#for some people reblog this or you're evil posts do more harm than good | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

what-do-bunyips-look-like · 11 months

Text

This crab day thing has gotten so frustrating so fast. The person who suggested it is an anti-abortion anti-feminist right wing christian transphobe. Many of the people spreading additional posts and info are ALSO anti-abortion right wing christian transphobes. Seriously. Start clicking their blogs when you see these posts. Search "abortion" and "feminism" and "trans" and "gender" and "groomer." This is really easy to confirm. But people don't give a shit because "crabs fun." okay.

And its not like people aren't aware of it at this point. Search "crab day" on tumblr and a good chunk of the results are asks saying "hey btw crab day was started by a transphobe/right wing christian." and most of those people have responded with something along the lines of "Um okay but like its a good idea though??? You guys can't even collaborate with conservatives for like a second to achieve a political goal? UGH this is why nothing ever gets done 🙄." or "Um okay but like that post had nothing to do with their political beliefs. so like its fine lol. Crab fun." Or "oh no omg im so sorry thats so gross i deleted the post but im still gonna keep reblogging all the other posts by the conservative transphobic anti abortion right wing christians whos blogs i wont check because we need to save tumblr!!!!"

Let me make this really fucking clear for those who don't get it: it doesn't matter if the post is not about their political beliefs. You and all your mutuals are reblogging them. You are making it easier for them to network and find each other. You are bringing them new followers, a bigger audience, a bigger platform and a bigger pool of people who will spread their oh so relatable non-political posts. Which will bring in more followers. And some of those new followers are going to be young dumbasses who are going to see all their posts about "groomers" and "mutilation" and the evils of porn and the horrors of abortion and how feminism actually harms women and do i need to tell you how that story ends?

You are showing that "crab fun" is way more important to you than the safety of trans tumblr users. You are giving them a bigger platform and a wider net with which to potentially harm trans people. By saying that you're not going to let their political beliefs ruin your fun, you're making it very clear that trans people are less important than your fun. And you're making it VERY fucking clear that you'd RATHER tumblr become a safe and welcoming place for anti-feminist anti-abortion right wing transphobes than give up fun crab.

You are showing that your need to throw money at a corporation is more important to you than trans tumblr users. I get where you are coming from. I do. You want tumblr to keep existing. I want tumblr to keep existing. I also want the other trans people who use this fucking platform to keep existing because frankly, they are the only reason i'm here. and if they aren't safe here and if you will throw us away just to keep tumblr shambling along a little longer then I have no fucking interest in tumblr.

"Okay but we need to save tumblr uwu!!!!" Look I'm just some dumbass and I don't know shit (and to be PERFECTLY honest, so are you), but I think this is a little more complicated than "if we raise enough money we can save the school/family farm/community centre/(insert cozy heartwarming thing that needs to be saved)!" As other smarter people have said, tumblr is operating at a yearly $30 million deficit. Thats $30 million just to break even. For one year. not become profitable. Its not a bail them out once and its all good forever situation. Tumblr is not a small message board run by volunteers who actually use donations to stay afloat. They are not a non-profit. They are not running a pledge drive. Throwing money at a corporation does not a nonprofit make. It makes you a consumer.

Your response to "tumblr making bad changes" is "give them money for making the bad changes to show that we don't like bad changes!! A reverse boycott'll show 'em!!" You sure about that??? (And some of you are calling this """""unionizing?"""" Put that word back on the shelf.) You don't know what you're doing and you're not listening to the smarter people who have tried to explain it to you. And once again, you're showing that this half baked scheme is more important to you than trans tumblr users. because crab fun.

And @everyone whos clambering over each other to "collaborate with conservatives for a good cause," we already fucking know that you love to do this shit. You are the same people who will say "yeah but theres bad people on both sides!!!" and who wont give up your Harry Potter or your Chick-Fil-A. You will throw us under the bus the SECOND it gets you something you want. Even something as stupid and small as pickle brine or a shitty videogame or fucking "crab day." And guess what. The second all your "shared goals" are accomplished and the conservatives get what they want FROM YOU??? You're going straight under that bus too.

And also, isn't it maybe a little hmmmm. SUSPICIOUS that CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS want to throw money at the site that we've been bitching and screaming at for how unfairly it censors any display of queer sexuality????? They don't have the same problems with tumblr that you do. You think that collaborating with THEM is gonna stop that? Gonna get the porn ban reversed? Gonna turn tumblr into a co-op? Gonna "unionize this bitch?" Hello????

If you must. MUST participate in this because crab oh so fun and tumblr is oh so in need of saving then for the LOVE of FUCK make your OWN POST and STOP PLATFORMING THESE PEOPLE. i don't want to hear "Oh but its a good idea it doesn't matter if a bad person came up with it separate art from the artist lol" if you're not MAKING AN ACTUAL EFFORT TO EXCLUDE THEM FROM THIS. BLOCK THEM. CHECK THEIR BLOGS. BLACKLIST THEIR URLS. ITS EASY.

and then maybe go give your $3 to an actual non-profit. or to an actual leftist independent organization. Or wikipedia. Or inaturalist. Or to one of the many hyperspecific message boards out there who are struggling along on donations from like 5 people. Or maybe, maybe, give your fucking $3 to an abortion fund or to a trans person's go fund me so they can buy food. Or to a womens shelter or a fucking homeless person or to any of the other people who anti-abotion anti-feminist right wing christian transphobes want to stop existing.

My partner is afraid to leave the house alone because people with these exact same political beliefs are in power. People are getting their HRT ripped away from them because people with these exact same political beliefs are in power. People are being forced to give birth because people with these exact same political beliefs are in power. Every day I'm ready to get the news that the state my partner is in is no longer safe and we have to figure out an escape plan. These people do REAL HARM in the REAL WORLD and their beliefs are, tbh, way more fucking insidious and mainstream and tolerated than those of TERFs.

But fun crabs are more important. okay.

#I have almost no followers here like 3 people will see this but i can't not say anything #prob gonna lose a few beloved mutuals over this screed tbh well so it goes #I'm sorry this is so aggressive i realize that some people still dont know but im VERY frustrated by the response here #I'm pinning this post and everyone who clicks on my blog to look at a cute bug has to see it #being trans on tumblr is infuriating #being trans in THE WORLD is infuriating #crab day #the crabbening #july 29 #crab week #save tumblr #anti crab day #etc etc etc #DO YOU REALIZE HOW FUCKING DISAPPOINTING IT IS TO SEE ALL THESE TAGS AND SEE HOW BIG THIS THIS HAS GOTTEN AND STILL NOONE GIVES A SHIT

114 notes · View notes

llatimeria · 3 months

Note

previously i had known you to be against incest and other similar kinks, but because of a post you reblogged earlier, can i assume you are now in support of it? it would be nice to have a clear answer in case it was somehow a mistake but as it was reblogged directly from op (who is open about their views on that) i find that harder to believe.

incest is bad, and incestuous abuse is absolutely life-ruining for a lot of real people, including people i care deeply about, and i personally am just not into it. it's less about me being "okay with incest now" (i am still. not, really) and more like... half "i have bigger problems than what strangers on the internet jack off about", half "i no longer trust random callouts that demonize vulnerable people, and even if I did believe every single accusation implicitly, the callout reaction really doesn't help with any of it; it doesn't help the victim at all (if anything, it can put them in harm's way by publicizing their abuse, which usually leads to them getting even more abused), it neither punishes nor rehabilitates the abuser in any meaningful way, and seems to only benefit the angry mob who get to jerk off to how cool and morally pure they are", and half "those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones".

basically it's a complicated subject. if by asking if i "support incest", you mean "would i molest my family members, or knowingly support people who have molested their family members" then the answer is "jesus fucking christ, absolutely not". if you meant "do you think incest is a fine thing to jack off to" tbh no not even that, i still think that's not especially cool. there's a reason it's taboo beyond just "i don't like it". it really, genuinely hurts people*. if you meant "do i have such a strong aversion to even the slightest possibility of being on the same side as an incestuous abuser that i'm willing to participate in a reactionary hate mob that, for all i know, was rallied up by transmisogynists in order to ruin some poor woman's life" then the answer is yes, i guess? accusing lgbt people, especially trans women, of being incestuous pedos is a a time-honored tradition of many homophobes and transphobes, so i don't really want to be a participant in that anymore.

*but then again so does half the shit i like. like, i'm into vore. vore in real life would literally kill people. not to mention that some people read furry stuff as bestiality - it's not, but there's no one authority on what is or isn't evil. no one person or group decides this, and we all have to decide for ourselves where our boundaries are.

there IS also an argument to be made that not caring about it, or at least not reacting with overt disgust and violence, helps normalize incest, which might make incestuous abuse more common or make it more difficult for survivors of abusive incestuous relationships to speak out about their experiences, which would Obviously Be Bad, and I don't really have a good rebuttle for it tbh. the ol' "fiction doesn't affect reality" battlecry is still kind of bullshit on the face of it, fiction demonstrably affects the way people behave. but also people aren't entirely mindless robots that are programmed to simulate whatever they find on e621? most of us have higher brain functions that allow us to do things like consentually negotiate morally gray kinks so people can have fun playing pretend without hurting themselves or others, and i don't really think the people who are selfish enough to genuinely molest members of their family for their own enjoyment are going to be especially influenced by porn? real abuse centers around predatory power dynamics more than literal sexuality and kinks anyway. the venn diagram isn't a circle or two circles, it's a venn diagram, you know?

tl;dr i can't tl;dr my thoughts on this subject you're just gonna have to read the post.

#sorry if any of this sounds dismissive but also come on. 'can i assume you support it now?'

8 notes · View notes

muggle-born-princess · 11 months

Note

Hello, genuine question but what about Chloe makes you sympathize with her but not Felix? (I meh about both of them. I was just genuinely curious because when it comes to those 2 people seem to always either love them or hate them)

@moonasthetic basically summed it up when they reblogged my post right here, but I will still give you my thoughts:

The reason why I see Chloe as more sympathetic than Felix is because while yes, both of them went through abuse and trauma that caused them to be the person they are today, I can't and will not sympathize with Felix due to how inconsistence his writing and arc have become. Throughout S4 and S5, we are shown to have Chloe be deemed as this irredeemable, heartless, and evil monster despite earlier seasons claiming that while she was an annoying brat, she was never deemed as a malicious witch as much as Thomas Astruc and the producers/writers want you to think. Bullied, insulted, belittled, and teased people? Yes. Wanting to actually cause them harm to the point where they're legit traumatized by her? No.

Meanwhile, with Felix, while yes they did foreshadow him the reason why he is this way is because he's a sentimonster and he's constantly ashamed of him, they right out make him do these heinous crimes such as stalking and harassing someone [Kagami] all because he feels that they have a "connection" or are "similar in a way," and committing genocide just so all the "little pwecious and misunderstood sentimonsters can live in peace and harmony," or whatever stupid crap they can pull out of their ass. (And yes, I did say this all in a mocking tone on purpose because that's how much I hate how this theory is true.) But does he ever get called out for it? Does he ever get thrown to an abusive person and force to live with them? Does he ever suffer the consequences for his actions? Hell no. They just make him go "Aww, he's a sentimonster that was abused! Let's feel bad for him!"

And yeah, I know what you're thinking:

"CHLOE NEVER SUFFERED THE ACTIONS OF HER CONSEQUENCES!"

Oh really? Let's go back and see some of the karma she did receive; whether they be too little or too big.

-In "Pixelator," she's denied a ticket to go to a Jagged Stone concert. Why? It's possible maybe she was seen as annoying to Jagged or maybe it was her punishment to treating Alya and Marinette poorly in this episode.

-In "Kung Food," Her father kicks her off the Judging Table after founding out that she was the one who intentionally sabotaged Wang Fu's soup. (And wow, I just realized that was one of the rare times Andre was an actual father.)

-In "Dark Cupid," she gets her looks ruined by Kim after humiliating him and then Sabrina sabotages her poster of Adrien when under Dark Cupid's spell.

-In "Despair Bear," she gets flour spilled on her after being rude to Mylene.

-In "Queen Banana," she gets indirectly kicked off of the movie group because she kept changing and bossing everyone around.

Oh, and in "Miracle Queen." she's kicked off the team for good for betraying Ladybug. Isn't that one already enough to say that she got karma for her awful behavior?

There's probably a few more that I'm missing, but these are the ones I can think of ATM.

To put it an end to this all, I can't see Felix as sympathetic due to how they decided to pull the sentimonster theory on us to make us sympathize with him, and to me, it basically says "Hey, as long as you're a sentimonster, you're automatically forgivable and a redeemable person!"

That's all I have to say.

#miraculous ladybug #ml salt #felix fathom #felix graham de vanily #felix salt #chloe bourgeois #sentimonster felix

43 notes · View notes

lifewithnpd · 2 years

Text

Narcissistic Personality Disorder; a summary

Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a cluster b personality disorder characterised by exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive need for admiration and attention, hypersensitivity to criticism and a dimished ability to empathise with others.

The DSM-5 describes people with NPD as having at least five of the following nine criteria:

A grandiose sense of self-importance

Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

Believing that they are "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)

Requiring excessive admiration

A sense of entitlement (unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with their expectations)

Being interpersonally exploitative (taking advantage of others to achieve their own ends)

Lacking empathy (unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others)

Often being envious of others or believing that others are envious of them

Showing arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder)

NPD develops either in youth or early adulthood, and the symptoms are pervasive and rigidly persistent over time. While some people may show signs of narcissistic behaviour, this does not guarantee that they qualify for a diagnosis of NPD. It is only if these qualities cause "significant impairment" and are "inflexible, maladaptive and persisting" that a diagnosis of NPD could be considered.

Associated Features: People with NPD tend to exaggerate their accomplishments and skills for admiration or praise. They have a sense of personal superiority, and this may cause them to look down on others.

Furthermore, people with NPD are more likely than others to respond with anger when presented with rejection or perceived criticism. People with NPD are vulnerable to feelings of shame and worthlessness over minor incidents in daily life, and imagined insults.

Causes of NPD While there is no proven specific causes for NPD, there are a combination of risk factors from biological, socio-environmental and psychological factors, including genetics, neurobiology, trauma, abuse and parenting styles.

Some key terms Narcissistic Supply- a type of admiration, interpersonal support or sustenance drawn by an individual with NPD from people around them. Sometimes referred to as an attention supply.

Idealisation and Devaluation- people with cluster b personality disorders often see the world in terms of everything being either strictly good or strictly bad. Idealisation is seeing someone as perfect and wonderful, whereas devaluation is seeing someone as evil and inferior. This is not controllable by the narcissist or person with the cluster b pd, and often comes from 'splitting', which is when someone does something to trigger the person with the pd's fears of either criticism, abandonment or rejection.

Some words on the term 'narc abuse' and why perpetrating this idea is harmful The term 'narc abuse', or 'narcissistic abuse' is harmful and ableist. You wouldn't call abuse by someone who happened to be autistic, 'autistic abuse'. People with NPD cannot help their diagnosis. While there are people with NPD who can be abusive, this is true of anyone in the population. Lack of empathy does not make someone a bad person. A sense of self-importance and hypersensitivity does not make someone a bad person. Stop demonising people for something they ultimately cannot control.

DO NOT. AND I REPEAT. DO NOT. DIAGNOSE ANYONE BASED ON THIS POST. PEOPLE SHOULD NOT ARMCHAIR DIAGNOSE OTHERS AS HAVING SERIOUS PERSONALITY DISORDERS. IF YOU'RE SERIOUSLY WORRIED ABOUT SOMEONE, CONSULT A PSYCHIATRIST.

Thanks so much for reading! If you liked this post give a person with npd some supply by leaving a comment, liking or reblogging!

Have a great day everyone! xoxo halo

#npd #narcissist #actually narcissistic #narc abuse #pathological narcissism #narc #npd traits #npd stigma #npd group #cluster b #narcissistic personality traits #narcissistic personality disorder

127 notes · View notes

morbidsmenagerie · 4 months

Text

Also just because I just reblogged this post and because people have been commenting on my wasp zine all varieties of:

But I have a phobia

Hate them anyway they bite/sting

Bet you've never been attacked by a wasp/spider/ect

If they stay away from me they're fine but as soon as they get close they're dead

I'm just going to! Respond to all of these!

Yes, spiders and wasps can sting or bite you. Bees can sting you. Beetles can bite you. For some reason though there's just a particular, vile hatred towards spiders and wasps. I don't even think people are generally as mad at mosquitoes for biting them, mosquitoes are more considered annoying than "kill it with fire get it away from me" stuff. I'd imagine most of you have been bitten by a dog or scratched by a cat, and yet cat/dog pictures don't get people saying "ew clearly you've never been bitten by one of those or you wouldn't find it so cute".

In most other animals, people understand that there's some level of personal responsibility involved. You got bit by a dog because you invaded its personal space and ignored its warnings, you got bit by mosquitoes because you weren't wearing bug repellant, ect. Obviously you can only minimize your negative interactions with bugs, it's definitely possible for them to get into your house and surprise you, but you can reduce the times this happens by practicing good house keeping. Crumbs, gaps in your windows/doors, trash buildup, ect can all attract bugs which in turn attracts spiders.

No bug "attacked" you. Bugs are not evil, vindictive, or out to get you. They're animals, and relatively simple ones at that. They do not have the capacity to wish you, in particular, harm. A spider runs towards you because it's trying to seek cover, and your shadow looks like a dark place for it to hide out in. Spiders have fairly poor eyesight for the most part and don't even "see" you as a unified thing, most of the time they just realize it's suddenly bright and they're exposed and they feel the vibrations of something very large above them. Wasps fly at you either because you got too close to their hive and they see you as a danger, or because you smell interesting and they want to see if you're food. If they are flying at you to protect their hive, don't try to swat at them, just quickly and calmly move to a safe place. If they're smelling you because they find your smell interesting, freeze and let them sniff around until they determine that you aren't a yummy fruit and fly away. Bees do the same thing! Most people know how to interact with bees though and don't blame the bee if they disturb a nest and get stung.

If you have a phobia, that must be really hard, I'm sorry! But understand that your phobia isn't the bugs fault. The bug isn't trying to scare you, they're just existing. If your phobia is severely affecting your ability to live in a world full of bugs, there are ways you can work on it. I'm not expecting everyone to like bugs, I just want to push for tolerance if possible. I used to be really freaked out by roaches (I lived in South Carolina and we had palmetto bugs) but I decided to actively work on it. I kept hissing roaches, because they were the least roachy roach I knew of, and interacting with them made me much more comfortable with all roaches. I still don't like roaches generally and I don't want them to infest my house, so I just keep good housekeeping practices and try to prevent that from happening. I like hissers now though, and I learned about a lot of other roaches I really like (domino roaches, cryptocercus, honestly a lot of the gyna roaches, and red runners which I also kept for a bit!) I know that is an extreme way to overcome your fear, but learning about and being curious about bugs you are afraid of does help. I used to even not like wasps! What changed my mind was reading about them (especially Endless Forms by Sierian Sumner) and actually learning about how diverse of an order hymenoptera really is. I definitely thought all wasps were the social hive building kind that sting which negatively affected my image of them, but there's so many wasps! That's part of the reason why I made the zine. If looking at pictures of spiders/wasps is too scary, there's books without pictures, or you can just ask some bug enthusiast friends/blogs for interesting facts to start out. Definitely decide how comfortable you are with exposure and don't over do it.

Also if your bug tolerance only extends to bugs that aren't near you, then that could also be something to work on. Bugs do not understand where your personal space meter is, they don't understand this contract you've made for allowing them to live. Bugs are everywhere, and they might end up in your house/room/bed/ect. It's not the bugs fault, and I implore you to try nonlethal removal when possible.

I might make another zine/pamphlet about overcoming bug hatred in general and building bug tolerance, but these are just some of my thoughts.

Also before someone twists my words and misinterprets this post some bugs are a problem! Obviously if your house has a roach/bed bug infestation take care of it! I also smack mosquitoes when they bite me! This is specifically about the wildly disproportionate hatred some bugs (mainly wasps and spiders) get compared to every other bug that could be considered a nuisance or cause damage.

#invertebrates #invertiblr #inverts #invert #bugblr

5 notes · View notes

oatmealaddiction · 1 year

Note

I am so sorry to come careening into your asks like this, but that post you reblogged where OP directly conflates conservatism with nazi germany is driving me insane. it’s like, has it occurred to people that painting a whole community as remorselessly evil perhaps has some drawbacks? maybe that history can also tell us about other times having no empathy for ‘the enemy’ has worked out well for all involved?

like. I get that conservatives have done violence and significant harm to our communities. those things are unforgivable. at the same time you cannot simply write off like half of the US for having bad politics. fight against them, fight against fasc alt right shit, just don’t say there’s something innately wrong with those shitheads that is beyond changing. that’s such eugenics bullshit.

There's a good book called "Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil" by Hannah Arendt. Arendt was a Jewish woman who fled Germany and the book was about the trial of Adolf Eichmann, an SS Officer who oversaw the deportation of many Jewish people to Auschwitz. What Arendt found after studying Eichmann was that at the end of the day, in spite of everything, he was just a normal guy. There was nothing off in his psychology, he wasn't mentally unwell, and by all accounts he was a regular citizen who had 'enthusiastically' upheld the system that the Nazi's put in place. Eichmann harbored zero guilt for any of his actions up until his execution, and argued throughout the trial that he bore no personal responsibility for what he'd done. I don't think it's inaccurate to compare conservatism to fascism these days given how many alt-right members are chomping at the bit to install an authoritarian in office, but if all you're going to say is that Republicans got the "Nazi" gene, you've got a misunderstanding about what makes people evil and how they justify evil to themselves. It's not that conservatives are born without the capacity to feel for others or that because they were born bad they became conservative and because you were born good you became liberal. When evil is systematized by those in power and held up as a status quo, doing depraved evil shit becomes ordinary and normal. For example, plenty of Americans still think it's normal and justifiable to enact the death penalty because it's been systematized as part of our criminal justice system. It's the status quo, so therefore it must be upheld no matter how immoral it is.

Frankly, I'm not going to sit here and try to defend conservative beliefs at a time when the Supreme Court is out here just chipping away at everyone's civil rights and white supremacists are breaking into the capital. I don't particularly feel bad writing off the people who continue to vote for and empower fascists. How do you empathize with someone who thinks you're a child predator or that you shouldn't have bodily autonomy? How do you keep your heart open to people advocating that teachers be shot for using someone's correct pronouns? Personally I think galvanizing more liberals into using their vote strategically and engaging in political action will have faster positive action than trying to win over the group who's dictated by bigotry. That said, it's important to understand that these views have been baked into America before the Pilgrims even got here. These ideas didn't pop up over night because an evil person invented them, they've been present for thousands and thousands of years. The conservative party acts the way they do because transphobia and misogyny and racism are normal aspects of American culture that have been systematized into our government and our society, Conservatives believe that because those things are normal, therefore they are just. So I take issue with the idea that there's something inherent in their brains or psychology that turned them evil, and that liberals are immune to this problem. Liberals will uphold the status quo too, albeit with different lingo. Plenty of liberals engage in True Crime podcasts where they celebrate when the police infringe on civil liberties in order to catch a serial killer. "No ethical consumption under capitalism" is often used as a blanket excuse to ignore unfair labor practices. The Queer community loves to accuse it's own of toxicity and predation just as much as the conservatives do. During the Heard v. Depp defamation trial, tons of liberals rejoiced at the way the legal system was used to silence a DV survivor and were happy to support suing a woman for talking about abuse. A lot of the time the people saying things like this, do not think of themselves as doing anything wrong. Evil is boring, and it's normal, and oftentimes those who act immorally do so without a single ping of their conscious. Thinking that conservatives were born with abusive personalities is the exact thinking people had about Nazi's in the wake of World War II. Americans assumed that there was something fundamentally sick and broken in the Nazi psychology, when in actuality it wasn't that different from the institutionalized segregation and systematized eugenics America itself had going on at the time. Being a Nazi was super normal in Nazi Germany just like being a racist was super normal in America. If you tell yourself that there's something fundamentally abnormal and inhuman in the actions of your enemies, you miss the wider picture of the systems they're part of. Worse, you're telling yourself that you could never be like that, that you could never do what they did, rather than examine the ways you're already complicit in abusive systems. Bigotry and abuse and apathy towards injustice are all human traits, and buddy we're all human.

tl,dr: Conservative politics aren't evil people politics, they're ubiquitous and we probably all hold them to some extent. So do your due diligence.

#sorry long rant

5 notes · View notes

smallwhalesdonotinteract · 1 year

Text

I posted 173 times in 2022

That's 173 more posts than 2021!

5 posts created (3%)

168 posts reblogged (97%)

Blogs I reblogged the most:

@laikamaeris

@sumersprkl

@2dames2zine

@propafranduh

I tagged 14 of my posts in 2022

#dames and dragons - 5 posts

#dames and dragons falen - 4 posts

#falen the betrayer - 3 posts

#dames and dragons fran - 3 posts

#fralen - 3 posts

#is there a ship name? - 2 posts

#? - 2 posts

#dames and dragons diamond - 1 post

#i just want to clarify that i did get permission to post this and that it did involve me making the 🥺 face - 1 post

#love this dichotomy. real falen had a job to do and he was gonna do it. other falen decided his job was to be hot - 1 post

Longest Tag: 126 characters

#the 'we can put some avocados in a bag for you it'll be just like the real thing' 'you're so weird corbin. thank you' exchange

My Top Posts in 2022:

OMG IN THE LIBRARY IN THE DWARF KINGDOM FRAN FAILED A PERCEPTION CHECK TO SENSE THE EVIL FALEN. The Falen-sense doesn't work when she knows it's a fake Falen! Her uncanny ability to make impossible Falen-related observations failed her enough that he could sneak up on her!!!

5 notes - Posted October 31, 2022

Me: "The real tragedy of Evil Falen being into Fran is that he can't pull her hair to playfully flirt with her. Because her hair is water."

My SO: "...uwuh 🥺"

Me: "Well that was a noise!"

Them: "He could try 🥺"

~~~

My SO: "Don't post that, you're bullying me!"

Me: "I thought it was cute! I'm not bullying you, I'm just... metaphorically pulling your hair."

7 notes - Posted October 31, 2022

Real Falen's first impression on Fran: *stabs two people she likes, has that awkward spit interaction with Corbin, leaves without saying anything to anybody*

Other Falen's first impression on Fran: *leans over her to whisper with a sexy voice directly in her ear* "Ooh, scholarly...~"

7 notes - Posted October 31, 2022

I don’t know how old Diamond is, because all of the group swooning over him reads sort of like middle schoolers fangirling over a much older boyband member, but I DO know that if he IS age-appropriate to crush on any of the main group, he is HEAD-OVER-HEELS in deep, courtly love for Maeri.

I mean, like. She’s canonically gorgeous, she didn’t lock eyes with him and immediately become a fawning sycophant, she’s incredibly powerful, she holds herself with grace and dignity, and she’s just genuinely good and kind and willing to try to rail against injustice and the systems that harm mortals, she’s a literal goddess but she still has a deeply human side. There’s nothing in that entire description that ISN’T bard catnip.

Maeri is LITERALLY the stuff of songs. Maybe DIAMOND’S songs. We know that Jambo the Maskmaker knew the Survivor’s Ballad, but (as far as I know) we don’t know who wrote it. Maybe Jambo picked it up from Diamond.

I just wanna imagine Diamond, newly-crowned champion of Dawson, getting saved by the Guardians and latching onto Maeri as his muse. He hears news of the battle, learns how she Names herself in the most dramatic and thematically appropriate way possible, and is DEVASTATED by the news that she has become trapped in the void. He prays to his benefactor, who gives Diamond a chance to save her. If he gathers all these powerful artifacts from all these dangerous places and brings them across the continent, he gets to bring her back. HE gets to be HER hero.

And then after all that work, somebody beats him to it, and his god shows up and shoos him off to the side while he bargains for his own life.

And yeah, at least he gets to look really cool while giving the Guardians a concert, which is what he’s best at in the whole world, but Maeri doesn’t even look that impressed.

Heartbreaking.

49 notes - Posted September 5, 2022

My #1 post of 2022

With enough repeated exposure to the Guardians' concentrated attention, all antagonistic Dames and Dragons NPCs will eventually succumb to what I call the "Falen state," in which that NPC, against their better judgment, will let the Guardians steamroll their decisions.

Symptoms of the Falen State include, in chronological order:

- the urge to strangle one or more members of the party, which becomes more and more impotent until it disappears almost entirely, but may still flare up with provocation

- resigned tone of voice with flat affectation

- being unable to say no even after repeated protests

- extremely reluctant fondness for the Guardians

- unhealthy levels of devotion to the Guardians, which may result in the affected NPC uprooting their entire way of life, agreeing to help them kill gods, or helping them overthrow the government of their home nation.

NPCs who have shown symptoms of the Falen State include, but are not limited to:

- Falen

- Alden

- Orestes (He showed early signs but managed to cut contact before Stage Three)

- Strong Selni, Wolf of the Waves (She showed the most resistance, but was the single focus of the Guardians' attention for more uninterrupted time than any other NPC. She didn't stand a chance.)

The best way to avoid falling into the Falen state is to avoid contact with the Guardians, if possible. If you must be in contact with the Guardians, avoid being interesting enough to hold their attention. If you start to feel any of these symptoms while in contact with the Guardians, cease contact immediately. Those with only the early symptoms can still live full, happy, boring lives. There is no cure for the later stages of the Falen State.

72 notes - Posted October 30, 2022

Get your Tumblr 2022 Year in Review →

#tumblr2022 #year in review #my 2022 tumblr year in review #your tumblr year in review

1 note · View note

lordoffireandflame · 10 months

Text

Hello, I hope you're having a wonderful day (or night)!

So, let's get down to business. I complain, a lot. A professional complainer if you will. To the point where it seems I never enjoy anything. And I post terrible dad jokes. If that's not your cup of tea, feel free click off!

Yeah this is just going to be straight up terrible dad jokes

This is a work in progress. Many changes are (hopefully) coming soon. Will probably reblog a lot more than I actually complain.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This list is always growing.

STUFF I WILL RAVE ABOUT

Welkin Weasels by Garry Kilworth

Hunter's Moon (aka Foxes of Firstdark) by Garry Kilworth. Camio my beloved.

Where the Mountain Meets the Moon by Grace Lin

All of Andy Frazer's work (he created the Dragons of Wales series, Dragons of Deep Time, Dragons of the Dark Woods, Novosaurs, and Project: Tepui).

I love good people and I love seeing good people do good things. Favorite trope. Gimme my heroes >:V

The aesthetic of giant walls, abandoned cities, ghost towns, etc.

The aesthetic of knights.

Brutalism (I LOVE POST MODERN BOMB SHELTER ARCHITECTURE, I WANT TO SEE IT EVERYWHERE).

Dragons.

Griffins.

Falconry.

Dinotopia.

Rain World (not the DLC, though I did have fun with it).

WolfQuest.

Saurian (whenever it actually updates :/).

Niche: Genetics Survival Evolved.

TBA

STUFF I WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT

A Song of Ice and Fire/Game of Thrones (where are the farms, George?).

Rain World: Downpour (I love butchering the old game's main themes/s).

The Dragon Prince (Justice for Humanity, Death to Avizandum, Glory to Aaravos).

Romance (no hate for romance authors and books, but when I read a fantasy book about defeating evil armies, I expect to see people defeating evil armies, what I don't expect is reading about how our hero(ine) is falling in love with the dark, brooding (abusive) man who killed her entire family).

Vampires (another personal taste thing. I only like them if I'm the one writing them).

Any kind of torture apologism (sorry gals, torture is never justified and it certainly isn't some hot 'morally gray' decision, it's just evil! People in real life will take this shit literally! <3)

I'm pretty critical of Fandom in general.

Fascism (should be self explanatory)

Ableism (same as above)

Amisia (same as above)

Transmisia/Transphobia (same as above)

Misogyny (same as above)

Racism (includes colonialism, cultural appropriation, cultural mockery, you get the idea. Same as above)

Honestly, really just any kind of harmful rhetoric?

TBA

0 notes

autisticsupervillain · 2 years

Text

Psst. Hey. Guy who screenshot my Gamdavevris post. You said you didn't reblog my post because you didn't want to be rude to me on my own post so I'll extend you the same courtesy.

If you're going to rag on a ship, maybe don't do it in that ship's tag. Because if someone is scrolling through a ship's tag, it's probably because they like it and want to see more of it.

And what do you mean "Gamzee and Dave shouldn't be allowed around women"? I completely ignore Homestuck^2, so if they're misogynists in that, I don't care, but nothing in the comic itself points to that. Like yeah, Dave had a lot of toxic masculinity to grow out of and Gamzee is straight up a villain, but none of that had anything to do with misogyny? The most you could do is argue about Gam's association to Caliborn, but even then, that was more Gamzee being indoctrinated towards him than anything else.

In the character dynamics front, there are a staggering number of thematic overlaps, between Gamzee and Vriska in particular.

All three characters end up they way they do thanks to having abusive parents, with many of their biggest character flaws forming from the world views they create in their attempts to cope.

On the Gamzee and Vriska side of things, both characters trap physically disabled characters into abusive relationships with them in order to serve their own ends, with both relationships ending in the abuser killing the abusee.

Both Gamzee and Vriska end up idolizing evil people in their attempts to cope with their trauma (Lord English and Mindfang specifically), which directly motivates some of their most heinous actions.

Furthermore, the fact that both characters share motivations and have harmed people close to the other (Terezi and Tavros) makes their relationship deeply personal and it makes the similarities they might see in each other all the more damming.

Dave mostly avoids this pitfall by virtue of having better friends and a more stable environment. No offense to any of the trolls, but they could hardly be expected to keep Gamzee and Vriska's shit together when they can hardly keep a handle on their own. Especially when compared to the humans, who at least have more healthy idea of what their lives should look like next to trolls. It's what keeps Dave from falling into the pit of straight up villain, as he has a social safety net of friends who can look out for him and his concept of a healthy relationship isn't so fucked that he believes that, say, throwing Tavros off a cliff would be in any way good for him, or that he's willing to go to the same lengths that Gamzee is willing to just for some kind of affection.

Basically, Dave can see why Gamzee and Vriska wound up they way they did, because he experienced the same kind of issues they did, only they had no safety nets. When Bro died, Dave had Rose to talk to. When Tavros died, Gamzee didn't have anyone to talk to... or anyone who'd listen at any rate. As such, in this hypothetical OT3, Dave would be motivated by trying to get them the same help he got... while Gamzee and Vriska would try to drag him down to their level, as they see nothing wrong with their behavior.

#homestuck #dave strider #gamzee makara #vriska serket #gamdave #davevris #gamdavevris #gamvris #ship discourse

27 notes · View notes

mayfriend-archive · 3 years

Note

Totally understand if you're not up for it and fully recognize the ronald mcdonald dom/sub anon vibes which is an AMAZING post btw but like...now i'm curious, what the hell did Lord of the Flies anon DO that got him blocked for the discourse? like...i just can't wrap my head around high school lit being...uh...that inflammatory i guess?

Okay so, I'll start by saying I've had a new anon from apparently the same anon saying they are NOT the person I blocked, just a rando making the same points, but I'll answer your question anyway just to set out why this person in particular got blocked, out of the several thousand who reblogged/commented on that very successful addition to the LoTF post I made.

First off, I added the 'real life Lord of the Flies' story because I thought it was a good story. I had read about it only a couple days beforehand in Humankind and, after reading out the entire chapter to my parents who weren't very interested, I was excited that there was not only a post where it would be relevant to post, but that I wouldn't be hijacking it, as it was already rejecting the widespread interpretation taught in many schools, that humanity is inherently savage.

When making the addition, I a) did not think it would get more than a couple reblogs, because the post was already at 50k notes and I figured anyone that might be interested would already have seen it, and b) I did not know the very specific context that prompted William Golding to write the book; all I knew was that he had been a teacher at a public school (basically, the poshest schools in the country - think Eton, Harrow, very 'old money' places that pump out Conservative politicians by the bucket-load 🤢) who hated his job and the boys he taught (which, valid), and new information I'd been given in Humankind - that Golding had said to his wife one day, "Wouldn't it be a good idea to write a story about some boys on an island, showing how they would really behave?" - which had no mention of The Coral Island by R. M. Ballantyne, which I have since learned was the text that Golding loathed enough to write an entire novel in refutation of - and included what I considered a very telling letter from Golding to his publisher, in which Golding wrote of his belief that 'even if we start with a clean slate, our nature compels us to make a muck of it.' Another Golding quote that I believe portrays his belief in humanity's 'innate savagery' is that "man produces evil as a bee produces honey."

Obviously, the author of a book putting forward the case for humanity's inherent goodness was going to oppose Golding's hypothesis; Bregman not only noted Golding's literary accomplishments and beliefs, but his personal life.

When I began delving into the author's life, I learned what an unhappy individual he'd been. An alcoholic. Prone to depression. A man who, as a teacher, once divided his pupils into gangs and encouraged them to attack each other. "I have always understood the Nazis," Golding confessed, "because I am of that sort by nature." (Humankind by Rutger Bregman, p. 24-25)

I have bolded the part about him as a teacher, because it is incredibly relevant to the original post that I commented on, which begins with a comic of a teacher locking her class in to see them 'recreate' Lord of the Flies, something which the follow up comments before mine staunchly reject as both misunderstanding the point of the book, and the fact that it took the kids in Lord of the Flies a significant amount of time without adult supervision to go 'savage'. This misreading of the text is widespread enough that when Golding won the Nobel Prize for Lord of the Flies, the Swedish Nobel committee wrote that his book 'illuminate[s] the human condition in the world of today'. Whether or not they misread it is beyond my expertise - they do at least mention the factors of the outside world neglected by many when analysing the book, but still seem to believe it says something about human nature as a whole rather than just, to quote thedarkbutbeige 'British kids being rat bastards' - but Golding quite happily took his Nobel prize on this basis. Which, in fairness, I would too. It's a fucking Nobel prize.

It was with this knowledge, and this knowledge alone, that I stated in my now very, very widely read comment that Golding 'wrote the book to be a dick', in response to the tags of the person I reblogged from. As I said, I now know that Golding did not write the book (solely) because he hated the kids he taught, but as a response to The Coral Island and the general idea that clearly the British were inherently civilsed, whilst the people they colonised and enslaved were inherently savage. So. That's the background.

The anon - or rather, the person I thought was anon - was the sole exception out of dozens of replies, who instead of telling me about The Coral Island politely decided it was time to go ALL CAPS and regurgitate points already made by thespaceshipoftheseus, and implied that the only reason that the real life Tongan castaways didn't go all Lord of the Flies was because they weren't British. Not because they weren't surrounded by violence like the boys in Lord of the Flies, or there wasn't a World War ongoing, or that they weren't the upper, upper, upper crust of a class-obsessed society like Britain - but because they weren't British. A complete inversion of the concept that Golding was trying to get across - now, instead of all of humanity being equally prone to savagery in the right conditions, it was solely nationality that determined it. As in, the British were inherently savage, but nobody else was.

I, trying for humour, made the terrible mistake of replying to them.

I won't lie, I was absolutely blown away that this was real life. What I think they were trying to do was be that Cool Tumblr Person who, after somebody's been shitty on a post, goes to their blog and sees something Damning in their about/description. In an ideal world, I imagine I'd have gone nuts or done something Unforgiveable. In what I can only call the rant that followed, they stated several times that I needed to go back to high school to get some 'proper literary analysis' skills and that the story of the Tongan castaways was completely unrelated to the point at hand which. I mean, I disagree, considering that I made the addition, but I couldn't get my head around how commenting on a post that was already rejecting the thesis that the 'point' of Lord of the Flies was that humanity was inherently savage and was, in fact, about how kids - British or otherwise - learn how to function from the adults around them, and that traumatised, terrified children aren't going to create a mini-Utopia, and put forward a real life example of how without the key additions of an ongoing world war, a colonial Empire and the subsequent mindset of thinking you are 'inherently civilised' and therefore can't do anything wrong, actually, people just want to take care of each other.

A friend has since asked me why I even have 'england' in my description. To be honest, it's a timezone thing - I talk to a lot of people online who don't share my timezone, and it generally makes me feel like if I don't reply immediately because it's 3am, they have the tools to see that I'm not in their timezone and not just ignoring them. I did consider changing it to 'british' or 'uk' after it was... 'used against me', I guess, simply because I didn't want to deal with it, but you know what. No. Not gonna do that. I am from England, and I have never hid that fact. I have a tag called 'uk politics', during Eurovision I refer to the UK's act as 'us' (even if I really, really don't want to. Because James Newman slaughtered that song and it was downright embarrassing), I regularly post stuff in my personal tag about where I live (and mostly complain about this piece of shit government). If people really think my nationality makes every point I make null and void, then they don't have to follow me or interact with my posts; tumblr is big, and I am one medium-small blog very easily passed over.

I did reply to them, trying to explain the above, but their next response really just doubled down. Because I used the word British instead of English - foolishly because the posts above mine focused on Britishness, and also because although Golding was English and taught English kids, the pro-Imperialism author of The Coral Island, R. M. Bannatyne was actually Scottish so, ding ding ding, falls into the 'British' category - they then decided that I was somehow trying to pretend I wasn't English and made all the same points, before ending with this doozy:

At this point, I knew there was nothing to be gained from replying, because if we're whipping out conditions like they're pokemon cards then there's no actual conversation anymore, and I'm not going to start mudslinging like an identity politician. They made up their mind, and I figured there could be no harm in letting them think that they 'won' by blocking them instead of replying.

Until the ask. INNATE ENGLISH SAVAGERY did, I'll admit, make me think it was them, back again. I even thought up a really good response approximately 12 hours after I replied, I was that sure. Until the second message came in, and said they were just someone who came from the post and made the same point by chance. So the saga draws to a close... for now.

It may have been them, it may not have been - the anon feature makes it impossible to be sure, but as the second message I got said, we're in a heatwave. It's too hot to argue. And I've just written a goddamn essay about a book I dislike anyway.

My pasty English ass is going to go melt. If there's Disk Horse, do not tell me. I am Done™

#emily speaks #asks #anon #lord of the flies #this is long. this is so long. why is this so long #i literally got out humankind so i could quote directly. how is this my life

8 notes · View notes

apprenticebard · 7 years

Note

To respond to your post since you were one of the few people who disagreed with me with respect in the convo: The fact that you're one of the few is most of the problem. Most of your community othered and demonized me. This is the same othering and demonizing that most conservatives do to liberals and victims. I literally can't, as in "violates laws of physics" can't, try to find common ground/work with people who are busy making up things I never said and treating me as a demon enemy. (1/2)

Hello again, friend! I didn’t receive a second part to this message, so I’m just going to respond to this part.

One thing I have learned in my time on the internet is that it is really, really easy to miscommunicate or accidentally hurt someone, so I’m going to take this point by point. The intent here isn’t to tear apart what you’re saying, it’s to make sure I’m responding to things you actually said, since I have a natural tendency to over-interpret and accidentally make assumptions about people (which is, as you can imagine, really bad for honest and respectful communication). I’ll do my best, but please let me know if I make a mistake, OK?

“To respond to your post since you were one of the few people who disagreed with me with respect in the convo:”

I’m going to try not to say anything against any of the individual the people who conversed with you; it feels rude to publicly discuss their behavior with you without involving them in the conversation. I did notice that several people talked about you in the third person, analyzing your behavior as though you weren’t there. I want to avoid hurting anyone else by behaving similarly towards them.

“The fact that you’re one of the few is most of the problem. Most of your community othered and demonized me.”

I’m not 100% sure what specific community I’m being assigned to here, but I’m going to put that thought on hold for the moment.

Aside from that, I’d like to point out that I’m one of the few people in this conversation who has not yet been directly criticized by anyone. For the moment, I’d like to avoid getting into the question of whether the criticism aimed at other people was justified, because going through everything that was said sounds exhausting. For now, let’s just stick to the fact that I haven’t received any yet. OK?

Like many other people I’ve met, I have a hard time responding gracefully to criticism, especially if it’s criticism of my moral character. Thinking that someone else thinks I’m evil makes it really hard for me to respond calmly, kindly, or in a way that addresses what was actually said. I think maybe I’m not alone in this; it seems like other people also have a hard time being their best selves when they’re on the receiving end of criticism, especially criticism harsh enough to be described as “demonizing”. So when Scott was criticized, he might have been hurt, and that might have made it harder for him to respond calmly and kindly. And when you were criticized, it might have (understandably!) made it harder for you to respond calmly and kindly in return. And if you’re both on the defensive, and both feel like you’re being insulted, it sounds like it’s going to be very hard for any substantive communication to take place. You would both feel like the other person was trying to unjustly drag your name through the mud, and you’d both feel like your legitimate concerns were being ignored. But I haven’t been criticized, so it’s a lot easier for me to respond calmly and kindly, and therefore I don’t know that it’s entirely fair to compare my behavior to that of the other people involved.

(That’s what this situation looks like, to me, but I’m obviously no more objective than anyone else. If that assessment doesn’t match your understanding of what’s happening, then I would ask you to explain to me what you feel is happening, so I can get a more accurate picture.)

I worry that when we ascribe beliefs and harms to communities, rather than to individual people, then this situation can occur even when nobody involved has ever personally hurt or insulted any of the other people in the conversation. We can end up in a situation where we think other people are totally unreasonable, incapable of ever giving anything or ever solving any problems, and that therefore all communication with them is pointless, purely because of what group we assign them to. And when they make the same assumptions about us, obviously no substantive communication is likely to occur.

But I don’t think it has to be this way. Right now, I’m making a conscious attempt to be as charitable, understanding, and friendly as I can. I’m doing this because I think it’s an essential part of establishing good faith, so that the two of us can have a conversation. I want to hear what you have to say! I want to learn from you about how we might make the world a better place! But unless I can convince you that I genuinely want those things, then it’s unlikely that you’ll explain your points to me in a way that I can usefully respond to. So I’m trying to modify my tone. I’m trying to slow down and remind myself not to make assumptions. I’m trying to include explicit invitations for you to disagree or correct me, so that you (I hope!) will be able to have confidence that my intention is to hear your points and respectfully communicate my own. If anything I do conflicts with those goals, then I’m asking you to let me know, so that I can take more steps to make that communication easier for both of us.

I believe that if I treat people with respect, then most people will eventually respond in kind. I believe most of those people will believe some of what I believe, or will at least have interests that are not totally incompatible with my goals, and that we will therefore be able to work together in some limited manner. But that won’t happen unless I understand them, and I won’t understand them unless I can establish good-faith communication, which requires me to be respectful and charitable even when I’m not sure the other person respects me very much.

This is basically my impression of what Scott was saying in his post, which is why I appreciated it.

“This is the same othering and demonizing that most conservatives do to liberals and victims.”

I’m really uncomfortable with the idea that someone can’t be both a conservative and a victim. “Victim” is a very broad term, encompassing almost everyone who has suffered significant harm at some point. I hope we can agree that self-identified conservatives are not immune to suffering harm. (Let me know if you’re using the term differently, or if you don’t think “conservatives can also be victims” is a safe premise.)

As someone who doesn’t necessarily identify as either a liberal or a conservative (though I do think I lean conservative compared to the rest of tumblr), I’d like to say that I see a lot of demonizing from both sides. A lot of my (very nice and very considerate!) liberal friends sometimes reblog things that say that people with my beliefs are necessarily evil, hateful, etc. Take minimum wage, for one example. I don’t believe in a higher minimum wage; I think we should switch to UBI and then abolish the minimum wage entirely. This is due to a complex web of beliefs that are, in my mind, motivated by compassion for poor people, particularly poor people currently living outside the developed world. When my friends reblog things saying that my beliefs mean that I hate poor people, it hurts a little, but I try to remind myself that they’re not talking about me specifically, and that even if they were, they’re (mostly) motivated by compassion, and they are (mostly) kind to individual people. I can therefore probably find common ground with them, despite their stated belief that everyone in a group that I belong to is evil.

Obviously some conservatives do exactly the same thing. I think we’re both aware of that, so I won’t bother going into it further, unless you think further analysis of this point is important.

“I literally can’t, as in "violates laws of physics” can’t, try to find common ground/work with people who are busy making up things I never said and treating me as a demon enemy.“

It is admittedly really hard to communicate with people who seem bent on misinterpreting everything you say. Sometimes it’s not possible. You can’t utilize teamwork unless the other person is willing to act as a team under certain circumstances. Sometimes the only thing you can do is try to protect yourself, which usually means removing yourself from the other person.

But the point of a lot of what I’ve said above is that I don’t think it’s usually impossible to find common ground with people, even if they initially appear relatively hostile. Even if someone thinks of me as an adversary, I still want to support them in their efforts to do good in the world. The hope is that by doing this, they’ll eventually decide that I am not an adversary, will reclassify me as someone who can potentially be helpful to them, and will then be more willing to listen to me in return. It’s hard—communication is always hard, especially when the people involved have different unspoken beliefs and assumptions about the world. But I think that it is possible to rise to the challenge, and I think that if I try, then more often than not, I’ll eventually be able to find some axis on which my goals and those of the other person are aligned. (And even if I don’t, as long as they’re continuing to explain things, I at least have the chance to gain a better understanding of them and their worldview.)

I’m still practicing this skill, obviously, but I do think that it has strategic promise.

Again, I hope things get better for you soon, and I hope you’ll correct me if I’ve misinterpreted you or said anything that strikes you as either rude or false.

#asks #jeyseic #long post #bard says things #if any of this sounds mean then the meanness is accidental and you should alert me so I can address it

3 notes · View notes