#is a lot more prevalent among that class

[j-esbian]

so so so fucking tired of people who perceive working in an office as the only “”real”” jobs

[chaos-in-one]

So tired of the "the existence of DID is highly debated in the psych field!" argument because every fucking time it is completely misconstruing what is actually going on

Like, yes, it is highly debated... by people who don't know what the fuck they're talking about when it comes to DID. Because having a *general* psychology degree does not make you an expert on a very specific and uncommon disorder. General psych courses barely go into the topic of the disorder because they're there to teach students the general idea of how to handle disorders as a whole and the general idea of how a human brain works. They usually don't go very far into the less common mental health issues & disorders because that would take more time than they have to teach in those classes and a lot of psych students do not plan to go into treatment for those specific disorders.

That is why specialists exist. And guess what? The idea that DID "may not really exist"? Not at all as prevalent among actual fucking specialists for DID. Because they actually deeply researched the specific disorder and where trained on how it works, the symptoms, and how to handle it.

Not to mention there are literal brain scans that have already proven that DID has a noticeable physical effect on your brain.

"It's highly debated if it exists" Does not mean SHIT when the debate is among psychologists who have next to no training in the disorder and the actual specialists are mostly agreeing it does in fact exists. Maybe try listening to specialists on disorders for information on it instead of just any psychologist ever.

[themousefromfantasyland]

A Fairy Tale Rabbit Hole

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is the movie that it started it all for Disney Animation and it's the most influential fairy tale movie ever. Its tropes and its tone still inspires fairy tale media to this day, either as parodies, or homages.

But what less people know is that Walt Disney was inspired to make this movie because of a peculiar silent movie that he watched when he was a teenager.

That movie was Snow White from 1916. Its writer, Winthrop Ames, adapted it from his own Broadway play. An example of American fairy tale theater.

This kept me thinking.

The Wizard of Oz is one of the most iconic fantasy films of all time, and it was made in direct response to Snow White. What people don't know is that the scene where Glinda saves the gang from the deadly poppies with a snowstorm came straight from a fairy tale musical from 1902. It came from The Wizard of Oz, a fairy tale musical "extravaganza", with direct input from L. Frank Baum, only two years after the original novel.

Actually, stage musicals seem to take a slight part in the creation of Oz. The Marvellous Land of Oz, the sequel, seems to be inspired by this stage culture. General Jinjur and her army dresses like chorus girls, Ozma/Tip may be inspired by the crossdressing in children roles, and this was the book's dedication:

"To those excellent good fellows and comedians David C. Montgomery and Frank A. Stone whose clever personations of the Tin Woodman and the Scarecrow have delighted thousands of children throughout the land, this book is gratefully dedicated by THE AUTHOR"

These were actors of the 1902 stage show.

Two years later, on 1904 Peter and Wendy premiered. This play is also one of the most famous children stories ever. Walt Disney himself acted as Peter in a local production of it and Tinkerbell quickly became a mascot for the studio.

This all led me to think more about fairy tale theater specifically.

Since the ending of the 18th century and through the 19th century, a genre of stage show developed through Europe. It was mostly comedic and light-hearted, mainly inspired by fairy tales, and it was geared towards children and families. It involved lavish fantasy spectacles told through operas, ballets, and what we today would call "musical theater".

It had many different names and variations depending on the country.

On England, it evolved through the pantomimes and it became a Christmas tradition.

In Russian, it was mainly through ballet, called the ballet-féerie, often considered a lower-class, more commercialized entertainment than traditional ballet. Tchaikovsky's Sleeping Beauty and The Nutcracker are among some of them. Sleeping Beauty would later inspire Disney's telling of the story.

In France they were called Féerie, and it was a mix of music, dancing, pantomime, acrobatics, and stage effects. It influenced the development of burlesque, musical comedy and film.

From Wikipedia:

With his 1899 film version of Cinderella, Georges Méliès brought the féerie into the newly developing world of motion pictures. The féerie quickly became one of film's most popular and lavishly mounted genres in the early years of the twentieth century, with such pioneers as Edwin S. Porter, Cecil Hepworth, Ferdinand Zecca, and Albert Capellani contributing fairy-tale adaptations in the féerie style or filming versions of popular stage féeries like Le Pied de mouton, Les Sept Châteaux du diable, and La Biche au bois. The leader in the genre, however, remained Méliès,[37] who designed many of his major films as féeries and whose work as a whole is intensely suffused with the genre's influence.[38]

Once you realize a huge chunk of fairy tale media has roots in family friendly stage shows from 19th century, a lot of it started making sense.

The focus on romance, the focus on damsels in distress, prevalence of lighter tones, the everlasting connection to music and dance.

They may be the main reason why some fairy tales are more famous than others. Some became source material for a continuous stream of operas, operettas, musical extravaganzas, ballets, plays, and others simply not.

And besides the Victorian Era storybooks that bowdlerized fairy tales for children, I think this whole genre of the theater was responsible to firmly establish fairy tales as a child friendly media, decades before Disney ever released Snow White to cash in that nostalgia.

If you have something to add or if I just got something wrong, feel free to correct me.

@ariel-seagull-wings @princesssarisa @adarkrainbow @the-blue-fairie @theancientvaleofsoulmaking @natache @tamisdava2 @thealmightyemprex

[transmutationisms]

idk how to word this right but seeing your post about tepid talk about how humans tell stories and I feel like I've gotta ask something ive never understood but. Why do people heavily invested in the arts industry or arts academia have such an oppression complex around the arts while also having this idea that everyone is naturally An Artist and anyone not living as An Artist is inherently less human or more "degenerate" to outright quote more than a few of these people. Its by far the most prevalent worldview I see in any artsy space and especially liberal ones but I've never understood where it comes from

i think it's just professional status-grabbing by people who feel entitled to the privileges of petit bourgeois luxury honestly like i think you actually see pretty similar and analogous attitudes among a lot of white collar and managerial types. scientists, doctors, certainly academics. people whose labour is considered enlightened and cerebral and they think playing that up will make it better compensated. like it really just boils down to reactionary egotistical cope for people who don't engage in class struggle or who consider themselves temporarily embarassed bourgeois etc

[dekuscrubbb]

So could we get a breakdown of what all the counselors do? Also, are the bois over certain cabins? Like Warriors cabin 3, Legend cabin 2, etc. Etc. Or is more like they're over their station and the campers just move between stations?

okay, fair warning... this might get a little long!

wild's sheet is the only one... done...... and actually needs to be...... redone. but he's in charge of archery, most of the meals, and survivalist/wildlife survival classes (which are required for all the campers to take)

both he and hyrule are the ones leading the survivalist classes, although they almost always have one of the other counselors with them, due to the fact that 20+ kids are tricky to keep on task for two people in the middle of the forest.

he and malon get along well, and she comes over sometimes to help feed the campers, but is ultimately pretty busy with the ranch. whenever there's a field trip to lon lon, they make lunch for the campers and catch up.

occasionally he and twilight will team up for horse riding lessons when there's a group larger than 5 being taught at one time.

i don't talk about warriors enough!! and i should. he's usually a cabin counselor, which means he's in charge of one of the cabins housing the sleepaway kids!

he's a bit of a denmother and spends a lot of his time making sure his campers are doing well.

see how legend has a red and white shirt and some of the campers have that same color scheme but flipped? well, that's to symbolize what cabin they're in. its to help with rounding up kids.

but its also helpful for the numerous cabin wars when legend and warriors put on. they're team building exercises and for fun, but due to legend and warriors' prevalent rivalry, they can get a bit out of hand. much to sky's chagrin.

warriors is also in charge of any plays and etc being put on at camp. as well as any large team events in tandem with legend + seldomly sky.

sky does a bit of everything around camp, but is mostly known to help out in arts and crafts as well as being the lead pest control guy. soooo, known for cleanup and being an extra pair of patient hands.

he's also a cabin head, but only for the kids who switch to sleepaway halfway through camp. has to be shaken awake violently most of the time, as his campers are fully aware of the 4 daily naps the guy takes.

the kids adore him because he'll get rid of the skulltulas and scare off any wolfos around camp, but he also gifts them little wood carvings if they stick around to watch him work.

sky is also known to share little secrets about his coworkers to the campers, just to make sure his chaotic image is upkept someway. he enjoys being both a voice of reason and keeping the remaining counselors on their toes.

they're highly coveted and are a bit too much of a source of contention between campers sometimes, as the trading games created with them cause.... fights.

legend is the second cabin counselor, most of the time at least. sometimes twilight beats him in the counselor beat-down at the beginning week of training, but its not usual.

although legend is a bit snappy and can seem cold towards the campers, they know better. they're used to the calmer, more caring side of legend since they have to sleep in the same cabin.

and don't tell anybody, but the hot cocoa legend sneaks out from the kitchen is the best balm for nightmares.

legend hates lake duty, but is the strongest swimmer among the counselors apart from wind. but since wind is about 4'9" on a good day, legend is essentially forced into lifeguard duty.

a few other counselors might hang out on the coast or do some games with the campers, but legend and wind are usually the two keeping supervision when it comes to the lake.

usually the guy to go into town with twilight, or at least the first to volunteer, as a majority of the counselors come along anyways.

although hyrule, four, wild, and wind are considered "junior counselors," wind is the youngest and definitely treated as such. even if he's probably the more level-headed and mature one at times.

its easy for him to connect with the campers, since they're closer than age, but he finds it infuriating that they treat him more like a peer than somebody in charge.

he teaches swim lessons in the shallower parts of the lake and holds water games + fights. teaching the campers how to properly act within water and the certain things to keep in mind when doing so.

he will also take the campers on river rides in the canoes through the forest, with at least two other counselors along.

when wind was also just a camper, he played pirates in the faux-pirate ship. he met tetra here and they stayed friends, even if she remained a camper rather than apply for counselor training.

twilight is the second guy you can find getting rid of pests, as well as the one guy you should go to for bear hugs and a cuddle if you need it.

he's in charge of trail rides, horse riding lessons, and the one to plan out any excursions into the small town just outside the forest housing the camp. bit of a worrywort and more than a little overbearing according to the campers.

although, also according to the campers, he's been acting a little weird and more withdrawn than usual. plus, there's a rumor that he's been staying out after dark, who knows!

he's a good cabin head, but he doesn't know if he likes being responsible for that many kids at a time, especially since he doesn't feel like he's up to the task. tends to fail the "counselor beat-down" on purpose, unless legend gets too annoying /lh.

hyrule is at the nurse's station most of the time, but in the afternoons he goes to help out legend or wild for whatever activities they're in charge of at the time. anxious, but good at his job, and endlessly annoyed at how many times the same kid can sprain their wrist.

luckily, having trained-ish magic and being somewhat knowledgeable when it comes to actual first-aid, hyrule is able to keep the campers relatively in good health. although, they have had to send a few home from injuries he couldn't deal with.

enjoys wandering around camp and the forest, and he's good enough with any sword that he's not too worried about the local wildlife.

hyrule and wild are rather close, and tend to wander off whenever they aren't keeping track of campers. they've gotten into some.... trouble on their own.

in charge of arts and crafts and gets a little too into the creation process. he's used to helping his grandfather with blacksmithing back home and holds the campers to the same standards at times.

but you can...... only make so much with pipecleaners and pinecones. for the most part he's pretty calm and enjoys his job, but if he has to take one more boxcutter away from an eleven year old terrorizing the arts and crafts tent, he's going to lose it.

he and wild have a theory about time's funding for the camp and they use up a lot of their free time discussing it. its unknown whether or not they truly believe this, but the mounting amount of evidence they keep finding is driving the two crazy. especially since time doesn't exactly confirm or deny anything.

will occasionally help out sky with pest control + whatever, but isn't a big fan.

and that's..... i think it! or as much as im able to write right now. got more flowers to plant, you know how it is! spring is very busy. nod.

asks are still open and whatever questions you may have can be made there! :)

[night-lakmen]

The art of writing 'confident' fictional women

Making female characters who're supposed to be 'queen bees' and/or popular comes with a great amount of misogyny and internalised competition amongst women.

• The Mary sue.

She's perfect, she's everything. While partying everyday and not studying once in the entire book, she's able to be both the magnet and the nerd who knows everything being taught in the class. All men turn to look at her, all women are envious of her beauty.

Most of such characters are described as having certain particular beauty standards. Beauty is different for different people,and attraction isn't warranted by looks. There's a stark difference between being easy on the eye and attractive.

Such characters are also shown to be either incredibly revealing in clothing in places where they shouldn't be, and are described using adjectives that make you more uncomfortable than enamoured. Most of the time they're said to be 'inspired off IT GIRLS', when being an IT girl says nothing about bringing other women down by saying how they surpass everyone around them.

• The Edgy Bombshell.

The og y/n.

Hair up in a messy bun, wearing the first thing she finds in her room she's still the most beautiful girl in school/class/the entire world. Things that are symptoms of depression become aesthetic for her, the just out of bed look being one of 'not like other girls' and not 'im suffering. Help.'

Such characters are often uplifted by adding bimbo, cheerleader chars who wear clothes/are portrayed to be more extroverted, glittery and cheery than the said character. Un necessary bullying from the girly chars and constant threats of 'you're stealing my boyfriend' ruin her day.

The only thing she needs to steal is a time table.

• The Pseudo bully.

She's not mean, she's just the girl who's honest with everyone.

Even though she's the worst person to walk on earth with the way she talks to people,somehow everyone bows to her word. Similar to the first one, she's somehow liked by everyone. Never a pore, never any body type other than hourglass, she brings her friends down by making weird jokes and putting them out as 'savage' when they're not comebacks, just actual insults.

But she's not a bully! Her behavior is entitled, she thinks she has earned the entire world because of the way she is raised or looks, but she is not a bully!

• The gangster

[I love biker women<3]

She's not like the other basic girls. She knows bikes, she knows cars. Everyone comes to her to get their stuff fixed and she has beef with every other woman in school. It isn't her fault she's one of the boys and was raised with 69 boys!

Most of the time such characters lean heavily towards type 2, having either an excess amount of terrible hygiene, humor, or towards 1.

The only time this is acceptable is when she's lesbian. I love biker women<333!!!

The art of writing fictional women has been around for ages, yet it is one people still haven't figured out yet. Much like in real life, the objectification of women and their bodies to appease the readers is prevalent among writers both male and sadly female. One woman can't be both popular and nice, for that's a sin. Kindness doesn't warrant popularity, for women are always fighting amongst each other in their mind.

Popularity is gained because of a lot of things, and most of them aren't positive things. The only time people end up liking you is if you're aware of other people: and don't put other people down to raise others. Women are much more than their bodies, their beauty, their sexuality. They can have off days, they can have many different kinds of personalities and moods depending on the situation.

The art of writing women is almost like the art of loving women, and it's safe to say that we're failing in both.

[lauramkaye]

ADHD is a learning disability. You might've been gifted but not all of us are or were. As a person with ADHD who isn't a genius or whatever exceptional stereotype you're happy to be I'm sorry if tou don't want to have solidarity with me but we do have the same diagnostic label as me and you don't get to make a new bullshit terms to escape the taint of being given the same diagnostic label for their problems as me.

....Wow, okay.

I wasn't sure if I wanted to answer this publicly, privately, address the point in a different post, or just ignore it. I'm choosing to engage in good faith with this because when I share ADHD information I do so out of a desire to help others who may be in the same boat I was in and I want to clarify if that information is misunderstood.

The post I suspect you are referring to was specifically about people who are both "gifted" (which as a label has plenty of issues but that is what's used in the field and how you will see it referred to in most literature/resources, so that's what I will use) and ADHD at the same time. ADHD and giftedness are two independent things, and a person can be one or the other, both, or neither. (A term you will often see used to refer to a person with giftedness and a disability that impacts learning is "twice exceptional," so using that as a search term may be useful if you want to read more on the topic.)

ADHD is a disability that can seriously impact learning, but it is not technically considered a learning disability. (source: Learning Disablities Association of America). It is considered a neurodevelopmental disorder, similar to the autism spectrum. ASD, ADHD, and learning disabilities such as dyslexia can coexist in the same people in different combinations and any or all can also coexist with giftedness.

This article is older but has a good rundown of some of the issues around gifted + ADHD. A particularly relevant quote: "While a misdiagnosis of ADHD is undesirable, diagnostic errors of omission are just as serious and may be even more prevalent among gifted students. This difficulty occurs when a student’s over-reliance on strengths inadvertently obscures the disability. While emphasizing strengths may highlight a student’s gifts and talents, it does not eliminate the reality of the condition and can, in fact, lead to a worse predicament in which the student distrusts his or her abilities because of the struggle to maintain them. On the other hand, if a student is allowed to acknowledge and experience the disability, he or she may learn appropriate compensatory or coping skills."

The reason I share information specifically about gifted + ADHD is that this is what I personally am, and therefore I have the most experience to share about it. The reason I want to share it is not because I think I'm a super special genius or because I don't want to be in solidarity with others who are ADHD but not gifted. The reason I want to share my experiences is that my ADHD was not diagnosed until I was in my late thirties and that late diagnosis caused me a LOT of avoidable suffering in my life. If I can spare someone else that kind of suffering by sharing the things I learned, I want to do that.

I was not diagnosed early specifically BECAUSE I was also gifted, so most of the indicators that usually lead to children getting tested/diagnosed for ADHD were either attributed to me being gifted (boredom, hyperfocusing on reading a book, one million hobbies I jumped between constantly) or masked by the giftedness (if I could do the assignment quickly in study hall right before class or retain enough from class discussion to pass the test, nobody realized/cared that I wasn't doing homework or studying.)

Which was fine, when I was a kid. But the older I got, the harder it was to keep up with things. By the time I got to undergrad I alternated between high and low GPA terms as I desperately tried to keep my scholarships and managed to keep EXACTLY the minimum GPA I had to. The level of stress and pressure got higher and higher.

I went to grad school. I made a 4.0 my first term.

The second term, I failed all my classes, was put on academic probation, had a meltdown on the side of the road in the middle of nowhere so that my mom had to drive out to get me.

I didn't go back, and I officially failed out of grad school. I had finally reached the point that I could no longer brute force past my lack of executive function with giftedness. And it was fucking devastating. That happened more than twenty years ago and it still hurts to remember even though I've had a lot of therapy since then. I had spent my life being praised for being smart and had built a lot of my identity around that; failing out of grad school felt like a blow to not just my career plans but my SELF.

The years after that got better, but I was still perpetually struggling. Everything just seemed so much HARDER than it should - I bounced in and out of debt, I constantly struggled with work deadlines, I couldn't be on time to ANYTHING, I was stressed out ALL THE TIME. I periodically just broke down and couldn't function for days. I kept making "careless errors" and "stupid mistakes" like forgetting to pay a $20 bill until it got sent to collections even though I had the money to pay it sitting in my checking account. I knew I knew HOW to do the things I didn't do and I knew I was smart enough to do them, so why couldn't I seem to manage it?

I must just... be a horrible person, I concluded. I didn't feel lazy or disrespectful or uncaring, but if I wasn't, surely I would remember birthdays and be on time for things and be able to keep my house clean and my checkbook balanced like normal people could, right?

I probably would have kept on this way indefinitely if a dear friend who was gifted + ADHD had not said "you know, the way you talk about your life sounds a lot like the way I was before I got diagnosed. Maybe you should see someone and check it out."

And I did. And I got diagnosed. And I started treatment. And it fucking CHANGED MY LIFE.

It didn't take away my struggles--far from it--but it helped me understand them, and gave me strategies to help address them, and gave me support to work around/through them. I still have to swim, but before I had weights tied to my feet and now I have a floatie to help keep my head above the water.

I want EVERYONE with ADHD to receive the supports and treatment they need to live their best lives. The information I share about the way ADHD intersects with my own personal brain configuration is meant to help anyone else out there who has a similar one. If it isn't helpful to you personally, I hope you find other sources that do and I wish you the best.

[mychlapci]

okay so i did quite a few cleaning/grooming headcanons during the last celibacy week so i figured i’d start it off with some more!

one thing i’ve been debating is how cybertronians clean their plating when my continuity has a completely mechanical cybertron. think about it, most human supplies used to clean cars and/or other machinery is quite soft to avoid scratching or otherwise damaging the exterior plating. 

so i have two solutions to this!

number one! the high pressure washer. this is basically just a normal car wash but more widely available to the public and utilised by more than just mecha with transportation altmodes. these showers would provide high powered jets of water that could blast either out of the floors, walls, or ceilings depending on the type of stall. they would probably look similar to gym showers in our world, very utilitarian in design. these would also be outfitted with vents that blast warm air over the plating in order to quickly dry off the user. i imagine these would be common among the labour classes and there would likely be many that are pay to use throughout the city. perhaps expensive ones have oil and solvent bathes that are meant for soaking rather than cleaning. 

my secondary solution is metallic fibres. i’m not entirely sure if it would work particularly well but the way i think of it is metal sheets flattened and then cut into extremely fine and flexible wires which can then be woven into something that might be a reasonable approximation of cloth. again i’m not entirely sure if it would work well because with cloth there isn’t the possibility that it could scratch the plating but i think with enough stretching and flattening, one could get a “softer” thread that could be used to make blankets and washcloths. these would likely be kept only for touch ups and smaller jobs since washing the entire frame would take a lot of time doing it by hand, hence the popularity of the above option. 

now onto the actual ideas revolving around grooming/cleaning habits. 

i think that manual classes are far more likely to develop communal grooming habits than scientific or racing classes. this is very several reasons. for one it’s far easier to get clean faster when there is more than one individual involved and in an industry such as mining or transportation, time is everything. additionally many of these jobs foster a strong sense of community between workers and in a work place where the wash racks are public, trust is crucial in regards to exposing oneself in front of others. 

army mecha, like seekers, tanks, and other such warframes also tend to display these communal grooming habits, with seekers in particular displaying intricate and complex rituals of grooming in regards to their wings. of course this varies from individual to individual and just as many mecha prefer to handle cleaning their frames on their own rather than seeking assistance or parting in community activities. 

in regards to actual cleaning products i think the manual classes would be supplied with the basics of a wash rack and if their employers are feeling particularly generous, cheap waxes and oils to relax the cables and touch up any plating that may have gotten scuffed or damaged. though many companies do not provide such things due to the prevalence of workers being replaced and/or becoming dirty from their jobs. it’s simply not worth the cost. 

those ranked higher in the caste system and who actually receive a paying wage would likely purchase waxes, buffers, and the above mentioned cloths to polish and wax their plating to a shine. even wealthier mecha who have shanix to burn might even buy scented oils, waxes, and extra paint in the event that they want to switch up their scents or paint colours. these bots would most likely include high ranking members of the government, like senators or elected officials, as well as the primes, diplomats, and entertainers.

oOooh inch resting... I do like it when big robots groom and preen each other I think they should do it more often. It makes sense. There's some bits you just can't reach with your own hands, and no one wants grime in the plating seams of their back, or on the back of their wings...

[quill-of-thoth]

Letters from Watson: Wisteria Lodge

Cultural Historical Note: Syncretic Afro-Carribean religions and spiritual traditions First caveat here is that I do not have expertise. I took a class once on African diaspora culture that briefly covered the many religious traditions that inspire depictions of Voodoo in the media. This is still more than Holmes and Watson had access to in the British Museum. In brief: African, mostly west African, religions came to the Americas when their practitioners were kidnapped during the slave trade, and changed and evolved as enslaved African communities encountered Catholicism and indigenous religious practices in and surrounding the Carribean. Practices associated with Vaudou, Santeria, Hoodoo, Vodun, and other diaspora religions have a long history of being misunderstood, misreported, and used for shock value in order to demonize people of African descent, or to tell a titillating story that also reinforces suspicion of such people, as is the case here. Remember folks, racism and stereotyping does not have to be intentional to be harmful!

Case and Themes: racism, exoticism, and religious slander. Warnings: Discussions of animal sacrifice, infanticide, and a lot of slander in the historical context of conflict between religions, and as excuses for colonialism. No more graphic than any case wrap up, but I get to use my unfinished classics degree here briefly.

Allegations within The Adventure of Wisteria Lodge that the practice of Voodoo includes human sacrifice and cannibalism must, of course, be taken with a whole cellar of salt, given the long history of accusing members of minority religions of taboo violence. When we examine any author's use of non-christian religion in their work (specifically when that author comes from a background of christian majority population and historical entanglement of christian religious institutions with the government of their home country) we have to remember that demonizing practitioners of other religions is one of the oldest tricks in the book. It's used both to provide excuses for violence against other communities, and to tell a scary adventure story.

Allegations within The Adventure of Wisteria Lodge that the practice of Voodoo includes human sacrifice and cannibalism must, of course, be taken with a whole cellar of salt, given the long history of accusing members of minority religions of taboo violence.

A modern audience is probably aware of the existence of Blood Libel, or a historical pattern of accusations against Jewish people of killing or planning to kill christian children, which then serve as excuses for violence against Jewish people. This is not unique to the the history of Christianity and Judaism - a pre-christian roman empire accused Carthaginians of widespread infanticide, for one example. In turn, there is modern debate about the true prevalence of infanticide by exposure, i.e. abandoning the baby outside somewhere, within the Roman Empire. (Archaeological evidence for infanticide in the ancient world is muddled at best, given that infant mortality in pre-antibiotic, pre-vaccine eras was just high overall, and burial customs for infants can be very different than the burials of an adult or an older child. There is also the fact that many ancient writings on morality and customs are written necessarily by the privileged few in any society; neither contempt for the poor, nor contempt for the ill and disabled, which are both very key aspects in discussions of historical infanticide, are new inventions.)

When it comes to politics and war between peoples, very little causes your public to support putting their own lives on the line to go fight somebody than accusing another group of shockingly violating some kind of taboo: infanticide, human sacrifice, and cannibalism are among the big ones.

By the time of the 1890s, the British Empire has some key differences from the Roman empire or various medieval kingdoms: it has colonies all over the world and it's people are, for the most part, literate, and have been for multiple generations. There is a huge role for propaganda to play here, with centuries of European nations justifying their projects of invasion, resource extraction, and enslavement on every continent besides Antarctica with claims against indigenous, non-christian religious communities violating every taboo they can think of. Even long after the communities in question are under European control, the religious argument that everyone in the world must be Christianized remains a useful tool in the political playbook, and authors of adventure stories often reinforce this propaganda, because what is shocking sells magazine subscriptions. Xenophobia is profitable so long as people are only a little scared and a lot thrilled: the idea that there are undeniably bad things in the world but they mostly happen elsewhere can be a comforting one. This is where we find the Canon of Sherlock Holmes, not just in The Adventure of Wisteria Lodge, but as an ongoing theme: places outside of England are exciting because they are both the site of scary, sensational, romantic (in the literary sense) violence, and very far away. Colonies and former colonies, in Australia, India, Indonesia, and America are places where Englishman export themselves to, and violence is imported from. A decent chunk of crime in the Sherlock Holmes canon is either the result of foreigners arriving in England with a violent history, or of Englishmen succumbing to violent impulses while outside of England, and bringing retributive violence home with them. This is also why the criminals so often escape the country but not vengeance: even when English law has a plausible reason to hang the dictator Murillo for one of many murders, it is both more exiting and safer for the audience for the man to be murdered in Madrid.

[wonderfullwonderfull]

Science and society: what is the usefulness of knowledge?

(I note that this essay is primarily focused on my experience in the USA)

I've been thinking a lot lately about what impact I will be making in the world with my life. For a long time I had the view that all science is by nature "good" and that any pursuit of new knowledge is worthwhile. While this is a simple and straightforward view of morality and knowledge, it is something that is extremely prevalent among people I work with.

Now I completely understand the inherent desire to feel like you are doing good in the world. Anyone with empathy or even common sense hopes that they do more good in the world than bad. This is an intense desire in me, and due to my sample size of 1 (me) I have to assume that this is true for most others. People want to feel like they are benefiting society and those around them. I want to feel like I am benefiting society and those around me. This desire is strong and will allow people to pursue intense cognitive dissonance in how their career and life choices affect those around them.

In the course of my physics PhD so far, I have encountered many who intend to work for military contractors. There are several motivations given for this, however I believe the primary factor that actually drives so many physicists to military is the wide availability of jobs and the high pay. While I despise class reductionism and the ignorance of intersectionality, I do think class and economics is the driving factor in most of these colleagues decisions. Why spend 18 months searching around the country for a job that will offer 80k when you can go work for the military contractor down the street for 200k tomorrow. These jobs are extremely easy to get with an advanced physics degree, and their availability draws those who can not afford a long job search. The reasoning is straightforward and clear for many: it is the only high paying job available for them.

For many, I can accept this reasoning. I personally will never work for a military contractor (which I will elaborate on), but I can understand the desire for economic stability and the difficulty to reject an offer so prevalent and advertised. However, most, if not all, physicists I met who work with military companies will not use this economic argument as justification. There are instead a few other justifications that I hear. All of them I believe are symptoms of phantasm and cognitive dissonance. I will address them in the order of ascending danger and insidiousness.

First, is the classic neoliberal argument of national security and "the ability to defend ourselves". I will not address this argument. Many more qualified than me have written amazing essays on how the neoliberal idea of defense only perpetuates colonialism and capitalistic exploitation. While this argument is easily discredited by evidence, it is at least straightforward, if not honest.

Second, is the social credibility granted to those who work within the military defence industry. While only the poor proletariat is send to fight directly on the ground risking themselves, all involved in the military benefit by its deification in America. While veterans are ignored economically, the social credibility given to those who assimilate into the American imperialist project gives mobility to those who might otherwise be exploited. While it may be unexpected, a very large number of those working in the military industry are queer, neurodivergent, or otherwise ostracized by society. For many, the false-egalitarianism of the united states military industry gives those with the technical ability, but not the social ability, to climb the ladder of society. Lockheed martin doesn't care if you are a faggot, they just want someone to engineer their bombs. This is an extremely dangerous justification. Clearly, lifting yourself up by endangering others is no true liberation. It is the "liberation" promised by caplitalist society. "Put your boot on whom we tell you to, and we will have you live comfortably" says the Boeing executive, says the capitalist, says the imperialist, says the statist. This dissonance and rejection of empathy, creating a life of comfort at the cost of pain of others. Again, those more read and more impacted have said this in much more well written ways. However the message is clear: there is no queer liberation in America until there is queer liberation in Palestine. There is no acceptance of neurodivergence in America while we use our military to turn away asylum seekers at the border. There is no racial mobility while we use the fruits of our labor to kill the wretched of the earth. This justification is in reality entirely about economics and class. The classic method of elevation in capitalist societies: step hard on those beneath you and you may one day climb just an inch higher.

The final, and I believe most insidious justification I often see and hear is that of the universal good of science and knowledge. I myself used this philosophy for most of my life. While I have never personally done any work for the military industry directly, my justification for going into physics is that basic research helps all. Why worry about imperialism when you publish your research for any to read? Why worry about what your bosses are doing as long as you are advancing humanity's knowledge.

This is easily discredited by many. So much harm has been done to people in the name of "science" and "knowledge". Tuskegee, Nazi "science", eugenics, early anthropology, war chemistry, nuclear bombs. The list goes on and nearly anyone can easily list five failures of science as a guiding philosophy. All knowledge is not equally good, not all knowledge is good. Is the creation of the covid vaccine equivalently useful to humanity as a bioweapon made in a lab? Is the Haber-Bosch process equivalently useful as mustard gas? Is nuclear power equivalently useful as atomic bombs? Are solar panels equivalently useful as crytpocurrency farms? Clearly not. Each of these examples are intimately linked to each other. In all of these cases you can argue that the science discovered in the former will naturally lead to the latter. It is all just knowledge, neither good nor bad.

I find this argument disingenuous. While no physicist went out to discover the strong nuclear force, certainly it was a conscious decision to harness it as a weapon. Science is not a random selection of facts that you pick out of a hat. All science is pursued actively. Every day I go to my lab I make a decision that I am going to try to use magnetic materials as platforms for quantum information. I don't go into some random room with lasers and magnetic resonance machines and magically come out with a computational qubit. Those working for BAE systems do not walk into work and just randomly come out with a design for a missile system. Anyone who works in science knows: pursuing knowledge is an active process. You must envision what you want, and pursue it with vigor. Justification for knowledge is always either given before the science starts, or not given at all. No one accidentally creates a weapons delivery system, then has to decide whether they will publish it. No, this decision was made well before funding was granted.

This is a fact I have had to deal with in my PhD program. I will state, while accepting I myself may have some cognitive dissonance in this, that graduate students should not be held accountable for the science they do in the lab. Anyone in academia knows that 90% of PhD students do not pick specifically who their funding comes from or what the goals of their research are. These are decided between their primary investigator and the funding agency. I must tell myself this every day, knowing that my funding comes from the department of defence, knowing that my results will be used for technology I vehemently hate. Should I be held accountable that the science I do may be used for illegal spying and surveillance when all I want is to characterize a material? Should the blame that rests with the department of defense be passed onto me? I hope not, but I honestly do not know.

I sit here thinking about this as my close friends from undergrad go off to work in public defence, legal aid, and community-driven nonprofits. For a long time I thought that the pursuit of science was equal in worth to these careers. However it has been made clear to me that science can easily be one of the most harmful careers. So what is to be done? Personally, I am too far along my education to make a meaningful change. I have too much debt and have invested too much time to switch to a more directly impactful career. And I truly love physics. Discovering the nature of reality is a magical feeling that is addicting. Nothing measures with the experience to be the first person ever to learn something. Should I just accept that my own happiness is worth the career? Should I lay down and use my knowledge of semiconductors to build a weapons guidance computer? I still think not, but the way forward is uncertain.

I myself will attempt to, if not do good, at least not perpetuate the bad. While I sincerely thing quantum computing can do massive good for the world, it can clearly do harm as well. I hope I can find a position where I can do good, but at the very least I can avoid doing bad by working for Lockheed.

Science is grey. Much good and happiness has come from the pursuit of knowledge. Much harm has come from it as well. At best we can do what we think is right in the moment and attempt harm reduction in our work. I may not be able to choose who used quantum information science, but I can at least choose not to be the one building a quantum computer for the air force. I can choose to not do the harm that is clear to me. Does this make me a good person? A bad person? No. In addition to me not believing in "good" or "bad" people, science is just science. It is as good as what is done with it. While I can not be able to tell what will be done with my discoveries in 200 years, I can see what will happen in the next five. And I can choose to not work for those who will clearly abuse science for the sake of profit and power.

In closing, I am reminded of Darwin and his theory of natural selection and evolution. While a clearly complex person who has held both despicable racial views, he also created the most widely accepted theory of science in the modern day. The knowledge of evolution has been used to create medicine, and abused to justify eugenics. Can we blame or credit Darwin for this? I say no, the knowledge gained is only as good as it is used, and those who use it must be those who carry the responsibility of their actions. Can Darwin be blamed for the capitalist justification of "Social Darwinism?" Even without Kropotkin's takedown of it in "Mutual Aid", even if social Darwinism became a mainstream view, the responsibility remains only with the fascists who use it. Those who discovered the knowledge nessesary to formulate this argument had nothing to do with how it is used. We can not blame scientists for their discoveries when it is not them who abused them. We can not credit scientists with praise for their discoveries when it wasn't them who used them for good. Darwin did not invent modern eugenics, he did not invent modern medicine. Darwin is not good because of his discoveries, he is not bad because of them either. He is just Darwin.

I hope that, even if my discoveries are abused, that I will still just be me. I have given up on the idea of scientists as a universally good career, as people selfless and honorable. We are just people. Knowledge is just knowledge. It is how we use it that must be judged, and how we justify it that must be analyzed.

I hope this did not come off too verbose and long. In many ways this is me trying to come to terms with the fact my career is not the noble pursuit that I envisioned as a bright-eyed undergrad. I still think science is a worthwhile pursuit and worthy of public support and funding. However, I will no longer excuse the actions of those who ignore their responsibilities in their creations.

[hetagrammy]

Do you have your own take on the cardverse AU? What is it like?

Way back in 2019 I had a Cardverse AU planned, and there was a lot of inspiration from @kyokyo866 's own take on Cardverse! It was very centered on the NA Brothers, with the basic plot being they were both born with King brands to the King of Diamonds (Francis), and Spades lacked a king, so Alfred was married off to prevent a future succession crisis in Diamonds and to satisfy a succession crisis in Spades.

The concepts I had for it have changed a little since, and I'd definitely change a lot of plot stuff if I ever went back to it, but some aspects have stayed the same. I'd keep magic as more of a rarity rather than a commonplace skill/aspect of society, but still present. I think it would keep the vibe a bit more fairytale-like, where magic isn't impossible but just remarkable enough to be a surprise. I kept to the whole brand/birthmark thing that's still pretty popular in fanon, but each kingdom has a slightly different system and culture surrounding it:

Spades has a prominent, traditionalist noble class with little upward mobility. The nobles send representatives to court, and the Queen and Jack are traditionally noble. However, the King is selected and found via prophecy, and thus could be born a commoner. The Ace is chosen by the King, and therefore could also come from a lowborn background. Spades' whole culture revolves around ideas about fate, prophecy, and superstition.

Diamonds also has a prominent noble class, but is more flexible with mobility. There is a distinction between old and new money, but financial success is what determines social status. A friend of mine once came up with the idea that the wealthy of Diamonds have something of a social contract, in that they are expected to provide public works and benefits in exchange for their power. Their power is derived from displays of wealth, which can cause dynastic chains and changes when it comes to the King/Queen.

I also have to credit my friend with an idea for Hearts which I absolutely love, which is the concept of love being part of a greater religious obligation. She came up with this idea of Hearts having a relic that is the literal heart of the first Queen that can offer guidance to the country via a high priest (the Ace in this case). It's all about the pursuit of love and happiness, but there's a big emphasis on the sacrifice inherent in that as well. The King and Jack come from this long line where the Jack has always been raised to be the King's loyal vassal, with a bond possibly stronger than that of the King and Queen (who is chosen by the King of course). Generally, your brand is based on merit, because again, that idea of sacrifice or love for the nation/lord is prevalent. This is why military officials typically have higher ranks there.

Clubs is where the ranking is most direct, with the King being selected from amongst the leading boyars in Clubs upon the death of the previous King. The King may also be challenged, or boyars may challenge each other to a duel for the kingship. The Ace and Queen are typically chosen by the King, in the Queen's case usually after a lengthy process of selecting from among the boyar families. The Jack is typically raised from a peasant position, as it ensures they will be able to advise the King and run his household without favoring any of the boyar families. Those born without marks are considered society's lowest, making up a serf class tied to a ruling boyar and their land.

I don't know if I'll ever come back to writing for this AU, but if you catch me drawing it on occasion, those are some of my general thoughts!

[leoneliterary]

I just noticed that both Teacher Alim and Poldi have long hair, and I was wondering: did Poldi decide to keep his hair long because he admires his teacher a lot? Or is it a popular style among the upper class/scholars?

A bit of both.

So a quick tidbit of lore for the Kingdom of Hashind:

Well kept hair, is associated with nobility or at the very least, affluence. It means that you have access to really nice hair oils and the time to sit and care for it. This is more prevalent in certain areas of Hashind and certain noble families. Yemoja and Laverna's families have a reputation for great hairstyles, like braids and twists and adornments. The men of their families also have great hair, but it is a bit more understated.

For other families, length is a status symbol as many families are used to seeing working people, like their servants, opt for short hair out of convenience. Poldi comes from a family like that. You'll meet more noble families, tribal groups, and people from other kingdoms as the story goes on, and each will have their own views.

Another group with a hair thing are the monks. Those that join the temple shave their head upon taking their vows, symbolizing that they've cut ties with materialism and vanity, then they never cut their hair again for as long as they remain monks. That's why Heka's hair is so long.

[orbmanson7]

How can Logan drinking an ever growing amount of wine in the birthday video be interpreted as? What kind of message us viewers (and Thomas since he was interviewing them) are we supposed to receive from that display?

Alcohol, huh? Here's a trigger warning just in case! I'll be talking about alcohol a lot in this.

Alright, so the obvious answer here is that they are playing on the adult comedy trope of someone drinking wine indicating they are stressed but still have some of their dignity left (it's not like they are so desperate, they're drinking straight whiskey or care so little about class that they're downing beers).

Alcohol in media is often used to portray a character using unhealthy coping mechanisms to handle stress. Namely as a way to say, in not so many words, that someone is either trying to forget something that upsets them or that someone is trying to de-stress from their hectic life. This is likely why both Logan and Janus are seen drinking wine, though Logan, as you've noticed, definitely does it a lot more often. Yes, it's played up for comedic effect, but it's still probably meant to show us how stressed he is.

In WTIT, once Logan realizes he will not only have to keep Thomas on task but also have to wrangle in Remus, he purposefully dumps out his coffee and immediately fills a tumbler with wine instead. In the early afternoon, too, no less. Yikes.

I won't get into potential alcoholic behaviors or anything because it's clear this is meant to be a joke above all else, even if it's a joke about someone utilizing an unhealthy coping mechanism. The only thing to really focus on with this is its lack of prevalence among other sides and its recently increased frequency in videos.

Like I mentioned, we've only really seen Janus and Logan purposefully ingest the stuff (sorry, Patton), but I fully believe that Janus drinks wine more for the aesthetics than for its effects. It's a villainous prop, it completes his look - the one he wants others to see. That's why we don't typically see him actually drink the wine when he's shown with it, mostly just holding it in a glass.

For him, it's more about looking like someone who drinks wine than actually wanting/needing to drink it. This is why he likes being seen as the "sassy aunt" like he said in the anniversary video, as the 'wine aunt' is another common trope seen in media. The wine aunt is often characterized as someone who likes to gossip, indulge themselves, and often cares more about how others perceive them and pretending they're unbothered by it than actually doing anything about it. Maybe that says something about Janus, maybe not. ;)

But in Logan's case, things are definitely different. I highly doubt it's about aesthetics for him (well, it is on a meta level for the sake of comedy, but not within the narrative) and it's far more about the wine's function.

Alcohol is known to lower inhibitions. As a depressant, it can heighten emotions (any emotions - happiness, sadness, anger, etc.) and it allows you to make more impulsive decisions that you may have properly thought out and talked yourself out of otherwise - depending on your tolerance level, that is. I don't personally like wine but I know it takes several drinks and shots before I can even feel buzzed, so Logan having increasingly larger containers doesn't have to only exist as a running joke, it can also indicate that he has a very high tolerance level.

That means he has a lot of control over himself and his faculties, and if he would want those inhibitions lowered, it would take A LOT of alcohol to actually have a significant effect on him.

If that was another way of saying he's divulging in something that will get his guard down and possibly let something more emotional take hold, it certainly would be an interesting analogy to use for such a purpose.

But, here's the thing - Logan indulging in drinking wine is a choice. He is choosing to do this, likely knowing full well what alcohol can do to someone's mind (which is why he keeps drinking more and more as time goes on). Comedic bit or not, Logan is either using wine as a unhealthy coping mechanism for stress and it's going to result in lowered inhibitions and impulsive choices that he's determined may be worth the risk, or he's using wine for the express purpose of its ability to lower inhibitions and heighten emotions and doesn't care if it's helping him handle his stress or not.

Either way, it doesn't seem like a smart move to make, at least not in the long-term.

But maybe it's a key to getting things moving narratively, who knows?

[acreaturecalledgreed]

i think, other than the prevalence of often unchecked white supremacy in these communities, i finally realized what it is about so many american norse heathens that gets so under my skin

its that majority of them dont give a shit about the current cultures that are in scandinavia

sure you read the edda like 15 times but do you know literally anything about norway? sweden? denmark? who lives there? what its like there? 

you “corrected” me for “incorrectly” calling christmas Jul, but do you not realize that in scandinavia many old pagan norse traditions have long since fused with christianity? that in norway, christmas is a one to two week long affair that is collectively called Jul? do you not realize that? 

you want to reclaim your culture but have you put in the effort to learn anything about it other than an american filtered pile of exclusively ancient traditions? did you double and triple check that those things have not been twisted and co-opted by nazis? are you loud and vocal in making that space unwelcome to them? 

im sorry that over generations this country stole all this from you to force your family into cohesive, identityless Whiteness

and you shouldnt be barred from trying to reconnect to your culture. its a good thing. i want you to. and honestly i dont think anyone should need to be of norse descent to get to be a part of it. 

but it is always going to leave a bad taste in my mouth when you approach it with some kind of mindset that you, american obsessing exclusively over ancient norse history, act like you are in some way More Accurately And Truly Norse than the actual literal people living in scandinavia today 

and there is a personal aspect to it as well, one i know a lot of ppl can understand

this country is extremely xenophobic and no, xenophobia is not the same as racism, though they often do overlap i am very much a white person, i have never and will never had to deal with any racism

i am a very privileged person; im a white person who grew up upper middle class with a loving and generous family, and this is in no way denying that 

but i am a norwegian person who grew up in america who faced the brunt end of a lot of xenophobia

peers who mocked me when i tried to share traditions and cultures, who told me i was weird or gross

id come home crying the first years after we moved here, embarrassed that i was norwegian, because that made me Different and Bad and Weird

people who spoke to my mother like an idiot because she has an accent, who wanted to “borrow” her bunad, the cultural dress she got fucking married in, to wear to a fucking costume party, who talked so often to her about how Glad they were that she got the Privilege to move to America and away from such a Poor country like norway when she didnt even want to leave her home at the age 45 and only left because my father had to go back to the states

people who were outright harsh and cruel to us for literally no reason other than we Weren’t American Enough (and for that matter, ive had to deal with it on the other end to- Norwegians telling me im stupid and ignorant because Im American and im Not Norwegian Enough, it makes me want to tear all my hair out and scream) it makes me

so bitter

to see those same people who i know were xenophobic to my family b/c we did not fit exactly into American Whiteness now hyper consume and wear norse paganism with pride and in the same breath tell me that i am being norse Wrong

i want to make clear that i am not crying appropriation. i genuinely feel i dont have the right to.

but i am asking for some kind of self awareness and respect 

PS. if anyone comes in here trying to act like you must be white to be norse i will break every limb you have and drop you in a ditch to burn that is nazi shit we dont do that here. we love and support norse pagans of color and if you are not putting in an effort to make them feel safe among white peers, you need to fix that.

[f1ghtsoftly]

Assigning Blame: Who is At Fault When Women Are Retaliated Against?

When things go wrong, it is often useful for us to endeavor to discover why, to make matters more complex, how does the apportion of blame change under objectively hostile social conditions? Does the prevalence of injustice preclude us from assigning blame to the oppressed? When the goal is to avoid the ire of the oppressor-how much responsibility does the oppressed hold? Is it even possible to attempt to outsmart someone committed to your destruction? What happens when you fail or refuse to play by their rules?

While I've read a lot and experienced a lot since childhood-it remains to me the most fruitful place to study power dynamics, a kind of lab that helps me reflect on and understand how to operate from a place of social weakness. I had known for a long time that what was happening at home was unjust and I tried multiple strategies to gain some power back, and was met mostly with failure. By the time I was 7 or 8 I had trained myself not to react to beatings for the most part, which made my abuser escalate in attempts to break me psychologically, they succeeded by beating my sister instead. My sister, watching my example-tried to get me to exercise caution. She believed that the only solution was to get away as soon and as much as possible. She didn’t see why resistance was necessary-she thought by controlling me she could make our abuse stop. It didn’t, even when I complied with my abusers wishes. As a young teen, I made a deal with someone to get us out of that environment, it was a trap. No sooner than two years later, my brother, sister and I were made to pay for my mistakes. I became the center of a patriarchal witch hunt and lost everything.

I don’t know if my biggest mistake was ever taking a stand against abuse, but what if it was? I don’t know if I prevented any suffering with my behavior. Conventional wisdom says I shouldn’t hold responsibility, but when you look at the suffering of others and my results, it becomes clear that a conscious, mediated resistance will yield a collective punishment that might just land us in a worse place than the one we were trying to escape. Is that ever worth it?

In many ways, these dynamics mirror the dynamics many feminists face today. Would we trade the short term wellbeing of our sisters for a shot at freedom? Could we even bear it if we did? Will the long term alliance with powerful allies be something that helps us? Or is that an illusion too? If we give up the support of the institutional left, who will protect us? Can we even protect ourselves?

I am…bullheaded. I tend to think that the consistent prolonged effort of one woman could become many, I also can become very fixated on a goal. To me, the short term pain means very little if we can get somewhere tangible-but I am also strong and lucky. The sacrifice to me means nothing in the face of lifelong subordination. Other women, of less financial means, with different psychologies, different needs might suffer more intensely than others, they might see different paths out. I want to help them, I hate to see someone suffer, especially if I feel like it is because of me. It makes me question the whole enterprise. Is it my fault? My fault for wanting better? My Fault for asking for it?

There is a concept in Marxism called adventurism, this article from the International Review sums up the content nicely;

“The adventurer is in general a declasse. There are many such people within bourgeois society, with great ambitions, and with an extremely high estimation of their own abilities, but who are unable to fulfil their high flying ambitions within the ruling class. Full of bitterness and cynicism, such people often slide towards the lumpen-proletariat, living a bohemian or criminal existence. Others prove an ideal work force for the state as informers and agents provocateurs. But among this declassed magma, there are a few exceptional individuals with the political talent to recognise that the workers' movement can give them a second chance. They can try to use it as a springboard to fame and importance, and thus take revenge on the ruling class, which in reality is the object of their efforts and ambitions. Such people are constantly resentful of the failure of society at large to recognise their alleged genius. At the same time they are fascinated, not by marxism or the workers' movement, but by the power of the ruling class and its methods of manipulation.”

Thus, the adventurer is someone who seeks fame and personal success over the wellbeing of the masses, who might see the revolutionary potential of a movement-but manipulates it for their own personal gain. Is this me? In some ways, I share similarities with the characters described above. It would make me perfectly happy to work on liberation all day every day for money, a comfortable amount of money too. I do harbor cynical beliefs about my own potential,I am frustrated that the positions that would make me happiest, educator, writer and worker for the empowerment of others-would require me to abandon any political education of substance. I grieve a life I feel I deserve but am not permitted due to our political moment. I hurt and feel suppressed and am impatient to end that hurt. I think though (and I am alright with those who disagree-you just need to substantiate it) that what separates me from the adventurist is two-fold. My dream of freedom is legitimate and I am more than happy to share. Sure, I do delight in the idea of freedom for myself and am eager to give it to others. I just happen to have a flashy way of going about it.

So, let's come back to responsibility. Who is responsible for inciting the violence? The protestors or the police? Myself or my abuser? What I find most interesting, is that it is both not my responsibility, but also impossibly hard to accept that. The objective truth is this, an oppressor can get to you at any moment for any reason. The oppressed have, by definition of their oppression, no capacity to control the aggression. Our only hope in this life is to continue to try and move forward, no matter their attempts to terrorize because the “right opportunity” might never come in our lifetimes, we must create it.

My biggest mistake growing up wasn’t acknowledging what was happening to me was wrong, my biggest mistake was believing others when they told me it was hopeless. It was not changing tactics. It was allowing myself to live in despair when an adult I believed was my ally began to betray me. It took me a decade to act on the information I knew at the time, that adult acted out onto me what he wished he had the power to act out on our abuser-getting control back from himself at my expense. Forcing him to confront that would have helped us both. But I didn’t, I suffered, blaming myself for ever wanting anything better in this life. I collapsed under the guilt that I had been the cause of my own repression.

It is with an extraordinarily heavy heart that I acknowledge the way forward will not be easy and there is precious little I can do about that. I don’t always have control of who they target. I can’t control who will give up. I can’t control the pain watching another woman suffer will cause me. Men and women invested in patriarchal power will do whatever they can to stop us. Our only recourse, as always, is to gather, to educate, to stand up for one another and keep moving forward, it is our only way of getting to the other side.

[kritischetheologie]

13 and 16

13. worst blorboficiation

16. you can't understand why so many people like this thing (characterization, trope, headcanon, etc)

I wrote a little bit about my frustrations about how max is written here. I do think the worst is actually daniel though. As much as I complain about how Seb is written, I feel like fanon Daniel is basically a mary sue who exists to teach Max how to love himself. There are exceptions to this rule-- generally, Daniel POV fic engages more deeply with his flaws, etc. I could recommend some tremendous fics that let Daniel be a complete person and undergo his own personal growth journey; off the top of my head, the UFC AU, the porn fic, and the ongoing hunger games au (I'm not tagging the authors since this is technically daniel hate but since y'all are mutuals hello hi love your stuff) all do a tremendous job engaging with, among other things, Daniel's tricky relationship to his own ambition, the mix of bloodlust and listlessness, the fear of deep emotional investments, the need to be liked... etc. I don't often fuck with Dando, but I do actually think Dando fic often gets closer to my sense of Daniel's characterization than most of what's on the dash, especially the works of the eminent ladyeggplant.

But I think a big part of the problem I have with Daniel as a blorbo is that Daniel does nothing for me, sexually. Less than nothing. I find him the worst type of annoying fratty straight guy and so every time my dash has a Daniel Day I just feel like I'm on the Truman Show. like this guy??? this is who you all want to fuck?? The ratio of want to fuck him vs want to be him is a little too high for me. (I have this problem with Carlos-posting too). this is, to be clear, almost certainly a Me Problem.

16. you can't understand why so many people like this thing (characterization, trope, headcanon, etc)

I mean, see above for my thoughts on The Desire to Fuck Daniel Ricciardo. Honestly... I don't really understand the prevalence of Turned Into A Girl AU's. yours (lmao!) is tremendous, insofar as it actually goes there on, like, the way that lewis is willing to fuck girl seb and not boy seb and what that says about both of their relationship with their sexuality. but it feels like a lot of the use of that trope is just a kind of lazy excuse to write het without having to engage with the reality of patriarchy... like, the blorbo who isn't a girl still sees the blorbo who is as a Real Person because he knows he's not really a girl, there's no risk of pregnancy because it's not Really his body, etc. etc.

you and I have obviously had long conversations about a/b/o and the way that trope can like, reproduce and also naturalize fucked up gender dynamics, but I don't like the way that the turned into a girl so often just sidesteps them. like there's always the token line about how they don't need to use protection because they can't get pregnant in this body, and I'm like [regina george voice] so you agree? you think engels's ursprung der familie was right about reproductive labor as the original site of class domination?

obviously this is a very cis-normative take and there's been tremendous work done by trans theory to disconnect patriarchy from the whole [catharine mackinnon voice] man fucks woman: subject verb object, thing, but... to me, it's very difficult to disentangle the social and legal structures of patriarchy from the uneven power dynamics of PIV sex, and god, I get it, I totally get the way it's a sort of wish fulfillment, so like, sure, that's why everybody likes it, but...

but like use it as an opportunity to say something about sex and gender and embodiment, you know?