks with BDSM play?

What makes the above listed things acceptable to you, but consensual kink not?

Is that a distinction that actually makes sense to draw, or is it based on some vague icky feeling about “deviant” sexual behaviors? Is it, maybe, the idea that someone’s actually *getting off* that makes it seem bad and wrong, and not actually concerns about safety and the risk of harm; is it maybe not really about pain and tears but about sex?

This is all a thought exercise, you don’t have to answer. It’s a process I find useful for walking through things I feel negatively about but suspect that the negative feelings stem from Social Bullshit I’ve been indoctrinated with rather than actual sense, just questioning why is this thing bad if this other similar thing is ok.

Hey Anon. Real life kinky person here, there are discussions and posts about kink tagged on my blog. As someone who engages in the darker side of psychological play and D/s dynamics with one of my Partners, if you have questions about some of those kinks, you can feel free to message me.

Some explanations and stuff after the cut.

I like Sadomasochistic behavior for the same reasons other people enjoy super spicy food, horror movies, and bungee jumping. I’m a wimp when it comes to spice, I don’t enjoy horror movies, and taking my life in my hands doesn’t seem safe. On the other hand, someone I trust implicitly using floggers I watched Him make with loving, careful, exacting Craftsmanship…? Oh that’s NICE. Like a deep tissue massage it warms the skin and prepares me for whatever He decides comes next.

I like knowing I can trust Him to craft a scene we’ll both find enjoyable, even if in the moment it’s painful and scary. Going through that together binds us closer, and in many ways it’s just as pleasurable as it is painful. I enjoy submitting to the pain, even though my instincts tell me not to. I enjoy the inner battle with myself and proving I’m stronger than I give myself credit for being.

Of course it hurts! But it hurts in the same way that sparring hurts, or really rough, good sex hurts. Because the endorphin rush after is just the same as any other adrenaline-pumping activity. It can leave you feeling giddy, exhausted, emotionally drained… and yes, sometimes that emotional release means you cry. But my Partner is there to catch me, and our after-scene debriefing time gives me space to tell Him what I liked, what I didn’t, and where He can push me further next time.

I’m going to use a REALLY EXTREME example to illustrate this point. We play with things I’m actually triggered by. We engage with my PTSD. We both have and had reservations about that play style, and what it meant for the relationship. That’s why we both put in a year of research into the pitfalls and potential issues before even DISCUSSING the scene. And then we brought our independent research to each other and said “Here are the pros and cons, these are the risks, where is the circle of acceptable risk? What can we potentially get away with, and what happens if it all goes wrong?”

Because we’re responsible adults. We engage with this, in this way, because of our relationship style. He leads, I follow. I need the structure that sort of relationship provides, and He needs the control. That authority exchange is happening between consenting adults, who understand what it means because we TALKED about it and explained our definitions before we began.

So far, we’re a statistical anomaly. We tend not to engage with my triggers that way unless we’re already in a good space in our relationship, with enough free time to handle the pitfalls. (Like at the start of a three or four day weekend, with plenty of time to talk. Not mid-week when I’ll be alone for the next three days, all day.)

I still don’t recommend that play style, even though it’s worked out well for us the four times we’ve tried it. Especially not to newbies, because it’s something you should only engage in after knowing your triggers, why they exist, and how they affect you. Exposure therapy and anything equating it should only be undertaken by a Medical Professional… but. That’s why it doesn’t fall under any of the acronyms like

Risk Aware Consensual Kink. I’m aware of the risks but is my Partner?

Personally Responsible, Informed, Consensual Kink? Well maybe. I’m putting MYSELF in this position by agreeing to this, I know the risks and I’m still consenting, and they’re in the same boat. But this isn’t just a nice heavy flogging where I might have a few welts or light bruising that’ll disappear in a few days…

Balls Out, Risky Kink? Oh yeah. Definitely. Potentially retraumatizing myself for the opportunity to have an orchestrated breakdown mid-scene before reliving my past because Dat Endorphin Rush Tho? Oh yeah~ That seems about right. Let’s go with that.

Particularly since it’s not really of the Safe Sane Consensual type of kink because let’s be honest, no kink is actually safe. Even fuzzy handcuffs can cut off circulation, and the silk rope you buy at the sex shop can get collapsed knots you have to cut off because it won’t untie easily. (That’s why you use cotton, nylon, or natural fiber like Jute or Hemp. It’s not safe, but it’s SAFER and that’s the distinction here.) Edge play; play that toes the line of what is acceptable, or considered ‘safe’; isn’t inherently better or worse than other play styles. But it is different, and it demands personal responsibility. If you don’t disclose something to your Top, and something goes wrong because of it…? You share responsibility with them, because it’s on you to be honest. (”Hey I have a trigger about whips”, and you go to a known whip Top for play without telling them? Don’t DO That!)

I’ve got a feeling that you’re coming at this from the place a lot of vanilla-leaning people are. That kink is automatically abusive because a man in control of a female bodied person is abusive. That you cannot consent to assault. That anything that LOOKS like abuse MUST BE abuse, because well, who could or would consent to bruising or some of the things we get up to?

Well, with consent, anything adults get up to together is, well, consensual. That encompasses everything from slow, gentle lovemaking sort of sex; that honest to Gods just cannot get me off; to bruises and boot kissing. Different strokes for different folks, as they say.

Some people really enjoy the sensation of fear, some people have violation or molestation fantasies that they can only explore with another consenting adult. Sometimes, you really just want to turn your brain off and act like a cute puppy for an hour or two, be stroked and loved on, and get hand-fed treats. Sometimes, nothing sounds better than getting the crap smacked out of you, until you’re crying, because nothing else can make you and you’ve been bottling your emotions and you need a release to be able to talk about what’s bothering you.

Sometimes, you want to know your partner stills cares enough to give you what you need. Sometimes, that thing isn’t a night on the town, but it IS a nice long spanking until you’re wiggling and red and sore, and then to be held and told you did well. And then taken out for ice cream because ice cream is amazing.

spellsinsugar:

Unpopular Opinion on the Sephora Witch Kit from a Native Person who used to work in the makeup industry

For reference: I used to work for L’Oreal in the same building that housed Sephora, Urban Decay and Anastasia Beverly Hills customer service. I worked for Lancôme, Khiel’s since 1851, Giorgio Armani Beauty and Yves Saint Laurent Beauty.

To clarify a few things- Sephora is not making these kits. They’re retailing them. The company making them is call Pinrose, which is a very popular fragrance brand. They’re known for ethically and sustainably using their natural fragrance ingredients, as well as using lab created fragrance ingredients to prevent using endangered ingredients or using animal products. They are cruelty free and they’re pretty open about their ingredients lists (an important thing because getting L’Oreal ingredient lists is. Uh. Very very difficult.)

I don’t give a shit about these kits. In fact – I’m probably gonna buy one! I’ve noticed that most of the people getting up in arms about “appropriating witch culture” are white witches who appropriate my culture all the live long day.

That tarot deck? Looks cute af. And I’m all for getting a big chunk of rose quartz for cheap. Also, the scents (because the kit comes with eight or nine fragrance samples) will probably be great and named after some witchy stuff!

The sage only makes me uncomfortable because white sage is endangered but I really want an honest answer from y’all who are all pissed off over this – do y’all know where your sage comes from? Do y’all demand that your local witch shop ethically sources white sage that doesn’t help to limit Native worship practices? Do y’all fight to keep your white owned witch shops from selling “sage kits” that come with fake feathers and stupid maiden/mother/crone chants? Do y’all demand answers on why your local witch shop uses the slur g*psy? Do y’all fight against the racism inherent in most witch communities?

If you can’t answer all of those questions confidently – then stop shouting about appropriation of witch culture. Just let people have their aesthetic fun. Remove the log from your own eye first.

Ok, I get that you’re ranting here and even justifiably so… but yeah, WE DO.

I didn’t know Sephora is only retailing them… it changes a few things but not my objections. (Though I hear you about rose quartz for inexpensive prices. Locally it’s skyrocketed for some reason, and my two inch pyramid I got for 15$ is now worth 30-45$)

Yes, I do. I kicked a fuss when it was being sold in non-Native shops here in town…. I only utilize one, currently, and I know where the proprietor is sourcing their sage. (Local grower, fellow pagan, and if they can’t keep up, they outsource to other local growers or someone in California depending on weather and shipping costs.) One of them has since gone out of business through no fault of mine. I don’t presume to tell the Brujeria and Botanicas what they can and can’t do as theirs is a practice closed to me and I don’t darken their doors. Nor am I about to take it upon myself to lecture them, you however can do as you please.

Yes, I do and have asked why and how they can justify those kits when they themselves know nothing about the native practice, and use terms that are inaccurate at best, harmful at worst. Yes I DO bash back when people insist on using g*psy in my presence, without knowing that it is in fact a racial slur, or to sell clothing. (I’ve already emailed sites like Pyramid Collection. They do nothing, so I don’t buy from their stores.)

I don’t wear crosses or religious jewelry I have no right to. I don’t decry Odin out of one side of my mouth and wear hammer pendants and cast runes with the other. We have two sets in this house, I do my best not to even touch the bag they came in because I have Issues with Odinn and I don’t feel like walking that line. I don’t support casting off practices because someone else rubbed their dirty racist hands on it; tall docs, red laces, leather jackets, punk/goth clothing, shaved heads; and support any other nonracist person wearing all those things.

They do not belong to them. The runes, no matter my own opinions on the path that spawned them, are for those who practice the religion. Not racists to pervert. White sage is for Native practitioners and those who have been accepted and immersed in the culture; or those who source it sustainably, and use it in smoke cleansing and do not pretend they are using it as Natives do.

My religion and spirituality is no less sacred than anyone else’s. I am allowed and able to take offense at someone utilizing something sacred to me or others “For The Aesthetic.” ESPECIALLY when I have been harassed, accosted, verbally assaulted, and mocked for the past two decades for being Pagan. IN PARTICULAR being a trans gay pagan in the south.

reggiemess:

reggiemess:

People who ‘love nature’ but violently hate their native coyotes, spiders, snakes, and scavengers are fake.

Here’s the thing about the post. You don’t have to love or even like every animal. You can dislike things! Humane, intelligent pest control is fine and necessary. This isn’t the issue and never has been.

It’s violent, blind hatred and hypocrisy that’s the problem. People who gush over foxes and owls and hawks but want coyotes and snakes dead in the next breath. People who will rescue prey from predators because predation is mean. People who find it appropriate to leave sadistic comments on pictures of spiders or snakes someone is appreciating or owns. People who insist on labeling species as ‘good’ or ‘evil’. This is the sort of behavior that bothers me.

People who only appreciate nature when it’s aesthetically pleasing to them and want to destroy the parts they find ugly and unpleasant don’t truly understand or love it. They love an ideal that isn’t actually representative of reality.

Tbh I can understand a fear response. Especially as someone who grey up in the Midwest and is looking to go back. Coyotes present a massive problem to anyone with dogs, cats, or livestock that lives outdoors and/or in barns. If even two Australian Shepherds and a Retriever cross didn’t scare those suckers off… damn yeah that’s something to fear. It doesn’t mean I want them all DEAD. It means if it comes down to my goats and horses or those rangy fucks, it’s the rangy fucks that are going down. Not because I have a grudge, but because I have a very hefty investment to protect. Same reason I’d sooner kill a coon than try to figure out if it’s only ACTING rabid. I will not deal with the carcass of a 2000lb+ animal who went rabid and tore around the pasture.

Same reason as we burned the ENTIRE woodpile when we saw that black widow. Five kids and two adults on a five acre farm with new kittens and baby goats…? Nope! Bitch has got to go… and any sisters and egg sacks too thanks.

Now. I don’t hate them irrationally. But I DO have a very healthy self preservation instinct that means I value my life and the lives of those I love above near anything else. Doesn’t mean I can’t be reasoned with or that I won’t do my best to see the other side of things. But. It’s not particularly safe or sane to allow your dogs who look up to you and depend on you for care to get into life or death fights every other night with an animal who may or may not cause damage at best, and severe infections and viral loads at worst.

It’s not particularly sane to try to MOVE multiple black widow nests or to go sticking your hand in dark spaces where they might also be living. For the same reason we cut down and burned the tree that had the termite nest, we burned the wood pile housing the very toxic spiders. I’m not about to come for anyone’s pet tarantula, and I think snakes are adorable for the most part… but that doesn’t mean that if some rattler crawls out of the rocks and starts taking a swing at me, that I’m not going to do my best to retreat AND ALSO defend myself if retreat is impossible.

It can definitely be both… and my reality isn’t a fluffy rainbows and unicorns sort of existence. I’m doing a lot better these days… but if I’m preparing to go BACK to that, even in the city well. Shit Happens. And I’d prefer it didn’t happen to ME.

MLM for Women and Other Bedroom Fantasies

This came up in a group very recently and I’ve been trying to formulate something that’s simultaneously witty and informative. I probably landed on “seems salty” again, but hey~ Who else but House-of-Crows to bring the salt in this tongue-in-cheek, sarcastic way? My goal is an eyeroll and “ok yeah sure…. hmm but also you have a point there.” The same responses I’ve tried to get with my now-retired Clue X Four series. Anyway, I stand by what I say in forums and I wanted to enlarge on my post and yeah ok, up the snark a bit because questions like these give me hives.

Query: I’ve been fantasizing about gay men and being the female cream in their male Oreo cookie. Is this a thing that happens and how would I make it happen? Isn’t that objectifying and fetishizing them and should I feel bad? Help.

Oh boy. And off we go~

1. Do Gay men ever want to be with women?

If we wanted to be with women, honey, we wouldn’t be gay. We’d be bi, pan, or homo/heteroflexible. Gay is a monosexual thing; unless it’s being used as a label because something else is too hard to explain. (See also: Queer)

2. Does this mean that I’m objectifying/fetishizing them?

TL;DR: Yes.
Long Version:
Yes, probably, but in the same way that women who read and write gay romances as a way of processing their own sexuality are objectifying and fetishizing mlm. The issue isn’t the writing and fantasizing, it’s the involving real people in those fantasies and expecting real life to conform to those expectations. It’s what leads to people demanding that Dean/Castiel become canon; I’d want the same thing but for different reasons; and berating content creators for their ships not becoming canon.

It’s what leads to people thinking that gay people are pure and innocent and that we blush over holding hands and kisses on the cheek and all we ever do is cuddle because “pure bab uwu” infantilization. It’s what shoves flower crowns and pastels down the throats of transmen and why so many of us identify as “boy” for so long… as soon as we’re not a safe soft boy anymore we’re an Evil Manperson but that’s another post for another day~

Personally, while I think people can write or read whatever their +black little hears desire, I’m also all for being self-critical and self-aware and using those tools to understand what and how our desires drive us. Fantasize about whatever you want, but when you try to translate it into reality, don’t treat people like fetish dispensers. The question isn’t “am I attracted to these people and these things?” Because you already know the answer. The question is “are they attracted to me and what do I have to offer them other than just sex?” Because, to be honest, asking someone to involve not only themselves but their partner with a third person is tricky already. Trying to get people who aren’t even interested in women involved is going to be harder. Finding a couple who are both interested in you at the same time and also into sharing and also have compatible kinks? Good luck honey, that’s why they call it unicorn hunting.

3. Is there a name for this?

Uh yeah. “gay best friends with benefits” or “fantasy that’s probably unattainable.”
On a less tongue-in-cheek note, yes a MFM threesome would be what you’re looking for. Also speaking from experience, do some stretching first if you plan on attempting double penetration; whether vaginal/anal, or both in one. It’s also difficult as hell to maneuver; yes even with one partner and a toy; and porn only makes it look easy. But it’s made to look easy on purpose… to fuel the fantasy. So your stretching should also be literal, not just sexual. Maybe do a little flexibility training if you can.

4. How does one go about finding such men that might be open to such a thing?

Most vagina-having people don’t considering that gay means you don’t want to involve yourself with women. Other gay men would go to gay swinger clubs; where to be frank, even transmen are at a disadvantage. (Since gay men, they like the penis. 😉 ) I would suggest that you search instead for bisexual, pansexual, or homo/heteroflexible men who are into sharing or swinging specifically.

I’d advise against just asking gay or male-loving-men you know to jump into bed with you. I’d also advise against bringing it up in a first conversation. I’ve done writings before on the subject of kink as Gift Giving, and asking people to give you something while offering nothing or very little in return. Kink is a time sink, and even Tops get drop. Be aware of what you’re asking and of whom, and try to tailor your requests to their interests.

You wouldn’t go to a sexual Top for nonsexual play, what would they get from it? You wouldn’t go to an Edge Player for bunny floggers and fuzzy handcuffs, what’s there to interest them? You wouldn’t go to someone who’d honed their skills in one specific area for YEARS only to ignore that kink entirely when you approached them, because it’s disrespectful to their skills and their desires as a person. (Barring those who of course enjoy playing to levels and teaching new people. But knowing who those people are is part of this process.)

So take a breath, do a bit of self-examining, and think about why you want the thing. Then figure out what you have to offer in return and go unicorn hunting. Good luck, you’re going to need it.

+side note: it may not be obvious, but I’m quoting QotD here. “Black” as in “corrupted by desire” which is obviously a rather troublesome term as desire can and is healthy and natural. But, again, I’m being sarcastic here in an attempt to be funny, similar to how Lestat acted throughout the book and movie. If that didn’t land, I apologize in advance. We can talk about colorization and terms Re: That, at some other point. I probably agree with you.