#Socioeconomic status and mental health | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

transgenderteensurvivalguide · 4 months

Note

Is it being discriminatory or offensive to think that being mtf is always going to be harder than being ftm? (I am enby afab)

Lee says:

Your question touches on a complex and sensitive topic within the trans community, and it's important to approach this with an understanding that every individual's experience with gender identity and transition is unique, and there are various factors that can influence the challenges they face.

The concept of intersectionality is crucial here. People experience discrimination differently based on intersecting aspects of their identity like race, class, age, disability, and their socioeconomic status, access to healthcare, etc.

And even beyond that, each person's journey is shaped by a multitude of factors including their family dynamics, social environment, cultural context. These factors can make the experience of being trans vastly different for each individual.

You can't compare two people based on a single identity and say "ah this person must have had it worse because they are [X identity]!" because people aren't just one single identity, they're whole people.

Certain things can affect one part of the trans community more than another, like hypervisibility vs invisibility/erasure for example, or the rhetoric supporting laws that prevent trans people from competing on teams that match their identified gender. It's true that trans woman are often dehumanized and seen as either sexual predators, as sexual objects, or as a joke, and as a result are often the targets of a lot of transphobic rhetoric.

Minority stress is real, and it can affect people's physical and mental health even if they are not personally facing a current physical threat to their safety.

While trans people who were AMAB may be more affected by some of that stress, that doesn't mean it exclusively affects them-- often the whole community ends up feeling the effects.

Even if trans women are often targeted in bathroom bills, for example, the end result is no trans person can use the bathroom that aligns with their gender. And being discriminated against for being transgender and seeing others face discrimination for a shared identity can create distress and that should be acknowledged.

Comparing the struggles between segments of the trans community can inadvertently create a hierarchy of suffering, which is not constructive. It's more helpful to acknowledge that while experiences can be different, each individual's challenges are valid and deserving of support and understanding.

We get variations on this discourse pretty frequently and I used to answer this question when it was asked. But recently I started to wonder what good my answer will do-- If I tell you "x group is Most Oppressed tm" how does that change anyone's lives for the better?

If you're interested in this type of thing from an academic perspective then you can study the issue more, and make up all the "What if" scenarios you want. A trans woman who grows up in a supportive white liberal NYC family, starts puberty blockers at age 12, starts estrogen and legally changes her name and gender marker at age 15, has bottom surgery at 18 and goes off to college having been "passing" as female since childhood is going to have a vastly different experience than a Black transmasculine person who grew up in poverty in the South, doesn't have a supportive family, came out at 16 and was kicked out and then never finished high school, manages to start testosterone at 23 but isn't able to afford top surgery until they 34 and is often misgendered as a result of not being able to bind in their physical job. They will have completely different backgrounds, experiences, and privileges even if they both started to transition before middle age. And of course "passing privilege" is another can of worms that I'm not going to open here.

Instead of focusing on which group has it harder, it's beneficial to recognize that yes, there are some differences in our experiences, when viewed on average, but that should be used as motivation to help people who genuinely need it instead of just being divisive.

When you notice someone using transphobic arguments or targeting any trans people, you should obviously speak up and fight back on their behalf if you're comfortable-- we have to support each other, but we're all part of the same community and everyone's safety is important. Don't put yourself in danger.

So yeah, I'm tired of rehashing the Discourse and won't be answering questions about that type of topic. Good vibes only lol. In general, we all need to work to foster a sense of solidarity and support within the trans community and be open to listening to the experiences of all trans individuals. Understanding the diverse perspectives within the transgender community can lead to greater empathy and support, and mutual support can be a powerful tool in navigating the challenges of living in a transphobic culture.

#Lee says #discrimination

98 notes · View notes

whetstonefires · 8 months

Text

The thing about the Shazam! (Captain Marvel but they don't have the rights to call him that) movie is that overall it's pretty good? Even if I question the pacing choices made in terms of screentime breakdown for '14yo boys making mortifying life choices and humorously failing judgment calls' vs. 'character development wrt to literally anything else about this fairly large cast.'

It's hokey; it should be. It's got some decent themes and fun character bits and set up good solid hero/villain parallels to subvert.

But.

But it massively clotheslined itself with a major storytelling fuckup connected to the opening hook mystery, whose resolution is meant to be the emotional inflection point of the whole film.

Because the thing is, this movie chose to be slightly interesting in how it approached its 'family' themes. In a variation on 'family of choice' (since your foster family are in fact assigned by the government and Billy not having a choice about living with them only about trusting them is a major story element) it went for the more nuanced and kind of interestingly grimy take that the people who are actually in your life giving a shit about you matter, if you let them, and that you need to stop giving the people who failed to love you power over your happiness.

Which is not a bad premise at all! As messages for a movie about a kid being sent to a group home go, that's the most upbeat you could possibly get and still be tied to reality.

The Vasquez couple are written and played well in these terms too because they really, genuinely care, and are making so much effort, but as system graduates themselves they never had competent parenting modeled for them and god does it show.

And the mental health problems of the kids who got enough characterization to have them were similarly...realistic in a best-case-scenario sort of way.

But! Still with the but! Even though they pulled off a lot of this fairly touchy premise rather well, there's a crack in the foundation that makes the whole movie kind of collapse on a thematic level.

Because the movie (following the prologue introducing the villain's backstory) opens with a juicy emotional hook where small Billy is separated from his mother at a Christmas fair and never sees her again.

Cut to some years later, establishing status quo scene, he's a Troubled Youth rebelling against the system in an endless quest to find his mother and go home. He is committing minor felonies to get access to police information about women surnamed Batson so he can go to their houses because eventually one of them has to be his mom.

His case worker after he's picked up again refers to his mother as 'someone who clearly didn't want you,' which Billy rejects as bullshit, and he's valid! Because that is not what you say when you have actual information. That's a surmise. That's a sentence that says Child Protective Services and the police couldn't find her either.

Especially because you don't immediately chuck a kid into foster care because he's found unattended. Maybe you do that later, after a lengthy period of oversight, depending on his mom's reaction to having him returned and her race and socioeconomic status and apparent mental health and so forth. But you don't just not contact her, and you definitely don't refuse to tell the kid about the result once you have.

The only normal situation where an accessible record exists of a kid's original parentage but it's denied to the kid is in sealed adoptions, which are a formal procedure that clearly didn't happen here. There is every indication in this opening sequence that his mom was never found.

Which means she's a missing person. Either because they located the correct Billy Batson and his adult never came back to their house (which would suggest foul play or some other drama) or because despite being old enough to be in school and knowing his own name, no one could find evidence that Billy existed prior to turning up at that street carnival.

Which would constitute a very mysterious situation! What is he, from a cult? Another dimension? Did someone (in the social worker's proposed scenario, Billy's mom) erase all record of her kid somehow? Was magic involved?

So: the way we're introduced to this scenario, there's a legitimate weird mystery here that none of the adults in Billy's life care enough about to do anything but tell him to write it off, the way they have. That his missing person clearly did it on purpose.

Billy's being ridiculous because if what he's trying would work then he wouldn't need to do it; his social worker could have arranged a meeting years ago. So it's a useless self-destructive behavior he needs to let go. But he's valid, in that he's being very obviously failed by the system and is doing the only thing he can think of to try to address his situation for himself.

And then! The Big Reveal is that his mom has been living under her maiden name in the same city as him this whole time.

Which the Gamer Kid Who Turns Out In This Scene To Be A Hacker (he's about 10) learned by. Breaking into a federal database.

So he goes to her house and it turns out. She'd been a teen mother and her babydaddy walked out after marrying her, and her parents cut her off, and she was depressed and felt like a bad mother so. When she saw the cops had her kid, she just walked away. And she wants to believe he's been happy and better off without her.

And the emotional arc of the film rests on how Billy comes to terms with this. With the fact that his past will never take him back and he has to learn to find joy in himself and his present situation and his future.

Having let go of that idea, he's able to emotionally commit to his gaggle of foster siblings and realize that unlike the villain, who was obsessed with punishing the people who never loved or accepted him, or the wizard who was focused on finding The Perfectly Worthy Champion, what you needed to be good and not lost was to be part of a mutually supportive group, like the wizard Shazam was before he and his siblings were betrayed. And then they can be a superhero team, woo!

And that part is actually depicted fairly well, all things considered!

But the problem is that the audience, to vibe with this properly, has to roll with the revelation that Billy was wrong to cling to the mystery of his vanished, beloved mother and the fantasy of going home again.

We have to be willing to participate in the idea that the Resistant Child Subjected To Foster Care was in the wrong.

And he wasn't! He wasn't wrong! His understanding of the situation was flawed but it should not have been flawed in this manner.

Because this scenario as it's depicted doesn't make any sense. The cops do not just keep your kid without following up if you fail to collect him from the baggage claim. CPS does not fail to provide a kid with the readily available evidence that he's been voluntarily surrendered to them, when he keeps running off trying to go home.

Why would they do that, after all? Billy's misbehavior was a huge hassle for them. They gained nothing by denying him access to his mother and the information about her that was, you recall, sitting totally available in a government database that could be hacked by a random 10 year old asian-american orphan. They just...made their own lives harder for no reason, while extending the suffering of a child in their care.

If the cops tried to return him back when and she said 'no i left him with you on purpose please keep him' maybe she gets prosecuted for child abandonment and maybe not, but either way, billy would know about it.

But if the screenwriters had made it clear early on that this information had been offered to him and he'd chosen not to believe it, they couldn't get a proper Reveal at the end because it would just be Billy being unable to continue pretending something the audience had known not to believe all along.

And they couldn't cram a good reason for the scenario they'd set up into the space they'd accorded it.

So they were just like, it's fine, if we cram enough cliches into this space people will react to the familiarity and go 'ah yes i know this one' and go along with it, and not notice that this isn't an actual coherent reply to the question that was set up an hour ago and therefore is emotionally unsatisfying somehow.

Anyway this is an important storytelling guideline: if you put in a mystery to control either the actual plot or, even worse, the emotional storyline, that mystery and its resolution have to make internal sense.

If you pull the Real Situation out of your ass, and it's not a matter of red herrings or That One Fact you didn't have that makes all the rest fit together differently, but in fact no one involved could have figured this out and especially if the people who did say this in the first place had no good basis for it, but still get narratively awarded the Correct trophy in a way that contributes to the thematic climax so the audience has to care. Then that will not get good results. It will make it hard to deliver on your intended themes.

Some people will not notice or care! This is true! But a lot of people will, and you'll get enough of a better punch even with the other folks, if the setup and denouement fit together properly and don't require reaching, to matter.

And when people do notice at all, rather than their naturally flowing along with the climax you're steering toward and experiencing A Story, there will be a tendency to notice you standing there placing roadsigns toward the Intended Emotional Response, and call you a hack.

People call out plotholes way too vigorously sometimes, so I want to be clear: it's not the lack of supporting logic I mind. It's that the active presence of illogic, of what's presented as a chain but is broken along its length, means the central character arc intersects with the core theme in a noticeably forced way. Which is bad craftsmanship on a meaningful level.

There is a loss of cohesion where you cannot satisfactorily resolve how the scenario we were initially shown came to be superimposed over the revealed truth, because that relationship between elements is very important to making a 'revelation' storyline land, you know?

In this case it's particularly vexing to me because the last-minute asspull and its thematic weight reaches back around and at the last minute moves the whole movie thematically to the other side of the line wrt whether it's approaching Billy, our protagonist, as a subject with whom we're supposed to identify or an object whom we're supposed to observe.

It makes all the high-school-freshman-posing-as-adult gags retroactively less funny because we were now more explicitly laughing at him, and takes a lot of the depth out of the emotionally sincere moments.

Up to that point I had really appreciated how, despite wavering that way, Shazam! hadn't actually fallen to the MCU Spiderman temptation to dehumanize its protagonist. Which seems to arise out of this weird tendency I've noticed to assume the natural sentiment of adults toward adolescents is bemused contempt, and that therefore if they ask their audience of paying grownups to empathize too closely with a teen hero instead of setting him and his Immaturity up as a clown for our amusement, they'll get themselves banished to the Children's Fiction ghetto.

And, of course, if they'd been fully committed to one side or the other of 'Billy is a protagonist the viewer relates to closely' or 'Billy is a protagonist the viewer relates to distantly,' they wouldn't have gotten snarled up about how much information to hand over when.

Committing to either option (giving us only as much information as Billy had and constructing a story that was solid from a being-Billy angle or giving us more information than Billy and operating confidently in the realm of dramatic irony) could have worked quite well. But because of the mixed signals and unstable narrative distance, they wound up with a distinctly weakened finale.

#hoc est meum #in real life things happen that you have no good reason to expect all the time #but in real life we know they happened for some kind of reason as in #causality exists and even in situations where we can't dig into the chain #we have cause to understand that it's there #in fiction they happened because they'd be convenient #so the rules of what information can be available and how you frame new information being revealed exist #to keep the audience from feeling jerked around #you have to earn people's trust and if you lose it #that limits the kind of results you can get #when writing fiction one of your tools is the reader's mind #if you give them reason not to allow you free use of it your composition contracts #screenwriting #shazam #and like in this case there's a profound betrayal of the protagonist and thus of the audience who connected with him wrapped up in it

87 notes · View notes

autistic-people-are-awesome · 11 months

Text

source: https://www.facebook.com/HVPPYHANDS

Hvppyhands

Can we talk about gatekeeping diagnosis, how it’s considered a great stroke of fortune to encounter a medical or mental health professional who has read a word about autism since they went to school two decades ago,

how race and socioeconomic status further compound our ability to seek a diagnosis, and about how self diagnosis is valid for these reasons and more?

We are common, and we are often invisible to the systems we face barriers in navigating.

This needs to change.

Our community’s concerning mental health statistics, unemployment, poverty, and disenfranchisement don’t discriminate

based on whether or not we’ve met someone competent enough to diagnose adults who’ve learned to mask throughout their lives.

The barriers are there for us regardless.

#autism #self diagnosis #actually autistic #late diagnosed autistic

133 notes · View notes

d0nutzgg · 9 months

Text

Predicting Alzheimer's With Machine Learning

Alzheimer's disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that affects millions of people worldwide. Early diagnosis is crucial for managing the disease and potentially slowing its progression. My interest in this area is deeply personal. My great grandmother, Bonnie, passed away from Alzheimer's in 2000, and my grandmother, Jonette, who is Bonnie's daughter, is currently exhibiting symptoms of the disease. This personal connection has motivated me to apply my skills as a data scientist to contribute to the ongoing research in Alzheimer's disease.

Model Creation

The first step in creating the model was to identify relevant features that could potentially influence the onset of Alzheimer's disease. After careful consideration, I chose the following features: Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR), Socioeconomic Status (SES), and Normalized Whole Brain Volume (nWBV).

MMSE: This is a commonly used test for cognitive function and mental status. Lower scores on the MMSE can indicate severe cognitive impairment, a common symptom of Alzheimer's.

CDR: This is a numeric scale used to quantify the severity of symptoms of dementia. A higher CDR score can indicate more severe dementia.

SES: Socioeconomic status has been found to influence health outcomes, including cognitive function and dementia.

nWBV: This represents the volume of the brain, adjusted for head size. A decrease in nWBV can be indicative of brain atrophy, a common symptom of Alzheimer's.

After selecting these features, I used a combination of Logistic Regression and Random Forest Classifier models in a Stacking Classifier to predict the onset of Alzheimer's disease. The model was trained on a dataset with these selected features and then tested on a separate dataset to evaluate its performance.

Model Performance

To validate the model's performance, I used a ROC curve plot (below), as well as a cross-validation accuracy scoring mechanism.

The ROC curve (Receiver Operating Characteristic curve) is a plot that illustrates the diagnostic ability of a model as its discrimination threshold is varied. It is great for visualizing the accuracy of binary classification models. The curve is created by plotting the true positive rate (TPR) against the false positive rate (FPR) at various threshold settings.

The area under the ROC curve, often referred to as the AUC (Area Under the Curve), provides a measure of the model's ability to distinguish between positive and negative classes. The AUC can be interpreted as the probability that the model will rank a randomly chosen positive instance higher than a randomly chosen negative one.

The AUC value ranges from 0 to 1. An AUC of 0.5 suggests no discrimination (i.e., the model has no ability to distinguish between positive and negative classes), 1 represents perfect discrimination (i.e., the model has perfect ability to distinguish between positive and negative classes), and 0 represents total misclassification.

The model's score of an AUC of 0.98 is excellent. It suggests that the model has a very high ability to distinguish between positive and negative classes.

The model also performed extremely well in another test, which showed the model has a final cross-validation score of 0.953. This high score indicates that the model was able to accurately predict the onset of Alzheimer's disease based on the selected features.

However, it's important to note that while this model can be a useful tool for predicting Alzheimer's disease, it should not be the sole basis for a diagnosis. Doctors should consider all aspects of diagnostic information when making a diagnosis.

Conclusion

The development and application of machine learning models like this one are revolutionizing the medical field. They offer the potential for early diagnosis of neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer's, which can significantly improve patient outcomes. However, these models are tools to assist healthcare professionals, not replace them. The human element in medicine, including a comprehensive understanding of the patient's health history and symptoms, remains crucial.

Despite the challenges, the potential of machine learning models in improving early diagnosis leaves me and my family hopeful. As we continue to advance in technology and research, we move closer to a world where diseases like Alzheimer's can be effectively managed, and hopefully, one day, cured.

#alzheimersresearch #alzheimersdisease #dementia #neurology #machinelearning #ai #artificialintelligence #aicommunity #datascience #datascientist #healthcare #medicalresearch #programming #python programming #python #python 3

54 notes · View notes

typenull · 9 months

Text

What once was captured by the term hysteria during the time of Janet was broken down, with the publication of the DSM-III […], into numerous, seemingly arbitrary categories which were declared to be distinctly different illnesses with different causes, treatments, and prognoses. Essentially, responses to trauma, adversity, and problematic family dynamics became reclassified as diseases of the brain, genetic flaws of the mind or disordered personalities that were isolated from context and ostensibly disconnected by distinct diagnostic boundaries. […] This largely occurred along ideological lines and appears to be impacted greatly by biases based on gender, race, and socioeconomic status. The most common of these broken-down categories are: schizophrenia, DID, BPD, and PTSD. […] The result of this dissociation of madness is that comorbidity is the norm, with trauma survivors typically garnering upward of eight to ten diagnoses during their career as a mental health patient. […] Instead of understanding that people are complex and their reactions to difficult life experiences are also complex, the mental health field, instead, tells such individuals that they have a large number of diseases, each ostensibly requiring a different specific treatment, and, worse, that they have an essentially disordered personality. As stated by Read, Goodman, Morrison, Ross, and Aderhold (2004), “If we were not constrained by the need for a diagnostic nomenclature we might not need to separate abuse sequelae into seemingly discrete categories, such as PTSD, dissociative disorders, schizophrenia, borderline personality disorder, etc.” (p. 24). They suggest that instead these complex and adaptive responses to adversity can be understood as processes that have evolved over time into problematic disturbances in multiple domains. As it stands now, these discrete categories and areas of interest are entrenched in society and in services, with associated stereotypes that serve no one.

— Noël Hunter, Trauma and Madness in Mental Health Services (2018)

#upload

32 notes · View notes

transmutationisms · 7 months

Note

thoughts on the idea that we 'inherit' (predilections toward) mental health issues via genetics? i was briefly thinking about it last night and would love your opinion/anything you happen to know about the matter. thanks!

yeah someone asked a similar question about intergenerational trauma recently (sry didn't get to it lol). i don't think there's one singular answer here because the behaviours, traits, &c we're talking about are so varied. like, these labels have different histories, social functions, &c; some are really just completely benign variation, others are distressing for the person dealing w them, many are both at different times & in different social contexts. in general it's obviously true that some traits, tendencies, &c seem to 'run in families' & genetics can definitely be a component of that. but claims that x is solely or purely or definitively genetic tend to raise my eyebrows for a few reasons: 1) most traits, even very 'simple' ones, are controlled by lots of different genes, not just one or two 2) we usually don't have a comprehensive list of those genes 3) even if we do, we don't usually understand in great detail exactly how all those genes play into whatever the trait is; this goes double for like, a consciously controlled behaviour that introduces questions about moral agency (as opposed to something purely physical like... idk, eye colour) 4) even if we do have all that genetic information, most people don't actually know what genes they do and don't have because bespoke genetic testing is still not something we just do all the time 5) having a gene isn't always equivalent to it being expressed (epigenetic factors) 6) it's basically impossible to determine the extent to which any given mh trait is influenced by environmental factors, like life style, learned behaviours, socioeconomic status, &c &c &c. again it's not that i'm saying genes can have NO effect here but i think most claims that boil a behaviour or diagnosis down to "it's genetics!" are v v oversimplified, overly credulous toward professional jockeying on the part of neurologists & psychiatrists, and usually pretty openly plugged into broader theories of social decline by way of inherited degeneracy.

22 notes · View notes

loki-zen · 3 months

Text

*joins an optional NHS ‘workspace’ about improving outcomes and provision for mental health, learning disability and autism, specifically meant to help address the fact that people with these diagnoses face barriers to accessing and worse outcomes when receiving regular health care*

*im like it’s good that this exist shame it doesn’t seem to have updated in a year*

*it updates*

*the update concerns a ‘Race Equity Framework’ that concerns itself solely with the question of whether some mentally ill, autistic or learning disabled people are getting shittier care than others (along a single axis that correlates with but isn’t socioeconomic status)*

#howling and wailing and gnashing my teeth #technically the NHS Trust that provides zero services whatsoever to adult autistic people gets a perfect racial equality score!#bc zero is equal to zero!

7 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 12 days

Note

https://x.com/fuckkoroks/status/1780650702894989334?s=46

Canadian government: *Treated their native population so inhuman Andrew Jackson would blush*

Leftist: Pushing for MAID on the homeless is the result of capitalism

Okay does leftists talk to any mentally ill person who don’t romanticize mental disorders often tell them it usually the GOVERNMENT that cause issues for us

Let me use my autism as example, as you already know the idea of autism=low functioning muted white kid

Also non white and female autistic people, when you are usually part of communities that barely understand mental illness as it is. You usually are undiagnosed for a while

Of course it got better…but the autistic “community” on tumblr shows the bitterness

Ugh another rate, I hate how modern kids media tell autistic kids (it’s fucking insufferable with black kids characters) that it a SUPERPOWER

But as you know the government been trying to kill people like me for generations as we are “burdens” to the system

Yes yes this in Canada, but I don’t understand how leftists are shocked by it?

What easier for an out of touch government, spending millions of dolllars in mental rehabilitation…I think lefties presume mentally recovery is like a kid cartoon character arc. Just because a lot of us don’t act like Hollywood ideas of a damage person. Doesn’t mean it don’t take a few years to recover (I’m still am)

Or old yeller such a burden?

Sorry for ranting

I feel like everything with that tweet is being misrepresented by everyone, leftist on purpose other person because they didn't read the article, a mistake I will not make. Let's see if I'm right

Article link

If a Canadian’s only affliction was “poverty,” 27 per cent said they would be fine with legalizing that person’s access to MAID. Another 28 per cent pegged “homelessness” as an appropriate bar to qualify for MAID. And 20 per cent of respondents were fine with MAID being handed out to anybody for any reason. In other words, one fifth of respondents agreed with the sentiment “medical assistance in dying should always be allowed, regardless of who requests it.” Notably, these most absolutist supporters of assisted suicide were pretty evenly distributed among age groups, regions and even political demographics: 20 per cent Conservatives, 20 per cent of NDPers and 22 per cent of Liberals were in the “always be allowed” camp.

Disturbing so far, but nothing to do with capitalism, there's poor people in every socioeconomic system and statistically lower number in capitalist/mixed economies.

One of the more controversial aspects of MAID has been a number of high-profile cases in which Canadians with serious illnesses opted for death only after years of failing to obtain proper medical care. The Research Co. poll found a slim majority of respondents who were fine with this, too; 51 per cent endorsed “inability to receive medical treatment” as sufficient reason for an assisted death.

The state's medical system not being able to treat people is not the fault of capitalism, not after they offered maid to the woman who just wanted a lift put in so she go upstairs in her home more easily.

The practice of referring or recommending assisted suicide has also spread well beyond the traditional boundaries of the health-care system. Notably, MAID is routinely practised within the Canadian prison system, despite similar measures proving deeply controversial in Belgium, a pioneer in assisted suicide legalization.

Ya this is government cost cutting measures at this point, not a capitalist issue given the people that seem to be being offered it, that and all the reports I've seen were there actually seems to be some pressure being offered to get the procedure.

They should go back to being honest and calling it assisted suicide.

Bunch of related stuff But as you know the government been trying to kill people like me for generations as we are “burdens” to the system Yes yes this in Canada, but I don’t understand how leftists are shocked by it?

Wait they're shocked? They've been some of the one's leading the charge

I don't know what snopes says but the mixture for me is that they can't actually eliminate down syndrome, it's not something their eugenics program can accomplish.

Cystic fibrosis they could do by sterilizing anyone that has the gene, granted if one parent does and one doesn't the odds of a CF child drop to zero, so genetic screening and tell parents where both have the gene they can't have kids maybe, see how that goes over.

Time to spruce up the sanatoriums they closed down decades ago so we can jail people who have committed no crime, or committed a crime that doesn't generally carry a prison sentence under the guise of 'it's for their own good'

But ya it's easier to live in a fantasy land where forcing people into treatment might actually work than it is to work with people and try and get them to decide that it might be a good idea.

Or old yeller such a burden?

To be fair Old Yeller had rabies, that was a mercy killing, fatal 100% of the time and a nasty way to go.

I do get your point though.

Sorry for ranting

No apologies needed, not sure when I'm gonna be able to have the time to get through whatever your next one is though, 98% chance going to get me pa from the hospital tomorrow and if so everything is gonna be delayed a bit.

#zoomer huey anon

5 notes · View notes

sashabeauty87 · 1 year

Text

So in this current video from Kate’s campaign, Shaping Us; Kate is having a conversation with Roman Kemp and he’s talking about Mental health and suicide. Well in the five seconds of listening to him, all I could think about is the audacity of Kate Middleton to be covering and discussing these topic(s) when I know she doesn’t give a damn!

When she and William had the opportunity to help a woman who was suffering from suicidal ideations while pregnant they didn’t lift a finger to help. So I feel an extreme amount of gaslighting and trolling is taking place, here!

Also, it’s not missed on me that this video is coming out just a week or so from James Middleton writing/discussing his mental health, yet again, and the loss of his dog. Like maybe I’m reaching here but I find the release of the article and her bringing out this video very convenient.

Maybe this is just me but the vibe/image I’m getting from all of this is that it’s only acceptable to discuss and care about mental health when the person is a white male, of a certain age, and socioeconomic background, and not seen as a threat to the status quo because the moment that a woman of color needed help they couldn’t care less and when she talks about her mental health and the struggles she faced they want to demonize her (& her husband).

* Overall, you don’t get to pick and chose whose mental health you care about and who is worthy of support! If you’re going to be a mental health advocate then you better care about and support all. Although there’s a discussion to be had about medical racism, etc I’ll leave that for another day!

#kate middleton #shaping us #british royal family #mental health #brf #catherine middleton #catherine elizabeth #duchess of cambridge #princess of wales

45 notes · View notes

realmermaid333 · 2 years

Text

How I Imagine Annie Cresta’s Hunger Games went!

It is always interesting to read people’s opinions on what they think happened during the 70th Hunger Games, whether or not they think Annie was a career, whether or not she was reaped on she volunteered, etc.

After thinking a lot about it and considering lots of different storylines and possibilities, I have developed what I think happened based on my interpretation of Annie and clues we get in the books. I am very against the idea that Annie is some frail, innocent, damsel in distress, so I am not particularly fond of storylines where Finnick saved her by sending her tons of sponsors. Mentors can’t really do that as far as I know, sponsors are super expensive especially as the game goes on longer. She would have needed to be very charming and popular among The Capitol to get bets and money like that. And even then, most tributes don’t get tons of sponsors, look at Katniss and Peeta, they didn’t get tons of sponsors, and they were the star-crossed lovers of Panem!

I think Annie would have had very average training scores. I think she would have been a little awkward and quiet in her interview, so it isn’t like people would be rushing to bet on her and get her money for sponsors. And I don’t think Finnick and Annie were in love when she was in the games, I have seen some fics make it so Finnick went super out of his way to get her lots of sponsors, but I don’t think that could have happened at all. We have to remember that Finnick was like the “playboy” of Panem, if he liked Annie, no one would be allowed to know that.

I think Finnick and Annie cared about each other and they were kind of friends, I think Finnick was fond of her and really wanted her to win, I can imagine he was very sad when he thought about how she might die. Maybe one or both of them had a small crush, but I do not think they started to like each other non-platonically until months after she won the games. With Finnick saying that Annie “crept up on him”, and with how different they were as people (especially then, at 18 and 19, before they had character development together), and how they differently they each were viewed by Panem, I think they may have even disliked each other for a while. I think they annoyed each other a lot after she won.

But, back to Annie’s games. I do not think she was a Career, I think she joined the Career Pack, but I do not think Annie trained in the academy, or that she volunteered. In my fic, I write Annie as being of lower socioeconomic status, living with her sister, Bethany Cresta, her mother, who I have named Brooke Cresta, and also has her aunt Ariel (I have not given her a last name lol). I also write her as having a father who was abusive, and her mother being someone with severe mental health issues, I think she would have had depression and paranoia (possibly paranoid schizophrenia) that got worse throughout Annie’s teen years. This family history of mental health issues, trauma, and being on the poorer side of District 4-- would have left Annie with a predisposition for developing PTSD with psychotic features, after experiencing the trauma from The Hunger Games. (I also believe Annie Cresta is autistic and I have autistic-coded her in my writing, I can make a post on this too if anyone wants :D)

I believe that Annie was good at spear fishing and used those skills to help her win The Hunger Games. Her and her sister illegally fished sometimes to get extra food for the family, so Annie was already good with spears and was able to train before the games in spear throwing, which I think she would have caught onto pretty quickly. In my fic, I write Annie’s district partner as an 18 year old Career tribute named Merwyn. He and Annie become close and he helps her get better at spear throwing, I think Finnick helped her a little too but I think he would have been too busy with the Capitol selling him to people that he would not have been able to be super present. Her and Merwyn bond in the few weeks they have before the games, and they promise to keep each other alive for as long as they can so one of them can go home.

I think it is important for me to add my two cents on how I think the Career system works in District 4, so I can explain how I view Merwyn. District 4 seems to be like the weakest link when it comes to Career Districts. It seems that 1 and 2 are the most likely to win and 4 is 3rd, or maybe even 4th place, with the number of victors it has. I think District 4 is a Career District because they are 1. Favored by the Capitol a bit because they supply seafood, which makes many of The Capitols luxury dishes, 2. their tributes would be good swimmers, able to use spears, and able to tie nets and get their own food source in the games easier than many other tributes, and 3. Correct me if I am wrong, but District 4 citizens are seen by The Capitol as like exotic mermaids, I remember there being many comments, from Caesar Flickerman I believe, in the Catching Fire book where he described District 4 in this way. So The Capitol may also favor them in almost like a fetishizing way.

So, it would make sense that a District with these advantages would use them. I don’t think they volunteer for The Hunger Games because they like the Capitol or because they see The Hunger Games as an honor, but because it is better to send a prepared, strong, older kid, than a small 12 year old. It also wouldn’t make sense to me if they felt that way about the games, since District 4 was one of the more rebellious districts and one of the first to join in on the uprisings in Catching Fire. So, I like to imagine that Merwyn sees what he is doing as making a sacrifice to protect other kids in his district and hopefully win to bring more food home. I do not think he was bloodthirsty like many careers are.

So finally, after I have given you this long ass background info--- if you have read this far I love you muah!--- Here is how I think it went down.

I will be using Merwyn as the name for Annie’s district partner.

Annie was 18, it was her last reaping and she did not think she was going to be reaped. To her surprise, she was picked, and no one volunteered for her. She was prepared to die, she accepted her fate but promised to try to get back to her mom, sister, and aunt. Merwyn, also 18, volunteered for a young 12 year old boy, and was then the male tribute

I think Mags mentored Merwyn and Finnick mentored Annie (it was probably also Mag’s last year being a mentor since she was 75 years old at the time and I imagine in the future Mags chose to stay home with Annie each year when Finnick left for his mandatory Capitol duties).

Merywn and Annie become chatty with each other once their nervousness eases. They become close friends. Merywn was really good with spears, he helped Annie learn and practice spear throwing. Annie and him become sad as the games grow nearer since one of them will have to die, but they promise each other that one of them is going to win.

Merwyn talks with the Careers and becomes acquaintances with them in training so Annie and Merwyn will have them as possible allies in the games, something I don’t think Annie would have liked the idea of.

I think at the beginning of the games, it was just Merwyn and Annie. They survived the bloodbath and only got as involved as they needed to be to get their hands on a few backpacks and some spears. A week or so into the games they ran into the Career pack and decided to join them to avoid trouble since District 4 is supposed to join the careers.

I am sure Annie would have disliked the other careers, she would have hated how they hunt down the smaller kids and how they are so violent. Annie would not like killing but she would do it in self defense if she needed to. I think there would have been arguments and altercations between the careers, particularly between Merwyn and some of the other boys. I think they would have all disliked Annie because they underestimated her and saw her being sensitive as her being weak. They’d want her dead, but of course could not attack her as long as she had Merwyn on her side. So after a while Annie and Merwyn tried to break the alliance, which led to a bloody battle between the six of them.

Annie killed a few of the other careers with her spears, but not the one with an axe who ended up beheading Merwyn. This led to Annie feeling extremely guilty, wishing she would have thrown her spear at the right person. Then maybe Merwyn would not have died as awfully as he did. This would make sense with how much Merwyn’s death seems to haunt Annie, not only did she watch her friend die in such a horrid way, she felt like it was something she could have prevented if she would have killed the “correct” person.

Annie escaped the last Career tribute, Merwyn’s attacker, and managed to run off by herself where she spent the last few days of the games. I think she would have been in shock, she would have almost died of dehydration because she was so stuck in a trance she was not able to move to get water or do much of anything.

I like to imagine that she got a sponsor from “Finnick, Mags, and District 4″ that was a piece of the seaweed bread from home, thanking her for her loyalty to her district partner, I think District 4 would really value that. I believe this would be the thing that brought her out of her trance and gave her hope, the sound of the silver parachute as it descended from the sky.

Annie survived not just because she was a strong swimmer. I don’t like that people make it seem like her surviving was simply because she got super lucky for some reason, like that isn’t how almost everyone wins the games, luck. I guess I can’t blame them cause the books made it sound like that too (darn you Suzanne!). She was not a completely helpless wimp who only won because of the flood, I think that is highly unlikely. She fought a bit! She killed like most tributes are forced to do at some point!

Annie promised her family she’d try to make it home, and she had a promise to a dead boy. A promise that she’d win if he didn’t, and she was not about to let Merwyn down. The boy who was beheaded, the boy she watched die, the boy who’s death she felt partially responsible for. Annie had the will to live.

So, she was in survival mode, she was running on adrenaline and the fish she was able to catch with her only spear she had left. She hid from other tributes, she was absolutely terrified, but she tried her best. And when the dam burst and flooded the arena, she was the strongest swimmer, the other 4 tributes left died in the flood, and she survived The Hunger Games.

#annie cresta #annie #cresta #finnick odair #fan theory #the hunger games #70th hunger games #thg #mockingjay #catching fire #fanfiction #fanfic #sorry this is so long #odesta #annick #strong female characters

61 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 8 months

Text

If you give a kid a smartphone, they’re going to want a social media account.

That’s not the start of a storybook. The average age for a kid getting their first smartphone is 10.3. Within a year, a child has likely made four or five social media accounts; by the age of 12, 90 percent of kids are already on social media, according to research by Linda Charmaraman, a senior research scientist who runs the Youth Media and Well-Being Research Lab at Wellesley College.

For parents and caregivers, the decision to let your youngster sign up for TikTok, Instagram, or Snapchat can feel like a daunting milestone. In May, the US surgeon general suggested that social media is contributing to a mental health crisis among the nation's youth. Around the world, lawmakers have been mounting pressure on the likes of Meta and TikTok to restrict the addictive design features that young users are subjected to. But social media can be valuable to young people too. Digital spaces can be beneficial settings to build friendships and receive social support from peers. So if your kid starts asking about social media (or you suspect that they already have secret accounts), what’s a parent to do?

“Social media is not inherently good or bad,” says Charmaraman, whose research focuses on adolescent development and social media. “It’s really about how people come to use social media, in what ways, and what kinds of supports they have to navigate it in a way that’s right for them.”

It’s absolutely possible for families to foster a healthy relationship with social media by understanding the science, starting conversations about social media and mental health, and setting boundaries on security settings and screen use. Here’s how to get started, whether your kid is 17 or approaching the age of 10.3.

What Does the Research Really Say?

It’s still too soon to determine any long-term effects of social media on youth mental health, says Charmaraman. She encourages parents to take a critical look at the popular studies that draw correlations between teens’ social media use and negative outcomes like depression and anxiety. “When you actually look at the statistical weight of how much we can explain the rise in rates of mental health difficulties due to social media or technology use, it’s less than 1 percent,” she says.

Correlational studies might also discount larger forces that contribute to mental health difficulties, like socioeconomic status or family relationships. For example, if a child is in a household where parents argue frequently, the child may turn to social media more often to seek support or distraction. That doesn’t mean social media is the problem. More restrictions on social media don’t correlate to a happier child, either, Charmaraman points out.

It’s also important to understand that much of the current research on social media and youth well-being has focused on middle-class white families. There’s still more to be learned about how social media impacts nonwhite, LGBT, or neurodivergent youth, or youth in unstable housing situations.

In other words, there’s no scientifically proven, one-size-fits-all social media rule. Tailor the following guidelines to your family and your kids, and be ready to adapt them as your kids grow older and their situations change. Don’t be afraid to set different guidelines for siblings too—kids in the same family could have different needs.

‘Onboard’ Your Kid Onto Social Media

You might want to start earlier than you think. “Don’t assume that your kid isn’t already on social media,” says Charmaraman. Especially if your child has an older sibling, or friends with older siblings, it’s likely that they’ve engaged with social media in some way.

Charmaraman recommends initiating a conversation about social media when a child is in late elementary or middle school, then gradually “onboarding” them onto social media with a lot of structure, rules, and oversight at first. It’s easier to be proactive about social media guidelines than to try to undo bad habits that have been cemented over years. “Prepare, as opposed to repair,” she says. (If you have an older teen, not all hope is lost—but more on that later.)

To onboard your kid, start with the highest level of scrutiny and security over their social media use, then gradually loosen the reins as the child gets older. Open up the social media app that your child is interested in, and look through the menu of settings together. Have a conversation with your child about how the platform works: What kinds of security settings and parameters make sense at the moment? Who should be allowed to message your child?

If a child is younger, you might consider having access to the account’s password as well. You might also set up an app’s in-house parental controls. (Here’s how to do that on Snapchat and Discord.) That way, if your child encounters violent, sexual, or other inappropriate content, you can intervene more quickly.

As a child gets older and earns more trust, parents can loosen restrictions on safety settings. If the child shows that they’re not yet able to self-regulate the healthy time they’re spending on social media, add more restrictions.

Chararaman recommends the onboarding approach rather than banning social media outright. Kids can find ways around restrictions, and more seriously, they’ll likely hold back if something bad happens to them online.

Recognize the Signs of Problematic Media Use

How can you tell the difference between healthy and unhealthy use of social media? Charmaraman says there’s no magic number for screen time limits. Some kids can use their phones healthily for several hours, if they’re searching for information or interacting with friends. Other kids tend toward more problematic behaviors, so they would benefit from more guardrails around screen time.

Sarah Domoff, an assistant professor at the University at Albany – State University of New York, suggests that as parents observe their kids’ social media use, they look into three broad categories:

The content your child encounters: You won’t be able to block all potentially inappropriate content on the internet from your child. So it’s important to know how your child responds. Do they continue to engage with content that’s potentially harmful, stressful, or untrue? If they’re having unhealthy responses to what they see on social media, consider more restrictions. If your child is able to recognize and bypass inappropriate content, they can be more independent.

When social media is being used: “The research shows that some times of day may matter more than others,” Domoff says. If screens interfere with sleep or schoolwork, consider having a conversation with your child about changing the timing of social media use, so it doesn’t interfere with other activities that keep them well.

Vulnerabilities that are specific to your child: Some youth may be more vulnerable to certain kinds of content or interactions that exacerbate mental health concerns.

Use these three categories to guide the conversations you have with your kids about social media. It’s important to acknowledge that it’s developmentally appropriate for teens to need some privacy from their parents as they explore their identities. If you decide to follow what your teen is doing online, make sure that your teen is aware of it. Frame your actions transparently, says Domoff. Try to tell them, “Because I’m concerned about your safety, I will be checking your content” or “I understand there are things that you may not want me to see. I’m just concerned about you being safe.”

Start a Conversation at Any Age (and Maybe in the Car)

What if your child is an older teen with social media accounts, known to you or otherwise? It’s never too late to start a conversation, says Aliza Kopans, a rising junior at Brown University and cofounder of Tech(nically) Politics, an organization that collects youth stories about social media and advocates for legislative reform. She says it’s important for adults to validate the importance of social media to teens. Don’t frame it as a waste of time, and acknowledge that online friendships can be just as valuable as those made in real life. “Come from a place of curiosity,” says Kopans. Rather than making assumptions, ask your teen how they’re using social media and how social media is making them feel, and start from there.

Domoff recommends weaving conversations about social media into your daily conversations. Treat it as informally as asking them how school went. “Just as you want to be the person your kids come to when they have a fight with their friend, you want to be that person too when it comes to online interactions,” says Domoff.

Still feeling awkward? Try talking about social media in the car, on the way to school or basketball practice. Parents often have an easier time navigating potentially awkward conversations in the car, says Charmaraman. That way there’s a natural end point, and you don’t have to make weird eye contact.

Be a Good Scroll Model

Your own behavior as a parent or trusted adult can have a powerful impact on your children’s relationship to social media. “If you’re checking work emails on your phone at the dinner table, what example does that send?” says Kopans.

Try to open up about your own experiences and reflections on social media, says Domoff. As a parent, you can model conversations about consent and privacy online. Ask your child, “Is it OK if I post this picture of us?” She suggests sharing your own day-to-day experiences, like accounts you follow or memes that you like.

She also suggests sharing the ways that social media impacts your own mental health, asking your kids something like “Hey, I saw this content, and it made me sad. Do you see things that bring you down? What’s something that you can look up online that lifts you up?” Address the mistakes that you’ve made on social media, and show your teens that they can always recover from their social media missteps too.

Model good internet privacy hygiene for your kids too. Teach them how to create (and keep secret) strong passwords for social media accounts, set up two-factor authentication, and practice basic smartphone security.

Finally, you can let your kids make some mistakes on social media, just like they will inevitably make mistakes in their friendships or at school. “Remember that being online is a skill that young people need to develop,” says Charmaraman. Friction or drama on social media doesn’t necessarily mean you should pull the plug. Eventually, your teen will become a young adult who is going to need to know how to monitor their own internet activity.

Rather than bringing out the banhammer immediately, consider the skills you’re helping your kid build, Charmaraman says, “Think less about ‘How do I get my kid off their phone?’ and more ‘How do I equip my kid with the literacy and self-knowledge to prepare them for a digitally connected future?’”

9 notes · View notes

don-lichterman · 2 years

Text

Genetics and environmental factors contribute to how socioeconomic status shapes the brain architecture

Your education, your job, your income, the neighborhood you live in: Together these factors are considered to represent socioeconomic status (SES) and contribute to a variety of health and social outcomes, from physical and mental health to educational achievement and cognitive capacities. The brain acts as an obvious mediator between SES and many of these outcomes. But the mechanism by which it…

View On WordPress

#anatomy #brain #education #Featured #Genes #Genetic #Genetics #imaging #mental health #Neuroscience #Nutrition #Psychology #research #Skin #UK Biobank

143 notes · View notes

expertacademicassignmenthelp · 4 months

Text

What is mental health?

Mental health is a state of well-being that enables individuals to cope with life stresses, realize their abilities, learn and work effectively, and contribute to their community.

It goes beyond the absence of mental disorders, emphasizing the importance of ongoing wellness and happiness.

Mental health issues affect daily life, relationships, and physical health.

Almost 1 in 5 adults in the U.S. experience mental health problems each year.

Risk Factors for Mental Health Conditions

Socioeconomic factors such as poverty and marginalization increase the risk.

2. Adverse childhood experiences, biological factors, and underlying medical conditions contribute to mental health issues.

3. Chronic stress, depression, and anxiety may result from physical health problems.

Types of Mental Health Disorders

1.Anxiety Disorders:

. Generalized Anxiety Disorder

. Panic Disorder

. Phobias

. Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

2. Mood Disorders:

Major Depression

Bipolar Disorder

Seasonal Affective Disorder

3. Schizophrenia Disorders:

Schizophrenia involves psychotic features, both positive (delusions, hallucinations) and negative (withdrawal, lack of motivation).

Early Signs of Mental Health Disorders

Withdrawal from social activities

Changes in sleep and eating patterns

Persistent feelings of hopelessness

Difficulty completing daily tasks

Thoughts of self-harm or harm to others

Diagnosis

Diagnosing mental health disorders involves a thorough medical history, physical exam, and psychological evaluation.

The American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual is often used for diagnosis.

Treatment

a. Psychotherapy

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

Exposure Therapy

Dialectical Behavior Therapy

b. Medication

Antidepressants

Antipsychotics

Anxiolytics

c. Self-help

Lifestyle changes

Relaxation techniques

Support networks

Myths vs. Facts about Mental Health

Intelligence, age, and social status don’t determine mental health.

Teenagers can experience mental health issues.

People with mental health conditions are not necessarily dangerous or violent.

Psychiatric medications are not harmful; they are essential for managing symptoms.

Maintaining Mental Health

Regular exercise, balanced diet, and hydration contribute to mental well-being.

Quality sleep is crucial for mental health.

Relaxing activities, mindfulness, and gratitude practices help manage stress.

Suicide Prevention

Ask direct questions if someone is at immediate risk.

Listen without judgment.

Seek professional help and remove potential harmful objects.

Outlook

Most people can manage mental health symptoms with proper treatment and support.

Recovery may involve learning new coping mechanisms.

Mental health issues are associated with chronic health conditions.

Prevalence of mental disorders peaks in ages 18–25.

Conclusion

Mental health Consists of cognitive, behavioral, and emotional well-being. It involves managing existing conditions while maintaining ongoing wellness. Stress, depression, and anxiety can disrupt mental health, but various treatments, including psychotherapy and medication, are available. Myths about mental health abound, and maintaining mental well-being involves self-care practices and a support network. While mental health disorders are common, proper treatment and support can help individuals lead fulfilling lives.

For Health Sciences Assignment Help,

Email us at;

[email protected]

2 notes · View notes

aleprouswitch · 5 months

Note

Hi there. Really appreciate your blog and the time and consideration you put into your posts. I hope you don't mind me talking about mental health, but you are one of the only people that I've seen that openly discusses this and I really appreciate it. I'm currently going through a very bad depressive phase and having uncontrollable panic attacks. On top of it already being scary to deal with, the stigma and isolation is another unhelpful layer on top of this.

I have also grown up in a very low social economic background and as I get older, I realise how much more comfortable and wealthy others around me are, and find that quite isolating too. I never feel good enough. My partners family are quite wealthy, and they critize my weight, my appearance ("when are you going to start dressing your age/normal") the fact that I don't want children, the fact that we can't afford a house. It's overwhelming.

I'm sorry to have a heavy message, but I just wanted you to know that your posts really help me and I feel less alone, and the world needs more unity now of all times. If you see this and read it, thank you.

This is an incredibly kind message and I'm glad that posting about the struggles I've had with mental health over the years has served as a source of inspiration and comfort for others. The combination of poverty and mental illness does a number of things to unravel someone's potential and their sense of self-worth as well. I try to explore these themes in my work because, of course, I've lived it.

I haven't had an easy life and have gone through things that I'm not really privy to discussing on such an open platform. I have Major Depressive Disorder and Complex PTSD from things I experienced as a child, teenager, and as a young adult. I grew up with very little money and with parents who weren't supportive of a lot of the things I wanted to do with my life, at least when it came to artistic matters.

Experiences I've had with being "othered" for not growing up with money, especially experiences going to a high school that was mostly made up of upper-class families, destroyed my self-esteem for a long time and honestly, I'm still recovering from the ways I was subtly made to feel inferior over my socioeconomic status and my mental health problems growing up.

Talking about these experiences has been a positive thing for the most part. Of course, there are some assholes out there who will try to use your trauma against you, but that's on them. I'm not interested in doing the whole "fake happy" social media thing where I only post these generic life updates and never show my struggles. I want to see the humanity in others and I want people to see me as human, too.

Please take care of yourself and keep fighting back. We're stuck living in a highly oppressive late-Capitalist system that is growing more and more fascistic and authoritarian by the day, and we have to find little ways to subvert all the conditional that this system regularly subjects us to. That's part of what inspired the title of my blog, "Learning to Unlearn" - we have to unlearn what values have been assigned to us in the name of greed and capital.

#asks #anon #nice asks

5 notes · View notes