#and attribute to trauma and dysfunctional thinking

[blood-orange-juice]

I realised I have a problem with the "Childe has cPTSD" idea that has been getting popularity in fandom, but it's probably more because of my gripe as a psych professional with the concept of cPTSD in general.

It's an understudied disorder and it's not yet in the DSM-V. Therapists use the term because it's better than nothing (they have to treat people regardless of whether we have a comprehensive theory of how humans function) but as it is now it simply clumps together too many things.

It started with a very reasonable thought that prolonged exposure to moderately stressful events can be just as harmful as One Huge Trauma, and also that the effects or prolonged exposure to stress will differ from only experiencing something once.

Sadly, the most common scenario in which a Western person (the type that has access to therapy and gets to talk about it online) can get cPTSD is child abuse. This means in the cases that are studied and discussed cPTSD response to prolonged stress is mixed with developmental trauma (all kinds of insufficient parenting and a child's needs not being met), attachment trauma (not having a stable relationship with a caretaker at a very early age when attachment strategies are formed), relational trauma (any trauma gotten in relationships at any age) and just general reaction to abuse (and all the damage to agency and self-worth that comes from it).

cPTSD of a person who came back from a war will differ a lot from cPTSD of a person who was raised by an abusive parent. There are similarities, sure, and it's important to recognise that a bad family situation can be just as damaging as being in an active war zone (in that sense the term has done more good than harm), but these two people won't have the same self-concepts and coping strategies.

The concept of cPTSD can be very useful if you are trying to understand what is happening to you personally or to explain it to your therapist (or to find a trauma-informed therapist), it isn't bad. But you can't say "this character has cPTSD" and derive meaningful predictions about his behaviour or self-image from it. It's too much of an umbrella term.

So, back to our boy. Bad things only started to happen to him at 14 and it's different from someone being consistently traumatised from an early age.

Does he have hypervigilance, bizarre strategies of self-regulation, at least some amount of dissociation, occasional attention problems and intolerance to helplessness? Yeah, probably, his lifestyle would do that to pretty much anyone. Prolonged stress just does that, doesn't matter how badass someone is. Some negative beliefs about himself are also likely. Difficulty with connecting with others is a given (everyone else lives in a different reality, how would he even begin to connect).

Does he have relational trauma? Also yes, we all do. Some justified guilt and anger over how things went? Not necessary but very possible. Some irrational guilt for things he couldn't control? Again, not necessary but I could roll with that (it's a common response to helplessness. guilt is easier to stomach than the loss of control).

Would he behave like a child abuse victim, thinking himself completely worthless and constantly doubting and pitying himself? I don't think so. He looks like a person who has never been abused in his life. It's very fun to write and I understand the appeal of it (I'm probably occasionally guilty of that too) but it's simply not how he's portrayed in canon.

He wouldn't think of himself like a child of narcissistic parents would either (having to be the best to prove his right to exist). He was long past the age when he could have gotten that type of trauma when Abyss and the Fatui happened to him. Also his resilience comes from somewhere and I think it's from having a loving family. Sure, it wasn't a perfect family (I have a lot of questions for them) and now it's irreparably messed up even more but he does look like a person who was loved as a kid.

[pinkprettycure]

kind of a weird as hell question but...if the roles were reversed and the crystal warriors were the nightmare agency and vice versa would opal/onyx/labra/chrys/luna be more or less dysfunctional than the canon team...

luna doesn't like them and is only there for convenience sake so she would probably be rogue regardless lol... idk how productive of a crystal warrior Onyx would be LMAO he's their nerf i guess, maybe he's their fairy idk how he would manifest his powers at all lol

Opal would be probably akin to Alex in terms of general attitude and strength, with less baggage about fighting. Fairies don't have families like humans so he wouldn't be judging and fearing himself on the basis of his familial trauma and Alex's issues are just really a mess and a half that makes it miracle he's as functioning as he is lol. But a really good support system is basically what saves Opal in canon so lol

Chrys and Labra both already understand the power of loyalty and bonds (theyre both very loyal to Druzy and could probably manifest power into protecting her.) Chrys would be the main highlight here i think because she's like, all the intelligence of Liam and Sophie with the observation and strategy of Val, she would know how to get them to fight the most effectively, she can analyze monsters and her own team and understands them better than themselves.

Druzy i wonder how well she would work, maybe she'd cause issues by having her own agenda,

for the crystal warriors though. I think twisting them on the side of evil would probably make them insanely OP lol... the nightmare agency's shtick is that they ultimately are twisting emotions to cause chaos and the CWs as agents means theres no reservations or restraint from them lol the biggest obstacles probably being Val, Liam, Amber and Alex

Val would be an insanely OP villainess because she's so tenacious and she'd probably have a lot of extreme loyalty on her side. Liam takes the role of Chrys with his intelligence, Sophie is the one who takes her position of data analysis and studying but Val is also extremely perceptive herself. and Both are hard to beat but especially Liam who's core attribute is undying loyalty.

Amber's biggest issue is she has a strong sense of justice and an incredibly harsh and judgemental nature to her, we get a dark knight archetype who fights for a warped justice and cuts down anyone who gets in her way.

And Alex...? We gotta ask what if he didn't care about hurting others, what if he discarded his humanity and allowed himself to become a monster? it doesnt really matter if his team wins because he'd take down his enemies with him.

[ellipse-society]

@cambriancrew I wanted to make my own post about this as it really isn't relevant to OPs post.

For one my therapist is a trauma and dissociation specialist who has been treating me for long enough to be able to say that she believes I meet the criteria of OSDD. And keep in mind OSDD is a catch all disorder for those who don't fully fit perfectly into the criteria for other dissociative disorders(OSDD and UDD have the same criteria except in the case of specifying the difference but tend to be utilized differently). Dissociation is basically an unspoken criteria for ALL dissociative disorders as it is why they are classified as such and we only brought it up because you used it as an example.

We benifit from treatment that acknowledges all of our headmates have different attachments to different memories and have different ways to best process them. The best way to work through our dissociation and our trauma in a way that works best for our system which was formed due to trauma is through looking through the distressing symptoms of both through an OSDD lense. While our system isn't causing us distress the trauma that is causing us distress is interwoven into our system. Our system helps with the symptoms of it and minimizes distress/disfunction but there is no way to treat the trauma without treating the system.

And as we stated we know multiple systems like us who benefit from a CDD diagnosis even though their system is not what they would attribute the distress/disfunction to and in fact it minimizes the experience of distress and disfunction. CDDs can be convoluted when it comes to distress anyway as the dissociation is supposed to help you ignore it.

I really hope this paints a clearer picture for you.

[crooked-wasteland]

Hazbin Hotel Liveblog: Dad Beat Dad

We are back to finish this. Real life got a bit in the way, but I do seek to write something rather big about this series and media literacy in general, but before i really can, i need to finish. Additionally, there are no more Vivienne Medrano-written episodes from here on out, which I am interested to see. I am watching these alone from this point, and sober, so I do apologize that they may not be as entertaining, or maybe they will be more so since you will see the active participation of my brain this time around.

Vaggie is sleeping like she is sitting at a desk. The way she wakes up is going from a slouched position to sitting upright like she’s the anime protagonist by the window at the back of the classroom. I immediately had to pause and laugh.

I didn’t even recognize Vaggie’s voice when she asks if Charlie is good. Goodness, After Angel Dust’s voice was so out of character last episode, I legitimately thought Roman just stopped trying for the rest of the series there for a minute. I actually had to start the scene over just to physically see who was talking.

I’m fascinated by the writing for Charlie this episode because instead of talking about things happening that were actually important, we focus on the things she did. It feels selfish of her to really only attribute the things she personally has done, all of which didn’t help at the time or were actively harmful to those around her. Additionally the idea that the hotel “isn’t working” is confusing. In what way is it not working? What is it Charlie thinks is supposed to show it working? There is entirely no clear idea of what “working” would be to Charlie. And instead of actually expanding on the idea of what this very nonspecific idea of failure is, they immediately use the situation to lazily introduce another character in Lucifer. It just reminds me of Carmella and how Sir Pentious’ out of character paranoia was just a segue to her being introduced through her arms dealing.

Side note, but this episode is written by Rachel Kaplan who wrote two episodes for Bojack Horseman. Specifically Season 5’s Ancient History and season 6’s A Little Uneven, Is All. I definitely feel Kaplan has solid comedy chops in her writing, but both of her episodes in particular really thrive in regards to her female characters. In Ancient History, for example, the story heavily focuses on Hollyhock and Princess Carolyn with sprinkles of Todd and Emily. The way Kaplan writes women in Ancient History is refreshing in media. She embraces HollyHock’s fragile mental and emotional state and how trauma has attached itself to Bojack in her mind. Despite Bojack not being the one to have harmed her, things that are fundamentally associated with Bojack are triggering. And you see how having such a sheltered and loving upbringing as HollyHock made her less resilient to the dysfunction that Bojack has horrifically normalized in his life.

Kaplan really does excel in writing for her female characters and I’m curious to see how she handles this episode. I see the similarities in writing such as Mr. Peanut butter asking for the rights to a happy birthday gift card that happens to be made by Ralph’s company to instigate their engagement for the episode. However, Bojack continued forward with Birthday Dad as a legitimate outcome and subplot within the series from that point forward. The point being that utilitarian writing is a necessary form of writing, but due to how little Medrano as a director focuses on the specifics of the story it results in the writers hired onto the team to struggle with very little to actually work with. How well this episode goes definitely feels like a canary in the coal mine for how much behind the scenes work was actually put into the female cast and series as a whole. If there is some strong foundations at least in the planning, Kaplan can probably make this episode one of the best ones, whereas if she is being left to build on sand, I believe the episode will feel hollow at its core.

While Kaplan is the writer for the episode, Medrano has self-identified as having written portions as a director, and it shows. On twitter she identified herself as having written the interaction between Lucifer and Alastor, and it completely broke the flow of the scene. I was starting to get into the feel of the episode for a second, Charlie was starting to feel like a person and her and Lucifer had a back and forth dynamic that was detached but affectionate and rather sweet. The visual direction also had improvements with more interesting compositions to tell the story and the silence felt less robotic. It started to get a flow only for Alastor to act as a massive pothole. I hypothesize that Medrano is highly protective of Alastor as a character and thus monopolizes his writing. Ironically it works well alongside her own personality she has displayed. Alastor is a very self-absorbed individual with entitlement who uses bravado and abuses to project this sense of power while being extremely insecure. It must be comforting to write what she actually knows for once.

Lucifer becoming an insecure manchild ruined any goodwill I was starting to build towards him. He went from being insecure in himself to suddenly projecting that insecurity outward onto Alastor and it immediately hollowed him as a character. The sudden screaming that wasn’t a part of his mannerisms until he’s demanding attention is a Medrano staple of what she thinks comedy is. It sounds like Medrano herself screaming for attention when threatened by someone with legitimate accomplishments and talent taking control of her show.

The issue with the large time skips and much ado about nothing going on in the actual episodes is why Alastor’s behavior is so confusing. Him being endeared to Charlie both seems in character when place in context with the pilot, and grossly out of character when it is not anything we have seen since. In fact, the series has made a point to emphasize this malicious side of him to, I guess, make him appear more “cool” and it disrupts any coherent idea of actually who he is.

So Alastor has not a single line for about two minutes after Lucifer requests to get to know the other members of the Hotel, and then this song. I’m so disappointed in this song. Lucifer distanced himself from Alastor and is introduced to the other sinners, and instead of having this song be what it clearly should have been: Lucifer singing about how he feels about Sinners and how foolish he finds Charlie’s quest because, you now, look at them. Lucifer has a first hand experience in Heaven and it would be reinforcing his character by reminding the audience that he himself is also in Hell to be punished. And his punishment is the very Sinners that Charlie loves. Like, there is so much interesting content to be pulled out of this ad explored. Instead, out of nowhere, Lucifer is just hyperfixated on this one sinner for no reason. That one second scene of Alastor doting on Charlie being grounds for this song-battle just makes Lucifer look insecure, petty and pathetic, which is also how Alastor looks. These two now are the same exact character and it is soul sucking. This episode was genuinely the best one yet, but Medrano is so infatuated with her own tumblr sexy man that it resulted in both of these characters becoming less interesting almost instantly. And I genuinely enjoy Lucifer’s singing and personality, and there was so much you could have done to really make this work. It almost worked. It’s so unfortunate that no one involved higher up had the experience or desire necessary to pull this together by keeping a tight control on an amateur and weak director.

I was informed that this is an unpopular take, but as a character I like Mimzy. Granted I’m only in so far as her being introduced to Lucifer, but she seems fun. Not really digging the idea of her backstory or her accent however. The issue is she has a very New England accent but was supposed to run in the same circles as Alastor when he was alive. So it would negate Alastor’s supposed Louisiana roots and life-long heritage because its very clear that Mimzy is from the North East. Flappers were primarily located in modern liberal areas like that of New York and Chicago with its money and socialite society providing them their primary source of income. The south, even in places like New Orleans, was still heavily segregated which resulted in stark social and economic expectations between social circles that Alastor and her never out have been able to bridge in 1920s Deep South. While there was a flapper movement in the 1920s, the society of the south was far more rigid and oppressive. And Mimzy's design flies in the face of historical context as the Flapper style and much of the 1920s was about being slender and boyish, the flapper style hinged on this androgynous look with shapeless and less restrictive clothing. Trying to make Mimzy sexy through tight clothing is the antithesis of Flapper culture. Taking into account Alastor’s supposed black American ethnicity, her line “Mixed company” comes off overtly racist, even if appropriate to her time period.

Mimzy’s animation on the bar. I had to pause and laugh again. There isn’t even any animation, she just slides across the screen as a static image with only her face being animated. Anyone who claims there was no rigging used in the animation process is a liar.

Niffty’s mouth movement in her line “Not for long” does not, at all, match the dialogue and I am curious what the original line was supposed to be.

This feels like an ego trip or Medrano. She really thinks Alastor is an interesting character and pushes this idea of how “badass” we are supposed to find him. Instead it reads like. Severely insecure OC (TM) and she really wants everyone else in the roleplay to be obsessed with him.

It shows how little Medrano understands the use of music in musicals. Typically speaking, you want the emotional heights to be the content of the songs, so by not having Lucifer’s song be about how much Sinners suck (which, again, would have made way more sense for the lead up and context of where the song was placed. In the script) it reduces his opinions about sinners to be unimportant compared to his own ego. It isn’t even about Alastor’s relationship to Charlie as the comparison to them both being “father figures” only appears in the middle of said song. This whole reminder about how he sees Sinners being an afterthought undercuts the idea that he even cares about Charlie at all. It has muddled the entire concept because you have one writer who knows where the emotional beats should be, and the other overly obsessed with her own wish fulfillment and ego. It is fascinating to watch this tug of war where one person is genuinely trying to make the characters their own people and build into them human connection and feelings while the other is so fixated on spectacle and her own identity being the focus of the show that any character groundwork is bulldozed in favor of aesthetics and attention. It’s actually almost heartbreaking to watch. It shows how, on every level, Medano has ideas that could work, but neither the ability nor desire to follow through, and the pitiful lack of security to allow others to really bring these ideas to fruition. It highlights how little the existence of this show is about telling a story and how it really is just all about Vivienne Medrano having a show.

The writing around Alastor is grossly unfocused and amateur. Husk warns him about the damage Mimzy brings with her, Alastor tells him to mind his business. Then he fixes her issues and tells her she needs to seek redemption or leave. And just like how the song is clearly played as a show to make Alastor appear like he cares, his interaction with Mimzy is (I think) also meant as a show. He doesn’t mean anything of what he says, but it is to just reinforce this facade for Charlie, right? Here’s the thing, I don’t know for sure. Based on the writing, it just feels like odd whiplash. It is a direct contradiction to what he said not minute before and it seems like Medrano wanted it played deceptive, but it lacks all feeling and buildup that it is just flat. If you read duplicity into the scene, your only evidence and reasoning is that nothing makes sense. When the clues to the direction of the story is that nothing is adding up, it’s a child’s concept of deception. It feels like a child telling themselves what they think is clever to some fictional idea of an audience in their head. It feels like a child brainstorming their story and how they will trick their viewers without understanding how human interaction works. And in regards to the idea of it being intentionally meant to be confusing, I can only paraphrase HBomberguy on his video covering the BBC Sherlock: If you don’t give the audience the tools to solve the mystery, you didn’t make a mystery. You are more in love with the character than the story and everything else, including quality, be damned.

The issue with Lucifer saying how Heaven never listened to him makes no sense to his character and story. If anything, he should be on the side of Heaven. HE is the one who didn’t listen, gave humans fee will and now he sees how much they suck. This whole stance he has doesn’t even line up to his own character. The way this should go is “Heaven didn’t listen to me, AND I WAS WRONG.” Like, Heaven and their rules, they were right. Lucifer’s hatred for Sinners is because Heaven was right. He thought they would be creative and loving when free, but he was wrong. They are sadistic, selfish, and cruel. Even in their altruism, they constantly put themselves first. This scene could have redeemed Loser Baby and show how Husk enabled Angel and not actually sought to help. How Husk’s empathy comes from a selfish place of superimposing himself over another person by making any sort of comparison between him and Angel before he shows even a sliver of care. There was so much here you could have fixed if you just had any idea of what story it was you were telling, if any story at all. Is Kaplan still even involved with the script at this point?

I think this episode gave me depression. This song could have been so powerful, but Charlie’s portion is jarring and doesn’t have any context to really comprehend what I am supposed to feel or understand. “Wishing it was me”, Wishing what was you? Wishing what? - Okay mid-typing i think i understood the context and this sucks. She means Lucifer was literally telling he stories and Charlie had an imagination. Like, not stories about his life or heaven, I mean fairytales. And she is literally singing about how, as a kid, she had an imagination. Like that is somehow special? And the reason this is so confusing and poorly placed is because Lucifer is singing about how much he wants to protect her from Heaven. But none of it adds up. He says he did this himself, which alludes to him also trying to redeem sinners and Heaven beat him down for that, when everything else suggests that this idea Charlie has is legitimately new. But the way it tries to combine these ideas completely loses the plot, the character relationships, the motivation, the world building. Angels in the Vivziepop universe have free will. Lucifer had to have free will to gift free will, and it is seen that the other angels choose to conform over stepping outside of that box. So Charlie being Lucifer’s child is not taught imagination, that’s a given and inherent trait of angels. And her whole “you inspired me” portion of this song falls face first flat because… imagination is inherent. It also means that free will is, in fact, just having an imagination. And heaven shows that angels can very much just choose to conform and how free will is a choice, but an imagination isn’t a choice. This just brought the whole suspension of disbelief crashing down. There is so much here to talk about in terms of media literacy and messaging and what is the meaning Medrano is trying to convey, but none of it works and it would be way too long for a live blog. As it is, this one episode has lasted me 2 hours.

Let’s talk credits a moment: Anyone else notice how Stephanie Beatriz is first to be credited? She is likely the highest paid actor in the show. Which means she charged a lot of money for her very minor role and it shows in order of billing who is credited first. Right after her is Alex Brightman who had three, maybe four, lines throughout the episode. Then Keith David who had about as many lines as Stephanie. Kimiko Glenn (Nifty) is billed higher than the main actress Erika Henningsen, and now you know why she only has about 3 lines per episode. This cast drains the resources of this show and the evidence is front and center at the credits. I don't understand why someone would have a cast where your lead actress, who should be the breakout name, is FIFTH to be credited.

I am just so disappointed. Before Lucifer enters the hotel 5/10. After Alastor: 0/10

[drdemonprince]

your reblog of that post reminded me. i have no connection to my indigenous culture on my father's side because i want nothing to do with that side of my family. the people i know from that side of my family are all horrifically and violently abusive. and what i often have to sit with is that this is one way various cultures are subsumed into a hegemonic whiteness. i have little doubt that the substance abuse and violence from that side of my family can be at least partially attributed to white supremacy. what little i know of my paternal grandfather is that he treated his kids and women largely the same way my father treats his kids and women. white supremacy turns trauma and the consequent violence into our culture, which (of course!) we want to separate ourselves from. so we're left with this hole where culture should be. i'm lucky enough to have (some) cultural polish roots via my adoptive grandparents on my mom's side, at least.

This is a very common story -- a friend of mine who is reconnecting with their Indigeneity has a similar struggle. In my family, the violence of assimilation and the violence of abuse, neglect, heavy substance use, and even interfamilial murder are all inextricably linked. There is this big hole in my family life, an occluded spot taking up more than a quarter of the page, but in the background so it's easy to be tempted to ignore. The family that had a distinct culture separate from the dominate white middle-class one is also the family that has almost no historical records of itself, erased much of the history that remained, took deliberate efforts to pass as white, and sometimes literally killed one another because they were so poor and traumatized and dysfunctional. Every healthy, loving, supportive link that i had to that family legacy died very early, as if marked by a curse. And my dad, who was uhh not so healthy, did too.

I can only connect to that history by doing things like talking to my one surviving uncle, exchanging foggy memories with one another to try and clarify things as best we can, reading about the region, doing geneaological research, and connecting with local tribes as well as heritage groups that preserve some vestiges of the culture, and cultures tangentially close to what once was there. I find it healing while also feeling like a fraud and an interloper, but I have settled on the understanding that keeping these words and practices alive and giving to them without demanding anything for myself is the right thing to do. And a whole lot of mourning. But if you are Indigenous at all, then mourning what is lost while fighting to preserve what is not is kind of the very culture itself, too.

On the other side of my family, it is harder. They were more present in my life, and less dysfunctional, but there is a profound hollowness there. My dad, my grandma, my uncle, my relatives who died before I got to know them, they were marked with trauma...but they were outspoken, and distinct, and so vibrantly alive. I can take the good with the bad of them and see a rich, full humanness. It sounds so terrible to say, but i find it very challenging to locate the humanity in my mother's side of the family. They do nearly all that they can to choke it out. I'm trying to not be resentful anymore of what they never learned how to do. So instead I will just be sad. Being around them is so cold. It's so lonely. Except for my sister.

Sorry, I made all of this about myself, but I hope some of this is resonant. I think there are ways you can connect with your Indigeneity even if your feelings toward your direct relations are quite negative. There's a lot of talk in Native spaces about pretendians and people not knowing their people and having no family ties and that exists for a reason, but it can sometimes scare the wrong people away, much as talk about straight people in queer spaces can drive the wrong people away. There are ways to forge new connections and practice a culture and find your people if you do not have them already, and some of my friends have shown me that. But you also do not have to if all the associations with that background are just...too upsetting and too linked to trauma. It might be healing to find your own way of relating to it, or maybe just connecting with the culture that you have fond warm feelings and associations with is the path for you. I miss my parternal grandmother so much. She was a truly radiant and special person. Decades after her death, my uncle, her son, still says she was his very best friend. And it's not even in a toxic way. she was just that wonderful a person. ive never been loved quite so actively, nurtured and made to grow while also listened to. i am so thankful i got that even for just thirteen years. and sometimes honoring her is just being a searcher and having a fiery spirit inside me and going to yard sales and crushing at trivial pursuit.

[eleminim]

some of the attributes are surely fundamental to making a good person but many are not. for example, people aren't avoidant for no reason and its more of a response to past trauma. a person can't be present all the time either. you may want a perfectly healthy body and mind as a bare minimum. but as far as I know, few (both among men and women) are lucky to have that in today's time.

we got to be kind to each other (as men and women) and understand that life is not easy for either of them. also, there isnt anything fundamentally wrong with wanting better person as partner. the reason why I get little triggered with such posts is that (most of the time) you find the blogs posting them quite dysfunctional themselves and seem to be living in some idealized world themselves or perhaps they carry this main character syndrome; always demeaning and generalizing men and showing their own impolitness, apathy, criticism, unforgiving selves in the process.

p.s. i do realise i am also being very critical and slightly unforgiving with these words, but i try to be less critical and more forgiving, as Allah asked, in general.

Hear me out, I agree with every word, space, mark whatever you sent I agree 100% and I too at some point am in the same situation but that doesn't make it right, It's not the right thing to do being critical and unforgiving. It's not easy but it's the intention that counts.

I think you're the anon that was offended about the 'If you want to not like a men just get to know them better '

[munchkinmarauder]

It is very disappointing to see pietro not getting any love in marvel comics, he is either always shown as villain or aggressive overprotective brother towards wanda which is not true at all!! He literally promised his mom marya to protect wanda, and wanda needs his stability and loyalty, which is why he behaves like this.

I just want him to have a stable relationship with Luna and Lorna. I really want him to be a decent, good father to Luna like Django was for him. And the found family is also sometimes blood family with Lorna is so cute!! I feel he should be in x men related teams. They treat him miles better than avengers- its also better for pietro and wanda to stay away from each other since sometimes I feel writers can't capture the nuances in their relation. And pietro deserves a good character arc other than protecting my sister for nth time and getting vilified in that process. And I am uncomfortable about the fact that wanda doesn't seem to be appreciative about pietro most of the times. But I feel, pietro and erik deserve some comic time- like erik and him discussing generational trauma, fatherhood, and bickering with each other at dinning table.

I agree with you that we need more Quicksilver - or that he should get similar prominence as Wanda - he's the marvel speedster and has links to several of the 616 universes key franchises. I do think his lack of recent prominence can be attributed to the MCU and the bad decision to retcon his mutant background and relationship with Magneto.

Don't get me wrong he is more than his relationships with his sister or father but no denying the MCU synergy has hurt his treatment in the comics. I definitely want more stories for him - something different. Let's see what UA tries doing (don't keep your hopes too high haha)

It's ironic given his personality but he's the wiredly gumpy glue that held the magneto family together (a testament to how dysfunctional they are but that's all the fun)- he's interesting cause for all his flaws and bad decisions he's primary motivated by love and fierce loyalty to those he holds dear.

He is an overprotective brother but recent showings of it have been to put him down with no neauance just to prop up Magneto and Wanda which I think is a shame. Wanda was also equally as protective of Pietro in early comics and I think that should be brought back and the twins codependency and baggage with each other explored by a writer who cares about both characters- we got some of that in Quicksilver:no surrender which I enjoyed but the story was from Quicksilvers POV so it was focused on his flaws and we've not really seen similar done for Wanda in the context of the twins relationship.

I don't think the twins should stay away from each other completely as they are vital in each others stories but they don't need to be completely defined by each other if that makes sense or stories between the two need to be evenhanded in the treatments and exploration of both characters- I think it's due time for a series focused on the two of them that does that- certainly an audience for it. I think we do need Wanda called out as well - much as I enjoy her character.

And yes more Luna, Lorna and Mr Dibbles! He and Lorna were close - why havnt they interacted? If Lorna and Wanda can - why not him

And Luna - more Luna in general please!!! Let him be a good dad (headcannon they spend time off panel - nothing to say that isn't the case)

We may be getting more Magnet Fam stories in the new year so let's hope we get more Quicksilver! We know he's gonna be in the SW issued coming out this month and UA is still ongoing.

[vsa-pieldepapel]

I love your headcanon of suselle being ‘i love you but you’re not good for me’ kind of thing. To me, it really fits their personal dynamics

Mmmm I’ll use this ask to elaborate a bit more since it is a great segway, hope you dont mind anon, since you pretty much aced it I think

Discussion of abuse and family shit and general bad relationships below if not invested scroll away— this shit is super interesting to me but I know it’s not an e for everyone thing

There is a very interesting video on YouTube about how Noelle repeatedly displays signs of learned helplessness. From what I recall of it a part is attributed to rudys hospitalisation which, fair, but to me it stems from before. In my Dess and Asriel post I talk a bit about how I think the holidays exhibit the toxic parent-enabler parent-golden child-scapegoat child family dynamic, which is a relatively common one in dysfunctional families. I think Rudy enabled mama holiday off the very beginning, when he first flirted with her and she slapped him and he still went on to pursue a relationship and have children with her. Per rudy’s own admission mama holiday is “hard” on Noelle, enough his primary concern while in the hospital is that the two of them are alone at home— not a good sign, and speaks of him knowing this behaviour is repeated. This is not new

As for Susie, well. She eats chalk. She speaks of not having her own room. She drinks the milk alphys leaves in the alleyway. She repeatedly assumes people want her away or don’t want to be friends with her, like there is something unlovable about herself. She tells ralsei he must have gotten the wrong person when he says he thinks she’s the hero, and when Toriel tells her to call her family, she doesn’t. She can also spot Toriel is a good mother, and care about Kris upsetting her. She is more emotionally intelligent than expected of a teen— I’ve seen people speculate she is homeless, I’m not sure if I agree 100% but she is clearly neglected.

This is when it goes to shit, though. In a book called Adult Children of Emotionally Immature Parents (that changed my life by the way kek) a couple chapters describe the way neglected children respond- internalisers and externalisers are the primary two responses. Internalisers shoulder the weight of their neglect. They shift the blame onto themselves, and constantly strive for self improvement, introspect and self-flagellate. Externalisers shift the anger of neglect onto external factors and tend to seek sensory soothing (substances), lash out and be aggressive, and respond with anger at perceived injuries of the ego.

Noelle is an internaliser, Susie an externaliser. In addition to that, Noelle pretty much embodies the fawning response to trauma, where Susie displays many signs of the fight and flight responses. From another link that I have read a lot lately I share the following screenshots,

TLDR: Susie responds to perceived injury with aggression. We see this through chapter 1 repeatedly. Even before she knows whether or not Kris will snitch on her over the chalk, she’s ready to be aggressive to them. When Ralsei criticises her hostility, she changes sides. She responds to a perceived betrayal by Lancer not only with self deprecation but with rage. Even in chapter 2, her response to Monster Kid and Snowy speaking ill of Kris is to scare them.

The thing is SUSIE IS ALSO A TEENAGER. She can learn. Her behaviour can be modified if properly assessed, and it is obvious she is still at a stage where she doesn’t really want to be hostile— as soon as kris and Ralsei open up, she shows the considerate, dedicated, playful, protective friend she is. You see this in the text, “learning of the steep price to pay if things are achieved through intimidation.l” And this is what Ralsei teaches her when he stands up to her behaviour. He does it in a clumsy way at first, but it’s clearly seeping in later on, and his boundaries, the important ones, are fixed. He says no cakes until she stops being mean to him and indeed does NOT give cakes until susie verbally promises and keeps that behavioral change. That is something he can give her— both that education and the unconditional affection she wants desperately but is also afraid of losing. Susie needs someone assertive who will stop the fight response.

Then there’s Noelle:

Kind of fascinating noelle is a young reindeer… a fawn, if you will. I don’t know if this is intentional and I’m inclined to believe it’s not, but it definitely makes for some incredible symbolism kek. Notice how it says they attract abuse, neglect or aggression? We already have dialogue in Chapter 2 in which Noelle romanticizes Susie’s intimidation, wanting her to laugh at her and degrade her… and how could she not? She has fawned so much she has learned helplessness, not standing up to even Berdly, who isn’t intentionally hostile, and her own father normalises aggression by a romantic partner, makes it a funny incident in a happy marriage. And people tend to be aware of the pattern in which children of domestic abuse victims will grow up and attract similar partners.

The issue is… both of these are defense mechanisms. They don’t work for long term relationships. They’re responses to perceived danger that are generally unpleasant to adopt and the person does to guarantee themselves safety. This link speaks of a “downward spiral” that is pretty much how I see Suselle:

Susie is aggressive, Noelle romanticises it while clearly responding with what she herself describes as “the good kind of scary”, Susie sinks into her mechanism even further because, well, it is endorsed, so it works!, which makes noelle fawn even further… and so on.

Susie already perceives herself as a ruthless, violent machine. We see her project this onto others. She projects it thinking her classmates want her out. She projects it onto Lancer, asking him who would want to be her friend, anyway. She calls herself Violent Ax Susie and emphasises how enemies are made for beating up, putting this facade of pride on this aspect of herself. Ralsei’s gentleness shocks her because it disarms her intimidation response and she is so affection starved a single gesture of kindness from Noelle made her spare Noelle entirely…

And yet, right before the Ferris Wheel, Noelle tells her supposed dream figment of Susie that “she doesn’t care about anybody”, something Ralsei and Kris realised wasn’t true in a single day of actually talking to her and engaging with her. And Susie’s response? “I mean, TRUE.” She immediately sinks back into this defense mechanism that we KNOW is not true.

Oof!

Do I think they like each other, truly, at the beginning? Yeah, I totally do, especially because they’re prolly gonna be the canon ship. And there is, after all, this thing in most relationships called a honeymoon period.

They’re gonna have an amazing honeymoon period. But then reality begins to sink in. The spiral starts. Noelle’s own unsolved insecurities become people pleasing, fawning, and even jealousy since Susie is so casual with affection with friends and cares for them, we can see that even now at the beginning. Susie feels threatened, she fights. They fight. It goes to hell.

In my headcanon, it’s Susie who tells Noelle to break up, because I imagine Susie is emotionally parentified— which makes her aware of a bunch of emotional concepts that teens haven’t grasped too in depth generally. We see her have a broad moral understanding in canon, even if the way she words it can be a little clumsy. It is her who realises this is no fairytale, and splits the relationship, and it HURTS, but it’s ultimately what is best for them.

And that’s the suselle rant part 1 I guess

I actually have even more on this, specifically on what Noelle would benefit from in a partner, why I think kris has it, why I could see this happening even after the start of Noelle’s and Susie’s development… but this is huge and scary to post as is! So kek

[astrotrains-spark]

Ai generated quotes with characters

Overlord: Ok, maybe playing ‘whose family is most dysfunctional’ wasn’t the best idea we’ve had. Rebecca's been crying in the bathroom for an hour. We can’t get her out…

Overlord: God, give me patience.

Rebecca: I think you mean 'give me strength'.

Overlord: If God gave me strength, you'd be dead.

Overlord: You often use humor to deflect trauma

Rebecca: Thank you

Overlord: I didn't say that was a good thing

Rebecca: What I'm hearing is, you think I'm funny

Ray: Why is Cryptor so sad?

Overlord: They took one of those “Which Character Are You?” quizzes

Ray: And...?

Overlord: They got Rebecca.

Cop: You’re receiving a ticket for having three people on one motorcycle.

Ray: Shit.

Cryptor: Wait, three?

Cop: Yeah?

Overlord: OH MY GOD REBECCA FELL OFF

Ray: *Gently taps table*

Cryptor: *Taps back*

Overlord: What are they doing?

Rebecca: Morse code.

Ray: *Aggressively taps table*

Cryptor: *Slams hands down* YOU TAKE THAT BACK-

Ray: Yo is Rebecca sleeping or dead?

Cryptor: Hopefully dead, I hated their guts.

Overlord: Yeah, so did I.

Rebecca: Okay first of all, fuck you-

Overlord: Why are Ray and Cryptor sitting with their backs to each other?

Rebecca: They had a fight.

Overlord: Then why are they holding hands?

Rebecca: They get sad when they fight

Ray: You're a loose cannon, Cryptor.

Cryptor: No, I'm not. I'm a cannon maybe, but a loose cannon? Is that what you think of me?

Rebecca: I think you play by your own rules.

Overlord: No way, they think rules were made to be broken.

Ray: Those are all attributes of a loose cannon.

Cryptor: No, I'm just a reckless renegade. Mechanic is a loose cannon.

Mechanic: *smashes a chair*

Ray: Poison is a magic transmutation potion that turns people into corpses.

Cryptor: This knife is actually a magic wand.

Rebecca: Meet me in the Denny’s parking lot for a wizard duel.

Overlord: *cocks gun* Magic missile.

Mechanic: What the fuck is wrong with you people

Ray: Bye Cryptor! Bye Rebecca! Bye Overlord! Bye Mechanic! Bye Cryptor!

Rebecca: You said ‘bye Cryptor’ twice.

Ray: I like Cryptor.

Ray: We’ve been conducting an ongoing study to see what Rebecca will and will not eat.

Cryptor: Grass? Yes!

Ray: Moss? Yes!!

Cryptor: Leaves? Ohh, yes!

Ray: Shoelaces? Strange but true!

Cryptor: Worms? Sometimes!

Ray: Rocks? Usually nah.

Cryptor: Twigs? Usually!

Ray: Mechanic's cooking? Inconclusive!

Overlord: How did you… test this?

Ray: You just hand them stuff and say ‘eat this’ and if they eat it, they eat it.

Overlord: ... I don’t know how to feel about this.

Mechanic: IS THAT WHERE ALL MY SPARE SHOELACES WENT?

Ray: In your opinion, what’s the height of stupidity?

Mechanic: *turning to Cryptor* How tall are you?

Ray: Do you ever want to talk about your emotions, Mechanic?

Mechanic: … No.

Cryptor: I do!

Ray: I know, Cryptor.

Cryptor: I’m sad!

Ray: I know, Cryptor.

Ray: You have to apologize to Mechanic

Cryptor: Fine.

Cryptor: 'Unfuck you' or whatever.

Ray: You fuckers don’t know about my knife stick. It’s a knife taped to a stick and it’s the ultimate weapon.

Mechanic, not looking up from their book: Spear.

Ray: BLOCKED.

Ray: Must be hard not being able to laugh

Mechanic: I do have a sense of humor you know

Ray: I’ve never heard you laugh before

Mechanic: I’ve never heard you say anything funny

Ray: You know, I'm starting to regret showing you how that blender works.

Mechanic, drinking toast: Why do you say that?

Ray: You saved me. I owe you my life.

Mechanic: No thanks. I’ve seen it and I’m not very impressed.

[anti-katsuki-lounge]

A time ago when everyone hyped for Encanto I remember seeing a post that said that Mirabel was a better character than Midoriya and that if she were in Midoriya's place she would have ended up hugging Bakugou. I feel that there is a lot to say about this, first of all I remember how the English fandom of Encanto criticized that the issue of Grandma's mistreatment was not addressed and that it was only solved with a hug (USA) and on their part I remember that fandom Latino responded that they should stop projecting its own family culture in what would be the dynamics of a Latina family. The truth is that as a latina I can say that it's true that culturally we have the family as a very important value, our relationships between parents and children are usually very close and the quarrels of grandchildren and grandparents are usually something beautiful because practically grandchildren are something to consent for grandmothers. What I want to get at is that our family relationships are close and we consider them very important to the point of justifying "you have to help because it's family". However, this type of mentality should change when it comes to factors such as neglect and mistreatment by someone towards another and that is precisely what the grandmother did with Bruno and Maribel, even considering the trauma, she took away one of her children by point of kicking him out of the family because his gift was inconvenient and she alienated Maribel to the point of alienating her from family events, all this is wrong and it's okay if people hold a grudge or deserve reparation. A better movie about family dynamics, effects and generational trauma is Turning red, here Mei confronts her mother, her mistakes aren't swept under the rug and especially because we understand her mother's attitude, there is a sincere apology and the mother shows progress in improving her relationship with her daughter.

What I'm trying to get at with this is that there is no such thing as giving Bakugou a hug or Midoriya being guilty of their relationship because he wasn't able to understand him, the victim isn't the one who should help his abuser to improve, the victim isn't the one who must sympathize with the abuser to the point of justifying the abuse suffered. Midoriya isn't a better or worse character because his relationship with Bakugou is dysfunctional, in his own way even since he entered the UA he has tried to improve his relationship with Bakugou, but it's Bakugou who has problems with him, not vice versa. But above all the traumas and problems of one aren't a free pass to mistreat others, people aren't stress relievers and Bakugou was never justified in his actions just because he had an inferiority complex, he crossed the limit at the time who started harassing and hurting Midoriya and continue to do so even in the AU and in his redemption arc he still does and is disguised as humor. I think what I'm trying to get that Midoriya doesn't owe Bakugou anything, he doesn't owe his forgiveness, he doesn't owe gratitude for being treated as a human being and that Bakugou considers him a friend isn't a prize, Bakugou was his abuser , it isn't about understanding and embracing your abuser because he suffers, the victims deserve more than this or that the responsibility for the abuse received is attributed to them.

I agree with all of this. Can’t add anything else. And as a Latino I also get what you mean when you talk about the culture.

[seosaneyaoi]

As to why the fourth wall works the way it does; blocking off any kind of upsetting emotion that kim dokja would collapse if he were to have it. I think (if you consider the meaning of the term fourth wall in general too) it exists to protect the reader's will, in a way. Obviously one cannot emotionally immerse themselves fully, feel the exact same thing the characters are feeling. There is always that border between us & the characters because the reader (we) are just spectating/reading. We are /not/ in that fictional world. Hence where the term Fourth Wall comes from,, its practically that border. So when someone is reading and they come across a very scary event, i.e. the kick-start of the apocalypse (since thats when the fourth wall's effects start to show), you wouldnt naturally feel any type of panic since you know it's a story. That leads to you -> assuming any possibilities of how the character could escape/survive those types of situations, instead of being awfully stressed or dysfunctional. And thats how Kim Dokja works throughout the novel. Even when fully teleported to the fictional world he cannot maintain a proper emotional stability (or have it at all) due to still having the attribute of a reader. If you were to notice that in earlier chapters then it would be an awful foreshadowing of the big kdj=you reveal, but orv had its way of making you not notice it. That being said i can also understand why kim dokja didnt ever feel part of kdjco; apart from the tons of trauma he had with other people, that is. It's because WE don't feel as part of them either

[hayscodings]

realest thing i ever said i think the most common mistake that people make when trying to interpret svetlana is attributing her reactions/thought processes/behaviors to her personality, something unique to and inherent in her, as opposed to recognizing them as the natural consequence of her having grown up in a dysfunctional society raised by severely traumatized people whose trauma dates back generations.

you cannot divorce the way that svetlana is from the world that she grew up in— that context is imperative to understanding how she operates and why she operates as such. without any knowledge about russian history, what it was like in the 90s after the ussr collapsed, post soviet mentality, and russian culture in general, you are missing the biggest, most informative part of the picture. because everything that svetlana is and isn’t is built on that foundation.

if all you’re looking at are her experiences on the show, and the only understanding you have is of american society/culture, then you can only go so far in drawing accurate conclusions about her motivations/character as a whole.

the thing that you have to remember about svetlana is that she was a post ussr baby who grew up in russia in the 90s. everything that she says and does makes sense when you contextualize it against that backdrop

[outofangband]

Intro to c-PTSD after Captivity and Torture, Looked at Through Maedhros and Húrin: Second Edition

Reposted with edits, fixes, and more information, this was originally posted early 2020

Complex trauma after torture and Angband world building masterlist  I’m working on cleaning up and editing many of the posts on the masterlist, this is the first one! 

I’m not going to link all my individual headcanons because that would be far too many links but feel free to search through my In the Iron Hell, Post Angband or individual character tags for them as well as the masterlist above. 

Also, these are all things that can apply to survivors of any kind of torture so it does not matter what one’s personal headcanons regarding what it was specifically that Maedhros or Húrin endured are.

I have several posts about Aerin and complex trauma, the first of which is here!

“ ...according to Herman, complex trauma involves totalitarian control over a prolonged period of time that has long-term effects on affect, consciousness, self-perception, perception of the perpetrators, relation to others and ability to make meaning and sense out of one’s life. Totalitarian control refers to complete authoritarian dominance over another which includes dictators, captors, and hostage takers”

Here is a brief description of common effects of torture and under the cut how they apply to Maedhros and Húrin, using as much canon information as possible as well as outside sources and using my own speculation or headcanons to provide examples

These will be elaborated on throughout the masterlist linked above. 

Torture, especially in the deliberate and political sense is designed to eradicate the victim’s sense of self by, among other things, stripping away one’s basic physical needs (food, water, hygiene, rest,) and one’s  basic emotional needs (safety, belonging, hope, and identity).

As one can guess, low self esteem and self worth are primary symptoms, as well as a fractured sense of identity and depersonalization/derealization symptoms. Periods of hopelessness and depression and/or restlessness and agitation often take up much of the survivor’s life. In addition, difficulty concentrating and planning for tasks as well as other forms of executive dysfunction are not uncommon.

note: much of the information about Húrin has been inspired by “The Wanderings of Húrin” in The War of the Jewels (HoME volume 11) though of course some is more headcanon based. Again you can see more about this in my analysis on The Wanderings in the above masterlist. 

1. Maedhros as a poor sense of identity and very low self esteem. It is very difficult for him to think about matters regarding his identity which was fractured and distorted in Angband both by attempts to rob him of it as well as Morgoth’s cruel emphasis on aspects of his identity as an heir and king. He strongly dislikes seeing his reflection and hearing others speak about him. Maedhros is relentlessly critical of both his physical and non physical attributes and has an unrealistic sense of self worth and image. This also manifests in his dislike of others attempting to do things for him and becoming anxious when he is shown kindness though that is for other reasons as well.

1,b. Húrin experiences something like an annihilation of his identity in Angband both regarding the labels he’d describe himself with (lord in Hithlum, warrior, husband, father) and of his personality. Morgoth more or less explicitly tells him that whatever suffering Morwen and Túrin endure in Hithlum under Morgoth’s human allies is his (Húrin’s) fault. He is forced to watch his children suffer and die and reunites with his wife only to witness her succumb to the shock of everything. His lordship is rendered meaningless and though he is still physically capable in fighting after his release, where he is able to use his skills has drastically changed. He has become far more bitter, cynical, and untrusting and there is a noticeable difference in how his speech is described before his capture to how he speaks in “The Wanderings of Húrin”.

The sense of failure that comes from his helplessness results in extreme self loathing. He also never gets the stability needed in the time between his release and his death to rebuild a sense of identity

A lot of what Maedhros (and Húrin) suffered involved humiliation and shame which is as you might have noticed a topic I like to explore and will continue to explore in more detail. I do specifically have a post on shame, dignity, and privacy too. 

“Several definitions of humiliation occur in literature but four should suffice here. All these definitions of humiliation seem to consider violation of human dignity as an important element. First, Statman (2000) defines humiliation as suffering an actual threat to or fall in one’s self esteem. Second, Lindner writes that it is when people treat others as inferior against their will. Third, according to Lazare and Levy, humiliation is explained as the emotional response of people to their perception that another person or group as unfairly or unjustly lowered, debased, degraded, or brought them into an inferior position.” Paul Crawford and Marit F. Svindseth, 2019

2. Maedhros suffers from severe anxiety and paranoia. He has frequent flashbacks and nightmares as a result. He develops a number of rituals regarding safety and security and becomes very agitated when he is unable to complete them. He will not eat unless he has either cooked the food himself or seen it cooked and he strongly dislikes accepting anything from others. His issues with trust are also severe and he strongly dislikes feeling at all helpless, even in benign ways. (For example, if he is thirsty, he will never say so and will refuse anyone’s offer to help by getting him water.) He also does not always believe that he does not “owe” others for things offered to him.

These also often manifest in anger, yet another thing that was taken from him in Angband. He might lash out, become visibly defensive or aggressive, and sometimes frighten others by the sudden nature of his anger. Emotional regulation is severely impacted by trauma especially when one has to suppress, ignore or dismiss the anger or fear they would normally respond to during distressing events

2,b. Húrin’s paranoia is acute and unrelenting. It’s easy to see why and indeed there unfortunately was some reality to it; he was kept under observation by Morgoth even after his release. His startle response is severe and he lashes out including upon waking, sometimes throwing up his hands above his face, sometimes acting more directly aggressively. This again we can see in the Wanderings of Húrin. He has similar issues with trust and feels agitation at having to rely on another for basic needs.

3. Maedhros has periods of dissociative confusion. These can last anywhere from minutes to hours. The symptoms of disassociation vary sometimes manifesting in feelings of unreality, disconnect, and out of body experiences and some are more akin to severe flashbacks.

3,b. Húrin has moments that are almost like vertigo; dizzying grasps of panic where he sways on his feet, vision distorted. At times, he loses track of where he is. These typically do not last more than a few minutes at most but can leave him utterly exhausted and disoriented.

4. Maedhros suffers from derealization and depersonalization symptoms. With derealization, the world around him feels vague, distant, and unreal. With depersonalization, Maedhros himself feels detached, unreal, and numb. These symptoms can be hard to identify and name and often, he goes through his duties without really addressing them. At times, he is so detached that he will not fully remember what has happened during those hours. He runs on autopilot though the numbness provides some protection for other trauma symptoms like hyper vigilance and startle reflexes. (the last two will be explored in a further post)

Maedhros started to experience episodes of a dissociative freeze response* while imprisoned in Angband. During torture, he would find himself watching from outside himself, sometimes from above, sometimes from a few feet away. After his rescue, he has these out of body experiences during times of extreme panic. Maedhros also feels completely disconnected from certain aspects of his identity and appearance. This manifested in dysphoria/dysmorphia, or, having a distorted image of both his physical appearance, strongly disliking compliments or remarks about his appearance, both because of how his appearance was “treated” in Angband and because of how it had changed, and being unable to consider or think about parts of himself (like labels or traits) that were important to him before.

4,b. Húrin has periods of derealization and depersonalization, a sense of unreality, of not feeling entirely in control of his own body or mind, of things being clouded and obscured. If these sound well…close to what Tolkien himself described for him in the aftermath of his release, that was certainly on purpose with the language I chose here. But whether or not Tolkien intended this in any way I can’t say. Derealization and depersonalization were not named disorders when this was written however that doesn’t mean they weren’t a part of the lives of traumatized people any less than they are now.

…

And of course this trauma affects every part of their lives. This is explored in more detail in my series about complex trauma and basic needs. 

“The personality formed in an environment of coercive control is not well adapted to adult life. The survivor is left with fundamental problems in basic trust, autonomy, and initiative. She approaches the tasks of early adulthood establishing independence and intimacy burdened by major impairments in self-care, in cognition and memory, in identity, and in the capacity to form stable relationships.³  In this way, complex trauma becomes entangled with character, chipping away at it and insidiously deforming it until it morphs into something bewildering.“ (The Unspeakable Mind by Shahili Jain)

 It is also important to note that, in much of media, male characters are expected to suffer PTSD only from battle and “heroic” acts, and are expected to only express such trauma with stoic anger and the occasional fury. Any kind of trauma but especially this kind of long term, interpersonal violence makes someone extremely vulnerable, no matter their gender.

[hauntedselves]

A couple months ago I did the SWAP-200 assessment (faked being a psych to get access - no identity fraud, promise!) and my results were interesting... I think they're not as accurate as they should be because the test made me rank the items from 1-7 (I think) and then I had to match a certain number of items to scores (e.g. I needed, say, 10 items scored 5 and 8 items scored 6, so if I'd ranked 10 items 6 and 8 items 5 I'd have to choose 2 items to re-rank them as lower than I initially scored them. And by the time you've done that for like 100 items you get pretty bored and start choosing things at random to reassess).

T-scores above 50 are clinically significant (50 being the mean), scores of 55-59 are traits, and 60+ are diagnosable disorders.

'Psychological health index' scores are usually 50; scores of above 50 are healthier and scores below 50 indicate personality dysfunction. My score was 49.1, which is pretty typical.

According to my results I have traits of StPD (score of 58.4), could almost be diagnosed with traits of Depressive PD, and clinically significant but not diagnosable traits of SzPD, AvPD, and DPD.

I have traits of avoidant (score of 57.1), schizoid-schizotypal (55.5), & borderline-dysregulated (55.5) personality syndromes, and clinically significant traits of dysphoric-depressed and high functioning depressive personality syndromes. The SWAP-200 personality syndromes are alternatives to the DSM categories.

I have very high scores in thought disorder (62.6), and extremely high scores in dissociation (73) (no surprise there). Also above the mean in scores of dysphoria and almost above the mean in obsessionality.

Like I said, I'm not putting too much stock in these results due to the ranking system (I mean, I understand why they get clinicians to do that, since it rules out false positives - but then I think it turns into people getting false negatives instead). But the thought disorder and AvPD & DPD results are interesting since I hadn't picked up on that (the traits I do have I would attribute to StPD, SzPD traits, and autism & trauma / codependency). And it was interesting that I didn't get diagnoses of anything, seeing as how much I relate to / have self-diagnosed with StPD (and have a clinical diagnosis of BPD!). And, of course, I was the "clinician" who scored it so it's definitely not as accurate as it would be if I took the test with an actual professional scoring it. Still, interesting results!

[lemonluvgirl]

How do you view peeta’s childhood? If he was close with his brothers, how bad his mom was, how he was with his friends…

Hmmmm this is a good question and its been sitting in my inbox for forever. And now I have a moment to answer it.

Ok so, in the trilogy Suzanne Collins writes very little in depth about the innner workings of Peeta's family, other than his mother was known around town as 'the witch'. She was seen as a mean and angry person, and Katniss herself witnessed her abusing Peeta when he burned the bread to feed her. Peeta's mom was also cruel towards Katniss when she was looking through the trash bins behind the bakery for food when Katniss was starving. Which, well, is pretty harsh when you think about it.

In Catching Fire Peeta also admits that no one else needs him, not even his father, mother, or brothers, and that statement is also very informative about the kind of family dynamic that exists in the Mellark household. It can also be noted that when Peeta and Katniss got back from winning the Hunger Games, Peeta's family remains living above the bakery and Peeta lives alone in his house in the Victor's Village.

Also when Katniss volunteers for her little sister, she notices no one volunteers for Peeta, even though he has 2 older brothers and one of them was definitely the right age to be able to volunteer to take Peeta's place.

Now, all of this leads me to believe a few things. One, that Peeta grew up without a good example of what a healthy relationship looked like, from the way Peeta talks about his parents, and the few interactions Katniss has with them, they seem to have at the very least a loveless marriage and a very dysfunctional household.

Two, Peeta grew up in most likely an abusive household. Other readers have made comments and observations about how good Peeta is at pretending for the cameras, and putting on a brave face. That kind of skill can be attributed to a young person who has spent most of their life concealing an abusive situation at home. Learning how to lie on the spot, and come up with excuses, etc., is indicative of that. Also the way Peeta romanticizes his relationship with Katniss in the first Games, even when he knows most of what they are doing is for the cameras, seems to me that he is searching for love and acceptance that he has never gotten before.

I do think Peeta had a lot of friends though, pre games. Even Katniss said he was popular and always surrounded by people before the Games, but after they got back from the arena Peeta changed. He doesn't seek out his old friends or their company. He keeps to himself for months until the victory tour begins. He most likely went through stages of depression and PTSD just like Katniss did. His experiences in the arena changed him. I think he became more introspective and more closed off to people who didn't share his trauma. Not that he was mean or rude, he was just not the same boy he was before the games.

I know some readers and THG fans explain away some of these things, and like to posit that Peeta may not have had as rough a childhood as many imagine, and while their theories may be true (only Suzanne Collins knows for sure what Peeta's home situation was like) I personally believe Peeta had a very difficult upbringing. It made him tougher than katniss initially gives him credit for, and it also helps him not give up on their friendship/relationship initially. In a way, Peeta being used to being rejected by the people he loves/cares for ends up working in katniss' favor. As messed up as that is. He keeps trying to be her friend even after she doesn't outwardly return his feelings, and they remain a team going into the 2nd hunger games.

So when Peeta tells Katniss she is his everything in Catching Fire, I think he means it. Even though she doesn't love him romantically (at least from his perspective) he knows they share a deep bond and she cares for him enough to die for him. To him I think that meant a lot, and he finally gets the moment where someone chooses him over all others. Unfortunately its short lived, and things go from bad to worse after that, but I like to think that Peeta got his happy ending post mockingjay.

He and Katniss recovered, had a real relationship, without the interference from the cameras/public this time. They fell in love and started their own family. So, he got the chance to do it right, the way he always wanted. I am sure Peeta gave his children the childhood he always wanted. Full of love, care, and most of all freedom, from the class divide, from the oppression of the Capitol, and from the Hunger Games. He built his family with Katniss and things were 'good again'.

[maxdibert]

Yes, sorry, I didn’t mean to imply that Tom Sr. didn’t have every right to leave because clearly Merope committed the equivalent of rape. I mean, it’s like someone slipping something into your drink at a club and assaulting you—it’s the same act. But regardless of that, when there’s a child involved, there’s mutual responsibility. In other words, like it or not, you’ve become a parent. What I’m referring to is that Rowling only attributes the problem to Merope being a terrible mother and doesn’t consider the fact that Tom Sr. also failed to fulfill his responsibilities. I’m not talking about the relationship between them, which was clearly a disaster, just as I think it’s appalling how casually Rowling talks about sexual abuse.

Rowling tends to downplay male trauma, as if men couldn’t experience violence or as if the violence they experience is a joke. That’s part of her internalized misogyny as well.

I also agree that given the nature of his parents' relationship, nothing good could have come out of Tom’s upbringing. He was going to be the child of a highly dysfunctional family no matter what.

Yeah, I really can’t forgive Dumbledore because he worked directly with children—and not only that, he was their primary guardian while they weren’t with their parents. He was aware that dangerous things were happening at Hogwarts and did nothing. He knew that many students were vulnerable to going down the wrong path and did nothing. He knew some were being mistreated and did nothing. He never did anything.

Many students ended up becoming radicalized, and it could have been prevented if he hadn’t left them abandoned and to their own devices. Many could have questioned what they were taught at home if he had bothered to do his job instead of condemning them to ostracism for belonging to a particular house, making them believe it was them against the world.

In general, many tragedies could have been avoided if he had simply been a responsible adult and a proper educator—if he had cared about more than raising little soldiers for his own benefit. He could have helped children and teenagers during critical developmental stages feel understood, supported, and protected. But he just couldn’t be bothered, despite having experienced firsthand what being drawn to the dark arts could entail, and despite knowing that it could be prevented or escaped. He just didn’t care at all.

Hi. Since you defend Snape's actions for being a victim of his socio-economic circumstance, would you defend Voldemort in the same way? After all he grew up in an emotionally and financially neglectful orphanage, during world war 2 at that. Do you think his actions are also a circumstance of his upbringing? Could he have changed? Was his future violence influenced by being stuck in a house, as a perceived muggleborn, that held prejudice against muggleborns and could have been therefore ostraziced or bullied just like Severus was? Of course Tom had a huge advantage of being attractive and charismatic and had the type of personality that allowed him to "thrive", but still he suffered a lot and I would even say he suffered more than Severus. What do you think?

The thing with Tommy is that Rowling basically labels him a psychopath from childhood because she literally says that since he was conceived through a love potion, he cannot feel love himself. So, she already frames him as a person with antisocial conduct disorder, which I’ve always thought is nonsense because you can end up killing people en masse without having been conceived without love. Rowling's idea of love and its consequences is entirely conservative and has very misogynistic undertones regarding the role of women in the equation, especially when it comes to maternal love.

The fact that she blames a "bad mother" and not the father who left without taking responsibility for his offspring is sexist as hell, but well, we're not here to talk about how Rowling lets her male characters get away with behaviors for which she would crucify any of her female characters while at the same time having female characters whom she only treats positively if they adhere to traditional notions of femininity related to motherhood but condemns them harshly if that traditional femininity involves personal tastes, hobbies, or personality traits. Rowling, you’re a fucking misogynist with a highly patriarchal view and a desperate need for male validation, but I’ll let you be for now.

I’ve always thought that if Dumbledore hadn’t stigmatized Tommy from the start, maybe things could’ve been different. But he labeled him as a sociopathic child from minute one and abandoned him to his fate. He saw a child with obvious behavioral problems in an utterly dysfunctional environment with all kinds of deficiencies—an orphan left to fend for himself in a post-war orphanage. He decided the kid was bad and stuck that stereotype on him throughout his life.

I don’t know if, with better treatment, he could have turned out to be a more decent person because Rowling decided he should be a sadistic sociopath from the cradle. But there are functional psychopaths everywhere. Top company executives are functional psychopaths, high-ranking officials are often functional psychopaths, and celebrities can be functional psychopaths. You can have an antisocial personality disorder and still be functional if treated properly. Could this have happened with Tommy? I don’t rule it out, honestly.

What I am sure of is that Tommy had a lot of resentment toward Dumbledore, and that resentment wasn’t unfounded. Dumbledore left many boys and girls who didn’t fit into his ethical and moral standards, or whom he simply found too complicated to manipulate, at the mercy of the "dark side." It’s no coincidence that those boys and girls ended up making wrong decisions.

Dumbledore was a figure of authority in the magical world, especially at Hogwarts. He was someone from whom everyone sought validation, and probably teenagers without strong parental figures needed that validation even more. And he made sure to despise many of those teenagers instead of working with them and trying to guide them properly, which is the role of a good teacher—especially one directly responsible for them during the school year.

I think if the Marauders started to disgust me when I saw the SWM scene in the fifth book, Dumbledore started to make me sick from the sixth book, when his treatment of Tom is exposed. You can’t label a child like that and then try to undermine his ambitions constantly when he’s a teenager. You’re only going to provoke increased resentment and opposition to everything you represent.

I also think Tommy has many parallels with Snape in the sense that both had Muggle fathers they clearly hated and despised. Their hatred toward Muggles likely began there, compounded by living in post-war conditions and being in a miserable orphanage of that era, which must have been hellish. They both probably wanted to distance themselves from everything that being a Muggle represented.

It doesn’t seem like a coincidence to me that both characters are half-bloods with Muggle fathers and have issues with Muggles because their experience outside the magical world—their experience with Muggles and the Muggle side of life—was absolutely dreadful. But at the same time, they are quite different because Voldemort, according to Rowling, couldn’t feel love and, I assume, couldn’t feel affection either, besides being a narcissist hungry for power.

Although, if you ask me, at its core, I think he was just a sadist angry at his parents. It always comes down to the parents, right? xD