#Cultural Psychology

[wranglerofchaos]

Fittingly enough, we've recently hit the stretch goal to bring in Scriv as a writer on top of their impeccable cultural consulting!

🏳️‍🌈 Scriv the Bard (she/they)

📝 Cultural psychologist, writer, and game designer specializing in all-ages game design and culture-conscious worldbuilding and sensitivity editing.

There are a few more writers we're still hoping to bring on - support the project and help us hit our stretch goals!

[inspotty32]

Ghosts television show season 4 refers to the newest season of the popular CBS comedy series Ghosts, which started in October 2024.

[solace-philosophy]

The entrancement with industrial civilization must be considered as a profound cultural disorientation. It can be dealt with only by a corresponding deep cultural therapy.

— Thomas Berry

[willowsearth]

Understanding Ourselves

Self-Awareness, Personal Growth, Emotional Health, Building Confidence, Cultural Psychology, Self-Esteem Tips, Vaulted Health Blog, Mindset for Success

Hi there, friends! Let’s talk about something super cool — you! Yep, today we’re going to explore how we see ourselves, how we think others see us, and why it all matters. Ready? Let’s dive in! 1. Who Am I? Understanding Your “Self” You know how you look in a mirror to see your face? Well, your brain has a kind of invisible mirror where it sees your self. This is called your self-concept, which…

[crustycrow]

HETEROSEXUAL CIS-PEOPLE LOOK HERE

Snaps my fingers at you as you scroll past this post

Look at me. Listen.

I'm not the best at serious posts, but that article up there reminded me of how important it is that people like you stand up for us. So hold on while I try to get this out of my mushy end-of-work-day brain.

We could fight this fight ourselves for decades trying to reach the equal laws, gender affirming trans healthcare that doesn't have a 2-5+ soul-eating years of waiting time, medical care with equal knowledge of lgbtqia+ bodies, and, what is often forgotten, inclusion in the little everyday areas of life like our way of speaking or things being set up or designed with the existence of queer people in mind.

But you joining in could get us there so much faster.

The power you have as a hetero cis person is that you set the standard for what is seen as the average way of treating us among other hetero cis people. You have been given the power of deciding what's "normal" and I'm begging you to use it.

Richard Green is a great example of to what extent your actions can help our situation, and smaller ways of support still add up to a great impact on society, and could make the days of the queer people you interact with.

Educate yourself before you speak up, but don't be silent.

[yuribeam]

(common superstitions from the perspective of a USAmerican- would love to hear superstitions from other regions and cultures!)

(follow the most often when the situation arises, or believe in the strongest)

[hyperlexichypatia]

As I keep shouting into the void, pathologizers love shifting discussion about material conditions into discussion about emotional states.

I rant approximately once a week about how the brain maturity myth transmuted “Young adults are too poor to move out of their parents’ homes or have children of their own” into “Young adults are too emotionally and neurologically immature to move out of their parents’ homes or have children of their own.”

I’ve also talked about the misuse of “enabling” and “trauma” and “dopamine” .

And this is a pattern – people coin terms and concepts to describe material problems, and pathologization culture shifts them to be about problems in the brain or psyche of the person experiencing them. Now we’re talking about neurochemicals, frontal lobes, and self-esteem instead of talking about wages, wealth distribution, and civil rights. Now we can say that poor, oppressed, and exploited people are suffering from a neurological/emotional defect that makes them not know what’s best for themselves, so they don’t need or deserve rights or money.

Here are some terms that have been so horribly misused by mental health culture that we’ve almost entirely forgotten that they were originally materialist critiques.

Codependency What it originally referred to: A non-addicted person being overly “helpful” to an addicted partner or relative, often out of financial desperation. For example: Making sure your alcoholic husband gets to work in the morning (even though he’s an adult who should be responsible for himself) because if he loses his job, you’ll lose your home. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/08/opinion/codependency-addiction-recovery.html What it’s been distorted into: Being “clingy,” being “too emotionally needy,” wanting things like affection and quality time from a partner. A way of pathologizing people, especially young women, for wanting things like love and commitment in a romantic relationship.

Compulsory Heterosexuality What it originally referred to: In the 1980 in essay "Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence," https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/493756 Adrienne Rich described compulsory heterosexuality as a set of social conditions that coerce women into heterosexual relationships and prioritize those relationships over relationships between women (both romantic and platonic). She also defines “lesbian” much more broadly than current discourse does, encompassing a wide variety of romantic and platonic relationships between women. While she does suggest that women who identify as heterosexual might be doing so out of unquestioned social norms, this is not the primary point she’s making. What it’s been distorted into: The patronizing, biphobic idea that lesbians somehow falsely believe themselves to be attracted to men. Part of the overall “Women don’t really know what they want or what’s good for them” theme of contemporary discourse.

Emotional Labor What it originally referred to: The implicit or explicit requirement that workers (especially women workers, especially workers in female-dominated “pink collar” jobs, especially tipped workers) perform emotional intimacy with customers, coworkers, and bosses above and beyond the actual job being done. Having to smile, be “friendly,” flirt, give the impression of genuine caring, politely accept harassment, etc. https://weld.la.psu.edu/what-is-emotional-labor/ What it’s been distorted into: Everything under the sun. Everything from housework (which we already had a term for), to tolerating the existence of disabled people, to just caring about friends the way friends do. The original intent of the concept was “It’s unreasonable to expect your waitress to care about your problems, because she’s not really your friend,” not “It’s unreasonable to expect your actual friends to care about your problems unless you pay them, because that’s emotional labor,” and certainly not “Disabled people shouldn’t be allowed to be visibly disabled in public, because witnessing a disabled person is emotional labor.” Anything that causes a person emotional distress, even if that emotional distress is rooted in the distress-haver’s bigotry (Many nominally progressive people who would rightfully reject the bigoted logic of “Seeing gay or interracial couples upsets me, which is emotional labor, so they shouldn’t be allowed to exist in public” fully accept the bigoted logic of “Seeing disabled or poor people upsets me, which is emotional labor, so they shouldn’t be allowed to exist in public”).

Battered Wife Syndrome What it originally referred to: The all-encompassing trauma and fear of escalating violence experienced by people suffering ongoing domestic abuse, sometimes resulting in the abuse victim using necessary violence in self-defense. Because domestic abuse often escalates, often to murder, this fear is entirely rational and justified. This is the reasonable, justified belief that someone who beats you, stalks you, and threatens to kill you may actually kill you.

What it’s been distorted into: Like so many of these other items, the idea that women (in this case, women who are victims of domestic violence) don’t know what’s best for themselves. I debated including this one, because “syndrome” was a wrongful framing from the beginning – a justified and rational fear of escalating violence in a situation in which escalating violence is occurring is not a “syndrome.” But the original meaning at least partially acknowledged the material conditions of escalating violence.

I’m not saying the original meanings of these terms are ones I necessarily agree with – as a cognitive liberty absolutist, I’m unsurprisingly not that enamored of either second-wave feminism or 1970s addiction discourse. And as much as I dislike what “emotional labor” has become, I accept that “Women are unfairly expected to care about other people’s feelings more than men are” is a true statement.

What I am saying is that all of these terms originally, at least partly, took material conditions into account in their usage. Subsequent usage has entirely stripped the materialist critique and fully replaced it with emotional pathologization, specifically of women. Acknowledgement that women have their choices constrained by poverty, violence, and oppression has been replaced with the idea that women don’t know what’s best for themselves and need to be coercively “helped” for their own good. Acknowledgement that working-class women experience a gender-and-class-specific form of economic exploitation has been rebranded as yet another variation of “Disabled people are burdensome for wanting to exist.”

Over and over, materialist critiques are reframed as emotional or cognitive defects of marginalized people. The next time you hear a superficially sympathetic (but actually pathologizing) argument for “Marginalized people make bad choices because…” consider stopping and asking: “Wait, who are we to assume that this person’s choices are ‘bad’? And if they are, is there something about their material conditions that constrains their options or makes the ‘bad’ choice the best available option?”

[provinzpoet]

On Engagement Bait

Whenever you see it, that's an additional five years. All currently active negative effects are dispelled.

A lil' essay.

I hate engagement bait - with a passion.

"Reblog if you care" "Reblog to mark your blog safe for [marginalized group X]" "Reblog or your mom dies in her sleep tonight."

"Reblog, or else."

I know most of these are made in jest. Harmless fun, right? But to me, "harmless fun" doesn’t excuse poor taste. Especially when it veers into manipulation.

So, here's a little something below the cut. If you're here for the poetry, you're free to scroll. If you're here for the ramblings, keep reading.

Either way, have another look at the duck. That's another 5 years on the house. Download it, look at it whenever - stack that immunity to last a lifetime. No engagement bait shall ever touch you again.

That little ducky up there was born in response to a post about you not having any original thought for the next five years.... unless you reblog.

It was meant as silent defiance, as a soft out. Then @bred-is-a-dumb-name reblogged my little ducky. With the following tags:

First and foremost: Thank you for speaking so clearly. Your tags were the push I needed to sit down and write this.

I. The Premise

Engagement bait plays with a simple human desire. Recognition. People want to be seen, they want to be recognized. Above all, they want to be validated.

From the early days of social media 'likes' equaled validation.

On tumblr, the currency of choice is reblogs. Reblogging equips a post with wings, allowing it to touch down on your own blog, be exposed to your own audience. The growth potential here is exponential, as reblogs don't just live tucked away in your profile, but are the groundwork of the tumblr algorithm on what content to show to its userbase.

My Thesis: You are responsible for the content you pass along to your mutuals. Even if you didn’t create it. Even if you reblogged it "ironically."

From the creator’s side, engagement bait is often a way to chase notes - a hit of serotonin from the numbers ticking up. And I get that. I love seeing my posts resonate too - reading your tags, your comments, the ways my words find you.

But I would never boost engagement through pain, coercion, or bad vibes in general. And I think no one should.

II. The Danger

Here's the catch: reblogging engagement bait feeds a manipulative feedback-loop.

But, at the same time, Let me be clear: Not all engagement bait is created equal.

Baity posts like "reblog to show your moots you appreciate them" (you know who you are! And I appreciate you too! c: ) are fine. Sure, they're meant to play the algorithm and the very human rationale that 'external validation is more valuable than internal validation' . basically: "If I reblog this post it'll mean more than if I just tell my moot they mean a lot to me".

At best, they're a reminder to be kind.

But - and this is the important part - there is also a different kind. Engagement bait like "Reblog or your mother will die tonight", "Reblog or no more creativity for 5 years".

These aren't funny to everyone. To some, they're not even neutral.

They're cruel. They are emotional abuse hidden under the guise of a 'funny context'. Of the absurdity of a duck holding that power.

Let's be real. It's not holding that power. And you'll reblog it ironically with funny tags in the vein of 'oh, better be sure, mighty duck'. Unless you don't.

Because guess what? It IS holding that power.

To those with OCD. To those in intrusive thought loops. To those with deeply rooted fear of loss. To the neurodivergent. Maybe even to you? To those, these posts can be triggers.

III. The Mechanics of Harm

To people like that, the harmless meme becomes a source of real-world stress.

It's toying with - to me - deeply problematic, psychological concepts:

Compulsion and Intrusive Thoughts For someone with intrusive thought patterns, seeing a post that ties inaction to harm can spark a cycle that’s hard to break. It’s not a meme - it’s a trigger.

Guilt-Tripping and Moral Coercion There’s a quiet cruelty to coercion wrapped in kindness. ‘Only good people will reblog’ is just a digital form of social blackmail.

False Urgency & Manufactured Stakes The moment a post tells you "do this now, or else" - it's bypassing your agency. It swaps thought for panic.

Neurodivergent Sensitivity to Harm Avoidance This isn’t about superstition. It’s about the fear of what happens if we don’t play along. That fear is real. Many neurodivergent folks have built entire internal systems around minimizing perceived danger. These posts poke at that. They exploit it.

The Illusion of Safety through Compliance Some users - especially those who’ve seen harm happen "coincidentally" after ignoring a chain post - develop ritualized engagement. It becomes a way to feel in control, even when logic says otherwise. Engagement bait can reignite old fears tied to punishment, loss, or abandonment. And I get it. These posts feel silly. But they sit in the mind like a splinter.

Yes, it's uncomfortable having it called out like this - and it should be. It's meant to be.

IV. Walk a mile in their shoes

I’m not writing this from a pulpit.

I’ve wrestled with compulsive thoughts and weird little rituals my whole life. So when I say this stuff can hurt, it’s not theoretical. It’s personal.

And I’m not here to scold. I’m just inviting you to zoom out. To consider that your reblog might have more impact than you intended.

V. Being Responsible

I try to bear responsibility for what I put out here. Tumblr is full of vulnerable, brilliant, open people. The way we talk to each other matters.

Don't get me wrong, sharing a joke is fun - But if you knew a joke would hurt your friend, you'd probably hold it back. The same logic applies here.

I'm not here to shame anyone - unless you’re making this kind of post in bad faith. If you’re knowingly feeding on people’s fears for notes? That’s not a joke. That’s cruelty. That, to me, is despicable.

All I wanted was to offer this, another point of view. And just maybe, if you’ve ever reblogged something like that without thinking, this helped you see it through a different lens.

Be nice to each other. Look out for each other.

We're all navigating this life for the first time, let's not make it any harder than it needs to be, okay?

Yours truly,

Poe

Just silently accept. The donkey will know.

[liberatingreality]

The opposite of courage in our society is not cowardice, it's conformity.

Rollo May

[wanderingcritter]

developing a kintype/theriotype via subconscious imprinting is actually so funny when u think about it, this shit deadass like when martha ate alphabet soup and suddenly learned to speak english somehow

[the-most-humble-blog]

"The tag of my shirt touching my neck"

My brain:

😱

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Writing Notes: Body Language

Body language - involves communication provided through nonverbal channels. This includes posture, facial expressions, eye movement/contact, proximity to others, and physical movements (Pease, 2017).

Body Language vs. Nonverbal Communication

Nonverbal communication - includes all forms of communicative acts except speech.

Body language - a type of nonverbal communication. It lies under the umbrella of nonverbal communication, which encompasses a broader scope of communication (Milton & Randall, 2022).

One way to differentiate between the two is to think about body language as all the nonverbal communication that can be seen (Milton & Randall, 2022).

Nonverbal communication that is not considered body language (or cannot be seen) includes repetition of words or statements, vocal characteristics of speech such as tone and volume, and sounds that might not be considered words such as “hmm” and “uh-huh.”

Some types of body language include:

Facial expressions. The face is an extremely expressive form of body language, with the ability to communicate numerous emotions without a single word. From anger to anxiety, fear to grief, embarrassment to disgust, facial expressions are one form of nonverbal communication that is considered universal across cultures and species (Keltner, 2009).

Gestures. Hand, arm, and body gestures are part of daily life. So much so that now in video calls or online meetings, a hand gesture or arm movement can simulate a thumbs-up or heart emoji. Gestures can be positive, such as an “OK” signal, or negative. Gestures are largely cultural and may express different meanings depending on geography and ethnicity.

Posture. How an individual moves and holds themselves communicates information in subtle and powerful ways. Posture includes how someone sits, holds their head, stands, walks, and engages their physical stance.

Eye contact. Our visual sense is especially important in nonverbal communication. The way we look at others can communicate many things and help to improve or detract from the flow of conversation. Eye contact can convey affection, anger, attraction, and interest, among other things.

Physical touch. Physical touch is a powerful form of body language and nonverbal communication. From hugs to handshakes, touch demonstrates a variety of messages. Touch is also a very personal way to express interest, emotion, and engagement with others and can be received well or create discomfort and tension.

Personal space. Physical space in interactions is also a very personal aspect of body language. Our need for or comfort with it depends a great deal on culture, the specific relationship, personal preferences, past experience, and the given situation. Understanding other people’s boundaries is an important component of assessing the need for personal space.

As more interpersonal communication becomes virtual, it is important to be aware of how body language is portrayed on a screen. Some ideas to consider in virtual sessions include:

Make sure lighting is sufficient so clients and/or members can see facial expressions and pick up on body movement.

Be aware of posture. It is easy to get too comfortable behind a screen and hunch over. Have good support when sitting, staying upright and attentive.

Maintain healthy eye contact. It may be beneficial to shift between looking at the screen and looking directly at the camera to avoid uncomfortable stares.

Avoid touching the face and head too much, as this conveys insecurity and can be a distraction.

Smile and use warm facial gestures, as the face is the main thing people see in virtual meetings.

Use hand gestures. This will require the computer or recording device to be placed far enough away to capture some of the upper body.

Cultural differences in body language exist. Below are samples that have been observed. It is not an extensive list of all cultural differences in body language, but it demonstrates that ongoing education and awareness are important when working with others in personal and professional settings.

Hand gestures. A thumbs-up in Western cultures is a signal of “OK,” but in the Middle East it is a sign of “up yours.” Similarly, curling the index finger (a sign to move closer) is considered impolite and rude in areas such as China and the Philippines (Cortez et al., 2017).

Eye contact. Most Western countries view eye contact as a sign of confidence and interest. In many Middle Eastern countries, eye contact between sexes is deemed inappropriate, and in some Asian cultures, unbroken eye contact is seen as aggressive and confrontational (Cortez et al., 2017).

Touch. Northern Europe and Far East cultures engage in very little physical contact or touch, where physical touch is a large part of socializing in the Middle East and Latin America (Cortez et al., 2017).

Seated positions. In Japan, sitting cross-legged is a sign of disrespect, and showing the soles of the feet is offensive in Middle Eastern countries (Cortez et al., 2017).

Interpreting Body Language

Argyle (1978) was one of the first modern researchers to study nonverbal communication and believed that humans have more than 700,000 forms of body language. Some specific areas to note for interpreting body language include paying attention to the head, face, eyes, arms, and hands.

Head. Nodding when another person is speaking is a sign that you are focused and listening. It can demonstrate that you agree with or acknowledge what is being said and validate opinions. Tilting the head to one side is also a sign of attentive listening and respect. Both of these are considered positive gestures in conversation. A lowered head or head back with a rigid neck is a sign of a negative attitude, criticism, denial, or rejection. When someone is supporting their head with their hands, this is a sign of boredom and disinterest. And angling the chin upward is a sign of arrogance and dominance (Danesi, 2022).

Face. As most people know, smiling is an open, approachable facial gesture that indicates warmth and interest. On the other hand, frowning is a sign of anger, disinterest, or disagreement with what is being communicated. Raising the eyebrows is a sign of surprise, and raising a single eyebrow tends to be an expression of disbelief. Pursed lips tend to demonstrate anger, sorrow, or a lack of acceptance, depending on the situation (Danesi, 2022).

Eyes. It is often said that the eyes are the window to the soul. Eye contact is the basis for understanding in conversation. When eye contact is avoided, it may demonstrate discomfort, uncertainty, or shyness, or signal that the person has something to hide. When someone’s eyes are narrowed, it could indicate anger. Briefly closing the eyes and quickly opening them again is called confirmatory blinking and can indicate confirmation or approval of another person (Danesi, 2022). Narrowing the eyes can mean several things, such as confusion or a need for more information. It may also indicate concentration or anger. It is also important to notice the pupils. Dilated pupils can demonstrate interest and attraction, while widening the eyes can signal surprise or excitement.

Arms and hands. Upper body postures consist largely of the arms and hands, which are the most mobile and prominent demonstrations of body language. Crossing the arms is a way for someone to create distance and demonstrates a negative attitude (Danesi, 2022). When arms are crossed and the individual is gripping their upper arms, this signals tension and discomfort. Arms crossed with balled fists are also negative body language but signal aggression and anger. Putting hands on the hips can be a sign of aggression or dominance. Putting hands in pockets signals a lack of engagement and defensiveness (Danesi, 2022).

General Tips on Interpreting Body Language

In general, self-confident people frequently look at their reflection in mirrors or windows and place themselves in a position to be the center of discussion. People demonstrate confidence through large gestures, big postures, self-assured smiles, firm handshakes, and steady eye contact. Embarrassment, insecurity, and low confidence are seen through nervous laughter, avoidance of eye contact, turning away, and avoidance (Mandal, 2014).

Nonverbal cues of fear can be seen with wide eyes, clutching, and gripping. Holding the breath, glancing around, and placing hands in front of the body is also a sign of fear (Mandal, 2014).

People demonstrate resentment with crossed arms, a stiffened body, hunched shoulders, and low vocal tone (Mandal, 2014).

Sexual interest and attraction can be seen through eye contact, exaggerated facial gestures, blinking, wetting the lips, touching the body, or crossing and uncrossing legs (Mandal, 2014).

Source ⚜ More: Notes & References ⚜ Writing Resources PDFs

Hand Movements ⚜ Common Gestures ⚜ Facial Expressions

[kafkasapartment]

Seth Abramson, Musk's biographer, explicitly labeled him a sociopath after he visited Auschwitz for a photo-op and Musk has claimed that mankind is just part of a “simulation”.

[inkiblot]

Philosophy Regarding Antiship Logic

( !! PLEASE READ !! This is my person belief and idea that I wanted to share. Please respect it! I'm always up to have a friendly chat but please don't be rude. Thank you!) I've been reflecting on modern philosophy and its influence on contemporary fandom culture, particularly the discourse between "proship" and "antiship" communities. I believe I have reached a compelling conclusion regarding the moral foundations of this debate.

To begin, let us define "antiship." The term generally refers to fans who disapprove of certain fictional ships and their supporters on the grounds that these relationships are problematic or morally objectionable. However, this raises a fundamental question: What constitutes moral wrongdoing?

This is where the antiship argument begins to unravel. The phenomenon of antishipping is primarily observed in Western society or within fandom spaces heavily influenced by Western social norms, whereas Eastern fandom cultures exhibit a relative lack of such discourse. This discrepancy suggests that the moral framework underlying antishipping is not universal but rather culturally contingent.

Drawing from the work of Friedrich Nietzsche, we can further deconstruct this issue. Nietzsche critiqued the origins of morality, particularly its foundation in Judeo-Christian teachings. If we accept his argument that morality is not an absolute truth but a construct shaped by historical and religious influences, then the moral objections posed by antishippers become questionable. How can one claim that a particular ship is "immoral" if the very concept of morality is rooted in millennia-old doctrines that are not universally accepted?

Furthermore, within the antiship community itself, there exists ongoing contention over which beliefs or ethical stances are "more morally right." This internal conflict highlights a broader philosophical issue: If morality is not an objective truth but a subjective construct, then no single moral stance can be definitively proven superior to another.

Additionally, one could argue that antishippers’ beliefs regarding the morality of certain ships could, in some cases, be interpreted as racially or culturally insensitive, if not outright xenophobic. There have been instances in which antishippers have engaged in such behavior, particularly when moral judgments about shipping are imposed upon works from cultures with different ethical and historical backgrounds. By applying a Western moral framework to media originating from non-Western cultures, antishippers risk reinforcing ethnocentric biases and disregarding cultural contexts that do not conform to their own moral perspectives.

Ultimately, the purpose of this argument is to illustrate that the antiship perspective lacks a stable foundation. Concepts of "right" and "good" are not objective realities but rather socially and historically contingent ideas. Thus, moral condemnation within fandom spaces is inherently flawed, as it relies on a framework that is neither universal nor absolute.

[ineedfairypee]

🙃

[recsspecs]

Might not shoot a person but kill an ant; is the value of life determined by the size of the body or human-centric understandings of social contributions or responsibilities?