#but that might not be his only mental issue

[fixyourwritinghabits]

Hello. I realize this might be overly personal for this blog but I was wondering if you had any advice for my situation. I'm trying to get back into creative hobbies like drawing and writing and while I made some progress with drawing I've really struggled with writing. It's been about ten years. I struggled with my mental health a lot when I was younger and essentially let my depression/anxiety and ADHD destroy all my creative ability. Logically I know the answer is to just write and write badly, but I'm preemptively disappointed and upset that what I write will be. Well. Shit. Or that I'll never improve. Or that I have no idea what to write. And when I do have an idea what to write it's all just gone from my head the second I sit down to write. So. Er. I guess I'm wondering if you have any advice or resources for people like me? Thank you :)

When you're juggling various different Back-Stabbing Brain issues, various pieces of writing advice - getting up at 5pm, forcing yourself to do it, etc - just doesn't work. For me, it's been a struggle to figure out even in optimal situations, so you're not alone. For me, the following is what worked.

Figure out your peak writing time.

Unfortunately, in our capitalist hellscape, you may not be able to use that time to your advantage. My peak time is from 2pm-5pm, right in the middle of work and fades right when I get home. Not ideal. But I can use that knowledge to take advantage of that time on my free days, and I can strategically time my breaks to do some writing. Or just write while pretending to work. Not that I would ever confess to doing that.

Taking the time to figure out when your brain is most willing to work with you is also very helpful. My brain will not work for writing after 8pm. It can, however, still do the dishes. Forcing myself to put off chores so that I can write is super hard thanks to my ADHD (which hates chores until I need to do something else), but I can combat that by making goal lists, scheduling my writing time (with set alarms on my phone!) helps me manage that.

Change location.

I can't get a lot of work done at home. I've tried. I've moved my desk around, I've locked down my internet browsers when writing, I have ignored the way my cat stares holes into my back to try to write. My brain, though, knows that the bed is right over there, we've got that pile of books to read, and oh hey, Tasting History has a new video. Also my cat wants to steal my computer chair and then get constant pets while in said chair because she is a princess baby. It's a losing battle.

What does work for me? Dragging my work to the library. Finding a cafe with enough space and quiet music to get some stuff done. Breaking out a foldable desk on the porch so that there is a closeable barrier between me and my distractions (the cats hate this option).

Changing location is something that works for me. If you have limited options, build barriers between yourself and distractions. Pile stuff on the bed so that it's not easy to give in and lie down for "just a minute." Close doors. Bribe your cats (or your kids). Use a standing desk - shifting your position can help lock down some of the ansty need to be doing something (my chair-stealing cat is more than happy to help with this).

I know of one writer who only gets work done by locking herself in her bathroom, because it's just enough change of scene to get her thoughts to settle. I know another writer who can only get editing done sitting in his parked car. However wacky, trying different scenarios to get something to work can really help.

Find the right tools.

The only way I can draft is by hand. It sucks and I have carpal tunnel, but my brain cannot type words into a blank screen. I need a pile of messy papers that no one else can read to work from.

I'm also very particular about what I write with. I use Uni Power Tank pens from Japan (because they're the only damn pen I've found that doesn't smear my left-handed writing), and I cycle through different types of paper I exclusively work with. Right now it's Five Star Reinforced Filler Paper with the triangle holes, not the round ones.

I don't know why this works, it just does. I've changed up what I've used over time, but as long as I'm consistent and not trying to write a chapter using differently-sized paper (insert scream here), I can get it done. Test out different tools and find what fits for you.

Organization isn't helping? Embrace chaos.

Jeff VanderMeer wrote an entire series on post-it notes, napkins, and on the backs of old bills. I wouldn't recommend that, but if a little chaos gets the job done, then do it. Spread a story across several half-filled notebooks. Map dialogue using only flashcards. Instead of waiting to sit down to get work done, scribble away while on a bus or on the move (safely, of course). Use a speech-to-text app to talk out your writing. Sometimes the more tactile you can make writing, the more you can break up those barriers keeping you from writing.

Try out different things! You'll eventually find what works for you

[stele3]

(Also, people might read Morrison’s run as Jason being at his most violent because that run is when he has the most mental health issues, and due to unconscious bias against the mentally ill, readers conflate the two. In fact, Jason only killed 8 people in Morrison’s run; in other runs he easily hit triple digits.)

The thing is that Jason haters get his relationships with the other bats much better than people who like Jason but are generally Batfam fans.

Those characters do not like Jason, they will always throw him under the bus when needed. He's the convenient scapegoat and it's easy to just put him aside because they don't need to inconvenience themselves with his presence there.

Also, whether or not you see them as a nuclear family, they do not support the member of the family that is just a bit harder to deal with - and no one is obligated to, but the thing is that, at the end of the day, the other bats will be there for each other, but they won't for Jason, because that would be just a bit harder.

(also, before anyone says "but they tried to reach out" - no, they didn't, not in any way that would be understood as such).

[thefingerfuckingfemalefury]

Schriver, an opponent of LGBTQ+ rights, states in the resolution that he believes the ruling is “at odds with the sanctity of marriage, the Michigan Constitution, and principles upon which the country was established.”

"Schriver, a dog-fucking mentally inferior waste of space who thinks an imaginary Sky Daddy is living in the clouds talking to him in his head, claims that the concept of rights and freedom are at odds with what a group of slave owning rapists who had only just discovered the concept of wiping their ass after they took a shit might want"

Would be a more accurate way to phrase this

The "principles" that "established" this "country" is "A group of racist rapist slave owners hated paying tax to the british and so they flung a lot of expendable cannon fodder at them until they stopped"

Schriver further claims that the ruling has resulted in increased “religious persecution,” citing a wedding venue that was fined in 2022 for refusing to work with a same-sex couple.

Me, whenever anti-LGBTQ oxygen thieving roaches bitch and whine about being "persecuted":

I don't even view these cattle as people

I certainly don't give a fuck about their feelings

[infernal-ism]

I apologize but I feel like I'm talking largely to myself tbh. it usually doesn't bother me, but I'm gonna say — and I'm sure it's gonna disappoint plenty of people. yes, Saint is bi-gendered. and this does, in fact, mean that he can switch between the physical characteristics of either, but that I spent so much of his conceptualizations hyper-masculinizing him to a point, especially trying to fit into a type of dynamic where I feel like people expect masculine muses to fit. yes, he can and is able to be the more dominant participant, but let's clear up what the fuck that even means to both him and to me:

it does NOT mean, you should expect him to take on the characteristics of the masculine ( ie a penis ) just because the other character has the same equipment he feels like having these days. you'll bump uglies as far as I'm concerned.

no, he won't change it because it's possible. he'll do so when he feels like it.

yes, he's perfectly capable of being dominant while getting dicked. please broaden your horizons on dominance and submission.

dominance / submission ≠ top / bottom.

as someone who's had to play a shorter male muse, the tall tree men on main ( Saint included ) doesn't automatically mean a shorter muse isn't completely comfortable with their height. the same way taller femme's aren't upset about theirs. I know I tease people about it, but only if I've seen it bother them. Saint's just like that.

it makes me side eye when someone says ��oh, but you could just change”. yeah, and the moon rises at night what of it.

if I read a character is gay man or a straight woman, I hesitate to consider shipping, because shit is complex and he's got parts that align in some ways more than others. and yes, being of both genders and being able to switch at whatever time he feels ( I mean he has a male animated ( bc I think the way the females are drawn are incredibly cookie cutter and make me 😬 ) and a female rl ( because it's hard to find a male that I like vs a female, ironic it's the same issue in reverse ). if I could depict how fluid he is, I would.

let me sit you down when I say this, SAINT HAS A PUSSY NINE TIMES OUT OF TEN. do you understand what 2 : 1 means? goddess during the day ( morning and evening ), only considered a god at night. his Venus ( the feminine ruler and divine feminine) is a raging influence during the day, while Mars ( the masculine ruler and the divine masculine ) is largely in the night. it might feel is insignificant, but it's a major energy shift.

I take into consideration the energies that effect him, how he feels ( this man has been hyper-masculine for more than half of his conceptualized and roleplayed life, it effects his mentality ), and how these things factor into his aus even.

I just mean this to say: if you have issues with feminine muses, or even the mention of pussy, there's a door for you.

and for my feminine muses, Saint isn't your daily dose of male attention. he's more like your best friend that wants to eat your coochie and get off on watching you do the same. idk. I would like to interact with more, but there needs to be a bit of an understanding, do you feel me?

I feel like these are things that can sometimes shift away from a character. you need to understand that he's not going to shift and change to scratch your itch of being dicked. he'll do it if he wants to, and only then. and if he's comfortable with you, he will. if he feels like you're not after him for one thing, it's likely to happen because he does enjoy being connected to you this way.

[anthurak]

So here’s a rather dark idea of something we could potentially see explored with Ruby, even if only in a hypothetical sense.

Looking back at Volumes 7 and 8, we can see that a core part of Ironwood’s character, and really that of the Atlas Military as a whole, is a belief that he was/should be this logical, pragmatic soldier without the ‘weakness’ of emotions. A very ‘I’m a very strong and smart hero man who don’t need no feelings’ mentality.

Of course, we see that in practice, this mentality took the form of Ironwood and the rest of his subordinates/minions simply trying to REPRESS all of their doubts, insecurities, fears and more. Which in turn left them generally unable to actually DEAL with all those emotions whenever they reared up. And also led to Ironwood and all his cronies being repeatedly played like a cheap kazoo by Salem, Cinder, Watts, Tyrian, Ruby, Qrow, Robyn, basically ANYONE with actual emotional intelligence.

So what does this have to do with Ruby?

Well let’s take a look back at the state Ruby spent much of Volume 9 in. Utterly overwhelmed by the pain, trauma and feelings of responsibility, guilt and failure. And while she was able to get help and move past this state by the end of the volume, I think it’s clear that the issues we saw Ruby grappling with this volume are in no way fully resolved. Meaning it’s all too probable that we might see Ruby grappling with this state again.

Ruby would never consider her feelings and emotions to somehow be a ‘weakness’ like Ironwood did, nor would she ever deliberately try to repress them. But given what we’ve seen, I think it’s entirely possible to see Ruby being so overwhelmed that she becomes NUMB to her emotions instead.

Now, let’s combine this with all the times we’ve seen Ruby display both clever tactics and frankly ruthless pragmatism.

In a darkly ironic twist, I think it’s all too feasible to imagine a hypothetical scenario wherein Ruby in many ways becomes the very cold, unfeeling, logical, pragmatic fighter and leader that Ironwood was so desperate to be.

While of course also showcasing why all that is actually a VERY BAD THING for Ruby, or really ANYONE.

[hyperpotamianarch]

Sha'ul HaMelech

So, I didn't get to write about Tanach lately. Since one of my daily studies (which only exists for my college, but it can still be fun sometimes) is a chapter from Nevi'im Rishonim, though, I have some stuff to say. Usually I pour my random thoughts on fellow Torah studiers around me, but that works best when they have a reason to study the same thing as me (Parashat Shavua`), or when they might have an interest in it for other reasons (Halacha). The study of the Tanach is a bit different, in that the people I'm around usually have a very different outlook on it than me, which makes talking to them about it a bit difficult. When I'm thinking of an original interpretation to a possuk, I'm not sure I want to hear the Midrash again. I know what it says, and I'm not sure this helps with the Pəshat, thank you very much.

So, that's just a preface to explain why I put my thoughts on Sha'ul HaMelech over here. To begin with that:

The perception of Sha'ul among Jewish circles is interesting. This is the failed king, after all. I hesitate to say which view is most common, because I was used to saying one is but have since (I think) encountered quite a few people who had the other, but two possible ways emerge: the sinful, bad king and the righteous king who fell and failed. As a general rule, I hold to the latter: Sha'ul had much potential, but he eventually failed. But today, I wish to talk about his coronation.

Now, picture this: you are but a humble shepherd (or maybe cowherd. Or just herd animals), of the youngest of the 12 tribes of Israel. You're not an important person, though you are remarkably tall.

Your father's donkeys have been lost, and naturally, you headed out with your servant to look for them all over the place. You might be vaguely aware that there is some turmoil among the Israelites - people asked the prophet for a king or something. That has nothing to do with you, though.

But you can't seem to find the donkeys, and you're hungry, and you tell your servant that at this point your father probably worries over you more than the donkeys. Your servant, however, remarks that there's a prophet close by and you could just ask him about the donkeys. When you raise objections over payments, the servant says he has some money. So they go there, and there seems to be a celebration or something.

To skip ahead a bit, when you meet the prophet, he starts telling you wierd things about greatness, telling him not to worry over the donkeys and that you'll eat with him. The next morning he talks to you alone, tells you of a few signs you will see on your way and anoints you as king. You go home and tell nobody about that, though they saw you start prophesizing, which is so odd there's a new phrase named after you: "Is Sha'ul among the prophets as well?"

A couple of days later, all the people of Israel come gather, for the occasion of crowning their first king. And how does Shəmu'el start this gathering?

“Thus said the Hashem, the G-d of Israel: ‘I brought Israel out of Egypt, and I delivered you from the hands of the Egyptians and of all the kingdoms that oppressed you.’ But today you have rejected your G-d who delivered you from all your troubles and calamities. For you said to Him: 'set up a king over us!’"

-1 Samuel 10, 18-19, Sefaria translation with minor edits

I don't know about you, but if I was Sha'ul in this situation, and I know that I am the king who is to be crowned today... I'd probably have hid too. Usually it's viewed as him simply being humble, and there are certainly other occasions where we see him being humble - such as him not telling his uncle of his anointment, but here... here, I found myself wondering if this threatening opening made Sha'ul scared. He's realizing that he's being put in this position not because it's G-d's will to give the Israelites a king, but because the Israelites insisted. It doesn't help that many people don't appreciate him being appointed king and mock him.

Then, of course, the whole story with Yavesh Gil`ad happens: king Naḥash comes to take over the east side of the Jordan river, and the Yaveshites ask for help. Now, in the Tanachic context we already know that Yavesh is tied to Binyamin, Sha'ul's tribe, through marriage (following the Levite's Concubine story in the book of Judges). That may or may not have had an effect on Sha'ul's decision. However, his next act of butchering two of his bulls and sending it all around Israek serves multiple purposes: firstly, Sha'ul is still dealing with his own cattle. That's not exactly a kingly job. Clearly, his coronation led to practically nothing. Secondly, Sha'ul does assert authority with this - by saying "if you don't come with me and with Shəmu'el I'll do that to your cattle" he's showing that he's the king and he can choose to do that. Thirdly, of course, this parallels the Levite cutting his own concubine to twelve parts and sending it all around Israel.

I don't see a need to detail what happened later. Suffice to say that Sha'ul won. His first act as the actual king following that is pardoning the people who refused to accept him, not wanting to sully the victory with executions. And Shəmu'el declares that they're all going to the Gilgal to renew Sha'ul kingship.

Picture yourselves in Sha'ul's place, again. You just won a battle against the `Amonites, and against a king who was probably much more experienced than you. You saved your kin from enslavement. Your kingship is widely accepted, and you're celebrating before G-d. Then Shəmu'el, your mentor, says he wants to say a few words. You know he led the Israelites up until now, and that now that he's giving the reins to you, he probably wants to make his final speech as a leader. He's still going to be here as a prophet, of course, but he's no longer the Judge.

He starts it up with asking if anyone has unfinished business with him. Did he take anything from anyone unjustly? Did he accept any payment for his role? The Israelites all answer what all of you already know they will: no, he hasn't. He asks G-d and you - G-d's Anointed One - to be witnesses to that, which you accept.

Then he starts another speech about the history of Israel. This time it's more detailed. And, once again, he reminds the Israelites how bad them asking for a king is,

Now, logically, I'm sure Sha'ul realized this had nothing to do with him specifically. The mere idea of a king, or perhaps the idea of asking for a king in this way during this time, is what Shəmu'el is speaking against. G-d chose Sha'ul because he's fit for the task, because he really is a good choice. The fact he was asked to choose a king was bad, but the chosen king wasn't. Logically, Sha'ul must know that.

But from his perspective, it's different. From his perspective, this is the second time Shəmu'el criticizes his role - which he didn't ask for. He was forced to enter a position that Shəmu'el had something against from the very beginning. In his day of victory, the day he was recrowned as king, what Shəmu'el has to say is that he really shouldn't have done this in the first place. Sha'ul starts his kingship feeling that Shəmu'el has something against him, and that quite possibly colors the rest of his reign. Maybe this explains a couple of his bad decisions later on.

[spacekatdet]

Already seen victim blaming on xitter 👍 Lets not do that and lets leave the hermits alone. Make up your own minds on if you should support Iskall. But I feel like if one of his VH team members leaving for differing morals, the hermits going back 6 plus years to remove him from thumbnails and titles, and removing him from the site and merch should be enough Doc even said they can't talk about it which could mean anything, including something legal. Mumbo said there were no minors invovled but doesn't mean others weren't since there ARE victims Just leave the hermits be, and let the victims decide if they want to come out. And stop victim blaming lmao

[bisexualcherdegre]

D:BH Rarepairsweek 7 | @dbhrarepairs

Day 3: Hank/Markus After the revolution, Markus and Hank are both trying to deal with the new situation they've been handed. Their paths cross.

[slavhew]

stuck in me stuck to you

[umemiyan]

oh btw since i didn’t get to add him in the post earlier because i literally ran out of room: kaiser’s stability levels noticeably decrease even further when he misses me. he’s exponentially cuntier but also has moments where he’s so silent that people are like... afraid lmfao

he tries to throw himself into plays so extra hard until he’s overdoing it and/or having a meltdown because he screwed up until noa or someone calls me like “how quickly can we arrange to get you here???”

[robocops-a-christ-allegory]

"Batman doesnt beat up mentally ill people he helps all his villains!" you guys have to fucking accept there are 8 billion batman comics and batman Media and that for every panel of Batman trying to help Harvey theres 5 of Batman punching him in the face and saying hes beyond saving. Please. Please.

[cloudeling]

fascinating 2 me how often people talk abt cass being bruce's favourite as if its just a silly funsies thing when most of the traits he praises/shows approval for in her are extremely unhealthy

[bigshoeswamp]

as someone who works with conflict, i really just hate it sometimes

[soulsxng]

Io, talk about your brother

Talk about... | Accepting!

"Luvi has been doing really well, since being discharged from Scelure. Before, you could really feel this...air of heaviness around him that made a lot of people nervous to be around him. It's still there, a little bit, but you can tell that even he feels a lot lighter than before."

"I think he still struggles a little bit here and there, but he's been good about asking for help when it gets to that point. He's even able to see Zahine here and there, again."

"I'm proud of him, is what I'm trying to say. And that I hope he'll continue to grow just like he has been..."

[paragonrobits]

some important calvin and hobbes facts in case you haven't read the original comic strip in a long time or only absorbed stuff on it from memes and out of context bits on here:

Calvin's last name has never been given, and neither has any of his parent's names. This was actually why his uncle Max only showed up for a brief storyline; the creator of the comic, Bill Watterson, ultimately felt that while it was fine to have him as someone for his parents to talk to, it felt far too awkward to never have Max refer to them by name and he never made a return appearance.

The general tone of the comic is fairly light-hearted, with a big emphasis on goofy slapstick comedy contrasted by clever wordplay and often surprising adult-centered jokes that'll hit you like a slap. A big part of the comedy is, as Watterson put it (paraphrased) "It's really funny to me when people express deeply stupid ideas with really fancy terminology." One notable example you might have seen is that one bit where Calvin asks his mom for money to buy a Satan-worshiping rock album and his mom replies that there's nothing genuine about them and they're just putting on the attitude for shock value, and comisserates with Calvin as he deplores that mainstream nihilism can't be trusted. He concludes that childhood is disillusioning.

There is a LOT of criticism of the extreme materialism and selfish mentality of the late 80s, when the comic was initially written. This may go a long way to explain how its aged so well; much of what it criticizes resonates well with people today.

Bill Watterson views comic strips a legitimate form of artwork, and repeatedly fought to have more space to draw more beautiful and artistic backgrounds, which was a very hard fight and unpopular even with other comic strip artists. He eventually did win some compromises and a lot of Calvin And Hobbes' artwork shows it, with the use of space to indicate time as well as a sharp contrast between the often plain environments of mundane life contrasted by the wildly beautiful imagery of Calvin's imagination (which often sports realistic depictions in an art shift of sorts).

Hobbes is explicitly not an imaginary friend, by word of Watterson himself. We don't know WHAT he is exactly, and Hobbes is apparently unaware of the strange nature of his reality; people look at him and only see an ordinary stuffed tiger plushie, but he has a tangible effect on the world that would be physically impossible for Calvin to do on his own. He's apparently been around for a while, and was apparently around when Calvin was a young baby.

On that note; Hobbes has implicitly killed (notably treated as both a gag and also with the vibe of 'he's a tiger, duh') and while he doesn't do it again on-screen, he doesn't have any moral issues about it. Calvin claims that he's never had trouble bringing Hobbes to school because the last time he did, Hobbes killed and ate a bully named Tommy Chestnut and simply comments that it was gross and he needed a bath. Calvin's tried to repeat this again, but Hobbes was grossed out at the thought having to eat a kid raw and not being allowed to use an oven first, or complaining that children are too fattening.

Hobbes became gradually less human-like in body language and more like an actual cat in both body language and behavior; this was due to Watterson drawing more inspiration from his cat, who also inspired a lot of Hobbes' running gags, such as pouncing on Calvin when he got home. Several years into the syndication of the strip, Watterson's cat passed away, and he did a tribute to her with a comic strip of the two of them agreeing to try to dream together so they can keep playing when they have to sleep; Watterson's commentary (if I recall right), remarks on his cat: "We can see each other again in dreams."

[busket]

I notice sometimes in queer and feminist spaces the idea of "this group is generally given more leniency and privileges in wider society; it's okay for us to be critical or even a little nasty to them because anywhere else they'd be praised". and that's understandable, i think. when you have real issues with men and how men act, it's ok to express that and to mock mens behavior. cis men who are generally praised and celebrated in society should be able to take some mean jokes or criticisms and accept they're not always going to be lauded.

but since queer and feminist spaces are generally more accepting of trans people and the wider society is not, this is also projected on to trans men. "trans men are men" was an affirming statement to our validity, but that was interpreted as "since trans men are men, and men are celebrated by society, I get to be a little nasty to them because the rest of society worships men. they can take it."

but the rest of society doesn't have that same level of trans acceptance. they don't see trans men as men, they see trans men as mentally ill, broken, mutilated women. so it's absolutely aggravating when we turn to queer and feminist spaces for solidarity, we face the same reactive nastiness cis men get and are told "come on, trans men are men. you are celebrated in society. you can take it." and when we look at the rest of society there's no celebration. there's only more nastiness and cruelty. so how can we "take it" when we have no community that accepts us and treats us without mockery? we don't have the shelter of acceptance that cis men have in the status quo, and sometimes we can't find a small umbrella of acceptance in queer communities either.

to be honest, I think a lot of people view trans men as a safe punching bag to vent their frustrations with men. you can mistreat a trans man and he's probably not going to fight you back since he's already so beat down. you can feel like you put a man in his place, you can feel like you're resisting the patriarchy. but all you did was act cruel to a marginalized person. and you know if you treated a cis man like that you might be putting yourself in danger, cos he might not take it lying down and he might not care as much about your wellbeing!

trans men are men, but trans men are not cis men. cis men are lauded and celebrated in society as long as they conform to the gender roles that were placed on them at birth. and this privilege is extremely conditional and not equally spread between men of different sexualities, races, ethnicities, ability, age, etc; trans men and intersex men are thrown to the side completely. I understand needing to vent about men. trans men do it too. but a persistent attitude of resentment and cruelty towards all men, including trans men, is not activism. all you do is push marginalized men out of the only communities they belong