#moral policing in general

[silent-raven13]

Why we need to prove our Latino side? Miles Morales’ B in Spanish...

One thing I’m annoyed with the fans watching Spiderman Across the Spider Verse, it's the way they make fun of Miles’ Spanish (I thought he spoke decent enough to understand, considering where he’s growing up)  How a lot of these Latinos (mostly older Spanish Speaking Latinos, I been seeing their asses on TikTok) calling Miles, a “No Sabo kid” because he got a B in Spanish. 

Like ya’ll never taken a Spanish class in America before? It’s not Latin American Spanish (or all types of Spanish in Latin America), it’s Castellano (Spain’s Spanish)! I don’t speak enough Spanish and went into a Spanish Speaker 1 class for my high school credit (and to get into College), and it makes up two credits (which is Spanish 1 and Spanish 2) I ended up with a B+ even when I barely spoke it, read, and write it (I bust my ass off for that B+). Even some of my classmates that knows fluid Spanish (Mexican and Salvadoran type of Spanish) were shookth by taking that class. Some of them even got low grades, or had to argue with our teacher because the Spanish we were learning wasn’t what we grew up with and the words we use wasn’t considered “proper”. So for those that never taken that class and start saying shit about Miles getting a B in Spanish, ya’ll are bitches and giving low vibration?? Like why ya’ll so badly wanna see young Latinos to prove their worth so bad?? 😒😒😒

The worst part is ya’ll love Evil Miles’ because his Spanish is so damn fluid, that you forget he lost his OWN DAD and was only around his mom more often to speak Spanish so well like ya’ll need to go to therapy. Read some articles about Latinos in America aren’t speaking Spanish as much as their native countries. Read articles about How part of Mexico becoming California, or Latino scholars talking about growing up during a time their own parents have to force themselves to speak English? Or how our American School system fucks us over! Once you learn why, you're gonna realize is a deeper than not wanting to.

[spikeinthepunch]

i have seen more posts abt this pop up sometimes but i think ppl really need to be taught more about OCD and its triggers because there is a lot of normalized behavior online that hurt OCD people and trigger them into episodes and dangerous behavior. things like PTSD triggers have become more widely discussed, and i think many find it easier to understand because they can grasp that its rooted in trauma, and the resulting trigger from the trauma 'makes more sense' most of the time.

OCD is complicated, and one of its biggest issues is that it is often rooted in things that 'dont make sense'. its what often results in people not taking OCD seriously, because some thing the person is freaking out about or focused on or spiraling about is strange, irrational, delusional, etc to them. this, plus the long time misinformation regarding OCD and seeing it has a neat freak/organization/pickiness disorder, makes people take it less seriously because their impression is that its some person simply getting upset about minor changes that others wouldnt normally be bothered by. so when its a bigger, more obvious, upsetting reaction suddenly its even more irrational to have been triggered because people cannot understand the weight and effect of what they think is so simple.

people absolutely need to unlearn this perspective on OCD, and take it seriously so that they can properly analyze their behavior to understand how it might be harmful. honestly the strict and controlling attitudes in online communities more often than not feed harmful thinking for OCD people, and only continue to do so when going unchecked

[marsupials-of-mars]

.

[bunnihearted]

wish i was better at sh+pl¡fting sighhhhh

[infernal-egocentrism]

An Introduction -

Hello, mind the newness... I've recently gotten into DoL and I've messed around with the idea for one, or maybe a few of my OCs behaving as NPCs in this world of Degrees of Lewdity.

Please call me Sang! Short for Sanguine -- first time I'll be using this alias, but I think I like it. I would like for this to either be a headcanons or roleplay blog-- could be both, to be honest.

This blog's primary focus would be my character who shall be known as "Yves," or simply "YS" for short. More information under the cut.

They are described as a beautiful person who has long, dark hair and wears primarily red clothing. While they choose to present cutely regardless of having a feminine or masculine body type, they are agender and will always a chest flat as a board.

Upon looking closer at their facial features, which might be difficult to make out on account of wearing light makeup, a PC can tell that they are not from around here, foreign. They juggle many interests, but find it odd that the locale has such a propensity towards lewd encounters.

Maybe they just haven't eaten enough of the food.

Oftentimes, they hide their supernatural features, and some scenario I've thought up of is that they come during mid-winter to have a late enrollment in the school that PC attends. On a weekend before their enrollment, they may be encountered in the museum, seemingly delighted to see what aged and rare artifacts may be on display.

Upon unlocking more of their information, once they openly express Intrigue, their title reads as "YS the ???" This changes the more you learn about them, and I might update the title of the blog to fit.

They would not be considered a Love Interest, but more likely a Notable NPC. Their interest towards any person would be increased if they are defiant or fight well- in the literal sense, with melee weapons or fists. Named NPCs they take note of would be Whitney, Sydney, Eden, and the Ivory Wraith. I'm personally a newbie at the game, so I'm not sure who else would work out well!

Additionally, the blog's icon and header should give you a few clues to their true identity.

Now for Sang's personal thoughts--

I'm a bit frightened since I have a pretty distinguishable artstyle and from the potential of people around me treating me like a freak for being interested in the game.... Despite this, my interest is more towards the lore that this has to offer and gushing at how other people interact with it with their PCs, too.

Maybe with time and enough confidence, I'll be able to post more art references of them. I hope I'll be able to get along with you all!

[theatremp3]

in some ways any of us could be in a dom/sub relationship with the postal service if we wanted to be

[biherbalwitch]

the darkling, ALEKSANDER, was never a Villain. In this essay I will-

[mxbitters]

lmao so some asshole posted this on my town’s patch page but god could you IMAGINE 

[todayisafridaynight]

THE MOLE SONG!!!!!!!!! PLEASE ENJOY I AM SO EXCITED TO TALK (ALWAYS AM BUT!!!!!)

HEY I SAVED OFF ON ANSWERING THIS UNTIL I FINISHED THE MOVIE AND IN THE SHORTEST REVIEW POSSIBLE

THAT WAS DEFINITELY A MOVIE™️

[catfishofoldin99colours]

one day I'll do a video essay on castle and the pack mentality of the police force and how it so quickly is used as a weapon against its own and how good cops don't last and morality is subjective in the police anyway

that or write a horror story about it, one or the other

[midamrevenant]

cringe as fucking hell for a piece of media to be anti-vegan in 2024. hannibal is running circles over you. HANNIBAL.

[sagechan]

"timeskip zuk/aang only cuz atla zuk/aang is problematic" take my hand. listen to me. it's not real. they're not real. nothing is problematic in fiction until you make it so. it just Exists. it just is. you can ship whatever you want. you can do anything forever. go frolic in a field and don't worry what an imaginary jury of tiktokers will say about you behind your back. they aren't real either.

[the-batacombs]

The cover is WF!Superman fighting KC!Superman, WF!Batman fighting KC!Batman, but they are not the only two who had a KC counterpart...

[opencommunion]

The discourse on terrorism is generally devoid of historical perspectives (‘terrorists are pure evil’ is one popular trope) and lacks any positionality because, it is assumed, terrorists simply live outside of morality and social norms. But such ahistorical and essentialist attitudes came to haunt this discourse when a former terrorist, Nelson Mandela, became a Nobel Peace Prize winner, or, more recently, when Osama bin Laden, a former American ally, ‘turned’ terrorist. The discourse on terrorism also does not account for state terrorism, whereby state institutions such as the army or police inflict violence on civilian populations, as was the case in Nicaragua and Chechnya (and by the US via the Contras). This last point is particularly missing from the discourse on the Palestinian–Israeli conflict. All attacks on Israelis, whether inside the 1967 border or outside, whether targeting soldiers or civilians, are dubbed terrorist attacks. But dropping a one-ton bomb from an Israeli airplane on a five-story Palestinian house, in which a militant may be present, knowing full well that dozens of civilians will be killed, is hardly ever described in Western media as terrorism.

Dorit Naaman, 2007

[beguines]

As a significant "feminised" category of mental illness, however, HPD [histrionic personality disorder] was superseded in the DSM-III by the introduction of the controversial BPD, a label which has been increasingly applied to women, with around 75 per cent of all cases estimated to be female. Seen as a milder form of schizophrenia and lying on the "borderline" between neuroses and psychoses, the concept has been used in psychiatry since 1938. Like other personality disorders, BPD has a notoriously low reliability level even by the generally poor standards of the DSM, and even within the profession is considered by many as yet another "wastebasket" category (though as Bourne ruefully remarks, the ambiguity of such personality disorders makes them particularly useful in policing deviance in the new century). One member of the DSM-III task force stated at the time of constructing BPD that "in my opinion, the borderline syndrome stands for everything that is wrong with psychiatry [and] the category should be eliminated". The chair of the task force, Robert Spitzer, admitted with the publication of DSM-III that BPD was only included in the manual due to pressures from psychoanalytically oriented clinicians who found it useful in their practices. Such practices have been documented by Luhrmann who describes psychiatrists' typical view of the BPD patient as "an angry, difficult woman—almost always a woman—given to intense, unstable relationships and a tendency to make suicide attempts as a call for help.' Bearing significant similarities to the feelings of nineteenth century psychiatrists towards hysterics, Luhrmann's study reveals psychiatrists' revulsion of those they label with a personality disorder: they are "patients you don't like, don't trust, don't want . . . One of the reasons you dislike them is an expungable sense that they are morally at fault because they choose to be different." Becker reinforces this general view of the BPD label when she states that "[t]here is no other diagnosis currently in use that has the intense pejorative connotations that have been attached to the borderline personality disorder diagnosis." A bitter irony for those labelled with BPD is that many are known to have experienced sexual abuse in childhood, something they share in common with many of those Freud labelled as hysterical a century earlier; a psychiatric pattern of depoliticising sexual abuse by ignoring the (usually) male perpetrator, and instead pathologising the survival mechanisms of the victim as abnormal.

By the mid-1980s, the hysteria diagnosis had disappeared from the clinical setting while BPD had become the most commonly diagnosed personality disorder. BPD is now the most important label which psychiatric hegemony invokes to serve capital and patriarchy through monitoring and controlling the modern woman, reinforcing expected gender roles within the more fluid, neoliberal environment. Nevertheless, as Jimenez (emphasis added) reminds us, the historical continuity from hysteria to BPD is clear: "Both diagnoses delimit appropriate behavior for women, and many of the criteria are stereotypically feminine. What distinguishes borderline personality disorder from hysteria is the inclusion of anger and other aggressive characteristics, such as shoplifting, reckless driving, and substance abuse. If the hysteric was a damaged woman, the borderline woman is a dangerous one."

Bruce M.Z. Cohen, Psychiatric Hegemony: A Marxist Theory of Mental Illness

[gamora-borealis]

here's the thing. to outsiders it may seem like we're excited because "phan is real!!" or whatever. but they don't know... it's not about that. phan has been real this entire time. there's always been evidence that dan and phil were together, more or less (more evidence than I think some people realize). the reason phan™ is such a big deal is because two silly gay boys met online in 2009, but their fame quickly outgrew their comfort zone and they quickly went back in the closet. dan was so traumatized from being bullied in school that he had a public meltdown on tumblr in 2012 insisting he was straight after some very private stuff leaked (that he insisted was a unused prank). after going to therapy and meeting so many queer fans on tour, dan slowly began to hint again that he was queer. but it still took them until 2019 to officially come out! and like. dan essentially confirmed that yes all the public online flirting back in 2009/2010 between him and phil was very real and that they were "more than just romantic" at that point and were currently "real best friends, life companions, and soulmates." but that was it, they weren't going to share any more. which is perfectly fine, but some of that definitely had to do with dan wanting to explore himself outside of the Dan and Phil™ brand (which unfortunately he got fucked over by the pandemic and by YouTube in the process). however they did eventually make a very cute announcement that they had bought and designed a new house together. and bit by bit they started making some more coupley jokes about each other here and there and sharing glimpses of a bedroom with both of their stuff in it, though it was still fairly subdued. but then dan finally got to go do his solo comedy tour and when he came back, shit suddenly CHANGED. 2023 was wild. they brought back their joint gaming channel they hadn't touched in five years since just before they came out. and they basically started the public flirting again??? this time on camera??? maybe not as direct as the 2009 stuff at first but. it's definitely been building up close to it. and then Dan finally releases his comedy special for free on YouTube. Phil writes a gushy tweet about it. and dan just replies with 🧡. ...except for within a larger birthday tweet in 2023, dan had not used a heart emoji for phil since like... 2010??? and then suddenly he screenshots this interaction and POSTS IT ON HIS YOUTUBE COMMUNITY TAB with the caption "gay" and a link to his special. like. this isn't about confirmation... the people who have been saying that they probably aren't together or that you shouldn't think or wonder if they are were like, the twitter morality police, ex-phannies, and generally clueless people. tumblr phannies clearly have known that they've been gay for each other for the past 15 years. but this whole "gay 🧡" incident is the first time Dan Howell has very publicly said something like this about his relationship while being "unapologetically gay" as a very public figure (there's been some magazine interviews that technically have come close but, nothing as direct as this). like that is so fucking huge??? that he and phil are finally comfortable enough online, on YouTube, and in life, to go there!!! as we are now approaching fifteen years of them together too!!! like, it's so nice to get to celebrate such a happy queer relationship and expression of queer joy. and dan has hinted that bigger stuff is coming too... like. yeah phan is real I guess 🙃