#this is a relatively new phenomenon to me

[sniped-hugger]

Hey can I make a playlist for the guy?

Uh, go ahead, I guess!! Just be sure to link back to me and stuff. Credit to the creator of the character since they’re just a widdle oc and not like. Mario

[melangedmess]

Can't wait for Christmas fever to be over it's too exhausting

[transmutationisms]

Hey, I've been delving into anti psychiatry readings but one thing always stands out to me: if there is no underlying disease behind a depressive state, for example, how does that new paradigm not end up placing the blame on the patient? I ask in good faith as I still don't have a clear answer on that regard, and would like to have better conversations about this topic that don't end when people tell me of a close relative with depression who has seemingly had a life free of traumas that could otherwise present as depression.

-materialist (marxist) anti psychiatry identifies the root 'cause' or basis of psychological experiences in the economic and material conditions of existence. depression or other forms of distress, just like other affective states, derive fundamentally from the world we live in, our political situation, the material alienation of estranged labour that underlies 'alienation' the psychological state. this doesn't mean that resolving the contradictions of capitalism (that is, workers' revolution) will magically eliminate all sources of distress, depression, or other currently pathologised experiences. however, it would certainly resolve / eliminate some distress for some people; additionally, it is the only way to overcome the capitalist paradigm that values people by their adherence to a normative standard of ability, which is what renders depressed people (for example) economically marginalised 'failed citizens'

-keeping the above in mind, i would question whether there is really such thing as a person who 'has no trauma' ie, has no material basis for alienation, depression, or distress. capitalism is an estranging system, including for the owner class (though of course this occurs in a different way to the labouring class, and i am not suggesting that the bourgeoisie are the 'victims' of capitalism or some such)

-none of the above is mutually exclusive with the role that an individual's neurobiology plays in their subjective or psychological state. like any base/superstructure phenomenon, the relationship is dialectical, with the material base generally dominating, but both acting on and being affected by superstructural phenomena. economic and material conditions lead to subjective experiences such as depressions; these experiences are also instantiated in, reacting to, and reacted upon by the physiological processes in the brain/body. however, when we say that depression (for example) is not a disease we mean that there is no biological entity---no infectious pathogen, no 'chemical imbalance', no organic lesion, no anatomical defect or physiological malfunction---that is identifiable as a single cause or correlate of depressed states, nor will there ever be; the psychiatric label is a heuristic catch-all applied to a constellation of experiences (symptoms) that are varying degrees of disagreeable to individuals (patients) as well as to medical and state authorities

-i think it's overly credulous to the psychiatric profession to assert that calling something a disease means that no one can 'blame the patient' for it. in fact i would say it would be difficult to name a disease that doctors, state authorities, and society at large does NOT blame on patients

-i also think it's overly credulous to the psychiatric profession to assert that there is a dichotomy between neurobiological diseases and things that are individual faults or failings. in fact i would posit that most subjective experiences, including of distress, are neither

[biblomaniac]

Supercorp headcanon:

The realization is almost startling. Kara hasn’t called her by her name in what seems to be a long time. They’ve seen each other nearly every day in the months following Alex and Kelly’s wedding, and yet Kara had said her given name only a handful of times, and only out in public.

Once Lena recognizes this curious phenomenon, she decides, as a scientist, that she needs empirical evidence to prove she hasn’t deluded herself into believing a fantasy. Over a two week period, Lena record dates, times, events, situations, and surrounding bystanders, and how each correlates to a different pet names from Kara.

By the end of the fortnite, the brunette has amassed a relatively large amount of data. Lena found that Kara called her:

Baby- 27 times

Babe- 15 times

Sweetheart- 10 times

Honey- 4 times

Lena is astounded to realize that:

1. She and Kara spend A LOT of time together; and

2. Kara has only called her by her name three times (two at The Foundation during a press conference, and one at CatCo when Lena dropped by to bring her favorite new Editor in Chief lunch.

Armed with proof, Lena plans to confront Kara when they meet tonight before game night. Unsurprisingly, Kara has already begun setting up snacks and games when Lena unlocks the door to what has become her shared apartment with Kara. Surprisingly, Lena didn’t have to find any sort of awkward segue to begin the conversation.

“Baby, what last game do you think we should set out for tonight? We played clue last week, but the last time we played monopoly it kind of got out of hand.”

“I wouldn’t say, ‘out of hand,’ Kara.”

“Babe, you bankrupted everyone and refused to end the game until Alex admitted you were the queen of monopoly. We do not need to have a repeat performance of that now that Esme will be coming.”

“Fine, let’s just play Candyland. Esme will enjoy it and she won’t have to struggle to keep up with the adults for this one.”

“Perfect idea, honey. Thanks for helping me pick,” Kara says as she finishes setting up and turns back around to face Lena.

Knowing there is no better opportunity than now, Lena asks if they can talk. If Kara swallows after she agrees, no one has to know. Lena leads Kara to the couch; they sit close enough to grasp hands if necessary but far enough to move their arms or legs without brushing against one another.

“Kara, why have you been calling me all these nicknames?”

“What do you mean? I’ve just been calling you by your name.”

It seems Lena didn’t factor in the possibility that Kara herself hadn’t realized she amassed such a large repertoire of pet names for Lena. A pink tinge crawls slowly up pale cheeks.

“Kar, you haven’t addressed me by my name outside of our jobs in months.”

“Okay, but we see each other every day. What have a been calling you?”

It seems Lena will have to shove her embarrassment in a little box so she can admit her findings to Kara.

“Well, you’ve… you’ve been calling me various terms of endearment.”

Kara chuckles at Lena’s overly formal response.

“Lee, just tell me what I’ve been calling you. It can’t be offensive, or you’d have brought this up ages ago.”

“You’ve been calling me ‘baby,’ and… and ‘babe,’ and ‘sweetheart,’ and—”

“Oh. Okay, did it bother you?”

“Well, no. I just—“

“Because if it has, I can totally stop. I’d hate to cross any boundaries.”

Boundaries. Since what Nia dubbed the “Friendship Breakup of the Century,” boundaries have been blurrier than ever. Even before Lex revealed Kara as Supergirl, boundaries between them were murky, tiptoeing back and forth over the line of friendship and something more. Lena has managed to keep her feelings stuffed into neat little boxes. She has never been certain if Kara felt what she did, never wanted to rock the boat of their relationship by calling to attention just how…intimate some aspects of their relationship are.

“What boundaries are there really left to cross, Kara?”

“What do you mean?”

It seems Lena will have to buck up and spell it out.

“We sleep in the same bed, for gods sake!”

Kara tilts her head, looking a bit like a confused puppy.

“What’s wrong with that? I thought you liked it!”

“I—I do!” Lena runs a hand through her wavy locks, growing increasingly frustrated by Kara’s inability to understand how odd their friendship is.

“So what’s the problem?!”

Lena jumps up, pacing back and forth in the space between the coffee table and the couch. She taps her fingers rhythmically against her crossed arms, trying to calm herself down.

“Friends don’t do this! The nicknames, sharing beds, and lunch dates, and movies nights cuddled up on the couch. Don’t you see how, how romantic this all is?!”

Kara jumps up, standing in Lena’s way, gently grabbing Lena’s shoulders. The blonde slowly uncrossed Lena’s arms, trailing her hands down until she is grasping Lena’s trembling hands. In the most soothing voice she can muster, Kara says,

“I mean, I guess. But we’ve never had a typical friendship, Lee. We’ve always been so much more, it doesn’t seem right to not do any of that. If you aren’t uncomfortable, and you don’t want me to stop, maybe…maybe all we have to do is stop being friends, and start being girlfriends.”

Girlfriends. Girlfriends? Lena can barely believe her ears.

“What did you just say?”

“I said, baby, be my girlfriend.” Kara gives Lena a beaming smile, watching as the brunette flounders to give her an answer.

“Girlfriends, like romantically, or…” Kara chuckles at Lena’s disbelieving tone.

“Yes, romantically! Like you said, there aren’t any boundaries left to cross but this one,” Kara moves her arms to Lena’s waist, leaning down slowly, giving the former CEO time to decline if she wants. Lena stares up at Kara, kryptonite green eyes roving between her lips and crystal blue eyes. With barely centimeters left between their lips, Lena surges forward onto her tiptoes, arms winding around Kara’s neck to pull her downward.

Seconds, minutes, even hours could have gone by before Kara breaks the kiss.

“So, is that a yes?”

“Yes, yes, yes,” Lena happily says, moving to hug Kara tightly.

“FINALLY!” A voice exclaims.

Kara looks up, having not noticed her sister peaking her head around the now open apartment door. Lena burrows her head into the crook of Kara’s neck, unwilling to part.

“You owe me $50, Nal!”

“Ugh. You guys couldn’t wait one more week? You just cost me big time,” Nia grumbles, fishing through her purse for Alex’s winnings as the Superfriends pile into the apartment for game night.

Lena finally pulls back from Kara’s neck, moving to welcome their friends, but isn’t able to stray far when the reporter wraps both arms around her waist, pulling the brunettes back flush to her chest.

“Kara!” Lena squeals, a pretty red blush blossoming up her neck and onto her cheeks.

“What, you just agreed to be my girlfriend, I’m never letting you go again,” Kara tells her as she leans down to press a kiss to her cheek.

“Later, when they leave, we can test out all our new boundaries,” Kara whispers quietly, placing a final kiss to the shell of her girlfriends ear before dragging Lena to the couch.

“Let’s play!”

*************

If Lena makes a point to win every game as quickly as possible, nearly shoving their family out the door at the end of the night, it’s no ones business but her own.

[what-even-is-thiss]

Hatsune Miku is an interesting phenomenon to me because she basically just started out as the mascot for a specific voice synthesizer program and I remember when I was in high school like ten years ago she was already pretty big as a like cyber celebrity and I thought she was just a passing fancy if I’m being honest. Relatively new technology of semi-convincing electronic singing voices, 16 year old anime girl as a mascot. Sure, that’s cute.

But over a decade later now I look at her and she’s still sort of nothing but at the same time she’s a lot. Her voice program been used to make over a hundred thousand songs but the mascot itself has kind of developed an entirely different fandom by itself.

And why not? She’s marketable. Shes got that big blue hair and big sleeves. She’s a computer program so you can project any personality you want onto her. She’s like Mickey Mouse at this point but with even less substance. Not that I think the nothingness there is a bad thing. It’s kind of a strength, turns out.

Something that marketable and that blank can have everything from best selling albums to cute stuffed dolls to to video games to learn Japanese with miku books and all of that has been made.

And this is a mascot for a voice synthesizer program, remember. People show up in person to see a 3d model hologram of this mascot dance onstage. And this was happening when I was in high school. This was old news even back then. But the fact that it’s still happening? I’ve never seen anything like it before or since. She’s a software mascot. Clippy never got this kind of attention.

[crnbrrysprite67]

My take on an older Neteyam if some way he was revived. I posted this on Twitter a while ago, but thought I might as well post it here as well.

Alternate versions & the headcanons I had while drawing this are below the cut.

Neteyam HC for Drawing

Revived by Eywa/Kiri

The first tattoo he received, rather than the traditional face piece, was his chest/shoulder, symbolizing the phenomenon that was his miraculous rebirth. It extends up his neck and to the back of his head to surround his neural queue. It was closely followed by the face piece that symbolizes his acceptance as one of the Metkayina people after he completed his iknimaya trials. He also has two leg pieces, one on his right leg that extends from the top of his foot to his thigh, and one on his left leg that extends from his ankle to his knee. They symbolize things such as his warrior and hunter status and his forest origins.

After the final war with the sky people was over, he and Loak decided to stay living with the Metkayina, but Jake, Neytiri, Kiri, Tuk and Spider returned to the Omatikaya. There are frequent visits between them. 

Despite living in Awa’ Atlu with the Metkayina, he is still very connected to the forest and his Omatikaya culture. Due to this, a lot of his accessories have a mix of Omatikaya and Metkayina cultural touches.

He is a respected warrior in the Metkayina clan, but his clan duties mainly consist of leading the inland foraging/hunting groups and when needed, flying to other Na’vi clans for trade/communications. A relatively new duty as he is one of the few who can ride an Ikran.

He has a spirit brother, a Tulkun named Rokem.

His Ikran is female, named A’hoet.

He mated a Na’vi woman from the nearby Tayrangi clan named Zeyka. He met her while on one of his hunts. As is somewhat typical of the Tayrangi people, she has an independent, free-spirited and a bit fiery personality. But she is also the first-born of her family which her and Neteyam connected to each other with as they could relate their similar responsibilities and expectations.

As of the time of the drawing, he has 3 children with her. (Each of the three shells on his chest guard were picked out by one of his children)

Daughter (6) - Neynawri (Nawri)

Daughter (5) - Seylitsi (Litsi)

Son (3) - Akanuey

He is considered one of the best hunters in the clan and while he is skilled with a spear, harpoon, and gun, he is unrivaled with a bow and arrow. (He and Neytiri often have friendly mother-son bow hunting competitions when he visits the Omatikaya.)

**Also, I’m completely fine with reposts or the use of my drawings/ideas in other works! Just if you do use them, credit would be appreciated! ☺️(and if you like, please @ me as I’d love to see/read them!)**

[dangermousie]

I swear I wasn't gonna wade into this but...you all know the saying about hell and good intentions.

I didn't even like Queen Woo (enjoy? sure. It was the definition of trashy fun especially with all the massive ff I was doing. But a good drama it was not) but the puritan hand wringing about the sex stuff (people on MDL, never a font of sanity, are discussing that only porn addicts could like this or that this is all a part of evil westerners to pervert pure Korean culture - no really!) has gotten to me.

First of all, I will never understand why all the complaints are about tits and sex scenes and not ALL THE SERIOUS CARNAGE. Like, surely murder and torture are a worse sin than fornication seeing that the former kills people. (We are not even getting into the fact that this is all fictional so like - no real people were harmed or fucked during any of the filmed scenes.)

Second - the concept of don't like don't watch seems to have gotten lost utterly. NOT EVERYTHING IS MADE TO CATER TO YOU AND THAT'S OK. No maker, let alone an entire entertainment industry owes you to make what hits the spot for you. I don't like (most) romcoms and I don't like those 8 ep shows netflix/disney tend to put out, so I don't watch. I don't sit around feeling entitled about being catered to (there is a difference between being wistful a particular drama or a genre doesn't cater to you and entitlement of "how dare they!")

Third - the argument that all the T&A is new in k-ent seems bizarre. In dramas, sure (because before streaming which is a relatively new phenomenon, it was all on TV only and if you go back far enough, there wasn't even cable and they have regs about what they can and can't show. Still, Yaksha was made in 2010 and had plenty T&A because it was on cable.) But have all those people complaining about all that new perversion never watched movies? I remember watching Untold Scandal, made all the way back in 2003 and starring the then delight of Japanese ladies' hearts Bae Yong Joon and the amount of naked sex scenes!!! Or think of A Frozen Flower from 2008 - it has het sex scenes so explicit it makes Queen Woo look like a church picnic and a gay couple making out on screen (another thing I see MDL peeps complain about - I will never be over some genius saying that the gay king in Goryeo Khitan War was evil addition of evil Western values and having to be told the king was actually historically gay.)

None of that is new. The only difference is that now some dramas have that too not just movies because they are on streaming only platforms and thus having the same lack of restrictions movies have done for a long time.

And finally - there are plenty of legitimate criticisms to be leveled at Queen Woo (or pretty much any other show.) Sex is evil is a bad hill to die on. None of the posters would be around to complain if someone somewhere didn't have sex at least once.

[tempesttz]

i feel like causing problems today: correcting actual endogenic misinformation on the anti endo blog about "correcting misinformation"

WARNING: VERY LONG POST ABOUT SYSCOURSE BELOW THE CUT! you have been warned. stay safe! :3c

[/image id: screenshot of tumblr blog @antimisinfo, the blog's profile picture, and the blog's header stating "correcting misinformation." end id.] (before we get into this, some of these images will be very bright! i will try to provide accurate image ids to every screenshot i post. stay safe!) okay so see this account right? op has no clue what they're talking about. addressing pronouns right now, i was going to refer to them by their preferred collective pronouns but i can't find them? i checked their carrd and their alters all had different pronouns and their about me just says this

[/image id: text stating, "horned haters is a subsystem filled with alters who hate endos / pro-endos. our whole system does but we are more passionate about it and plan to try make as many safe spaces for anti-endos as we possibly can!" end id.] so at least i know they prefer alters. cool [happy] so far okay whatever they REALLY hate endogenic systems thats cool thats whatever nothing new there but

[/image id: five images of different flags, likely did/osdd related, anti endo related, or something similar. text underneath flags states "system hot takes," "anti endo support group," "anti endo system terms," "agre and littles safespace," and "fictive stuff." end id.] jegus dude you weren't joking about being passionate about hating. this is like, grade a hater here. but i digress this probably isn't the post to be screwing around on i'll keep the screwing to a minimum i promise. that being said i don't promise to be nice, i do not owe anyone kindness, especially when they are not kind to me. i will try to be polite. so this is already splendid right but you would think with this many accounts dedicated to hating endogenic systems (they also own anti endo vents, i think?) they would at least know what they're talking about, right? right?????

[/image id: text reading "so what are endos? endos or endogenics are people who claim to have did/osdd without trauma or claim to have alters/be a system without having did/osdd." end id.] source: endos / endogenics and why they aren't valid, may 8 2024 for the sake of convenience, i'm going to be referring to did/osdd as osddid from now on. okay so first of all, anyone who claims to be endogenic while having osddid is almost definitely also traumagenic and has reasons rooted in trauma, those two things aren't mutually exclusive. endogenic is a broad, personal label. an endogenic system with did could be one with a lot of created alters or headmates. or just two created alters, headmates, etc. who knows! it's a very personal label after all. that being said, to have osddid, you have to have some form of trauma in almost every case, because trauma is what causes the dissociation, amnesia and other symptoms of osddid. anyone who's arguing to the contrary is wrong. you cannot have osddid without trauma? "so tempy, endogenic systems aren't real! they don't have osddid!" wrong. you can be a system without having osddid. for just one example, sourced from the national library of medicine, pubmed central, "multiplicity can be placed along a continuum between identity disturbance and dissociative identity disorder (did), although most systems function relatively well in everyday life. Further research is needed to explore this phenomenon, especially in terms of the extent to which multiplicity can be regarded as a healthy way of coping." (2017) taking some bookmarks from your sixth grade english class (which i can only hope you have passed by now, if you are on this website,) we are going to use some inferences. if multiplicity isn't dissociative identity disorder, but it is a state of being multiple and a system, what do you have? a system without osddid. "but tempy, that doesn't mention osdd!" that's because osdd wasn't a medical term before the dsm-5. not to mention, it stresses that "...most systems function relatively well in everyday life..." and that "...multiplicity can be regarded as a healthy way of coping." osdd is a disorder and an osdd system's plurality is disordered. non-disordered plurality is a thing that exists, and almost all non-traumagenic plurals are non-disordered! so we're already off to a terrible start. op isn't creating a distinction between plurality and osddid, likely because they believe that osddid is the only way to be plural. this not only was disproved above by a literal scientific article on a .gov website, but also the icd-11.

[/image id: text stating "boundary with normality (threshold):" which then moves a line down to a bullet point stating "the presence of two or more distinct personality states does not always indicate the presence of a mental disorder. in certain circumstances (e.g., as experienced by 'mediums' or other culturally accepted spiritual practitioners) the presence of multiple personality states is not experienced as aversive and is not associated with impairment in functioning. a diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder should not be assigned in these cases." end id.] so someone can experience multiple personality states without it being part of a mental disorder. and it's not dissociative identity disorder, and it can't be otherwise specified dissociative disorder, so... i wonder what it could be? well, many things! all under the wonderful way-too-vague umbrella that is endogenic plurality. oh, you need more proof? how about we look to a book written by eric yarbrough, a psychiatrist who specializes in lgbtq issues:

[/image id: text reading "the phenomenon of plurality is unknown to most mental health clinicians. most professionals know this condition as dissociative identity disorder (american psychiatric association 2013), although plurality and dissociative identity disorder are not exactly the same. being plural, or having two or more people existing in one body or space, is just one part of the diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder. many people who are plural do not experience distress from the existence of others within themselves." end id.] what was that, psychiatrist eric yarbrough in your book transgender mental health which was published by the american psychiatric association?

[/image id: text reading "plurality is a more patient-centered approach to what has historically been referred to as dissociative identities. this is not the same as the dsm-5 diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder (american psychiatric association 2013). plurality makes up just one part of the larger diagnosis and does not necessarily cause distress. although many people who are plural have a history of trauma, there are just as many who do not. a plural system is a collection of all the alters present. with some people these alters might come and go, whereas with others they are static and waiting to be discovered." end id.] this is not the same as the dsm-5 diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder, huh? it's just one part of a larger diagnosis and doesn't necessarily cause distress, huh? still not convinced? rapid fire! zarah eve, sarah parry: "not all multiplicity is based in trauma" (2021) mick cooper: "neuropsychological research has demonstrated the inherently divisible nature of the brain and consciousness" (unsure, likely pre-2013) zarah eve, kim hayes, sarah perry: "multiplicity experiences are phenomenologically distinct from clinical dissociative experiences" (2023)

kymbra clayton: "there may be in the general population a large number of people with [multiplicity] who are high-functioning, relatively free of overt psychopathology, and no more in need of treatment than most of their peers. they may not have abuse histories and may have evolved a creative and adaptive multiplicity." (possibly 2005)

the entire endogenic and non-traumagenic resources google doc, created by a diagnosed traumagenic system can we at least establish there's been a recorded medical existence of healthy, non-disordered multiplicity in psychiatric fields and that this isn't something that someone just made up on tumblr one day? okay, cool, thanks. now i wonder if there's a word for that. oh wait. it's called non-disordered plurality and tends to be much more common in non-traumagenic systems. by now you've probably forgotten the actual reason this post exists, so back to antimisinfo!

[/image id: text reading "why is this bad? this is misinformation because as far as science knows did/osdd is a trauma based disorder (specifically caused by trauma in early childhood, which is speculated to be 1-9 / 1-12 years old) and your brain would not split/create alters without reason. you cannot have alters without having a disorder, this is common sense as it's not normal to have alters. to add onto this endos also take over our communities and teal our terms. (we'll make a post with further information on that in the future.)" end id.] okay so first off non-disordered systems exist, let's stop talking about osddid as if it's the only way plurals can exist. second off, you can be multiple without having a disorder, it's literally highlighted in the icd-11 that non-disordered multiplicity exists. see above for disproving that. this is not common sense, because as seen above people can experience multiplicity without it being disordered, therefore meaning it is "normal," though not realistically normal as all plurals are a minority. normal =/= bad/disordered. cool? cool now, onto "endos take over our communities and steal our terms." i have no clue what terms op is talking about (tried to find their elaboration on those terms but it seems they haven't posted it), nor have i ever gotten an actual comprehensive list of terms they think we're stealing, but here we go: the terms traumagenic and endogenic were created by an endogenic system

[/image id: text reads "an important part of the development of these terms involves our journey towards identifying as plural. we have used a lot of terms for ourselves over the last thirty years; since 2014, we have identified as endogenic, but have known we were plural since at least 1990. the road" text cuts off. end id.] the term plural can be traced back to 2003 and even in its oldest records recognize the existence of non-traumagenic plurality. it has always been an inclusive term

[/image id: header reads "heart's home." text next to it reads "join date: january 02, 2003." text underneath reads, "this is my site for people that have mpd did, {;} also i agree that not all is cause by trauma. {;} i was on the ring from ring world and did not know this was moved." end id.] introject is a psychiatry-focused word, meaning that it could be claimed to be osddid exclusive, however multiple communities have used them in tandem for years. it can be traced back to this glossary which was written before the dsm-5, or pre-2013.

[/image id: text reads "introject - introjection occurs when a person (singlet or plural) internalizes another person (real or fictional) into his or her mental space. in classical psychology, the introject is usually a parent, whose advice for good or ill becomes integrated into the person's moral system. more broadly, many people experience introjects as a kind of muse, inspiring them to creativity or self-improvement (a psychologist would call this an "internalized imago"). (psychiatric)". new line. new line text reads, ""introject" is seen as derogatory by some, because it is a psychiatric word and seems to imply that such people of necessity are unreal. They prefer terms like walk-in, soulbond, or fictive. having an introject does not necessarily mean you're multiple. it is an experience common to singlets and plurals. some multiple systems report adopting people from books, films, or real life, making them part of the group and allowing them to take the front if they desire." so, having introjects hasn't even always been seen as a fully plural experience! singlets used to be considered to be able to have introjects too! isn't that cool? not to mention, they also have a definition for fictive in there, recognized as a wider plural term! cool, cross that off the list... oh? what's this?

[/image id: text reads "system - a group of persons in one body. also, the operating system by which a group governs itself. multiples have many different names for this: group, collective, clan, household (or house), family, etc. (may have originated with a few multiples writing for the amateur press; we first read it in an early mpd book.)" end id.] so non-disordered plurals have used the term system since ever too... not to mention, hey, look at this term!

[/image id: text reads "empowerment is for all multiples. It is not only for natural (non-trauma) multiples; you can be empowered and be a multiple who was born as one person and split due to child abuse. In fact, if that's your situation, empowerment is a wonderful thing for you, and is something your therapist (if any) ought to be encouraging." end id.] wow... non-trauma multiples. look at that. is that enough terms? if you want me to look up more, feel free to suggest anything the endogenic community is "stealing" that haven't been used synonymously and consistently in both traumagenic and endogenic spaces since before traumagenic and endogenic were terms. okay back to misinformation.

[/image id: text is a link that reads "there is also a carrd that explains why endos are bad and debunks a few myths if anyone is interested in it! if not continue reading." end id.] i didn't need to click on this to know it was the why endos are bad carrd. this is the most touted anti endo carrd in existence. i'm so sick of seeing it i'm not even addressing it today. it's wrong and blames endogenic systems for systemic issues like "making actual systems be less believed." not a verbatim quote, but you can go read it for yourself and then scroll up and read everything i just said again.

i've never actually seen another anti-endo carrd. which is saying something, because there's a lot of endogenic carrds, some better than others. carrds in general aren't reputable in most situations, unless they cite other sources, which the why endos are bad carrd doesn't. it cites a google doc about cultural appropriation and the theory of structural dissociation, which is about osddid, not non traumagenic plurality. it also implies that anyone identifying as endogenic has been lied to, is traumagenic and in denial, is a singlet who's experiencing a factitious disorder or other disorder misleading them, or are a singlet faking because they think it's "fun." no comment, i'll talk about it in length another day.

[/image id: text reads, "why can't you have did/osdd or alters without trauma? as far as science knows did/osdd is a trauma disorder and in order to have alters in the first place you require dissociation, which is also a trauma (or stress) response. here are tons of medically reviewed sources that say this:" image ends. end id.] once again, not osdddid. also, "as far as science knows..." see above. science knows about non-disordered plurality. op goes on to list a bunch of articles about dissociative identity disorder, that talk about dissociative identity disorder. they are wonderful articles about dissociative identity disorder and prove that individuals with dissociative identity disorder (and by extension otherwise specified dissociative disorder) experience that disorder due to trauma. that being said... non-disordered multiplicity is a thing, and endogenic systems still don't have osddid. seeing a pattern?

[/image id: text reads, "what about religious beliefs / tulpamancy? first people are not required to believe or participate in your religious beliefs (and religious beliefs are not exempt from criticism) and second tulpamancy is a closed buddhist practice that has nothing to do with being a system and should not be compared to being a system nor should it be included / involved in system communities. Note that the dsm-v also says that in order to have did; "the disturbance is not a normal part of a broadly accepted cultural or religious practice." <- this does not mean it's possible to have alters due to a religious thing, if anything it says they cannot be counted as alters / as a system." end id.] okay so i corrected this in the image id, but op actually wrote "tuplamancy" twice. lol first off, tulpamancy isn't a closed buddhist practice. a tulpa is a theosophical term that was originally inspired by the tibetan buddhist nirmāṇakāya, translated as in tibetan as sprul-pa. "the western understanding of tulpas was developed by twentieth-century european mystical explorers, who interpreted the idea independently of buddhahood," according to wikipedia, sourced from tracking the tulpa (2015). a google search could tell you this. did you research any of the communities you are attempting to debunk past listening to what people who agree with you say? if you've decided in the past three months that google is your friend, i would google "echo chamber." second off, people absolutely are not required to believe or participate in your religious beliefs, and religious beliefs are subject to criticism. however, they should also be respected. this post, along with most other things you have had to say, have not respected spiritual plurals. not to mention, not all non-traumagenic plurals are spiritual. not to mention, not all tulpamancers are spiritual, in fact, most aren't. "modern practitioners, who call themselves "tulpamancers", use the term to refer to a type of willed imaginary friend which practitioners consider to be sentient and relatively independent. modern practitioners predominantly consider tulpas to be a psychological rather than a paranormal concept. the idea became an important belief in theosophy." see: wikipedia again. i mean, if you want me to go find scientific articles about this i can but wikipedia has plenty. go check the sources on wikipedia. this should have been the first thing you did if you wanted to "combat misinformation," by doing actual research before posting. op then starts talking about did. see: not all plurals are disordered. op also takes the time to shit on spiritual multiplicity again, which i will rightly ignore, refer to two paragraphs ago. it's midnight and i would like to finish writing by 1am.

[/image id: text reads, "to add on, no you cannot pray to be a system or transition into being a system. if you were to pray and one day magically become a system you are either in denial or you've convinced yourself you're something you're not. believing you can be a system without trauma or that you can become a system by praying is like believing you can get autism from vaccines or drinking too much dairy milk, that's just not how it works." end id.] this is a half-truth! you cannot pray to become a system unless you count spiritual possession (and frankly that responsibility lies on the individual in question), and you cannot pray to have osddid as that's a dissociative disorder that stems from childhood. you technically can transition to being plural (created systems are a thing, intentional and unintentional creation of headmates has been recorded dutifully since at least the early 1900s (see: tracking the tulpa, 2015). for the sake of it, here's a sciencedirect article about authors who experience different forms of hearing their characters in their head, who's recounts all sound very similar to non-disordered plurality. "believing you can be a system without trauma or that you can become a system by praying is like believing you can get autism from vaccines or drinking too much dairy milk, that's just not how it works." maybe if all plurality is disordered. it isn't. see above when i showed multiple examples of non-disordered multiplicity. believing that all plurality is disordered is like insisting that god created everything on earth after being presented with the theory of evolution. the analogy goes both ways.

[/image id: text reads, "what about mixed origin systems? Mixed origin systems are not a thing. did/osdd forms purely from trauma, you can't form from a mix of trauma and not trauma, that's not how it works. if you identify as mixed origin you are likely in denial and really need to come to terms with the fact that you are either traumatized or you're not a system at all." ] okay so first of all people can be traumatized past the age of twelve. ooh burn i know crazy. not to mention, plurality in general is known to be experienced by neurodivergent individuals, who as a minority are more likely to experience some form of trauma. this isn't a controversial statement, right? i don't have to prove this, right? cool great thanks. oh hey i just found a really flat ginger ale this will now fuel the rest of this post. there's this crazy concept, some people can be traumatized without it causing them to be disordered. or, a person with osddid could have created headmates, therefore making some of their system of non-traumagenic origin. personally, i was a system before i was traumatized. this caused my plurality to have some very trauma-based aspects, trauma holders and trauma-focused roles. that being said, my plurality (mostly lol) isn't disordered and my first recorded headmate was a created/spontaneous headmate at the age of ~nine.~ isn't that cool? anyways i've been medically recognized as plural so you can't fakeclaim me [silly] i dont have osddid. don't fit the diagnostic criteria. but i've been experiencing headmates since 9 and have recognized my plurality since 12. i'm 18. most of my headmates can be sourced to when i was 13-15, as that's when i experienced the most trauma (i'm better now stay safe though yall). that's decidedly after the gracious "1-12" estimate you gave, op. not to mention, we created headmates intentionally at the age of 12. so what's up with that op? what am i? okay i'm done being anectodal, i just took the opportunity to parry a personal opinion with a personal anecdote just to further drive the nail in that people like this exist and are living breathing sentient individuals with lives outside the screen and many of us have been plural since ever. i sourced non-traumagenic multiplicity to before the dsm-5 just in this post alone, not to mention tulpamancy (many tulpamancers don't consider themselves plural/multiple or part of the community).

[/image id: text reads, "what about other kinds of origins? Other origins like "willowgenic" and all that bullshit? Yeah no, same thing as endos, not possible. look above for all the proof you need, did/osdd is only caused by trauma. traumagenic is the only valid origin." end id.] i dunno if i told you this but did/osdd isn't the only form of plurality because not all plurality is disordered. also, spelling every origin you don't agree with incorrectly in a post that's supposed to be informational doesn't lend to your credibility. it's spelled willogenic. you're welcome. also, the word "traumagenic" was created by an endogenic system (see above, during "endos are stealing our terms," first link). you're appropriating our terms, buddy. [silly]

[/image id: text reads, "but I gave myself did! / but I created my own alters! no you didn't. that isn't possible, you cannot turn yourself into a did/osdd system and creating alters is a coping mechanism, not something you do for fun, sources on this;" text ends. end id.] half truth! you can't give yourself osddid because it's a dissociative disorder that forms due to childhood trauma. you can, however, create alters/headmates. see above when i talked about tulpamancy. op goes on to link more resources about dissociative identity disorder that don't mention other forms of plurality. not all plurals are disordered, let's move on.

[/image id: text reads, "isn't being a system like the same as being trans or being lgbtq? no, many endos compared the two but they are completely different. Being lgbtq is an identity, it's something you are born as. being a system is a debilitating disorder caused by severe trauma, it is counted as a disability which is;" text ends. end id.] first off i gotta say it again, not all plurality is disordered. op goes on to explain why did is a disability, which is true. that's just true. but again. not all plurality is disordered. second off, half truth! being a system is not the same as being lgbtq! that being said, a lot of systems are part of the lgbtq community, both due to its known effects on gender and sexuality and because a lot of them are neurodivergent. speaking on the internet plural community here, anyways. a lot of anti endos are referred to as "sysmeds" as a reference to "transmeds," people who believe that all people who are transgender must have a disorder in the form of gender dysphoria. sysmeds are people who believe that all people who are systems must have a disorder in the form of osddid.... same thing different font debunked not all systems are disordered. anyways.

[/image id: text reads, "but the dsm-v says that trauma isn't required! no, the dsm-v actually says csa isn't required, there are other forms of trauma that don't involve csa or child abuse. To act as if it saying that the trauma isn't always ca or child abuse means that it doesn't require trauma at all is extremely invalidating to those who are traumatized in ways that don't involve child abuse or csa." end id.] both of you are wrong jesus christ. okay so first of all the dsm-v heavily implies that trauma is basically required in order to have osddid.

[/image id: text reading "dissociative identity disorder is associated with overwhelming experiences, traumatic events, and/or abuse occurring in childhood. the full disorder may manifest at al-" text cuts off. end id.]

[/image id: text reads, "the dissociative disorders are frequently found in the aftermath of trauma, and many of the symptoms, including embarrassment and confusion about the symptoms or a desire to hide them, are influenced by the proximity to trauma. in dsm-5, the dissociative disorders are placed next to, but are not part of, the trauma- and stressor-related disorders, reflecting the close relationship between these diagnostic classes. both acute stress disorder" text cuts off. end id.] second of all the part of the dsm-5 that goes over dissociative identity disorder doesn't mention sexual violence once. the best i can assume this claim came from is an old belief that most dissociative identity disorder trauma if not all is inherently sexual.

[/image id: text reads, "promoted by charismatic individuals such as cornelia wilbur -- that multiplicity was almost always caused by severe, repeated child abuse, usually sexual, and was an extreme form of dissociation." end id.] so... where did you get this info, op? you didn't give us a source, after all. and again.... not all plurality is disordered. so this is a pointless argument to make. shit, i'm out of ginger ale. and it's 1am. it's okay i'm basically done right? uh, right?

[/image id: text reads, "but this source claims endos exist / did doesn't require trauma! most of those sources are extremely old and / or made by endos (or pro endos) themselves. (we'll make a more in-depth post on this topic some other time, but for now this is all we have to say on it)" end id.] first off i dated every source i cited, most are post-2013 and the newest is from last september (sep 2023). the oldest is ~2003. you're welcome. second, if you denounce every source given matter how reputable because it's "written by pro endos," you'll only end up listening to people in your own community. hey, remember when i asked you to google "echo chamber?" also, i'm waiting for that post, op. also also, for the sake of it, not all plurality is disordered, so why are we mentioning did again? oh yeah, because you don't believe in non-disordered plurality. is that because all the sources proving their existence are pro endo? hey, fun challenge, if you're over the age of 21 and find yourself wishing to, take a shot every time i reiterate not all plurality is disordered. [joking]

[/image id: text reads, "but we don't know everything about the human brain! you're right, we don't. the brain is mysterious, but we do know enough to know that it doesn't do these kinds of things for no reason. we know the brain reacts to trauma and we know what the difference between a normal brain and a disordered brain is. just because we don't know everything doesn't give people an excuse to jump to conclusions and spread misinformation. it is better to stick to what science currently knows which is the theory of structural dissociation, which is the current theory about how did/osdd forms, and so far no one has been able to disprove it. and before someone says it, no it is not only a theory, it is a scientific theory which is;" end id.] hey i have this fun concept for you not all plurality is disordered. also, just to throw it out there, otto van der hart, the guy who created the theory of structural dissociation referencing the haunted self and doing so along with ellert neijenhuis, suzette boon and kathy steele, had his license revoked years ago for abusing his plural patients. not to mention they promote only referring to the "client" and not the "parts," and only referring to alters as "parts of the client." i recommend reading this article on power to the plurals, and if you feel like some extra reading, you can also check out this old article about how psych professionals used to be encouraged to bait or purposefully leave information out or use different names for integration to attempt to coerce their plural patients into final fusion. in conclusion, not all plurality is disordered, source your shit, and if you're going to talk about only dissociative disorders at least get your claims right. thank you. stop spreading misinformation.

dave got a blinkie for his post so now i want one

[/image id: green and yellow blinkie gif with the words "written by jade harley!" in pixelpoiiz font. end id.]

[/image id: blinkie with a dark blue, almost black background featuring multiple stars, one of which twinkles. contains text reading "written by kankri." in the pixeloid sans font. end id.]

[so-bitya]

Whitewashing in Anime - Soma ft. Usopp

Avoiding "Brown"

Here is an image of Soma comparing his skin tone from the first season of Black Butler and the current season airing now. As you can see, Soma's skin is noticeably lighter than it was in the past. I considered the lighting and took shade from his hand that looks relatively mid tone. However, that's not really a fair excuse if the anime continues to lighten Soma's face this way.

I also compared his skintone from the Book of Circus season which is relatively more recent, and chose images where he's clearly in good lighting. Soma is still noticeably lighter this time around.

Whitewashing is an incredibly common phenomenon that been happening a lot lately in anime, especially with reboots. A great example I can think of off the top of my head is One Piece where they lightened nearly everyone's skin color in the anime, despite some of the cast being characters of color?

(^^^this character is canonly black according to Oda, the mangaka.)

"Oh but Oda gives Usopp pale skin in all his color illustrations"

One, he should know better. Two, if Oda said Usopp would be African in real life, and chose a brown, Jamaican-american actor to play him, then yes, they have been ridiculously disrespectful in how they've been portraying the character's racial features so far.

In that sense, it's actually relief that anime studios in the past weren't afraid of giving their characters darker skin unlike mangakas who were terrified of even the lighest shade of brown.

For instance, I am happy that A-1 studios made Soma, Agni, and Mina, who are all the same race, slightly differ in skin tone. Mina's skin is cooler toned compared to Soma and Agni's warmer hues.

HOWEVER, and other fans pointed this out, Soma and Agni's skin leaned so far from being golden brown to straight yellow in many scenes, that they were walking around like they have jaundice which is so... Of course A-1 studios found some way to mess it up ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Another thing, do you guys honestly think being accurate to Yana's art style is always the best thing to do in adaptions? Angela Blanc, the secret villain in the anime original first season, pretends to be an abused maid and gets whipped in her very first scene. And according to Yana's concept sketches, she was originally brown. I'm actually glad the anime whitewashed her in that instance.

I'd like to point out, Sebastian's skin tone has also changed in the new season, and he's noticeably tanner than his previous anime appearances and yana's illustrations. So why is this okay for the anime to make creative changes for sebastian's skin tone, but have to stay accurate for Soma? (whose dark skin been established in anime viewers' eyes for decades now).

To be fair, I did a comparison of the anime grayscaled and Soma in the manga during the Weston arc. I checked the values and while I will say that his skin is relatively in the same as the manga, only few degrees lighter, whitewashing isn't only about skintone.

Colourism in Features

We could argue whether its just different anime styles or the way Yana draws noses, but its not a great look for Soma's nose to be made noticeably sharper compared to his flatter/rounder nose in the manga/earlier seasons of the anime.

Talking about the Mandela effect and cognitive dissonance as well... there's also something about how manga readers seen Soma with brown skin and pure black hair years in the manga, only for the anime to lighten those features.

It doesn't help that Soma canonly has purple hair and yellow eyes (if anything, I do appreciate the more natural tones they gave Soma this season. No more highly saturated purple hair and yellow eyes!)

Yes, Kuroshitsuji is a fantasy story, and YES artists of color like to play with fantasy features with characters, me included! But my point is that black/brown representation in media is so little already, especially when character artists are also averse to drawing any defining racial features.

Yana has designed brown-skinned characters in the anime with straight white hair and light-colored eyes about three times now (ie. Agni, Angela, and Hannah). The only Indians with dark skin and hair are a bunch of homeless thugs that Soma and Agni stop from mugging Ciel, proving they're "one of the good ones", and Mina whose treatment in the manga/anime is abysmal.

Discussing Racism in Fandom

Alright, so over the past few days, I've seen some fans disappointed with Soma's skin tone change and I hope my post illustrates why they would be. But I've also seen some angry and frustrated reactions to those fans! And I want to ask, why?

Why is fans bringing up racism in anime considered "discourse" but reacting harshly towards those fans is not?

Why would fans expressing disappointment about whitewashing gets you more angry than the whitewashing itself?

Why is being disappointed that an anime lightened a character's skin tone, a character who both anime-only watchers and manga readers alike saw as dark-skinned, "stupid" to you?

How come the fandom gets a good laugh out of the usage of "fag" potentially canceling the anime, but talking about race is a "risk" to getting a new season?

And if you disagree with my points and believe the anime is only being accurate to Yana's work, why not just say "Soma's skintone is more accurate to Yana's color illustrations, but I understand the disappointment and shock," without being condescending towards us for being concerned in the first place?

I'd be pretty happy if the anime was just using intense lighting and that Soma is darker than he appears (in fact, if that happens I'll reblog the good news to this post!) Because this post isn't "discourse" to me, I'm discussing race regarding one of my favorite characters in the fandom. Discussions like these don't ruin the fandom, but actually help it become a more welcoming place for fans of color.

Whitewashing in Anime - Agni ft. Cithis

[princessrainevillanueva]

DreamWorks Dog Man Movie - Official Poster and Trailer

DreamWorks just revealed the Official Trailer and Poster of The Dog Man Movie, starring Pete Davidson, Isla Fisher, Lil Rel Howery and Ricky Gervais!

Description from DreamWorks Animation:

From DreamWorks Animation—creators of the beloved blockbuster franchises Kung Fu Panda, How to Train Your Dragon and The Boss Baby—comes the canine-crime-fighting film adaptation of Dav Pilkey’s New York Times bestselling literary phenomenon: Dog Man. When a faithful police dog and his human police officer owner are injured together on the job, a harebrained but life-saving surgery fuses the two of them together and Dog Man is born. Dog Man is sworn to protect and serve—and fetch, sit and roll over. As Dog Man embraces his new identity and strives to impress his Chief (Lil Rel Howery, Get Out, Free Guy), he must stop the pretty evil plots of feline supervillain Petey the Cat (Pete Davidson; Saturday Night Live, The King of Staten Island). Petey’s latest plan is to clone himself, creating the kitten Li'l Petey, to double his ability to do crime stuff. Things get complicated, though, when Li'l Petey forges an unexpected bond with Dog Man. When Li'l Petey falls into the clutches of a common enemy, Dog Man and Petey reluctantly join forces in an action-packed race against time to rescue the young kitten. In the process, they discover the power of family (and kittens!) to bring even the most hostile foes together.

Watch the Trailer here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaJbAennB_Q

Follow me on Instagram and X for more updates from the Pilkeyverse and the DreamWorks Dog Man movie!

[loving-n0t-heyting]

For most of the post-war period, “getting active” required finding a party, joining, canvassing, knocking on doors, dishing out leaflets and attending meetings.

Now, from the comfort and safety of their own homes, these keyboard warriors can engage in far right politics by watching YouTube videos, visiting far right websites, networking on forums, speaking on voice chat services like Discord and trying to convert “normies” on mainstream social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook.

While it contains traditional organisations such as Richard Spencer’s National Policy Institute, generally speaking it remains a decentralised collective of anonymous people working in broadly the same direction and towards similar goals. This relatively new means of engaging in political activism also facilitates a more international outlook.

From a 2018 analysis of the uk far right, cited in the nytimes coverage of the riots

This is just talking about far right views becoming popular, right? You can dress it up in talk about "decentralised collectives" but thats about on the same level as talking about memeplexes or hiveminds, its fine if yr shooting the galaxybrain shit with friends but you cant expect me to take it superduper seriously. You have not identified a new form of post-organisational organising via a syzygistic standalone complex or whatever, you have just pointed out the existence of political fads and shifts in opinion, a phenomenon dating back to the origin of the human species and of which all of us are aware starting in kindergarten at the latest. It wasnt invented on the internet and its not some paradigm shifting innovation in political theory to point it out

[gacha-incels]

My current theory is that ( Puts tinfoil hat )  The ongoing gender war stuff in both CN and KR have definitely shifted how some 'waifu-collectors' see the female player base and therefore male characters in gacha games. There's definitely an ongoing narrative that women are the root of toxicity and more devs should adopt the waifu-only policy to appeal to as few women as possible and gatekeep their safe havens. The irony is that most of these people advocating to exclude women are using the vocal minority for their examples as to why, which is exactly what they don't want done to themselves. Basically, women should only play Love and Deepspace and men can play GFL2/AL/Snowbreak/Nikke etc. As long as women 'stay in their lane' they are satisfied, even though it's been shown that both men and women will pull for characters of the opposite gender and vice versa. Mixed cast games are trying to err on the side of caution because if they don't appeal to this crowd enough (by skewing the gender ratio harder, or by making more fanservice designs) then they will be brigaded on social media for appealing too much towards women or radical feminists.

omg yeah I feel like “gamer” men say this outright around the world from east to west. “women are coming into our games and making the women less sexy and everything more toxic” etc. attitude has ramped up. though it was always bad if you remember, in the west at least, the absolute insane violent tantrum reaction to Anita Sarkeesian for making like I cannot stress this enough just pretty basic feminist videos about video games. It was like seeing grown adult men have the same type of screaming tantrum a toddler would have when you tell him he can’t have an expensive toy at the store. except instead of one kid sitting on the floor screaming it was an unbelievable amount of men worldwide sitting in their computer chairs screaming and writing graphic rape threats and making full video games where you violently beat her. For the crime of just one woman talking about fucking Mario or whatever. THIS is how these men react when you do something as benign as that. I posted some more about this here.

you have no idea the insane shit that gets blamed on female fans or female employees of mixed sex gachas. A lot of that has been already posted here obviously so I’ll post something new I saw just so we can archive some more examples. Recently one of my friends from the infrared blog I sometimes repost here showed me this strange phenomenon happening on the Genshin impact leaks subreddit where a good amount of guys were accusing the developers of the game of being fujoshis because they thought a new female water character was being nerfed so that a previously released male water character would be the strongest water character. I thought this was a joke (my mistake) but it spanned a LOT of comments and got extremely heated. Later I found these comments in another thread there

Like this is the thought process. This sucked -> ok so probably a woman wrote it -> well most writers graduated from liberal arts schools, and most liberal arts students are women, so it was definitely a female writer. This is how easy it is for this type of “gamer” male to blame anything they hate on women. They did this for one of the stories in HSR that was disliked as well. If you look up “有男不玩” there are videos on bilibili but also some on YouTube where you can get snippets of how these guys are thinking about female gacha players. They share some similarities with all gamer men who think women are more frivolous, unskilled and don’t like action games. there were particular comments that reminded me of how Korean incels wrote about women, in that games should stop pandering to us altogether because we don’t have enough money, or if we do have money it’s because it’s coming from a boyfriend or male relative, or we’re all just playing f2p. ironically a huge amount of merch sales, IRL events and fan-PR like fanart comes from female players and they are usually the ones to stick around the longest I believe, but these guys only understand the money aspect of these games.

There are a lot of ones that were interesting but I don’t want to use too many since I was working with MTL, and then looking up individual phrases, and then retranslating some, and then looking up context, etc. lol. so when I have a better grasp on this I can make a better post.

in regards to how they find it ok if the games are sex segregated yes exactly,I posted about this earlier and probably a couple months ago too but this was most recent so it’s easiest to just copy here

[seat-safety-switch]

My neighbour has a dirty ass. It's completely filthy and it disgusts me, it's so obviously repulsive. The least they could do is go to a car wash once in awhile. Sorry? Oh, yes. Their Ford Escape has been picking up a lot of dirt on the rear bumper, because all modern cars do.

The cause? Aerodynamics. That's Greek for "wind shit." You see, when your car is driving through the air, it's forcing that air aside. Air can't occupy the same space as your car, because it's matter and all (believe it or not.) Some of that air goes to the side of your car, sure, but not most of it. Most of it gets forced up your hood and windshield, and over your car. This causes a lot of wind resistance, which is why airplanes are shaped like lawn darts and Priuses are shaped like the cough drop a Gundam would take.

Here's where things get really crazy: the air that flew over your car now needs a place to live. Unfortunately, the air you didn't drive into is there, because it had rich parents that bought it a nice air condo. So it has to slum around the road, in the vacuum left behind by the place that your car now isn't. All this results in a little spinny vortex of air behind your car, which sucks dirt and crap off the road directly onto your car's departing ass.

This is a relatively new phenomenon. Back in the day, sure, tailgates on trucks got dirty, but so did the rest of the truck. They had the aerodynamics of two bricks, because that is basically what a truck is. My late-1970s Plymouth had innovative new fuel-saving strategies like "don't put the windshield wipers right in the middle of the windshield" and "mirrors probably should be a little curvier."

To help my neighbour, and maybe even you, I've come up with a new strategy. Sure, it's gonna hurt your fuel economy, and maybe even doom the planet. But at least the front of your car will become appreciably dirty. It's called "putting a snowplow on the front of it." With this giant sail in front of your car, you'll collect every stray bit of grit, dirt, filth, and mule deer that crosses in front of you on the highway. And when you get home, you'll look back at all that gunk stuck to the front of your vehicle, and feel like you did some serious driving.

[ask-cyantist]

[Cyan considers the both of you, narrowing her eye lens. She lets out a sigh.]

"I guess that's fair. Impostors are a relatively new phenomenon, since the expeditions for MIRA only began a few Zumiran years ago. Alright. I'll try to explain my theory as best I can."

[Cyan waves for you to follow into the specimen lab. She flips up a projector from a stand, and clicks out half the lights. A few taps on her MIRApad activates some slides.]

"From the limited information I've been able to gather- small sample size, and all... Impostors as we know them can only perpetuate as an offshoot of existing crew mates. They cannot exist in a vacuum- to put it simply, Impostors are a drastic transformation that Beans undergo due to external factors. Stress alone cannot trigger it, because otherwise we would have experienced outbreaks of impostor killings long before achieving space flight. Impostors cannot breed more impostors- at least, I really hope they can't- but they can spread their condition to uninfected members of the same species.

"Beans are not the only sapient race that have Impostors, it CAN exist in other species- but I imagine due to our genetic makeup, the differences in how it manifests must be quite vast. The common factors I've been able to deduce from my own research and sparse records across MIRA's database is that Impostors crave proteins, particularly fatty tissues, to an almost manic degree, and they kill to feed and satisfy that need. In our particular region of space, I have one known, documented source of Impostor genesis."

[Cyan clicks the slide, and her expression darkens as she looks at the image.]

"...a species native to Polus, which I dubbed a 'Boreworm'. Calling them a 'parasite' isn't entirely accurate. More like a symbiote- though not by choice. I thought they were exclusively burrowing polychaetes... but I was wrong. Turns out, they spend most of their life cycle sheltering inside an unwilling host for protection. Boreworm infestation does provide some benefits, like expedited tissue regeneration, improved flexibility and heightened senses. But I wish I'd never found the $#%& worms in that dirt."

[Cyan takes a deep breath, re-centering herself.]

"I don't believe there's some secret space coalition of Impostors out there. If there was, we Beans would have been wiped out as a species. Impostors are stronger and heal faster than normal Beans- if they could organize, we wouldn't stand a chance. I've also found that a sort of territoriality is present among my ilk. We don't like other impostors, for various reasons. I suppose for normal impostors, who succumbed to the borderline feral instincts, it's a simple matter of competition. More impostors means less 'food' to go around. For me- my crew is my family. I don't want any of them to die... even if they hate me."

~~~~

@thomasdimensor @impostercrewmate

[Mod: I'M BACK IN THE SADDLE BABYYYY. Thank you both for your asks! :DD I finally got to touch on my personal headcanons for impostors!! And also I laughed at how accidentally similar your wording was hehehe~]

[I could go into more details on the Boreworms, but the post was getting long enough as-is xD So I'll save it for another ask if anybody is interested in my ghastly little parasites~ Enjoy the horrifying implications!]

[ihaveanaversiontodecisions]

very sleep deprived and slightly delirous but I want to talk about the lovely little phenomenon that is the Faroe verse and the she/her-ening. because like. here are two largely audio- based forms of media that don't have any major female characters and not in a weird sexist way like it would be for bigger shows with more resources and profit incentives but because it's just some guys ( GUY (singular)in Harlans case) trying to be silly and there's just. not any. and it's fine.

and in normal, larger fandoms, that wouldn't mean anything because people ignore or belittle female characters even when they're incorporated, poorly written or not, into the narrative. so many fandoms HATE female characters, whether it's outright, by blaming them for "getting in the way" of m/m ships, or simply not caring about them enough to talk about their character.

but here you have these tiny subgroups of these relatively small fandoms with no female characters and they're GOING OUT OF THEIR WAY to incorporate or even create entirely new fan made female characters. It's just crazy to see and it's one of the silliest things that makes me a little emotional because here are these groups of people that genuinely like female characters to the point that they're willing to create entirely fandom offshoots of their beloved shows and it just mak3s me really happy

anyways Faroe verse and she/her-ening truthers I love you and I think you're really cool and it's silly but you kinda make me wanna cry Ina. good way

[jbk405]

A random question for the Buffyverse fandom: In your first watch did you think it was common for vampires to be cursed with a soul?

I've seen a bunch of people working their way through the Buffyverse for their first time, and many off them seem to think that vampires being given a soul is (relatively) easy to accomplish and even (somewhat) common. And they're so convinced of this that they get confused and frustrated when it keeps not happening in both TV shows.

I mainly see this opinion pop up right about when they get to season four of Buffy, or season one of Angel.

Once Spike semi-joins the Scoobies after the Initiative puts the chip in his head they keep saying "Why don't they just give him a soul and have him join for real?"

On Angel, where they introduce the idea of non-malevolent demons, they say "So when are we going to see other re-ensouled vampires? We know Angel isn't the only one". Except he is, and nobody in the entire franchise up to this point has ever referred to another vampire with a soul.

It'd be one thing if they said "It would be cool if..." since I do that theorizing myself all the time and that's the joy of fandom and fanfic and headcanons. But what they're saying instead is "we know they do..." and that confuses me.

I came into the franchise sideways myself so I didn't get the "natural" exposure from the beginning (I started with Angel season three and then caught up with everything else). Was this a common expectation that people had during the original airing if they watched Buffy from the beginning?

Or is this a new phenomenon because new watchers have been exposed to 30 more years of Good Vampire media and have come to expect it?