ask the archetypes

anonymous asked:

humanitarian is literally the (developed) aquarian ARCHETYPE, like, do you not get that you can't change that? it's literally set into stone, your personal experiences should never come into play with actual facts.

I’m not trying to change any ‘facts?’ (seriously what is it with people bringing ‘facts’ into astrology- this isn’t a hard science it’s nebulous and subjective and full of holes and exceptions and evolves with humanity, that’s the whole appeal)

 I’m not challenging the archetype? I’m just pointing out how it manifests in real human beings, and the fact is, so-called humanitarians (the human embodiment of the Aquarius archetype) are very often selfish, deceptive, and have hidden agendas (gandhi, obama, it’s a long list, use google)

astrology is useless unless you find a way to apply archetypes to real people and see how it plays out in the real world via… get this… personal experiences (wow)

also…. bruh….. nothing is set in stone… everything you take as a “fact” can change in a second (look at what happened to the world of physics w/quantum theory, scientists literally can’t agree on what reality is anymore, and that’s physics, not astrology which is even more weird and wishy-washy)

astrology is a human construct, along with every archetype in it.

a chair is only a chair because you decide it’s a chair and sit on it, without your ‘perception’ and ‘personal experience’ it’s just dead wood glued together in a weird shape

personal experience is a perfectly valid way to come up with new ideas and draw your own conclusions about stuff, that is literally why we are alive and have functional brains

‘facts’ aren’t created in a vaccum; they are verbalized by people applying their personal experience/perception to the world

** I sound mad but I’m not mad, just trying to clear some really basic things up, feel like this should all be common sense so idk

redinkofshame  asked:

You mentioned that the female body-chan is too exaggerated for your tastes; what do you think of the Figma Archetype Next: She? (I know you mentioned cost, I'm just curious if you have experience with it and it's less pose-able or something.)

Hi, thanks for the ask, and for your patience!  I had a couple of crazy work weeks, so I’m behind on asks and posting new pictures, but I’m hoping to catch up next week!

As to your question – first off, some background for anyone reading:

S.H. Figuarts Body-chan (left) | Figma Archetype Next: She (right)

In general, I do think the Figma Archetype Next: She figure looks like a more useful resource for someone seeking less stylized anatomy.  I also think these look like two entirely different women, with Body-chan appearing maybe 4′ or 4′5″ based on her proportions and head size (though still lacking anatomical believability), while Next: She’s proportions are more like 5′9″ to 6ft tall.  I even overlaid Next: She’s photo over some of these athlete body comparison charts to see how the proportions line up.  She consistently matches the 6′+ female athletes, and occasionally a 5′6″ or 5′8″.  I recommend trying it out yourself too, paying close attention to head size and placement of the soles of the feet. Any drawings based on these figures would have to account for their proportional differences.

I don’t have either figure, so I can’t really vouch for quality or poseability.  I’ve found pictures of Body-kun and Body-chan together, but I don’t know how Next: She’s scale compares to Body-kun’s.

My biggest worry about Next: She from looking at pictures is flexibility in posing.  With such a long torso, it would be difficult to get a realistic bend or swivel in the spine without having an additional point of articulation at the center of the waist.  Even Body-kun with his short torso doesn’t have as much flexibility there as I would like.  I can’t get him to fully curl over his knees, for example.

The pictures on this site are some good examples of the lack of realistic bend.  She achieves some good @eschergirls​ -like snaking in the waist, but I’ve never seen a real human achieve such feats. ^_^

I also find it disappointing that none of the female figures appear to have any full swivel capability above the biceps or the upper thighs, because it’s helpful to see the rotation of the muscles and joints even if your female characters only have the slightest hint of muscle definition.  It may not be a deal-breaker if you have good anatomical knowledge or have a simplified art style, but it’s a minus for sure if you ever draw buff women.  It looks like both female figures might have *some* swivel in the thighs, but it also looks much more limited than Body-kun, who can achieve over 90 degree turnout purely from upper thigh rotation. (anyone out there who has either female figure and can confirm?)

Here’s another example of how lack of flexibility can lead to faulty posing[1].  And this is even one of the promo images used for Next: She.  Yes, if you were lifting your leg in front of you, the back of your knee and the heel of your foot would face forward[2].  But if you were lifting your leg to the side as the figure is doing, the back of your knee and heel would face outward[3].  I’m not sure if it’s just a bad pose or a reflection of this figure lacking thigh-swiveling capability.  Either way, it’s something to watch out for when making a mannequin approximate a pose that it can’t quite do.  (disclaimer: Body-kun can almost do a full side split, but he can’t lift his leg above his waist, so it’s not like he can emulate these dancers either.  But he can do pose #1 with his knee and even his thigh muscles facing the right direction.)

Of course, mannequins are only guides, to be used as supplements alongside anatomical study from life.  So if your knowledge can fill in the gaps that the figure leaves behind, it’s all good.  I think this figure could probably be helpful for artists who are looking for more basic poses, or artists who don’t draw a lot of women with visible muscle mass, or for anyone who has good anatomical knowledge and can recognize the points where the figure deviates from reality.  When using mannequins, I also like to feel out unusual poses with my own body, and look at video and photos (ones I know aren’t doctored) and real life to judge the pose’s viability and do anatomical comparisons.

Personally, I find it more helpful to have a believable pose as a base, regardless of gender, than to have a correctly gendered figure that lacks believable posing ability.  So I prefer to stick with Body-kun for now.  But that’s purely personal preference.

tl:dr I do think Figma Archetype Next: She would be a helpful reference as long as you supplement it heavily with anatomical studying from life and can recognize where the figure falls short of reality - but this is also true of most drawing aids.  I think it has better anatomy than Body-chan, but I don’t think it has the same range of believable poseability as Body-kun.

I know that was probably way more detail than you wanted, but I hope it helps!  If anyone has either female figure and wants to chime in, feel free!

anonymous asked:

Re: Blue Diamond, I find it interesting that she so strongly resembles a very well-known piece of funeral art. Google 'Black Aggie Statue' (also known as 'Grief') and you'll see what I mean. There's a legend about the statue that it's bad luck or cursed! This statue was so well known in its day that it was widely copied for headstones and memorials around the world. Sugar talks about a dance being an inspiration for the character design, but I think Black Aggie must have been as well.

That’s an interesting idea! And it further reinforces the idea that BD is in perpetual mourning, or at least she’d like to be. 

And to add to that, the veiled figure of mourning is one that is well-known as well. I feel all this historical imagery blends together into BD’s aesthetic so that immediately looking at her, we already get a set of ideas about who she’s supposed to be and what she does.

The thing is, Crewnvierse has always introduced these tropes knowingly and then subverted them. Every antagonist ever is a good example. So I think that’s also a really good hint at what’s to come for us, and it’s that the Diamonds aren’t the one-note characters they present as.

anonymous asked:

Moon in Aries?

Boulevard of Broken Dreams by Green Day

I walk a lonely road
The only one that I have ever known
Don’t know where it goes
But it’s only me, and I walk alone

I walk this empty street
On the boulevard of broken dreams
Where the city sleeps
And I’m the only one, and I walk alone

Little known fact about Aries moon: they probably grew up really lonely and feel alone to this day. Their sister sign, Libra, also grew up lonely. 

These two signs developed different personalities to cope with the same issue; Libra is co-dependent and people-pleasing to avoid being alone. Aries is independent and walks that “lonely road” without caring what others thing (most of the time). 

Aries moon is likely to accept the loneliness that Libra moon runs from. 

anonymous asked:

where is this "archetype" comic for a scrub who is only very recently back into the phandom

Hooo nelly, you’re in for a treat. I linked it in that pic I drew but you can can read it on joe-the-hoe’s deviantart HERE

It’s a super good, really dark, grungy horror AU with over 400 pages, but that’s all i’m going to say about it in case of spoilers.

Also - the artist responsible for this masterpiece is @homeboysammy here on tumblr, though as far as I know deviantart is the only place they post the comic.

anonymous asked:

could you pls pls explain sweater boy/ absolute nightmare? thank you in advance

Sweater boy and absolute nightmares are non-fandom-specific names for the two halves of the Dynamic. Sweater boy refers to the Watson archetype; it was first used to describe Robert Sean Leonard, wearer of sweaters and an iconic Watson actor. Absolute nightmare refers to the Holmes archetype; it first appeared in a comment on The Toast (the comments on the actual article appear to be inaccessible) about the BBC version of Sherlock Holmes. 

anonymous asked:

When you say archetype, do you mean like a powerful symbol?

Not really. That would be another way to look at it though possibly. When I say archetype I mean more like a facet of a bigger thing, an entity who fits into a big umbrella term. Sometimes they may not even be a full being, more like a persona that an entity takes on for a while.

Like okay so The Hermit to me is an archetype who I’ve run into a few times. Not as an entity, or a spirit, or anything as solid as that. More like I will find a character in media, or a song, or an image, or a real actual person that has that Hermit “vibe” to them, and it feels like a continued conversation with something across all those instances. Like it’s the same “otherness” on the other side of all these lyrics and symbols being tossed my way. Not in a “ah yes the gods are sending me signs” kind of way but more in a “Oh, this is another person/image/thing touched by the Hermit archetype.” 

I’m realizing I’m very bad at explaining what I mean by archetype. It’s a vague sort of feeling so difficult for me to put into words right now.

The Eye of Timaeus
(This card is also always treated as “Legendary Dragon Timaeus”.)
Target 1 “Dark Magician” monster you control; Fusion Summon 1 Fusion Monster from your Extra Deck that lists that monster on the field as a Fusion Material, using it as the Fusion Material. You can only activate 1 “The Eye of Timaeus” per turn.

Can Be Found In: Dragons of Legend (DRLG-EN005), Dragons of Legend: Unleashed (DRL3-EN045)

“Dark Magician” is a very interesting case in the card game. Despite his low stats for such Level, being one of the most popular monsters in the franchise allowed him to stay relevant thanks to a massive list of cards and effects supporting him. Pretty much becoming his own archetype despite being technically the only member, “Dark Magician” is one of the most flexible Normal Monsters with several summoning options and mechanics to work along with.

“The Eye of Timaeus” is the most limited among the Legendary Dragons when comes to materials to work with, but said monsters makes it the most prevalent among all three. “Timaeus” allow us to perform a Fusion Summon by using a single Dark Magician in our field (Not simply “Dark Magician” himself, but any monster with that title in its name). Is a very simple an cheap effect which combined with the many resources arround “Dark Magician” and his comrades will easily setup the arrival of the right Fusion Monster for the occasion.

The Fusions we can bring out with the assistance of “Timaeus” are scarce, with three of them requiring “Dark Magician” and one by using “Dark Magician Girl”. But where it lacks on Extra Deck options it compensates with a big pool of cards to bring one or even both of these monsters, going from “Temperance of Prophecy” bringing one of them or “Magician Navigation” summoning them together. “Dark Magician” gets the upper hand by a huge margin when comes to summoning and searching options, with further assistance of cards like “Magician’s Robe” and “Palladium Oracle Mahad” as well many revival options such as “Swing of Memories” and “Dark Renewal”. However, we don’t even need to summon one of these two Dark Magicians to immediately prepare a summon with “Timaeus”, as with the simple assistance of “Elemental HERO Prisma” we can dispose of one of these monsters to take their place on the board. Keep on mind that cards like “Dark Magic Inheritance” won’t work to search for “The Eye of Timaeus”, as the Spell instead of working with “Dark Magician” himself asks for monsters inside the archetype.

“Timaeus” might only have four Fusion Monsters to work with, but each of them provides a very unique role on the field to stand out individually. The main Fusion arround this Spell Card will be “Amulet Dragon”, banishing Spell Cards from each Graveyard to obtain an ATK boost as well able to revive a Spellcaster once defeated, keeping the field pressence or even prepare a new Fusion Summon by reviving a Dark Magician. “Dark Magician Girl” only provide us with “Dark Magician Girl the Dragon Knight”, carrying the ability to destroy face-up cards during any turn thus becoming a menacing removal effect during any circumstances. “Dark Paladin” is probably one of the most known “Dark Magician” counterparts, with the ability to negate Spells as well getting stronger when working along or against Dragons makes it the most supported Fusion of the bunch as shares traits with the Buster Blader and Destruction Sword archetypes. Last we have the weakest of the Fusions “Dark Flare Knight” as is a summoning condition for the nomi monster “Mirage Knight”, but thanks to “Timaeus” will considerably ease his summon due requiring the Fusion “Flame Swordsman” on his own. Don’t forget that “Timaeus” is far from over after providing Fusion Summons, as once in the Graveyard can be banished by the effect of “Legend of Heart” to bring “Legendary Knight Timaeus” and others if is working along the rest of Legendary Dragons.

While “The Claw of Hermos” has the most liberties and “The Fang of Critias” provides some of the most disruptive Fusion Monsters, “The Eye of Timaeus” has it the easiest to gather arround his scarce yet highly supported materials. Despite asking for a Dark Magician on our field to be activated, the many tools arround both “Dark Magician” and “Dark Magician Girl” makes it really easy to Fusion Summon right from early game to late game. From many revival options to “Elemental HERO Prisma” considerably cheapening the setups, even “Dark Magician Girl” which has far less options can even have her own build arround her only Fusion Summon. “Timaeus” is undoubtly dependant of the many options involving both Dark Magicians to have them on the field, but with the many chances to summon one of them by almost no effort makes it the most remarkable of the Legendary Dragons.

Personal Rating: A

+ Fusion Summons by only using a Dark Magician in our field
+ Highly supported thanks to the many options arround “Dark Magician” and “Dark Magician Girl”
+ “Elemental HERO Prisma” cheapens the preparatives considerably

- Dependant of other cards and effects


Thank youvm 

I love drawing I just rarely get to computers to  post @.@

Now I do >u<

Anon somehow matching outfits were the hardest thing I was able to do

 (with some sort of pose) O.O

Thank you but I sorry dun actually do FT anymore, I only sometimes draw Grayza because I still like their character designs together… 

tenacioustaylor  asked:

Could you explain the shadow functions for infj? I understand what they are but I'm not exactly sure how they manifest depending on the position in the stack they're in.

yes of course fren ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) let’s see.

INFJ’s Shadow Functions

Opposing Personality: Ne
The INFJ will feel overwhelmed by a bombardment of ideas and information, especially when they are disorganized and don’t seem to have any pattern to link them together with. They probably get annoyed when people jump from topic to topic too quickly. INFJs use this function when antagonizing people under stress, so they will probably become very abstract when very angry or stressed, becoming aggressive in a way that their arguments are endless, may not make sense, and they easily overthink. They will probably regret everything after they’ve calmed down.

Critical Parent: Fi
When stressed and in a position of extreme self-doubt or anxiety, the INFJ will judge themselves very harshly on the morality of the things they’ve made a mistake on. They will start to question everything they believe in, and they might even be constantly thinking about or replaying the emotions associated with the event.

Trickster: Te
The INFJ will have trouble keeping up with, or making schedules. They have a poor sense of time and lack the ability to accurately tell how much time something will take. They also have trouble assessing key tasks or key points, and will therefore often overwork themselves (because they think all the tasks are necessary) or elaborate too much on something unimportant, instead of “cutting to the chase” (because they think all the facts are necessary to point out). They may also have trouble controlling people and their environment, preferring to use Fe instead, where they can blend in with the environment. This can make them seem manipulative, where they try to take control based on their understanding of others’ emotions.

Demon: Si
Demonic Si will make the INFJ try to shut off the function the most. They have terrible short term (and sometimes long-term) memory, which makes them bad at and hate memorizing things. Demonic Si will also recall horrible memories. The INFJ will also have a poor sense of knowing their physical limits. They may have irregular sleeping and eating patterns, and it might stem from some anxiety. For example, they might have an irregular eating pattern because they’re insecure (or they might have an eating disorder), or irregular sleeping pattern because they are stressed (which causes insomnia).

i hope i helped! \o/ just remember, the only shadow function that really sticks out like a sore thumb is the trickster (PoLR) function. the others would require the types to be extremely stressed (since the shadow functions oppose the first four).

Ask Meme: Archetype Quiz

Thank you, @lepetitchoucommie for the tag!

Elsee Ryder

It’s pretty accurate. She’s a heart on sleeves type, with a big streak of adventure. Her intellectual side comes out more in regards to her little experiments in the environment that she performs as she has the time.

I tag: @lupalavellan @puppypopcornpizza @head-bitch-inquisitor @commspecialist  @oblivionscribe if you want to do it

mine favorite anon ask/reply archetype on here is

(prolly some nervous gay child) are you a terf?

and the reply is like an 8 paragraph passive aggressive dissertation on the topic

anonymous asked:

Say I wanted to join the collective as an archetype, would that be allowed or does one class get all the say on all the archetypes? (As in, if someone wanted to be a holy gun or a dusk knight, would that be too close to your blog?)

Here’s how I typically decide: I ask for what class/archetype you’d like to submit as, ask what that class means to you, if you feel passionate about it, and what kind of content you’d post, and what would you do to minimize excessive overlap with an established classes. After that I usually say no, or yes, but sometimes if I’m uncertain I’d send you to the blog that I’d fear you might be overlapping with too much, and if they give you the OK then great! If they don’t that’s the end of the discussion.

At first blush on holy gun and dusk knight: The first I’m interested in hearing your position on, the second I’m wondering what’s the difference between it and the dark knight. 

anonymous asked:

I am working on a fantasy story that puts the great burden of saving the country on twelve teenagers. They are all capable in their own way and very different from each other, some even non-human. My question is: are there too many main protagonists?

Lots of Protagonists

The question you should really ask yourself here is whether or not you can handle twelve main characters. Does the idea of it overwhelm you or excite you? If you feel that you’re able to do it, then it’s a challenge I think you should definitely explore. You said they’re very different from each other, but here are some general tips/considerations:

1) Make them distinct in appearance. This doesn’t mean that you need to have twelve different ethnicities represented, but this is your chance to be diverse and embrace backgrounds other than your own. You might also have a good mix of gender or gender identities, as well as different hair colors, eye colors, variations in height and weight, as well as age (in your case, some younger teens versus older teens). Do what you can to make each character unique in appearance, even if that means browsing through Google to find models/actors/drawings for each character (for your own benefit - not to show other people). Even though it’s a novel and readers ultimately won’t see what these characters look like, it’ll be easier for you to describe them each individually if the picture is 100% clear in your own mind. 

2) Make them distinct in personality. With twelve characters, it can be easy to fall into tropes/stereotypes. The best tip I’ve heard on this subject is to take two personality traits that don’t seem to go together and put them in one person. Someone can be friendly, yet selfish. A character who’s really tough might still be dependent on other people. The “funny” one can actually be intelligent and thoughtful, as opposed to just the dumb friend. Challenge yourself to come up with traits that make it easier to distinguish them, and if you do have any similar traits, try to put those in characters that aren’t easy to get mixed up in appearance. 

I also gave another tip way back when someone asked about archetypes, as a good starting point to develop your characters. See this link I referenced to read more about those. The key is starting with an archetype and then adding/changing aspects of each one to make it unique.

3) Give them very different names. As a general rule, I try not to have two main characters whose names even start with the same letter, but at the very least, try to avoid names that appear or sound too similar, like a character named Sammy and another named Sandy. Or one named Christian and another named Christine. Names are an easy way to show distinction, so don’t pass it up.

4) Consider their backstories, but don’t go crazy. Show differences in the way they were raised, their hobbies, the friends they had, whether or not they had siblings, and whether they went through any trauma or significant hardship. I warn you not to go crazy, because of twelve people, not all of them are going to have a tragic backstory, so make sure that some of them experienced normalcy and happiness (perhaps up until your story begins). 

5) Introduce them slowly. Usually, the wisest advice in such large casts of characters is to start with the characters before they all know each other. So you can focus on building their personal story/character development one at a time before their individual stories converge into the main plot. If your story is set up so that they all know each other from the start, you can still introduce them in batches. Start your story with a few of the characters together in one scene, and really spend time showcasing each character in that scene. Once you’ve well into the scene, you might also mention a couple other characters, who you’ll actually bring into the story a scene or two later. Just try to avoid putting all twelve of them into the very first chapter, and if at all possible, try to keep all twelve from being key players in one scene. The important thing is allowing a reader time to get to know each other character on their own or in small groups, instead of trying to differentiate them when they’re all in one scene. 

6) Don’t get too attached. Be prepared to cut some of your characters, if their significance to the plot later on seems small or nonexistent. If each character is important and has a contribution to the plot overall, then that’s great. But if some of them just kind of fade into the background and do very little to advance the plot, you might have to consider cutting the character out. Of course, that doesn’t mean you can’t ever use the character. If your hesitation to cut a character is because you love the character, consider putting them in a different story where they’re able to snag more of the spotlight. 

All in all, I think you should give it a shot. The number of main characters in a story is largely dependent on how many characters the author is able to handle, because it’s that which will determine how successful the story is written. If you’re not overwhelmed by the idea, you should do it, but be prepared that as the story progresses, you might find some characters aren’t as necessary as they first seemed. 

Good luck!


arkoslover  asked:

For the Yu-Gi-Oh! fandom ask meme: #13 Favorite deck archetype. Could you also explain why as well?

For me, definitely Toons/Relinquished (because I love Pegasus and they’re just so awesome) and BEWD/beatdown with a lot of strong low-level monsters and BEWD support (because I also love Kaiba!) As far as Toons though I actually prefer the “lower class” toons you can use without Toon World being on the field or paying any cost for. Toon Gemini Elf is probably my favorite card in YGO besides the really iconic ones.

Overall though my favorite type of deck incorporates elements of both my favs (BEWD and Relinquished or BEWD and Toon Gemini Elf/Toon Goblin Attack Force.) Definitely not competitive but definitely fun.

Tbh I am not super versed in the TGC, I’ll never be competitive in PVP and have no desire to be… I just play for fun! I really want to experiment with more types of decks though. I love Machine, Fiend and Spellcaster types too. And Harpies are cool, although I’ve never played with them much. I really just like everything from DM haha. It’s a fun game.

anonymous asked:

whats wrong with the asexual post?

For the sake of simplicity, I’m going to explain using the old “punch up” vs “punch down” principle of comedy and satire.

Basically, punching up means your comedy makes the more powerful party uncomfortable and punching down makes the less powerful party uncomfortable. 

This is why we can watch a movie about children beating up adults and it’s a family friendly comedy, but a movie about an adult who harms children is a disturbing drama, horror, or tragedy.

There could be a movie about an adult hurting children played for laughs, but it would be perceived as offensive by a lot of people (myself included) because it’s abuse-apologist. 

The difference is that children are in a position of lesser power in comparison with adults, and often are actually, in real life harmed by adults who abuse that position of power. So reversing the every-day reality of that power dynamic relieves stress and can be funny, and it makes children feel good, because it’s empowering! But laughing at adults hurting children is just laughing at real world systems of power that traumatize countless people and it’s just.. not funny to me at all. 

The rule of thumb is that to write successful, non-offensive comedy, you always make sure your jokes punch up. 

So with that principle in mind, we can look at the post. 

[Image description: a post made by zupakid that says “Being asexual is great bc you only have to worry about 6 out of 7 deadly sins. That’s like almost 15% less sin”.]

On the surface, there’s nothing too wrong with it. It’s taking two unrelated concepts and connecting them in an ironic and surprising way, which is the baseline of comedy. 

But, applying the punch-up/punch-down principle, it’s important to look at the larger cultural context of the elements the joke is drawing on. 

The 7 deadly sins is an idea thoroughly intertwined in Christian ideology. They aren’t actually a part of the 10 Commandments, but most people in Christian-majority Western countries will very quickly associate them with that faith context. 

The history of these ‘7 deadly sins’ has largely been used to hurt marginalized groups. All of them are pretty normal human experiences that almost everyone will have sometime. Pride. Envy. Wrath, Gluttony, Lust, Sloth, and Greed. These are natural feelings that can lead to hurtful actions but the experiences aren’t inherently anything. And because literally anyone could be accused of these things, it’s a very effective tool for describing any marginalized person as ‘sinful’ or immoral in some way. 

(Think about anti-Semitic people assigning ‘greed’ as a character trait to Jewish people, think about fat-phobic people assigning ‘gluttony’ as a character trait to fat people, think about ableist people assigning ‘sloth’ to neuroatypical people, so on and so forth.) 

These attributes aren’t just a harmless trope, they’re much more deeply entrenched in our cultural belief systems than many of us want to admit. 

And when we look at “lust” as a character attribute, it’s important to look at how that has been assigned to marginalized groups. Lust, as a concept, has been used to oppress women in countless ways (”too distracting,” temptress archetype, “asking for it,” etc), sex workers in countless ways (even though ‘lust’ literally has nothing to do with performing sexual labor), and LGBT people in countless ways (who have been abused, faced housing and employment discrimination, have been tortured, sentenced to conversion therapy, chemically castrated, sterilized, forbidden from raising children, forbidden from using public restrooms, raped, and killed) under the guise of punishing the ‘sin’ of our ‘lust.’ 

So this joke, whether intentionally or not, is evoking a tool of marginalization– the concept of deadly sins– and is suggesting a division between ace and non-ace and assigning the notion of “less sinful” to ace people and “more sinful” to non-ace people. 

That implication directly plays into the ideology used to marginalize LGBT people, and has been evoked in traumatic histories of users who have read that post. It made them uncomfortable, scared, upset, etc., because it was a joke that punched down at them. And they have a right to be offended at that, no matter what the original intention of the joke was.