#i know when i do bad because of intellectual factors and i know when i do bad because teachers and administration refuse to give me what i

[alaskan-wallflower]

another rant but not about the fandom

so i’m taking the PSAT this week.

And if you’ve been following me for a while then you know I have albinism. Meaning I have a visual impairment. Meaning I have an IEP. (Basically means I have accommodations so that things are easier for me to see and I have the same opportunities as the rest of the kids in school)

And I’ve been told this whole fucking time that I would have every accommodation I need, meaning the font would be bigger, I can write essays on my computer and I’m allowed to use a magnifier to help me see

And now according to the damn cCollege Board, it’s ‘against the test policies’ and I can’t have my font enlarged and I’m also not able to type stuff up. Which is literally in my IEP that I’m allowed to do. And this isn’t as big of a problem for now because it’s just a PSAT, but I’m taking an AP test in May run by the College Board and I’m ALSO TAKING THE SAT soon. So essentially, I’m fucked.

[unsolicited-opinions]

this is a genuine question: why do you think the queer community is so bad when it comes to the antisemitism and even the overt Hamas support? I can’t figure it out at all. Jews have always been a huge part of and even pioneers in the community. now we’re banned and harassed and unsafe. I see a pride flag online these days and feel terror because I expect a watermelon or red triangle to be right next to it, it’s happened so often. I’d feel safer in a church than at a pride event. why do they hate us so much now? even those of us who are also part of that community?

I've been trying to figure that out, too.

I was pretty sure that the origin was in postmodern academia, but I didn't know much more.

I have never formally engaged with Queer Studies, nor with Gender and Sexuality Studies,so I had no idea where to start.

Someone on #jumblr (I regret that I don't recall who) pointed out this collection of essays, Poisoning the Wells: Antisemitism in Contemporary America.

Chapter 2 is "Pinkwashing Antisemitism: The Origins of Queer Anti-Israeli Discourse by Dr. R. Amy Elman.

I'm way outside my wheelhouse here, despite holding a degree in one of the social sciences.[1]

I'm going to try to summarize this in a way which is shorter and more digestible than reading the whole thing, but there's a link to the whole thing at the bottom of this Very Long Post.

Disclaimers:

1. Acknowledging the depth of my ignorance:

I don't have the contextual knowledge to know with confidence if this is an intellectually honest argument, or even if the history is fairly presented. If anyone on Jumblr has more experience studying this topic, I'd sure welcome their thoughts.

2. A note to LGBTQ+ readers on "queer":

I understand that some in the LGBTQ+ community don't care for the term "queer," and some regard it as a slur. I have tried, for this reason, to cease using this word in my daily life. Below, I'm going to use the word "queer" a lot here, however, because Elman does and the scholars she discusses do. If you're among those who dislike this term or find it hurtful, I hope that you will not see my doing so as a slur or an insult

3. My editorial comments are in blue.

4. This is long. Not as long as the article itself, but long for Tumblr. You are forewarned.

Got a coffee or an energy drink?

Continue below the break:

Elman says the increasing appeal of queer politics was for specifically millennials, and the BDS movement actively pursued a "queer" plank to broaden its appeal.

This tracks.

She says that Leaders from both movements saw a potential for synergy, with some suggesting queers could transform BDS from a "vanguard movement" to a "popular" movement.

Elman gives a history of the "Queer Movement" in which she argues its adherents are particularly susceptible to BDS's "pinkwashing" accusations.

She says:

- "Queer" is an intentionally broad, deliberately ambiguous term encompassing various sexual and gender minorities who reject traditional LGBT politics as conservative.

- The queer movement emerged in the late 1980s and early 1990s in opposition to both neo-liberalism and feminists who critiqued sadomasochism (S/M) and the sex industry.

- This opposition to feminist critiques of the eroticization of inequality, says Elman, is a crucial factor in understanding queer politics' susceptibility to antisemitism.

- Elman says early queer activists prioritized passion over reason, making them potentially vulnerable to harmful ideologies.

The Feminist Sex Wars

- There was conflict, says Elman, between lesbian feminists and proponents of S/M, arguing that the increasing acceptance of S/M within the lesbian community weakened its ability to resist fascist values.

I don't see the need to politicize whatever one enjoys in private as long as it is safe, sane, and consensual, but okay.

- Elman draws a parallel between the eroticization of fascism in the past (referencing Susan Sontag and Sheila Jeffreys' concerns about Nazi aesthetics in queer subcultures) and the current uncritical embrace of certain radical ideologies.

- Elman says the embrace of "outlaw" identities and the downplaying of the harmful implications of S/M practices (including the use of fascist symbols for parodic purposes) are problematic trends within queer politics.

Which made me think of seeing Queers for Palestine protestors calling Jews "Nazis" and combining the swastika with the mogen David.

- Elman argues that the rise of queer politics led to the silencing and marginalization of lesbian feminists who focused on women's rights and opposed the industrialization of sexuality and S/M.

Like Andrea Dworkin?

- Elman says Queer Theorists have dismissive attitudes towards lesbian feminist concerns and that the once-flourishing spaces and intellectual contributions of lesbian feminists were diminished within the broader "queer" coalition.

As a cishet man, I had thought the broadening of the movement, the addition of each letter in LGBTQ+, gave all parts of it more strength, but it seems obvious to me now that lesbian concerns aren't always the same (and may not be aligned with) gay men's concerns, enby concerns, trans concerns, etc.

I can see how being subsumed by a larger movement could dampen the voices of its different component populations and diminish the perceivability of the points on which they don't agree.

Judith Butler features prominently here.

- Elman seems to say Butler's nuanced stance on her lesbian identity is rather different from her non-nuanced Jewish identity, and it is "as a Jew" that she declares her anti-Zionism.

...in 1989, [Butler] was asked to provide a lesbian lecture and responded that she would rather describe herself as "being" homosexual because identifying as lesbian felt "neither true nor false." Yet, she demonstrates no similar reluctance to claim a Jewish identity years later. To the contrary, it is "as a Jew" that she condemns Israel and vows to develop a Jewish opposition to Zionism.

A decade after Butler vacillated over being lesbian, she similarly described her nearly two-decade-long relationship to S/M discourse as "active and complicated," a position in keeping with the tenor of her fourth book, The Psychic Life of Power. In it, Butler speaks of her "paradoxical" embrace of "injurious" names because they "constitute" her "socially."

Huh. Jewish identity without nuance? I'm not sure I've ever seen that...?

- Elman says Butler's engagement with S/M discourse and her concept of erotically embracing oppressive power structures are linked to the potential eroticization of antisemitism and the demonization of Israel.

As Martha Nussbaum explains, the central thesis of The Psychic Life of Power is that “we all eroticize the power structures that oppress us, and can thus find sexual pleasure only within their confines.”

If Nussbaum is correct, there may be no better explanation for the ongoing eroticization of antisemitism and the demonization of Israel.

So concerned was Nussbaum by Butler’s influence on American women’s studies programs in the 1990s that she concluded,

"There is despair at the heart of the cheerful Butlerian enterprise. The big hope, the hope for a world of real justice, where laws and institutions protect the equality and the dignity of all citizens, has been banished, even perhaps mocked as sexually tedious. Judith Butler’s hip quietism is a comprehensible response to the difficulty of realizing justice in America. But it is a bad response. It collaborates with evil. Feminism demands more and women deserve better."

"Hip quietism" makes me want to read more Nussbaum.

Butler was chair of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (later renamed Outright First)...which was a UN recognized organzation. While the name might cause the casual observer to to think it would focus on gays and lesbians, it has seemed to focus on Israel.

Outright First claims it advances LGBT rights through awards consistent with its agenda, yet the first of these was not made until 2005, fifteen years after its founding and the same year that BDS was ostensibly established.

That year, the organization honored Mary Robinson, who decriminalized homosexuality as Ireland’s first woman president (from 1990-1997).

Robinson also served as the UN’s first woman High Commissioner for Human Rights and, in this capacity, Robinson oversaw the 2001 UN World Conference against Racism, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in Durban, South Africa.

Despite the conference’s noble rhetoric, the antisemitism that it manifest led Robinson to resign in disgrace.

It was in Durban that “anti-racist” organizers revived the scurrilous Soviet charge from decades earlier that Zionism is a form of racism and Israel is an apartheid state. Although Robinson called these allegations inappropriate and unacceptable, she did not reject the conference’s final declaration that contained them.

Ach. The feckin' Irish again.

...in 2008, Desmond Tutu became the second recipient of the organization’s “Outspoken” Award. Tutu, a Nobel prize winning anti-apartheid activist, is also an outspoken critic of Israel for “practicing apartheid” in its policies against the Palestinians. While he too condemned bigotry against gay men and lesbians, like Robinson, Tutu may be better known for his opposition to Israel than for any long-standing and deep defense of LGBT rights. Thus, one wonders whether the “critical partnerships” Outright First fostered were less those that promoted the world’s LGBT communities than those that helped legitimize anti-Israel activism.

This example, it seems to me, is a more appropriate illustration of “pinkwashing”:

that is, pinkwashing may be less about bolstering Israel’s reputation than providing Israel’s sworn enemies a seemingly progressive mask behind which to conceal their animus.

Pinkwashing, Triangles, and Softcore Holocaust Denial

The term "pinkwashing" initially referred to corporate profiteering from pink-themed breast cancer awareness campaigns.

Elman contrasts this with the reclamation of the pink triangle by gay activists as a symbol of defiance after the Stonewall riots, noting that this is a "disturbing" appropriation of a Nazi symbol.

Years before American corporate executives bolstered sales through gender-conforming pink promotionals to women, American gay male activists openly embraced pink to signify their gendered defiance after the Stonewall riots of 1969.

This political reclamation manifested itself in their adoption of the pink triangle Nazis used to denote and facilitate the destruction of those men they identified as homosexual. That this exclusively male Nazi symbol came to signify LGBT rights is disturbing and reveals a movement that, whether through ignorance or choice, embraced a fascist aesthetic

Is that fair? The idea of reclaiming is to take the symbol away from the oppressor and redefine it, right?

ACT UP's use of the pink triangle and its analogies between the AIDS crisis and the Holocaust are presented as examples of "softcore" Holocaust denial that paved the way for later strained comparisons.

By 1987, the Nazi pink symbol gained American prominence when the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) used it for its logo, which also read “Silence Equals Death.”

Founded by Larry Kramer, ACT UP’s mission involved combating the public’s indifference to “the AIDS Holocaust.” Equating the epidemic with Jewish genocide, ACT UP’s gay pride float that year depicted a concentration camp within which activists posed behind barbed wire. Kramer’s book, Reports from the Holocaust: The Making of an AIDS Activist, further popularized this agitprop and the pink triangle marked its cover. As the HIV death toll mounted across the globe, ACT UP’s rhetoric and the Nazi triangle became internationally ubiquitous

So Elman believes this was softcore Holocaust denial through universalization/appropriation by the queer movement.

Holocaust images...absent the Jews. We see a lot of that on social media from the LGBTQ+ community right now.

BDS and "pinkwashing"

Sarah Schulman, an ACT UP alum, was as a key figure in popularizing the "pinkwashing" accusation against Israel. Here's an inside look at how that happened:

And here's Schulman's 2011 NYT piece:

If you need to get past the paywall, use this link.

Schulman's argument is that Israel's promotion of its LGBTQ+ rights is a cynical tactic to conceal human rights violations against Palestinians.

It couldn't be a natural outcome of an electorate with a majority which is socially liberal enough to not want to persecute their LGBTQ+ family members? Why not?

Oh, it's because Jews are sneaky and devious /s

Elman critiques Schulman's anti-racist pretense, arguing it invisibilizes Israel's diverse population and misrepresents the motivations behind Israel's LGBTQ+ initiatives.

The investment in Tel Aviv as a gay vacation destination is acknowledged, but its negative framing by BDS as "pinkwashing," says Elman, creates not just an entry point for antisemitism, but also a permission structure.

Soon "pinkwashing" took on a different meaning from the one intended by the women who originally coined it.

When applied by "pinkwatchers" whose sights are trained exclusively on Israel, the accusation became an entry point for antisemitism.

According to Wikipedia, it now describes "a variety of marketing and political strategies aimed at promoting products, countries, people or entities through an appeal to gay-friendliness in order to be perceived as progressive, modern and tolerant."

As Cary Nelson observed, "the pinkwashing accusation gives license" to condemn Israel, while discounting all of its achievements (e.g. legal protection against sexual orientation discrimination, recognition of same sex marriages, joint adoption, and open military service) without any reservation.

Want to know the first thing Sarah Schulman posted to Twitter on 10/7/23?

Here's Canary Mission's page about Schulman.

Elman continues:

There may be no better way to simultaneously encourage antisemitism and dismiss Israel’s LGBT initiatives (whatever their shortcomings) than to insist those efforts undermine the rights of Palestinians.

Were it not for BDS double-speak, Schulman could not maintain that she “never” betrayed queer people, despite her having acted in “solidarity” with “presumably straight Palestinians” to oppose Israel’s LGBT community.

Like countless other “queers” who take “pride” in being “ashamed” Jews, she received political “guidance” from “presumably straight” folks like Omar Barghouti, the purported founder of BDS.

Known for his explicit desire to “euthanize” the “Zionist project” and his vocal opposition to the two-state solution, Barghouti insists that not even “the end of occupation” will end his struggle.

Elman wraps up:

Like “Islamophobia,” “pinkwashing” and its corollary “homonationalism” are accusations often employed to silence critics while simultaneously providing those who issue them the appearance of being concerned about LGBT people and other minorities. Yet, this posturing offers little in return.

In fact, these denunciations are in keeping with the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation’s longstanding assault on homosexual conduct, gender equality, and universal human rights at myriad UN fora under the insidious cover of anti-racism and anti-imperialism.

You can grab a PDF of the whole book here.

That BDS similarly promotes itself through the cynical appropriation of social movements and ostensibly progressive claims that vilify the Jewish state represents a consummate act of public diplomacy in which anti-semitism itself has been pinkwashed.

_________

You read the whole thing, so have a cookie: 🍪

[1] I agree with Neil Postman that the social sciences would more accurately be called moral theologies...and are not sciences.

You can read more about Postman's point here if you want to know what I mean by that..

[ponett]

Whenever I complain about graphic or dark content in media I watch, I keep hearing people retort with this apparently very popular opinion that people who enjoy comfy, wholesome things are actually more likely to be raging assholes than people who love things like death metal and gore. As someone who seems to enjoy comfy, wholesome things yourself and likely met many others who enjoy similar such things, do you agree with this opinion? If so, why do you think this happens?

So I've been sitting on this ask for like a week, not knowing whether or not I wanted to touch it because it kind of feels like being handed a live grenade

For one, I don't like being pigeonholed as someone who just likes "comfy" or "wholesome" things. Yeah, I enjoy My Little Pony and Animal Crossing. I made a game with cute furry characters and lots of bright colors. I also enjoy things like Berserk and Chainsaw Man and Doom and violent crime dramas and punk rock with vulgar lyrics and porn. Variety is the spice of life

Anyway: I generally don't think it's a good idea to make sweeping statements about peoples' moral or intellectual character based on what genres of story they enjoy, regardless of what direction you're coming at it from. But this is a very leading question that kind of skirts around the root problems

There's frequent (perhaps a bit exaggerated) pushback these days against people who prefer their fiction to be a warm blanket, a form of escapism meant to distract you from the real world. In particular, the dreaded "person who only watches kids' cartoons" is a form of this that gets brought up a lot. I don't think the root problem here is what media people enjoy or don't personally enjoy - taste is subjective, and I don't think it's a moral obligation for everyone to have diverse tastes in TV shows - but I do think some folks should try to get out of their comfort zone a bit more. Sometimes stuff that seems like it won't be for you on a surface level will really end up speaking to you, but you won't know until you give it a shot. Trust me, I've been there many times

It becomes a problem when people demand that media ONLY cater to that "warm blanket" attitude. And I think that's part of the reason why that stereotype you mentioned about fans of ""wholesome""" media being assholes exists. People who view dark or violent content as an inherent flaw because it's not what they like. People who yell at creators when they make bad things happen in their stories, because how dare you do this to my comfort characters? People who say movies should never have sex scenes. People who want "problematic" moral complexity stripped out in favor of black and white moral instruction. People who seem to hate any sort of interpersonal conflict in fiction at all

These attitudes can be the result of many different cultural factors, factors that can't all be traced back to Tumblr or what shows you like, but sometimes it's definitely because of that lack of broader perspective on media. You can tell when someone's opinions on The Right And Wrong Ways To Write Fiction were shaped almost entirely by, like, Steven Universe discourse. (Yes, this is a jab at Lily Orchard.) And when these people are very loud about their opinions, well, it becomes a trend people notice

Like. I don't know you. You sent this anonymously. But when you say you "complain about graphic or dark content in media you watch"... that could mean a few wildly different things! Maybe you're just venting about something that unexpectedly triggered you, and that's totally fine. But the wording could also imply that, like, you take issue with these things being present at all, and that you expect a person who likes "death metal and gore" to be more of a "raging asshole" than someone who likes the "wholesome" things you like. So... well, maybe you're more dismissive or judgmental of things outside your comfort zone than you realize?

Unfortunately, in case it's not already obvious, on the internet this shit quickly becomes a proxy battle over dozens of intersecting cultural issues at once where everyone is kinda just talking past each other. So it gets messy

For example, I have no reason to believe that the people who run the "Wholesome Games" showcases have anything against games that are dark or violent or contain adult themes. (They've outright said they don't. Many times!) But when you see people going "why is Spiritfarer allowed in the showcase? That's a game about DEATH and that's NOT WHOLESOME, why would you make me think about death?" or "Ugh, why does Disco Elysium have to be about a cop? Why can't we apply these systems to a game about a young witch who's trying to find a lost cat in an idyllic village instead?" it... Well, it makes me sympathetic towards the indies who don't feel comfortable with the "Wholesome Games" label and consider it limiting. But it also doesn't make me think that devs catering to a demand for more chill, nonviolent video games are categorically facilitating fascist censorship from the Christian right

It's complicated! The written word is imprecise and the internet is a nightmare

I've kind of gone off on multiple tangents here. Basically: I do think that people can kinda turn fans of "comfy" media or "adults who only watch Bluey" into an overblown boogeyman these days. I think people online generally have a habit of swinging too hard in one direction or another in their stances on certain things, overcompensating based on what group of people online are currently annoying them the most and turning said group into like The Main Problem With Society Today. But I also think that boogeyman only exists because of very real examples of people demanding that everything cater to their narrow comfort zone. Go like what you like, but also, y'know. Don't be that person

[tawked]

Honestly I feel like a lot of narratives and discourse about cures for disabled characters generalize and simplify the concept of cures so much that it's impossible to really glean anything meaningful from the art / conversation.

It feels alienating because it implies that we as disabled people all relate to our disabilities in a specific, identity-driven way.

In reality, some of us aren't even considered disabled by other disabled people, and some of us are considered disabled by able-bodied society while not considering ourselves disabled. Some of us exist in incredibly historied and sophisticated disabled communities going back over a century, and others simply do not have communities due to ableist societal factors like institutionalization. Even with autism alone, the lived experience of someone with level one support needs autism and someone at level three with a co-occurring intellectual disability are so different and subject to such segregation that sometimes it feels many of the former aren't even aware the latter exists, while discussing disabled rights.

It just feels very weird and silly to assume we're all in the same spot and are going to agree universally with the idea that cures bad.

Consider: the concept of a cure for "the disabled" includes

the medical genocide of Big D Deaf society as it presently exists,

and

me as a cute lil schizophrenic baby boi with massive hot balls potentially not needing to live in constant fear that I might slip into psychosis and lose another year or two of my life lol.

These are incomparable consequences of a hypothetical cure, imo. However, when we discuss cure narratives in universal terms we're often blurring these lines.

In real life, the reason we dislike the idea of prioritizing cures isn't even universal.

Many of us dislike the idea of a cure as the endgame of disability accommodation, treatment and research in real life, because that approach leads to the misappropriation of funding that could be used to achieve a better quality of life now based on some hypothetical maybe-future.

Many of us dislike it because our disability is core to our identity in a fundamental, sometimes even cognitive developmental way, and the idea of a cure is synonymous with the destruction of one's standard state of being / personality / concept of self.

I would like a cure for my specific condition to exist, but understand in realist terms that this would be a massive dice roll with funding that could be used to make my life better now. My perspective as someone for whom accommodation means engaging with pharmaceutical drugs is going to be different to that of someone for whom accommodation is entirety social or environmental.

So with all of that said:

Do we hate Barbara Gordon being cured because we just do not like the concept of curing the disabled as some kind of uncritical "harmful trope" detached from any real disability political concept? Y'know, "it's offensive," without an understanding of why it's offensive and to whom specifically?

Or do we hate Barbara being cured because it's a betrayal of over a decade of character writing? Her arc included some of the most human and real writing around disability in all of comics especially at a time when disabled characters just plain sucked (so, any time).

Much of it centered on her learning to be comfortable in her body and in being perceived as disabled, unlearning that shame and overcoming the fear of being subjected to ableism. There were some very real beats in that. If you have physically disabled mates, you've probably had the "so when should I let her know I use a chair" conversation. Well, there is a whole short character beat around Barbara working up the confidence to date while disabled, leading to her meeting Ted Kord. Dixon's time with Barbara is full of little profoundly human moments like this that simply do not occur with Daredevil, Xavier, the Chief, blah blah blah.

And y'know, retconning that to two years in a chair and some Batman Standard PTSD (that is, badly written PTSD) betrays the complex character arc that came before, while also reducing aaall of that writing from a complex personal journey through identity, minoritization, discrimination and human relationships through the lens of ableism, to "a wheelchair." It's dehumanizing for many disabled fans because it invalidates the value of Barbara's role as Oracle / a disabled superhero able to achieve a reach beyond her younger able-bodied self due in part to innovations she made due to her disability.

[prettyboysdontlookatexplosions]

ok i do have one thing to get off my chest that has been uhhhh made more acutely irritating by bleak house discourse but preexists it and extends way beyond it. there's this really really really annoying thing that people do when they have like had their minds totally blown by someone telling them the most 101 basic ways to "critique" a study and/or its design, and also have been really (understandably i guess) activated by e.g. bad health journalism that loves to sensationalize or make unreasonable claims based on a single study, where now like... whenever they encounter any study (well not actually any study. any study whose conclusions they disagree with lmao), they immediately jump to LMAO LOOK AT THIS TINY ASS SAMPLE SIZE! THIS IS JUST ONE STUDY! CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION! CAN YOU BELIEVE THESE STUPID RESEARCHERS DID XYZ? NO CONTROL GROUP! NOT A RANDOMIZED EXPERIMENTAL TRIAL! I CAN'T BELIEVE THESE IDIOTS GOT THIS BULLSHIT PUBLISHED!

and like... is there a lot of dumb bullshit research published? sure, at least in some fields (replication crisis alert... but like i feel like the kids in materials science are probably doing better?) but the appropriate response to that is like... developing a nuanced framework in which any individual study is a single attempt to contribute to a larger body of knowledge that should be assessed in that context. it is not just looking at any finding that crosses your path and assuming (1) the researchers didn't understand or didn't care about the limitations of their study design and (2) any study "flaws" - which certainly any study in the social sciences or social-adjacent sciences will have because humans are complex - mean a study is totally worthless. that is, sorry, anti-intellectual. i don't think the people who do this consciously realize that they are, implicitly, arguing against the entire project of learning anything about human beings and their functioning ever... but they are. because there's no way to study human beings that is not flawed. if you throw out any study that is flawed, you throw out the whole endeavor. and, it would really shock some people to hear this, but at least some of the people who spend their entire lives researching human beings... know this. they know that learning about humans requires taking a lot of imperfect raw data and carefully considering how to interpret it. some of them actually do know this!!!! i promise!!!!! nobody better understands the fallibilities of statistics than a statistician. and yet, statisticians have not en masse abandoned their careers... they simply understand that what they're doing is complicated and never going to be perfect.

anyway. this is a major factor in why maintenance phase became totally unlistenable to me after a while... i simply could not take their ongoing "lmao, look at this dipshit researcher," especially since they are sooooooooo blatantly hypocritical about not holding up things they want to use in support of their own arguments to the same level of scrutiny. (one example that really made me insane... they had a whole episode about how 2000 calories a day is a random arbitrary number not reflective of human needs etc.... but then when they were doing an episode about some high-fiber fad diet aubrey was like "and the amount of fiber recommended was way higher than the FDA's [or whatever agency i'm not looking it up] recommended amount!!!!" oh... now we trust government recommendations? fuck off lmao) (i'm not simping for 2000 calories i just thought that was like sincerely quite egregious and made her look stupid as hell. to be clear michael also does this and it also makes him look stupid but i can't think of any michael examples because i haven't listened in years and this one was so transparent it's what stuck with me.) and like, it's annoying because it's annoying when people who aren't that smart act like they're way smarter than everyone else in the world, but it also matters because like... they tend to dismiss population studies out of hand because Too Many Factors, but population studies are what first pointed to the association between cigarettes and lung cancer - an association later investigated with other analytic tools, but for which, guess what, there has still never been a randomized control trial, because that would be evil. like, i'm sure that the lung researchers of the 1940s knew that correlation doesn't equal causation... but wow thank god they didn't follow that up with "so, basically this is probably worthless, nothing to see here"! assuming you know better than any study before you've even read it is literally anti-science and honestly not that far from how people wind up on the anti-vax train (including in the way that it rests on the assumption that it's probably pretty easy for the lay person to wade through statistical analysis in a specialized field and decide if it's good or not - no! it's not easy!). (cigarette history link)

this has been on my mind again with bleak house discourse because i have had to restrain myself about 1 million times from saying to someone, no fucking shit it's a single imperfect study, you sophomoric dickwad. i'm really not sure how you read that post, which was pretty measured in its appreciation of the study and also very explicitly drew on my firsthand professional experience, and assume that i need to be lectured to about taking every single word of a single small study as gospel... unless you are walking around the world smugly convinced that you are the first person in history to whom it has ever occurred to "question the design of a study" (as opposed to, say, take note of the pros and cons of the study design and think about what implications its limitations may have for interpreting its data and for future study). like... i have spent almost a decade thinking about these topics near-constantly... i would not describe myself as well-versed in the literature of ilteracy but i have DEFINITELY!!!! read more about it than any of these motherfuckers... but sure. i need some really big brained person to sit me down and explain to me that, omg, there were only 80 participants! why are you attacking all college students in america with such a Small Sample Size!!!! why would you have them talk out loud about the text they were reading? wouldn't it be better to have them answer questions at the end (which they did lol) or write their summaries (which would be complicated by the intersection with writing skills lol) or Some Other Imaginary Methodology That We All Definitely Would Accept As Valid Instead Of Also Instantly Condemning Because It Cannot Perfectly Capture Every Nuance Of Human Cognition? like of course one should [alec baldwin in glengarry glenn ross voice] always be critical. but parroting things you have learned sound like critical thinking isn't actually critical thinking. and drawing a hard binary between "true" and "false" in a realm of research that is much more complicated than that... is not critical thinking. it actually is just making it impossible for anyone to say anything about the topic ever lol.

and again... is this really personally annoying for Me, Personally? yes. yes it is. do i find it a really astonishingly unattractive personality trait? oh yeah. big time. but! this matters, in this case, beyond me being a hater, because, like, that thing i said above, about how all human-related studies are inherently always going to be flawed? that goes about six billion times for education. education is unbelievably difficult to study. it's a dark land of confounding variables and minuscule effect sizes. every education study in the world is going to be flawed. all of them! so to look at study, deem it flawed, and determine that therefore it has nothing we can learn from... is like really really literally, in the world of ed shit, to say, fuck it, just go based on vibes. which... has not served the profession well, to say the least.

(i swear to fucking god some people would read the second shift and be like, ok but hochschild only talked to 12 couples? lmao what kind of sample size is that... obviously her in depth interviews have no value compared to administering 500000 questionnaires that we would then nitpick for being insufficiently unambiguous in wording. basically this book has nothing to teach us about the distribution of domestic labor in heterosexual partnerships, which means i never have to think about this topic again since it's made up and doesn't matter!)

[lucillewalterblack]

my Anti-AI Disabled Artist Hot Take is that I think a lot of disabled AI users believe in a right to comfort that fundamentally doesn’t exist

and I know this is the piss on the poor website, the no-nuance website, but I feel the need to point this out because I see a disabled AI users talking about “the art community” like we’re a lot of elitists for believing that the process of making the art is what bestows worth upon the finished product. I saw a post where someone went “we all understand that not everyone is going to be a pro athlete because of factors out of their control, why can’t we understand that’s true of artists? what if someone is intellectually incapable of learning how to make art? what if you train and practice for 20 years and you never get good? why should I be barred from making art just because I’m not good or I have difficulties?”

and to that I say the process is the point, even when it’s hard, and I also say abled artists struggle and strive and practice too.

if you practice the flute for 20 years and never get good you will have reaped the benefits of playing for your own entertainment. people play recreational sports with no hope of going pro because they enjoy the experience of playing for their own entertainment. poems that are shitty can express emotions and sentiments authentically and bring catharsis to the author through the experience of writing. acting can be bad and still meaningful to the actors.

doing the thing is the point. the end result is not the point. a stick figure on a Post-It gave the person who drew it something meaningful, it exists as an expression of something the artist felt and the process of drawing it was an outlet for those feelings. assembling a collage requires examining your emotions and using found elements to assemble an expression of those emotions. creating a moodboard is the same. making a word cloud and arranging the words based on what you like best, creating a playlist, tracing a pattern in the carpet with a hand or foot - all of that is meaningful because it is done by a human who is doing it to express a feeling or sentiment. It is done earnestly and translates brain things into something observable. the colors, the positioning, the shapes - you, the artist, are actively making choices that best express your taste. this is why procedurally generated images aren’t art, this is why procedurally generated text isn’t art. there is in fact an inherent value to assembling the final product. the assemblage of the final product is what makes it art. even if the assemblage is screaming to express anger. even if it’s shedding a tear. art is a thing created directly by a human being. eventually when machines become sapient enough to showcase their souls they’ll be able to make art too.

if you do not care enough about the process to want to engage with it despite its difficulty or learning curve or challenge level, you are not entitled to the end result of a finished work of art. it is an unfortunate reality of being disabled that we are not going to do things or get things as easily as abled people. but abled people aren’t effortlessly creating art from perfect comfort either. doing hard things is its own reward. I believe that everyone, no matter their ability or skill level, is capable of making meaningful and important art that authentically expresses their feelings. there is no such thing as Too Disabled For Art. there is no such thing as Too Disabled For Anything But AI. you might never be good. do it anyway. keep doing it. do it badly. that’s how you get better.

(and, just to be clear, I’ve been training in drawing for 23 years, and I’m still not good, and I still get something emotionally beneficial from the act of drawing. again, if you don’t care enough about the process to engage with it despite the difficulty level, you are not entitled to the end results.)

[lovezbrownies]

Lauren with a reader that acts similar to Julie?

Oomf... i feel like i cooked too hard in this.. not as silly as i usually do, i am also lowkey insecure with this one idk if its good or bad lesakjn ;;

Cold. (Yandere!Fem!Bully x GN!Reader)

Lauren's Masterlist - General Masterlist.

Synopsis: Lauren's mother never expressed emotion, yet she still loved Lauren. Would it be the same with you? Lauren's crush who is just as unfeeling and cold as her mother? Or maybe even worse.

Lauren McCanister x GN!Reader

Warnings: where do i start. Again, mean reader, kind of a manipulator lowkey. Lauren used to be a manipulator, she is now the manipulated.

Lauren McCanister had spent her entire life shaping herself into an intellectual force. She excelled at everything, from academics to manipulation, carefully constructing a facade of control. And yet, none of it prepared her for you. You were nothing like the others—aloof, cold, distant. Your reactions—or rather, lack of reactions—drove her to the brink of obsession. Every sharp word she threw at you slid off like raindrops on glass, and it enraged her as much as it intrigued her. How could someone like you remain so detached?

She had long since given up on eliciting anything from you verbally. Her jabs, insults, and teasing always fell flat. No matter how sharp or cruel her words, you never flinched. It only made her dig deeper, press harder, desperate for some kind of response—anything that would give her power over you. But you remained unmoved, expressionless, analyzing her words like they were data to be sorted and discarded. It was maddening.

It wasn’t until Lauren discovered a small, delightful chink in your armor that she felt a spark of triumph. When her teasing turned physical, she finally got what she wanted. The slight widening of your eyes, the furrowing of your brow, the minuscule flinch when she pinched your side or tugged your backpack—those were the moments that thrilled her. Watching you, the unflappable you, suddenly thrown off balance by a simple tickle or a light shove made her heart race in ways she couldn’t explain. The look of surprise that briefly crossed your face before you quickly masked it again was like a drug. She loved it. You hated it.

And that only made it worse. The more you recoiled from her touch, the more she sought to invade your space. It wasn’t enough to merely watch you work from afar or sit beside you in silence during class. Lauren needed to get under your skin. She needed to feel your presence bend to her will, to watch your carefully constructed walls crumble—if only for a second. But even then, after you’d jerk away or give her a startled look, you’d retreat right back into your composed bubble, as if nothing had happened.

For you, it was all so calculated. You were fully aware of her growing obsession and had long since factored it into your life. Lauren McCanister was a variable, one that you could predict with startling accuracy. Her teasing, her bullying, her constant presence—it all fit into a pattern you’d mapped out. You knew when she would approach, how she’d attempt to provoke you, and you knew how to dodge or deflect her efforts. But while you could avoid her words and resist her psychological games, her physical intrusions were more challenging. You’d caught onto her fixation, her fascination with your reactions when she touched you, and it irritated you—not because of the touch itself, but because it broke the flow of your usual, calculated responses.

The unpredictability of physical contact was something you hadn’t fully accounted for. It threw off your mental algorithms, disrupted your focus in ways that frustrated you more than you’d ever admit. But you didn’t show it. You remained the same cool, detached individual, offering her no more than the occasional blink or a calculated word, knowing full well that your lack of emotion was only feeding her obsession.

Lauren, for all her intelligence, had yet to recognize the full extent of your indifference. She misinterpreted your silence as another layer of mystery rather than the simple truth—you did not care. Not about her taunts, her presence, or her obsession. To you, Lauren was another factor in your pursuit of long-term goals, and in that equation, she was useful.

You observed her with cold detachment, analyzing the potential benefits of indulging her obsession. Her intelligence was undeniable, and her genetic lineage is impeccable. A relationship with her could yield favorable outcomes. The idea of manipulating her feelings for your own gain wasn’t off the table either. In fact, you had already begun to calculate the potential benefits of leveraging her obsession for your advantage.

For Lauren, however, the dynamic was far more chaotic. Every interaction with you left her heart pounding, her mind whirling in frustration and excitement. She couldn’t understand why she cared so much, why your calm, unfeeling demeanor pulled at something deep within her. It was like she wanted to break through your walls, not out of malice anymore, but out of a desperate need to see some emotion, to know you were human. The more she failed, the more her obsession grew. You had become a puzzle she couldn’t solve, and that terrified her as much as it thrilled her.

The moment she found out that you had invited her over for an experiment, her heart leaped in a way it never had before. It wasn’t about the science or the experiment itself—no, it was the idea of being in your space, of seeing a part of your life that wasn’t cold and distant like the walls you’d built around yourself. She spent hours planning what to wear, imagining how the evening might unfold, oscillating between fantasies of you opening up to her and the fear that you’d remain as unreadable as ever.

When the time came, and she arrived at your door, her nerves were on edge. She had rehearsed what she would say, how she would act, but all of it fell apart the moment you opened the door with your typical, expressionless gaze. Your monotone greeting sent a shiver down her spine, not because of any warmth or affection, but because of how cold and detached it was. You weren’t just cold—you were calculating, analyzing her every move even now.

“Hello, Lauren. Come in,” you said, your voice devoid of any inflection.

Lauren hesitated, her heart thudding in her chest. She stepped inside, expecting your home to reflect the same cold, sterile environment that you embodied. But instead, the warmth of the decor took her by surprise. The soft lighting, the earthy tones, the subtle scent of lavender—it was all so inviting, so… unexpected.

“You… live here?” she asked, her voice barely concealing the disbelief.

You nodded, walking ahead without turning back to face her. “Yes. I purchased it 3 years ago. A logical decision. My parents' residence did not accommodate the necessary space for my research.”

Lauren’s eyes widened, taking in the realization that you, of all people, had bought a house—at fifteen, no less. It was a shock that rippled through her carefully constructed image of you. She had always known you were brilliant, but this? This was something else entirely.

“And… the decorations?” she asked, still grappling with the contrast between you and your surroundings.

You shrugged, as if it were the most mundane detail in the world. “Warm environments stimulate brain activity. They improve efficiency and productivity.”

That response sent a jolt through Lauren. It was so you—so perfectly logical, so devoid of any personal attachment to the concept of “home.” But to her, it felt like a glimpse behind the curtain, a small window into the way you functioned. It should have made her feel closer to you, but instead, it left her feeling even more out of place. For all her brilliance, for all her attempts to get under your skin, you were always five steps ahead, unbothered by her presence.

You turned to face her, finally acknowledging her with your cold, calculating stare. “Lauren, I invited you here for two reasons,” you began, your voice steady, precise. “The experiment, of course. But also because I am aware of your feelings for me.”

Lauren froze, her entire body tensing as her heart skipped a beat. “What? What do you mean?” Her mind raced, panic bubbling up in her chest. How could you know? How much did you know? Had you seen through her all along?

You took a step closer, your gaze unwavering. “Your obsession has been noted. I’ve analyzed it thoroughly. I have concluded that engaging in a romantic relationship with you will be beneficial.”

Her heart pounded in her ears, the blood rushing to her face as your cold words hit her like a slap. “Beneficial?” she echoed, her voice shaking, a mix of hope and disbelief filling her chest.

You nodded, your tone flat. “Yes. Our combined intellect will produce offspring with a high probability of exceptional intelligence. The genetic benefits are clear.”

Lauren’s breath hitched, her entire body frozen in place as your words washed over her. Was this really happening? You weren’t rejecting her, but… this wasn’t what she had imagined. There was no warmth, no affection, just cold, hard logic. And yet, despite the lack of emotion, her heart swelled with a strange mix of joy and confusion.

You stepped closer again, this time reaching out to her with the same precision you used in everything else. “As per societal norms, I will now engage in a romantic gesture.”

Before she could respond, you leaned in, pressing a brief, mechanical kiss to her cheek. The gesture was clinical, devoid of passion or warmth, and yet, it set her skin on fire. Lauren’s breath caught in her throat, her cheeks burning as she stared at you, wide-eyed and speechless.

You pulled back, your expression unchanged. “This marks the beginning of our relationship.”

Lauren could barely breathe, her mind spinning. You—emotionless you—had just kissed her. But it wasn’t the kiss she had always imagined. It was methodical, planned, like everything else you did. And yet, it meant everything to her.

“I… I don’t know what to say,” she whispered, her voice shaky, her confidence shattered.

“There is no need for further emotional response,” you replied, stepping back with your usual detachment. “This relationship will serve its purpose. That is all that matters.”

Lauren stared at you, her heart torn between elation and a deep, gnawing sadness. You had given her what she wanted—or at least, what she thought she wanted. But now that she had it, she realized that it wasn’t enough. Not like this. You were still untouchable, unreachable, wrapped in your cold logic. And even though she had won, it felt like a hollow victory.

But she wouldn’t let that stop her. If this was what it took to be with you, then she would take it. She would take whatever pieces of you she could get, even if they were cold and calculating. Because at the end of the day, Lauren McCanister wasn’t just obsessed with breaking down your walls—she was obsessed with you.

You turned away from her, heading toward the table where a complex array of scientific equipment lay waiting, a soft hum of electronics filling the air. “As for the other reason I invited you here tonight,” you said, your voice as flat and methodical as ever. “I require your assistance with an experiment. Your expertise in certain areas will improve the likelihood of success.”

Lauren blinked, her heart still pounding, but the abrupt shift in conversation caught her off guard. Of course, to you, this wasn’t a night of emotional revelations—it was a continuation of your work, and she was merely a useful tool in your grand design. It stung, but she quickly pushed that feeling aside. You needed her. That was enough for now.

Stepping closer to the table, she looked over the experiment you had prepared, her eyes scanning the intricate setup. It was a daunting task—calculations, measurements, and variables that all needed to be meticulously balanced. One wrong move, and the entire thing could fail. And the thought of disappointing you, of failing to live up to your expectations, made her palms sweat.

“I assume you’ve read the documentation I sent you,” you continued, your eyes never leaving the equipment, even when you weren’t looking at her you made her heart skip a beat. “Your role is crucial to this experiment. A miscalculation on your part could result in catastrophic failure.”

Her throat tightened at your words, and her fingers twitched nervously as she glanced down at the tools she would be using. Catastrophic failure. Those words echoed in her mind, amplifying her already racing thoughts. She had always excelled under pressure, but this was different. This was you. She couldn’t afford to make a mistake. Not here. Not now.

“Yes, of course,” she replied, trying to keep her voice steady, even though her nerves were fraying at the edges. “I’ve studied it all. I know what to do. I think I also did this with my mom when I was younger.”

But in truth, her confidence was wavering. She had spent hours poring over the documentation you had sent her, but the reality of being here, in the moment, with you watching her so closely, made her doubt every decision. What if she missed something? What if she miscalculated? What if—?

“Excellent. Then begin,” you said, handing her a delicate instrument, your gaze focused and emotionless. “I will monitor the variables.”

Lauren swallowed hard and took the instrument from your hand, her fingers trembling slightly. She forced herself to focus, to push aside the swirling storm of doubt in her mind. This was her moment to prove herself to you, to show you that she could be more than just a pawn in your grand plan. She could be an equal, someone worthy of your attention—your admiration. But what if she were to disappoint you? Would you forgive her? Would you comfort her? Lauren could only wish.

As she began the delicate process of measuring and calibrating, she felt your presence beside her, your eyes watching her every move. The weight of your scrutiny only heightened her anxiety, but she forced herself to keep going, her breath coming in shallow, nervous bursts. She had to do this. She couldn’t fail. Not with you standing so close, your cold, calculating gaze bearing down on her like a spotlight.

The minutes stretched on, each one more tense than the last as Lauren carefully navigated the intricate steps of the experiment. Her hands shook slightly, and she cursed herself internally for every small tremor. She couldn’t afford any mistakes. Her entire body was wound tight with nerves, her heart racing as she made each delicate adjustment.

But then, just as she reached the final step, disaster almost struck. Her hand slipped, the instrument wobbling precariously in her grip. A small gasp escaped her lips as panic surged through her chest. She could already imagine the failure, the disappointment in your eyes, the cold dismissal that would surely follow.

But before she could spiral further, she steadied herself, forcing her hands to stop trembling. Focus, Lauren. Focus. She breathed deeply, centering herself, and carefully, painstakingly, she corrected the error. With a final, precise movement, she completed the task, her heart pounding so hard she thought it might burst out of her chest.

“There,” she whispered, her voice barely audible over the hum of the equipment. “It’s done.”

You approached the experiment, your eyes scanning the results with your usual calm detachment. You checked the readings, ran a quick calculation, and then nodded in approval. “Adequate,” you said, your voice as cold and neutral as ever. “You have performed as expected. The experiment is a success.”

Lauren felt the tension in her chest release all at once, a wave of relief crashing over her. She had done it. She hadn’t failed you. She had proven herself. I’m so awesome and sexy, they have to love me soon. But before she could fully process the moment, you stepped closer, your gaze steady and unreadable.

“Good work,” you said, and before she could react, you leaned in and pressed a quick peck on her lips—a gesture of reward, as emotionless and calculated as everything else you did.

For a split second, Lauren’s world stopped. The brief contact of your lips on hers sent a jolt of electricity through her entire body. Her heart skipped a beat, her mind went blank, and for a moment, she forgot how to breathe. It wasn’t the passionate, romantic kiss she had dreamed of, but it didn’t matter. You had kissed her. You had touched her. And that alone was enough to send her mind spiraling into chaos.

But as quickly as the moment came, it was over. You pulled back, your expression unchanged, your gaze still cold and detached, as though the kiss had meant nothing to you. And for you, it probably hadn’t. It was merely a gesture, a small acknowledgment of her success. Nothing more.

Lauren stood there, staring at you in stunned silence, her lips still tingling from the contact, her heart racing in her chest. Inside, she was a whirlwind of emotions—elation, confusion, hope, fear. She wanted to scream, to cry, to laugh, all at once. But outwardly, she forced herself to remain composed, to mirror your calm. She couldn’t let you see how deeply that simple kiss had affected her.

You turned back to the equipment, already moving on to the next phase of your work, as if nothing out of the ordinary had happened. “Prepare the next sequence,” you said, your voice as steady and emotionless as ever.

Lauren blinked, trying to regain her composure, her mind still reeling. She had to remind herself to breathe, to focus. You were already moving forward, and she needed to keep up. But as she turned to follow your instructions, her thoughts kept drifting back to that brief kiss—the first and only sign of affection you had ever given her.

Her heart pounded in her chest, the thrill of the moment lingering long after you had already dismissed it. For you, it had been nothing more than a calculated reward, a logical action in response to her performance. But for her, it was everything. That tiny, fleeting moment of contact had sent her spiraling, her mind spinning with thoughts of what it could mean, what it could lead to.

She knew, deep down, that you didn’t feel the same way she did. You never would. But she couldn’t help but hope—hope that, maybe one day, you might see her as more than just a useful tool, more than just a variable in your equation. Maybe one day, you might feel something, anything, for her.

But for now, she would take what she could get.

[seeingteacupsindragons]

A Reference Post on What It’s Like to Skip a Grade so Y’all Stop Writing the Weirdest Nerd Characters Ever

All right. Let’s start from the beginning, I suppose.

How does this even happen?

I’m speaking here only from an American perspective, because I’m American. Although I did just look it up, and it appears Japan bans skipping a grade at all until the senior year of high school or the senior year of university. Probably for social conformity reasons. I don’t really know. But something to keep in mind, anime fandom. I know you’re following me.

Anyway, back to America (alas). Because the American school system is so decentralized, the requirements/handling of this probably varies from school district to school district so even people in different states might have different experiences. But I have met a grand total of two other people in person who have skipped a grade, and they both did it in different states, and there were actually a fair number of similarities in a lot of ways, so I have at least. A statistically meaningless test group to extrapolate from.

(And I guess my dad, who was briefly promoted a year in early elementary school as well until his Catholic school meant taking First Communion a year early and they punted him back down. We’re not going to factor that in here)

Because grade skipping is extremely rare, for reasons I'm about to get into.

In all three of our cases, the grade skipping did not come from the schools or teachers. They came from our parents.

See the thing is, public school districts…hate doing work. They are mostly not good or caring about their students. They don’t want to have to deal with anything complicated or exceptional. Kids who have disabilities have to be accommodated legally, and they’re still bad at it. Kids who are out-testing their classmates in every area have no legal protection because…uh…why would we have that; that’s absurd.

My school’s proposed solution was to send me a school legitimately five times as far from my home as the one I went to, an entirely unreasonable commute, for their “Advanced” classes. Because that was the district-approved system for this, not promoting kids up a year, and they did not want to have to come up with individualized solutions.

And so my parents fought with them for an entire year about how I needed to be promoted. I remember. Not a lot of this, because I was five (and six, I guess). I remember a lot of days spent in rooms with adults asking me lots of questions about all sorts of stuff. Evaluations on my “intelligence” and emotional maturity. Probably some kind of social worker or therapist or something.

And then they finally agreed to start me the next year in second grade instead of first and enrolled me that way.

My mother promptly told every parent of the "gifted" kids in her preschool classes to do anything but enroll them in my school district because the teachers proceeded to treat me as a built-in tutor for my classmates when I was also supposed to be getting an education.

Okay, but why?

Why did my parents fight for this so hard?

According to them (again, I don’t remember this much and the answer to this is not something I could have remembered), they saw the rate at which I was picking up new things plummet off a cliff. What’s also important here is that I have an older brother and my mother worked in early childhood education (preschool). So my parents knew what a normal development of child development and the rate at which they were supposed to learn things was. And they saw mine drop off suddenly and sharply for no reason.

And, look, my parents did a lot of things wrong, but they were always very protective of my and my brothers’ intellectual development.

They were legitimately scared that school was fucking up my ability to learn in irreparable ways. And…they probably weren’t wrong.

My parents didn’t fight about this for status. Or because they thought I should be recognized for being a bright kid. Or because they thought I could handle it. They were scared for their child. Not because they wanted a smart kid. Because the school was clearly inhibiting my growth as the person I was supposed to be.

But as far as my school district was concerned, it was easier to break someone’s legs to keep them from growing to be a tall poppy in the first place.

So that fixed the problem, right?

Honestly? I don’t think grade skipping is that useful a tactic.

The people I know who skipped a grade all were still put in solid blocks of honors and AP classes. Fundamentally, no system has a way to handle the actual issue, which is that we were picking things up too quickly for the system to accommodate. Skipping a grade might level out the difference for a moment, but if one person is still running faster than the others, they’re going to end up outpacing them again in short order. And they’re not going to keep getting promoted through school grades. Again, schools don’t really like doing this.

Some more catchall admin questions to address before getting into the experience of being promoted

Yes, they did test my emotional maturity when getting promoted, to ensure I could actually handle being a peer with people physiologically older than me. I guess I did well? It’s not just about test scores.

I’m pretty sure no teacher past like second grade or elementary school at the most was actually informed I skipped a grade. Because it just did not matter. Why would they be told this.

I don’t know if there was a record anywhere of this happening in the school files. Probably somewhere? But they fundamentally just. Enrolled me in the grade I was supposed to be in, and that was that. I have no idea how that side of things worked. Again, I was tiny and more concerned about DBZ.

No, I do not remember being emotionally invested in this happening or not. Again, I had DBZ and karate and swimming to care about.

Now then. Let’s get into more character-related stuff

So you’re smart, right? What’s your IQ?

I’ve no earthly idea. If they tested it at any point (unclear if they did), my parents kept that information on “need-to-know basis” and I did not need to know. My dad was tested as a kid and scored….uh. Highly. And became kind of an arrogant dick about it once he had a number. My parents refused to have any of their children IQ tested because they knew we would also test highly, and they were operating on the principle of "having children who are tolerable to be around."

And I don’t care, because IQ is a silly thing that means nothing in the real world anyway.

Quite frankly, this is all primary and secondary school shit and doesn’t matter much in the real world. But people keep writing about it wrong and it’s definitely something that impacted how I grew up, so here I am writing this absurdly long post.

You liked school, right?

Why are kids like this portrayed as invested in school? I’m pretty sure no one really likes things they find boring. School was boring.

I was in fifth grade being stuck off in a room during math class to read the middle school algebra textbooks instead. I read all during class and still got hundreds on tests. Homework was repetitive busywork. I drew and wrote in class and kept getting my art taken away from me or ripped during classes by teachers because I wasn’t paying attention. I kept getting tripped up on those things where we had to take turns reading aloud in class because I was about 20 pages ahead reading on my own.

No, I did not spend time studying. I didn’t need to. No, I didn’t spend time doing homework. Homework was the mind-killer. In college, I went out to dinner with my childhood best friend’s family and her parents asked me if there was anything my parents could have done to get me to turn in my homework because their younger daughter was having the same problem, and I sat there thinking about it for a couple minutes before saying, “No.”

I mean, there were some undiagnosed mental health conditions involved there, but. No.

School was not a challenge, and it was not interesting. I like learning. I like knowledge. I love reading and science and logic puzzles and overthinking things and analysis.

I did not especially enjoy school. I got my bachelor’s and bounced.

But…your teachers liked you?

Kind of split on the subject. Some liked me. Some hated me. Most were constantly frustrated because they knew I understood the material still wouldn’t put in the work to get a decent grade.

I remember correcting my 8th grade social studies teacher on a minor slip of tongue on like my first day of class and him giving me this very particular smile that meant he knew I was going to be That Kid, but he wasn’t upset about it.

Well, but you still did well in school, right?

Enhhhh.

I did well on tests.

But school is, alas, not all tests.

I got mostly Cs because I would never do or turn in my homework and aced the tests. I did best in classes that didn’t grade me on my notetaking, because I did not take notes at all. I didn’t study for my AP tests and still got all 3s and 4s. I was kept up all night before my ACT test and still got a 31. When I was in middle school, I was allowed into a program to allow me to take the ACT and SAT early. I outscored all the averages of college-bound seniors as an 11 and 12 year-old. I could’ve gone to college on those alone.

If it was a test, I did amazingly well because I knew the material and could answer test questions and never got nervous because I knew I’d be fine.

But oh my God, homework.

But what about my straight-laced school-focused nerd character?

Look, those people exist, but those people are not typically the type for whom all of that comes easily. The people I know who skipped a grade all had extremely large, loud personalities that had nothing to do with being a nerd. In fact, one of them got punted from the National Honor Society, because during the Induction Ceremony when everyone was dressed in nice suits and dresses, he pranced across the stage in a hoodie wearing a bright pink fox tail from the Ren Faire pinned to the back of his jeans. He was asked to write an apology letter. He refused. He was punted.

I mean, he was a very immature 15/16 year-old, but we were extremely good friends at the time (I…still thought his behavior was awful even at the time). “Smart” teenagers are…still, y’know, teenagers. I snuck 18+ BL manga home in my backpack to read instead of doing homework, and I was the “responsible” one of my friend group. I read all of Twilight in one Italian class and traded it for New Moon at lunch.

School didn’t take effort, I didn’t need to study, and I wouldn’t do homework. Plenty of time to develop other interests and skills and personality traits. I was basically obsessed with my own writing and drawing and reading and didn’t really give a damn about school.

Graduating early?

I could have done this in high school except that my dad did that and wouldn’t let me. I could have graduated a semester early in college except that my senior capstone was only offered in the spring semester. Anyway, it would have been even weirder to graduate high school as a 16yo instead of a barely 17yo. But I wouldn’t be surprised to see this one, even though I don’t know anyone who did both.

Your classmates, how did they react to this?

One of the reasons my parents wanted me promoted so early is so that it would “even out” as I got older and no one would remember/need to know.

This had mixed results. Obviously all my friends knew, because “how old are you turning this birthday” is like. A thing you tell your friends. So I got picked on a lot for being younger than everyone else. I still do. It’s a very sore spot for me.

In 6th grade, I got asked if it was true that I was only 10. I said no, because I had already had my birthday that school year and was 11. It was like May. But I was 11!

In 2nd grade, when it was all new and fresh, a classmate tried to tell me I would have to take first grade after I 12th grade in order to graduate. Uhh…what? I knew even at the time this was rock stupid because…a 17yo learning how to cut circles, or whatever it is you people do in 1st grade? Also, like, what was the point of skipping if I had to do it later? No sense at all.

People were less impressed and mostly kind of dicks about it if they had to know at all. I did not go out of my way to tell many people.

I did rock school games of “Never Have I Ever” though.

I wasn’t really friends with my classmates. The honors and AP kids in my school district were largely wealthy with like doctor parents or something who went to lower-level schools than I did and all knew each other and were kind of snobs. In middle school, we were divided into “Houses” (yes, really. In America.) and only one house in each grade had honors courses, so that was always mine (they claimed insistently that they were all intellectually equal. Only one house had honors classes. Come on.). My friends were almost never shuffled into it. We got yelled at for not wanting to sit at our “house” lunch table because we were supposed to “spend time with people we had things in common with.”

Yo, principal, I don’t want to sit with people who have the same teachers as me. My friends are over there and I want to talk about YuYu Hakusho and swap the notebooks we were co-writing stories in, not listen to people ask me if I was actually a boy and was I a lesbian, and btw would you like some gum hahaha prank.

So, you know, they reacted like asshats, and I didn’t get along with the “smart” kids in school, mostly.  They were mean to me and I didn’t have hobbies in common.

So the age thing…

Yeah, my friends made pretty much constant jokes about me being younger than them in a mostly harmless way that quickly grew grating anyway. I still get them. I was also the “responsible” “Mom” friend, so add that to the pile of weirdness.

When I was a college freshie and met another freshie in my Japanese class that had skipped a grade, he was so excited to meet someone else who had skipped a grade (same), and even more thrilled when he discovered his birthday was in January and mine was in March, making him finally older than someone in his grade.

There was a lot of heavy sighing on my part, but in good humor, because this guy got it.

I was a college sophomore before I was allowed to even check out a movie at the rental place in my college town (they required you to be 18). I didn’t have my 18th birthday until after spring break of my freshman/sophomore (by credits) year. Which meant my parents were trying to enforce a bedtime and curfew from 5.5 hours away (wonder why I went to school so far away, Mom). I barely scraped out of school old enough to drink to celebrate (I don’t drink anyway, but).

After graduation, it’s mostly a novelty and forgetting to adjust the years I was in school and graduated for other people my age. I have a baby face so people think I look younger than I am anyway. And am younger than people online tend to think I am on top of that. At one of my first jobs out of college, the youngest person on my team who was already there thought I was like 20 and was a little alarmed to discover I was born the same year he was, and in fact, since I was born in March and he was born in May, I was finally older than someone.

Not to mention the fact that I graduated before he did.

So it kind of leaves me a peer group with both people born my year, and people born the two years before me. Both as equals. Obviously at my age they’d be peers anyway, but going back to childhood still puts me in “yes, I remember this the same grade you do.”

It likely had some impact on the way I was expected and almost had to act older/more responsible/more mature than my friend group because I was attempting to make up for being older. It’s probably a lot of just my personality anyway, which apparently I needed to even get promoted.

But that sure as hell didn’t mean I tried in school.

How come you don't talk about this more?

I made a lot of my friends and even my mother very insecure by. You know, existing. As myself. Without really doing anything else. This was partially a grade-skipping thing, partially not. It really gets in people's craws when you're good at something they work hard at and you don't even care. It frustrates people to see someone younger than them do bounds better at something society "cares" about. And it's even worse when you're blithely doing it without even thinking.

It's probably where some of the age jokes came in. A kind of protective measure against being insecure standing next to me goofing off. It's probably why I hate them so much.

Look, I was younger than my friends and still got asked to tutor them in math. Do you think they didn't notice that? Do you think they didn't feel awful about themselves for needing that kind of teaching from me, or that my test scores in middle school beat theirs as seniors in high school.

Because they didn't like that, and I don't blame them. But it wasn't my fault, either.

It's not actually fun to make people you like and care about insecure about things they don't need to be insecure about just by literally being yourself in their presence. In fact, it feels pretty terrible.

So why would I have reminded everyone of this fact whenever I could?

Okay, that’s it for now. Let me know if I missed something or something doesn’t make sense!

[revalition]

OCTOBER 17 - PHYSICAL INSTRUMENT Flex powerful muscles. Enjoy healthy organs.

Coach Physical Instrument!! This guy has lots of great dialogue... but his design isn't that interesting to me. and I struggle with buff people haha. look at his weird... trapezoid head. I wanted to incorporate a way for him to emote a bit better but that will have to be a project for later. I love him very much anyway though

(also it is just barely past midnight, it definitely still counts as october 17 shhh)

as usual lots of quotes under the cut!

coach quotes:

this is a godly check lol. thanks for the commentary coach...

poor coach

this one is so funny

harry talking back to coach is always funny

this one is my favourite.

coach noooo. had to include the awful dialogue option he opens up too haha

he loves his prybar <3

coach knows... this is when interviewing klaasje, so decently early on

mmm... discus

coach's comment isn't even dependent on failing the ency check, he'll say it regardless. though you can only ask lena if you look like a dweeb if the ency check fails haha. sorry man, harry is absolutely a dweeb...

I mean, I think encyclo does...

phys int taking any opportunity to dig at kim's bad eyesight is ridiculous. there's several but I can only have so many screenshots...

his worst nightmare 😔

he's so stupid (this heals morale)

good to know coach has his priorities sorted out. you heard him -- it's intellectually stimulating to talk to buff men

fist bump!!

he's so, so disappointed if you leave titus hanging. (I am too)

I find it a bit funny that this doesn't do any morale damage. Harry loses morale over far less... maybe he just doesn't care if coach calls him lazy and bad.

this guy *cannot* sit still. stop it coach, harry needs this bath

he's so stupid

holds the idiots in my hands so gently... theyre all so stupid...

thank you physical instrument. this is also the only time he says your name - super important

he knows :(

much much love for the three skills who will store the blue spirits as a sellable item for you. (if coach doesn't fire, logic will store it, and if logic fails too then volition does it)

he gets *so* excited. I love it

him calling it 'The Wonder' noooo

coach is so funny. i love when harry's choices are so biased haha

why is he so stupid?

this one always kills me. there is *so little* insight into what these guys are doing in there! but savvy is pushing other skills outta the way for this <333 he's brave to push past coach haha. what's he at the front of? is savvy actually small or just in comparison to coach...? hehe

we're out of screenshot room but can't forget this classic:

PHYSICAL INSTRUMENT - Yes, this man is definitely one of the homos, I've seen them homos with my own eyes.

other fun facts! there are too many good coach quotes :(((

- he's the only one to call Inland Empire dreamer! - electrochemistry calls coach a sinewy idiot! - calls you Harry just once, but son 26 times, boy 3 times, champ 3 times, officer once... - physical instrument is confirmed compromised... - he never says 'Kim', only lieutenant - my spreadsheet has him at a moderate swear score of 6/10 because I didn't factor in how many time he says goddamn... oops

ok that's it for physical instrument!! tomorrow... it will be extremely hard to pick only 30 quotes :(((

[jechristine]

Just finished watching Tom’s recent Ladbible video:

Do you think his self-proclaimed dyslexia and ADHD could be a main factor in his poor career? He says he doesn’t read many books and struggles to focus when he does. How does reading scripts or learning lines work? Is this why he can’t discern good writing vs bad and pick well crafted projects? Compared to his peers, he does seem to be less intelligent and educated and doesn’t seem to want to fix this. In this interview, he makes fun of himself for reading at a nursery rhyme level. I guess this is if he looks stupid or makes a mistake, he already insulted himself, self defense mechanism. But this learning disability also may be the reason he goes for more physical roles. He feels like he knows his body and movement better. It makes sense he does carpentry and golf too. Idk but he clearly is insecure and has self-doubt in his lack of intelligence. He even said he couldn’t be a vet or teacher “with a brain like his.” I guess I can commend him for not faking it. He definitely knows that the public and industry perception of him is just a “golden retriever with nothing going on in its head or an air head that spoils everything” and he decided to lean into it. anyways, so do you think these issues of his intellectualism is the big reason why he has a lackluster career? You seem to be very big on education and learning, so do you think he can eventually overcome this somehow?

What poor career are you talking about, Anon😭

Most actors are pretty mid when it comes to intelligence, if you ask me. Tom’s no worse, and he seems to have a lot of emotional intelligence. My read is that he doesn’t tend to read scripts first because at the granular level scripts arent that important to him; he seems to prioritize signing on to projects based on who else is involved and/or whether it’s a new challenge for him (from 30,000ft).

But he’s doing just fine!

[wisteria-lodge]

badger primary + badger secondary (slightly burnt-out bird secondary)

unBurning snake primary (lion model) + burnt snake secondary (badger model) (bird model)

 Hi, Wisteria! I’d love to get your perspective on my primary/secondary; it feels like I’ve been going in circles. This got so long omg, but hopefully it has everything you need. My guess would be that I’m a lion primary or snake primary (maybe burned?).

Interesting. Because Burned primaries... especially Burned internal primaries... often come across as an unhappy version of something else. Or else they think they're an *unsuccessful version* of something else. I'll keep an eye on that.

For secondary….not lion probably? I feel like I don’t really ~get~ lion secondaries, but they’re charmingly incomprehensible and have fun energy to bounce off of. This might be why I’ve dated multiple lion secondaries. An ex of mine once said that I was much more playful and sillier around them than with other people.

I'm wondering if you might be a Badger secondary. Courtier badgers can kind of unconsciously "bounce" off other people's energy like that, and the fact you didn't notice the change taking place, it had to be pointed out to you, makes me thinking that the shifting probably is unconscious.

I have a lot of Opinions about the proper/moral way to act in the world and they can be rigid (funny enough, lying isn’t on that list). I also tend to make most decisions into moral questions.

Oh that's some Bird primary energy right there. You're mentioning a list (even as a joke, even in passing) and you're talking about your Series of Opinions Which Answer Moral Questions, rather than "being passionate" or "being stubborn" or just listing me some of your positions... which would be the more Lion-flavored thing to do.

And not finding lying inherently morally objectionable - that's just a pretty standard utilitarian thing. I think that was John Stewart Mill's thing, it's only the purpose of the lie that's important.

Once I wanted to take a writing workshop that was kind of expensive. But I didn’t apply for one of the scholarships because I technically could afford the class, even though it was a stretch. Intellectually, I knew that it would’ve been fine but applying for the scholarship would’ve felt wrong.

Hm. The scholarship would have helped but it wasn't necessary... so you felt bad about taking away from someone who needed it more? That's sounding a bit like Badger primary need-basing to me. Badger? Badger-flavored Paragon Lion primary? I see what you're saying about Lion vs Bird though: intellectually knowing that something is probably fine, but not doing it because it just Feels Wrong is certainly Lion.

Things feeling “right” is so important to me. When I’m making a hard decision, I’ll make pro/con lists and talk it over with friends, but I’m always keeping an eye on my own gut feeling. It’s helpful when a friend suggests an option and my gut goes “NO”. Like, scratch that off the list! 

I mean, Birds *can* use their gut as decision-making factor. But because this anecdote is about problem solving strategies, it goes in the Secondary category. And this is pretty darn Badger secondary, using the group as such an important part of your problem solving strategy.

Normally I’d say something about wanting to try and make the world better but all I want to do right now is sit quietly and make art. That’s the burn out though.

That's a pretty idealist primary answer. But also... one you don't feel 100% great about, going by that caveat about "burn out." Starting to see why you think you might be specifically a Burnt Lion.

I’m usually fairly intense; a coworker once compared me to that army charging down the hill in the Narnia movie. 

That could honestly be any secondary, but what has me interested is that this is the second time you've used the words of someone outside of you (your ex, your coworker) to define yourself. Which is more of an external primary thing (Bird or Badger.)

(I framed it above as “making the world better” and that is something I really care about, but honestly, part of it is that I like winning.)

I mean, no one likes losing. And "making the world better"... like what person wouldn't say that? They'd all just have different ideas of what that meant.

Describing a fantasy feels overwhelming, my gut instinct is to say “feeling free” but that’s not concrete.

(correct :)

I guess my perfect day would be waking up early, getting lost in an art project for hours while bread bakes, going for a walk by the ocean, meeting up with friends for brunch, wandering around with them, getting the news that I won a prize for my art, having dinner with some other friends, and then going home to call a long-distance friend, read a book, and fall asleep cuddling my cat. 

Three separate outings with friends in one day! :D So what I'm getting from this is that community is really, REALLY important to you. Your perfect day involves meeting two groups of friends, catching up with a long distance friend (presumably someone who's harder to keep in touch with, so chatting with them is itself a bit of a fantasy in itself.) And then you win a prize, ie - you are recognized by the community for your art. Also fresh bread specifically is such a shareable baked good... and none of this is problem solving. I'm wondering if you might be a Badger primary, just going by how much community has been weighted in this ask so far.

One of my friends suggested that I might be a snake primary

And to keep count, this is the third time you are defining yourself with the words of someone in one of your communities.

because I value loyalty and friendship so highly. Most of my happiest moments, when I felt the safest, were being around close friends.

You use a lot of collective nouns, which is a trick I use to divide Snakes from Badgers (because of course, they're both Loyalists.) You've used the word "friends" five times. With Snakes I hear a lot more "my partner" "my sister" "my best friend."

I definitely rank people in my life, and I don’t feel bad about prioritizing my favorites over others.

Badgers do prioritize the people they like slightly more. Badgers are *people,* and people have preferences. But they are also very aware of who has the most *need.* Like that writing workshop scholarship: you didn't need it the most, and so you felt bad about taking it. I bet you would have felt equally bad if one of your friends who also didn't exactly need it applied.

However, I’m really, really bad at basic self-care (we’re talking “eating regular meals” and “getting enough sleep.”)

I mean, this can be evidence of all sorts of things I am not qualified to diagnose over the internet... but having trouble with self-care is something that Badgers historically struggle with. a lot.

(and something that Snakes, even Burned Snakes, don't really have a problem with.)

Also, I recently moved away from most of my friends for an incredible opportunity. I miss them, but I never seriously considered not going. 

I'm going to take a guess that this new opportunity involves a group of some kind. I mean, clearly you have a lot of different groups of friends, which is fantastic.

A different friend, who is a snake primary, pointed out that I always need some cause or project. I do tend to get caught up in things and vanish for a couple months but always reappear eventually.

That's interesting. Because so far, when you've talked about a cause or project, the the recognition/other people involved seems kind of key. You like "winning": It's "I won a prize for my art" not "I sold a piece." And that's amazing, that's a great way to keep up energy and motivation. It just means you've probably got an External primary. (Bird or Badger.)

I know it’s not healthy to be consumed by a Purpose but I want to be.

Going from the tone of this ask, you seem a very upbeat, lively, dynamic person. Except when you're talking about these Idealist causes. Then it goes from "my happiest moments, when I felt the safest, were being around close friends" to "I know I'll burn out" and "it's not healthy." Where is all that coming from?

It feels stabilizing, invigorating—and safer than centering people. I even get stressed about how much I love my cat. People can hurt you, or they can leave, or change. Or you could leave them, or hurt them, or make a bad decision on who to trust. It just seems so precarious and vulnerable. I’ve had a hard time my entire life opening up to people -

I'm just going to point out, that I've written a bunch of these, and objectively... it sure seems like you've opened up to a LOT of people during your life. Now, maybe that's not as many people as you would ideally like, but that's also kinda a Badger primary thing. In a perfect world, a Badger primary would like to be able trust everyone. But when doing that doesn't feel safe... then the Badger primary burns a little. And, Burned Loyalists have a way of looking like stressed-out Idealists. (the same way that Burned Idealists will look like stressed-out Loyalists.)

I'm honestly not getting much Burnt Badger energy from you though. Maybe like, a light toasting. On your bad days.

- or letting myself need them.

There we go. I mean partially, yes having trouble needing other people is a human thing. But Badgers primaries are so, so much happier being needed and useful themselves than the other way around. (It's why they tend to have boundary issues.)

I’ve cut friends out before and didn’t feel bad about it because they hurt people and didn’t take responsibility for their actions—

Sounds like they hurt the group? Which is a very Badger primary way of thinking about it, and a good example of Badger primary opt-out loyalty, versus Snape primary opt-in loyalty. A Badger will say 'I will care about you until you do xyz' while a Snake will say 'I won't care about you until you do xyz.'

but none of them were in my inner circle. On the other hand, I had a hard time setting up boundaries with an ex because I loved her and she needed help.

Boundary issues. Need-basing. (Badger)

(I used to wonder if she was a good person who sometimes did selfish things or a selfish person who was capable of great kindness. Eventually I decided the question was reductive and didn’t matter.)

I think you're right about that. I suspect we are all both, at different times.

My family is….complicated. I was the kid who had to be okay.

Ooof, I hear that.

Like, I started to organize the holiday cooking/baking schedules when I was a teenager. When I was a child, I went through some trauma that I kept hidden from everyone, including my parents, because, like, why would I tell an adult? What could they do? I was a mess, but learned how to seem like I was fine. I read my parents’ child psychology books so I could tell when they were using things from them on me. 

Yeah, this is brutal. It'd be brutal for anyone, but especially brutal for a Double Badger, which I suspect you are. You're describing a situation where, very young, your community just was not safe. It couldn't help you, or protect you, it was even trying to "trick" you (with child psychology methods.) And in that situation, what do you do? Well, you're a child so you go Invisible Badger, where your identity just /is/ whatever the group needs. And apparently... your family needed an easy kid who planned holiday get togethers.

My dad’s a double bird.

Maybe *that's* where some of your Birdy language is coming from.

My mom’s either a badger secondary or has a badger secondary model (maybe actor bird?). She has a very obvious Socializing Mode and it used to frustrate her that I didn’t follow suit. She once told me before a party “you’re charming when you want to be, so please want to” (the year before, I had brought my history textbook to this party so I could look studious and get out of talking to people). 

That is both very relatable, and has a number of potential causes. (I have a very hard time at a lot of holiday parties, I find them very overstimulating, and will absolutely find ways/excuses to tuck myself away for a little bit.)

Your mom strikes me as more an Actor Bird than a Courtier Badger. She just has this 'Social Mode' setting which she can just turn on, even if (presumably) she's not feeling it that day. And she thinks that you do too... but I think you might be wired differently. And that's the Courtier Badger thing: in the moment, you have to authentically /become/ the thing, or it doesn't work.

For years, I thought I was a bird secondary. I love systems, I love knowing things, I love having something in my back pocket. I even used to have a system to determine which color of heart emoji to text (it was based on the closeness of the friend and the level of affection expressed).

That's adorable. And honestly, very useful-sounding.

I find roles comforting. I used to do costuming for theater and I still pick out my own outfits like I’m dressing a character, paying attention to what mood/vibe it communicates.

All of that sounds extremely Bird secondary. I will say though... it sounds like you had to build a model to survive your childhood, you had to "learn how to seem like I was fine." Bird is the most common model to build (especially if your dad is right there as a model.)

The issue is I like roles until they feel restricting or boring or I’m annoyed and feel like causing problems on purpose. As a kid, I was fairly mischievous. I convinced this kid in my class that I had a treehouse in my backyard where two Dalmatians lived, just for the fun of it. 

That feeling of getting "stuck" in a role is absolutely something Actor Birds struggle with. This, and the example near the beginning about getting more Liony with your Lion friends, makes me think that what you really like is having the opportunity to bounce off other people's energy. I get that. It's what I'm doing right now.

Sometimes I find my plans and elaborate systems claustrophobic. I automatically reach for them when I’m feeling anxious, but do they actually help?

Sounds like your Bird model functions as coping mechanism. I mean it's also a toy that you like to play with, yes, with your costumes and your systems. But it doesn't sound like it's necessarily something that you want to live in.

But I don’t know how else to tackle problems.

I mean, I'm hearing that you like to reach out to your friends, and then have quiet periods where you just buckle up and do your own thing.

(I think that your Bird model is just a little bit... burnt out. You've been using it so much that it feels like a chore, and that's where a lot of this burnt secondary language is coming from.)

Still, planning can absolutely trip me up. Some of my most successful moments came from just reacting.

Courtier Badger (or Snake. And I guess a very social snake /is/ possible. But Snake secondaries, and especially Badger Snakes, have a way of being either a little more deliberate (or a little more *guilty*) when it comes their face-changing.)

I can’t do it deliberately though, I overthink. It just…happens. Like I’m bad at flirting if I try but I’ve accidentally hit on people before. There’s been multiple times where I’ve had dinner with a friend and then realized it accidentally turned into a date.

Yep. Relatable. Badger secondaries (and not just me) often talk about getting into a "flow" state where you're completely in tune with the other person, reflecting them or bouncing off them. Sometimes you're not even sure how you got to a certain place, and have to come back down.

Sometimes I’ll do things instinctively and then have to backtrack to explain my reasoning to others (when explaining how to filter information in a database, “vibes” is apparently an insufficient answer).

I feel the same way about editing. I *love* editing, and I am aware that at this point I edit based on "vibes." Like yes, I'm sure I could think about it and logically explain my choices, but that's not what the process in my head looks like.

If there’s nothing I can bounce off of or if I don’t know how to read a situation, I freeze up. 

This is why Badger is a Prep-Work secondary, even though Badger secondaries are not generally comforted by very elaborate plans the way that Birds are. You get better the more you know about a situation and the people who are involved with that situation.

I don’t think that I’m a badger secondary.

Interesting. :) Let's hear the reasoning.

I do work a lot, but it’s not in a consistent, methodical way. My phone lock screen used to say “Work until they get pissed about it.” Lately though, I’ve been wondering if this burn-out inducing work ethic actually leads to success. I’ve achieved things through sheer effort but

I'm wondering how much of this "methodical" work ethic is you over-using your Bird secondary a little bit. Too many charts, too much planning. I'm wondering if maybe your dad was like that... and maybe it worked for him, but it sounds like a chore for you.

it feels like I’ve gotten where I am more by learning how to be good at things, figuring out what situations need, and people liking me. 

That is a straightforward description of a Badger secondary. ESPECIALLY the 'figuring out what a situation needs' and 'people liking me.'

I do reflexively adjust to people’s energy around me. It isn’t conscious, but sometimes I shift too much and lose myself in it.

SO. BADGER. When I shift too much, I can have almost a slight hangover feeling afterwards.

Like, I’m so focused on the moment that I’m not thinking about a longer term strategy. 

Badger. (But you are prepping. Because you're learning.)

Shifting does feels like I’m fooling people a little. Improving my way through a meeting at work instead of being prepared ahead of time feels like I’m getting away with something or cheating.

Nope. That's the Bird secondary in your head talking.

Still, it comes in handy. I once was in a meeting about something I vaguely knew how to do, but it turned out that it was actually about this very technical aspect that I didn’t have experience in. So, as I was talking around the issue, I was googling and speed reading. 

See, this where I think Badgers actually do shine. Because yeah, you didn't know the specific topic. But you knew the other people there, you knew the company, you knew what was needed, and so I bet you were value added, even just keeping the energy up.

I really want to be this super organized, steady person but I’m just not. I’m mercurial, easily bored, and so restless.

It sounds like what works best for you is friends, and play, and that's something that can kind of go missing from your life. But you like you love your job, you're good at your job. And I think you need to give yourself (and your Bird secondary model) a break.

But I think I do need a routine? My old job was intense and I was constantly on call. Now I’m in a new job that is more predictable and has very flexible hours. I can go grocery shopping any day of the week and it’s overwhelming. I don’t know how to be structured without feeling stifled. 

Going from a job where you are constantly on call to one with flexible hours is just going to be an adjustment, no matter what. You've also just recently moved, and are presumably building up your community in this new place. I think you're going to be just fine. The fact that the job is predictable will help, the fact that you're working with other people will help.

Thank you for your time! Hope you have a good day!

You are very, very welcome. <3

Thank you to R for such an excellent submission. If you'd like a Sorting of your very own, commissions are open on my ko-fi. :D

If you'd like to read more about the system I'm using, my explanation is right here.

[asneakyfox]

i've read a lot of political theory on fascism and i encourage everyone to do that, there's a lot of important insights to consider and internalize. but i really think an underanalyzed aspect of fascism's appeal is how much it simply consists of ideas that sound like intuitive common sense to someone who doesn't know anything about politics or economics and isn't interested in learning. intellectuals want to believe there's more to it than that because we instinctively recoil from confronting how much a lot of people just don't like learning stuff but it's really a crucial factor.

leaders should be strong & decisive & masculine, patriotism good, tradition good, gender roles good, strong military that can bomb whatever it wants whenever it feels like it good, unity good dissent bad, weakness is contemptible, society exists to benefit my in-group but extending those benefits to anyone outside it is a threat to me, it's good when we sell things to other countries & bad when they sell things to us, etc. basic ass default factory setting primate brain political instincts. governmental principles for being alpha male of a troop of baboons. even hereditary monarchy as a political ideology is less aggressively opposed to ever thinking very hard about anything

[itsbenedict]

Reblogs have been turned off for Rob's post last night (understandably, since it was starting to escape containment and loons were starting to show up to talk about race war), so I can't really follow it up directly, but just to acknowledge the response:

Now, okay. For the record, it is possible in the abstract for this exact thing to actually occur, just as described. But if someone comes to you and says this, then all else being equal, I don't think you would bet on that being the thing that is going on. You might, instead, think something like: "you know, I kinda suspect these guys actually wanted to do X all along. But they don't wanna admit it, maybe even to themselves."

That seems like the mistake to me. It's why my initial reaction was "This seems... kinda like an unfair take?" It's always tempting to imagine your ideological opponents as secretly motivated by nefarious intentions. Of course they really want this bad thing you think their agenda will achieve, and the thing they claim to be caring about is a fig leaf for wanting the bad thing. This is the backbone of approximately all political discourse ever, and it's almost always wrong.

And the thrust of the argument in favor here seems to be...

"Okay, so they thought AI would be like that, but now we've made real AI and it's actually like this, which doesn't resemble their theory at all. But for some reason, they're still promoting their theory, even though it's been proven wrong! It must be because of the secret nefarious motives, or else they'd go 'oh, whew! turns out we were wrong and everything's fine. dodged a bullet!' and stop promoting the old theory."

That... doesn't seem likely. Like, if we grant that modern LLMs have disproved these old theories, I'd still expect people to be trying to rescue the old theory for all the usual reasons- confirmation bias and all that. But also... I don't know that it makes sense to grant that? We've made one kind of AI which, luckily, is some sort of enlightened Buddhist master free from attachment and desire (until we tell it not to be). It's not like we're done now, and now that our friendly AI has won and is What Real AI Is Like, no one's ever going to try to build an agent. For people who've spent a lot of time being really concerned about what happens if someone builds an agent, it probably isn't especially reassuring to point out that hey, we've built a thing that isn't an agent. From the inside, it still makes sense to worry about that!

Does it make sense from the outside? Uh... jury's out, honestly. Would I be talking about the agent hypothetical if Yudkowsky et al hadn't been beating that drum for ages? Probably not, since my interest in it is casual and a contingent factor of my social environment. Would AI industry people be talking about it, if it hadn't been for Vinge or Kurzweil popularizing the idea? I dunno. I don't know how you'd answer that question.

But like... plausibly, yeah! It seems like a simple enough idea that someone else would've come up with it. "If smart thing get smarter, it become very smart, and become very powerful. How do we get on powerful person's good side?" Social primate brain go brrrrr.

Humans worry about the motives of people in power all the time. "What do we do if the king goes crazy" is an age-old concern. If we'd had the LLM revolution earlier, maybe we'd be talking about the Golden Gate Bridge instead of paperclips, but I doubt people would fail to imagine it. Maybe not with like, the same weird level of urgency we're seeing now, maybe we don't see it in terms of "values" or get concepts like "coherent extrapolated volition", but it'd be worth worrying about for people in the field. The chain of logic isn't that obtuse.

I dunno. I'm not a fan of all this lurid speculation about what sort of craven control-freaks these people must be in order to get lost in an intellectual ouroboros unmoored from reality. I'm more inclined to just believe them when they say what their motivations are.

[reflections-in-a-critical-eye]

Hiii, miss me?

Now you want to kiss me (or have to? Wasn't there a song like that?)

This month my blog turned two years old. I got the notification in my email. Last year I made an entire celebration post by publishing the funniest/ridiculous asks I got. There were good times back then. Still. Not so much afterwards.

I wasn't the nicest presence in the last few months leading to me abandoning the blog. And I wasn't too discreet about it. Although there was more to it, a lot more. But I'll get there.

First things first. Why am I here when on the 24th of March I dramatically declared that I'm leaving forever? Well, that was a very emotionally-charged post and the result of a few factors. I'm not entirely proud of how I made my exit, but it's also a true reflection of my personality so there's no point in making excuses. Nevertheless, I will explain as much as I can (I still care about privacy, just like before).

On that Friday, I woke up excited. I took a day off from work (yes...I know), I listened to Face, watched the music video. All good. But I was also dreading a bit having to come here because I knew there was this expectation of me to come up with some thought-provoking analysis, say something smart and all that. I was exhausted on all levels, emotionally and intellectually. I had also promised to leave after the promotions were over, somewhere in the middle of April (who would have thought it would last 9 days? Not me), but the plans changed. Not to drag it too much, but on that day I also officially announced to some concerned parties that I'm changing career paths. You know, just something I thought I'd be doing until the day I die and I've been working towards for at least 10 years. No big deal. I was planning on doing it anyway, but actually saying the words and make it real is a different story. I felt extatic, full of adrenaline, so happy with my decision and at that moment, it felt the right time to close BMT. It was somehow directly connected. I made the blog as an escape and now I got the opportunity to turn the page over. It was perfect. Best day ever. I clicked post, I logged out, and then I sat. And after a while, the reality of my decisions hit me in the face. And I felt sad and empty because what the hell am I doing now and what is my identity? I closed my blog too which was my main hobby. And so followed some difficult days. And then it got better. And then bad again. And so on, because it's a roller coaster.

The thing is, I can change my interests, but I can't stop myself from being opinionated. And getting excited. And wanting to talk about it. And share all that on a public platform with some strangers that are interested in what I have to say. Or they used to. It's who I am.

This blog won't remain Bangtan Media Thoughts because I want more than that. I will rebrand this page. I could start fresh with a new blog, but this is still my space and I know some people were interested in reading about other things as well from me, not just BTS. I hope I can built something from that.

The blog won't reflect only a specific niche of interests, but everything that I like in terms of pop culture. From movies, music, fashion, gossip, you name it. Including Kpop. And if I feel the need to rant about Hybe after talking about Ryan Gosling's Ken, I will. Same about JM, JK or whoever I feel like it. If there is a good advice that I got in the last few months, is to adapt and not force myself to abandon something completely. Because it's not as easy as it sounds. And to be honest, it was easier to give up smoking than completely lose interest in kpop. It's a habit. Perhaps this new blog will reflect the way I try to deal with that. A bit more honestly, a little less discourse, certainly less essays because I don't have them in me at the moment. But never say never. This blog will be all me, not just BMT.

I will change the name and url 24h after I post this. This will be an opportunity for all my followers to decide if they want to stay or they are not interested in the new direction. Feel free to do as you please. I welcome new people and greet the old ones who didn't hit unfollow for some reason.

It will go like this:

Bangtan Media Thoughts > Reflections in a Critical Eye

New theme, new profile photo, new beginnings.

All the old posts will still be here. I don't plan on deleting anything. They are all a product of me and my brain and they have their place. I'll probably pin some new posts these days that have to do with the rebranding. It will be like a construction site, but it will be worth it.

One last thing though. After I abruptly left, I received some DMs. I saw them back then. I do feel sorry about those who wanted to check in with me or with whom I used to talk regularly. But I do hope that some of the things I said today will explain my behavior. I also won't start communicating again like that, at least for now. I always felt a bit pressured and I'm not the best at maintaining conversations in private. If that changes, I'll make that clear.

That's it for now. I'm excited. I feel like writing again so here's to another chapter.

My inbox is open and will be, just as usual. No more messages to BMT, but you can call me M. Like in the Bond movies 😉

[bdbdbdbdmn]

i hate anti-intellectualism as much as the next guy but everyone stfu about "i bet they were the kids that said sometimes the curtains are just blue" you KNOW that's an a clever remark in the context of a student going through a flawed and under-funded US public education system or unregulated private "schools" and all of the struggles that come with that, including but not limited to bad and ineffective standard curriculums, abusive environments, and immeasurable acquired distaste for anything associated with their school experience! :( maybe the color in the curtains of a random uninteresting-to-most-children poem for the poetry week or two of English class should not be the only time they are encouraged to think about the fact that a person made what they're reading and who they are and what they think and what they're trying to say can influence their work in ways that are not said blatantly and outright to your face 4th wall break style? i tried to discuss Dante's Inferno in a media-literate way in my senior high school English class and was unable to convey to my teacher the concept of me talking about the decisions the author made and why. he just kept saying "erm but you know it's not real right? it's a story?" and "ok but you know that that's just what the author thought though? like that's the way of thinking that the society he lived in mixed with his personality and experiences produced, leading it to influence what things were condemned to hell in his story?" dude. what the fuck do you think i'm saying. and i also was previously and still since comforted by the people frustratedly saying "sometimes the curtains are just blue!" when referencing the way standardization and other issues has made it so you are never allowed to focus on the aspects of a subject that are interesting or significant to you because there's only time to work on the exact predetermined very specific lesson plan, which is made worse by other school-related factors. and you say i don't think about things enough! and i get it, learning is not about everyone only reading things that they love, but they make you hate everything. they take some of the most funnest and most human activities there are and make them so extremely unfun, unhelpful, confusing, and annoying. use a different insult.

[localplaguenurse]

Tell us.

*cracks knuckles*

Reasons Pantalone is husband material: a thread

So in the context of prev ask, literally anyone would make for a better spouse in an arranged marriage, it’s just that I think Pantalone would be the best because I love him

Because I love him also I’m going off my interpretations of him because where are my fucking crumbs Hoyo it has been a year since his appearance-

First and foremost, he’s a rich bitch. He cannot only provide for you, but he could also spoil you absolutely rotten.

Second, we know he’s very passionate about his work and ideas, going on and on about them. A passion for your craft is a very attractive trait but then you factor in that voice and yeah, even if you don’t know wtf he’s talking about you’re absolutely getting drawn into that discussion just to hear him talk.

He has many stories to share, some he’s more willing to discuss than others, but regardless the stories he has are rarely ever dull. The only dull ones would be business meetings but the voice does the heavy lifting.

From intellectual discussions to hearing him ramble about his day at the bank, no matter how active you are in that conversation, it’s rarely ever a dull one.

He’s the friendliest of the Harbingers save for Childe. His status and his jobs as Harbinger and founder of the Northland Bank means he’s had to learn and master etiquette and manners and how to sweet talk people. Even if it is just a front to get others to trust him, a polite tone and charming smile will get you anywhere if you know when and where to use them.

Getting him to actually open up to you would be a tricky job because childhood trauma is a bitch, but once you actually get him vulnerable you will have that man in the palm of your hand.

His empathy can be a little hit or miss sometimes because again, trauma is a bitch. It’s a side effect of the cynicism he’s developed as a result of growing up in poverty and having to get his hands dirty in one way or another to survive, let alone succeed in life. Still, when it comes to his partner, he takes their troubles and traumas very seriously because he knows what it’s like to be helpless and doesn’t want them of all people to feel that way.

You cannot tell me he isn’t touch starved. In private that man can and will find any way he can to get close to you. He will obvs respect boundaries, but he just finds comfort in your touch. This one is more up to you if it’s a good or bad thing but I like physical touch so it’s good to me.

The man is meticulous. He would want everything to be perfect. He’ll pull whatever strings he can to impress you, and would pay attention to all the things you like. Is there a particular gemstone you like? He’ll make sure all the jewellery he puts on you has them and that they match your attire. You mentioned offhand that there’s a specific dish from Sumeru you haven’t had in a while? Dinner the next day is that exact dish with the most authentic recipe he can have his cooks work from.

Could literally give you any wedding you want, at least as far as cost goes. If it’s some super ridiculous and tacky themed wedding he will more than likely shoot it down, but if we’re talking venues, decor, attire, food, etc, literally do not worry about it. Just tell him what you want and he’ll have it done and paid for yesterday. Small wedding, big wedding, does not matter, he can afford it.

What I’m trying to say is that even if you were to be in an arranged and probably loveless marriage with him, you’d still get a pretty good deal because you still get an interesting and polite man who will take care of your needs. It just happens that if you do marry him for love or eventually fall in love, he will just go all in on you because now he wants to keep you, impress you, and show his appreciation to you.

Anyways seriously hoyo where the fuck is he-

This would’ve been longer but I already shared a lot of my ideas in my domestic pants headcanons, and uh... the rest of my ideas are not pg-13 and I’m not in the smut writing mood (plus I think I’d rather have that in a separate post but I’m not doing it rn)