#I read real-life research journals for scientific stuff

[getvalentined]

Thinking about finally throwing all my FF7 meta analysis and lore deep dive stuff onto a sideblog. It'd be reblogged from here, but I'd be able to organize it a little better, have a directory so people could find things more easily, and maybe it'd stop people from regurgitating things I say word-for-word for brownie points when they can just find and reblog the fucking original post(s).

[thefirstknife]

trying to do some research on Pre-Collapse Earth. did Earth change after the Traveler’s arrival? like did countries or cultures change in any way?

Absolutely.

The Traveler's arrival completely changed all humanity knew and thought about everything. Just the simple existence of the Traveler and its arrival to the solar system was enough to shatter pretty much every single concept of human knowledge and science, without even touching on its powers and paracausality.

It fundamentally changed humanity and how we relate to the world around us. Some believed we put too much trust in it. But overall, society changed due to the scientific and technological advancement that improved all human life at barely no cost.

This was the age of life, and governments did not, ever, use force against human beings. There were always alternatives. Every soul sacred. Every evil treatable.

Last Days on Kraken Mare

Last Days on Kraken Mare is really good for a lot of information about the Golden Age and how many changes happened to society. It's a pretty consistent theme about the Golden Age how cultures mixed together, which can be seen in names of pretty much every character from the Golden Age. This can also be seen through the history of the Bray family (more about them in posts here and here).

This one is interesting:

Mia van der Venne is more than 200 years old. Change comes faster, these days, and you live to see more of it. Changes like Ismail being allowed to pray not in the real direction of Mecca but in the direction Mecca would be if it were transposed from Earth to Titan. Changes like the rise and fall and rise again of the Bray cult of personality. Like the new worlds the Traveler opens up to humanity.

... as it shows how religions had to change and adapt to humanity's new way of life and interplanetary travel. As noted here, and in the posts I linked above in relation to the Brays, Islam seems to have thrived in the Golden Age and survived the Collapse. Other religions that we know of that were doing fine in the Golden Age are Judaism, Buddhism and Hinduism, the latter having been confirmed to have survived the Collapse due to Lakshmi's comments here:

She playfully taps on all four of his hands. "I am named for an ancient goddess," she says, "with as many arms as you. In her hands are dharma, kama, artha, and moksha. Law, desire, meaning, and finally, liberation. Freedom from the war of death and rebirth."

War and general violence seems to have also been largely gone, as noted from the same lore tab:

"Are you threatening to shoot me?" Mia stares at the Exo woman in disbelief. She hasn't seen a gun in nearly 50 years, and now they are not only coming into her habitat, but they're also pointed at her.

Similar sentiments, about Golden Age being a time of peace, are mentioned a few other times as well.

There were the bad side-effects to this, obviously, most notably in the story of Clovis Bray and his company. Clovis Bray took the Traveler's gifts and the advancements of the Golden Age to an extreme that led him to commit incomprehensible atrocities for his own benefit. His entire journal is a good read, as well as confidential Bray Records lore book (though can be triggery with certain descriptions of medical stuff and violence).

Outside of just general idea about what the Earth was like during the Golden Age in regards to freedom from violence and wars, as well as obvious mixing between populations and cultures, we don't know many details about specific countries and how all of it worked. There are mentions of cities and areas, but not many details about the structure of countries and states.

The only one specifically described and mentioned several times is USA, consistently described as:

Nowhere outside the retro-nationalism of the North American Empire does any private organization have such sweeping, selfish authority over knowledge which should belong to the whole human commons—and at least the twin eagles are voluntary society, answerable to higher law! Clovis Bray reeks of the old unregulated capitalism.

And here:

"Some American you are," Mia teases him. David comes from the North American Empire, Earth's biggest voluntary retro-nationalist republic, full of people who love military pageantry and muscular aerospace displays.

I have a feeling Bungie has some strong opinions about the current state of the United States of America.

[dirk-has-rabies]

Gender variance and it's link with neurodivergency

Okay so this is it going to be another long one

All quotes will be sourced with a link to the scientific journal I took it from

Okay Tumblr, let's talk gender (I know, your favorite topic) my preface on why this topic matters to me is: I'm autistic ( diagnosed moderate to severe autism) I'm nonbinary trans ( in a way that most non-autistic people don't understand and actually look down on)  and I went to college for gender study ( Mostly for intersex studies but a lot of my research was around non-binary and trans identities) I will be using the term autism as pants when I have experience with however when ADHD is part of the study I will use ND which stands for neurodivergent and yes this is going to be about xenogenders and neopronouns.

autism can affect gender the same way autism can affect literally every part of an identity. a big thing about having autism is the fact that it completely can change how you view personhood and time and object permanence and gender and literally all types of socially constructed ideas. let me also say hear that just because Society creates and enforces an idea does it mean that it doesn't exist to all people it just me that there is no nature law saying that it's real and the “rules” for these ideas can change and delete and create as time and Society evolves and changes.  gender is one of those constructs.

Now I'll take it by you reading this you know what transgender people are  (if you don't understand what a trans person is send me an ask and I'll type you up a pretty little essay lmao,  or Google it but that's a scary thought sense literally any Source or website can come up on Google including biased websites so be careful I guess LOL) anyway to be super basic trans people are anyone who doesn't identify as the gender they were assigned at Birth (yes that includes non-binary people I could do a whole nother essay about that shit how y'all keep spreading trying to separate non-binary people from the trans umbrella)  some people don't like to use the label and that is totally fine by the way.

now autistic people to view the world in a way differently than allistic (neurotypical) ppl do.  we don't take everything people teach us at 100% fact and we tend to question everything and demand proof and evidence for things before we can set it as a fact in our brains. This leads to why a lot of autistic people are atheist (although a lot of religions and this is not bashing on religious people at all I am actually a Jewish convert)  this questioning leads to a lot of social constructs being ignored or not understood At All by a lot of autistic people and personally I think that's a good thing.  allistics take everything their parents and teachers and schools teach them as fact until someone else says something and then they pick which ones to believe. autistic people study and research and learn about a topic before forming an opinion and while this may lead to them studying and believing very biased material and spitting it out as fact it can also lead them to try and Discover it is real by themselves.

because of this autistic people are more question their gender or not fall in a binary way at all as the concept of gender makes no sense to a lot of us. “ if gender is a construct then autistic people who are less aware of social norms are less likely to develop a typical gender identity”

no really look: “ children and teens with autism spectrum disorder ASD or Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder ADHD  are much more likely to express a wish to be the opposite sex compared with their typical developing peers” That was posted in 2014. we have been saying this stuff forever but no one wants to listen. the thing is gender variance (being not cisgender or at least questioning it)  has always been closely hand-in-hand with autistic and ADHD people I'm even the doctor who did that study understood right away that it all made sense the whole time: “ Dr. Strang said they were initially surprised to find an overrepresentation of gender variance among children with ADHD. However, they later realized that prior studies have shown increased levels of disruptive behavior and other behavioral problems among young people with gender variance”  SEE YOURE NOT WEIRD YOURE JUST YOU AND YOURE NOT ALONE IN THIS!!

5% autistic people who did the study were trans or questioning. it was also equal between the Sexes fun fact. that may not seem like a lot till you realize that the national average is only .7% that's literally over 700% higher than the national average. That's so many! and that's just in America.

 in Holland there was a study in 2010 “ nearly 8% of the more than 200 Children and adolescents referred to a clinic for gender dysphoria also came up positive on a assessment for ASD” they weren't even testing for ADHD so the numbers could be even higher!

now I want to talk about a  certain section of the trans umbrella that a lot of autistic people fall under called the non-binary umbrella. non-binary means anything that isn't just male or just female. it is not one third gender and non-binary doesn't mean that you don't have a gender. just clearing that up since cis people keep spreading that. non-binary is an umbrella term for any of the infinite genders you could use or create. now this is where I'm going to lose a bunch of you and that's okay because you don't have to understand our brains or emotions To respect us as real people. not many allistics can understand how we see and think and relate to things and that's okay you don't have to understand everything but just reading about this could be so much closer to respecting us for Who We Are from you've ever been and that's better than being against us just for existing.

now you might have heard of my Mutual Lars who was harassed  by transmeds for using the term Autigender (I was going to link them but if it gets traction I don't want them to get any hate)  since a lot of people roll their eyes at that  and treated them disgustingly for using a term that 100% applied correctly.  Autigender  is described as " a neurogender which can only be understood in the context of being autistic or when one's autism greatly affects one's gender or how one experiences gender. Autigender is not autism as a gender, but rather is a gender that is so heavily influenced by autism that one's autism and one's experience of gender cannot be unlinked.” Now tell me that doesn't sound a lot like this entire essay I've been working on with full sources…..

xenogenders and neopronouns are a big argument point on whether or not people “believe” in non binary genders but a big part of those genders is that they originated from ND communities and are ways that we can try to describe what gender means us in a way that cis or even allistic trans people just can't comprehend or ever understand. Same with MOGAI genders or sexualities. A lot of these are created as a way to somehow describe an indescribable relationship with gender that is so personal you really cant explain it to anyone who isnt literally the same as you.

Even in studies done with trans autistic people a large amount of them dont even fall on a yes or no of having a gender at all and fall in some weird inbetween where you KINDA have a gender but its not a gender in the sense that others say it is but its also too much of a gender so say youre agender. And this is the kind of stuff that confuses allistic trans people and makes them think nonbinary genders are making stuff up for attention, which isnt true at all we just cant explain what it feels like to BE a trans autistic person to anyone who doesnt ALREADY know how it feels.

In this study out of the ppl questioned almost HALF of the autistic trans individuals had a “Sense of identity revolving around interests” meaning their gender and identity was more based off what they liked rather than boy or girl. That makes ppl with stuff like vampgender or pupgender make a lot more sense now doesnt it? We see that even in the study: “My sense of identity is fluid, just as my sense of gender is fluid […] The only constant identity that runs through my life as a thread is ‘dancer.’ This is more important to me than gender, name or any other identifying features… even more important than mother. I wouldn't admit that in the NT world as when I have, I have been corrected (after all Mother is supposed to be my primary identification, right?!) but I feel that I can admit that here. (Taylor)” and an agreement from another saying “Mine is Artist. Thank you, Taylor. (Jessie)” now dont you think if they grew up with terms like artistgender or dancergender they would just YOINK those up right away????

In fact “An absence of a sense of gender or being unsure of how their gender should “feel” was another common report” because as ive said before in this post AUTISTIC PEOPLE DONT SEE GENDER THE WAY ALLISTIC PEOPLE SEE IT. therefore we wont use the same terms or have the same identities nor could we explain it to anyone who doesnt already understand or question the same way! Participants even offered up quotes such as “As a child and even now, I don't ‘feel’ like a gender, I feel like myself and for the most part I am constantly trying to figure out what that means for me (Betty)” and also “I don't feel like a particular gender I'm not even sure what a gender should feel like (Helen)”

Now i know this isnt going to change everyones minds on this stuff but i can only hope that it at least helped people feel like theyre not broken and not alone in their feelings about this. You dont have to follow allistic rules. You dont have to stop searching inside for who you really wanna be. And you dont have to pick or choose terms forever because just as you grow and evolve so may your terms. Its okay to not know what or who you are and its okay to identify as nonhuman things or as your interests because what you love and what you do is a big part of who you are and shapes you everyday. Its not a bad thing! Just please everyone, treat ppl with respect and if you dont understand something that doesnt make it bad or wrong it just means its not for you. And thats okay.

[thebashfulbotanist]

Mushroom Rules and Taboos

Mushroom season is in full swing! There are a few topics one should always avoid when talking with mushroom hunters. I’m a moderator on a mushroom identification group of about 30,000 people, and if you start talking about one of these topics, your post or comment will be deleted! Here are a few rules one should follow when talking with fellow mushroom hunters (and yes, I know these sound like a cross between Karen complaints and fae rules). 

1. Never ask for someone’s mushrooms spot. Asking for someone’s mushroom spot is tantamount to declaring you’re going to steal all of their mushrooms and leave them with nothing but severed stipes! This is very rude and hurtful. If you really need a hint as to where to find certain species, instead ask something like, “at what elevation in what mountain range did you find these?” That will allow the forager to give you a general answer, and won’t force them to give up their secrets. A kind forager will respond to, “Where is your mushroom spot?” with something like, “400m, Cascade foothills.” A less forgiving forager might stuff a wad of moss down your throat.

2. Do not argue about or even mention “cut versus pluck.” Whether you cut a mushroom from the ground with a knife or pluck it with your fingers has no significant effect whatsoever on the health of the mushroom population or how many mushrooms will come up the next year. There is a common misconception that cutting mushrooms with a knife is less damaging, but this is untrue. Cutting and plucking both don’t cause any harm! You’re just removing a fruiting body, and the real body of the mushroom is formed by mycelia underground. People feel really strongly about cut versus pluck, even if they know the different methods have no real effect on the fungi. Some people prefer to cut so others know they were there, or to keep their baskets clean, while others prefer to pluck to leave less visible debris in the forest, or to take more edible fungus. Either way: it should never be brought up. It’s a bannable offense in some groups - think, “We! Do not! Talk! About! The! Orangutan!”

3. Do not scold people for picking mushrooms they do not know the species of. This is called “pick shaming” in mushroom hunter communities. Sometimes, well-meaning folks will scold people for picking mushrooms they don’t know because they think it’s “wasteful” to pick a mushroom if they do not intend to eat it. This comes from a good place, since they’re obviously environmentally-conscious, but it also shows that they don’t know much about fungi. They are not plants! Revisit point 2: picking or cutting mushrooms has no effect whatsoever on the health of the fungus. More importantly, a lot of mushrooms need spore prints and a view of the entire specimen, from the base to the top of the pileus, to properly identify. In fact, to identify many toxic Amanita species, you must look at the volva at the base of the stipe, which requires pulling out the entire specimen. New foragers should indeed pick mushrooms to identify them - this is how they should learn. 

4. This is more of a pet peeve, but: do not ask “is this edible?”  or  “is this magic?” before you know what mushroom species you’re working with. Few things irritate me and other mushroom experts as much as seeing a picture of a toxic mushroom with the question, “Edible?” but no request for id. There are three reasons for this: First, I don’t want to be responsible for whether you eat a mushroom and get sick from it. I can tell you what I think it is, and there’s a 99.99% chance I’m correct, but if I’m either wrong or you have a particular sensitivity to that species (and many people do to common species like Laetiporus conifericola), I don’t want to get the blame for “telling you it was fine to eat.” Many mushroom hunters make a point of giving only the identification and letting the requester research edibility on their own for this reason. Second, me telling you if something is edible is not helping you learn to identify or hunt mushrooms, it’s just giving you a cheap way to repeatedly stick Agaricus foundinmyyardicus  on the forum and have someone else id it for you. Third, and more importantly, why are you putting things in your mouth if you don’t know what they are?  WHY?! What is wrong with you?! Mushroom maggots are also edible, but you would not eat them! 

5. Do not make unverified claims of mushroom medicinal use or, worse, offer medical advice unless you’re a trained and licensed professional. You can say, “There are some studies I found in this peer reviewed journal that indicate Trametes versicolor might be promising for such-and-such use,” but do not say stuff like, “Turkey tails cure cancer!” or, “Susan, I hear you had the flu. You should drink Ganoderma oregonense tea to boost your immune system!” Don’t risk poisoning someone, messing with their medication, or spreading pseudoscience by suggesting they use a mushroom for medicinal purposes unless you’re a trained medical professional. A forager who has casually read some journal articles is not a trained medical professional!  

6. Don’t mock folks for asking for confirmation of an “easy to identify” mushroom species. You’d be surprised by how many people misidentify species that are as “easy” to identify as Cantharellus formosus. I would much rather forty people post chanterelles and one accidentally post Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca while asking for confirmation than forty one people blindly eat their mushroom haul, thinking they’re chanterelles, only for one to get sick on Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca. Be responsible, and remember you were a beginner once, too. 

7. In identification groups, don’t give a definite identification unless you’re 100% sure of the mushroom someone is asking for an id of. If you’re unsure, say something like, “Looks like Laccaria bicolor,” or, “Compare to Amanita augusta.” Don’t say, “That’s Xerocomellus zelleri” with certainty unless you’re willing to bet on your mother’s life it’s Xerocomellus zelleri. This usually isn’t a big deal, but there was a bit of a kerfuffle on one of the mushroom forums a few years back when someone said, “That’s a matsutake!” about a deadly Amanita smithiana, and then proceeded to argue with David Arora, a legend among mycologists and the author of identification books like Mushrooms Demystified and All that the Rain Promises and More, upon being corrected. 

8. When identifying mushrooms, always use scientific names. Common names are colorful and easy to remember, but different species might have the same common name, or other people might be unfamiliar with the common name you’re using. Some species don’t even have common names! It’s totally okay to give both a scientific name and a common name, though, if the common name exists. 

[orangeoctopi7]

Family Fun Day

The latest chapter of the Spider Stan AU is here!

Stanford came down to breakfast well-rested and refreshed Saturday morning. Fiddleford was supposed to get back tomorrow night and while Ford was still hurt that his best friend would lie to him, he was eager to finally start making some headway on the portal project. Stan, on the other hand, came into the kitchen looking as disheveled as his brother had ever seen him. There were dark bags under his eyes, and he was still wearing the same clothes he’d had on last night, now wrinkled as an old man. Ford figured this was approximately what he himself had looked like during finals week in college.

“Did you sleep at all last night?” The researcher asked his brother.

Stan gave a negative grunt and made a bee-line for the coffee maker.

“What kept you up?” Ford asked curiously.

His brother shrugged. “Readin’.”

“That’s… not like you.”

“Uh… couldn’t sleep. Started reading through some of your nerd stuff, hoping it’d bore me to sleep. Didn’t work.” Stan crossed his arms and glared at an innocuous spot on the ceiling.

“Oh. Well, if you need help sleeping in the future, I’ve developed some meditation techniques that have helped me.”

Stan took several long slurps of coffee and a few mouthfuls of cold cereal before responding. “Nah. I’m just too stressed.”

“Yes, meditation is meant to help with that.”

“We both been workin’ too hard! We needa take a day off and have some fun!” Stan continued right over his brother’s comment on meditation. “McWhozit’s been havin’ fun in California this whole time, playin’ with his kid, makin’ love to his wife. We deserve a break too!”

“I thought we had fun the other day while we were weight-testing the web shooters.”

“Well, sure, but that was mixin’ work an’ pleasure. I mean actually taking a break . No tests, no studies, no scientific observation. When’s the last time you did that?”

“Well, there was the night I spent at the Corduroy's cabin… although, it turned out to be haunted. I learned a great deal about ghosts, though.”

Stan pinched the bridge of his nose. “Yeah, that. That’s exactly the kind of thing I’m talkin’ about. Even when you’re supposed to be takin’ it easy, you end up doing research and/or almost dying. But not today! I officially declare this Family Fun Day! I’m gonna make sure you take a break. What do you do for fun in this hick town?”

Ford rubbed his chin thoughtfully. “Well… there’s an arcade downtown. I hear they just got a new, cutting-edge game!”

Stan rolled his eyes. “Ugh, nerd stuff.”

“Oh, come on, there’s plenty of games where you punch things! You’ll love it!”

“Alright, fine. If that’s what you really wanna do, I’ll give it a shot.”

* * *

The arcade was small, dark, and noisy. Stan was honestly surprised his brother liked it here. He remembered his brother liking quiet, brightly lit places, like the window seat at the library, or an empty beach. The arcade was… overstimulating.

First, Ford dragged him over to what was apparently the newest and most popular game in the whole place. The art on the side of the cabinet showed a gorilla carrying off a damsel in distress, chased by a guy with a red hat and big mustache. It reminded Stan of one of his favorite Harry Claymore movies. Unfortunately, it seemed like every kid and nerd in town wanted to play this game.

“They really should devise a system where they can call up your number when it’s your turn to play.” Ford grumbled as he looked at the long line crowded around the console. “Well, I’m fairly sure that’s just a single-player anyway. Let’s find something cooperative.”

“Um, ok.” Stan followed his brother to another cabinet with no line. It was painted black, with the words BIRD FIGHT written in fancy script at the top, and a knight riding a beautiful white bird flying across the side. Stan watched the pixels move across the screen. “So in this game, you play as a sword-wielding knight… riding a swan?”

Ford scratched the back of his neck sheepishly. “I know it’s silly, but it’s a really fun cooperative game.”

“Are you kidding?” Stan laughed. “That’s the most intimidating thing I’ve ever seen! I tried to break into a mansion with swans on the grounds once. They gave me way more trouble than any guard dog ever did. I almost lost an eye!”

Stan struggled to learn the controls, despite Ford’s efforts to explain them to him. It had a control stick, but it only went left or right. To fly, you had to repeatedly tap the button to flap the swan’s wings. Stop flapping, and you would slowly descend.

“This is dumb.” Stan complained as he died a second time. “Why can’t I go up and down usin’ the stick thing? And how’d my guy get all the way on the other side of the screen all of a sudden!?”

“It’s a wrap around.” Ford replied, as though that meant something.

They made it through the first wave of enemies, mostly thanks to Ford, but it wasn’t long until Stan lost all four of his lives and he was stuck just watching his brother play, because he refused to waste more quarters on this thing. “This is too complicated.” He huffed.

“Well, let’s play something a little simpler.” Ford suggested. They wandered to the back of the arcade, Ford looking over all the different options, trying to decide which one Stan would enjoy. A light gray-and-black cabinet in a dark corner caught his eye. “Hmm, I haven’t seen this one before… Corner of Contradiction? Looks like a beat-em-up, I’m sure you’d enjoy that.”

The controls were certainly more straightforward than Bird Fight. There was a control stick to move your character around the screen, one button labeled “PUNCH”, the other labeled “JUMP”. Enemies always came in from the right side of the screen, so Stan didn’t have to split his attention as much either. He definitely took to this one much more quickly than the last game, but he was still clearly lagging behind Ford in skill. They made it through a whole level before Stan finally ran out of lives again, and Ford knelt down to add some more quarters to allow him to continue playing.

“Oh, what’s this?” The researcher paused when something caught his eye. When he stood back up, he was holding a small scrap of paper with some sort of symbols scribbled onto it. “Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A…” He read out loud. “I suppose B could be the jump button…” Ford input the code, and suddenly both of their life counters read 30. “Fantastic!”

Stan groaned. “We’re gonna spend all day playin’ this game!”

“Aren’t you having fun?” Ford shot him a concerned glance.

“Well sure, but I don’t wanna stay here playin’ this one game through 30 lives, even if I am losing three of them a minute!”

Ford smirked. “You’re just jealous that I’m actually better than you at fighting for once.”

“Please.” Stan scoffed. “Pushin’ a button isn’t fighting. If any of these games were anything like real fighting, I’d cream you.”

Ford’s face lit up. “I think I know just the game!” Once again, he led Stan through the arcade, this time coming to a stop at a very old game cabinet decorated like the American Flag. Instead of buttons or a control stick, it had two red boxing gloves attached to levers. PIXELWEIGHT CHAMP by SHMEGA the sign at the top read.

Stan grinned and cracked his knuckles. “Now this is more like it!”

The gloves were a little small, obviously meant for children, but Stan managed to squeeze his hands in. It wasn’t exactly like real boxing, but he still preferred it to the clunky control sticks and buttons of the other games. This game could tell if he was punching up, down, or even swinging a hook! Ford, for his part, seemed happy to just stand and watch his brother play for a while.

Stan made it through several bouts before finally reaching the final boss. It was the first opponent the game had thrown at him that really gave him any trouble. It kept on dodging every blow he aimed at the computerized contender. Finally, in a fit of frustration, he fell back on his signature move.

“Left Hook!” he shouted.

The left-hand controller ripped out of the cabinet with a metallic shriek and a sputter of sparks.

The twins gaped at the broken and now lightly smoking game before them.

“Time to go.” Stan said quickly, dropping the broken controller on the floor.

“Agreed.”

* * *

“Welp, that was a disaster.” Stan grunted as they sped away in his car. “Hopefully nobody calls the cops.”

“Perhaps, but at least I finally found a game you had fun with.” Ford smiled as he jotted down the cheat code he’d learned earlier in his Journal.

“Yeah, but now we got nothin’ to do for the rest of the day. Yeesh, this car is like an oven.” Stan griped, rolling down the windows. “There a pool in this town?”

“Yes, but I wouldn’t recommend we go there.” Ford made a disgusted face. “It’s not exactly sanitary and I have reason to believe one of the life guards is a berserker.”

Stan grimaced. “Yeah, public pools are basically like underwater public busses. But it’s just so stinkin’ hot!”

Ford flipped absentmindedly through his Journal, suddenly stopping when a particular page caught his eye. “We should go to the beach!”

“I ain’t drivin three hours back to Portland just for the beach.”

“No, the beach at Lake Gravity Falls. It’s not exactly like the beach we grew up with but… it does remind me of home.”

“Alright, beach it is! Let’s swing back to your place and grab some swim stuff.”

* * *

The lakeside beach was very different from Glass Shard Beach. For one, it smelled a lot better. The shade of the surrounding cliffs and trees were much welcomed relief from the burning sun. Still, the gentle lapping waves of the lake were nothing compared to the majesty of the ocean. Ford didn’t have an extra pair of swim trunks, so Stan had to acquire some from the nearby bait and tackle shop while his brother wasn’t looking.

“Strange.” Ford mused as he observed the deserted lakeshore. “Given the extreme temperatures and the impending start of the school year, I expected this place to be packed.”

“It was, this mornin’.” The grizzled old lady who ran the bait and tackle shop wheezed ominously. “But somethin’ washed ashore that spooked ‘em all away!”

“What was it?” The researcher asked excitedly.

“Oh no you don’t!” Stan grabbed him by the shoulder and pulled him back. “Family Fun Day, remember?”

“A giant tooth!” The woman cackled.

“Stanley, come on!” Ford pleaded.

“You need a break, genius!”

“Wasn’t this morning at the arcade enough?”

“Nope. Not for how long you’ve been without one. Now put on some sunblock. This tooth thingy will still be there tomorrow.”

“I bet you twenty dollars it won’t.”

“You should really know better than to bet against me by now.”

* * *

Stan found them a spot on the beach with plenty of shade from a large tree, with plenty of branches hanging over the water, and a couple of large fallen logs that made a good place to sit and leave their stuff without getting sand in everything.

“Y’know, it’s a good thing nobody else is here. Cuz look what I brought!” Stan pulled out one of the web shooters. “The world’s greatest rope swing!”

When Ford didn’t answer, he looked up to see his brother standing on the taller of the two logs, a pair of binoculars in hand, staring at a spot about a mile up the beach where Stan could see the giant tooth the old lady had mentioned. It was easily the size of his car. Ford stuffed the binoculars in his pocket, started a quick sketch in his Journal, and picked them up again for another look. Stan rolled his eyes with a sigh, put on the web shooter, and thwiped a line onto the binoculars, yanking them away with a flick of his wrist.

“Hey!” Ford whined.

“Hey yourself. We’re here to have fun, remember?”

“This is fun to me!” the researcher steamed.

“I know, nerd, but if you keep on working every day without takin’ a break every once in a while, even if it is fun for you, you’re gonna run yourself ragged!”

Ford grumbled, but he couldn’t help but see the sense in his brother’s words. He really hadn’t stopped studying and exploring and theorizing in the past six and a half years, not even for a day. And yet before Bill had proposed the idea of discovering the dimension of weirdness, he’d felt stuck in a rut. He still did, in some respects. Could it be due to burnout?

Still, he wasn’t about to tell Stan he was right. He put his Journal down with a beleaguered sigh. “It’s probably just something to do with the height-altering crystals.” He then looked up with a grin. “So, are you proposing a jumping contest?”

“You know it!” Stan shot a line up to the highest sturdy branch he could find hanging over the lake. “So, has this gauntlet got like, I dunno, a quick release button or something?”

“Actually, it should be waterproof.”

“Should be?”

“Well, I never got around to testing it.”

“Why does that not surprise me? Alright, I’ll take first swing.”

“Why do you get the first swing?” Ford protested.

“Because I’m the one who’s used these things the most, and I’m the most likely to survive if something goes wrong.”

The researcher rolled his eyes, but let his brother proceed with the first swing. Stan ran down the beach, lept off one of the logs, and let the line swing him over the water, where he released the line and sailed forward into the lake with a resounding splash.

“How was that?” Stan asked as soon as he poked his head back out of the water.

“Amateurish!” Ford grinned smugly. “You weren’t even close to the maximum distance of your swing, and your release arc was shallow.”

“Alright, Dr. Physics, let’s see you do better!” Stan splashed him and then threw the web shooter to the shore.

Ford ran along the largest log, leaping off the end towards the water before firing the web shooter up at a high branch. The line held fast, and whipped him out over the water. Just at the farthest point of the pendulum swing, Ford swung his legs out for a little more momentum, then released the line, throwing himself in a long arc before finally crashing down into the lake. He’d almost doubled Stan’s distance.

“Hah!” Ford laughed triumphantly as he swam back to shore.

“Pch, I can do that.” Stan scoffed.

“Well then, why didn’t you?”

“Cuz I didn’t know how until you just showed me, genius.”

Stan’s second attempt followed Ford’s example. He ran along the log and jumped into the air, but he could jump much higher than his brother, and his enhanced senses allowed him to pinpoint exactly where the best place to anchor for his line would be in that split-second of air-time. As the line stretched over the water, Stan shifted his weight and his grip, basically throwing himself off the end of the swing. He practically flew over the water before splashing down, easily doubling his brother’s distance.

“The student has become the master.” Stan grinned when he saw Ford’s shocked expression. They continued to use the web shooters as a rope swing for another couple of hours, each of them improving their techniques to go higher and farther each time, although Ford could never beat Stan’s distance again. Eventually, the researcher gave up on improving his own distance, and set about figuring out how to help Stan break his own record.

“It’s all about momentum.” Ford explained. “You’ve already perfected throwing yourself off the line at the farthest point of the pendulum’s swing, in order to produce the farthest arc you can. In order for you to reach even further into the lake, you’ll need more momentum, and at this point, the best way to add more momentum is to chain together more swings.”

“So, like we were doin’ in the forest a few days ago?”

“Exactly.”

Stan felt his stomach churn at the memory of how the branch had snapped, how he’d unexpectedly started falling. He wasn’t exactly afraid of heights anymore… he was just afraid of being up high and something going wrong. Still, he’d really gotten the hang of swinging today, and chances were even if something did go wrong, he’d just splash down into the lake. That would be fine.

“Ok, I’ll give it a shot.”

Stan climbed up one of the big pine trees a few yards back from the beach, found a sturdy branch to stand on, picked out his first anchor, and leapt into the air. Time seemed to slow down as he reached the end of his first swing. He picked out another anchor over the lake, released his first line, and swung out above the water. He could feel his own weight pulling him forward even as he came to the end of his rope, the momentum Ford had been going on about. Stan just shifted to let the weight carry him on further, and let go of the line. The air rushed past him as he continued up another foot before gravity finally started to overcome his forward motion. When he finally splashed into the water, he was so far from the shore, his brother looked like a little doll.

“Hah, I’m gonna be half-way into the lake if I go any further!” Stan laughed when he finally made it back to shore.

“You probably could, if you got swinging fast enough. Or if we added more weight.”

“More weight, huh?” Stan mused.

“I suppose we could stick water bottles to you, like we did with the car, although I fear that may increase the risk of a bad belly-flop….” Ford trailed off as he saw his brother grinning mischievously at him. “What?”

“I know a way we can double our weight.”

“‘We’? Oh no, no, no, no. No!”

* * *

“The greatest mystery is how I let you talk me into these things.” Ford grumbled, clinging to his brother’s back like a baby monkey.

“Quit your whining, I’m the one who’s afraid of heights.”

“...I honestly thought you were over that. What with the climbing buildings and all.”

“Eh, it’s complicated. I’m still not great with heights, but if I have something sturdy to hold onto or a reliable way to catch myself, it doesn’t bother me as much.”

They reached the large branch that Stan had used for a jumping-off platform before. Stan lined up his first anchor while Ford tried his best not to throw his brother off-balance. “You ready?” The Spider Man asked.

Ford took a deep breath before nodding. “Ready.”

At first, it wasn’t too different from the rope swing, except now he was holding onto his brother’s shoulders for dear life. Then they reached the end of the first pendulum swing and Ford felt his stomach leap up as they briefly achieved weightlessness. Then the forward yank of the next line set his heart racing as they shot up, over the water. There was one final moment of weightlessness, and Ford let out a holler of delight before finally dunking into the water.

It was better than any roller-coaster.

They came up out of the water gasping and laughing, splashing and shouting with triumph. It wasn’t exactly half-way into the lake, but they’d certainly gone farther than ever before. Unfortunately, that also meant it was a much farther swim back to shore. By the time they got back, the sun was starting to set.

“Welp, better lay down and dry off in the sun while we still can.” Stan mused, pulling off the web shooter and trying to find a spot on the log that wasn’t covered in shade.

“Actually, I think I know a faster way to dry off.” Ford picked up the gauntlet and gave his brother a significant look.

“Really, you wanna go again?”

“Just the swinging bit. The air rushing past us will dry us off in no time.”

Stan rolled his eyes. “Alright, if you’re sure.”

The second time wasn’t nearly as scary to Ford, although he got the feeling Stan was still a little apprehensive about swinging with a passenger. Still, they swung through the trees together with little problem. It was thrilling. And while it certainly dried them off, the rushing air coupled with the dropping air temperature presented a new problem.

“Cccold!” Stan stuttered as they came to a stop back at the beach where they had left their things. He quickly changed back into his jeans and a jacket.

“We’ll have to remember to do this to dry off while the sun is still high, in the future.”

“Oh, so you’re sayin’ you’d do Family Fun Day again?”

Ford rolled his eyes, but smiled. “I’m sure you’ll force me to take breaks more often than once every six years.”

DOG KLJQ TTIE Y KUZ LLW? BHMB L QSODM QCXT! U KLL’Y WMQE RT FUVLJQY EPZU DOGZ HMWLP PZU YO DMLJQY BICRD!

[bettertheworld]

How and why fear scares people into eating meat.

Did you ever wonder why you ate what you ate as a child? Do you wonder why you continue to eat what you eat? Or are you simply on autopilot because you don’t think it matters all that much and you basically have it all figured out? Or do you feel powerless, and confused with the amount of fake news out there about food and you’re not sure where the hell to find real information? The answer does not lie in marketing, it lies in scientific research; geeks required.

Quick disclaimer - I’ve been through University and have a Bachelor of Science with a minor in Psychology and am trained as a Paramedic and for all of the years I’ve been out of school, I’ve become a geeky Paramedic thereby educating myself with regard to emergency medicine and the causes of our main killers.  

What I find to be most useful with regard to school is how I am able to read research and make sense of it.  Giving credit to where credit is due is not as easy as it seems - this is why ‘that guy’ or ‘my friend’s friend’ literally knows nothing, and anyone who refers to life rules from those sources, does not know as much as a person who refers to scientific journals. 

Now with regard to food, I’ll be able to help you digest some of what’s out there and help you critically think for yourself. I won’t do it for you, but I’ll help you do it yourself, so bring your critical thinking, and bring your skepticism, I welcome it.

“Everything in moderation”, we’ve been told, except moderation has never been shown to be effective, i.e. reversing certain illnesses the way a specific diet has.  Can you guess which diet has cured a the most common killers in today’s society?  If you were able to guess, do enjoy this write-up, if not here’s a hint - it contains no animal products and I encourage you to open your mind and do some research after reading this. If this challenges you to your core and are offended, you are probably upset that your feelings and actions are in direct conflict, but that’s okay - real information will fix that.  

On the topic of real news, here’s a few gems; butter from dairy in your coffee is never healthy, eggs are never part of the healthiest diet possible, and bacon is the quickest way for you to cause cancer and heart attacks in yourself.  Eggs are the most concentrated glom of cholesterol you can eat on the planet and most people are born lactose-intolerant because we’re not cows, we’re people, so why would it ever be a good idea to challenge the body in such a way that it actually doesn’t want to be? In later write-ups, I’ll discuss the ‘Lac-operon’.

One thing you’ll need to do is always consider the source of research.  Just because Dr. Oz or some “Doctor” or “professional” goes on TV blabbing out the benefits, of X, Y and Z or saying “the relationship isn’t strong enough to prove anything”, you have to ask yourself, who has done the research on the topic and who paid for the research to be done? 

Rich people paying for research have a reason for doing research, it’s always about money, and they always get what they want in some way, shape or form due to the flexibility of statistical analysis. Rich people with money who have gone out of their way to pay for research, are also most likely to be taking advantage of nearly everyone downhill - kind of the way Trump does business.  The sick-minded narcissistic ways the meat and dairy industries are run, if admitted by everyone would shudder in disbelief.  The veil that has been pulled down before all of our eyes is real, and needs to be lifted.

The problem with foods is that as the research comes out, then another paper comes out to deny the ‘realness’ of the original - now who do you believe? This is especially true when it comes to foods containing cholesterol - animals products. You might wonder why animal products contain cholesterol? Because their cell walls contain cholesterol, just like ours do. Why do companies want to exploit this? Animals do not have rights the way humans do, so if companies can get away with exploiting animals and make a bunch of money doing so, and people are dumb enough to support this because they need huge amount of protein (because they don’t know how little they actually need), then my friend, you are indeed a sucker supporting Trump-like meat and dairy businessmen.

Cholesterol is needed by the human body to have strong cell walls and it’s made inside our own bodies, it’s never required to be eaten because your body makes all it needs. When people eat cholesterol, consider the fact that it is a solid at room temperature and has a melting point of 148 degrees Celsius. That means until you get to that temperature, it’s a solid - this is why it gets stuck in your arteries, and remaining in your arteries until it’s pushed into the walls or is broken down; if you’re smart enough to stop eating cholesterol.  

Our bodies make what it needs, you never need to eat cholesterol, so saying certain foods have ‘good’ and ‘bad’ cholesterol is like saying cyanide, sometimes is ‘good’ or ‘bad’.  We all know that ALL CYANIDE IS BAD CYANIDE, but we don’t all know that ALL CHOLESTEROL IS BAD CHOLESTEROL.  We know all cyanide is bad cyanide because the effects of cyanide poisoning are very quick and easy to notice, but the effects of cholesterol-poisoning have a delayed onset - so long that many of us could never piece it altogether, and we call the manifestations of this poisoning ‘heart attacks’.

Do you know there are strong correlations between certain types of foods and certain illnesses? Do you know you can avoid the major killers in today’s society by avoiding the bad foods? It’s difficult to say what’s ‘good’ and what’s ‘bad’ because both of those denotations are subjective, but when it comes to cancer, heart attacks, strokes, the science is clear, animal products are killing you, slowly but surely - decreasing the years you get to live on this earth, and decreasing the quality of life that you live.  

Wouldn’t it be wonderful, a life not fearing cancer, heart attacks, high blood cholesterol, and best of all, not fearing high blood pressure which is also called “the silent killer”? All too often you hear people say, “Yeah, my father died of a heart attack, so I will one day too”. While there is a wee bit of truth to this statement, the amount of greatly overestimated. Habits and traditions are what are subconsciously passed down to next generation, thereby the body tends to react similarly as time goes because you’re eating the same foods with roughly the same body. 

But what is hugely undervalued is with a change of habits, i.e. change of food sources, comes great opportunity to change your destiny. Just because dad had a heart attack or had cancer, does not mean you’re going to have one or die from one. Even if we have cancer genetics, certain foods promote ‘cancer-genetics’ and others thwart these genes from producing cancer.

Once you remove the foods that are associated with hardening of the arteries, you don’t have to worry about hardening arteries anymore. Without hardening arteries and clogging them with cholesterol, your risk for a heart attack was just cut down to nearly to a huge degree. Food matters, food matters a lot.

There are many peer-reviewed scientific journals out there - pubmed being a great starting place, which discusses how plant-based whole foods diets are reversing diabetes and reversing clogged arteries associated with heart attacks?  Did the meat-producers forget to tell you this? 

If my memory serves me correctly, it was something like 84% of diabetic patients, within 20 weeks of a new whole foods plant-based diets were off their diabetic medications having fixed their insulin resistance. Diabetes is a problem of physical nature, if all or most of the sites where the sugar goes from your vasculature to your functional cells of your body are blocked with cholesterol and other fats, then you my friend are ‘diabetic’.  When you clear those sites with a whole-foods, plant-based diet you have essentially cured yourself of diabetes. Animal-fats have higher boiling points than that of vegetable sources, this is why they’re problematic for us. 

Similarly, this same vegan diet was proven to erode the cholesterol in the arteries, thereby cleaning up the arteries, and with regard to the heart, you’ve now decreased your likelihood of having a heart attack.  The vegan diet works for both illnesses because both of these problems happen in the tubes of the body, the highway, the vasculature, arteries to be exact. 

With diabetes, you remove the cholesterol and stuff that sticks to it, thereby allowing insulin to let sugar into the cells from the arteries, and with heart attacks, you allow blood to circulate through the coronary arteries more freely now that the plant-based whole foods diet has eroded away the cholesterol and other fat-soluble substances stuck into the walls thereby blocking the blood-flow.

This is where we discuss the problem with saying ‘everything in moderation’.  Science can now say, with certainty that a plant-based whole foods diet will fix your arteries nearly all of the time, but no one can say that eating one piece of meat per day will allow the same progress to occur - so let’s critically think, is ‘everything in moderation’ even true? Who made this garbage up? My guess is probably some Doctor who was making allowances for him or herself!  

We all love to hear good things about our bad habits, but you’ll never hear a teacher tell a student, “It’s ok that you don’t really try very often in my class, everything in moderation my dear.” So why do we give ourselves allowances based on our own wants when it comes to food? If you’re a scholar, if you’re a critical thinker, if you value your body, you need to begin asking yourselves the questions that matter; how much do I value my health - do I even care about myself, or the future? Or maybe you aren’t a scholar, thinker, or maybe you don’t care and that’s why you refuse to understand what science has proven. Again, if you take offence to this, you’re at war with yourself.  Everything I write is based on science but I do not write the sources in.

When I discovered these facts, I went on a rampage, trying to help everyone, wasting my energy and burning bridges, but now I’m leaving it all out on the table for like-minded people to read. I assume we all are like-minded because everyone just wants the best for themselves and their loved ones. It might be shocking to be challenged, so I’ll do my best to maintain neutrality, but what you might discover by following me might change the course of your life and sometimes we need a little challenge, but not too much.

You can’t free an oppressor, or the oppressed with oppression itself, it must be with deliberate care and without imposing ones beliefs, it must be with information, not by force. While I could use the platform to shred fools who base their decisions not on science but tradition, instead I’m going to empower you and not make you feel stupid for being duped - because we all have been duped by the meat and dairy industry.  I want to continue to critically think, and beg for you to do the same.

Did you think you had free will when you were developing your eating habits and family traditions? Did you think you chose your food yourself with a sense of ownership? Or did you just want to fit in with the rest of your family? Did you not want to disappoint your parents by not finishing food prepared for you? Did you want to be guilty of letting an animal die for you, and you denying eating it forcing your parents to throw it out and waste its life? Did you want to avoid being called and feeling ungrateful? Was trying to be a good boy or girl causing you to compromise your thoughts and feelings? Did you love zoos but ask yourself, why am I eating this animal? And why don’t we have pet cows? Why do we think dogs are cute and cows not?  So many children have thoughts that are repressed and never entertained by true critical thought, this is a crime of parenting.

Now circulating all over the internet are videos of cows playing fetch with fitness balls, just like dogs fetch a tennis ball. Imagine you could watch the video  without thinking that because you eat meat, that you’ll completely disregard the emotions you’re feeling of how cute the cow is, so that it won’t be hard to eat your next beef-oriented meal? 

Conversely, imagine you are healthy, strong, full of energy and vegan person who can fully enjoy videos of cute animals because you don’t see them as food, you see them as sentient beings capable of feelings, social structure, language and emotion. This is just one way people differ because of food choices.

This is how people are split when it comes to cute animal videos.  No self-proclaimed animal lover wants me to bring up this comparison because for me to even suggest eating a dog is the same as eating a cow, the omnivore will become so enraged that they won’t be able to focus on the conversation and they’ll begin hating on this argument before I finish the thought - likely because they’ve repressed the thought in their own mind. I think eating all animals is completely wrong and completely necessary, but is eating a cow any different than eating a dog? Not in the slightest, but facts don’t change belief systems - they polarize the crowd

Why are some people not able to accept this logic? It’s because of a little thing called Carnism.  A viral belief system where some foods and animals should be looked at as food, while other animals can be considered cute and not-to-be eaten.  To one, a cow might be considered cuter than a dog, and a dog might be considered cuter than a cow to some, but to the alien coming from a different planet, they would not be able to see why which is cuter because they have not been affected by carnism itself.  If a cow and a dog are both animals, then they are both food or neither are food. Why does one get preferential treatment in today’s society? Carnism is to blame for why. Carnism is with a simple google search, a basic idea that meat is there for us to eat, and if we’re not eating it, we could be because we’ve conquered the world, so it’s now there for the taking; aside other important points.  

Who does carnism affect? Everyone who thinks they need meat and everyone who despises the idea of people who think they need meat to survive? Who started carnism? When science got interested in food, we made some inaccurate discoveries and statements, and we’ve sort of run with that. A 200 year-old science paper by Liebig which has been debunked plays a small role, but companies who saw the profit in exploiting animal protein are the true perpetrators of this. 

How do they do it? Marketing.  Marketing is a genius tool that highlights the good, and ignores the bad.  Marketing is telling you what you want to hear about something that has no part in offering what you’re being told it offers. Marketing also tells you that if you wear the same sunglasses as Jason Statham, that you’ll be as desirable as Jason Statham. Clearly you’ve been affected by marketing because if you put on the same sunnies as him, you’re not going to resemble Jason Statham because you are not Jason Statham, and have a different bone structure than him.  As a result, the sunglasses will have a different effect on you, and more than likely you just wasted $600. Buying what other people wear won’t make you look like them, but your feelings tell you otherwise - welcome to the level of marketing - your feels. And also, he’s 5′8, sorry if you thought he was 6′1. 

Feeling a certain way about something is what determines our beliefs then our actions.  When people feel that they need meat, they defend their ‘right’ to eat it, instead of listening to the ways you can get everything meat offers, and be so much more healthier.  Try questioning an omnivore as to why they eat meat and then prepare yourself for heaping pile of shit excuses, and subjective garbage because none it’s true or valuable. 

Humans have needs for amino acids, not meat.  We need some fats and are pretty damn happy with certain types of carbohydrates.  When it comes down to it, we need a fuel source, and a machine to move us that turns energy into movement, we’ll call this tool our muscles, we need muscles.

Since muscles move us, we need to fuel them. What are the ways we can do do? Plants and or animal products. If we think that we need to eat cow’s muscles for energy, we should know that this is completely false.  Let’s discuss why this is not optimal.

For us to use muscles for energy, we have to eat that muscle, break it down, store it, then mobilize it for energy, and this process takes time and energy and you can refer to it as a slow process. On the other hand, if we eat carbohydrates, these sources are quickly accepted by the body and are ready to be used for energy extremely quickly by comparison.  

If you’ve seen The Gamechangers movie, there is a study that uses beet juice and proves that you’re going to be able to cycle longer if working out after drinking beet juice vs not drinking it at all.  This is because you’re providing a high-octane fuel source vs using meat which contains much less high-octane fuel to the point we’ll just call it low-octane fuel source. In addition using protein for energy requires you to be in starvation mode and you’re deciding to break down your body because there is no high-octane fuel around, this is  not optimal - this sounds a lot like chronic fatigue.  Using meat for energy is not optimal, not even close.

How does beet juice then offer us the chance to have stronger, better muscles? The juice offers energy that your muscles use quickly and readily.  From my time at the University of Guelph where I completed my undergrad, I took a Cardiorespiratory Physiology Lab course, and I sure am glad that I did.  I learned that whatever system you challenge, you will have gains in. So, if I provide my leg muscles with energy thereby allowing them to cycle, and I challenge my leg muscles with exercise just beyond what it comfortably, there will be growth - you will change the physical structure of individual cells.  This means that the next time you challenge these muscles in the same way, the work that was 10% beyond your comfort zone, next time is 9% beyond your comfort zone, which means you have experienced 1% growth.  

How did this growth happen? You fed your body what it needed for growth to occur. Did you need meat for this growth to happen? No, you needed essential amino acids. Amino acids that are made by plants. All amino acids are made by plants, and so many plant sources contain every single amino acid. As long as you’re challenging your body beyond it’s comfort zone and you’re feeding it the building blocks it requires for growth, growth will happen. Animals are not required, amino acids are, amino acids that can all be provided by plants.

The difference between vegans and omnivores is that vegans say, “No, it’s not ok for us to exploit animals for any reason”, but omnivores don’t want to discuss this matter because they feel that meat is required, so they do not fully allow themselves to empathize with what they’re eating, if they did, an omnivore would not be able to eat the cow, pig or chicken. 

If it comes down to taste; what a greedy reason it is to kill a sentient being taste is?  If it comes down to nutritional needs, saying you need animals to be healthy is a lot like thinking you need to only breathe oxygen from Nepal, because only Nepalese oxygen provides me with what I need. False!  If we’re eating food and getting enough amino acids from a plant-based whole foods diet, is it in any way deficient compared to amino acids from animals? The answer is no, and additionally, you’re not priming yourself for cancer, heart disease, diabetes, other cardiovascular disorders.

Just a few thoughts maybe we should revisit.  Were you given a choice between eating meat and not eating meat? When you were 5 years old and could conceptualize that you’re eating another life, did your parents sit you down and ask you how you felt about it or even talk to you about it? Did they even bother to tell you that you’re eating a sentient being capable of thought and having feelings? Do you think your parents had a clue about what they were feeding you beyond whatever food guide was popular at the time? Did you know that food guides are based on financial relationships and not what’s actually best for your body (until recent history in Canada)? Does this information enrage you the way it did to me? Do you know what government subsidies are? Does it make sense that you can find burgers at fast food joints for super cheap which contained the life of an animal, but can never find a ridiculously cheap head of broccoli? In fact, have you ever seen a cheap salad at McDonald’s? No, and you never will, because there are no government subsidies for lettuce or anything that goes in a salad.  The government is in bed with whoever pays them the most money, and due to the fear that people have regarding becoming protein-deficient, 98% of people are afraid to turn their back on meat and dairy. I did this is 2014 and to this day, it’s been the best choice of my life.

The interesting fact is in the 1950s and 1960s, the FDA artificially increased the amount of protein ‘needed’ to sell more dairy and meat. Especially after Babe Ruth died of throat cancer due to smoking. At the time ‘Doctors’ were claiming cigarettes weren’t bad for you or cancer-causing, the relationship ‘wasn’t strong enough’.  The baseball community should all be vegan for this reason alone.

If we’re human, always been and always will be human, then out there somewhere is a perfect diet for us, but what if we’re too afraid to eat the healthiest diet for us because of scare tactics used by the meat and dairy industry? Wouldn’t that be sad, maybe even criminal? I think so, but you only have yourself to blame once someone informs you or you read this.

I want to discuss the process of cooking food, but I want to get into that next time, the idea of what’s on the label, vs what’s on your plate after you cooked the carcinogens into it, and the vitamins out of it.

Ask yourself, what is the meat and dairy industry doing for you, aside from providing you with a much-less-than-healthy source of calories? They’re providing you with cancer, cardiovascular disease, double-standards, an emotional haze and basically, you work for them while they make you sick - this sounds a lot like the exploitation of you, the consumer. You think it’s time to wake up yet?

[jaybug-jabbers]

All-Glitch Pokemon Blue Run Pt1: An Introduction

The following is an archive of a series of e-mails exchanged between ‘junebug15@pokemail.com’ and ‘profwg@pokemail.com.’ 

Please keep this information classified.

6/10/97 10:00am

Greetings!

I am a news reporter with the Butterfree Bugle. I received a tip about a young lady who was found unconscious just outside the town limits of Pallet Town. She reportedly wandered out there in pursuit of "a strange noise."

I am currently attempting to contact this individual so that I might interview them for further details. I would greatly appreciate any help you could offer in tracking her down. The safety of the residents of Pallet Town are my top priority. Such news could serve to alert others to any potential problems or threats in the area.

I thank you in advance for your assistance,

-W. G., Butterfree Bugle

---

6/11/97 7:22pm

Butterfree Bugle Reporter,

I think I may be able to help you locate this person. Do you work at the local office in Pewter City? Did you plan on conducting interviews there? It's odd, but I can't seem to find any W.G.'s listed on your website.

-J

---

6/11/97 9:08pm

J,

Yes, I am a recent hire, and our website has not been updated in some time, unfortunately. I do apologize for that.

I'm actually stationed quite a distance from Pewter, so I was hoping to conduct the interview over the phone or even online.

I am quite pleased to hear that you can assist me! You do live in Pallet Town, then? Did you know this young woman personally? Perhaps you could provide an address or phone number for me. This would help enormously.

Thank you greatly,

W.G.

---

6/12/97 11:31am

Butterfree Bugle Reporter,

To be honest, I do want to help you, but I have some concerns. There's plenty of scams going around online. I kind of need you to provide me some credentials or something. I hope you understand.

-J

---

6/12/97 1:06pm

J,

I understand perfectly. You are wise to take such precautions.

Please see the attached file with my work ID. I trust this will be sufficient.

-W.G.

---

6/13/97 12:14pm

"Butterfree Bugle Reporter",

I just got off the phone with the Butterfree Bugle. Spent an hour talking to them. They've never heard of you. I also described the "work ID" you sent me. It's nothing like what they use for their employees.

Buzz off, creep.

-J

---

6/13/97 11:44pm

J,

All right. Let me start again. I beg of you to read this before you block my address.

I apologize for the subterfuge. The fact is I must be extremely cautious in my line of work, and that sometimes requires a cover story. I can't very well e-mail half the country while spreading my name and purpose around.

However, I strongly suspect you are the very person I have been attempting to locate. So I will reveal to you the truth. I can only hope that you are cautious about what you do with this knowledge.

My name is William Ginkgo. I am a pokemon professor located in Cinnabar. My specialty focuses on very . . . unusual pokemon.

Look, I heard from an old contact about something strange occuring in Pallet Town. I have very good reason to believe that I could provide at least a partial explanation for who or what you encountered out there. I'm willing to wager that nobody else has been listening to you about it.

Let me help.

-Professor Ginkgo

---

6/14/97 2:52pm

Professor Ginkgo,

Okay. I'll bite.

You want to hear my story, I'll tell you. But you may be disappointed. There really isn't much to tell.

It was late, like 9ish or something, the sun was about to set. I was outside with my Caterpie and my Kakuna, practicing moves. We were just in the grass right outside of town. Sometimes in the evenings I hear weird sounds coming from the distance. Like a cry of some sort, but strange . . . distorted. Almost sounds like something between a human and an animal-- I can never really tell which it is. My friends can never hear it, they tell me I'm nuts, but I know it's there. Also, sometimes I think I can see stuff moving out of the corner of my eye? But when I turn to look it disappears.

Well, the mystery had been bugging me for ages, and I was getting tired of my friends telling me I was crazy. And that night, I heard it again. It seemed to be coming from the field just past the fence. Actually, that often seems to be where the sound's coming from.

I don't know if you've been to Pallet Town before, but there's this tall, decorative fence that goes around most of the perimeter of the town, and a big abandoned field just past it. Nothing really out there but grass, but whenever we were young and we tried to climb the fence our parents yelled at us. Nobody was ever allowed to climb it, and we were told not go out there in the field. I guess it's private property or whatever. I'm honestly not sure. But I never see anyone out there. It's practically taboo around here to even joke about going out there.

It really wouldn't even have occurred to me to break that rule, if it hadn't been for the weird noises. I spent a while perched on top of the fence, listening, and waiting to see if anybody would come by. Nobody did, so I hopped down on the other side and made my way over to the grass.

Everything was fine and normal at first, but as I got closer, I started feeling a little lightheaded, and the sounds seemed to be growing louder and higher-pitched. Almost as if I could hear them inside my head. And then I reached the grass, and my vision went blurry and started to black out. I thought for a second that I saw . . . something. I'm not sure what. It's kind of jumbled in my mind.

Then I guess I passed out, because the next thing I remember is waking up at home in my bed. My parents were there, really worried. They said somebody spotted me as they were walking by, unconscious on the ground.

And that's about it.

You're a pokemon professor, so maybe you have some idea of what's hiding out there. Is it dangerous? My friends and family still tell me I'm imagining things.

-June

---

6/14/97 6:12pm

Dear June,

Thank you for sharing your story.

I do not believe that you are simply imagining things. In fact, what you are describing is a phenomenon that has occured before. Typically it occurs when people wander too far outside a town or city limits. It does not always happen, of course, but there are certain locations . . . that seem to attract the phenomenon.

As to what's hiding out there, I may have some idea. I would like to ask: have you ever heard of glitch pokemon?

-Ginkgo

---

6/14/97 8:04pm

Uhh. What? Glitch pokemon?

---

6/15/97 1:45am

Dear June,

Allow me to give you a proper introduction and explanation.

As I said, I am Professor Ginkgo. I have a small lab on Cinnabar Island. To be more precise, there are a series of labs on Cinnabar Island housed under the same roof, and I rent a small space there.

I actually grew up in Viridian City and attended the same school as the pokemon professor in your town-- Professor Oak. We were once colleagues, in fact, along with our little circle of friends.

They were all so welcoming at first, and so supportive. We all helped each other and were quite close. Encouraged each other, learned from each other. I watched Oak get his research off the ground, uniting his interest in psychology and pokemon and developing his innovative Pokedex. I collaborated with Elm on some of his studies with pokemon breeding. I even had some of my work published in some very prestigious academic journals.

That all started to change once I started to progress further into my own research interests. Back then, I was studying Ghost-type pokemon. So much is still unknown about them. In particular, I had been investigating reports of a ghost that the Silph Scope had been unable to identify. It took many months, but eventually I encountered this creature myself. And what I experienced . . . I could not quite explain. During my struggles to understand, I uncovered some very obscure papers published in a very niche journal: they were about glitch pokemon.

The article's authors theorized about the existence of these creatures. Creatures with extraordinary features and powers, unlike anything we've ever seen before. Their underlying theory was that our world, and our very universe, can have certain points where the very fabric of reality is weakened, or . . . distorted. The very laws of nature can bend or even break at these points. And somehow, glitch pokemon can immerge from these points.

I realize this sounds remarkable and perhaps even unbelieveable. Yet the descriptions in these old papers aligned so well with my own observations and experiences. The more I pursued it, the more I learned, and the more I realized I was onto something big. Enormous. And incredibly important.

Unfortunately, my colleagues were not quite so open-minded. Even when I confronted them with the direct evidence that I had collected, they scoffed at my ideas and dismissed them as mere drivel. Crackpot theories and superstition, they told me. Journals refused to publish my work. Colleagues stopped collaborating with me. I was eventually ostracized by the entire academic community.

In my desperation I contacted the authors of the original articles I had found. It took time, but eventually I tracked them down. And here, in Cinnabar, I found a few scientists quietly studying glitch pokemon. It is here I have settled and devoted myself to my life's work.

I apologize for giving you such a lengthy personal history, but I thought it prudent to explain precisely where I'm coming from. It is important that you understand I am not just some quack or charlatan. I can tell you with certainty that glitch pokemon are very real and very incredible creatures. Just as Ghost type pokemon were once thought to be silly superstitious drivel, but were later revealed to be very real lifeforms that we could observe and capture-- thanks to the Silph Scope-- we are on the verge of another scientific epiphany.

However, we must also be very cautious. Over my years of study I have come to learn just how powerful glitch pokemon can be. They have the potential for a great deal of danger, as well, if mishandled. In the wrong hands, this could be devastating. This is why I must take so many precautions. It is also why my research is so crucial. We must come to understand these powerful creatures if we are to safely co-exist with them.

June, I believe you may be able to help me with my research. I don't wish to overwhelm you, but you spoke of frequently hearing strange sounds and seeing things you could not explain; things that nobody else seemed to notice. One of the things I have learned in my work is that not everyone seems to perceive glitch pokemon. It appears that only a select few are capable . . . or are willing. I am still uncertain as to why this is, but I suspect part of the reason is that glitch pokemon are usually very shy, ellusive creatures. It could be that something about you draws these pokemon to you, and makes them more willing to reveal themselves. In any case, the fact that you notice them at all is highly noteworthy. 

I'd like you to mull it over. You could contribute to some very important and meaningful work. And the fact of the matter is I am in desperate need of a field assistant. I may not have the popularity nor the generous funding of your local Professor Oak, but I can promise you the research will be exciting and interesting.

Let me know what you think.

-Professor Ginkgo

---

6/15/97 4:38pm

Professor Ginkgo,

Are you sure you want me? I'm literally just a Bug Catcher. I don't have any aspirations to beat all the gyms or become the very best at anything, like the other kids do. I just like spending time with my bug pokemon and maybe having a few battles for fun. Honestly, I don't have much to do this summer and this whole glitch pokemon thing sounds really crazy but also . . . kinda cool? But I figured I should warn you. I'm not exactly a model pokemon trainer.

---

6/15/97 5:19pm

June,

That shouldn't be a problem. Because of the need to be discrete about our research, I actually would actively discourage you from seeking out many battles for recreational purposes. It's best to keep a low profile.

Of course, I still would provide you with a pokemon to accomapy you during field research. It's simply a necessity in this modern day for anybody going out and about-- for guarding against unruly wild pokemon, for subduing potential research subjects for capture, for protection against any ruffians that may try to pull a Rattata out and try to mug you, etc.

In addition to the sheer practicality, though, I think it would present the perfect opportunity for you to start learning about and bonding with glitch pokemon right away. There's no better way to learn about something except first-hand, after all. It would be a formal part of your research to travel with such a companion.

-Professor Ginkgo

---

6/15/97 8:06pm

Wait, you're gonna give me a glitch pokemon? Really??

---

6/15/97 8:31pm

Of course, if you decide to assist me. I would also loan you a pokedex, of sorts-- one modified for my own purposes. You should find it an invaluable tool on your journey.

Would this be agreeable to you?

-Professor Ginkgo

---

6/15/97 10:00pm

To heck with it. I'm in.

-Junebug

---

End Notes

This series will follow my playthrough of Pokemon Blue using a team of only glitch pokemon. Throughout my journey I will explore and play around with a lot of other glitches in the game, too. I will not be using any sort of cheating device; these will be strictly natural glitches.

These end notes will list the specific glitches I use in each post. Obviously I’m mixing in a little lore and fiction to spice things up in these posts, but I believe the end notes should clarify exactly what’s going on. I hope you all enjoy the adventure with me!

Click For the Next Part of the Series!

This is a repost on a new blog. The original post was on Nov 20, 2019.

[1358456]

Shield built her own VR headset though. She's probably decently intelligent

She built her own VR set, huh? That’s cool. But... Being technologically adept and being scientifically/logically/mathematically intelligent are unrelated.

“Intelligent” is also very vague. In what regard, exactly? Logically intelligent, emotionally intelligent, technologically intelligent (aka, tech savvy), etc.

And built her own VR set... but how? Did she design it herself and make everything on her own with her own designs? Did she follow a set of instructions? Did she use a guide? Modified an existing equipment?

All that said, if Shield built her own VR set from scratch completely on her own (like inventing), then... yes, she would have to be pretty smart and logically intelligent. After all, in order to make such a thing, after the technological part of actually putting the thing together, she needs to make the program WORK. As in, computer programming. And that requires mathematical intelligence.

In such a case... I can get Shield to work with Blue in building more tech stuff. Oho, that’d be interesting. ... And I can still get Platinum to lecture her about science stuff too. Except the lecture won’t be scolding, but rather, teaching. Because still, Platinum is the only one in Pokemon Special or REAL LIFE, who can actually read EVERY piece of scientific research journals that are published, remember them, and have the desire to actually look them up.

[madscientistjournal]

I Didn't Break the Lamp: Interview with Sam Fleming

Today, we’re chatting with author Sam Fleming, who has a story in I Didn’t Break the Lamp!

DV: Tell us a bit about yourself!

Sam Fleming: I was born and raised in Scotland, spent almost two decades in various parts of England, and now live in a house built 130 years ago, along with my partner, my dog–an obstinate husky known as Floof–and Fingal, Shackleton, Max, Peregrine, Blackbird, Thokk, and Emily, who are all bicycles. I’m a multivariate egregore stacked up inside a human meat trenchcoat trying their best to pass well enough to avoid making people run screaming, and a highly trained scientist with a mutant brain who is employed to crack tough problems and negotiate complex solutions in the name of saving the world. I was on the British Junior Olympic archery squad until I damaged this entropic bag of bones and juices falling off a mountain. The armed services refused me admission when I was eleven years old and almost every year of asking thereafter. For a few years in the late nineties, I spent a lot of my time scaring fake Satanists away from an Oxfordshire stone circle. I collect fountain pen ink and hate having my hair cut. Some or all of the above may resemble the truth.

DV: What inspired you to write “Ludwig” for I Didn’t Break the Lamp?

SF: My first story for which an editor was prepared to pay, “What The Water Gave Her” in the Fish anthology from Dagan Books, was full of imaginary beings, all of them sea creatures. I had a story in Apex Magazine, which ended up in the Best of Apex Magazine Volume 1, in which there was an imaginary friend called Hedron. I love writing about them, and I love the ambiguity inherent in their existence. Are they real? What would it mean if they were? What does “real” mean? Something I randomly said in a conversation with a friend many many years ago has always stuck with me: “There are only two of us here, this is consensus reality.” So much of what we experience is generated inside the brain, and not all brains are the same. My own perception is somewhat awry and it’s impossible for me to step completely outside that frame of reference. I love having an excuse to show what the view is like from here.

“Ludwig” almost wrote itself in response to the prompt. A call for stories about imaginary friends! I couldn’t resist. There were a lot of little bits and pieces of things I’d stashed away in the back of my head, all swarming around in search of a tale to inhabit. I’ve been fascinated by the idea of felt presence since I first read about Shackleton’s epic crossing to the Stromness whaling station. Several years ago, I participated in a scientific study about imaginary friends, because they’ve been a big part of my life and formative experiences, and I suppose it continues to niggle that somewhere my experiences with such things are recorded in fairly comprehensive detail. Mad scientists … not so much, because I know plenty of scientists and not one of them is “mad” in the stereotypical sense of cackling “It’s ALIVE!” during thunderstorms, but shove an academic title on a villain and Bob’s your estranged relative.

DV: Your descriptions of the titular character, Ludwig, are both vivid and surreal. Did you have a visual inspiration for Ludwig, or was he concocted solely from your imagination?

SF: I’m synaesthetic. My senses are all cross wired into each other and especially my proprioception, which is the sense that tells you where your body is in space without you having to look. A lot of my descriptions are surreal, because I’m reverse engineering what I think might resonate with other people but keeping a certain synaesthetic gloss. As for Ludwig in particular, I first saw a short video of a featherstar on twitter a couple of years ago and was utterly mesmerised (you can see it here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRej1VKDgcE, and there’s another good one here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyketlthVWg). I’m not sure I could ever invent something that is weirder than creatures that already exist in the ocean. My first degree was in marine science, and I’ve done my fair share of peering at sea beasts, but I’ve never seen anything move like that, and dearly hope to see one in the flesh one day. I merely added the light and colour that, for me, inhabit that movement. And a bunch of extra arms.

DV: Your story includes descriptions of a handful of imaginary acquaintances. Were there any others that you would have liked to include that were cut for space, or others that you have thought of descriptions for now?

SF: There was a blobby, marshmallow thing called Henrietta that didn’t make the cut, and a flock of butterflies with razor-sharp wings that formed the shapes of other creatures, a bit like the fish in Finding Nemo. Honestly, I could probably talk about imaginary friends until my audience wandered off in search of a change of subject. I feel like I can reach out and open a door, somewhere off to my right and slightly up and in, and the next in line will step up. Maybe there’s a giant cosmic stash bag of creatures looking for a footprint in the world. There have been a surprising number of studies into imaginary friends, and what they look like/what they mean. One child had an entire herd of nappy-wearing cows. Another had a group of pre-schoolers, with whom she shared a language and a birthday. None of the imaginary friends in Ludwig are too far removed from what has been reported by scientists working in the field. Except Ludwig himself, of course.

DV: If you had an imaginary friend growing up, what was their name, and what were they like?

SF: I had loads. I had a roster. I had two friends, one a seal and one a dolphin, who came swimming with me on Thursday afternoons after school and taught me how to hold my breath for longer and swim faster. For a while I believed I was a selkie. I experienced an array of beings who donned vaguely human forms and told me secrets, but I wasn’t allowed to say anything about them or they would be angry. I had one who didn’t even try to conform to the conventional laws of physics, and who was better at maths than I was. Sometimes I would look at a stuffed animal instead of this being when talking to them, because it was easier on the eye. I have had more imaginary friends in my life than I have had actual physical ones, probably, and not all of them were friendly. I don’t know why, or where they came from. I don’t remember deliberately inventing any of them. More often than not they didn’t have names, because I didn’t talk about them, and we knew when we were talking to each other or about each other, so what was the purpose of names? They were invariably older than me, and seemed to know more about everything except really simple things, like why anyone would put ketchup on food, and if we were prepared to eat stuff that didn’t taste nice without ketchup, then why not make everything taste nicer by putting ketchup on it? Or hats. Why hats? I remember that question. “Why are hats?” They probably wondered why we didn’t put ketchup on hats, given that apparently some people are prepared to eat them when reality diverges sufficiently from expectation. My imaginary friends were even weirder than I was!

DV: What’s on the horizon for you?

SF: I’m going to my first WorldCon this year, in Dublin, which is exciting. I have a story called “Pretty Little Vampires” in the Not All Monsters anthology from Rooster Republic Press, due for publication next year. There aren’t any imaginary friends in that one. I have a few other pieces looking for a home, including a novella, and am working on a couple of novels while collecting notes and research for a third. I have hypergraphia, which isn’t nearly as helpful for fiction as you might think, but which does mean I’m always writing. At least when I’m not saving the world.

I Didn’t Break the Lamp: Interview with Sam Fleming was originally published on Mad Scientist Journal

[micropenisunveiled-blog]

How Having a Small Penis Messes With Men’s Minds     

I noticed my penis was one of the smaller in the bunch as a kid, when I used the communal showers after swimming, track and basketball practices. So for a long time public washing was strictly off limits—I'd rather drive home from the gym in my sweaty clothes and shower in the privacy of my own apartment.

My insecurities about his 3.3-inch erection affect more than just my hygiene habits. Condoms didn't stay on well, and that made sex more of an anxiety trip than it already was. In a recent bout of obsession, I gathered a "database" of scientific papers on penises and measured myself multiple times a day for several weeks to see how I sized up. Growing up, it shaped me socially, even when my pants were on. Because of teasing from my brothers and some team mates at school I became quite insecure.  I had an ongoing fear that I would never grow up, never become a man.  I feel that my low self-esteem, due to my size, was a main driver for this.  I did an interview with Michelle Malia, freelance reporter on November 3 2017 that was published in Tonic. 

I am reprinting the article here.

I suspect that lots of guys can relate to my story. It is part of why I started this website.

THE TONIC ARTICLE

Almost one in five American men are unhappy with the length of their erection, according to a recent study of more than 4,000 men, and another 15 percent have a problem with their girth. You won't be surprised to learn that the guys who thought their penises fell short had less sex than the penis-proud group. "Being small can be the heaviest of burdens. I'm genuinely afraid of everything and everybody alike," says David, 30. "I feel I just can't be truly sexually desirable to women with my size."

There's a lot of dick-shaming that perpetuates this idea. When Marco Rubio exposed Donald Trump's small hands, Trump felt the need to tell the whole country that his penis was perfectly fine, thanks. (On national television. During a presidential debate.) In a Fat Shack ad, a seductive blonde—lips parted, a trail of mustard dripping out of her mouth á la cum—holds a sandwich. "Four inches has never been so satisfying," the caption reads.

It goes beyond mainstream news and marketing and weasels its way into casual conversation. "A lot of the jokes we make in everyday life are often sexually related in one way or another," says Abraham Morgentaler, a urologist and the director of Men's Health Boston, whose practice focuses on the health effects of testosterone deficiency. "It's sort of standard humor for guys to josh each other about masculinity type stuff, including penis size."

Movies and television frequent take jabs at villains and characters by assaulting their masculinity.  No one would consider making fun of a man with one arm, or a blind individual.  When asked in a recent Bloomberg poll what bothered them most about Donald Trump voters picked one action above all others: when he mocked a reporter with a disability in November 2015.   But no one winces when someone makes fun of a man’s small penis.  Interesting!

Morgentaler calls men with dick fixations "peno-centric." The idea that the size of your junk validates you as a man might start as early as boyhood. "When we're younger and coming of age sexually, when there's a lack of sophistication about what it means, number one, to be a man, and number two to be a good lover, the thing that men can see and point to and certainly think about is really the penis," he says.

Boyhood is synonymous with inexperience, and sadly, we don't magically figure everything out as adults. Some guys may think they're small even when they're not, but for the ones who do fall left of the bell curve, the best way to get over it is by being realistic about what your penis "should" look like and how important it really is in the long term”, Morgentaler says.

Lots of people never have the chance to see other people having healthy, real-life sex, so they might base their expectations on the sex they do see, usually in porn. But—shocker—porn is not real life. Those macho men are more than well endowed and that can give off the wrong idea, that you need to sport an eight- or nine-inch shaft (also, ow—but we'll get to that later) to satisfy your sex partners.

"If a guy watches 50 or 100 of these video clips, he's going to feel inadequate because he may be smaller than every one of those," Morgentaler says. "But those men are extremely unusual." When researchers sifted through data on more than 15,000 men, they found that the average penis is 3.6 inches soft and 5.2 inches erect. Nothing like many of the massive dicks we see on our laptops.

On a purely biological level, it's also irrational to think size has anything to do with your baby-making skills. "If it matters from an evolutionary standpoint, the best question would be, does it increase fertility?" says Robert Martin, an evolutionary biologist and adjunct professor at the University of Chicago. "The testes size indicates the potential of producing sperm, but I don't see any connection between penis size and anything that would be important in evolutionary terms." There's no evidence that primates have ever used their penises as a power display, he adds, and it may even have little to no effect on how physically desirable you are as a man.

Australian researchers generated 343 life-size male figures that ranged in body shape, body height, and penis size. They projected these "men" on a screen and asked 105 heterosexual women to rate how sexually attractive they were. The women cared most about body shape, which was responsible for 79.6 percent of attractiveness. (They preferred a triangular torso with wide shoulders and narrow hips.) Height came next with 6.1 percent, and penis size fell by the wayside, accounting for only 5.1 percent of attractiveness. "It seems to be a male preoccupation," Martin says.

It's a preoccupation that can be debilitating. Andy, 24, has never heard complaints from sex partners about his 4.7-inch erection, but he still can't shake the feeling that he's coming up a half-inch short. "It lingers in my mind throughout the day on a regular basis," he says. "It causes great anxiety and depression most of the time." Andy started to notice he was smaller than average when he was 19. Like Jase, he also measures a lot. "There [have] been days when I find myself spending a huge amount of time with a ruler next to my penis."

When he's naked in front of sex partners, he often tries to cut through the awkwardness of the initial reveal by being self-deprecating—"It's small, huh?"—but nobody has ever complained or agreed.

It's not crazy that Andy's partners aren't throwing him shade. When it's part of the equation, the penis is an important part of sex—whether it's the real thing or the dildo equivalent. But it's not everything. "How we talk and behave in bed, how we touch, these are all important parts of what makes for good sex," Morgentaler says. "The hands and the mouth and the lips are all part of that. The penis is just one part of the repertoire."

Bigger is not always better, and that goes for anal, too. Research in the Journal of Sexual Medicine found that 72 percent of women and 15 percent of men feel pain during anal sex. In another study, 76 percent of bottoms reported pain during anal, and for 23 percent of those guys, it was worse than mild.

Not to mention more than a third of women need clitoral stimulation, not penetration, to reach orgasm.

Jace told us that he wonders if he was born bisexual, or if his life experiences led him to exploring sexuality with men, specifically because of his fear of intimacy with women after bad experiences.  In his relationships with women he told us that he had used large strap-ons, penis extenders, and sex toys of all kinds before he finally figured out all women need is need is clitoral stimulation to reach her oh-my-god moments. Now I helps her plateau using the basics: his mouth and, sometimes, a vibrator.  In his relations with men Jace told us that he is exclusively a bottom, and has come to prefer orgasms through prostate stimulation. 

Jace has three decades of life in the books, he's been married and in a long term dom/sub relationship with another man—that's a lot of time to figure out what is and isn't important in your relationships and sex life. Younger guys might need to live a little more before they figure that out. "Every time I hear stories about guys my age hooking up and having one-night stands and even being in relationships, it gets to me because I know I can't ever do any of those [things] because of my size," Andy says.

The peno-centric approach can keep you from engaging with others in all sorts of ways, whether fully clothed or bare-ass naked. Morgentaler recently saw a patient who was worried that he wasn't "developed" down there—despite his junk being "completely normal," Morgentaler says—and because of that, he was still a virgin.

Jace doesn't get regular checkups anymore, because at his last visit the doctor brought in several interns including a young woman to check him for a hernia. "I really thought that I was going to die of embarrassment right in the doctor's office," he says.

David doesn't like swimming or going to the beach because he feels exposed. "I can say with all my heart, I'd be way more happy and have a better life if I had a normal penis," he says.

It might seem like a huge deal when it comes to first-time hookups or one-night stands, but in the longer term, your penis does not take top priority. Most aspects of a relationship have nothing to do with what's in your pants—compatibility, mutual respect, and sense of humor, to name a few. Good sex is also high up there in importance, but using your penis is just one way to satisfy your partner, and it's naive to prioritize size over everything else.

"I would emphasize that this problem often goes away when a guy ends up in a stable relationship, because the couple figures out what they do that works, and penis size is usually not an impediment," Morgentaler says. "The quality of the man is not dependent on the size of his penis."

[timeisacephalopod]

Ball and Chain

So I read a thing a couple days ago that said a lot of IronStrange stuff is Tony centric, which is true for a lot of what I write too (seeing that Tony is my fav character) but I was like rude. So here’s a Stephen centric fluff piece that is inspired by me watching Say Yes To The Dress lmao. Also as usual with my writing Stephen is Asian (Nepali specifically).  (Fun Fact: Sushruta is the first doctor to have recorded a surgery, hence Stephen naming his dog that).

Stephen is sure Tony doesn’t mean anything by it and maybe he’s just used to being single, he’s been single most of his life so it’d make sense. But it just annoys him that Tony never says anything when people make jokes about his upcoming marriage to Stephen as some kind of evil trap meant to strip him of his freedom.

“I know it’s probably selfish,” Stephen tells Christine, “but its offensive to call me a prison to my face.” Tony always looks a little confused when people say it but he never actually says anything about it.

Christine frowns over her lunch, “actually that’s probably the least selfish thing you’ve requested of him,” she says.

“Alright, I know he’s afraid of dogs but I am not giving up my corgi! We’ve bonded,” he says. Accidentally because he’s never been a pet person but Wong had some puppies and decided Stephen’s place was a good place to get rid of one. In his defense after two hours Stephen finally understood that Brooklyn Nine Nine skit where Rosa claims she’d kill everyone in the room and then herself for the dog.

“Stephen, he was terrified of the dog and I told you I’d take it so you’d still see him and you told Tony to get over himself. You’re lucky he loves you because that was just insensitive,” she says.

“Well he likes the dog now,” Stephen mumbles in his defense. And by likes that mostly means Tony doesn’t run from the dog in terror anymore. Its not like the fear had been warranted anyways, Sushruta is harmless unless you’re a shoe.

Christine sighs, “because you forced him to deal with the dog instead of compromising. That was selfish when you had a viable solution to your problem and a terrified partner, but wanting Tony to point out that marrying you isn’t going to end his life or his freedom is pretty normal. I’ve always hated that, men treating marriage like its the end of the world when usually they’re the ones to ask. Besides, Tony doesn’t do anything he doesn’t want to- he’s pretty famous for that so the jokes are extra stupid,” she points out.

Stephen prickles a little, “women make those jokes too,” he says- he’s heard them. Stupid reporters, he’s never liked them. None of them can ever relay his research in a way that’s actually accurate. Scientific journalism is an absolutely horrible field given how it botches the findings ninety nine percent of the time. He and Tony have bonded over it and the fact that neither of them are any good at explaining their research in layman's terms. Though they disagree that an expert should be able to do that- the entire point of an expert is that they know things others don’t, not that they should be able to teach all. Only some people can do what he can anyways, and the only person who’s a step above Tony is a Wakandan princess. He thinks Tony should give himself more credit.

“Really, Stephen? I’d like to point out that women are always the nags, the balls and chains, and the gatekeepers to freedom. There are cake toppers with brides dragging their husbands to the wedding- so yeah, women make the jokes too but they’re also mostly the butt of them and its usually guys urging their friends to run away. Guess you got relegated to the role of woman,” she says.

Stephen makes an offended noise, “how the hell did that happen?” he asks. First of all the entire point of his and Tony’s relationship is that none of them are women so how’d he get stuck in that role? Tony is shorter. And cuter. “This is because I’m Asian, isn’t it?” he asks, squinting.

Christine snorts, “actually I think it might have more to do with Tony being a living embodiment of every white male power fantasy ever and his fans don’t want to give up that toxic stereotype, but I guess it could be racism,” she says, trying at least to give him some credit.

“Once a fan mailed him a bag of his own hair. I think the fact that his name was ‘Gary’ says everything you need to know,” Stephen says. “And I am not a woman nor am I enacting some convoluted plot to trap Tony with marriage. Does the public know about divorce?” That and Christine made a point when she said Tony doesn’t do anything he doesn’t want to. And he proposed. Stephen had been mad about it because he’d been planning to and then Tony ruined his carefully thought out plans. He even used the dog in the proposal and it was so sweet he cried and now Wong has pictures he’ll certainly use to blackmail him later.

“Good luck to you, I don’t think I could handle dating a celebrity let alone one that nets me stupid jokes about how marrying said celebrity will ruin his life,” Christine says, shaking her head.

*

Stephen didn’t even want to do this stupid interview but Tony insisted, then brought up the dog when Stephen stuff refused. He mostly only agreed because Tony pointed out he’d been afraid of his own house for weeks before he finally got used to the dog and even then Sushruta is the only dog he doesn’t hate. Turns out he’d nearly been eaten by a dog as a child and Stephen felt a little bad about forcing him to deal with the dog so fine, he’ll do the stupid interview and deal with the stupid jokes about Tony’s freedom like he didn’t walk into this engagement himself since he asked but whatever.

When the stupid reporter makes the dreaded joke Stephen rolls his eyes on cue, letting out an annoyed noise but its Tony’s reaction that catches the reporter’s attention. “You must be straight,” Tony says, catching Stephen’s attention with it too because what’s that got to do with it? Which is what the reporter asks. Tony snorts, “only someone who’s had the benefit of knowing their right to marry is never in question would ever make such a fucking stupid joke,” he says, irritation written all over his features.

Oh, good point actually. Stephen never considered that because he’s never really considered himself the marrying type. But then neither had Tony and here they both are, quite smitten with each other.

“I... uh... that’s not what I meant,” the reporter stumbles out and Stephen rolls his eyes again. Sure it wasn’t, but he doubts there will be an answer if he asks what was meant by the comment.

Tony rolls his eyes too but its much more theatrical than Stephen’s, impressive considering how dramatic Christine likes to remind him he is. Personally he doesn’t think he’s that dramatic at all. “Sorry, but I fail to see how people consistently insulting Stephen to his face by acting like being married to him is some kind of hardship I’m going to have to face can be anything less than bullshit perpetuated by a group of people who’ve taken their rights to relationships for granted. I’m marrying Stephen because I love him, and I’m excited to spend the rest of my life with him even if I have to put up with his stupid dog. If I wasn’t happy about marrying him than I wouldn’t have proposed because unlike the general public I don’t think marriage is supposed to be a prison where couples suffer. And it helps that he’s good in bed,” he adds and Stephen lets out a sharp laugh.

“Yes, that’s right, I’m quite a catch,” he says, nose in the air. “And Tony is alright too,” he adds almost as an afterthought. He really is though, and he’s patient with Stephen in a way he rarely gets from others. Christine has told him not to take it for granted but Stephen already knows he takes full advantage of Tony’s patience. But he does appreciate Tony, really appreciates him because they have an understanding with each other that most don’t. He understands Stephen’s arrogance and his fears and he’s always so willing to help him when he needs it. And he can see when Stephen needs it. No one else can.

He looks over at Tony and smiles, knowing his love is translated in the look and Tony smiles back, emotion radiating off his features too. Stephen straightens a little and faces the reporter, “also, the only ball and chain in our relationship is stupid media personal such as yourself following us around all day snapping pictures and making stupid comments,” he says.

Tony lets out a sharp laugh, “god, I love you,” he says, weaving his fingers through Stephen’s.

“Well,” he says, “you are lucky to have me.” And he’s so, so lucky to have Tony too but he’s not going to say that to the cameras. People, contrary to what they might like to think, are not privy to their relationship.

Bonus Scene:

Tony didn’t want to get married in a church, he’s a fucking atheist and Stephen is agnostic, but his parents whined and cried until Tony finally gave up. Stephen, who’s much more used to fighting with his parents, had been prepared to drag it out longer but at the rate things were going they’d have to push back the wedding date because Stephen’s parents are more stubborn than Tony and Stephen combined. Which is frankly terrifying.

But here he is in what he has to admit is a pretty church even if he doesn’t believe in the deity its build to worship with Stephen standing in front of him and his dumb dog sitting between them, tongue lolling out of his face. That thing is plotting their deaths, Tony knows it, but when it eats them alive Tony will tell Stephen he told him so. 

The priest or whatever, the fuck if Tony knows, he just wanted to marry Stephen in peace before his parents got involved, prattles on until he gets to the part where Tony is supposed to do the vow thing. Tony repeats the words in a mostly empty way, knowing Stephen won’t care that he has no real interest in a religious ceremony that’s only taking place because his parents threw an epic fit at least until the part where he’s supposed to honor and obey Stephen?

“O-what?” he asks, giving Stephen a look as his eyebrows fly up. “Honey if I don’t obey Pepper you have no chance. I’ll honor you just fine, but I’ll obey over my dead body,” he says.

Stephen throws his head back and laughs, “I had him throw it in there to shake things up a little, make it interesting because you know, these things are boring and I figured the audience might appreciate the show,” he says.

Off to the side Stephen’s parents cluck in disapproval, “just ruined his own wedding,” his mother mumbles but Stephen hears it- Tony swears he has super hearing.

“On the contrary, mother, I made my wedding about me rather than you. And you know, Tony,” he says almost like its an afterthought but it isn’t. The entire point of this stunt was to give him a voice in the ceremony he hadn’t wanted because, despite his outward arrogance and generally harsh personality, Stephen has a deep capacity to care and he always goes out of his way to make sure Tony feels appreciated. Even if that means screwing up his wedding ceremony and risking his parents’ wrath later.

[crabbybun]

there are different kinds of GMOs please stop acting like you know what you're talking about LOL

You have clearly never met me.

If there’s one thing I love to do, it’s read.  If there’s one thing I’m good at, it’swriting research papers.  The fact that Ihave anxiety and read random Wikipedia articles to cope means you just gave mea challenge.

To start, I have a pretty loose definition of GMO.  Considering that, since the time humansdeveloped agriculture, we have been cross-breeding plants & animals to fitspecific needs/solve a problem/create a specific taste/etc. – thereforealtering their genetic makeup – I consider most of what is consumed by humansociety to be a GMO.  To split hairs now,to essentially say that the new technology we develop to continue to do whatwe’ve been doings since early civilization, is now somehow “bad” without anyclear evidence to back it up just smacks of hypocrisy to me.  Like, if you actually do research, you’llfind out stuff like we used to use X-rays and Radium to genetically modifyplants but yeah it’smodern biotechnology that’s killing us.  

To address your assertation – of course there are differentGMOs.  The definition of “organism” iskinda broad to begin with.  According toWikipedia [fuck whata professor says; it’s a good place to learn broad knowledge of a topic, if youhave critical thinking skills] it’s very close to the technical legal term“living modified organism” and if that isn’t the broadest thing I’ve ever heardof idk what is.  And while the term GMOdoes not generally refer to organisms that have had genetic material added tothem to change them, transgenic crops have geneticmaterial added to them, not “chemicals”of any sort.  

[That’s another pet peeve of mine – the crusade against“chemicals” by the pure life groups. Nothing has ever sounded more like pseudo-science than that crap.]

However, the fact that there are different GMOs doesn’t makethe supposed “controversy” over their safety any less inane.  I’ll freely admit that, despite my terriblyunderdeveloped digestive system, I am a major foodie and I don’t reallydiscriminate in what kinds of food I’ll eat. That means that I’ll look at all the vegetarian & vegan dishes thatpeople make – and even some gluten-free ones for my Celiac bestie.  A friend from high school found me onFacebook and she had gone way raw vegan by that point so…I have been around the“GMOs are unsafe” discourse the most.  

The first genetically engineered plant is reported in 1983 –a tobacco plant resistant to a specific kind of bacteria.  Genetically engineered animals go back evenearlier.  That means that the scientificcommunity has been studying GMOs for at least 35 years.  That’s a lot of time to study; that could betwo generations worth of people to look at!

And in that 35 years, they haven’t found any real dangerwith GMO crops.  The Library of Congressnotes that the scientific consensus is

“indicating that there is no evidence that GMOs present unique safety risks compared to conventionally bred products.” 

This study looked at 10 years of GMO cropsafety.  Anotherliterature review consisting of 6 years of studies came to roughly the sameconclusion.  And a decade of EU-funded GMO research says 

“The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research, andinvolving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, andin particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plantbreeding technologies.”

Note: these are from several places, not all American.  Is that enough for you? What about the American Association for the Advancement of Science who says 

“contrary to popular misconceptions, GM crops are the mostextensively tested crops ever added to our food supply” 

and while 

“there areoccasional claims that feeding GM foods to animals causes aberrations…althoughsuch claims are often sensationalized and receive a great deal of mediaattention, none have stood up to rigorous scientific scrutiny.”  

The AMA agrees and their Council on Science and Public Health found that 

“bioengineered foodshave been consumed for close to 20 years, and during that time, no overtconsequences on human health have been reported and/or substantiated in thepeer-reviewed literature.”   

Yes, I agree with the Food & Agricultural Organization ofthe UN that any new plants that wecreate have to be studied for adverse effects,but considering the testing that GMOs go through in most developed countries, Idon’t really worry about their safety when they come to the market.  The idea that GMOs are, in fact, extensivelytested for safety on a regular basis is reinforced by this article in theJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine: 

“The European Food Safety Authority and each individual member state have detailed the requirements for a full risk assessment of GM plants and derived food and feed. In the USA, the Food and Drug Agency, the Environmental Protection Agency and the US Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service are all involved in the regulatory process for GM crop approval.”  

The same study also finds that: 

“goods derived from GM crops have been consumed by hundreds of millions of people across the world for more than 15 years, with no reported ill effects (or legal cases related to human health), despite many of the consumers coming from that most litigious of countries, the USA.”

So let’s just lay it out there: science says GMOs are safe –so safe that even Bill Nye had to change his mind about them -and there is now an absolute mound of science to look at.  

However, one of the things that bugs me about the pseudo-sciencethat keeps bunk like this around is that it’s detrimental to the science takingplace on a large scale with this.  Our globalpopulation is rising quickly, and we need to address the challenges that gowith that.  Plant genetics could hold thekey to things like global food security, for instance.  Climate change threatens how we doagriculture now and GM crops could be a lifesaver.  We’re losing fresh water for crops and GMcrops could be adapted to that.  Tbh I’vefound that a lot of this bunk is rolled up in privilege that doesn’tacknowledge the fact that GMOs are helping out in needed areas of theworld.  This article in Genetics magazine talks about adapting GM ricefor resistance to floods in places like Southeast Asia or India, and how drought-resistancecorn can help in Africa.  This articlefrom the National Academies Press discusses how genetic modification can simply affect the yield of crops.  

There’s a lot that can be done for a lot of people that canbetter their daily quality of living, and that is worth a lot more to me than abunch of pseudo-science ignoramuses standing in the way of progress.  It’s kind of a racist argument, to me.  Not to mention that your idea of “there aremany different GMOs” – insinuating that some may be dangerous – is as dumb asan anti-vaccer saying “well there are many different kinds of vaccines so onemay cause autism!”  Much like that argument,there is ample evidence to suggest GMOs are safe.  Considering that pretty much everything youeat was engineered to be that way, y’all just better learn to deal withthat.  

Every carrot you eat is a GMO

Every orange you eat is a GMO

Get tf over it already.

[moonlightcrossfire]

HOW I GOT MYSELF TOGETHER ?

HOW I DECIDED TO GET MYSELF TOGETHER?

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 16

Hey guys! I know it's been a quite while I haven't posted anything here, it's just I've been through extreme moment of indecisiveness and doubt with plenty plenty plenty of breakdowns, hesitation and fear.

Fear of what? Of not being able to get myself together and make everything move through the correct path. If you're a huge procrastinator, a reluctant soul that has that hidden glow that's afraid to step outside, hope this helps you and be your sign to get your shit together.

Don't you ever get that feeling in your insides that makes you feel strange? Makes you feel there's something wrong? Or most likely, can it be a sign that'll push you to change your life?

I got that feeling that twirled my insides and let guilt build through me and sneak into my blood, it was screaming that I was wasting my time and indeed I was. Then, I automatically smiled and I felt clips of my future self flashing in front of my eyes, I realised back then that I didn't want to be that girl who spends her day in her sweatpants watching TikToks or scrolling through Instagram watching people reach places when I know I can reach the same places, does it make sense?

PSA: Sweatpants will always be the greatest piece of clothing ever made for women.

When I got that vibe, I knew my energy wouldn't lie to me. My mood changed real quick, from depressed and doubtful to someone who's sure of what she wants to do and where does she want to reach.

In a night full of stars, here's how I decided to change the way I lived:

1. Wake up early everyday, even on weekends.

All those who know me know that I run to my bed as soon as the clock says 9:00 PM, sometimes 8:30. They'd be like, "What makes you go to bed so damn early?" "The night is still in its beginning, at its finest, why would you want to sleep now?" Etc etc.. and my answer would be that I'm exhausted or I don't like staying up late, boring answers I know, it's just the way it is. However, it's been scientifically proven that sleeping early and waking up early increase your life's longevity, and sleeping for less than six hours will make you susceptible to illnesses. The health benefits of sleeping early are endless, do your research! The point is, waking up early doesn't only have you ready the day with positive energy but it makes you more organised if you're a busy person occupied with school, career, hobbies or interests. Take advantage of sleeping early!

2. To Do lists are your new best friends.

The best timings to write your to-do lists are either before you go to bed or after you wake up. To Do lists are known for keeping you on track, it helps you plan your day and accomplish things you postponed to go out with your friends or ignoring what you gotta do to finish another episode of your favourite show and end up forgetting what you have to do. Get a journal or a planner and take it EVERYWHERE you go, jot down reminders, appointments, chores, anything that won't make you forget your duties. By doing that, you'll feel responsibility has grown to be a part of your existence, neatness and organisation as well. Personally, in my To Do list I writ down tasks that I believe I can finish in a day. For example, doing homework, writing a new chapter for the new project I'm writing, make character maps, take pictures for my VSCO, write excerpts to post on MoonlightCrossfire, etc etc. When I write my first to do list I tried my hardest not to procrastinate, it was quite difficult not to procrastinate but I accomplished 70% of what I wouldn't have done if I was on my phone all the time. So, start writing your first To Do list right now!

3. Read affirmations, pray, set goals.

I've heard that reading affirmation boosts your mood to a certain extent. I believe it's what law of attraction is about. For who doesn't know what Law of Attraction is, it's the law which uses the power of the mind to translate our thoughts and turn them into reality. Specifically talking, if you think positively, the positive things will come to life. Reading affirmations such as calling yourself beautiful or believing you can do whatever you want to do or striving to love yourself more and being grateful for whatever God has given to you will make you see thing from a bright perspective. Try calling yourself beautiful in front of the mirror, our conscience will hug you and warmth will contaminate your skin.

Praying for a beautiful day or a better life or a respectful job or a happier self by means making your relationship with God a genuine relationship even if you aren't religious will turn your tables. Whenever you get the chance to pray, do it for yourself before anyone else.

Setting goals whether they're near goals or future ones will make you feel more stimulated by clinging more to them as passion eventually strengthens, that's when you know that you should never give up on things you find your peace of mind into and unleashes your true self to.

4. Focus on your education.

I'm an average student, my grades are like rollercoaster, I reach high highs and get unfortunate grades, it's pretty normal. I maintain a good score by giving my best to subjects I love and find myself flexible in studying such as literary subjects, as for scientific subjects however I don't mind a passing grade. When you study the subjects you love and feel like shining in them, you'll study them with so much effort yet so relaxed because you are aware of your abilities in these subjects. On the other hand, the subjects that you feel like you study them for the sake of passing, you need to build a mentality that you know passing these classes will bring you closer to achieve your dreams. You have to know that the path to reach your dream life will be full of thorns and and barriers to reach the sunshine and butterflies.

5. Eating healthy + moving more.

Sleeping early isn't enough for a drastic life change if you sleep with a mouth full of chocolate or a bag of chips or a burger. I'm NOT saying you should kill your evil cravings, but try to do a little bit of swapping. Pinterest is full of recipes and swaps that will statist your craving and at the same time revives you instead of slowly killing you. I've realised that a little bit late and I felt something blocking my throats that I won't eat as much McDonald's as I used to, but we have to let go of things that makes us happy sometimes. (McDonald's is the love of my life :/) Healthy food isn't as bad as people make it look like, we convince ourselves that they're not flavourful to run back to fast food and satisfactory foods.

If you're a lazy person like I am that moves from a couch to another and considers it a workout, you might want to read this. Doing chores will have move automatically and as you move you are helping your body become more flexible, you burn calories and you feel lightweight. At school or work or stuff, try to walk as much as you can, it keeps you alive.

Last but foremost, when I write my to do list, I write a water tracking list that makes sure I drink 8-10 cups of water a day. Water is your life saviour, it keeps you hydrated, helps you lose weight, keeps you in the bathroom so you won't get involved with bullshit and drama + it clears your skin. Who said detox water isn't recommended as well? Water with lemon and mint is my favourite water detox combination, you can add pomegranates too!

6. Limit distractions and use of electronics.

Your series can wait, your friends can wait, your lover can wait, your family can wait but your future doesn't wait for you. Why? Because you chase your future, it is not your future that chases you. It is preferable to limit the use of electronics while working or studying. I'm teaching myself to get used to not be on my phone a lot, I'm teaching myself to focus without looking at my phone and surrender to surf social media, I'm teaching myself to resist it. You should learn resistance, too. Try to use your electronics when you're 100% done with all your tasks on your to do list, you won't have anything to carry on your shoulder and you can check your friends' posts and stories or watch some celebrity tea.

7. DON'T KILL THE VIBE, CREATE PLAYLISTS!

Ever since I downloaded Spotify I made different playlists for different moods and I honestly love them all and vibe to them with my heart like I can't explain how I am passionate about my music taste. The fact that people make fun of the music I listen to because I don't listen to what they're used to listen to, not because the music I listen to makes me superior, it's just a matter of taste. When you listen to music you love, your happiness hormones boost your body, mind and soul. When your body, mind and soul are full, your creativity becomes limitless. I listen to music pretty much all the time specially when I'm writing, it gets me in the mood and I get so inspired by the stories every song holds. If you're a lover of music, you're forever young.

To sum up this blogpost, planning your life out and finding yourself and getting your shit together are major keys to reach your purpose. It will make your life much easier, enjoyable, satisfactory and pleasurable. Who doesn't want that? Then, learn to live your life the way you want to live it. They say you only live once, right? Live by this motto.

[lati-will]

The Ancient Power Of Chanting (Mantra) Validated By Modern Science

Chanting (mantra) is an ancient technology that, as modern science reveals, connects us in a very real way to the farthest reaches of the universe.

I love chanting mantras, and I do so daily as an integral part of my kundalini yoga practice. I don’t need to know the specifics of how it produces a calming and sometimes even transcendent effect on my consciousness, but I’ve always been deeply curious about the mechanisms that may be at play beneath the surface of my awareness.

This is why I am both deeply grateful and amazed by the work of John Reid, the UK inventor of the cymascope — a technology that renders sound visible. In an article published on his website titled, “Cymatics — A Bridge To the Unseen World,” John and his wife Annaleise reveal facts about sound that are simply mind-blowing and worthy of far greater dissemination.

First, did you know that sound is actually not a wave but spheroidal phenomenon? In their words: “Before looking at cymatics more closely let us dispel the popularly held misconception that “sound is a wave”: It isn’t. All audible sounds are, in fact, spherical in form or spheroidal, that is to say audible sounds are sphere-like but not necessarily perfectly spherical. For the sake of simplicity we’ll call these spheroidal sound spheres “Sound bubbles.”

Take a look at the ultrasound beam produced by dolphins:

As you can see above, the sound is not produced in wave form but as a spheroidal beam. If you were to slice horizontally into the beam and look at the cross section it would appear to contain geometric patterns that contain a type of cymaglyphic information analogous to hieroglyphs. In other words, these sound structures carry information as real and meaningful as words do in human language.

John’s dolphin research using cymatoscope has revealed groundbreaking information about how dolphins communicate and “see” with sound. If you are interested, you can drill deeper into this discovery by reading his landmark paper published in the Journal of Marine Sciences: Research and Development, titled “A Phenomenon Discovered While Imaging Dolphin Echolocation Sounds.”

John and Annaleise go on to explain one of the most amazing facts about the ‘sound bubbles’ that we produce, which I find most compelling in connection to many powerful experiences I have had with mantras, both listening and reciting them, in the yoga tradition:

“Our world is teeming with beautiful holographic sound bubbles that envelop us in shimmering patterns of acoustic energy, each bubble rushing away at around 700 miles an hour as new bubbles form from the source of the sound. Whether the sound is emitted from your voice or from some other source, such as a musical instrument, this ‘bubble-in-a-hurry’ leaves a fleeting vibrational imprint on the surface of your body: every cell in the surface tissues of your body actually receives sound patterns from the bubbles that surround you.”

Did you get that? When we speak or chant, we are producing sound bubbles that attain speeds of 700 miles per hour. But it gets better. Check this out:

“You create infrared light even when you speak… The atoms and molecules of air within this expanding bubble are bumping into each other, each collision transferring your voice vibrations to the nearest atom or molecule. As these ‘bumps’ occur they cause infrared light to be created due to the friction between the magnetic shells of the air particles. The infrared light carries with it the modulations of your voice that rush away at the incredible speed of 186,000 miles per second. Unlike the sound of a voice, which becomes inaudible after about one mile, the infrared light created by your voice rushes out into space where it travels for eternity, carrying your words or songs to the stars.

Thus, there is a direct relationship between sound and light and in fact there can be no light in the Universe without sound because light is only created when atoms collide with each other, and such collisions are sound. So light and life owe their existence to sound.”

What I find so amazing about this is that kundalini practitioners have long made claims about the power of mantra to connect us to the universe that on the surface may appear like pseudo-science. But the science that John Reid is speaking to — the actual empirical phenomena — now lends scientific support to at least some of these claims.

Here is Yogi Bhajan, founder of the American tradition of kundalini yoga, making statements that make more sense in light of the mechanisms discussed by John Reid:

“Every element of the Universe is in a constant state of vibration manifested to us as light, sound, and energy. The human senses perceive only a fraction of the infinite range of vibration, so it is difficult to comprehend that the Word mentioned in the Bible is actually the totality of vibration which underlies and sustains all creation. A person can tune his or her own consciousness into the awareness of that totality with the use of a mantra. By vibrating in rhythm with the breath to a particular sound that is proportional to the creative sound, or sound current, one can expand one’s sensitivity to the entire spectrum of vibration. It is similar to striking a note on a stringed instrument. In other words, as you vibrate, the Universe vibrates with you.”

“What is a mantra? Mantra is two words: Man and tra. Man means mind. Tra means the heat of life. Ra means sun. So, mantra is a powerful combination of words which, if recited, takes the vibratory effect of each of your molecules into the Infinity of the Cosmos. That is called ‘Mantra.’”

“By vibrating in rhythm with the breath to a particular sound that is proportional to the creative sound, or sound current, one can expand one’s sensitivity to the entire spectrum of vibration. It is similar to striking a note on a stringed instrument. In other words, as you vibrate, the Universe vibrates with you.”

“Mantras are not small things, mantras have power. They are the mind vibration in relationship to the Cosmos. The science of mantra is based on the knowledge that sound is a form of energy having structure, power, and a definite predictable effect on the chakras and the human psyche.”

We live in a remarkable time where what was once purely the stuff of myth, and considered magical thinking and “woo” by skeptics the world over, is starting to receive validation through the ‘hardest of sciences.’  For instance, the concept of the body radiating light is now also accepted through the discovery of biophotons which we reported on in a previous article, and even the ritual of burning medicinal herbs sage to ‘ward off evil spirits’ like has been found to have powerful cleansing properties.

That said, the most powerful way to understand information like this is to experience it directly. I encourage readers to experience the tradition of mantra directly. Listen or recite them, and visualize the sound actually moving at tremendous speed, and producing light that is extending out into the farthest reaches of the universe. Perhaps then the aphorisms of spiritual masters like Yogi Bhajan will no longer seem strange and unattainable.

For more evidence-based research on the therapeutic value of chanting, please visit GreenMedInfo’s database on Chanting.

To directly experience the power of mantra, try this kundalini mantra lesson and listen to one of my favorite mantras — the Gayatri Mantra — below:

To learn more about the CymaScope and a related project Sayer Ji and John Reid are partnering on, take a look at SystomeBiomed.

By: Sayer Ji

[realtalk-princeton]

Clover, I'd love to hear more about FRS 118 Life on Mars - or Maybe Not! It's supposed to be available again this spring and is by far my favorite FRS topic of all the interesting options

Response from Clover:

Ayyy cool! Yeah so firstly the title of this seminar “Life on Mars” can be a bit deceiving because the seminar is only very briefly about Mars. In truth, the course focuses more generally on scientific journalism. You’ll be taught by two awesome professors— Michael Lemonick and Ed Turner. Mike is a science journalist who has written for many big name publications, and Ed is a professor of astrophysics who also has had experience with the media side of science. It’s a really interesting combination, as they both have different yet extremely interesting backgrounds, have lots to share and teach, they don’t always agree with one another coming from the science vs. media sides, etc.

You come to learn through this seminar that there’s a lot that goes into science writing. You’ve got the pressure to make readers interested in your writing, but you also run the risk of exaggerating to the point of lying; you want to get news of novel cancer treatments out to the world, but don’t want to spark false hope... This honestly is only a tiny part of the complexities we talk about, but the general idea is there is so much that goes into science journalism that doesn’t always meet the eye— unless you know to look for it! Also, it covers science journalism about climate change, AI, space (where Mars ties in!), medicine, etc., divided into 4 big chunks over the semester— so it touches on all kinds of scientific topics!

Cool features of the course include really neat visitors coming to the class (we had journalists from Science, the head ‘storyteller’ from JPL, etc.) and snacks for every class. Workload is relatively low to medium level, depending on how much you want out of the course. There are tri-weekly topics, and each week you get sent 1) a list of article links to read and 2) a weekly science journal. Each week someone from the class will have to lead a discussion on #2– one week that’ll be you. The articles from #1 are not necessarily all discussed, but they follow a sub-topic of the tri-weekly theme and you spend a good chunk (~half) of class talking about them.

As for other assignments, we got 6 writing assignments throughout the semester. They ranged from 1 page journal articles (write something from a provided press release) to a fast turn-around article (we turned in our stories by midnight that class day) and even a feature story (longer article, I think 1000 words). For all but the fast-turn around, you get 1-2 weeks to work on the assignment. Definitely mangaeable. Mike grades the papers, and he can be blunt with his comments. But if you take the time to read through them (they are very detailed haha), you’ll find that you can improve on those parts of your writing and genuinely get better with time.

Final part of the course is the research paper, which is more of an academic, writing-sem-type paper comparing different journal coverage just like you do in class. Longer than other assignments, but for sure manageable.

The overall grade breakdown I believe comes out to be mostly participation in seminar (which is easy enough to do if you even just read half of the articles assigned and the weekly news one), ~6% each for your writing assignments, and then the rest is final project stuff and your grade for the weekly discussion you lead. They are nice graders for all of the participation stuff in my opinion, and even if you don’t talk all the time it doesn’t matter so long as when you do contribute, it’s valuable.

I have to say that the class is only as engaging as you make it, as it’s so heavy on discussion. Some weeks I didn’t read all the articles, which made it easier for my workload, but I didn’t gain as much from that class and it was more stressful worrying about discussing an article I hadn’t looked at. Additionally, Mike and Ed spend a good bit of time talking to you all and sharing stories from their experiences. I thought they were all really cool, relevant, real-world stories, but I guess that could be subjective. Does make for a less strenuous class even if stories aren’t your favorite thing.

I know this was probably more than you were looking for, so I’m sorry if it’s annoying to sift through for the parts you actually wanted to know about. I just thought I’d put all my info on the class down in one post for anyone else looking into taking FRS 118. If you have any more questions about it, feel free to ask.

TLDR: highly recommend! Low stress, great professors, interesting material! I have become a better consumer of science news because of this seminar! :)

[sorryforthephilosophy]

The Ethics of Fiction Writing - Part One

Let me start out by saying that I’m not here to advocate censorship.  There are three possible reasons for trying to establish what sorts of writing might be unethical*.  The first is as a preface to trying to censor it, which I think is reprehensible.  The second is so that people who care to try to make their own actions ethical can choose to censor themselves.  The third is so that people can criticize others for what they think is unethical behavior.  While I think the first (censorship) is reprehensible, I think that self-censorship and ethical criticism are incredibly important (and, in fact, are what counterbalance a lack of censorship so as to make it workable).  Note that in self-censorship I include the ability of owners of media companies to decide what works they would want to publish.  As the owner of a small publishing company, I am quite protective of my ability to make ethical judgements about what I choose to publish, even if it means “censoring” the work of a writer who wants me to be the mouthpiece for their stuff.  Their censorship is my right to free speech. 

Does fiction writing needs ethics?  I think most people would agree that journalism, scientific writing, legal writing, historical writing, etc. are activities for which ethical considerations apply because unethical behavior in those endeavors can harm people.  Can fiction writing harm people, and is it possible for writers to predict and reduce or prevent that harm?

There are some no brainers here, which will not be the thrust of my discussion.  Stealing another writer’s ideas is unethical, as would cheating a publishing company you have a contract with by writing something totally different from what they expected.  These are unethical because they are deceitful business practices.  It is unethical to write about a fictional character who the readers recognize as a stand-in for a real person when then including libel in the writing that readers take as true.  In this case, the fiction is not unethical as fiction, it is unethical because the writer causes it to be taken as non-fiction.  Writing your manuscript with the blood of neighborhood children is probably unethical too, but again in a way that is not unique to fiction writing.

Setting aside those no-brainer cases of unethical writing, is it possible for fiction to harm people by virtue of the nature of the fiction itself?  I would say yes.

There are two possibilities here.  One is that the fiction harms the readers of that fiction.  The other is that the fiction affects the readers in such a way that they are more likely to do harm to people who haven’t read the fiction.

There have been many claims that popular fiction (including novels and horror movies) have caused harm to young people, turning them to crime, violence, madness or suicide (see http://sorryforthephilosophy.tumblr.com/post/156771321550/how-literature-saved-novels-for-the-middle-class for more).  As far as I can tell, this is a class-ist age-ist cultural-reactionary form of paranoia with no basis in fact.  Of these, the only one that has any evidential backing is the Werther Effect.  In the Werther Effect, a popular piece of fiction with a (likeable) character committing suicide may be associated with a higher suicide rate in real life.  As far as I can tell, the jury is still out on whether fiction can have an appreciable affect on suicide, but it’s easy to imagine that people who may already be close to suicide may be driven over the edge by a portrayal that romanticizes it.

Let’s say for the moment that this is true: that it has been shown, and writers should know, that if they portray suicide in a certain way in their stories that it will cause more people to commit suicide.  Does it then follow that it is unethical for writers to write about suicide in those ways because they know (or should know) that they will cause deaths?

There are two main arguments against writers being ethically responsible here.  The first is the personal responsibility of readers argument.  The argument goes like this: readers have free will, can choose whether or not to read a book that romanticizes suicide or whether or not to act on that romanticization.  Where the reader is a child, that child’s parent or guardian should be responsible for keeping the child from reading things that may harm them.  Therefor, the person responsible for the harm a story does is the reader (or reader’s parent) and it is unfair to blame a writer for the lack of responsibility of readers (or readers’ parents).  This is similar to the tort law concept of a superseding intervening cause (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intervening_cause).  The personal responsibility argument is the “just because I sell knives doesn’t mean it’s my fault if someone cuts themselves - I shouldn’t be held responsible for people being dumbasses” argument.

It’s also similar to an argument about whether security researchers should disclose security flaws to the public.  If we know that most system administrators are lazy and won’t patch their systems, then disclosing security flaws will do more harm than good.  The number of systems that are secured by responsible system admins after having seen the report is outweighed by the number of unpatched systems that will be put at risk by hackers having access to those same reports.  The question, in my mind, is whether you want to punish the system administrators who are being responsible (and their users) in order to help the system administrators that are lazy and irresponsible (and their users).  In the long run, I think it’s best to take the path that encourages and rewards responsible behavior, rather than the path that encourages and rewards laziness and irresponsibility.

So, as a general principal, I am empathetic to the “let’s assume our audience is made up of responsible people” argument.  On the other hand, a 1 in 1,000,000 rise in the suicide rate caused by a story with a romantic portrayal of suicide isn’t going to have a tangible impact on whether or not readers in general take responsibility for how media affects them, but it will have a very tangible effect on one person and that one person’s family and loved ones.  I would argue that writing a story with a romanticized suicide is like selling cigarettes or guns.  Yes, people can choose not to smoke to excess, and people can choose not to shoot each other with guns, and the people who smoke or shoot should bear the brunt of the moral responsibility for the harm they cause.  Despite that, I would not, personally, ever sell cigarettes of guns because I would know that, in doing so, I would be responsible, even if only in a small way, for someone being hurt.  My ethics revolve around the moral principle of not harming people (or, indeed, anything capable of not wanting to be hurt) and so I would not write a story that romanticized a suicide.

The second major argument one could make against ethical responsibility for causing increased suicide rates is the “truth” or “realism” argument.  This argument says that inasmuch as a story’s portrayal of suicide is honest or realistic, the writer cannot be held responsible for any harm done by the fiction.  If that character realistically would commit suicide, or if suicide really is as romantic as it is portrayed, then its portrayal in the story represents a type of “truth” and one cannot be held morally responsible for passing on the truth.

Again, this is an argument that I am empathetic with on its face.  I think the concept of trying to hide the truth from someone in order to protect them holds no ethical water.  Ignorance is a form of weakness, and keeping someone ignorant to protect them is like cutting their hamstrings to prevent them from wandering out into traffic.  It always does more harm than good, and usually indicates that the person trying to do the protecting has a dysfunctional relationship with truth. Back to the personal responsibility argument: everyone has an ultimate responsibility for their relationship with reality.

A counter-argument to the “truth” or “realism” argument is that fiction contains no truth or realism, making the moral unassailability of conveying truth a moot point.  I don’t believe this.  I think all fiction contains things the author does not try to convey as truth, and things the author does try to convey as truth.  Take the tortoise and the hare story, for instance: I doubt the author expected readers to believe that the story was historical fact, nor that animals can talk to each other.  On the other hand, the idea that perseverance can win out over arrogant raw talent is something that the author believed and wanted the reader to take as literally true.  Every story has these hidden truths, no matter how small.  If the wimpy character puts his life on the line to save his friends, the message is that this is something human nature is capable of.  To say “all fiction contains truth” is a double edged sword for fiction writers: they can’t use “it’s all just make believe” as a defense for the potential harm their writing might do (as we will see in the next section) but it does mean that they can use the “I’m just telling the truth as I see it” defense.

This is something where I think every author has to judge themselves.  If you write about suicide in a way that romanticises it, is that what you really believe is an accurate portrayal of suicide, or is it one of the little fictions you put in to make a good story and that you hope will be washed away by the reader’s suspension of disbelief?  If it is the former, then I think the “it’s the truth as I see it” defense actually could apply here.  Even still, did you really have to write about suicide?  Was there not an equally truthful way to write the story that would be less likely to cause some reader’s family to live out a terrible tragedy?

The other way fiction is said to harm people is by triggering panic or flashbacks or obsessive thoughts among people with various mental issues.  From a psychological point of view, I’m very skeptical of this.  If we accept that it is true, however, the ethical thing to do seems to be to provide trigger warnings.  I wrote more about this here: http://sorryforthephilosophy.tumblr.com/post/147460931760/why-i-am-going-to-use-trigger-warnings

So, to sum up the score so far:

Harmful or dishonest aspects of the writing or communication process that have nothing to do with the fictional content of the story: Unethical

Romantic portrayals of suicide: Inasmuch as the Werther Effect is real, and the author isn’t relaying the “truth” as he or she sees it, the author bears at least a little moral responsibility.

Fiction that triggers obsessions or flashbacks: Insomuch as that’s a real thing, trigger warnings are the ethical thing to do.

So far, not a lot of really clear potential harms and thus no clear ethical standards.  In the next part of this series, I’ll address the other way fiction might harm people: by affecting how the readers/audience treat others. 

*I’ve used both the terms morality/moral/morals/immoral and ethical/ethics/unethical in this text.  I take morality to mean the underlying goals of trying to be a good person or trying to limit the harm we do in this world.  Ethics are the rules we build for ourselves to try to achieve those goals.  Morality is why, ethics is how.