#and i've seen understandable and valid points and opinions from people using both labels

[statisticalcats2]

Hey guys, any American politician in a high spot is gonna be some flavor of Zionist.

And we're gonna deal with the reality of that and treat people fairly and not hold them to different standards depending on if they're a Jew or a gentile, right? .....Right?

[avissapiens]

Avis' Subject Symposium

A Crash Course in Trance Pt 1: Files.

(Art by Acro @sodalite96/https://twitter.com/sodalite96 Used with their permission. Go check them out!)

So often new subjects come to me and they don’t know the first thing about trance. None of its mechanics or methods, and so it can be very daunting for them; to step into such a wide abyss without knowing what to expect and what is expected of you. Many of them, even experienced subjects, expect that 100% of the work is and should be done by the Hypnotist. In truth both parties, the hypnotist and the subject, must be willing and able. But while it’s more readily apparent what must be done in order for a tist to be successful in their endeavors, many subjects/potential subjects can have a hard time understanding what it takes to get the most out of their trance, both from pre-recorded files, and from live sessions with a hypnotist. So, I’m here to give you what is in my opinion, the essential Crash Course to Trance, starting first with trancing to files.

Location

Find yourself somewhere nice, darkened and quiet, where you know you won’t be disturbed. This is already a hard task for a lot of subjects, living with other people always increases the chance that one might barge in on you, eyes glazed over, drooling all over yourself. Or that someone’s reckless pounding from above might shake the abyss so thoroughly that it takes you out of trance. But here is the thing I will stress. While physical quiet is a good idea as it allows you to focus on the words and suggestions streaming into your head. What matters so much more is internal peace and quiet. A location where you can feel at ease and safe and secure in yourself. A locked bedroom surrounded by mountains of pillows. Your favorite plush armchair that threatens to swallow you almost as well as the Abyss of Trance. The peaceful morning route on the train whose path you know so well that you can be lulled into trance just by the rumbling vibrations of the tracks beneath your seat. Wherever you can be comfortable.

The ideal location for trance I'm sure does exist in some government facility or therapists office somewhere, where you can be dropped into an isolation tank and be brainwashed clean. But most of us will never encounter that. So what matters then is the ideal mindset for trance, which is one of peace, safety, trust and assurance.

Equipment

This is one of the reasons so many love using files. Because its barrier to entry is so low. All you really need is something to play the file on and a place to listen. This is in contrast to working directly with a tist where you need, at the very least, A good internet connection, maybe a camera, Another person who you trust and who might be wildly inconsistent. Or working in person which probably will require a whole location and time-table to get set up. No, Files are relatively simple and they are no better or worse than live sessions for certain purposes. However, like all simple things, they can be elevated by improving its ingredients. A box cake from the store and a home-made chiffon are functionally the same, but their difference comes in the ingredients and technique.

So for trance I recommend spoiling yourself a little, at the very least buy yourself some decent quality over-ear headphones. Many file-makers (myself included) add frequencies and binaural beats underneath the main track. These serve the purpose of training your own brain’s waveforms to a certain frequency, thus more easily taking you into trance. But they can only be detected and properly registered with some good headphones. Additionally, The encapsulation of headphones provides a more immersive experience, isolating you and transporting you through the trance experience like you are in your own little world. Trust me. $600 studio headphones aren’t needed, But a good quality wired $40 headset goes a long way and is multi-purpose. A decent quality chair or mattress also will serve you well, not just in trance but in life.

Focus

Trance is a very tricky state that, like all things, requires practice and patience to master. Staying in trance is like a tightrope walk, teetering gently between the realm of consciousness and awareness, and the oblivion of total subconscious and sleep. It is the liminal space between the two, that subconscious space that makes trance and hypnosis possible. It is the state where your mind is most open to total suggestion and where magical things can happen. So how does one walk the line between these two modes of being? The answer is focus. Or rather Half-focus. Focusing without focusing. With descriptions like that it can sound like some kind of Zen riddle, but that is often what it feels like sometimes. Now this is not a laser focus like you would expect in a classroom setting, no one is being tested here. It's a more gentle and subtle focus. Like focusing on the world around you. Focusing on the wind on your face, the rise and fall of your lungs; On the way your body just goes loose and slumps over. The trick is to go in and to follow along, to listen and pay attention and try to comply with the suggestions given at first. Suspend your disbelief and engage with it unironically and without pretense. If you notice yourself drifting, don’t try to force it back to focus. Simply let it explore where it wants and to carry on organically. Nothing in trance needs to be forced. Simply focused on and allowed to happen.

Many subs oscillate in trance, their minds ebbing and flowing like a Sine wave; wavering in and out of trance, one minute aware, the next minute completely blank and asleep, and then for a brief moment in bliss. But it averages out to trance at the end of it. One must also not fear dropping out of trance. Focusing too much on that eventuality makes it a self fulfilling prophecy. Just Focus-not-focus-half-focus and enjoy yourself.

Apprehension

So many subjects look at files and their mind begins to spin with endless questions and anxieties. Worries about “losing themselves” or “changing too much” or “doing things they don’t want to do.” It’s a valid set of concerns for a new subject, uninitiated in the true mechanics of trance and only knowing of hypnosis what is shown in the media. Evil villains and monsters brainwashing our heroes to do horribly enticing and arousing things. So ingrained is this idea that it even crossed over into the allure of hypnosis files. And while I won’t say it's impossible for that to happen, I have 3 comments on it to ease your mind. First, with Files, one of the best things about it is that the subject gets to control practically every single aspect of the experience. When you do it, how many times you listen, and whether you listen at all to begin with. While all files should be clearly labelled with Content and trigger warnings and given an explicit summary of what they are and what they do, we know that is not the case. The amount of “Mystery files” I've seen on various forums irks me to no end. But it appeals to some people. However, for those who are not particularly fond of surprises you have the absolute power to review the file before you trance to it. You can give it a fully aware walk through, or just jump through segments to look for anything that doesn’t suit your taste.

Once you’ve done that however you might still be conflicted about some content. Not openly averse to it, but unsure. Dumbing down and IQ reduction are probably number one on this list. People are so terrified of somehow losing everything when they learn to stop overthinking things. For these concerns my second point suggests Introspection. Ask yourself “Why do I/Don’t I want this?” “Is it really as bad as my anxiety is making it out to be?” Because if you like something a lot, and really want it, then why should you deny yourself it out of fear? Even aside from dumbing, many desires are tinged with this air of guilt or fear. Terrified to acknowledge or grab hold of what we truly want and own up to it. In my estimation Hypnosis can be one of the best ways of dabbling with those desires because in trance there is no shame or judgement. Finally, my 3rd point says you don’t have to worry. If you really don’t like a suggestion you can always leave it behind. Your mind has built in fail-safes to reject suggestions you haven’t agreed to. A file cannot make you do something unless you want it, at least subconsciously. The old cliche goes “All Hypnosis is Self-Hypnosis” and what that fundamentally means is that as a subject you are the one who decides what happens. You consent and go along with things and allow them to happen to you. It is your desire, your focus, your arousal and your own subconscious that allows hypnosis to work. Subjects have more power than they know. I really hope it assists some people in vibing better with trance and files. I’ll be putting out another version for Live hypnotists later this month.

Thanks again to Acro for letting me use their Art, definitely go and support them on twitter. And If you want to support the creation of more hypnotic experiences that might help you practice that balance of focus then you can do so by subscribing to my Patreon, or to my Youtube channel. And if you want to interact more closely with me and my supportive community you can join my Discord server.

[anarmorofwords]

Hi! You're probably not going to like this ask, but before getting into it I'd just like to say that this isn't meant as Kamala hate or anything, and I don't really want to offend.

Having said that, wouldn't it make sense that we get to see how Kamala treated Anna after she came out? It's in all likelihood one of the things that's weighing on Anna the most.

Obviously Kamala had her valid reasons: her parents aren't as liberal as the Lightwoods, she believes (knows?) their love is conditional as she's adopted, she's not white and not being heterosexual could further any treatment she's suffered from being different... Her reasons have already been listed multiple times by multiple people. Kamala has the right to stay in the closet and fear coming out. And while that shouldn't be villianised, we can't forget that closeted people can harm those around them.

If Kamala had kept treating Anna like a good friend, rumour would've sparked, and even if it was denied, she'd have been harmed by merely associating with Anna. Especially with the life Anna began leading; she could have been labelled as one of Anna's 'conquests' by the Clave. That, as we've established, is detrimental for her safety.

But at the same time, it would create a breach between Anna and Kamala. And Anna had the right to be hurt by it and weary of it when Kamala said she wanted a relationship.

If we look at it from that perspective, Anna's actions (though inexcusable in how they treated Kamala --who was also at fault for not accepting a negative for four months) make sense. Kamala wasn't only a fling of a week*, but also the girl she lost her virginity with, who asked her to be her secret (until she married Charles, after which Anna's affections would be discarded), who hid her sexuality for two years and sat back while Anna suffered from homophobic commentary, and who now wants a relationship hidden from most of the people that know her.

Kamala shouldn't be forced to come out; but the harm that can do to the women she may engage with is reflective of what happens nowadays. I can mostly think of examples with gay men, so my apologies in advance. But how many women have seen their marriages ruined by their husband having affairs with men?

Creating characters that reflect a toxic part of the 'hidden' LGBT community shouldn't be seen as hating or villinifying. Thomas isn't out and he isn't labelled a villain by the narrative --because his actions don't harm anyone. The hate Alastair gets in-universe is because of his past as a bully, not because he's gay. Matthew's not fully out and he isn't villianised --like Thomas, because the decisions he makes to keep his sexuality hidden don't impact anyone negatively.

I'll even go as far as saying that not even the narrative villianises characters like Kamala and Charles. If it were, they'd be seen more like Grace in Chain of Gold. We'd see how Kamala's actions are affecting Anna's in more ways than anger (that in itself put the fandom against Anna), and the characters would note so. We wouldn't see scenes were Cordelia empathised with Charles, nor Matthew said he loved him.

Be it as it may, Kamala and Charles represent ugly parts of being closeted that can naturally occur when someone is in their position. LGBT people are human. Humans, when put into very difficult situations (and Charles risks his career; Kamala her safety), can make decisions that harm those around them. Consequently, the people they're harming have a right to feel, well, harmed in whatever range of ways --this goes mostly for Alastair, and very partly for Anna, whose treatment of Kamala was horrible.

Readers need to understand what is pushing these 'villianised' characters to harm (again, mostly for Alastair) the more prominent characters and go beyond how they are instantly depicted. Because these are complex characters based on complex real people influenced by very ugly realities we will move on from someday, but sadly not yet.

By the way, Charles and Kamala's situations aren't that similar beyond the closeted thing, but I crammed them together because of a post I saw you reblog.

Please understand I'm not justifying Charles's actions; that I understand the pain he's put Alastair through, and know that he shouldn't ever be near Alastair. Nor am I trying to justify Anna's actions nor hate on Kamala.

I'll just finish my pointless rant by adding that I do think cc has sensitivity readers. I think she asked a gay man to go through tec (I don't know if he still revised her other books, though), and know she asked POC's input when writing someone for their culture. I don't know much beyond that, but I doubt who revises her stuff is up to her. Wouldn't that be something the publisher is responsible for (honest question)?

*I've also noticed people using the argument that they didn't know each other long enough for Anna to harbour such ugly emotions towards Kamala, but Kamala also remembered Anna pretty deeply and is 'in love' with her. I just wanted to say that considering cc writes (fantastical) romance where someone can ask a woman they met two months ago marriage, stressing over time spaces doesn't make much sense. Just my take.

hi!!

alright, where do I start? probably would be best with stating that while I can analyse Kamala's situation with what I know/see/read about racism and discrimination and reasonably apply things I've read/heard from PoC to the discussion, as well as try to be as sensitive about it as possible, I'm still a white woman, so not a person that's best qualified to talk about this.

that being said - if someone wants to add something to this conversation, you're obviously more than welcome to, and if there's something in my answer that you don't agree with or find in some way insensitive or offensive - please don't hesitate to call me out on that.

back to your points though: (this turned into a whole ass essay, so under the cut)

I don't think Anna shouldn't be able to reminiscent on Kamala's behaviour/reaction to her coming out, or be hurt by it. what bothers me is the way CC talks about it - I can't remember the exact phrasing, but the post where she mentioned this suggested something along the lines of "you'll see how Kamala sided with the Clave and didn't defend Anna after her coming out", therefore putting the blame on Kamala and completely disregarding the fact that Kamala wasn't in position to do much at all. It suggest that their situation was "poor Anna being mistreated by Kamala". therefore I'm afraid Kamanna's main problem/conflict will remain to be portrayed as "Anna having to allow themselves to love again and forgive Kamala", while Anna's shortcomings - and Kamala's vulnerable position - are never discussed. I think it would be possible to acknowledge both Kamala's difficult situation and the possible hurt her behaviour caused Anna without being insensitive towards Kamala's character, but it would take a really skilled - and caring - author to do both of the perspectives justice. CC would have to find a balance between being aware of the racism/prejudice Kamala faced/ writing her with lots of awareness and empathy, and still allowing her to make mistakes and acknowledging them. As it is however, I'm under impression that she's just treating it as a plot device, a relationship drama.

I'd say no one expects characters of color to be written as flawless or never making mistakes, it's mostly the way these mistakes are written and what things these characters are judged/shamed/

And that's - at least in my understanding and opinion - where the problem is. it's that the narrative never even addresses Anna's faults, and portrays Kamala as the one that caused all - or most of - the pain, without ever even acknowledging her problems and background.

White characters in TLH make mistakes and fuck up - because they're human and they're absolutely allowed to - but the thing is, non-white characters aren't afforded that privilege. Anna's behaviour is never questioned - none of it, shaming Kamala for not being able to come out, dismissing her desire to be a mother, or any of the questionable things she did in ChoI. Same with Matthew, James, Thomas. Alastair and Kamala however? they're constantly viewed through their past mistakes, and forced to apologize for them over and over, forced to almost beg for forgiveness. Moreover, those past mistakes are used as a justification of all and any shitty behaviour the other characters exhibit towards them now, which is simply unfair and cruel. They're held to a much higher standard.

So I'd like to say that yes, Kamala was in the wrong to keep nagging Anna after numerous rejections, and she was in the wrong to not inform Anna about Charles prior to them having sex - but that doesn't give Anna a free pass to constantly mistreat Kamala. And let's be real, Anna isn't stupid - while at 17 she could be naive and uninformed, I can't imagine how after years of hanging out with the Downworlders and numerous affairs and being out and judged by the Clave she's still so ignorant about Kamala's situation. I definitely think she's allowed to be hurt, but to still not understand why Kamala did what she did? Anna isn't blaming her for not telling her about Charles earlier - which would be fair - but instead for refusing to engage in an outright romance with her. She's being ignorant - and consciously so, I think.

Overall, I think you're definitely right about how coming out - or staying closeted - can be messy and hurt people in the process, especially in unaccepting environments/time periods, and I've seen enough discourse online to know there will never be a verdict/stance on this that will satisfy everyone. I, for one, would really like to refrain from putting all the blame on a single person - but, at least the way I see it, CC is pointing fingers. maybe not directly, but she is. Kamala, Alastair and Charles have no friends or support systems, and the only people in the narrative that defend them are themselves (ok, Cordelia does defend Alastair from Charles, but not from shitty takes about him and his "sins"). Also, sorry, but I don't like how you say "hid her sexuality for two years and sat back while Anna experienced homophobic comments" - it sounds very much judgemental. Kamala had every right to do that? The fact that she slept with Anna doesn't means she owed her something, and certainly not coming out and most probably destroying her life, or even defending her at the - again - expense of her own reputation, or more possibly safety.

As for Charles - it's a different issue here, at least imo - I fear that it'll be implied that his refusing to come out will is his main "sin", and therefore not something he can be judged for, which ironically, will be villainizing, but mostly will mean his actual sins are dismissed. This is where the scene with Cordelia feeling a pang of sympathy for him comes into play, and it worries me. I've never hated Charles for not wanting to come out, but rather for, let's see - grooming Alastair, disregarding Alastair's needs and feelings, disrespecting his mother, being a sexist prick, being low-key far-right coded "make Shadowhunters great again" etc.

As for sensitivity readers - I'm no expert, so I don't think my input is worth much. From what I've gathered from multiple threads/discussions on twitter, tho it is probably consulted/approved by the publisher, many authors push for that - and authors less famous and "powerful" than her. I'm not a hater, but seeing fandoms' opinions on much of her rep, I think she could do better. Because if she does have sensitivity readers, then they don't seem to be doing a great job - maybe they're friends who don't wanna hurt her feelings? Or maybe she thinks a gay guy's feedback will be enough for any queer content - which, judging by the opinions I've seen from the fans, doesn't seem to be true.

Again, these are mostly my thoughts and I'm more than open to reading other opinions, because *sigh* I really don't know how to handle this.

Bottom line - I really really don't want to be hating on the characters in general, playing God in regards to judging the struggles of minorities, or even criticising the characters too harshly for being human, flawed etc. What my main issue is is how CC handles those complex and heavy topics.

I hope I make sense and this answer satisfies you somehow - I also hope someone better equipped to answer might wanna join this conversation.

* I desperately need a reread of TLH before I engage in any more conversations like this, but I didn't wanna leave you hanging. So yeah, I might be remembering things wrong. Again, let me know, I'm very much open to being corrected as well as to further discussion.

* I use she/her pronouns for Anna because that's what she uses in canon

[mallowstep]

What are your opinions on forbidden relationships in Warriors? I've seen people label it as a "trope" because of how common this is. Some find the forbidden romance aspect intriguing, though others find it extremely repetitive and old

I'd like to know your thoughts!

hm. well, it is a trope. i mean, there's an average of one major one a series, right? greysilver, leafcrow (and others, but that's the big one), heatherlion (and implied others), tigerdove, idk i don't remember anything from avos but violetshine luv her but there's probably something, bristleroot. dotc doesn't count bc well it's dotc.

anyway.

definitely a trope.

but that's not a bad thing.

what i think people don't give warriors enough credit for is that these are not all the same forbidden romance. most of them are handled in different ways and bring up different conflicts. i understand why people are tired of them, but let's not discredit one of the only good things in warriors romance: that they make forbidden relationships different.

like, with grey and silver, it's about loyalty and responsibility. leafcrow is just bad idea central, both heatherlion and tigerdove are about responsibilities and young cats, and they have two different answers, and bristleroot is challenging the whole idea from the start.

so like. give credit where credit is due: we're not doing the same (forbidden) relationships again and again. i don't see enough people talk about that.

okay so it turns out i have um. a lot of thoughts about this. idk i just kept writing and now it's over 2k words. so you know. under the cut: matthew does half-baked media analysis to talk about why the code and cats' relationships to it are misunderstood. while actually staying on topic.

anyway from here on i'm just going to say relationship/romance, and understand that i'm generally talking about the forbidden kind. also i'm talking exclusively within the realm of warriors romance, which is, on average, bad. so when i say "X is good," i don't mean "X is good in general," i mean "given what we have, X is good." just to be clear.

right! basically, this is a tool. it creates tension and drama, and that's fine. warriors is a soap opera, remember. soap operas use secrets and relationships and all sorts of plot devices over and over again. warriors is not Serious. it can be dark. it has serious moments. but it is not a Serious Book Series for Serious Kids. it is a soap opera for Future Theatre Kids. yeah?

from that perspective, i'm a-ok with forbidden romance. (also, as a mini-aside, it creates some much-needed genetic diversity when kits are involved.) and again: all of the major relationships are different, so i think that's better than a lot of people give it credit for.

yeah, heatherlion and greysilver and tigerdove are all about the same general idea (loyalty and responsibility), but they all have different circumstances and different resolutions.

so like? yeah. sure. why not?

plus, like, who's reading warriors for the romance? i separate the concept of "romance" from a "relationship" here: i like the relationships in warriors (ivy and dove tension my beloved), but i'm not here to read about tigerheart wooing dovewing. (yes, i do love the tigerdove scenes in oots. no, that's not because i think they're very good at being romantic.)

but i digress.

if warriors was a Serious Book Series for Serious Kids, i'd have a different take here. having been in an IRL forbidden relationship, i have the Personal Insight and Experience to say they're this weird mash of "very much how it feels" and "not at all how it feels."

tigerdove is probably my favourite bc it's the closest to my circumstances, and i think dovewing is a good pov. i like how she breaks up with him because it's a bad idea, but that's not the same thing as not feeling for him.

(heh. twelve-year-old me reading oots like "this will never apply to my life" what did you know)

but to the point, if warriors was serious, i'd point out that the consequences always seem to be internal. we haven't seen characters be punished for their actions. and so on.

but warriors is a soap opera.

and here's my actual thesis: we haven't seen characters be punished for their actions, because "forbidden relationships" are a normal and expected part of clan society.

like no, fandom-at-large, you're kind of missing the point. okay, you know how like. people complain about. idk. ivypool and fernsong being distantly related?

(third aside/very long ivyfern rant, i put a nice big "rant over" after it if you want to skip past it: they're third cousins. they share, max, 2.2% of their genetics. they are fine. do you know your third cousins? do you? yeah. and like. they live in a closed society. there is no one new.

i've never seen someone complain about forbidden romance and ivyfern at the same time, and i do generally agree we should have more mystery fathers, altho for a different reason, but like. idk. this bothers me.

their last shared relative was nutmeg. that's so far back. god. i get it, there was a prophecy saying they're related, but if you remember my rant about how dovewing shouldn't be a part of the prophecy because of how distantly related to firestar is, you know how i feel about that already.

complaining they're related and that's a problem is. deep breath here. it requires demonstrating that warriors has kept track of kinship all the way back to firestar's mother. and even if you wave that requirement, you still have to convince me they would care about that. this isn't a "they're cats, harold" situation, this is a "you would not know your third cousin even if you lived in the same town" situation.

i mean maybe you would. some people do. but my hometown has generations of people who married within its borders. you get as far as "cousin," maybe "second cousin" if you're feeling fancy. i'm not trying to make an always true statement, i just. every time i see someone complain about ivyfern being related, it strikes me as not understanding how extended families work?

i know third cousins isn't technically classified as a distant relative, but you have, on average, 190 third cousins. i feel so strongly about this i looked it up.

like i'm not. okay if you say, "I don't ship ivyfern because they are third cousins and that makes me uncomfortable" you are Valid. in general, you are all valid. i do not think you have to, on a personal level, be okay with ivyfern. you are free to do as you wish.

but. if you want to argue "ivyfern is a Bad Ship because they are third cousins" you have a hell of a burden of proof. simply saying "they share a great-great-grandmother" does not meet that, because like. yeah. we're all pretty damn related.)

(ivyfern rant over)

IVYFERN RANT OVER

right so. anyway. if you remove forbidden romance? you're forcing a lot more of those situations.

i've been messing around with modelling some small-scale fan clan-adjacent stuff to double-check the ratios for wbcd, and it's. it quickly becomes a necessity, is what i'm saying.

but i got distracted like. researching how related third cousins are. my point is not about that, that's like. a different topic. that i crammed into here because i have no self-control.

no, no, what i was trying to get to is: oakheart straight up tells us that cats have half-clan kits all the time, it's not a problem, no one talks about it. and that? that is exactly what we see modelled by warriors.

the only reason greystripe and silverstream have a problem is that silverstream dies and greystripe claims the kits. i feel very strongly that if she had lived, the kits would have been born and raised riverclan kits, that might, maybe, one day, guess who their father is.

we haven't had any half clan kits in a while, which yes! i think is a problem, but like. the fact that the three are medicine cat kits seems to be a bigger issue. which feels right.

and i'm not trying to argue what i think should be, i legitimately believe the text of warriors defends this, even in newer books which throw out a lot of the older world building in favour of more human-like conflict.

as readers, we are naturally following protagonists. we are following the interesting story. but imagine you're just a background riverclan cat. minnowtail, if you will. do you think, do you honestly think, anyone cares about minnowtail?

not in a bad way, just. if she's meeting up with mousewhisker at night, do you think anyone cares? of course not! no one cares. she's not a Protagonist. her kits aren't going to be prophesized about.

heck, finleap switches clans! and it's barely a big deal. it feels like one, but when's the last time anyone bothered dealing with it? that's what i thought.

(also i forgot like all of avos so that very last point might be a bad one if it is my argument stands i just literally do not remember anything in avos but violetshine. none. zero.)

but it's easy to get caught up with characters like hollyleaf and bristlefrost and forget that like. not everyone cares about the code. most of our protagonists do, because it's become mostly equivalent with being moral. and i have an essay draft titled "the code as religion vs the code as law" where i want to expand on this more, but i think like. that idea, that we as readers should use the code as a way of evaluating cats' behaviour, is flawed.

like, i'm not talking about being inconsistent with how that is applied. if you want to say, "the trial leafpool goes through for having half-clan kits is legitimate because of the code," i still think your approach is flawed.

because the cats themselves don't seem to think that way.

the code doesn't, to me, feel like the ten commandments. it does not feel like "you must do this to be a good cat."

rather, it feels like aesop's parables. "here are mistakes cats made and what we do instead of that."

i don't think the cats know the code the way we do. i do not think they memorize a list of rules as kits. i think they know what is and is not part of it, but i imagine they know the stories far more than the rules.

(i'm working on my lore stories to replace code of the clans.)

and even if that's my thoughts, i do think this is supported by the text. no one ever teaches the warrior code, cats just learn it in pieces. "don't waste food because we don't have enough to spare" is taught, not "there's a rule about food and starclan on the code."

that's why the whole arc of the broken code even works: the reason the imposter is able to manipulate things is because cats don't treat the code as a rigid set of rules and commandments, but guiding principles.

the parts of the code that we tend to focus on the most are relationships, apprentices, and battle. or that's my perception. i didn't do a poll to obtain that. there's also the leader's word, but readers don't usually think of that as a good rule, so i'm not including it.

but the parts the cats focus on most are food, territory, and the leader's word. which makes sense: those are basic needs: food, security, and...i don't want to say authority so much as some kind of social system. explaining it would be a whole thing. just trust with me, if you don't mind.

i don't think we have any real reason to believe cats care about half-clan relationships half as much as we do. yes, apprentices are chastized about it, but that's not really the same thing as being punished.

and it's hard to tell, because apprentices being punished has really fallen off, and that's kind of the problem with any argument i try to make about warriors, but.

wow.

i'm actually still on topic? i'm 2k words in and i'm still on topic? a day i never thought would come.

let's wrap this up. cats seem to care about half clan relationships in that: a) they lead to conflicted loyalties, b) they mess with borders and prey, and c) they are in the code as bad. in that order.

and again, if the code was some high and holy religious doctrine, we couldn't have the broken code as an arc. it does not work if the cats are already following it to a t, and know it word for word, because it's signfiicantly harder to manipulate people if they do.

not to the level the imposter does, at the speed he does.

and yes, you could argue that it's more bad writing, but. i think that discredits warriors. yeah, it sure has its fair share of bad writing, but i don't think that's in the way the imposter works. instead, he seizes on a big important doctrine that's nebulous, and uses that to control people.

and that? that feels much more interesting.

so with that in mind, i don't think the cats would care about your typical, non-protagonist forbidden relationship, and i don't think we should, either.

as far as a plot device, i think we're okay with what we have. don't get me wrong, i understand why people are tired of it, but i think we also should remember that warriors is not repeating itself. having multiple forbidden relationships is not repetitive. now, if medicine cats were having half-clan kits every series, i'd make a different argument.

but all of the major forbidden relationships have different outcomes, lessons, and circumstances, and for me, i think that's signficantly interesting.

i didn't really check sources and quotes for this, so like, if you spotted something wrong, feel free to correct me. my overall point stands, but there's a lot of warriors and i have a bad memory, so i could have missed somthing major.

[nightswithkookmin]

RE JIKOOK IS ESTRANGED

Them

Me

Lol

JUMP CUT ALERT: This is a continuation of an ongoing discussion behind the scenes.

DISCLAIMERS:

Article 19, UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Every person has the right to freedom of opinion and expression which includes the freedom to hold an opinion without interference through any media.

Misinterpretation of my opinion, my words constitute a violation of my human rights. Please do not take my words out of context, share it on another platform in furtherance of your own agenda. If you do hold yourself accountable first. You are the author of your own intentions and interpretations.

I do not intend malice by my words nor do I seek to be disrespectful of any member mentioned in here. I simply enjoy mentally stimulating conversations and thought provoking discussions.

Let the records show.

MATTER OF THE DAY

Thanks to everyone that's shared your thoughts on this matter with me and thanks to that person that brought this matter to my attention.

I haven't looked into it and I don't know how severe this issue is.

I think people have the right to believe in anything they want to believe in. Personally, I don't think Santa is real but clearly others do, doesn't mean I'm sane or that they are crazy.

I don't think discussions of this nature should be about who is right or who is wrong. Everyone's opinion is valid and holds true to their own delusions. Lol.

Frankly, I prefer this kind of ship wars to the slurs and abuses and they are distributing hard core porn now?? What is going on! Chileee.

I have never believed JK and Tae to be anything more than friends. At one point, I wondered if they were even friends at all lol but since they admitted to having had a falling out themselves at one point the topic is now moot.

Tae and JK have- had- have a really special bond. To me anyways. I always saw them as the evil power twins of BTS due their ability to come together to wreck havoc especially on Bang PD's scripts. Lol. I think I have mentioned this a few times now.

I smiled to myself when I heard them call themselves partners in crime. The bond is there no two ways about it- you either appreciate it for what it is or you don't. personally I love their bond. Can't stand their shippers but I love their bond. They keep the drama going for me- love it. Lol

The question has always been whether their bond is as profound as their shippers make it seem. I argue it's not and I will always argue it is not. Lol

I think it's only fair that they also question whether Jikook's bond is as profound as we make it sound. I really can't be mad at that. All is fair in love and war- at the very least we can agree to disagree.

I mean even Jikookers themselves question the extent of JK and JM's bond. Some think they are just very special friends and nothing more. I think I talked about this in my is Jikook real post when I mentioned labels and the degree of love between JK and JM?

We know JK and JM have a unique bond. The question then is how far does that bond go. Is it just platonic, romantic or something in between?

This is the question I was aiming to answer with my is Jikook real post. My objective was to try and dismantle all the nuances that keep us from seeing the 'truth' about Jikook- that they are real. At least the way I see them.

I talked about unrealistic expectations we have of Jikook, false conditionings that often leads us to see Jikook as something more than they are- the amplified Jikook. We get used to highlight reels of Jikook's interactions in edits such that we feel there is something wrong with them when we see them in real time.

I mentioned that Jimin's nurturing nature often also estops people from reading more into his relationship with JK. He is nurturing of everyone, JK ain't special- they argue, just as this person is doing.

I talked about Jimin's Idol persona, the facade of the boy in love with JK- Jimin's role within BTS since debut and how that can equally blind us into thinking Jikook is something more or less than they really are. I have a post dedicated to this topic sitting in my drafts so I will not go into the details of it here. Please look forward to that.

But this person's post touches on another aspect of Jimin's personality that I feel is one of the things that often keeps us from seeing his relationship with JK for what it really is- his inclination for professionalism.

I keep saying this, several times now, that Jimin's Idol persona to me seems well developed, elaborate and very elusive.

I have mentioned a few times how I think during Jikook break ups that they keep it civil and professional for the sake of the team and that you might not even notice the difference especially if you place high value on their skinship.

The skinship would be there, the cordiality and civility would equally be there- except for moments when they are fighting, that gets bloody. Lol. They are best friends at the very least. It is why it's important to reevaluate the metrics we use to determine whether or not they are a couple.

I wish I could dialogue with this person to understand her assessment of Jikook and what she is using to determine whether or not Jikook are a couple and what makes her think Tae and JK are. Know what I mean?

What makes her think Jikook were a couple before 2017? What makes y'all think Jikook are a couple at all? I would like to hear from y'all- but come at me with the skinship bit and I'll block you deadass. Lol

So on this person's post, I think I agree with her assessment of JM's persona but I don't agree with the Jikook have been broken up since 2017. And I think I understand where this is coming from... I think some of us do. Yes they had a few fights that year especially leading up to Jimin's birthday- August was it? but we all know JK more than made up for it with the damn GCFs. Lol. kindly visit the timeline, peruse as many content as you can and form your own opinion on it. This is just mine.

Are Jikook Jikooking all the time? Absolutely not. They are human too. They fight, they make up, they break up they get back together, they have introverted, extroverted moments, they go up, they go down- have bad hair days, it's all part of their dynamics I'm afraid. From my point of view of course.

I feel some people notice these things too and when they sense Jikook aren't in a good place they bow out and Jump ship- I don't blame them. They are shippers not supporters. What Jikook need are supporters not shippers- or maybe both, do you.

Could this person be one such people? DNF shippers? Given up on Jikook before the end of their story? I don't know. May be.

Jikook is not a fantasy that you ship. It's a relationship that you support. You can't escape into them. They are an ongoing love story- chapters close, chapters open, you just have to ride it out till the very end.

I think the challenge of their post for me is whether or not Jikook is a performance. Her post leans into the whole Jikook is fanservice bull especially in light of the recent photoshoot video which some are using as evidence Jikook don't 'click' when the cameras are off- the lies they tell on Beyonce's internet!

I think I have speculated on this and shared my thoughts on this whole Jikook is fanservice bit. I will delve deeper into it in my next post on Jimin's idol persona but as I've already said, Jikook is fanservice is equally a misnomer.

Yes Jikook does fanservice sometimes, but they are not fanservice. Fanservice is the cover for their relationship. It's their glass ceiling- nothing to see here folks just two snakes under glass. Keep it pushing. (Sorry. Couldn't help myself. Lol)

But you do raise a valid question, what is Jikook like when the cameras are not filming?

Is the mood of Jikook in that footage the general mood of Jikook behind cameras as Tuktukkers are claiming? They barely interact, JM doesn't pay much attention to Kook, yadda yadda yadda?

And the part that gives me a complex, that JK only interacts with JM when they are the center of attention. Huh???????????

Sigh.

I feel caught between a rock and a hard place on this one.

The theory you pointed out in support of this assertion isn't mine and I think I made it clear I didn't share the same thoughts on it. I said it was valid nevertheless. Chilee, this is hard. Lol

Yes JK is an introvert, Jimin is an extrovert, JM doesn't live for JK, all that is true and some Jikookers have said that too- so when you ask, if this is who they are when the cameras are off does that mean what they do when the cameras turn on is fanservice-

I-👁👄👁

I don't know the thought process that went into that theory so I can't confidently defend it. I'll ask? Lol.

Personally, I'd like to know whether or not they see the tension in that footage as tension in the first place. Chileee I don't know.

I see it as tension. Not a very serious one though. So we'd have to agree to disagree on that one.

But the part I can argue, the part I agree with is Jikook aren't hyper super duper lovey dovey on each other all the time. They aren't cuddly all the time. They have their moments of quiet- Jimin seems like the more affectionate kind who'd rub all over JK in the comfort of their homes but still...

If you ask me though, I think Jikook are tamer on cameras than they are behind scenes. I always talk about the fear and panic in the members' eyes when they see Jikook gravitating towards each other- it's probably because they know the extent of Jikook's shenanigans. They know how worse it can be because they've seen it all.

And when JK panics sometimes when JM gets closer too you just know dude is scared perhaps because of his Mochi chick's devil may care shamelessly in love policies- Jimin wild. Bless him.

I did say also that Memories 2019 is equally eye opening. These were censored bits. BigHit was holding all of that and giving us crumbs- stingy mfs. Bless.

All that said, again I don't think Jikook are hyper lovey on eachother behind the scenes. Another part I diverge from that view is that this is not exactly off camera. It was just behind the scenes of a photoshoot. Something we've seen a countless times.

This is not BTS's first ever behind scenes photoshoot. It's just a different angle that's all.

They were working. They were at work. This wasn't an alone private space for them so they can't base on this to say Jikook don't interact when the cameras are off.

The cameras were rolling. We saw them interact, JM was interacting with everyone the way he always does on camera all the time except he wasn't interacting with JK the way he does all the time, grainy footage or not- I mean let's call a spade a spade and not a big fat spoon. Lol

As to why he was doing that- let's just say there are many schools of thoughts.

My thought as I've said is JM was freezing JK out. I think with anyone that's recognized and is familiar with Jikook fights, that mood is all too familiar as I mentioned earlier.

If JM was being courteous and not mad at his man then he would have kept it 'professional' and done the 'fanservice' bit with Jk as per usual just as this person is saying since the cameras were still rolling.

Jikook is not fanservice. They are real.

I have refrained from providing a detailed analysis of that '5 minutes' footage for reasons I will explain later when I do share my thoughts on that footage- eventually. Some day.

But my hypothesis remains the same that I think Jikook were fighting or had a minor issue. As to why they were fighting, chileee I don't know. The confirmation bias in me feel it had something to do with JM's birthday but honestly it could have been over anything at all- dumplings, microphones- we all saw that slap on stage, a certain Iphone notification perhaps, did JinMin make a secret VLive without Kook again? Lol

There are plethora of reasons, I can only speculate on a few. And I think we've all seen Jimin when he is not 'Jimining' with the others, JK included. Take his mood with Tae at GDA for example- since this is not a VMin post I won't go into it.

But it seems they squashed whatever beef they were having on stage when JM extended his hands to Tae and they shaked it out.

We've seen him and Suga bicker too- which again, I am not gonna to get into out of respect for their shippers but I can point you to the On comeback VLive early this year when Suga touched JM and JM mouthed Hajima to him- which I think had something to do with what was going on with him and JK at the time but that is besides the point. Every shipper for themselves.

I contrast his 'fights' with Suga and V to show you the difference between Jimin being professional and courteous and Jimin being rah rah. He was sat next to suga, talking and laughing with him but snapped the moment Suga held his back.

He did the same in the Dynamite MV Vlive, smiling and laughing with Suga but the moment JK teased him with the Yoonmin comment his countenance fell.

Jimin is not that good of an actor if you ask me. I have said he is very Kumbaya in nature, often makes compromises for the sake of the team but that don't mean he is a pushover or one to trifle with- he scares me when he is mad. Lmho.

The scene in that footage didn't look to me as that he was being nice and courteous to JK- is that y'all's definition of professional courtesy? Damn.

If they were having a lover's squabble then the 'icy' mood of Jikook we saw in that footage is not the general mood of Jikook when the camera's are turned off.

I have to state again that I don't know much of what goes on behind the cameras and most of the things we see sometimes are equally missing context.

That been said we have seen enough of Jikook 'behind cameras' and they are more intimate than we can imagine. A certain cozy selfie at the back of an abandoned truck comes to mind. Whatever they were doing at the back of the track wasn't intended for the cameras judging from JK's reaction.

We've had glimpses of Jikook when they are not the center of attention enough to have a fair idea of what they are when cameras are off and I don't think it is that mood we saw in that footage.

We saw them at Jingle ball bell, towards the end of 2019. We saw them in their own space doing what they do best- making us feel single as fuck. Bless them.

We've seen them at awards, we've seen JK eating Jimin's ear nom nom to calm him down- like I would have just bought him icecream to calm down his nerves or rubbed his back but whatever JK. He is your man; you know him best. Good for him. Good for both of you. Now come back and feed us.

And the bit about JK only laughing with JM when he noticed he was on the Bangtan Bomb cameras in that footage- now that's nasty below the belts phony ass ass! I felt that one straight in my chest, shit. Lol

Dude was in a doghouse it seemed and I noticed them stealing glances at each other and.... sigh.

I just think JK was looking for an opening to warm his way back into JM's good graces- it's really nothing we haven't seen before.... sigh.

This is 2020 that narrative of JK hates Jimin, JK doesn't like JM needs to stop. It's dead. Pack it up. Chileee, y'all tried it with this one.

Jk is nice to JM only when the cameras are on him? Nice try.

JK is so fake and fraudulent he glared RM down till he stepped away from Jimin- again, in the very same photoshoot footage y'all swear to God is proof Jikook is not real.

Find it. RM stood next to JM. Looks up see's something- or someone. Does his tell- the hand to head thingy he does when JK glares at him over Jimin. He backs away inches from JM.

Cut to JK. Dudes a mood. Jin bumps into him, stares at him but JK wouldn't even look at him and then deadass looks away grumpyly- talk of professionalism. You doing great swidy keep going!

You can hide a relationship, fake it on God but you can never hide the intimacy. Taekook just lack that intimacy, I'm sorry. Even in that 'estranged' moment Jikook's intimacy was still there-

Even in whatever mood JK was in- which again, I believe was just due to their lover's squabble- JK still was claiming his man and exercising his right of authority over him. That's how you know they are not broken up. In my opinion. Chileee. I'm gonna get in trouble. Deep sigh.

Y'all think JK was hovering over Jimin because he was preparing to strike him down like a censored censored censored? Yea, he was preparing to strike alright- All the corners of Jimin's heart. Y'all better stop before I find you. Lol

I said I wasn't going to analyze the footage in this post but damn. This man out here serving us all kinds of brooding assorted jeonlous as his man takes a time out or two to wiggle wiggle wiggle on him Malfroy style and y'all are out here peddling nonsense. Strike one.

He was a mood alright. Did y'all see Tae rubbing his chest, arms and legs, ears did y'all see any body else in there doing that for him? Y'all's falcon cannot hear his falconer give it up and sorry, Jikook can't relate.

As I've posited, JM I feel was mad as hell for whatever reason and wasn't in the space to be that person JK needed him to be- in that moment. Doesn't mean they are like that behind scenes all the time.

And before I get attacked again for causing drama, being toxic etc by Jikookers understand that I am just a delusional person shipping these two in a way that makes sense to me. Write me off as delulu, and go please.

Whatever ambiguity surrounds that moment, to me, Jin and RM's reaction to JK clarifies things a bit. Jikook were boiling hot. JK was still keeping an eye on his man. Lol. Bless them. That's my conclusion. I'm running miles with that. Catch me. Lol

Feel free to come up with your own theory in a way that makes sense to you.

I'm not sure how long that fight lasted but from the rain day incident I'm hoping it wasn't that long. Jikook are fine I believe- I hope. Judging from the way JM drew JK out in his VLive with the whole I miss JK comment? Did that not sound familiar to y'all? And that Mickey mouse thingy- JM ain't slick. Bless him.

JM is the perched akekeke whisperer whispering all kinds of things in JK's ear, feeding JK news of what goes on on social media and what not. Dude don told his man they won a BB on his birthday, told his man Jin wasn't happy he chose his bag over his- definitely told his man Army was missing him- what? I'm going with that too sue me. Lol

Did you or did you not see Jk coming out to do a live log afterwards? And JK seemed less grumpy, in very high spirits? Wedding bells- I'm manifesting it for JK. Manifest with me.

Remember when JM did a log and talked nonsense about JK, and JK did a rebuttal log to respond to JM and address some of the things JM had said about him? Remember that? It's a jikook thing and it's back😌

I have said JM uses social media to connect with Army while JK uses it as an outlet to express himself. Through out his Live he kept talking about how he wasn't prepared to do a live and it shows in the way he kept saying it was awkward, he just kept it business and didn't know what else to share... I wonder who put his paws on him, dragged his ass to turn on the camera because Armys had asked of him- a certain quick tempered chick who dragged his man out on social media to do the whole Chuseok greetings 2020 on Twitter perhaps?

And JK is so whipped he'd do just about all the hoops to appease his man- Jikook AU written by Goldy. High five. No but seriously...

Behind the scenes, JK sneaks into JM's bed at night- Taekook does it too? Please! The look on JM's face when RM spilled that tea is enough said.

There's only two people in BTS that panic and don't want us to know they lay one on God in bed and it's not Tae Kook.

JK: Jimin hyung and I will sleep here

JM: how about we let the others choose first

Everyone shares a room:

Footage:🦄🍲🐯🧀🐺🍟🐓🥛🐑🛏

JIKOOK share a room:

Footage: 🚪👀

Behind the cameras Jikook sneak into each others bed- camera caught them live. You saw JM's face, I can't make this shit up. Lol

Behind the scenes, Jikook do laundry at 1am. *insert JM pervy face meme.

Chileee, y'all making me trip with this one. Deep breaths.

Jikook have their moments. This was one of them. Can they be human? Please. Thank you.

At this point, these folks are not even shippers. They is shoppers shopping a man for their bias. Lol. Just admit y'all want Jeon thick thighs strong butt for your bias and go. Just admit you want some tall glass of Tiger charming face husky voice strong chest for your bunny and go. Lmho

Chilee, when we say Tae and Kook had a falling out we don't mean they freeze eachother out behind cameras. Hell, we don't even mean they fake their bond or interactions. C'mon! Tae and JK admitted they are not lovers and y'all is bitter. That's why y'all is making up this nonsense about Jikook. Speak the truth and shame the devil. Peter would be proud.

When we say Tae Kook is not real, We just mean JM spends JK's birthday with him while every one including Tae is out there cruising for Jesus with friends. We just mean Jikook claim eachother even when they beefing. That ship beefed and didn't even know they was beefing and they are real? Damn.

We just mean Jikook make efforts for each other even when they are having bad days- Had it not been for Jimin they'd still be gnashing on these cold streets. Place some respect on his name, y'all's ungrateful. Lol

Tae and JK don't want each other they both want Jimin- there. I said it.

Thanks for attending my Tedtalk. 👁👄👁

Now where was I? Never mind. I'm just gonna go burn some sage. There's too much negativity going on around. Hakuna matata!

There is nothing wrong with Taekook as a ship. Personally, I'm a multishipper I ship all the ships but I support Kookmin. I don't mind their shippers calling them whatever, but my eyes twitch when people who claim they support Jikook act wishy washy with Jikook. Lol. Like are you going to withdraw your support of Kookmin if JK sits on Tae's lap?👀 Yall make me nervous. How can you think Jikook is real but then look at Taekook and go huh??? What are y'all seeing that I can't see?

Like those are two completely different dynamics. It's the skinship isn't it? Talk to me. Jikookers who see something nonplatonic in Taekook honestly give me trust issues. Y'all have me out here looking over my shoulders.

I am delusional but I'm confident in my delusions because to me it is about the love and support for JM and JK as LGBTQ plus couples. Please stop shipping Jikook, stop shopping JK and JM for eachother and start supporting them because they are real.

IN MY OPINION.

Signed,

GOLDY

[thespacenico]

Hi! I just saw your post about asexuality and wanted to share for a sec!! I'm a trans queer guy who happens to be ace as well. I've not thought about it much actively, but I've never really considered myself as part of the lgbt community for my asexuality mainly because it's something I could keep to myself. Being trans was obvious for a while and will always impact me visibly. If I'm in a queer relationship, that's visible. Both have brought me far more strife than my asexuality (although with what you mentioned in your post, I'm sure my situation factors into that). I guess I've always separated my identities; if I want to talk about ace stuff (which is rare, to be fair) I'd go to aspec specific spaces. Otherwise, I go to more generally queer spaces. I mean this in a fully respectful way because I'm interested, but why do you group your "aceness" with your lesbian identity? I have interacted with other ace people outside of the internet and their perspectives wildly vary. I will say anecdotally that the "het" aces I know that consider themselves lgbt for their asexuality often speak over me on queer and trans issues. Personally, I feel there exists a deeper systemic issue regarding trans and queer discrimination than ace discrimination which is part of why I don't immediately consider my asexuality as lgbt or those heteroromantic people as lgbt. In another regard, asexuality obviously is a sexuality (as you mentioned), but I've found with the way my identity blends together, it just makes more sense to talk about that specific part of it with other ace people. I think I see the ace spectrum as a separate thing to measures of the types of people I'm attracted to and the type of person I am. Levels of attraction vs. identity and types of attraction in terms of identity, ya know?? I hope this doesn't sound aggressive!! I really want to hear more about your perspective as a fellow ace person. Most ace people I do regularly speak with who see themselves as lgbt choose that community because that's where they first learned about the label. Feel free to disregard all of this because I know it's long!!!

hi! thanks for sharing! you brought up a lot of good points so i’m gonna try to acknowledge/respond to all of them best i can! for the record, i think it’s worth pointing out that we’re both ace, but since it’s a spectrum there’s a really good chance that even we don’t experience it the same way, which is why discussion amongst the actual asexual community is super meaningful compared to discussion amongst allo people who have a very limited knowledge of asexuality to start with. all that being said, here’s my perspective on things! 

I've not thought about it much actively, but I've never really considered myself as part of the lgbt community for my asexuality mainly because it's something I could keep to myself. Being trans was obvious for a while and will always impact me visibly. If I'm in a queer relationship, that's visible.

that’s fair! i agree that it’s something we can keep to ourself, but why do we have to (or choose to) keep it to ourself? the why probably differs for most aspec people. in my case, i’m pretty vocal about my asexuality (on twitter at least), but in real life where i’m surrounded by straight cishet allo people, i keep it to myself because they wouldn’t understand it in the slightest, many of them would think i’m just trying to be special, etc. not only am i assumed to be straight (i’m not), but i’m also assumed to be allosexual (i’m not).

visibility is an interesting topic too because i think that’s when we veer into conversations about things like “straight-passing,” “cis-passing,” etc. at home i’m mostly still in the closet, but my identity is still very much real. it may not always be visible, but it’s definitely there! a visibly queer relationship is just one way our identities are put on display. but even then, sometimes two lgbtq+ individuals can be in a relationship and it’s not visibly queer — for example, two (or even one) bi people in a m/f relationship. to people outside of the community especially, it doesn’t look like a queer relationship, but it very much is.

all that to say, asexuality often isn’t visible per se, but there are many other identities that also lack visibility under certain circumstances, in a sense. that’s why i don’t personally consider visibility very much!

Both have brought me far more strife than my asexuality (although with what you mentioned in your post, I'm sure my situation factors into that). I guess I've always separated my identities; if I want to talk about ace stuff (which is rare, to be fair) I'd go to aspec specific spaces. Otherwise, I go to more generally queer spaces.

i can’t speak on your trans/queer experience specifically (and i’m sorry for the trouble people have given you for them), but this is also where i would personally say that just because asexuality doesn’t cause you as much strife as your being trans/queer, doesn’t mean that it’s not important or any less valid as part of your overall identity. asexuality aside for a moment, the lgbtq+ community has been historically oppressed and discriminated against, basically even before its official inception. this may not be realistic, but let’s say that 100 years from now, we're finally free of that oppression/discrimination. we don’t suddenly lose our place in the lgbtq+ community, do we? oppression doesn’t have anything to do with the validity of our respective identities, if that makes sense. other identities aren’t more or less valid depending on how oppressed they are. that’s my opinion on that! and like you mentioned, i think our personal situations definitely do affect our experiences in general. 

when it comes to talking about ace stuff, i think the point is that lots of us within the lgbtq+ community sometimes separate our identities in different ways, even those that aren’t ace, because there are often specific spaces within the community itself. sometimes lesbians need lesbian specific spaces, sometimes bi people need bi specific spaces, sometimes trans people need trans specific spaces, etc. it’s always much easier and more validating to talk to people who share your experiences. like you said, there are also aspec specific spaces! and yet, everyone within one of those specific spaces can have very different identities. as an ace lesbian, i might engage in a lesbian specific space without ever needing to talk about my asexuality, or engage in an aspec specific space without ever needing to talk about my lesbian identity. i’m not necessarily talking about every part of my identity all the time, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t there. 

I mean this in a fully respectful way because I'm interested, but why do you group your "aceness" with your lesbian identity? I have interacted with other ace people outside of the internet and their perspectives wildly vary.

i think that for me specifically, i feel like my asexuality plays a veeery big part in how i experience attraction in general. i used to id as bisexual, but after a while i realized i wasn’t attracted to men at all and so began to id as lesbian. it wasn’t until then that i realized i was also ace, and that honestly threw me for a loop because for a while it made me wonder if i was bi after all (i’m not, but i thought about it for a while!). technically speaking, there are other labels i could use to describe my attraction, such as sapphic asexual or homoromantic asexual, although i think for the latter sometimes it depends on how a person feels about the split attraction model and how it can be applied. 

either way! it’s my experience that asexuality significantly influences how a person experiences attraction compared to allosexuals. i’d say that’s the main reason i “group” my aceness with my lesbian identity, because to me they’re intertwined.  

you’re right though about how the perspectives of ace people wildly vary! it’s super interesting to hear from other ace people what their thoughts are. i think for me it comes down to the fact that some ace people may not need a space specifically for their asexuality, and that’s okay! like you’ve mentioned, they typically don’t experience the same level of discrimination, at least not in the same ways, and sometimes it wholly depends on the kind of people you’re around and whether or not you’re out. many ace people do experience discrimination though and desperately do need that space, and i don’t see why the lgbtq+ community shouldn’t be for them as well, considering. there are certainly differences between issues involving asexuality and other identities like gay, lesbian, trans, etc. but there are differences between issues involving specifically those identities as well, and certain similarities between all of them.

I will say anecdotally that the "het" aces I know that consider themselves lgbt for their asexuality often speak over me on queer and trans issues. Personally, I feel there exists a deeper systemic issue regarding trans and queer discrimination than ace discrimination which is part of why I don't immediately consider my asexuality as lgbt or those heteroromantic people as lgbt. In another regard, asexuality obviously is a sexuality (as you mentioned), but I've found with the way my identity blends together, it just makes more sense to talk about that specific part of it with other ace people.

i know how frustrating it is to have people talk over you about issues that directly impact you and not them, and i’m sorry you’ve had to deal with that. i do think however that this sort of thing happens even within the lgbtq+ community all the time. this is in no way a justification or excuse for the people who have spoken over you, but just a comparison. i’ve seen tons of conversations (usually on social media) where lesbians will speak over bi women on bi issues, non-lesbians will speak over lesbians on lesbian issues, cis people will speak over trans people on trans issues, etc. it’s frustrating in any case, and it typically has to do with the fact that there’s a certain level of ignorance for almost everyone when it comes to an identity that’s not theirs. (am i making sense??) i even see allo people speak over aspec people on ace issues all the time as well. tldr - i’m not saying there’s not a specific underlying issue with the “het” aces who have spoken over you on those issues, but you can definitely draw comparisons to certain circumstances elsewhere within the community.

i 100% agree with your point that there is a much deeper systemic issue regarding trans and queer discrimination than ace discrimination. i think my view on that pretty much goes back to what i said earlier about how i don’t think discrimination or oppression determines the validity of an identity as an lgbtq+ identity. regardless, like you said about how you feel that it makes more sense to talk about your own asexuality with other ace people, i think sometimes it just comes down to how we perceive/experience our own identities! i often feel more isolated due to my asexuality more than i feel isolated due to my being a lesbian. that may not be the case for all aspec people, but it really impacts me personally.

I think I see the ace spectrum as a separate thing to measures of the types of people I'm attracted to and the type of person I am. Levels of attraction vs. identity and types of attraction in terms of identity, ya know??

that’s also fair! i think in my mind it’s just that aceness is part of my identity/is its own independent identity regardless of who i’m romantically attracted to. my asexuality would still exist whether i’m also a lesbian or not. i just happen to personally combine my identities (aka ace lesbian) because they’re both there and they influence each other. 

Most ace people I do regularly speak with who see themselves as lgbt choose that community because that's where they first learned about the label.

i’m glad you brought this up at the very end too!! i first learned about the label from the lgbtq+ community as well, but it took forever for me to realize that it described me. in my experience, asexuality is crazy misunderstood both in and out of the community. it took me weeks to months of doing my own research on asexuality to understand what it really is, and even then that there’s a spectrum. in regards to everything about this post, i think where an ace person falls on the spectrum might be a big factor that plays into what their experience is like and whether they feel they need a space like the lgbtq+ community. either way, the fact that most people first hear about asexuality from the community and the fact that we have our own flag and everything really speaks to all this. why not choose the lgbtq+ community since it’s already here, that’s where asexuality is often talked about, and that’s where people understand what it’s like to experience attraction that differs from the norm? 

anyway those are my thoughts!! it’s nice to be talking to someone else who’s actually ace rather than feeling like i’m having to preach to allosexuals who don’t think my asexuality matters period :’)

[silverquillsideas]

What do you think about the artworks about Blanca and Ash in the artbook "Angel Eyes"? I've often seen people critizize it due to it being suggestive and sensual and how Yoshida could draw them like that.

Hello anon. Hm... Interesting question. I really cannot be a judge of how or what Yoshida was thinking when she created those drawings. As far as I remember, the Blanca / Ash drawings were a lot fewer than those of Ash and Eiji’s together, but yeah, as you mentioned, they were far more sensual than the more innocent Asheiji ones.

I do know that a lot of people don’t like Blanca, for various reasons, and that’s why seeing the creator herself indulging in artworks, that to them, might appear to be ‘inappropriate’ or ‘inconsiderate’ to Ash, as a character. Hence, the outrage over “how could she do that?!”

Blanca was Ash’s mentor, probably the first adult who extended a hand of friendship without any attached strings or conditions to a young Ash, who, at that time, was pretty much a captive in Dino’s clutches. Ash trusted Blanca, a great deal, to the very end, and that, above all else says a lot about who Blanca was as a person. Throughout Private Opinion, Blanca got through Ash’s natural defenses and actually tried to understand who he was, something no one else at that point of time, had even bothered to do. They bickered, teased each other, shared stories about their past (Blanca trusted Ash enough to reveal his true identity), and all through that time, Blanca taught Ash the skills he’d need to survive in the world he had been thrown in.

I have often wondered why Blanca never tried to defy Dino and get Ash out of there safely, even if it’d paint a target over both their foreheads. I guess escaping the violent mafia world looks like a good option in fantasy but not in real terms? Who knows? Blanca’s suggestion to Ash to get back to Dino, even after all the torture he had faced in his past was the tipping point at which most fans’ dislike of him intensified. But thing is, I do see where he came from. Dino’s web was just that vast and inescapable that time, and given the conditions put on Ash (Eiji’s death against his submission) that was probably the best option he could come up with. Blanca had been a mercenary all his life, right from age 8 or 9, when he was drafted into KGB’s gruelling training regime. Following orders and obeying commands is what he was trained to do. The one time he actually rebelled, the woman he truly loved was killed. With that kind of background and experience, he tried his best to spare Ash the pain of losing the people closest to him, even if the cost was steep.

Anyway, my ramble is getting long, I’ll wrap it up here. I personally don’t see a problem with the drawings…they can be left upto any interpretation you might like : whether canon, a future, a what-could-have-been, or imaginary scenarios that need not necessarily be true, whichever way you might look at it. They were simply illustrations of how Yoshida envisioned Ash and Blanca’s dynamic. They were deliberately sensual, yes, but I don’t think there has to be a mandatory, or canon shippy angle to it, the exact reason over which all the outcry is about. Sometimes just plain labels like ‘age gap, ew gross’ or ‘teacher-student is a big no’ or even ‘oh, but there’s such a power imbalance!’ aren’t justified reasons to crucify any particular character-dynamic over, human interactions, and their reflection in fictional worlds are much more complex than that.

But yeah, definitely, disliking / liking any particular type of art is entirely up to the person, and no interpretation of any fictional content is inherently wrong. Each one of us does and should have our own likes/dislikes/boundaries concerning what we see depicted in art or elsewhere! People’s criticisms are valid, so are others’ appreciations. At the end, it's up to you. :)

[an-actual-real-live-eevee]

why do people keep recommending DBT? I've tried it and from what I've seen I understand why it works, but it... pretty much requires believing factually inaccurate stuff about how things work and essentially turning yourself into the kind of "both sides kinda have a point" (the "dialectic" part of it) that ended up giving us people like Trump in power. and mindfulness essentially just sounds like self-induced dissociation.

....okay, first thing: I’m not sure if you have the wrong idea of mindfulness or dissociation, but dissociation is basically being disconnected or divorced from the present/yourself/your feelings to some extent. 

mindfulness? mindfulness are exercises that are about being in the moment. trying to get yourself to be as present and focused on the current point in time as you possibly can be. a lot of the exercises are designed to make you focus on the stuff going on around you and what’s near you right at that moment, what’s real. that is like....about as far as you can get from being designed to induce dissociation. which isn’t to say it CAN’T do that, if mindfulness is triggering for you or something, but that is...very much NOT what mindfulness is or is meant to do.

it is used to treat anxiety and depression, but in my experience, that’s largely used for anxiety of “but what if (bad thing) happens” or similar--anxieties that are based on being divorced from the present moment, but make you panic all the same. the idea is that by focusing on the things that are real and around you instead of the anxiety, you’ll ruminate less and hopefully feel better.

anyway.

I genuinely cannot tell you why people recommend DBT other than “it’s largely successful for most people with BPD”. I know it works for some people, but that doesn’t mean it’s for everyone! unfortunately, people tend to recommend the same things over and over because they work for 98% of people, which means that becomes the go-to suggestion. however, from what you’re saying about it, I again feel like you have the wrong concept of what DBT is. it’s not about believing inaccuracies.

DBT has four basic principles it tries to teach: mindfulness, distress tolerance, emotion regulation, and interpersonal effectiveness. I’ve already covered mindfulness, so let me talk about the others, I guess?

distress tolerance isn’t about telling yourself that you’re not in distress or that the situation’s not necessarily bad or shitty--it’s about trying to maintain some amount of control in a ‘crisis situation’. distress tolerance is about learning to tolerate situations without flying off the handle, emotion-wise. its skill sets largely revolve around tolerating a distressing situation until it can be dealt with WITHOUT harming yourself or others with how you handle dealing with the distress, learning how to not be totally caught up in the moment or your feelings so you can take a step back and deal with things rationally, knowing that bad situations don’t last forever but also learning to accept the things you can’t change or at least can’t change immediately (however awful they are, which is then where things like ‘tolerating the situation until it can be dealt with’ comes in), and looking at situations logically so you can make a sensible decision rather than a purely emotion-based one.

and if you’re going to be one of those people who’s going to say “bad situations never change”, then I’m sorry, but I really have no words for you. I can’t force you to believe things will change--I just know that as long as you keep an eye out for opportunities to get things to change, things...can definitely get better. but that’s the only way I can see any of these being considered ‘inaccuracies for how things work’.

emotion regulation, now, is about basically increasing your resistance to having negative feelings (self-care. it’s taking care of yourself and trying to learn to manage things that might cause negative feelings if left unchecked, like a chronic pain disorder, which left unmanaged can cause things like depression, irritability, etc.), and about understanding and acknowledging your emotions in a non-judgmental fashion, and then trying to handle them in a positive way.

like, say you’re depressed. the first step would be accepting you are depressed--putting a label to the feeling and accepting it’s real and something you have to deal with feeling right now. anything like “I’m weak or I suck or I’m a bad person for being depressed” are judgments that are unfair and untrue, and emotion regulation tells you to stay away from those as best you can, as well as statements like “I have no reason to be depressed”, which you can’t actually know. (sometimes depression is situational. sometimes it’s neurological. both of these are valid reasons to be depressed. and the neurological can cause you to feel depressed in basically ANY situation. so you probably do have a reason to be depressed. saying you don’t is a judgment and also likely untrue.)

the second step would be trying to do things that might help the depressed feeling. will these always work? no. but ‘opposite action’ and similar do, to some extent, work. watching a funny video when you feel like being dead can actually help. it’s not going to cure you, it’s not going to fix the feelings, but it can make things more tolerable, and that’s the point.

finally, interpersonal effectiveness. this one’s just about being...better at communicating with people. it’s about balancing wants versus needs in conversations with others, learning how to better maintain relationships with others (and when it might be time to STOP maintaining a relationship if it’s taking too much out of you or is unhealthy), gaining desired objectives in conversations, and maintaining self-respect in exchanges--don’t offer apologies for things that aren’t your fault, don’t do anything you know you’ll regret later, stuff like that. this one is the one I’ve found the most use of, personally, as it’s about communicating in an effective, respectful (to yourself and the other person), and non-emotionally-charged way, which are all things I’ve struggled with. and honestly continue to struggle with somewhat, but I’ve gotten better.

please keep in mind, this therapy was designed for BPD. a lot of us struggle with dealing with distressing situations to the point where “we need to talk” might cause anxiety that leads us to self-destruct, or we get depressed one day and suddenly everything is awful and we try to kill ourselves and focus only on how bad this is right now and how it’s clearly going to be bad forever. a lot of us also struggle with communicating in a way that doesn’t hurt us or others.

DBT focuses a lot, yes, on ‘being in the middle’, being moderate, but that’s because BPD is largely about being black-and-white, which is...just as inaccurate as ‘all sides have a point’ can be sometimes. but you are also not really meant to apply DBT...to politics. ‘all bad situations don’t last forever’ doesn’t really mean that if people are trying to bring conversion therapy back, you should sit on your laurels and try to ‘accept how it is’. DBT is built purely for emotion and distress handling. it’s also not designed for EXTREME situations--it’s designed to try and help people who tend to take a situation that’s not that bad and blow it up into the worst thing ever to take it down a notch from what is basically extremist thinking about how a situation is or will go. if a situation is genuinely terrible, you shouldn’t try and tolerate it. if you’re being abused, that’s not a time to apply DBT principles. but if you broke your foot? yeah, that’s a time to try and tolerate the situation and just remember it will pass in time. and that’s what DBT is designed for.

basically, like most therapies, it is not and never will be applicable across the board in everything. it’s made for dealing with BPD situations in an overall average kind of life--like, most people get stuck in traffic. lots of people break bones or spill sugar. it’s just, with BPD, these things can also end up seeming like the worst thing ever. DBT is designed to try and teach us to handle everyday situations in a more....emotionally moderated and rational fashion. but that’s it. that’s all it’s made for.

again, it really isn’t for everyone. and as someone who didn’t get a whole lot out of traditional DBT outside of the interpersonal part, I really wish that would stop being everyone’s first recommendation and seemingly the only thing people want to do. but your assessment of it is....incorrect, and suggests to me you are either expecting it to be applicable across the board (which almost nothing is) or that you are interpreting it incorrectly/have been exposed to something that wasn’t actually good DBT. which isn’t to say that it’s going to be effective for you. it might be totally useless! but you have the wrong idea.

....the only thing I can think of that could possibly seem “based in inaccuracy” besides ‘things can get better’ is the whole ‘positive self-talk’ thing. like “you’re great” when you feel like you suck, or “you got this” when you feel like everything is falling apart. and honestly, it is kind of difficult to determine the factual accuracy of ‘you’re great’, so yeah, it could be inaccurate, but negative self-talk falls into much the same thing. they’re judgments. opinions. they’re not facts. both are inaccurate. so even if it feels false, sometimes the thing therapists try to do is teach you to combat your own dubious mental judgments with the reverse of those judgments. but if that doesn’t work for you, then just try another thing from the skill you’re learning--not every one involves ‘positive self-talk’ or dealing in things that might not be accurate statements.

that’s all I can really say here.

....oh, no, wait, one more thing. if you really think “both sides have a point” is what got Trump in power, that’s not really it. what got Trump in power was reactionary thinking and talking points. he said what people wanted to hear. if you need proof, just look at the fact that there are gay people who supported Trump when his pick for vice president was a person who supports conversion therapy. Trump’s great at eliciting emotional responses from people and he kind of just ran with that, saying what would get the most intense response from whoever he was speaking to. and people didn’t look at things logically, they responded emotionally, and believed what he was saying. that, and a lot of Republicans who were leaning more radical than moderate also supported him, regardless of if they agreed with him right out the gate or not.

that’s really how Trump got into power--playing on people’s emotions and saying things that seemed in support of more radical conservative ideas. like, people who try and say “both sides have a point” about things where the ‘opinion’ in question threatens lives and/or freedom are totally not helping the situation, but most of the people I know who like to try and play “devil’s advocate” or be moderate in politics also did not support or vote for Trump, because he played the radical side.

...and also, DBT is never going to tell you that you have to listen to someone who’s telling you that a minority group you’re part of, or a minority group in general, doesn’t deserve things like freedom or rights. if a person tries to incorporate that into DBT, they’re doing it wrong, leave immediately.

now that’s all.