a_queer_one

I like the joke. However, I just gonna say, sounding really isn't intended to be a painful activity when done in a kink context. Despite looking crazy it's intended for pleasure not masochism

RIP Drizly

I think the way you applied it showed some nuance, as you talked about it in non-absolute terms. However, when applied broadly it can be harmful.

If we always assume that homophobes and transphobes are queer and trans, then we assume that queer and trans folx are the ones hurting themselves. It's a small jump from there to say that closted lgbtq people are the source of lgbtq people's trauma, which is both harmful and false.

Not sure where you think I claim to know the true path. I can assure you I don't, even just in my relationships. I was mentioning an option, if you wanted something, that seemed relevant based on your words. I'm confused how discussing folks who have a different view of consent make them cultists.

But the thing about consent being key is that you're more than welcome to reach your own conclusions. You do you.

Just want to say I'm sorry your potential partners are turned off by consent seeking. I definitely wouldn't be with my partners if they didn't find consent sexy.

I can promise you that the actual bdsm community cares a great deal about consent. Negotiating is a critical skill in that context, especially if engaging in stuff that might look nonconsensual. If you like your sex kinky and consensual you might seek out your local kink scene.

What the actual fuck.

CNC as a kink is fine, but to be done healthily requires really solid negotiation skills by all parties. Ain't no way in hell you can implicitly consent just by going to a party. Even the most edgey edge-player (someone who does risky bdsm play) I know would nope the fuck out of that.

Fucking awful.

Ah, the classic right-wing technique of taking pictures from Folsom Street Fair and putting them next to pictures from Pride to imply they are the same thing.

Yeah, there is definitely an eeriness. The tone taken for the Deep Ones / fish people in The Shadow Over Innsmouth is really genocidal. The story was penned in 1930-31 though, so inspired by prior concentration camps

To clarify, he was absolutely racist with really reactionary views. He wasn't a Nazi.

I'm not defending him, but I also think it's worth being clear about who was and wasn't a Nazi when discussing those alive during the Nazi Party.

For anyone curious, this letter (sorry for linking that site on lemmy, best source i could find) has him discussing Hitler in 1933. It's far more positive than I'd ever defend, but it's also pretty clear he's not a Nazi. He saw Nazism as the lesser of two evils compared to Bolshevism. I think that's a fucking bad take, but I don't think someone who says

"Still—don’t get my wrong. I’m not saying that Schön[e] Adolf is anything more than a lesser evil... When the Germans can get another leader, & emerge from the present period of arbitrary fanaticism, his usefulness will be over."

is a Nazi. He was just a good ol' New England reactionary racist.

This video essay also has some really great insight into discussing the reactionary nature of Lovecraft from a leftist standpoint while still recognizing his literary contributions.

Minor correction, Dan didn't testify. He was present for some of the depositions of Alex in the TX case, being there to help guide Mark Bankston's questioning. Mostly mentioning cause Dan was pretty clear he didn't want to actually testify