#pervasive invalidation

[unwelcome-ozian]

[welcometoteyvat]

one last lantern rite thought (at least it should be the last one)

some people are disappointed about wasted potential with menogias's lantern and tbh me too—however i am Not trading gaming's character arc for yaksha lore they can coexist. just make the lantern and minu an important sideplot/ending quest and get those fontanians out of the epilogue instead (every day we're faced with the restrictions that gacha places on storytelling) we can have both estranged son and father and also geo yaksha expansion... i agree that it's pretty disappointing to have all his mentions be in random lines and the furnishing description without any proper focus on it, but then again, after the first lantern rite i dont think any of the mingxiao lantern designs have gotten like a focus in the event itself (sea gazer from 3.4 wasn't mentioned much either). so maybe there's precedence but also . where's yaksha storytime

the other things conspicuously missing are xingqiu (bro put on a french outfit just to not even interact w the fontainians in the epilogue like what is this), liyue 6ang, and beiguang annual lantern rite flirtations. like again, all of this could have been shoved in the epilogue because they're cameos but no it's international collaboration time? like sure but hhhh forced as hell sorry

[crooked-wasteland]

An SA Survivor's Reading of Stolitz

I don't believe that creators should be confined to telling one type of story. The beauty of fiction is to explore worlds, emotions and scenarios that are by definition unreal. It gives a safe space to interact with extremes that we would never necessarily wish to experience in our real lives with the ultimate safeword of no longer engaging with the material.

That being said, as creators, there is an ethical awareness that must be maintained in order to tell stories of things like trauma and abuse. Being alone in a cabin in the woods with a killer, that scenario is not a pervasive subculture in our society. Whereas cases of child abuse, sexual and domestic abuse are not only real, but common. And the complexities of psychological damage that perseveres long after the traumatic events are necessary aspects to telling these stories.

If you are not consciously aware and attentive to the lasting impact these events have, you run up against the horrific possibility of retraumatizing an individual unprepared for the callous invalidation of their experience.

No one should ever be shamed for engaging with media that depicts trauma they themselves may have experienced. For many, engaging in the fiction of it is a way of processing and validating their experience. Frankly saying, if you wish to write about trauma at all, you should be writing for that audience in specific. Otherwise you are simply exploiting the horrors that real people live through and struggle with every day for some cheap drama at the risk of triggering someone whose story you are inadvertently telling.

And much like most therapy speak, the term Triggered has become appropriated and misused to the point of losing all meaning in the lexicon. According to the University of North Carolina, "A trigger is a stimulus that elicits a reaction. In the context of mental illness, "trigger" is often used to mean something that brings on or worsens symptoms. This often happens to people with a history of trauma or who are recovering from mental illness, self-harm, addiction, and/or eating disorders."

The university breaks down the types of triggers as well and gives examples as to what those subcategories mean. I highly recommend that even if you are not the sort to follow up on references, I do recommend going over the article. It offers coping suggestions as well for those who are at risk of becoming triggered and helps refocus the sense of control back to the individual.

With that said, this is where I came across the inspiration for this essay. I completely removed all information for this user because the last thing someone needs when expressing how the misappropriation of abuse triggers them is how it is their fault for being triggered. These are the original tweets this response was in reference to.

As such, I feel the empathetic need to write this essay as a sympathetic reading to this person and others who have experienced SA who find that Stolitz resonates in an undesirable and even harmful way. I think this person deserves to feel seen.

To make the argument that the relationship between Stolas and Blitz isn't fundamentally abusive requires an author-intent reading of the series. It necessitates massive leaps to fill in gaping plot holes that never clarify the story Medrano is intending to tell. This is plainly just a reading of the series as is with all the context that has been physically, actually, shown in the series and that alone.

Throughout the series, Blitz is depicted as emotionally volatile and unpredictable with low self-esteem and crippling loneliness. He is constantly hounding his employees through sexual harassment from a sense of envy over their loving relationship, and infantalizes his twenty-two year old adopted daughter through an abusive dynamic where she ranges from rude to outrightly cruel while he consistently sacrifices any personal boundaries and self-respect.

The relationship between Loona and Blitz in specific feels like a masochistic self-hatred on Blitz's part where he allows himself to be used and abused by a parasitic family member to feel wanted, showing a pure desperation to be desired by someone in any way. Loona is verbally and physically abusive to her adopted father, using terms of endearment like "Dad" as a tactic to control Blitz's behavior, rewarding him when he does something for her benefit and taking it away when she deems him embarrassing or unwanted.

Blitz's tie to Stolas in the main story comes when he is called in a vulnerable time. Hiding from Martha who is hunting him down, he explicitly tells Stolas that now is not a good time to call. Stolas, who has a visual of Blitz's situation, ignores all of it. He is unconcerned about the danger Blitz is in, instead viewing Blitz solely as a sexual object as he offers the trade of the book for sex.

Stolas is more knowledgeable of Blitz's situation than even Blitz is aware of. He not only is told that the current moment is not a good time, and Blitz's tense tone portrays a sense of anxiety, but he can physically see Blitz. It exists entirely within reason that he chose this specific moment to call while he knew Blitz was in a difficult position, using the tension to leverage a quick response that would get Stolas his way without needing to intimidate Blitz himself. Using the threat of a third party to pressure compliance from Blitz.

Come Loo Loo Land, the interactions between Blitz and Stolas are simply outright hostile. Blitz actively does not want to have a sexual encounter with Stolas and is even so untrusting of the Goetia that he is repeatedly asserting the boundary that he is not at all interested in sex, which Stolas explicitly mocks by being openly sexually suggestive to him. Everything Stolas has to say to Blitz is steeped in objectified sexuality as Blitz asserts his person, dehumanizing him to the point that Blitz is first and foremost an object of gratification. Even to the point of neglecting and humiliating his daughter, Stolas uses the excuse of spending time with her as a means of leering on Blitz.

In this episode we see Blitz has a history of being overlooked and unappreciated. His act in Loo Loo Land went nowhere and we see the first hints of his failed performance career. Over the course of the series, this hint towards a crippling lack of self esteem masked by an extroverted exterior is reinforced.

In Harvest Moon, Blitz is genuinely flustered when given recognition by Striker. He is quick to devalue his relationship with Stolas because there genuinely isn't a relationship at this point.

After having gone missing for two episodes, Stolas returns, being slightly less sexual and slightly more affectionate. It is a sudden recharacterization, but it is only for this scene. The rest of the episode once again shows how Stolas values Blitz physically in a sexualized manner and claims Blitz through the use of a pet name he repeatedly requests not to be called. In the opening scene, Blitz vocalizes that he "doesn't mind" their arrangement for the book, which could be taken at face value in regards to the first season. He does have the option to reject the agreement at any time and return the book in the context of this episode. It's why, despite still being an abuse of power dynamics overall, the relationship itself doesn't tip over into abuse. Blitz has the same amount of autonomy as Stolas at this time, before the context of season two, he has just as much power to end the agreement.

With the addition of The Circus, this retroactively is a situation of placating one's abuser. Blitz assuring Stolas that he doesn't mind the sex would be a way of asserting Stolas' complete control over the relationship and that Blitz isn't necessarily threatening the status quo by his question.

They don't actually know anything about each other, they aren't friends and don't spend time together outside of their forced meetings. Blitz doesn't know anything about Stolas and questioning the need Stolas has for his book could very well be read as a means of interrogating the agreement as a whole and figuring out why this was the arrangement.

(The argument that Blitz had any opportunity to negotiate things comes from an audience bias. It is probably the dumbest thing I have ever seen put into writing. Blitz doesn't know that he has any leverage in the relationship at all. He doesn't actually know Stolas has any feelings for him. That's kind of the whole point of the hot and cold romance slant that Medrano is trying to replicate.)

This is because the book is not the reason the relationship exists.

Blitz does not instigate sexual conduct, Stolas does by leading Blitz into a private room and locking them both inside with the impression Blitz would have sex with him. Blitz has no choice in the location or the isolation. He was caught trying to illegally break into the home for the explicit purpose of stealing the book. He was caught and is effectively at Stolas' mercy in every sense of the word. Not only is he still alive due to Stolas' whimsy, but if he tries to escape now after being shown this grace he could risk having the guards hunt him down and the second time will most likely not be so kind.

He literally does not know Stolas. They met for a day as a playdate and Blitz spent the whole time manipulating Stolas into facilitating his own robbery. There is no trust between them, there isn't even a relationship. While the doe-eyed pink vignette animated around Blitz shows that Stolas has an attraction to him, Blitz is entirely in the dark about this. Stolas' behavior is merely unpredictable and precarious from his position and limited knowledge.

(And even when placed in the context of their single day together, Blitz is still objectified by Stolas immediately, and Blitz is repulsed and forced to interact, just like when they are adults.)

(Just another side note, the argument that because someone decides to do something must mean they are not afraid is just asinine. Generally speaking, most people who commit crimes are in a state of fight or flight, it is more akin to gambling your actual life. Its a rewards and risks assessment, not a case of being sociopathically unafraid.)

It isn't until Stolas dramatically announces his desire for sex that Blitz realizes he has something that can be used to distract the Prince while he steals the book. And that's the issue with the argument that Blitz is the one willingly escalating the situation: it's not sincere. Throughout the entire sequence, Blitz isn't once sincerely interested in Stolas. He leans into the pretense to gain control of the situation, of which, might I remind you, he has had zero control over up to this point. Not only is he not interested in Stolas, but this is a bid for control from the position of helplessness. This way he is not relying on Stolas' unpredictable behavior, he is reclaiming power in the dynamic by playing into Stolas' desire.

("But Stolas says nevermind and Blitz keeps going!!"

Yeah, because he needs to maintain control of the situation. This is what power dynamics actually look like; there is a two-way push and pull. The only way he has any power is through the lens of sexuality. He needs to keep Stolas interested in him to keep his position. But throughout the scene, he is explicitly depicted as being put off by Stolas. In fact the entire reason he ties Stolas up is because he was becoming too into the act. He is shown to not be sensually performing bondage, he is trying to remove a problem.

And side-side note, I know I said I wouldn't lean into Medrano's intention or explicit dictation on how she demands her show be interpreted, but she was the one who said that The Circus and Loo Loo Land are connected in the timeline and Blitz's hostility in Loo Loo Land reads far more like a man who feels used and taken advantage of. So even the argument that Blitz was an enthusiastic participant is disproven by Medrano's own metacommentary and character interactions.)

And ultimately, it all boils down to that last moment scene. Between willingly having sex with Stolas when he is tied up or the book, Blitz makes for the door to leave. He doesn’t willingly engage in sex with Stolas. Either you can read the scene as a form of pity sex, which in the context of Medrano’s timeline and Loo Loo Land, shows Blitz was not enamored with the encounter or you have to read this as being manipulatively pressured into it. There is no way to argue Blitz has any leverage in the situation and no grounds to argue that it was mutually enjoyed.

That doesn’t even start to cover the fact that all the way to Ozzie’s, Blitz is repulsed by Stolas. When calling, he openly shows that this is something he would rather not be doing. He doesn’t have feelings for Stolas and despite just using the man who is using him, just having to deal with Stolas is distressing for him.

This is not an equal or fair relationship dynamic. It is not a mutual relationship. This is a relationship of self-preservation and coercion. And the fact is, it could have worked with very small changes to The Circus. Having the dynamic be actually mutual would have been a great start, but just properly addressing the actual dynamic and having Stolas take ownership of what he's done, and validating the fact that coercion is sexual abuse. Because out of all the sweeping changes, retcons and inconsistencies, the one aspect that has persevered throughout the show is just how trapped Blitz feels.

In Truth Seekers, Blitz’s hallucination is contradictory in its attempt to be visceral, and that is not inherently a problem. Trying to be abstract, it is normal for people to experience contradictory emotions over something. It makes sense in that way, but it needs reinforcement in the expanded narrative to tell it's story. As such I am just going to give my reading on the sequence based on my narrative and state it as fact.

The clown costume shows that Blitz sees himself as a joke, feeding into his low self-worth that no matter what he does, he is always the clown being laughed at. The murky wasteland is a reflection of his life. Devoid of anything bright or good, it is populated by dead trees and the ground is a quicksand like sludge, showing how he devours the good and extinguishes it in his own life. He kills his own happiness. Moxxie exists as a critical voice Blitz hears, telling him how stupid and awful he is to everyone around him. Blitz rejects his own self-criticism, reaffirming his self destructive victim mentality that appears when faced with the consequences of his own actions.

It's when the characters of Fizzarolli, Verosika and Striker appear that Blitz gives his regrets, insecurities and resentments voice, poorly impersonating the voices of those who saw the real him. Striker mocking Blitz’s need for companionship, how he lies to himself constantly and presents himself as independent and assured when really he sees himself as needy and pathetic.

Fizzarolli adds to it, pointing out Blitz’s failures to make it on his own, however this portion of the series should probably be considered non-canon as the newest episodes established that Fizzarolli and Blitz have not had any contact with each other since the accident. The more important line Fizzarolli says “You're going to die alone”, have been written out of the show. There would have been no time or place for Fizz to have ever spoken this to Blitz.

Then there is Verosika, who brings up Blitz’s self destructive tendencies, showing Blitz’s own abusive behaviors towards characters like Moxxie. It also suggests an explanation to why Blitz tolerates Loona, because her constant rejection of him contradicts his reactionary need to push others away, as well as feeds his self-flagillation.

It is when he endeavors to flee the reflections of the worst parts of himself that he runs into Stolas. Perched atop a pristine staircase of gold, being fanned by two silhouettes of Blitz. This shows the power imbalance in every way. Blitz doesn't even walk up the stairs, but crawls. Himself just a faceless accessory to Stolas’ desires, but everything he has intrinsically tied to the power Stolas' exerts over him. This is shown explicitly by the chains around his hands and neck, Stolas' reeling him in as he bears a grimace of reluctance. It is the most explicit representation of being trapped between two bad decisions. Either he is just the joke, the failure, the asshole, the stupid piece of shit, or he is the pet, the object, the toy. Stolas mentioning Blitz being "afraid to love" is less a suggestion that Blitz has any feelings for Stolas, but instead his psyche convincing himself that the relationship is not so exploitive. That he is not being dehumanized and abused, but on some messed up level he is being wanted and desired, which is better than the wastes below.

Maybe one could say that Blitz is being elevated out of his situation for how the feathers removed the costume and sludge, essentially wiping him clean of his worst self, providing a sense of safety. But he only has this opportunity because of Stolas, and it isn't free as shown by the feathers also becoming the chains binding him. Because at the end of the day, Stolas isn't the prize at the end of the climb to self actualization, the stairs belonged to him in the first place. To escape the horror-filled wasteland below, Blitz has to play by the rules of the owner of the stairs.

And ultimately, that isn't a story that is off-limits.

The Stolas apologist argument is why the depiction of this dynamic is triggering and harmful, not the fact that it exists in the media. Just owning the scenario and having Stolas acknowledge that he has sexually abused Blitz would have gone a long way. Instead, Medrano and the fandom have insistently represented this victim-blaming interpretation where Blitz is responsible for his own abuse. And that will never be okay. This goes all the way back to my "Not All Victims are Survivors" post. Blitz is the victim in this and his bad behaviour and own abusive actions directly correspond to the fact that he is a victim with a victim mindset. He actively lives in the middle of his abuse and has formed maladaptive strategies through manipulation, harassment, verbal abuse, and self harm. These do not remove his victim status. There is no such thing as a "Perfect Victim". And he should not have to be any sort of way in order to have that experience validated. And the issue that is at the heart of this show is that the narrative and the fanbase require a victim to be framed as delicate and hapless to circumstance with a soft and gentle personality to be a victim. To come out of abuse aggressive and harsh with sharp edges is framed as being less valid. But this outcome is normal and it's a difficult battle to work on oneself to feel safe again. It's absolutely a story worth telling.

But you first have to be interested in telling a story.

[lilybecca1]

My analysis on Midoriya and why I think he has undiagnosed BPD

Throughout Izuku's childhood, he was always seen as weird, off-putting, an outsider to social norms. Being left out, being seen as "different" is very common amongst people, especially kids, with undiagnosed disorders. So let's jump straight into it. What is BPD and how does it develop? (Contains manga spoilers)

Here are a few summaries amongst many that I have found (also, I'm not a psychologist or a healthcare professional, these are all just based on my own observations):

BPD, short for Borderline Personality Disorder, is a severe mental health condition characterized by a pervasive and challenging pattern of symptoms including emotional dysregulation, unstable self-identity, fear of abandonment, intense and unstable interpersonal relationships, impulsivity, and self-harming behaviors.

People with borderline personality disorder (BPD) experience extreme emotions. Once a powerful emotion is triggered, it is very hard for them to calm down. Because of this, they often have unstable relationships. They also engage in self-destructive behavior.

Researchers think that BPD is caused by a combination of factors, including:

Stressful or traumatic life events (for example, emotional abuse, neglect, often having felt afraid, upset, unsupported or invalidated),

And genetic factors.

Symptoms may include:

A strong fear of abandonment. This includes going to extreme measures so you're not separated or rejected, even if these fears are made up.

A pattern of unstable, intense relationships, such as believing someone is perfect one moment and then suddenly believing the person doesn't care enough or is cruel.

Quick changes in how you see yourself. This includes shifting goals and values, as well as seeing yourself as bad or as if you don't exist.

Periods of stress-related paranoia and loss of contact with reality.

Self-injury

Wide mood swings that last from a few hours to a few days. These mood swings can include periods of being very happy, irritable or anxious, or feeling shame.

Ongoing feelings of emptiness.

Inappropriate, strong anger, such as losing your temper often, being sarcastic or bitter, or physically fighting.

Now, let's get into it.

BPD, like all disorders, isn't the same for every person. Symptoms and the intensity of these symptoms can vary. It can make some people's life and relationships really difficult, but others can go on for years undiagnosed living a completely happy life without even knowing there's anything wrong. Midoriya's case, in my opinion, is the latter. These symptoms don't surface that obviously in him, but I believe, in different circumstances (queue those Villain Deku and traumatized Deku fics) these symptoms and behaviours could actually turn into much bigger problems and affect his life in a much more impactful way. But, in any case, let's analyze these symptoms and how they may have surfaced in him throughout the manga.

Of course, I decided to turn to TikTok as well and watch some actual explanations and experiences from people who actually have been diagnosed with this disorder in order to understand BPD on a more subjective level, not just objective. And what I have found turned out to be very interesting.

People with BPD often develop a very emotionally attached connection with one specific person in their life, which is their "Favorite person". This person can be anything including a friend, family, therapist, partner, etc. This is a person that someone with BPD can become dependent on. They often view them as a person who's perfect and can do nothing wrong. They might overshare, and expect availability from that person at all times. The dependence on this person goes beyond just adoration, because they are idolizing them to the point where it's all consuming. A person with BPD can switch from absolute adoration one moment to absolute hate the next. They might have trouble with boundaries, sometimes even having zero boundaries when it comes to that person. Their life constantly revolves around that person and the favorite person's identity becomes their own, and they can feel literal physical pain when losing that person. You see where I'm getting at?

I believe Midoriya has developed this dependency and attachment towards one particular person, can you guess who?

Yep, Bakugo Katsuki

Midoriya views Kacchan as perfect, as the embodiment of the image of victory. It's like he blindly ignores Katsuki's bad traits and the things he has done to him, and he idealizes him to the point that Katsuki became his symbol of victory. So much so that he himself has absorbed this identity that he built around Katsuki, for example during battles, which we see during the moments he clearly imitates Bakugo and mirrors him. Izuku "ILoveKacchan'sPersonalSpace" Midoriya basically has zero boundaries when it comes to Katsuki, I mean y'all let's not forget he basically stalked him and even knows what body part Katsuki washes first in the shower. Not to mention he gives zero fucks about boundaries when he butts into Bakugo's emotions even though Bakugo has clearly tried setting boundaries for almost their whole time knowing each other. Deku has also overshared with Katsuki(and only Katsuki), when he told him about OFA even though it was literally meant to be the one secret that he should have kept to himself. His life has always revolved around Bakugo to the point he cannot keep himself away from him.

And talk about experiencing physical pain when losing the favorite person...remember when Bakugo was kidnapped? Yeah, remember that kinda cringe and second hand embarrassing, absolutely animalistic scream that Midoriya let out? Yeah, well..... And then when he actually lost Katsuki, when he saw his dead body. Izuku lost control of his quirks in the middle of a freaking battle, LITERALLY started choking on Blackwhip and screaming in pain, and Blackwhip turned into a heart pierced by three swords that symbolizes intense and extreme physical and emotional pain. Need I say more? No.

And if you think Midoriya isn't capable of extreme hate too, ahhahaha, you're wrong. He can fr switch from absolutely adoring his Kacchan to planning how he's gonna rip off his legs in his diary. Yeah, I haven't forgotten about that one, Izuku.

So, it's very clear that Bakugo is Midoriya's FP and that he has developed this unhealthy, borderline toxic dependency towards him. But let's break down his character even further.

People with BPD tend to engage in self-harming and dangerous activities impulsively, diving in without thinking, in order to feel something. Well, we can tick that one too. Problem child number 1 is known to do and jump into things impulsively without thinking, even if it causes self-injury. In fact, he sometimes engages these self-destructive behaviours on purpose, like all those times when he broke his own bones over and over again. All this just so he can make Todoroki use his right side. Seriously, Deku. Yes, they are training to be heroes, but noone in the class is as reckless and impulsive as Izuku.

Which actually brings me to my next point, which is people with BPD objectifying themselves for validation, going insane lengths just to prove their own self-worth, never having a clear sense of self and seeing themselves as bad or as if they don't exist. I have talked about this in a previous theory of mine too, which you can read here. Midoriya Izuku does not have a clear sense of self. He mirrors others around him, behaving according to the mood and expectations of others. He has no sense of self, because he has built his identity around wanting to be a hero. To him, he is only worth something if he reaches that goal, that dream. Meaning he has no self worth or identity unless he does as he is expected to do, aka be a hero and put everyone else before himself, sacrificing his own needs, and in worse cases his own well-being. He basically objectifies his own self and turns himself into a simple puppet, a Deku, an empty vessel that can hold OFA and his dream of being a hero. To himself, he is nothing more than an object that's meant to be sacrificed if it's needed.

Now, let's continue with: emotional dysregulation, extreme mood swings, and inappropriate, strong anger, such as losing your temper often, being sarcastic or bitter, or physically fighting.

Well, first let's talk about something that's called "splitting". BPD is a disorder that causes extreme mood swings, making the person go one second from feeling happy and fine, to the next second feeling complete, pure rage. There is a fine line between these two moods, and it's very easy to fall over the edge. For some people, it can happen multiple times a day and could last from minutes to hours to even days, and for others, it can happen very rarely, it depends on how severe the symptoms are for each person. One thing in common though, is that splitting occurs when a specific memory, trauma or emotion gets triggered.

There are different types of splits, one of them being Rage split. Rage splits usually come with sudden outbursts of anger that seemingly come out of nowhere. When it occurs, the person might feel a tightness in their chest, their vision might narrow. They might experience a burning sensation in their chest as if their heart is trying to escape. This overwhelming emotion of anger can cause them to become infuriated with someone or something for no apparent reason. These episodes can cause impulsive actions, inappropriate speech and violent behaviour. It's almost like a cathartic release of emotion, and oftentimes the person doesn't remember the event fully, or only remembers it as a blur.

Now let's compare Midoriya's rage and outbursts and how they could be considered as splitting.

Scenario One: Izuku screaming his ass off saying GIVE ME MY KACCHAN BACK, charging at the obviously overpowered villains with two broken arms. Now, we can all agree that this was pretty out of character for him, and everyone was like Okay wtf. So the threat of losing Katsuki(which also directly correlates to his fear of abandonment) triggered him and made him impulsively and recklessly run towards the villains, even though he was completely defenseless.

Scenario Two: "Monoma, you b*tch". Midoriya literally unlocking a NEW QUIRK cause Monoma was talking shit about his FP, causing violent behaviour from him, getting tunnel vision, being completely OUT of it to the point they had to use Shinso's quirk to make him snap out of the episode. And now, this wasn't just about some rando insulting Bakugo. In my theory I explained how Monoma insulting Bakugo was essentially Monoma insulting Izuku's own values and identity. Because he has absorbed Bakugo's ideals, his values, his desire to win. Monoma talking shit about him felt like he just insulted who Izuku was as a person, as if he jabbed at the very essence of Izuku's dream, of his ideals. THAT was why it triggered him so bad.

Scenario Three: Midoriya vs Shigaraki 1. FP got stabbed, Midoriya immediately saw red and ran straight into the villain's hand without thinking about the consequences. He almost rage quit y'all. He raged so hard he bit the goddamn tendril like a freaking dog. He disassociated so hard he got tunnel vision and his eyes actually lit ablaze. Bruh.

Scenario There'stoomuchtokeepcount: Midoriya vs Shigaraki 2. Aka Deku AFK-ing in the middle of a freaking war and being like I'm out, y'all on your own now, after seeing FP's dead body. Tightness in his chest, unable to breathe, vision narrowed, in fact, completely blocked because of Smokescreen. A burning sensation in his chest as if his heart wanted to escape = Three of Swords. A cathartic release of emotion as his quirks released and gotten out of control. His biggest rage split moment right there.

But, rage isn't the only type of splitting that can occur. Another type is Isolation split.

Isolation splits usually stem from a deep-seated fear of abandonment. You may find yourself feeling unwelcome and unwanted, even in familiar environments such as school. You might have an urge to push people away, and often cut yourself off from others. For some, this means aggressively cutting people out of their lives for no apparent reason, for others, it might be a more subtle withdrawal from social groups and conversations. All the while hoping that someone will notice and ask them how they are doing. It might also include suppressing anger into anxiety, guilt, or self-hatred, identity dysmorphia, self-sabotaging relationships to be in control, stress-related paranoia, loss of contact with reality, and on-going feelings of emptiness.

Reminds me of a certain Vigilante Arc.

Isolation splits usually stem from fear of abandonment. In Izuku's case, why did he leave UA? Well, on the surface level, it was to protect his classmates from harm. But on a deeper level..

During his Vigilante Arc, he felt like he had to carry the burden of OFA all by himself. He felt like this responsibility that he carried made him a burden for others, including Katsuki, his friends, his family, and All Might. He feared that they would also realize this and feel like he's a burden, so he pushed them away, cut himself off, and left before they could leave him behind. Of course, this is not the truth, but this is what he believed. His feelings of anxiety towards the possibility of losing them in the war, his guilt of being a burden, his self-sabotaging is what made him believe that he is unwanted, unwelcome. During splits, the person views everything as either black or white, no in-between. Either all good, or all bad. He wanted to feel in control by leaving them behind for "their sake", almost maniacally insistent on being alone, like in the scene where All Might wanted to check on him and give him some food, but Deku ultimately ended up pushing him away and leaving him on the ground too.

During these episodes, people with BPD cannot logically think the situation through, they don't understand that their intense paranoia and belief that everyone hates them is just the reflection of their own feelings. During this episode, this Vigilante Arc(the episode didn't last for the entire arc, but there were probably higher and lower moments instead) he lost contact with reality and lived in a state of constant paranoia and a feeling of emptiness. He believed it was for the "better", but deep inside, that child inside of him just wanted someone to save him, to pull him back and not let go. Deep down he was just a child who just wanted some reassurance and to be validated. Like in his letter to Katsuki. Although we didn't see the whole letter, there were snippets of "Help me", and "thanks for everything" in it, reflecting Izuku's own feelings of "Please love me" and how even though he said he wanted to be alone, deep down he just wanted Katsuki to save him, to be there by his side.

Lastly, another symptom of BPD that can occur, albeit rarely, is the idolization, devaluation and ghosting of certain people, specifically the Favorite Person. This might just, technically, explain the ending of the manga and Chapter 431. Midoriya subconsciously idolized Katsuki his whole life seeing him as perfect. But as we all know, nobody is perfect. Midoriya had always viewed Kacchan as his image of victory, as someone who cannot lose. Yet, he has. The very person who he believed could never ever lose died on the battlefield. The person who believed was the strongest broke down crying in front of him saying he wants to be on his heels for the rest of his life. And what was Izuku's reaction?

Stop crying, this isn't like you.

Midoriya progressively went through the devaluation of Bakugo Katsuki's character, of his Favorite Person. Now, this is just a theory, because devaluation doesn't necessarily mean anything bad. It just means that he had stopped blindly idolizing Katsuki and realized that he is just a human too.

But in some cases of BPD, devaluation also comes with losing interest. Of finding a new favorite person who they see as their new "idol". Or to put it simply, Uraraka. Now, I don't want to go into more details because I am still very much hurt from Chapter 431, but we have seen an obvious ignorance, almost ghosting from Izuku's side towards Katsuki, something that is completely the opposite of how he would have acted before the war. Instead, he is looking at Ochaco as if she was his hero, and he sees her as a person that he wants to get to know more, to get closer to. Leaving Bakugo behind.

I spy an untreated BPD right there. But how could this disorder have developed in Midoriya? Well, it can be due to either genetics, or a series of traumatic events during childhood, for example emotional abuse, neglect, and going through feelings like being afraid, upset, unsupported or unvalidated.

Well emotional abuse came from the bullying. Neglect came from his father leaving. Being afraid was also because of the bullying and Bakugo. He felt unsupported by his own mother when it came to his dream of becoming a hero after being diagnosed quirkless. And he felt unvalidated his whole life simply because he didn't have a quirk. So yeah. I'm pretty sure these were all reasons that he has developed BPD, although not a severe case. If he actually turned into a villain and never got into UA, I imagine these symptoms could have worsened, making him extremely irritable, prone to snapping and having emotional outbursts and having an even more toxic codependency in his relationships.

I'm not saying that BPD is anything bad, I also have a friend who has BPD and it doesn't make you a bad person, people with BPD just simply experience emotions more intensely than others.

So yeah, I hope you guys enjoyed this analysis, and of course, let me know what you guys think!

[exeggcute]

i think it's also understandable that a lot of trans men i know and follow are tired of having to explain that while "misandry" doesn't exist, systemic oppression against trans men for being trans men does exist because being a trans man is being an oppressed gender affected by specific forms of misogyny that are not just traditional transphobia. just kind of sick of everything being watered down to "oh sensitive mean trans men are being evil misogynists" when i see ill treatment of trans men talking about their own oppression as well as dumbass transmisogynistic trans men who need to shut up.

(for context: I assume this is in reference to this post, which has started getting a bunch of notes again recently)

I don't intend to invalidate anyone's experience because it's possible that I just run in different circles than other people do or whatever, but, I genuinely cannot recall a single time (on tumblr or otherwise) that I've seen or heard an LGBT person state or even imply that systemic oppression against trans men doesn't exist. like full stop. and maybe it has happened and I just haven't seen it! but I am sort of skeptical that this is happening at scale because I don't exactly live under a rock lol.

what I have seen, and what I was speaking to in that post, was how people will rightfully discuss that (1) misandry is not a thing and (2) men are collectively afforded advantages over women, and then other people will overhear those discussions and go "oh so that means trans men aren't oppressed for being trans?", which is not what the original discussion was about, but then it gets derailed into a whole other thing orthogonal to the original discussion and stokes resentment on all sides of the conversation.

and I will grant that there are undoubtedly people who go "ugh I fucking hate men" in a venting way, but we rightfully make fun of cis men who get really bent out of shape when cis women say that. there are also random people who say generally spiteful and/or stupid shit but that's true about anything, you know. doesn't necessarily make it a widespread phenomenon. but if it turns out I'm wrong and that is actually a pervasive attitude I'm more than willing to hear that out! I just haven't heard any compelling evidence for it yet.

I would also like to restate for the record that I am a transmasculine person on testosterone lol. if that lends any legitimacy to my opinion here, even though it really shouldn't matter either way. the other day I got called "bud" by someone who saw the newfound T-induced cystic acne all over my jaw and 100% assumed I was a teenage boy

[tangents-within-tangents]

I think something that's seriously bothered me about the Gravity Falls fandom is how Ford, which has been depicted as nothing but aro, gets that depiction constantly thrown out the window to ship him with Bill Cipher. The idea that their toxic relationship could only ever be something romantic, and that friendships don't have these kinds of explosive shitty relationships is ludicrous! In my own experience, the worst abusive relationships I've seen had been between friends, not romantic parters. This fandom has been driving me bonkers because everywhere you look people are spreading this misconception that "BILLFORD IS CANON!!!" because they never take off their shipping glasses. Characters do not need romance to make their experiences complex!

Yes like the fandom thing is always "if you don't like it you can just scroll past" or whatever, but there is this point where shipping culture just gets so pervasive and unavoidable!

And it basically inherently devalues/invalidates friendships and any other type of love beside romantic or sexual (which have so much real life and storytelling merit!). Especially when it's treated as if it is the only way to view things, like it's the default, even in cases when there is literally nothing in the text to actually suggest sex/romance!

And like yeah plenty of hc and shipping has nothing to do with what is or isn't in the text. But when aro/ace identities are treated as an empty slate to project whatever on instead of as an identity in itself? When there is so much romance all over the place but you can't let us have our one (like literally one) canon character? When it gets to the point that you can't possibly think of a 'platonic explanation' for things that literally do not have to be romantic in any way? If you can't conceive of a relationship having value and depth, love and complexity without romance/sex? If you can't think of a character/storyline being interesting without it, or of someone's life being meaningful and complete without it? That's just amatonormative (aka aphobic)

And like can you see why maybe that would get frustrating for some of us to constantly see everywhere all the time?

[invested-in-your-future]

Over the years I've seen many people reading or watching fiction in which authoritarian force rises to power and doubting how plausible that would be.

Whether it's Korra, Arcane, RWBY, or even Star Wars, there would always be those in the audience who would question the possibility. A ton of fictional works, really, that I am too tired to list.

Just many cases of people going: "People would stop this", "It's silly nobody noticed", "Why don't people realize those are the badguys", and "This would never happen here."

Over and over again.

In some cases, even the said fiction would take this stance, pretending neutrality and centrism will always prevail over chaos and that hatred or evil would simply invalidate themselves by being inept (case in point RWBY, which eventually fails to match even the grade school level of understanding of social issues).

Well, just look at how fast companies are folding in the face of fascism right now—just tripping over themselves to appease the would-be overlords.

Evil doesn't need to be smart—it just needs to be pervasive enough to be mundane and sufficiently widespread to function as an excuse.

[bittersweetresilience]

Adrien Agreste and Borderline Personality Disorder

DISCLAIMER: I've been a bit low on spoons this week, so I haven't gathered as much evidence as I probably could have. Also, I am but a humble student in clinical psychology. This is mainly a thought compilation for @moonieratty!

To introduce the topic, without going into it too much, personality is described by features and behavioral patterns, or traits, consistent across situations and across time. Personality disorders are therefore enduring patterns of highly maladaptive traits evaluated in personal and sociocultural context (Dozois, 2019, p. 290).

Like other disorders, personality disorders have diagnostic criteria. The DSM is used primarily for diagnosis in the US and Canada while the ICD is used more widely in Europe and other places. I'm more familiar with the DSM, but I've included a brief section on the ICD to be comprehensive. It ended up a bit longer than anticipated, so let's go below the cut. Warning for discussions of abuse, self harm, and suicide, and a brief mention of substance use.

Overview of Borderline Personality Disorder

BPD is prevalent in a small percentage of the population, about 1-2% by varying estimates, and is characterized by instability across domains of emotions, identity, interpersonal relationships, and behavior. Its onset is usually in late adolescence or early adulthood and symptoms may diminish with age, after one's thirties or forties, especially with therapeutic intervention. Along with ASPD, it has been the focus of a lot of clinical research; it is unfortunately associated with high rates of non-suicidal self-injury and suicide (APA, 2022, pp. 754–755; Dozois, 2019, pp. 308–309).

Etiological factors for BPD include both biological and environmental disturbances. Of note to our discussion is the heightened risk for BPD in cases of child abuse or neglect, as well as growing up with another family member with a serious mental health condition (NHS, 2022). It's been well established that Gabriel is emotionally neglectful if not outright abusive toward Adrien in multiple ways, so this is a clear risk factor. In addition, although I won't argue definitively for Gabriel having a psychological condition, he did keep Emilie's body in the basement, so there is clearly some kind of disturbance going on.

From a cognitive-behavioral perspective, Linehan argues that BPD stems from families who consistently invalidate childhood emotional experiences and "oversimplify the ease with which life's problems can be solved," which may cause children to learn to seek attention and communicate with others through emotional outbursts (Dozois, 2019, p. 297). This rings true for Adrien and Gabriel as well.

I have to apologize for my son, Ladybug, he's like his mother. Way too overly dramatic. (Jackady)

It doesn't seem like this is the first time Gabriel has thought this, and labeling an emotional reaction as being overly dramatic is very much invalidation of it. As for emotional outbursts, Adrien has had quite a few, mostly as Chat Noir. More on this later.

To round out this first section, attachment theory proposes a connection between poor parent-child attachments and BPD relationship difficulties. Specifically, maladaptive behavior in relationships may stem from childhood development of an anxious-ambivalent attachment style, where intense fears of abandonment interfere with a strong desire for intimacy (Dozois, 2019, p. 310). You can clearly see this in Chat Noir's relationship with Ladybug, and I'm sure other people have discussed Adrien's attachment style more in depth, but suffice to say I think this is an apt description.

Argument from DSM-5-TR

In the DSM, personality disorders are primarily diagnosed on a categorical model. There are a few general criteria which I won't be going into, but I will highlight that personality disorders are stable and pervasive, and would be diagnosed only if they were leading to significant distress or dysfunction. Adrien's mental state is not great, so the latter shouldn't be a problem, but this show does not always pay attention to consistency, so I'm going to be speculating some. Everything in this section is cited to the relevant DSM entry unless otherwise stated.

The DSM characterizes BPD with instability in relationships, self image, and affects, as well as marked impulsivity. It has no exclusion criteria, so BPD can be and frequently is comorbid with other disorders like mood disorders, PTSD, and ADHD. Of the below criteria, five need to be met in order for a diagnosis to be made.

Frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment

Hey, where're you going? . . . So you're allowed to know her true identity, but I'm not? (Syren)

You're not really replacing me with a turtle, are you? (Anansi)

A lot of people have delved into Adrien's abandonment issues, which feature most prominently in his relationship with Ladybug. His fears of being replaced result in him seeking reassurance from Ladybug, and he can lash out if he does not receive the response he hopes for. Ladybug is his world, and he wants to be hers, so anything infringing on that feels to him like a threat of being abandoned, and he does not like it very much.

Impulsive behaviors like giving up his ring can be interpreted under this lens: he can avoid abandonment by doing the abandoning first. Then it will be him leaving, and not the other way around.

I also interpret Adrien's nightmare (Le Marchand de Sable) as being a fear of being alone as much as it is a fear of being trapped.

Unstable and intense interpersonal relationships alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation

We'll be united, more powerful and free. We'll defeat Hawk Moth, then we can both run away to an island! Far away from everything. We will live off nothing but fruits, and we will have a little pet hamster and we will name it— (Le Patineur)

I just can't do this anymore. I give up… on everything. Even you . . . If I become Chat Noir again, Ladybug will just end up rejecting me, over and over. (Kuro Neko)

Even though Adrien mostly keeps his head on straight regarding what he's owed and not owed by other people, his relationship with Ladybug is full of highs and lows. He thinks Ladybug is the most amazing girl, but this can recoil quickly into feeling as though Ladybug doesn't care about him enough or isn't meeting his needs.

Furthermore, he developed this idealization of Ladybug as a potential lover or caregiver at one of their first meetings (Cœur de Pierre), and continually sought to spend time together and share the intimate details of their secret identities early on. These are all common to individuals with BPD, as is the switch from idealization to feeling as if the other person "does not care enough, does not give enough, or is not 'there' enough." Ladybug is the only person Adrien consistently projects this instability and intensity on, which might be something interesting to explore.

Identity disturbance: unstable self image or sense of self

When I was a kid, I always wanted to be what my parents wanted me to be! (Exauceur)

But, does that mean Chat Noir is who I really am? Deep down inside? (Kuro Neko)

With all the secret identities, it isn't surprising that Adrien fits this criterion, but canon even explicitly draws a link between Adrien's unstable sense of self and his childhood experiences. He doesn't know who he is, and he distracts from this by being Chat Noir, only to struggle even more when he feels useless and underlooked as his hero self. His behavior shifts dramatically between trying to prove himself with grand gestures and refusing to participate or lashing out. There is definitely something to discuss on this front.

Impulsivity in at least two potentially self-damaging areas

Giving you some extra time . . . I trust you to bring me back, m'lady. (Gamer 2.0)

There are only two liars left in Paris and one of them knows the ultimate way to catch her attention . . . Crazy about you, m'lady. (Mensonge)

This is walking a thin line between impulsivity and suicidal behavior, which would be excluded from this criterion, but I'll list self sacrifice here because I can see an argument for Chat Noir's impulsive behaviors being out of love or the desire to be useful. There may still be some self injurious intent or euphoria, but Chat Noir does have faith in Ladybug to bring him back eventually. Nevertheless, this is impulsive and unhealthy. Chat Noir jumps too quickly to this option to have thought it through.

I can't think of another area, because Adrien isn't old enough for reckless driving, spending, substance use, or sex. This is also a kids' show. Just presenting these options for fanfiction writers out there.

Recurrent suicidal or self mutilating behavior, gestures, or threats

I... I don't know what to do! (Chat Blanc)

This is all our fault . . . Cataclysm. (Culpabysse)

By itself, what happened in Chat Blanc would not be solid evidence, as that was an unprecedentedly traumatic situation. Combined with Culpabysse, though, there is a strong case to be made for at least passive suicidality for this to be able to come up as an option.

You could also interpret the self sacrifice in this category. Suicidal behavior in individuals with BPD is often preempted by fears of rejection or abandonment, so an interesting analysis could be made on this front.

Affective instability due to marked reactivity of mood

He's still only thinking of himself! I just want this terrible day to be over and done with! I hate Christmas! (Pire Noël)

Sorry! Sorry! I didn't mean to make you so mad. I get it. You're sick of me . . . No one can help me, Kagami. (Glaciator 2)

Adrien's prolonged episodes of anger and despair reflect a high reactivity to emotional stressors, especially interpersonal ones. In general, he just doesn't feel very well unless something is actively bringing him joy. Most of his outbursts are brief, though, and I will discuss them as part of a later criterion.

Chronic feelings of emptiness

I'm not Adrien, so I wouldn't know if this is the case, but I can say he has experienced at least one depressive episode (Kuro Neko) and emptiness would not be unfamiliar. You can look at him and decide.

Inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger

How was your amazing evening with your "friends"? . . . What do you think? (Glaciator)

Why not? No one'll know if I quit. No one'll care! (Syren)

A two-person plan?! There's only one two-person plan, and that's Ladybug and me! (Sentibulleur)

Give me a break, Miss "I can't even come up with a superhero name"! (Hack-San)

Anger in individuals with BPD can manifest as bitterness, sarcasm, or recurrent verbal outbursts, which Chat Noir absolutely exemplifies. These outbursts are often followed by feelings of shame or guilt and contribute to a feeling of being bad. Chat Noir apologizes after being harsh in Glaciator, and I wouldn't be surprised if he felt badly about the other times. Again, these outbursts are often precipitated by interpersonal fears and perceived threats of abandonment. Unlike other symptoms, this specific one tends to be unique to BPD.

Transient, stress-related paranoid ideation or severe dissociation

I cannot recall any evidence for this but headcanon away, my friends.

All in all, I think Adrien has a strong case for BPD presentation according to the DSM. Canon is not always consistent, but I think it presents an interesting and mostly coherent narrative for this lens. From this perspective, Adrien's behavior reflects a deep intolerance of being alone and a dependence on other people to define the self.

As a corollary, BPD behavioral patterns are frequently linked to self sabotage and self undermining right when a goal is about to be realized, which could manifest as dropping out of school right before graduating or ending a relationship when it seems to be going well. Food for thought. Individuals with BPD may also feel more secure with transitional objects like pets than with interpersonal relationships, which could reflect in Adrien's relationship with Plagg.

To add some subjective understanding to this clinical mumbo jumbo, I've added a source of genuine BPD experiences below (Mind, 2022).

Argument from ICD-11

With the release of the ICD-11, a dimensional model for diagnosis of personality disorders became the new standard. What this means is that individuals are no longer labeled as having 'histrionic' or 'dependent' or, indeed, 'borderline' personality disorders, but are rather assessed as having any form of personality disorder on a sliding scale of severity and with trait domain specifiers (Swales, 2022). To put it more simply, people are diagnosed only with a general personality disorder or personality difficulty which can be optionally specified as deviating on one of the personality traits in the Big Five model, which is well established in personality psychology.

This move has several benefits. Stigmatization related to particular personality disorders can be reduced, and differential diagnosis and comorbidity between personality disorders becomes irrelevant. However, people retain access to treatment and support. Evidence-based treatments like dialectical behavior therapy are particularly well established and crucial for BPD; for this pragmatic purpose, the ICD contains one additional specifier for borderline pattern personality disorder (Bach et al., 2022; Swales, 2022).

The DSM and ICD are designed to be compatible with each other in many ways, and in this case, the borderline specifier in the ICD is directly lifted from the criterion of the DSM (WHO, 2023, 6D11.5). Based on our previous discussion, Adrien would be equally qualified for a diagnosis in France. I would likely describe his personality disorder with moderate severity, where multiple areas of functioning are affected and self harming behaviors may be present, but not all areas or relationships may be equally impacted and traits are not as rigid and inflexible (WHO, 2023, 6D10.0–6D10.2).

Interestingly, the ICD includes three additional manifestations of borderline pattern which are optional and may vary across time (WHO, 2023, 6D11.5).

A view of the self as inadequate, bad, guilty, disgusting, and contemptible

An experience of the self as profoundly different and isolated from other people; a painful sense of alienation and pervasive loneliness

Proneness to rejection hypersensitivity; problems in establishing and maintaining appropriate levels of trust in relationships; frequent misinterpretation of social signals

I'm fascinated by the number of adjectives in here. I simplified very slightly, as I did with the DSM criteria, but I had to keep all these adjectives. Anyway, I won't elaborate for too many more paragraphs, so let's say sentimonster moment and leave it at that. I will spare you my mirrored Félix essay. For now.

Qualifications and Limitations

First of all, Adrien is a teenager. The distinguishing factor between a personality disorder and regular adolescent difficulties would be longevity and identity concerns beyond his developmental phase (APA, 2022, p. 758). Second of all, Adrien has a uniquely terrible home life and magical problems. Some of his behaviors could be normal considering his experiences and sociocultural context, and this matters when it comes to psychological evaluation. Take everything with a grain of salt!

More generally, the categorical model of the DSM has several issues, not to mention diagnostic issues related to culture, gender, and stigma. Some but not all of these issues are addressed by the dimensional model it includes in a later section, which shares theoretical foundations with the model of personality disorders in the ICD. Even so, issues remain. Diagnosis, access to treatment, and political statements are intrinsically linked in complex ways. I won't get into all of the nuances, but be safe, remember this is a fictional character, and keep an open mind.

REFERENCES:

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787

Bach, B., Kramer, U., Doering, S., di Giacomo, E., Hutsebaut, J., Kaera, A., De Panfilis, C., Schmahl, C., Swales, M., Taubner, S., & Renneberg, B. (2022). The ICD-11 classification of personality disorders: A European perspective on challenges and opportunities. Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40479-022-00182-0

Dozois, D. J. A. (2019). Abnormal psychology: Perspectives (6th ed.). Pearson.

Mind. (2022, September). What does BPD feel like? https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/types-of-mental-health-problems/borderline-personality-disorder-bpd/experiences-of-bpd/

National Health Service. (2022, November 4). Causes - Borderline personality disorder. https://www.nhs.uk/mental-health/conditions/borderline-personality-disorder/causes/

Swales, M. A. (2022). Personality disorder diagnoses in ICD-11: Transforming conceptualisations and practice. Clinical Psychology in Europe, 4(Special Issue). https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.9635

World Health Organization. (2023). International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems (11th ed.). https://icd.who.int/

[this-is-exorsexism]

treating someone's nonbinarity as not real when their coming out had bad timing.

this is exorsexism.

let me elaborate. countless of times when there was some kind of controversy around someone and they happened to come out as nonbinary during or right after, they were accused of only coming out as a tactic to avoid accountability and that they aren't actually nonbinary. note that these "controversies" ranged all the way from something reasonable like supporting transmasculine lesbians all the way to actually messed up things.

it's exorsexist because you're once again not seeing nonbinarity as a real identity. you see it as a political statement and as some kind of shield you believe gives us any advantage in society when it doesn't. interestingly enough, i've not seen this as much when people come out as binary trans. this idea of "they/them pronouns as a shield" and "being nonbinary to avoid accountability" are pervasive.

the truth is that nonbinary people can be bad people. the truth is that being a bad person does not invalidate someone's nonbinarity.

the harm is that even if you only try to invalidate the bad nonbinary people, you invalidate all of us and show us how conditional your respect and allyship are, especially because something as harmless as having a queer identity you personally don't like is sometimes enough to make someone a bad nonbinary person.

the golden rule is "don't misgender trans people even if they're horrible" and this applies to nonbinary people too.

even if someone chooses to come out to avoid accountability, you shouldn't question their actual identity but only the timing of their coming out.

it's even more bizarre when a nonbinary person who's been out for years does something bad and people start acting like they've only just come out to escape responsibility for their actions.

if your impulse is to attack someone's nonbinarity rather than their actions or just wait for an excuse to invalidate someone's nonbinarity, then you aren't the ally you think you are.

[heyftinally]

Things you dislike about Tumblr?

Oh gosh, here we go

The piss poor reading comprehension

The rampant oppression Olympics

The rampant panphobia/aphobia/queerphobia for anyone who isn't a conventionally attractive thirst trap or happy to be fetishized

The bigots

The way the damn website never WORKS

The spam/scam

The bitch who got my OG blog deleted and thus barred me from my old URL and nuked over a decade of posts (I still have it out for her and I wish I knew her URL because wholeheartedly fuck her and her shitty christian superiority complex)

The fact that tags are becoming more and more unusable because twitter/tiktok people are filling them with unrelated crap, making the search function even less usable than it already was

The pervasive need so many people have to attack randomly people for not saying things exactly the way they think they should/speaking about personal experiences and acting like those experiences are somehow evil and should be ignored. To an extent this ties into the first point, because nobody fucking reads and they just infer whatever they want, but genuinely I've seen SO MANY PEOPLE basically say "your experience is harmful to the narrative that supports my beliefs, so obviously you're bigoted against me for having lived something that contradicts my beliefs". I wish I was joking, but I'm not. I've been sent hate for saying that calling sex repulsed asexuals "fully ace" is harmful because it's saying that sex favorable asexuals are "less ace" - I got called aphobic for asking that my orientation not be diluted and invalidated just because of my preferences. That's one example of *many*.

I think that's at least the most glaring/frequent ones. Tumblr sure...is.

[overclockedopossum]

Been gaining a few followers since the hoptimistic post has been doing the rounds again, and since I've not posted about politics recently I'm worried they might get an inaccurate impression of what "Tonal Whiplash: The Blog" means so let me go ahead and fire off some rent lowering gunshots:

-The DNC are not your friends. They are not an "imperfect ally", they are a passive enemy. The actions of the DNC make no sense as an attempt to advance leftist or even liberal politics, but perfect sense as an attempt to maximise donations to the DNC.

-Trans rights are human rights. Relatedly, WAY more people need to be getting to medically transition. The regret rate is worryingly low.

-I don't think people with marginalised identities have an inherent unlimited right to be a dick to people with ostensibly less marginalised identities. That doesn't mean every single thing less marginalised people complain about more marginalised people saying is wrong but like there is a line somewhere between "men seem overrepresented in this field" and "boys are stupid throw rocks at them". Trans women calling trans men threatening for existing, and generally reproducing cis radfem rhetoric but doing it to trans men, are the wrong side of the line.

-Relatedly: misandry is real, actually. Anti-white racism is real (if rare), heterophobia or cisphobia could in theory be real, fucking any kind of "reverse" bigotry can be an actual extant thing that happens in some situations. That doesn't magically invalidate observation of the "conventional" bigotry - obviously misogyny is also real - but it is something you have to be willing to contend with as part of the complex, nuanced real world that exists. Sometimes it's interpersonal because situationally the "more marginalised" person actually has the power, and that can be on a local-but-significant scale, but also...

-An understanding of misandry specifically as something that's not just interpersonal but IS structural and is offset by privilege - including male privilege - in some situations but not others is in my opinion particularly useful to an accurate, holistic understanding of the world. A black man shot by police, a trans man beaten for using the bathroom he's legally obligated to use, a homeless man left on the streets, these are examples in part of misandry as it intersects with racism, transphobia and classism.

-Patriarchy remains in my view the best term to describe ongoing gender relations just let's not pretend like it's something every single man personally opted into. Toxic masculinity exists and is a useful concept, but best understood as something that men are the initial victims of.

-Men's and Women's liberation are not, in fact, in tension. Any attempt at gender liberation that assumes they are is doomed to failure. It is not useful to attempt to establish who has it worse - only to work issue by issue to dismantle patriarchy.

-Radical Feminism doesn't have to be Trans Exclusionary to be harmful, bigoted nonsense.

-Class exists. It's not the only thing that exists, but it does exist.

-The entire world is ableist as fuck in a way that's extremely pervasive.

-Invisible and/or mental disabilities are not "less serious". Making points about ableism then insisting they're only applicable to physical disability is not constructive.

-This isn't like a pillar of my political identity but fuck it, while I'm going: I don't think "gaslighting" is as overused a term as people make out. I think it's a spectrum and can be mild, and it's wrong to gatekeep what counts as "gaslighting" by severity since it's useful to recognise in even mild cases (especially early into relationships!!). "It was just a joke" can be gaslighting. The point is that it's an attack on the victim's ability to make or interpret observations of reality, as opposed to lying which applies to things the victim hasn't been able to observe for themselves.

-Free Palestine

-But, incidentally: don't be fucking antisemitic about it. Don't let genocide supporters define what is and isn't antisemitism. But like I've seen some shit said about Israeli Jews as an entire class of people that was not ok.

there's probably more i could add but that'll do for now. i'm broadly leftist politically, further left than Labour or the DNC, against oppression and for liberation, but not tightly subscribed to any specific ideological framework.

Will get in fights with basically anyone whose politics involves shitting on the vulnerable or attacking identity groups that people don't have a choice about being in (eg gender, sexuality, race but not political alignment, class, career choice). However I don't actively seek out such fights so it's gonna depend what ends up on my dash.

[whitesinhistory]

On July 28, 1916, the chief of police in Louisville, Kentucky, announced the arrest of at least three people for interracial relations, or miscegenation. He also announced plans to open an investigation into the practice, which would “spare no effort” to prevent people from forming or maintaining interracial romantic relationships in Louisville. 

Earlier that day, Louisville police made at least three arrests involving allegations of interracial romance. Authorities first arrested Harry Jenkins, a 34-year-old Black man, and Alice Shumaker, a 30-year-old woman who self-identified as Black but whom police believed to be white. Louisville law enforcement jailed both Mr. Jenkins and Ms. Shumaker on disorderly conduct charges, though they stood accused of little more than being found under the same roof together at the same time. Unwilling to accept Ms. Shumaker’s own racial self-identification, the local jailor forced her to submit to a blood test “to determine whether or not” she was Black.

The same white Louisville officers who arrested Mr. Jenkins and Ms. Shumaker also detained George Eaton, a 16-year-old Black boy. After subjecting George to a search, the officers found photographs of three teenaged white girls in his pocket. George claimed that the white girls had given him these photographs and refused to identify them. The officers arrested George, while the chief of police directed other high-ranking officials in his department to “make a round of photo galleries” in the city of Louisville to uncover the white girls’ identities. 

Kentucky criminalized interracial marriages from the year it was admitted into the Union in 1792. At the time that Mr. Jenkins, Ms. Shumaker, and George were arrested, state law made it illegal for a Black person—defined by the Kentucky Supreme Court as a person with “one–fourth part or more of Negro blood”���to marry or live with a white person. Those found in violation of the law faced a fine of up to $5,000 and up to a year in jail. Black people charged with miscegenation faced dehumanizing treatment by law enforcement, and investigations and court proceedings were often humiliating and intrusive. Despite the fact that the Supreme Court invalidated all laws criminalizing interracial marriage in 1967, Kentucky did not repeal its anti-miscegenation statute until 1974.

During the Jim Crow era, one of the racial boundaries white people protected most fiercely was the prohibition on romantic contact between Black men and white women. Fear of intimate contact between Black men and white women was fueled by the pervasive myth that Black men were violent, sexually aggressive, and always in pursuit of white womanhood. In Kentucky and other states, these fears led to the aggressive enforcement of anti-miscegenation laws, the degradation of interracial couples, and the destruction of multiracial families. To learn more about anti-miscegenation laws and other policies enacted to maintain white supremacy, read EJI’s report, Segregation in America.

[the-haunted-office]

🔥

Send me a “ 🔥 “ for an unpopular opinion.

I really wish the RPC wasn't so focused on graphics and aesthetics. I know it's all subjective here and everybody can do what they want, but it's frustrating that for a hobby that is supposed to be mainly about writing, that so much of it is centered around how good a person's blog looks or how attractive their muse is.

Then again... I suppose this isn't so much of a roleplay community thing so much as it is just a thing. It's the same in the book community, and in movies and TV and everywhere else. So much of it is about looks. It's just a little disappointing.

But, that said, that is certainly my opinion and not meant to be invalidating to anybody. There's a reason appearances and aesthetics and everything are so pervasive, even if I don't quite get it, and that is why it is an unpopular opinion. :p

[taylortruther]

i totally agree that there’s homophobia in the fandom and some people use gaylors insane theories as an excuse to say completely inexcusable shit! but i also personally believe a lot of the time gaylors specifically (whether they’re queer or straight bc it’s not mutually exclusive) accuse people who are disagreeing with their theories or asking them to stop of being homophobic for those two things. even if they’re being completely respectful. like ill see an insane thread made by a gaylor & someone will comment something along the lines of “im queer so i totally get relating to taylors music and reading it through a queer lens so it relates to you but that doesn’t mean you need to push your sexuality on taylor herself or invalidate her relationships with men she’s publicly said she’s dated/dating or her father esp when she’s denied being in the community and said it makes her uncomfortable.” ect ect something like that. & they’ll jump in w the ‘how’s the internal homophobia working out for you’ ect. idk. that’s just one example but there’s many! a large portion of the gaylor fandom also seem to completely discount the bisexual community & the possibility of if taylor is queer she might be bi.

i’m not disagreeing with you at all, i believe there’s horrible people in every fandom, especially large ones like ours. there’s racism, sexism, homophobia, so on.

i just also think i’ve seen countless cases where someone’s almost tiptoeing around them trying to be completely respectful and not mean at all and get slapped with the accusation of homophobia.

i’m so sorry this is so long

anon with all due respect what do you want me to say here? "you're right, some individual gaylors act out of pocket, thus we should focus on that instead of the pervasive homophobia in the fandom that reflects the wider and more serious/troubling concern of homophobia in the world"? try to look at this from a wider lens/a macro scale.

like, what does it mean that i said this:

yes, gaylor theories are wild, but i stopped debunking gaylor because i was contributing to homophobia in the fandom, which i saw with my own eyes in asks and the people who supported me.

...and i have now had dozens of people sending me asks that say things like this:

yes, but some gaylors are AWFUL, and sure some swifties are homophobic but gaylors are STILL BAD and you have to acknowledge that!

[continuations]

Low Rung Tech Tribalism

Silicon Valley's tribal boosterism has been bad for tech and bad for the world.

I recently criticized Reddit for clamping down on third party clients. I pointed out that having raised a lot of money at a high valuation required the company to become more extractive in an attempt to produce a return for investors. Twitter had gone down the exact same path years earlier with bad results, where undermining the third party ecosystem ultimately resulted in lower growth and engagement for the network. This prompted an outburst from Paul Graham who called it a "diss" and adding that he "expected better from [me] in both the moral and intellectual departments."

Comments like the one by Paul are a perfect example of a low rung tribal approach to tech. In "What's Our Problem" Tim Urban introduces the concept of a vertical axis of debate which distinguishes between high rung (intellectual) and low rung (tribal) approaches. This axis is as important, if not more important, than the horizontal left versus right axis in politics or the entrepreneurship/markets versus government/regulation axis in tech. Progress ultimately depends on actually seeking the right answers and only the high rung approach does that.

Low rung tech boosterism again and again shows how tribal it is. There is a pervasive attitude of "you are either with us or you are against us." Criticism is called a "diss" and followed by a barely veiled insult. Paul has a long history of such low rung boosterism. This was true for criticism of other iconic companies such as Uber and Airbnb also. For example, at one point Paul tweeted that "Uber is so obviously a good thing that you can measure how corrupt cities are by how hard they try to suppress it."

Now it is obviously true that some cities opposed Uber because of corruption / regulatory capture by the local taxi industry. At the same time there were and are valid reasons to regulate ride hailing apps, including congestion and safety. A statement such as Paul's doesn't invite a discussion, instead it serves to suppresses any criticism of Uber. After all, who wants to be seen as corrupt or being allied with corruption against something "obviously good"? Tellingly, Paul never replied to anyone who suggested that his statement was too extreme.

The net effect of this low rung tech tribalism is a sense that tech elites are insular and believe themselves to be above criticism, with no need to engage in debate. The latest example of this is Marc Andreessen's absolutist dismissal of any criticism or questions about the impacts of Artificial Intelligence on society. My tweet thread suggesting that Marc's arguments were overly broad and arrogant promptly earned me a block.

In this context I find myself frequently returning to Martin Gurri's excellent "Revolt of the Public." A key point that Gurri makes is that elites have done much to undermine their own credibility, a point also made in the earlier "Revolt of the Elites" by Christopher Lasch. When elites, who are obviously benefiting from a system, dismiss any criticism of that system as invalid or "Communist," they are abdicating their responsibility.

The cost of low rung tech boosterism isn't just a decline in public trust. It has also encouraged some founders' belief that they can be completely oblivious to the needs of their employees or their communities. If your investors and industry leaders tell you that you are doing great, no matter what, then clearly your employees or communities must be wrong and should be ignored. This has been directly harmful to the potential of these platforms, which in turn is bad for the world at large which is heavily influenced by what happens on these platforms.

If you want to rise to the moral obligations of leadership, then you need to find the intellectual capacity to engage with criticism. That is the high rung path to progress. It turns out to be a particularly hard path for people who are extremely financially successful as they often allow themselves to be surrounded by sycophants both IRL and online.

PS A valid criticism of my original tweet about Reddit was that I shouldn't have mentioned anything from a pitch meeting. And I agree with that.

[freewingthefree]

I'm adding this:

Traumatic invalidation in the Jewish community after October 7

But reflecting the conversation I had with some friends about this. How are we supposed to address anything when antisemitism is so pervasive and people refuse to acknowledge it? Even in countries where Jews have equal rights, that doesn't mean that the terrorizing or mistreatment stops, only that we now have the *chance* to try to have the wrongs righted - and even there it's an uphill battle. Constantly minimized, de-legitimized, brushed aside. Sure when I got fired due to antisemitism, I could try to sue - but did I have the tens of thousands for a lawyer? Would the evidence be accepted? I'd have to expose my very soul to the world for a CHANCE at the wrong being set right, and even then, would the world care? I doubt it.

"Harned (Citation2022) described nine types of traumatic invalidation: Ignoring (Others not paying attention to what you do or say. Being treated like an unimportant person), Emotional Neglect (Not receiving caring or loving responses from people. Others being indifferent to your suffering), Criticizing (Being insulted, put down, mocked, or called names. Being told that what you do, feel, or value is wrong), Blaming (Being blamed for things that are not your fault. Being told you cause stress or trouble for others), Misinterpreting (Having your behavior and intentions misread in negative ways), Denying Reality (Being told your perceptions of basic facts are inaccurate. Others denying certain events occurred), Controlling (Others telling you what to do, being treated like you are incapable of making wise choices), Excluding (Being left out of important activities. Being denied entry to valued groups), and Unequal Treatment (Being treated as less than or different from others. Discrimination based on your personal characteristics) (p. 369)." We deal with this treatment on a daily basis as Jews - we were prior to Oct 7th, and are dealing with it more now than before. And increasingly, we are excluded by the very groups that claim they stand for equality and stand against discrimination. So placed in a situation where our choices are:

Give up our jewishness (as if we could)

Fight a battle with the deck stacked against us

Flee to the one place on earth where we can hope to live as ourselves and not have to operate with a pervasive threat of societal ostracization for just being Jewish

Is it any wonder that so many are choosing option 3 as option 2 becomes untenable due to rising violence in the diaspora? I don't want to have a choice forced on us - but if nothing changes, our homes and lives will be raped from us once more and I'm just. So tired.

what’s very hard about combatting antisemitism as a jew is that gentiles do not trust jews. full stop. somewhere in the back of their minds, we are deceitful and malicious. we have secret evil agendas. we want to destroy the western world or the eastern world or communism or capitalism. i feel compelled to find multiple sources for this dumb vent post because i always feel compelled to prove i am trustworthy, and while googling, i thought twice about linking a jewish source. this constant emptying of the pockets is a particular source of exhaustion because, like, how can you have any genuine dialogue when the other person automatically writes you off as a dirty liar? how do you convince people you have good intentions when every action condemns you because jews are nefarious manipulators who want to dominate the entire world? hey siri what are the protocols of the elders of zion