I don't know how strictly accurate this is, but one of the things I find shocking about watching historical dramas is how many people there are around all the time---according to Madame de... (1953) a well-off French household in the Belle Epoque maintains a workforce of at least 3, and the glittering opera has staff just to open doors. According to Shogun (2024) you can expect a deep bench just to mind your household, and again, people who exist to open doors.
Could people....not open doors in the past? Were doors tricky, before the standardization of hinges? Because otherwise, the wealthy used to pay a whole bunch of people to do it for them in multiple contexts, and I find myself baffled.
6K notes
·
View notes
“When I first heard it, from a dog trainer who knew her behavioral science, it was a stunning moment. I remember where I was standing, what block of Brooklyn’s streets. It was like holding a piece of polished obsidian in the hand, feeling its weight and irreducibility. And its fathomless blackness. Punishment is reinforcing to the punisher. Of course. It fit the science, and it also fit the hidden memories stored in a deeply buried, rusty lockbox inside me. The people who walked down the street arbitrarily compressing their dogs’ tracheas, to which the poor beasts could only submit in uncomprehending misery; the parents who slapped their crying toddlers for the crime of being tired or hungry: These were not aberrantly malevolent villains. They were not doing what they did because they thought it was right, or even because it worked very well. They were simply caught in the same feedback loop in which all behavior is made. Their spasms of delivering small torments relieved their frustration and gave the impression of momentum toward a solution. Most potently, it immediately stopped the behavior. No matter that the effect probably won’t last: the reinforcer—the silence or the cessation of the annoyance—was exquisitely timed. Now. Boy does that feel good.”
— Melissa Holbrook Pierson, The Secret History of Kindness (2015)
29K notes
·
View notes
Today my therapist introduced me to a concept surrounding disability that she called "hLep".
Which is when you - in this case, you are a disabled person - ask someone for help ("I can't drink almond milk so can you get me some whole milk?", or "Please call Donna and ask her to pick up the car for me."), and they say yes, and then they do something that is not what you asked for but is what they think you should have asked for ("I know you said you wanted whole, but I got you skim milk because it's better for you!", "I didn't want to ruin Donna's day by asking her that, so I spent your money on an expensive towing service!") And then if you get annoyed at them for ignoring what you actually asked for - and often it has already happened repeatedly - they get angry because they "were just helping you! You should be grateful!!"
And my therapist pointed out that this is not "help", it's "hLep".
Sure, it looks like help; it kind of sounds like help too; and if it was adjusted just a little bit, it could be help. But it's not help. It's hLep.
At its best, it is patronizing and makes a person feel unvalued and un-listened-to. Always, it reinforces the false idea that disabled people can't be trusted with our own care. And at its worst, it results in disabled people losing our freedom and control over our lives, and also being unable to actually access what we need to survive.
So please, when a disabled person asks you for help on something, don't be a hLeper, be a helper! In other words: they know better than you what they need, and the best way you can honor the trust they've put in you is to believe that!
Also, I want to be very clear that the "getting angry at a disabled person's attempts to point out harmful behavior" part of this makes the whole thing WAY worse. Like it'd be one thing if my roommate bought me some passive-aggressive skim milk, but then they heard what I had to say, and they apologized and did better in the future - our relationship could bounce back from that. But it is very much another thing to have a crying shouting match with someone who is furious at you for saying something they did was ableist. Like, Christ, Jessica, remind me to never ask for your support ever again! You make me feel like if I asked you to call 911, you'd order a pizza because you know I'll feel better once I eat something!!
Edit: crediting my therapist by name with her permission - this term was coined by Nahime Aguirre Mtanous!
Edit again: I made an optional follow-up to this post after seeing the responses. Might help somebody. CW for me frankly talking about how dangerous hLep really is.
17K notes
·
View notes
this can't just be me but do you ever hear a YouTubers voice and immediately click off because you just can't stand how they sound and don't know why. even if the content itself is fine
8K notes
·
View notes
The excitement on both their parts for "Him" returning to this plane of existence, Phil handing Dan the knife to make the blood sacrifice, Dan then saying He will require blood straight from the source (Phil) and Phil saying he will willingly give it, this isn't even the homoeroticism of an unwilling sacrifice, it's two equally fucked up dedicated devotees who are codependent and enablers to each other, it's the way they only fit together with each other because of the rough edges, it's the way Satan always looms behind the Lovers, the way He is present in the backdrop (here and in the Devil tarot card) but the lovers linked together are in the foreground, the Devil is only the symbol of a bond, what the image is about at the end of the day is the bond itself, anyway anyone else wanna go crazy about this with me?
2K notes
·
View notes
In the middle of a Justice League meeting, Batman feels a tug on his cape. He looks down to see a little boy who could easily pass as one of his.
"Erm," the boy starts. "I frew up."
6K notes
·
View notes
“You see, that’s what abuse does to you. You know? Made me this sticking plaster for all of life’s weirdos. This open wound for them to sniff at.”
1K notes
·
View notes
Ya know what shout out to butches who wrestle with our butchness because we don’t fit the mold in some way. Butches who aren’t physically strong or naturally caretaking because of physical disability, who need to be cared for, who can’t hold open the door for a femme. Butches with long hair, butches with big hair, butches who express their culture via their hair. Butches who’s masculinity is shaped by their culture, who’s masculinity doesn’t fit the white eurocentric mold. Fat butches, butches with curves viewed as feminine, butches who don’t have skinny, boyish builds. Butches who don’t want to be sexualized, butches on the ace spectrum. Butches who don’t have traditionally masculine interests or mannerisms or whatever. Effeminate butches. Butches who take inspo from gay men. Butches who like the occasional dress or skirt. TRANSFEM BUTCHES!!!!! And any other butches who don’t fit a certain mold!! All butches are good butches and we are all valid.
1K notes
·
View notes