#but my degree is social and behavior science

[the-cookie-of-doom]

Sometimes I forget I have a sociology degree and then I have a subject like this one, where I'm debating (in favor of) the importance of cultural competency in health care, and then I'm like oh yeah. I'm actually semi-qualified to speak on this subject.

[mazamba]

Sponsored By

Ironically, the most eventful day in the careers of Mr. and Mrs. Fenton had nothing to do with ghosts. The two had just returned from the supermarket and were carrying in the groceries, when the shadow in the corner began to speak.

"We need to talk."

"GHOST!"

The couple were on their back before they could draw their weapons.

"You are the foremost experts in the field of ecto-biology," said Batman as if he hadn't just brought down a three hundred pound man and a ninth-degree black-belt before either of them could realize he'd moved, "I have questions regarding your sponsor."

"Sweetie, is the Batman in our living room?" asked Jack.

"I do believe he is," replied Maddie as she stood up and patted the dust off her clothes, "you know, you could have called for an appointment. We'd have made time."

"In the 80's, the two of you had your doctorate studies rescinded due to your studies in what you called "ecto-science"," he stated, ignoring their indignation, "yet you now live in an upper-middle class neighborhood and spend thousands of dollars a year on technology that didn't have a proper proof-of-concept until recently."

"What's your point?" asked Jack.

"Where is the money coming from?"

"If you must know, we have a sponsor," replied Maddie, "after our dean proved to be too small-minded for our research, we were approached by a man who was more open to the possibility of inter-dimensional research."

"He wanted us to study ghosts!" cut in Jack, "He even gave us our very first sample of ectoplasm!"

"That one sample was the backbone of our research for years, until we got our portal running."

"You never asked where he got that sample from?"

"He seemed like a trust-worthy fellow," dismissed Maddie, "all he asks is for copies of our experiments and for ectoplasm from our portal."

"What sort of experiments?"

"Well, at first we needed to verify the psycho-active behavior of the sample," recalled Maddie, "if you give me a second, I have my research around here somewhere."

"You took the sample to several morgues," Batman told them, "the sample's most drastic and extreme behavior occurred when it was placed close to bodies who had a history of violent and anti-social behavior in life."

"Maddie, the League's reading our papers!" Jack giggled excitedly, "But yes, it's how we know that all ghosts are evil ectoplasmic scum!"

"You never questioned the origin of the sample?"

"It was the only sample we had," pointed out Maddie, "but it's properties matched all of our theories."

"The man you spoke with was Ra's al Ghul," he informed them, dropping a folder full of pictures and documents for them to peruse, "thousands of years ago, Ra's found a well of green water that is now known as a Lazarus Pit. Using its power, he has rejuvenated himself time and again to maintain his position as the head of the League of Assassins. After some experimentation, he found the same pits could keep his forces alive, even in death.

"Over time, the League came across a problem that threatened their continued existence. They were consuming the Pit's water faster than it was replenishing itself. After much experimentation, they found a solution. At the moment of death, when the human soul passes over to the Infinite Realms, what you call the Ghost Zone, a small amount of ectoplasm leaks over to our side."

"Wait, you don't mean...?" Maddie trailed off, horror settling in.

"Ra's killed people en masse to replenish his pool," affirmed Batman, "further experimentation revealed that people who died in a state of extreme fear or pain provided more ferocious soldiers. That is where your sample came from.

"In it's neutral state, ectoplasm reacts equally to all emotional ranges. Repeated exposure to emotional extremes will imprint the ectoplasm, causing it to react more strongly to a specific emotional range than to others. The negative emotions of Ra's victims imprinted on the ectoplasm, resulting in your skewed results."

"Wait, how would you know that?" demanded Maddie, "We're the foremost experts on ecto-science and we didn't know that!"

He pulled out a thick folder and slammed it onto the table.

"I had my research peer-reviewed."

"By who?" asked Jack, "We looked all over and couldn't find anyone in the scientific community!"

"You weren't looking in the right place. There is a branch of the Justice League that specializes in the supernatural, ghosts and demons chief among them. They want me to bring you in."

"Really!? Did you hear that Mads! We're being recruited by the Justice League!"

"They want me to arrest you," Batman corrected them, "for illegal poaching of innocent and neutral spirits, particularly after last week's attack on their newest member, Danny Phantom."

"The Ghost Boy!?" roared Jack, "That no-good ectoscum made the League before we did!?"

"I have watched his fights. He takes care to avoid collateral damage and only appears when other ghosts attack, sometimes at great personal cost."

"Look, Mr. Batman," sighed Maddie in a condescending tone, "we've fought the ghost boy for years. He has a history of crime and violence. If you look far enough, you'll find-."

Batman had no time for nonsense.

"The League has already looked into the incidents. All show indications of either coercion or mind control."

"Ghosts are deceitful and conniving-!"

"We have already established that your initial sample skewed your results," he cut Jack off, "this would imply that all of your research and experiments need to be reassessed, including your opinions towards ghosts in general.

"Regarding Ra's al Ghul, you will need to continue working with him. Cutting contact suddenly may put you and your family in danger."

That caught their attention.

"What do we need to do?" asked Jack, all jokes and outrage immediately tossed out the window.

"Keep doing your research with this new information in mind. Your experiments have been applied to the Lazarus Pits, resulting in unstable results. Recent subjects have come out in a mindless rage, while others have shown no effect on their mind, and yet others have had no effect. Ra's is already skeptical of your continued collaboration. If you provide him with research based off this new information, he may decide you are not worth his time or money. When it comes to Ra's, your best option is dismissal to irrelevance. You do not want to make an enemy out of him."

"It's not just that," admitted Maddie, "if we were the only ones being affected, we'd simply let him know we're exploring new horizons outside of ecto-science. The thing is, we have two children, one in college and one near graduation."

He gave them a card. "Call that number. All of their college expenses will be taken care of."

"I... Bruce Wayne?" read out Jack.

"We've collaborated before, he is trustworthy," he reassured them, "the next part is up to you. Will you be scientists, or poachers?"

Their lights flickered, and he was gone.

[biancadoes1]

want to revisit an important topic.

The disrespect towards Luke about his ADHD, anxiety or dyslexia.

After June 13th, people suddenly got a degree in Social and Behavioral Sciences or psychology. You could also say a degree in I know it all.

It shows how uneducated and out of touch people are. It's horrendous, it doesn't define who we are and it definitely does NOT give anyone the right to basically make accusation that are false and can be damaging for someone.

I've have seen the wildest takes/essays/analyses from people about someone they don't know. I remember someone claiming he suffers from codependency/can't be alone and this is why he jumps from one relationship into the next. Another gem was he started dating a younger girl because he can take care of her.

Those are only mild takes compared to other crap that I've read.

My heart breaks a little for Luke. He is such a gem of an actor. It's the same with Nic, she wants people to listen to what she is saying and putting out there. Such a slap in the face for these two actors who love what they are doing and all that those crazy people care about is stalking like there is no tomorrow. About their work? Nada. Nothing. They believe anonymous accounts, side characters or news outlets(that only want your money and clicks) and throw a tantrum every single day. I'm honestly losing faith in humanity. People are so easily persuaded and manipulated.

Personally I think Luke is the first man who really made me believe in this so called one woman man. The WT was a love letter for anyone who is searching for the real meaning of honest and unconditional love. This man is so dedicated to Nic as if he knows her like no other. No joke, I bet he would take a bullet for her. I could go on about Luke Newton bringing real masculinity back and Lukola blowing my mind every single day but that wasn't the subject I wanted to talk about.

Leave them alone and learn to show some respect!

#my thoughts#speculating#colin my wife bridgerton#here comes luke I can be ken for newton#let's go#Luke Newton is perfectly capable of looking after himself

.

[ms-demeanor]

Hi! My employer's workplace wellness program was recently revamped, and I'm trying to assess whether it's slid into the nonsense side of wellness-world. Specifically, there's a webinar being offered by a guy named Abra Pappa on using an "anti-inflammatory diet" to "battle against chronic diseases… including heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, and even certain cancers." This sounds… sketchy to me, but I know you have both expertise in nutrition and a strong bullshit detector, so wanted to ask what you make of it.

Okay long story short never trust anyone who got their degree from a university that started off as a school for chiropractors.

Abra Pappa got her MS in Functional Medicine and Human Nutrition after getting a BA in Theater; I checked the requirements for that degree and the school's whole catalogue is throwing red flags but what's throwing the most red flags for me is that if I wanted to get a degree in nutrition from an ACEND accredited program I'd need to take a hell of a lot more than one bio class, one anatomy OR one physiology class, one medical terminology class, one nutrition class, and one biochemistry class in order to get into a master's program.

It's funny because she went from a BA in theater arts to an MS in Functional Nutrition and Human Nutrition and I've been trying to go from a BA in Theater Arts to an MS in nutrition and *aside* from the whole private school costs thing one of the major barriers is that I'd basically need to re-do all of my undergrad to get in a lot of chemistry, some calculus, and MANY nutrition classes before I qualified for a Master's program. But based on the program she took I'm only one medical terminology and one biochemistry class away from a Master's program instead of more like ten to fifteen classes (primarily in nutrition, chemistry, and physiology) away.

Anyway she says she's a Licensed Dietician Nutritionist. There are some states that allow LDN certification, New York is one of those states. *BUT* to be an LDN in New York you have to

Complete a program in dietetics-nutrition that culminates in a bachelor’s degree that qualifies for certification in dietetics-nutrition or has been accredited by the Commission on Accreditation for Dietetics Education (CADE).[Note: CADE is now ACEND] The program must include at least 45 semester hours of coursework in dietetics/nutrition and must include at least 20 semester hours of coursework in the area of human biological sciences and social and behavioral sciences

Pappa went to the University of Western States in Oregon, and the only ACEND accredited school in Oregon is at OSU, so if she's an LDN it's from someplace that isn't New York, where she lives and works.

She also claims to be a CNS, a Certified Nutrition Specialist, but in order to qualify for THAT you need to have an MS with some pretty rigorous coursework

And this is what the school required for her MS program:

And given that she didn't have a science degree for undergrad it seems pretty likely that she wasn't doing anything close to what an undergrad nutrition program looks like:

For the record, here are the MS requirements for an MS in nutrition with a health and wellness emphasis at that same school:

In order to get accepted to the MS in nutrition program in that school you either need to have a BS in nutrition or a BS in biology or chemistry and take all the undergrad level nutrition requirements ON TOP OF that BS.

I don't think that a theater degree and an MS from a woo-y correspondence school really count, even if you do pay $45k for your diploma.

If you go look at the requirements for any ACEND accredited school and compare them to the MS program from University of Western States it leaves UWS looking pretty shitty in comparison. Like, nowhere in her requirements is there a statistics class! Stats is required even for an associate transfer certificate in nutrition! EVEN AT THE 2-YEAR LEVEL FOR REAL NUTRITION DEGREES YOU HAVE TO DO STATS AND SHE DIDN'T HAVE TO TAKE A SINGLE STATS CLASS FOR HER MS. You will note that the cal poly MS program has one entire MS-Level class on vitamin metabolism and one entire MS-Level class on mineral metabolism for any of the three MS in Nutrition emphasis courses; her school required neither.

This shit makes me want to climb the walls.

I'm just going to start calling myself a nutritionist. California will let anyone call themselves a nutritionist, there are absolutely zero protections on that term and I can get myself a piece of paper for like three hundred dollars from a diploma mill that has some kind of bullshit accreditation.

Here are the programmatic accreditations her school has:

Compare with the Cal Poly programmatic accreditations (I cite cal poly a bunch because it was the program I was hoping to get into eventually so I researched it the most; that's where I got my BA, go broncos):

Note that the website for her school is listed with the department of education as wschiro.com because it was called Western States Chiropractic College until 2010.

Every time i dig into something like this it makes me want to stare into space for hours. No wonder college students are getting fucked on their loans and going to bullshit schools. No wonder everything is a scam these days. People bitch about credentialism but you know what maybe this lady is a CNS; sure, for some people that requires passing board certification tests, getting 1000 hours of clinical supervision, and becoming a Nurse Practitioner with real actual nutrition study from a solid program, but for other people it requires zero understanding of statistics, a theater degree, and three *whole* units of anatomy. Maybe she clears the bar on that one! She doesn't have the qualifications for an LDN in New York, she's not an RDN because she sure as fuck didn't take the classes required for a *VERY SERIOUSLY* protected title, but maybe you can be a CNS with an online diploma from the western states chiropractic college.

I fucking hate everything.

You know the whole reason I wanted to get a degree in nutrition was to yell about shit like this online, but fuck it. Fuck it, I'm a nutrition-isht because i live in california and I can say I am and who's going to check? Who's going to look up whether I took classes in public health or anatomy or the metabolism of micronutrients before they hire me to do corporate seminars on healing your relationship to food? I am legally allowed to do that so I might as well, right? If all I have to do is be charismatic and convincing I'm pretty sure I've got that down, actually, so who's going to check?

Nobody! Nobody is going to check and everything is a scam and I hate everything.

ANYWAY

The relationship between nutrition and inflammation and the relationship between chronic disease and inflammation are two different, complicated things that are difficult to point at and say definitively what the connections are.

I am of the opinion that any time you're getting deep into things like an anti-inflammatory, ketogenic, or PH-Balancing diet without a specific condition that calls for the avoidance of certain foods for very clearly scientifically reported reasons, you're dealing with a woo-woo biohacker who's looking to sell a diet plan.

The thing about nutrition science is that it seems like for most people the "answers" are pretty basic: eat enough food, get enough macro and micronutrients, eat a variety of food, avoid processed meats, try to eat more fruits and vegetables, get enough water, and stay as active as possible NOT for weight loss reasons but for metabolic health and joint/muscle maintenance. It's really, really, hard to sell that though, which is how you get people like Abra Pappa in 2013 writing out this bugfuck "Food and mood" handout with a midday snack that is so bonkers in the way the calories are distributed that I'm sitting down and doing math about it (it looks like about a third of the calories that day are supposed to come from the mid afternoon spinach, mint, cocoa nib, and coconut milk smoothie which is, as I said, bugfuck nuts).

It's hard to sell "please eat more fruits and vegetables, which is difficult because actually most places don't grow enough vegetables for the population's nutrition needs and it's cheaper to eat grains and industrially produced meat than it is to eat five cups of vegetables that you need to prepare daily and also maybe skip the bacon" but it's much easier to sell "five anti-inflammatory superfood milkshakes that will fill your belly and fight cancer" because it's packaging nutrition as a product and not as a massive systemic issue that happens to have very specific requirements for a large number of individuals who *do* happen to have disorders that are based on nutrition and inflammation (celiac disease! I've got one of them! Eating the wrong foods definitely causes inflammation in my body as the result of an autoimmune disorder! but that doesn't mean that the things that are inflammatory for me are inflammatory for everyone!)

Anyway I think like about 97% of workplace wellness programs are largely bullshit based, or at least import bullshit a lot of the time, and nutrition is a science that has, just, so much bullshit in and around it.

So I would take anything they say with a grain of salt, and hopefully less than 255% of your RDV of saturated fat (seriously that meal plan is ludicrous).

Side note: there is a subset of nutrition people who looked at the way that we got fat wrong in the 80s and flipped it and reversed it and went "actually you can have as much fat of any kind that you want as long as it is natural and you will have no issues" and this is how you end up with people on 100% natural clean keto diets who have cholesterol levels over 600. Abra Pappa recommends "clean/natural" eating and has taken continuing education on keto and has a recipe for a single-serving smoothie that calls for 8oz of coconut milk I think she's very much in the "'good' fat truther" camp (or at least she was in 2013 which is maybe why New York has a requirement for people to have some kind of nutrition certification for giving out nutrition advice and maybe she should have done that because she didn't even go to her bullshit "grad school" until 2017).

(We DID get fat wrong in the 80s and total avoidance of all fats is bad for you and there are 'good' fats that you should eat and everybody needs to eat some level of fat for proper nutrient absorption but even if you're only getting fat from nuts and avocados that's not going to prevent your arteries from forming plaques if you're having nearly triple the recommended daily value of saturated fat as part of your afternoon snack)

[local-hellhound-steals-spaghetti]

I’m by no means any sort of expert on any animal’s behavior so please feel free to ignore this random observation/ opinion.

But something I find interesting about people defending Moo Deng’s treatment is the frequent assertion that her keepers love her, as if that excuses everything. I honestly don’t doubt that her keepers love her, but that doesn’t mean their actions are appropriate.

To me it’s reminiscent of someone cornering and petting a dog against it’s will because “I just LOVE dogs!!!”. Loving the animal doesn’t mean you can’t inadvertently harm them with your actions.

Idk, I just have a lot of feelings on this and this was my attempt to sum them up. Hope it makes some sort of sense 😅

Oh yeah tell me about it! I appreciate you sharing this because I feel like I'm going insane when I see people being given the same information as I have and drawing a totally different conclusion from it.

Like... it's not okay just because they harass her a little bit. That's... not how that works.

Also I find the "trust the keeper" argument super ironic coming from someone who worked with dolphins - the species in human care that EVERYONE has an opinion on. And you'll tell people "hey, trust me on this. I see these dolphins every day. They participate in their own health care and don't do something if they don't want to. They are objectively in good welfare based on all the current data we have of what that looks like. I do behaviour records every day to prove this. And if I didn't think they were doing well, I'd be fighting tooth and nail to improve their lives or I would leave my job." (which I have done, btw)

And I'll still be told I'm enslaving dolphins and I do it for the money (when it was free labour - yay for animal industry exploitation - or absolutely bugger all). Trust the keeper... unless I watch a biased documentary packed full of misinformation. Then I know *more* than the keeper will and the keeper is just a moron who doesn't need a science degree and years of unpaid internship experience for this job!

But if it's a cute animal that has no preconceptions established of their welfare in human care? It's free game to coo over. Sure the keeper just dropped that squirming, panicking baby hippo he was trying to force into a tub! But he has so much experience because someone on reddit said so! It's actually all just desentisation! (not how desensisation works ever)

Can you tell I'm frustrated? Yeah...

Anyway I am usually the first in line to defend a zoo and their keepers - I know it's not easy to work in a zoo that's underresourced or in an education vaccum. But I'm going to call out bad handling when I see it. Especially when it's reinforced by social media clout and is being encouraged to continue by people justifying it as "desenitisation" or "actions of an experienced keeper."

[icyg4l]

Pick-A-Child Star: Inner Child Messages

In honor of Black History Month, I am continuing the series of highlighting Black icons while prioritizing the spiritual needs of Black Americans. Pick the image that resonates with you most.

Left-to-Right (1-3): Keke Palmer, Aleisha Allen, China Anne McClain

If you chose Pile One, you resonate with the energy of Keke Palmer. As we all know, she is a multi-talented human being. She is a singer-songwriter, actress, dancer, talk show host, podcaster and model. Her name is synonymous with the phrase 'busy bee'. Her infectious personality has followed us through movies and tv shows like True Jackson VP, Scream Queens, Akeelah and the Bee, Nope and much more. She continues to grace the screens with her charismatic nature.

"You're always wondering what you're not, can't you be happy with what you've got?"

When you were younger, you may have watched the tv show, 'How to Rock', starring Cymphonique. The premise of the show is navigating the social castes of high school. I channeled the theme song for this show. You really need to show some more gratitude, man. What's in your imagination is being reflected on the outside world; just enjoy the moment. Your brain is on overload all the time and you really need to rest. On Valentine's Day, you should give yourself some 'me time'. Another message that I get from your inner child is that you need to go play! For some of you, I sense that you're reluctant to let someone into your life when they have good intentions. I think high school plays a big role into why you navigate the world the way that you do. You are not in high school anymore! You are officially responsible for your own shit (that means the emotional trauma too, boo). Your inner child also wants you to know that you should take up some karate/self-defense classes. It is imperative that you learn how to stick up for yourself physically, not just verbally. Lastly, if you have lost a father figure, you should do that thing to honor his legacy such as getting a tattoo of him, getting a portrait painted of him, starting that company and naming it after him. You are your father's offspring, you know?

If you chose pile 2, this means you resonate with the energy of Aleisha Allen. She is most famously known for her roles in the 'Are We There Yet?' film series and School of Rock. Her cheeky portrayal of these characters solidified her as a Black child star icon. After starring in these classic films, she took on smaller roles in 'The Electric Company' and indie films. Since then, she has acquired a Bachelor's degree at Pace University and a Master's degree at Columbia University in Communication Science and Disorders to fulfill a career as a speech pathologist.

“I gets down, I don’t play”

Some of you may be in the midst of choosing a major after being undecided for so long. Some of you may switch majors a lot. Your inner child wants you to choose something that makes them come alive this time. In other words, choose a career path that's not boring to you. You could have ADHD/ADD or some type of learning disability. You need to slow down because you’re inviting some disingenuous energy. Your inner child does not trust the people that are around you. Your light shines too bright to be staying in spaces where you're not celebrated. This made me think of a video of Megan Thee Stallion talking about walking out of rooms where you don't feel comfortable. Do exactly that, my love. Everything will work out just fine if you believe that it will. Your inner child wants you to be as optimistic about this transition as possible. And lastly, you don't have to tolerate anyone's behavior, or quite frankly anything. If you feel like you have to put up with someone's bull, then you need to leave. You guys were quite the sassy kids, weren't you? Now, where did all of that energy go? Why are you dimming yourself down just to appeal to others? It doesn't matter if you're in a corporate meeting or a classroom filled with white people, you speak your mind. You know what's going on, don't be intimidated.

If you chose Pile 3, you resonate with the energy of China Anne McClain. She is known for her roles in Daddy’s Little Girls, A.N.T. Farm, the Descendants series and Black Lightning. Her range in roles highlights her witty, yet dramatic personality, which is the reason for any drawn interest in her. She is also a singer-songwriter who was once in a girl group with her older sisters, Lauryn and Sierra. Since then, she has documented her spiritual journey on social media after quitting acting.

“I’ve got friends on the other side”

This is the pile that I would probably choose. This is the pile of the hoodoos/witches/spiritualists/occultists. Your inner child wants you to know that the spells you’ve been casting have been working. As a child, you may have had some experiences with ghosts/spirits. Nobody believed you but who cares? They’re your friends now. There may be a cousin that you haven’t seen/talked to in a while. Please talk to them! Your inner child misses them so much! It doesn’t matter if you’re not on good terms with them, please go do it. For some reason, you should go play hide and seek. This could also mean that you should prepare for an item of yours to go missing temporarily. It could also mean that you will find out some information that you’ve been searching for. Finally, if you feel like you have nowhere to go, think again! Your inner child wants to go to place where you once frequented. This could be the beach, an arcade or the park. Go have a picnic. Go insert those coins/swipe that card into your favorite apocalypse game. Go dig your toes into the sand! You are going through self-actualization and it is important that you stay grounded. Be prepared to step into uncomfortable positions. Connecting with your inner child is a way to do so. It is essential for your growth as a person.

[weeb-polls-with-pip]

Autistic Anime Boys Prelims - Propaganda Division - Group 1

Propaganda:

Rintarou -

"Has a special interest in science and will do anything to indulge in it. Has many strange mannerisms and will only drink his favorite drink."

Baki -

"Special interest in fighting and doesn't give a fuck about anything else except for his friends. Kidnaps fucking George Bush and asks him if he can put him in the biggest prison in America because he wants to fight people there. Literally goes to jail for his special interest. Autism."

Yoshi -

"look at him. he is Autism: The Character. The game deals with how he was ostracized for "weird" behavior and it got down his self esteem so bad that he calls himself trash and if you look at how he struggles to interact with others i.e. low social stamina (game's hit points are literally his psyche), struggle to control his emotions intense passion about subjects of interest etc etc he reads as immensely autistic and his arc of learning to love himself and find people who love him for who he is is so. very important to me <3 my dear favorite autistic scrimblo.

also look at him. his design is the trans flag colors. what's not to love here!! he likes bunnies!! he made those bunny ears himself, even. in 1BeatHeart, he made cat ears for his friend. i love his 1BeatHeart design also because in that game he's an Adult and STILL unabashedly himself, showing that he took those lessons from his childhood to heart! an autistic adult having some degree of pride in himself, being renowned even if he's still seen as odd, and being content and having friends. aurgh."

Steve -

"Uses his autism for evil! Is obsessed with vampires and wanting to become one but has so many compiling issues that he eventually becomes a key player in a supernatural war. Took it as a personal betrayal when his best friend had to become a vampire to save his life."

Yuuto -

"source: trust me bro."

Hatchi -

"Has a special interest in food and often lets it cloud his judgement. Is very bored of life at the beginning of the story but doesn't understand why. Does things others see as strange or reckless because he thinks it would be fun."

Keiichi -

"He is surrounded by people who speak in codes and euphemisms that he cannot understand based on social rules that he is not privy to."

Ayato -

"evil autism (/pos)"

Yuzuru -

"he is best boy!!!"

Amuro -

"Being a Newtype is just space autism to me. But also he sucks at falling in line in a structured environment, would rather work with machines than talk to people, and is only allowed as a child soldier because he's the bestest at big robots."

[system-of-a-feather]

New Pinned Post

I'm no longer in need of back up money, so commissions aren't needed, but if you ever want to commission me, I'm usually open. I also occasionally put some of my art on redbubble.

Please read Boundaries before sending an ask.

Anyways, hello everyone, I am too lazy to find my old crack DID pride flag (it'll come up some day and I'll link it here), and I figured I should slowly update some of my intro stuff for this blog after not touching it for a fucking minute.

You can call me Feathers - we're a 21+ year old Buddhist mixed-AAPI intersex nonbinary system (they/them) that is at late stage recovery and often defaults to a fully fused state (though we freely play with our multiple identity and operate as independent parts whenever it works best for us; often for trauma processing or navigating complex life decisions). As a result, we don't always tag which part is out and sometimes tag "alter: fei" or, more recently, "feathers speaks" Sometimes we might tag which part is dominant, but it's all whatever.

For the most recent discussion on Buddhism, Full Integration, Final Fusion, and Functional Multiplicity written by our fully fused self before our recent decision to swap back to Functional Mulitiplicity, feel free to read here; it's long but a pretty cohesive understanding of our current experiences with our DID and shit. (5/15/2024)

We're diagnosed with DID, C-PTSD, autism, trichotillomania, OCD, and honestly a number of things cause complex-trauma life. We have some physical disabilities but nothing that typically causes too much obstruction in our day to day.

As a result of our state of recovery, we really don't have a set headcount, however we were / are polyfragmented.

Some fun things about us and things you'll see on this blog:

Due to the fact that DID is no longer really that much of an interesting topic / impactful part of our life, we only occasionally post about DID and our experiences with it. While it was the original purpose of this blog, as a depiction of our healing journey and what healing with DID can look like, we decided we would rather just post about whatever sparks joy in our life. As a result, rather than much content on DID, you will likely see things relating to the topics below. PLEASE feel free to send asks about ANY of the topics below. We love to talk about things.

We are Buddhist (primarily non-theistic; mostly non-denominational, largely Zen) and we really enjoy it. We particularly like the philosophy and do practice it. Admittedly, we identify as being god awful Buddhists, but thats okay cause its part of the process.

We love research and plan to go into it when our ducks are better aligned. We particularly love research and literature around developmental psychopathology, trauma, dissociation, animal behavior, and the more abstract neuroscience topics (particularly consciousness research). We likely won't post much on it as overtly here because I don't enjoy talking science on tumblr much because most people (in my experience) don't actually want to talk about research as much as they want to prove their point.

We are avid bird watchers and regularly document / photograph the birds we see and upload them to ebird. We really enjoy it as an activity and social engagement and really love sharing that joy and knowledge with people. We actually have a minor in Avian Science and have been tested on North American ID skills. We also know more than we need to about chicken biology as a result of said degree. If you want to send anything about birds, bird watching, or asking for a bird ID (even non North American), they are ALWAYS welcome and you are ALWAYS allowed to tag us in any bird related content.

We do a lot of creative work and have dedicated ourselves (without writing partner) to a large story world project that we've been writing for over a decade now. We actually specifically started grinding our art skills in 2020 specifically just to help build that world up. Art is one of our largest self soothing coping mechanisms. We are going to turn that story world into a comic and a TTRPG system so please check out @thedevaaffliction.

Overall, we really just like thinking about a lot of topics and things as part of both our interest in research, philosophy, and as part of our Buddhist practice. We don't really find an interest in arguing discourse / syscourse because we really dislike and see very little benefit in debate. That said, we love to discuss experiences, thoughts, feelings and perspectives on complex topics and as long as the intent is to discuss and share rather than to "win" or "prove", we really enjoy that sort of enrichment in our life so we do welcome it. That said, we withhold the right to deem any conversation as more debate than discussion and to abandon it.

Additionally, related to the fifth point, we believe in being fully transparent about our past and admission that we were wrong as we think it is very important to be able to re-evaluate your beliefs and opinions and grow. In our mid teens we actually were pretty far into the alt-right pipeline and until about a year or so ago, we were staunch anti-endos. These days we are basically commies and very pro-endo. If anyone has any interest on how we pivoted so hard in our opinions on those topics, we are more than open to talk and discuss it as well as any insights we pulled from the experience.

Also we love martial arts - I forgot that cause I'm not particularly XIV brained rn but we REALLY enjoy martial arts.

We suck at being labeled and having labels. We're just very very queer.

--------------

DNI:

People who put on their socks/shoes in the order of Sock-Shoe-Sock-Shoe

That's about it. We liberally block, so we don't really worry about DNIs. If we don't like your content for any reason, we will remove it from our dash. Whether or not you want to interact with us is up to you past that point. Generally, we welcome anyone to follow as it can make for good conversation.

[hypokeimena]

i know i could google it but i love to question american mutus, what's it really like in a frat ?

well like it's extremely variable. one of the primary things that makes frats scary and nonfunctional is the fact that at MOST schools, the frat is technically "off campus" housing which means that the university - while dependent on greek life to provide housing to students - has no or extremely limited legal control over behavior which happens in frat houses bc... it is "off campus". which is what leads to the kind of bad shit you hear about bc there's very little like... accountability. HOWEVER greek life at my school was 1. housed in dorms 2. at a school with a more liberal milieu, and also not an enormous part of campus culture - it was there if you wanted it but it wasn't the ONLY place to socialize, or the only kind of group housing etc, the way it is in some other more rural schools where that's sort of the only thing there is to do yk. also 3. it was a group that very much self-selected for people who cared about Living In Community who wanted a space that was not as traditionally "fratty".

i tend to feel it has much more in common with the way i've seen people describe coop housing than with other frat houses; we were a greek letter org with a national - but we are co-ed and legally distinct, though we still share songs and a history with the all-male org.

so for me "what was being in a frat like" well it was like living with a bunch of people who all agreed that we wanted to live together, drink responsibly together, and learn all the same drinking songs. together. which i think is not typically the experience for many people!

checked in with a college friend to see if this description held true to her perception also and she said "well housing coops don't ritualistically blindfold members" which i feel like is a big thing for her to claim. they might. i don't know that. anyway it was good and fun and we did not do Hazing except in to a degree that was entirely opt-in.

have these descriptions also: "[frat was] like kind of a traditional frat, kind of a religious community a little bit (in the way that frats are that) and kind of like coop housing for people who like movie nights. also kind of like attending city council meetings. a homeowners association for self destructive people. socialization daycare for computer science students. sleepaway summer camp but the kids and chaperones are the same age. and also the same people. [frat] is like the post-musical rager for high school students who played in the orchestra pit" (h/t @oddliestcatch)

[graciereadshannigram]

re: audhd, heuristics, emotional processing, and critical thinking*

hooo boy, can't wait for all the nuance here to be completely missed but walk with me for a minute? (tl;dr at the bottom)

in psychology, there’s this idea of mental heuristics, right? they’re the shortcuts your brain uses to make decisions or problem solve faster. and thinking about it, for someone with audhd (hi hello that is me), those shortcuts are probably even more important because we’re already using up so much processing power just dealing with daily stuff.

which brings me to emotional processing and critical thinking.

to paraphrase one of my fav tiktokers, jasminesgarden23, "if you're feeling triggered, your critical thinking shuts down." so when strong emotions like fear, shame, or disgust** get triggered, critical thinking stops being a priority! dealing with the Emotion and coming back to baseline becomes the priority.

and the bigger the emotion, the more our brain looks for the quickest way out, and that's when mental heuristics (like black-and-white thinking) really start to take over.

instead of spending a bunch of energy processing every angle of a situation, we can just jump to an either/or conclusion. it’s not great for nuance, but it definitely saves on brainpower. like, you don’t have to get stuck in the messy middle of a problem if you can just label it good or bad, right or wrong, move on.

i mean, we see this all the time with Tumblr Discourse™️, right?

for example, "if you read [insert 'problematic' ship or kink/tag here] fics, you’re automatically a bad person."

boom, a mental heuristic.

because why sit in the discomfort of processing a complex issue when you can just label something good or bad and move on?

it doesn't require deeper critical thinking, it validates your emotional trigger, and allows you to process and move on in a less energy-intensive way.

(i'm guessing disgust is a big driver in this particular example, but so might be this idea of moral justice, this feeling of wanting to be a 'good' person, which is a whole other topic to explore another time)

(this particular heuristic is also completely invalid on multiple levels, don't come at me please).

and i want to emphasize that our brains evolved these mental shortcuts for a reason! they can be useful! they can also be incredibly harmful.

but the thing is, if you develop an over-reliance on these shortcuts, and aren't interrogating why and when you're using them and whether or not they're helpful or harmful, when are you supposed to practice your critical thinking skills? and if you aren't practicing, critical thinking could remain this energy-intensive task.

idk man, would love to respectfully and thoughtfully discuss with others if you're interested in it. (on tumblr??? you ask? yeah maybe not the best platform, but here we are!)

tl;dr: black-and-white thinking is a mental shortcut that conserves energy, especially for audhd brains, but it becomes even more tempting when strong emotions like disgust or fear are involved. while it simplifies complex issues, it could possibly weaken critical thinking over time, making it harder to deal with nuance without getting overwhelmed.

*i am heavily relying on my undergraduate degree in psychology, my master's degree in social & behavioral sciences, and my career in qualitative psych research, but have done exactly zero extra research before word vomiting my thoughts up. so like. take this with a grain of salt.

**these primary emotions are sometimes expressed via anger, a secondary emotion

[realjaysumlin]

They D0N'T like Blacks because they feel inferior - Dr. France Welsing e...

Two Black Indigenous Men gang up against one Black Smart Intelligent Woman Doctor to defend whiteness and I am also disappointed in this interview with Dr. Welsing for not informing them that people who call themselves white invented the concept of race and natural genetics clearly indicated that race isn't biological and considered as a social construct.

She had published this before she wrote her journal on white inferiority complex which the science of psychology recognizes today because of her work and we find her research to be conclusive that whiteness is indeed a inferiority complex.

In psychology a person who discriminates against another human because of a dubious science are the ones who feel inferior. I studied her work before I even stepped foot on my university campus because in the 10th grade I took elementary psychology in highschool as an elective.

While in the 11th grade I went to a community college program to learn basic psychology that is required for all college students of Psychology 101. Just after I graduated from highschool I received two credits from highschool and the community college before going into my freshman year in college.

When I got to college I decided to make economics my major and behavior psychology my minor even though I had two credits in psychology. After I graduated from college with my economics degree I went back to get my bachelor's degree in behavioral psychology and went on from there to get my post graduate degrees in both psychology and economics.

Dr. Welsing and Dr. Frantz Fanon was my inspirational motivation to focus on psychology in the beginning.

[just-simlish-things]

Anthropology Legacy Challenge

An Anthropology Legacy Challenge

By: Just.Simlish.Things

This mini legacy challenge is based on the study of Anthropology. According to Merriam-Webster, Anthropology is (1) the science of human beings especially : the study of human beings and their ancestors through time and space and in relation to physical character, environmental and social relations, and culture. (2) theology dealing with the origin, nature, and destiny of human beings.

As someone who is interested in human behavior and pursued a degree in Psychology, but dropped out cause college is hard�� Anywho, I created this challenge originally for myself because I wanted to test myself as a storyteller. I wanted to see what I would choose and how I would write it based on my own belief systems and environment (a little about me, I’m a Christian, and I try to write my stories based around teachings of Jesus without it coming off as ‘preachy’ cause even I don’t like that). This challenge is meant to see how people from different walks of life, culture, beliefs, etc. would react when faced with two options. Well, your sims, actually. There’s going to be minimal rules because I want you to have full reign of the writing process. I’ll provide the prompt and you take it from there. An optional component: make a post at the end of each generation, explaining why you chose what you chose. I would also love to see what yall do with this challenge so if you end up doing it, tag me @just.simlish.things on Instagram. If you would also like to see this challenge, message me about it because I’m only doing it for my close friends, so I’ll add you if you want to see it.

Generation 1: Love or Obligation?

Prompt: Create a scenario that involves these two opposing themes. An example of this could be where person A is constantly working because they need the money but they love person B a lot, but their relationship is rocky because of the job. Person A then has to choose between their job (obligation) or person B (the person they love). 

If you choose love: The heir has a happy childhood up until highschool. 

If you choose obligation: The heir has an unhappy childhood up until highschool.

Generation 2:  Fame or Lawlessness?

Prompt: Based on your choice from the previous generation, decide which path they will pursue in highschool. If you choose fame: The heir has a good reputation, until they’re caught in a scandal. If you choose lawlessness: The heir is a high profile criminal until they’re finally caught. Based on any trait that your sim has, choose one, decide how they will handle their downfall. Will they come out on top or accept defeat? Whichever you choose, will be the reputation that the next generation will start with. 

Generation 3: In their shadow 

Prompt: The start of this generation requires the heir to be in hiding until young adulthood. Someone from their parents' past notices them and starts treating them like their parents. Do you choose to be defined by your parents choices, or make a name for yourself?  

Generation 4: Solitude or Community?

Prompt: You contemplate your family origins and you decide whether to let the bloodline end with you, or do you start a family knowing that this cycle could continue again.

I want you to have fun with this challenge. Explore different ideas and use your own thoughts, opinions, upbringing and whatnot to really flesh out each generation. I can't wait to see what story you tell. 

[am--f]

TikTok, Seriality, and the Algorithmic Gaze

Princeton-Weimar Summer School for Media Studies, 2024 Princeton University

If digital moving image platforms like TikTok differ in meaningful ways from cinema and television, certainly one of the most important differences is the mode by which the viewing experience is composed. We are dealing not only with fixed media nor with live broadcast media, but with an AI recommender system, a serial format that mixes both, generated on the fly and addressed to each individual user. Out of this series emerges something like a subject, or at least an image of one, which is then stored and constantly re-addressed.

TikTok has introduced a potentially dominant design for the delivery of moving images—and, potentially, a default delivery system for information in general. Already, Instagram has adopted this design with its Reels feature, and Twitter, too, has shifted towards a similar emphasis. YouTube has been providing video recommendations since 2008. More than other comparable services, TikTok places its proprietary recommender system at the core of the apparatus. The “For You” page, as TikTok calls it, presents a dynamically generated, infinitely scrollable series of video loops. The For You page is the primary interface and homepage for users. Content is curated and served on the For You page not only according to explicit user interactions (such as liking or following) or social graphs (although these do play some role in the curation). Instead, content is selected on the basis of a wider range of user behavior that seems to be particularly weighted towards viewing time—the time spent watching each video loop. This is automatic montage, personalized montages produced in real time for billions of daily users. To use another transmedial analogy—one perhaps justified by TikTok’s approximation of color convergence errors in its luminous cyan and red branding—this montage has the uncanny rhythm of TV channel surfing. But the “channels” you pass through are not determined by the fixed linear series of numbered broadcast channels. Instead, each “channel” you encounter has been preselected for you; you are shown “channels” that are like the ones you have tended to linger on.

The experience of spectatorship on TikTok, therefore, is also an experience of the responsive modeling of one’s spectatorship—it involves the awareness of such modeling. This is a cybernetic loop, in effect, within which future action is performed on the basis of the past behavior of the recommender system as it operates. Spectatorship is fully integrated into the circuit. Here is how it works: the system starts by recommending a sequence of more or less arbitrary videos. It notes my view time on each, and cross-references the descriptive metadata that underwrites each video. (This involves, to some degree, internal, invisible tags, not just user-generated tags.) The more I view something, the more likely I am to be shown something like it in the future. A series of likenesses unfolds, passing between two addresses: my behavior and the database of videos. It’s a serial process of individuation. As TikTok puts it in a 2020 blog post: these likenesses or recommendations increasingly become “polished,” “tailored,” “refined,” “improved,” and “corrected” apparently as a function of consistent use over time.

Like many recommender systems—and such systems are to be found everywhere nowadays—the For You algorithm is a black box. It has not been released to the public, although there seem to have been, at some point, promises to do this. In lieu of this, a “TikTok Transparency Center” run by TikTok in Los Angeles (delayed, apparently, by the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic) opened in 2023. TikTok has published informal descriptions of the algorithm, and by all accounts it appears to be rather straightforward. At the same time, the algorithm has engendered all kinds of folk sciences, superstitions, paranoid theories, and magical practices. What is this algorithm that shows me such interesting, bizarre, entertaining, unexpected things? What does it think I want? Why does it think I want this? How does this algorithm sometimes seem to know me so well, to know what I want to see? What is it watching me watch? (From the side of content creators, of course, there is also always the question: what kind of content do I need to produce in order to be recognized and distributed by the algorithm? How can I go viral and how can I maximize engagement? What kinds of things will the algorithm want to see? Why is the algorithm not seeing me?)

These seem to be questions involving an algorithmic gaze. That is to say: there is something or someone watching prior to the actual instance of watching, something or someone which is beyond empirical, human viewers, “watching” them watch. There is something watching me, whether or not I actually make an optical image of myself. I am looked at by the algorithm. There is a structuring gaze. But what is this gaze? How does it address us? Is this the gaze of a cinematic apparatus? Is it the gaze we know from filmtheory, a gaze of mastery with which we are supposed to identify, a gaze which hails or interpellates us, which masters us? Is it a Foucauldian, panoptic gaze, one that disciplines us? 

Any one of us who uses the major platforms is familiar with how the gaze of the system feels. It a gaze that looks back—looks at our looking—and inscribes our attention onto a balance sheet. It counts and accounts for our attention. This account appears to be a personalized account, a personalized perspective. People use the phrase “my TikTok algorithm,” referring to the personalized model which they have generated through use. Strictly speaking, of course, it’s not the algorithm that’s individualized or that individuates, but the model that is its product. The model that is generated by the algorithm as I use it and as it learns from my activity is my profile. The profile is “mine” because I am constantly “training” it with my attention as its input, and feel a sense of ownership since it’s associated with my account, but the profile is also “of me” and “for me” because it is constantly subjecting me to my picture, a picture of my history of attention. Incidentally, I think this is precisely something that Jacques Lacan, in his 1973 lecture on the gaze in Seminar XI, refers to as a “bipolar reflexive relation,” the ambiguity of the phrase “my image.” “As soon as I perceive, my representations belong to me.” But, at the same time, something looks back; something pictures me looking. “The picture, certainly, is in my eye. But I am in the picture.”

On TikTok, the picture often seems sort of wrong, malformed. Perhaps more often than not. Things drift around and get stuck in loops. The screen fills with garbage. As spectators, we are constantly being shown things we don’t want any more of, or things we would never admit we want, or things we hate (but cannot avoid watching: this is the pleasurable phenomenon of “cringe”). But we are compelled to watch them all. The apparatus seems to endlessly produce desire. Where does this desire come from? Is it from the addictive charge of the occasional good guess, the moment of brief recognition (the lucky find, the Surrealist trouvaille: “this is for me”)? Is it the promise that further training will yield better results? Is it possible that our desire is constituted and propelled in the failures of the machine, in moments of misrecognition and misidentification in the line of sight of a gaze that evidently cannot really see us? 

In the early 1970s, in the British journal Screen, scholars such as Laura Mulvey, Colin MacCabe, and Stephen Heath developed a film-theoretical concept of the gaze. This concept was used to explain how desire is determined, specified, and produced by visual media. In some ways, the theory echoes Lacan’s phenomenological interest in “the pre-existence to the seen of a given-to-be-seen” (Seminar XI, 74). The gaze is what the cinematic apparatus produces as part of its configuration of the given-to-be-seen. 

In Screen theory, as it came to be known, the screen becomes a mirror. On it, all representations seem to belong to me, the individual spectator. This is an illusion of mastery, an imaginary relation to real conditions of existence in the terms of the Althusserian formula. It corresponds to the jubilant identification that occurs in a moment in Lacan’s famous 1949 paper “The Mirror Stage as Formative of the I Function as Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience,” in which the motor-challenged infant, its body fragmented (en morceaux) in reality, discovers the illusion of its wholeness in the mirror. The subject is brought perfectly in line with this ideal-I, with this spectacle, such that what it sees is simply identical to its desire. There is convergence. To slightly oversimplify: for Screen theory, this moment in mirror stage is the essence of cinema and ideology, or cinema as ideology. 

Joan Copjec, in her essay “The Orthopsychic Subject,” notes that Screen theory considered a certain relationship of property to be one of its primary discoveries. The “screen as mirror”: the ideological-cinematic apparatus produces representations which are “accepted by the subject as its own.” This is what Lacan calls the “belong to me aspect so reminiscent of property.” “It is this aspect,” says Copjec, speaking for Screen theory, “that allows the subject to see in any representation not only a reflection of itself but a reflection of itself as master of all it surveys. The imaginary relation produces the subject as master of the image. . . . The subject is satisfied that it has been adequately reflected on the screen. The ‘reality effect’ and the ‘subject effect’ both name the same constructed impression: that the image makes the subject fully visible to itself” (21–22). 

According to Copjec, “the gaze always remains within film theory the sense of being that point at which sense and being coincide. The subject comes into being by identifying with the image’s signified. Sense founds the subject—that is the ultimate point of the film-theoretical and Foucauldian concepts of the gaze” (22).

But this is not Lacan’s gaze. The gaze that Lacan introduces in Seminar XI is something much less complete, much less satisfying. The gaze concept is not exhausted by the imaginary relation of identification described in Screen theory, where the subject simply appropriates the gaze, assumes the position created for it by the image “without the hint of failure,” as Copjec puts it. In its emphasis on the imaginary, Screen theory neglects the symbolic relation as well as the issue of the real.

In Seminar XI, Lacan explicates the gaze in the midst of a discussion on Sartre and Merleau-Ponty. Again, Lacan’s gaze is something that pre-exists the seeing subject and is encountered as pre-existing it: “we are beings who are looked at, in the spectacle of the world” (75). But—and this is the crucial difference in emphasis—it is impossible to look at ourselves from the position of this all-seeing spectacle. The gaze, as objet a in the field of the visible, is something that in fact cannot be appropriated or inhabited. It is nevertheless the object of the drive, a cause of desire. The gaze “may come to symbolize” the "central lack expressed in the phenomenon of castration” (77). Lacan even says, later in the seminar, that the gaze is “the most characteristic term for apprehending the proper function of the objet a” (270). As objet a, as the object-cause of desire, the gaze is said to be separable and separated off from the subject and has only ever existed as lack. The gaze is just all of those points from which I myself will never see, the views I will never possess or master. I may occasionally imagine that I have the object, that I occupy the gaze, but I am also constantly reminded of the fact that I don’t, by images that show me my partiality, my separation. This is the separation—between eye and gaze—that manifests as the drive in the scopic field. 

The gaze is a position that cannot be assumed. It indicates an impossible real. Beyond everything that is shown to the subject, beyond the series of images to which the subject is subjected, the question is asked: “What is being concealed from me? What in this graphic space does not show, does not stop not writing itself?” This missing point is the point of the gaze. “At the moment the gaze is discerned, the image, the entire visual field, takes on a terrifying alterity,” says Copjec. “It loses its ‘belong-to-me aspect’ and suddenly assumes the function of a screen” (35). We get the sense of being cut off from the gaze completely. We get the sense of a blind gaze, a gaze that “is not clear or penetrating, not filled with knowledge or recognition; it is clouded over and turned back on itself, absorbed in its own enjoyment” (36). As Copjec concludes: “the gaze does not see you” (36).

So the holes and stains in the model continuously produced by the TikTok algorithm—those moments in which what we are shown seems to indicate a misreading, a wrong guess—are those moments wherein the gaze can be discerned. The experience is this: I am watching a modeling process and engaging with the serial missed encounters or misrecognitions (meconnaissance—not only misrecognition but mistaken knowledge—mis-knowing) that the modeling process performs. The Lacanian point would simply be the following: the situation is not that the algorithm knows me too well or that it gives me the illusion of mastery that would be provided by such knowledge. The situation is that the algorithm may not know or recognize me at all, even though it seems to respond to my behavior in some limited way, and offers the promise of knowing or recognizing me. And this is perhaps the stain or tuche, the point at which we make contact with the real, where the network of signifiers, the automaton, or the symbolic order starts to break down. It is only available through the series, through the repeated presentation of likenesses.

As Friedrich Kittler memorably put it, “the discourse of the other is the discourse of the circuit.” It is not the discourse of cinema or television or literature. Computational recommender systems operating as series of moving image loops seem to correspond strangely closely to the Lacanian models, to the gaze that is responsive yet absent, perceptive yet blind, desired yet impossible, perhaps even to the analytic scene. Lacan and psychoanalysis constantly seemed to suggest that humans carry out the same operations as machines, that the psyche is a camera-like apparatus capable of complicated performance, and that the analyst might be replaced with an optical device. Might we substitute recommender media for either psyche or analyst? In any case, it’s clear that the imaginary register of identification does not provide a sufficient model for subjectivity as it is addressed by computational media. That model, as Kittler points out, is to be found in Lacan’s symbolic register: “the world of the machine.”

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Colin Wright

Published: Feb 18, 2024

There was a time when biologist PZ Myers was relevant. This period spanned the late 2000s and early 2010s, coinciding with the rise of “New Atheism” (as some called it). In 2006, Myers’ blog Pharyngula was celebrated in Nature as the world’s most popular science blog and was deemed the top atheist blog by Hemant Mehta in 2009. In 2008, Myers was part of a memorable incident where he and Richard Dawkins were planning to attend a screening of Ben Stein’s pro-Intelligent Design propaganda film, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. Despite Myers being interviewed and featured in the film, he was barred from entering by a security guard on orders from the producer, Mark Mathis—but Dawkins was allowed in!

In 2010, I invited Myers to give a talk about Intelligent Design at Sierra Community College in Rocklin, CA, where I was studying before transferring to UC Davis for my bachelor’s degree. I picked up Myers from the Sacramento train station, and we enjoyed a stimulating conversation about evolution en route. Before his talk, I gave him a tour of the school’s esteemed natural history museum. After his talk, we all went out with Myers for food and drinks and had a great time. I share this to show that my starting attitude toward Myers was nothing short of admiration.

However, as gender ideology gained a foothold within the atheist movement, the brains of many prominent and once-rational figures began to melt. Philosopher Peter Boghossian has poignantly characterized this shift among Left-wing intellectuals from being quick to point out the limits of their knowledge to a tendency to pretend to not know what is undeniably known.

This trend is exemplified by Myers, as I will illustrate.

Recently, Richard Dawkins shared on 𝕏 the lecture I delivered at the Genspect conference in Denver, CO, last year, titled “The Sex Binary: What It Is and Why It Matters.” Dawkins praised my talk as “superbly clear & totally correct,” and reaffirmed the reality of the binary nature of sex. Following this, gender activists bombarded Dawkins with absurd articles challenging the binary concept of sex, including a particularly misleading piece in Scientific American titled “Stop Using Phony Science to Justify Transphobia,” which asserts that “Actual research shows that sex is anything but binary.”

In response to this onslaught of dubious science, Dawkins countered the article directly: “This ridiculous article…ignorantly misunderstands the nature of the sex binary.” He went on to underscore the important distinction between how sex is “determined” versus how it’s “defined” in biology that I outlined in my talk.

In turn, Myers, seemingly desperate to regain some of his previous prominence, criticized Dawkins in a blog post. Myers’ misunderstanding of the biology of sex, especially given his background in developmental biology, is on embarrassing display in his post.

Myers begins his criticism by suggested that Dawkins’ expertise in ethology (the study of animal behavior) means he lacks the sufficient expertise that would give him better insight into the biology of sex.

Did you know that Richard Dawkins began his career as an ethologist? He got his Ph.D. studying animal behavior under Niko Tinbergen. If you’re an ethologist, you might study things like courtship behavior and parental investment and feeding strategies etc., etc., etc. Dawkins studied how animals make choices.

This argument is a common strategy used by gender activists to undermine those who present biological facts that contradict gender ideology’s central dogma. I receive this criticism incessantly because I am also an ethologist. I studied the collective behavior of spiders and social insects, and this often gets me dismissed as some “bug guy” out of his depth commenting on issues well outside my academic wheelhouse. This portrayal, however, is couldn’t be further from the truth, and it is often medical doctors and biologists who study a narrow group of taxa who are most likely to form misguided views about the biology of sex.

In reality, ethologists (now usually referred to as behavioral ecologists) are uniquely well-situated to address questions pertaining to the fundamental and universal meaning of male and female. That’s because the most profound behavioral differences to be found in nature within a species are those of males and females. It turns out that the evolved reproductive strategies of producing either fewer large gametes (ova) or many small gametes (sperm) results in divergent selection on many behavioral traits between males and females. Moreover, understanding that the universal defining feature of males and females is rooted in gametes allows us to account for instances where behavioral sex roles are reversed, as is seen in some birds and other animals. In fact, such role reversals would be indiscernible without identifying the males and females based on the gametes they produce, underscoring the relevance of ethology in discussions about biological sex.

For instance, how do we know that male seahorses are the ones that gestate young and give birth? Or that in northern jacanas (J. spinosa), it is the females who are larger, more ornate, territorial, and exhibit less parental care than males? This knowledge stems from understanding that male and female are categories that exist independent of mere morphology and behavior.

Myers makes an uninformed argument:

Somehow, an awful lot of biologists study sexual behavior — like lekking, or sexual displays, or fidelity, and on and on — that don’t necessarily involve sperm collection or measuring ovulation or that kind of thing. It is absurd to insist that only gametes define sex. I recognize spider sexes by the morphology of their palps, and by their differences in behavior, not gametes. I see the birds flying outside my window, and I discriminate sexes by color, primarily.

Myers could not be any more confused here. How does he recognize that it is typically males who form leks, or that males often display more elaborate mating behaviors and exhibit less sexual fidelity? This knowledge comes from studying these species and correlating these behaviors with the type of gametes an individual produces. Once we discover that males of the Vogelkop superb bird-of-paradise (Lophorina niedda) possess highly decorative plumage and engage in elaborate sexual displays, we no longer need to continuously verify this. We know it’s the males because we learned that only those with decorative plumage and elaborate sexual displays in this species produce sperm.

However, Myers insists that defining an individual’s sex based solely on gametes represents an “extreme reductionist” approach, and suggests we should consider “all the other valid signals they openly display.”

Dawkins is just being an extreme reductionist to the point he’s making himself and his position look silly. Go ahead, all you reactionary biologists, rant about how there can be only two true sexes because people have some cells that are almost never seen in public, in defiance of all the other valid signals they openly display. Better biologists will go on recognizing all the factors that define sex without your self-imposed, narrow-minded blinders.

The core and critical flaw in Myers’ argument for using other traits to determine the sex of an individual is that these traits are only reliable indicators of sex in species where we already know which individuals are males and females, based on their gametes. In humans, we associate breasts with females and facial hair with males because adult human females typically develop breasts and adult human males tend to grow facial hair. But how would Myers propose to identify males and females in a newly discovered species without any prior knowledge of their secondary sexual characteristics?

Consider a hypothetical new mammal species with some individuals small and blue and others large and brown. Since we know mammals are anisogamous (i.e., reproduce via fusion of a sperm and an egg), we can be as certain as possible that this species also exhibits males and females. But how do we determine which is which? Should we assume the blue ones are males and the brown ones females, as is the case with blue groper fish? But in blue gropers the males are large and the females are small. Should we therefore consider the blue individuals of our new mammal species female because they are small? But in spiders the males are smaller than the females, suggesting perhaps the small individuals should be considered males?

Do you see the absurdity of the approach? We know human males tend to be hairier, male blue gropers are blue, and male spiders are usually smaller, because being male is a trait independent of hair, color, or size. What unites these males is the type of gamete they have the function to produce. That is what makes them male.

Thus, the only way we can know which individuals of our new species are the males and which are the females is to find out which individuals produce sperm and which produce eggs. The. End.

Myers has to understand this, but he is too afraid to tell the truth.

==

The people who say, "but, but clownfish!" conveniently leave out the part where they explain how we know a clownfish has changed sex. Does it like mimosas and shopping, or is there some other indicator compared to before?

What is it about a clownfish changing sex that tells us it has changed sex?

🤔

[misty-moth]

hi, just ignore this if it’s too personal—

Why did you switch from comp sci to sociology? And do you enjoy your studies?

I don’t mind at all! It’s a somewhat long story (because I ramble 😅) so I put a tldr at the bottom 😭

Basically I signed on for a school that specializes in computer science. The gist was it was a sped up process where in 3 years you earn a bachelor’s degree and a guaranteed job. Which is a pretty rad deal. In theory.

I am nooot a fast learner. I think I’m pretty smart, but when it comes to memorizing it takes a hot minute to settle. I knew that going in, so I got tutoring every single day during lunch and after classes. I got to the second semester easily enough, but then I had a coding class with a particular teacher who lives in my mind’s hall of shame 😐

I was excelling at all of my gen ed classes, but if you fail any coding class at any time, you have to wait a year before you can take that class again, and you can’t move onto the next cs course because it’s a progression. So obviously I was trying my damndest to study so that wouldn’t happen. I asked a ton of questions during class, too, no shame if it meant passing.

And riiight at the end of the semester it all finally clicked. We had a project where I realized all of the math was mathing, I knew what programs to call, etc etc. But my teacher still just knew me as asking “too many” questions.

In the fine print of the college acceptance agreement, turns out a college professor there can change your letter grade if they feel like it. So I earned a 70.1% in the class (which is baaarely passing) but he switched it to an F. 🙂

So then I transferred because I wasn’t going to only take gen ed classes for a year on the off chance they pass me the next time (it was also crazy expensive ofc) so I transferred without any clue what I now wanted for a degree…

Funnily enough, what made me choose was a gender studies class I signed up for on a whim. It opened my tiny lil world from everything I learned from my childhood, and I realized I liked people 😅 I branched into sociology because it’s like psychology-in-motion, and figuring out why people do things made the world make more sense.

I don’t work in the field anymore, but I worked in the behavioral science field for a while. I taught a class of three year olds who’d experienced trauma how to cope/socialize, and later at an elementary school I was a med tech/receptionist/multi-office manager of a few behavioral units (they gave me a lot of hats but no raise 🥲) but the The ‘Vid happened and I burned out.

I loved working with kids, truly, but I didn’t make anywhere near enough to live so I had to give it up. The 3 yo job was $11 an hour and the elementary school was $15… for context. Degrees required for both *feels good inc laugh*

Tldr: I think sociology is really interesting, but I also found computer science interesting. I was just better at one of them 😅 I also would have been making a lot of money rn had I succeeded (my friends who graduated there are making six figures kill meee)

[kaija-rayne-author]

I went thrifting with the kids a couple of days ago and I'm still in so much pain it's making me teary. I don't cry easy. My therapist scolds me about it. 5 hours of shopping with two well behaved kids and I sat down through most of it. I could really use a wheelchair, but I can’t afford one. It would have to be electric, because my EDS is degenerative.

Guess I'm stuck in bed again.

I really wish people would understand that I would give so much to be able to just... live. Even the limited existence I had before covid was better than it is now. I can't go to a movie, or the zoo, or the aquarium. I leave the house for supplies and medical care. That is literally it. I risk my immunocompromised life every time I leave the house because people won't mask. I risk my minor children's lives and my partner's too. We're all immunocompromised.

I used to hike, ride horses, dance, bike, practice 3 types of martial arts.

Then I caught swine flu and my body gave up. I was diagnosed with me/cfs (which is now usually considered a post viral illness, meaning you got sick with a virus and never got better).

Then 3 years ago, I caught version 6 of the first wave of covid. I barely survived, but I never got better.

I honestly can't imagine how people can be so blasé about viruses. They can absolutely destroy your life. They've destroyed mine. I was healthy! I exercised and ate well! I was vaccinated! (Antivaxxers fuck off. I have science degrees, you're really badly misinformed.) I did everything right and it still took me down.

There's nothing you can do behavior wise that will guard you from viruses except masking, vaccinations, and social distancing. Setting up air cleaning options helps too, but since we can't even get people to mask, I'm not holding my breath on that one. (Har, har, I'm hilarious.) Vaccinations are imperative, but they don't do anything for transmission. They exist so that if you do get it, you have a better chance of survival.

And humanity could have defeated this illness 3 years ago. Except because selfish people wanted their 'normal' back... we didn't. PSA? Your 'normal' sucked a lot for disabled people already. It's worse now.

I do the best I can, but it has robbed me of so much. My scientific career, my ability to make a living that doesn't mean just scraping by well under the poverty line.

I can't hike anymore, or bike, the brain knowledge of my decades in martial arts and dance is still there, but I probably couldn't take a hit anymore. Being around horses again is an impossible dream.

Hell, just getting out of bed some days is an impossible dream.

I have nightmares of being without a mask, and people walk around bare faced.

I fucking guarantee there isn't a 'fun' thing on this planet that is worth living like I do.

The worst isn't when the virus kills you, it's when you survive it and have so little ability left.

And more people survive SC19 than die from it. They survive, but millions of people are already disabled from it and the numbers rise every day.

How are people not fucking terrified? How?