#abstract concepts are REALLY hard to write!

[puppyeared]

[sherdnerd]

How professors sound when they make illustrations mandatory for a paper

[twiceroyaldove]

tone tags are such an interesting phenomenon linguistically. bc they're of course intended to add clarity to text communication, in a way that's more explicit than nonverbal signals, but they're also more removed from the message than verbal signals are -- arguably more removed than nonverbal signals are too, bc they're so constructed.

and that distance gets in the way of efficacy, from my perspective -- like there's a reason we spontaneously developed emoticons extremely early on in the internet days (and eventually latched onto emojis so hard), and ~*~wAyS tO eVOkE tOnE~*~, and the ones that caught on are the iconic [in the linguistic sense, ie resembling the concepts they evoke] ones bc they can be guessed.

and i think there's also a reason that when speaking out loud we don't just say what we want to say and then add "genuine" or "not mean" at the end as if speaking it makes it so -- we use full sentences like "I'm really not trying to be mean here." that's the part that really interests me, the abstraction of concepts that have never been just about tone, have always needed carefully chosen words to be expressed at least sometimes. that's where i think tone tags are distinctly less effective than just writing out the sentence for someone to read as part of the message and not as an abstracted layer on top of the message. (whereas with stuff like /lh for lighthearted i kinda get it -- i still find a well-chosen emoticon or emoji does a much better job at making me read a message in a lighthearted tone, but i get the desire to be explicit.)

ik this reads like a critique even though i started out saying it was just interesting, and idk it's both. i think the desire to implement a completely explicit tone layer on top of messages is fascinating, and i think its failure states are also fascinating, and im not about to grump at people for using an imperfect tool bc they're all imperfect.

[five-thousand-loaves-of-bread]

be constantly in own world for me (level 2/3 autism) mean like. think pretty much only about self. understand only self. entire world just me n special interest, sometimes/often times not even include own basic needs, like “hair greasy clump body itchy need shower” (unconsciously feel bad sensory, n make very uncomfortable annoyed easily frustrated, but don’t consciously know am feeling extra irritated or that am feel this way because need shower). n world often limited to thing in front of me. n sometimes not even include thing in front of me. see it (as in physically capable of vision) but not see it. n thing, people, any that not put infront of me for while, stop realize they existed in first place.

n be in own world, only think only able know self, mean that, see self as normal, as norm. everyone (this abstract concept of other people that have memorized like you memorize history fact for test), everyone like me. not even “am like everyone,” but that everyone is like me. everyone same ability as me. everyone think like me.

“everyone think like that to extent”

right. to extent. thing is am far greater than that normal “extent”

to point that average day, ask me, n would only able explain that, “think everyone same ability as me, everyone think like me. everyone exist like me.” stay at vague generalization because not able think any deeper not able think of examples. to give example in this situation mean on some level need have ability understand “am think this normal but others may think it abnormal for them”. n. most times not have ability to second part, because in own world theory of mind.

sometimes try force it. try really hard force it. try really hard think, look at other people, try make sense try find what exact different. but can’t force something not have ability. so go back rely on scripting. sometimes advanced scripting n rephrased scripting.

special interest in something social-related let me cheat little bit. appear more capable. like break down complex autism community disability community dynamics. but am videotaping camera. computer analyzing research data. not participant. it thankfully happen, but it only happen because special interest allow it be part of own world, n it only part of own world because can only see these (supposedly very humanly n organic n messy) interactions as flow charts, maps, equations, inanimate objects. closest metaphor may be, with this special interest lens that allow these social dynamics enter own world, am looking at these “people” these social dynamics similar to regular person playing the sims n thinking of sims character made out of code that they control.

rare rare times able suddenly realization of outside world. usually happen in flash. n then end. n then left to chase that feeling trying so hard remember what it felt like so can memorize it like another history fact to memorize for test removed from source removed from emotion, to make self appear know what am talking about know more than am capable of, next time someone ask, “isn’t everyone like this?”

just had flash of that that lead to write this whole thing. but already gone. something about… “those funny ‘gen z fix up work force’ stories. they actually people same age as me?’” something about sudden realize what people my age my life stage expected do usually do. something about think am so normal but actually am missing out “so many” things (what things?).

friend tell me “by be young person who severely disabled you missing out so much on same age activities”. n. inside think, (i am but) “don’t know. …am i?” n for it be genuine question, or disbelief question.

n respond with “haha, yea.”

it not lying. it just script. am don’t know what my script means.

don’t follow up by ask me “so what you think you missing out on?”

don’t know. don’t have that script (a script am don’t know meaning to) yet that make other people think am understand, either.

[please don’t say you “relate” or “feel same” “this me” or similar unless am know who you are.]

[itoshiexx]

mi vida

synopsis: sae never thought someone could become his life, but that changed when you came.

pairing: itoshi sae x gn!reader | words: 749 | warnings: established relationship, fluff

notes: welcome back to "things i wrote on a whim when my boss wasn't at the office"!! apparently i write a lot better in english without much planning, so yeah. this idea came to me based on a personal experience, since i call my boyfriend "minha vida" (which is the same for "mi vida"/"my life" in portuguese) and i never really thought i could consider someone to be my life before him.

i really really hope you like it, and i wanna thank you all so much for all the love you've given to Unworthy (but chosen), every note and follower made me super happy! <3

and also, i'm so sorry if my description of the spanish culture is not accurate and for any english mistakes!

during his time in spain, sae learned a lot of things. mainly, how to improve his soccer career even more, striving to become the best in the world after already being the best in his country. 

he was a genius, of course, so it wasn’t really hard to learn the language or get acquainted with the city of madrid, which was a lot warmer than japan — in many ways. however, it was really fucking hard to get used to the customs of the spanish people and its culture, considering it was so different from the japanese. they were extremely welcome, and sae was anything but. if anything, he was even more closed than typical japanese people. 

in spain, people were always greeting each other with a kiss on each cheek, showing off bright smiles and making conversation with strangers. friends talked loudly among each other, giving hugs and always touching somehow. the concept of personal space? totally nonexistent. in short, it was weird. 

but nothing was weirder than couples. 

the concept of love was already foreign to sae. he didn’t understand how a feeling could envelop one so much and make it forget about the rest of the world. he didn’t know how such an abstract thing, with no sense of logic whatsoever, could be so overwhelming to the point of taking one’s life completely, until all you could see, think and feel was your significant other.

most of all, he couldn’t fathom how someone could become your life. 

“te amo, mi vida,” was what he used to hear an old couple say to each other. they were the owners of sae’s favorite restaurant, a small little place in the suburbs of Madrid, and always treated him with a kindness he didn’t deemed himself worthy of. 

at first, he wasn’t able to comprehend what the sentence meant. he could barely write it on google translate to try to get its meaning, and he didn’t really care enough. though, as the time went by and sae became more fond of the couple, he eventually gathered the courage to ask the woman about it. and he was very surprised to hear the answer. 

“it means ‘i love you, my life’,” she said, smiling from ear to ear and handing a glass of salted kombucha tea to sae. it was one of the reasons he adored the place so much — it was the only restaurant he found that served his favorite drink. 

the older itoshi could only stare, dumbfounded, and mumble, “…why?”

the woman laughed at the boy’s naiveté. “why, you ask? because that’s what he is to me.” 

sae only stared in silence, too stunned to speak.

“i… i don’t understand,” he confessed. it sounded silly, and kind of pathetic, but at that moment he didn’t really care. the woman gave another smile, this time an understanding countenance, and placed her wrinkly hand on his shoulder. 

“you will understand one day, boy. and when your person comes, make sure to bring them here, right? i’d like to meet them!” 

the soccer player wanted to tell her that it would never happen. that the itoshi sae had no time for foolish things like love, and he most certainly would never love someone so much to the point of seeing them as his life. his life was soccer, and his goal was to become the best in the world. 

there was nothing else. 

oh, how he bit his tongue. 

it was at the age of twenty two when he entered the restaurant once again, and this time, not alone. you were walking by his side, with your hand intertwined in his, chatting excitedly while he just listened. a small smile was on his face, and his features were impossibly soft, in a way they only got around you. 

you, who were light in the darkness, who were comfort after a long day of practice, who was the one he loved most. you, who was the definition of home in every sense of the word. the only one that could make his heart swell so much it made it hard to breathe. 

he pulled your chair for you to sit like a true gentleman, and sat right next to you, always in need to touch you somehow. a hand was placed on your thigh while the other one opened the menu. and he turned to you, voice gentle like you could break:

“so, what would you like, mi vida?”

you, who was his life.

© 2023 itoshiexx. do not plagarise, translate, or repost any of my work on here or other sites.

[languageshead]

I love it when I am having a discussion with someone who says autistic people know more about autism than NT parents of autistic people with high support needs and their argument is „autistic people do more and better research“ when literally most of us with higher support needs have language impairment as well as we are mostly likely unable to properly understand scientific papers, abstract concepts, long texts with complex writing, a lot of us have a hard time using the internet, a lot of us cannot use the internet, I (eg) don’t really know how to do research with Google because I cannot tell what is or isn‘t an advertisement, the many results make me overwhelm etc.

Like thank you for proving my point that the autism community actually knows nothing about us and that our parents actually do understand these concepts better than you.

*Of course a lot of parents of autistic people are bad parents, them being NT or autistic parents. But bad parents are bad parents regardless of autism. It‘s still not okay to bully (specially moms) parents and caregivers of autistic people and claim you know better just because you are autistic. It‘s completely dehumanizing of autistic people because it means you don‘t see them as a person with likes and dislikes, you just see them as autism.

[bogkeep]

when i was a teen, i was in love with my best friend. to this day i cannot tell you with any certainty whether or not i was in love romantically or platonically. i don't know and i don't care. it's very possible there is a difference, but i never found it. i've asked many people about it and everyone has their own definition of where that line goes, none that ever applied to my own experiences. there is no satisfying, universal and objective line. i think that's good, actually. the idea that there is some shining abstract concept that's specialer than all the other concepts that can only be achieved like nirvana by some people and not others is not a comfortable idea. this is not to say that everyone has the same feelings and experiences, absolutely not - but we categorize our experiences within the contexts we exist in. or maybe that's just word salad.

i know that - at the time, i knew i was deeply connected to this other person and kept thinking about her all the time and we talked about wanting to be close friends for our whole lives and wrote poetry together about our soulmateness and we made mutual friends feel like a third wheel. i knew i had no desire to kiss her or take her on dates, and she crushed on some boy at summer camp, but the connection between us was mutual and explicit. if the concept of a queerplatonic relationship had been available to us at the time, maybe we would've recognized it as such. i just knew that what i was feeling didn't match up at all with what i've been told 'being in love' was supposed to be like - especially because, at the time, Being In Love also included sexual attraction. we had just cracked open the 2010's and asexuality was a punchline and a joke.

i know that - during the time i was made to feel ashamed of my aroace identity and the narrative was that i'm actually just repressing my TRUE queer identity, i reframed my memories - i had obviously been in love with my friend Romantically. i was a Real Gay. i was Valid. I Was Sapphic Actually. you can't kick me out of the parade if i had pined for my best friend as a teen!!!!

i know that - once i reclaimed the pride in myself, i reframed the memories again: i had obviously been in love with my friend Platonically, because otherwise i would've been a traitor to the good name of aromanticism. if i knew what it was like to have a crush i would contradict myself. who am i to write about romantic love as if i know? what was i doing at the devil's sacrament?

maybe it is a mystery. maybe i don't know shit. it's hard, actually, to know anything at all when the way my strange brain filters emotions through my body reads so different to the user manual. how can anyone stand to pine for another when it's all anxiety, all day? "butterflies"???? really????? how am i supposed to know anything for sure when my brain's favourite hobby is to pick thoughts apart and run them through the distortion machine on repeat, on repeat, on repeat? i don't know if i've ever loved anyone at all, now that i think about it. maybe i'm an empty shell of a human and everything i do is an act of puppetry and wishful thinking.

i just gotta trust that the love is there, in some form or another. even when i can't reach for it and confirm its existence - let alone deduce a detailed taxonomy. what do you even need that for.

[pygmi-cygni]

writing tip - children

kiddos, ninas, ninos, kinder, whatever you like to call em, they're everywhere. especially in writing! children can be a fun, innocent way to lighten up your story or add opportunities for immeasurable angst.

But i have noticed a propensity for miswriting them. I briefly touched on this in my character continuity post, but I'll go in depth about it rn.

Kids are fascinating. Their little brains work just as hard as adults, but the way they think is way different. I think there's an equal balance of overestimating and underestimating child capabilities in stories, so I'll explain examples of both.

When writing dialogue for children, it's important to note the way that certain milestones are met.

Kids under the age of five are not going to be conjugating verbs, using tense or proper structure. They have just passed the telegraphic/multiword stage of speech, which basically means being able to string words into a sentence. The vocabulary is low, but the comprehension is high. They'll be able to describe things but with a lot of abstract thought and physical description.

Example: John (5 y.o) watches a blue tow truck carry a red car down the road. He runs to tell his father.

Overestimating: "Papa, look! There's a blue tow truck with a car!" (too specific)

Underestimating: "Papa, lookit! A blue thing had another red thing on top of it an' it was goin real fast!" (John knows what cars are at this age; he has passed the 'thingy' stage of description)

Accurate: "Papa, look! A blue truck with a hook on it was with a red car on the road and the red car was on top going fast!"

John is at the age where he can identify nouns and actions, but he can't really put them in the correct order. He might not know exactly what a tow truck is, but he can see the blue truck has a hook, so he says that instead.

Kids at this age are good at descriptions and big picture concepts. If you want to use a kid as a witness in a mystery, this age would be helpful for describing the perp's looks, but nothing specific about what happenened.

Also, kids are remarkably efficient. After the age of two, toddlers/young children can feed themselves and keep themselves entertained. Obviously an adult/caregiver would need to organize and resource the food and toys, but the kids no longer need another person for every movement.

First words.

Not gonna be anything with plosives or hard palate sounds. no -ing, no consonant blends (spider, brick) no k or ck.

Soft vowels, bilabials (m, p, s, l) are all that's really gonna be a thing. (mama, papa, wa-wa, moo, baby, that kinda stuff.) it's used a lot because it's correct.

Toddlers are not busting out complicated words like stegosaurus, ok.

Obviously there are exceptions but by and large, it's pretty simple. Use this as a reference or not, but just some tips for keeping it realistic.

xox bye

[orbital-inclination]

What does Molten think of the Classic Undertale? Its story and alll the characters, I wonder if he sees himself as Sans and his brother as Papyrus or the opposite.

How Molt and Rem understand the Multiverse and all its branching iterations can explained by using a tree. "Classic Undertale" is the root system. The trunk is the branching-timeline-like AUs. (eg. "What if this happened in the classic timeline?" scenarios.) The branches are the worlds that fall adjacently, but do not necessarily share enough traits to fall into the "Trunk" category. The further and higher you get on the tree, the farther removed the AU is from the Root system. Molt views his own world as being a distant lonely leaf on that cosmic tree.

Molt and Rem view the multiverse very organically. There was no one around to teach them so they came to their own conclusions. Long story short, Molt views most Sans coded characters not in those terms but as individuals occupying a strange and kinda abstract cosmic role.

A quick note: its hard for Molt to distinguish others based on their AU because the distinction is often superficial and emotions are felt the same way. One monster's joy feels the same as another's. The difference is not the feeling itself, but how individuals react to situations. So unless Molt knows someone really well, and gets to know their voice, it's hard for him to tell them apart. As for Classic characters specifically:

Sans and Papyrus: surprisingly, Molt doesn't see himself and Rem in Sans and Papyrus as much as you would think he would. But out of the two, Molt would find himself relating to Papyrus more. Papyrus, who feels with his whole heart. Papyrus's relentless optimism and unshakable faith is infectious and inspiring, and like Molt, Papyrus knows how to keep secrets. (also, Papyrus is a significantly larger source of positivity than, pretty much, everyone else in UT. Of course, Molt would be drawn to him, but this is more a secondary reason.)

Toriel, the mother he never had: Molt likes Toriel the most. She is kind. She is loving. And though her love may blind her, she's an incredibly strong person. Privately, Molt wishes Nim could've been like her, both in the "physically there" sense and also "emotionally there" sense. It's possible that if Molt had met Toriel when he was younger, he would have accepted her as a mother figure. Now that he's older and wiser, he refuses to accept any parental/mentor figure, at all, in his life.

Asgore: the depths of his sadness and grief is intimidating. Asgore's one saving grace is that he regrets the things he's done. As a rule, Molt doesn't judge others on their past actions, but on their current actions/methodology. So how he feels on Asgore, depends on WHEN he meets Asgore. On another parental subject note: Molt has never had a father figure in his life: its an entirely new concept to him. So Asgore MIGHT get away with fatherly advice and support, as long as Molt isn't aware that's what Asgore is doing.

Fun fact! while i was writing "What I never told you" i considered the possibility of Molt meeting Asgore, Chara, and Asriel while the three were on a camping trip, instead of meeting Noelle and her mother. But this was a possibility i considered late in the game, so i ended up not using it. i think i still have a draft of it, somewhere.

Alphys: Alphys and his brother are a lot like. They both lie. They are both burdened by guilt, and that guilt governs what they do. Molt knows he should be more sympathetic, but the lies and the guilt leave a sour taste in his mouth. In saying that, if the two met, Molt would never be intentionally rude or mean to Alphys. He would keep his misgivings to himself, and keep his distance.

Undyne: a surprisingly positive influence. Undyne is a source of positivity that you would not expect if you weren't paying attention. Undyne inspires others, she gives hope to so many monsters of the underground! That being said, she is too boisterous, loud and aggressive for Molt to feel comfortable interacting with. Her loud personality is overwhelming! He prefers to appreciate her warmth from a distance.

Mettaton: Molt unironically enjoys listening to Mettaton's Movies and TV appearances, but more over, he enjoys the reaction Mettaton's corny over the top performances get from his brother and the team. Groans of dismay. Half concealed snickering. The "this movie is so bad its good" to the equally amazing "Actually I genuinely loved it but i can't admit it or everyone will laugh at me." its all so good.

When Mettaton inspires so much positivity, how could Molt not like him?

Flowey: the link to the post on flowey here!

W.D Gaster: Who is that? Never heard of him.

PS: originally I wanted to include Frisk in this post, but than i realized that i really needed to think about it more. Get back to me on Frisk later. (general statement, directed to anyone)

[anittam]

ToT Theory: We Already Passed The Prologue, We Just Didn't Realized It

Hi, nerds! I been on a break from playing tears of themis, bc for a while it stopped being a game I enjoy playing and started feeling more and more like a chore, but recently I started playing again, so I think I will start posting again, so yeah.

Yesterday when I got home from work, instead of my brain helping me relax, it kept bombarded me with abstract and useless concepts, preventing me from sleeping, and just like that, this theory was born.

Warning: Crack theory (I meant it), and spoilers.

I have no clue of how long you been playing tot, but let me tell you something, early game tot fandom were fighting for the lives, because of the game's prologue, that shit was crypted (I not sure if I used this right) as fuck, for no good reason. Trust me when I say, people were losing iq points trying to get some sense out of this.

So many theories were made, some saying that vyn was the villian, rosa was a traitor or amnesiac, stuff like that, but what most theories had in common was that the prologue happend somewhere in the future of the game, that eventually we would do a full circle and go back to the begining of the game.

So here is my sleep deprivation theory on this subject, the prologue happended somewhere between the blossom chapter 4 and the first year anniversary.

Hear me out, at this point of the game I fully I believe that the dream sequence was really a dream, and not a trance vision. Rosa, our sweet sweet Rosa, just received love confessions from her four good male friends, and she doesnt know what to do, she is overthinking and overanalyzing trying to decide who she should chose, because she likes all four of them in a romantic way. She is thinking about it so much that she even started dreaming about it.

In the dream sequence, she sees the boys, Luke, Artem and Marius, and its connection with them, being represented by 3 objects.

If you paid attention to the blossom chapters, you would realize that thoses objects where thing that represents Rosa getting closer to them, by the way, all of those objects where introduce in the first blossom chapter (I think is because the writes just had a general ideia of the way the story would go so they just putted there in the beginning so they wouldnt have to think to much about them). The 3 objects were, luke's box, which is a central point to his personal story, a painting Marius gifted Rosa, and a bouquet Artem sended to Rosa (I know the flower is not the same, but the change is to represent Rosa's feelings at that moment).

These 3 things, although important in helping Rosa and the ones she loved build a strong relationship, it also brings her sorrow because of her indecision. Because she cant possibly love four people at the same time, thats insane, and cruel on them.

But anyway, after that she sees herself in vyn's office, and he say some weird shit, which phrase referring to one of the boys.

Luke: he talks about the chest of memories, rosa spent 8 years think about luke, what she did wrong, why he abandoned her, just for him to throw some bullshit excuse at her, in luke's first bithday card, Rosa say that she hated luke, but she cant stop loving him. But since he came back, she started to learn more and more about him, and his new life, and she is not exactly thrilled. When it come to she and Luke, there are trust issues, that are very hard to overlook, but they learn to work it out.

Marius: he talks how Rosa pretends to be okay and she is not, and that my friends is a recurring theme in their relationship. And not only her, but Marius is the same, they are constantly trying to not let the other know whats going on, they put on this facade of "im fine, dont worry" which just let the other more concerned. They have communication problems, but as the story they learn to be more open, and properly communicate their needs and concerns.

Artem: this part is the most used in "Rosa is a traitor" theories, because vyn talks about standing by your convictions but betraying your heart. And seeds of this happening was already presented in cannon storyline and in the Artem's personal story, in chapter 3 of the cannon story, Rosa strongly believes that the law is wrong, because if mother killed to save their child, they shouldnt be punished. And Artem's blossom chapter 2, Rosa wants to go against her clients wishes and push her to put her husband to trail for domestic abuse. In both scenerios, Rosa show herself to be a very closed mind person, and if she thinks somethinf is right, she would stand by it to the very end, what ends up causing friction between her and Artem. But in the end she give up her ideials, to do the "right thing", and that is her greatest conviction, doing what is right, she doesnt always agree, and sometimes she gets hurt in the process, but she done right nonetheless. Alternatively, it could also mean, think she has to choose one boy, even if she likes all four.

And after that she start feeling overwhelmed, she is in pain, and vyn makes her go to sleep again.

Now, what about vyn? What is his part in all of this? Since they barely touched on the hypnosis subject on the game, we could link this to one other moment in the game, in vyn's blossom chapter 4, Rosa witness vyn hypnotizing a pacient to help her realize that the one she loved was only using her, which left an impact on Rosa. Maybe her subconscious thought that such practice would help her decided which boy she should choose, but that didnt help her, just left her more confused.

And then she woke up. Without having her response, and still not knowing who to pick.

And this is my theory.

[laufreyjarson]

some thoughts as i ease back into deity worship;

having to step away from my practice for awhile, i was worried that i wouldn't be able to communicate with my fulltrúi as clearly as before.

granted, communication between me and loki/freyja has always been pretty straightforward, and is only interrupted by my own lack of perception (in this case, i wasn't very open to receiving communication since i was mentally preoccupied). i was nervous, though, that my absence had caused them to lose interest in me. however, as soon as i opened back up to it, things were back to normal, and i didn't lose my ability to tap into their energy and interpret signs!!

i'm neurodivergent and i don't do well with abstract concepts or vague answers, so divination tends to be my best friend when i want to spend some time with deities and confirm any thoughts, feelings, or intuitions i get. that being said, i'm trying to expand my practice, and i think loki and freyja have been reaching out to me in discreet ways to re-incorporate their presences into my daily life.

recent experiences;

- i have pulled the tower in every single tarot reading i've done in the past two years. this card represents what loki tends to represent for me, and i didn't make this connection until recently. i did a deity reading this past sunday, and when pulling the first card to represent the deity i was working with (just to confirm), i pulled the tower! i asked on the pendulum if the tower in my readings has been loki showing up for me, and he said yes. i was really touched by this...!

- so many spiders. as always. and they don't go away until i give loki an offering. please help

- i have a few diagnosed mental illnesses, most of which are manageable but a lot more debilitating than i like to acknowledge. a major symptom is that i have a hard time finding the motivation to take care of myself, but ever since may, i've had the energy to take the extra step and do the best i can! i prayed to freyja regarding this and after acknowledging her role in my self care, my acne started to clear up, which i've had for twelve years, and is cystic + sooo stubborn

- around a month ago, i had the sudden idea to create a journal where i write down nice/positive things people have said about me. this came after a mental rut where i was experiencing extremely low confidence. i asked freyja if it was her idea and if she wanted it dedicated to her as an offering, and she said yes!

- i'm very mild mannered and a huge people pleaser, but recently i've had this fire inside of me that's allowed me to stand up for myself and set better boundaries. i asked loki if this is him, and he confirmed it is!

- i got a very intense impulse to weave bracelets for both of them. i put them around my wrists as a kind of protection, because i do love offerings i can wear! of course loki's snapped after an hour and i had to make a new one, but that was mostly my fault ><

there's so much more, and all i can feel is this huge sense of gratitude as i realize they have been showing up for me in every facet of my life, even though i was too distracted to fully realize or acknowledge it. the silent support that they have shown me is so so meaningful, and only proves to me that my love, care, and respect for them is reciprocated! all i can say is i'm so so happy. i will never take this relationship i have built with loki and freyja for granted.

[nicosraf]

congratulations on finishing the book!!!! i feel very very proud of you :)

how are you feeling now that it’s done!!!

thank you so much!! i really appreciate it ;_; i've been working myself to the bone with this and dealing with a LOT of headaches but I'm glad the story is done :)

I'm reading it right now before I send the last part to my betas, but I'm having a lot of emotions. On one hand, I'm sort of paralyzed by the fear that it's not good enough, that it's boring, that it isn't what people want, that it's too serious, too unserious. When I published ABM, I had maybe a dozen people looking forward to it. Everything is so different now. I'm so nervous it makes me sick. It makes me feel like crying. The anxiety is killing me. I keep imagining, in vivid detail, DMs from people telling me they hate it and pointing out every flaw.

That said, oh my god I can't believe I managed to write this book. I did what I set out to do, and I think I turned an abstract concept into a true story, incorporating all the themes I wanted to touch. I think I managed to juggle a huge cast (which I've never done before!) and write a complicated plot with a LOT of moving parts. I filled notebooks planning, I rewrote good chunks of it, barely slept for months, wrote until my hands cramped, and I actually made the book coherent. It's emotional. I worked really hard!! And I value hard work more than anything, so I couldn't be happier with myself. I'm very very scared, but I'm reading this book now and I'm happy that it exists. I did it ! Writing a book is incredible and magical. I'm almost in tears of joy

thank you again!!

[olderthannetfic]

https://www.tumblr.com/olderthannetfic/736934958092959744/ive-actually-been-genuinely-wondering-how-greek

Yeah, sorry, but this is one of those situations where people really need to consider where these “cultural appropriation” discussions started before (heh) appropriating these terms to talk about stuff like Ancient Greece.

Cultural appropriation came out of discussions of cultural imperialism, and particularly the way that empires would deny non Western and indigenous peoples their own cultures while stealing those cultures to profit off of themselves. That’s what appropriation is. But while they were taking those original cultures they were also imposing Western cultural values, including teaching people to value its history and its literary, artistic, mythological etc. canons, which included the ancient Greek pantheon and their associated stories.

Which is to say… idk, i find it super rich that someone growing up in, say, an Asian or African country, learning about Greek mythology because the history of that colonial education system making it An Important Thing to Learn In Every Culture (because references to it are common knowledge now that people mention and art draws on and so on), and then connects really well with, say, Orpheus and Eurydice, or the Iliad, or Herakles, or whichever and whomever as kids often do when learning about cool ancient mythologies in school… and then as an adult they write a book on it, and then some white American who has some Greek ancestors or whatever, a white person from a country that played and still plays a huge role in spreading that cultural colonialism — that person has the AUDACITY to tell this Asian/African/whatever author that now THEY are the colonizer engaging in cultural appropriation for doing their spin on Orpheus and Eurydice. That this colonized person making the best of their colonial education system is actually the one doing a colonialism now — which is what they’re saying by using these terms even if they don’t realize that. Like do people get the problem with abstracting away the concept of “appropriation” so hard from its colonial roots, means a Greek-American can accuse someone from, say, the Philippines (once colonized by the USA) of “appropriating” religious beliefs that that Greek-Americans’ ancestors haven’t worshipped in nearly two millennia?

And if this sounds like some ridiculous hypothetical it isn’t — I’ve already seen the “invoking classical Greece if you’re not on Greek ethnic origin is appropriation” type crap start popping up on book social media, with even one author invoking her identity as a “Greek person” to claim that it was racist to criticize her bad YA novel styles of “being a Percy Jackson ripoff”

--

[acorpsecalledcorva]

Ok last night's research was wild and I would genuinely appreciate input and other thoughts on these ideas, especially if you've come across these before as I don't think I've seen them discussed. I was actually just looking into the idea of DID being a disorder or multiple realities as highlighted by Kluft but then I ended up in a rabbit hole.

Functional Dissociation of the Self: The Psychological and Sociological Self

So first of all I was reading this paper

Which is really really good, it's massive, absolutely huge, but incredibly thorough and explores how different kinds of trauma are predictive of different disorders and presentations across PTSD, DPDR, Dissociative depression, and complex Dissociative disorders.

But quite early on it mentions the work of Sar and Ozturk and this concept of the Psychological and Sociological Self, so what's that?

(this is just an abstract but it also appears in Dissociation and the Dissociative Disorders DSM V and Beyond so you might be able to read it in a Google books preview)

This paper kind of proposes a new idea, my initial thoughts are that the authors aren't exactly exploring new ground so much as redrawing the map, however, it does seem to be that their perspective has merit in application. The idea is that everyone has these two selves, the psychological self is that deeper true self, it's your creativity and your reason, all that behind the scenes good stuff that makes up you. The sociological self is much more influenced by culture, it's behaviour and social conditioning and belief, the things we project outwardly about ourselves.

If this sounds familiar it's because it absolutely is, it's all very Jungian and Freudian and the authors admit to this. Where they differ though is the amount of agency given to the selves. Neither is a passive observer but instead a duality of the self that works in parallel as a team. These guys are also not afraid to get political in their writing and highlight how a culture that is at odds with the psychological self can give rise to extremist behaviours through overelaboration of the sociological self. There's a great bit in one of their papers about the kind of person who swings politically from far right to far left, it's wild.

When it comes to trauma, they propose that dissociation arises when the Sociological Self attempts to bury the psychological self to protect it. For instance, in the example of betrayal trauma from a caregiver, the psychological self would be the part of you that is hardwired to remain attached to said caregiver, while the sociological self recognises the danger. The SS pushes the PS down to protect it from the external reality, however, the authors suggest that the SS is unequipped to deal with this effectively without the PS's help.

Interestingly, they also suggest that the SS attempts to deal with trauma by distorting the reality of it. It repeats a version of the trauma to try and solve, unsuccessfully, and everytime it repeats it changes so that the trauma becomes retraumatising. This is important because this is where the sociocognitive aspect comes in, because when we are unable to rely on the internal solutions of the PS we turn our attention outward. Fantasy proneness, then, would result in unreliable narration of traumatic events based on attempts by the SS to reconcile trauma from external sources. Pseudomemories. The trauma is real, and a hard copy is stored in the psychological self, but when the SS acts as a barrier to the PS then that core trauma is inaccessible. That's why it's important to focus on the feelings behind the trauma as those remain true.

In this model, alter identity formation arises from the discrete packaging of trauma that is set aside, and an attempt by the psychological self to connect with the external world and creates a new sociological self. This is very relevant to me as it pertains to how I experience alters, that there's a pool of fragments (discrete trauma packages) and, when required, an alter emerges from this pool and passes through my social conditioning to create the identity aspect of the alters sense of self. The biographical data of the alter is therefore formed from my sociological self's interpretation of external sources (be they archetypal or direct copies of media).

This disconnect of the PS and SS leads to an underdevelopment of the psychological self and an over development of the sociological self. This is what, in the authors opinion, leads to the paradoxical phenomena of a lack of neuroplasticity (no new solutions for trauma are found) and high adaptability (new alter identities in traumatic or stressful situations) found in CDD patients. It also means that the psychological self remains a child with a strong drive towards protection and nurturing, but therefore, retains it's sensitivity towards betrayal and therefore need for protection.

Now, this is the extra wild bit, because the authors propose that reconnection and engagement with the psychological self should be the primary goal of psychotherapy and if successful then the PS can rapidly develop and resolve trauma.

In this paper

The authors highlight the main barrier to access of the psychological self, the trauma self. The TS is an aspect of the over developed sociological self. It contains a distorted sense of reality, one of hopelessness and helplessness, and projects this reality internally. Think of it like a recursive version of Plato's allegory of the cave. The trauma self sits inside the cave, miserable, but afraid of the shadows on the wall and therefore unable to leave. Those shadows are then projected inwards to internal parts onto their own cave wall. This creates a bidirectional phobia of the internal and external world. Internal protector parts are hyper vigilant against a distorted view of the external world, and the host alter becomes phobic of the internal parts which they view as irrational, frightening, and dangerous (hello, this is me).

Now, this is the bit that seems insane to me and what I would love others opinion on, because the authors seem to suggest that persecutory parts hold the resolution skills for processing trauma, and if the host would only stop being prejudiced against them (like, actually, not like liberal white women who support BLM but lock their car doors when they see someone looking a little too urban) and let the persecutors do what they were originally designed for then recovery is incredibly swift and effective. One case study took 6 sessions. They also claim that patients have had no relapses up to 7 years after treatment.

So, this to me seems way to good to be true (or maybe that's my treatment resistant trauma self talking 😅). There must surely be counter arguments to this model on limitations or impracticalities. The first paper I linked seems quite thoroughly in support of this model, but I'm pretty sure that it's the first time I've come across it. Does anyone else know more about this? Has it been done to death and thoroughly debunked? Are there discussions by other big names in the field? Help a sister out

[qua-qua-qua]

whats your favorite programming language?

ooh that’s hard mind if i go for a bit of a rant? (also i might use some terms you don’t know you can usually find them by googling “<langauge> <concept>” or smth similar or you can ask me)

tl;dr rust is my favorite

so my first language was javascript(/html/css). and it’s a *horrible* language for tons of reasons (that’s a separate rant). but it’s gotten a bunch of nice features recently and i’ve found myself almost liking it somehow. i’m like half convinced it’s stockholm syndrome but who knows. it’s not really a contender for my favorite per se, but i might be most comfortable in it? it’s certainly my favorite scripting language.

the language with the best syntax imo is swift. i love it bc it feels very well designed and the syntax feels very intuitive and clean coming from javascript (as in it fixes some warts i don’t like about js/many c-family languages). one thing i particularly like (and miss in literally every other language) is the ability to infer the object that a property is being applied to. that’s kinda confusing without an example so basically:

let color: Color // some other stuff color = .green // instead of Color.green

it’s super minor but i love it so much and it’s a shame fewer languages have done something similar. i don’t really have many other thoughts on swift though since i haven’t used it in a while. it gets a bad rep as an “apple language” bc they made it, even though it’s open source, has its own organization, and can run anywhere. but bc of that it doesn’t have an amazing ecosystem for running outside of apple devices, so no one does it. it’s a chicken and egg problem. anyways. i want to use it more to try it but haven’t gotten around to it.

okay haskell i’m not very good at it i learned it recently but i absolutely love the functional style. i miss it in all other languages. especially currying. i love functional programming but i have a hard time when everything is perfectly pure. also monads are super cool and i love finding them in other languages. oh i also miss function composition. a lot. it’s so ridiculously useful. i think i’ll enjoy haskell much much more once i get used to it.

finally, what i would say is generally my favorite: rust. it’s very well designed, and i love the zero-cost abstractions. basically (the rust website explains it much better) they mean that rust is about as fast as c, and much faster than any c i could write (and probably as fast as any c an expert could write). i love having everything be so fast but also not having to worry about a ton of low level details eg memory management. (i can’t write a c program for the life of me without leaking memory, causing undefined behavior, or both 💀). perhaps my favorite part of rust is the ecosystem and tooling. cargo (the package manager and build system) is absolutely wonderful and just works™. like literally always. i have zero problems with dependencies and compiling and running and even cross compiling*. and the ecosystem is equally amazing. there’s a crate for pretty much anything under the sun and they’re all open source!! i love how i can just go and look at the code behind the libraries i use just by clicking on “go to definition” in my IDE. and it’s not uncommon for me to be able to understand it too!! and there we go end of rant rust is fun.

\* with one exception: when the rust code links to c code. which is mostly pretty rare but does happen.

actually i lied about ending the rant. i should probably mention python. not because i like it, but bc you prob know it, or at least of it. i’m neutral on it. i don’t know it very well. i wouldn’t say it’s bad, but it’s also not very good. the biggest thing it has going for it is that almost everyone knows it. and it’s a fine scripting language. i’m just not a huge fan personally. (one of my friends would murder me for saying this lmao they love python).

okay sorry for saying so much but um if you have any questions about any of it feel free to ask!!

[audreyscribes]

What do you think about children of dolos? I never hear anything ab them,canon or fanon

Dolos/Dolus, the personified spirit (daimon) of trickery, cunning deception, craftiness, treachery, and guile.

Well I can see why people don't really talk about any children of Dolos, or Dolos either. This is because Dolos is a personified spirit and is very abstract in terms of mythology, and the only substantial specific story about him is from Aesop's Fable (fun fact: it's actually a latin work!)

As a general concept, not even connecting it to the PJO universe, so trying to create a demigod from Dolos is like grasping at straws without no way of knowing how to build a house with it, or should you even build it, and basically all we have to go with is the concept of Dolos, the fact Dolos is born as one of the many personifications of the world, and that one story in Aesop Fables. If I were writing for a child of Dolos, not adding the restrictions and guidelines for the PJO verse for demigods:

Since Dolos is Guile; deceitful cunning and trickery, I'd imagine you can make the demigod something like a child of Hermes but that leans heavily towards trickery, thievery, and craftiness.

They can lie, charm their way in and out with the silver like tongue, are smart and quick, while also being resourceful. Unlike Hermes demigods, who are basically the Jack of all trades, the mentioned traits are their only traits as a Dolos demigod and are more concentrated. Now whether those traits lean more negatively or a more positive way depends because the demigod children are mortal and their morals are gray, but also hard to say since Dolos is a daimon. They can copy others and things like Dolos did with Prometheus' work with Veritas (Truth) and Dolos' attempt to create an identical one but came out with Mendacium (Pseudologos, Falsehoods). However, although the children of Dolos are nimble with their fingers and their eyes accurate, they cannot copy everything identically and there is always a flaw in it, thus being a counterfeit compared to the original source. But you know the words, "Fake it till you make it"

A/N: You guys are really coming out of the wood works asking me demigod questions and my own two cents about it. You've found a loophole and cheated the system. I can only imagine when S2 of the PJO TV Show is on air and then you guys are going to go feral.