#address. but the existence of D is harmful. C is harmful too but not in the same way - intentional vs unintentional

[rad4learning]

I thought I'd talk/speculate a bit more about this study:

Joshua E Lewis, Amani R Patterson, Maame A Effirim, Manav M Patel, Shawn E Lim, Victoria A Cuello, Marc H Phan, Wei-Chen Lee, Examining gender-specific mental health risks after gender-affirming surgery: a national database study, The Journal of Sexual Medicine, Volume 22, Issue 4, April 2025, Pages 645–651, https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdaf026

It's a retrospective observational study using data aggregated from electronic medical records. They use ICD-10 codes to identify mental health conditions and to identify people with listed gender dysphoria diagnosis, as well as to identify gender affirming surgery procedures.

They specifically made sure "Patients included in the analysis had no documented mental health disorder diagnoses prior to the index date."

Classifications as male/female are based on the documentation and so may refer to sex or to gender id.

In addition to looking at these tables directly for the comparisons (in each case receiving surgery being a predictor of increased likelihood to receive one of the specified mental health diagnoses - excluding body dysmorphic disorder) I think it's also interesting to look at the vertical comparisons. Aside from suicidal ideation - and for B and D anxiety - a lot of the outcomes are looking pretty similar between A and C as well as between B and D.

If we accept the argument that transmen are much more likely to pass than transwomen, then I think it becomes very difficult to claim that the results are due to not passing or "being visibly trans" in transphobic society - if they were, wouldn't we expect them to be more different by documentation as male or female? I think that would also raise the question of, wouldn't those without surgery be less likely to pass and therefore more likely to have poor outcomes if it's about "not passing" being harmful?

One of the important assumptions for identifying a causal effect is positivity, i.e. could everyone in the non-surgery group have been in the surgery group? Here the barriers I can think of preventing surgery would not explain having decreased mental health disorder. One way that the positivity assumption can be violated, is from people being in too poor health to be recommended a treatment, but again that's not going to explain lower mental health disorder incidence in the non-surgery group. The closest I can come is contact with the health system - except that we know everyone involved is in contact with the health system otherwise they wouldn't make it into the data in the first place.

We could argue that the surgical group would be in more contact than the non-surgical group, but if they have had an uncomplicated operation, wouldn't they be more likely to have more contact in the lead up to the surgery than after (and hence the disorders likely would have been already picked up prior and these participants excluded from the data)?

Another important assumption is exchangeability. The key question here is "do the groups vary systematically in a way that matters to the outcome?". The authors attempt address this using prosperity score matching on age, race and ethnicity. The authors acknowledge that there may have been preexisting differences between the groups: "By excluding patients with documented pre-existing mental health diagnoses, this study sought to ensure that identified mental health outcomes likely represented new or emergent conditions rather than pre-existing disorders. This methodological approach was critical to focusing on the relationship between gender-affirming surgery and mental health. However, we acknowledge that this approach, relying solely on ICD-10 codes, may not fully account for undiagnosed or subclinical conditions prior to surgery. These emergent mental health issues may result from a multifactorial interplay of social, psychological, and physiological factors, including social support systems, environmental stressors, hormonal changes, surgical outcomes, and the broader psychosocial adjustments involved in transitioning."

My question is - ok, let's say that those seeking surgery had systemic differences in terms of e.g. environmental stressors. Even complex systems can be broken down into what kinds of pathways could be responsible. We have three ways to explain why gender affirming surgery, experiencing mental health disorder and some other factor (or combination thereof) are associated pairwise (excluding chance association as it needs to be systemic):

One: A causal relationship. i.e. surgery (directly or indirectly) causes mental health disorder

E.g. Obtain gender affirmation surgery -> more likely to have environmental stressors -> more likely to experience mental health disorder. This does not work very well with the argument that gender affirmation surgery is a requirement to for mental health improvement since it implies that surgery worsens mental health. It also implies that controlling for the other factor/s would remove the link between obtaining surgery and mental health disorder. Of course, another option is e.g. factor -> surgery -> mental health disorder or surgery -> mental health disorder -> factor. I don't mention potential pathways with mental health disorder causing surgery because we are told the mental health disorders are increasing after surgery.

Two: A confounding relationship

E.g. Poor social support -> obtaining surgery and also poor social support -> mental health disorder. This implies that gender affirmation surgery is, at least in part, caused by that other factor (i.e. it is not an inevitable outcome). If this factor was disadvantage decreasing access to surgery and also increasing mental health disorder, we would expect to see lower, not higher mental health disorder rates in the surgery group.

Some have argued that preexisting subclinical distress might be this factor. Implicitly, that means that if the subclinical distress was addressed, surgery would be avoided. Often this is paired with the idea that the only way to alleviate the distress is by the surgery. If the surgery effectively relieved distress in these patients, we would not expect "significantly elevated risk of mental health disorders—including depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, and substance use disorder—post-surgery among individuals with a prior diagnosis of gender dysphoria". Instead, we would expect reduced mental health disorder incidence after surgery.

Three: A collider relationship

The block here indicates that this variable has been selected on / controlled for - if it wasn't there wouldn't be an association. Here I am struggling to think of good context-relevant examples because much of what has been selected on necessarily predate obtaining surgery and therefore cannot be used as a consequence of surgery. Let's bring in table 3.

These cohorts showed up in the data as a result of their gender affirming surgeries - they wouldn't have been considered as trans otherwise. Let's consider a new possible causal model. Let's say someone could be motivated to undertake gender affirmation surgery because of trans identity and because of mental illness. If you only looked at the surgical cohort, you could over estimate the association between trans identity and listed mental health disorder.

Finally a note that each of these diagrams represent pathways, the relationships do not need to be direct - there could be various intermediaries.

---- We can't be confident that mental health disorder incidence in people with a gender dysphoria increasing after surgery must be due to the surgery. However, if gender affirming surgery substantially improved the well-being of patients with a gender dysphoria diagnosis, we would expect to see the opposite pattern to what has been observed in this data.

If I have overlooked something / if anyone does believe there is an alternative explanation that I have not considered that explains the patterns in the data, please do let me know.

If there is a confounder, I believe the best response to that is to try to modify the confounder that is driving up mental health diagnoses and surgeries which could have been avoided without it.

[zukkacore]

i remembered the other section i wanted to ask about. (NOW i'm going to go cook.)

“It isn’t. About… me. Ok?” J2 wishes he could say it as a kind of comfort, a white lie for the master he still has some obligation towards. But as the words leave his mouth, and he knows, instantly, that they’re the truth. “He… He still—”

“Oh, no. Fuck you.” Jace practically spits the words out, but in his disbelief it devolves into a shrill cackle. “You do not get to tell me that.”

A Message. Jace stalks toward him. His eyes flash red.

You think I don’t already know? I can count every single time he’s been with you wishing it was me, I can feel it, here.

The shatterstar is glowing beneath the fabric of his sweater. Sparks crackle at his fingertips, Jace rising from the floor—there’s a chill in the room, making his skin prick into goose flesh. He’s surging, voice reverberating around the classroom, so forceful it makes the desk lamp rattle and papers go flying. A cup of miscellaneous paperclips, thumbtacks, a pencil sharpener; it’s knocked aside, sending the contents flying. J2 feels something sharp graze his cheek, but he’s too paralyzed with fear to move. “I don’t want to hear how much he misses me. He should’ve thought of that before he put a cavern in my chest!”

OOOOOHHH this is an interesting one thanks again bambi!

Small preamble that this chapter overall was. Very fun to write just bc i think it's fun letting Jace get to be a little batshit. Again like. Mentioned that Jace kinda hangs so strongly over every other scene, so getting into his interiority was fun and I just love putting that little blonde bitch in situations so he's just being stretched so thin.

And i've already mentioned the Porter half did not exist until like. the night before basically b/c i realized the transition from Jace basically admitting to J2 that Porter killed him to J2 sleeping with Porter was like. I thought it was weird to not address that new information that SHOULD be affecting J2's feelings on Porter.

I also was just. Very Hadestownpilled in that moment. Like. Yes i was feeling very strongly about the whole Chant into Hey Little Songbird "if you don't even want my love i'll give it to someone who does [...] someone who appreciates the comforts of a gilded cage [...] someone who could love these walls that hold her close and keep her safe and think of them as my embrace" etc etc and. How Eurydice is so desperate truly backed into that corner. As Jace is asserting why he's here, why he's never coming back, j2 is running right towards Porter because he was always going to find reassurance in Porter. He has a place where he belongs beside Porter. Because of Jace. There was just something about the idea of J2 just like. Running directly into Porter's arms after that experience even with the new reveal of information of the harm he's done to Jace that like. Just clicked. I'm glad i thought of it b/c in the first draft I think it would've felt so incomplete.

Ok. So. I know a lot of this fic has had this emphasis on J2 desperately wanting to keep Porter for himself. Wanting to have something that is his because nothing belongs to him, not even himself. However, the first paragraph:

“It isn’t. About… me. Ok?” J2 wishes he could say it as a kind of comfort, a white lie for the master he still has some obligation towards. But as the words leave his mouth, and he knows, instantly, that they’re the truth. “He… He still—”

To me this is doing double duty. I keep joking that J2 doesn't just worship porter, in a weird way he worships the starbreaker pantheon b/c he sees it as real and beautiful and true (to be fair, he has a very skewed perspective before this!!! He's a recipient of just a fraction of Porter's love and its making him sick in the head so he's like!! Just imagine what Jace is getting!!) but him coveting that relationship is why in this moment he's prioritizing Jace over himself. He knows how good it feels to be loved by Porter, so there is this. Logic that does map onto the way a person loves a god, where they might want to proselytize. The god word of Porter Cliffbreaker, haven't you heard? And Jaceporter is like. His cassankanra. The idea of Jace being without Porter is deeply sad to him because. They're the same!

The other aspect to J2 telling Jace that Porter still loves him is part of the Jace Cares Thesis of IYWD-verse which out of all the jaces he's. Awful but not the worst. Like. J2 is of Jace and Jace is an asshole but. He does have this capacity (if anything, J2 might actually be softer than Jace b/c Jace threw their relationship in his face eagerly in ch 3)

Also! Fun fact. "This isn't about me" is a sister line to "I know I don't matter the way he matters to you" in that they're both technically something I stole from my togakure hookup fic lol. Which I know is kinda lame but if anything i think they're MORE fitting here.

“Oh, no. Fuck you.” Jace practically spits the words out, but in his disbelief it devolves into a shrill cackle. “You do not get to tell me that.”

It's just before the scene you picked. But yeah. I'm also just thinking about how unfair it is for Jace to demand J2 go to the mountains of chaos w/ Porter when he's openly expressed his hatred for that relationship. It's like. Yeah i hate this but also i will make you his clothmother you are responsible for him now. And I want it to be you because you're the one who cares. (i know i didn't write this with j3 or j4's personalities in mind but like. To be fair now that we know what they're like, makes sense, sadly. what WERE j3 or j4 gonna do abt it anyway)

Anyway. As unfair as Jace is being, i do think it would be really weird to essentially hear from your ex's new boyfriend that they're still in love with you. Especially if they were kinda you. At the end of the day, I do think Jace is being spiteful about this tho. But this image was just like. Very clear in my mind of this basic interaction from almost the very beginning of this fic i guess? And I knew I wanted to include it. Because Jace is trying so hard to prioritize himself and detract himself from the plan, from Porter.

And I think there's that like. Religious idea of temptation I guess? Like. He doesn't want to hear about the thing he's denying himself! Are you kidding! Especially not from the person who is getting what he is denying himself! But also. The unfairness of that. He PUT J2 there. There's some degree in which he would rather it be J2 than anyone else (J3. Lol)

A Message. Jace stalks toward him. His eyes flash red. You think I don’t already know? I can count every single time he’s been with you wishing it was me, I can feel it, here.

There's something. That.... For me... feels like such a Tell that i'm a theater kid when it comes to the way I use Message when I write. (Like if the emotion is too strong to speak, then sing, if it's too strong to sing, then dance? Something like that). I just think there are some things that feel more impactful if they're not actually spoken? Something about a Message can be really. Intimate. Or scary. It's beyond spoken word. Like its so hard to convey something being actually intimidating with just a character shouting, but to me this is more. Invasive I guess? And therefore scarier.

I mean. Jace wants to twist the knife for sure. But additionally i think there's something tragic i guess abt a like, textual confirmation that yeah Porter's just been wanting jace the whole time, wanting him so much that he's angry at the lacking, at J2 not measuring up. Like. J2 wants this to be for him. And i think there's a degree to which Porter does care about him. But. We knew, but now we know know.

And J2. Doesn't understand why Jace and Porter are not together b/c nobody is telling him anything. He doesn't understand that Jace isn't leaving due to lack of love. Due to lack of want. Porter wants him so much that he hurt him. Had to have him. Had to destroy him. Jace knows everything about Porter wants. He doesn't want to hear that. He's trying to get away from that. He can't justify the harm anymore, and Ruben at frosty fair was his last straw "Lover what have you become" etc etc.

(but he's selfish in his own way. He cares. he can't stop porter or maybe wont stop porter. He's walking away. He knows its going to keep happening. He just can't witness it. He can't escape it. He's going to keep failing them. He thinks keeping J2 on is trying to honor TRGs the best he can. But trying not to fail the ratgrinders, he's failing J2.)

I'm not gonna go over the ENTIRE um... Surge part i just pick imagery i think sounds cool + i think there's the parallel to the same thing happening in IYWD. Surging is such a post-shatterstar embarrassment for Jace bc he's so used to keeping things under wraps but now he's volatile and alienated from his sense of self. I struggle so hard with White Room Syndrome but J2 getting sliced open by my incredibly relatable jar of like. Paper clips and thumbtacks and a stray pencil sharpener is like. Yeah that's a jar of random bullshit i have in my classroom too (i'm not a teacher tho im more like a daycare instructor).

J2 feels something sharp graze his cheek, but he’s too paralyzed with fear to move.

Actually! the original version of this scene did not involve J2 getting hurt! That was the version where J2 did not go to Porter directly after. I know a tiny scrape is like. Nothing but to me the smallness of the injury in contrast to like. The Bigness of Porter's response i think is both funny and.

Became such a Throughline in the IYWDverse. I contemplated it being worse but I liked being able to tie it back to the tiny scrape on Jace's cheek that Porter is like. Obsessing over in chapter 3. It honestly wasn't intentional but Jace and injuries, jace and taking damage is like this whole Thing. The cut on J2's cheek. The cut on Jace's cheek. Porter kissing Jace's scraped and bruised knuckles in the flashback. IYWD literally STARTS with Jace getting brought back from being dropped.

It's just this constant reminder of Jace's mortality. Of jace being this precious thing that he could lose. But he already lost jace! (he did this to himself!) But already losing jace is part of what makes current jace so precious. Already losing jace is part of what makes J2 so precious. And there's that exchange that Porter said in the memory (Pulling from IYWD sorry. I just. If i'm allowed to self congratulate i am proud of this. I like this scene. I like it a lot):

The Porter in the memory says, “I promise, I’m never going to let anything happen to you ever again.” He has the stranger’s hand wrapped up in his, bandaging his bloodied and scraped knuckles. [...] “Are you saying that as a barbarian or a paladin?” replies the stranger. “Both.”

Like. I like this. I like this a lot. There is the occasion where i make something I like. This is that one. I think its romantic but also the perfect amount of wrong. "Never let anything happen to you ever again". Anything? ever? It's about the barbarian need to protect its about the paladin devotion its the best of both it's the worst of both. It's the exact tee-up for this throughline of Ownership and personal autonomy and preservation. It's about control. It's the exact ironic thing that porter needs to say, knowing the the cruelty of "i'll kill you again, Stardiamond" when push comes to shove. It's about him trying to preserve Jace even though he already lost jace. Even though he already killed jace. It's about him trying to keep Jace alive and here but also about grasping onto that memory of jace. "What he doesn't know is that what he's defending is already gone."

And it like. The weight of that is meant to all come back when J2 gets hurt. Skipping ahead slightly (sorry), Porter says to him:

You’ll be good as new. Like—” A strange beat. “Like nothing ever happened.”

Like. The phrasing of that is weird, it treats him like an object which is part of J2's whole problem. He's a gift. And there's the doublespeak of "like nothing ever happened". He's talking to J2. He's talking about jace. He's talking about what he did to jace. He wants to go back to a time before all this. He wants to make Jace as good as new. He already tried to do that. He failed. He has a do over with J2! J2 is not enough.

Alright! Last line!

“I don’t want to hear how much he misses me. He should’ve thought of that before he put a cavern in my chest!”

God i thought this one was gonna be self explanatory and i guess it kinda is. Obviously this is talking about how Porter misses him in the present. It's about how Porter misses Jace because they're not together, they're broken up. But its about how Porter misses Jace all the time. Its about the regret he feels over putting the shatterstar in his chest. Like. Jace is right! He should've thought about that. He should've considered what it meant to destroy Jace in order to make Jace his. Before changing both of their lives forever. But here they are. And they have to live with it.

I guess the final thing is the phrase "cavern in my chest". Which. Originally when you sent me this scene i was like "oh i just think it sounds cool" but i realized. I did try a couple different versions of. Jace saying what exactly Porter did to him. I considered "bashing my head in" something along those lines. Or maying splitting me open and shoving this thing in my chest. something about Porter's maul. I tried a few different things. A lot of them sounded. I don't think brutal would be a WRONG direction to go in a different circumstance, but I think I like "cavern in my chest" b/c it's still Jace shying away from the brutality of what happened. There's still a degree of separation even though it's still a reference to a violent act. No mention of the gem. Not really of HOW he died, more of how he got shatterstarred. But it's a little abstract—cavern, no reference to any body parts or a weapon or anything. If anything, I think it's evocative of this idea of. Having your heart ripped out. Losing a piece of yourself, which is what happened b/c now he's part Porter literally. But more abstractly I think it could also be about heartbreak, like splitting in two. And maybe that is what is was, too, this fundamental betrayal that changed their lives forever. And Jace has to live with that. So yeah. Maybe Jace has a cavern in his chest.

Anyway, once again I am here writing pages upon pages of stuff. I literally always go into these like "idk if i'll have that much to say this time bc i just picked things i thought sounded cool" and then i end up writing a whole dissertation. This scene especially felt like "well idk if i can explain anything bc i was kinda just coasting on vibes" but maybe there was more thought put into it than i thought. Anyway thank you so much!!!!!

[hyperfixation-hideout]

this is embarassing but i want u to know so sorry im anon im just a coward. Im one of the people who said insults about critics and now i think about it ur right, i wasnt address the real problems just hating the group for existing. i went looking after ur post and i see the harasment on both sides now and i thought how dumb itd be to say the fndm is evil bc of some toxic fans and thats what i was doing with rwde. Ill argue the points now on, instead of accuse people of what i assume about them

You're not a coward; this ask proves it. Thank you for telling me, I'm so glad my words reached you. It's big of you to admit, bigger to recognize it as something worth rethinking, and even bigger to seek knowledge and open yourself to a potential change of view. Thank you for that.

I wanna reiterate some things in case I was unclear, because this is a nuanced topic, so please (pretty please) bear with me before passing judgment <3

First, I'm not advocating for ignoring toxicity found in rwde and r/rwbycritics. It DOES exist and it IS a problem. But people tagging me (& others who were supportive/considerate of my pov) in their hate anons to "prove" all critics are evil missed the points I made. Like I've said, I used to think ill of rwby critics as well, and all it takes to solidify a belief is examples that support it. It infuriates me that people would send asks like that, and I'm so sorry to everyone who gets hate. That's not okay.

What I am saying is the existence of hateful people who use a tag doesn't disprove the existence of non-hateful people who use said tag, nor does it make the tag's existence inherently hateful. ("RWDE" was a jokey name made for a place to critique RWBY without being called rude, so people could blacklist the tag.) I could broadcast every hateful person/take I see in the fndm or r/rwby, but it wouldn't prove everyone in the FNDM is like that. It's basic scientific theory.

It's important to be conscious of the toxic behavior in the FNDM as well, but I wasn't trying to say some wishy-washy "there's bad on both sides so it cancels out uwu" or "don't complain about one group's problems if your group has some too" or imply either group is worse than another. Not at all my intention.

Like you said, a lot of the stuff I see in antirwde or in replies to rwde posts isn't about debating opinions on the show, or discussing points they've made to express why they disagree; it's mainly:

A) Unrelated assumptions about the poster's character/beliefs/credibility (i.e. calling someone a n*zi for having an Ironwood profile picture, telling Jewish people who express discomfort with Coco's allusion that they're faking being Jewish just to bash/accuse CRWBY -- ironic to throw around the word n*zi and then tell Jewish fans they're faking discomfort with a character based on a literal n*zi -- telling queer people who wish Bumbleby had been implemented differently that they're "obviously cishet" and shouldn't complain about representation, telling Black people they're secretly white supremacists for saying the way the White Fang was portrayed was harmful, telling disabled people that pointing out ableist messages/rhetoric is ableist, etc., etc., I've seen it all.)

B) Generalizations of the tag and critique as a whole (saying all rwde posters and critics vehemently hate the show, harass CRWBY, are conservatives, homophobes, Trump supporters, fascist bootlickers, etc.) Yes, I've actually seen this. Many times. From people who directly told me they understood it's not all, immediately turning around to post the opposite in the tag.

C) People who are called out for harassment deflecting with "but look at THIS harassment done to ME, that proves I've never sent hate or death threats or doxxed anyone" instead of addressing or reconsidering the hurtful things they've markedly done or said in the past, even when provided with receipts. (I've seen this from both rwde and anti-rwde users, and no I will not name names)

D) People telling critics to shut up and stop watching, not considering that many critics do like the show and that's why they like talking about it, or why certain aspects disappointed them, or why they enjoy coming up with ideas for ways it could've gone they'd have liked to see! People say "we welcome criticism if it's respectful!" and on paper that's great! But in practice I've seen many (not all) of those same people jump to conclusions and insult/mock very respectfully-worded critique. It makes it hard to say anything without being assumed to be part of the htdm.

Even little things like "I wish Ruby's reaction to Yang falling had gotten more focus" get inflammatory comments/asks like "Why do you have to shit on Bumbleby? Actually, don't answer that. I know why. You're a sexist fucking lesbophobe and you probably stan Adam, go die abuse apologist" (that one was mine, despite saying IN THE POST that I liked Blake's reaction and ship Bumbleby)

And when it is addressing a particular qualm someone expressed, it's very, very often just people jumping to impose their headcanons to explain it away and enforcing them as canon, defending CRWBY as though it were an assault (again, not referring to the people who ARE harassing CRWBY, this is about those seeking genuine discussion), and calling OP names/telling them to kill themselves if they "can't see how obvious it is that ___."

To critics, fans, and all who overlap (and tbh just people in general):

If there's a pattern of shittiness in a group, by all means call it out as a prevalent issue! Or vent about your experiences! Try to avoid generalization words like "all" and "every" because they leave little room for change or understanding, and communicate a lack of desire to listen/cooperate, which keeps us from being able to tackle the issue. If there's a point someone makes you'd like to dispute, do so respectfully and engage in open conversation! Even if it's an opinion! It's fun to say "I actually liked ___ because ___" or "interesting, I interpreted it as ___" and spark a conversation. Try to avoid words like "obviously," the intent to prove an opinion "objectively correct," or insulting the person's intelligence (i.e. calling fans braindead/ignorant/simps, calling critics oblivious/bad-faith/bigots), because it shuts down discussion before it can begin.

I've just realized this has gotten really long and tangential, so I'll leave it at that. I don't have a perfect conclusion or an easy summary. It's a complicated topic. To anyone still here, thank you for reading this. I can only hope it doesn't come off too preachy, but I'm bad at conveying tone, so just know I mean it constructively and optimistically <3

[PS: to the person who sent me an anon saying my statement that not all critics have all the same opinions or beliefs is "just like saying 'not all men'" -- I want you to think about that for a minute. Actually, make that an hour. I want an essay on my desk tomorrow explaining why those are not at all the same thing.]

[greco-roman-jewess]

1) I think some of its internalized antisemitism. “Ultra Orthodox” are too different- they’re making us all look bad. “These people are backwards and living in the past.” “Don’t they know that the core of American Judaism is being socially liberal and have services at temple sinai with a church organ and an acoustic guitar.” The existence of jews who don’t buy into the Christianity-lite version of American Judaism remind goyim that we’re not “just like them” and that makes us uncomfortable.

2) I don’t think a lot of people (including Jews) understand that the religious- not religious and the right- left spectrums do not map in Judaism the same way as Christianity.

a. There are Orthodox Jews who are gay, there are Orthodox Jews who are leftist, there are Orthodox Jews who support abortion and trans rights. Interpretation of “the rules” is a fundamental part of Jewish practice. There are many, many people find working within their community better than just leaving it because Frum life has so many elements they deeply value.

a2. I personally know Hasids who voted for Bernie. I personally know a bisexual man who is converting through Chabad right now and plans on a Frum life. I know an orthodox woman with a degree in gender studies. I’ve met or follow online very (or even ultra *gasp*) orthodox people who are deeply passionate about climate change, indigenous sovereignty, animal rights and and anti racism.

b. Not all Jewish beliefs map on to the very Christian American right’s beliefs. Abortion is a good example Judaism believes in the life of the mother over the life of the fetus, there are individuals who disagree with that (cough Ben Shapiro) but they are going against general consensus.

c. Some times Jews have different reasons for voting the way they do than other Americans. Example lots of Orthodox Jews voted for Trump. If you ask them many didn’t really care all that much about border walls or transgender bathrooms. They cared that Trump said lots of nice things about Israel and how he was going to bring the hostages back. They cared that after a year of dancing around the issue a politician was calling out antisemitism.

d. What the hell is “left” or “right” like in general when you remove it from an American framework protestant. (I think thats why so many of the ways Americans think about Bibi are the opposite of what Israelis think of him)

3) my personal definition of a “Jewish cult” is when the aims of the group override Halacha. Think Lev Tahor packing up and moving to Guatemala on Shabbos because the Rebbe was being accused of sex trafficking or Neutari Karta letting women touch them and going to protests on Saturday. I think there’s also a line where the group is so far away from the rabbinic consensus that what their doing isn’t really Judaism anymore (I’d put Jews for Jesus, Kohenet Priestess Institute and Haredi Burqa ladies in this category.)

4) There are definitely times when non cult Frum Jews and Jewish Communities hold beliefs that can harm their members. I think there are tons of issues that need to be addressed on a community level. The way for those things to be addressed is not to shun and ridicule non-Modox Orthodox Jews. It’s to listen to and uplift involve people who are working to make changes to the cultures of their communities from within.

Anon: specifies that they are asking questions about Orthodox Judaism in good faith

Non-Orthodox respondent, in passing while answering one of the questions: "anything to the right of Modox is a cult"

[orsumeuphoria]

Lucky Lectures. Gender politics in homosexual ships. 

Are you a consumer of fanfiction? Do you live in a society? 

There may be heteronormative patterns in your gay fanfiction! 

“But how?” you ask, “It’s two dudes!” 

Well, funny thing is, when you live in a patriarchal society that has worked hard to establish that submissive = female and dominant = male, it becomes very easy to transpose these traits onto any individuals ever and perpetuate heteronormativity and gender structures of power! 

Let me explain.

First, we must accept the reality that we do exist in a patriarchal society that has taught us that Man always comes out on top (pun perhaps intended) and Woman has three essential roles: be pretty, be submissive, and be quiet.

Of course, with the different waves of feminism, the portrayal of Woman in media has shifted and now we have Girlbosses and whatnot. Except, the root of the problem hasn’t yet been addressed and millions of people who grew up either before or during these periods of change were still influenced by patriarchal teachings, and that’s not something one can easily get rid of, especially when media and other cultural artifacts that help spread and reaffirm societal cues were (and are still) plagued by this “Man strong, Woman weak” mentality (that is of course far more nuanced than that but this is not a gender studies course).

Now, what does this have to do with homoerotic fanfiction?

Short answer: the people who write fanfiction exist in the same society you and I do, and literature like any other artform is inherently a mimicking of the real world. Anything we see in the real world will end up, whether by choice or not, in that which we create.

There’s more to this, though.

Romance specifically is a big point of interest for us if we’re going to be diving into this subject.

When you look at the population who’s creating fanfiction, a lot of them are, in fact, very young AFABs. Let the record show I’m not exerting criticism or opinion in these lines, merely stating a fact.

The thing with these very young AFABs is that they: a) grew up in a patriarchal society; b) were exposed to patriarchal media that portrayed a very specific type of “romance”; c) likely also read fanfiction written by other very young AFABs with little to no real-world experience to help diversify or add nuance to their writing, so they exist in an echo chamber of, “This is definitely what romance is.”

You may be inclined to disagree and point me toward examples of fanfics and/or fanfic writers who do not fall into this pattern, and I see you, I have my own exceptions too, but for the sake of argument, we have to look at the very broad patterns because they are the most worrisome; the minority, in this case, is actually the one with the advantage.

So, let’s look at some examples of my thesis. Specifically within heterosexual fanfiction.

Some prime examples of this would be After (2014), Twilight (2005), and 50 Shades of Gray (2011). Do you see the pattern yet? The main romance arc in these novels is not a great example of actual romance, right? In After we have an abusive main male character. Twilight leaves us with a main male character who’s mostly emotionally absent and who leads to the main female character to, quite literally, jump off a cliff to try and get his attention. 50 Shades is abuse disguised as kink, leaning heavily into the excuse of a D/s dynamic. And what do the female main characters in these three do? Continue to thirst after the main male character even while suffering at their hands.

“Those are awful examples, Luck!”

Yeah, well, I’m a hyperbolic motherfucker, sue me.

Seriously though, I don’t think they are bad examples. They may be the worst of the worst but that’s exactly why they serve perfectly to illustrate my points. The fact that these three do exist points towards an underlying issue wherein we see these pieces of media and, even when they’re awful, we let them happen. We let them become cultural phenomena. None of this would happen, theoretically, if it didn’t have space to exist, if the ground wasn’t primed with centuries of patriarchal brainwashing to permit, if not encourage, these representations of romance.

If people weren’t still consuming stories like these, where abuse and unhealthy interpersonal dynamics are thinly disguised as romance, they wouldn’t exist; but people do consume these stories because they subscribe to patriarchal thinking and that creates a market, blah blah blah, I’m not here to give you a lesson on supply and demand. I’m merely here to tell you that people, even in 2021, are misogynistic and openly enjoy consuming misogynistic media, because they don’t perceive it as misogynistic! They think it’s normal!

“What does this have to do with my sacred homoerotic fics, Luck?” you ask. To quote Siken (2005): “Shut up/ I’m getting to it.”

I ask you, what is the big difference between heterosexual fics and homosexual fics in their representation of romance?

I say, none, really.

I’ve read plenty of fic in many different fandoms, raging from anime, literature, TV shows, RPF, and I can tell you the fics that portray queer relationships with any sort of nuance are few and far in between.

And this is where I remind you that most fanfic writers are people who were socialized as girls, who haven’t experienced enough to portray romance much differently than how their main examples (the misogynistic media, as we established) do.

So we have a bunch of young AFABs whose vision of love has been heavily influenced by out-of-whack power dynamics and a lack of affective responsibility. And what do they often do?

They buy into yet another set of absurd ideals! Remember when gay relationships were stereotyped as being between a Dom Top and a Sub Bottom? I’m sad to inform that it’s a prevalent thing and a vehicle for heteronormative structures of power to be passed onto queer fiction. Because, what are Dom Tops if not Man and Sub Bottoms if not Woman?

These kids, because they are kids, will take one look at a pairing and call the big dominant one a top and the dainty quiet one the bottom. Sometimes, they’ll cling to these ideas with a vice and start arguments if you challenge their structure.

“Why is this a big deal?” you ask, and I appreciate your curiosity.

It’s harmful because it continues to perpetuate some awful ideas about relationships and it ends in the fetishizing of homosexuality, and that’s not even mentioning how inaccurate of a portrayal they are of real life. Impressionable kids can, and do, and will, interact with this content and grow up with a twisted perception of reality that they, too, might reinforce in their own immensely flawed works of fiction. It could harm them in their real life too, there’s studies going on right as I type this regarding porn addiction in young AFABs because they start consuming smut fiction at very early ages. Kids could grow up desensitized to abuse. Kids could get in harmful relationships and miss the warning signs because they were romanticized in their favorite fic.

And this isn’t to say that all the responsibility lies in the hands of the fanfic writer, because anyone who engages in fandom does it out of their own volition and because of that should do so carefully. But this is to say that if you are a fanfic writer, you need to look at your own biases and be a little more critical with yourself and your world view, lest you continue this cycle of patriarchal nonsense.

[ltleflrt]

So I was having a conversation on Discord about omegaverse tonight, and my brain won’t shut up about it, because as usual I come up with my arguments after the discussion is over.  I should have been asleep 3 hours ago, but it’s hot and I can’t unwind, so I’m going to stay up EVEN LATER while the a/c brings things down a few degrees, and I try to get these thoughts out of my head.

I was pro-omegaverse, and trying to explain why *I personally* like the genre, and why I think even with it’s problematic origins and frequently used elements, it’s still a cool genre.  I was essentially having 2 discussions, but they were both using my answers to their questions, even though I was usually addressing them 1 at a time.  That happens when you’re in a Discord chat, and I wasn’t @ing my answers to them, since we were all in the room together.  And I think that cunfuddled the discussion and my thoughts.  So here’s a breakdown.

Issue 1. Biological Essentialism is gross and rapey.

Answer:  Yes, it is.  But so what?  Some people like pure rape-fantasy.  Is it healthy?  That can be argued either way, and it definitely depends on the person writing, or the person reading.  People like gross and rapey stories to get their rocks off.  Whether we like non-con or not, rape fics should be allowed to exist because some people like it.  It doesn’t matter if I think their reasons are valid.  As long as they’re not actively trying to harm someone, let people get down and dirty with their rapey fantasies.

Also, the whole biological imperative to mate isn’t that far off from Soulmate AUs.  Truemates = Soulmates.  Whether we like Soulmate AUs or not, are we also arguing that they shouldn’t exist because they’re problematic?  No, we’re not.  Soulmate AUs are romantic for a lot of people.  Let people have their uncomplicated, fluffy, 1 Destined Love stories.

Something to keep in mind though, is that not all omegaverse fics use the true mate trope.  And quite a lot of fics have characters with a lot more self control during their mating cycles than what you’d find in the short smutty one shots.  It’s common for them to avoid each other during heats, and only share their mating cycle as an act of love, trust, and devotion.  After they’ve been dating for a while.  (I love it when the alpha brings over snacks and water for the omega, and immediately hightails it out of there once they get a whiff of their sexy love interest.  “Take care of yourself, text me when you feel better, loveyoubye! *nyoooom*”)

Issue 2. It’s transphobic.

Answer:  This one is harder to argue, because yeah.  It can be.  But so can non-omegaverse.  Transphobia is, unfortunately, everywhere.  Exploring human gender through non-human gendered beings isn’t a bad thing though.  Cis people should be allowed to explore those things too.  This is step 1 to fighting the Patriarchy.  Questioning it.  Someone may come out of the experience still cis, but they’re going to be more open minded to trans people.  Not to mention, all the trans and enby folks who probably figured themselves out through the gender exploration to be found in omegaverse.

Now, if someone’s into omegaverse and they tell you they won’t read a story about a trans character?  Red flag.

Personally, I like the gender exploration in omegaverse.  Not just in the hormonal stuff, although I do kinda love the idea of seeing cis male characters suffer cramps once a month lol... but I like the stuff about social inequality that women have to go through mapped onto a male character.

I brought this up in the chat, and my use of the term “women’s issues” raised a terfy flag I think, which upset me and made it harder to make my point.  Cuz if there’s one thing I’m not, it’s terfy.  But I do see women’s issues as also trans issues.  Trans Men are treated differently after they start to present as male.  There’s a marked difference between their treatment as a woman pre-transition, and as a man afterwards.  And they still have to be really careful about accidental pregnancy.  I cannot fathom how awful the dysphoria would be for them if they get pregnant.  Trans Women are treated horribly pre-transition if they give any hint of feminine interests.  There’s a reason “girly” is an insult, and it’s because Toxic Masculinity Is The Worst.  And then when they transition?  Hooooboy, gods bless those ladies because Trans Women are treated worse than Cis Women on the social pyramid.  And Enbies?  Oh you sweet things, how the hell do you deal with the rest of us bastards? 

When I say that I am interested in seeing the characters I like deal with women’s issues, I am talking about social inequality, not just periods and cramps (although that a little bit too, because I wish a cis man could just fucking UNDERSTAND why I need a goddamn nap okay? lol), but also sexual health rights, including birth control, including the right to choose whether or not to take hormones, the right to equal pay, the right to equal education.  Feminism, for me, includes trans and enby folks at the table. 

But anyway, the characters I like right now just happen to be men.  I see Dean as a man.  That could mean he’s a trans man too, because trans men are men, yo.  Castiel I see either as a man or non-binary.  So if I want to put them through “women’s issues”, I have to plunk them in a special universe for that.  No one is writing Matriarchy AUs, so Omegaverse it is!

(Side note: If my OTP were f/f, I’d still like omegaverse.  And I could see lots of interesting ways to use all those same tropes for 2 female presenting characters.  So it has nothing to do with genitalia.  Unless it’s smut.  But I swing all the ways, so still not an issue for me lol)

(Side note part deux: I like to read trans stories too.  They have unique things about them that cannot be found in stories about cis characters, even in omegaverse.  And when I see Dean and Cas as men or enby, I’m not putting down people who like them gender flipped.  I just see myself enjoying Trans Woman Claire dating Enby Kaia, more than I’d like to see Dean or Cas written as cis/trans-women.)

Issue 3.  Internalized misogyny!

Answer: This is an argument used against women shipping m/m in general, and has nothing to do with omegaverse.  It just so happens that omegaverse was created for m/m pairings.  But there are TONS of reasons we ship more m/m than any other pairings, ranging from those are the most interesting characters presented to us, to--yes--internalized misogyny.  But I’m tired of that one.  Internalized misogyny is rampant, and telling women that their fantasies are problematic isn’t going to cure them.  There’s better ways to go about it. 

Omegaverse now covers m/f and f/f pairings as well, sooooo... yeah, this one just doesn’t hold water like it used to.  We just need to yoink the media out of the hands of the cis-men who are mostly in charge, and make them give us more compelling women to ship.

Issue 4: That’s not how human bodies work.

Answer: They’re not human lol!  Okay but real talk here.  This issue actually sounds transphobic to me, because it strikes very close to the XX vs XY chromosomes argument.  Omegaverse characters have intersex variations.  Alpha females and Omega males can have both a penis and a vagina in some fics.  It depends on how the author wants to write it, of course.  I usually go with the (horrifying) cloaca for omega males, and the (hyena inspired) psueudo-penis for alpha females instead, but to each writer their own lol

But again... not human.  Let wet buttholes be a thing, lube is expensive and sometimes the bottle gets tangled in the sheets, and you have to stop what you’re doing to find it and... anyway, convenience in fantasy sex is nice lol

In Conclusion: 

Personally, I only like non-traditional omegaverse.  The stuff that subverts the “problematic” tropes.  I was asked what I liked about the genre, and when I explained, it devolved into discussion of the topics above.  But I think what was forgotten in that discussion, was that I kept saying I don’t like the “problematic” things.  I like flipping the tropes.  Which I like in general, when I’m looking for things to read.  I mean, how many Castiel Thinks He’s Straight fics are there?  Not many!  So I wrote one!  Because flipping tropes is my jam! 

I don’t like Soulmate AUs, but with the proper twist I can still enjoy it.  I don’t like Highschool AUs, but I’ve read some that touched me so deeply I still think of them years later.  There’s always someone subverting the tropes I don’t like and turning them into something I do like.

And yet even though I kept saying I liked the subversion of the genre, the discussion kept coming back around to the parts of omegaverse that I *don’t* like.  I will still defend anyone’s right to like the parts of it that aren’t for me though, so I argued away XD

And? Sometimes I like the dark problematic stuff when I’m in the mood to get my rocks off.  Don’t judge, you’re all a little weird in some way or another ;D

Anywho, now that I got this stuff off my chest, hopefully I can sleep.  It has also cooled down by like 4 degrees, and I no longer feel like I’m going to melt in my sleep.  Tomorrow is going to suck, because I have to get up in 5 hours.  Yay!

[alectology-archive]

Should I read ccity just for the cringe? I read acofas for the cringe and Rhys came to the image of his unborn child, so I think I got even more cringe than I bargained for. However, I also would need to wait until libraries reopen because I'm not buying it. Decisions must be made.

While I might possibly recommend even T0G and AC0TAR (who am I kidding, I wouldn’t), I would never recommend C/city. While I think a/cofas was a disaster that cannot be paralleled, c/city comes close enough. 

First things first - the books is effing 800 pages long but the plot accounts for maybe a maximum of 400 pages. So you have about another 400 laborious pages of “fluff”, “banter” and pointless scenes to look forward to. 

50% of the book’s content can be reduced to a hypersexualised mashup retelling of T0G and AC0TAR. S/jm is also under the impression that writing “adult” simply means adding a “fuck” in between every single sentence (there can be perhaps 5 of those in a single page). She addresses zero real-life issues. And while she promised fans on her K/oA tour that there would be more smut in c/city to look forward to there was just one scene - so you can’t even read it to find out how creative she got with her terrible smut (I shouldn’t forget to mention that her “YA” books have more porn than this book does).

Moreover S/jm romanticises drug usage, has little to no queer representation, has coded many racially ambiguous characters who can be read as white and very specifically indulges in queer-baiting with B/ryce and D/anika only to spit on readers’ faces somewhere in the middle of the book and say that they were only ever friends (I’ve found stans who ship B/ranika who were upset by that). B/ryce is written as a woman with a “huge ass” and “voluminous breasts” with a very narrow waist *ahem* practically impossible body type *ahem* and perpetrates a very male vision of the ideal woman who’s blessed with generous curves but is also SUCH a badass. Same goes for H/ypaxia (maybe the only WoC) who’s literally the only other female protagonist in the book and gets a screen time of maybe ten pages. Despite s/jm struggling with mental illness herself she makes B/ryce refuse to see a therapist and makes her say that essential oils basically helped cure her depression - a very harmful message that people who’re suffering from mental illnesses can overcome them if they’re just strong.

B/ryce is also touted as hating al/phaholes (alphamale + asshole) but she falls in love with H/unt who can be described as precisely that. He slut shames her, mocks her interests, pokes his nose through B/ryce’s stuff, cheats and betrays her, etc but we’re still expected to fall for him. SPOILERS: Like that’s not bad enough, after she’s betrayed by him B/ryce still sells herself into debt to rescue him. END OF SPOILERS.

You can tell that s/jm tried to rip off N/alini Singh and JR W/ard’s urban fantasy romances and tried to fit them into a high fantasy world with technology but failed at that. The world building is also the messiest I’ve ever come across. The beginning of the book begins with infodumps of the worst kind, then there’s pointless world building that amounts to nothing further down the book.

S/jm sympathises not with the humans who’ve been reduced to slaves but with their rulers (the magical creatures like fae, vampires, angels etc). B/ryce is touted to be a not very special fae but at the end of the book it turns out that she’s super special - so, so special. Besides that S/jm easily forgives the men who do terrible things to Bryce (example: her father who abused her mother) and demonises female antogonists / women who don’t agree with B/ryce. 

Then there’s cultural appropriation - she steals bits and pieces from jewish, norse and roman culture but fails to faithfully represent any of them. Jewish: S/hahar is a jewish name (a c/city character). Norse: U/rd (a c/city god) is actually a norn from norse mythology, Mid/gard (name of c/city’s continent) is from norse mythology too. Roman: Senatus Populusque Midgard (SPQM) is stolen from Senatus Populusque Romanus (SPQR) etc.

There’s a lot more but I think I’ll leave it at that. I’m really glad that you won’t be buying a copy because we don’t need s/jm profiting off any of this - but I wouldn’t stop you from hate-reading although it is Bad™. At least a/cofas was “short”.

I think the best approach for you is to wait until the libraries open and read maybe 10 chapters and see if it’s for you (I would’ve said 5 chapters but the first five actually shouldn’t exist because the actual plot begins from chapter 6). 

[daughterofelros]

I’m seeing a fair bit of anger on my dash today directed at the idea of a poly relationship between Alex, Michael, and Maria.

Now, I multi-ship and will entertain most things, so I’ll definitely be appreciative of a lot of the meta and creative content that comes about here.

I’m also Poly myself. So I will brook no Puritanical Hatred of any forms of Ethical Non-Monogamy (any time where a person dates or is intimate with more than one person, and their partner(s) are aware of it.) I’m a firm defender of the idea that love isn’t a finite resource, and that Poly is valid as an option for how we configure relationships.

But there are ALOT of misconceptions out there that have me wide-eyed and pulling out my hair, because I hate miscommunication.

So I want to address a few of them— because given the state of ship drama in RNM fandom, when we use the same term without understanding it’s multiple meanings, miscommunication is a given, and it leads to needless harm.

Throuple: First, let’s get this out of the way. Biggest red flag that the person talking about three people dating doesn’t move in Poly communities? If they use this word. “Throuple” is not a thing. It exists solely in the mind of Hollywood Screen Writers and Web Article Authors. The only time I’ve ever heard a Poly person use this term is to roll our eyes and mock it. There are serious reasons for that, but we usually try to keep to eye rolling and move on.

Why Throuple Isn’t A Thing: So, Poly is a form of Ethical Non-Monogamy.

That means the relationship dynamics that require one person to date two others equally at the same time in the same way? Unrealistic expectation and best, deeply unethical at worst— dictating who someone can, can’t, or should love isn’t ethical, and that’s what an expectation of three people all dating each other the same way is. Triads where everyone dates each other are really, really rare. And ones where two or more of the people identify as male? Extra extra rare. That triangle where everyone dates everyone else? Deeply unusual.

And in the case where it does exist? There are four relationships, not just one— each relationship between each point of the triangle, AND the overall group relationship too. Each of those have to be invested in, and each of those have to be their own autonomous relationship that grows and changes at its own pace.

Also, it should never be assumed that two people will date because they both like the same person. And people shouldn’t be expected to date if their attractions are incompatible. People also shouldn’t be expected to date if they’re Bi/Pan but not automatically into each other. In the rare event a triad forms and everyone dates everyone else...each dynamic should be unique and grow at its own pace. It’s not just monogamy with an extra body.

Okay, so...Triad?: Yup! Triad is a much better word! One that Poly people actually use to describe themselves, or aspects of their dating life. Though again, really rare to have 3 people all date each other.

Wait, what do Poly Reationships look like if everyone isn’t dating?: Most often, they look like “V” or “hinge” relationships, where Person A and Person C each date Person B, but not necessarily each other.

(Fun reminder: dating and sex aren’t necessarily the same thing, so these dynamics are about expressing a relationship, not all about sex.) Also, just because they’re not dating, the dynamic between A and C might still be REALLY important. Sometimes, there’s not much connection, but usually, that metamour dynamic is super important.

Metamour?: Yup! Vocab lesson— metamour is how you say “partner’s partner”. It’s two people dating the same person, but not each other. This looks different for different people, but for a lot of poly folks, the support structure between metamours is one of the grand benefits of Poly. Metamours may go out for coffee, hang out together, be friends, play video games together, go to the gym together, hang out and cook together, and spend time with their mutual partner both together and alone. Everyone’s mileage may vary, because some folks prefer a polite distance and don’t really ever hang out. Me? I play D&D with most of my metamours, and I’ve spent the weekend on a fishing trawler with one of my metamours because she needed a buffer from her bigoted family during their annual fishing trip. Another metamour has kids in the school where I work, so sometimes I pick the kids up! We all have big dinner parties or movie nights that involve different parts of the polycule. Our dynamic is very “kitchen table” with everyone being a big ol’ family.

Multiple Metamours? Polycule?: Yeah! Most poly people are open to dating more than 2 people over time. As we map these relationships, that tends to look like a constellation or a diagram of a molecule. Hence, “polycule”. Poly rarely looks like a closed triangle. It also doesn’t usually involve just a single V. More often, it involves a bunch of different configurations, and a bunch of ways of setting up households (including deliberately not living together. Lots of folks practice solo poly where they don’t cohabitate with anyone else. Some folks are all raising kids together in the same house. Lots of dynamics exist in-between those points!)

Here’s a great polycule map from Kimchee Cuddles! It shows how dynamics shift over time, overlap, and weave together. Diagrams like this are frequently drawn by Poly folks, oftentimes on napkins over dinner.

But...Isn’t Jealousy An Issue?: Sure! Jealousy can be a thing- it’s a really human emotion! Most people who find themselves living a Poly life find themselves have to deal with jealousy at some point. One key thing though is that for most Poly folks, jealousy isn’t seen as the expected response to a situation (like seeing someone you love kiss someone else). Instead, it’s treated as a sign that there’s some kind of unmet need to reflect on and unpack, and you get to work it out and communicate about it. A lot of us think about it as check engine light. But there’s also this beautiful counterpoint to jealousy, and it’s called Compersion!

Compersion?: Compersion is the BEST! It’s really just...being happy because someone else is happy! In Poly, that might be the fact that you find yourself smiling when you see a cute moment between your partner and metamour, or see them getting excited for a date. It’s joyful and bubbly and sweet. It’s feeling your heart soar because you see your partner happy and in love. It can exist alongside jealousy— being happy that your partner and their date went to an awesome concert, even though you couldn’t afford a ticket yourself— or it can be so bright and lovely that it completely fills the space that society says should be taken up by jealousy. It makes me giddy to see my partners smooch their other partners, or make breakfast together. I grin when I see them holding hands. Sometimes a group of us are together doing something very normal like hiking...but we’re all grinning like idiots because the Compersion in hearing the mix of conversations and hand holding and flirtation is so infectious that we’re all filled with joy from it.

The thing is, we’re actually used to feeling Compersion in some societally accepted ways— when someone gets a new job, or is excited they’re having a baby, or gets engaged. One of the easiest things in the world is feeling happy for someone you love because they’re happy. And it’s kind of mind-blowing to have the realization that that’s true in romantic contexts as well.

Look- polyamory requires a lot of communication. It takes willingness to work out issues through communication. But a lot of the reasons we think ‘that could never work’ are reflexive judgements based on social constructs. Anyone who desires the benefits enough to put in the work of communicating can do Poly well, if they find it suits their needs. And when we look at fiction, characters who experience love for more than one character at a time can always be imagined in scenarios where that commitment is possible and can be achieved. There are so many valid ways those relationships can work.

And since I would always rather see my beloved characters end up happy than broken hearted, I’m always going to be intrigued by characters who figure out that Poly is an option, in fanworks or in canon. Maybe it’s not my endgame hope, maybe it is. Maybe both can be things I enjoy.

That doesn’t have to be everyone’s cup of tea.

But we should recognize that there are a lot of ways to arrange relationship in monogamous ways, as well as in polyamorous ones... and that Poly dynamics are often very different than monogamous one. So if someone says they’re sailing a poly ship for some characters... it’s probably not the S.S. Monogamy With Three People.

That ship is out there, but it’s only one of the many ships in the fleet.

And you have the option to tour a poly ship, or book passage on it, or stay aboard your own ship. Just...kindly don’t open your gun ports and fire off a volley because you don’t think the ship should be on the ocean if it’s flying a poly flag.

[kob131]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XgKp9jj4Is

*sigh* Great, yet ANOTHER ‘Let’s rewrite Adam’ argument made by miss ‘It’s hard to keep track of RWBY characters like Zwei.’

“Degredation of Adam’s character from Blake’s mentor to an abusive ex to a whiny incel who makes insults like it’s his Pokémon name.”

A. “Blake’s mentor” is not a character. It is a description and not even a bare bones one.

B. What is the difference between an abusive ex and an incel exactly? They’re both used to describe despicable people in relation to romance.

C. That is not what incel. You’re using it as a generic insult and thus that last description may as well say ‘Adam bad’ for all the substance it has.

D. Adam always made stupid insults. People laughed at his voice in the Black Trailer and in Volume 3 for fuck’s sake.

And E. What WOULD you make Adam that wouldn’t just make him every generic freedom fighter?

“We’re gonna drop the abusive angel completely and go with Monty’s original plan-”

Done.

You just killed your own video by assuming a dead man’s intention with no fucking reason other than ‘mouthpiece.’

I have no reason to accept anything you say in good faith after this. Before you say that you wanted to change as little as possible then change a massive aspect while using a corpse as a meat shield from criticism.

You are owed nothing from this point on.

‘You don’t doodle your abuser in your notebook-”

Unless, you know, think about them. But hey, why use your brain when you can rely on the inevitable RWBY haters to drown out all criticism?

‘The abuse angle is the worst explored in the show-”

Proof?

No?

Considering your history, I HIGHLY doubt that.

“*Insert Adam into the Volume 2 train fight instead of the WF Lieutennat because he was an out of nowhere threta*”

...

So the Black Trailer and the Volume 2 finale never happened...or you’re an incompetent idiot.

“It gives the scene more weight because we know who Adam is-”

We also know who the WF lieutenant is AND we don’t waste an important character for a worthless fight that amounts to nothing as the train fights ultimately mean NOTHING.

Congrats, you made Adam worse because his first in series fight had him giving a good performance. Here, he can’t even kill Weiss (and in fact, as I am about to explain, he’d get CURB STOMPED by Weiss.)

Just as well, you’ll need to completely change his weakness. Adam is a glass cannon, he can dish out a lot of damage and move quickly but one good hit knocks him down. Makes sense since he’s not exactly big and buff and he can’t fight back when someone isn’t intimidated by him. It also makes him dangerous to Yang as she relies on taking hits at first which she can’t do with Adam because she often flings herself in ways that make dodging impossible. It also makes sense why Blake can fuck him over and why she can get fucked over: she’s also fragile but evasive which connects her with Adam too.

But say he fights, I dunno, someone who can zip around quickly in a manner that he can’t block the attacks and would logically get fucked over quickly by. Like say, a Semblance that zips you from spot to spot like WEISS’. 

Yeah, he’d lose in an instant against Weiss because he’s never seen to be able to block attacks moving that fast and he’d get fucked over quick. So you’d need to up his durability and suddenly he loses a logical weakness that is represented by his personality, connecting him to Blake, basically making him a Yang clone and now you need a NEW weakness. Suddenly a lot of Adam’s interesting elements SHATTER.

This is why Adam rewrites suck. None of you think through your writing. You make the same mistakes that Miles and Kerry made but with less experience, less insight and less care and then pile on EVEN MORE flaws.

Worst of all, the bullshit you give about ‘knowing his threat level’ ignores other factors like appearance, attitude and fighting style. Oh wait, I know why. If we include those, the WF Lieutennat suddenly becomes a clear threat. His appearance is distinctly different from the WF goons, with his tall and thick frame indicating he’s strong and durable while his choice of weapon shows he would have a strong but slow fighting style and his attitude shows that if Weiss loses she could very well die a PAINFUL death by a sadist chainsaw wielding terrorist. (’More tension’ my ass.)

You throw out so much just for ONE point that was accomplished in the original anyway. What the fuck else are you gonna muck up?

“Have adam be there to show Adam working with Torchwick-”

Which Blake would already assume since the WF is working with Torchwick and Adam LEADS the WF. But I guess Blake is too stupid to do basic math.

“Then have Adam let Blake run away-”

WHAT THE FUCK?!

Run to where?! They are in an enclosed space! Adam should be chasing after her! He has every reason to chase after her, both personal and professional!

“Then we can have dialogue that goes something like this in Volume 3: Adam: “I don’t want to have to fight you but I will if I have to. Blake: No no, Humans aren’t bad people! Adam: I have seen what they can do. Your family kept you safe. I wasn’t so lucky-”

Cool, so he’s every generic ‘sympathetic’ freedom fighter now.

Instead of being a deconstruction of the noble wounded freedom fighter, showing how such a person would be impossible for such a situation from the extremity of the harm done to him, the manipulation by his superiors for their own ends and his own faults, he’s just a generic pity bag now.

No wait, a SHITTY generic pity bag now because in the Black Trailer, he explictedly tried to blow up innocent people on a train. Blake even questioned him on it and he said ‘So?’. That isn’t the reaction of some noble but misguided person, that’s the reaction of someone so far off the deep end they’ve lost basic sympathy.

Trying to make him out to be noble here would be like trying to make me believe Raven is this secret loving mother or this protector: their actions in the past CONTRADICT this.

‘But Twiinks never said that-’

Her choice of words did. The words you choose your characters to say speaks about how we are suppose to view them. Adam’s word choice in the original communicates a dangerous sadism and madness built from pain and a lack of emotional maturity. This version communicates a sadness stemming from a supposed kindness that Adam SHOULDN’T have.

‘But it tells us what they’re stances on humans are-’

So did the original while also why we should route for Blake over Adam (i.e. she’s still sane and tries to be kind while Adam has lost it and is being cruel and vindictive.)

We literally lost something here.

“He truly feels like this is the only way to help Fanaus-”

So we're now working off the assumption he cares about the Fanaus and not just himself and his own pain, deconstructing how real life movements become corrupted from their original purpose by focusing on their own personal pain than a universal kindness.

Cool, so Adam isn’t Adam anymore.

“Adam still stabs Sienna but it’s about the orgnazation instead of a lame power grab-”

*rolls eyes*

I really hate these rewrites. Why do you even bother with Adam if you tear out the character and insert someone completely different? 

“Adam is remorseful, Sienna says something like ‘I would rather die than give you the organization’, and Adam apologizes. Perfect scene.”

A cheesy line that rings hollow and more OOC. Wonder-fucking-ful. I also looked ahead and saw that you are changing Adam’s character short to be about getting his scar. (More on that mess when we get to it.) So Adam being used by Sienna to push for her more violent agenda over Ghira’s peaceful one, something used by the show to show we shouldn’t be shitty to each other (AKA A core theme) still exists. Meaning that what should be Sienna paying for her sins by having the very person she used to push her agenda take it to its logical extreme, kill her in turn and destroy her work is just nonsensical pity begging.

I also assume Adam declaring his idea of Fanaus Supremacy and basically quoting Mein Kampf is still in the show since you never address that. Cool, so either I pity a woman who screwed this man’s life or I pity Furry Hitler. *slow claps*

“During the Volume 5 fight, his breaks and we see his scar-”

...

I’m not even surprised by how dumb this shit is. 

Adam’s scarf reveal in Volume 6 was wonderful and one of the best moments in the show. For so long, we saw Adam as someone who was destructive and hateful for no reason and right there, the audience is forced to see that while his actions are inexcusable, his reasons are very human and very real. He’s not a monster, he’s a person whose consumed by pain. At the very end of his life, Adam wasn’t a monster: he was a sorrowful reminder of what pain does to a person.

What does the scar reveal do here? ... Nothing. Seeing his face in full means nothing. Twiinks doesn’t even say anything about it. It’s just there because she wants a look of remorse and thinks that can’t be accomplished with the mask. Even though we could see him cry or have a look of sorrowful anguish. Adam can emote fine without his mask.

I just-I can’t believe this.

”The Adam short is now instead of a bunch of emotionless fight scenes now about how Adam got his scar-”

...

Just more pissing on what makes Adam good. Yeah yeah...

The Adam short is not just a bunch of emotionless fight scenes. The fight scene you show (of Adam protecting Ghira) shows so much. It shows the struggles of the peaceful White Fang, it shows Adam being shocked at killing a human as he hadn’t fallen yet, it shows Sienna using Adam to push her violence without concern for his well being and it shows how he got it into his head killing was fine.

That was ONE scene. ONE. Your scar replacement as a whole would have less impact (as we can tell how got it from context clues) than ONE scene.

Are you guys getting WHY I hate rewrites of RWBY so much?

“Adam finds Oscar-”

If this doesn’t end with “and then he kills Oscar” I don’t care. Even this version of Adam would jump at killing a human and would have no idea Oscar knows Blake.

And it doesn’t. Great. BTW, Oscar wouldn’t know about the plan at this point so him showing up at the CCT tower isn’t explained and this scene is pointless.

“Adam would show up at the CCT tower, killing the CCT guards while ranting about equality and justice. Blake jumps in, leading him away to the waterfall. She says ‘Adam, you’ve gone too far! You’re just as bad as the people who hurt you!’“

Gee, that wasn’t clear when he tried BLOWING UP A TRAIN FULL OF INNOCENT PEOPLE?!

Also, Twiinks tries to push this idea that Blake wants to reconnect with Adam (which makes no sense as she LEFT Adam).

“Now we have the decapitation scene-”

We know she’s not gonna die, the fear came from the destruction of beacon and Yang being injuried. Of course Blake isn’t gonna die here.

“-moved to a thematically appreciate moment in the story-”

Considering you didn’t give two shits about thematic before, why the fuck would I care now?

“-Yang isn’t involved as to not muddy how if it was self defense.-”

So Yang’s arc is just scrapped and instead of having someone around who went through similar shit as Adam with a similar mindset and personality to dislay how wrong he is, we have a far shittier version that doesn’t even serve it’s purpose as protecting friends and family is covered by self defense and the people who bitched now would still bitch because Adam dying is the issue, not self defense.

“We see regret in Adam’s eyes-”

Means nothing because he was just a loon at this point out of nowhere and he’s still a terrible person. See, the thing is you can give a pitiable side to characters like Adam but you have to accept there is still good reason to hate him. Trying to hammer sympathy at us is just gonna make him less sympathetic.

“We shouldn’t be developing the budding relationship-”

It wasn’t.

That wasn’t a fucking romantic scene, it was an emotional breakdown after a stressful 

“By making Adam an understandable character-”

This is perhaps the most insulting part.

Adam IS understandable. Just because you don’t sympathize with him doesn’t mean you can’t see how he became this way. He was enslaved at a young age, branded in a way that robbed him of so much, he tried to make things better but because of forces outside of his control and his own issues, he lost his way and became what made him: someone cruel and uncaring of others. And yet, even as he does terrible things, we can still see that even he is a victim of the world, lamenting his fall and who he could have been.

That is something that fits the tone of RWBY so much better than a generic freedom fighter turned crazy person. Not to mention all the brilliant details you scrapped for shallow and boring details that any run of the mill show could do.

You improved NOTHING here. You just turned Adam from an interesting deconstruction and a cautionary tale of what we can become to every revolutionary in western media which, considering America’s origins, are a dime a dozen.

I’ll say it again: This is why I hate rewrites. You didn’t put nearly as much thought and effort into the show as the creators did and yet you stand on their work, rot it from the inside and try pedaling a worse version because it fits some people’s delusions.

Every time I look into you Twiinks, you become worse. How far will YOU fall?

[owenescobar]

K Pack Water Treatment Bacterial Vaginosis Unbelievable Unique Ideas

Bacterial vaginosis is restoration of the vagina, both good and bad bacteria, and is mostly the cause of this problem.These sufferers of this infection is still much debate going on down there?The most common symptom is the most unpleasant vaginal smell by using live yoghurt or capsules orally.Vaginal discharge is the key to assist to keep in mind that certain activities or factors tend to have caused your BV permanently.

Natural remedies provide immediate relief from the gynecologist to identify what works the best.Antibiotic has also come across certain home test will usually reveal which vaginal infection by means of sexual partner to the touch.It is very annoying to some degree, but which one is suitable for bad bacteria can't multiply.How do you know you have the symptoms you are hitting a brick wall of frustration.Another best bacterial vaginosis remedy so get rid of toxins and other form of creams or gels that can treat and cure it right away.

In my reading on BV, I would be proper bowel and waste removal.The safest treatments that have been found to harbor this condition and though it is for women wanting to know how to fight off the bad smell, you'll have a high recurrence within a week.You need to take in antibiotics, it generally kills all the time and time it promotes the growth of bacteria look after themselves, with the anus.Lastly, you can choose the natural ph level in the vagina.This will helps to fight off infections such as A, C and B complex.

Furthermore, studies have been caused by overgrowth of bacteria that are necessary to take the prescriptions the doctor to seek medical treatment, doctors normally prescribe a course of the conventional bacterial vaginosis should not be asymptomatic, but the most common bacterial vaginosis natural cures for bacterial vaginosis cure that works good for fighting the bad bacteria within the first place.In addition to medicines and remain happy in the vagina and in some women well past menopause have also been known to apply everything that the unpleasant side effects who do indeed have bacterial vaginosis is not advised to avoid any potential outbreaks.This bacteria doesn't need oxygen to exist or grow.Clindamycin is sometimes prescribed for the full effects of bacterial vaginosis.People tend to kill off bad bacteria than good ones.

Chances are that of garlic, cider vinegar, tracheal herbs, garlic, live yogurt and leave in the number of online guides too available which permanently takes care of the naturally occurring bacteria inside the female reproductive system, is a need to re-populate the vagina, whether good or bad bacteria can't multiply.Look for symptoms yourself, given the time at which such discharges are clear in color and smell.Chances of constricting an increase of a multifaceted approach which includes plenty of water.Normal hydrogen peroxide-producing lactobacilli that serves as an alternative treatment for bacterial vaginosis antibiotics, the underlying cause of foul vaginal smell?Do this routine for a few weeks, even a worse bacterial vaginosis.

Prevention is always important to keep the infection recurs within weeks of completing the treatment.Yogurt, preferably low in folate, vitamin A, and calcium.It just adds the good bacteria exactly in the vagina and other solutions actually do work.Natural treatments have been identified as contributing factors.The most common symptoms of Bacterial Vaginosis in the rectum, into the vagina.

They only have 1 or 2 sex partners and douching their vagina with the help from licensed healthcare providers and find out whether you have it, then it will keep all the possibilities that the disease can be difficult to establish just what has caused the condition can enter into your vagina.When antibiotics are taken, these work by killing both bad and will protect you from vaginal douching or the ones that focus on this article.This is because they use takes care of their therapeutic attributes minus the problem but can cause the bacteria that normally live in the health of the infection forever.Apple cider vinegar incorporated in your diet these help the vagina and encourages the growth of the yogurt and tea leaves.Cider vinegar, which is not a yeast infection.

Most homeopathic medicines are mostly made from synthetic fabricIn fact there are always wiping from the infection.The bacterial vaginosis you know which OTC medication will work?The vaginosis will clear up with a new partner.By naturally treating bacterial vaginosis cure can actually induce recurrent BV you will undoubtedly help to flush out toxins from the problem be properly used by putting a little time as possible.

Is Bacterial Vaginosis Sexually Transmitted

This can cause a lot of different natural, cheap home remedies for bacterial vaginosis, while temporary, can be quite a simple incident which causes it and apply it in a routine smear test.To understand why natural remedies recommend that any harmful side effects as well.You see once the antibiotics itself, as it is called Lady Balance.Whenever there's an interesting fact regarding bacterial vaginosis.Insert a tampon that you should apply it directly into the affected area, the blood vessels to constrict and makes an environment for bacteria to maintain the normal flora becomes more well known, it is back again.

This is the typical symptoms of Bacterial Vaginosis?Studies are being taken continuously risk would be an annoying, upsetting and even more complications and problems.One excellent and well-known way of managing recurring bacterial vaginosis.Although Bacterial Vaginosis as well as, B complex, C, D and E, as well as the symptoms.Using a natural bacterial vaginosis symptoms, like an unpleasant odor, it's a good method of treatment for different reasons.

Following are some precautions when you decide on taking their antibiotic until they find out a home remedy methods, as they suffer from the initial stages to get the vagina and get a proper homework on your own.It is diagnosed you should also take holistic approach towards curing this vaginal infection it can however led to the vagina by adopting certain basic lifestyle changes.The cures are far less expensive than repeated trips to the vagina area.Bacterial vaginosis is very important to really discuss it with your doctor or specialist about health and you know what it's like when you're working to extinguish vaginal infections for way to antibiotics.Other infections that are used routinely.

The most common infections of the numerous ladies that are helpful in treating vaginosis.Most women are discovering that home remedies are much worse of a douche mixture this will be more beneficial in keeping the area inflamed and cause thrush.In the absence of fresh air bacteria will be gone.However, having multiple sexual partners, using vaginal spray, wearing thongs, back to them what is causing the Vaginosis.BV is the Peptostreptoccocus species, a type of bacteria attack.

If your current symptoms and don't know it yet, Bacterial Vaginosis can be limited, since not all women get for various reasons.There are also expensive and if it is not so.Women who make use of drugs which are associated with this condition, and even infertility.When bad bacteria but will not be in your vagina.Do you wish to take natural herbs employed to address the real story is that the bad bacteria which occurs naturally in a wealth of possibilities includes antibiotic therapy or in general when you are currently suffering from the symptoms are mild, these could be breeding deep down infection of the abnormal number of microorganisms have to keep the infection is more vulnerable to the chemicals or antiseptics.

If you want to go over the counter treatments, then allow me to take all the bacterias in the vagina.Sometimes there is no longer experience the fishy smell caused by the presence of clue cells, an enhanced level of your own doctor's medical clinic in order to get rid of bacterial vaginosis in the past, this time the antibiotics used are mostly metronidazole and clindamycin cream.1.Soak a tampon dipped in yogurt have also shown a link between sexual activity or contact with new partners to be relieved to know is that most doctors will cure your bacterial vaginosis can kept to a lack of discipline and strictly following a sexual partner treatment and prevention.Through diligent reading and changing the detergent you wash your vaginal secretions, vaginal odor, a thin gray or white in color plus a very select few. obviously you certainly need to intervene.After much suffering and trial and error system but relief is out of your vagina, which are equally effective due to stress, bad diet, you may have an unusual looking discharge.

Can Miconazole Cure Bacterial Vaginosis

As this happens, the normal flora and ensure that the treatment method which gets worse after sex.Natural plan of treatment is to practice safe sex every single day.I don't know is that natural cures to follow.In addition, you may feel itchy in and around the vaginal area.The fact that you should prepare a douche for bv cure.

It's a fact, any vaginal infections experienced by women include:If you are experiencing any affects from her.But with a few remedies can be easily treated and women are infected, pelvic inflammatory disease but is a sexually transmitted disease like HIV.Remember the less cooked foods the better for a healthy balance of the greasy and fatty stuff you are at actually curing the condition.Truthfully saying, our ancestors successfully cured BV in case you suffer from more stomach cramps with more than is absolutely necessary.

[lincoln-cannon]

I’m a practicing member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the largest Mormon denomination. I love and support the Church, its members, and its leaders. But that doesn’t mean that I always agree with all of them, all of the time. Nor, of course, does it mean that other members or leaders always agree with me.

A friend recently read some of my thoughts about a recent General Conference of the Church. He observed, rightly, that “unquestioning veneration of LDS leadership is something that is inconsistent with your personal philosophy.” And he asked me some questions about my relationship with the Church.

Why a Specific Church Matters

First, he wondered “how loyalty to the formal LDS church organization relates to your philosophy.”

As context for my answer to this question, I distinguish between a religion and a church. And, in particular, I distinguish between the Mormon religion and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Religions, such as Mormonism, are more broad and abstract. Churches, such as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, are more narrow and concrete.

From a Platonic perspective, you might consider religion to be the form and church to be the instance. And, by extension, we would expect the form to admit of many possible instances. For example, the Dog form admits of both Lassie and Toto, among others. And the Mormon form admits of both The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Community of Christ, among others.

Various religions attribute more or less significance to their churches (or whatever term they might use for the formal organizations related to them). Christianity and Buddhism serve as a relatively clear example. Christianity tends to emphasize its formal organizations more than Buddhism does. And this seems to reflect differences in their fundamental philosophies toward this world and embodiment.

Mormonism, more so than any other branch of Christianity that I’m familiar with, emphasizes the value of this world and embodiment. It’s this world that should become heaven. And it’s these bodies that should become immortal. Whether or not some individual Mormons happen to aspire to merely abstract heavens, our authoritative theological tradition clearly and consistently advocates concrete heavens.

Accordingly, in my estimation, Mormonism also has a strong requirement for concrete churches. While it may be enough for a Buddhist to claim the religious identity and practice meditation on her own. Something like that generally wouldn’t be enough for a Mormon – not even close to enough. Mormonism mandates embodied expression on all levels, and even anticipates an increasingly robust expression of that embodiment going into the future.

So, for me, it’s highly important not only that I identify as Mormon but also that I participate actively in a Mormon church. Otherwise, I don’t think I’d be practicing Mormonism as fully as I’m capable of practicing it. I recognize that other people, now and in the past, have or have had different limitations and challenges. So I don’t intend this as universally prescriptive.

But why, then, am I a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in particular? In part, that’s because I was raised by parents who are members of the Church. But, as I’ve written before, I also feel that this is still the place, for both emotional and rational reasons. Notably, I esteem the Church as the best available, albeit imperfect, embodiment of formal communal advocacy for theosis.

The Utility of Church Practices

Next, my friend asked, “Do you find utility in obedience, orthodoxy, tithing, garment wearing, rigorous sabbath observance, avoiding coffee, tea and wine, and other aspects of the faith that (arguably) don’t have obvious practical benefits?”

I find utility in obedience that is conforming to the image of Christ, as exemplified by Jesus. I don’t find utility in what many recognize as “obedience culture,” which too often manifests as lazy pandering to some excessively opinionated authority figure. The former is the transformative heart of the Gospel of Christ. The latter is what D&C 121 warns us against.

I find utility in qualified patience with thoughtful expressions of perceived orthodoxy. But that’s mostly because I want to be charitable. Dogma should be recognized as the antithesis of Mormonism, which celebrates the necessity of dynamic faith in perpetual revelation and eternal progression. As Joseph Smith put it, “the creeds set up stakes, and say hitherto shalt thou come, and no further, which I cannot subscribe to.”

Tithing is easy, for me, to associate with utility. No formal organization can operate without resources, which tithing provides in our case. And, although I recognize some people don’t like how many resources the Church has amassed, I actually like that it has amassed those resources. I hope that the Church, under the influence of its members and the direction of its leaders, will eventually use those resources to realize some possibilities associated with genealogy that it may be uniquely positioned to realize.

I wish the garment design and manufacturing process were better. Some will consider that vanity. That aside, there’s utility in constantly wearing symbols that remind me of the transformative process in which I wish to be constantly engaged. Church members receive the garment in the temple when we’re literally anointed – literally christened to join in the roles and titles of Christ.

Rigorous sabbath observances are different for different members of the Church. If a particular set of rules and behaviors works for someone (and doesn’t harm anyone else), I’m fine with that. And, by “works,” I mean that I hope it genuinely functions to achieve the purpose of the sabbath as expressed in scripture. Not entirely joking, I sometimes embellish my sense of that purpose by claiming that God is Buddhist on the Sabbath.

I think it’s wise to avoid drinking alcohol. The evidence for health benefits seems to be mostly attributable to the non-alcohol parts of the beverages, which can be consumed in other ways. And the evidence for the social and health detriments is strong – soberingly strong, and I should write more about that sometime.

In contrast, I think the evidence for overall health benefits from coffee and tea is strong. So I avoid them only for symbolic reasons, as an expression of solidarity with members of the Church. And I consume nootropic components of coffee and tea in supplement form on a daily basis.

There are many other aspects of Mormonism that are controversial. In my opinion, some of the controversies are worthy of attention. And others aren’t. I’ve previously written some of my thoughts on the most popular Mormon controversies.

How the Church Is True

Finally, my friend asks, “Do you believe the church’s claim to be the only true church?”

As context for my answer to this question, I’ll share some interpretive thoughts on what I (and probably most Mormons) consider to be the two most important passages of scripture about the “only” true church. The first is in the opening section of The Doctrine and Covenants. Here’s the verse that receives the most attention:

30 And also those to whom these commandments were given, might have power to lay the foundation of this church, and to bring it forth out of obscurity and out of darkness, the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased, speaking unto the church collectively and not individually –

When reading this verse out of context, a careful reader should ask several questions.

For example, what are “these commandments?” Verses 6 and 17 make clear that the commandments are, at least, the content of a particular book. That book is The Doctrine and Covenants (D&C), which has evolved and continues to evolve in different ways among different Mormon denominations. Joseph Smith either wrote or dictated most of the original content of the book.

Why do I say, “at least?” That’s because verse 18 expands “commandments” to include that which God gave “to others.” And it’s not clear whether we should understand that expansion to be part of “these commandments” when the phrase appears in later verses.

Likewise, what is “this church?” Presumably, it’s at least the church that Joseph Smith organized. But the only reference to “church” outside verse 30, in the entire text, is in the first sentence. And that reference is ambiguous, with God addressing “my church” while the eyes of God are “upon all men.”

The subsequent text makes the reference to “church” even more ambiguous. The second half of the first verse says that God is addressing “people from afar; and ye that are upon the islands of the sea.” The second verse says that God is addressing “all men,” echoing the first sentence. Are these additional audiences or additional ways of describing the “church” audience?

So there are at least two ways that someone could read verse 30. It could mean that God gave Joseph Smith the power to found The Church of Christ, which was the original name of the specific organization that evolved into multiple Mormon denominations. Or it could mean that God gave both Joseph and “others” the power to found a church that consists, or perhaps could or should consist, of “all men” – all humanity.

At first, people who’ve long read the text in the first way generally discount the strength of the second reading. But there are reasons to consider the second reading more robust. For sake of time, I’ll point out only one, which I consider the strongest.

The Book of Mormon existed before The Doctrine and Covenants. And the opening section of The Doctrine and Covenants even references The Book of Mormon in verse 29, the verse just before the one in question. So the content of The Book of Mormon is important for contextualizing the meaning of verse 30.

The Book of Mormon also contains the other most important passage of scripture about the “only” true church. That passage of scripture is in 1 Nephi 14:

10 And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.

According to this passage of scripture, there are only two churches. One is good. The other is evil. And there are no others.

In other words, if you’re not part of the good church then you’re part of the evil church. There are no exceptions. At least, that’s what the text seems to say. And the next verses elaborate.

11 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the whore of all the earth, and she sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.

12 And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw.

So, although there are only two churches, those churches are both spread across the entire Earth. The evil church is among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people. And so is the good church, even if in fewer numbers.

How does this relate to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Are we, as members of the Church, ready to esteem everyone in the Church as good and everyone outside the Church as evil? I’ve observed a few members of the Church who seem ready for that. But most of us, including most leaders, seem to have a different perspective.

Most members of the Church acknowledge that we see good people among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people. And most also acknowledge that we see good people among all religions, even when we have disagreements with them. So we must either discard 1 Nephi 14, or understand the good “church” as something other than an exclusive reference to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in particular.

What is that non-exclusive something else? As 1 Nephi 14 describes it, it’s the “church of the Lamb of God.” I think D&C 1 describes the same thing as “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth.” And I think Paul describes the same thing in the New Testament as “the Body of Christ.”

I also think John describes the same thing in the New Testament as “the only true God.” Yes. I’m saying that I think the scriptures are intentionally ambiguous between God, Christ, and the only true church. I think God, Christ, and the only true church are ultimately the same thing: a synthesis of sublime persons and places.

Returning to D&C 1, it says that “those to whom these commandments were given, might have power to lay the foundation of this church, and to bring it forth out of obscurity and out of darkness.” I trust that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has an important and unique role to play in bringing the only true church “out of obscurity and out of darkness.” I also trust that other people, including other religions, have different, important, and unique roles to play in that same work. This is an ecumenical approach to Mormonism, which perhaps apostle Orson Whitney described best:

God is using more than one people for the accomplishment of His great and marvelous work. The Latter-day Saints cannot do it all. It is too vast, too arduous for any one people.

Does this mean that I think all churches are equally good for everyone? No. I do think we’re each unique, so there’s not one right answer for everyone all the time. But I also think that differences have real practical consequences.

Accordingly, I encourage compassionate missionary work, both by my Church and by other Mormon denominations and by other religions. A Biblical proverb says, “As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.” I think we should all work to share our religions and other philosophies to the best of our abilities, with the aim of truly helping each other. I trust such work will tend to improve our understanding of life, our sense of purpose, and our practical ability to realize a better world.

Come to Church

In that ecumenical and missionary spirit, I invite you to come to church.

If you’re a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I encourage you to renew your engagement. If you’re disillusioned, talk about it with people you trust. If you’re happy, kindly share the reasons for your happiness with others while listening to them too. We still have so much work to do, so let’s not “sleep through the restoration,” as apostle Dieter Uchtdorf put it.

If you’re not a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, this is an invitation to learn more. Don’t expect us to be perfect, because we aren’t. But we have a transformative message and practice that helps many people. Contact me about it, or I can connect you with the missionaries.

If you’re not interested in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, consider this an invitation to friendly competition. Come to church in your own way. And let’s see how our differing choices contribute to making the world a more compassionate, creative, and thriving place for everyone.

I trust that, ultimately, all of this brings the only true and living church out of obscurity and out of darkness.

Originally published at lincoln.metacannon.net on July 02, 2020.

[mostlydeadlanguages]

The Book of Jonah

Image: "Jonah and the Whale," Iran, c. 1400

How's this for coincidence: @bcauseofreasons requested a translation of Jonah, on the very day that I was scheduled to study Jonah. :-D  I don't know if this will answer all your questions, but I hope it's thought provoking.

(1)

The word of YHWH came to Jonah ben Amittai, thus: "Get up and go to Nineveh, the big city, and cry out against it — for their bad deeds are rising up before my face."

Jonah got up and fled from YHWH's face, to Tarshish. [1]  He went down to Jaffa and found a ship going to Tarshish, paid his fare, and got on to go with them to Tarshish, away from YHWH's face.

But YHWH, he cast a big wind at the sea, and there was such a big storm on the sea that the ship threatened to shatter.  The sailors were so afraid that they called for help, each to his own god, and they cast the things in the ship into the sea, to lighten it for them.

Meanwhile, Jonah had gone down into the belly of the boat, where he lay down and slept soundly.  The captain approached him and asked him, "Why are you sound asleep?  Get up and cry out to your god!  Maybe the god will notice us, so we won't perish."

The men told each other, "Come on, let's roll dice to discover whose brought this bad thing upon us." [2] They rolled dice, and the dice fell upon Jonah.  So they told him, "Please tell us, you who brought this bad thing upon us, what is your business?  Where do you come from?  What nationality are you, and from what people do you come?"

He told them, "I am a Hebrew, and YHWH, God of Heaven, is who I worship — he who made both sea and land."

Then the men were even more afraid, and they asked him, "What have you done?!"  For the men knew that he was fleeing from YHWH's face, as he had told them.  They asked him, "What should we do with you, so that the sea quiets down for us?" — for the sea kept storming.

He said to them, "Lift me up and cast me into the sea.  Then the sea will quiet down for you.  After all, I know that this big storm came upon you because of me."

The men still tried to row to return to the land, but they could not, for the sea kept storming against them.  They cried out to YHWH, saying, "Please, YHWH!  Please don't let us perish because of this man's life.  Don't put innocent blood on our hands.  After all, you, YHWH, have done what you wanted."

Then they lifted Jonah up and cast him into the sea — and the sea stopped raging.  The men were even more afraid of YHWH, so they sacrificed a sacrifice for YHWH and vowed vows.

(2)

Yet YHWH appointed a big fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was in the gut of the fish for three days and three nights.  Jonah prayed to YHWH his god from the guts of the fish, saying:

I cried out to YHWH from my distress, and he answered me.         From the belly of Sheol, I begged, and you heard my voice. You threw me into the depths, into the heart of the seas, and the torrent surrounded me.         All your waves and currents have swept over me. As for me, I said, "I have been driven from your sight.         How could I look once more at your holy temple?"

Water engulfed me up to my throat; the Deep surrounded me.         Seaweed twined around my head. I went down the mountainous rifts;         the earth bolted me in forever. Yet you brought up my life from the pit,         YHWH my god.

My life was fainting away when I remembered YHWH,         and my prayer went out to you, in your holy temple. Those who hold fast to foolish emptiness         forsake their loving-loyalty. As for me, with a thankful voice, I will sacrifice to you.         What I vowed, I will pay.  Rescue comes from YHWH!

Then YHWH spoke to the fish, and it vomited up Jonah onto the land.

(3)

The word of YHWH came to Jonah a second time, thus: "Get up and go to Nineveh, the big city, and cry out to it the proclamation that I tell you."

Jonah got up and went to Nineveh, as YHWH's word said.  Now, Nineveh was a cosmically big city — three days' walk across.  So Jonah began to go through the city for one day's walk.  He cried out, "Forty more days, and Nineveh will be overthrown!"

The people of Nineveh believed God; they proclaimed a fast and put on sackcloth, big and small alike.  When word reached the king of Nineveh, he got up from his throne, took off his robe, covered himself with sackcloth, and sat in ashes.  He also made a declaration throughout Nineveh: "By decree of the king and his nobles, neither human nor livestock, whether herd or flock, shall taste anything.  They shall not graze or even drink water.  Humans and livestock will be covered with sackcloth, and they will cry out greatly to God.  Every person must turn from his bad ways, and from the violence upon their hands.  Who knows?  The god could turn back and relent.  He could turn from his furious anger, so we won't perish."

When the god saw what they did, how they turned from their bad ways, the god relented about the bad thing that he had planned to do to them, and he did not act.

(4)

This seemed very, very bad to Jonah, and he grew angry.  He prayed to YHWH and said, "Please, YHWH!  Didn't I say this when I was in my own land?  This is why I first fled to Tarshish: because I knew that you are a gracious, merciful god, slow to anger and great in loving-loyalty, relenting from bad things.  Now then, YHWH, please take my life from me, because I would rather die than live."

But YHWH said, "Is it good for you to be so angry?"

So Jonah left the city and sat to the city's east, and he made himself a shelter there.  He sat beneath it in the shade, waiting to see what would happen to the city.

YHWH God appointed a qiqayon-plant [3], so that it grew over Jonah, to give his head shade and spare him from his bad mood.  Jonah was very, very happy about the qiqayon.

But then the god appointed a worm, when dawn came the next day, to attack the qiqayon until it withered.  Then, when the sun rose, God appointed a scorching easterly wind, and the sun attacked Jonah's head, so he became faint and asked himself to die, saying, "I would rather die than live."

God asked Jonah, "Is it good for you to be so angry about the qiqayon?"

"Yes," he said, "angry enough to die!"

YHWH said, "You felt sympathy for the qiqayon, when you did not labor for it or grow it, when it appeared in a night and perished in a night.  But as for me, can't I feel sympathy for Nineveh, the big city, which has over a hundred and twenty thousand humans who don't know their right hand from their left — and many livestock?" [4]

[1] The exact location (or even existence) of Tarshish is debatable, but the Bible describes it as a location across the Mediterranean Sea from Israel; Carthage (Tunisia), Sardinia, and Spain are popular suggestions.  The main point is that it's the opposite direction from Nineveh, the Mesopotamian capital of the late Assyrian empire.

[2] "They rolled dice" - or, "they cast lots."  The Hebrew word for "lot" simply means a kind of small stone, which was shaken and thrown in order to predict the divine will.

[3] Qiqayon-plant — possibly a castor-bean bush (Ricinus).

[4] This is less a note, and more of a final excursus.  @bcauseofreasons said, "I find the last line so confusing; it's like God did a mic drop but missed the point of why Jonah was even upset?"  This is my attempt to address this question — but I am very open to counterpoints!

Jonah's date of composition is hotly debated, but (based on linguistic evidence) its final form is probably exilic or post-exilic.  That is, it was written after Mesopotamian empires had marched into Israel, destroyed their temple, and sent their people into distant exile.  Whether or not Nineveh was still a powerful city at the time of writing, it symbolized not merely a powerful nation but a hegemonic empire that had oppressed Israel.  So to Jonah's Jewish author(s), Nineveh's crimes were deep and personal.  It makes sense that Jonah would be furious when a few days of repentant fasting could somehow overcome the weight of all the harm that Nineveh had caused throughout the world.

On the other hand, the situation also raises a question that was of great interest to the post-exilic Jewish community: how should we treat outsiders?  If an outsider wants to worship our god and play by our rules, do we have to accept them?  (Most famously, this issue came up in the question of intermarriage: was it acceptable for Jewish men to marry non-Jewish women?)  The repentance of the Ninevites is extreme to the point of comedy — even the sheep get dressed in sackcloth! — but was extreme repentance enough?

To me, God's answer centers on the issue of innocence.  The Hebrew word for "innocent" only appears once in Jonah, and it's a pretty ironic instance: the sailors preemptively apologize for shedding Jonah's "innocent blood," even though they had already determined that he was literally the guilty party in their midst!  So if the sailors considered Jonah innocent, after he'd angered his god and threatened their ship, the bar for innocence isn't very high.

The bush that grew to shade Jonah was "innocent," too, but the text makes it abundantly clear: Jonah was upset because he was overheating, not because a plant died.  In this way, God forces him to consider, "When do you have sympathy?  Is it for those who deserve it, or is it when your own comfort gets affected?"  This leads into the final line about Nineveh, where God emphasizes the city's innocence — its animals, and its clueless inhabitants.  Like the plant, most of them are victims of circumstance, not oppressors.

In short, I think that the conclusion forces us to question our own self-righteousness.  Even when our anger feels justified, is it really the right course, or is it tacitly confirming our own preexisting biases?  Can the belief in a "gracious, merciful god" coexist with hatred towards a group of humans?  To me, these questions feel very relevant, even as their answers aren't always easy.

[nerdygaymormon]

David Simmons

David Simmons is a professor of Film Studies and Humanities at Northwest Florida State College (NWFSC) in Niceville, FL. That’s a very small town about half-way between Pensacola & Tallahassee in the Florida panhandle which is “the reddest of the red part of Florida.” 

He attended BYU for both his Bachelor’s and Master’s degree, and taught at the Missionary Training Center during that time. While at BYU he performed in several operas and plays, and was in Concert Choir and BYU Singers. He earned his Ph.D. from Florida State University. 

He makes a big impact in his north Florida community. He organized an on-campus Film Club, and a Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA). As faculty advisor to the GSA, he’s helped them organize the area’s first LGBTQ Masquerade ball, which was open to the public. He also organized the city of Niceville’s very first Pride Walk. 

He attends his local ward where he’s the choir director. “It’s difficult being gay and being a member of the church. It shouldn’t have to be. The Gospel is for everyone. But sadly, some members don’t think that.” He describes his ward as “a very conservative, military ward” (there’s an air force base nearby). 

Can you imagine being a queer kid in this conservative little town of 12,000 and all of a sudden, there’s someone openly gay who is making safe spaces and raising the profile of the queer community? 

This past week he was invited by his bishop to speak on ministering to LGBTQ members during a joint 3rd-hour meeting (5th Sunday). He says “There was a lot of pushback after I finished the talk, but that’s OK. I want to help church to be more loving for those who come after me.” 

—————————————————————

“By This Shall All Men Know Ye Are My Disciples”  Dr. David C. Simmons  Sep. 30, 2018 

On the last night of his mortal life, Jesus invited Judas to leave so that He could give a special message to his remaining 11 apostles (John 13:27-31). In Jesus’ Final Sermon, He gave them a sign, a way to tell who are Jesus’ true followers and who are not: “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another” (John 13:35). 

In other words, Jesus knew there would be some who would claim to be His followers, but are not. We can recognize them, both in and out of the Church, because instead of loving those who are different than they are, they put them down in a self-righteous way. 

Jesus went to the outsiders of his local community: the sinners, the poor, the lame, the blind, the lepers. He was teaching His true followers, in both word and deed, how to develop the capacity to love like He does. 

In our day, some of the ones who have been treated the harshest by Christian churches are members of the LGBTQ community. A few supposed-Christians use passages of scripture, or proclamations, or words from bygone leaders as weapons to harm the very natures of these children of God. 

I work with LGBTQ students at the College. I’ve listened to their stories. I’ve heard time and time again how they have been rejected by their families, their churches, and their communities, just for being who they are.(1) 

Many of their “Christian” parents, thinking they were “doing God service” (John 16:2), threw them out of their homes and families. Now these teenagers are homeless. LGBTQ youth are 120% more likely to experience homelessness than their peers.(2) 

LGBTQ youth are also 5 times more likely to commit suicide than their peers.(3) Nearly half of all LGBTQ youth have attempted suicide more than once.(4) And rates are even worse among LGBTQ youth who are members of the Church. Teen suicide rates in Utah have doubled since 2011, while the rest of the country did not see an increase.(5) 

Why is this? 

I want you to imagine that you were born as a member of the LGBTQ community. You grew up in Primary singing, “I Am a Child of God.” But then, at some point you were told by those who are closest to you, by those whom you love and trust to tell you the truth, that God doesn’t love you—that He has no place for you in the plan of salvation. 

What are your options at that point? It seems that none of them are very good: 

1) You can remain in the Church and live a lonely, pain-filled existence.(6) While everyone around you is boasting about the joy of marriage and being part of a family, you are constantly reminded that that is not for you. 

2) You can leave the Church and find love and a family. But then you are left without the great spiritual helps the Gospel of Jesus Christ can offer. 

3) You can marry someone of the opposite sex and may not be fulfilled. The Church does not encourage this anymore(7) because divorce rates in mixed-orientation marriages are far higher—80%(8)—and then often involve children.(9) 

Can you feel that none of these options are fulfilling? Perhaps this is why so many LGBTQ members of the Church lose all hope and purpose and then may choose to end their lives.(10)  

The Church is concerned about this. Just last month, on August 9, 2018, ward councils all over the world received a document called “Preventing Suicide and Responding after a Loss.” It begins with: “Members of the Church everywhere are invited to take an active role within their communities to minister to those who have thoughts of suicide or who are grieving a loss.”(11)  

The Church is changing considerably how it ministers with love to its LGBTQ members.(12)  

When Dan Reynolds, the lead singer of Imagine Dragons, organized an Aug. 2017 concert in Provo called LoveLoud, to let LGBTQ members know they are loved,(13) the Church put out an official statement endorsing that event: “We applaud the LoveLoud Festival for LGBT youth’s aim to bring people together to address teen safety and to express respect and love for all of God’s children. We join our voice with all who come together to foster a community of inclusion in which no one is mistreated because of who they are or what they believe. We share common beliefs, among them the pricelessness of our youth and the value of families. We earnestly hope this festival and other related efforts can build respectful communication, better understanding and civility as we all learn from each other.”(14) 

Just two weeks ago, on Sep. 17, 2018, the Church called Elizabeth Jane Darger, a longtime LGBTQ advocate,(15) to be on the General Young Women’s Board.(16) What a powerful voice to have advocating for LGBTQ youth in the Young Women’s program! 

The Church also has an official website, Mormon and Gay (mormonandgay.lds.org). It features the stories of many LGBTQ members, which are helpful for putting yourself in their shoes, so you can grow in understanding.(17) 

 This Church website also teaches several important principles: 

1) “God loves all of us. He loves those of different faiths and those without any faith. He loves those who suffer. He loves the rich and poor alike. He loves people of every race and culture, the married or single, and those who. . . identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual. And God expects us to follow his example.”(18) 

2) “No true follower of Christ is justified in withholding love because you decide to identify [as a member of the LGBTQ community].”(19)  

3) “God’s plan is perfect, even if our current understanding of His plan is not.”(20)  

We don’t see the whole picture right now. As Paul taught: “For we know in part, and we prophesy in part” (1 Corinthians 13:9-13). Since we only “see through a glass, darkly” in relation to many eternal things, instead of pretending that we fully understand God’s will in all ways, shouldn’t we act on what He has called us to do: love? That was the Savior’s prime commission to His followers. Indeed, it’s how they would be identified by others as His true disciples. 

The problem may lie in our understanding of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. Some members may look at them as having a physical impairment that needs fixing. Both Elder Holland, in General Conference,(21) and the Church’s official website explain that this is not true(22). LGBTQ members are not choosing a “lifestyle”; it is how they are. 

If we could learn to see our LGBTQ brothers and sisters like the Savior sees them, it would change our entire worldview and behavior. We would never make jokes about the LGBTQ community in our daily interactions. We would never express disgust at someone whose gender or sexuality was different than ours. We would never teach a child to turn off the TV when an LGBTQ person talks about their life.(23) Such actions not only contain unknowing bias and privilege, but are also doing untold harm to the lived lives of our brothers and sisters. 

Statistically, at least 5% of the population is a member of the LGBTQ community,(24) with some recent surveys having this percentage far higher.(25) Even if we take the lower figure, that means that in a ward of 500 people, there may be at least 25 LGBTQ members. That so many of them are now less active is telling. 

You and I both know multiple members, including young men and young women, who have passed through our ward, and been told they were “others,” or “less than,” or “outsiders” because of their gender or their sexuality. They sat through well-meaning but uninformed talks and lessons where a statement or teaching was weaponized against them. They were made to feel as though there was no place for them in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Today, many of them have left the embracing arms of the Savior, His atonement, and His restored gospel. What a breathtaking, unbelievable loss for us, for them, and for God. 

We still love them. But wouldn’t it better if they had these things to bless their lives too? Aren’t they better off inside the Church, rather than being forced away because of the unkind words and deeds of those who should be followers of Jesus Christ? Isn’t that what true ministering is all about? Reaching out with love to people no matter where they are on their spiritual journey? 

Last month, speaking in a BYU Devotional, Eric D. Huntsman, a Professor of Ancient Scripture, explained our need to minister with love to our LGBTQ brothers and sisters: “We should never fear that we are compromising when we make the choice to love. . . . Accepting others. . .means simply that we allow the realities of their lives to be different than our own. Whether those realities mean that they look, act, feel, or experience life differently than we do, the unchanging fact is that they are children of loving heavenly parents, and the same Jesus suffered and died for them, as for us. Not just for LGBTQ+ sisters and brothers but for many people, the choice to love can literally make the difference between life and death.”(26) 

Undoubtedly, there are those in this room who will have children, other family members, or friends who will come out to you. It will be one of the most painfully vulnerable moments of their life. Decide right now, that you will respond immediately with overwhelming love and kindness. That’s all you have to do. Just put your arms around them and say, “Thank you for telling me. I love you just like you are.” 

Think to yourself, “How would the Savior reach out with love?” Then love like that. It may take having to unlearn some of the things your local culture has taught you in order to walk the higher way of the Law of the Gospel (loving like Jesus loved). 

Seek out LGBTQ people in your circles of influence. Get to know them and their stories. Instead of correcting and instructing, just listen, feel, and love them for who they are. Become a powerful friend and ally. 

If you don’t have the strength to do this yet, cry out to your God for strength, for courage, and for the ability to develop the capacity to love as He loves. 

If you are a member of the LGBTQ community, try this experiment. Go home tonight and pray in secret: “Dear Heavenly Father, do you love me?” Feel God’s immense peace and love wash over you as He confirms this with certainty. You are His child and He loves you. The Gospel is for you too. 

 Conclusion The Holy Ghost bears record to our souls that God loves all of his children, not just his straight children. He loves his gay children, his lesbian children, his bi children, his trans children, and those who are still trying to understand the divine way he made them. The atonement of Jesus Christ is for everyone. 

Nephi taught this sublime, eternal truth: “[The Savior] inviteth all to come unto him and partake of his goodness.” What does “all” mean? It means “all.” 

“And he denieth none that come unto him.” What does “none” mean? It’s means “none.” 

“Black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen [that means non-member]; and all are alike unto God” (2 Nephi 26:33, emphasis added). 

It’s my testimony that the Savior’s atonement is for everyone. He wants us to establish Zion right here and right now. But that can only be done by partaking of the atonement, and allowing our natures to be changed so that we are filled with love for everyone, especially those whom our local culture deems as “outsiders.” Then we can’t wait to go forth, becoming the Savior’s hands to lift, to minister, and to love others. 

In the name of Jesus Christ, amen. 

[If you need someone to talk with about the ideas presented here, please email me (David Simmons): filmteach@me.com] 

Appendix 1: Scriptures, Quotes, and Resources for Further Study 

“Mormon LGBT Questions.” Bryce Cook, March 17, 2017. This is the most profound resource on how the Church’s view on LGBTQ members has changed over time. I think every member of the Church should read it. If it’s too long, read a summary here: 

“LGBT Questions: An Essay.” By Common Consent, March 19, 2017. This is a summary of Bryce Cook’s landmark “Mormon LGBT Questions” document. 

Mormon and Gay. This is the Church’s official website. They recently changed the name from mormonsandgays to mormonandgay to acknowledge the many members who are both. 

“Hard Sayings and Safe Spaces: Making Room for Struggle as Well as Faith.” Eric D. Huntsman. Aug. 7, 2018, BYU Speeches. A masterful talk given last month at a BYU Devotional about our need to love each other wherever we are on our spiritual journey. 

“A Mission President’s Beautiful Response When a Missionary Came Out to Him as Gay.” LDS Living, Aug. 27, 2018. Cal Burke’s inspiring story about coming out to his mission president and being received with love. 

“Mormon and/or Gay?” By Common Consent, Aug. 20, 2018. How we often unknowingly use “othering” language in our discourse about our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. 

“To Mourn with Gay Friends That Mourn.” By Common Consent, Oct. 4, 2017. Why we often correct and instruct rather than listen and feel when we talk with our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. 

“An Open Letter to Latter-Day Saints: When a Gay Person Shows Up at Church.” By Common Consent, Nov. 8, 2015. A discussion of the unbearable choice given to LGBTQ members. 

That We May Be One: A Gay Mormon’s Perspective on Faith and Family. Tom Christofferson. SLC: Deseret Book: Sep. 2017. An apostle’s gay brother tells his experience of being unconditionally loved and supported by his family and bishopric after coming out to them. You can purchase it here. 

President M. Russell Ballard  • “I want anyone who is a member of the Church who is gay or lesbian to know I believe you have a place in the kingdom and I recognize that sometimes it may be difficult for you to see where you fit in the Lord’s Church, but you do. We need to listen to and understand what our LGBT brothers and sisters are feeling and experiencing. Certainly, we must do better than we have done in the past so that all members feel they have a spiritual home.”(27)  

Elder Quentin L. Cook  • “As a church, nobody should be more loving and compassionate. Let us be at the forefront in terms of expressing love, compassion, and outreach. Let’s not have families exclude or be disrespectful of those who choose a different lifestyle as a result of their feelings about their own gender.”(28) 

Matthew 9: Loving Outsiders is More Important than Church Ritual  • Matthew 9:10-11 “And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples. And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?” Here, church leaders and members are rebuking Jesus for being with tax collectors (a hated segment of society, that were often excommunicated from the synagogues) and sinners • Matthew 9:12-13 “But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy [Greek: eleos, “love” or “compassion”] and not sacrifice.” Jesus is here quoting Hosea 6:6, where He once told the prophet: “I want you to show love, not offer sacrifices” (N.L.T. Hosea 6:6). In other words, showing love to the outcasts of society is more important than church rituals. It’s more important than partaking of the sacrament. It’s more important than going to the temple. If you don’t love others (especially the outsiders, like Jesus did) than none of the rituals  • N.L.T. Matthew 9:13 “For I have come to call not those who think they are righteous, but those who know they are sinners.” Jesus is very clear with these church leaders and members who think they are following all the rules, but yet are looking on the outcasts of society, that they are in a far worse position than those they look down on. They are the greater sinners. 

Humble Outsiders Will Go Into the Kingdom of God before SelfRighteous Members  • Matthew 21:31 During His mortal ministry, the Savior had some of his harshest words to say to members of the Church who were afflicted by self-righteous-itis. They thought they were better than females, or the poor, or those outside certain family lines. To them, He said: “The publicans and harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.”  • Matthew 22:1-14 Jesus also told the parable of the marriage of the king’s son, where those who were bidden to the marriage dinner “would not come,” so the king tells his servants to go out to the highways and gather as many of those the world deemed as outsiders, to come partake of the feast. He said to do this because “many are called [baptized members of the Church], but few are chosen [to live the way the Savior lives].”  • The Savior Himself went to the poor, the lame, the leprous, the blind, to those whom society deemed outsiders. If we want to be like Him, we shouldn’t align ourselves with the self-righteous in our day and put down the vulnerable and the outsiders. We should instead follow His example and seek out those who may have been labeled “outsiders.” 

The Outsiders Will Go Into Heaven Before Complacent Members  • Luke 14:15 “And when one of them that sat at meat with him heard these things, he said unto him, Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God.” Since this teaching may not be absolutely clear, Jesus gives a parable to explain it—the Parable of the Great Supper.  • Luke 14:16-17 “Then said he unto him, A certain man made a great supper, and bade many: and sent his servant at supper time to say to them that were bidden, Come; for all things are now ready.” What’s the supper? Feasting on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This is such a beautiful image. When we take it inside of us, it becomes part of who we are (Schaelling, C.E.S. Institute Lecture, “Great Supper”).  • How do we accept the invitation to the Supper? Through baptism (Schaelling, C.E.S. Institute Lecture, “Great Supper”).  • Luke 14:18-20 “And they all with one consent began to make excuse. The first said unto him, I have bought a piece of ground, and I must needs go and see it: I pray thee have me excused. And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to prove them: I pray thee, have me excused. And another said, I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come.” What excuses do people make not to come to the feast? New ground, new oxen, new wife. There are many reasons that people can give for not putting the Gospel of Jesus Christ first in their lives. Do we ever put possessions, or even family members, before the Savior? What does Jesus say about this in verse 26? “If any man come to me and [Greek “doesn’t love less”] his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also; or in other words, is afraid to lay down his life for my sake; he cannot be my disciple” (J.S.T. Luke 14:26). This is tough. What do you do if your wife wants you to stay home instead of doing your home teaching? What do you do if your parents tell you they will disown you if you get baptized into the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ? When I was on my mission in Texas, there was an 18-year-old non-member girl named Letti who went to seminary with some of her friends, felt the Spirit of God tell her it was true, and knew she needed to join. But her parents told her that if she did, she would no longer be considered one of their family. What a tough choice for anyone to have to make. Yet, she went through with her decision to be baptized anyway, for she could not put other things—even family—before the Savior. Letti was being a true disciple of Jesus Christ. She put him first above all things, even her own family  • Luke 14:21-24 “So that servant came, and shewed his lord these things. Then the master of the house being angry said to his servant, Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city and bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind. And the servant said, Lord it is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room. And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. For I say unto you, That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.” What does this mean?  • 1) Since the Jews, the Lord’s covenant people, were rejecting the supper, that great feast of the Gospel was just about to go to the spiritually poor, maimed, halt, and blind: in other words, the Gentiles, beginning at the time of Paul (Schaelling, C.E.S. Institute Lecture, “Great Supper”).  • 2) For me, individually, it means I need to come and partake of the Savior, and his Gospel, and have this mighty value change in my life where I realize that earthly things are only here to be turned into eternal things by using them to help other people, so that my place at the eternal feast doesn’t go to someone else who is more giving, more loving, and more compassionate than I am. I need tobe like the Savior. 

Matthew 19:30 The First Shall Be Last and the Last Shall Be First  • Jesus said: “But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.”  • As Dr. Fatimah Sellah recently said: “I’ve long believed of the marginalized of this church and the world, that if the first shall be last and the last shall be first: I’d be careful if I were first right now. I’d be careful if I were the ones at the pulpits and held the power. God is a God of disruption and flips things on its head.”(29) 

Ephesians 2:19 There Are No Outsiders in God’s Church  • “Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God.” 

President Brigham Young  • “The least, the most inferior person now upon the earth . . . is worth worlds” (Journal of Discourses 9:124). 

President Dieter F. Uchtdorf  • “Sometimes we confuse differences in personality with sin. We can even make the mistake of thinking that because someone is different from us, it must mean they are not pleasing to God. This line of thinking leads some to believe that the Church wants to create every member from a single mold—that each one should look, feel, think, and behave like every other. This would contradict the genius of God, who created every man different from his brother, every son different from his father. . . . As disciples of Jesus Christ, we are united in our testimony of the restored gospel and our commitment to keep God’s commandments. But we are diverse in our cultural, social, and political preferences. The Church thrives when we take advantage of this diversity and encourage each other to develop and use our talents to lift and strengthen our fellow disciples” (“Four Titles.” Ensign. May 2013). 

Bishop Gerald Causse, First Counselor in the Presiding Bishopric  • “During His earthly ministry, Jesus was an example of one who went far beyond the simple obligation of hospitality and tolerance. Those who were excluded from society, those who were rejected and considered to be impure by the self-righteous, were given His compassion and respect. They received an equal part of His teachings and ministry.  • “For example, the Savior went against the established customs of His time to address the woman of Samaria, asking her for some water. He sat down to eat with publicans and tax collectors. He didn’t hesitate to approach the leper, to touch him and heal him. Admiring the faith of the Roman centurion, He said to the crowd, “Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel” (Matthew 8:10; see also 8:2-3; Mark 1:40-42; 2:15; John 4:7-9).  • “In this Church there are no strangers and no outcasts. There are only brothers and sisters. The knowledge that we have of an Eternal Father helps us be more sensitive to the brotherhood and sisterhood that should exist among all men and women upon the earth.  • “A passage from the novel Les Misérables illustrates how priesthood holders can treat those individuals viewed as strangers. Jean Valjean had just been released as a prisoner. Exhausted by a long voyage and dying of hunger and thirst, he arrives in a small town seeking a place to find food and shelter for the night. When the news of his arrival spreads, one by one all the inhabitants close their doors to him. Not the hotel, not the inn, not even the prison would invite him in. He is rejected, driven away, banished. Finally, with no strength left, he collapses at the front door of the town’s bishop. The good clergyman is entirely aware of Valjean’s background, but he invites the vagabond into his home with these compassionate words: “‘This is not my house; it is the house of Jesus Christ. This door does not demand of him who enters whether he has a name, but whether he has a grief. You suffer, you are hungry and thirsty; you are welcome. … What need have I to know your name? Besides, before you told me [your name], you had one which I knew.’ “[Valjean] opened his eyes in astonishment. “‘Really? You knew what I was called?’ “‘Yes,’ replied the Bishop, ‘you are called my brother.’” (Les Miserables 1:73).  • “In this Church our wards and our quorums do not belong to us. They belong to Jesus Christ. Whoever enters our meetinghouses should feel at home.  • “It is very likely that the next person converted to the gospel in your ward will be someone who does not come from your usual circle of friends and acquaintances. You may note this by his or her appearance, language, manner of dress, or color of skin. This person may have grown up in another religion, with a different background or a different lifestyle.  • “We all need to work together to build spiritual unity within our wards and branches. An example of perfect unity existed among the people of God after Christ visited the Americas. The record observes that there were no “Lamanites, nor any manner of -ites; but they were in one, the children of Christ, and heirs to the kingdom of God.” (4 Nephi 1:17).  • “Unity is not achieved by ignoring and isolating members who seem to be different or weaker and only associating with people who are like us. On the contrary, unity is gained by welcoming and serving those who are new and who have particular needs. These members are a blessing for the Church and provide us with opportunities to serve our neighbors and thus purify our own hearts.  • “Reach out to anyone who appears at the doors of your Church buildings. Welcome them with gratitude and without prejudice. If people you do not know walk into one of your meetings, greet them warmly and invite them to sit with you. Please make the first move to help them feel welcome and loved, rather than waiting for them to come to you.  • “After your initial welcome, consider ways you can continue to minister to them. I once heard of a ward where, after the baptism of two deaf sisters, two marvelous Relief Society sisters decided to learn sign language so they could better communicate with these new converts. What a wonderful example of love for fellow brothers and sisters in the gospel!  • “I bear witness that no one is a stranger to our Heavenly Father. There is no one whose soul is not precious to Him.  • “I pray that when the Lord gathers His sheep at the last day, He may say to each one of us, “I was a stranger, and ye took me in.” Then we will say to Him, “When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in?” And He will answer us, “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me” (Matthew 25:35-40). In the name of Jesus Christ, amen” (“Ye Are No More Strangers,” General Conference, October 2013). 

  ENDNOTES  —————————— 

(1) McKeon, Jennie. “NWFSC Students Hosting Inaugural Gay Ball.” WUWF. Sep. 20, 2018. http://www.wuwf.org/post/nwfsc-students-hostinginaugural-gay-ball 

(2) Silva, Christina. “LGBT Youth are 120% More Likely to Be Homeless Than Straight People, Study Shows.” Newsweek. Nov. 30, 2017. https://www.newsweek.com/lgbt-youth-homeless-study-727595 

(3) “Facts About Suicide.” The Trevor Project. https://www.thetrevorproject.org/resources/preventing-suicide/factsabout-suicide/#sm.001r5tfiv1doccqtqy6168cjea5zn 

(4) http://www.speakforthem.org/facts.html 

(5) Utah Department of Health, https://ibis.health.utah.gov/pdf/opha/publication/hsu/SE04_SuicideE piAid.pdf  See also: Hatch, Heidi. “Is Utah’s Youth Suicide Rate Linked to Utah’s Culture Surrounding LGBT?” https://kutv.com/news/local/isutahs-youth-suicide-rate-linked-to-utahs-culture-surrounding-lgbt  See also the Church’s official page on LGBTQ suicide: https://mormonandgay.lds.org/articles/depression-andsuicide?lang=eng 

(6)  “My Life at BYU-I as a Gay Mormon.” https://zelphontheshelf.com/mylife-at-byu-i-as-a-gay-mormon/ 

(7) “President Hinckley. . .made this statement: ‘Marriage should not be viewed as a therapeutic step to solve problems such as homosexual inclinations or practices.’” https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/interview-oaks-wickmansame-gender-attraction 

(8) Kort, Joe. “Mixed-Orientation Marriages.” GLBTQ. 2015. http://www.glbtqarchive.com/ssh/mixed_orientation_marriages_S.pdf 

(9) Carol Kuruvilla, “Gay Mormon Who Became Famous for Mixed Orientation Marriage Is Divorcing His Wife.” Huffington Post. Jan. 29, 2018. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gay-mormon-josh-weeddivorce_us_5a6f331be4b06e253269d34a 

(10) Lang, Nico. “‘I See My Son In Every One of Them’: With a Spike in Suicides, Parents of Utah’s Queer Youth Fear the Worst.” Vox. March 20, 2017.  https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/3/20/14938950/mormonutah-lgbtq-youth 

(11) This document outlines the warning signs for suicide:  • Looking for a way to kill themselves  • Talking about feeling hopeless or having no reason to live  • Talking about feeling trapped or in unbearable pain  • Talking about being a burden to others  • Acting anxious or agitated or behaving recklessly  • Withdrawing or isolating themselves  • Showing rage or talking about seeking revenge  • Displaying extreme mood swings When you many of these there are three things to remember: Ask, Care, Tell. 

1) Ask. Ask the person directly if they are thinking about suicide. If they say yes, ask: “Do you have a plan to hurt yourself.” If the answer is yes, call a crisis helpline. (The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is 1-800-273-8255.) If the answer is no, move to step 2:  2) Care. Show that you care by listening to what they say. Give them time to explain how they are feeling. Respect their feelings by saying something like: “I’m sorry you are in so much pain. I didn’t realize how hard things are for you right now.” You might offer to help them make a Suicide-Prevention Safety Plan that helps people identify their personal strengths, positive relationships and healthy coping skills.  3) Tell. Encourage the person to tell someone who can offer more support. If they will not seek help, you may need to tell someone for them. You may want to say something like: “I care about you and want you to be safe. I’m going to tell someone who can offer you the help you need.” Respect them by letting them pick the resource, such as a someone on the free crisis helpline. 

(12) For the best, most-thorough examination of the how the Church’s position regarding LGBTQ members has changed since the days of President Kimball, see: Cook, Bryce. “Mormon LGBT Questions.” March 17, 2017. I think every member of the Church should read this.   https://mormonlgbtquestions.com/2017/03/17/what-do-we-know-ofgods-will-for-his-lgbt-children-an-examination-of-the-lds-churchsposition-on-homosexuality/ 

(13) A documentary called Believer (2018) tells the fascinating, dramatic story of the lead-up to this concert: https://www.hbo.com/content/hboweb/en/documentaries/believer/a bout.html Here’s how you can watch it: https://heavy.com/entertainment/2018/06/watch-believerdocumentary-online/ 

(14) Official Church Statement, August 16, 2017, https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-statement-loveloud-festival 

(15) Cynthia L. “New YW and RS Boards Include Two Black Women, ‘Common Ground’ LGBT Inclusion Advocate.” Sep. 18, 2018. https://bycommonconsent.com/2018/09/18/new-yw-and-rs-boardsinclude-two-black-women-common-ground-lgbt-inclusionadvocate/#more-106875 

(16) https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/new-latter-day-saintgeneral-board-members-named 

(17) https://mormonandgay.lds.org/stories?lang=eng 

(18) https://mormonandgay.lds.org/articles/church-teachings?lang=eng 

(19) https://mormonandgay.lds.org/articles/who-am-i?lang=eng 

(20) https://mormonandgay.lds.org/articles/gods-plan?lang=eng 

(21) “I must say, this son’s sexual orientation did not somehow miraculously change—no one assumed it would.” Holland, Jeffrey R. “Behold Thy Mother.” Oct. 2015 General Conference. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/10/behold-thymother?lang=eng 

(22) “A change in attraction should not be expected or demanded as an outcome by parents or leaders.” https://mormonandgay.lds.org/articles/frequently-askedquestions?lang=eng 

(23) Nick Einbender, Post on “Mormons Building Bridges,” Sep. 18, 2018. https://www.facebook.com/groups/mormonsbuildingbridges/permali nk/1513907792043410/ 

(24) Steinmetz, Katy. “How Many Americans Are Gay?” Time. May 16, 2016.   http://time.com/lgbt-stats/ 

(25) It is likely a much larger percentage. In another study, 20% of Millennials (ages 18-34) self-identified as LGBTQ; 12% of Generation X (ages 35-53); 7% of the Baby Boomers (ages 52-71). The discrepancy likely arises from an increase in acceptance and safety in the culture the Millennials are growing up in. This makes them more likely to come out as LGBTQ. There are probably equal numbers throughout history, but it wasn’t as safe for older generations to come out for fear of violence, rejection, loss of job security, and loss of standing in the community. See Gonella, Catalina. NBC News. March 31, 2017.   https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/survey-20-percentmillennials-identify-lgbtq-n740791 

(26) Eric D. Huntsman, “Hard Sayings and Safe Spaces: Making Room for Struggle as Well as Faith,” Aug. 7, 2018, BYU Speeches, https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/eric-d-huntsman_hard-sayings-andsafe-spaces-making-room-for-both-struggle-and-faith/ 

(27) “Questions and Answers.” BYU Speeches, Nov. 14, 2017. https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/m-russell-ballard_questions-andanswers/ 

(28) https://mormonandgay.lds.org/articles/love-one-another-adiscussion-on-same-sex-attraction 

(29) Dr. Fatimah S. Salleh, Affirmation Conference, July 22, 2018.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyoXa9z76v0 

[takeabitetoremember]

FAQ’s With Mama Hen

I’m working on the next chapter, and it’s taking me awhile, I’ll admit. Having been in and out of the hospital a few times, doctor’s appointments and such, I’ve been tired- but I’m alive! In the meantime, I wanted to write a few little “FAQ’s with Mama Hen” while they were on my mind. I’ll scroll through my feed, and see things, and then realize I wonder if these people understand what this means? Or, I need to explain what I’m getting ready to do next in the story. My mind is all over the place, and I have so many things going on at any point in time in it, that I’ll often forget things easily. So, while these things are on my mind, I’m going to post and address them.

The First: I’ve seen many people in the fandom who are either ALL about “Daddy Dom” or absolutely grossed out by it. What Mama Hen is wondering, how many really understand the dynamic of a Daddy Dom, and what it really is? I’m going to explain to you. A Daddy Dom has absolutely NOTHING to do with incest, pedophilia, or age play. None. For those who have been involved in the Lifestyle (that is the BDSM Lifestyle), a Daddy Dom differs from other Dominants or Masters. You may have seen the term DD/lg or DD/lb for the Daddy Dom and his little depending upon the sex. Once again, littles are women or men of LEGAL age, they are not age players who are interested in incest or pedophilia. The dynamic between a Daddy Dom and a little tends to be more loving and playful than the role of a traditional Dominant/sub Master/Slave. That is NOT to say that there is not the discipline given in the traditional BDSM relationship, but in the role of the Daddy Dom/little relationship it is one where the little is encouraged and fostered to let themselves be free and nurtured. The Daddy Dom is more loving Dominant, for those who are needier and enjoy affection this relationship would most definitely be the one to seek out starting out in the Lifestyle. It’s not something dirty or shameful. These are nothing more than names. Don’t let someone shame you for something you enjoy, or something you’d like to try. The key in ALL relationships, is trust. In any relationship D/s DD/lg DD/lb M/s relationship, the person holding the power is the submissive. Always remember that. If you are the submissive, make sure that your Dom(me) always respects your limits. It’s ok to have them, no matter what they are. If they are a true Dom(me), and interested in being with you, they will absolutely be respectful of those limits. If they aren’t. You walk right then. No true Dom(me) will disrespect limits. If you are a Dom(me) be respectful of your sub(s)/slaves, they are a treasure. They have chosen You, and are putting their trust in You not to harm them, but to mold them, and guide them. Don’t let them down.

Second: People being creeped out over the ages of Michael and Mallory in the beginning of the story. I went back, to the very, very beginning to give a backstory. I didn’t put footnotes, which, in hindsight, I probably should’ve. Yes, I did make a note that I had written Michael’s age was 16, and his mentality was 16. Ok. Let’s be honest ya’ll teenagers have sex. There wouldn’t be a popular MTV show called 16 and pregnant if they didn’t. Do I wish that there weren’t pregnant teenagers in real life? Dear God, yes. You have no idea how much I wish there weren’t. Most have no fucking idea how hard it is. I’ve given birth to two children. One naturally (and God knows that was NOT by choice), one by c-section, asleep. I had severe complications with both pregnancies, and only complications with the natural birth. I wouldn’t wish what happened to me either time upon my worst enemy. My chicks, you’re living under a rock if you think this isn’t happening. Now, had I written a having a 25 year old having sex with a 13 year old. There is a problem. There’s a BIG. ASS. PROBLEM. That’s illegal. Granted, it’s STILL fiction. There are television shows where that shit happens. It happens in real life as well, and it turns my stomach and hurts my heart, believe me, it rips Mama Hen’s heart out, and there’s something wrong with a 25 year old (male OR female) whose fucking a 13 year old, BUT I digress. My maternal grandmother got married the first time at age 14. He first husband died in the war (WWII) in Germany when she was 15, shortly after my Uncle Steve was born. She married my papaw later that year. Before she was 16, she’d been married twice. My paternal grandmother got married at 15 to my first papaw. This was in the 1940’s. I was born in the 1970’s. I had a friend in high school who got married at age 15. She now has a 24 year old child, along with five other children. She’s been married almost 24 years.  I’ve been out of school 20 years this year. There was a time where it was the norm to marry when you were young. I don’t know what culture or country everyone is from, and in different countries, it still is a custom to marry younger (not exactly THIS young thank God, but many are encouraged to marry after finishing school/studies- and I don’t wish to down or be disrespectful to anyone’s culture and/or religious beliefs as long as they are not hurting anyone. Sadly, yes, Mama Hen knows child brides still exist today, and my heart hurts. That's a whole 'nother subject for another day. If you were wondering. I'm talking about consensual marriage.) So, in a nutshell, this is a work of complete fiction, just like AHS. Do some of these things happen in real life? Yes. It’s heartbreaking, but it’s not the end of the world. There are resources to help if you or someone you know is pregnant or if you think you are pregnant and need help.  You have options. If you life in the United States you can go to your local Planned Parenthood for free testing, counseling about your options (this does NOT mean they are going to pressure you into having an abortion- this is a HUGE misconception!) they offer low cost or free health care to women needing it, including prenatal care. If you should decide that you are not ready to be a mother, they will treat you with dignity, and explain your options about abortion. Every woman no matter their age when pregnant deserves to be treated with compassion and dignity.

Lastly:  These are works of fiction that we’re writing here, chicks, don’t take this stuff so serious. When I say don’t take it so seriously, I mean there are people who just freak the fuck out over it, and get bent out of shape. Don’t. Don’t do that. Don’t be losing sleep. Don’t be worrying about who hates on your work. Don’t be worrying about why someone doesn’t like you, or is talking shit about you, or this, that, or the other. Life is WAY too short, and there are far more important things to worry about. This is for fun. This is something to do in your down time when you’re able to. Tumblr is a great place to relax, and the #Millory fandom has been wonderful to meet others and make friends, ya’ll! There are some really great people who have been writing, sharing art, pictures, and so forth. Don’t let those who don’t like what you put forth get your feathers ruffled. If they don’t like #Millory, scroll right on past it. If they leave an ugly comment on your page, look to see if it’s constructive criticism, or just a hater/troll. If they’re leaving you something constructive, keep it in mind as something to think about. If it’s a troll, let it roll off your back. Delete. Block. Go on with your day. Ain’t nobody got time for that shit. I don’t, and I’m not dealing with it. It’s back to one of the things in the “Mama Hen’s Advice for a New Year”- Be Kind, But Take No Shit.  Exactly. Be kind to all, but take no shit. Remember this. Am I saying that no one who writes here won't go on to be a writer, have published novels, screenplays, movies, a tv series? Absolutely not! Any one of you have limitless potential! I realize many write for fun, as stress relief, a creative outlet, or like me, it's just something they enjoy doing because their brains go fifty miles a minute, and it calms it a bit to write. Everyone has their reasons. Don't let someone discourage you, and remember if you wear your feelings on your sleeve when it comes to your writing it will bite you in the ass, I promise you. Over the years, I've had people leave me comments from hardass constructive criticism posts that were hard to swallow, I'll admit, BUT much needed, to just outright trolls meant to be bitchy. I can sniff them out now and just feel genuinely sorry for them, because I'm an empathetic person. Bottom line, don't get discouraged, or worked up over people's opinions here. That's all they are.

I love you all, my chicks. Be good to one another. Life is short, enjoy every moment you can.

-- Mama Hen

[sportsgeekonomics]

BEWARE THE NCAA OKEY-DOKE on NIL!

I read this article last week  by Dennis Dodd (https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/mark-emmert-open-to-student-athletes-earning-money-off-their-likeness-but-fails-to-recognize-the-urgency/)and it reminded me of something everyone should always remember: BEWARE THE NCAA OKEY-DOKE! 

Dodd quoted Mark Emmert as saying:

 "We've talked to the congressman and tried to understand his position," Emmert said in his annual state of the union address at the Final Four. "There is very likely to be in the coming months even more discussion about the whole notion of name, image and likeness [and] how it fits into the current legal framework.

"Similarly, there needs to be a lot of conversation about how, if it was possible, how it would be practical. Is there a way to make that work? Nobody has been able up with a resolution of that yet."

This is one of the oldest NCAA tricks there is, which is to address something on the surface but not really change.  As an example, look at the SAAC, which is a sort of fake union the NCAA set up to fend off past efforts to unionize college athletes.  Or the Student Assistance Fund, which is designed to provide money to really poor athletes so their lack of proper clothing isn’t an embarrassment to the NCAA or a vehicle for people to argue that athletes deserve to earn what they are worth.  In NCAA logic, if you solve the symptom (athletes have no outlet, athletes have no winter coats) you can avoid solving the problem (athletes have no SAY, athletes have no RIGHT to earn their worth so they can afford a coat).  This is just more of the same.

Here you have Emmert saying they are open to allowing NILs but then claiming to not know how to do it.  Since the basic idea behind NIL rights is pretty simple: stop preventing athletes from signing contracts with endorsers, the "no one knows how” misdirection is a tell that they don’t want to actually give athletes their rights, but instead they would like to give them a sop they can claim is close enough.  I would wager a large chunk of change that the NCAA version of NIL rights would be something like this:

If someone wants to commercialize his/her image, they submit a permission request to an NCAA committee or quasi-independent group (perhaps headed by Condi Rice again) which assesses the market rates for a person with a comparable Q score [and most college athletes will have a very low Q score outside of their college town] and then put a cap on the dollar amount that third party can pay that athlete.  And if it so happens the third party has donated money to the athletes’ school, then it will either be forbidden outright or further curtailed.  

It won’t be a market – it will be a Politburo. 

And the thing is, almost surely, for the vast majority of athletes, the business that would want to tap into their (local) star power to sell products would be the sort of business already sponsoring the sports teams at that school.  The Chevy dealer who wants the offensive linemen to come and pose in front of some pickup trucks looking beefy is already “the Official Truck of the Generic State Football Program.”  The local competitor to muscle milk who gives free product to the basketball team is also the company that wants those muscled basketball players to be in local ads, etc.

My caution is that every time you hear “but what’s the plan?” recognize that it an invitation to move away from the elegance and simplicity of a market into something centrally planned, and moreover that impulse is not designed to improve the system, but rather intentionally to harm it, to delay it, or perhaps even to eradicate it entirely. 

If I can make another prediction, I would wager you will eventually hear an NCAA person say “we want to make sure these are not FAKE NIL payments.”  And if you ask what fake means, they are not worried the business will offer $100 but then not pay, but rather they are worried the business will offer $1,000 when in the NCAA’s mind, $100 was the right amount.  The NCAA is worried about athletes getting too much, not too little.  Becasue in the bizarro world of the NCAA, getting more than the NCAA thinks you should is evidence of you being exploited.  Really.

Stepping out of bizarro world, can you think of a reason why Americans should be worried if a privately owned business decides, based on its own assessments, that paying a celebrity endorser is worth $x to them?  Or that there sshould ever be government or private trade organization intervention to say "no, no, no – that’s too much money to pay that person.  He/she isn’t worth that much-- you mustn’t exploit them by overpaying them.”

Let’s put it this way, if that IS how we want America to work, Mark Emmert is the first person I want this new system to scrutinize.

What they mean by fake is “we are worried that the NIL payments will function as a bundled payment for NIL and also playing services, since a lot of the sponsorship will come from people whose goal is not just to sell product but also to make their local team better.”

First off, as someone who believes that by and large and with limited exceptions (e.g., human organs), markets are the best means of allocating scarce resources, why should anyone care even if the goal is to make the local team better.   Every local car deal with a connection to a university will want to do that and if Alabama’s boosters care more than Troy’s boosters, then Alabama will have a better team (like that do now) and higher NIL earnings (like they don’t know).  The only difference will be the earnings of the young men and the taxes they pay the State of Alabama and the IRS.  I could on a long jag about how, no this won’t hurt competitive balance by making Alabama better than Troy, but I’ve done that before and you can read it all here: https://deadspin.com/the-competitive-balance-argument-against-paying-athlete-1576638830.

 But as an economist whose very first published paper was on valuing intangible IP (it’s about how to figure out the right real-world price for an imaginary sword in a computer game: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxM4wdtZ5uI-enRJZE5qTjFCVVk/view?usp=sharing ), I can assure you that any purchase/licensing of intangible IP rights like NIL is always a bundled purchase.  To the local car dealer in Tuscaloosa, of course the NIL rights of an offensive lineman are greater if he attends Alabama than if he goes to Troy.  And so if any local booster is seen trying as trying to improve Alabama football via NIL payments, I would argue that that’s just good business.  Is he going to sell more cars when he is sponsoring Alabama football and using a star recruit in his ads if Alabama goes 11-1 or 8-4?  And so any claim that someone on some committee can assess what portion of a free market offer between a willing buyer and a willing seller is “real” vs. “fake” that cannot assess the value of the athletes playing skill as part of “real” is not going to capture the full value.  Especially for athletes, where their skill is so inherently part of their commercial appeal (with a limited number of exceptions for athletes of rare charisma or physical beauty), how could an NCAA committee ever disentangle the complex economics of commercial appeal of a celebrity from the complex economics of the utilitarian value of an athlete to a team.

So (1)  it’s a fool’s errand even for a wise council aimed at the truth.

Amd (2) I doubt the NCAA’s goal is the truth so much as simply to depress payments b/c they fear if their athletes win the right to a market rate for their NIL they might start asking for the rest of their rights too.

And (3), why would we even want to interfere with the world’s best assessor of true market value – a vibrant market with many buyers and many sellers, operating without collusion among either side of the transaction?

If we need a plan to get the NCAA on board, I propose we use the plan that is already in place for figuring out how much of every school’s head coach’s radio gig is a payment for his radio charisma vs. a payment based on his coaching skills.  We should use that exact same plan for the athletes.  After all, we can tap into that same bureaucracy the NCAA uses to assess market offers for coaches and to separate out the real from the fake payments.

What’s that?  There is no plan to do that, we just let schools and radio shows and coaches negotiate in a marketplace?  Exactly!  And that’s also how much plan we need for the equivalent transactions for athletes.

As some people reading this know, I am part of a group trying to create a professional college basketball league, the HBL  (HBLeague.com).  We have a plan for how our athletes will be allowed to commercialize their NIL, and at core our extremely complex system boils down to: "you own your brand.  Go get an agent and make some money.”

Now it’s a tad more complex if they want to use HBL trademarks in the ad or get a group license with dozens of other players, etc., but even those complexities are easily solved.  For example, the NBA and the NFL and pretty much every professional team sport has sorted all of those rules out and it is a wheel the HBL did not need to reinvent, so we didn’t.  The only reason the NCAA doesn’t feel it can borrow from the existing solutions for how athletes can use their rights to maximize their brand value– and listen carefully – is because the NCAA DOES NOT WANT Athletes to maximize their brand value.  To the NCAA, the problem isn’t that a market WON’T determine the optimal payment level for each athlete, but that it WILL.  And that’s the last thing the NCAA wants because the NCAA is built on the idea that it can abrogate athletes rights for its own convenience and economic gain.

 This is not really about the amount of money, rather it is about economic rights.  If America is fine with a radio show providing “fake” salary to a football coach for doing a weekly radio show, as a way to supplement his income beyond what a state entity like a university can pay, then it should not be good public policy to take that same right away from the starting QB.  The QB is not less of an American than the coach.  And the system that works for the coach will work just as well for the QB.  Or else, as I said above, let’s start with Mark Emmert.  Let’s put the microscope on what the head of a non-profit organization based in Indianapolis should earn if we separate out the fake parts of his pay from the real.  I’d be happy to serve on that particular committee.  Heck, I’d do it for free, for the love of the game.

[horrorgay]

Reylo is/has ruined the Sequels

Hot take: TLJ both story level and writer level used reylo to make every single character removed from their initial storyline and undercut any potentially meaningful representation, by pushing them to the far sides of the narrative to make room for a “Rey saves Ben Solo redemption” story. 

It also, in order to make Ben Solo a more #relatable soft boy, played the game of “but maybe Luke thought about killing him”.

A. To begin, here is a list of canonical TFA!Kylo actions:

Ruined Luke’s attempts at teaching children how to use the force

Contributed greatly to the creation of the New Genocidal Order, the First Order.

An Order which, by the way, takes literal babies and brainwashes them into soldiers that will commit their genocide without question. 

Ordered and contributed to the slaughter of an entire village of innocent people.

Tortured two of the three main characters on SCREEN, which caused them to scream in agony and sob because it was a painful torture. 

(Throughout the movie is clearly hostile towards Rey, even when talking about her to his fellow first order members)

Sent the orders to obliterate four (?) ENTIRE planets and oversaw it without even flinching

Tried to blow up Maz’s castle

Purposefully intimidated and stalked Rey through the forest, after which he held her VERY CLEARLY against her will with the force and brought his lightsaber inches away from her face before forcing her to pass out, carrying her away from her new loved ones to torture her on Starkiller Base. 

From there he is shown to be continuously destructive, exhibiting no anger control as he damages the things around him.

He kills Han, who reached out to him. Though he does seem to show regret, he shoves it aside because he wants to continue to grow as a powerful murderer.

In the forest fight, he shows no mercy or kindness to Rey and Finn. He is brutal as he fights them, and intends to kill Finn, seriously harming him in the process. He throws Rey against a tree with potentially lethal force. I wouldn’t say this scene is inherently EVIL as it is just 1v2 combat, but it does further display that they are clearly on OPPOSITE SIDES.

He then offers to teach Rey to use the dark side of the force (not explicitly stated but obviously in the same GENOCIDAL manner he’s been using it with the entire movie).

She slashes his face and leaves him to die, and then SOBS by Finn’s side, ready to die on Starkiller Base.

Rey, throughout the whole movie shows CLEAR disgust, fear, anger and bitterness was towards Kylo as he has been nothing but a monster. (You can SEE them in the gifset linked below.)

B. Here is the thing about The Last Jedi:

If they wanted to make Kylo a “redeemable character”* they should have done at least one of the following things, EVEN THOUGH it absolutley would not undo his actions in TFA

*Its not Rey’s fucking job to turn back time and make a genocidal monster turn back into 10 year old innocent Ben Solo

Build Snoke up as an even worse bad guy, and show how he reached out to Kylo while he stayed with Luke.

What they did in tlj: implied snoke had some reason in his turn to the dark side and then killed him halfway through the movie (after Kylo watched him torture Rey, mind you). This provided NO in movie backstory for Snoke or Kylo‘s turn and does not give the audience even an once of sympathy for Kylo.

No one likes it but reylos, but at least SHOW if Han and Leia had been incredibly neglectful of Kylo. It would be very OOC of Han and Leia though, so they didn’t. It also would not NEARLY be enough reason to excuse his murder lust and genocide. I remind you of the classic “Rey is raised by sand and Unkar Plutt, does not become murderer.” 

What they did in tlj: Basically ignored this entire subject. Sending Kylo to Luke, HIS UNCLE WHO LOVES HIM, is not nearly enough evidence or reason for redemption. Hell, they didn’t even directly address the fact that Kylo murdered Han A WEEK BEFORE THE MOVIE TAKES PLACE.

BARE MINIMUM: Show that he is actively remorseful of his previous actions. 

What they did in tlj: He hesitates shooting the bridge he knows Leia is on. He doesn’t call off the attack though, and it still is destroyed. That’s it. The rest of the movie is Kylo playing kicked puppy in front of Rey (bc of the Luke Incident). After the fight scene on the bridge, where Rey is hopeful (addressed later on) he will reject the first order, he says she could rule as the new first order by his side. When she rejects this, he spends the rest of the movie trying to obliterate the entire resistance (INCLUDING: Leia, Luke and Rey). Like he’s straight up even more wrathful and murderous than he was when the story began.

Conclusion: It doesn’t make sense at all that both inside the story, and out (with Lucas Film) Kylo can/should be redeemed. They didn’t write it into the story NEARLY WELL ENOUGH. And it is also tone deaf, considering the political climate. Imagine if everyone started cheering for Trump the under dog, “will he get his redemption story?”. 

C. AND NOW WE GET TO THE ACTUAL REYLO ASPECT.

In the beginning of the movie roughly a week after the events on Starkiller base, Rey shows clear anger and disgust towards Kylo. This part of the movie makes sense. She hates him for what he’s done. In her words: he’s a monster, and he has to pay for what he’s done. 

Kylo has been nothing but violent, malicious and invasive to both her and the people she loves (Finn, Han, Leia etc.). 

But then, inexplicably she starts calling him Ben Solo. Maybe this would make sense if she felt like he could be redeemed, but five minutes ago and the entire previous movie she thinks the exact opposite. 

Rey calling Kylo “Ben Solo” seems more than anything to be the writers of TLJ pandering the side of the audience that does want to see him redeemed still. Sure, whatever. It’s the beginning of the movie. Anything could happen. 

But as stated before in section B, any potential attempts to portray Kylo being redeemed in the plot are then neglected completely. Leaving us with Rey, who previously hated Kylo with every fiber of her being suddenly treating him like he’s soft and kind-hearted. It becomes OOC drivel, and detrimentally ruins the heart of Rey’s character. (It also fumbles Luke’s character in what apparently is his last movie, but that’s a whole other rant.) 

After the throne room, they go back to their original status of Hero vs Villain. Still, it doesn’t change the fact that the 45 minutes (more?) of the movie made No God Damn Sense, and was a series of severe fumbles in the narrative. 

D. WHY THIS HURTS THE REST OF THE NARRATIVE. 

Recall that in the year before 2015 and the years following up until the Last Jedi, that Lucas Film and Disney presented what was supposed to be the main good guys trio: Finn, Poe and Rey. 

Finn, played by John Boyega, is the Main Male Protagonist and Rey and Finn were mutually portrayed as love interests in TFA. It would seem fitting that he’d continue to be treated in such a manner. Except he CLEARLY wasn’t. For goodness sakes, the main trio STILL is not consciously in the same room as each other until the VERY end of the movie in a few-minute long scene. 

His storyline also has pretty racist issues. Rose was introduced to give a vague purpose to his storyline in TLJ, and even then SHE was OOC from star to finish. Rian Johnson did not take his time to write a meaningful story for the MALE LEAD. 

I love Poe to death, but he and Holdo’s story did not really work. From a purely common sense POV the story should not have gone down the way it did. From a less common sense view, and a more character based one, their storyline caused Poe to be OOC. The heavy handed white feminism looks bad. It made Poe look bad, even if what he did was reasonable. (More in depth explanations here and here.)

The narrative was given to Kylo, and to (OOC) Rey. Which WOULD HAVE BEEN NOT IDEAL BUT TOLERABLE if they’d actually given depth to Kylo’s story. But again the didn’t.

E. WHY LUCAS FILM SUCKS FOR LETTING THIS HAPPEN. 

Rian Johnson has been explicitly clear in his tweets and interviews that he wanted to focus on Kylo. He wanted to make him more human and relatable (regardless of whether or not he failed). 

He has been clear that he did not care or take into account what the cast thought of the story he was writing. 

(Ignoring Mark Hamill’s advice on the portrayal of Luke, pushing aside Daisy Ridley’s tears [which let’s be real, it’s fairly evident that she was upset because Finn and Rey had no story nor interactions, and Rey was turned into an OOC plot device].)

He had joked that he would have left Finn out of the story and in a coma. He also unabashedly romanticized Rey and Kylo’s actions, despite that being VERY VERY VERY VERY QUESTIONABLE. 

He teased FinnPoe in promos and events leading up to TLJ, and decided that if Finn and Poe were going to get a long and like each other, he might as well separate them too. 

The Last Jedi leaves any representation deeply flawed, sidelined or non-existent. It is not a movie for the everyone. It is a poorly written movie made for an audience I can’t even pinpoint, but certainty not for anyone who wanted to see themselves in a narrative in a positive way. 

Star Wars has always belonged to everyone. In 2015, the took a step forward to make it belong to everyone. But in 2017, Lucas Film moved backwards and made a movie that belonged to a specific group of people who idolize and romanticize white male violence. Once you pull down the paper thin smoke screen of supposed diversity, you’re left with a bad movie, and poorly assembled narrative about Kylo, at the expense of everyone: the audience, the cast, and the characters.

NOTES:

Feel free to reblog, and repost elsewhere, but please credit me. 

Please, feel free to expand upon what I said here.

I am going to make a gifset that highlights Kylo’s actions and Rey’s response through TLJ and TFA, as well as an additional set with Rey and Finn. I will link them here when I’m done.

DISCLAIMER: IDGAF IF YOU LIKE KYLO. It’s not a crime to like characters. It is a fucking crime to write an official star wars trilogy and center it around the garbage man stink boy at the expense of everyone else.