me, every time i come across a post listing the symptoms of adhd:
@everyone who identifies with the last picture: there is literally nothing wrong with suspecting you might have adhd. Best case scenario? You go to your doctor, say “I think I might have ADHD”, get tested and get a diagnosis and appropriate care for whatever condition you have. Honestly, most people with ADHD I know who got diagnosed when they were older did so by speaking for themselves and saying “I think I do have ADHD”. And honestly? What’s the worst consequences? You do so because of real problems you struggle with and when you e.g. join a server for people with adhd and learn how to cope with your problems, what harm has been done if it turns out it wasn’t adhd? You still learned some useful strategies? And not all mental health professionals are experts on every condition, and that especially rings true for adhd. So learning about it and having your own voice is important no matter what. Don’t self medicate of course, but get to know the condition you might have, speak with other people about it and try to find professional help if you need to. Saying “I think i might have ADHD” is an important step there.
I have ADHD, and knowing and treating that (hell yeah, adderall) has been legitimately life changing. I wasn’t diagnosed until 30, six months after I’d self-diagnosed based on a lot of reading.
I started reading because I kept saying “but I do that!” to Tumblr posts.
Official/medical/the vast majority of information on ADHD and its “symptoms” are what neuro-t’s see causing disruption around ADHD people.
They are a horrible indicator of what it’s like to actually HAVE ADHD, or the mental CAUSES of that observable behavior. It can be COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from the inside, and affecting behavior not commonly listed. There’s a lot of other cognitive funkery often associated with ADHD, and your custom combination may not “look like” ADHD from the outside.
ADHD is also not a problem with focus, memory, time, organization, or attention to detail. It is a difficulty REGULATING those things, specifically according to neuro-t standards. It tends towards extremes instead of medians.
So common ADHD indicators not mentioned include the exact opposite of all of those—being able to focus for long periods of time on a single thing and remembering copious details are the biggest (I think). Because an ADHD brain can’t NOT focus on something it finds engaging or stimulating (positively or negatively), it can’t NOT notice details it tags as relevant because of interest, curiosity, or I honestly have no idea sometimes.
But because of wiring differences, what an ADHD brain tags as engaging, relevant, important, etc. is not the same as a neuro-t. Same with organization—my brain organizes according to its own set of tags, I often how things should be arranged or ordered or how ideas are connected in MY head. It all makes sense to ME. Common structures or tools for organizing (remembering, etc) don’t work for me, they tell me how to arrange something by size or shape when all I can see is the color. Or by colors—only I can’t see THOSE colors, I see THESE colors, or even if I do see the same colors, I call them different things. Is this more orange or yellow, green or blue, etc. It really doesn’t help that an ADHD brain can often see multiple interpretations or ways of classifying things at once, and has no way to know which one (if any) somebody else is using.
ADHD brains are fantastic about prioritizing—they prioritize everything around them by how engaging it is, for starters. They can come up with all kinds of ways to prioritize a list of items, but if it doesn’t choose ones identical to neuro-t priorities, they “can’t focus on important things, get lost in small ones,” “miss or forget important details,” “have trouble making decisions,” or, my favorite, “can’t prioritize.”
For example, the ADHD signs generally listed are prioritized by what neuro-ts notice as causing disruption in a neuro-t environment, making them symptoms.
The ADHD-things YOU notice, which may be causing problems or driving successes (or both), are not.
So if you think “but I do that!” thanks for not wanting to invalidate our diagnoses, but read or listen to ADHD people about how THEY see it. If it keeps clicking, find someone if at all possible who SPECIALIZES in ADHD for your age group. They’re less likely to blow you off for not matching the standard checklist, especially if you’re a LADyHD who really need their own. (And if things don’t click, keep reading about other neuro and psych stuff—maybe it’s something else.)
Also read this, https://www.additudemag.com/symptoms-of-add-hyperarousal-rejection-sensitivity/, I have so far never seen an ADHD not go YES, THAT. And quite a few undiagnosed people I’ve flagged have gone “oh, shit, there it is.”
And finally, Leonardo da Vinci was very probably and Sherlock Holmes DEFINITELY (I will die on this hill) ADHD. So just think on that for a bit.
To all the young Millenials about to watch M*A*S*H for the first time, do not be turned off by Max Klinger being a guy in a dress.
For those of you unaware, the character tries several schemes to get out of the army on the grounds of being mentally unfit for service, most notably being a man who wears a dress, which no one buys. It’s played off as a joke but everyone loves him and treats him very respectfully unless it’s a character you’re not supposed to sympathise with.
You might want to call bull on the fact that they’re getting a cheap joke at a man in a dress. But, this man in a dress had a gender identity crisis ON SCREEN (although they couldn’t call it that) and also helped pave the way to allow transgender people into the armed forces.
No, seriously. A congressman who was a fan of the show brought up how Max Klinger cross dressing never was an issue at this M*A*S*H unit and it allowed transgender people to serve in the armed forces!
I’m a trans(masc) millenial and the biggest thing I feel was made fun of was how much some people were bothered by Klinger’s clothes, not the fact that he’s wearing them.
Klinger learns a lot about fashion and sewing and seems to develop a genuine passion for it over time.
There’s even one time when he develops a psychosomantic (spelling?) rash during a short time when he has to wear his uniform. Even after it is clear that he’s not gonna get to go home by wearing dresses, he continues - suggesting either a persistent act of defiance to make him feel better, or a real appreciation of the clothes… or both!
He’s clearly coded as straight, is accepted by his peers, and his character arc and development is barely focused on his clothes (rather it focuses on what he wants to do with his life; his dream future).
For a show made in the 70’s depicting the 50’s, M*A*S*H was a show before its time - with feminist messages and anti-war messages, as well as speking out against homophobia and racism - and Klinger was a groundbreaking character.
This is especially true, I think, if you watch the episodes sans the laugh track. Without the canned laughter, Klinger’s costuming comes off as especially sincere.
Klinger is a good man and a great character and everyone in the camp respects him (and if they don’t, it’s not because of his attire).
The discovery that you can select “English Without Laugh Track” as an audio track has made the DVDs wonderful.
YOU CAN TURN OFF THE LAFF TRACK?? YES PLEASE!!
Klinger is the best!
When I was a little girl I legit loved Klinger and his gorgeous dresses and skirts, and nothing about him seemed strange or abnormal to me; I understood that he’d wanted a section 8 initially but it also seemed really clear to me that in that process he’d found himself, in whatever sense was important to him, and everyone accepted him in the unit. To me growing up in a completely queerphobic household/culture, he was a figure of great love and joy and positivity, and I embraced him unquestioningly and gratefully.
Bonus: Klinger also comes from a family of immigrants.
Like the cross-dressing, the jokes about it are sometimes a little borderline for today’s audiences. But Klinger’s cultural identity was mentioned constantly, and consistently shown as something that he was very proud of.
There was even an episode where all the M*A*S*H peoples’ families were planning a get-together in the states, and everyone worked especially hard to make sure that Klinger’s parents - who didn’t speak any English - were welcomed and included.
(Including this picture again for the caption over at Imgur - ‘M*A*S*H is owned by Fox. Fox is now owned by Disney. Klinger is now a Disney princess.’)
KLINGER IS A DISNEY PRINCESS
If Klinger were only doing this for the hope of getting a discharge, he would NOT have spent so much time coordinating his outfits.
Because if you watch him, and listen to what he talks about, he clearly spends a lot of time not only finding women’s clothes in a war zone in a foreign country, he manages to make sure all the accessories match. That he’s got the right jewelry and shoes and hats and purses to match.
That takes care and attention even in civilian life. In the middle of a war zone? It meant something to him.
Imagine Klinger finding out he’s a Disney Princess.
And insisting on wearing a tiara every day, so proud and so joyful.
So Netflix will be dumping Bridgerton in December, which by the link’s description has nothing to set it apart from every other regency romance ever except my god, this.
If 2020 were a print, I’m not sure it would look EXACTLY like that sick green mess, but it’s definitely related.
Look, I would love to see more colorful costuming in regency-era pieces. The new Emma did a pretty respectable job of this; regency fashion was not a pastel wasteland for women and strictly somber-with-a-side-of-hessians for men, they got into some loud shit. (They were also rowdy and emotive AF, which the Romola Garoi/Johnny Lee Miller Emma does quite well, many of those dances are supposed to be fast and lively and stoic Real Men Have No Emotions hadn’t been reinvented yet; formal manners and emotional restraint are not equivalent, damn it. They WERE some loud shit.)
But I could have lived without the Barbie and Friends Jane Austen Dream Collection thing going on in the second image, and whatever the hell home dec challenge nightmare the fabric from the first crawled out of.
Bright colors and patterns, to the point of obnoxious LOUDness to many contemporary eyes, are historically accurate for basically the entire 19th century. By all means, let’s liven up the sartorial playing field, but there is no excuse for this technicolor nonsense.
REGENCY BARBIE, lord have mercy.