#and my job is to help them reframe problems

[domini-porter]

jda just told me a UW neurologist is doing research studies into tarot and found it acts on the brain through the same (as-yet unidentified) mechanism as talk therapy and as a tarot reader who approaches my work through the lens of trauma recovery I am VINDICATED

[alianoralacanta]

Hi Alianora! I am curious to know your thoughts on Ferrari and PR. Particularly how they do damage control. 2022 comes to mind, and this year's triple header as well.

Maybe it's because I don't keep up with other team statements as much but Ferrari seem to be less... transparent?? with their struggles as a team. Binotto in 2022 comes to mind when he would pin the blame on his drivers and say that nothing needs to change.

Also Charles in particular plays the PR game more than Carlos. I mean, this year in China, Charles said the two of them had talked and everything was fine, but then when asked, Carlos said the complete opposite and that they hadn't actually sorted it out. Oops.

I remember specifically Charles saying the team was "extremely united, no division" in 2022 but then multiple statements of his in 2023 under Vasseur imply otherwise.

Ferrari seem to be more willing to throw their drivers under the bus when shit hits the fan and it's more clear that the team messed up big time. Vasseur will have no problem defending Charles in weekends where Ferrari aren't a complete disaster, but in situations like the triple header, he's willing to shift the focus on the drivers.

Is it a Ferrari pride sort of thing?

Ferrari and PR

Firstly, apologies for the long delay in replying. This is my 3rd attempt at finding a coherent frame for my thoughts on the subject. I hope this works. If it does not, please request clarification, reframing or simply to have another attempt.

Also, fair warning: long essay. This essay is 6060 words long, excluding headings. As such, it will be divided into multiple “read more” sections. Tumblr only allows this by posting the essay multiple times, with a fresh addition each time. Please wait for the “Essay complete. Hope this helps” before reblogging. Firstly, PR is not a monolith. Humanity is not a monolith with one unified opinion of what everything is and how everything works. They agree and disagree on what is appealing in a statement made to them on a given subject. Thus, PR can and often is tailored to particular audiences. Furthermore, different groups that produce PR value different things. Section 1: What does Ferrari value? (Ferrari myth PR)

Ferrari has been stricter about PR than any other team. Part of this originated with Enzo Ferrari himself, for he was careful to ensure that nothing was said that undermined Ferrari's political position or offended his sense of what the speaker's job should be (driver or engineer). It has to be said that this didn't put the boundaries in the same place as any modern team's PR approach. While complaining about the team or car being slow was considered just as wrong then as now, a driver saying they'd been cautious because the race was long would also be considered bad. Enzo considered it his job to worry about the car, and the driver's job to press the car as hard as possible. (An engineer who suggested putting less emphasis on the engine in favour of the chassis would fare no better). On the other hand, skipping a sponsor event to go kart would probably meet with his approval. (Whether he would have regarded Max's sim racing as similar enough to treat likewise is unknown, since race driving software wasn't very sophisticated in the 1980s). Later in Enzo Ferrari's career, there began to be more emphasis on Ferrari the myth. Niki Lauda was not particularly appreciated while he was at Ferrari because his approach was so different from Enzo's ideal, but Niki became far more appreciated after that because Enzo realised what he'd done had, in fact, resulted in Ferrari's myth strengthening. (The title did no harm either). Gilles Villeneuve encapsulated what it meant to augment the Ferrari myth. The intervening decades ended up condensing the traits that became part of "Ferrari myth PR": - humble and modest - fast - respectful of opponents - downplaying team psuedopolitics - eloquent and concise when needed - competing with style, verve and boldness - able and willing to do the impossible - believing in the team even when it does not believe in itself - remember one represents a dream - remember that, whatever one's nationality, one represents the honour of the tifosi The price for defying PR in the Enzo Ferrari era was variable and fickle, due to the perennial psuedopolitics behind the scenes. (The situation under Fred Vasseur would have been considered relatively calm back then. Some parts of the Mattia Binotto era, not so much).

[unbidden-yidden-deactivated20240]

I feel myself having so much less patience these days, and I don't like it.

Patience and compassion and kindness are things that must be cultivated like tender plants - they grow by the inch and die by the foot.

Seeing into someone's heart is something that takes a little effort, but the way to do it is by reframing your outlook, like you might adjust your vision to see through water. There are layers to a person, and you have to look past what they say or do on the surface in order to get to their true motivations.

And it takes patience and holding space for people, because they are used to operating in an unsafe environment. It's like when you go to the pond, you're not likely to see frogs right away. You might need to sit quietly for a half hour before the frogs re-emerge and float to the surface. But once you see them, suddenly there are frogs everywhere! You just had to wait until your mind allowed you to take them in. People's vulnerabilities and intentions are the same way. You might need to wait a while until the person is sure you are safe to be around, or they might have been exhibiting all of those vulnerabilities and motivations pretty openly; you just couldn't tell until you knew what you were looking for.

This gets much, much harder to do when you yourself don't feel safe, especially when you aren't (or feel like you aren't) being seen as human. You also (obviously) must see the other person as equally human to yourself, or this doesn't work. Perhaps a broken, deeply flawed person; but a person nonetheless.

I work in the domestic violence field, and so I end up talking to a lot of abusers in my professional life on behalf of my clients. I've found that it helps a lot to be kind. Why? Not because it's deserved, but because it's unexpected. They come into the situation ready to fight and argue, and instead, I speak to them kindly and explain why what my clients are asking for is in everyone's best interests. This seems to deflate them pretty immediately. They come into the situation thinking I'm the boss level for "fights with my ex (or whatever)" and then I listen. I take them out of earshot of my client, I let them vent (which helps me figure out what they actually want) and then I patiently explain our position and how we're offering to resolve the situation. And you know what? It works. A lot of the time, they were expecting me to treat them like a monster. But they're not a monster; they're a person who has done some inexcusable and horrific things, but they remain a person. I think about both my abusive exes, and the truth is that they're both people I loved, and loved for a reason. I wouldn't want someone else to hurt them (even if it was in cruel words only) just because they hurt me. Sometimes, the abuser is the father (or mother) of the client's children. There is typically always anger, but what good does it do for me to vent that anger for my client? Who does it help? Nobody. If we can't agree, then fine. I will do my job of asking the tough questions without mercy. But before that? Far better to de-escalate if possible.

Another conflict resolution thing: you have to remove the aggressive third parties that are angry on one side or the other's behalf. They tend to aggravate the party and escalate the situation by talking in the person's ear and saying how unfair this is and generally making it about their own feelings rather than problem solving.

But here too, finding out where the third parties who have involved themselves in the situation actually want is critical to diffusing this as well. They are people who are righteously (at least in their mind) angry on behalf of one of the parties because they love them and this has activated their protective side. And sometimes people really do need an advocate, yes. But sometimes (a lot of times) these third parties actually get in the way of de-escalation and problem solving.

All of this requires patience, effort, cultivation. And I work hard to do that. But lately my patience has been worn thin by too many people seeing me as subhuman, and it's really starting to wear on me.

[sandersontheside]

thought i would give some options (or multiple in one if ur feeling ambitious lol) from drabble list 5 + prinxiety ! 6. "We need a strategy." 41. "Don't you want some advice?" 59. "If there is a problem, I don't want to hear about it."

Thanks for the options! I ended up using them all and writing some romangst. I've never really written canon compliant stuff before, but that's where my brain went with this. Hope you enjoy! (prompt lists: 4,5,7)

Roman appeared in his room still trying to hold back the tears that were pooling in his eyes, and immediately curled up in his bed. It was foolish, he knew, how upset he was. He was being a drama queen, as usual. Poor Roman, can’t handle things not going his way, too used to being the center of attention. 

But in his defense, Thomas was planning a music video. If any of them should’ve been in charge of this, it should have been him. It was his idea, his song choice, his artistic vision. And they were all more than happy to take his ideas at the start. But now that it was in the practical planning stage? Suddenly it was “colorful lighting and smoke effects are too expensive, Roman” and “maybe Thomas should just sing the song in his living room”  and “it’s not fair to always ask Thomas’s friends for help.” 

Roman wasn’t stupid. He knew that his big ideas would have to be pared down for practicality. And he knew that paring them down was Logan’s job. But it still hurt, the way he was completely shot down time and again. Patton tried to reframe it as encouragement–“Don't you want some advice, Kiddo?"---and maybe Roman would have believed that before. Things change. Heroes fall. And no matter how much Patton insisted he was trying to help, Roman still felt stifled, even as he continued to rattle out ideas to be scrapped for parts. 

“We need a strategy,” Logan had eventually snapped. “Not a daydream.” 

That shut Roman up for a long time, as the others went back and forth on the aforementioned strategy. Eventually, he got tired of being ignored and passed over, and decided there was no point in sticking around. He didn’t even say anything, just raised his arms and began to sink out. None of them even noticed. 

Or that’s what Roman thought, until he pulled from his self pity by a familiar, low voice. “Trying to slack off, Princey?” Virgil’s tone was light and teasing, but Roman wasn’t in the mood. 

"If there is a problem, Dark Knight, I don't want to hear about it,”  he snapped, sitting up. 

“Woah,”  Virgil put his hands up. “There’s no problem. Except maybe with you. Why���d you leave?” 

“No one’s asked for my opinion in the last ten minutes,” Roman shrugged, feeling guilty for lashing out at his—at Virgil. “I don’t think I’m needed up there.” 

“Well, that’s stupid,” Virgil shoved Roman over on the bed and squished in next to him. “As soon as you left, so did Thomas’s desire to work on the music video at all. All he had to listen to was Logan pointing out the impracticalities and me worrying about his audience hating it. We need you to balance us out, Roman. You know that.”

Roman huffed. “That may be the case, but it doesn’t change the fact that Logan and Patton won’t listen to my ideas. Every single thing I said got shot down.” 

“Come on,” Virgil leaned against him, warm and solid. “You know your ideas can be a little out there sometimes. We all have to compromise. That’s what balance means.” 

“I know, I know!” Roman threw his arms up. “Intellectually, I know that. But lately, it all just feels like an attack. Like they all hate me.” 

“You know it’s not, though, right?” 

Roman didn’t say anything. 

Virgil reached a hand to cup Roman’s cheek, tilting his head and forcing him to make eye contact. “Look at me. It’s not. Patton loves you. Logan loves you. I love you.” 

Roman blinked, feeling his eyes mist over again, and pressed into Virgil’s touch. “I’m just—I’m tired. Ever since the callback, everything with Logan and Patton has felt off. I’m always walking on eggshells around them and it’s exhausting.” 

Virgil sighed. “I know, and believe me, I have been on them to make it right with you. It’s going to take time before things feel normal again. But I promise they still love you.” 

Roman sniffed. “Thank you. I guess I’m just not doing well with all the changes. Janus getting accepted, my brother getting acknowledged. God knows he’ll be accepted next, and then Thomas won’t need me at all.” 

“Ro,” Virgil wiped a stray tear away with his thumb. “Even when Remus is accepted, Thomas will still need you. You’re more than creativity—you’re his passion, his drive. I don’t think Remus has any of that.” A pause. “Well, maybe ego.” 

Roman snorted. 

“As for De-Janus, I really don’t think he’s out to get you. He’s just….Like That.” 

“I really don’t like that guy,” Roman shook his head. 

“That’s what you said about me once, Princey.” Virgil smirked. “Look where that’s gotten you.” 

Roman couldn’t fight a smile at that. “I think it’s gotten me right where I need to be.” He kissed Virgil softly. “Thanks for coming after me, Stormcloud.” 

“Anytime, Princey.” Virgil wrapped his arms around Roman and pulled him in tight. “I know things are difficult right now. But you’ve always got me.” 

“I know we still need to work on this music video,” Roman leaned back, taking Virgil with him until they were fully horizontal. “But can we cuddle for a bit first?” 

Virgil laughed softly, repositioning himself so his head was on Roman’s chest and their legs were tangled together. “We can.” 

[fierceawakening]

I feel a bit afraid to even post this, for fear of someone else lashing out at me for questioning received wisdom but I still kind of feel like people are so invested in explaining their point of view (which I’m already saying is valid) that they’re missing part of mine

And that is that for me, part of my trauma is that I was both physically violated AND physically altered. And also I’m afab, and very often girls and women bear the brunt of purity culture in ways men and boys… definitely can but I’m not sure they always do.

And what purity culture says to little girls is that their worth is in their… well purity. Their innocence. That’s what’s beautiful and lovable about them.

So what happened to me… at least as I experienced it, I felt it stole my innocence. Destroyed my purity. I was still a virgin, but I’d kept a tight lid on any interest in anything dark or sinister or anything like that (and it turned out there was a lot to keep a lid on.)

After my trauma I was so angry and disillusioned I couldn’t do that any more. I got angry. I got cynical. I got bitter.

Which is all understandable. But here’s the kicker: I felt bad about it. Like a monster. Damaged and broken.

I kept getting diagnoses of situational depression. I’d get talk therapy until I felt a little better and then it would end and I’d need it again, later, like clockwork. It didn’t dawn on me that this indicated a chronic problem, not clearly enough for me to say “let’s look at diagnoses that include recurrence.”

In grad school, I read the book Trauma and Recovery which is an in depth look at PTSD, mostly as suffered by women who were raped or sexually abused.

In it, the women described my deep feelings of having been defiled so well it was eerie. They talked about feeling like there was dirt or oil or mud or sludge way down in their soul, where they couldn’t remove it.

That it made them fundamentally unclean in ways other people weren’t. Dirtied deep down, in ways that would forever separate them from other people who hadn’t been polluted.

Which is how I felt and still feel when things get bad, and what makes me feel suicidal. I can never be clean again, so I’m fundamentally unworthy, so I need to die and get it over with already.

Trying to frame it as that I’m still clean, or that the dirty one is the perpetrator(s), may work for other people, and I wish them the best. But trying to reframe it that way has never worked for me personally. As I said my body is literally altered surgically. I can’t avoid that something changed.

So what has worked to help me feel less like I don’t deserve to live?

Seeing the new thing that was created as worthwhile rather than poisoned.

Because of that, I get a lot of reassurance out of monster stories, especially ones where the monster isn’t fundamentally evil, just threatened and lashing out, or confused, or a child that doesn’t know its own strength or the like.

Which overlaps A LOT with “what doesn’t kill me makes me stronger.”

It’s not quite the same but it’s a cousin concept, a sibling. “You tried to kill me. You really should have finished the job.”

So when I see people say “don’t tell me I’m stronger now, I get to be the judge of that thank you very much,” that version I get.

But when I see “the idea that I’m stronger now is bullshit, all I did was break,” that one twigs me.

Because it pulls me back to the broken doll oozing ichor. Nothing new came out of this. Nothing brave. That’s just a demon trying to justify continuing to exist, when deep down it knows all it is is pollution.

I make these posts not to tell people that they need to see themselves as stronger. I don’t know how they should heal. They know that.

I make them to remind people that there are a lot of different ways to reconstruct a self, and that it’s easy to overstep if you generalize too much.

[seidigardensystem]

Your Words Matter

Dear Therapists,

I had just logged into a Zoom session for my Diagnosing Pathology class and my cohort was in deep discussion with one particular student as we all waited for our professor. This student in particular was already working in some sort of clinical setting, not yet giving therapy, but a new client profile had come across her desk with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder. She didn’t know much about the diagnosis herself, but she was concerned because her boss said, “Whoa, good luck with that one. Borderlines are very difficult to work with.”

Difficult. It’s not the first time I’ve heard that word. Every time I hear a professional utter the word, “difficult” when referencing a client it stings. Is that how you really see us? As patients/clients that are stuck in a downward spiral whose struggles are too much for you to handle? Don’t you believe in what you do and that there is hope for us?

My heart breaks for whoever this person is that has borderline personality disorder because the cards have been stacked against them before they’ve even gotten started. One of my school assignments required me to write about working with a difficult population and this was my response:

“If we get the idea that a particular diagnosis or population is difficult to work with it feels like we are setting ourselves up for failure. Maybe we will treat them differently or have lower expectations or refuse to work with them because we have a negative perception.”

In 2022, I attended the Healing Together conference hosted by An Infinite Mind in Orlando, Florida. I was sitting in a session where I could hear and learn about lived experiences with dissociation and an excerpt from a book was read aloud as an example of how some clinicians view dissociative identity disorder. The presenter who read the excerpt was sad, the audience was sad, and I felt infuriated. The gist of the excerpt talked about how a clinician should be wary because clients with dissociative identity disorder are difficult to work with and that they bring unsolvable problems to therapy.

Unsolvable problems? Listen, if a client’s problem was easy to solve, they wouldn’t need therapy! Of course we are bringing our unsolvable problems to you. We believe in your ability to help us. We were trusting you enough to share our struggles. When we hear you call us difficult, challenging, resistant, and a myriad of other words, you break our trust and confidence.

My ask of you is that you reframe your perspective of difficult clients. My therapist always says that behavior is communication, so when you find a client’s behavior particularly difficult, ask yourself, “What is my client trying to tell me?” “What does my client need right now?” Seek out peer consultation or supervision without passing judgment on how difficult a client is for you.

I’ve always carried around my own judgment about myself as a client in therapy. I used to tell my therapist, “Thank you for putting up with me” and her response was, “There’s nothing to put up with.” When I had the opportunity to watch her present at a conference once, I went up to her just before it started to tell her she’d do a great job. She just smiled and said, “Everything I’m presenting today, I learned from you.” I thought about that for a long time. Not once, in our years of therapy had she ever shown any indication of frustration, feeling challenged, or felt I was difficult. She simply adapted her interventions as needed.

The NICABM posted back on June 11, 2022 on their Facebook page a quote from Pat Ogden, PhD; “When we call clients resistant or difficult, it’s because our interventions are not working and we feel incompetent.” As clients, we don’t think you’re incompetent. We think there’s something wrong with us and we believe you when we hear you say we’re difficult. So, please, choose carefully. Your words matter.

Sincerely,

A DID Client

References

NICABM. (2022, June 11). What may at first seem like opposition or resistance can often signal a client’s deepest struggles. [Status Update]. [Image attached]. Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/NICABM/photos/10159170676011314

[angel-maybe-alive]

My problem with Hades and Persephone retelling

(aka this will not end well for me)

So sometime ago I made a post about things I hate in "modern literature" basically me ranting about booktok shit, and I mentioned my pure hatred for the "hades/Persephone retellings" genre and I tried to explain it in the reblogs but I didn't phrased myself very well there so I want to do it again?

So here I go swinging another baseball bat to the wasps nest.

The Homeric hymn of demeter is this very known tale of why we have the seasons, the plot basically goes as: Hades god of the underworld kidnaps Persephone goddess of flowers, demeter her mother goddess of crops gets desperate don't do her job while trying to find her the world suffers yada yada something something in the end Persephone has to spent half of the year with her mother (spring and summer) and the other half with her husband in the underworld (autumn/winter)

Right

Now let's go to the " doesn't matter my opinion people will be mad at me "part

The full myth as is presented in the Homeric hymn of demeter has Persephone pretty clearly being kidnapped and held against her will

The myth was very clear about Persephone's not willingness to the marriage as she 1- screamed for help 2- was described as miserable when visited by Hermes 3- asked for her mother 4-lightened up once hearing about her 5- is described as being tricked by hades to eat the pomegranates who kept her tied to the underworld

In the context of when the myth was created the reasoning was pretty clear to be about the horrifying yet inevitability of wedding, and the separation between mother and daughter.

Arranged or forced marriages are a fictional thing to a lot of people nowadays, it's a thing of time pieces or something from religions that you don't understand and find oppressive but it was (and still is in some places ) a reality

The arranged marriage has its perks in some context as it takes away the burden of having to choose your partner and if your culture is build on this you would not see this as a oppressive practice just how things are the sky is blue and someday your father will choose your husband.But there's also the fear, your future husband could be half decent person there was a chance or an horrible monster very possible sometimes you truly couldn't know.

Kinda like death itself there was This uncertainty, the fear yet anxiety and maybe longing of it without knowing what would come next.

So in context this tale probably resonated a lot with girls and women at the time as a reminder that after the marriage they can still see their mothers time to time, it wasn't death itself just separation, even if their wedding was bleak as a dark winter, spring will come.

And I love this tale really

Then we have the new context, like I said the fear and longing of arranged marriage is not a reality to many people in modern western secular world, But suffocating mothers are.

There is discussion on whether or not Persephone went on her own will but it is a pointless discussion the result is still the same she has half of the year up here half down there.

But the retellings do a weird thing, some of them reframe it to make demeter the villain.

Demeter goes from grieving mother to an angry wench who it's just terrified of an empty nest and suffocates Persephone she is mother goethel locking Rapunzel in a tower,She is the opressor.

And hades is the stand in badboy he is rhysand, darkling, Damon Salvatore and draco Malfoy In leather pants and all the other guys in black clothes but not in a cringe emo edgylord way in a dangerous way with a jawline to cut diamonds and abs for days, rich and powerful a dominating alpha ready to sweep the damsel ad bring her to freedom.

Do you ever heard that anarbor song 18, if not listen it's exactly the hades guy on those retellings

And the thing is I have no true problem with this concept it's not my cup of tea(I prefer the golden retriever rather than the black cat) and I do think the amount of coercion and straight up sexual assault on those are quite not good, but it might be someone's else's cup.

The problem is calling this a feminist retelling as by making Persephone a willing bride it empowers her.

It truly doesn't.

The original was already empowering a grieving mother doing anything on her power to save her lost daughter is fucking punk.

Yet the rebellious vein of the modern author the desire to be that girl the one who had the guts to actually runaway from home after fighting with your mom for not letting you paint your hair, mixed with the desire to be coddled by a dark prince charming, aman who will desire you so much he won't be able to control himself, a beautiful rich man who will worship you, have amazing sex with you, will be enough of a feminist to respect your choices yet enough of a patriarchal alpha male to spoil rotten with all things money can buy, provide for you as you are his queen, this desire takes one of the most simple yet understandable tale of true feminine power and bastardize it to another opposite Attraction tale.

And this is why I hate hades and Persephone retellings.

[readingloveswounds]

Any tips on how to deal with perfectionism and imposter syndrome?

These are both things I deal with so often, and I can't say I've beaten them entirely, I've definitely found ways to cope.

As a sort of tl;dr at the start - I think overall it takes time. I have adapted and grown because I've had several years now to learn and get comfortable with what I need to know and be okay with what I won't be an expert in.

Imposter Syndrome:

Take on the persona of a Certified Trickster(tm). I know it sounds silly, but let's be real, most of imposter syndrome is your brain being silly in its own way. If I'm not meant to be here but still am, that means I've conned my way in. The perfect crime! I'm not locked in here with you, you're locked in here with me! I know this sounds exaggerated, and it definitely is, but the point of "playing along" with the idea of being a fraud (which is what plagues me a lot) is to expose to yourself how silly/unhelpful it is to get stuck in that rut. You have better things to do with your time! I am assuaging my fears about being extremely un/underqualified for any job or postdoc by going well it's not my problem, it's theirs. I won't weed myself out of the pool unless it's something I'm actually truly unqualified for, such as a set specialization that isn't mine or teaching coordinator positions.

Make a list of things you have accomplished. I have a little heading in my planner of "[Month] Accomplished" and I write down anything I'm proud of or happy with that month, usually as I do it. I think it's really easy to forget that you've been up to good things when worrying about whether or not you're an imposter, and it really helps me be aware that I'm not just messing around.

Befriend the people in your department. This may sound a bit obvious, but I could either beat myself up about not having accomplished anything when xyz person has done so much or I could hang out with that person and find out that they're a real human being, not someone up on a pedestal. Your mileage may vary because there's plenty of egos and plenty of assholes, but I do very much suggest being friends or friendly with people because it can humanize them in such a way as to make your subconscious stop using them as a cudgel against you.

Perfectionism:

Involve other people! Perfectionism traps you in your head and says that no one can see anything you do until it is perfect (which is impossible). Who exactly you involve will have to be up to your discretion for a variety of reasons, but part of why I sent parts of my chapters to my advisor on a regular basis was to make myself stop picking at small things that didn't matter, as well as to make myself allow other eyes on it even when something wasn't perfect. And it does suck sometimes when you feel you could have done better at writing something and have to send it off, but if you've seen some of my posts, I like to reframe that as making it my advisor's problem now. And usually it's not that bad, and if it is in rough shape he'll give me advice on how to make it better. Sharing my writing with people will always make me squirm, but it's a learning squirm, and if you can find people who care about your progress in a good way, it's terrifying but it helps.

The strides forward that "there's no such thing as a perfect dissertation, just a finished one" has taken me are immense. This is about a fairly specific milestone, obviously, but reframing it as not the pinnacle of my career that has to be 100% perfect but rather the start of my career that starts a conversation and that I can adapt and change and move forward with or from has really helped. It doesn't have to be perfect, I just have to say "hey, I'm out here with these thoughts" and make it as good as I can.

I hate to make this an ode to 'go touch grass,' but go out into the world and observe what other people do. THEY don't have to be perfect, and while I know the refrain of that is "but I do," participating in conferences, watching presentations, talking to other people can help you challenge that idea in yourself.

I think at some point I decided I wanted to be comfortable with public speaking, which allowed me to let me go of being perfect at it. So find ways to rephrase goals into metrics that are actually realistic.

There is also something to be said for going "No, we're not thinking about this right now" to yourself. It may not work every time, but it'll work enough of the time.

Hopefully this is helpful!

[gem-femmes]

How to Subtly Push Back in a Negative Job Interview

My inspiration for this career guide is a hostile job interview a few years back. I fumbled it because I was unprepared.

At the time, I was taking a break from the family business (I've since returned full-time), going out in the world and doing my own thing.

I met this business owner at a gala. I had already been aware of the company's reputation as one of the best in their field. We hit it off immediately. It turned out they were looking for a freelancer with my exact skillset for an ongoing project.

I went in for an interview a few days later. I tailored my presentation to their company and needs, as I usually do.

I made an effort to prepare. Overall, I expected smooth sailing as I had already made a good impression at the event. I was armed with tons of relevant experience, skills, and portfolio.

Long story short, the owner was absent that day. I was interviewed by other senior staff who, much to my surprise, went for the jugular: a stress interview.

The problem was that we were discussing a freelance project, not a permanent position with the company.

In that context, the stress interview technique was misguided at best. It showed me that they didn't understand the freelance relationship and had unrealistic expectations. Working with this client would likely be a nightmare.

Freelancers have other options, and we are looking for clear, professional, and mutually respectful interactions.

That was definitely not the case.

I was just trying to get a feel for the project, but the interviewers seemed determined to neg me.

I was angry at myself for fumbling that interview.

Not because they didn't choose me for the project. The interview was a huge red flag 🚩, so I was no longer interested in working with them anyway.

No, I disappointed myself by being powerless, not knowing how to push back in a professional way.

I was clueless as to how to defend myself without burning bridges. The latter is relevant because I might eventually have to deal with that company again in our family business.

I vowed to myself that the next time this happens (because it will), I will be prepared. So I brainstormed some sentences to flip the script when it's all stick and no carrot.

💬 1. Ask Direct Questions

"I’m sensing there are some concerns here. Could you share what specific qualities or experiences you’re looking for that you feel I might not meet?"

Translation: Let’s see if you can back up your negativity with something concrete.

💬 2. Highlight Their Approach

"I’ve noticed this interview has focused a lot on challenges and potential negatives. Is there a particular reason for that?"

Translation: Why so serious? Let’s balance this conversation out a bit.

💬 3. Turn the Question Around

If they hit you with something overly harsh, try, "That’s an interesting perspective. How does your team typically handle situations like this?"

Translation: Let’s talk about how you guys deal with these issues. I’m curious.

💬 4. Reframe the Situation

"It sounds like this project has a lot of potential challenges. What support does the team offer to ensure success?"

Translation: If you’re so worried, how about telling me how you plan to help?

💬 5. Emphasize Your Professional Standards

"I always strive to maintain a high standard of communication and professionalism in my work. What’s the typical communication style within your team?"

Translation: Let’s make sure we’re on the same page when it comes to professionalism.

💬 6. Use Silence Strategically

After a particularly harsh question, pause before responding. Let the silence do the talking.

Translation: Silence can be louder than words—let them sit with their negativity for a moment.

💬 7. Seek Clarification on Their Concerns

"It seems like there are some strong concerns about this role. Could you clarify what the biggest risks you see in bringing someone on for this project are?"

Translation: Spell out your concerns. Let’s see if they’re really justified.

💬 8. Politely Challenge Assumptions

"I’m curious about the assumptions behind that question. Could you elaborate on what led you to ask that?"

Translation: What’s the real reason you’re grilling me here?

💬 9. Redirect to Your Strengths

"I appreciate the focus on potential challenges. However, I’d love to highlight how my previous experience with [specific example] directly aligns with this role."

Translation: Let’s get back to what I bring to the table.

💬 10. Exit Gracefully

"It seems like there may be a disconnect in expectations. I believe it’s important for both parties to feel positive about a collaboration. Perhaps it’s best if we reconsider if this is the right fit."

Translation: I have options. If you don’t see my value, I’m out.

Use these techniques wisely, and you’ll not only navigate tough interviews with grace, but you might even leave the interviewer rethinking their approach.

After all, your career is all about knowing your worth and choosing who you want to work with. ✨

[yeats-infection]

you've organized a union?? bro how are you consistently this cool, like one human being shouldn't be able to contain all this coolness...rock on

i thank you my friend but organizing a union has nothing to do with being cool... organizing is also the easy and fun part compared to bargaining and stewarding!! i also have not done and am not doing anything on my own. i was asked if i wanted to help early in the organizing process and then was part of the bargaining committee and am now the shop steward. we have sort of a three-person union leadership committee with a vice-steward and somebody who works more externally with the broader labor movement. we also have a five-person labor-management committee that helps out a lot with larger actions when we do them.

all you have to do is start quietly talking to the coworkers you bitch about work with and explore if a few other people are interested. ANY employee at ANY kind of job can form a union and it's okay if the union is really small!! ours is about 50 people. others in our local are as small as 5-10. and others are thousands of people!

once you have a small group you can look into local unions in the area and reach out to them to talk about organizing. there are unions that cover lots of different kinds of workers (united auto workers is one, i'm a UAW member) and unions that cover specific kinds of workers (nonprofit professional employees union, communications workers of america, service employees international union, etc). you would look for a "local" (a smaller regional affiliate) of one of these unions that is based in your area. the employees of the local can help train you on how to organize a larger group toward an election and they'll also train you on bargaining and be with you in bargaining. keep in mind that it is illegal for management to retaliate against you for union activities!!!

my gentle words of advice would be that if you are going to do this you have to be in it for the long haul. it doesn't end with organizing, and it gets much harder after that. for that reason, hating your boss is not enough of a reason to organize - by all means hate your boss and laugh thinking of their face when they get the notice of election... but that will not carry you through literally years of fighting over every penny and every letter of the contract. i will recommend trying to reframe your thinking to come at it from a perspective of 1) building solidarity among the lowest-paid and least powerful people at the workplace and redistributing some power to them and 2) being solutions-oriented to repair problems in your workplace and have a say in your conditions.

another exciting piece is that a union is a 501c4 organization under the US tax code - so you can lobby federal, state, and local governments on your issues :)

i think overall the moral of the story is that if any of us want to actualize any progressive ideas in this world we are going to have to do more work. and i mean more work in real life. tweeting about leftism and yelling at each other on tumblr about which gay pirate show is more politically righteous (not to accuse you of doing this anon, lol) has literally zero impact on the material conditions of reality. bringing about any real redistribution of power in society is going to take MORE WORK from ALL of us!! forming a union is an important way to do that work, especially as the more of us that have unions the stronger the labor movement is, and organized labor has the power and built-in solidarity to make headway on a number of other progressive issues...

[milesonthenet]

So Goosebumps is actually good, huh?

Good evening, you ghouls and girls! I know that I am about a week late for Halloween references. I have been going through a creative block in coming up with reviews.

For example? I was supposed to do something with Earthspark a few posts back. That still might happen, but I would rather focus on other stuff. In fact? There are some good topics that I have been thinking up for you guys.

Something wicked this way comes... and what is its name? Goosebumps! It's the children's horror that everyone seems familiar with to some capacity. From the books to the movies, to the old TV series that helped perfectly adapt those books to the small screen.

This year? Saw the release of Goosebumps' latest media installment. A Disney+ exclusive released in October that helped light up our imagination. I remember seeing the trailer, and you know what I thought?

First Thoughts:

"They are about to pull a Riverdale",

Honestly, seeing the trailer made me think that it was going to be bad. I mean, the hip rap music and some of the acting just bothered me. Everything looked so needlessly gritty, in a way that felt the opposite of the movie's first trailer.

When the series finally landed, I decided to watch it. The episodes themselves were pretty well-structured. They did a good job of translating the antagonists of the prior books into the stories. The way some of them were even recontextualized felt new.

The character work was a little shoddy at times, but I felt like it was okay. It shined when it needed to most, and that was what helped it. The series has just wrapped up its first season.

So without further ado? Let's take a closer example, and look into some of the things Goosebumps has done. We will review both the good and the bad.

The 'Good'

Slappy (He's not a dummy, he's just plain scary)

Now, anyone who is at least vaguely aware of the series knows Slappy. He's the 'breakout star' of the Goosebumps franchise. Also? He was played by Jack Black, and that's just plain funny.

Our second-mos iconic doll (That title goes to Chuck!) is the overarching villain. He poisons Biddle's mind and turns him against his friends. Also, he teaches him a spell that basically makes everyone turn into dummies. Which, weirdly enough, starts with them gaining more wooden cheeks.

As much as Slappy is not able to move, he is just as threatening as ever. That accent that they give him is actually awesome. It helps underline his more sinister, bargaining nature.

My only 'problem' with Slappy is his lack of movement, overall. I feel like it takes away from the fantasy. However, I suppose Slappy's power to worm his way into other people's hearts is perfect compensation.

An attempt to reframe the stories

The series takes Goosebumps' iconic books and puts them through a blender. Because of this, we end up with vague strokes and loose ideas derived from the books. However, there are some strong points to take from this.

The way they adapted Say Cheese and Die! for example, was pretty useful. It felt natural for the episode and offered a good opener for the season. I also enjoy how they chose to adapt Go Eat Worms, in spite of how absolutely disgusting that episode is.

Our monsters are better:

The monsters you see in Goosebumps are actually very well-designed in my opinion. Harold's flaming 'ghost' form, for example, is pretty freaky. The series understands its roots, and it is not afraid to embrace them.

The design of Slappy is faithful enough to how he would normally look. There are a few notable differences, but it still draws a good enough example of what he looks like.

The actual design of the 'worm' monster got me. It sufficiently creeped me out seeing how it moved. The way that the creature is animated is nothing short of impressive.

The 'Bad'

The group's 'connection'

Yeah, this is where things get more critical of the series' nature. The main protagonists are good, but I feel like they function better when paired off. It is easy to see how they function more as pairs than as an actual group. If the series gets a second season, then I hope they improve the group dynamic.

Goosebumps was given ten episodes for its first season. There was a lot to cram into the series. Between Hary Biddle, the various monsters, and the character's own struggles? You had a lot to deal with right off the bat.

Harold Biddle (And he's just not interesting enough)

Harold Biddle just does not interest me. I get it however, he is more or less the thing that 'ties' everything together. However, he just does not interest me in any way.

I'm sorry, but he is one of the weaker parts of the Goosebumps series. He's your typical normal 'outsider' kid whose life is unexpectedly ruined. When he gains Slappy, he becomes a monster, and a tragic incident (that was also the fault of the main cast's parents - GREAT work by the way!) results in him burning alive.

Now that he's back, he's swearing vengeance on the children of those who wronged him. However, I just feel like he's an unnecessary element in the series. His role could be given to someone else, and it would be better.

More monsters could have been appreciated,

The monster selection for the series is not bad, but it is limited. In just a few episodes were introduced to some interesting antagonist elements. The Cuckoo Clock of Doom, the Haunted Mask, Slappy, and the Worms, for example, were all used in the series.

However, I feel like there are other monsters that we could have seen employed. The Garden Gnomes, for example, feel like they are a natural fit for this series. You could also have employed an episode with the Mummy, or The Creeps.

Honestly, the ones I am surprised did not somehow make it in are the Abominable Snowman and the Monster Blood Can. I think that they would have been easy plots to implement into the series.

Overall? I hope for more antagonists in a potential second season!

Overall, what makes Goosebumps worth while?

Goosebumps is an attempt to try and adapt a beloved children's horror series. That attempt is well-rewarded with its modernized blends of old Goosebumps stories. The story of Port Lawrence is only just beginning, and it can only go further from here.

I do genuinely hope that the series gets a second season because it deserves that option. There are so many stories and elements that could be adapted for the series. You have so many more layers to pull from with the books.

For people who have yet to check out the series? I would wholeheartedly recommend it if you are looking for a scary good time. I just think you should go in with the mentality that it is not the Goosebumps that you grew up with. It's the start of someone else's Goosebumps, for a newer, edgier series.

I hope you enjoyed this review. Next time? We're gonna tackle something spectacular. See ya and viewers beware? You're in for a good scare.

[road-rhythm]

hey Roadie! A question I've been curious about for a while, if you feel up to answering: how do you plan your outlines for the long, plot-heavy fics you do?

You've mentioned outlining in advance in your author's notes in the past, and I'm curious about how that process looks for you, because I'm always impressed by how... organic (?) each new development feels. "Organic" is the best adjective I could come up with, but I mean that (at least in Hard Mouth, which as a finished story is easier to see globally) you do a great job of building tension toward what *seems* like it will be the resolution of a problem, and then you throw a wrench in the works so something else takes relevance instead, or else the planned outcome loses a lot of the "this will fix all our problems" McGuffin-ness by the time it comes about because of shifting circumstances, but it doesn't take away tension at all, just keeps reframing the action in cool and intersting ways.

So that's a very roundabout way of saying I love your plotting and do you have any thoughts about how you approach it? Or maybe you'd be willing to tell us about HM and if/how the outline changed? <3

how do you plan your outlines for the long, plot-heavy fics you do?

On index cards, half like a Rubik's Cube and half like solving for x. Except I don't know what shape the Rubik's Cube is going to be, and I can make more blocks for it (but not an infinite number), and "that's hot" is a valid standard of proof in the algebra.

When I start something, I have a constellation of ideas that I want to put in it because they're iddy or otherwise attractive to me. Sometimes these are very specific images or scenes; sometimes they're barely more than a mood. Then I think up ways to connect them. When some number of them are connected, including enough of the ones that need to go at the beginning, I start writing. Then I continue thinking up ways to connect the dots in the constellation and think up more dots to put in along the way and then also think up ways to connect the new ones and in the process move all of the dots around, sometimes a little, sometimes a lot. Then I write more and also plan more and keep doing those things until I finish. Really it isn't any deeper than that, I'm afraid.

The final output of that process is a first draft that ideally should then get edited into some best version of itself, but which in practice ends up standing as-is because life is short and while my interest in the final shape of the stories is not zero, it is at a level that makes things like editing optional. Nowadays when writing fanfic I yeet installments without reading them more often than not, which I do occasionally regret, but not enough on balance to stop. I do ninja-edit a lot of sentence-level stuff after posting; e.g., at this point I have actually read Hard Mouth pretty much all the way through and have ironed out the highest-intensity cringe bits in the prose (I hope). But there's no help for the structural things, because they would take a lot of work to fix and I don't care enough to do it. Like, I care about being able to tell that they're there, I think? I care about the attempt to say something I mean, I care about saying what I mean as faithfully as possible, and I care about saying what I mean as effectively as possible. But I care in that order, and "faithfully" and "effectively" are not always congruent, but whatever, this is a very long digression. I have neither the lifespan nor the attention span to edit my fanfic, but I would if I did.

(If I were selling original work, the editing phase would be non-optional and therefore I would do it. Attention span factors would still make it difficult, but those can be pushed through to a positive result.)

TL;DR index cards & vibes

[empty-pizza]

some closing thoughts i never got a chance to post about harrow the ninth

I can't help but feel a bit whelmed by this book. I liked it, I would give it an 8/10 maybe, but I also feel almost like... I enjoyed the book more for the reading experience I got from my personal engagement with it, moreso than I did from what the book actually did.

The #1 thing that kept me clocked into the book was the mysteries. And it is not every day that I put that much into trying to catch all the details and figure out what was really happening. That engagement is a result of the book doing great setup and being very intentional about the hints it gave; I couldn't do that with most other books if I tried. And I think my engagement with the mysteries helped me stay interested even when the characters and plot weren't fully engaging.

...except that's the thing, the characters and plot should have been good enough that I didn't need to focus on the mysteries. The book was absolutely full of great characterization and interesting plot beats, but I'm not sure it had enough momentum as a whole, and I think that's clear most of all in how Harrow kind of just doesn't have a character arc.

She has interesting moments, my favorite being not just her soup plan, but the sheer desperation and exhaustion seen in her character at the moment. But that's more of a thing she goes through than a personal arc of change.

Instead of a character arc, Harrow's progression is more about uncovering the mystery of what exactly is going on in her head. That has two problems. The first is that where she ends up, the answer to what's going on in her head, is just that she's in the exact same place she was in at the end of book one. We already knew that she'd do anything to get Gideon back; this just slightly reframed the level of dedication. My expectations might be a factor here; I loved the mystery of the letters she left for herself and her changed memories so much that I was hoping the answer was something huge; not just wanting to get Gideon back but some larger thing to accomplish, secrets she couldn't let God and the Lyctors know. Instead it was just the one thing, and while it's an interesting one thing, I kinda hoped for more.

The second problem is that it didn't feel to me like anything Harrow did throughout the book affected the outcome. I personally wanted to see Harrow actively engage with the mystery of what happened to her memories, to figure out why her past self left her the letters. I guess that just wasn't what this story was meant to be. But I also didn't feel like Harrow's experiences without Gideon in her memories actively affected her outlook once she got them back. It didn't feel like she had any new perspective because of everything she went through. It really did just feel like a reset back to before she lost her memories.

I do wonder if my perspective on this will change on a reread; I know that worldbuilding details and secrets become way more apparent the second time, but maybe there's also an aspect to Harrow's character that I missed throughout this book. But right now, I feel like my opinion on the book has gone down somewhat since I finished it. It was a really fun book to read in the moment, but in retrospect not every mystery I was excited about gave me something to satisfy me.

This is something that I think book one was stronger in. Even though circumstances caused me to be whelmed by Gideon and Harrow's personal resolution in that book, I think it did a great job of showing their relationship gradually growing and changing to justify what the ending was. Book 2's resolution just feels like it's a culmination of book 1 without being a culmination of book 2.

Anyway I'll try to get back to Nona soon. Went through some life stuff in the last few days that took away my energy to read but I'm definitely excited for where that book will go.

[livebloggingmydescentintomadness]

Hey Momdad. I hope you're doing okay! I'm struggling. With addiction. I've had tendencies for years, and then had some serious trauma, then more trauma, and it got worse. I'm working with a therapist on things like drinking less, but it's so hard to just exist with my feelings without taking something. And I feel like I'm doing so slowly... it's been over a year since I started this journey, and I'm still near the beginning. Anyway, whether you can answer or not, thank you!

hey there, sweetheart, i'm so sorry that you're having to deal with this. it's not fair and it fucking sucks.

(just as an fyi, my autism can sort of make me have a difficult time answering messages that don't include a specific question to guide me in the direction of what kind of reply to give, so i'm just going to assume that what you're looking for is support and advice about addiction and trauma. hope that's a correct assumption 😊)

first of all, addiction in the aftermath of trauma is - sadly but realistically - completely and totally normal. i'm not any sort of expert and certainly not a scientist, but from what i've learned, addiction very, very commonly results when a person's reality is unbearable.

and that makes sense, doesn't it? it's not like addiction is fun, it's not like anyone enjoys having their life revolve around substance abuse. but when reality is too painful and overwhelming to bear, living creatures will pursue whatever escape is available to them. drinking doesn't make you happy, but it's better than the alternative, right? that's not weakness, that's just being a life form capable of experiencing suffering.

for a much better and more scientific explanation of what i just described, i'd like you to read this post from my addiction tag, because it's incredibly eye-opening and i think will help you reframe your situation.

now, having said that, i hope i'm not coming off as telling you that substance abuse is a-okay and you shouldn't try to get it under control, but i do think that it would help if you can a) better understand why this is such a problem for you, and b) have some compassion for yourself. shame is not a good motivator, so stop telling yourself you're doing a bad job and you should be doing better.

take a look at what you've been through and let yourself think, man, that fucking sucked. that was so fucking awful, and it still makes me feel fucking awful. of course i'm struggling. anyone would struggle after that. other people are struggling after going through the same thing. of course it's hard for me to live with that. of course it's hard for me to learn how to live with that. of course it's hard. of course it's taking time to heal from all that awful pain.

i know that it's frustrating that this is taking so long, but honestly, you are so much further ahead than so many other people. there are countless people who go their whole lives without ever addressing these problems. countless people who go decades. you are so much further ahead than you think you are, just by acknowledging that you have an addiction - hell, just acknowledging that you have trauma at all! so, so many people bury it deep deep down and pretend it doesn't exist, and pretend they don't have a problem.

you know you have a problem. you're seeing a therapist. you've been working on your addiction for an entire year without giving up. that is, genuinely, an incredible achievement. so many people will never do that.

addiction is not something you simply get over and move on from. it's something you're gonna have to deal with in one form or another for the rest of your life, because even if you've had it completely under control for years, you'll still have to be aware that you are always capable of relapsing. so i think it's honestly a good thing that this is taking time, that you're doing slow but steady work, because a quick and simple fix just isn't going to last long term.

i know it's discouraging to feel like you're seeing so few results, and it's so hard to see a future where you can live with your feelings and memories. i know it's hard not to feel like a failure or worse every time you take something or drink. it's hard and it's awful and none of it is fair.

but you're doing a good job, i promise you that you are, and you're so much stronger than you realize. that strength is going to take you farther than you know, and you will find your way. just keep taking the next step, okay? you're going to get there.

take care of yourself, darling.

[cowboylikedean]

I saw your posts and to be honest, you’re spreading misinformation about the body neutrality movement because you do NOT understand it fully.

Body neutrality isn’t “fat people exist”. Body neutrality is nothing but the core belief that our bodies are just bodies and that’s alright. There is no type of body that’s superior. No hierarchy. Looks shouldn’t play a role in how we experience the world. Body positivity, on the other hand, is still all about validation of different body types. It’s still about fitting in this harmful mindset driven by capitalism that you have to be considered pretty by society to deserve respect.

Body neutrality is about seeing people for their character and appreciating their bodies for keeping them alive. As a physical disabled person who saw their self and their community getting harmed by that (how body positivity reinforces the need to be considered attractive), it’s quite sad to see you talking down on body neutrality without even understanding it.

Wrong. Thanks for playing!!!!

Body positivity is not driven by capitalism, it was co-opted by capitalism and you let capitalism create the narrative. You let capitalism steal a body movement from fat people and decided that the problem was the movement, not the way capitalism reframed it. Like its meaning, its true meaning belongs with the bullshit capitalism ascribed to it and not with the fat people who pioneered it for decades prior. Good job!!! You know what I call that????? Fatphobic.

Body positivity is not about being pretty, it's about respect and the right to exist free of shame. I'll say it again slower this time but...

You cannot fight negativity with neutrality.

Let's take your definition of body neutrality that "bodies are just bodies and that's alright."

"Your body is too fat!!!" "My body is a body and that's alright"

Does the body neutral statement contradict the fatphobic statement? No? Huh, that's weird. Since you brought up disability (by the way... I'm also multiply physically disabled!), let's try that!

"Your body is supposed to walk!!" "My body is a body and that's alright"

Does the body neutral statement contradict the ableist statement? No? Huh, that's weird. Let's try body positivity for shits and giggles.

"Your body is too fat!!!" "Fat is not a bad thing deserving of disrespect"

Well, that kinda sounds better... Let's try disability....

"Your body is supposed to walk!!" "Disability is not a bad thing deserving of disrespect"

Wow. If we define body positivity as fat people did from the 1970's-the 2010's, it becomes the only actual helpful solution here!!!

See, body neutrality doesn't fight harmful societal narratives. It helps individuals get good at ignoring the harmful societal narratives. It's like an ion... An ion with a lot of negatively charged particles (electrons) and neutrally charged particles (neutrons) is still going to hold a negative charge. If you add positively charged particles (protons), you have a neutral charge.

If the message society sends is "bodies should be xyz way to receive respect" and your counter is "bodies are bodies and that's alright," you don't counter that. You have to fight for the right to receive respect. "Bodies deserve respect because there is no wrong way to have a body, so all bodies are correct" takes a positive stance.

I have seen a lot people define their "body neutrality" by this statement, but again this is how fat people defined body positivity for almost 50 years before capitalism twisted it (which btw they could only have done by the fact that thin people had already taken it and twisted its meaning). So if that's how you define "body neutrality," you took something from fat people, mangled it and twisted it, fucked it up, recreated it, and then said that somehow it was better than what fat people did. Fatphobic.

I completely understand body neutrality. I just also understand body positivity, which is a piece that you, unfortunately, are missing.

It’s quite sad to see you talking down on body positivity without even understanding it.

[tonyglowheart]

actually, no I'm upset again about SIX lmao

because okay yes it's the Hamilton problem. Because for all that Six is like meant to be a, them, in that space, rewriting history.... it's like... it's all a complete fiction that doesn't...really seem to have bearing on the real queens' lives and legacy, like it all works within the context of the show, sure, but the "victory" of the show is, reframing a competition between them as solidarity, but it's still predicated on like reclaiming their assumed feuds. And SIX hardly highlights the amazing achievements these queens had in life, each is still shoehorned into an Archetype, and it's that Archetype that they seek to reclaim in the end, when like... for some of them that Archetype is manufactured for the show.

Like, Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn both were highly educated and highly involved with politics in life as queens. Hell, Catherine comes from an impeccabl pedigree- her parents are the frickin Reyes Católicos. Catherine once rode in armor to rally troops while pregnant (in.. some war or uprising or other, I ain't an expert in English history, just a hobbyist on the Six lmao). Anne was definitely involved with politics lmao (though fine, arguably the song lyric means they weren't her thing before she came to the English court...), she was involved in diplomatic affairs as a court lady.

Jane Seymour was also disappointing to me because her whole deal was "I'm not what I seem on the surface, look closer and you'll see more." But really her song kind of... presents more of the same. Henry not only loves her only, but also she truly loves him/her love is stone. And she wants to be a mother to her son. That's exactly what we think of her already ((mother who) died after birthing a son), that's. not anything new. Like Jane Seymour may not have been as highly educated as Catherine or Anne, but she also isn't just "woman who died becoming a mother." She helped reconcile Henry and Mary. She pleaded on behalf of the monasteries, which were in the process of being dissolved (the dissolution of the monasteries caused a lot of upheaval not just religiously but also in the way of life for the common people. Check out the Tudor Monastery Farm series to see how enmeshed the monasteries were in the lives of the common people). But no, lol, you'll suddenly see more... of the same, ig

Anna of Cleves.. Yeah less said the better. They invented a made up Anna of Cleves who is a girlbossified ugly chick who honestly kind of becomes a Henry mirror in Get Down, which if I think on it too hard I do find off-putting lmao. When there are contemporary accounts that indicate while maybe not hot, she was hardly hideous. And I don't think SIX does a good enough job of addressing that aspect of, it rly was a Henry thing. They just fall back on "my face lost me my crown" (though Henry's chief complaints seemed to have been with her body), although I will say having her move back to Cleves (""haus of holbein"") probably actually would have been something Anne wanted. But like temperament wise, she was known being circumspect and a good housekeeper and generous with her servants. She greeted Katheryn Howard at court as queen courteously (perhaps a tad overly so even, but that helped to cement publicly/to Henry how little she (publicly) resents the humiliation of being cast aside and rendered "unmarriable" and sexless in the eyes of the public). They also cast her as like, "yeah my life is amazing lol no complaints" as if we shouldn't waste our time sympathizing with her, because I mean think of how much harder the others had it (which is quite contrary to the ultimate message they land on lmao). And also Anne is definitely one of the least formally educated of the six, and notoriously NOT savvy (so much as circumspect) the way say Anne Boleyn or Catherine of Aragon were, so to cast Anna of Cleves as the "educated, savvy princess" is incredibly ironic to me. Like, Catherine and Anne are right there.

K-Howard is probably the one who has a solid-ass arc and whose portrayal I think adds something very interesting to the discussions on the six. Hers is the only one that I think does a good job of highlighting something *based in reality* and shining a mirror to people's perceptions they have of K Howard as this ~silly girl who got in over her head.

And Katherine Parr gets an actual shout-out to her life outside of Henry (though I find the premise of her song as a "sob story" a bit.. of a tryhard stretch personally). But she's, like, the only one who gets to be the "educated wife" out of the six.. when like. that wasn't the reality of the Six

Anyway. There's a lot to dig into and ig for Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn. Both are figures that are highly present in the public consciousness and imagination, so I guess even though they do, like, lose their depths... it's unlikely to really do "damage" to the historical discourse surrounding them? But still kind of a shame when I really think about it. Because like.. cmon.

But then again, this is after all a piece of musical theater, not a history lesson. So maybe it's fine, maybe it's excusable. Idk. It really is like... I both do and don't mind it. If they could have snuck in more historical references I would have been thrilled. But also they're trying to tell a specific story, and so the characters are written to service that story, and like, it does succeed in that. But there is like just enough history that it haunts me bc I just Know people are looking at it like a history lesson too and they're gonna take the wrong stuff away from it maybe. 8V