#social norms make no sense sometimes

[my-autism-adhd-blog]

7 Neurotypical Norms I will Never Understand…

Neurodivergent_lou

#autism #actually autistic #social norms #social norms make no sense sometimes #neurodivergence #neurodiversity #actually neurodivergent #feel free to share/reblog #neurodivergent_lou (Facebook)

[cazort]

I find it very weird how so many people on Tumblr nowadays are like "age in bio or I block you" and it makes me wonder if these people have any experience living as an adult in the real world. These people never explain the rationale behind their demands.

Like 99% of the places I go it would be considered rude, socially awkward, and sometimes even creepy to ask another person their age, especially an adult. People can be touchy about age for a variety of reasons, most of which come down to some type of discrimination or bias which can go both for being old or being young.

Businesses or other organizations with legal cutoffs for age or other valid reasons to know a person's age will do so discreetly and only when needed. Most of the time the business doesn't even know or record the person's age, they just want to check whether or not it is over some sort of legal limit, like 21 for purchasing alcohol or 18 for a lot of other things, or older or younger cutoffs for a few other things. (Related: I'm fine with people saying their blog is for 18+ and they are 18+.)

Age can also be a sensitive topic for trans and gender-nonconforming people. We trans people often have a more complex relationship to age, especially people who pursue HRT but even those who don't, often experience a "second puberty" where we go through changes including both physical changes and social / mental / lifestyle changes that involve exploring various aspects of life and gender-expression, and we often do this a lot later for the gender we identify as, than our cis counterparts do. Gender also affects how people see us, like I notice that people often think I am younger than I am because of "feminine" presentation choices that I make, and this is less likely when I present more masculinely (such as if I don't shave my face), and I've noticed that people with more strongly pronounced sex characteristics (like facial hair, a deep voice, or a curvy build with big breasts and hips) are often seen as older than they are, especially in their younger years, whereas people with more androgynous builds and features are more likely to be read as younger. I've repeatedly had people tell me I'm lying about my age when I am being 100% honest, so it's like, displaying my age sometimes opens me up to negativity and harassment from people who think I'm lying. So again, all of this can be sensitive for us trans and GNC people, so demanding ages is likely to bring up more sense of weirdness and conflict for trans people, especially since a lot of us have people read our ages very wrong, just based on how we look, and because also people can judge us for "age inappropriate" behaviors as adults, which interacts with how we trans people are often viewed as "creepy". So demanding ages in bios is going to be harder on trans people and thus comes across as somewhat anti-trans and cisnormative, especially when it comes from cis people who show no understanding of trans people's issues. And I've noticed these are most of the people demanding ages in bios.

There are also other reasons not to want to share your age. People under 18, or even younger (or much older) people who are over 18, also might not want to advertise their age because it might attract predatory behavior or other unwanted attention. Younger and elderly people alike are often targetted with scams. And in general, age is yet one more potentially valuable piece of personal data that scammers are interested in collecting so it's not a good idea to just put it out in plain view on the internet for any stranger to be able to see and collect.

Demanding ages in bios is also totally unnecessary and doesn't seem to have any benefits. Tumblr already has built-in measures for marking content and/or blogs as NSFW. Anyone can lie about their age so demanding people put ages in their bio does nothing and may even create a false sense of security surrounding interactions where a person's age is relevant.

Also, so many people will update their bio once and then never change it. Like one person I follow, whose blog is very active, has had the same age listed in their bio for like 7 years, so the figures shown are often wrong just out of sheer negligence. And this is okay, like I'm not gonna run around policing people like "You have to update your blog bio or I'm gonna unfollow you!" what kind of uptight authoritarian bullshit would that be?

And like what are people even expecting to accomplish with this sort of demand? I just don't get it.

Here's how I think about ages in bio:

I don't care whether or not you put it there.

If I don't know you, I'm gonna take whatever number you put there with a grain of salt because I know you could be deliberately lying, or just never updating your bio.

Even if I trust your listed age is accurate, I don't really want to think about it very much. Ageism is a thing and people can have biases both against younger and against older people. I want to see everyone the way they are, not based on my preconceived notions about them. Things like maturity, wisdom, naivety, immaturity, experience or inexperience, will speak for themselves and manifest in different ways, and I want to focus on who you are and what you say and do, not some number that gives me an impression of how you "should" think at your age. If you have the maturity of a middle-schooler, I don't care if you're 55 I'm not gonna give your perspective special treatment. If you have something intelligent to say or some deep insight, and the idea speaks for itself, I'm gonna listen to you no matter how young (or old) you are.

If you demand ages in bios it makes me conclude you are probably not someone who is safe for me to interact with, even if you theoretically would want to interact with me (which you probably don't because I have never put my age in my bio.) As someone who has experienced sometimes severe ageism both for people judging me for being too young, or too old, in certain situations, it tells me you are out-of-touch with IRL social norms and are willing to impose new norms that 99% of people would find rude, and that you're probably the kind of person who would make negative or untruthful snap judgments about me for all sorts of reasons, probably not just age, and therefore that I don't want to interact with.

So yeah. Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.s

#age in bio #its weird #tumblr etiquette #maturity #immaturity #age #ageism #trans #transphobia #second puberty #age discrimination #respect #honesty #tumblr #social norms #weird social norms #where are people taught to be like this? #it makes no sense #i don't understand people sometimes

[truthsinwhispers]

.

#85-90% of my friendships throughout my entire life were fake. #because i'm perfectly pleasant and fine to be around so people like me okay. #until i'm just a little too weird. until i'm just a little too offputting. until i feel just a little too hard. #until i fail to connect with someone in a “normal” way. #but i'm so nice and so hopeful and so trusting and so naive you'd feel so bad saying to my face you don't want me around. #so you ignore me and give me the false promises of “oh i'll see you again sometime we'll make plans!” and we both know it's a fucking lie. #if you knew my insecurities about you tore me apart you'd feel so bad. because i'm so nice and so pleasant #but that's all i'm fucking good for. i'm just pleasant and nice. i'm so pleasant and nice. and you don't have to care about me too much. #because i'm all whimsical and smiley and i like to giggle and talk your ear off but i can't connect with you. i can't connect with you. i ca #n't connect with you. #and then i lose the people who genuinely care about me to time. i want to throw up. #i'm so likeable. but i'm not loveable. i'm so nice and so pleasant. #i say nice things and give you compliments but when my whimsy borders on Too Much it's not okay anymore. #i break the rules of social norms and then you realize oh i'm really weird and my brain is weird so then you just kinda put me away. #like a toy. i'm everyone's favorite plaything until they outgrow me. #i'm sick of being outgrown because i refuse to let my sense of whimsy and simplicity of happiness die again. #i'm so nice and pleasant.

[definitelyuseless]

some people on heres takes on fiction are literally so bad or just weird its like literally where did that even come from

#especially things that have less of a fandom for some reason a higher proportion of people have stupid takes #its probably pointless going into the specifics of what this specific time but its actually so annoying #like its literally everyone who i can find talking about it? seriously #and like often its from the totally brainded thing like thats a significant relationship it must be romance #or absolutely everything thats even vaugley possible definitely has to be gay #and a lot of the time its like yeah whatever thats a bit of a stretch and not really the best understanding of their relationship #but sometimes its like thats literally the worst possible interpretation that makes no sense and is basically directly contradicted in the #text and its like i know a lot of people do it for fun not cause they want to understand the relationships in the text accurately #but still it sort of gets annoying #especially when like theres so many characters that it would sort of make sense to ship that would make way more sense but they have to #choose the ones whose relationship is portrayed as literally the furthest from romantic thats possible #without being biologically related or hating/being indifferent to each other #but oh no just cause its one of the strongest theres no way it could be anything but romantic fucking hell #also peoples understanding of social/culteral norms around gender and stuff like that? #fucking abysmal its ridiculous

[pallastrology]

the midheaven and imum coeli

aries on the midheaven makes for a native that aspires towards independence. they are natural hunters, relentless in their pursuit of their goals. they often have a reputation for having authority issues, and this can be true, they don’t cope well with working under the boot of other people, but they aren’t difficult to work with in general; when given the opportunity to work with someone they can build a strong connection with and when given a common, meaningful goal, aries midheavens are wonderful team members and are encouraging, passionate and energetic. with the midheaven in aries the lower heaven is in libra, and that’s where we see that slightly uncharacteristic talent for working in partnerships. growing up, the natives may have lived in a household where everything had to look perfect, where there were poor boundaries and avoidance and comfort-seeking from caregivers, rather than firm but fair treatment. the native had to grow up quickly and is very much a self-made individual now, but in some ways, they can feel stunted, like they’re stuck developmentally. they need to learn to uphold boundaries without becoming militant, to work with others while still supporting and encouraging themselves, to stay connected to the people that matter while they chase their prey.

taurus on the midheaven brings a desire for security. the native is artistic, stoic and determined. they don’t necessarily want fortune and fame, but they want to be valued and respected. they aren’t afraid to get their hands dirty or put in long hours and hard work to get to where they’re aiming for. their career paths can sometimes look more erratic than you’d expect for an earth placement, and this is because taurus midheavens often have issues with under - or over - valuing themselves, taking on meaningless work because they feel they haven’t earned better, or refusing opportunities out of stubbornness or a feeling of being out of their league. they work well with others when they are given time and patience, because these natives often have trust issues and can’t open up easily. with the midheaven in taurus the lower heaven is in scorpio, and a lot starts to make sense. they often grew up in homes with intense emotions and little in the way of healthy outlets or communication, homes where distance and mistrust was the norm. secrets were often kept and love may have been treated as a resource to guard fiercely and rarely give away. as an adult, the native has to come to terms with these early experiences and understand that we all have inherent worth, and are all deserving of unconditional love; it isn’t a thing to be earned, it’s within us all and can - should - be shared freely.

with gemini on the midheaven, the native aspires towards connection. they are adaptable, expressive, creative thinkers, who are quick to ask questions and quicker to learn. they have a strong desire to fly the nest and discover some of the world for themselves, and they usually do just this. the native can sometimes struggle to focus; they have a tendency to spread themselves too thin and get overwhelmed. they can be rather insecure, lacking faith in themselves and their abilities at times. this is often down to their upbringing. as a gemini midheaven, they have the lower heaven in sagittarius, which can indicate that they felt alone a lot growing up. perhaps their caregivers were very busy people, or they struggled to make friends, or were ostracised in some way. they may have felt like an outsider as a child, and so relied on their hobbies and dreams to sustain them when other people couldn’t. as an adult, gemini midheavens are a little anxious, quick to doubt themselves, but quick to seek out connections too; whether social or developmental. they would suit a life path that involves flexibility, a fast pace, multiple routes to progression and the chance to experience many kinds of people. however, they do need to stay still sometimes and listen to themselves. they may feel inferior at times, but they can learn a lot from themselves if they open their hearts.

cancer on the midheaven makes for a native that aspires towards comfort. they are highly attuned creatures, sensitive to others’ emotions and needs without them needing to say a word. the native is naturally maternal, not necessarily in the sense of wanting children, but in that they have a lot of care and love to give to whom they choose. they are traditionally well-suited to a career in the public eye, as this nurturing quality reflects well on others. the intensity of their life will often ebb and flow quite dramatically, even as far as water signs go. they need periods off to just rest and return to themselves, or they burn out terribly. with cancer on the midheaven, capricorn is on the lower heaven. growing up, the home was often a cold and clinical place, not one where emotional connections were the norm. as a result, the native, often subconsciously - as is the nature of water signs - goes through life searching for the warmth and comfort they needed as a child. they can become dependent on loved ones, or go the other way and give everything to these loved ones without getting an ounce back. it can be really helpful for them to research reparenting and go through life with the concept in their mind’s eye.

leo on the midheaven brings a desire for adoration. they may aspire to be seen as a star in their chosen field, though, honest as they are, only want this reputation if they can back it up. they are deeply passionate people, who work and play hard. their creativity and generosity will take them far in life, if they can learn to accurately identify and work on their flaws. at times they can be stubborn, and this is both good and bad for them. they are driven and determined, but often lack self-belief and rely heavily on loved ones to encourage and praise them when things get hard. with leo on the midheaven, we find aquarius on the lower heaven, and so we learn a little more. the native’s childhood was often quite a lonely one. whether that’s through an unconventional upbringing, emotionally distant caregivers or living somewhere isolated from peers, the native often felt they were alone in the world. now, as an adult, they are powerful people with the heart of a child. they are honest and loving and often a lot more vulnerable than they appear. they want love and support, but can get stuck feeling they need to “perform” to earn affection, becoming reliant on external sources for validation. building some self-esteem and learning to validate their own experiences and emotions is invaluable for these gentle giants, and they start to step into their strengths.

with virgo on the midheaven, the native aspires towards health and contentment. they are quick thinking, careful and dedicated, with a tendency to plan ahead down to the minutiae. there can be a habit of rushing ahead to their chosen destination without being able to enjoy the path they’re taking, and they are prone to anxiety and overthinking. a virgo midheaven is a judgemental placement, in that they are constantly assessing their situation and adjusting accordingly. this can make them seem controlling or critical at times. with the midheaven in virgo, the lower heaven is in pisces. the native’s childhood was often a chaotic place, with few boundaries and little emotional stability, leaving them to fend for themselves in a confusing and uncertain world. the native’s need to feel in control now makes a little more sense, but living life in constant fear of losing it is no real way to live. making use of their penchant for routine, their ability to learn any skill - especially those they deem practical in some way - and their softer, compassionate side will come in handy to help them loosen the reins a little. over time, with the same devotion they give to their loved ones and their chosen field, things do feel less daunting.

libra on the midheaven makes for a native that aspires towards peace and beauty. they are soothing, reflective and highly intelligent, with a craving for an easy, yet meaningful life. they have a tendency to choose pleasure and comfort over growth, to their detriment. they can be very afraid of confrontation and authority, making themselves small and silent to avoid it. they are attracted to careers in the arts, human rights, or paths that find them developing one-on-one connections with people in some way. with libra on the midheaven, we find aries on the lower heaven. the native often grew up in an explosive house, where conflict was handled poorly and communication was last in line. their caregivers may have been draconian and not allowed them to develop much of their own self, which can explain their fascination with how people work and their struggle to maintain healthy boundaries as adults. they are sensitive individuals and work very hard to make others happy, often at their own expense. it takes time to spot these patterns and start mending them, but it’s worth the work to build a beautiful life, by and for one’s own self.

scorpio on the midheaven brings a desire to know all their is to know about their chosen field. they are intriguing, determined and passionate, but they aren’t loud about it. they chase their goals with a fierce drive and focus, which can leave them blinkered to the rest of their life in the process. they can be overachievers, pushing themselves beyond their limits, and are often attracted to the “darker” side of life; what classes as dark, i’ll leave up to the individual to decide for themselves. the native is an intense individual, and not one that makes friends easily, but they tend to make friends for life when they do, chart depending. scorpio on the midheaven means taurus is on the lower heaven. the native’s childhood was often quite traditional in terms of values, with strict and hardworking caregivers who perhaps had some secrets. difficulties were between family, and we therefore kept quiet and not addressed, left to fester. as an adult, scorpio midheaven looks to excise secrets and half-truths in their life, and lives a life of integrity at any cost, or alternately, if they internalise their early experiences, they live a double life, hiding themselves from the world. to thrive, they need to be honest with themselves and their loved ones, and make use of their intense drive to work on themselves and their goals.

with sagittarius on the midheaven, the native aspires towards growth. they are detached, curious and enthusiastic, with an insatiable lust for knowledge. they are often attracted to careers that involve a lot of education or personal development, but can find it hard to settle down. traditionally, this placement would denote travelling or uprooting for a career, which suits the native just fine as they don’t attach too easily, to places or people. with sagittarius on the midheaven, gemini is on the lower heaven. growing up was a lonely experience for the native, who spent a lot of time alone. they craved connection and spontaneity, but instead of their caregivers, who may have been anxious individuals themselves, they found solace in the world around them. as adults, they are very cool externally, but struggle to attach closely and may struggle with commitment issues and a need for freedom that beats everything else. if they can settle their hearts and learn to let people in, they’ll find that their unique way of seeing the world, their creative thinking and wealth of knowledge will serve them very well indeed, and the world is just waiting for them.

capricorn on the midheaven makes for a native that aspires towards independence, respect and mastery. they are driven, strong-willed and surprisingly fiery at times, with a strong sense of responsibility. they are natural leaders and managers, but often fail to see themselves this way until they’re older and wiser. they don’t tend to find the prospect of self-employment attractive, preferring instead a more structured pathway, though they suit working for themselves very well. with capricorn on the midheaven, cancer lies on the lower heaven. the native’s childhood was spent having to “mother” those around them, whether that is because of unstable emotions from caregivers meaning they couldn’t do it, or life circumstances leading to an inability. the native had to learn to put aside ideas deemed childish in order to try and become what was expected of them. as an adult, capricorn midheaven is capable of truly amazing feats, but they are prone to melancholy and find it hard to believe in themselves. when they do learn this vital skill, their passion, drive and determination will take them far indeed, and help them strike a balance between work and life.

aquarius on the midheaven brings a desire to better things. they are more patient than they seem, but their brains move quickly and they do find it hard when those around them can’t keep up. they need support from their people and a good network to really thrive, being a social sign despite the mad scientist stereotype. they may be attracted to almost any field, but it has to be important to the native. with aquarius on the midheaven, leo is on the lower heaven. throughout their childhood, they felt different. not necessarily a bad different, but they knew they were cut from a different cloth to their caregivers, or peers perhaps. being a compassionate and conflict-avoidant placement, they often tried to act the part of one of the gang, and now as an adult they can feel unsure of who they really are and where they really fit in. they have a wide range of often-contradictory interests and skills, and make friends with people of all backgrounds, so they are something of a patchwork quilt. but that’s no bad thing, and embracing every part of themselves will allow them to find meaning and support in life.

with pisces on the midheaven, the native aspires towards healing. they are kind, perceptive and willing. their goals can be ephemeral and easily clouded, leaving them confused about their place in the world. they aren’t afraid of work but are deeply afraid of being stuck in a situation that drains them, as a sensitive and honest individual. with the midheaven being in pisces, the lower heaven is in virgo and so this fear makes a lot more sense. growing up, the native lived in a stern, restrictive household, where they felt they had to be perfect to be loved. they may have struggled with health issues which caused them some delays, or other rifts in the family. now, as adults, they can lack direction and feel easily overwhelmed and burned out, falling into pits of despair and depression relatively easily when they don’t take extra care. they have a huge store of compassion and this will be their most vital asset, along with their genuine interest in humanity and the world. they have a willingness to help others, an understanding of the depth of the human soul, and the ability to sit and listen and absorb. building healthy boundaries and letting themselves explore will serve pisces midheaven well in life.

#pallastrology #astrology #astrology blog #astrology post #midheaven #mc-ic #imum coeli #midheaven in aries #midheaven in taurus #midheaven in gemini #midheaven in cancer #midheaven in leo #midheaven in virgo #midheaven in libra #midheaven in scorpio #midheaven in sagittarius #midheaven in capricorn #midheaven in aquarius #midheaven in pisces

[beguines]

Yet problems in the legitimacy of psychiatry's vocation have remained, and reached crisis point at the cusp of deinstitutionalisation in the 1970s. At the time, a number of significant studies demonstrated the profession's inherent tendency to label people as "mentally ill," to stigmatise everyday aspects of a person’s behaviour as signs of pathology, and to make judgements on a person's mental health status based on subjective judgements rather than objective criteria.

The study that had the most direct impact on the psychiatric profession—as well as public consciousness—at this time was David Rosenhan's (1973) classic research On Being Sane in Insane Places which found that psychiatrists could not distinguish between "real" and "pseudo" patients presenting at psychiatric hospitals in the United States. All of Rosenhan's "pseudo" patients (college students/researchers involved in the experiment) were admitted and given a psychotic label, and all the subsequent behaviour of the researchers—including their note-taking—was labelled by staff as further symptoms of their disorder. This research was a culmination of earlier studies on labelling and mental illness which had begun in the 1960s with Irving Goffman (1961) and Thomas Scheff (1966). Goffman's ethnographic study of psychiatric incarceration demonstrated many of the features which Rosenhan's study would later succinctly outline, including the arbitrary nature of psychiatric assessment, the labelling of patient behaviour as further evidence of "mental illness," and the processes of institutional conformity by which the inmates learned to accept such labels if they wanted to have any chance of being released from the institution at a later date. Scheff's work on diagnostic decision making in psychiatry formulated a general labelling theory for the sociology of mental health. Again, his research found that psychiatrists made arbitrary and subjective decisions on those designated as "mentally ill," sometimes retaining people in institutions even when there was no evidence to support such a decision. Psychiatrists, he argued, relied on a common sense set of beliefs and practices rather than observable, scientific evidence. Scheff concluded that the labelling of a person with a "mental illness" was contingent on the violation of social norms by low-status rule-breakers who are judged by higher status agents of social control (in this case, the psychiatric profession). Thus, according to these studies, the nature of "mental illness" is not a fixed object of medical study but rather a form of "social deviance"—a moral marker of societal infraction by the powerful inflicted on the powerless. This situation is summated in Becker's general theory of social deviance which stated that "deviance is not a quality of the act the person commits, but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an 'offender.' The deviant is one to whom that label has successfully been applied; deviant behavior is behavior that people so label".

Bruce M.Z. Cohen, Psychiatric Hegemony: A Marxist Theory of Mental Illness

#bruce m.z. cohen #psychiatric hegemony #psychiatry

[dyketennant]

seeing good omens fans rallying together to make season 3 happen and maybe i'm just a jaded and bitter old man but. i really fucking hate that we live in a world where we as fans have to spend our free time on our knees begging billion-dollar corporations to allow the stories we love to get made. i hate that it's almost never assumed now that we will get more of the show we like, sometimes even when the next season is already in production, especially when the story even toes the line of any social boundary whatsoever. i hate that we have to live on edge, convinced that if the show we like isn't the #1 most popular show in the world, it will not succeed.

why does it have to be the most successful show ever made to be deserving of something? why is that responsibility and pressure put on fans, not on the people holding tv shows and movies over our heads like dogs waiting for a treat that may not ever come? why do artists have to hold their breath, knowing the money and resources are all there, but that maybe mr. zaslav is in a bad mood today and maybe he'll decide to casually dump your livelihood in the nearest dumpster, as if that's the norm?

and let me be clear, it's not our fault that we get so jittery and nervous when we don't get an instant confirmation of renewal. what i'm saying is, is anything ever going to be "enough" to grant any sense of security to artists, regardless of how well their art performs? will we ever feel safe to like media again?

#knock on wood but im not too concerned about good omens being renewed due to the marketing level? but still #good omens 2 #this also applies to #ofmd #our flag means death #the sandman #prodigal son #warrior nun #wga strike #sag strike #<-- tagging because it feels relevant here

[centrally-unplanned]

In my list of orphaned projects is a big damn essay on the fertility transition , which I never wrote. I had this in the docket for almost a decade, back when worrying about fertility rates was still a hot take. But alas the ship has sailed, everyone is talking about it now and has written it all out already, and I have mountains of projects, so I will just outline it quickly, sans graphs and footnotes. Maybe doing that will incentivize me to write up a full one someday, and it also gets my cohesive viewpoint out there.

The Future Is Exowombs & the Global Fertility Transition

The Trendline

The fertility transition has long roots - going back to 19th century France, originating in metropoles like Paris and culturally exporting itself to the countryside.

It seems broadly linked to material prosperity in ways that are load-bearing, one implies the other.

It is a 'sticky' cultural transition - once a country begins to move towards lowered TFR it never recovers outside of temporary blips.

It is not related to "western" cultural norms or specific contingencies of religion or ethnicity - those can matter at the margins, but rarely make a huge difference.

Starting in the 1990's, following sharp increases in A: global economic growth and B: global cultural diffusion/global monoculture, a trendline that used to be reserved for wealthy countries has rapidly accelerated, affecting countries at almost every income level. The fertility transition is now fully global.

The Cause

The primary driver of this phenomenon is the positive realization of desires - and by that I mean it is not something forced on people due to a lack in their lives.

It is not primarily caused by growing singleness; the number of people having any kids at all today is lower but overall pretty similar to the number of people who did a hundred years ago. It makes a marginal difference but not a huge one.

It is not linked to money, or housing prices, or other economic issues - fertility rates do not notably change with income levels or other price factors. At the margins, sure, but not at relevant ones.

It is not linked to specific technologies like contraception. People have understood how to prevent pregnancy for centuries - though like many things they do contribute at the margins. Additionally, you can’t uninvent them.

It is by a large majority linked to the death of large families. It was previously common for there to be families with 5 or more children, sometimes way more. 10+ children was not that rare in the past.

These families were disproportionately engaged in agricultural production; cities have always been fertility sinks.

In a world of manual household labor, rural living, low rights for women, low economic opportunities for women, and high death rates for children, these large families made sense. The 'opportunity cost' of the endless pregnancies & sicknesses was low (economically, not gonna handwave the immense personal toll)

All of these reasons have vanished. People want to have families, and love their children. But enduring multiple painful pregnancies, putting your career on hold, and spending huge chunks of your lifespan on child raising no longer tracks. The experience of having ~2 children is superior, along almost every metric, than the experience of having ~5 children for most people. This is what I mean by positive desires - the family structures of the past were built on misery and necessity, and will not return willingly.

The Problem

Many will point to the economic & social consequences of the Fertility Transition. They are very real, particularly at sub-1.0 fertility rates. If you are South Korea today, you have no plan for how your economy will truly support itself 50 years from now - you will vanish as a country in a few generations.

The focus on nearish-term crises also misses the opportunities lost - economic growth is premised on specialization, and specialization is premised on scale. A smaller world is a poorer world per capita, and a less innovative world, problems which have compounding effects. The difference in the long term is orders of magnitude.

But, far more importantly than any of that, is that we are nowhere close to the capacity of the earth to support humans. Supporting double or even triple the current population of the earth is trivial; a 10-fold increase would be quite easy, particularly once innovation is factored in. Being alive is a good of worth incomparable to anything else - the 'future' is literally defined by it. Time only meaningfully passes through the eye of one who can behold it.

The Failed Solutions

Money cannot buy lifespan or reclaim lost time - all attempts to throw money at the problem of fertility can help at the margins, but won't change the fundamentals. Some people want to have 2 kids, but can only afford 1. Or are prioritizing a career, but will work part time to have 3 kids. But the current policy crop of tax benefits or subsidized child care has not found a way to make someone truly want a larger family size, just mitigate gaps between desire and ability - and only barely.

Could radically larger amounts of money solve this problem? A professional career track in giving birth, 100k+ salaries for full-time mothers? I am open to the idea - but society isn't. The fiscal transfers needed are too radical for the current political environment, no one is proposing this.

Immigration was frequently proposed as a stop-gap, but its a 90's idea, premised on the idea that the Fertility Transition was a western problem that other countries did not face. It is not and never was; as every country's fertility declines, immigration becomes a zero-sum solution.

Turning back the clock on cultural change is A: impossible, the material logic of modern industrial production broke the need for it, and culture is downstream of material constraints. And B: its barbaric - if your answer to humanity's obstacles to greater flourishing is to condemn half of it to misery, we are better off dead.

So population levels will either stagnate or decline - unless something intervenes.

The "Future" Aka Getting Rationalist On Main

Exowombs, aka artificial wombs, allow you to grow a human child outside of the need for a person to incubate it. The baby (hah) step they let you do is strongly lower the cost of having a child; this is time & health given back to a mother, it will make having larger families easier.

But that won't fundamentally, shift the reality - that most people only want 1-2 kids, they don't want to raise more than that. However, with exowombs, you don't need to; you can make children outside of a family's desire for one. You can do that pretty trivially, actually. A society, if committed to solving its fertility issues, could mass-produce people with exowombs. Which would be very good to do ethically, because living is good and I personally don't think kids at orphanages should be euthanized to end their suffering, they are fine.

If some society, somewhere, did this, they would rule the world in a few generations. No one else is solving this problem, and meanwhile the human capacity to live on Earth is being woefully underutilized. Before natural human growth would solve this eventually - now it seems that will never happen, so anyone who actively tackles the problem wins. They literally win the future, by being the future.

Now, no one is going to do this soon - proposing this idea is not my point. Exowomb research is harshly regulated or illegal everywhere, modern society hates the idea of this kind of experimentation. We are, in so many ways, allergic to the idea of solving this problem. It doesn't even have to be exowombs, maybe we do the salaried mothers idea. My point is just the illustration - the future where there is 100 billion people dwarfs any current trendline future. That hypothetical dominates the worldline space, because arriving there organically seems to have faded away. The fact that we are not going to take that future, that it is probably gone now, is really, really sad.

But of course there is the other solution, the reactionary specter - instead of the technological solution, we choose the social one, of cultural regression and expanded reproductive control. I am not so worried about this, personally? Because I think it would unsustainable and result in a lot of bleed to liberal societies. It should not be taken lightly though - in a world where everyone has 1.0 fertility, and the social and economic consequences are becoming dire, I wouldn’t discount the willingness for radical solutions. I myself prefer the technologist side. But I think odds are we don't get either, just the long decline.

TL;DR - don’t let the Mormons win. Build exowomb factories.

#the fertility transition #essay

[tossawary]

For several different reasons, I'm not personally a big fan of "Soulmate AUs" (universes where there is some way to determine your destined romantic partner, often by some kind of magical birthmark), though I will admit that I have read and enjoyed some of these stories before. There are lots of fun and interesting ways to explore and subvert these tropes.

But past the coercive amatonormatism of it all (which I have seen many people consciously explore in neat ways), one of the things that sometimes bugs me is the worldbuilding or lack thereof. Often, the author of a Soulmate AU is not interested in expansive worldbuilding for a short fic and that's fine and fair. They're explicitly not here to explore what known soulmates throughout history would do to culture, both in terms of social norms and actual laws of government, in a 2k meet cute fic about people finding love.

The world being largely unchanged in a Soulmate AU sometimes makes me wonder if soulmate marks or whatever ARE relatively recent in these worlds, especially when so many of these worlds have magic. How did this HAPPEN? Some of these soulmate setups are so specific and artificial in their design (timers, written words, etc.) that I can't fully suspend my disbelief that it's at all natural. I replace this system's origins in my head with the "a wizard did it" excuse. Then it would make more sense for this world to be more or less identical, just with soulmates slapped on top by a mischievous or angry god.

I have seen many people go with various kinds of "it's a blessing from the gods" explanations and I think that's fun and fine worldbuilding. (And for most people's stories, there just isn't really a need to actually explain this magic system.) I'm currently interested in the idea that someone, not necessarily a divine being, intentionally or even accidentally cast a soulmate spell RECENTLY. Some people are thrilled and other people HATE this.

"Yeah, we've only had 'soulmates' around for about 200 years, since that big mysterious spell, and it's been a big fucking mess ever since." That's a funny mild subversion of the trope in my opinion. And also, I mean, personally speaking, I think that "let's go on a quest to argue with the god wizard who says you're not my soulmate (and maybe kill him and end his stupid spell)" is potentially an incredibly romantic storyline.

#tossawary fandom #fic ideas #soulmate au

[transmutationisms]

Hi Caden don’t know if you listen to Ethel Cain but was wondering what u think abt her subverting the Americana aesthetic since I think she’s often compared to Lana, at least online. I do think she’s doing something different & to me more compelling than Lana, but I don’t really know how to articulate it.

yep i like ethel cain. i agree she and lana are doing very different things. like, i said before that lana uses american nationalism because she's playing off the fact that it makes/has an erotic appeal, and she places herself as the object of desire in that paradigm—tell me i'm your national anthem, etc. my read on ethel is that she's interested in the rural americana 'trad' aesthetic from a very different angle, where she's trying to connect the homestead and american rural social structures to the perpetuation of violence. there's some overlap here in the sense that lana is definitely also interested in sexual violence and sexuality-as-violence, but in her work the violent or abusive man is generally a specific figure who's aberrant from the norm, and a lot of the artistic interest for lana comes (i think) from her interrogating what it is about this man that's appealing to her and how she sees herself through his eyes. with ethel, on the other hand, she portrays violence as coming through the infrastructure of normal and normative social structures, like the family and the church, with abuse understood to be a feature of these and not a bug. family, church, etc are in turn understood to be part of the infrastructure of american rural communities, casting the critique she's making through the ethel character onto this entire social apparatus (& there is some implication here of how this is all a part of westward colonial settlement—which is a potentially fruitful direction to go in, the idea of expansion into the 'frontier' as a narrative of, or narrative prerequisite to, violence).

so for example this is partly why, for ethel, incest specifically is a mode of sexuality & violence that she continually uses and interrogates: she's invoking it as an intensification of the 'normal functioning' of the family, which means the whole family structure gets pretty ruthlessly questioned through the character of ethel and the violence she faces. she invokes the trad aesthetic and the idyllic family homestead, then shows you the brutality that creates and is created by them. for lana, the family is not a concern in this way and is not something she's questioning or challenging the way ethel does (the daddy/girl thing in lana's work is p far removed from even a pseudo-incestuous reading most of the time, even in her lolita references). there's a similar distinction with how ethel examines protestant theology and practice with the explicit goal of pointing out inherently violent aspects of it, whereas for lana, invoking god or christian imagery is generally more on the level of playing off the way that american nationalism resembles and uses rituals of religious worship. lana takes political phenomena like the appeal of nationalism, and expresses them through the erotic configuration of these relationships with older, dominant men. with ethel it's more that she looks at social structures and practices signified by the rural americana aesthetic, and pokes and prods at these structures until the violence inherent to them is glaringly obvious to listeners through the ethel character's story. it's a way of problematising these institutions and practices, not letting them hide in plain sight by presenting themselves as benevolent.

so yeah i can understand why people might want to compare these two artists, but i think they're actually doing very different things. i would probably not say either of them 'subverts' americana or signifiers of nationalism, which is not a criticism, i just think that concept is often poorly defined and less frequently applicable to art than people sometimes think lol. ethel uses her character's story to deconstruct and question the american aesthetics and institutions her work invokes; lana translates these aesthetics and institutions into explicitly erotic discourses and dissects them through the allegorical figures of the people and relationships in her songs. (this is not to discount the importance of erotics in ethel's work as well obvi but this post is already long :P)

#ethel cain #lana

[am-i-the-asshole-official]

AITA for being condescending towards an asexual kid in GSA?

🙃🏳️‍🌈 to find later

Long post so buckle up.

I (17, they/it/he) am one of three co-leaders of my school’s GSA, along with R (18, she/her) and N (17, he/him). All three of us are openly bi, and I’m also openly trans and (most importantly) very loudly aromantic. We’re all in 12th grade now but we were leaders last year (in 11th grade) too. The school/GSA is small enough that all four grades (9–12, so around 13–18 years old) are in the same GSA, there’s no separate upper grade and lower grade groups. We also have two advisors, both cis queer teachers; and some younger queer faculty members also join sometimes for formal events. We take turns running events during club time, such as fun crafts or watching music videos. Sometimes we also do educational stuff or documentaries, including having teachers come in to facilitate discussions.

I’ve been planning (since early December) to run a two part series of discussions about asexuality and aromanticism (separate discussions of each). I really just wanted to do one day about aromanticism, but R said that if I did that, people would derail it and just talk about asexuality anyways, which both N and our advisors also agreed made sense. So, it’s two days, and the asexuality one is first so that the aromanticism one can be closer to Aromantic Spectrum Awareness Week (ASAW).

There’s a girl in GSA, let’s call her A (16, she/her), who’s in 11th grade. She’s very socially awkward and if someone points out that she’s accidentally said something rude or offensive she’ll make a big deal out of not knowing and generally derail the conversation. Also, two years ago A made a ton of “jokes” about me and my little sibling (16MtF) being “secretly dating.” When I asked her (politely at first) to stop, she said she was just joking around, and kept doing it. I asked her again and also asked the theatre teacher and school counselor for help, and eventually she did stop. But A kept following me around and trying to be friends with me, and I was super uncomfortable to the point that I asked the school counselor to facilitate a conversation between A and I so that I could ask her to fucking stop. It somewhat worked. Now she still keeps trying to start conversations with me in the hallways and such, but I just brush her off or ignore her.

The one place I can’t do that is during GSA. Since I’m a leader, I have to be civil to everyone and actually talk to people (R, N, and I set norms at the start of the year during our planning meetings). A is asexual but not aromantic, and today she showed up like 5 minutes into lunch (cafeteria lines are annoying) and loudly asked if she was late. We weren’t doing anything in GSA today, just chilling. At some point during the meeting I announced casually that next week we’d be discussing asexuality, and then the week after that we’d talk about aromanticism, which leads nicely into ASAW during February break. When I said this, A immediately said that she would be extra ace that week [during ASAW]. I was like, “during aromantic spectrum awareness week?!?!” in the same tone of that “during pride month?!?!” meme. She looked like someone had just given her an F on the most important test of the year and said she hadn’t known.

I also made a comment about how there’s way more openly aspec people at our school than at most schools, and N said that maybe the presence of role models is part of that (clear subtext: he was referring to me). I said pretty loudly (more people could hear) that it was kinda funny that I’m the “ace role model” when I’m literally not asexual. A looked super lost and confused at this, and I think she might’ve thought I was ace, even though I’m super open about not being ace, and have told her directly more than once.

Here’s where the potential assholery comes into play. There’s an ad for PrEP that was fairly common on the back covers of theatre playbills in the past year. The ad shows a Black man dressed in ripped leggings with fishnets, shiny knee-length heeled leather boots, and some sort of white leather harness, doing a bridge pose with one leg extended upwards so that the “r” in PrEP is resting on the sole of the boot. The ad has a bright red background and text that says “you cast of PrEP options is changing” along with a small QR code and website link. The pose is somewhat provocative, but not out of place on a playbill for an all-ages show.

During GSA, A was saying that she thought the ad was bad, because of the leather being “fetish gear” and “weird” (basically the same arguments people use to say that gay people shouldn’t be allowed in public). I told A that there’s nothing wrong with someone wearing leather, and she said that “it’s fetish gear and that’s disgusting and degenerate and just bad advertising!”

I explained calmly, like I would to a child (although I probably wouldn’t talk about this topic with a child), that PrEP is a medicine that people take if they anticipate having sex with someone who’s HIV-positive, so it’s okay that the ad is somewhat suggestive. She seemed to accept that, but still said that the leather was weird, and the ad should’ve shown “a diverse group of people getting pills at a pharmacy” instead, because “fetish gear” was too much.

I asked if she thought that all leather clothing was inherently fetishistic, to which A said yes, and then I asked, “do you know that people can’t just choose fetishes?”

She hadn’t known that, but she still said the ad was too sexual. I pointed out that it was a fairly well-targeted advertisement, using theatre references, but maybe A was not part of the target demographic. I also said that sometimes outfits are just hot without there needing to be any fetishes involved, which she didn’t refute, and that even if it was a fetish, that wouldn’t make it inherently “bad” or “degenerate” at all.

A said that she still didn’t like it, and I told her that she was entitled to have whatever feelings she wanted to have, but that doesn’t mean the advertisement itself is a problem.

Another person (17, he/him) called out “[OP], what do you think about kink at pride?” in a sort of nonchalant way, so I walked over while saying “i’m pro–kink at pride.” The conversation eventually moved in other directions, and then club ended and we had to go to our next classes.

TL;DR: given my position of power and responsibility as a GSA leader, AITA for being kinda condescending towards an ace person who’s 2 years younger than me because she was being very sex-negative about an ad for PrEP?

What are these acronyms?

#aita #am i the asshole

[ancientgoddessofegypt]

MERCURY-NEPTUNE : THE ILLUSIONIST MIND READERS. CAPTORS OF THE SOUL & RARE GEMS OF THE COSMOS.

Mercury/Neptune aspects have a mind that is capable of seeing things out side of the norm. There ability to see the unknown and be able to see the subliminal in everything makes them a delicacy in understanding the magic behind the scenes.

Mercury neptune babes have the ability to sense things through social cues others would never guess they’d know upon meeting them. Their able to pick up on energies in the space of the and can sometimes hone it for themselves.

This special quality allows to dip and dabble with certain vibrations and alchemize it.

Naturally good at telepathic communication and are impeccable mind readers.

No matter what a person does it will be impossible to hide the truth because energy does not lie. It is thru the art of communication they are able to receive certain messages from you even if it doesn’t make sense at the moment.

This placement is a rare gem. I call this a “siren” aspect. Due to its nature or attracting others with their voice and alluring them with their thoughts and ways of expression.

Very good at hiding the truth in plain sight and showing us what they want to see, that’s their Neptunian skill kicking in putting up a fog whenever they feel is necessary.

As they are great at seeing thru illusions they are even better at creating them.

Their way of making you feel something with the use of words is a power tool into embracing others and themselves. It is through the tongue that they are able to heal you, themselves as well as speak what they desire into fruition.

The dreamers use words to script their reality and make it possible by living through the heart. Neptune is the higher octave of Venus so it is the higher heart. Believing in something even if we do not see it as the part that makes the dream grow stronger.

Can recieve visions starting at a young age. Seers are typically born with this placement and can have dreams of the future. Deja vu moments can happen very often and usually it’s a message for them on how to perceive the future.

Something about their mannerisms makes people inspired by them. Neptune is also the muse, so the way they write and speak can sometimes be duplicated due to the magical auras they carry, it shows through their way with words. <3 hope you all enjoy !

#astrology #astrology thoughts #astrology observations #neptune #mercury neptune aspects #tropical astrology #astro knowledge #astrology tips #astrology and numerology #vedic astrology #love astrology #poem

[genderkoolaid]

This article is about the experiences of trans men in Pakistan; one of the men interviewed is also intersex. It discusses their experiences with anti-transmasculine transphobia and intersexism, but I also found this part at the end interesting:

“I am an official chela in the transgender community,” smiles Shahzaib [one of the trans men]. A chela lives under the advice and support of his guru, an older, experienced, transgender woman who is the head of the Khwaja Sira household, he explains. “If you look at history, transmen, or those women who didn’t want to marry or didn’t consider themselves women, had a place in Khwaja Sira households. So, to this day, they carry this tradition on.” “The Khwaja Sira community has had a longstanding relationship with Mai Munday,” explains Dr. Mehrub Moiz Awan, a Khwaja Sira social media activist. Mai Munday are transmen in Khwaja Sira Farsi. “They used to come to the Dera of the Khwaja Siras, and act as their brothers, and sometimes even they lived in our Deras. All masculine responsibilities were undertaken by these transmen.”

I have never heard of this, but it makes sense that transmasculine & other genderqueer people would take shelter in these communities!

#m. #transmasc history #and present

[max1461]

Honestly as much as I'm like "I appreciate media that is unabashedly horny", which is true, anime fan service is often a bit too much for me just on the level of like, my own taste. Uh it just comes across as crass and tacky a lot, it makes the work more difficult for me to enjoy.

I also think the argument that it's like, often problematic objectification is not wrong. Maybe that's obvious. But like, well, there's something subtle (or sometimes, not so subtle) which makes the difference for me between "media that feels horny in a 'fair' way" and "media which feels horny in 'gross' or 'gawking' way". Those are both poor terms but like, sexualized in a way that feels...

Well there's no easy line for me to draw here. There's nothing specifically that you can't do in work, IMO, there's basically no line that I'm like "categorically you can't cross that". But I do think you should be at least somewhat aware of the ideas your work is conveying about sexuality and society and so on.

Uh maybe what I mean is just "have tact". Like I don't mean "never try to titillate the audience", and I don't mean "all your titillation must sufficiently be subversive of social norms to be allowed", or whatever. Lots of people who say the thing I said in the last paragraph mean one of those things. But I don't. I just mean don't be a dumbass, maybe? I mean something. I mean be aware that like, while I don't a priori object to a work in which every female character's boobs flap around simply because the creator finds it hot, there are certain works where you really should not do that. You see? Things have to be... contextually appropriate, and I mean both the work's internal context but also its context in society as a whole. Right, because of social conditions, and you know, the way that women are treated, and shit, well you're all smart you all know, there's certain contexts in which it is not appropriate to have all the female characters have their boobs flop around. And many more contexts where it's sort of fine it just makes the work a bit worse.

Idk.

Cause like. There's some anime, actually a lot of it, that's just ridiculously straight-guy-horny and I'm just like "you know what, this is fine actually, this is great. I have zero problem with this." And then there's a lot that has all the same shit in it and I'm like "oof, that feels really inappropriate. That feels like a shitty portrayal, an insensitive thing to include, that's bad."

And the different is not the nature of the panty shots themselves it's everything around the panty shots, right. Does that make sense?

I feel like the is kind of the sensible synthesis of recent (and IMO correct) trends around like, idk, pro-horniness? Like sex positivity already means a specific thing but like, pro-horniness, you know, pro-desire (many people on this website are talking about such thing, and again I think correctly), with the IMO also true and important fact that like, objectification of women and so on is a real thing in media and it is actually problematic (I mean "problematic" in the naive sense, not as SJ jargon). Like maybe it's not problematic in the exact set of ways 2014 pop-feminism or anti-porn radfems or whatever say it is, but it's like. There are contexts in which I think you really probably should not be zooming in on the boobs and so on. Like, you feel me?

#navel gazing

[she-who-seek-happiness]

For those who have ADHD and/or autism.

I wanna to do a test to see if I'm autistic, have ADHD, both or neither. For some reason I'm terrified of knowing the truth. Sorry if I sound offensive at some point, I'm just writing about myself and don't mean to be mean at any point.

ADHD, the name changed right? Gonna use this one because I'm writing this quickly. If I have ok, that'd explain why I'm so forgetful and nothing catches my attention unless I'm interested in the topic. And why is so hard to focus. And why I never finish my projects. But I'm not hyper active. I'm a pretty calm person, I can't reall5sit and focus for too long, but give me a hair elastic thing and I'll play with it for hours while listening to you. And I'll be able to actually listen.

Don't ask me to look in your eyes tho, I will. But only for 5 minutes if you are lucky.

My mom a lot for times aska me for things and I completely forget about them, things that are important and I feel bad for forgetting.

But all of this could simply be me and no ADHD. I don't know.

Autism

Frankly I don't think I have autism. But the reports are just so relatable it scares me a bit. I was bullied a lot during my childhood. I remember in the first grade, I tried hard to make friends but I never was able to. To this day I don't know why. Why people didn't like me? I have a timeline of events in my head of my entire life, things that happened when I was 2 y.o. but I don't have details. I don't remember if i did something or not to be not liked. The first school that my parents put me in I was there for a year. In this whole year I didn't make a single friend. I remember I asked my parents for help to do a lost of people who were and weren't my friends simply to try to uncover the reason for that. Is this a sign of autism? Idk. Maybe I'm just out of the norm, but not autistic. Doesn't seem like autism. Autism is something that affects your day to day, every day life. I'm not sure if I have signs everyday.

I have trouble socializing. I have trouble making friends. I have trouble maintaining friendship. But I can understand sarcasm, jokes and I'm able to tell when people are sad or uncomfortable. so there's goes signs that the internet sites gave me. Sometimes I do have troubles talking and truly understanding what my parents say. Not because they are complex, but because I don't get it. There are easier ways to do things and they won't for some alien reason.

I have trouble understanding relationships, in the sense what it means to be in, part of or the different aspects of relationship. People expect things. Sometimes it feels like mathematical equations on which I have to be constant aware of. I gave to do this to get to that. A lot of times I feel like I'm manipulating the few relationships that I have big I can't see another way.

Don't you dare change my routine. I'll be messed up and although not cry, I'll be very close to. Unless the change is "we are not going outside of the house anymore", sudden things messes my little planned time. At the same time I can't really organize myself very well.

I do have some subjects on which I'm very passionate about. But I'm no genius on them and although I'd love to, I can't keep going on them for hours and hours because, as said before I can't communicate very well. My social skills are terrible, I don't know what to say most of the time but I feel like I should.

I don't think I have autism. I don't think I have ADHD. I think I'm only different from other people but can't put my finger exactly on what exactly. I don't feel like I really fall into the spectrum because I lack the usual signs. But I don't know how much of this is stereotyping both those conditions.

#autism #adhd #questions #help?????

[lnkedmyheart]

I don’t think a majority of people understand is that Dazai’s version of manipulation is just… putting people in situations and making an educated guess at what they will do. Usually he’s right but sometimes he’s wrong! Sometimes he will set the pieces up so they will be more likely to fall a certain way, but I think it is more accurate to say most of the time he is manipulating the situation more than he is manipulating the people, if that makes sense? His method of manipulation is pretty hands off, all things considered. Fyodor, on the other hand, seems to favor a more direct and heavy handed form of manipulation, what with his lobotomies, his answer to the waitress question, and his usage of vampire Chuuya. He also relies on people acting the way he expects them to to a certain extent, but he seems far more quick to take direct route to controlling the board

Dazai manipulates the situation based on what he thinks people will do based on their personal set of beliefs as individuals and then attempts to gently nudge them in that direction. Dazai knows people are unique and fascinated by them.

Fyodor manipulates people because he thinks people are useless and empty beings following a bunch of social norms and he likes to fuck with that and use them like puppets. Fyodor thinks they are a generalized category of sinners and hates them.