Both my parents actually suffer from HORRID emotional dysregulation and are prone to snapping and going into rages. My sister is the same way tbh. I am now realizing this is why they are constantly baffled by the question of whether or not I am mad at them.
I don't have external meltdowns.
I could. I don't let it happen.
I keep my rage on the inside and stay pretty quiet about it. It's just as strong as theirs [physically shaking nose bleed from high blood pressure kind of bad], but like as a kid I saw how terrifying it was to be around [dad breaking dishes, mom putting our lawn chairs into walls] and I just internalized that I wasn't going to wear that anger on the outside.
So my mother genuinely cannot tell if I am just being quiet or if I am silently hearing the dial-up noises of pure rage. This has lead her to both making strong and confident statements like "You are a pacifist who would never hurt a fly U.U" but also acting like I am secretly dangerous maybe... It's because she has never seen me snap.
She knows what her temper is like [throwing chairs through walls], she knows what my father's temper is like [pick up child and toss out door], and she can tell I am being tested, but she doesn't know what happens when I snap or where that breaking point is.
Her -perhaps unhinged- solution to this, my whole life, has been to do things that should obviously enrage me or shut me down completely, like ignoring important boundaries, repeatedly, punishing me for expressing emotions or needs at all, etc... And then to constantly ask me if I am angry with her when I get too quiet [right after near directly telling me to shut up].
It has occurred to me now, they have never once seen me lose my temper, so they literally just can't tell if I am angry at them. My sister is easy, my mother fights and screams with my sister constantly, my mother understands this. My mother doesn't have any grasp of feelings or boundaries that are not screamed at her [apparently, and I fear my sister is the same way]. Her and my sister are close despite constant fucking fighting because they understand each other.
They are trying to get me to engage the same way and it is not working. I realize now that this has been hard for them.
I was so successfully taught to suppress my emotions, by being punished for any outburst, that rage quiet looks the same as any other kind of quiet from the outside. To them anyway.
I did tell her. For the record. I used my words. I did tell her very calmly that my response to rage, in order to avoid doing the things that terrified me as a child, was to simply leave [the autistic urge to GTFO]. When a situation or person causes too much of the dial-up rage noise, I simply extract myself from that situation, up to and including never speaking to a person again. I explained this calmly. I explained it calmly 100 times and I explained that I explain myself calmly as my rage response 1-5 [also pretty much every other negative emotion tbh], and I told her that what came next was me simply opting out and fucking off. I told her this. I couldn't understand why she never took me seriously, or why she never fucking understood.
I couldn't understand what made her like this.
But it's the same problem I have with everyone else multiplied by a factor of 10.
If I am explaining myself calmly, they can't understand that it's actually serious or that I am actually upset. ESPECIALLY because they read me as "female" and women "aren't that rational" so if I am not screaming and crying about something, which I never do, people assume I can't be upset and it isn't serious.
And then after having my boundaries ignored too many times despite having calmly explained how and why it's a problem [shaking inside or not]... I leave. I leave and everyone gets upset like this is unexpected behaviour, even though I told them 50 times that is how I would respond if they kept doing *the thing.*
And for neurotypical people especially, they are expecting there to be a disconnect between what someone says they need or feel and what their actually boundaries and feelings are, and they expect the latter to be demonstrated with emotions. Telling them bluntly you do not function that way somehow never helps?
My mother isn't just looking for normal yelling or a few tears to know I am serious, whether or not I do those either [I don't], she's looking for an explosion to know there's a problem at all.
Fucked if I know how she proceeds through life this way in general or if this is just her expectation of her own kids???
And I couldn't get why my mother couldn't read my emotions and didn't seem to think I have any. It's because she's testing for the rage limit to see where my 'actual' limit is instead of taking my word for it. Never the fuck mind that she could simply *not* test at my boundaries instead of letting me have them. Separate issue.
I couldn't figure out what made her *like this*
She's expecting me to throw a giant meltdown violent tantrum at people when I have 'actually' had enough. Maybe she got away with those being like 5'4" in another time, but I am the size of the average man, I do not get to have giant screaming rages, whether or not people perceive me consciously as a woman, and least of all because a lot of people -at least unconsciously- read me as 'masculine' or at least always "they guy" of the situation compared to all other women and some men [bigger stronger and more rational, more able to just absorb the damage and let it go so the less rational screaming/crying one doesn't have to be dealt with]. Even if it was in me to be willing to terrify people [usually never], there are such limited instances where it wouldn't just blow back on me. Potentially very dangerously.
I am going to be the quiet calm one. You are going to have to let me use my words, bitch.
So she kept ignoring my boundaries until I had to cut her out of my life, and she probably doesn't understand and probably thinks it feels sudden -after 36 long years of bullshit- abrupt and unfair.
But I told her hundreds of times.
I probably should have just screamed at her.
22 notes
·
View notes
Tease Tidbit Tuesday ✨
Both my mind and body have been through the wringer these past few days, so I’m off to see my doctor soon but not before I drop a little more of the insomnia fic ☀️
(Prev snippet here)
Finally able to speak his mind, Eddie stares at his drink for a few seconds before he lifts his eyes, turning his attention to Bobby. “I was wondering if I could take on a few more shifts, keep busy, you know?” He questions and immediately feels Buck’s worried eyes boring into the side of his face. He ignores it, keeping his focus directed at Bobby.
Bobby pushes his glass aside and folds his hands on top of the table, leaning forward to minimize the distance between him and Eddie.
I know that look.
“Eddie, you’re already doing more than your fair share. You need to take care of yourself too, of Christopher” Bobby says determinedly as he tries to read the emotions of the man sitting across from him. He’s visibly fatigued, dark circles slowly forming under his eyes, his hair slightly unruly and his lips chapped.
Eddie straightens his back, gripping onto the side of his glass a little harder, not allowing the numbness of his fingertips take control. “I know but… It keeps my mind off things. Being busy helps” He counters, irritability rising in his body.
I need to work.
I just need to work and it’ll get better.
I’m not sleeping, so why not work?
Then maybe I won’t have a chance to relive that moment every time I close my eyes, then maybe I won’t have a chance to feel like I’m suffocating, to feel like the darkness resides within me, Eddie thinks, trying to argue with himself.
Tagged by my lovelies @daffi-990 and @tizniz 💋
Tagging!! @watchyourbuck @cal-daisies-and-briars @vampbuckley @honestlydarkprincess @giddyupbuck @spotsandsocks @hippolotamus @wikiangela @wildlife4life @thewolvesof1998 @theotherbuckley @disasterbuckdiaz @butraura @jeeyuns @fionaswhvre @devirnis @diazsdimples @steadfastsaturnsrings @poughkeepsies @athenagranted @weewootruck @lover-of-mine @jesuisici33 🩵🦋
Tagged for reader: @coatedpanda16 ✨
50 notes
·
View notes
You cannot imagine how giddy I get when I see you've posted a nice long thesis on the riders. And the timezones work as such that I see it during breakfast and it MAKES MY ENTIRE DAY. The content just keeps tumbling around in my brain the whole day. Thank you!!!💛💛💛
this is so incredibly kind that I really don't know what to say... so I'm going to fire off a random undercooked take that is very very far away from thesis territory. featuring the 2015 season
in 2022, jorge gave one of his own regularly scheduled takes on the 2015 season. he offered up a bit of an unusual opinion by focusing on the argentina clash that year - which he that "crucial" in the collapse of the marc/valentino relationship:
(god, can you imagine having a workplace falling out so bad that seven years later it's still an active topic of speculation what exactly the precipitating event was, and several of your coworkers enjoy regularly weighing in with their thoughts? like man they'll never be allowed to rest)
I find this really interesting coming from jorge. one of the fun things about that season is the degree of genuine ambiguity that exists about all of the major on-track flashpoints. was one of valentino or marc responsible for the argentina crash? was the cutting of the chicane at assen premeditated by valentino? and, of course, did valentino really kick marc at sepang? that being said... the argentina one has always been the one where it just seemed... unfortunate timing, shit happens. it's more on marc, he made a misjudgement and also just took a bit too much risk in the context of the title fight, but complete racing incident. that's the reason why this is a slightly odd take from jorge. it's the one incident nobody really has pinned on valentino, certainly not the commentators or the commentariat or otherwise or anyone
to be clear - this post isn't about figuring out what 'really happened' at argentina 2015, it's more about... well, how it was perceived at the time, and what that tells us. but, just to quickly get this out of the way: from the outside (and with the obvious caveat of 'what do I know'), it's a little tricky to see how you'd solely blame valentino for the collision. valentino is by this point clearly ahead of marc, he's literally just been bumped into by marc so may also not have been 100% in control of the bike, and he's taking a regular line into the next turn... when marc essentially rides so closely to him that valentino turning the bike takes out marc's front wheel. even if vale's deliberately trying to ride defensively against marc, he's perfectly entitled to do so. I know jorge doesn't actually specify valentino crashed marc out deliberately, but given the specific situation, I feel like that's what you're implying when you're saying he's "responsible". you're suggesting valentino knew where marc was and essentially purposefully moved the bike across to wipe out marc's front wheel and... look. I suppose it's possible, though valentino's also allowed to some extent to deliberately make the life of the guy behind him harder. more likely, this is just what happens when two hard racers race each other and insist on practically sitting on each other's bikes when they're on track together - sometimes it'll go wrong. except, of course, that won't stop controversy from breaking out... especially not when it's these two. here, from one of the write ups of the race, is a description of the two of them I've always been fond of:
which is very them, yes. same type of guy, slightly different flavour, both with carefully cultivated reputations. but look, the main takeaway is this: we don't know their actual intentions. I don't know if valentino deliberately made contact with marc. let's be honest, marc doesn't know if valentino deliberately made contact. only valentino knows that. jorge lorenzo certainly doesn't know that. so why is this the incident he brought up?
in part, I'm curious how jorge even got that impression that marc was mad, and also why he thinks valentino was to blame. the latter, okay, jorge isn't naturally inclined to be generous towards valentino's particular style of racing, not least because he's fallen foul of it a fair few times over the years (though I'd say valentino on occasion was rather less subtle than that against jorge lol). but why is this the thing jorge brings up? I mean, you'd think he'd point to assen as the turning point, given he was literally sitting in that extremely awkward post-race presser and clearly very much enjoyed the whole thing. does he know marc was mad at valentino for argentina? that marc "didn't like it"? was this some kind of paddock rumour at the time? would there have been any basis for that rumour?
so, marc himself was quick to publicly deny that he was angry at valentino, something he reiterated at the next race in jerez. immediately post-race, he said the following:
and the official statement:
it's still far from the snarky digs of the post-assen presser, but to me this is a little open to interpretation. I always find 'learn' a very interesting verb. casey over the years was particularly keen on using that word, typically in relation to valentino, to the point where when you see that his tweet commemorating valentino's retirement includes the phrase "I learnt a lot from you".... well, that can be read in lots of ways, not all of them positive. it kind of depends on what you're learning, right? when casey uses it, the implication is basically that valentino was an asshole and casey had to learn to play his games and be more selfish fighting vale. marc uses the word four times in the interview, plus again in the statement. valentino has a certain reputation, a reputation marc is of course more than aware of. he is known for... not being a cheat, necessarily, but being a little underhanded in his tactics, a little devious. yes, valentino did a good job in managing the race, but also in the "melee". "you learn different things and different strategies". what kind of different strategies, marc? are we sure he's talking about tyre preservation here?
(speaking of tyre preservation, one of the reasons why marc was probably feeling particularly disinclined to let valentino go without a fight was the fuckery with the tyre choices. long story short, tyre choice was a big talking point due to the extreme wear they'd had the year before and the extra compound bridgestone had developed. marc made a bit of a show of faffing about with a late switch that he kept concealed until basically the last moment, presumably to fuck with his competitors who were tensely waiting to see what he'd pick. valentino, who had opted for the hardest option, said after the race that he'd ignored what marc was doing because he knew there was only one choice for the yamaha anyway. so in the end it didn't really work to unsettled his key rival and also... well, I mean, marc was two laps away from the tyre choice working in the race, but not quite! just couldn't build up the lead he needed to prevent valentino from reeling him in)
also, "in the end you can see perfectly what happens" is not technically the same thing as saying valentino was not to blame for the incident. it's a phrasing that shies carefully away from actually giving marc's own take on the incident. basically telling the viewer to draw their own conclusions from what they've seen on tv - even though of course marc does make clear he sees it as a racing incident. it's the kind of vague statement that marc has occasionally popped out over the years, at times perhaps implying more than outright stating he has a problem with a certain incident, which does make you maybe raise an eyebrow or two at how he words it here. it's just... listen, it could be 100% innocent and the whole thing isn't flirting with disaster as much as assen is, far from it, but it's the kind of thing where with 20/20 hindsight you do kinda go. hm.
there is a little more evidence that marc was indeed mad at valentino for what happened at argentina... if valentino is to believed and marc's manager told him so directly after sepang:
(why, if you are marc marquez's manager, do you go to valentino rossi after sepang 2015 to tell valentino you think marc was angry at him for losing him the title. why would you do this. what are you trying to accomplish here)
do I believe this conversation happened? yeah, kinda, because it feels like an odd and very specific thing to make up. that's just a gut feeling thing - I have zero evidence either way obviously. I think at most it's plausible valentino misinterpreted what alzamora was saying. of course, the words "as much" do set off an alarm bell or two, maybe suggesting alzamora didn't directly tell him the bits about argentina and assen. but, y'know, it's also entirely possible marc did think valentino had deliberately taken him out in argentina, especially in the heat of the moment - and his team would very much have been aware of his feelings on the matter. not fun to crash out of the penultimate lap. not when clashing with the championship leader, who is also your hero and who you've generally gotten the better of... not easy not easy
anyway, again, this is definitely a bit of an undercooked take, but it's always nice to get a little bit of insight into what the paddock vibes were at the time. if there are many people - and if there were many people back then - who think that valentino had deliberately taken out marc, that he should have apologised to marc, that marc was mad at valentino.... if it got back to valentino through alzamora, did he hear it from other people too? to what extent was this kind of thing common wisdom within the paddock, or are these takes literally nobody but jorge believes in? we don't know, but it's interesting! argentina is kinda the unloved child of 2015 divorce incidents. partly because it does look so innocuous, partly because it's harder to ascribe ill intent, partly because the two parties are far more pleasant to each other in the aftermath. that's why jorge coming back to this specific incident has stuck with me... in all honesty, I don't really trust jorge to be a particularly good judge of marc and valentino's interpersonal chemistry at any given moment in time, but did he see the cracks beginning to emerge so early in the season? to what extent did argentina already make things visibly less comfortable between the pair of them? why does jorge think marc wanted an apology?
if marc really was particularly angry, then it does go to show how quickly he flipped the switch himself when it came to valentino, swiftly reappraising him as a serious rival who should be treated as such. also, let's put aside a minute what valentino's actual intentions were... it's revealing if marc did think valentino was deliberately fucking him over here. (which, given he's repeatedly using the word "learn" - if he does think valentino's responsible as jorge suggests, then he also doesn't think it was just an innocent lil mistake. you don't 'learn' from your hero making an error, you learn from them riding in a way that wins them the race by crashing you out.) like, y'know how in this post I was saying marc obviously was perfectly aware of valentino's past history, including the feuding and controversy of it all? I mean, if you want proof of how aware he was, look at assen 2015! he's clearly immediately suspicious of valentino and his motives... because he knows what valentino's like, because he knows that 'planning to exploit a grey area in the rules by deliberately allowing marc to make contact before cutting the chicane' is absolutely the kind of sneaky shit valentino is renowned for. what if marc does share jorge's belief that valentino is responsible for the argentina crash? if marc thinks valentino did so deliberately, then that tells you something about how marc sees valentino, no?
obviously they both massively over-correct when they arrive at jerez, which is how we get 'in bed remains the same' and lingering hugs feat. hip-stroking in parc fermé, all that stuff. if it did plant a little seed of suspicion, a little seed of doubt, then that maybe helps explain why they were focused on each other more than they were on the guy who won the next four races - even when it became increasingly clear jorge was the championship favourite. which is what it comes back to for me - the fact that such a seemingly innocuous incident was allowed to blossom into so much more shows there was already something there between the pair of them. the championship might be one thing... but somehow, if given half a chance, they were always going to see each other as their number one rival
14 notes
·
View notes