#and if it's this beheviour is the reason

[71kedi-yip]

I FRİCKİNG HATE THE PEOPLE IN THE REPLIES! BRICK! DEAR YOU ARE DOING A FANTASTIC JOB! DON"T YOU FRİCKİNG DARE RESIGN! I WILL CRY!

RULE NUMBER WHO KNOWS OF TUMBLR ! LOOK AT THE TAGS, MORE INFO IN TAGS!

[ID: Three tags from the original post: Relatable ad, totally not cringe, actual photo of tumblr staff]

Relatable ad, totally not cringe. What does that mean, oh I don't know, maybe it is irony, but nooo.

Actual photo of tumblr staff. Oh my, is this making fun of yourself? It can't be.

(My dear friends, do you think they don't know we are called tumblrinas? That, using the wrong word makes the meme more funny?)(btw, I know and hope most of you were joking in the replies,i my word is to the other ones)

I know I am unproportionally protective of a person just doing their job; but they are doing a good job at their job and their job is one of the reasons we can have this website as it is(as we like it).

Like yes, it shows up 20 times(at first when ads were new, probably because of my location, I had no ads but tumblr ads. I didn't even get the landscaped ones. I know how it feels to see the same ad again and again), but ads on tumblr are better then most(*cough*all*cough) other websites, they don't cover content and you can just scrool thru. And tumblr tumblr ads are plain old lovely, they don't flash, they try to be either funny or cute(they usually succeed), and they carry the inherited funny factor of promoting the product on the product.

Also, Brick and the emporium/tumblr shop/marketing/merchendise team is doing a steller job right now. Like I have zero moneys and I especially have zero moneys I can justifiably spend on shipping but I get so close to buying stuff from tumblr shop whenever I look at it(that's another thing, I like looking thru the shop! what?). Like, there are funny meme stuff, there are tumblr memoribilia(how the frick do you write that word?), then there is actually cool looking can use it in real life stuff.

Like all teams, sometimes they hit the mark, sometimes they miss it. Some memes of theirs will not be for you, some will make you keel over with laughter. You will look at some of their products and go "ugh, who wants that", and your fingers will itch to buy some. (Or maybe, you will hate all of their products, all of their memes, that's okay too) but you should realise, it is pretty much impossible to create something that will be loved by all. There will be things created in this world that you will hate and let me tell you, there will be things you will love that will be hated by a lot of people.

And I understand disliking ads, like I get bloodthirsty on youtube, unskipible ads, not even one but two, oh I am evil. But like, the way to handle said ads is not to write hate messages to the people whose job is to create said ads?

I understand getting frusturated that tumblr which was once clean off of ads is now filled with them. But if muskrat tought us anything, it's that social media sites are hard to make money off of. And they require a lot of money to maintain, money they don't generate.

I don't know how it is right now but I remember hearing that tumblr doesn't make a profit, like it requires the parent company to lose money to keep up. And untill a solution to that is found, Tumblr can be seen as being on borrowed time. And I don't know about you guys but I love tumblr, it's the one social media site I like and use, I love the culture we have here, I love the anonimity, I love the lack of algorithm, I love that I can reach to the end of my recomended, I love the fandoms, I love the weirdness, I love the fricking blue. I don't want it gone.

And so I respect Brick, a person who is getting paid to create stupis memes and memeble products for this website I adore. Amd who is doing a really good job at that.

[relaxxattack]

A genq, with no harm meant (we have differing opinions, that's okay) but like. Genuinely, what is the difference between a fan privately messaging drm, and Tommy "Schlatt Stan" innit messaging Schlatt at 16/17 and getting talking in the dms, ending up becoming friends. What's the difference between him doing it with Wilbur? With techno? All of them were people he looked up to, was a fan of and admired enormously, and yet they were allowed to grow a friendship. Hell, I met my best friend because I was a huge fan of hers, made her art, edits, probably would have been a stan if that had been a thing back then but we got to talking in private messages and after a while she gave me other apps to contact her on. I met my gf because she was a fan of my writing - we now live together. I genuinely don't understand how this is automatically creepy or predatory beheviour, having been on both sides of the scenario. I think the situation has a lot more nuance than just "DM's bad, no cc should DM anyone ever" and "getting a private Snapchat is creepy"

(I should say for the purposes of this I'm only taking what we know 100% to be true, which is the insta DM's which have 0 evidence of any kind of inappropriate sexual content, I'm waiting for further solid evidence to make a full judgement on the situation)

the difference is that tommy was a fan asking specifically for advice about content growth, OR to join their content. tommy was always trying to be a youtuber + bully bigger ccs into letting him into their content. tommy reached out first, and he was on BUSINESS. although of course they became friends later, the nature of his reaching out was 'professional'

this situation, on the other hand, involves a content creator having a pattern of talking to underage female fans. specifically to compliment them or their appearance, or ask to make their conversations MORE private by sharing snaps. ( <- that is the info from the dms DREAM CONFIRMED. not any others). that action is almost immediately by anyone with street smarts read as predatory.

is it possible it WASN'T? absolutely. it's fully possible that in the best case scenario all of that was in good faith. but it still LOOKS really fucking bad. and dream is not an idiot. he should have known how bad that looks, how obviously predatory it seems. in the BEST CASE SCENARIO, he's still a complete idiot who was engaging in idiotic and unprofessional behavior that looks unsafe and predatory. and then he brushed aside everyone's reasonable concerns about it. that is the BEST POSSIBLE CASE SCENARIO, and it's still pretty fucking scummy. plus with how ridiculous his response is, i'm very inclined to believe it's at least somewhat worse than the best case.

*EDIT: realizing after the fact that this looks very aggressive-- i’m not aggressive towards you, anon, your question was asked fairly politely. this situation as a whole just makes me grossed out and angry

*EDIT TWO: wilbur, after finding out tommy was a minor, became uncomfortable with the power dynamic and blocked him until a later date at which it was clear tommy was a cc too. it is REMARKABLY easy to notice when a power dynamic is a little off and form respectful distance, and ccs are absolutely capable of it.

[jonginsboyfriend]

They recorded KB before his last instalive which mean he feels free to mention ks since that day, like you said it seems like he's always thinking about ksoo and it makes me even more sad because even if we don't know him we saw how he wasn't acting as usual after the news comes out. Antis used his strange beheviour, making it look like ji didn't care about ks when it was the opposite and a lot of things + now KB and the last live just confirmed it

It feels like he's using this exo comeback as a reason to mention ksoo tbh. It's like saying it's okay to mention him now bcuz every member does it. We're missing them because we're having a cb without them. I'm missing ksoo bcuz he's not in the cb with me.I mean it's the perfect timing. He filmed those shows and there he saw how it was okay for them to mention ms and ks so now he's more comfortable. But not too comfortable...he was still nervous and blinked rapidly and looked down when mentioning he watched swing kids.

Let's see how much he mentions him after the comeback is over which is like today...if he even mentions him at all. Suddenly going on a live and saying he did smth bcuz he misses ksoo outside the context of a comeback might trigger some reactions from people in sm or fans in general. Like why is he saying that all of a sudden?

[ineedrelationshipadvice]

So my bf and I have been dating 5 months, but I think I might be into him as a friend? The thing is he's really inexperienced too, which isn't what I reallyy need. I know he likes me alot. I stole his first kiss last we met and...I don't think I felt anything. No sparks. I like him as a person and we share similar (ish) interests and I don't want to stop talking to him. But I'm feeling more negative about this than enthusiastic. He doesn't seem to put effort in and I'm always making plans. Help.

Okay, so I was pondering what might be wrong throughout this whole message you wrote me. Because this whole "spark" concept, the "chemistry" of a relationship, I largely reject the concept. Of course people will like who they like. But romanticism would have you believe that these are inalienable things about the world; that two people will meet, and it'll be like this wild, magnetic attraction. It "just happens." Nah, fuck that. There are reasons people don't have chemistry, and while they might be mired in concepts that may not always have concrete ground to stand on, there ARE reasons for it. Even the most illogical thing ever can be boiled down via logic. 

So what's your reason for not having a good time here? You said it in the last sentence. "He doesn't put effort in" and "I'm always making plans." THESE are the spark you're not feeling. It's not that you like him more as a friend although that is possible, and it's not that you "didn't feel sparks." It's that you have fundamental issues with the way you've been treated in your relationship. The honeymoon has ended and no longer will him just vibing out with you carry the relationship. 

So what do? It means you gotta lay down the law with this boy, and let him understand exactly what's going on here. And to do that, it means you really need to drill down on your own feelings. Are you sure that there is no spark? Are you sure that you just don't romantically like this boy anymore? What about this boy did you like romantically before that has changed in the past 5 months? Or was it never there to begin with. Answering that is a little critical before we move forward. Do you have answers for those questions? You might, and if so those are also part of the larger reasons you're having concerns with this relationship. I can't answer these questions for you though; only you know exactly how you feel. 

But if you want to actually put effort to try to make the relationship work before you end things, then you need to go straight to him and sit him down, and have a talk with him. Let him know that you're not feeling to good about this relationship at present, and that you have some serious concerns with his beheviour that need resolution. Let him know that you feel like he's not putting in effort. Tell him what he's doing wrong, and better yet, tell him things he could do that would improve his performance or make him happy. Furthermore, tell him you're tired of always making the plans for the two of them, and then ask him to take the initiative more in this relationship. 

After you have that serious talk, where you listen to both of your concerns as a couple, then you can wait and see if he improves. If he can't fix his shit in a month, then be done with him and end the relationship. Otherwise, if you're already past the point of no return, just break up with him and be done with it. But just remember, whether you try to fix it and he doesn't change, or whether you're already done now, if you try to break up with him, feelings will be hurt. This won't be easy for anyone, and there are no guarantees you two will be able to remain friends. That's why I insist on patience and caution; don't end this before you actually try to fix the problems. Make sure you actually try, because you can't unring that bell, and if you end the relationship, there might not be taking back the hurt that is caused by the initial break up. Tread lightly with that before you make a drastic decision. 

[julystorms]

(not to go into to much detail but i myself am a victim of sexual harrassement which is why i have even less patience than before for this kind of content. But i'll keep your advice in mind, sorry for this here long post)i agree wholeheartedly that there are bad het/gay ships that makes me want to puke, like virion/cherche noire/laurent gerome/inigo ESPECIALLY rinkah/jakob my god. those 2 ships were the first to come in my mind, and of course nothing is 100 perfect but my main issue is that it

doesnt take that much morality to make your gay characters not predetory nor should such beheviour be handwaved with an apology. It comes across as fetishizing to me when all it takes is for 2 people of the same gender to be a perfect couple when back then the fandom went from dispising male flirts simply sweet talking to sugarcoating soleils sexual harrasment of other women. Which is bizarre to me when there are tons of great interactions between 2 people of the same gender in fe main one beingbeing kagero/orochi seeing no reason to praise soleil and even then i doubt that most people ship kagero and orochi because of their interactions, Lot of the time there are more people that wanna jack off to gays/lesbians which disgusts me beyond words.

No worries about the long message. I don’t mind!

Like I said, I totally get where you’re coming from, and I suspected you weren’t harping on f/f ships in particular on purpose; it’s just something to keep in mind when you present a criticism: sometimes being vague is better to avoid writing yourself into a corner. I dislike all of the ships you’ve mentioned proobably for the same reason(s) you do, minus one: I haven’t read Noire and Laurent’s supports--and now I’m afraid to.

And I agree completely that it doesn’t take that much effort to create representation for people that isn’t an offensive stereotype. “Predatory gay” is honestly one of the worst things. It’s real, it exists (just like predatory straight people do), but the issue I take with it is that gay/bi/pan people have a hard enough time in this world as it is; I hate that Soleil exists to, I don’t know, almost perpetuate the idea that that’s how gay people act. And that can be harmful.

Fandom’s opinion of the “flirty male character” trope has changed a lot over the years. Sain was a well-liked character. Forde was well-liked, too. And then it fell out of favor and started to have an effect on the way these characters were written/portrayed. I remember fandom’s opinion re: Sain was mostly neutral/good and then suddenly everyone wrote him like he was a male cat surrounded by females in heat. It was jolting! (Not to mention OOC, but my point is that fandom’s view of the trope changed from being kinda meh toward it to outright despising it--which I understand. It’s never been my favorite trope and by the time FE13 hit I was hoping they’d drop it because I felt they couldn’t manage to write it as an ASPECT of a character instead of the whole character....if that makes sense.)

I’m honestly not sure why people like what they do. I agree, Kagero and Orochi have nice supports and I think they’re kind of casually shipped by most of the fandom...but there’s not a lot of meat in their supports to inspire people to do creating I think. They’re fun for amazing art, but as far as fanfiction goes...I honestly couldn’t write anything for them--not something engaging anyway. I think they seem like they’re good enough together that it’s just not necessary to add more...? Huh.

As far as your last part goes, I understand the frustration of fetishization and I’ve seen it, too, but sometimes it’s better to just let it go. Fandom is gonna ship whatever they want, and you have to remember that fandom isn’t just a haven for the socially awkward and anxious folks with mental and physical issues to work through/out/around, but also a lot of people who are looking for representation...and frankly a place to get their jollies, whatever those may be. The question I think people need to ask themselves is why they seek m/m things over f/f at a ratio of like, 50:1, especially considering women outnumber men in fandom by a large margin most of the time. And hey, why is fandom is so incredibly biphobic, not to mention acephobic? 

Anyway, your frustration with the source material makes a lot of sense to me, and your irritation with fandom for not also being overtly critical about what they’re consuming also resonates with me--just at the surface level, though. I think the first thing you have to teach yourself to not go crazy in fandom is that everyone consumes media differently and what you hate may still ring true/important for someone else, regardless of its status of “healthy” or “unhealthy.” You do you, let other people do them, and unfollow/block those whose words/justifications you don’t want to see. It’s worked out well for me so far. :)

[mirlywoutersmaster-blog]

First research...

“(…)As for that of Mamoiada also the “Carrasegare de Ottana”, the carnival of Ottana, would seem to be a ritual dating back to the cult of Dionysus (…)”

“(…) transposition man-animal, such symbolism staged clearly refers to the close relationship that existed between the owner and the oxen yoke, precious elements for the life of the farmer.”

(Sandalyon- 01 January 2016)

—————————————————————————————————————————-

“Derived from a mediterranean neolithic cult of farming and fertility, the core character and originality of this event has been maintained due to the region’s long history of isolation.”

“(…) representing the struggle between animal instinct and human reason.”

(www.trendland.com)

—————————————————————————————————————————-

“The Carnival atmosphere in Sardinia, especially in Barbagia’s villages, is totally different from the merry one you may experience all over Italy: this is because our Carnival evokes ancient farming rites, where men and animals are the main characters of the show.”

“(…) they celebrate the rite of yoking and the men’s eternal struggle against mother nature.”

“The ox represents strenght and fertility: the ritual of the ox carried by men, who worship it to invoke the herd’s fertility, has the power to transform them into oxes, changing their human features into animal traits.”

“(…) perform a chase which becomes a dance. Its aim is to exorcise the danger of the trasformation into beasts.”

                 (www.sardiniamagicexperience.com)

—————————————————————————————————————————-

“The rituals are centuries old and celebrate the seasonal cycle, fertility, life, and death. People literally put themselves into the skin of the “savage,” in masquerades that stretch back centuries. By becoming a bear, a goat, a stag, a wild boar, a man of straw, a devil, or a monster with jaws of steel, these people celebrate the cycle of life and seasons.”

(www.books.google.be – about Charles Fréger; Wilder mann)

—————————————————————————————————————————-

—————————————————————————————————————————-

“The Wild Man(…) is, according to legend, a son born of the union of a bear and a woman, whether by consent or not. Belonging to two worlds and knowing the intricacies of both, this mythical being is considered a ‘superman’, destined for the highest rank of power;(…)”

“In most cases, the Wild Manwears a costume made of natural materials or animal skins; his face is rendered unrecognisable, (…). An accessory, (…) and one or more bells complete his outfit. (…) These bells, as well as the plant and animal matter of the costume, connectthe Wild Man to his natural origins; however, through the way he stands and through his dance, he is also a part of the cultural sphere – the coat of skin could ewually belong to a shepherd. (…) He embodies the complex reletionship of love and hate which man maintains with his environment.”

“Zoomorphic masks(the shaping of something in animal form) are universal.They demonstrate the links that unite man and hies environment, in other words culture and nature.(…) They have therefore been invested with a series of symbols and powers, intended to control man’s environment. (…) Amongst the European zoomorphic masks, we can cite the Bear and the Goat. Note that both always appear in the company of a human who tries to somehow keep control, (…).”

“The character of the Bear(…). His costume is made of fur, usually taken from a domestic animal, or of vegetable matter. (…) The bear mimics the beheviour of a tamed animal before it goes wild and rushes towards the crowd. His master must therefore control it and make it submit to his will. Sometimes the savage beast is put to death so as to be able to bring back to life under the leadership of man – culture prevailing over savage nature. (…) Finaly, it should be remembered that the Bear is closely related to the Wild Man, of whom it could be one of the parents.”

“The figure of the Goat(…). The ‘game of the Goat’ inevitably includes jaws that chatter, a guarantee of prosperity for those who hear their noise. The ‘plot’ promise fertility to the audience, (…), and the staging of the death and resurrection of the animal is a symbol of the vitality of nature. Its symbolism also associates life and death. On one hand, the goat is an animal with horns, hooves and wool. These are materials which relate at the same time to the living world – on the animal, they grow, change appearance, deteriorate and die – and the world of death – insensitive to pain, the act of cutting them in no way violates the health of the animal. On the other hand, horns and hooves constitute a physical link between two worlds: through their orientation towards the sky or their capacity to dig into the earth.

           (Charles Fréger – Wilder Mann)

—————————————————————————————————————————-

De Reizende Illustrator…

“Reizen betekent anders kijken. Dat schoonheid ver weg eerder opvalt dan thuis, merkte Jan Sluijters. Zijn Bal Tabarin uit 1907 is een zinderend balfeest, de omgeving oplossend in lichten, alles warmte, kleur, sfeer, een zwoele dansavond die zich in tijd en ruimte eindeloos uitstrekt. Zulke sprookjes vind je nooit thuis.”

                 (www.nrc.nl/nieuws)

MENS EVOLUEERT >< NATUUR VERGAAT

Er zijn nu ongeveer 6 miljard mensen op aarde, dit worden er in de nabije toekomst zo'n 10 miljard. Met zo'n snel groeiende bevolkingoefent de mens een steeds grotere druk uit op de natuur en heeft dus een grote invloed op de biodiversiteit op de aarde. Iedereen moet etenen heeft ruimte nodig om te wonen en te ontspannen. Elk mens benut natuurlijke bronnenzoals aardolie. We produceren ook afval, vooral in de rijke landen, maar nu ook steeds meer in de arme landen.De mens veroorzaakt schade aan het leven naast natuurlijke factoren zoals een natuurramp of een klimaatverandering. Wat zijn precies de schadelijke ingrepen van de mens?

Overbevissing: ‘verbeterde technologie’ àmoderne vistuigen en opsporingsapparaten àVernietiging schuil- en voorplantingsplaatsen àoverbevissing en afname vispopulaties!

Ontbossing: hout als bouwmateriaal of brandstof àvernietiging leefgebieden en schuilplaatsen van dieren àverdwijnen dieren en planten!

Overbegrazing: behoefte aan voedsel, vooral vlees.

Vernietiging en versnippering van leefgebieden.

Vervuiling en wereldwijde klimaatverandering; het broeikaseffect.

Invoering van vreemde soorten.

(www.natuurinformatie.nl)

Dropping environmental slogans like ‘save the planet’ to focus on ‘intelligent living’ instead would make a big difference, says George Marshall

Please, I beg you, if you care about climate change forget about “saving the planet”.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not arguing that you chuck your bike in a hedge and hurtle off to Heathrow in your 4x4. In fact the exact opposite.

The problem is that this wretched phrase and all the concepts it embodies are guaranteed to have the exact opposite effect. Let me unravel it and I hope you will agree.

First there is that word “planet”. This word contains no sense of emotional connection. What is a planet? A lump of cold rock floating in space. Personally it does nothing for me. My attachment is to my family, friends, and community. The further I get away from that core the less I feel connected or prepared to act. The word planet, like climate, distances it even further from my immediate concerns.

And then there is this saving thing. Some people, and I am one, are motivated by the call to save something specific from imminent destruction - rainforests or whales or the panda - but this is a rallying cry for a campaign, not a total change in behaviour.

The phrase “save the planet” is closely associated with these worthy campaigns and the activist culture that produced them, which, let’s face it, is overwhelmingly white and middle class. It is not an association that reaches deep into mainstream society.

And the wider associations of the word “save” speak of struggle, abstinence and sacrifice. It is no surprise that we are invariably told that the way we will save the planet is by giving something up: heat or travel or lighting.

Once again, telling people they have to give something up is an unproductive way to change their behaviour. Advertisers, those experts in motivation, never use the word save. Even if a product saves time or money they still avoid the word and highlight the wonderful things you could do with that extra money or time.

But people are not told about the wonderful things they could do with this planet if they save it. They are told, endlessly, of the appalling things that will happen if they don’t. This is blackmail and it simply doesn’t work.

But the biggest problem with “save the planet” lies with the underlying concept that people can be motivated to make personal changes by a gentle appeal to a vast collective goal. Why should anyone be told that it is their personal responsibility to save the planet any more than it is their responsibility to end global poverty or stop war?

A few people may be satisfied by the argument that if everyone made those small efforts it would create the desired change. However I fear that most people know only too well that the tiny contribution of their own efforts will immediately be overwhelmed by the indifferent high-carbon behaviour of their neighbour. And who can blame them?

So I say let’s chuck out the tired old phrases from a strategy that is clearly not working. Let’s start from first principles.

People want to make things better. No one feels motivated to do something that simply makes things less bad. They need a positive vision.

People want personal gain. That gain need not be financial: it could be an improvement in their health, happiness or status. People never want to live with less. But people are prepared to live differently, and they are happy to make the change if they are persuaded that this will bring other benefits. Put them all together and you get a very different message. And, to further reject the authoritarian tones of instructions to do this or that, I will write it as a personal testimony:

“I have embraced a lighter lifestyle because it is the smart, cool, intelligent and healthy way to live. I want to live in the present and the real world, not be tied to an outdated and dangerous 20th-century way of living. I live this way because I love it, because it makes me feel good and because it is healthy and gives me freedom.

“I feel that I am setting the pace for the 21st century and I am excited to see people all around me trying to catch up. If we all work together we can build a world that is cleaner, fairer and happier and that is what I want to leave my children.”

Isn’t that a better way to look at it?

—————————————————————————————————————————-

Eddie Vedder – Society

It’s a mystery to me We have a greed With which we have agreed

You think you have to want More than you need Until you have it all you won’t be free

Society, you’re a crazy breed I hope you’re not lonely without me

When you want more than you have You think you need And when you think more than you want Your thoughts begin to bleed

I think I need to find a bigger place ‘Cause when you have more than you think You need more space

Society, you’re a crazy breed I hope you’re not lonely without me Society, crazy and deep I hope you’re not lonely without me

There’s those thinking more or less less is more But if less is more how you’re keeping score? Means for every point you make Your level drops Kinda like it’s starting from the top You can’t do that

Society, you’re a crazy breed I hope you’re not lonely without me Society, crazy and deep I hope you’re not lonely without me

Society, have mercy on me I hope you’re not angry if I disagree Society, crazy and deep I hope you’re not lonely without me

[bendlerbaldler-blog]

Me: Explains to an SJW that their logic is flawed, and that their dismissive and mocking beheviour to those who do not agree with them, denotes a hateful mind and a regressive ideology.

Them: Makes text-posts taking me out of context, and then makes another text-post about how they’re gonna’ block me and delete all my asks, so no one can read any of their stupid responses that just insult me instead of proving me wrong :)

Somehow... I feel like I’ve ascended to a whole other level... I feel free... I feel one with the universe... And I finally understand SJWs... The real reason they’re so bitter and annoying, is because secretly they just want to be loved... Just... Beautiful... 

No but legit, they’re all bitter because no one loves them.

[secular-vernacular]

Fans systematically misremember, and misinterpret, the behaviour of their own team compared with the opponents. A match in which both teams appear equally culpable of committing fouls to an impartial observer will be seen by a partial fan as one characterised by far more fouls by the opposing team than their own.86A user’s guide to what affects behaviour.

Key points:

- So government often turns to less coercive, and sometimes very effective, measures, such as incentives (e.g. excise duty) and information provision (e.g. public health guidance) – as well as sophisticated communications techniques. 

- Behavioural insights can be used to enhance already existing programmes (e.g. incentives)

- Incentives & information intended to change behaviour by “changing minds” - carrot and stick, with accurate information, people will weight up revised cost & benefit and respond - but suggests people perfectly rational. If we shift to “changing contexts” - the environment within which we make decisions and respond to cues - potentially powerful way to improve individual wellbeing and social welfare. 

- Nine of the most robust (non-coercive) influences on our behaviour are captured by MINDSPACE:

Messenger: we are heavily influenced by who communicates information 

Incentives: our responses to incentives are shaped by predictable mental shortcuts such as strongly avoiding losses 

Norms :we are strongly influenced by what others do 

Defaults: we "go with the flow‟ of pre-set options 

Salience: our attention is drawn to what is novel and seems relevant to us 

Priming: our acts are often influenced by sub-conscious cues 

Affect: our emotional associations can powerfully shape our actions 

Commitments: we seek to be consistent with our public promises, and reciprocate acts 

Ego: we act in ways that make us feel better about ourselves

We show how this framework can help tackle challenges in three major areas of policy: crime and anti-social behaviour; pro-social behaviour, such as voting and volunteering; and healthy and prosperous lifestyles. 

For each policy area we give case studies of innovative evidence-based interventions, including: 

 How the logic of gang membership was used to combat gang violence (Norms) 

 How inertia helped us save more for retirement (Defaults) 

 How giant bananas reduced littering (Salience)

- Social influence & norms: going for lunch with others - taking the stairs or the lift 

- Salience & priming: smell, heat, size of plate & tray, choice of option if it came first 

- Commitment & reciprocity: wait at lift because psychologically committed, paying for someone if they get you cutlery

- Incentives & choice environment: physical environment can shape decisions (joining someone at a four person table rather than an eight person)

- This report complements the Government Social Research guide to Behaviour Change (which outlines various models for understanding and applying different models of behaviour), the Central Office of Information‟s Communications and Behaviour Change (which focuses specifically on the implications for Communications), and the Cabinet Office‟s Guide to Segmentation.

- markets rarely account properly for the good and bad spill over effects of our own behaviour on others.

-  some behaviours – such as antisocial behaviour and lack of exercise - have remained resistant to policy interventions. 

- We recognise that the most effective and sustainable changes in behaviour will come from the successful integration of cultural, regulatory and individual change – drink driving demonstrates how stiff penalties, good advertising and shifting social norms all combined to change behaviour quite significantly over a couple of decades.

In broad terms, there are two ways of thinking about changing behaviour:

1) The first is based on influencing what people consciously think about. We might call this the „rational‟ or „cognitive‟ model. Most traditional interventions in public policy take this route, and it is the standard model in economics. The presumption is that citizens and consumers will analyse the various pieces of information from politicians, governments and markets, the numerous incentives offered to us and act in ways that reflect their best interests (however they define their best interests, or - more paternalistically - however policymakers define them). 

2) The contrasting model of behaviour change focuses on the more automatic processes of judgment and influence – what Robert Cialdini calls „click, whirr‟ processes of mind. This shifts the focus of attention away from facts and information, and towards altering the context within which people act. We might call this the „context‟ model of behaviour change. The context model recognises that that people are sometimes seemingly irrational and inconsistent in their choices, often because they are influenced by surrounding factors. Therefore, it focuses more on „changing behaviour without changing minds‟. This route has received rather less attention from researchers and policymakers. 

- Two systems of thinking - fast and slow - The two systems have different capabilities: the reflective mind has limited capacity, but offers more systematic and „deeper‟ analysis. The automatic mind processes many things separately, simultaneously, and often unconsciously, but is more „superficial‟: it takes short-cuts and has ingrained biases. As one academic source explains, „once triggered by environmental features, [these] preconscious automatic processes run to completion without any conscious monitoring‟.

- In practice, this distinction is not so clear-cut: a mix of both reflective and automatic processes govern behaviour. When reading a book, for example, we can concentrate and ignore our surrounding environment – but if someone calls our name, we break off and look at them. Our reflective system is ignoring everything but the book, but our automatic system is not.

- limits to information: But we also know that providing information per se often has surprisingly modest and sometimes even unintended impacts when it attempts to change individuals‟ behaviour:

xAfter public warnings of an „obesity epidemic‟, New York State passed legislation that made restaurants post the calorific content of all regular menu items. Initial studies found no detectable change in calories purchased after the introduction of labelling.20 The reason for this may be that to most New Yorkers this information does not mean anything much, or – according to one early analysis - they are not aware of what levels of calories are good or bad. New York City has subsequently initiated an educational campaign that informs residents that „2,000 calories a day is all most adults should eat‟. 

x More generally, it has been found that existing „changing minds‟ theories and methods leave a substantial proportion of the variance in behaviour to be explained.21 For example, one meta-analysis of pro-environmental behaviours reported that at least 80% of the factors influencing behaviour did not result from knowledge or awareness.22

x  For example, one intervention tried to provoke drivers to reducing their driving speed by painting a series of white stripes onto the road that are initially evenly spaced but get closer together as drivers reach a dangerous curve. This environmental design gives the sensation that driving speed is increasing (even when the speed does not really change), which in turn triggers the driver‟s natural instinct to slow down. The cost of sending such a visual signal is close to zero, but the effectiveness is very significant.25

Arguments for cost effectiveness:

1) Perhaps the strongest argument for cost-effectiveness is that, quite simply, there is no neutral option for government interventions 

2)  since government spends a considerable amount of money on influencing behaviour, its success in doing so will be maximised if it draws on robust evidence of how people Simply providing information often has modest and sometimes even unintended impacts This report focuses on the more automatic or context-based drivers of behaviour 16 Discussion document – not a statement of government policy actually behave. Indeed, there is also some evidence to back up the view that changing the context, rather than people‟s minds, may be more cost-effective. 

- Some of the elements have been developed to explain largely automatic effects on behaviour (e.g. N, D, S, P, A) while other effects relate to elements that draw more on reflective processing (e.g. M, I, C, E).27 We recognise there are important lessons for policy-makers coming from more traditional theories of behaviour change that relate to the Reflective System. But we can only understand how incentives work, for example, when we account for the automatic effects of loss aversion alongside the more considered weighing up of costs and benefits.

- Messenger

- The weight we give to information depends greatly on the reactions we have to the source of that information. We are affected by the perceived authority of the messenger (whether formal or informal). For example, there is evidence that people are more likely to act on information if experts deliver it. 

- It has also been shown that demographic and behavioural similarities between the expert and the recipient can improve the effectiveness of the intervention. Importantly in relation to addressing inequalities, those from lower socioeconomic groups are more sensitive to the characteristics of the messenger

- Whilst expertise matters, so do peer effects. The „Health Buddy‟ scheme involved older students receiving healthy living lessons from their schoolteachers. The older students then acted as peer teachers to deliver that lesson to younger „buddies‟

- We are also affected by the feelings we have for the messenger: for example, we may irrationally discard advice given by someone we dislike.32 Feelings of this kind may override traditional cues of authority.  In such cases, the most effective strategy for changing behaviour may be to use third parties or downplay government involvement in a campaign or intervention.

- We also, of course, use more rational and cognitive means to assess how convincing a messenger is. For example, we will consider such issues as whether there is a consensus across society (do lots of different people say the same thing?) and the consistency across occasions (does the communicator say the same thing in different situations?).33

- Incentives

Our responses to incentives are shaped by mental shortcuts, such as loss aversion

- Losses loom larger than gains: We dislike losses more than we like gains of an equivalent amount. Most current incentive schemes offer rewards to participants, but a recent review of trials of treatments for obesity involving the use of financial incentives found no significant effect on long-term weight loss or maintenance.35 An alternative may be to frame incentives as a charge that will be imposed if people fail to do something. One recent study on weight loss asked some participants to deposit money into an account, which was returned to them (with a supplement) if they met weight loss targets. After seven months this group showed significant weight loss compared to their entry weight. The weight of participants in a control group was not seen to change.36 The fear of losing money may have created a strong incentive to lose weight. Therefore, policy-makers could emphasise the money that people will lose by not taking an action, rather than the amount they could save.

- Reference points matter: the value of something depends on where we see it from – and how big or small the change appears from that reference point. If the utility of money is judged relative to very locally and narrowly determined reference points, a small incentive could have a great effect. 37 As possible evidence of this, incentives were used in Malawi to encourage people to pick up their HIV result (many do not otherwise): take-up was doubled by incentives just worth one-tenth of a day‟s wage. 

- We overweight small probabilities: But evidence suggests that people place more weight on small probabilities than theory suggests. While people are likely to overemphasise the small chance of, say, being audited, which may lead to greater tax compliance than rational choice models predict. 

- We mentally allocate money to discrete bundles. We think of money as sitting in different “mental budgets” – salary, savings, expenses, etc. Spending is constrained by the amount sitting in different accounts39 and we are reluctant to move money between such accounts. Mental accounting means that identical incentives vary in their impact according to the context: people are willing to take a trip to save £5 off a £15 radio, but not to save £5 off a refrigerator costing £210.40 This means that policies may encourage people to save or spend money by explicitly „labelling‟ accounts for them, without removing their control over exactly how the money is used. The impact of particular expenditure could be boosted by linking it to one mental account rather than another.

- We live for today at the expense of tomorrow: This implies that we have a very high discount rate for now compared to later, but a lower discount rate for later compared to later still. This is known as „hyperbolic discounting‟ and it leads people to discount the future very heavily when sacrifices are required in the present – for example, to ensure improved environmental outcomes in the future.42 There is evidence that the immediacy of reward has an impact on the success of schemes to treat substance misuse disorders.43 

- Norms

- Some social norms have a powerful automatic effect on behaviour (e.g. being quiet in a library) and can influence actions in positive and negative ways. Their power may come from the social penalties for non-compliance, or the social benefit that comes from conforming. Behavioural interventions using social norms have been successful in a number of areas, and most are based on telling people what other people do in a similar situation.

-  If the norm is desirable, let people know about it:  In seatbelt use, the „Most of Us Wear Seatbelts Campaign‟ used a social norms approach to increase the number of people using seatbelts. Initial data collection showed that individuals underestimated the extent to which their fellow citizens used seatbelts either as drivers or passengers: although 85% of respondents to a survey used a seatbelt, their perception was only 60% of other citizens adults did. An intensive social norms media campaign was launched to inform residents of the true proportion of people who used seatbelts. As a result of the campaign the selfreported use of seatbelt significantly increased.

- Relate the norm to your target audience as much as possible: In recycling, when a hotel room contained a sign that asked people to recycle their towels to save the environment, 35.1% did so. When the sign used social norms and said that most guests at the hotel recycled their towels at least once during their stay, 44.1% complied. And when the sign said that most previous occupants of the room had reused towels at some point during their stay, 49.3% of guests also recycled.

- Consider social networks: Norms may also have important effects in explaining „contagious‟ behaviour. There is still controversy surrounding the idea that we are more likely to get fat, for example, if our friends get fat48 – and get happier if they do49 – but it is at least plausible that social networks are at play here to some degree. Combined with the appropriate messenger (and other elements of MINDSPACE too), social norms and networks could used to bring about behaviour change that passes through groups and communities.

- Norms may need reinforcing: In energy conservation, a large-scale programme (80,000 homes) sent letters that provided social comparisons between a household‟s energy use and that of its neighbours (as well as simple energy consumption information). The scheme was seen to reduce energy consumption by 2% relative to the baseline. Interestingly, the effects of the intervention decayed over the months between letters and increased again upon receipt of the next letter.50 In other words, if the norm is not immediately apparent to people, repeated efforts may be required for its effects to become self-sustaining. 5.

- Be careful when dealing with undesirable norms: Sometimes campaigns can increase perceptions of undesirable behaviour. When households were given information about average energy usage, those who consumed more than the average reduced their consumption – but those who were consuming less than the average increased their consumption. This „boomerang‟ effect was eliminated if a happy or sad face was added to the bill, thus conveying social approval or disapproval.51 

Similarly, messages aimed at reducing bad behaviour can be undermined by the social norms they implicitly signal. For example, two signs were placed in different areas of a national park. One sign urged visitors not to take wood and depicted a scene showing three thieves stealing wood, while the second sign depicted a single thief – indicating that stealing is definitely not a social/collective norm. The first message, subtly conveying a norm, increased the amount of wood stolen by 7.92%, while the other sign increased it by 1.67%.52 Therefore, policymakers may actually validate and encourage harmful actions by making them appear the norm rather than the exception.

- Defaults

- This default setting is often selected through natural ordering or convenience, rather than a desire to maximise benefits for citizens. Structuring the default option to maximise benefits for citizens can influence behaviour without restricting individual choice, as the following examples show.

x Ventilators are frequently used to help very unwell patients who are breathing insufficiently in Intensive Care Units. Ventilators have settings that allow doctors to decide how much air to blow into the lungs per minute. Doctors usually determine the choice of volumes used and it is recognised that the lungs can be injured if volumes are too high. A research study changed the default setting of the ventilators to provide lower volumes of air into patients‟ lungs. The mortality rate was 25% lower with the new setting – such an improvement that the trial was stopped early. 53 

x In addition, there is evidence that the use of opt-out defaults can raise organ donation rates greatly (see Figure 2 below), although this remains a controversial issue.54

- Salience 

- In our everyday lives, we are bombarded with stimuli. As a result, we tend to unconsciously filter out much information as a coping strategy. People are more likely to register stimuli that are novel (messages in flashing lights), accessible (items on sale next to checkouts) and simple (a snappy slogan)

- Simplicity is important here because our attention is much more likely to be drawn to things that we can understand – to those things that we can easily “encode‟. And we are much more likely to be able to encode things that are presented in ways that relate directly to our personal experiences than to things presented in a more general and abstract way. For example, the size of the current NHS budget is more salient when expressed as an amount per tax payer than as the overall amount. Similarly, because we find losses more salient than gains, we react differently when identical information is framed in terms of one or the other (as a 20% chance – not a statement of government policy of survival or an 80% chance of death).

- it has been shown that, over a 30-year period, taxes that are included in posted prices reduce alcohol consumption significantly more than taxes added at the register.58 Salience may therefore offer a way of complementing traditional price levers in policy-making

- When making a decision, we often lack knowledge about a topic (for example, buying a DVD player). Experiments show that we look for an initial „anchor‟ (i.e. a price for a DVD player) on which to base our decisions. It has been shown that the minimum payment amount on credit card statements attracts our attention and „anchors‟ our decisions. 

- The power of anchors is such that they work even if they are totally arbitrary. If people are asked to write down the last two digits of their social security number, this „anchors‟ the amount they bid for items and their estimates of historical events – even though clearly there is no logical connection between the two.

- Anchors endure over time, and continue to influence our decisions long after conditions change.61 This is related to the well-known ”confirmation bias‟: people tend to pay little attention to information that challenges an existing belief or hypothesis, and focus intently on any supportive information

- salience explains why unusual or extreme experiences are more prominent than more constant experiences. Our memory of experiences is governed by the most intense „peak‟ moments, as well as the final impressions in a chain of events.63 In other words, we may prefer the dentist that gave us three hours of steady discomfort over the one who gave us sharp pang of pain, because that pang is particularly salient. Peak effects can, for example, help us predict which medical treatments may be avoided by patients.

- Priming

- Priming shows that people‟s subsequent behaviour may be altered if they are first exposed to certain sights, words or sensations. In other words, people behave differently if they have been „primed‟ by certain cues beforehand.

1) Words

- Exposing people to words relating to the elderly (e.g. „wrinkles‟) meant they subsequently walked more slowly when leaving the room and had a poorer memory of the room. In other words, they had been „primed‟ with an elderly stereotype and behaved accordingly.

- Asking participants to make a sentence out of scrambled words such as fit, lean, active, athletic made them significantly more likely to use the stairs, instead of lifts.

2) Smells

- Mere exposure to the scent of an all-purpose cleaner made significantly more people to keep their table cleaner while eating in a canteen.

3) Sights

- If a happy face is subliminally presented to someone drinking, it causes them to drink more than those exposed to a frowning face.

-The size of food containers primes our subsequent eating

- Deliberately placing certain objects in one‟s environment can alter behaviour – „situational cues‟ like walking shoes and runner's magazines may prime a “healthy lifestyle” in people.69 In this way, priming can reinforce existing intentions to act in a certain way.

- Affect

- Affect (the act of experiencing emotion) is a powerful force in decision-making. Emotional responses to words, images and events can be rapid and automatic, so that people can experience a behavioural reaction before they realise what they are reacting to

- This means that many people buy houses not because of floor size or location, but because of the visceral feeling they get when walking through the front door 

-  It was found that the actual advertising content had a significant effect on take up of loans, rather than just prices. In particular, including a picture of an attractive, smiling female increased demand for the financial product by the same amount as a 25% decrease in the loan‟s interest rate.

-  Researchers noted that Ghanaians used soap when they felt that their hands were dirty (e.g., after cooking or travelling), that hand-washing was provoked by feelings of disgust. As a result, the intervention campaign focused on provoking disgust rather than promoting soap use. Soapy hand washing was shown only for 4 seconds in one 55-second television commercial, but there was a clear message that toilet use prompts worries of contamination and disgust, and requires soap. This led to a 13% increase in the use of soap after the toilet and 41% increase in reported soap use before eating.

- unhelpful to „create fear without agency‟ – in other words, to create an emotional reaction without obviously connecting it to a change in behaviour. Otherwise, people may simply continue with the same actions but with increased anxiety. It has also been argued that people can build up an expectation of being shocked in relation to certain messages, which can make them less effective. A better tactic may be to present these messages in a counter-intuitive manner instead, which points towards to the importance of customer Insight

- Commitment

- We tend to procrastinate and delay taking decisions that are likely to be in our long-term interests.75 Many people are aware of their will-power weaknesses (such as a tendency to overspend, overeat or continue smoking) and use commitment devices to achieve long-term goals. 

- It has been shown that commitments usually become more effective as the costs for failure increase. One common method for increasing such costs is to make commitments public, since breaking the commitment will lead to significant reputational damage. 

- To increase physical exercise, commitment to achieving a goal (such as 10,000 steps a day using a pedometer) appears to significantly increase success. 

- A final aspect of commitment is the importance of reciprocity. We have a very strong instinct for reciprocity, which is linked to a desire for fairness that can lead us to act irrationally.82 We can see the desire for reciprocity strongly in the attitude of „I‟ll commit to it if you do‟. Reciprocity effects can mean that, for example, accepting a gift acts as a powerful commitment to return the favour at some point, which is why free samples are often effective marketing tools.

- Ego

- We tend to behave in a way that supports the impression of a positive and consistent self-image. When things go well in our lives, we attribute it to ourselves; when they go badly, it‟s the fault of other people, or the situation we were put in – an effect known as the „fundamental attribution error‟.

- .84 We think the same way for groups that we identify with. Psychologists have found this group identification to be a very robust effect, and its power is so great that – like a number of the other effects above – it changes how we see the world.85 

-  Fans systematically misremember, and misinterpret, the behaviour of their own team compared with the opponents. A match in which both teams appear equally culpable of committing fouls to an impartial observer will be seen by a partial fan as one characterised by far more fouls by the opposing team than their own.

- giving is also the result of a desire to maintain a positive self-image (in the eyes of the opposite sex in this case).88 This suggests that, for example, attempts to reduce smoking should consider if smoking is bound up with a desire for self-esteem and positive self-image, which means self-esteem may be an effective route for change (pointing out that smoking causes yellow teeth and impotence).89 Of course, this is not a blanket prescription – for people with very low self-esteem, a more effective route may be to build their sense of self-efficacy. This reinforces the need to combine MINDSPACE effects with a nuanced understanding of the capabilities and motivations of the target audience (see Chapter 4). 

- We also like to think of ourselves as self-consistent. So what happens when our behaviour and our self-beliefs are in conflict? Interestingly, often it is our beliefs that get adjusted, rather than our behaviour.90 The desire for consistency is used in the foot-in-the-door technique in marketing, which asks people to comply with a small request (e.g. filling in a short questionnaire for free), which then leads to them complying with larger and more costly requests (e.g., buying a related product).91 Once they have made the initial small change to their behaviour, the powerful desire to act consistently takes over – the initial action changes their selfimage and gives them reasons for agreeing to subsequent requests (“I did that, so I must have a preference for these products”). In other words, small and easy changes to behaviour can lead to subsequent changes in behaviour that may go largely unnoticed.92 This approach challenges the common belief that we should first seek to change attitudes in order to change behaviour.

- Similarly, it has been shown that the greater the expectation placed on people, the better they perform.93 Thus, people with positive expectations internalise their “positive” label and succeed accordingly; but this influence can also be detrimental if a negative label is used.94 A self-fulfilling prophecy is created, whereby people behave in a way that is consistent with the expectation of others. 

- Our desire for positive self-image leads to an (often automatic) tendency to compare ourselves against others and “self-evaluate”.95 When we make these comparisons, we are biased to believe that we perform better than the average person in various ways: 93% of American college students rated themselves as being “above average” in driving ability.96 This bias may require policymakers to go beyond what might be considered optimal in regulating some behaviours. For example, it might be necessary to enforce stricter working hour limits for professions that impose risk on others, such as long-distance drivers and medical staff, because people will overrate their ability to cope with fatigue and stress; or set very low levels of acceptable alcohol consumption when driving, because drivers will overestimate their driving skills.