#like adoption should be an extremely rare thing…..we should be unsettled by adoption the way it works rn

[angelfrommontgomery]

Those are the numbers for adoptions by parents who have no prior connection to the child like imagine u make 5k a year and u can’t afford to care for ur child so u get pressured into relinquishing them to a private agency and an infertile couple who HAS to have a baby drops 50k to adopt ur baby and they are strangers and your baby isn’t even going to be cared for by somebody in your own community who is able to but instead is going to whoever can foot the massive bill and the adoptive parents consider this a “win-win” situation cuz now they have a baby and the baby has a loving home but u were a loving home ur just poor and now u have been forever changed by this experience nobody wants to acknowledge

[i-will-physically-fight-you]

The History Behind Unsympathetic/Sympathetic and My Personal Views on It

I’ve been in the fandom since 2018. I watched Can Lying Be Good? and I was desperate to find Deceit fic because heck, he was such a cool new character! But I was dissatisfied to find, time and time again, all the fics depicted him as a manipulative, abusive piece of garbage who was evil for the sake of being evil and no shred of good in his snakey heart. 

And look. I’ve been in fandoms since 2012. This fandom isn’t the first fandom to take a character and depict them that way. At that point in time, it seemed like Deceit was a villain (or at least an antagonist) and I was fine with reading villain Deceit. I just wanted more nuanced, multi-faceted Deceit. A Deceit who thought he was the good guy. A Deceit who did the wrong things for the right reasons. A Deceit who was a bad guy, sure, but human. I wrote the fic I could not find anywhere else in the fandom. So as funny as the fact that I rarely write Janus now, he’s the whole reason I ended up in this fandom. 

Shortly after the video aired, there was concerns over triggering content involved with this depiction of Deceit. Vice versa, there was also concerns about the depictions of Deceit in a softer, redeemed light. As some people found this to be uncomfortable for their own reasons. Simply tagging any and all Deceit content with just the character tag wouldn’t work. There needed to be a separate tag.

 I was never been involved with the fandom pre-Deceit, but I must say it’s really fascinating to see how his introduction to the series greatly impacted the sociology of the fandom to this day. Because this gave birth to the sympathetic tag and would later bring about the unsympathetic tag.

Yes, sympathetic, because largely the fandom view was that this character was an irredeemable villain and so the character tag acted as the unofficial “unsympathetic” tag.

 Keep in mind until SVS we didn’t get any substantial on-screen time w/ Deceit. We also didn’t really get much glimpse of what his personality was like before then, because the majority of Can Lying Be Good he was acting as Patton. That’s a LITERAL YEAR where the fandom had to guess at what Deceit was like.

Now fandoms, like I mentioned before, easily fall into a black and white morality when comes how they interact and perceive characters regardless of canon. Either a character is an abusive monster unworthy of redemption or they’re a soft cinnamon roll who can do no wrong. This occurred with Deceit.

For the longest time, there were two popular depictions of Deceit. An irredeemable abusive monster and a fluffy scaly boi who can’t help always speaking in lies (thus what he speaks is always reverse of what he really means) and could do no wrong. It was dark times for those who reveled in morally-grey Deceit, who could not find fics who weren’t these two extremes.

Which I’m not saying either popular depiction was bad. The beauty of fandom is that everyone is free to create and interact with however they like. it just seemed to me to be wildly different from the little we had seen of Deceit. 

Somewhere down the lines, the “unsympathetic” tag was born. I’d like to believe it was sometime before SVS but I could be wrong. Again--Deceit was the catalyst for this. It was argued that using the character tag for the placebo “unsympathetic” tag caused those who liked the character to be made feel bad for liking the character. 

But there still needed to be a tag for those who found abusive/manipulative depictions of him triggering, right? So the unsympathetic tag was born.

Definitely after SVS was the first instance I remember the unsympathetic tag was used for a character other than Deceit (A shocker I know!!). Some people found Patton’s behavior in the episode to be manipulative. Art/fic depicting him to be this way was created. And since, the unsympathetic tag was a concept that already existed in the fandom, it made logical sense to start using that for Patton. 

And eventually, of course, this spiraled into using it for the other sides. Any fic/art depicting a side to be on the same levels of fanon Can-Lying-Be-Good Deceit was given this tag.

When Remus was introduced w/ DWIT, the fandom reacted rather differently. There was a huge show of acceptance & support for him, in a way that Deceit didn’t receive in CLBG. He was given the “cutesy cinnamonroll” treatment, with people calling him a trash goblin and adopting him. Of course, there was the opposite effect happening as well. With art/fic depicting him as a ruthless monster. 

And there was still people who found the character uncomfortable/unsettling, myself included (it’s taken awhile but I’ve warmed up to his character). So a new tag, different from unsympathetic/sympathetic, was born. The “DukeDontLook” tag. This tag has fallen largely out of use, for similar reasons as the character tag for Deceit being used as a placebo for unsympathetic Deceit.

However, I think the latest episode illustrates a valid point in all of this; although the “unsympathetic/sympathetic” tags were born out of good intentions, it does not change the fact that in some ways, they’ve been more detrimental than good. Pushy is pushy, as dear Janus would say. It forces the fandom to view content through a narrow black-and-white lens. 

Whereas the series has shown, it’s much more complex than that. These characters are more than just the good sides (”Light” Sides) vs bad sides (”Dark” Sides) of Thomas. They’re part of a human’s personality and humans? They’re flawed beings. They’re not wholly good or wholly bad. Same goes for a singular human trait. The world is grey. Janus can be right sometimes, just like Patton can be wrong sometimes. And there’s nothing erroneous with that.

But! That does not change the unsympathetic tag served a purpose for a reason. And that the reason? To help those find characters depicted that way upsetting. So how can we help those who need it? 

In my opinion, “unsympathetic” tag should be replaced with “villain” tag (Ex. “villain logan”) if the character is a clear antagonist. If it’s a fic, even include that in the warnings/author’s note. If it’s more complex than using that label, elaborate. (Ex. “This character will do something that some might find to be triggering”)

TLDR: The Unsympathetic/Sympathetic tags started out of good intentions, but I believe it has caused more harm than good. It’d be best to replace “unsympathetic” with “villain” as those who wish not seeing a character portrayed in that light can then block those tags.

[trickstercaptain]

JACK, MASCULINITY & BISEXUALITY.

          so I’ve made absolutely no secret of the fact that one of the big things I love about Jack as a character ( among plenty, plenty of other things ) is how he challenges traditional ideas of masculinity, and I’m gonna use this meta opportunity to elaborate on that and hopefully connect it to Jack’s sexuality ( mostly within his canon verses, though a lot of this does also apply to his modern verse ). the long and the short of it is that Jack is simultaneously allowed to be a badass and admirable to the audience and display selfishness, cowardice, his own quirks and his desire to avoid violence wherever possible. the first two demonstrate the perks of being an anti-hero, but it’s the last one that I’m going to talk about first: Jack does not like violence. he will choose methods of solving a problem that avoid, where possible, the use of brute force, even when it puts him at a disadvantage. he chooses not to shoot Will in order to escape the smithy in CotBP despite that proving to be the easiest way out, and he is told by Barbossa in that same movie that it’s likely the mutiny would not have happened if he hadn’t been such a merciful captain. we are encouraged to like him as an audience because he uses his wits to get out of trouble, and we are encouraged to like him in spite of the fact that he is the worst swordsman of the franchise, relatively speaking, and that he in fact loses every single fight he is a part of ( unless he cheats, which he does frequently ). 

        second, he is also allowed to be quirky. a lot of this links in with the idea that Jack is an archetypal trickster: he is transgressive on purpose because that is what a trickster does. he breaks the rules because it’s fun, he manipulates others because it’s fun, he gets bored easily and uses trickery and deceit to get ahead of his opponents while casting himself as a fool. tricksters also tend to have a very fluid attitude towards gender because, once again, it is another way to transgress boundaries, and there’s certainly an undeniable sense of androgyny to Jack. I’m not here to label him as anything because a) in Jack’s canon any modern ideals just wouldn’t apply and b) he is still a man and, more importantly, still benefits consistently in his narrative from being a man, so this androgyny is purely in how he outwardly expresses himself rather than the result of any internal struggle. he is experimental and individualistic and this is one of many ways in which Jack’s character draws on the rock star tradition ---- particularly the rock star tradition of challenging masculinity with the way they dressed on stage ( think Bowie, Jagger and Hendrix ).

         but this sometimes effeminate expression of his sense of self does make it more difficult to be taken seriously by others, both within his own social strata of fellow pirates and outside of it: he wears kohl that, while practical, accentuates his pretty boy, fey image, he wears his hair long and braided ( which isn’t necessarily a sign of “femininity” in itself, though he combines this with tying trinkets and beads and jewellery into it ), he sways as he walks ( again, a practical response to being on a ship for long periods of time, but isn’t something that Jack ever seeks to correct in order to appear more intimidating ) and is fond of theatrical gesturing which, yes, feeds into a stereotype but means that in no way does he carry himself in a typically masculine way. for instance, the way Jack sits: while yes there are times when he deliberately kicks his feet up on the table to occupy extra space and piss people off, he doesn’t consistently sit down in a way that emphasises his physical power or dominance ---- in fact, in the last multiple Jacks scene in AWE, when Jack is talking to himself in the brig, we see one of the clones crossing his legs with his hands on his lap as he sits on the bench ---- something I would argue is rather reserved and not overly masculine in nature.

        now there’s an argument to be made that Jack uses his effeminacy to his advantage, in the same way that a trickster would bend any rule that benefitted him, and that this isn’t the true him, but I’d argue that, while there is of course an element of using that behaviour to encourage others to dismiss him as a fool of no consequence, it is too consistent for it to be an act, particularly as it causes him as many problems as it does solutions. it’s absolutely in his nature. another great example I want to draw on is in The Price of Freedom, where Jack uses his “sexuality” ( I use this word loosely as it’s really the only way to describe what he does lmao ) to unsettle one of Teague’s lieutenants and jailors and throw him off, both while he’s been searched airport security style and while he’s trying to conspire with Christophe to break him out of Shipwreck’s cells.

“Roger, old chum, unless you want to cause me embarrassment—and yourself a lifelong case of envy—by demanding that I actually produce the goods for your delectation…er…inspection, I’d suggest you desist.” He batted his eyes at Teague’s lieutenant.

[...] Without answering, Jack abruptly turned to confront Mortensen, who was looming behind him, scarcely a handbreadth away. “I don’t care if you’re present, Roger, but must you breathe down the back of me neck?” He rolled his eyes. “Or are you trying to work up the courage to grab me backside and give it a squeeze?” He’d spoken loudly, and his voice carried to all Christophe’s crewmen. The cell-bound pirates laughed, whistled, and jeered obscene suggestions at Mortensen.

        I love this scene because it shows how Jack switches effortlessly between typically masculine and typically feminine behaviour and uses both to achieve what he wants. the seductive act of flirting with Mortensen ( despite the fact that Jack is twenty in this scene and is very likely half the age of the jailor in question lmao ) to throw him off is a very femme fatale sort of solution ( and that is an archetype that Jack plays around with a lot ), but being a man adds an element of what I spoke of earlier too ---- that he’s more likely to be dismissed as an irritating little shit and not someone who is conspiring to break someone out of the cells. he also relies on the hyper-masculinity he is surrounded by when he speaks loudly enough for all of the pirates in the cells to hear and jeer Mortensen in response, further embarrassing him and diverting his attention long enough for Jack to make his intentions to Christophe clear.

        because this is the thing about pirates, friends. yes, they were largely accepting of and/or unbothered by homosexual behaviour, and had crews who operated in a far fairer way than many merchant or naval ships of the same period, but they are still male-dominated environments. female pirates are rare as far as historical records show purely because we only know for sure that a few were women. women would, for the most part, have to adopt masculine traits in order to exist in the same space, and many would and did disguise themselves as men in order to achieve this. Jack is therefore something of an anomaly in his challenge of male gender norms ---- he could act more like your typical brutish, violent male captain and have a far easier time of it because that’s ultimately the sort of behaviour that is rewarded in this hyper masculine space, but he doesn’t, and this is where he stands out and positions himself as an outsider even in the profession he had literally branded into his arm.

        Jack has also been directly hurt by this culture of hyper masculinity, too. it’s clear that his grandmother sees him as an easy target for her abuse because he both struggled to and didn’t want to conform, and he faces similar criticism from Teague because of his non-violent personality. in his attempt to not become like Teague, too, Jack internalises his own anger and aggression which makes him self-destructive as opposed to outwardly destructive to others. Christophe is the most similar pirate in the franchise to Jack in terms of the flamboyant way in which they both present themselves ( and Jack is no doubt influenced by Christophe in that respect, though that’s another meta entirely ), but Jack does not share his ruthless, amoral personality. and he is mutinied against by Barbossa because people are easier to search when they’re dead. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, but it speaks to the strength of Jack’s character that he remains a largely good-hearted individual when it ultimately comes down to it, and did not contort his sense of self in order to make his life easier.

        so linking all of this into his sexuality, while Jack is bisexual by modern definitions of the word and does not have any shame associated with it due to the openness of pirates to living outside of the established norm ( and the fact that Jack grew up among these pirates, so would likely have not realised the extent of the prejudice that existed until he joined the merchant service and entered into civilised society ---- and I mean, when he did he was called a molly at one point by Mercer ), he was never properly taught how to have a healthy relationship with another man, whether romantically/sexually or not. Jack doesn’t really have many positive close relationships with other men to draw on ( Robby and Gibbs are of course the exceptions, and they are both extremely important ) and all of the betrayals in his life until Elizabeth come from men. moreover, just because pirates were more accepting of homosexual relations between men, doesn’t necessarily mean that pirates should be held up as paragons of healthy behaviour lmao, both in general and in regards to male on male relationships. ships are male dominated microcosms in the same way that all-male prisons are. and this is why Jack does develop one toxic male trait: the inability to express his emotions in a constructive and open way.

        Jack therefore, for the most part, just doesn’t like men. he knows how to get along with them, he certainly has a brothers-in-arms approach to his crewmates and isn’t beyond liking the odd one or two, like Robby and Gibbs ---- and it is certainly a theme that Jack is drawn to those soft, non-threatening, nurturing sorts of men ( to fill a void of nurturing behaviour in his life, imo ). of course he has trashy taste too thanks to the lingering damage of his crush on Christophe and living and growing up in the sort of environment that rewards hyper-masculine behaviour, but his most successful relationships with men are those he doesn’t perceive as threatening, and those who are happy to compliment rather than challenge him in his position as captain.

       meanwhile, he loves women. absolutely fucking adores them, and I don’t mean this just in a sexual way, but in a genuinely appreciative way too. he craves their company and prefers their company to men ( he is honestly so much happier sat at a table with five other women than he is sat with five other men ), and I think this is because he’s more likely to find acceptance with them than he is men, and historically speaking in his life has found greater understanding and affection and care from women than he ever has from his own sex. and I think in turn, because he too is a very non-threatening sort of man, absolutely a woman’s man like my god, is why he is generally adored so much by the women in his life in spite of his flaws and lesser traits lmao. why do Giselle and Scarlett constantly let him back into their lives?? because yes he’s fun and  good in bed but, if Jack’s list of corrected lies to them at the end of AWE is any indication, he also spends a considerable amount of time just talking to them, spending time in their company and getting to know them.

[ograndebatata]

Prisma headcanons

Well... here’s a bit of a variation of headcanons as far as series goes, if still keeping in touch with the general theme (by which I mean I’ve temporarily switched from headcanons on characters from Elena of Avalor to a character from Sofia the First, while still keeping the theme of villains). 

So... I’ve chosen to tackle Prisma this time around.

As I mentioned in my last headcanons post, I don’t think I’m the best at coming up with headcanons for villains, as I struggle with the balance of making them ‘ultimately pity worthy’ and at the same time ‘clearly in the wrong’, which is, in my personal opinion, how the average villain should be if you want to make him or her three dimensional and not entirely evil.

To those more coming over from the Sofia the First fandom, please note that my headcanons can stray into dark territory, including things like deaths in the characters’ pasts and heavily implied or even explicit violence.

This one is also a bit different in that it involves some, shall we say, bad parenting (and unlike other instances of it, it comes from biological parents rather than adoptive or step parents). I’m not absolutely sure it crosses the line into abuse, but I’d say it very likely does. I welcome any feedback on that matter should you wish to provide it.

At any rate, reader discretion is very much advised when reading this.

To those who still want to do so, please check below the cut for my headcanons on Prisma.

Prisma

No chip off the old block

Like all crystal-makers, Prisma was born in the Mystic Isles, the realm where all of magic originates. Her father Littrow and her mother Iolite, were Crystal Masters of great renown, and her sister Azurine, about four years older than her, already showed signs of being a promising Crystal Master in her own right, with some saying she could be even better than her parents.

But if their expertise on that field was said to be top of the Mystic Isles, the same could not be said about Prisma’s.

Granted, the start of her life was not the best ever. While most throughout the Mystic Isles liked Prisma, finding her a clever, sweet, well-mannered and cheerful child, even if her appearance did not favor her in the least. Granted, they knew she was not to blame, but there was something about her chalky complexion combined with her auburn hair and her pale cat-like eyes that made her look unsettling, even as a child. That wasn’t helped by the fact her parents held quite the reserve of judgement about her, thinking her demeanor was just too cheerful and bubbly, not proper for a Crystal Master in the least. Also, she seemed to ask too many questions, and had a bit too much curiosity about things they would rather not talk about. She would also be too reluctant to study certain subjects and too eager to study others for their taste. Azurine had been much better on all those aspects, with a far more proper demeanor and far more willingness to obey her parents and far less tendencies to question them. And, while they wouldn’t say this to their daughter, they too couldn’t help but be a tad put off by her icy feline eyes, even if her character did not match them in the least.

But if Prisma’s parents had their reservations, her big sister loved her dearly from the first time she laid her eyes on her. Prisma, in turn, loved and idolized her older sister, though she responded to her parents’ reservation with a rather healthy measure of wariness. Azurine was sad at what the relationship between her sister and their parents was like, but did her best to make up for it.

Things grew worse Prisma was seven, and her parents had her making her first crystal, as per tradition of all Crystal Masters. While crystal-makers are very long-lived, they age at about the same rate as humans for the first two decades or so of their lives, and their art is to be started at as young an age as possible.

As Prisma had been excellent at the theory in the classes she had already been getting (even with her reluctance for them), both Littrow and Iolite had high expectations for her first crystal. And both had them nearly-shattered once Prisma put her first crystal to use.

Both her parents had been expecting something spectacular, such as an Aqua Crystal, or a Ventus Crystal.

But instead, it turned out to be an Energy Crystal.

Even Azurine was shocked by that one, although unlike her parents she made the effort to smile and compliment Prisma on such a well done crystal, given that it was a technically perfect Energy Crystal.

But her parents were less understanding. Energy Crystals had very little practical use, because as their name would suggest they could only shoot blasts of what could only be described as ‘energy’ - beams of ‘solid light’ that damaged or even destroyed what they hit. Worse, they tended to be sought after by human magicians who would normally use them to wreak havoc in the living world, or even, on a few rare occasions, be used by evil crystal-makers themselves.

For the first time, Littrow and Iolite truly made Prisma sad. She couldn’t understand what was so bad about her crystal. She had worked hard on it, and while she hadn’t been expecting it to destroy the boulder she had used it on, surely crystals like that would be useful for something. Azurine was quick to reassure her that it meant nothing - the kind of crystal she had produced did not change who or what she was  - but her parents undid that right away.

Both were in agreement that they simply would not have a maker of Energy Crystals in their family. The gossip it would cause, the damage it would bring to their reputation… it simply could not be. Their younger daughter simply had to have some other crystal-making talent somewhere within her, and they would bring it out if it was the last thing they ever did.

One can say they certainly tried. And to her credit, Prisma did have the intellectual capacity to understand how other kinds of crystals were done. But there was something else at play, something her parents knew and which Prisma herself also learned soon enough.

A crystal-maker’s ability was genetic to a great degree. When it comes to their personal ‘brand of magic’ one is overall born with it. It can be strengthened and practiced, but it can’t be ‘actually’ changed. Azurine had been born with more than one brand of magic, but Prisma only seemed to have the ability to make Energy Crystals.

Sadly, her parents kept refusing to accept that. And as they kept trying to change what could not be changed, the gulf between them and their younger daughter only grew.

At first, Azurine didn’t mind. Sure, it seemed like Prisma needed help, but a lot of people throughout the Mystic Isles needed help with things. Once she had been helped, surely she would be better.

But as time kept passing, and Prisma only looked like she was getting worse, Azurine started to feel sorry for her and did her best to cheer her up, doing fun things with her to compensate for the strain of her so-called studies. They would go on walks through the many isles, study crystals, create many kinds of crystal contraptions (their best creations were the crystal locks) and Azurine would tell Prisma stories. And unlike her parents, she would actually answer Prisma’s questions to the best of her knowledge.

Prisma treasured the time spent with her sister… but as they both kept growing up, and word about Prisma’s lack of talent got out, far too many people started throwing comments about how sad it was that she couldn’t live up to her sister’s potential.

The best that could be said was that the other residents of the Mystic Isles did not have as many problems with Prisma’s Energy Crystals as her family feared, even if they did use them to bring up how talentless she ultimately was.

Publicly, Prisma acted sweet and bubbly and cheerful and like it didn’t bother her in the least.

But in private, at every chance she got, she would take one of her Energy Crystals and use it to blast at things to relieve her frustration.

It largely worked at first.

But as she grew older, it stopped having effect. And other following events did not help in the least.

Distancing and banishment

As time went by, Azurine started having a more active role in crystal manufacture and maintenance, thus leaving her less time to be with Prisma.

Her parents, however, kept dedicating themselves to her day and night, bent on bringing some kind of talent to create crystals that weren’t Energy Crystals out of her.

After a great deal of work that took up literally years of their lives (Prisma was already twelve by this time), they did manage to teach Prisma to make Terra Crystals, and while they were of a very basic sort, it was enough for them to be sure they were on the right path, and thus keep at their efforts.

But the task of creating Terra Crystals was too difficult for Prisma. They were so distant from her natural talent that even making one left her extremely tired. And Terra Crystals were still the simplest sort to make - all the others were even more complex. The idea scared her so much that she literally trembled in fear at the idea, because  she knew her parents would keep at it.

For the worst possible reasons, they never got the chance to do so, as months after Prisma finally managed to force her magic to produce Terra Crystals, a wicked witch named Illura invaded their home Mystic Isles, planning to steal their trove of knowledge on crystals and use it for her purposes on the Ever Realm - purposes they could all guess were not good, given the kind of foul power they could sense was boosting her already great inherent magic.

Azurine pointed out that there was no way she would be getting out with what she sought, as the Protectors would be arriving shortly even if she managed to defeat all four of them, which would be difficult as it stood, but Illura pointed out that she had left a little something behind to handle that problem. It took no tactical genius to realize that she meant a magical barrier.

And worse, she had brought along some similarly boosted humans, although they were not boosted to the same degree she was.

But Prisma had an idea. Perhaps the kind of barrier she had made could be broken through with her Energy Crystals. Thus she asked her parents and sister to keep Illura and her soldiers busy while she tested out her idea.

To her dismay, as she left, she heard her father shouting “Don’t do that! I forbid you!”. For once, she ignored his command and went on with her plan.

The first attempt did not go well. Blasting directly at the barrier with the energy from her crystals did nothing to it but strengthen it. Prisma counted herself thankful that she had only blasted a little amount of energy, otherwise it would be even more difficult to break through.

With that first step out of the way, she analyzed it to the best of her ability, and realized that Illura was using several metal rods she had installed in concrete places to sustain the barrier. And to prevent the Protectors from handling them, she had configured them so that the barrier would be outside them. As Prisma and her family were crystal makers, they should supposedly be unable to dismantle the metal rods.

Prisma knew she would be taking a risk with what she was about to do, but it was their only chance. Gathering herself, she aimed her Energy Crystal at the closest rod, and fired it with as much strength as possible.

To her relief, it worked. The metal rod shattered like a toothpick under the energy impact, and she felt the barrier weakening right away. Bolstered by her success, Prisma ran around and sought all the metal rods, and blasted them with her crystal. She succeeded in her task, but the effort was so intense that she had passed out.

Once she woke up, she made her way back to their damaged home, and learned that the Protectors were able to get through once she brought down the barrier, and Illura had been killed, while her soldiers (at least those that had survived) were simply sent back home, as they, besides being boosted, had also been brainwashed.

Unfortunately, she had brought down the barrier too late, as her parents ended up being killed.

Prisma didn’t know how to feel about that. On one hand, those had been her parents. On the other, she couldn’t remember a specific time when they had loved her for what she was. Ever since she could remember, they’d always had some sort of reservation with her, and she could see the clear differences between their interactions with her and the ones with Azurine.

She was sad about their deaths, but not in the way Azurine was.

At first, Prisma’s instincts were to comfort her sister, but upon seeing how all the Protectors were already taking care of that - and how no one at all seemed to have spared any thought for her, the first seed of bitterness was planted within her. Not even Azurine coming to check on her after the initial shock had passed and thanking her for bringing down the barrier did anything to change that.

And as the years went by, her bitterness only grew, for even though she had proved that her Energy Crystals did have their use - after all, without them, the barrier wouldn’t have been brought down - no one cared. All who wanted magic crystals went to Azurine, all who had praise to give only gave it to Azurine, and more than a few made disparaging comments about her.

Once more, Azurine did try to comfort her, saying that Prisma was her little sister and she loved her no matter what, and pointing out that if not for Prisma, the Protectors couldn’t have gotten in, they all would have been killed, and who knew what Illura would have done. And after all, what mattered the most was that Prisma knew she had done it.

But to Prisma, it was easy for Azurine to talk when she was the one who got all the attention and credit and praise. Just for once, she would like to be respected and loved and seen as talented.

And in a very ironic twist, Illura gave her the means to do so.

For whatever reason, she had brought along the notes she had collected on crystals, which had things even Prisma and Azurine hadn’t known about. Upon studying them and improving on them, Prisma was able, after almost twenty years of work, to build an enhanced Terra Crystal, with which she could create the most powerful crystals that had ever existed, something that Azurine could never hope to match.

It did have the unfortunate drawback of draining the isles she would make her crystals on… but Prisma was past caring about that. If they had never cared about her, she wouldn’t care about them either. The only thing that bothered her, if only on a subconscious level, was that she had to cheat to get that far.

And in the end, her plan failed anyway when Azurine managed to get the Terra Crystal away from her. And worse, by losing her enhanced Terra Crystal, she ended up losing her magic too. Somehow, she had put so much of herself into the crystal that its loss lead to her looking by and large like a regular human - her chalky skin became a dark tan and her auburn hair a dark brown. Only her eyes remained the same.

But even with her powers gone, Prisma managed to escape to the Ever Realm, vowing that someday, she would achieve her goal.

Wicked whiles

It turned out Prisma had been severely underestimating what she would need to do to achieve her goal. While getting to the Ever Realm from the Mystic Isles was easy enough, the other way ‘round was much more difficult. She made several attempts as the years went by, but none got anywhere close to success. And not having her powers to help put even more of a dampener on her attempts.

But one attribute that had not been stripped away by the loss of her crystal was a crystalmaker’s long lifespan, so she did have time to wait and plan. As she could sense her crystal had not been destroyed, she was also motivated to find a way.

And eventually, about a hundred years after her escape, Prisma did have a chance to return to the Mystic Isles when she ran into two princesses from Enchancia, one of which had an amulet that could summon unicorns.

Despite some minor hiccups, her plan worked out, thanks to her appealing to Princess Amber’s desire for a personal amulet. But when Princess Amber and Princess Sofia managed to come back and Princess Amber looked past her own desires and at the common good, destroying her Terra Crystal. And this time around, Prisma was captured by the Protectors and put in a cell.

Unfortunately, they put her in the cell closest to the Locket of Vor, something Prisma had heard stories about since her childhood, about how its power was terribly incomparable to anything in any realm. She didn’t know the whole story, as her parents had been adamant they wouldn’t share it until she was old enough to not have nightmares. All she knew was that Azurine, after hearing the story for the first time, looked as pale as Prisma had when she was still in her full Crystalmaker form.

Prisma assumed that Azurine was just unduly sensitive, and surely the locket could not be that dangerous. But she also assumed it would be more than enough for her purposes.

And with the help of a strangeling named Twitch, she was able to obtain it. She got surprised to find a spirit inside it, but she didn’t complain, especially upon learning how the locket could lead her to the Wicked Nine, objects that also were unbelievably powerful. With all those, Prisma knew she could reach power even further beyond than when she’d had her enhanced Terra Crystal.  

Her attempt to get the first one (the Falcon’s Eye) failed, but Twitch did bring her a Necessi-Key that she was able to use to get out of jail. Her attempt to get the second one (Maleficent’s spindle) also failed, but she was able to use her Necessi-Key to get away from Princess Sofia. Then, her attempt to get the third one, (Grimhilde’s crown) succeeded, and she was even able to get a weapon and a raven named Wormwood for a second animal ally out of it.

And Wormwood was a helpful ally indeed, happy to teach her anything he could about human magic, just as long as she would use it for evil. Prisma was not sure she could learn such things, given how she had lost her powers with her broken Terra Crystal, but it turned out human magic was different enough that she could indeed learn it. She even managed to learn enough that, though the Protectors were able to take Grimhilde’s crown away from her, she escaped.

She even started entertaining the thought of simply continuing her studies of human magic and get back where she was through that, which she believed would be possible. But the spirit within the locket put a stop to such ideas, reminding her just how far she could get if she absorbed the power of the Wicked Nine.

Eventually, Prisma was able to make her way back to the Mystic Isles, and release the power of the Wicked Nine. But it didn’t take her long to realize just what she had caused, once the spirit within the locket took a semi-corporeal form and dove into her body, to use her as a source of possession and put her plan into action.

In a second, she understood just why her parents would not share the full story about the Locket of Vor with her. There was so much darkness in that tremendously foul old spirit that it just about made Prisma petrified with terror. There was literally nothing there but joy at the horror and sadness and grief that she caused to anything and everyone. And a primary source of enjoyment to her was Prisma, even after what she had done for her.

Within Vor, Prisma did everything she could to break through and call for help, but it was useless. She could do nothing but be a silent partner as Vor unleashed her destruction.

In the end, she was released when Sofia used the sheer strength of her love to banish the spirit of Vor forever… and released again when Sofia’s friends pulled her out of the amulet, unwittingly dragging her along.  

Now aware of the kind of horror she would have been unleashing, Prisma surrendered to the protectors, ready to meet her punishment, whatever it was.

In the end, she had quite a surprise when Azurine, upon seeing her, rushed to hug her, shouting how relieved she was to know that she was alright and that she had been so worried.

Upon such a display, Prisma could do nothing but return the hug and cry like a fountain in a mix of fear, relief, and joy. And that night, for the first time in around a century, the two of them sat down and talked, and the broken bridges between them started being rebuilt.

Of course, Prisma still had to wait for quite a few years before being allowed out of jail. And once she did get out, she had to do further work before earning her complete freedom.

But by the end of it, she could genuinely say she was happier than she had ever been her whole life, even with the marks of everything she had endured and made others endure.

[butyouvealwaysbeenthecaretaker]

Rationalism: Pros & Cons

I’ve been toying with both adding “rationalist adjacent” to my Tumblr bio, and attending an IRL meeting – but I’m feeling very two-minded. The pros are so powerful and important – but so are the cons, and I’d venture to say the cons are actually worse.

I think it would be good to come up with a new label for a certain sort of Rationalism. The diaspora is very big, and like many social movements, has a lot of different splinters. I’d like to use a new term for “the bit of the diaspora I like”, because there is so much here I don’t want to be associated with. And so much I do.

I really like what Rationalism means on Tumblr, and how I understand it from participating here. We could call it Handmedown Rationalism, 2nd Generation Rationalism, or maybe there is a term for it that I've not encountered. Maybe the term is "Tumblr Rationalism", although I am not positive that using "Tumblr" as a prefix will communicate kindness and gentility well. "Kelseyan Rationalism", perhaps.

You get a radically different vision of what Rationalism means depending on...

You mostly read EY and Less Wrong

You mostly read r/ssc

You mostly read theunitofcaring

You actually live in San Francisco, and these people are in your social structure, not merely your news feed

It's very important to me to communicate "I believe in a kinder world, and want to be part of making it happen". Rather than "statistically, white people are better, and consent isn't evolutionarily sound" or "The biggest issue of our time is a hypothetical technology's hypothetical behaviour, and if you don't sign your children up for cryogenic freezing you are a lousy parent".

I've been researching and reading for months now, and I don't think I can use the term because there's such an huge iceberg of esoteric ideas below the surface, and too many of them are silly, terrifying or wrong. But I think most people who've encountered Rationalism through Tumblr are in a similar place about what they want to communicate when they say "Rationalist", and what they think "Rationalist" means - or want it to mean.

Is there another word? Can we make one?

Under the cut, long post of my “pros and cons” of adopting the label…

Nice things about Rationalism

1) Discourse norms which make me feel comfortable and supported to participate in discussions. The only people I feel entirely safe around on Tumblr. Both: people I always feel safe commenting on or reblogging, and people who rarely if ever put distressing content or behaviour in my newsfeed. The sorts of complex conversations and big ideas Social Justice promised - but no one is yelling at me or weaponising social shame.

2) Evidence-based reasoning, and a call to be open criticism, change your mind, listen to those you disagree with, and back up your positions.

3) Optimism that we can change the world – much needed, in the face of cynicism and apathy. Beautiful traditions like celebrating the eradiction of smallpox.

4) Social structures offering alternatives to the traditional role of religion: whenever core Rationalist bloggers write about their lives, I am deeply envious. Co-living, people who are united by shared values and vision, social norms favouring neuro-atypical people, etc. I would like this in my life.

5) I really like the idea of stepping away from the “Culture War”, because it generates “much heat but no light”. There’s an important kernel of truth there, about focusing on facts and productive work over clickbait and quick wins.

6) Some of their low-level issues are salient for me. This includes – attempting to have a more generous approach to men as a group, a general fear of Social Justice norms, and a belief in experimental self-care/improvement regimens.

7) I really grok Rationalists. I'm on the same wavelength. They're people I want to spend time with. Rationalism makes people happy and gives them purpose; that's always a good.

I think most tumblr people who use rationalist/rationalist adjacent are primarily communicating 1 & 7. They have discomfort with social justice norms: they want the discussion, politics and tolerance, without the shouting and death threats. And they intuitively see Rationalists and think "ah! my people!"

Unsettling things about Rationalism

Pretty much everything in this category boils down to “it is most rational to act effectively to achieve a stated goal. Too many Rationalist community tropes encourage extremely inefficient approaches.”

1) Missing the wood for the trees. Or focusing so hard on the wood you walk into a tree.

Like: politely playing footsie with fascists. There is such thing as too much civility. It’s good to be open minded and question your assumptions – but life is short. I’m OK with calling scientific racism a settled conversation so we can move on to something more important and productive. Like: a lot of the background noise about women, relationships, and consent. Sometimes things can’t be explained from a pure rational stance, and it’s uncomfortable to watch people try. How comfortable am I being associated with a group which includes Robin Hanson…? His writings about rape are - simply awful.

I do not for one moment wish to be mistaken for a person who agrees with those articles, or believes racism deserves a fair hearing when repackaged to sound sciency.

Every group is like this, right? But it's an odds game. I'm OK with identifying as a feminist, because I know our fringe crazies are safely on the fringe and small in number. With Rationalism...the fringe is putting the best ideas into practice effectively, while the core writings and influential figures are so far out the Overton Window they've actually hit the ground and started walking.

2) There’s nothing more stupid than a man who believes he is very clever.

“My idea is more logical than yours” functions a bit like “I’m more oppressed than you” in Social Justice spaces. If the space holds the value that “the most logical argument is king” or “the most oppressed person is prioritised”, then you don’t actually get rational debate or equality. You get a stick everyone tries to use to get ahead. Too many people presenting themselves as clever, not enough actual humility or uncertainty. When more status is granted for Writing Clever Worldbreaking Things, it encourages overconfident pseudoscience instead of authentic, accurate doubt.  

Also: factoring in emotions, impulsivity, and irrationality is a vital part of getting the right answer when it comes to human beings.

3) Subcultural norm against participating in politics. Political engagement is an important tool for changing the world. It’s not perfect, but it’s what we have – ignoring it is dangerous and daft.

4) Related: subcultural norm for starting from scratch over participating in someone else’s project.

The world is changed by those who do the dishes and take minutes at meetings. Lots of big-scale Rationalist projects attempt to duplicate stuff that already exists, or re-invent the wheel, instead of improving something imperfect and building on work already done. The Libertarian streak encourages this attitude towards government, and the urge to set up parallel agencies and initiatives – instead of working at the grassroots. Which is not glamorous, but it is effective.

5) The wrong goals.

You can change the world at a local level – whether that’s pressuring a local store, supporting local people, writing to councillors, becoming a councillor. Focusing on existential risk is…well, to reuse the phrase, it’s a lot of heat and no light. Masturbation and no money shot. Debates without answers, actions, or measurable outcomes. In short – it’s bad activism. Martin Luther King won by focusing attention on a particular cafeteria protest, a particular bus company.

6) Poor use of power.

Rationalism appeals to some of the smartest and most influential people on the planet – well-paid people in tech, who are ambitious, courageous and motivated. I’m pretty furious and horrified the ideology channels this energy towards AI Risk rather than, say, global warming – something which is definitely happening, hurting people right now, and could absolutely benefit from that passion, innovation, money, and a Libertarian alternative to government dawdling. Tech is – worryingly – powerful in the ways that governments are powerful; if you’ve developed a ideology which connects powerfully with people and makes them believe they can save the world, it’s a crime to then tell them to LARP about with imaginary robots. Like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos farting around with Mars rockets instead of nuking wealth inequality, or setting up top-quality schools in deprived areas, or eliminating HIV, or…

7) Feels like a dodgy pyramid scheme.

“We should pledge to give a percentage of our income in effective ways to change the world” – brilliant! “We define ‘effective altruism’ as ‘AI research done by the founder of our movement’ – even though AI research has minimal impact, and our founder has no credentials.” Hmmm. Also "thank you for donating to our group for teaching Rationalist thinking. We have now decided to change our focus towards the aforementioned AI research. Alas, it's so speculative, don't expect measurable results or accountability for this - just know your money has been well spent, saving the world."

I think it’s very ugly to fill people with beautiful feelings, and then channel them into giving you money.

I think it's unsettling that Rationalism provides community for people who are outsiders, who are disabled, and who have scrupulosity issues - then says "good people in our community donate to our founder. It is the most rational action, and the only way to save the world."

Like, you have a captive audience of people who have - at long last - found their tribe. They're very vulnerable to social pressure which may lead to exclusion from the group. They're motivated by the idea of acting rationally, inspired by purpose you gave them to go out and make a difference - and experience acute distress at thinking they are not doing enough good. Do not. Squeeze these people for money. You asshole.

I don't think it's deliberate - but it's still wrong.

8) I like what the Sequences stand for – but not the Sequences themselves.

Learning how to reason, how the mind works, learning critical thinking, developing flexibility and introspection are all excellent. But I want to learn that from original texts by the best thinkers in the world. That is pretty emphatically not You Know Who.

9) Related: Amateurism.

In theory, I like the idea of teaching individual citizens how to use statistics, analyse scientific papers, how to run experiments, and tailor their own medication etc. In practice, these fields have experts in for a reason. Someone who attempts to use statistics, and does it poorly, is far more dangerous and worse off than someone who does not pretend to know, but trusts a reliable source. Core-Rationalism frequently includes people making definitive statements and presenting themselves as an authority, and being very overconfident about their expertise.

(A lot of this is neurodiverse stuff, right? Setting up your own grandiose project from scratch; being an auto-didact; mistrust of traditional authorities; being very clever etc. I’m too ADHD to function, so I can see where it’s all coming from – but it’s hardly optimised for efficiency or outcomes.)

10) There is no such thing as a safe community, and getting these things right is very difficult.

However, it is discomforting how many people close to the heart of power have credible abuse accusations against them. Also, how one of the key Rationalist organisations responded to an abuse accusation, with an inadequate internal process which concluded everything was fine. They’ve since backtracked. That’s not enough for me, because abuse scandal management reflects your innate understanding, bises, beliefs and background. You can’t backtrack when you realise that it looks bad, because the original misstep continues to reflect your group’s true values.

Also, the wider movement has a lot of beliefs which lay the groundwork for abuse: mistrust of feminism, economic approaches to dating, gender and sex, evolutionary psychology and pseudoscience, key figures arguing that rape is nicer than being cheated on...

11) People who say "I don't like Social Justice", and lowkey mean "I don't like feminism or being nice to transsexuals". Rather than how I mean it: "I don't like being frightened or walking on eggshells, I don't like how rage and shaming are totally OK, I don't like how inflexible and bad faith ideas are, I don't like how I've seen it used in real life as a weapon to gain power and control. I don't like bullies."

We are on the same venn diagram, but not nearly enough of an overlap. (Given the choice between a nasty person who supports my rights, and a kind one who does not, I choose: cutting off contact with humans and never leaving my house again)

12) Rationalism is a mere degree of separation from a lot of online movements and subcultures which are definite problems. The resurgence of polite scientific racism; anti-progressive pushbacks on LGBT rights and feminism; some of the MRA stuff, some of the incel stuff; treating Trump/politics as a dinner party debate rather than an active threat...

Can one promote Rationalism, without accidentally building these movements too...? It feels too close, and wilfully blind.

13) I want what the Rationalists I follow have. When I think about attending the local meetup, I imagine an evening spent with reddit users who think racism is very clever, and use phrases like 'not technically rape". How can I even consider adopting a label when I figure the odds are like...70/30 in favour of the rape Nazis? I do not imagine meeting people I would like to leave my child with. I do not think I will find an IRL mirror of for the cool, compassionate, nerdy people I follow online.

If you even have to ask "what percentage of this group are likely to be rape Nazis?", your have your answer.

[observenature]

Alternative Narrative Construction

There are many key elements that differentiate humans from the rest of the living world.  On a systemic level, our intellect, our memory, and our creativity put us in a different category from all other Life on Earth.  In material and emotional ways our desire and compulsive drive to make sense of the actions and intents of others holds the duplicitous position of (possibly) being our greatest and worst feature.

Our brains have an innate tendency and capacity to assimilate observations, experience, context and memory into a narrative stream that becomes the story-line of our life.  We construct stories about what led up to an experience, what will happen after an experience, and what is going on during an interaction or experience.  This narrative drive penetrates to the core of all people — I would argue it is a fundamental human characteristic, seen across all cultures, professions, orientations, and intelligences.  It spans across arbitrary scales of time, from moment to moment — "Why did he/she say that?"  "This is why X is happening to me." — up to the time scales of civilization — "We are the chosen people."  "Our country has played such-and-such a role in human history." "Where is history taking us?"

Frequently, during that process of narrative construction we make two fundamental errors in reasoning that permit us to portray and/or distort that narrative such that we are always the victim and / or hero of our own narrative -- or said differently, these distortions seemingly permit us to live in the cognitive duality of believing we acted with our best self while not being intellectually honest in our examination of our actions or alternative potential actions. That we seek to (nearly) always create the narrative as such seems justifiable in a sense ... it is difficult to imagine telling ourselves the story of our own life and not feeling like we are doing the right thing most of the time (unless we are sociopathic). Often, if we do look back and question our behavior, we will distort the narrative of ourselves and others to post-dictively justify our behavior — hence why intellectual honesty and integrity are so critical to authenticity, moral character, and emotional intelligence.  At their core, these errors hinder our ability to be honest with ourselves and compassionate with everyone else.

The first fundamental error is that we assume, usually on little more than our immediate observations, that we have enough data to infer the narrative of anyone but ourselves.  For instance, we observe a momentary action of another, perceive it to slight or offend us or go against a value we hold, and then instantaneously create a narrative that vilifies that actor or calls their character or intent into question.  Similarly, we might perceive actions or words of others as complimentary or supportive of our own narrative, when they may in fact be critical, neutral, or irrelevant.  To my mind, the truth is, as is known by those in deep emotional relationships with others, it is extraordinarily rare that we have enough context and understanding of another's personal history and values to spin and follow their narrative thread, or to have any real insight into the motivations and intentions of others.  Yet we continually assume and impose a narrative of our own construction onto other people’s actions. We believe we know intent of another’s actions or words, and we discount the multitude of alternative reasons that could explain actions of another without vilifying them.  Presumably, this is because acknowledging this lack of understanding of another’s narrative: (a) is unsettling in so much as it leaves us without a narrative context (i.e. narrative ignorance) — in the absence of knowing another’s narrative which weaves with and affects the course of our lives, it becomes difficult to construct and maintain our own narrative, thereby assailing our identity and the context in which we make the choices on which our character is built, (b) calls into question the validity of our own narrative in which we are wronged or superior in some way — this opens up the possibility that we are not the hero or the victim, that our actions or words were not as good or wise or justifiable as we imagined, which might cause us to question if we are as good or smart or consistent as we imagine we are, and (c) it cripples our ability to infer intent and meaning in other people’s actions which hinders our ability to make our own, well-informed and rational choices that feel good and justified. This error in logic also harkens to a possible axis (of many) along which our personalities traverse -- that true balance between the extremes of self-pity (victim) and arrogance (hero) is an unstable equilibrium that requires constant work to maintain, and not everyone has the capacity, insight, or stamina to do that continual work (though I think/hope/have to believe that given a genuine desire, anyone can pull them selves into that state of unstable equilibrium).

The second fundamental error is that we create, bond with, and maintain a single narrative — usually the ego-centric hero/victim narrative.  We do not typically attempt to create alternative narratives that are simultaneously consistent with our observations and our ignorance, and portray the intents and actions of others in a (more) favorable light, unless that narrative also portrays our own actions and intents in a favorable light.  Of course, in any system or situation with imperfect knowledge of context and history — which is every situation and system — there will be multiple possible narratives consistent with current knowledge.  Yet rather than engaging in the intellectually honest work of generating alternative narratives from different view points, we choose the easiest and more self-favorable narrative.  That choice of narrative is often unfair to everyone else, myopic of the complexity of real life and real people, and ultimately, leads us to behave in ways that only reinforce our view of ourselves as victims or heroes, leading to self pity or arrogance, respectively, both of which should be avoided by those seeking balanced, compassionate, and integrious characters -- i.e. characters consistent with their best values and evident by their normal actions. As a scientist, I see this as being akin to articulating multiple hypotheses that are consistent with current data, and between which, in the absence of more data, no one hypothesis emerges as necessarily more plausible -- often those mutually consistent hypotheses each may lead to drastically different assessments of our own and other's actions -- a sobering thought when considered in light of the fact that we make life altering decisions based on a single, biased narrative hypothesis.  I want to be the kind of person that has the patience, compassion, and capacity to genuinely entertain multiple narratives, and maybe even generate decisions that are based on this more pluralistic vision of what the hell is happening around me.

While I stand behind all of these ideas (and of course, this is, in a sense, its own narrative), I am not really sure what to do about it, except maybe be more easy going, not read into the actions of others, and not tie my sense of self worth and life direction so strongly to the personal identity that requires constant inference and maintenance of my own and others’ narratives.  Pragmatically, in my current mindset that means removing expectations about people and situations -- I see expectations as punctuated narratives drawn from a biased view of prior experience and applied to current context for the purpose of making narrative construction easier, and almost surely, more error prone.  Lastly, I want to call into question my own narrative more frequently -- thus far I have found that to be the hardest thing I have ever done, but immensely valuable.  It is a strange basal value to have -- that is -- to hold as a primal value the questioning of one's own narrative whose dynamic trajectory sets the course of decisions and actions that lead to the adoption of other primal values.  Maybe honesty, uncertainty, flexibility and patience have a stronger link than I once realized.

Here's to giving one less fuck every day! :)

[bestinshowdogtraining]

Home Alone?

Dogs Home Alone- What You Can Do

Dogs have a much better time of it these days. No longer do they have to while away hours in the doghouse outside; they are more often kept indoors and treated like family members. But, although we may have changed our attitude toward our pets, we have changed our lifestyles, too, and we are now less available. Frequently both parents work away from home and the kids are at school. So, although dogs no longer have to battle the elements outside, they do have to contend with being home alone during the day, sometimes all day, with little to occupy their time. From the owner's point of view, the home may be ideal: plush rugs, elegant furniture, and chic décor, but dogs do not appreciate such environmental refinement and would by far prefer to be socializing with people or other dogs, or chasing a blowing leaf outside. Like children, dogs have an agenda that is subtly different from that of adult humans, and have likes and dislikes that can be diametrically opposed. Some "Type-B" personality dogs may nap during their owners' absence, arising lazily with a yawn and stretch upon their return. Other more compulsive "Type-A" dogs may suffer extreme boredom and stress during their owners' absence. The telltale signs are easy to see: the garbage can contents may be strewn across the floor, cupboard doors opened, food stores raided, paper or pillows shredded, and so on. While there is a well-known syndrome of separation anxiety, the bored dog scenario is distinct from separation anxiety and represents the sometimes ingenious attempts of a dog that is "bored out of his mind" to find something time-filling to do. In attempting to distinguish between a dog with separation anxiety and one that is just bored you should ask yourself the following questions:

· Did you acquire your dog from a shelter or pound?

· Has he had multiple owners?

· Did you get him when he was over three months of age?

· Is he a "Velcro dog"? (Does he follow you around constantly?)

· Does he appear anxious as you prepare to depart?

· Does he whine or bark after you have left?

· Does he urinate or defecate ONLY in your absence?

· Does he destroy things ONLY in your absence?

· Does he refuse to eat when you are away?

· Does he greet you over-exuberantly when you return? A score of five or more "yes" answers is highly suggestive of separation anxiety. If any doubt exists as to the precise cause of the dog's unrest or agitation when you are away, a video recording will serve as the tiebreaker. Dogs with separation anxiety are visibly anxious, pacing, panting, and whining or barking, whereas dogs that are bored simply wander around searching for something to do. Also, they may get up and down frequently and act in an unsettled, restless way as if experiencing a dilemma (which they probably are). The key to managing an otherwise bored dog is "Environmental Enrichment" (the big E's). Below is a list of measures that owners can employ to reduce their dog's tedium during long stints home alone. 1. Get a dog for your dog. Although getting a dog for your dog rarely works to improve separation anxiety, this can help your bored dog – as long as the two dogs get along. However, introducing an overly dominant, oppressive dog may have exactly the opposite effect. If in doubt, ask an expert to help you select the right dog for your dog and lean toward a younger individual and one of even temperament. 2. Hire a dog walker. Most dogs really appreciate the lunchtime visits of a dog walker who provides a much welcome respite in the middle of an otherwise long day of nothing to do. 3. Doggy day care. One better than a dog walker is doggy day care. The problem here is that it is expensive and thus probably only available to yuppie puppies. Check out the day care center thoroughly as you would kiddy day care for young children. 4. Crates. Providing a dog with a crate gives him a room of his own, a place in which to hang out and to get away from it all. If you don't provide a crate, most dogs will improvise, finding solitude under a table or bed or behind a couch. Crates should never be used for punishment or as a substitute for appropriate management. I think it is rarely, if ever, appropriate to shut a dog in his crate all day while you are away but an open crate is another matter. 5. Food puzzles/sustained release food. Most people have developed the habit of feeding their dog before they leave in the morning. The dog wolfs down his food and then has nothing to do all day. It may be more appropriate to feed the dog as you leave and/or to arrange for the food to be discovered by the dog after you have left. 6. Radio/TV. Many people already leave a radio or television on for their dog when they leave. The "white noise effect" does seem to have a soothing effect and thus may have some redeeming features. Think of it this way; any lilting/melodic sound (not "heavy metal") or even just background gibberish is probably better than the sound of silence or a clock ticking on the mantelpiece. Most animals seem to prefer seeing images of other animals or nature programs. 7. Room with a view. Some of the best visual enrichment that a "home alone dog" can enjoy is the "real TV" experience of observing the world outside through a window with a panoramic view. 8. Transitional object. Some people report that leaving out an article of their apparel comforts their dog. The dog can then snuggle up to the item in their absence and be reminded of better times. 9. Rotation of toys. Well-meaning owners leave toys out for their dog to play with in their absence. This is a valuable enrichment strategy but will not work well unless the toys are interesting and novel. Toys that move or are good to chew are apparently the most fun and the way to keep them riveting is to rotate them so that they don't lose their appeal. 10. "A tired dog is a good dog." You could also say, a happy dog. Exercise generates serotonin in the brain and thus has a calming and mood-stabilizing effect on man and beast. A dog that has had a good run for 20 to 30 minutes before the owner departs will be less anxious, more composed, and prepared for a little R & R in the form of a good nap. 11. Dog door/fenced in yard (except perhaps in the big city). Another idea, if you live in the suburbs and have a reasonable-sized fenced in yard, is to fit a dog door to allow your dog to come and go at will. There are many ways that we can try and make our dogs' lives more interesting and engaging during our absence. Some dogs will fare quite well with the application of just a few of the measures listed above. Nevertheless, the wisdom of getting a highly social pet like a dog must be considered if you know in advance that you will be required to be apart from that pet for many hours each day. It is preferable to choose the right time in your life to acquire a dog – a time when you are in a position to spend sufficient quality time with your pet and not wind up a latchkey parent. For those of you for whom this advice is too late, take heart, adopt the some of the big E's, and look out for your old pal.