#you can see multiple factors in why that may be the case

[flickering-nightfall]

Playing with some ideas mostly regarding gender/reproduction in RW, and slugcat colonies.

Full transcript under the cut!

Creatures in Rain World are typically simultaneous hermaphrodites but require partners to reproduce, with either individual capable of being a genetic donor or carrier. Alongside what we are familiar with, this has lead to interesting reproductive strategies such as rotating donor/carrier roles, or dual/simultaneous genetic swaps.

Rotating donor/carrier roles - A K-selection reproductive strategy. One partner carries the first child, the other partner carries the next child, and so forth. Allows each partner to recover from the demands of childbearing.

Rain Deer aren't quite monogamous, but they tend to choose the same breeding partner whenever mating season rolls around. They serve as a donor one season, then bear and raise a child the next. Calves are raised away from the rain and worm grass, in places that have less food but more safety. Calf wool is softer, not yet gunked up by the dirty rainfall. Their legs are sturdier as children, allowing them to run for cover while the parent wards off threats.

Dual/simultaneous genetic swap - An r-selection reproductive strategy. Parents fulfill the donor and carrier role for each other. The more children you make, the more likely some are to survive!

Multiple batflies lay thousands of eggs in a single "blue fruit." Several eggs congeal and become nutrient paste for the surviving eggs (and for hungry slugcats). Like some plant seeds, batfly eggs that are consumed before pupating can survive passing through the digestive system. Ew.

Ancients also fell under this umbrella. Their genders (and the genders of iterators by extension, who have no sex anyways) could have been determined by a variety of other factors, such as societal role, donor/carrier preference, or simply different categorizations of personal expression.

It's difficult to say how well their common pronouns would translate to ours, but it seems they can translate to an extent, given what Moon and Pebbles use canonically.

Slugcats, like real slugs, can have children with a partner or self-fertilize. Unlike real slugs, they are often known to adopt.

In the case of self-fertilization: children who are born from one parent may display a large amount of genetic diversity despite the circumstances. Maybe slugcats have some sort of... genetic reservoir independent of their own genetic code?

Slugcats live 20-30 years on average... if they manage to reach adulthood. Their mortality rate is sadly rather high, especially in pups. If they were to develop as a civilization, it's likely their lifespan would increase dramatically.

Slugcats in a colony are more likely to have more children, and to successfully rear those children to adulthood, than those who wander alone or in small groups. The safety and stability of a colony cannot be understated.

Colonies either have a set, cycling migration path, or wander continuously. Survivor and Monk's tree home was a nesting site that their colony frequents about once a year. So it's likely that they'll see their family again!

...also, the strength of large colonies are why scavengers are likely to become the dominant species. In the time of Saint's era, continuous migration has become more of a risk, and it has become more difficult to support large populations. Slugcat populations have shrunk back to the more forgiving equatorial zones.

Saint's tongue is pretty unusual and probably unique to them, or to a small population that they hail from. Fur (of varying thickness) is much more common.

Meanwhile, scavengers are bulkier and covered in thicker insulating fur. They:

have seemingly massive populations

have a burgeoning society (the existence of merchants, tolls, bartering, elites and leaders)

are adept at communicating (non-verbally)

manipulate their environment

can build structures (scavenger-made structures were a scrapped idea from Saint's campaign)

can create complex weapons and tools

may have agriculture behind the scenes (unsure if scout parties prioritize exploration or hunting)

I would wager on scavengers developing more quickly than slugcats, but it would be nice if there was a future where both could co-exist.

[tubchunk]

q!tubbo, fred, and how far are you willing to go?

So I have THOUGHTS about the lore today :D

FIRSTLY:

When watching the stream, I was so convinced that the letter Fred left asking q!Tubbo on a date was fake, a trap by the federation. But now, realising that it was actually genuine, it was a real desire they expressed, and q!Tubbo never lost faith once that he meant that invitation, breaks my heart. I don't know when Fred realised that their feelings may be something other than just friendly (if they even are completrly), but I bet the movie date and q!Tubbo's endless kindness and patience towards her is what made them want to push a bit further. I wouldn't be surprised if Fred forgets about the Federation, what they have done, and what their position means, when they're talking to, thinking about, or simply with q!Tubbo. Because he never treats him as "Federation Worker WA02". They're Fred. They're someone who exchanges letters with a curious, kindhearted, chaotic engineer, using flowers to communicate things too large to put into words on a page. That's who they are when picking up the letter where q!Tubbo says yes to a date, telling him to pick him up whenever.

But then, like with q!Pierre, q!Quackity comes and kidnaps him, and that stark reality returns. Because to the other islanders, he is a Federation employee, working for an organization that has hurt, tortured and manipulated the people of the island to the point of memory loss and trauma. In q!Pierre's case, Fred was DIRECTLY involved in what happened to him, and to q!Quackity, he is the symbol of what took everything from him. They don't care about what Fred may be like away from the office, he is an employee of the vessel of their worst nightmares. This isn't usually a problem for them, he defaults to the persona she must adopt as a high-ranking employee, with no fear and curt responses that don't reveal much.

Until they bring q!Tubbo into their threats.

And that shakes them up, something in them twists. Not him, he has nothing to do with any of this. Fred says that every time, cuz to them, q!Tubbo is the part of their life that is untainted by the things he has done as a Federation employee. He's the boy who taught him what a friend was, who always wished he was healthy in every letter he wrote, who promised to protect him with what little he had cuz he cared. They have never seen q!Tubbo as anything other than kind, patient, and understanding. He needs them to stay separate, both for q!Tubbo's safety, but also his own. Because they think the moment q!Tubbo finds out what he has done, he thinks he'll leave. Why would someone as kind as him stay by his side after finding out they're a monster?

But q!Tubbo isn't exactly what Fred thinks he is, either.

The same boy who excitedly showed him Wall-E in the cinema, who picked flowers to give him every time they wrote, is also the one who laughed down the barrel of Cucurucho's gun pointed at him, before making his escape. He's snuck into the Fed office multiple times and broken into all its parts, he's broken several rules and continues to do so without a care. HE WENT TO THE NETHER !!! HE LAVACASTED A FED BUILDING!! MAJORITY OF THE ISLAND CURRENTLY WANTS HIM THROWN BEHIND BARS AND HE DOESN'T CARE !!!

Quackity (the cc) had said during the Brazil meetup streams that following events would push the people of the server to see how far they would be willing to go. And I can so clearly see how this would factor in for fred and qtubbo's arc.

Fred has been convinced by q!Quackity that q!Tubbo now hates him. But he doesn't know that, despite q!Quackity trying everything, q!Tubbo refused to be angry at Fred. His faith in them is unwavering TO A FAULT. And he has said before, he does not CARE whether Fred has hurt people or harmed them, because that's his friend (cough cough partner). He knows Fred better than anyone else, and would not think to abandon him through anything. And if he's done bad things? q!Tubbo would not care, he'd probably be willing to walk down into hell with Fred's hand in his if it came to it. Who's to say, to get Fred back, q!Tubbo wouldn't snitch to the Federation? Anything to get the one he cares about back. He promised to protect them. That's how far he's willing to go. Even if it means everyone on the island hates him even more. If it's Fred, he's willing to do it.

q!Tubbo would be willing to burn all his bridges if it meant keeping him and Fred warm.

i was kinda disappointed with the lore today cuz i had hoped it would be more qtubbo centric, but i guess shit must havebeen shifted around cuz tubbo is travelling and it wasnt the best convenience for him but PRAYINGGGGG they do something with this and qtubbo gets his true neutral/villain arc for fred toxic yuri coded frubbo are so real to me

[many-but-one]

i believe survivors of RAMCOA when they talk about the abuse they suffered, but the one thing i cannot wrap my head around is how abusers purposefully program alters? and this makes the moral ocd worms in my brain go NUTS.

i think i dont understand bc not every child who goes through severe torture/abuse will develop DID/OSDD and it feels way more probable that abusers arent attempting to make alters so much as theyre conditioning certain responses (and if a childs brain happens to split these experiences into alters then thats a byproduct that benefits the abuser).

all of this makes me feel like a bad ally to RAMCOA survivors, and while its not your job to educate me would you mind explaining how the programming alters aspect works?

[Trigger warning: talking about how programming works and why not all children who experience RAMCOA develop DID or may not end up becoming fully programmed. Brief mentions of child death. Mentions of child torture. Nothing in detail, obviously. Also talking a lot about how the deprogramming process works. If you are a programmed system yourself and you worry this could be triggering, have grounding items nearby just in case.]

Note: when I say “successfully” or “properly” programmed system, I’m talking about in the eyes of the abusers. Also, this is talking about TBMC (torture based mind control) programmers. I have to put that disclaimer because you wouldn’t believe how many confused computer programmers I’ve gotten in comment sections on other socials.

So, the reason not every child who goes through RAMCOA develops DID is because developing DID requires some pre-requisites. Things like genetic predisposition to dissociate actually do make a big difference. Also, how early the abuse started. If someone goes through RAMCOA trauma, but not until they’re older and their personality has already begun integrating (which can happen younger in some children, even as young as around age 5-7, though some researchers have said personality integration can happen as late as the teen years) it will be significantly harder to develop DID and therefore properly program the child. In addition, how much access programmers have to the child, how long they had access to the child, and how much support the child has outside of the abuse are also contributing factors.

If programmers see this kid one week out of the month, the parents don’t know about it and therefore the kid has a relatively okay home life with love and support, and they only have access to the kid for a couple years, that’s not going to be good grounds for programmers being able to properly do what they want to do. Some may still try if they don’t have access to anyone else, but this rarely creates a “successful” programmed system. Conversely, if they see the kid every day or multiple days a week, a parent is in on it/they have a bad home life where abuse (of possibly a lesser magnitude but not always) occurs, the parents are neglectful or very busy and likely to not notice things, and they have access to this kid for several years, that makes for a better chance that this kid will be properly programmed.

Because of all of these factors, programmers will often pick children who they know have parents with PTSD or CPTSD (or a dissociative disorder, if the parent has disclosed that to them), who they can access early in their life or have prior history of abuse (so are more likely to already have begun developing a dissociative disorder), and whom they have access to frequently. Sometimes, the child’s parent will be programmed by the group themselves and be born quite literally just to be programmed by the group. Some groups take great care in keeping family groups within the group because that creates stronger loyalty bonds and gives them easy access to children to program. It’s not uncommon for a group goal to be for their grown programmed systems to have kids to eventually give to the group, which is why apprehending a programmed system and having them work on deprogramming before this can happen is essential.

A lot of kids that programmers desire to program actually end up “failing out” because they aren’t able to take to the programming. Depending on the group, this could mean they will end the kid’s life or they will just stop the programming-related abuse altogether. And contrary to what most people know, even successfully programmed children have loads of failed programs, or parts that didn’t take well to programming. Most of the time these parts who have failed programming will be put in “discard areas” in the system’s inner world, and they will be either forced into dormancy or they will be stuck there until amnesia barriers eventually break down as the grown person starts to work on deprogramming (if they ever do.) A successfully programmed system’s most active parts are parts who did not fail their programming, and these are often the most well-rounded parts retrofitted with a personality that would have likely been created by the abusers.

To add: there is often layers upon layers of amnesia even in these single well-rounded parts (that often end up having an alters-in-alters subsystem, and said part might not even be aware they have one) and the “top part” or most front-facing part of that subsystem may not even be aware they are programmed. At least, until a cue happens and their program starts running and they start doing things they wouldn’t normally be doing. A lot of programmed parts don’t even know their own cues or even what traumas they have that would have created their programming. They might know they have trauma, but the memories of the programming might be missing, or the context surrounding the programming traumas might be missing. Usually these cues and context behind the traumas are hidden in EPs or fragments that are buried pretty deep within their subsystems. Accessing these EPs in therapy is integral to the deprogramming process, as learning what manipulations were done to make a programmed part believe what they do is essential in undoing it. All deprogramming really is, is showing programmed parts that what their abusers made them believe was true is a lie and that they are not at risk to be harmed anymore if they no longer have contact with the group. (Cutting off a system’s communication with the group is first and foremost what they should do when deprogramming)

As for your assumption, that abusers are trying to condition children and these experiences happen to split an alter to hold the conditioned response, you are partially right. In some cases, especially in cases where it’s a single parent or a family unit doing this to their own kids, it’s often more likely that the parent is not fully aware that they are creating a DID system. This is where the difference between programming and conditioning is important to note. We made a video about this here: link to TikTok video.

However, in larger groups, programmers do know they are creating a system. DID is not some unknown secret to much of the world, and research about it is easy to find. Even inexperienced groups can find research on DID and how alters form very easily and use that to try and create a system in a child. Whether or not they will be successful with that info alone is hard to say. I was abused by two different groups, one of them inexperienced and one of them very experienced. The initial attempts at programming were often unsuccessful, and we assume they got in contact with the experienced group to learn more and they essentially showed our main handler/programmer how it was done. (We have memories of him being taught and observing/taking part as necessary to the teachings, so this is not speculation, we know this was the case.) Once we were in the hands of the experienced group, we became very well programmed and our system’s organization changed massively. On top of that, the inexperienced group was now experienced, so we actually have alters who are programmed by two separate groups, each loyal to their own group. Some of our parts were loyal to both because they were programmed by both. (“Were” loyal because we’ve deprogrammed significantly and they no longer feel loyal to the groups anymore.)

Like I said in my initial post, programming alters is actually not that complicated on the surface, though in practice it is difficult, and to create a well programmed system takes a lot of skill and intelligence. Skilled programmers are unfortunately often incredibly smart individuals. Anyone who’s been willing to speak with me about their programmers often cite them as being people with high level college degrees. Doctors, engineers, mathematicians, scientists, psychologists. If not a college degree, they often work in areas like police work, political work, religious ministry, or other city/county/state positions. If none of these, they (horrifyingly) tend to work in areas where children are often present. Pediatric doctors/nurses, summer camp counselors, Sunday school teachers, daycare attendants, nannying jobs, teaching, etc. While not all programmers will fit this bill, a lot of them do. In the world outside of their programming job, they are often well-liked by their community. This is not to say everyone in these positions is a programmer, also. Want to make that REALLY clear. Not every person with this job has a secret side job of torturing kids, these just happen to be common areas they tend to gravitate toward. They are often thrill-seeking sadists and egocentric. Having a position in their community in which they are consistently recognized for their accomplishments or adored is often important to them. Sometimes, programmers are also programmed themselves, especially in large groups with generational aspects involved.

Now that that’s out of the way, I’m not going to explain in explicit detail how programming works because that doesn’t make me comfortable to share, but a very dumbed down version of it is pretty simple:

1) torture child to create alter splits

2) get one of these splits to front via triggers related to the torture that caused them to split

3) indoctrinate them with a behavior or action that, if they do not do that action, means they will be punished further. While they are doing said action/being indoctrinated with certain beliefs, have a specific trigger or cue present so that when they see that trigger/cue in the future, they will immediately do the action/enforce the beliefs they have been taught.

4) repeat steps 1-3, basically.

This is why I explained that programming is kind of like conditioning on steroids. Except the child is severely manipulated, tortured, and has extreme threats of harm to self or others to reinforce it, and this is done repeatedly, to the point where it causes the alter extreme duress if they do not do their assigned task because if they didn’t do their task in the past (in childhood) they would be tortured or would have to witness other children be tortured. They will fully believe if they do not do the thing, they or others WILL be hurt, and they believe the programmers WILL know if they don’t, so they often just do it automatically in efforts to avoid the punishment they believe is coming. It is extremely hard for them to override the emotional flashbacks, somatic flashbacks, etc, if they try to resist doing the task. Adding onto that, programmers will often create alters who will punish parts in the inner world the same way the abusers would if they do not do their task, so that is another layer of fear on top of that. These programmed parts often cannot distinguish the difference between outer world torture and inner world torture, as they rarely get contact with the outside world except to do their tasks. So if they don’t do their task, they will be punished by alters in the inner world space and they may fully believe they are being punished in real life. Creating safe spaces for alters to go in the inner world if they don’t do their assigned task is an important part of deprogramming. Because once an alter realizes they will not be punished both externally and internally by not doing a certain action, they will be much less inclined to do said action.

If all of that sounds extremely messed up and fucks with your moral OCD, you’re right to feel that way. It is messed up. These people are vile, fucked up, and cruel. They often do not see the children as human beings and care not of how much this damages the child physically, psychologically, and emotionally. These children are dehumanized beyond belief. Many programmed parts of a system do not see themselves as human unless they were specifically meant to be human. Commonly created alters are things with no free will or no ability to think for themselves, such as angels, robots, and inanimate objects. If a child truly believes they cannot think for themselves, it will be harder to deprogram them. Which is why deprogramming often involves teaching the grown system that they are allowed to make choices outside of their group’s desires and control. It is not easy.

For those that read this and are feeling dissociated and/or anxious, remember your grounding techniques. Get some mints, cinnamon candies, or sour candies and munch. Smell a strong scented candle. Hold some ice or hand warmers in your hands. Look around the room and pick out items that you recognize to be from the present. Pet a cat/dog/[insert animal here] or hug a stuffed animal. Remember, it is currently 2024 and you are safe. Your abusers will not know you read this unless you tell them yourself. You are brave, capable, and safe. I believe in you and your healing journey.

Take care, everyone.

[dreamings-free]

It's not just the Black Keys. Why are so many big tours selling poorly? Stereogum | June 11, 2024 | by Zach Schonfeld

long (and US focused) but still quite interesting article on the current state of concert touring, why tours are getting cancelled or downsized, and what's up with ticket pricing. (my selected excerpts/highlights under the cut)

[excerpt, all highlights mine]

[Eric Renner Brown, a senior editor at Billboard] adds, “I do think [The Black Keys] are an artist that can fill those rooms still. I think the demand is there in terms of people who want to see Black Keys. But perhaps at that price point, the demand was not there.”

Ostensibly, agents and promoters should have access to data that can give them a better sense of demand. But they often place outsized importance on raw streaming numbers.

“The data is very confusing,” says the anonymous booking agent. “There’s a lot of passive listeners for data. You can have millions upon millions of streams, but that doesn’t mean it’s gonna turn into tickets. The opposite is, there are some artists who don’t have many streams at all and they can sell like 2,000, 3,000 tickets.”

[..]

It’s worth noting that the Black Keys have released four albums since returning from hiatus in 2019, and toured arenas as recently as 2022. This may be a case of oversaturating the market.

The band’s 2019 and 2022 arena runs weren’t exactly sold out. In between, the band left their longtime manager in 2021, signing with Irving Azoff and Steve Moir at Full Stop Management. Some sources speculate that Azoff, a former CEO of Ticketmaster, may have encouraged ambitious touring plans. On Thursday, Billboard reported that the group has now parted ways with Azoff and Moir. (The management company did not respond to a request for comment.)

“Essentially, you have some very big managers that are out of touch with the granular finesse and nuance of ticketing,” says another anonymous booking agent. “And they have these large expectations and they tell their agents what they want. And the agents are probably texting each other on the side, going, ‘This man is out of his fucking mind.’ But they do it anyway because, in the case of Black Keys, they’re not gonna challenge Irving Azoff.”

[..]

One contributing factor to instability in the touring industry is the rising cost of… well, everything. It’s part of why ticket prices are so high; it’s also part of the reason some acts are backing out of touring commitments.

Bands at all levels have been sounding the alarm about this for years. In 2022, for instance, Animal Collective canceled European tour dates and explained, “We simply could not make a budget for this tour that did not lose money even if everything went as well as it could.”

Industry insiders say that’s not uncommon. “Everything is ridiculously expensive,” says a tour manager who works with major acts and asked not to be named. “There’s not enough gear for everyone to share, so the vendors are having to pay high amounts for equipment. A single bus for a six-week tour can cost $100,000. Multiple that by multiple buses, and then trucks, and then crews are at a minimum, so they’re getting top rate right now because there’s not enough crews.”

COVID, of course, exacerbated this crunch. “What happened after the pandemic is, everyone was ready to tour at once,” the tour manager says. “There’s not enough gear to cover all of that. A lot of bands have had to cancel tours because they don’t have gear or they couldn’t afford the gear,” the tour manager continued. “I was on a tour with somebody last year where we had to book a private jet because there were no buses available. For the first week of the tour, we had to charter planes.”

Acts are thus incentivized to book bigger venues to recoup the costs of touring. The catch-22 is that bigger venues necessitate more elaborate stage production, which makes for a more expensive tour.

“There’s the expectation to have that production,” says the tour manager. “If people went back to having just two trusses of lights and a P.A. and no frills, it was just about the music, they can afford to tour. But everyone wants to see those flashing lights. Everyone wants to see that video.”

“So much of the economics of these big tours is completely invisible to fans and consumers,” says Kevin Erickson, director of Future of Music Coalition, a nonprofit advocacy group. “You can sell out a tour and come back in the red if there was a cost overrun or a miscalculation.”

For mid-level acts with sizable followings, these frustrations are compounded by a lack of suitable mid-sized venues.

“For a band that maybe has assessed its demand in the market to be in the 8K range or something for capacity, where are they going to go if that sort of venue doesn’t exist?” says Brown. “And if, say, the local theater that seats 3K or 4K can’t accommodate two or three nights, it can only put them for one night on the tour routing. That’s a real concern.”

[..]

At the end of the day, it all comes back to price. The average ticket price for one of the top 100 tours rose from $91.86 to $122.84 between 2019 and 2023. Concerts are too damn expensive, and there’s a growing sense of consumer frustration with shows that cost as much as airline tickets.

-> read the full article here on Stereogum.com

[covid-safer-hotties]

Feeling Sick More Often? It Could Be “Long COVID” - Published Sept 3, 2024

While many of us would simply like to move on from all things “COVID,” unfortunately, not all can. In fact, a growing number of people – even millions – are still battling lingering symptoms. Often known as “long COVID” or Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection (PASC), these symptoms range wide and far.

But how do you know?

How do you know if your health condition is a cold, flu, or lasting effects from COVID-19 infection? If you’re not sure how to get to the bottom of it, here’s how…

Brain Fog You’ve probably heard of brain fog, but what does it really mean?

Basically, brain fog is all about mental difficulty. This can show up in a variety of ways, everything from confusion to concentration problems, memory lapses, and a general feeling of ‘dullness.’

But again, these symptoms can often be mistaken for other things. If you’re not sure if it’s from COVID, consider the timing. Long COVID typically happens just weeks after you’re infected. Not only that, but it can easily last for many months or longer.

If you notice other symptoms like dizziness, general fatigue, and headaches – speak to your doctor about long COVID.

RELATED: Tired Of Brain Fog? Here’s How To Clear Your Mind

Gastrointestinal Symptoms Nobody likes feeling bloated or sick to the stomach, but how do you know which is which? While it’s easy to think issues like diarrhea and nausea are related to other conditions – even food poisoning – you’re in luck.

The symptoms of gastrointestinal distress due to Long COVID are unique. Firstly, they usually persist for months, which is unlike food poisoning that only lasts days. Beyond that, you may also experience symptoms like body aches and even breathing difficulties. Finally, try to chart any recent COVID-19 infections so you know if there’s a temporal relationship.

Sleep Problems You may not think of long COVID causing sleep disturbances, but it’s actually fairly common. People with the condition will often struggle with insomnia, restless sleep, and even excessive sleep problems. Related problems include feelings of anxiety, depression, and other primary sleep disorders.

Again, look to see if your issues started close to an infection. If stress, lifestyle factors, or other disorders aren’t related, it could be due to COVID-19. And finally, look out for chronic fatigue syndrome. This issue is not usually fixed by adequate rest, which is different from most sleep conditions.

Heart Palpitations Ever feel like your heart is racing or doing funny things?

Do these odd sensations come with anxiety, severe dehydration, or other vascular issues? If you’ve been dealing with cardiovascular problems following a COVID infection, you’re not alone. In fact, these palpitations occur soon after infection, if they do occur.

Other symptoms to be on the lookout for are chest discomfort, shortness of breath, and feelings of dizziness. If you notice that your heart palpitations last for weeks and occur without any real exercise, it could certainly be related to COVID.

Sensory Sensitivities Sensory sensitivity is nothing new. It can come from lights, sounds, and even touching things. In some cases, everything around you may simply feel like too much. That’s why it is easy to confuse these sensations. Some migraine sufferers or individuals with fibromyalgia may report similar feelings.

But here’s how you know if it’s Long COVID or not…

Do you still show other symptoms of the virus, like respiratory issues, or fatigue or aches? When it comes to Long COVID, the effects usually hit multiple sensory systems, which is usually not the case with fibromyalgia.

If usual pain and migraine medications don’t work, consider talking to your doctor about Long COVID. The condition will usually disrupt daily living quite significantly, so if you’re struggling with multi-sensory issues, don’t ignore it.

When all is said and done, Long COVID can be a challenging diagnosis. Fortunately, many treatment protocols can help. In fact, many of the treatment protocols also help individuals who had adverse reactions to the COVID vaccines.

So if you’re not feeling like yourself, aren’t responding to normal medications, and can’t figure out long-lasting health problems, don’t stress yourself sicker. Listen to your body, listen to your healthcare professionals, and stay consistent.

With some tweaks and changes, you’ll be able to fight off that lingering sickness sooner than later!

[kuiperoid]

Dark Grey Matter: Neurodivergence and the Goth Experience

[originally posted here]

Alternative subcultures have existed for nearly as long as human society. Modern examples include the flappers of the 1920s, the beatniks of the 1950s, and the hippies of the 1960s. These alternative subcultures have been defined by music, literature, fashion, and film. For those outside of these subcultures, it may be unclear what would make one wish to exist in a group that is not part of the norm. While there are many factors for each individual, it is clear that neurodivergence plays at least part of a role for many people. For the case study, I will be using the goth scene, being a member myself and because it is both newer and longer lasting than some of the others, being what to subcultures as water is to liquids, if you may. There have already been analyses of specific post-punk musicians and their neurodivergent diagnoses - Gary Numan and David Byrne being autistic, Danny Elfman with his ADHD/OCD combo, and Blixa Bargeld being synesthesic, not to mention speculation about countless others. This is not one of those. The musicians are important, but this is more about the members of the subculture as a whole, whether they produce music or not. This is also not to say that every goth or person in any given alternative subculture is neurodivergent or that every neurodivergent person is involved in an alternative subculture, just an observation on the overlap between the two. 

To start us off, let us focus on what is typically seen as central to the goth subculture: the music. There are currently a myriad of subgenres of goth music: darkwave, deathrock, gothic rock, and ethereal wave, among others. It is sometimes difficult to define goth music as a whole, especially with bands that bleed into non-goth specific post-punk genres, such as shoegaze or industrial and with different terminology being more popular in different regions and eras. A rough definition for all of these subgenres would be a variety of alternative rock music with origins in punk (though some have influence that includes glam rock, synthpop, and even Caribbean-British dub reggae) that typically values minor chords, a heavy bassline that dictates the melody, slower rhythms, mezzo vocals, and artful, often dark lyrics. Why would this genre appeal to neurodivergent people specifically? The initial appeal is the sound. A common comorbidity with autism, ADHD, and other variations of neurodivergence is Auditory Processing Disorder or other differences in sound processing. Those thusly impacted may respond to verbal cues more slowly, be irritated by certain sounds more easily than others, and mishear words more frequently. There are numerous hypotheses to address differences in musical taste and likely multiple contributing factors and differences in audio processing may be one of those factors. While not every instance of APD is exactly the same, it is easy to see how a music genre that focuses on deeper pitches, more pronounced vocal styles, and slower rhythms would aurally appeal to individuals who experience auditory processing differences. 

Aside from the way that the music sounds, there is also great appeal in the lyrical content. Certainly, goth bands touch on a variety of topics, from the historical monologues on the World Wars by Joy Division and the Pagan rites of Inkubus Sukkubus to the scathing diatribes of 1980s conservative politics by Sisters of Mercy and the sexual escapades explored by London After Midnight, just to name a few. Across the diverse set of subjects that these bands cover, there is a consistent return to one recurring theme: being an outsider observing an imperfect world. The experience of feeling like an outsider is certainly one that many neurodivergent individuals can relate to. Many neurodivergent individuals are made to feel like outsiders from a young age, often bullied by their peers for their communication styles and told by family members to behave differently, traits they have difficulty controlling. With differences in communication and internalizing the world, it is difficult to make sense of supposed social rules and forge connections. When one has similar requirements to exist happily as others but difficulty obtaining them due to reasons outside of one’s control, it is easy to recognize the world as a flawed place full of inequality and rewards for shallow traits. There is hope for those whose auditory processing differences do not manifest in alternative music, at least not exclusively. Fortunately for youth of today who still feel like outsiders, be it due to neurodivergence or anything else, but still have more mainstream aural preferences, modern pop artists are less afraid of embracing oddity and touching on feelings of isolation. Some may even serve as bridges for those with a taste for multiple genres as some pop artists have expressed an appreciation for goth artists. One now-former member of One Direction previously cited Joy Division’s Unknown Pleasures as a primary music inspiration, Dua Lipa did a photoshoot that made an homage to Siouxsie Sioux, and Billie Eilish has been seen performing in an Alien Sex Fiend shirt.

Of tertiary importance to the scene compared to music but more obvious to those not involved in the scene is fashion and makeup. The way that neurodivergent people often do not internalize social norms, current trends are often similarly not internalized, so dressing according to any sort of trend is not even considered. That being said, clothes are not necessarily chosen at random either. Something of utmost importance to many neurodivergent individuals when choosing clothes, as with many of their neurotypical counterparts, is comfort. This sometimes manifests in more obvious physical ways, such as removing tags or avoiding certain fabrics. It is easy to see how a scene that values DIY aesthetics would appeal to those with sensory differences; no one can fault one for cutting off a tag when the entire outfit is cut up and put back together with safety pins. However, there are also ways to achieve psychological comfort. Case in point, Blixa Bargeld, founding member of German industrial band Einstürzende Neubauten and arguably founder of the industrial music genre as well as former guitarist of Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds, has attributed his preference for wearing all black to to his synesthesia and finding other colors to be too overwhelming. Many black-wearers have made similar statements, with or without a diagnosis of synesthesia or something similar. Neurodivergent people also often find comfort in wearing clothing related to one’s special interest, so band shirts are a common staple, along with outfits that homage musicians, movie characters, or others they admire. There is also the issue of expression. Neurotypical people often have difficulty reading the emotions of their neurodivergent peers due to differences in emotional expression. Clothing and makeup, in addition to highlighting one’s general interests, can also help in making emotional expression more obvious to others. Of later importance, many neurodivergent individuals find that dressing in a way that labels them as a person with certain interests, this can help them attract others of similar interests. Given that many neurodivergent people have difficulty making friends and initiating social interactions, having an easy way to call to others that they are like them is socially beneficial. 

In conclusion, it is clear why there is a connection between these two. Alternative subcultures are a welcoming environment for many who feel like outsiders are neurodivergent individuals are often made into outsiders by default. In addition, the sounds and sights of goth specifically appeal to many of those with specific sensory differences. With such a long, rich history that continues to this day, this subculture is fit to be quite a rewarding special interest. 

[scarletwritesshit]

🕯️ Mortefi x F!Rover 🕯️The Rover and Her Red Cat Researcher

Mortefi scratched his head in utter confusion. He had absolutely no leads to go off of as a starting point, and even worse was that he had never seen a case quite like this before. Granted, he was more specialized in other fields of research, but denying the opportunity to learn more about the peculiar would be a fool’s choice. She returned seeking answers. He wanted answers himself. Unfortunately for the both of them, basic testing came back completely normal, and Mortefi did not know why.

What he did know, is that he didn’t know anything about the girl who went by the name of Rover. She had the clothes of a foreigner, most certainly a region that he was most unfamiliar with. Without as much of a formal name that could at least provide some clues to her heritage, Mortefi was at a complete loss for tracing back her origins. It was perplexing, to say the least. The thought of contacting senior researchers at Huaxu Academy had crossed his mind more than once, but what would they be able to do, if every result was as average as it could possibly be?

Rover came to him seeking some form of answer, and he was determined to give her something of value. A response along the lines of “I haven’t the slightest idea” simply was not acceptable. Unfortunately, he was stumped. He understood none of this. Mortefi was even sure to run multiple tests, and carry out the exact same procedures on another researcher he knew was average as a control. He could find absolutely nothing.

“Any luck yet?” Rover asked, peeking around his shoulder.

“Regrettably, no,” Mortefi admitted. “All of the tests that I have conducted have yieled completely normal results. You’re clearly a deviation from the norm, yet I fail to determine what factors exactly make you stand out in such a way.”

“But what about my memory loss?”

“No leads in regards to that either. Not even the medical specialists could find anything wrong with your head neurological system.”

Rover sighed, a bit disappointed with his response.

“If it were not for your unusual appearance, as well as the inclusion of that most curious sundial, I would have been led to believe that you were faking all of this for attention.”

“If I had the answers, then I would have no reason to pester you.”

“That may be so, but despite multiple attempts with a control variable taken into account, neither me nor my colleagues can find anything explicitly wrong with you. It’s slightly infuriating, to put it lightly,” Mortefi said, with a slight growl to his voice.

Rover noticed that Mortefi’s once curious expression quickly began to fade away. He exhaled a bit of smoke, clenching his fits as if his frustration was becoming unbearable. With another sigh tinged with smoke, Mortefi pulled out a lighter from his pocket and flicked the cap open. Rover’s heart jumped, and she backed away from him worried that Mortefi was one bad decision away from burning down the entire laboratory, the two of them included.

He clicked the lighter a couple of times, the flame igniting and dissipating, almost as if he was sizing up the equipment around him for the maximum carnage possible with such a small lighter. However, after a good couple of clicks, Mortefi let out a deep breath, this time no fiery smoke to be seen.

“I…apologize for that bout of unprofessionalism,” Mortefi said, sticking the lighter back into his pocket.

“Were you debating burning this entire place down just now?” Rover said, still tense and prepared to bolt.

“I merely find the click of my lighter to be soothing. I cannot let my nerves to get the best of me.”

“I can assume very much so. I could see you exhaling literal smoke.”

Mortefi cleared his throat, and picket up his tablet once more.

“With that being an issue best left in the past, I suppose that this mystery is not going to solve themselves. Shall we proceed?”

Although she was still somewhat shaken up from Mortefi’s actions just moments prior, Rover nodded her head and allowed for Mortefi to resume thoroughly examining her. He grabbed her hand and noticed her Tacet Mark, bringing it closer to his eyes in an attempt to find anything that stood out as unusual. As he squinted his eyes at her hand, Rover awaited the moment where he would be struck with inspiration and shove her under some laboratory equipment for vigorous testing. However, he simply held her had rather tight and continued observing it intently.

“Something super fascinating about my hand?” she asked.

“Ah…no. Just simply conducting a thorough examination.”

He leaned away a little, allowing a Rover a little bit more personal space. Now that he had lifted his head up a bit more, she caught a clear glimpse of his eyes for the first time. His pupils were slit, somewhat like those of the reptiles she had cut down on the way. They, however, felt more curious and alive than just plain bloodthirsty. In fact, they were almost cat-like, giving him the look of a man occupied with a lot of thoughts rather than just a beast whose only thought was what its next victim for a meal was.

Noble, majestic, respectable. It was like she was face to face with a dragon in human form, which made her heart skip a beat every time the light of the laboratory reflected the amber shine in his eyes.

Despite these thoughts of a well-respected dragon standing before her, Rover felt as if Mortefi kept the demeanor of a cat hidden beneath an aura of authority and intelligence. The way he lit up with curiosity while working on his research, his normally calm mannerisms, and the eyes that widened like a curious cat every time even the slightest detail caught his attention all further supported her strange feeling of fondness for Mortefi. Hell, it was becoming mighty tempting to reach out and pet his hair as if he really were a friendly cat.

Just one little pat wouldn’t hurt, she hoped. At the very worst, he would push her hand away, but this nagging urge of hers had to be satisfied. Just one little pet. She could just play it off as a side effect of the brain damage Mortefi insists she doesn’t have.

With her free hand, she reached up and gently pet him. His eyes widened and was a bit surprised by her sudden move, but showed no clear signs of taking any insult. In fact, she could argue that for a moment, she saw him enjoying the attention.

“You really are curious about me, aren’t you?” she said.

“I believe you to be the more curious one, in terms of both attributes and apparently behavior,” Mortefi said, releasing her hand to ruffle his hair back into place.

Some of Mortefi’s lingering tension appeared to have eased thanks to Rover’s playful gesture. Maybe her wild guess wasn’t too far off in actuality. She wouldn’t hesitate to continue if it meant putting Mortefi at ease, but even she had enough common sense remaining to think that petting someone performing tests on you was a bit unusual. Her mind was already upside down, and Mortefi was clearly withholding a great deal of stress, so both of them would have an excuse, should he desire more.

“You look like you’ve lightened up a bit,” Rover commented.

“I believe that I am the one who is supposed to be assisting at the current moment in time. Worry not about me, it’s nothing I haven’t experienced before.”

“Are you sure that you don’t want just a little more? You can think of it as a way of me repaying you for putting all of this effort into attempting to help me.”

Mortefi looked around the lab, as if he was anxious that someone had opened doors that have clearly remained shut throughout the duration of their conversation.

“A subject eager to assist is certainly an usual case. Usually, individuals that do come into the lab constantly ask when the tests are concluded as they get pried and poked,” Mortefi said, puzzled, yet intrigued.

“As we have clearly concluded, I’m not a normal test subject.”

“You are normal, in a sense. In a contradictory manner, that is rather abnormal. Abnormalities in some way are to be expected to be turn up in at least one test. You however, have shown- “

“Normal this, abnormal that, just say that this has been confusing you and you wouldn’t mind another pat to destress,” Rover said, reaching out her hand up once more.

“I suppose this could be a prime opportunity for us to both discover something about ourselves,” Mortefi said with a sigh.

He put his tablet down onto the table and glanced at Rover’s hand, nodding to signal that it was okay for her to proceed. With a smile, she once more began to pet him, only just realizing how soft his hair actually was. It was a bit of an unexpected feeling for a man whose chest was partially covered in what appeared to be scales.

“Do you like it?” she asked.

“In the most unusual way possible, I find it to be quite the soothing experience.”

As she continued gently petting Moretfi, she noticed that his eyes were relaxed and he was blinking rather slowly. Rover’s impulsiveness somehow managed to pay off for both of them, though now it was possible that she could be petting him all day if he was this fond of the attention. He was showing no signs of resistance or wanting to stop either, despite the tests waiting to be ran (or, re-ran) on Rover.

“If it helps you keep your cool, I would gladly keep going all day,” Rover said, mainly as an excuse to continue feeling his surprisingly soft hair.

“Are all outsiders like you this considerate for the well-being of others?” Mortefi asked, almost as if he were slowly becoming drunk off of the affection from Rover.

“Maybe. I don’t know how someone like me is normally supposed to think.”

“Right, my apologies,” Mortefi said, lifting his head up. “As nice as that truthfully feels for the soul, we must continue attempting to discern the extent of your…condition.”

“Mortefi, has anyone ever been nice to you in such a way?” Rover asked, completely disregarding his statement.

“I never considered such things as my studies have always taken top priority. An honest answer would be no, up until now, but I find it most strange that a stranger would be the first to think of me in such a regard,” Mortefi said, attempting to piece together his thoughts. “…Let’s resume the operation before I once more allow myself to get carried away.”

[howtofightwrite]

Why do some armies, militias, or rebel groups commit war crimes at much higher rates than others? If you're trying to go beyond designating good guys and bad guys by authorial fiat, what are some of the fail-safes you'd want a fictional armed faction to have to minimize their My Lais as much as possible?

So, an important warning on this, I'm mostly writing this off-the-cuff, and I'm not doing a lit review at all. So, if you're looking at this as a scholarly work, please consider this a rough draft at best. Also, somewhat obviously, the subject matter here will get pretty dark.

Unsurprisingly, TW for war crimes, and terrorism. Though, I'll try to keep this clinical.

The short answer is multiple factors with no individual one ever being universally true. I'm going to break down war crimes and atrocities into two general categories: Planned and Unplanned. This is because these spring from distinct factors.

There is another possible dichotomy, distinguishing between war crimes of action, and technically illegal behavior, such as the use of munitions or weapons that are legally prohibited, but are not directly associated with any atrocities. Examples of the latter could include deployment of chemical weapons against valid military targets, or even military buildups in violation of previous armistice treaties. For example: the Bismarckand Tirpitz were floating war crimes, simply by existing, and violating existing treaties (I'm not 100% sure which treaties off hand, and the legal status of these battleships is a little more complicated than I'm suggesting.) In general, I don't think this is what you're looking at, but it's worth remembering that war crimes cover a much wider range of topics that just atrocities committed against civilians.

Planned atrocities are intentionally executed by the faction, these are often deliberate strategies employed by those organizations. This can include things like terrorist attacks, or deliberate targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure to demoralize enemy forces or the civilian population itself, these can also be employed to erode public support for ongoing military actions. Of course, in some cases, the deaths are the primary goal, and any effect on morale is incidental.

Unplanned war crimes and atrocities occur incidentally, often as a result of failures in the chain of command.

This isn't a strict dichotomy, a group may have policies or strategies that can lead to war crimes through insufficient discrimination (in this context, discrimination refers to the concept as it exists in Just War theory/doctrine, which is to say, discriminating between civilian and military targets.) For example, a faction who intentionally bombards military targets in a civilian population center (read, a town or city) would probably fall more on the unplanned side of the spectrum, in contrast to a faction who simply firebombs the entire city.

When it comes to planned atrocities, ideology is probably the biggest factor to consider. Particularly how their ideology regards the people they're killing. This can take a few really horrific turns, but if you have a group with no regard for human life, and no concern for international law, then you're likely to start seeing war crimes coming fast and heavy.

It's easy to simply designate these groups as, “the bad guys,” but that really undersells how subversive some of these thought processes can be. Unfortunately, the line between terrorist and freedom fighter is a question of perspective, and even groups you'd normally be sympathetic to may be responsible for some horrifying acts, which they justify to themselves by othering their victims. (Usually this othering is based on religious, ethnic, or political affiliation. Though, it can be any combination of the three.) A group of rebels may not have any qualms about “collaborators” getting caught in their attack, even if those people are considered guilty by simple proximity.

A classic examination of this is Battle of Algiers (1966), it's an excellent film, and absolutely worth the watch if you've never seen it.

Unplanned atrocities and war crimes can often lead back to two compounding factors: discipline and morale.

Discipline comes with a massive, “citation needed,” sticker, because it's not completely predictive. Nominally, well disciplined armies can engage in unplanned war crimes. Some of this ties into the second factor, morale, but some of it is independent of that.

Some of the difficulty with discipline is opportunistic crimes (such as looting), which can then spiral out into worse atrocities. In these cases, you're looking at the individual discipline and morale of each soldier combined with a lot of contextual factors, but that doesn't translate smoothly into a generalized model.

The simple model would be that low discipline forces are more likely to engage in opportunistic crimes. They're more likely to evaluate their current situation in relation to how it can potentially benefit them, and when you combine that with the chaos of war, it is a recipe for unplanned atrocities.

Morale is a little more complicated than discipline. In theory, troops who are suffering from low morale  are more likely to engage in unplanned atrocities. (While it's a gross oversimplification of the background factors, this is an apt description for the Mỹ Lai Massacre. Nominally disciplined soldiers, suffering from flagging morale, who incorrectly identified the villages' civilian population as collaborators, and started murdering people.)

However, in practice, morale can be a double edged sword, low morale creates a real risk of soldiers ignoring orders for personal gain, or engaging in illegal behavior out of desperation, however, a sharp increase in morale can also result in lapses leading to criminal activities. The primary example of this would be victory looting (which is a war crime, in case that was unclear.)

In theory, morale and discipline should slot together fairly cleanly to create a single spectrum, but the reality is a lot messier.

In the case of many irregular groups (such as militias, resistance groups, and rebels), the actual forces will be a coalition of different groups that may not see eye to eye on things. In this environment, it's basically impossible to effectively police the different factions within the group. And, unfortunately, history shown that these kinds of coalitions tend to purge their less radical members as they consolidate their power. (The only case I can think of where the radical and terrorist elements were shed by the more mainstream factions would be the IRA. In almost every other case, victory filters for the most ruthless.)

Importantly, coalitions like this tend to be regarded as a single entity by non-members, with the actions of each individual group reflecting on the coalition as a whole. The major exception here is with advanced analysis, where someone who is very well versed in the political or strategic details may be able to explain the different groups and how they fit together. But, for general public opinion, the coalition may as well be a single faction.

Coalitions like this are almost certain to have members who have no qualms about civilian casualties, either due to indifference to collateral deaths, or by identifying civilians as acceptable targets. This can cause problems for these groups as they alienate less radical members of the population. In extreme cases this can even result in recruiting difficulties, and the terroristic elements can cause problems for any peaceful negotiations with outside powers.

These terroristic elements, and atrocities in general, can bolster support against a faction. In some cases, these radical elements can become more of a detriment to the coalition as a whole than its real foe.

If you're hoping for a way to prevent this, there really isn't one. These kinds of coalitions are, “opt-in.” Worse, some radical elements are likely to spin up from existing members. In theory, these internal radicals can be a discipline issue, but in some kind of rebel group, they really won't have the resources to fight a war on multiple fights, especially not against themselves while their, “real,” foe is hunting them.

Radicalized organizations (whether they're part of a coalition or not) are also dangerous to their, “allies.” This is because they can provoke an escalated response from their foes. In many cases, if a group has proven that they're willing to deliberately target civilians, it will provoke a more severe response from their foes. That can come in the form of simple retaliation strikes, or could result in enhanced security and greater scrutiny. Finally, these organizations can provoke the emergence of radicalized organizations among their foes. For example, an renegade rebel cell with no qualms about civilian casualties could become the justification for an authoritarian regime's military to create death squads and deploy them in territory that the rebels operate in, taking a scorched earth approach.

While it's not frequently discussed in fiction, cultural differences can also result in, unintentional hostilities, which can also provoke escalation. At the very least, this can provoke resentment against foreign forces, which ensures that any rebel group would have a continual supply or recruits.

So, the original question you asked was, “how do I avoid this?” And, unfortunately, the answer is, “you don't.” Wars are horrific and messy, and unfortunately, the only way to avoid these kinds of horrors is if everyone agrees to, “play by the same rules.” In an asymmetrical war (such as with a rebellion or resistance), that's not possible. The, “legitimate,” government wouldn't view the rebels as a legitimate military force, and if the rebels operated openly they'd be arrested and executed. From there, the fuse is set.

-Starke

This blog is supported through Patreon. Patrons get access to new posts three days early, and direct access to us through Discord. If you’d like to support us, please consider becoming a Patron.

[taffywabbit]

im also anti proship but calling rugrats porn drawings "child porn" really dilutes the severity of actual child porn. we shouldnt be confusing actual cp that hurts real children with just weirdos drawing porn of cartoon characters that happen to be kids, the two things are not at all on the same level

ok i suppose this was inevitable, i may as well get into it.

(CW for some discussion of CSA and child pornography, obviously)

first off, "i'm also anti proship but" is a terrifying way to start your message, and to go and follow it up with some extremely common proship copypasta i've heard a million times about "taking attention/resources/severity/etc away from real CSA victims" or whatever kinda makes me wonder how "anti proship" you actually are...?

kind of the point of this whole debate is typically that "proship" folks insist that fiction, or in this case "porn of cartoon characters that happen to be kids" as you put it, has no effect on reality or people's mindsets. and so-called "antis" like myself generally respond to this idea with something along the lines of "well it sure seems to affect the reality of your cock and balls", and point out how repeatedly consuming media with a particular focus or message has been shown time and time again to quantifiably influence the way people view the world around them, in ways that subsequently affect how they act, or desensitize them to things that might otherwise upset/offend them. y'know, like political propaganda! or blockbuster movies about killer sharks! obviously some people are going to be more resilient against that sort of influence when the real-world equivalent of "porn of cartoon characters that happen to be kids" is something so blatantly unacceptable, and nobody is really claiming that the impact of fictional CP is "on the same level" as its IRL counterpart.

but at the very least, most people who would be considered "anti proship" WILL tell you "hey, i'm not trying to say that you jerking it to twitter porn of Gwen Tennyson or Tails or whatever is LITERALLY THE SAME as committing CSA, but it's still really fucking concerning and creepy that the majority of your sexual fixations are all specifically cutesy vulnerable cartoon characters under the age of 12, many of whom also have canonical adult designs that you conveniently avoid in favor of sexualizing the ones that are barely old enough to learn long division. you should maybe do some introspection and figure out why that is and whether or not you're really comfortable with what it implies about you. personally i know I'M not comfortable with that shit and i'm not going to keep hanging around you unless you make some serious changes." except usually in my experience the conversation ends up being a lot shorter and ends in a block pretty quickly. like i'm not a psychologist and i don't keep a bunch of studies on hand to throw at you about how fictional CP is often a factor in grooming, but i DO have a brain and can pretty clearly see when someone is rationalizing behavior that will lead them to places i'm not willing to follow.

ANYWAYS to focus more specifically on the actual reason we're talking about this (which was, to be clear, a mobile ad Tumblr served me that depicted one of the dads from Rugrats having sex with his 3yo daughter): yes, actually, that shit IS illegal to create or distribute. it's not the SAME as literal photographs of real children, OBVIOUSLY, but it's still also extremely fucked up in its own right, and any reasonable person in your life would probably stop talking to you if you told them you got off to it.

don't believe me about the legality part? check this out:

so like, I GUESS you might get some legal leeway with cub furry art or sonic porn or stuff that isn't always obvious in how much it's intended to parallel real children? if you really care? but this ad was literally multiple illustrations of a human adult man having intercourse with a human toddler. it's pornography centered around openly fetishizing the sexual assault of a child by a parent. i fail to see how referring to that in shorthand as "child porn" is inaccurate in any way that matters.

and Tumblr is a US-based company, beholden to the laws shown above, so they are at least somewhat responsible when illustrated pedophilic incest porn gets shown to thousands of their mobile app users in an ad they got paid to display. THAT was the original point i was making in my post. but thank you for trying to derail it to interrogate my "anti proship" views or whatever, i have had multiple people send me fairly nasty asks about it in the past year and you finally caught me in a moment when i was already pissed enough about something else that i felt like going off about this stuff. sorry if you actually agreed with most of this and i came off as overly rude/harsh, but if that's the case then this response is for all the other anon asks and replies i've gotten too, i guess.

now we're all clear about where i stand and i hopefully don't need to talk about this again - it's kind of a fucking bummer to think about this stuff and i've been avoiding the subject intentionally. you are always welcome to just block me if you have a problem

[littlewitchygreen]

Intermediate Witchcraft: Next Steps

So, you've done your homework on the basics, and you've practiced the early skills. What's next? Where do you go from there? How do you learn more? Well, there are several factors that go into intermediate witchcraft along with several routes to take, and I'll explain a bit of that here.

Research

Part of the issue with moving into more advanced magic is that most available books cater to beginners. That is because of a few reasons that I'll get into further in the post, but that does leave the issue of how to find more advanced information still. This is where deep-diving into specific topics will serve you well.

There are going to be few if any 'Witchcraft 201' books out there, because more advanced knowledge is not going to be that generalized the way introductory knowledge can be. However, if you look into specific topics, there are a lot more books. You don't have to specialize in one area either - you could look at books from as many fields as you'd like: deep-diving into astrology, herbalism, tarot, curses, whatever you'd like. Growing your knowledge in a specific area will make you more advanced overall as you expand your knowledge base.

Many of the more advanced texts are also going to be much drier than the popular books for witches just starting to learn skills - historical texts, academic papers, etc. So, look beyond what you can find on the shelves of the most popular bookstore in town as well. I'd recommend looking into databases like JStor, Google Scholar, and even university databases to see what you can find there. As always, consider who is publishing the information, what biases might they have, and what may be inaccurate or culturally appropriative when taking in new information to stay accurate, safe, and get the most out of the information you find.

Mentorship

Another route some people take is finding a more advanced mentor when they are struggling to progress on their own. This is one of the reasons why some of the more advanced information is not widely published as well, as it is not always appropriate for the information shared through mentorships to be widely spread. In some cases, this is because it is part of a closed practice that you have to be initiated into or taught directly, and in other cases it's because the information is personal to the mentor.

Still, there are pros and cons to going this route and it's all based on who your mentor is.

Some pros: you have someone experienced in witchcraft who can guide you more personally than a widely available book and who knows your personal practice very well - and who can share information, experience, etc accordingly.

Some cons: your mentor has only one perspective out of a vast array, they have biases that are in their practice as a result of their practice being their own, and they have intimate access to you and your spiritual life because of their role.

My personal suggestion to anyone considering this route is this: do your research on who you are accepting as your mentor, remember that what they teach is their practice not the practice, and even consider having multiple mentors over time to diversify information and beliefs that you learn. Your safety and wellbeing are paramount, so never accept someone as a mentor lightly, as having that kind of role in your life is a heavy responsibility and some may abuse that kind of access to you.

UPG

UPG stands for Unverified Personal Gnosis - or unofficial information gained through personal experience. This is in my opinion the primary reason there aren't more widespread 'Witchcraft 201' books available, as a lot of the information those books would contain is obtained through personal experience rather than from official sources. This is also why many witches begin to talk less and less about the more advanced aspects of their practice, as UPG generally comes from experiences that become more and more personal to the witch in question.

Along that line, your practice will primarily continue to grow through personal experience of your own and continued practice. Books and teachers will only take you so far before you have to gain knowledge yourself and get better at the skills on your own. So, at a certain point, significant portions of your own practice will become UPG as well.

Many witches are fine sharing some of the less personal aspects of their UPG with others, which is how new information and ways of doing things still spread. Offline, I've had multiple witches share with me parts of their own practices, for example, which have influenced the way I practice - and vice versa. However, each of our practices were still different from each other, due to the UPG each of us has and our different approaches to practicing.

Understandably, it can be frustrating trying to figure out where to go once the guidebooks most of us start out with are no longer applicable or available. So, one of the most valuable pieces of advice on how to continue to progress that I ever learned is this: never stop asking 'why'. Why does this mean that? Why do we do that? Why is this done that way? Why is this a common thing but not that?

I hope this helps someone, and best wishes!

[lostinvasileios]

Fears.

Yeah, that's nice. But, why do you fear so much? No, I'm - serious, why?

A lot of the times, as sad as it is, I've encountered people who often lower their own power by fearing all the possible outcomes. Key word, love: possible.

Take it from me, for the first year or so of me practicing and getting close with deities, no matter how obviously real things were, I always had a lingering thought of "what if I'm just making it up?" or "they'd never say that to me."

While being able to differentiate your own thoughts and your own projection while interacting with deities or magic(k) at all is important, you don't need to fear it. If you mess up, you mess up. Nobody's angry or disappointed at you because the universe, your deities, they understand. You're only human. And you're trying. That's what matters. Trying.

Your failures are not measured, they aren't keeping score of all the times you accidentally fucked up something small like interpreting their exact wording or actions like if they waved their hands at a specific point in their sentence or not. You know??

Here's something that helped me: if it makes you happy, then fuck all else. Everything can technically be perception, anyways. If something's fake, you'll find out eventually. You'll be able to tell at certain points.

Lady Hekate once told me, "things are only as real as you want them to be."

Of course, grounding and else other are also important factors, but if the only thing that's realistically stopping you here is the fear of them being figments of imagination, fear of "failing" to reach out to them, ect... You don't need to worry about that, dove.

Most of the time, it's just brain fog. It's just the fear of the unknown, rejection, and other things of those categories. And that's all valid.

Most of the time, at least for me, it was the fact that I was in the presence of such magnificent beauty that made it difficult to believe I was actually experiencing what I was. It was the amount of incomprehensible, out of this world love that the entities I connected with had for me. It was - them, in general at times.

I suffered from psychosis for years when I was younger before starting my journey, and despite how I've gotten drastically better over the years, I still contain some certain... Tendencies you could say.

I constantly questioned if things were real, and, yes asking questions is alright. It's great to do, actually. But don't drive yourself into a sorrow pit over them. You know? Don't bring yourself down more by believing those overthinking fears you can have at times.

I was under such immense fear of making things up that I failed to realize that the only reason I was having such a hard time was because I doubted myself way too much. I was way too hard on myself on multiple cases, and still can be at times unfortunately.

Have more faith in yourself, have more patience with yourself. No matter how experienced someone is, there's always something new to learn, and learning is difficult for everyone at times. Everyone's gone through the same thing in their own variation before, and most likely will a thousand times again. The more you learn to trust yourself, the more you can overcome that battle - which might be one of the hardest, to tell you the truth - the smoother this will get for you. But it takes time, it takes breaks, it takes tears and effort, it takes a lot. It takes you.

One of the points of magic and deities or whatever the hell else is to simply learn to enjoy life more. To live. To experience. You can't do that if you're too caught up in your fears to see how far you've gotten, to see at all.

You know the truth, deep down. Just shh, and listen. It may take a long time, but eventually, you'll find your answer to the reality of things. To the emotions of things. Don't pressure yourself, don't suffocate yourself with doubts and fears.

Everything that's yours is yours, everyone creates their own realities and fates. Just be you. Just grow. Just feel. Just... Live your journey. Everything's gonna be fine, bee.

[aspd-culture]

But aspd-culture, what "causes" ASPD?

Well, that's hard to say as it is commonly a mix of nature and nurture, and we can't say for sure "this set of things will cause ASPD". I can, however, explain some serious risk factors that, if you relate to them and have this disorder, may have been a part of why you developed it.

TW for heavy topics, as you might have guessed.

Just a heads up that, if you have the disorder, this one is gonna be a rough read. A lot of things that you were told throughout your childhood should be "normal" and maybe that you even thought were helping you are gonna pop up here as things that heavily increase the chances of ASPD, and we're not just talking about abuse and neglect, though of course that is the first one I'm gonna get into because it's the most obvious and well-known risk factor. Do expect some other information you might not have been ready to hear, though.

So the first one, as I said, is maltreatment as a child. This can include many kinds of abuse, including verbal, emotional, physical, sexual, etc. There are some reasons to believe that sexual abuse in particular, especially long-term sexual abuse, significantly increases the chance of developing ASPD.

The next is neglect, which also comes with a significant risk of developing ASPD, especially if the neglect is related to both the emotional and physical needs of a child. If the child experiences neglect in regards to needs such as food, hygiene, shelter, medical care, etc, but does not experience emotional neglect, the risk of developing ASPD appears to be somewhat less than if the child experiences both.

Maltreatment and neglect before the age of 18 months is especially significant when it comes to risk of developing ASPD. Not greeting an infant, not properly showing emotion and "appropriate affect" to an infant, and in particular a lack of attachment from their mother (either due to her literally being absent or just emotionally absent and disconnected) during the first 18 months of life are less commonly thought of forms of neglect that seriously affect secure attachment and increase the risk of ASPD.

The third and last of the "expected" answers to this question is witnessing intimate partner violence during childhood, especially regularly or across multiple partners. This shows the child two things: one is a fear of the aggressor as well a need to tiptoe around someone who should be a secure caregiver to avoid danger, and the second is a disbelief that the victim of the violence is able to protect them from danger, either because they appear weak (children are supposed to believe until a surprising age that their parents are superhero levels of strong and unable to be intimidated or weakened) in the eyes of the child, or because the child does not want to bother them with their issues when they already have their own abuse to deal with. This is especially true in cases where the child successfully controls the violence where the adult cannot (think those kids who use themselves as human shields because the abuser doesn't dare touch the child for various reasons), as it makes them feel they are responsible for protecting both themself and their caregiver, which disrupts normal attachment.

Here's where we get to the less obvious, more specific stuff that can lead to ASPD. There are multiple studies showing that an excess of television (I know, but hear me out bc this isn't about violence on tv), specifically when it is being used as a stand-in parent, significantly increases risk of developing ASPD even when other factors are controlled. As someone with ASPD, I can 100% see how this is valid. I used television to try and understand what normal people were like, and in turn, I experience a weird type of affective "empathy" when shown emotions in the over-acted way that they do on sitcoms, even though I do not experience that empathy when shown normally expressed emotions either on tv or in real life.

It also makes sense to me because generally when TV becomes a stand-in parent, the child is watching other children be cared for in ways that they are not in real life. The child may then be led to believe (as I was) that caring about other people is something made up for TV, since that's the only time they see it. Once the brain develops the understanding of fantasy vs reality, if TV is the only time that a child sees secure attachment styles, loving and attentive caregivers, etc, the brain may falsely place that in the fantasy category. That can lead to the thought processes and attachment issues that are typical of pwASPD, including feeling as though only they can be trusted to look out for themselves, that irl relationships are supposed to be transactional vs emotional, etc. So if you, like I did, attempted to watch sitcoms and such like Full House, Boy Meets World, etc. as a way of understanding what a normal family is supposed to be like or to understand how people are supposed to interact with each other, it is very possible that that was a contributing factor to the development of your ASPD.

Another somewhat surprising one: show of hands on how many pwASPD grew up hearing "it's just a joke", "you have no sense of humor", and "lighten up, we're just teasing you" - either from other kids, caregivers, or both?

Teasing is believed to be another major factor in developing ASPD. Teasing can cause a child to feel insecure, unsafe, and attacked when coming from people the child does not have a secure attachment to, and can decrease chances of the child developing that secure attachment later. This is especially true if the teasing came from caregivers, and of course has a higher chance of affecting the child if they attempt to set boundaries around it and aren't respected in that. This leads to the child feeling attacked by the people they are supposed to go to for comfort, and the more people who tease the child, the more likely the child is to feel unsafe around people as a whole - leading to the mindset that all people are dangerous and that the only person the child can trust is themselves. This teasing also causes self-imposed isolation as a way of feeling secure, which reinforces again that people are inherently unsafe and the only person the child can trust is themself. So if you tried to communicate your distress, discomfort, etc. about being teased and were dismissed, especially by your caregivers, then that significantly increased the chance that you would go on to develop ASPD.

One that is currently debated as to if it is a factor or not is the presence of an overprotective mother, specifically if that over-protectiveness became a point of contention between you two as you became more independent. It's surprising because a major characteristic of children who develop ASPD is independence, and most hold the belief that only they will protect them, but the reasoning is sound imo. The reason for this one, from those who believe it is associated with ASPD, is that when a child goes through the normal process of asserting independence, if they are met with either fear tactics as a form of control or heavy anxiety from their maternal figure, the child learns to be insecure, anxious, and obsessive about protecting themselves because they are being taught that the world is not safe/that they are not capable enough to explore that world. This can lead to an overblown expectation of the danger in the real world and leads to anxiety and distress around outside people. This anxiety and nervousness about the world can lead to the child seeing everyone and everything else as a threat, a mindset that is commonly associated with ASPD. If that anxiety is later disproven (as it inevitably will be unless the child experiences significant trauma - itself a risk factor for ASPD), this causes a rift in the attachment to the caregivers in question, and can make the child distrust their judgement and ability to assess risk, which again affects how safe the child feels with them. This is especially true if the connection to their caregivers is weakened by inconsistency, abuse, neglect, or other factors.

Any inconsistent behavior from caregivers, in fact, is another risk factor for developing ASPD. Children need to be able rely on consistency and routine to feel secure and develop normally. If they are constantly uncertain of how safe they may be with one or both caregivers, they are more likely to learn the idea that the only person they can rely on is themself.

Note that all of this is based on the current scientific understanding of ASPD's development, which deals significantly in both stigmatized and entirely false beliefs about the disorder. However, I focused here on points that made sense to me as someone with it, and did my best to explain how these contribute to ASPD through that lens in addition to the potentially biased medical lens. Our understanding of psychology in general is always changing, but these are some risk factors that are commonly believed at the time of writing to increase the chances of developing ASPD.

Also worth noting is that all of these factors do not need to be present to have ASPD develop. These factors significantly increase the risk of developing ASPD, especially when combined with a genetic component, but I am in no way claiming that you have to have all or even any of these to have ASPD.

I hope this helped you understand this disorder and the people with it a bit better. If you know someone with ASPD, maybe this can help you process why they hold the beliefs they do, and if you have ASPD and feel comfortable, feel free to show or explain some of this to your friends if you think it may help them understand where you're coming from a bit more.

A lot of the stigma, I think, comes from the fact that people don't get what we went through that led our brain to believe our antisocial traits were the best way to protect ourselves. For some, a little more light shed on that subject may be all they need to be more compassionate about it. And if you went into this with a negative outlook on pwASPD, I understand. It's easy in the world we're in to end up with that thought process. I appreciate you reading this far and ask you to read just a bit further to the end.

Try if you can to imagine what it's like to be a kid who has been through more than most adults have in their entire life and gotten so little help that that little child believes no one in the world protects anybody else. Imagine what kind of a world we were picturing growing up in because at the time, that was all we had ever seen. It would be horrifying, right? Even worse than the already pretty sucky world we currently live in. Imagine being a child and thinking that every other kid is going through the same stuff you are at home and handling it so much better. And for some, imagine knowing that some don't or that they get help, but not knowing why your life is different. Would you want to live in that world? Would you be able to keep the innocent, childlike wonder? Would you not be angry and hurt and confused as to why you didn't deserve the help and the life other kids get? Many of us lived thinking that from painfully early ages.

Is it so far-fetched for us to think we needed to protect ourselves if everyone was like the sample size of people we had met? Is it so shocking, then, that our subconscious thought that the traits we have now would be the only way to keep us safe? Is it really that surprising that a child so rarely, if ever shown kindness and empathy, might grow up not knowing how to replicate that for other people?

Most of us looked down the barrel of a proverbial (for some of us, literal) g*n as a toddler to young child, so we put on a vest. How were we supposed to know that other children had never felt that unsafe? How were we supposed to know that someone was supposed to help us when they never did?

Just food for thought. Thanks for reading.

[sophieinwonderland]

(on anon because I don't want to get thrown into the anti-endo shredder by replying to that post directly)

it's worth noting that a scientific theory isn't really what either you or the other system describe. the thing they described (an idea that is broadly supported) is called "consensus," while the thing you described (an idea that is directly testable) is called a "hypothesis." a scientific theory is an explanation of some kind of underlying process/phenomenon that explains the observations, and a good theory makes testable predictions as well, but the entire theory is not directly testable per se (because it may involve things that are not observable). theories can be validated (i.e. their predictions are shown to be accurate) but they cannot be conclusively proven, nor can anything in science, which is why you only ever see "consensus" and rarely see scientists treat a particular idea as fact unless it is so well-established that it can be taken for granted (e.g. "thinking is a result of neurological activity")

an example of a well-supported psychological theory would be that thoughts and feelings predicate behaviors - that is, there are internal, non-observable mental states which correspond with those reported by subjects, and those states are involved in the initiation of physical actions in response to stimuli (not the other way around). this is the central idea of cognitive psychology, and despite how simple it sounds, historically it was not always well-accepted (e.g. behaviorists rejected the idea that these non-observable states were worth considering).

most modern theories in psychology outside of the world of neuroscience are the subject of at least some debate among researchers, though. effectively no theory of etiology for DID has achieved what I would call "consensus" - though practicing clinicians do generally see it as a trauma-related disorder, there is not much direct evidence that trauma is both necessary and sufficient to cause it, nor any consensus on how exactly traumatic experiences would precipitate multiple personality states (structural dissociation is one of several theories).

this type of research is difficult for ethical reasons, obviously - you can't just e.g. traumatize randomly selected people and see if they get a mental disorder, so you have to just make inferences based on what you see in patients seeking treatment, which could be skewed by a huge number of factors. you see this reflected in the fact that the DSM discusses trauma as a likely etiology for dissociative disorders but does not include it in the actual diagnostic criteria (unlike PTSD and the trauma disorder section, where exposure to a particular traumatic event is a mandatory part of the dx) - this is actually the case for many different disorders, because childhood adversity is a risk factor for a huge number of psychopathologies without necessarily being the ultimate cause (there is something called gene/environment interaction or GxE - conditions like schizophrenia are thought to be genetic but almost always also involve some kind of environmental insult which may act to trigger the disorder).

dissociative disorders are also under-researched when compared to more common diagnoses so a lot of the theories that do exist don't really have a lot of hard evidence to rest on, frankly, and are subject to change as more evidence comes out. even theories based on fMRI studies can come under fire given the replication crisis/finding that fMRI studies are often not as reliable as they seem (generally "fishing expedition" studies where the researchers did not have a specific brain area in mind are highly suspect, as are studies with a small sample size - I've seen both rampantly in DID studies). SDT seems like as decent a theory as any, but theories in this discipline are very routinely revised or discarded given the fast pace with which our observational technology evolves. taking SDT for granted as if it were a fact is unscientific, even if it is well-supported.

the biggest upshot here is that the world of clinical psych research hasn't even really settled on how traumagenic dissociative disorders work, nevermind the possibility of non-traumagenic dissociative disorders or nondisordered plurality. scientists do not rush into consensus when there is this little evidence to go around in the literature, and the focus of research is generally going towards interventions and helping patients, not settling arguments about etiology. a lot more funding goes into applied therapeutic work such as diagnostic tools and treatment modalities than anything else, and that most likely won't address this question since much of that work only centers on disordered cases that match the classical presentation.

I know I'm late posting this, but really solid overview!

[lexsang]

Could you recommend sources about sanguinarian vampirism? I tried to look for it but most recommend books seem to be published by sketchy/charlatan authors and it makes doubtful if they are genuine or not (besides some of them have very prejudiced views towards sang).

Videos, podcasts, articles, sites or books are all welcome recommendations and I would be very grateful if you had them.

Thank you very much!

(Sorry for how long it took for me to get back to you, the past few weeks have been hectic to say the least, but I've been thinkin about this ask since you sent it) My main issue with the vast majority of content on sanguinarian vampirism out there is that it is made by people who are just interested in vampires, and have no actual experience living through the things we live through. They often times come off as halloween-spooky, and inauthentic, with an emphasis on shock factor for an audience that doesn't understand that we really do actually exist.

Books are definitely not the place to look from my experience if you're interested in learning about sanguinarian vampirism. They are one of the best places if you're wanting to learn about psychic vampirism or vampiric witchcraft, but they're not for the blood drinkers.

Videos can be good learning material, but I haven't seen any on sanguinarianism that aren't just people talking about their experiences in the community, and it can get fairly full of unnecessary drama and zero useful info quick. I used to watch videos from the creator below, though I personally didn't get much out of them, but that may not be the case for you. Most of the videos are on psychic vampirism, but there are a few on sanguinarianism if I'm remembering correctly.

With Podcasts, I'm sure there are a number of one offs on paranormal podcasts if you look hard enough, but the time is most likely not worth it. The link below is one of the best I have seen, a series of great interviews with real vampires (I was lucky enough to be one of them, though that's not why I suggest this series), and the second is a youtube channel called Coffin Lounge (I would link, but youtube is being weird), which could be good, but I don't now yet. I have only listened to a little bit of the first episode, and it is more goth community centered than vamp, but there may be good stuff since since each episode is with a new guest.

Sites are the best bet so far, with forums being one of the best places to look imo.

Sanguinarius.org and their connected forum, VCMB.org were where I first realized I wasn't alone, and wasn't crazy. The biggest benefit of forums like this one, is that you are, without a doubt, listening to real people's experience, and seeing real vamps figure it out for themselves. There is so much information in the VCMB, even though it isn't very active anymore, the experiences are still there.

theredcellar.com has also been a personal favourite for ages. It is full of plenty of articles that focus on the medsang perspective, and it is home to some really down to earth vamps who are all wonderful. They also have a forum, as well as a discord that is linked on their site.

The absolute best teachers, however, are just regular old vampires. You will learn more in a few hours than you could hope to learn in months from articles and the sporadic info online by sending someone a message and asking if they have the capacity to answer your questions. Whether you are an awakening vamp looking for advice, or just interested in the real, visceral experience that vampires live through, most are kind and willing to share. Everyone's experience is different, and speaking to multiple people will help you realize just how colourful and varied the world of vampirism is.

And if you are a vampire, I know that this is cliché, but experience is a great teacher. So much of vampirism, from what I've seen and experienced myself, is about trying to run away from the vampiric experience, and be as human as possible. It has stopped being about that for me. Manage your health of course, and don't go without feeding for too long if you can help it. Take the substitutes you need to take to control the beast when you need to take them, but feeling those cravings instead of fleeing from them is a great way to become more familiar with vampirism. No one will be able to tell you more about your vampirism than yourself. Learn to meditate in those moments of hunger. You are a vampire, it's ok to allow yourself to be just that from time to time.

I hope this was helpful! Please feel free to ask if you have any more questions, I'm more than happy to help if you feel that I can :)

[backjustforberena]

Do you think Rhaenys was relieved or upset that Viserys rejected Laena as a marriage prospect? She was there the first time around when Aemma was wed at 13 and had multiple losses before having Rhaenyra at 15, but that's also her daughter losing chance at being Queen.

Good question. Complicated answer. At least, it is for me. Some may disagree and that's okay, but I'm tempted to never absolve Rhaenys in her culpability in the act of proposing Laena as a bride to Viserys. I think she does it with her eyes wide open, I think a part of her wanted the match to happen and I think that she wasn't pressured or bullied into it. For her sins, she wants the match to occur.

Laena's youth is the only thing against this match and, even then, Rhaenys has put in a safeguard: she won't have to bed Viserys until she turns 14. She makes SURE that Laena knows that and would make sure Viserys knew it. The rest of the reasoning, which I assume Rhaenys has thought of and discussed at length with Corlys, are all reasons to put Laena forward as a bride and reasons why Viserys would be a good match.

Even the issue you cite in your ask, nonnie, can be logically and reasonably defended against if you want to look at it as a simple pro and con list without any emotional factors in there. Laena would be consummating the marriage at an older age than Aemma did. Viserys is an older, more experienced bridegroom than he was with Aemma. The assumption is things would be different. Rhaenys sees her daughter as a very strong girl and sees her cousin as a kind man. I don't think she believes she'd be putting Laena in any overt or specific danger.

(Although, just a quick book lesson: Viserys and Aemma married when Aemma was 11, and unconsummated until she was thirteen. We have no idea, in fact, how aware of these events Rhaenys was or even if she attended the wedding as she would have been either pregnant or post-partum and it during a rocky time, as they wed, at most, a year after Prince Aemon died and Rhaenys was passed over in the succession - in the midst of the Second Quarrel. However, we have no idea when Viserys and Aemma get married in the show - it's possible that neither Aemma or Viserys were that young and, therefore, it does not factor into Rhaenys's view within the show. And in the book, it's not Corlys and Rhaenys that propose the match.)

She's very vocal in telling Viserys that the match is a good one, moreso than Corlys. She's side-by-side with her husband and he checks in with her before making the offer. In my reading of the scene, it wasn't a case of "going along" with Corlys - I think the blame is far more on the system and on this entrenched sense she has of the patriarchy: she sees this as the only way to go i.e this is the "order of things", so she bows to that, as opposed to any individual. It's an internal conflict.

Because this is the way that makes sense, the way that is advantageous to her daughter as much as it is hideous to her, overall. She's doing something she'd rather not do - what mother would? But she is of the opinion that she, as a woman, will always have to do such as it's the only way to do things because of her political position and the ultimate lesson that was the Great Council. Rhaenys has shown time and time again, throughout the series, that she is completely and utterly realistic, if nothing else. Pragmatic, even.

Of course, the straight answer is obviously her daughter not marrying her much older cousin is absolutely wonderful. It bothered her in the first place, we know that, we heard her say it. Rhaenys will be thrilled she gets to keep her daughter with her for longer, on Driftmark, not relinquishing her to the Red Keep. But not wedding her to Viserys opens up to who will she marry? (The implication is that Laena was left unbetrothed as Corlys was off at war, not because they thought she was far too young for a betrothal - in the show, at least, the book differs ofc). At least with Viserys, he was known. At least there were various things that Rhaenys could hold within herself and try and reassure herself with:

Viserys would never bar Laena from a dragon (in the book, Laena is already a dragon rider. This is not the case in the show as Laena says she claims Vhagar when she is 15) or be unable to understand her bond and interest with the creatures. He'd also not seek to use that dragon as a weapon or something to "better" himself or empower himself with. There's no need for it.

Viserys is a kind man. He is not a drunkard. He would not beat her. He is not a spendthrift. He is also in charge of his holdings, as opposed to an heir yet to inherit or, worse, a son not due to inherit anything.

Laena would be kept in a manner to which she is accustomed: a hard thing to do when your dad is the richest man on earth, but this is the one match that would have Laena ascend to, arguably, a position she was born to. Even if not Queen, then Princess.

King's Landing is very close to Driftmark. It's not far away and Rhaenys could easily and frequently visit, especially with Corlys being on the Small Council. If Laena were married to another lord, that access is threatened. In other words: Laena will have the support and protection of her parents. They can be as involved as they like.

It's politically advantageous to their house. Rhaenys is a political animal. She knows the writing is on the wall with the Stepstones, she knows that Viserys will have to marry and that whomever he marries, they will have very close influence and access to the King. Of course she would want that. She'll be aware of the stresses that have been going on in the last six months. Longer than that: with the Stepstones.

It keeps the Valryrian lines together. Absolute win.

It goes some way to satisfying their ambition. Both Corlys and Rhaenys.

Laena would be Queen. Laena would be the mother of a King. And if it's a marriage for love that Laena wants later on, then she'll have the latitude to do that when Viserys dies. She'll still be young enough to remarry to have a life that could be anything she wishes, especially with a King for a son. Queen Mothers have remarried before.

By not marrying Laena, all those anxieties and questions would stay as they are: who will she marry her daughter to? How much control will she have? Will she be treated well?

Plus, when you lay it all out like that, and certainly what the show wants us to see, is that this match would be the best thing, in comparison to Alicent Hightower. I can imagine Rhaenys being very worried when she hears Laena has not been chosen, as much as she is relieved. Upset? No. I don't think Rhaenys "does" upset, not in matters such as this. But it's not just about Laena not marrying Viserys. It's not just "my 12 year old daughter won't marry my 40+ year old cousin" - it's everything surrounding that and Rhaenys is far too smart to be unaware of that.

The rejection essentially means destabilisation, not only for Hosue Velaryon but for the realm as a whole. And she hasn't got a clue what Viserys is thinking. Because why would you throw this away? Why would you reject HER daughter? Why is he, basically, just making things worse? Widening the gap between the Houses when barely a few days ago (or whatever the timeline is) he was saying he valued the bonds between the Houses?

And it's got instant consequence: Corlys resigns as Master of Ships. They pack off to Driftmark, boycott the royal wedding and throw in their lot with Daemon and start a war to protect their shipping lanes. A war that, if Laena had married Viserys, would have been backed by the Crown, in all likelihood. So they're p***ing off the Crown by doing this without the King's leave (not that I see Rhaenys being mad at that).

And Laenor goes off with that war: he's fifteen. Rhaenys will have known that from the get-go. If it's war, Laenor will likely have to go. In marrying Laena to Viserys, there might have been some avoiding that. There won't be now. And there will be no allying with the Crown. There will be no presence at court, no direct awareness of the political landscape. It's a severance from such involvement, which has it's own vulnerabilities as much as it affords her house independence.

Anyway, I'll attempt to wrap up, apologies, this was a stream of consciousness. The answer is: Rhaenys would feel all the things and show very few of them. It's what she always does. She would be sad for her daughter. Happy for her daughter. She would be frustrated. She would be worried. She would be angry. She would be relieved. She would be unsurprised. She would be aghast. Such are people.

Honestly? She would likely not dwell on it long. They have other storms to face and she has other pains to carry.

[limonecat005]

Am I obsessed with alhaitham? Maybe. Another Alhaitham x you fanfic.

You stare at your reflection in the full length mirror in front of you while you sat on a vanity chair. Your eyes couldn't believe what they were seeing; an ethereal angel with royalty and elegance shining as the summer sun filtered through the windows, falling gently on you. You never realised you could look so breathtaking in white, with your hair so beautifully and carefully styled.

Did you really deserve this?

You shake your head at the thought. You didn't do anything wrong, it was the people, not you- Alhaitham taught you that; it was them, not you.

Never you.

You once more analyse yourself in the mirror and you can feel your tears welling up in your eyes, burning and hazing your senses. You quietly sob as all the memories came flooding in your mind; everything until now had been so painful. You almost thought that this pain was something you were destined with and that you were to be subjected to this debt you may have not filled in your last life.

Your journey was so tiring and hard.

You suddenly felt two large hands gently move yours away from your face. Confused, you look at the person in front of you. You could not see or hear clearly, your eyes blurred everything around you and your ears only focused on the shaky pumping pump of blood. Everything was so messy, so unrealistic- it might just be a dream and you might wake up on your straw bed in your rundown shed.

Fingers gently wiped out your tears; it was the kind of touch that was very foreign to you. The kind to warm your heart and let out another stream of tears down your cheeks because you were never provided any loving touch or something as simple as love. So when a pair of lips kissed your forehead, you sobbed weakly, feeling so wanted, so loved, so needed and loved.

"My love, you are worrying me." You could finally hear a faint soothing voice. "Why are you upset on your special day?"

You slowly wiped your tears away to clear your vision and you could finally notice Alhaitham kneeling across you, his concerned eyes observing you.

"I called your name multiple times, but you didn't respond to me." His right hand cups your cheek. "What is it that is bothering you."

You inhale deeply and close your eyes for a while. "Tell me Alahitham, why can I not rage? When there are people who deserve my anger, why do I shed tears?" You could feel your eyes burn again. "Why do I always dream of how it could have been if no one betrayed me? Why do I always dream and expect?"

You heard your soon to be husband mutter something under his breath before he leaned himself forward to let his forehead rest against yours. You felt his hands travel to your hair, his fingers treading through your locks, gently lulling you into a state of solitude.

"It is because of your heart which is akin to a child's innocence and dreams. Because you were robbed from your childhood, your inner kid always sought for a home where you could be yourself. And when the child found comfort, you would do anything to keep it forever. Your purity in terms of intentions, loyalty and hard work was misused by this corrupted world."

You let the words sink in. The more you revised what Alhaitham said, the more you felt dizzy. You always believed that you were capable to tackle anything that came in your way, but it seemed that it was only possible when there was someone, you loved, beside you. The more you thought about it, the more it was evident that you only did things for love like a child would do anything for their parent's love.

"Despite your hurting, you could not bring yourself to loathe anyone because you were never taught that being angry was alright; it was okay to feel emotions. You were always taught that anger and sadness proved you weak or a troublesome factor in the society." Alhaitham distanced a little. "But that is not the case, to be human is to be feeling and imperfect."

You remained quiet for a while before you spoke up weakly. "I want to learn anger."

His lips stretched into a small fond smile. "I will be there in every step of yours. Until you are ready, may I be the advocate for your anger?"

"You might as well bring hell for them. You anger is dangerous, Alhaitham."

"Oh but my love, it is what they deserve."