#honesty I’m more critical than anti

[merely-a-caricature]

I just felt like pointing out the fact that even if Izuku wasn’t in Bakugou’s life, he still probably would have been a bully. Because, seriously, the first panels in the manga are of Izuku trying to protect some kid that Bakugou was bullying.

He was already picking on other kids than Izuku very early on! Bakugou would’ve been a bully and an egotistical jerk even if Izuku wasn’t in his life. This just shows that he treats everyone this way. He’s not very nice to his lackeys or friends either. Even to the “Bakusquad” he’s still not very kind. Bakugou was just particularly nasty to Izuku and decided to target him. He’d grow up a jerk with a superiority complex regardless

#bakugou critical #bakugo critical #anti bakugou #anti bakugo katsuki #honesty I’m more critical than anti #Because I’m not against bakugou like anti would imply but im still gonna tag is anti

[maryversusthemovies]

Steve Albini

This is going in the Mary Vs. the Movies newsletter, but I wanted to post it here too:

Steve Albini passed away yesterday.

When I was young, I religiously read critics. I didn’t know most of their names, but I would read as many album and film reviews as I could, whether Rolling Stone and Spin or the Philadelphia Inquirer at my junior high library, or whatever magazines or alt weeklies I could get my hands on at Zerns’ Farmers’ Market. I saw critics as they wanted to be seen—as guides, as teachers who would tell me what was good and what should be avoided. (I avoided Teenage Fanclub’s Bandwagonesque for years because Rolling Stone only gave it two stars—this should’ve been my first clue, I get angry just thinking about it).

So when Nirvana’s In Utero came out, the critical response, as far as I experienced it at the time, was “this is unlistenable noise, and it’s all Steve Albini’s fault.” Now, I didn’t know who he was, but I loved Nirvana. In our review for Over the Edge I mention the “Smells Like Teen Spirit” video, and I don’t think I can overplay just what a liberation it was to see a band destroy a school when I was twelve. For this and other reasons, Nirvana was very important to me, and I was deliriously excited for a new Nirvana album. And here people were saying “this is garbage”. Well, I thought, how bad could it be? “Heart Shaped Box” sounds good, right?

I couldn’t understand what the critics were talking about—this sounded great. It didn’t have that shiny ‘90s Butch Vig sound, sure, but it wasn’t unlistenable. (By now I had found The Velvet Underground & Nico, so at least “European Son” had prepared me for what noise rock might be.) If anything, I realized I loved In Utero more than Nevermind because of the noise. It was an early lesson in not blindly listening to critics over my own gut. 

Now, here I am, more than thirty years later, a (kind of) film critic. I’m not saying don’t listen to critics—I still read them, still look for insights. But I definitely don’t prioritize them over my own reaction to a work of art itself. And realizing that the critics can be wrong because they didn’t like how Albini recorded this album, it was a huge lesson for me, long before college or anything tried to teach me critical thinking.

Anyway, after that, I found out Albini had a hand in so much music that I loved—the Pixies and Breeders, Superchunk, P.J. Harvey. And that’s just when I was 14, I’d since gone on and gotten into everything from Silkworm to the Wedding Present to Joanna Newsom to Low. He was the first engineer—I won’t call him a producer, I promise—whose work I actually cared about. (Sure, later I would find out about Phil Spector, but my god if he isn’t the anti-Albini, so the less said the better.) And I know this isn’t even touching his own music with Big Black or Shellac.

When Dennis and I first started going out, he brought up Albini’s article “The Problem with Music”, specifically talking about how the industry squeezes and gaslights artists, waving thousands of dollars in front of them and whittling away at the pile until the band is left with essentially nothing. It informed the way we both kick against being tied down to any kind of boss, at least when it comes to any creative output we make. Even if someone came to us tomorrow and said they wanted to sign us to their podcast network (a thing that won’t happen anyway, given how the media bubble has burst), or sign Deth Elf, my gut reaction would be “no”—we’ll always be small, and we’ll never be professionals, but we’re doing what we do because we love it, and we want control over it. And maybe that’s shooting ourselves in the foot, but at least it has a kind of honesty.

I know people who knew him, and I can’t imagine the loss their feeling right now. I’m just someone who listens to the radio a lot. But my god, my life would be so much poorer if he hadn’t been there shaping music for the last forty years.

#steve albini #indie rock #music

[acephysicskarkat]

Hello, saw some of your anti c//a that mention how you think c//a is a bad enemies-to-lovers ship while griddlehark is a good one, and may i ask how that is? Genuine question, because i don’t like c//a, and i’m neutral on griddlehark (mainly because I don’t know much atm), from what i’ve seen/heard, it seems like it’s a lot more toxic of a dynamic than c//a is initially/pre canon? Again not trying to bait, am gen curious /genuine

This is going to be kind of disjointed, and I apologise, but this is kind of a topic that defies a simple summary.

Bear in mind that ahead be big Locked Tomb spoilers and the SP0P spoilers that basically everyone already knows.

I would say that the two critical differences are 1) the handling of the toxicity within the narrative, and 2) the structure and arrangement of the toxicity.

You are absolutely correct that pre-canon Griddlehark's mutual hatred is a toxic dynamic. They initially detest each other with a passion; one of the main plot points driving the entire series is a young Harrow having Gideon's blood under her nails after a fight.

As Gideon and Harrowhark work together, however - and here is the point where 100% of bad enemies-to-lovers arcs crash and burn - the toxicity goes down. It never becomes totally healthy - indeed, post-GtN Harrow invents an entirely new way to have an unhealthy relationship, involving performing brain surgery on herself at 17 - but the majority of the narrative is spent showing them moving from "would piss on the other's grave given the chance" to a mutually tolerated working relationship, to a growing loyalty, to the pool scene where Harrow shows Gideon more honesty and trust than she's had from anyone in her life. A lot of what makes this work is pacing and structure; every new step works because it's building on the previous ones, none of them feeling jarringly fast or unmotivated.

More than that, a big help is that the toxicity feels intentional. The relationship being Kinda Fucked is a 100% intentional thing that I'm pretty sure I've seen Tamsyn Muir talking about in interviews. It's a narrative element that Muir is monitoring and adjusting with the care of a good zookeeper trying to keep the humidity in the reptile enclosure exactly right.

(I genuinely cannot praise the writing in these books enough.)

Turning to SP0P as a contrast, its relationship has a more understated toxicity, but a much more pervasive one. Young Adora and C*tra weren't clawing at each other's faces whenever left unsupervised, but young C*tra sure did claw at Adora's face for wanting to have more than one friend! It's not the PVP arena of Growing Up Griddlehark, but "you are my friend, therefore your needs are subordinate to mine" is still far from a healthy dynamic, and the narrative never addresses it.

The bigger problem, though, is that the toxicity doesn't so much "go down" as trace out a parabola. The entire first half of the narrative shows the toxicity going up sharply, to the point of C*tra being willing to die just to make Adora miserable, then it hovers there for another quarter, and then it returns to an earlier level of toxicity. S5 C*tra's treatment of Adora stays awful. She spends "Taking Control" throwing a tantrum over how the real problem is Adora and the others being mad at her; she portrays herself as the wounded party in her like four separate murder attempts on Adora in "An Ill Wind" to produce the worst line of the show; she continues throwing tantrums whenever she doesn't get what she wants and making everything about herself right up to the love confession, including that confession ("stay with me, the person who spent four seasons refusing to stay with you!"). It feels bizarre that Adora goes from "even if you're my best friend, I won't let you blame me for shit that isn't my fault" in S4 to doing nothing but looking sad when C*tra portrays her as being in the wrong for not just meekly standing by while C*tra burned down her home and murdered her friends.

And - and I'll acknowledge that a big part of this is probably executive fuckery, I just don't think that really matters - the pacing and structure absolutely are not helping. I could buy S5's sudden reversal if C*tra and Adora had had a fun, weightless enmity where there was an obvious respect between them. They don't. C*tra spends a truly distressing amount of time utterly consumed by the desire to cause Adora as much pain as possible, to the point of attempting a murder-suicide on the entire world. No point in S2-S4 shows a C*tra who Can't Bring Herself to Really Hurt Adora, regardless of the things the stans have convinced themselves they saw; she's so totally driven by spite that she tears her own life to shreds in the hope Adora will be caught up in the edges. The relationship has to do a sudden R*ylo swerve rather than building on what's gone before because "what's gone before" is like three plot points in the first season that have been narratively overwhelmed by C*tra's multiseason campaign of cruelty like a single pea being weighed against the USS Nimitz.

This is where intentionality comes into play. The toxicity in c/a is just there. For all the bullshit about C*tra's story being about what happens when you're the toxic friend, it doesn't feel like an intentional narrative element that is seriously being examined; it feels like a writing fuck-up where C*tra was supposed to feel like way less of a stalker asshole.

Anyway, I hope this has made some vague semblance of sense, but I've been at this for like an hour and I'm tired and I need to go check on a craft project.

#spopcrit #locked tomb spoilers

[dontbotherwiththepronunciation]

Have people actually responded overly negatively to your more critical opinions? (Rhetorical question lol; Not doubting it, just a little shocked )

I’m new to the fandom and this makes me almost not want to engage anymore 😅 you’re so polite when expressing your opinions and it never feels like an attack on individual fans but just critical thinking about the source material and fan reactions so this feels. Really sad tbh.

Personal:

It’s kind of you to ask and I’m grateful for your words. I try to be respectful but I’m often afraid of turning into those I hate.

In all honesty, I think a big part of my fear comes from how bad of an experience the 2016 fandom was. Most of the theonbloggers from then are gone now but many of their followers/mutuals/friends who looked and said nothing remain and it automatically makes me more paranoid. The racism and homophobia was unbearable and came from the most popular blogs back then and out of those who remain I can think of only two who moved a finger to stop it.

The present is better but now there’s more of us so it’s less targeted but more prevalent, I think, often even unintentional. Back in February I made a Theon poll and it got criticism. Some of it was fair and constructive, some wasn’t. It was then followed by nasty anons. The nasty anons came back in the recent past over not liking ships involving the squid prince and the Starks. There was also an incident of being accused and shamed for being a thramsay shipper (which I am not). Recently I perceived an uprising of show defenders who criticised book-only people for “gatekeeping”, not accepting show canon and being overall upset about the blatant miscasting of “dark” characters. On the survey there was an abundant majority who were almost aggressively defendant of A|fie A||en as Theon’s actor, yet with exception of my irls, every person agreed he at least did a good job with what was given to him or just praised him. The animosity for him wasn’t present at all but there was a lot of animosity for anyone who might eventually criticise/dislike him as Theon’s actor. I was also vagued about on the survey seven times, on four other different occasions I was attacked due to my wording (someone sent me suicide bait over a misreading of the sexually repressed Theon question), two people accused me of the survey being actually a throbb survey and another one said it was an anti-throbb survey.

There was also a case in which someone misread two questions and mixed them up so they told me all the many fandom trends they loved and then listed the blogs they despised (mine was among them). That one was at least funny and it made me wheeze. I am not even mad at that person, I applaud that audacity.

However, I am still here! Which is test to the fandom on itself because I rarely stay in fandom spaces for longer than six months, at said point I decide to become an hermit and consume stuff by myself (even without negative experiences). I still think this is a vast improvement compared to 2016 and I’ve gotten to meet some really cool people who aren’t always of the same opinion but are respectful and have so many fascinating ideas to explore! It can be so relieving once you find a small niche of people to debate and daydream with (and admittedly sometimes just complain). The mean people on the survey were also just a minority compared to all the rest of the responders, many of which were kind, honest and very open. I often found myself snorting while reading the proposed “wish fulfilment endgames” because you could tell how much they cared for the character. The thought “I want to be friends with this person” was more present on my mind than the few mean responders were.

This was also a less frequent case, but sometimes when people told me about the blogs whose Theon posting they enjoy they would write longer texts explaining why, and some of that was very touching. I wasn’t namedropped often but a few of my mutuals/people I follow were and it always made go “Yes! I agree! They are amazing aren’t they?! I loved their meta on [insert topic] and-“ seeing people gush over their friends is always a joy.

Also someone referred to my posting as “Jeyneposting” and i consider that the most emotionally significative description I could have gotten. Thank you!

TL DR: it’s not all bad. Until now I think it’s worth it. Good luck! : )

#fandom related #speaking

[seasurfacefullofclouds1]

Sea, I’ve always agreed with you that any potential references Louis made to Larry after 2018 were not indicative of an ongoing relationship. Until this tour. I know you said in a previous post that you can understand why Louis would use Larry for marketing. And I guess I can understand why, too. But I can also think of many, many times when Louis prioritized honesty over his career and profits. But if Louis is basically baiting fans, I can’t really criticize Harry for doing the same thing. We might think Louis has every reason in the world to be angry and resentful toward Harry right now, but I’m just… not seeing it. And I’m not talking about Larries and their cringey behavior, I’m talking about Louis.

Are you asking me whether I think Louis is referring to Larry because they’re still “together”? The answer is no.

Mostly I think that every “Larry” thing Larries attribute to Louis for this tour is either a coincidence or a reference to One Direction (the aftershow playlist, for example).

Louis has used Larry for marketing, and you’re right, in principle it’s no different than Harry using Larry for marketing. I see their behavior as marketing — larrybaiting— because I see no intimacy or affection in these gestures. It’s fandom manipulation. The only difference is that Louis relies on his fans for any sort career, the majority of whom are Larries.

Assuming that Larry was a big part of Louis’ 1D life, I can understand the references to it on his album and subsequently his tour. Louis also bore the burden of having to deny “Larry” multiple times, on the very first solo interview he ever had (in 2017 with Dan Wootton, of all people), to be called homophobic by media because of his denials (even when he criticized the use of Larry fanfiction in Euphoria). In the Euphoria episode, as with his April 2017 milkshake tweet, we can see exactly how Harry benefits from the LGBT-friendliness of Larry, but Louis wasn’t even consulted. “Larry” is the weapon Sony used to drive media discourse to be pro-Harry, anti-Louis. “Larry” weaponized thousands of Harries against Louis and drives the viral, hateful trolling on social media— it is the reason Harries follow Briana Jungwirth, Eleanor Calder, and Freddie fan accounts. “Larry” drove Sony’s economic campaign to blacklist Louis.

This history tells me that 1. Larry is still economically viable, 2. One person bore the brunt of the fallout from “Larry,” because of the power of the industry. So Louis referring to Larry is more subversive than Harry— defiance, maybe.

Economy aside, I still wish that Louis wouldn’t refer to Larry going forward. Again, I think he needs a better longterm fanbase and better longterm marketing. If he would like to be taken seriously as an artist, then leave the past in the past. Move on.

#louis tomlinson #larry stylinson #harry styles

[dankusner]

Patric Gagne is a writer, former therapist, and advocate for people suffering from sociopathic, psychopathic, and anti-social personality disorders.

She earned a PhD in clinical psychology with a dissertation that examined the relationship between sociopathy and anxiety.

This research became the groundwork for her continued studies on sociopathic disorder, as well as the foundation for her memoir. 

She did her undergraduate work at UCLA and earned her masters and doctorate at the California Graduate Institute of The Chicago School.

MODERN LOVE

He Married a Sociopath: Me

As a wife and a mother, I have learned how to tell the truth. Which is why I always know when my husband is lying.

By Patric Gagne Oct. 16, 2020

My husband was trying to tell me I was “the only one” for him.

“Don’t lie to a liar,” I said.

It wasn’t a very romantic reply, I’ll admit. But I’m not a romantic. I’m a sociopath.

My husband knows this, of course.

As for me, I knew as early as age 7 that I wasn’t like other children.

I didn’t care about things the way they did.

I was a girl (my male-sounding name, Patric, is short for Patricia) who mostly felt nothing.

It wasn’t until college that a therapist told me what I had long suspected: My lack of emotion and empathy are hallmarks of sociopathy.

A few years later, doctors would confirm my diagnosis.

Human beings aren’t designed to function without access to emotion, so we sociopaths often become destructive in order to feel things.

I used to break into houses or steal cars for the adrenaline rush of knowing I was somewhere I wasn’t allowed to be — just to feel, period.

It didn’t take long for me to realize this was not an effective life strategy.

Rather than risk incarceration (or worse), I used my diagnosis to fuel my pursuit of a Ph.D. in psychology.

Like many, I gained my first understanding of sociopaths from pop culture, which portrays us as singularly dangerous and threatening, our flat emotional state and lack of remorse making us unfit for normal life.

It wasn’t until I began my research in graduate school that I learned sociopaths exist along a wide spectrum, like many people with psychiatric disorders.

You’ll find us everywhere in daily life, as your colleagues, neighbors, friends and, sometimes, members of your own family.

My husband and I dated in high school and found each other again after college.

You would think my insincerity, emotional poverty, absence of shame and guilt, and reduced empathic response wouldn’t exactly land me in the “dream girl” category.

Perhaps because he and I had grown up together and he was already familiar with my “bad” side, he remained in denial for years about my having any sort of real psychological problem.

Nevertheless, 13 years later, we’re still in love and happily married.

But am I “the only one” for him? Definitely not.

My husband had developed a crush on a female colleague at work.

It was obvious, and I understood why.

She was everything I’m not: thoughtful, kind, compassionate.

I doubt she ever attempted to choke anyone.

Unlike me.

She was socially appropriate at parties, appreciated compliments and affection.

Her charm was authentic and her darkness, if she had any, relatable.

Unlike mine.

It made sense he would like her.

They would make a great pair.

So why wouldn’t he just admit it?

He knew I didn’t take things like this personally.

That’s one of the perks of being married to a sociopath: I don’t get jealous.

He knew that if he were to tell me he liked her, I would listen and relate without reaction.

I might even end up helping him shed some of his Catholic-school guilt.

All he had to do was be honest.

When you’re a sociopath in a marriage, especially one with children, honesty is critical — even more, I would argue, than for people in “normal” relationships.

As a sociopath, I had difficulty prioritizing telling the truth, but as a wife and a mother, I forced myself to learn.

Outside of my family, my loyalty to the truth is what has enabled me to connect with other people.

As a doctor who specializes in the research of sociopathy, I prize credibility and integrity as my greatest asset.

Granted, it hasn’t been easy.

People claim to want complete honesty from their partner or spouse, but I have found they aren’t always happy when they get it, especially when that honesty is coming from a sociopath.

My husband was never thrilled to hear that I had spent the day in a stranger’s house without that person’s knowledge or committed other misdeeds.

But his real anger was reserved for the fact that I never felt guilty about these things.

For my husband, guilt is a driving force.

His formative years were shaped by his overbearing and infirm mother.

And then he married someone who seemed immune to it.

He wanted to know: Why did I never care what anyone thought? Why was my behavior never limited by guilt?

For a long time, he was angry.

But eventually he began to understand it wasn’t my fault that I was born with a reduced capacity for remorse.

And it wasn’t his fault his mother was so negatively attached.

A few years after we married, with his encouragement, my behavior started to shift.

I would never experience shame the way other people do, but I would learn to understand it.

Thanks to him, I started to behave.

I stopped acting like a sociopath.

And thanks to me, he started to see the value in not caring as much about what others thought.

He noticed how often guilt was forcing his hand, frequently in unhealthy directions.

He would never be a sociopath, but he saw value in a few of my personality traits.

He learned to say “no” and mean it, especially when it came to activities he was doing purely out of obligation — family visits or holiday gatherings he didn’t enjoy but couldn’t decline.

He started to recognize when he was being manipulated.

He noticed when emotion was clouding his judgment.

What a pair we are.

Certainly, there have been setbacks.

He isn’t always patient.

I’m not always on my best behavior.

And on those occasions, I leave a token on his desk to let him know when I have been up to no good (minor mischief like sneaking embarrassing items into a line-cutter’s grocery cart).

The token I leave is an innocuous trinket, a Statue of Liberty figurine from a key chain.

Anyone else who saw it wouldn’t think twice. But he knows what it means.

Whenever I leave the figurine on his desk, it means I’ve done something wrong.

The second he sees it, he comes to find me, gives me a kiss and slips it back into my purse.

Often, he doesn’t ask what I’ve done, but if he does, he knows he can trust me to be honest.

And I know the same, so I never stray too far outside the lines.

Which is why his denial of his office crush was so confusing.

For the first time in our relationship, it wasn’t my interpretation of the truth that was causing a shift in our marriage; it was his.

Believe it or not, I could appreciate the cause of his dishonesty.

On good days, I was almost entertained by it.

His clumsy white lies were like a toddler’s, and nearly as endearing.

On those days I wanted to hug him for being so cute.

“You see what you’re doing?” I wanted to say. “You’re not being honest about your feelings for her. You’re lying. Now, how is this any different from what I used to do?”

And just like that, he would have gotten a lesson in empathy — from a sociopath, no less!

And we would have laughed and understood each other better and gone back to sharing everything.

At least I’d like to think so.

My husband, after all, was the one who said we must be honest without exception.

And he was the one who insisted I confess to every single thing every single time.

So why wasn’t he playing by the same rules?

I have been forced to come clean about everything, even when — especially when — I don’t want to.

It’s hard, frustrating, confusing and annoying, but I have done it for him, for us!

If he wasn’t willing to do the same, then what?

Should I leave him?

Go back to being dishonest?

Wait for him to leave me?

On bad days, these were the thoughts that dominated.

When I couldn’t help but wonder: Is this what fear feels like?

I think it was.

My husband was lying to me.

Gaslighting me.

Sneaking.

Acting like a sociopath.

And isn’t that how we sociopaths are defined — as liars without the ability to empathize?

On such days, I saw what it must be like to be married to someone like me.

And the irony is almost shimmering.

Still, I couldn’t help but smile thinking of the future, of the days when we would be able to joke about the time we almost split up because he started acting like a sociopath.

And that in doing so, my husband was finally able to teach me the one thing I have been trying to learn all of my life: empathy.

Patric Gagne is a writer and doctor of psychology from Los Angeles.

What It Feels Like to Be a Sociopath

In movies, sociopaths are often depicted as cold-blooded killers, but the disorder is actually widely misunderstood.

Patric Gagne is a therapist, wife and mother of two living in the Los Angeles area, and she just wrote a gripping memoir about how it actually feels to be a sociopath.

I interviewed Patric on the phone about misconceptions, her childhood, and her urge to break rules…

First off, what do you wish society knew about sociopathy?

Sociopathy doesn’t mean what a lot of people think it means.

Sociopaths can feel the primary emotions, like happiness, sadness and anger.

But sociopaths have a harder time feeling the social emotions [emotions that depend upon the feelings or actions of other people, such as embarrassment, guilt, shame and empathy].

Sociopaths can learn social emotions, they just learn them differently.

I call sociopathy an ‘emotional learning disability,’ since that’s what it feels like.

People often picture sociopaths as Ted Bundy or Jeffrey Dahmer, not average people.

Not every sociopath is a serial killer who’s out to get you.

These extreme examples comprise only a small fraction.

But they’ve been misappropriated to define everyone with the disorder.

It’s wild to me that this perception has been allowed.

It’s the only personality disorder where we are villainized full stop, even though that’s not what the research says.

There’s so much mental health awareness these days around autism, depression, anxiety, the list goes on.

So, I was shocked by the negative comments on your New York Times piece.

People were really upset that they featured an interview with a sociopath.

I represent a very inconvenient truth because many people want to think all sociopaths look like monsters, since monsters are easy to spot.

It’s unsettling that you could be living next door to a sociopath and have no idea, or with one and have no idea.

People don’t like that.

Statistics say that the prevalence is just under 5% of the population.

Little kids can seem like sociopaths.

Toby once bit a kid at the playground, and Anton would push over his friend’s block towers.

What’s the difference between typical kid behavior and sociopathic behavior?

Socio-emotions are learned emotions.

Babies don’t automatically feel remorse from the womb.

When a kid knocks down block towers, you say, ‘Hey, that might make someone sad.’

A neurotypical child will get that and start feeling shame or guilt.

A neurodivergent kid may still feel ambivalent.

My mom would say, ‘Well, you don’t want people to feel sad, do you?’ And I was like, well, what does it matter? I couldn’t conceptualize those traditional socialization lessons until I was much older.

As a kid, did you know you were different?

Yes. I learned very quickly that it wasn’t okay to say, I don’t feel bad about that.

And I learned that it wasn’t okay to say, I’m not excited that so-and-so is coming to visit. If someone asks if you’re excited, you nod and say yes. I realized that in kindergarten.

If you suspect your child might have an ‘emotional learning disability,’ how would you approach that?

Preemptively sit a child down and say, ‘Personally, I feel excitement or shame in this or that situation, but there are a lot of people who don’t feel anything when X, Y and Z. And it’s okay that you don’t have those feelings.’

When you’re socializing kids, talk about behaviors, all day long, but not emotions.

There is nothing inherently immoral about having limited access to emotion.

There was a scene in the book where your mom was crying to your dad, saying, what can we do with her?

What has your mom said about raising you, looking back?

When I was growing up, psychology wasn’t as much of a thing, and my mom did the best she could.

Her reaction to the book is what I’d hoped for: understanding that there was a reason that I behaved the way I did that had nothing to do with her.

This is a personality disorder, not anything a parent did right or wrong – the lack of a traditional emotional response is not personal.

You talk in the book about how, since you didn’t feel strong emotions, you would instead feel apathy.

Then stress would build up, and you’d do risky behavior just to feel something, anything.

Can you tell us about that?

Yes, as a kid, I would sneak into our neighbors’ house when they weren’t home and just hang out, or sneak out of my house at night and follow people around the neighborhood.

In college, I stole cars at night, drove them for hours, and then returned them without people ever knowing.

What about hurting people?

I wrote down the rule that I couldn’t hurt anyone.

Then I thought, so, what can I do?

Sneaking into a neighbor’s house, it’s like, look, there’s no one in this house, who cares if I’m here?

But because I knew I wasn’t ‘supposed’ to do it, it felt good.

It gave me a release.

It can’t explain it more than that.

If you’re a kid, and you throw a bottle, it feels good – this is similar.

I didn’t really want to be doing that stuff, but I felt a compulsion.

A compulsion? That sounds similar to OCD or addiction.

I read a magazine article about OCD, and it felt similar — that compulsion to do things that you don’t want to do but that you know will make you feel less stressed.

I remember thinking, oh, so instead of repetitive behaviors or counting or washing hands, I feel compelled to do destructive things.

That understanding helped me recognize that maybe if I follow the tips that they give for OCD, maybe my stuck stress will go away, too.

What were the OCD tips?

They recommended writing down your behaviors and teasing out why they made you feel better.

It’s all about redirecting it so it doesn’t control your life.

I remember, as a child, picturing people in prison and thinking, wouldn’t that be nice?

I’d think about being in lockdown with the lights off and how even if they wanted to do something, even if their compulsive drive was at the absolute highest, they couldn’t do something destructive because they were inside the walls. Wouldn’t that be nice not to be lying in my own bed feeling powerless against that urge?

What are your urges like as an adult?

My traditional lifestyle has been such a service to me because I respond to the structure and the idea that I have a family.

I could go out and steal a car tomorrow and I might get arrested, or I could choose to do some cognitive journaling.

So many people on the sociopathic spectrum have the ability to lead high-functioning, beautiful lives.

What are your guidelines for living a moral life, since you can’t really trust your gut? Do you lean on social norms and laws?

As a sociopath, you can still have a moral compass.

I don’t feel shame and guilt, but my working brain can still tell me what is right and wrong.

A sociopath makes decisions based on logic.

I appreciate the benefits that come with living within a harmonious community.

I don’t have to CARE in order to make the right choice.

That’s something people get wrong about sociopathy – ‘I have to care about you to do the right thing by you’ is just as inaccurate as ‘you have to believe in God in order to make the right choices in life.’

You make the right choices in life because they benefit you and the people you love.

You wrote that your husband sometimes gets upset that you can’t love him in this all-encompassing way.

You love him, of course, but you feel emotions differently.

My husband is Italian, he’s as hot-blooded and passionate as it gets.

You don’t have to be a sociopath to not meet those qualifications!

That said, love is a learned emotion.

Just because feelings like love and remorse don’t come naturally to sociopaths doesn’t mean they don’t come, period.

What does he think of your memoir?

I would write chapters and my husband would read them first, and there were more than a dozen times where he came in and said, you can’t write this, you have to burn this.

He was aghast that I would even consider telling these stories, but playing such an intricate part in the writing process also allowed him to understand what I was saying.

I’ve been with him since I was a kid, and when he read it in black and white, he finally understood me.

What do you hope people take away from the book?

Most of all, I wrote it in the hopes of reaching sociopathic people to feel less alone.

But also I wrote it so neurotypical people could read it and go, ahhh!

sociopath memoir Patric Gagne child

#Youtube

[topazadine]

Thank you for making the antishipper/proshipper demographic survey, I’ve done it and I think it will be really interesting to see the results. :D I personally consider myself a neutralshipper but I chose the antishipper option just in case. The reason I consider myself neutral is because while I’m 100% anti-harassment, I am not 100% anti-censorship: I’m anti-censorship for most things except for p0rn involving minors who are visibly underage (i.e. not including aged-up minors). Have a nice day:D

Glad to hear you took it, and I very much appreciate your honesty. I know it can be hard, even anonymously, to admit things about ourselves, whether that's disclosing past traumas or discussing reading habits.

The poll will be open until 5 November, when I will begin tabulating the results. There's already over 800 responses in only three days, so this will likely be a monstrous overtaking: I ask that everyone's patient as I get everything calculated and presentable.

In that post, I'll also be discussing the methodology, explaining my reasoning, and suggesting improvements for future amateur researchers to make on new polls. There have been complaints about why I phrased questions certain ways, which I understand: no survey is perfect, especially one that's made purely for fun without an Instituional Review Board, grant proposals, or any oversight committee.

My phrasing, terminology, and restrictions were informed by my previous work: I've taken quantitative analysis courses when I dabbled with a BA in biology, as well as Masters-level statistical analysis courses during my Political Science MA. Probably also took some for my BA in English, but that’s a million years ago now and all I remember from anything is getting drunk in Scotland.

I knew going in that it wouldn't be perfect and that some subtleties couldn't be explored. There's a delicate balance between being detailed enough to get at least some valid results, and keeping a survey concise enough that people will actually take it.

The only criticism I don't appreciate is people believing I should go back and revise the questions to suit their own specific needs. Once a survey's made, it's locked: you can't go back in and change everything because then all the results are totally useless. You also can't provide endless variety, because then the results are also totally useless. This isn't a qualitative survey, nor is it an interview with one specific person: there has to be enough generalization that you can actually have more than one person answering for a question.

Anyway, that's a ramble. I appreciate you taking the survey, and I appreciate you mentioning your experiences!

[sunandmoongobrrr]

on katara and white feminism

i was thinking a little bit about how Katara and other atla women are seen as "traditionally feminine."

there's this crisis that almost all south asian women go through where we're hyper-masculinized to the point of not knowing how we fit into being feminine.

there's a unique pain in the realization that you'll never be feminine like the white women around you expect you to be. that you'll never have their paper-thin eyebrows or perfectly slim figures or sleek straight hair or small nose or whatever beauty standard is centered around whiteness (although is not necessarily contained to being white--but is a standard set for women of color to make us think of white features as desirable). or you'll never be seen as quiet and demure and worthy of protection (which can fit into why this type of femininity is seen as lesser than, but there's also safety in the protectionism of white women, especially from the demonized man of color).

it's why there's such a huge movement against white feminism--women of color have such a different experience from white women as to fitting in to what white supremacy deems "feminine."

it's been a longtime coming, but i think i'm finally starting to realize that being feminine goes deeper than what my surface features tell me or what society expects me to be.

that's why i like katara so much. she is a little whitewashed -- her eyes are large and blue and her figure is slim, but this is not what makes her feminine. What makes her feminine is how fiercely feminine she is. she is compassionate and nagging and caring and angry and ambitious. and all of this is what encompasses her femininity-- not because she does chores, not because she has healing abilities, not because she wears makeup. but because her femininity is a part of her actions and choices. she is not a fighter in spite of being feminine--she's a fighter because she is feminine.

in all honesty, part of the way i was able to come to terms with being feminine in a way that is not defined by western stereotypes is exploring my own culture. i'm Hindu, and the three central female goddesses worshipped in Hinduism are Parvati, Lakshmi, and Saraswati. There are many ways to define their characteristics, but in general Parvati is seen as the Mother goddess, Lakshmi the goddess of wealth and abundance, and Saraswati the goddess of knowledge. i found myself very close to these manifestations of femininity because they encompass such fierce versions of what femininity is--something that i felt more comfortable with after society pushed me out of the femininity worthy of protection. Parvati manifests into power, war, ferocity, compassion, family. she is all of these things and the things they encompass, too, and i think it's a really beautiful way of seeing femininity.

i think it's a really important way to view the atla girls, too. there's this subconscious idea that ty lee is somehow more "feminine" than katara or suki or mai or toph or azula because she is the bubbly pink feminine that we've been accustomed to seeing. she's the nice and the compassionate and the loyal (among other things) and those are all feminine. but the fierce, and the ambition, and the blades and the flame and the ice are all feminine, too. its why people saying that political leadership or any sort of organizing role is a masculine trait is wrong; those things absolutely encompass femininity, just in different ways.

anyway, this was all started because i've been seeing people say that saying katara shouldn't be a healer is misogynistic because they're discrediting feminine roles. but i don't think they understand that femininity is not just the compassion or the helping or the healing abilities. katara has those, but she also has the ferocity and the war and the ice. and those can also manifest in a healing role, but the way katara's healer future was envisioned--her being demure and sad and alone in the South Pole--is not who she is. and that's fine. it's fine to be a different feminine than what people tend to think of when they think of femininity. but it's not fine to force her into the kind of femininity that is deemed acceptable by white supremacy--the kind that is demure and quiet and following, and again, is fine if that is who you are as a person. this is the basis for being anti-choice feminist; the realization that some choices can be easier for women depending on what roles society forces us into. that the statements that women will be criticized for whatever they do because femininity is deemed lesser than, and that one version of femininity is deemed more acceptable because it is centered around whiteness, can coexist.

it's also why i think terfs are ridiculous. (side note: i am not trans so feel free to criticize this) femininity has nothing to do with what body you were born with or the physical traits you exhibit at birth. femininity is a part of your actions and choices and personality, and it can sometimes bleed into what we see as masculine because gender is a spectrum and these traits are not completely separated from each other by a hard line.

anyway, i think such sums up my thoughts about white femininity and why i think katara and other girls in atla encompass the beauty and complexity that is being feminine.

#katara #pro katara #atla #avatar #atla meta #katara meta #choice feminism #white feminism #feminist #feminism #i cant fucking spell the word feminism #or femininity #take a shot whenever i say the word feminine #why are there two n's in that word #why cant english function the way i want it to #anyway #mili rambles #as i do

[starseed-twenty]

Sun Sign culture

(Based on typical and underlying traits each sign has)

Aries Sun - very self-reliant and don't like to depend on people - thinks/cares for themselves first, then another person - voices their opinion after sensing the vibe - high belief in their opinions - patient but gets irritated/annoyed rather quick - quick to fall in love if you look 'perfect' - confident & assertive at conversing - can be irrational (won't think things through), especially if faced with an annoying or uncomfortable situation - charming, but would rather chase you/lure you in than get chased - extreeemely loving & will do almost anything for you if they are deeply in love with you

Taurus Sun - likes to keep a small circle of trusted people - number one sign to love anything beautiful to do with the senses (nice smells, delicious tastes, amazing views, beautiful sounds, soft touches) - reserved and more often than not, will do things because it's allowed/supposed to be done that way - very skeptical of taking risks or making things that could mess up - dislike doing things that are out of order / disrespectful - very patient, but will come at you like a bull if you hit their last nerve - very lowkey about their emotions but they feel them - extreeemely supportive if they love you and care about you - feel very good about making their loved ones / parents proud - can be pretty lazy but since they love relaxing, if it's something they're supposed to be doing they'll get it done in order not to be stressed Gemini Sun - full of ideas / stories / random thoughts - likes to share their opinions around the right people - sometimes shy, but most times not too scared to share some of the weirdest or craziest thoughts that go on in their head - tends to relate or be relatable to many situations - pretty humourous and intellectual/wise - not to be confused with smart tho, because they can make dumb decisions sometimes lmao - the type to laugh at their terrible situations then look for a way forward, unless it is deep then they pour it out alone - many may say they're two-faced when actually it's just that they easily adjust/adapt to new environments and say the latest thing that comes to their mind - pretty generous and accommodating (making them great hosts) - actually really caring and loyal if they love you, but you'll have to be able to keep up with their crazy minds and have fun with them Cancer Sun - not as emotional as you think, but quite sensitive - they loove honest and genuine people (people who are real with themselves) - as much as they love their home, they also love to have fun! - they just want to be treated like kings / queens (highly respected and loved) - dislike flaky/not too serious/hard to pin down people - can be shy but surprisingly can also say blunt things about themselves - they truly respect themselves more than anything - randomly super goofy sometimes - very tender, loyal and caring once you really get to know them and they love you (not off the bat, but once you seriously get to know them) - MOODY AS HELL - super smart! Leo Sun - the most generous people you'll ever meet - only really selfish if they really want what you're asking for - caring but have a loott of pride - always do things by how they feel in the moment - have a really chilled, cool vibe to them - like to showcase their best assets, you'll barely know their insecurities (unless they joke about them) - one of their major goals is just living the luxurious life and having the finer things - like to get touchy when they like you - they fall pretty hard when they're deeply in love - very confident internally but also have a sensitive ego so don't diss them too much unless you're lightly joking around Virgo Sun - some of the most smart/intellectual people - always want things to be done and said right - really dislike people having control over them, they appreciate helpful people but not bossy ones - they are also very helpful people who like doing things for others - will most likely cater to you and be your little servant if they're super in love with you (not a literal servant, but just devoted to you and pleasing you) - really dislike aggressive loudmouths and ignorant/arrogant people - actually happen to find sarcastic and witty people interesting - some are pretty boring and some are super hilarious, it honestly varies lol - clean, well-prepared spaces / things that are not too cluttered make them impressed - have a thing for criticizing certain things, they can't help it sometimes - pretty shy and goofy when they like you, then open up bit by bit Libra Sun - they are all about positivity and fun vibes - really smart thinkers but you won't tell cause they're good actors - really talkative and funny once you get to know them - hate tension/awkwardness/bad vibes and will most likely step away from it - good at putting things together and have an eye for beauty so they are the best at fashion - a sucker for romantic things (if they're in love with you they'll be extremely romantic and try to please all your senses) - as much as they love people they also looove their time alone so they'll be social and then also anti-social after a minute - super wise at making decisions, but take their time because they're making sure it's the right one (therefore called 'indecisive') - quite selfless in the sense that they think of what's best for you before thinking of what's best for them - slow to get angry, but once they are, they're blunt and will cut you off! Scorpio Sun - surprise surprise, they are very friendly and lovable people - super humorous and goofy when they're happy - when they are not in the mood you will feel it - they live for honesty and genuine things/people, so they can be cautious people - once they trust you, DO NOT take it for granted (they're sensitive to betrayal and don't trust easily) - one or two very close friends - important to know your boundaries with them. they dislike people who forcefully try to worm their way into their lives - STUBBORN AS HELL - secretive, but love opening up to people who've earned their trust - most of the time don't actually care what you think, unless you mean something to them Sagittarius Sun - highkey lowkey the most opinionated people you'll ever meet - super hilarious and sarcastic individuals - also stubborn as hell - lowkey have that 'I got it' vibe - if they don't like you, you'll know it - loud and bitchy when they're angry, won't stop talking and will be petty as hell - a little bit selfish about the people (and things) they love - want to experience the best memories with you when they're in love with you - pretty optimistic and positive so they don't dwell on bad vibes for too long - not afraid to take risks if something looks enticing or fun Capricorn Sun - super nonchalant people who overlook annoying vibes or address them with full power, depending on their mood - can be pretty moody - very dark/dry/mean sense of humour, will tease you or laugh at ‘teasable’ people - really good at taking control over their emotions - if they cry, it is something serious because they hate letting their emotions get the best of them - they like working on something or having some sort of plan/little scheme to work on (even in love lol. they can work for love too) - they HATE disrespect. chances are they’ll never forget it if you’ve ever disrespected them - will open up to you (which can be really hard for them) and treat you like a king/queen if they're deeply in love with you - gifted with a sense of knowing what's morally right and morally wrong - not the type to fall quick, hard and deep in love. take a while to be invested Aquarius Sun - the one sign that doesn't care about almost anything (in both a bad and good way) - if they do care, it is lowkey but it is real because they're fixed - have a weird sense of humour, and may sometimes be blunt - may have a thing of feeling entitled or that somehow they’re unique than most - but pretty humble in treating everyone the same - loves entertaining people and people who are funny - does not like talking about feelings and emotions regularly, but when the mood calls for it, sure - has no problem ignoring people, things, thoughts and signs . they’re just really nonchalant - can be very random and just do things for the fun of it - when they are in love, you'll never really know but most likely they’ll want to spend a lot of time with you and hear your thoughts a lot Pisces Sun - have the tendency to like to act cute and sweet and beautiful - this is not always the case. in fact, 70% of the time they are pretty manipulative - as much as they may feel a lot, they barely talk about their feelings and just sweep most things under the carpet or brush them away - like thinking or 'dreaming' about the craziest scenarios that can make them smile or laugh - their favourite hobby is mentally escaping - hate bad vibes and tension, but aren't afraid of arguing! - like to think they're smart (most times they are though, other times they're pretty dumb (esp if they're led by love)) - when they are in love, they are almost everything you've ever wanted (super caring, pretty forgiving, and will do a looottt for you) - if they don't like you they don't even bother breathing in your direction - somehow they can pretty cynical and witty, making them seem mean, but they’re not really.

Side-note: I actually wrote this about two years ago lol and just found it yesterday in my old notes. So if I may sound like I’m repeating things from other posts or asks , I’m not actually trying to repeat anything more than I’m posting it for a ‘sun sign culture’ post and think this one is interesting to share.

#aries #aries sun #taurus #taurus sun #gemini #gemini sun #cancer #cancer sun #leo #leo sun #virgo #virgo sun #libra #libra sun #scorpio #scorpio sun #sagittarius #sagittarius sun #capricorn #capricorn sun #aquarius #aquarius sun #pisces #pisces sun #aries rising #aries moon #taurus rising #taurus moon #gemini rising #gemini moon

[weirdefilippis]

Ser Aaron Hawthorne

It’s been a few weeks since Dark Fortress #3 was released, and we think it’s probably safe to start talking about it.  But still, fair warning: ahead there be spoilers…

So we’ve been writing towards one panel for a long time.

And that image has been in our head because of one lyric from the song that has connected to Ser Aaron Hawthorne the most since we started writing him.

“And I know... if I’ll only be true to this glorious quest… that my heart will lie peaceful and calm when I’m laid to my rest.”

That is a line near the end of the classic “The Impossible Dream” which originated in Man of La Mancha, the musical about Don Quixote.

Nunzio’s mother is a linguist and literary scholar.  And when he was growing up, Cervantes’ Don Quixote was a big part of his life.  And as we got older, we both found ourselves saddened by how (to put it bluntly) anti-heroic the world has gotten.

We teach comic book writing and the number of students who invariably criticize Superman as ‘unrealistic’ by saying “If I got his powers, I wouldn’t do good things” is terrifying.  Seriously, that says something about you, not about Superman or the world.  But the fact that so many say it… that tells us something about the world.  People laugh at or dismiss a character motivated by the desire to do good.  Don Quixote fought to uphold those ideals.  And he’s generally thought of as crazy.

When we pitched Knight Errant, we started with two characters from a tabletop RPG.  The character in that game was named Anders Hawthorne.  We pitched him with a different name (for obvious reason) but also changed a key thing about him.  In our game, he was a big buffoon, a blowhard telling tales of his own greatness, looking like a fool while he worked in concert with his deft Squire to secretly save the world.

But our comic version (in addition to changing him to be unaware of Vaea’s skills and side-hustles) was more… broken.  He was older, and had endured more than simply ridicule.  He had seen the worst the world had to offer, and still strove to present a knightly ideal to the world.  And that meant he had to self-medicate through drink.

It was through conversation with our editors at Dark Horse and the team at Bioware that these changes became more and more pronounced.  And we started to realize that he was a Don Quixote figure dealing with alcoholism as a coping mechanism for his PTSD.

And the song came back to us.  We knew that “The Impossible Dream” was the ideal he once fought to uphold, and he projected through his stories.  And we knew his journey was to realize that he was, despite all the evil in Thedas, and suffering of his life, living that dream.  That he had been ‘true to the glorious quest.’

And that was when we knew we’d need to see his ‘heart lying peaceful and calm’ and it would need to be ‘when he was laid to his rest.’

He was ready to lay down his life for Vaea’s crimes in Knight Errant #5.  But we knew that wasn’t the right time.  He would not be ready to die (and we would not be ready to write that death) until Vaea was ready to be the Knight who took up his cause.

And so we ended Knight Errant with both of them alive and building a new bond.

And we knew that if BioWare asked us to write more, this would be the arc of the story.

So we set out to show that he could inspire even a con artist to become a hero.  But we knew that would end badly, and cause a setback.

And we knew that when our last miniseries was done, that he would be ready.

Sadly, that did not make us ready to let him go.

Writing his death was brutally hard for us.  In following his story, both of us unpacked some of the issues we’ve had in loving alcoholic relatives.  And he became family to us.  And by showing his renewed drive to undertake a quest, we were often tempted to change course.

(We never thought about changing course just because people started to think his death was “too obvious.” In all honesty, it being obvious was because of time honored hero’s/heroine’s journey tropes that have been around so long because they work.  And it was also because we were foreshadowing it.  We can’t get upset if people see coming what we are trying to tell them is coming.)

In the end, it had to end this way.  Before Dark Fortress came out, we posted song lyric images, and we went with Man Of La Mancha, from the same show.  We didn’t do Impossible Dream.  Because we knew what image would go with which line.

So here it is… the moment we wrote towards, the one we knew had to happen… and the one that wrecked us to see brought to life so well by our amazing collaborators.

Rest in peace, Ser Aaron Hawthorne.  You were true to the glorious quest.  And we know your heart is peaceful and calm now.

#dragon age #dragon age dark fortress #dragon age knight errant #ser aaron hawthorne #dragon age dark fortress spoilers #Dark Fortress spoilers

[whitehotharlots]

The point is control

Whenever we think or talk about censorship, we usually conceptualize it as certain types of speech being somehow disallowed: maybe (rarely) it's made formally illegal by the government, maybe it's banned in certain venues, maybe the FCC will fine you if you broadcast it, maybe your boss will fire you if she learns of it, maybe your friends will stop talking to you if they see what you've written, etc. etc. 

This understanding engenders a lot of mostly worthless discussion precisely because it's so broad. Pedants--usually arguing in favor of banning a certain work or idea--will often argue that speech protections only apply to direct, government bans. These bans, when they exist, are fairly narrow and apply only to those rare speech acts in which other people are put in danger by speech (yelling the N-word in a crowded theater, for example). This pedantry isn't correct even within its own terms, however, because plenty of people get in trouble for making threats. The FBI has an entire entrapment program dedicated to getting mentally ill muslims and rednecks to post stuff like "Death 2 the Super bowl!!" on twitter, arresting them, and the doing a press conference about how they heroically saved the world from terrorism. 

Another, more recent pedant's trend is claiming that, actually, you do have freedom of speech; you just don't have freedom from the consequences of speech. This logic is eerily dictatorial and ignores the entire purpose of speech protections. Like, even in the history's most repressive regimes, people still technically had freedom of speech but not from consequences. Those leftist kids who the nazis beheaded for speaking out against the war were, by this logic, merely being held accountable. 

The two conceptualizations of censorship I described above are, 99% of the time, deployed by people who are arguing in favor of a certain act of censorship but trying to exempt themselves from the moral implications of doing so. Censorship is rad when they get to do it, but they realize such a solipsism seems kinda icky so they need to explain how, actually, they're not censoring anybody, what they're doing is an act of righteous silencing that's a totally different matter. Maybe they associate censorship with groups they don't like, such as nazis or religious zealots. Maybe they have a vague dedication toward Enlightenment principles and don't want to be regarded as incurious dullards. Most typically, they're just afraid of the axe slicing both ways, and they want to make sure that the precedent they're establishing for others will not be applied to themselves.

Anyone who engages with this honestly for more than a few minutes will realize that censorship is much more complicated, especially in regards to its informal and social dimensions. We can all agree that society simply would not function if everyone said whatever they wanted, whenever they wanted. You might think your boss is a moron or your wife's dress doesn't look flattering, but you realize that such tidbits are probably best kept to yourself. 

Again, this is a two-way proposition that everyone is seeking to balance. Do you really want people to verbalize every time they dislike or disagree with you? I sure as hell don't. And so, as part of a social compact, we learn to self-censor. Sometimes this is to the detriment of ourselves and our communities. Most often, however, it's just a price we have to pay in order to keep things from collapsing. 

But as systems, large and small, grow increasingly more insane and untenable, so do the comportment standards of speech. The disconnect between America's reality and the image Americans have of themselves has never been more plainly obvious, and so striving for situational equanimity is no longer good enough. We can't just pretend cops aren't racist and the economy isn't run by venal retards or that the government places any value on the life of its citizens. There's too much evidence that contradicts all that, and the evidence is too omnipresent. There's too many damn internet videos, and only so many of them can be cast as Russian disinformation. So, sadly, we must abandon our old ways of communicating and embrace instead systems that are even more unstable, repressive, and insane than the ones that were previously in place.

Until very, very recently, nuance and big-picture, balanced thinking were considered signs of seriousness, if not intelligence. Such considerations were always exploited by shitheads to obfuscate things that otherwise would have seemed much less ambiguous, yes, but this fact alone does not mitigate the potential value of such an approach to understanding the world--especially since the stuff that's been offered up to replace it is, by every worthwhile metric, even worse.

So let's not pretend I'm Malcolm Gladwell or some similarly slimy asshole seeking to "both sides" a clearcut moral issue. Let's pretend I am me. Flash back to about a year ago, when there was real, widespread, and sustained support for police reform. Remember that? Seems like forever ago, man, but it was just last year... anyhow, now, remember what happened? Direct, issues-focused attempts to reform policing were knocked down. Blotted out. Instead, we were told two things: 1) we had to repeat the slogan ABOLISH THE POLICE, and 2) we had to say it was actually very good and beautiful and nonviolent and valid when rioters burned down poor neighborhoods.

Now, in a relatively healthy discourse, it might have been possible for someone to say something like "while I agree that American policing is heavily violent and racist and requires substantial reforms, I worry that taking such an absolutist point of demanding abolition and cheering on the destruction of city blocks will be a political non-starter." This statement would have been, in retrospect, 100000000% correct. But could you have said it, in any worthwhile manner? If you had said something along those lines, what would the fallout had been? Would you have lost friends? Your job? Would you have suffered something more minor, like getting yelled at, told your opinion did not matter? Would your acquaintances still now--a year later, after their political project has failed beyond all dispute--would they still defame you in "whisper networks," never quite articulating your verbal sins but nonetheless informing others that you are a dangerous and bad person because one time you tried to tell them how utterly fucking self-destructive they were being? It is undeniably clear that last year's most-elevated voices were demanding not reform but catharsis. I hope they really had fun watching those immigrant-owned bodegas burn down, because that’s it, that will forever be remembered as the most palpable and consequential aspect of their shitty, selfish movement. We ain't reforming shit. Instead, we gave everyone who's already in power a blank check to fortify that power to a degree you and I cannot fully fathom.

But, oh, these people knew what they were doing. They were good little boys and girls. They have been rewarded with near-total control of the national discourse, and they are all either too guilt-ridden or too stupid to realize how badly they played into the hands of the structures they were supposedly trying to upend.

And so left-liberalism is now controlled by people whose worldview is equal parts superficial and incoherent. This was the only possible outcome that would have let the system continue to sustain itself in light of such immense evidence of its unsustainability without resulting in reform, so that's what has happened.

But... okay, let's take a step back. Let's focus on what I wanted to talk about when I started this.

I came across a post today from a young man who claimed that his high school English department head had been removed from his position and had his tenure revoked for refusing to remove three books from classrooms. This was, of course, fallout from the ongoing debate about Critical Race Theory. Two of those books were Marjane Satropi's Persepolis and, oh boy, The Diary of Anne Frank. Fuck. Jesus christ, fuck.

Now, here's the thing... When Persepolis was named, I assumed the bannors were anti-CRT. The graphic novel does not deal with racism all that much, at least not as its discussed contemporarily, but it centers an Iranian girl protagonist and maybe that upset Republican types. But Anne Frank? I'm sorry, but the most likely censors there are liberal identiarians who believe that teaching her diary amounts to centering the suffering of a white woman instead of talking about the One Real Racism, which must always be understood in an American context. The super woke cult group Black Hammer made waves recently with their #FuckAnneFrank campaign... you'd be hard pressed to find anyone associated with the GOP taking a firm stance against the diary since, oh, about 1975 or so.

So which side was it? That doesn't matter. What matters is, I cannot find out.

Now, pro-CRT people always accuse anti-CRT people of not knowing what CRT is, and then after making such accusations they always define CRT in a way that absolutely is not what CRT is. Pro-CRTers default to "they don't want  students to read about slavery or racism." This is absolutely not true, and absolutely not what actual CRT concerns itself with. Slavery and racism have been mainstays of American history curriucla since before I was born. Even people who barely paid attention in school would admit this, if there were any more desire for honesty in our discourse. 

My high school history teacher was a southern "lost causer" who took the south's side in the Civil War but nonetheless provided us with the most descriptive and unapologetic understandings of slavery's brutalities I had heard up until that point. He also unambiguously referred to the nuclear attacks on Hiroshmia and Nagasaki as "genocidal." Why? Because most people's politics are idiosyncratic, and because you cannot genuinely infer a person to believe one thing based on their opinion of another, tangentially related thing. The totality of human understanding used to be something open-minded people prided themselves on being aware of, believe it or not...

This is the problem with CRT. This is is the motivation behind the majority of people who wish to ban it. It’s not because they are necessarily racist themselves. It’s because they recognize, correctly, that the now-ascendant frames for understanding social issues boils everything down to a superficial patina that denies not only the realities of the systems they seek to upend but the very humanity of the people who exist within them. There is no humanity without depth and nuance and complexities and contradictions. When you argue otherwise, people will get mad and fight back. 

And this is the most bitter irony of this idiotic debate: it was never about not wanting to teach the sinful or embarrassing parts of our history. That was a different debate, one that was settled and won long ago. It is instead an immense, embarrassing overreach on behalf of people who have bullied their way to complete dominance of their spheres of influence within media and academe assuming they could do the same to everyone else. Some of its purveyors may have convinced themselves that getting students to admit complicity in privilege will prevent police shootings, sure. But I know these people. I’ve spoken to them at length. I’ve read their work. The vast, vast majority of them aren’t that stupid. The point is to exert control. The point is to make sure they stay in charge and that nothing changes. The point is failure. 

[limv3000]

My thoughts and opinions on Sakura and Hinata:

Hinata (in my opinion) is not a good character. I know and heard that Kishimoto cannot write female characters and it shows. Hinata was weak throughout most of the show and she’s basically there for Naruto’s love intrest and fan service (sadly) and for the Hinata stans who say ‘she had more potential’ for what? During the war really all she was there for was to give Naruto a fuckin hope speech because of Nejis death and even Sakura did more than her.

In OG Naruto she was annoying (in my opinion) she always focused on one person and that was Naruto, when she could’ve been training her ass off for herself and the only motivation she had was Naruto. She wanted to get strong for Naruto, She wanted to save the village for Naruto. She never really did anything for herself, and please tell me if I’m wrong. Hinata was always interpreted as fragile and weak, which was the downfall. I don’t understand how people love her for that? During the Chunin Exams she tried her best for Naruto and that was also the only reason she tried her best. Neji was one of my fav characters during that arc because he was right and he was honest. Neji said it was fate that he’d die for Hinata and look what happened, he died. for hinata.

Don’t misinterpret what I’m trying to say, I don’t hate hinata and I don’t support hate towards her but these are just my thought and I know people obviously won’t agree. Now back to the whole ‘Naruto’s love interest’, I seriously think that’s all she is. How does Naruto never pay any attention to her throughout the whole show and then starts loving her? AFTER ONE MOVIE. I hope all of you didn’t forget the fact Hinata did confess her love to Naruto cause she thought she would die, and yeah Naruto did go psycho and killed pain, but let’s say that happened to Sakura, Shikamaru, or Lee. He would’ve done the exact same thing because those are his friends. After the fight with pain he came back and went on with not paying any attention to Hinata, literally he forgot all about the confession. Basically >>

About Sakura, *sigh* everyone’s interprets her as a strong/strongest kunoichi, which I guess your not wrong. Sakura is strong, but she didn’t get that by herself. Throughout the war she really wanted just some acknowledgment from people (Sasuke) and I won’t lie she did help, at healing. She’s a healer ninja and she’ll be there to break the ground when she’s needed to break the ground. She summoned a large snail, which not everyone can do, but it’s basically heal people. Now, I’m huge on anti-ending in Naruto, after the war I didn’t want to watch. But I did. Anyway, Sakura never did anything for herself, and I know there’s no way any of the Sakura stans can disagree, but you will and you’ll find a way. Sakura became strong because the fact that she realized Naruto couldn’t be the only one to save Sasuke and she realized she’s a selfish person(Not in all cases,but most), so she asked Tsunade to help her to go and get Sasuke back. During OG Naruto I won’t hate on Sakura for being a selfish asshole. Nevermind I will. Sakura only ever did anything for Sasuke or to get attention from Sasuke and only Sasuke, she did care about Naruto but only whenever they’re in danger, or he’s on the doorstep of death. Sakura never helped in anything and she stood there crying and screaming and she had to be helped in almost every mission 24/7. Sakura and Hinata are alike in many ways, they become strong for one person, they focus on one person, and they want to be with one person.

Then the Sakura stans will get mad, because in all honesty. Sakura is pretty useless. She can heal and she can break the ground, now don’t get mad I know about all the other things she can do too, but please, argue with me.

These are just my opinions, I’ll take criticism. Just don’t be stupid about it.

#naruto #naruto shippuden #anime #anti ending #sakura #hinata #opinion

[delusion-of-negation]

top 10 (ish) ridiculous or annoying FAQs:

(click at your own discretion)

1) "kids today rely on others to do everything"

ah yes, damn those participation trophies! if it wasn't for them my hands wouldn't be fucked, and I wouldn't need people to write for me. but seriously, stop reading boomer comics, and go outside to meet some actual young people.

2) "sus that a non-american says mom"

yeah, because it's clearly the superior version, and I'm not too patriotic to concede a defeat.

3) "sweaty, the victims of abuse by catholics are real people, stop appropriating their pain just because you want to hate catholics; plus teachers abuse people just as often anyway"

so firstly, I don't hate anybody. and secondly, regarding the fact that victims really do exist, [insert "of course I know him, he's me" meme here]; although I don't often talk much about the abuse I went through or what my religious beliefs are. but, more importantly, statements like "survivors are people" can be phrased like "some people are survivors", and when you're unable to act according to the latter (like when you don't even consider that somebody might be one) then you display a failure to recognise the former - you're projecting; a survivor can't be appropriating their own pain, but you can be appropriating it to silence one. and thirdly, teachers do abuse - the problem isn't and has never been purely religion, rather that abuse is often done by somebody in a position of trust, power, and familiarity; and that the lack of a global minimum enables totally legal abuse on top of the illegal stuff. people with access and respect have more opportunity to abuse than those without, and that goes for teachers too. but, once again, you can be appropriating the pain of survivors to deflect and silence people. please remember this before you say that shit.

4) "get help/therapy"

way ahead of you - years ahead of you. but it's not magic - people who say this often act as if you'll start behaving differently overnight. not only are some things simply beyond the ability of talking therapy to completely rectify, it also takes time and has to be selective. you've got to pick your priorities, and that's definitely not whatever ship or joke you're mad at me about today. therapy is a slow, arduous process that can't guarantee results - it isn't "anti-recovery" to recognise that, it's honesty. while I've been in therapy for a long time, it is not necessarily going to change whatever you don't like about me - whether that's because it can't, because my focus now is on more important or urgent things, or because I don't want to change that.

5a) "tell your family you ship incest, see how that goes; normal people find it disgusting"

actually, some know, and they're fine with it. in fact, one prefers sibling pairings in fiction to all other dynamics because, to paraphrase, "it's a deeper level of messed up co-dependence". so unfortunately for you, my remaining family (by which I mean those not dead or cut out of my life after abuse and so forth) actually are able to distinguish between fiction and reality. plus, my reasoning for caring if they find it gross or not pertains only to recommending books and such - their opinions do not dictate my tastes.

5b) "don't sexualise/appropriate incestuous abuse" and "I bet you enjoyed being raped" and other attempts to upset me over 5a

firstly, as I've already said here, survivors can't be appropriating ourselves. in addition, you're not owed people's history or trauma - it's not okay to require people's personal information, or else you'll send anon hate and accusations of appropriation. secondly, I'm not sexualising our abuse (not just because I write horror, and so a lot of my writing is intended to be creepy, not sexy); these stories aren't about us, they're not us at all. entire dynamics/people (fictional or otherwise) aren't all going to be applicable to us or identical to us, just because they have something in common with us; they're not us and they're not accountable to us. thirdly, the fact that people send this stuff (attempting to trigger people's trauma over ships) is so much more worrying to me than somebody making our communal imaginary friends kiss. you're trying to hurt people. and finally, to the "I bet you enjoyed it" crowd (if you're at all serious): do you think you'd enjoy being in a real zombie apocalypse, alone, afraid, and really at risk of being eaten alive? a fictional scenario does not feel remotely the same as a real one. this isn't rocket science - things that look like you aren't you; fiction isn't reality; don't send anon hate. (edit: comparable "just leave me alone, I'm not hurting anyone" sentiments for yandere stuff, and anything else you decide I'm naughty for.)

6) "you'll be sent off to do manual labour once your communist revolution happens"

while I don't know why people think that I'm a communist, a dictatorial regime probably isn't going to want me to do manual labour. they're more likely to just shoot me; I'm useless and a liability. call me crazy, but something tells me that "ah yes, we shall give ze deranged cripple ze power tools" isn't the communist position.

7a) "they/them can't be singular pronouns"

yes they can, and they're used as such in both shakespeare and the bible. but you don't have to say this - I'm also okay with he/him, so you could've just used those and chilled out. also, do I look like somebody who views the rules of grammar as fully immutable and imperative?

7b) "enbies/aros/pan/etc aren't valid"

do you really think that you're going to change any hearts or minds by putting that in my ask box or under my funny maymays? chill out, it's not worth the effort - you could be planning a party (in minecraft) and having fun instead. it isn't worth my time to rant at everybody who's saying something isn't valid, updating how I'm explaining it as my opinions grow and general discourse around it evolves; I'm just who I am, somebody else is who they are - why bicker in presumptuous ways about if that's enough? it ultimately is valid, in my opinion, but that isn't an invitation to keep demanding that I debate. (edit: old posts of mine probably don't phrase things incredibly, on this or anything... I tried.)

8) "what are your politics?"

my politics are informed first and foremost by the knowledge that I'm not cut out to be some kind of leader - I don't want to be the guy who tells everyone else what to do, I just offer what seem to me like valid criticisms of how we are doing things now, and general pointers on the values and ethics that I would prefer to move towards. things like individual freedom, taking the most pacifist route where possible, trying not to give excessive power to small groups of people (governments or corporations), helping those in need even when they're not palatable, and letting me suck loads of dicks. but please refrain from decreeing me something - there's not enough information in what I said, so you'll just be filling in the blanks with assumptions. (edit: workplace democracy seems cool to me; benefits are good; fair fines and taxes; and the "sperm makes you loopy" saga: 1, 2, 3, and 4.)

9) "you're a narcissist"

no, I don't meet the diagnostic criteria. joking on the internet that you're hot doesn't make a person a narcissist. the fact that I've chosen to keep my actual self-esteem issues to myself is not proof that they don't exist - you're just not entitled to that information about me. but it's also not narcissism to really like how you look. (edit: don't throw labels around carelessly too.)

10a) "kin list?"

the fabric of the universe, a zombie, dionysus, maned wolf/arctic fox hybrid, a comedian, big gay, big rock, ambiguously partial insincerity. (edit: kin list may or may not be incomplete.)

10b) "kin isn't valid/that's just being insane"

haven't we established that I'm deranged, and that sending stuff like this on anon is simply a waste of your precious time? besides, I do not care if it's invalid or insane - it's fun, I'm happy. (edit: see 7b for my opinion on sending me yet another ask with "that's invalid" in it; I'm not in the mood to discuss the nature of validity.)

bonus: "it gets better" and "trigger list?"

as I've said before, things just don't always get better for everyone - sometimes things can't be cured or even treated, sometimes they kill you; in some cases it could get better if not for a blockade or lack of time. the world is messy. it needs to be more normalised to reassure or comfort people without relying on saying that their issue will get better or be cured. it does suck to be this ill, but it also sucks to be made out to be a lazy pessimist, just because I have the audacity to not play along. and as for the trigger list, I don't like providing people with an easily accessed list of ways to hurt my feelings or harm me - upsetting me is supposed to be challenging, and thus rewarding. if you want a cheat sheet then you're out of luck, I'm afraid.

bonus #2: "FAQ stands for frequently asked questions, it doesn't need that s at the end!"

yeah, I know, I just enjoy chaos and disarray.

bonus #3 (edit): "what are your disabilities and how exactly are they incurable and/or deadly?"

again, I don't tell the internet everything about me, especially when it poses a risk, especially not as an easily accessible list for you to refer back to whenever you feel inclined to hurt my feelings. that is understandably a sore subject. (edit: that includes physical health issues btw.)

bonus #4 (edit): "so we shouldn't be critical?"

if it wasn't clear from my answer about politics or my post in general, you can have opinions about things, and you can voice that. it's just not realistic to exist at extremes: to think that you alone should dictate what exists in fiction, or to think that people shouldn't be expressing disdain or criticism of any calibur. say how you feel about things, that's fine, but it's also fine if people find that they don't value your input. plus we're all flawed, we can all be hypocritical from time to time, we all get bitchy, and we all make mistakes, or even knowingly fuck things up. that's important to keep in mind, whether we're talking about the one being criticised or the one doing the criticising - poor choices of words, imperfect tone, or contradictory ideas are inevitably going to happen occasionally.

congrats on reaching the end! if you have, at any point, said one of these to me, you owe a hug to your nearest loved one (once it's safe).

edit: might add more links/bonus points in the future when I think of things, but it's late now. (sorry for links where prior notes in the thread have my old url, that may get a tad confusing; also, not all links are my blog or my op, since it is to illustrate points/vibes, not to self-promo.)

#don't take life too seriously #nobody gets out alive anyway #tw abuse mention #tw csa mention #tw incest mention #tw for any tws I missed #idk why I did this

[thepastneverforgets]

BatFam One-Shot

characters: jason todd & damian wayne plot: damian is separated from the group during a weekend patrol and the nearest person, jason, is called upon to check on him. cue them begrudgingly bonding. note: this fic isn’t anti-bruce but it’s largely written from jason’s bias perspective so it’s not exactly bruce wayne friendly either. also, not all the familiar with damian in current canon, just fyi. cw: smoking

“I told you I knew where the best hole-in-the-wall vegan spot in Gotham was; you should trust me more often...” Jason remarked as he watched Damian practically scarf down his own tin-foil wrapped meal. 

Damian immediately scoffed with food still in his mouth, and then made sure to swallow it all down--’manners, young man. mind them’ they both heard Alfred chastising tone in their head--before he went on to spit out, “trust you, Hood? I’d sooner trust the clown before I did that...”

And didn’t that just make Jason seethe, glaring at Damian’s little smirk and biting the inside of his cheek to keep himself in check. He didn’t want to bite back or smack the kid upside the head, but was strongly feeling the urge to do just that, which he counted back from ten to ignore. After all, he was the adult in this situation, trying to extend an olive branch and show Bruce that he could play nice, even with his legitimate Demon Spawn. It wouldn’t do him any good to sink down to the brat’s level. And frankly, he’s on the verge of just dropping off the rooftop and grappling away to leave Damian to make his way back to the manor on his own, when the younger boy’s next words gave him pause.

“I suppose it’s adequate enough, though. Certainly better than the things father tries to get me to eat.” 

“Puh-lease, Bruce wouldn’t know good taste if it bit him in the ass. All that secondhand smoke while dining out in the 80′s and early 90′s probably ruined his taste buds.” Jason reasoned with a dry laugh.

“You smoke.” Damian went on to point out, jumping in to defend his father even if he was just criticizing him a second ago. Just as Jason bundled up his empty food wrapper and tucked it into his utility belt to throw away later, and so that he could instead pull out a cigarette from the next pocket over. 

“Only after dinner...” He quipped--and also when he couldn’t get the particular iron taste of blood out of his mouth, but he left that part unsaid. His lips curled up in lopsided grin while he held the cigarette between them to light it up, with his favorite lighter, which was shaped to look like a tiny six-shooter . It was only after the first puff of smoke was expelled over the city streets that Jason sagged in relief, legs lazily swinging back and forth over the ledge of the building’s roof. 

“Let me try.” Damian demanded out of nowhere and Jason immediately coughed on his next drag.

“The fuc-- What the hell do I look like to you, brat... your gateway into becoming a damn addict?” 

Damian scowled and moved to snatch the cigarette, but was too slow. Jason’s broad and bulky frame leaned away from the pipsqueak as he pulled a proper drag this time. “Oh, whatever, Hood. I’ll have you know I’m built different from you. I wouldn’t get addicted...”

And didn’t that naïve and childish proclamation just make Jason laugh in delight, his half-smoked cigarette stubbed out against the roof and shoved in the same pocket he had put his trash in earlier.

“Yeah...? Why don’t you go tell that to B and Al the next time you all have a little family movie night; just bring it right up when he tries to get you to watch The Brave Little Toaster or some shit, see what his face says...”

With a scrunch of his nose and a huff, Damian replied, “he already made me watch that with him, I feel asleep on it, on him...”

“Ha, me too, kid, me fucking too...” And this time, Jason’s high and short laugh sounded clogged with too much emotion, nostalgia and resentment all cobbled together and caking his throat. “I get that it’s his favorite animated movie from way back when or whatever, but damn, he couldn’t pick something a little more exciting-- think he just wanted to watch something that he knew would put us to sleep....”

“Oh..” Damian mouthed, looking around for a place to put his trash before he simply followed Jason’s lead and continued on, “I-- I didn’t know that. Do... You don’t think he was insulted that I didn’t pay attention and drooled on him, do you...?” 

For a moment, Jason paused at the honest note of doubt and concern in Damian’s face, the little wannabe Batman finally looking like the child he was. Which had him answering with kneejerk honesty, “No, no I don’t think he cared, even a little. The boss-man is just a quality time kind guy...

     But, I bet you don’t even know what his favorite movies and books actually are, do you? Or what spot in that exclusive study of his that he likes best to read in...?”

Damian scowled, in thought, and then shook his head. As far as he knew, his father didn’t do much of any reading these days, unless it was blaring off the bright screen of the bat-computer. 

Jason sucked on his teeth with a disappointed ‘tsk’ and shook his own head. “Then ask him, when you get back; see what he says... we can compare notes next time and see if he’s done any personal growth in the last decade or more...” he suggested before he finally stood on the very edge of the roof and stretched out his heavy limbs.

All the crime and corruption that filled the city streets was so far below him that it seemed a world away. And it was getting about that time for him to clock out of this little babysitting job and jump back into his swamp. 

“Come with me...” 

Once again, Damian’s unexpected words gave Jason pause and he glanced back at the kid with a raised brow. “Uh... thanks but no thanks. I got some business to attend to and time to kill, before Al makes that insomniac actually sleep and he becomes any sort of tolerable.” 

“You know, you’re not better than him, Todd. He made yo--”

“Whatever you say, brat...” Jason cut off the ‘you should be grateful to him for the rest of your life’ bullshit Damian was likely going to feed him, even after all the trouble he went through to get the kid a decent meal, and pulled out his grapple gun. “Now you go and get home to daddy, yeah... I’m sure I’ll be seeing you around.” And with that, Jason jumped off the roof and worked to put a street of distance between them. 

And although Damian wasn’t happy with not getting the last word in, his mind was quickly pulled to other matters as Batman came in through the coms a moment later, demanding to know where his youngest son was and why he hadn’t returned from patrol, yet. 

“In route as we speak...” was all he said in response, his path taking him back to the manor and opposite Jason.

#joshingmyself! #mywriting! #jason todd #damian wayne #ficlet

[rabbitrah]

idk why exactly but there's been an influx of terfs interacting with my content on all three of my active blogs and it's so upsettling. idk if it's because my posts are spreading further, because there actually is a more active terf community now that there used to be, or if the posts I'm creating now are more relevent to terf interests but it's so upsetting and although I'm trying to "block and move on" I'm finding the "moving on" part hard. It's a disturbing reminder of the backlash effect. I thought 7 years ago when I came out as trans to the first people that by this point in my life I would see more acceptance and less aggression. Maybe there is more acceptance. But the backlash that it's created is so difficult to reckon with. The anti trans legistlation being proposed in my country (usa) and abroad (especially the uk) is deeply scary to me. I'm so scared, especially since I'll be entering the field as a public elementary school teacher in less than two years. I've already made peace with the fact that I almost definitely won't be out at work, but I have new fears of being "found out." Although the new supreme court ruling has made it illegal to fire someone for their gender identity in my country, I have been fired for being trans without fired for being trans before. It's not that hard to do.

My boss at the first childcare job I had found out I was trans because a friend/coworker kept using they/them pronouns for me even though I was closeted at work (easy mistake!), so she did some digging I guess, then took me aside to tell me she "supported it" but that I had to keep it a secret (I was) because I was "teaching children to speak" and she didn't want me to "confuse them." I just nodded, so embarrassed and scared to be found out that way. I'd been mentally planning how I might be able to come out at work, but that flew out the window immediately.

Her treatment of me had already been pretty cold, but got colder after that. During a parent-teacher meeting that we all had to attend, she mentioned that one of the issues with the center was the lack of experienced staff, and how it's SO HARD to find good, experienced staff. It didn't even phase me because I was used to her belittling and criticizing me at this point, but it horrified a lot of the parents, who came up to me later to assure me that they thought I was doing a good job and that their kids had had a great year with me as their teacher.

I'd previously already gotten her approval to miss a few days at the end of the school year (cleanup stuff, after the kids were gone) so I could attend training for my summer job. A week later, just a few weeks before the end of the year she told me that I actually couldn't miss these days, and if I insisted on missing these days, I would have to resign. I was 20 and scared and non-confrontational. I told her couldn't lose out on my summer job that I'd already committed to, so if that meant I'd lose my position at the daycare, then fine. I knew whole-heartedly that this last minute, arbitrary decision was because she wanted an excuse to push me out. Thankfully I was smart enough to tell the parents of my kids and my coworkers that I was not quitting because I didn't want to stay, that I very much wanted to keep working, but that I had to keep my summer job and my boss wasn't giving me a choice.

Thankfully a new director replaced my old boss that year, a former coworker, and she called me that summer to ask if I would come back, and my YES couldn't have been louder. Now this is my career and I'm getting a degree in education. I couldn't be more passionate about my field. But I'll never forget that experience. A year later, at a training conference, my new director carefully asked me "how I identify." I knew she was kinder and more supportive than my previous boss. I knew that I could probably be honest without backlash. I still decided to tell her that I was bisexual and not tell her anything about my gender. She never asked again and I'm grateful to her for that. In all honesty, my previous boss might have outed me to her, or she could have found out another way, but she respected my privacy.

Seeing this sudden influx of terfs in my sphere is bringing back that old fear. This idea that people with an inherent repulsion of me are hidden all around me. They will be my bosses and my coworkers and I won't be able to tell who is who until it may be to late. Getting fired from a public school job is more damaging than getting fired from a community daycare. If I get outed and subsequently fired because my coworkers believe that there's something inherently unstable, corrupting, confusing, or even predatory about my lack of gender, I might struggle to find another position in that district or even that state. I might have too to a city or state far away from my loved ones to continue to work in my field (which would also mean getting a new teaching license.) Many trans people, especially trans women, have much more life threatening concerns, but this is mine.

Cis friends and trans friends who work in less scrutinized fields or more progressive cities are often critical or confused about how I could choose to stay closeted or don't think the backlash could really be so bad. They don't like thinking that there isn't a simple solution or a perfect school where I'll be able to come out and still teach, but I have to keep my expectations low, to protect myself. I've learned better.

#composibg whole ass essays on my phone for 2 people to read on tumblr dot com #iconic emile move #tender gender #teacher tag

[bereft-of-frogs]

Hi! What do want to see from the Loki series if you could decide? I'm super excited by the glimpse of the magic blast we got to see in the latest trailer.

That’s a really good question, anon. And I went back and forth on how much honesty I wanted to answer this with, and how conceptual I wanted to get with it...

because like, the ‘normal’ answer would be something along the lines of ‘cool magic would be fun! some stuff to tie into the larger plots. references to Thor or the Valkyrie! weird time travel shenanigans. catharsis!’

but the real answer is: ‘literally any spark of interest or joy or enthusiasm for this fandom that doesn’t immediately get crushed into sad dust by discourse-adjacent nonsense?’

That sounds bad. But, yeah, to be really honest I’ve been burning out hardcore, and I’d love to get **that** feeling back. Like I’m still working on drafts of WIPs that were already in the works, but...they feel like chores. I’d love for the series to spark some of that passion so they don’t feel like chores anymore. And feeling this burnt out/empty has made it hard for me to have any expectations or desires from the show. Like...I so desperately want to care about what happens but I’ve reached a level of somewhat frightening ambivalence.* On the one hand, that’s not too bad, because like a month ago I was really anxious about the kinds of discourse that we were going to get during the series, but on the other...at least then it was because I was really hyped and now...I just feel like I cannot even come close to achieving the level of emotion that I *should* feel or that the majority of the fandom is feeling.

so like. I’m pretty flexible on the specifics, but I’m hoping to get like...any enthusiasm back. And not to say I’m not looking forward to it! I’ve really liked what trailers have been released so far, the effects and set design look really cool, I’m digging the aesthetic and the action scenes clips are definitely promising...but I’m looking forward to it in a sort of more neutral way, like ‘oh, I’m looking forward to this show’s release, that will make for enjoyable Friday evening viewing’ rather than being like super-hyped or having any expectations or desires. Please take this for a true neutral position lol, this isn’t me being anti-the series or pre-critical or whatever...I genuinely think I’m going to have fun watching it! But as of right now I’m just sort of neutral about everything.

I’m sorry that I was #LikeThis all over your very nice ask, anon XD And I’m sure I’ll find some emotions by the time the show starts airing, I really hope I can get like...even a little nudge of enthusiasm back.

*this could also just be [gestures at the state of the pandemic/lockdown/isolation] because I in general barely feel human emotions anymore. that’s more the frightening part lol, normally I’d be like ‘w/e I’m just feeling neutral about this one thing’ but it’s everything and the articles I read said that’s normal so I’m shelving it with my various ‘pandemic/isolation-induced cognitive issues’ and not worrying too much about it.

#god i really hope this comes back i just signed up for the MRBB #lol i'm sure i'll find some balance again #and my emotions come back from the war #which according to the article about pandemic cognitive issues they will lol #but just like...saying the words 'i don't care' is a bit extreme #but also yeah i don't really care at this point in the same way i would before #i'm plugging away at a couple WIPs but my attentions been sorta elsewhere and i only feel a little bad about it #i did actually work on some original stuff last night so that's a benefit of being in a fandom emotions lull! #unnecessary dramatics #thank you for asking! #(no seriously thank you for sending me an ask! please don't take the weird emotions of the answer as a reflection on the question) #Anonymous