#i. am. willing. to. debate.

[ohumokay]

Firstly, this is a long post about romanticizing and misinterpreting OCD. If you "ain't gonna read allat", MOVE ON. This is a topic I am very passionate about and willing to debate. Secondly, if you are an individual struggling with OCD or OCPD, I commend you and open my messages to you if you ever want to talk <3.

OCD - "Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder is characterized by unreasonable thoughts and fears (obsessions) that lead to compulsive behaviors... excessive thoughts (obsessions) that lead to repetitive behaviors (compulsions)." [Google]

OCPD - "Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder is a mental health condition that causes an extensive preoccupation with perfectionism, organization and control." [Google]

Now that we have the definitions that anyone can look up on the internet so I'm not denounced, let's talk about the fact that romanticized OCD is just water downed OCPD.

Good afternoon.

We all have seen some person on tiktok or any social media saying "Oh my gosh, I'm so OCD lol" and they simply reordered their desk or something. And, depending on which side of the internet it falls on, the response will either be "OMG SAMEEE", or a long paragraph arguing how OCD is a real disorder and shouldn't be the butt on a joke.

Both are entitled to their opinions, it makes me no difference. And, from a 10 second video, I can neither confirm nor deny that the person has OCD, but I can firmly say that rearranging a desk is not a definitive sign someone has OCD. Too many people claim OCD or use OCD to degrade and invalid another, and not only are they mocking the very real and very destructive disorder, but the symptoms that they claim correspond with OCD are more commonly diagnosable in OCPD.

I'll admit, I was a part of the problem for longer than I'd have liked, but I corrected myself after researching OCD, OCPD and the contrast. Again, Google is free, and the definitions above come from there, so no one has to take my word.

Romanticized OCD is typically associated with perfectionism, over controlling tendencies, and habitual cleaning. There are cases of people without OCD claiming they want partners with OCD specifically for the reasons listed above. On the other hand, there are people who are separated from their partners for the reasons above and claim they couldn't handle their ex-partner's "OCD". While both parties are well within their right to these opinions, classifying these behaviors solely as OCD is where they are wrong.

True OCD is the act of appeasing reoccurring compulsions in order to soothe irrational fears or obsessions. Individuals with OCD often perform repetitive behaviors to ease intrusive thoughts (which are also romanticized in the media and mistaken for impulsive thoughts). True OCD is an anxiety disorder and is commonly aligned with GAD (General Anxiety Disorder). True OCD can and has included perfectionism, over controlling tendencies, and habitual cleaning, but it's because of irrational fears blown out of proportion that need the ritualistic acts to calm them.

True OCD is commonly labeled as crazy (which is universal for most neurological disorders), while Romanticized OCD is labeled as relatable. OCPD is never mentioned nor given its credit for being the true foundation of Romanticized OCD, and consequently, both True OCD and OCPD are backgrounded to Romanticized OCD.

Similarly to many other disorders, an individual can be obsessive and compulsive without having a disorder, and can have a controlling personality without having a personality disorder. Relating common behaviors to the severity of a damming disorder not only negates the intensity of said disorder, but can also lead to self-misdiagnoses.

I am, in absolutely no way, shaming self-diagnosed OCD, nor am I invalidating it in any way. I'm just a girl with Google and a scattered brain. This is me trying to present what I believe is true with evidence that is accessible by the masses. If you have any disagreement with what I've said, feel free to debate me publicly or privately. I am not prideful nor immobile to opposing opinions and factual information. And if I'm spreading false information, please check me.

[overthinkinglotr]

Has read the Silmarillion and enjoyed it: Gandalf, Aragorn, Legolas, Frodo, Sam, Faramir Has read the Silmarillion and hated it: Gimli Hasn't read the Silmarillion: Merry, Pippin, Boromir Has read the Silmarillion, then wrote passionate Silmarillion fanfiction poetry that made Aragorn try to gently explain the dubious ethics of writing RPF about Elrond's dad: Bilbo

[noot-noot-shoot]

Presidential debate (yaoi version)

[insomnya777]

etho and joel are nick and gatsby variants. that's it that's the post

[stormofdefiance]

Dkdkdkdks this is not a serious analysis in any way at all but the podcast I’m listening to has started going through Plato’s dialogues & in one of them (The Symposium) an excruciatingly handsome young man, Alcibiades, tries desperately to seduce Socrates with his good looks in the hopes of gleaning more wisdom from him. In it Socrates does get into bed with him, but all that goes down is Socrates ‘not moving at all’ and rambling endlessly on about philosophy. Idk I’m just pishing myself, this is just so incredibly Ratio/Aventurine core dndndndxndn

[abortionado]

The idea that misogyny is a real axis of systemic oppression whereby men are privileged in some ways and women are subjugated in some ways is THE most baseline fundamental building block of feminism, and if you refuse to believe this then you are not a feminist. Like point blank, end of, you are not a feminist if you don't believe in institutional misogyny. Having some vague idea that women shouldn't be second class citizens does not make you a feminist

[vanity-complex]

Genuinely, I think people are very out of touch with the reality of what a revolution is and, instead, have a romantic vision of what they want revolution to be. I think this is because the word revolution has been entirely removed from the words civil war. There is no such thing as a 'quick' revolution. Revolutions are long and bloody conflicts that address great social inequity at the cost of life. Blood is spilled, life is ended, and people suffer. The reality of revolution is that suffering has grown so immense that war does not feel like suffering in contrast. Revolution is an agreement that the social contract has rotted to its very core, and that the only way to fix it is through violence. It is to risk everything to create a power vacuum where an entirely new society and order is created. Revolutions do not settle in a few months - they take years, decades, centuries. The French Revolution, perhaps the most famous romantic revolution, was not just cutting off the head of a king or queen, it was the indeterminate slaughter of a social class and any who dare question the morality of it followed by centuries of new governments. Today in Syria we see revolutionaries finally take hold of their government after 13 years of intense fighting, and still there is so much up in the air for them as they approach creating a new government. In other cases, a monarchy falls and dictatorship takes root. Perhaps an imperfect democracy falls and a new monarch is found. This is not to discredit revolution, as it is a useful tool of the masses to effect change, but it is a reminder that revolution is a tool that is powered by blood and you must ask yourself: is the blood that rots as people suffer greater than the blood that will be spilled to right those wrongs? If so, then organize and revolutionize, but know that life will change forever and, once you start, there is no going back and no telling what lies on the other side.

[cowchickenbeefpork]

you know even though it’s important to acknowledge how sexist/homophobic the writing was for Isabella and how shes definitely not good for edward(her actions in the dress up scene can easily be interpreted as rape since Edward is consistently mentally ill in this show and literally went to Arkham for it) but to paint her as someone intentionally malicious is very ????? Strange to me.

it paints her as someone calculating, someone who know what they’re doing is wrong but does it anyways which isn’t like how we see her act in the show at all. We see her risk her life for a man who she’s only dated (AND KNOWN!!!!) in the SPAN OF A WEEK!!! A WEEK PEOPLE!!! The first time she risked her life was when she found out he used to be in Arkham and killed his previous girlfriend and stayed with him nonetheless and the second was when she risked being strangled to death while she was dressed up as Kristen to prove he wouldn’t hurt her. Both of these events happened within the same week. If you were planning to intentionally abuse someone in order to make yourself feel more in control and powerful, why would you pick a man who went into Arkham for killing his previous partner LET ALONE DRESS UP AS HER TO PROVE YOUR LOVE TO HIM???? Someone doing this intentionally would at least wait and pace these events around in order to ensure their safety, not do that all at once. Isabella does them all at once.

even with the clone theory attached to her it still just. Doesn’t really paint her as someone who is mature enough to know what her actions are doing. The clones are at most around a year old, and I don’t think you ever get a good grasp of morals in the span of only a year alive even if you were born as an adult. Even if you head-canon her behavior to be motivated by the court of the owls as a intentional act to separate Ed and Oswald, the blame still wouldn’t fully be on her because of the fact she is a clone whose barely lived a life. This would be her just following orders, not fully understanding the morals of it because this is all she’s ever known!

I know it’s because she doesn’t have a lot of content so she’s more flexible as a character which makes you be able to make her whatever you want her to be but it’s like !!!! We like the same show right??? Why aren’t you not utilizing the little bits of characterization we do get of her in canon for your version of her? What’s the point of writing for such an underdeveloped character if you only keep around one to two traits in the end?

it just feels like wasted potential. With a character like her you can explore how sometimes not all abusers know what they’re doing. You can explore how sometimes abusers are hurting their own well being with their abuse. You can explore how sometimes abusers are also victims. You can explore abusers who aren’t the most standard basic idea of abuse with someone like her and yet it’s the route not taken!!!!

[alicentflorent]

Instead of Alicent meekly agreeing to Ottos dead toddler parade for PR and only going along with it out of “duty” they should have given her her own motivation: RAGE. Perhaps Alicent wants the city to see the child that has just been martyred, to remind the people of the cruelty inflicted on her family by her enemies. She wants them to remember the little Prince Jahaerys and what was done to him. She wants people to see what they did to her girl, their beloved queen, who is in so much pain. She wants people to feel her families pain and suffering so they remember what the blacks did to an innocent child, not just as a ploy to keep the people on their side, that’s ottos reasoning, but because Alicent wants everyone to know their pain, so she puts her families pain on display because she is done hiding it. After hiding her pain for years, suppressing her feelings and remaining dutiful and poised. Alicent is done pretending. Unfortunately, this leads to Alicent hurting her children, the parents of the murdered child, as her pain and rage consumes her more because they didn’t want their child to be a martyr or for his body to be on display for strangers to see on the day of his funeral.

[tiredguyswag]

look if you're a desi blog following me on here (this goes for everyone actually) you need to recognise india's currently committing war crimes and settler colonialism in kashmir, and you need to understand that the biggest exporter india receives is from israel (and it's mostly weapons) which are used in occupied kashmir and that india makes up 45% of israel's arms exports. kashmir is one of the most militarily dense regions on the planet. kashmiris are regularly brutalized by the indian army.

and if you believe any of that stupid 'hinduphobia is a thing that happens in india' please just get out right now

i will not stand for any islamophobia. this is people's lives we're talking about. this is not up for debate.

[straightlightyagami]

maybe the reason people on here do not understand what terfs/gc radfems believe and often cannot even tell them apart from transphobic conservatives,or just transphobes who are not radfems in general, (like they will say stuff that is in most cases very obviously untrue about terf beliefs like “terfs want women to be feminine” and “terfs have nothing against cis men actually they only care about trans people”) is that they cannot grasp that terfs genuinely view trans men as women and trans women as men. and then they get mad when people tell them their perception of this ideology is incorrect. i think this is a pretty dangerous trend bc this is how they recruit people, someone hears all this stuff radfems supposedly believe, arguments against strawmen instead of the actual thing, and then they hear actual radfem beliefs and go “so i was lied to.” since this person doesn’t understand the basis of this sort of bigotry, they may begin to believe it if it is introduced with a different explanation.

so to say, in order to defeat your enemy you have to understand them and you clearly do not

[commandernachos]

[exar547]

clothes other than shoes, gloves and hats are the sonic universe's equivalent of gendered fashion

OKAY let me explain.

almost every female character wears clothes, dress, pants shirts right? and almost every male character only wears shoes and gloves (sometimes a hat or mask) right?

my theory is that this is the mobian equivalent of gendered fashion.

AND before you argue with Sally Acorn: i believe she's meant to be depicted as a tomboy, everything from how her personality contrasted every other female character back when she was created to her entire rebellious ordeal, i think her fashion is what's considered tomboy fashion. i'd also like to make it clear that i'm referring to her archie design; this one right here.

so, with all of this aside...

why'd i make this post?

all to say this.

if Dr. Ivo "Eggman" Robotnik were a mobian, he'd be considered a femboy. (hell, it's possible he's considered a femboy anyway)

i can and will debate this.

[irenespring]

I was going to make my next politics post about Project 2025 and its likelihood of trying to ban fic in the US but then I saw this and fuck it, we're talking about this right now.

Not sure whether my Jewish alarm bells or history person alarm bells are ringing louder, but this is getting really scary. This is Nazi shit. Full-tilt unabashed Nazi rhetoric. He's talking about assigning people numbers and putting them on buses in massive groups. He wants to do it with violence. With the Supreme Court the way it is right now, he could do it. He can kill people with impunity, as long as he's doing it as President. That is the current law.

If you can vote in this election, you need to vote for Harris. Whether you like her or not, she is not using Nazi rhetoric and elevating admitted Nazis (*cough* Robinson in North Carolina *cough*). She is the only one with a shot at victory.

We need to stop this man. If that means making a pragmatic move and voting for someone you detest on some issues but who is not going to assign humans serial numbers and round them up into detention camps bloodily---fucking pinch your nose and do it.

Take it from someone who has to spend a large portion of their week reading history studies...history will not remember your supposed reason for not voting. You will be remembered as a Trump supporter, because you supported Trump.

Tldr: We need to stop this man in this election. Vote for Harris.

[ebenelephant]

^

lesbian.

hope u understand.

[llycaons]

I saw a slightly obnoxious post like 'wow you realize it DOES make you feel better when you read more books and do x and y and z' and had my typical instantly contrarian thought of 'well sometimes....but some books this year I read pissed me the fuck off' but readings those books enhanced my enjoyment of the books I actually like so in a roundabout way I guess it was true..