#logical rational practical were so foreign terms for me

[iftitah]

i think im getting better at living in the moment

[cerastes]

Why do you think Doctor is popular amongst AK fans, Drimo? Is it solely because of the typical insert self thing all gacha protags have in common, or is it Being Into War Crimes and Silly Shit? Or a mix of both?

A number of factors, in my opinion.

Arknights is more of a niche game in terms of appeal and presentation when compared (and contrasted) with the rest of the market, and indeed, while it doesn't have the sales of products with potent, established IPs behind them (IE: Fate) or products that have a more mainstream appeal to them (IE: Genshin), it still does pretty well in terms of revenue because it has leaned into its niche and has succeeded in it.

You could consider Doctor a reflection of that design philosophy and output: A good deal of mobile games sort of force the angle of "you are a young person, not an adult yet" to the main character. Or it goes completely unaddressed and people just fill in the blanks however they see fit. With Doctor, the possibility of not being an adult is, well, astronomically low, but never outright impossible. This is not done by assigning an age or age range to the character per se, but rather, because of how the world treats them, and here is where I think Doctor, as a character meant to be our point of view into the world of Arknights, succeeds and ends up more interesting than practically everyone else: Doctor is part of the world's mystique, not a mere visitor to it.

Doctor is not a rando that got pulled into something bigger than them and now has to scramble and make allies to deal with it. Even from second one, when one might get that impression, it's immediately established that Doctor had their hands in the pie since a long time ago, these people aren't just getting to know you now, you are surrounded by a mix of characters that know you closely and others than have heard the stories. Amiya and Ace have already gone through thick and thin with you, Dobermann has only heard you're this absolute monster of a tactician, Scout knows you so well that he can lament what has become of you. Your character, Doctor, is not a visitor, a foreigner, they are, from second one, DEEPLY involved in the overarching story, with ties to several characters from the get go. The way the player is eased into the world from such a character is amnesia, which organically allows you to "relearn" the world, your duties, and what's going on.

The war crimes and silly bits, as you put it, are a big fruit born from the fertile soil detailed above, but it's not the war crimes and silly bits in a vacuum that make Doc universally popular, but rather, the way they are treated as building blocks of an ultimately more important facet of the story: Doctor is in fact part of the world, and not a mere visitor experiencing the world, and they have the characterization, loose as it may be in some regards (the silly bits and the bits open to interpretation) and rigid as it may be in others (the war crimes, the ties to Amiya, Kal'tsit, Flamebringer, W, and other veteran RI personnel, and other such bits that are NOT fully open to interpretation). Few things about Doc are set in stone in a way that you can't do whatever you want with them as a self-insert, while at the same time, there are some things that are inexorably tied to Doctor's role as a character, which are not merely informed, but rather, are built upon and developed constantly, intrinsically and extrinsically. That last bit there might have been confusing, so let me posit an example: If they were merely informed, we'd be told Doctor did some very very bad things in the past, but that's ok! You can be better now! It's the future that matters, we'll change from here on! But it is not merely informed, it is built upon and developed, we're told Doctor did some very bad things, but not to the character directly at first, rather, we hear discussion about Doctor's past, then it's ambiguously suggested to the character proper (usually, it's Kal'tsit that does this) that they were godawful in the past, and no one in earshot really denies it, but they weren't just godawful, they also had some very personable aspects to themselves, such as Scout saying that even after they'd become a beast of logic and warfare that treats the loss of life like a game of chess, Doctor still took time to have a drink with the likes of Scout and Ace, talk with them, hang out, to be supportive to Amiya beyond just the role of a combat commander, and other such things. The war crimes, thus, are not there to just say "Doc was Bad And Cool", it's treated in a tragic, solemn manner that has characters still try to find the good in them, and the effects of which still affect the characters to this day.

Doctor feels much more like a character than the usual self insert without really stripping away the freedom that comes with having a self insert.

To make a comparison, Mr. Sawyer, creator of Fallout: New Vegas, addressed a more self-contained but similar example in a bit of introspection regarding the game, particularly about how people liked Courier Six more in the DLCs rather than the base game. He rationalized that it is because Courier Six in the DLCs has a lot more humanized dialogue that allowed certain things to be set in canon, so long as you said them, about their backstory. Little things, peppered throughout the DLCs, such as having kids or having been to a certain state before coming to the Mojave, as well as far less generic dialogue, such as colorful insults and other such more personable lines of dialogue or expressions of surprise compared to the very bland and direct Courier Six of the main game, whose dialogue they made with the intent of being a blank slate and thus had to be as uncharacterized as possible so people would fill their own blanks. In relation to what we were discussing about Doctor, you could say that Courier Six in the base game feels more like a visitor to the world, while Courier Six in the DLCs feels like they are part of the game mystique and the game world's, like another character in the narrative over whom you have control more than a complete blank slate over which to project into.

The market trend always favors self-inserts, it always has and this likely will never change, especially in anime style games, given the very self-referential nature of media from Japan and its influence in its neighboring countries (such as Arknights in this case, being a game made by a Chinese developer), but one cannot deny the impact and resulting popularity from self-insert characters that are still a part of the world's mystique rather than being mere visitors to it, as this has an audience as well, a specific subset of the self-insert, if you will. I think Doctor belongs in this category, and enjoys the benefits that come with it, thanks to being well written.

[middlingthebest]

I’m Blue

Word Count - 1700

No warnings

Roman leaves things behind him, it was the usual bane of the day that Logan had to deal with. This particular thing was unusual but hardly weird enough to warrent this much of his attention. It was just a lipstick. A strange, blue lipstick. And yet it had a hold on his attention that he couldn't quite break free from. 

He shouldn’t have left it there. It was illogical, Roman had carried it out of his room, he hadn’t even put it on, and left it on the sitting room table before wandering off again. Logan had just been tidying it up when he slipped it into his pocket, he had fully intended on dropping it back off in Roman’s room and it was an honest mistake when he had forgotten about it, distracted by an “invasion” from Remus. Finding it later after he had begun settling into his room for the evening had been something of a surprise but hardly world changing.

He had already slipped his tie off, his glasses neatly abandoned for the night beside the bed. Returning to the commons would mean redressing and getting up from his chair, and he was disinclined to do both so instead he pulled the tube out of his pocket and set it on the table.

The lipstick was perfectly noticeable, clearly out of place in his room and he would spot it easily in the morning when he left for breakfast. In the meantime he turned on his desk lamp and pulled over his notebook to check through his to-do list for tomorrow and add the odd things he had neglected to finish today. There wasn’t much, though the distraction in the living room today had left a few low-priority tasks left undone, he thought as he glanced over at the lipstick then back again. He would have to speak to Remus about his timing, he concluded, noting it down to the side of his list and absently comparing the blue of his pen to the blue of the lipstick.

It was an interesting shade, and a strange choice for Roman - certainly not a colour he had seen the other side wearing before. He picked it up when he realised his attention had drifted back over to it and opened the cap, marking the top of his sheet with the makeup to inspect it further, a “swatch” he believed the term was though he had little confidence in his usage. He recapped it and sat it aside again, scribbling neatly with his pen beside streak of blue to compare the two colours though he was unsure what it was exactly he was looking for.

He stared at it for a long moment as he tried to drudge up the vocabulary to describe it as anything other than blue. He didn’t know the exact shade though could tell it wasn’t as rich as the ink, a paler blue but darkened like a grey. Pulling the sheet closer to him didn’t yield him anymore answers so he picked up the tube again and drew a line on his hand, bringing it to his face, lost in thought as he studied the colour and tried to figure out what it was about it that was drawing so much of his attention.

He should try it on. The thought snapped him out of his inspection and he recoiled from it instinctively, dropping his hand from his face as he picked up the tube to move it away from him. His fingers coiled around it but with his arm now outstretched he couldn’t quite bring himself to let it go. It wasn’t illogical to try it on, he told himself, still holding the makeup away from him. Its sole purpose was to be worn so wearing it was actually the logical thing to do. The colour was hardly dignified but it wasn’t gaudy. He would almost say it could be considered classy. Plus he liked it, he thought. And he was alone. He could see what it looked like, figure out his thoughts on it, and move on.

He pulled his hand back in and took the cap back off with a trepidation that was illogical and had brought it up to his face before he remembered people usually used a mirror for this kind of task. Standing from his chair, he quickly crossed over to the mirror hanging beside his dresser and paused in front of it. He felt foolish now that he was standing, it would be just as easy to take it to Roman’s room and be done with it. He lifted the lipstick to his mouth with a foreign motion and clumsily swiped it over his bottom lip, tidying up as best he could as he went along until he had one lip done.

Nothing comes out perfect on your first try, he reminded himself, swiping at the outline of his mouth until he had a reasonably clean line. He set about filling in his top lip with little further consideration until he had completed the task. For little more than a basic understanding of the theory behind applying makeup he thought he'd done an alright job with it. It wasn't as neat as he would have liked but the colour was pleasing and if he could apply it more evenly-

"Logan! Have you seen my-" Roman crashed in unannounced and Logan spun to meet him, feeling his heart seize in his chest as he watched the flamboyant side gasp and let out a strange, choking screech before leaving, fleeing just as suddenly as he had arrived.

He might actually be sick, it was the only thought that was circling around his head, as absurd as it was, and he swiped angrily at his mouth, conjuring a damp tissue and scrubbing at the stain until it was gone from his face. His blood was running cold around his body, sharp in his lungs as he kept his breaths steady and sat back down at his desk, his back ramrod straight. Roman exploded back into the room within the minute.

“Ah, good you took it off!” He exclaimed and if Logan hadn’t been mortified before he sure was now. Oblivious, Roman powered over to the logical side and presented his hand with a flourish. Logan lifted his own hand with the lipstick and Roman snatched it up but instead of leaving again he just perched on the desk behind him and waggled a thin stick in his face. “I brought lip-liner. I know me and the emo nightmare tend to hog Thomas’s attention when he’s had makeup videos on before but I thought you would know some of the basics.” He paused when finally noticed that Logan wasn’t saying anything and lowered his hand. “Are you ok?”

Logan didn’t think he was ok but he didn’t know how to process exactly how or why. His anger was lifting but the embarrassment and confusion he felt were both still very much present as he realised he had misunderstood the situation. Roman took his silence as a cue to keep talking but now that he had paused to read the room he lost all of his excitement and fell immediately into concern.

“I’m sorry, I just burst and started yelling. I didn’t take the time to think- I’m so sorry. I just got excited-” His eyes widened as he realised what he probably should have said in the first place. “That colour looked amazing on you, you just needed to tidy up the look a little.” He held the lip-liner up again for Logan and tried to push every ounce of his sincerity onto his face as he waited anxiously for a response.

Logan swallowed hard and did his best to push down his insecurity, his embarrassment over being caught unexpectedly, and tried to approach this rationally. He could admit his application of the makeup had been less than ideal. He had enjoyed the colour, it was interesting, and sitting before him now was a willing teacher who could help him come to the most fully realised conclusion he could reach. It might even be foolish not to take this for the opportunity it was.

Clearing his throat, Logan schooled his features and met Roman’s nervous gaze with a falsely confident one of his own.

“That seems reasonable.” He started, reaching to adjust his glasses before realising they weren’t there. He focused on the fact that Roman himself was in his pyjamas and that his own casual state of undress left him far from underdressed and carried on. “If you are willing to assist, while I am assured in my theoretical knowledge of applying lipstick the actual physical practice is not a skill I have acquired.”

The grin that broke out across Roman’s face was hardly called for but it succeeded in breaking the awkward tension that resided between them.

“Putting lipstick on can be a b****.” He summarised, the bleep he used to censor most of his swearing sounding around them as he uncapped the liner and reached carefully for Logan’s chin.

The finished look was not, apparently, the finished look as far as Roman was concerned but from what Logan could see it was much better than his own first attempt. The colour was dignified and applied flawlessly under Roman’s careful ministrations. It was loud – there was hardly any denying that blue lipstick could be anything but – and yet its cool and reserved tones lent him both a confidence and comfort in his own style and presence that he couldn’t have assumed it would achieve. When Roman fled from the room a third time, returning once again with more products, Logan couldn’t quite find it in him to discourage the creative side as he began colouring in his features with more makeup than he’d ever seen any of the sides (except Virgil, maybe) wear at any one time.

Logan allowed him to take a gentle grip of his face and followed his instructions to open his mouth, not that wide, well now it’s just closed again, would you stop talking for two seconds? with minimal complaints.

The final final look would never leave his room as far as he was concerned but he was keeping the lipstick. If he ever decided to wear it out was his own business but under Roman’s enthusiastic tutelage he was quick to learn an almost flawless application, and while he still wasn’t sure what exact shade of blue it was, he was certain that he liked it.

[funkymbtifiction]

hey charity, can you describe in depth why you mistyped as ISFJ, and found your true type of ENFP (what lead you to it, does it feel like the one, etc). also what do you score on function tests?

Sure. You should know I blame my Enneagram 6 for… like, all of it.

I came on the scene assuming I was an ENFP right from the start, but that’s before I was introduced to all the stereotypes which focus on behavior and not mental processing. I thought the general profiles of the ENFP fit me really well – but then I started getting doubts because… honestly, I don’t just leap into things without looking or thinking about them first; I have not hopped on a plane to a foreign country and gone off to do exciting things without a safety net; I do not move apartments or change boyfriends every 4 months out of boredom; I can finish whatever books I start writing, without getting distracted and leaving a lifetime of half-finished tasks behind me; and I use my Ne for more than just idealism. At the time I knew nothing about Enneagram, nor that all of the above is Ne-dom + Enneagram 7 (with an sx variant of idealism). Plus, my 6 is anxious about the future to some extent, and I had read about inferior Ne being anxious about the future.

So, that threw me off a lot. I had a long list of what I didn’t realize at the time were blatant stereotypes to compare my behavior to, and coz I’m a head type / 6 it didn’t match. No one explained to me that it’s how you think, not what you do, that determines your type. So I had to resign myself to likely not being an ENFP, and because I’m somewhat introverted, that narrowed down my options (I assumed I had therefore to be IXFX). I kept reading… and found a bunch more stereotypes, especially of the “Fe is unselfish, and Fi is selfish and rude and uncaring” variety. I looked at Fi characters and saw a trait of stubbornness and selfishness I could not relate to and I had a strong reaction to of dislike. I am an agreeable person who spends a lot of time concerned with how she makes other people feel and goes along with them to keep them happy. I make decisions based on how I think they’re going to feel – so since I wasn’t some clueless and totally self-absorbed person, I obviously had to use Fe, right? (I’m ashamed of how I used to see Fi. And those “Fe is the nice one” stereotypes sadden me.)

Again, I never at that time ran across anything that explained how Fe is a social organizer and thinks in terms of “us” and “we” (the collective) which would have helped me realize – that’s not what I do. I actually have an adverse reaction to that sort of thing. No one told me Fi’s feelings are abstract and hard to tell other people about; if they had, I would have connected to it, since I have had people ask me how I’m feeling and I just stare at them in confusion, unable to articulate it because it’s all… impressions in my head. Abstract. And often out of sync with what people expect me to feel. I once had someone express to me, “Oh, I’m so sorry you didn’t grow up close to your sisters, how sad.” And I was like, “Why is it sad? I don’t care that we weren’t close. Should I care that we weren’t close? Why would you assume I’d care? And why would you express sadness over it? Because people are supposed to be close to their sisters? But why would you be close to them if you have nothing in common and no attachment to them?”

Because I quickly identified Ne in myself (THAT at least rang true – the “getting ideas outside yourself” has always been blatantly obvious to me, about me) and was going off stereotypes, I concluded (rather unhappily, I might add) that I had to be ISFJ. And, as you probably know, I stuck with it for a long time.

Several people pointed out to me that I used way, way more Ne than an ISFJ. I just reasoned that my dad was an intuitive and it rubbed off on me (cute… but that’s not how it works, not the focused, reading-between-the-lines, operating-on-hunches Ne that I use). A few other strangers around tumblr suggested to me I came across as a Te user, due to my straightforward / directive style, in which I discard any pretense of niceties and just answer questions by focusing on what’s being asked and giving an answer (no Fe “sugar coating” – I often read back over stuff later and go, “Oh yeah, I guess I could have been less blunt and less detached and more warm and personal… oops”). I assumed they had to be wrong, because I finish things and ENFPs don’t. Stupid, I know.

But ISFJ never quite fit. I left bait in ISFJ forums to entice them into abstract conversations that went ignored. I looked at my ISFJ (confirmed) best friend and could see NOTHING similar in us, from how we communicated, thought, felt, and reacted to our overall tastes and interests. And frankly, when I said I shared her type, her eyebrows shot up into her hairline and my parents died laughing. None of them knew what type I was, but it “sure as hell isn’t ISFJ.”

And then came two intense discussions over about a week that forced me to toss out ISFJ altogether and start over. In the first, an INTJ I’d met through this tumblr and had been talking to / corresponding with for a few months pointed out that our Te thinking process was similar; our conclusions were similar; my reasoning was similar to hers, as was my Fi tendency to think people are all responsible for their own emotional states. So, that threw me for a loop. Then another NF friend had a five hour argument with me in which she insisted I had to be an intuitive and came up with evidence of how fast my brain switches gears, how often I am abstracting away from things (as an example, someone dies in a movie and I cry, not because the character is dead but because I’m thinking about death / loss abstractly), and how fast I can think on my feet and discard my own ideas, and how often I contradict myself.

I finally just accepted it, tentatively and with anxiety, since I was still hounded by the 98 ways I do NOT fit the ENFP stereotype. Learning my Enneagram has helped that anxiety fade, but I still wonder if I got it right sometimes. Looking back, I can see where I screwed myself over from recognizing my cognition sooner because of my 6w7 tendency to trust / seek other people’s opinions and automatically suspect, “Well, they probably have more information / knowledge than I do… so even though it feels kind of wrong, I guess I’ll run with their idea?” Ne-dom tendency to latch onto other people’s notions even if they’re thin. If this person is married to a (7 core) ENFP who never finishes things… and I finish what I start and and steadily work at it until it’s done… then I guess I can’t be an ENFP because this person must know what they’re talking about... (Typical immature tert-Te – lose patience, just wants an answer, grabs onto one example and assumes it creates a base pattern, rushes to a conclusion that doesn’t fit, and then tries to figure out WHY this feels off.)

You ask if it feels right. Not always but I’m learning that’s owing to my tritype. My 6 finds it hard to let go of the four people out there who still think I’m an SFJ. I have anxiety about it from time to time, wondering if I’m misleading everyone, until I remember how bad I am at anything Si-related and how easy it is for me to abstract away from an object, and then I feel weirdly comforted / secure again.

Function tests. The Socionics one always gives me ENFp or INFj (INFP). I tend to baffle the similarminds test, since I get similar to these results (current):

Te (Extroverted Thinking) (70%) your valuation of / adherence to logic of external systems / hierarchies / methods

Ti (Introverted Thinking) (30%) your valuation of / adherence to your own internally devised logic/rational

Ne (Extroverted Intuition) (70%) your valuation of / tendency towards free association and creating with external stimuli

Ni (Introverted Intuition) (50%) your valuation of / tendency towards internal/original free association and creativity

Se (Extroverted Sensing) (15%) your valuation of / tendency to fully experience the world unfiltered, in the moment

Si (Introverted Sensing) (35%) your valuation of / focus on internal sensations and reliving past moments

Fe (Extroverted Feeling) (65%) your valuation of / adherence to external morals, ethics, traditions, customs, groups

Fi (Introverted Feeling) (65%) your valuation of / adherence to the sanctity of your own feelings / ideals / sentiment

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

 based on your results your type is likely - unclear

HAHAHAHA.

If you’re asking me this, to try and find your type, drop all the stereotypes about the types and focus on how your brain works. Remember to factor in your core Enneagram type and think about how that might impact your dominant function. I can see clearly how 6 shapes my Ne and has strengthened my Te. It holds back my Ne in some respects (it’s like… I operate on Ne but am anxious about my N conclusions without Te finding proof), and between 6 and 1, focuses it intently; but I am still prone to leaping on ideas half-baked and running with them, since I am not always great at objectively ruling them out (which also made it hard to find my type)… which is high Ne, not low Ne. And then there’s the fact that I shock most people when I honestly say I can’t remember 95% of my childhood, much less what I just read. I realized the other day my grandparents have all been dead for over 5 years. I honestly could not have told you how long they’ve been gone – in some ways, it feels like last summer and in others, like a lifetime ago. THAT is how bad I am with actual details, even on things that matter to me. My Si basically hangs out, stressing over forgetting things / practical details and gets nit-picky about DID NO ONE NOTICE THAT’S FORMATTED WRONG?

- ENFP Mod.

[forsetti]

On Guns In America: Full Mental Jacket

America loves its guns.  It loves them so much, it is willing to overlook the damage they inflict on individuals, families, and society.  It loves guns so much, it denies evidence from around the world that supports the conclusion that fewer guns = fewer gun-related injuries and deaths.  It loves guns so much, it eagerly looks for ways to make them more dangerous, more lethal, more accessible.  It loves guns because, in spite of being the world's superpower, its past and present have been steeped in insecurity, fear, and a false sense of superiority.  Schools shootings are a microcosm of the problem of guns in America-A dangerous weapon in the hands of insecure, angry, testosterone-riddled, white males whose brains and moral compasses are at best not yet fully developed and at worst, seriously and permanently fucked up.

The problem with guns in America isn't that there aren't enough of them. The problem isn't “God has been taken out of schools and society.” The problem isn't immigrants, minorities, or Muslims.  The problem is mental health-the mental health of white, male America.  To be more specific, the problem is, and always has been white supremacy. If you don't understand the role white supremacy has and does play in how America views and loves it guns, you are part of the problem. This includes a lot of “good guy” gun owners who provide cover for their not-so-good guy gun-owning brethren.

The common thread from the first European white settlers to a large number of current gun owners in America is white supremacy.  The first white men on this continent used guns to steal land, resources, and life from the Native Americans.  The 2nd Amendment was written, in part, to ratify slavery.  It was important for guns to be readily available for whites to keep slaves in line, to be able to fend off any slave rebellion, to protect their women from “violent, sex-crazed” black men.  When slavery was abolished, the heavily armed Klan came to power to ensure white rule and supremacy was maintained.  The Mulford Act in California was passed in 1967 and signed by then-governor, Ronald Regan, repealing open carry in response to members of the Black Panthers carrying guns while they patrolled the streets of Oakland to make sure the police did their jobs properly.  Gun sales went through the roof when the first black president was elected.  Right-wing media pushes gun ownership with threats of marauding bands of Mexican gangs, Muslim terrorists, race wars, and imaginary government operations that will imprison God-fearing, gun-owning, PBR-drinking, tobacco chewing, white Americans.  

The fact that America has 5% of the world's population and almost 50% of the world's guns isn't by mistake, isn't to protect it from foreign powers, isn't to defend itself from its own government.  America has the most guns because it was built on white supremacy.  Guns were the tools used to take the land from its native inhabitants.  Guns were the tools used to keep the economic resource of slavery in line. Guns were used against fellow countrymen in order to maintain the right to own other people.  Guns were used to inflict fear, harm, and death in order to preserve and enforce Jim Crow Laws.  White supremacy doesn't carry as much power without means and threat to commit violence.  Guns and racism in America go together like Dylann Roof and a Glock .45, like Mom and apple pie.

The main reasons mass shootings are more prevalent in America now than in the “Good Old Days,” are two-fold: First, white America is losing its demographic and cultural power; Second, there are exponentially more guns now than in its mythologized past.  This explosion in the number of guns in circulation is not distributed equally among the population.  While the number of guns being manufactured and sold has skyrocketed, the percentage of households that own guns has been steadily declining.  This means those who do own guns are owning more and more of them.  I'm pretty sure the Venn Diagram of homes with guns and racists is damn near one, complete circle.  

I'm not saying all gun owners are racists but a lot of the ones who own multiple guns, who purchase semi-automatics, bump stocks, high capacity magazines, push for open carry, are pro-Stand Your Ground laws, reject even the most sensible background checks, are racist as fuck.   The NRA, right wing radio, FOX News, and Republican politicians have fed these people a steady diet of fear since the passage of the Civil Rights Act.  They've latched onto anything and everything non-white that can be peddled as a threat.  They've done this with to great success.  If you don't think so, just look at the spike in gun manufactured and sold starting the second Barack Obama was elected in 2008.  At no point did he discuss taking anyone's guns during the campaign but the mere fact a black man became president scared the living fuck out of white supremacists to where they went on a weapons-buying spree that would make Adnan Khashoggi blush. There was a small spike in guns sold after Bill Clinton was elected but it went back down to normal levels during his second term.  New guns in circulation hit a record high in 2008 and the number more than doubled by the end of Obama's second term.  If you don't think race and white supremacists' fears were not the cause of this, you aren't too bright.

This relationship between guns and white supremacy in America is why you can't have a rational discussion about gun control.  Racist fears will always override common sense, logic, evidence, social well-being, decency.  To make matters worse, their irrational fears have filtered down to a lot of other gun owners.  Every day I hear someone say, “I'm a responsible gun owner and I don't do....” or “I know a lot of gun owners who are responsible and they don't do...,” as a rationalization and justification to not only defend the status quo but to argue for access to more guns.  A lot of the “good gun owners” are sure carrying a lot of water for the “bad gun owners,” right now to the point it is impossible for me to discern which is which.  Practically speaking, there isn't much difference, politically, between an overweight, shirtless red neck posting pictures of himself holding his AR-15 in front of a Confederate Flag and the gun-owning Republican next door who is a CPA who drives a KIA Soul because both are obstacles to any gun reform. The CPA might not think he is giving cover for and be providing support to Cletus's white supremacy when he parrots NRA talking points but he sure as fuck is.  If this wasn't true, you'd see these “good gun owners” come out against their fellow gun-owning brethren whenever there was a school shooting or some other horrible run-related incident.  The silence of “good gun owners” tells you where they stand and to me, it seriously calls into question just how “good” they really are.

A good person doesn't stand quietly by as children are gunned down in schools, as families are worshiping in church, as people are watching a movie in a theater.  A good person doesn't parrot conspiracy theories about gun confiscation, Jade Helm, FEMA camps, race wars... A good person doesn't look at the overwhelming evidence from the American Medical Association, the CDC, and every other industrialized country in the world and come away with the ideas that more guns are needed and teachers should be armed.  You can say and think what you will about the people you know and love who own guns about how “good” a person they are but my definition of what constitutes a good person doesn't cover this kind of moral failing.

I never see any of these “good gun owners” coming to the defense of black victims of gun violence at the hands of the police.  When 12-year-old Tamir Rice was shot within microseconds by the police for having an air rifle in an open carry state, none of these “good gun owners” came out in his defense.  Instead, they parroted the same talking points as white supremacist websites and talking heads.  The same for Michael Brown in Ferguson, Laquan McDonald in Chicago, Walter Scott in South Carolina...  Unarmed black men and boys who are killed by the police are always labeled with negative terms. Meanwhile, white mass shooters are “mentally unstable,” “misunderstood,” “a good neighbor”...  Not only are white shooters talked about in better terms, they are treated with more respect when apprehended.  Tamir Rice laid dying in the park, he received no assistance from the police who shot him.  In fact, they prohibited Tamir's sister from getting help.  When the black church shooter, Dylann Roof, in S. Carolina was caught, the police stopped by Burger King to get him food before taking him in.  When the school shooter in Florida was finally nabbed, he was taken unharmed, wrapped in a blanket, and courteously placed into a car.  Not a single “good gun owner” said a peep about any of these situations.  Instead of seeing the built-in, systemic racism of how we view and treat black victims compared to white killers, they automatically rolled out their NRA-approved talking points.  When it is time to speak up about injustice, racism, inequality, if guns are involved even remotely, these “good gun owners” always seem to stand up on the wrong side of the moral fence, if they stand up at all.  My definition of “good person” doesn't encompass this kind of shitty behavior.  At no point does an inanimate object take precedence, priority over a human being.  That many of those defending guns as THE ANSWER are also 'pro-life,” is as ridiculous as it is hypocritical.

The other main factor in America's obsession with guns is toxic masculinity.  I know the term “toxic masculinity,” has gotten pushback from a lot of people for being “too demeaning,” “too mean,” “detrimental to the discussion.”  My response to this criticism is, I don't fucking care.  If you are male and your ego is so fragile you can't handle a negative label and need to rage about it, you've pretty much proved the need for the description.  Don't #NotAllMen at me either.  This is a lazy, dishonest response.  When people use “toxic masculinity,” they are referring to very specific characteristic traits.  If you don't fit the description, then shut the fuck up about it so you don't risk joining their ranks.

Men are more violent than women.  Some men more so than others.  Insecure men of this type, even more so.  Add in a heavy dose of white and gender supremacy and you get a toxic mixture.  Throw deadly weapons designed to kill and maim at high rates and you often get very dangerous outcomes.  The more of these traits a man has, the more likely they are to be violent.  Take just about any mass shooter in America the past fifty years and you will find someone who has a history of violence against women and/or racial animus.  Men who exhibit toxic masculinity traits are mentally unstable.  They do not know how to properly process and deal with a world where they are not the king of every hill by the mere fact they are white men.  This is a cognitive problem.  To be okay with people like this having access to high powered weapons designed to kill is an epic public safety failure.  People in hospitals, jails, halfway homes...who are deemed dangerous are not allowed belts, shoestrings, anything that can be used to harm themselves or others.  Yet, we as a society have decided it is okay for mentally screwed up white men to not only own guns but make it easy for them to get as many as they want and almost whatever kind they want.  This is fucking insane.

Imagine being in charge of policy for a mental health hospital, coming up with the position that the residents who exhibit violent tendencies, believe they are naturally superior to others, and who are prone to conspiracy theories should have almost unlimited access to things that will inflict the most pain, injury, and death on others.  What Board of Directors would vote or this policy?  What rational person on the outside looking in would say, “This seems like a great idea”?  The easy answer is, “No one,” because it is so fucking stupid.

This brings us to the “the left shouldn't be so critical of the right” stage of the discussion.  Every day, I read some article or comment that claims if the left would only stop the name calling, the harsh criticism, the sense of superiority, then the right would “do the right thing.”  This argument is so fucking stupid it really doesn't deserve a response but since I'm feeling generous, here goes...  

Either your arguments and positions are supported by evidence and tethered to reality and morality or they are not.  If they are not, then it doesn't matter what the left says or thinks about you, they are still fucked up.  If you don't want to be on the wrong side of an issue, of history, of morality, then the ONLY choices you have is to either continue to be on the wrong side or mea culpa the fuck out of yourself and get on the right side.  There IS NO OPTION where you get to believe the wrong things and also get to be on the right side. These are the fucking rules of logic, of morality, of history.  Don't blame liberals because you are wrong.  Don't blame anyone but yourself for being on the wrong side.  Suck it up. Take the personal hit.  Learn a fucking lesson.  Just don't blame others for your intellectual, moral failings.

If you really believe guns are the answer and the more the merrier, you are a deeply damaged, cognitively delusion person and a big part of the reason why America is so entrenched in a culture of guns.  You are mentally unhinged and a danger to everyone around you and to society, in general.  And, I'll bet, if I scratched the surface of your personality even the slightest, I'd uncover a whole lot of racism and bigotry just beneath the surface. You can say that guns aren’t the problem, which may be true. The real problem is racism mixed with toxic masculinity.  I am all for doing everything possible to address these problems. However, until we do, I think keeping weapons out of their hands that can and do inflict massive damage to others is the very fucking least we can do. To do...to think otherwise is the very definition of “crazy.”

[hak-7]

THE METAPHYSICAL MEANING OF EVE

From Wonderland To The Promise Land

The Bible says that the first mother was made from the rib of our first father, that G-d had made our first father complete. Then He forgot that the man had a lonely nature. Then G-d said: "Oh, I've got to make him a mate." Now, I'm not laughing at the Bible, I don't laugh at it. To tell you the truth, I respect it. But I'm giving it to you in this language so you can see the kind of childish ideas that we grown-ups have been holding on to. It says, He took a rib one rib from the man, and filled up the hole no ... it gives you the impression that it was just gouged out He's not even a good surgeon. He put the flesh that was taken out, back in its place just a patch-up job, a butcher's job—and then made the woman with this rib. What does that make the woman? It makes her a different creation from the man.

How can the Bible say, "Flesh of my flesh and bone of my bone?" How can she be flesh of his flesh, bone of his bone and she was just made from the bone? Just one bone. In the forming of human life in the womb of the mother, bones don't come first, flesh comes first. So if this woman is made from one bone she doesn't have the full value, the full human worth of the man. Right from the beginning the woman is put in an inferior image. If you don't believe that this is the trend; keep reading about the woman as her story is told from Genesis to Revelation. She becomes more and more ugly, inferior and wicked. I'll just name a few of the stars for you in the Bible: Eve, Jezebel, Delilah, Salome. We can look right into the language of the present environment and see that these evils, these destructive concepts in human ideas or in human minds are still hurting human development. They're still being preached and they're still hurting our human development. G-d gives us the most beautiful concept of the man that He creates. The man that He creates is a mind, a human mind—a rational and compassionate human mind; and from that mind is born, not a woman, but society. And the rib of the man simply tells us, in symbolism, that society was made from the man that G-d inspired called Adam in the Bible and that society had a law, a principle. Not many, but one.

The Bible says G-d made the woman from a rib of the man. Not from all of them, but from only one. This is symbolism, telling us that this generation or this genesis of the man that the Bible is telling us about is the story of the church. You may ask how can that be the story of the church when the Genesis was revealed and written long before Christ Jesus? But it was interpolated, interpretated, and changed, and reformed long after it was revealed. They formed it to speak the church doctrine, and the church doctrine says that Jesus gave only one commandment—that you should love ye one another.The scripture gives us the proper concept of man, that man should not be seen in the individual, the male or the female, or any single individual, but in the creation of society. Man should mean humanity and humanity includes both male and female; he or she is a part of a unit. The male has to mate with a female to reproduce his physical self. And the female has to mate with a male to reproduce her physical self. How can we see society as male and as female separated one from the other? And how can we think that the whole society was generated from one man called Adam? How can any sensible, intelligent people think that G-d made a man and then reached into his body and deformed that man after forming him rightly, and made a female of his rib? That looks like guesswork to me.

What do they call the tornadoes and the hurricanes—these terrible violent forces that make human beings fear for their very lives, that take away their houses and their cattle, destroy the hard earnings they have worked so hard for and built up in homes and businesses? These strong violent forces are called by the names of women. Isn't that proof that the same mentality exists. The mentality of the writer of the Bible is still existing. "Will you attack the writers of the Bible?"You don't want to see the contradiction. You don't want to see the ugliness in the Bible, so you suppress it. You push it out of your mind. But remember, every time you push something out of your mind, you're only pushing it out of your conscious mind. It goes into your subconscious and causes mental problems if the environment doesn't do something to bring about the kind of healthy change needed for you.We've been saying that G-d made man in his own image and likeness when we should have been saying that God intended humanity society to be in His image and likeness, character-wise or morally speaking. The scripture has meaning. The scripture can attract the rational mind, the logical thinker; the scripture can attract the shipbuilder, the banker, the chemist; it can attract all men if it's taken back to its original purity: if we just take off the false dress of poetry, mythology, symbolism and allegories that take us into wonderland instead of the promised land.

Community life must exist by both our excellent human form and by material development. At the base of our community problems are the religious formed habits of seeing life and the world through mythological eyes. When I say that I'm going to cross over Jordan one day, this clearly is not a religious expression. This is an expression colored or designed by the language of mythology. When I say that I'm going to a Kingdom in the skies, that's mythology; that's not pure religion. When I say that God is a Man of War, that's the language of mythology and not pure religion.When I say that G-d created man from the dust of the earth, formed him as a person, and created a mate for him with a rib taken from his body, that's the language of mythology and not pure religion. We have been given more mythology than we have been given religion, in terms of the language that we use. How can people clearly understand what religion is all about if they are using a language that is foreign to the purity of religion? They have to have a language that is consistent, that speaks clearly the word of truth that G-d revealed to His prophets.

The symbolic concepts that we have been given of first man, of first woman, of the creation, of the origin of the races, all of this is so heavily covered under mythological concepts, the beautiful symbolism of the poets, that we can't see the reality that should be influencing our lives. We don't get the beautiful language under the surface. We get socially destructive language. When you read the Bible, you read it literally, but the hints revealing the evil of the Bible are also given in it.The Bible says that a certain religious man took another man who is called Son of Man on a tour of the city to show him the extent that evil had grown in the society. He took him to the gate of the city and he told him. "Son of Man, look at the evil that these people are practicing inside the gates of this city." He took him to the courtyard of the Temple, "Look at the evil that these people are practicing right around the Temple." He said, "Come Son of Man, let me take you into the Temple." He took him into the sanctuary where there were the holiest of the holy, and there he found the abomination of abominations.

This is in the Bible, I didn't dream this up. The Bible states it, and it's not given as something that was presently existing. It's given in the Bible as a prophesy revealing what will come. And the Bible tells us of the last day; it says that the greatest evil will be in the Holy Sea. I'm not referring to the Catholic Church. It so happens that their sea is called Holy. I'm talking about the lake that God intended to be for religious life and religious development.

The Bible says that in the end that lake would be ruled by a beast. And G-d would destroy the beast in the lake by turning it into a lake of fire. Haven't our church lives been turned into a lake of fire? Wasn't it once a cool water for us to bathe in, and now it has become a lake of fire burning the conscience of the great number of Christians who are looking for high sensation, and yet calling themselves church goers? Our conscience has almost been buried six feet and left without any sign of life in it. But there is still enough light in most of the American Christian lives to feel guilt occasionally.

Those Christians who really are sincere and are giving their best to be Christians are in a lake of fire. Their conscience is not only on fire because of the sins that they're doing, but, also because many ministers and priests are just changing the role of the preacher or the priest into a role of an opportunist, preaching money,preaching song and dance. They preach whatever they think will appeal to your need for high sensation. I know there is still the good preacher. But look at him today. Even he has gone back, he has fallen.I saw in one magazine where a Catholic priest was sitting down in a meditation position before the bare-bone skull of some animal it looked like it was a donkey. He was meditating and saying that he didn't see anything wrong with a priest doing that as long as he kept his Catholic religion. How is he going to keep his Catholic religion and give himself to that kind of pagan exercise? The Catholic is supposed to be dignified. Though the atmosphere was ghostly, they've always been dignified. We've seen them bring in the bands, bring in the electronic . . . acid . . rock. Long ago the Christian churches turned themselves into bands.

You go to hear the preacher and you're wondering when he's going to preach. He comes up and says, "Amen." Amen is said when we finish something. He finishes before he starts. And then the choir begins to sing, and he just comes in to build the momentum up again. As soon as he gets the momentum up he says, "Have you got the feeling . . . have you got the feeling?" And somebody says, "Yeah." And the band starts again. I'm talking about the great majority of the churches in America.Where are we going to go if we only crave for sensation and don't want any sense? I thought that the correct definition for the human being is homo sapien thinking individual. I thought that's what separated us from apes and other creatures. If we're not going to think but give ourselves to sensation, to the influences in the air, then where will our lives be that G-d Created? Religion teaches the Christian, Muslim and Jew that God created the human being to be a thinking being.

Let's look at some of the so-called religious concepts. And they are religious concepts, but in the composition that we get them they are more concepts of fiction, fantasy, and mythology than religion. We're told that the world was made out of a void. There was nothing but water, and light rose, out of the water and formed the sun, moon and stars. This is the kind of ideas religious people have been given of the creation of the world.What kind of picture is this giving us of Almighty G-d? It's giving us a kindergarten story of Almighty G-d. Those who view G-d this way see Him with nostrils, and some Bibles show G-d with nostrils and breath coming out of His mouth flowing down to the people. If you ask most Christians how did man get on the earth, "Well, G-d made him." G-d made him from what? "The Bible says, from clay." Notice when they get in trouble it's always the Bible says. . . ." They will start off speaking from themselves, but the more trouble they get into the more they refer you to the Bible.

Imam W.D. Mohammed (raa)k

[rainraisins]

Dear Journal, Things I Wished to See More in the Philippines

Journal 6 

I didn’t really think of myself as that nationalistic growing up, until I heard that true patriotism is wanting to make your country improve, not liking everything about your country or thinking it’s perfect. Honestly, a lot of people here seem to have a lot of praise for PoC people who have a complete respect for their own cultures, histories and traditions. I’m okay with that, but no matter how much I tried, I can’t seem to like Filipino traditions much, not because I hate being Filipino, but because I hate traditions in general. I keep trying to like it, but I don’t. 

I think practicing Filipino traditional dances in school growing up was completely boring, I hate majority of Filipino shows and dramas despite trying to like a lot, and all the classics are almost all very boring. I’m not sure I will get much praise being listened to this way on Tumblr, but apparently when it comes to what people describe as “true patriotism,” I seem to be much more patriotic than those many rule obsessed nationalistic folks, despite being so annoyed by the Filipino national pledge, I just sad down to read books each school flag ceremony. 

I did donate the most money generously oftentimes, studied Filipino political issues in depth, and the various modern cultural problems too. Everyone always gave opinion essays that the teacher wants to hear, but if I get in trouble reciting something else or writing something else, I just did it. Had high grades anyway. Not much of a risk to lose a few points, not to brag.

 It’s just. . . the Philippines of the past, rather than the modern Philippines bores me to death. It’s not a matter of choice. I just. . . can’t. I like art and poetry as a hobby. I very much respect people’s romantic natures because they have an optimism that I lack, but you see I’m mainly an engineer. . . so I can’t seem to care much. You see why I made an anonymous blog out of cowardice than put my name out there now, do you? 

So here is the list of things I wish I saw more in the Philippines, in those days I daydream of a better country. 

1. I wish there was more stories that weren’t romance and comedies. I feel a lot of Filipino issues is because people can’t seem to think of things rationally or seriously enough. Filipino culture sometimes thinks you’re a bad person, because you don’t find their jokes very funny, and don’t smile all the time. 

2. The romance stories are mostly very cliché stories where random men and women (not very unusual for men to like romance here) get into abusive relationships, while most Filipinos seem to find this very romantic. Yuck. Then most Filipinos seem to enjoy very unrealistic relationships where you fall in love at first sight, and not make long term plans with relationships. Part of why overpopulation in the Philippines is horrible.

3. Filipinos seem to think anti intellectualism is funny, which I think might be a characteristic from trying to follow much of American culture. I hate math! I’m funny! I hate studying! I’m funny! I hate reading! I’m funny! Fantastic. 10/10 humor. 

4. People are so loud here, and while when talking to foreigners, I do miss the kind of rowdy friendliness and warmth. . . it can get a lot for me. 

5. People being respectful to elders too much, compared to the younger generation. In the West, being old is too disrespected but here in the Philippines, it’s the other extreme. People seem to believe if you’re old, then you’re always right. Though I still do mano (putting my hand on someone’s head), because I’m too lazy to argue about it all the time. Old people don’t get to make life decisions for me, because they’re old. They have experience for their own lives, not mine. 

6. People make decisions in politics based on how famous the last names are. People think family is very important, so important that people respect cases of nepotism, and favoritism with family members. That’s stupid. Clearly we can all agree just because someone is your family, doesn’t mean they’re always right, especially if they’re abusive.

7. Another trait of Filipinos not often being able to take things seriously. They like electing people who are celebrities, such as a certain boxer named Manny, being a politician. People being good leaders is not the same as how entertaining they are. 

8. I can barely find any Filipino blogs or channels that are not about make up, fashion, food, travel, and so on. Nothing wrong with that. It’s just I can barely find any content that requires thinking, and critical thought much. I’m a bit annoyed.

9. I wish people didn’t defend the Japanese so much when reading about its history of helping the Nazis during World War II, because they’re ASIAN, and clearly we should give Japanese people a break from becoming violent extremists to them, because obviously the West has also been violent to them. No, that means both of you are responsible. Stop defending Japanese Nazis because they’re Asian. Look at what they did in the Philippines back then! I like anime now, and I wouldn’t like Japan to go back to its backwards past.

10. Would be nice if Filipinos were somewhat more individualistic. Not that the West has no need to learn to be collectivistic or think of the benefit of the group. Just look at the US with all the hatred of masks for some reason because it goes against their individual FREEDOM. Just a piece of fabric on your face, and they’re already throwing a temper tantrum. Now you see, Filipinos are the opposite. They think if you disagree with the general group or culture, you’re evil and stuff. Now I bet people here would be much more offended by me talking about all this in this tone with Asian, particularly Filipino issues, than with someone from the West complaining about their own issues. 

Bla, bla, bla, just being Asian doesn’t mean I should care about stupid honor and obedience when it comes to completely illogical things, and sentimentality in a way that would harm the greater good. That’s what it is with Filipinos. Many of us care about family, or at most the certain area of the Philippines we live in. People don’t really think logically enough with their sentimentality to think of Filipino society as a whole, including the ones in other countries. If it benefits their family, then who cares about other Filipino families? 

[donnerpartyofone]

ramblings

honestly i hate it when people use this word in their content or URLs. i hate it as much and in the same way that i hate the overuse of the word “random”. both represent tactics designed to absolve the user of any obligation to communicate clearly, stand by their opinions, or otherwise allow that the things they choose to do and say and support are symptomatic of who they really are as an individual--as if the things that you engage with are just “something that happened”, like the weather, and there’s some separate secret “you” that has nothing to do with the waves of activity that appear to emanate from your person. not that everything has to be a manifesto, but constantly qualifying your every action or feeling as chaotic and indeterminate is insecure at best and fraudulent at worst. at any degree of severity, it is at the very least just fucking annoying.

but, i’m thinking about quitting tumblr again, and this line of thought could probably be safely categorized as a ramble. i mean i’ve been thinking about it for years, as much as anybody of my vintage does, although my ordinary complaints have just had to do with obnoxious technical and community issues. this net neutrality disaster is really pushing my buttons. can i really afford, mentally, to keep using a yahoo product? but the thing is, as soon as i think this, i’m assailed by internal synthetic echoes of the kinds of radical voices i’ve absorbed from tumblr itself. this is one of my worst personal problems, that i internalize other people’s voices with extreme success. so, as soon as i think about boycotting yahoo by leaving tumblr, i involuntarily imagine someone telling me that i’m an elitist pig for theatrically divorcing myself from a major corporation when many people, who are perhaps the most victimized by corporate behavior, can’t even choose to remove toxic corporate material from their lives, and that my empty gesture is even less than symbolic when i don’t know who picked the orange sitting on my desk and i’m typing this out using a slave-manufactured Apple product furnished by my employer who rather famously tortures its blue collar employees. this morning i was feeling good about using up leftovers for my lunch instead of letting them turn into climate-destroying food waste, until i thought about where the stray mayo packet i just used was going to wind up, and moreover where the plastic bag i used to tie up that trash was going to wind up, and what an asshole i was for thinking about how i can recycle the tin foil i wrapped my sandwich in when in fact recycling plants have been linked to cancer in their employees. i may have congratulated myself this morning for repairing my thrifted shoes with glue instead of throwing them out and replacing them, but the fact that they’re under my feet right now and for as long as i can keep them doesn’t affect the fact that some animal is going to be choking on them when i can no longer make use of them. so, the same internalized radical voice that calls me a huge piece of shit for participating in this or that march or protest, even though i do vote and i do put money toward needs and causes when i can, that voice is definitely here to tell me that dramatically leaving tumblr after seven years makes me at least as much of an asshole as does continuing to use it.

if you exist anywhere left of center lately, your available political energy is pretty routinely sapped by infighting that seems to insist that if your intentions as well as your strategies are not absolutely virginally pure, then you need to just shut the fuck up and pull on your hair shirt and bury yourself alive until a real rain comes to wash all the scum off the streets. it’s like, no progress shall be made until a progress arrives that simultaneously and equally improves all areas of life, leaving no remote potential for debate in its glistening wake. nothing you do matters because everything you do is evil and there is no shortage of people who can prove it to you. the cultural climate i live in has made me really adept at proving it to myself. like the second you think even of certain A list celebrities who use the rewards of their meteoric careers in order to give back to their communities, you can say, well, what’s the carbon footprint of one of their concerts? what’s the point of doing anything at all? it feels like there are really just two ways you can live your life: you can aim for self-actualization, which may do wonders for your personal identity but which seems to require constant material sacrifice on the part of everything around you, OR you can relegate yourself to some sort of extreme jainist existence in which you deprive yourself of every personal indulgence to the point that your individuality is so degraded that the question of the meaning of your life looms larger than ever in relief.

there’s also the question, as evidenced by all this leftist infighting, of who is even smart enough to think of as much as one thing to do that’s actually a good thing to do. even if i were to let go of my entire life as it is to commit myself puritanically to some cause, it seems like a sure thing that i’d pick the wrong cause, with a world of negative side effects for other causes. and on the general matter of choosing sides, i don’t even think i know what, like, anything is anymore. i saw this post float by the other day that said something about how sick the OP was of the fierce leftist protection of sexual predators, as if defending rapists were a popular tenant in left-of-center parties, and the post had tens of thousands of notes and i just couldn’t figure out what the fuck it was even referring to from real life. i understand that there’s a lot of talk about how, speaking in very limited terms, “democrats are as bad as republicans”, and i understand what that’s about structurally speaking, but as far as “left” and “right” goes it seems like the language has completely broken down to the point that it doesn’t even refer to anything anymore other than some almost facelessly broad ideas about whether you think the government should help you or leave you alone about X. maybe what i’m really trying to say here is just that i have no idea what the fuck anyone is talking about to the point that just being alive is like being permanently trapped in some foreign country without a single cent of local currency.

so anyway, once i’ve achieved a subterranean level of depression over the fucked up shit that happens as a direct result of every minute that i even exist on the planet earth, i ALSO start to collapse under the slings and arrows of another internalized voice, that of a shitheaded rightwing alpha dog who sees guilt as a symptom of extreme weakness, of useless fragility. and to some degree that’s true, if my main state of being is this dissolving soreness, then how could i possibly be effective even at something that appears to be “the right thing to do”? and moreover it’s like if every single thing i could conceivably do with my life is categorizable as “evil”, then “evil” ceases to be a worthwhile judgment to make and abide by. everything is nothing and nothing is everything so you might as well just do whatever you want, right? but of course that’s not acceptable because in doing whatever i want, with no regard for the worldly consequences, i still feel terrible. so to try to treat that condition, i for-just-one-instance choose to go to the tiny neighborhood grocer next door to the constantly-expanding chain store right next to him, and i remember to bring cloth reusable grocery bags, which of course i know will just be choking out flora and fauna after i’m dead or stopped using them, and then the radical leftist voice in my head berates me for just “doing good” as a hollow gesture designed to make myself feel and look better, and we’re back to everything is nothing and nothing is everything all over again.

and why even worry about this, or literally anything, when at any moment we’re all going to be bombed off the face of the planet because we’ve elected, seemingly for entertainment’s sake, this scandalous id monster who isn’t even a real politician? i’m running out of these daily pills that i need for some real dumbass reasons, and i need to make an appointment for my annual medical humiliation in order to get more of them, but it’s so hard to care. over the last several years i built up a certain amount of personal pride by “being brave” and submitting myself to normal adult maintenance routines, but the more of them i’ve been through, the more they just feel like some sort of kafkaesque ritual whose only result is its own existence. and if i’m just going to boil to death in the rising oceans anyway, why bother?

the most rational idea that my tiny shitty brain is able to come up with is that the best most of us can do is to just do what feels “right”, as often as is practically feasible. so i think, well, leaving tumblr would be a thing, even if it doesn’t make a real difference in real life, it would be something i did based on a feeling of at-least-vague altruism. but then i think of all my friends here, people who are remote and in bad spots in their lives who i can at monitor in some well-meaning way, and i think about my family members here and their excellent art projects that are facilitated by this place, and like doesn’t my thought process indicate that i think all of THOSE people are evil parasites too? i mean what is the ultimate extension of the logic i’m trying to employ here? when i think about that i feel like a bigger sack of shit than ever before. then i kind of start thinking about all the people in the history of my life who have openly categorized my depression, whatever its sources and symptoms at the time, as just me being a pill, being difficult, being negative, being counterproductive, looking for attention: the explicit or tacit response being, “why don’t you just _______?” but i don’t know what this ________ is that’s supposed to replace all my feelings and behavior. i guess that’s kind of the point of this whole thing, that i have no idea what the alternative is supposed to be, to all this, and how i can “just” do that instead.

so, maybe just because it’s something to do, i’m thinking of moving over to blogspot or something that makes me feel even slightly less complicit in the actions of these cartoon villains that run everything. i understand that if i do that, then i’ll be lucky to maintain relationships with even like ten of the people whose presence here i know and love. i assume i would just continue on as normal, although without the benefit of this often-amazing kaleidoscopic font of images and ideas, and the ability to glibly inject some “hilarious” thought of mine into other people’s uptake streams, and the surprise discovery of new and exciting people via the entropy that rules my dash. or maybe i won’t risk all that, and i’ll just sit tight right here, because what really would be the actual result of my bailing? maybe i’ll just delete this later today, when i’m feeling sufficiently embarrassed and overexposed about it. i guess i’m going to go spend money i don’t deserve to make on some stuff that i don’t need to have, in a place that damages the world when i have to live in both obvious and invisible ways, while i think it over, for the rest of my natural life. 

[chlorentine]

A Treatise on Human Culture by Prince Aximili-Esgarrouth-Isthill

Chapter 7: Private vs Public

As far as I can see, there is very little that humans find sacred. In their culture it is not the thing itself but the social implications that creates taboos. This observation aligns exactly with chapter 3, Human Chaos. When a human is alone on Earth, they are at their most dangerous in terms of sheer unpredictability. Their rules of behavior are dictated by one another, and without another person there to hold them accountable, it is not uncommon to see a human completely abandon their old self and begin to behave entirely erratically. Still other humans behave in very consistent ways regardless of the presence of others. Both morality and logic, what we Andalites would consider static things that one either possesses or lacks, operate on an individual basis among humans, each of which becomes distorted in isolation.

The implication here is clear: humans require other humans to function. I am convinced that a single human, even for a short period of time, begins to emotionally and mentally deteriorate without the support of other humans. There is a saying that I have heard them say: Always bring two so they have friends. A human is only seen as a complete success if they are surrounded by friends and family: it is a requirement for even the most basic levels of status. Of course, this concept is not foreign to Andalites; we have been living and thriving in herds and family unites for centuries. However, it would be irresponsible to claim that the intense and consuming need for validation that humans crave from one another is in any way equivalent to the Andalite scoop structure.

I would like to emphasize that this is not neurological: it is a cultural difference. During the Andalite-Yeerk War, I was marooned on the Earth theatre, where the war would eventually come to a close. The culture is an infectious thing, and it is dangerously easy to become absorbed into it. In their words and actions, they seek approval. However, the approval they seek is not restricted to superiors and elders, as a hierarchical appeal: they also seek the approval of their peers and equals. It is an extremely complex and disturbing fact of life for the inhabitants of Earth.

Although the craving for attention is cultural, the crushing despair humans experience in isolation could potentially be neurological, and I would venture to claim that it is a neurological phenomenon that Andalites partially share. The way the Andalite brain reacts to trauma is distinct from the way humans experience it, but I know for a fact that social isolation has a significant impact on both species.

During my time on the planet, I spent a great amount of time with the Earth Liberation Army. The six children were completing their intermediary stages of education, aptly called “middle school” because of its status between elementary and secondary education. Developmentally, the humans were at a critical stage of their lives wherein they were being taught how to build relationships with other people. Apart from their academic studies, human children are also saddled with the responsibility of simultaneously training themselves on social acceptability. The complexities of social acceptability on Earth are so difficult that they spend their entire adolescent life learning how to exist within it, and to my understanding many struggle with it well into adulthood.

One human, a nothlit casualty of the war, was with me throughout my stay on Earth. Due to being a nothlit (and the secrecy involved in the Earth theatre of the war, which I go into more detail in my previous work, Humans at War), this human (hereafter referred to as T-Bird) was a rare exceptional case of being completely kept at the margins of society. He only communicated with me and the other soldiers in the Earth Liberation Army, and he expressed to me on numerous occasions the depth to which this affected him psychologically. He felt broken, and even apart from the threat of a short lifespan and his trauma concerning his physical form, T-Bird’s struggle was severely aggravated by the prospect of being unable to connect with other humans & living his life alone. Many humans who are not associated with this war (which created unique experiences in many ways) can attest to having a similar emotional struggle, and the distress that accompanies it is very real.

Andalites have not had the same history as humans, and we definitely do not share the same neurology. Therefore, my experience being marooned on Earth may very well be the first extreme example of social isolation that Andalites have on record. I will not go too much into detail about my psychological development, but by the time the war was over, I had assimilated completely and was virtually indistinguishable from the native species. I related to the experiences of T-Bird. Through this mutual understanding with the humans I was able to realize an aspect of Andalite psychology that is critically underexamined, and in the aftermath of the Andalite-Yeerk War we can only continue to ignore it at our peril.

The humans, although primitive and basic in many ways, are very advanced in terms of morality and ethics. I do not in any way claim that they behave ethically in all circumstances: in fact, the chaotic behavior I discussed in chapter 3 is primarily as a result of how easily they are able to disobey ethics and logic. However, as a species they seem to have decided that ethics are situational, and that every bit of new information alters what they deem to be “the right thing to do.” Andalite morality is simple by comparison, which stems from our biological origins: Andalites were herd animals and obeyed a strict hierarchy, whereas humans are primates whose society is based on mutual support (with far less emphasis on chain of command). We are content to obey a chain of command whereas humans need things rationalized and explained. The details of human ethics are highly individual and convoluted, to the point where no two human sees exactly eye to eye. This creates an even more chaotic environment, and one would think that there is ceaseless conflict on a planet wherein no one is in agreement.

This assumption would be false. Although it is true that there is significantly higher and more malicious instances of violence and conflict on the planet, the systems for unity are that much stronger. How to account for this discrepancy? It is simple: humans are not detail-oriented.

Two humans who disagree on nearly every issue under their sun can be united for a lifetime based on a single point of ethical compromise. Moral conflict can often be resolved by peacefully acknowledging their difference in opinion. The miracle of humans is that their quest for “approval” is not because of some social capital that they stand to gain: it is in the interest of establishing bonds. Andalites cannot fully understand their emphasis on forming bonds, and it is bizarre to think that the moment they meet someone they are interested in forming a connection with them. However, that is exactly my experience. Upon landing on Earth, the humans instantly began giving me “nicknames” and protecting me as though I was one of their own. They immediately held me to the standards Andalites would only expect of intimate friends. Within weeks, I was berated for not revealing detailed personal information, and by the time I left Earth I was left completely bare and vulnerable to them. They knew me in ways I daresay no one else ever will.

This prospect is frightening to Andalites. On Earth however, this is not so frightening, because these bonds do not go to waste. We do not have them simply for their own sake. The bonds are an intricate support system that prevents humans from entering psychological distress to the point of dysfunction. On Earth, when something happens that is emotional distressing, we confide in others. Humans, who are naturally prone to extreme empathy, then ease any suffering by sharing the weight. This explains the trend previously observed: all humans are a little sad, but only those who are isolated experience acute depression. Andalites mourn privately, taking vigils of silence or completely excusing oneself from society to contemplate loss. Humans consider this an unhealthy way to mourn, and Earth mourning is considered a personal journey that is undertaken interpersonally. Although this sounds gauche and degrading, but it is not public as an Andalite may imagine: friends, who are likely experiencing similar things to you, help each other understand their feelings, and the result is far more effective than if the process was undergone individually.

There are countless extravagant human customs surrounding death. A human friend of mine described a ceremony undertaken once a year to lavishly honor the dead through an opulent and elaborate festival. There are counseling groups specifically designed to give community to those suffering a loss. The one I am personally most familiar with is the funeral. If any Andalite were to participate in a human funeral without the appropriate social context, they would undeniably find it a vulgar affair. Dozens of humans come together to publicly profess how important the deceased was while standing over their remains.

I personally have been to only a handful of human funerals, all for victims of the Andalite-Yeerk War. The largest of them was that of Rachel Berenson, the most decorated soldier participant on Earth. There were several hundred attendees, but there were thousands who fought for attendance. The event was broadcasted internationally, and the whole planet was united in mourning her. The feeling of loss became the single point of ethical compromise that allowed the victims some basis for catharsis.

In my region of Earth, the most common funerary practice is to place the corpse in a wooden box and to bury it six feet under the ground. During the ceremony, those who formed the strongest bond with the deceased and had the most intense grief are given the title “pall-bearer,”. They lift the box onto their shoulders and walk with it on a circular route so that the deceased may experience their community once more before being interred. I am very glad that Rachel’s funeral did not include this: the humans have much more lifting power than me, and I do not know if I would have been able to carry it unwaveringly for that long.

[hiruma-musouka]

This is kinda random, but I've had this in my head for a couple days now. Something really, REALLY bugs me about the Uchiha Massacre. Was Sasuke REALLY the last remaining Uchiha? Are you telling me that there was no Uchiha that was having an affair that lead to a bastard child? In a family of Trained Military Police, there was not a single person who was able to minimize at least a LITTLE damage, hid, or who played dead? Root didn't have an Uchiha member (*stares suspiciously at Sai*)? (P1)

(p2) Also, was not a single Uchiha on the mission roster/on a mission, at the time? Or outside of the district for whatever reason? Kids sneaking out to play, teens going to visit a sweet-heart, shinobi out for some late-night training? REALLY? And the Uchiha was NOT A SMALL FAMILY. They were spared the losses of Kurama’s attack due to Danzo. People slip through cracks with those kinds of numbers. Sorry for the rant, but this has been bugging me lately.

(p3 an apologies for further comment) Also, was not a single medic able to do SOMETHING? We have blood replenishers, soldier pills, organ transplants, and so much more. Did not a single medic TRY to save the wounded they found? And someone HAD to have noticed the smell of GALONS OF BLOOD and/or have heard Sasuke SCREAMING, so medics would be called. The premise of the IN-VILLAGE massacre is believable with several individuals. Not with a major clan of 100-200+ members like I think they had.

Welcome to reason 27543782 for why that segment of the manga doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. I wonder about these things. Canon tends to handwave things like logic which exasperates me, but on the other hand, this train wreck of weird writing decisions is partly why we linger on it so much as a hobby.

So let’s have fun going over a few of the points you brought up.

Bastards: this… actually might not be an issue in kekkei genkai clans as much? Or rather unclaimed bastards might not be. If your trump card that lets you stay ahead of the competition is tied to your blood, there would be a lot more emphasis on keeping track of or preventing bastards than in many societies. It’s not only a matter of legitimacy and determining inheritence (practical reasons they’re historically disapproved of) but… it’s weirdly akin to preventing corporate espionage, enforcing copyright laws, and preserving state secrets. So it’s possible that the taboo against bastards is strong enough that there weren’t any unclaimed bastards outside the clan. You could swing it a few ways depending on worldbuilding and cultural norms.

(Of course, if the sharingan is genetically recessive then you might never know a bastard if the bloodline didn’t manifest. Yet I’m sure future canon will retcon whatever they want as soon as they need an Uchiha for a Dramatic Reason.)

As for no one living through it, yes, that’s weird if we stick with implication that it was really ONLY Itachi and Obito-as-Madara pulling it off. Two people versus a clan of a few hundred in what should have been an area close enough to call for help in a village which should have internal security? Lots of questions. From all signs, they should have been caught in the act since they weren’t going for subtle.

Tbh, I kind of headdesk and sigh over this arc because there are several things tied into all of this that I would have found more satisfying to change. Like, Danzo’s Root not being made up of brainwashed victims but instead of patriotic volunteers, but that’s another topic @elenathehun is welcome to cover. Part of the problem is likely that none of this was planned in advance, so in Arc 1, Root as it is in canon likely didn’t exist given that the original idea for Itachi was as an actual villain. Also, power scaling - sort of an issue in Naruto. The relative powers of all the players involved don’t work really well…

It’s all very messy. And the rational behind it all is all very messy. People should have slipped through cracks. Not to mention the lack of sense in the motivations of the people influencing it. Like Danzo: let’s presume for a moment he still wants to deal with the coup through death. Why wipe out an entire clan while you’re already suffering a manpower shortage? Danzo wants to preserve the strength of the village? Arrange for key “accidents” for the major Uchiha players. Leave the fighting force mostly untouched. Done sloppily it might have alarmed the Uchiha themselves, but you already have an internal problem. This would leave you manpower and a better face to present to foreign powers than your only remaining founding clan with one of your famous trademarks being wiped out in a single night by your own people. How weak does that make Konoha look to do as canon did, especially after the Kyuubi attack!

Like seriously. Seriously. If it wasn’t for Konoha being the protagonists (and thus game-breakingly buffed) then let’s relook at the Hidden Villages to compare issues as of canon volume 1. I might be forgetting things but:

Konoha = Kyuubi, Hyuuga Incident, Uchiha massacre

Suna = resource limitations due to deserts, economic issues

Kiri = long term bloody civil and martial strife

Iwa = recovering from mass manpower hits in the 3rd war

Kumo = …currently looking not too terrible?

Seriously. If Konoha keeps making odd decisions, it might have been very interesting to replay the series from the perspective of them having shot themselves in the foot repeatedly with Kumo being the primary major power.

Anyway, I got off topic from your asks. As for saving people, I’m pretty sure the Drama of the massacre was supposed to be that they were all found dead on scene. They have magic medical abilities in Naruto, but Tsunade and Shizune are MIA at this point and while biological realism is rare in a world with exchangable limbs and eyeballs, there do seem to be some things which are genuinely more difficult to heal than others. Nerves and the chakra system being examples. Not a great thing since clinical death (the cessation of breathing and blood circulation) is followed very quickly by the increasing spread of brain injuries to the point that full recovery of the brain after only a few minutes at normal body temperature is rare. So if we accept that somehow Sasuke was the first person to find everyone (???) and that no one found him for awhile, I’m actually not surprised that they couldn’t save anyone.

RE clan numbers: I feel like I once read a post that had deduced the likely population statistics for Konoha, the Uchiha clan, and different shinobi ranks, but I cannot find it.

It’s a few hundred people?? I think at least in WSE they had to have 300+ to maintain a functional population if endogamy is a primary strategy for large clans??  And birth rates have clearly decreased (to the current/future detriment of Konoha’s military forces) after the village was founded but we don’t know which generation that actually occured in. So yes, I would assume a minimum of 200 members at least given the Uchiha didn’t get whalloped by the Kyuubi.