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

[unar-mage-ddon]

been thinking about brain (as if i don't think about him constantly already) and lately i always end up coming back to this one little thing that i promise isn't meant to be a burn against him — what's this guy's friend situation like?

these two lines in particular ("friends. cool." and "friendship's a beautiful thing." respectively) stick out the most, especially the second one because in japanese, the literal meaning is more like, "friendship's great; makes me jealous." which i've always found kind of interesting at this stage of the game because that kinda implies he still doesn't consider the other union leaders his friends yet, right?

so i went digging a little to see if he ever referred to them as such and came up with these two—

���where he uses the word 仲間 in reference to them, the first one referring to player. it can mean "friend," but it's a little closer to "ally" or like "acquaintance" — it's the same word you'd use to refer to coworkers or fishing buddies, people you'd hang out with or are friendly towards but not necessarily confide in, that sorta thing. close, but there's a slight difference.

(there's also this line — "well, since your friend is here and the makeup of this world is complicated, i'll try to keep things simple..." — where he refers to player as お友達, with the お at the beginning being a polite way to say "your friend." not really related to the rest of the post, i just think it's kinda funny since he normally speaks so casually)

anyway, all of this, to me, comes across as him keeping himself kind of emotionally distant from the others, not really letting himself think of them as more than just "allies working towards the same goal" for one reason or another.

and then the fountain scene happens:

his very last line in the game and he finally calls ephemer, at least, his friend. but it's not 友達, it's not even 友人; the word he uses is 親友, which is what you'd use for close friends — for all intents and purposes, best friend.

(自慢 means pride or to boast by the way. he's so proud of his best friend. i'm going to start eating glass)

so . i don't have a point to make with any of this i just wanted to share my thoughts from the last two days. brain makes me really emotional ok

[trainnster]

A Message for our Dearest Friends ✨

[[ Before anything, I do give a TRIGGER WARNING for those who may not want to read about anymore of Nirmal's escapades, and also who may not want to look into discussions of z!on!sm, harrassment of children, and just general nasty ass behavior from Karen Supreme over here. If you do read though, I very much thank you! ]]

So y'know unfortunately I was not added to The List™. Really sad, might just piss and die from it all. HOWEVER, I care about this fandom and I'm always for being petty, so I guess I'll take the bait and send a nice little message to our dearest friend @gordontheengineswifenirmal and her little bestie boo @drackara for trying to fuck with MY friends!! 😁

FIRST OFF, I am not nor will I ever take shit from some bitch who named herself after that fugly ass grey cat from Garfield, so no I am not scared of you and actually I'm SO happy you chose a fandom I happen to be in to try and be a little prick to so I can go into some of the shit you've done!! Like omg thank you SO much for this opportunity, girl! 😊✨

SECOND, you are old enough to be the parent to about 60% of this fandom yet lack the simple maturity basics that even a 5 year old has, so like idk but maybe you should look into going back to school and doing something with your life, since it's obvious you're just rotting in your friend's basement and don't have any sort of diploma or certificate to your name teehee!! 😘

THIRD, going on with how grossly uneducated you are at your crusty dusty ass age, let me remind you that nobody, I mean NOBODY- Actually, here, lemme add the definition so you can get it:

NOBODY [pronoun] / ˈnoʊ.bɑː.di / : not anyone

(SOURCE: Cambridge Dictionary)

Yeah, so that? Yeah, nobody owes you shit over actual families who are going through one of the worst mass humanitarian disasters we've seen in modern history! There's this other thing called "independence", yeah, and THAT means that we ALLL get to choose where our money goes! Isn't that so great? Yeah so that means… People get to choose if they want to monetarily support you!!! 🥳 Isn't that just so lovely?

And y'know, maybe it's just me, but I dunno if people would want to use their independence over their money to send it to a random 42 year old over helping people escape literal genocide. Doesn't sound so great does it? Yeah, maybe it's kinda like people have hearts and understand that genocide is far worse than some random 42 year old who spews z!onist rhetoric, disrespects sex work, and demands monetary gain from literal kids who she not only calls slurs but also actively exposes to NSFW content on her little confessions blog!

Y'know… maybe THAAAT'S why people don't send you money! Yeahhh it's cuz you're a basement-dwelling prehistoric z!onist toad who actively threatens the safety of literal children in online spaces!! I got it figured out!! And y'know, I got you figured all out too, darlin', because I sure as hell know this ain't your first rodeo and this post sure as hell ain't mine!

And y'know I could just keep going on and on, but considering you're probably red in the face and sobbing like the infant-minded subhuman creature you are over lil ol me simply going over just one single little atrocity you've committed on this fandom, I think I'll spare you from holding you to the mirror for ALL that!

Anyways, I do hope this all finds you just SO well, and maybe you can understand just a teensy bit why people y'know… Don't like you! Yeah, so uh hope your holidays go great, hope the new year treats you better than how you've treated ANY of us, and I do hope that poor single braincell gets some friends in the incoming year because he sure is real lonely in that hollow head of your's! Anyways buh-bye hon, hope you have a fantastic day 🥰

[ironworked]

60 Sec Rec: In The Flesh

"Four years after the Rising, the government starts to rehabilitate the Undead for reentry into society, including teenager Kieren Walker, who returns to his small Lancashire village to face a hostile reception as well as his own demons." [imdb]

First things first, I have to warn you that it was cancelled after just 2 seasons (9 episodes) on a bit of a cliffhanger/'oh I need to know more' moment. Believe me, I'm sorry. But it's still so worth watching! I'm far from the only one waiting for a revival, still, 10 years after it ended.

In The Flesh isn't about the rise of the undead, or about a post-apocalyptic future. It's a story that picks up after a treatment (not cure) has been found and is being put into use. The afflicted must follow said treatment, wear contact lenses and apply heavy make-up, all to pretend they are the same as they were while they're very, veeeery discreetly re-introduced into society and their old life. But... it's not that simple. Society has changed, and so have their families. The new normal that tries so hard to look like the old one... isn't. In very dangerous ways.

The show kinda does with zombies (sorry, 'Partially Deceased') what Buffy did with vampires and Gen V does with superpowers, but it's... harsher maybe, less glossy, and comments on different subjects like homophobia and xenophobia. Could have been a disaster, but I think they did very well.

The setting is so good, and the actors feel like real people. You'll really feel for Kieren and get invested in all his relationships and struggles trying to save what he can of his old life and build a new one. Can't say much more because it's all spoilers, just check it out!

Created by Dominic Mitchell. Written by Mitchell, Arthur T. Manderley (Polseres vermelles), Fintan Ryan (The Aliens, Hustle), and John Jackson (Grantchester, Being Human). Directed by Johnny Campbell (Doctor Who, Shameless), Jim O'Hanlon (Emma, Coronation Street), Damon Thomas (Killing Eve, Penny Dreadful), and Alice Troughton (Merlin). Starring Luke Newberry, Harriet Cains, Marie Critchley, Steve Cooper, Emmett J Scanlan, Emily Bevan, Stephen Thompson,...

Previous: Deadloch - Dead Boy Detectives - The Tick - This Close - Kung Fu - Nancy Drew - Kevin Can Fuck Himself - Silo - The Flight Attendant - Severance - Hacks - Hit The Floor - Black Sails - 12 Monkeys - T@gged - The Diplomat - The Mick - Timeless - UnReal - Kings - All Rise - Barry - Halt and Catch Fire - Resident Alien - Santa Clarita Diet - Claws - Roswell New Mexico - Upload - Rutherford Falls - The Expanse - Interview With The Vampire

[velvetvexations]

So weird question, but I've been seeing posts going around in transfeminist(and transradfeminist) spaces talking about how there's this huge problem in the queer community of people not agreeing rhst trans women are women, and like claims of people responding to the question of "would you stand up to defend trans women and argue that they are in fact women?" by saying "yeah, of course, gender is whatever you want it to be :)" and how that's a huge problem because it shows they don't actually agree that trans women are women, and insisting that "it only makes sense to categorize trans women as women and nothing else and if you won't accept that you're a bigot" and I'm just getting the feeling I'm missing something?

Cuz like yeah, trans women are obviously women, that's. That's obvious? And I don't think I've seen anyone on any side of trans discourse or theory or whatever state that they don't think trans women are women, or that any trans person isn't the gender they say they are(except for like people who are against afab transfems or argue for why it's okay to use theyfab, I guess) but I think that's something we all agree on overall, kinda the foundational stance of trans rights, but it's being said like this gotcha?? But I have no idea what the hell it's supposed to be a gotcha against??

The only thing I can possibly see this being about is like, people saying transphobes and our transphobic society don't fully view trans people as the gender they are, which they don't, that is also obvious and it doesn't mean trans women aren't women, just that society puts them more in the broken pervert faggot freak category and occasionally moves them between the woman and man categories based on whatever will hurt said trans women the most in any given situation, but if that's what it's about then how does people talking about how gender can be fluid have anything to do with that? It's honestly kinda weird to see people get so focused on like proving without a shadow of a doubt that trans women are women in all aspects and saying that acknowledging that gender is fluid and complicated and not easily defined is transmisognistic like...it feels a little transmed-ish to me?? And like also I thought we as a community were moving away from slogans like "trans men/woman are men/women" and on to like "trans liberation" because arguing that we are the gender we say we are with bigots breaks down into pedantic nonsense that detracts from the real issues like bathroom bills and anti-drag laws and HTR bans??

I just keep seeing these posts all over and it's making me feel like...idk like I'm in middle school and people are teasing me by asking me questions that I don't have the full context for and then calling me a freak when I answer wrong, but I'm worried if I ask any of them "what's this really about" I'm going to get insulted and called a transmisognist for suggesting it's not just about trans women being women even though I really am getting the feeling it's not actually just about trans women being women.

Anyway if you don't know that's fine, I just thought you might have some insight since you seem to understand these people and their talking points pretty well and you're also a trans woman so I trust and value your input on this stuff.

the entire point of trans radical feminism is basically that it soothes dysphoria a bit to imagine that Christofascists do actually think trans women are women and trans men are men and treat them like the cis equivalent so they've abandoned gender anarchy because it's not validating enough

they don't care about liberation they just want to tell themselves that other people see them as what they identify as and that is literally their only priority

"trans women are women taxonomically because we're oppressed" Emily that's how radfems define womanhood they just think the oppression is based on sex rather than self-identification

[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.)

[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.

[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)