#but this post isn't really about that. well it kinda is. but it can be understood without shipping goggles. i hope

[panlight]

also continuing off the Informed Traits discussion, just how much of Caslisle's compassion/kindness is informed? Bella and Edward both make it seem like he's this saintly figure and pillar of goodness, but then there's moments where he does things that make you wonder if the view on him is just really rose-tinted.

Again, going back on BD where he invites his friends to witness and doesn't seem to care that they're hunting humans just outside forks/la push and let's them stay even after already knowing what their presence triggers the tribe to phase, the book also reveals that he took Jacob's blood sample to study without his consent?? Like a lab experiment???? (I learned this through a post showcasing that part in the book) Also in a podcast I listen to that discusses the plot of MS, he apparently fakes being Billy's distant relative (impersonating an indigenous person uhhmmm 😬) and, well,,,, lets just say I can see why some people think that entire phone call just gave colonizer vibes. AND!!! didn't he drug a woman to steal their car and kinda doesn't react much when they caused a massive car pileup??

On the one hand i dont mind if it's meant to show us that even Carlisle's sense of morality is flawed, but between Bella's "the Cullens are good to the core" and every time Edward talks about him in MS, it's feels more to me like another unreliable narrator trope.

This one is harder for me because, see, I want the compassion to be real because I think the concept of a vampire blessed/cursed with Super Compassion is legit fascinating! As I've said about 23470234 times, my favorite aspect of vampire stories is how they become a vampire, how you cope, the choices you make, what you accept and what you deny about your new reality. The idea that for this one guy, becoming a vampire made him even more compassionate is just the kind of twist on it that I've never seen anywhere else and I think it's really interesting, actually. A dud of a superpower, sure; the innate push-pull of vampire instincts vs super compassion compels me, though.

But obviously I can see where it comes from that it could be an unreliable narrator thing or outright lie. Or at least a show vs tell problem where we're told he's compassionate but actions suggests otherwise.

I think it falls apart in two major ways:

The protagonist-centered morality. Everything in the story is about facilitating the E/B romance. Carlisle's alleged compassion can only help that, he can't hinder it. They HAVE to move back to Forks so the story can happen, he can't say "huh maybe it's NOT compassionate to move back to a place where people know what we are and are terrified of us." He can't refuse to drug the soccer mom because they have to save Bella! He can't object to having witnesses gather in Forks and force more teenage boys to phase and put humans at risk of being eaten because we have to save Renesmee! He can compassionately offer Bree surrender, but neither he nor Esme can do any more than that to try and save her, because that would complicate Bella's upcoming wedding. The Bella-centricity of it all sits like a supermassive black hole in the middle of the story, disrupting the orbits and bending the light of the other characters.

Carlisle can't be any more compassionate than his author, and that limits him. We had a fandom discussion about this a few years ago, but basically because SM doesn't see the problems with how the Quileute characters are treated in the story, none of the characters can, either. I remember calling it the moral version of how Alice is supposed to be a fashionista, but because SM doesn't really know anything about high fashion, there's a lot of 'tell' about her being this fashion icon but the actual show of clothes in the story doesn't live up to it. Or Carlisle himself -- he's supposed to be this genius doctor who has studied medicine and science for centuries, but SM isn't a doctor or a scientist, so some of the stuff she makes him say doesn't live up to the idea she planted. SM totally missed the settler-colonial stuff, the dehumanizing language, etc etc, so none of the characters, not even Compassionate Carlisle or Power-of-Heart Esme can.

tl;dr I like to think the compassion is real but hindered by the narrative insisting on prioritizing the love story AND Carlisle being unable to be more compassionate than his author. But that's because I WANT it to be real because I think the concept is really interesting, even if the execution is lacking. I don't need or want him to be Perfect or a Saint, and I'm sure existing as a VAMPIRE of all things would naturally come into conflict with compassion all the time (examples in the book is him not wanting to kill James and it leading to the extended hunt instead; offering surrender to Bree but knowing if he goes against the Volturi they could kill the whole family; telling Sam in BD that this isn't his fight and 'don't get your family slaughtered for pride,' even as Sam insists they have to be there for Jacob and Jacob has to be there for Nessie [blargh].) and that struggle and how he deals with it when he's in a situation with no Compassionate choice is available would be great. Even that car chase in Midnight Sun could maybe work if the story gave Carlisle any room to protest until Alice insists it's the Only Way!!!! or whatever, and some follow up where like oh huh weird some random charity swooped in to pay all the medical bills of everyone involved in the pile-up and bought them all new cars. If Edward, Jasper, etc can't turn off their gifts, Carlisle shouldn't be able to either, even when being forced into uncompassionate actions. But SM doesn't care. She only cares about Carlisle, let alone his compassion, inasmuch as she needed a kindly father figure to set up the vegetarian vampire thing and for Bella to have a convenient doctor.

[chamanthi-crab]

Starting Episode 8! I'm thought i was on track to finish by the end of 2024 but unfortunately not might just post this as and then continue later

I dont remember what this key is. Is this the key as the owner of the world, key to the golden land?

Oh my god she is so small

Is this going to be a happy ending with Ange with them...

Awww it's really nice seeing them all interact like this

Pumpkin tea does sound good

Is Kinzo supposed to be alive at this point in time

This Genji and Kinzo interaction reminds me of Ronove and Beatrice when he kept asking her to maintain her dignity as well

So this is a tale to remember their family members and think for themselves how they are without the impression of other people telling them or to understand and remember all her family members fondly or as good people

I still liking clapping along with everyone lol

I dont know if we're just being gaslit with this episode or if its a pick what you want to believe

It's cute seeing Eva doting on Ange

It's Schrodinger's almond

Im getting nervous with this cake slice

Okay i still won

I'm getting nervous with the quizzes but I will do my best

So these pieces are all aware of what happened and this truly is for Ange. To remember a time when she was happy with everyone. Eva tried to do her best but it was just too hard with the unconditional unrewarded love that it warped her

99+ x = ambulance x = ambulance - 99

130 - x = car x = 130 - car ambulance - 99 = 130 - car

car = 0.5*99 49.5 ambulance + car = 229

hah some of my work to try figure it out, yeah nope

That ambulance puzzle did me in, i'm not adept enough at japanese wordplay for this

I appreciate the effort they went through with some of puzzles to be solvable in English as well

w white choco watermelon cookies cake

p pepper jack cheese picante potatoes

a anchony pizza albacore tuna

o lemonade orangelime sherbet

a choucreme cake amana almond choco sherbet lemon

s shiosenbei sherbet

k kare to kimchi

n coffee green tea

hah some more of the list to keep track. The voice lines against the text is getting me mixed up with Shannon's puzzle. I wonder what the original word was. I think its funny that they say black coffee in the examples but the puzzle is to figure that out. Oh wait maybe lemonade is the one to figure out in the original?

S P W Sh C V M

W + S - P XXX S+M (-P -W) XXX Sh+V -S XXX C+V-S-W-P XXX

1 P W C M V __ Sh S 2 P W C M V S ___ Sh

3 P W M V __ Sh S C 4 S P W M V __ Sh C

5 W M V __ Sh C S P 6 W P M V __ S C Sh

7 W M __ P V S C Sh 8 P W M __ S C Sh V

9 M __ P W S Sh C V 10 W M ____ P S C V Sh

11 ____ W M P S C V Sh

01234 __ 56 0 12345_6 0123_456 01234_56 012_3456 0123_456 01_23456 012_3456 0_123456 01_23456 _0123456

yeah the minimum has to be 11....

oh wait the puzzle said to carry each *person to the opposite bank, i guess it doesn't matter about the livestock or the food if it gets lost

Now I'm really doubting a happy ending with this...more like an ending of acceptance and moving forward rather at the best

Oh is finally telling what he didn't get a chance to tell

geez Rudolph you're an ass. That is all your fault

Kind related to how blood isn't the strongest tie but the bonds that you natured. But in some cases blood or belief in it can still block that bond from fully forming

Oof hopefully I can do these last 4, I only missed Nanjo-sensei's so far I think

eh one puzzle but two medals. Does what I pick change the outcome? okay no need to pick haha I wouldve also picked the red one

Please dont Monty hall me oh man now we gotta switch

Something about fragments with these probability discussion

Yay now for the last two

...or not

Ange falls asleep and then so will I

Oh man I kinda want to cry

Huh I got 16 medals...is that right

Oh shittttt Battler doll cuteeee awwwwwww Thats a good present

I wonder if in the future she will see that doll and remember

Uh oh this is like that one from episode 6 where can't escape the room

Is Bernkastel the cat leading Ange?

Looks like we have more murders again

What is this purple text? Key statements for the mystery?

If the culprit must not die...and the culprit can lie but others cannot lie, you'd mainly have to find a contradiction in the statements between a few people. I'd probably have to get back and read those again

Rereading Bernkastel's tale

But can there be multiple culprits for different parts? And Bernkastel's wording is rather suspicious

I think someone or some people in the first twilight were not dead which could mean at least one person was lying when checking their parents. Genji was checked by Nanjo and Kanon so they probably are not the culprits here

Culprit of the first twilight killed six people...so probably not their parents but also Krauss and Natsuhi so that would narrow it down to Battler and George as the one for the first twilight...i don't think both of them are the culprit

The surviving parents could also be a culprit if they murder as well...

I do think Nanjo was killed outside the guest house so yeah he was not a culprit

When they went to see Natsuhi and Krauss the parents could have slipped out i don't know if they reopened the dining the room or just taped it

Hm is the definition of sealing the same as before and what level...cause Battler said the dining room was sealed and that's a bit suspicious cause I guess his parents could have left in that time to the outside

Shannon's death and the remainder could've been done by George's parents or Battler's parents, and they also did the rest of the murders so they could all cooperate with their kid who is also a culprit to lock doors and such in the guest house

George and Battler's statements feel like they contradict each other for Nanjo's death

Maria I will assume is not a culprit so guaranteed innocent. George can't kill an adult according to Maria so he could kill Shannon or Kanon or Jessica. If that's the case then if he was the culprit then someone else should've killed the folks in the first twilight but that would not match up

I'm leaning on Battler and maybe Rudolph and Kyrie as the culprits

Okay so I can select multiple people for the culprit select..do I click on them to select or do I need to black everything out?

I'll look at the hints now

I kinda want a full text version so I can see everything without clicking on the buttons

Going through the hints haha I feel like I jumped ahead with my reasoning rather than doing these more logical steps

Regarding the closed room, only Krauss and Natsuhi's doesn't quite make sense to me. Cause the other one's can be explained by the parents locking the door to the dining hall. The child can lock the guest house door.

Oh wait

Maybe they did the switcheroo technique in that previous game in episode 6 i think. So the child kills 4 in the dining hall, then during the break time the child and one parent goes to Natsuhi's room and the child kills both of them so now they have six victims, then the parent locks the door from the inside and hides, and when everyone comes to their room, the child diverts attention and lets the parent slip out during that time. The parent will escape before the room is sealed up and then they can leave the mansion

I feel like I started with the last hint on the first page lmao

I didn't think about the first twilight culprit being locked up in Natsuhi's room, but I think my theory also does not contradict anything maybe...though might be a bit difficult. Battler could kill an adult that was not denied...huh maybe their translation wording is weird for that part?

Wait are they actually gonna give the answer through these hints

Ange is trapped as a spectator in the game

oh man and she has to see her family orchestrating this what torture

dang Battler really playing it up lmao

haha Maria

Oh shit Erika????? she's the cat???? or the cat got her

EVA-BEATRICE too??

Oh yeah it was a logic puzzle right

I remember one time I was getting a crisis about getting dumber and my brain being less flexible that I started doing a whole bunch of them

Yeah Battler you forgot about finding Ange afterwards

So essentially those two keys are for Ange to pick if the witch did it or that humans did it is true

Except why would Featherine have Eva's diary

so the key is for the diary

Well goats do eat plants

Oh...i guess not just plants....

Oh diary in the beginning was in the coffin so it must be in the church right?

I really hope most of them can escape...I dont know it just really feels that Bernkastel is tricking Ange and no matter the ending it won't be good regardless of opening the diary or not

I started umineko and am properly going through it (third times the charm whoo). Hoping i get enough momentum to finish it

I looked up word count it doesnt seem too bad around 1.1 million thats almost like erha (i say as someone who got through only about 2/3 of erha lol someday ill finish it)

Im gonna say i do not like the sound of crying or kids throwing a tantrum [i think cause i feel traumatized by my cousin's children] so the U-u-u crying of Maria was driving me insane i had to mute and speed through. The voice doesnt bother that much when her mood is good

I got into the music from it cause it was by shikata akiko sometime maybe 2015 or 2016 cause they were absolutely beautiful songs, so i was interested in playing it eventually

[royalarchivist]

[A sad violin song plays over an image of a sad hamster]

Pac: This doesn't have anything to do with me – I wear a blue sweatshirt, you're crazy, this mouse doesn't even have a sweatshirt, this hamster! [Reading chat] Am I a depressed hamster?

[ Transcript continued ↓ ]*

–

Pac: Actually– that's fine! I embrace that idea – of course I'm going to be depressed, are you crazy? [He hits his desk, then starts counting off people on his fingers] Fit is gone, Richarlyson is gone, Ramon is gone, Bagi and Empanada who were always there when we were there are also gone, I haven't seen them! It's just me and Tubbo, and sometimes Philza shows up.

Pac: I lost Chume Labs, I lost the Favela, I lost Murder Mystery, I lost Ilha Chume Labs, it's crazy! Look at how much I've lost, and I've gained nothing! Of course I'm going to be depressed, are you crazy?! How am I supposed to be happy?!

Pac: [Reading chat] "You have us Pac," that's true, thank you. No, that's true, sorry.

* NOTE: Please note that this is an incomplete transcript, as I was primarily relying on Aypierre's translation mod at the time and if I am not confident of the translation, I do not include it. As always, please feel free to add on translations or message me corrections.

[hopeaterart]

Okay, longer post on how I think 600 Strikes should've gone.

Okay, so full disclaimer before I start: I ADORE Epic: The Musical. I found out about it thanks to my sister showing me Monster, and I've been hyped for the release of every following Saga. It's what got me to start writing my own Greek Myth fic! The Vengeance Saga is no exception: all of it was a banger. My least favorite song of the lot wasn't even the one this post is about: it was 'Not Sorry for Loving You' (I don't. ljke Calypso). 600 Strikes, especially with the second half, is actually one of my favorite songs of the concept album.

HOWEVER, I've stated in my last post that the second half should've gone like THIS ↓

And I stand by this.

Now, before I really start, I don't actually imagine Poseidon taunting Odysseus with words. More like, laughing madly at him while he has a breakdown about what he's become. Full on Joker from Batman cackle. Poseidon is a violent misanthrope at best, and an insane maniac at worst.

Now, onto my first point: Poseidon is a god. And until Six Hundred Strikes, gods in Epic were portrayed as being insurmountable. I really liked that. I know that other people liked that. And having Poseidon remain unmoved even as Odysseus tortures him is would've really driven that in.

Just... imagine it: Odysseus has done what very few have done and bested a god. Still, the Lord of Tides refuses to lift up the storm, spitting him to the last moment. He's got no choice but to resort to drastic measures, and everything- the pain, the frustration, the hatred, both toward himself and the god- come spilling out as he stabs him with his own weapon over and over and over again.

He's throwing his words back in his face, making sure that Poseidon knows: every ounce of pain that Odysseus inflicts on him can be traced back to his own damn actions. But Poseidon isn't begging for mercy, or trying to retain a shred of dignity by gritting his teeth and enduring. He's goading him on. He's taunting him, he's laughing at him. He's laughing.

And why wouldn't he? He's done it, after all. He got what he wanted. Odysseus of Ithaca, the arrogant mortal who refused to finish the job, is no more. Only a ruthless, broken monster remains. One who's earned the right to get back to his kingdom.

("With everything you've done, how will you sleep at night?" becomes less of an attempt at getting the last word in, and more of a genuine curiosity.)

Now, my second point: it would muddy who, exactly, between Odysseus and Poseidon, who ends up getting their revenge. Now, in the actual musical, it's obviously Odysseus, and he deserves the win. The man has done nothing but take Ls since the Cyclops Saga, he deserves a W before making it back to Ithaca.

In canon, Poseidon is very much not pleased with how things end up turning out. But if Poseidon had been pleased with Odysseus

Physically- well, it's still Odysseus. He brought Poseidon to his knees with a windbag, his own storm, and the ghosts of his entire fleet. And then, he picks up his own trident and goes to absolute town on him. Even if Poseidon is happy about getting his shit rocked , he's still getting his shit rocked.

But philosophically? I'd argue that Poseidon is the winner here.

For the entirety of Act 1, Odysseus believes in Open Arms (RIP Polites) and to his credit, it does work. First with the Lotus Eaters to find more food (even if it led him right to Polyphemus, they are high as balls), and then Circe to save his men. He also doesn't get to see it, but it's also more or less what happens between Telemachus and Athena, which eventually leads to his freedom from Calypso. Shit, the one time he decides to use it in Act 2, it nearly works on Poseidon himself in Get in the Water! The problem is that the world isn't always kind, and sometimes, it'll react to open arms by stabbing you in the chest. Just look at what happened with the cyclops.

Meanwhile, Poseidon believes in Ruthlessness. And being ruthless has served Odysseus very well: the Trojan Horse, killing the infant to save his family, also Circe to save his men (before she pulled out the Other Ways lmao), neutralizing the Sirens, the sacrifice for Scylla, even sacrificing his own crew to stay alive. The problem is that both of these characters confuse being ruthless with being cruel, and that's what fucks Odysseus over.

Oh well. Being ruthless and cruel was just what Odysseus needed to deal with Poseidon. And it's what will get him through the suitors, so he can finally reunite with his son and wife.

Lesson learned.

(Also, Athena is Odysseus' mentor, and a well-documented thing in actual Greek Myth (and sadly untouched in the musical even if I understand why) is that Poseidon and Athena do not like each other. Documented rivals. What happens is that he successfully sank his claws in her abandoned pupil, and twisted Odysseus into a monster that would horrify his past self even before Open Arms. In the face of spitting his least favorite niece like that, getting repeatedly stabbed was absolutely worth it)

[t4tadrienette]

Goku definitely wanted to train Gohan for fun, just like Grandpa Gohan did with him, but then he wanted to respect Chichi's desire of him not becoming a fighter. He also spent 4 years of Gohan's life together and living peacefully.

But then he died, and when he came back, he found that Gohan was turned into a fighter by Piccolo, fair, I guess. He didn't see him fight, tho, he doesn't know the story behind him becoming a fighter, just that he was trained by Piccolo.

Then Gohan wants to go to Namek to find the dragon balls because he has to make sure their dead friends come back, and Goku goes wow that sounds like me, he also can't stand to stay on the side when it comes to these things.

Weeks pass, and now he's finally able to reach them on Namek. They have to fight, of course. Things happen. He's the only chance they have to defeat Freezer. Things fall apart now, Goku becomes Super Saiyan and tells Gohan to take Piccolo and get away. Goku is stuck alone on Namek. He saves himself by pure luck. He decides to stay where he is, to learn something new, to be able to also control his Super Saiyan state.

A year passes, and he comes back to earth. News from the future, saying that in 3 years, there's gonna be a new threat. They have to train, Gohan wants to train with him and Piccolo to fight this new threat. The three years have passed, and now there's another threat outside of the androids. Goku finally healed, he gets Gohan and tells him they're gonna train to defeat Cell. Gohan accepts to train with him. Gohan puts his all into that training, and Goku finds out Gohan has so many capabilities than what he shows. That's good! They have a chance at defeating Cell, maybe.

They finish their training, Goku wants Gohan to spend as much time with Chichi, and he wants to spend the remaining days before the Cell games as a family, you never know. The Cell games start, and Goku goes first to study him, to see how strong he is and if Gohan might have a chance. Oh, Gohan definitely has a chance. Come on, Gohan, now is your turn, I can tell you know you're stronger. Gohan is having difficulties, tho, Goku says it's just a matter of time before his fighting instict and anger sets in. But Gohan doesn't like fighting. That knowledge comes to Goku as a shock. He always assumed Gohan was fighting for the safety of the earth and for the love of fighting as well. At the end of the day, how could he think different, he never truly saw Gohan fighting, and at the end of the day, he was just picking up what Piccolo started in the first place. He never truly showed a disliking for fighting, or at least he never told him. He didn't know how in his first fighting against the Saiyans, he was petrified by fear. He wasn't there for the love of fighting, but because he had to, since he had this power.

Goku realises he miscalculated this. He immediately tells Krillin to pass him a bean so that he can get back into shape to go help him. Of course, Cell stops him before that. After Cell started to attack the others, finally Gohan snapped and unleashed his power, Goku was right after all. Gohan was definitely more powerful than him. He was the right warrior to defeat him. Gohan needs to defeat him once and for all, tho, but he doesn't. He says he has to have a slow and painful death. Those are some shocking words coming from Gohan. It doesn't sound like him. Well, now that has brought some problem, Cell is now about to explode and take all the earth with him. Now Goku has to make a decision. He will sacrifice himself. At the end of the day, he was the one to put Gohan in that position in the first place. It's only fair for him to do that. But, his sacrifice is useless, Cell comes back. Gohan tries his hardest, but his arm is broken. How can he defeat him now. But Goku is there to help him find the strenght and the others too. In the end, Gohan finds the strength to finally beat him.

It's time to revive people. There's still the problem of Goku not being able to be resurrected a second time. They think hey maybe we can use the dragon balls from Namek. But Goku stops them. He thinks that Bulma was right. He only attracts threats that put the earth in jeopardy, Piccolo, the Saiyans, the androids, and Cell. Maybe if he stays dead, they will stop coming. Like that, he will not put Gohan in danger anymore, Gohan will not have to fight anymore. So at the end of the day, it's better for him to stay away, rather than him staying with them, after all he was the one to put Gohan in that situation in the first place. In the end, he makes the selfless choice for Gohan. Maybe it's better for him not to have a father, but being safe, than having a father and being put into danger. At least, that's what he thinks is the right thing to do

[autisticcassandracain]

I dunno man I feel like most statements along the lines of ‘Batman isn’t REALLY x, he’s y’ don’t hold much water because usually, there’s a pretty good chance a number of writers over the years have written him as x, you just didn’t like it or think it doesn’t count for some reason.

For example ‘Batman isn’t REALLY a good parent, he’s actually a bad parent’, when Batman has been written as a good parent by a number of writers, and has, in addition, been written as realizing that he’s screwed up with his children and resolved to fix it by even more. At the same time, stating ‘Batman isn’t REALLY a bad parent, he’s actually a good parent’ is also incorrect, because Batman has been written as a bad parent by a number of writers, either intentionally or not; in addition, the pattern presented by the tug-of-war between writers who believe he should be a good parent and writers who don’t has, over the years, created an unintentional pattern that strongly resembles that of an abusive relationship. So, stating he is a good parent is inaccurate and dismisses a bunch of his canon writing, but stating he is a bad parent also dismisses a bunch of his canon writing and the intentions of the authors that wrote him.

The secret here is realizing that Batman has had so many writers over the years that it’s practically impossible to find a universal truth about him beyond the basic premise and maybe very, very basic characterization keystones. Writers with different beliefs about both the character and the world at large have written him in accordance to their worldview, and sometimes that worldview will align with yours, and sometimes it won’t.

Like, at this point, Batman is more an idea than he is a character. He is the bare-knuckled fight against injustice, but what ‘injustice’ is depends heavily on your worldview, as does what ‘bare-knuckled��� and ‘fight’ mean. Batman has been interpreted in dozens of different ways over the years, and singling out a few of those as the True Batman is largely arbitrary and dependent on your personal taste and belief in what the character should be. The only ‘objective’ measurement you could apply here are the old Golden Age comics, and I think most fans can agree that measuring modern Batman comics by how faithful they are to the Golden Age comics is, more often than not, a little ridiculous.

For the record, I do think that arguing about what Batman should be matters; if right-wing assholes use the character as a mouthpiece for their worldview we can and should critique that, but not because it’s ‘OOC’, but because the worldview espoused by those right-wing assholes is harmful and shitty. Batman should be a good parent, not because it’s ‘OOC’ for him to be a bad parent, but because having your paragon of justice be a child abuser is pretty shitty. Etc.

I don’t really have anywhere specific to go with this, I just think it’s a little strange when people try to view Batman as a character with a clear-cut characterization, rather than a concept that many people have approached in different ways over the years. Can that concept be mishandled? Sure. But it’s usually mishandled for reasons a bit more substantial than ‘a previous writer wrote it differently’.

[liquidstar]

a friend who'd wait :)

[cigarettes-and-black-eyeliner]

Has a person that has done nothing wrong to you in your life annoy you so much sometimes?? This is happening to me. [Person] has done nothing wrong. Well okay they have annoying(and wrong, might I add) opinions & ideas about stuff I'm passionate about. Honestly I get where they're coming from but I just don't get the conclusion they came to.

[23meteorstreet]

charlie literally saying he doesn't feel safe using the second room... i mean yeah at first it seems silly that charlie insists on sleeping in the same bed as frank & hiding the bathroom for 10+ years but really it's his way of making sure he always has someone to protect him at night

[paleangels13]

Helloo, I still exist did anyone even notice I was mostly gone lol

Anyone interested in ehhh...slightly unhinged work-related talk?

No?

Well. Too bad

Anyone that knows me irl please ignore the tags – I'm embarrassed ✨🥰

[sheyshen]

Something I want to build on with vincent at some point is how much the years of being an adventurer has taken a toll on him. he spent so long just being angry at the world but as he gets closer and closer to carteneau he does start recognizing how reckless he's been and the mistakes he's made over the years. friendships (especially with layla and nhea) helping him get a little closer to how he used to be before finally stopping and trying to do better for himself when he loses his leg. and the fact that guilt has really solidified in him to still make him push himself in his healing rather than combat (though sometimes still pushing himself too far) and how the years of treating himself like a weapon have taken a toll on his mind (he has terrible nightmares that only a select few have been able to help him through it)

[multi-lefaiye]

sometimes you have a trigger that cannot be reasonably and easily accommodated for, because it would require the people around you to police themselves to an extent that is not healthy for them to do.

that doesn't make your triggers and your trauma any less real or valid or *deserving* of accommodations, but deserving does not necessarily always mean that those accommodations are possible.

sometimes the best way to handle your triggers is to recognize what triggers you and do what you have to do to handle them when they come up. find coping mechanisms that work for you, and as much as you're able to, be open with the people in your life about it. even if they can't make sure you never have to interact with something that may trigger you, they can be a support system for you to ensure you'll survive the blows as they come.

it's not always possible to avoid what triggers you and it's not always possible for others to do that for you. (to be clear: i'm not at all saying people should *seek out* content that they *know* will trigger them or that they shouldn't remove themselves from situations that are triggering when they have the ability to do so, but that sometimes it's not that easy.)

(disclaimer: this is not psychological advice and i'm not saying this applies to everyone.)

[gudansoo]

me: asks my sister for help [after resentfully/passive aggressively not asking for a week]

my sister [interrupting me]: i can’t help you

me: asks an ed director to get the assistants to help me [after weeks of doing most all the work myself]

ed director: i offered but no one volunteered

me to my therapist: i feel like everything i do i have to do by myself

my therapist: why do you feel that way

me: ..............................

[screambirdscreaming]

This is very well articulated and true to many people's experiences, BUT with the diagnostic landscape as it stands, I think its really dangerous to assume that children who *do* get diagnosed are treated any more kindly.

Many kids who are diagnosed are not actually given words to explain their experiences. Their needs are simply dismissed as "symptoms" they have to "work on" and "get past".

Some kids are actually diagnosed with "Oppositional Defiant Disorder" - whereupon ANY need they express - even those which would be treated as reasonable from undiagnosed or neurotypical children! - is pathologized as "defiance". And yes, this diagnosis is highly racialized.

Honestly, knowing that ODD exists as a diagnosis really forces a person to challenge their perspective on what diagnosis is and means. Yes, diagnosis *can* be a tool of understanding, a way of banding together around shared struggles and generating shared language, tools, and resources. But it can also be a tool of opression and social control. And it *is*, currently for many people, a tool which is used to opress them. Even if it is also currently, in other people's experience, a tool of solidarity and support.

I think people who have experienced adult diagnosis as a relief, a breakthrough, a finding of community and tools of understanding - are sometimes prone to projecting this experience onto an imagined experience of childhood diagnosis, without looking into what childhood diagnosis actually entails.

It shouldn't be surprising, given the way children are dismissed, corralled, managed, and expected to conform to adult expectations at all times - that childhood diagnosis lacks the experience of autonomy, self-realization, and support found by those seeking diagnosis on their own terms as adults.

And it's understandable for people to say, "I wish I'd had this experience [of finding a diagnosis as an adult] as a child." But you can't just say, "I wish I'd been diagnosed as a child", and expect it to mean that - without MAKING childhood diagnosis mean something completely different than it currently does.

And I do absolutely think that it's crucial to change childhood diagnosis to mean eduction *of parents and caregivers* about the diagnosis, to mean kids are given tools and resources to express their needs and to process their experiences, to mean kids are given access to the same sort of supportive community that adults find through diagnosis.

But I actually don't think that's the first step. I think the first step is to create a cultural shift where we LISTEN TO CHILDREN WHEN THEY EXPRESS THEIR NEEDS, IN THEIR OWN WAYS, ON THEIR OWN TERMS. In general. For all children.

Where adults take seriously kids who are upset over problems adults find absurd. Where adults are willing to make accommodations that kids request even if they don't understand why it matters. Where kids aren't ridiculed or shut down for asking for things that don't make sense. Where kids who say they're in pain are treated as if they're in pain, not as if they're trying to get out of something. Where kids who say they need to sit something out are allowed to sit something out. Where adults make an effort to understand what kids are trying to communicate, even if they cant "use their words".

It turns out that having been dismissed by adults over something that really mattered to you as a kid is a near universal experience. And I'm not saying it's not *worse* for neurodivergent kids. I'm just saying that it's treated as bizarrely normalized in childcare that kids won't come to adults with really serious issues, like abuse. That they'll try to hide it. Why? Because they've learned that adults don't really understand them, and won't try to understand them. That adults don't really listen.

And it's hard, actually - as an adult working with kids, they'll come to you with a concern that seems absolutely ridiculous. Like, their classmate was bragging about how he's going to borrow his uncle's helicopter and fly to the north pole to meet santa. And THEY know santa isn't real and that the north pole is very dangerous - but they think it's absolutely credible that the kid could steal the helicopter, and they're terrified he's gonna get hurt. And you can't laugh! Not even a tiny little bit! You have to treat absolutely seriously their concern, and work it through with them. Because to them it's not ridiculous. They don't have the perspective you do, about what's real and possible and plausible and what isn't. All they'll see is that you've dismissed their real fear - and after that, why would they come to you with anything else they're scared of?

So you have to meet them where they are. You have to treat their experiences and perspectives as genuine, even when they don't make sense to you. You have to work towards understanding their reality, and what they're trying to convey to you, and what they want you to do for them in response. Even if they don't know what they want you to do! They're coming to you as an adult who will fix a problem for them, but if you fix the problem your way and it turns out that's not actually what they wanted, they *still* learn that adults don't understand them and can't help them. You have to learn to unpack all your concepts of what goes on in kids heads, and really meet them where they are. As complex individuals whose ways of thinking and being are probably totally different from your own, regardless of whether they - or you - are neurodivergent.

And this unpacking goes beyond kids. Not only do we need to take kids seriously, we need to take each other seriously. We need to build a world where people are able to understand and respect that other people are different from them without having to know Why and How. Where you don't NEED a diagnosis to be allowed to exist in a way that is different from other people.

anyway I don't mean to detract from the conversation about how alienating and destructive it is to your ability to relate to yourself, to grow up neurodivergent and having your own experiences constantly denied to you. I just think that while we're at it, we may as well address the problem at the root.

[silent-sentinels]

yeah we've got a guy called Yearning but apparently the kid's bested him with the sheer amount of homesickness she feels.

[medicinemane]

"This study says...", sorry mate but your bias is so on your sleeve that I'm not gonna be trusting any studies you cite because the thing is it's very easy to do a "study" that says anything you want, and it's just not worth my time to read tripe that just coincidentally supports exactly your position

(This is about "articles" that have "evidence" that just so happens to align with what the writer would want, and it's for some site that's gonna have massive bias. To make something up as an example, if Atheism.com has an article talking about how this study proves god doesn't exist... maybe you can see why I think they probably have their finger on the scale a bit and it's not really worth my time reading either the article or the study)

(Bonus summary of thoughts in the tags, realized why this most bothers me is it kinda stops being able to have an earnest conversation about important topics cause... yeah; this stuff is worth discussing but we can't when you're presenting evidence that's from one of the most biased sources on the subject you could possible have managed)