#evidence-based study methods

[kedreeva]

Hi Kedreeva!! You mentioned that male peafowl get aggressive when hand-raised, why is that?

There is no research done on this to be able to definitively give an answer. I've written about this before, as well, but I'm feeling chatty.

However, according to anecdotal evidence by keepers around the world, after being hand raised male peafowl treat humans the same way as they would treat a rival peacock they hold a grudge against, and the aggression is almost always worse during mating season (exception cases where it's bad all year). This would seem to indicate that instead of seeing themselves as humans, peacocks see humans as "like them" ie: peacocks, and that the aggression is hormone based.

With peafowl, a male will attempt to chase off unrelated rival males. Related males form leks, but even males that have not ever met before seem to be able to clock blood relations (this actually was confirmed in scientific study, which I have talked about before so you can find it in the peafowl tag somewhere), and whatever method they use to do this, it cannot apply to humans (because you're definitely not able to be blood related to them). As such, the solution is only EVER going to be: chase off. But, humans are not going to be chased off by a bird they are keeping in a pen, and so begins a feedback loop of stress and aggression: they try to chase you off, they can't, they get frustrated and stressed and more desperate, rinse and repeat. This eventually, even with no reinforcement from you, leads them to be stressed even just seeing you, whether or not you're interacting.

However, most people I've seen aren't just "not doing anything," they are actively reinforcing the idea that they are a threat to the bird. They yell, they make sudden movements, they kick them, they pin them to the ground, they chase them around/carry them around, they spray them with hoses, they attack them with sticks/rakes/pool noodles... I have seen the gamut. And ALL of it reinforces the idea, to the peacock, that they are DANGEROUS and should be CHASED OFF. The bird physically cannot escape in many of these situations (being penned in a flight pen), so the only option they would see is fighting.

This is ALL solved by just... not hand raising them. When they don't consider you to be a rival cock, then 99.9999% of them will be chill dudes even during mating season. They don't actually LIKE to fight, but there are certain situations which inform their instincts (instincts strengthened greatly by hormones) that they need to in order to survive/reproduce.

There is ONE potential work around I have found for hand-raised males, if it is not already too late, and that is extensive training. Stan was, by necessity, hand-raised due his medical issues early on. I trained him to jump to a treat perch when he was young, and once he got aggressive, I was able to reinforce the treat perch such that when I went into his pen, he would immediately go to that perch and he would get treats when I left if he stayed there. This didn't eliminate his stress over my presence, but it did alleviate altercations between us, and allow me to care for him properly. I have helped two other people do this with their young hand-raised males (ones they didn't know better about, and won't repeat), so I know that it CAN work for some others, but it's never going to be a good solution compared to just not fucking doing the hand raising in the first place. The birds will still be experiencing stress they shouldn't have to, and the owner will experience stress knowing that aggression is sitting just beneath the surface at all times.

[olderthannetfic]

I mean, I do feel like if someone was traumatized by their religious upbringing, helping them to recognize that as a bad thing and helping them to be free of it is arguably the right move? Yeah just telling them “god isn’t real, get over it” is most likely insensitive but arguably freeing them of their self hating beliefs is the ideal outcome?

--

Man... I was raised to despise religion, but a steady diet of nerdy youtube and really weirdly anti-intellectual takes on tumblr has forced me into repeatedly defending religion. I did not ask for this, but here we are.

Personally, I find most religion kind of dumb, but it is a key part of a great portion of humanity's search for meaning. It's the backbone of so many cultures in so many places and times. Knowing about it is useful for everything from being more politically informed to making up better fantasy world building in fiction.

When a person has religious trauma because they were told that their religion, in this context probably Christianity, hates them, telling them to ditch religion is like telling them they're not allowed to ever have a birthday party again because their abusive parents did something awful at their past ones. Ah yes, cut yourself off from major celebrations and cultural experiences, not to mention community. That's sure to fix things!

It would be far more effective at 1. making them feel better and 2. making them stop adhering to a shitty religion if we introduced them to better religion.

The history of Christianity is one of the most studied subjects on the fucking planet. There are a multitude of progressive scholars who have explored things like how the early church very possibly had major female figures that later asswipes tried to downplay and cover up. I think Religion for Breakfast has some interesting videos that at least touch on this.

There's a whole complex conversation to be had both about how the early church actually handled same-sex relationships and about why a given prescription is even in there from an anthropological perspective. Take the pork thing: it's probably about taxes. Some of the others are about differentiation from nearby groups at the time. Understanding the historical cultural context helps dismantle the idea that this or that specific prescription is a vital core part of the religion that must remain unchanging thousands of years later.

"A true Christian wouldn't have abused their gay kid" is a far better message than "Give up everything you know", and it has plenty of support from scholars who are deeply religious but not dumbass textual literalists who can't grasp that even if a holy text were the word of god, English language edition such-and-such is subject to human interference in the form of All Your Base-level translators.

If Christianity or whatever religion is the issue is a no go due to the traumatized person's past experiences, plenty of people would still be happier finding a different religion than going without.

I really, really cannot emphasize this enough: Religion is a key part of many people's lives the same way, say, sex is.

A lot of people around here seem to fundamentally not get this in the same way that you see people who haven't realized how ace they are going "But whyyyyy?" over the central role that horny plays in somebody else's life. You don't gotta get it, my dudes. Doesn't mean it's going away.

Even just understanding the parameters of what counts as religion and all the different flavors that exist out there will help put the trauma into context for many people. Your asshole parents are in a cult not because all religion is lies but because this Christianity has been perverted into a vehicle for abuse. Other religious people like the scientific method, research, logic, and evidence. It's just your church that's atrocious.

Shitty religion leads to self hate.

You can pick another religion.

[togeppy]

doubt-free ;

xaden riorson x reader

reader quells xaden's worries that he's not going to be a good father, and when he holds his child for the first time, he comes around to believe it himself. ✧ : based on this req! set post-series because these characters need a break and a happily ever after. brief mentions of body self-consciousness near the beginning.

"Have I sprouted a tail?" you ask your husband nonchalantly, as you finish fixing your bed and move to sit atop the now-neatly presented spread. 

Xaden, momentarily stunned, raises an eyebrow from where he sits at his desk. "What?" 

You face him as you make yourself comfortable, letting the book that you had decided to read rest on your lap as you gaze back at the man. "You've been staring at me for minutes now, and not in an 'I need to get you in that bed instead of making it up' way, but in a 'I am looking at you concerned because you've grown a new appendage' way." 

The man lets a small laugh escape his lips at your antics. "No, you have not grown a tail." 

You give him another pointed look. "Fine, then care to explain why you're giving me that look? I know this bump makes me look kind of lumpy now, but I would argue that it's your fault I look like this, so you don't have the right to look at me like I've turned into a wyvern." 

Your hand goes to rest atop your belly that has recently made itself visible regardless of whatever clothes you attempt to hide it behind. You’ve become self-conscious about it - you haven't gotten used to the changes your body is undergoing, and more often than not you find yourself looking in the mirror in the morning wondering where your old body has gone.

Xaden's smile immediately falls, getting up from his seat to lie in front of you on the bed. Without hesitation, he moves your hand and begins peppering kisses along your stomach. A soft smile instantly lights up your face at the action. When he finally finds the amount of kisses he’s given satisfactory, he looks back up at you. 

“Don’t think for a moment that you look unattractive because of this,” he mumbles, placing one final kiss on the bump, “You look more attractive than ever. You’re carrying our child and I think that you look absolutely gorgeous doing it.” 

Your heart lightens at his words, and you bring your hand to rake through his hair as he grins up at you, adoration evident in his eyes. 

“I appreciate the flattery, but that doesn’t explain why I’ve got eye marks in my back from how hard you’ve been staring.” 

Xaden’s smile falls once again as he moves to sit up properly next to you. His eyes go distant, and all you can do is study him as he finds the words to vocalize what he’s thinking. 

“Every time I see the bump grow, it becomes more of a reality that we’re going to be parents.” Xaden starts, unable to meet your eyes at first. You can tell that he hasn’t arrived at the core of his thought yet, so you stay silent, knowing that he’s carefully choosing his words, a habit he’s developed since being named as the Duke. 

“I don’t really… have any idea what a normal parent is like,” he whispers, eyes finally drifting up to your own, his eyebrows furrowed as he continues thinking, “My mother left me in the middle of the night as a child and ran off to the isles to start a new family immediately afterwards. My father was actively running a secret rebellion while also acting as the Duke of Tyrrendor. He cared about me, but I can’t say that his parenting methods were ideal. I… worry that I’m not going to be a good dad because of it.” 

You sit stunned for a moment, before setting your book down on the bedside table, long forgotten. You move quickly to slot yourself between Xaden’s legs, sitting with your own legs tucked beneath you so that you’re now face-to-face, and you take his hand in both of your own. 

“You’re going to be an amazing father,” you state, confidence clear in your voice, “I’ve never met a more caring man in my life. You sacrifice so much for me and everyone in this province daily, more than I could ever begin to put into words. I have no doubts that you’d do the same for our child.” 

Your husband shakes his head, placing his free hand on top of your bump. “But that’s why I worry. I have so many responsibilities that I fear I won’t have enough time to properly give our child the time that they need.” 

For a second, you stare back at him. It’s a valid concern - he does have a lot on his plate given his title, but you know that despite his stony exterior, Xaden Riorson is a lover at his core. He always finds time for the people close to his heart. 

“You’re excellent at dividing your time. You make plenty of time for me, I almost never feel like you’re neglecting me.” 

He raises an eyebrow at you. “Almost never? That’s more often than I’d like.” 

The corner of your mouth lifts up in a playful grin. “Sometimes I’m convinced Garrick thinks he’s the one married to you. While I’m aware that the two of you are allowed to spend time together, I think you need to cut down on your allocated Garrick time and redelegate some of that time to me.” 

Xaden rolls his eyes as he lets out a laugh in fond exasperation. “Can, and will gladly do, but when he comes to our door in protest, you’re the one that’s going to have to deal with him.” 

Your smile only deepens, “I can do that.” Your knees now grow sore at your position, so you move to lie down, and the dark-haired man guides you to lie atop him, your head nestled in his shoulder as your body rests between his legs. 

“In all seriousness though, you might not think it yourself, but you’re incredible at being present despite everything you’ve got going on. You do your paperwork here instead of your office just so that you can be in the same room as me. You invite everyone to have meals together daily so that you’re always updated on how our friends are doing.” You lean forward and place a gentle kiss on his neck. “This baby is never going to doubt that you’ll do the most to make time for them.” 

Xaden smiles softly as he looks down on you, rubbing a hand against your back. You can see in the way that his facial expression has changed that he’s started to accept your words, and has somewhat accepted that he’ll be a not-too-shabby dad. He presses an equally gentle kiss to your forehead. “Thank you.” 

You angle your head to get a better look at him, and you eye him with adoration. “Besides, we’ve got a village at our disposal anyways. Surely if we don’t know what we’re doing, someone will.” You think of your friends, who were so eager to help out the moment that you announced you were expecting, and you know that any of them would be willing to come to your aid in a heartbeat. 

Xaden nods in agreement, before his eyebrows furrow again. “We’re not letting Ridoc babysit without someone else present until this kid is at least ten.”

You open your mouth to protest, but before the words can come out you think of a future where Ridoc has turned your child into an equally rowdy mini-him, and anticipate the headache you both will have trying to rein them in. “Agreed.” 

Your husband lets out a little exhale that doubles as a laugh and holds you tight. 

“Normal parents are overrated anyways,” you whisper, your hand resting on Xaden’s chest, “We staged a revolution, won a war and now reign over a whole damned province. This kid is going to be bragging that they’ve got the coolest dad ever.” 

Three months later, you walk - or rather, waddle with how large you’ve gotten - into your room, where you’re surprised to see Xaden standing near the corner of baby things, a small onesie and children’s book in each of his hands.

“Trying to find your next read?” you quip, and the man spins around to face you, rolling his eyes.

“Wondering how in the world to take care of a baby,” he responds, setting the book down. You move towards him, and he quickly wraps his free arm around your waist for support, knowing you’re not able to stand for very long without growing uncomfortable. 

“That’s a battle we’ll learn to deal with when we get there,” you respond, gaze finally dropping to the item of clothing he had picked out, “I like that one, Imogen bought a cute matching set.” 

Xaden smiles softly, though his eyes have the far-off look you’ve grown so familiar with. 

“What’s on your mind this time?” you ask patiently, knowing that your husband will speak when he’s ready. 

“I’ve been a warrior my whole life, not a nurturer. I’ve spent years fighting to prove my worth as a marked one, to advocate for the cause of the revolution, to demonstrate my competence as a Duke.” He sighs. “This onesie is so… so miniscule. Switching from being a fighter to protecting someone this tiny feels impossible.” 

You take a long look at him - you thought that you had quelled his worries about being an unfit dad months ago, but it’s clear the doubtful thoughts have returned. 

Tilting your head slightly to the side, thinking back to the past, you decide to challenge the man. “You’re not just a warrior, you’ve always been a protector too. You took on 107 scars to keep the marked ones safe. You killed a prince because he was bullying your best friend. You became venin and then gave up the power to save the entire Continent. You shelter me from the onslaught of… everything you face each day. You can’t say that you’re not a nurturer, because you’ve taken on so many fights to protect others that you don’t even realize it’s become second nature to you.” 

He stares back at you, stunned by the list of things you had so easily thought up. “I- I guess.” His eyes are still distant as they travel down to the book he had set aside. “Do you think they’ll like me?” 

Your hand goes up to gently stroke at the man’s cheek. “Of course, they’ll absolutely adore you.”

Xaden stands quiet, still staring down, his mind elsewhere. “I have no experience with babies, and I’ve been told my interpersonal skills make me unapproachable. For most of my life people hated me before they even met me. What if our kid thinks I’m too boring for them? That they can’t come to me with their worries?” His voice sounds defeated, like he’s just accepted that his own child will resent him straight out of the womb.

You look at him, dumbfounded. “Xaden, it’s a baby. I seriously doubt they’ll be concerned about your interpersonal skills, just that their dad is there to rock them to sleep. You’ve quite literally got more backstory than anyone on this continent, I don’t think it’s possible for this child to find you boring.” 

His eyes are no longer hovering on the book, and they now look at yours, as if seeking validation within them. You hold his gaze, strong and sure, letting him know that you believe every word you say to be the truth. 

He exhales, his body sagging against you, and you know you’ve - at least temporarily - placated his fears. He rests his head atop yours, placing a kiss into your hair. His voice now sounds weary as he speaks. “I’ve never been this worried about anything in my life. Honestly, I don’t think I’ve ever had anything this important worth worrying about.” 

You can’t help but smile knowing the feeling all too well. “Yeah, I’ve been getting more and more terrified the closer we get to this baby being born.” 

He lifts his head and studies you. “You’re doing a better job than me at not showing it though.” 

You shake your head. “To the untrained eye, you look unfazed and perfectly prepared. I’ve just been married to you long enough to know that you’re not.” 

Xaden sighs again, tightening his grip around your waist. “You’re going to be the best mother. I’m going to have to try pretty hard to be able to compare.” 

You laugh, peeling yourself away from him to go sit down, your body physically protesting at having stood for so long. “I don’t think you’re going to be a good mother.” 

Your husband scoffs at your joke, following behind you as you continue. 

“But you’re going to be an amazing dad, just you wait and see.” 

Emotions were never Xaden’s strong suit, but holding your baby for the first time has awoken emotions that he didn’t know he was capable of feeling all at once. Pure joy, elation, anxiety, wonder, pride. He feels all of them and more as he stares down at the newborn in his arms. 

Noticing your fatigue hours after the baby was born, your husband urged you to sleep, assuring you that he would keep a careful eye on the baby. He now stands swaying as you and the baby both rest, the latter held tightly yet gently in his arms. 

He paces slowly around the room, rocking your child as he moves. His eyes never leave them for a moment as his shadows hover protectively around both him and the swaddle of blankets to prevent anything from causing the baby any harm. When he’s sure the newborn won’t stir, he carefully takes a seat in a plush chair in the corner of the room, holding them against his chest. 

His finger goes to lightly trace the baby’s features, adoration and awe evident in his eyes. All of his defenses are down - Xaden has never felt this exposed or vulnerable in his life, all because of his offspring, so fragile in his arms. He stares down at his child, unmoving apart from the rise and fall of their chest as they take in small breaths. 

“I’m never going to let anything or anyone hurt you,” he whispers quietly so that no one arouses from their sleep, “Might spoil you a little too. But don’t let your Mommy know that.” 

He casts a quick glance up to you and smiles softly at your sleeping figure, body fused with the bed out of pure exhaustion, yet relaxed, trusting wholeheartedly that he’s taking good care of your child. He knows at that moment that he will do your bidding for the rest of his life - it’s because of you that he has this precious baby in his arms, and for a treasure so great, he can never repay you. 

His eyes drop back down to the newborn, his heart never resting for a moment as the elation overcomes him, every single nerve in his body alert. 

“Everything I do from now on will be for you now, huh,” he coos, “You’ve only been here for a few hours and I’m already willing to raze all of Tyrrendor if it’ll keep you happy. Hopefully it doesn’t come to that though.”

Xaden feels it deep in his chest, the doubts no longer chasing him. He will be a good father because the tiny bundle in his arms deserves the world. They will never doubt that they’re loved, they will have his undivided attention any time they need it, and they will be safe from anything that comes their way. He’s a protector and a nurturer, and with you by his side, and all of your friends that have become family ready to lend a helping hand, this baby will have anything and everything that they will possibly need. 

“I love you with everything that I am,” he whispers to your child, placing a soft kiss on their forehead, careful not to jostle them too much, “And that will never, ever, change.” 

Your husband holds the baby tight, though now the anxiety is gone. He holds his whole world in his arms, and he feels calm, knowing that a new chapter of his life is starting. He’s no longer just the Duke of Tyrrendor, the ex-venin shadow-wielder, or the head of the revolution. He’s your child’s Dad, and to him, that’s the most important title of them all.

[drdemonprince]

hi, i was wondering if you’d heard of/listened to the podcast the Telepathy Tapes? it’s got me feeling all kinds of ways i cant parse yet as a speaking autistic person.

the telepathy tapes is supremely fucked up unscientific nonsense that relies upon the use of a widely discredited communication method called Facilitated Communication, which has been widely disproven numerous times for DECADES and has literally been used to justify the sexual abuse of Autistic people by their care providers numerous times in the past.

FACILITATED COMMUNICATION IS NOT REAL.

it has been disproven many times including in double-blinded experiments. The responses given via facilitated communication reflect information that the *facilitator* knows, not information the Autistic client knows. The American Speech-Language Hearing Association says that facilitated communication should never be used because it is so heavily discredited and prevents Autistic people from actually communicating on their own.

there are many legitimate ways for nonspeaking Autistics to communicate, but FC is not one of them. it quite literally relies upon the exact same effect that makes Ouija boards "work"-- small twitches and unconscious moves on the facilitator's part cause them to pick out words and letters, and makes it seem like the Autistic person is communicating, but all the messages come from the facilitator themselves.

From a systematic review of dozens of studies on FC conducted from the 1990s until 2014:

"Results indicated unequivocal evidence for facilitator control: messages generated through FC are authored by the facilitators rather than the individuals with disabilities. Hence, FC is a technique that has no validity."

Resources:

Facilitated Communication Denies People with Disabilities Their Voice

Facilitated Communication: The Resurgence of a Disproven Treatment for Individuals With Autism

Facilitated Communication and Authorship: A Systematic Review

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Understanding a Scientific Article

Abstract

A brief description of the key points you will find in the paper. This can include:

Objectives: What questions the researchers hope to answer.

Methods: What type of study the researchers used to conduct the study.

Results: What the researchers discovered.

Discussion/conclusion: What the results mean and/or the author’s interpretation of the results.

Look at the date of the study.

Was it conducted in the past year? 5 years? 15 years? As new information is learned, scientific standards and techniques change, and practices evolve.

New research may support results from older studies as well as lead to new methods to diagnose and treat conditions and diseases.

New research can, at times, also contradict other research, which may require additional research to explore and resolve these differences.

Research can separate the good results from the bad results. In this way, the scientific method is self-correcting, which is reassuring.

Looking at the date can provide insight into how the study fits into the larger evidence base on a particular topic.

Methods

Detailed information on the type of research or approach used, the study’s design, the participants, the measurements or outcomes recorded, and steps taken to avoid bias.

Types of Research

Basic research: Scientists ask questions about theories or concepts, and test hypotheses to improve scientific knowledge. It’s the first step in any research.

Translational research: Researchers build on the observations and results of basic research to develop and test new ways to prevent, detect, or treat conditions and diseases.

Clinical trials: Well-planned clinical trials are done with people and may vary in size and type. Clinical trials give the clearest information about whether a treatment or a lifestyle change is effective and safe in humans. However, because they are complicated, lengthy, involve many research participants and can be very expensive, they are usually done only after smaller preliminary studies have been completed.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: When researchers review each other’s research to check for quality and look for converging evidence among studies, they may write systematic reviews and meta-analyses. These look at different studies on the same topic. When many studies come to the same conclusion, it helps us know that the results are reliable and valid.

While all research studies are important and contribute to our knowledge base, clinical trials are the types of studies you probably hear about most often in the news. They can have the most immediate impact on improving health and treating disease.

Results

What the study showed.

The data, summaries, and analyses of the study are presented in this section. Tables, graphs, and charts that show the results are often included.

To better understand the results, you can ask these questions:

How do these results compare with previous studies?

A single study rarely provides a final, definitive answer.

Repeating a study using the same methods with different volunteers and investigators helps us know that the results are reliable and valid.

What do “statistically significant” and “clinically significant” mean?

Statistically significant means the differences observed between the groups are real and not likely due to chance.

Clinically significant is a measure of the size of the effects observed in the study, which shows the impact of the treatment.

A study can find statistically significant differences between two treatment groups, but the differences may be so small that they are not clinically significant in terms of usefulness for patients.

Are there potential conflicts of interest?

Did the study sponsor or the investigators have any financial or reputational "stake" in the outcome?

Most medical journal articles include information about relevant financial relationships.

Discussion

What the results mean.

This is where you can often find out how the study relates to your own health.

This section includes the authors’ explanation of, and own opinions about, what the results mean.

Since the conclusions are the authors’ own, others may or may not completely agree with their explanation of the results.

References

Previously published articles the authors used to review what related research was done before, to help design the study and interpret its results.

Source ⚜ More: Notes & References ⚜ Writing Resources PDFs

[is-the-post-reliable]

I wanted to practice media literacy, but something that keeps coming up is reaffirming to trust what a majority of scientists and doctors believe rather than the fringe ones who may be trying to sell you something. And I agree with that, but I keep getting this bad feeling in the back of my mind because, well, I remember learning about how a lot of different scientific fields are based in ableism, racism, misogyny, etc. Like, for example, a majority of doctors in the US are in favour of invasive and traumatizing surgeries on intersex infants to "fix" them, while intersex adults advocate against these surgeries.

Will this come up in the later courses and discussions on media literacy? Stuff like, trusting the scientific method even if the general consensus is scewed due to being a part of an oppressive system? Thank you ☆

hi! so first of all, I want to start by saying this is probably outside of the scope of this blog to definitively answer - this kind of issue could be debated forever. Also, I want to clarify that I’m not trying to give a ‘course’ here, I’m not a teacher in any way, I’m just some guy who likes fact checking

So with that in mind, I think we should definitely acknowledge that scientific communites are made up of people, who all have their own biases. Social beliefs absolutely have, and will continue, to affect our scientific understanding. That being said, I don’t think that bias is inherent to the scientific method - in actuality, it’s the opposite. When biases affect the research, that’s bad science, which is exactly what media literacy and scientific literacy helps us distinguish. Essentially, I don’t think that these biases are a reason to not practice media literacy. Media literacy is what helps us to think critically about these things.

To use your own example, surgical intervention on intersex infants was based on little data, and became the normalised ‘treatment’ before any rigorous studies were done. It’s the introduction of proper scientific method in medical care that has helped to change our understanding of surgical intervention, and is now pushing to limit surgeries on intersex infants.

From the American Journal of Bioethics: ‘However, the main empirical premises behind this approach, namely, that significant psychosocial benefits would in fact accrue to the child because of early surgery and that these benefits would, moreover, reliably outweigh the associated risks of physical and mental harm, were never subjected to rigorous testing (Creighton and Liao Citation2004; Liao et al. Citation2019). Rather, standard practice in this area became entrenched and institutionalized long before the advent of modern evidence-based medicine (Diamond and Beh Citation2008; Garland and Travis Citation2020a; Dalke, Baratz, and Greenberg Citation2020) as well as key developments in bioethics and children’s rights (Brennan Citation2003; Reis Citation2019; Alderson Citation2023; Gheaus Citation2024).‘

[just-aake]

Everlasting Devotion - Part XII

Pairing: princess!Natasha Romanoff x fem!reader

Summary: Sequel of Boundless Devotion Series. MedievalAU. With her coronation over, Natasha is now the queen of the Romanov Kingdom. However, the position comes with challenges from both old and new enemies as Natasha tries to maintain the peace while also navigating her relationship with you.

Masterlist Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13

Warnings: light angst

Words: 5160

Natasha sits at her desk in her private study, her chin resting on her hand against the armrest of the chair as her eyes remain fixed on the dull, cracked stone on the table before her. 

The room is quiet, save for the distant hum of the bustling castle outside as the staff work to prepare for the upcoming birthday celebration of their queen. 

But Natasha’s attention isn’t on any of the preparations or details–she already told her mother the idea she had for the party so that she and you could enjoy the day despite your current hidden relationship. 

At the moment, however, her thoughts swirl as she considers the mysterious stone.

It’s clearly meant to hold some form of power, though not well it would seem, seeing how the surface fractured so easily when it simply fell to the ground.

As if it was barely able to contain the energy within. 

Based on what she has seen, her best guess is that this stone must be related to some sort of sorcery. 

She taps her fingers lightly against the desk, replaying the events in her mind. 

The effects of being around it—whatever they were—didn’t feel natural. Its ability to influence the mind like the way it did to her, to stir vivid memories as if she was back in that moment again, is too dangerous to ignore.

Then, there is another concerning issue.

Her brow furrows as she recalls the brief, vacant expression on your face when she had stopped you from touching it and the way you seemed disoriented before snapping back to yourself, with no memory of what had happened.

Despite your reassurance, the unease lingers in her chest even now as she considers the possible explanations. 

What’s worrying is that it reminded her too much of the effects of Dreykov’s Widow methods—the blank stares, the lack of control, the erasure of one’s will. 

Natasha’s heart clenches at the memory of when Dreykov had used you against her, forcing you to try to hurt her while under his control. 

She shakes her head at the possibility. 

No, it’s not the same. 

Dreykov is still imprisoned, and without a handler to activate any lingering programming, you shouldn’t be at risk. 

And yet…this stone did something. 

Her fingers curl into a fist as she resolves not to let history repeat itself. 

Whatever this is, she will find a way to protect you from it. 

Natasha picks up the stone, holding it closer to the light. Its surface glimmers faintly, but it offers no clues to its origin. She sighs and places it back down, frustration creeping in. 

The kingdom has so little knowledge about sorcery. There are no experts she can consult, no archives to scour for answers, no next step for her to turn to.

Natasha pauses, straightening in her chair, as she suddenly remembers that there is one person she can ask for help.

Her thoughts are interrupted by the thud of a stack of papers landing on her desk. 

Startled, she looks up to see Steve standing beside her, his expression serious but kind.

“These are the documents we found at Sitwell’s home,” he says, gesturing to the pile. “It’s enough to confirm his and Rumlow’s dealings against the kingdom.”

Natasha sifts through the papers, her eyes scanning the incriminating evidence. But as she nears the bottom of the stack, her frown deepens.

“There’s nothing here about who they were working with,” she mutters, frustration evident in her voice.

Steve nods grimly. 

“No names, no locations. Just references to ‘the supplier’ and ‘the broker.’ Whoever they are, they’ve covered their tracks well.”

Natasha leans back in her chair, pinching the bridge of her nose as she summarizes the situation aloud.

“So we’re dealing with two unknown enemies—one who’s after the secrets of the Black Widow operations and another after this stone and whatever weapons are tied to it.”

She lets out a deep sigh. 

“And in the middle of it all is Y/n.”

Her voice softens slightly at your name, but the worry in her tone is unmistakable.

“This can’t get any worse,” she sighs again, shaking her head.

Steve’s sharp inhale makes her snap her gaze to him, her eyes narrowing in warning.

“What is it?” she asks, apprehension in her voice.

Steve hesitates, his jaw tightening before he answers.

“It seems word has spread about Sitwell’s death—and about a certain someone who was also spotted in a tavern near there around the same time. People among the houses and the kingdom are starting to connect the dots, or at least trying to.”

Natasha’s face hardens as she rises from her chair, slamming her hands on the desk.

“They’re trying to blame her for his death?” she exclaims, disbelief and anger coloring her voice. “The report clearly states what happened!”

Steve raises his hands in a placating gesture. 

“We omitted Lady Y/n’s presence at the scene in the official report, but we can’t hide the fact that many people did recognize her in that area. And with her current reputation, people are eager to jump to conclusions and conspiracies that she was involved in some way.”

Natasha’s fists clench as she glares at the papers on her desk, her mind racing. 

The thought of you being unfairly targeted, of such false whispers about your character spreading like wildfire through the kingdom, makes her blood boil. 

“They don’t know her,” Natasha says fiercely, her voice low but trembling with emotion. “They don’t know what she’s been through.”  

Steve places a steadying hand on her shoulder, his voice calm but tinged with sadness.

“People always look for someone to blame, someone to fear,” he says. “It’s easier than facing a real monster.”

His words are filled with a sense of understanding and sympathy that Natasha notices.

“Her situation reminds you of someone?” she comments, her tone quieter but no less probing. “How is Bucky anyway?”

Steve hesitates, his eyes betraying a flicker of hesitancy before answering simply. 

“He’s doing good.”

He doesn’t offer any more information about the man than that.

Natasha doesn’t mind, but she still presses on, deciding to confront him on the question that has lingered in her mind since she heard about it.

“Bucky told me how you stopped him from killing the Stark princess.” 

His eyes widen in surprise at the sudden topic, but she continues before he can speak. 

“What exactly happened after that?”

Steve regards her for a moment before he exhales heavily, his shoulders sagging slightly in resignation as he recalls the past events. 

“After she was taken, Bucky and I tried to find her,” he admits. “We searched for days, but after what happened, Stark declared him as a fugitive. Anyone found helping him would be seen as an enemy of the kingdom. And with the peace treaty still newly established…”

“Bucky went into hiding,” Natasha finishes. 

“I convinced him to,” Steve confirms. “Told him I’d keep looking for her after he left, but the search was called off soon after.”

Natasha furrows her brows at the revelation. She thought only Steve and Bucky were the ones who knew about the Stark princess being alive.

“Called off? By who?”

Steve’s expression tightens in hesitance before he answers.

“Your mother was the one who ended the search.”

Silence falls in the room as Natasha stares at him, her mind reeling as she processes the implications of his words.

Her mother had known the Stark princess was alive. And yet, she had kept it a secret for all these years.

A new unease settled in Natasha’s chest.

If her mother had been willing to hide something this important…

What else did she know?

~~~~~~~ ⧗ ~~~~~~~

Your hands cradle the sides of the cup, seeking comfort in its warmth, but it does little to calm the unease twisting inside you.

Steam curls softly in the dimly lit cabin, dissipating into the still air as you finally glance up, bracing yourself for the reaction.

Across the small table, Bucky leans back in his chair, his expression unreadable.

His gaze is steady and fixed on you—not angry, but filled with the quiet patience of someone who has seen too much.

“I wasn’t joking when I told you not to touch things you don’t understand yet,” he finally says, his voice calm but firm.

You wince at the reprimand, lowering your gaze to the cup in your hands.

“It’s not like I did it on purpose,” you murmur. “One moment, I was behind Natasha, and the next…she’s telling me I hit her.”

Your fingers tighten around the cup as the memory flashes in your mind.

The faint glow of the stone had drawn your gaze, an inexplicable pull you couldn’t resist.

And then—nothing.

A lapse in time. A gap in your memory.

But this time, it was different.

Your voice drops to a whisper, raw with fear and dread.

“Bucky, I hurt someone this time. Someone I care about. What if next time it’s worse?”

His features soften in understanding at your tone. He exhales, leaning forward to rest his forearm on the table.

“You haven’t talked to Wanda about this?”

You shift uncomfortably in your seat.

“That’s…related to another problem I need to tell you about,” you admit hesitantly.

Bucky raises an eyebrow, waiting.

You inhale sharply before confessing, “The person I hired to fix the gates is actually Tony Stark. He’s in the kingdom.”

Bucky doesn’t react right away. His face remains unreadable as he considers your words carefully.

“Huh,” he mutters at last. “Guess I shouldn’t be surprised. He’s always had a knack for showing up when you least expect it.”

His calmness catches you off guard.

“You’re not worried?” you ask cautiously.

Bucky offers a wry smile.

“I’ve been running long enough to know how to stay ahead,” he sighs, glancing around the cabin. “Doesn’t mean I like it, but I can handle it.”

He studies you curiously.

“How did you figure out who he was?”

You scoff, shaking your head at the memory.

“He practically bragged about his identity when I confronted him,” you say, exasperation lacing your voice. “I’ve never met someone who manages to compliment himself in almost every other breath.”

Bucky smirks, nostalgia flickering in his expression.

“Sounds like him. Guess some things never change.”

His demeanor shifts, his amusement fading as he leans back in his chair.

“So…does he know who you really are?”

You hesitate, looking back down at your cup.

“No,” you admit before sighing. “And I don’t think I should tell him.”

With Tony in the kingdom for peace treaty discussions, revealing the truth would only complicate things—especially for Natasha. You can’t risk him finding out that his sister had been taken by one of her own people for all these years.

Bucky observes you for a moment before suggesting lightly, “What about the twins then?”

Your head snaps up, eyes wide in disbelief.

“What? No. Those two, especially, cannot know.”

His expression softens, understanding your apprehension.

“You said the three of you grew up together like siblings. I doubt finding out who you really are would change that.”

Your throat tightens in fear at the thought.

“Stark soldiers killed their parents, Bucky,” you remind him, your voice cracking slightly. “How can I ask them to see past that?”

Bucky sighs quietly with sympathy before answering.

“Because they know you. Not the kingdom. Not the name—you.” He pauses, his gaze steady and sure. “If anyone understands that, it’s them.”

Silence settles between you. Your fingers trace the rim of your cup as you wrestle with the thought.

“I just…I don’t think I can do it.”

Bucky sighs, but he doesn’t push further.

“At least consider having Wanda check on you,” he suggests. “If you’re still worried about what’s happening with your memories.”

You take a slow breath before nodding, reluctant but willing.

Bucky studies you for a moment before asking, “Are you still going to keep looking into that stone?”

A small, determined smile tugs at your lips.

“I need to figure out what’s happening. You said it yourself—I have to understand how it works. If I can do that, I can learn to control it.”

“That’s not what I meant,” Bucky deadpans, shaking his head. “I understand you want to regain some sort of control of the situation, but are you sure this is the best way to handle it?”

“I don’t know,” you admit honestly. “But I know I’ll figure it out.”

He watches you for a long moment before nodding.

“All right. Just…be careful.”

You offer him a grateful smile before your expression turns more serious.

“What about you? Are you going to leave now that Tony’s here?”

Bucky is silent for a moment as he considers his response, looking around at his home in contemplation before facing you again.

“Have you told anyone else about what’s happening with you?”

You look away, hesitating. Talking with Bucky about this has always been easier than others since you know he understands what it was like not being in control.

With a soft sigh, you shake your head in response.

His expression softens, something gentle flickering in his eyes.

“Then I’m staying.”

Your eyes widen slightly, looking up at him.

“Bucky—”

“I’ll be careful,” he assures you before you can protest. “You gave me a heads-up, and I appreciate it. The least I can do is be here for you.”

His words hit you harder than expected. After everything—the whispers, the distrust, the isolation—it’s not something you’re used to hearing recently.

“You don’t have to, you know.”

“I know,” Bucky replies with a small smirk. “But someone has to remind you that you’re not alone. We have to look out for each other—to protect the people we care about.”

A quiet laugh escapes you, the weight on your shoulders lifting just a little.

“Thanks, Bucky.”

~~~~~~~ ⧗ ~~~~~~~

Natasha slows her horse to a stop at the entrance of your manor. Swinging down smoothly, she lands lightly on her feet, her eyes assessing the newly installed gate.

The sturdy iron bars gleam under the sunlight, their intricate patterns hinting at the work of a master craftsman. A stark improvement from the wreckage that once stood in its place.

Whoever you had hired had done an impressive job.

A voice from behind pulls her from her thoughts.

“Queen Natasha.”

She turns to find Wanda approaching, a woven basket hanging on her arm. Beside her stands a man Natasha doesn’t recognize—tall, poised, his presence exuding quiet intelligence. He carries himself with effortless grace, his thoughtful gaze studying Natasha as much as she studies him.

Natasha offers a small nod in greeting. 

“Hello, Wanda.” Her gaze shifts to the stranger. “And I don’t believe we’ve ever met.”

Before Wanda can respond, the man steps forward with a polite and respectful tilt of his head.

“Vision,” he introduces himself smoothly. “A…friend of Wanda’s.”

Natasha eyes him carefully, her instincts sharpening. There’s something calculated about him, as if he chooses his words with great care. But she doesn’t comment on it.

“What brings you here?” Wanda asks, her tone polite but cool.

Natasha takes out a sealed envelope from her side, the royal hourglass crest embossed in the wax.

“I came to deliver an invitation for Y/n,” she says. “For my birthday celebration.”

Wanda glances at the envelope and then meets Natasha’s gaze.

“She’s not home at the moment,” she says, pausing briefly before adding. “She’s visiting a friend.”

Natasha nods in understanding, already suspecting where you might be.

“Then I’ll leave this with you.” She extends the envelope. “This invitation is also extended to you and Pietro if you wish to attend.”

Wanda takes it without comment, tucking it away. Her gaze lingers on Natasha, assessing.

“If that’s all, Your Majesty, then perhaps you should return home.”

Natasha’s lips twitch in amusement at Wanda’s bluntness, but she doesn’t move. 

“Actually,” she says, tilting her head slightly, “I was hoping to ask for your help.”

Wanda’s brows knit in surprise. 

“My help? With what?”

Natasha reaches into her satchel once more, this time retrieving a familiar object—the cracked stone. She holds it between them, its fractured surface dull, absent of the eerie glow it once emitted.

Wanda’s entire demeanor shifts. Her fingers tighten around the handle of her basket, her expression darkening.

Natasha studies her reaction before continuing.

“I need your help proving a theory of mine.”

Wanda’s gaze locks onto the stone, recognition flaring in her eyes.

“And you want me to do what, exactly?” 

“Channel some of your magic into it,” Natasha explains, keeping her voice measured. “I believe this stone is meant to hold a sorcerer’s power, but I don’t know the extent of its capabilities.”

Wanda doesn’t respond immediately. Instead, she looks at the fractured gem with barely concealed wariness.

“I don’t know if I’m comfortable with that,” she finally says, a note of hesitation in her voice. “We have no idea what could happen.”

Before Natasha can push further, Vision steps forward, his voice even and composed.

“I must agree,” he says, eyes flicking over the fractured surface. “The stone, in its current state, would likely fail to contain her magic. The cracks compromise its integrity.”

Natasha shifts her attention to him, her sharp gaze narrowing slightly.

“You seem well-versed in this subject.” 

Vision offers a polite smile. 

“My family has studied sorcery and its potential for generations.”

From his pocket, he produces a small, glowing yellow stone—no larger than a pendant. The energy within it hums faintly, vibrating with an unseen force. 

“This was given to me by my brother before he disappeared,” Vision says, gazing at it with a flicker of nostalgia. “It holds only a remnant of power, but when I concentrate, I can still feel his presence.” 

Natasha studies the tiny stone—a miniature echo of the one in her hand. Vision’s words confirm her suspicion: these stones were meant to contain a sorcerer’s magic.

But that revelation brings an unsettling realization.

“Does that mean the power in these stones could be wielded by anyone?” she asks, voicing her thoughts aloud. “Even those without magic?”

Vision nods thoughtfully. 

“Theoretically, yes—if the vessel is strong enough to contain it. However, its effects would also depend on the source.” He gestures subtly toward Wanda. “For instance, Wanda possesses extraordinary strength and versatility in her powers.”

Natasha doesn’t miss the admiration in Vision’s voice or the way Wanda’s expression softens as she glances at Vision—the quiet smile she offers him. 

But she pushes past the moment, turning to Wanda with renewed urgency.

“Can we speak alone for a moment?” 

Vision catches the cue, offering a courteous nod before excusing himself. He strolls past the gates, hands clasped behind his back, leaving the two of them in private.

Once he’s out of earshot, Natasha’s expression shifts, her voice lowering.

“How is she?” she asks, cutting past the pleasantries. “Really?” 

Wanda crosses her arms, her posture becoming defensive.

“She’s fine,” she answers curtly. “Aside from the ridiculous rumors that she had something to do with Lord Sitwell’s death.” 

Natasha exhales slowly. She had anticipated this, but hearing it aloud cements the weight of it.

“I didn’t expect this to lead back to her.”

Wanda’s eyes darken, her stance firm. 

“You should have.” There’s a bite to her words. “With how people already treat her, it doesn’t take much for them to paint her as a villain.”

The unspoken accusation isn’t lost on Natasha.

Still, she meets Wanda’s gaze evenly.

“That’s why I came—to make sure she’s okay.” Her voice is softer now, more genuine. “Have you noticed anything…strange about her lately? Any unusual behaviors?”

A flicker of protectiveness and outrage flashes across Wanda’s face.

“What are you implying?” she demands. “That she’s not herself?”

Natasha hesitates. She doesn’t want to question your state of mind either. But after what she saw, she can’t ignore it. 

“Something happened to Y/n in town,” she admits. “I don’t like the thought of her mind being affected again either. But after everything, isn’t it worth checking?”

For a moment, it seems like Wanda is about to argue further, but as she considers Natasha’s question and the concern in her tone, her defensive posture relax slightly, though her resolve remains firm.

“She’s fine,” Wanda repeats. “I made sure Dreykov’s influence in her mind can’t be used again, and I’ve checked multiple times before.”

Natasha watches her closely for a long moment before slowly nodding.

“Alright, if you’ve already checked it out,” she says, pausing to gauge the truth in Wanda’s expression. “I’ll trust you. We all care about Y/n’s safety, after all.”

Wanda’s gaze sharpens, the weight of something unspoken pressing between them.

“Do you?” she asks quietly. “Because it really doesn’t feel that way—not with how you’ve been handling things.”

Natasha’s lips press into a thin line, but she doesn’t argue. She understands where Wanda’s anger is coming from.

Instead, she simply says, “We’re on the same side here, Wanda.”

Wanda’s eyes search hers, looking for something—anything—to convince her of that. But in the end, she only shakes her head, her expression unreadable.

“I wish I could believe that.”

With that, she turns and walks into the manor, leaving Natasha standing alone, the weight of unease settling deeper in her chest.

And for the first time in a long while, she wonders if you feel the same way.

~~~~~~~ ⧗ ~~~~~~~

After leaving Bucky’s cabin, you return to the manor, your mind a whirlwind of unease and resolve. 

The stone in your possession is still a mystery, and if there was anyone who could help you decipher it, it was the man currently hammering away in the makeshift tent out front. 

As you approach, the sharp clang of metal against metal echoes into the cool evening air. 

The tent, hastily set up near the manor’s entrance, is cluttered with half-finished contraptions, schematics, and tools strewn across multiple surfaces. A warm glow flickers from the hanging lanterns, casting long shadows over the disarray. 

Pushing aside the front flap, you step in.

Tony is hunched over a worktable, humming an offbeat tune as he shapes a small piece of metal. Sparks dance off the edges as he grinds it against a whetstone, the acrid scent of burning steel filling the air. 

He doesn’t acknowledge your presence, too absorbed in his work.

You make your way to the table, pausing just in front of him. When he still doesn’t look up, you pull the cracked stone from your pocket and set it down with a deliberate thud.

The impact silences the rhythmic clang of his tools.

Tony finally stops, his hands stilling as his gaze flicks to the stone, then to you. A single brow lifts in curiosity.

“I need to understand how this works,” you state, gesturing at the fractured stone. “Your friend mentioned how you once tried to create something like it but failed.”

Tony scoffs, setting his tools aside as he straightens to his full height. His arms cross over his chest, an air of casual arrogance settling around him.

“First of all, I didn’t fail,” he corrects, wagging a finger at you. “I chose to stop. There’s a difference.”

You furrow your brows slightly at the revelation. 

“Why did you stop?”

“Conflict of interest,” he replies vaguely, leaving little room for elaboration as he waves off the question. Then he tilts his head, scrutinizing you. “And second, even if I were to humor this little project of yours, what makes you think I’d need your help?”

You shift, fingers tightening around the object hidden behind your back.

“Because you couldn’t figure it out yourself,” you reply smoothly. 

Tony chuckles, the sound dripping with amusement.

“And you think you can?”

Your grip tightens around the charred book’s worn cover. 

“Yes,” you say evenly, “with your help. And with this.”

With deliberate slowness, you bring the book into view.

The second Tony’s eyes land on it, his entire demeanor shifts. His casual smirk falters, and his body tenses, fingers twitching like he’s resisting the urge to snatch it from your hands.

He takes a single step forward, pointing at the book.

“How do you have that?”

You take a step back, holding it just out of reach.

“It was given to me.”

His expression darkens.

“Well, that doesn’t belong to you. So hand it over.”

You raise a brow, unaffected by his sudden change in tone.

“Help me,” you counter, “and I’ll give this to you.”

His jaw tightens, his gaze flicking between the book and your face. The seconds stretch between you, thick with tension.

Then, with a long exhale, Tony crosses his arms and tilts his head.

“Alright,” he says simply. “You’ve got my attention.”

~~~~~~~ ⧗ ~~~~~~~

“Pietro, calm down. It’s not that big of a deal.”

You step into your room, the familiar space offering little comfort against the storm of emotions trailing in behind you.

Wanda looks up from where she stands beside your bed, momentarily pausing as she arranges another dress among the already spread-out collection. Her eyes flick to you, curiosity flickering in their depths.

Pietro follows in after you, hands waving in agitation, his movements restless.

“I just don’t get why you want them to stick around,” he huffs. “The gate’s already been fixed.”

You sigh, turning to face him, hands on your hips. Ever since you had revealed the news of Tony and Vision’s extended stay, Pietro had been nothing but vocal in his disapproval.

“I know you and Tony don’t get along, but—”

“It’s not just that,” Pietro interrupts, frustration evident in his voice. His fingers fumble inside his pocket before pulling something out. “Look, I searched through their things—”

“Pietro!” you exclaim, aghast. “You went through their belongings?”

He barely acknowledges your reprimand, stepping closer to show you a small scrap of fabric. You frown as you take it from him, running your fingers over the faded embroidery. 

The lines of an all-too-familiar sigil stand out against the fabric—Stark’s crest.

“They’re from the Stark kingdom,” Pietro says, voice laced with disapproval. “We can’t trust them.”

Your fingers tighten around the cloth as your gaze flickers away.

“They’re not bad people,” you say softly. “Not everyone from Stark is bad.” 

He scoffs in disbelief, rolling his eyes. 

“Sure. But do we have to involve them in our lives?”

You let out a tired sigh, realizing that Pietro’s resentment toward the kingdom was something you had anticipated but clearly underestimated.

“Bucky saved your life,” you remind him gently, hoping to reason with him. “Or did you forget he’s from Stark too?”

His expression twists at the mention of Bucky, as if the reminder conflicts within him. Crossing his arms, he shakes his head stubbornly.

“That’s different.”

“Come on, Pietro,” you try again, softening your tone. “Can’t you at least try to—” You hesitate, searching for the right words.

But Pietro is already shaking his head.

“Please, Y/n, don’t let them stay.” His voice is quieter now, almost pleading.

He looks at you with the same expression he wore as a child—the little boy who always counted on you to take his side.

You take a steady breath, grounding yourself before answering.

“I’m sorry, Pietro,” you say, firm yet gentle. “But it’s already done.” 

His lips press into a tight line.

For a second, it looks like he might argue further, but instead, he clenches his fists and exhales sharply through his nose. Without another word, he dashes off, the air around him rippling from the sheer force of his departure.

The lingering tension settles heavily in the space he leaves behind.

You pinch the bridge of your nose, exasperated.

“Wait—Pietro!”

The only response is the distant sound of his retreating footsteps.

You let out another sigh before turning to Wanda, who has remained silent throughout the entire exchange.

“Wanda,” you start. “Can you talk to him? You’ve been spending time with Vision—maybe you can convince him that they’re not all bad.”

When she doesn’t immediately respond, you glance at her more closely. She’s staring down at her hands, lost in thought. Her fingers twitch slightly, as if turning over something unseen.

“Wanda?” you call again.

She blinks, her gaze snapping up to meet yours.

“Can I look inside your mind?” she asks suddenly.

You freeze. Of all the things you expected her to say, that was not one of them.

A beat of silence passes between you.

Wanda, sensing your hesitation, quickly waves a hand. 

“I just want to make sure the block I put in place is still strong after all this time,” she clarifies, her voice even but her fingers fidgeting slightly.

You shift, glancing away.

For a moment, doubt grips you—not because you don’t trust Wanda, but because what if she sees too much? 

Wanda watches you closely, and when you don’t respond, her shoulders sag slightly.

“Never mind,” she says, softer now. “I shouldn’t have asked.”

You snap your gaze back to her, guilt tightening in your chest.

“No, it’s fine,” you say quickly.

Her eyes widen slightly in surprise. 

You take a steadying breath, shoving aside your apprehension. You know Wanda—know that she would never pry deeper than necessary. And more than anything, you don’t want her to think that her abilities should be feared.

You reach forward and take her hand, gripping it firmly. 

“I trust you, Wanda.”

A flicker of something unreadable crosses her face, but she nods, inhaling deeply before closing her eyes.

A soft red glow encircles her fingers before she brings them up to your temple.

The moment her power touches you, it’s as if a presence brushes against your mind—gentle, cautious. It doesn’t force its way in, merely drifts through the edges of your consciousness, skimming the surface like a ripple across water.

For a moment, an uneasy thought lingers—what if she sees the truth?

But Wanda does not pry deeper. She simply searches for what she needs.

After a moment, the red glow fades, and she withdraws her hand.

You look at her, your heart still hammering in your chest.

“Well?”

A smile breaks across her face.

“Everything’s good,” she assures you.

You let out a breath you hadn’t realized you were holding, the unease within you easing just a little.

“That’s good to hear.”

Your gaze shifts to the array of dresses and fabrics spread across the bed. Some fabrics are cut into smaller elaborate designs, while others are carefully pinned together, awaiting final touches.

You raise an eyebrow. “What’s all this?”

Wanda’s grin widens with excitement. She reaches for an envelope on your desk, holding it out to you. The opened seal bears Natasha’s family crest.

“To prepare for the Queen’s birthday celebration,” she reveals.

Then, in a playful gesture, she picks up a piece of fabric and drapes it over the upper half of her face.

“It’s going to be a masquerade.”

~~~~~~~ ⧗ ~~~~~~~

Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13

a/n: Thank you for reading!

If you asked to be tagged and I missed it, please let me know again.

Taglist : @midastouch013, @2silverchain, @dvrkhcld, @observeowl, @x-drowned-x, @fireandblood-3, @natsxwife, @leequifey, @blacklightsposts, @srt-sah, @scar-letwidow, @likefirenrain, @autorasexy, @natsbiggestfan1, @lex13cm, @iheartjohansson, @tofu9162, @unexpected-character, @natashasilverfox, @acciowriting, @qtreesfanstuff, @mrsrushman, @inarayofmoonlight, @viosblog112, @inarayofmoonlight, @maximoff-jp, @natashasilverfox, @hellenheaven, @hotcocoandonuts, @alwaysgoodnight, @cactuslover2600

[royal-cupidity]

Something happened and I thought that this is gonna make some funny fic.. since I can't write, maybe you can do it? (I'm not forcing you, its ok if you don't do it) This is really embarrassing.. before I tell it, I WAS ON MY LOWEST POINT. I was ovulating, horny, single and research was killing me.

I had fun with a test tube.. it almost got stuck. I tried to pull it out but it was really slippery and I thought of using forceps but I was scared that it might break it inside so I had no choice to get it out with my fingers.

I'm so sorry you had to read this. A few days ago I was defending you from some fools on the internet and now this.

This isn't how I usually talk but I have used up all my grammar skills due to our research paper. I'm so tired. College makes you do questionable things.

“In Vitro, In You.”

Rating: T+ (mild sexual content, no actual smut) Pairing: Senku Ishigami x Reader (I found this EXTREMELY FUNNY and too good to pass up. Thank for you sharing lmfao— took my mind off of my wisdom teeth consultation…)

You weren’t going to die like this. You refused.

Not on the laboratory floor, pants halfway down, staring at a poster of Marie Curie and wondering if she’d be proud of your “curiosity.”

The test tube was still inside you.

You were still inside your lowest moment.

One ovulation-induced, thesis-writing, brain-rotting moment of weakness. You'd seen it lying there, glinting under fluorescent lights like a siren from hell. Slim. Smooth. Sterilized. And, regrettably, conveniently phallic. And in your hormonal haze, you’d thought:

“Science is exploration.”

Not even two minutes later, you were on your back trying to remember if borosilicate glass had a tensile strength strong enough to survive vaginal suction.

You’d panicked. Reached for the forceps. Recoiled. Visions of ER visits danced behind your eyes. You imagined explaining it to your gynecologist. Worse: a male gynecologist. Worse still: Senku Ishigami, who was, tragically, your partner for this semester’s Advanced Experimental Design.

That was when the lab door opened.

Click.

Rustle.

“Yo. You forgot your data sheets—”

And then silence.

You couldn’t even look.

“...You know, there are safer methods for artificial insemination,” Senku said dryly, voice echoing off your pride. “Unless this is some radical new protocol you forgot to mention during hypothesis design.”

You wanted to die. No, you wanted to evaporate. Maybe combust. Something quick and volatile that left no body, no evidence, no test tube.

“I can explain,” you croaked, not moving. “Actually, I can’t. But I can theorize. Hormones. Stress. Sleep deprivation. A warped sense of agency.”

“You’re giving me citations while a test tube is still halfway inside you?”

“Please stop talking.”

Senku crouched, annoyingly calm. He set your data sheets on the counter, adjusted his lab coat, and leaned forward with the investigative interest of someone studying fungal growth in petri dishes.

“You want help?”

You turned your head sharply. “No!”

He raised a brow. “Then stop clenching.”

You whimpered. “I wasn’t clenching until you walked in!”

“You’re literally creating negative pressure,” he muttered, and—oh god—he reached for gloves. Snapped them on. Powdered latex and your dignity now mingled in the air like acid and base.

“Senku, if you even think about going near—!”

He pulled back. “Relax. I'm not gonna go spelunking in your sin cave, jeez. I was going to hand you the lubricant from the prep kit, but if you’d rather do this raw—”

You flung a hand toward him without looking. “Give it!”

He placed the small bottle in your palm like a soldier passing a grenade.

Five minutes of slippery, shameful maneuvering later, you managed to retrieve the test tube with a soft pop and an echoing sense of lost innocence.

You lay there, limp, glaring at the ceiling. “If you ever tell anyone about this, I’ll spike your food with potassium cyanide.”

He snorted. “You wouldn’t waste good cyanide on me.”

“Don’t tempt me.”

Senku grabbed a disinfectant wipe, flicked the tube clean with an almost too-practiced motion, then held it up to the light.

“...Still intact. Glass is more durable than most people assume. Honestly, I’m impressed. You chose a high-quality one.”

“Are you complimenting my taste in emergency sex toys?”

“No, I’m complimenting your subconscious material analysis skills under stress.”

You sat up, face hot enough to sterilize the entire counter. “I can’t believe I’m in love with you.”

The words fell out. Just—slipped. Like everything else today.

Senku paused. Like someone who just got an unexpected positive result in a wildly unethical experiment. Slowly, he turned to you.

“Oh?” he said, voice infuriatingly smug. “So that’s why you were willing to risk internal lacerations in the name of biology. You were thinking about me.”

“No I wasn’t.”

“You literally just said—”

“Shut up! That was a—heat of the moment—delirium confession!”

He leaned in, way too close. “So you’re saying if I ran a controlled trial—let’s say, increased proximity and chemical stimuli—you’d still deny any feelings?”

“Don’t you have platinum to purify or something?”

“You’re deflecting.”

“I’m threatening to kill you.”

Senku’s grin was a slow-burn reaction, heat rising without a single spark. “Alright then,” he said. “When you’re ready to write your case report on how not to use lab equipment as a coping mechanism, let me know. I’ll peer-review it.”

He turned to go.

But before he reached the door, he looked over his shoulder.

“And hey,” he said. “If you’re still curious about inserting things for science—”

“GET OUT.”

[h-sleepingirl]

Essay: Hypnosis is Irrational

For PSYCHOSPIRITUAL: A Spirituality/Hypnokink Essay Jam

This is an essay about bonfires, Quaker meetings, Judaism, and the entirely transcendent nature of hypnosis. I'm sorry in advance to philosophers and scientists. Don't come for me until you've seen God in the ceiling through your fluttering lashes!

--

Rationality is a core value of modern western society. Materialism and objective, evidence-based science are seen as the gold standard for how to view the world around us. It’s easy to see why -- this approach has catapulted humanity forward over a relatively short period of time, technologically and philosophically. Finding the truths of the universe through hard evidence and math is extremely compelling and much more logical than basing our views off of conjecture or old religious texts.

Hypnosis entered public western consciousness in tumult. Franz Mesmer’s animal magnetism clearly worked, and he had theories of why, but they didn’t hold up to scientific rigor. Really from its inception, hypnosis has been fighting to be seen as legitimate as a medical practice, and as compatible with evidence-based science.

It’s not that it doesn’t make sense that hypnotherapy fights so hard to be accepted as a “real” discipline, or that it needs to go through studies to be practiced on patients. We value medicine that is objectively safe and effective -- for good reason.

That being said…

I am not anti-science. But I do think if we don’t acknowledge the methodology’s limitations, we are being dishonest and misleading -- with ourselves and with those we teach.

Here’s the thing: We are not doing therapy with our partners. We don’t need to be beholden to these limitations. Not in our theory, and especially not in our practice.

We are free -- more free than any other practitioners of hypnosis -- to accept and celebrate its irrationality.

And when we stop trying to shoehorn our experiences into being understandable, we are free to explore and experience unbelievable things.

--

In terms of spiritual beliefs, I would describe myself as a skeptic-leaning agnostic. I think that how you are raised is a major religious influence on you, and I happened to be raised in an atheist household. Despite branching off from my family and taking spiritual exploration seriously, I would never confidently say “I believe in God” or “I believe in magic,” nor that I am even particularly convinced by my handful of difficult-to-explain experiences.

While my spirituality intersects with hypnosis, I am not here to tell you that hypnosis is the result of God or magical forces -- and I’m not here to define how hypnosis fits into “magic” or vice versa. I think that too is a kind of rationalization -- it’s trying to explain something nebulous in a concrete way, trying to fit it into a box.

I don’t think that calling hypnosis irrational should cause us to seek alternative, definitive answers outside of science. I think that we as humans need to be comfortable not knowing, not labeling -- a space that can be very uncomfortable for us, but one that ultimately allows us to have less-filtered subjective experiences.

Subjective experiences are the core of hypnosis. No matter what method is purported to be “objectively” best, the one that you should actually use is the one that makes your partner feel trance most intensely. Science simply cannot anticipate, direct, or account for the subtlety of the subjective experience of hypnosis.

Scientific tests cannot accurately measure anything about hypnosis, because hypnosis relies almost entirely on the softest variables: the interpersonal relationship and biases we have, the way a person is feeling or primed on a given day, the slightest changes in tone or delivery or nonverbal language. We might say that standardized hypnosis is a completely different activity from the hypnosis that we practice with real partners.

A brainwave-measuring machine cannot communicate the intricacies and depth of a trance. I would not be surprised, if I was hooked up to an EEG, that many of my “trance states” would not produce expected effects on the device. Even physically observable signs of trance do not tell the whole story -- I can be having an intensely hypnotic internal experience while appearing completely awake. There is simply not an objective way to tell when I am hypnotized -- it is completely based on my own feelings.

And yet, with shocking accuracy, my partner can tell the exact moment that I slip into trance, even if I give no discernable outward response. When pressed, he often can’t identify what the signal is -- it is very, very subtle, if anything.

It is a moment where his focus on me melds into my experience, into my mind.

Really, there have been countless times in hypnosis that I feel with total certainty that my mind is being read or that I am reading my partner’s mind. It’s shocking, and sort of maddening, and I have heard from many others that they’ve experienced the same thing. Our urge is to say, “Well, that’s a result of unconsciously reading microexpressions, of knowing a person’s nonverbal language intimately, of having a robust internal map of a person, being good at anticipating hypnotic responses, linguistic cold reading tricks.” That’s rationalizing, and it’s all very logical and certainly has some element of truth to it -- but it causes us to say “OK, case closed,” and sigh in relief that we can dismiss the question and no longer be faced with it.

The reality is this: Those are guesses. They are probably pretty good guesses, but I believe we fall into this trap of assuming the logical-sounding guesses we make are objectively correct, even in the absence of evidence.

Ostensibly, the vast majority of “answers” we have about why hypnosis works are just that -- theories, models, best guesses. Science doesn’t even have a singular accepted answer on whether hypnosis is an altered state. Often, working within a given theory (or two) gives us structure and allows us to perform more effectively. But when we really think about the nature of hypnosis, the truth is that we really don’t have much of a solid idea why and how it works.

That’s uncomfortable. I’m not pushing that because it’s the cold, hard truth, or because accepting it is some form of mental asceticism (nor spiritual gateway). I’m saying it because living in that liminal space of irrationality will actually change the way you do and experience hypnosis -- because it frees you from the limitations of feeling like everything we do has to make sense.

--

I have my own theory about why we want to make those logical guesses: Because it feels embarrassing to say we are hypnotists and yet there are things we don’t understand. Because we are afraid of judgment if we say we are actually mind-reading or doing magic, even as a shorthand for a complex invisible process. I think these are unconscious biases -- a result of seeing ourselves as rational people in a rational world. Spirituality is seen as lesser and fake -- entertaining the idea of magic gets you labeled as immature or crazy.

But when you try to remove your biases and think about it, it is crazy that we use just our words to make people forget things, hallucinate things, have orgasms, experience dissolution of the ego. And we don’t really know why.

True curiosity and wonder are hypnosis’s best friends. New subjects who struggle to experience trance or suggestions often are stuck because of their expectations -- they feel like they know what is supposed to happen, so when their experience doesn’t line up, they perceive it as failure. It’s why one of the best ways you can set a person up for “success” in hypnosis is to really cultivate a sense of curiosity, of not being judgmental of their experience, of not assuming they know what is happening.

Even still, this model of trance often has the subject experiencing wide-eyed wonder while the hypnotist actually holds the esoteric knowledge of what’s going on behind the curtain. But in my opinion, the real magic happens when both parties are prepared to question everything they know, to be surprised, to not take for granted, and to observe without rationality.

My most treasured memory is one that I keep close to my chest. Briefly: it was at a hypnosis-friendly bonfire on the autumnal equinox. My partner and I embraced and for an hour had a completely shared experience, wordless and hypnotic and bizarrely spiritual. Neither of us were “driving” -- we were both passengers, almost like being possessed. No drugs were involved, just the two of us in the right place at the right time, able to let go of the feeling that we were “crazy” or being illogical, or that we knew what was going to happen. We were both really shaken by it.

That ultimately led us to being able to have trances, occasionally, where we mutually let our guard down and play without the usual “rules.” We can’t do it intentionally, but sometimes we hit on little pockets of magic, and then the trance becomes like spellcasting, and spellcasting isn’t bound by the laws that supposedly govern hypnosis.

We know that hypnosis is influenced largely by how we expect it to work. We give pretalks to set expectations that often function as suggestions, boundaries, and definitions: “All you need to do to be hypnotized is pay attention -- it’s OK if your thoughts drift.” “Hypnosis might feel different from what you expect, like floating or sinking.” Even: “You can always come out of trance if you need to.”

I believe my partner and I are on similar pages about whether magic is “real.” The word “maybe” does a lot of heavy lifting in my worldview. It’s really more about being open to different perspectives, and playing in different models. So if we can dip into a perspective where hypnosis behaves a bit more like magic -- or otherwise irrationally -- then that actually, literally changes the way hypnosis works.

This is the true nature of hypnosis -- it is a shapeshifter. If you define hypnosis as a science or as a spiritual practice, it works either way. So if you can change the beliefs you inhabit, you will experience wildly different trances. And it may be irrational to assign spirituality and magic to it, but it is not absurd.

--

In this way, belief and perspective is actually where a lot of the nature of hypnosis sits.

After the “bonfire incident,” I was motivated to do some spiritual seeking, and I started going to Quaker meetings. Quaker meetings are simple but intense: People get together in a room and sit silently, opening themselves up to “messages” from within their own hearts or outside themselves, and if they feel moved to share a message, they stand up and speak it. There is no discussion, just completely passive listening and speaking.

I found this to be an extremely potent spiritual environment. We weren’t meditating, per se, just going quiet. Sitting silently for an hour with no other stimulation was luxurious, and felt quite a bit to me like a kind of trance.

I went regularly for a few months. I never spoke, but I did listen. There was one meeting I remember vividly where I was sitting and thinking about something, and at that moment, a woman stood up, and shared a message that was very close to what I was pondering over.

Then another woman stood:

“I know sometimes in this room,” she said, “we feel like we are all thinking the same thing when someone shares a message. This is one of those times for me.”

There was no fear of judgment, nor proclamation of metaphysical experience. It was just a statement of fact.

Quaker meetings taught me to be curious. If the bonfire opened the door, Quaker meetings honed my ability to be irrational. There was a period while I was going regularly where I was seeing wonder in the world at every turn -- a leaf falling on my back felt like a tap on the shoulder, the wind felt like a whisper.

And when my partner and I were doing hypnosis, my rigid belief system became so flexible that I was utterly open to suggestions about my experiences. He would tell me things and I believed them completely, almost like being on a drug, or completely enchanted. We were doing serious magic back then, tempting reality to peel back and reveal the “truth” underneath. It was intoxicating, and it certainly had an element of danger.

As intense as it was, I found this magic to be frustrating too, because I wanted to understand the nature of it -- I wanted to understand hypnosis so badly, and I wanted so badly for magic to be real. I thought that maybe there was a facet of hypnosis that I’d been missing -- some spiritual facet -- that would take me one step closer to an objective, unified, overarching hypnosis model.

I was right that I had been neglecting to think about spirituality with regard to hypnosis. But of course the idea that was leading to some overarching truth was a red herring. The real truth is that there is no overarching truth -- hypnosis can be seen from many models and perspectives, but there isn’t a singular “correct” one.

-- 

I have written extensively about how I feel this is core to hypnosis -- both in educational articles, an upcoming book, and in a personal essay about Judaism. My Jewishness is critically important to me, and has taught me a lot about the value of diverse perspectives, including on the spectrum of rationalism versus spirituality or mysticism.

By some, religion is often seen as incompatible with science (or rationality) -- unprovable mystical forces, an unseeable omnipotent creator. But there have been a number of important rationalist thinkers throughout history, across world religions.

Judaism’s most famous is probably Maimonides -- Moses ben Maimon. He lived in Spain in the 1100s, a time and place where Jewish mysticism was thriving. Maimonides was both a scientist and a deeply religious, learned Jew. One of his greatest contributions to the culture was in codifying Jewish law and practice in the common tongue to make it accessible to the average Jew at the time. In doing so, his rationalism made a great impact in Judaism as a whole.

Maimonides brought Aristotalian philosophy into Judaism, which came with a full rejection of the supernatural -- with the exception of God as transcendent creator. (The creation exists, so it must have been created.) One of his major theological tenets was that there was no conflict between the scientific and the teachings of Torah -- that the revelations of God were completely compatible with science. To Maimonides, for example, angels were not supernatural beings, but a metaphorical personification of the natural forces of the world. There are “angels” for why the wind blows, and “angels” for why we are held stuck to the earth.

If something appeared to be at odds with the natural order of the world -- whether it was from Torah or a perceived miracle -- Maimonides said that was our own lack of understanding, both of science and of the “secrets” of Torah. Essentially: everything that seems irrational has a rational explanation.

There are pros and cons to this, in my opinion. First, it’s neat, elegant, and sensible -- and I think it’s compatible with a measured view of hypnosis. Hypnosis is real -- no one is disputing that -- and while it has unknowable parts to us at our current point in history, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it behaves counter to the natural order of the world.

But I think Maimonides contradicts himself. If you claim to be humbled by the secrets of the world and revelation, why would you so vehemently reject that the world might behave differently than you understand or expect?

How can we claim to “know” the natural order of the world in any capacity beyond what we can observe? How can we claim that our observations are universal or objective?

If we can’t know, we can only experience, explore, experiment. It is brutally human -- reaching out to the world with our limited five senses and our remarkable consciousness. By the nature of us being humans, our explorations will all produce different perspectives and models, all of which have an element of truth to them because all of our experiences are “real,” true experiences.

Hypnosis operates necessarily with/on the human brain -- two unique human brains -- so we each see a unique, limited facet of it. By talking, playing, and connecting with each other, we learn about other facets and perspectives which influence our internal models of it. On a larger scale, as a community, we create, bend, and break rules about it as our community experience evolves. We actually change what hypnosis is, how it works, and how to do it.

Even in just 15 years, I have seen firsthand how hypnosis changes as the community changes. If you look back at historical sources about hypnosis, you can see that we do something radically different nowadays -- which we think of as more sophisticated, but then again, historical hypnotists were doing amazing things too.

Hypnosis as a thing evolves as we explore it more -- as we explore each other more -- and push its boundaries.

We can’t pin down what it is. We can’t model it. But we can participate in it.

It is transcendent -- as Maimonides and Aristotle say God is transcendent; utterly beyond us.

--

Part of my experience of being hypnotized really intensely is a deeper acceptance of what I am feeling or thinking, moment to moment. It is a kind of radical acceptance that what my brain is doing is important and real. It’s not that I don’t understand that I’m hypnotized, or that I don’t make any critical judgments about what is happening. It’s just partially that if I feel something “weird,” I don’t dismiss it out of hand.

When I am in deep trances, weird stuff often happens. I get spontaneous sensory hallucinations, I get stray thoughts that can blindside me.

Occasionally, I have this unmistakable feeling that I am “seeing God.” That felt like a crazy thought to me the first time I had it -- like a person of capital-F “Faith” would have. It didn’t suddenly make me believe in a higher power, but I was left with that feeling that I had touched something divine while my partner murmured into my ear and took control of me.

Hypnosis is not just transcendent by nature or in a vacuum -- it feels transcendent. It feels like nothing else in this world; it completely transcends language and the realm of usual experience.

It makes sense that when faced with this kind of experience, it makes a skeptical person like me feel for a moment that there might be something more, something ineffable. It makes sense that when I have spiritual experiences with hypnosis, it feels innately spiritual to me.

But also it is true that hypnosis is simply very weird.

Why do I feel like I am connecting with divinity in deep trance? Why do I feel certain that my partner and I are reading each other’s minds? Why have I felt a quality of presence or possession?

I can believe it or disbelieve it all I want. I can rationalize it in any way I want. You can relate to me, or think less of me and judge me. But none of that takes away from what my experiential truth is.

What hypnosis feels like is not just more important than what it “is,” that is what it is. The subjective experience that we inhabit is hypnosis. 

Humans are moved by weird, irrational, transcendent experiences. Those are the times our worldview is affirmed or shaken. For those of us who are spiritually open to the idea that the materialistic world might be more than it seems, these moments are bright sparks of light, motivating, inspirational.

Hypnosis does this to me all the time. I am constantly amazed by it. I truly believe the only reason we look at it as a mundane phenomenon is because we assume our world is mundane -- we take it for granted.

But it is not mundane. It is two people communicating in such an intimate way that it behaves like a psychoactive drug. It is striving to know another person so deeply that you innately understand what they are thinking and feeling and you don’t know why. It makes the impossible seem possible; it makes magic feel 100% real.

That’s not some perspective that is out of touch with reality. That is the grounded view of hypnosis.

We are allowed to have crazy experiences with this art. Our main job is not trying to sell people on the idea that it is real. We work so hard to portray ourselves as sane and grounded -- we imitate therapists who need to have an answer to skeptics walking into their office. I think that at a certain point when we are doing intimate hypnosis we are allowed to say, “OK, I know this is real, and you know this is real, so let’s drop the bullshit and acknowledge that what we are doing is actually completely crazy.”

Hypnosis is amazing. It is just amazing. I am not saying that it is completely impossible to understand -- I think it is fair to say at this point that my life’s work is trying to understand it and communicate that understanding. I am saying that we need to not cut ourselves off from amazement, from confusion, from wonder, from not-knowing -- those are crucial to understanding, even crucial to science.

It is a form of respect to the art and to our partners to inhabit a space where we don’t know, to relax our egos and say that hypnosis is more than we can comprehend. To listen -- to ourselves or our partners -- when weird stuff happens.

Hypnosis will grow with us as humans if we let it. We have the opportunity to open ourselves to it, to greet it curiously, and to truly surrender to our exploration.

--

Sleepingirl (they/she) is a hypnokink educator with over a decade of experience on both sides of the pocket watch. They’re the author of several books, many articles (patreon.com/sleepingirl), and LearnHypnokink.com (a guide through the foundations of improvised hypnosis).

Their body of work in hypnokink is extremely extensive and spans many mediums -- see everything at https://sleepingirl.info/.

[morbidsmenagerie]

We Should Talk About Jumping Spiders

This post is going to be a long one, summing up a lot of my thoughts on jumping spiders and their popularity and perception. I have been keeping bugs since 2019, so I've seen both the before and after the rise in popularity of jumping spiders as pets. I've also been volunteering at an Insectarium for over 2 years now and have talked to many bug lovers (and haters!) over the years. I love spiders, and have kept jumping spiders, tarantulas, sicariidae, theridiidae, and lycosidae. In working at the Insectarium I have raised several jumping spider egg sacs, and personally have raised egg sacs of my own spiders over the last several years.

This post is going to address the public image jumping spiders have and why I think a lot of claims about them are exaggerated, as well as discuss some of the issues I see with jumping spiders becoming highly popular pets.

Intelligence

I'm first going to discuss jumping spider intelligence, because that is the thing I see the most on and the thing I think is most misunderstood. I have seen several people asserting that jumping spiders are "as intelligent as 3 year olds" or "capable of doing math".

It's important to understand that almost all of these claims are based on studies done on the genus Portia specifically. This matters because jumping spiders are a highly varied group, and evolved for different situations and niches. The abilities Portia displays are impressive, including using a detour to get to a prey item, being able to map in 3D space, using previous successes in trial and error, and being able to determine how much prey is expected vs is seen in an expectancy violation trial.

It's important to clarify that these studies are done on Portia spiders specifically because of the niche Portia fill. Portia primarily hunt other spiders, especially orb weavers. This is a high risk prey item because landing on a web incorrectly would cause the jumping spider to be eaten. A lot of the tools Portia need to be able to hunt other spiders directly contributes to it's relative intelligent abilities, for example web plucking Portia need to have some ability for trial and error so they can determine which web-plucking sequences work best for attracting prey.

In this overview of different experiments that have been done on Portia jumping spiders, they note that other jumping spiders that do not web-pluck do poorly on a trial and error test involving escaping a moat.

Figure 8. Results from confinement experiments. Spider began trial on an island surrounded by an atoll in a pan of water and given two opportunities to choose its method of crossing the water (i.e., by leaping or by swimming). Successful first choice: plastic scoop made waves to help spider across to the atoll. Unsuccessful first choice: plastic scoop made waves to move spider back to the island. After making its first choice, it was recorded whether the spider repeated that choice or switched. Data analyzed using χ 2 tests of independence. Reprinted by permission from Springer (Cross and Jackson, 2015).

"The findings from experiments showed that the seven aggressive-mimic species were proficient at solving the novel confinement problem by repeating “correct” choices (i.e., the choices that delivered them to the atoll) and by switching when they made “incorrect” choices (i.e., the choices that sent them back to the island), but there was no evidence of the two non-aggressive-mimic species solving the same novel problem (Figure 8). These findings suggest that species which use trial and error to solve aggressive mimicry problems are predisposed to be proficient at using trial and error in a novel context."

This makes sense, as cognition is an extremely expensive adaption to maintain in an evolutionary context and would not develop if it was not needed. This is why it is misleading to take studies done on Portia spiders and generalize them to all jumping spiders, especially in the case of Phidippus which are generalist hunters. There is no need for Phidippus to develop the ability to be able to perform well in a trial-and-error test like this because they do not web pluck as part of their hunting strategy, and do not regularly hunt dangerous prey such that needing diverse strategies for attack was something they needed to develop. Portia are exceptional for jumping spiders and should not be treated as the norm.

Reading the article also does a good job at breaking down which experiments have been done on Portia, why they are interesting, and what they could mean. Portia are very interesting spiders and the studies done on them are intriguing, but I also think it's important to note other arthropods have shown similar or superior abilities in cognition, problem solving, and memory.

Hermit crabs display dynamic risk taking/risk aversion behaviors (link) and I could link hundreds of articles on memory, cognition, and problem solving behaviors shown in hymenoptera. It is a symptom of the jumping spider bias that wasps are not treated with the same level of curiosity for their cognitive abilities. Portia aren't even the only spiders that display flexible behaviors for the purpose of hunting other spiders, pirate spiders (link) also perform web-plucking and use multiple strategies to hunt prey, but far less research has been done on their cognitive abilities.

Anthropomorphism

Because jumping spiders are widely seen as cute, and people may know the generals of studies done on the intelligence of Portia, there is a tendency to anthropomorphize and "intentionalize" their behavior. A jumping spider looking upwards isn't seeking a higher vantage point, it's looking *at you* specifically. A jumping spider turning it's head to track movement isn't displaying a normal behavior that allows it to find prey and avoid threats, it's "curious" and "thinking about things". This happens with mantises as well, as mantises are also visually based and turn their heads towards movement, but even mantises are not anthropomorphized to the same extent that jumping spiders are.

This often leads to wildly mischaracterizing the spider's behavior.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Chasing Bugs (@chasingbugs1)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Danie's Arachnids 🕷️ (@daniesarachnids)

These two posts on Instagram demonstrate some of this. In one, a jumping spider looks at her reflection, to which the author claims this is proof she is "self aware". A further look at the comments shows other people stating their jumping attacks their reflection. What is most likely happening in this is the jumping spider is attracted by the movement of her pedipalps in the shiny surface, so she looks at them to determine if the movement is from prey or a threat. Jumping spiders frequently wiggle or move their pedipalps as they walk, the behavior is not unusual and not a sign that she is "admiring her reflection". In the other video, it shows the common behavior of a jumping spider waving it's front legs. This is often characterized as "asking to be held", but this behavior can have a few different meanings. Jumping spiders raise their front legs before they jump, so it's often done if you, for example, put your hand out for them because it is a natural part of their jumping movement. They can also raise their front legs as a threat display, which can happen when confronted with another jumper (or their reflection) or a large intimidating object (like your hand). It also seems to be a common behavior when they are on a ledge, perhaps in preparation to jump off the ledge even if they haven't found a suitable place to jump yet.

A jumping spider looking around (or looking at you) is also not displaying "curiosity" in the way that word is often use. Jumping spiders look around because that is how they primarily interact with the world, they aren't displaying a behavior that is fundamentally different than an isopod feeling it's way with it's antennae across the ground. They look at you (or up at high points generally) because Phidippus primarily hunt in wide open spaces. They are most commonly found in the wild on top of fence posts, on the sides of walls, on tall stumps, ect. They seek higher vantage points so they have the largest field of view to see prey. If you are interacting with one that is likely the top of your head. I've also heard it suggested that they focus on faces because your face has a lot of movement that attracts their attention, your eyes and mouth move around a lot.

Edit: Also I hope this goes without saying but jumping spiders are highly cannibalistic and solitary by nature. There is no evolutionary basis for them to have formed the ability to recognize and remember other individuals of their species, much less form a bond with them, much less form a bond with a wholly alien species to them such as a human. Animals that can remember other individuals do so to remember their place in social communities, remember which individuals they have good or bad relationships which, and which individuals are part of their colony/pack/herd and which ones aren't. Jumping spiders frequently avoid all other jumping spider shaped objects except for in the specific context of mating because the risk of cannibalism is so high. There is no reason to believe one is forming a special bond or relationship with you.

Ambassador Animals

Jumping spiders are often recommended as first pets, particularly for people who are trying to work on their arachnophobia. The reasoning is jumping spiders are cute and so will make people like spiders in general more. While this can be the case for some people, I don't think jumping spiders make good first pets.

If you are arachnophobic, jumping spiders move very erratically and can be very mobile. You often have to interact with the spider to catch it, and for people who are nervous around spiders the unpredictable movements can be difficult. Jumping spiders are also not the easiest spiders to take care of, in fact they are more intensive than almost any other arachnid. Because they primarily hunt using vision, they almost exclusively eat live prey. It can be very difficult to get a jumping spider to take prekilled prey, and they have a strong preference for flying prey. They also have high metabolisms and need to eat a lot compared to other spiders. While raising slings, we fed our Phidippus regius once every 2-3 days, and watered them every other day. All other spiders I've raised have needed to eat once a week at most and get watered once a week or less, and can easily go longer if need be. Other spiders are also much better at taking prekilled prey, so are easier to feed. Fruit flies are genuinely a pain in the ass to deal with, especially if you haven't kept inverts before, and at larger sizes jumping spiders vastly prefer blue bottle flies which can also be a pain. With almost any other spider you can use mealworms (or dubia, crickets, waxworms, ect) and prekill them as needed to feed them off.

Liking jumping spiders also does not necessarily translate to liking other or all spiders. I have met too many people at the Insectarium that tell me they *only* like jumping spiders, usually siting jumping spiders as being more "intelligent and cute" than other spiders. I've already talked about how jumping spider intelligence is often exaggerated and over applied to the family, but because this perception and because of anthropomorphization, people hold other spiders up to an impossible standard that even jumping spiders themselves don't meet. I would even argue that liking Phidippus jumping spiders doesn't translate to even liking other jumping spiders. Again, they are a varied and diverse group, and too many people tell me jumping spiders are their favorite spiders but can't name a single non-Phidippus jumping spider found in their area.

Here's some jumping spiders found in the Pacific Northwest that I wish more "jumping spider fans" cared about:

Here are some other jumping spiders in the US:

There are also literally thousands of interesting jumping spiders that fill all sorts of different niches all over the world. This is just me being a bit salty but don't tell me that you "love jumping spiders" and they're your "favorite spiders" if you're just talking about a handful of Phidippus in the US and maybe a Hyllus species.

This extreme focus on Phidippus regius also has consequences when recommending spiders as ambassador animals to people with arachnophobia. Phidippus regius are only native to the extreme Southeastern United States, primarily in Florida and some Caribbean islands. Most people do not live where Phidippus regius occur naturally, so if you recommend this species as a first spider and it doesn't work out for whatever reason, the person who owns the spider is either left to euthanize it or try to rehome it. Someone who is arachnophobic and has determined they can no longer care for the spider is probably not going to take the time to rehome it, much less pack it for shipping if that is required. It is much better to recommend someone try to keep spiders that are local to their area, so if they determine they can no longer keep the spider it's easy to release them back into the wild.

Over-collecting

The extreme focus on Phidippus regius leads to my last point. Phidippus regius are not found in most of the US and the demand for them is extremely high. They are marginally bigger and generally more colorful than Phidippus audax, which are much more common and found throughout the United States. Most content on jumping spiders as pets focuses on Phidippus regius specifically. The demand for them is extremely high, and a large female can be sold for quite a lot. There's one wholesale store in particular that regularly sells adult female spiders (mostly wild caught) for 75-90$. This limited native range and high demand leads to excessive collecting.

This person supplies most of the wholesale wild caught Phidippus regius. Most of the sub-adult to adult spiders you will buy come from this person, but I need to stress that similar mass collecting operations are happening all over Florida (even in protected areas as populations are harder to find outside of protected spaces). Each of these deli cups has a jumping spider in it, and from his Facebook posts they collect a similar output week to week. (link to a post talking about this some more)

Phidippus audax get almost as big as Phidippus regius and have similar behaviors to them, but are largely passed over in favor of the larger regius. This leads to collecting practices like this. If you are going to get a Phidippus regius at the very least ensure you are getting one that has been captive bred. The publicity and the misrepresentation of jumping spiders as being intelligent curious, or dog-like has real consequences on the demand and collection of these animals. Also keep in mind that Florida collection not only supplies the US demand for these spiders, but for Phidippus regius sales around the world, as they are primarily found in Florida.

Conclusion

Not entirely sure how to end this as this is the accumulation of a lot of different thoughts I have on jumping spiders. I do like jumping spiders and I do think they are fascinating, primarily I want people to stop anthropomorphizing them and generalizing intelligence studies that have been done on Portia to all jumping spiders. I also think there are other spiders that make good entry level spiders, some of my favorite spiders are also extremely easy to keep. If you're scared of spiders, one of the best ways to help get over your fear is to learn more about them, I highly recommend Travis McEnery's Youtube Channel (link). He is one of the most informative and diligent educators on common spiders you are likely to find in and around your house.

If you really want to try to keep a spider as a pet, I recommend starting with a wild caught spider from your area. For one, it can help you appreciate the spiders you see frequently more, and for two there is much less commitment and pressure. You can keep a spider for as long as you are comfortable, even just observe them for a few hours and then release them. Almost all spiders are also incredibly easy to keep, and the ones you would find in your home are going to be very undemanding for care. I hope this was informative.

[blackstarlineage]

The Harm of Physical Discipline on Black Children: A Garveyite Perspective on Abuse, Colonial Trauma, and the Need for New Approaches to Parenting

From a Garveyite perspective, which champions self-determination, empowerment, and the uplifting of Black people globally, the physical discipline of Black children—often normalized in many communities—is a direct result of colonial conditioning, intergenerational trauma, and an internalized acceptance of oppressive tactics. This form of discipline, though widely practised, ultimately hinders the development of strong, confident, and independent-minded Black youth who can lead the charge toward liberation.

This analysis will explore why physical discipline is a legacy of slavery and colonial rule, why it contradicts Garveyite principles of Black self-empowerment, and why alternative methods rooted in respect, understanding, and cultural restoration are necessary.

1. The Colonial Roots of Physical Discipline in Black Communities

Many Black families defend beatings, whoopings, and corporal punishment as “tradition,” but in reality, this practice is a remnant of colonial rule and slavery rather than a cultural legacy of African societies.

Fact: Pre-colonial African societies relied on communal discipline, verbal correction, and rites of passage to instil values in children—not beatings inspired by slave masters.

Example: During the Transatlantic Slave Trade, slave owners brutally whipped and beat enslaved Africans to instil obedience through fear. This method of control was later internalized and passed down through generations.

Example: Colonial governments in Africa and the Caribbean used severe physical punishments to enforce European laws on Black populations, reinforcing a hierarchy of control based on violence.

Garveyite Takeaway: If beating children was an effective and righteous method of discipline, it would have empowered Black people under slavery rather than kept them in a state of fear and submission. If it did not liberate us from white rule, why should it be used to prepare our children for liberation?

2. The Contradiction of Physical Discipline and Black Empowerment

Marcus Garvey’s teachings emphasized the need for strong, independent-thinking, and self-disciplined Black individuals to lead the charge for global African liberation. Physical discipline directly contradicts this vision in several ways:

How Physical Discipline Weakens Black Children Instead of Strengthening Them:

1. It Instills Fear, Not Critical Thinking:

A child who is beaten does not learn why their actions were wrong—they only learn to fear punishment.

Fear-based discipline leads to obedient followers, not revolutionary leaders.

2. It Damages Self-Worth and Identity:

Black children who are frequently hit may internalize self-hatred and associate discipline with violence instead of wisdom.

How can we tell Black children they are kings and queens while treating them like enslaved people?

3. It Perpetuates the Cycle of Oppression

Many Black parents justify beatings by saying:

“I do this so the police won’t have to.”

This statement is an admission that corporal punishment is a tool of white supremacy, used to “prepare” Black children for life under oppression instead of preparing them for liberation.

Example: Malcolm X, Huey P. Newton, and Marcus Garvey were not obedient, fearful children—they were defiant, critical thinkers who challenged the status quo. We need leaders, not people conditioned, to obey authority without question.

Garveyite Takeaway: We must stop preparing our children for submission to oppression and start raising them to become liberators and builders of Black power.

3. The Psychological and Emotional Damage of Physical Discipline

The Scientific and Psychological Evidence Against Beating Black Children

Numerous studies confirm that physical punishment leads to negative long-term effects rather than producing disciplined, successful adults.

Research has shown that children who experience corporal punishment are more likely to:

Develop low self-esteem

Exhibit aggressive behaviour in relationships and society

Struggle with mental health issues like depression and anxiety

Be less likely to challenge authority, even when that authority is unjust

Example: Many Black adults defend beatings by saying, “I was whooped as a child, and I turned out fine.” However, if we examine how much internalized trauma, anger, and distrust exist within the Black community, it’s clear that we did not “turn out fine.”

Garveyite Takeaway: A truly free and empowered people do not need to rule their children through fear—they lead them through wisdom, cultural education, and self-determination.

4. The Double Standard: Black Children vs. White Children

One of the most dangerous consequences of normalizing corporal punishment in Black households is that it prepares Black children to accept violence as normal, while white children are often raised with nurturing and encouragement.

How This Affects the Black Community in the Long Run

White children grow up being told they can achieve anything—Black children are often told they need to be beaten into obedience.

White children grow up to become bosses, entrepreneurs, and leaders—Black children, conditioned through fear, are often expected to follow rules instead of challenge them.

The system punishes Black children more harshly in schools, knowing their own parents won’t fight back against abusive authority.

Example: Black children are three times more likely to be suspended or expelled from school than white children for the same behavior—yet Black parents still tell their children to be quiet, obey, and never challenge authority.

Garveyite Takeaway: Beating Black children does not protect them—it only weakens them while their white counterparts are being raised to dominate the world.

5. A Better Approach: How to Raise Black Children for Power and Liberation

If physical discipline is a product of oppression, then the solution is to return to African-centered parenting methods that build strong, confident, and intelligent Black youth.

Garveyite Alternatives to Physical Discipline:

1. Restoring African Values of Communal Discipline

In African societies, elders disciplined through community correction and mentorship, not through beatings.

Teaching, storytelling, and cultural reinforcement were the primary methods of guidance.

2. Rites of Passage Programs

Black children need structured rites of passage to transition into adulthood, teaching them responsibility, self-discipline, and leadership.

3. Building Self-Discipline Instead of Fear

Encourage critical thinking and accountability instead of forcing obedience.

Teach children to analyze their actions and take responsibility without violence.

4. Lead by Example

Many Black children experience hypocrisy from parents who demand respect but show none.

Children learn from watching—if they see strong, disciplined, and intelligent parents, they will embody those traits.

Example: The Nation of Islam emphasizes self-discipline, structured education, and accountability over beatings, producing many strong, disciplined leaders.

Garveyite Takeaway: We need Black children who think critically, move strategically, and act boldly. This will never be achieved through fear-based parenting.

Conclusion: Breaking the Chains of Slave Discipline

The physical discipline of Black children is not cultural—it is a practice forced onto us through colonial rule and slavery. If we are to build a strong and liberated race, we must break the cycle and return to African-centered, Garveyite principles of discipline through empowerment, knowledge, and cultural restoration.

Final Thought

Marcus Garvey did not build the UNIA by beating his followers into submission—he inspired them through discipline, knowledge, and leadership. If we want strong Black leaders in the future, we must raise children who are strong in mind, not just fearful of punishment.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Andy L.

Published: Apr 14, 2024

It has now been just little under a week since the publication of the long anticipated NHS independent review of gender identity services for children and young people, the Cass Review.

The review recommends sweeping changes to child services in the NHS, not least the abandonment of what is known as the “affirmation model” and the associated use of puberty blockers and, later, cross-sex hormones. The evidence base could not support the use of such drastic treatments, and this approach was failing to address the complexities of health problems in such children.

Many trans advocacy groups appear to be cautiously welcoming these recommendations. However, there are many who are not and have quickly tried to condemn the review. Within almost hours, “press releases“, tweets and commentaries tried to rubbish the report and included statements that were simply not true. An angry letter from many “academics”, including Andrew Wakefield, has been published. These myths have been subsequently spreading like wildfire.

Here I wish to tackle some of those myths and misrepresentations.

-

Myth 1: 98% of all studies in this area were ignored

Fact

A comprehensive search was performed for all studies addressing the clinical questions under investigation, and over 100 were discovered. All these studies were evaluated for their quality and risk of bias. Only 2% of the studies met the criteria for the highest quality rating, but all high and medium quality (50%+) studies were further analysed to synthesise overall conclusions.

Explanation

The Cass Review aimed to base its recommendations on the comprehensive body of evidence available. While individual studies may demonstrate positive outcomes for the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones in children, the quality of these studies may vary. Therefore, the review sought to assess not only the findings of each study but also the reliability of those findings.

Studies exhibit variability in quality. Quality impacts the reliability of any conclusions that can be drawn. Some may have small sample sizes, while others may involve cohorts that differ from the target patient population. For instance, if a study primarily involves men in their 30s, their experiences may differ significantly from those of teenage girls, who constitute the a primary patient group of interest. Numerous factors can contribute to poor study quality.

Bias is also a big factor. Many people view claims of a biased study as meaning the researchers had ideological or predetermined goals and so might misrepresent their work. That may be true. But that is not what bias means when we evaluate medical trials.

In this case we are interested in statistical bias. This is where the numbers can mislead us in some way. For example, if your study started with lots of patients but many dropped out then statistical bias may creep in as your drop-outs might be the ones with the worst experiences. Your study patients are not on average like all the possible patients.

If then we want to look at a lot papers to find out if a treatment works, we want to be sure that we pay much more attention to those papers that look like they may have less risk of bias or quality issues. The poor quality papers may have positive results that are due to poor study design or execution and not because the treatment works.

The Cass Review team commissioned researchers at York University to search for all relevant papers on childhood use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for treating “gender dysphoria”. The researchers then graded each paper by established methods to determine quality, and then disregarded all low quality papers to help ensure they did not mislead.

The Review states,

The systematic review on interventions to suppress puberty (Taylor et al: Puberty suppression) provides an update to the NICE review (2020a). It identified 50 studies looking at different aspects of gender-related, psychosocial, physiological and cognitive outcomes of puberty suppression. Quality was assessed on a standardised scale. There was one high quality study, 25 moderate quality studies and 24 low quality studies. The low quality studies were excluded from the synthesis of results.

As can be seen, the conclusions that were based on the synthesis of studies only rejected 24 out of 50 studies – less than half. The myth has arisen that the synthesis only included the one high quality study. That is simply untrue.

There were two such literature reviews: the other was for cross-sex hormones. This study found 19 out of 53 studies were low quality and so were not used in synthesis. Only one study was classed as high quality – the rest medium quality and so were used in the analysis.

12 cohort, 9 cross-sectional and 32 pre–post studies were included (n=53). One cohort study was high-quality. Other studies were moderate (n=33) and low-quality (n=19). Synthesis of high and moderate-quality studies showed consistent evidence demonstrating induction of puberty, although with varying feminising/masculinising effects. There was limited evidence regarding gender dysphoria, body satisfaction, psychosocial and cognitive outcomes, and fertility.

Again, it is myth that 98% of studies were discarded. The truth is that over a hundred studies were read and appraised. About half of them were graded to be of too poor quality to reliably include in a synthesis of all the evidence. if you include low quality evidence, your over-all conclusions can be at risk from results that are very unreliable. As they say – GIGO – Garbage In Garbage Out.

Nonetheless, despite analysing the higher quality studies, there was no clear evidence that emerged that puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones were safe and effective. The BMJ editorial summed this up perfectly,

One emerging criticism of the Cass review is that it set the methodological bar too high for research to be included in its analysis and discarded too many studies on the basis of quality. In fact, the reality is different: studies in gender medicine fall woefully short in terms of methodological rigour; the methodological bar for gender medicine studies was set too low, generating research findings that are therefore hard to interpret. The methodological quality of research matters because a drug efficacy study in humans with an inappropriate or no control group is a potential breach of research ethics. Offering treatments without an adequate understanding of benefits and harms is unethical. All of this matters even more when the treatments are not trivial; puberty blockers and hormone therapies are major, life altering interventions. Yet this inconclusive and unacceptable evidence base was used to inform influential clinical guidelines, such as those of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), which themselves were cascaded into the development of subsequent guidelines internationally.

-

Myth 2: Cass recommended no Trans Healthcare for Under 25s

Fact

The Cass Review does not contain any recommendation or suggestion advocating for the withholding of transgender healthcare until the age of 25, nor does it propose a prohibition on individuals transitioning.

Explanation

This myth appears to be a misreading of one of the recommendations.

The Cass Review expressed concerns regarding the necessity for children to transition to adult service provision at the age of 18, a critical phase in their development and potential treatment. Children were deemed particularly vulnerable during this period, facing potential discontinuity of care as they transitioned to other clinics and care providers. Furthermore, the transition made follow-up of patients more challenging.

Cass then says,

Taking account of all the above issues, a follow-through service continuing up to age 25 would remove the need for transition at this vulnerable time and benefit both this younger population and the adult population. This will have the added benefit in the longer-term of also increasing the capacity of adult provision across the country as more gender services are established.

Cass want to set up continuity of service provision by ensure they remain within the same clinical setting and with the same care providers until they are 25. This says nothing about withdrawing any form of treatment that may be appropriate in the adult care pathway. Cass is explicit in saying her report is making no recommendations as to what that care should look like for over 18s.

It looks the myth has arisen from a bizarre misreading of the phrase “remove the need for transition”. Activists appear to think this means that there should be no “gender transition” whereas it is obvious this is referring to “care transition”.

-

Myth 3: Cass is demanding only Double Blind Randomised Controlled Trials be used as evidence in “Trans Healthcare”

Fact

While it is acknowledged that conducting double-blind randomized controlled trials (DBRCT) for puberty blockers in children would present significant ethical and practical challenges, the Cass Review does not advocate solely for the use of DBRCT trials in making treatment recommendations, nor does it mandate that future trials adhere strictly to such protocols. Rather, the review extensively discusses the necessity for appropriate trial designs that are both ethical and practical, emphasizing the importance of maintaining high methodological quality.

Explanation

Cass goes into great detail explaining the nature of clinical evidence and how that can vary in quality depending on the trial design and how it is implemented and analysed. She sets out why Double Blind Randomised Controlled Trials are the ‘gold standard’ as they minimise the risks of confounding factors misleading you and helping to understand cause and effect, for example. (See Explanatory Box 1 in the Report).

Doctors rely on evidence to guide treatment decisions, which can be discussed with patients to facilitate informed choices considering the known benefits and risks of proposed treatments.

Evidence can range from a doctor’s personal experience to more formal sources. For instance, a doctor may draw on their own extensive experience treating patients, known as ‘Expert Opinion.’ While valuable, this method isn’t foolproof, as historical inaccuracies in medical beliefs have shown.

Consulting other doctors’ experiences, especially if documented in published case reports, can offer additional insight. However, these reports have limitations, such as their inability to establish causality between treatment and outcome. For example, if a patient with a bad back improves after swimming, it’s uncertain whether swimming directly caused the improvement or if the back would have healed naturally.

Further up the hierarchy of clinical evidence are papers that examine cohorts of patients, typically involving multiple case studies with statistical analysis. While offering better evidence, they still have potential biases and limitations.

This illustrates the ‘pyramid of clinical evidence,’ which categorises different types of evidence based on their quality and reliability in informing treatment decisions

The above diagram is published in the Cass Review as part of Explanatory Box 1.

We can see from the report and papers that Cass did not insist that only randomised controlled trials were used to assess the evidence. The York team that conducted the analyses chose a method to asses the quality of studies called the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. This is a method best suited for non RCT trials. Cass has selected an assessment method best suited for the nature of the available evidence rather than taken a dogmatic approach on the need for DBRCTs. The results of this method were discussed about countering Myth 1.

Explainer on the Newcastle Ottawa Scale

The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) is a tool designed to assess the quality of non-randomized studies, particularly observational studies such as cohort and case-control studies. It provides a structured method for evaluating the risk of bias in these types of studies and has become widely used in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

The NOS consists of a set of criteria grouped into three main categories: selection of study groups, comparability of groups, and ascertainment of either the exposure or outcome of interest. Each category contains several items, and each item is scored based on predefined criteria. The total score indicates the overall quality of the study, with higher scores indicating lower risk of bias.

This scale is best applied when conducting systematic reviews or meta-analyses that include non-randomized studies. By using the NOS, researchers can objectively assess the quality of each study included in their review, allowing them to weigh the evidence appropriately and draw more reliable conclusions.

One of the strengths of the NOS is its flexibility and simplicity. It provides a standardized framework for evaluating study quality, yet it can be adapted to different study designs and research questions. Additionally, the NOS emphasizes key methodological aspects that are crucial for reducing bias in observational studies, such as appropriate selection of study participants and controlling for confounding factors.

Another advantage of the NOS is its widespread use and acceptance in the research community. Many systematic reviews and meta-analyses rely on the NOS to assess the quality of included studies, making it easier for researchers to compare and interpret findings across different studies.

As for future studies, Cass makes no demand only DBRCTs are conducted. What is highlighted is at the very least that service providers build a research capacity to fill in the evidence gaps.

The national infrastructure should be put in place to manage data collection and audit and this should be used to drive continuous quality improvement and research in an active learning environment.

-

Myth 4: There were less than 10 detransitioners out of 3499 patients in the Cass study.

Fact

Cass was unable to determine the detransition rate. Although the GIDS audit study recorded fewer than 10 detransitioners, clinics declined to provide information to the review that would have enabled linking a child’s treatment to their adult outcome. The low recorded rates must be due in part to insufficient data availability.

Explanation

Cass says, “The percentage of people treated with hormones who subsequently detransition remains unknown due to the lack of long-term follow-up studies, although there is suggestion that numbers are increasing.”

The reported number are going to be low for a number of reasons, as Cass describes:

Estimates of the percentage of individuals who embark on a medical pathway and subsequently have regrets or detransition are hard to determine from GDC clinic data alone. There are several reasons for this:

Damningly, Cass describes the attempt by the review to establish “data linkage’ between records at the childhood gender clinics and adult services to look at longer term detransition and the clinics refused to cooperate with the Independent Review. The report notes the “…attempts to improve the evidence base have been thwarted by a lack of cooperation from the adult gender services”.

We know from other analyses of the data on detransitioning that the quality of data is exceptionally poor and the actual rates of detransition and regret are unknown. This is especially worrying when older data, such as reported in WPATH 7, suggest natural rates of decrease in dysphoria without treatment are very high.

Gender dysphoria during childhood does not inevitably continue into adulthood. Rather, in follow-up studies of prepubertal children (mainly boys) who were referred to clinics for assessment of gender dysphoria, the dysphoria persisted into adulthood for only 6–23% of children.

This suggests that active affirmative treatment may be locking in a trans identity into the majority of children who would otherwise desist with trans ideation and live unmedicated lives.

I shall add more myths as they become spread.

==

It's not so much "myths and misconceptions" as deliberate misinformation. Genderists are scrambling to prop up their faith-based beliefs the same way homeopaths do. Both are fraudulent.

[blueiscoool]

Ancient Roman Fast Food: Songbirds Were a Popular Snack in the 1st-Century

A fascinating new study published in the International Journal of Osteoarchaeology reveals that song thrushes — small migratory birds — were once a popular form of Roman street food, challenging the long-held belief that they were an elite delicacy reserved for luxury banquets.

Archaeologists analyzing a 1st-century BCE cesspit in the ancient Roman city of Pollentia, located on the island of Mallorca, Spain, discovered 165 thrush bones (Turdus philomelos) among food remains such as pig bones, sea shells, and fish. These findings emerged from a latrine attached to a taberna—an ancient Roman food shop similar to modern-day fast food joints.

Fast Food in Ancient Rome: Not Just Wine and Bread

The cesspit was adjacent to a popina (a Roman snack bar), where six amphorae were embedded in the countertop — a setup similar to what’s seen in Pompeii’s famous thermopolia. This context, combined with the quantity and preparation style of the bird bones, strongly suggests that thrushes were cooked and sold for immediate consumption.

Unlike the gourmet descriptions found in ancient texts like Pliny the Elder’s writings or Apicius’ recipe books — which describe thrushes as fattened with figs and served in elaborate sauces — these birds were likely wild, seasonal, and pan-fried in oil. The absence of femurs and humeri among the bones, paired with broken sterna (breastbones), indicates they were flattened and cooked whole, possibly using techniques still common in Mediterranean cuisine today.

Not Just for the Rich: Evidence of a Common Meal

Historically, thrushes were thought to be a luxury, mentioned even in Emperor Diocletian’s Edict on Maximum Prices in 301 CE. However, this new research challenges that notion. The birds were found in a modest commercial setting — not a lavish villa — suggesting they were accessible to ordinary Romans.

Researcher Alejandro Valenzuela from the Mediterranean Institute for Advanced Studies (IMEDEA) notes that these birds were likely caught during winter migration using nets or glue traps, methods still used in some regions today. Their seasonal abundance made them a cheap and efficient source of protein for the working class.

Culinary Clues from Ancient Bones

Valenzuela’s detailed bone analysis revealed that most breastbones had been intentionally broken, likely to flatten the birds for faster, oil-based cooking — ideal for a street-food environment. Interestingly, the lack of burn marks suggests the thrushes were not roasted but fried — a fast, high-heat method of preparation similar to modern fried quail or chicken wings.

The presence of domestic chickens and European rabbit remains in the same pit further supports the idea that the taberna offered a varied menu catering to everyday tastes.

Broader Implications: Roman Street Food Culture

Pollentia is not an isolated case. Similar finds in Pompeii and rural Roman villas in Britain suggest a widespread tradition of fast food across the empire. These establishments — often serving wine and hot food to workers, merchants, and travelers — were integral to urban Roman life.

The study concludes that while pork remained the staple of the Roman diet, small birds like thrushes played a crucial role in the urban food economy. Their presence in non-elite contexts provides a more nuanced picture of Roman culinary practices, highlighting the adaptability and diversity of ancient street food.

By Leman Altuntaş.

[creature-wizard]

Critical thinking tip: Beware of false equivalencies!

A false equivalence is a claim that two or more things that might appear superficially similar are actually the same, when in reality they aren't really comparable at all.

An example of this is when young Earth creationists (who proclaim that Earth is only 6000 years old and everything in Genesis happened literally) claim that they are simply just interpreting the same facts differently from other scientists, as if it's just like the famous rabbit-duck illusion where one is equally justified in seeing either a rabbit or a duck.

But the reality is that young Earth creationism simply doesn't work like this. Instead, their "science" is based on cherry picked data and ad hoc reasoning to try and dismiss the many facts real scientists discover that constantly show that young earth creationism just isn't very likely. Radiometric dating, tree ring data, and geological data consistently show that the Earth is quite a bit older than 6000 years. YEC responses to this often boil down to "well maybe physics just worked differently back then" (here's one example of this), and of course they never do any real tests or research to show that this is a real possibility. Moreover, they invent some absolutely bizarre claims to supposedly disprove evolution - like falsely claiming that the Second Law of Thermodynamics prohibits it.

All of this shows us that YECs aren't just scientists who interpret the data correctly - they are politically-motivated spin doctors using the aesthetic of science to make themselves look more credible. This is why when someone claims that their fringe idea is just as scientifically credible as a mainstream one, you have to ask yourself if that's really true. Are they following the scientific method and accepting results that don't align with what they wanted? Or are they engaging in special pleading and relying on fake evidence?

(By the way, I recommend Gutsick Gibbon's YouTube channel as a resource debunking YEC claims!)

Another form of false equivalence is when someone claims that mystical experiences and intuition are just as valid for determining what's going on in the world as genuine scientific research. But when we consider that something as wrong as World Ice Theory came from an apparently mystical dream, we have to consider that these kinds of experiences can be extremely misleading. We also know that professional psychics' yearly predictions have a high rate of failure. (Some examples. More examples. And some more examples. And even more examples!) We know that a tool such as the Ouija board can enhance memory recall, but when we're really honest about the accuracy of mystical information-gathering means, we have to admit that they're just no substitute for research and study.

So when someone asserts that two things are basically the same, or are fundamentally equivalent or fungible, ask yourself - are they really, though? And then do the research to find out!

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Writing Notes: Scientific Inquiry

Scientific Inquiry - a form of problem-solving and questioning that helps people come to a greater understanding of observable phenomena.

An understanding of this style of scientific reasoning forms the basis upon which the nature of science itself rests.

Once you become familiar with scientific inquiry, you can use it for specifically science-related study or as just one additional tool in your arsenal of critical thinking skills.

Core Elements of the Scientific Inquiry Process

From encouraging scientific questions to facilitating well-reasoned conclusions, the scientific inquiry process helps illuminate our understanding of the world. Here are 7 core elements to the scientific inquiry process:

Asking constant questions: At the center of both the scientific method and general scientific inquiry lies the ability to ask questions well. Make observations about a particularly interesting phenomenon and then pose questions about why such a thing happens. Let preexisting scientific theories guide your questioning, but keep in mind every theory continues to be just that—a theory—until scientific inquiry definitively proves or disproves it.

Testing your inferences: Scientific progress hinges on your ability to experiment and test inferences about evidence. To do so, you need to set up an independent variable (something you will use to test) and a dependent variable (the thing or things you are testing). Seeing how well your inferences or predictions match up with the reality of a given experiment is essential to scientific inquiry.

Making connections: As you make observations about a specific phenomenon, make connections with every other relevant topic you can remember from your past science lessons or research. Scientific knowledge is as much a result of old realizations as it is of new discoveries.

Seeking evidence: As you seek to understand the natural world, there’s no substitute for hard evidence. Collect data and gather evidence relentlessly throughout your scientific investigations. The more evidence you have to answer your initial questions, the more ironclad your ultimate case will be when you draw conclusions.

Classifying data correctly: Science is as much a process of data collection and classification as it is of asking and answering questions. This means knowing how to elucidate or graph out your discoveries in a way other people can understand. It also means using citations from other scientific journals and texts to bolster your ultimate argument as to why a particular phenomenon occurs.

Drawing conclusions: Eventually, you need to draw conclusions from the data you collect. After you’ve made an exhaustive study of your specific focus, use inductive reasoning to make sense of all the new evidence you’ve gathered. Scientific ideas are always malleable and never completely concrete—alternative explanations are always possible, and new evidence should lead to new questions and conclusions.

Sharing findings: Science is an innately group-centered discipline. The more people interpret data, the better chance there is to ensure there are no loopholes in new research. No one person’s understanding of science content is infinite, so it’s important to let other qualified people ask questions of your conclusions. Natural science is more of a never-ending collaborative process than one with a concrete point of termination.

Teaching science means ensuring learners understand how to conduct qualitative and inquiry-based learning.

Science teachers must utilize a pedagogy that foregrounds hypothesizing, experimenting, and drawing on other scientific knowledge in both theoretical and practical ways.

Educational research indicates that it can help students see the correlation between scientific inquiry and everyday life, whether in elementary school or high school.

This sort of analogization helps people understand that a scientific frame of thinking is quite intuitive when you observe it within more commonplace parameters.

As a simplistic example, imagine a student has a hard time understanding the effect of heat as an abstract force.

Allowing them to observe the degree to which bread burns at different temperatures in a toaster would help make the point clear in a more hands-on way.

Source ⚜ More: Notes & References ⚜ Writing Resources PDFs

[glitteraffe-art]

This is a pretty simple explanation of the topic, and does not cover every detail, but hopefully it is a nice overview!

Slide text in text form, and reference and image source URLs under the cut:

Title Card: Cloning Mercenaries 101: How Real-Life Cloning Works

CW: Mentions of animal death (in a research context)

Slide 1: Foreword

If you're into TF2, chances are you've come across fanworks depicting the "clone theory" to explain why there's more than one of each mercenary.

Clone theories generally fall into the categories of either respawn/teleportation cloning, or biological cloning. Today, we'll focus on real-life biological cloning.

"But TF2 is a Looney-Tunes comedy! Why bother with the science of a fairly common, but minimally supported headcanon?"

It's always worth understanding how the real-life version of something really works!

Slide 2: What is Cloning?

"Cloning" broadly refers to the process of producing individuals who are genetically identical to another individual. It can include single- and multi-cellular organisms.

Cloning includes both natural cloning (like plant cuttings, asexual reproduction) and artificial cloning (like cloning DNA fragments, cells, and organisms).

"Reproductive cloning", is the cloning of a multicellular organism to create a new genetically identical individual.

Engie speech bubble: Natural cloning is more common than you may think: for example, plants grown from cuttings are clones of their "parent"!

Slide 3: Reproductive Cloning

There are 2 methods of reproductive cloning for mammals:

Embryo Splitting

- Used to create identical twins from 1 egg and 1 sperm cell after in-vitro fertilization (IVF)

- Not really for cloning an existing adult so we won't focus on it.

Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT)

- Used to create a number of clones of an individual organism from 1 body cell (somatic cell) from the organism and 1 donor egg cell

Engie speech bubble: We’ll be focusing on SCNT here!

Slide 4: Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (Diagram)

1. Nucleus removed from body (somatic) cell of individual to be cloned (by pipette)

2. Nucleus removed from donor egg cell

3. Somatic nucleus placed into empty donor egg cell

4. Resulting egg stimulated and begins to divide

5. Resulting embryo transferred to uterus of a surrogate mother to develop.

Slide 5: Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer

The resulting clone embryo is not 100% identical to that of the individual to be cloned.

- The body (somatic) cell's nucleus may have contained mutations

- The mitochondria (powerhouse of the cell) of the resulting clone embryo will be the donor egg's mitochondria

That's right! If the donor egg is NOT from the individual or their matenal line (mitochondria are passed down maternally) the resulting clone embryo will NOT be 100% identical.

Engie speech bubble: With different mitochondria, a clone may have differences in body parts with high energy demand, like muscles, heart, eyes, or brain.

Slide 6: Dolly the Sheep

Some methods using the principles of SCNT were used as early as the 1950s (based on earlier work in the 1920s) to clone amphibians.

The first successful mammalian clone using SCNT was Dolly, a cloned sheep born in 1996 in Scotland, and announced to the public in 1997.

Dolly eventually developed severe arthritis and a progressive lung disease and was

euthanized at age 6 despite sheep's average lifespan being 11-12 years.

Engie speech bubble: Dolly was named after Dolly Parton!

Slide 7: Some Downsides

Inefficiency & Failure Rate:

SCNT has a high failure rate - many clones die during gestation, and newborn clones may die of abnormalities. For example, for Dolly, 277 fertilized eggs -> 29 embryos -> 3 lambs born -> only Dolly survived.

Advanced Aging(?):

Due to Dolly's age-related diseases it was speculated her DNA was already genetically "old". Later studies of further clones found no evidence of having age-related diseases, but the idea of "advanced" or "accelerated" aging of clones made its way into pop culture.

Engie speech bubble: More recent cloning using SCNT have reported higher success rates, but still have many failures.

Slide 8: What Does this Mean in TF2?

A resulting baby born from SCNT will, in fact, be a baby. The baby will NOT have the memories, experiences, muscle mass, or, well... anything past genetics, of the individual they were cloned from.

In terms of TF2, a lot of time and money would need to be spent raising, feeding, and teaching the resulting baby for the next 18 or so years to get anywhere close to a useful mercenary. Not very efficient...

Engie speech bubble: In short, you'd need to look beyond realistic cloning

and take some sci-fi shortcuts to get already-adult clones as often portrayed in fandom.

REFERENCE URLs

(Removed the hyper links since Tumblr likes to hide posts with hyperlinks)

Image of Dolly is from here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/22/newsid_4245000/4245877.stm

I mainly referenced these while writing (Yes, Wikipedia unreliable, I know, but this slideshow is a for-funsies TF2-themed general explanation and not an academic essay):

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK223960/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_(sheep)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somatic_cell_nuclear_transfer

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloning

I also looked at these when trying to determine if the Wikipedia information was reliable:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK223969/

https://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_and_General_Biology/General_Biology_(Boundless)/17%3A_Biotechnology_and_Genomics/17.01%3A_Biotechnology/17.1D%3A_Reproductive_Cloning

https://www.britannica.com/science/cloning/Reproductive-cloning

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3790123/