#i think for a lot of people the question of who the essential doctor is to them is the same as who their first is

[apas-95]

I’m an anarchocommunist that thinks a lot of other anarchists are stupid. For example, I don’t think that most people will just make insulin or do garbage collection/processing out of the kindness of their heart, and I also don’t think if it was genuinely done out of the kindness of their hearts that it’d work great. My idea is that for the “getting people to do the shitty jobs” question, the people that do those jobs should be compensated better in some way. Maybe a larger/nicer house, I’m not sure on the details. But other anarchists will say “all labor is equal”, and while I’d like to agree in the “work is hard” sense, I think things for the obvious common good, like teacher or garbage man or doctor deserve some sort of reward over other jobs. And for the efficiency of the labor, I think *specifically for labor* there needs to be some sort of organization, and we can use what’s worked before. We don’t need to have bathtub insulin if there’s a factory right there, and if there’s no connection from the insulin factory to doctors/pharmacists and truck drivers then it won’t work either. Really, my main problem with Marxism/Leninism or Stalinism or Maoism or any combination of those is that there are specific people with far too much power over others. I’m ok with light power in the way of “man you gotta drive the firetruck to the burning building even though you hate the dude that lives there”, but I’m not ok with the idea of a supreme leader or representatives in a political sense due to as I’ve amounts of power obviously corrupting people.

Really I’m sending this to you to get your criticism of my ideas- I think you’re pretty smart, and even if I disagree with you on some issues, I think I agree with you on others. I also want to say that not all anarchists are… like that.

So, years ago, before I started reading any Marxist theory, this is about where I was at politically. If you think about any of the practicalities, you come up to points where, very clearly, the maxim of 'no authority at all' conflicts with being able to do anything. If you're seriously considering how society could be better organised, if this is something you actually intend on bringing about, then you make some amount of concession to reality - as you did with the firetruck example!

Now, myself, I went on like this for a good while, coming up with methods of truly democratic organisation that wouldn't be susceptible to the types of totalitarianism I'd heard about, ending up very similar to your position. I was interested, however, in how these 'failed experiments' that I'd learned devolved into bureaucracy started out, and I started reading up on the history, and realised, with some discontent, that what I'd developed, once I'd made all the concessions for reality that would be necessary if this system were to be the actual one real human beings lives depended on, was essentially identical to the Soviet system.

From there, I read up on Marxist theory, still basically wary that this had all, at some point, been taken over by an evil dictator, but able to see that the earliest stages, at least, had been exactly what I was imagining, but put into practice. Reading the theory, reading how their experience experimenting with different forms of organisation, and the failures of some types, had led them to discover what did and didn't work, and adjust accordingly, made me suddenly appreciate why certain things were done certain ways. The harsh experiences of civil war had revealed certain dynamics and mechanics in the way society and production worked, which translates into political theories that bore out results I wouldn't have expected (and neither had the communists who had discovered them through practice!).

Eventually, with some chagrin and a significant deal of excitement, I realised that much of what I'd passively absorbed about socialism, many of the common-sense maxims that I'd been taught by capitalist society about the nature of power and so on, were very much artifacts of a decades-long war against these communists and the system they'd built, carried out by exactly the corporations and empires I had thought myself opposed to.

I won't critique any individual point of yours, but I will enjoin you to try out some Marxist theory - Dialectical and Historical Materialism, or Socialism, Utopian and Scientific, or Principles of Communism, or even the Communist Manifesto, and to read between the lines of whatever capitalist source you read on socialism, to notice every [citation needed] and wonder what actually happened such that someone felt the need to make something up.

[hello-nichya-here]

Did Sia insult topic of autism somehow?

Oh honey, it's sooooooooo much worse than that.

Sia wanted to make a movie about an autistic girl that manages to connect to people/feel safe and confident through music. So far, nothing outrageous, just a simple concept that would obviously put Sia's music front and center while doing something nice and educating people on autism.

There was controversy about her not casting an autistic actress as it would have been nice representation, but she could have totally gotten away with that since, come on, hollywood hasn't even figured out Rain Man isn't exactly true to life, they're not ready to have an autistic person playing an autistic character. Baby steps.

The real problem started when Sia started promoting the "charity/support group" that was helping "educate" her on the topic to make the movie. The "charity" in question was Autism Speaks - which is absolutely HATED by the autistic community for things like:

1 - Spreading the myth that autism is a mental illness that one can develop/catch like the freaking flue and potentially be cured of, instead of a neurotype, aka something starts in the woomb and cannot be "cured" because to do that you'd need to replace someone's entire nervous system, which is impossible.

2 - Using that myth to get outrageous amounts of money from people so they "search for a cure" - that doesn't exist and will never exist because curing autism is biologically impossible, AND despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of autistic people don't even want to be "cured" (plus, since said "cure" would essentially mean giving the person a new brain, it leads to the question of "Would I even be the same person, or would that just kill and replace me?")

3 - Using the myth of "We don't know what causes autism" (we do, it's genetic) to, of course, get MORE money from people so they can "do research to find the missing puzzle piece" (if you ever see autistic people complaining about a puzzle piece being used to represent the condition, that's why, it was started by Autism Speak's massive disinformation campains).

4 - Falsely "confirming" things like soy milk cause autism with one of the world's most ridiculous "research", losing only to "vaccines totally make kids autistic, buy MY vaccine instead, guys, I am totally not an unbelievably biased person, it's ALL the other doctors/scientists lying to you. GIVE ME MONEY!"

5 - Pushing the narrative of "autism is inherently a tragedy" to distract from the fact that all the money they waste on stupid shit could be used to help autistic people and their families. Instead, they focus on creating more and more panic, making parents in particular despair even more - to the point that one of their "awareness videos" includes a mother talking about how she wants to murder her autistic daughter and then kill herself... while sitting right next to said daughter.

6 - Promoting ABA "therapy" - which was created by the same guy responsible for the attrocity that is gay conversion "therapy." Both have led to unbelievably high rates of confirmed PTSD and suicidal ideation in patients (victims), and ABA in particular has been compared to literal dog training. Very fitting since it was created by a guy who famously did not believe autistic people truly counted as thinking, feeling human beings, and said as much several times. Despite that, it is still praised by some utter bastards because "it makes the patients act less autistic when they're not crying in the corner or trying to jump out a window"

So yeah, working with these guys is a genuinely horrible thing to do since they're basically a scam/hate group pretending to be a charity - and people were STILL willing to give Sia the benefit of the doubt, since Autism Speak uses all their resources to make sure they're the first thing people see when looking up how to help autistic people.

Lots of Sia's fans, both autistic and allistic, warned her repeatedly, politely, that she needed to supporting them IMMEDIATELY as their goal was the exact opposite of the one she claimed to have - aka raise awareness through an accurate portrail of autism. People were even kind enough to name organizations like ASAN as replacements to help her fix any damage done to the project.

And instead of being a decent human being, Sia decided to cry on twitter about how the mean retar-I mean, autistics were bullying her even when she was so kindly using them for her vanity project.

Because yes, that's how the movie turned out. An unwatcheable piece of garbage, with the autistic "character" being so fucking bad even the people who actively use "autistic" as insulted being offended on our behalf - and of course, she was used just a prop to show how awesome Sia's character was.

Seriously, it was so bad the actress playing the autistic girl was sobbing in between scenes because she knew how it was horrible and she didn't want to insult anyone, but Sia is literally her godmother and helped her career by putting her in nearly all her music videos so she felt obligated to go along with it.

So yeah, fuck Sia and fuck Autism Speaks.

[copperbadge]

hi, i had a medium to big question. in your post about the adhd self-help book you mentioned people with adhd being conditioned to be nonconfrontational, but i've never once in my entire life connected the two? can you break down the connection for me so that i can once again (this week, even) have my understanding of my own condition blown wide open?

So, you are not the only person to ask about this, but that's on me for being unclear -- I wasn't trying to assert that kids with ADHD are automatically conditioned to be nonconfrontational, I was more trying to be like "Hey not everyone needs lessons in medical self-advocacy but a lot of nonconfrontational people do." And I think there is a higher population of people with neurodivergence who are deeply confrontation-averse, but I don't have like, numbers for that, it's just an assumption based on other knowledge.

It gets complicated; ADHD is a disease based heavily in acting impulsively against your best interests. But yeah I do think people with ADHD are often conditioned to avoid confrontation because of two main factors: rejection-sensitive dysphoria and executive dysfunction.

RSD, which I hate perhaps more than any other symptom or behavior associated with ADHD, automatically kicks our nervous system into high gear in social situations and encodes embarrassing moments in our memory with high-def clarity. Because RSD naturally causes a level of anxiety around socialization, it tends to make us nonconfrontational simply because a) we don't want to be yelled at, b) we don't want to embarrass ourselves by getting emotional about something that may not warrant it, and c) by the time we realize what's happening our body is already on high alert which means we are likely to go into fight-flight-freeze mode.

Me, I freeze, usually, but none of those three options are great for fast thinking during an argument. I used to lose arguments a lot simply because I couldn't think or react as fast as the neurotypical person I was fighting with, so I simply stopped having fights. Notably, I did not have this problem when fighting with my brother, who is also neurodivergent and has many of the same freeze reactions I do.

If people disagree with me, even when I know I'm right I also know I probably won't be able to vocalize it properly, so I back down. Usually it's trivial so it doesn't matter, and I've gotten strategic about how and when I argue about things that do matter; it's also a lot easier to do with strangers or professionals (like doctors) where I don't have to worry about long-term social repercussions. But yeah, our own nervous system tells us "hey maybe don't pick this fight" about every single fight and if we do pick that fight, it treats our opponent as a dangerous predator.

Executive dysfunction's interaction with nonconfrontation is something I have less problem with because while I do have poor executive function, I've spent a lot of time and energy training myself to cover the Important Stuff. I have mild ADHD so I'm capable of this; I'm not trying to say everyone with ADHD is, because lord knows it's exhausting for me and I've been doing it for roughly thirty years. But essentially, I cover where it counts: if someone needs me to do something I do it, I meet deadlines, I pay bills.

So with that disclaimer in place, a very common issue especially for children with undiagnosed ADHD is that they'll be told or asked to do something and simply be unable to begin or complete it, then when they're asked why they didn't do it they can't explain. Even if they try to explain that they simply couldn't, like they were incapable of doing it for reasons they don't understand, that usually doesn't hold water with a lot of parents and teachers.

"I couldn't bring myself to write this essay," is actually something I told myself a few times in college, but it's not something I'd bother trying to tell someone else, because if you think you're neurotypical that sounds very insane. So I'd lie and say I forgot, or I'd take the fail, or I'd simply drop out of the class. Crucially I would not fight with the authority figure who was questioning me about it, because I knew I wouldn't be able to explain myself, and I'd just end up getting in more trouble for longer.

Our culture is structured for neurotypicals, and it's not even structured for all neurotypicals. Behavior that deviates from Approved Neurotypical even when you think you are Approved Neurotypical is highly punishable. So if your options are passivity, even when passivity leads to pain, or confrontation, most people who aren't Approved Neurotypical will opt for passivity once they've had a taste of where confrontation leads. I know I do.

And the thing is, there's nothing actually wrong with that. It's a strategy calculated to minimize pain. Even when I'm firing on all cylinders on a fresh dose of Adderall, I still generally let fights go unless there will be actual real consequences, because it's just not worth it. But knowing we have ADHD and knowing we fall into this pattern, I think it is good to be aware that sometimes letting a fight go is really going to fuck you, and at that point even being bad at it is better than not engaging.

I'm pretty good at calculating those, but it's a lifelong process, knowing which hills to die on when you assume you will automatically die if you ever get above sea level.

[cinnamontoastcrunch-15]

Red Flags

Oh my god I've been so burnt out I'm so so sorry but I WROTE SOMETHING FINALLY

“Right, so…” Lily starts, settling down in front of the others with a coffee in hand, “what are we thinking?”

“I have a feeling we’re all thinking the same thing,” Mary says, shaking their head to themself. As Lily glances around, everyone nods in agreement.

Remus Lupin has terrible taste in men.

It’s an infamous fact among the group, really. Somehow, Remus manages to find every weird, rude, and downright horrible man on the face of the earth. He's not stupid, but he is impressively good at ignoring all of the warning signs. Lily remembers, more than once or twice, picking up the pieces, shouting at the exes, even stopping Remus from taking them back. It always sucks to see him that upset, and Lily just couldn't take it anymore.

So, they've developed a system.

It involves a lot of internet stalking, going through social media after social media, looking for pieces of evidence, things they can mention directly to the guy in question. If they can figure out if they're exactly the same as the others, which they usually are, they can scare him away before it’s too late. Remus isn't exactly… aware, of their system, but it works, and they need it to keep working. It's better that Remus is a little upset that his boyfriend of two weeks has ghosted him, rather than a painful betrayal.

This newest guy, though? They can't find anything.

“You’d think someone with the name Sirius fucking Black would have something slightly shady on his socials!” Marlene says with a groan.

“I mean, the name’s red flag enough, right? Everyone knows the Black family,” Peter says, but James is intervening before anyone has a chance to agree.

“Hold on, they essentially got rid of him five years ago. I don't know that we can still hold his name against him.”

Yeah, that makes sense. Unfortunately.

“Okay, well… what does he do for a living?” Mary tries, only to get a good few shrugs.

For someone who posts ten times a day, this guy is really quite quiet about his private life.

“I think he's a doctor,” Peter says eventually. “That’s what I found when I looked him up. Pediatric Surgeon?”

“Oh, so he literally saves kids lives,” Marlene says, exasperatedly throwing her hands in the air. “I'm sorry, he can't be Mr Perfect! This isn't how Remus works!”

Lily wants to say that maybe it is, maybe he's turning a corner, but she bites her tongue. They don't actually know anything real, anything substantial, about this guy. All they know is that he grew up in a very prominent family, and can build a careful social media presence. That means nothing.

They need to dig deeper.

“You know what this means, right?” Lily says grimly. “We have to meet him.”

Remus knows exactly what his friends are up to.

They think they're so brilliant at hiding their little… background checks on anyone he even so much as mentions wanting to date. Well, he can't exactly blame them. He's dated some absolutely horrendous people, and he knows that. Showing up at Lily’s as a crying mess wasn't exactly his finest moment, so he gets why they're so concerned.

Sirius, though? God, they’re never going to have to worry again. For a good few weeks, Remus had thought he'd made Sirius up. He's never fallen for someone as quickly as he's fallen for Sirius, even though they're taking everything so slowly. Honestly, he'd move in with Sirius tomorrow, if he asked, but Sirius is too good to ask that so soon.

That doesn't stop Sirius from panicking a little, as Remus keeps setting the table for dinner with his friends.

“What if they hate me? I mean, what if I set a really bad impression and they hate me forever-?”

“They definitely won't hate you. Believe me, you'll click with them. Especially James. I have a feeling he's going to love you.”

James is always the most supportive. He at least tells Remus before the others start to interrogate them.

“But what if-”

“Hey, don't panic.” Remus reaches out and takes both of Sirius’ hands in his. It sends a little thrill through him, the way Sirius’ breath catches in his throat. “Just… don't feel intimidated when they start asking too many questions, and you'll be fine.” Sirius nods once, and Remus squeezes his hands reassuringly.

There’s a knock at the door before they can kiss.

Remus groans as Sirius drops his head onto Remus' shoulder. He takes a breath and takes a step away, as Remus tries to quash the nerves. He knows how much they're going to love Sirius, but it isn't really helping. He doesn't want them freaking him out and scaring him off.

Still, it's too late to give them all the boot now, so, with a slight hesitance, he accepts his fate and opens the door.

“Hey, guys! You’re all here… at the same time,” he says, sticking a perplexed expression on his face. Mary smiles brightly as Remus steps aside to let them all in.

“What a coincidence, right?”

They’re really bad at hiding things.

James is the last one in, and Remus holds him back quickly.

“Please tell me they're not grilling him. Sirius is nervous enough.” He knows the answer already, but James shrugging apologetically only confirms it.

“They didn't find anything online. You know what that means.” Remus nods once, trying to bite back a groan. “They're doing it because they care.”

“I know. Just… please give him a chance. He's… Prongs, he’s amazing.” He watches James’ face soften, and it gives him the slightest glimmer of hope.

Maybe this'll be okay.

“So, Sirius…” Marlene starts, the moment they all settle at the table.

God, it's already starting.

“What’s your favourite thing about our Remus?”

Honestly, Remus is pretty sure that's a tricky question. He's never seen anyone answer it right. There's always something wrong with the answer. It almost feels like a cruel start.

“Oh, wow, I don't think I could pick!” Sirius says with a smile. “I mean, unless you let me pick everything,” he adds with a wink. It draws a smile out of Remus, and James is already positively beaming. The others, though, exchange a confused glance.

“What, so you can't think of anything?” Peter says disbelievingly.

“Oh, I just meant- I think everything about him is amazing.”

A blush immediately spreads it's way across Sirius’ face and, oh, Remus could look at him forever; could watch his face turn rosy until the end of time.

“What d’you think of his writing? Y’know, his breakout piece on euthanasia?” Lily asks, resting her chin in her hands.

“I thought his breakout piece was his intersectionality one?” Remus turns to him, stunned. He didn't even know Sirius had read any of his articles.

He's also right.

Christ, he must be ticking some kind of box for his friends.

“Right, this is stupid,” Mary interrupts Remus’ train of thought, and he's already dreading whatever they're about to say. “If you have any intentions of hurting him, we’ll quite literally kill you.”

“Mary!” Remus says quickly, his hand reaching out to grab Sirius’.

“No, he needs to hear this!”

“Why? Because you couldn't find anything when you looked him up?”

It's enough for the group to lapse into silence.

“Listen.” Remus forces himself to take a breath and slow down. “I know why you do all of this, and I get it. Really, I do. I appreciate how much you care. Sirius, though, he's… guys, he's wonderful. You don't have to worry this time.”

James nods, Mary also seemingly placated. The others, though, turn to Sirius.

Yeah, that makes sense.

“Honestly, I’ve never felt this way about anyone. I wouldn't dream of hurting him. I'm falling in love with him more every single day-” He cuts himself off with wide eyes, immediately turning to Remus.

Oh.

Oh, wow.

“You love me?” Remus asks. It's almost like his friends just… vanish, in that moment. All he can see is Sirius, sitting beside him, telling him that he loves him.

“Shit, I didn't mean to say it like that!” Sirius groans, his face reddening by the second.

Okay, accidentally telling him that he loves him.

“I wanted to plan something nice, think of the right thing to say, not just- God, I'm so sorry, I didn't mean for this-” He buries his head into his hands, muffling his panicked rambling.

“Sirius?” He tries quietly. Sirius just shakes his head minutely. It's really bloody endearing.

Remus is going to have to go about this differently.

Slowly, gently, he reaches out and pries Sirius’ hands from his face. He lets himself lace his fingers through Sirius’, as their eyes meet and Remus’ stomach flips.

“I love you, Sirius,” he says softly. “Christ, how could I not?”

Sirius’ face brightens in an instant, and Remus can't help but beam right back at him. He can practically feel the tension in the room lift.

He has a feeling his friends won't be worrying about him anymore.

[transmutationisms]

serious question but do you personally believe there is a way to approach psychiatry in a way that uplifts and upholds patient autonomy and wellness or is the entire trade essentially fucked haha. Btw this is an ask coming from a 3rd year med student—with a background of severe mental illness—who is considering a residency in psychiatry after receiving life-saving care in high school pertaining to said conditions. (I have peers who have been involuntarily hospitalized and treated horribly in psych wards, with approaches i patently disagree with, but was lucky not to experience. I don’t like modern american medicine’s approach to mental illness; “throw pills” at it to “make it go away” ie. a problem of overprescribing, inadequate and non-holistic approach to mental health, and i feel a lot of that can be attributed to the capitalistic framework. I also def agree with you that so much of what can be considered normal human responses to traumatic events/normal human suffering can be unnecessarily pathologized—a great example being the whole “chemical imbalances in the brain is the ONLY reason why im like this” argument that ive unfortunately fallen hard for when i was younger and am still currently dismantling within myself…and like dont even get me started on this field’s history of demonizing POC, women, LGBT, etc). Like i deeply love my psych rotations so far, and i utterly feel in my gut that this is the manner in which i would like to help people—a lot of whom are just like me—but im wondering if there is a way to reconcile these aspects in a way that one can feel morally okay participating within such an imperfect system, in ur opinion… ngghhhhhh i just want to be a good doctor to my patients…

(ps i love all ur writing and analysis on succession!! big fan mwah <333)

i don't mean to sound unduly pissy at you, specifically, but i do have to say: every single time i've talked about antipsych or broader criticism of medicine on this website, i immediately get a wave of responses like this, from doctors/nurses/psychs/students of the above, asking me to, like, reassure them that they're not doing something immoral or un-communist or whatever by having or pursuing these jobs. and it's honestly frustrating. why is it that these conversations get re-framed around this particular line of inquiry and medical ego-soothing? why is it that when i say "the medical encounter is not structured to protect patient autonomy or well-being," so many people hear something more along the lines of "doctors are mean and i wish they were nicer"? why is it that it's impossible to discuss the philosophical and structural violence of academic and clinical medicine without it becoming a referendum on the individual morality of doctors?

i'm choosing to read you in good faith because i think it's possible to re-re-frame this line of questioning to demonstrate to you the sorts of critiques and inquiries i find more interesting and more conducive to patient autonomy and liberation. so, let me pick apart a few lines of this ask.

"is the entire trade essentially fucked?"

if you're thinking of trying to 'reform' the project of medical psychology within existing infrastructures and institutions, then yeah, it's fucked. if you're still assuming that affective distress can only be 'treated' within this medical apparatus (despite, again, no psychiatric dx satisfying any pathologist's understanding of a 'disease' ie an aberration from 'normal' physiological functioning) then you're not challenging the things that actually make psychiatry violent. you're simply fantasising about making the violence nicer.

"I don’t like modern american medicine’s approach to mental illness; “throw pills” at it to “make it go away” ie. a problem of overprescribing, inadequate and non-holistic approach to mental health, and i feel a lot of that can be attributed to the capitalistic framework."

i hate when i talk about psychotropic drugs being marketed to patients using lies like the chemical imbalance myth, and then pushed on patients—including through outright force—by psychiatrists, and the discussion gets re-framed as one about 'overprescribing'. my problem is not with people taking drugs. i am, in fact, so pro-drugs that i think even the ones administered in a clinical setting sometimes have value. my issue is with, again, the provision of misleading or outright false information, the use of force and coercion to put patients on such drugs in order to force social conformity and employability, and the general model of medicine and medical psychology that assumes patients ought to be passive recipients of medical enlightenment rather than active participants in their own treatment who are given the agency to decide when and how to engage with any form of curative or meliorative intervention.

'holistic' medicine and psychiatry do not solve this problem! they are not a paradigm shift because they continue to locate expertise and epistemological authority with the credentialed physician, and to position patients as too sick, stupid, or helpless to do anything but receive and comply with the medical interventions. there are certainly psychotropic drugs that are demonstrably more harmful than others (antipsychotics, for example), and some that are demonstrably prescribed to patients who do not benefit from them and are even harmed by them. conversely, there are certainly forms of intervention besides pharmaceuticals that people may find helpful. but my general critique here is aimed less at haggling over specific methods of intervention, and more at the ideological and philosophical tenets of medicine that cause any interventions to be imposed by force or coercion on patients, then framed as being 'for their own good'. were suffering people given the information and autonomy to actually choose whether and how to engage in any kind of intervention, some might still choose drugs! my position here is not one of moralising drugs, but making the act of taking them one that is freely chosen and available as an option without relying on physician determination of a patient's interests over their own assessment of their needs and wants.

"so much of what can be considered normal human responses to traumatic events/normal human suffering can be unnecessarily pathologized"

true, but don't misunderstand me as saying that drugs or any other form of intervention should be forcibly withheld from those who do want them and are made fully aware of what risks and harms seeking them could entail. again, this would still be an authoritarian model; my critique is aimed at increasing patient autonomy, not at creating equally authoritarian and empowered doctors who just have slightly different treatment philosophies.

"dont even get me started on this field’s history of demonizing POC, women, LGBT, etc"

ok, framing this as "demonisation" tells me that you're not understanding that, again, this is a systemic and structural critique. it is certainly true that a great many doctors currently are, and have historically have been, outright racist, trans/misogynist, ableist, and so on. framing this as a problem of a well-intentioned discipline being corrupted by some assholes is getting it backwards. medicine attracts prejudiced people, not to mention strengthens and promotes these prejudices in its entire training and practice infrastructures, because of its underlying philosophical orientation toward enforcing 'normality' as defined by 18th-century statistics and 19th-century human sciences that explicitly place white, cis, able-bodied european men as the normal ideal that everyone else is inferior to or failing to live up to. doctors who really nicely tell you that you're too fat are still using bmi charts that come from the statistical anthropometry of adolphe quételet and the flawed actuarial calculations of metlife insurance. doctors who really nicely deny you access to transition surgery are still operating under a paradigm that gives the practitioner authority over expressions and embodiments of gender. the issue isn't 'demonisation', it's that medicine and psychiatry explicitly attempt to render judgments about who and what is 'normal' and therefore socially 'healthy', and enforce those standards on patients. this is not a promotion of patient well-being, but of social conformity.

"i deeply love my psych rotations so far, and i utterly feel in my gut that this is the manner in which i would like to help people"

let me ask you a few questions. you say that you like your psych rotations... but how do your patients feel about them? is their autonomy protected? are they in treatment by free choice, and free to leave any time they wish? are they treated as human beings with full self-determination? if you witnessed a situation in which a patient was coerced or forced into a certain treatment, or in which you were not sure whether they were consenting with full knowledge or freedom, would you feel empowered to intervene? or would doing so threaten your career by exposing you to anger and retaliation from your higher-ups? what higher-ups will you be exposed to as a resident, and then as a practicing physician? could you practice in a way that committed fully, 100%, to patient autonomy if you were working at someone else's practice, or in a hospital or clinic? could you, according to current medical guidelines, even if you had your own practice?

when you say "this is the manner in which i would like to help people", what do you mean by "this"? can you define your philosophy of treatment, and the relationship and power dynamic you want to have with any future patients? is it one in which you hold authority over them and see yourself as determining what's in their 'best interests', even over their own expressed wishes? have you connected with patient advocates, psych survivors (other than your friends), and radical psychiatrists and anti-psychiatrists who may espouse heterodox treatment philosophies that you could consider? do you think such philosophies are sufficient for protecting patient autonomy and well-being, or are they still models that position the physician's judgment and authority over that of the patient?

"im wondering if there is a way to reconcile these aspects in a way that one can feel morally okay participating within such an imperfect system"

and here is the crux of the problem with this entire ask. you are wondering how to sleep at night, if you are participating in a career you find morally distasteful. where, though, do your patients enter into that equation? do you worry about how they sleep at night, after having interacted with a system of social violence that may very well have traumatised them under the guise of providing help? why does your own guilty conscience worry you more than violations of your patients' bodies, minds, and basic self-determination?

i can't tell you whether your career path is morally acceptable to you. i don't think this type of guilt or self-flagellation is fruitful and i don't think it helps protect patients. i don't, frankly, have a handy roadmap sitting around for creating a new system of medicine and health care that rests on patient autonomy. affective distress is real, and is not something we should have to bear alone or with the risk of having violence inflicted upon us. what you need to ask yourself is: how does the medical model and establishment serve people experiencing such distress? how does it perpetuate violence against them? and how do you see yourself countering, or perpetuating, such violence as someone operating within this discipline? what would it mean to be a 'good' actor within a violent system, if you do indeed believe that such a thing is ontologically possible?

[echooefrost]

TGS MEDIEVAL AU :0

Is this Historically accurate? no. Does that matter? no.

Alright, This is gonna be a lot, so thou shalt be warned

In the Au, Robert is a prince and Lanyon Sr. is the King, they rule over a small kindom somewhere in England - name TBA (so not like real monarchies which rule over entire countries etc.) The premise is basically; The Lanyon's personal/private doctor recently passed away so they call in a new doctor/chemist from Scotland - did you guess? yep, It's Jekyll. Hyde exists before Henry/Edward meets Robert (I haven't worked out the exact logistics about it yet, but I will) Jekyll/Hyde are more Chemists/Alchemists than Doctors but they are both still very good doctors regardless (so they don't really wear the 'plague mask' thing) I aged only Jekyll, Hyde and Lanyon down to about their early 20's so it matches around the original timing of when J&H met Robert in TGS. There are other smaller reasons but they aren't to important, all you need to know is that it doesn't really change anything

Lanyon is betrothed to Everly from a neighbouring kingdom -this is where it differs slightly from TGS, it's a political marriage not a lavender marriage. Neither Robert nor Everly are happy about this however, they are both only children in royalty so they don't really have an option.

Hyde is essentially the local gremlin that has in-built eyebags and a sense to sell you things not very discreetly that he probably shouldn't be selling. His Cape is comedically large and has a very extensive collection of illegal powders, drugs, and other nefarious items. Almost everybody knows Hyde becasue at some point they have all needed some rare item from him. - this is where the blackfog comes in (yes it exists!) the Blackfog is basically the same but Hyde really wants to go so he can buy/sell lots of items for his little side-business he has going on, however Lanyon Sr. is opposed to it and it's existence because well... illegal.

*Hyde also goes by: The Spirit of [insert Kingdom's name] at night (soooooo original, ik)

Jekyll stays pretty much the same, He really cares about his reputation so he can move up on the social ladder and create his own Science business at some point, and I mean he doesn't want to make a fool of himself in front of the King of all people, that wouldn't be a very good look, would it?

In this universe, The lodgers are all citizens of the small kingdom and they all sort of have different occupations/roles in the town. They can't all be scientists, but do not fear because they still as equally crazy and chaotic as before. Rachel is the Lanyon's personal chef but she also helps run the bakery in town with Mr. Doddle. Jasper looks after most of the animals and creatures in the kingdom, he used to be a farmer but moved to get away from home. I am yet to work out how Jekyll and Jaspers relationship dynamic stays the same in this universe but I will figure something out.

There is A LOT of Jekyon and Lanyde going on here, so I've got something for everyone, (there may or may not be a masquerade at some point...) and it's not just centred around romance, there is lots of other plot stuff happening so do not fear my ace/aro friends (or just people who aren't a fan of romance)!

That's most of it for now... I'll draw some more stuff at some point and give some extra details, If you have any questions please ask (my asks are open) I'd love to hear from you all!!! Don't be afraid to offer any suggestions or other criticisms. Maybe I'll write a fanfic one day who knows, we will see.

Thanks for listening to my rant (*^▽^*)

*Footnote - I don't think you guys realise how hard it was to make hyde not look like either A.) a fucking elf or B.) Link. Did I succeed? not sure.

[intuitive-revelations]

Retrospective notes and what to keep an eye on after The Legend of Ruby Sunday

I started writing this while watching through a second time. While my thoughts were still a bit random and out of order, I've edited them into something that makes a bit more sense to read through.

Susan:

A little bit weird at first that Ruby asks why the Doctor doesn't recognise his own granddaughter, given that she doesn't know about regeneration yet and Susan Twist is clearly not mixed race. After thinking for a second, I realised she probably just immediately reconciled this as an adoption scenario, especially with her own family and history.

I've posted seperately about my feelings on the retcon of Susan's origins, but I am still surprised we're going this direction. I also find the wording a little bit questionable, as the Doctor makes it sound like he hasn't had children before, when he 100% did.

A Susan misdirect being linked to the word TARDIS is excellent though, given that she claimed to have come up with the word. (People freak out about what this means for her origins, but I don't see why it can't just be that she's responsible for the English acronym translation convention, which then passed on to all of human history thanks to the Doctor's travels.)

We didn't get Susan this time round, but such a massive red herring implies that RTD is planning to build up to such a thing for real, right? I assume we'll also be talking more about her next episode / in Tales of the TARDIS.

I also mentioned this in my live notes, but I quite like the Doctor's justification for not going back to Susan. It makes sense on its own, but takes on a whole new meaning in light of what happens in Big Finish (even if you do need to slightly nudge the meaning to make sense, and admittedly it still clashes with her participation in the Time War).

The Time Window and Misdirections:

Slightly put off at 'time window' being used as terminology for UNIT's tech when that's been used for actual time portals in-universe before.

Liked all the mentions of chronons though. Need to combine that and "N-dimensional time" into an actual pseudoscientific theory of time physics in Doctor Who with artron energy etc.

The Time Window is also totally how we get the Memory TARDIS, right? I'm guessing that's why the Doctor sent Ruby there, so she can escape into it (though I don't know what that will look like given Tales of the TARDIS surely won't be essential viewing). I wonder if that means the Doctor we'll see in that won't be the real one?

Super sneaky making the time window the 'secret from the Third Doctor era' that is revealed that was teased. Not a lie, but really teases something different to what we got.

Actually, in general kinda mixed feelings about the sheer level of misdirection is this story. You've got the above, all the focus on Susan, maybe the 'Beast', literally playing the Saxon theme (The Master Vainglorious). Seemingly also the thing about where people were stood on Christmas Eve… though I am going to check to see if there's something about the TARDIS / Sutekh. That being said, I'm guessing we're coming back to this, as the pointing isn't really explained yet.

RTD also said the script opened "INT. COFFEE BAR, USA - DAY, 1947" but we clearly never got such a scene. :/

On the other hand, all the playing around and subversion with anagrams was a lot of fun. Very much riffing off of DW tropes. Very funny also that UNIT would immediately pick up on the S Triad thing, given their and the Doctor's history with the Master's own aliases.

Sutekh and the Pantheon

Super intrigued by everything regarding the Pantheon in this episode. So we've got members:

Sutekh: God of Death. The Oldest One / The One Who Waits, the Mother and Father and Other of them all. The Toymaker: God of Games. The Trickster: God of Traps. Maestro: God of Music Reprobate: God of Spite. The Mara: God of Beasts. The Three-Fold Deity of Malice, Mischief, and Misery. Gods of Skin, Shame, Secrets Incensor: Gold of Disaster Incensor's Children - Doubt and Dread. Harbinger(s)

I'm probably too EU-brained, but it feels crazy putting entities like the Toymaker and the Trickster below Sutekh? They're both Eternal/Guardian level, while Sutekh is just an Osiran, powerful but ultimately ephermal. How is he 'the oldest' and the 'mother/father/other' of them all? I guess age could be partially put down to Sutekh's fate in Pyramids of Mars, but actually originating before them doesn't really make sense. I guess he could be an incarnation of a much older being, a bit like the Doctor could be?

However, I also doubt Harbinger is entirely reliable. She's clearly hyping up Sutekh's dominion, so him being the 'god of gods' may not mean much in terms of their origin.

Speaking of which... a lot of allusions to the Devil here, as I mentioned above. Chidozie finds himself in 'hell' and Carla literally calls the shape in the Time Window "the Beast". The security camera is also 66m away (funnily enough, around 73 yards). Add in Gabriel Woolf also playing the Beast in series 2, and you really do have to wonder if there's a connection. If Sutekh and the other Gods really do see him as the same entity as the Beast, then maybe he really could be the oldest of them all.

Side note: "Mother, Father and Other of them all" is great. Connecting the word 'Other' to parentage is also interesting, given we've been talking about Susan...

Going back to the Pantheon - I am now 100% convinced, after theorising before, that we've been meeting members of the Pantheon of Discord.

While there are family connections between some of them, I doubt they really are all related. They're way too distinct for that. But as a loose coalition of malicious god-like beings across the multiverse, it works. Weirdly, it is also reminiscent of some plotlines from the Tenth Doctor Titan Comics. It also feels like the direct opposite of the 'Accord' from the Leftbridge-Stewart series, which was seemingly another coalition of more benevolent deities, including the Azure Guardian. I wonder if they oppose each other?

Some of the namedrops are super interesting too. As I mentioned in my live blog, the Three-Fold deity must be connected to the Six-Fold God, even if just an imitation. Some of the names (eg. Doubt and Dread), being directly named for concepts and emotions, also brings to mind the Menti Celesti.

I also strongly suspect we're going to meet the Trickster again. RTD even foreshadowed as much when he illustrated Now We Are Six Hundred.

Big question is... when did Sutekh become connected to the TARDIS? The latest it could have happened is Wild Blue Yonder, and that would be the simplest explanation... but dialogue implies he's been attached and waiting for longer.

Again, mentioned this in my live notes, but the connection of Sutekh hiding in the "Howling Void" and appearing on UNIT scanners with contradictory information like the Dalek Void ship is an excellent connection. Especially, again, with the possible Hell connection:

RAJESH: And what's the Void? DOCTOR: The space between dimensions. There's all sorts of realities around us, different dimensions, billions of parallel universes all stacked up against each other. The Void is the space in between, containing absolutely nothing. Imagine that. Nothing. No light, no dark, no up, no down, no life, no time. Without end. My people called it the Void. The Eternals call it the Howling. But some people call it Hell.

Does this imply he attached himself to the TARDIS while it traveled through the Void? If so... when was that? Again Wild Blue Yonder is a good candidate, as the TARDIS literally reaches the edge of the universe (at least in some sort of spacetime geometry), but this could technically harken back as far as Journey's End, when the TARDIS last visited Pete's World.

A bit of me is intrigued by the description of Sutekh "whispering, delighting and seducing" the TARDIS, but nothing else indicates the TARDIS was willingly carrying him. Again another sign that Harbinger's speech may not reliable.

Remaining Mysteries

No offence to the people who were all in on the theory, of course, but I'm pretty sure the 'TV' theory is nothing. Especially after this episode. I feel like people latched onto the promo shot for this episode which looked like a TV set and confirmation bias took on from there. That being said, I am ready to eat my words if it somehow comes back to that next week!

(TBF, the TV theory obviously does have some relevance to DW in general, what with the Weeping Angels, Doctor Who exisiting in-universe, fourth wall breaks etc. I just don't think it ever had anything to do with this story.)

So Mrs Flood is confirmed to be something alien or supernatural, after the ambiguity with the Christmas 4th wall break. Simplest answer is that she's also serving Sutekh / the Pantheon, but IDK... she seems different.

Still need to know what's up with Ruby's mum too. Annoyingly, the episode makes it kinda ambiguous if she was pointing at the past Doctor (as per the flashback earlier this series) or at the present one. If the prior, I assume she was actually pointing at the TARDIS / Sutekh?

That damn "worlds with orange skies" line. It's probably nothing, right? But why did we focus on it, complete with musical sting. RTD knows that's significant. Hell, it's specifically significant to Susan, with her talking about Gallifrey in The Sensorites, and Ten recalling it in Gridlock.

Also, unless the soundtrack was lying to us, which it doesn't usually (though I guess isn't unprecendented, with the Weeping Angel theme being used in Day of the Doctor when Osgood realises the statues are disguised Zygons), maybe a Master reveal coming up some point in the future? How though, I have no idea.

[m-a-salter]

Why is Peter Capaldi so hot? Part Three.

[part 1] [part 2] [part 4]

In Part One and Part Two we considered (1) Mr. Capaldi's physical characteristics and (2-3) behaviors. In this part, we will consider his acting roles in relation to his hotness. This is essentially the sub-question, "Is Peter Capaldi hot, or am I just in love with several of his characters?" My contention is that, as long as your relationship with him remains parasocial, it is not an important distinction.

And for those of us who have not been brainwashed by moral purity cultures within fandom, this holds for (4) his good, appealing characters and (5) his potentially evil characters. They are hot in different ways, but all are hot.

4. Highly lovable characters

Call me old-fashioned, but nothing is hotter than goodness.

4.1 Danny Oldsen, Local Hero (1983): I am aware that some people don't think there is any relationship between a character being an adorable precious cinnamon roll and the actor playing the character being hot. Those people are entitled to their opinions.

4.2 Randall Brown, The Hour (2012): Principled, highly competent, dapper, and with a tragic backstory, in my mind, the hotness of Randall Brown infuses everything Peter Capaldi does.

4.3 The Doctor, Doctor Who (2014-17): Has anyone read this far who doesn't think the twelfth Doctor is hot? I personally have a particular soft spot for the soft smile.

5. Slightly or majorly evil characters, but in a sexy way

5.1 Malcolm Tucker, The Thick of It (2005-2012) and In the Loop (2009).

5.2 Cardinal Richelieu, The Musketeers (2014): He didn't get to have as much sex as the other characters in this show, but he still wore a lot of leather.

5.3 Daniel Hegarty, Criminal Record (2024): All cops are bastards, some are sexy bastards in well-tailored suits.

[part 1] [part 2] [part 4]

[winepresswrath]

hi! i always love your MDZS/CQL takes; can i ask what are the questions you think CQL is asking, as compared to MDZS?

I haven't actually revisited either canon in ages, which is making me nervous. what questions the novel is interested in can be pretty contentious all on its own! @mikkeneko has an excellent answer in the notes here which I reccomend to everyone. My own thoughts are honestly pretty scattered- I keep on deleting things and going hm, that's not quite right.

So, for the obvious-to-me example, people reasonably zero in on the creation of innocent doctors/radish farmers who Wen Ruohan is holding hostage. In CQL it's easy to infer that Wen Qing and Wen Ning are maybe the only cultivators and almost certainly the only combatants among the Wen remnants, and their status is much more ambiguous in the novel, which I personally think is asking, essentially, "and so what? were they wrong to run, when they had a chance? Do they deserve what Jin Guangshan will do to them if they go back? Aren't they just people, actually?" Whereas the question that CQL is asking is more to the effect of "What does Wen Qing owe these people, when she is their only defence? What is she entitled to do to save them, at other people's expense? If she fucks up that moral calculus, what then? Does it matter if she's personally fond of some of the outsiders who are going to get hurt? If one of them saved her brother? Later, this question will flip to what Wei Wuxian and Jiang Cheng, and the parallel to Jiang Cheng's situation in particular is, I think, genuinely pretty fun. You're giving up the Wen as soldiers who've laid down their arms in exchange for Wen Qing also grappling with leadership and the question of how many horrors she can stand to look the other way on to protect her own people. one reason I keep deleting so much is that a lot cql's changes were motivated at least in part by censorship, which I think we mostly share a general and justified distaste for! but I also think that within the bounds of that censorship the creative team put a lot of work into actually doing something interesting with those changes. Or, for another example- nieyao! There's a much greater emphasis on the nmj-jgy relationship, it's unambiguously very close and they are clearly extremely important to one another, and I think that's because the cql team has a lot to say about love, trust, power, and the ways those things interact, and that reflects back on all of the other relationships in play, including Wangxian. Almost every time, when CQL chooses change a relationship they make the characters in question closer- that's true for Jiang Cheng and Lan Wangji, for Wen Qing and the Yunmeng contingent, for Zixuan and Mianmian, and Huaisang and Meng Yao. It's even true for Lan Wangji and Wei Wuxian, who have a close and trusting relationship in first life! CQL puts a much greater emphasis on "all right, so you care, what next?" How do you choose someone and then choose to be good to them? What if there's a massive power disparity between you? What if you seriously disagree about your priorities and morals? How do you trust someone who's betrayed you? When is it a stupid choice to trust at all? How do you have faith that you know someone well enough for that trust to be meaningful?

for legal reasons i would like to specify that it's not that mdzs isn't interested in these problems. i do remember wangxian's literal trust fall. cql is asking these questions all the time about everyone. also for legal purposes i'm not suggesting that cql lwj and jc love each other. but! they establish a three month wartime partnership looking for wwx and then jc immediately drops him on wwx's say-so despite apparently having a positive enough opinion of him to tell wwx he thinks they should make up twice. lan wangji will later tell wwx he thinks he should loop jc in on the second flautist! these are people trying to navigate some kind of relationship/shared interest/community, as opposed to a hateful void. cql wants to say hey, how do you go about this? while I'm here and rambling cql also puts a lot of emphasis on wwx's connection to yunmeng and changes things up so instead of feeling alienated right before he leaves our last glimpse of him there is happily picking lotuses and playing with a kid! in both stories the narrative is asking who do you protect? who do you leave behind? can you ever get it back? but the angles are very different.

[salt-baby]

As someone who is currently working in the healthcare field and looking at attended medical school, can you please elaborate on the ableism and doctors post you made? I’d very much like to avoid inadvertently falling into that category.

Somehow this missed my radar, my bad!

It's a difficult question to answer, although it is the right question to be asking.

You can find my other elaborations here and here, which will likely be helpful.

But to address your specific question, when I think about the ableism of practitioners, in some cases it is just bias, but in many it's just your run of the mill ignorance.

It takes experience to work well with disabled people - both because of the heterogeneity of them, and because the disabled experience is so far removed from the able bodied one.

Some people like myself call themselves disabled as an identity they're proud of, some people call themselves disabled but are uncomfortable with their condition to various degrees, and a lot of people would find it offensive for you to call them disabled because they would call themselves chronically ill or not impaired at all.

In your medical practice, "disabled" is going to be a legal term with a set definition, used to distribute benefits. You'll be taught an impairment model of disability, and your first instinct will likely be to try and fix the problem your patient is experiencing.

In a case like mine, that's not a mindset the patient is going to appreciate, as backwards as it sounds. Yes, I'm in a doctor's office to get treated, but the reality is that expert doctors have already evaluated my conditions and done all they can to help me. There's no quick fix - the fantasy of curing a difficult case is impossible with me, but it doesn't stop some young doctors from trying. My disability isn't one illness, but ten, and often what disables me is the environment around me rather than my actual illness (this is called the social model of disability, and that's where you should start studying).

I'm in a doctor's office to find relief from specific symptoms, or for a new problem (secondary to my existing conditions) that has popped up. Some residents have reviewed my entire medical file, and asked about things that weren't followed up on, and there's only so many times I can say "there's nothing we can do about it". Many premeds, when I mention the medications I'm taking, think that there must be some kind of better medication setup for me. Except there isn't, all of my meds are essential, and at this stage of illness, all medications have nasty side effects. I will never get better and will likely live the rest of my life on immunosuppressants and I'm okay with that, but that's very difficult for able bodied people, esp medical practitioners, to accept.

And in many cases, medical practitioners have put their foot in their mouth by just being ignorant. One person working at a rehab hospital asked if I slept in my orthotics - the answer is no, obviously, orthotics are painful to wear (it's also bad form to ask a disabled person about their disability just because you're curious). Someone told me it'll be okay, they used to wear wrist braces too and they're fine now - in reality, their supervisor just told me to consult surgeons, I was recommended casts, and my wrists remain permanently displaced to this day. I lost most of my ability to write. Our issues were not the same.

On another occasion, a premed picked up my orthotics and moved them away from me without asking - those are expensive (2000$ USD) and irreplaceable, and I need them to walk, I'm vulnerable without them. But to others, they wouldn't be aware that those braces are that valuable. Many disabled people, myself included, view mobility aids as an extension of their own body. For all intents and purposes, my orthotics are my "knees". I often compare it to a phone - it'd be really weird to take someone's phone and move it away from them, or even to touch it unannounced in the first place.

The reality of what a disabled life actually looks like is obscure to the vast majority of able bodied people. Let me be clear, I live a happy and satisfying life, where I enjoy my work and my friends and my family. My existence is not a tragedy, and when it's treated like one, it devalues my hard-won happiness in life and what I have to contribute to the world. But at the same time, every hour of every day is impacted by my disability. I have to change how I cook because I struggle with lifting a pot or standing on my feet for too long, my closet has to be adapted for my orthotics and nerve pain, a number of medications have to be kept basically within ten feet of me at all times, and I have to be very careful anytime I eat something I didn't prepare myself.

You may prescribe a medication which you know can cause nausea, and not realize to your patient, that side effect looks like being sick everyday, skipping meals, wearing a mask so a smell doesn't set you off, and not enjoying eating anymore. You may write a script for the test which is medically the correct option, but your patient may be sensitive to the specifics of the procedure (ie, for religious reasons, it may be difficult to strip down to a gown for some of the more involved imaging procedures). Cystometry and other urological procedures especially. I find this is where doctors sometimes inadvertently do harm. The best option for your patient isn't always the best option medically - it's what fits their priorities and improves their quality of life.

Understand that the current culture in medicine, for doctors, is often very callous and frustrated towards their patients. Recently I heard someone express that their patient needed to just accept their disability already and start being compliant with treatment - they had been disabled for three months. It took me a year to feel even remotely settled with becoming disabled, and my disability isn't nearly as severe as that patient's. Do not follow in your colleagues' footsteps.

If you spend the time trying to understand your patients (which may look like reading disability theory papers, memoirs, watching documentaries, possibly even volunteering, talking to some of your seniors with more experience, etc) then you're already miles better than most of your coworkers. Take the time to consider it from your patients point of view, and even though it's not what's in your textbook, appreciate the value of the information your patient brings to the table (their experience, their concerns, their gut feelings), and you've already done what most disabled people are desperately searching for in a practitioner.

The reality of a minority identity, is that for adults who have become accustomed to something like being disabled, it matters a lot more where your heart is than what you actually say. I don't care if someone is politically correct - I care if they're trying. Even if they're not quite there, that effort will pretty much always be seen and appreciated. I'd far rather someone call me "handicapped" but never view me as lesser, rather than someone who falls over themselves to "accommodate my limitations" and never actually intends to accommodate anything. Be sincere, and you can make mistakes, we'll know what the intention was.

Best of luck, my friend.

[kiok0r0]

"Hey Kioko, how's the new job?"

I now understand why people advocate so strongly for universal healthcare. Insurance is such bullshit. But aside from that. This is a terrible job.

"It's only been two weeks. What's going on?"

Okay.

So I didn't think this through.

More under because the rant's long

This job I'm at is at a clinic. They're open three and a half days each week, it's typically 30 hours per week. I've got no experience or knowledge of medical terminology and medical computer programs. I admitted this in the interview we had. I was way too over the moon when they IMMEDIATELY HIRED ME AFTER ONE INTERVIEW. Why do I know they immediately hired me? They sent me forms that jobs normally send after someone gets hired. That should have been, you know, two red flags. But again, they wanted me to come in for a work interview, so I thought maybe they wanted my paperwork beforehand so I can do the work interview.

No, I literally missed the signs. I mean, I thought it was weird but I sort of thought they were super eager. And then after that work interview, they asked how soon I could start.

"I want to at least do my two weeks at my other jobs." Since, to be honest, while I hated one of the jobs, the managers at both places have been super kind.

"Can you ask if it's possible to leave earlier?" The doctor asks without hesitation.

Also another thing to say, I don't have a lot of work experience. I've been hired on the spot for one of my other jobs and didn't have a job at the time so I didn't really need to do a two week notice. But a two week notice is a courtesy. And again, while I didn't like the job, I really liked the managers. They have been patient and flexible with me and didn't pressure me to do things I couldn't do. So I felt rushed and slightly offended. But I brushed it off. Maybe they just thought I would be a good fit for the position and really wanted me to start soon.

So I started Tuesday. Realized I had to leave to celebrate my brother's graduation this week. Here was what the doctor did when I told him that I would be gone Friday and the first half of next week:

I have essentially did a speed run of the basics of the tasks I'm supposed to do the four days I've been in so far.

It's not even the end of week 2, mind you, and I haven't done a complete week at this place yet. Sure, the doctor's not expecting me to be an expert, but when I am the only one working at the front desk and I have no experience in the medical field or know how to do insurance claims maybe there should be a lot of training.

There is none. I have been taught way too many things in the span of four work days that takes thirty minutes to explain to me. And then it eats away my time because a new thing arises that the doctor didn't teach me.

He's expecting questions from me. I have so many and he's not available at all times. And I don't know how to tackle a lot of things without asking for help. There is no one available all the time. I am floundering. I'm spending way too much time after closing to figure out what to do by myself.

No one is teaching me how to read insurances. No one is teaching me how to explain to patients why their bill is like this. No one is teaching me how to be good on my own. This is the worst job with training. I'm essentially the face of a clinic who's trying to maintain people's health. And I have to learn "along the way"?

I don't know. I feel that when I'm in charge of looking at someone's expenses for their health, I feel there should be someone that should be training me from the moment I get into the office and the moment I leave.

I told myself I'll give this a chance. I wanted to give myself a year, 6 months at the bare minimum. Now I think I'll give it 3 months.

Oh and they told me my position is "office manager" when I had to tell someone what my position at the clonic is other than being just being an office clerk. Which. Was the job title on Indeed.

[deathsbestgirl]

Idk why but I feel like asking you a slightly challenging X-Files question. Why do you think Scully asks to be alone at the end of "Emily"? Would she not want Mulder there to help her through her grief? Is she shutting down? Do you think Emily changed how Mulder saw himself?

literally i think about this every time i watch emily!! this is going to be a long one so under the cut

i think scully asks to be alone for a lot of reasons. she's not easily vulnerable, even with mulder who she trusts more than anyone. she's usually the protector in this relationship (even if he often shields her bodily and goes to great lengths to save her). but this is her daughter, she's barely had time to process emily's existence before she's losing her. scully tells mulder he's right and she doesn't want it to be true but it's also the only thing allowing scully to let emily go, to not keep fighting.

while scully chooses her battles, she never gives up on the people who are important to her. sometimes it really shocks me that she lets emily die, that she doesn't question mulder when he asks the question about a cure for her. but emily pleaded with scully, telling scully her mom said no more tests. she's already been through so much and she couldn't bear to see emily in pain (that air pressure chamber — literally the moment emily showed slight discomfort she tells the man to turn it off, and gets more urgent about it when she sees emily's veins). putting her through more experimental treatments that would mostly just hurt her, she couldn't bear it.

failure is something scully struggles with deeply. and even though she barely had any time with emily, this is a failure to her. she wasn't going to be allowed to adopt emily, and she couldn't even save her. plus the connection to her abduction here is making her even more vulnerable, especially after the harrowing experience of her cancer and being forced to face it. mulder essentially asks the same question after her diagnosis and upon the discovery of emily.

so much happened to scully in these two episodes and it's ending with her daughter's death, which at the moment, she's likely thinking this is her only chance. and it's her profession and lack of serious relationships that was hurting her chance. and then even trying to save emily was making it worse.

i also think she takes mulder's concerns *very* seriously. and it's hard to reconcile all of this with what she knows is right, the only choice to her. it's hard to imagine scully abandoning any child, but a little girl who looks just like melissa as a child? her daughter? unthinkable.

there's something here, too, i think about mulder keeping the information about her ova from her and turning away when the doctor asks if they're the parents. while she absolutely understands and will forgive him, these are not small things. they always tell each other the truth, no matter how hard it is because it's what they both value above most things. and while mulder isn't emily's father biologically or through marriage, i don't think there's any question of what his role would have been. regardless of how mulder & scully classify their relationship.

all this to say, there's a lot at play and it's who scully is. it takes her long time to be voluntarily vulnerable with him. she's always trying to hide her pain & her weakness. she's the strong one. and any time she believes or is vulnerable, when their roles reverse, they are off kilter. they are almost too comfortable in their assigned roles, the parts they play for each other. it takes a long time for them to find the balance in the ways they've changed each other, the space they give each other to be exactly who they are & everything they are (even though it comes slowly because it's scary & uncomfortable and they have to make a new blueprint & roadmap).

(side note, this is another reason i love fight club. after all things, they're clearly so much more comfortable stepping out of their typical role. scully can play paranormal believer and it isn't scary when she sounds like him.)

and just to answer the other two parts: i don't think she's shutting down, and i do think she would want the comfort. but two things: first, i'm not sure scully knows how to accept comfort just yet. she rarely opens up until she's at a point where she can't, even with her mom. second, this is after small potatoes & detour & mulder turning away at being assumed the father...scully understands mulder isn't ready. and now they have some more to work through. season five is actually one of the toughest. it's the season where they're most in limbo — to me, even more than season six. it's just emotional landmine after emotional landmine. so, i think maybe she thinks she can't let him comfort her. she's aware of her feelings & what she wants, and she respects every choice of his so deeply. not even so much because of him, but because there's a new awareness that's difficult for her to navigate.

i might need to you to explain this question about mulder a little more. i think emily is terrifying for him, for many reasons. i don't know if it changes anything for him quickly, but it feels the start of something (as so many endings are).

[spandexual]

Shippy ask: who are your greatest hero/villain rivals to ever do it in a sentai

Insane (eh, only mildly) question: what's your most common "you sort of put my kink in this show but you did it WRONG so I'm just annoyed you came so close now"

Clothing advice: any advice for coordinating stuff in the bodysuit region to look like streetwear because I've seen a few people on the wild in them looking great lately and I would enjoy secretly feeling like a starship captain

I mean have you seen Gekiranger. Have You Guys Seen Gekiranger. I know you specifically have but You, Reading This, Have You Seen Gekiranger? Tiger vs. Lion, literally feral untamed wild child raised by pandas in the forest vs elegant arrogant ambitious little princeling with a simpering girlknight at his side, purity and fury vs corruption and bitterness... You Guys... Jan and Leo (and I'm not calling him fucking Rio he's a LION the same way no one calls Mele the CHAMELEON "Mere" despite that being what dumbshit John Toei wrote in the mook) are the absolute peak of sentai hero/villain ships. Actually I would say the peak of toku hero/villain ships entirely. gaijug is just below and then like thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis far underneath those two is like, uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh actually idk, whatever KR hero/villain ship ppl have convinced themselves is peak ig. KR doesn't do very good hero/villain come to think of it. I guess it's because of all the main/secondary like how every sentai has its red/sixth (and usually red/blue too but I feel like that's not actually as common as ppl make it out to be, I think a lot of it is people just wanting an episode 1 ship)

Honestly, if my kinks show up in shows at all, they're often done perfectly bc people don't think they're sexual so don't have to pretend they're not (eg. The Stig being essentially a moto-drone like WOW) or the entire premise of the show is based around it (... like Super Sentai and Kamen Rider, even though the suits have not been as sexy as I'd like lately) lmao. I did get a bit annoyed at The Orville for giving Isaac (very sexy faceless kind of evil robot) a human appearance and emotions at first but the whole arc was his sexy milf doctor girlfriend going "ehhh actually I like you more when you're a sexy faceless kind of evil robot" which is incredibly based (as is the fact his sexy milf doctor girlfriend is The Sexy Outfit Wearer of the show a la Deanna Troi despite being a canon mother of a teenage boy and visibly middle-aged). ummm but I think all shows should have more crossdressing that isn't for jokes and more femdom or at least FLRs that aren't "bitch wife controls wimp man" coz like ew

Bodysuits are pretty easy to style casually! If you're talking more leotard style that are like a top with a crotch and no legs then a really sexy thing to do is wear low waisted bottoms so the skin on your hips is showing. Kind of like an advanced whaletail lol. Looks best if the bottoms are big baggy jeans/trackies or really slutty tiny pleated/otherwise voluminous miniskirts, I'd stay away from anything tight, small top big bottom energy yk. If you're talking about the full-body tight catsuit type, I think they're always gonna look a bit costumey, but you can still style them. Wearing a cropped/waist-length non-tight jacket over the top always looks super cool, look at 80s Rogue from X-Men! A floor-length coat would look cool too, rather than balancing the silhouette like with the baggy jeans or puffy jacket, it reduces the sex-costumey look by de-dramatising the silhouette by giving it a solid background. There's a lot of ways to play around! Bodysuits are essentially an inner layer the way tshirts and leggings used to be lol so you can honestly do whatever but I think if you want to be stylish you can't go wrong with the balancing act.

[vashtijoy]

I was wondering if it is possible that the surname "Akechi" is actually a pseudonym/alias . . . like, his celebrity name, and not the surname of his mother. I don't think the game ever hints at it but it came to me because Dietman and the Silent Requester uses the alias concept and my brain kinda automatically assumes everything in that mission has some kind of parallel to Akechi himself, and because it would make sense to use a different name (that he chose for himself) from his mother for his Detective Prince image, honestly. Do you think that's possible?

This is a fun one, but for myself, I think it probably isn't that likely. Ditto the idea that Akechi is mukoseki (essentially, unregistered at birth, which would have put him at a very significant disadvantage).

Akechi obviously has a life beside what we see. He's registered in high school and is participating in university entrance, all of which he might struggle to access if he was unregistered; he's presumably registered as "Akechi Goro" and not a second name unknown to us. He's remarkably high-achieving, which tells us that he hasn't just been parachuted into a (probably private, as he makes a big deal of earning his school fees) high school post-Shido; he was likely in a good middle school before that, through his own efforts. He tells us he obsessed about his grades so someone would want him. School will have been a big deal for him—up to a point.

He must have been registered with a doctor at some point, and so on. He will have taken standardised tests in elementary and middle school, and those tests will have needed a name, and have gone on file. By the point of canon, he's taken the national mock exams. By the time he's in high school, people do not know that he's an orphan, that he was an unwanted child, that he never had a father—he's successfully hidden it all. Which is a story in itself, if you ask me; a story which might suggest a successful change of identity—or simply that he got into private school, perhaps on a scholarship, and never told anyone his history. Yusuke mentions that his Kosei scholarship entitles him to a free place in a dorm; I like to think that Akechi, in middle school, may have benefited from something like this.

He also works in multiple fields—he must get paid by someone, even if Shido isn't paying him a yen. So he must have a bank account; he must pay tax on that income—two things Shido might certainly be able to help him with, if he saw fit. But even if Shido gave him the apartment he lives in and a credit card for his day-to-day expenses, there's still a lot going on, that that alias would have to take into account.

Shido is capable of a lot, but Akechi can't ask Shido for help establishing his anti-Shido alias; that would ruin the plot. He could, perhaps, strongarm people's shadows into doing things for him, changing things, forgetting him; we know he interrogates them. We never see him do any of that, but you could easily hypothesise it, and I wouldn't put it past him at all.

But in the days before the Metaverse, Akechi already has a lot of paperwork pointing to him; he's not a ghost, he hasn't fallen between the cracks; he's a boy with a life and a history. He's not somebody who can just start going by a different name—not without it raising questions, and drawing attention. Not without people looking up years later, when he's on TV, and saying "hey, that's <name>".

but mom

It seems to me that Akechi is just going by the same name he's had all along, perhaps because some part of him wants Shido to know who he is, perhaps because it's his mother's name, it's his name, and he doesn't want to cast it aside. But then why doesn't Shido recognise his name, like he recognises his face?

It's often said that Shido just doesn't remember people, but in fact he remembers Joker's name—he remarks on it when he sees the death certificate, though he doesn't know where he's heard it. He is doing the same thing Joker is, when he knows Shido's face, his voice, but can't place them.

My suspicion is that Shido just never knew Akechi's mother's name, and that Akechi knows that was the case, and why it would be the case. I think she was a sex worker all along, and that Shido was one of her clients; that, perhaps with the charm and cleverness her son would later show, she wormed her way into his good graces, as much of a mixed blessing as that would have been.

Akechi does not really say, for instance, that his mother and Shido "had a relationship"; he uses the word aijin, which is much more like a mistress, or plaything. Some boys at Shujin talk about how Shiho is going to be Kamoshida's next aijin after Ann. Shadow Okumura suggests to Cognitive Sugimura that he make Haru his aijin—"just take her as your lover". A couple of women on Harmony Alley laugh about becoming the aijins of politicians so they can be spoiled rotten. And Akechi says that his mother and Shido had an aijin kankei—an aijin relationship; she was his mistress, and when she became pregnant, she was dropped like a hot potato.

Akechi's mother might well have used a name that wasn't her own, for her work. She might well have gone only by a given name. That seems more likely to me than Akechi setting one up for himself.

is it a stagename?

One thing makes it very clear that "Akechi Goro" is not a stagename, even if it is an alias: Akechi is not famous at the start of canon, and so he has no need for a stagename. We watch the Detective Prince develop in realtime. And Sae, who's clearly known him awhile, knows him as Akechi; he hasn't adopted a different name for the screen.

could you do it anyway :|a

Absolutely. Go wild. You don't even have to think about this shit if you don't want to. That said, if I was writing this, I would probably face tweeny Goro with at least a few of these issues.

[giyrut-girlie]

(queer) jews in my phone i need help/love

this is a long ass post im so sorry lmfao, im putting it in under the cut to save you all but also if people have head space pls read <3

on friday night, i found myself the last of the shabbat guests (who weren't staying the night) at the Rabbi's house. i had asked my housemate to pick me up at 10:30, but everyone else left before 10.

the kids and rabbi's wife had gone to bed, so it was me, the Rabbi, and two older frum guys who stay over shabbat most weeks to be closer to shul.

for some context, earlier in the evening one of these guys had asked another dinner guest (a med student who I'm good friends with, she's a year or two younger than me) whether trans issues came up in her study. the two of us youngins made brief "help me" eye contact and she answered saying that yes, they did cover trans issues given that as a doctor she will, at some point or another, treat trans patients. the subject was changed, but the room was a bit tense.

so: 10pm, i'm sitting at the table, a little tipsy from all the wine, just hanging out until my ride comes.

the rabbi says "hey ella, i have a question for you now that everyone else (by which he means the not-so-frum people) is gone." and i Just Knew what he was about to ask.

i won't go into extreme detail about the actual conversation, but to sum it up: I was asked my opinion on trans folk, i said that i am supportive and do in fact believe trans people about their identities and was Shut All The Way Down. if i cited statistics i was told that actually they'd seen the opposite, if i tried to explain a study i was familiar with, i was told that they didn't think that was true. i actually don't know how i stayed calm, bc my mind and body were telling me that i was Unsafe basically the entire time (thanks anxiety disorder really did me a solid there /s).

eventually 10:30 rolled around and i had a get out of jail free to skip the rest of that fuck awful conversation, and my housemate was very nice to listen to my debriefing. while talking to her i came to the realisation that one of the main factors in the disagreement was that the rabbi didn't actually value the wisdom of any cultures/teachings/histories outside of judaism. if I talked about sistergirls of the torres strait, or māhū of hawai'i, that was dismissed essentially as goyische nonsense.

this whole conversation has been a Fucking Downer for my mental health. i actually broke shabbat (beyond my usual one melacha to be in the clear and sneaky housemate taxi service) that night bc my thoughts were racing too much to sleep without putting on some comfort media.

but beyond the mental health stuff (though probably actually very related) i've found myself really struggling with judaism since friday night. having my rabbi, who has been helping me through conversion, and who i have really valued as a teacher, and the only two other frum people in the community be so overtly transphobic all at once has really taken me for a spin. like, my rabbi is a lubavitcher, i knew that he was going to be fairly conservative about some stuff, but he literally told me that he only uses the correct pronouns for one of our community members as a "personal favour", and essentially told me that she was good evidence against trans acceptance bc nothing she could ever do would ever make her not a man (and you better believe this involved a lot of comments about her appearance)

to put the icing on the cake, when i dropped off his kids today (i nanny for them once a week), he handed me a book that upon research is basically the jk rowling talking point bible. he said to me that it was a really good book for me to read and that it might help fight some of the "mob mentality" (interesting term for scientific consensus but okay)

(also i had actually looked up my own citations from the discussion later and found myself to be very much correct in my recitation of statistics, but you better believe i wasn't petty enough to forward them on)

ANYWAY if anyone is still reading i'm fucking bummed and super anxious about interacting with my community, my conversion, finding the balance between really truly wanting to pursue an orthodox lifestyle and also being queer myself etc etc

i live in a really small jewish community and can't really leave until i finish my degree in 2026, so i can't exactly just find a more accepting rabbi or shul.

anyone have any advice, or just some solidarity for feeling shitty in this space? love u jews in my phone xx