Author: Brin

~ Brin ~ Leave a comment

sinesalvatorem:

bordering-lines:

anonbinarymess:

sinesalvatorem:

I feel unreasonably pleased with the fact that my preferences are so strange that, even when someone purposefully trolled my dating quiz aiming for the lowest possible score, they STILL scored 20 points due to me being a weirdo :p

Specifically, for the question of what they might do if I seemed upset, they selected “initiate sex” (despite previously claiming to be ace). For most people, that would probably be a pretty crass response. However, I find it to be quite positive and VERY distracting, so it pretty consistently makes me stop feeling bad.

Unsurprisingly, no one has non-trollingly selected this answer, because they don’t want to look like an asshole. (Even though, in my peculiar case, “doing romantic things at me” and “fucking me” are the best possible options.)

I chose romantic stuff, but initiate sex would’ve been my second choice provided my partner wasn’t like… pissed at ME and just at the world. #badcopingmechanisms

Wait is this uncommon? Romantic and sexual things are *often* My preference as a response to me being upset. Not always, but often. Is that like… not a normal thing?

I’m not sure. However, I do get the impression that most people would see initiating sex with an upset person as taking advantage of them. This is not at all how it would work for me, but I can understand people who expect this and shy away from it because of that. I think “doing romantic things at [partner]” is less likely to be seen this way, which is why far more people were OK with that.

It would at least be interesting to find out what fraction of people have a positive opinion vs a negative opinion of their partner initiating sex when they’re upset.

As someone who originally thought picking “initiate sex” on that survey would be a bad idea:

My line of reasoning was “Upset people don’t want to have sex, so trying will just piss them off (further), and possibly cause them to take out their upsetness on you. Maybe not so much that last part with Alison specifically, but there’s still the pissing-off problem, so still not a good idea.”

(I did pick romantic stuff, though, because that seemed like upset people would be more amenable to it.)

So it seems like the problem is “more variation than expected in what upset people are amenable to”.

Tags:

#reply via reblog #nsfw? #is the blue I see the same as the blue you see

~ Brin ~ 2 Comments

{{previous post in sequence}}

transgirlkyloren:

also I wonder if it is possible to influence the kind of voices you get by expecting your voices to be kind and helpful before you hear them. seems like it has a low downside to try to acquire those expectations if you’re in a high-risk group for voice hearing

Tags:

#there’s actually a thing buried in my Tumblr drafts #about how spending my early adolescence in the neurodiversity blogosphere #led me to treat my influenza(?)-induced hallucinatory voices with respect #(the mildly annoying one ignored me and I think the nice one appreciated it) #while I was aware that given the circumstances they were likely to be transient #the idea that they might not be didn’t scare me #not being scared sounds helpful #this post seems like it qualifies for the tag #in which Brin somehow manages to be among the most singlet people she knows #(I wonder if I should post that draft at some point)

{{next post in sequence}}

~ Brin ~ 1 Comment

transgirlkyloren:

shower thought: if you buy the idea that the content of the voices people hear is culturally mediated, representation of voice hearers who hear nice voices is basically the most important kind of representation. if you make a couple of tv shows starring a voice hearer whose voices are kind and positive then maybe lots more people will have kind and positive voices which is a huge QOL increase for a very vulnerable group

Tags:

#interesting idea #the wondrous variety of sapient life

{{next post in sequence}}

~ Brin ~ 1 Comment

{{previous post in sequence}}

I’m beginning to wonder if Team TARDIS’s complete lack of concern for air breathability is a deliberate running gag.

Tags:

#Nardole you just spent six weeks in the hospital for failure to bring a spacesuit #you of all people should not feel safe taking your helmet off as soon as you see the local atmosphere can support an open fire #you know what else has atmosphere that can support fire? a fucking *biohazard lab* #Doctor Who #reactionblogging #oh look an update #Empress of Mars #dw spoilers

~ Brin ~ 2 Comments

{{previous post in sequence}}

transgirlkyloren:

brin-bellway:

transgirlkyloren:

I think if you’re writing porn online in this day and age and you have any sort of audience, even if you say “18+ only”, some teenagers are going to read it

(as well as some older people who for whatever reason don’t have much sexual and romantic experience)

and so part of Doing Porn Ethically is trying to make your porn something that you’d be okay with a very inexperienced person reading and drawing conclusions about sex from. and so some of that is trying to be realistic about the emotions involved with sex, about safer sex practices, about sexual ethics, and about the mechanics of sex and then when for whatever reason you don’t want to be realistic signposting ACTUALLY USING CONDOMS IS A VERY GOOD IDEA AND YOU SHOULD NOT RAPE OR ABUSE PEOPLE AND ALSO COME IS GENERALLY PRODUCED IN MUCH SMALLER QUANTITIES THAN THIS STORY CLAIMS

(I have a nagging feeling that I’ve misunderstood something here. I will tentatively post this anyway, but I might have gotten something wrong. (Although it’s also possible that the thing I’m wrong about is the sense that I’ve misunderstood something.))

—

Hmm. I’m so biased in favour of this that I can’t tell whether or not I actually agree with it on its own merits, rather than agreeing on the grounds of “I personally enjoy porn more when it’s about realistic ethical stuff, and I would like to encourage people to write their porn in a way I prefer”.

(Like…judging from context, this post was likely inspired by a post from yournaturalstate. I dislike yournaturalstate’s work primarily because it’s *unpleasant*, before even getting into any ethical considerations.)

—

I’m not sure whether this is a point in favour, or a point against, or a tangent, but it’s something related:

Mind-control porn in particular has problems with people insisting on putting blanket Do Not Try This At Home warnings on *everything*. Even things that are actually perfectly ethical and realistic. Even things that are thinly fictionalised scene logs of sex the author actually had (as an enthusiastically consenting bottom).

Written on the entrance to the largest and most well-known mind-control erotica repository are the words:

“The situations described here are at best impossible or at worst highly immoral in real life. Anyone wishing to try this stuff for real should seek psychological help and/or get a life.” (emphasis original)

(This warning is *not true*. Not in all cases.)

So personally, when I think of porn messing up impressionable teenagers, I think of teenagers being told they have to choose between being ethical (or safe) and satisfying their most deeply held desires. This dilemma is terrible enough when it *actually exists*; we *should not tell people it exists where it does not*, should not inflict that on more people than absolutely necessary.

(I say this as a former impressionable teenager falsely told her sexuality could not be safely fulfilled.)

…now that I’ve written that out, I guess this section is a point in-favour-but-with-reservations, pointing out a possible failure mode of a generally good idea. (And a failure mode the original context in question is particularly prone to, at that.)

(Well, okay, yournaturalstate specifically is not prone to it *enough*. But still, I’ve learned the hard way how easy it is to swing too far the other way.)

I think that noting which things are actually perfectly ethical and realistic is, in fact, part of having your porn be good sex ed. Misinforming people is bad sex ed. 

An excellent point. I agree.

Tags:

#the actual message of this response could probably have been conveyed just as well with a ”like” #I’m reblogging mostly so that people following me but not you can see this bit #reply via reblog #sexuality and lack thereof #nsfw text #(the following category tag was added retroactively:) #conversational aglets

{{next post in sequence}}

~ Brin ~ 1 Comment

transgirlkyloren:

I think if you’re writing porn online in this day and age and you have any sort of audience, even if you say “18+ only”, some teenagers are going to read it

(as well as some older people who for whatever reason don’t have much sexual and romantic experience)

and so part of Doing Porn Ethically is trying to make your porn something that you’d be okay with a very inexperienced person reading and drawing conclusions about sex from. and so some of that is trying to be realistic about the emotions involved with sex, about safer sex practices, about sexual ethics, and about the mechanics of sex and then when for whatever reason you don’t want to be realistic signposting ACTUALLY USING CONDOMS IS A VERY GOOD IDEA AND YOU SHOULD NOT RAPE OR ABUSE PEOPLE AND ALSO COME IS GENERALLY PRODUCED IN MUCH SMALLER QUANTITIES THAN THIS STORY CLAIMS

(I have a nagging feeling that I’ve misunderstood something here. I will tentatively post this anyway, but I might have gotten something wrong. (Although it’s also possible that the thing I’m wrong about is the sense that I’ve misunderstood something.))

—

Hmm. I’m so biased in favour of this that I can’t tell whether or not I actually agree with it on its own merits, rather than agreeing on the grounds of “I personally enjoy porn more when it’s about realistic ethical stuff, and I would like to encourage people to write their porn in a way I prefer”.

(Like…judging from context, this post was likely inspired by a post from yournaturalstate. I dislike yournaturalstate’s work primarily because it’s *unpleasant*, before even getting into any ethical considerations.)

—

I’m not sure whether this is a point in favour, or a point against, or a tangent, but it’s something related:

Mind-control porn in particular has problems with people insisting on putting blanket Do Not Try This At Home warnings on *everything*. Even things that are actually perfectly ethical and realistic. Even things that are thinly fictionalised scene logs of sex the author actually had (as an enthusiastically consenting bottom).

Written on the entrance to the largest and most well-known mind-control erotica repository are the words:

“The situations described here are at best impossible or at worst highly immoral in real life. Anyone wishing to try this stuff for real should seek psychological help and/or get a life.” (emphasis original)

(This warning is *not true*. Not in all cases.)

So personally, when I think of porn messing up impressionable teenagers, I think of teenagers being told they have to choose between being ethical (or safe) and satisfying their most deeply held desires. This dilemma is terrible enough when it *actually exists*; we *should not tell people it exists where it does not*, should not inflict that on more people than absolutely necessary.

(I say this as a former impressionable teenager falsely told her sexuality could not be safely fulfilled.)

…now that I’ve written that out, I guess this section is a point in-favour-but-with-reservations, pointing out a possible failure mode of a generally good idea. (And a failure mode the original context in question is particularly prone to, at that.)

(Well, okay, yournaturalstate specifically is not prone to it *enough*. But still, I’ve learned the hard way how easy it is to swing too far the other way.)

Tags:

#reply via reblog #sexuality and lack thereof #nsfw text

{{next post in sequence}}