#because that was a compulsion. that was a compulsion.

[apricustar]

just had a thought what if—in trying to feel close to bobby—buck is the one who goes to confession and meets with father brian?

what if buck walks into that church—not out of faith, not in search of god—but because he’s trying to find bobby?

buck has never been a church guy. has never been a religious one, either. but bobby was. everyone knows how important bobby’s faith was to him.

in the early days, confession was almost a compulsion for bobby—when he was still caught in that spiral of guilt and trying to claw his way out. but later? it became peace. quiet. a routine of sorts; time for him to just be.

and now we have buck who is full of all these feelings. we haven’t seen him express any of them beyond 8x15 when the disbelief cracked him open and the grief poured out, raw and animal and real. ever since then he’s been holding everything in, stretching himself incredibly thin to show up and be there for everyone else because that’s what he took bobby’s final words to him to mean.

and the firehouse—the place that used to be representative of home, safety, comfort—is just full of reminder of what’s gone. bobby’s seat at the head of the table. bobby’s office. bobby’s apron hung in the pantry. his absence is everywhere. it’s heavy. grief with a name but nowhere to go.

and buck—he can’t walk through a single room without feeling it. without seeing bobby’s shape outlined by what’s no longer there. it’s not just loss. it’s presence, inverted.

so that’s why he goes to church. it’s not about praying or finding god. i think, really, it’s about needing somewhere to put the ache inside him. a place to feel close to bobby in a way that doesn’t feel haunted the way the firehouse does. this is grief trying to make sense of itself. this is buck stepping into a space bobby once held sacred, hoping maybe he’ll feel something.

maybe part of him is hoping for forgiveness—not for something he did, but for what he couldn’t stop. for not being able to save him. for still being here when bobby isn’t. for feeling like he isn’t doing enough for the team. but more than anything, he just wants to feel close to bobby. in any way possible, even if he doesn’t feel like he deserves to.

and maybe, without even planning to, he ends up in the confessional.

sits with his colt legs awkwardly folded underneath him. it smells like dust and old incense and something faintly like cedar. not unpleasant—just old, lived in. he has no idea what to say. no idea how to start. but he blurts something out like i’m not religious! or is there a correct way to confess?

and father brian simply says you don’t need to be or you don’t have to be religious to seek comfort here or there is no right way to start. just start.

and buck says the only thing he’s been holding in since bobby died: i miss him

at the end of the day, it’s not about belief; it’s about missing someone so much that you’ll sit anywhere they once felt whole, just to feel a little less empty.

it’s about finding the one place that still feels like theirs, and hoping—just hoping—that’s enough to feel close again.

[coffee-in-rain]

Thinking about Hannibal drinking his first cup of coffee post-fall, sitting next to Will, and becoming teary-eyed because it's really setting in: Will's chosen to stay. Will's chosen him.

He blinks rapidly, turning to face the wall—but then, there is a warm hand coming to cradle his own (his hands shake when he holds things for more than a few minutes because of brain damage), helping him hold the bottom of the mug steady—and there is a warm palm cradling the back of his nape, a thumb smoothing over sensitive skin, making him shudder and want to lean into it. Will is gentle with him now—but this is new: being called "sweetheart," and hearing it flow from Will's mouth with a soft southern drawl. He's never imagined being called that; no one's ever seen the soft part of him—the part that wants to nestle close and be touched, held, and loved—the part that needs tenderness after being deprived of human contact for three long years. He sucks in a shaky breath, but it's wrapping around his vocal cords and larynx—like rope—like a noose. More than his hands are shaking now—his lungs are too, rattling with a pent-up sob—something small and wet and far too childlike.

Will's touch is gentle, prying Hannibal's fingers apart and coaxing him to release the steaming mug and setting it down on the nightstand—forgotten. Hannibal doesn't need second-degree burns on top of a gunshot wound. Then, Will simply waits—stroking Hannibal's nape. He doesn't force Hannibal to turn away from the wall. He lets the moment be: Hannibal's shaking breaths, struggling to stifle a dormant cry—it wants to come out—it's been residing in Hannibal's chest for who knows how long. He doesn't rush the moment. He continues caressing Hannibal's nape. He slides another arm around the front of Hannibal's waist. He pulls Hannibal close. He doesn't wince when trembling fingers curl around his arm and dig blunt nails into skin—scraping with desperation bordering on frantic. Like Hannibal's afraid to be released. Like Hannibal's a child again—needing a parent's grounding touch and comfort. He knows about age-regression.

Chiyoh mentioned it before—when they'd converse over dinner, and the only topic they'd had in common was Hannibal. Will once asked her about Hannibal's behavior as a child—and it came up then—that some nights, they'd wake up to noise in the kitchen and find Hannibal eating while sitting on the floor, making a mess, shoving bread and fruit and sometimes even fistfuls of flour into his mouth, anything within reach, really.

Like a compulsion—something ingrained—something learned from years of malnutrition and not enough food. Like he was still in Lithuania. Like he was still a starving boy.

Hannibal would turn around, then, once the lights were turned on. He would be different, almost younger, almost afraid, almost skittish—scooting back into the pantry. Chiyoh and Lady Murasaki would try to speak to him, but he would only ever shrink even further away, holding a piece of bread in a shaking hand as if afraid it would be taken. He wouldn't recognize them in those moments. He would try to eat still, desperate to fill an already bloated belly. Lady Murasaki would start cleaning up the mess, letting him eat what he was holding. He didn't want to come out, no matter how much they tried to coax him, no matter how gentle their tone was—as if he didn't understand the French language. He was still learning, but in daylight Hannibal could understand. Then, Robertus came downstairs and that's when something seemed to shift inside Hannibal—made his eyes flood with tears of relief—made his mouth open with a tremble—made him wail out a raspy word: "Tėtis."

Because Robertus looked like Hannibal's dead father.

The only time Hannibal spoke (unknowingly) before the age of seventeen. He needed to be held on those nights, cleaned up, reassured, and carried back to bed. He needed Robertus to lay with him until sleep overtook him. He's not regressed in a long time, Will suspects, but maybe Hannibal feels safe to do so. Here, in Will's company. Letting himself want. Letting himself need. Letting himself burrow into Will's side with a small, earth-shattering cry.

[seewetter]

I'm no anarchist, but I have a few thoughts on this.

"The reason I’m not an anarchist is that in the centuries before the Americans with disabilities act people could have all installed safe wheelchair ramps in all of their buildings and they didn’t.

If you’re trying to make a system that relies on people being nice I’m not gonna go with it."

I like this observation.

Years ago I ran into a Christian conservative who argued against welfare states, arguing that people should not be compelled to pay taxes, they should willingly perform charity. In other words, lets rely on people being nice.

That said, this criticism is directed at a subset of anarchists that rely on people being nice. It doesn't apply to anarchists like George Barrett who propose things such as using loose associations like motor clubs to regulate traffic. Or, more generally speaking, there are anarchists that don't want to force anyone to do anything, but absolutely are aiming to excite people to do things or to arrange / administrate certain social arrangements to make them work. I don't think I could argue that motor clubs "rely on people being nice", they rely on a combination of social needs and internal organization.

Of course, this is complicated. Motor clubs (or Wikipedia, another organization often viewed as anarchist) have a pretty tight internal organization. If Wikipedia didn't have an article history, for example, it would be much harder to restore other people's work or to spot tampering attempts. Similarly, a motor club is freely entered into, but there is some degree of internal compulsion. Perhaps anarchists like Barrett perceive motor clubs to be more liberated than governments because they are smaller and so you feel less powerless when things go wrong. A motor club might service a large area, but is smaller than any government and doesn't have a state monopoly on violence. But large organizational structures may simply be necessary. I have yet to see anarchists make a persuasive case for how we could successfully replace these often unpleasant structures.

"Tribal societies do participate in warfare and social higherarchies"

That observation isn't wrong, but I feel it talks past the anarchists in the room.

Archaeologists will tell you that various prehistoric cultures of the paleolithic and neolithic had what they call "flat social structures", whether that's Chinese societies before the Bronze Age, the Indus Valley civilization or the Cucuteni-Tryppilia culture (who built settlements larger and more populated than the Sumerians west of the Black Sea before the Sumerians even existed).

These societies all participated in warfare -- very frequently, even -- but hierarchies as we know them today are not well documented until various Mesopotamian, Levantine, Egyptian and other Bronze Age societies develop a lot in the ways of specialized labour. Then we see Ancient Assyrians experimenting with free trade and chattel slavery (for people who don't pay their debts) and later see the Assyrian experiment with legal gender equality collapse into a more explicitly patriarchal order.

Some anarchist writers (like Wengow & Graeber -- who I wouldn't rely on for an accurate understanding of history, but whose central thesis I support) use historical examples like this to try and encourage people to keep their minds open to how malleable human societies can be, rather than declaring human history to be a linear progression from a bad past to a good present. If past societies could abolish things that we ourselves fear to abolish, then perhaps understanding the past (and our present circumstances) better can help encourage improvements. Of course running some tiny society in an egalitarian way is much easier than running a globally connected society of 8+ billion people. But it still may be worth examining those efforts.

"I’m still not anarchist after all of your explanations and I stand by what I said because like I said above I know more about anarchism than a lot of you seem to think I do"

I haven't read the comment section and thus can't comment on whether they are good explanations but no matter how pretentious or smug the responses may be, I want to point out that mere exposure to other people's ideas will not always lead to a more informed outlook.

Maybe it's just the flippant tone of "I'm still not X after all of your explanations", but it seems to me a bad way to have a conversation or learning experience when talking like that.

"Also, as someone who is not fit for work, and only got disabilitybux last year, I can say that mutual aid is pretty much a joke.

It just doesn't work because almost no one is willing to help and even if, it turns into a popularity contest."

I can believe that mutual aid doesn't work (or didn't work for you), but I want to point out a few things:

We could apply a Rawlsian courtain and make that a fundamental requirement for mutual aid. Now the whole idea of a popularity contest goes out the window, doesn't it. :)

That almost no one is willing to help indicates that there isn't much trust in mutual aid or in aiding you etc. In other words, this isn't so much a problem of "mutual aid" but a problem with people who talk about mutual aid and then fail to aid.

I'm not suggesting that you are making bad observations or invalid criticisms -- clearly these are spot-on observations about actual people who fail to help others. But mutual aid doesn't work by default, it needs a community who knows what they're doing to effectively implement it. The fact that effective volunteer organizations exist tells us that in certain contexts genuine mutual aid exists. Can it replace the welfare state in a reliable way that we will not regret? I have major doubts, but why not be open to the possibility?

Generally, when things sound good on paper but don't seem to work in reality -- is when we need to understand what went wrong, not abandon the idea of good-sounding things. The good things failed to materialize, but that doesn't lessen the need for good things.

In practical terms, I think it's totally fair to tell off anarchists and use your personal experience as an example: folks, this never worked for me, I don't see why it would work in the future, stop promising me mutual aid that never comes. But also, it makes sense to view mutual aid not as ...the mutual aid specifically being offered (and then perhaps withheld) by some group of unhelpful idealists... but instead to view mutual aid as a vague idea for how we could move beyond the state which clearly needs to be implemented very carefully (if at all). If the mutual aid delivers for disabled people (and others) great. If the mutual aid doesn't...why bother.

Does that make sense? Anarchists are a diverse crowd with conflicting ideas who are even worse than Marxists at not taking their own knowledge for granted and are world champions at overlooking gaps in their plans for the future. But that doesn't mean they are wrong. They might have better political instincts than the rest of us -- they might have intuited their way towards a better future than the rest of us would be willing to realistically hope for. And if that's the case, then not only should we be open to their ideas, but also be more constructive than they seem to be. (Assuming you have the time, energy etc. to participate in this type of critical exercise, which I totally get isn't most people's thing).

The reason I’m not an anarchist is that in the centuries before the Americans with disabilities act people could have all installed safe wheelchair ramps in all of their buildings and they didn’t.

If you’re trying to make a system that relies on people being nice I’m not gonna go with it.

[leejenowrld]

What are some things that help Jeno and y/n ‘connect’ during sex? Like what are those moments that make them feel like they belong together or that they are going to be the death of each other

Can’t wait for ghostin!!!!!!!

this is such a perfect question because for jeno and y/n, sex has never just been about pleasure — it’s always been this warped, visceral space where everything they won’t say out loud finally bleeds through. it’s physical, yes, but it’s also emotional survival. connection by compulsion. every time they fall into each other’s bodies, it’s less about control and more about recognition. the aching, undeniable truth that no one undoes them like this. here’s a breakdown of the moments during sex that make them feel like they belong to each other and why those moments hit so hard.

1. when he tells her he’s close, and she tightens around him on purpose, just to ruin him

it happens without warning — he’s already too deep, too lost, one arm braced against the headboard, the other cupping her jaw while he fucks her slow but hard, breath ragged, rhythm falling apart. she’s got her thighs wrapped high around his waist, her mouth parted like she’s already close, but it’s the way she holds him in that moment — tight, sudden, intentional — that breaks him open. his breath catches mid-thrust. he tries to pull back. she won’t let him. she smiles. “you said you were close, baby. i want to feel it.” her voice is low, syrupy, her fingers running through his damp hair, and he groans like he’s dying, hips stuttering forward as he fucks into her with wrecked precision. “you’re evil,” he mutters, jaw clenching, “you feel like you know what you’re doing to me.” she kisses the corner of his mouth and whispers, “i do.” he comes so hard his whole body locks. she doesn’t let go until he gasps her name like a prayer.

2. when she rides him slow with her forehead resting against his, both of them breathless and staring into each other like they’ll never get another chance

she’s on top, but it doesn’t feel like control. it feels like confession. her palms are on his chest, her hips moving slow, dragging over him with every grind like she’s trying to memorize it. they’re both quiet, just breathing, just feeling, until he cups the back of her neck and pulls her in close, their foreheads pressed together. her breath hitches. his jaw clenches. he whispers, “don’t stop. not yet.” she nods, mouth brushing his as she moves again — slow, deep, aching — and he exhales like she’s pulling his soul out of him. “you’re gonna kill me,” he says, voice cracking, and she just shakes her head, tears caught in her lashes. “no,” she whispers, “i’ll keep you alive. i swear.” it doesn’t even feel like sex anymore — it feels like belonging. like she’s his answer and he’s her undoing. she comes with her forehead still pressed to his, mouth open in a silent cry. he follows with his hand gripping the back of her shirt like he’s afraid she’ll disappear.

3. when he’s eating her out and murmuring things into her pussy, and she’s so wet he can’t stop licking it back up

jeno’s on his knees, eyes closed, hands hooked tight under her thighs while her legs shake over his shoulders. she’s dripping, overstimmed, her fingers tangled in his hair — and he loves it. he’s kissing her so slow, tongue dragging over every part of her pussy like he’s trying to ruin her one lick at a time. every time she gasps, he groans, low and filthy, and she feels the vibration all the way up her spine. “so fucking wet for me,” he mutters into her cunt, licking a stripe through her slit before sucking her clit into his mouth again. she moans, thighs tightening around his head. “you like this?” he says, eyes flashing up. “you like how messy you are for me, baby?” she chokes out a yes, but he doesn’t stop. “say it. tell me how bad you want my mouth.” she cries out — “please, jeno, don’t stop, i’m so close —” and he groans into her, sucking harder until she comes in broken waves against his tongue. he doesn’t stop. not even after. not even when she’s trembling, gasping his name like it’s the only word she knows.

4. when he fucks her from behind and pulls her shoulders up just to hear her beg in his ear

they’re on their knees, her hands gripping the edge of the mattress, his cock buried so deep inside her it’s hard to breathe. he’s relentless but steady, one hand on her hip, the other creeping up her spine. then he pulls — slow, intentional — until her back’s flush to his chest, her head falling back onto his shoulder. he wraps one hand around her throat, not tight, just present, and the other slides down between her legs, fingers brushing where they’re still connected. “listen to you,” he whispers, mouth against her ear. “so desperate for me.” she whines his name, and he tightens his grip on her hip, thrusts harder, deeper. “what do you want?” he asks, voice wrecked. “say it.” her fingers scramble to grab his wrist. “you. i want you. i want you to fuck me until i forget who i am.” his eyes flutter shut, thrusts faltering, and he groans, “you’re going to ruin me.” she leans her head back and says, “you already are.” and he comes inside her with his face buried in her neck, whispering her name like it’s the only thing he has left.

5. when she wraps her legs around him and begs him to stay inside after he finishes, because she can’t stand the thought of him pulling away

the sex was rough — fast, deep, everything they’d been holding back — but the aftermath is too soft. she’s trembling under him, body wrecked and sensitive, but she doesn’t let go. her arms are around his shoulders, her legs still tight around his waist, and when he tries to pull out, she whimpers. “don’t.” he stills. “baby, you’re shaking.” she nods, kisses his cheek. “i know. i just need you to stay.” his heart clenches. he buries his face in her neck, still half-hard inside her, and lets his hand slide down her back, tracing the shape of her slowly. “i’ll stay,” he whispers. “i’m not going anywhere.” she sniffles. he kisses her temple. and they stay like that, skin to skin, bodies tangled, until their heartbeats sync again. because for them, it’s never just about the high. it’s about coming back to each other.

[ultramaga]

"Autism" AND ASD are ill-defined. They do not tell you the severity. If someone has Down's Syndrome, there's a lot you can predict immediately about them. With Autism? It's far too vague. The term needs to be tossed and something else, based on objective measurements, needs to take its place. Are some autistic people in need of a cure? Yes. Because they are unable to be independent enough to work, and because that condition denies them a full experience as a human.

Here's a man with no arms and legs. In his case, he does pretty well. Is that typical? Of course not, most people would go under in that situation. What about a cure?

I think most people would try one if it was an option. "Capitalism is inherently ableist." No, that's called reality. Cripples were culled under communism. It's only been in recent years, thanks to the huge surplus of capitalism, that we have been able to care well for many people who cannot work, and that largesse is totally dependent on a healthy economy.

You cannot conceive of the horrors of life as a cripple outside of a wealthy capitalist society.

"If you cannot generate labor or revenue for the system, then you have no inherent worth as a citizen or a person and will be classified as a burden." This is how socialist states like Canada view you, and why they push for euthanasia, yes. If you are able to work, you can fight against the State. Being so disabled you can't work means they can and will crush you. Now I went to college with an autistic man who was competent as a programmer but he couldn't so much as travel there without a parent to drive him. It was fully accessible through public transport, but he couldn't cope with it. As soon as those parents are too old, or if they die, he's lost. It is a major problem even in a moderately wealthy country if you cannot travel without aid. Yes, there are assistance programs. No, they are not good. Some people will get some care. Most get nothing. And this is a socialist state I am living in. Now imagine there's a cure, something that will help with the physical difficulties of autism, the inability to cope with noise or communicate with others.

This is not always a minor thing, and I keep seeing people saying "I have autism, I have some minor difficulty doing something, wow I am special" and it stuns me. I'm autistic. It sucks. It's not a superpower. Sure there are some autistic people who are superior to normal people at certain things, but the majority are not, and the apex fallacy absolutely applies. Being unable to cope emotionally is not a little quirk, it can be devastating. And it is certainly not just a mental condition.

And yet Leftists treat Autism as if it was a fashion statement, and you are just being mean for not accepting it. No, I think a cure could be terrific. The trouble is that how do you cure something when you don't understand it? I doubt it is just one thing - it's more likely to be a host of things, ranging from genetic disorders to gut biota issues. And the cure has to be defined. What are you curing? Balance issues? Digestive? Compulsive behaviours? Anxiety? Nothing is defined about the cure. So people are fearful of a cure, imagining the worst, and hopeful, because we have had cures or at least improvements for other conditions, conditions once just accepted as normal.

In my lifetime, people have changed from HAVING THEIR TEETH REMOVED to going to old age with their teeth. Mostly people had their teeth removed altogether, because it was assumed they would all be gone soon. And until dentistry improved, that was true!

I know very few old people who have to wear dentures now. When I was a child, it was standard.

Autism doesn’t need a cure. Capitalism does.

[ahotknife]

Hi!! First of all, I love your fics, you’re incredibly talented and I would eat up anything you write <3

And now, my question! You always write Adam as dominant and a bit of a sadist (which I totally agree with), but yesterday I was thinking about how that fits the canon idea that Adam is scared to death of becoming his father in terms of violence. Because the way he practices sex is violent, and obviously his partners (Ronan at least) enjoy it, but wouldn’t he be afraid of losing control and crossing a line? So, how do we think Adam approaches this?

It’s just a thought that popped out of my mind and I really wanted to know your opinion on that!

Okay, that’s all 🌟 Thank you and have a good day!

hi! yes i have had many conversations about this and will attempt to distill this response into a few main points.

1. the application of controlled violence against a consenting peer is radically different from physical abuse of any kind. kink, and especially impact play or physical punishment, is a form of catharsis and it’s all fun & games for all parties involved. if it’s not, you’re doing it wrong.

2. adam has darker, violent tendencies in canon—messy but true. he wishes he’d been the one to punch his father, he kills whelk (or at least ensures he doesn’t live), he masterminds a pretty extreme way to destroy greenmantle’s life. this does not mean he is doomed to become physically abusive, but the impulses are there. adam likes power. he wants to have power, and he likes to identify power in other people so he can come up with ways to control it—in his daydreams these methods are often physical.

3. to my earlier point about catharsis: people are into what they’re into for a reason. i’m not saying this is a conventional or necessarily “pretty” itch he needs to scratch in his brain, but i think there’s something to being the person who hits instead of being hit. i think there’s something to being able to exercise a compulsion onto another person and then tell that person they did a good job, they did so well, they’re so good and he’s so proud of them. not to be all “you just wouldn’t get it” but if you’re not into BDSM it’s probably not going to make much sense. you’ll just have to take my word for it that engaging in that kind of scene is really fun and everybody involved gets off on it.

4. specifically regarding ronan, it’s pretty clear from canon that ronan is a masochistic thrill seeker. aside from the tattoos, fast cars, and reckless behavior, he starts fights on purpose and does things that will undoubtedly result in injury on purpose. he doesn’t attempt to temper his own physical responses or urges, and he doesn’t shy away from adam’s. also: ronan is bigger and stronger than adam—i don’t think there’s a way adam could really truly hurt him. there is always that risk, but i don’t think ronan’s in any danger of real damage. first of all that’s not adam’s goal, second of all ronan wouldn’t let him do it. (only i know the super secret adamronan safeword that lurks in the peripheral awareness of all my fic.)

tl;dr—adam already has the impulse to be violent. adam already has an innate preference for physical behavior & responses. he won’t be his father, because he isn’t his father. deciding you’re not going to abuse your loved ones is enough—he won’t abuse ronan, because he doesn’t want to. if he had kids, he wouldn’t abuse them, either, because he doesn’t want to. we see him curtail a few outbursts in mixed company—he’s capable of it even without an actual outlet for it. kink would be a practical, consensual way for him to sublimate his desires into something he enjoys. i think he approaches it knowing it’s something he wants and something ronan wants—no point in ignoring or repressing something so huge if you can get some really good sex out of it. kink is like a sandbox—it’s a controlled environment where safeguards are in place to make sure no real damage is done (as long as what you practice is SSC/RACK), so you can have a lot of fun there.

and also: it’s hot & i like writing it, so adam approaches it thinking it’s hot so that i have reasons to keep writing it. but don’t worry, it IS grounded in canon.

hope this helps!

[lost-inanotherlife]

some thoughts about addictions in LOST

there will be spoilers and, obvi, I'll talk about addiction as a narrative theme/motif in this post, so be warned if this is triggering to you.

In this post I've said that, on rewatch, I didn't particularly like Charlie and I've also added that, perhaps, one of the reasons for this change of heart (I used to love Charlie back in 2004) is the show (not particularly brilliant, imho) handling of his addiction/recovery storyline. This post, though, won't be specifically about Charlie but it will be about the way the show portrayed addictions mainly as signifiers of 1. the possibility of being "saved" and 2. clinical depression.

To be honest with you, I don't agree with the people that say that LOST is a character-driven show. But I don't agree with the people who say it's plot-driven either. To me in LOST characters and plot go hand in hand. So how can i describe LOST? Well, I would say that LOST is theme-driven: both plot and characters must adhere to the show's main themes. And it makes sense, right? I mean, never believe TV writers when they say they have everything planned out in advance, you know that it's a lie. 99% of the time they just have a half-baked story and, perhaps, some more or less well thought-out characters. The rest is "just" some very general and very big Themes and they rely on those to write their story like water in a desert.

One of LOST's big themes is, of course, destiny. Like all the tales about destiny the more the characters struggle against it, the more they end up enacting it. In LOST the struggle takes the shape of a rejection of the past: in one way or another all the characters are compelled by their past or by one event that happened in their past/childhood that has molded the direction of their lives and the way in which they experience the world. In other words, as you all well know, these characters can't let go, they can't move on.

One of the ways in which this compulsion is portrayed is substance addiction. Charlie and Jack are the two main characters who struggle against it but they do it very diffrently. Or, better, the writers portray their respective addictions very differently.

In Charlie's case, his heroin addiction is a very prominent feature of this storyline: you take it away from him, his story loses most of its pathos and meaning. Charlie's addiction and his recovery from it are an integral part of his character that you can't substitute with anything else.

On the other hand, Jack's addictions are treated as a motif to basically telegraph the audience that The Character Is Not Doing Well. If you take away Jack's alcohol abuse, for instance, from his story, you won't end up changing it that much. Like, with or without his alcohol abuse, Jack's still pretty much a depressed man with a difficult relationship with his father and a general lack of belief in the value of his life per se.

However, in both cases, the ways in which these addictions are written are never realistic, they only serve a narrative purpose, aka to signify something else: in Charlie's case his addiction stands for his possibility (or lack thereof) to be "saved" while in Jack's case his addictions signal his clinical depression.

When LOST writers write Jack sitting in a sea of empty bottles, popping pills like there's no tomorrow, they want to show without telling that "Jack Is Not Doing Fine!". Theirs is a narrative device to say something without saying it, it's not active interest in exploring what it really means to have substance abuse-related problems. In other words, it's NOT a way of telling the audience "Look, there's a quite big and deep element of substance abuse in this character's story that actually plays a big role in the decisions the character makes because hey! he's not okay, so we'd like to portray this in a realistic way and explore it in depth". They dont' say that because they aren't interested in that. And they're not interested in that because LOST is not EXCLUSIVELY a character-driven show. Characters and plot must go hand in hand and the plot is fast-paced, chop! chop! let's go! we don't have time to go THAT deep into character analysis.

Case in point, when Jack's on the island his addictions seem to disappear. He's not only Suddenly Fine but even characters who are close to him and know about his issues conveniently seem to forget about them. In S5 Kate and Jack go back to the 70S to live in Dharmaville and they literally PRETEND that nothing has happened in the previous three years between them, like nothing at all. Jack's addictions are not treated as something that the show really wants us to pay attention to because, if we do, we are bound to realize that, even if, when he's on the island, Jack doesn't experience any withdrawal symptoms, he's still NOT in a healthy place, mentally speaking. And not like, "I'm sad because I've ruined my chance with Kate", but more like "My mind is a minefield, I can only think about one thing and I need it to feel better, to make myself feel better again or I'll kms". This is what "We have to go back" really means: symbolically, it's Jack's compulsion wrt his past trauma, in much realer terms, it's Jack's being an addict and thinking that the island is his last dose, his ultimate chance at HappinessTM.

Something very similar happens to Charlie as well and I think it's no coincidence that both characters end the way they do and both deaths have scarred an entire generation of people watching TV in their teens, lol.

Charlie's perhaps the first character that introduces the theme of destiny when he writes "fate" on those thingies he has on his fingers (I'm aware that "destiny" and "fate" are not necessarily the same concept but let's use them as interchangeable terms bc, come on, we only have 5 fingers per hand and the word "destiny" doesn't fit, lol, okay?). He's also the only character whose story is decidedly connected to drug abuse. And, I think, this wasn't necessarily a good move on the part of the writers team because I personally think that you can't write a character who's struggling with addiction and then write said addiction solely as a way to talk about something else. You gotta factor in what it really means to be an addict and what it means to be an addict on a fucking island with tons of free heroin on it. The reason why I think that the writers didn't really think it through is because nobody on the island shows an ounce of compassion, or just plain sympathy towards Charlie. Like, Charlie's addiction is written like The Bad Thing and everybody around him treats him like The Bad Man Who Snorts Heroin and it's just so... moralistic!!!

Not only that, S2 is a season where almost every character starts having some sort of hallucinations. Mental health is a whole sub-theme in S2, the season where we have episodes like "Dave" where Hugo/Hurley's past history in a mental health facility is revelead. So people are, beliavably I'd say, starting to get a bit weird on the island and they all begin to See Stuff and the people around them seem to understand this, they're sympathetic and they all go like "you have to rest" or something. Not with Charlie. Charlie has visions and nightmares because he's a Drug Addict. No other explanation. Not even one person who was like: "PERHAPS if it's hard for us who don't have to struggle against a fucking heroin addiction, maybe, MAYBE, it's even HARDER for Charlie so, not saying we have to justify the shit he does, but at least let's all try to understand him". Nope. Charlie's bad and does bad thing because, CLEARLY, he was using drugs and he was using because he's bad person and an addict. Like, no, don't write stuff like this, please.

If you add the fact that his recovery story is LITERALLY compared to being baptized, aka "be saved from the Original Sin", I'm sorry but I can't shake the feeling that there's some veiled, surely unconscious, Christian propaganda at play here.

Aside from that, Charlie's whole "Heroin Arc" ends in S2. Like, it's done, it's over, he throws all the heroin into the sea, Charlie Pace Is Saved. That's good, right? Weeeeeeell. To me no, it's not good because then S3 starts and we have the "Charlie Is Supposed to Die" arc and I asky myself why? Like, I can feel that the writers didn't know what else to do with Charlie besides Charlie having drug problems. So when the drug problems are over, they "redeem" him with a storyline of self-sacrifice that feels a bit forced, to me at least. Not only that, it also reduces Charlie to his former drug abuse storyline and this reinforces the feeling that Charlie is an addict, can only be an addict and, once he's not an addict anymore, he must die because he can ONLY be an addict since the writers hadn't figured out anything else for him. What I'm trying to say is that I don't think the writers understood and/or cared about the consequences of the things they had written and the other possible takeaways people might have inferred from the way they wrote addiction stories.

I'll say one good thing the writers did and it was what I consider the actual Big Reveal of S3 finale. Des' flashes weren't about Charlie dying, they were about him not allowing Charlie to die because Charlie was the one who was SUPPOSED (not to die) but to go the The Looking Glass station and stop the jamming signal because he's the only rock musician on the island (which means that, surely, he'd know "Good Vibrations"). So, to me, Charlie was not "supposed to die", he was "supposed to be there" which is a whole other thing. And Charlie can "be there" because he accepts that he will die. This was a very interesting thing but, I mean, S3 is a fucking mess, we all know that, so for one good thing there are at least three more that aren't so good (let's all remember that S3 is the "Stranger in a Strange Land" and "Further Instructions" season, and many more laughable episodes written just because they had to write the show and the network wouldn't "free" the writers from LOST, lol).

I'm reaching rambling territory so I'll stop now but, basically, I personally don't like the way LOST handles addictions. I understand that this is a story, a narrative where things means something else as well, I understand that both Jack and Charlie's addictions are strongly connected to the issues they have with their respective family members and, therefore, the reason why they were on that plane in the first place. So I understand that addictions mean many different things in LOST. And, ngl, it'd be fine by me if both characters didn't end up self-sacrificing themselves thinking that THAT was their redemption. But they do, both Charlie and Jack die in order to save other people and this is great and noble but I simply can't forget that these were two characters struggling with addictions who ended badly. The nobility of their acts doesn't make them less sad and, frankly, wrong.

[heavencasteel420]

Am I dreaming, or is this really rude and presumptuous?

I mean, to start with, that’s literally wrong (he gets high twice onscreen and this is said to have been a regular occurrence since moving to California), but also that seems like a pretty bad-faith reading of “compulsively.” Many generally harmless things can be done compulsively, from checking whether you turned the stove off to playing phone games. I asked the first question because I’ve seen this user get mad at people for not considering S4 Jonathan a carefree stoner (seemingly because they’re a St4ncy shipper and that interpretation suits their vision of that ship). Maybe they didn’t see it and that’s why their response was off-topic, but given their general behavior, maybe not.

Again, this is a response to a post where I said that Jonathan’s morose/compulsive weed usage was “so special to me” and “they didn’t ruin his character.” Is that demonizing? And, no, I don’t “cry” (Jesus) about characters drinking one beer…but if they’re drinking it before work/school in the morning, that is TV for “this is a problem.” And also it’s a sign in real life that someone is struggling.

(I posted my answer in this screenshot before I saw theirs in this screenshot; I was hoping against hope that we wouldn’t have to get into all of that.)

This is just such a high-handed, aggressive way to approach this conversation. What, am I on trial here?

More of the same.

They do not know.

[biggest-gaudiest-patronuses]

Glinda really had an entire musical number expounding on the theme of "success in life is not about being highly qualified or even competent, but manipulating people's superficial perception of you." and then she went into POLITICS. truly the #girlboss representation the world has earned

[imogen-eye]

//

Yep! She just needs someone stubborn enough to sit though apathy. She's always been upfront with her opinions when they're small- her view of compulsion, her thoughts on tea and things like that. I think that's what makes apathy so hard to deal with. She's never been clear about the important parts of herself, so it's the small details missing that makes it so bad .

The only people who've tried to get the truth from her in the past used compulsion because it's 'too much effort' to go back and forth until she says the truth, but that's the problem. The more she doesn't manually work through telling the truth, the less she ever will. She was very out of it during the performance, so she didn't react at the time, but during the prologue? Everyone was told about her exact creation . That's terrifying for her to know. And yet no one even questions her lying? Of course she'll continue.

Aaaaaaughh that's so silly . Such a cool concept. imogen would be suspicious of that kind of thing though . She's had her life altered from a normal looking canvas once . not again.

Aaaaaughh. He seems silly . I'm pretty sure I have an ask from you I haven't answered yet. Too locked in for my exams ...

I've got one in an hour >_>

Hello. I have more (ANGST) Hc's 👹🫵

No matter how much she need's it, Imogen can never bring herself to ask for a hug. She like's to wrap her arm's around herself and pretend she gathered up the courage to do so.

Goodbye 👹🫵

// FUCKKKK. I just imagine her doing it as a child and then, when locked in her studio by Immi, she sits and hesitantly does it again. and post becoming an avatar, she tries really hard not to do it because she feels like she’s always being watched, and she’d never let anyone see it, but… :)

[brainrotisseriechicken]

i SWEAR i tried to draw literally anything else but i just couldnt draw anything that wasnt clefdraki yuri .im sorry

[feartoxinjelloshot]

lest anyone think he ever leaves my mind, here's some of cv (clipsverse not codotverse LOL) jon :^D mostly just a fun drawing but i wanted to dig into his psyche a little because i looove dissecting his brain. in my au one of the major building blocks of why he does the whole scarecrow thing is because he has struggled all his life with debilitating anxiety & panic disorders. there are of course a handful of other factors but i really liked the idea of a scarecrow who is irrevocably obsessed with studying how fear affects people's lives because it affects his life so deeply. he's convinced that if he studies fear extensively enough then he'll be able to cure himself of it and live a quote "normal life" unquote, but, ironically, he's afraid of what actually going through with it would do to him...

[umesakus]

okay i finally came up with answers and i’m listing them like this because i had too many thoughts for tags 🙃

umemiya - i am a youth case worker/counselor umemiya TRUTHER!!!! i think he’s perfectly suited for it. OR running the children’s home (or at the very least being involved somehow/starting his own. maybe with a farm or big garden). can also very much see him being a foster parent otherwise.

sakura - i think haruka would start as a cute little delivery boy tbh 😭 idk what kind specifically but yeah. he’s fast and would learn his way around areas pretty quickly i think. then i could see him eventually getting into some sort of trade… like working with his hands or body in some way. WAIT i just had this vision of him almost being some sort of technician… or assistant… ykwim… LIKE PHYSICAL THERAPY OR SMTH idk

katsuki — i can’t even lie i can kinda see kat being a paramedic or like some other type of emergency responder/medical worker. he doesn’t have the bedside manner for a nurse or doctor but he has a sharp mind and is quick to act… like he might be snippy but he’s gonna be the one to shove an aspiration needle in your lung or something because he’s figured out why you can’t breathe LOL

megumi — my little veterinarian <3 or some other sort of animal scientist. tho i think he would be good at the diagnostics and even surgeries in vet medicine. and running labs and stuff… yeah i see it for him. he has a library of different cases and symptoms in his brain. he’s pretty detail-oriented and i think his chill demeanor would go well with animals specifically

kaiser — tbh!!! i could see him being an actor like his mom. which is kinda fucked up but i think his desire to prove his existence could manifest in wanting to be seen in this way, especially if he was known for playing a certain villain role or something. also the intense dynamics and connections with other actors. i feel like he could get really into it, and almost sorta feel like he’s getting to be “real” by being “fake”…. if that makes sense. like he gets to let out certain things and form certain connections that he otherwise wouldn’t allow himself to irl. tho i think he would also grapple with the sort of “dehumanization” factor that comes into play with celebs and stuff. he wants to be known and loved but also… no he doesn’t lol. so it’s a very tumultuous dynamic.

jean — i actually struggle to pinpoint his career path most of the time tbh. but i often see him in like… business. or management. WAIT…..editor/managing editor jean….. holy fuck i think i just unlocked some selfship lore actually LMFAO okay everything else is canceled i have to go think about this now

suga — him being anything other than a teacher….. omg idk….. maybe a nurse actually?? i could kinda see it!!! he’s got kind of a cheeky sweet energy too like he’d be the one who gets you to take your meds or let him draw your blood. he could work in pediatrics!!!

oikawa — mr. volleyball prince… he has influencer energy. but he also almost sorta has nurse energy too in a way i’m not even gonna lie…. that probably sounds crazy but i’m kinda picturing like mean girl in high school who becomes a nurse or w/e LMFAO like do u see it?? and who is also an influencer/has an online following. or like a chiropractor who posts videos and shit and people like him cuz he’s hot sndjdjdjdj i’m imagining him in nurse scrubs tho and drinking an iced coffee and showing up all chipper in the morning and the night shift nurses wanna kill him LOLLLLLL

sunday — i’m gonna try to refrain from saying pastor or some shit LMAO but like. he has his compulsion to try and help people so… i’m feeling non-profit org vibes. or some other helpful program. yeah i think he could manage some sort of organization… maybe even be involved with politics but it’d end up being too corrupt for what he originally wanted to do. but he might get wrapped up in it like a toxic PTA mom LOL or i could also see him being involved in PR, tho it prob wouldn’t make him happy. tbh i think he would actually enjoy something nerdy like working in a museum or coordinating things for a theater y’know… like the musical programs and whatnot. COULD BE THE SPECIAL ORGANIZATION HE MANAGES!!! makes music and performances accessible to people or whatever… and gives him a chance to monologue about them

satoru — it’s hard to think of him as anything other than a trust fund or sugar baby/househusband….. gege basically confirmed it. but i guess i could see entrepreneur who has crazy ass ideas and/or an influencer. he would enjoy the attention. could be a streamer or smth too who plays a lot of games or gets into other nerdy content

ryusui — HMMMMM…… it’s tough because he already does a bunch of different shit like being a captain and pilot and entrepreneur LOL. he has great leadership skills but is also like me in the sense that he kinda needs the freedom to just… do his thang sometimes. like he can’t be babysitting people all day so he’d need a team of individuals he really trusts to get shit done. and he can’t be locked in TOO much on something or he’ll get antsy… if i had to say something other than what he already does, i’d say maybe something in civil engineering???

oooh wait i just thought of a fun question

what do you think would be your f/o’s career or occupation if they didn’t have their (or don’t have a) current one? (or if they were in a modern au type setting if that applies?)

[moghedien]

the absolutely hilarious thing to me is that the "softly, softly in the shadows" quote from the book comes from the compulsion scene with Elayne and Nynaeve, and I'm fairly certain its the only time Moghedien says it in the books.

but in the show she says it multiple times but she didn't actually say it in that scene lmaooo

[awfullybigwardrobe44]

I’m not exactly sure what you’re describing, but I think the key word with what you described here and in your tags is “dread.” If drinking 11 mouthfuls feels “wrong” and gives you “dread,” to me, that COULD be OCD—you’re just resisting the compulsion to “complete” it and pushing through the distress, if that makes sense. Which is actually really good! That’s how therapy for OCD works.

“Cannot stop yourself from that thing bc otherwise everything is Bad”—that sounds like a classic compulsion. An example from my own OCD: researching. I have spent hours, DAYS, researching topics about salvation to try to figure out if I’m saved. Sometimes the stuff is very interesting and fascinating, but that’s not ultimately why I’m researching—I’m researching because I’m wondering if I’m saved or not, which brings intense anxiety, so trying to “solve” the problem with research sometimes brings relief. But to resist that—which is what we do in ERP therapy—is intensely distressing. It feels like my eternity is at stake, because my OCD is telling me that if I don’t address this problem right now, I might miss “something God is trying to send me,” might miss something that would lead to me getting saved, etc.

It might help to think of it this way: for you, sometimes you drink water “correctly” and enjoy the feeling of “rightness.” For me, sometimes I read a Bible verse and feel the thing I think I SHOULD feel, and it makes me happy/relieved. I think, “Wow, maybe that’s a sign that I’m saved!”

But at other times, you drink “wrong,” and experience dread, and then you either try to do it again to correct it or you push through the dread. Same with me: I might feel the “wrong” thing in response to a Bible verse and start panicking/questioning my salvation and trying to feel the “right” thing to prove to myself that I’m saved.

It might be worth noting what happens if you tear yourself away from the thing or NOT do the thing that gives you that sense of satisfaction. If you’re enjoying a project and have to stop to go to dinner with friends, you may be sad to leave the project, but you’re not anxious (assuming you’re not on a deadline or something or stressed about finishing it for other reasons). That’s a sign it’s not OCD. If I have to stop doing a compulsion to go to dinner with my family, I will be in so much distress that I’ll have to excuse myself to go to the bathroom during dinner in order to continue compulsions because the anxiety from putting off the compulsions is too great.

With the water, yes, you may get satisfaction from drinking 11 mouthfuls, but the real teller is what happens when you don’t—you feel “dread.”

Does that help at all?

Important distinction for OCD that no one seems to realize:

If you are enjoying the obsession/obsessive topic, it’s not OCD.

I have spent hours upon hours obsessing about cosplay projects and having the time of my life. This was NOT my OCD.

I have had times of my life where all I could focus on was a fun school project. It was so fascinating and it was all I wanted to think about. This was also NOT my OCD.

OCD comes with distress/anxiety/dread. Not just “I feel like I can’t focus until my desk is tidy,” either—it’s usually excessive/unreasonable dread and sometimes panic, depending on the severity of your OCD.

OCD isn’t fun. OCD isn’t enjoyable. If there’s any sort of enjoyable factor to your “OCD,” it’s not OCD.

Doing compulsions brings RELIEF sometimes, which is why we do compulsions in the first place (and get stuck in cycles of doing them). But that’s the only positive feeling in the OCD experience, and it’s also one that you ultimately have to deny yourself in order to find lasting healing.

[artisyghostlybird-gelat]

To love freely forever

1 /2 /3 /4 /5 /6 /7 /8 /9 /10 /11 /12 /13 /14 /15 /16 /17 /18 /19 /20 /21 /22 /23 /24 /25 /26 /💛27💛 // ALL