#think the desire for pressureful impacts was caused by this lmao

[autogeneity]

AAAAAAA really thought I was getting better but apparently it decided to get worse instead

[mikeshanlon]

i really enjoy the way young royals explores the theme of legacy and how detrimental it can be to have to live up to a legacy or be obsessed with reputation. (analysis and thoughts under the cut)

i think wilhelm resents the fact that he has to live up to the role of being in the royal family and yet is very afraid of ruining that legacy bc of all the pressure. before he was sent off to hillerska he went to a normal school and wanted normal people around him and was content with erik having to take on the responsibilities of crown prince. and when he does have to assume that role he says he can never be erik, that he’s always had to be compared to him and obviously doesn’t like that. but even before erik passed and he had to take on those duties he was afraid of fucking up the legacy of the crown, when he sees that sign in the hallway that says you are in charge of your own legacy after he holds hands with simon, his anxiety worsens. you can tell it’s been instilled in him for a long time that what is most important is the crown’s reputation rather than his own wants. in the scene where him and simon fight about alexander being caught, he obviously wants simon to stay, but he focuses on how him doing drugs will fuck up his family’s reputation if it gets leaked. as much as he cares for simon, his legacy and his duties are like this oppressive cloud hanging over him. 

i do think that wille cares for his family of course but to me it’s different that the sort of loyal unconditional care with simon and his sister/mom. erik and wille had unconditional love, erik understood how difficult being a prince in the public eye was, and wille obviously cared for him deeply and felt like he could to talk to him about issues. his relationship with the queen is much more strained, she wants a tailored, doctored representation of him in the media, he cannot be anxious and bite his nails, she makes all the decisions for him. family is important to wille partially because it has to be bc of how special his family is. he helps his family, he helps august pay his tuition, and then makes a point of disowning august after his betrayal as his new “brother”. but again, because of the royal status and expectations upon the family, that supersedes and colors all of their relationships with each other. it seems to be more a sense of “duty” than unconditional love. especially after erik’s death, wille always has to consider how the crown’s image will be impacted, even though he never wanted to have this responsibility, or even the responsibility of being the “regular” prince under erik. being a family unit that is under constant public scrutiny is going to strain relationships. the queen knows that the anxiety of fucking up his legacy will get to him, and she uses that to get wilhelm to back out of admitting it was him in the video and coming out. wilhelm has to choose between his own happiness and their reputation, is forced to think that denying it’s him in the video is the only way. he loves simon and wanted to live freely, but that pressure of legacy won out.

i don’t know if i think wille necessarily values the crown over his own personal happiness and relationships, like in the way maybe the queen does--i don’t think it comes from a place of “i’m lucky to be prince and owe my duty to the crown, so i do what i have to do to stay that way” (like how the queen said the crown is a privilege not a punishment), but from fear of destroying the legacy and his family. afterall, he still wanted to pursue a secret relationship with simon, i think if he fully valued the crown and uplifting legacy and fulfilling his duties he wouldn’t have tried that. he wouldn’t have made a point to tell simon he loves him. hopefully we get another season because i think with the iconic ending revolution rendition and him looking in the camera, which also parallels the shot of him being forced to apologize/go to hillerska, he is realizing that focusing on legacy is taking away what’s important to him, and he’s going to shake shit up.

august is definitely the most obsessed with legacy, wanting to carry on his father’s business, being persistent on befriending wilhelm and trying to social climb, wanting power and perfection with being prefect, rowing captain etcetera. he is so obsessed with perfection and reputation he gets addicted to drugs, he fucks with simon and makes him get stuff for parties he can’t afford because good parties will make him look better, he manipulates sara multiple times, he mostly wanted felice because of her nobility, he fucking films wilhelm and simon and OUTS him, his own cousin. he hates that wille has everything he wants but isn’t as interested in preserving and more importantly improving the legacy he’s inheriting. meanwhile august’s familial legacy is dwindling, and he holds on to the last bit of assets and names that he can.... v much sick and a weirdo that shows how harmful being obsessed with legacy is

the queen is of course v focused on legacy and it really breaks my heart and makes me angry that she doesn’t care about wilhelm’s happiness more than their reputation, and moreso doesn’t get august in trouble for literally leaking child p*rn of her kid for the sake of appearances?!?!?! like how is he even remotely trustworthy she is wrong for that! like i said earlier the obsession with legacy puts a strain on their mother/son relationship. she doesn’t even really say anything about wille’s sexuality or his relationship, and barely comforts him, mostly goes in with a plan she’s already concocted without him to fix everything. 

erik seemed to understand and accept his role as crown prince but obviously had issues with it as well, like when he makes the plan for him and wilhelm to run from the press, or when he tells wilhelm to enjoy himself while there aren’t so many eyes on him that care. erik shows someone who has more unconditional love and empathy but still has to focus on legacy and is much more inclined to continue his legacy, but we do see those glimpses over how even the most “ideal” attitude of preserving legacy causes issues.

felice is expected to live up to her mother’s legacy, of being an equestrian, of being the lucia, but she doesn’t want either of those things. her mother wants her to be thinner and straighten her hair, and find someone of nobility to be with. obviously she does find wilhelm attractive lol but i think the main reason she pursued him and definitely why she pursued august was because she was expected to social climb and have royal kids. felice feels the need to portray a false narrative of herself on social media to uphold a certain image of herself. it’s very fucked up that her mom wants those values instilled in her but i love that felice was putting up boundaries and pushing back against her mother and the narrative she’s supposed to live up to. her giving sara the role of lucia and focusing on supporting her friends more in the latter half of the season shows growth and i’m excited to see where her story goes. 

sara is interesting because she seems to want to reject the legacy of her family and being working class and to fit in with the elite of hillerska. sara hates micke, hates that simon contacted him because it’s bringing in this “shameful” and painful part of their past (which i mean is def fair). other than sara’s betrayal in 1.06, i think the scene where she tells her family that she wants to reside at hillerska really exemplifies where she’s at in her relation to legacy/class. after dining at hillerska and living amongst the elite she gets annoyed at eating around the TV, she blames her mother for not leaving micke sooner, she gets angry with simon for caring for her. she wants to lead her own life, be popular and wanted because people want her, not for pity (even though i think simon of course truly cares abt his sister she feels annoyed with his protection and care). felice says early on that she thinks sara doesn’t care what other’s think or having friends, and sara says she still wants friends though. i think sara’s biggest thing is she wants to belong, her and simon moved schools after she was bullied for being autistic so i think that definitely affected her even though she tries to act nonchalant about hillerska at first. we see sara’s longing to fit in in smaller ways at first, like her asking her mom for a better piece of her uniform because hers are “cheap” and already worn out. she gets annoyed at simon for chewing loudly, or her mother sitting casually at the table. as she gets closer to felice and madison and all the other students, the allure of the upper class and their lifestyle draws her in more. so much to the point where she gets very anxious and upset at the idea of her and simon leaving hillerska because he’s having his own crisis and doesn’t consider his pov. so much so that she effectively betrays simon and felice, the people she’s closest to, to make a deal (and make out lol) with august to room there and “be just like him”. personally i think sara’s attraction to august is mostly that allure of the elite and that he seemed to “desire” her when he kissed her because he was being a manipulative dickhead--again that want to fit in and be wanted. and  i think there is a really interesting angle of jealousy and competition in female friendships, even if it is really subtle or not intentionally insidious or anything, sara does slowly start to trying to assume all the roles/fashions/mannerisms of felice to live that life she wants. i do think felice and sara’s care for each other is genuine and one of my fave parts of the show, but i think a lot of people who experienced being a teen girl know how we are always pitted against each other even in our subconscious because of how society treats and values women.

simon seems to be the character that is least interested in upholding legacy and tradition or giving a fuck what anyone thinks (as omar said here lmao) and that makes him a really interesting foil to wilhelm. there could be something said about micke fearing that simon is following in his footsteps, but to me that plot more so reveals how the upper class (august) continually exploit the working class for their benefit, and the trappings of generational oppression. the other thing that can be said is simon signing up for private tutoring and rowing, but again i think that serves to further show that he is forced to “play” by the game of the elites because the school/society is corrupt, and also, that simon has further ambitions outside of where he’s at. he wants to get good grades because he wants to explore new places and avenues. to me simon’s biggest motivations are his passions, the things and people he loves--music, his family, wilhelm. he isn’t loyal to others just because he’s expected to be, or uphold a certain image but because he really cares. he doesn’t watch out for sara because that’s his expected role as her brother to do so, but because he cares. he wasn’t interested in knowing wilhelm because he’s a prince like everyone else, he makes it clear he thinks the royal family are privileged and exploitative, but he is interested because he saw the real wilhelm. he’s out and proud even though his elite classmates are more conservative, he doesn’t care about voicing his unpopular opinions, he has no problem walking away from august’s dickhead behavior or calling him out on his shit. simon doesn’t care if people don’t think of him in the best light. (the only exceptions ig are the drugs conflict and the video, though literally anyone would have a problem with that because it’s much deeper that public opinion and has ramifications and is deeply traumatic--but just adding that before someone is like “well actually!”) i also think it’s interesting that most of the songs simon sings has themes of pushing back against the societal norms, and being remembered in history, plus of course the revolution song motif, and how much those songs affect wilhelm, he seems to connect deeply, like he wishes he could do those things but simon is the one who gets to sing them and actually live them.

[idreamtofmanderleyagain]

Morality-Focused Frameworks Of Discussion As Acts of Control

This is a post in response to a larger conversation I’ve been having with @eshusplayground. I have a perspective that I think would be really relevant to the conversation but I also don’t want to derail the specific focus of the following posts she’s been making recently.

(Trigger Warning For Abuse Discussion and Brief Mentions of Rape)

---

So I’m in the Hellraiser fandom. More specifically, I’m a Pinhead/Kirsty shipper.

For those of you that don’t know, Pinhead is a demonic torturer from hell who’s design is inspired by the BDSM community. Characters who open a magical puzzle box have unknowingly given themselves away to his violent underworld community of eternal torment and depravity. Hellraiser is a film about romantic and sexual horror, and there’s quite a lot in there about abuse and trauma. Kirsty is a traumatized person, and in my personal opinion, very likely a CSA victim.

And I ship these two characters together.

So the subject matter of my particular fandom is extremely intense and niche and complicated to navigate, although YMMV (I have no trouble with this franchise, but I cannot really handle GOT or American Horror Story, for example). After I grew interested in Hellraiser and integrated into it’s fandom, my perspectives about the way we have conversations about villainous characters started to have a major shift.

I often see people have these intense conversations (and arguments) about where a particular character exists on a moral scale, with the subtext (or outright text) that if they tip too far one way or another, they can be rendered unworthy of their own subgroup of fans within their own fandom. People who love those characters or find them shippable are then subject to moral judgements.

So how does one apply such logic to a psychosexual torture demon?

The answer is you can’t.

The frameworks people online use to have these discussions do not make any sense when talking about my fandom. Hellraiser is a dark horror fairytale presenting disturbing, surreal images and behaviors in order to discuss complex and difficult experiences and perspectives. The monsters within it, like Pinhead, are more metaphor than anything.

Now, my follower count is too low and my fandom is too niche for me to really be on the receiving end of a lot of the cruelty that manifests online about the moral validity of the fiction I enjoy. That said, between the anti-kink TERFS and the younger folks involved in purity culture on this site, I can imagine exactly what it would look like. You know what they would look like.

“You’re an Abuse Apologist!”

“You’re an Abuse Fetishist!”

“You’re reinforcing sexism!”

“he’s an irredeemable torturer, you’re probably okay with literal real world rape lmao uwu”

“This is bad kink representation and you’re complicit in the abuse real men do to women because you like this!”

Now, setting aside the fact that the canon lore context of Pinhead involves him having a human soul brainwashed by a monster god to become what he is, and is also in a roundabout sense “redeemed” in canon, I think most people utilizing this kind of framework would assume that I believe Pinhead can be redeemed in the way online Discourse (tm) means it, because that’s how we talk in fandom about the villains we really like.

I do not want to redeem Pinhead. I don’t think he even needs redeeming. I don’t even see value in that conversation at all. Redemption is not a concept that makes sense for what he is, or what he could become as a character. The framework of Pinhead as a Real-World-Equivalent Human Male Abuser who Cannot Be Redeemed From His Actions would inevitably dominate all conversation, regardless of the fact that it is inherently incorrect and detrimental to real, robust literary analysis of the narrative he exists within and how brilliantly it actually interacts with male on female abuse as a subject. By nature of it’s gross oversimplification and misrepresentation, It ruins the potential for greater, more nuanced and complex conversations.

And that’s the thing: my engagement with this particular story and it’s characters has a lot to do with the potential in the narrative to examine how trauma interacts with love, desire and gender politics. Hellraiser has a very unique way of exploring that kind of subject through a storytelling aesthetic that appeals to me (horror/fairytale, gothic romance, etc).

This is about to get personal, so strap the fuck in.

I am the victim of gendered abuse, in that I had an emotionally abusive step father and sexism was absolutely a factor in why that manifested the way it did. I am also a second hand victim of gendered abuse, in that my biological father was a serial stalker and rapist, and other male abusers (or just self-centered family members) caused severe emotional destabilization in my childhood. I grew up viewing adult men as unstable, selfish children. My family endured a lot, and I came to resent the men in my mother’ life for not taking on the role of protector and nurturer when she needed them most. I had discovered the great lie of traditional masculinity: in the face of real crisis, grown men were not protectors. They did not hold together the domestic space. They abused or faltered and abandoned us. This was a repeated pattern among several men in different roles. I was often left picking up all the pieces, taking on roles as a child that these men could not. I had to have strength they did not.

My experience of desire for romantic intimacy with men and men in roles of stable, nurturing authority now inherently involves a jumbled emotional soup of fear, pain, and a deep longing that comes from a place of feminine vulnerability, a desire to be taken care of instead of being the caretaker.

The narrative of Hellraiser pushes a lot of buttons for me. It speaks to my own trauma experiences in a very specific way. In an effort to further that conversation, I’m trying to create a piece of art (a fic) inspired by the deeply personal feelings this film gives me.

For me, Pinhead represents the Jungian shadow masculine, a simultaneous mix of fear and desire, the potential for suffering and pleasure, and everything in between. These experiences are inherently intertwined for me. And Kirsty’s experiences mirror many of my own.

In other words, in order for me to get out of Hellraiser what I get out of Hellraiser, Pinhead has to be exactly what he is, and everything that he is. Which includes monstrosity. Which includes the potential for change. His place in the narrative must fully, truly embody this conversation I need to have with masculinity, which inherently involves painful, scary things.

Anybody demanding that I either denounce my interest in him as morally offensive because he’s a monster in the full sense of the word (and not just the aesthetic one like what is currently trending in Monster Boyfriend fandom), or force a traditional redemption arc upon him as if he were a real life human person who must repent for his real life sins, are essentially saying that I am not allowed to engage with this work of fiction in a way that is transformative for me. And that’s very unfortunate, because honestly, I think my perspective is so much more dynamic and has so much more to offer.

This is not just about basic catharsis. This is not even a power fantasy about emotionally transforming a powerful (white) dude, or “bad boy” fantasies, both standard arguments for villain stanning that feels like it has never truly represented me or the complexity of my experiences and interests. This is a full-on conversation and act of self expression I want to have through art about the experience of fear and trauma when dealing with men as a woman who desires men.

And I don’t think a person has to be traumatized in order to want to engage with this type of fiction. I want to be clear that my experience is not a justification for my interest (I do not need to justify myself), it is an example of a perspective that gets erased by the framework of these conversations.

To me, the framework of moral validity for enjoying fictional villains and monsters and whatever you please feels incredibly stifling to the complex, dynamic ideas and analysis that I want to engage in, because I, and many people I know, are consistently pressured to structure their thoughts with this framework as the only acceptable baseline of discussion. This is so ubiquitous that when people I’ve known have tried to engage in ways that diverge from that framework, the responses they get are outright confused or direct the conversation right back to the original framework they tried to avoid. Complex conversation gets steamrolled.

Somewhere in the conversation we were all having about acknowledging and discussing abuse and oppression, and acknowledging troubling patterns in media which reinforce the normalization of abuse and opression, some people decided that there was a very serious moral discussion to be had regarding the mere act of liking things which involve dark subject matter and complex, or even monstrous characters. They now argue that there are very clear cut, simple moral frameworks for A) telling stories and B) enjoying stories, and most importantly, that this moral framework is a valid justification for the social treatment and silencing of certain people.

A framework, by the way, which I think is actually not functionally a framework, because like the toxic American fundamentalist christian groups it’s thinking is structured from, it does not account for the vastly diverse moral landscape within it’s own space. There is no objectively consistent body of knowledge anybody is working from, because morals are derived from the human experience, which is inherently subjective.

Interestingly, no where does this have more of an impact than with marginalized people, and people like me, who want to express something deeper and more meaningful in the conversation about abuse and oppression than what this framework really offers us. To be honest, The more I see this kind of conversation making the rounds, the clearer it becomes that it’s a means of control and power game playing. It’s not about morality, but about how morality can be leveraged in order to silence truly diverse and nuanced perspectives and uphold people’s sense of self-comfort. It is a means of supplanting more convenient and easily digestible understandings of these highly complex subjects that require more intensive, thoughtful engagement, especially when it gets challenging. This kind of rhetoric absolves people of making room for complex and diverse experiences, and reinforces an (at face-value) easy to follow set of moral rules of how we are all allowed to think and feel.

The implication of all of this is that if we all adhere to the One True (alleged) Moral Framework of Fandom Engagement, then we will somehow come out on the other side with all the Good People having a Great Time having Squeaky Clean Fun. And I don’t think I should have to tell you at this point how stifling and disturbing the implications of that kind of mentality really are.

 Quite frankly, I think a lot of us are very tired of constantly speaking on other people’s terms.

[eroticcannibal]

What's recovery rhetoric? I think I have a basic understanding of it, but I feel like I'm missing the nuance of it, if that makes sense?

Ok I’ve learned my lesson, I’m typing this up in wordpad too and also I’m lazy so I’m cribbing from previous posts  (which I will link to in case anyone wants some further reading). Also it might not be necessary for u but I’m gonna cover basics in this in case any newer followers are curious.

So, SUPER short version, “recovery rhetoric” is the eugenics-lite way that recovery is discussed and pushed on mentally ill/mad/neurodiverse people. Recovery rhetoric is essentially the intra-community version of neurotypical ableism and their ultimate goal of eradicating neurodivergency. It’s an ultimately harmful attempt to try and assimilate into neurotypical society. Now I don’t think those that perpetuate it are intentionally malicious, I completely understand the desire to get better and be “normal”, but nonetheless the impact is ultimately harmful.

Things that are typical of recovery rhetoric:

Constantly changing redefinitions of “recovery”. Recovery means the problem is gone, which for most people is not possible, ever. Most people engaging in recovery rhetoric recognise this but rather than give up on recovery, which is demanded of all of us by ableist society, they attempt to redefine it, which creates a situation of one side telling a vulnerable person that “recovery is possible!”, which sets them up for the trauma of constant and inevitable failure for not living up to The Actual Definition Of Recovery, which will usually be internalised as a personal failing.

The insistence that their is One Way That Recovery Looks. To make this easier to discuss here I’m going to define this as “improvement” rather than “recovery”, but recovery rhetoric ignores the variety of people and their situations and experiences. The standard for improvement tends to be go to therapy, take your meds, “healthy” (read: respectable by ableist standards) coping mechanisms only etc etc which is inherently harmful for prioritising respectability over what is actually helpful for an individual.

One example would be the earlier discussion on my blog regarding addiction, the recovery rhetoric approach would frame replacement and even addiction itself as “unhealthy” coping mechanisms, therefore things that should be eradicated immediately regardless of the individuals situation. Their is no consideration for those who would be worse off in their current situations without their “bad” ways of coping. No consideration for those that respond differently to different things (insulting myself is FUN it doesn’t actually damage me, the same is true of others, please leave us be). Their is no consideration of the fact that “healthy” is subjective. Their is no consideration of the fact that for some “healthy” is UNACHIEVABLE. Their is no consideration of those who would be harmed by “respectable” methods of improvement, such as therapy or meds (abuse within mental health fields exists and is rampant). And this tends to breed a lack of compassion for those in worse situations than those who can just drink a glass of water and take their meds to feel better. It’s respectability or you aren’t trying hard enough and you just want to be ill. Because recognising that personal improvement is actually antithetical to the expectations of ableist society, those entrenched in recovery rhetoric will tear down anyone who is a threat to their viewpoint so they can hold on to the hope they will be “normal”.

(Also, I’ve just realised this parallels the CBT approach: removing a negative behavior results in the problem it is a response to being solved. Which is… not how things work but given how CBT has been pushed lately above all other forms of treatment due to low costs, to the point where some other treatments have been cut away completely, I’m… much less suprised by this aspect of recovery rhetoric. I’m copywriting this insight /j)

The idea that to be neurotypical and sane is the default, what we should all aim to be, and that existence outside of that is a deviation to be fixed no matter the cost. By God You Better Be A Productive Cog In The Machinery Of Capitalism Or You Have Failed. This links in a little with the previous point, in that what is considered “healthy” and “recovered” doesn’t always correlate with what is good for someone.

The pathologising of Every Damn Thing Even If It Is Harmless. Not texting back is because you are traumatised. Don’t do toooo much self care because that’s indulgence. Don’t trust people? It’s because you’re crazy, not because people have shown you can’t trust them. I could go on.

Coercive loss of autonomy through intra-community pressure. You are not allowed to be ok with being ill or mad. You are not allowed to disagree with professionals, you must submit to them and seek treatment from them. Recovery is not optional. Don’t you dare suggest there is nothing actually wrong with you. And of course listen to some random blogger who knows nothing about your life, they just want the best for you, you aren’t anti-recovery, are you?

The denial of outside factors in mental illness and madness. If you have a problem, it’s because of you, your brain, you have to fix it. Your recovery is down to you. Homeless? Abused? Can’t get medical treatment? RECOVER ANYWAY.

It leaves no space for those who have been harmed by recovery attempts and the mental health field. Certainly no space for those that have been killed by them.

(can u tell I’m getting lazy towards the end here? My hands hurt, sorry)

Recovery rhetoric may seem quite lovely on the surface, but the end result is a few uwu recovery drink-water-take-your-meds blogs feeling all morally superior because it’s easier for them, and a culture of attacking anyone who has life a bit harder.

MORE POSTS ON RECOVERY RHETORIC, PRO-RECOVERY CULTURE AND RELATED TOPICS )some are more serious, thought out posts like this, some are fairly casual exchanges of experiences)(check the notes, there’s some good additions)

[Example of the hostility towards those who cannot perform to the standards of pro-recovery culture]

[The value of “toxic” communities like pro-ana]

[Pathologising normal behaviors]

[What is recovery culture]

[A positive approach to personal improvement]

[The cost of recovery]

[Personal accounts of psychiatric abuse][Theres a ton more on my blog if u search “psych”]

[An alternative view on living with a weird brain, which I include mostly due to the hostility in the notes as an example of the behavior directed at anyone who does not perpetuate recovery rhetoric. IDK if the worst of it will show up in the notes cus a lot of people blocked me over that post lmao]

[Pathologising healthy behaviors]

[How recovery culture can cause a lack of trust in yourself]

[”What is recovery?” a perspective by a psychiatric survivor, I’d also recommend that whole site for anyone interested in anti-psych, recovery-critical and Mad perspectives]

[An alternative vision of treatment]

My blog is not the be all and end all of reading, I’m just not looking further lmao

[shima-draws]

Okay listen I really really enjoyed The Wonderland/Birthday Wonderland a LOT but there’s definitely like. Huge chunks of stuff that are missing from the plot that I would have loved to see;; SPOILERS AHEAD BEWARE

First of all let me say that this movie definitely would have worked better as a TV series. Why? Because the world itself is MASSIVE. There’s so much worldbuilding shit going on that they only got to touch a little bit of each section, and left so many things open ended. And then there’s the fact of the plot itself that leaves a lot of holes behind and unanswered questions.

Rest is under the cut so ya’ll can avoid spoilers if you so desire:

What the fuck happened with the sweater contest? They make it out to be such an enormous, important part of the plot that literally ends the moment Akane hands the sweater over. We see her protectively guarding it the entire journey to the city, and yet it’s never even touched upon if the sweater wins the contest or not. What happened bruh?? I want to know if it won, a lot of unnecessary screentime went into the development and story of that sweater! Don’t leave me hanging!

“Our world is dying”, Hippocrates says, as the majority of the land is still thriving pretty okay from the looks of it. Aight. There’s lots of gorgeous visuals in this film that are made clear through the gift of water that they’re living--and apparently there isn’t even enough water to go around for humans to drink. At that point literally everything else would be dried up, right? There is literally a giant pond--GIANT! With koi fish right outside the city. They just gotta learn to distribute their water better;; it’s a shitty system tbh lmao I mean there’s plenty to go around. They just don’t bother to try spreading it evenly, which is why some places are flourishing while others are not. They really should have spent more time showing how people are suffering from this rather than showing the remaining gorgeous parts of the land--that would have made the impact of saving that world that much stronger, made the stakes so much higher. If Akane had seen how bad it really got without water, maybe that would have driven her character development earlier on, and made it more significant.

Akane’s change. It felt...really...anti-climatic. Or maybe just rushed. It was a sudden, minor sort of thing that when I realized I was like “Oh, okay, she’s already come to the conclusion that she can be strong on her own, but I wanted to see that?” They didn’t execute it super well. It feels like we’re missing an entire scene where Akane finally breaks through her fear to gain courage and make her own choices. There was definitely a bit of that right before she made her grand speech to Zangu, but there was nothing that prompted it. The whole movie is a coming of age story for her, building up until the moment where she has her great breakthrough and is able to be confident with herself. But...they don’t show that. We don’t get to see that moment. I don’t know why, because it’s the most important thing of the entire film? They really could have handled that better.

I really wish they touched more on Midori’s involvement;; she was so minor I almost didn’t catch the connection between her and the previous Goddess of the Green Wind. I like that Akane feels closer to her because of this, but we never really get anymore information than that. How did Midori end up in Wonderland so many years ago? Was she a reluctant hero type like Akane, or was she determined to save the world? Did she meet Hippocrates way back then, or was it a different alchemist that lead her on an adventure? Was something wrong with the prince at the time which required her presence in order to make sure the drop rain ceremony went well, just like Akane? I don’t know! I want to know!

The ending was SO abrupt and short. Literally right after Akane and Chii get back that’s it bam roll credits movie over! I’m like. Whiplashed by it. I wanted to see how they were affected by the journey (besides Chii immediately going to take a nap which fandjksad MOOD), and how they’ve changed from their adventures. We obviously see a huge change in Akane at the end, but how does this affect her life in her own world? Does she start treating her friends differently? Does she ever make up with the girl she abandoned in order to be in the popular group (which is another huge thing they never came back to). Is she more determined to do things now, to be confident? Is this a change her mother notices? At least show the impact of what they went through;;

Halfway through the movie we’re introduced to a London-type city that’s really...not so fun looking. Dark, gloomy, and depressing, with obvious signs of poverty, where everyone looks angry all the time. It’s a very very clear outlier in the colorful Wonderland. I’d love to have seen more history on this city...why is it so different from the rest of the world, and so dark? Why do all the people seem so unfriendly, when those outside of its walls are generous and kind? How did this city come to be? It’s such an enormous mystery that they never talk about, besides hinting that this was where the prince had ended up once before he became Zangu.

Speaking of the lovely prince. I know we got kicked in the face with his backstory (and that shit hurted, this poor baby who also kinda deserved it but not to THAT degree), but I would have liked to see even more. Maybe I’m biased because he became my favorite character the instant his identity was revealed, idk. (And, to me, he feels way more fleshed out and rounded as a character regarding his development than Akane does, which is another reason why I like him best.) But while we were given his motivations in becoming Zangu, the personality difference between Zangu and his regular princely self is IMMENSE. I really don’t think the prince would have ever committed such acts--he may be a little shit and have a lot of anger issues (which, valid, I mean his parents died and he suddenly has all these huge expectations on his shoulders and he’s. He’s just a kid man, that HAS to be traumatic) but I really don’t think he would ever strike against his own people or openly threaten them. Sure, he’s definitely shown to be prone to angry outbursts, and is fond of pushing everyone who cares about him away, but he’s not purposefully malicious. And as soon as Akane transforms him back, he calms down immediately and becomes immensely selfless and heroic. So: why the enormous change of heart? I think something that could be canon that they never really mentioned is that, when he was transformed into Zangu, he became sort of a puppet. A lifeless doll without any real empathy, and the only emotions he could feel were a burning anger and a desire for revenge to those that wronged him and made him feel pressured to perform the drop rain ceremony. Being trapped inside a body like that probably just made those feelings escalate, resulting in all of the crimes he committed and all of the people he hurt. (And maybe they did touch on this but I just don’t remember since my memory is garbage lol)

Going off of that, I know this is the type of story where we follow the hero characters, and as soon as Chii and Akane made it home that was it, we weren’t allowed another peek into the Wonderland. But...what if we were granted that opportunity? Could we have gotten the chance to see how things changed after they left? Perhaps the prince began a journey traveling to all of the towns and villages he terrorized, and apologizing to the people. Maybe Ron starts to train under Hippocrates just like Pipo. Maybe the rain washed away all of the sorrow in that lonely city, which caused people to start to change it and make it brighter. Change, change, change! I want to see proof of Akane’s help! 

Why the fuck did the other alchemist/sorcerer (I forget his name and there’s no info on him anywhere MDAKMASD I’ll update this when I find out later) do that to the prince?? That was SERIOUSLY fucked up. “Oh yeah, to punish this child for being naughty and angry after his parents died, which is actually perfectly reasonable, let’s turn him into a doll where he can’t MOVE OR SPEAK and let him sit there in absolute torture until I feel like setting him free again, instead of trying to find an alternative way to confront him about his anger issues”. Dude;; No wonder he was so fucking angry and bitter when Ron finally allowed him to speak again. I would be too! Trapping children in naughty doll prison is not the answer!

I’m trying to think of more but I think I covered most of it :’) If ya’ll have anything to add, please do!

Like, overall, the movie was GREAT. It would have been even better if they didn’t shove so much information into it that ended up becoming irrelevant later on. It felt as if they were trying to cram a TV series into a movie, trying to cover all of their bases but failing. There’s just so many things they left open-ended and unanswered;; and you know me, I’m a slut for lore like this so I want to know EVERYTHING. And I only got little bits and pieces of it. I really would kike to know if they just cut out large portions of the movie to fit the time limit and the budget;; because that would make a lot of sense, because it feels as if I was handed a puzzle without all the puzzle pieces.

[lesbianrobin]

oh.... yes..... as an adhd steve-lover (and person who has a history of unknowingly crushing on adhd characters) i beg to hear ur reasoning......... please...

alright so a lot of this is gonna be like projection ddnkjcn and it turned into more of a general character analysis than an adhd analysis and i’m sure that some things i describe will differ from your personal experience so feel free to critique me but here goes:

Why Steve Harrington Has ADHD

Steve struggles in school, yeah, but that’s not really… crucial to my reasoning? I personally did pretty well in school despite having difficulties with getting work done on time and understanding certain things. The fact that he clearly tried to do well and just couldn’t is what’s important. That’s a classic ADHD thing, feeling like there’s some kind of invisible block making it impossible to think the way you’re supposed to be thinking and do the things you’re supposed to be doing. We see him studying a few different times with Nancy (though he’s reluctant to focus on the task in s1), it’s implied he’s written multiple drafts of the essay that he shows Nancy in the beginning of s2, meaning that he wants to do well. After Nancy critiques his essay, he basically decides to give up because he’ll never be able to make it good enough, and he probably shouldn’t even bother applying to college, and he’ll just end up working for his dad anyway. It’s a bit of an extreme jump from the relatively mild criticism he receives, but it seems to me like the kind of mindset that I (and others with ADHD) fall into constantly. First of all, rewriting something you’ve already written when you have ADHD can be… torturous. It’s impossible to focus because you’ve done it already, it feels pointless and boring, and your brain is just done with the topic. To Steve, there’s no point in even trying because he’s never gonna get it right, and he’d rather not even try than apply to college and have to suffer rejection. ADHD isn’t laziness or apathy. People with ADHD actually tend to care a lot about their performance in various aspects of life, and they care so much that it can often either propel them to excellence or drive them to depression over failure (whether that failure is true or perceived). Spoiler alert: we’re about to get into rejection sensitive dysphoria, folks!

I think this describes Steve perfectly. He wants to be the best at everything (Prom King, anyone?) and he cares a lot about what people think of him (to the degree that he spent three of his four years in high school behaving specifically to avoid the possibility of Tommy H and others making fun of him). Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria, or RSD, is a condition which impacts almost all people with ADHD. This means that they are far more sensitive than most people to what others think about them. Think about Steve’s entire character arc: he essentially spends season one chasing the approval of Tommy, Carol, and Nancy. When Tommy and Carol’s desired behavior differs from Nancy’s, causing conflict, he’s forced to take a look at himself and decide what’s more important to him: pleasing his friends, or doing what’s right. Since Steve is a certified angel, he goes with what’s right, and from there goes on to apologize to Jonathan and help him and Nancy fight the Demogorgon. (Sidenote: the fistfight with Jonathan could definitely be considered as further evidence of ADHD! RSD can cause extreme emotional reactions when the person in question feels that they have been hurt or rejected, such as Steve believing that Nancy cheated on him with Jonathan. The fact that Steve resorted to cruel insults that he clearly doesn’t believe shows that he was acting out of his own hurt and anger, not out of true hatred for Jonathan.) 

Anyway, s1 Steve’s entire life is built around seeking approval from his peers. He realizes that his desire for approval has turned him into somebody that he doesn’t like, so he makes a change, and by s2 we see that he’s shifted somewhat: Now, he wants to please Nancy. He’s able to handle being mocked by Billy and Tommy H because he no longer puts any stock in their brand of approval, but being told by Nancy that she doesn’t love him elicits another (somewhat) extreme emotional response: he immediately leaves her at the party with Jonathan and doesn’t pick her up for school the next morning. He’s upset with her. Later on, he goes to her house with flowers intending to apologize, though he doesn’t actually know what he’s apologizing for. All he wants is for Nancy to be with him and like him again, because he can’t handle feeling unloved and rejected. S2 is also where we see Steve’s academic insecurity, and he hints at issues with feeling like a failure in the eyes of his father. By the end of the season, he’s able to handle not being loved by Nancy because he’s found a new source of self-esteem and approval: Dustin and the rest of the kids. Through acting as their “babysitter,” Steve’s found something to take pride in that nobody can take away from him. Billy may have overshadowed his basketball stardom and broken his keg stand record, but Steve no longer needs these shallow achievements to feel a sense of self-worth. 

S3 shows that, although he’s moved on from seeking approval from specific peers, Steve is still stuck searching for validation. He flirts indiscriminately hoping for anybody to respond positively, and he gets a job to appease his father. Here, I’m gonna jump ahead a little bit (because that’s just the way my brain is saying it’s gotta be lmao) and talk about a few of Steve’s other canon traits, then circle back around to how we see his ongoing struggle with RSD manifest in s3.

Now for the trait that people more commonly associate with ADHD, especially in men and young boys: hyperactivity. This one is a little more self-explanatory so I’m not gonna spend as much time on it. Steve excels in situations with clearly defined rules and expectations where it’s easier to stay on-track, as well as in high-pressure, fast-paced environments. This is why he succeeds in basketball and why he’s such a big damn hero every season. He thinks on his feet and steps up in intense situations without hesitation. Steve is the one who wedged something under the elevator door so that everyone could escape, he’s the one who took out a Russian soldier before he was able to alert anybody else, and when he saw Billy about to ram into Team Griswold Family, he crashed into Billy’s car. Part of this is the fact that it’s a sci-fi action horror show, and there are going to be dramatic action-packed situations, but it’s telling that if Steve is around, he’s almost always the one leaping into danger and adapting to the situation to deal with it quickly. Speaking of s3: The conversation Steve and Robin had on the floor in the Russian torture chamber!

This feeds into an even more elaborate Steve meta theory of mine about how he basically lives his life as if it’s a play and there’s a script and a set of rules that he’s gotta follow to please the audience, so I’m not gonna go into ALL of it, but this conversation is also important to the idea of Steve having ADHD and struggling with RSD. Steve says, “It just baffles me. Everything that people tell you is important, everything that people say you should care about, it’s all just… bullshit.” When Robin says that she feels like her life has been “one big error,” he agrees. So far, Steve has lived his whole life according to one set of rules. If you flirt with girls and go to parties and play basketball, you’ll be cool and popular. Now that he’s graduated, he’s floundering. The structure of high school is gone and everything he worked for doesn’t actually matter in real life. People with ADHD often struggle more than others with the transition from high school to either college or the working world. Loss of familiar frameworks, routines, and actions can hit the ADHD mind hard, and this is pretty clearly happening to Steve in s3. In the beginning of the season, he can’t even manage to have a decent conversation with a girl without bringing up school and his own perceived failures. Sidenote: Robin also mentions that Steve was late to class every single day, which is both extremely relatable to me and the most ADHD thing I’ve ever heard. I knew exactly how long it took me to get from my house to the school, and I woke up with plenty of time to get ready every single morning, yet I somehow managed to be late so many mornings that I got multiple detentions and ended up having to skip a couple of classes entirely because another tardy would have fucked up my disciplinary record.

Later on in the bathroom scene, when he’s talking about why he didn’t talk to Robin back in school, Steve says, “…maybe ‘cause Tommy H would’ve made fun of me or I wouldn’t be Prom King. It’s stupid…” and it’s somewhat of a continuation of the earlier conversation. Steve is expressing the same sentiment. Now that he’s out of high school, everything that he once used to measure his success and self-worth is just stupid. This is another classic RSD thing! People with ADHD/RSD often set impossibly high standards for themselves and then struggle with self-hatred and doubt when they cannot live up to these expectations. Robin kind of inspires and encourages him to set new, more attainable standards for himself. Spending time with Robin makes Steve happy in a way that he’s never really been before, and he realizes that all of the benchmarks of normalcy and success that he’s been striving for don’t guarantee happiness like they’re supposed to. Instead of finding happiness in academic, romantic, or athletic success, he finds happiness in an unlikely friendship. His whole arc for three seasons has essentially been a big struggle with RSD and impulsivity where he learned how to handle social rejection and place the needs and feelings of others before his own.

There’s also a ton of little things in Joe Keery’s acting choices that support ADHD Steve, like his near-perpetual motion and the way that he’s gotta pace and eat a damn banana (both the traditional way and the no-homo breaking it into pieces way, might I add) so he can listen to Dustin talk about the Russian code. I personally relate to a lot of things he does, like mixing up basic names and facts (like Nazis/Germans in s2 and Gumby/gumbo in s3), and needing to explain a whole situation out loud before he really gets it (like when he runs down the entire monster situation in the mall in s3). I don’t know if those are ADHD things but they make me feel Seen. 

Anyways. That’s about it!! Thanks for asking lmao

[nancydsmithus]

How To Use FOMO To Increase Conversions

How To Use FOMO To Increase Conversions

Suzanne Scacca

2019-11-21T11:00:00+00:002019-11-21T11:34:57+00:00

Consumers are motivated by need and desire. And sometimes, just sometimes, they’re motivated by FOMO. That’s right: we can now add the ‘Fear Of Missing Out’ to the list of drivers that get consumers onto our websites and into our apps.

With that said, when we take a closer look at what FOMO really means and the negative impact it can have on consumers, is it something we really want to be encouraging as we build digital experiences for them? My answer to that is:

Yes, but you must use FOMO responsibly.

FOMO can be a really effective tool to add to a marketing and sales strategy. As a web designer, though, you need to find ethical ways to appeal to your users’ fear of missing out. Today, I’m going to show you some options for doing this.

A More Ethical Way To Design with FOMO

FOMO stands for “fear of missing out”, and while it might seem like some innocuous acronym like YOLO or LMAO, this isn’t a cute way of saying “Wish I were there!”.

The fear part of FOMO is all too real.

A 2013 study titled “Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out” defined FOMO as:

A pervasive apprehension that others might be having rewarding experiences from which one is absent, FoMO is characterized by the desire to stay continually connected with what others are doing.

One of the conclusions from the report was that “FoMO was associated with lower need satisfaction, mood, and life satisfaction.”

It’s not just scientists taking note of the negative effects of FOMO in marketing, social media or otherwise. The Competition and Markets Authority went after hotel booking sites for using misleadingly urgent and deceptive discount marketing messages to increase sales.

Even without the fear of retribution from some standards authority, you really need to think about how your web and mobile apps leave your users feeling. A little bit of envy might be fine, but once the general sentiment trickles over to jealousy, disappointment or stress, it’s time to reassess what you’re doing and why.

Let’s take a look at some ways you can leverage the underlying concept of “missing out” and strip away the fear elements.

Quick note: All of the examples below are from mobile apps, however, you can use these design principles on websites and PWAs as well.

Gently Remind Visitors About Limited Availability

There’s nothing wrong with presenting limits to your users on what’s available or for how long it will remain available. It only becomes a problem when how you convey this sense of urgency or limitation causes stressful decision-making.

This is something I talked about in a recent post, “How to Stop Analysis Paralysis with Web Design”.

Basically, when you induce stress in your visitors or consumers, it makes the decision-making process more difficult and can lead to regretful purchases or no purchases at all. In that last article, the focus was on the drawbacks of presenting customers with too many choices.

However, the same kind of response (i.e. dissatisfaction and overwhelm) can happen when you put pressure on them to make a choice on the spot.

So, instead of displaying a large timer counting down the minutes left to buy items in their shopping cart or a bright red banner that screams “24-Hour Sale!”, use more gentle reminders around the site or app.

Best Buy has an entire section on its product pages dedicated to in-store and online availability:

Best Buy lets customers know when products are out of stock in store and online. (Source: Best Buy) (Large preview)

Now, if this were a product with only one color or memory option, I’d suggest removing it from the online inventory altogether. If you can’t provide a date when the product will become available again or put customers on a waitlist, don’t bother teasing them with an out-of-stock listing.

That said, this item has multiple variations, which makes the “sold out” notice quite potent.

Paul Messinger, a professor of business and researcher at the University of Alberta, commented on this phenomenon:

Sold-out products create a sense of immediacy for customers; they feel that if one product is gone, the next item could also sell out. Our research shows there's also an information cascade, where people infer that if a product is sold out, it must have been good and therefore a similar available product will also be desirable.

What’s also nice about displaying sold-out products is that it reduces the number of choices consumers have to make. Granted, some may be unhappy because the silver phone they wanted is unavailable, but, as Messinger says, this limitation on what they can buy might encourage them to try another variation of the product.

One of my absolute favorite examples of gently nudging consumers to use or buy your products is Hulu:

The Hulu app has an entire tab dedicated to “Expiring” content. (Source: Hulu) (Large preview)

There is an entire tab in the app that lets users know which content is about to expire.

For those of you who stream content like a maniac (like myself), you know how easy it is to lose track of shows and movies you’ve added to your list. You also know how hard it can be to find the perfect thing to watch when you have dozens of options sitting in your queue, especially if you use more than one streaming service.

That’s why this “Expiring” tab is brilliant. The second I see it, I think, “Either use it or lose it, Suzanne” — which is incredibly motivating. Also, the fact that I have a much shorter list to work with helps me get to a decision more quickly.

This would be useful for e-commerce websites, for sure. If you have products that are low in inventory, give them a dedicated space for shoppers to peruse — kind of like a bargain bin without the bargain.

If your website runs a number of offers simultaneously, you could use a similar approach as well. Create a page for “Offers” or “Rewards” and break out a separate tab that shows users all the offers that are about to expire.

Call Attention to Rewards

When selling something online — be it a subscription to a repository of plugins or a store full of products — don’t forget to enable account registration. Sure, it’s a nice touch for users that want the convenience of saving account details so they don’t have to input them with each new purchase. There’s another reason to encourage your users to register though:

So you have a way to call attention to their spendable rewards.

FOMO isn’t always the fear of missing out on what others are doing. Sometimes it’s just a fear of missing the chance to get a really good deal. Promoting attractive sales offers (“75% off everything in store!”) is one way to do that, but, again, you have to recognize that that’s only going to stir up issues caused by the paradox of choice.

A softer but still effective way to compel users to buy sooner rather than later is to show off their rewards totals or expiration dates.

As a Gap customer, this is one of my favorite things about shopping with them. Whether I’m in store, on the app, shopping through the website or looking through my email, I receive these kinds of reminders:

Gap reminds logged in users when they have rewards to spend. (Source: Gap) (Large preview)

The “Redeem your Super Cash” reminder is the first thing I see when I log in. Even if I’ve gone to the app with the intention of just window browsing, that rewards reminder (and the impending expiration) almost always motivates me to buy something so I don’t lose my member perks.

Unlike sales banners that promote generic offers, this approach works really well because you’re appealing to loyal customers — the ones who’ve already signed up for an account and have a history of buying from you.

And if you’re worried about a banner of that size taking up too much space in your app or mobile website, think again:

Gap uses a pulsing blue ticker in the top-left corner to remind users about unspent rewards. (Source: Gap) (Large preview)

Gap doesn’t continually show the rewards reminder.

See the icon in the top left corner with the circle over it? That circle is pulsing. It’s there to let customers know that there’s something to look at before they check out. And that something are the rewards they need to spend before they lose them.

Hotels.com, on the other hand, dedicates an entire page to rewards:

Hotels.com users can access their free night rewards on the “Rewards” tab. (Source: Hotels.com) (Large preview)

It’s similar to that urge people feel to log into social media just to check on what’s going on and to make sure they’re not missing anything. This “Rewards” tab should send a similar vibe: “Hmmm… I wonder how close I am to my free night?”

Although you can’t see it here, Hotels.com has a policy about how long customers can hold onto these earned nights before they lose them. (It’s just below this section.) By gently reminding users about this stipulation, it likely encourages its rewards members to book more trips so they can get their free night.

Encourage Sharing with Friends and Family

One of the problems with building FOMO into a website — much like any marketing you do for business — is that it’s coming from you. Until you’ve earned the trust of visitors and users, how are they supposed to believe a product marked as a “Top Seller” really is what you claim it to be? Social proof is supposed to help mitigate these kinds of concerns, but even that can be faked.

You know what I think is a more effective way to generate FOMO? Let your customers and clients do it for you.

Here’s how Airbnb does it:

Airbnb rewards its users for inviting friends. (Source: Airbnb) (Large preview)

The “Invite friends” feature encourages users to let their friends, family and colleagues know about how awesome the Airbnb experience is.

Hey, I just booked this awesome apartment in Montreal for Christmas. You’ve got to check this out! Oh yeah, you also get $40 off your first booking!

Even the headline on the landing page encourages them to share the experience; not just do it to get free travel credit (though that’s a nice incentive, too):

Airbnb encourages its users to share their love of travel by rewarding them and their referrals with travel credits. (Source: Airbnb) (Large preview)

Imagine that friend who’s busy running a business and in dire need of a vacation. They receive this offer from you — a person they know and trust. Of course, their reaction is going to be, “I need to do that, too!” And with a discount code in hand, that’s a pretty strong source of motivation to get in the app and make a purchase.

You’ll find another great example of generating FOMO through your users from the 23andMe website:

The home page for 23andMe invites users to 'Share your Ancestry'. (Source: 23andMe) (Large preview)

For those of you who haven’t signed up for one of these genetic testing services, it’s actually pretty cool. You submit a saliva sample and they tell you what your ancestral background is (as well as how it can affect your health). But it’s more than just, “Your maternal family originates from Turkey.” It gets super-specific on what parts of the world your ancestors are from.

Notice that banner in the screenshot above that says “Share your Ancestry”? That’s where users find auto-generated social posts that are designed to be share-worthy (they look like Facebook and Instagram Story cards):

23andMe auto-generates social posts users can share with their friends and followers. (Source: 23andMe) (Large preview)

This is my ancestral breakdown according to 23andMe. So, let’s say I want to joke about how boringly anti-nomadic my ancestors were on Twitter. I could edit the banner or share it as is. And guess what? That’s free advertising for 23andMe, even if I chose to ditch the logo they placed at the bottom of the file.

As those posts reach social media connections — those that know the user or those that are only acquainted with them online — FOMO starts to rear its head. “Oooh! I really want one of these! Where’d you find this out?”

With this kind of FOMO marketing on your site or app, you can stop relying so much on heavily-discounted sales events and other urgency-inducing tactics (which will cost you more in the long run). Instead, let your users generate that intensified interest.

Use More Grounded Photos and Designs

You’ve no doubt heard about lifestyle influencers using shady promotional tactics to increase sales.

One of the most well-known examples of this is the Fyre Festival, which created a bunch of buzz on social media thanks to promotional videos of celebrities and supermodels partying it up in the Caribbean. The people behind this failed festival didn’t care about the experience. They focused solely on the image of it and consumers ate it up with a spoon — until they realized that image was a lie once they got there.

Then, you have micro-influencers who try to make money from affiliate sales. However, all is usually not what it seems as Jordan Bunker explained to The Guardian:

All isn’t how it is perceived on Instagram. People assume I have a great life and everything is handed to me. I live with my parents and I work from a desk in my room; it’s not like I have a separate working space or office.

That’s not the only deception. Influencers often make their luxurious lives seem like something that’s easy to achieve. The reality, however, is that many of them have to work really hard to stage their life, every second of every day, hoping to get the perfect shot that will make consumers want to follow them or buy the stuff they promote.

But as Lucie Greene, an analyst who specializes in consumer behavior, pointed out:

We’re seeing a rising awareness of how social media use and influencer culture affects mental health, from Fomo (Fear of Missing Out) to driving compulsive, addictive consumption, to feelings of isolation.

Granted, the messages alone that influencers send to followers are often problematic. But so, too, are the images. So, as you design your website and integrate photos from your clients or from stock photo sites, think about what message you’re really sending.

Sephora, for instance, promotes its products with photos of the actual products. You might see a model or two on the top of the home page. For the most part, though, the focus is on the products.

That said, cosmetics and other beauty products can be used to convey a certain image and lifestyle — one that consumers desperately want. So, is Sephora missing out on an opportunity to create a “Sephora Lifestyle” by not photographing models using its products?

Sephora lets its users’ photos inspire the right kind of FOMO. (Source: Sephora) (Large preview)

Unlike many other retailers who might share photos of models living their lives in some far-off, exotic locale while wearing their products, Sephora doesn’t do that. The only time you really see photos of its cosmetics and products in action is here, in its “Inspire” community.

So, rather than leave its customers pining for some life that they may unconsciously associate with the red lipstick they were thinking of picking up, real customers get the chance to paint a more realistic portrait of its products.

A gallery of product photos from the Sephora Inspire page. (Source: Sephora) (Large preview)

As consumers grow weary of artificially enhanced photos and scenarios, you’re going to find it harder to make them feel like they’re missing out. However, by allowing your customers to provide a real look at what your products can do (and this goes for any kind of product, physical or digital), that’s where you’ll start to see consumers responding to feelings of missing out.

Before I wrap up here, I want to point out that this isn’t just for companies that sell affordable products.

The Inner Circle, for example, is an exclusive dating app. In order to join, users must first be prescreened and approved.

Now, you might think that a luxury brand like that would want to use influencer-like photos to show users how much they’re missing out by not dating in their “class”. But they don’t.

The Inner Circle luxury dating app doesn’t focus on the luxurious side of dating. (Source: The Inner Circle) (Large preview)

In this first example from the app’s signup page, you can see that the focus is on finding a popular spot to hang out and meet people. While the black-and-white filter does give it a swankier vibe, there’s nothing about the people in the photo that necessarily screams “Exclusive!”

The same thing goes for this photo:

The Inner Circle paints dating in a positive and natural light. (Source: The Inner Circle) (Large preview)

This is the kind of date most people would go on: a date in the park. The people in the photo aren’t all glammed up or wearing clothes made by high-end luxury designers.

These photos feel accessible. They let users know that, at the end of the day, they’re using this app to make real-life connections. There’s nothing exclusive about that.

And if a luxury brand like The Inner Circle can send that kind of message to its users with photos, then any brand should be able to do the same and be successful with it. Just be honest in what you’re portraying, whether it’s a photo of someone cooking with your products or a look inside the real (not illustrated) dashboard of your SaaS.

If you want to give prospects the feeling that they’re about to miss out on something worthwhile, just be real with them.

Wrapping Up

Maybe not today and maybe not tomorrow, but deceptive FOMO tactics will eventually catch up with you when customers start to realize they were misled by inflated numbers, exaggerated scenarios or seemingly time-sensitive or exclusive offers.

Remember: the websites and apps you build for clients shouldn’t just attract and convert customers. They also need to help your clients retain that business and loyalty over the long term. By being more responsible with the messages you’re sending, you can help them accomplish that.

(ra, yk, il)