#I'm only a little sorry about hijacking this post op I just have a lot of feelings about this subject

[notsuchasecret]

On March 12, 1990, some thousand protestors and advocates dropped their mobility aids and crawled up the steps of the US capitol building to fight for their rights.

[id: A photograph of the steps of the US capitol building. Several people are standing and crawling on the steps. The focus of the photograph is an eight-year-old Jennifer Keelan-Chaffins, a young blonde girl with a white and red bandana on her head, a blue tee-shirt, and bluejeans, who had left her wheelchair behind to crawl up the steps. She looks toward the counter with a tired, but determined expression.]

This demonstration was instrumental in passing the Americans With Disabilities Act.

In 1988, at the height of the AIDS epidemic here in the US, David Wojnarowicz was photographed wearing a jacket with a rather brutal saying on it.

[id: David Wojnarowicz wearing his famous denim jacket, photographed from behind. The jacket features a pink triangle, a symbol for the gay community reclaimed from Nazi markers for gay men, over which the words “IF I DIE OF AIDS - FORGET BURIAL - JUST DROP MY BODY ON THE STEPS OF THE F.D.A.” are painted in white.]

Wojnarowicz felt it was his personal duty and obligation to not allow himself to be silenced, to speak up for his rights, especially following the death of his lover Peter Hujar.

Most of us know the story of the Stonewall riot, of the shotglass heard ‘round the world. Stonewall wasn’t the only gay bar at which there were riots: several in New York City, San Fransisco, and a few other cities also helped spark the queer rights movement as we know it.

But look at the faces.

[id: Three black-and-white images from gay-rights protests in the 1960s. The first features a group of people, mostly men, standing with their fists in the air, shouting. In the foreground stands a man in uniform, likely a police officer, with his hands behind his back, viewed from behind. The second image is a group of people on the stairs of a building, running from a cluster of police officers in riot gear, holding guns and batons. A sign hanging from the building reads “STOP ATTACKS ON LESBIANS & GAYS”. The third image is of a parade, several people walking down a sidewalk in an urban neighborhood. The man in the foreground holds an American flag. The visible banner reads  “STONEWALL MEANS FIGHT BACK! SMASH GAY OPPRESSION! Gay caucus [illegible] against war & fascism”. There are two other banners visible with their wording out of frame.]

My point here is that none of these protests were pretty. None of them were calm, quiet words and polite conversations. The time for that came after.

But each of these protests needed to happen. Many of these people were beaten. Many were imprisoned. History books like to gloss over this, but the fact was that even the so-called poster child for peaceful protest, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. himself, was imprisoned multiple times for his activism, and was assassinated for a reason.

They will not listen if you do not give them a reason to listen.

Ultimately the debate over changing the minds of our oppressors with angry words versus kind words is meaningless because it rests on the assumption that people in power will be swayed by words at all. In reality, people who have power over you have limitless ways of tuning you out or reinterpreting your words to death. It's often the case that they won't actually hear you unless there are material consequences for not doing so.

[phantom-of-the-501st]

Just to add on to this, I think this is a running theme with the clones in general.

The clones very rarely talk about the loss of their brothers. Fives never mentioned Echo, Echo never mentioned Fives, Rex only mentions Fives when referencing the chips and the only time Rex actually brings up Echo after the Citadel is when he thinks he may be alive. Jesse, Waxer, Hardcase... There's a long list of lost clones that they just don't talk about.

And sure, Crosshair isn't dead, but it seems to me that when it comes to the clones, choosing to bottle everything up and never talk about it is the thing to do.

I refuse to believe they don't think about him. But I really think they've just made this silent agreement to never talk about him. And I wouldn't be surprised if it's to keep that conversation away from Omega as well.

And Crosshair chose to stay with the Empire. The Batch can't do a whole lot about it because unless they force him to leave they aren't going to he able to do much. So really one of the only options they have is to live their lives.

I've seen some people say that they don't seem to care that Crosshair isn't with them. "But they look happy on these missions". Okay... that doesn't mean they don't miss him.

Grief affects people in different ways. For me, part of the way I cope with losing a loved one is to accept that realistically, there is nothing I can do about it. And if I can't change what has happened, then I have to learn to live with it. I've had multiple times where I've had fun and been laughing while also going through a loss. It doesn't mean I don't miss them, just that I'm learning to live knowing that really I can't do anything to change that.

And like I said, Crosshair isn't dead, but with him actively making the choice to stay, the Batch's hands are tied. They're trying to keep off thr Empire's radar, so running in to try and rescue a brother who chose to be there is not exactly their best plan.

So they have to deal with it in whatever way they can. And for the clones, that normally means not talking about it. His brothers miss him deeply, but that doesn't mean they can't still find the little bits of joy in their ridiculously chaotic lives.

They're trying to cope. It does not mean they do not care about him.

(Sorry OP, I hijacked your post here. 😅💕)

Thinking about how the batch reacts to Crosshair and how they're coping and I've come to the realization that quite frankly. They're not. They're just actively choosing not to cope with it because they're actively choosing not to think about it.

They don't talk about Crosshair much, it's true, because talking about him stresses them out and makes them feel guilty - just look at how they try to brush it off when Cut asks about him, how everything just stops when Omega pulls out Crosshair's weapon kit. How they react when they do come face to face with him and everyone is immediately on edge and unsure of themselves.

Because outside of Echo, the Batch has never had to deal with this kind of acute loss before that we know of. By all accounts, this is their squad, this has always been their squad, they've had a 100% mission success rate. Theories that they knew and grieved 99 are just theories at this point, but even if it did happen exactly like that, it's still not the loss of one of their own. And he's not even dead. They just don't know how to help him.

So they try not to think about it and they try to move on with their lives, especially after he told them in no uncertain terms that he did not want to come home with them. And the next time they are confronted with him I'm pretty sure that wound is going to be exactly as raw as they left it on Kamino because they just decided that coping is hard so they're going to try NOT ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM AT ALL.

And, to be fair, Crosshair appears to be doing the exact same thing because they all share psychological problems like it's going out of style. I love them. They have massive emotional problems.

[etoilesombre]

Ok fuck it, basically the only thing I make pirate blog exceptions for is to talk about work stuff, apparently. But I saw that post and it bothered me a lot, and I think I can see what got twisted into what that person was saying, and it might be helpful for folks to know.

1) You cannot "traumadump" in therapy, that term is about sharing potentially difficult/triggering experiences in social/personal relationships. You are not, generally, responsible for your therapist's wellbeing. Totally agree with OP.

2) Your therapist *might*, in an initial session, encourage you to limit how deep into trauma you go. (Not issues and challenges, TRAUMA.) This should be done up front, and with a lot of explanation. So, there is a big power imbalance in therapy, and retraumatization is very real. People with trauma history often do not feel empowered to advocate for themselves/say no to requests from authority figures. So often, I will say up front to someone something like: "I'm going to ask a lot of questions about your history. I want you to share as much as feels comfortable for you, in whatever words you want, and nothing you say will be judged. But if I ask you something you don't feel ready to talk about yet, you can tell me as much or as little as you want, and we can always come back to it." Because we're not used to being empowered to say no to things in clinical settings.

I also give people the option of telling me that something happened, without going into details, and have a (two way) discussion about the challenges and benefits of talking about trauma, triggers, coping/grounding skills, etc. And sometimes, if someone is talking about trauma and clearly starting to dissociate/panic/generally get really distressed I will pause them, do some grounding, and check in about how they're doing/whether they want to continue.

3) Because here's what you DON'T want to have happen: You really don't want someone who has experienced severe trauma to go into experiences which they may not have talked about/not have talked about in years and open up everything in the first session without having first learned any skills to help them regulate/ground themselves when they're triggered, and with no trust established yet in the therapeutic relationship. Having a panic attack in a new environment with a stranger is Not Fun. Everybody's gonna survive, but its often good to do some prep first. Trauma work is often a slow process where you build up to really sharing and processing *everything.* If someone does it too soon, sometimes they leave feeling all... cracked open and not put back together. And also there's often shame associated with having done that, and not enough space in a first session to work through that response, and so you just don't see people back cause they can't face it. So. That's the potential downside. If a therapist encourages you to wait before sharing something, it should be for YOUR wellbeing.

4) THAT SAID. Going the whole way into trauma in a first session can be great! Lots of people have been holding stuff back and just waiting for therapy as a chance to let it all out, and should be able to do that! Lots of people find immediately talking about it and having someone who is able to hold it and not be freaked out really healing right off the bat. There is nuance, it's not one size fits all, you know yourself and your needs better than your therapist does ESPECIALLY in a first session.

And maybe that's the other caveat. A lot of us are assholes. We're not special, we're not better at being human, our degrees are not actually that hard to get. In a first session, you should be evaluating the therapist as much as the therapist is evaluating you, and you should feel free to keep meeting people until you find someone you click with. So like yeah, totally feel free to share all your history, but also feel free to hold off if you're not quite feeling it with the therapist.

Ok, very sorry to hijack this and write this huge thing probably nobody's gonna read cause this is a dumb pirate blog. I just feel like therapy should be demystified and always feel a need to take opportunities to make it as transparent as possible, cause what we do is really in no way magic, or even privileged information.

TLDR: Whatever your therapist does should be for your wellbeing, not theirs. You may know what is good for your wellbeing better than they do.

Just. For the record, for anyone worried after seeing that post; Traumadumping on the first day of therapy is like. A good therapist’s dream. Like they WANT you to spill out your problems so they can help you work through them. When you only have an hour with someone once a month it is a Godsend for them to be able to just. Say whats hurting them right off the bat. The biggest problem I had at therapy was I became so conditioned to not talk about my issues that nothing was able to get done. So please, ‘traumadump’ to your therapist. Its what they’re paid for. They are trained to decompress, you don’t have to worry about them.

[bluemoonpool]

I love this post. I hadn't thought about the possibility of Bella and Charlotte being friends, until I read through it! I would have loved to see it happen, and I really do think that both of them would've greatly benefited from their friendship. Like op states, Bella and Charlotte's personalities balance each other out in a wonderful way. And because their powers differ, there's little to no room for territorial jealousy. I would like to point out a few things-- Just some areas of the post where I differ. I'll put them below the cut, to keep this post from getting any longer. 

While I do agree with a lot of this post, I feel like there might be some misinterpretations. For example, when op said that Bella doesn't let anyone get close to her. That's not the case at all. Bella and her parents moved around a lot, so she never had the chance to really make friends as a child. For children, making friends is important to developing social skills. I personally know what that's like, because my parents moved around a lot when I was a child too. Bella's an open and friendly person, she's just socially awkward. Another thing was the mention of Louise Chatham and Max Hamilton being rigid and stuck in their glory days. I disagree with this because someone who relives their glory days is someone who hasn't grown up, and accepted the idea that that stage in their life is over. It's a very internal thing that reflects outward, and requires no outside trigger. We can say that it's not the case for both of these characters because a) both of them speak about their experiences as parts of their lives that are no longer there, and b) both of these memories are triggered by outside sources. For Louise, it was meeting Cleo that triggered this, and for Max it was Lewis (and later Charlotte). Louise and Max weren't exactly interfering in the lives of the girls or Lewis, they were simply passing down whatever lessons they learned, whether it was knowledge or regrets. There seems to be a lot of focus on the "there can only be 3" logic. Taking another look at season 2, we can see that this idea wasn't the core of their problems, nor the reason for Charlotte being excluded. It's a bit more complicated than that, and all the girls are to blame. Cleo's indecisiveness toward her relationship with Lewis forced her to make the mistake of accusing Charlotte of something she hadn't done, which set things in motion for season 2. Emma's to blame as well, since she basically treated Charlotte (after becoming a mermaid) like a really dumb child. As for Rikki, I feel like the rigidity toward her stems from the idea of Charlotte being a bad person, which Cleo inadvertently roped both Emma and Rikki into. If it hadn't been for Cleo's jealousy, I'm more than certain Rikki would've been cool with Charlotte. Rikki's just fiercely loyal to her friends. That said, there was a lot the trio did against Charlotte, but that doesn't mean that she hasn't done stuff to mess things up too. Equally jealous of Lewis' friendship with the girls, Charlotte has lied to those around her, manipulated them, she's stalked both Lewis and the girls, and has done her fair share of exclusion as well. Even before she became a mermaid, Charlotte has been trying to force herself into their little world (finally succeeding after purposefully jumping into the moon pool, and becoming a mermaid). That's the real problem as to why the trio were so against Charlotte being a part of their group. But I do agree with op in saying that the whole season is nothing but misunderstandings and double standards! It’s almost hilarious. (Actually, I could go a bit deeper into that but I'm already hijacking a lot of this post, and I'm sorry. If anyone wants me to talk about it, let me know.) And that's where Bella and Charlotte differ, in my opinion. When Cleo and Rikki met Bella, she was already a mermaid; a part of their world. Bella didn't have to force her way in, and because of that I'm certain she'd have been accepted anyway, regardless of whether Emma was in the picture or not. It had nothing to do with "there can only be 3." That's pretty much it. I hope that I got my points across well enough, and please do add to this post if you can! I really enjoyed reading through op's thoughts, and the idea of friendship between two unlikely mermaids! If anyone could fanfic this, that'd be perfect, thank you! I need this in my life-

AU H2O Friendship: Charlotte and Bella

(I don't want any crap about this alone. Free Speech can be practiced but no hate!)

If I had to think of a friendship from H2O that I'd like to have seen, it would be between Charlotte Watsford and Bella Hartley.

(Yes, I am aware that for this to happen, Charlotte had to have stuck around and still be a mermaid for Bella to approach her, but this is an AU of itself!)

So why? Excellent question because at first, one would think they would be as opposite as Rikki and Emma were. But at second glance, if you dig deeper (and deploy better writing and character development), their friendship makes a lot of sense.

For starters, the two would have been their own separate group from the girls, power-wise:

Charlotte has the main 3: Freezing, Boiling and Manipulating/Creating water from an already existing source. Or in layman's terms, Charlotte can manipulate water in its 3 states of matter -Heat being Gas and Solid being Ice.

Bella's powers aren't in a matter of states, but thickness. Realistically, Bella has Viscosity Manipulation:

"The resistance of fluids to a change shape, influencing spraying, injection molding, and surface coating. In everyday terms (and for fluids only), viscosity is "thickness" or "internal friction", thus, water is "thin", having a lower viscosity, while honey is "thick", having a higher viscosity. Put simply, the less viscous the fluid is, the greater its ease of movement (fluidity). The user could make water thicker, making it harder for sea-life to survive or have honey pour out like water by making it thinner. " (from Superpower Wiki)

Therefore, Bella's powers allow her to make any liquid thick in anyway - thick enough to an ooz-like substance, hard enough to walk on, or causing it to explode (or attack).

So, in the best phrasing, both girls have their own sets of powers. And surprisingly, could use them in combinations if they wanted to: constructing paths while avoiding getting wet, creating attacks, creating items from molding and hardening, diversions and escapes to avoid exposure.... Basically, more than we ever saw on the show. And because their powers are so alike and different, it would avoid jealousy between them (especially on Charlotte's part, since she wouldn't feel like she had to compete).

Next, the friendship itself. What would it be like? Bella is mostly seen and notedly described as Bubbly, Caring and Attractive, but with her Status, she's doesn't let anyone get to close to her. In canon, it was Cleo and Rikki's - reckless - use of their powers that caught her attention, leading one to think she thought she was alone. Charlotte is Honest, Humorous (in her own way), and Strong-Willed. However, she is prone to Jealousy and Insensitivity, especially when feeling threatened or stressed.

As canon, we obviously saw Charlotte's worst traits at best and her best traits at worst (bad writing!) and Bella doesn't really stand up much for herself nor let it be known (debatable passive). So as friends, here's how I'd imagine it going down: (For Charlotte) Bella would be able to reach out to Charlotte in her worst moods and calm her down, encourages her to look closely at her actions and the consequences, inspire her immerse herself in her art, implore her to take in to regard of other people's feelings and accept that things won't always go her way/(For Bella) Charlotte would teach her to not be such a Pushover, to raise her voice, to take risks with relationships but call out when said relationships don't seem fair, provide honest opinions where others would rather flatter her, and tell her it's okay to be a little selfish in her life. But the main they both have in common (beside being the "4th" mermaid) is that, regardless of how it came to be, both girls know what it's like to be the outsider and will go out of their way to reassure each other that they're not alone anymore.

Lastly, they would become best friends because, unlike their Mako Mermaid counterparts, the Main Mermaid Trio would never have let them in.

(Y'all gonna think I'm bashing, but on this blog, I'll never be anything BUT honest regarding this!)

Take away the love triangles, legacies, durations and all that, let's tell the truth: Charlotte would have never been welcomed into the group. Not only were they waaayyy too closed off with anybody else aside their group (include boyfriends and exclude families), they had these two rigid yet nostalgic old people where were stuck in the glory days, back when they were young and happier, but disregarded why their group basically broke up (I mean, c'mon! They never even had families! They were still old geezers in the end!). "Only 3 Mermaids" statement only ended up being proven true because the girls (together and on their own) couldn't see past the idea that it didn't need to be "just three", choosing to follow the Past Gen's terrible examples . Max himself was in the wrong too for low-key encouraging Lewis that Cleo would always be the one for him - Basically my logic: If they are meant to last, let it happen on its own. Don't interfere! - and for leading Charlotte to gain and lose her tail, only indulging her because she was Gracie's granddaughter and inadvertly helping her loss only when her bad side became more apparent. Yes, she may be a lot like Gracie , but she has her flaws too. Basically, Season 2 was a mess of misinterpretations, past nalstogia, constant hypocrisy! Charlotte may have been in the wrong, but everyone else constituted to her downfall. Plus, Charlotte was realistic and straightforward on how she felt, having no problem of acting on it (like a certain fiery mermaid y'all like to praise....). Cleo, Rikki (and later Emma) were long ready to dismiss her before they even gave her approval or a chance. A chance they'd never give her, even as a legacy.

(If you by a feel I'm using the same arguments, sorry. As said before, I can't even talk about the second season without ranting!)

Moving forward, lets talk about Bella. For thise who believe they would have let Bella in, even if Emma hadn't left, bless your optimistic hearts. I might have said the same thing, but if the experience with Charlotte was still fresh in the mind, powers and lovers aside, the Ireland-made mermaid was better off if she kept walking when she first appeared. Let's play on the Comet still heading to earth: From 3x01, Bella would try to acknowledge the girls after the guy harassed her, they'd dismiss her. She'd try again at the bar named after Rikki, where they'd do it again until the Water Tentacle takes said mermaid away. Bella still stays to introduce herself, they'd thank her but dismiss her. 3 times would be enough for Bella to believe they'd want to be left alone. Why? Because the girls choose to only stick in 3s and Charlotte is still a fresh wound for them. Lewis might try to get them to befriend her, but they never listen to him anyways unless needed. Bella keeps her distance, the girls are stuck realizing a comet would destroy the world (and regarding the crystals, never wear them.) When comes time, either Emma or Cleo might realize Bella could help, but dismiss it as they'd thing 3 of them are enough to stop it. But Emma's powers can't hold hold the Tower of Light and the world does end. Why? Because they chose to be stuck in their ways and ignore the signs that Bella was meant to be with them for a reason. Yeah, this is all speculation on MY own take of how it would have went, that's beside the point. While it's nice to think Bella would have got a chance, in actuality, the only reason her spot was made was to secure the "Only 3" rule in Emma absence and you can't really deny it. Season 3 was an AU of its own where Bella's introduction all depended on timing and inconvenience on the Rikki and Cleo's part.

That being said, between the two mermaids, the H2O Trio would have never batted an eye at them, not unless they had too. And because of this, Charlotte and Bella would feel it was better to form their own group since they literally would have no one else to accept them.

All together, friendship between Charlotte Watsford and Bella Hartley is one friendship that I would have love to have seen and recognize as it's a friendship formed from loneliness and differences that set them apart from everyone else yet their do very personalities compliment each other and would bring out the best in them. Between their very different sets of powers, traits, interaction with the girls, they just might actually be what the other needed.

[livelaughlegendlore]

Okay, sorry to hijack your post OP, but it's potentially unpopular opinion time: I HATE when Griffin says "Okay, that means I get to make a ~Hard Move~."

Sooooo, I'm not a super experienced GM across the board, but I've run a good bit of Monsterhearts, and the various PbtA games are my favorite game systems to play in. (I've done some Masks and Dungeon World as a player, lots of Monsterhearts on both sides of the table, and I've been prepping to run Night Witches for a little while now.) And in every PbtA rulebook I've read, it's explicit in the GMing chapter that you don't SAY when you make a hard/soft move, you just do it. Same as in the rest of the game: to do it, you have to do it. As a player, you don't say "I want to roll to Use Magic," you describe the actions your character is taking and at the end of that description you roll the dice or wait for the GM to tell you to do so. As a GM, you never say that you're taking a Hard Move, you just describe the phone call from the friend in the ER, or the parent entering the room just in time to see the mangled werewolf transformation. (Oops, my monsterhearts is showing! ::shoves it back in the box:: )

Anyway, it bothers me that Griffin always announces his Hard Moves. It's not true to the system as it wants to be played. And I'm hardly a 100%-by-the-book type of player or GM, but to me that violates the spirit in which the game was intended? "To do it, you have to do it." To me, that's one of the only unbendable rules in a PbtA game. ::shrug::

One of my housemates makes a compelling point that Griffin is GMing more transparently for the sake of the medium, that there were fans who complained after TAZ:Balance that it didn't seem like an actual play podcast and that they wanted to see the game mechanics more. I don't happen to agree, I think taking extra time for mechanics in a story-driven show is taking time away from the story, but ultimately I can respect the McElroys' decision to listen to the desires of their fans!

However...

(from Avery Alder's incredible game Monsterhearts, p111)

(Also, this is absolutely not McElroy hate! I love TAZ and I think Griffin is doing a great job with Amnesty! I'm being kind of a hardass here because I have a pet peeve about this specific thing. I'm a bit behind and I just started listening to the fist episode of the new monster hunt, and I'm mad excited to get back into it!)

I know that a hard move is like Griffin throwing a wrench in things that makes it harder for them to complete their investigation, but my stomach drops every time because whenever he says “hard move” I hear

Bad Luck