#and thus can just conform to that society expectation

[aceaceace144616]

How am I supposed to be bisexual AND trans?

Someone please give me instructions

[boysborntodie]

Darry and Dally are performers and perpetrators of toxic masculinity.

With Dally, it manifests as violence, anger and a need for control, and in the end, because society tells men to suppress their ‘weak’ emotions and manifest them through means such as violence and anger, he succumbs to it.

Darry’s masculinity manifests through being strict and tough, and holding Pony to those same standards. He doesn’t enjoy hobbies such as reading or watching movies, instead preferring to ‘do’ things and he believes in practicality, restrain and strong will.

By the end, while Darry still has a long way to go, he has accepted Pony for not fitting his standards of masculinity and tries to be more understanding of him.

Continuing on this, Johnny and Ponyboy both also struggle with toxic masculinity within their arcs, but for them it’s centred around seeing these standards and trying to embody them but always falling short.

Pony, whose arc is about coming of age, according needs to conform to societal gender standards, and his struggle to do so is also a struggle to fit in, to find his place. He thinks the world is beautiful, cries easily, likes movies and books (which ofc aren’t feminine traits but society looks down upon men if they do this, esp in that era).

But as the novel progresses, Pony understands how detrimental these standards are and how the boys around him fall victims to it. And thus he rejects them, instead staying true to himself.

For Johnny, masculinity is a tool to combat his circumstances. He needs to embody societal expectations for men in order to survive. He idealises Dally (to some degree, their relationship is much more complicated tho) because Dally doesn’t let anything hurt him.

But Johnny, despite wanting to, can’t do that. He can perform masculinity to some degree (playing cool, taking on pain, fighting), but it’s just a performance with Johnny not actually being able to genuinely embody it (life in Tulsa is killing him, and he doesn’t become harder and tougher like Dally, but just breaks more and more until he’d finally shatter).

This is another reason for Johnny eventually stabbing Bob (he believes he needs to be hurt so he doesn’t get hurt. And society has made that the norm to the point it is true for them).

But through Pony, Johnny is able to understand that these traits are toxic and harmful (he rejects violence), and that Pony, as someone who doesn’t fit the mould, is more admirable and better for it.

[daenerysstormreborn]

Also something that drives me fucking wild is seeing people refer to Dany and Arya’s roles as patriarchal or wish-fulfillment for men. Just yesterday I saw the phrase “patriarchal power fantasy” used. I need everyone to sit down and think about what “patriarchy” means.

For the purpose of this post, and any other post I make, please know that when I say “masculine” I am referring to stereotypes associated with the male sex and when I say “feminine” I am referring to stereotypes associated with the female sex. Masculine =/= male and feminine =/= female.

Patriarchy does not refer to masculinity. It does not mean that masculine people are in power (I wouldn’t go as far as to call Dany or Arya masculine, but bear with me). Patriarchy refers to systems where MEN are the sex caste in power. Men. Not masculine people. Under a patriarchal system, women are oppressed regardless of whether or not they conform to femininity, although the less a woman conforms, the more she is punished for it. Dany and Arya’s arcs are inherently ANTI patriarchal on the simple basis that they are female and they defy what is expected of women in Westeros. They can never represent male power fantasies because they are not men. Referring to their arcs as male power fantasies is telling on yourself. You are revealing that your view of women and what we want and fantasize about is narrow. Why would you assume that only men would desire to travel across the sea and learn the ways of a secret society of assassins? Why would you assume that only men would want to wield the power of dragons and amass loyal supporters?

You are part of the problem by assuming that the desire for power is a male trait. Yes, we stereotypically associate that with men. That stereotype, and what we consider masculine and feminine as a whole, almost exclusively exist to uphold the patriarchy. Women are expected to be peaceful pacifists, complacent, quiet, because that keeps us under the boot of the male caste. Consider why so many “strong” female characters are less feminine. Is it because people feel the need to make them more like men in order to be “strong?” I say no. At least, not most of the time. If this is what you think, you’ve got the order mixed up. Skirts, dresses, and heels are impractical for fighting and limit movement a lot. Thus, it wouldn’t make sense for a competent female fighter to be wearing them. These things have been forced upon women BECAUSE they are impractical. A woman who keeps her hair short and wears no makeup and wears pants and no heels is not trying to emulate men. She is shedding femininity because femininity is impractical and time consuming. Consider WHY so many traits associated with power, leadership, and combat are considered masculine. It’s the enforcement of the patriarchy. Female characters who chase down these things and embody these qualities and do not conform to femininity are not basically men. They are women who are rejecting the system. This is antithetical to the patriarchy and to male power fantasies.

In summary: a female character who has an arc typically associated with male characters can never be a male power fantasy BECAUSE she is female.

Obligatory note that women who do conform are not lesser and their stories are not less important—they just do not challenge the patriarchy.

[clueless-fan-critic]

Nimona: Just Now Got Onto The Hype for This Movie

After my first viewing, the movie Nimona was a thrilling, fun adventure with so much love and passion behind it that it makes you want to root for the bad guy and antiheroes once again. This makes you question what side you should support or not. And I love that it makes that kind of statement in the film.

Based on the novel of the same name written by ND Stevenson, they built a story about what it means to be a hero or villain, even going to lengths of what one’s true self is in the face of adversity. There’s also a bonus of a gay couple being at odds with each other like any couple in media.

If you want to watch the most human film of 2023 staring a pink-haired shapeshifter, then let’s get into the deep stuff.

Freedom and Freethinking

Nimona is the character that embodies someone who’s comfortable with who they are, at least on the outside. However, Nimona desperately wants to belong in a world that doesn’t want them to exist. This can mean lots of things, especially being an allegory for being nonbinary or transgender, thus not conforming to society’s rigid expectations.

Ballister Blackheart is the black sheep of the society he was placed into, the outsider that doesn’t feel like they could belong. He was essentially molded into a role meant to change the status quo and was later branded a villain by the kingdom. Sure, he was framed for murder, but he was greatly disliked and mistrusted before for not being of a “noble” bloodline.

Ambrosius Goldenloin is more portrayed as the man stuck between duty and love as he slowly unravels from the changes to the status quo. He still remains loyal because of his status as the direct descendent of the founder to the kingdom. He benefits from the system he resides in unlike Ballister and tries to find a middle ground to what he wants and what is right for the system.

All the people in the kingdom are influenced by their belief that monsters are evil and slaying them is the only option, as well as being affected by the fear of an unknown world beyond the walls. While the people aren’t evil, they aren’t innocent victims either. They still benefit and follow the life built within the walls of their kingdom without questioning anything

Transformation

Each character undergoes some sort of transformation, whether shapeshifting or through emotional growth. Some can be considered good for them and much needed, while other parts are very, very bad for a lot of people. Ballister internally transforms from a warrior to a friend to a monster that can empathize with Nimona’s feelings of isolation. You can even argue that Nimona’s shapeshifting is a representation of being genderfluid and changing their appearance to feel like they’re free.

The Director’s transformation is more negative if anything. She essentially allows her own fears of losing security get the best of her to the point of letting innocent people die than see any other solutions.

What it Means to Be Human

I loved that it doesn’t shy away from making strong commentary on how people make judgements and are motivated by their belief of being right. Around the climax, Nimona transforms into a giant shadowy monster after experiencing all of the pain she’s endured and nearly took her own life because she believed she was a monster. This was a powerful scene because we can understand feeling like no one will love or accept you, but there’s that small act of kindness that brings you back from that darkness.

Now...

Nimona is a modern classic that deeply explores identity and transformation within their characters in a rich environment and complex themes. This film makes the audience reflect on their own views on what they consider different while understanding self-acceptance and challenging societal norms. It’s a must-see for anyone who feels like an outsider and wants to learn about self-love and freedom from rigid ideas of identity. All I can say is that I’m emotionally exhausted from the rollercoaster of feels that I’ve felt.

[greetings-humans]

so. some things could be a lot better in the barbie movie.

i really liked sasha and her view on barbie and society. I like how she didn't see barbie as something empowering but still chose to help. I like her, I think she's a cool character. she's not one for traditional femininity, though. so what the hell was that pink dress??? she can be strong and connect to her mother and her girlhood and still wear her cargo pants and dress in dark colors. she can decide that she doesn't want to be feminine and still be a girl/woman. (she can also decide that she's not a woman, but that's mostly just me projecting my weird asf gender)

also. weird barbie was noticeably more "presentable" in the end of the movie and I believe that taking away most of her weirdness really diminishes the point. she's not getting an apology and being recognized as a person that deserves rights and agency and control and to not be shunned, because wow now she's more feminine. that's not the point, and I think that they could have showcased a lot better. she should be getting all of the above, because the barbies realized how bad shunning her because of her differences is. because not being a barbie ""correctly"" is such a bad reason. because not being what they expect of her is not a good reason.

however, on to some good things about the movie, there are some pretty cool examples of the "conform to the expectations or else" part of society that it showed.

weird barbie should have had a decent amount of power in the matriarchal barbie society, but was shunned for being weird and different and expressing herself in a non-traditional (and thus unacceptable) way. this shows that sometimes the criteria for the powerful harm more than just those that are obviously oppressed. (e.g., men feeling uncomfortable with expressing affection because it's not manly and thus repressing themselves).

allan also serves as a similar example. even in kendom, allan didn't have any sort of power because the way he expressed himself didn't fit with what the kens expected of him

and also of themselves. (yeah I'm at it again with the "stupid criteria for who gets power don't just harm those that are generally considered the powerless")

and I'm saying this because the kens thought that the world expected men who had power to act like this, and because they wanted to have agency and control and power, they conformed.

in the end, ryan gosling's ken addressed that by pretty much said that he didn't even really get why he was behaving like that, that it wasn't what he wanted. we can assume that what he wanted to not be a second-class citizen, to not be powerless, and in achieving that via patriarchy, he behaved in a way that he thought he should, not in a way befitting of his personality.

aaand this is the basis of why equality and equity are cool and why matriarchy or patriarchy can lead to a lot of oppression for everyone involved. no one wants to lack agency or control over their lives. so, yes, this movie made some pretty good points.

[gaylor-gremlin]

analyzing taylor swift’s 'tim mcgraw' reveals a complex interplay of gender norms. let’s unpack the song through judith butler’s gender performativity theory.

butler’s theory says that gender isn’t inherent but performed, shaped by societal norms and expectations, challenging traditional notions of gender identity.

this song at first appears to conform to traditional gender roles. the opening of the song establishes a conventional male-female dynamic, reflecting societal expectations of femininity.

butler's theory suggests gender is an ongoing performance. in 'tim mcgraw,' swift’s portrayal of longing and nostalgia fits into this traditional feminine role, but she immediately subverts expectations by calling what “he” said a lie.

the subsequent shift in pronouns from 'he/him' and 'my' to 'you' in the song is more than just a narrative device. it’s a deliberate move that transitions the story from a personal memory to a universal, inclusive experience.

this use of 'you' invites listeners of all genders and orientations to place themselves within the narrative, challenging the binary and exclusive nature of traditional gender roles.

by broadening the song's appeal, swift subtly questions the rigidity of these roles. this aligns with butler’s concept of gender as fluid, shaped by societal interactions and individual experiences.

the dynamic interplay of gendered pronouns in ‘tim mcgraw' showcases swift’s nuanced understanding of gender performativity, blending traditional narratives with progressive concepts.

thus, swift's songwriting in 'tim mcgraw' serves as a subtle yet powerful commentary on gender norms, illustrating the evolving nature of identity in modern society.

this analysis highlights the depth of swift’s work, even at a young age, showing how popular music can be a platform for challenging and redefining societal constructs of gender and identity.

[tittyinfinity]

I've really enjoy following you this past year and I wanted to ask for insight on something because I respect your viewpoints. I want to stay on anon because this is something that has caused me a lot of internal pain and i am not confident enough to go public about it. I started calling myself non-binary back when I was 22 (I'm 32 now) and due to autism + polycystic ovarian syndrome I've felt at odds with "cis womanhood." my inability to wholly conform to what is expected of me is something I have grappled with my entire life. I have regularly felt that I am not a "real woman," thus adopting the label. My genuine attraction to women as a bisexual person is perhaps the only thing that links me to womanhood. There are times where I have felt that I don't have a gender at all whatsoever and that trying to apply one to myself is only a cause for stress and anxiety. I have no desire to transition and there are individual aspects of estrogen I have enjoyed experiencing. Lately i have been feeling at odds with the nb label, and as I interact with more and more trans and transitioning non-binary people, I feel like I am a fraud taking up space. I sometimes wonder if I am in spaces that are not for me and I certainly don't want to claim any labels that are not mine to claim, especially as trans healthcare is constantly under attack in the US and that is something that does not directly affect my rights. I love and value the trans friends that I've made but I worry that I may have been calling myself a term that I don't have any right to use, as though I am a "tourist," or something along those lines, trivializing meaningful labels from an already heavily oppressed community. I don't want to cause any harm or pain to the trans people I care about by adopting a label that doesn't fit. Should I just go back to calling myself a cis woman who struggles with conforming to traditional patriarchal expectations of womanhood?

anon i love you. these are literally the same exact same thoughts i had before coming out as agender. I felt like the only thing that was connecting me to my "womanhood" was the oppression, sexism, and misogyny i faced as one. and that made it so much harder to give up the "woman" label because it felt like I was somehow abandoning and/or invalidating those experiences. it's ESPECIALLY harder when you're dealing with issues related to your reproductive system, like you and I both. what you're feeling is very valid and normal. but our bodies and our outside experiences are NOT what defines us.

i have to constantly remind myself "you only feel like you don't belong in trans spaces because your heavy experiences with misogyny still brand you as a woman against your will."

almost every single transgender person has had those thoughts of "I feel like my gender doesn't fit me, but I still experience things as This Gender so therefore I would be 'intruding' on trans spaces." please please do not feel like you're "invading" any space.

You are not hurting anyone else or taking resources away for just being yourself.

You can allow yourself the space to be something other than what society has labeled you, as a "woman."

And when you do allow yourself to have that space, it is SO FREEING. it feels AMAZING!

there is no problem whatsoever with throwing away a past label, because it's like throwing away any past label of yours – you're not the same person you were 10-15 years ago, so why keep identifying that way anyway?

I don't know who you are, but I'm already excited for you to begin your journey. Be who you want to be. BE YOU. I love you I love you I love you.

Go be YOU.

[gimblestank-the-goblin]

So why is nobody talking about the smoking? Like maybe it's too obvious next to the whole clock symbolism thing but I absolutely adore how Scorsese is able to use the old visual metaphor of smoking (so often relegated to indicating that a person doesn't think about/isn't worried about their future ) to tell us so many different things about so many different characters.

Katya for instance smokes as a way of discarding her identity as a Soviet. It represents her rejection of her old life as Gorbachev's perfect housewife (and don't get me started on how the arguments about their smoking habits, how he disdains her for smoking while engaging in the habit itself, is a microcosm for their entire relationship. The way he tries to force her to conform to the Soviet ideal of the perfect housewife because he no longer *can* conform to the Soviet ideal of the perfect husband, not as some think as a way of highlighting his hypocrisy but rather a desperate attempt to hang on to the last vestiges of his old life. ) And her embrace of her new identity as an Italian. In this way it represents an act of rebellion and an act of freedom, representative of her new life in the "free world". At the begining of the film, smoking represents the promjse of her new life. A life where she is free to do what she wants and *be* what she wants. (You'll note this is also paired with her meeting Sophia who introduced her to the vice and takes her on a whirlwind tour of the city.) Yet, as the movie goes on the framing of the cigarettes (and Sophia, and Naples) shifts. Her addiction now represents not freedom, but another chain around her neck. Another means of control. Smoking (and Sophia) becomes a stand in for the false promises of capitalism and the western world. For how it entices you with promises than traps you with debts and obligations and addictions. And how this system of control is no less all-encompassing then the system of control of the former Soviet Union, it's simply more subtle. It's notable, after all that it is Katya's addiction (to cigarettes and to Sophia) which ultimately spells her downfall.

And speaking of Sophia, it's hard to ignore how she uses smoking as a means of escape, both in that the movie repeatedly shows her using smoke breaks as an excuse to leave stressful situations and give herself a moment to think, but also in how she doesn't mind that smoking is cutting her life expectancy. If anything she seems to enjoy the thought that smoking will make her die early. Yet at the same time she's *poor*. We see her scrounging for money to pay for her smokes, and her addiction is highlighted as just another capitalist chain. Her addiction to smoking is used to control her and thus demonstrate that capitalist control of the people is no different from Soviet control (again, parallels to Katya).

Of course, we have to talk about Valery and Gorbachev, but we have to talk about them together here. Smoking (as the film tells us) was widely disparaged under Soviet Russia, it's addicts viewed in much the way we view drug addicts. Yet the brand both characters smoke is a *Russian* made cigarette (blink and you miss it, but it's American owned) which uses the iconography of the Soviet union in all it's branding (notice how the mascot on the box looks like a farmer out of a society propoganda poster, the extensive use of red, etc).

So we've got a widely disparaged vice being peddled by imperialist powers, which is sold and embraced under the guise of nostalgia for a perfect past that never existed. There's so *many* layers here that I can't capture them all, but the way it parallels both Valery and Gorbachev's own complexity feelings towards Russia, the Soviet union, and their relationship to both is absolutely fascinating. As is the way it mirrors both their roles in the story. Both end up working for America (Gorbachev through the mob, Valery being given his missions by a conspicuously American higher up in interpol) and being used to exploit the newly weakened Russia (Gorbachev is famously acting as middleman as drugs go from the US to Russia, Valery is literally working for NATO) while clothing themselves in the costume of Soviet Russia (the attempts by both characters to hold onto their old Soviet identity has already been analyzed to death elsewhere) and this disguise/costume grants them access to areas of Russia which foreigners can't get access to (Gorbachev builds his empire on access to Russian markets, Valery is hired explicitly because interpol and foreigners are distrusted by Russians)

And, of course, both of them *hate* this. But they can't stop. Just like they can't stop smoking. And both of them direct this anger outwards towards *Katya* as they try to force her to live up to the same Soviet ideals they have abandoned in a desperate attempt to hold onto the life they have lost.

And then there's Ice Pick Joe. Who's a freak who *doesn't* smoke and who's lack of smoking is used as another way of showing what a freak he is. But also he's the only happy and healthy member of the cast.

[persnicketypomelo]

Hi😅 if it's okay can I please ask for a yandere L

With a shy darling that has abandonment issues and wears Jirai Kei Kawaii because of their Mental Health🙁and they think it's cute😌

Sorry if this sounds weird and if you're not taking requests sorry for asking😅

I take requests, no worries! I'll try to incorporate these aspects but it's very specific.

I'm probably going to write a one-shot loosely based on the ending. Stay tuned!

OOC, mentions of bullying, obsession

Yandere L with Shy Reader

You hadn’t always been such a scrambled person

And if you had known it would lead to living (forcibly) with a man who enjoyed dissecting your mind, twisting you into the mould of a loving spouse, maybe you could’ve avoided such a tragic history

But hindsight only poisons you with regret, thinking about every misstep you made that led you to your current position

Life hadn't been the kindest to you

People are cruel, but children are the most cruel of all

Any and every difference that you harboured from your peers scrutinised you to bullying

You learned the hard way that cruel people will smell a victim in you no matter how much you erased yourself, no matter how much you rid yourself of individuality

Surviving the bullying was somewhat tolerable, but the worst sting of all was betrayal from those you trusted

Friends you had known from childhood turned their backs on you the moment you became subject to bullying

Years worth of friendship came so easily crumbling down to them in exchange for social desirability

The bullies were cruel, but the sudden cold looks and dispersal at your approach of your previous friends hurt even more

Thus, you began to act out in any healthy way you could find

Socially, you never were bold enough to express yourself forthright, and so you partook in fashion subcultures that drew scornful gazes

Muted pink, black, and white became your colours of choice, and the frilly, attention-grabbing style was a liberating outlet in a culture of conformity

-----

When the Kira killings started, you could not say you were all too distraught to see the horrible people around you, along with the scum of society, get their just desserts

Perhaps it was wrong to think this, but you were quite relieved at the change you saw as a result

The streets were…quieter…more orderly

Even school violence seemed to cool quite drastically

It was the season now for university acceptance, and you could cry at how well your studying paid off

To be accepted into the prestigious To-Oh University was not anything that those around you expected—but you knew better than to underestimate yourself, and it paid off

If anything came out of the hardship you faced early in life, it was a profound, unwavering sense of self

And on no account would you change yourself anymore

You were used to lingering glances on account of your fashion taste, but lately, you would turn your head to find yourself eye-to-eye with a pallid, lanky man across the classroom

Even when returning his unblinking stare, he refused to break eye contact, to the point you had to avert your gaze first out of pure discomfort

Although you were accustomed to staring, none had been so bold as to unabashedly continue staring upon being caught

If you recalled correctly his name was “Hideki Ryuga”…or something along those lines

After class, you exited swiftly, eager to escape your peer’s frog-eyed stare

But you were extremely unfortunate in your luck, it would seem, for you heard a low, monotonous voice calls your name from behind, only to see the black haired man with his fish eyes staring at you

The two of you walked to class together, and the whole time it seemed he was probing you, trying to draw certain responses out of you

“The truth is,” he finally explained, pausing in his steps, “I find you to be an interesting person, for reasons I am not quite sure of, myself. I’d like to talk to you more in the future—to see how you think.”

Although he had an abrupt and direct manner of address, he did not seem to have ill intent, (though you had long learned to always keep up your guard)

------

I suspect that L is very focused on his Kira investigation, but if you catch his attention, all he knows is that he wants your presence by his side (of course, only after ensuring that there is no way you could be Kira)

He doesn't have normal relationships with others, and as such any sort of relationship with him would not be typical

You help him think, and he does value your insight, both on topics related and unrelated to the Kira investigation

He cannot assuage your fears of abandonment or the scars of your past, as he is not very charismatic with his words, nor is he very affectionate...

But your turbulent past makes him even more curious to see what makes you tick and your unique perspective due to that

However, he would try his best to show, through his actions, that he will not abandon you

As the Kira case gets more serious, with more casualties, his possessive tendencies may flare

He may prefer to confine you to a shared apartment, both for your own sake and his own twisted affections for you

Although he is not one keen for physical affection, sometimes he comes back after a long day and holds you, breathing in your scent and listening to your heartbeat

L may be a beacon of justice for the world in uncovering the perpetrator of the Kira murders

But only you and his butler know of this morally twisted side of him, a man who would break any morals to keep you by his side

Uh i did my best, but it's not very good

[hoardingpuffin]

Things I would like Allistics to understand

[for the record, this is a subjective post. If you are on the spectrum and have constructive criticism with my takes, feel free to voice them. Allistic people however, take a back seat. Thank you.]

Autism is not an illness. It is not something you can "cure" and we do not, as a community, want a cure. It is something you are born with, and there is nothing wrong with being autistic. However, at least until society fundamentally changes, autism is a disability. The world is not laid out for people like us, and thus being a person operating in a world not built for us is taxing and disabling.

Generally speaking, we as a community prefer "autistic person" over "person with autism" since our autism is linked indifferently with our identity, it is apart of who we are

"functioning" labels, so "high functioning" and "low functioning" are not great. They essentially rank you based on your ability to mask and act neurotypical, and also imply that if you don't conform to neurotypical/allistic patterns you are essentially defect - the opposite of functional. Instead, try using "high support needs" and "low support needs" - this terminology centres not our inability to conform or do certain things, it instead just gives an indicator of the level of support we need. This makes it seem less like a flaw on our part.

there is no way to "look autistic". Autism is highly individual, so it doesn't have a look. So if someone tells you they are autistic, do not respond with any variation of "you don't look autistic" or "but I know X autistic person and they act like Y and you don't so you gotta be lying". Autistic people know they are autistic, and just because we don't act like that other autistic person you know, doesn't mean we aren't autistic.

In a similar note: Every autistic person has a different experience with autism based on their life. An autistic Person of Colour will have a very different experience with their autism than a White autistic person. An autistic person from a wealthy family will have a different experience with their autism than an autistic person from a lower income background. Everything in your life will factor into your experience with autism, including but not limited to the age when you were diagnosed/found out, the medical support situation in your family, the family constellation, the friends you have, the schools you go to and much, much more. Don't expect us to all be cookie cutter shapes.

forcing a nonverbal autistic person to try and speak, or to take away their communication options like sign language or a tablet, or even just a notebook, is abusive and ableist. It is the equivalent of holding your mouth shut. Sometimes words just don't work, for some of us only occasionally, some people are fully nonverbal. That doesn't mean we are "dumb", or that we "don't try enough". We just do not fit into society's image of normality.

Self Diagnosis is equally valid to a formal diagnosis. Many people on the spectrum might choose to not get a formal diagnosis, for a plethora of reasons. Maybe they cannot afford one, or don't have access to it. Maybe they want to migrate to a country that doesn't give citizenship to people with an ASD diagnosis, or maybe their country strips them of their rights after diagnosis. Yes, a formal diagnosis might help you get help - or it make your life harder. This, again, is individual, but trust me if I say that self diagnosed autistic people didn't just say "I think I am autistic" one day. We do research, we take every test there is, we overthink every trait, every little thing, before we even use the word for ourselves. Also, many medical professionals will refuse to diagnose adults because of idiotic reasonings such as "you can dress yourself" or "you make eye contact" as if late diagnosed adults didn't mask for ages.

No, we are not robots. Yes, we feel emotions. Yes, we tend to be more direct and blunt. No, we are not incapable of love, or kindness, or any other emotion, we just process them differently and show them differently.

Autism Speaks doesn't speak for us. Full stop.

[veilchenjaeger]

please please please please make a case for the specific kind of dyke xue yang is pleaaaaase <3

!

I am very, very tired, so I don't know how coherent I'm capable of being, but I'll try my best!

One interesting thing about Xue Yang is the way his non-conformity with societal rules works, because he imo utterly does not give a fuck about the society around him and the way he relates to it, outside of the fact that he doesn't fit in. (With some exceptions, of course.) I read him as kind of having an attitude that can be somewhat summarised in three points, which are:

Society expects certain things, and other people play the game of society by either conforming or not conforming to these things. Xue Yang is highly aware of societal expectations and moral ideals how they're in conflict with what people actually do. He sees through the elaborate dance of social norms and interactions, he knows all the steps, he just thinks it's a stupid dance.

He does whatever he wants. He's not bound by societal conventions in any way; he makes his decisions according to what does and doesn't feel good to him personally. (That isn't entirely true because he's still influenced by society, but I'd say it's mostly true.)

He is important; society and other people are not. He knows how he and his actions are seen and judged, but it doesn't matter, so he'll just go ahead doing what he does! (It does matter to him. Deep down, it does. But that's imo restricted to his anger and hurt at being considered worthless or monstrous, and not as related to any specific actions others judge him for.)

So, Xue Yang's style of non-conformity is drastically different from e.g. Song Lan's. Song Lan cares about society. He deliberately places himself in opposition to its norms, because he sees them as harmful and hopes to change that. Thus, he takes part in that dance, even though the steps he chooses are different. Like, even deliberate subversion of and non-conformity with societal norms in some way reproduce these norms. (Which in itself is a completely neutral thing; subversion and non-conformity are reactions to something and kind of depend on that thing existing in the first place.) Every action is a dialogue with society. And I don't necessarily think that Xue Yang isn't in a dialogue with society, but he goes about it in a different way. He doesn't choose his steps, he just moves, no matter whether he ends up going with the flow or not. He's currently on his way to the buffet table.

(Xiao Xingchen doesn't know the dance. He's stepped on Song Lan's feet thrice already.)

Introductory meta done. Now onto dyke Xue Yang.

To preface that, of course everyone who reclaims the term "dyke" is a dyke, no matter how they present. I'm going with this term partially because it is so vague, partially because it's connected to rebellion and has the same "You think I'm worthless and insult me? Fuck you, I'm going to own everything you despise me for so hard that you'll have no power at all over me" vibe Xue Yang has, and partially because, when used to describe an aesthetic rather than an individual person or a group, it evokes certain images for me that imo fit Xue Yang pretty well. If there's a more precise word for that aesthetic, I don't know it. I'm going to argue in favour of dyke aesthetic Xue Yang, and there are two main points I want to address.

One, Xue Yang's non-conformity is so volatile that I don't think it would fit into a certain category. There's something deliberate about things like being butch or femme, both in terms of these labels having a certain history in a community (I don't think Xue Yang would see herself as part of a queer community, at all) and in terms of the societal dance. It's a specific way of choosing your steps. For Song Lan, that sort of deliberate non-conformity works super well imo because canon Song Lan is so deliberate about the way he doesn't conform! For Xue Yang, I doubt she'd think about things like the way she performs her gender. It doesn't matter. She does what feels good, no matter whether that's inconsistent or fits into any categories. Again, I don't think Xue Yang has the drive to seek out other people who share her experiences or identify with anyone else, which is after all a part of giving the way you do queerness a specific label and arguably a part of openly performing that kind of queerness in the first place.

This isn't particularly uncommon or anything; most lesbians are neither butch nor femme. But on top of that, Xue Yang also doesn't give a shit about conforming or belonging to anything else, so I imagine that the way she looks is... maybe not blatantly, visibly queer? Because that would require her to want to look queer, but also not not visibly queer, because she'd entirely ignore cisheteronormative ideals of How To Dress.

Which brings us to the second point, which is the question of how removed from the dance of society Xue Yang actually is. Bc I think there are some things she would care about. Considering his CQL aesthetics especially, but also in the novel, Xue Yang is edgy! He named his sword Jiangzai! All the not giving a shit about society aside, there is one thing Xue Yang does imo care about performing, and that is the very fact that he doesn't give a shit about society. Which of course stems from the way he was harmed by the prevalent social structure and the hurt he compensates for with his blatant disregard for any kind of morals or propriety. So, like, dyke Xue Yang would still care about looking different, maybe in some way that seems somewhat dangerous and certainly in a way that gives a middle finger to everyone who'd disapprove.

And I genuinely think that might be anything! I can truly see Xue Yang dress in anything from a full biker suit to a 2014 Babymetal stage outfit - the crucial point imo is that she'd always look different, slightly to the left from anything you could give a name to or put your finger on. It would probably be something at least vaguely practical - she needs to be prepared to stab people and wouldn't want to be held back by her clothes of all things - but that's about it. I think that general vibe - neither truly GNC nor truly conforming to anything, neither masculine nor fully feminine nor deliberately androgynous, but always visibly different from the cishet norm - fits the term "dyke" pretty well.

Also, I just think she'd wear knockoff Doc Martens.

[adamsvanrhijn]

I'm the anon who asked about the Carrie scene! My point was to ask what do you think was the part that reflects the general opinion on Oscar within their group? The reason why I asked, was because till that point, I hadn't thought Oscar would be anything but a desirable catch within that fictional society. Because no one in season 1 reacted to him in that way, some people wondered about his motivations of course and called him out for fortune hunting. But all he was described as by others was charming, witty and good-looking. But that scene gave me the impression that Carrie (and thus possibly a larger group of people, young women specifically) might actually find him somewhat strange or cringeworthy, even if he also has those positive qualities, that Gladys was also charmed by, to some extent. So I was interested in hearing your personal thoughts on this subject. Do you think people actually see that Oscar is somewhat -different-? Whether that indicates his sexuality or not.

So I answered the way I did because Carrie prompting Gladys in the direction of "Oscar is not husband material" such that it is a silly idea that one might marry him, from a storytelling perspective, IS what is indicative of how people view Oscar, and that Oscar is viewed as different, even if it is not straightforward about why he is viewed that way. Because there isn't really a reason for us to know what Carrie specifically thinks of Oscar otherwise. It would matter what Carrie as an individual thinks if Gladys didn't already agree and she intended to persuade Gladys, because that would mean her opinion is significant in Gladys's decision because of her role as Gladys's best friend, but that's not what's happening here—Carrie is just saying something out loud, now that it might have stakes, that is yet to be spoken otherwise. The logic is circular!

I think the vibe is that Oscar is fun at parties but not to be taken seriously as a prospect for marriage, and is lacking in personal qualities that make him appealing as, the man who is going to fulfill the role of the head of your family and with whom you are going to be associated presumably for the rest of your lives such that his identity outweighs yours and your own social significance is subsumed by his — which was the reality of marriage for a woman at this time.

It isn't clarified what precisely he is lacking because the more relevant part for the audience is that he is seen that way at all, regardless of how objectively true that is. As you say, it isn't a viewpoint that has been expressed before — Oscar being vaguely, undefinably Different isn't a problem or a risk until he tries to step into a social role that necessitates conformity and is expected to meet certain benchmarks (quietly, of masculinity).

But from a show perspective, this isn't coming completely out of nowhere... the first time we hear specifically out loud that Oscar isn't suited to being a husband, father, and family head is earlier in the episode from John. And John has more context than any other person, and his personal opinion is that Oscar should sidestep those responsibilities if he wants true happiness, fulfillment, and comfort; he's thinking of Oscar as different not in a way that negatively impacts the people he associates with but in a way that impacts him himself. To John, it shouldn't matter overall that Oscar isn't those things, because he can choose not to try to be those things, and instead pursue a life that will bring him genuine good. John thinks Oscar should opt out!

In 1.08, Oscar himself calls out that to date he hasn't been living his life in a way that would bring social benefits or make him appealing as a prospect—what Oscar, in his anxiety and perhaps denial, overlooks is that he does not actually have a clear cut time wherein his behavior is Okay or a defined deadline by which point he needs to get his act together. There's no grace period to social conformity: his reputation has developed alongside him over time, and it will take marked changes in his behavior to overcome that before he can get what he wants. That's the realization he has, or almost has, in S2 when his life has taken a turn from what he expected it would be and it's harder than he thought to get ahold of what he wants.

Because Oscar has not been doing what is expected of him! Until S1, Oscar hasn't demonstrated the more important typical behaviors of a young man preparing for a wife and family, and any efforts to secure a wife he has made (or made a show of making) have been seen as insincere fortune hunting. Armstrong calls this out very early on, and George questions his motives immediately. And he can't make up for that overnight—which Carrie confirms for us in 2.01 by reminding Gladys that he isn't seen as a worthy choice.

[runthepockets]

I think people either forget or ignore that I have autism cus I'm extroverted and energetic and outgoing and athletic and don't have a very hard time in social situations but I very much am still autistic. Like, I can't read body language and I see a lot of social rules as really facile and thus can't conform to them, I ask a lot of questions about how things work and why, I'm really blunt, I can't decipher passive aggressive commentary or sarcasm a lot of the time and anything less than a "Jared fuck off" isn't something that computes with my brain, and of course I have a lot of special interests.

Idk it's crazy (but not surprising, considering how our society treats neurodivergent people) how even other autistic people have these very narrow and stereotypical ideas of what autism looks like and get mad at you for not being autistic in a way that they can compute or that doesn't, like, give them some sort of up in the social hierarchy (think of how any time autism is brought up in a positive or even nuanced context, it's in context of people Satoshi Kajiri or Temple Grandin, never just the quiet working class guy on the subway or the kid who picks fights all the time in class, or anything). Like people are quicker to write me off as some kind of master manipulator who doesn't care about other people's feelings rather than just pause for a minute and be like "oh yeah, this guy's brain doesn't work like it's supposed to, maybe I should show him a little patience and empathy instead of perceiving him as a deranged male aggressor just cus he doesn't fully understand the contrived social expectations I just assumed he would know, maybe I should show him a little patience and empathy instead of dickriding him without lube." Idk I'm a pretty smart guy and I'm pretty good at reading people but I still have fucking autism, I'm not a fucking robot, I'm a person doing his best.

[horizon-verizon]

[HotD] Helaena and Alicent’s Relationship: Evidence of Neglect and Abuse

CW: Domestic Abuse 

Helaena is our sweet, mythic Cassandra, but in her feudal, martial, patriarchal society and in the Red Keep's court, she is likely just too “odd”.

Since she doesn’t appear to interact with anyone in court and those courtiers would have seen her mumble under her breath, playing with creepy-crawlies most of the time, she undoubtedly would have been seen as either crazy, feeble-minded, or defective. Which has interesting implications for her relationship with Alicent.

Signs of Mental/Emotional Abuse (LINK)

being emotionally upset or agitated

being extremely withdrawn and non communicative or non responsive

unusual behavior usually attributed to dementia (e.g., sucking, biting, rocking)

nervousness around certain people

an individual's report of being verbally or mentally mistreated

Traits of Abusive Behavior from Parents (LINK)

Continually ignoring or rejecting a child

Physically or socially isolating a child

Forcing a child to do things by scaring them

Exposing a child to domestic violence

Constantly criticising, humiliating or blaming a child

Constantly swearing, yelling or screaming at a child

Making a child feel different from other family members

Telling a child that they’re worthless, unloved or not enough

Withholding love, support, praise or attention from a child

Bullying, teasing, insulting or belittling a child

Having unrealistic expectations or unreasonable demands of a child

Not allowing a child to explore, express themselves, learn or make friends

Treating a child badly because of things they can’t change (eg. disability, gender, sexuality)

Threatening abuse or threats to harm loved ones or pets

Alicent's Characterization

Show!Alicent is one of the many women of the ASoIaF universe whose close family member uses their body's reproductive abilities for their own ambitions and against her will.

But Show!Alicent is the example of that woman who doesn’t resist against most patriarchal expectations and standards of moral femininity--unlike the gender nonconformists Daenerys, Rhaenyra, some of Cersei, Arya, Brienne, etc. All women who, it must be noted, dressed and/or acted outside of the norms of Westerosi standards for (noble)women even when they were children and teenagers.

Yes, even Cersei, the woman who constantly uses Lannister specialness as a way to access that martial power that men receive and direct in this world, rejects anything remotely feminine if it doesn’t lend to this access, and thus becomes blind to her own faults and weaknesses. This looks like nonconformity, but of the self-destructive and abusive kind. Yet, she also puts pressures on her own daughter, Myrcella, to conform to the patriarchal standards of femininity, which Myrcella resists.

Show!Alicent is clearly more like Cersei in this last aspect, when episode 6 shows us Alicent grabbing Aegon’s face and yelling into it about him being the challenge to Rhaenyra’s claim and how Rhaenyra will definitely kill him if he doesn’t work with/stand untied with Aemond against Rhaenyra’s children. Alicent wants Aegon to consider Rhaenyra a bigger threat than she is, and when he doesn’t she lashes out against him.

Show!Alicent is a person who demands conformity to the feudal standards of gender expression from herself and from others. She wants "perfection".

Helaena can never conform to the standards due to her visions, mumbling, fixation on bugs (before she becomes a mom but too late because everyone in court would have seen her as weird), etc. Some of us may like Helaena for basically exposing Aegon and for being the least hateful or power-seeking of all the characters, but in the context of feudalism and the environment she would have grown up in, she would be seen as just defective.

Thus, Alicent definitely can't even begin to understand her, let alone respect her boundaries. She would see Helaena as someone either needing "fixing" and try to make her act more like she strived to when she was younger. (Not that we get to see how Alicent reacted to Helaena after she had her, because of the time jumps.) That is, of we have a consistently wrotten Alicent character.

Mother and Daughter Don’t Get Along

Since we don’t get scenes of events between the 5th and 6th episodes due to the massive time jump, the audience is forced to evaluate Alicent and Helaena’s relationship in just two episodes (6 & 8). On one hand, I think is unfortunate because Alicent and Haleana get only 3 scenes together where we could have had more to better answer the questions I have about Alicent, Helaena and Aegon [II]. At the same time, I think the show also is trying to let us know that their relationship is one that is one of silent resentment and ignorance with how little to two actually speak and understand each other.

Helaena becomes a Cassandra figure in the show, where she sees future events, talks about them in language that’s more poetic than colloquial, and gets ignored by her entire family. It looks like she’s usually on her own with small objects of her interest: the small knitting kit and her bugs. Her brothers talk about her while right next to her in episode 7 while she mutters about threads and the coming civil war. Viserys is nowhere to be found near her, nor do we ever see him talk to her or about her. Otto seems much less stern, intimidating and looming towards her than he is with Alicent, but it still seems indulgent and condescending (episode 8). And Alicent doesn’t seem to really know what to do with her in any of the scenes they have together.

Images Credit: criston-cole @ tumblr

Phia Saban, the actress playing Helaena, plays her as at least neurodivergent and maybe autistic. And the refusals happen when Helaena is trying to tell Alicent about her visions. We get scenes where we’re made to wonder whether it’s just autism, autism and non abusive emotional distance built from very different personalities, or if it’s autism and abuse that makes Helaena refuse Alicent’s touches. 

Helaena does let Alicent touch her in episode 8 when she enters Aegon’s room after Alicent lectures him for being so openly promiscuous. However, that touch recives no real reciprocation (HBO, “Lord of the Tides”, Episode 8: 24:50). 

We may argue that is just an autism thing, but autism is on a spectrum of behaviors and manifestations. Not all autisitc people reject all sorts of touch.

And the reason why I think that Helaena doesn’t want Alicent’s touch specifically is because she was much more receptive to Jacaerys Velaryon in episode 8 where they dance together than she ever was to Alicent, her own mother.  

Images Credit: mercymaker @ tumblr

Helaena w/Others Besides Alicent

I don’t think that it’s just Helaena being an autistic person who experiences an aversion to touch even from family members. Because, an autistic person who does have this aversion is not going to accept touch and physical interaction form either family or almost strangers, and Jaecaerys is less family-by-blood than Alicent is. He also doesn’t appear close to Helaena and didn’t seem to have grown close in the same spaces while he lived in King’s Landing.  We don’t get even one interaction between them when he lived in the Red Keep. He also has apparently been in Dragonstone with Rhaenyra and Daemon for the past years between episode 7 and episode 8, away from King’s Landing, being even physically further from Helaena than he was before. 

Obviously he would have at least said some words to her or have been near her for a few hours at some point in the past, but there’s no indication that they ever spent time together openly and intimately to have grown any sort of bond. Alicent would have had much more opportunity, even with her possible household duties as a married royal/noblewoman/queen.

We don’t get to see how Helaena regards Aemond’s or Otto’s touch, but seeing as Otto isn’t much of a toucher himself and Aemond looks more focused on training with Criston and on Alicent, I doubt they have much of a strong relationship themselves. I believ that this was intentional on the part of the writers, to show only fraught interactions between Alicent and her kids. Even that moment of episode 9 where Alicent nonchalantly calls Aegon an “imbecile” for doubting her love for him we learn that aegon feels unloved and has for his entire self-aware life. There has to be a reason as to why, that sort of feeling doesn’t just appear out of nowhere. And in comparison, the show shows us that Rhaenyra’s kids and stepkids aren’t distant, scared of her, nor Daemon.

The greens however have multiple instance of that happening.

As for Aegon, they managed to produce three children (Maelor should appear by the next season), at least having sex twice to have them (Jaehaerys and Jaehaera are twins canonically. I assume that in the show they are still twins). And she had them very quickly after she married him. Plus, in episode 8, as she talked to Baela and Rhaena about the good and bad of marriage, she herself reveals that she doesn’t get to see Aegon often, implying that there is a standard of intimacy in that Aegon never met because he doesn’t work to build bonds of love between them both because Helaena is another way for him to not have a choice in when Otto/Viserys arrange their marriage AND because he doesn’t think anyone really loves him. Similar to Daemon not wanting to marry Rhea Royce but forced to at 16 for political/economic advantage of his superiors. (Digression: Perhaps they also thought that it would be good for him, since Rhea could count as an heiress.)

There is therefore a quiet loneliness with the imposed solitude there, and which I think she has learned to live quietly and ignored or side-eyed since her childhood. 

Alicent’s willingness to put herself before her firstborn doesn't erase the pattern of neglect and abuse done.

[bylertruther]

i'm not a scientist so idk what Actual Science there is behind this concept to back up my feelings, but i highly doubt we'll have an actual time loop plot / Serious Time Travel in s5. i just don't see how it would make sense in the lore they've established thus far.

time stopped in the upside down and it didn't affect the rightside up, so what good would will manipulating time again do? the rightside up kept aging and everything has already happened. if whatever happened in the upside down timeline could affect the rightside up, we would've already seen it happen, no?

vecna is associated with clocks, yes, but is he as obsessed with time itself as some people think him to be? when you consider his statements as a whole, it seems that his problem lies mostly in society's imposition on natural structures; or, the rat race and the checklist we're all expected to tick off as we go throughout life; aka, forced conformity. his beef is with societal pressures and how they alienate those who don't wish to abide by society's arbitrary rules.

he wants out of the rat race. he wants to feel in control of his life. he wants to be freed of the constraints of time and the milestones society expects you to have achieved by whatever age. he wants to be allowed to be different, as he naturally is, and not punished, shamed, or alienated for it; or, as he later is, used / weaponized for it.

that's why he talks so much about purity and how humanity spoils things. that's why he targets those who are "other". that's why he wants to burn everything down and "reshape the world into something beautiful".

he literally says these things. overall, his entire shtick is that he opposes conformity and believes his otherness is what makes him superior. as such, he wants to tear society down and rebuild it. this world cast him out and so he wants to reshape it into one where he has a place that isn't beneath someone's boot.

he taunts his victims with a grandfather clock, because he first manifested his powers by stopping one of its hands. it's also an unsettling psychological warfare tactic: he's telling his victims that their time is running out and he's coming for them; they can't stop it, because time waits for no one.

he talks at length about destroying what already is to build something new. the only two people that he wanted, and potentially still wants as could be the case with the latter, by his side in these endeavors were eleven and will--two characters that are inherently different from their peers and whose plots in this show have almost always centered around their otherness. eleven was the one super-powered girl who has had to fight monsters and save them time and time again, often at the expense of learning what it means to be a person and what it means to be herself. will had traumatic experiences inflicted upon him by vecna, but even before that we are made aware that will was treated differently due to his sexuality. they are the only two that vecna has ever identified with and deemed worthy of living in his new world.

this show has always been about embracing your otherness. right now, it seems we're dealing with a villain who has taken this to the extreme and has let his experiences turn him into a monster; aka, "evil is a relay sport when the one who's burnt turns to pass the torch". reducing his character, that is to say his ambitions and overreaching part in this grand story, to someone that wants to stop time and can be stopped by just going back and erasing everything feels... inconsiderate to the story as a whole, as well as the efforts that have been made to explore trauma and how it affects us all.

the point isn't that we can just go back and undo what went wrong and be swell again. that doesn't align with the heart of stranger things. the point is, and always has been, that you are more than the awful things that have happened to you; that you can always learn and grow from your pain; that there is a way out of the cave and it'll be worth it once you get there.

we're not going to have a time loop, because that's cheap and reductive and solves nothing. it undoes all of the growth and learning that these characters have undergone. not only that, but we know that time being manipulated in the upside down doesn't change anything on the rightside up.

this isn't strictly or literally about time and stopping it. it's about how you can't keep people in cages and expect them to turn out fine and obey for the rest of their lives without losing their humanity in the process. it's about tearing things down and making something of the wreckage. it's about being broken and building yourself back up stronger not in spite of your broken bits but because of them. it's about how sitting in your pain and letting it consume you can either turn you into the very same monsters that caused your pain in the first place or have you feeling stuck while everyone else goes on with their lives.

vecna's life was stolen from him before it ever even began. he wants complete and total control over all life, because he's never felt in control of his own life. he wants to reshape the world, because he's never been allotted a space of his own in it. he wants to break the order of things, because his kind, those that are different, have always been forced to conform or be punished for daring to be themselves in a world that tells them they're inherently wrong. he's associated with time, because he had years of his life stolen from him when he was kept prisoner in the lab, and because he's seen the way that the rat race makes monsters of men. he hates humans, because they never once treated him like he was one, too.

we can't just pick one detail and base his character or the entire show around it. you're not seeing the bigger picture when you do that.

he's looking to create a new world from the rightside up's ruins and there's only one character on this show that we've seen do that.

vecna is all about darkness, destruction, and despair.

will is all about light, life, and hope.

stop hyper-focusing on time.

[qingzhouxi]

Introspect: Self-Analysis of Developmental Progress

Blog Post #8 Preliminary Drafting: May 6, 2023 Blog Draft Created: June 3, 2023 Blog Posted: June 4, 2023 Post-Publish Revisions: Not Applicable

I claim that I have developed myself as compared to before. But just how much did I develop? Let us see here!

I think that I have developed ever since I took Psych 101, and I also think that my self-analysis based on some psychological developmental theories may be of help to affirm this claim. I am by no means an expert regarding these theories and as such, some statements may be inaccurate in the perspective of some people. However, I will try my best to be as objective in evaluating myself with the help of the theories I selected, namely: Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development and Erikson's Theory of Psychosocial Development. I will also make use of one mainstream personality theory, particularly, the Big Five Personality Traits. Lastly, I will also be explaining my overall health using concepts related to the mind-gut connection.

A. Pre-Analysis Thoughts

I honestly believe I have improved quite a lot compared to how I started the Psych 101 course. However, there were times when I regressed due to stress and pressure, although I think I have managed stress and pressure quite well now, especially considering my body does not show signs that I am stressed or pressured. In any case, I am pretty confident that I am more or less psychologically healthy. In terms of the concepts that I will be using below, I think that:

My moral orientation fluctuates between Stages 4 to 6.

I am currently in the Intimacy vs. Isolation stage and prefer intimacy.

I became less neurotic and less extroverted.

My mind and my gastrointestinal tract are both functioning well.

While many of these would probably be correct since I also observed that I am becoming more aware of myself and my environment, partly because of taking Self-Defense classes and mostly because of taking the Psych 101 course, some predictions may still be inaccurate due to bias. Additionally, besides the mind-gut connection that has a multitude of scientific bases, the other approaches are still theoretical and thus may not totally be applicable to my case. Considering all of these, there may be differences in the results and my predictions, hence why I also included the last part to address possible test-induced inaccuracies or my personal biases.

B. Before Taking the Course

To be completely honest, I did not have any expectations of what will be discussed within the entire course because I know that different instructors will approach the course differently. As such, I did not have any relevant test results that I have taken immediately prior to the start of the semester. However, analyzing my actions from before may be able to give insights into how I was before.

Even when I was still studying at my Senior High School campus, I already did not like conforming to norms, although this does not mean I break the school conduct. Instead, I do not like to follow what society considers normal—I do not follow fashion trends, I do not use trending apps, I do not play popular games, and many others. It should therefore not be a surprise when I say that I do not entertain beggars, I retaliate when Christians use their religion to justify wrong deeds, and I oftentimes intentionally leave people on seen.

Retrieved from https://www.psychologynoteshq.com/kohlbergstheory/

Therefore, I can say that my moral compass during this time is oriented toward Stages 4, 5, or 6 on Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development (or Theory of Moral Development). Mostly though, since I always consider the benefit of involved parties during this time but not the law, I think I used the Stage 5 orientation the most. Stage 5 of Kohlberg's theory is when a person acts for the benefit of him and other involved parties, hence the reciprocity.

Comparing myself to others, I am a very romantic person when it comes to relationships, hence why I generally tend to be careful with the feelings of my loved ones. I also try to spend as much time as I can with people, going so far as to stay awake until past 1:00 AM if the person I am talking to is dear to me. Additionally, when given enough time to prepare, I make sure that I can give little gifts to my friends when I am going on a trip. I do not really like being isolated from my loved ones, hence my clinginess to people I care for even when sometimes, this clinginess does not show up since I repress them when I think I may be going overboard. To tell you frankly, I used to have adult separation anxiety until as recently as last year. As such, my being clingy to other people, especially my friends and family is not out of the blue. In this case, I am choosing between intimacy and isolation and evidently, I prefer intimacy, even just with those whom I consider friends. For reference, this is the conflict of Stage 6 of Erikson's Theory of Psychosocial Development, the summary of which can be viewed below.

Photo by V. Sus (2023). Retrieved from https://helpfulprofessor.com/psychosocial-development-theory-erikson-stages/

These two previous theories are age-related and since I am in the respective stages appropriate to my age, prior to taking Psych 101, both my moral development and psychosocial development are not delayed.

The Big Five Personality is a holistic assessment of an individual's personality, although it tends to only be descriptive rather than explanatory according to some researchers (Lim, 2023). However, it remains the personality theory that is the most widely accepted by psychologists of the present day. In this theory, it is said that a human's behaviors can be modeled through five traits: Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism, hence the acronym that is often used for the theory, OCEAN. I personally have taken this personality test although unfortunately, I was not able to take it immediately prior to the start of the course. However, I remember taking it last year and scoring quite high on both neuroticism and extraversion. Looking back, I agree with these results as before, I tend to get mad or upset quite easily and even outwardly express these emotions. Moreover, I was also very outgoing back then and connected a lot with the people I love and care about. In retrospect, this could have also been caused by my adult separation anxiety.

As discussed during one of my Psych 101 class meetings, there is a very strong link between mental health and gut health, which is coined as the Mind-Gut Connection. Since December 2021, I have suffered from chronic gastric inflammation called gastritis. Aside from this, if you can correlate it to my Blog Post #6, this is the same year I experienced the trauma related to my so-called "ex-M.U." Turns out, this bout of chronic gastritis could have been attributed to the aftermath of my initial heartbreak. This, in combination with the stresses brought about by the nearing application period for many universities like De La Salle University-Manila, University of Santo Tomas, Far Eastern University, the entire UP System, and many other universities, is what I claim to be the trigger of my chronic gastritis. When I consulted a gastroenterologist, he told me that he cannot pinpoint the cause of my gastritis through my lifestyle and eating habits and so, one of the most probable causes is stress. It can therefore be triangulated that stress is the real cause of my gastritis, hence anecdotally proving the mind-gut connection.

C. After Taking the Course and Comparative Analysis

After taking the course, I honestly learned so many things and while I know myself that I will not remember all the specifics taught to me, I do know that I will remember the concepts, especially those that can be applied to my life. Talking about these concepts, I will be writing below what I think I became in terms of my morality, social development, neuroticism, extraversion, mental health, and gastrointestinal health.

Moral Development

To supplement the definition of Stage 5 from before, the sixth stage of the Moral Development Theory means a person acts based not on acceptance or mutual benefit but based on what they think is right, uninfluenced by the sake of others. As such, this kind of action is fueled by an internal moral compass, adjusted to do things that do not benefit other people even just to some extent. Using this theory, I can definitely see myself fluctuating between Stages 5 and 6, although compared to before where I always use Stage 5, I now mostly use Stage 6 as demonstrated by my prioritization when taking action. Before, I always do group work first because it will benefit not just me but my groupmates too. However, now, I make sure I prioritize my individual work because the amount of work that needs to be done in this individual work tends to be much greater than in group work, thus needing more attention and focus. In addition, when choosing between responding to my friends and doing my academic outputs, I always choose my academic outputs now because while responding quickly to my friends would, to some extent, increase our closeness because they would think I prioritize them, I think academic matters are more important and are therefore my priority for the time being. And yes, I still retaliate when Christians use their religion to justify their wrong deeds and even their superiority complex. Although, instead of attempting to defend a person being attacked, I am retaliating because I think they need to be taught the hard way that anything immoral remains immoral even when any widely accepted book justifies it. In any case, I do not care whether other people agree or not with me, as long as I am doing what I think needs to be done—to prevent the justification of what I think is wrong.

Psychosocial Development

After multiple times of introspection, what I came up with is that I am still in the sixth stage of Psychosocial Development—Intimacy vs. Isolation stage, and I still choose intimacy over isolation even though I am not currently looking for a prospective lifelong partner nor am I looking forward to meeting one in the future. It must be important to note that this stage does not call for wanting a partner for one to desire intimacy over isolation. This intimacy may come from different sources like family, friends, pets, and many other similar beings. As such, my wanting intimacy with friends is enough to justify my desire for intimacy over isolation. As for my separation anxiety, it has thankfully gone away by now, although some of its manifestations like worrying about the well-being of my loved ones from time to time are still present since it has become second nature to me after suffering for so long from adult separation anxiety. Despite this, I still manage to contain my worry and I do not become controlling or overbearing when I am worried about the safety or happiness of my loved ones. Since I still desire intimacy and am also intimate with select friends, it can therefore be concluded that this separation anxiety only increased my wanting intimacy and not directly caused it.

Big Five Personality Traits

I had personally taken the test for this personality typing and if my memory serves me right, my previous test scores for both neuroticism and extraversion are higher compared to the values I received now. Screenshots of my most recent test scores that pertain to neuroticism and extraversion can be seen below.

My neuroticism decreased by a little bit while my extraversion decreased by a lot. Compared to what I can recall wherein I got 80+ for both neuroticism and extraversion, the values seen above are lower, especially the extraversion one. I think the cause of my becoming extraverted is that I am now able to know how important it is to make time for myself and what I actually need to do that benefits me, not that of other people. I used to be quite people-oriented, and I still am, the difference now is that I do not only see how important it is to connect to other people but I also see how important it is to connect to my inner self rather than ignoring it. The slight decrease in neuroticism though is much harder to explain, although I may have a lead as to why it did not decrease significantly. I am quite neurotic ever since I was a child even when I did not experience neglect, I am confident in my skills, and I do not overreact to many things. I think the reason why I still got such a high neuroticism value is because of the high-stress environment around me that causes me to constantly and deeply feel negative emotions. Although, compared to before, the level of stress I experience now is a lot more manageable despite being subjected to arguably a more stressful environment than in senior high school.

Mind-Gut Connection

I personally think my mental health is much more stable now compared to last year's—I do not always feel sad, I am not always stressed, I feel happy when doing daily things, I am interested in learning more than what was taught, and many more. Compared to before when I used to only learn for the sake of complying with the requirements, I only submitted on time for the sake of not being reprimanded, and I only kept my grades good for the sake of not being shouted at, my being curious now is a significant improvement. And my gut health also supports this, as evidenced by my overall healthier gastrointestinal tract. I now do not experience gastritis often, if at all, and I can also eat without feeling nauseous after only eating a small portion. With a small concern being erased, my mind gets put to rest, hence my better mental health. It can therefore be said that the mind-gut connection is not just a symbiotic connection but it also benefits from feedback loops wherein the improvement of one facilitates the improvement of the other which, in turn, facilitates the further improvement of the one.

D. Post-Analysis Thoughts

Summarizing the entire evidence of my improvements, the following key ideas can be seen:

My moral orientation is now oriented toward self or mutual gain, rather than being somehow bound to conventional morality.

I still prefer intimacy over isolation. I do not have problems being intimate with friends as long as the context is right. I am not seeking to have a romantic partner at the moment.

My moral and psychosocial development milestones are appropriate for my age.

Both my neuroticism and extraversion went down. I am still stressed although I can manage the feeling better now.

My mental health and gastrointestinal (gut) health are steadily becoming better. I now do not experience gastritis often.

Perhaps almost next to nothing can be added here since there does not seem to be any disparity when comparing the comparative analysis results and my previous predictions. If anything, it revealed that I am now quite self-aware as even without a lot of intentional and focused reflection sessions, I already know my current self and how it compares to my previous self.

Wooo! That was a lot. If you are still reading till this point, I congratulate you for your unwavering dedication. I appreciate you reading this blog till the end. See you again!

References:

Lim, A.G.Y. (2023). Big Five Personality Traits: The 5-Factor Model Of Personality. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/big-five-personality.html

Psychology Notes HQ. (2020). Kohlberg’s Theory [Online image]. The Psychology Notes HQ. https://www.psychologynoteshq.com/kohlbergstheory/

Sus, V. (2023). Erikson's Psychological Stages [Online image]. Helpful Professor. https://helpfulprofessor.com/psychosocial-development-theory-erikson-stages/

Word Count: ~2570 (w/o References), ~2605 (w/ References)