#anyone can be abusive regardless of their mental disorder

[homeworkreminder]

If you're a licensed therapist and make tiktok or reels or shorts or whatever talking about trauma recovery and specifically painting all abusers as narcissists and tagging your posts as npd, I believe your license should be revoked and you should be not allowed the chance to practice in any type of medical field, or any field that requires professionalism.

[letters-to-lgbt-kids]

My dear lgbt+ kids,

Can you have a healthy relationship with a narcissist?

Well, if you trust many social media posts, then the answer would be a resounding "No". Narcissistic is - apparently - a synonym for abusive, and of course you can't have a healthy relationship with an abusive partner!

But, well, social media is not always right. A lot of topics get oversimplified, terms get misused and black-or-white thinking is rampant - and "narcissistic means abusive" falls into all three of those pits.

Let's look at it a bit closer: "Abusive" describes a set of behaviors - while narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) describes, well, a personality disorder. It's a mental health condition.

I am not a trained mental health professional, so I'll use a medical source here. According to mayoclinic.org (link to article), symptoms and their intensity may vary from one affected person to the next (just like the exact symptoms and severity of depression or anxiety may vary!). A person with NPD may

have an unreasonably high sense of their own importance

have an excessive need for attention and admiration

have low/no empathy (struggle to understand or care about the feelings of others)

have low self-worth

be easily upset by criticism

struggle with social interactions

have difficulty managing their emotions

experience major problems dealing with stress 

And, again just like with other mental health conditions, NPD can negatively affect the person in a lot of areas of life. For example, struggling to manage their emotions and stress levels may make it hard for them to hold down a job and cause financial worries, or they may avoid participating in social events, which may lead to them becoming isolated and depressed etc. And yes, of course some symptoms may also lead to problems in romantic relationships.

Therapy for NPD usually centers around talk therapy, with the goal of helping the person to better understand and manage their emotions, to learn how to cope with self-worth issues, and to create/maintain healthy fulfilling relationships and communication with the people around them.

Now, you can look at all this and go "See? The social media posts are right! They are self-centered, have no empathy and are easily upset! That's abusive!" - but that'd be jumping to conclusions. None of those things are behaviors.

An autistic person may also easily get upset and they may also feel low empathy. So could a person with major depression. Yet, we do not treat "autistic" or "depressed" as a synonym for abusive. We do not assume that their symptoms will definitely lead to abusive behavior. So, why would that be different for people with NPD?

Am I saying no person with NPD has ever been abusive? Of course not. That'd be black-or-white thinking, too. What I am saying is: People with NPD are people. And people can show abusive behavior or they can not.

If someone who easily feels upset hits you, that's abuse... but hitting would be abuse, even if they didn't feel easily upset. A partner with or without NPD shouldn't be hitting you. If someone with no empathy degrades and insults you, that's abusive... but that would be abuse regardless of their ability to feel empathy. A partner with or without NPD shouldn't be degrading and insulting you.

A person could have NPD and behave abusive - but "some people are X and Y, so all people who are X must be Y" is a flawed logic.

So, let's circle back to the beginning: can you have a healthy relationship with a narcissist? Yeah. It will be a relationship with someone who has a mental health condition and that's something to be aware of because mental health conditions do affect everyday life (duh?).

You should set boundaries and take warning signs of abuse seriously - like you should do when you date anyone, regardless of health status.

With all my love,

Your Tumblr Dad

[cluster-b-culture-is]

Cluster b culture is trying to research cluster b disorders, and every article by official mental health organisations talking about how we all exhibit abusive tendencies or whatever.

We are not all abusers

We are not all abusers

WE ARE NOT ALL ABUSERS

WE ARE NOT ALL FUCKING ABUSERS!!

I'm genuinely so sick of it. I found one fucking article that talks about people with aspd like, yk, ACTUAL FUCKING HUMAN BEINGS. And guess what? It wasn't that fucking hard after all. It's really easy to talk about people like they're more than just potential abusers. Cause ANYONE CAN BE AN ABUSER, REGARDLESS OF WHAT IS OR ISN'T WRONG WITH THEM. WE ARE HUMAN, PLEASE FUCKING TREAT US LIKE IT FINALLY

.

[genderqueerdykes]

We're appreciating these pro-endo posts as an endogenic, especially the fact you account for traumatized endogenics (we at least notice "usually" and other such words in a lot of posts, and were taught at a young age how to analyze shit because of being autistic) so like...thanks. :)

Hopefully y'all are okay, anti-endos are really showing their asses this time in your asks. And we hope everyone else realizes they have always been that bigoted.

hey of course, thanks for sending this ask!

yeah i don't know why people don't understand that endogenic systems can... also have trauma. like. endogenic doesn't mean 100% free from trauma. anyone can have trauma. trauma doesn't always manifest in the most extreme forms possible like dissociative disorders. like i cannot stress enough that dissociative disorders are a very specific kind of plurality, and should NOT be used as a metric to gauge whether or not someone's plural experience is legitimate or not. the diagnostic criteria for dissociative disorders is so painfully restrictive that a lot of people who probably do have a dissociative disorder don't get the diagnosis because it's so fucking specific

and again, i just want to stress that endogenic systems literally are not hurting anyone. you are not spitting in my face or talking over me as a system with DID. you are being respectful by using a term that suits your experience way better. like idk how that is offensive to people. endogenic systems developed a term to express a specific type of plurality. that's not trying to mock or ape on dissociative plurality. it's not an attempt to talk over dissociatives. it's creating an entirely new conversation that needs to be had

people getting upset about endogenic systems are creating mountains out of mole hills. it is quite literally a nothing burger of a problem. there IS no problem. nothing wrong is even happening. like i cannot overstate how fucking annoying it is when other dissociatives decide its time to get on their high horses and act as if they're suddenly experts on psychology and mental health. like it really pisses me off when other plurals with dissociative disorders decide the entire plural community is about them. the dissociative disorder communities are about plurals with dissociative disorders. specifically. you can still occupy spaces made for people with DID, OSDD and so on and leave endogenics alone and the world will keep turning. the sun will rise tomorrow regardless.

learn to mind your own goddamn business if you can't respect that other people experience the world differently than you do. maybe, just maybe, the dissociatives who are intentionally going out of their way to mock and harass endogenic systems are the fucking problem, here. you don't get to be a fucking bully just because you have trauma. you don't get to attack and hurt people who haven't hurt you just because you were abused. that's literally fucking perpetuating the cycle of abuse. if you think to yourself that because you are traumatized, that it's okay to take your anger out on people who have no trauma, you seriously need to reassess your life. what does that do for you? temporary catharsis? a rush of dopamine that lasts mere seconds? chasing the high of harassing strangers will not undo what was done to you in the past.

as a dissociative- i only understand what dissociative plurality is like. i do not understand other forms of plurality. and you know what? i don't find the fact that other types of plurality existing offensive to me. it's just not. i've been very close friends with so many endogenic, spiritual, natural, etc. systems out there over the years. i have never found it offensive for anyone to say "oh hey i'm plural too!" and then explain a different plural experience than the one i have. thats why the term plural even exists, because it encompasses a broad range of plural experiences, not just dissociative ones.

like, to the dissociatives who are pissed off that endos exist: literally stay in dissociative disorder-centric spaces and tags. they're right there. you HAVE a community that you can interact with who understand exactly what you're going through. if it offends you that you find a VARIETY of plural experiences in the general plural community- that community isn't for you. like seriously. if it offends you that deeply that other types of plurality exist- the general plural community is not for you. it's literally not made for you if you can't except that numerous types of plurality exist. you have spaces you can occupy that ARE made 100% for people just like you. you can quite literally stay in spaces made for dissociative plurals only. like. you can do that. that's an option. and you can stop bullying other people out of spaces that they rightfully belong in.

trauma is never excuse to be a fucking jackass. it's perpetuating the cycle of abuse. that's nothing to be proud of. break the cycle. stop abusing people just because you were abused.

[hrizantemy]

One of my main issues with Sarah J. Maas is at the beginning of “A Court of Silver Flames” she said and I quote “For every Nesta out there- climb the mountain.” Forcing anyone. regardless of gender, to endure physical exertion beyond their limits to the point of physical and mental breakdown is abusive behavior. Forcing someone to hike for multiple days beyond their physical capacity can lead to exhaustion, dehydration, injury, and even death. It disregards the person's physical well-being and safety.

Enduring such extreme physical exertion can lead to significant mental and emotional distress, including feelings of despair, hopelessness, and trauma. Forcing someone into a strenuous activity against their will violates their autonomy and personal agency. Everyone has the right to make decisions about their own body and activities, and forcing them to engage in activities they do not consent to is a violation of that right.

Experiencing such traumatic events can have long-lasting effects on an individual's mental and emotional well-being, potentially leading to ongoing issues such as PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder).

The same mountain that she was forced to climb by the male that also said this and I quote again “Everyone fucking hates you. Is that what you want? Because congratulations, it's happened.” Verbal abuse, such as telling someone that everyone hates them, is harmful and can deeply affect an individual's self-esteem, mental well-being, and sense of belonging.

Using language to intentionally hurt someone emotionally is a form of manipulation and control. It's an attempt to undermine the person's self-worth and isolate them from others. By telling someone that everyone hates them, the abuser is attempting to distort the victim's perception of reality, making them doubt their own experiences and feelings. This contributes to feelings of confusion and self-doubt.

The statement suggests that the victim is universally disliked, which can lead to feelings of isolation and alienation. This isolation can further empower the abuser by cutting off the victim from potential sources of support. Verbal abuse can have long-lasting psychological effects, including anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, and trauma. It can also contribute to a cycle of abuse, where the victim may internalize the abusive messages and believe they deserve such treatment.

So in conclusion for every Nesta out there who is going through this or a situation like this. Please seek support from friends, family, or professionals. Contact authorities, and know that there are organizations, especially ones that provide the victim with access to appropriate medical and mental health care.

[evil-marco]

if you believe in narcissistic abuse, block me. if you believe in disordered abuse in general, block me. if you demonize cluster B disorders, this is not a safe space for you. i am a cluster B haver and i will clown on you.

narcissistic abuse is not real. someone with NPD will not abuse you in a special way that only they can do. it is abuse the same way that anyone else abuses someone. calling it narcissistic abuse is perpetuating stereotypes that are a) untrue and b) derogatory.

someone with ADHD can abuse you. we do not call it ADHD abuse. someone with DID can abuse you. we do not call it DID abuse. using the term narcissistic abuse is perpetuating that all narcissists are abusive. they're not. they are a person with a disorder, just like me and you.

this is not to say that the abuse isn't real. of course it's real. that's not what i'm saying. i am saying that slapping narcissistic in front of it does not make it more important or severe or impactful. abuse is abuse. saying narcissistic abuse does not make your point have more weight. it just tells me that you are not someone i want to talk to.

mental health matters. it matters, regardless of if it's glamorous disorder. pwNPD are not abusive. stop spreading that stereotype.

(this is, in fact, targeted towards someone who keeps interacting with my posts/my account despite having multiple posts on their account about how much they believe in narcissistic abuse. boo, bitch.)

[xx-slug-xx]

Narcissistic abuse doesn’t exist. Only abuse that’s from a narcissist

I am in awe of the fact that in the year 2024, I still see people regularly use this term. Both out in the real world and online.

NPD is an actual disorder. It can be a developmental mental illness that’s traumagenic in nature. It can be simply how someone is, no trauma involved even. Regardless, it’s a form of neurodivergence and it shouldn’t be seen as an inherently bad thing. Just because someone is a narcissist, that doesn’t mean that they are an abuser. There’s no such thing as BPD abuse, schizophrenic abuse, or autistic abuse. People with NPD are neurodiverse, just like (I’m assuming) most other Tumblr users, their brains work differently than that of the norm. That is not a bad thing, just like how there’s nothing wrong with having ADHD. I just really hate when people equate narcissism with abuse. Anyone can be an abuser, even a narcissist. But there is no “abuser mental illness” like people make it out to be.

[the-anxious-acrobat]

just curious, do u support circused that have wild animals in them-?

(tigers, lions, elephants, bears, etc.)

no, I am very strongly against it. the truth about animals in circuses is that they are abused and endure lives of complete misery, usually illegally poached from the wild and sold or bred into circuses, purely for entertainment. 

in circuses, animals are made to perform unnatural tricks which none of them would willingly carry out. elephants are made to stand on one leg and spin in circles – often while standing on top of small stools. these are actions elephants have never been observed carrying out in the wild precisely because they cause long-term damage to the animals’ physiology. it is well documented that elephants are forced to perform these actions by being terribly abused, and young elephants are savagely constrained in a process called ‘the crush’ which breaks their spirit and forces them to comply. big cats have been popular in the circus industry, but many have their teeth and claws removed rendering them harmless to their abusers. they are ‘trained’ with whips which teach them to fear the handlers and not attack.

the actions animals do in performances are so unnatural that no animal could be encouraged or instructed to carry them out – they would have to be forced. initially this is done with violence, then with the promise of food. as a result, many circus animals are also underfed to keep them hungry and eager to please. 

the animals commonly abused in circuses are extremely stressed by circus conditions. the loud noise of the music, the cheers of the crowd and the dizzying lights all disorientate and cause stress to wild animals. over prolonged periods can result in abnormal behaviours and health problems related to anxiety. for species such as tigers, bears, macaques, etc, performing on stage is deeply traumatic. 

the living conditions for wild animals in circuses consistently fail to meet the animals’ most basic needs. when the show ends, the animals typically return to isolation in small barren cages which give them no opportunity to carry out behaviours natural to their species, or to interact with their own kind. investigation into animal circuses found 100% of facilities failed to meet the animals’ basic needs. bears were found rocking in tiny cages – a well-known sign of stress and mental health disorders – and macaques chained by their necks.

circus animals are often transported over large distances with circuses, even transporting dolphins by truck and plane which is clearly unsuitable for the species, and more. they are abused, humiliated, and treated absolutely dehumanisingly. how anyone that treats an animal like that could live with themselves, I don’t know. but none of that matters when it comes to monetary gain.

as with any industry that creates financial gain, some people try to defend animal circuses. they say the animals are stimulated by training and performance, but all the evidence and the experts disagree. defenders of animal circuses also argue that seeing animals perform is a form of education which raises awareness and appreciation of wild species. but the truth is very different.

in reality, animal circuses teach nothing. the behaviours they see are completely unnatural and give an entirely false impression of the lives and needs of animals. seeing animals abused on stage only teaches people that animals are here for human entertainment and that we can treat them in any way we please, regardless of their emotions and needs. this is not a lesson people want to teach their children.

and animals don’t belong in circuses. they belong in their natural habitats, free, in their own cycles of life, wild, ferocious, untamed, and left the fuck alone. they should not be in the circus industry, and any entertainment industry for that matter. having wild animals in captivity is horrific, vile, inhumane and just plain wrong. when animals are caged, it's a loss of what and who they are. it’s wrong to capture wild animals and confine them in captivity for people to go and gawk at them. and I can’t believe some people don’t understand this. 

however, animals that do enjoy the stimulation of circus are dogs. dogs love training and performance. they love to learn, with the right rewards. a lot of the time they consider it play time, and for them, getting attention from their people is always a good thing. it depends on the dog, and some dogs may not enjoy performing tricks they've learned. but most of the time, as they are so smart and energetic, dogs do enjoy performing. 

I love animals with all of my heart and I will advocate and fight for them forever. the circus I am in is also obviously very against it.

in short, no, I do not support and never will support animals in circuses, and that’s not even an option. animals deserve a far better life than the ones they've been subjected to.

[wsknbfanaccnt]

Can you do the mental health one for Hanamiya? 👉👈

OKAY NORMALLY I WOULD REFUSE BECAUSE I ONLY DO REQUESTS FOR THE GOM+KAGAMI

but honestly this was so interesting to think about I can't resist so here we go

Hanamiya Mental Disorder

TW!!: mentions of sadism, self harm, mental illness, substance abuse

Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD) + Sociopathy

though Hanamiya is a little bitch, I can't imagine that he doesn't struggle with his disorder sometimes

I don't mean that he is a straight up sociopath either, it's more like ASPD with traces of sociopathy

so I say this because the one big trait of his is doing everything for his enjoyment regardless of how it might affect others

it's not clear if he does this outside of basketball, but I know for a fact that he's not a complete asshole

like for example he wouldn't kick a baby just for the fun of it

but he does have sadistic tendencies

not necessarily sexual either (tho he probably is like that in bed anyways) but just something about seeing pure despair in someone just lights a fire in him

I say Sociopathy because despite everything, he's incredibly intelligent and charming

that's the thing, he can be charming if he wants to and he's fucking amazing at it

when something doesn't go his way, he's the type to blame others for it, manipulating the truth and gaslighting everyone

and unfortunately he's also good at it, and people will believe him

he definitely will also get violent if he isn't satisfied with something, he'd probably pick a fight/hurt others or throw shit around and destroy his surroundings

but sometimes that isn't enough

I think he definitely self harms because of that, he needs to be satisfied one way or another and if he can't get that by being violent to others, he'll do it to himself

but he does so out of anger, and he rarely does it

discovered marijuana after high school and became addicted

it's not clear in the anime, but I think Hanamiya and Imayoshi would get along the most (despite Hanamiya hating Imayoshi lmfao)

they just relate to each other in ways that others dont

so in turn it's a weird friendship

even if Imayoshi is a bitch, Hanamiya had always found some comfort in Imayoshi's presence

tho he's never vulnerable with anyone, there's just a silent mutual understanding between the two

it's not a deep understanding, but they just get it ykwim?

he struggles with in the way that he has kind of a weird perception of himself, knowing that he is a genius but also trying to prove it to himself and others

the amount of manipulation he does would lead to some amounts of paranoia, needing to be in control of the situation 24/7

I honestly am not too sure if he would necessarily "struggle" with making connections since that would kinda require him wanting to make connections

but he does struggle in the sense that he can't empathize with people and he's blunt, always taking the easy way out since he doesn't care about others

since he deems himself superior to others, he has a fragile sense of self and crumbles if he feels out of control

occasionally experiences derealization

[narcissisticpdcultureis]

NPD culture is very carefully explaining with incredibly delicate & validating phrasing, "when we say narcissistic abuse isn't real, we are saying that the actions described as narc abuse can be committed anyone regardless of their mental health. Your abuse still happened and your trauma is still real trauma. It's the language that you are using that is harmful. Please still feel free to talk about how your abusers treated you while understanding that pinning abusive actions on a disorder rather than how that indicidual responds to their own symptoms of that disorder would not only be ableist, but also counterproductive for your own healing."

And then getting "Oh, so we can't talk about our abuse?? You're victim blaming me?" in response.

Like. I spent so long practicing ways to healthily communicate and settling people down when they're upset. I had to dig through myself and fish out all the anger and shame and harm from the way I was communicating and figure out what my logical fallacies were and how they were harming the people I try to talk to. It would be nice if they could provide maybe atleast 25% of that back and atleast ask themselves, "Is there a reason I'm getting upset by the notion that the way I am coping with my trauma is doing something harmful to others?" and then do what I did, and get comfortable with the state of being embarrassed and get comfortable in the state of finding out you're wrong about something.

.

[cdd-system-terms]

Involunharm

[pt: involunharm. end pt]

not requested by anyone

Involunharm [In-vol-un-harm]

Involun: involuntary

A term for alters that hold trauma related to being forced to harm someone (for RAMCOA/OEA/TBMC/programmed systems only), regardless of how much or how bad. This can include any sort of harm or abuse, regardless of how minor or how major you consider it to be. This includes failed attempts to harm someone. This can also include being forced to harm or attempt to harm animals, not just people. Some examples would be physical abuse, verbal abuse, neglect, sexual abuse, rape, animal abuse, mental abuse, pyschological abuse, emotional abuse, gaslighting, manipulation, religious abuse, grooming, bullying or cyberbullying, sextortion, etc. It can also include abusing someone into developing or fully developing a disorder, worsening their existing disorder symptoms (regardless of if they have the "full-blown" disorder or if they are only showing some traits), and/or intentionally triggering their disorders. Disorder examples are dissociative disorders, addictions, eating disorders, personality disorders, etc. It can also include worsening physical issues.

The harm can be done to anyone or anything (such as animals) of any age, sex, gender, etc.

The syskid version would be Involunharmkid and the same flag is used for both terms.

*-someone can coin a similar term for non-programmed systems, I don’t mind ^^ But I am using the involun- prefix for programmed systems exclusively

[thatnarcissisticfeel]

hey... i mean this in a completely respectful way and i'm sorry if it comes off as otherwise, but i'm genuinely curious about all the anti narc abuse content on your blog... while i fully believe that it's possible for pwNPD to not abuse people, i also fully believe that ppl can be extremely traumatized by pwNPD (two of my friends have mothers with NPD and have extreme trauma stemming from said mothers NPD traits) so i'm genuinely just curious what exactly you mean by "narc abuse"??? i'm really sorry if i offend anyone but i'm just- genuinely curious and hoping to learn more about the disorder because i've had a lot of pwNPD in my life and wanna know more about how they work, how to treat them, etc

Hi! No worries, I accept all questions that are in good faith, and if i can be honest I really admire your desire to learn more, AND I admire the fact that you're so candid about your current feelings about pwNPD. I'd much rather have a person who is willing to learn more after having had bad experiences with pwNPD, than a person who doesn't know anything about NPD and just inherently assumes the worst of us.

But to answer your question: I don't think there's a single neurodivergent person out there - narcissist or otherwise - who denies the fact that their disorder/disability can make them act in ways that they wouldn't act if they were neurotypical. However, no one is abusive/rude/toxic/whatever SOLELY because of their mental illness or PD or disability. For instance, I've had some friends who were really rude to me due to the fact that their Autism makes social cues difficult, but they didn't "autistically abuse" me or anything, and I don't "autistically abuse" people when I myself fumble with social cues due to my own Autism.

(Obviously 'not understanding social cues' isn't comparable to abuse anyway, but you get what I'm trying to say, right?)

While some pwNPD might indeed be "bad people" - for lack of a better term - due to their NPD, that isn't the case for the vast majority of pwNPD, so terms like "narcissist abuse" or equating narcissism with abuse hurts all pwNPD and further stigmatizes the disorder. Even the people whose toxic or abusive behavior can be contributed to their NPD, it's still harmful to call it narcissist abuse, bc it implies that it's ONLY the fact that they have a personality disorder that makes them abuse people, and thus it's only possible for them to stop abusing people if they recover (please note PDs are really hard if not impossible to make a full recovery from).

Also, there's not really any specific flavor of abuse that's exclusive to pwNPD. Like, what does narc abuse mean? That you're a selfish, entitled asshole who constantly puts other people down to feel better about yourself? Well, there's plenty of people without NPD that are like that! Does it mean that you're blind to your loved one's feelings and always prioritize yourself over them and don't care when your loved one is hurting? That's not exclusive to NPD either! Most "narc abuse" behaviors can really be attributed to ANY abuser, regardless of neurotype. I'd even argue that there's more people withOUT npd that do those behaviors than there are people with.

I hope that helped, let me know if you have any more questions!

[thousandyearphantombunker]

I could never hate a whole group of people. I'm autistic I grew up being told i was spoiled r*t@5#d and incapable of being kind and that I should stay in toxic relationships because I was too dumb to make other connections and how people must be saintlike for accommodating me. I was told my problems aren't real and that I'm delusional and I wasn't listened to. Growing up I heard symptoms of autism written about in the most disgusting vile way possible and it all basically boiled down to the criteria for my disability (ei the symptoms of autism) being equated to being an immature idiot who isn't smart enough for anything and that lack of ability meant I deserved nothing and should be grateful anyone wanted to be friends with me regardless of how they treated me. It meant people would rather listen to the people around me rather than me whenever problems arose. I've seen friendships torn apart by political discussions getting out of control and irrational hate. Maybe I'm an idiot but I can't hate any group of people. I can't. I can hate individuals but an entire group? An entire population? My sister has a possible personality disorder and has low empathy and it sickens me how people with these disorders are seen as monsters, as inherently manipulative and abusive. The shit I hear people say about men the way they say it... it's abusive it's borderline suicide baiting. And no matter what misandrists say they are evil if they do that shit. If you say shit like 'oh we have a male suicide epidemic? Haha more men should join the rates'- listen even if misandry isn't systemic your still being horrible piece of shit. I pray to God that you get a wake up call and realize even if men's issues are systemic that suicide baiting people is evil. I hope you find your heart and stop poisoning yourself with your shithead mentality and get therapy for whatever caused you to be like this. Your insane. Yeah men cry wolf about women. Women cry wolf about men. Shut your ass up Maybe I'm being manipulated by 'incels' or 'creeps' but I don't know. I think after seeing women purposely suicide bait men and say that it's good that men are dealing with mental health crisis and how it's a good thing that men are suicidal -i don't know I think they're fucking disgusting- suicide baiting is fucking evil- your evil if your do this can you stop politicizing people's mental illnesses and act like a goddamned human and treat people coping with a crisis with kindness and respect? Can you stop being horrible?

It helps that those 'creeps' might have a point. It certainly helps that most of the 'incels' and 'creeps' I've met are trans, ace, autistic, unattractive etc but never actually entitled rapey or immature. If your response to anyone dealing with mental illness is 'good they deserve to suffer' your an asshole. You people claim "The difference between misogyny and misandry is that misogynistic men want women to be silenced, dumb, humiliated, submissive, controlled, abused, molested, raped, impregnated, trapped, surgically altered, beaten, and killed, and misandrist women want to be free of the men who think and do the above." Yet I hear shit like "Young girls need to be actively taught to not help males regardless of their circumstances or age. Whether it's your boyfriend of 5 years who recently got into a debt or if it's any stranger in a dark alleyway crying for help. Neither of them are gonna end well FOR YOU. You're not gonna get appreciated, you're not get acknowledged for long. Infact, you're gonna be the one who'll be taken advantage of." Or "Men are lonely? Fucking good. Maybe, for the first time in civilisation, they fucking should be." If your response to someone in crisis is "we go through more pain than you" or "you deserve to be in pain for others sins" your just radicalizing men against you. If your response to someone asking for help is "your dangerous and poisonous and you deserve to get hurt" then you disgust me. You are fucking gross. Imagine being so paranoid that you make being a woman sound like a fate worse than death and make basic human decency sound like a senseless sacrifice. Maybe stop telling little girls to be paranoid. Maybe stop letting your irrational paranoid victim mentality poison your goddamned heart. Stop telling every woman you meet that evil men are always out to get them and that they should be paranoid and afraid all the time- your not helping feminism your just telling people being a woman is scary and bad. Your not helping feminism your making the world a colder place convincing girls that kindness will get them raped and murdered and telling men that they are inherently bad

It's not called being a man baby when these men eventually break down- it's called 'i fucking opened up for once and now I'm suffering for it'. Maybe it's because of my own issues from when I was a kid but womanchild manchild adultchild and being insulted and hunted down for harassment when I was vulnerable - this shit always grossed me out. I don't know if there is an actual epidemic of male suicides but I do not like how I've seen an uptick in suicide baiting from radfems/people laughing at the idea of anyone being in that much pain psychologically. Wtf.

I could never be a radfem thinking my personal issues is justified that any of this shit: bullying, ableism, laughing at rape and domestic abuse victims, racism, transphobia

It's not okay it baffles me

[callipraxia]

As semi-promised on Thursday night: here is a fuller explication of my thoughts after reading @zephrunsimperium's post about Ford and anger (which you should go check out their various Ford analysis pieces if you haven’t, they’re excellent and, unlike me, actually get to the point in a timely manner!)...thoughts which ultimately melded with some attempts at another essay I had semi-abandoned a few months ago, so hold on tight, friends, you’re in for quite the long ride with this one, should you choose to wade through it to the end, for this essay is more than 10,000 words long. Numbers in parentheses indicate endnotes, which can be found at the, well, end. Trigger warnings for extended discussions of multiple kinds of abuse portrayed/only thinly made into metaphors in the GF canon, and for discussion of mental health. For anyone feeling up to dealing with all that...read on below the cut.

To my way of thinking, one of the most essential things for understanding Ford lies in recognizing all the gaps between who he is, who he wants to be, and who he wants other people to think he is, and the intersection of anger, the performance of masculinity, and his long, long history of relational traumas is the fateful crossroads which those gaps emanate from. At the risk of sounding unduly like a pop psychologist, I also think his father is an important individual to consider in light of these issues.

Filbrick, as Stan tells us in ATOTS, was a strict man who had “the personality of a cinderblock.” Stan is not always a terribly reliable narrator, but he seems to lack the ability to lie to the flashback camera, and the first few flashbacks of the episode give us a glimpse at what the Pines family was like in the sixties which supports Stan’s assertion about his father. In those scenes, Filbrick is the only character we don’t see expressing strong emotion of some kind before the science fair, something that makes the ‘sound and fury’ of the scene where Stan is disowned, when it comes around, all that much more shocking. Until this point, Filbrick came about as close to physically resembling a cinderblock as his personality was said to; even when he expressed approval of Ford in the principal’s office, it was a relatively muted display, barely more emotive than his earlier “I’m not impressed” or his silent disappointment in the season one flashback when Stan recalls the summer Filbrick first sent him to boxing lessons. We learn after the science fair that he can, apparently, express anger very vividly, but “Lost Legends” further underlines how he is otherwise mostly emotionally inaccessible to his family; Stan (despite being far more aware of his emotions than he might like to admit that he is) cannot just talk to his father about how he feels, and once again, the only concrete emotion Filbrick shows on-screen is anger. Pictures near the end suggest possible mild experiences of a few other feelings, and the adult Ford, narrating many years after the fact and very probably after Filbrick’s death, speculates about what might have been going on in his head, but those feelings are never made explicit the way his anger is. We don’t know why Filbrick is this way (the closest thing to a hint we get is the information that he was a World War II veteran - there is, after all, a reason for the common portrayal of the Stan twins’ entire generation as one which was saddled with cruddy fathers in the aftermaths of World War II and Korea – but for all we know, Filbrick could have been like that before the War, too. What was his family life like, growing up? His financial condition? Could he just be someone who was born with a strong predisposition toward an emotional or personality disorder, regardless of whatever else happened in his life? We just don’t have enough information about him to say for sure), but it seems safe to speculate that he was this way pretty consistently: whatever else was going on with him, the only emotion he seems to have felt comfortable expressing was anger.

And this is the guy Ford and Stan had held up to them as their first, and quite possibly most influential, example of what being a man is.

I’d argue that – when they were children, at least – this was more of a problem for Stan than for Ford. Filbrick presumably saw them both as shamefully weak as children, but Ford, at least, had another route to the old man’s approval readily available to him. If Filbrick was at least grudgingly proud of Ford’s intelligence, then Ford could receive the measure of parental approval which Stan craved and could never get; we also see that Ford could apparently hold his own while sparring with Stan by the time they were teenagers, so it’s likely enough that he no longer had to worry about physical assault from his classmates by the time he was in high school, either. Though still isolated and insecure underneath it all because of his childhood experiences and probably in part due to his ongoing social isolation, Ford was able to find a path to a kind of self-esteem: he was both brilliant and quite capable of using his six fingers to break your nose if you had too much to say about them, and he knew it, and everyone else knew it, too. He also had his brother as a constant source of support. When Ford was made to look ridiculous by having a drink thrown in his face in public, Stan promptly threw a drink in his own face in order to look even more ridiculous. When Ford won competitions, which he seems to have started doing at an impressive rate very early in life, Stan seems to have been almost over-enthusiastic in his approval: he looks as delighted about Ford winning the science fair (at the time, before the meeting with the principal) as Ford himself does, if not even happier about it. Even his habit of copying off Ford’s papers in class could have served as a reinforcement for Ford’s ego: he not only could manage for himself, but he could even allow someone else to depend on him.

In this way, by the time everything went wrong, the teenaged Ford had probably already developed a degree of self-respect and self-sufficiency that Stan was still struggling to reliably maintain forty years later. Neither of them could ever be the kind of man Filbrick was, or of which they thought he would approve, they were both too emotionally vulnerable and expressive for that, but it’s probably noteworthy that Ford kept pictures of famous scientists (instead of family photographs) around him during his college and young adult years: because he could also do something Filbrick never could, he was able, to some degree, to carve out an idea of “how to be a man” on his own terms. If Filbrick’s approval was an immovable object in the path between Stan, Ford, and healthy expressions of adult masculinity, then where Stan flailed against it, Ford simply walked around it by choosing new conscious role models.

Tesla, Sagan, Einstein, and company were “great men,” successful (well, at least remembered posthumously) and respected, who were also given to Nerdy Enthusiasms. Said enthusiasm, an open delight in the marvels of the natural world, was therefore an emotion besides anger that Ford could express freely without compromising his view of himself, and it seems that he did so regularly. This appears to have worked well for him; we know very little about his college years – only that he worked very hard, that he made at least one close friend and (based on his usage of the plural ‘friends’ when discussing DD&MD) possibly even had a social group of sorts, and that he continued to indulge his creative side to a degree by playing DD&MD, which was as close as someone in his late teens and early twenties could probably get to continuing the kind of fantasy play he’d enjoyed as a child without sabotaging his probable adolescent desire to feel very grown up – but it seems they were productive and reasonably happy. Six years after them, a slice of his life comes into focus for us in the form of his journal. He was probably around thirty to thirty-three years old when it was written(1), give or take a year or two, and we find him several years into the circumstances he was in when he says, as a much older man, that he’d finally found somewhere to belong. He could be lying - Ford, unusually, even has the ability to lie to the flashback camera, or at least omit things - but we don't really have any reason to believe this; when the flashbacks turn to Stan making an abortive attempt at contact, Ford on the phone sounds cheery. His lack of paranoia and surprise about someone phoning him is also not the only evidence that, at this time, he may not even have been totally socially isolated in Gravity Falls – in the same years, he goes to the public library with some regularity, he declines to buy cookies from a zombie Boy Scout, he converses sometimes with the mailman, and he is on friendly enough terms with Dan Corduroy, even some years after Dan finished building Ford’s house, to know that Dan’s family had a holiday cabin and to ask to use it. Clearly nobody was too close to Ford even then, but his chosen path was going reasonably well for him; it's possible that Stan might have found him rather harder to replace at this point than he did later, after an unspecified time lapse, which may have lasted as long as a year,(2) during which Ford had gradually became a complete recluse as he became more and more consumed by his relationship with Bill Cipher. Before that time lapse, Ford the man seems like a logical enough place for Ford the boy to have ended up; after it…..

Well, after it is where we get back to the topics of anger and its intersection with various aspects of identity and self-concept.

A decent place to begin is with Fiddleford, and with why, exactly, Ford asked him to come to Gravity Falls. Ford tells us that he asked Fiddleford to come because he (Ford) did not have the technical know-how to complete the Portal. There is some evidence to support the veracity of this idea: Fiddleford is, after all, the man who later proves able to build astonishingly lifelike robot monsters whilst homeless (and thus, it seems safe to assume, without conventional sources of funds or supplies), and he is the one who sees the flaws in the Portal design. Indeed, he seems to start spotting them before he even has a chance to physically see them: Ford tells us that Fiddleford started suggesting revisions to the plans over the phone while still in California, in the same conversation where he agreed to come. In the third portion of the Journal, the sixtysomething Ford also mentions hearing about how a Parallel Earth Fiddleford was convinced to come back to the project, at which point the Parallel Portal was stabilized and became something that could be used the way Ford had intended to use it (as opposed to how Bill had intended to use it). The implication is that Ford not only didn’t understand how to complete the Portal, but that he also didn’t understand the plans even as far as he thought he understood them. Certainly the Fiddleford of the main timeline, who would have worked with him before, was instantly suspicious about the existence of a third collaborator once he saw how far Ford had gotten without him, which further supports the idea that Ford was more of a theoretician than a mechanic. This does, however, run somewhat against the grain of much of what we see Ford do on-screen. As a teenager of modest economic means, he was shown to be as comfortable working with his hands as with his pencil, and he was able to build something which acted enough like a perpetual motion device that he won a state-wide competition and drew the attention of an elite university. At university, he created the mind control tie – something which appears, both by its existence and by the glimpse we get of how it’s wired in “The Stanchurian Candidate,” to involve electronics more sophisticated than what Fiddleford was shown working with in roughly the same time period. I tend to run with the idea that the events of the episode “The Stanchurian Candidate” only happened in a particularly vivid nightmare of Stan’s, and therefore include the tie simply because it was in the Journal, but if one goes with official canon and accepts that “Stanchurian Candidate” happened, then Ford somehow, in a matter of hours, with no budget or supplies, invented a thousand-year lightbulb that also improves the complexion of the user in the same episode that shows us the wiring of the tie. In the eighties, he also seems to have developed his mind-encrypting machine as a private project, and in the Multiverse, he survived entirely on what he could steal or construct for thirty years, and it seems he had progressed a long way toward the development of the Quantum Destabilizer on his own before he stumbled into the ‘Better World’ dimension; Parallel Fiddleford really just sped the completion process up because he’d happened to discover a useful fuel source for presumably completely unrelated reasons years before Ford showed up. Clearly, Ford can more than hold his own as an engineer, and as one with a particular flair for doing impossible things with electricity and the laws of energy conservation; even Fiddleford trusted his gift in that area enough to, however reluctantly, briefly accept his claim that he had been working alone despite his serious doubts about the idea, and to allow Ford to bully him into silence about the Portal’s design flaws for weeks or possibly months before the confrontation at the diner. Why, then, did he suddenly become convinced, during that fateful July, that he could not finish the Portal without Fiddleford?

The answer may lay a few pages further back in the Journal. Not long before he calls Fiddleford, Ford makes notes on the plans for the Portal that Bill had showed him in a dream. One of these notes is “I MUST NOT LOSE MY NERVE!” Later, in a state of mind where he is increasingly paranoid and beginning to lose a degree of touch with reality, he reflects repeatedly about Fiddleford’s nerve in similar terms. There may well have been some level, deep down, on which Ford knew he was getting in over his head, and he was scared out of his mind by that realization. If this is true, then, on some level, he knew something was...off, with what was going on around him. He knew he needed help from someone he trusted and who was not Bill. And so he reached out to his college roommate for that help, and he did so in a way that allowed him to still plausibly deny just how much trouble he was in, both to himself and everyone else, and he didn’t only need that deniability because he was inviting a third party into the isolation of an increasingly abusive relationship and would need an excuse if Bill took exception to the idea of Ford relying on anyone or anything other than Bill. He also needed that plausible deniability to preserve his self-concept, because by this time, whatever he had or hadn’t been earlier, Ford Pines had become a deeply, deeply dishonest man.

One of the key moments for understanding this - and, in many ways, the character overall - occurs in “Dungeons, Dungeons, and More Dungeons.” There, Ford delivers the exasperated line, “if my hands were free, I’d break every part of your face!” If that line was taken totally out of context and shown to a casual viewer, the casual viewer would likely misidentify it as a line of Stan’s. Stan is, after all, the character with the hair-trigger temper and violent tendencies, right?

To an extent, yes. In “The Golf War,” Stan asks Soos if it would be “wrong” to punch a child (Pacifica) – probably more of an indirect threat in response to Pacifica’s insults toward the Pineses than a true question, but Stan’s moral code is sufficiently different from the standard issue that one can’t completely dismiss the possibility that he really wanted to, well, punch a child. And who can forget his antics in “The Land Before Swine” or “Scaryoke,” where he punches his way single-handed through monsters which had defeated the rest of the cast? Or in “Not What He Seems,” where he takes on multiple government agents in zero gravity while, for at least part of the time, he had his hands fastened behind his back? Or that glorious moment in the finale when he did, in fact, break every part of Bill Cipher’s glitched-out face? Stan is also the character who lost his temper to the extent that he lashed out at Ford physically in the middle of the save-the-world ritual, and Stan is the one who keeps his old boxing gloves around his bedroom, along with owning at least one set of brass knuckles. As an old man, he still seems to take pride in having learned to fight back against the world physically as a child, and he recommends that Dipper try knocking Robbie unconscious bare-handed when Dipper is challenged to a fight. And, of course, the man is a menace whenever he gets within a certain radius of the Stanmobile, the vehicle that can take out roadway railings, light poles, and theme park gates without showing a scratch. There’s no denying it: Stan is perhaps many other things, too, but he’s also a very physically aggressive kind of guy. If, therefore, someone in this series was going to threaten to break someone’s face, it seems obvious it would be Stan…but it wasn’t. It was his supposedly milder-mannered, “goody nerd-shoes,” brother who, on examination, actually behaves far more casually violently than Stan does throughout his sadly short time in the series. To demonstrate:

Ford sets foot in his house for the first time in thirty years and identifies the first person he sees as his brother. Later, writing in his reclaimed journal, Ford describes his own reaction thus: “instinct took over and I punched him right in the face. I feel kind of bad about that!” 

In the very next episode - aside from his antics in the first scenes(3) and the already-mentioned description of what he’d like to do to Probabilitator after the wizard captures him - we also have Ford’s immediate reaction to the wizard’s materialization. Stan is, naturally, most clearly unnerved by an evil math wizard suddenly materializing in the TV room, but there’s a moment where he glances sideways at Ford after Ford pulls a gun; to me, at least, this glance made it seem like he found that behavior pretty disturbing as well. For the past several hours, after all, Ford had been playing board games. Most people do not bring concealed guns to game night with their nephews. Ford does.

Stan and Ford both have wanted posters that show up ‘on screen’ – Stan’s in his box of memorabilia in “Not What He Seems,” and Ford’s in Journal 3. Stan’s talks about “scams, frauds, and identity theft” - all potentially serious crimes that can ruin the lives of the people on the other ends of them, but ones which follow the general tendency (per the reading I did last March) of real-world con men to avoid violence in the commission of their crimes. Ford’s, on the other hand, refers to its subject as ‘armed and dangerous,’ and as someone with a bounty on his head. From the way Ford depicts his own appearance in it, it seems likely that particular version of the poster is at least ten to fifteen years old, but in “Lost Legends,” he is still instantly recognizable in the multiverse for his criminal shenanigans, even in the company of his near-identical twin. In his own words, “a number of dimensions consider me an outlaw to this day.” If one uses the dictionary definition of the term - and considering how much variety comes up just in the few examples Ford gives of worlds he’s visited, there’s no reason to assume he hasn’t visited a few Premodern Justice Dimensions - this means there could be multiple dimensions out there where the authorities took the time and trouble to formally declare that he had done something shocking enough to justify the revocation of all rights and protections he might have otherwise enjoyed under the law, thus allowing anyone to do anything they could physically manage to him with no fear of any negative repercussions except those he could personally inflict on them. He also refers to his own  exploits as “swashbuckling” (a term which brings piracy to mind) and offhandedly mentions travels with “bandits” (a term which describes practitioners of behavior usually classified under the ‘organized crime’ umbrella due to the cooperative nature of the often violent or potentially violent crimes in question).

Much of this behavior, it’s true, can be attributed to a combination of trauma responses and, in the Multiverse, sheer necessity. He refers in the journal to talking “my way into and out of food and shelter,” and the “out of” comment underlines how, like Stan before him, he very abruptly went from having a relatively stable situation (at least in the material sense) to being homeless, which would be at least a serious shock to the system of almost anyone, including people in much better mental health than he was in at that time. Then there’s the more complicated non-material aspects of his previous situation. As an adult reader, it’s stomach-knotting to go through the 1980s portion of the journal, because if you look at the behaviors and dynamics and leave out the “incorporeal eldritch abomination” element, it only takes a very little extrapolation from the material for his ‘partnership’ with Bill becomes an uncomfortably realistic depiction of a domestic abuse situation. Considering that either of these major traumas of 1981-1982 could (and, if the fantastical elements are stripped out, regularly do) induce PTSD in nearly anyone, and considering how many more traumatic events he doubtless went through in the years following, it’s not implausible that the man would develop a tendency toward believing that the best defense is a good offense. However, there is also evidence that at least some of these tendencies predated Ford’s major traumas, and that – despite how he would very likely insist this was not the case - the trigger-happy adrenaline addict we meet in “A Tale of Two Stans” may not represent a total change in character from who he was before the Portal – or even before Bill. The evidence here is admittedly scarcer and more ambiguous, but to illustrate:

In Journal 3, Ford seems sincerely puzzled about why Fiddleford would show signs of trauma after the gremlobin incident. This incident involved Fiddleford being shown his worst fear (something which ended in tourists being removed from the Mystery Shack via stretcher in apparent catatonic states. Fiddleford was a  man who probably had an anxiety disorder to begin with, who was just accepting the reality of the supernatural, and who was living, for at least several months, hours away from where his wife and young son were, something which seems to have troubled him at the best of times. It's remarkable he was functioning at all after the gremlobin incident). He was also hit with a bunch of venomous quills, and flown through the air by something which clearly had no good intentions for him in mind…and that was all before the solution to the situation ended up involving Ford crash-landing everyone through the roof of a barn, breaking Fiddleford’s arm in the process.

The gremlobin incident is not the only time Ford, even before the multiverse, appears bewildered by perfectly ordinary responses to frightening stimuli. While Fiddleford admittedly may have had some form of anxiety or compulsive disorder to begin with (an idea supported by events like his tearing out his own hair under stress and his need to correct the Cubik’s Cube), his reactions to monsters appear far more reasonable than Ford’s offhand assertion that he has survived many monster attacks without registering any of the experiences as traumatic.

When Fiddleford was in danger, Ford’s automatic response involved, essentially, jumping off a cliff and hoping the magnet gun-to-hyperdrive attraction would first catch and then carry him long enough for him to catch up…and that he would then somehow figure out how to land the improvised gremlobinmobile without killing himself, Fiddleford, and the monster all in one go.

When we go into the bunker in “Into the Bunker,” Soos finds a candy dispenser in a cabinet filled with weapons. These weapons appear to be a mix of firearms alongside various medieval or Renaissance-style pieces. It is, of course, possible - though to my mind, improbable; Fiddleford seems to prefer indirect methods of aggression, mostly in the form of homicidal robots - that some or all of these weapons belonged to Fiddleford, but there is also evidence that there was a similar mix of weapons in the house which later became the Mystery Shack: sside from Ford’s singular ideas about how to answer a door in “A Tale of Two Stans,” we also see a box of other manual weapons which Dipper has access to in “Boss Mabel,” and which Stan is seen rifling through to find a crossbow - presumably the same one which had come alarmingly close to his nose thirty years earlier – at the beginning of “Love God.” Stan further asserts there are ten guns in the Shack during “Fight Fighters,” but we never see them; even while fighting against zombies, while following pterodactyls into caverns beneath the town, and during Weirdmageddon, Stan routinely arms himself with bludgeoning weapons, not ranged ones. The only time we see him use a ranged weapon (at least that I can recall) is the time he aims the crossbow at a balloon, which was out of reach. Ford, however, despite demonstrating almost immediately upon arrival that he’s quite capable of fighting without one, repeatedly uses ranged weapons even in close quarters: the crossbow in Stan’s face, the handgun in the living room, the Quantum Destabilizer during Weirdmageddon, the spear in the closing montage of the finale. These examples are, of course, all justifiable enough in their various contexts, but the combination of several incidents and all the weapons around the house and its environs makes it seem eminently possible that Ford was a bit of a weapons nut long before he became an interdimensional fugitive, and that if there actually are ten guns in the house, Stan may have more or less 'inherited' them along with the Stanford identity.

When Bill - who knew Ford very well before the Portal - shows Ford a vision of a possible future in an attempt to convince Ford to join him in his conquest of the universe, it is a vision of complete destruction. We see Bill’s giant finger tearing cities apart in an uncomfortable amount of detail, and are treated to the sight of planets being munched on like apples…and this is Bill’s sales pitch, the ‘party’ he is inviting Ford to and really, really wants Ford to agree to attend. This leaves us with two options: either Bill can’t understand that anyone might ultimately desire anything beyond or besides the chance to participate in unlimited, consequence-free violence (something which doesn’t square too well with Bill’s otherwise apparently excellent grasp of human motivation and how to manipulate it to serve his own ends), or Bill has some reason for thinking that the prospects of immortality and a group of ‘friends’ to destroy things with on a massive scale might genuinely appeal to his “old pal” just as much as the prospect of being “all-powerful” and “all-knowing” would. This is also hinted at by how Bill appears to try to convince Ford to relate to him by revealing that he was once mortal himself and explaining that he burned his dimension before offering Ford the chance to effectively do the same to the universe of the canon timeline. 'Become a god of destruction' or 'get tortured a lot' were also not the only possible options Bill could have offered; he could, for instance, have tried to convince Ford that if he (for all intents and purposes) became a god, then he could save at least some sapient life-forms in the universe from Bill by setting up his galaxy as a benevolent dictatorship or the like, with the alternative being that everyone would die if Ford didn’t take that deal. Bill did not attempt anything of the sort. Bill, at least, thinks Ford is not only capable of observing or even committing acts of great violence, but that he is capable of relishing the opportunity to do so.

Why are all these things easy to overlook? In part, it is because Ford wants us to overlook them, because they do not ‘fit’ with the person Ford wishes that he was. He wants, very much, to see himself as a cool-headed, utterly rational, cultured figure – not least because this would represent a total contrast to his twin brother and everything Stan stands for, either in reality or inside Ford’s imagination - and so he uses long words and is usually fairly softly-spoken. He emphasizes his “well-ordered and scientific mind” even as he behaves in ways which suggest he’s highly volatile and puts in writing (however carefully concealed the information might be behind veils of words) that he planned to make his name on a scientific project which wasn’t of his own design, a behavior which indicates a comfort with shortcuts even more potentially disastrous than Stan’s. When he does, rarely, have to acknowledge something that he would rather not acknowledge directly, he always immediately justifies the potentially unflattering behavior in fairly grandiose ways - stealing radioactive materials, for instance, is rationalized as a ‘doing a public service,’ and all the things he did to become a wanted man in multiple dimensions are, similarly, lumped together and dismissed as crimes committed “for a noble purpose.” No doubt some of them were, but on the page about the Infinity Die, one doesn’t really get the impression that he was particularly discriminating about when he used that thing, considering the usage statistics we’re given. The page informs us that the Die saved Ford’s life three times, endangered it “around 20,” permanently changed the color of a sky one time…and that it’s been used enough other times besides these that he can note the odd frequency of rolling a four(4). When talking to Dipper, he also seems quite confident about just how far the Die can warp reality - he doesn’t speak as if “the universe could turn into an egg” is an exaggeration. Use of the Infinity Die would not be a reliable way to limit damage or even to advance his goals while committing other crimes, so it becomes a bit difficult to justify his apparently relatively casual use of it as something he did only as a last resort and/or only in service of a noble purpose. Most fans recognize that he clearly started over-identifying Dipper with himself toward the end of the series, but he identifies Dipper with himself only when it comes to traits he is proud of having; otherwise, the “grammar, Stanley” remark is one of the few criticisms he has of Stan which doesn’t also come across as something he might want to say about himself and his own less desirable qualities, if he could only bring himself to acknowledge them for what they are in plain language. It reads, to borrow from someone I once talked about the character with on Reddit, like “my man is just as chaotic [as Stan], he just manifests it differently.”

Part of this difference lies in their respective approaches to the truth. Neither is anything you could reasonably call an honest man, but the distinction lies in how Ford appears to lie to himself a lot more often than Stan does. Stan, outside of ‘working hours,’ is utterly up-front about who and what he is and what he cares about: he’s a crook and a grifter and a liar, interested only in that which benefits him and the small number of people he personally cares about. Only once, when contemplating his epitaph in “The Stanchurian Candidate,” does he show anything even vaguely resembling shame about this, and even then, he still includes the detail that he would, of course, be a crooked mayor if he became one. It's entirely possible that the only ultimately sacrificed himself to destroy Bill because of the direct and imminent threat Bill represented to his individual relatives. As the man himself once said: it wasn’t enough for him to be the town’s hero, because his real agenda was being Dipper and Mabel’s. Ford, on the other hand, seems to have shared many of Stan’s desires (wealth, respect, shortcuts to these things) as a young man, but also to have always felt some need to convince himself that he wanted more (for lack of a better term) socially acceptable ‘side features’ as well. When he dreams of scientific accomplishment, he will admit he looks forward to riches and glory...but he also throws in that he wants to revolutionize science to enhance the well-being of all mankind, too. When he writes down the story of how he began his quest to kill Bill, he acknowledges that he wished to “wreak vengeance for the life he stole from me” - but only after saying he would “save the multiverse from [Bill’s] wrath.” Later, though, when talking about his meeting with a parallel Fiddleford, he refers to his vow as a “vendetta” - a word defined as “a blood feud in which the family of a murdered person seeks vengeance on the murderer or the murderer's family; a prolonged bitter quarrel with or campaign against someone.” The word can be used far less precisely in casual conversation, of course, and he probably does sincerely see it as his duty to atone for his mistakes by removing the entity which seeks to exploit them, but at the end of the day, despite his attempts to frame his behavior in terms of doing what is objectively right, there’s also a massive degree to which his quest is personal. Anger and revenge and personal concerns ultimately prove just as important to him as they are to his brother, if not even more important. This is illustrated perhaps most dramatically in the lead-up to the Final Deal: one can only imagine what Bill’s back-up plan was, because Bill came close to not needing one. Ultimately, when put to the test, the principles which went along with the persona Ford tried so hard to project crumbled: the family was, in the end, more important to him than saving the world, just as it was for Stan. He never mentioned the idea of making any attempt to save himself in the deal (on top of doubtless believing that such an effort would be doomed to failure, there are hints that Ford always planned to die in the execution of his revenge, or at least never saw a way around doing so), but he was willing to let Bill take over the galaxy “or worse” just to save (or at least exempt himself from the responsibility of personally dooming) three other people on a probably quite temporary basis. If Bill was unraveling reality all around them, after all, where exactly were Stan and the twins supposed to go?

“What other choice do we have?” It took no few viewings of the finale for it to register why I always find that line so wrenchingly uncomfortable to watch. At that moment, finally, for the first time on screen, Ford admits that he cannot save the situation, or even himself. That he’s been backed into a corner – trapped – forced to acknowledge that another entity can and will hurt him, and that it can and will hurt him on as many levels as it pleases. He’s been taken right back to where he was when his first grade classmates nearly put him in the hospital, and he can’t hide it from himself or anyone else anymore...and it’s after this moment that we almost immediately see a dramatic change in Ford’s behavior and self-representation. The same man who remained remarkably defiant, all things considered, when tied up by an evil sorcerer who was gloating about its plans to consume his brain, or even in the midst of what was probably several days of severe torture,(5) visibly flinches, his hands shaking, while using the memory gun; in the aftermath of that moment, we then see him standing in a corner, looking helpless and at a loss for what to do while other people (specifically, mostly Mabel) try to figure out a solution without his assistance, as he's meekly accepted the situation instead of trying to change it. Dipper notes that some point in that day was the “only time” anyone had ever seen Ford cry, a statement that implies there had been other occasions where Dipper expected him to cry when he didn’t do so – perhaps it’s just because Dipper is used to Stan, who cries rather a lot, but for some reason, Dipper regarded this observation as specific enough to underline the severity of the situation during the first hours of Stan’s amnesia. The closest Ford really gets to his pre-Weirdmageddon demeanor again is when he takes the long way around the block in order to ask Stan to accompany him to investigate some anomaly up north, just as he’d previously made the same excuse about being too old to manage on his own anymore for asking Dipper to stay in town after the summer ended; since even unbending enough to, effectively, ask anyone not to leave him was already a step away from his isolated-hero act, it’s far from one of his more distinctive adult characteristics reasserting itself. Something, it seems, in the man profoundly broke in the throne room of the Fearamid, and based on his worryingly fervent attempts in the last pages of his journal to represent both Stan and Fiddleford as plaster saints, it doesn’t seem like it’s getting fixed any time soon.

I noted earlier that I suspected Ford had no intention of surviving his duel with Bill in the Nightmare Realm during “Not What He Seems.” There are a few reasons for this. One is simple probability, of course (even if he had destroyed Bill, there would have still been plenty of creatures around that would have been more than happy to eat him, and his death ray was almost out of power). More pertinent, however, are a few of Ford’s own words. Twice, he refers to Stan as having “saved” him – not ‘rescued’ ‘retrieved’ ‘gotten back’ or any other possible combination of words, but “saved.” The first, where he’s still grumbling about it, is when he shows Dipper the Rift and explains why he was angry at Stan for this seemingly charitable behavior: he saved Ford’s life, but at the cost of endangering the world, and at that time, Ford was still deeply committed to the idea of himself as someone who sacrifices, not someone who sacrifices are made for. On the second occasion, while trying to explain what just happened to Dipper and Mabel after they realize that Stan no longer recognizes them, he sounds almost bewildered as well as moved as he makes the statement. Shortly before that second occasion, in the Fearmid itself, he also, infamously, uses the word “suicide” on the Disney Channel, when he tells Dipper and Mabel that any attempt to take on Bill – or, in other words, to undertake the very task he was attempting when the Portal reopened in NWHS – was a “suicide mission.” His behavior, from the moment he comes back, is usually varying degrees of reckless, and the Journal illustrates that this isn’t an entirely new tendency: aside from vowing to undo the damage he’d done “or lose my life in the attempt” at the end of the 1980s section, he also put himself through the kind of work conditions that can literally kill a person for, it seems, months before he realized Bill had played him; afterward, he proceeded to have a breakdown while continuing, or even increasing, his dangerous habits of sleep deprivation and stimulant overuse. And even before that, as previously noted: he once didn’t think twice about jumping off a cliff. There has, at least since he came to Gravity Falls, always been a part of Ford which seems to have had some inclination toward self-destruction; he may not have been suicidal as such in the early years, but even then, he seems to have been more than merely indifferent to his own well-being. It is at this point that all the disparate threads of this essay will begin to gather back together into a single line, because this behavior can be interpreted as Ford, essentially, daring the universe to so much as try to make a victim of him, because it was at in those years that he began to feel the need to assure himself that he wasn’t one. After he admits he’s out of ideas in the Fearamid, though, he finally has no other choice but to admit that he has in fact been victimized – specifically, by Bill Cipher.

When Ford chose to adopt famous scientists as his models for how to be a man, he began to lie to himself about himself to some degree. He insisted he was rational and unemotional when he was anything but. He retained some pride in being in better physical condition than the other men close to him during both his scientist and hero arcs, but he downplayed his quite real attraction toward violence (recall that on two of the three occasions where he and Stan came to blows, Ford was the one who escalated the conflict) and thrill-seeking, trying to veil them from himself as well as the reader. Ford’s tendency toward black-and-white thinking didn’t disappear at the end of the show; he simply reversed the polarity, so that now, instead of him being the hero, he recast others in that role and was at least attempting to accept a place among the ranks of those who’d needed saving. This was something that he’d been denying he was for a very long time, even at the price of focusing on anger-inducing aspects of the past, perhaps distorting them out of proportion in his memory so he could keep his mind on the future. Unable to cope with the loss of control implicit in his situation with his 'Muse,' acting as the agent of something else and being manipulated in deeper and deeper over his head, he directed his attention to a future where he would be on top again, focusing on anger toward the past instead of on his fear of the present.

For most of the show, Ford has real issues with anger, and I tend to believe that quite a lot of them had to do with the need to protect two things after the disintegration of his relationship with Bill Cipher. One is his image of himself, and the other - arguably, something dependent on the maintenance of his self-concept - is his sanity – or at least, if not his sanity, then his ability to function. As noted the other night – anger might not feel good, exactly, but it can feel so much better than hurting that it can be mistaken for feeling good. Fury can be paralyzing, yes, but it can also, when directed outward, keep you moving – spite, as they say, is the source of many an accomplishment Self-loathing, on the other hand, will crush you like a boulder, sooner or later...and it’s painfully obvious, in the scrambled, increasingly unhinged journal entries between the Portal test and his decision to call Stan, that Ford is capable of intense self-hatred. Even in later years, when he has focused his entire mind on revenge for decades and reviles the traits in his brother that he dislikes in himself, there’s still that undercurrent of guilt and self-hatred running just beneath the surface, so close to the top that even he can never really fully ignore it. He doesn’t really know how to accept help while maintaining his self-respect, and here’s where we get to him being both an abuse survivor and, arguably, specifically a male one.

Earlier, I referred to his partnership with Bill as an uncomfortably realistic depiction of a domestic abuse situation when you strip the supernatural frills away. Bill could well have marked off items on some kind of manipulation checklist: he would flatter Ford to draw him in, and then withdraw without explanation, leaving Ford despondent and thus that much more dependent on Bill upon Bill’s return. Bill convinces Ford that nobody else really understands him like Bill does, and that nobody else ever could do so. They are all parasites who want to ride on Ford’s coattails, or steal his work, or are people who will hurt him because they are jealous of him; Bill is the one who inspires him, because he’s just that deserving of inspiration...except, of course, when he isn’t. When the Muse would go silent for long stretches of time, waiting with highly uncharacteristic patience until he got just close enough to desperate for a breakthrough. Then the whole cycle would begin all over again, until finally, by 1980-1981, Bill had succeeded in reducing Ford’s world to little more than himself. Based on the state of Ford’s study, he was, by the end, probably literally worshiping Bill as a god.(6) It is therefore possible to argue that the relationship included spiritual abuse in addition to the blatant psychological, physical (“enjoy the mystery bruises”), and financial (in that much of the grant ended up being used to pursue Bill’s agenda instead of for its intended purpose) abuse...and all of that happens before the possession sub-plot after the Portal test, where any illusion that their association is consensual or in any way for Ford’s benefit falls apart. Bill systematically violates every understood boundary within the relationship during the weeks between the Portal test and the Portal incident, and Bill very clearly enjoys doing so. He takes the time to taunt his victim by scribbling in the Journal when Ford blacks out. He seems to derive a great deal of satisfaction not only from the ability to completely deprive Ford of all mental and bodily autonomy on a whim, but from reminding Ford that he had this ability: he seems to have gotten a twisted satisfaction from knowing that Ford knew that, sooner or later, he would be unable to physically prevent himself from sleeping any longer. The hopelessness and inescapability of his situation are thrown in Ford's face again and again, and apparently for no better reason than that Bill is a physical and psychological sadist. Other people's misery and horror are like a drug to Bill, and we see, again and again, in the series that Bill will even undermine the pursuit of his own goals in order to enjoy it.

And the person he did all this to was Ford. Someone who already had profound trust issues (from his point of view, everyone he ever cared for had betrayed him to one degree or another), and whose formative years were during early fifties. This is significant, even aside from the impact of personality flaws specific to Filbrick Pines on his son’s development. Even today, in our rather better-informed times, many people dismiss the idea that men and even boys can be victims of abuse entirely, and even some of those who acknowledge the possibility won’t take it as seriously as the idea of men abusing women and girls. When Ford was physically and verbally bullied in elementary school, the only solution his father could offer was “learn to hit harder than the other guy.” If someone hurts you, you hurt them back; this, in the earliest examples he seems to have had, is how you reclaim power, and if you can’t do that, then Filbrick thinks you’re weak, that you’re an embarrassment, and that he just wishes you were gone, to very nearly quote Stan from “Dreamscaperers.” This was also a general attitude of the surrounding culture, without a lot of prominent examples of better options. Years later, it follows - horrible though it is to say – reasonably enough that when Ford realized he’d been manipulated and used by something that couldn’t be punched in the face, he began to have a breakdown, which only began to resolve in a small way when he convinced himself there was, in fact, a way to do something at least equivalent to punching Bill in the face. His plan was irrational and poorly strung together, and it did require him to ask someone for help, which must have galled – but it’s only Stan he has to ask, after all, and Stan doesn’t really count, and Stan owes him anything he might choose to ask for anyway, and besides, he’s not really asking Stan to help him deal with the problem, is he? He’s going to be the one who defeats that bastard or dies trying. Stan’s just...going to hold his beer, so to speak. Or book, as the case may be. Because he doesn’t need Stan. He doesn’t need anyone. Because he’s in control of this situation. He’s going to save the universe, and then everything will be fine again (or so he tells himself), because then he will be, once and for all, beyond the reach of anyone who might want to hurt him again. Because if he can pull this one off, then who would dare? Who would even want to? He’ll be a hero, a savior, someone deserving of everyone’s respect – and if not, he’ll at least be a martyr, which to him likely seems like a better second choice than continuing to live with the thought that he’s vulnerable and that everyone knows it.

An interesting thing to examine at this point is the similarity between his approaches to Fiddleford and Stan in the eighties. Earlier, it was argued that Ford may have reached out to Fiddleford as much out of repressed fear as from any real need for technical assistance. When Fiddleford first comes to Gravity Falls, Ford cannot stop talking about Fiddleford’s excellence, praising it even above his own. Fiddleford is his friend, his partner, his companion on this path to glory. Slowly, though, it changes. He begins to cast more and more doubt on Fiddleford’s capabilities, in a way, at first, which almost seems reasonable due to Fiddleford’s neuroses. He begins to feel that he is doing Fiddleford a favor – many favors, in fact – by allowing him to participate in “making history” like this. He projects and lashes out. This shows up even more clearly when he writes to Stan. He does not, admittedly, start out with praise in that case, but he still clearly goes through the same process of progressing from acknowledging a need to twisting it around in his own head so he no longer has to do so, just at a higher rate of speed. Almost as soon as he decides to write to Stan, he adds in his journal that “perhaps he can prove his worth to me.” This is followed by some prevarication – the line about how perhaps the mistakes of the past can be made right could apply to his thoughts on how he feels Stan wronged him, his thoughts on his situation with Bill, or even his past actions toward Stan, and when Stan arrives, Ford initially seems to present the matter as one where he needs a partner-in-crime because Stan is the one person he can trust – but within minutes, he shouts about how he’s offering Stan the one chance he’ll ever have to do something meaningful in his entire life. He’s progressed again to the idea that he doesn’t need help, and that he’s just doing these people - people who he has ostensibly asked for help - a favor. He is still in control. Because he doesn’t need them. He doesn’t need anyone. And when he triumphs over Bill, then….

...Then….

...Then we get to the bit I did write about on Thursday night. Specifically, how there’s very likely going to come a day when Ford will start finding it very, very hard not to have Bill around to hate anymore. To paraphrase zephyrsimperium - even when anger is hurting you so much that even you can see that it’s doing so, even when you know, intellectually, that it doesn’t really feel very good at all, it still hurts less than actually cleaning out the psychological wound.

To a certain extent, Ford’s anger did save him in 1982. Coping mechanisms can be necessary, for a time, when a trauma is too close to deal with. Truly dealing with it would be healthier, but there are situations where some distance has to be put between oneself and the trauma before it can be addressed; situations where you’ve just very suddenly become homeless and are being hunted by your reality-warping abuser would, it seems safe to say, be among these. Too much pain from too many sources could not be addressed all at once, especially by someone who, for reasons both cultural and innate, possessed none of the psychological tools or self-awareness to even begin to work through it all, and so when survival became a priority, focusing on hating Bill more than he hated himself probably was the only choice Ford realistically had in that moment. At the end of the show, however...Bill’s gone. Ford no longer has that mission to focus on, and at some point, that’s likely to mean waking up and realizing – if I may be forgiven for quoting a song from the Dark Ages, aka, my childhood -

“Wherever you go, there you are/You can run from yourself, but you won’t get far.”

Learning to defend himself as a child wasn’t enough – he still had to seek validation, acceptance of some kind, through all those competitions. Winning the competitions wasn’t enough – he still needed to find a place where he could fit in, somehow, either as a genius or as an anomaly. Going to college, finding someone he considered even more brilliant than himself, winning a grant – somehow, it still wasn’t enough, he needed to discover a new theory and emblazon his name in the history books...never realizing that even if he’d succeeded in that endeavor, it still wouldn’t have been enough. And all that was before Bill. Afterward, sure...he killed Bill. The being that made him feel weak and stupid and helpless all those years ago, it’s gone now. He won. And it still won’t be enough, because removing Bill doesn’t undo what Bill did to him. It doesn’t take away the difficulty of trusting anyone else after such an acute betrayal. It doesn’t take away the anger at himself for being someone who got duped. It doesn’t take away all those years out in the Multiverse, and the memories of whatever less-than-ideal things he had to do to survive them, or the impulse to hit first and ask questions later that he’s developed, or anything else. Nor is throwing himself into being the Perfect Friend or Perfect Brother in an attempt to make up for the past going to ultimately help much – he can’t undo whatever wrongs he did Fiddleford or Stan any more than they can undo the ones they did him, and all three of them are likely in for a rough ride of learning how to have relationships where sometimes you clash and disagree, but you trust the other person enough that you can have a relationship with them when neither of you is a Perfect Anything to the other…and where you trust the other person to still want to be your friend after you demonstrate that you aren’t perfect, or even able to perfectly fit into a simple, clear mold. As hard as accepting onself as a flawed individual with vulnerabilities that can be exploited is, it's probably still child's play compared with then, after having been taken advantage of in the past, to trust anyone to not do so at the first opportunity again.

Despite the somewhat gloomy tone of this essay, there are reasons for hope. One lies simply in the fact that Ford got this far. His story, after all, follows the arc of many a tragic hero, and yet, he manages to end the show alive and without having gone over to the Dark Side (even if he came dangerously close and was only pulled back from the edge by Stan’s quick thinking and acting skills). Another, more promising, is in "Lost Legends," where we get a glimpse of the Pines family in the week between Weirdmageddon and the birthday party. We see that Stan has recovered his normal personality and memories enough that he and Ford manage to annoy each other throughout the adventure. They disagree on how to proceed, which of them is more competent to look after the twins, etc...and the incident ends with a truce, rather than each of them slinging blame at the other for the situation Mabel ultimately has to rescue them both from. Ford is able to accept that they both contributed to the problem, rather than it being a black-and-white situation, the way he seems to have viewed most situations for quite some time. He even lets Stan play with the super-glue gun of science. It's progress. Here's hoping, for everyone's sake, that it's one step among many to be taken.

Notes

(1) See my essay “The Trouble With Timelines” on AO3 for an explanation of this assertion.

(2) Reasoning for this hypothesis can also be found in “The Trouble With Timelines.”

(3) Based on his lack of alarm when a second specimen later attacks him in the lab, my theory is that Ford staged the near-escape of the Cycloptopus at the beginning from first to last - note how he appears to have a pretty solid grip on it when he enters the gift shop, and later turns to the family, holding it up and smiling brightly, after subduing it as though looking for approval from others before indicating that he’d like to be included at meal times. Later, in “The Last Mabelcorn,” we learn from the read-out of his thoughts that he lurked closely enough behind the vending machine to eavesdrop for at least long enough to hear Stan refer to him as a “dangerous know-it-all;” since his other thoughts in that sequence all involve loss, anxiety, regret, and childhood bullying, it seems reasonable to assume that whatever he had hoped  to overhear, it wasn’t that. Considering how Ford agreed to avoid the children at the end of “A Tale of Two Stans,” it seems likely to me that Ford staged the Cycloptopus incident just for an excuse to interact with the rest of the family for a moment without obviously trying to do so, and that the creature was not actually especially dangerous.

(4) Though it is possible that some of the times Ford rolled a four were among the 20-odd times the Infinity Die allegedly endangered his life; if he was already in a bit of a bind and decided to risk getting a solution that way, rolling a four with something that is highly illegal to own - and, therefore, probably even more highly illegal to roll - would be unlikely to improve his situation

(5) I saw an essay once where someone actually tried to figure out what, if Bill was accurately portraying his own usage of electricity, happened there: best-case scenario involved convulsions violent enough to dislocate joints accompanied by severe internal and external burns. It seems, considering the contrast between his first appearance in “Take Back The Falls” and his relatively physically normal behavior during the rest of the episode, that being turned into gold again resulted in the instantaneous restoration of his pre-torture physical condition, but this would probably provide small comfort if you are under the impression that every time you ‘wake up,’ you’re just going to go right back through the same thing again...and again...and again….

(6) Comments in the codes of all Journals and in invisible ink in the blacklight journal make the question of Ford’s religious beliefs another interesting one; we know he was raised Jewish, but his few remarks after dealing with Bill could suggest that, by the story’s main time, he may have become some form of dualist. An argument which can be used either for or against this idea is the apparent existence of the Axolotl cult, as shown in exclamations by space refugees, carvings in Jheselbraum’s shrine, Bill’s dying invocation, and a bumper sticker in “Lost Legends.” On one hand, Ford expresses confusion about what the refugees meant by “praise the Axolotl!” and makes no explicit connection between the statement and the carvings he later sees in Dimension 52; when he speculates on “the opposite of Bill?”, it is unclear if he is referring to Jheselbraum or her background art/presumed patron deity (“Oracle” is suggestive of the Oracles of Delphi, who were priestesses of Apollo and were supposed to prophesy through divine inspiration, so it does seem likely that Ford, Jheselbraum, or both believe that another entity is the source of her prophetic gift). It is also unclear what, exactly, the power dynamic between Bill and the Axolotl is; the fact that Bill invokes it in the hopes of returning from his deletion implies it is far more powerful than him, but it is unclear (both in Bill’s invocation and in the Axolotl’s prophecy in “Time Pirates’ Treasure”) if the Axolotl could choose to ignore the invocation if it wished to do so. Bill, we know (or are at least told), was once a mortal being which sought escape from all laws, including the laws of nature which dictated his own mortality; we do not know how the Axolotl came to exist outside of time and space, or what this implies about its nature. When Bill muses on his enemies, however, he swears that neither Time Baby nor “the big frilly jerk” will stop him; this could imply that he sees Time Baby and The Big Frilly Jerk (most likely Axolotl, unless the canon version really does have a twin brother) as equal threats, and that perhaps “the ancient power” is something they are all in some way bound to/reliant upon for their seeming immortality? Bill was able to reduce Time Baby to his component molecules, but word of author is that TB is not actually dead and will eventually manage to pull said molecules back together into a Time Baby-like shape again, which renders the issue of power levels even murkier.

[bumblebeerror]

I’m a normal amount of rage now so I can articulate myself I think

I understand a lot of online talk is hyperbole. I understand that not every single thing said on the internet is meant to be taken completely literally, the way my brain interprets it at first.

But. But.

The thing is that suicide bait and telling people to die and harassing others online has, historically, not only been incredibly harmful - I will have been on tumblr for a decade this coming spring. I have known people who, as far as anyone could tell, at the very least suddenly deactivated, and likely killed themselves because of a constant barrage of hatred and suicide bait for things like being aro or ace, being pan, being sexual abuse survivors and writing sexual assult fiction to cope and work through their trauma, the ‘reasons’ are endless at this point - it’s also just. Not an effective way to make fandom safer in any way, and the perpetrators of that behavior are never being hyperbolic.

It did not make tumblr safer when a group of people harassed me for misunderstanding the difference between Bipolar Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder at the age of 16, nor when they continued for two full years to harass me because my first url contained the word “crazy” in refrence to myself. It didn’t make tumblr safer when they told me to kill myself. It didn’t make it safer when they told me they were happy my father died, because I was hurting and that’s what they wanted. It didn’t make tumblr safer when I felt so personally in danger that I had to send an ask containing the address and phone number of the person who started all of it, someone I knew In Real Life and Knew My Schedule, to them, just to get them to stop for fear I would contact their mother or call the police, because the harassment was that intense. And I was one of the lucky ones - someone who knew their harasser irl and could properly leverage a threat like that in exchange for finally being left alone after two full years of nonstop hell every time I opened the site.

And before it crosses anyones mind - yes, it is suicide bait to tell someone they should die. We aren’t playing this game. Just like when aphobes said it so fucking often that prominent ace bloggers actually did end up hurting themselves, and got mass reported for it and changed it to “piss your pants”, saying “you should die” is the same intent as “kill yourself”. Don’t fucking kid with me.

It doesn’t make fandom safer for minors to tell sexual assult survivors to die because they wrote fiction to work through their trauma.

It doesn’t make fandom safer for trans folk to tell trans fans of shitty authors to die.

It doesn’t make fandom safer for mentally ill or disabled folks to tell people to die.

What it does, is convince vulnerable people that they really are better off dead. What it does is convince people you barely know, who have friends and family and lovers, to kill themselves, on the basis of what fucking fandom they’re in. I cannot imagine a more fucking morally depraved reason to say that to anyone.

It helps no one to do this. It benefits nobody. It doesn’t make you a virtuous person, it doesn’t make you morally correct.

It makes you someone who, without the threat of irl consequences, would happily, eagerly, and with sick relish, make someone’s life hell because you don’t like that they like a certain media.

And regardless of what that media is, the very idea of that is absolutely disgustingly wrong.

Human rights don’t only extend to people you like. They extend to everyone. So should your goddamn morals.

[lapydiaries]

Rules

○ Welcome to the Lapydiaries! We are a 25+ Multifandom network.

For being part of the network the following is required:

○ Be 25 or older, minors are not accepted. Lying about your age will result in membership termination and becoming blacklisted.

○ Include the network somewhere visible on your blog after your acceptance

○ Join the discord server

○ Post all rebloggable works using the #lapydiariesnet

○ Be sure to inform the admin team about URL changes, hiatuses (anything longer than being two weeks inactive), etc. 

Rules

As members of the network the following rules are expected from you to ensure that the experience within the network is enjoyable and safe for everyone. 

General Rules

○ Lapydiaries welcomes everyone regardless of race, ethnicity, sexuality, disability, education, background, fandom, etc.—therefore no hate, harassment or bullying of any kind will be tolerated. Everyone must be treated respectfully.

○ All members of the network will be given three strikes for rule breaks before they are terminated from the network.

○ The admin team reserves the right to turn away applicants, give strikes, terminate members, and blacklist non-members from the network for any reason deemed necessary and not already listed.

Content Rules

○ Reposting, stealing, and/or plagiarising work that is not your original content is not tolerated and will result in immediate termination and a permanent ban.

○ Credit anyone who helped you (banner creators, beta readers, etc).

The network accepts any written and visual content.

Written works (including social media aus) need the following details:

Pairing: 

genre(s)/au(s): 

word count:

Trigger/Smut (if applicable) warnings: no warnings need also to be stated as well

Rating: 

Synopsis/Summary:

Read more cut: Fics over 500+ words must have a ‘read more’ cut, for smaus after the first line of pictures (three pictures). All nsfw content must be under a read more.

Please note: The members will receive one private message warning them of any missing requirements on fics using our tag. After three continuing issues, the member will receive a strike.

It is necessary for the members to respond in a timely manner. If you're not answering a message within two weeks, the admins have to assume you're ignoring them, resulting in a possibility of membership termination.

○ For collab masterlists, please include:

Each author

Summaries/synopsis for every fic in the collab

A ‘read more’ cut after the collab description

○ For series masterlists, please include:

Links to each chapter

A summary/synopsis

General pairing, genre(s), au(s), overall trigger and smut (if applicable) warnings, overall rating, estimated word count

While the network accepts darker written content, the following topics will not be reblogged:

paedophilia

rape, non-consensual sex

incest

beastiality

romanticisation/idealisation/glorification of mental illnesses and severe health issues (depression, anxiety, addiction, eating disorders, cancer, etc.)

romanticisation/glamorisation/glorification of abuse, manipulation, assault, etc.

smut written for minors/idols that stated they're uncomfortable with it

In general tagging your work as "dark topics", "explicit or sensitive themes" is not acceptable and will result in a private message. Everything needs to be tagged appropriately (even if it means revealing a plot point), to ensure no reader could be possible triggered/harmed by your works.

If the members are uncertain about their written works being acceptable for a reblog, they can run it by the admin team.

Important: We will only reblog written content tagged properly, following the above mentioned rules.

○ Using the network tag #lapydiariesnet means you understand the stated rules, accept and follow them when posting your content.