#disability is not a monolith etc etc

[firefly-fez]

me at 8:00: yeah guys i can’t come out tonight. yeah got another insomnia flare-up, really need an early night. have fun tho!

me at 1am: how are we, as a society ever going to destigmatise disability if we won’t even let ourselves say the goddamned word. maybe the reason you think disability is an offensive term is because disability itself offends you. and of course it does, because it is offensive. The notion that a disabled person did nothing to deserve their disability and cannot achieve success the same way you can because of it offends the idea that you are successful because of your vitues, not your luck. It offends the pride you have in uour work, your success, your wealth and whether you truly earnt it. Disability is offensive only because the innate humanity of a disabled person offends the very propaganda our extractive capitalist society relies on to—

[ichayalovesyou]

Why Do Old-School TV Duos Have SUCH MLM Vibes?!

I think there’s something very specific about the formula and writing style of non-serialized/semi-serialized shows from the 60s to 80s that featured two grown men going on wacky dangerous adventures that makes my gay little literary analysis brain go absolutely off the wall bonkers. I’m trying to figure out why!

I’m writing this on my Trek blog because I don’t think this pattern in people actually shipping these types of relationships the way they do if fandom as we know it wasn’t born via TOS in syndication. That being said! I also think it has to do with the way these shows are designed that makes myself and others OBSESSED with a specific character dynamic that feels (to me) damn near impossible to replicate in modern television. In a way that’s more than just fandom, it’s in the way TV like this was written at the time!

Further explanation under the cut!

🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈

I think what it usually boils down to is this. There’s a charming protagonist whom without the series could not operate, frequently top billed or the title character! (See: Wild Wild West, Starsky & Hutch) BUT he doesn’t have anyone to play off of! So what do they do pretty much every single time? Give Mr. Idealized Vision of Time-Period Masculinity For Genre a second guy to rhyme with!

See but the other guy has to play opposite but parallel to our hypermasculine protagonist. So what frequently ends up happening is that in order to play off our “normal” guy, even though he’s also a white dude, is that he’s still somehow Other.

They’re always perfect for each other, and they always get into scenarios that would be written, shot and interpreted by conventional audiences as romantic IF either one of those characters were a woman! Especially at the time these shows were made in.

If the one is aggressive, the other is gentle. If the protagonist is violent, his counterpart is intellectual. If the one is stoic, the other is emotional. Which (while one size def doesn’t fit all) usually makes the second guy come off as much more queer-coded (and sometimes other minorities like neurodivergent/disabled etc) than the other because of the traits associated with masculinity vs gayness at the time! Our prime examples in these gifs are Spock, Hutch, Artemus, and also *BJ!

*(M*A*S*H is a bit of a unique case since the show flirts with queerness more openly in ways that people more into the series have explained better than me but I think it still fits the formula I’m discussing.)

Here’s the thing though right? We’ve got two best friends, and the show NEVER really feels right if one of them is missing unless the focus of the story is how A & B operate without each other while trying to find the other one. They stick with and rescue each other unfailingly in scenarios that might destroy a regular friendship.

Hell, there’s often stuff that would emotionally/physically destroy a regular person/character in modern media. But because it’s not serialized they always seem to pull through seemingly through the power of friendship alone or dealing with it off-screen! Emotional consequences? Yuck! (Unless it’s M*A*S*H or Starsky & Hutch, like I said, not monolithic)

Here’s the thing that some people might say throws a wrench into the interpretation I’m discussing. What about the absolutely non-stop parade of conventionally attractive women the main protagonist (and less frequently the supporting man) goes through?

I would reply: how many of those female characters actually emotionally impact our protagonists as characters long term?

The answer is of course, because it’s NOT serialized, almost none! Kirk can watch Edith Keeler get killed by a car accident and still be making eyes at Spock the next episode. Hawkeye can have a “life changing” romance with a Vietnamese humanitarian woman, then share a blanket with BJ next episode like she never existed!

The Doylist explanation of course is not just the fact it wasn’t serialized but also just, constant, blatant 20th century sexism. Which SUCKS!!! As well as not wanting a long term love interest to throw off the character dynamic of our duderagonists. It’s the 20th century tv equivalent of bros before hoes.

However the Watsonian explanation always seems to result in no love interest EVER being more important than what the two protagonists have no matter whether you think they’re queer or not. No attractive woman could make our reputed babe-hound protagonist abandon his buddy. There’s no earnest romance our more queer-coded supporting man doesn’t end (or get ended for him) often for the protagonist’s sake.

Now some of these women are incredibly well written and straight up GOOD matches for our guys. So why wouldn’t they get involved in something long term UNLESS!! They were in love with each other the WHOLE time?

What if protagonist (frequently the babe hound) doesnt know he’s queer, or knows but doesn’t know he’s in love with his bestie, or any number of similar fruity explanations? The supporting man also runs into this explanation but people tend to believe he’s already aware that he’s queer but either also doesn’t know he’s in love or is keeping it to himself because time-period homophobia and/or thinking (probably not unreasonably) that babe hound is straight?

Between the inherent closeness of being narrative foils. The regularly scheduled life or death drama creating sometimes insanely romantic (in the narrative if not a literal sense) drama between the two. The revolving door of weekly women they never seem to get attached to enough to leave one another. The non-serialized nature resulting in sparse personal information/history about the protagonists as a result.

I think between the very NATURE of the way tv shows were written at the time. Plus the way fandom was shaped by a dynamic that has rippled through how media works and is interpreted by fans for decades upon decades. It’s not hard to imagine getting really emotionally invested in the possibility of the protagonists being in love is a fantastic way to enjoy the media!

In conclusion, it’s really fun and easy to go “these bitches gay! Good for them good for them!”

[jesncin]

Hi! I'm sorry if this an inappropriate question to ask, but I was wondering if you had any advice on how to accurately portray characters of color? I'm White and my creative fiction includes a lot of diverse characters, and I don't want to just ignore how their races impact their stories but at the same time being a racial/ethnic minority isn't something I've personally experienced and I don't know how to walk the line between good representation and some White dude telling stories that aren't his place to tell. Do you have any advice on how to accurately present characters of color without appropriating?

Luckily I have time today so I'll give my 2 cents! For one: there is no such thing as "accurate" portrayals of POC. Our experiences aren't a monolith. Something personal I would write and pull from my lived experience might not be relatable to, say, another queer Indonesian. And characters I write that are outside of my identity (Black, disabled, etc.) are inevitably going to be less authentic compared to someone of those identities tackling those characters. That's just something to make peace with- we can only do the best we can with the perspective we have.

With that: the usual platitudes are "do your research" and "listen to POC", I dislike both of these sayings! I get what they mean, but I don't love the insinuation of "doing research and listening" as a means of personal creative benefit. So instead I encourage different mindsets:

Instead of "do your research" (where identities can be treated as subjects to be learned and not people) I prefer "expand your perspective". Art is so cool because it's self expression. Stories are awesome because it's a shortcut to a person's deepest feelings. They get you fascinated and invested in a life so unlike your own. I can't stand "I only read queer books" people because it's an admission that they refuse to engage with identities they can't relate or project onto. There are so many important stories out there outside of your bubble. Get into the habit of earnestly learning about perspectives outside of your own. And not with the mindset of "this'll make me a better writer if I consume the identity and can become them" but with the mindset of getting to learn about a new friend. I think people take "stay in your lane" too literally sometimes where they focus so much on writing about their own experiences that they miss out on empathizing with other people.

Instead of "listen to POC" (I hate this one. Because our opinions aren't a monolith, it essentializes all of us to being media critic savvy experts, and white people tend to cherry pick the POC opinions they like instead of looking at the wider conversation) I prefer "improve your media criticism skills, and supplement with different perspectives". Not only should you "expand your perspective" as my last point said, but you should also be critical of things you read and learn! Learning about how ableism, racism, classism, etc. operates in life helps inform your opinion of how an identity was portrayed in a story. Recognize that earnest, and well intended attempts at representation can still be flawed or performative (the amount of times I'm told "I'm sure they weren't intending to be racist" like I truly believe the writer is a mustache twirling racist villain is too much). It's important to be opinionated! Do the work to find different perspectives to inform your own.

Lastly, don't ask for labor from marginalized people haha. I know that's what you're doing now (and this always happens to me whenever I voice a critical opinion of race representation) but I happen to have time (I'm still waiting on my editors to get back to me, such is the life of publishing). Most people don't, and are exhausted with explaining themselves. I don't bother my other marginalized friends whenever I write perspectives outside of my own. I do as much of the work reading articles, history, criticism, art etc. first. Especially if it's going to be a published work, then find Authenticity Readers and pay them for their labor. Avoid asking general, easy to google answers y'know? A lot of people have done the work writing thought pieces in their own time about a variety of perspectives.

[dearinglovebot]

my nonverbal person's guide to respectfully handling the handler

disclaimer: we aren't a monolith, we have different nonverbal experiences, etc. this is mostly meant to give basic information for non-mute fic writers or other creatives

is the handler nonverbal/mute? as far as we know, yes. she is a nonverbal character ergo canonically "mute". it would be disrespectful to erase this.

but she whispers. some mute people can do that. particularly elective mutes (those who can speak, but generally do not) and selective mutes (an anxiety disorder which prevents speech in certain cases). though, even those with one of the physical causes (brain injury, nerve damage, etc.) might be able to. it's deeply personal.

but if she can speak, how is she mute? mutism is defined by abnormally limited speech in daily life, not complete inability. someone who is silent 90% of the time is still mute. total mutism and partial mutism are part of the same nonverbal spectrum. however, we do have different lived experiences because of this. just like how two autistic people may have different support needs.

what causes mutism? in short, it is either a physical impairment like a TBI, stroke, neruological disorder, etc or it is psychological. often, psychological mutism is comorbid with other mental disorders. a large portion of elective mutes are autistic! it can also be a PTSD trauma response where you feel "blocked" from speaking. there's lots of ways mutism can occur.

what kind of mutism does she have? we don't know! we'll need her backstory to really know this. all we know is that she is primarily nonverbal with the ability to whisper short sentences/single words. this implies she doesn't speak often, though, as strained speech is a symptom of vocal disuse.

how do i respectfully portray her limited speech? my general rule is, what canon says goes. don't make a mute character speak more than they would in canon. does this character not speak at all? do that. does this character only speak in dire circumstances? do that. does this character occasionally whisper? do that. making a character speak less is alright, but an absolute no no is making a mute character speak more. this is ableist thinking. for example, part of ABA therapy for autistic elective mutes is making them "learn" to speak against their will. mutism is a disorder which will often be "cured" in media. like many other disabilities, we don't want magic cures. we want accommodations and acceptance.

how can i portray her communicating? look at canon! she uses facial cues, physical cues, and her whistle. those are all ways she canonically communicates with others nonverbally. maybe she and her raptors communicate different things by how long she blows the whistle or by making multiple whistle noises at once. maybe there's more than one whistle and that's simply her attack whistle. get creative!

[bwafficial]

🎀 welcome to bwa !!

⌒⌒have a bwamazing day !! 🎀

꒰੭☆ this is an age regression blog run by the bwa moderators, made primarily to advertise our discord server !! if you like what you see here, you're sure to love our server!!!! (* ^ ω ^)

꒰੭☆ on this blog we'll be making stimboards, mood boards, headcanons, userboxes, etc !!

blog rules : no nsfw interaction & no proshippers

requests are currently open !! ୨୧

☆ blog tags :

#bwasks - answered asks

#bwa bwa bwa - random talking

☆ mod intros :

☆🐣 all about ciel !!꒰ pronouns ꒱ : any/all pronouns ꒰ age ꒱ : 16-17

◡likes: animanga (mostly shonen), visual novels (danganronpa, yttd, ddlc, corpse party), manlybadasshero, berleezy, american history, vocal synths

☆👽 all about zorble !!꒰ pronouns ꒱ : xe/it/pup/star/zem ꒰ age ꒱ : 15-16

◡likes: marine biology, aesthetics, collecting xenos

☆🧪 all about mars !!꒰ pronouns ꒱ : any/all pronouns ꒰ age ꒱ : 16-17

◡likes: rwby, fiction podcasts, collecting consoles & games, tech stuff, animanga, los campesinos, persona, cats, eccentric & unconventional stuff

☆🐾 all about zai !!꒰ pronouns ꒱ : he/skull/bitter/neos ꒰ age ꒱ : 14-16

◡likes: drawing/art, horror games, gothic architecture, music, fashion, vkei, gothic rock, j-rock, j-fashion, fictkin + alterhumanity

☆🦊 all about burger !!꒰ pronouns ꒱ : it/its

꒰ age ꒱ : 15-16

◡likes: drawing, moodboards, watchin youtube, daydreaming, alterhuman and fictkin :)

⌒⌒

☆ server ad :

🎀BWA SERVER !!

୧ ‧₊˚ our server revolves around making sure you can be you, not adhering to the softer sides of age regression. you curse while little? cool! wanna make an obscene joke within reason? okay! 🍅🥒♬

we do have channels for sensitive littles, but we also acknowledge that every agere server is already catered to sensitive littles. age regression is not a monolithic experience. here's to the tinies and tots that swear, like horror, and don't mind a dirty joke or two.

╭ about 🎀bwa ! ☆ 🦀﹒lgbt , mogai , cdd , poc , and disability friendly!

🍊﹒14+ age limit !! ⭐﹒fun and educational channels 🪁 ﹒owner is fully black queer and disabled

join us today ! (◕‿◕) https://discord.gg/jw8UE64KXH

[five-thousand-loaves-of-bread]

in short, think self diagnosis, after extensive research, is valid.

not everyone have access to medical professionals. not everyone have access to competent quality medical professionals. not everyone can afford. medical trauma & medical neglect exist. misdiagnosis exist. medical racism sexism misogyny. etc.

though. to add some nuance: (i am specifically addressing autism but probably applies to most self diagnosis)

1. sites like tiktok and tumblr provide important lived experience lens that hard to find any other place. often play huge part in journey! but tiktok and tumblr should not be only place you do research for self diagnosis.

further, watching one tiktok or one tumblr post is not enough for self diagnosis. know most people who self diagnose isn’t doing this, but do see some people do this.

2. there are late diagnosed autistic people with higher support needs. there are late diagnosed autistic people who are visibly developmentally disabled but their other I/DD diagnosis covered over their autism. etc.

having said that though. overwhelming majority of autistic who self diagnose who are late diagnosed. have lower support needs, are high masking, less visibly autistic. most of them lived their life in nondisabled neurotypical society, mainstreamed, go to typical school, get job, maybe job after job after job fired quit fired again—often forced to be this way, not given choice. which is all distressing. have grief about not being noticed as autistic earlier.

but. you need to know that there are early diagnosed autistic folks, some of them high support needs and/or nonspeaking minimally speaking, some of them who put in special ed, go to “special” schools, who have high support needs, who can’t or not allowed to live independently, who needs full physical assistance with bADLs, who can’t keep own basic safety, who will never able to hold typical job, etc etc… they are still autistic. just because you have trauma about being late diagnosed late identified doesn’t mean for them early diagnosis is a abuse free blessing.

early diagnosed, visibly developmentally disabled people like these often face the blunt of the violence. they are one of the most marginalized groups in our community.

some late diagnosed autistics hold privilege over some early diagnosed autistics. (note i say some—late diagnosis early diagnosis not monolith experiences.)

3. just because you are, say, autistic, doesn’t mean right this second you should be an autistic advocate, or right this second you’re qualified to. i believe all autistic people have important meaningful thing to say about own experience with autism. but being an advocate involves so much more than that.

being advocate involves constant learning, especially from people more marginalized than you and people not similar to you.

being advocate means constant self reflection, means reflect on own privilege and oppression, means reflect on own internalized ableism internalized racism, etc.

being advocate means learning to decenter self, learning how to hold space for others, learning how to apologize and take accountability.

being advocate means learning how to listen.

being advocate means learning how to take responsibility.

being an advocate means addressing own trauma and not project trauma onto others, especially other more marginalized groups.

being an advocate means acknowledging nuance.

newly realized autistics, newly self diagnosed autistics, newly professionally diagnosed autistics (who didn’t know they autistic before professional diagnosis), they all have important place in autistic community and autistic conversations. but being new to this means you have so much more to learn. and you need to learn how to do more good than harm when share own experience and do own advocacy.

4. there is a world of autism experiences beyond your own. listen to them, too.

with all that said. self diagnosis, after extensive research, is valid.

[enbycrip]

I’m seeing the “people don’t expect physically disabled people to be less disabled for their comfort so why do they expect mentally ill/neurodivergent people to do so?” memes making the rounds again, and I am here to remind you, as an autistic and ADHD, mentally ill, chronically ill person with multiple physical impairments that this is just not the case.

If you are both and that is your personal experience, I obviously do not expect you to deny that, but please be aware that this is very much *not* universal.

I am a full time mobility aid user and part-time wheelchair user. Both my personal experience and thousands of accounts from the wheelchair user community reflect the fact that most wheelchair users and other mobility aid users *continually* have our boundaries pushed around our use of mobility aids for the ease and comfort of others.

“I know we said step-free access but it’s just a couple of small steps so that counts, right? Our staff can lift you if you *really* can’t manage.”

“Oh we can’t really fit your chair or rollator in the car so you’ll just have to manage without them. You walked that far last week with the rollator so doing a few days around a city with a stick should be fine, right?”

“Your cousin really doesn’t want a stick in her wedding photos so you’ll just have to manage, but there will be lots of seats and it’s not like you have to stand up really.”

“You’re much too young to be using a stick anyway. Wait til you get older and you *really* know what pain is.”

“I know that restaurant is on the second floor and there’s no lift but the rest of the team really like the food there so I’m sure you’ll manage, won’t you?”

“We really don’t like you using that wheelchair - surely it will make you more disabled?”

“I know our accessible toilet is down a flight of stairs but people don’t really need to use a bathroom in a restaurant do they?”

“Oh, we booked this restaurant for x celebration (bonus points if it’s for *your* birthday/graduation etc) because it’s so nice and it just *didn’t* occur to us to check if it was accessible!”

These are just picked off the top of my head as a number of things I have encountered over my years as a mobility aid and wheelchair user.

I picked this out of my various impairments because wheelchair users are so frequently regarded as the sort of “iconic” disabled person, but my boundaries on pain and mobility aid - including wheelchair - use are genuinely pushed at least as much as those of my neurodivergences and mental illnesses. I have been accused of “bad behaviour”, “doing it for attention”, “faking it”, “making a scene” and “not really disabled” multiple times when the issues causing the problem were physical - including when my legs have physically given out on me in public places, causing me to fall.

None of this is peculiar to my experience. I have encountered hundreds of thousands of similar accounts and experiences from other disabled people all over the world.

I will absolutely allow that it sometimes feels easier, more “valid”, to ask for reasonable adjustments/accommodations for physical impairments than for neurodivergence or mental illness, but I would also contend that that is an issue of internalised disableism at least as much as anything else.

I believe at least part of the issue is that the image of disability the majority of the abled population has is that it is an unchanging, monolithic thing. “Can’t see”. “Can’t hear”. “Can’t walk.” “Can’t speak.” Whereas the majority of disability is *considerably* more nuanced than that. This is *very* much the case with neurodivergences and mental illnesses, but it is also very much the case with physical impairments.

Basically - being disabled is often pretty awful. The world is extremely inaccessible. It is often tempting to view other types of disabled people as “having it easier” or “encountering more understanding” etc etc. While this may absolutely be true on an individual level, particularly intersectionally (money, race, gender, queerness etc *absolutely* affect life as a disabled person) on a systemic level, it is equally absolutely *not* the case.

And various institutions *massively* benefit from internal envy and infighting in any marginalised community. Perpetuating the idea that “those people have it waaay easier/are stealing your resources etc etc” lets institutions off the hook. The only way we can practically improve the situation - accessibility, services etc etc - for *all* of us is by solidarity with each other as oppressed, marginalised disabled people.

[genericpuff]

If I'm planning to make a comic that features diversity, how do I prevent giving people the feeling that I'm just doing it to check a box?

I do have a bit to say on this, but before I do, disclaimer: My opinion is my opinion and is not necessarily the opinion of all those in the groups I belong to, let alone the ones that I don't. Everyone is different so this is a wide topic and much of it relies on listening to many voices, not just one. Take my advice with grains of salt and treat it as a starting point, not a monolithic rule.

The biggest reason writers get accused of featuring 'diversity' just to check a box is because they don't put any effort into those characters the same way they do others. Maybe they're half-baked or based on stereotypes or it's clear they either aren't a part of the group they're depicting or never consulted someone from that group (this goes for fat rep, POC rep, disability rep, etc.)

Ironically, it just comes down to asking yourself the same question you just asked me - are you writing a character a certain way because you genuinely want to, or are you writing them because you want validation from the readers who might identify with that character?

I'm not gonna assume what groups you fall into of course, but speaking generally to the majority of people who try to include diversity for the sake of it - if you're gonna write a character who's disabled, write them because you want to and are willing to put into the effort; if you're gonna write a character who's black, write them because you want to and not just for the sake of "diversifying your cast". This might be a hot take, but you're not automatically guilty of anything if you're writing an all white all heterocis all abled cast. Obviously it's not as simple as that in all cases, there are definitely stories featuring casts like that who are doing it to push a hateful agenda, but if your characters just happen to fall into a majority because that's where your expertise lies, then by all means, more power to you. Just own up to it, be aware of it. Don't write an all-majority cast like that and then include obligatory half-baked "token" characters to try and make yourself seem diverse, or claim that your work is representing certain groups of people if it isn't due to poor research or lack of exposure to those groups.

Be genuine. Be earnest. Be open to listening and learning. It goes a lot further than putting on a facade just for people's attention or including characters from specific groups just because you feel like you "should". You don't have to do anything, this is art and art is open to all. Write what you want to write, just be honest about it.

[adhbabey]

Imagine saying that mentally disabled people have more privilege than physically disabled people. We're in the same boat, we're just as oppressed as you, just often in different ways.

While y'all won't get locked up in institutions, we're probably both forced to rely on medications and drugs. We're both likely to become addicted or victims of drug advertising.

We both have high rates of suicide, we both probably have severe mental illness along with our disabilities. Depression can be it's own form of chronic illness.

We're both barred from jobs, having children, we lose benefits for marriage, we're incentivized to quit. We both deal with rights being taken away and autonomy issues. Not a lot of protests are accessible on either side.

We're just like you, in the same boat. It's just that disability isn't a monolith and is a spectrum and variety of experiences. Some people will struggle less than others, doesn't mean everyone will. Some mentally disabled people have to rely on mobility aids, aac, carers/people aids, etc. A lot of us have to rely on family and can't move out of abusive situations.

It's not fair to insinuate and assume that we have less oppression just because we don't have the same experiences or disabilities.

We are in the same boat. Stop erasing our experiences. It's okay to focus on cpunk alone, I'm mainly focusing on madpunk in my blog. But we are just as disabled as you. Not more or less.

[themogaidragon]

Support Needs Pride Flags

PT: Support Needs Pride Flags /end PT

These are all disabilities inclusive, since the my former ones are exclusive to autism (link). These flags are inclusive of all disabilities.

Disclaimer: support needs aren't monoliths, they don't have clear ends and starts, the definitions presented here are just attempts at defining what they are.

More information and ressources about support needs on @birdofmay on this post (link).

Here is the Wikipedia page (link) about basic activities of daily living (BADLs) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADLS).

High Support Needs

PT: High Support Needs /end PT

High Support Needs: inability to live independently, requiring global support with BADLs and IADLs. This can include frequently or consistently requiring support with: self-feeding, cooking, bathing, functional mobility, transportation, basic grooming, putting on makeup, continence, toileting, getting dressed, completing tasks, housekeeping, managing medication and money, transportation, etc.

Can be abbreviated online or in writing as HSN(D) for High Support Needs (Disability) or HS(D)P for High Support (Disabled) Person.

Moderate Support Needs

PT: Moderate Support Needs /end PT

Moderate Support Needs: ability varying to live independently from person to person, requiring support with IADLs and some BADLs. This can include frequently or consistently requiring support with: cooking, preparing meals, self-feeding, completing tasks, transportation and mobility, toileting, washing one self, getting dressed, housekeeping, managing medication or money, using communication devices, grocery shopping, pet care, etc.

Can be abbreviated online or in writing as MSN(D) for Moderate Support Needs (Disability) or MS(D)P for Moderate Support (Disabled) Person.

Low Support Needs

PT: Low Support Needs /end PT

Low support needs: ability more often than not to live independently, requiring support uniquely with IADLs. This can include frequently or consistently requiring support with: balancing a checkbook, cooking and preparing meals, pet care, housekeeping, managing medication or money, shopping, transportation, getting started on some tasks like organizing a garage sale or arranging to move from one house to another, etc.

Can be abbreviated online or in writing as LSN(D) for Low Support Needs (Disability) or LS(D)P for Low Support (Disabled) Person.

Flux Support Needs

PT: Flux Support Needs /end PT

Flux Support Needs: ability fluctuating to live independently, requiring support at fluctuating intensity with BADLs and/or IADLs, so much that it cannot be considered low, moderate, high or in between those. Fluctuations can be random, have causes, vary in length and frequency.

Can be abbreviated online or in writing as FSN(D) for Flux Support Needs (Disability) or FS(D)P for Flux Support (Disabled) Person.

Moderate to High Support Needs

PT: Moderate to High Support Needs /end PT

Moderate to High Support Needs: inability to live independently, requiring support bordering between moderate and high. This includes but isn't limited to: being on the high end of MSN, being on the low end of HSN, requiring support with most of BADLs but not globally, requiring support globally with BADLs but moderately, etc.

Can be abbreviated online or in writing as MHSN(D) for Moderate to High Support Needs (Disability) or MHS(D)P for Moderate to High Support (Disabled) Person.

Low to Moderate Support Needs

[pt: Low to Moderate Support Needs /end pt]

Low to Moderate Support Needs: significant difficulty to live independently, requiring support bordering between low and moderate. This includes but isn't limited to: being on the high end of LSN, being on the low end of MSN, requiring severe support with IADLs and a few or mild support with BADLs, etc.

Can be abbreviated online or in writing as LMSN(D) for Low to Moderate Support Needs (Disability) or LMS(D)P for Low to Moderate Support (Disabled) Person.

[thoseyoulove]

I usually just reblog here and don't speak much, but I've been reading too many different takes on this and wanted to say this. This is a Gothic horror about monsters, yes. You can't watch this show thinking is a Disney animation and they'll be basically perfect all the time. There's murder, physical assault, sexual assault, there will probably be incest at some point and more. Everyone that decides to still watch the show is willingly signing up for it. Nobody is forcing them to watch it, it's their call and they should recognize that. And, yes, the show isn't about moral codes and punitivism. It's about exploring the depths of existence and immortality, how high and deep down they can go, if they're condemned to suffer forever or if they can evolve, forgive each other, forgive themselves and find some sense of peace. If you want characters to be condemned and die for their crimes and mistakes, there wouldn't be anyone left to tell the story. Sure, you can still watch it anyway, because the writing, the acting, the score etc are phenomenal, but know that's not happening and that's never been a promise the cast or crew has ever made. Know that certain wishes for yours won't be granted. You can still have a lot of fun, but you know what to expect and that you'll never be fully satisfied.

That said, this doesn't mean the characters should always get a free pass to do whatever the hell they want and everyone should always accept it either. Even on the show, their actions have consequences, the characters get disappointed, hurt, angry, remorseful etc. They break up. They need to make up for each other and gain their trust back. Yes, they're vampires and their bodies and minds work differently, but they still have pretty human feelings and that conflict is one of the premises of the show. Not to mention how a lot of their problems are pretty human too, and stuff that hit close to home for a lot of individuals, so their audience made of real people will react in different ways. If somebody isn't counting the days to see rape, sexual exploitation, incest or any of these heavy topics, it's their right. They may even have traumas with it and, honestly, they shouldn't reveal their personal stories so people learn how to be sensitive and stop calling them weak or mocking them. But if people don't have problems watching that kind of content, or even like some characters known for such actions (focus on some because I don't know how they'll adapt them and if/how they'll be redeemable), that doesn't necessarily mean they support or do that in real life themselves. Perhaps don't make assumptions about strangers without having a pretty good reason to.

People have their own tastes, experiences, triggers and boundaries and they know what's good for them or not, when they can keep watching something or when they should drop it. And that counts for people of color, women, people who are queer, disabled, neurodivergent, part of any minority and/or have a history of being abused. You may be in one of more of those categories, but other people may react different and have different opinions too. People aren't a monolith. We can talk about it and this should be a healthy place for anybody that feels safe to talk and share their opinions and experiences. But if you ever have an impasse, you can mute, blacklist, block words and people. There's nothing wrong in respecting your own personal boundaries and you should never risk your own peace of mind for something that is supposed to be entertainment. Just don't go to people's Twitter/Tumblr accounts to bother them, change their minds or make insensitive jokes, maybe? It's really not that hard.

[dragonofdarkness666]

So apparently I'm autistic..

This is the best definition I found. I hope this helps anybody else that is curious or confusing about the often vague definition.

Autism is a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by issues in communication and sensory sensitivity, which differ from those of the larger population. Communication issues can vary from completely nonverbal to being verbal with a large vocabulary, but with difficulty around the nuance of typical communication, such as tone of voice, body language, metaphor, etc. Sensory issues can vary from being overwhelmed by sensory stimuli that others barely notice (like high pitched noises or florescent lights), to seeking out stimulation that others can find confusing (like repetitive movements or listening to the same song over and over again), and these issues can fluctuate over time.

Many autistic people mask their symptoms due to social pressures, but the underlying issues for those symptoms are still there, and are often exacerbated by masking. So, an autistic person can appear neurotypical, but then seem to act differently “out of nowhere”. This is often due to the stress of masking becoming overwhelming to the point that they find masking difficult or even lose the ability to mask altogether.

Autism is not a monolith, and every autistic person will have varying degrees of the previously mentioned issues. This is why autism is considered a spectrum. The autism spectrum isn't a gradient from “no autism” to “lots of autism”. A spectrum is like a color spectrum, red and blue are both equally colors, but they are clearly different. Autism is similar in that I'm clearly different from a nonverbal autistic person, but we're both equally autistic.

Autism is not an intellectual disability, and while many autistic people can have an intellectual disability comorbid with their autism, many of us can also have average or higher than average intelligence. Autistic people have the same range of intelligence as the general population, but to different degrees than neurotypical people. It can be thought of as a learning disability in the context of social learning, but other than that it has little to do with intelligence.

Autism is not a lack of emotion or empathy, and while we can often struggle to communicate our empathy and our emotions it doesn't mean that we don't have them. Some autistic people may have a comorbid condition that effects these areas like AsPD, but in general we have the normal range of empathy and emotions that we struggle to communicate with others. In fact, for many of us our emotions and empathy can be so strong that they're overwhelming to the point that we feel like we have to avoid situations where they're likely to be triggered. This can make us seem less empathetic than we actually are, especially when paired with our difficulties with communication.

So, that's the gist of what autism is, with a bit of the common misconceptions of what it isn't for good measure. Hope that helps.

[dkettchen]

✨ Men's day PSA ✨

by your friendly neighborhood transmasc men's lib activist ⁓

To the women, male feminists, gays, nonbinaries and transmascs who haven't gotten with the program yet:

If you want the rest of us (incl all trans & otherwise genderqueer ppl) to be free, cishet men need to be freed, because misandry and gender roles affect all of us, but they're the ones defining society's mainstream conception of what it is to be a Man™.

And cishet men can't do that by themselves, so they need your allyship!

Here's my old video on men's issues if you need a general intro to men's lib. Feel free to also check out my videos on men's studies and matriarchy, as well as the various things linked in their descriptions.

Here's some simple things you can do for the men in your life:

question your misandry & anti-men/-masculinity biases

ex. do you think it's fine to make fun of/be mean to men? how do you feel about your own masculine qualities? would you do/think the same thing to/about them if they were a woman/queer person? etc

meet men with kindness & give them the benefit of the doubt

men, like anyone else, are people and not a monolith, the vast majority of them are perfectly lovely and safe to interact with and don't deserve your prejudice, they deserve to be treated as well as anyone else & are usually used to being treated significantly worse

include them in stuff & teach them skills they traditionally don't get to participate in

there are plenty of matriarchal skills that are hecking useful & not available to a lot of cishet men the way they are to women and queer people, ex. make-up, hair/nails/skin care, fashion, sewing/knitting/crafting, or even just like base social skills/presentability

value them

ex. show that you want for them to be alive, healthy, and happy; compliment them/their looks; (where applicable) express your attraction to them incl what abt them you're attracted to; etc

support them in their own self-liberation efforts

ex. emotions/mental health/self-worth, fashion/self-care, parenting/home-making, etc

respect their current limits & comfort zone

ex. if they're not/not yet comfy w something more extremely out of their comfort zone, don't push it, as it might discourage them; understand that certain things don't come to them as easily (yet) as they do to you

remember intersectionality as with all things

ex. don't forget that plenty of men have marginalised identities (mental health, disability, class, race, queerness, etc) and therefore are not the Image of Privilege you may make Men™ out to be; don't invalidate/erase transmascs' & queer men's claim to female gender role things/femininity in order to validate their manhood/masculinity; be mindful of different issues & stereotypes affecting men of different ethnicities; etc

[emwhyarentyouwriting]

Reading Up on Bisexual Issues:

Bisexual Erasure

As for other forms of discrimination, there is also an issue of "bi erasure" happening even within the LGBTQIA+ community. I highly recommend reading Kenji Yoshino's findings in "The epistemic contract of bisexual erasure". But, the highlights include the idea that 'monosexual' people (gay and straight people) either implicitly or explicitly, more or less team up to make the bisexuality of an individual just gO AwaY because of the attitude that as soon as they date the opposite sex, they are portrayed as straight, and as soon as they date the same sex, they are portrayed by society as gay and only gay—both of these assumptions are untrue. ✨If someone is bisexual, they are bisexual.✨ THAT MEANS THEY LIKE THE GENDERS (PLURAL) NOT JUST ONE AT A TIME. And, for the love of god, a bisexual woman/femme dating a man/masc (vice versa) does not make them straight... It's not that hard to understand, I promise. And, I'm sure they know exactly who they are because the human identity is (usually) thought to be stable, even with additional fluctuations if they present themselves. Yes, people can act within social contexts, but normally human identity (such as sexuality, gender, values, etc.) can be pretty stable.

Economic Disadvantages

Recently, I learned most funding doesn't actually go to helping out bisexual folks, 25.9 percent of bi men and 29.4 percent of bi women experience poverty aged 18-44 (slightly more than the gays), with additional factors for neurodivergence, disability, ethnic background, race and more, because the reality of discrimination is common sense. So if you can, please support specifically bisexual causes (as well as the rest of the community because it's also not a monolith). They deserve the same opportunity of a decent living just as the rest of us do.

Bisexual Men Being Completely Invisible and Bisexual Women Being Seen as hypersexual

Bisexual men in most accounts don't seem to really "come out" much at all. When women do so, they are immediately demonized as 'wanting to take all the genders' (???) and that's somehow a threat to other people attracted to the genders???? It makes no sense, I don't know. Speaking for cis people (because there's so little data elsewhere), they aren't generally taken serious in any capacity and called "confused" or, the classic "why can't you just pick one and stick to it?" (I don't know, what if I asked you why you didn't pick a certain partner yourself? Then it would be rude, oh no.) But even still, most bisexuals are considered "whoreish" and oversexualized when the bisexual themselves do not even wish to be sexualized at all (remember that asexual biromantics exist). Meanwhile when someone says "I'm bisexual" they're like "yeah okay" and never acknowledge or respect it again, like it's invisible. Because to most people, it is, because they don't want to think about it for some reason (probably cultural/social bias).

TL DR:

People are sucky to bisexuals, be nice and respect the fact they like both genders, respect is not that hard.

________________

SOURCES:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/26579818?seq=10

[drill-teeth-art]

Hi! Not really an ask! I just wanted to express how much I adore how you actually give accurate representations and descriptions of disabilities/conditions that your characters have. I've found that a lot of people will not put in research or have no experience with those sorts of things and will use stereotypes. So finding someone who makes it accurate and can relate to these sorts of issues is really refreshing. Also I utterly adore your art, I often find myself checking Tumblr just to see if you've posted anything. I love you so much and you're an amazing person. Have a good morning/afternoon/evening/night!

Quite honestly the bare minimum disability research is very simple and I highly encourage people interested in writing disability to do it!

Here are the steps I recommend for anyone interested in writing disability:

-look up the disability you wish to portray

-read a description of the causes, symptoms, and treatments from a credible medical website (read more detailed description of terms you don’t understand as well if needed)

-highly encourage artists and writers to look at reference images and videos for visible disabilities, mobility aids, sign language, disabilities that impact how people move and sit and stand and talk, and etc.

And there! That’s what I’d classify as the barest minimum for disability research. A basic understanding of the condition. What I’d call good disability research involves much more. Reading writings by disabled folks about being disabled, having your work critiqued by disabled folks and compensating them for their time, researching harmful media tropes to avoid, understanding that disabled people aren’t a monolith and will have different relationships with and feelings about their disabilities, etc.

Bit of advice for people interested in depicting disabilities aside, thank you so much. It’s really not too hard to fact check at least the facts of a disability and a lot of people still won’t do it. I’ve seen it. And it frustrates me too. I really appreciate you reaching out! I work hard on my art and this means a lot. I hope you have a good day/night too!

[rosy-fox-art]

Ok🙏🏻 So, this isn’t going to be an easy post, but I think it’s worth saying something because it affects me, and I’m not sure someone else will.

I’ve seen a lot of interpretations of Heart’s blinding as a either a narrative or literal punishment for his attempt to shoot mind. Either Mind blinds him or Soul does. I’m not calling anyone out in particular, I’ve just seen them floating around.

But as a legally blind person (I have oculocutanious albinism which means I am photosensitive and my visual acuity is 20/200), I have slowly realized that these reads in particular are playing into a harmful trope of ‘karmic disability’ and have slowly made me uncomfortable. The trope is essentially that a character is ‘punished’ with a disability for doing something wrong (it is wrong to assume a disability is a punishment in the first place).

I figure that people do not mean to play into a trope or cause harm, etc. I figure that this sort of thing just makes for more ‘ interesting’ fan content. It’s dramatic and spicy and maybe even fun to write. I’ve been there and done that. But it doesn’t serve to push aside the problem, either. So, I guess if anything I’m making this post just to make people aware of it. And of course, not all people who cannot see well or at all will agree with me or be made uncomfortable. We are not a monolith.

I would also like to clarify that I am aware that as far as cannon is concerned, Heart’s blindness is metaphorical. That all we truly know is that he wears a blindfold, and not necessarily the condition of his eyes. However, it is extremely easy to read him as blind or disabled when it comes to fan content. And it’s the fan content alone that I’m talking about, here. Nothing within the album itself . I also know these are not the only interpretations. That some people have very nuanced reads to deal with a very nuanced situation. Far be it from me to police the interpretations of others . This isn’t an everyone problem. You’re welcome to ignore me and move on with your day, especially if this doesn’t really apply to you.

As for what you decide, then, to have be the cause of hearts blindness is up to you. There is nothing wrong with him simply being born like that. People like that exist. Though I know it is not as ‘exciting’ to write about or draw, etc… I typically have it as having been done by himself in order to play into the seeming ‘willful’ blindness and also give him some sort of agency over himself, as not to play into victimizing him. But that’s just me.

I’ve honestly been wanting to talk about handling Heart’s blindness in fan content for a while now, as it’s very personal to me considering I have to deal with some of the challenges posed by it irl haha… maybe I will do so in a more light hearted fashion someday in terms of mobility aids and whatnot. My ask box is always open. So sorry for the abnormally heavy post. I’m not gonna lie, I was very nervous to make it…