#and they are like... international influencers...

[forgottenwriter]

''Howlers'' Werewolf variant which uses their loud howls to compensate for diminished sight. Suspected to be the product of vampire cross-breeding at some point, as they combine werewolf and vampire traits. Most notably, they are reluctant to enter dwellings when not invited explicitly (but still can if pushed.)

Attempts to discern whether they are able to sustain themselves on a diet of blood alone have proven futile as they are enthusiastic eaters.

Hunters should be aware of their signature attack; they can focus their howls into an amplified sonic blast which is known to cause intense internal damage and organ failure in the unprepared.

''Night Suckers'' Originally thought to be a regional vampire variant, they were later discovered to be an off-shot of the same general family. Unlike vampires, Night Suckers are not associated with wealth or influence, as they typically scorn such things. They are highly intelligent, but posses a non-human mindset and goal-system.

It is said, unlike a vampire who was once a human, a Night Sucker was never anything but what they are now. They have incredible strength and speed, and are able to engage equally even with ancient vampires, though, they are surprisingly passive unlike their aristocratic cousins.

Night Suckers do not require blood to sustain themselves, but instead siphon the anima - the life essence - of the living while they sleep. This can be fatal if suffered for a prolonged period, but Night Suckers will often vary their targets to prevent the arousal of suspicion. In fact, they are even known to take a liking to certain families whom they feed upon, and act in their best interests. In one particularly notable tale, a Night Sucker rescued a man who had been captured by slavers, and was later identified to have been feeding on that family for three generations.

Families hunted by Night Suckers in this way sometimes choose not to get rid of them, as the Night Sucker will typically not cause fatality, and they consider a few nights of sleeplessness a month to be well worth an immortal, undying protector.

''Nasty Little Flying Freak'' It knows what it did.

can u imagine if other pieces of media were as scared of calling their monsters what they are as zombie media is about calling zombies zombies

[afloweroutofstone]

Republicans vote against the policy preferences of their voters more often than Democrats, but are not punished for it at the ballot box to the same degree that Democrats are. One theory for why is that Republicans are more motivated by ideological identity than Democrats are.

When a Republican voter identifies a policy they dislike that is nonetheless considered "conservative," they are more likely to approve of a politician supporting it than a Democratic voter would be with a policy they dislike that is nonetheless considered "liberal."

[Free PDF version here]

Drawing on research from political psychology, we argue that past scholarship on roll-call voting and representation has incorrectly conceptualized constituency preferences by dismissing symbolic attachment to ideological labels as a source of real attitudes used to evaluate legislative position taking. Indeed, political psychology research has shown that operational policy preferences and symbolic ideology are distinct dimensions of ideology that are not necessarily strongly correlated with one another (Converse 1964; Ellis and Stimson 2012). Mason (2018a) calls these two dimensions “issue-based ideology” and “identity-based ideology.” We argue that both dimensions of ideology—issue/policy and identity—influence public evaluations of elected representatives’ roll-call votes. Moreover, because people often hold policy preferences that do not match their symbolic, identity-based attitudes, a lawmaker’s roll-call decision can create internal conflict in how constituents evaluate their performance. A single roll-call vote can either satisfy both dimensions of a constituent’s preferences, neither dimension, or only one. When these two preferences diverge, we argue that rank-and-file Democrats reliably prioritize policy preferences over symbolic attachments, but rank-and-file Republicans tend to reconcile the conflict in favor of their symbolic attachments to their ideological identity. These differences in the behavior of Democrats and Republicans, we argue, are a function of the “source cues” that citizens receive from political elites—cues that help structure the opinion of rank-and-file partisans. Due to the ideological composition of each party’s coalition, the elite cues differ systematically between Democrats and Republicans. On the one hand, Republican identifiers overwhelmingly also identify themselves as conservatives—i.e., they embrace a conservative identity—but they hold diverse operational policy preferences. On the other hand, Democrats are a diverse coalition of ideological identities, but all largely endorse liberal policy positions. As a result, Republican and Democratic lawmakers face different incentives when it comes to the way they frame political issues and engage in roll-call behavior. Republican lawmakers are more likely than Democrats to cast roll-call votes that are incongruent with district opinion on high-profile policy issues because their constituents often value symbolic loyalty to “conservatism” more than they care about the content of the public policy being advanced, while the opposite is true for Democratic lawmakers. As a result, lawmakers of both parties are following their electoral incentives, but they serve districts that demand different patterns of representation. Our argument ultimately stands in contrast to recent work depicting Republicans as more motivated by ideology and Democrats by identity (see Grossmann and Hopkins 2016). ...We show that Democrats are more likely than Republicans to approve of representatives who cast votes in line with their specific policy preferences. Conversely, Republicans are more likely than Democrats to approve of representatives who vote in line with their ideological identity, even if they sometimes vote against their preferred policy outcome. In other words, Republican identifiers reward support for in-group loyalty to the conservative team but Democratic identifiers reward support for their individual policy positions. ...Among districts represented by Republicans, though, operational opinion has a weaker association with roll-call decisions than it does among districts represented by Democrats, while the reverse is true for symbolic, identity-based attitudes. The district’s symbolic attitudes predict roll-call voting for Republicans in Congress more than they do for Democrats.

[imgonnaeatyouhyugosugitmoto]

Random Solivan Brugmansia Headcanons Part 2

Art Credit: @ Chemziere on IG or @ cheamiiii on Tiktok (in case you can’t read the watermark)

Sol’s a D1 Gooner for m/c

⚠️Warning: Suggestive Language, and Violence Mentioned

—————————————————————

Headcanons 🎃:

Has considered getting more piercings, but you heavily influence this decision. If you told him you like his piercings he’d say something along the lines of “I was thinking about getting more…”in order to get a response out of you. He wouldn’t outright ask you this because he’d be nervous. If your response is along the lines of:

“You should definitely get more! Piercings are cool!” then he’s immediately getting more. Just imagine him straight after lecture speed walking off campus to a piercing shop. Also Bonus points if you suggest a certain piercing. The next day in one of your shared courses he has said piercing(s), though a bit swollen

“Oh that’s nice…” or No response would result in him tweaking out internally. Outside he’s non chalant about it and doesn’t bring up piercings into a conversation again. But He’d crash out, you can imagine he rips out all the piercings and punches the mirror at home, personally I don’t. Sol seems more like the type of person to keep his piercings. But he’d try to take breaks from wearing them, or even wears piercing retainers, since he had piercings before he even “officially” met you. He likes you but those are his piercings man. This is getting to logistical but in theory if each piercing costed about $50 USD (depending on where you go and location on your body and all that, it’s way more than $50 but let’s say $50 and not factor piercing guns which are cheaper) his upper body piercing including his ears would be about $700 USD since he has 5 on each ear, and he has his nipples pierced plus the spider bites on his lips. Only if you outright said “I don’t like piercings” is when he would consider removing his piercings.

Moving on from that analysis about his piercings, he would have some freaky piercings. I saw a person talk about him having a dick piercing and yeah I agree with them (shout out whoever said that) but I wanna add on that he’d have a stack…

Also! Imagine Sol with a tongue piercing… lowkey he’d have a silver one instead of a black one. Yeah he’s mismatching his jewlery but silver ball is superior (I’m sorry don’t cancel me)

Sol would go to great lengths to take care of his piercings! He cleans them daily with saline and does the whole salt water soaks if necessary.

Imagine Sol with a septum, not a ring or the the one withs the ball ends. A SPIKEY ONE!

Sol seems like the type to stretch his septum (if he had one) or his ears. Speaking of stretching his piercings I don’t think he’d be the patient type. He’d probably experience blowout (ouch if you’ve experienced it) because he couldn’t wait.

He gives off impaitient in general. Sol does not wanna play the waiting game anymore

This is more piercing talk but if you have piercings Sol has definitely thought about asking you about matching ones! But if you take the initiative he’d be cheesing, like kicking his feet in the air giggling.

“I was thinking that we get matching piercings Sol” his Jaw drops then he freaks out inside.

I can see Sol getting tattooed since he already has several piercings. Definitely would tattoo your name on him, though its between somewhere visible like his neck or arm or somewhere private like across his chest or above the groin (quite freaky if you ask me).

Some other tattoos that seem very “Sol” could be something Edgar Allan Poe related, maybe a raven in reference to “The Raven” or a line from a poem. A silly idea would be a pumpkin since yk you’re his “pumpkin”

Speaking of that imagine if he had a raven tattoo and you say something like “wow I like your Crow tattoo!”… like Crow? Which sounds like Crowe? Crowe as in that Ichabod?! Yeah Sol’s getting a coverup tattoo or if he’s feeling extra violent he’d scratch his skin off…

This idea is just goofy and doesn’t even sound like a headcanon but imagine Sol tattooed your face on his body somewhere like “aww” but also “wtf?”

Enough with the body mods and tattoo talk, moving on

Would love matching anything. Matching clothes? YES. Matching Jewlery? Sol might as well buy you a wedding ring and propose to you right there. Matching Hair? He already has the hair dye ready. He’s obviously crazy about you so Matching is beyond what he can imagine. Plus it would show others that you belong to him.

Speaking of matching I don’t think he would enjoy any commentary such as “awww you guys are so cute together!” Or “I love the matching the sweaters” like yeah boosts his ego but also “WTF?!” like what do they mean they love the sweaters? Do they love you? Also why are they complimenting you?! Why are they speaking to you?!(Sol is included in the compliments but he’s crazy so no logic there) The Brightside is that ygs are recognized as being together…

He’s probably really into smelling you, even if you are stinky and you came back from the gym or something. Your smell drives him CRAZY.

Forgot to mention but if you ever make him something, he tweaks out. Like oh you made him a bracelet? He wears it even in the shower. You made him lunch? He’s cheesing and finishes every last bite. Wrote him a note telling him “good luck” on a final? Yeah he’s keeping that note forever, of course he laminates it. As mentioned in part 1, he’d have a shrine, and everything you made for him resides within that shrine.

Your Opinion matters as stated on multiple occasions. If you ever say something like “oh short hair looks good on some people” then he’s getting that haircut. Same thing if you like long hair, he’d grow it out for you.

Quite literally everything he does is for you.

While we don’t know information about Sol’s family and if he even has any, if you asked him about his Family he’d get really quiet and you should take that as a hint to move onto a different topic.

I forgot if I mentioned this in my last post, but Sol is the type to wear guyliner and do his eyebrows….

Keeping up appearances is important to him as it directly impacts your perspective on him.

On my Sol you are the apple of his eye

He would enjoy intimate moments: sharing a pair of earbuds with you, video calling late at night, falling asleep next to eachother.

But if you wanna get freaked out and have sex all the time then he doesn’t mind that…

Sol’s down for all kinds of intimacy because it’s with you.

Even though your first “hangout/date” was the arcade at the movie theater, Sol would put in effort towards a “makeup hangout/date” so that you can see the better of him. Plus he’d like to know you and spend time with you. (He does know everything about you but he’ll pretend like he doesn’t know your social security number especially at a moment where you’re aware of the time you’re spending with him god he’s such a freak)

He manifests you. Sol is not exactly the religious or spiritual type but I mean if collecting crystals and getting tarot readings will help him date you then hell yeah. He needs all the help he can get, he already knows he has you but just for security I suppose…

We already are aware that he stalks the shit out of you and likely has photos of you but just imagine Sol walking to a print store asking the cashier to buy a 6 foot poster of you. The cashier isn’t paid enough to question Sol but they’re also like “wtf?”. Logically Sol would probably ask Hyugo for help since Hyugo has resources or Sol has a used and abused printer at home (Lolz)

As Stated in the last headcanon Sol doesn’t seem to be studious but if he needs to then yeah he can lock in. On one assignment he could get a D; the bare minimum, but he can easily get an A. Though the professor would question him if they cared enough.

Sol would lock in for class if it involves you. Although Sol is irrational and aggressive it doesn’t mean he isn’t academically Smart.

Socially he sucks and is awkward plus antisocial. This is seen with his interactions towards you and given the fact that his only friend is hyugo (albeit through a mutual agreement or contract). I mean you don’t just ask someone to get married after they compliment the lunch you made.

Anyone who’s not you isn’t worth his time. Regarding assigned partner work, he’d ask to do it alone or Hyugo in advanced helped him out and had the professor assign the two together. I can see Hyugo also helping Sol out by bribing your professor to pair you together on several occasions.

Sol is the Crazy ex. If you managed to breakup with him he’d go insane. He’d isolate you and kill everyone you love like duhh but let’s start out slow. His immediate response would be to get back together with you, he’d apologize and literally get down on his hands and knees begging you to come back. You’re stupid if you think he would let you go so easily. If he can’t get back together with you through apologizing and begging then he’d move onto finding out the cause. He’s stalking your socials, and also your friends to see if they were the reason. If Sol can’t deduce anything from his investigation then that’s when he becomes hysterical and takes it out on everyone with an axe of course!

Scenario

You: “I’m breaking up”

Sol: “I’m pregnant!”

You: “I meant the phone”

Sol:”Sorry I panicked” ahhhh Sol

Really suggestive but regarding sexual intimacy he’s so freaked out, if you can match his freak then you’re in for a long ride. Sol is the type to be into anything. He has to be open minded for his pumpkin.

An Idea I had is rather than let’s say Sol having photos of you up on his walls, he has portraits and all kinds of paintings of you on his walls plus the photos but more so Art of you. If he was into sculpture then he’d carve a marble statue of you. You are his muse. An analogy that can explain this relationship is how the ancient greek scuptors idealized the body and human form, Sol is the greek sculptor and you are the ideal form of the human body. You are beauty.

Speaking of art, he has definitely crashed out after drawing or painting you. Maybe the lightings off or he drew your eyes wrong, he’s putting that piece into storage or something. While he wasn’t able to capture your essence properly, he can’t bring himself to throw it away or destroy it because he thought of you while making it. The next piece he spends extra time on it.

He’s such a yearner. He has that yearning playlist dedicated to you on Spotify. I can already envision the Jeff Buckley “everybody here wants you” or Radiohead “all I need” albums on the playlist

Speaking of Music Sol looks like the type of listen to pierce the veil and sleeping with Sirens or some other alternative music but in actuality he’d listen to your favorite music (if it is actually PTV and SWS then hell yeah) or some other sort of yearning music directed towards you

Sol has written Poems about you. (Yk Since he likes Poe)

Sol’s Poems would range from Haikus about you to feelings of rage towards Crowe but also the frustration he feels waiting for you to notice him.

He is the ultimate Crowe hater. D1 Anti-Crowe.

To be honest Sol’s obsession with you is quite deluded. He is self aware that he is unhealthily obsessed with you but he doesn’t care. Feelings of doubt towards you are nonexistent and he’d shut down any contradictions. If Hyugo were to comment on Sol’s infatuation with you, Sol would be infuriated and say something snide like “your advice wasn’t a condition I agreed to” or straight up “shut the fuck up.”

In the “No Witnesses ending” where you strangle him with his choker, he probably enjoyed that. The physical part, not the part where you’re crying about Crowe because you love Crowe and not Sol. Boo Crowe👎 also Boo Hyugo👎 after he stabs you

It’s canon from Fantasia Tumblr that after the NW ending that Sol begs Hyugo to kill him. But if Hyugo doesn’t kill him, Sol would die exactly how you did. Sol would stab himself in the chest, kind of sweet in a sense, but it’s symbolic. It’d be retribution for your death indirectly caused by Sol.

Sol has a belt collection and specifically a studded belt one. Just imagine Sol with a green checkered belt.

Sol would change his aesthetic for you. He’d be like Ren from 14 days with you (if yk). If you say that you prefer softer aesthetics then he works on becoming your preference. You’re funny if you think you can have a type, like what do you mean type? Sol is your type and Your type is Sol. Sol becomes your type, your ideal boyfriend and eventually husband.

Sol pours his blood sweat and tears into you. All of his being goes towards you. You are his reason for living (duhhh)

I feel like one of Sol’s main methods for courting you is through imitation he’s like the periwinkle purple audio. If you like a certain food then all of the sudden that’s Sol’s favorite food. Your Likes, dislikes and hobbies become a part of Sol. Imitation is a smart tactic since people tend to go for others that are like them/ similar. Shared tastes is an easy way to make conversation,

Sol doesn’t care about the “opposites attract” trope, especially if its aesthetic wise . Only if you believe in the “opposites attract” trope then Sol would be fine with it

He’d let you yap about interests, some drama you heard, complaints. He’s a listener, but he can be a yapper (only if you want him to be)

I feel like sometimes Sol get tired of cooking since he cooks lunch for Hyugo and himself all the time.

Sol has a high tolerance for mostly anything you do. Mayb you kept burning the food while you guys were cooking at you apartment, he doesn’t mind it happens! Plus it’d be an honor for him to taste your cooking. Or Maybe you made stupid financial decision, dw Sol’s got you. But if you spend more time with someone other than Sol? That’s his final straw.

—————————————————————

Okay That’s enough. I spent over 2+ hours writing these and I can see a part 3. These have been checked for errors to the best of the abilities. Again thank you for all the support! And Suggestions are appreciated! I noticed in this series of headcanons I jump back and forth between ideas, apologies in advance, things just come to mind. I know I said I would write Crowe headcanons and I will soon! Also I don’t know if any of you notice but my formatting is between two types as I progress as a blogger. Okay enough thanks again you perverts… Also let me clarify that I do not condone the things Sol has done to m/c in the game, let me live and have imaginary headcanons, though some are on the far side of headcanon much less canon behavior.

[murfpersonalblog]

@darnmand A friendly reminder that Anne Rice's official biography confirmed that Lestat was based on Stan too, and how Anne (sub)consciously felt about their strained marriage at times. Multiple things can be true at once.

Yes, AR based Loustat on different aspects of herself. But she also based them on the people around her, to represent both the internal (Anne) AND external factors/influences/inspos that shaped her outlook on life: parts of Lestat are based on her husband Stan; just like parts of Louis are based on her mother Katherine; and parts of Claudia are based on Michelle (external), but parts of Claudia are based on AR's childhood & relationship with her mom (internal).

AR's biography explained how Stan reminded her of her hero, James Dean, and how James Dean became the blueprint for Lestat, too--cuz Stan AND Dean represented the type of active man Anne liked most, and Louis represented the type of passive mindset Anne liked least about herself.

And best of all, Christopher Rice himself confirmed that Loustat were based on BOTH of his parents, Anne AND Stan.

TL;DR: The blanket statement that "Lestat was NEVER based on Stan" is just not factual; there's way more to it than that, as AR's biography laid out piece by piece.

AR was a very complex & multifaceted & multidimensional person, who wanted her characters to be the same way, representing the ofttimes contradictory dualities & dichotomies within people, that is the very hallmark of Gothic literature itself.

I had an idea of Lestat as the man of action, the man that could do things that I never could, the man who could make decisions that I’d never had the nerve to make, and the person who could go through life joyfully in spite of the questions that torment me, the doubts that torment me, the horror of death that torments me. (...) [Lestat] never really absorbs a tragic definition of himself for very long. He always comes back laughing at everything and just rebounding. It may take him a few years, but he always does it. I really wanted to explore a personality different from my own. - Anne Rice (source)

[dailypj]

(Assuming that you’ve already put some thought into characterizing PJ, tho feel free to ignore this if not! I’m just trying to scope out how to potentially write PaperJam’s character into a fic, since him being sort of a skeptic could mean that he wins the idgaf war too well and has no impact on the central plot yknow)

Do you have ideas for any fun internal conflicts or character arcs for PJ? If there’s a multiverse-threatening conflict unfolding, what would PJ be doing about it, if anything? What mcguffins or circumstances could be triggered that would quickly pique PJ’s interest enough to get involved?

As always my first piece of advice for writing anything pj is to go through the resources provided by his creator, @7goodangel (@-ing in case you wanna put in ur 2 cents, he is ur guy)

Here are the links for:

Pj’s bio

Pj info tag

Pj faq page (bit of a shortcut for the info tag since it holds answers to a lot of previously asked questions, tho not all of them)

now for an actual answer, there's a long ramble under the cut, enjoy

first thing that ik for sure is canon, pj would step in if it's necessary to protect his family (I believe it was a comment somewhere by 7 that stated that pj would go as far as suffocating someone for threatening his kid's life)

if the multiverse being in danger has the capacity to hurt his loved ones I'm sure he'd do something about it, but I think the lengths he's willing to go will vary depending on what/who is causing it and which other characters are joining the fight

Ink for example is definitely an interesting ally considering their past. a conflict between them is pretty much inevitable, especially if you take from canon and had them separated years prior

Now if pj’s loved ones aren't present here, that’s where my guesses on how she’d act get fuzzy. In the past, pj took it upon herself to judge whether certain aus should stay alive or be erased. She believed that what error did was wrong not because it was a massacre of innocents, but because he did it too indiscriminately

(I’d say it was pretty easy to gain a dehumanizing view of others when the 2 biggest influences she had referred to the masses as just fictional characters or anomalies…)

Now, she does indeed spare aus she deems acceptable, but I’m not sure how much she’s willing to risk for them. Cuz like, part of her self-given job is motivated by the want to prove she isn’t a mistake to the man who wants every universe to die

Basically she’s got some pretty dark grey morals and it’s fun to deconstruct them (or make them worse if you wanna go the antagonist pj route, equally fun imo)

now a more headcanon-y idea (aka the trait I tend to exaggerate in nearly every pj varient I've made thus far for angst purposes) is leaning into the whole "I have to be useful to be worthy of anyone's care" thing, and just strongly wanting to disprove bad assumptions/expectations about herself (especially the mistake thing) which couldd lead to her going down a phase of believing she should follow in ink's protector footsteps to try and become more of a priority in his eyes (with the added bonus of keeping fears other characters may have about her "becoming like error" at bay)

does it work? idk but maybe if she just obsesses over it even more the identity crisis will be worth it Slash J

so ya that's my 2 cents on a potential conflict based on canon stuff, absolutely feel free to go ham on whatever direction you feel like taking pj I'm just a big advocate for "learn the rules before you break them" 👍✨

[gothamite-rambler]

Talia walked over to Jason, who was playing with toddler Damian. Damian was happily stacking blocks into a perfectly symmetrical tower while Jason built with Legos nearby.

Talia (worried): You told him?

Jason (frustrated, but keeping his voice steady): For the hundredth time this year, I haven’t told him!

Talia: Alright good, and you haven't told any of his “sons” either?

She added quotes around sons, as she saw Damian as his only true heir. Jason rolled his eyes. Damian continued stacking blocks silently.

Jason (annoyed): No. Don’t put quotes around “sons.” He actually likes those idiots.

Talia: So you say, but when he finds out about our son, that’s when he’ll rid himself of those stupid, insignificant Robins. Every last one of them was weak, pathetic—

Jason coughed, glaring at the woman to remind Talia that he was also a Robin. She rolled her eyes, shifting her hip to the side.

Talia: You obviously aren’t included when I criticize them. Anyway, I’m glad you’re being smart and keeping his little brother a secret. I’m working on how to tell B. Damian is still a baby, which gives us plenty of time.

Jason (disbelieving): Talia... He’s three.

Talia: No, he’s at least one.

Jason glanced at the obviously growing toddler and picked him up by his hips to lift him closer for Talia to see.

Jason (bouncing Damian for emphasis): He’s three. We met him three years ago when he was a baby. His birthday was three months ago!

Damian (repeating): Three!

Jason: He’s been learning new words.

Talia: Oh... I thought he was just an intelligent baby. Well, he is, since he shares my genes. Took him a while to speak, is that normal?

Jason: I’m not sure, but thankfully he hasn’t been fully corrupted by you and your father. He’s cute and bouncy too.

Jason held Damian up and gently bounced him, making the toddler rattle to play along.

Jason: One more time, are you sure he’s—

Talia (interrupting): For the thousandth time, he’s my baby that I gave birth to! I pay you to babysit, not question the DNA of my star.

Jason: Are you going to kill me if I don’t stop?

Talia (glaring at Jason): ...You know the answer.

Jason: You won't, that's what I thought. Anyway, I’m going to spend time with my baby brother. I don’t need your negative influence around him.

Talia: Himar ghabi. You’re lucky he likes you, and I tolerate you. Just don’t fill his head with lies about me.

Talia left, closing the door to the playroom behind her. Jason set Damian down on the floor, sighing exhaustedly.

Jason: How am I supposed to be the positive influence on this kid?

Damian (patting his brother’s leg eagerly): Ah, ah!

Jason: What is— Oh, you made this tower?

Damian nodded proudly, showing off a neatly built house made from the same colored blocks. The little toddler grinned at his handiwork.

Damian: Nice?

Jason: Nice job, kid. Here’s a Starburst.

He pulled a couple of fruit chew candies from his pocket, unwrapped an orange one, and handed it to Damian. The toddler happily chewed the candy. While Damian enjoyed the candy, Jason jotted some notes in his journal.

Jason (internally): Three years old and Bruce has no idea he exists. I’m getting paid to take care of him, and he’s a cute little brat. Talia continues to frustrate me, but this kid makes it all worth it. She’ll probably tell Bruce when Damian starts elementary school, and if she doesn’t, I will — I don’t trust either of them to be good teachers.

Damian (holding a Dr. Seuss book): Read, please.

Jason (smiling as he took the book): “The Cat in the Hat”, good choice. Take a seat.

Damian plopped down on the ground, although he couldn't grasp the book’s absurdity, he enjoyed listening to Jason read them.

Arabic words used:

Himar ghabi - Stupid donkey.

[t4lon]

this is an incredibly rambly post about "splitting" vs headmate creation, and the view of splitting as inherently maladaptive vs other forms as inherently neutral. this is not endorsement or encouragement to split on purpose, or a general statement on CDD system functionality in general, it's solely like. idk. just a breakdown of our experience

content warnings for. well. Intentional splitting (in the vaguely inaccurate CDD sense), mentions of sex, abuse, and self harm, and discussion of sadism in a sexual context

i want to preface this by saying we already struggle to differentiate intentional creation methods from intentional "splitting"; we have DID and frankly were under the impression that for people like us, these are kind of fundamentally the same thing

i no longer think this is true, because among people with CDDs, there seems to be this incredibly common notion that splitting is 100% bad, that it represents a regression in recovery, or that at the very least it is always a maladaptive coping mechanism that you would be better off discarding to use something else. i see this sentiment pretty consistently even from people who are extremely pro-endo- and willogenic and it has confused me and kind of settled me further into the alienation i feel from both endogenic and traumagenic communities

we split on purpose to cope with cognitive dissonance; additionally, we use heavy dissociation to relocate our memories, skillsets, and symptoms between ourselves as our circumstances change. it is of course important to keep in mind that our life is not perfect- there is always a possibility that our situation is so negatively impactful that the "maladaptive" methods we employ are simply all we have, but i think at this point i dont believe that, and i really can only make my point through a very personal example

i (this specific alter) have always struggled with healthy expressions of sexuality; my sexual behavior has always been heavily influenced by trauma, and i find it difficult to kindle any sort of pride or positive emotions about any of my sexual interests. a lot of sex was, for a very long time, a way to paradoxically punish myself for wanting to have it. relevant to this example, i leaned heavily into my masochism because my sadism scared me

i was like this my entire life. there was very little anyone could do to change my mind, because as much as i respected and was attracted to sadists/sadism, i simply could not internalize the idea that it may be scary but is not inherently evil for me to want to hurt other people consensually in a sexual context. i could rationally push myself to accept this notion for others, and i could live alongside and befriend them with this understanding, but i could not under any circumstances identify myself as a sadist- to do so would undermine my (deeply warped and unhealthy) self-image of someone who is Acted Upon during sex. so any attraction or desire i experienced surrounding the topic became incredibly distressing

this eventually resulted in an involuntary split, and an alter who ultimately ended up abusing me for several months as we struggled to come to terms with our collective feelings about sex

and then she split, again. whether or not it was truly intentional is frankly debatable, but it was something we had been thinking about for some time when it happened, and something we have done in the past. the result was two new alters, one holding not only her sadism, but also autistic and OCD traits that had previously been repressed or punished, in the form of A Special Boy Who I Love So So Much, and the other holding her religious inclinations, her gentleness/parental instinct, and ironically her temper, in the form of. well, the other guy's wife

now i share a mind and body with someone who i love deeply, and who is unashamedly sadistic, and not abusive. this level of proximity is unmatched; with him, i can functionally practice BEING sadistic in a healthy way without having to push through the cognitive wall of "that's not me. i dont want to be like that", and through this practice and trust in him i can slowly realize my own identity without being sent into a spiral of self hatred

so i do want to ask- what about that is more maladaptive than self harm with sex i don't want to have? what about that is more maladaptive than continuing to fake it until i make it, hating myself the entire time?

it is very hard to extend grace to yourself. it is very very hard for some people to make their internal voice any kinder, or to quell critical or anxious thoughts.

it is much easier to love and respect someone else.

For our system in particular, it is fundamentally easier, and frankly healthier, for us to acknowledge the things about ourselves that we don't like by learning to love each other in spite of (and later, because of) them. i was never going to get through the miles of social trauma and aversion to cringe and religious shame on my own, but because i love and trust and know and at times AM my headmates, i know that it's possible to exist peacefully in ways that frightened me

community and external support could probably also contribute to this, but in order for that to work i would have to overcome another hurdle- social phobia and general Autism Problems make it difficult for me to maintain consistent relationships with other people, and on top of that, i am an incredibly arrogant person who struggles to trust the judgment of others, especially when being provided validation or encouragement. i simply either dont trust that you mean it, or i dont trust that you actually know what you're talking about. i truly believe that this is never going to be fully solved; i think that this specific form of skepticism and distrust (note that i am NOT always right!) is genuinely partially wired into our mind. we need reason to believe you, and because you simply cannot be an expert in our mind nor do you have any true frame of reference for what we feel internally, we cannot trust you when you tell us it's okay to be/think/feel anything

and as far as ethical concerns wrt headmate creation for this purpose go, this is why i brought up our ability to intentionally dissociate to relocate memories and concepts. in a way that feels very similar to the process of splitting a new headmate, we can simply voluntarily trade traits that distress one member but are neutral or appealing to another. it's when no one can handle the trait that it gets "lost" and repressed, which we frankly DO consider maladaptive for our circumstances. but through this process we can functionally pause and continue the process of "headmate creation" indefinitely, forever.

tldr DID is confusing. plurality is confusing. i kind of have to just ignore what everyone calls healthy bc i think i tend to hurt myself to fit a mold on principle

[ariaxco]

why you're not glowing up (it's not what you think) ⋆.ೃ࿔*:･ 🎀

you're doing all the "right" things. skincare routine, gym membership, new wardrobe, pinterest-worthy morning routine. you bought the supplements, followed the influencers, saved every "that girl" post.

so why do you still feel exactly the same?

because you're trying to glow up from the outside in. completely backwards.

the girls who actually transform — the ones who look different six months later, who carry themselves like they know something you don't — they didn't start with the aesthetic. they started with the invisible stuff first.

you're still operating from your old identity

here's the thing nobody tells you: you can't dress like her, work out like her, eat like her, and still think like the old you. your brain will sabotage every external change until your internal world catches up.

you'll buy the expensive skincare and still pick at your face. you'll meal prep on sunday and binge by wednesday. you'll set the 6am alarm and hit snooze until 9.

why? because deep down, you still believe you're the girl who doesn't follow through. you still see yourself as the one who starts strong and gives up. you're trying to change your actions while keeping your old story about yourself.

the real work is rewriting that story. deciding you're someone who keeps promises to herself. someone who deserves the life she's building. someone who doesn't quit when it gets boring.

you're avoiding the real work

face masks are easier than facing your patterns. new clothes are easier than new boundaries. gym selfies are easier than sitting with why you actually hate yourself.

the real glow up work is boring:

going to therapy and actually doing the homework

journaling without making it aesthetic

saying no to people who drain you (even when they guilt trip you)

setting standards and sticking to them when someone tests them

sitting with discomfort instead of shopping it away

looking at why you seek validation from people who don't even like themselves

you want the transformation without the mess. but healing is messy. growth is uncomfortable. real change means grieving who you used to be.

you're performing transformation, not living it

posting about your 5am routine doesn't make you a morning person. talking about self-love doesn't mean you practice it. buying the books doesn't mean you read them.

you're performing the aesthetic of change without doing the actual work.

real transformation is invisible at first:

choosing yourself even when no one's watching

doing the work when it's not exciting anymore

building habits so quietly no one notices until the results are undeniable

healing your relationship with yourself before you try to fix anything else

stop documenting your journey and start living it.

you're waiting for motivation to maintain you

motivation got you started. that burst of "new year, new me" energy that had you buying workout clothes and downloading meditation apps.

but motivation is a liar. it shows up when you don't need it and disappears when you do.

discipline keeps you going. discipline is showing up on tuesday at 6am when the excitement has worn off. discipline is choosing the salad when you want the fries. discipline is doing your skincare routine when you're exhausted.

the girls who actually transform? they show up on the days they don't want to. every single time. they built systems that work even when they don't feel like it.

you're trying to skip the basics

you want the advanced routine before you've mastered drinking enough water. you want the perfect morning routine before you can wake up on time. you want self-love before you've learned basic self-respect.

glow ups aren't built on complicated routines and expensive products. they're built on basics done consistently:

sleeping 7-8 hours

drinking water

moving your body

eating food that nourishes you

protecting your peace

keeping promises to yourself

master the boring stuff first. the magic happens in the mundane.

you think time will fix what discipline won't

"i'll start monday." "after the holidays." "when life calms down."

life is never going to calm down. there will always be stress, chaos, reasons to wait. the girls who glow up don't wait for perfect conditions — they create them.

stop waiting for the right time. there is no right time. there's only right now.

the real glow up formula

change your identity first. decide who you want to be, then start acting like her today.

do the boring work. therapy, boundaries, healing, discipline. the stuff that doesn't photograph well.

build systems, not motivation. create routines that work even when you don't feel like it.

master the basics. sleep, water, movement, nourishment, peace.

stay consistent longer than you stayed inconsistent. this is where most people quit.

stop trying to look transformed. start being transformed.

stop performing your glow up for the internet. start living it for yourself.

stop waiting for motivation to save you. start building discipline to sustain you.

your glow up isn't about becoming someone new — it's about becoming who you've always been underneath all the fear, doubt, and other people's opinions.

she was always there. you just forgot how to be her.

[andreablog2]

Geopolitically , the states have historically exerted significant influence over Latin America through liberal-leaning policies and the Middle East through conservative-leaning policies….. Liberal administrations have often promoted economic integration and cultural influence in Latin America via trade agreements and soft power initiatives, including the spread of progressive values like feminism and LGBT rights, which can reshape local identities. Conservative administrations have prioritized military and strategic dominance in the Middle East through interventions and alliances, often promoting Western-aligned governance and traditional values that resonate with local elites. They take turns and act shocked but ultimately both serve the mission of American hegemony.

Domestically, both liberals and conservatives exhibit sinophobic tendencies, but again they take turns. Just kind of the opposite direction. Conservatives often encourage Latin American immigrants to assimilate by emphasizing patriotic values and cultural alignment with mainstream American identity, especially by prioritizing racial hierarchies that favor whiteness, like the anti blackness in Mexicans is a plant/not related to “casta” at all, the state of Texas in general…. Liberals, meanwhile, promote multiculturalism but often advocate for Middle Eastern immigrants to adopt progressive American values, such as feminism and LGBT rights, which can conflict with traditional cultural norms, effectively pressuring cultural realignment. They take turns and act shocked but ultimately both serve the mission of like domestic cultural pruning.

The two party system really just allows this endless colonization and internal reeducation of immigrants from said colonized counties. But it’s all obfuscated through party lines. Even if not through a blue red election pattern , the two political parties in America have never been stronger and America is such a big county they can effectively run both initiatives at the same time, especially domestically. But not just domestically, with Trump and maga, the liberal party(and now the “dem soc” party) have done such a good job of branding themselves as ideologically incompatible with Trump, even branding him as a rogue agent…that way they can continue their “counter” measures by posing as course correcting for his actions.

[mariacallous]

In the summer of 2008, I was 19 years old, halfway through college, and an aspiring poet with a notebook full of earnest stanzas of questionable quality. I loved writing. I loved literature. As I considered what sort of career might suit me, I became curious about the life of a book editor. So I made my way to New York City for an internship I had received at a major publishing house. Joining me were four other interns—two Black women and two Asian women. The idea was to open industry doors to students from backgrounds underrepresented in the field.

I felt primed for the experience, fresh from a transformative college course that introduced me to the history of Black American letters, anchored by The Norton Anthology of African American Literature. Published in 1996 by W. W. Norton and edited by the scholars Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Nellie Y. McKay, the book traversed three centuries of writing, from the Negro spirituals of the 18th century to the poetry and prose of the late 20th century. This was the volume, many said, that had assembled and indexed a Black American literary canon for the first time. Toward the anthology’s close, I found myself spellbound by Toni Morrison’s 1973 novel, Sula, and intrigued by a single line in her biography: Not long after she published her first novel, “Morrison became a senior editor at Random House.”

I’d never known that Morrison had straddled the line between writer and editor. Perhaps naively, I hadn’t envisioned that someone could do both jobs at once, especially a writer of Morrison’s caliber. And I didn’t know then how many of the writers who surrounded her in the Norton volume—Lucille Clifton, June Jordan, Leon Forrest, Toni Cade Bambara—as well as figures beyond the anthology, such as Angela Davis, Muhammad Ali, and Huey P. Newton, had relied on Morrison to usher their books into the world. I certainly did not appreciate how dynamic—and complicated—both the art and the business of those collaborations had been for her.

Now readers can discover Morrison the bold and dogged editor, thanks to a deeply researched and illuminating new book, Toni at Random: The Iconic Writer’s Legendary Editorship, by Dana A. Williams, a scholar of African American literature and the dean of Howard University Graduate School. Decades of path-clearing and advocacy had preceded the Norton anthology, and Morrison, as the first Black woman to hold a senior editor position at the prominent publishing house, had played a major part. In a 2022 interview, Gates remarked that Random House’s hiring of Morrison, at the height of the civil-rights movement, was “probably the single most important moment in the transformation of the relationship of Black writers to white publishers.”

A pronouncement like that runs the risk of hyperbole, but Williams’s meticulous and intimate account of Morrison’s editorial tenure backs up the rhetoric. How Morrison handled the pressures of wielding her one-of-a-kind influence is fascinating—and, in retrospect, telling: As an editor, she was not just tenacious, but also always aware of how tenuous progress in the field could be. And it still can be: The recent departures of prominent Black editors and executives who helped diversify publishing’s ranks after George Floyd’s murder in 2020 are a stark reminder of that.

Morrison’s arrival at Random House in the late 1960s, a fraught and fertile moment, was well timed, though her route there wasn’t direct. She was born Chloe Ardelia Wofford in 1931 in the midwestern steel town of Lorain, Ohio, to parents who, like so many millions of Black Americans in that era, had fled the racial violence of the South in search of safety and economic opportunities farther north. They recognized their daughter’s brilliance early (as did teachers) and began scraping together money to make college possible. Morrison went to Howard, majoring in English, minoring in classics, and throwing herself into theater. After getting a master’s degree in American literature from Cornell University and teaching at Texas Southern University, she went back to Howard in 1957 and spent seven years in the English department. She joined a writing group, whose members loved some pages she shared about a young Black girl who wishes her eyes were blue—the seeds of her debut novel, The Bluest Eye.

Morrison also married, had a child, and divorced, before returning home to Ohio in 1964, pregnant and in search of a new start. One day not long after, three copies of the same issue of The New York Review of Books were accidentally delivered, carrying an ad for an executive-editor job at a small textbook publisher in Syracuse that had recently been acquired by Random House. Morrison’s mother said the mistake was a sign that she should apply. Morrison’s first novel was still several years off, and she needed a steady job that would allow her to focus on her writing in the evenings. She was hired and spent a few years at the publisher before it was fully absorbed by Random House, one of whose top executives had been struck by her intellect and editorial adroitness. She was soon offered a job as an editor on the trade, or general interest, side. She accepted.

Amid racial upheaval and widespread student protests, Black studies and African studies were on the rise, transforming how the history, literature, and culture of the Black diaspora were taught. “I thought it was important for people to be in the streets,” Morrison later said. “But that couldn’t last. You needed a record. It would be my job to publish the voices, the books, the ideas of African Americans. And that would last.”

Her galvanizing insight as an editor was that “a good writer,” as Williams puts it, “could show the foolishness of racism,” as well as the many facets of Black life, “without talking to or about white people at all.” Morrison came to appreciate the power of directly exploring the inner and outer dimensions of Black life as she edited two groundbreaking anthologies: one that brought together some of the best African fiction writers, poets, and essayists, Contemporary African Literature, and another called The Black Book, which documented Black American history and daily experience through archival documents, cultural artifacts, and photographs. A frustration with the focus she found in the work of some homegrown Black writers also shaped her thinking. As she said later,

I realized that with all the books I’d read by contemporary Black American writers—men that I admired, or was sometimes disturbed by—I felt they were not talking to me. I was sort of eavesdropping as they talked over my shoulder to the real (white) reader. Take Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man: That title alone got me. Invisible to whom?

Morrison recognized, Williams writes, that this “editorial aesthetic” of hers made her work harder. Famous for giving its editors unusual freedom, Random House was all for unearthing new writers and creating a new readership. Still, reaching a general audience remained a trade publisher’s mandate. A salesman at a conference once told Morrison, “We can’t sell books on both sides of the street”: There was an audience of white readers and, maybe, an audience of Black readers, he meant, but those literary worlds didn’t merge. “Well, I’ll just solve that,” Morrison decided. She was determined to “do something that everybody loves” without losing sight of her commitment to Black readers.

To pull off that feat, Morrison’s mode was to be relentlessly demanding—of herself, her authors, and her Random House colleagues. She tailored her rigorous style to the varied array of Black writers she didn’t hesitate to pitch to her bosses. But whether she was editing her high-profile nonfiction authors—Newton, the Black Panther leader, and others—or largely unknown and highly unconventional fiction writers, among them Gayl Jones, her protective impulse stands out.

As they worked on their books with Morrison, Newton as well as the activist Davis resisted the pressure to lean into the sort of personal reflections the public was curious about, and she supported them, while insisting that their thinking be clearly laid out. For Newton’s 1972 collection of writings, To Die for the People, that meant tossing weak early essays and reediting the rest, even those that had already been published. But her aim was not to present his ideas “all smoothed out,” Williams writes. Morrison emphasized that “contradictions are useful” in accurately tracing the evolution of the Black Panther Party away from a focus on armed revolution and toward the goal of creating social infrastructure within communities, offering programs such as free breakfast for students. She felt that a reflective Newton should emerge from the book’s pages. Aware of the public narrative that positioned the Panthers as unhinged, violent racial nationalists, Morrison encouraged him to describe “what he believes are errors in judgment in the Party line behavior.”

She worked more intimately with Davis, whom she sought out right after Davis’s acquittal on charges of murder, kidnapping, and criminal conspiracy (resulting from a courthouse raid in which guns that were registered to Davis were used). For a time, Davis even moved in with Morrison and her two sons, then living in Spring Valley, New York. As they progressed through what became Angela Davis: An Autobiography (1974), their friendship seems to have made Morrison fiercer in deflecting calls for more personal revelation (which she considered sexist code for sensational romantic-life details). She bridled at one reader’s report asking for, among other things, more signs of Davis’s “humanness” in the draft. In a memo to Random House’s editor in chief, Morrison remarked that humanness is “a word white people use when they want to alter an ‘uppity’ or ‘fearless’ ” Black person.

At the same time, she pushed Davis for more vivid storytelling, and less academic vagueness in her account of her political life, her time in prison, her trial. At one point, Morrison chided her that “humanity is a vague word in this context,” evidently referring to Davis’s discussion of incarceration:

You repeat the idea frequently throughout so it is pivotal. “Breaking will” is clear; forcing prisoners into childlike obedience is also clear; but what is erode their humanity. Their humaneness? Their natural resistance?

Morrison bore down on publicity for the book too, famous though its author already was. She secured a blurb from the well-known British leftist Jessica Mitford, who wrote about prison reform too. Still, Morrison’s commitment to Black readership was unrelenting, and Random House arranged to provide hosts of book parties for Davis in Black communities with copies at a 40 percent discount. The party conveners could sell them at regular price and keep the profit.

Always on the lookout for new talent, Morrison asked friends who taught in creative-writing departments to send promising work by their students her way. In 1973, she dug into a box of manuscripts sent by the poet Michael Harper at Brown University. The writer was Gayl Jones, then in her early 20s, and Morrison was stunned by her narratively experimental prose. “This girl,” she felt, “had changed the terms, the definitions of the whole enterprise” of novel writing. Morrison, confessing that she was “green with envy,” immediately set up a meeting with Jones and soon persuaded the higher-ups at Random House to give her a book deal. She and Jones turned first to the draft of a novel titled Corregidora, which tackled the sexual exploitation of women entrapped in slavery, and its psychological and spiritual toll, in a more devastating and effective way than Morrison had ever encountered.

Spurred on by her fervent belief in Jones’s talent, Morrison was determined to ensure that Corregidora made an impression, well aware of how a successful debut could define a fiction writer’s career—particularly that of a Black woman fiction writer. She set exacting standards, bluntly calling Jones out when she thought she was taking shortcuts: “For example, Ursa’s song ought to be a straight narrative of childhood sexual fears,” she wrote to Jones, and went on: “May Alice and the boys—the fragments are really a cop out. You know—being too tired or impatient to write it out.” Understanding how shy Jones was, Morrison joined her for interviews and used her own literary capital (Sula had recently appeared to acclaim) to advocate for her work. “No novel about any black woman can ever be the same after this,” Morrison declared in a 1975 article in Mademoiselle.

Two years later, with the publication of Song of Solomon, Morrison also saw how her stature could get in the way. “In terms of new kinds of writing, the marketplace receives only one or two Blacks,” she later lamented in an interview in Essence magazine, wishing that the books she edited and published sold as well as the ones she wrote. In 1978, after the publication of Jones’s second novel, Eva’s Man, and a story collection, White Rat, Morrison’s once-close relationship with her unraveled amid mounting tensions with Jones’s partner; he had begun to represent Jones, and his behavior had become ever more erratic and aggressive.

By then, Morrison had just published a second novel by Leon Forrest, whose debut, There Is a Tree More Ancient Than Eden, had been a daunting, and thrilling, foray into novel-editing for her, back at the start of the decade. Together they had worked on an introductory section, describing the novel’s large cast of characters, not just to help readers but to orient Morrison herself as she went through the whole manuscript—and to get Random House’s editor in chief to offer Forrest a contract. With a foreword by Ralph Ellison (Morrison saw that two pages of comments he’d sent in would serve that purpose well), the novel was hailed for its risk taking and, Williams writes, for dwelling “in Blackness without reducing Blackness to an object of racism.” Though Forrest’s books lost money, Morrison’s support never wavered, and Random House, following her lead, stuck with him.

After scaling back on editing for a while, Morrison officially left Random House in 1983. She was eager to stop working on her fiction at night and “in the automobile and places like that,” she joked, and also to stop feeling “guilty that I’ve taken some time away from a full-time job.” The hard-driving editorial mission that had defined nearly two decades of Morrison’s life had never been peripheral for her—and hindsight reveals what a versatile catalyst she’d been in American literary culture. Though her departure was a boon for her own writing, it came at a cost. The number of Black authors who were published by Random House nose-dived after she left.

That probably didn’t come as a big surprise to Morrison. Seven years earlier, speaking at a conference on the past and future of Black writing in the United States, she had a message for the audience of major Black writers and critics: Don’t expect structural racism within and beyond publishing to disappear—but also don’t let that stop you. “I think that the survival of Black publishing, which to me is a sort of way of saying the survival of Black writing, will depend on the same things that the survival of Black anything depends on,” she said, “which is the energies of Black people—sheer energy, inventiveness and innovation, tenacity, the ability to hang on, and a contempt for those huge, monolithic institutions and agencies which do obstruct us. In other words, we must do our work.”

[gamora-borealis]

"the fbi is going to take my phone away" "the fbi agent assigned to read our texts checked out a long time ago" dan and phil you live in london why is the united states fbi spying on you

[kingkatsuki]

“Just the tip” and then him not being able to hold back because the pussy is just too good is one of the hottest things ever — I will die on this hill.

[turtleblogatlast]

Leo getting hit with a truth curse but instead of forcing him to admit to super sad or worrying things it’s things like “it was me who broke the remote” “I saw Mikey prank Donnie and helped hide it because it’s way funnier if he didn’t know who it was” “I rip my clothes to look more like Raph’s because he’s really cool” “my stripes aren’t even red they’re pink!”

[nomomio]

If I had a nickel for every time I found a space opera with a masculine female lead, a lesbian romance, and motifs/character experiences so uncannily similar to DID that I need to sit the author down and ask some fucking questions, I'd have two nickels. Which isn't a lot, but it's weird that it's happened twice.

[critter-wizard]

ep 43 had me tearing up in a fucking shopping centre ‼️‼️

b+w alt version that I truly couldn't decide if I liked it more . Also I included a lot of thoughts in the tags but they're somewhat incoherent<3

[intowxnderland]