#and asocial is undesirable to them)

[infiniteorangethethird]

fav kind of interaction is when a neurotypical comes up to me with "omg we are SO similar we're practically same" and then prove their point by listing off traits I only possess as a part of my masking

[helslastangel]

Astrology Placements as Jungian Archetypes

@helslastangel

𓆩♡𓆪

The Persona

Ascendant

🌅 Put simply, the Ascendant is the face we greet the world with on a day to day basis - the filter through which others will eventually meet our core self (the Sun).

🌅 Like the Ascendant, our Persona is the way we present ourselves to the world: a mask we develop to adapt to changing environments and blend into social situations. It is meant to keep us from acting on every primal impulse we may have in dealing with other people.

🌅 Of course, some people can do this more effectively than others, forming a spectrum ranging in extremes from social chameleons who lose themselves in favor of identifying with others and asocial loners who lose sight of others in favor of guarding their inner identity.

The Shadow

Lilith, Chiron, Uranus, Neptune

🌌 Lilith, Chiron, Uranus, and Neptune represent parts of ourselves that we hide or repress (such as desires, ideas, and instincts) because either we or society consider them to be weaknesses, personal failings, or just plain undesirable.

🌌 Similarly, the Shadow is the counterpart to the Persona - an archetype born from our attempts to conceal the dark, rebellious, or wounded parts of ourselves from the public eye - and sometimes our self-criticism.

🌌 Though we all have these sides to us, some people can embrace their shadow side fully and work through the challenges that come with it, while others try harder to deny it exists, pushing it down further before ultimately projecting it onto others.

The Anima/Animus

Mars, Venus, Moon, Saturn

🍒 Mars & Saturn are masculine planets, concerned with action and always in a state of "doing."

🍒 They represent our relationship with the external world and how we interact with it. The way we approach situations with others and solve problems can be understood through these placements.

🍒 On the other hand, the Moon & Venus are feminine planets, meant to receive and content to simply "be."

🍒 These represent our inner world and our relationship with our intuition and emotions. The way we let go of control and allow life to bring its blessing and guidance to us.

🍒 These placements involve our sense of duty and responsibility, as well as our needs and desires, intertwined (for better or for worse) with societal expectations of the roles we're meant to play.

🍒 Likewise, the Anima represents the feminine aspect of the male psyche, involving trust, empathy, and emotional intelligence, and the Animus represents the masculine aspect of the female psyche, relating to logic, stoicism, and the urge to problem-solve.

🍒 This archetype represents our connection to what Jung refers to as the collective unconscious - the shared thoughts/beliefs of society at large.

🍒 Whether the anima/animus was repressed or allowed to develop plays a huge role in determining how balanced a person's personality will be.

The Self

Sun, Mercury, Jupiter, Pluto

💠 As we know, the Sun in astrology represents the ego - the core self, our "true" identity.

💠 Mercury and Jupiter represent different aspects of our intellect, knowledge, and ways of thinking, and Pluto symbolizes transformation, (ego) death, and rebirth.

💠 I see a parallel in Jung's "self" archetype, representing the union of the conscious and the unconscious in an individual.

💠 Different parts of one's personality are woven together to form a whole and the level of harmony between these aspects determines one's mental state.

[tarragonblack1235813213455]

SOCIAL SCIENCE

||||||||||||||||||||||||||

PSYCHOLOGY

|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

A VISIONARY SERIAL KILLER will often suffer from a psychotic break from reality; he will believe that he is another person or he was compelled to murder by an entity.

■GOD MANDATED

GOD has told a person to murder someone

■DEMON MANDATED

A DEMON has compelled a person to murder someone

EXAMPLE: Berkowitz killed at the command of Harvey, a dog, who was possessed by a demon; that demon was able to send him several murderous messages in the form of incessant nocturnal barking from across the street.

A MISSION-ORIENTED KILLER will justify his actions as necessary to "RID THE WORLD" of a certain type of person perceived as undesirable, such as a homeless person, an ex-con, a homosexual, a drug user, a prostitute, or an individual of a different ethnicity or religion; however, they aren't psychotic.

EXAMPLE: Joseph Paul Franklin specifically targeted black people. He believed that race mixing was a crime against God. This led him to focus most of his hatred toward any interracial couple.

A HEDONISTIC TYPE of SERIAL KILLER will seek the thrill of the hunt and derive pleasure and satisfaction from committing a murder. They will view people as expendable. FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY has identified three separate categories of the hedonistic killer: "LUST, THRILL, and COMFORT."

■LUST is a category of the hedonistic type of serial killer that will inflict SADISM in order to experience SEXUAL AROUSAL from the MURDER of a potential partner DURING THE SEXUAL ACT, this will often include elaborate staging of the victim's body.

EXAMPLE

Jeffrey Dahmer derived pleasure from the sadistic acts associated with each crime, linking violence and sexual arousal.

An "ORGANIZED NONSOCIAL" subtype of the lust serial killer will be intelligent, educated, aware of law enforcement, narcissistic, and prepared. They have no regard for societal norms. They’re indifferent, irresponsible, and self-centered, although they can seem amiable when necessary. They will generally leave a clean crime scene but might take a trophy to experience pleasure after the crime was committed. They don't feel remorse. They will, nonetheless, pay close attention to any media report about their crime. They’re “methodical and cunning” and they are aware that they’re committing a crime. In fact, this will actually please them.

An “DISORGANIZED ASOCIAL” subtype of the lust serial killer will tend to suffer from a mental illness – especially psychosis – or to be criminally inexperienced. They will often use a weapon found at the scene and leave evidence behind. They’re impulsive. With murder, they will blitz their target and mutilate the body post-mortem. They might feel badly about the crime after it happened. They don’t watch for media coverage. They are “socially aversive”. They often feel rejected. The crime that they commit is often close to their residence or place of employment.

■THRILL is a category of the hedonistic type of serial killer that will view the undetection of a murder committed by him as a sort of amusement to be had at the expense of the lesser individual or group.

EXAMPLE

The Zodiac Killer taunted law enforcement with several letters; that wasn't everything. He sent a cryptogram that hid other important details about his crime spree as well in order to prove his superiority.

■COMFORT is a category of the hedonistic type of serial killer that will murder a close friend or relative for financial gain. After that, she will usually wait for a while before killing again to allow any suspicion by those in close proximity to subside. They often use drugs or poison, and most notably arsenic, to kill their victim.

EXAMPLE

Dorothea Puente would poison tenets and bury them on her property. After that, she would collect their social security check. Dorothea would claim that she is innocent.

A POWER/CONTROL-ORIENTED TYPE of SERIAL KILLER will derive pleasure when exerting power, control, and dominance over their victim. The primary motive is not sexual in nature, but it is, in fact, to have the victim feel helpless. As a result, it will empower them, and they will feel in control of the situation when, in reality, they often feel powerless.

EXAMPLE

John W. Gacy enjoyed the process of murder. Every step was drawn out for his satisfaction. With that, the last step was bittersweet since it marked the end, but it, still, gave him the most pleasure when he killed each victim.

[doxiedreg]

3, 10, 20 and 30 for the last oc you have drawn :]

take two because i accidentally exited out of the ask and lost what i had typed so far ;-; ALSO SO SORRY ANSWERING THIS TOOK SO LONG, I am not having a good week energy wise. It's now like a week later gdrhkghkfdg or at least it feels like it, i have no sense of time. 3.What is/was your character’s relationship with their father like? Morrison: Doesn't remember his dad as he ran off with another girl when he was like 5 years old and also they didnt really have any meaningful interactions in that time even if he could remember. Morrison's dad was very not ready for kids and had 0 interest in raising them so he mostly ignored morrison and his siblings and then as soon as a different pretty thing came along he ran away like a coward, not even leaving his ex girlfriend with child support. Morrison also is not really interested in looking for him, it's his fault he had to be the man of the house at a young age and help raising his younger siblings and manage the house. At least helping his mom with finances made him realise he was a natural at doing paperwork and managing money which is a very good skill to have in the criminal underground Gin: Very bad, suffered physical and mental abuse from both his parents. It's why they have a permanent crooked tail, she didnt receive proper healthcare after the incident so the bones never set correctly. His parents were of high prestige you see? And they wanted a heir they could be proud of to take on their legacy. But when Gin was born, she was mostly mute and behaved very weirdly in his parent's eyes. Their parents tried to teach the weirdness out of him, then when that didnt work they got frustrated and the vocal abuse started and then eventually it escalated to physical abuse and gin was beaten and scratched whenever she showed an undesired behaviour. However Gin still remained the way they were and if anything started to act out more as his needs were not met and she was scared and frustrated and angry. In the end when he was 10, gin was unceremoniously kicked out on the street with only the clothes on their back. His parents telling her she wasn't worthy of being asociated with them. They happened to have been dumped in the poor neighborhood morrison resided in with his mom. They met shortly after and morrison felt bad for gin and also saw potential in them with how big and strong they were. He was 15 at the time and decided to ask his mom if gin could be taken in. Since Morrison was a big help at home, his mom didn't mind, and gin was lovingly raised along with Morrison's siblings. They have been inseperable since. (also yes this means i changed morrison's age to 43. OC development can happen on the spot like here)

10. Does your character feel more comfortable with more clothing, or with less clothing? Morrison: More clothing! Makes him feel fancy >:) He likes wearing suits and bowties and all the accessories! Gin: Prefers less and loose clothing. It makes him feel less restricted in their movements! And also just more comfy, she hates tight fitting clothes, especially denim. 20. what ways does your character compare themselves to others? Do they do this for the sake of self-validation, or self-criticism?

Morrison: He is trying to match Thorn in notoriety(sp?) and secretly wants to overthrow him but he knows that needs more planning so he is just extremely passive aggressive towards thorn now. So definitely self validation, he wants others to see that he is the better mob boss! Thorn is just some old cheese who thinks he can stomp all over the others by making them pay his stupid taxes. Gin: Gin very much looks up to morrison and strives to be the best bodyguard they can be for him. He often struggles with feeling like she isn't worthy of morrison's praise and care and feels like they are stupid due to the years of abuse. But morrison is quick to point out that gin is his most valued gang member and that they have an amazing brain for tactics. Gin still struggles to accept he means it and isnt just saying it to be nice but she still very much cares about him. So self-criticism for them.

30. What does your character find repulsive or disgusting?

Morrison: Cheese. He might be a rat but he hates the stuff. Will get offended if you offer him some and will indirectly insult people by comparing them to cheese. (for example calling thorn "the big cheese" or "old cheese" or calling his expendible crew members "little cheese biscuits") Also don't compare him to chucky cheese, he will sicc gin on you on the spot. He might be using an arcade as a front for his shady business but that's just disrespectful! Gin: Gin doesn't like the smell or texture of fish or really any seafood. Not to mention all the lil pokey fish bones you have to deal with its just disgusting to him. They very much prefer red meat and chicken. Gin is not a fan of strong smells in general like perfumes, those super musky shampoos, strong deodorants and the smell of cooking broccoli and cauliflour. It just makes her gag immediately. Eggs are also a smell and texture they hate, especially cooked ones. Morrison is perfectly happy to accomodate to that though and is careful to only take him to restaurants that serve her safe foods whenever they go out to eat together.

Whew thats finally done! This was a fun exercise to develop my new babies, I hope you guys will enjoy this read :) You can find more oc asks answers on my oc blog @elena-oc-blog

[angstmongertina]

and still so far (7KPP)

I technically had this written a while ago now but it kind of fits for today’s 7KPP daily prompt and I haven’t posted it yet so I’m gonna do that now.

This is another fic for my universe where Lia and Lyon break up before the end of the Summit. Because I live for angst.

Title taken from the song So Close from Enchanted.

Prompt 19: Facade

AO3 Link

He almost, almost, did not attend the ball. After all, he had already made his unofficially required annual public appearance towards the beginning of the season and was accordingly left to his own devices for the remainder of his time at the capital. Surely none of society was expecting his attendance at an engagement ball.

None, it seemed, except for one of the two whose engagement was being celebrated, and it required very little thought to figure out which one.

Still, that itself was worth considering, if only to prevent less enjoyable considerations from occupying his mind. Regardless of their previous association, Lady Camellia was never one who would do anything that might taunt him in the slightest, or, if their most recent interaction was any indication, even communicate with him at all if she could avoid it, not that he could blame her for that. The invitation was almost unthinkable to have been from her. But her… But Lord Randall, it appeared, had no such misgivings and, given his conviviality, seemed inclined to invite anyone who might have a passing relation to the parties in question.

Which he did, though perhaps not in the way the lord believed.

Still, Camellia appeared… content, or at least was genuinely willing to accept the man’s hand, which he knew was no small concession in it of itself, and whatever else happened, he would always wish the best for her, something that she tended to undervalue on her own. Not to mention the fact that, given her more reticent nature, the celebration would not be so large in scale that his absence would be unnoticed, something which might raise more undesired questions than his attendance would.

He wondered briefly when conforming to societal niceties became such an exercise in irony.

And so, he found himself standing in the corner of the ballroom, watching as a small crowd whirled on the floor or else mingled by the refreshments. Most were only vaguely familiar, a testament to his asocial tendencies, but they clearly recognized him; the surprised and calculating looks directed at him when they assumed he was not paying attention were evidence enough for that. In fact, it was some miracle that they had not descended upon him in full force, though perhaps he had the couple’s insightful choice of friends to thank for that, even more so than the drink and generally unapproachable expression he nursed.

It was, however, not enough to prevent Lord Randall from greeting him, leading his fiancée along by the hand. Then again, perhaps he should have been expecting it; the pair had shown themselves to be consummate hosts, and his determination to remain as far from the festivities as possible no doubt had caught their attention. He had attended, after all. It was only logical that he would have to interact with them.

That did not stop him from stiffening, ever so slightly, when he noticed their approach, a sentiment that she echoed, given the shock that crossed her face, replaced almost instantaneously by a polite smile.

Their reactions, however, did nothing to reduce her fiancé’s enthusiasm.

“Your Grace! A pleasure to see you again!”

Instinctively, his eyes darted to Lady Camellia, but instead of meeting his gaze, she dropped into a low bow, eyes lowered and hands clasped before her. “We are pleased you have decided to attend our humble celebration, Duke Lyon.”

Her greeting was everything appropriate from a minor noblewoman to a duke of Jiyel… and yet somehow all the worse for it.

Forcing some semblance of a polite expression onto his face, he bowed in turn. “It was a privilege and an honor to be invited.”

“So formal, you two.” Lyon nearly jumped, but Lord Randall only chuckled, shaking his head and clapping him on the shoulder. “One would think you barely know each other.”

“It has been four years, Randall.” Her voice, though chiding, was soft, almost hesitant, as apologetic eyes flicked to his face. “And I’m afraid much has changed since then.”

“Then you two should catch up!” He had, apparently, already encountered the lord enough that he was not entirely surprised to find himself pushed towards the lady. Unfortunately, that did nothing to quell his discomfort, particularly when he found himself grasping the hand of one Lady Camellia. “Go on for a dance.”

Before he could even formulate any sort of response, he was propelled towards the center of the room, Lady Camellia right beside him, as Lord Randall fairly disappeared into the nearest group of guests. It was almost impressive, given the man’s height was not far from his, and, as such, almost a head taller than the vast majority of people in the kingdom. Or, at least, it would have been had the situation not been so uncomfortable.

“I apologize, Your Grace.” He looked down, meeting anxious brown eyes, and told himself that it didn’t sting when she dropped his hand, taking a step away. “Lord Randall has always been enthusiastic about such things. He is more gregarious than I by far and I think he wishes to ensure that I find an equal enjoyment in companions.”

She chuckled, something resembling a smile, small and tremulous, crossing her lips for a heartbeat, and his chest constricted too tightly for him to form a response. Instead, he only inclined his head, offering his hand, and her smile, such as it was, turned melancholic.

“I have no desire to force you into a dance when all of Jiyel knows your distaste for such things, Your Grace.”

He shook his head. “Hardly.” When she didn’t react, instead watching him steadily with that faint sadness lurking in her gaze, he swallowed, forcing the words out of his suddenly dry mouth. “It would be an honor, Camellia. Please.”

That managed to catch her off guard, if the visibly stupefied look on her face as she accepted his hand was any indication.

As if on cue, the musicians played the opening strains of the next waltz, and he drew a deep breath, carefully leading her into the proper position and ignoring the gapes and whispers from the crowd. They did not go unnoticed by his partner either, a fact that was apparent when her expression somehow turned even more stilted.

Still, she said nothing as he stepped around her, save for offering him wordless apology when their eyes met. He shook his head, focusing instead on sweeping her across in turn, on recalling the lessons from his childhood, so many years ago. The lessons that he had reviewed in preparation for the Summit four years past, that he had anticipated using…

Keeping his face neutral, he carefully eased her into a turn, watching as she twirled, her gown rippling around her, light and graceful. When he caught her, she beamed, a warm, genuine smile that seemed to steal his breath. “A fine secret you’ve been keeping from us, Your Grace.”

For a moment, panic scrabbled at his throat and he nearly stumbled over the next step. “What?”

The sound was more croak than word, but she only grinned, a little sheepish. “The rumor on the Isle was that you didn’t attend the Ambassador’s Ball because you didn’t know how to dance and had no desire to advertise it.” She paused as he led her into a free spin, dropping away before returning to his arms, elegant and natural and something in his chest twinged. “I have no doubt society thought the same way, but I’m afraid your secret is out now.”

“You flatter me, milady.”

She said nothing more, only shaking her head with a soft, almost wistful look, and he followed her lead, putting the crowds and the people out of mind until there was only the two of them. Her grasp in his, light and trusting. Her hand resting on his arm, his palm against her shoulder blade. In synchrony and as one, a wordless conversation of giving and taking, a perfect communication of the mind. Warm and soft and right.

When he pulled her closer, leading her into a pivot, somewhat stilted but still with decent form, she laughed, cheeks flushed a faint pink, and for a moment, he relaxed completely, letting the faintest hint of a smile curve his lips as they spun smoothly across the floor.

Faintly, he heard the music taper away, sensed the other couples on the floor slow as the song came to an end, and he carefully led her into a final turn, bowing as she dropped into a low curtsy. Applause surrounded them, compliments and warm wishes, sights and sounds that slowly filtered back into his consciousness. Teasing remarks from the Jiyelese elite… not the delegates at the Summit.

That was four years prior, and a moment that had never come to pass.

He offered her his arm, feeling his chest tighten when she accepted it, tucking her hand into the crook of his elbow with her face arranged back into a mask of inscrutability. “Thank you for honoring me with the dance, Your Grace.”

He cleared his throat. “It was my pleasure.”

Lord Randall, of course, had chosen to wait in the farthest corner of the room, and Lyon would likely have suspected that the man was planning something were he any less good-natured. As it was, however, he simply led her along, grateful that her presence, at least temporarily, served to protect him from any who might have wanted to approach him.

It did not, however, shield him from the weight of his partner’s gaze nor the gentle pressure of her hand on his arm.

“I must admit I was surprised you accepted the invitation.”

Her voice was soft, hardly audible over the music and conversation around them, and surely inaudible to anyone who might be listening in. For a step, he faltered, but when she said nothing more, he chanced a glance in her direction.

“I thought it would have been more telling had I not.”

She pursed her lips. “Perhaps. But you would also have been spared all of this…” She hesitated, looking about as though hoping to find the right word to describe the celebration plastered upon the wall. “All of this unpleasantness. Socializing.”

“Perhaps, but… I came to wish you well in person.”

Her smile was small, tinged with wistfulness. “I am glad you came.”

Unable to meet her gaze, he looked away and swallowed, feeling the strange lump in his throat shift with the movement. “I… I am as well.”

All too soon and yet not soon enough, Lord Randall stood before them, beaming as he accepted the hand of his betrothed. “Welcome back, my flower. I hope you enjoyed yourself and were able to catch up?”

She might have said something in reply but Lyon didn’t notice, preoccupied by the friendly gaze that met his, open and unguarded. “Thank you for humoring my request, Your Grace. I hope you know that any friend of Lia’s is a friend of mine.”

Yet another offering of gratitude added to the swirl of interactions and conversation, and between the forced pleasantry and polite socialization, it was all suddenly too much.

Glancing between the pair, he nodded, replying with something that, given the affable smile he received, was appropriate enough. Or, more likely, the lord was simply generous enough to accept whatever had managed to leave his mouth as agreement. At any rate, it was enough to allow for his escape, which was all that he wanted, the social consequences be damned.

Finally alone on the cobblestone, under the cool night sky, he released a shaky breath, watching as silhouettes continued to pass before the brightly lit windows of the ballroom, blissfully unaware of how the celebration was thoroughly crumbling the foundations of his very being. Then again, who would have noticed? Not even he had realized…

“Duke Lyon?”

He had to press his lips together to prevent something that resembled hysterical laughter from bursting forth. It was only natural that if anyone at the engagement ball were to notice, were to follow him out, it would be her. One of the couple that the ball was celebrating… and the one person in the entire seven kingdoms who still possessed the ability to send his world completely off-kilter.

“Lady Camellia.”

He said nothing more, and she approached slowly, footsteps faltering and stopping when she was almost close enough to touch. Almost, but still just out of reach. “I know I may very well be the last person you wish to see in this moment, but you left in a hurry without bidding farewell, and… well… I was worried…”

When she trailed off, he glanced down to find her watching him, sorrow resting heavily on her features, and he slowly released a breath, finding, though not to his surprise, that he was still—would always be—unable to resist her. “I apologize. I found I needed some air.”

Her answering smile was at once tentative and rueful. “I thought you preferred to tell the truth?”

That, the reminder, the memory, of a less burdened man’s long-lost words, was enough to coax a barking, almost harsh, laugh from his throat, and she was not quick enough to disguise her flinch. Not from him. “I did.”

What he left unsaid seemed to hang between them for several heartbeats before she nodded. “I suppose much has changed since then. For the both of us.”

“Indeed.” He shifted, noticing the way she moved subconsciously, balancing his change in posture without thinking.

Or, perhaps more accurately, she was reacting, adjusting. Adapting and rebuilding, just as he knew he had to.

He drew another shaky breath, closing his eyes against the pinpricks of heat behind his lids. “I hope Lord Randall makes you happy.”

For a second, she froze, expression startled, before she smiled, gentle. Sad. “He does.” A pause, during which time he could barely breathe, and then a warm hand brushed against his, light and tender, so quick that he almost missed it. “Thank you, Lyon.”

He nodded once, not trusting his voice, and waited until she returned to the ballroom before letting his mask fall.

[jkottke]

The Hayflick Limit

Biology is one field I don't know supremely well, having had a couple of college courses and then mostly just public television documentaries. So it's always cool to get a new concept or two to play with, like the Hayflick Limit.

What is it?

In normal, replicating cells, all the important genetic code in a cell's nucleus is protected by telomeres--sections of non-coding DNA on the ends of chromosomes. (Elizabeth Blackburn, who won a Nobel for her work on telomeres, compares them to the caps on the end of shoelaces that keep them from fraying.) Every time cells divide, telomeres shorten ever so slightly; the white blood cells in newborn humans have telomeres that consist of about 8,000 base pairs, which falls to around 1,500 in the elderly.

The Hayflick limit is thought to occur when telomeres are gone and cell division would be risky, because without their protection, loss of genetic information would occur. When cells no longer replicate, they're considered "senescent": they carry on most of their normal cellular activity and eventually die. The Hayflick limit is one cause, but external stress, like an infection, physical trauma, or UV radiation can hasten cell death, according to Jan van Deursen, a cancer biologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.

Senescent cells are a culprit in aging, but they also have benefits. They give off proteins that can recruit immune cells, which can promote wound healing, and they're one of our body's defenses against cancer. One of the reasons cancer occurs is when cells switch on a gene that allows them to rebuild their telomeres--kind of like speeding through a stop sign. That's why the only immortal human cells are cancer cells.

So the Hayflick Limit, if it could be waived, could theoretically prevent or delay aging. But as it is, it's a built-in cap on how many replications a body's cells and tissues can undergo, so it guarantees our mortality.

Here's what Hayflick himself had to say about it:

To slow, or even arrest, the aging process in humans is fraught with serious problems in the relationships of humans to each other and to all of our institutions. By allowing asocial people, tyrants, dictators, mass murderers, and people who cause wars to have their longevity increased should be undesirable. Yet, that would be one outcome of being able to tamper with the aging process.

I guess at a minimum, as bad as everyone is, at least they (as an individual) are not around to be bad forever? I'll take that silver lining.

[therebelsthemartyrsthesurvivors]

Changing the Narrative

While confronting the Holocaust in Germany and Poland, visiting Auschwitz-Birkenau, Treblinka II, the memorial sites, I had an epiphany: the victims of the Holocaust are always labeled as victims and the perpetrators are always infamously talked about, as if they should be the main focus in our history books. These people, these “victims” were fighters and martyrs who knew about sacrifice and the possibility of death. Some survived death when they were only a few feet away from it, and not even this scare turned them away from returning to dreadful places like the Warsaw Ghetto to warn others of the fate that was awaiting them in death camps like Treblinka II. We do not give credit where credit is due. We do not talk about people like Emanuel Ringelblum, we talk about people like Heinrich Himmler. We do not talk about people like Jan Karski, we talk about people like Rudolf Höss. Because of course we have to mention the evil behind it all, but we give credit where credit is not deserved, and we see this at memorial sites, we see this at museums, we see this in poor representations of the Holocaust in film, media, in museum tours, and literature. We focus on the perpetrators and the bystanders, the people at fault, but we never focus on the fact that there was a resistance, there was hope, there were uprisings fueled by hope and the unity of persecuted peoples.

This paper is meant to ethically represent the Holocaust— the survivors, the resistance, and the rebels— those who rebelled against the odds and fought a fate decided for them by the infamous perpetrators and the bystanders. This paper is meant to highlight the stories we do not always talk about. In this paper I will be focusing on three specific groups of the many peoples targeted in the Holocaust, specifically Jews, women and children (including the unborn), and the LGBT community. This paper is a written self-reflection based on my experiences confronting the Holocaust as a survivor of assault. I want to change the narrative and focus on the stories that matter, reflect on the truth of the Holocaust, and discuss what can be done differently to respectfully and ethically commemorate the survivors and “victims” of the Holocaust. In this paper, I will argue and defend the fact that the so-called “victims” were martyrs, and the survivors were the greatest resistance of all.

THE HEAD, NOT THE TAIL

Dating back to 1930s Europe, the persecution of Jews had started much earlier than is recognized. Propaganda was used to divide communities, and successfully turned the backs of non-Jewish neighbors on their Jewish neighbors (as we see in several pogroms that occurred throughout the war— before, during, and after), however men were targeted before women and children. German Jewish men were being deported and interned far before German Jewish women were because women clearly were not even remotely viewed as a threat. In reference to Between Dignity and Despair, a historical account written by Marion Kaplan, German Jewish women were vital to the survival of German Jewish men deported and interned prior to the creation of ghettos and the decision to exterminate all Jews. Men “were forced to flee promptly” (Kaplan 24). Wives and mothers were responsible for saving their husbands from permanent internment in camps. These women learned several languages to be able to locate their husbands and fathers, and they managed to hold down the household, all at once. German Jewish women had “the burden of keeping their households and communities together.” (Kaplan 6) Men were only set free because their female relatives located them and provided them with the identification papers necessary to be released. It was their female relatives who tracked them down and released them from internment. They newly learned how to financially support their families, how to get by with the few resources they had, and they learned how to use these few resources to accomplish finding a site of refuge. We never hear these stories though, and we need to change the narrative.

The Greatest Crime. Jewish and Roma women were a persecuted minority. Jewish women more exclusively because they had the ability to procreate Jewish children, and of course, Jewish lineage is passed on through the mother. This was viewed as a political threat to the Third Reich.

At Auschwitz and Ravensbrück, Jewish and Roma women were subject to forced sterilization methods to test which methods would be most cost effective. Other “undesirables” were also exposed to forced sterilization at these camps. Upon arrival at Auschwitz-Birkenau, visibly pregnant Jewish women and Jewish women with small children were sent directly to the gas chambers to be killed. The story of Jewish women and children entering Auschwitz-Birkenau is a painful one. Dr. Josef Mengele, infamously known for conducting medical experiments on twins at Auschwitz-Birkenau, was responsible for the decision that declared that Jewish women with small children entering the camp would be gassed. His logic was that the small Jewish children had nowhere to go because all Jews were imprisoned in the camps, they could not work, and there weren’t any facilities on the camp where they could live and develop “normally”. He also claimed it would not be humane if he sent the children on their own to the “ovens” without allowing the mother to be there to witness the child’s death, so the mother and child would be sent together. We hear about Dr. Josef Mengele every time we talk about Auschwitz, but someone we never talk about who is incredibly vital to the survival of Jews in Auschwitz was Dr. Gisella Perl.

A Hero in Hell. Dr. Perl was a Hungarian gynecologist who was interned as a Jewish prisoner at Auschwitz, yet was also the head women’s doctor. Dr. Perl once spoke that the greatest crime at Auschwitz was being pregnant. She worked under Dr. Mengele and was ordered to notify him of any pregnant women that were living onsite at the camp. Dr. Mengele claimed that these women were going to be sent to a different camp to receive better nutrition. Women quickly came forward on their own, but it was soon learned these women were being experimented on and were sent thereafter to the crematoriums. Dr. Perl made it her mission to save as many women as possible while she could. She performed secret abortions on the dirty, excrement-infested floors in the barracks with her bare hands. She explained to the expecting mothers that two lives would be lost if they went through with their pregnancy because becoming pregnant in the camps meant a death sentence was awaiting them.

Fertility = Sabotage = Resistance. Interestingly enough, pregnancy was not at all uncommon on these cursed grounds where pregnancy was supposedly “not allowed”. However, brothels were common and contraceptives were clearly not available to women. Male prisoners would often seek out sexual favors in exchange of goods that would help a woman survive at the camp. There were barracks specifically used by the SS to molest and rape Jewish women. “Their actions and feelings towards Jewish women created inner conflicts for the SS officers, leading to violence against the women, who were blamed for seducing the officers” (Holland, par. 5). Age was not a restriction either. Thousands of babies were born at Auschwitz but were almost all immediately executed upon exiting the womb. Dr. Perl saved many women from instant death with the hope that they would one day have a family of their own, outside of the hell they were living in. There are only two known infants who were born in the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp and survived. A one year old weighed in at six pounds and was so weak that she could never cry, which is how she survived. She was easy to hide because no one ever heard a sound coming from her. Her mother was dying due to starvation when she gave birth to her. We never hear these stories though, and we need to change the narrative.

IDENTITY

We seldom hear about the LGBT community when we talk about the Holocaust. I could even use the word ‘never’ if I wanted to because if we are being honest, the LGBT community is not commonly included in the narrative. Members of the LGBT community faced harsh, brutal treatment in concentration camps and were treated far worse than political prisoners, Jehovah’s witnesses, the Roma, criminals, and asocials. Lesbians were subject to black triangles and labeled as “asocials” instead of receiving the pink triangle which was meant to label a person as being gay. These pink triangles assigned to gay men were commonly used as shooting targets for the SS. Compared to gay men, lesbians were hardly viewed as a threat, but they were raped and “forced” to verbally change their sexual orientation. SS men found that lesbians were the easiest to sexually convert. Gay men in Germany were forcibly castrated. Boiling water was used to literally boil off their testicles. They were called in to local police stations where they were sodomized with the ends of broken broomsticks and the torture would not end until they bled. Gay men in the Holocaust were considered the “lowest of the low” but this is often omitted from history books and Holocaust literature.

Homosexuals are not Cowards. Willem Arondéus was an openly gay, anti-fascist resistance fighter. Arondéus was one of the very first to join the Dutch resistance and his underground organization provided Jews with fake identities. In 1943, he was responsible for the bombing of a public records office that contained a catalog with the names of hundreds of thousands of Dutch people residing in Amsterdam. This was important specifically in the case of Dutch Jews because Nazis were using the catalog to look into fake identities. He planned the attack on the records office with the help of other resistance fighters, many of them also openly gay. We do not mention the fact that he dressed as a German Army captain and walked fifteen men past guards to enter the records office. We do not mention the fact that Frieda Belinfante, a classical cellist, talented conductor, and open lesbian, was one of his main resistance fighters. The rebels marched into the building, they drugged the rest of the guards, and set up the explosives. They destroyed nearly a quarter of the public records office.

We need to talk about the fact that this moment, this decision, kept thousands of Jews from being deported and identified. Unfortunately, someone within the underground organization betrayed them and turned them all in. Arondéus said he acted alone in the bombing, but the Nazis executed him and the other thirteen resistance fighters anyway. The rest of the rebels managed to flee the country. Arondéus’ last words, spoken through his lawyer, were Homosexuals are not cowards. I have to write this in bold. I have to emphasize what was meant to be emphasized by Willem Arondéus. Homosexuals are not cowards. It is a rare opportunity that we get to hear these stories of justice, resistance, rebellion, and we need to change the narrative.

THE REBELS            

There is one last person I feel an intense need to talk about, and that person is Emanuel Ringelblum. I mentioned him earlier as someone we do not typically talk about and I want to end that. I feel it is important to address that there was a Jewish resistance and Emanuel Ringelblum was a huge part of it. Many people believe that Jews could have risen up against the Nazis and that they could have “actually done something”. Here is another ounce of proof that Jews resisted and rebelled and survived and actually did something.

The Archives. Ringelblum is responsible for the Oneg Shabbat Archives, better known now as Ringelblum’s Archives of the Warsaw Ghetto, which I will refer to as “the archives”. He was the inspiration behind the secret Oneg Shabbat Archives, which translates to “Sabbath pleasure”. Naming the archives “Oneg Shabbat” was technically code because Ringelblum and other archivists would meet late afternoons on the Sabbath, which is why the archives are named as such. During the day they would take in as much information as possible and write notes on what happened at night. The idea was to document the atrocities of the Nazis in the ghetto, and the archives played a huge role in memorializing those who passed on from starvation, those who were transported to Treblinka II. The archives have kept memory alive, stories, testimonials; they are living words that have survived. These stories, these documents are proof that the Holocaust happened, that there was a resistance, that people knew they might more than likely die, but they wrote anyway. If they were caught writing the archives, they would undoubtedly be killed, and they knew that. Most of the archivists who contributed to the Oneg Shabbat Archives passed away during the war, many of them deported to Treblinka II. This form of resistance is so significant and powerful because they did not resist with violence, yet these archives were a huge slap in the face for any Nazi, any bystander, anyone who was complicit with Nazi crimes because these archives proved that people knew they might die, it proved that people were not just dying because they were weaker or lesser or incapable; they were not dumb, they were not cowards. It proved that Jews were persecuted and it proved that they fought back in every way they could think of. If anything was going to survive persecution and death, it would be the truth. The Truth Meant Survival and Resistance. The one thing the Third Reich wanted to disappear more than the Jews was any memory of the Jews. Any memory of them resisting, rebelling, fighting back; any memory of them, any record of them living, any suitcase, pocket watch, or hairbrush that belonged to them. Anti-semites tried to strip Jews of everything they were, everything they had, every bit of their identity. There are two sides to the story of Jews during the Holocaust, and only two: Hope and Resistance. If Jews were so sure they were going to die, why would they try to fit their lives in little suitcases? Because they had hope. If Jews didn’t think and know they might die, they wouldn’t leave behind three milk cans worth of archives to keep their memory and stories alive. Keeping the truth alive was resistance. Ringelblum is important because he stripped the Nazis of their superficial identities. He stripped away the false importance that the Nazis gave themselves and he revealed the atrocities committed. All of the archivists revealed the cowards hiding behind the curtain, a curtain called “propaganda”. “The archive materials and Ringelblum's own written chronicles constitute the most comprehensive and valuable source of information we have” (“Emanuel Ringelblum”, 2018). Had Ringelblum not initiated the secret archives, we would not know a whole lot of what we do know now because of these documents. We probably wouldn’t know much of anything that transpired in the Warsaw Ghetto without these documents. We would not know a whole lot of what occurred in occupied-Poland. We would not know a whole lot of the truth without the Oneg Shabbat Archives. We never hear these stories though, and we need to change the narrative.

LACK OF ETHICAL REPRESENTATION AND MEMORIALIZATION      

We never hear these stories because people and governments feel threatened by the truth, they feel accused, they might feel ridiculed, they might be in denial. In Germany and Poland, I witnessed the way “homosexuals” who were persecuted during the Holocaust still are not ethically represented at memorial sites, at museums, by the tour guide at Auschwitz who spoke the words “homosexual rape” back to back in the same sentence to try to describe how one prisoner at Auschwitz sodomized and simply raped another man, neither known for being gay. I witnessed the way “homosexuals” are represented by a small concrete box, hidden off in a park, with a sweet video that truly does no justice to the people who were considered the lowest of the low in concentration camps and were treated as such; treated like target practice and science experiments. I witnessed the way an information panel at the Sachsenhausen concentration camp incorrectly included all members of the LGBT community under the same word, homosexual, when there was a photo of a young transgender woman pictured clearly right in front of me, but unless you have been to these places, you would not know of these stories, and I need to change the narrative.

Neglect.  I witnessed the way women were neglected at memorial sites. I witnessed the way the unborn were neglected at memorial sites. I witnessed the way it was common to hear that there were brothels at concentration camps, and I’ve read so many stories of women who saved lives in the concentration camps, yet we do not memorialize women as we do others. We categorize them under other groups of people, we steal parts of their identity that we do not want to ethically represent because “other people suffered too” and it “wasn’t just a war on women”, yet we have women being raped, being used for sexual favors, being killed upon arrival at concentration camps because being pregnant is a crime if you are considered an “undesirable”. Even German women were targets and were often forced to procreate to snowball the production of Aryan children, the opposite situation compared to that of a Jewish woman. I witnessed the way children were neglected at memorials. In the war, they were treated like adults, even though they were far from transitioning into adulthood. They were raped, beaten, abused, experimented on, and then discarded. If they were too young to work, they died in gas chambers. Some children worked in the camps at an age as early as five years old if they looked older enough, lying their way through the selection process to survive. Treated like adults then, barely memorialized now.

Knowing these stories that we do not talk about, I felt a moral obligation to address these issues and how a lot of these issues are still relevant to today. In Germany, memorial sites were neglected— blown-out speakers, waterproof lighting issues— not to mention, Nazi-era laws are still in place in the country to this day. In Poland, I met and spoke to locals who support the new Polish laws that are completely anti-semitic and are a sad example of Holocaust denial. I will not even begin to readdress what I mentioned about the tour guide at Auschwitz who referred to rape as “homosexual rape”. Ultimately, I think what made me feel uncomfortable in some of the cities I visited in Germany and Poland was the fact that there is still a lingering presence of what happened, yet people try to suppress it. It is almost as though there is no aftermath, and we are stuck in the past like it is still happening. It appears to be believed at memorial sites that so long as there is some contribution made to the memorialization of persecuted minorities that all is well, yet the memory of persecuted homosexuals is kept boxed in, closeted. There is no visible effort to protect the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe. People sit on the memorial, have picnics at the memorial site, on the concrete blocks that are a part of the memorial. There are signs promoting “Hitler’s [recreated] Bunker” in Berlin that surround the area where the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe is located. In regards to the educational tours, at least there is some contribution being made to spread the knowledge and awareness of what happened, but to call Auschwitz I “Auschwitz Muzeum” is unethical, uncomfortable, and desensitizing. In Oranienburg, Germany, one of the original meeting places for SS officers/commanders was repurposed as a city tax office. Their new police academy building is also repurposed SS property, and sits right in front of the Sachsenhausen concentration camp. Sachsenhausen is uncomfortably referred to as a museum as well. I understand that these are now historical sites and that there are exhibits at some of these camps, but I will never understand why we cannot just refer to them for what they were. When I visit these locations, I know exactly what happened and I do not view these places like they are museums, no matter how many exhibits there are in front of me. Real human hair is not an exhibit. Shoes that belonged to people is not an exhibit. The suitcases, the kitchenware, the glasses, the pocket watches. None of this belongs behind the wall of a glass case.

People died.

‘Museum’ is not the term used to represent a location where hundreds of thousands of real people died. Where human beings died.

CONCLUSION        

The truth cannot die. These stories cannot be made to disappear. No law can change the past, alter the past, nor can it convince me to ignore the past. I have seen what denial looks like at memorial sites. I have seen what denial looks like at museums. Because of this, I cannot ignore the truth, but I can change the narrative. I can share what I have learned, I can raise awareness, I can share the stories. I know that homosexuals are not cowards. I know that lesbians, women, children, Jews, European Roma, the resistance, the archivists… are not cowards. History knows this. History has seen this. Children and newborns survived Auschwitz when they shouldn’t have. Jewish women remained fertile when they shouldn’t have. Members of the LGBT community survived when they shouldn’t have. Jews survived when they shouldn’t have. Jewish lineage was passed on when it was meant to be cut off. History knows that the “victims” were martyrs, and the survivors were the greatest resistance of all. It is vital to share the stories of people like Dr. Gisella Perl, Willem Arondéus, and Emanuel Ringelblum. Spreading awareness is vital. Making note of unethical representation and memorialization is vital, correcting it is vital.

Memory will live on, as will the stories and the journal entries. Traditions will live on, lineage will be passed on, and the rebels will never really die. We cannot forget the stories that matter, the legacies that matter, and the people who changed the course of the Holocaust. There was a resistance. There was hope. We cannot let the truth die. We must preserve the truth, identity, history. Because if we do not defend history, it will be rewritten over and over again and the truth will be at risk. The Holocaust has truly nothing to do with the perpetrators and everything to do with the difference makers. It has everything to do with the survivors and the martyrs. It has everything to do with resistance and hope.

But this is never how the story goes, and we need to change the narrative. 

[chryso71]

Module: ILN2001 2020/21

Research Project

Chryso Yiallouridou

Introverts-Extroverts-Ambiverts

Today we live in a time where extrovert culture dominates our lives. It is a “celebrity-centric”, “model-centric”, and “presenter-centric” world where “outgoingness” reigns (Ahsan, 2019, p.29). The principles of the extrovert culture require people to be loud, bossy, bold, active, fun and adventurous. The goal is to be popular, to be liked, to be visible, to show a “know-it-all” personality, to… brand yourself. Small talk dominates over substantial conversation, false happiness and forced friendliness are ever present, bragging and excessive consumerism are the norm (Ahsan, 2019). People are judged by superficial criteria: their looks, their (pretend) hobbies, the stuff they buy, the way they spend their leisure time. Cain talks about the rise of the “Extrovert Ideal”, or the “omnipresent belief that the ideal self is gregarious, alpha and comfortable in the spotlight” (Cain, 2013, p.4). She explains that our cultural focus on extroversion has made introversion a second-class personality trait, “somewhere between a disappointment and a pathology” (Cain, 2013, p. 4). We learn to idolize the charismatic, outspoken, assertive, confident person and devalue the soft-spoken, quiet, reflective, reserved person.

In this world of extrovert tyranny, being an introvert is considered an insult. Introverted people are being oppressed, stigmatized, and forced to become loud and extroverted. They suffer “bullying, humiliation, exploitation, erasure, exclusion, alienation, discrimination, epistemic violence and disadvantage at the hands of the global system of Extrovert-Supremacism” (Ahsan, 2019, p.14). For many introverts, the pressure to conform to a culture of extroversion has costs for their mental and physical health, their personal lives, and their sense of integrity and authenticity in terms of the choices they have to make everyday. “Research suggests that acting falsely extroverted can lead to stress, burnout, and cardiovascular disease.” (Cain, 2012, p.22). Many social events for introverts are simply exhausting. Most of them are characterized by social rules that require you to “keep calm and carry on talking”. Everywhere extroverts are moving around at ease, making small talk, and laughing in clusters while the introverts are smiling weakly, nodding their heads, hunching their shoulders, and struggling just to find one person with whom they can be comfortable with.

Cain (2013) also states that most characters in teen sitcoms have clear extroverted personalities that make them popular and successful. Introverted characters in these movies and TV shows are portrayed as socially awkward and undesirable. These shows present only stereotypical portrayals of introverts as powerless and pathetic. The story usually emphasizes how introverted kids are trying to change in order to be more popular. The media’s underrepresentation or almost total omission of marginal social groups is defined as “symbolic annihilation” (Tuchman, 1979). Tuchman divided symbolic annihilation into three aspects: omission, trivialization and condemnation. Teen sitcoms have all three of these characteristics (Zhou, 2017). They either completely omit these characters, or present them in the most trivial roles (like the satellites of the shining extrovert stars), or condemn them as pitiful and pathetic. In her research, Zhou found that the representations of extroverts and introverts in these shows put extroverts in more powerful roles and the introverts in more passive and powerless roles. “Protagonists in contemporary teen sitcoms fit the criteria of extroversion: they are energetic, social, confident go-getters that live a glamorous, independent, exciting lifestyle and tend to have outsized personalities” (Zhou, 2017, p.28). According to Stuart Hall, representation gives a group of people their public identity; it teaches people how to read, evaluate, and understand a group of people and shows how relevant and important they are in society (Zhou, 2017). Therefore, the symbolic annihilation of introverted characters implies that introverted people are not worthy of appreciation and that extroverted behaviors are the acceptable norm in society.

Similarly, social media reflect a similar pattern. They encourage people to present a sense of self that is typically, bold, exciting, sociable, and outgoing. Social networking sites, like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube and others have provided a space for young people to share information about themselves with other users (and brag about how many “likes” they got). In these websites people control the image they present by selecting specific pictures of themselves smiling around friends or videos that most of the time are deliberately recorded showing themselves engaging in hobbies they never really take up. This is the ideal world for extroverts. They now have a worldwide audience and a technological device that helps them to manage the impressions that others make about them.

But let’s get things from the start. About 100 years ago Carl Jung suggested the most important distinction between personalities and defined extroversion/introversion from a psychological perspective (Jung, 1921). According to Jung, extroverts concentrate their interest on the external world (people and activities outside of them). They draw energy from social interaction, and they tend to be outspoken and sociable. They are friendly and sometimes impulsive, they love crowds, excitement, and risk-taking. Introverts focus on the internal. They find social interactions draining, and they need time alone to recharge. They value inner life, silence, contemplation, reflective solitude, intimate company, tranquility, peace (Ahsan, 2019, p. 15). If you’d ever decide to look at things through an introvert’s perspective, you’ll see that they spend their time learning new things, studying or even taking care of others. Nevertheless, they will never be considered as the “alpha” of their group but their roles are equally important (if not more important sometimes). Precisely because they don’t rush into conclusions, they can be wise and think with a clear mind. The phrase “think before you speak” could have even been created by an introvert herself addressing an extrovert.

Although extroversion and introversion are psychological terms, these concepts are used by ordinary people who label others based on their behavior and body language. This can lead to a lot of myths about how extroverts and introverts behave. One common myth is that introversion equals shyness. But, as Cain reminds us, “Shyness and introversion are not the same thing. Shyness is the fear of negative judgement, and introversion is a preference for quiet, minimally stimulating environments” (Cain 2012, p.7). You could be a shy extrovert or a bold introvert. Why do people tend to link shyness with introverts? First, because to the outside world, shyness and introversion seem to be the same thing, and second, because our society is against both traits. In addition, a shy person that was once an extrovert, could slowly become an introvert since life experience usually changes people towards being more quieter and self-contained and less in need of excitement. Take for example the stereotypes that we have created about introverts: we label them depressed and afraid to “seize the day”, go on adventures, take risks and speak up for themselves. These stereotypes do not exactly imply an active guy who likes to go out and experience life (and who also happens to be an introvert and enjoy spending time by himself). Being an introvert has a lot to do with being mentally engaged with your inner world and very little (if not nothing) to do with being shy or depressed.

A second misperception of introverts is that they are often considered asocial. Introverts tend to make friends more slowly than extroverts and extroverts tend to make friends more quickly (kind of like going swimming in early May; some will go into the water inch by inch and others will run and dive into the icy water straight with their head first). However, when you find yourself having a small friendly conversation with a neighbor or better yet, a random stranger (a barista, a cashier), even though it may cause positive feelings it doesn’t necessarily mean that you should be forced to party or socialize with them more often; too much of that could feel exhausting for someone who is an introvert. It should be clarified though that just because introverts get overwhelmed around many people this doesn’t stop them from having fun, learning and engaging in all sorts of activities. They are completely capable of experiencing the state of “flow”, as Csikszentmihalyi defined it, “when you feel totally engaged in an activity — whether long-distance swimming, song-writing, or ocean sailing. In a state of flow, you’re neither bored nor anxious, and you don’t question your own adequacy.” (Cain, 2012, p.23). Besides that, nobody doubts that introverts are perfectly able to develop nurturing relationships with their family and close friends, and spending time with loved ones is never exhausting and it doesn’t make anyone feel socially drained. As Cain put it, “If you don’t cast your social net too wide, you’re more likely to cast it deep — which your friends and family will appreciate.” (2012 p.25).

Interestingly, Jung also said that all of us have both sides, but one side is more dominant than the other. Well, this detail was missed, and until recently, psychologists and behavioral scientists divided the world into these two opposite types of people. Today the conversation shifted to include a third personality type, that of the ambivert. Petric states that introversion and extroversion “are part of a single, continuous dimension of personality. Most of the personalities can be measured somewhere between two extremities. The most adaptive personality traits have ambiverts, because they exhibit both introversion and extraversion, depending on the situation”. An ambivert is someone who has qualities of both personality types and can switch from one to the other depending on their mood, the circumstances they are in and their goals. Ambiverts, Bernstein (2015) notes, are like being “bilingual”. They speak both languages of introversion and extroversion. They can move between being social or being solitary, speak up or listen carefully, and turn inward or go outward according to the situation. If you think about it, aren’t we all ambiverts? Haven’t we all found ourselves at times feeling good around other people and at times wanting to crawl into a cocoon and disappear? An introvert may be reserved around strangers but can be highly energetic or even bossy (see my sister) around certain people (family, close friends, or their partner). An extrovert may enjoy being around others but there are times when even those hyperactive types need time alone to recharge. Introvert, ambivert and extrovert constitute a spectrum of personality traits rather than clear-cut personality types. In any case, both Cain (2013) and Ahsan (2019) challenge us to recognize and celebrate the unique qualities of introverts and give them space to flourish and find a voice.

References

Ahsan, H. (2019). Shy Radicals: The Antisystemic Politics of the Militant Introvert. Book Works.

Bernstein, Elizabeth. "Not an introvert, not an extrovert? You may be an ambivert." Wall Street Journal (2015).

Cain, S. (2012). The power of introverts. TED: Ideas Worth Spreading.

Cain, S. (2013). Quiet: The power of introverts in a world that can't stop talking. Broadway Books.

Jung, C. G. (1921). Psychologische typen. Rascher.

Petric, Domina. "Introvert, Extrovert and Ambivert."

Tuchman, G. (1979). Women's depiction by the mass media. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 4(3), 528-542.

Zhou, Y. (2017). Are Introverts invisible? A Textual Analysis of how the Disney and Nickelodeon Teen Sitcoms Reflect the Extrovert Ideal.

[confrontingthetruth]

Berlin Memorials and Museums

Berlin, Germany

3/12/2018

I appreciate the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe and the Memorial to the Murdered Sinti and Roma, but I do not appreciate certain aspects of the memorials. For example, why is it that they are “Memorial[s] to the Murdered…”? Why the murdered? It provides the assumption that people never fought back, and they did fight back. Not to mention the neglect at these memorials: simple details that were a little too random, such as damaged lighting and speakers that were not working. Simple flaws that made me think, “Is this intentional? If not, what is the intent?”...

I have my criticisms in regard to the memorial constructed in dedication to the murdered “homosexuals” as well. In fact, I have a problem with the fact that not everyone arrested for being “homosexual” was gay. There were bisexual individuals, transgender individuals, lesbians. Women were not even regarded to as “homosexual”, even if they were lesbians. They were considered “asocial” and assigned black triangles to identify them as such. The memorial was a small concrete box, tucked away and hidden, that truly closeted the memory of persecuted LGBTQ+ identifying individuals.

I also do not understand why there is a whole museum dedicated to Hitler and the Third Reich. The ‘Topography of Terror’. Does this not unethically represent the Holocaust? Does this not present propaganda and photos taken by the Nazis? Why does Hitler need a whole museum dedicated to his merciless plan to conquer and destroy European Jews and other people deemed “undesirable”? Is this for education purposes, or a disguised relic?

It was uncomfortable to recognize this.

[givemefuckingv-bucks-blog]

“Men Should Die!”

DYSTOPIA: what would a women’s society look like?

I will make quotations from this old blog: https://witchwind.wordpress.com/2014/10/07/utopia-what-would-a-womens-society-look-like/ “I often muse about all the things that we’d need to change about patriarchy if we abolished men’s rule over women and the earth. Everything and every single aspect of social organisation is so much the opposite of how it should be, it’s dizzying to even begin to think about all the things we should stop / change. Mostly it’s about men stopping from doing harm. But stopping men isn’t enough because beyond that there is the entire world to relearn, to heal, and our entire society to rebuild. We would be faced with the immense task of replacing all the misogynist, genocidal, biocidal practices men have ordered our society with for eons. So many of us now are acculturated, cut from land, nature and from one another. Before we do anything, the very first measure to adopt is to take all men out of all positions of decision-making immediately, and actually out of any kind of social, professional position whatsoever.Major serial killers, serial torturers, pimps, pornographers, severe domestic abusers, serial rapists, genocide planners, biocide planners and pedocriminals across the world will simply be euthanised: the decisions will be taken by women in a mass world tribunal for patriarchal crimes. This is by far the best solution, and is the most legitimate, ethical way of reducing male population to more reasonable levels. Such men would otherwise forever pose a threat to women, children, animals, the earth and society as a whole, and we know they have no chance of ceasing their violent behaviour after having reached such an advanced stage of sadism and sociopathy. It would be reckless to spend space, resources and energy in keeping them alive in prisons.All of men’s (alive and euthanised) belongings, property, resources and land will be confiscated from men and handed back to female care and supervision – property rights over land will be abolished. You can’t own land!” (Alright, so does this mean just do whatever you want and you can ‘trespass’ on your enemies’ property?) “ All men at least above 15 (or younger if very asocial) should live separately from women and children, on their own in small huts or studios, isolated from one another and scattered around so that women can keep an eye on them (they should never be in groups or packs, that would be illegal). So it would also be illegal for male adults to impose their presence on females, girls and children. Men would have to care for themselves on their own: food, laundry, etc. No male above his age of puberty would be allowed to receive any kind of service from a female. Their life expectancy would probably drop to the age of 40, but that’s how things should be. Women’s life expectancy without men would rise to 130 years at least.” (No, the world would economically crash because you can’t own, remember, a thing.) “In order to keep all men and post-pubescent boys busy, we’d send them to clean up the vast amounts of detritus, pollution and toxic wastes men have littered and almost killed the world with.” (Remember, women did this along with men.) “Much of the damage to the earth is irreversible, however with a great deal of effort and genius, women will find sustainable, natural and simple ways of healing a lot of the damage men have caused, and send men off to do the dirty work. No man will be allowed to take any decision without female guidance. We know what happens when men decide on their own! DISASTER.” (No, when men decide on their own, pretty much you either get a pizza or complete a treaty or meeting.) “Fathers’ rights will cease to exist. There is no such thing as fatherhood — as we all know, it’s a myth. Men will necessarily lose all and any power to dominate and control women’s reproductive capacities.It’s the inalienable right of each woman to control every phase of her reproduction and life creation. Abortion will be possible at any stage of pregnancy, however there will hardly be such a thing as undesired pregnancy since there won’t be any men forcing pregnancies on us any more. Abortion will nonetheless be recognised for the trauma, mutilation and loss of life that it is. The number of children and human population will naturally decrease to sustainable levels, so will the number of males born. Women will be free to experiment parthenogenesis or procreation with two female eggs.“ (That won’t work, you’ll have to have hetero coitus. You’ll pretty much die out after the last pregnant woman gives birth.) “ All relationships of authority, domination and subordination will be abolished between all women of all ages. We will be able to recognise each other’s strengths, expertise, guidance and capacities (or lack of) without it implying superiority, inferiority, veneration or lack of respect. We would find each other beautiful. We would live our friendships, love and affection for women unhindered. All oppressive male institutions will be abolished after men have been retrieved from them. We obviously won’t keep these institutions. They will return to the nothingness that they belong, just as a distant, bad memory.  No more military, no more army, no more wars! It would be illegal for men to hold weapons. Global peace would be the immediate consequence. Most weapons will be destroyed (or recycled into something else), such as weapons of mass destruction, anti-personnel mines, tanks, machine guns, all manners of terrestrial, marine and air-bombers, and all the many disgusting things men have invented. For the remaining weapons such as guns or blades, women will hold exclusive right of use over them in order to defend ourselves from men, from the risk of them taking power over us again.” (Think about the Jihadist women and terrorists. Get ready to die, b17(|-|.) Feel free to read the rest of the article: https://witchwind.wordpress.com/2014/10/07/utopia-what-would-a-womens-society-look-like/

[thecreativecollection]

“The human masses sealed off in [refugee, labor, or concentration camps] are treated as if they no longer existed, as if what happened to them were no longer of interest to anybody, as if they were already dead.” —Hannah Arendt   It is common today to lump together all the various kinds of camps employed by totalitarian and pre-totalitarian regimes. But Arendt distinguishes at least three kinds of camps. The refugee camps, used both in totalitarian and non-totalitarian countries, simply work to keep the “undesirable elements of all sorts — refugees, stateless persons, the asocial and the unemployed” invisible and out of sight; the labor camps, as they existed in the Soviet Union, combined neglect with the chaos of forced labor to create a Purgatory, a gateway to Hell; and finally, the extermination camps perfected by the Nazis, which sought not only physical extermination, but also to reduce living itself to the “greatest possible torment,” opened the gates to Hell. All three types of camps share one goal in common, according to Arendt: “the human masses sealed off in them are treated as if they no longer existed, as if what happened to them were no longer of interest to anybody, as if they were already dead.” The point of these camps is to enact a terror that “enforces oblivion.” —Roger Berkowitz

lareviewofbooks.org/article/arendt-matters-revisiting-ori...