#he’s actually autistic and we love him for that

[bedheaded-league]

One thing that so many people get wrong about Holmes is saying that he’s anti-social and bad with people. He’s awkward, of course, in a very classically autistic way, but when it comes down to it, he’s actually pretty good with people a lot of the time. How do we know this? He has a shocking number of acquaintances who are fiercely loyal to him.

There’s Watson, obviously, but then there are the Baker Street Irregulars, who are clearly in it for more than the pay he gives them - they always seem delighted to help him. Across various stories, Watson runs into a number of people who do whatever he wants as soon as he so much as mentions Holmes’ name. Many of their cases could only be solved because Holmes has a network of convenient people who will do basically anything for him. We don’t know what Holmes did to earn such loyalty, but we can guess - he helped them. He was kind to them. We know that he is often much kinder to the outcasts and downtrodden of society than anyone expects him to be, because we see it in his behavior.

I think that this really ties in so neatly with Holmes being both autistic and queer (however you choose to read his queerness). He doesn’t care about the rules of “polite” society, so he often insults people who consider themselves his superiors. But he is always kind to those who aren’t used to receiving kindness from the world, because he knows what that feels like. That’s why the Irregulars love working for him - he makes them feel important! Honorable! Invaluable to his heroic work! He treats them with respect that no one else in the world gives them, and it’s not just because he’s trying to get something out of them. He actually respects them.

And above all, we know that he isn’t antisocial or bad with people, because Watson loves him so much. Watson, who is by all means a much more well-adjusted member of society, is more loyal to this weird little man than he is to his own country, which he literally got shot fighting for. Because Holmes has earned his love and loyalty. Because he’s a good person. And even if he’s bad at the official rules of polite society, he’s good at being kind. And that’s what really matters.

[pancakeke]

hiiiii can I get a court of public opinion to comment on an argument/my current drama issue? long ass post under the cut

I put numbered questions in bullets under screenshots + explanations. you don't gotta respond to all 12 questions but if you could reply with a number and a corresponding answer I'd really appreciate the outside perspective.

background: my friend and I are both autistic. yesterday he used the term "migrant labor" in a way that I interpreted to refer to an individual. my running gag is to call him a capitalist and accuse him of exploiting people at any opportunity cause he's openly a communist and it's funny to mess with him. he makes jokes back to me and neither of us have ever had issue with this. so i said he loves to exploit migrant workers. his response to insist that I didn't understand the concept of the term "migrant". after accusing me of being wrong a lot and a lot of me trying to figure out what he was talking about, he finally explained that he was talking about "migrant labor" as an economic system, even though I was talking about "migrant workers" as individuals. like I even used a different term so i really don't understand his pivot. but I digress.

before he actually explained what he meant by arguing about the term "migrant labor", my repeated questions about what he was trying to correct led to this:

context: he is canadian and I'm american. we frequently joke about how we spell words differently, but also throughout this conversation he brought up different laws, so I didn't know if he put "labor" in quotes as a joke to discredit the source for being american under the reasoning of "fuck what america thinks about any topic" or he was indicating that the link was american and that meant its information wouldn't apply to canadian laws/definitions that he may have been trying to reference.

I requested clarification for this and other things he said but did not receive explanations. he claims the message in the screenshot provided a sufficient answer.

this is the link i sent him on discord. it is very relevant to this post.

Question 1: do the options I came up seem reasonable or do they seem like wild guesses?

Question 2: you think it's possible that both of my assumptions could be wrong?

Question 3: does his response of the word "labor" in quotes bring to mind an obvious explanation that I didn't consider or mention here?

I again said that I didn't know what he meant and asked for more detail.

he has still not explained what he meant by responding "labor" in quotes and insists that it was a sufficient response that provided necessary context for me to understand what he meant by it. now he is focused on telling me that the encyclopedia britannica is an american publication.

Question 4: is it clear that I was aware the encyclopedia britannica is american before he repeated this information?

Question 5: using your own personal knowledge of the encyclopedia britannica and considering the words making up that URL I shared, do you understand why he repeated this information?

Question 6: given the screenshots so far, do you have any reason to believe that an explanation of the nationality of the encyclopedia britannica provides the remaining context needed to clarify what he meant in the first screenshot when he replied "labor" in quotes?

Question 7: understanding that he was actually making this statement to provide additional context to his previous statement, do you believe it was reasonable for me to follow what he was doing here?

note: my messages time stamped 1:00 is related to the information I had been given before he sent that screenshot. it's not a response to the screenshot.

ultimately this was the whole issue: he refused to believe that my link was credible because it used the american english spelling of "labor" rather than the british english spelling which is "labour". he felt that pointing out the spelling was enough information and context for me to draw the same conclusion.

going back to that link I initially sent: ultimately he made an incorrect assumption from the text of the url. i do not know why the url uses american english, but the actual encyclopedia britannica page only uses the british english spelling "labour" (except when citing book titles that use the american english form). despite being fully capable of viewing the page, he refused to click the link on principle and based this entire argument on the basis that his assumption was correct.

Question 8: do you believe he provided adequate explanation before sharing the the wiki?

Question 9: would you say it's an easy to start with the information "the encyclopedia britannica is an american publication" and conclude that "it is published using british english, not american english"?

Question 10: would you consider it a "direct explanation" that he sent the screenshot without saying anything about it in text form?

Question 11: were you personally able to come to the conclusion he expected me to understand using only the first screenshot in this post?

Question 12: was it reasonable for him to insist he knew the contents of the encyclopedia britannica web page based only on its url?

this is not the first time this friend has done something like this to argue despite quoting "Socratic method" all the fucking time.

Bonus Question: how well would you say my friend employed methods of socratic debate in these screenshots?

[freyasfatale]

Gyns, don’t even trust XY’s who are “bisexual”.

I have an abusive ex who preys on women who either have homes (so he can use them for shelter and money), has a history of abusing women, and preys on teens. He cheated on me with a 17 year old a few times when he was 22, then tried to tell me he wasn’t a pedophile because she was almost legal and he was “only 5 years older than her” and the age of consent in our state is 16. He once told his recent ex, my friend, that she was “past the age men biologically want a woman, so she should be grateful to him”.

Anyways, that’s just a few things he’s done. I can do a whole master post about this stupid moid one day. Maybe even dox him lol. He’s currently on a social media brigade, claiming he’s not a narcissist, just avoidant, and that he’s actually just a happy go lucky loving hippie guy! Why is he doing this? Because his recent ex pressed charges on him for harassment and trespassing after he dropped off gifts to her house after she went no contact with him.

Right, so, he claims he is bisexual despite never having any sexual or romantic relations with other males. He doesn’t do this because he’s actually bi, he does it in the same way some “trans women” do it — to get a pass. It’s like when Brad Pitt did a photoshoot wearing flowers in his hair and pink after the abuse of his ex wife Angelina and children was revealed. “I’m a feminine guy, I’m not abusive, I’ve gotten in touch with my feminine side now so I’m not like that anymore!”

Nope, they still are. Because narcissists can’t self reflect and make changes. They just victimize themselves, like my abuser does. He also throws around the fact that he’s autistic, and uses that as an excuse as to why he’s been abusive before. No, sorry, autism doesn’t make you have sex with minors and force women to get pregnant/have unsafe abortions. You’re just a sociopath.

So please, be wary of these “bi” men. All males are shit, we know, but some try to use labels like “bi” or “trans” to establish trust so they can use and abuse you later on, and to disguise the fact that they are abusive. I’m not sure why or when being “trans” or “bi” or “gay” is exclusive to being abusive?

[rocketboots564]

Also to @soullessjack YES YES! I completely forgot the unmistakably autistic-coding of Jack!

A lot of people often downplay the autistic side of him by infantalizing him cause “he’s only thwee years owld! >3” or whatever… which is its own bag of issues

Anyway, if there’s one characters I’d like to have meet in some sort of crack crossover fic it’s Testament from Guilty Gear.

The autism would start autisming

The queer themes you can pull from Jack Kline’s story and character would be so good and we don’t talk about it enough.

Apart from being the literal Destiel love child…

Jack is someone who is hated by heaven, hell, and even humanity for something he can’t control, something he didn’t ask or choose to be, and tries to get the people around him to accept that part of him.

Anyway, if anyone knows any fics exploring these themes, PLEASE tell me know 

[vaguely-concerned]

from what I infer from some of his dialogue, my guess is that while lucanis hasn't had a proper relationship before he has had one night stands and short term flings. and -- listen, I know he's a dick and a menace and probably a hopeless case but please do still spare illario dellamorte a moment of your thoughts and pity for the role of incredulous yet intrepid wing man that he's all but certainly had to play on several occasions for that to happen. there are 100% people out there who were trying SO fucking hard to get no strings attached laid by this stupidly hot emotionally unavailable mysterious stranger who won't be in town for long without lucanis ever realizing it. people who would have remained tragically unlaid if illario weren't there to clue him in.

I'm just imagining Illario staring in pure dismay and disbelief at his dumbass of a cousin failing to pick up what someone isn't just putting down but scattering all over the floor like glittery confetti burning with a magnesium flame brightness to spell out 'SIR PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE RAIL ME THIS IS AN OFFICIAL ENTHUSIASTIC INVITATION TO MY BED' and having to push him out the door after them like 'maker's breath sometimes i don't understand how you have the wits to grip the right end of a knife, lucanis, they were throwing themselves at you and you just stared at them in mild puzzlement until they gave up and went away go fucking GET THEM for the sake of my sanity if nothing else!!!'

[lunarharp]

uhh another modern au agott follow-up. They've gotten progressively sillier

[anachrosims]

Chanukah Sameach to the Jewish simmers on my dash <3 <3 <3

[crowzirawho]

Crowley and the Bentley

I want to talk about autistic Crowley for a moment. There are many things that could point to Crowley being autistic, however, I'm going to talk about his relationship with his Bentley.

The Bentley is a sentient car who is supposed to be an extension of Crowley, and her actions are to an extent manifestations of Crowley's own feelings (see: trying to keep Aziraphale happy). This whole relationship represents the empathy an autistic person can feel towards inanimate objects and the specific emotional bond they form with them.

Crowley has made the Bentley a part of him, canonically feels everything she feels (hyper-empathy), and projects his own feelings on her. He has a strong emotional attachment to her and treats her basically how he treats every other sentient being. Autistic people form emotional bonds with inanimate objects (example: stuffed animals but it truly can be anything) and treat them like people, feeling the emotions they would feel, project their own emotions onto them, etc.

But because Crowley is not just an autistic being, but a supernatural autistic being with magical powers, his emotional attachment to the Bentley made her sentient. That's how he felt about it, that's how he's always treated the Bentley, so he made it true. (Similar to how he was driving through the fire with just the power of his imagination.)

The Bentley shows in a way what happens inside an autistic person's mind when they have an emotional bond with an object, except in this case it's also outside of his mind because Crowley has that specific power over imagination.

In short, Crowley's feelings are so strong that it makes his car have feelings, too.

I think this specific autistic experience is not shown enough or it is portrayed as the person having a "weird obsession" with an object instead of an actual emotional attachment.

I'd like to note that Aziraphale is also seen being hyper-empathetic towards inanimate objects, specifically books. The books aren't sentient, not to our knowledge at least, but Aziraphale winces when Maggie and Nina throw the books. And I think that's beautiful.

[funkle420]

what's the ship name for Legoshi/Luois/Haru as a throuple??

[unproduciblesmackdown]

among the boundless billions zaniness like laugh track as it definitely has that moment of expressing "rolling my eyes as The Left makes a kerfuffle of Acting like they have a stance as a veneer over the true belief that [xyz] is cool & chill actually" like what, approximate 0.000% chance wendy isn't, as usual, given the Objective Stance of "yeah yeah ohh we are cancelling involved parties talking about how we Don't watch this But. we all love this damn epic movie & already have it memorized so shut the fuck up, kids today" like. don't wanna really delve into how much billions thinks taylor or anyone is "really" trans / nonbinary like not too much benefit of the doubt in this material including what does provide info abt that specifically

& the general like [head in hands. what do you think any of this could possibly be about (you're the one that made your show at all about Power)] of "yes, it's bad/wrong to be someone that someone has done something to / victim of something" like that to be anti misogyny All Women Must Be Epic Winners b/c there's something to be proved: that they don't Deserve to be victims (of misogyny), not taken as a Given. while when we see some epic winner men stepping on other men (who need not all be guaranteed Winners so as to say misogyny is wrong), that's often Good, well beyond any assumption that various forms of basic disrespect / violation / patterns of emergent/entrenched power difference as Bad (for being things done to people, not for there being people they're being done to), & generally billions has to take an extra step when ppl get shitted on & tell us the Specific Cases when it was undeserved actually & someone was being mean to a specific person who didn't deserve that. & the specific cases when hey guess it wasn't that bad(tm) or when hey It's Okay that you're someone something was done to, in this case. & tell us what we were supposed to know all along like when someone who something was being done to (wrong Of Them, whether b/c they inherently deserve it no matter what, &/or b/c they failed to be someone who could make it Impossible to do anything to them, which, how do you do that besides being The Authority / Superior yourself, exactly? nonrhetorically? what if the in group vs out group / fascism / authoritarianism protected Me?) was actually being treated Too Well b/c ah well the abuse meant you were getting any attention, maybe it meant you were claimed as any superior's property, maybe it meant you weren't Already disposed of, as all Losers were in the end, You're Welcome.

obviously referring to winston where it's spelled out all the abuse towards him was deserved, & More than he deserved in the case of rian having more access & taking advantage of that, all for billions' enjoying its own sendoff there of, again, maximizing violation & violence short of [real violence is physical & leaves bruises / draws blood / Literally kills] which would be distasteful in general But doesn't it make wags look like the winner & winston the loser is that the former's completely unrelated completely impersonal ego blow gets way amplified taken out on winston, the most vulnerable recurring character when spyros as [first & ultimate Everyone Hates Him role] is more entrenched in there & billions still magnanimously pities tuk, as it does winston too, just not quite as much. again that like completely surface level realized power fantasy of forcing the mirror up to the Inferior so they're like nooo my inferiorityyyy & in doing so like, the projection in that lmao, we get it re: the valuing of & need(tm) for such Power Tripping & Reaffirming My Superiority & My Ego Restored; Everyone Claps like good god. & then for all ben & tuk are the slightly softer Two Too Nice Boys duo to the rian & winston quant duo, also like too nice i guess but not as much, ben is in charge of tuk but Any instance of rian being in charge of winston outstrips them in that "yay interpersonal abuse" dynamic, like then in the end billions may be like "yeah it's possible to be mean to them unlike how being mean to winston is actually Nice b/c he deserves everything he gets, we only vicariously enjoy it vs Feeling Bad for tuk & ben sometimes (still magnanimously & it's Not That Bad / just goofin)" like ben & tuk still Fail by not being people it's impossible to do anything to. & not Exceptions who anyone is really being Too Mean to. like if they were women, in which case, no problem surely with a "positive" kind of victim blaming where there is something Inherent that Will be victimized so hey how about to cancel that out there's this special Paternal Protection you Need always, Or Else? :) but instead they are men who are asian & is ben gay & w/tuk & winston nobody mentions glasses or fatness but billions doesn't really do much or very in depth textual mentioning of Anything, even w/nonzero mention that there may be gender & race in this world. a gay man, once. no disability. we just Know who are the inferiors who deserve it when they're treated inferiorly, or if they don't, they start deserving it when they fail to stop/avoid it, but if you start mentioning the factors behind who we all totally agree is inferior like whoa nobody was Saying any of that? being the real agent of oppression on the basis of the factors only You spelled out, much? nonbinary? i never say anything about the Gender Binary when i'm subscribing to it, sounds like You've created & enforced it. obfuscation & deflection onto [so Just Normal nobody has to label, explain, or argue it] couldn't serve a purpose & protect the existing power differences as they are. maybe You're the problem? perhaps you brought it upon yourself & now you're causing too much trouble standing up for yourself while everyone else's criticism is laser focused on you as the prior & continuing negative actions done to you are taken as a given / unquestioned / covertly protected to overtly encouraged?

anyway so wild if the Completely Normal(tm) Victim Blaming is uncritically recreated & oft embraced for "if you're watching this & don't wish you were axe / find him appealing" [billions as a sequence of vicarious power trips] purposes in this series....but a bit wild considering like this is your multiseason show that wasn't just purporting to be those power trips for [enough demographic & apparently specific personal tastes overlap w/creators] & was at all purporting to question the matters of power at play in the material, or yknow, at least to not be completely superficial material while said material is textually & thematically all about power difference being leveraged, how, the consequences, & so on. thus i will have to intermittently talk about it forever like this like lord unbelievable. & the funny little & sometimes less funny less little characters it has trapped in there so that those of us who were never meant to be in the audience can be cursed with this knowledge. like i have some feedback. "imagine not victim blaming" & "imagine adjusting your perspective can go beyond superficial layers added to politely defer to some other ppl while they're present but really like cmon do they deserve that. am i not just saying what we're allll thinking"

[library-fae]

me being anxious to ask for anything vs me and my boyfriend both being autistic and needing explicit communication

[horsemage]

I think we should bring back basic etiquette lessons such as shutting the fuck up when you’re watching a movie in a group that is not exclusively your friend group 🙂

[bat-gwuck]

i just want everyone to know that i recently watched the film that was quite possibly my first ever hyperfixation for the first time since i was 12 and it has had disastrous consequences (i used to watch it every single day and one time i watched it six times in a row and tbh i would gladly do it again)

[anotherpapercut]

CORRECT THANK YOU FOR SHARING

[soullessjack]

every time you say jack has the mental age of a baby or a toddler an autistic person spawns in your house to kill you. it’s me. I’m in here and I have something sharp.

[sizzleissues]

I went to go ask him for help with getting a job. Decided against it, surely I could do the application quiz on my own. Failed. Don’t know how I answered wrong. Realised I do kinda need his info but I still panic and feel sick when I text him because I don’t know how he’ll respond so that won’t be happening.