#i can guarantee that my perceived self is entirely different from my actual self

[idontdrinkgatorade]

i can’t imagine having a crush on someone you hardly know

[cuttoothed]

Fic for day 3 of @jonmartinweek for the prompt "Healing & Recovery". We've all been saying jmart need a lot of therapy after the finale, so...yeah.

Disclaimer: I have never been to couple's therapy. I have done some reading on it, but this is not intended in any way to accurately reflect real world therapy practices. Please just assume that anything "off" is due to the way couple's therapy is practiced in AU-land (though of course feel free to let me know if you spot anything egregious).

*

“Why don’t you start,” Judith suggests, “By telling me about the incident?”

The two men on the sofa give her identical startled looks, as if she’s uncovered something incriminating. Martin seems to regain his composure first; he clears his throat, and his hand moves to cover Jon’s, unconsciously protective.

“Sorry, wh-what do you mean by “incident”?”

“For most couples who come to see me, there’s an...inciting incident,” Judith explains. “Something that makes them realize they could use some professional support to work through things. Of course any couple can benefit from seeing a therapist together on occasion, to deal with small issues before they become big ones. But, well, it’s the same way that everyone knows they should go for regular check ups with their GP rather than waiting until they actually get sick—it’s just not something most people get around to until they need it.”

She pauses to give them time to consider that, and after a moment Jon nods, looking mildly embarrassed.

“Right,” he says. “That’s, ah, I think that’s fair.”

“There are pretty strong extenuating circumstances, though,” Martin huffs defensively. “We didn’t exactly have the option for therapy in the a—wh-where we lived before.”

“It’s not intended as a criticism,” Judith tells him. “You’ve chosen to talk to a therapist, and that’s a big step—one that many people never take. You’re ahead of the curve, Martin.”

Martin looks mollified at that; he’s clearly a bit touchy about perceived criticisms of their relationship, and Judith doesn’t want to get him on the defensive. She gives them both an encouraging smile.

“So,” she says. “Is there an incident you’d like to talk about?”

The two of them look at each other expectantly, as if each is waiting for the other to start. After several long moments of silence, Jon raises his eyebrows meaningfully, and Martin sighs.

“Fine,” he says. “So, we, uh, we recently realized that our...garden was a-a bit of a mess. So we—Jon and I—we get together with our...housemates, to figure out what kind of flowers we should plant. Fuschias or—or hydrangeas. ”

He pauses to glance nervously at Jon, who gives him a reassuring nod, squeezing his hand.

Right, Judith thinks, This is probably not about flowers.

“We agree we all want fuschias,” Martin continues, “Except Jon—he wanted hydrangeas. But we took a vote, and it was fuschias.”

“Except of course most of our—our housemates weren’t there for that meeting,” Jon interjects, folding his arms across his chest.

“Yes, but we agreed we couldn’t wait to ask every single person,” Martin says sharply, back on the defensive. Jon’s brow furrows and his mouth opens as if to say something, but he changes his mind and shuts it again. Conflict aversion is one of the most common dysfunctions Judith sees in the couples she treats; very few people want to disagree with the person they love, and even fewer know how to have a constructive conflict. She makes a mental note of it for later.

“Go ahead, Martin,’ she suggests gently. Martin looks unhappy, but continues.

“So we agree to plant the fuschias the next day, but Jon—Jon sneaks out in the middle of the night and starts, uh, planting hydrangeas. Without telling anyone.”

Without telling me, Judith hears in his hurt tone. Jon’s arms are still folded, and he’s almost squirming in his seat with the effort to not interject; Judith decides it’s a good time to invite him into the story.

“Jon, why did you feel so strongly about the hydrangeas?”

“It’s—it wasn’t that I wanted hydrangeas, I just couldn’t a-accept the idea of—of fuchsias.”

“Couldn’t allow it, you mean,” Martin grumbles. Judith lets it pass and continues to focus on Jon.

“Why is that?”

“They, uh, they spread…” Jon waves his hands vaguely. “Their—their...roots? They would get into the, uh, the neighbors’ gardens, completely take over, destroy everything.”

“Potentially,” Martin insists. “There was no guarantee—”

“There was no reason they wouldn’t,” Jon snaps.

By now Judith is not only sure that this has nothing to do with gardening, but suspects that neither of these men has ever seen a fuchsia in their lives. It’s fine, though. This is far from the first time a client has invented a story out of whole cloth so they can work through something uncomfortable without actually describing it. And this is their first session; Judith hopes in the future they’ll trust her enough to give her the real story.

“Remember,” she tells them. “We’re not here to decide that someone was objectively right or wrong, we’re here to help you understand each other and improve your communication skills.”

“Right,” Martin mutters, unconvinced. Jon’s expression is distressed, but he continues.

“There was no other choice,” he says wearily. “The only other option was—was azaleas, and I know you didn’t want that, Martin.”

“Absolutely not.” Martin sounds horrified. “But hydrangeas, Jon? Do you really think that was a better option?”

“You have to see the difference.” Jon’s tone goes stiff and incredulous, as if he’s winding up for a lecture, and Judith decides to cut that off before it starts.

“So what I’m hearing,” she says, “Is that you both had very strong, conflicting opinions on this topic. And that’s okay—it’s okay for you to disagree, even on something important. You’re not always going to agree on what the right thing to do is. Often there is no single “right thing,” so it comes down to how the different choices make us feel.”

“That doesn’t seem like a good way to make a decision that affects the wh—a lot of people.” Jon clearly considers that his opinion on not-flowers was the objectively correct one. Judith smiles.

“People aren’t computers, Jon. Even the most logical minded person in the world is influenced by their feelings—about important issues, about other people. You’d be surprised at how much of our decision making is rooted in emotion; either how we anticipate the outcome of our decision will make us feel, or how we are feeling in the immediate moment of the choice.”

A spasm of something that might be grief or pain flashes across Jon’s face, and he leans unconsciously in Martin’s direction. Martin’s arm instantly goes around him, offering comfort without thought. It’s clear that these two love each other deeply, unquestioningly—and that’s also part of the problem. When someone you love thinks that you’re wrong about something that’s important to you, it can feel like a rejection of your entire self.

“I’d like to pause this discussion for now, and try a little exercise,” she says. Jon nods, sitting back up and disengaging from Martin��s embrace; Martin looks attentively at her, though his expression is unsure.

“One of the biggest challenges we face with people we love is recognizing that they are separate from us. I know—” she says, raising her hands to stop the objections she can already see forming on their lips. “Of course you know that you’re separate people. We all know that, rationally. But emotionally, it’s natural to see the people you’re close to as extensions of yourself—it’s an evolutionary impulse to aid group bonding. It happens with friends and family, and it’s an even stronger impulse between partners.

“We have to do a lot of work to truly internalize the idea that the people we love have their own inner emotional lives that drive their opinions and decisions. But once you are able to fully grasp that truth, it makes disagreeing with the person you love feel less emotionally fraught; it’s a powerful tool for navigating conflict constructively.”

Jon is frowning, but it’s in consideration rather than disapproval. Martin still looks skeptical, his body language defensive, though he doesn’t say anything. That’s probably the best she’s going to get for now, Judith thinks.

“So,” she says. “The exercise is this: I’d like each of you to take a few moments to think, and then tell the other person something about yourself. Not a fact, but something that you feel. And I would like you to listen without interrupting when your partner tells you their feeling. Can you each do that?”

“I, ah—” Jon’s frown deepens. “That’s...rather difficult to do on demand.”

“I know,” says Judith with sympathy. “That’s why I’m here, to support you both in doing the difficult things. If it was easy, you wouldn’t need a therapist to facilitate.”

“Right,” says Jon. “Okay.”

“Martin?”

“Fine,” he says, but his tone is reluctant. Judith gets it; vulnerability is hard enough in front of someone you love, never mind with a stranger in the room. It’s easier to pretend that it’s pointless, that you’re not really putting yourself out there to be hurt. She has the feeling that Martin is someone who would rather avoid being hurt, even if it means closing himself off.

“All right,” she says. “When you’re ready, Jon, would you mind going first? No rush, take all the time you need.” Hopefully, seeing Jon take the first step might help Martin get over some of his defensiveness.

“Oh,” he says, and for a few moments his expression devolves into one of intense concentration. Then he nods, turning towards Martin.

“Start with “I feel”,” Judith suggests.

“All right,” he says, breathless with nerves. “I, uh, I feel...responsible. For—well, for everything, basically. And for everyone. Bad things have happened to people, and it’s my fault, because I should have done something. Everything that happened, back there, it was all because of me.”

“It wasn’t you, Jon!” Martin protests. “Annabelle told us—”

Judith is about to remind him that he’s supposed to just be listening, but he cuts himself off first. Jon laughs, an ugly sound that’s more like a sob.

“And how is that supposed to help? Knowing that the—that they were using me my whole life, how does that absolve me of any responsibility for what I did? For the fact that I failed to do anything to stop them? I couldn’t even go through with the one thing that could have actually meant something, because—”

He clamps his mouth shut, his jaw locked tight; Martin looks down at his hands, his expression distraught.

“Because of me.”

“Martin—” Jon’s tone is wounded, and he reaches for Martin’s hand. Judith sees reflections of a shared pain in both their faces, though she doesn’t understand why; this would be a lot easier if they’d just tell her the truth.

But you didn’t get into this profession because it was easy, did you?

“Thank you for sharing that, Jon. I think there’s a lot more for us to explore there, but let’s give you a break and give Martin a chance to share, okay?”

Jon nods, clutching Martin’s hand in his. Martin gives a long, slow exhale.

“Righto,” he says with false, brittle cheer. “”I feel,” wasn’t it? Right. Jon, when you do something stupidly self-sacrificing for other people, I feel like everyone else is more important than me.”

Jon flinches.

“Martin,” Judith says, keeping her tone level. “Let’s keep the focus on what you feel, not on what causes you to feel that way, okay?”

“Right,” Martin mutters, and glances at Jon. “Okay. In that case, I feel...like I’m not important. Like the only thing I can really do is—is take care of you. And if I can’t even do that, then what bloody use am I? That’s it, I suppose.”

“Martin…” Jon says again, softly. His eyes are wet, and he’s clinging to Martin’s hand like a drowning man to a plank. Martin swallows hard and shakes his head, but he makes no move to extract his hand from Jon’s grip.

“Thank you, Martin,” Judith tells him. “I know that wasn’t easy to share, for either of you. But this is the kind of honesty that we need, in order to build strong communication. Let’s all take five minutes—if either of you want to take a bathroom break, or get some water—and then we can talk about where to go from here. All right?”

Martin disappears to the loo, while Jon wanders around the office, looking with polite interest at the shelves of books and ornaments. Judith writes a few notes for herself, to follow up in future sessions. She hopes there’ll be future sessions. Both of these men seem deeply hurt, traumatized by events that they’re just barely alluding to, and have clearly been struggling through as best they can with less than ideal coping mechanisms, trying—and likely failing—not to hurt each other in the process. They both need individual counselling as much as couples’ therapy—maybe more. She’s certainly going to recommend it..

They clearly love each other, though. And they want to make it work. If they’re willing to put the effort in, they have better than even odds in their favor.

Martin’s eyes are red-rimmed when he returns; he sits on the sofa as near as he can to Jon, who presses their shoulders together. Judith can’t help smiling at the sight.

“How long have the two of you been together?” she asks. She always asks new clients at the end of the first session, rather than at the beginning; that way she can get a feel for the relationship without preconceptions based on longevity. The two of them look at each other properly, for the first time since Martin came back in, and matching, sheepish smiles break out on both their faces after a moment.

“So it was three weeks in Scotland,” Martin begins, ticking it off on his fingers. “And then—how long?”

“Uhh, it’s...let’s say half a year, give or take?” Jon makes a face that says he’s really not all that sure.

“Right, and then we’ve been here nearly six months. So...about a year, all in all?”

“But we knew each other for over three years before that,” Jon insists earnestly.

“It sounds as if the two of you have been through a lot,” says Judith. “And not all of it gardening related?”

“No,” Jon says with a self-deprecating chuckle. “Mostly not.”

“We barely scratched the surface today—and that’s normal. Relationships are complicated, and it takes a lot of time and hard work to build understanding and communication. But I promise you, it is worth all the effort. You both made a really strong start today—it takes courage to be that honest, even with your partner.”

The two of them give each other a long look, and the smile they trade is tentative, but genuine. They haven’t solved anything today, have only just begun to reveal their hurt and their insecurities; they have a long journey ahead to get to a truly honest, healthy place both for themselves and their relationship. Judith has a feeling they’ll persevere, though—that losing each other simply isn’t an option.

“So,” she says, “Should we make this a recurring appointment?”

Jon glances questioningly at Martin, who bites his lip and then nods firmly, taking Jon’s hand in his.

“Yeah,” Martin says. “We’ve done much harder things. We can do this.”

“Together?” says Jon, and Martin smiles.

“No matter what.”

[myopinionhi]

A Will Solace Character Analysis: the Underappreciated Soft Side

I've noticed many fanfictions have Will Solace OOC. So I’ve been thinking about aspects of Will’s personality fans seem to either gloss over or exaggerate. Here, this post is me doing an in-depth analysis explaining Will Solace’s canon personality in the books, and how it can sometimes differ from fanfictions. Sprinkled in this analysis are tips to fanfiction writers on how they write Will as more in-character.

There is one major aspect of Will that people seem to ignore or underemphasize. Nico best explains it when describing Will in this quote

Jason was a fighter. You could tell from the intensity of his stare, his constant alertness, the coiled-up energy in his frame. Will Solace was more like a lanky cat stretched out in sunshine. His movements were relaxed and nonthreatening, his gaze soft and far away. In his faded SURF BARBADOS T-shirt, his cutoff shorts and flip-flops, he looked about as aggressive as a demigod could get, but Nico knew he was brave under fire. During the Battle of Manhattan, Nico had seen him in action - the camp's best combat medic, risking his life to save wounded campers.

To sum it up, Will Solace is a very chill and calm character. A lot of writers make Will more irrational, impulsive, overbearing, and emotional than he actually is. Will is not the type of character to create drama unless he's, as Nico puts it, "under fire." In other words, the intense side of his personality doesn't come out unless the situation is urgent or dire.

Fans remember during the Second Giant War how he gets angry and argues with Nico over Nico's health and shadow-traveling, so many assume Will is going to be this fiery over a lot of other things regarding their relationship. For example, fanfic writers may make Will controlling or overly sensitive with Nico. However, keep in mind, Will gets heated with Nico during the Second Giant War because Nico's shadow-traveling is killing him. This is how Will describes Nico's dire state.

"Coach Hedge told me all about your shadow-travel. You can’t try that again."

"I just did try it again, Solace. I’m fine."

"No, you’re not. I’m a healer. I could feel the darkness in your hand as soon as I touched it. Even if you made it to that tent, you’d be in no shape to fight. But you wouldn’t make it. One more slip, and you won’t come back. You are not shadow-travelling. Doctor’s orders."

Will is a healer. When he touches Nico's hand, he can sense how little sleep and food Nico has been getting and how Nico's being taken over by darkness. Nico is on the verge of death and hasn't cared about his health for a long time. Nico is also stubborn about it, so Will has to be aggressive in order to save Nico's life. This aggressive behavior is not the norm for Will, but it can sometimes come out when he has to assert control in a life-or-death situation.

Will is a calming prescence. He's a diplomat. He stops violence on multiple occassions.

He's one of the few people who's able to calm Clarisse's violent rage, and he does so in a gentle manner.

Clarisse pointed her dagger at Rachel. "What about their allies, huh? Did you see that tribe of two-headed men that arrived yesterday? Or the glowing red dog-headed guys with the big poleaxes? They look pretty barbaric to me. It would’ve been nice if you’d foreseen any of that, if your Oracle power didn’t break down when we needed it most!"

Rachel’s face turned as red as her hair. "That’s hardly my fault. Something is wrong with Apollo’s gifts of prophecy. If I knew how to fix it –"

"She’s right." Will Solace, head counsellor for the Apollo cabin, put his hand gently on Clarisse’s wrist. Not many campers could’ve done that without getting stabbed, but Will had a way of defusing people’s anger. He got her to lower her dagger. "Everyone in our cabin has been affected. It’s not just Rachel."

One of the most underrated Will Solace moments is when he stops a bloody battle from happening between Camp Half-Blood and Camp Jupiter.  

But he knew it wouldn’t do any good. After weeks of waiting, agonizing and steaming, the Greeks and Romans wanted blood. Trying to stop the battle now would be like trying to push back a flood after the dam broke.

Will Solace saved the day.

He put his fingers in his mouth and did a taxicab whistle even more horrible than the last. Several Greeks dropped their swords. A ripple went through the Roman line like the entire First Cohort was shuddering.

"DON’T BE STUPID!" Will yelled. "LOOK!"

People are so used to seeing demigods, especially male demigods, being aggressive fighters that they can't wrap their heads around a brave and strong demigod who actively tries to avoid unnecessary conflict and destruction as much as he can.

And that's Will Solace's strength: he has the ability to prevent as much harm as possible.

Will is a difficult character to write. There's a lot of dueling factors with his personality. He's calm and pacifying while also being brave and assertive. He's fun and lighthearted while also being intelligent, logical, and grounded. He's laidback while also being responsible and hardworking. He's insecure but not melodramatic. He's very caring and protective but not pushy.

Will's personality confuses Nico sometimes too.

He’d always thought of Will as easygoing and laid back. Apparently he could also be stubborn and aggravating.

The trick to writing Will is to keep in mind his default personality is a soft and lighthearted character. Writers tend to overemphasize the hard side of his personality when his default personality is actually the soft side.

Think of the relaxing, lanky cat metaphor Nico uses for him. He and Nico bicker often, and it works for Will because he rolls with everything and doesn't take things too seriously. He's able to alleviate Nico's moodiness with humor, wittiness, groundedness, and patience. Nico affectionately calls Will a "dork" because Will usually keeps things light. Interestingly enough, he's able to be lighthearted without coming across as insensitive or an airheaded goofball, the latter of which is something Nico dislikes about Percy's personality. On a related sidenote, another way writers make Will OOC is they make him too dumb or too immature. I know I mentioned to focus on Will's soft side, but be careful to avoid that too. He's a SENSIBLE, lanky cat.

The way Will keeps his composure during a stressful situation by using laughter while still being mature is expressed well in this exchange with Apollo. (Yes, Will has a lot to manage.)

It was difficult to think of this young man as my son. He was so poised, so unassuming, so free of acne. He also didn’t appear to be awestruck in my presence. In fact, the corner of his mouth had started twitching.

“Are—are you amused?” I demanded.

Will shrugged. “Well, it’s either find this funny or freak out. My dad, the god Apollo, is a fifteen-year-old—”

“Sixteen,” I corrected. “Let’s go with sixteen.”

“A sixteen-year-old mortal, lying in a cot in my cabin, and with all my healing arts—which I got from you—I still can’t figure out how to fix you.”

“There is no fixing this,” I said miserably. “I am cast out of Olympus. My fate is tied to a girl named Meg. It could not be worse!”

Will laughed, which I thought took a great deal of gall. “Meg seems cool. She’s already poked Connor Stoll in the eyes and kicked Sherman Yang in the crotch.”

The fiercer side of Will's personality comes out only when the situation calls for it; this happens sometimes when he has to be a caring family member, a responsible healer, or a warrior in a dire situation. Even when he gets more forceful, he doesn't get more forceful than he has to.

Since Will has such a balanced and lighthearted personality, what are his flaws? What are the dark sides of his personality? There are four main things that stick out.

1. He's insecure about his self-perceived lack of abilities.

"I agree," Will said. "I wish I was a better archer … I wouldn’t mind shooting my Roman relative off his high horse. Actually, I wish I could use any of my father’s gifts to stop this war." He looked down at his own hands with distaste. "Unfortunately, I’m just a healer."

2. He sometimes struggles to endure the heavy responsibilities he has as a healer and as a protector to his family.

“I got it reattached,” Will told me, his voice shaky with exhaustion. His scrubs were speckled with blood. “I need somebody to keep him stable.”

I pointed to the woods. “But—”

“I know!” Will snapped. “Don’t you think I want to be out there searching too? We’re shorthanded for healers. There’s some salve and nectar in that pack. Go!”

I was stunned by his tone. I realized he was just as concerned about Kayla and Austin as I was. The only difference: Will knew his duty. He had to heal the injured first. And he needed my help.

3. He forces himself to bottle his emotions to keep his composure.

Will laughed under his breath. “I’m terrified. But one thing you learn as head counselor: you have to keep it together for everyone else. Let’s get you on your feet."

Here's a second example.

I rested my hand on Will’s shoulder. “Don’t worry. We’ll be back by dawn.”

His mouth trembled ever so slightly. “How can you be sure?”

4. He constantly worries about his loved ones.

Nico rested his hand on Will’s shoulder. “Apollo, we were worried. Will was especially.”

In conclusion, Will Solace's personality is difficult to get correct. But don't worry, if you write Will as a laidback, witty cat in your fanfics, I guarantee he'll be more in-character than many other fanfics with Will Solace.

(Note: I am only human. If you believe I'm misinterpreting some aspects of Will's personality, feel free to express it. What I say isn't 100 percent the right interpretation.)

[sazandorable]

About moderating and banning content on AO3!

Okay so! I haven’t had the spoons to do this for a while but I cracked and ranted about it on twitter which is... not... conducive to long rants, so!

This is a h u g e discussion part of the l o n g history that led to the creation of AO3, which older, more informed, and more articulate people have talked about at length and can be found around if you look (I reblog some of it in my AO3 and fandom history tags for the curious). So I won’t go into that here, nor into the practical reasons why it’s not even possible to put that system in place anyway.

Arbitrarily, or the purpose of this post, because it’s the biggest topic I’ve seen brought up lately, I’ll be talking about fic depicting underage characters in se*ual situations, but honestly I could hold the exact same conversation on literally any controversial content.

This is about why you, specifically, if you are a content creator and especially if you are marginalised and especially if you are queer and especially especially if you are sensitive to fiction depicting certain things... do not, actually, want a banning system on AO3.

What? Of course we do. There’s a lot of p*do shit on AO3 and p*do shit is gross. No one should condone that, wtf? It would be easy to do — just periodically delete the entire Underage tag!

What will happen if that is done is that people will re-upload and continue to write it, they’ll just stop tagging and you will run into it with zero warning nor ability to filter it out. Again, this is not a theoretical — we know this is what happens. When I was a teen, adult content (all adult content) was not allowed on FF.NET; it was everywhere regardless, and without tags. The exact same thing happened on tumblr when adult content was banned as well. It’s not a matter of “staff not handling it well” — it just doesn’t work.

To keep safe the people who need to be able to exclude that tag, that tag needs to exist and be used.

Well, shucks. A reporting system then?

A reporting system would operate in one of two ways:

-an algorithm, which would delete a lot of stuff we wouldn’t want it to delete.

-humans, which is... the bigger problem.

An algorithm sounds great. We do want it to delete everything.

Okay. What about the daddy k*nk fics between consenting adult characters? What about the fics featuring characters that are children in the canon but are adults in the fic? What about the fics about teenagers exploring their se*uality together, written by adults about the experiences they remember having or wish they could have had? What about the thousands of SasuNaru and Drarry and other shounen and YA fics that will get written, by teens or by people who remember being teens? What about the se*ually explicit fic written by teens who are se*ually active in real life? What about the fics about CSA as trauma, about healing from it? What about the fics written by survivors of CSA to cope about their trauma? What about the fics that clearly show that it’s evil and traumatic? What about the super dark, harrowing, but beautiful and artistic that I’m glad I read even though it fucked me up for days? What about the ones that were really shitty but also horribly hot?

Well, some of these are still not okay, but maybe some might be. It depends on how it’s written. We’ll have humans moderating content and deciding, then.

Okay.

The thing is, I don’t know which of the things I just listed were okay for you to be depicted in fiction and which were too much. Odds are I don’t agree with you. Odds are if I asked 10 people randomly picked off the street, not everyone would agree.

Odds are, even if AO3 arbitrarily decided on which of those are allowed and which are not, you would not agree with their choice, and you would still be unhappy with the decision. (Or you would be happy, but your friends wouldn’t.)

Odds are, different AO3 content moderators might not agree on whether a given fic qualifies or not — is it artistic enough? Does it show enough that these actions are evil and wrong? Can the author prove they’re a teenager? Can the author prove they are a CSA victim? Can the author prove that this is to help them cope with their trauma? The author seem to be functioning alright, they mustn’t really be traumatised!

You know what I mean! There’s absolute, objectively gross shit out there that is not artistic and should not be published.

I agree that there’s vile stuff out there that makes me sick and that I think is very clearly just ped*philic trash. But there is no way to, 1) stop those from getting published anyway, 2) take those down and preserve the safety of everything else.

If we start forbidding some things, there’s two ways to go about it.

One single, clear, arbitrary rule — for instance, absolutely no adult content featuring characters under 18 (leaving aside the fact that this would not even work for the reason cited above). So we lose all the stuff from teenagers, all the coming of age stories about adolescence, all the stuff from CSA survivors; people who need to write it can’t publish it anymore, and people who need to read it can’t anymore either (and as a cool bonus, they’re told it’s wrong and made to feel bad about it). Depending on whether the rules applies to characters that are under 18 in the canon, we lose entire fandoms.

Or, subjective moderation by humans, according to what they estimate to be gross.

Let’s assume all moderators can agree on what’s gross or not.

If there is a system in place to ban some underage works because “gross shit”, then that means other gross stuff can be taken down on account of being gross and harmful.

Yeah! Gross stuff should be taken down! Come on, surely everyone agrees on what’s gross and harmful.

Ah.

But the problem is.

Here is a list of things I have seen — with my eyes seen — called harmful to be depicted in fiction:

Murder

Non-con

Inc*st

Cannibalism

Torture

Self-harm

Mental illness

Drugs

Racism

K*nk

Non-negotiated k*nk, but healthy k*nk is ok

Spanking k*nk

BDSM where the woman is a bottom, but woman top is ok

Healthy depictions of BDSM

Unhealthy depictions of BDSM

Queer people doing bad things

Abusive relationships

Rival/Enemies to lovers

Redemption stories

A happy relationship between a 17 yo and an 18 yo

A happy relationship between a 20 yo and a 60 yo

A happy relationship between a boss and their employee, or a college teacher and a student

A happy relationship between a 14 yo boy and an older teenage boy, because that’s reminiscent of older men preying on younger gay boys IRL

Se*ual content featuring a character whose age is unclear in canon and some people headcanon them as being underage, some as being a young adult

Loving, consensual fluff between characters that are evil villains, because it romanticises them and their actions

Dark content shipping female characters

Fluffy content shipping female characters, because it’s misogynistic to act like lesbians are only soft all the time

Consensual s*x featuring a canonically asexual character, because it implies that all aces can and should still have se*

Fics about the same canonically asexual character hating s*x, because that erases the experience of s*x-positive aces

Shipping a character who is perceived by some fans as queer-coded with a character of a different s*x

The tendency to ship a black character with white characters

Fluffy drunk s*x, because that’s not actually consensual

Sleep s*x, because that’s not actually consensual

Trans characters not experiencing dysphoria, because that idealises the trans experience

Consensual s*x between adults that are not married

LGBT+ content, because kids shouldn’t see that.

I guarantee you: you, I, and 10 random people plucked from the street will not agree on what, in that list, is and isn’t okay to publish and consume fiction of.

So why should your taste be the one followed? Why should it be the taste of mods you don’t know? Why should anyone get to dictate? What if the mods think your OTP is gross and your NOTP is fine?

This is the slippery slope argument.

Yes, it is the slippery slope argument. Because we know it happens. Because we’ve been there, because I’ve seen it happen myself twice already and I’m not even thirty. Because we know people do complain loudly about all of these things.

And because the second there is a banning system in place, assholes will use the system to abuse it and get stuff they just don’t like taken down using the “it is gross” argument, and one day you’ll wake up and the beautiful fic that helped you come to terms with your abuse/trauma/identity/orientation/k*nk for feet will be taken down and wonderful vulnerable creative people will have been harassed out of fandom because they argued with 1 person who didn’t like their foot k*nk fic that happened to also feature, for instance, a CSA trauma backstory.

Again: not exaggerating. Not theoretical. It happens, we know it happens, AO3 was created literally because it happens.

I still fucking hate that stuff.

That is completely fine and normal. No one likes everything. Me too! Most of the dark stuff is niche and the creators know only few people will like it the same way they do.

(For the record, I get grossed out and triggered by fics about an asexual character who does not like s*x having s*x with their partner to make them happy. Deep in my gut everything screams that that’s fucked up, terrifying and harmful, how can people write that. But I recognise that there are people who love and need that, and I leave those people and their content alone.

OTOH, I read a lot of otherwise dark shit and I enjoy it in the same way I enjoyed, say, Hannibal, in the same way some people enjoy true crime documentaries, horror movies or r*pe fantasy k*nk. It helps me explore stuff that I like to see in fiction, in a safe, controlled way. I’m also asexual, 90% s*x-repulsed IRL, and, obviously, I would never abuse a child. For that matter, I wouldn’t kill and eat people, either, nor would I do 90% of the tamer k*nky stuff I read.

Of course, Hannibal was fucked up and lots of people probably think Hannibal was gross and should not have been aired — but as exemplified by the fact that it was created, aired and watched, lots of people thought it was fine, interesting and even fun to watch.)

You can and should curate your experience and protect yourself. The AO3 website now allows you to exclude certain tags, and people have developed tools to help with that such as plugins that save your filters or hide fics that contain certain words.

But no, it isn’t going to, and it shouldn’t, get banned.

[fairycosmos]

girlies do you all agree that like... someone being in love with us seems so unrealistic and almost unreachable? i am always so amazed and shocked how ppl talk so calmly abt all the partners they have had when i am like... how do you even find someone to love you where and how does that happen and how do you turn into someone other than just a funny comedic bro friend you know... i am not trying to be all depressing or fishing for compliments but i GENUIENLY cant imagine anyone ever loving me just because it seems so far away and unreal. i have had a boyfriend one time and i didnt even know him i just didnt want to reject him and like. i was so scared of the intimacy and i was so overwhelmed that i hid in the bathrooms in school and refused to look into his eyes whenever we did talk like 💀 i feel like i am not made to love and be loved you know

plz this is so :(( i just wanna hug you. also i completely know what you mean and i think a lot of ppl do. i have never understood ppl who just fall in and out of relationships. i’ve only ever officially dated one person too - but i never fell in love w him and i think i was just doing it out of societal pressure or to prove to myself i could. i was JUST thinking about this the other day when i was laying in bed. how i just couldn’t fathom someone laying here with me and actually enjoying it. it looks so natural for everyone else but if someone put their hand on my shoulder or looked at me up close i think i’d cut them out of my life. i don’t know how i handled it in the past. i feel like dating me would be such an honest to god disappointment - and that someone would only ever do it if they were settling lmfao. i would feel so bad that they’d have to see me and put up with me? and not get anything in return. like i’d be such an embarrassment and there’s no way around it. i’m a void of a person with nothing to give anyway. plus it’s just so much work to be vulnerable when there’s no guarantee or even high chance it’ll last. and how do you even meet anyone in the first place besides dating apps? how does love even start or how is the protentional for it found?

there are a few things i like to keep in mind when i get overwhelmed by this. the first is that all of your problems with love are internal, but actually nurturing a loving bond with someone is both internal and external because half of it comes from some place outside yourself. outside all your own issues. what i’m saying is others don’t see you or your emotional difficulties the way you do. your self hatred has you convinced you’re unlovable and i’m sure that is deeply rooted and comes from a multitude of factors in your life and your past, but it is not an absolute truth. it may have felt like one since you were a kid, but it is not. the trick of it is to make you believe you are. it has to make you believe because it’s not a fact in the first place. you weren’t born shying away from love, you learned to, and you can unlearn the impulse as well. honestly everyone reads each other differently, everyone sees each other in a new way. you have never seen or perceived yourself in a moment of relaxed happiness, when you’re talking about your interests, when you’re joking around with someone. but everyone else has. there’s nothing inherently wrong about you. you just have a very limited viewpoint of who you are and what your presence could mean to people. the second thing i like to remember is that there is literally no rush. it is so so much more common than you think to remain single up to your late 20s and beyond. i know it seems like the whole world has someone but it doesn’t mean they’re fulfilled or happy either. we live in a relationship and sex obsessed society, and i really feel like most of us wouldn’t date so quickly if we didn’t constantly feel like we had something to prove or that something was missing from inside of ourselves. it is much healthier to go with the flow and to let whatever will be, be. the third thing is that you are a whole person on your own. there are so many different types of love in this world and romantic is just a slither of the greater picture. obviously it’s entirely natural to crave that type of intimacy, but it is not something you will crumble without. it doesn’t make or break your life. it is much simpler and easier to let it find you cause it will, when you feel capable of seeking it out. i think you may have been uncomfortable in past relationships because you just weren’t ready, and that’s totally fine. you can yearn for love and still recognize that you may not be emotionally prepared to take on a relationship just yet, those experiences can co exist imo. i think it’s all just a matter of idk. patience and self love is whats coming to mind for you.

idk if therapy or talking to someone about why you feel this way is available to you but if so, or if it ever is, i would really recommend it. i know that may seem like a big step and super nerve wracking but it’s important to examine who or what made you feel this way in the first place. then you can begin dismantling those beliefs and building your life around being your own friend rather than your own worst enemy. i know that’s a lot, it’s just something to consider for the future. anyway you are good!! you are lovable!! you were born with an inherent worth that hasn’t disappeared just cause you can’t see it at the moment!! and i’m sure you’d say the same about other ppl, so it applies to you too. sending you a lot of love. which you will take on bc guess what :^) ur capable of feeling and giving all forms of love. even if it takes a long time for you to really learn how to do so in a way that you’re compatible with. mwah x

[inqorporeal]

hi! i just read through your mandalore theory, and it's FASCINATING, i love it! any thoughts on Satine herself?

(The Mandalore Theory)

I have a LOT of thoughts about Satine, both meta and in-universe. If she were a real person, I can pretty much guarantee we would never be friends, but as a character she’s fascinatingly complex. I’mma put this under a cut, cus it’s going to be long.

Satine is a wealthy, privileged member of Kalevalan nobility, born and raised on Kalevala and educated on Coruscant. Her father, then-Duke of Mandalore, was likely rarely home when she and her siblings were younger, since he would have had to be resident in Sundari; the rest of the family remained on Kalevala for their safety, because the Mandalorian clan wars kicked off in 60 BBY when a number of Mandalorian clans rejected then-Mand’alor Jaster Mereel’s proposed social reformations and formed the Death Watch (the Wookieepedia says the clan wars started about 44 BBY, but if we examine the larger series of events, it’s pretty clear that things started much, much earlier). Satine hadn’t even been born at that time; due to the growing conflict, it’s understandable that the Duke’s family would have been housed elsewhere for their safety.

Satine’s mother and older sibling (the canonical parent of Korkie) are both unnamed but they’re also both presumed dead, likely victims of the Clan Wars. Eventually the Duke was also killed, prompting Satine’s involvement under the guard of Qui-Gon Jinn and Obi-Wan Kenobi.

At this point, Satine is a complete outsider to Mandalore. Kalevala effectively owns Mandalore -- it has its own king/queen, and provides political support to the New Mandalorian faction (it can be debated as to whether Kalevala originated as a Mandalorian settlement which eventually severed ties, or if it began as its own sovereign world and later adopted some Mandalorian social structures such as the clan system). Satine is not from Mandalore, has never lived on Mandalore, was not educated on Mandalore, and has only the barest, most watered-down connection to Mandalorian culture. Canon and Legends offer slightly different stories, but the important part is that the Republic backed the New Mandalorian faction and helped them to win the Clan Wars. Satine then effectively outlawed traditional Mandalorian society within the parts of Mandalore controlled by the New Mandalorians.

There’s something to be said for the way people react to childhood trauma, the way they deal with healing, and how it affects their relationship with the world as adults. Satine was a child when she lost two members of her family, and a teenager when she lost her father to the same, seemingly unending conflict. Her family has been caught up in this war since before she was born, and it’s entirely understandable that she would have a vested interest in ending the conflict for good, preferably forever.

But as a result, her policies are authoritarian, albeit with the blessing of the people who consider her their leader. The people who stay in New Mandalorian-held territory approve of her work -- everyone is probably sick to death from nearly 20 years of fighting by that point. It’s notable that, during TCW, the only New Mandalorians who actively fight back against Death Watch are the Sundari guard: New Mandalorian civilians never give any indication of owning weapons, armour, or the means for self-defense, and without the Republic’s support -- which Satine refused! -- are utterly steam-rolled by Death Watch over the course of the Clone Wars. Traditional Mandalorian culture has been completely wiped out of their society, and whether this was the ultimate goal of the New Mandalorian faction or if Satine’s own policies led to this point, the fact of the matter is that she was the nominated leader of the movement and approved if not encouraged the sundering of Mandalorian martial tradition. The factions that wanted to continue the conflict -- who refused to surrender their culture -- were banished to what are effectively penal colonies: if they wouldn’t follow the New Mandalorian way of life, they would lose their ancestral homes.

These are not the policies of a leader who seeks reconciliation and social progress; these are the policies of a colonizing force. This is the quintessence of cultural genocide, and Satine is depicted at the forefront of the movement.

On the meta end of things, the fact that a kids’ TV show tries to prop this up as an ideal is more than a little shocking. There was so much space to have an exploration of morality and cultural preservation in TCW’s depiction of Mandalore and Satine as its controlling authority, but they completely dropped the ball and instead went with a very two-dimensional depiction with zero critical discussion. And then showed New Mandalorian pacifism failing Satine’s people repeatedly anyway; good job, Filoni.

Satine has her reasons for her policies and her treatment towards a significant population who should, in theory, also be her subjects. But it’s important to recognise the distinction between having a reason for one’s behaviour, and having a responsibility to address that behaviour when it’s hurting others (or oneself). When one is in a position of holding power over others -- whether in a management position, leadership role, parent or teacher -- it’s even more crucial.

My thoughts on Satine are that she’s a terrible person, secure in her perceived moral superiority, who never shows any indication of ever questioning whether her personal morality is actually what’s best for the hundreds of thousands -- if not millions -- of lives she’s responsible for. She places personal morals above necessary diplomatic compromise; and blames the resulting conflict on the people whose lives she effectively spearheaded the ruination of. If everyone would just do things her way, everything would be better! Whilst she deplores physical violence, her noncombative policies still enact violence against people who hold different values, and in this way she is as uncompromising as her opponent, Pre Vizsla; they both lead cults of personality by sheer force of will.

(A side issue for me with regards to Satine -- which is a far more personal issue than anything objective -- is her treatment of Obi-Wan Kenobi. She displays an incredible lack of respect for his culture -- which is consistent for her established characterisation -- and the way she constantly negs him reminds me of the way my asshole ex could never say anything positive about me. They’re set up to be an ideal for how Jedi should handle attachments and love, as a contrast to Anakin and Padme’s relationship, but I can’t see anything romantic in it.)

But you know what? As a character in a piece of media, I like her. Media desperately needs more complex characters like Satine, particularly female-presenting characters, who are frequently given only two dimensions and one of them is “pretty”. She had a role in TCW that could have been very nuanced with the room to explore a very controversial topic, had the writing been up to the task.

And then the showrunners killed her off for the sake of another character’s manpain. The New Mandalorians -- her cult of personality -- doesn’t even fall apart without her in charge, the way cults of personality are wont to do in real life! The manner of her death serves no real purpose at all in the larger plotline; she could have been killed by anyone else at any other point and it would have had the same effect on Mandalore. Nothing changes there in the year -- a full year! -- between Satine’s death and the Siege of Mandalore at the end of the Clone Wars. Satine could have been kept alive in captivity; she could have gone into exile; the results would have been the same, or possibly even more interesting.

I think Satine is an awful person. I also think that -- as a complicated, contentious, controversial character -- she was underused and underdeveloped, and deserved a hell of a lot better from the storyline than how it treated her.

[petroltogo]

Hello! Im not sure if asks are allowed? I didnt see anything about it (I didnt scroll that far.) but people doing requests.

I just wanted to say I read ur superhero AU and Im in love with it! Im intimated by your writing (Im trying to make something in the fandom-soon, hopefully) cuz like, its so amazing?? I also admire it, and aspire to get to get to that level one day!

I wanted to say thank you for writing it. I dont really read anything Varia related, and rarely 10th gen (Im mostly into the arco)! And also, any tips for writing? Writing in the khr world? Thank you for taking the time to read this, and Im sorry if Im intruding on ya, homie. Please have a pleasant day!

First of all, you’re not intruding, I love getting asks!! Asks are allowed, welcome and actively encouraged [unless it’s just to spew pointless hate, in which case it’s blocked] and thank you so much for sending me one! And for your super sweet words, I’m glad you enjoyed the super AU so thank you for letting me know and for the ego boost lol

Posting something you’ve written is a scary experience -- I’ve been doing it for years and I still keep second-guessing myself and putting things off and deciding not to write a fic idea because why would anyone want to read that, right? And that goes doubly so for any fandoms I haven’t written in before and established a ground-floor level confidence to build on. But it still gets easier the more often I do it. Moreover I’m not forcing anyone to read it, I’m just offering my fics up for anyone who’s interested in the fandom and wants to take a closer look.

And if more and more people keep on creating things in any one fandom, that means there’s more and more content to choose from for everyone. Which means we all win because we have more fics to read, more art to marvel at, more videos to watch, more whatever it is you wanna do -- we all have more of it to choose from, and with every person that joins in, the chance of any one of us finding exactly the kind of content they’re looking for increases.

So. I hope you will try your hand at creating and that you’ll find the courage to publish it if you’re comfortable with that. I wish you all the self-doubt-silencer in the world [ignore those voices, ignore them like I used to ignore my french homework!] because I guarantee you: Someone is gonna love what you make.

That said, to be completely honest [this could’ve been] a villain’s origin story is the first time I’ve played in the KHR world, so I’m not sure how helpful I’ll be since I’m not actually that familiar with the fandom. But in my experience the most important thing is just to have a story in mind that you want to share and to write the names of the characters correctly -- [on an unrelated note, I’m so sorry Kyoko but I’m still not sure how to spell yours] -- because at the end of the day, writing fanfic to me means sharing your perspective on the characters, your interpretation of them with the world.

And some people will decide it doesn’t align with their own views and will shrug and move on and some will fall in love with it because it will resonate with them or make them rethink the character or give them an insight they’ve never considered. I think that’s one of the most beautiful parts of fandom tbh.

Writing, hm, what can I tell you about writing. This is actually really tricky because I don’t know what type of story you’re trying to write so if there’s something specific you struggle with, feel free to drop me another ask!

But in general I’m a very character-oriented writer [as the super AU probably illustrates] so my tip is to always make your character’s voices count. Whether you write in first POV or in third POV, as long as it’s from the perspective of a specific character always use that too your full advantage. Use the limits that POV defines, use what the characters don’t know -- whether your audience knows or doesn’t know doesn’t matter -- to your advantage. 

For example: A conversation between Reborn and Skull in their early arcobaleno days. Reborn’s side of things might be full of double-meanings and hidden messages that he’s trying to get across while probing the cloud for the same sort of information and interpreting Skull’s expressions and reactions [in ways that may not be correct] because he’s mafia. Skull might take the exact same conversation at face value. He might miss all the implications, accidentally give Reborn the wrong impression about 23 random things and not notice and that single interaction could set the tone for their entire relationship going forward.

[Focusing on the limits of a character’s POV also helps keep interactions more realistic in my experience. Because when we interact with people, we don’t actually know what’s going on in their minds but as the authors writing that scene we do. The characters don’t and reflecting that in their interactions makes them seem realer and gives their personality (especially their personal biases and blinders and interpretations) more chance to shine through.]

And btw I don’t mean turn every conversation into a misunderstanding. Drama can be fun but it doesn’t always have to be about drama. I think of it more along the lines of “no two people ever read the same book”: No two people experience the exact same conversation or event the exact same way. That doesn’t mean we misunderstand each other daily, at least not necessarily. 

But there’s always things about an interaction with our friends/family/random strangers that we’ll forget or that we meant in a different way than what they take it for and sometimes we notice that while talking and sometimes we don’t. That’s how it can work with characters too: not every different perception has big repercussions or leads to an argument or whatever. Sometimes you can just use that to highlight that your characters are different people with different experiences [Skull is really a great example in this case and so are Colonnello and Lal Mirch vs the “true” mafia members but also maybe how being a mist might color your perception of reality vs being a sun etc.] and that those different backgrounds affect how they perceive and act and justify their behaviors.

Okay, I’m gonna stop here because this could go on for a while and I’m not even sure that’s what you’re looking for, but I hope it helps! [If it doesn’t, let me know if there’s other aspects of writing where I could help.] Happy weekend and (hopefully) happy writing!

[jokeringcutio]

Debunking Arthur Fleck Fluff HC’s

As a reply to questions I have received about Arthur’s ideal partner, his mental state, living with him, and much more, here’s a little background to the darkness in my tales and some thoughts on the matters.

Oh, look, he’s so sweet. So romantic. Such a good boy. He would be such a great boyfriend, such a good partner, such a nice protective father. He just needs cuddles and lots of love.

Welcome to my *essay*.   Ever wondered why my depiction of Arthur Fleck is as gritty and dark as it is in some of my recent fics? Oh yes, I have written fluff and kind fics as well. But here are some reasons why I think that if Arthur Fleck were real, you’d better seek yourself a different guy to fall in love with.

Hold your horses:

1. Arthur Fleck’s mental health issue. 2. He is unpredictable. 3. He doesn’t see reality. 4. His humour is dangerous. 5. You would be emotionally and physically drained. 6. He murders people, including his own mother. What guarantee do you have he won’t kill you or your child? 7. And would you truly want a man like that to be the father of your children?

Warnings: This post contains sensitive content, such as topics of self-harm. Be aware of this and decide whether you wish to continue reading or click this away. This is purely explaining my own experiences and how they effect my view, explaining rather than convincing you how I got to this point of view I use in some of my darker fics.

My main points: 

Let’s break it down.

1. Arthur has a real bad mental health issue, which is said to involve self-harm, negative thinking, hurting himself, hurting others, having delusions. Now why would that be a bad thing that you can’t overcome? - I’ve seen a large amount of Joker fans on Tumblr thinking that if they were there, they could help fix Arthur. And perhaps, they could. If they can, Arthur would not transform into Joker. But realistically, he would still need to take his medicine every day to keep his mindset as docile as it is at the start of the film. _ > Dangers: People who are on meds for their mental health have the tendency to, once they feel normal and happy, stop using their medicines and have a relapse. Which is very hard to see and you will have to use all your energy to help them back on track. _> A medicine can stop working. A mum of a friend of ours had this happen to her, where she became immune to her meds and had tried so many, some being taken off the market, others losing their effect after months or years of usage. She was tired of having to go through the whole process of finding a new one that worked. When it stopped being effective, she killed herself. _> A medicine can be taken off market. And whenever something happens to the meds, will your love be enough to keep Arthur standing tall? Because it might be bad luck, but the instances I have seen where people have had a serious case of reoccurring depression, or borderline syndrome, it always ended with the loved ones, despite giving it their all (their time, losing their jobs loving and taking care of them, their money, all of their possessions, their body and their soul, giving up friendships, other family members and what not), only to end up with it never being enough. That is to say, yes, there are many different mental conditions and each has different levels  of severity. That is to say, every level can be severe, but while some give hope that the person suffering from it can function normally, or can find happiness, I think with all that the film has shown us, Arthur is at such a stage that we can assume it will not be cured miraculously. And you should wonder if anything you do could ever be enough.

2 & 3. He’s unpredictable. 

This is part of his mental health issue. He has delusions as we noticed from the film. He doesn’t see reality. He imagines an entire relationship with his neighbour, who makes it quite clear she hardly knows the guy.

_> Danger: No matter what you do, you have no grip on the image he has of you in his mind. His reality differs from whatever it is you do. It will put you in immediate danger. -- Now why is this a terrible, terrible problem? Someone very close to me has mental issues and delusions. So I have first-hand experience. It is frightening! For years on end I have been careful about what to say, never to say something that will upset them, always say yes to whatever suggestion they give. Even if it ruins your own life. Even if they tell you all sorts of things that are wrong with you, or with people you love. You accept it out of fear because they are so instable and you want to help them forward. To give them the space they need, to look after them in times of need. And it is FRIGHTENING. Because this person I know changes personalities as well. In a way that we can argue Arthur changes personalities when he becomes Joker, but this person I know has over ten personalities and you never know who is coming out next. One personality is capable of doing normal grown-up things, the next is a small child, but all of them are angry, jealous and mean. -> Which is a big difference with Arthur. Let me make it clear now, I don’t think Arthur falls in this multiple personality disorder category. There’s a clear transition between him and Joker, possibly helped by the lack of medicine available and the effects of it waning. Arthur is unstable and unreliable because of what his own mind makes him perceive, not necessarily for being different personalities in one body.

To expand on my personal experience: This person imagines the weirdest and scariest things and to them, this is reality. Now this person is a very extreme case I won’t expand on, but they see things that didn’t happen. In a quiet room, they imagine a fight. People talking about the weatherforecast are in their mind plotting this persons death. Someone showing kindness is often in their mind someone doing something horrid or lewd and they can flip about it and shout, and throw stuff, and cause a whole scene. 

So yes, no matter how kind you will be to Arthur Fleck, if his reality of you watching television is a contorted delusion of you telling him you want to walk out on him, and he places you inside his ‘bad people’ box, you might be up next for the chop. It’s how family drama’s occur, it’s one of the reasons why some people kill their loved ones because they don’t want them to get together with someone else, or live without them. Only, you don’t even have to actually want to walk away from him. He just needs to imagine it and your safety is gone. Another thing I like to think this person I know and Arthur might have in common is the obsessive and possessive way they would deal with partners. This person slowly made a web around their partner, isolating them from friends and family, making them even have to give up their job for them. They control their mobile, their email, stalk them online, send messages out of their partner’s name. Nothing that reaches the partner hasn’t run by this person, and this person takes their partner out of groups without telling them. They control everything of this persons live, and it grew so silently, so slowly, that the partner didn’t notice until it was too late. And now the partner doesn’t care. No one matters to them, no one except this person who they try with all their might to keep happy.. Which is incredibly sad. Because we can see the partner fading away, ill, unwell, with little to no joy left. And that is the bleak reality I have been faced with and still am faced with. And which I can’t ignore when looking at Arthur. The idea that he too could and would slowly create a web around the one who has taken his fancy, isolates them, makes them dependant and care only for his well-being.  4. A sign why he is dangerous. His jokes include murder, giving a glimpse of his brain. And though some might find his morbid humour funny, how would you feel if you were happily married, had a beautiful son you loved dearly, and someone would say “knock knock, your son is dead” and hold up the dead body of your son. Because think about it, his humour isn’t just humour. His humour is part of his fantasy, it is part of what he starts doing. It is a mirror of the darkness in his mind. And we have seen reasons why the murders he commit can be ‘justified’. But if you have to be realistic, can any murder be justified? A murder is still a murder, still bad. He still kills people. People we happen to know little about except that they took the piss off someone (or did they? read the note underneath this paragraph). But they have family members, friends, a mother and father. They have people who love them, who wait for them at home. How would you feel if your child, your brother or sister, your best friend, your lover, would not arrive home one day because someone thought they were bad because they ...let’s say... accidentally bumped against them in the street, or happened to look them in the eye, and were killed for it because the one they bumped against or looked at thought it was his right to do so. You would not laugh about it. You would be fucking livid.

- note: As the film is an account by Arthur, do we even know if the guys on the train actually abused him? What if they were just minding their own business and Arthur imagined being struck down by them? I mean, we do see bruises on his body, but it is his ambiguous account. Has anyone considered the possibility that the abuses took all place in Arthur’s head and he killed these men because of his own fantasy running wild and dark and morbid? I don’t think it went this way (I mean, there’s the textual evidence of Arthur having been abused in the past and what-not), but suppose for a moment that even that evidence is what came from his mind as he tells the tale, his reality. In a way we can’t trust anything that we’ve seen in the film..... 5. Ever lived with a borderliner? Then you will know how draining it is emotionally and physically. (Now, if you are diagnosed or consider yourself a borderliner don’t instantly take offence. I am talking about severe cases here, and as always there are gradations. And I do hope for you and everyone who loves you that your gradation isn’t as bad as the one I am about to describe. And if it feels it is, know you ARE LOVED.) Because if you know Borderliners you know this: They are usually the most glorious people you’ll ever meet. They shine bright, you can’t help but to instantly fall in love with them. And as such, I have never understood why they feel the need to be this self-destructive or why they never seem to understand how much they hurt all those around them who love them. But I’m not here to dwell on the hows and why’s and my own thoughts and experiences in this. I bring this up because people who are self-destructive, they suck the energy out of their loved ones. Or rather, if you love someone who wants to hurt themselves, it is emotionally draining. Because every time they want to hurt themselves, it feels like you failed, like you are not enough to them either. You can try to help them, keep them on track, and they can use your energy to keep standing. And with some people it works, with others unfortunately not as much. But now take Arthur Fleck who is an extreme case. He wants to hurt himself as well. You need to keep in mind that you will have to use every trick up your sleeve to stop him. Often. It can be little things as well. It can just be that he feels down and you have to tell him things to make him see the bright side again. But keep in mind, this won’t be once. This might be several times a day. It can be he has had a delusion that upsets him. You will have to put time and energy in to get him out of his dark mindset continuously. And if he’s anything like people I have experienced in the past, you might expect for him to bring extra drama when you’ve gone out and have a fun day, or part of a day, without him. Because he will be jealous, or feel left out, and he will probably have ruined the pans in the kitchen and burnt his own food and without words show you that you actually can’t leave. He might make hurtful or embarrassing comments when other people are around and his behaviour might scare of others, slowly isolating you from your friends. Until you are dependent on him, and constantly busy with him. And constantly trying to help him exist, and be sort of normal and sort of happy. Or in the worst case, you are constantly trying to keep all triggers away that will make him relapse and fall back into his dark thoughts. From experience, you’d think no one can handle that for long. But reality is that quite often, they persist, because they love the other THAT MUCH. Even if the one they love doesn’t understand, doesn’t seem to see, how much they sacrifice for them. But almost always they stick together till the end. And people can last for years like this. Years and years. It would count for you too.  Once you’re in, you don’t want to get out because of your love for him. But you are constantly tired, you are isolated, you miss all the opportunities life offers you, you are always setting aside everything to make sure Arthur won’t flip. And even then, he flips. Constantly. But you don’t see how odd the live is that you stumbled into. After several years of slowly slipping into this life, you don’t see reality anymore. You don’t see what you miss. You are just surviving. And taking his hand to survive along.

That is what I have seen and still see. That is the basis on which I analyse a character like Arthur Fleck. That is why I can’t imagine you could have a truly happy ever after with him. 6. But worse than what I am witnessing in real-life, where the person I know who reminds me of Arthur’s mental quirks a lot is known for talking about murder, is the fact that we know Arthur Fleck is actually capable of it. And we also know that no matter what you do, if something in his brain makes the flip and he suddenly thinks bad of you, you might be up the chopping block next. This has nothing to do with whether or not he loves you. At this point we assume his love for you is real, it is strong, it is probably a lot like an obsession because once he has found you he doesn’t want to let you go again. And if he so much suspects you want to leave him, he might just make the choice that you won’t get away from him. Or if he thinks you have turned against him, what then? So consider this, are you truly save with this man? Because I don’t think you are. 7. Now, you have chosen to risk all above. You help Arthur take his meds and they work. He is sort of stable. He has his occasional sudden outbreaks where he is upset, tries to harm himself, laughs uncontrollably, and if he’s fine he makes morbid jokes. And you want a family with him because hormones and all of that stuff. Now imagine you are a child and you grow up in this small flat. Imagine it like this: You grow up. Now replace Arthur as your father with someone you don’t find physically attractive. Replace him with your own real life dad for instance. Imagine that you are born from your actual parents, but you live in a crappy small flat and your father wastes his money mostly on cigarettes (so the place stinks, but hey, if you can stand it kuddos). Imagine that your father has this laugh like Arthur, whenever he is upset. It comes out at random and sometimes unexpected times. And since you grew up with it, it frightens you, because it means your father is either sad or angry. And a kid’s initial reaction is they want their parents to be happy, so if a parent cries they cry along. It’s imbedded in children. Your father being upset upsets you too. He’s unpredictable and suffers from moodswings. One moment, he smiles at you and says he is proud of something you did, the next he is angry and shouting. Sometimes he snaps at you for something you didn’t do. A lot of the times he ignores you as he’s caught up in his own mind.  When you are smaller, it is easier for him to be around you and he doesn’t show his ugly side as much, but when you grow older it gets worse. He is so familiar with you and your mom that he shows his bad side, his sadness, his irrational side, all of it, whenever he wants to. How will that make you feel? Scared? Uncertain? Not worthy perhaps, because of the way he snaps at you and blames you for things you didn’t do? Scared to say the wrong thing, to react in the wrong way. But as you grow up you discover that there is no right way to say things. When he is in one of his moods whatever you say is wrong, because a lot of the things are going on in his mind and he won’t or can’t share them with you. Sometimes you think he doesn’t like you because he’s distant, you can’t get him to respond to you and you might think he ignores you. He puts a lot of attention on himself with his unpredictable mood changes and the way he can be very dramatic about wanting to die, which can come out of nowhere and gives you the feeling you, as a kid, are not good enough. And it SUCKS. It sucks to feel that way. To be scared of your own parent all of the time. To be scared of what you say to him, what you do.

But the bright side, when you grow older you recognise parts of him in you. And if you can get through to him, he will recognise them too. And when you reach your twenties you’ll be able to talk. At first, it won’t be easy. But when it is, it is because you say you understand how he feels and you describe it to him so well, he believes you are pretty much a failure like him. He will say so in his own words. And you will accept it, but you won’t think you are a failure. Not anymore. Because you learnt how upsetting his behaviour can be, and you’re determined not to be that way. You show some of the symptoms, but not nearly as bad as him. And he reflects himself on you, thinks you are worse than you are, sees himself when he looks at you and takes it for a fact. Another of his delusions in which you play along because finally, finally, you two can connect.

You’d be so thrilled to leave the house and move to a place of your own.

Anyway.

 TLDR;   

-        Accept the fact that you can’t change Arthur, which also means you can’t erase his negative thoughts.

-        Would you be safe in this relationship? If you can’t control the reality he makes in his mind, and he actually starts murdering people, who can guarantee he won’t kill you next?

-        Even if you don’t care dying by his hands, the relationship will probably be physically and emotionally draining for you.

-        Still want to settle down? Do the test: Imagine your own father in Arthur’s role, behaving his way.

 In conclusion: I don’t think anyone would live a happy live with Arthur Fleck. I think probably the most stable relationship, that will last the longest and have some semblance of a happy life, would be with a partner who is quiet, innocent, unexperienced, and who would sacrifice everything to keep him from tumbling into his dark mind. And he will tumble, even with all the best efforts. And it will still be a tiring, numbing and draining experience. But such relationships do exist in the real world, and unfortunately, I am still witnessing one that has been going on for years. And that’s why, I can’t see, from this distance, how anyone would be happy with the character of Arthur Fleck. He is too far gone. On the aspect of love: I feel I need to make it clear that love is, in all cases above, not a point of issue. Love will not diminish because someone has troubles of body or mind. For this, I imagined the love between Arthur and the other, both-sided. And no matter the hardships, I believe that once love is there it won’t falter. By the way he might ensnare you it might even feel as if it’s deepened, strengthened. And if you recognise yourself in some of the points I have mentioned above but struggle with yourself or your feelings, then know that no matter what ails you, there will always be someone who can love you, and health issues don’t equal the end of relationships. Not at all. From what I have seen, most partners stick by their loved one till the end. So don’t ever think that you could not find love for having a ‘fault’, or for simply being somehow different.

On my personal view of Arthur: He is still hot as f*ck though and I understand fully why people wanna tap that arse >) Arthur Fleck is a character that has not only his appearance going for him, but also all the mystery and complexity that make him interesting to write, read and fantasize about. Joaquin brought something alluring to the character, not just by the dubious glances and the paradoxical character he is playing (sweet and helpful caretaker versus revenge seeking murderclown), but the fraility of his character, both his emaciated body and his compassionately brought complicated emotions, are enough to lure anyone in. Because he makes us believe he is vulnerable. And he makes us want to get out there and hug him. While at the same time, all of us know that he can stand up for himself and that he is stronger than you would have given him credit for at the start of the film. And I believe, his character of Arthur Fleck / Joker would be stronger than most of us clown lovers. But that will not detain me. And I will continue to write about him doing smutty things and stuff, just because I can. And I will fantasize good things happening to him, and him being fluffy and ok as well, and write that down too. But in reality, we all know it probably wouldn’t be ok. Hence why I bestow you a few Dark Arthur Fics to balance against the pile of fluff I occassionally drown myself in. We can’t take just the good side of him, when there’s the complicated less prettier side to take into account as well. And perhaps, perhaps I can show us that we can love him for it just the same. We’ll see....

. . . .

And now I pose the question to you: We base a lot in life on assumptions. We are extra sensitive to the emotions of those we love the most. Keeping all this in mind, Can you truly be happy with Arthur Fleck?

[lesbianrobin]

oh.... yes..... as an adhd steve-lover (and person who has a history of unknowingly crushing on adhd characters) i beg to hear ur reasoning......... please...

alright so a lot of this is gonna be like projection ddnkjcn and it turned into more of a general character analysis than an adhd analysis and i’m sure that some things i describe will differ from your personal experience so feel free to critique me but here goes:

Why Steve Harrington Has ADHD

Steve struggles in school, yeah, but that’s not really… crucial to my reasoning? I personally did pretty well in school despite having difficulties with getting work done on time and understanding certain things. The fact that he clearly tried to do well and just couldn’t is what’s important. That’s a classic ADHD thing, feeling like there’s some kind of invisible block making it impossible to think the way you’re supposed to be thinking and do the things you’re supposed to be doing. We see him studying a few different times with Nancy (though he’s reluctant to focus on the task in s1), it’s implied he’s written multiple drafts of the essay that he shows Nancy in the beginning of s2, meaning that he wants to do well. After Nancy critiques his essay, he basically decides to give up because he’ll never be able to make it good enough, and he probably shouldn’t even bother applying to college, and he’ll just end up working for his dad anyway. It’s a bit of an extreme jump from the relatively mild criticism he receives, but it seems to me like the kind of mindset that I (and others with ADHD) fall into constantly. First of all, rewriting something you’ve already written when you have ADHD can be… torturous. It’s impossible to focus because you’ve done it already, it feels pointless and boring, and your brain is just done with the topic. To Steve, there’s no point in even trying because he’s never gonna get it right, and he’d rather not even try than apply to college and have to suffer rejection. ADHD isn’t laziness or apathy. People with ADHD actually tend to care a lot about their performance in various aspects of life, and they care so much that it can often either propel them to excellence or drive them to depression over failure (whether that failure is true or perceived). Spoiler alert: we’re about to get into rejection sensitive dysphoria, folks!

I think this describes Steve perfectly. He wants to be the best at everything (Prom King, anyone?) and he cares a lot about what people think of him (to the degree that he spent three of his four years in high school behaving specifically to avoid the possibility of Tommy H and others making fun of him). Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria, or RSD, is a condition which impacts almost all people with ADHD. This means that they are far more sensitive than most people to what others think about them. Think about Steve’s entire character arc: he essentially spends season one chasing the approval of Tommy, Carol, and Nancy. When Tommy and Carol’s desired behavior differs from Nancy’s, causing conflict, he’s forced to take a look at himself and decide what’s more important to him: pleasing his friends, or doing what’s right. Since Steve is a certified angel, he goes with what’s right, and from there goes on to apologize to Jonathan and help him and Nancy fight the Demogorgon. (Sidenote: the fistfight with Jonathan could definitely be considered as further evidence of ADHD! RSD can cause extreme emotional reactions when the person in question feels that they have been hurt or rejected, such as Steve believing that Nancy cheated on him with Jonathan. The fact that Steve resorted to cruel insults that he clearly doesn’t believe shows that he was acting out of his own hurt and anger, not out of true hatred for Jonathan.) 

Anyway, s1 Steve’s entire life is built around seeking approval from his peers. He realizes that his desire for approval has turned him into somebody that he doesn’t like, so he makes a change, and by s2 we see that he’s shifted somewhat: Now, he wants to please Nancy. He’s able to handle being mocked by Billy and Tommy H because he no longer puts any stock in their brand of approval, but being told by Nancy that she doesn’t love him elicits another (somewhat) extreme emotional response: he immediately leaves her at the party with Jonathan and doesn’t pick her up for school the next morning. He’s upset with her. Later on, he goes to her house with flowers intending to apologize, though he doesn’t actually know what he’s apologizing for. All he wants is for Nancy to be with him and like him again, because he can’t handle feeling unloved and rejected. S2 is also where we see Steve’s academic insecurity, and he hints at issues with feeling like a failure in the eyes of his father. By the end of the season, he’s able to handle not being loved by Nancy because he’s found a new source of self-esteem and approval: Dustin and the rest of the kids. Through acting as their “babysitter,” Steve’s found something to take pride in that nobody can take away from him. Billy may have overshadowed his basketball stardom and broken his keg stand record, but Steve no longer needs these shallow achievements to feel a sense of self-worth. 

S3 shows that, although he’s moved on from seeking approval from specific peers, Steve is still stuck searching for validation. He flirts indiscriminately hoping for anybody to respond positively, and he gets a job to appease his father. Here, I’m gonna jump ahead a little bit (because that’s just the way my brain is saying it’s gotta be lmao) and talk about a few of Steve’s other canon traits, then circle back around to how we see his ongoing struggle with RSD manifest in s3.

Now for the trait that people more commonly associate with ADHD, especially in men and young boys: hyperactivity. This one is a little more self-explanatory so I’m not gonna spend as much time on it. Steve excels in situations with clearly defined rules and expectations where it’s easier to stay on-track, as well as in high-pressure, fast-paced environments. This is why he succeeds in basketball and why he’s such a big damn hero every season. He thinks on his feet and steps up in intense situations without hesitation. Steve is the one who wedged something under the elevator door so that everyone could escape, he’s the one who took out a Russian soldier before he was able to alert anybody else, and when he saw Billy about to ram into Team Griswold Family, he crashed into Billy’s car. Part of this is the fact that it’s a sci-fi action horror show, and there are going to be dramatic action-packed situations, but it’s telling that if Steve is around, he’s almost always the one leaping into danger and adapting to the situation to deal with it quickly. Speaking of s3: The conversation Steve and Robin had on the floor in the Russian torture chamber!

This feeds into an even more elaborate Steve meta theory of mine about how he basically lives his life as if it’s a play and there’s a script and a set of rules that he’s gotta follow to please the audience, so I’m not gonna go into ALL of it, but this conversation is also important to the idea of Steve having ADHD and struggling with RSD. Steve says, “It just baffles me. Everything that people tell you is important, everything that people say you should care about, it’s all just… bullshit.” When Robin says that she feels like her life has been “one big error,” he agrees. So far, Steve has lived his whole life according to one set of rules. If you flirt with girls and go to parties and play basketball, you’ll be cool and popular. Now that he’s graduated, he’s floundering. The structure of high school is gone and everything he worked for doesn’t actually matter in real life. People with ADHD often struggle more than others with the transition from high school to either college or the working world. Loss of familiar frameworks, routines, and actions can hit the ADHD mind hard, and this is pretty clearly happening to Steve in s3. In the beginning of the season, he can’t even manage to have a decent conversation with a girl without bringing up school and his own perceived failures. Sidenote: Robin also mentions that Steve was late to class every single day, which is both extremely relatable to me and the most ADHD thing I’ve ever heard. I knew exactly how long it took me to get from my house to the school, and I woke up with plenty of time to get ready every single morning, yet I somehow managed to be late so many mornings that I got multiple detentions and ended up having to skip a couple of classes entirely because another tardy would have fucked up my disciplinary record.

Later on in the bathroom scene, when he’s talking about why he didn’t talk to Robin back in school, Steve says, “…maybe ‘cause Tommy H would’ve made fun of me or I wouldn’t be Prom King. It’s stupid…” and it’s somewhat of a continuation of the earlier conversation. Steve is expressing the same sentiment. Now that he’s out of high school, everything that he once used to measure his success and self-worth is just stupid. This is another classic RSD thing! People with ADHD/RSD often set impossibly high standards for themselves and then struggle with self-hatred and doubt when they cannot live up to these expectations. Robin kind of inspires and encourages him to set new, more attainable standards for himself. Spending time with Robin makes Steve happy in a way that he’s never really been before, and he realizes that all of the benchmarks of normalcy and success that he’s been striving for don’t guarantee happiness like they’re supposed to. Instead of finding happiness in academic, romantic, or athletic success, he finds happiness in an unlikely friendship. His whole arc for three seasons has essentially been a big struggle with RSD and impulsivity where he learned how to handle social rejection and place the needs and feelings of others before his own.

There’s also a ton of little things in Joe Keery’s acting choices that support ADHD Steve, like his near-perpetual motion and the way that he’s gotta pace and eat a damn banana (both the traditional way and the no-homo breaking it into pieces way, might I add) so he can listen to Dustin talk about the Russian code. I personally relate to a lot of things he does, like mixing up basic names and facts (like Nazis/Germans in s2 and Gumby/gumbo in s3), and needing to explain a whole situation out loud before he really gets it (like when he runs down the entire monster situation in the mall in s3). I don’t know if those are ADHD things but they make me feel Seen. 

Anyways. That’s about it!! Thanks for asking lmao

[batmimi2710]

Most Beautiful Waterfalls in the World

On the off chance that you ask the average individual what they think about 5G innovations, how 5G changes the Future of technology, the main thing that will fly into their head will probably is something to do with cellphone innovation. What's more, in the event that you consider the 2019 rollout of 5G so far, maybe that wouldn't be excessively far misguided. The regular person would likewise likely review that 5G is a quicker follow-on innovation to 4G LTE, and that wouldn't be all that off base either.

Be that as it may, what 5G offers today, how it's conveyed, and what the 5G scene will look like in the following 2–3 years will be tremendously unique. Actually, at the danger of utilizing buzzwords, for sure, 5G NR (New Radio) innovation is ready to be "troublesome." That stated, this up and coming age of remote organization innovation will likewise be an empowering agent over a horde of ventures and applications, and no doubt prod all-new use cases also. The Future of 5G technology is very bright yet an new innovation to this world.  

There are numerous various sorts of 5G innovation that will be conveyed by the different transporters; however so, the invention is about a lot bigger cuts of free range and massive scope in the limit. The FCC characterizes 5G field in four essential groups, Low-band between 600–900MHz, Mid-band between 2.5–4.2GHz, otherwise called Sub-6, frequencies above 24GHz, also called millimeter Wave or mm-Wave, lastly what it calls Unlicensed range, that can be gotten to for an assortment of committed uses including 5G. Regarding authorized content, Low, Mid, and mm-Wave groups will be sent by different transporters, with T-Mobile and Sprint snatching an enormous lump of Low and Mid-groups for more extended reach, and AT&T and Verizon guaranteeing higher frequencies for higher rates. Eventually, these innovations will coincide with and require 4G organizations to work first in a 5G NSA (Non-Stand-Alone) usage, with independent arrangements coming later down the line. There's a great deal to process and unload here; however, what's genuinely significant about 5G are its monstrous headways in the limit, lower inactivity, and throughput. Moreover, don’t forget to check the 5G coupons.

All 5G isn't the equivalent – Sub-6, mm-Wave, and Unlicensed Spectrum:

Starting with a quote as someone said, "5G will change everything.” Without getting excessively profound off course as for Low-band, Sub-6 and mm-Wave, at a significant level, Low and Mid-band (Sub-6) 5G by and large has longer reach and inclusion, though mm-Wave offers higher limit and quicker multi-gigabit execution, however, requires a denser populace of cell base sending since its range is just a couple hundred meters and it has difficulties with entering dividers. The truth will be that the US will send a blend of 5G advancements with AT&T and Verizon driving mm-Wave organizations at first, while T-Mobile and Sprint seem, by all accounts, to be going low-band range for an inclusion play. In any case, the other inborn advantage of 5G innovation, when all is said in done, is idleness. Where 4G can have ping times in the scope of 25 - 50ms or somewhere in the vicinity, 5G has the guarantee of single-digit millisecond inertness. What's more, with regards to cutting edge 5G applications, inactivity will be necessary. It is the prime example of How 5G changes the Future of technology and how it has a significant impact on future generations.

5G could empower a brilliant city framework and genuinely autonomous driving:

Qualcomm explicitly is on the cutting edge of 5G advances, with a start to finish silicon arrangements from 5G customer handset gadgets like Samsung's Galaxy S10 and Note 10 collection, to the base station and fixed remote client premise arrangements. I invested energy with the organization as of late, figuring out how 5G will genuinely reshape the fast broadband assistance industry for shoppers and the undertaking. It will likewise help empower innovation advancement that will require super high limit, low inactivity organizations to be acknowledged entirely, for instance, brilliant city applications, and self-governing vehicles. At the point when you think about the city of things to come, with countless self-sufficient cars driving around, various remote arrangements should be sent to permit this modern vision to turn into a reality. 5G will change everything.

Past only AI anxious gadgets for machine vision and AI, a horde of IoT gadget advances would all be able to be coordinated by means of a 5G network to empower more secure, more productive keen transportation administrations. Traffic lights that speak with vehicles and vehicles that communicate with one another as well as to "everything" around them or (C-V2X, as Qualcomm likes to lash abbreviations around everything), will permit more secure independent vehicles and could, in principle, at any rate, mitigate gridlock and limit the chance of a mishap. I'll accept the traffic benefits when I see them obviously, having explored excessively frequently in Boston and New York gridlock; however, you can perceive how "elastic necking" could be a relic of times gone by if your vehicle is being motioned to keep it moving. To put it plainly, C-V2X is one of the numerous applications that will help be empowered by 5G NR innovations, permitting vehicle-to-vehicle, vehicle-to-passerby, and vehicle-to-framework correspondence over a devoted 5.9GHz range organization. Qualcomm has C-V2X chipsets arrangements effectively accessible that are viable with 5G innovations just as Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ASDA) sensors, as a significant aspect of a stage arrangement. This is the Future of 5G technology. Furthermore, you can also look at the websites to know more about the 5G.

5G fixed remote will reshape the broadband ISP and administrations scene:

Another industry, past only quicker cell phones that 5G NR innovations will reshape, will be private and business broadband internet providers. Particularly in under-served territories that have issues with last-mile availability and heritage link/fiber web administrators, 5G innovations will empower remote gigabit and multi-gigabit internet providers in your home or office, without the requirement for Wi-Fi, or related to WiFi-6, and consistently associated. 5G fixed remote accesses is one of my most loved expanding zones of the new innovation, as it will empower new degrees of rivalry among transporters and ISPs, just as new administrations with much lower dormancy, rapid associations for distributed computing, gaming and that's only the tip of the iceberg. Gaming administrations like Google Stadia, Microsoft xCloud, and NVIDIA GeForce NOW will flourish when 5G fixed remote access turns into a reality. This is an answer to the question of how 5G changes the Future of technology. And lastly, ending it on the coupon, you can avail to have a discount on your purchases of technology and gadgets.

[spilledreality]

Institutional Myth in Contemporary Art

I’ve spent a lot of time in & around the New York visual art scene the past few years, and it’s been a very strange & uncanny but also informative experience. A lot of the preference falsification and undead prestige cultures of, say, academia, or science, or politics are in play, but here the emperor seems almost fully denuded, instead of partially clothed, which helps clear the fog. I’ve been trying to understand, and see clearly, through a culture which I’ve previously accused (jokingly, but seriously) of gaslighting me and other participants, & thought some of the resulting thoughts might be of interest to folks around here who either are inside visual arts communities, and feel similarly enshrouded, or who are outside of it but have never quite ‘understood’ what’s going on in visual arts scenes.

Sarah Perry, in “Business As Magic,” defines an institutional myth as a public narrative advanced by a number of simultaneous institutions and individuals with aligned self-interests, who are uncoordinated (there is no “conspiracy”) but nevertheless converge upon and reinforce a shared message (as if there were). The four characteristics of such a myth are:

Language of Morality: Beliefs about trivialities are not myths. Institutional myths “refer to widespread social values and emphatically use semantics coming from those value systems” (Piber & Pietch, 2006). Myths deal with sacred matters and moral consideration, and often use language borrowed from religion.

Zone of Ignorance: Myths are protected from falsification or excessive inquiry by social forces. “Follow the sacred and there you will find a circle of motivated ignorance,” says Jonathan Haidt. […]

Idealization and Ambiguity: Myths are not merely falsehoods, but idealized, simplified accounts of complex matters. Myths attach to values that are difficult to precisely define and difficult to measure. A myth is so vague and uncertain that its epistemic status is in some ways unknowable. […]

Symbolic Evaluation: Since myths deal in subjects that are inherently ambiguous and in some sense unknowable, the evaluation of myths is “restricted to symbolic considerations, which leave many interpretations possible” (Piber & Pietch, 2006). Symbolic ritual activity is directed toward the sacred value, with no demonstrable causal connection to any particular measurable outcome. Empirical falsification is inherently difficult, and therefore can be avoided. 

Perry applies this frame to discuss national security as the institutional myth whose moralistic invocations of terrorism, and sacredness zone around 9/11, created an unchallengeable narrative in early 2000s American political culture, leading ultimately to heightened military involvement in the ME. I think it applies also to a very different kind of narrative, advanced by progressive cultural institutions & interested individuals, rather than conservative political ones, this being the myth of visual art’s intrinsic and inalienable value to society. (This narrative is heavily incentivized by both government grant structures and private donor prestige cycles.)

Language of Morality. Contemporary visual art is advanced as not just capable of addressing current cultural, ethical, & political crises—that capability is assumed, as evidenced by the high valuation and large attention directed at explicitly activist work—but one of the key technologies in doing so. 

Zone of Ignorance. One important supplementary myth of the visual arts world which insulates it criticism is that outsiders to the its culture are incapable of advancing meaningful criticism against it, since they lack the deep disciplinary knowledge necessary to “properly” perceive contemporary works: 

When I showed the poem to Sischy, she was not amused. “Forgive my lack of a sense of humor,” she said, “but what I see in that poem is just another reinforcement of stereotypes about the art world. It’s like a Tom Stoppard play, where you have an entire broadway audience snickering about things they haven’t understood. It makes outsiders feel clever about things they know nothing about… [T]his poem reflects the gap that exists between the serious literary audience and the serious art audience.” 

That’s Janet Malcolm in 1986’s “Girl of the Zeitgeist,” quoting Artforum Editor in Chief Ingrid Sischy. The “poem” under discussion is by art critic Robert Hughes—his writing for Time magazine, instead of a dedicated New York arts publication, is enough for Sischy to dismiss him as outsider. 

There is an extent to which many of the “effects” which contemporary art tries to achieve in viewers are inaccessible to outsiders; they dialogue with the discipline’s history, techniques, other contemporary artists, etc. However, the majority of critics who are familiar enough with contemporary visual art to bother formulating public opposition to it are well aware of what the artworks under discussion are 1) trying to, and 2) do in fact accomplish in viewers. What is being objected to is the scope and value of that accomplishment. Is a work which claims to “think through” crucial contemporary political issues, merely by using fabric with a contested history of use (e.g. produced in the Middle East, used by American military, etc…), actually “thinking through” anything substantial, and if so what conclusions can we actually come to through the invocation of this contested fabric? The successful delegitimization of outside critiques also suppresses the reality that many, perhaps even most, insiders to visual art are themselves disillusioned with the current state of visual art. This reality is hidden through preference falsification not just to others but to oneself, insofar as once one “becomes” an insider, one has invested such tremendous amounts of time and psychic energy which would be devalued by such an admission. Further, the futility of launching such critiques against contemporary art —the clear public record of critics/thinkers/writers being delegitimized as necessarily ignorant— discourages insiders from receiving the same fate, say, that Robert Hughes receives. In other words, no outsider is capable of criticizing, and no true insider would. Either way, aggressions against the zone of ignorance are handily suppressed. This is to say nothing of the self-selection effects in which those skeptical of visual art’s impact on culture & society instead go into filmmaking, or research, etc. Continuing (Tumblr won't let me start my numbering at 3, so treat #1 & 2 as #3 & 4 in actuality):

Idealization and Ambiguity. The precise benefit and value of contemporary art is kept vague, or even undefinable—the value is intrinsic and inalienable, but also unquantifiable. It is argued to exist, but is also so self-evident it does not need identification. 

Symbolic Evaluation. As The Sublemon has argued, experimental art rarely embodies a true experimental spirit because it lacks success-failure criteria, and its results are not actively evaluated, are treated as beside the point, as if the mere conducting of the experiment were where value lies. (As opposed to the value lying in the extraction of knowledge possible in the experiment’s wake.) Part of this is the rise of precarity in visual arts culture, which leads to (as Bourdieu puts it), mutual admiration societies of hobbyists who support each other in order to rise to the top. Rigorous criticism, with the real potential of failure, is suppressed; paradoxically, art that claims to be highly experimental and risk-taking never seems to fail. Similarly, there is very little real attempt to evaluate the claims of contemporary art’s general value, purpose, or function. Occasionally such questions are summarily asked in the op-ed pages of a major newspaper, but the discipline itself evades, in almost all its theoretical production, real inquiry into these topics. 

These qualities of institutional myth resemble Bourdieu’s theory of illusio: “the tendency of participants to engage in [a field’s] game and believe in its significance, that is, believe that the benefits promised by the field are desirable. […] Whatever the combatants on the ground may battle over, no one questions whether the battles in question are meaningful. The considerable investments in the game guarantee its continued existence. Illusio is thus never questioned” (Henrik Lundberg & Göran Heidegren). 

Lastly, Perry argues that within corporations, energy must be split between turning an efficient profit and perpetuating the public-facing institutional myth. In arts organizations, the two efforts are the same; money comes in via grants and donations that are the result of persuading both individuals and other institutions of the worthiness of the myth.

[funkymbtifiction]

I interested about how much your subjective view on a fictional character comes to play when you type a character? I mean not just “yours”, more like everyone elses… There are characters that looks like all the people perceive almost the same way, but others have highly different ways to see depending on the wiewers own personality,  morals and logical system. So do you think it’s possible that a character can be 2 or more type, depending how you perceive it or  its totally out of the table?

Everyone has biases, but there’s a right way to understand something and a wrong way, and if your understanding is wrong, the chances of you mistyping are higher. The most contention over characters seems to come from the “cool” characters that everyone wants to be certain types… like Sherlock. The INTJs want to claim him. The people who think they are INTJs want to claim him. The INTPs want to claim him. And there’s a big anti-sensor bias against accepting him as a sensor, because he’s too smart. That’s the bottom line, and really shows a bias: if a character is perceived as too intelligent to be one of those dumb sensors.

But if you look at him functionally and really watch what he does, he is not an NT, because he gathers sensory information BEFORE he draws conclusions on it. He throws himself into the environment and deducts from noticing three tiny white hairs on someone’s shirt that they own an angora cat. Se/Ni. Sensory world leads to an intuitive leap. ISXPs are good with lower hunches and intuitive leaps, but also easily engaging with the environment.

I would say if you subconsciously want a character you like to share your type, and you do not want a character you DISlike to share your type, your odds of mistyping characters goes up significantly, because instead of just looking at what a character does and why, and what comes easiest or hardest to them, you are going to be bending the facts or inserting motivations where there are none. Sensory typists can get stuck on the details, but intuitive typists often have a problem with inserting narratives where none exist. Thinking their “head cannon” is the actual motives of the characters. They are the ones baffled when you go, “But nothing in the movie/show/book supports what you just told me about their motives,” because they thought it did and failed to realize they made all of that up to fill in the blanks. (This, btw, is what intuitive do all day, every day – make things up with their intuition to fill in the blanks; they can be right, or they can be wrong, but they do it.)

Another problem is bad writing. If a character isn’t developed well, doesn’t have any characteristic traits that really stand out, and is overall shallow and bland, there’s more room for people to interpret them differently and assign them different types.

Lastly, you can tell a bias if they continually type most characters as intuitive (there should be way more sensors) or if they type most characters whatever type they think they are; it’s likely they are doing self-comparison in that case, and if so, there’s no guarantee they typed themselves right. If they did not, their entire approach may be faulty. Also, if they are typing all the villains INTJs, that’s a big red flag.

I guess my short answer is, a well-written character can have only one correct type, because they should hit all the markers of one type; a badly written character can have several types, because either they are inconsistent and act like X when it’s convenient, or there’s nothing there to get a read on, so people can insert whatever they want to see.

If you want to avoid a bias yourself, check up on whether your feelings are involved in the typing (“I want them like me / not like me”; “I like them / dislike them”), whether you have proof for the conclusion you reached (if you start writing a profile and can find no evidence beyond vague generalities to support a function, try finding evidence for other functions), and whether “this thing is not like the others.” If most established and agreed upon INTJ characters are calm, deliberate, and do things from behind the scenes, the odds of having a highly erratic, impulsive, emotionally reactive one are near nil. People of the same MBTI SHOULD somewhat resemble each other, despite Enneagram types, and they don’t, some of them are mistyped.

- ENFP Mod

[beyondthetemples-ooc]

@astrearl​ I cut the post, so I really don’t know why it was all still there on your blog, but I don’t want to stretch peoples’ dashes with four essays in a row! So, new post then?

tl;dr I think you’ve confusing an ENBY’S perception of THEMSELF for SOCIETY’S perception. Which, when we’re talking about an INDIVIDUAL’S identity and preferences, shouldn’t really matter at all. Society’s not the be-all end-all of right, correct, and true.

Consensus =/= Reality.

What’s wrong with a novel term sounding like gibberish? The term “nonbinary” may be from the last century, but the concept of gender outside of masculinity and femininity has a LOT of history in other societies! I would encourage you to research what it means to be two-spirited and fa'afafine. These words don’t exist in colloquial language, and yet there ARE words for them in OTHER languages.

English is a very lacking language on this one.

But the lack of terminology DOES NOT indicate a lack of validity. Society’s rules are all arbitrary and made up, too. Putting a dress on doesn’t automatically give someone a typical XX-chromosome’d person’s body parts or mannerisms. Believe me, I know a lot of trans people who would be DELIGHTED if that’s the way it worked. But it doesn’t. Because clothes aren’t INHERENTLY gendered, it’s only peoples’ PERCEPTIONS. Heck, even mannerisms aren’t inherently gendered.

That perception is NOT universal.

It’s a matter of a different perception is all. Nonbinary people, in general, don’t perceive a skirt as being Feminine. Like I said: It’s not about the association with gender for ME, PERSONALLY. It’s about the way it flows! I like to feel the fabric fluttering around my legs! Fuck all with femininity; if they were perceived as masculine, I’d wear them just the same.

I don’t know how to explain to you that society’s perception of gender isn’t the same as an individual’s perception of themself. Society’s perception of a tree as tall doesn’t impact the tiny oak sprout that’s just starting out. Society’s perception of pigeons as ugly doesn’t impact my love for them as pets. Society’s perception of my gender doesn’t determine what my gender actually IS.

I think you might be conflating gender roles (what society says belongs in masculine/feminine categories) with an INDIVIDUAL’S gender. Or perhaps, the observer’s schema with the subject’s identity.

An individual’s identity is NOT determined by what the world interprets!

Enbies aren’t delusional. We know that society, at large, doesn’t even accept that nonbinary is an option. We know that the vast statistical majority is going to see a dress, and make an Automatic Schema Assumption that “that individual must be a woman”.

But it doesn’t HAVE to be that way. People can learn! People can become tolerant! They don’t have to understand it; clearly you’re comfortable in your preferences being associated with femininity, but that ASSOCIATION is just YOURS, and YOURS ALONE.

A lot of people making the same assumption doesn’t automatically make it true or correct.

But you know what they say about assuming, right? (Unless “to assume makes an ‘ass’ out of ‘u’ and ‘me’” is an American one...)

Anyways, that perception is NOT universal! Just because it’s statistically more common doesn’t make it accurate, or any more valid than my own perception of MYSELF. Just because outsiders don’t understand the experience doesn’t make it any less valid. Just because we’re still in the process of developing out own consensus doesn’t mean it isn’t still a real, true expression of who we are. It’s hard to find words for something your language is biased against, you know? That’s why there’s no Official Dictionary. I mean, if you looked in your local library, you might find some of those hard-and-fast definitions you’re looking for. They are going to be from people within the community, though. I don’t know why that’s a bad thing? Just like you’re going to find definitions of two-spirited from Native Americans, and only a Polynesian could tell you what it means to be fa'afafine.

It’s only natural for a community to know its members better than people outside the community! Duh! That’s GUARANTEED. That’s a GIVEN. That’s facts of life! Nobody can talk about what nonbinary means unless you’re actually, you know, nonbinary.

Let me ask you a question: Do you act like you have an English degree? Why or why not? How or how not? Because there isn’t any one way someone with an English degree acts? It’s like that. See, it’s all entirely subjective. Perception is SUBJECTIVE. And that fully includes the perception of the self. It doesn’t HAVE hard-and-fast rules, because you cannot quantify something that can’t be fit on a number line. There are so many factors that go into someone’s Relationship With Gender. But the inclusion of their own thoughts and feelings about themself doesn’t make their experience any less valid.

(As an aside: Note the effortless use of third-person pronouns with nonspecific gender. “They/them” is already entirely valid as a singular third-person pronoun in our colloquial language. People just don’t want to have to think about using it intentionally when they ~assume~ they know someone’s gender. And, you know, people threw fits about “you” being used as a singular second-person pronoun instead of “thou” four centuries ago, and yet, miraculously, somehow /s, I haven’t seen a single person walking around using “thou” colloquially! Could it be because language and perception of words evolves and changes naturally, as a matter of course?)

Someone’s “Gender” is one’s perception of their own relationship to gender. It has nothing to do with presentation or society’s rules, it’s literally ALL perception-- to use your words, “thoughts and feelings”. It’s literally just thoughts and feelings. You can’t evaluate your own experience without thoughts and feelings.

It’d be like asking someone their opinion on the literary merit of Emily Dickenson’s poetry, or their favorite color, and telling them to use society’s answer instead of their own thoughts and feelings. These things AREN’T able to be given hard and fast rules, because there are so many different answers, and so many different ways of perceiving and interacting with the world. And that absolutely, completely includes perception and interaction with gender.

Nonbinary is an umbrella term, my friend, not a diagnosis.  

And if you absolutely MUST have those “scientific” standpoints to understand transgenderism, don’t you know that the very same genomes and squishy brain parts impact an enby’s perception of oneself?

Gender doesn’t come in only two flavors, and I mean in the genetic, scientific way. The various genetic markers that form the parts of the brain that create schemas and perceive oneself can be every bit as varied as the parts that process basic arithmetic. There is no two distinct and separate “male brain” and “female brain”. Every study I know since like 2006 that has tried to prove that was debunked. Neurology’s wild, okay, and anyone who tries to reduce the vast variety of human brains into two categories based only on chromosome shape is desperately lacking information on how those chromosomes affect the brain-- and exactly what areas they DON’T.

tl;dr on that, the brain’s perceptions are formed by THOUGHTS and FEELINGS. Not just sensory input, but how one ANALYZES it and the self-talk they employ. Not by genetic markers, but how an individual experiences the world.

And that VERY MUCH includes the way one interacts with gender. How they connect with it. How they see others’ schemas, analyze them, and determine if they fit their perception of themselves or not.

Just like trans folk, enbies have all the same genome sequences and gray matter that’s making them feel that way.

All I’m trying to tell you is, nb folks get offended because people are Making Assumptions instead of just, you know, taking two and a half seconds to ASK.

And then there’s the issue of telling someone that “I identify as nonbinary, could you please use they/them when you’re talking about me?” And then people don’t respect that.

You can’t expect anything but getting offended if someone makes an outright request like that and people don’t respect it.

You don’t have to understand someone to respect them. I don’t understand how the religion of Islam works, and yet I don’t go around calling Muslims Christians. Because they’re just not the same, and it’s in very poor taste to call someone something they’re not. Particularly if they’ve outright Told You.

Not to mention, ALL the issues society has with Gender Roles and how it feeds into Sexism, but that’s a whole new essay.