#‘RM right?’

[9kylian]

[magicshop]

GROIN - RM (2024)

[urmingirl]

“He just loves music and has a lot of interest in culture. He just seemed like a bright boy”

[namchyoon]

day 270/547 until joon returns

[jkvjimin]

PARK JIMIN & KIM NAMJOON ↳ MMM (Mini & Moni Music)

[yoongikook]

you are my pain, divine

[itssunshinetoday]

~ the boyfriend pictures series

boyfriend pictures

[taxed-up-trotter]

dr simptio anyways isnt aventurines boss form wife material

[btsiu]

"I never felt so free before You're goddamn ghost"

RM 'LOST!' MV (2024)

[hyperlexichypatia]

I am begging Mental Health Culture to stop broadening the definition of "self-harm." If you want a term to convey the concept you're trying to express, may I suggest bringing back the term "bad habit"? "Self-harm" is grounds for involuntary commitment. Do you want people to get involuntarily committed for spending too much time on the internet before bed or volunteering for too many projects? No? Then don't give coercive psychiatry ammunition by broadening the usage of their coercive terminology! When I first started out in the Mad liberation advocacy movement, one of the arguments we made against involuntary commitment and coercive intervention for "self-harm" was that neurotypical people do things that are "bad for them" all the time, like playing football, smoking tobacco, or eating candy, and they still have the bodily autonomy right to make those "unhealthy" choices. The point was to highlight the double standard that some people were denied rights because of doing things that were allegedly "bad for them," while other people were allowed the dignity of risk and freedom to choose. Our point was "The neurodivergent/Mad person picking her skin should have the same right to bodily autonomy as the neurotypical person dancing ballet, even though both are doing things to their bodies that could be described as 'bad for them.'" The argument was that neither should be pathologized. Current discourse would pathologize both, as well as even more variations on human behavior. That's a big step backwards. "But it's only self-harm if it has certain emotional motivations" -- let me stop you right there. Coercive psychiatry does not ask us what our emotional motivations are. It dictates to us what our emotional motivations are, and increases the coercion if we disagree with it (because disagreeing with their assessments of our emotional state is also A Symptom). Do you think the Parental Surveillance Industrial Complex is going to listen to their children before following through on moral panic articles about how parents should take away their children's hobbies because they're "self-harm"? Don't ascribe good faith to coercive psychiatry, because coercive psychiatry doesn't ascribe good faith to you.

[bts-trans]

240611 RM’s Instagram Post

그때의 우리

Us, back then

Trans cr; Faith @ bts-trans © TAKE OUT WITH FULL CREDITS

[kithtaehyung]

— ✰ GROIN ! twt ; ig

[cubemanmileys]

inside namjoon

[namchyoon]

day 333/547 until joon returns

[namsoek]

rpwp | by RM

[miujo]

　　　ꈍ　　　𓎠𓎠　　life is better than the death　　 ꔫ