just watched the lc live action first 2 eps and idk man. its entertaining but its just like- these are NOT the charas i know who TF ARE YOU. it also doesnt rlly tie in to the donghua so like is this just a whole ass seperate universe? who tf is the teacher? also how the hell did cxs know lgs name without an introduction 💀 the way cxs already gave lg a nickname a-guang like- yall JUST met. it just doesnt make sense. i mean it seems loke ep 2 improved from ep 1 and from what ive heard it gets better over time but still man. i like how they made cxs a geek and what they did with qiao lings mom and him it was sweet. also the opening was rlly fun. i have mixed feelings on cxs and lgs dynamic cause on one hand its silly and i like it but also... this is NOT lg and cxs. im so confused how this relates to the donghua. and my girl xss is GONE. also the way the powers work is rlly weird like i just dont like that change in general. i feel like with this change (the fact they removed the whole memory and emotions aspect of cxs power) it removes a lot of the emotional weight the og held. also ik cxs showed signs of cleverness but still they dumbed and losered him down to a point i do not like. the musical was good so i had hope but this just aint lc to me and the 1st ep way just- bad. like writing wise. even outside of lc (in which itd make even less sense).
20 notes
·
View notes
Hello, I am going to discuss my thoughts on content/trigger warnings as someone living with OCD. I am absolutely open to good faith engagement and discussion on this topic.
Having some thoughts on the idea that adding trigger warnings somehow ultimately harms the person with the trigger. They absolutely can create an easy tool to obsessively control your access to the topics/to avoid them, but I’ve always felt it should be the potentially triggered person’s decision on what they were ready to do about it. Uncontrolled exposure is just as capable of causing obsession as is avoidance, in my opinion.
I think of the (terrible telephone retelling of a) case I heard about while discovering recounts of actual lived experiences with OCD.
—The following example discusses intrusive thoughts about domestic violence.—
A woman had an obsession with being was afraid of hitting her boyfriend. Her compulsion was that she would have to hold her arms stiffly by her side. She recognized this as OCD and sought exposure response prevention. Her therapist told her to try and ignore the compulsion, or potentially do the opposite. The woman became so obsessed with healing she forced herself to keep her hands away from her sides (almost obsessively) and constantly checked whether or not she “still wanted to hit him.” In the end, the ERP just became entangled with her obsessions.
It takes so much strength to face these types of problems and practice the mindfulness and grace with yourself to recognize it. It’s something you really need to be ready for because it’s going to take a lot of effort to do the hard thing when the easy thing is right there.
How can we claim it’s best to “force” exposure on someone else? How can we go around vigilante therapising people we have deemed too ill to do it on their own (or just be left alone)?
This is not to say that anyone is bad if they can’t or don’t want to tag things. More just my thoughts about how pushback against that idea can swing too hard into trying to prove not tagging was morality correct.
Some articles that articulate so much of my experience with OCD:
Having No Cure for OCD Is the Cure
Help! I Have OCD About What’s OCD
In the spirit of bodily autonomy, I think we all deserve agency in our lives no matter how “incompetent” other people may think we are. When you’re ready, you’re ready. There’s no healing to be had sitting around thinking you’re broken or lazy or whatever for not being ready to change. We all owe each other the kindness to do what we can in good faith, too.
I started doing too much table setting in the tags, so I’ll put it under a read more, lol.
I recognize that this isn’t very radically (in the abolition vs reform sense) anti-psychiatry, and I do have a complicated relationship with that idea. I recognize that I have a good deal of privilege (particularly among people with more stigmatized/less understood “disorders”) but this framework is the only one I’ve ever been able to access that gives me any insight into myself at all. That isn’t something everyone can afford to do in several senses.
As a physically disabled person, I just connect my experiences with chronic illness and mental illness (which I think can fall under the umbrella of chronic on its own) more and more these days. What truly was the difference between not being able to do something out of pain versus anxiety? Our brains are organs, too. Our thoughts are chemical and hormonal, too.
One of the fondest memories I have of coming to terms with disability was explaining my experience with an autoimmune condition to a bipolar friend, and he replied that we were “chronic illness buddies.” And I felt so understood as someone who has suffered with various types of anxieties for their entire waking life.
40 notes
·
View notes
im not the anon but i want ur hiramarchie thoughts <3
hehe :3 well first off I want to say I loved and agreed with both EJ's and the @riverdale-retread answer I reblogged. and a lot of the other conversation they've reblogged which I just read through, which, hello, I was not plugged into the side of the rvd fandom having these interesting discussions but I am now!!
second off. Hiram is an ultimate John to me. so named for emperor john gaius of the nine houses, as made famous in Harrow the Ninth (2020). a john is a character in book, film, musical, television show, etc, who uses patriarchal mores and emotional manipulation to control the life of the object of his attention/affection. he uses the allure and the promise of the family unit (or replacement for it) to entrap and destabilize a younger, naif-ish (ymmv) protagonist (usually). that's a very wide net. there's a lot of examples, including but not limited to: derek shepherd, the vampire armand, Hades from hadestown, Humbert Humbert, Joel thelastofus, Arthur aguefort, Jack lovetheoretically, and Hap theOA. as you can see, a lot of variety in there. johns can take many forms. commonly they are fathers.
Hiram and Archie have absolutely incredible john plot going on. I mean, for one thing, they map so closely onto EJG and kiriona in season 2, as demonstrated here. they really have the daddy issues goes both ways, men love orphans thing happening. as mentioned in the post above, Hiram has a Thing about sons. he also has a thing about daughters, which to me suggests he REALLY has a thing about Being A Father, and also he's Catholic, and a mob boss, so he basically thinks he's God. thinking you're god is a Very John Trait. fathers, like gods, need followers to be able to claim the identity. Archie is something Hiram wants to Have, both as an asset and as a worshipper. I mean, the pun on johns as pimps is not unintentional. and Archie is so obsessed with having a belief system. as the post above said, he doesn't really care if the belief system is Correct, he just needs one. I rlly enjoy fandom engagement on relationships with this type of power dynamic, that is mutually obsessive but severely unbalanced.
third, this is less analytical, but I also just fucking love the chemistry and energy of their scenes. I think that the deeply personal and violent hatred they have for each other is so fucking funny and rich. like that for seasons afterward Hiram is cartoon hammering the town of Riverdale, STILL, because of his bad breakup with his daughters boyfriend. rvd is at its best when it goes full drama full silly at the same time, with all the actors taking the silliest situations to their dramatic extreme, and KJ and mark Consuelos bring their 100% every time. bravo
11 notes
·
View notes