#i feel like people want alternative perspectives on theories

[notherpuppet]

Do you think there's a right and/or wrong way to handle QPR? I know it's a tricky relationship, but it feels like most/some people kind of just slap the label onto a ship while depicting the ship as just romantic/having no difference with a romantic relationship. (this is why I was a little surprised when you said you do radioapple qpr when it reads a lot more like normal romance). Not meant as an attack or anything on anyone, just genuinely curious more than anything. Again, tricky relationship

So Imma put this link to info at the top of this post: https://taaap.org/2022/07/16/qprs-part-one/

Alright, so please take what I say with a grain of salt, because that's exactly what it is. One small bit of perspective in a mass of many people who experience QPRs in their life and/or are on an aro/ace spectrum. I also have NO QUALIFICATIONS on gender/sexuality theory, so my opinions are shaped by what I've learned and experienced personally. While people may identify with the same term, we are all still individuals with our own experiences. Words can help describe a phenomenon, but it doesn't make everyone who identifies with the word into a monolith.

So I've stated a few times that I navigate shipping Alastor similar to my own experiences as an aroace person. (I guess I'm sharing about myself with this post, but I think that can be helpful to just spreading awareness of an "alternative lifestyle"). So I'm romance-repulsed and sex-repulsed LOL but I'm also "positive" about those things. Like I view romance and sex as lovely, fun experiences people can have, but I've never been into it personally. It's fun for me to consume media about romance/sex, but yknow, it's also fun for me to consume media about violence or isolation. Doesn't mean I want to experience or engage in any of those things lol.

Anyway, I'm a huge people person and I love to party and yknow it seems most people are really wanting to fall in love or fuck or whatever pretty much all the time, but especially at parties hahaha. Normally, I'm pretty touch-averse, but I love dancing so much and it's a blast to dance with a partner (salsa especially!! i don't care for grinding for probably obvious reasons). And to connect the two previous sentences, people (whatever gender they are) would be very kissy-touchy on the dancefloor. Which i honestly dont really give a fuck about hahaha. I don't really get anything out of kissing but I also don't mind it. I just like to dance. It's all a pretty superficial--but still genuinely fun--experience for me.

When it comes to my deeper or more intimate connections, I have had friendships that have felt SO on the line of what was viewed as a romantic relationship. They were exceptional friends and we connected on a level that was deep and true, but it wasn't romantic. Sometimes we'd slow dance, sometimes we kissed, and it rocked. But it wasn't more than that, it was all that it needed to be. I didn't want more and neither did they (except one situation and so we had to stop being friends lol whoops). From the outside, people would even refer to us as partners in a half joking way, but we really were just friends. And I love those friends!! And a huge part of what made those relationships (which at the time were described as 'situationships' because we didn't know any of these terms haha) was their convenience. We either lived in the same building, worked together, or were neighbors LOL. I'm still friends with those absolutely lovely folks, but we don't live around each other, so our QPR just appears a lot more like any ole regular friendship. But it's not like there was a feeling that we transitioned into something different than before. It twas what it twas! (Had to take a pause while I was typing to reminisce fondly for a second, okay back to hazbin hahaha)

SO, whenever someone asks or it comes up, MOST OF THE TIME I do ship alastor through an aroace lens and experience with QPRs (specifically, MINEE because they were fun and I've never felt like doing this before I met a character like Al). And my XP is: "this isn't gonna be a partnership and we ain't fucking" LMFAO. so yeah!

When it comes to using a queer term like QPR, I just hope folks are considerate in their writing, but I also am inclined to just believe them if they say that's their intention because QPRs can look very different. Again, aroace and ace folks are not a monolith. The terms help to describe a human's experience. I'm inclined to think people are writing in good faith.

And all this being said, I want to just emphasize that I really don't think it's necessary to consider any of this shit if you want to ship a fictional character. I understand wanting to be protective of a character who shares an identifier with you (I personally don't wanna see romance/sex with Al in canon). But shipping is a fun thing a fandom does that often does ignore canon. Tale as old as time. I don't think anyone needs to be beholden to canon when they're writing fanfiction or having fun. If we did, I would have like--5 artworks on this blog hahaha. These characters are like dollies, do whatever you want. It's cool if people don't like it and I think it's cool if people do. It's just not that serious. There are ships I'm not particularly into or dynamics that I am not enchanted by, but whatever. I can just scroll or close my eyes.

TLDR; shipping in fandom doesn't need to be taken seriously at ALL. It can just be fun way for someone to play with fictional characters they like. That being said, I think it's good practice to use queer terms thoughtfully.

[handweavers]

Cab you elaborate a little on that post about artists of color not having a good understanding of materialism? Like, do you mean that they are unknowingly perpetuating capitalism by being materialistic or something else?????

( This is a genuine question because I misunderstand long posts easily, sorry if it sounds rude ).

when i say 'materialism' i'm referring to dialectical materialism, the marxist theory that political and historical events result from the conflict of social forces - people's access to material needs like shelter, food, healthcare, etc. and their relationship to the means of production. these events can be interpreted as a series of contradictions and their solutions. it is the scientific method for understanding politics/economics and history, and the basis of marxist analysis and of marxism leninism as a framework.

i'm saying that many artists of colour in the west speak a lot about capitalism, imperialism, colonialism, war, etc. from a vaguely 'leftist' but ultimately still liberal perspective, and thus they are not actually challenging anything with their work. they will talk about anything But class, and fall easily for bourgeois politics as long as it's concealed in social justice or "leftist" or antiracist sounding language

and it's because they won't engage directly with marxism leninism, they won't engage with learning materialist analysis, and having this understanding would prevent them from falling for these attempts and allow them to do work that actually has some kind of meaningful impact on these systems they claim to be against. so they are trying to talk and write and make art and organize about capitalism and colonialism without understanding how these things actually function in a literal, material sense...

simply existing as nonwhite people in the west doesn't inherently teach us these things, otherwise all people of colour in the west would be communists. we have to actually do the reading and be open to another framework of understanding the world, to having our worldviews shifted. but i think some people don't want to do that because of their relative class position. it makes them uncomfortable, or they don't want to admit that they benefit from imperialism in some ways. they can't - or won't - decouple an awareness of their class position from morality or their personal feelings.

without a marxist framework for understanding what capitalism is and how it functions, whatever work they claim to be trying to do to challenge capitalism or colonialism or whatever At Best doesn't do anything, and At Worst continues to serve bourgeois interests. the confusion between colonialism and imperialism in particular is easily exploited, so that with the language of anti racism and decolonization people end up agreeing with and promoting US/NATO foreign policy on imperialized nations - these buzzwords can sound pretty good if you don't know better. all this talk about decolonizing our minds and art practices and being anti capitalists but no one can actually explain what capitalism is or how colonialism works or the material role of racism under capitalism, nor do they want to talk about their own relationship to capital, so the talk is just empty lol. all these artists trying to figure out "alternative, embodied ways of thinking and being" and it's all just more liberalism

[yourheartonfireblog]

So, I've been thinking about The Locked Tomb as a whole, particularly about how Tamsyn Muir pulls off the trick of making a dramatic tone and perspective switch with every book, yet it still feels cohesive as a story and a series.

Something that just clicked for me after a reread of Harrow the Ninth is noticing that a motif obviously present in HtN is actually running through all the books, in a way that supports this constant resetting at the beginning of every novel. And that is Alternate Universes. As in, like, the fanfiction concept of AUs.

Massive spoilers ahead for the first three books of The Locked Tomb:

Probably the biggest link between the books is the structure. All three books of The Locked Tomb roughly follow the same narrative pattern; the narrator/protagonist starts the story hopelessly outclassed and the least informed person in the situation in which she finds herself. At first she is passive or blocked from action, but there's a realization/revelation that she is not as helpless as initially thought. She builds in power and action (and this is rewarded with exposition dumps to catch her and the reader up on what is actually happening). The final act is a fight to the death and as she is dying the narrator makes a sacrifice of her own body in a way that manages to preserve at least part of her consciousness outside herself.

(The secondary narrative in Nona the Ninth -John's confession- loosely follows this pattern too. Except of course John makes a different decision in the final act of his story.)

More than just the structure, each story is a variation on the same themes. Some of them are obvious. Power and how people use it/ abuse it. The narrator's relationship to their own body and how it becomes an expression of trauma.

But another less obvious theme, right from the first chapter of Gideon, is the narrators all have some connection to an Alternate Universe version of themselves/ their lives.

I'll admit this theory is weakest in GtN. But I don't think it's a coincidence that Gideon's entire life plan is inspired by military-themed porn mags - a smut AU, if you will. She's also the only one of the narrators who regularly indulges in daydreams that give her the strength to fight and struggle forward. Also not, I believe, a coincidence.

In HtN things start getting more on the nose - unlike Gideon, Harrow has magic. Rather than accept reality, Harrow uses her power to lobotimize herself into creating and living in an alternate reality, while retelling an alternate version of the prior book. This of course is the book with the infamous role swap/ Regency ball / barista AU sequence, just in case you didn't get what's going on.

But NtN is equally about AUs - Nona is the story where the universe conspires to give Harrow and Gideon the alternate universe of the life they both wanted. Gideon (or at least her body) does turns out to be the daughter of the emperor and the crown prince of the universe. Harrow (or at least her body) gets a found family who love her and a brain that is 100% free of the horrible truth of her abominable origin. We spend most book wondering just who is in that body, Harrow or Gideon, and that's part of the point. The trauma is so deep Harrow and Gideon are unrecognizable as people if their slate is wiped. So of course Nona turns out to be a secret third option.

More to the point, NtN is the book where we learn that the Nine Houses are, in fact, John's shitty self-insert AU. Harrow had a little power a and lobotimized herself, John had more and lobotimized all of humanity he could get his hands on, remaking them into this bizarre and baroque universe centered around worshipping him as a god-emperor. The planet of New Rho, outside John's direct control, is bursting with life and chaos and mess and humanity that is missing entirely from the glimpses we get of John's universe. It's no wonder the other survivors call everyone in the Nine Houses zombies - they are, in fact, brainwiped slaves to John's whims whomever he will pick up, put down, resurrect, and murder exactly as he thinks is best.

I'm very excited for Alecto the Ninth and how this is going to play out now that we've met all three of the people in this relationship, and everyone is in the same place in the right body.

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

the shroud parents

Okay, so I’ve been thinking about this for a while 🤔: “Why are the Shroud parents so warm and loving when the impression we had of them from Idia are so... negative?” And then I realized it’s very obviously because CHARACTERS CAN BE UNRELIABLE NARRATORS.

Like. That does NOT mean that what happened to the characters didn’t actually happen. The events very obviously DID happen as described (especially as it pertains to post-OB flashbacks), but it’s how the characters tell the information that paints the perception of events and how certain elements are presented or omitted entirely.

***Content warning: I briefly mention a few dark topics under the cut (including suicidal ideation and depression) and link to a related post on those topics!!***

As an example, let’s look at the Shroud parents. Idia previously described his grandma and dad as being very gloomy and negative people. He also says his parents as being the types to value results over their children’s feelings. We also notably do not see Mr. or Mrs. Shroud in Idia’s backstory flashback when he was going through a difficult patch of coping with Ortho’s death. This all led to us having an impression that the Shroud parents were cold, distant, calculating, and just overall not very good parents. Then we meet the parents in book 7 and Mrs. Shroud is SUPER bubbly, and both parents readily welcome Ortho as an official member of the family. It’s a huge juxtaposition which completely recontextualizes the information Idia previously gave us.

Idia is Mr. Doom and Gloom, a huge pessimist. It could be possible that he was greatly exaggerating elements of his parents’ personalities, usually when it pertains to them asking him to do something he doesn’t want to (ie pulling him out of school to research on his classmates). Alternatively, it’s implied that he barely left his room for two years following Ortho’s death. The lack of the Shroud parents in Idia’s flashback could indicate that as their own method of coping, they distanced themselves or they gave Idia space to heal on his own. Or maybe Idia was even the one who actively shut his parents out? It’s extremely possible, especially given that there are theories floating around that Idia’s memories and thoughts are greatly impacted by grief, depression, and/or suicidal ideation.

This makes me kind of want to go back and reevaluate all the other OB boys’ flashbacks and see just how much of the information could have been colored by the bias and the perspectives of the storytellers 🤔 POV actually adds a LOT to whatever is being told!! Like you can tell in Riddle’s flashback that even though he now knows his mom’s parenting has fucked him up, he doesn’t appear to hold any ill will toward her. He’s moreso confused and unsure how to proceed, feelings which are perfectly encapsulated by Riddle asking why his chest still hurts, even though he has followed every rule his mom has set for him. As a result, Riddle is shown to be a lot more hesitant and charitable to his mother compared to other people.

Interestingly, fans are quick to bypass Riddle’s own neutral telling of his story and demonize his mother (I think maybe because his circumstances are more relatable?), whereas with Idia he tells us the worst of his parents and it paints our ideas about the Shroud parents in accordance with Idia’s telling.

I also wonder if the fandom’s assumption that Leona’s whole country despises him or that Azul’s mom didn’t know about him being bullied is true at all??? Because if you think about it, Leona’s flashbacks only ever depicted palace servants talking badly about him, which are not representative of all of the Sunset Savanna. We don’t meet locals that speak badly of Leona in his hometown event either??? Then for Azul’s flashback, you can’t really take omission of information as confirmation of anything.

This line of thought also applies for the information the boys relay to us; how much of it is embellished or slightly altered in order to project a certain outward image to their peers? Especially considering how NRC is teeming with (mob) students ready to pounce on you if you seem weak??? It’s really interesting stuff to think about.

[sapphire-weapon]

So, in light of recent events, I've been doing a lot of thinking. People ask me a lot how to get into analysis and where to start if they want to analyze characters and media -- and, historically, my answer has always been "start with the themes."

But there's actually a point 0 place to start. I never mentioned this, because I thought it went without saying -- but that was stupid for me to do, because people are coming to me with nothing and I'm expecting them to have something by default. That's dumb.

The real place that you start?

Is with the writer and the target audience. Who is writing this story, and who are they writing it for?

This is the exact reason why I've also said, in the past, that not all readings of a text are valid. The only way to make all readings of a text valid is by invoking Death of the Author.

So, what is Death of the Author?

Very plainly, Death of the Author is defined as: a literary theory that argues that the meaning of a text is not determined by the author's intention, but rather by the reader's interpretation.

A lot of queer media analysts and scholars, for example, invoke Death of the Author in their work, because they know that an author did not intentionally set out to write a story that was reflective of the queer experience -- but their argument is that there's a way to read the text that is reflective of that experience. They're not saying "this is what the story means." They're saying "this is what the story means to me."

And this is a very valid form of literary analysis, because it provides extra meaning to a work beyond what the author intended and makes it more accessible to a broader audience.

But the thing about Death of the Author is that you need to acknowledge that you're invoking Death of the Author. Because if you don't, then you're making a completely different argument, which is: "the author/work intends for us to take this meaning from it." And you can't say that in good faith for all readings of a story. There is no way to make a claim that there's a positive allegory for the trans experience within Harry Potter, because that is most certainly not what JK Rowling set out to do. However, you could make a Death of the Author argument in favor of that -- which would be great, because it'll piss her the fuck off.

That's what I mean when I say that "not all readings of a text are valid." When I say that, what I actually mean is "that is absolutely not what the writers intended for us to take away from this scene/character/relationship/line of dialogue."

So, if you're someone who's coming to me, personally, and asking "how do I do what you do?" -- I don't make Death of the Author analyses. That's not what I do. So, my step zero to writing meta is to consider who is writing the story and who they're writing it for.

And there's a few reasons why I do this.

First and foremost, I'm in the business of theorycrafting. In order for me to try to accurately predict where a character arc or storyline is going and how it's going to manifest in future titles, I need to try to hone my focus on the writer's actual intentions. Because if I can't see things from their perspective, I'm never going to be able to chart out a course for where they might be going. And I'm not always right -- but sometimes I'm really right. Like, really super right. And I can't stop being right. And that feels really good.

The second reason is because acknowledging the writers' intentions opens them up to criticism. It's hard to criticize a writer for a lack of inclusivity if you take the stance that all readings of a text are valid and therefore any of the characters could be XYZ marginalized group. It's hard to criticize a writer for a sexist narrative or a sexist framing of events if you make the argument "but it's possible this completely alternate interpretation is also valid."

Like, I love DBZ. I love Akira Toriyama. I cried openly when he passed. But DBZ has some sexist bullshit going on in it. And you can't criticize it or him for turning all the female characters into housewives and babymakers while also supporting a reading of the text that says "but this is the happy ending that the characters are fighting for in the first place, so it's actually empowering."

So, in the case of Resident Evil...

Resident Evil is being written and developed by Japanese men in their 30s, 40s, and 50s for a group of Western cishet male gamers between the ages of 18-35. That is their target demographic. They are not talking to my coworker who's a 24 year old afab bi enby who desperately loves the series; the series just happened to reach them despite that.

And while everything in RE released prior to 2005 is pure survival horror meant to make you constantly feel like you're on the back foot, everything from RE4 onwards is a power fantasy. There are still horror elements to the games and movies, but RE more turns into a monster-of-the-week series about cool characters doing sick wrestling moves on cool monsters.

The devs and also the majority of their target audience project onto the male protagonists of the series to a certain extent -- which is why there has only been one title released since 2005 with a focus on a female protagonist, and that's Revelations 2 -- and, even then, Claire had to share the spotlight with Barry. Women have been playable here and there and been considered "main characters" -- but they've never really been the focus of any new titles that have come out. Sheva is considered Chris's partner. The RE6 campaigns are primarily about Leon, Chris, and Jake. Revelations 1 is seen as a Chris and Jill game in equal measure. And even though Death Island was supposed to be about Jill -- it wasn't, really. Because every other character had to be there with her, too.

So, when I get shit for taking a "heteronormative perspective" to my RE analysis -- there's a reason why I'm doing that. It's not because this is how I inherently view the world. It's because that is the intention with which the games are being written. That is who is writing the games and who the games are being written for.

Let's take RE4 Remake as an example, here. Capcom had to mash three different women together in order to create Ashley and turn her into an idealized fantasy woman so that she had the perfect face, the perfect body, and the perfect voice.

And the games are being developed by and for men who project onto Leon and see him as a power fantasy.

That is why it's absurd to me for people to say that Leon and Ashley never flirted with each other in the game. Of course they fucking did. Capcom created the perfect woman with giant tits and a small waist and a huge ass and a supportive personality and put her into close quarters with a male power fantasy protagonist. They put the flirting in so that their target cishet male audience could live that.

What people don't understand is that the eagleone romance wasn't created for the sake of the ship. It was made because of:

dudes who want to fuck Ashley and

Yoshiaki Hirabayashi's love for fairy tales.

(What makes me say that Hirabayashi loves fairy tales? He wrote RE5, which has a shitton of fairy tale elements surrounding Jill and Wesker specifically and even an alternate costume for Sheva that's called "fairy tale." To find that he turned RE4 into a fairy tale wasn't surprising to me at all, considering what the source material was. But the RE5 thing is for a separate post.)

Capcom doesn't care about your ships or our ship wars. They didn't create a Leon and Ashley romance because "we ship these two characters together." They created a Leon and Ashley romance so that guys who want to fuck Ashley can feel like maybe they could.

And because Hirabayashi fucking loves fairy tales.

And I also love fairy tales, which is why I love the ship. But I also do recognize that there's a sexist element behind the construction of Ashley's character and am capable of criticizing the ship for that reason.

So. Yeah. Start there. Start with the writers. Start with the intended audience.

I know that RE isn't being written for me. So I have to look at it from the perspective of the people who it is being written for. And if you want to analyze media, you have to do that, too.

[m4rveys]

why i think harvey specter and louis litt are bpd coded (to an extent)

this is just harmless headcanon based on what i noticed while watching, don’t take me too seriously. i’m pretty sure aaron korsh has never even heard of bpd and no one in that writers room knew enough about psychology to actually write a borderline character…

i could make a way more in depth analysis of their mental… situations… but i haven’t rewatched the show in a while so these are just my most basic observations

louis

aside from his uh.. obvious emotional instability and anger issues. i think the most tangible proof i have of this one is when he was described as “loving, hating, and wanting to be harvey at the same time.” now, i’m pretty sure that was just a movie quote… but Very Telling imho…

also the way all his romantic relationships play out in the show (TARA!!!!)… idk y’all… that tara thing was textbook limerence in my eyes.

side note, i’ve seen people call him bipolar quite a bit but i’m pretty sure most of that is just the colloquial (see: wildly incorrect) usage/misunderstanding of the term and not actual concrete evidence of any bipolar theories.

harvey

this one is a little less obvious, so bear with me. but i think the way he started having panic attacks so severe he had to see a therapist (!!!) because donna went to work for someone else at the same damn firm… i’m sorry but the abandonment issues are wild. also the scene when he sees lipschitz one on one and he’s basically complaining that everyone leaves him and louis is gonna forget about him once he has a baby…? which uh, has he ever met louis before? also, that scene gets extra funny when the writers had him and donna leave for seattle like the day after lucy was born… who’s leaving who now?

also, his anger issues got pretty bad too… and his whole “i don’t care about anyone, caring makes me weak” shtick from the earlier seasons isn’t necessarily giving mental illness, but it certainly doesn’t paint a picture of perfect mental stability… i mean, he does change throughout the show (see: the whole situation with anna) but i’d argue that was directly a result of mike’s presence in his life.

ACTUALLY, DONT EVEN GET ME STARTED ON THAT ONE. SECRETLY KEEPING MIKE AND RACHEL’S OLD APARTMENT JUST IN CASE THEY MIGHT COME BACK??? but that deserves a whole separate post bc that’s not related to bpd… just homosexuality.

there’s honestly way more than that, but i’d have to rewatch the whole damn show and take notes to properly make an analysis, which i am not currently willing to do.

Also in my mind mike is slightly autistic coded (strong sense of justice, eidetic memory, hyperempathy (actually just normal empathy tbh but he just looks really emotional compared to Harvey “I Don’t Get Attached To Clients, I Win” Specter)) but that’s not an actual theory i have nor is it at all supported by canon, pure projection by me on that one.

Uhhh again don’t take this too seriously, this is just my brain ramblings. i just thought bpd coded suits deserves more love than 4 unknown reddit comments (one of them being me), 1 tumblr post from half a decade ago, and 1 paragraph in a “tv series that portray bpd” article… i was seriously spoiled in my previous fandoms with the mental disorder hcs (see: adhd denki, bpd goro, autistic izuku/shoto/bkg/ren/saiki/everyone hcs being wildly popular).

also, this is in no way meant to be insulting/demeaning to any characters mentioned, just to share an alternative perspective/interpretation, i’m literally the ceo of borderpolartism… (and made up words!) feel free to disagree as heavily as you’d like, this is nothing but my own personal opinion.

Uhhh, i also have no formal education in psychology, just years of lived experience w bpd/autism and their dsm-5 criteria memorized… (Not that the dsm-5 is great in itself, that book is wildly problematic all on its own, but that’s a subject more fitting for a formal research paper and not a tumblr post made by a generally uneducated moron who only finished school up to the 9th grade…)

one day i’ll write up a proper analysis/explanation/character study, but for now this is the best you’re getting outside of the mildly implied but never explicitly stated autistic mike ross WIPs rotting in my notes app rn, never to be finished.

[tokiro07]

UU Appreciation Week Day 7

Anything Else You Appreciate - Four Years And An Anime

When Undead Unluck started, I had no idea what it was going to develop into. For such a long time, it seemed like I was the only person who knew about it, and I was resigned to that fact. All of my favorites end up being really obscure, and more often than not end up getting canceled by the end of year 2 if they're lucky

I started #fouryearsandananime as a prayer, practically a joke, never really expecting that I'd see it come to fruition. Even if it made it that far, I never dared imagine a scenario where there were enough people reading it to organize community events like UUAppreciationWeek, much less that anyone in such a community would give me the time of day

But here we are

Nearly at the end of year five, with an anime special that will hopefully usher in season 2 on the way, and an honest-to-goodness fandom banding together to celebrate it as it approaches its natural, intended conclusion

These past five years have been such an amazing and inspiring time for me. Even at the height of my previous favorite, Medaka Box's run, I never read this closely or wrote this in-depth. My skills as a reader and writer have grown and changed so much thanks to Undead Unluck, to say nothing of how I've actively tried to improve my outlook on life

In the very beginning, I was just making small observations here and there, a theory or two when inspiration struck, but nothing consistent

Then I started doing that week-to-week, trying to always have something to say just so there would never be a week of silence in the fandom

Then it became a game of I Spy, trying to identify every hidden detail and bit of foreshadowing that I could, seeing what Easter Eggs were hidden in the background or what threads were being tied up and when. This became pretty exhausting, not very fun to write and I imagine not very fun to read

Then I started examining the themes, the narrative choices, the character arcs. The things that actually mattered to the reader experience. No longer bound by the chore of going over every panel with a fine-toothed comb, suddenly I felt inspiration rushing over me every week

With time, my reviews got longer and longer, diving deeper and deeper. I started having fun with it, giving each review a silly little title to differentiate them for anyone reading over them later. I started making previews of the topics as a sort of summary of what each chapter had to offer. I started breaking up the reviews themselves into sections to make them easier to read

Undead Unluck has helped me discover and develop both my creative voice and my reader's eye; the skills I've developed here have deepened my capacity to appreciate not just UU, but manga as a medium, enabling me to better understand what it is I'm looking for in manga and articulate when I find it

I've always wanted to write my own stories, and I've dabbled in the past, but I've never been satisfied with what I had because it always feels empty. I've never had a theme I've cared enough to dissect and analyze, no message I've been so passionate about that I wanted to share it with the world. I don't believe that's necessary for every story, but it is a standard I hold myself to. I wouldn't say I've found such a message or theme yet, but what I have found is a guideline for how to go about it when I do

Reading Undead Unluck, I have a much richer understanding of how any given character can analyze a facet of an idea, represent a different perspective, propose an alternative, or reach a deliberately incorrect conclusion. That's the kind of story I want to be able to write, and I'm so grateful that it was the kind of story I got to read

So thank you, Tozuka

For lasting over four years

For writing something so inspirational

For allowing an excellent anime to come into existence

For helping me to enjoy life

I appreciate you

[vykker]

Oddworld Headcanon 5/?: Vykkers Labs is Hot and Sweaty

I was gathering pictures of vykkers for drawing references when I noticed something. Why are their outfits so threadbare and nasty? And how come some of the vykkers we see in-game are ass naked? Their most valued business partners are, I assume, the Glukkons, and the Glukkons take fashion & clothing extremely seriously.

Pictured: My Favorite Boys in their tattered rags

Well, what do we know about vykkers? From an evolutionary perspective, not much. We know they're descendants of some arboreal prey species, that's about it. If we extrapolated on this, we can assume they're jungle dwellers. Jungle = big tree.

Jungles are [generally] hot and humid. A creature that evolved to live there would probably not need to wear clothes to keep warm. They might even find the sensation of clothes unpleasant if they're unaccustomed to it. If you were used to swinging around naked in the tree tops, you'd probably find clothes to be smothering and itchy.

Thus, I postulate that vykkers keep the Vykkers Lab thermostat at a comfy 80 or 90 degrees, which is about the temperature of the Amazon in spring. Not only is it a comfortable temperature to them, but it allows them to do work without having to wear clothes, which they apparently hate. I mean, look at Headley the Auctioneer and his stupid little haircut. He wants to look refined, he's dressed in his finest attire, and it's still just shirt cuffs and bow tie.

Now, there IS an outlier to this idea, and that is our beloved Doc Vykkers from Stranger's Wrath. He's dressed a little more conservatively. That being said, his outfit is still just a body-wrap type thing with a hat. He's not wearing shoes or gloves, and his legs and forearms are bare. I guess you could say that his body wrap is air-tight and made to conserve moisture in the dry desert climate, but that's basing a speculation off of another speculation to try and make my theory fit, it could be as simple as he just likes wearing clothes. [Or my theory is wrong.]

Speaking of humidity: I believe the vykkers prefer their environments nice and humid. However, I don't think they need to do anything specific to keep humidity where they want it. As we see in the first levels of Munch's Oddysee, a massive area of the ship is dedicated to a hydroponic spooce farm.

This massive flooded system, combined with the vykker's preference for warm places, would practically turn the Labs into a sauna. I imagine a human entering the labs would feel disgusted by the air in the Labs, and if a visitor were wearing glasses, they'd immediately fog up.

Having Vykkers Labs be an unexpectedly hot and muggy environment would increase the discomfort of non-vykker workers and experiments, making the Labs even more unbearable to work in, probably even nauseating. The whole place would also stink. High humidity and temperatures are the preferred breeding grounds of bacteria, mold, and funguses. If you walked through Vykkers Labs, I think you'd alternate between smelling whatever slime is growing in the walls, and the extremely toxic chemical cleaners they use to disinfect the place, trying to keep said slime from taking over. That's not even including the smell of blood and medical waste. Vykkers don't seem to have nostrils, but I think I recall Humphrey complaining about "the smell" after Irwin leaves a fuzzle on the burner. Maybe you just get used to it when you're so dedicated to pursing science.

When wealthy visitors hop over to Vykkers Labs, I imagine they're taken to special quarters of the ship that are dehumidified and nuked with air freshener.

There's more. Vykkers Labs is not exactly air tight. Aside from all the rusty paneling we see in the labs, we're also shown massive bay doors on the outside where people can exit and enter. There's also the Poop Chute, where they dump waste, and in the concept art, the bottom center of the ship seems to be hollow.

I think Vykkers Labs consumes a LOT of water. The hydroponic vats keep dehydrating, and the vykkers aren't exactly about resource conservation. I imagine that Vykkers Labs will periodically lower close to the ground in order to collect water. They probably drop a massive hose from the middle of the ship and suck up entire lakes at a time. Ecosystems have died just from them topping off the tank one Tuesday. Not only that, but on summer mornings, when the sunrise first hits the side of the ship, you'd probably see a massive cloud of steam rise from it, like when the sun hits the pavement after a rainy night. A mudokon on the ground, looking up at the sky, would see a trailing white cloud approach, something massive and dark spinning inside it.

[moongothic]

Here’s something interesting! Read back to Marineford arc and consider what Whitebeard might have meant to Crocodile. It was only after the witnessing WB getting stabbed and talking to his adopted son that Croco did a 180 to protect Luffy. I try to read WB’s dialogue to guess what he said affected Croco so much. My favorite theory is that WB is Croco’s bio dad and thus Luffy’s other grandpa! The family tree would be so entangled lol

This is one of those things which makes me feel insane because, I swear to god, around like 2011 I remember Oda saying in an interview that he based Whitebeard on a gay friend he had, which was like part of the reason why Whitebeard's crew WAS his family, instead of him having like a wife and bio-kids. That Whitebeard was gay. But like, no matter how I try looking that up I can't actually find any information to confirm this?? Like no interview or as much as a mention of an interview like that ever existing??? DID I IMAGINE THAT??? IT'S SUCH AN OLD, CORE MEMORY, I CAN'T IMAGINE HOW I WOULD'VE IMAGINED IT UP??? OR WAS IT JUST AN EARLY 2010S TUMBLR HOAX?????? I FEEL DERANGED

Honestly, considdering the way Marco of all people found it unimaginable WB had kids, let alone that Weevil was the son of Whitebeard and Stussy (the current running theory being that Weevil is actually like a clone of WB with Stussy's DNA mixed in), I do personally find it unlikely Whitebeard has any bio-kids at all. Like, that felt like the implication there to me, that Marco doesn't believe WB had bio-kids with anyone, and I would be inclined to believe Marco there as he's kind of meant to be seen as an authority figure in a way (at least on this subject)

At most, if the "Xebec is Croc's dad" theory did turn out to be true, it would actually make sense if Whitebeard had adopted Crocodile after the God Valley incident-- whether the kid stayed is debatable, since WB did still betray his dad so he might've ran away, but regardless, at most I could see WB being Croc's adoptive father. At most. (Alternatively, as Oda has stated in an SBS, Whitebeard didn't believe women belong on a battlefield so it could be plausible he didn't want to keep a 9 year old child on his ship either. So he could've picked up Baby Croc until he found a safe place to ditch him in, kinda like how Franky ended up)

I have been feeling tempted to do a re-analysis of Croc in Marineford because, when I did my first analysis, I was too Lost In The Sauce and far too excited about the mere idea of Crocodad to form coherent, even semi-objective thoughts. But now that it's been a few months, I feel like I could really look at it with a more fresh perspective

But let's just look this exchange Crocodile and Whitebeard had really quick

As far as we know, the only person Crocodile has ever lost to (aside from Luffy) was Whitebeard, and that loss was the thing that crushed his spirit and dreams. Whitebeard, the most powerful man in the world. He who humbled Crocodile and taught him his place in the powerscaling of the world, that Crocodile was at best a silver medalist and could never catch up to him.

That must've been Crocodile's entire worldview, for so many decades. That WB was #1, an absolute fact nothing could change.

But time comes for all.

Whitebeard has become old. He is no longer in his prime.

"I can't remain the strongest forever"

Even if Whitebeard didn't say that outloud, I'm sure in this moment Crocodile understood that deep inside. That the absolute he had believed in wasn't an absolute after all, that a new era is approaching and the kids (Luffy and Ace) on this battlefield are going to take their places (his and WB's) sooner or later, whether they like it or not.

And of course; this isn't the same Whitebeard who beat Crocodile's ass over 20 years ago. Taking his head would not give him the satisfaction and catharsis he wanted.

Trying to get past Jozu and Marco and the rest of WB's crew, some of whom might be more dangerous than WB himself at this point, would not give Crocodile the revenge he wanted. It wouldn't even be worth the effort. If anything, taking WB's head here and now would just give the World Government exactly what they'd want.

Like, putting aside all the theories, your Crocodads and Whitebeard's bio-kids aside. ('Cause sometimes you need to look past the rose-tinted theory glasses even if you don't want to) (And I need to remind myself to do that more often tbh) I do think the main reason Crocodile ends up assisting Luffy, is simply because of that. Whitebeard isn't worth it anymore. He's just an old man. Crocodile could kill him, without a doubt, it just wouldn't change anything.

So he just moves onto the next thing on his list of priorities; not letting the Government get what they want, out of spite.

[marymalone]

How do you navigate relationships and shifting?

Oh... I guess the answer is... I don't (?

Even in real life, I don’t do relationships—it’s just not something I seek out or feel drawn to. I like the idea of relationships, the concept of lovers bound by some invisible thread, but in practice, I don’t really engage in that culture.

It feels distant, almost foreign, like something I can admire from afar but don’t truly want to dive into. I’m more captivated by the thought of love than the reality of it, more enchanted by the fantasy than the commitment.

Relationships are beautiful in theory, but for me, they’re simply not essential.

So, when it comes to shifting, I usually don’t have a partner. I know that sounds odd, especially since most people in the shifting community do it to experience being in love with their favorite characters.

For me, that’s just not the draw. I’m more interested in the worlds, the stories, the freedom to explore alternate lives and perspectives without getting tied down.

Love stories are captivating, sure, but I’d rather lose myself in the adventure, the mystery, the endless possibilities that shifting offers. Relationships feel secondary to the thrill of existing in another reality, where I can be entirely myself—without any attachments.

So, the answer is no—I don’t engage in relationships.

I do form sentimental connections with others when I shift, but they’re not what I’d call relationships. They’re more like deep bonds or unique affinities, connections that don’t fit neatly into the traditional framework of romance. They’re intense, meaningful, but they exist without the weight of commitment or expectation.

In these worlds, I connect on my own terms, free from the typical constraints. It’s a kind of closeness that feels more fluid, more aligned with the way I move through those realities.

[crayolacolor]

simon infinitytrain?

send me a character and i'll list the below things about them | accepting!

HELLO ANON. i do not know if you'll ever see this because it took me ten years, but here i am, answering you.

FAVORITE THING ABOUT THEM:

fun fact: simon infinity train is the reason i have a disclaimer about me getting attached to tragic antagonists in my pinned post. so you can probably make an educated guess what i like about him.

he's just. such a well written character. i love how his negative character development was contrasted against grace's positive character development. i love how the writers did a really good job of making him infuriating and sympathetic at the same time.

i'll go more into my thoughts on him in a later section, but yeah, the tl:dr is he really just is my character type hahaha.

he's just a really complex character and imo the writers nailed that.

LEAST FAVORITE THING ABOUT THEM:

okay well, this answer changes depending on if you mean from a writing perspective or a 'him as a person' perspective. from a writing perspective, 100/10, no notes. i can't think of anything i disliked.

from a PERSON perspective. episode 6 makes me want to murder this man <3 i want to put tape over his mouth every time he speaks in that episode. it's somehow WAY worse than when he's just straightup being an over-dramatic anime villain at the end of the season.

FAVORITE LINE:

oh there are many. i need to rewatch again. but the ones that live in my brain rent free are ALL after his downward spiral begins:

"teamwork begins with two people trusting eachother. but you? you're no person." dramatic effect. extremely traumatizing for everybody who's ever watched this show. 10/10

"i liked what we had, but you made me do it! you betrayed the apex. and you betrayed me." again, dramatic effect. really gives you a feel for what's going on in his head, i think. 10/10

"why would i ever want to change if i'm always right!?" iconic. i think this is the one people remember the most from him, along with the one from ep 5.

BROTP & OTP (combining because my answer is the same for both):

grace. lol. full stop. hopefully i don't have to explain that i am VERY AWARE that their relationship was unhealthy in many, MANY ways. that is what i like about it. i'm a huge fan of messy relationships in fiction. i am a self proclaimed angst fiend.

the tragedy of it all is 100% the appeal of it for me, from either a platonic OR romantic standpoint. i love that. and yes, i do ship them to an extent- but NOT in the "i think they should have gotten together in canon" way. again, the angst is the appeal!!

i admit i do also enjoy aus where they fix their relationship, but not INSTEAD of the canon, more so in ADDITION to the canon. i think it's a fun alternate route to explore, but i deeply adore what the infinity train writers did with them in the show and that will not be changing.

NOTP:

literally any of the protags from the previous seasons. y'all, simon and grace are 18. you can't be shipping them with the 13-14 year olds. please stop. (nobody here! i mostly see this on ao3, honestly.)

RANDOM HEADCANON:

i think simon has been back to the cat multiple times in secret.

i really like the theory that he got some of the apex's tech from her. the main thing i have to support this is this line from the episode where he returns to her cabin in book 3:

"i knew you'd have something. you always do."

particularly i think there's a good chance he got the unmodified gravity boots from her (and likely modified them himself) and possibly also the number tracker.

UNPOPULAR OPINION:

oh i'm sure a lot of what i've already said has been an unpopular opinion, haha. i'm one of those people that's so in the middle in a debate that both sides of it have reasons to disagree with me.

i really like simon. he and grace are my favorite characters in the show. there are parts where i feel really bad for him, and parts where i want to yell at him and hit him over the head with a very large stick.

i see his death as a tragedy in universe, but also a really good writing choice on the part of the infinity train crew.

i don't think they secretly had a scheme to make us dislike him. i think it was written in such a way that it makes sense that some people would have a viscerally negative reaction to him, and others wouldn't. he's a very complex character and that's good writing!!!

i think the tragedy was the point, which is something both people who like him and people who hate him seem to completely overlook in a lot of cases. it's either "woohoo! simon died!" or "killing simon was bad writing he should have been redeemed >:/" not "oh this is really sad but i love it from a story perspective."

i don't think he was "irredeemable", per-say. the fact is, he was faced with a pivotal choice in episode five, and he picked the wrong one. he chose to double-down. i love that. i really do. i love the downward spiral. it's painful in the best way. i would not change the canon show for the world. again, 100/10, no notes.

but i can also see a universe where he made the right choice. i was writing a fic about that, once. (which admittedly has some characterization issues which i would fix if i tried it again.) i think it was possible. and i think that's a fun route to explore too. not a better route from a writing standpoint, but a good one.

i have so many more thoughts but this has already gotten really long, and i have two more questions to go, lol. but if you want to hear anymore you're free to send me another ask about it!

but, for now, moving on.

SONG I ASSOCIATE WITH THEM:

someone else on tumblr pointed out that "the moon will sing" by the crane wives is a good fit for simon @ grace and now i can't unhear it.

and, finally, FAVORITE PICTURE OF THEM:

anime villain simon my beloved.

[campgender]

been thinking about how when writing stone sex scenes i in some ways “default” to the top’s pov; the only piece with a stone bottom pov i’ve actually finished was very focused on pain sensation. & this became particularly evident with my current wip where the perspective alternates, & my first thought was to have the chapter break right after they fuck bc for some reason it felt less “right” to write the sex scene from the high femme character’s pov. like wait, back up baby, what?

(kennedy & davis with an old-school slide projector in my mind reminding me fem narrators didn’t discuss their internal lives, their lived sexual perspectives, rather community dynamics & needs—)

it’s complicated because in some ways reading “the fem tapes” assuaged some of my shame & in other ways spiked it, because obviously it’s fine if someone’s personal journey includes ““giving”” more when they’re older, but i wish that were balanced in my life by depictions of people who moved to “just laying there” as a middle-aged or older adult, etc. so that it seems my life is less an inevitable line but open to a variety of possibilities.

so yeah. the shame. on one end writing a stone top pov is validating because it’s like, the easiest if not only way to see myself as permissible, & then maybe beautiful. it’s a common butch/fem tactic in & outside of fiction: your desire is a vehicle through which i can understand myself as okay. (maybe part of why so many queer people, too, freak out when someone doesn’t want to fuck them, but i digress.)

& on the other end like. to write about my sexual practices & experiences, or something close, without that lens of external validation, ‘yeah i swear i like this even though she’s not doing anything’ — that scares the shit out of me‼️ because as much as i love amber hollibaugh’s descriptions of this semiconscious sublimation of desire & theory on reception & etc — ultimately i very rarely feel like any of that’s what i as an individual am doing. i feel (fear; know) that the vast majority of my sex is very self-centered. sometimes i’m able to believe it isn’t wrong, but not long enough or strongly enough to write it down.

[madmanbear]

Illegalizing survival strategies, offering no solutions

A problem I have with some radfems is that they often believe the patriarchy can be undone by the individual actions of women or female-born people making choices “not to be brainwashed.” Like if enough women choose individually not to have sex with men or shave their legs, corporations whose interests have always been shaped by men’s desires and not women’s behavior will stop telling women to be sexually attractive to men. As if patriarchs aren’t willing to lose money on this.

Sex work is bad, and therefore the ability to legally prostitute oneself should be removed—no similar effort given to fighting systemic poverty, providing shelter to and destigmatizing prostituted women and girls and thus allowing them to return to a society after sex work.

I see a lot of angry discourse and read theory about how sex work is bad. Yeah ok. You cannot remove someone’s only source of survival without finding them an alternative immediately. Otherwise, you do not care about survival.

I feel the same way about butch lesbians who transition, honestly. I used to be a transmedicalist. I believed a person needed to suffer greatly with gender dysphoria, identify as the opposite sex internally, and pass as the opposite sex for a year before transitioning to the opposite sex or taking HRT. I believed this process could be gatekept and medicalized.

Although detransitioners are very rare, and only a small percentage of that minority actually regrets their transition, the majority of those in that minority seemed (to me) to be butch lesbians. I thought medical gatekeeping could help prevent women from transitioning to escape prejudice rather than for actual desire to be the opposite sex. (This could be that a lot of detrans bloggers and grifters were butch lesbians at the time, idk.)

Reading Stone Butch Blues changed my perspective completely, and my transmedicalist views evaporated. I do not have a patriarchy stopping button. I cannot prevent Butch lesbians from being beaten and raped by police. I can’t prevent them from facing workplace discrimination. If a Butch lesbian wants to pose as a trans man in order to access medical transition and thus male privilege, I have absolutely no right to stop her (or him). Butches are welcome to access the male privilege I have earned, it is not mine, it does not belong to me, it does not belong to anyone. Butch lesbians deserve male privilege. I have absolutely no alternative to offer. I do not have a patriarchy stopping button.

Radfems kind of think like vegans, as if they can convince everyone to stop eating meat regardless of circumstances and that this will automatically solve global warming. Sure vegans sometimes mention the government subsidizing the agricultural industry but they’ll mostly focus on People’s Choices. Radfems seem to believe that women who wear makeup or shave their legs or do sex work or transition despite not identifying as male are traitors not participating in the Patriarchy Boycott radfems are doing, and thus deserve to be punished and have their survival strategies removed through illegalization. As if patriarchy can be boycotted.

[itsclydebitches]

You know I don’t have a problem with the relics in theory but maybe they should have been naturally displaced items from the…(I forgot the name) “Wonderland”. I think one of the worst things in the course of the story was the introduction of the god brothers. Not looking forward to the team saying a whole speech between the four of them being holier than thou with the deities. Also the Maidens shouldn’t exist. Not without some true purpose cause semblances are already plenty strong and better

I feel that, anon, and I personally hate how none of this fits together now. RWBY keeps adding more worldbuilding that just complicates an already underdeveloped world:

Characters have aura that protects them/heals them from physical harm. At first it seems like everyone's got that - and they technically do - but it needs to be unlocked to work and after showing that once around episode 3, it's never relevant again.

Aura is distinct from Semblances, special powers that let you do cool things by controlling some natural force.

This is distinct from Dust which is substance that also lets you do cool things by controlling some natural force.

Not everyone has a semblance and not everyone has access to Dust. What determines - from an individual and class perspective - who gets what? Not important.

Oh, also one semblance is randomly inherited, but no one cares to unpack that.

Oh, also, also one semblance is randomly The Worst Thing Ever, but no one cares to unpack that either.

Semblances can also evolve! This will happen at random points and will only be tied to the narrative structure in the loosest sense.

Now, semblances can evolve again... maybe. If you're Ruby, anyway.

All of this is how Remnant naturally functions. It's a magical world.

Sike! Actually there's real magic and it's distinct from Semblance magic because... uh. Idek anymore.

Four women are able to wield real magic because a singular magic user gave humanity that ability generations ago.

He got that ability by being a part of Humanity 1.0. Why did the Gods drastically change the skills humanity had access to the second time around? Unclear.

Oh yeah, there are Gods too with their own shapeshifting/creation magic, completely unlike the magic they gave to people.

They did, however, give four random, real-real magic objects to help ("help") one guy with the worst group project in existence.

So at least we've got this settled then, yeah? For however messy everything else is, the Gods are the top dogs who dispense real-magic/semblance-magic to everyone else.

Sikex2! They're actually from another world that functions completely differently from the one they created. They're the product of a third type of magic, which is even more convoluted than what Remnant's got because it functions under Wonderland logic -- AKA, no logic at all.

This includes the real top dog (for now): a Blacksmith/tree lady we meet for a grand total of 10-ish minutes, making miniature people and letting go off into the multiverse to wreak havoc.

That's too much worldbuilding with too little development! Once upon a time a nonsense world birthed two super powered beings who decided they wanted to be Gods. They go off and create a group of people with magic distinct from their own. Then they wiped them out, creating a second group with another distinct magic structure (that supposedly isn't really magic), but remnants of the first group remain. So the world is now populated by everything from "I'm an NPC with nothing going for me" to "I have a super power" to "I have super powers, but not the cool individualized kind" to "I have the real magic super powers" to "I'm a device from a literal alternate reality" and all of it is mushed together without rhyme or reason so that fights are impossible to get invested in now due to the lack of consistency. Are you fighting another normal super powered person? A weaker version of that without a Semblance? A god-like being wielding real magic? A transforming cat possessing the most powerful character on screen? The answers don't matter because Ruby is going to win regardless by swinging her Normal Fighter Weapon around.

Meanwhile, I miss when wielding Crescent Rose was actually SUPER impressive against the grimm, rather than a "How are you even winning nowadays?" puzzlement against the new backdrop of elite forces and magic and godhood.

[asteracaea]

Concerning ITTG, these are just my first thoughts when I heard these lyrics [from a newbie Kaylor perspective] I'm not sure if this has already been suggested before but I thought I'd offer this alternate interpretation.  🫣

On the surface level it sounds damning, but looking deeper... maybe it isn't.

When the dinner is cold and the chatter gets old

You ask for the tab

This is just screaming gossip to me. She has to sit around and listen to all the theories, the speculation, the hearsay.... like people chattering at other dinner tables about what may have happened. 

Or that moment again, he's insisting that friends Look at each other like that

Soooo in my mind I immediately thought of how maybe some people would look at the way Karlie and Taylor would uh... gaze intently at one another... 🙊 and suggest or identify with that being attraction, but only be met with "oh friends can look at each other like that, it's so just platonic" and are so adamant that there is absolutely no possibility that it could be more. They think they know the story but they don't necessarily.

… When the words of a sister come back in whispers

That prove she was not

In fact what she seemed, not a twin from your dreams

She's a crook who was caught

What I feel like could be being said here is that she knows people will gossip, she hears the whispers of speculation about her falling out with Karlie. They're saying she betrayed Taylor. To them, Karlie was that "friend" who stabbed her in the back. They're putting words into Karlie's mouth, writing their version of the story. So it's not actually clear that it's Taylor that thinks this, it's the overall sentiment of the whispers coming from other people. She's allowing this rumor to spread for whatever personal reasons she has, but it does not necessarily mean that this is her truth. It's almost similar to How did it End. She's letting the public conduct the post mortem of the relationship, whether or not it's true.

  … That old familiar body ache

The snaps from the same little breaks in your soul

You know when it's time to go

It's breaking her because she knows the truth, whatever that may be. Maybe she wants to say something, maybe she wants to scream it in their faces 🤷🏻‍♀️ but she can't, so she just has to stay silent, ignore the chatter, ask for the tab, and leave. This is the decision that she made, to let the public believe this narrative, and she has to be okay with that.

I could be way off base and it got super long but I just thought I'd put it out there! 🌼🩷

oh i love this very much, anon!! that's brilliant!

someone (@9w1ft was it you?) made a great analysis of the "crook who was caught" line in terms of something like being found out (...kissgate?) and the definition of crook as a person who engages in fraudulent or criminal practices - which we could totally apply to, let's say, hiding a forbidden love from the public?

again, i know all this is a stretch to try to make this line fit our personal view of things, but if nothing else it's a fun mental exercise! working our analytical muscles

[trans-axolotl]

(Apologies this is long and rambley)

So ive been thinking on a peer-made trait-based 'diagnostic model' (not for disorders but neurodiverse traits), rather than the way the DSM and ICD do it and what that would look like and if it would be a good idea to propose as an alternative that focuses the patients unique experiences over theorized model boxes with misleading names.

Ive been growing increasingly discontent with how the ICD and DSM both categorize disorders, and the completed alternate models ive seen that already exist are not much better honestly, and worse for my specific brainfuckery. The alternate models that only focus on one section are just that- focused on one specific experience. Monotropisim as an alternate autism model can never be fully realized in the bubble it exists as a theory in. Plurality has like 50 different theory models and half of them aggressively ignore common reported experiences because they don't work with their unverified personal gnosis theory of everything, and the other half are likewise mostly incomplete. Trauma/cause-based models ignore genetic/from birth issues as a known cause of mental illness/developmental disorder and also consider everything trauma to the point of diluting the term.

I figured the best option would be to group traits by perceived experiences or related phenomena, with overlap, and the best way to do that accurately would be to make the 'diagnostic codes' combinable infinitely. (ex- a category that is 'unusual sensory experiences' with synthesia, hypo and hyper sensitivity to stimuli, needing to regulate with the sensory system (stimming) to high degrees, hallucinations of any kind, voice hearing(would also go under the plural category when consistent and personlike in presentation), visual snow, etc and each trait is a unique string of characters you can stack under the category string to create a larger string that describes your experiences quickly and concisely).

(The groupings are still all up in the air and id want to get a lot of perspective before cementing it, but I do want to put synthesia and hallucinations and visual snow all together because they are adding a Weird experience and its sensory based stuff others cannot perceive)

And then I realized that this is just the Geek Code but for neurodiversity,,

Im STILL not sure if that makes it a bad idea or not honestly.

On one hand the way the DSM and ICD are set up is NOT actually that great, and being able to shorthand a list that describes things better and doesnt pathologize people as having 'asshole liar personality disorder' or whatever would be fantastic, on the other it is also clunky, people are gonna be pissed about how I am categorizing things contrary to how the DSM and ICD group things (autism and schizophrenia and plurality are all holding hands and kissing with tongue), and it may more strongly encourage people to share very private information online via sharing their string code of every last neuroweirdness they have (which I do NOT want people doing for safety reasons).

So I just went 'hm, whos a cool antipsych person who may have more insight than I do about trying to make a peer-made description system for those who dont want to use the DSM or ICD to describe their experiences', and I thought of you, so thoughts? Is it feasible? Is it a good idea to try? I have like 500 million projects and I REALLY shouldnt add a new one of this magnitude, but I feel like its an important idea to at least float around first.

Hey anon! My answer got pretty long, so I'm going to put it under the read more.

I actually know a few people doing something like this--the founding director of Neuromancers started a project like this (not much has been happening with it lately, bc everyone is so busy with other organizing commitments and life, but if we ever get back to it i'm really excited about it. you could join the discord for Neuromancers and ask about the project if you want to join). I'm a known DSM hater and think that both the DSM and ICD and most biomedical models of mental illness as well as the "evidence based" processes of diagnosis are so fundamentally flawed, oppressive, and are in no way culturally relevant to the vast majority of people. a lot of us are still going to use that terminology as a shorthand because it's the most accessible and understandable in our current society, but that doesn't necessarily mean we all like it or agree with the way it's formulated in the DSM.

Honestly, I'm always a big fan of mad/mentally ill/neurodivergent people creating more ways of understanding ourselves and creating more resources for us to use. I think that there's never going to be one right model that works for every experience or than can encompass everyone. And I think that there's so much value in really deconstructing and dismantling the DSM--understanding exactly how disorders are currently categorized, the evidence behind it, the lack of evidence behind it, what clinicians and researchers are saying about these diagnoses, how we actually experience these diagnoses in practice, how diagnoses change through history, things like that. It can be super crucial to build our own understandings of just how these diagnoses were shaped in the first place so that we can understand what it would mean to dismantle and build alternative models that feel more affirming for us. I think your idea of trying to group more by traits rather than strict disorder criteria is something that might resonate with a lot of people!

that being said, i think that it is such a large and difficult project and also something that is almost impossible to make universal--there are so many factors going into everyone's experience with madness/mental illness/neurodivergence, and different labels are going to resonate with different people for different reasons. it's hard to predict what language or models will catch on with different people, and not all types of language or models are accessible to everyone. i guess for me i just think it can be helpful to go into projects like this without the expectations that this will necessarily be able to replace the DSM for everyone, and instead thinking more about how this can be a valuable tool for providing more options and ways of thinking about madness/mental illness/neurodivergence! even if it doesn't work for everyone or is only applicable to certain types of traits and variations, i think that this type of creation of knowledge is so, so valuable. i hope that makes sense!

some other related concepts that your ask reminded me of was @bioethicists principles of liberatory antipsychiatry. Charlie identifies the right to your own explanatory model as a key principle of liberatory antipsychiatry, and that liberatory antipsychiatry should affirm and build upon those individual models, and respect that as a way of healing. I think that's a really important insight, and to me makes a lot of sense. We all have the right to draw from our own experiences + minds, as well as use existing knowledge, science, and disability community experience in order to create alterative labels, models, and frameworks for our madness/mental illness/neurodivergence. I honestly feel like I've created my own hyperspecific model of madness for my own bodymind, and that framework has been super helpful for figuring out how to live with my madness. Idk how helpful it would be for anyone who isn't me, but having my own particular explanatory model was crucial for helping me heal.

It also reminds me of the way this really amazing peer support network for people living with schizophrenia in Japan called Bethel House, who developed a framework for radical peer support and healing. This article talks about the concept of tōjisha-kenkyū, which in English would get translated as something like "self directed diagnosis" or maybe "political education," and it seems kind of similiar to English concepts about self diagnosis.

"Self-reflection is at the heart of this practice. Tōjisha-kenkyū incorporates various forms of reflection developed in clinical methods, such as social skills training and cognitive behavioural therapy, but the reflections of a tōjisha don’t begin and end at the individual. Instead, self-reflection is always shared, becoming a form of knowledge that can be communally reflected upon and improved. At Bethel House, members found it liberating that they could define themselves as ‘producers’ of a new form of knowledge, just like the doctors and scientists who diagnosed and studied them in hospital wards. The experiential knowledge of Bethel members now forms the basis of an open and shared public domain of collective knowledge about mental health, one distributed through books, newspaper articles, documentaries and social media." (Japan's radical alternative to psychiatric diagnosis, Satsuki Ayayais and Junko Kitanaka, ).

Anyway, thought I'd share those things to sort of point you in the direction of other people thinking about madness outside of the DSM. if you end up doing any more thought or creation for this idea, def feel free to share with me! I love seeing all the ways people take apart the DSM and build our own knowledge, and would love to keep updated.

best of luck, anon!