#and intended to be invalidating

[lukabellinus]

i started testosterone!!!!

[mellohiizz]

wanted to talk about odyssey duo and my um. view on their dynamic and relationship.

probably going to be a pretty long yap, but i really wanted to talk about them since there's been some talk about them after the last uu video. it caused me to think deeper into their relationship and i wanted to write it down.

(putting it here just in case: not targeted at anyone. just yapping about the codependent silly guys that i hate.)

the thing about odyssey duo, to me, is that yes, they are in some ways unhealthy. they're codependent and messy. but that doesn't mean that they're "toxic" or their friendship is not working.

they're both flawed characters with destructive traits. parrot is dry and unable to express his emotions properly, which leads to misunderstandings over his intentions. wifies is not a saint either, he's stubborn and can get very pushy when it comes to his own decisions. (insisting on dean leaving without explaining anything and trying to do it without parrot knowing, burning the compass to forcefully keep parrot from going to farlands)

but the main thing about them to me is that if you really look into it, they're both trying to make it work. they do care about each other and have both shown it more than once in different ways.

they both did and said things that aren't great. but it doesn't make one or the other good or bad. yes, parrot came out quite cold and uncaring a couple of times, but it doesn't automatically makes him a bad person, or means that he's mistreating, or even 'abusing' wifies in any sense.

if we're pushing it to that point, you could say wifies also used parrot in a sense of wanting to feel human and wanting someone who would 'want him back' without knowing his real self. (im being dramatic with this, obviously)

parrot comes off as uncaring because of how dry and unable to show his actual emotions he seems to be. which is a valid character trait considering how often he just couldn't because of the circumstances. parrot is someone who's very goal oriented. when he needs to focus on something, he locks in. it's the only thing he thinks about and everything else goes to the back of his mind.

which also brings me to the point of the way parrot deals with grief. one thing is how often parrot just couldn't express his grief over losing someone. he grieved luigi, yes, because it was one time he actually was allowed to take a little bit of time to actually process the fact that someone died in front of him. and even then, instead of fully allowing himself to grieve, he had to focus on other things.

same goes for dean. dean's death was pretty much shock value for both parrot and viewers, and parrot tried to grieve him too. but during it, he was interrupted by literally the number one threat at the time.

so of course when another loss comes into picture, parrot doesn't allow himself to grieve him. he acknowledges his loss ("your leader just killed my best friend"), but there was no time for him to actually let himself properly grieve wifies or even allow himself to react. they were in the middle of dealing with the mafia, and he needed to focus on that instead.

we only see the impact wifies' death had on him by the end of the episode. where he does listens. he lights the beacon despite expressing his indifference to them the whole episode. that, once again, shows that he does care.

he was hesitant on letting wifies go through with joining the mafia in the first place. he agreed because he trusted wifies to be safe and know what he's doing. it was already shown to us that wifies is parrot's weak point. he tried so many times to keep wifies away from the danger simply because he didn't want to lose him. back in the video where clown was hunting parrot, there was a very clear parallel between branzy being clown's weak point and wifies being parrot's. the difference in that was parrot knew clown wouldn't have hesitated to kill wifies.

they both changed the ways the go about things for the other. they care, but unfortunately, they were doomed by the narrative. the universe screwed them over by putting them into circumstances where they just wouldn't have worked it out.

in conclusion, because this is already very long, yes, odyssey duo are messy. they're not the healthiest duo, and they do have issues. but they tried to overstep those and work, and that's what i like about them.

[smartzelda]

Sorry guys I gotta speak my truth on this one

I'm not kidding when I say that I think that blaming shit media literacy from fans on shipping/shippers avoids the actual root of the problem to throw people you can easily throw under the bus (simply because it's not unpopular to consider people who post about ships or ship characters in media as having lesser or derivative tastes by default)

And here's why.

I think when you blame people who are "shippers" or "consume media through shipping lenses", the true root of it all is a mindset problem.

In actually, putting on shipping lenses can be helpful when trying to analyze a piece of media. When analyzing media you're supposed to approach it through a number of mindsets and put on different lenses (both to deepen your personal understanding of the media, and to pick it apart and see what you can find there (whether intentional or not on the author's part)), and different ships can be some of those lenses

When it comes to ships between main characters (for those who are genuinely willing to see what the narrative is showing with their relationship and what it's doing), there are times when analyzing it from a shipping lens may be helpful. As someone from KH fandom, I have seen people come to deeper understandings and pick canon apart in the process of analyzing a relationship that is genuinely integral to the story (platonic or not). I've also seen people get into rarepairs of characters who barely interact or who just suffer little screen time, and I've seen them come to better understandings of those side characters and how they potentially fit into the world of the media simply because people are now focusing on these characters and how they fit into the narrative.

Frankly, I resent the idea that the only way to truly objectively analyze a piece of media is by turning off the part of your brain that gets excited over relationships and individual characters. Don't get me wrong, that is a way to approach a piece of media and a valid one at that, but the truth is that we cannot be free of bias.

For instance, I was watching House MD with my parents circa last year. At some point I started heavily tuning into what was going on with House and Wilson's relationship. My parents, on the other hand, were largely watching casually. They're not thinking of character relationships or getting heavily invested in most characters, they're watching because they like watching. One of them in particular did try to analyze things that were happening in the show as they happened. However, when it came to the scene late in the series where House threw out Dominika's letter approving her American citizenship, my parents could understand that he was doing that because he didn't want her to leave, but not much beyond that. I ended up explaining to them that House's fake marriage for Dominika was an explicit parallel to when Wilson was living with House in the early seasons. Both situations started with House being none too happy about it but ultimately letting them stay, spending a considerable amount of effort getting them to leave/getting this situation to be finally over so he didn't have to deal with it anymore, and then by the time a piece of news comes through that would mean the person in question actually leaves, House hides this news as long as he can. Because he doesn't actually want them to leave and has grown attached. And by doing this he became a self fulfilling prophecy. By reacting to the truth of Wilson and Dominika leaving him the way he does, he seals his fate and they ultimately leave anyways. Maybe I ship Hilson, but becoming open to how their relationship was handled allowed me to transition to doing character studies and recognizing patterns/parallels that I wouldn't have noticed if I didn't particularly care about the characters or their relationship.

Likewise, I've seen mutuals complain about how people who don't like or don't care about certain characters often overlook these characters (what they're actually like and their place in the narrative), while the mutuals in question (by default) are able to come to deeper understanding of what the writers/story is trying to do because they care about this funky guy

You can't eradicate bias when you're engaging in media analysis, but you can consciously put on a range of lenses and observe the media through different povs with the goal of understanding the media better or bolstering your reading of it. And those lenses/povs can include focusing on specific relationships or the perpective of certain characters

And this is why I say it's actually a mindset problem. Shippers and people who have this one blorbo they like a lot aren't inherently terrible "fandom brained individuals" who are the root of media analysis problems. The problem only arises when people's readings/analysis of a piece of media are inherently restrictive/narrow and self centered. Your problem is with people who view a piece of media through a ship they like but don't keep an open mind about it, and whose "media analysis"/views on canon cannot be split from fanon and their comfortability levels. These are the people whose "media analysis" starts and ends with justifying their fanon as canon, whose views on media revolve around sorting characters and relationships into categories they personally enjoy rather than trying to understand what's going on.

Here's another example.

Here we have a fictional ship we'll call uhhhh...Blanebin. this fictional ship I made up on the spot for characters that don't exist named Blane and Corbin

Person A is super into Blanebin. They're part of the main cast of characters and canonically childhood best friends, so person A (as much as they enjoy fanart and fic) is also enjoying analyzing how narratively important to each other they are. Recently, Corbin started dating another character in canon, but Person A is enjoying watching how Blane is reacting to this. "Is this potentially a tell that Blane is jealous or is having complicated feelings about this? What if he was, how would that contextualize his behavior this season? Here's what I think based on how Blane dealt with explicit jealousy last season in a different situation". It's not impossible that person A is still missing further understanding due to their obsession with Blanebin, but at the end of the day this obsession has allowed them to start picking through the characters both in and outside this relationship. It has allowed them to see potential subtext and theorize on what might happen next with these characters' relationship. Not to mention that with addition of Corbin dating someone else, instead of trying to erase this fact or state that Corbin canonically isn't into that person, Person A is trying to factor in how Corbin's current dating life affects his relationship with Blane (irregardless on personal views on the nature of Corbin's relationship with the person he's dating).

Person B is also super into Blanebin. They really enjoy fanart and fic of the characters, love obsessing over their moments together, and just feel like there's really something between the characters. To person B, every moment between them is just further proof that the writers are ship teasing them. But Corbin getting together with someone else this season? Oh that pissed person B off. They cannot believe that even though Corbin and Blane are CLEARLY gay for each other the writers had Corbin get with someone else this season. Perhaps, they think, it was even a decision specifically made to spite fans. How evil of the writers to tease a perfectly good ship and then have them not get together first? They must have been just doing those teases to get views from Blanebin shippers those scoundrels. To Person B, since Corbin started dating someone when he obviously has some chemistry with Blane (even though the series is far from over) means that Blanebin can never get together now and Corbin x person he's dating is ruining Blanebin by existing. In fact, they think, this is terrible writing for Corbin to be dating someone else because they don't like that relationship and don't see the point. Obviously if the writers were good then Corbin would have started dating Blane instead because this was supposed to be the Blanebin show.

Person C despises Blanebin. Don't get them wrong, they've always enjoyed the character's childhood friendship, but they actually have always thought Blane would have been better off with Victoria. They have a lot of moments too! But they're tired of seeing people ship Blanebin. Corbin just got together with someone else, so obviously that's not gonna work out. Plus Corbin and Blane totally has always given person C bro vibes. In fact, person C thinks, sure Corbin and Blane have a close friendship, but people shouldn't be shipping them. Person C likes Blanetoria and Blanetoria can't be canon if Corbin is in the way of it. So Person C likes to read Blanebin as siblings anyways. Sure they're canonically friends, but obviously their friendship turned into brotherhood. This means that nothing can be in the way of Blanetoria and Corbin can keep dating the person he's already canonically dating. Actually, now Blanebin just straight up makes Person C uncomfortable. Don't the pesky shippers understand that Blanebin are sibling coded because they're childhood best friends and that they're important to each other because they're brothers? It's obvious to anyone with eyes.

Sure, ships are involved here, but is the root of this problem shipping? Character A isn't as knowledgeable of other characters in the plot due to this lens they're using, but at the end of the day they're dedicated to analysis. Their love of the characters is pushing them beyond what they like or dislike to try to understand what might be happening through their lens. Not perfect, but they are slowly broadening their horizons. But Person B and C's problems here are their restrictiveness. What is or should be canon to them is tantamount to what they personally like or find comfortable. Is person C actually analyzing the this fake show when they decide to "read" Blanebin as basically canonically siblings (and this all of their moments are totally a bro thing) just because they don't like Blanebin and the idea of them getting together over Blanetoria makes them uncomfortable? Is person B actually analyzing this fake show when their "analysis" of Blanebin goes only as far as asserting it's being ship teased and deciding anything short of canonizing Blanebin is a targeted attack or "bad writing" because it's not what they wanted personally to happen?

This is what I'm talking about. This is the mindset. Shipping isn't the problem. The problem is when people marry fanon and canon to the point where they have a vested interest in superimposing their fanon over canon as "a reading" and trying to make "collective decisions" on what is canon (or what canon is trying to say) based on what does or doesn't make them uncomfortable. The problem is people being restrictive and centering their own likes and dislikes in the conversation, so they can only interact with canon "analysis" wise by deciding what is canon or should be canon "as obviously agreed on by everyone". You can't simply claim you like media analysis. To be able to analyze media and bolster your views on any given canon, you must be open to looking at it through multiple povs, to studying characters without trying to pretend things you don't like don't exist or do like do exist. There is a balance that must be kept between trying to keep objectivity and putting on specific focus/bias based upon the lenses you're putting on. You have to be willing to try to figure out what a media is doing or saying, not saying you're trying to figure out what it's saying while in actuality trying to define the narrative around what people believe it's saying in ways that suit you.

Thank you for coming to my ted talk.

[caligvlasaqvarivm]

wanna ask how you feel about the eridan bpd headcanon/theory(?? not sure what to call it!) you're so good at your character analysis and i'd love to see your outlook on it

Since I don't have a degree or any formal training in psychology, I feel deeply uncomfortable diagnosing characters. I've made an autism joke before but only because I'm on the spectrum. He's definitely traumatized and anxious, but I mean those as descriptors of his behavior rather than capital-D Diagnoses. I try to focus on those when I can - the cause and effect of cognition, self-image, and behavior - and those factors may very well match up with DSM criteria, but I try not to touch an actual diagnosis with a ten foot pole unless the author has explicitly stated that X character has Y condition.

[ssiggss]

Selfshipper rant under the cut gotta get this off my chest

I want to interact w other self shippers who selfship w/ Ace so bad sometimes but usually when I find one I go to their profile they're always saying the most invalidating shit abt other Ace self shippers like "he's ONLY mine he doesn't love ANYONE ELSE and if you think he'd like you you're WRONG"

Like I get being possessive or 'non-sharing,' I don't have an issue w that. I've seen non sharing selfshippers who are so kind and polite abt it, it's the ones who act like their ship is the only valid one and flaunt being a cruel little shit that I find embarrassing and corny.

Ace has always believed he isn't worthy of living or being loved, and for that reason I LOVE seeing people selfship w him bc YES he's so lovable and he deserves happiness.

I've thought abt making a little server w all the chill Ace self shippers where we talk abt our ships and how perfect he is and all the things we love abt him and hype each other up but I fear this is an unrealistic desire lmao

[notnights]

Man... Poor Gangle always seems to end up in abusive relationships...

"Always"?? Are there other abusive relationships she's been in??

But yeah my poor little meow meow. I need to draw some happier things with her. But I like to feel sad, and share in Gangle's sadness.

[ouidamforeman]

related to prev post i just reblogged but as a certified Deranged Close ReaderTM of the good omens novel i sometimes remember some of the shit that's in it and feel insane, esp when i think about how often it does this weird thing where something is a Joke but at the same time deadly serious or revelatory or containing critical information or later revealed to be very serious in another part of the book. its like fridge horror but managing to be funny the whole time and used as a device in itself to convey information. ik this is very "just read more books" of me but I just like it and think it's very weird and rewards close reading in a way thats more fun than usual lol

[isorottatime]

“so then what? you want jews to have no place to go?”

regardless of any peoples’ “having a place to go”, it should NOT be coming at the expense of people already living there. any ties, religious or otherwise, shouldn’t ever mean you have the ability to kick REAL, LIVING, BREATHING PEOPLE, WITH FAMILY AND MEMORY AND CULTURE out of their ANCESTRAL HOMES in favour of settling somewhere you have never lived. EVERY religion & culture should have access to their holy & historic places. liberation for palestinians & their land doesn’t mean a reverse in the roles of oppression. this is the coloniser’s fear; fear that the subjugated will call for revenge; an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. this fear justifies their genocide. genocide, for the “safety” of the oppressor. the solution to the oppression of a people is not to expedite them to a land you’d like a convenient ally in. the solution is to create a world that isn’t so violently hostile it creates the need for a “homeland”. a “homeland” that, no less, is hostile to an entire sector of the people it claims to be home for.

FREE PALESTINE 🇵🇸

[therevengeoffrankenstein]

step 1: post "'we're pretty boys for secret girls' from 'austin, we have a problem' by fall out boy is a trans coded lyric."

step 2: turn phone on vibrate

step 3: ....

[angelnumber27]

What are u a survivor of

how much time do you have

[bluevveather]

Op and this reblog as well as the vast majority of the people in notes are 100% correct about it being extremely disrespectful and enraging(the explanation of what the original painting was and means is also very very good to spread) but seem to be missing the actual point of the tweet iirc.

Rage. In my heart. All-consuming. FUCK AI.

[sunflowersand-bees]

So I haven’t watched Schnee’s new video yet, but just the title being “In Defense of Christian Linke” or wtv is already throwing up red flags

[maybeophe]

On the one hand I can understand the reasoning behind pretty much everyone (besides Martin) being hostile towards the Archivist. Canon itself does a great job of explaining why the irrational characters act and behave the way they do, and an even better job of explaining why the rational characters would also be against the more inhuman aspects of Jon. I get it, it's reasonable.

On the other hand... he's literally the most pathetic little meow meow on the planet. Every time his appearence is mentioned he's described as tired and unkept and pre-maturely greying. All he ever seems to do is apologise to his co-workers and experience the horrors. A little sympathy isn't much to ask for; he's literally just as scared - if not more so - about his growing inhumanity as everyone around him and yet no one takes a moment to acknowledge this and help him. They just blame him for acting on impulses he doesn't even understand.

[shimmershifts]

an open letter to those who have not yet shifted.

i don't know how many of you will see this, let alone how many will read it entirely. this letter is for those who have been trying to shift for two years, five years, more. those who cannot give up, and those who will not give up, and maybe even those who already have. to preface, this letter will not rehash everything you already know. you've scrolled every forum, you've seen every method, you've read every tip. you've trialed, and errored, and persevered... but you're still here. law of assumption, manifestation, belief, intention. but you're still here. you've been told all about shifting... right? you already know what shifting is... right? you should already know how to shift... right? but you're still here.

this letter is not intended to debase or invalidate those who do already believe in those things and who are satisfied with that. this is for those who have been trying that way for 2 years, 5 years, and more, and still haven't shifted. this is for those who might want an alternative perspective.

what you've been told

in my personal opinion, the online shifting community as it currently stands is very... rigid. narrow. there are a few dominant views, and then the many who drown out any possible dissent or disagreement. i do understand why this happens. reality shifting is already a marginal belief, hounded by anti-shifters and disbelieved and debunked on all sides, so it makes sense that people feel the instinct to close ranks at any sign of an outsider. unfortunately, this has led to a community that raises its hackles at even other reality shifters who simply don't believe the exact same way that you do. law of assumption. manifestation. intent. (and dare i say it, the multiverse.)

i don't believe in any of that, in the context of shifting.

now, wait! don't go yet, stay with me. it's okay if you do. i'm not intending to change the minds of those who already believe in these things. i'm not going to go at anyone and say "i'm right, you're wrong, and you must change your mind to agree with me!" that would be silly, and counterproductive. let's lower our guards, and extend an olive branch, please. if you feel these things serve your journey, then carry on. you're allowed to disagree with me, i won't be upset. you're allowed to think i'm wrong, if you want. literally no worries at all.

but i am a little tired frankly of certain ideas being treated as the only options, and often in a rude or hostile manner. if you are someone who has spent five years trying to shift, and you see yet another post that boils down to "all you have to do is want it hard enough" does that not hurt your soul? the following sections of this post are for those who these ideas have not been working for. for those who have not yet shifted. it's been two years. five years. more. and you're still here. are you open to another possibility?

what is reality shifting?

i've told you what i don't believe, but what about what i do? i'll try to keep this as concise as possible for the sake of brevity and comprehension, knowing i could potentially clarify in future posts. but please continue with the understanding that im a chronic overexplainer, and my curse is the fact that the extra words don't always actually increase understanding. bear with me.

reality shifting: broadly speaking, this refers to shifting your linear experience of reality from one, to another. this has been known by many other names in the past, across continents and cultures, even in pre-agriculture societies. i'd include ideas like persistent realms, quantum jumping, focus 21, etc. language is subjective, and people may describe or understand the same experience in different ways.

i believe reality shifting is a haphazard side effect of our limited ability to perceive and comprehend reality. let me explain. space, as we understand it, is three dimensional. but reality isn't. it's our bodies and minds limiting our perception and understanding that makes all of reality seem that way to us at surface level.

1D: let's consider a hypothetical one dimensional existence. everything would a straight line, and the only way to perceive anything else would be as a single point directly in front or directly behind you. forwards and backward. the 2D and 3D are beyond your limited ability to physically sense or feel, let alone to comprehend. Forget about the 4D (time). due to your lack of comprehension, you cannot move at will in two dimensional planes, let alone three dimensional space or even time. you are static, a single point.

2D: let's consider a hypothetical two dimensional existence. it would be a flat, infinite planar expanse. you might be a square, or a circle. you can move freely in two dimensional directions (forward, backwards, side to side), but not in the 3D. No up, no down. If you tried to perceive a three dimensional object, you would only be able to comprehend it as linear, a line on the horizon where it intersects your 2 dimensional plane. you would perceive the 3D as moving around or within you on its own, without the ability to direct it. the 4D, or time, if you could perceive it, would be static, a singular point at a time.

3D: what about our three dimensional existence? congratulations, you now are a form, such as a sphere, or a cube. you can move freely in a voluminous, infinite three dimensional space. Forward, backwards, side to side, up, and down. if you *try* to perceive the fourth dimension (time), you can only comprehend it as linear, a line where it intersects your 3 dimensional space. You perceive it as moving around or within you on its own, without the ability to direct it yourself. any dimensions higher than that, if you could perceive it, would be static, a singular point at a time.

quick 4D sidebar: clearing this one up now because this will confuse some of you who are involved in other communities. in many law of assumption and manifestation communities, "4D" has been used to refer to your imagination, inner world, a bridge to "higher vibrational states", etc. i don't use it that way. i use it in the sense of the mathematical concept, or linking three-dimensional space with time. 4D=time.

4D and 5D: so, time is the fourth dimension. that means it is four dimensional, yet due to our limitations as 3D creatures, we can only perceive it as linear. we perceive it as moving around us, without our direction, forwards, (or backwards in some cultures). what about the 5th dimension? the static one? the one we can only perceive one point of at a time? let's call this 5th dimension... reality. due to our limited perception, it may not seem like it, but time and reality are just like space in that all of it exists at once. if you were a 5th dimensional creature, you wouldn't see a bunch of different realities, you'd just see one the way we just see one 3D universe around us right now.

tip: think of it this way, if a three dimensional creature moving through time is only able to perceive it linearly, it may think that each point of time exists separately, passing by in chronological order. this would be like a character in a book, the character experiences each page one at a time as we turn the page. but we know that actually, the entire book exists all at the same time, and already did exist before we picked it up and started reading it, and continues to exist even when we set it down. the same is true of time, and reality. even if we perceive it as linear, or a point, all of it actually exists simultaneously, like space.

still, we can only perceive one point of reality at a time. i believe when we reality shift, we are by some freak of nature (or nurture) finding a way to trigger a "movement" in this "5th dimension," and therefor shifting our linear experience of time and our singular perceptual experience of one reality to another. ("movement" is a bit of an abstraction here, as movement generally refers to 3D space. you're not actually moving anywhere, you're already there, you just... can't see it at the same time as this.)

ok, so how the heavens do i shift?

if you read through all of the above, i assume that's what you're asking by now. "get to the point shimmer! how do i shift?" if you don't need intention, belief, assumption, manifestation, three gallons of water, crystals, or anything else then what do you need to shift?

if we boil shifting down to its absolute core, all you need to do in order to shift is to shift. (put down the pitch forks, and the flaming feathers and tar. i'll elaborate.)

shifting involves finding a way for us 3 dimensional creatures to trigger a shift in a dimensional direction that we do not have the capacity to perceive. so what i mean by "all you have to do to shift, is to shift" is that there is no physical movement, or secret password we can whisper that makes us shift, not inherently. it's sort of like being told to find your invisible and non corporeal primordial tail, and then swish it in a direction that doesn't spatially exist. find your "move in the 5D button", and then press it. except, there is no button.

so how do we "move" from one point of reality to the other? well, the first clue to this is in noticing what part of us is actually doing the "moving".

you don't make it happen with your three dimensional form. there is no body part or mass or motor function in your 3D body that triggers a shift. there's nothing that allows a three dimensional form to move in five dimensional directions... you just can't. your body stays here. that's good news actually, in my opinion. there is no need to force yourself into strange bodily positions, or chug water, or whatever else. your 3D body is irrelevant, because it's not going anywhere. you don't have to do anything with your body to shift. some people can shift awake, asleep, in the shower, walking around, etc.

you also don't necessarily do it with the fourth dimension, time. there is no specific amount of time that you'll shift after. it might seem you've spent a lot of time trying to shift, but the actual shift itself is instantaneous. some people shift their first try, and some of you might be on your second decade of attempts. again, the time factor being irrelevant is good news because this means it doesn't have to take time.

i also don't think we do it with just intent or belief. the intention word gets used so much it basically means nothing, but the general idea is that intent is the driving force that manifests your desired outcome. in the context of shifting, people use it like "set your intention to shift, and you will" or "intent makes you shift." or the dreaded "you just have to believe harder." personally, i don't think that's true. i don't think intention makes you shift. if it did, you all would have shifted by now, right? i think looking anyone who's been trying to shift for 4 years dead in the eye and telling them they just haven't intended to shift yet is honestly a bit cruel and unusual. some people who intend to shift will shift, but in my opinion, its a case of correlation, and not causation. there are also people who shift without intending to, or who intend to shift but don't.

it's also not really our thoughts that shift. or our mind as a concept, or our entire self. we know this because you don't turn into a comatose vegetable when you shift to a different reality. your thoughts, mind, and self here are unaffected by your awareness shifting away from it. if you successfully "permashifted" to hogwarts tonight, your self here would still wake up in the morning and go to work.

so what does shift? only our linear experience of our own awareness. so in order to reality shift, we just need to find a way to trigger our awareness to shift from one point of reality to another in a non linear fashion, and then integrate that into our linear experience. aha! you think. great! now how do i do that...? unfortunately, this is not an exact science (yet.) once you begin shifting regularly, i think it gets "easier" in some regards because you get a sense for how your awareness "feels" and what works for you. for those who haven't shifted, i can't say "take three deep breaths and recite the secret words, and then you'll shift." there is nothing specific you can physically do that will for certain make you shift. there's no secret passwords.

there is no key to shifting. the good news is, this means there is also no lock.

what we can do is get ourselves primed, into a state that increases the chances our awareness is triggered to shift. ie, find the "move in the 5D" button, (you know, the one that doesn't exist) and learn how to press it. and because it is our awareness that shifts, my "methods" have to do with priming your awareness for shifting. you don't need to believe, which is a good thing because it means doubts won't hold you back. you don't necessarily need to intend, which is a good thing because it means there are no secret blockages in your way. no "subconscious", no "reprogramming", no "delusion is the solution." you don't need any of that. you also don't have to do anything specific with your body or space unless you feel like it and want to. you don't need a script, but you can make one if you want. it's whatever, it's irrelevant darling, it's non-consequential.

these three methods below basically encompass all shifting methods out there. i might expand on techniques for these methods later, but for now i'll go over the basics.

method one: pure awareness

it basically boils down to two steps. get into a state of pure awareness, and then shift.

the first step for this method is actually a simple one, sort of, but i think it's unkind to call it easy. it can be easy, if you just happen to have a perfect technique that works for you on your first try. if so, congrats! if not, don't despair. it comes more naturally to some than others, at first. you can probably build the skills and try different techniques necessary for you to get there.

but what is pure awareness? it's currently very often being called "the void state", but i'm not using that term for a few reasons. one, i think using the term "the void state" or calling it "the void" is making people think it's some sort of place that they're trying to go. it's not. it's not a physical place at all, and that's kind of the point. most of the time, your awareness is perceiving reality through the confines concept of 3D reality, because that's the data input it's receiving from your brain and body. that grounds you in this reality, and allows you to go about your day to day life. your goal with the pure awareness method is to focus on just your awareness, absent of all 3D distraction data and input. that way, your awareness is primed to be triggered to shift its focus to the 3D perception of a different point of reality when you come out of that state.

i might make a post about techniques for getting into the state of pure awareness, but this post is already long enough.

method two: destabilization of awareness

this method gets over complicated, but it basically boils down to two steps. destabilize your awareness, and then shift.

honestly, most shifting methods i see online are in some way doing this. lucid dreams, the hypnogogic state, SATS, self-hypnosis, "symptoms", and also all those iterations of the "raven method" the "staircase method" the "alice in wonderland method" etc are all basically ways to destabilize your awareness from the linear perception it is so used to in this point of reality, offering the opportunity of triggering a shift to a different one. they're all sort of either distracting or subverting your focus on the 3D here in this point of reality.

basically, you'll be trying to discombobulate yourself to the point your awareness is not focused on 3D reality, and trigger a shift.

method three: absence of awareness

sleep method gang, rise up. i'm serious. this method involves reducing your awareness to zero, or as close to it as possible, another potentially prime state to trigger a shift. (and by sleep method, i don't mean lucid dreamers or SATS, i mean simply going to sleep here, having a period of complete unawareness, like totally dreamless sleep, and then waking up in your DR.)

this absence of awareness during sleep is (in my experience) the most common cause of accidental or unintentional shifts, but you might be one of those who can trigger a shift to desired realities with this too.

sleeping is not the only way to get to the state of the lack of awareness. i'd say total distraction methods also count for this. you're not asleep, your body is awake, but you're so "zoned out" (or alternatively in a meditative state such that) you're absolutely not aware of the 3D experience of this point of reality anymore.

this is completely different from the state of pure awareness by the way, because in the state of pure awareness you are aware. like, in pure awareness you have a full train of thought and total control. the absence of awareness is the opposite. it feels sort of like a "blip" where reality time and space passed you by and you were not aware of it.

[gonyadaldysgenesis]

the intersex community saying "PCOS can be intersex" is NOT saying you have to identify as such if you have PCOS! if someone tries to force this on you theyre in the wrong! identifying as intersex is a complex decision that only you can make.

what we are saying is that PCOS tends to cause a natural, physical difference in both someones gonads (ovaries) and primary sex hormones (T and E)!

if you intend to push back against the notion that PCOS can be intersex, please consider:

do you think being intersex is something to be ashamed of? (this is intersexism.)

do you think PCOS being considered intersex is invalidating its status as a disability? (a lot of intersex variations are disabling.)

do you think PCOS being considered intersex is saying that they are not "real women"? (this is intersexist. people with intersex variations that cause hyperandrogenism who identify as women are still "real women".)

do you think being intersex is being "between sexes"? (there are a lot of intersex variations that cause traits that are outside of the sex binary entirely rather than causing ambiguous traits, and whether or not an intersex person identifies themselves as both, in-between, or neither sex is up to them, not someone else. intersex people can still consider themselves full females or males, their intersex variation does not affect that choice.)

you have a right to express your discomfort with other people trying to force a label on you that you did not ask for! you do NOT have a right to be intersexist to our community and tell other people that their identification is wrong.

[tiredtief]

...this is absolutely not what DDDNE means or was created to mean. DDDNE comes from this:

The joke is entirely that the packaging says "dead dove, do not eat", the character opens the bag, and says "I don't know what I expected" because the bag does indeed contain a dead dove as the packaging states. Why he opened it expecting anything else is a personal failing.

The point of DDDNE is not as a warning for graphic content or triggering content necessarily - it's just to say "hey, there are tags on this fic indicating what is in it, you should read those tags and know what this fic contains before reading, so that if you are bothered by this content, you know and don't continue". It has nothing to do with it specifically being graphic content.

From Fanlore:

DDDNE is commonly used with darker fics and topics, yes, but that is because it means "be aware of what's in this, read at your own discretion", because writers were sick of taking time to tag and warn about content only for people to comment "there's (content) in this, how disgusting!". Making posts like this redefining something while clearly not having some basic research on what the actual tag means reflects poorly on you.

y’all… characters drinking alcohol (in fanfics) is not “dead dove do not eat”

character death alone is not “dead dove do not eat”

angst alone is not “dead dove do not eat”

whump alone is not “dead dove do not eat”

self-harm (in fanfics) alone is not “dead dove do not eat”

suicide (in fanfics) alone is not “dead dove do not eat”

infidelity (in fanfics) alone is not “dead dove do not eat”

BDSM / smut / rough sex (in fanfics) alone is not “dead dove do not eat”

even non-con (in fanfics) alone is not necessarily always “dead dove do not eat”

of course, any of the topics mentioned above can be “dead dove do not eat” if it’s written in extremely graphic details in the nature that will sicken your readers / in a way that can make your readers throw up and say what the actual fuck / if it’s the main plot of your story. but taboo topics alone are not “dead dove do not eat”. I’m saying this because I’ve seen people use “dead dove do not eat” tag in stories that only mention a taboo subject once and it’s one sentence or one paragraph long, and that is… not what the tag is for.

for instance, if your story contains non-con, but it’s not explicitly written in graphic details / it’s not written in a way that can make your readers throw up and say what the actual fuck / it’s not the main focus of your work / it’s only one or two paragraph long, tag it as “rape/non-con” accordingly, but it does not warrant the “dead dove do not eat” tag.

sure, you can say it’s “not that deep” and that it’s all just “made up fandom stuff”, but it can also make it more difficult for people who want to avoid the tag or people who seek out the tag specifically to curate their experiences if the tag isn’t being used correctly the way it's supposed to be used.

I’ve explained what “dead dove do not eat” as a tag means and how you can properly use it here.

but to make it as simple as possible, this is basically the meaning of “dead dove do not eat” tag 👇🏻

(so no, the tag isn’t about character going through a nasty breakup and drowning themself in alcohol or character getting drunk and having sex they end up regretting)