#and while every abusive situation is different and unique to the people involved

[coochiequeens]

Enough is enough

“A nation is not conquered until the hearts of its women are on the ground. Then it is done, no matter how brave its warriors or how strong their weapons.”(Cheyenne proverb)

We’re experiencing a pivotal moment where Oklahoma can say “enough is enough” and allow women to protect themselves, even in complicated situations. Let me explain.

For the last decade, I’ve been at the University of Oklahoma, and while my journey may be unique, it has always followed the evidence.

My career began as a SWAT officer and police detective. I know firsthand the importance of the justice system and the need to hold people accountable for the commission of crime. The things I saw in those roles made me question why people commit crime and led me to a career in forensic psychopathology.

I moved to Oklahoma in 2013 to investigate differential criminal behavior among women. If you didn’t know, Oklahoma incarcerates women at rates among the highest in the developed world. We are three to five times higher than New York or California and over 15 times higher than Iran, a country currently in cultural and political upheaval regarding women’s rights.

Data shows men and women commit crimes with fundamentally different drives and motivations. While the majority of all criminal justice-involved people have experienced trauma, women who commit crimes have experienced trauma that’s significantly more extreme and problematic.

ACE (adverse childhood experience) scores measure childhood trauma on a scale of 1 to 10. The average ACE in the United States is about 1.5. The average in Oklahoma is about 3, and the average for an incarcerated woman in Oklahoma is over 5 with about 40% of incarcerated women in Oklahoma having an ACE score of 7 or higher.

Adding to the impact of this childhood trauma, upward of 65% of incarcerated women in Oklahoma were in abusive relationships at the time of their arrest. Trauma follows them across their life span and creates a biological injury to the brain that can cause mental illness, and almost always affects behavior and decision making.

However, did you know that evidence of abuse isn’t commonly considered by courts in most states when handing down sentences? In February, Rep. Toni Hasenbeck, R-Elgin, introduced legislation, House Bill 1639, that would help domestic violence survivors who fight back against the person abusing them.

When that legislation passed the Oklahoma House with a unanimous vote on March 22, it was a key step toward allowing the courts to have more discretion when sentencing crimes where domestic abuse plays a significant factor.

HB 1639 also could give women convicted of a crime the opportunity to provide evidence of their abuse for consideration at sentencing modification hearings.

We already know a majority of women in Oklahoma prisons are trauma survivors. Courts not taking into account the abuses these women have suffered is basically saying they’re OK with our criminal justice systems endorsing the abuse.

Rigid sentencing laws have already devastated too many women who have experienced terrible trauma. I think that’s why HB 1639 has had such strong support, so far.

I also strongly believe our state’s lawmakers should maintain the language demanded by impacted families. Our legal system must consider the circumstances behind every crime, and sentences should be proportional — and retroactive — depending on each individual situation.

The authors of HB 1639 didn’t say people should be free to commit crimes or avoid responsibility for their actions. Rather, they said context is important. They got the bill language — both the sentencing angles and the retroactivity — exactly right.

I encourage Oklahoma legislators to pass HB 1639 with full retroactivity, and to limit sentences to 10 years and allow courts to rehear cases and hand down shorter sentences to people who show a significant link between the domestic violence they experienced and their crime.

It’s the right thing to do. Because, truly, enough is enough

By David A. McLeod, Ph.D., MSW, is associate director and professor at the Anne and Henry Zarrow School of Social Work at the University of Oklahoma.

[martinarecolvice]

Women's Shelter Clothing Drop Off

In times of crisis, women and children often find themselves in need of shelter and support. Shelters play a crucial role in providing refuge, safety, and resources for those escaping difficult situations like domestic violence or homelessness. However, these vital establishments rely heavily on the generosity of the community to keep their doors open.

>>>>>>>>Women's Shelter Clothing Drop Off<<<<<<<<

One significant way you can make an impact is through donations. By participating in a women's shelter drop off, you contribute not only items but also hope to those who may have lost everything. Whether it’s clothing, toiletries, or household goods, your contributions can help rebuild lives and provide comfort during challenging times.

This blog will guide you on how to donate effectively—exploring what items are accepted at shelters, where to drop them off locally, potential tax deductions from your donations, and more. Join us as we highlight how small acts of kindness can create ripples of change for women and children in need.

Helping Women and Children in Crisis

Women and children in crisis face unique challenges that can be overwhelming. Many find themselves fleeing unsafe environments, such as abusive relationships or unstable living situations. In these moments of desperation, shelters become a lifeline, offering not just physical safety but also emotional support.

These shelters provide essential services like counseling, job training, and legal assistance to help women regain their independence. They create a nurturing environment where mothers can heal while ensuring their children feel safe and supported. A stable space allows families to rebuild their lives away from the trauma they have experienced.

The impact of community support is immeasurable. Donations play a pivotal role in maintaining shelter operations and providing necessary resources for residents. Every item donated helps create a more comfortable setting for those seeking refuge during difficult times.

By participating in initiatives aimed at helping these vulnerable populations, you contribute to rebuilding hope and resilience within your community. Your involvement sends an important message: there are people who care and stand ready to assist those facing hardship.

Types of clothing donations are most needed at the shelter

When it comes to supporting women's shelters, there are a variety of clothing donations that are needed to help those in need. Here are some types of clothing donations that are often most needed at women's shelters: 1. Undergarments: This includes new underwear and bras in various sizes. Women often arrive at shelters with only the clothes on their backs, so providing them with clean and comfortable undergarments is essential. 2. Socks: A fresh pair of socks can make a huge difference for someone who may not have access to laundry facilities or has been walking long distances. Socks also help keep feet warm and dry, which is especially important during colder months. 3. Winter wear: Coats, hats, gloves, and scarves are essential for staying warm during the winter months. Many women who come to shelters don't have adequate winter wear and rely on donations to stay warm. 4. Professional attire: Many women leave abusive situations and need professional attire for job interviews or work. Donating business-appropriate clothing such as suits, blouses, skirts, and dress shoes can greatly benefit these women. 5. Maternity clothes: For pregnant women seeking refuge at a shelter, having access to maternity clothes can make a big difference in their comfort and well-being. 6. Plus-size clothing: It's important to remember that not all women are the same size. Donating plus-size clothing ensures that all women at the shelter have access to comfortable and well-fitting clothes. 7. Children's clothing: Women's shelters often house families with children, so donations of children's clothing in various sizes are always needed. 8. Comfortable clothing: Many women arrive at shelters with only the clothes they were wearing when they left their homes. Donating comfortable and casual clothing like t-shirts, sweatpants, and pajamas can provide them with much-needed comfort during a difficult time. 9. Hygiene products: Along with clothing, women's shelters also need donations of hygiene products such as shampoo, soap, toothpaste, and feminine hygiene products. Overall, it's important to consider the needs of the women and families who will be receiving these donations when deciding what to donate. New or gently used items in good condition are always appreciated. If you're unsure of what to donate, it's best to reach out directly to your local women's shelter to see what specific items they may be in need of at the time.

Where to Donate Clothes to Women's Shelters?

Finding the right place to donate items for women's shelters can depend on your location and the specific shelter you want to support. Here are some options for where you can donate:

1. Local Women's Shelters: The best place to start is by contacting women's shelters in your area and asking what items they currently need. They may have specific donation guidelines or wish lists that can help guide your giving.

2. National Organizations: There are also national organizations that work with women's shelters across the country, such as the National Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV) and the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV). These organizations often have information on their websites about how to donate items or funds to support their work.

3. Clothing Donation Centers: Many clothing donation centers, such as Goodwill or The Salvation Army, accept donations of gently used clothing and household items that can be distributed to women's shelters.

4. Online Giving Platforms: You can also use online platforms like DonateMyDress.org or Givebackbox.com to donate items specifically for women in need.

5. Local Nonprofit Organizations: Nonprofit organizations in your community may also work with women's shelters or provide services for vulnerable women. Contact them to see if they accept donations of goods or funds that will benefit women in need.

Before making a donation, it's always a good idea to contact the organization first to confirm their needs and donation guidelines. This will ensure that your donation is put to good use and helps support women in need.

Drop off locations

When considering a women's shelter drop off, it’s important to know where you can make your donations. Many local shelters have designated drop-off locations that are convenient for community members. These spots are typically accessible during specific hours to accommodate donors.

You can often find drop-off sites at the shelter itself. Most women’s shelters offer structured times when donations will be accepted. This allows staff to manage incoming items effectively and ensure everything is sorted properly.

In addition to shelters, some organizations partner with businesses or community centers as donation points. Check their websites or social media pages for updates on these temporary locations, especially during special campaigns or events.

Before heading out, it's wise to contact the facility directly. They can confirm what items they need most urgently and any guidelines regarding packaging and cleanliness of donated goods. Knowing this information helps streamline the process and ensures your contributions truly benefit those in need.

Tax deduction for my donations

When you donate items to a women’s shelter, you're not just helping those in need; you may also be eligible for tax deductions. The IRS allows taxpayers to deduct qualified charitable donations from their taxable income. This can lead to significant savings during tax season.

To qualify, the donations must be made to a registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Most women's shelters fall under this category, but it’s wise to check their status before donating. Keep receipts or written acknowledgment letters provided by the shelter as proof of your contributions.

The value of your donated items should reflect fair market value at the time of donation. This means considering what similar items sell for in thrift stores or online marketplaces. For larger donations, you might want an appraisal for more accurate valuation and better deduction benefits.

Remember that there are limits on how much you can deduct based on your adjusted gross income (AGI). Educating yourself about these rules ensures you're maximizing potential deductions while supporting vital services for women and children in crisis.

Conclusion

Supporting women's shelters through donations can make a significant impact. By participating in the women’s shelter drop off initiative, you directly contribute to the well-being of women and children facing crises. Your generosity provides essential items that help them rebuild their lives.

Understanding what items are most needed can guide your donation efforts effectively. From clothing to hygiene products, these contributions fill critical gaps in support services offered by shelters. Every bit helps, and even small donations can add up to create meaningful change.

Finding local shelters for drop-off is easier than ever thanks to various online resources and community boards. Many organizations provide clear details on where you can bring your donations, ensuring they reach those who need them most.

Remember that donating doesn’t just benefit others; it might also offer you tax advantages. Keeping track of your donated items allows for potential deductions when filing taxes—making charity not only a kind act but beneficial as well.

Your involvement matters greatly in supporting vulnerable populations within our communities. Consider making a regular commitment to donate or volunteer at women's shelters near you—it could be one of the most rewarding decisions you'll ever make.

FAQs

What types of clothing donations are most needed at the shelter?

We primarily need gently used or new women's clothing, including professional attire, casual wear, outerwear, and undergarments. Seasonal items like winter coats and summer clothing are especially appreciated.

Are there any clothing items that the shelter cannot accept?

Yes, we cannot accept used undergarments, clothing with stains or damage, or items that are heavily worn. Additionally, we cannot accept clothing with inappropriate or offensive messages.

When and where can I drop off clothing donations?

You can drop off clothing donations at our shelter's main location during our donation hours, [8 hours]. Please contact us in advance if you plan to bring a large donation.

Can I donate clothing directly to women at the shelter?

For the privacy and safety of our residents, all clothing donations are handled by our staff. We ensure that your donations are distributed to those in need through our established programs.

Can I receive a tax receipt for my clothing donation?

Yes, we provide tax receipts for all donations upon request. Please ask our staff for a receipt when you drop off your clothing, and they will be happy to assist you.

[thefirstknife]

I keep seeing this brought up in your posts with o14 and just want to point this out: just because someone doesn’t know/say they’re being abused doesn’t mean they aren’t. I myself didn’t know the emotional/verbal abuse I endured until after the fact and this really makes me uncomfortable when you use that point. Please understand that it is very much a thing that happens to those (not all cause everyone is different) that are abused.

You’ve brought up an important point that I am very well aware of. I am glad you sent this ask in this way and I want to address why I don’t use it as an argument.

Under read more, warning for talk about abuse:

I specifically don’t want to entertain this part of the discourse because abuse is about power dynamics. The abuser is usually someone with more power over the other person and the abused is usually someone who cannot escape the situation due to that power imbalance. And the abused person often either doesn’t have the capacity to understand the power imbalance or isn’t capable of asking for help or escaping the situation because the abuser is in some way threatening them. It doesn’t have to be a direct and physical/vocal threat (though it often is), it can be implied, but the imbalance in power dynamics is essential to identify an abusive situation. This is why abuse always features an age imbalance, economic imbalance (employer-employee or a household where only one person works and has control over all the money), family imbalance (parent-child) and so on. The abuser is the one who must have power and control over the abused. 

There is no such thing between Saint and Osiris. In no way are they ever presented as one being above the other. They are equals in every single way: age, experience, position within their respective jobs and so on. Saint does not fear Osiris, nor does Osiris have any power or control over him. Saint isn’t afraid of talking back to him and challenging him. Saint isn’t isolated from others and he isn’t afraid or incapable of asking for help (from YW, Ikora, Sagira previously...). For that reason, I cannot accept that there’s a possibility of Saint being abused but just not knowing about it. From all the available lore that I’ve poured through to compile all of the known and documented interactions between the two, there is no indication that Osiris holds any power or control over Saint in order for this relationship to be classified as abusive. 

Some people said that Osiris is being abusive by “withholding emotions” from Saint, which can definitely a part of an abusive relationship. However, I do not believe that Osiris is withholding emotional availability; this argument only popped up after Sagira’s death and their bickering in the Hangar (where Sagira was mentioned). It is explained numerous times by many different characters that Osiris does not respond to grief well. Ikora knows it, Saint knows it. This is not an abusive trait per se, as one cannot really control how they handle that sort of extreme grief. One could even argue that Saint was the abusive one in this situation by bringing up Sagira before Osiris gave him permission and a green light that he’s okay with discussing it. Same thing happened when Crow brought it up. However, I will not claim that Saint or Crow are abusing Osiris because there’s no other evidence to it. The situation is complex and not just easily boiled down to abuse. As someone who has been through abusive situations, I believe it’s reductive to call one bump in the road as abuse. It makes it harder to recognise actual abuse, both for victims and onlookers. 

Of course, maybe there’s something in the background that we don’t know about. After all, we don’t have every single Saint/Osiris interaction written out in the lore. However, considering what we do have and what we do know about these two characters, I can say for a fact that there is no power imbalance between them and Saint is not the type of a person who would sit back in fear of anyone and not know about being abused, definitely not by Osiris. There is simply no evidence. Of course, if someone just doesn’t vibe with the situation due to a personal experience and the whole Saint/Osiris argument that happened most recently in the lore is triggering for them, that is something I can respect. It’s personal, you can’t control what triggers your trauma. But that’s a personal experience, not an objective read on their relationship. People have been adamant about saying that the relationship is objectively abusive, which it is not. If it’s upsetting for personal reasons, I would absolutely recommend not interacting with the upsetting content and would implore people to tag their content appropriately.

In my original post from back a month ago or so, I specifically addressed how people tend to claim Osiris is abusive over Saint without backing it up with anything and essentially vilifying one of them (Osiris) while completely infantilising the other (Saint). It’s harmful to mlm, especially to mlm of colour because of how Osiris is treated by the community. It’s a reductive view of a long-term mlm relationship that spans centuries. The time span is quite literally incomprehensible. 

People also never bring up Saint’s behaviour towards Osiris, such as pushing a sensitive topic in public and pressing him on it when he’s clearly not ready. These are also signs of abuse. Another sign of abuse are also threats of physical violence which Saint does in the Devil’s Ruin quest dialogue when he tells Osiris to “get off this line” to which Osiris responds with “make me” and then Saint quips with “you would not survive that.” Nobody brings that up as abuse. And they shouldn’t! It’s clear that this isn’t a serious threat. And it should be clear that one quarrel over a traumatic topic isn’t a sign of a toxic relationship. Saint also greets Shaxx with the line “I always hated you, brother” and then they both laugh. Saint is very clearly often joking in this way and people recognise it as not serious. Osiris should be given the same benefit of the doubt when he retreats into himself over indescribable grief; he’s not emotionally manipulating Saint, he is grieving in the only way he knows how.

I find it highly suspect that this whole discourse only started once the pairing was confirmed as canonical. People have been shipping them way before that and with way less information available and there’s never been any discourse about how Osiris is actually abusing Saint in this relationship. I just find it really suspicious that a mlm relationship featuring a man of colour gets labelled as abusive from the side of that man of colour specifically, only after we’ve received the information that it’s canon. It’s an incredibly common pattern in fandom spaces when a fandom favourite (in this case Saint) gets into a canon relationship with a character that’s easy to be prejudiced against. Even if that prejudice is unconscious, it’s still prejudice and it’s painfully obvious to anyone who has ever been in fandoms for as long as me (or longer). There are also literally scientific studies on this so I’m not just talking about my own experience. 

Without any evidence of abuse and no imbalance in power dynamics present between these two characters, I can’t see how someone can come to a conclusion that Osiris abuses Saint after they’ve argued once “on screen,” especially after Saint himself explains what the situation is about. He eloquently puts his reasoning into words when Amanda asks him if there’s trouble and also promises to reach out for help if he needs it. I don’t like the trend of jumping to a conclusion, especially when people who do it are highly inconsistent about it (most recent one being the person who claims Osiris is abusive, but also claims that both Osiris and Saint are grown men who can handle themselves without our help; this is a contradictory statement, as Osiris cannot be abusive to Saint if Saint can handle himself and can just leave if he wants to).

I apologise if the discourse about this whole thing is making people uncomfortable. I should’ve addressed my reasoning behind it earlier, in order to make sure that everyone is on the same page. I should’ve also tagged it with a warning for talk of abuse, but no one else did and I didn’t think to correct it, which is definitely something I should’ve done. People started talking about how Osiris is abusive and toxic without thinking that people going into the tags might be upset by it and unfortunately I didn’t think of it either.

I hope this explains it adequately. It’s a long post but I didn’t want to hold back on any of the details because this is an important topic. If there are any points that anyone believes are not properly explained, feel free to ask for further clarification.

[almightyrozenidiot]

*points at you* akira & ryuji for the ask game if u want :)

I'm gonna put everything under a read more so I don't clog up people's dashes.

describe their canon relationship/dynamic

Canonically they're best friends. It's not so prevalent in Persona 3 but definitely in Persona 4, there's a tradition of having the first human male character the Wild Card protag meets be their bestie and confidant. They're usually a bit of an outcast that could fit in with society/a friend group but for one reason or another, has lost their place in it. Whatever happens, they are "second banana". They're a bit of a jokester but not to the extent they and the protag are a manzai comedy duo (but they should be). At the end of the day, they will be there by the protag's side through thick and thin.

your ideal/headcanon version of it? how does it differ from how it is in canon & why is this your favorite version? any other alternate versions of it you enjoy?

I don't think my ideal version of it really differs that much from canon? They're just two dudes who happen to be dating to me. I guess in my head they get up to more wackier hijinks and Joker is willing to carry Ryuji around more.

what do you like about their relationship, why is it interesting or enjoyable to you?

I know I go on a lot about how LGBTQ+ relationships should be allowed to be messy and complicated, but that doesn't mean I can enjoy a simple, cute ship from time to time. And these two fit that niche for me. I mean they're still morally grey and do crimes and shit but compared to, say, Akeshu or even Ryugoro, they are homies that kiss and do crimes.

what about the individual characters involved? what does this relationship mean to them, what makes it unique among their relationships?

Ryuji was one of the first people that didn't immediately go ballistic at Joker for being arrested, which is the key to their relationship - platonic or otherwise. They're also in a similar position of wanting someone to stop lauding other others by abusing their power for personal benefit, but lacking the means to achieve it, so even if he doesn't outright state it, Ryuji is one of the first people Joker would go ride or die with. Also I think what's interesting is when Ryuji gets a bit drunk off of the popularity of the PT, Joker seems hesitant to tell Ryuji to calm down (at least afaik). Whether it's because he's scared of the consequences of deflating Ryuji's enthusiasm and putting a wrench in their friendship or because he trusts Ryuji will see eye to eye with him is juicy either way.

Joker is the catalyst for Ryuji's life changing and looking better. Like it's very clear he wants to do something about his situation but every time he tries something he goes about it the wrong way and it never works out for him. Also from Ryuji's confidant and after the Kamoshida incident, you can tell he's learned from the whole ordeal and while he is still a bit brash in his methods, he knows he can make a change as long as Joker is there for him in some capacity. This comes full circle when he risks his life to lower the lifeboat when Shido's Palace is collapsing because he built up confidence from all of his experiences - none of which would have come to be if Joker didn't give so much of himself to make all this happen to begin with. Also also I forget the line in question but when Ryuji is like "wherever I am with you is when I'm at home"... I am actually physically tearing up typing this aaaaaaaaaaa

Even if he takes his safety of being anonymous as a Phantom Thief for granted when shit hits the fan around Sae's Palace, never once does he take Joker for granted. He's just as angry when he learns about Joker's circumstances and is willing to do anything to make Shido pay.

favorite interaction they have in canon

I think I pretty much described it with the line that I don't properly remember due to my shit memory lmao. I'm also a fan of Joker and Ryuji's awakenings because they mirror each other in how helpless they both felt but were able to turn a dire situation around and protect each other.

favorite interaction they have in your head/a situation you want to put them in

I just like imagining them hanging out and doing mundane shit in my head. I like imagining this meme with a lot of my otps but in this case, the third wheel is either Ann or Morgana. Morgana more often than not (just imagine there's a table or something IDK).

[bitchesgetriches]

Hi bitches, I'm a bit nervous to ask this but I'm being genuine I promise. I don't want you to think I'm some biggoted old fool.

Could you please help me understand how sex work isn't exploitative? I hear a lot of people saying "it's just the same as normal work, it's better than my job at Amazon/target/wherever and no one is calling that work exploitative" or "well you wouldn't do YOUR job if you didn't have to either" but like, checkout work IS hella exploitative??? Most work IS hella bullshit that only exists to feed the capitalist machine. I DO fight for a world where work is a choice. I understand why The Right would love onlyfans, but why is The Left lining up to defend it?

Sex work - especially things like onlyfans - is overwhelmingly done by the poor or as a way to escape poverty ("I was being paid shit in my previous job, now I can afford an apartment" is something I hear a lot). But in doing so it transfers all the risks to them, it's essentially turning sex work into the gig/hustle economy, isn't it? You end up on a zero hour contract with no union, health, benefit, maternity protection, in a job that can be hella dangerous and have serious emotional repercussions and requires huge emotional labour and/or disconnect and I don't really understand why we're just cheering this along?

I don't object on moral grounds. Sex is sex. Consenting adults do what you want. People are well within their moral and legal rights to choose to sell sex, (or the emotional labour that comes with it), or photos, or whatever they want - just like they are free to go work for target. I absolutely understand the need to - and support - decriminalisation of sex work, the need to make it safe and secure for sex workers, but I just can't see why ~the world at large~ sees huge numbers of young 18 year old women being herded and encouraged into joining Onlyfans - in several cases with people saying "can't wait for you to turn 18 so you can have an OF" so the patriarchy can pay £3-4 a month to see their tits and people cheer this along? One or two get rich, I'm sure, but who is getting REALLY rich? It's the old white men that own onlyfans and take a 20% cut, as always. It's the patriarchy working as it always has. Allowing one or two women to succeed while holding the rest down for exploitation. Except now it's mixing with the worst bits of 21st C capitalism, too. Surely all OnlyFans is is Uber for Sex work, using the gig economy to de-unionise and isolate workers, strip them of benefits, make them into independent contractors and profit off them?

Sure, it's a step up from kidnapping girls from Romania to have them do porn, but is that really the bar? Can we maybe just stop for a second and imagine a world where rich white men don't get richer off the emotional and physical labour of women? Where the other available work options aren't so shit that a zero-hour career with no employment protections, a limited lifespan, in a dangerous industry doesnt look like heaven in comparison? Sure, you can work for three years, sell your emotional labour, and pay for college. But why are we cheering that instead of asking why this has to happen in the first place? We're fiddling around the edges of the system, giving it a makeover, and rebadging it "female empowerment" instead of actually changing anything fundamental. Poor women sell sex. A few are allowed to break out. Men get to leer at naked women for pennies a year. Rich men get richer. Plus ça change. Not even to mention that because of the ~emotional~ connection that onlyfans gives beyond porn, we're embedding the idea that women are "money in, girlfriend out" machines. I know several girls that won't even *talk* to men in any situation without a minimum $50 fee. And apparently the fact we also have a crisis of men so lonely they're willing to pay this isn't a problem either? Where's our luxury communism dreams bitches?

Bitches, I trust you. What am I missing?

I don’t think you’re a bigoted old fool. Nor a prude! I think you’re incredibly enlightened about the dangers of unfettered capitalism and labor exploitation.

Almost all of the issues you highlight about exploitative sex work can be said about exploitative labor in any industry. Poor people taking shitty jobs that don’t pay enough and enrich capitalist, patriarchal corporate overlords? That happens all over the world in industries from meat packing to clothing sweat shops to, yes, sex work. The exploitation of a person’s body for labor is an ethical stain on our culture at large. It’s why we’re so in favor of labor rights advances including a higher minimum wage, unions, and humane work environments. 

Raising the Minimum Wage Would Make Our Lives Better 

Are Unions Good or Bad? 

Coronavirus Reveals America’s Pre-existing Conditions, Part 1: Healthcare, Housing, and Labor Rights 

Sex work is not unique in that it opens desperate and poor people up to labor exploitation. It’s not even uniquely dangerous to the bodies of workers--John Oliver did a bit on the US meat packing industry recently that made me faint with body horror. 

So we agree that labor exploitation is bad. And it’s something that we should work towards ending in every industry. But I can see why some people would view exploitative sex work to be a different kind of bad. Because sex is sensitive! It can be used to punish and hurt. See revenge porn and the way synonyms for “sex worker” are stigmatized and used as insults throughout society. 

Now, a few clarifications. When I refer to sex work, I’m not just talking about cam work on OnlyFans. There are lots of other outlets for many different kinds of sex work. And I’m also not just talking about women sex workers. People of all gender identities and sexualities do sex work, and we should advocate for fair labor practices and safety for all of them. I am firmly pro- decriminalizing sex work so that the industry can be made safe, regulated, and destigmatized in an effort to reduce exploitation. I want sex workers to have the power of collective bargaining! I want them to be protected by law enforcement and our justice system, instead of targeted by it! I want them to pay taxes and have the privileges associated with all tax paying workers! I want them to have the power and protection of a regulatory industry that will purge abusive and violent clients from their field!

I also disagree with the characterization that choosing sex work freely, even out of desperation, is a “step up from kidnapping a girl from Romania to have them do porn.” Human trafficking is not sex work. It’s slavery and torture. Even when the choice is between making $7.25 an hour working at WalMart and making $7.25 as a cam girl, there’s still a choice involved, even if it’s a shitty one. There’s consent. Trafficking victims have no choice, no consent, only violence. 

I honestly don’t want to start a debate here. We’re all on the same page that labor exploitation is bad. So I’ll just end with this: not all sex work is inherently exploitative. Which I guess is your real question!

I’ve mentioned before that I have friends who are former sex workers. Specifically strippers and a specialty dominatrix. As with any job, they had their ups and downs, their good nights and bad nights. But they all agree that they freely chose the work not out of desperation or a lack of other options. And they even enjoyed the work in some cases. If someone prefers sex work, thrives in giving that emotional labor to others, I’m not going to judge and I’m certainly not going to tell them they’re being exploited. It would frankly be insulting, condescending, to tell someone that their choice of work (when it truly is a choice) is bad for them. 

It’s a fine line, but the line does exist. Sex work CAN BE exploitative. But it is not inherently exploitative, as far as I’m concerned. 

[thewillowbends]

So I'm rewatching the first season and reading the book, and I've got Thoughts (TM)

And I've got a LOT of thoughts about what exactly Leigh Bardugo was doing here in terms of the moral and ethical statements of the narrative, so I'm putting it under the cut.

Something that's really glaring on the rewatch is just...the complete lack of compassion every character outside Aleksander has for the plight of the Grisha. The army treats treats them with reciprocal dislike, despite the fact that they couldn't even cross the Fold with the Inferni or Squallers. The tsar and tsarita treat them with condescension and disdain, clearly valuing them mainly as a utility that, historically, they've happily turned on when they felt they were growing too powerful. Baghra has just given up on trying to protect other Grisha who aren't immortal like her or Aleksander. Even Alina is guilty of othering them and has to be told off by multiple characters (Ivan, Aleksander, Baghra) to stop treating her power like a yoke instead of a responsibility and opportunity to help others.

We get this big, bad, armor-piercing line from her to Aleksander about how he doesn't care who suffers as long as he wins. Which is true to some extent, but...where is her compassion? Didn't we just spend a hefty portion of the narrative wanting to give her power away to somebody else so she can, what, be with her bestie? Meanwhile, there's, you know, an actual war going on. This isn't small stakes shit she sees going on around her. People are dying. We literally have an entire plot where we see a Grisha kidnapped, enslaved, and then sent to be put to death...who was given to the enemy by her own people!

And then we get that line from her in 1x07, only to have it followed up by her running away at the end of 1x08 for....why? Most people on the ship are dead or those that survived weren't his supporters. The people on the docks were killed, and most of them actually were traitors trying to kill Alina. Aleksander didn't lie about that. So she's running away to take the blame for some nebulous reason that's not really well explained, which is...well, what the fuck happens to the rest of the Grisha? Do we not care about how Aleksander's actions are going to reflect back on them and cause a potential backlash or something? Not to mention, nobody is on the other side to warn them that Aleksander is a threat to begin with. Even if you assumed he was dead, you'd definitely want to assume he likely had supporters back at the palace, too!

From a character writing perspective, I find it stupid that Aleksander doesn't tell her certain things because if he's such a big, bad, clever manipulator, he would absolutely be weaponizing his own pain and experiences to make her stumble in empathy. That's bad character writing to me when you're telling me somebody's an abusive villain but actually isn't using very real and effective abuser tactics. But then you also have Alina who refuses to even point out...Aleksander, I get it! I've talked to other Grisha! I see what you're going through! But this can't be the answer. You have to see this won't end well for you! Like, her own arguments make no sense to me. They're so myopic and self-involved.

One of the big things that bothers me that gets folded into Aleksander's other manipulations is this idea that he primarily associates and values her for her power, in contrast to Mal who primarily sees her for being herself. While I get the intent of that on a narrative level, in the scope of the wider story...it just literally makes no sense for Aleksander to parse those two as separate. Not when the whole reason Grisha are hunted down and killed is because they don't get the privilege of being people outside of their power. Aleksander doesn't get to be General Kirigan without also being the Darkling. Therefore, Alina doesn't get to be Sankta Alina without also being the Sun Summoner. Not a single other character gets to be relevant without being powerful.

Even on a narrative level, it makes no sense. One, it's frankly kind of sexist (when are male protagonists ever expected to be segregated from their power) and two...that's the whole reason we're telling her story! That's why she's the protagonist! She is special. She can't be separated from this unique power destiny has handed her. We don't tell stories about common, boring people; we tell stories about people who incite conflict or change. So even the mere concept to me of basing a character's identity or value around not wanting value is frankly kind of ridiculous.

There's just this strangely insidious underpinning to the story that power is inherently dangerous, even as it acknowledges that people who are NOT in power can very much suffer at the hands of those who do. So where's the moral and ethical reflection about what this means for the rest of us? What does that mean for minorities?

Think of the scene on the boat where Aleksander has Ivan kill off the nobility. The narrative wants you to see this moment as blackly humorous and awful, but stop for a moment and think about what happened there from his perspective. This is a man who spent centuries watching his people get killed and enslaved, and that isn't a false representation or manipulation from him, either. His statement is backed up both by what we see in the flashbacks and by other Grisha. Nobody created a safe haven for him and his people - he did that! He had to claw his way to the top, flatter, kill, and fuck his way through god knows how many noble houses, just to get to this moment where he could build a Little Palace. And it took him four hundred years just to get that! All while Grisha are dying!

And nobody did anything about it. Not the king, not the landholders, not even the peasantry. They were happy taking advantage of the Grisha's powers, of course, when Aleksander helped raise them up into a position of prominence, making them soldiers and enchanters. And even then, they're mocked! The army can't wait to get rid of them!

And then some noblewoman, who has enjoyed the benefits of her wealth and power, some of which were built on the backs of your people, sits there and tells you, the moment you take hold of the power everybody else has been grabbing for centuries, has the audacity to sit there and tell you that the world will hate Grisha and view him as a heretic?? When less than twenty years ago, your people were being killed right and left? When the enemy is still kidnapping and enslaving your people? When your own countrymen view you with fear and intrigue already? The audacity to sit there and frame it as a hypothetical when it's very much an actual reality still going on. Just look at the barely hidden seething rage and contempt on Barnes face when he delivers that quip about "needing to do that speech again." Motherfucker has been waiting YEARS for this moment, this revenge. And really, who can blame him...if you aren't wrapped up in the narrative wanting you to focus on just what he's doing to poor Alina.

The way the Grisha's situation is framed along with how the Darkling's descent into villainy is handled is so just incongruent to me. The pieces don't fit. You're asking me to see this man as completely irredeemable after you just showed me six episodes of Grisha being killed both for being what they are in the hopes of protecting Alina, after you showed me that Aleksander had already TRIED appealing to the protection of the crown by lending it his power, after making us see that lies and manipulation are the only way he and his mother have been able to survive as long as they have in a world that eradicated them. Where is the compassion in the narrative for that?

And okay, fine, you can do an irredeemable villain. You can do a Kilmonger-esque story with the Darkling, but that requires forcing your protagonists to empathize with the villain and change from it. But then I read ahead and...that doesn't happen?? She winds up walking away from it all at the end?? In fact, she even loses her power. And that's supposed to be a HAPPY ending? After we just saw how badly this minority was treated for how many centuries??

You know what it feels like? It feels like Leigh Bardugo read The Hunger Games, tried to replicate a Katniss, and then completely failed to understand the profound situational differences between her protagonist and that one. Katniss is a girl made extraordinary by her circumstances. She's not special herself other than the fact that she did the right thing at the right place at the right time and helped create the tipping point for a revolution that was already in the works before her. Katniss walking away from the world after makes sense because she's burned out after the war, but it also got its use from her. She helped make the revolution work; she showed up for the event while it was happening and did what she could. The situation was out of her control and power for the most part, and she still managed to rise the occasion.

Alina is NOT Katniss. She is inherently special. She is inherently powerful. She has the ability to create change and bring a new perspective that Aleksander has long given up on and which her country desperately needs. We know the world of the Hunger Games will be better because the creators of real change were always working behind the scenes behind Katniss. She was just their propaganda, their symbol. Alina is a symbol, but she is also a very real power. It's not an act of moral celebration for her to walk away from power at the end, namely because there's a whole minority class of people we still have to worry about. Putting a Grisha on the throne is no promise the country won't turn against them eventually, nor does that protect the hundreds of Grisha at the mercy of a superstitious peasantry and countries that will likely continue to invade them.

It's just...I dunno guys. It's frustrating because all the compelling elements are there in the characters and storyline, but it's like the author had a set of characters telling one story and then she had an entirely different plot in mind, and they just clash all over the place for me and become thematically inconsistent. But what really gets me is that she had seven years to think this shit over...and we're looking to get the same story all over again. Usually, it's a great thing to have an author involved in the show. This is a rare situation where I wonder if it hurts the chances of it improving.

[hellsbellschime]

Ok, so I’ve always noticed some of the racism on TVD , most notably the treatment of Marcel and Emily, and the founders day parade episode (which, as a Virginian I have to say that the episode made me low-key ashamed when I re-watched it years later). But it took me a while to catch onto the racism on Bonnie‘s character. I was wondering if you have done a meta about it and could link me to it, or if you could do one?

Well it only took me like a year but here ya go!

Despite the fact that The Vampire Diaries is a show that was ostensibly created for girls and young women, the show undeniably seems to lack a certain level of respect or basic interest in its female characters. And while every single significant female character demonstrates that misogynistic point of view in one way or another, one of the most unique, distinct, and apparent instances of The Vampire Diaries' sexism is on peak display with one of it's leading female characters, Bonnie Bennett.

Bonnie obviously occupies a particularly interesting role in the series because she's the only black leading character, and it's also hard to miss that The Vampire Diaries universe has a pretty apparent issue with it's non-white characters as well.

The race problem on TVD expresses itself in a few different, extremely blatant ways. The most obvious issue with people of color on The Vampire Diaries is that those who are actually PoC within the narrative itself are typically pushed to the sidelines and relegated to supporting players at best, but there is also an issue with presenting PoC performers who are white-passing as white characters.

None of the PoC characters in The Vampire Diaries get very good treatment, but the series seems to be exceptionally problematic when it comes to its presentation of black characters. While black people arguably get more representation than any other non-white characters in this fictional world, they are almost all outrageously attractive, extremely light-skinned, and conveniently lacking in any emotional needs or inner life that needs to be addressed within the narrative, seemingly designed to show up, perform whatever service is necessary, and once again fade into the background if not just be killed off entirely.

This is an issue with every black character in the series, but given that Bonnie is the most significant and prominent in the series, it comes as no surprise that she was affected the most intensely by these biases. It's one thing to be a black character, it's one thing to be a female character, but being a black female character in the TVD universe is exceptionally crippling. But how exactly did the misogynoir of The Vampire Diaries completely neutralize Bonnie Bennett as a character?

Bonnie was mistreated, dismissed, and outright ignored in many big and small ways throughout the course of the show. But, a lot of that treatment can be pretty easily sorted into a few categorizations. The Vampire Diaries went through a pretty seismic shift from the start of the show to the end, but it has always been a series that falls primarily into two genres, the supernatural thriller genre and the romance genre.

The show pretty clearly transformed from a show that was firstly a supernatural story with a romantic subgenre into an almost entirely romantic story with a supernatural backdrop, but it's safe to say that the vast majority of the plotlines were either focused on magic or love. And, it's not particularly difficult to see how Bonnie was forcibly excluded from a predominant storyline in each genre, even when it made absolutely no sense.

Bonnie was a completely inexperienced witch at the start of TVD, so her cluelessness and powerlessness made a certain amount of sense at that point. But by the end of season 2 at the very latest, it seems fully established that she is one of the most powerful living witches in the world, and for the bulk of the series it is plainly acknowledged that she is one of the most powerful witches who ever lived. Which is exactly why Bonnie's position in the narrative is baffling.

In quite a few instances, Bonnie's magical abilities seem to be somewhat inconsistent, at least in the sense that, if she can solve some of the biggest problems that the Mystic Falls gang is confronted with, then it's very odd that she can't solve the others. And while plenty of characters in TVD are occasionally used as plot devices rather than characters, Bonnie seems to be the one who is specifically designed to show up, fix what needs fixing, and then become set dressing once she's no longer necessary as the mystical solution to every unsolvable issue.

And this is actually a significant problem with the witches at large, but of course is most recognizable with Bonnie because she is the most prominent witch. While not all witches are women of color, it seems like they are far more represented in that faction of the magical world than in any other. So then, it's interesting that the witches are presented as servants of nature who are meant to selflessly restore order to the world without actually using their abilities for their own personal gain.

Of course there are plenty of witches who appear to use their powers for themselves, but still, it's incredibly meaningful that the lone black main character in the series is constantly sacrificing herself for the sake of the otherwise entirely white cast of characters. It's even more meaningful that she seems to willingly put herself in the line of fire every time, and it's also extremely telling that she suffers and even dies without complaint for the sake of other people.

And while TVD has never been the kind of show to linger on emotional moments for too long, Bonnie seems to stick out like a sore thumb in this circumstance as well. Most of the main and even supporting characters have moments where their pain is acknowledged and at least has a second to breathe, but there are quite a few situations where Bonnie should be upset but isn't, or where her emotional journey as a character literally takes place off screen.

This lack of acknowledgment and nearly complete omission of an internal emotional life that doesn't involve sacrificing herself for her friends only further makes Bonnie feel like a plot device instead of a character. And, while no character needs a romantic relationship to make their character complete, it is incredibly relevant that, on a series that was built largely on a foundation of romance and arguably became a completely romantically driven show by its end, only one of the female leads was pretty much never presented as a viable love interest.

Nearly every character is either threatened or charmed into doing what someone else wants them to at some point during The Vampire Diaries, however, Bonnie's charm-to-threaten ratio seems to lean very heavily in favor of threatening. That in itself wouldn't necessarily be a huge issue, but it seems to punish Bonnie in a way that is so severe that it's completely illogical.

Trying to intimidate Elena or Caroline, people who at best have the strength of a baby vampire and at worst are as powerful as a normal human, makes sense. But trying to strongarm the most powerful witch in the world instead of just convincing her to do what you ask seems like an incredibly dangerous and completely baffling decision.

And yet, that is how Bonnie is forced to do nearly everything that she doesn't want to do in eight seasons of the series. By the end of season 2, TVD has canonically confirmed that Bonnie is powerful enough to destroy Klaus Mikaelson, and yet people like Klaus, Katherine, and even vampires as young as Damon get Bonnie to do things by simply bullying or even assaulting her into doing it. And what does Bonnie typically do in response? Absolutely nothing.

At a certain point, the consistent contrast between Bonnie's mystical strength and the way that people treat her in order to use that strength becomes a pretty gaping plot hole. And while it's not unheard of for someone to try to sweet talk Bonnie into joining their team, it is almost always done by a character who is far less powerful than she is and who is completely irrelevant to the narrative at large.

In contrast to characters like Elena and Caroline, the distinction between them becomes even more obvious. Perhaps a thin argument could be made that because Elena is a doppelganger that makes her a tad more unique, but when one of the most powerful creatures on the planet was wrapped around Caroline's finger, it really begs the question, why wasn't anyone ever as invested or even obsessed with Bonnie as they were with the other two female leads on the series?

After all, Elena's love was consistently treated as if it was the greatest prize that anyone could possibly win, and the two male leads were completely obsessed with her and willing to do anything they could to try to win her over. And despite the fact that Elena was at the center of the love triangle that was a significant driving force behind the story for the entire series, she still managed to score a few love interests that weren't Salvatores throughout the show's eight seasons as well.

And, while Caroline was actually treated as more of the reject love interest in comparison to the unattainable Elena, her record with romance is also incredibly varied. Even though she was portrayed at best as the consolation prize and at worst the abuse victim, she did have some sort of romantic relationship with the two male leads in the show. Or at least, that is how The Vampire Diaries chose to portray it.

In addition to her horrorshow with Damon and her incredibly brief marriage with Stefan, Caroline is also a love interest for Klaus, Matt, Tyler, and disgustingly, Alaric. Arguably the only main male character who doesn't serve as Caroline's love interest or potential love interest at any point is Jeremy.

Although this laundry list of love interests can be partially excused by the fact that Caroline is characterized as someone who wants to date a lot, the contrast bet0ween characters like Caroline and Elena and characters like Bonnie is astonishing.

Over a nearly decade-long run, Bonnie's only legitimate leading men are Jeremy, Elena's kid brother who Bonnie will willingly die for but who also prefers a literal dead person over her at one point, and Enzo, her epic love romance that comes about at the very end of the series in a relationship that almost entirely develops off-screen.

Of course, female characters do not need love interests to validate their characterization or very existence, however in an environment where every single barely significant supporting character seems to get at least two love interests, it's incredibly telling that Bonnie Bennett gets two important love stories in eight seasons of storytelling.

It seems even more relevant that the show seemingly went out of its way to sidestep almost any and all opportunities for romance in Bonnie's character arc. Whether it was Kol, Kai, or Damon Salvatore, there were quite a few instances where there was a clear and easy route to develop a love interest for Bonnie in a way that made sense and had a pretty solid amount of audience support, and yet the series always went out of its way to avoid it.

In stark contrast, Caroline is still seen as a viable option for a burgeoning love story when she's pregnant, and Elena is an acceptable love interest when she's literally unconscious. And yet, in a series that began with romance as its secondary genre and that evolved into a romance series with a supernatural backdrop, Bonnie is supposedly not as appealing of a love interest as Elena and Caroline regardless of any circumstances, no matter how insane.

If these issues existed in a vacuum then they might be excusable, but considering how poorly The Vampire Diaries treated its female characters and black characters, it's pretty much impossible to avoid the reality that Bonnie Bennett's entire character arc was likely hamstrung by the fact that she was a black girl.

In any reasonable circumstances, Bonnie would have arguably been at the center of every single supernatural storyline, and she logically would have been a far more appealing love interest to any powerful characters in the series. But instead she spent the vast majority of her screentime with her inner characterization ignored, her personal development unexplored, and serving as little more than a glorified deus ex machina who didn't even want her friends to bother mourning her when she literally sacrificed her life for them.

Representation was always an issue in The Vampire Diaries universe, and unfortunately it seems like Bonnie was the definition of their token black character. Although the series had eight entire years to course correct and had many seasons where they were desperate for new ideas and decent character development, the racism and misogyny of the series seemingly prevented them from ever tapping into the enormous untapped potential of someone who should have been one of their flagship lead characters.

[rosesastrology]

Dejanira (157) - The victim

Dejanira shows where we feel victimised in life. Aspects tend to be more important here than signs and houses, though those do give a general image. Conjunctions tend to manifest in enhancing the planet Dejanira is in conjunct to. Dejanira conjunct Mars, for example, tends to signify that the native is a victim of their Mars- this could manifest in various ways. A water Mars conjunct dejanira could signify that the native represses their anger and is a victim to their own emotions, it could even indicate self harm. Mars conjunct dejanira in general usually talks about being a victim to anger or sexual relationships.

* Keep in mind that the aspects tend to change certain interpretations depending on the aspect, planets involved, degree, orb, etc.

Dejanira in the signs:

Dejanira in Aries: One of the harder positions to have Dejanira in would be Dejanira in Aries, in my opinion. Out of experience and observations, Dejanira tends to repress the native’s sense of self and leads to a life of self discovery with eventual acceptance (in the best case). These people can have short tempers but in general, natives often suppress their anger and passions. They repress this part of themselves. They tend to have bold dreams, and may feel enslaved their own saviours and passions in a way. Often the native struggles with self-acceptance and self-care. They are usually a victim to the self, quite literally. A theme in their life seems to be growth. The growth they go through is messy, it is a struggle and it doesn’t feel as though it helps (even if it does). They get stripped from the thing that brings them happiness time and time again until they actualise their independence and sense of self-acceptance.

Dejanira in Taurus: These natives tend to struggle with love and they’re prone to abusive relationships. The abuse can manifest in multiple ways, even materially (partner breaking their stuff, a partner who always gambles, etc). These natives may be very attractive, and prone to these types of abuse. They tend to be used when they really only want security, preferably on all fronts. If this dejanira does not manifest in the love area (due to aspects and houses, etc) it usually manifests in poverty or richness, of which the native needs to learn. Whether through love or through materials, the native feels as though they are victims of stability and safety- they often feel unstable, unsafe and unprotected.

Dejanira in Gemini: This could very easily manifest in being verbally abused, bullied, misled, topic of taboo or gossip. On the other hand, the native may be very unique to the point of being a loner and no one talking to them. This may cause them to feel alone. These natives feel as though they are a magnet for others to criticise and judge. They often feel misunderstood and as though others are laughing at their misfortune or mistakes. They usually don’t fit into a traditional school and are usually the subject of bullying when they’re young.

Dejanira in Cancer: While this could signify child abuse, I noticed that it often signifies parents who seem to be taking care of the native but are never actually there for them. The native may have had a nice childhood, but never developed a true relationship with their family. They don’t feel as though they truly have one. The native is usually very independent and tends to shut off their emotions partly, especially to their own children or friends. This is the type of person who does not cry in front of others willingly- usually.

Dejanira in Leo: These people tend to have given up on their chance of being in the spotlight. They’re endlessly selfless, both in their career and love life. They give and give and still blame themselves when things go wrong. They’re often pessimistic people. They’re scared of others leaving them, insecure, and generally need validation to feel whole.

Dejanira in Virgo: These people are overly critical of others and themselves. True perfectionists. They will not led their mistakes slide. They overthink their every move. They don’t allow themselves a breather. Sometimes this manifests in health issues, but usually it manifests in an overly critical and perfectionistic individual. They tend to be too practical, which can be the downfall of their own emotions.

Dejanira in Libra: native seeks beauty in everything but themselves. They tend not to care about themselves. They seek a sense of stability and feel as though they’re victims of the law/certain rules that were set for them. Their thoughts and their ways often get obstructed.

Dejanira in Scorpio: this usually manifests in extreme situations. I’ve often seen it manifest different types of abuse and crime within the life of the native. Sexual abuse seems to pull through consistently here, either that or exploit of the native by another person. They tend to get themselves involved in darker matters.

Dejanira in Sagittarius: the native does not fit into an average education system. Their parents mabe business people, or otherwise often absent from their lives. The native usually travels a lot, whether physically or mentally through escapism. They tend to try to run away from their problems but they always catch up. They’re impatient, they want what’s best but they want it now. They worry a lot.

Dejanira in Capricorn: this position often shows up in the charts of successful celebrities. It usually means the native feels enslaved or tied to their work. It can also mean they feel like a victim of society or the social system. On the other hand, this position often shows up in workless people too.

Dejanira in Aquarius: the native feels like a victim in groups. They may be a victim of bullying. They tend to be very different from other children when they’re young. They’re overly unique, or so they think. They tend to ‘just want to be normal’. They’re often misunderstood and have opposing or even radical opinions.

Dejanira in Pisces: similar to Scorpio, the native is prone to abuse and addictions. Bad coping mechanisms are very common with this placement. Often they feel as though their spiritual, creative or emotional gifts were repressed when they were younger.

[ptsdawarenessmonth]

PTSD Awareness Month: Everything You Need to Know

Did you know that June is, among other things, PTSD Awareness Month?

Almost 3.7% of Americans over the age of 13 are diagnosed with PTSD in a given year. While that may seem like a small percentage, that’s millions of people.

Many people are unfamiliar with the details of PTSD. They may think that PTSD can only happen as the result of combat or a serious accident.

But this isn’t true. There are many causes of PTSD, and a lack of awareness can lead to many people not seeking or getting the help that they need.

During PTSD Awareness Month, we want to take this opportunity to inform people about this serious mental health condition. Keep reading to learn all about PTSD.

What Is PTSD?

PTSD is short for post-traumatic stress disorder. It’s a condition that may start after someone experiences any kind of traumatic event.

When we experience trauma, our brains change. Trauma can lead to depression, personality disorders, substance abuse, and even physical health problems.

There are many treatment methods for PTSD, but not all of them will be effective for every patient. Treatment is almost always necessary for PTSD recovery.

What Causes PTSD?

As we mentioned before, many people are misguided into thinking that PTSD is only the result of combat.

There’s a reason for this. PTSD used to be referred to as shell shock or battle fatigue. These names lead to the belief (and represent the old common belief) that it’s a mental disorder that’s unique to soldiers.

It’s true that many veterans who experience intense combat situations do experience PTSD. These situations are traumatizing, and they may have involved personal injury, the death of friends, and terrifying or traumatizing sights and sounds.

That said, there are other things that can contribute to PTSD, and some of them are surprising.

Lesser-Known but Common PTSD Causes

In short, anything that can cause trauma can also cause PTSD. This will be different for every person. Something that isn’t traumatic for someone who has proper support structures may be traumatic for someone who doesn’t.

One of the top causes of PTSD is sexual assault. This impacts people of all genders, though more women report PTSD from sexual assault than men. Domestic abuse or other abusive situations may also result in PTSD.

PTSD can also be caused by things like car accidents, the death of a friend or family member, or witnessing an accident.

Many people experience unexpected PTSD from childhood trauma. This PTSD may not show up until adulthood.

This is often confusing for people who are suffering from it. Because there isn’t as much information on this kind of PTSD, they may not have enough support.

People who were exposed to violence or abuse as children may develop normally but experience the after-effects in adulthood. This can result in the fear of others, intense flashbacks, or emotional memories that are difficult to process.

Even things that may not seem traumatic can cause PTSD. Poorly handled divorce can cause a child to develop PTSD in the future, as can any instance in which the family structure changes without warning.

Symptoms and Effects of PTSD

There are several common symptoms that people with PTSD experience. If you know someone with PTSD, you may recognize them.

The first symptom, and often one of the symptoms that therapists aim to treat, is avoidance. This means that the person with PTSD will avoid anything that could trigger their trauma, as well as any thoughts of the traumatic event or feeling. This prevents the person from processing the memory.

People with PTSD may experience angry outbursts as a result of flashbacks or feeling misunderstood. Because the trauma replays, it’s normal for someone to be emotionally exhausted.

People with PTSD will often experience intrusive thoughts. These thoughts include flashbacks, involuntary memories, or bad dreams. They’re often so vivid that the person can’t tell that they’re not real.

Complex PTSD

Complex PTSD is different. While it includes all of the symptoms of standard PTSD, it also presents symptoms that are more common in other mental health conditions.

These can include:

Attachment issues (both anxious and avoidant)

Poor emotional control

Hopelessness

Isolation

Thoughts of suicide

Emotional flashbacks

Complex PTSD is more common amongst people who experienced trauma as children, experienced frequent trauma or abuse, or experienced trauma at the hands of a loved one.

PTSD Treatment

There is help for people with PTSD. With a combination of therapy and medication, many people with PTSD heal and live normal lives.

Exposure therapy is common for PTSD patients. It allows patients to experience aspects of the traumatic event without re-exposing them to the trauma itself.

There are several kinds of exposure therapy, but EMDR is one form that’s growing in popularity.

Common medications for PTSD include SSRIs and anti-anxiety medications. Patients may also benefit from mood stabilizers.

Helping and Raising PTSD Awareness

PTSD Awareness Month is the perfect time to help out with awareness in your own community.

This doesn’t have to be a grand gesture. You can start by informing people on social media about PTSD and sharing helpful information. There are always infographics going around on platforms like Instagram that make PTSD information sharable.

If you notice someone dismissing someone else’s PTSD, talk to them. Make sure that they’re informed and talk about how they may be perpetuating a harmful stigma against this misunderstood mental health condition.

People with PTSD need support if they’re going to seek treatment. Be part of the solution.

PTSD Awareness Month: Stay Informed

PTSD Awareness Month is the perfect time to inform yourself about PTSD and support any friends or family members with PTSD. If these symptoms and causes sound familiar to you, it might also be time for you to seek your own treatment.

At the Mental Health Center of San Diego, we want to help. We offer both therapy and medication assistance to help anyone suffering from PTSD. Our goal is to help you heal. Reach out today to talk to a compassionate care representative so you can start your journey to wellness.

[secretgamergirl]

A Little Horrifying Primer on Transphobes

Some time ago, I put together a Little Fact Checking Primer on Trans People, as a basic resource for disabusing people of some of the many completely ridiculous yet absurdly widespread beliefs about trans people that simply have no basis whatsoever in reality. And wouldn’t you know it, every single lie exposed in that primer is not only still widely believed, but is presently being used as a basis to sign some absolutely horrific human rights abuses into law. So it’s high time I follow that up, in this case focused more on who keeps actively spreading these lies and why. I’m going to try and keep things as light as I can here, but we’re going to be looking at the most monstrous side of human nature, so apologies in advance if this is a dark read.

First, let me just note that there are two things I don’t plan to do in this piece. I’m not going to waste time debunking the arguments of the people I’m highlighting (much of this is already covered in my earlier primer, others have done the work in cases where I haven’t, and frankly these people’s claims should be self-evidently utter nonsense to begin with). I am also going to be very selective in what I link to, or even share related images of, as I would frankly not like to fill a post on a blog I generally try to keep safe for all audiences with media directly dealing with, for instance, child sexual assault, and much of the relevant information also involves stochastic terrorism against innocent people, and I would prefer not to throw more fuel onto such fires.

Transphobes lie constantly, about everything.

To some degree this is obvious. We’re talking about people who scaremonger about the possibilities of trans women dominating competitive sports and assaulting people in restrooms, despite the status quo already reflecting the conditions they insist would make these inevitibilities for decades and centuries respectively, and their grim visions never once having come to pass, and also constantly insisting that the woman in the photo below is actually a man, going further to say this is evident to anyone giving her the merest glance.

It goes beyond that though. There’s at least a little plausible deniablity in claims like this, or that “science is on their side” if they were simply uninformed about the world they live in, never actually looking into what laws exist, what science actually says, and never actually meeting a trans person or even seeing a picture of one of us. I’m talking really bold lies here. Like wholecloth fabricating a story that a convicted murder was trans, including anecdotes about wigs dresses and a planned name change, in a major newspaper. Or to cite an old favorite of mine, the time a pack of bigots walked up to a crowd of people peacefully picketing a transphobic legal proposal, started roughing them up and taking closeup photos of members of the crowd to stalk online when they got home, got sufficiently riled up for one to straight up assault an innocent person half her size, filmed the whole thing, uploaded it to youtube, and used stills of that assault as acomanying photos when they went home to write articles about the assailant being a “grandmother” attacked by rowdy trans women. And yes, they did monkey’s paw my wish to see that specific image on newspapers. Interesting side note, when it came to real public light that J.K. Rowling endorsed this sort of hatred, it was because she accidentally pasted some profanity laden rambling about how the imagined moral character of the other party in that incident, years after the fact, into a post praising a child’s fan art of her work.

To be a little less niche, transphobes can’t get enough of spreading the lie that the young fellow in this photo is a girl. Specifically a trans girl, providing proof that all their scaremongering about the dastardly threat of trans girls in competitive sports has finally come to pass.

To be fully clear, that’s a man (or a boy if you want to split hairs about him being 17 in that photo). Mack Beggs. A rather insidious choice for this sort of story, considering the actual context for that photo. See, Beggs attended high school in Texas, during a (still ongoing as I write this) period wherein that particular state had caved to this exact sort of propaganda, and in order to head off a wholly imagined wave of trans girls competing on girls’ sports teams, and enacted a law mandating that in all such competitions must compete under whatever gender is stated on their birth certificates. And as it happens, the first, and to my knowledge ONLY time this has come up was with Beggs here, who again, is a man, as no one with a grip on reality could argue against, has “female” on his birth certificate. Which is another way of saying he is a trans man. The guys in the same boat as trans women who we talk about a whole hell of a lot less because their existence is extremely inconvenient to the majority of transphobic propaganda. Case in point. And this is all information it is really impossible to come across if you’re coming across this photo in any sort of respectable source. Take this story, which is as unambiguous about this as you can get. And yet, in the very comments section of that story, there they are. Carrying on like this story about a trans guy, forced by a transphobic law to compete as a girl, which he absolutely did not want, and received horrific threats over, using phrases like “female to male” and bringing up that he was assigned female at birth and is on testosterone-based HRT, is about a trans woman cheating the system. Or to quote word for word, “Now also transgender female want to be male also compete in female sport. biological born“ That’s not “being confused,” that’s standing next to you in a white desert and complaining about being adrift in a black ocean, bald-faced, not even trying to be convincing just make a power play, lying through one’s teeth.

I could spend this whole article on just this point. Lying about who they are, various people’s falsified credentials, whole websites full of “anonymous parents of children who think they’re trans” turning out to be one single woman documenting the abuse of her very much trans son, or of course the people behind the whole “bathroom bill” panic candidly admitting it was all based on utter fiction. I do have other points to cover though.

Transphobes are firmly entrenched in the media.

It is extremely difficult to find oneself in a position of having to explain to people that a particular group of people is effectively in control of press outlets, as that is rather classically a claim conspiracy theorists absolutely love to toss around at various marginalized groups (including trans people hilariously enough, but of course the most common and lingering version of this is the antisemitic variant). I really can’t get around it here though. Specifically in the U.K., you honestly can say that transphobes control the media. I already touched on this with the assault case I mentioned above and the fabricated story about the murderer, but this is a pretty well-documented situation. I mean, even The Guardian calls out The Guardian on this, and that’s the outlet that gets the most attention because it’s the one with the most otherwise respected name, but every paper in the country has been running transphobic propaganda pieces on a weekly if not daily basis for years now, and while they do get reprimanded by watchdog groups and have mass walk-outs over the worst of it, it’s not like there’s some governing body with the authority to step in about it. Meanwhile the BBC is constantly inviting diehard zealots like Graham Linehan to news programs where he compares being trans to being a nazi, and hosting debates where someone just sits down and repeatedly chants the word “penis” at a trans woman.

Things are better in the rest of the world, but we still have right-wing creeps like Jesse Singal both writing horrific propaganda pieces (we’ll get back to that one) and blackballing trans writers out of covering trans issues ourselves (and personally stalking the hell out of those of us who try). We’ve got our Joe Rogans and Tucker Carlsons out there (no way in hell I’m linking videos here, have a real information link and a still).

The line between diehard transphobes and straight-up nazis basically does not exist.

What even is there to say here? You can easily poke around havens for nazi activity for yourself and compare the particular unique vocabulary used there to the primary bastion of anti-trans hate speech on the internet (the “feminism” section of what was originally a site for parenting tips before violent fascists took the forums over) or just peruse the follows of the thousands of people I’ve blocked on social media and see if you can sort out a clear division in the networks of channers with frog avatars and the accounts with names like GoodieXXrealwoman, or you can read up on Gab and Spinster, the two twitter alternatives that are just different portals to the same server, set up by the same guy. Maybe do some research into “the LGB Alliance,” or WoLF but any way you slice it the only real difference to be found is the general purpose nazis take a little time off now and then to watch borderline pedophilic anime and the really dedicated transphobes think to use language that sounds vaguely well-educated and left-leaning. I mean, this came from the “feminist” side of the fence:

And not to belabor the point here, but the ones claiming to be a bunch of “feminist mums” sure do let the mask slip any time they’re confronted with the fact that “women” includes black women, and oh just have a whole thread about all the weird conspiratory theories these people have about how trans people’s whole existence is some sort of Jewish plot for world domination. I swear a few months ago they were all passing around a story about some bank having an above average number of trans employees and they were all just “and we all know who controls the banks, right?” about it.

Transphobes endorse an awful lot of people who are openly pro-pedophila.

This is the part where I am really loath to link the many many specific examples I have on hand. Or to talk about this at all for reasons of good taste. Or, for that matter, to talk about this in a tumblr post when there’s an ongoing problem of people with backgrounds strongly tied to this site making baseless accusations of pedophilia against every queer person they can find, so let me be very clear just what I’m talking about while avoiding anything too graphic.

That’s James Cantor. Transphobes love him for being one of the closest things they have to a scientist on their side. And I am featuring him in a screenshot here showing that he is followed by current queen of the transphobes J.K. Rowling, while speaking to both another big name in transphobic circles, Debra Soh, and based on their names, what I’m guessing is at least one straight-up nazi. And in case you think “the P” he’s talking about adding to LGBT (or “GLBT” as weird anti-queer bigots who also have issues with women often write it) might stand for “poly” or “pan” he’s all too happy to clarify that.

This is the entire thrust of Cantor’s work and life. He is the world’s biggest pedophile rights advocate. He wants it declassified as a mental disorder, all stigma on it removed, and tirelessly pushes forward the idea that the majority of.. people who feel compelled to sexually assault children are good people who present no potential harm to anyone and should in fact be lauded.

I am not generally one to claim that someone with a PhD is spewing out questionable garbage with regard to their field, but the reason I am aware of Cantor at all is that other transphobes keep trying to hold up a particular post on his blog as "a study” (which it is not) that offers “proof” (in the form of a blurry jpeg of basically some random numbers) of some ridiculous quackery about how trans kids will “grow out of it” if exposed to conversion therapy (another way of saying torture), which Cantor himself seems to be pushing, so I am somewhat skeptical of his academic chops. And I am, of course, REALLY suspicious that all these other bigots gravitate to him purely because they’re that desperate to find anyone with a PhD in anything that backs them up against literally every scientist in a relative field, to the point that they merely forgive his particular advocacy they are plainly all aware of, particularly when such a common fig leaf used by transphobes is “keeping children safe from sexual deviants.”

And of course, Cantor is most often invoked when coming to the defense of Kenneth Zucker. This Kenneth Zucker.

Those are separate papers. Zucker isn’t controversial though for organizing panels to discuss how attractive people agree small children are (at least not exclusively). Mostly, he’s known for running a conversion therapy center which subjected gay and trans children to various sorts of torture in an effort to “fix” them, which at least for those trans "patients” I have spoken with involved a fair amount of having them strip completely naked and talking a lot about their genitals.

Zucker is something of a controversial figure with the transphobic scene, as they are extremely on board with his sexual torture of queer children, but he does actual work (for some value of the term) involving trans people and thus is not able to commit as fully as they would prefer to making life horrible for trans people, due to a professional obligation to acknowledge reality now and then. As an aside, the similarly positioned Ray Blanchard, while not to my knowledge particularly interested in the attractiveness of children, lives in a similar purgatory of trying to reconcile his career, bigotry, and sexual hangups, yielding compromises like this:

Of course, that’s just looking at the straws transphobes grasp at when looking for scientific credibility. Real leaders of the movement include Germaine Greer, author of The Beautiful Boy, which is about what you are afraid it might be, and features a very young child in a cover feature he did not consent to posing for. Or Julie Bindel, who among other things is rather infamous for writing whole articles on subjects like whether a teenage girl she came across maybe has a huge penis you can totally see if you really squint at her skirt. Again, I will not share a link to go along with that one.

Transphobes terrorize and attempt to defund charities and other unambiguously good organizations.

Graham Linehan, previously best known for cowriting some sitcoms and possibly spending a year angling to get into my pants so awkwardly I didn’t pick up on it is now best known for trying to pull the plug on a children’s charity, in a story that somehow also involves Donkey Kong. Well, and the interview about nazis. And possibly the other interview about “defending me from nazis” until it got into his head that I might not be as young and hot as he imagined. Rather not link to a far right extremist youtube channel though.

There’s also a current effort to replace Stonewall (an organization named after the location where a pair of trans women kicked off a riot which is generally agreed to be the start of the LGBT+ rights movement) as the UK’s primary LGBT+ rights organization with the “LGB Alliance.” The hate group mentioned above, with the skull face and the rifle. Closest I can find to an article on that effort on short notice that isn’t propaganda.

Transphobes paper areas in truly disgusting propaganda.

I don’t want to directly link to grown adults skulking around children’s playgrounds and bathrooms plastering surfaces with mass printed stickers of crudely drawn penises, but would encourage you to read this very long post, being sure to load all the images, to really understand how deeply strange this behavior gets.

Finally, I cannot stress this enough, this really extreme behavior I’m citing, and the specific people involved in the examples I’m giving, these aren’t random cranks on the fringe of things. The people going on televised panel discussions, writing up news stories, and testifying before lawmakers in efforts to pass horrifically discriminatory if not literally life-endangering laws (there is a major ongoing effort to legally end all medical care for trans people, and I don’t just mean care directly relating to being trans) are literally the same people involved in the sexualization of children, nazi collaborations, and roving gangs assaulting people in the street. At a bare minimum I urge people, when booking guests and handing out writing contracts, to do background checks and see if they’re platforming actual terrorists. If we could actually bring legal consequences to bear against the worst of this, that would be great too. As things stand though, the whole world is just consistently citing a bunch of racist, woman-hating, serial liars with no real credentials, and questionable attitudes towards the sexual abuse of children, as “trusted experts” and refusing to seat actual trans people or people who have legitimately committed lifetimes to academic and practical work with trans people any seats at the table.

[mtsainthelens]

dune live blog 1

I was debating doing a live blog, because Dune is a very old and studied series. Everything there is to say about it has probably already been said. I know I’ll be making some fairly inane statements that people who have never read the book won’t care about and that people who have finished the book also won’t care about. This live blog mostly exists for my own benefit. This probably could have gone in a notebook somewhere. But eventually I decided that there is some value in seeing someone react to a series for the first time, even if it’s a kind of smug, poorly-aged remark everyone can laugh at. On the other hand, wrong predictions might even be more insightful than correct ones. Fresh eyes are good, I think.

I’m at page 100 right now, so starting a little late - not really though, it’s a sci-fi book, so it’s taken me about this long to get situated. Most of my observations have been about things Jessica has said.

First of all, I love this woman. She’s balancing a lot of things and despite all she knows, she isn’t shown to have that much confidence in herself or her instincts. Her exchange with Yueh in the latest chapter kills me, where the text calls him a traitor every other sentence and all she can do is feel pity for him.

Another thing she mentioned in the exchange was her relationship with Duke Leto - the two sides of him, how sweet he could be and then how cold. She blames the latter on Leto’s father: “If only that old man had died when my Duke was born!”

I’m guessing generational curses may be a big theme in this, and that this line may be indicative of the way Jessica views Leto’s influence on Paul as well. I haven’t really seen how Jessica reacts to Paul being around Leto, but it doesn’t seem to be with great enthusiasm. Paul is being raised in the Bene Gesserit ways - he’s meant to take after his mother while taking over the responsibilities of his father. In a lot of ways, it seems like Leto himself is a hinderance to this process.

I was misunderstood on the meaning of concubine, and took it more to mean prostitute. I was forming a vision of Jessica in my head not unlike Magdalene, but I don’t think it holds up much now. There is a lot of religious subtext in this book. I’ve heard that Islam was apparently pretty intrinsic to the series, but unfortunately I can’t speak much to that. All I recognize is the young, unmarried woman with the son destined for greatness and supernatural ability. Treachery, also is not limited to Christianity, but all the talk of Yueh makes it seem like a significant parallel. (It’s also interesting how they didn’t hide the fact he was a traitor at all, even a little bit. still, they haven’t what exactly he’s done or will do.)

This is a small thing that I’m kind of proud of myself for picking up on, and the last thing I have to say about Jessica.

Page 49, Paul recalls how the Reverend Mother said “a ruler must learn to persuade and not to compel.”

Page 104, Jessica says “motivating people, forcing them to your will, gives you a cynical attitude towards humanity. It degrades everything it touched. If I made him do . . . this, then it would not be his doing.”

I didn’t understand the first statement until I read the second. Now it reads as though the difference between persuasion and compelling is that the former requires work and preserves the autonomy of the people involved. “Compel” and “motivating”, however, may be used interchangeably. I think this was a specific warning from the Reverend Mother to the Kwisatz Haderach. It’s a warning not to abuse the powers he’d have inherited from his mother when he ascends to leader - a unique predicament only he could be in.

Moving beyond that, I’m still a little vague on the political and business side of things, but I’m invested. My prediction is that the nephew of the Harkonnen will be set up as a foil to Paul? They’re all part of an empire, I know that much. I’m hoping we get to see what some of the battles look like - my original assumption was those would take up a lot of the book. Remains to be seen.

Also, what’s up with that knife?

[strangertheory]

"anti-Mileven"

I know you submitted this as a message and not an Ask, but I hope you don't mind if I answer your question with a longer post because this is a topic that is important to me but is complicated. I've meant to do a post about this, but kept putting it off because it is a very layered topic for me and my thoughts about Mileven are probably not what a lot of fans want to hear.

I respect that everyone develops an attachment to their preferred couples in stories for personal reasons, and as such any criticism of the dynamic between two characters that are dating can feel like a very personal criticism. I respect everyone's head-canons and favorite ships as sacred ground: I don't want to tell anyone how they should or should not relate to a story. That's unique to each of us as fans, and we will all enjoy Stranger Things for different reasons.

However: I do have some thoughts regarding the way that the narrative has established the dynamic between Mike and El. And I personally do not find their dynamic *as it currently is* to be one that is ideal for either of them yet.

I really care about Eleven and I really care about Mike. They are two of my favorite characters in the story.

To say that I'm "anti-Mileven" is a huge oversimplification of how I feel about Mike and El's dynamic.

I am very much anti:

overlooking the fact El has been treated as a lab rat and abused and isolated from society for the majority of her existence and her ignorance of her own identity and her own desires is repeatedly reinforced canonically. ("How do I know what I like?") El has spent only a few months out in the world beyond her cell at the lab and beyond Hopper's cabin, she knows very little about the world yet, and she is being taught much of what she now knows by her boyfriend who also happens to be one of the few people she interacts with in her daily life. The power difference and social difference between them is huge currently regardless of whether Mike is a nice kid with good intentions or not, and they are both fourteen years olds.

overlooking that it is superficial and not representative of a "deep" relationship to only kiss and make out with a significant other and not do other meaningful activities that establish a real day-to-day relationship (like hanging out with friends and other loved ones as a couple.) There's a popular misconception that the act of two people kissing is inherently romantic and a sign of emotional closeness. But kissing becomes romantic psychologically when two people share a deep affection for one another that is based on shared experiences and emotional and psychological connectedness. If two characters can be shown to care about one another without ever physically touching, they have the potential for a deep connection that is based on more than the thrill of physical affection. Give me a well-developed relationship first, and then kissing will seem romantic to me. Without an established psychological and emotional connection between characters, kissing is merely a superficial representation of the idea of intimacy between characters without any actual substance underneath. Sure that's what kids do when they're figuring out how dating and feelings and physical intimacy work and it's not harmful in itself provided that they are both comfortable with it, but keep this in mind within the context of the other concerns I list here.

trivializing Mike's dishonesty and blaming Hopper for Mike's lying when the truth is Mike could have easily explained to El that Hopper didn't want them spending as much time together and having some space would be better. El is well aware of Hopper's dislike for their time spent together. This should have been a very easy conversation. As Lucas rightfully asks as Mike is ranting about the situation he got himself into: "Why lie?" Good question, Lucas. Good question. El asks Mike this again later at the mall. "Why do you lie?" Mike stares back at her with an awkward expression, and does NOT answer her. Why is this answer not an easy one? Why has Mike still not addressed things with El? I think there is more going on here than just Hopper's threats.

I am very in favor of:

El learning more about who she is and what she wants to do with her life outside of the desires and expectations of other people.

Mike figuring out how to effectively express his thoughts and feelings honestly. He is clearly struggling to do this throughout season 3, and it is uncharacteristic of the kid who defiantly said and did what he wanted frequently in seasons 1 and 2. Clearly Mike is not comfortable and is nervous, which is understandable for someone exploring new emotionally vulnerable territory like dating for the first time, but he needs to learn to be honest and tell people how he is thinking and feeling or else he is also putting himself and his feelings and needs at risk and potentially establishing an unhealthy relationship that will hurt him and hurt others even if he doesn't mean to. Mike's nervousness is STILL present in the final goodbye scene in which Mike and El talk, and El tells him she loves him and kisses him. He is still stumbling over his words and anxious, and he seems notably confused after El kisses him. These small details are not trivial, they are clearly intentional.

Recognizing that Mike is the first person her age that was kind to El when she escaped the lab, and given that she has only known pain and abuse her entire life and has never known friendship let alone romance that her psychological readiness for understanding a romantic relationship is NOT the same as an ordinary 14 year old's and this cannot be stated enough.

Recognizing that societal pressures and personal insecurities might be a huge factor in how Mike clings to El's attention and affection for him, and that there is evidence in the story that supports this interpretation. We know that Mike is bullied frequently, and that there is a layer of homophobia often involved. (Even if James and Troy were speaking rudely about Will, they were still directly confronting Mike. The implication is there.) We know that Lucas yelled at Mike "No Mike. You're blind. Blind because you like that a girl's not grossed out by you!" This reveals that Lucas knows that Mike is insecure and wants validation. Just because Mike has a desperate desire to be loved and liked by a girl does not mean that his appreciation of El's attention is based on his genuine romantic affection for her. Mike might be dating El because he enjoys the attention, he likes being liked, and he likes how having a girlfriend makes him feel more accepted and normal.

Recognizing that every moment that Mike has tried to share something that he is passionate about with El (the Yoda figurine, the dinosaurs) she has been completely disinterested. Since El has no cultural connection to the pop culture stories Mike loves and she lived in the Lab her entire life, it makes perfect sense that she will have no interest in these toys. Her lack of interest in what Mike is passionate about, however, is worth noting: not because it's a bad thing, but because it's just one of many reasons they are "not even from the same planet" and cannot bond and connect easily. El has lived an incredibly different life from Mike, has suffered through so much, and is still learning about the outside world and about herself. She is severely behind in social and personal development. She needs time to learn and to grow and to heal so she can live her best life and recover from what she has been through. (She doesn't really care about your Star Wars toys, Michael, because she just learned what a phone is and is processing a lot of other things right now.)

*I want to credit @kaypeace21 for pointing out many of these particular observations listed above: you can read her very detailed and extensive analysis in her post here: El is Not in Love with Mike.

These are just a few of many thoughts I have regarding Mike and El's dynamic together, and why I find the romanticization and idealization of their dating relationship to be more suited to fan-canon and fanfiction. For El to have a relationship with Mike that I would personally enjoy and appreciate, the story would need to convincingly allow her to establish a notably better understanding of who she is and what she wants, and have time to heal from her trauma and learn a lot more about the outside world. While I suspect that the Byers moving away will be very difficult for Will, in many ways I think it will benefit El tremendously and I hope that she is given more opportunities to learn and to grow.

I also agree with @hawkinsschoolcounselor 's hypothesis that Mike is projecting his feelings for Will onto El. It's impossible for me to see Mike's dynamic with El as entirely separate from Mike's relationship with Will because El was found in the woods when they were looking for Will in season 1, El helped everyone find Will in the Upside Down and saved his life, and El reappears at the end if season 2 and saves Will from the Mindflayer. Until season 3, El's appearance in Mike's life has been directly tied to Will's survival and safety. I do not think this is a trivial aspect of El's narrative. El's importance within the larger story being told is repeatedly tied back to what Will is dealing with. The reason that El and Will's narratives are so deeply intertwined has not been revealed in the story yet, but I suspect that there are some important aspects of El and Will's stories that haven't been fully revealed yet that will bring all of these seemingly isolated plot threads together. The creators of Stranger Things repeatedly tie El and Will together visually and narratively (re: @kaypeace21), and I believe there is a very specific reason for this.

I look forward to seeing what happens in season 4. Whether my interpretation of El and Mike's dynamic is fair or not, I trust the writers have a compelling next chapter in their story for us all to enjoy.

[m-y-fandoms]

Danganronpa 1 Girls: adopting an abused child - Headcanons

Request: If it's okay, the DR1 girls with an adopted child that was previously in an intensely abusive living situation? The kid is extremely traumatized by the experience, and is very quiet, fearful and suffers frequent breakdowns and nightmares.

Part 2: Oh! Adopted abused child for DR1 girls anon here... To specify, headcanons.

Of course! A unique request. I’m gonna write this assuming they’ve had the child in their home for a while, maybe a few years, and you can headcanons the girls’ partners versus if they are single moms on your own. This will just be how the DR1 girls treat their adopted, previously abused child. - Mod Kokichi

WARNINGS: past child abuse implied/referenced. Trauma/panic attacks and anxiety

Aoi Asahina:

The queen of three things: sweets, sports, and positive attitudes.

She would definitely use these three skills/interests of hers to help the previously abused child she adopted.

First of all, she’d chosen this child in particular because she saw their profile and asked about them. Her big heart wouldn’t allow her to abandon a child that’s clearly been through a lot of suffering, especially not after her own experience in the killing game.

Despite whether or not she had a partner, she’d want kids when she was able to responsibly care for them. Also, her experience as a big sister would prepare her for kids a little better than an only child.

Sweets: having a panic attack? Here’s some home-made cookies. Bad day at school? Let’s strap on an apron and bake together tonight. Stayed up late with insomnia or nightmares? Well good news, doughnuts for breakfast the next morning!

Sports: being athletic and active herself, Hina would encourage her child to enter team sports to get better at socializing and just learn important motor skills, but she wouldn’t force them into it, knowing crowds or loud noises may overstimulate them.

Maybe she’d have them start small. Table tennis or private swimming lessons. When and if they were ever ready, soccer or lacrosse on the school’s team.

That’s not to say she wouldn’t love and appreciate a more artistically or mathematically inclined child. Sports or not, she’d find a way to use their inherent skills to better them. She’s not one to give up on the people she cares about.

Positive attitudes: slip-ups and panic attacks are nothing to get discouraged about! She would stay up all night with a child going through anxiety, assure them that this too shall pass, and use positive reinforcement.

Sakura Ogami:

Another mom who would seek out sports as a way to ease her child’s suffering.

But unlike Asahina, she’d see sports as more of a way to teach perseverance and self-discipline rather than social skills.

She would want them to learn some type of martial art. It would teach balance, strength, inner-peace, and erase self-doubt.

Plus, learning martial arts would help teach self-defense. She would never want her child to go out until the word helpless and not knowing how to defend themselves should they absolutely have to.

She would enjoy reading to her child at night, and talking at length with them about what was bothering them. She would let them cry onto her strong shoulders, and offer stoic wisdom. She’s like, super good at giving advice.

Loves them unconditionally, is fiercely protective and loyal. A very supportive and loving mother.

Shells out the cash for any and all therapy they need, physical and psychological. She doesn’t see mental illness as a weakness.

Celestia Ludenberg:

This mom, instead of teaching a child to ignore trauma and bullies - be they internalized and metaphorical or external and corporeal - would teach her child how to face their obstacles head on.

Bullies at school? Well we’ll handle that. “They won’t be a problem anymore, trust me.”

PTSD and past trauma? Well we will sit here and talk about these weaknesses until they become our strengths. “What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger, and you’ll be undefeatable after all you’ve been through.”

This child will be spoiled, but not in a bratty way. They will simply wear the best clothes, eat the most expensive food, and attend the best schools.

Celestia would play endless card and board games with her child to keep their mind off of darker thoughts.

“Moooom, you cheated again!”

“Oh? Did I~?”

“Yes!” A disgruntled but reluctantly amused smile.

“Well~ I think it is simply that you don’t know how to play this game yet. But one day, you will.”

Kyoko Kirigiri:

At first, it may take her a while to open up and truly be the best mother she can be.

But she understands wanting more from a parent-child relationship, and after a while of doubting herself, would buckle down and do what she needs to do.

Wouldn’t be as pushy with talking about triggering subjects, or entirely comfortable giving advice either.

But is a terrific listener/observer. She walks in after work and sees her kid crying alone in their room. They’d remembered something scary, something they didn’t want to think about, they said.

“I see...well, do you want to talk about it?” And she’d sit there by their bedside until she was sure they didn’t need her any longer.

If single: definitely has a big house, a reputable maid, a nanny, a nice car in the driveway, but still insists on personally packing her kids lunch with a little encouraging sticky note inside.

If she has a partner: can be convinced to be more involved and slowly but surely becomes more hands-on and soccer-momish, minivan and all. Sees her partner’s own parenting skills as a challenge to step it up. Kyoko has all the makings of a great mother, she just won’t let herself see it. A partner would be just the push she needs: a Watson to her Holmes.

Toko Fukawa (I watched the anime and played the three main games so if her personality changes drastically in ultra despair girls and I’m way off I apologize):

Toko knows childhood regret, trauma, nightmares. She understands feeling isolated and different. She would be a very clingy and coddling mother.

If you ever touched a hair on her child’s head, you better just execute yourself before she does.

Sure she’s not the most confident or kind person on her own, but we’ve seen how devoted to and possessive she is of people she cares about.

She’d read to her child nightly, but only what she deemed to be the best children’s literature, of course.

Would love her child more than she loved her own partner. She would feel needed, like someone depended on her for once instead of her tagging along behind someone else.

I think as she boosts her child’s confidence and social skills, her own would grow along with them.

I know she’s getting better every day at controlling her inner demons, and her other half, Syo (I watched like two hours of UDG gameplay so I know this much) but I think she’d be extra careful and determined to have full control once becoming a mother.

Sayaka Maizono:

I think she would see music as an outlet for a hurting child.

Another girl who would have hella money, so she wouldn’t hesitate to get her kid lessons from the best instructors, be they voice or instrumental lessons.

And when her child mentions feeling uncomfortable about leaving the house for unnecessary reasons, especially for going to a public, noisey studio, she would pay extra to have the instructor come to them.

To her, music heals the soul.

When they have nightmares, she’s the most likely of the girls to sing lullabies, being the most talented and confident in her singing voice.

She would definitely want to be a mother one day, but with her time-consuming job, might find adoption easier and less compromising to an idol’s “flawless” body (her manager’s opinion more than her own ugh).

She’d use her intuitive “psychic” abilities to sense when her child was having a particularly rough day, or having more depressing thoughts. I think she’d be one of the ones more suited to deep conversations and true motherly advice.

Junko Enoshima:

I honestly don’t think she’d adopt a child for any wholesome or selfless reason.

She’d adopt a child with PTSD or past trauma in order to feed off of their despair or to teach that already hurting child to hurt others.

She’d be drawn to the more chaotic and/or mentally unwell children, but it would be a mistake to let her near them.

Junko is selfish in every way and would only adopt a child to carry on her evil lineage.

It may not even go that far. She may get bored of them or decide they aren’t worthy of becoming her protege and just dispose of them like an old play thing.

(Sorry Junko stans but I’m not about to pretend she’s just a bratty, preppy rich blonde mean girl type. She’s a selfish and abusive psychopath lmao)

Mukuro Ikusaba:

Another one who probably shouldn’t be a mother.

I do feel bad for her though. Much like Korekiyo, I think their siblings both abused and manipulated them from a young age. They never learned any differently. Still she’s responsible for her bad choices in the series.

Without Junko’s influence, I believe she would be fiercely protective of a child, much like an obsessive mother bear once she retired from mercenary work for good.

But unfortunately, she’s given her life to her abusive sister.

If she had a child, they would either be neglected because she spends all of her time serving Junko or away on dangerous mercenary missions.

Or they would be trained to be an abused slave to their aunt Junko just like Mukuro is.

Junko may manipulate Mukuro into adopting a child, saying things like: “you’re more of the mommy type than me!” Or, “yeah I totally think a despair filled child would be good for you! You could teach it to like kick ass and shit!”

This of course, was all a way to get Mukuro to do all the work of actually raising the child, while Junko warped both of their minds to her cause.

[ssfpubliclibrary]

Book Review 

Becoming Maria by Sonia Manzano

Review by Alex 

Many of us have friends on Sesame Street. We grew up relating to Elmo, Big Bird, and Grover, and finding comfort in the guidance of our human friends in this imaginary neighborhood, like Gordon and Maria. Long before she was Maria, though, she was Sonia Manzano, and her upbringing was much more complicated than sunny days sweeping the clouds away.

Sonia Manzano grew up in a poor, immigrant family in New York’s Bronx. Her father was an alcoholic who would beat her and her mother when he was drunk, and outside of her home, she faced the racism, sexism, classism, lack of opportunities, and sexual harassment that was par for the course in the 1950’s and 60’s. Sometimes the beatings involved the use of household items and would leave visible marks. “My mother rises on her toes, pointing to the radiator and the fading bruises on her arms and face. ‘Look at me!’” So how does someone so entrenched in an environment filled with hate and intolerance end up being such a pivotal part of a world built for preschoolers on a foundation of love and patience?

Although it didn’t seem so at first, Sonia had people watching out for her. Her teacher, Ms. Pellman, noticed how despondent Sonia was. Kept awake every night with fears of her drunk father finding the kitchen knives her mother fearfully hid in the oven, Sonia trudged through the school halls just trying to lay low and survive. Instead of confronting Sonia, Ms. Pellman engaged her, asking Sonia to help around the classroom. Ms. Pellman quietly showed Sonia that she was valued and needed. Ms. Pellman continued to take cues from Sonia, noticing her confidence jump when she started her period, as all girls in the grade were anxious for, and encouraged that by giving Sonia allotted times for bathroom breaks with her friends. She acknowledged Sonia’s difficult home life quietly and made Sonia feel special. Another unnamed teacher saw past an older, more surly Sonia to a thoughtful student in need of nurturing. He asked her to stay after school to take her away from the judgement of peers who encouraged apathy. It was during those after school hours that he patiently answered any questions she had about music, dance, and authors that she’d ask about in class but gruffly brushed aside as something she’d heard somewhere to preserve her tough reputation with her friends.

Something that we can take from Sonia’s story is that even though you may not notice, there is always someone that cares about you. Sonia had a bad home situation, but those teachers that really cared about her, helped her realize that they truly saw her; that she was too special to be ignored.

Sonia’s ability to blindly build upon the quiet encouragement of sincere teachers is truly inspirational, but I found the story hard to follow. Something that makes this book unique is the fact that even though it is an autobiography, it is written in completely present tense. Adding on to the unique writing style, the book was nonlinear, jumping from one moment in time to a completely different moment without any apparent relation between the two memories. The disjointed recollections and consistent use of present tense made it hard for me to get invested into her life, and out of five stars, I would rate “Becoming Maria” one and a half stars. That said, it is clear to me why this book was among those on the summer reading list for incoming El Camino High School 9th grade English honors students. The challenging read calls for thinking beyond what is written. The reader is made to consider the reality that some life experiences are either learned from many years after living them, while others, more bleakly, must be accepted as having served no purpose except for the pain. It’s an unsettling concept to realize, and paired with graphic retellings of abuse and sexual harassment, I would recommend that this book be read by readers in the 8th grade or higher.

[getreadytosmash]

Small smash headcanons I was thinking of and to put out my reboot designs

Skaar

Skaar took a more gladiator look from his time on Sakaar and no longer wears the loin cloth except for when he's on off days

His hair gets to around his upper back and often tends to be in buns and ponytails

Working on his reading and writing and gets help from Hulk and goes to the Xavier Institute for sessions with his mind control and memories

Got introduced to queer stuff by Rick and he was THRILLED to find out about this stuff and the footage of Skaar carefully picking out non binary, asexual and panromantic stuff was trending for a month

Yes I'm going into pridecanons a little more

Skaar's very happy with his own feelings of being nb. The rocks below him whisper about it always being fine and he doesn't need to care about what others say anyway. Not when they're too busy calling him a monster to care about his gender

Anyway. Skaar's sex neutral and I say this because its quite often the theory that all ace folks won't have kids blah blah but??? Some aces want sex to have kids and that's Skaar.

Ridiculously good sword fighter and often meets up with Nightcrawler and Shadowcat to have sword fights and compare tricks

Lots of whipping scars on his back and some around his mouth that hardly anyone knows are from

Has a matching scar with Red of a circle on the back of his neck as well as running lighting scars up his hands and feet with Rick, Red and Jen from where the Skrulls tried to harvest their gamma

Absolutely has the tattoo and has no clue about it

Occasionally has days where he can't remember the entire event and Skaar's become rather thankful that they can rely on Rick's cameras to guide him home if needed.

Adores the Savage Lands and is best friends with Kazaar and Zabu

Sometimes copies memes from Rick and it’s terrible

Likes having Jen help him with normal stuff, especially when she helps him learn stuff like reading and writing 

Rick

Yeah, can’t feel anything and that causes a few secret depression episodes aha 

Big on other sensory stuff now. Really likes to savour sights, sounds, taste and smells since he lacks a big ass part of it now. It really isn’t that uncommon for Rick to have a low of flowers within his bedroom and shit. 

Has to file down his spikes since they keep growing and often Hulk does it for him while Rick falls asleep

Rick needs a lot more protein now and often eats eggs or fish and gets into big fights with Red over it daily

Uses a stylish for everything since his fingers don’t work on touchscreens anymore

Often wears sleeveless jackets with different pins. Owns four of them with three of them entirely dedicated to alien, mutant and bi rights

Well known Youtuber and I really need to get around to writing some videos he’s done god someone remind me to put out that shit

Hardcore gamer and still screams at Samuel to help make a dating sim come oN-

Can hold his breath for an hour and a half and didn’t realise until he fell asleep in the bath and got woken up by Hulk panicking and tossing him out of the water

Very intent on mutant rights and often helps out with teenage mutants and raising the social status of the school 

Loves bi culture and is very defensive over aspects of his identity after years of feeling lost among the orphanages 

Has gotten more comfortable with his gender since he’s been wearing kilts and skirts for almost two years now

Used to have scars across his hands and thighs from years of canings from the nuns but now has a large cracked scar across his chest after Abomination ripped his shell off

Red unintentionally fathers him and blames Hulk 

Best pals with Jen and Betty and is the only one who gets to join them on Ladies Night with Lyra and Marlo

Stands on his tip toes when talking to Hulk often because he wants to be tall and it amuses Hulk to no end

Jen

Has a lot of different costumes she changes regularly and Rick always posts a vote on “What outfit has Jen got this week?”

Freckles and curly hair galore 

Hulk paints her nails and she does the same for him and it isn’t long before Skaar joins in

Works in New York but stays at Vista Verde for her time off

Yes i do want a all female gamma mutate team and yes they are A-force

They consist of Jen, Betty, Lyra, Carmilla and Marlo but are sometimes joined by other female heroes

Wears sweatband wrists, left one is the bi flag and the right one is the trans flag

Was afraid about being open towards loving women for a few years since Jen knew her father didn’t do anything about Bruce’s abuse, what would happen to her if Brian found out she liked more than boys? Came out after hulking out and is happier than ever

The same goes for being trans since Jen’s form is based heavily on her mentality of her body. Gamma gave Jen the body she wanted and she was SO pleased with it

tbh I do imagine she was more comic/noodle armed at the start since Jen wanted to look rather feminine but over time she’s gotten more comfortable with her body and idea of who she wants to be and slowly she got beefier 

Has two wardrobes at the base and makes Red help rearrange stuff for laughs

Pals with Samuel and often enjoys sitting around and dragging him out for shopping and starbucks while discussing cases

The one who appears in Rick’s youtube videos the most 

Can never finish a book and feels deep seeded adhd guilt

Sings outloud to every thing she hears 

Likes grape flavoured stuff and she is so thankful that she can’t die for that sin

BEST pals with Betty and Rick. Like. There’s a reason my “Betty is the OG Hulk and is a lil wlw with Jen” has happened honestly 

Has vitiligo patches of grey around her arms that were left over from her more traumatic transformations

Watches Red bake if she’s having a panic attack and the videos don’t help

Red

Has a lot of scars over his body from where Ghost Rider’s chain dug into him and left him burnt. idk seems really fucking cool

Like Jen, has yellow patches along his spine and hands from where he was joined mentally with Zzzax 

Still gets nightmares about said incident and is still scared for the day that a nightmare is actually happening

Started to bake because it helps from when he couldn’t control his heat powers or during ptsd attacks

Tends to get lost in work alongside Samuel, especially if they’re overly excited about a certain idea

Hulk fondly calls him a nerd for this exact reason and Red tackles him over it to this day

Tech reacts to him badly sometimes due to his possession issues and there’s been once or twice where he’s had some...odd experiences when it’s come to certain technology or alien tech

Stays the same mostly with his outfits but occasionally wears a leather jacket and fuck it takes his shirt off a lot he’s a dilf he can do that 

The one who crouches for humans the most and it isn’t uncommon for him to do it purely to unsettle the humans. Ass

Uh. Likes women but??? Sometimes there’s an annoying guy and shit being able to be easily suplexed now means that anyone who can do it can kinda catch his eyes and he fucked a demon- uh. Red has a lot of thoughts now about dating and it’s nerve-wracking

Still does missions with his Thunderbolt team and still hangs out with Hell’s Circle team when he met others that had been dragged down to hell as well

Gets courted by vampires and hates the fact that the others laugh at it 

Gets nightmares of crashing, of electric burning him away but doesn’t want to admit to the fact that he has some ptsd 

Not really Red but fuck it Betty has her own team and I’m shifting the Gamma Corps for Betty so her team involves; Betty (Harpy), Marlo (Sirin), Clay (Hulkverine), Lyra (Athen), Carmilla (Scorpion) and Gwen (Daydream) 

Right. Uh. So for those who don’t know who Daydream are, basically the writer at this time had been going through a bad divorce and he treated Betty like SHIT which involved breaking Bretty up before they could have a child, making Betty suffer a miscarriage, killing her and having the villain Nightmare raping her in her sleep and having Betty give birth to Daydream who appeared for one arc and was never seen again. So. I’m mad. 

anyway fuck him but I did like Daydream so instead she was an experiment from gamma base as a unique weapon that got used to infiltrate the Agents sleep but was later on rescued along with the rest of the gamma experiments. Got adopted by Betty when she found out Gwen had her DNA and went “oh worm?” to getting a baby i have more thoughts about this but u know. carry on.

Hulk

So Tired. Part time team leader and Avengers and even has his many own adventures of trying to help so many people out

I imagine he has a lot of the same issues as Steven in suf where Hulk often stresses out more about not being able to help people since he worries about the worst case scenarios 

Gets forced to take days off by each of the team and appreciates it but dear god if he doesn’t get anxiety about the whole situation every time

SomeTIMES he wears a blue shirt but only sometimes and that’s if he’s actually prepared for missions. Also has boots Red got him but Hulk keeps those clean and safe instead

Team dad for a reason. Fathers anything he can get his hands on and well known for it enough that Rick and Skaar get him something for fathers day every year and Jen gets him goofy ties because she KNOWS he doesn’t throw them out

Pretty relaxed about being pan and yes he makes jokes about being attracted to kitchenware he’s THAT terrible Rick wants to die and not come back pls 

Buys a lot of pride stuff for the others. Skaar owns so many nb and ace colour chalks he needs help

Really wants to own a guinea pig but he’s worried about scaring it or not being around all that often to take care of it properly

Falls asleep through almost every movie that he usually starts one half of it one day and finishes it the next day

Meets up with Ben Grimm and Logan Howlett every Wednesday for a night out. Usually they do bowling, play cards or go out to eat. It’s isn’t uncommon for other heroes like Spidey or Gambit to join them occasionally

Has business lunches with Betty to discuss movements of gamma mutates that turns into a fun brawl because they’re immortal children

Keeps a whiteboard in his room so that he can have arguments with Joe and Bruce.

Samuel

Keeps his outfit relatively the same but adjusts it slightly so it isn’t the exact same outfit he wears back when he was evil

Tends to cover up more after he gains a power that lets him control people just by touch

Aware of this power and thus often awkwardly flitters when someone near him might be upset and keeps spare gloves or arm sleeves on hard just in case

Has the sharpest teeth of all the hulks and actually tends to file them down so he doesn’t need to “scare people off” when in reality he’s self conscious about his teeth and the fact that he keeps biting his tongue by accident 

Buys and redesigns Icarus’s cage every other month to make it more elaborate, is currently fighting the constant urge to buy more rats for this reason

Demiboy! Fine with what he is, doesn’t give a shit. He rules hell and he’ll send you there if you argue with him so who the fuck cares if Samuel wears dresses and makeup?

Big stupid bi. Cannonly into women who are more powerful than him with examples being Rikki (Aka Brilliance, a female Leader) who kicked his ass and threw him across the room with her more advanced mind, Betty Ross...who can blame him, and lately is that one scientist in Hulkverine who Samuel literally fell for within one night sksksk

Big manipulator for people he cares about. Samuel has and will make elaborate plans to keep someone he cares about safe and is more than willing to kill anyone who has hurt his loved ones

Owns a large collection of nail polishes and tends to vary them when he’s bored and creates amazing art. Red watched Samuel once spend and hour re-creating all of Van Gogh’s paintings on his nails

Really good friends with Betty surprisingly, mostly because she can make jokes about being dead and he’ll just snort and go “same” 

Has the second best sense of smell after Skaar as he can smell early signs of sickness as well as a wider range of emotions

Info dumps so much and has long winded theories about the oddest things that resonate really well on the Youtube channel

talks to his oversized rat so seriously

Suffers nightmares and currently runs the Down Below and is so tired

Has actually died from exhaustion twice already 

Has large sockets in his back due to the fact that Samuel physically cannot hold the information he knows all the time and uses it to charge his phone

Still hangs out with villains like Loki and Mystique tho

[uncloseted]

So I've had a conversation with a friend, and he was telling me that gay people are not Born gay but become gay because of social experiences and I called that homophobic he got really offended and said he was not that he didn't care if someone is gay or not but it's a fact and a point made by many psychologists that people become gay because of their environment, I said what I found homophobic was the implication it's like a mental disease he said he didn't believe it was a disease but that if you say it's inherent it's like saying it's genetic which it's not and that the same person has different chances of becoming gay according to their family and socio cultural experiences. It did got me thinking, are you aware of such studies and their revelance?

The answer to the question “what makes people gay” is really nuanced and I think probably more complicated than you might have expected.  I’ll get into explaining those nuances the best that I can in a second, but I think the best answer to your friend’s argument is just that he has the correlation and causation backwards.  

People who are raised in environments where being LGBT+ is permissible aren’t more likely to be gay; they’re just more likely to come out of the closet because they know they’ll be accepted and that they won’t be in any danger.  In places where homophobia is rampant, of course there appear to be fewer LGBT+ people- the LGBT+ people who are out in those places are disowned, harassed, bullied, attacked, and sometimes killed.  It makes sense that more LGBT+ people would opt to stay in the closet in a situation where violence is a possibility.  This comes out in the data; although it appears that more gay men live in costal cities in the US, the percentage of internet porn searches for gay male porn are the same across all states, around 5%.

Moving on to the “causes” of homosexuality, it’s likely a lot of different things in combination, and there’s not exactly a scientific consensus just yet.  Male homosexuality may have different causes than female sexuality and bisexuality, and trans identities are also a separate set of factors.  For the purposes of this conversation, let’s focus on male homosexuality, as it’s the most studied.

First, a couple of things that it’s not: per the Royal College of Psychiatrists, there’s no evidence that parenting or early childhood experiences play a role in sexual orientation.  Per the American Academy of Pediatrics, “there is no scientific evidence that abnormal parenting, sexual abuse, or other adverse life events influence sexual orientation. Current knowledge suggests that sexual orientation is usually established during early childhood.”  Children who grow up to be non-heterosexual are, on average, substantially more gender non-conforming in childhood (even if they’re bullied for it), supporting the idea that sexuality is established early in life.  Sexual orientation is not a choice (here, here, and here).  In (old, unethical) studies where newborn and infant boys were surgically reassigned into girls and raised as girls, they did not become more feminine or male-attracted than their AMAB counterparts.  Socialization does not induce feminine behaviors in men or make them attracted to men. “Nurture” is a lot stronger than “nature” in this case.  There are no scientifically rigorous studies that support the idea that sexuality can be changed after birth, whether through surgical treatments, lobotomies, hormone treatments, electric chock treatments, aversion therapy, hypnosis, psychoanalysis, or any other type of conversion treatment.  I would love to see his sources on all of these psychologists who supposedly believe people are gay due to their social environment.

Sexual orientation appears to be a complex interplay of biological and environmental (but not social) factors. Nonsocial, biological factors have more evidence to support them than environmental factors, particularly in homosexual men.  So your friend isn’t entirely wrong, although he’s right for the wrong reasons.  Environment is a factor, and so is family (since that’s where you get your genes and epigenetics from) but homosexuality is inherent.

Let’s start with strictly biological factors that go into sexual orientation.

One of the biggest hypotheses for the cause of homosexuality is the impact of hormones on a developing fetus. I’m going to skip over a lot of biology here, but basically the core of this theory is that gay men’s brains may have been exposed to less testosterone in the womb than their heterosexual counterparts, had less receptivity to the masculinizing effects of the testosterone, or experienced fluctuations in hormones at key times in their development.  In women, it’s hypothesized that the opposite is true- lesbians may have been exposed to higher levels of testosterone.  This is supported by right hand finger digit ratios (the length of the index finger divided by the length of the ring finger), which are a marker of prenatal testosterone exposure- lesbians have a lower digit ratio than heterosexual women, while gay men have a higher digit ratio than straight men.  Gay men may have been exposed to more testosterone than their straight counterparts for a number of different reasons, including maternal immune response and fraternal birth order, genes, epigenetics, and prenatal environmental chemical exposure.  We’ll go over each of those below:

Maternal immune responses during fetal development are demonstrated as being a cause of male homosexuality.  During pregnancy of a male child, male cells enter a mother’s bloodstream.  These cells are foreign to the mother, and so her body develops antibodies to neutralize them.  Again, skipping over a lot of nitty-gritty biology here, but basically, the more pregnancies a woman has, the better her body gets at neutralizing male cells (particularly, Y-linked antigens) and the more antibodies she has against those Y-linked antigens.  

In turn, this creates what’s known as the “fraternal birth order effect”- basically, the more male sons a woman has, the more likely it is that her next son will be gay.  One study found that each additional older brother increases the odds of a man being gay by 33%.  Researchers have found that mothers with a gay son have heightened levels of antibodies to the NLGN4Y Y-protein than mothers with heterosexual sons.  The fraternal birth order effect is estimated to account for between 15 and 29% of male homosexuality.  Some studies have identified structural differences in the brains of homosexual men as opposed to heterosexual men that are due to prenatal hormonal exposure.  For example, straight men typically have right hemispheres that are 2% larger than their left, while in gay men the two hemispheres are typically the same size. 

Genes also play a role in sexual orientation.  Identical twins are more likely to share a sexual orientation than fraternal twins or adopted siblings (an estimated 80% of identical twins share a sexual orientation).  The largest study on the genetic basis of sexuality, published in Science, determined that there are at least five different genes that are correlated with homosexuality.  The genes identified do all sorts of different things, and some have functions that are yet to be determined.  An estimated 25% of sexual behavior is attributed to genetics.  Another study found that maternal female relatives of homosexual men tend to have more offspring, suggesting that genetic material that promotes fertility in women and homosexuality in men is being genetically passed down on the X chromosome.  Researchers estimated that this explains about 20% of genetic homosexuality (which is right in line with the estimate that there are four other genes involved).

Epigenetic factors also impact a person’s sexuality.  Epigenetic changes are changes in gene activity that are not caused by changes to the DNA sequence itself.  Epigenetic factors can “turn on” or “turn off” the expression of certain genes.  Per an article from The Guardian, “think of DNA as an orchestral score, the notes on the page unchanging. But the annotations on the manuscript will dictate how the music sounds, with crescendo and lento and adagio. The conductor and orchestra play their annotated manuscript, and each performance is unique, even when the original scores are identical.”  Epigenetic marks can be “turned on” or “turned off” during gestation as well as after birth.  Researchers hypothesize that epigenetic factors change how cells respond to androgen signaling, which is critical to sexual development.  Like we talked about above, fetal levels of exposure to the androgen, testosterone, seem to impact sexual orientation.  In gay men, the epigenetic marks responsible for managing the amount of testosterone the fetus is exposed to are thought to be too aggressive, blocking testosterone from reaching the fetus. This is pretty new research still, so the evidence to support it is limited, but one study found that the methylation pattern (the epigenetic change) in nine regions of the genome appeared to be linked to sexual orientation, and could use it to predict the sexual orientation of a group with 70% accuracy. 

There are a handful of statistical physiological differences between gay and straight man in addition to the difference in brain hemisphere size I mentioned above.  These are averages across populations, so they may not apply to each and every homosexual or heterosexual individual.  The suprachiasmatic nucleus of the hypothalamus is larger in gay men than in non-gay men.  The INAH 3 in the brains of gay men are the same size as the INAH 3 in women; both are smaller than in heterosexual men’s brains. Homosexual and heterosexual brains respond differently to two putative sex pheromones.  The amygdala is more active in gay men than straight men when exposed to sexual material.  Gay men are more likely to be left handed or ambidextrous than straight men.  Gay men are more likely to have a counterclockwise hair whorl than the general population, which is also correlated with left handedness.  Gay men have increased ridge density in the fingerprints on their left thumbs and little fingers compared to straight men.  These are all minor, but support the idea that there is a biological basis to homosexuality.

Now that we’ve gotten through the biological factors, let’s talk environmental.  When we say, “environmental” people usually think of the environment a child is raised in- who they parents are, how their parents act, who their friends are, what kind of activities they do, etc.  But in this case, that’s not what we mean.  The impact of a person’s environment after birth seems to have a weak effect on sexual orientation at best; there is no substantial evidence to suggest that early childhood experiences influence sexual orientation at all.  So in that case, what do we mean by “environmental”?  We’re really talking about the environment the mother was in during the pregnancy, and the prenatal environment that the fetus experienced (the hormonal influences that we talked about above).  These may include things like maternal exposure to anti-androgenic chemicals and endocrine disruptors while pregnant.  However, given that homosexual people have always been present, even pre-industrialization, these factors cannot be considered central to what causes homosexuality.