#i think i'm frustrated with my department (and i have valid reasons) but also i'm frustrated with myself and feel like i am doing bad work

[kaladinstormsblessed]

every day i get closer to dropping out of grad school

[katebeckets]

the tortured poets department

i have thoughts!! surprising, right?? this is for anyone who cares to read them ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Before you read, note that this is going to be critical of things, so let me just start by saying I have loved and listened to Taylor since I was 8, so none of it is said lightly or without careful thought (in fact, this took me absurdly long to write). Most of the issues I have are very near to my heart, actually, so I've spent a lot of time thinking about it. If you don't want to read criticism, then just don't read more. DISCLAIMER that I did my best, but not even this fully captures the nuance I feel able my own opinions lol I recognize the other sides and points, I really do. I hold many conflicting opinions.

The short version is I will always love her music and her voice and she is capable of writing absolutely gorgeous lyrics (dare I say poetry?). I don't tend to think too much about the sound of it because if I like the sound, it's all I really care about—maybe it sounds the same as other stuff, but if I like that other stuff, I don't really care about whether she branches out or not. I think it's great and interesting when she (or anyone) does, but I also don't like change so it doesn't matter to me the way I know it matters to some people. That's just me!

What gets more complicated for me is the narrative, themes, and general trends that have been more prominent the last year or so, and that's what the rest of my thoughts are. It's me enjoying the music while also being acutely aware of all the grief tangled up in it because of how much less connected I feel in many ways.

Side note: this got soooo much longer than even I expected and it still just scratches the surface! so if you decide to read, 1. thank you, and 2. I'd love to keep talking to you. 🤍

———————————————————— 💭

I am an overthinker (shocking!) and will for sure be annoyed that I can't think of each and every thing I think about this album, but this is what comes to mind right now. Some things that have stood out to me more and more with each release:

a tendency to write self-aware lyrics that, in trying to be self-aware, betray somewhat of a lack of self-awareness

a frustration with never growing up that she expresses while also not realizing the way she is complicit in that and her own refusal to grow up

considering herself the victim, particularly after "overcoming" the accusations that she always plays the victim

venturing more boldly into the territory of serious mental illness/suicidal ideation/mental health treatment despite demonstrating a fair amount of ignorance regarding those things in the past

fame going to her head (in the sense of her becoming further and further out of touch) and the entitlement in a lot of the more immature attitudes that come across in these songs

self-awareness: for me, the first example that comes to mind is Anti-Hero: "it's me, hi, I'm the problem, it's me." It's a claim at self-awareness because she's poking fun at the fact that she knows people always say "maybe she's the problem." The reason why it feels to me like it exposes a lack of self-awareness is because she explores it mostly as a criticism to overcome and not a valid point of self-reflection. @jakeperalta's tags on her post explain it better than I do. Yes, there's an issue when you reduce every feeling to "well maybe she's the problem," but part of growth is admitting that maybe you are part of the problem and coming to terms with the fact that there is often some inevitable truth to that statement—and being willing to work on it. This example is from Midnights, but I think it ties into the next point.

immaturity/never growing up: I actually think these first two sections are just two parts of one section, but it's easier to read this way anyway. There are lots of references to not growing up on this album, the first that come to mind being "So High School" and "teenage petulance." Maybe it's just me, but as a 34-year-old woman, I wouldn't want to be feeling "so high school." I mean, as a 25-year-old, when I talk about feeling like my high school self, it's usually because I'm recognizing how limited my judgment and self-awareness was in high school (despite all the therapy and my efforts to be self-aware in high school). And I am aware of my own bias here—I absolutely hate the football game days because I didn't even like watching people act like that in high school, but at least they were high schoolers—but I do think part of what we've seen is Travis allowing her to be more immature and take less responsibility because that's also where he is at. Obviously I don’t speak to it with any authority since I don't know what happened in the relationship, but based on her behaviors and what I know about Joe (which is VERY little), I kind of get the feeling that part of what she didn't like about being with Joe is that he pushed her to grow. "Your integrity makes me seem small," etc. etc., but not in an “I want to grow” way, but not liking that feeling because she shouldn't have to feel small just because she wants to be able to only do what makes her happy. Just looking at the difference in her behavior and the fact that it seems like she's stopped trying to learn (Miss Americana-ish), it seems like she very much resents the responsibility that comes with being such a famous person and mainly considers herself a victim of her fame.

victimhood: to an extent, yes, she is a victim of her fame. No one should have that much fame and power, and of course she didn't sign up for it in this way. But wanting to have the kind of influence and reach that most artists desire is intertwined with fame. There isn't a way to separate it (in an ideal world, maybe, but that isn't what we're dealing with) and it's something that, to some degree, artists do sign up for. And I think she resents that she's expected to take any sort of responsibility for anything that she doesn't want to do, in a very, "but that's not fair!," teenage petulance kind of way. She even says in Sweet Nothing that "I'm just too soft for all of it." We're all too soft for all of it, but that doesn't mean we get to ignore it. It bothers me that she doesn't seem to feel any sort of responsibility to use this giant platform to do better. Everyone is aware of her influence, including her. I think that's part of the grief. No, it is not her job to use her platform for good, but I thought that it was something she valued and something she wanted. The other line that really stuck out to me was from Cassandra: "They say what doesn't kill you makes you aware, what happens if it becomes who you are?" You may be a victim of what doesn't kill you, but if it becomes who you are, that's not their fault. It reminds me a bit of the exhaustion of living with mental illness. For me in particular, it affects my relationships in a very fundamental way, and there are days that I sob because I am exhausted of things that are so normal being so, so difficult for me... but even though I didn't ask for it and it's not fair that this happened to me, it's still my responsibility to understand how my issues affect how I show up in relationships. It's still my problem, even though it isn't my fault that it's my problem. And if you're lucky, you find really beautiful people who are willing to help you and see that it's not their responsibility, but they want to make it easier for you—I recognize how lucky I am to have some people like that, but it never makes it anyone else's problem. If they decide one day it's not their problem, the truth is that it isn't (and then there's a more complex conversation about what you want to do to preserve a relationship). This is also very connected to something about Kate Beckett/why I identify with that character, and I can touch on that if anyone wants to know, but I don't really have cohesive thoughts about that prepared (it makes more sense if you already know the character). This also goes to other things, like her being upset that people always focus on who songs are about while ignoring the part she played in feeding that culture (like with secret messages).

mental health: this goes to a bigger discussion of how we turn to celebrities who are HIGHLY unqualified to have opinions on things for guidance (the nuance of the above discussion about using your platform), but the more she ventures into the discussion of mental illness, the more upset I get by some remarks she has made in the past. And yes, people grow, she may not feel this way anymore, but nothing in her behavior gives me any reason to believe that she doesn't still have this attitude. This is one that I know I have to be careful of because of how personal it is for me (I've been placed on a 5150 "danger to self" hold and I am a therapist), but one interview that has always made me so upset is that one where she talks about how she's never been to therapy, then ends it by saying "I feel like we just had a therapy session." She has said multiple times how she has never wanted to go to therapy when she has her mom, who already knows everything about her. And that is highly irritating to me because 1. that's why she's your MOM, not your THERAPIST, and 2. there's already so much stigma and apprehension around therapy and many people feel this way, so to have someone like Taylor Swift validate all the people who say "I'd rather talk to someone who already knows me" or "so and so is my therapist" is unbelievably frustrating. There's a reason it's unethical to treat people you know—that isn't therapy. And I think I wouldn't be so bothered by it if she didn't speak about it with such authority, like she knows what she's talking about when what she's saying shows that she doesn't (edit: this is specifically in regard to therapy, not mental illness. I am highly aware that anyone can be mentally ill). The other thing about this album is that it does seem to be an album about loving people with mental illness, and I've already seen a lot of interpretations that simply feed the narrative that people with mental illness are unlovable and mental illness is the reason people mistreat you (particularly the discussion about her lovers being blue all the time). And the issue with that is it's already a common misconception among people with mental illness, that their mental illness is an excuse or reason why they don't treat people right. It's disrespectful to the people who recognize that they have a mental illness that affects how they interact with others and choose to try to overcome it. I'm all for honest discussions about mental illness, but it's so disheartening when it happens on such a large scale and some of the loudest voices are people who don't know enough to know how to (at least try to) do no harm.

fame: I'm not really going to go into it because this has already turned out way longer than I meant for it to, but also because I feel like it's already been touched on. For me, it's the conversation about her feeling she should be able to just do what she wants. I think we all feel that way, but because of her fame and the fact that she's just about untouchable (as shown in how she came back from being cancelled), she can just tune everyone out. But one example was how uneasy I felt about this album being announced at the grammys. For one thing, it's not a fan-voted award, so even if it should, it doesn't feel the same. And regardless of your take on award shows, I do think it showed a level of insensitivity to the other artists who haven't won a bunch of grammys to decide that she would announce a new album at the grammys. Because even if she had a backup plan and said she didn't plan on it, the truth is that, to decide to have a backup plan, you did have to count on it happening, at least to an extent. You had to feel it was likely enough that you wanted to have a back up plan just in case, but it probably would go the way you wanted. To me, it just felt so... disrespectful. Because for many other artists, it doesn't happen more than once. (not to mention the many other things happening that got completely overshadowed, like Annie Lennox calling for a ceasefire)

So if you read all that... I don't even know what the point is at this point. These are just thoughts that, to me, don't feel right to simply ignore. I know there's an argument that you can enjoy music without enjoying where it came from, and it's true to an extent, but I also think part of the music is where it comes from. So... I don't know. Do with that what you will. And if you are reading this, I love you (I can't believe you're reading this).

[justanothersyscourse]

I don’t really want a diagnosis because I physically can’t have children and I want to be able to adopt in the future. I’m also trans + autistic so I’ve already got some stuff working against me in that department.

I haven’t brought up being a system to my therapist because I’m afraid she won’t believe me, and it’s mainly the trauma symptoms causing problems and not the presence of alters. (Also I don’t think she has a lot of experience with dissociative disorders?)

I guess I just . . . want to know if this is ok? If I should talk to her about it or just try to forget about it all and try to ignore that I’m probably a system? Idk I’m afraid to open up about it and then be told that I’m just making it up or something. I’m open to the possibility that I’m not actually a system and I have something Else going on, but we’ve already ruled out BPD so idk what else it would be. Like, if there was something else happening that made sense I’d accept it, but I’m afraid it’ll just be completely dismissed and I’ll be even more confused.

Idk srry I felt like I needed to get this off my chest and ask someone who has more experience with all this about if it’s ok to be where I’m at or if I should do something different.

A is for placeholder

B is for my infinite frustration

C is for FCK U TUMBLR, STOP CUTTING OFF MY FIRST TWO LINES

Hi, Anon!

There's a lot happening in this ask, so let's take it point by point.

It's absolutely, perfectly fine to not want a diagnosis. Period. Full stop. There are MANY reasons someone might not want one, and they're all valid-- EXCEPT FOR ABLEISM. Not wanting a diagnosis because "ew, gross", is bad. Just based on the last handful of posts I've made today, I just want to say, so long as you realize you CAN have one, do whatever works for you. Don't think you won't get it, and on the opposite end, don't think you NEED one.

Self DX is also super valid when it's well researched, and the person self-diagnosing is open to change when presented with new information or new perspectives (which it sounds like you are, so A+ for you, gold star). If you feel it fits your experiences, have at it, you're welcome here.

Another big thing that's misunderstood about the dyfunction criteria is that it doesn't need to be the alters causing you problems. Like, AT ALL. It can be the PTSD, the amnesia, the comorbid issues, the identity confusion-- ANYTHING. The DSM doesn't mention AT ALL that the alters specifically cause dysfunction. Instead, it talks about trauma memories, embarrassment over symptoms, anxiety from trying to hide symptoms. It can literally. Be. Anything.

On a plus note, if you are actually only experiencing issues with trauma memories, then you don't necessarily need a therapist that's specialized in anything other than PTSD. I've said this before, when you're looking for a therapist, look for one who specializes in the problem you're CURRENTLY having. Might it be helpful to bring up your system to your therapist? Definitely, if your system isn't integrated and still experiencing amnesia, your alters won't all benefit from the therapy sessions. In that case, it might be helpful to mention it. If that's not an issue, or the issue is with YOU specifically, then you don't necessarily need to tell your therapist if you're not comfortable doing so.

Don't "ignore" that you're a system, just be mindful of to who and when you want to present that information. Here's an example-- I moved cities a few years ago and never took my file with me. That means my current GP doesn't know I'm a system. I also don't plan to tell him unless I need to make any major changes to my medication. I go to him when I'm hurt or sick, not for mental stuff, so he doesn't need to know. That's okay. My system doesn't necessarily affect my broken leg. My meds, on the other hand, may have a negative effect on my system that he might need to be aware about. I don't know, I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. And that's a decision I made about that doctor specifically. I might, for WHATEVER reason, choose to tell my... I don't know... gynecologist about my system. You tell who you want, when you want.

I can't tell you whether you should tell your therapist or not. I CAN tell you that the decision, either way, is perfectly valid and good, so long as it's YOUR decision (no one is forcing you one way or the other), and the results are working for you.

I highly doubt your therapist is going to dismiss you, as well. And if they do? Fire them. Get another one. Get a second opinion, and a third opinion, until it makes sense to you. If they can say, "maybe it might be this, have you considered this disorder? Here's some reasons," and those reasons make sense to you? Great. If not, keep looking.

I hope this helps. You're doing just fine.

[thefloatingstone]

@noirandchocolate

Yeah I remember reading the post and thinking 'this sounds like it MIGHT be an adhd thing' but I didn't want to say that bc I didn't want to come of patronizing like 'oh hun your feelings are just your neurodivergence acting up.' Nevertheless even if it IS 'caused by' adhd that doesn't make the feeling less 'valid' or less shitty to feel!

Yeah XD; probably if you had said that right there and then, because I was angy, I probably would have just been grumpy about that being pointed out because for whatever reason I have this weird complex about "not getting listened to" which I'm pretty sure is thanks to growing up in the school system. (it also left me with the belief that nobody ever listens to ANYTHING I say and nobody puts any value into my words) so at that very second it probably would have just annoyed me.... but you right tho XDDD and honestly, Now that I'm not angry, it actually does make me feel a LOT better to have other people with ADHD go "oh I recognise that one. Yeah that sucks bro." especially since, despite the tone of the post, I really was talking about it to hear if this is what everyone feels and they're just not talking about it or not.

....so the typical ADHD experience. "Everyone probably feels this way and they just don't mention it."

btw I get this too though probably about different subject matter. For example I have to hold back from correcting people about legal topics when they're 'just making a joke' or even when they're outright spreading misinformation, bc I know no one in the 100k notes is going to notice and it's a waste of my time. And then I feel agitated for hours especially if the post goes by on my dash AGAIN.

Ah yeah yeah yeah.

My big triggers are misinformation just... in GENERAL really makes me angry. (Did you guys hear fucking Rubber Ross on yt tell his 300k followers that Herge "drew N*zi Propaganda because he was German" when Herge was BELGIAN AND HAD HIS COUNTRY OCCUPIED DURING THE WAR AND WAS PROBABLY TAKEN PRISONER TO DRAW PROPAGANDA ROSS O'DONOVAN WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU?????)

Another big thing that sets me off a LOT is when you see teenagers (almost always from the US) going on about how Communism is the bees knees just because they hate capitalism and you can just fucking tell they've never opened a single history book in their entire lives and lemme tell ya, the friends I have who actually live in the Eastern Block HAVE SOME DISAGREEMENT WITH THAT STATEMENT But as you say. What the fuck is the point yelling in a 100k notes post because all you're gonna get is a bunch of 16 year olds calling a "bootlicker" or sending you spicy memes of that stock image of that dude deep throating a doc martin and all manner of "wow you're a terrible person sweaty (:" in your inbox and it's honestly not fucking worth the longlasting consequences.

(Law stuff isn't the only thing that's just the most noncontroversial topic I could mention as an example, lol. But anyway I do get this feeling like 'ò_ó Now I'm mad but I can't do anything about it, UGH!!!' when I hold back from shouting at strangers on the internet about various things. Feels like being a frustrated, angry tiger pacing in a shitty zoo cage.)

A frustrated angry tiger pacing in a shitty zoo cage is 100% the feeling. And it can last for HOURS. as in PLURAL HOURS. And it sucks ass, man. (I was yelling at my therapist about Ross O'Donovan's showing his ass at his 300k subscribers which is probably the angriest he's seen me but forgive me if some popular asshole accuses a war victim of being a n*zi makes me just a little bit annoyed)

But honestly it IS, as always, a good feeling to have someone else go "it's ok. It's not just you. I know how that feels." even if it can't be right that very moment where I'm still being like

(Also as an aside please if you didn't have a very good history department in high school, I am BEGGING you to make some time to read up on your recent world history, people)

[ukftm]

**URGENT** Hi. I'm sorry to be a pain but could you provide links to sources that say an unenrolled deed poll is just as valid and legal as an enrolled one, cause my mum doesn't believe me and wants sources. Thank you :)

The name change guide on uktrans.info has lots of information that will likely be of use. 

The deedpolloffice website specifies that an enrolment process is completely optional.

There is also helpful information on the freedeedpoll website.

It’s worth noting, re: the deedpolloffice website and others like it, that it’s no more or less legal than creating a free deed poll using the same guidance. See the disclaimer on their website, and this Guardian article (which is generally quite interesting, but the quote below might be particularly useful):

“...One of the key reasons so many people fail to realise they have a basic legal right to change their name for free is the lack of an official, one-stop government-backed free advisory service.

Although the form you can download from the Ministry of Justice is all you legally need to present to banks and other official institutions in order to change your name, there is nothing on any government website that makes this clear. There is also widespread confusion in local and central government departments and agencies about what constitutes an "official" deed poll.

A DVLA officer we spoke to was unable to explain what constituted an acceptable deed poll if you wanted to change the name on your driving licence, but kept repeating the "original certificate" must be sent. Similarly, Nationwide building society initially told Money it would reject deed polls which didn't bear "the official seal", but was unable to explain why.”

Basically - this is one of those situations where ‘rules’ made up by individual companies as to what they’ll accept can be fairly arbitrary or based on inaccurate information. It’s frustrating, because the gov.uk website implies that organisations are within their rights to ask for an enrolled deed poll (so you might want to omit sharing that link with your mum). However, if someone insists on seeing an enrolled deed poll before they will change their name, they’re asking for more evidence about your change of name than is needed by UK law. 

Indeed, in the case of trans people I think there’s probably an argument that requiring an enrolled deed poll could violate data protection laws and the Gender Recognition Act. Enrolling a deed poll basically means publishing your current and former name, in effect making your name change a matter of public record that can be looked up by anyone. Information on a name change related to a gender change constitutes sensitive personal information, and unfortunately I don’t think there’s specific legal guidance on this, but we can probably dredge up some relevant information on data protection and  the GRA that should scare anyone who is insistent that your deed poll needs to be enrolled.

I hope this helps - but if you have further issues with your mum, rather than letting her worry you into expending energy on providing proof (which is difficult to do, as I’ve said above), I would suggest asking her why she doesn’t believe you, and what she thinks would go wrong if you tried to change your name without an enrolled deed poll. After all, you can create these documents for free, so even if an organisation didn’t want to accept that document (which honestly, they have no legal right to do), you haven’t lost anything by trying with a free option first

~ James