#i don't know why i subject either of us to this

[rosiewitchescottage]

Let's get context here.

When we're talking

'let's get rid of or discourage anyone from reading these books'.

- Reason? Usually because there's some theme that certain people don't want to be known about, or because someone has issues with an author.

100% agreed that this is BAD - Books that talk about slavery, books that talk about The Holocaust.

These should always be widely available, even if they're not very well written, tell the story from an unusual angle or maybe get facts wrong.

All these have the value of getting the subject talked about, and the history studied.

Books that tell m/m or f/f love stories or show a family that simply has two dads or two mums. These books should be available, because whether people approve or disapprove, same sex relationships are a reality.

And as long as they're treated the same way as we'd expect a m/f couple to be, in a book aimed at the same age group, then where's the harm?

Then there's the saga of J K Rowling. You don't like her? You don't want to read her books? Well good news, because you don't have to do either.

But say that no one else should either? Try to erase J K Rowling as author of her own work?

Then don't go expecting to be seen as doing something 'good'.

When we're talking

"These books contain sexual/sexually related words and/or images, which makes them unsuitable for children and young teens. They do not belong in a school library or children's library'.

Then why would anyone have issue with these books being removed from such places?

As far as I know these books can be bought by parents for home use. So they're not getting outright banned.

People talk about children who've been sexually assaulted and needing to talk about what happened to them. And that's important. But I'm still not seeing how all these overly sexual details are necessary.

There's a world of difference between simply naming the body parts where no one should be touching them, especially not grown ups, and using the language of sexual acts!

We can and should be able to name all our body parts, using the right words. And children should know what constitutes a healthy and loving relationship.

But we can help them to talk about violations of this without language that they shouldn't need to know before the middle teens, at the earliest.

And this is NOT supposed to be an anti LGBT matter. This should apply whether a book is showing opposite sex or same sex couples.

As I said earlier. Little children should be able to see families with two same sex parents as well as opposite sex parents, or indeed grandparents.

The issue with 'Grandpa's Pride' shouldn't be that Grandpa has a male partner.

If this was shown exactly the same way that any other grandparents would be. Then I'd be singing a different tune.

Show Grandpa and his partner holding hands and happy, fine. But why the heck do little ones need to see leather BDSM Daddies?! 😡😡😡

[fandomofone]

Low key peer pressured into doing this core four thing by @buggachat and everyone else except I can't draw M & A to save my life so it's more like core two. So you get this truly awful 10 minute sketch of Alya & Nino in no particular style instead. (Mainly bc I don't really have one) A full drawing will be 24-36 curse word filled business weeks, thank you very much

ETA the reference picture that I forgot when I posted 🤦

[silent-sentinels]

we have gotta actually finish the other account, it has been months and we want to tell revi that we're also plural hgkjgk

[tentacleplains]

more scenes that basically everyone sees but pointing out a specific detail i find interesting: "though i hope you don't cause a scene this time" does avery regularly cause scenes at parties?? lmao

[wombmoth]

I subscribe to the belief that not all men are rapists and pedophiles but that they all have the capacity to be. I believe this is because men are especially opportunistic in their approach to life.

So because there are a lot of vulnerable young women out there, who have been primed to be submissive by patriarchy, it makes them easy prey and when men see an opportunity, they take it.

So while under different circumstances they may not behave like predators, in this instance they do because they have access to vulnerable young girls, and its a lot easier to get sexual access to an unexperienced young girl than a woman who knows how to set boundaries and can better read someone's intentions.

This kind of dynamic taking place over and over again over hundreds of years has created a culture of men who associate young girls with easy sex. Which is why they are so fetishized in culture.

So I don't think that men naturally prefer young girls, I just think that they know a good opportunity when they see one, and they have spread the word to other men "oh hey if you want to get laid, these young girls are really easy to manipulate into letting you fuck them"

On the subject of opportunistic behavior, if you read about past wars and the tactics used, you will notice that tons of men will begin mass raping women, men that are just your average joe back at home.

Why is that? Because they have been given the green light to do it. Hell, all you have to do is read about history and notice that a higher percentage of men were just outright scumbags. Again, that is because women were not protected and men had permission to behave however they felt like.

So this is all just evidence of their tendency to act out when the opportunity presents itself to them. Not all will necessarily seek out opportunities to abuse and rape women, BUT a majority will not turn down the chance to do so if circumstances make it easy for them. Do you see what I'm getting at?

It's disgusting and not really much better than the idea that all men are pedophiles. It's just that men operate on a very primal level and it doesn't help that now people just throw their hands up and say "Well that's just how men are!" so they have no incentive to start acting like civilized human beings.

Really at this point we can't expect them to either.

There’s constantly a question on my mind. I’m sure a lot of you have experienced sexual abuse before the age of 18. We all know teen girls receive a lot more attention than adult women. Are all men pedophiles? What are your thoughts about that? Lately I’ve been thinking that some men are just able to control themselves better but young girls are sexualized at such a high rate that I can’t let this go. If not why is the top porn category “barely legal teens”?

[tricksterlatte]

Anyone else think short form social media based on algorithms designed to promote topics that create more engagement instead of more joy, the idea of fast fashion but conveyed through social media, and the fact you can monetize suffering and outrage better than ever has largely resulted in the death spiral of media literacy and the mass emergence of bad faith readings?

[pa-pa-plasma]

i don't think i'll ever get over how people treat kids that aren't good in school as worthless no matter what. "oh it can't be that bad" my guy idk how to tell you this but the last time i went to a normal high school the principal called me into his office to brag about how he failed me in all of my classes before the semester was even finished & i should quit while i'm ahead cuz i'm too stupid ("officially" diagnosed as such by a school counselor & a psychiatrist!!) to succeed. & this is considered normal

[dkettchen]

me waking up in a cold sweat at 6:20am: "I should get evening classes to be a hair dresser & training to be a makeup artist to be my own hair/make-up person on photo/video shoots and defy industry's single-gender-dominated-and-not-improving department segregation system like the all-rounder online creator that I am 👀😤"

[sparkly-skies]

Okay aluminium hat on, it's hypothyzing time:

So on the newest picture you can see Julians (my buam *sigh*) arm tattoos better and there is this big A

Which brought me back to this big ass omega sign on bmth skirt guy's arm.

Now we can't know if there's a connection between them but they are on opposite arms and have the same style (though Julian's tattoos are all in that blackline style), also alpha and omega are the first and the last letter of the greek alphabet, maybe Julian was born first? And they wanted matching tattoos?

There was also this christian stuff I found while searching and them having grown up in Bavaria it's entirely possible they're christian so idk, maybe the connection is there and not with each other. But I want to believe they love each other so much they wanted twin tattoos.

Now onto your opinion🎤

Should have sent that one with the last ask. (They also both have snake tattoos. And I still need to know what is written on bmth skirt guys throat)

---

Thank you for the mic 🎤, the aluminium hats are on 🤡👽🤖

Ah, you're embracing the Bua name, maybe you'll come around to liking Bavaria after all eventually, if only for the concerts and your Buam 😌 also love "bmth skirt guy", you're right, bmth should put a swooshy skirt in their merch, I'd buy it. Or your buam; I have enough shirts I don't wear but I could use a longer skirt. They could put the dancing skeleton on there at the bottom. pspsp Laura's Buam, who's responsible for merch, I have suggestions.

Your Bua has some very nice tattoos there 👀 is that a lightswitch though? Because, not to project here, but that reminds me so much of that artwork about ADHD that goes "utterly obsessed - uninterested" or something like that. The gameboy 🥰 Zelda Minish Cap my dear.

I like your idea with the matching tattoos as the first and last letter of the greek alphabet! Now I don't know a lot about them, or anything, really, but they did seem like they're pretty close, what with their bickering on stage, and a lot of siblings get matching tattoos. And I like that idea better than something about the bible or whatever that was. I don't know about you, especially because I don't know how catholics and protestants are split up in Germany, and I'm from one of the more conservative/traditional areas of Austria, so I know quite a few people my age who were altar boys/girls, and I don't think even any of them would get a religion-themed tattoo. I'm sure there are people our age who would get a tattoo like that, but probably not that many. Then again I can't speak for Bavaria, but I still like the matching twin tattoos idea better.

"But I want to believe they love each other so much they wanted twin tattoos." I see. It's not just your buam making me cry anymore, you've joined them!

So our questions for after the next concert: A breakdown of all their tattoos but especially the letters and the writing on BMTH shirt's neck, and if and where he found vegan cheese that melts and tastes good. And if they have pets and if yes, can we please see them, it's part of the targeted marketing, and what about a long colourful swooshy skirt as merch 🐱🐶🦝

[beeseverywhen]

I mean like. Not to bring the mood down but... you guys know that's because American media is everywhere right? Like the world is unable to avoid some version of American accent on a regular basis. Of course ppl find it easy to mimic. This is absolutely not restricted to ppl in the UK, its really common for ppl who learn English as a foreign language to have perfect 'American actor' accents (cause the reason everyone's so good at the American accent that's expected of them as actors is cause at large there's little distinction between regions in the 'Hollywood accent' that ends up on TV and films and stuff. You guys have massive regional differences in pronounceation, but what makes it on to TV (in 9/10 cases) is a very standardised version of American English.)

But yeah. It's not just actors lol. Most British ppl can speak in a passable american accent, as can loads and loads of people worldwide. I'm not saying this to be like 'you should feel guilty! 😡' but it does always stun me when Americans are unaware of the impact their country has worldwide on all versions of English (and even on use of native languages. Many countries are using English more and more over their native languages and dialects , and yeah, historical colonialism has had an impact there.)

But in the last few decades things have progressed way way faster and that, is thanks to the impact of anglo/american/ect lead capitalism. I'm in no way dismissing the impact the UK has on this, but in recent years, its the US that is largely pushing that train .While the UK and several English speaking commonwealth countries are very involved in this kind of capitalist imperialism, there's a reason that more and more people are speaking American English. Not one of the many UK dialects, not Australian English, or NZ English. Across the world more and more people are increasingly speaking in the same standardised american dialect that's in so much of the media you export. Hollywood based media, with that standardised accent/ dialect and the standardised 'normal american life', has a stranglehold on the world and I just find it crazy that a lot of you guys don't even know.

It's stupid stuff like. So many countries are importing american cars and are widening their roads/ changing town planning to account for it (this is less of a thing in the UK but I see it more and more when I travel). Its the food becoming avaliable everywhere. Its the influence that for profit healthcare has even on countries with socialised health systems. Its houses being built to account for American style appliances. Fashion trends. Worldwide, everything is slowly evolving to be closer and closer to this 'American standard' which honestly? I really don't think actually represents the lives of real American people either. You've been turned in to products, the system has taken an unrealistic snapshot of 'American life' and it's being sold to you all day in day out, but it's also being sold to the rest of us. It's being pushed on us all.

Kids in the UK go through phases of talking only in American accents. Anyone born later than the 90s is carrying round 2 sets of spelling and vocab, cause we're all so used to the American way, that you barely know which one you're using half of the time. In the UK we have always had really strong regional accents yeah, and dialects differ between areas that seem tiny to you guys, I know. But like. Those dialects are being lost cause all UK accents are evolving to become closer to this standardised american and yeah not great, but at least we share a language! US American society is largely rooted in the same foundations as UK society, largely we have the same flaws! But oh my god. What about the rest of the world.

It's global. This impact continues to be seen, steamrollering ahead, in places that had completely different starting points. UK culture isn't that dissimilar to that of the US, so we aren't losing nearly as much as cultures that had something completely different. So much is being lost.

Languages and dialects and everything else is just being wallpapered over so we all meet the same ideal of the 'American life' and it's not even real! It's just a product based on how ppl were actually living in the US, manipulated until it's the most marketable mould. You guys are victims of it as well but like. It's based on your culture so you don't lose as much if you conform to it. Just like how in the UK, if we conform, we lose more than US, but nowhere near as much as countries that had languages, dialects and cultures that were so so different to UK/US culture. The less like the US, your starting point, the more there is to lose.

And look. I said it to start with. I'm not having a go. That's not what this is. But you guys really need to be aware, you need to make an effort to understand the impact that this plastic Hollywood american culture is having on the rest of the world. You need to actively look for it, and make an effort to not pay in to it. Because when Americans see other cultures represented in media and say its not relatable, when you guys go on holiday and make no effort to learn local customs, and try and pay in dollars and spend your time abroad like you're still in America, when you see cultural differences and immediately argue that the American way is better and of course everyone should have giant cars and never dry laundry outdoors and live in American style homes, without any kind of critical thought. Just 'this is how we do it so why wouldn't everyone else do it this way. This is the only way. The American way is obviously best.' When you guys do that you are individually feeding in to this absolute bulldozing of cultures (including American ones!) to allow for better marketability.

It isn't any one individual American citizens fault that things are the way they are, and you guys are victims of the same system, but you need to have some self awareness when it comes to the fact that as individuals you are unknowingly, helping driving this forwards and as individuals, there are things you can do to limit your personal impact (and no arguing that you have no culture is not it!!! Being all self deprecating doesn't do shit. Take some responsibility and accept that individual Americans didn't create this system, but currently, individual Americans really are doing their bit to keep promoting it, to keep pushing it on the rest of the world.

And I've already rambled for an age so I'll stop here but I just want to make clear as an ending note here, that this really isn't about piling on Americans and being all 'boo it's all America's fault. They should apologise. Their culture isn't worth anything.' Not at all this is the opposite of that. The fact that millions of Americans have been convinced you have no culture, all while a mimicry of American culture is plastered on to the rest of the world, and while you as individuals are encouraged to help that happen, often without even realising what you're doing; is a crime. You've been wronged, as have we all.

And America is not the problem. The problem is imperialism and it didn't start with you guys. It started in Europe, and Europeans, particularly British ppl, have a responsibility to push back and be self aware, take some fucking responsibility and not inadvertently keep feeding in to that system, just as you guys do. The US didn't start the fire, imperialist capitalism is a fire that started burning long before the United States was even considered, but its on all of us, to do what we can to not feed that fire. And right now? You guys are the face of it.

This idea of what America is, is the face of imperialistic capitalism, and that means that even if you don't mean to, you guys are feeding that fire more so than the rest of us. You're responsible for spreading it, more so than the rest of us. And if you don't step up and take responsibility, accept that you're gonna get it wrong sometimes and you need to try to do better; if we don't all do that. There will be nothing left. They'll paper over it all, the lives of real Americans just as much as those in Scotland and India and the Netherlands, and 100 other cultures, that are at risk, thanks to this fire, that's currently, largely coming from America.

So yeah. It's absolutely not just on you guys and ppl who act like there's no racism or wealth divide in Europe or anywhere else for that matter are complete idiots, however, this Americanisation of the world (and I hesitate to call it that. Because its not a representation of real American lives. Its simply wearing an American face.) Its real. It's happening.

And we don't tell you about it to make you feel guilty (those of us who aren't dicks at least) ,we are telling you. We are kicking up a fuss. Because it isn't fair. It's not right and while individual Americans ignore that and refuse to take responsibility where they can (small apples. We aren't asking for you to call a violent revolution in our names. Just take some time to learn about the rest of the world. Stop assuming America is always right and examine your biases. When you find them. Stop personally pushing them.) , while that is happening, as individuals, you are contributing to this. It's not even altruism. This system is hurting Americans too. It's hurting us all. All we ask is that you do what you can to not personally contribute, and keep an open mind, be aware. That's all any of us can do.

when a british actor does an american accent everyone’s like “i didn’t even know they were british until they were on colbert.” but when americans do a british accent everyone’s like “they’re supposed to be from east cocksford but their glottal e’s are north dicksford. shameful.”

[thedandelionresistance]

So uhhhhh someone's trying to argue that psychiatric disorders can exist on an entirely non-physical level

1. This is from a sociopolitical analysis of the institution of psychiatry, and I suspect is therefore taken wildly out of context at best and is irrelevant to actual neurology at worst.

2. It claims that psychiatric conditions have not (yet) been convincingly SHOWN to arise from physical conditions, directly contradicting the claim that humans are embodied and therefore all human activity is biology-dependent.

3. Unless the claims of genetics being largely unrelated to mental health is about a very specific topic, that's just science denial. The MTHFR gene has been heavily implicated in multiple commonly comorbid conditions that are also suspected to be post-viral in a large percentage of cases, such as chronic fatigue syndrome, POTS, and mast cell diseases. Multiple conditions, from diabetes to bipolar to autism to again, mast cell diseases, are known to be highly genetic, despite the exact genetic cause often still being unclear.

4. The sources used to back up the prior point are: an article in "Independent Science News for food and agriculture", which also platformed multiple articles and even a Twitter thread about the conspiracy theory of covid being leaked from a chinese lab; and an article about how the diagnostic criteria of bipolar was changed and is now overdiagnosed to sell more drugs.

5. The supposedly "suppressed" "negative" articles are potentially out of date (I've had a harder time accessing them). From what I can find, though, the former is a book largely considered more political than scientific, which was criticizing overly reductionist perspectives on genes as related to systemic social inequality. The latter appears to be about personality and "neuroticism" primarily, with little said about genetic roles in psychiatric health. It seems that they do not actually contradict the possibility of even some genetic influence on psychiatric health, let alone physical influence.

6. The whole argument is a logical fallacy, arguing that because we've ruled out some of the few biochemical and structural/physiological characteristics that could cause mental illness, we've ruled physical causes out entirely. It uses two highly specific discrete claims about two disorders in the vast spectrum of mental health, claiming that brain sizes affected in part by antipsychotic use do not seem to cause schizophrenia and that all other differences in neurobiology are likely due to "intellectual ability" and the conveniently vague "other uncontrolled factors". They further use depression and schizophrenia again to talk about how two specific neurotransmitters had not been proven to cause the illnesses - specifically, ones which have evidence supporting their role in other disorders, such as ADHD. While some of the theories of chemical imbalances causing mental illnesses have since been more conclusively disproven, others have had more evidence emerge supporting them having some role in multiple psychiatric diagnoses.

7. That whole paragraph actually only focuses on whether or not there are neurobiological causes for mental illness. Even purely sociogenic mental illnesses, such as certain cases of PTSD, still have been shown to have effects on the brain at a physiological level, while others show up in studies as changes in patterns of bioelectrical brain activity or changes in chemical production or reuptake efficiency. Proving or disproving origin does not actually provide evidence for mechanism. However, in case I am misinterpreting the word "cause" here and it is actually meant as "mechanism", disproving mechanisms is quite literally part of the process to find the true mechanism, and does not actually support that psychiatric conditions occur entirely separately from the physical brain.

Essentially, even aside from the irreputable and irrelevant sources cited, the lack of scientific consistency and sociopolitical focus of the excerpt; the author's repeated self-citations; the failure of insufficient, unreliable, and outdated evidence to support the claims they make; the fact that their actual argument that mental health problems are not "equivalent" to other health issues; amd that psychiatric conditions have not yet been observed as arising from a direct proven neurological source, while actively admitting that humanity is stored in the body, so to speak...

None of this proves that there is not a biochemical or physiological mechanism and/or origin for psychiatric illnesses that, in our search closed eyes in the dark for understanding of the human brain, we are fumbling for. Neurology is a science in its infancy compared to most other medical fields, still stumbling its way through "four humours" levels of rudimentary understanding of the highly complex processing and control unit that is the 86 billion neurons of the human brain. This is even more true when we soften the science of neurology into neuropsychiatry, practically poking experiences of the conscious mind with a caveman-stick. This is not to disparage the sciences, but rather, to point out that we understand so little that we can't even recognize the full scope of our ignorance, that 600 years from now may earn us the same ridicule as blood-letting leeches and cocaine soda for head colds.

More to the point, anything we process - sensory input, emotion, thought, pain, dissociation even, oppression, poverty, trauma - it all goes through the brain. Our entire understanding, self-conception, and consciousness arise from biochemical, physiological, and bioelectric actions and reactions. The "self" is essentially a simulation run by a fleshy machine as it responds to stimuli and generates aspects of identity from desires to beliefs.

While the point that the excerpt is likely building to in a larger context, that many mental illnesses may originate in part of in whole from factors like systemic injustice and external conditions to the body, that doesn't make the illness itself occur outside of the physical human bodymind. Even experiences like religion and "communing" with a higher power, astral projecting, and so on, require your brain to perceive them as occurring, which means that extremely complex series of chemical production and absorption and electrical signals and activity traversing specific paths in specific regions of the brain are occurring.

The same is true of mental-illness-as-reaction-to-conditions.

To argue otherwise is to argue that some metaphysical conscious separate from the physical human body exists. This is just cartesian dualism, and falls entirely outside the realm of science and well into philosophy. If a "soul" of the self exists that can suffer an "illness" or other "corruption" causing severe distress and dysfunction within the physical world, it is outside of the realm of science to even examine, let alone make claims about. Furthermore, even then in order to be perceived within our physical reality, the brain must process and/or create that perception of said "soul" and "illness".

This is far more into the realm of philosophy than is comfortable, considering that philosophy claiming to be science is just pseudoscience in a stick-on mustache. (I respect philosophy in its own right - love it, actually - but when it plays at being a rational and empirical science, I draw the line. It has its own internal logic systems and reasoning which has little overlap with or application to scientific methodology.)

But, returning firmly to science, the irony is that it's entirely possible that some psychiatric conditions may not be entirely or even primarily neurological. The gastrointestinal, endocrine, lymphatic, and immune system have all been implicated to some degree in having varying degrees of impact on mental health. Some conditions we call mental health may originate in dysfunction of other systems, which may also in turn be driven by external factors. The brain is the control center of the body, and the body processed all consumed materials into needed resources for the brain and body alike.

Some primarily physical disabilities even have significant neurocognitive symptoms, such as brain fog/cognitive impairment and strong mood swings. Some symptoms themselves may straddle the line, such as seizures and sleep disorders/disturbances. Some physical symptoms, such as dysautonomia, have been reported to cause symptom sets highly similar to neuropsychiatric conditions like ADHD, traumatic brain injuries have been observed to sometimes replicate symptoms of dissociative disorders, and Chiari malformations have been noted to sometimes cause anxiety.

Mast cell disorders have overactive release of neurotransmitters as part of the process which drives symptoms, and those neurotransmitters can affect the brain strongly, to the point of causing an array of mental symptoms - some of which even drive further degranulation in a vicious cycle.

In any case, mental illnesses may not all be neurogenic or even primarily neurological. But they are still, in fact, physical. Everything we perceive or imagine must be processed by the brain. Only the imperceptible does not cause any sort of brain action or reaction, and if we are not aware of it or affected by it on any level, it's outside of the realm of science, let alone medicine.

Now, if you wanna talk philosophy, we can argue whether something must be perceived to exist. That's a really fun philosophical topic, one which I contradict myself on, even.

But from a medical perspective? Medicine, including psychiatry and the classification and treatment of mental illness, does require a perceived experience which affects you, which results squarely into some kind of physical process in the brain. That's science, babeyyyyy!

[leebrontide]

Here's a funny little story about disability accommodation.

So I'm a bit deaf. Like...I have a prescription for a hearing aide but don't own one kind of a bit deaf. And I used to work at this noisy ass addiction treatment clinic. So even in my office I relied a lot on lipreading.

So one day I'm working with this client, and she's getting more and more upset and shut down, no matter how I try to steer us onto a calm, relaxed subject of conversation. And I can't figure out why the conversation has gone so far south.

And then I realize I am sitting at a buckwild angle in my chair, leaning waaaay over to the side. I'm almost falling off this chair. I look like a total goober.

And then I realize I'm doing that because I'm trying to lipread this client, who keeps turning further and further down and away from me. I probably would have noticed sooner but lipreading is actually kind of hard and I was focusing on noticing her upset rather than my body language.

And then it clicks.

She thinks I'm leaning like this because I am being a passive-aggressive asshole who is trying to force/shame her into making eye contact with me. I'd known this client enough to know she hates eye contact- possibly autism, possibly anxiety. Always possible it's both or something else.

I sit up straight and say. "Oh! Hey, I don't give a shit about eye contact, I'm trying to read your lips so I can understand what you're saying to me."

Instant vibe change. She relaxes, and sits upright comfortably in her chair, looking about a foot to the left of my head, so I can see her face clearly but she doesn't have to either fake or evade unwanted eye contact.

From then on things go a lot smoother, and we can get some good work done.

One side benefit from normalizing accommodations and reducing barriers to them is that it allows for low-stress conversations about what everybody needs in order to fully participate in an interaction. If I hadn't named the need I was trying to meet, she wouldn't have realized she could have her need met as well.

[drdemonprince]

have you defined the meaning of “white woman brain” anywhere and if not, can you? /gen

Many Black and brown feminist writers have discussed this phenomenon and I encourage you to seek out a lot of writing about this subject, because there are a variety of perspectives, but to distill it, white woman fragility brain is a phenomenon that is not exclusive to either white people or to women, but is especially common among those who can weaponize white womanhood, and it consists of the following qualities:

A view of oneself as a helpless victim that is constantly in threat of being attacked, especially by strangers (even though statistically, this is not the case).

A refusal to consider oneself as capable of doing harm to others, especially a lack of consideration toward others' body autonomy or consent. (even while being highly concerned about one's own autonomy and consent).

A generally passive or passive-aggressive orientation toward the world: seeing oneself as a romantic or sexual object to be approached, but never wanting to initiate (or feeling that one never can), never feeling comfortable directly communicating displeasure or one's desires, believing that others instead must guess at it. (and then resenting people when they don't, but never expressing it).

A tendency to cry, excessively berate oneself, complain about being made to feel "unsafe," or give up when criticized or challenged, especially when challenged by people of color.

A tendency to associate a person's body type with how much of a threat they are. For example, feeling unsafe around people with penises and expecting a social space to accommodate that fear to cater to you, a fear of people who come from cultures where it's common to speak loudly, a fear of those who are large, assertive, and/or darker-skinned.

Instinctive fawning-type responses to stress, and a pattern of feigning happiness, agreeability, and ease when one is not genuinely feeling it, and expecting all other people (but especially other women) to feign happiness as well, paired with a deep-seated resentment of anyone who violates this illusion and expresses any negativity (being especially punitive toward women of color).

Instinctively "smoothing over" conflict between other people before it even begins, even when healthy conflict is necessary and not at all your business-- often performed by gossiping behind other people's backs, triangulating information when it is not yours to share, asking people to alter their behavior in order to avoid a reaction from somebody else, presenting your concerns as if they were somebody else's ("what will people think!"), tone-policing the airing of grievances, derailing hard conversations with more light-hearted topics, and excluding people who are known to be candid and assertive.

Here are some articles on elements of the phenomenon and why it is so dangerous:

Now, I single white cis women out a lot when I am describing this phenomenon, because they have the most to gain from exhibiting these qualities, but make no mistake: this is a pattern that many types of people can and do use. I have seen white trans women use white women's tears to silence critique. I have witnessed women of color being passive-aggressively derailed and silenced by a Black manager who was in a position of institutional power over them. Multiple of the women who sexually harassed me in the story linked above were not white. And LORD knows I see plenty of t boys falling back on this shit, as well as cis men from wealthy backgrounds. It's a mindset that has deep colonial roots and we all must be on the look out for it in ourselves and others, and we must be vigilant in uprooting it.

[libraford]

Park Cleanup Pet Peeves

I'll be starting my seasonal gig at Parks and Rec in a couple months and I've got a couple things I wanna say. I know that this will probably not reach the people who need to hear it, but if ONE LESS person leaves the parks a mess, I will be That Much Happier.

-You're not supposed to smoke, drink, or have sex in public parks but I know that people will anyway. But if you are going to do those things, please dispose of the evidence in the trash cans. A human has to pick these things up.

-Dog poop goes in a bag. Bag goes in the trash can.

-The little wax paper liners in the women's room? See you're supposed to put your pad/tampon in that wax paper bag, take the bag out of the bin, and then dispose of it in the actual trash can. Don't feel bad, no one told me either. Also no one told the dudes I work with. But this reduces direct exposure to bodily fluids, especially as the summer gets on and it gets hot in those bathrooms.

-On that subject! The little bins that they go in next to the toilet? Don't stick trash in there. Don't put diapers in there. Also don't put beer cans crushed in such a specific way that I slice my hand on them as I try to jimmy it out of there. Literally, that bin is too small for most things. They are meant specifically for those brown bags. Please for the love of god, throw things in the trash can.

-As for the urinals, please no solids. Most commonly gum and chewed tobacco, but you can use your imagination.

-If you're doing a photo shoot or an event with confetti, please use a paper confetti instead of a plastic one- its easier to get rid of.

-If you're doing a pizza party, we'd rather you stack the pizza boxes in a pile next to the trash can instead of trying to fit them in the trash. Because then we can just throw the trash bag over the top and tie it instead of trying to fish it out. This kind of goes for any big trash- if it won't fit in the trash can easily, don't try.

-Please don't call cops on people sleeping in the parks if they're not bothering anyone. Even if they've been sleeping there all day. Dude's just trying to chill.

-Destruction of the toilets will result in the indefinite locking of the restrooms. You ruined them and now everyone at the softball tournament can blame you for it.

-Parks people are not the police. We are maintenance workers who are not trained to handle most emergencies and the most we can do in any situation is report to the proper department. Please don't look to us for answers if someone is starting a fight.

-Also please don't spit on us for driving on the path. We're permitted to. Its essential for us to drive on the path to do our job.

-please don't abandon animals at the park. Rehome them properly. I spent a whole week trying to catch a rooster last summer.

-look, I get it- 'oh no, your pretty building has writing on it!' Grafitti is so edgy. We get it. But it means Jacob has to sand it off now so that the kids at the birthday party don't see a giant drawing of a weiner. Acts of rebellion that create more work for the working class are not revolutionary.

-please do not set fire to the Tiny Free Library. Why did you do that? That's mean.

-please do not feed bread to ducks and geese. Corn, birdseed, lettuce- those are better for them. If you want to reduce tge amount of goose poop in the parks, shop feeding them bread.

-also do not anger tge geese. They remember what its like to be dinosaurs.

I'll have more later, probably, once the season wears on.

[lovingseventeen]

Hiii could you pls write about how seventeen gets their s/o to sit in their lap?? Thanks so much

svt getting their s/o to sit on their lap

a/n: i hope this is sufficient for my very delayed return (please).

seungcheol: 

✿ it's truly just second nature for him at this point

✿ he'll just casually guide you onto his lap and you don't really question it either

✿ say you're about to sit next to him on the couch

✿ as you're about to sit he'll just lightly pull your wrist in his direction and there you are

jeonghan:

✿ loves to rest his head on your shoulder when you sit on his lap

✿ the simplest "come here" and you're following

✿ he loves this because you don't even have to pay attention to him but he has all the access to wrap his arms around your middle

joshua: 

✿ pats his leg when you want to show him something on your phone

✿ "josh look at this thing i just saw-"

✿ immediately, he's sitting up and spreading his legs so you can walk in the space between them and sit on one of his thighs

✿ "let me see, pretty"

jun: 

✿ will gradually shift you onto his lap over time absentmindedly

✿ neither of you two really notice but you just wind up there

✿ you were watching a movie on opposite ends of the couch (which is fine) but now you're there??? (no one is complaining)

hoshi: 

✿ so annoying about it (i mean this in a loving way)

✿ why should you sit anywhere else when his lap is literally right there??

✿ even if you sat somewhere else without thinking about it he's jokingly scoffing "so you hate me"

✿ (it's okay, just go sit on his lap and peck his cheek and he's all giddy again)

wonwoo: 

✿ pulls you towards him by an article of clothing

✿ it could be your pants loop, the sleeve of your hoodie, or the back of your shirt

✿ he doesn't need to ask you twice :')

woozi:

✿ always asks for your opinion when he makes a new beat or writes new lyrics

✿ "i want you to listen to this" he says with a hand stretched out

✿ he likes to have you sit on his lap while he places the headphones around your ears

✿ he gently presses his forehead to your back as he waits for your thoughts

dokyeom: 

✿ perpetually wrapped around you anyway (his love language is physical touch)

✿ it doesn't take long when an arm around your shoulder as you're sitting next to each other moves to your waist

✿ then he figures this isn't close enough and he'll also maneuver you so you're eventually on his lap. he'll quite literally wrap his arms around your middle so he can move you

✿ "this is better" as he nudges his face into your neck

mingyu:

✿ will manhandle you if he has to

✿ you try teasing him just to see him get pouty and as you're trying to get away from him, he uses a little bit more of his strength to pull you towards him

✿ but as you're sat you feel him mumble against your shoulder "do you actually not want to?"

minghao:

✿ i think he's a pretty straightforward person

✿ a simple tucking your hair behind your ears and he's caught your attention

✿ "i want you closer" as he holds your arm to help you move

seungkwan: 

✿ dances around the subject instead of just telling you what he wants lol

✿ "did you know that sitting on wooden chairs is actually bad for your back? there's no cushioning"

✿ "oh really? should we order cushions then or-"

✿ "you could sit somewhere else"

✿ "but i need the table for my laptop and i get so lazy on the couch-"

✿ "then maybe you could just sit here" he offers, moving his chair back to welcome you. then it all clicks (he's a dork)

vernon: 

✿ also probably someone who just tugs you gently in his direction

✿ i don't think he'd need to use words for you to get it either

✿ even if you're standing around him doing anything else and you feel him lightly pull the back of your sweater you follow him without giving it much thought

chan:

✿ as long as you're in his vicinity he pulls you with him as he sits down

✿ both of you just came home from work? he's dropping himself down on the couch and you're coming with him

✿ has most definitely missed at least once and you both landed on the floor

[homunculus-argument]

If you don’t mind answering: why is it that when you talk to swedes about Finland it’s generally “that’s our weird little brother <3” but when finns talk about Sweden it’s a lot more hostile might be the wrong word but you probably know what I’m trying to get at?

I understand there’s a lot of history there and stuff but I’m not sure if I get it completely

One funny thing is that Swedish is still an official language in Finland. All public services are legally required to be equally possible to operate in both finnish and swedish, and there are still some older finn-swedes (born and raised finnish natives who speak swedish as a first language) who do not speak a lick of finnish and consider that a matter of pride. Finn-swedes make up about 5% of Finland's population, and while they are just as finnish as finnish-speaking finns, a lot of native finnish speakers who have never met one don't see them that way.

Learning swedish is mandatory in finnish-speaking schools, and it's famously in the top 5 of the most hated school subjects. Many refer to it as "pakkoruotsi", "forced swedish", and see it as a remnant of imperialism, either because the thought of swedish as an official language on its own feels degrading (the thought of swedish-speaking finns existing at all doesn't occur to them, because due to making up 5% of the population, many finnish-speaking finns have literally never met one), or they resent the finn-swedes themselves, grumbling about how the entire country has to learn an entire language just to accommodate such a tiny minority - most of whom speak fluent finnish anyway - like some kind of a slave race.

I had literally never met any swedish-speaking finns in my life before I moved into a town where they used to make up the majority of people just a few generations ago. None of them have ever thought of it odd that the entire country has to fluently speak both, because in their personal experience, everyone they know is bilingual anyway, so using both languages and fluently flipping between them is effortless to them.

There are small bubbles in the country where finnish and swedish are spoken 50-50%, because 5% of the population speak swedish as a first language.