LillyPip

Sci-fi & horror author, UXD, software dev, composer/engraver, gamer, seamstress/tailor, nerd, etc; she/her. Aroace.

  • 128 Posts
  • 2.98K Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 8th, 2023

help-circle

  • LillyPiptoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldHostile architecture
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    I could see this meaning something more – and even something inclusive – if the environment is part of the design; for a moment I ignored the steep looking sand bank, but if that’s part of the art, that changes the meaning by a lot. That would make much more sense.

    I’ve lived places where the landscape changes a lot throughout the year, though, so I sort of ignored the background and took the bench itself in isolation.

    Maybe that’s where I fucked up.




  • Kinda feels like most people today don’t have solid assets. At least in the 1st world west, many people have no hope to own tangible assets, and will rent all their most expensive things – home, vehicle, etc – and now most people’s assets are highly spongey, though they’re convinced otherwise.

    It hurts, but almost none of us can hope to own property or anything solid like that. That’s why I refuse to relinquish my land, though literally everyone around me won’t stop hounding me to do it.

    I get it. I can barely afford McDonald’s (I treat myself every few months), but I will not give up my land. Whatever. But I gave more than that to help stop genocide.



  • But what this art says to me, as a wheelchair user, is something completely different because this design is the opposite of inclusive. Is that what is meant?

    This design says I should be excluded – taking it as art, this design communicates everyone having conversations and leaving me out, because that back bar will exclude me by design.

    If I’m to socialise, I should be on one end or the other, but that middle part means I’ll be artificially excluded by the environment.

    Is that what it’s meant to mean?


  • LillyPiptoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldHostile architecture
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    They couldn’t, though. Because of the space the back of the chair and the radius the wheels requires, the person in the chair would be sitting nearly a foot in front of anyone seated on the bench.

    e: look at the amount of space with my custom high-end and narrow profile chair (it’s even more space with the standard-issue chair):

    .

    Your head will be in line with the leftmost right dot if you’re relaxed. I backed my chair against a door, and that’s fuzz or something.

    That back bar prevents you from sitting ‘with’ anyone.


  • LillyPiptoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldHostile architecture
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 day ago

    as well as practically.

    X doubt.

    This is worse than nothing, because (as a wheelchair user) there’s like 10 inches of clearance behind the chair (given wheel clearance). That back rail means you can’t back up to get yourself in line with your compatriots,so you’ll be in front of and misaligned with the people on either side, such that they’re literally talking behind your back.

    If this design was in earnest, it’s godawful and just shows the designer had no idea what they were doing.

    If it’s an art project, then I can appreciate it. If it was meant to be practical, it’s a major fail.


  • LillyPiptoComic Strips@lemmy.worldwhy?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 days ago

    Well, yes, but I meant the form-fitting fashion that was the rage when pockets disappeared from womenswear between like 1910 and the late 1950s. Women still weren’t allowed to wear overtly manly clothes except in certain contexts, so everything from the waist down had to be overtly feminine, since just wearing man pants was too subversive.





  • LillyPiptoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldWater time
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Counterpoint: it’s super manly to just own it and not worry about how you look. Whether you do tiny laps like a cat or big ol’ slurps like a dog, having the confidence to just hydrate yourself and not care who’s watching is kinda sexy, ngl



  • LillyPiptoComic Strips@lemmy.worldwhy?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    To be fair, it’s really hard to design fashion that’s stylish AND has pockets.

    It’s hard enough to design something that looks good on a variably sized and kinetic shape. Now make it look good and have storage.





  • LillyPiptoComic Strips@lemmy.worldBat-van
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    In that era, though, many couples slept in separate beds and pushed them together for sexy times.

    Both sets of my grandparents even slept in separate rooms. When I was very small, my parents had 2 beds in 1 room. That’s how it was often done.

    So that doesn’t really help much. If anything, the pushing 2 beds together was media speak for sexy times…