#“we prefer OUR misinformation”

[emethethe]

Current full page art for the Beasts and Blessings ttrpg.

[samuraisharkie]

that virtualtoybox person literally told me they aren’t reading what I said and then tried to talk to me w about as much in their tags lol. i never understand people that go ‘I’m not reading all of that but you should read what I have to say” bc like. imagine how infuriated ur gonna get when that response is leveled right back at you? and judging by their tags they didn’t read past my very first line. bc they started comparing animals and animal rights to eugenics which is EXACTLY what I was saying is extremely dangerous to do. That’s exactly how people start calling things that happen to animals a ‘Holocaust’ and I’m positive such a statement is made in that book they told me to read. I’m disabled too. I know what I’m talking fucking about too. In the animal section, I for SURE know more than you do! Because if you knew and truly cared about animals and their welfare, you wouldn’t be talking like PETA. Here’s a trick to other disability activists: learn about animal welfare by volunteering on farms and educating yourself on breeders and the industry rather than getting involved in PETA! And another critical trick: NEVER compare animals to people! That’s exactly what the freaks that think any living thing with a deformity that should die are doing. These people would clutch their pearls the moment they hear farms cull undesirable animals bc they can’t afford to keep every single one and have to streamline their breeding and raising to what will help keep the farm running. That doesn’t mean these farmers want to do the same to people, because the animal is NOT a person and doesn’t live like one. Our lives are not even remotely comparable! People like OP are the people that keep a wild bird with an amputated wing alive bc in their mind it would be insinuating all amputees should die if the bird is put down, and next thing the bird is on the Dodo as inspiration porn. Duex Face is an exception to two headed animals, not the rule. Don’t tell me to do my research when you’re spouting talking points from people that have caused more problems for animals as a whole second only to the commercialization of animal industry. Maybe you need some research (field research) instead! They’re going to block me and I’m assuming that’s why I can’t rb the post anymore even if I wanted to (like I said I didn’t want to start a fight so like. I’m not going to be yelling and acting like an asshole. I swore a bit in the tags initially bc I feel very strongly about how animal rights activists have fucked up disability activism by acting like there’s equivalency in our existences, but that’s not targeted. Most was going to respond telling them that if they feel this strongly they need to be reading more about the animal industry rather than relying on people that are in no way experts on animals talking as an authority on them, and using that to tie with their human rights activism as if animals rights and humans rights are even remotely the same in any way. Whatever though at least the tags are there if anyone who cares enough actually reads them and thinks about them. Will most likely just attract militant vegans and ARAs like the op but whatever)

[photomatt]

You gonna do anything or make any statement about the rampant transmisogyny on this hellsite, especially in cases like predstrogen recently? Or yall gonna stay silent and keep letting/making us get pushed off of it.

I have a number of asks about this, so this is to address all of them, I won't do each individually.

We generally do not comment on individual cases, but because there seems to be mass misinformation around this, I will make an exception and comment on predstrogen.

First, Tumblr has a number of LGBT+ including trans people on staff, and they see things from the inside fully, and they're not protesting this case.

Why do we wrongly have a transphobe reputation? We did have an external contract moderator last year that was making transphobic moderation (and also selling moderation, criminally). As soon as we were aware that person was fired, and we later terminated the entire relationship with that contracting firm and have brought almost everything in-house (at great cost). I have previously commented on this publicly, several times.

I am not aware of any Automattician (people who work at Automattic and Tumblr) who has made any transphobic moderation actions. If it's reported it is investigated immediately, if anything were found that person would be terminated for cause immediately.

Predstrogen's account was suspended for:

Repeated mis-tagging of adult content against Tumblr's community guidelines. This has nothing to do with clothed transition photos, she had 20+ other blogs and multiple accounts with names so explicit I can't post them here without a mature tag.

Multiple cases of harassment of other Tumblr users, not just me.

Multiple threats of violence, not just the one I share below.

These represent a breach of our Terms of Service, and we've exercised our right to refuse service.

Threats of violence are never okay. Threats of violence are not protected speech. We will work with police and FBI where appropriate, though to be clear prestrogen's case hasn't warranted that so far. I'm referring to what we may potentially do for other threats. I just got a death threat yesterday from someone mad about predstrogen, and that account was immediately terminated.

So regardless of whether you still think Tumblr staff is somehow a bunch of transphobes, know that threats of violence or death are still not acceptable and will result in immediate and serious action. Know that when you rile people up, they can do dumb things with possibly permanent consequences.

(2 hours later update: I have changed instances of the pronoun "they" or "their" to "the account" because I am unaware of pronoun preference in this instance and don't want to misgender anyone. Thank you for the people who reported this as an issue. Update 2: "She" is apparently better, the post now says that. Sorry for the mistake.)

Here's one (of many!) examples of the harassment violations, this one targets me but there are others targeting other users on the site.

The second part seems to indicate she wanted to be suspended, I'm unaware of why, perhaps to create this sort of uproar. I agree the hammers feel silly, but the start, "i hope photomatt dies forever a painful death" is a violation of Tumblr's community guidelines and terms of service.

The car part did hit close to home as I have almost died twice in car accidents.

Update 2: Added this text to the adult content part: This has nothing to do with clothed transition photos, she had 20+ other blogs and multiple accounts with names so explicit I can't post them here without a mature tag.

[azulapunchedozai]

Can we like.. normalize skipping contents that we hate or contents that don't align with our opinion? I've seen the most beautiful ship arts in almost every social media platform and there would always be like

"Love the art! Hate the ship!"

Look, I know social media peeps do their best to stay positive but is it really that important to accompany your compliment with a COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY statement? Can people normalize keeping their opinions to themselves when it's not needed? Girl that is obviously a ship post. Why do you feel the need to say you hate it after complimenting?

THANK YOU SO MUCH for the compliment but I'd rather have you not comment on my post at all if you're just gonna leave backhanded compliments. Is it really that hard to JUST say "I love the art!" and be respectful? And if you hate the ship so much then do yourself a favour by scrolling up or down to avoid the content. Trust me, avoiding negativity would be better for your mental health.

It's not just happening in ship arts. Fanarts in general. There'd be like, a fanart of a character or a redesign and there will be comments like "I prefer them with this-that though." or "This-that suits them better!" or "I don't like them with this-that!".

Or there would be contents that talks about how this character is the best character of this show/game/movie or how this character has the best game effects and there would be like, "I prefer this-that character though." or "I don't see anything about *charactername though." or "Nope, *charactername is the best."

An example of this is when I was scrolling through contents about Furina's c6 plunge attack and infusions and how they are the best and there are a bunch of comments saying "I don't see Raiden though" or "Raiden's plunge is the best"

And I was like NO ONE ASKED??? Look, no hate to Raiden Shogun because she's literally one of my favorite characters. I love her plunge attack and I have an undeniable bias when it comes to purple and pink but the video was OBVIOUSLY NOT ABOUT HER. The video was not a misinformation and simply someone's opinion/preference.

It's like going to a room full of people talking about how they like the color red and saying something like "I prefer blue though!" Gosh why would you do that? It's just so EMBARRASSING and SO ATTENTION SEEKING at it's finest. And then when people call them out, they'd pull the "opinion" card and act like s victim. If you want people to respect your opinion, why don't you do it first?

People need to learn that not everything that appears on their feed is about them and to not take everything PERSONALLY because not everything is about you and not everything revolves around you. People can have different opinions and enjoy any content that they want even if those are opposed to your preferences. Being different from you doesn't make them less valid in any way.

If it's not illegal or harmful just keep your mouth shut, is it really that hard?

Instead of wasting your time commenting on a content that you don't like (and by doing so, the said content would just appear on your feed more frequently), why not search for contents you enjoy to satisfy yourself, yah?

Why? Because that's the normal thing to do. People have become so brave on whatever they say on the internet because they know they'd never suffer real life consequences.

[facts-i-just-made-up]

Literally why do we need google ai when we have you. They're taking your job

Not at all, Google AI boldly goes place I never would. I could not and would not ever suggest people cook spaghetti with gasoline or eat a mushroom based on unsupervised digital assessment. If I did and someone died, I would likely go to prison. But with Google's infinite army of lawyers, they can do all these and more without any accountability whatsoever.

Also, with politicians spreading misinformation designed to turn their followers violent against election workers, commit violent treason, undermine the systems on which what little justice can be found in this country are based, and distort public knowledge even to the point of medical science denial and support for genocide, I on this blog have not done much political humor since 2016 at all. Google AI however can simply tell you that yes, Hillary Clinton does eat babies and shoot random people with Kamino saberdarts. They can even have YouTube show neo-nazi propaganda to kids without warning so they can make a few extra bucks, all without any repercussions beyond their usual legal expenditures.

Yes, it's a bold new world of AI-made pleasures beyond our comprehension. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to escape this painful line of thought to seek the comparative relief of trying to pass a kidney stone. That's not even unreality, agony and pissing blood is preferable to thinking about the world right now.

Sorry.

[patrice-bergerons]

Quick FAQ on Tumblr, "Value", and the Proposed Crab Day

Motivation: I see a lot of misinformation circulating on the dash re the proposed crab day and I wanted to offer a simplified and judgement free perspective using core principles of finance.

Q: We keep being told that tumblr's been making nothing but a loss for years, and yet, if it is so unprofitable, then why is no one is shutting the website down? Is it really in need of our money if it's already owned by a multi-billion dollar corporation?

This is in fact not as much of a paradox as it appears to be because "value" in corporate finance terms is a function of present and expected future profits (adjusting for the fact that profits you expect to be earn in the near future are worth a lot more than equivalent profits expected to be earned much later in time).

This means that you can have a company or a product that is currently making a loss (i.e. costing a lot more to run than the income it generates) and it might still be worth some (or a lot of) money as long as you expect it to generate enough profits going forward. Uber for example has been making a loss for years and is still valued at billions of dollars because people think it will eventually generate a lot of profit.

Q: What does all of that mean for tumblr, specifically?

Given how unprofitable tumblr has been historically it's actually a pretty good sign that management has a plan to try and make it profitable because it means they haven't thrown in the towel yet!

But if they fail or if they decide that no matter what they do tumblr will remain unprofitable, then they wouldn't have much business incentive to keep running it. This is why participating in crab day or spending some money on tumblr in general is a good idea, if you can afford it and if tumblr is a service you would like to keep enjoying into the future. And if the answer is no to either of those questions, that's ok too--don't let anyone guilt you on this.

Even more questions-and-answers under the cut! My inbox is also open for any (good faith) questions you might have.

Q: But we all use tumblr religiously--isn't that enough?

Not quite. Tumblr's current state means that the existing userbase is not enough to make the site profitable. For that to change, either the existing userbase needs to become more profitable, or tumblr needs to get a lot more new users--or have a combination of both.

Q: Can crab day really solve all this?

Once again, not quite. A one time cash-injection is not equal to sustainable income, which is what tumblr ultimately needs. This means tumblr will still need to court potential new users and that entails some change to the design and/or the perception of the site. (I love tumblr but guys, if we are real for a second, last time I told my coworkers that, they asked me if I also had a myspace account.)

Q: So why participate then?

Because it will still help. While some change is inevitable and necessary, if we the existing users put our money where our mouth is, it would send a strong signal to management that we value the service they offer and that they should take our preferences into account in designing the site's future also. Also some cash, even if it is a one time deal,

Q: I heard people who came up with the idea are transphobic Christian fundies--do you really want to associate with people like that?

I don't. But who the blogs behind this idea, as people, are has no bearing on the merits of the idea itself.

[mechanical-sunchild]

Not to put pressure on particular being or the community but I do believe that as beings who are not human/not entirely human especially those of us who are animals we should endeavour to be educated on the basics of animal welfare and the basics of our own species.

Ignorance is not good even amongst humans, but looks especially bad amongst those who aren't in my opinion. In fact, one of the biggest things that made me doubt the legitimacy of otherkin/therians* years and years back was the way so many seemed to just...not understand their species (or things about other animals) at all, but present as that animal through a bunch of stereotypes and misinformation instead. Some of which was harmful when they claimed they applied it to their pets of the same species as them.

You should be at least vaguely aware of your species diet/behaviours/needs surely, especially for theriform members of your species.

It might also be good for everyone to know about true domestication versus just taming an animal and why some animals shouldn't be pets, the correct treatment of domesticated animals, the correct treatment of farm animals, online animal exploitation videos etc...just vaguely, just enough to not be fooled into believing misinformation.

*I know others opinions of us don't matter and many will still think badly of us anyway, but it's always good to not be ignorant and besides we're in a very unique position as therians (or whatever label your prefer) to stand up for theriform animals and we can't do that if we're not informed.

[kelandry5]

Let me be very clear about something

NO valid, reliable study has ever found a link between autism and vaccines.

The results of the original study that claimed there was a link were FAKED.

The researcher publicly admitted he found NO link between autism and vaccines.

Further studies were UNABLE to replicate his results.

If a study's results cannot be replicated, the results are not reliable. That means the methods of the study were flawed or someone lied.

And THAT means the study does not prove what it claims to prove - in this case, a link between autism and vaccines.

Vaccines do NOT cause autism.

We already know what causes autism. RFK doesn't need to find the cause or assist in the spread of misinformation.

Autism is caused by genetics.

Sure, maybe there's a preventable cause of autism. Maybe grandma got exposed to some chemical or drug. Maybe a strain of the flu turned on the autism jeans. Maybe mom ate too many bananas while pregnant. It's not completely impossible.

But RFK's registry idea won't help us figure that out. I guarantee no one has jotted down everything my grandparents were exposed to, the exact flu strains my parents were contracted, or how many banana's my mom ate while pregnant. No one has even taken a sample of our genes to analyze. And since autism, especially in females, was rarely diagnosed until relatively recently, there's a serious limit to how far back we can trace the disorder in any family tree even if we tried.

RFK needs to sit down and shut up. Or, preferably, he can go take a nice long walk off a short cliff.

Let me be very clear.

Most autistics don't want a cure. We are NOT sick. We are NOT broken. We are NOT damaged. We don't need to be "fixed." And we definitely do NOT NEED non-autistic people deciding things for us. We do NOT need RFK.

What we need is understanding and acceptance. What we need is for non-autistic people to take the time to try to understand us the way we try to understand them. We need our differences to be respected. WE need respect.

Being in the minority does not make us inferior.

Gold is not inferior to more abundant metals.

Being less capable of functioning in environments that were not designed for us does not make us less functional.

A fish does not need to be cured simply because it cannot climb a tree.

[neechees]

https://www.tumblr.com/baconvonmoose/762184790376136704/thank-you-look-i-know-people-mean-well-i-do-im?source=share

Reading all this and that's the first time ever I've seen someone say this about W*nd***.

Thought to bring this to your attention

I've always said that you'll get differing opinions about the Ice Cannibal because different groups might have differing opinions & protocol on the spirit on who can or can't say it or when, and like I've always specified I prefer it when people dont say it around ME.

But I'm kind of suspicious about this random user coming and saying "well I'm Native American" because of the way they're speaking. They say they're "a subdivision of the Algonquin" like there's no "subdivision" of the Algonquin UNLESS they're claiming to be of the Algonquin TRIBE and trying to talk about their specific community, but they don't specify it, and they seem to be equating Algonquin with Algonquian (a Language FAMILY), which is something a lot of Moniyawak & pretendians do.

Also, there's no "my tribe told the first version of the wend!g0 myth" like they claim they are, because again, multiple tribes believe in this spirit, and it'd be stupid & unfair to try claim authority on it for "the first" because we don't know who was "the first".

This user also claims that "it's a spirit that can possess people so it can look like anyone you know", I've talked with other ndns about this and there's even some debate over whether this "possession" thing is even true, at least for some tribes, because settlers were using this excuse to go and execute multiple Native people under the premise that they were "possessed" by a cannibal spirit (and how often do you think White people back then gave a shit about our spiritualities?). In many tribes, including mine, I know the ice cannibal is a spirit that exists in its own right but that also humans can turn into one.

This person is just acting like a jackass and doesn't seem to hang around other actual Native Americans who believe in our religions, because of the way they're talking, but want to act like an authority on our spiritualites. They don't even want to acknowledge that maybe they heard the "we don't say it" variation because of different beliefs in different tribes. Them calling everything I just mentioned fucking "misinformation" is itself misinformation, and completely fucking unfair of them. And the ice cannibal spirit isn't even the only spirit we do this with. We don't just avoid saying its name out of fear, it's also out of respect and protocol.

I've also never seen this person on ndn tumblr, & they don't seem to have an "ndn" tag. This might be a case of a White person suddenly claiming Native heritage to get in on a conversation that isn't theirs to have. With the way they're acting, talking about Native spirituality, etc, this sounds more like a White person with maybe some Native ancestry who doesn't actually hang around other ndns just trying to be an authority on something they have no fucking clue on & that they got all their information from white websites, because virtually everything they said was wrong.

[sorin-sunchild]

The sad thing is once enough misinformation is spread about a group you're well and truly snookered.

Rumours get spread by people who are blatantly lying because either they've understood something wrong and refuse to budge or just hate you for whatever reason.

And if they're good at it, they'll make you out to be a problem and use as many emotional targeting tactics as possible.

Things that people who are 'good' would surely never question or bother to check, it sounds so plausible and is a thing you're already against, so it's easy to believe these people are doing a bad thing right? Why would anyone lie?

So they make their own posts, based on these lies and/or misinformation and they also refuse to be dissuaded because they're convinced you're bad.

Often they've never interacted with the group they despise or read the posts they're generalizing either.

Why bother? Why care to do so when it's easier to hate and bully and get likes and reblogs for it?

Better yet, now it's cool and ok to target this group for bullying memes, ridicule and hatred because they're 'harmful' let's drop any prefixes or specific types of 'people like that' and just mock the whole lot of them. Nobody will notice our bigotry if we pick the right target.

And the poor targeted group has to spend the energy they don't have debating and refuting so that the misinformation doesn't take over and it never feels like you're winning and some start a new discourse based on this defense of yourselves alone. Not like just laying down and taking it was ever an option.

It happened with bisexuals for existing and not 'choosing a side', it happened to pansexuals for preferring a different mspec label, it happened with asexuals for finding a word to describe themselves, it's happening now with trans mascs for giving a word to oppression specifically targeting them for being trans + masc. Who's next? Hopefully no one but we never learn.

(the same principle applies outside of the queer community too. Don't tag as q slur.)

[tempesttz]

i feel like causing problems today: correcting actual endogenic misinformation on the anti endo blog about "correcting misinformation"

WARNING: VERY LONG POST ABOUT SYSCOURSE BELOW THE CUT! you have been warned. stay safe! :3c

[/image id: screenshot of tumblr blog @antimisinfo, the blog's profile picture, and the blog's header stating "correcting misinformation." end id.] (before we get into this, some of these images will be very bright! i will try to provide accurate image ids to every screenshot i post. stay safe!) okay so see this account right? op has no clue what they're talking about. addressing pronouns right now, i was going to refer to them by their preferred collective pronouns but i can't find them? i checked their carrd and their alters all had different pronouns and their about me just says this

[/image id: text stating, "horned haters is a subsystem filled with alters who hate endos / pro-endos. our whole system does but we are more passionate about it and plan to try make as many safe spaces for anti-endos as we possibly can!" end id.] so at least i know they prefer alters. cool [happy] so far okay whatever they REALLY hate endogenic systems thats cool thats whatever nothing new there but

[/image id: five images of different flags, likely did/osdd related, anti endo related, or something similar. text underneath flags states "system hot takes," "anti endo support group," "anti endo system terms," "agre and littles safespace," and "fictive stuff." end id.] jegus dude you weren't joking about being passionate about hating. this is like, grade a hater here. but i digress this probably isn't the post to be screwing around on i'll keep the screwing to a minimum i promise. that being said i don't promise to be nice, i do not owe anyone kindness, especially when they are not kind to me. i will try to be polite. so this is already splendid right but you would think with this many accounts dedicated to hating endogenic systems (they also own anti endo vents, i think?) they would at least know what they're talking about, right? right?????

[/image id: text reading "so what are endos? endos or endogenics are people who claim to have did/osdd without trauma or claim to have alters/be a system without having did/osdd." end id.] source: endos / endogenics and why they aren't valid, may 8 2024 for the sake of convenience, i'm going to be referring to did/osdd as osddid from now on. okay so first of all, anyone who claims to be endogenic while having osddid is almost definitely also traumagenic and has reasons rooted in trauma, those two things aren't mutually exclusive. endogenic is a broad, personal label. an endogenic system with did could be one with a lot of created alters or headmates. or just two created alters, headmates, etc. who knows! it's a very personal label after all. that being said, to have osddid, you have to have some form of trauma in almost every case, because trauma is what causes the dissociation, amnesia and other symptoms of osddid. anyone who's arguing to the contrary is wrong. you cannot have osddid without trauma? "so tempy, endogenic systems aren't real! they don't have osddid!" wrong. you can be a system without having osddid. for just one example, sourced from the national library of medicine, pubmed central, "multiplicity can be placed along a continuum between identity disturbance and dissociative identity disorder (did), although most systems function relatively well in everyday life. Further research is needed to explore this phenomenon, especially in terms of the extent to which multiplicity can be regarded as a healthy way of coping." (2017) taking some bookmarks from your sixth grade english class (which i can only hope you have passed by now, if you are on this website,) we are going to use some inferences. if multiplicity isn't dissociative identity disorder, but it is a state of being multiple and a system, what do you have? a system without osddid. "but tempy, that doesn't mention osdd!" that's because osdd wasn't a medical term before the dsm-5. not to mention, it stresses that "...most systems function relatively well in everyday life..." and that "...multiplicity can be regarded as a healthy way of coping." osdd is a disorder and an osdd system's plurality is disordered. non-disordered plurality is a thing that exists, and almost all non-traumagenic plurals are non-disordered! so we're already off to a terrible start. op isn't creating a distinction between plurality and osddid, likely because they believe that osddid is the only way to be plural. this not only was disproved above by a literal scientific article on a .gov website, but also the icd-11.

[/image id: text stating "boundary with normality (threshold):" which then moves a line down to a bullet point stating "the presence of two or more distinct personality states does not always indicate the presence of a mental disorder. in certain circumstances (e.g., as experienced by 'mediums' or other culturally accepted spiritual practitioners) the presence of multiple personality states is not experienced as aversive and is not associated with impairment in functioning. a diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder should not be assigned in these cases." end id.] so someone can experience multiple personality states without it being part of a mental disorder. and it's not dissociative identity disorder, and it can't be otherwise specified dissociative disorder, so... i wonder what it could be? well, many things! all under the wonderful way-too-vague umbrella that is endogenic plurality. oh, you need more proof? how about we look to a book written by eric yarbrough, a psychiatrist who specializes in lgbtq issues:

[/image id: text reading "the phenomenon of plurality is unknown to most mental health clinicians. most professionals know this condition as dissociative identity disorder (american psychiatric association 2013), although plurality and dissociative identity disorder are not exactly the same. being plural, or having two or more people existing in one body or space, is just one part of the diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder. many people who are plural do not experience distress from the existence of others within themselves." end id.] what was that, psychiatrist eric yarbrough in your book transgender mental health which was published by the american psychiatric association?

[/image id: text reading "plurality is a more patient-centered approach to what has historically been referred to as dissociative identities. this is not the same as the dsm-5 diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder (american psychiatric association 2013). plurality makes up just one part of the larger diagnosis and does not necessarily cause distress. although many people who are plural have a history of trauma, there are just as many who do not. a plural system is a collection of all the alters present. with some people these alters might come and go, whereas with others they are static and waiting to be discovered." end id.] this is not the same as the dsm-5 diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder, huh? it's just one part of a larger diagnosis and doesn't necessarily cause distress, huh? still not convinced? rapid fire! zarah eve, sarah parry: "not all multiplicity is based in trauma" (2021) mick cooper: "neuropsychological research has demonstrated the inherently divisible nature of the brain and consciousness" (unsure, likely pre-2013) zarah eve, kim hayes, sarah perry: "multiplicity experiences are phenomenologically distinct from clinical dissociative experiences" (2023)

kymbra clayton: "there may be in the general population a large number of people with [multiplicity] who are high-functioning, relatively free of overt psychopathology, and no more in need of treatment than most of their peers. they may not have abuse histories and may have evolved a creative and adaptive multiplicity." (possibly 2005)

the entire endogenic and non-traumagenic resources google doc, created by a diagnosed traumagenic system can we at least establish there's been a recorded medical existence of healthy, non-disordered multiplicity in psychiatric fields and that this isn't something that someone just made up on tumblr one day? okay, cool, thanks. now i wonder if there's a word for that. oh wait. it's called non-disordered plurality and tends to be much more common in non-traumagenic systems. by now you've probably forgotten the actual reason this post exists, so back to antimisinfo!

[/image id: text reading "why is this bad? this is misinformation because as far as science knows did/osdd is a trauma based disorder (specifically caused by trauma in early childhood, which is speculated to be 1-9 / 1-12 years old) and your brain would not split/create alters without reason. you cannot have alters without having a disorder, this is common sense as it's not normal to have alters. to add onto this endos also take over our communities and teal our terms. (we'll make a post with further information on that in the future.)" end id.] okay so first off non-disordered systems exist, let's stop talking about osddid as if it's the only way plurals can exist. second off, you can be multiple without having a disorder, it's literally highlighted in the icd-11 that non-disordered multiplicity exists. see above for disproving that. this is not common sense, because as seen above people can experience multiplicity without it being disordered, therefore meaning it is "normal," though not realistically normal as all plurals are a minority. normal =/= bad/disordered. cool? cool now, onto "endos take over our communities and steal our terms." i have no clue what terms op is talking about (tried to find their elaboration on those terms but it seems they haven't posted it), nor have i ever gotten an actual comprehensive list of terms they think we're stealing, but here we go: the terms traumagenic and endogenic were created by an endogenic system

[/image id: text reads "an important part of the development of these terms involves our journey towards identifying as plural. we have used a lot of terms for ourselves over the last thirty years; since 2014, we have identified as endogenic, but have known we were plural since at least 1990. the road" text cuts off. end id.] the term plural can be traced back to 2003 and even in its oldest records recognize the existence of non-traumagenic plurality. it has always been an inclusive term

[/image id: header reads "heart's home." text next to it reads "join date: january 02, 2003." text underneath reads, "this is my site for people that have mpd did, {;} also i agree that not all is cause by trauma. {;} i was on the ring from ring world and did not know this was moved." end id.] introject is a psychiatry-focused word, meaning that it could be claimed to be osddid exclusive, however multiple communities have used them in tandem for years. it can be traced back to this glossary which was written before the dsm-5, or pre-2013.

[/image id: text reads "introject - introjection occurs when a person (singlet or plural) internalizes another person (real or fictional) into his or her mental space. in classical psychology, the introject is usually a parent, whose advice for good or ill becomes integrated into the person's moral system. more broadly, many people experience introjects as a kind of muse, inspiring them to creativity or self-improvement (a psychologist would call this an "internalized imago"). (psychiatric)". new line. new line text reads, ""introject" is seen as derogatory by some, because it is a psychiatric word and seems to imply that such people of necessity are unreal. They prefer terms like walk-in, soulbond, or fictive. having an introject does not necessarily mean you're multiple. it is an experience common to singlets and plurals. some multiple systems report adopting people from books, films, or real life, making them part of the group and allowing them to take the front if they desire." so, having introjects hasn't even always been seen as a fully plural experience! singlets used to be considered to be able to have introjects too! isn't that cool? not to mention, they also have a definition for fictive in there, recognized as a wider plural term! cool, cross that off the list... oh? what's this?

[/image id: text reads "system - a group of persons in one body. also, the operating system by which a group governs itself. multiples have many different names for this: group, collective, clan, household (or house), family, etc. (may have originated with a few multiples writing for the amateur press; we first read it in an early mpd book.)" end id.] so non-disordered plurals have used the term system since ever too... not to mention, hey, look at this term!

[/image id: text reads "empowerment is for all multiples. It is not only for natural (non-trauma) multiples; you can be empowered and be a multiple who was born as one person and split due to child abuse. In fact, if that's your situation, empowerment is a wonderful thing for you, and is something your therapist (if any) ought to be encouraging." end id.] wow... non-trauma multiples. look at that. is that enough terms? if you want me to look up more, feel free to suggest anything the endogenic community is "stealing" that haven't been used synonymously and consistently in both traumagenic and endogenic spaces since before traumagenic and endogenic were terms. okay back to misinformation.

[/image id: text is a link that reads "there is also a carrd that explains why endos are bad and debunks a few myths if anyone is interested in it! if not continue reading." end id.] i didn't need to click on this to know it was the why endos are bad carrd. this is the most touted anti endo carrd in existence. i'm so sick of seeing it i'm not even addressing it today. it's wrong and blames endogenic systems for systemic issues like "making actual systems be less believed." not a verbatim quote, but you can go read it for yourself and then scroll up and read everything i just said again.

i've never actually seen another anti-endo carrd. which is saying something, because there's a lot of endogenic carrds, some better than others. carrds in general aren't reputable in most situations, unless they cite other sources, which the why endos are bad carrd doesn't. it cites a google doc about cultural appropriation and the theory of structural dissociation, which is about osddid, not non traumagenic plurality. it also implies that anyone identifying as endogenic has been lied to, is traumagenic and in denial, is a singlet who's experiencing a factitious disorder or other disorder misleading them, or are a singlet faking because they think it's "fun." no comment, i'll talk about it in length another day.

[/image id: text reads, "why can't you have did/osdd or alters without trauma? as far as science knows did/osdd is a trauma disorder and in order to have alters in the first place you require dissociation, which is also a trauma (or stress) response. here are tons of medically reviewed sources that say this:" image ends. end id.] once again, not osdddid. also, "as far as science knows..." see above. science knows about non-disordered plurality. op goes on to list a bunch of articles about dissociative identity disorder, that talk about dissociative identity disorder. they are wonderful articles about dissociative identity disorder and prove that individuals with dissociative identity disorder (and by extension otherwise specified dissociative disorder) experience that disorder due to trauma. that being said... non-disordered multiplicity is a thing, and endogenic systems still don't have osddid. seeing a pattern?

[/image id: text reads, "what about religious beliefs / tulpamancy? first people are not required to believe or participate in your religious beliefs (and religious beliefs are not exempt from criticism) and second tulpamancy is a closed buddhist practice that has nothing to do with being a system and should not be compared to being a system nor should it be included / involved in system communities. Note that the dsm-v also says that in order to have did; "the disturbance is not a normal part of a broadly accepted cultural or religious practice." <- this does not mean it's possible to have alters due to a religious thing, if anything it says they cannot be counted as alters / as a system." end id.] okay so i corrected this in the image id, but op actually wrote "tuplamancy" twice. lol first off, tulpamancy isn't a closed buddhist practice. a tulpa is a theosophical term that was originally inspired by the tibetan buddhist nirmāṇakāya, translated as in tibetan as sprul-pa. "the western understanding of tulpas was developed by twentieth-century european mystical explorers, who interpreted the idea independently of buddhahood," according to wikipedia, sourced from tracking the tulpa (2015). a google search could tell you this. did you research any of the communities you are attempting to debunk past listening to what people who agree with you say? if you've decided in the past three months that google is your friend, i would google "echo chamber." second off, people absolutely are not required to believe or participate in your religious beliefs, and religious beliefs are subject to criticism. however, they should also be respected. this post, along with most other things you have had to say, have not respected spiritual plurals. not to mention, not all non-traumagenic plurals are spiritual. not to mention, not all tulpamancers are spiritual, in fact, most aren't. "modern practitioners, who call themselves "tulpamancers", use the term to refer to a type of willed imaginary friend which practitioners consider to be sentient and relatively independent. modern practitioners predominantly consider tulpas to be a psychological rather than a paranormal concept. the idea became an important belief in theosophy." see: wikipedia again. i mean, if you want me to go find scientific articles about this i can but wikipedia has plenty. go check the sources on wikipedia. this should have been the first thing you did if you wanted to "combat misinformation," by doing actual research before posting. op then starts talking about did. see: not all plurals are disordered. op also takes the time to shit on spiritual multiplicity again, which i will rightly ignore, refer to two paragraphs ago. it's midnight and i would like to finish writing by 1am.

[/image id: text reads, "to add on, no you cannot pray to be a system or transition into being a system. if you were to pray and one day magically become a system you are either in denial or you've convinced yourself you're something you're not. believing you can be a system without trauma or that you can become a system by praying is like believing you can get autism from vaccines or drinking too much dairy milk, that's just not how it works." end id.] this is a half-truth! you cannot pray to become a system unless you count spiritual possession (and frankly that responsibility lies on the individual in question), and you cannot pray to have osddid as that's a dissociative disorder that stems from childhood. you technically can transition to being plural (created systems are a thing, intentional and unintentional creation of headmates has been recorded dutifully since at least the early 1900s (see: tracking the tulpa, 2015). for the sake of it, here's a sciencedirect article about authors who experience different forms of hearing their characters in their head, who's recounts all sound very similar to non-disordered plurality. "believing you can be a system without trauma or that you can become a system by praying is like believing you can get autism from vaccines or drinking too much dairy milk, that's just not how it works." maybe if all plurality is disordered. it isn't. see above when i showed multiple examples of non-disordered multiplicity. believing that all plurality is disordered is like insisting that god created everything on earth after being presented with the theory of evolution. the analogy goes both ways.

[/image id: text reads, "what about mixed origin systems? Mixed origin systems are not a thing. did/osdd forms purely from trauma, you can't form from a mix of trauma and not trauma, that's not how it works. if you identify as mixed origin you are likely in denial and really need to come to terms with the fact that you are either traumatized or you're not a system at all." ] okay so first of all people can be traumatized past the age of twelve. ooh burn i know crazy. not to mention, plurality in general is known to be experienced by neurodivergent individuals, who as a minority are more likely to experience some form of trauma. this isn't a controversial statement, right? i don't have to prove this, right? cool great thanks. oh hey i just found a really flat ginger ale this will now fuel the rest of this post. there's this crazy concept, some people can be traumatized without it causing them to be disordered. or, a person with osddid could have created headmates, therefore making some of their system of non-traumagenic origin. personally, i was a system before i was traumatized. this caused my plurality to have some very trauma-based aspects, trauma holders and trauma-focused roles. that being said, my plurality (mostly lol) isn't disordered and my first recorded headmate was a created/spontaneous headmate at the age of ~nine.~ isn't that cool? anyways i've been medically recognized as plural so you can't fakeclaim me [silly] i dont have osddid. don't fit the diagnostic criteria. but i've been experiencing headmates since 9 and have recognized my plurality since 12. i'm 18. most of my headmates can be sourced to when i was 13-15, as that's when i experienced the most trauma (i'm better now stay safe though yall). that's decidedly after the gracious "1-12" estimate you gave, op. not to mention, we created headmates intentionally at the age of 12. so what's up with that op? what am i? okay i'm done being anectodal, i just took the opportunity to parry a personal opinion with a personal anecdote just to further drive the nail in that people like this exist and are living breathing sentient individuals with lives outside the screen and many of us have been plural since ever. i sourced non-traumagenic multiplicity to before the dsm-5 just in this post alone, not to mention tulpamancy (many tulpamancers don't consider themselves plural/multiple or part of the community).

[/image id: text reads, "what about other kinds of origins? Other origins like "willowgenic" and all that bullshit? Yeah no, same thing as endos, not possible. look above for all the proof you need, did/osdd is only caused by trauma. traumagenic is the only valid origin." end id.] i dunno if i told you this but did/osdd isn't the only form of plurality because not all plurality is disordered. also, spelling every origin you don't agree with incorrectly in a post that's supposed to be informational doesn't lend to your credibility. it's spelled willogenic. you're welcome. also, the word "traumagenic" was created by an endogenic system (see above, during "endos are stealing our terms," first link). you're appropriating our terms, buddy. [silly]

[/image id: text reads, "but I gave myself did! / but I created my own alters! no you didn't. that isn't possible, you cannot turn yourself into a did/osdd system and creating alters is a coping mechanism, not something you do for fun, sources on this;" text ends. end id.] half truth! you can't give yourself osddid because it's a dissociative disorder that forms due to childhood trauma. you can, however, create alters/headmates. see above when i talked about tulpamancy. op goes on to link more resources about dissociative identity disorder that don't mention other forms of plurality. not all plurals are disordered, let's move on.

[/image id: text reads, "isn't being a system like the same as being trans or being lgbtq? no, many endos compared the two but they are completely different. Being lgbtq is an identity, it's something you are born as. being a system is a debilitating disorder caused by severe trauma, it is counted as a disability which is;" text ends. end id.] first off i gotta say it again, not all plurality is disordered. op goes on to explain why did is a disability, which is true. that's just true. but again. not all plurality is disordered. second off, half truth! being a system is not the same as being lgbtq! that being said, a lot of systems are part of the lgbtq community, both due to its known effects on gender and sexuality and because a lot of them are neurodivergent. speaking on the internet plural community here, anyways. a lot of anti endos are referred to as "sysmeds" as a reference to "transmeds," people who believe that all people who are transgender must have a disorder in the form of gender dysphoria. sysmeds are people who believe that all people who are systems must have a disorder in the form of osddid.... same thing different font debunked not all systems are disordered. anyways.

[/image id: text reads, "but the dsm-v says that trauma isn't required! no, the dsm-v actually says csa isn't required, there are other forms of trauma that don't involve csa or child abuse. To act as if it saying that the trauma isn't always ca or child abuse means that it doesn't require trauma at all is extremely invalidating to those who are traumatized in ways that don't involve child abuse or csa." end id.] both of you are wrong jesus christ. okay so first of all the dsm-v heavily implies that trauma is basically required in order to have osddid.

[/image id: text reading "dissociative identity disorder is associated with overwhelming experiences, traumatic events, and/or abuse occurring in childhood. the full disorder may manifest at al-" text cuts off. end id.]

[/image id: text reads, "the dissociative disorders are frequently found in the aftermath of trauma, and many of the symptoms, including embarrassment and confusion about the symptoms or a desire to hide them, are influenced by the proximity to trauma. in dsm-5, the dissociative disorders are placed next to, but are not part of, the trauma- and stressor-related disorders, reflecting the close relationship between these diagnostic classes. both acute stress disorder" text cuts off. end id.] second of all the part of the dsm-5 that goes over dissociative identity disorder doesn't mention sexual violence once. the best i can assume this claim came from is an old belief that most dissociative identity disorder trauma if not all is inherently sexual.

[/image id: text reads, "promoted by charismatic individuals such as cornelia wilbur -- that multiplicity was almost always caused by severe, repeated child abuse, usually sexual, and was an extreme form of dissociation." end id.] so... where did you get this info, op? you didn't give us a source, after all. and again.... not all plurality is disordered. so this is a pointless argument to make. shit, i'm out of ginger ale. and it's 1am. it's okay i'm basically done right? uh, right?

[/image id: text reads, "but this source claims endos exist / did doesn't require trauma! most of those sources are extremely old and / or made by endos (or pro endos) themselves. (we'll make a more in-depth post on this topic some other time, but for now this is all we have to say on it)" end id.] first off i dated every source i cited, most are post-2013 and the newest is from last september (sep 2023). the oldest is ~2003. you're welcome. second, if you denounce every source given matter how reputable because it's "written by pro endos," you'll only end up listening to people in your own community. hey, remember when i asked you to google "echo chamber?" also, i'm waiting for that post, op. also also, for the sake of it, not all plurality is disordered, so why are we mentioning did again? oh yeah, because you don't believe in non-disordered plurality. is that because all the sources proving their existence are pro endo? hey, fun challenge, if you're over the age of 21 and find yourself wishing to, take a shot every time i reiterate not all plurality is disordered. [joking]

[/image id: text reads, "but we don't know everything about the human brain! you're right, we don't. the brain is mysterious, but we do know enough to know that it doesn't do these kinds of things for no reason. we know the brain reacts to trauma and we know what the difference between a normal brain and a disordered brain is. just because we don't know everything doesn't give people an excuse to jump to conclusions and spread misinformation. it is better to stick to what science currently knows which is the theory of structural dissociation, which is the current theory about how did/osdd forms, and so far no one has been able to disprove it. and before someone says it, no it is not only a theory, it is a scientific theory which is;" end id.] hey i have this fun concept for you not all plurality is disordered. also, just to throw it out there, otto van der hart, the guy who created the theory of structural dissociation referencing the haunted self and doing so along with ellert neijenhuis, suzette boon and kathy steele, had his license revoked years ago for abusing his plural patients. not to mention they promote only referring to the "client" and not the "parts," and only referring to alters as "parts of the client." i recommend reading this article on power to the plurals, and if you feel like some extra reading, you can also check out this old article about how psych professionals used to be encouraged to bait or purposefully leave information out or use different names for integration to attempt to coerce their plural patients into final fusion. in conclusion, not all plurality is disordered, source your shit, and if you're going to talk about only dissociative disorders at least get your claims right. thank you. stop spreading misinformation.

dave got a blinkie for his post so now i want one

[/image id: green and yellow blinkie gif with the words "written by jade harley!" in pixelpoiiz font. end id.]

[/image id: blinkie with a dark blue, almost black background featuring multiple stars, one of which twinkles. contains text reading "written by kankri." in the pixeloid sans font. end id.]

[margaretkart]

Greek bookstores and Greek myth retellings

Well most certainly as a bookworm my visit to bookstores is quite often, so i came across many times, them having books of the myths retellings.

Outside they look simple but the more you read them, the more frustrating the situation becomes.

I have made a similar post about the failure of Greek mythology retellings and the issue needs to be discussed more.

The stores simply do their job but they unintentionally make many Greeks prefer and fall victims to misinformation from these books and not valuing the actual ancient plays.. how so you may ask?

By simply putting the retellings right at the entrance of the store and the ancient plays further back to be forgotten.

Especially young people influenced by apps such as tiktok or Instagram they unintentionally believe these books are faithful to the source and have a false image of our culture heritage.

Especially with the same ideologies these books have:

Men = bad, sexist, abusers

Women= oppressed, abused, have no autonomy or opinion

Ancient Greece= a barbaric land full of filthy men

Greek gods= cruel, manipulative

Seriously this is the image foreign authors have about our culture? This is the so called great culture they see, that influenced many through their traditions and philosophy? Isn't it harmful to the actual Greeks who we value our heritage?

Rhetoric questions but you get the point.

[midnightscramble]

Hiya, could you do a Portia Featherington x female baker reader. Of course you have all creative freedom. Thank you, love. ;P

Sugar, Sugar Part 1 (Portia Featherington x fem!Reader)

Part 1, Part 2, Part 3

The Masterlist

Author’s Note: Thanks for the request! Love this idea and am so joyed to write for it. If it’s not to your liking feel free to make another request (don’t be shy!). Happy readings to you.

Summary: The stress of running a doomed household is getting to Portia. In an effort to get her daughter and Mister Finch to produce an heir, she employees local baker Y/n to fill the house with goodies.

Warnings: Portia has anxiety, slight derogatory references to religion, memories of a neglectful marriage, period typical misinformation about pregnancy and fertility, No Beta read

“Mama, I swear, Albion and I have been trying. It is simply in God’s hands. A baby shall appear within my belly when he deems it so.” Philippa shrugged and looked towards the vaulted ceiling as if it was the heavens. Portia pinched the bridge of her nose at her daughter’s idiocy. She walked towards the window and looked out upon the street, shaking her head while cursing her daughter’s religious education. Of all the books Penelope had convinced the late Lord Featherington to supply her with, it had to be the Bible that Philippa happened upon. The very same girl who could not remember her Hail Marys.

Spinning on her heel, exasperated, Portia looked towards her daughter, “It is absolutely in your hands. God gave mankind free will. Free will which you will use to become pregnant. Are you sure that Mister Finch is doing his part, is he doing all a man can to enhance his virility?”

"There is only so much Alby can do, Mama. He has many allergies, it is near impossible for him to eat the foods that are meant to increase his bravado." Philippa yawned resignedly.

"Well, have you noticed any particular type of food that effects his, uhh," Portia raised her eyebrows and whispered conspiratorially, "appetite for you?" Philippa gasped despite her mother's careful phrasing, causing Portia to roll her eyes.

Offended, Philippa tsked, "Mama, that is very improper of you to ask. But if you must know, he rather enjoys sweets before the act."

Of course, Portia thought, when does the man not want sweets. "Then I shall have the staff fill your room with treats and you are not to leave until you are sure you are with child."

"You cannot trap us in our room!"

"I very well can! All of our futures are dependent on your and Mister Finch's coupling. I cannot count on Prudence to put her pride aside and measure up to the task. Penelope has not a suitor insight while she chases Mister Bridgerton's coattail. Please Philippa, if you do not do this we will lose everything." Her ears ran hot as she tried to reason with her. Was it possible that she was the only one who understood the enormity of the situation?

Slouching, Philippa huffed "Fine, although my only request is that the sweets not be from the kitchens. I'd rather it be from Y/l/n Pastries and Delights. The shop has gained quite the following with-"

"Yes, yes. I will take care of it, now off you go! I expect you to be glued to his side by the time I return with the order."

...

The carriage ride into town was bumpy and unpleasant. Perhaps Portia was overly sensitive due to her soured mood. She despised having to haggle, especially with someone as well connected as the Ton's premier baker. Since the death of Lord Featherington, Portia had been careful to reduce the size of the staff and have the kitchens purchase day old produce from the markets. While she preferred to be frugal in such times, this expense would prove to be important. Never did she think her family's future would rely on a man's appetite.

Coming to a halt, she peered out the carriage window. Her destination was at the edge of the Ton, surprising her considering the supposed popularity of the bakery. Gingerly stepping out of the carriage, she tried to settle herself. She knew exactly how to get what she wanted. Men, older men in particular, were simple creatures. With a delicate balance of sexual innuendo and pseudo helplessness, she was sure to emerge victorious.

The shop bell jingled, causing Y/n to look up from her place behind the counter. "Welcome in! what can I do for you, Lady Featherington?" She smiled brightly at the auburn haired woman. The aroma of the shop washed over Portia gently, reminding her briefly of the display of sweets she had at her own wedding.

Portia smiled tightly and approached the counter. To be known about the Ton was both a blessing and a curse. There was pride in being instantly recognized by strangers, yet it made discrete deals such as the one she was trying to procure all the more difficult.

"Hello, Dear. I was wondering if I may speak to the head chef?"

"I am the head chef." Portia released a guffaw, "Pardon me, I'm afraid you misunderstand, I am looking for the shop owner."

Y/n smiled kindly, Portia was not the first to make this mistake, "That would be me, Lady Featherington."

Portia's smile dropped momentarily. A woman shop owner was hard to come by. Sure, there were lady bakers in the Ton, but none owned the shops they worked in. "How modern," she complemented, "I was hoping it would not be too late in the day to place an order for tonight?" She was in fact hoping that it was too late, and thus the remaining goods would have a reduced price given how long they had been siting.

"As a matter of fact, I make night batches to supply to the local families. It seems everyone is partial to dessert before bed," Y/n jested slightly. Although her heart rate picked up a notch, Portia released a laugh to show good nature. Reevaluating the situation, she looked around the shop, "Well I'm not sure what I should order..."

Reading the hesitancy in her eyes, Y/n offered "Why don't I give you an assortment. That way you can come back tomorrow with a list of what was enjoyed, hmm?" She was used to having to sell herself to the people of the Ton, none were quick to trust a female shop owner.

Portia's smile relaxed at the prospect, "That would be lovely, thank you." Y/n started packing up one of each dessert. Absentmindedly, she made conversation, "My condolences on the late Lord Featherington. When my own husband died, it nearly sent me to ruin."

Eyes widening, Portia scrambled for an appropriate response to such an abrupt topic change, "Thank you..." She drifted off, not sure what to say. She studied the young woman, wondering what she was getting at. Their eyes met briefly and Portia looked away, feeling caught.

Filling the silence she continued, "My condolences as well, was it your husband who started this fine establishment?" Internally she grimaced. She knew it was none of her business, yet the oddity of the situation drove her to seek some sort of explanation.

"We started it together. I had to petition to the province to assume control of the estate. They wanted to give this shop to my eleven year old cousin, can you believe that?"

She sucked in a breath, "Yes, yes I can." Portia was becoming all too familiar with inheritance laws.

Y/n placed three full boxes on the counter and grabbed a paper. "Now, I am going to write which box contains which sweet," she beckoned Portia closer to watch as she wrote.

"This box has", rather than listen, Portia found herself distracted in watching Y/n's hands move as she emphatically described how each pastry could be identified. Her fingers twisted as she mimicked the pipped icing atop a miniature cake. The subtle flexing of her hand when she grasped the quill left Portia wondering what strength those hands possessed. Y/n seemed to have a good work ethic, leaving no doubt in her mind that she would be behind the scenes with her staff, kneading dough, working till sweat dripped down the column of her throat- Portia's mouth suddenly felt very dry and she cleared her throat, causing Y/n to pause. Embarrassed she rushed, "Thank you, I shall return tomorrow. You can hand these off to my footmen." She spun around on her heal and in three long strides she exited.

Y/n called after her, "Have a nice night, Lady Featherington!"

...

Feeling rather worn, Portia told Philippa's maid to have the sweets brought directly to her daughter's room. She retired early, settling in the king sized bed with the latest issue of Lady Whistledown. Seldom did she wish to know the true identity of the infamous writer. However, it was nights like these that she wanted to meet the woman face to face. She was curious, how had she made it so far? Was there a man behind the publishing? If it was truly a Lady behind the gossip expose, she may be the most independent woman of their time.

Oh, to be so free, she thought.

Turning, she blew out her bed side candle and tossed the pamphlet to the floor. Even with her husband dead, she was still chained to his decisions, his name, the failures he had made and hid from her. It would have scorned her if not for the fact that she had no emotion left to give the man.

She had never truly been dependent on him, at least not in the traditional sense. There were women like Violet Bridgerton, who mourned her husband years after his passing, pious and properly. For Violet had loved him, and in turn was dependent on his love and company. Portia, on the other hand, had tried to love her husband. She gave Lord Featherington her youthful devotion, drawn to his coy smiles and cold disregard for her. There was a certain safety in giving her heart and hand in marriage to a man who was distant. Who showed his affection in gifts rather than touch or word.

Their relationship, transactional at best, had entirely ceased upon the birth of Penelope. Lord Featherington had given up on the prospect of a male heir and moved to the opposing wing. From then on, the bulk of their interactions consisted of sitting across from each other at breakfast and linking arms at social events. Both were too content to break the newly developed pattern. It was almost pleasant, to look upon each other and feel no obligation to pretend.

Tonight was like any other night in her marriage, spent alone. She was normally untroubled by the empty side of her bed, cold and firm from being unoccupied. Closing her eyes she resigned herself to ignore the sudden deficiency. She told herself that it was of most importance to fall asleep quickly. Tomorrow she would have to be sharp to negotiate with Y/n.

Reminded briefly of the baker, thoughts of little cakes with pipped icing, quills, and the smell of bread paraded through her mind as she succumbed to sleep.

[maxdibert]

Although I disagree with you on your opinion that Snape wasn’t a bully, I do think you handle arguments well and I love reading about them. You seem like a sensible person.

We can disagree on that point because I also have my reservations about validating his behavior as an adult. It’s not something I would do if people didn’t use it to discredit the abuse that preceded that behavior, or if they didn’t conveniently ignore that other adults—whom they often admire or hold up as examples of good conduct—also engaged in rather abusive and questionable behaviors.

My issue isn’t that I think he was right in being an asshole to his students. Of course he wasn’t right; of course that behavior was awful. But I won’t accept that being used as justification for the abuse and mistreatment he suffered long before he acted that way. Nor will I accept it as an argument to demonize his character when there are other adults with equally questionable behavior, and no one says a word about them. I think people need to be consistent. And if they’re not, then let’s play the inconsistency game.

If the argument is to villainize Snape for his behavior as a teacher but no one is going to say a word about Hagrid being irresponsible, Dumbledore being the main architect of a school system that fostered ghettos and cult-like groups, or McGonagall using rather questionable disciplinary methods, then I’m going to allow myself to play the same game and downplay it. Because everything can be downplayed, and I get the feeling that many people don’t understand that their personal perception of whether Snape’s actions were better or worse than those of other teachers is irrelevant. What matters are the facts. And the fact is that most teachers in that school were profoundly irresponsible adults whose methods were anything but pedagogical or positive—not just Snape.

These people always complain that we turn Snape into some poor, pitiful victim uwu, but that’s simply not true. Snape is, in fact, a victim. And victims can be terrible people, but that doesn’t make them any less victims. And I’m not just talking about him being a victim of James or Tobias—it goes beyond that. Snape is a victim of a system structured to ensure that people born into certain circumstances are doomed to social failure, all to maintain the dominance of the ruling class and sustain the false narrative of meritocracy.

Snape is the perfect example of what happens to people who are born without social, familial, or economic capital within a capitalist system that inherited class-based caste structures. My stance on this character isn’t just a matter of personal preference or fandom—it’s a deeply political stance. And I don’t care that it’s fiction, because fiction is a reflection of reality. The lack of comprehension, context, and empathy we show toward fictional characters speaks volumes about how we internalize and apply our prejudices in real life.

I will not judge someone who has faced lifelong socioeconomic barriers—who has been socially vulnerable and at high risk of exclusion, and whose poor choices were shaped by those very conditions—the same way I would judge someone born into wealth, surrounded by support networks, in a financially stable environment, and cushioned by endless privileges. You can’t do that—it makes no sense. And the fact that so many people seem incapable of understanding this only highlights the internalized classism, misinformation, and the deep-rooted normalization of classist rhetoric in capitalist culture. I don’t know if that makes me “sensitive,” but I do know that it makes me socially aware.

[sejdkvinna]

rune misconceptions

Learning and studying runes is no small task, and there's a lot of misinformation and misconceptions out there! We are also limited on historical sources of magical uses for runes, so reconstructing how to use runes often requires some creative liberties. Modern interpretations of the runes absolutely have their place, but understanding what we do and don't know about runes for historical sources can help you discern where information is coming from.

Blank Rune

The blank rune isn't a rune! Ralph Blum's "Book of Runes", published in 1983, is responsible for the creation of the blank rune. He preferred a 5x5 grid system over the 3 aettir sets, so adding a blank rune was convenient for this purpose. Additionally, the blank rune can be considered redundant. The blank rune is associated with wyrd and that you are not meant to know the answer, which is a meaning I've also seen many attribute to the rune Pertho.

Rune Spreads

While rune spreads can absolutely be useful in modern witchcraft/divination, we don't actually know that rune spreads have a historical basis. Our knowledge on the potential of rune casting in old customs comes primarily from Tacitus in "Germania" (not written by a practitioner, only an observer), who writes:

"They attach the highest importance to the taking of auspices and casting lots. Their usual procedure with the lot is simple. They cut off a branch from a nut-bearing tree and slice it into strips these they mark with different signs and throw them at random onto a white cloth. Then the state's priest, if it is an official consultation, or the father of the family, in a private one, offers prayer to the gods and looking up towards heaven picks up three strips, one at a time, and, according to which sign they have previously been marked with, makes his interpretation. If the lots forbid an undertaking, there is no deliberation that day about the matter in question. If they allow it, further confirmation is required by taking auspices."

However, this still doesn't necessarily indicate that the runes were the symbols in question, so whether runes were used for divination is still disputed! If rune castings and spreads work for you, keep at it! My only advice is to recognize that runes aren't just Norse tarot cards, respect their differences and treat them as separate. But be wary of sources that claim that their rune spreads or methods of casting are based in ancient practice - we know very little about divinatory uses of runes!

Origins

I've heard a few different stories on the origin of runes (mythologically speaking). Some claim that Oden created the runes and therefore belong to him. Others claim that Freja is responsible for teaching Oden the runes. While Oden is heavily associated with the runes and Freja did teach Oden magic (specifically sejd/seidr), the runes were revealed to Oden when he sacrificed himself on Yggdrasil and waited nine days and nights.

Learning the Runes

"Runes none should grave ever Who knows not to read them; Of dark spell full many The meaning may miss. Ten spell-words writ wrongly On whale-bone were graven: Whence to leek-tending maiden, Long sorrow and pain."

Egil's Saga warns people to not use the runes if you do not know them well. This isn't meant to fear-monger or discourage people away from learning the runes, but take your time learning them! Reflect on their meanings, understand how they fit into their mythological/cultural context.

References

http://whispersofyggdrasil.blogspot.com/2012/04/wyrd-blank-rune.html?m=1

https://www.groveandgrotto.com/blogs/articles/whats-up-with-the-blank-rune-how-and-whether-to-read-it

https://norse-mythology.org/runes/runic-philosophy-and-magic/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runic_magic

"Germania" by Tacitus

Egil's Saga

https://norse-mythology.org/tales/odins-discovery-of-the-runes/

[witchthewriter]

𝑨𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒈𝒚 𝑳𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒐𝒏𝒔!

So, I’ve decided to create indepth posts about astrology; the signs/placements, planets, and houses. I have a short overview here. Everyone has a whole birth chart, here's a free site that I use and trust (don't go on co-astrology it's full of stereotypes and misinformation.)

Find the first lesson here. 

Second Lesson: 𝐌𝐎𝐎𝐍 𝐒𝐈𝐆𝐍𝐒 🌙

Your Moon sign represents the deepest, most inner side of ourselves. It’s our inner world and it is very uncommon to see that side of someone. That’s why as a child you may show those traits more than when you’re an adult - as you age, you can hide that side of yourself. 

Our Moon aspect is how we show comfort, how we display emotions and who we are when we are alone. It's our instincts, how we react to situations, our sense of security. The Moon is linked to the mother and child, it represents our inner mother and our inner child.

  So, unlike the signs in their Sun placement - they are a bit different in your Moon sign. 

Moon in Fire signs: Attention, adventures, a partner or friends who care as much as you do

Moon in Earth signs: Work, routine, stability

Moon in Air signs: Intellectual stimulation, new things, social interaction

Moon in Water signs: Alone time, caretaking

𝐀𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 | 𝑇𝘩𝑒 𝑅𝑎𝑚

With an Aries Moon, this means that the planet, Mars, rules your inner self. It means you’re direct, quick to action, impulsive, and bold. You may tend to be impatient. Nothing is done quick enough. They make for fiercely protective parents and impassioned activists. 

Gets bored easily 

Emotional issues take precedence

Take things very personally, and they deal with problems by facing them right away

Moon in Aries folk experience difficult childhoods

Never have to ask them how they feel - they’ll let you know clearly and sometimes ... eractically. 

The difference between an Aries Sun and an Aries Moon is that Moon in Aries will rebel just for the sake of it. They’re a lot more active and have a desire to have new experiences. An Aries Sun is much more restrained in their expressions and emotions. 

𝐓𝐚𝐮𝐫𝐮𝐬 | 𝑇𝘩𝑒 𝐵𝑢𝑙𝑙

With a Taurus Moon, they feel with their senses and are pretty much rooted in their ways. Those with this moon placement typically have a stereotypical homemaker kind of mother figure. It should be noted that Taurus Moon’s are usually not the gambling type, they prefer to protect themselves and their finances by being overly cautious. 

Generally very romantic

Once they have made a commitment, they’re persevering

They make great teachers

Often the mediators of a group

The difference between a Taurus Sun and a Taurus Moon is that there’s a soft, graceful, and refined quality to the Taurus Moon that isn't seen in the Taurus Sun, who embodies the archetype of the Bull much more readily. 

𝐆𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐢 | 𝑇𝘩𝑒 𝑇𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑠

With a Gemini Moon, a person is witty, open-minded and highly imaginative. Generally, they have a million and one projects going. With a finger in every pie, they have a desire to keep on creating; since they have so many ideas. The mother in the lives of those with a Gemini moon is usually childlike or stunted in some way that makes her more of an older sister than a traditional mother.

Nervousness and worry are common traits 

In their families, Lunar Geminis often take on the role of organizing get-togethers

They are at their best when they have plenty of things to do beyond routine

This placement almost always have a way with words

The difference between a Gemini Sun and a Gemini Moon is that the Sun is more sociable, and has a want to be around others. While the latter (just as intellectual) cares about what is underneath. 

𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐫 | 𝑇𝘩𝑒 𝐶𝑟𝑎𝑏

With a Cancer Moon, they seek out security and familiarity in all they do. This aspect remembers a lot; like walking libraries. Not ones for small talk, or in other words, ‘surface-level interactions’, this placement prefer deeper connections and therefore the company of only their inner circle. 

Moon in Cancer suggests a mother or maternal figure that experienced extreme and ever-changing emotions. The moon in Cancer child learned early to adapt to these shifting emotional energies and developed the desire to make it better through their own efforts. 

The Moon is “at home” in the sign of Cancer, as the Moon is the natural ruler of the sign.

Nostalgic; they over idealize the past

They feel valuable when they are able to assist

The difference between a Cancer Sun and a Cancer Moon is that the Cancer energy is shown more readily in Cancer Moons’. This is due to the planet being in the sign that it rules. A person will have exaggerated traits of nurturing, caring, intuitive etc. 

𝐋𝐞𝐨 | 𝑇𝘩𝑒 𝐿𝑖𝑜𝑛

With a Leo Moon, they have a natural charisma without the need of being loud. They feel most at home in the company of greatness and finery. The mother figure for those with natal moon in Leo is a kind of grande dame who either failed to give her striving children the attention they needed or was overbearing and a bit of a “Dance Mom,” pushing them towards success in the hopes the shine of it would lend them some spotlight.

Although they are romantic, giving and kind, there’s a bit of an “all press is good press” mentality to those with this moon

Sometimes they just need some encouragement

Very proud, and they are rarely happy to follow orders

The difference between a Leo Sun and a Leo Moon is that the Sun placement is much more outgoing, flamboyant and in need of the spotlight. Another way of looking at it is that the male lion is the Leo Sun and the female lion is the Leo Moon. 

𝐕𝐢𝐫𝐠𝐨 | 𝑇𝘩𝑒 𝑀𝑎𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛

With a Virgo Moon, they feel most content when they’ve straightened out all the details of everyday life. Their key trait is being a worrier, normally striving for order, cleanliness, service to others and efficiency. The maternal figure was likely traditional with a scoured kitchen floor and the pervasive energy of wanting more from her children than they were able to deliver.

Virgo curiosity shows up big time with this position of the Moon

Plagued by perfection

Feelings get in the way of work, so they would prefer to repress them

The difference between a Virgo Sun and a Virgo Moon is that the Virgo Sun wants to be the stereotypical Virgo but fails to meet them. While a Virgo Moon cannot do anything but those stereotypes (or traits, if you prefer that term). Hence, the sun sign strives to exhibit its qualities, it often falls short. The moon, on the other hand, can't help but exhibit the full force of its sign.

𝐋𝐢𝐛𝐫𝐚 | 𝑇𝘩𝑒 𝑆𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠

With a Libra Moon, you’re very alluring and attractive. You’re quite flirtacious, and feel the most safe when you’re wanted. Although, you can be highly flexible, you’re also very indecisive. There’s this belief that Libra Moons have that what is good must be beautiful and what is beautiful must be good

They feel safe and secure when they are in a partnership

Big people-pleasers 

Strive for validation

Gracious? Yes. Direct? Never.

The difference between a Libra Sun and a Libra Moon is that Libra Suns have the desire for big social groups, while Libra Moons are more interested in focusing on one romantic relationship. Another big difference is that Libra Moons have an innate need for fairness and charm more so than the Suns, but they rarely display it. 

𝐒𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐩𝐢𝐨 | 𝑇𝘩𝑒 𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑝𝑖𝑜𝑛

With a Scorpio Moon, you are love someone who will challenge you so that you may understand yourself better. In other words, you like when those that are trustworthy come to you with honesty. Hence, Scorpio Moons seek out emotional intensity. 

The maternal figure for those with this placement was likely an unwilling mother who suffered her own heavy losses and serious sorrows. Though she may have cared for her child, the child sensed and internalized being somehow unwanted.

Have a strong fear of betrayal

They are unlikely to forget a kindness or forgive an insult

Scorpio Moons want all or nothing

The difference between a Scorpio Sun and a Scorpio Moon is that while the former wants to come across as powerful, the latter needs to know they are.  As well as this, Scorpio Moons are more guarded in their self-expression than the Scorpio Sun. So, people aren’t usually aware that Scorpio Moons desire such power. 

𝐒𝐚𝐠𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐮𝐬 | 𝑇𝘩𝑒 𝐴𝑟𝑐𝘩𝑒𝑟

With a Sagittarius Moon, you have an inner restlessness and a grand desire for independence. This aspect wants to discover the boundaries between the known and the undiscovered. 

The mother for this moon was likely a lifelong learner who sought enlightenment in spite of — and because of — trying life conditions. So important was self-discovery to this momma that she may have been somewhat absent mentally or physically.

They have a need for personal freedom and space

Natural storytellers

There’s a bit of a teacher in this placement, and definitely a helpful spirit

No matter the incident, trauma or horrific event, Sag Moons seek the silver lining

The difference between a Sagittarius Sun and a Sagittarius Moon is that Sag Sun’s are into philosophizing about the meanings of life, while Sag Moons want to go out and experience the meaning of life. They want to find out for themselves, rather than read and talk about it. 

𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐧 | 𝑇𝘩𝑒 𝑆𝑒𝑎𝑔𝑜𝑎𝑡

With a Capricorn Moon, this aspect is often seen as unfeeling, however, they have big emotions just like every other sign. But they hate letting people see that side of themselves. Not much for taking risks in life, Lunar Capricorns look for safety and security in most everything they do. They desire to build something of enduring value.

The mother in the lives of those with natal moon in Capricorn was a bit of a perfectionist with little patience for the learning through failure modality of children. As a result, people with this placement develop adult sensibilities and self-discipline very early on.

Being useful and productive are basic needs for Cap Moons

They have a hard time asking for help or human tenderness as they were raised not to expect it

Need to feel worthwhile in the real world

The difference between a Capricorn Sun and a Capricorn Moon is that even though they both strive for prominence, Cap Suns aren’t shy about showing it. They’re open and forthcoming. Comparatively, Cap Moons are more guarded and cautious in their expressions. 

𝐀𝐪𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐮𝐬 | 𝑇𝘩𝑒 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟-𝐵𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑟

With an Aquarius Moon, they tend to make brilliant friends, allies and activists. They make a point of never leaving anyone out, and will fight for the rights of others. They crusade for equality. This aspect is the domain of oddballs and anarchists.

The mother figure related to this lunar placement was a combination of erratic flakiness and progressive thinking. She likely fared better with teenagers she could talk to rather then-toddlers she was responsible for.

They are lifetime students of human nature

Unpredictable yet charming 

They are intellectuals who want to dismantle harmful or limiting social structures

The difference between an Aquarius Sun and an Aquarius Moon is most obvious when they’re confronted with an emotional person; Aquarius Moons tend to shun the emotion and avoids it at all costs. Aqua Moons will provide a wise solution, while Aqua Suns are still awkward with emotional people - they are more likely to relate emotionally. Show empathy and/or sympathy. 

𝐏𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐞𝐬 | 𝑇𝘩𝑒 𝐹𝑖𝑠𝘩

With a Pisces Moon, they are often seen as ‘dreamy’ or ... ‘spaced out,’ however, they are much mre intune with the world around them then people realise. People often perceive this aspect to be weak, though they don’t undertand that it is acceptance, rather than weakness. 

The mother for those with this moon was one of two extreme archetypes: either a martyr/saint who did all for all, or a wounded bird that required a certain degree of caretaking from her own children.

They desire to nurture and to be nurtured 

Pisces Moons put themselves in the role of rescuer

They can easily feel the emotions and trauma of others

The difference between a Pisces Sun and a Pisces Moon is that the latter doesn’t wear their stereotypes like Pisces Suns do. Pisces Moons are less obvious, yet it’s deeper and more powerful.