nebulasfury
I talk about things
Anti psych and anti establishment ♧ Youth liberation ♧ Anti capitalism
49 posts
Last active 60 minutes ago
Don't wanna be here? Send us removal request.
Last Seen Blogs
cheatsykoopa98
Cheatsy's "Pomni being happy" blog
allthenamestakenwtd
I like toxic fictional men,send help please I beg
otherkinaredumb
Otherkin Are Dumb
perceptivehands
i'm a mystery wrapped up in a conundrum.
willspenquill
willsoftchills' art blog
Text
I 100% believe that the main reason people are scared they'll lose their creativity after they get help isn't because of some sort of self hatred most of the time, but because of the very material reality that the psychological industry exists to make people "normal" rather than happy. Like, when getting "help" means conforming to social standards, and your art is something that actively makes you less normal in the eyes of society, than it makes sense that you see that "help" as a threat to your existence as an artist. Most psychiatrists would openly admit that they'd consider turning an independent creative into an emotionless businessman as a win, why is it suddenly a conspiracy theory when the patient understands that just as well?
187 notes
·
View notes
Text
Strength, resilience, self-love, independence, optimism, etc ...
I don't like these things, they don't make me feel "empowered", they don't give me that "Fuck yeah!" feeling that others seem to get
I feel like a traveling spirit that got off at the wrong train stop.
This particular world is not for me.
This world where I need resilience because I am being attacked
Strength because sometimes I must hurt others
Self-love because no one else will love me
Independence because we aren't there for each other
Optimism because we're naturally overwhelmed by how bad things are
I thought I was someplace else entirely. Why would I want this?
Every so often I feel something deep within me wake up, say "Hoooly shit, we're still HERE? I told you years ago that we need to move on from this life. Oh well, I'll check back later," and it goes back to sleep
4 notes
·
View notes
Text
I just saw that Shakespeare is trending, then i remembered
He mentioned Palestine in Othello
Othello was published in 1622, thats 401 years ago
four hundred one years ago
"I know a lady in Venice would have walked barefoot to Palestine for a touch of his nether lip."
- Act 4, Scene 3
11K notes
·
View notes
Text
a comic about printers
I remember seeing a post a couple months back of someone talking about printer troubles and companies making them bad deliberately, like pointlessly different screw sizes and a lying no-usb-compatibility sticker
If someone knows it please tell me, I'm pretty sure I remember it had good resources on a youtube channel that teaches you how to fix stuff!
48K notes
·
View notes
Text
children should not be forced to compete against their classmates in physical "education". sports in school only encourage bullying, ableism, and bioessentialism.
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
So my paranoia around my phone paid off.
My stepfather decided to go through my phone for some reason. I've never been more grateful that I don't look up questionable things out of anon and that I keep all my social media hidden
I don't think he should've done that. I'm sixteen, this is ridiculous
0 notes
Text
employers: "you have to be 'doing something', you CAN'T just sit there."
no, you literally can. sorry to go full autism mode here i hate this concept of "you cannot do x" when you literally can. the laws of physics aren't going to stop working because you are just sitting on a chair at your job while there's actually nothing for you to do. gravity will not stop working just because your employer thinks you need to stand or be "doing something" at all times. angels won't descend from the heavens to banish you to hell. someone sitting in a chair will not cause a business to go bankrupt or even lose any money... at all.
the only outcome of this situation is you sitting in a chair. that's literally it. you literally CAN do it. also sitting and resting is "doing something". not that humans need to be constantly "doing something". sitting and resting in the chair while there's downtime will only increase your productivity, not decrease it. there are countless studies that prove that workers who are able to sit and rest are leagues more productive (and happy) than workers who can't. there are no omnipotent beings that will punish you if you do something that you were told you "just can't" do.
we tell other people all the time that they "just CAN'T" do something when they literally just can and it changes nothing. if someone's primary explanation for why you can't do something is because "you just can't," the entire situation is just about control. i'm sick of people being told they "can't" do things when they literally can and won't bring harm to a single soul. you "can't" do it because it will make them mad because you're not doing exactly what they say. that's literally the only reason you "can't" do it, because them not being upset and keeping their power over you is more important than your autonomy.
352 notes
·
View notes
Text
To any unmedicated mentally ill people reading this
- Your reason to be unmedicated is valid whatever it may be.
- You're not inherently unstable or dangerous. People shouldn't be afraid of you.
- You're not ruining your health or hurting yourself by being the way you are.
- You're feelings about yourself and your body are not something other people get to choose for you.
- You're not the bad type of mentally ill, or giving the community a bad name.
- You're not somebody else's worst case scenario.
- You deserve to have the community consider your needs and feelings.
- You deserve love and comfort.
67 notes
·
View notes
Text
You don't have to be "happy" to deserve the freedom to control your own life.
It's easy to justify people's right to live their lives as they choose with "Let them do whatever makes them happy!" or "As long as they're happy, who cares?"
I've said this! But it's not a very effective argument. Because how can you prove that you're "happy" -- a subjective emotional state?
Queer people, disabled people, fat people, Mad/neurodivergent people, people in stigmatized relationships, are constantly told that we're wrong about our own happiness.
That we think we're happy, but this false belief is part of our Mental Illness(TM).
No one Like That could ever really be happy!
And this prejudice is fundamentally unfalsifiable.
We can't prove our subjective feelings.
If we could, people would somehow redefine "happiness" to exclude what they don't approve of.
I made the mistake of reading the comments on this article about age differences in relationships which literally has the headline "They say they're happy. Why is it so hard to believe them?"
Of course, the commenters were all too eager to answer the rhetorical question.
"If they were really happy, they wouldn't need to say so" (maybe they're sick of being asked).
"People in situations like that don't know what's really going on, they think they're happy!" (what, exactly, is the difference between thinking oneself to be happy and actual happiness?).
(Side note for the relationship-specific version of this: I also see a lot of "They think they're in love!" and I have to ask: If people in relatively new relationships are told that "You only think you're in love, you're actually in lust/ a crush/ new relationship energy," and people in established long-term relationships are told that "You only think you're in love, but it's actually complacency/ not knowing any better/ helplessness," is there a magical medium-term relationship duration at which people can actually love their partners?)
You can never prove that you're "really happy," because if someone has already decided that your identity/lifestyle is incompatible with happiness, they will never believe you.
Arguing "I should be free to make my own choices or be myself, because I'm happy this way" will only prompt the response "The fact that you so mistakenly believe that you're happy is proof that you're mentally incompetent, and you should not, in fact, be free to make your own choices or be That Way."
Being constantly "happy" at all times is, also, just a completely unreasonable expectation. Humans have a range of emotions! Experiencing the full range of positive and negative human emotions is not a reason to deny us our rights.
In Jesse Singal's anti-trans hit piece, which I'm not linking to, Singal cites parents of a trans man who oppose their son's right to transition because, according to them, he was depressed after his transition. Now, notably, the son was not interviewed (and he was misgendered throughout), so we have absolutely no idea what his actual emotional state actually was (I don't know if the son ever went on the record anywhere with his own version of his story).
But let's assume, for the sake of discussion, that his parents were correct, and he was depressed.
So what?
Trans people have the right to be depressed!
Trans people have the right to the same emotional range as cis people!
People's rights should not be dependent on what emotions they do or don't experience.
Additionally, this insistence on "happiness" as a prerequisite for rights, autonomy, and acceptance (willfully) ignores that the denial of rights, autonomy, and acceptance tends to make people unhappy.
Authoritarians think they have a real gotcha with "If you're happy this way, then why are you complaining?" as if people can't be profoundly happy with their identities and profoundly unhappy with how society treats them for those identities.
I am, for the most part, reasonably happy with being a fat, Mad, autistic, queer woman. At least I generally feel no pressing desire to change any of those things about myself.
And I am extremely unhappy with the way I am treated for being a fat, Mad, autistic, queer woman.
But there are certainly times when I might think to myself "If I were taller, I could reach that top shelf" or "If I were thinner, I could maneuver into this tight space" or "If I weren't autistic, I could travel more."
And at those times, I still deserve autonomy and basic human rights.
I might be happy, sad, angry, anxious, excited, blase, or in a state of perfect Zen, and I would still deserve autonomy and basic human rights.
36 notes
·
View notes
Text
Remember that reproductive rights don't just mean the right to an abortion or other contraception. They mean the right to reproduce just as much. It's only really ever exclusively been the right not to reproduce for cishet, white, able bodied (especially able bodied) people.
When you hear someone talk about the poor having too many children or talking about overpopulation do you understand that that's an attack on reproductive rights (and also eugenics rhetoric)?
Do you consider the fact that many women have to have their reproductive organs surgically removed to be legally considered women an attack on reproductive rights? Do you consider it weird that this is what many democrats consider a "reasonable middle ground"?
Do you consider the fact that many neurodivergent people are put on medication that removes sexual function and essentially chemically castrates them, and most doctors don't see this as an issue (especially when the patient in question is afab) an attack on reproductive rights?
Do you consider the fact that people's wombs are being removed in the American concentration camps that continue to operate on American soil an attack on reproductive rights? (And have you thought about the concentration camps since it stopped being a talking point about an individual politician?)
If you do not understand attacks on the marginalized's right to reproduce as attacks on reproductive rights, than you do not get to call yourself pro choice. Your just pro abortions for privileged women.
118 notes
·
View notes