#so you know. it's a complicated topic!

[hinotorihime]

actually i'm gonna also say something kinda controversial—

astrology, as a system, does not make sense unless you accept on at least some level the concept of Immutable Fate. and i think there are a lot of people out there trying to do astrology who aren't actually comfortable with that!

like, yeah yeah astra inclinant sed non obligant* and all that but fundamentally the underlying worldview of traditional astrology is not actually fully compatible with the kind of highly individualistic post-enlightenment view of what "free will" means that our culture claims to overtly epouse. and i think that a lot of modern approaches to astrology** are genuinely incoherent because they are not actually willing to properly grapple with that tension.

[taradactyls]

So I could be totally wrong but, I believe it was sort of expected that men/gentlemen lose their virginity before marriage in regency times. But I also there’s some fandom ‘debate’ about whether or not Mr Darcy would’ve had sex before getting married. So I was just curious about what your canon for Mr Darcy in T3W is. Is he a virgin or not?

I knew someone would ask me this eventually, haha. I've actually had really long conversations with my beta reader about this trying to figure it out. It sounds like this might all be stuff that you’ve already seen discussed in the fandom, but I’ve never thought about it deeply before and so these are new thoughts to me.

I keep going over the historical real-world likelihood, the authorial intent, and the text itself but I’m still not 100%. I’ll explain my thinking and what I find most likely, but here’s your warning that it’s not a clear cut yes/no.

Because on one hand, at that time period it was most common for men in his position to have seen sex workers or have casual encounters/mistresses with women from their estates. Though I do absolutely believe not all men did that, no matter how much wealth and power they had. To go back some centuries, William the Conqueror seemed to be famously celibate (no hints of male lovers either according to the biography I read) until his marriage, and there's no evidence of affairs after it either. The best guesses as to why are that it was due to his religious devotion and the problems that had arisen from himself being a bastard and not wanting to recreate that situation. Concerns over religion and illegitimate children would certainly still have been applicable in the regency to men who thought that way. And in modern times I've seen sex workers say that when an 18/21yo is booked in by his family/friends to 'become a man' often they end up just talking and agree to lie about the encounter. After all, it’s not like every man wants casual sex, even if they aren’t demisexual or something in that vein. But, statistically speaking, the precedent of regency gentlemen would make Darcy not a virgin.

On the other hand, just how aware was Jane Austen, the very religious daughter of a country rector, of the commonness of this? There’s a huge difference between knowing affairs and sex workers existed (and no one who had seen a Georgian newspaper could be blind to this) and realising that the majority of wealthy men saw sex workers at some point even if they condemned the more public and profligate affairs. The literature for young ladies at the time paints extramarital sex - including the lust of men outside of marriage - as pretty universally bad and dangerous. This message is seen from 'Pamela' and other gothic fiction to non-fiction conduct books which Jane Austen would have encountered. Here's something I found in 'Letters to a Young Lady' by the reverend John Bennett which I found particularly interesting as it's in direct conversation with other opinions of the era:

"A reformed rake makes the best husband." Does he? It would be very extraordinary, if he should. Besides, are you very certain, that you have power to reform him? It is a matter, that requires some deliberation. This reformation, if it is to be accomplished, must take place before marriage. Then if ever, is the period of your power. But how will you be assured that he is reformed? If he appears so, is he not insidiously concealing his vices, to gain your affections? And when he knows, they are secured, may he not, gradually, throw off the mask, and be dissipated, as before? Profligacy of this kind is seldom eradicated. It resembles some cutaneous disorders, which appear to be healed, and yet are, continually, making themselves visible by fresh eruptions. A man, who has carried on a criminal intercourse with immoral women is not to be trusted, His opinion of all females is an insult to their delicacy. His attachment is to sex alone, under particular modifications.

The definition of a rake is more than a man who has seen a sex worker once, it's about appearance and general conduct too, but again, would that distinction be made to young ladies? Because they seem to simply be continuously taught 'lust when unmarried is bad and beware men who you know engage in extramarital sex.' As a side note, Jane Austen certainly knew at least something about the mechanics of sex: her letters and literature she read alludes to it, and she grew up around farm animals in the countryside which is an education in itself.

We can also see from this exert that the school of thought seems to be 'reformed rake' vs 'never a rake' in contention for the title of best husband, there's no debate over whether a current rake is unsuitable for a young lady. And, from Willoughby to Wickham to Crawford, I think we have a very clear idea of Jane Austen's ideas of how likely it is notably promiscuous men can reform. This does not preclude the possibility that her disparaging commentary around their lust is based more on over-indulgence or the class of women they seduce, but it's undoubtedly a condemnation of such men directly in line with the first part of what John Bennett says so it's no stretch to believe she saw merit in the follow-on conclusions of the second part as well. Whether she would view it with enough merit to consider celibacy the only respectable option for unmarried men is a bit unclearer.

I did consider that perhaps Jane Austen consciously treated this as a grey area where she couldn’t possibly know what young men did (the same reasoning is why we never see the men in the dining room after the ladies retire, etc) and so didn't hold an opinion on men's extramarital encounters with sex workers/lower-class women at all, but I think there actually are enough hints in her works that this isn’t the case. Though, unsurprisingly, given the delicacy of the subject, there’s no direct mention of sex workers or gentlemen having casual lovers from among the lower-classes in her texts.

That also prevents us from definitively knowing whether she thought extramarital sex was so common, and as unremarkable, as most gentlemen treated it. But we do see from her commentary around the consequences of Maria Bertram and Henry Crawford's elopement that she had criticism of the double standards men and women were held to when violating sexual virtue. Another indication that she perhaps expected good men to be capable of waiting until marriage in the way that she very clearly believed women should. At the very least, a man who often indulges in extramarital sex does not seem to be one who would be considered highly by Jane Austen.

She makes a point of saying, in regards to not liking his wife, that Mr Bennet “was not of a disposition to seek comfort for the disappointment which his own imprudence had brought on, in any of those pleasures which too often console the unfortunate for their folly or their vice.” This must include affairs, though cheating on a wife cannot be a 1:1 equivalent of single young men sleeping around before marriage. However, the latter is generally critically accepted to be one of the flaws that Darcy lays at Wickham’s door along with gambling when talking about their youth and his “vicious propensities" and "want of principle." Though this could be argued that it’s more the extent or publicity of it (but remembering that it couldn't be anything uncommon enough that it couldn't be hidden from Darcy Sr. or explained away) rather than the act itself, or maybe seductions instead of paying women offering those services. I also believe Persuasion mentioning Sunday travelling as proof of thoughtless/immoral activity supports the idea that Jane Austen might have been religious enough that she would never create a hero who had extramarital sex.

So, taken all together this would make Darcy potentially a virgin, or, since I couldn't find absolute evidence of her opinions, leave enough room that he isn’t but extramarital sex isn’t a regular (or perhaps recent) thing and he would never have had anything so established as a mistress.

I’ve also been wondering, if Darcy isn’t a virgin, who would he have slept with? I’ve been musing on arguments for and against each option for weeks at this point. No romantasy has ever made me think about a fictional man's sexual habits so much as the question of Darcy's sexual history. What is my life.

Sex workers are an obvious answer, and the visits wouldn’t have raised any eyebrows. Discretion was part of their job, it was a clean transaction with no further responsibilities towards them, and effective (and reusable, ew) condoms existed at this time so there was little risk of children and no ability to exactly determine the paternity even if there was an accident. It was a fairly ‘responsible’ choice if one wanted no strings attached. In opposition to this, syphilis was rampant at the time, and had been known to spread sexually for centuries. Sex workers were at greater risk of it than anyone else and so the more sensible and risk-averse someone is (and I think Mr Darcy would be careful) the less likely they would be to visit sex workers. Contracting something that was known as potentially deadly and capable of making a future wife infertile if it spread to her could make any intelligent and cautious man think twice.

Servants and tenants of the estate are another simple and common answer. Less risk of stds, it can be based on actual attraction more than money (though money might still change hands), and is a bit more intimate. But Wickham’s called wicked for something very similar, when he dallies (whether he only got to serious flirting, kissing, or sleeping with them I don’t think we can conclusively say) with the common women of Meryton: “his intrigues, all honoured with the title of seduction, had been extended into every tradesman's family.” And it isn't as though Wickham had any personal duty towards those people beyond the claims of basic dignity. Darcy, who is shown to have such respect and understanding for his responsibilities towards the people of his estate and duties of a landlord, would keenly feel if any of his actions were leading his servants/tenants astray and down immoral paths. Servants, especially, were considered directly under the protection of the family whose house they worked in. I think it's undoubtable that Mrs Reynolds (whose was responsible for the wellbeing - both physically and spiritually - of the female servants) would not think so well of Mr Darcy if he had experimented with maids in his youth. It would reflect badly on her if a family entrusted their daughter to her care and she 'lost her virtue' under her watch. Daughters/widows of others living on the estate not under the roof of Pemberley House are a little more likely, but still, if he did have an affair with any of them I can only think it possible when he was much younger and did not feel his duties quite so strongly. Of course lots of real men didn't care about any of this, but Darcy is so far from being depicted as careless about his duties that the narrative makes a point of how exceptional his quality of care was. Frankly, it's undeniable that none of Jane Austen's heroes were flippant about their responsibilities towards those under their protection. I cannot serious entertain an interpretation that makes Darcy not, at his current age, at least, cognizant of the contemporary problems inherent in sleeping with servants or others on his estate.

A servant in a friend’s house would remove some of that personal responsibility, but transfer it to instead be leading his friend’s servants astray and in a manner which he is less able to know about if a child did result. That latter remains a problem even if we move the setting to his college, so not particularly likely for his character as we know it… though it wouldn’t be unusual for someone to be more unthinking and reckless in their teenage years than they are at twenty-eight so I don’t think having sex then can be ruled out. Kissing I can much more easily believe, especially when at Oxford or Cambridge, but every scenario of sleeping with a lower-class woman has some compelling arguments against it especially the closer we get to the time of the novel.

Men did of course also have affairs with women of ranks similar to their own, though given Jane Austen’s well-known feelings towards men who ‘ruined’ the virtue of young ladies we can safely say that Darcy never slept with an unwed middle- or upper-class woman. Any decent man would have married them out of duty if it got so far; but if he was the sort to let it get so far, I think it impossible Jane Austen would consider him respectable. Widows are a possibility, but again, the respectable thing to do would be to marry them. Perhaps a poorer merchant’s widow would be low enough that marriage is off the table but high enough that the ‘leading astray’ aspect loses its master-servant responsibilities (though the male-female ‘protect the gentler sex’ aspect remains) but his social circle didn’t facilitate meeting many ladies like that. Plus, an affair with a woman in society would remove many layers of privacy and anonymity that sex-workers and lower-class lovers provided by simply being unremarkable to the world at large. It carries a far greater risk of scandal and a heavier sense of immorality in the terms of respecting a woman’s purity which classism prevented from applying so heavily to lower-class women.

I think it’s important to note here that something that removes the need to think about duties of landlords towards the lower-classes or gentlemen towards gentlewomen is having affairs with other men of a similar rank. But, aside from the risk of scandal and what could be called the irresponsibility of engaging in illegal acts, it’s almost certain that Jane Austen would never have supported this. For a devout author in this era the way I’m calculating likelihoods makes it not even a possibility. But if you want to write a different fanfiction (and perhaps something like a break-up could explain why Darcy doesn’t seem to have any closer friend than someone whom he must have only met two or so years ago despite being in society for years before that) it does have that advantage over affairs with women of equal- and lower-classes. I support alternate interpretations entirely – it just isn’t how I’m deciding things in this instance.

I keep coming back to the conclusion that, at the very least, Darcy hasn’t had sex recently and it was never a common occurrence. It wouldn’t surprise me if Jane Austen felt he hadn’t done it ever. Kissing, as we can see from all the parlour games at the time, wasn’t viewed as harshly, so I think he’s likely made out with someone before. But in almost every situation it does seem that the responsible and religious thing to do (which Jane Austen values so highly) is for it to never have progressed to sex. I also don’t think it conflicts with his canon characterisation to say that he wouldn’t regard sexual experience as a crucial element of his life thus far, and his personality isn’t driven to pursue pleasure for himself, so it’s entirely possible that he would never go out of his way to seek it. So, I’m inclined to think that the authorial and textual evidence is in favour of Darcy being a virgin even if the real-world contemporary standard is the opposite. (Though both leave enough room for exceptions that I’m not going to argue with anyone who feels differently; and even if you agree with all my points, you might simply weight authorial intent/textual evidence/contemporary likelihoods differently than I do and come to a different conclusion).

Remember that even if Darcy is a virgin this wouldn’t necessarily equate to lack of knowledge, only experience. There were plenty of books and artwork focused on sex, and Darcy, studious man that he is, would no doubt pay attention to what knowledge his friends/male relatives shared. Though some of it (Looking especially at you, 'Fanny Hill, Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure') should NEVER be an example of appropriate practice for taking a woman's virginity. Darcy would almost certainly have been taught directly or learnt through exposure to other men talking to make sex good for a woman – it was a commonly held misconception (since Elizabethan England, I believe) that women had to orgasm to conceive. It would be in his interests as an empathetic husband, and head of a family, to know how to please his wife.

Basically, I’m convinced Darcy isn’t very experienced, if at all, and will be learning with Elizabeth. But he does have a lot of theoretical knowledge which he’s paid careful attention to and is eager to apply.

[clumsypuppy]

i feel like im not making any sense but does anyone else feel like there are stories that let u run with them and ones that spell everything out for you

[right-there-ride-on]

Gyjo in the fandom

cw: light discussion of ableism

Gyjo… what am I thinking about gyjo…

I like them. I like them a lot, actually. They have paralleled narrative arcs, they complement each other nicely, the romantic subtext is incredibly obvious to the point that even the most homophobic fan you know will admit they understand why people ship it… so why do I also have a problem with it?

There’s a lot of good fanart. Hell, I’ve reblogged plenty. Maybe it’s just something that’s more pronounced in fic.

I’m trying to word this correctly. My issue with gyjo has nothing to do with the text itself. I think my problem is just how people portray it in the fandom.

Maybe it’s because it’s so popular, or maybe it’s the sheer prominence of applying ‘Character A’ and ‘Character B’ dynamics without considerable regard for the characters involved, but I feel gyjo is very prone to flanderization. I believe the intersection with how ableist people are toward Johnny (intentionally or not, subtly or not) and the old tropes these two get shoved into makes it so I have trouble enjoying fics in the fandom.

I’m not saying it’s bad to enjoy certain tropes. I’m not saying headcanons are bad either. What I am saying is that writing is hard, but if you’re going to write fanfiction please have consideration for the characters you’re writing. The arcs of these two are complex and multilayered, which is why I think they have such staying power, but I also think they also provide a good opportunity for us as writers and artists to examine our biases when it comes to the portrayal of certain groups, personality types, mental illnesses, queerness, disability, etc. and maybe come out better people for it.

[3liza]

the "robe curls" or "heatless curls" headband doohicky is alright for some hair types but my hair will NOT dry overnight in that thing, or with a dryer hood, highly porous, fine but medium-high density in 3B curl type. plus i need actual tension to get any kind of blowout effect because of the texture.

so ive been wondering why no one has made one of those halo roller bands out of some kind of flexible ducting and you attach one end to a blow dryer and just blowdry it out all at once. should be 2-3" diameter hose made of either vented ducting material or some sort of mesh/foam similar to garden hose drip-watering material (could be silicon to give it heat resistance). and maybe in the case of mesh some sort of brush roller center insertion with bristles to hold the wrapped hair, or velcro at minimum. with blow dryer attachment it would give the blowout effect within about 15-45 minutes imo

this kind of setup is, i think, either using electric heat or hot air (i think the former) to set an old-fashioned perm. what i'm suggesting is just attached a hose to a home hair dryer using this sort of attachment:

but then the hot air hose itself is used as the hair roller tube in this fashion:

yes i have one of those dryer-attachment fabric hoods and they do not work well for me on top of a roller set or robe curls or anything else. something is wrong with the air circulation, my hair doesn't dry in a reasonable amount of time. that's why I'm mulling over turning the hose into the tube the hair goes around. the hose itself is vented with individual holes and does not vent through all the fabric. it would need a layer of air-permeable material (open mesh, velcro, bristles of some kind, low-density fiber foam, some sort of heat-resistant polyfill fiber quilting?) between the hose vent holes and the hair surface.

im happy for my fellow white women with untextured hair who are getting nice blowout waves with this satin roller tube thing but the diameter is so small my hair will just shrink back up to frizzy 3B instantly when i take it out. yes i know about hair products, all of them, humidity products and cuirl creme and gel and heat protectant and mouse and blah blah, ALL OF THEM. i have tried it, dont tell me about them

anyway shark tank thats my proposal thanks for the opportunity today also do you guys have a trashcan i have some old gum ive been chewing and. what you mean just hand it to you? like in your hand? ok

[frameconfessions]

I hope the protoframes remain relevant even after this story arc for the Drifter concludes, but I also recognize how complicated things would get with how many characters they could keep trying to make stay relevant, leading to a Konoha 13 Naruto type situation where we have too many relevant characters from Umbra & Ordis all the way to Kaya Velasco.

.

[hypotenussy]

You know what? Maybe I'll get through college purely for the sake of learning to write strong academic papers to prove my mom wrong about things.

[starpros-sunshine]

Why can't queer people just exist? Why do we have to 'Come Out'? Why do we have to stick a label onto everything so that other people can better understand it? Why does our existence have to be a statement?

[herenvibing]

cr3 is gonna end and the pc’s still feel like the same people to me :|

(crcritical content in the tags feel free to skip)

[warupiposaru]

oooo whats the lore on joes breakup...

^ (i sound like if maccie was sending anon asks on tumblr)

*spray bottle* Shoo Maccie! Shoo!!! /sillay

AAAAA oh em gee argehgagaaa!!!!!!!!!! Lore under the cut uhgnrmr,,,

OKAY.. Struck By the Rain is Joe's teenage breakup song!!!!!!! There's some queer angst,,,, ?

Joe's past partner not accompanying him through transition ("I wish that we could be close. Close enough to use our real names for once.")

But, ALSO Joe coming to struggle wth his a-spectrum identity. ("Am I beautiful now?" "You told me it was just for fun, I suppose I was too young")

And that Joe had to take the strength to let go of this relationship for his own well being. ("And now I'm walking away." "I'm not the kind to let you watch as I cry, So I've got to leave... I've got to forget you.") That even though he wishes they would still say "Oh I love you so!", those times are gone as they're growing up and figuring themselves out.

And this relationship has done DAMAGE ON JOE, even if he has come out into his true self through the pain. ("And so I'll hide myself away from the world, leave behind the sorrow of a sad little girl." > "I'm a broken man")

He's become a worse isolator, more secluded and reserved- when he's still a bright man underneath the mask. Joe already has issues from home, so a long lasting relationship ending in such a complicated manner, in his developmental years no less, did a toll.

TLDR: Joe's breakup was due to his queer identity, and he never had the power to hate this person, because it was simply that they weren't compatible- and no one was quite the villain (Lonely Storm)

[dayurno]

[multishipper-baby]

Random Onnie gender thoughts plus oc x canon for flavor.

[ennuidays]

i wonder if people think im a clueless idiot . i wonder if people think they have me wrapped around their finger . like realistically i know Nobody cares about me that much but like ... i cant help but wonder if everyone is out to Get Me

[anthromimicry]

okay, but i think it is about time to talk about one of misao's fears is, because i believe that they can tell you a lot about a character and their psyche — and i came to tell y'all that the one i'm going to be talking about today is that misao fears becoming a mother / motherhood. the first reason in which why i believe this is because misao just genuinely thinks that she is not the nurturing type and that she would likely be a terrible parent to her child ( which i know is a very depressing thing to think about. but it is something that she has feared for a long time, unfortunately. ) this likely stems from a mix of misao's inability to deal with her own emotions, though, as she feels like it's better to just bottle them up and deal with them all on her own rather than the alternative. and this would be to try to confide in someone and/or get help from them should she need it. so, misao feels as if her child were to come to her needing emotional support from her, she would absolutely fail at it and the last thing she wants is to emotionally neglect someone the way she had been as a child ( p.s. of course, this was mostly just borne out of unfortunate circumstances, as i've stated before because of kaiyah's illness. though this hasn't stopped misao from feeling the brunt of the impact that it had on her. )

plus... i feel as if misao also doesn't have a lot of confidence in herself whenever it comes to the concept of always being able to put a child first, as she has a pretty negative self-image of herself deep down if i'm being honest. she sees herself as an extremely selfish person who can't even become friends with one person because she is so afraid that someone will hurt her, and in her opinion, that makes her pathetic or weak. so she doesn't feel like she'd be able to take care of a child with the amount of responsibility that is required to in order to raise them properly and protect them at the same time.

though this isn't necessarily true as misao has put up those barriers that would normally let people into her heart mostly due to trauma, and having experienced trauma doesn't make anyone weak. i just feel as if she desperately needs to remedy her self-image because it is very damaging to think of yourself like that and it would be really good for her emotional health if she were to try to ways to better cope with everything that she's experienced throughout her life. there are other reasons as well behind why misao fears motherhood while i'm talking about it, however, and these are arguably one of the more bigger ones: the act of giving birth itself and suddenly being thrust into having to not just take care of yourself, but the baby inside of you as well. which sort of makes sense whenever you connect the dots as to how many horror stories misao has heard about delivering a baby and also how much a person's experience while being pregnant can vary from others. i mean, it has been shown that some people may have more morning sickness than others and that they just don't have a very good experience with being pregnant in general, for example. but other's may be 'glowing' as they say and may find it easier to deal with.

so, you never really know what kind of pregnancy you're going to have until you actually become 'with child' as misao would call it. and the unknown aspect surrounding it scares misao more than anything. plus, as it stands now, she isn't sure whether she'd want to go through the process of giving birth as there can be a lot of complications regarding it. but there can also be so many good things about inviting a new member of the family into your home and misao feels as if it is kind of expected of her to have children so she can continue the kanade line.

but misao is just so afraid of it for these reasons that she can not see herself as a mother, even in her head. however... there is the matter of adoption that she has yet to take into account, but with how focused the jorōgumo are about having biological children, i feel as if misao hasn't even considered it to be an option for those who are afraid of giving birth and also to give a baby / child a loving home as everyone deserves one of those. but yeah. i hope that this gave y'all a little more insight into her character, as misao is scared of re-enacting her past in a way, though i feel as if you become a mother yourself... you have to separate what will be your own experience of parenthood from your parents. so, in order to overcome this fear she has, misao would have to treat it as an entirely different thing from kaiyah's experience as a mother and her own child self's experience of her as a mother.

and this is definitely possible. it would just take some work, as overcoming any kind of fear would. plus, i feel as if misao were to accept other people's help it would also benefit her, since discussing motherhood / plunging into the topic of the sometimes seemingly scary thing that is parenthood is definitely not something that you have to try to go through alone.

[wild-at-mind]

If you ever see me becoming one of those transmisandry people, please fucking call me out immediately.

[bookwyrminspiration]

i do wonder sometimes! i think having so many desi friends here also reminds me of it too because like. idk it feels similar, some people grew up in the mother country, and then sometimes people talk about how they grew up in places where there is an abundance of street food, which is something my dad talked about getting when he was a kid... but like. i can't really fathom what cambodia would be like now without the khmer rouge. like. there's so much history we wouldn't have lost? so much music and so many movies and like all of this art and history and all these statues that were destroyed? it kind of just makes me feel angry when i think about it now lmao because as much as i wish i could be wistful and imagine what it might have been like. i don't even KNOW. and we can't know because of how many records and films and documents were burned to ash by the cpk. that shit was stolen from us and it wasn't from europe or the wider civilized west, but our own people who decided that they were better than everyone else, and now we are a third world country that is basically just a tourist attraction 👍👍👍 it kind of sucks a lot haha. there's a lot my parents lost too since they were really young when they left, so it's just like, even if they met they wouldn't be the same, so i don't know if i would actually be able to go up against the beauty standards and stuff the way i do now. and also i don't even know if i would have met you guys which would be a whole different kind of sucky tbh!!!! net loss!!! even as much as i wish i knew all those languages from a young age i don't know if it would be a good trade. even if i got to grow up with chickens :/

No yeah that makes a lot of sense! It's like...you want certain aspects of both, the now and the what could have been, but some of the way things and who you are now as a person are are only possible because you lost the what could have been. And trying to reconcile the two and imagine what you lost is still present is near impossible, because they fundamentally cannot exist together. But you still want them to? If all that makes sense

And being around people does remind you of it, because you each have different experiences, different pieces of the overall community/identity, and you can see pieces you wish you had but if you did have them. You wouldn't be you. Yeah I wish I grew up with more mexican foods at home and was taught them instead of learning on my own, but that wouldn't be me, because the me I am has learned the language from scratch on my own and found resources and recipes on my own and etc. so like...to want those pieces and the different options is like wanting to be a different person, and do I want to be a different person? very complicated feelings

Then at the end of the day it's like should I even bother thinking about it when there's literally nothing to be done about it, history and my connection to everything is already in place. I can't change what languages and food I grew up with, where I was born and raised, etc.

Because it's a very emotional topic! There's anger, like you mention, but also so much grief and loss...it's quiet overwhelming. And of course the specific histories for each of us is very different, so I in no way mean to speak for or over your own experiences. This is just what you reminded me of based on what you said and my own reflections. I try not to think about it too often because when I do...oh boy is that a nasty hurt on so many levels