“I’m Losing My Mind”

had a dream that there was this new tiktok trend called "scrubbing" where people would take images of fictional characters and put them in images of bathtubs and drag around transparent pngs of soap and brushes with their tiktok art tablets and like liquify tool their hair down to mimic giving them a shower. and people would get into flamewars in the comments of every single video over the types of soap they picked and if the images had decently removed backgrounds and if they got soap in their eyes. and it got onto the news because it turned out everyone doing the trend was doing it compulsively like they physically couldn't stop and each video was a solid few minutes long because they were just collectively obsessively recording themselves fake-showering these fictional characters and arguing about it online

oh yeah. that's exactly what cross-stitch is supposed to look like

it's funny although a little exasperating how artists designing "princess" or medieval-esque gowns really do not understand how those types of clothes are constructed. We're all so used to modern day garments that are like... all sewn together in one layer of cloth, nobody seems to realize all of the bits and pieces were actually attached in layers.

So like look at this mid-1400's fit:

to get the effect of that orange gown, you've got

chemise next to the skin like a slip (not visible here) (sometimes you let a bit of this show at the neckline) (the point is not to sweat into your nice clothes and ruin them)

kirtle, or undergown. (your basic dress, acceptable to be seen by other people) this is the puffing bits visible at the elbow, cleavage, and slashed sleeve. It's a whole ass dress in there. Square neckline usually. In the left picture it's probably the mustard yellow layer on the standing figure.

coat, or gown. This is the orange diamond pattern part. It's also the bit of darker color visible in the V of the neckline.

surcoat, or sleeveless overgown. THIS is the yellow tapestry print. In the left picture it's the long printed blue dress on the standing figure

if you want to get really fancy you can add basically a kerchief or netting over the bare neck/shoulders. It can be tucked into the neckline or it can sit on top. That's called a partlet.

the best I can tell you is that they were technically in a mini-ice-age during this era. Still looks hot as balls though.

Coats and surcoats are really more for rich people though, normal folks will be wearing this look:

tbh I have a trapeze dress from target that looks exactly like that pale blue one. ye olden t-shirt dress.

so now look here:

(this is a princess btw) both pieces are made of the same blue material so it looks as if it's all one dress, but it's not. The sleeves you're seeing are part of the gown/coat, and the ermine fur lined section on top is a sideless overgown/surcoat. You can tell she's rich as fuck because she's got MORE of that fur on the inside of the surcoat hem.

okay so now look at these guys.

Left image (that's Mary Magdelene by the way) you can see the white bottom layer peeking out at the neckline. That's a white chemise (you know, underwear). The black cloth you see behind her chest lacing is a triangular panel pinned there to Look Cool tm. We can call that bit the stomacher. Over the white underwear is the kirtle (undergown) in red patterned velvet, and over the kirtle is a gown in black. Right image is the same basic idea--you can see the base kirtle layer with a red gown laced over it. She may or may not have a stomacher behind her lacing, but I'm guessing not.

I've kind of lost the plot now and I'm just showing you images, sorry. IN CONCLUSION:

you can tell she's a queen because she's got bits I don't even know the NAMES of in this thing. Is that white bit a vest? Is she wearing a vest OVER her sideless surcoat? Girl you do not need this many layers!

I don't know why people don't seem aware of this, but going out of your way to step in and say "this does not apply to me because I am not part of this conversation :)" does not contribute to the conversation. If you're aware that you have nothing to do with this subject, you are allowed to just skip it. It's always morally correct to not step into something that doesn't involve you just to announce that it doesn't involve you.

"I don't need this advice for how to avoid contaminated meat because I'm vegan :)" that's nice dear. This information has nothing to do with what we were talking about and brings nothing of value to the conversation.

"I don't need this advice for how to stay safe in these spaces because I don't go to those places :)" that's nice dear. This information has nothing to do with what we were talking about and brings nothing of value to the conversation.

"I don't need to pay attention to these culturally gendered red flags because I don't date that gender :)" that's nice dear. This information has nothing to do with what we were talking about and brings nothing of value to the conversation.

"I already avoided this fun but risky activity because I didn't like doing it in the first place :)" that's nice dear. This information has nothing to do with what we were talking about and brings nothing of value to the conversation.

You don't need to announce that some situation, post, or piece of advice doesn't apply to you. Your perspective on such matters is not valuable.

one of the best academic paper titles

Lighter than a butterfly...

[hunched trembling in a dark corner with a knife] I can be normal about normal things and I can prove it