do you have or know of any tips for gaining when you have trouble feeding yourself reliably (autism) and/or a lot of sensory issues/food specificity? (also autism)
okay so like, this isn't an exact science but the general community consensus on how to gain without resorting to really harmful ways to force your metabolism down is to just eat lots, with a wide variety of nutrients and a moderate focus on protein and carbs. so that's likely your goal. now, how you get there in your situation is through the same techniques that anyone with your problems uses in order to eat more regularly. you should work with your sensory issues and preferences rather than against them, and find ways to make cooking as easy and accessible as possible.
i don't know of any particular ones off the top of my head (followers, help finding links would be appreciated), but i know that there are a lot of low-effort/low-spoons cookbooks out there. find ways to reduce the number of steps in cooking, the complexity of the steps, and the amount of cleanup.
i'll also say that, as someone with executive functioning issues (autism as well), cooking is a skill that starts taking less effort and fewer spoons with time and practice. a few years ago, it always took me a ton of effort to force myself to get up and make any sort of meal even if i was feeling ravenous, but now with basic meals, i hardly have to think about it at all, and i actually find the act of cooking reinvigorating rather than a drain on my energy! cooking is no longer something i procrastinate on, and i find it quite relaxing to do. i promise it will get easier!
14 notes
·
View notes
how tf did me facetiming someone i matched with on tinder turn into them giving me unsolicited advice about giving people your full attention after i already let them know that i recently got diagnosed as adhd and it’s hard for me to focus on just one thing/person and then them telling me that “based on my behavior” they think i’m autistic like ?? didn’t ask, we literally started messaging each other like a day ago, even if i am autistic (which wouldn’t be a bad thing if i am) when has it ever been socially acceptable to tell someone you JUST MET that you think they’ve got some kind of mental disorder/illness/disability/etc.
my friends have mentioned that i might be autistic and that’s fine bc i’ve spent a lot of time with them and they actually know me and i take their perspective of me very seriously because they’re the people who see me 100% unfiltered and have known me whenever i’ve been completely unmedicated. i trust their word.
this person from tinder, however, i have sent like maybe 20-30 messages to where we talked about nanowrimo and i was like omg it’d be so cool to meet someone who also writes, whether it’s as friends or as more, i would love that—only for our facetime call to be less than 20 minutes long and for them to try and diagnose me as autistic just because i, after ALREADY TELLING THEM that i have adhd and after them asking about meds and me telling them that i haven’t taken my adhd meds today because i didn’t have work and also i’ve taken multiple naps today which has made my head even more foggy and made it even harder than usual to focus, found it difficult to focus.
like. i wasn’t unresponsive. i wasn’t ignoring them. i was listening and i was responding, i just also was looking between my phone and my laptop screen.
which okay i understand that maybe i’m just frustrated because of the “based on your behavior” comment because an 18 minute facetime call does not give someone enough interaction time to try and fucking diagnose me as anything, and maybe this is more of a we just didn’t vibe and that’s fine, i don’t think they’re like a bad person or anything and if nothing else i’m glad the mismatched vibes were felt before deciding to meet up or anything, but also.
eighteen minutes. literally eighteen minutes and they fucking “based on your behavior i think you’re autistic” and “here’s some advice, when meeting new people you should give them your full attention”
FUCK that.
3 notes
·
View notes
It’s been several weeks since I started watching Nosferatu, and I finally picked it up last night since I now have a knitting project suitably mindless that I can do without having to look at it and can watch the movie in peace. I’ve finished the third act, and I have to say, this is honestly really faithful to Dracula. Since it’s never been a secret that Nosferatu is heavily inspired by Dracula (read: an unauthorized adaption), I’m going to assign Dracula names to the roles characters play in the story rather than use their actual names most of the time.
The character combinations are interesting, but make a lot of sense given the large cast of characters in the book. I haven’t gotten far enough for most of the secondary characters to be a major presence, but I’ve read that they’re mostly absent, so the focus remains mostly on the Jonathan and Mina figures.
One of the biggest changes so far is that Mr. Hawkins and Renfield are combined into Knock, a now-malicious solicitor secretly in kahoots with the Count.
Narratively speaking, this actually makes a more of sense than it might sound at first. Mr. Hawkins is mostly a plot device in the original story, not really a character, and given the restraints of a silent film, it would be rather challenging to establish why and how the Count wants to visit England. When you strip down the conversations from the captivity portion of the novel, you’re left with the challenge of how to convey the Count’s desire or to establish how exactly he made arrangements with a foreign solicitor, so giving him an agent abroad is a pretty economical way to convey that. Then, when the Count is travelling, using Knock as a Renfield-figure and thrall of the Count serves to heighten the tension, and while the “the life is in the blood” speeches are a little less mysterious, they do pair very well with the back-and-forth between the not-Demeter and not-Van Helsing teaching a botany class about carnivorous plants.
The major downside of that choice is that it removes much of the nuance present in the books regarding the characters under the Count’s sway. Renfield and Seward’s back and forth about the nature of sanity is so far completely absent, and I expect this will be the case through the movie, going off of the visual language’s cartoonishly malicious depiction of Knock. Renfield’s humanity is really just not shown, and while Knock’s gleeful manner while eating bugs is quite similar to Renfield’s manner in the book, I highly doubt the element of resistance will show up.
Still, overall, this feels like a simplification rather than a warping of the story. Unfortunately, it’s a simplification that results in a caricature of mental illness, and yet I don’t think it’s a fundamental misreading of the story, unlike Drac/Mina pairings.
The second major change so far is that Mina and Lucy’s role have been combined into one, and given their similar narrative roles as vulnerable and beloved targets, this makes a lot of sense. Now, the Mina-figure is the sleepwalker. There is a slight change in that the prophetic dreams start earlier, but it also serves to emphasize her connection with Jonathan without the letter and journal devices. It also establishes her vulnerability early on, pretty much as soon as we realize that Jonathan is in peril, which is an effective way to convey the peril of Lucy-Mina without diary entries and serves to jump-start the middle act of the story (which I admittedly found rather slow during Dracula Daily)
In a related vein, there’s another convenience change that’s either big or small depending on what you view as an important theme. In Dracula, the Count seems primarily interested in England, and his later vendetta is the result of his predatory nature, not the driving motivation. In Nosferatu, that’s flipped, and his primary motivation to leave his castle is to track down not-Mina. He presumably did first send for a solicitor, though, so the motivation isn’t absent, it’s just less developed.
Apart from character changes, the biggest other change is that the Count spreads plague rather than just killing or turning characters. So far, it doesn’t feel fundamentally different from the book, but I don’t know yet if it will have larger plot implications down the line.
I will say, though, that the time period is always waiting a little bit uncomfortably at the back of my mind. It came out in 1922, and there’s just so much going on in the Weimar Republic at this time. It’s a culturally wild time. I don’t know a lot about this film, or its make, or how it was received, so I’m just left with vague implications about the various changes and how they would be received. What does it suggest that he spreads a plague? What does his increased focus on preying on Mina mean? What are the implications of the fact that he has an apparently willing agent abroad, or that Renfield is only a slavish caricature, totally devoted to the count?
I don’t know the answers to these questions, but they’re always looming somewhere as I watch.
13 notes
·
View notes
so this is more of a personal ask than a public one and I want to make it 100% clear that you have No obligation to agree. anyways I saw your post about triggers and how you can react to them and I was wondering if I could ask you some questions about it, since I am working on a novel where a character has ptsd and I want to be as accurate/respectful as possible. tbc I would Not ask anything about like…trauma or anything. just stuff like ‘are certain triggers associated with certain symptoms or do they seem to be random’ and how long it may last/tactics to deal with them.
again, not at all obligated to say yes
I'm not certainly not opposed to the idea, seeing as how conversations like these ones can benefit more than just writers or creatives
6 notes
·
View notes