#Instead of trying to make people develop or conform to you

[sa1808fi]

Lucy's character development throughout all the Lego movies is interesting, mostly because she's spent a long time hiding her personality in different ways. Despite talking about being different and not conforming to Lord Business's ways, she ended up conforming in a different way to another group of people instead.

I mean if you look into it, originally she worked for Business and wrote 'Everything is Awesome', which ended up being used as a way to manipulate the population so that they would follow all of the rules that Business made without question. Once Lucy found out about those plans that would ruin thousands of lives (Including hers), she ran away from everything that reminded her of the life she used to have working for a dictator and unknowingly helping his plans.

She tried so hard to change herself from who she used to be (she did succeed), but ended up trading her individuality and what actually made her special for a completely different persona that really didn't make her as happy as she pretended it did.

I think that's why she hated Emmet so much when she first met him.

Lucy probably spent years training her skills to defeat Business because she felt so guilty for unknowingly helping the evil overlord.

So seeing all of her efforts to redeem herself be thrown away, because the universe deemed this random unqualified construction worker (who really didn't seem all that different compared to the other people under Business' thumb) more worthy of the piece of resistance has got to hurt.

But then as the movie progresses, she slowly starts to realize that while Emmet is your stereotypical worker drone, he doesn't let that drag him down. He doesn't change himself because he's happy the way he is, despite how everyone else tries to change him.

Going back to my original point, despite preaching about everyone being special in their own way, the second movie starts with everyone building a new society from the ground up, where being tough and gritty is the norm and expected.

But this time instead of having a whole other community of master builders who have been challenging the norm for years (Since now the master builders are also following the social expectations), it's just Emmet challenging everyone's worldview.

Lucy keeps trying to make him listen to her, and teach him that to protect himself he has to change the way he is. It worked for her, it's how she escaped from Business, so why can't he do it too?

I don't think she realizes how she's acting. She's spent a long time forcing herself to be tough and it's normal for her. She pushes down every part of Lucy down to become Wyldstyle (Only really letting Lucy out around Emmet), so that's what she expects of Emmet.

It really isn't until the end does she finally let her be herself.

Just been having Lucy thoughts lately.

[rosemarydisaster]

Magnus Protocol ARG

Im not sure if someone else has already done this (most likely) but I've been re-readin the magnus institute excell with all the kids names. Since the tests where psychological in nature I thought maybe I could figure out if the "Connor" Dyer profile worked for Alice. But I think I've found out something about Sam. This might be the most tin foil hat theory I've had in a while but it makes sense! I've connected the dots!!!!!

There's a couple of things I need to stablish first:

The names seem to be ranked from lowest to highest score on the empathy test.

Sam scored the highest, Gerry the second highest (Dyer is closer to the middle of the list).

The tests seem to relate to cognitive development, especially related to morality and empathy.

The Asch test measures your "conformity" aka, how susceptible you are to peer pressure. Basically, they ask you a question, everyone before you gives the wrong answer, and the test is whether you would give the correct answer or go with what the others said.

The Milgram test measures your obedience when in conflict with your morality. The (very) abridged version is: they tell you tu punish someone by shocking them with increasing voltages and if you refuse they ask you to continue. The experiment goes on until reaching 450 volts or if the participant completely refuses even when ordered to continue.

We know the Institute was trying to find Subjects, Agents and Catalysts (there's an amazing post about this from @alice-apparently )

Okay so I made a little excell with the relevant info:

Both Gerry and Dyer show low conformity and obedience levels. Which, knowing Gerry (and maybe Alice??) makes complete sense. We can assume that they both chose to give the correct answer even if everyone else answered differently, and they also refused to administer the punishment even when directly ordered.

Sam on the other hand, mr "would rather die than complain about being forcefed cake" did in fact go with what most people said instead of the correct answer. He also finished the Milgram experiment, going against his moral compass to obey the instructions.

I think they were trying to find viable subjects to groom into avatars for the eye. Hear me out. The kids with the lowest empathy score show high scores in the Milgram test (makes sense, they don't care as much about hurting people) but from 80% empathy forward no one scores high. No one except Sam, the one with the highest empathy score.

Why not just pick the one's with the least empathy? the least empathetic kids were also the youngest and the ones with lowest cognitive developement (I do not go in deph about the other test but you can see the scores for yourself here). This kids aren't useful yet, because maybe they'll become more empathetic (And as such, more resistent to the Milgram test) as they grow up/develop.

Not Sam. He has perfect scores in every single development test, he has the highest empathy and yet he's the most likely to be influenced to harm other people.

In episode 10 Sam confirms his obsession with finding out why they didn't chose him despite having the highest scores. Gerry was the second highest and he didn't get picked either. My theory is that Sam was indeed chosen, and the fact that he shows no survival instincts when it comes to figuring this mystery out is prove.

His test results show someone whiling to file useless papeworks with extremely personal information because "well, you're supposed to even if no one reads it". Also Teddy leaving for a job that somehow didn't actually exist smells like somebody trying to free a spot in the very Eye-coded OIAR. A spot that Sam is more than happy to accept.

I don't know if this is an incredibly long con to condition Sam into the perfect vessel for the eye or if the Magnus Institute had to change plans after burning down. If it's the latter I can see them being very happy when their specialest little boy signed up for the OIAR and fell right into their laps again. Either way, Sam's fucked.

[loveerran]

Utah Bathroom Ban

In an effort to protect women and children from a problem that does not exist, Utah legislators recently passed, and the governor recently signed into law, HB 257. Among other things, this bill defines criminal penalties for improper use of a binary, sex-designated (male or female) restroom in a government owned or controlled space that does not correspond to one's assigned sex:

"Going into a bathroom that is not consistent with your birth gender, or your birth sex, you are putting yourself at greater risk. I think that’s the best way for everybody to look at it and say, ‘How do I avoid risk? How do I avoid risk of arrest?'" - Senate sponsor of HB 257 Dan McCay

As a trans woman who has been out and about for 20 years, what I hear in this quote is very specifically: "We want you to be scared when you use a bathroom that doesn't align with your assigned sex at birth. You already know someone may report you just for being there and the criminal justice system is horrible for trans women, so maybe you'll think twice before trying to pee when out in public."

And it works. I am reminded I am different and should be scared of what will happen if the wrong person is having a bad day, reports me to the bathroom monitoring authorities, and some cop starts making choices that put me in a difficult or dangerous situation. Stories of abuses suffered by trans women in the system are legion.

But I don't think my situation is the real problem here. In practical terms, this bill means a trans kid can't use a school restroom that aligns with their gender identity and/or presentation. Instead, they have to develop a 'privacy plan' with the school and use separately designated facilities or a faculty restroom, etc. - reinforcing that they are 'other'. This is very dangerous and will create victims and we have actual data and studies to back up that assertion.

Let me restate: There is data demonstrating that bathroom restrictions hurt gender non-conforming kids, with a reported increase in the sexual assault rate of nearly 50% when bathroom restrictions of this type are in place.

My wife points out "I would be safer in a men's restroom than you. Most men will actually try to protect women, but that doesn't apply to trans women. Quite the opposite."

The sponsors of the bill could not name a single instance of trans kids being a problem in spaces aligned with their gender identity. Not one single incident for them to rely on. And they ignored evidence indicating there are actual harmful effects. This bill makes a small, marginalized group of people more likely to be victims of violence.

This issue was so important to the Utah legislature that they devoted a substantial portion of the 1st two weeks of the legislative session to HB 257, including significant changes after the public comment period passed.

When the bill went live on May 1, the Utah State Auditor's office began being flooded with false reporting (I love you all :)!). The Auditor's office responded by publishing what can only be described as a scathing indictment of the situation:

"the Office created the complaint form to comply with a statutory mandate – a role we did not request. Indeed, no auditor sets out to become a bathroom monitor... Like many in the public, we learned about our role under this bill shortly before the bill was rushed to final passage. I recognize that many Utahns feel trampled by an invasive and overly aggressive Legislature that too often fails to seek input from those most affected."

Thank you to everyone who continues to fight for us on this issue. There aren't enough of us to win this on our own. We need your help.

[owl-bones]

Okay, now I'm just imagining how Helios' influence would be on our side as creators. Just this kind of cognitive influence that you don't notice being inflicted on your creative process. Then someone points out how different your au is from it's orginal concept and ya... it was supposed to be a swapfell or something, wasn't it? The esthetics are some much warmer, yellows, and oranges with reds in every design than orginally planned. And where did that sun emblem come from? Instead of the usual delta rune of that's supposed to represent the angel that clears the underground/player it'sa blazing sun for some reason? Why did you turn it into a sun again? You can't seem to remember, and everything is so developed that you can't really bring yourself to scrap anything. Even if you try, you get this mythic case of art block and somehow lean /more/ into it instead. It just seems easier to go with the flow at this point. You're going as deep as desgining the architecture for once, totally not your usual taste and yet... idk, I just like those kinda meta interactions, so I'm rambling a little.

yessssssss!!!

that'd put Helios on Ink's hitlist even more-- not only is he putting most AUs off-script, but he's indirectly influencing creators and making it harder for them to create according to their own desires......... maybe they'd stop creating entirely, or move on to other things that are easier and turning out the way they want........

how is there supposed to be a flourishing/expanding multiverse if all the AUs are stagnant and forced to conform to Helios' wishes? Ink would definitely team up with Eos to get things corrected, but they're working at a major disadvantage. within the AUs that Helios has helped and that they're trying to correct, they'd be seen as the villains. they're actively trying to sabotage AUs to be negative again, or get them to reset entirely. not only are they working against an army and massive sphere of influence, they're working against all the people in the AUs.

a Horror AU isn't going to want to be put back underground and in a famine, they're gonna fight for their freedom and happiness. this is why Adze (Horror) works for Helios even though he totally knows the vibes are So Incredibly Off slkdfjlksdjfs he doesn't care if the balance is messed up or other grand heroic nonsense, you aren't putting him and his brother back in there

the entire multiverse's balance on the line, and the creators' own ability to maintain the story of their AUs properly, but are they doing the right thing if they have to make so many people suffer? which is more important-- that things are canon or that the story is nicer for the people in the AU? what a conundrum..........

[kite2013]

Do you think MHA is sexist?

Hi there Anon

To answer your question

Yes I do

The way the outfits of Female Heroes are revolved around how attractive it makes them, instead of you know...

Being an actual Hero Outfit

It would make sense for Women who want that type of outfit to get it, but the vast majority are forced in it by the author.

The author could have touched upon this by revealing that Hero Society have made it so that Female Heroes must conform to a certain image.

This is just about the outfits by the way, there are posts by people that explain better than I could, about how the Female cast were unutilized and took a backseat to the Male cast who were given much more characterisation and were fleshed out.

We know far more about Mirio and Tamaki compared to Nejire, despite the hype about them being the top 3 students.

Uraraka is the only Female Student of Class 1A that gets the necessary character development and characterisation.

The rest get shoved in the background with maybe a few moments (Jiro, Mina, Momo)

There are more examples, if you find the right posts talking about it. I'll try to link some in this post when I find it.

[daily-hanamura]

I kind of wished that the persona 4 cast wasn’t stuck in a narrative where the main theme is ‘always accept the role thrust upon you and if you don’t like it, just force yourself to like it’. Yukiko actively wants to leave Inaba and create her own life, but is portrayed negatively when doing so, with her character arc involving her accepting the role thrust upon her. Don’t get me started on Naoto. I know you’re the Yosuke guy, and was wondering what are your thoughts on this when applied to Yosuke?

I want you to know that being called "the Yosuke guy" is now my greatest achievement you've made my day everyday for the last week

I do agree with you, and I think it was one of my initial issues with P4 where, for a game whose entire narrative is about being true to yourself, it sure falls back into that tired sense of social conformation a lot. It's grating, right, because it feels like what they really mean to say is "be yourself! but not too much and not in a way that makes other people unhappy and make sure you're still living up to other peoples expectations because that's the real reason why you're unhappy with yourself, you haven't accepted who we want you to be (which is the real you that we've decided) etcetc" and it just undercuts the emotional impact of their self-acceptance (see also kanji and rise). (dw I know P5 also kind of has the same problem, and I can go into a whole thing about the limits of transformative narratives written by capitalist corporations but i wont. today-)

I think with Yosuke though, it's really interesting because his character arc is more so tied to his relationship with Inaba as a place, rather than his fundamental self-perceptions. It's established early on that Yosuke hated the town for various reasons; he's a city boy who wants excitement and connection, but most of the town hates him so he's shit out of luck and it gives him little reason to like the town back. As the game progresses, he starts to like the town -- "it's not about where you are, but who you're with", so it's his friendships (and having people who accept him for who he is) that makes the place meaningful for him. And, at the end of the day, Yosuke did get what he wanted - excitement and connection.

But he's not tied to Inaba.

In P4AU, it's revealed that Yosuke's struggling to figure out what he wants to do in life, but by the end of it he tells Yu that he wants to leave the town and go to college with Yu in the city, and that he wants to see the world and experience more things for himself. It fascinates me because it very strongly implies that Yosuke's arc isn't complete as we're very expressly told that he's still developing. It stands in contrast to the other characters who have effectively been fixed into some role or position (Yukiko as an inn manager, Rise as an idol), and unlike them, Yosuke hasn't been permanently relegated to the things that he starts off hating. He hasn't been written to stay in Inaba or even to continue working at Junes after graduation, instead he gets the opportunity to try things. imo this makes his arc more situational (and therefore layered) - Yosuke's perspective on his circumstance matures, but who he is as a person doesn't have to change, and he's not forced to make a trade-off with the wishes he had at the start.

This might be because Yosuke is Atlus' favourite character of the contrast between Yosuke's city background and the rest of the Inaba folk. There's a guy in the school who talks about how most people who finish high school in Inaba just go on to get jobs, and very few actually leave for college and beyond. It's something deeply realistic and reflective of human geography IRL, because that's very common in small communities. A fear of the outside world because of how isolated they are (and Inaba kind of is - remember how Yosuke said they barely had cell connectivity up until recently) means they tend to look inwards instead of out, so there isn't as strong an awareness of what else there is out there and a belief that your options are basically just that (it also makes it all the more impressive that they have surprisingly well-traveled teachers). Yosuke, on the other hand, is very much connected to the internet and the outside world, and he also tends to think about the things that he's missing out on more tangibly.

It makes for a very interesting parallel with Yukiko, who had grown up in Inaba all her life and also expresses that same interest in wanting to go out and see the world. Yukiko's idea about the kind of options that she has is weirdly limited for someone who is supposed to be at the top of her class. When you meet her at the bookstore, she talks about getting a job license so she could leave town, and her first thought was interior decorator (do you even need a license for that? it's not a chartered profession unlike an architect or interior designer, but things might work differently in japan). And maybe she does have a genuine interest in it so I'm talking shit, but it also feels like it's a job that she's aware of only because of the ryokan. As far as I could tell, we don't actually see her express any interest in, say, furniture themes or colour swatches and fabric textures in the way Kanji very clearly does. Her world view, like everyone else, is bounded by the reach of her experience, but because Inaba is so small and cloistered it impedes her ability to imagine beyond that. Even when she's thinking of leaving, her options are still limited to her experiences at the inn. I'm still really salty about how she decided to stay at the ryokan in the end, because something much more satisfying in my opinion would have been for her to get the opportunity to try different things elsewhere in the world, and if she decided that the ryokan was the right thing for her, then, well, fine, I guess? Or some cliche like exploring other inns elsewhere so she could bring that knowledge home. Especially since she had the support of her family and the inn staff, it makes her narrative feel more like an acceptance of her lot in life, rather than a genuine realisation that yeah, this was what she wanted, which was what the game wanted us to think, except it's not convincing. Instead, it just feels like a weird stagnation because her initial wish of wanting to see the world beyond the ryokan was not satisfied.

But hey, guess who does!

Yosuke gets to learn how to make the best of a situation, but ultimately, he's not beholden to it. He - and his writers - understand that he's not done growing, so he doesn't fix himself to a role that he doesn't like. AND IT'S GOOD. I just wish everyone else got that opportunity.

[watsername]

honestly i love mcc i love competitive minecraft but the game just isn’t fun for anyone anymore. lots of players have dropped out are talking of dropping out or go on stream saying things like ‘this is the first mcc i’ve actually enjoyed in a while’ . like. thats not the sign that an event is successful . and i don’t really think that’s scott’s or the developers faults but it’s more so the culture around mcc that has changed drastically in the past year or so.

when i first started watching it, mcc was about cc’s learning to work together and competing in a fun event where there was no real stakes except the winners got a fun little token. mccs rise in popularity has snowballed a little to develop this culture of expectancy . as with all fanbases, some fans become a little too engrossed in the content and become a little overbearing about it creating this toxic culture of criticism under the guise of analysis . this isn’t to say that all mcc analysts are toxic or that the concept of vod reviewing and analysing a players performance is bad- but the attitude that a lot of the more vocal fans have been taking towards this has been .mm . not the best .

forcing players into rigid boxes based on their performance records and dogpiling them if they undeperform or over glorifying a players for performing above their average etc, it creates a competitive culture amongst fans trying to prove who suppprts the better player . very much ‘my dad is stronger than your dad’ kind of vibe.

this whole attitude also makes it less enjoyable for the players who may now feel a lot of pressure to conform to the expectations of their fans- of course everyone tries their best every event but if someone’s having a bad performance they’re more likely to experience genuine discomfort and self confidence issues continuing in the event because they know what people are expecting of them . even for lower ranking players it can affect self confidence because nobody expects anything of them .

its marketed deeply throughout the fandom as a for fun event with people who are naturally competitive being shunned for their competitive attitude but logging online and seeing people hating some people winning, hating on other teams for knocking their team out of top 2, refusing to congratulate the winners, even complaining over and over again that some aspects of the event like pvp and parkour are unfair to their streamer because their streamer ain’t good at them to the point where pvp and parkour games had their coin distribution rules changed . that doesn’t scream for fun behaviour .

that’s another thing . random changes to games that don’t necessarily need to be changed . the buildmart changes were good it make it easier to navigate and allowed people to move between sections faster and featured some new builds, the sky battle coin distribution prioritising the amount of time you survive over kills actually undermines the point of the game as a pvp heavy event . instead of fighting people you can get away with playing more defensively . we already have survival games for survivability . same goes for remixes i don’t think they typically go down well . some might but majority don’t tend to have a good reception .

even within the players themselves, there’s because quite a cliquey kind of dynamic where if the team with the most support doesn’t win, the winners are not congratulated. take last night for example . ponk and gumi scored their first wins, ponk being the first black person and as far as i can remember gumi being the second woc and first asian woman to win an mcc . let’s not even get into the diversity of mcc right now but only two people came into the voice call which lasted a while after the event to congratulate the team, only sylvee and scott and a few replies on twitter . ‘oh but the captain’ idc . i love him too but he didn’t win and it was a big day for the team that did with 50% of the team getting their first win and they played really well together. looking again at fan behaviour towards creators some players have felt unwelcome by the pressure of the competitive dynamic called bad sports for being upset with their own underperforming and alienated by the community for having multiple wins or because they just don’t want them in the event . that doesn’t scream for fun . and that in itself is really bad sportsmanship .

i think overall what started to kill mcc was it’s pandering really. i’ve fully done research on how scott puts together teams before but i still believe a lot of what goes into a team is how well it will be received. it doesn’t really force creators to get to know each other and work with each other it just takes groups of people who already know each other have relationships with each other and have relationships that are recognisable to the fanbase . this doesn’t allow people to meet and find new creators they might enjoy to watch and it prioritises some teams as the Ones To Watch because of certain dynamics pres t which undermines any smaller creators trying to make their way into the event . the insistence on changing games based on viewer complaints as opposed to suggestions from players themselves on how things can be improved is just odd to me too .

idk man mcc just isn’t what it used to be and a lot of people are becoming way too entitled over what they want to see there

[thelostgirl21]

I wish there was a way to clearly say:

I'm personally comfortable being called a "woman", only because I have the sexual dimorphism typically associated with a female of the human species, and that's how other people see me as when they look at my physical appearance; nothing more.

While making 100% sure not to accidentally bring any harm to the trans community, or making it sound like one's gender identity should always match their physical appearance, when that's far from being the case.

Because, until very recently, I'd always been calling myself "a girl", or "a woman" exclusively based on how I physically look.

To me, defining myself as "a woman", has always been the equivalent of describing an external characteristic of my body that others are able to see.

- I'm a woman.

- I'm 5'7''.

- I have brown eyes.

- etc.

It's always been exactly the same to me. It's what you can physically see, not who I am.

Somehow, it's like I completely forgot to develop a sense of personal identity tied to "being a woman" while I was growing up.

I could wake up tomorrow with a body that has the sexual dimorphism of a male of my species instead, have everyone call me a man and suddenly have to live my life as one, and I'd have only ONE problem with it.

Just the one.

My partner is a heterosexual man, so that would be a challenge.

But otherwise, I think I'd just be really curious to explore the physiological differences between my prior body and my new body, and then move on with my life without changing a single thing to the things I like, my behavior in general, personal interests, probably the way I like to dress, too, etc.

I'd just be "looking more masculine" while doing it.

It would be like having blonde short hair instead of my current brown long hair.

The rest of the world would treat me differently as a man, sure! But that wouldn't reflect how I identify or feel inside about who I am.

Just how others now see me as and choose to socially treat me.

My gender, to me, is something that's always existed outside of myself.

I have no personal use for it, nor is it a part of my personality.

I guess I've often been gender-non-conforming, too, not because I was attempting to rebel against my own gender, felt a need to distance myself from the binary, or anything... But just because I've never seen the point of it.

I've had boyfriends telling me that it was like I wanted to be the "man in the relationship", and being upset that I wasn't letting them play their role at times (that hasn't really been an issue with women, oddly enough); and I broke up with them without looking back, because what the fuck was that even supposed to mean?

I wasn't trying to behave like a man or a woman, I was just being myself, and adopting the social roles and behaviors I'm comfortable with. If you can't love me as I am, then what am I supposed to do?

Younger, I've had little boys back at school telling me that "it was weird for a girl to like certain things or express herself a certain way", and my response has always pretty much been to shrug, go "guess I'm a weird girl then", and then continue doing things my way.

(Yes, I'm aware that I've been very privileged to live in a world where I've merely been occasionally bullied or suffered verbal micro-agressions for ignoring the social standards set for "little girls"... Then again, I've probably embraced some of them!

I loved playing with my "He-Man and the Masters of the Universe set", or walking around with a lightsaber pretending to be Luke Skywalker... But I was cool with "My Little Poney" (the originals) and "Rainbow Bright", too!

Like I said, I wasn't trying to be "non-conforming", I just liked whatever I liked!

I was also lucky enough that my parents fully allowed me to go for what I enjoyed in terms of toys, games, activities, playmates, etc., regardless of gender.

And my physical appearance as a child occasionally had people mistaking me for a boy. So, perhaps, the other adults that saw me behave as one in public assumed I was one, and thus put less pressure on me to behave in a way that would have been deemed more "feminine" than "masculine".

By the point I really started looking more "feminine" (like I do now), I guess I'd moved past caring about it, and/or had reached a point where it made no sense to me that it would suddenly have been upsetting that I occasionally behaved "as a boy" or enjoyed "boy things" now when, until then, it had always been perfectly fine and well accepted that I did!

I guess there's something to be said about the influence of early socialisation, and how adults in the social environment of a child respond to a young child's gender, in the level of importance they might instinctively give to it later on.)

Like, I'm pretty sure that, if I were to ask you to determine my gender based on my looks alone (while fully giving you permission to do it), especially when I'm performing on stage wearing makeup, you'd go "you're a woman!" with a fair level of confidence!

But that's just it! To me that's just the way I look. A stylistic choice based on the way my body chose to develop, if you will.

What drives me nuts, though, is that I have zero problem empathizing with the trans community and their need to express their own gender identity, because I know what it feels like to need to be seen and respected as one's authentic self!

You tell me you identify as a woman, a man, agender, genderfae, etc., and/or feel a need to express it? Be yourself, and rock that gender! It is who you are, and it is your right to own it!

The fact that I feel like I don't have any particular use or need for gender doesn't mean that it can't be important for others, and that they don't have a use or need for it themselves.

Just because I don't intimately understand it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist or doesn't matter. It doesn't mean that I can't support, and actively advocate for proper gender recognition and respect in schools and other public places.

I "get it" without "getting it", if you will.

The problem, however, is that I am extremely uncomfortable with the idea that, if I identify as a "woman", people will assume that it means more to me than "I physically look female".

That it will be assumed that I emotionally and psychologically connect with my gender, and feel a need to express it, or a sense of attachment and belonging to the woman gender.

After having called the way my physical body "looks" to others on the outside "being a woman" for decades, it's hard for me to suddenly go "being a woman is not the same as passing for a woman, it's about the gender you identify with inside..." and stop calling myself a woman, because I feel like I've no gender identity inside of myself.

But "agender" doesn't quite feel right to me, either, because I'd never had any problem with the idea of being a woman, until I learned that I was supposed to give a damn about being a woman, and personally connect with my gender, that is.

And "gender non-conforming" doesn't sound quite right, either, because I'm not trying to avoid conforming to the woman gender, or expressing a different gender than the one that was assigned to me at birth.

They basically gave me a gender based on my genitalia when I was born, and I went "Yeah, sure! I guess I can look the part... Why not?"; while ignoring the whole social instructions booklet and guidelines that went with it.

So lately, every time someone has asked me what my gender is, or what gender I identify with, I've had a tendency to freeze, panic, and mentally go:

Like the idea of my having a gender makes no internal sense to me. It's not something I can relate to, "vibe with", or identify with.

Is there a way to respectfully say "I'm calling myself a woman for convenience's sake, because that's the gender traditionally associated with the way I look, and I'm okay with having grown into a feminine appearance by default? But please, don't assume it means anything to me beyond that, or expect me to behave, dress, or do anything according to the woman gender."

I've been using "gender apathetic" in an attempt to convey it, but is that really what it means, and how most people understand it?

Basically, I feel like my answers to these questions would be:

- What physical look do you most resemble? Woman / feminine / female.

- What gender do you identify with? None.

- Do you feel comfortable being called a woman, and her / she pronouns, based on the way you look? Yes.

How do you freaking call or define that?

Non-internalized cisgenderism?

[sarucane]

Why didn't Ed always protect Stede?

I'm a bit late to the party and only really got into OFMD with S2, so I've started watching S1 really thoroughly only recently. And I've noticed that there's this narrative in the fandom that Ed and Stede are super protective of each other, particularly Ed--but as I've gone through S1 (number redacted) times, it's been driving me nuts how much Ed doesn't protect Stede.

Sure, there's the meme we all love when Ed stands in front of the firing squad--but for most of the scene before that, he's been standing and watching Stede beg for his life. He's upset, but he doesn't intervene until it's nearly do late. And before that, Ed doesn't say or do a thing about Calico Jack treating Stede like shit--sure it's believable that he just doesn't notice the passive aggression, but not even catching the "Steve" thing? That's something that isn't even intervening, Jack could be making an honest mistake. But the thing no-protection moment that's really driven me nuts is this moment

In the scene before this, Ed and Stede have just had an incredibly emotionally intimate conversation. Ed is clearly at least half in love with Stede at this point. This is a relationship that means something important to him, this is a person he cares for deeply. And…and Izzy almost murdered Stede in front of him, because of him, and he just looked away.

But at the same time, Ed does love Stede, he does intervene to protect him from the English--at great personal risk and cost. By the end of S2 Ed's much better about this kind of thing (though I'd argue he's never as super-protective as I've seen suggested).

So what was going on here? Ed's a total softie inside, especially with Stede, so why was he like this?

And I've got a theory! Here goes:

Mr. "greatest pirate who ever lived" is, in fact, an overachieving rule-follower (cough teacher's pet cough).

Ed doesn't intervene to help Stede because Ed conforms himself to the rules set by whoever has the strongest personality in a room, or whatever "code" is being pushed on him/is easiest to follow.

I think this is part of why Ed often struggles to identify what he wants, or hold onto a firm sense of his self-identity. And I think it's a lot of why he's so attracted to Stede, and why that relationship is so important to his development: Ed is much less likely to follow the rules when he's one-on-one with someone, and spending a lot of time alone with Stede gives him much more mental space to understand what he wants.

And just like Stede is most successful when he doesn't try to follow the traditional rules of pirating, Ed is most successful--in his relationship with Stede and outside it--when he doesn't obsess over bending to the rules, and instead picks and chooses which ones to follow and which ones to discard.

I have a partly-written super-long version of this where I go episode by episode looking at how the rules theme works with Ed's character mechanics, but I'm just going to focus on the topic question here (I might get around to posting the long version, but I also might be distracted by something shiny;) )

So let's start with The Art of Fuckery and the thing that was driving me crazy.

Ed's core conflict in this episode was whether he'd going to send Stede to "doggy heaven." Why would he follow Stede to doggy heaven? Because according to Izzy, Stede is categorized as a pet, and Ed has "a policy regarding pets aboard your vessel." It's a rule. Ed has to follow it.

And Ed fully intends to follow it, right up until the kraken turns up and the rules go out the window. And then he's in a safe space with Stede, drowning in memory of the good rules he broke (don't kill people you love). But Stede rejects the idea that Ed breaking that rule makes him a bad person. He appeals, instead, to friendship. And offers his own rule: that they could pretend the murder thing never happened.

Because that's the amazing thing about Stede: he lives at the intersection of aristocratic and pirate rules (which isn't supposed to exist, and which drew Ed to him), and he makes up his own rules.

When Ed's with Stede, he can follow different rules, unlike anything he'd imagined. Can even sometimes make up his own rules. Can actually pay attention to himself, think about what he wants, what he likes and fears.

But when Ed's in a crowd, or alone with someone trying to impose something on him, he conforms. So when Izzy invokes Pirate Rules and steamrolls Ed ("no you're not doing this,") Ed lets him.

It's a character flaw, and it's a serious one...but it's also one Ed works on when he stops complaining about the treasure hunt business. And when he and Stede discuss the idea of co-captains, and arrangement that would break the rule that "a ship has only one captain."

Which Ed is able to do because he's in a safe space. Calico Jack disrupts that, and introduces a succession of games with clearly defined rules, which Ed follows one after another. And Ed has so little self-awareness, is so easily swamped by Jack's personality, that he doesn't notice how Jack's treating Stede, let alone defend him, and he bows to every hint of pressure.

And all that culminates in Ed having to make a decision: follow pirate rules, where everyone's just at "various stages of screwing each other over," or do what he wants. Go help his friend, the guy he loves.

Which just ends up with him being absorbed right back into the pirate system of rules. He tries to use this at first, faking a confession on the grounds that he's a "life is cheap sort of guy." But Izzy's outsmarted him, and Izzy invokes pirate rules again: that Ed told him the rule for a first mate was "above all loyalty to your captain."

Ed doesn't call out for the Act of Grace until the last minute. He could have done it at the trial--he didn't. This is a hard thing for him to do, because he's surrounded by rule-following pressure, from Izzy and from Chauncy. The last time he was in a situation like this, Ed just looked away and let Stede die (he thought).

But the thing about Ed is that he's "half insane." For years, he used the combo of being considered "mad" and also having Izzy around to have his cake and eat it too with rules, to be the world's greatest pirate and also hang onto his own authentic self.

As a result, Ed got good at finding loopholes. Places where you can follow the rules and break them, at the same time. Getting run through, but in a place that missed "all the important bits." Being sentenced to death, but asking for an Act of Grace.

It's a big deal when Ed steps in front of Stede like that. He's acting against pirate rules, risking being absorbed by the rules set by the English.

He does it for Stede--and that starts to set him free. After that, Ed's never just following the rules again. He actually can't, even when he tries: his going kraken at the end of S1 and start of S2 is doomed from the start and full of contradictions, starting with the fact that he's on Stede's ship, the ship with hidden passages where rule-breaking can be hidden until it's needed.

Ed struggles a lot to figure out which rules to follow ("I will abide by the guidelines"), which rules to set aside ("Can we take it slow?"), when to make up his own rules ("So we're innkeepers now."). And Stede helps him, telling him things like "This can be whatever we want it to be," and "you're not a dick, life's a dick."

I don't really have a clever conclusion to this particular meta. It's a messy thing, and individual figuring out how to their life does and does not intersect with society. This theme doesn't resolve neatly, it just stops at the end of the season, like the tension between Ed/kraken/Blackbeard.

But there's a lot of hope here, I think. When Ed acts to protect Stede, and to fight alongside him, he's not just being a protective partner. It's a learned action, the physical manifestation of a decision Ed's made about who he wants to be in the world. Rules be damned.

[starswhisperwritershear]

@any-n-everything Here's why i think Sam and Tucker needed some more thorough development. I mean it's not that they were terrible, and I think the majority of my problems with them suffer from the writing and it being a kids show who's primary goal was to teach kids moral lessons. But Sam had several moments where she disregard what Danny wanted and pushed her own agendas no matter how that affected him and Tucker. Such as the gorilla project (yes it was for Danny's grade but the poor kid got no sleep that night and clearly didn't want to be there), or the one that gets me the most is season 2 episode 1 when she wished Danny and her had never met and then instead of trying to solve the problem in any other way (she already knew at this point that it was the wishing ghost attacking) Like going to get help from any of the other ghost hunter or dealing with the ghost herself which she was shown very capable of doing (and we needed more of because honestly that was a cool aspect of her character) she decided to put her friend, who she supposedly cares about, through the most traumatic experience of his life a second time. She killed him, twice. Because she was the one who egged him on to go in the portal the first time despite him warning her about safety issues, and then she just shoved him in the second time. But then the show wants to convince me she likes him romantically. That's crazy. Not to mention the one time with the trucks that Danny and Tucker liked and she wanted him to use his ghost powers to her advantage despite having in several other episodes berated him for doing the same thing. And (last example I promise) in the show finale when he gave up his ghost powers to protect his family and go back to a normal life because he's been struggling with this for so long, she gets upset! (They all do, I'm not excluding Jazz and Tucker from this, this is just my Sam paragraph). She tells him that she feels she lost a friend and that he's wrong to give up superpowers because now he's not unique or special and she wants friends who are unique and special. Like damn, Sam. Low blow. It's like when a friend only wants to hang out with you to play on your x box and when you don't have the x box they disappear and hate you.

As for Tucker, he's not quite as bad and again I think his character just suffers from the Tv-Y7 rating, but there are a few times where he just straight up disrespects Danny. The only two times we're shown that they get in a fight, Tucker completely does a 180 and makes Danny out to be the bad guy. In the episode where he wishes he has ghost powers he just blames Danny for taking the spotlight and showing off how much better he is, when Danny never did any of that (at that point in the show). Even if Tucker felt that way because of jealousy, he was still really rude with how he spoke to Danny and quite literally put a citizen's life in danger just to upstage Danny. He does it again in the one for where he runs against Dash for class president. (I know that in both of these he was under a ghost influence, but all of the problems started before the ghosts got involved, they just enhanced what he was already feeling.) (And I know Danny and Sam weren't listening to him but that's wildly out of character for Danny and I feel the writers just conformed his personality to the plot to teach the listen to your friends narrative) but he also took that scepter willingly from the mummy ghost. He has like a weird superiority complex that he takes out on people at the most random times. Then in the episode with Nocturne, his best dream is him being all rich and making Danny his janitor! That's not how you think of your best friend! That shows just how much better he thinks he is compared to Danny. Then in the episode where the G.I.W. buys Danny's house and Danny is freaking out, Tucker is like hey man, you have a lot of money now, act like it and enjoy it and calm down. Then gets mad at him when he acts like it and enjoys it! And also he did the same thing as Sam in the finale.

Sorry for the chaotic jumbled mess of thoughts, I have more to say I just can't remember any more specific examples off the top of my head at the moment. But again, he could have worse, I just think they also deserve their own growing and learning moments.

[vigilskeep]

how do u like get into da2 bc ive only finished it twice (compared to my 7 complete origins playthrus) and its just so like unsatisfying to me like roleplay wise. it just feels so hard to build a character and a unique story which sucks bc i like some parts of the game!! its just hard to get thru the everything else about it

at some point i’m not going to be the best person to answer this because i have the opposite problem but !! i did have an initial playthrough of da2 that is like. nothing to me bc it was so generic so i guess i did develop from that point

i think using the “colour system” of personality to its fullest really helps. especially having a “secondary colour” to use for flavour or in certain situations? if you’re struggling with your character feeling unique from other people’s characters, i would recommend avoiding primarily purple to begin with... as fun as it is, it’s kind of considered default for hawke. not to push my own agenda but for example, trying out a primarily red hawke can really refresh the game without losing entertainment value. and a blueish red and purplish red are really different, and where you use that blue or purple really alters things. and i would recommend rivalling at least one companion... let your hawke have some opinions instead of just being blank slate to win everyone over

idk da2 is the kind of developing a character i love so it’s hard for me to explain the appeal. it gives you a set of really specific circumstances and you get to decide what kind of a person those circumstances create. here are some of the major questions that distinguish one of my hawkes from another:

how do they feel about the magic in their family? do they value it or resent its dangers?

how do they feel about being the eldest sibling, pushed into protecting and leading the family? did they accept that? does the pressure weigh? how does that affect their memory of their father and their relationship with leandra?

does their father have elven heritage, or heritage from another part of thedas? how does that affect their experiences in and out of their home? do they want to engage with or ignore that part of themselves?

what did they do before the game starts? where did they get and practice their skillset?

what makes them choose the spells and abilities they use? what specialisation do they take and why? who taught it to them?

do they care about their appearance? do they care about conforming to gender norms? how do they want to look and why? do they achieve it?

do they wish they could return to ferelden, or is kirkwall their home?

are they just doing all this to protect their family and stay out of the templars’ reach, or are they ambitious? do they want money? power? the luxuries of hightown? the ability to really change things? the status their mother told stories about? do those priorities change?

what are afraid of? how do the dangers they face every day affect them? which quests linger in their memory? how do those traumas affect their decision making?

have they ever been in love before? what are they looking for in a romantic partner? is the person they fall for what they would’ve gone for, or a surprise? what is it about their romance that made them fall for them? do they hold their parents’ romance as a perfect fairytale ideal or a fate to avoid?

maybe you can’t do anything you like with a hawke, but get a few unique ideas and a cohesive and interesting enough combination of the yes/no questions, or pick an answer to one of these questions that really grabs you and take that as far as you can to its natural extreme as the centre point of their character, and you can really do a lot

(and don’t be afraid to let them have answers to the above questions that you disagree them/that are morally imperfect!!!)

[satellites-halo]

Hi, can I ask you a few questions about intersex? I'm trying to inform myself more about this topic. it's okay if you don't want to answer, but could you recommend another blog to answer my questions? my two questions are why intersex belongs to the lgbt community and what is afab transfem and amab transmasc /genq

Hi I can totally answer this <3 thanks for asking so respectfully!

Discussion of IGM, intersexism, and transphobia below. It got a bit long so putting it under the cut lol

1. Why does intersex belong in the LGBTQ+ community?

Intersex people are often oppressed alongside other LGBTQ+ people. We are a minority in the world, directly challenging the idea of a binary sex and, therefore, seem to 'inherently' challenge a binary gender in a way that makes conservatives and gender critical people uncomfortable. (It's important to note that intersex people can be cisgender, though, and identify with a binary gender themselves.) Recently, Peru classified being transgender, nonbinary, or intersex as having a mental illness (warning for transphobia, homophobia, and intersexism in the comments of that article). We are seen as inherently disordered, inherently breaking the 'rules' of being cisgender and being heterosexual no matter how we identify, because our bodies are not 'normal'.

Intersex babies or children with 'abnormal' genitals are often operated on, having their genitals mutilated to conform to a perisex ideal. This was done to 'avoid gender identity confusion' and is still done today, though through advocacy and speaking up in larger communities (like the LGBTQ+ community), people are now more likely to be aware of the fact that this is not something these intersex children tend to appreciate once they are adults.

There's a lot to intersex history to look at and see how our rights are inherently tied to gay and transgender rights as well, so I'll just bring up one final example for this. In 1979 in Australia, a cisgender man who had been born intersex at birth and raised as a man had his marriage annulled on "the basis that an intersex man could not be legally married because marriage can only be between someone who is seen to be wholly male and someone who is seen to be wholly female."

2. What is an AFAB transfem and an AMAB transmasc?

Answering this requires me to go over some terminology. Definitions have been muddied a lot recently, and this is something I want to approach properly. I'd also like to say that I am transfem myself, and I'm looking at this purely from the perspective of what the intersex communities definitions of these are. I will not be going into other definitions of these identities or doing discourse over what is and isn't valid.

(c)AFAB = (coercively) assigned female at birth. Not necessarily someone who is female

(c)AMAB = (coercively) assigned male at birth. Not necessarily someone who is male

AXAB = assigned (x/intersex/neutral) at birth. This is almost never used in real medical settings, and is instead a form of self identification for intersex people or people who do not want anyone to know their AGAB for any reason.

I'm going to be focusing on AFAB transfems for this, since that's what I feel confident talking about as a transfem, but this also applies for AMAB transmascs.

An AFAB transfem is an intersex person who was coercively assigned female at birth, but either went through IGM, had a masculinizing puberty, or otherwise doesn't have experiences that line up with typical Female-ness. Due to this, this person may develop complicated feelings about gender and go on hormones, dress a certain way, go through surgeries, or present themselves a certain way to transition to female. Sometimes they go through name changes and get stricter with what pronouns they prefer (ex: going from being ok with having they/them used to wishing that people only use she/her). Some of these people see themselves as cisgender women, while others may see themselves as a transgender woman or transfem due to the shared experiences between them and MTF trans women. It's important to remember with this that these people are not claiming to be MTF, and should not go into communities specifically for MTF transgender people, but are still transfeminine in a uniquely intersex way.

Here's some language I think it'd be helpful for u to learn:

xtf- intersex to female

itf- intersex to female

xtm- intersex to male

itm- intersex to male

xtx- intersex to (nonbinary/genderqueer/agender/xenogender/etc)

itx- intersex to (nonbinary/genderqueer/agender/xenogender/etc)

intersexism- prejudice against intersex people

perisex/endosex/dyadic- not intersex

salmacian/altersex- transitioning to have mixed/unconventional genitals. this is not the same as being intersex, but is important to know since they are used to avoid people saying "I am transitioning to be intersex"

I think that's itt... If any other intersex people want to add on feel free to but pls don't bring discourse under this post 🫶 also sorry if this is kinda messy haha I'm rlly disorganized xP

[wheelercurse]

This is going to be a hot take, and I know people will boo me (they hated Jesus, too), but I understand why people think Will was childish because he kind of was. And that was an essential part of his arc and development in season 3.

Stay with me. Let me explain it better.

Season three central themes were change and growing up. It's where their coming-of-age story started. Will was very insistent on playing d&d, more than his other friends. They were leaving their childhood behind, but Will held onto it much more than the others. And that's understandable because part of his childhood was taken away by Vecna. He spent one week in the UD, and when he returned, he wasn't the same. Then he was possessed by the mindflayer. He was that way for his trauma.

Does that mean the message was that he should stop playing games (d&d) like Mike insinuated? Absolutely not.

Mike had this mindset because his arc was the opposite. He was determined to fit in with society's expectations of a teenage boy (dating girls instead of playing games). He was on the other extreme of the spectrum.

That’s why they ended their arc in a middle ground. Will put his game in the donation box (accepting moving on from his childhood), and Mike agreed to keep playing with him (accepting more of his nerdy side)

Back to my point, it was an essential part of his arc because it was a big reason for the breakdown in Castle Byers. If you think he only destroyed it because of his love for Mike or his struggle with his sexuality, you don't fully understand the scene. Of course, it was part of it, and many didn't get it on the first watch. But it was also about growing up and confronting that his childhood was gone.

The breakdown is a culmination of many things that Will was dealing with: his lost childhood, his trauma, his alienation (he knows he's different because he doesn't like girls, and because of what happened in the Upside Down), his struggle with his sexuality, his feelings for Mike.

He wanted to play d&d more than his other friends when they were focused on girls. Of course, he wasn't immature for not liking them. But he knew he wasn't interested in them, and seeing his friends with girlfriends, made him feel more alienated. More when Mike told him, "It's not my fault you don't like girls." He wanted things to be like they used to be when they were little kids, but of course, it wasn't the same. That's why he remembered all these memories of the party and then tore up the photograph.

Also, the rain fight was about growing up. That's the first layer to understand this scene. As I said, Mike and Will's arcs were on the opposite side of the spectrum. One changed much of himself to conform, and the other refused change. These opposing views clashed and provoked the fight.

I won't deny that Mike and Lucas were assholes for making fun of Will. Of course, he was right to get mad at them. That's also why the boys apologised to him. Mike was also in the wrong for ditching his friends and being extra focused on his girlfriend.

But the fight was a pivotal scene for both of their development. And we see the fruition in their last scene together.

So, the season's message wasn't that you should leave your interests behind because you grew up, but life's changing, and you can't avoid it.

They literally spelt it out at the end:

"I don't want things to change. So maybe that's why I came in here, to try to stop that change. To turn back the clock. To make things go back to how they were. But I know that's naive. It's just not how life works. It's moving. Always moving whether you like it or not."

We have to take into account also the show's themes: against conformity, embracing being different, and accepting yourself. Of course, the message would never be, "you should stop being a nerd and conform." That's why we see the heroes joining another d&d club and Will making a d&d painting for Mike. I said this because if you want to understand characters' arcs, first, you have to grasp the main themes.

[sirwow]

Nother HC/AU ramble about these two under the cut

Since these two basically have nothing about them it leaves me all the room I want to ramble about what I think their relationship would be✨

As I said in my original HC post, these two start off as rivals, Insomniac re challenging Samurai to a fight when he lost his winning streak to the new guy (Samurai) n got salty. Being they fought half drunk in a night club, things eventually got out of hand and a sword stab to a generator later both got electrocuted, messing up their heart beats. This put them as the perfect candidates for the new rhythm doctor program and what put them in the first chapter.

Samurai was fine when the program was used on him, but Insomniac’s much more effected heart beat (this is what you get for wearing no armor) ended up causing the development of the virus. It’s hard to explain but basically the rhythm doctor program’s ticking of the beats going down the line was Ai doing so and the Insomniac’s heart beat corrupted it into only following the extreme- creating the virus that separated itself from the original program. It’s not really malicious! It’s just trying to get people to follow the beats it was taught.. being really fucked up and possibly deadly beats but beats nonetheless.

Anyways, after Insomniac and Samurai got taken care of, Samurai continued having mild relapses each day, steady and predictable. Insomniac instead ended up stuck with extreme episodes that would appear in sudden bursts, first of these showing up in X-1N where future ones will likely only get worse as the virus Ai conforms more to being insane as he has episodes. A cycle of oh no.

In the meantime they have their own time to hang out n meet the other patients. Samurai being in the west for the first time has him curious about everything and everyone, just wanting to be a part of whatever was happening. Insomniac chose to be distant from the others to continue focusing his time on training but still had to get Samurai sometimes if he wanted to spar with someone. He always had some group with him, usually Logan and Hailey, on weekends it be Cole and Nicole. Insomniac doesn’t mind Cole n Nicole, they don’t bother him much and if they did have a question they weren’t dumb. The kids on the other hand he was probably exploding in his mind if they interrupted to ask if they could touch the sword.

Samurai and Insomniac also share a room for the sake of space and sparing. The only language they both know is English but it’s both their second language so most conversations are simple and dependent on their tone. Insomniac always talks about training or honor but Samurai is much more interested in talking about the new things he’s learned or discovered. Insomniac has been in the west for a few years now so can’t help but find it a bit childish and his demeaning view of Samurai isn’t helped when he finds out he’s not a fighter for his family or honor but just. Likes to sword fight. (insert “stop having fun” img here)

After X-1N, Insomniac was pretty shaken up to say the least. Without anyone else to open up he decided to be vulnerable and talked a bit about life to Samurai. Insomniac wondering what Samurai’s personal propose was if wasn’t fighting for anything. Samurai simply corrected Insomniac, he was fighting for something, his own fun and joy of experiencing life. Sword fighting just being one of his favorite deep outlets of this. Despite it being a bit corny and being said as Samurai was failing but continuing some crochet he wanted to learn, it did strike a bit of a cord with Insomniac.

Slowly Insomniac opened up to the others, placating the curiosity of the kids a bit, going to the cafe n trying the tea there while also teaching Nicole how to make some specialty ones he can make, and eventually when Samurai was talking about learning baseball, Insomniac took initiative and asked to join him. Samurai n Insomniac were finally able to come to a understanding with how the other thoughts and worked.

Now then that’s all I’m gonna write for now. Iv got more but I gotta cook in the brain some more. Thnak for reading

[dinoburger]

I think everyone needs to pursue some harmless, inexplicable impulses to stop themselves from continuously pursuing impulses that are harming them.

We leave chance to those who are hierarchically above us, we scramble to put things back together to the way they were before when a variable changes. We become stuck in a treadmill of ever pursuing a better, recent past instead of trying to build anything more lateral.

We become punitive towards other random variables of the people in our lives. We resent those who become ill and dependent, those who do not conform to our ideals, those who challenge us in meaningful ways, as opposed to those who want to beat us back into whatever our rightful place in the hierarchy is.

Fate is in the hands of politicians, as long as we tell ourselves that it is. But, when you recognize the pattern, you can't accept that anymore. Because it isn't an element of random, it's an element of decay, what we're seeing is parts of our societies suddenly crumbling because all the structure beneath has rotted out in a way that was ultimately more predictable than seemed from the outside.

We need to stop viewing ourselves in some obligatory dichotomy of purpose and purposeless and develop a sense of the inexplicable. It's only "pointless" activities that make us appreciate the value of activities that feel meaningful.

If all we have is purpose, how do we just be? How do we know when to stop? When something isn't working? When we're eating ourselves alive? When we become so complacent that we think we know how it all works already, how do we ever prepare for change?

How do we ever develop our senses and skills beyond the one "purposeful" task that we've set ourselves?

[phlve]

Sociotype Profiles — LII

Ego

Leading Ti

The LII naturally assesses statements, opinions, and actions in terms of conformance to certain principles. These principles may in practice be rules of thumb based on experience, but LIIs will usually appeal to more general, self-evident reasons, if the need arises. The LII is most engaged in communication when they are critically analyzing people's decisions and actions as well as how they generally are or are not consistent with certain pre-established goals. their dual, the ESE, likes hearing the LII's judgment, and simultaneously softens its edge by shifting their focus to how they are communicating their ideas, letting them see the intellectual thought process from the outside. The ESE appreciates and praises their ability to take the information seriously, but the ESE will find funny ways of reminding the LII of how they are coming across when they seem more serious than they realize.

"Just because" is not in an LII's vocabulary. If there is a reason for something, the LII will probably want to find it. The LII strives to reduce things to their most essential aspects, and mentally recreate the whole from the bottom up. The LII's theoretical tendencies can often leave him out of touch with reality, and if unchecked may lead to abstract theories that make logical sense but have little bearing on the real world.

The LII may explore many avenues of thought, but in the end only tell others his refined conclusions, because he sees the intermediate steps as irrelevant. He is often too concise for his own good, making it difficult for others to understand his ideas.

Creative Ne

The LII often applies Ti in an academic field such as mathematics, one which allows for abstract speculation to be realized in concrete conclusions. The LII does not much care for implementation or hands-on work, requiring some degree of independence from material demands in order to develop his own ideas. If the LII feels made to do a task he perceives as boring, he will try to find an original way to do it, if simply for the sake of developing an interesting idea. The LII can think on his feet, and is able to consider multiple viewpoints, although if he feels that he has fully analyzed an idea in the past, he may dismiss it out of hand with Ti.

The LII is always in tune with the "big picture", looking at things from the most general perspective possible. Given this frame of reference, he sees many ways ordinary life could be changed to meet his vision of how things should be. Thus the LII is often seen by other more practically-minded types as naively idealistic.

The LII does not come up with ideas simply for their own sake, but tries to relate everything back to "the main point". He quickly becomes impatient or disinterested with discussion that is simply meant to generate ideas, instead of realizing them.

Super-Ego

Role Fi

The LII is acutely aware of social conventions, such as saying "please" and "thank you", and expends much effort to conform to these rules to maintain the status of a "polite" person. But he tends to overdo the conventions themselves, as opposed to the relationships they are supposed to establish, and so ends up stepping on other people's toes (violating some less easily definable convention which he would never really want to conform to anyways). He prefers an easy-going environment where such conventions don't exist in the first place. When in a heated argument, an LII can alienate others by his natural tendency to hold and defend strong opinions (Ti).

If asked to express a unique, personal sentiment, such as a favorite color or football team, the LII may find difficulty choosing if there is no "obvious" answer. He often feels like he has no real personal, subjective feelings at all, and usually has to make a conscious decision where other types could easily supply an instinctive reaction.

The LII also is very sensitive about how other people see him, feeling depressed if he has affections that are not returned. For this reason, he tends to avoid expressing signals that show interest in certain people (as opposed to signals about his general mood and demeanor, which he feels to be much more natural), but of course it just aggravates his loneliness, instead of relieving it.

Vulnerable Se

The LII hates being ordered what to do, and chafes especially under orders that don't make sense to him. In such cases the LII is likely to criticize the authority — but if he does he is not subtle about it, and usually ends up being marked as a "rebel" and feeling even more frustrated than he did to begin with. An LII works best alone, so that he doesn't have to subordinate (to) others — or constantly negotiate his priorities, which strains his patience and diverts his time and attention away from reworking his understanding; if he is forced to waste time defending what he already knows, he gives up the freedom to deepen his understanding further. He does not tolerate pushiness combined with close-mindedness.

The LII does not like being simply told "get real" or "get off your duff", which he views as crude, intrusive, and insulting. He prefers to be left alone - or better, included in an atmosphere of open discussion that is receptive to his thoughts and thereby inspire him to develop them more.

If the LII has a problem that cannot be solved intellectually, but requires direct personal confrontation, he may resort to total avoidance rather than approaching the person directly, which he tends to think will produce only frustration and contempt. The LII thinks that, in an ideal world, everyone would just listen to reason instead of insisting on having their own way.

Super-Id

Suggestive Fe

Being a naturally private person, the LII finds it difficult to believe that others would be interested in what he is thinking or feeling at any given moment. He feels like something is not quite right if his interaction with the people around him is too aloof. However he only rarely makes an effort to venture into more open spheres, because he usually avoids making small talk, preferring to talk about his real interests and say only what he truly believes.

To this end, the LII, above all things, appreciates others' attempts to get him to "open up" emotionally and express his true thoughts and views of the world - not just as an abstract ideal living in his head, but as something that other people actually care about enough to participate in and bring to fulfillment. His focus on important abstract matters also leads him to detach from the world, if it is not complemented with a healthy dose of silliness. The LII is usually oblivious to his emotional-psychological state and feels little responsibility for improving it, not to mention the state of others. This means that "bad emotions" can build up in him until some environmental factor comes along to alleviate them. Visible demonstrations of emotional warmth play a major part in this: something as simple as a big smile and a hug is enough to brighten an LII's day. The LII can be attracted to insincere displays of affection, even if he consciously realizes that they are only in jest.

The LII is often at a loss for what to do in social situations, and appreciates others who make him feel included in a new group and in the emotional side of a situation. The LII tends to take life very seriously, and appreciates others who can show him the lighter side of things.

Mobilizing Si

The LII has poor control over his physical well-being, neglecting matters of simple hygiene relatively easily. He dislikes having to take care of mundane details of work, but simultaneously derives pleasure from aesthetic neatness and organization.

The LII is easily annoyed by sensory over-stimulation, including loud noises, bright light, and temperature. On the other hand, he easily becomes "addicted" to more pleasurable things, such as music, which have a corresponding effect on his mood (Fe). When left to his own devices, the LII tends to oscillate unhealthily between total indulgence of the senses and total neglect (the latter especially when working on something he feels to be extremely important). He tends to feel guilty for indulging in hedonism for the sake of hedonism.

On the surface the LII can seem easygoing, but in work projects or at home his critical nature will become more obvious.

Id

Ignoring Te

The LII is an efficient worker, and seeks out new tools, resources, or methods as long as they are directly relevant to his work or interests. He is not likely to keep especially careful track of his finances, avoiding this by keeping his needs simple and constant.

The LII can easily understand whether something is impractical or not, but prefers to explain why using structural principles. He dislikes rote memorization of dates and the like, but paradoxically will often have a mental store of many arcane pieces of information (such as the first 100 digits of pi) he finds interesting or equally absurd technical skills (like mastering a video game). Such skills and information will either be a part of his leisure activities, or relate directly to his main interests, which he chooses not based on their immediate practical consequence, but on how interesting they are.

The LII only exchanges such information in conversation for entertainment, and criticizes overly bland or rambling analyses, especially if he feels they have no point.

Demonstrative Ni

The LII is a naturally cautious person, and never acts without considering the consequences in detail. This tendency sometimes prevents him from acting decisively—or at all. However, he tries not to be overly pessimistic about the consequences of others' actions, and only offers direct advice in this area if it is specifically requested. If something bad happens he is usually willing to forgive and move on without placing blame, re-establishing the course as subtly and smoothly as possible. While he tends to have very specific ideas about his general life principles and goals, he is basically indifferent as to their specific timeframe and implementation.

The LII has an active imagination, but it tends to fade in and out and its products are rarely verbalized. He hardly ever says purposely cryptic or idiosyncratic things, and criticizes others for employing overly obscure concepts.

Source: Wikisocion