#it feels like it causes cognitive dissonance to believe something that goes against all of my lived experiences

[paranormaljones]

.

[g33kyr0b0t]

some thoughts of mine that im posting here from discord

(TW: references to S/A, pregnancy, mouthwashing spoilers)

jimmy is an interesting creature cos like... it'd be so easy to make him a villian with no conscience. but its so interesting to me that he has one.

he feels guilt about what he did to everyone, but with anya in particular he's terrified of actually confronting it.

with his guilt around daisuke, swansea and curly he can twist the situation to make himself the victim. a misunderstood martyr who was just trying to save everyone

but he can't justify what he did to anya. he can't justify the pregnancy

so, just like every other uncomfortable truth he's forced to face, he runs away from it.

thats why the horses and pregnancy related stuff are so nightmarish. him getting caught for assaulting anya *terrifies* him. the one way he can rationalize his actions is to portray anya and her unborn baby as inhuman monsters that exist to mock and torment him.

in that one final sequence with the IDs on the walls, anya's ID is actually still there. its just always hidden.

jimmy can't look her in the eye, because that means having to confront that he did that to another human being.

instead of accepting responsibility and facing the consequences, he chooses to ignore it.

the closest thing we have to actually representing anya as a human is literally just a representation of her uterus. thats all he's willing to see her as.

anything further would be too distressing for him, so he just shoves it all aside.

cognitive dissonance is a hell of a drug.

when you firmly believe something, and you are faced with evidence that goes against it- it can honestly drive some people mad.

jimmy firmly believes that he is in the right. at every turn, he is confronted with everything he's done wrong. this causes him immense distress, and he's willing to do whatever mental gymnastics possible to justify his actions to himself.

even if that means ripping reality apart at the seams.

[cupcait]

saw something dumb on tiktok and now i need to rant about caitlyn under the cut bc it's long and. spoilers yknow.

i rly. hate hate HATE that arcane brought on a certain group who knows nothing abt the characters before arcane & has defaulted to calling people who love caitlyn??? names??? and everyone has just this. absolutely ridiculous view of her because of her actions in s2 and i just.

did we watch the same show? almost every single character has done something that isn't... good?? there's so many who just so grossly misunderstand her character and her arc and it's so incredibly frustrating. yes it's awful seeing her morals falter due to her anger. it's awful seeing her allowing grief consume her and it'll never justify her actions. but like..... it's very human to be blinded by guilt, rage, and especially when mourning.

in act 1 she feels like it's her fault her mom died. like she failed, because she didn't do the one thing in her mind that would have prevented that. she feels her discipline and morals are what led to not only her mother dying, but two other members of the council. the entire point of her arc in the beginning is that cognitive dissonance. she isn't acting herself! she's going against her beliefs! THAT'S THE POINT!!! it doesn't mean they no longer exist in her. the way she behaves in the first two acts are VERY drastically different from the caitlyn we see in league, and in act 1. but she grows from it. she learns from it. & that won't erase the pain she caused during this period, but it is what serves to ground her again, putting her back to dedicating herself to healing.

also... she has not even AMBESSA in her ear, BUT POSSIBLY LEBLANC???? i know it doesn't drop her name but she has leblanc's exact eye makeup, and it's apparently leaked lb is getting a rework (more aligned w her appearance in arcane?) but mel says this line, sorceress/leblanc calls her a sly girl, and then we see ambessa tell her she is the wolf.

also this shot in the opening? ambessa's eyes glowing just like shadow lb?? leblanc's entire thing is being the deceiver it's rly not surprising lb as ambessa would have been able to perfectly pull the strings & make cait act out of character.

regardless of all of that, caitlyn says very clearly hating jinx made her hate herself. we are not supposed to like or side with her during her siding with ambessa, because she doesn't like it either. she doesn't even side with herself. people say she folded the minute vi called her cupcake and like, that's funny, but it's more that seeing vi again was a reminder of what the hell she actually wants to be fighting (or shooting) for. "ambessa" wanted caitlyn to have a distraction from vi for a reason.... it'd bring out her heart, rather than the fear that could be easily manipulated.

ppl saying she kissed vi to manipulate her in act 1 and i just..... i have to laugh..... we're talking about the same caitlyn who had to snap herself out of it to avoid kissing vi after healing her wound w the shimmer.... riiiight..... people acting like she didn't immediately have an expression of regret after hitting vi w the butt of her rifle... RIGHT.... SHE KNOWS SHE FUCKED UP we literally see the shift before she leaves. goes from looking like she cant believe what just happened to looking like she's about to cry out of guilt before she turns and leaves. it's awful seeing her do this to vi, and again, we aren't supposed to like it. i just think it's really clear she doesn't either. 😭

also idk i just think it's weird to call people names over characters they like especially considering the amount of people who will forgive other characters who have. arguably done worse.

[beepbeepbobop]

Back again.

I was telling my friend (who isn’t a Baccano! fan, but listens to me ramble) about my take on immortals and Czeslaw, and I don’t know where to put it, so!  It goes here.  As a warning, this is mostly me rambling and probably treads ground that has been talked about a lot in the past, but I hope it’s interesting anyway.

(This and the Infinity Train post is not a sign that I’m going to be more active in the future.  Social media and the prospect of interacting with other people’s posts still make me anxious.  Maybe one day.)

So!  The first thing to keep in mind is that change is a major theme in Baccano!.  No one is incapable of changing, but people have different relationships with it depending on who they are.  Czes can't believe that he has changed seventy years after Isaac & Miria stealing him despite clear evidence that he has.  Meanwhile, Nile actively resists change:  His greatest fear after becoming immortal was that he would become desensitized to the loss of human life and begin to devalue it, so he spent decades fighting in active war zones so that he'd never forget the reality of death.  This backfired, and instead left him inured to loss of life...but it's clear that he doesn't want to be this way?  Realizing that he's gotten to the point where his expression doesn't even change if someone dies is devastating for him.  Chane is the opposite:  While it's absolutely for the best that she stops being a hitwoman and killing machine for her father, softening up is terrifying to her because then she can't serve her father the way she wants to.   Czes is on the opposite end of the spectrum, because he wants to be better because he thinks he's a bad person (later on, he decides that he's the only bad person left in the world.  Sir.), but can't recognize it because he doesn't feel different.

And...this is pertinent to the older immortals in particular - I'd argue even moreso than with the younger ones.  Aside from the fact that the Elixir literally stops you from changing in the sense of age or injury...it also has to place inhibitors on your brain.  Your brain is, after all, a physical part of your body!  There are some....weird aspects about immortality that no one is able to figure out (for example, immortals can give birth; someone also pointed out that there are no examples of crying in reverse even though that's also a part of your body), but it's still safe to say that the brain doesn't age either because then...then a lot of the cast would be catatonic from Alzheimer's.  Even without that, the human body can only retain so many memories.  If an immortal's brain had the ability to deteriorate over time or overload based off of the amount of memories it contains....well, I don't think any of the older immortals would be able to function.  Szilard definitely wouldn't be able to function (and neither would Firo after he devours Szilard) because Szilard has the memories of over a dozen people running around in his brain.  Which brings me to my next point:  If an immortal's brain functioned like a human's, devouring would not work as a concept.  One of the hallmarks of being immortal is gaining other people's memories.  Imagine the strain that would cause.  And yet, it doesn't seem to be a problem!  The chief worry of those who have devoured other immortals is worrying that having the memories of the other person might change you consciously or subconsciously.  This is Firo's concern over devouring Szilard.

So...the fact that the brain doesn't physically grow older or change (with some leniency given because real world science sure is iffy here)...feels relevant because, mn...

Many of the older immortals feel stagnant, or stuck in time.  Firstly, if the immortals changed at the same pace as a human being, I don't think most of them would be recognizable from one era to the other.  And yet, they are!  The Victor Talbot of the 1700s is clearly the same person as the Victor Talbot of the 1930s, albeit with alterations (because what kind of person would stay exactly the same after centuries?).  The answer to that question is Elmer, by the way.  Everyone comments on how he acts just like the Elmer they remember back in the day.  But Elmer is a special case, seeing as he's our local empty shell and probable sociopath (not that he has ASPD!  ASPD, sociopathy and psychopathy all present and function entirely differently from each other, which makes it....strange that they're lumped under the same umbrella - but that's another matter).  Secondly, immortals...Uhm, they all handle grief horribly, and seem to feel stuck in the past?  Maiza, for instance, acts starkly different from his past as a rebellious noble-boy gang member, but he's never forgiven himself for giving Gretto the information that led to his death.  (Gretto being his brother.)  Huey's overarching goal is to bring his dead girlfriend back to life, and he's been working towards this goal for centuries.  Sylvie, who admittedly was not an immortal when Gretto died, held off on drinking the Elixir until she was all grown up, then set out to finding Szilard to take revenge on him for killing the boy she had run away with.  This lasted for, you guessed it, centuries.

This isn't to say that immortals don't change, or even that they don't change drastically.  I mentioned Nile, who became inured to death after fighting in war for decades.  Czes went from a trusting, innocent child to someone paranoid and self-centered enough to try and get an entire train car's worth of people killed for his own safety to someone who wants to be a good person, but thinks he never will be and that there's something fundamentally wrong with him.  But changing appears to be very, very difficult, and happens over an extended period of time in response to extreme situations.

And...this is particularly relevant to Czes (who keeps coming up as an example because he's the main person I'm thinking about with this tangent) because....it arguably hits him harder than any of the others due to being a child.  Only the best decisions were made aboard the Advenna Avis, which includes letting the eight year old drink the immortality elixir.  But...mn.  It's one thing to be perpetually in your thirties, or twenties, or sixties, and another altogether to perpetually be eight years old.  Czes can't truly 'grow up' even though he has more life experience than most adults combined, and it shows in his extreme emotional reactions, his self-centeredness, ect.  There's a certain misconception about anime-only fans that he's an adult in a child's body, but I think it's easier to tell in the light novels that that's not the case, especially since you see what he's like back before the Advenna Avis.  (He is shy.  Very shy.  Did nothing wrong ever.)  Also, the fact that SAMPLE goes, "Yes!  The perfect sacrifice!" when they specifically take a child to target emphasizes this.  It's not proof - I'm pretty sure that SAMPLE would focus on his physical age as an 'eternal child', and may or may not have the resources to analyze him and go, "This boy is still eight years old in his head," - , but it hammers the point home.

Then...mn.  One thing that's stuck out to me ever since the start is how long Czes was with Fermet.  There's such a thing as learned helplessness, and it's not like Czes had anywhere to go, so that's not what is odd to me...especially when Fermet is known for manipulating people, and could definitely seed the idea that Czes can't go anywhere.  More than physical proximity, I think about how long Czes believed in Fermet.  It's explicitly stated that Czes absorbing Fermet's memories is what made him realize that - oh, Fermet was just sadistic and everything he said was an excuse.  And...I think this is both an example of being controlled in many respects, and....another example of an immortal being stuck in the past - but in a very, very different way.

First off, learning that the people you look up to want to harm you is...difficult at best, especially when you're younger?  But being mentally 'stuck' at a certain age would make things worse, because Czes is perpetually an age where it's natural to depend on a parental figure, and at an age where the brain isn't equipped to make those kinds of calls or realizations.  There's also the matter of cognitive dissonance!  Cognitive dissonance means a lot of things, but essentially, it's the idea that you have two conflicting beliefs, but the actions you take can retroactively alter your beliefs/place emphasis on one more than the other, as the mind is predisposed to reduce dissonance.  I...take issue with how cognitive dissonance is interpreted because many examples don't account for the beliefs or opinions not being equal in the first place, but that's not the point.  The point is that, as a child, the impulse to reduce dissonance is present while also being played against difficulty reading intentions, perceiving the world outside of yourself, and thinking critically.  (For what it's worth, abusers also tend to discourage critical thinking because it damages their narrative, which would also play a part.)   So, for example...

Say that, theoretically, Czes was yelled at every time he questions the idea that Fermet's intentions are right, or that maybe Fermet doesn't have his best interests in mind.  (Czes is insightful, and they lived with each other for a long time, so this probably happened at least once unless the text directly contradicts me.)  This is tame compared to the things we know about his time with Fermet, but ignore that.  The desire to not be yelled at would lead him to hurriedly agree later on, and cognitive dissonance means that you're inclined to try to make your beliefs agree with your actions.  In other words, the more he plays along, the more his brain tells him that he definitely believes this, and it makes perfect sense to!  Fermet has shown that he cares about him, and took him in after his grandfather died, so of course.  It only makes sense.  And it's even harder for him to bridge the gap to a different conclusion because of how difficult it seems to be for immortals to change.  It's only when Czes devours Fermet (or...or at least gets his memories) that everything snaps into place, because he can't reconcile that no matter how hard he tries (coincidentally, this also happens when he gets memories of being an adult, and while I seriously doubt that Czes went through Fermet's memories willingly, it kind of hammers my point about how difficult being eternally young would make things).  So of course he snaps as hard as he does.  It'd be kind of amazing if he didn't, honestly.

TLDR:  Being immortal made it even harder for him to recognize or comprehend his trauma.  Sorry for that.

[fem-fatalist]

This is a heartbreaking article. What sticks out tho is this bit: 

Kuhn's business did not handle Kyle Dixon's funeral, but over the course of the pandemic his chain of three funeral homes has helped bury hundreds of people who died from the coronavirus. He says about half of those families asked that COVID not be mentioned in obituaries or death notices.

"You know, I've had people say 'My mother or my father was going to die, probably in the next year or two anyway, and they were in a nursing home, and then they got COVID, and you know, I don't really want to give a lot of credence to COVID," Kuhn says.

Some families wanted to have their loved one's official death certificate changed so that COVID was not listed as the cause of death, Kuhn adds. Death certificates are official state documents, so Kuhn couldn't make that change even if he wanted to. But the request shows how badly some people want to minimize the role of the virus in a loved one's death.

[emphasis mine]

Maybe your knee-jerk reaction was like mine: what fucking hypocrites. These denialist types were going on and on about how death certificates were altered, and yet want to literally do that in favor of their delusions. 

What’s interesting is this article goes further into the psychology of this cognitive dissonance: 

When a person dies from something that is controversial, Doka says, that's called a "disenfranchising death." The term refers to a death that people don't feel comfortable talking openly about due to social norms.

Doka pioneered the concept in the 1980s, along with a related concept: "disenfranchised grief." This occurs when mourners feel they don't have the right to express their loss openly or fully, because of cultural stigma about how the person died. For example, deaths from drug overdoses or suicide are frequently viewed as stemming from a supposed "moral" failure, and those who are left behind to mourn often fear that others are judging them or the dead person's choices and behaviors, Doka says.

I struggle with this, because damn, that fucking sucks. You believe COVID is fake so hard that even something as jarring and tragic as a young family member dying from it doesn’t snap you out of it.  Because: shame. 

However, I struggle to muster much sympathy. I’m sorry, I’m trying. But this still strikes me as incredibly self-centered, ignorant, and arrogant behavior. The only way I can rationalize it is that their entire eco-system is like-minded, so it can be difficult to go against the grain in the same way it’s hard for people in cults to go against the grain. It’s their family, their friends, their entire social life. 

As much as this does a great job of succinctly explaining why people do this, I think it’s profoundly sad that all the advice that is offered is to distance yourself from them, because there’s no way of convincing someone who is that far gone.  

But, if it’s like a cult, then the answer is to actually NOT do that. It’s to actually stick with them, and patiently offer small counters to their toxic conditioning. 

At least some kind of record will cut through the bullshit in this family tho:

[dontletthishappentoyou]

Dr. Strange

Okay, so a few things.  So this is kind of representing ‘Eastern Philosophy’ or something kinda vaguely, and I can only speak about the basics of one of those philosophies that I know about, but the movie seemed to acutally dig into it a bit in one of the main themes in a more subtle than expected way. Person wants X, wise people help him think about stuff, person accepts not having X. Nice. The first stuff you learn about Buddhism is that life is suffering and the cause of suffering is wanting, craving, hunger, or some other translation. Basically, you can either get what you want and soon want something else, or you can learn to overcome wanting through seeking or working toward some form of enlightenment. Iron Man entered this film wanting his hands to work again so that he could be a surgeon again. Being a surgeon gave his life meaning, and the wise people thought about why it gave him meaning, figured out that it was kind of okay, but very not anatta, so they guided him, mostly indirectly to grow. Some of the world-building reminded me a little of my time with Korean Zen masters in a way that isn’t complete nonsense to the audience. Or it’s acceptable nonsense. The Ancient One at one point said something like “not everything makes sense” and it was kind of an excuse to keep the magic system soft and to tell the protagonist and audience to accept that it’s not something you should bother trying to understand, but seeking to understand is not always part of Zen. I’m assuming most people have heard questions like “What is the sound of one hand clapping?” and stuff like that, and part of the point of meditating on these mantras and coans is to “sit in the don’t know” as I’ve heard it put. Embrace the human incapacity to understand. I’m curious if knowing more about Buddhism would make me appreciate the Zen influences in this movie more or less, but it was more satisfying than I was expecting. Philosophically, it came across as though it was legitimately making an effort to represent the ideas of another Zen influenced cultures. It’s also extremely possible that what I’m recognizing as zen specific are acutally generalizable to Hinduism and other Eastern religions and philosophies, but I have no idea.  It also was genearlly more satisfying than most other Marvel films I’ve seen in terms of character growth. I don’t remember Iron Man well enough to attest to that, but it seemed like this Strange guy was basically the same character with the same flaws as the initial Iron Man character. They seem pretty interchangeable. But I think the arrogant, smart, know-it-all archetype was kind of perfect for the message of accepting human limits for understanding, although there were many points where Strange’s understanding of the magic system as hard is what got him out of situations.  I forget where, but I heard somewhere that character arcs can be seen as focusing on disputing a lie the character believes at the beginning. “I am awesome because I succeed at what I do” seems to be the lie that was most addressed. Thor was close with this, where he clearly went from beliving his lie to not, but the path was slightly muddly and seemed to be built on more generic inspiration, but in this, the events and challenges seemed to directly address the lie. The climax was quite blatant with it, forcing him to create a time loop where he died in a hopeless fight with some sort of god over and over again. He had been told the truth version of the lie pretty directly, and had been coming to it gradually himself by practicing things he’s not good at and being proven wrong about things many times throughout the film. Admitting he was wrong was an element of most rising actions in various levels of subtelty. He also learned that things aren’t about him, fighting this general arrogance through a bunch of humbling experiences that make sense, and ended up making decisions that aligned with that lesson, which was presented relatively simply at the beginning but made more meaningful through the events of the story, as is often the case in and beyond Marvel.  The Iron Man know it all archetype also made me think a bit about whether the film was misinterpreting what a scientist should ideally be, or if Dr. Strange himself was kind of misinterpreting the ideals of science. I think a lot of people imagine some specific kind of close-minded, atheistic, nihilistic character when they think of smart science people. I would say smart science people are primarily curious, open-minded, and seek truth even if it goes against what they previously believed. If you’re a neuroscientist who believes that X procedue is the best way to reach Y result, and you read a study showing that Z procedure is more efficient at achieving Y, you now have a new belief, provided the study was well-done, even if Z comes from a cult, Eastern or African medical traditions, or anything. The stereotype would be Nietszche’s science as religion kind of scientist, where Science is a sacred thing that can’t be challenged, rather than a method of looking for truth.  Regardless of what the ideal scientist is, I know I strive to be the good one, and some of my worst mistakes in attempting to achieve that resulted from trusting that everyone who speaks sciencely were alike in that thinking. Citing studies and statistics for the Bad Scientist is a cherry picking process used to defend X, rather than a way to look for the best way to Y. The Good and Bad Scientists seem to generally have the same aesthetic and take a bit of inspection to differentiate. So Dr. Strange was sort of one of the Bad Scientists at the beginning, dismissing many things as impossible, but happened to be faced repeatedly with undeniable proof. If he was a Good Scientist, it would be nothing but exciting for him. If he was a Bad Scientist, it would be loads of cognitive dissonance. He seemed somewhere in the middle, but ended up open to this weird area of science beyond typical nature, and ended up rolling with it really well. It left it a little bit ambiguous as to to what extent he was a Bad Scientist at the beginning, but he did seem to become a better one, partly through embracing the unknown.  Basically, I think this may be my favorite so far, but will keep thinking about it for a while and maybe rethink some bits, but I really enjoyed the character growth and felt that the themes were well thought out, well portrayed, and aligned with the plot, the general aesthetic, and the world-building extremely well. It just felt like an extremely cohesive movie in most of the things I care about at the moment. I’d definitely have complaints, mostly in terms of who gains power how fast. It felt like it was plot-driven convinience and didn’t necessarily align with who had the most motivation or access to power, but that kind of thing bothers me less than it used to. I’m fine with plots that pretty blatantly serve character development. Some action was meh, some supporting characters were uninteresting, the music was appropriate but generic, world-building didn’t feel like it was entirely thought through, but those don’t feel all that important to make the film work as a whole. Some of it even felt kind of necessary to make it work. A more structured magic system would have defeated the point of embracing unknowns, spreading the focus across too many characters would have been great for a series, but would have detracted from how concise the movie felt in the portrayal of its themes and thrown off the pacing. I also don’t have much insight into the action. Maybe they consulted people who had studied Kung Fu and other martial arts that were born from the philosophies that inspired the themes and that’s just what it looked like and I don’t personally recognize that because I don’t know anything about them. I’d actually really appreciate if they had done that. Maybe I’ll actually look into their choreographer or something. Maybe the music would be less generic if I had been paying more attention to it. 

[unsafepin]

Optical Illusions: A Study of Aesthetics in Activism in Two Accounts

There’s been a particular thing bothering me about social media for a while. I should probably get a cool editing app, write it in a few bullet points and post it on Instagram. You know what I’m talking about, right? The goddamn infographics. If I have to sit through another slideshow explaining to me another military conflict, another societal issue, another existential unfairness on a baby pink background in a cheery font, I might combust. But the cognitive dissonance of aesthetics in activism has been a problem for a while, hasn’t it? So today, I want to examine the effect of focusing on aesthetics over content, or, on the flipside, not considering the optics of your activism enough, and what it does to the consumer of your content by picking apart two local activist-adjacent media projects, Tetraedras and Giljožinios.

Firstly, I want to make my own bias abundantly clear. I am personally acquainted with the teams of both projects, so obviously there will be innate personal bias involved. I highly encourage anyone reading to check both projects out themselves (@t3traedras and @giljozinios on Instagram, as well as Giljožinios’ YouTube channel) and make their own conclusions on the matter. I believe that while my familiarity breeds deeper knowledge of my subjects, it also makes me more vulnerable to assumptions about individuals involved. My insights come from the perspective of an observer, not an expert. Welcome to the circus.

The use of the word “optics” in a metaphorical political sense sprung up in the 1970s to describe the way major political decisions would not necessarily affect an average citizen, but how it would appear to them, e.g. 'U.S. President Barack Obama temporized for weeks, worrying about the optics of waging war in another Arab state after the Iraq fiasco' (Toronto Star, 19th March 2011). However, it’s become increasingly relevant in our age of social media, an age of perceptions over substance, of shortening attention spans and increased barrage of information one has to stomach daily. Social media is the great equalizer - a random person off the street can theoretically hold as much influence as a politician - thus it is becoming increasingly crucial for the average Joe posting on the countless apps owned by Facebook to be as familiar with PR terms as a firm with a six figure salary. Or at least that would be nice, seeing that more and more average Joes are becoming actively involved in politics and education, seeking to influence their newfound audience.

So, let’s see how successful average people with no media or politics degrees are at balancing their image. Both Tetraedras and Giljožinios lean into their 2010’s social media project optics: millennial pink themes, bold names, young teams. But that’s where the similarities end. Tetraedras’ brand is safety. The shades of color on the profile are calming, the illustrations are youthful and playful, their more serious posts are interspersed with more relaxing content (poetry, photoshoots, etc.). Giljožinios is confrontational. The colors electric, posts loud and to the point, they’re what it says on the box - a leftist project - and unapologetic about it. This might help to explain why audiences react as differently as they do to these two, on the surface, similar accounts. Because while you might’ve stumbled on Tetraedras organically while browsing, them having almost two thousand followers, Giljožinios crashed into the educational/political social media scene by being featured on the goddamn national news, that’s how controversial the project is. And obviously I am oversimplifying the issue, Tetraedras slowly built up to posting more opinionated content, while Giljožinios came in guns blazing accusing USA of imperialism, but you’ll have to let me explain. Tetraedras, in its essence, is a welcoming environment. They explain complicated problems in short bullet points with accompanying comforting visuals, their mascot is a inoffensive geometrical figure and their face is a beautiful girl, make-up matching the theme of the post. Giljožinios is named after a revolutionary device, their profile picture is a monarch being beheaded, their host quite infamously sat in front of Che Guevara memorabilia in their first and (as of writing) only video. It’s a lightning rod for angry comments by baby boomers, no matter what comes out of their mouth. In fact, I would argue that, if presented accordingly, the idea that the US is conducting a kind of modern imperialism is just a simple fact and personally can’t wait until Tetraedras posts that with a quirky illustration of Joe Biden to introduce the concept to the wider public.

This leads me to my next point, because despite what’s been previously suggested, I’m not here to solely sing Giljožinios’ praise. There is a cognitive dissonance in both of these flavors of social media activism, but while I can understand Tetraedras’ on a PR level, I’m kind of personally insulted by Giljožinios’. While purely personally I find aspects of Giljožinios’ radicalism distasteful, I appreciate the honesty in the youthful maximalism, of coming in strong and not backing down, but from the guys that made a communist Christmas tree once I almost expected something more stirring than “military industrial complex bad”. This leads me to ask: who is your content for? Your average breadtube-savvy twenty-something already heard this a thousand times, because they consume similar english-speaking content and I doubt any minds of the vatniks that came by to fume in the comment section are being changed. I’m obviously harking on a newborn project here, the team of which has already been bitten by authorities censoring their content, but so far there has been a lot of optical bark, but no substantial bite, especially considering the team seems to be in a safer place now. And the inverse is true for Tetraedras, while I can understand wanting to be visually interesting yet inoffensive, their visuals are sometimes laughably, morbidly light for the topics they discuss Sexily posing in Britney Spears-inspired outfits while discussing the horrors of her conservatorship springs to mind (funny how Britney’s conservatorship leads her to have next to none bodily autonomy, including her public costume choices). And, once again, your target audience is teenagers. They understand English, they’ve seen the news, they don’t need you to translate infographics filled with statistics and information that’s locally completely irrelevant. There needs to be some kind of middle ground between aesthetic cohesion and common sense, because this all signals to the viewer that the content is meant to be mindlessly consumed first and to educate second.

Which leads me to ponder what kind of consumption accounts like these encourage, which will surely lead me to an early grave as I drink away the existential dread of how social media rots all of our brains. Because yes, actually, producing funky visuals to convey an idea way too complicated for an Instagram post is fun. I myself got distracted multiple times during writing to make the first slide for my own post. Meta, I know. This is obviously more of a problem for Tetraedras, who seem to fervently resist injecting their content with a few more paragraphs and a tad more nuance, but even with Giljožinios choosing a more appropriate long-form format to educate, I still pray everyday they don’t get lost in the revolutionary reputation their group built up and forget to make a point, not just talking points.

Because what all this all inevitably leads to is misinforming the public. Again, this seems to be less of a problem for Giljožinios, as the amount of critical eyeballs they have on them leads to them being corrected on every incorrect numerical figure and grammatical mistake, I just hope all this harassment, once again, doesn’t get them all caught up in the optics of a revolution against all the Facebook boomers and forgetting to do their due diligence to the truth. As far as I know, the only factual mistake is miscalculating how much Lituania invests in NATO and there’s still a historical debate in their comment section about the existence of a CIA prison in Lithuania, if anyone’s concerned. Tetraedras, however, is safe. And safe content goes down just like a sugar-coated pill, you don’t even feel the need to fact-check it. And fact-checking is what it sorely requires, or else you’re left with implying that boxing causes men to become rapists and citing statistics of every country except the one in which, you know, me, the team and the absolute majority of their followers live in.

So what’s my goddamn point? Burn your phone and go live in the woods, always. But in the context of this essay, if you are a content creator that aims to educate, inform, incite, whatever, you need to put aesthetics on the backburner. And, more importantly, we as consumers need to stop tolerating content that puts being either pretty or inflammatory first instead of whatever message it’s trying to send, because the supply follows where the demand goes. Read books, watch long-form content made by experts, not teenagers on the internet chasing followers out of not even malicious intent, but almost a knee-jerk reaction. Because while the story of those two accounts cuts especially deep, expectations for local-, even friend-made content being much higher than that for some corporate accounts shooting their shot at activism, the problem is entrenched deep, thousands of accounts exhibiting the same problems racking up millions upon millions of followers. Having said that, my attention span is barely long enough to read the essays I write myself, so maybe do burn your phone and go live in the woods.

Also, pink is actually my brand so both of these accounts are being contacted by my lawyers and the rest of you don’t try any shit.

[x-un-dia-mas-x]

The latest episode of KE sort of messed me up because I saw a lot of myself in Villanelle. It’s taken me awhile to articulate all of it. 

I knew exactly what that panic feels like when you’re about to see a narcissistic parent. I know the overwhelming dread and the desperation in wanting to escape from the situation when confronted with a narcissist, initially. The initial fight/flight reaction Villanelle displays is so instinctual, because your body perceives the narc parent as a threat, even before you mind can register what is occurring. When the narcissistic parent is around, your mind gets so wrapped up in the cognitive dissonance, dysfunction takes over. The inconsistency in the parent’s behavior overrides any sort of logic and you live in a constant state of confusion that becomes normalized. We can even see glimpses of narcissistic envy displayed from her mom in regard to Villanelle and the relationship she had with her father.

This parent can treat you like the apple of their eye in the presence of others, especially strangers, yet completely rip you apart when you’re alone with them. It can be even worse in the company of people they can manipulate and pin against you. Despite the cognitive dissonance, deep down, you can feel resentment and an uneasiness you might not be able to be decipher towards that parent. Villanelle displayed this wonderfully, every time she stated that her mother was evil but couldn’t really articulate why. But as the episode goes on, we can see that is her instincts are correct. This is especially true after we see her little brother hitting himself in the head, as he has internalized all the intense negative critiques from his mother.

The cognitive dissonance that was so brilliantly depicted in this episode, especially in the last scene on the train, I almost had a fucking break down. We see Villanelle, quite literally, have a psychotic break after she murdered her mother. It is the perfect manifestation of narcissistic abuse trauma I have ever seen on television or film. Clearly, being rejected yet again by her mother in such a humiliating manner after seemingly being accepted by her mother, caused all that resentment, agony and despair to revive in Villanelle and come back stronger than before. But in the same scene on the train, we see Villanelle clearly feeling regret, mourning her mother and more specifically, what her mother should have represented in her life SO powerfully. I think the fact that she is wearing her mother’s outfit in the train scene is very symbolic of this; she is yearning and mourning at the same time for something she’s never had and now, there is no hope left to have it.

When you have a narcissistic parent, you live in a constant internal conflict with yourself regarding that person; clearly, their behaviors should illicit a hatred, because it is abuse - they do not come from a place of genuine love and security, their behaviors are to establish power over another. But despite all of this, they are still your parent, and you, as a human being, need that sense of security and unconditional love from a parent in order to grow into an emotionally healthy, functional, independent adult. Because of this internal conflict - you don’t trust yourself, your judgement, or your perceptions regarding your parent, because you have never had a healthy space to develop that clarity. As a result of this, I think Villanelle’s internal conflict will quite literally grow larger than life for the rest of the season.

What even fucked me up more was the fact that her attractions to women made more sense logically after seeing this narcissistic mother’s behavior. Villanelle was first involved with Anna, because she embodied the female caretaker role in Villanelle’s early life. I mean, I’m not a doctor by any means, I’m not trying to diagnose her psychologically and I only speak from personal experience - but the obsessive nature of their relationship also makes me believe that Villanelle displays unhealthy psychological reliance on women who embody aspects of maternal love and a strong sense of self. This most likely stems from the fact that she has no true sense of self or identity and has been robbed of maternal love her whole life. And why does she have no sense of self? She was never able to develop a strong sense of identity, because of extreme narcissistic abuse, on top of all the other trauma she endured throughout her life.

This isn’t justifying her murderous actions as a character by any means either, most of us just go to therapy and get on just well with our lives after narc abuse. I am simply trying to convey the message that that her character development makes perfect sense from a psychological point of view. Also, BIG fucking shout out to Jodie Comer, all the writers and producers of the show who were able to capture just how insidious the repercussions of narcissistic abuse can be to an individual through television.

[khunfounded]

Stuck in the Cave

This one is pretty long and serious, birds, and if you are uncomfortable with the discussion of toxic relationships I recommend skipping it. I’ll cut it off before any analysis this time. 

It’s about Rachel and Bam’s tumultuous relationship, so if that interests you, read on.

Tonight we are discussing three songs from the same album, Hospice, which depicts the entirety of a female perpetuated abusive relationship. It has a lot of nuance and treats the both individuals as humans, rather than entirely a monster and an angel.

The songs are Shiva, Kettering, and Epilogue by The Antlers. I’ll have the videos in front of each analysis rather than all at the top to make it less blocky.

Let’s begin with Shiva.

The entirety of Hospice is told through a metaphor about a hospital worker who gets into a toxic relationship with a patient, which I think is really fitting considering the arc of Rachel pretending that she is paralyzed from the waist down.

Suddenly every machine stopped at once And the monitors beeped the last time Hundreds of thousands of hospital beds And all of them empty but mine

I think these lines fit the exact moment that Rachel pushes Bam. For Bam it is sudden, unexpected. Though for Rachel, who metaphorically has been in the hospital bed for a while, it was a long time coming.

The one chance for Rachel to keep their relationship ended with that push, when the monitors beeped the last time, though Bam did not know it yet.

After that, Bam is alone. Even when he is surrounded by people, they are all using him to perpetuate their agenda. So, there are many beds, but there is no one there with Bam, either in a hospital bed or visiting him. Well, I was lying down with my feet in the air Completely unable to move The bed was misshapen, and awkward and tall And clearly intended for you

When Bam is forced into joining Fug, he can’t move. They have him in check. If he does try anything, they will destroy the one good thing he found. The people who would have visited him in the hospital.

These last two lines remind me of when Khun tells Rachel that if she truly cared about Bam, she wouldn’t be coming up the tower while Bam was stuck underneath it. The bed, the ruin, was made for her, but she escaped it by putting Bam in her place.

You checked yourself out when you put me to bed And tore that old band off your wrist But you came back to see me for a minute or less And left me your ring in my fist

The theme of the bed intended for Rachel continues in this stanza. Without anyone (except Fug, who I personally see as the hospital administrators) knowing, she checked herself out of the hospital and placed Bam there instead.

The hospital band is Rachel’s supposed fate of not being worthy of the tower (though you could argue that her cunning and luck actually does make her worthy, but I’m not), which she tore off by sheer force of will.

The minute or less she came to visit him is the push, and the ring (which in the context of the album is a wedding ring) is what is left of their relationship. Bam, because Rachel is so integral to him, is stuck with it, while Rachel is not. He has both rings now, and the relationship is completely one-sided.

For Rachel, to possibility of joining the stars (whether seeing them or becoming one) is worth the dissolution of a completely devoted love. Though, that love of Bam’s is completely healthy, fueled by his loneliness and the fact that for the longest time the only good thing he ever knew was Rachel. She knows this, which is part of why she gives back the ring. She thinks that even if she picks Bam, he will leave her once he is loved and loves other people. My hair started growing, my face became yours My femur was breaking in half The sensation was scissors and too much to scream So instead, I just started to laugh

Now this, this fits so well.

Bam’s hair is such an important part of his character. Not only does it track the years, it also tracks his emotional state. He is at his lowest when it is at its longest, (which is poignant considering the length of Rachel’s), happiest when it’s shortest, and most in control of his destiny when it is in-between, since at that point is able to choose its length.

I think the second half of the stanza represents the mental break and subsequent cognitive dissonance that he goes through because his mind cannot handle the idea of his most precious person betraying him.

Oof, one down two to go. This is tough.

Now, onto Kettering. 

Ouch, this one hurts.

I wish that I had known in that first minute we met The unpayable debt that I owed you Because you'd been abused by the bone that refused you And you hired me to make up for that

Throughout much of the series, Bam believes he owes Rachel a debt because of the hope she gave him in the cave, though in my opinion she did less than the minimum (though no one owes anyone anything, I still believe that sometimes basic human kindness should win out. Well, morality quandaries for another time).

The bone that refused her was her fate of being unworthy of climbing the tower, which everyone and anyone told her whenever they could. Honestly, that would turn me bitter, too. This is a good chunk of why she is so venomous towards Bam, because his fate and outlook are quite literally the opposite of hers.

To Rachel, everything comes so easily to Bam, whilst she has to claw and fight and lie for every scrap that she can. Though, we all know better. Bam’s life is filled with suffering.

Thus, she hires Bam to make up for her destiny. She tries to take his place and put him in hers. Also, she is just fundamentally cruel to him, trying to ruin every good thing he has every chance that she gets. Walking in that room when you had tubes in your arms Those singing morphine alarms out of tune Kept you sleeping and even And I didn't believe them when they called you a hurricane thunderclap

Everyone tells Bam that Rachel is bad news, but he only sees the girl that gave him light and had her chance to climb the tower violently ripped away from her.

It takes Rachel doing to Khun what she has been doing to Bam all this time to get him to realize that he truly does not know her at all. When I was checking vitals I suggested a smile You didn't talk for a while, you were freezing You said you hated my tone, it made you feel so alone And so you told me I ought to be leaving

This is basically a continuation of the theme of Rachel treating Bam cruelly while he tries his best to make her life better.

It reminds me a lot of the moments right before Rachel pushes Bam, and for a few seconds her demeanor shifts, shocking him  But something kept me standing by that hospital bed I should have quit, but instead, I took care of you You made me sleep and uneven And I didn't believe them when they told me that there was no saving you

Bam is stuck standing by Rachel because of his devotion and the toxic relationship that they have created. For the longest time, he tries to find her and take care of her, but she doesn’t want that. She wants to see the stars. Without him.

He doesn’t see it, though, no matter what they people who really love him try to say.

Next, next, next.

It’s the Epilogue.

Finally, we are at a point where Bam realizes how toxic their relationship truly is.

This one is dense, birds.

In a nightmare, I am falling from the ceiling into bed beside you You're asleep, I'm screaming, shoving you to try to wake you up And like before, you've got no interest in the life you live when you're awake Your dreams still follow storylines like fictions you would make

I do not believe for a second that Bam doesn’t have nightmares about Rachel. She is such a large part of his life and his psyche. He must have trauma both about wondering if he could have saved their relationship and what she has done to his loved ones.

Rachel is asleep. She thinks that what she is doing to see the stars is worth it, but Bam knows better. He has lived the destruction and suffering she has caused.

She has no interest for a world where she is unworthy of the tower, so she dreams up a new one and tries to make it real.

So I lie down against your back until we're both back in the hospital But now it's not a cancer ward, we're sleeping in the morgue Men and women in blue and white, they are singing all around you With heavy shovels holding earth, you're being buried to your neck            

In that hospital bed, being buried quite alive now. 

I'm trying to dig you out but all you want is to be buried there together

This again harkens back to the idea of Bam having nightmares about Rachel. The morgue is his fears that what is happening will ruin them both.

The men and women are everyone in the war that are adding onto the pressure and consequences of this fight. In the end, Tower of God truly is about Bam and Rachel’s relationship and all the fallout that it causes

Bam sees that Rachel is being buried by the decisions she has made, and he is slowly being buried, too. Though, unlike Rachel, he is trying to dig their way out and save them both.

You're screaming And cursing And angry And hurting me And then smiling And crying Apologizing

This chorus is haunting, especially because of the singer’s voice (which is even worse if you imagine the singer is Bam) . It is demonstrative of the two faces that Rachel shows, and the abuse that she puts Bam through just to see the stars.

It evokes the image of Rachel and Bam in the meadow after Rachel has been stabbed. Rachel apologizes to Bam, though he does not truly know why. I've woken up, I'm in our bed, but there's no breathing body there beside me Someone must have taken you while I was stuck asleep But I know better as my eyes adjust, you've been gone for quite a while now And I don't work there in the hospital, they had to let me go

After Rachel puts Khun into a coma, Bam wakes up and he sees their relationship for what it truly is. There is still a part of him, though, that wonders what went wrong. 

His eyes are still adjusting, even after he has awoken.

When Bam leaves the hospital, he is leaving their one-sided toxic dynamic, though much like the physical injuries he has suffered, there are still scars.

When I try to move my arms sometimes, they weigh too much to lift I think you buried me awake, my one and only parting gift But you return to me at night just when I think I may have fallen asleep Your face is up against mine, and I'm too terrified to speak

Sometimes, what he has gone through makes it tough for him to go on. I am glad Bam has such a wonderful, loving support system.

Again, nightmares and trauma caused by Rachel. Things like what she has done to Bam never truly leave you. She has gifted him with immense trauma, and scars that may fade to silver but will never disappear. You're screaming And cursing And angry And hurting me And then smiling And crying Apologizing

Thank you for reading, please watch video of puppies after this.

[fat-acceptance-dropout]

What first caused you to go against FA? (For me it was when I was bullied for wanting to lose weight)

It's been a while since I answered this question, so I guess it's time to answer it again; bear in mind, though, that I'm mobile so cut me some slack.

There are two things that made me go from supporting to opposing Fat Acceptance.

One, cognitive dissonance.

Two, becoming aware of the hopelessness lurking just below the surface of the FA movement.

Let's tackle them in order, since that's how it happened.

Picture this:

I'm sitting on my bed, eating some horrid thing called a pizza cone that I'm not enjoying, but I'm eating nonetheless.

As I'm eating this, I'm browsing Tumblr and start writing about how weight loss is impossible, and I'm the living example, because I exercise and eat healthy without losing weight.

Do you notice the contradiction?

I certainly did.

It's hard to argue about healthy eating when you're basically fellating cheese and pepperoni and not even having fun doing it. (Seriously, fuck pizza cones. Pizza is fine as it is. Cones just complicate things.)

I had to be honest with myself in that moment. I neither exercised or ate healthy, at least not often enough for it to make a difference.

Certainly, I did it sometimes, but the exercise was hiking twice a week, and maybe some yoga, and the eating healthy was drinking green smoothies and not caring about what I ate the rest of the day.

Certainly, I dieted sometimes. Lasted a month or two, went crazy, binged and called the whole thing a bust.

So, with that big, bright, sharp moment of clarity, I decided to try for real. No half measures. I decided to go all the way.

I joined a boxing gym, which was something I had always wanted to do and something that I was fairly confident I'd be able to stick to. By now, I knew well enough that I didn't like regular gyms, so I decided to avoid those.

No weight machines for me, just free weight exercises and boxing.

Then, I started counting calories.

By now, I knew that sticking to a diet plan just wasn't going to happen, and counting calories would allow me to eat what I wanted as long as I measured myself.

It went horribly.

When I first started counting calories, I went over my daily limit by 12:00 pm, which was one of the most frustrating things I had faced at the time.

I had to acknowledge that I really ate a lot, and that I had not only very little control over what I ate but also over when I ate.

I ate food I didn't like, I ate when I wasn't hungry, I ate when I was feeling down, I ate when I had cravings, I ate when I exercised, I ate when I didn't exercise, I ate and ate and ate.

So I started puking to eat more.

Rather than acknowledge the fact that I had an unhealthy relationship with food I decided to double down on it by binging and purging, rather than just binging.

I didn't lose any weight.

I knew it was a bad idea when I started, but I still did it, and when that neither made me lose weight or made me reduce my caloric intake, I realized I needed a change.

So, I changed. Acknowledged my unhealthy relationship with food, worked on changing it, worked on eating better, worked on exercising for real, and wouldn't you know it? I started losing weight.

So, as I started losing weight, and I started feeling better in ways that I never would've expected —no more ankle pain, no more flash heats, no more snoring, no more fits of coughing— I realized that the FA movement and HAES had lied to me.

Not only was weight loss possible, but excess weight does have an impact on your body.

That's when I realized the hopelessness lurking below the surface of the Fat Acceptance movement, because below the 'love yourself', 'you don't have to lose weight to be loved', 'you deserve respect regardless of your weight', and 'your weight doesn't reflect your worth' of the movement, that I wholeheartedly approve of, there are some insidious messages:

- Weight loss is impossible

- Your actions have no impact on your body.

- Your weight has no impact on your health.

- Even if you want or need to change, it can't be done, so you're fucked.

- Wanting to change means there's something wrong with you.

- Suggesting changes means, at best, ignorance, at worst hate.

And more.

While I understand that, to some, the idea of weight being out of one's control is liberating, I always did find it defeatist, even when I was a complete supporter of the movement, and it caused no small amount of resentment.

After all, how are you not supposed to feel resentful and angry when others have the thin genes? When you're just going to have to accept that you're fat? That you're helpless to change?

Make no mistake. I believe in self acceptance, in learning to love yourself and not using someone's physical appearance as a measure of self worth, but I found that the deeper one digs into the movement, the more helpless it makes you feel, the more it goes from accepting yourself to there is nothing you can do to change.

Again, some people see that as liberating. I didn't. I still don't.

It's kind of why my message isn't "you should lose weight," or "you shouldn't be fat," but rather "you can lose weight." (and keep it off.)

Because ultimately, I believe that knowing that the choice exists is what makes all the difference.

You can choose to lose weight. You can choose not to lose weight, but you're choosing. You're actively making a choice, and you can change that choice if you feel like doing it.

Choosing to be fat is a hell of a lot better than being fat because you have no choice, and the constant message of "you can't change, you can't change," of the FA movement is what led me to go from simply not being part of it to being against it.

[aelinbitch-archive]

literal YEARS ago an anon asked me to expand on tog characters’ enneagram types and i have no idea why i’m starting with him of all people but here’s why I think chaol is a type six

(even if you don’t know what the enneagram is you can def still read and understand this if you’re interested in a shady analysis of Chaol’s character)

Ok I’ve been thinking about Chaol (cursed sentence) because I realized that I’ve been 110% sure for so long that he’s a six but that it’s also possible he’s a one. And it’s tough for me to make a final call because I could not be less willing to go back and read his chapters, which means I don’t have anything to work with except what I remember. Buuut I’m pretty sure my initial instinct is right and that he’s a six, so let’s review:

The case for Chaol as a six

Brief overview: “The committed, security-oriented type. Sixes are reliable, hard-working, responsible, and trustworthy. Excellent "troubleshooters," they foresee problems and foster cooperation, but can also become defensive, evasive, and anxious—running on stress while complaining about it. They can be cautious and indecisive, but also reactive, defiant and rebellious. They typically have problems with self-doubt and suspicion.”

Doesn’t tell us much, but could reasonably be Chaol (but so could the description for type 1). Especially, in my humble onion, the “foreseeing problems” part. Think about his treatment of Celaena/Aelin in both books 1 and 4.

Stress/Growth: In stress, 6 goes to dark 3 (competitive and arrogant). I’m not sure how well those words fit specifically in the context of Chaol, but I do feel like I see glimmers of this concept. Like... insisting to Celaena in the first few books that his view of the world is Correct and Better Than Hers. And in growth, 6 goes to 9, which basically just means they just Chill Out, so, sure.

“We have named personality type Six The Loyalist because, of all the personality types, Sixes are the most loyal to their friends and to their beliefs. They will “go down with the ship” and hang on to relationships of all kinds far longer than most other types. Sixes are also loyal to ideas, systems, and beliefs...” 

Everyone who follows this blog knows I’m not by any stretch a Cha*rian stan but... tell me this isn’t him with Dorian (and Adarlan).

The biggest reason my instinct for Chaol is type 6 is because sixes, especially counterphobic ones, are characterized so much by their over-identification/over-commitment/allegiance to structures that they perceive as providing them with security, and Chaol’s devotion to Adarlan and Dorian (and semi-understandable meltdown when those things get pulled out from under him) really aligns with this. 

“The reason Sixes are so loyal to others is that they do not want to be abandoned and left without support—their Basic Fear.“

I think the reason he was such a little bitch in QoS was because Celaena left (even though... he...... sent her away..............) AND Dorian turned into a Valg AND he lost his job/old life so it was kind of the perfect storm to trigger his fear of being abandoned and without security.

“They also tend to fear making important decisions, although at the same time, they resist having anyone else make decisions for them.”

True.

“If Sixes feel that they have sufficient back up, they can move forward with some degree of confidence. But if that crumbles, they become anxious and self-doubting, reawakening their Basic Fear. (“I’m on my own! What am I going to do now?”)” 

One of the reasons I sometimes doubt Chaol is a six is because sixes are so anxious, and when I recall him in the first few books, he generally seems pretty decisive. But I think that was because 1) he was completely secure in his position and able to be more confident because of that and 2) if he’s a 6 than he definitely has a 5 wing, which makes sixes more serious and steady. 

So then when we look at him in QoS when he lacks any kind of security, I think we definitely see more anxiety and unease.

“Until they can get in touch with their own inner guidance, Sixes are like a ping-pong ball that is constantly shuttling back and forth between whatever influence is hitting the hardest in any given moment. Because of this reactivity, no matter what we say about Sixes, the opposite is often also as true. They are both strong and weak, fearful and courageous, trusting and distrusting, defenders and provokers...”

This is really interesting and kind of shows up in Chaol’s relationships with Dorian and Celaena/Aelin and Nesryn and Yrene. Like for sure a lot of it is also just his natural character development over the story, but I think it’s kind of interesting that when he’s closest with Dorian, he’s Adarlan’s #1 cheerleader, then when he’s dating Celaena, he’s vowing to bring Endovier down with his bare hands or whatever, then when he’s on his own/with Nesryn, everyone needs to get their head out of the clouds and focus on Practical Things except for him when he wants to save Dorian, and Aelin, who once inspired him to think differently, is now unreliable and frivolous and tyrannical. 

“When they learn to face their anxieties, however, Sixes understand that although the world is always changing and is, by nature uncertain, they can be serene and courageous in any circumstance.” 

As much as I don’t care for him, I think he gets there by KoA.

“Levels of Development” is very convincing.

“Level 3: Dedicated to individuals and movements in which they deeply believe. Community builders: responsible, reliable, trustworthy. Hard-working and persevering, sacrificing for others, they create stability and security in their world, bringing a cooperative spirit. Average Levels Level 4: Start investing their time and energy into whatever they believe will be safe and stable. Organizing and structuring, they look to alliances and authorities for security and continuity. Constantly vigilant, anticipating problems. Level 5: To resist having more demands made on them, they react against others passive-aggressively. Become evasive, indecisive, cautious, procrastinating, and ambivalent. Are highly reactive, anxious, and negative, giving contradictory, "mixed signals." Internal confusion makes them react unpredictably. Level 6: To compensate for insecurities, they become sarcastic and belligerent, blaming others for their problems, taking a tough stance toward "outsiders." Highly reactive and defensive, dividing people into friends and enemies, while looking for threats to their own security. Authoritarian while fearful of authority, highly suspicious, yet, conspiratorial, and fear-instilling to silence their own fears. Unhealthy Levels Level 7: Fearing that they have ruined their security, they become panicky, volatile, and self-disparaging with acute inferiority feelings. Seeing themselves as defenseless, they seek out a stronger authority or belief to resolve all problems. Highly divisive, disparaging and berating others

Levels 3 and 4 are very book 1. And I mean, Level 6 (and even 7)? That’s QoS Chaol right there in a nutshell. That’s all of his behavior towards Aelin. And Level 5? His treatment of Nesyrn. The mixed signals, the passive-aggression, the belligerence.

Convincing quotes from the “Growth Suggestions” section: “You tend to get edgy and testy when you are upset or angry, and can even turn on others and blame them for things you have done or brought on yourself. Be aware of your pessimism: it causes you dark moods and negative thought patterns that you tend to project on reality.” and “Sixes tend to overreact when they are under stress and feeling anxious. Learn to identify what makes you overreact. Also realize that almost none of the things you have feared so much has actually come true. Even if things are as bad as you think, your fearful thoughts weaken you and your ability to change things for the better.”

Like... as of KoA.......is Aelin a dictator who burned everyone in Adarlan to a crisp with her monstrous power? Are "normal” humans enslaved by the might of magic wielders? No? Interesting.

There’s also a lot of really convincing stuff in the “Sixes in a Relationship with Eights” (Aelin is an 8 for sure) section

“Sixes tend to look up to the Eights as their hero, while Eights are touched by the Six's devotion and courage.”

“For the most part, [the Eight expecting to be in charge] is also fine with Sixes, except for those times when Sixes feel the need to push back and to prove themselves. They need to show others (including the Eight) that they cannot be pushed around or taken advantage of. Power struggles of all kinds can ensue. This is especially true of "counterphobic" Sixes who can actually react much like Eights, displaying leadership, decisiveness and independence (on the positive side) as well as bluster, aggression, and defiance.”

For me, this mostly recalls QoS, but I also think that Chaol’s decision not to tell Celaena about Nehemia being “questioned” could be an example of Chaol needing to push back and prove himself. This shit did not appear out of nowhere in book 4.

Ok and finally, quotes from the “Type 6 as Compared to Type 1″ section

“What these two types have in common is the tendency to feel guilty when they do something contrary either to their ideals (Ones) or to the commitments to allies, beliefs, and authorities they have made (Sixes)”

This is a really close call, because Chaol has screamed “HONROR LOYALTY DUTY” into the void so many times that it seems like he’s a One - loyal to ideals. But I think, based on textual evidence I am not at all willing to review, his main anxiety is about being a traitor to Dorian, to his position in Adarlan, and to his title. It’s true that he believed these things made him honorable and loyal, and betraying them caused him to lose this, but I think that’s less of a morally-driven cognitive dissonance thing and more just the way he expresses his guilt over leaving Dorian. (And his outrage over having those systems/allies/beliefs that brought him security pulled away).

“Average Sixes are anxious, indecisive, ambivalent, and, above all, reactive. They find it difficult to relate to others with self-confidence as equals, tending either to become too dutiful and dependent or to go to the opposite extreme and become rebellious and defiant. Sometimes they get stuck in the middle and become ambivalent, indecisive, and vacillating.”

Literally? Break this down chunk by chunk for Chaol and you get: Dorian (too dutiful and dependent), Aelin (rebellious and defiant), and “Celaena”/Nesryn (ambivalent, indecisive, and vacillating).

“Righteous anger, irritation, and moral indignation are the principal negative emotions in Ones, whereas fearfulness, suspicion, and anxiety are the principal negative feelings in Sixes.“

This sentence right here is what almost made me doubt myself and type him as a One instead (which for sure could still be a possibility! I could always be wrong). Because Chaol definitely has all the preachyness and moral indignation of a One. 

But! Working with the theory that he’s a Six, couldn’t his moral indignation (mostly towards Celaena/Aelin) also be the result of his job and circumstance - the systems he has attached himself to in order to remain safe? He’s... a cop, basically. So his contempt/superiority complex towards a notorious criminal makes sense. And as a loyal follower of the man he thinks is The Best Prince Ever, his condemnation of the actions of this powerful, seemingly unstable new queen makes sense. It’s not necessarily ACTUAL moral indignation, it’s just... indignation period, expressed using the kind of morally superior language one might expect from an ~honorable~, well-to-do captain of the guard.

My working theory is: it’s not that his ~unwavering principles~ lead him to be truly, genuinely in opposition to Aelin’s actions (he goes back and forth maybe 10 times over the course of the series on whether or not it’s morally acceptable that she kills people), it’s that he deals with his anxiety and fear of Aelin and what she/her power might mean for his future by holding her accountable on the value/moral system he developed while working for Dorian/Adarlan.

Like: “Sixes are uncertain, and rely on reassurance, back-up, familiar procedure, or the sanction of previously tested ideas and philosophies to help them come to decisions.”

It’s a complex issue, but I would view his whole “Honor!!!! Honor Honor Honor!!!!!!! Did I mention Honor?!?!” schtick as a “previously tested philosophy” that helps him come to a decision/judgement rather than an actual One-ish principle. 

“Both are "should" and "must" people: both feel obligated to take care of all duties before relaxing or attending to their own needs. Further down the Levels, both types exhibit a legalistic streak: Sixes at Level 6 are The Authoritarian Rebel and Ones at the same Level are The Judgmental Perfectionist.”

Ones moralize and scold, lecturing others in the name of an ideal about whatever issues are of concern to them. ("Do you have any idea how wasteful it is to use an air conditioner?") Sixes can also give orders, not because of rigid inner standards, but because they are afraid of what they see as the erratic, irresponsible conduct of others potentially disrupting the security and stability they are trying to maintain. They are angered and threatened by others "breaking the rules" and becoming more unpredictable. Sixes identify with certain beliefs or authority figures and internalize the values that they have learned from these sources of guidance. Once they have identified with what they have taken to be trustworthy sources of information about the world, Sixes can be aggressive toward anyone who does not accept the same values as they do. This is especially true when Sixes are more insecure–the more anxious they are, the more they want to cling to whatever positions or allegiances they still believe in.

This, for me, is kind of a slam-dunk in proving Chaol is a Six. If you took that paragraph and replaced “Six/es” with “Chaol” and the vague “others” with “Aelin” and told me it was an analysis of QoS specifically, I would 100% believe it. 

And also, to compare one and six again, just to be sure: does Chaol appear to moralize and scold? Absolutely. Think back to that initial confrontation with Aelin. But when he’s doing it, is he saying “it’s wrong to kill people/use your magic/do whatever because it _____” fill in the blank with an actual ideal of his? No. He doesn’t think she’s in the wrong because she’s going against his ideal of ____ (No Magic? Nope, as Aelin points out, he doesn’t have a problem with Dorian’s power. Power to the People? Nope, hasn’t always been something he worked towards. Nonviolence? Nope, he’s killed as well). He thinks she’s in the wrong because 1) she scares him, 2) she is a contributing factor to his current feelings of insecurity and inferiority, and 3) most unforgivably of all, she’s a threat to Dorian Havilliard, the thing Chaol is still clinging to the most.

Also, I didn’t bring up HoF this whole time (mostly because QoS is such a ripe book for analyzing his character so I tend to overlook the others). But that whole book for him is a prime example of that classic six anxiety that I wondered if he maybe didn’t have enough of to be a six just based on books 1 and 2. He can’t go a second in HoF without worrying about Adarlan and Dorian and the future he thought he had with Celaena and what ~Aelin Galathynius~ means to all of that. 

Also also, while considering whether Chaol might be a one, I was reading about how ones are much more restrained and less prone to outbursts and have more control and how sixes are super reactive. And I was wondering about the scene where Celaena mauls his face and tries to kill him, and thinking hmmm, why doesn’t he freak out and have the guards take her away immediately instead of waiting a few seconds and trying to deal with her on his own? Isn’t that more controlled? And it made me realize an important thing to think about when considering all of this which is that, while he’s dating her, Celaena (and the future he has with her) is one of the “things” Chaol is loyal to. He has an allegiance to her, or at least the version of her he loves/perceives/accepts. Which explains a lot about how differently he treats her before, during, and after he’s involved with her.

Also pt 3, all of this was written using quotes just from the enneagram institute website, which isn’t even that in-depth of a source. If I’d been less lazy I could have whipped out a bible-length book and found passages from there, but that wouldn’t have let me copy and paste, so lol. All I’m saying is don’t assume this website is the entirety of the enneagram, or even like the Official Website for it (it’s not, it’s just a good one). We’re not even getting into subtypes here (maybe I’ll make a follow up post, lol).

So anyway that’s what I think about Chaol! And if you’re curious, this is Aelin.

[teacupfulofstarshine]

Manager flirting au with Analogical? Please?

FUN STORY: I ALREADY DID THIS PROMPT BUT I MISREAD IT

I DID NOT REALIZE IT MEANT A MANAGER AND THEIR COWORKER FLIRTINF

BUT IT IS OKAY, I WILL WRITE IT AGAIN (it’s definitely not because you requested analogical and i’m weak for them, it’s not, shut up) 

pairing: romantic analogical (my bOYS), background romantic royality

(tw: vv minor injury, brief blood mention) 

“order up!” 

patton smacks the bell with his spatula, and logan sweeps in imperiously with his handkerchief to wipe off remnants of scrambled egg. “as i know i’ve told you, patton, please refrain from using your spatula to ring the bell.” 

“whatever you say, manager man!” patton laughs. 

“patton, you are my twin. we have known each other since we were in our mother’s womb. i know you know what my name is.” 

“hey there, manager man,” virgil quips, pulling the plates onto his serving tray. logan turns his head away to hide the inevitable pink flush in his cheeks. “your tie’s crooked, you know.” he pokes logan’s chest with his index finger. 

logan (immediately, predictably) looks down to check his tie, which is, of course, perfectly straight (unlike himself). virgil (immediately, predictably) flicks his finger up and knocks into logan’s chin, and then he bops logan’s nose. just once, just softly, and then he’s spinning around with the serving tray, off to deliver whatever patton’s just pushed out. 

logan stares blankly after him, blinking perhaps a more rapidly than he otherwise would. 

“you’re really smitten, huh, bro?” patton smirks. he reaches a (mercifully clean) hand through the pass window to ruffle logan’s hair. logan squawks (quietly) and bats patton’s hand away, fixing his hair with a few quick combs of his fingers. 

(he truly, desperately hates being the younger twin, even if it is only by seventeen minutes, because he is also the more mature twin, and it’s leading to a lot of cognitive dissonance.)

logan takes a deep breath and prepares a snarky comeback, but before he can lay into his brother, roman shows up. he has a full tray of dirty dishes under each arm and a tray balanced precariously on his head. if logan didn’t know about roman’s seemingly inhuman balance from his many years of stage managing roman’s productions, he’d fire him on the spot. 

(he does know, and he’s still considering it, because dammit roman they’ve talked about this.) 

roman pushes the trays below his arms into the dirty dish rack and effortlessly lifts down the one on his head. he leans through the pass window (logan’s fingers itch to grab his notepad and write roman an infraction) and kisses patton before giving logan a messy, two-fingered salute and breezing back to the door to seat a new customer. 

“i’m going to strangle him with this necktie,” logan seethes. 

“but you like that necktie,” patton points out. 

“then i will take care tomorrow to wear a tie i am not particularly attached to and i will strangle him with it.” 

“i’d appreciate it if you didn’t strangle my boyfriend, lo.” 

“and i’d appreciate it if i didn’t have to come back there with a fire extinguisher. again.” logan raises a pointed eyebrow at patton, who whirls back to the thankfully-not-yet-smoking stove. he takes another brief moment to take a deep breath, regain his composure - 

and there’s a clattering noise, and the sound of something hitting the ground, and then the sound of someone hitting the ground. logan’s eyes fly open, and he wouldn’t be surprised if steam was pouring from his ears because he has had it up to here with roman’s theatrics - 

“fuck!” 

something tightens unpleasantly around his heart, because that’s not roman, that’s - 

“logan!” roman calls, but logan is already moving. he barely registers his feet carrying him, barely registers the blood rushing in his ears because virgil is on the ground, and there’s something red and wet all over him and logan wants to vomit. he crouches next to virgil, hands hovering over his torso, and he was a fucking emt in college why can’t he remember what to do - 

“logan?” that’s virgil. “virgil, it’s going to be fine, it’s -” 

“logan, dude, calm down. it’s just a broken dish.” 

logan blinks rapidly again (why does he keep doing that?) and the facts of the situation slowly start to settle in. virgil is on the floor, and he looks annoyed but not hurt (not hurt), and there are fragments of white porcelain around him, as well as more red liquid, too thick and too bright to be blood - 

it clicks in logan’s brain - virgil is sitting in a puddle of tomato soup. he’d fallen and dropped the dish, covering himself in tomato soup in the process. logan crouches, not caring about the mess on his shoes, and pulls out his handkerchief almost automatically, wiping the soup from his face. he gets about halfway through before roman’s back with towels and - and the first aid kit? 

“boss, you’re shaking,” virgil says, scrubbing at his eyes with his soaking sleeve. “are - you really that angry? you can take it out of my paycheck, if you -” 

“virgil.” logan pauses, breathes, because his voice shouldn’t be that shaky. “i’m not worried about the dish.” 

virgil’s eyes are wide and his face is red, and logan tries harder to scrub the soup from his face before he realizes that it’s not soup on his face, but blush. and then logan is blushing, too, and virgil’s eyes are very wide and very brown and very beautiful and his mouth is open and his lips look soft and inviting and logan wants to kiss him. 

“are you injured?” he says, and roman is soaking up the soup and sweeping the dish pieces into a dustpan and logan has the first aid kit (why does he have the first aid kit?). “why - why do i have this?” 

“i cut my finger, i think?” virgil holds up his hand, and there’s a shallow slice along his index finger, like a papercut but slightly deeper, and logan sucks in a breath and then he’s laughing. 

“boss? you gucci?” virgil snaps his uninjured fingers in logan’s face. 

“i thought you were dying,” logan wheezes, breathless with laughter. 

virgil smirks. “can’t get rid of me that easily, boss man.” 

logan soaks up the minimal blood with the cleanest part of the handkerchief and sprays it with neosporin. he carefully wraps a bandaid around the cut, and before he knows what’s happening, he’s pressed the pad of virgil’s finger against his lips. 

virgil’s face is redder than the spilled soup and there’s a windows error message noise playing on loop in his head for some reason. 

logan very abruptly stands up, does a one-eighty, and bolts into the kitchen. 

“logan, what the hell just - “

“pattonijustkissedhisfingerwhatthehelldoido!” 

“logan?” 

logan sits down hard in the corner, knees pulled to his chest, and breathes. patton lets him be. 

(sometimes, logan desperately enjoys being the younger twin, because patton has known him his entire life and can read him like a book.)

roman bursts in five minutes later. “so have you two finally gotten your lives together?” 

“what?” 

“logan, half this restaurant’s patrons only come in here because they like watching you and virgil flirt! please tell me you two finally got your act together!” 

“what are you talking about.” 

roman facepalms. “logan, he likes you! jeez, you’re thicker than those books you read! he’s been in love with you for ages!” 

logan rockets up, because oh. oh, he’s been such a fool. 

he bursts through the doors and marches straight through the restaurant, ignoring the whispers and stares and phone cameras pointed at his direction as he speedwalks towards a crestfallen virgil (not again, never again, he’ll never look like that again if logan has a say in it). 

“roman says you’ve been flirting with me.” best to be blunt. 

virgil blinks, once, like he doesn’t believe this is real. “only for the past three years, but yeah, thanks for noticing.” his voice is deadpan sarcastic, but there’s something swimming in his eyes. hope, logan thinks, because the cautious light flickering in virgil’s eyes reminds him of the feeling fluttering against his ribcage. 

“ah. it - it appears i’ve been a tad dense, then, thinking i was pining after a lost cause.” 

virgil turns scarlet. “you … i …” 

“at the very least,” logan whispers, taking a slow step forward, “our unnoticed, incessant flirting has been good for the business. but i find i don’t much care what’s good for the business if it’s not good for you.” 

he cups virgil’s face with one hand, brushes his purple-fading-brown hair out of his eyes. virgil swallows audibly, and one hand presses against logan’s chest. 

“is this okay?” logan asks, because he’s terrible with social cues. 

virgil pushes forward and kisses him, and well. logan has his answer now, doesn’t he. 

(it turns out they needn’t have worried about the business after all, because the video of logan storming through the restaurant and kissing virgil goes viral, and they’re busier than they know what to do with.) 

(once, virgil dips logan in the middle of the floor and kisses him, etiquette be damned. logan can’t even look at him for seventeen minutes after that - he just stands in the kitchen and screams quietly while patton laughs at him, the traitor.) 

(I HOPE THIS IS WHAT YOU HAD IN MIND!!! FEEL FREE TO SEND ME MORE PROMPTS ILYSM!!!) 

[psychweeb]

Watamote Analysis Pt.2: More Than SAD?

Alright, so a quick overview: in my last post regarding Watamote (Watamote: An Intriguing Perspective On Social Anxiety), I discussed how many of the situations in Watamote, as well as the traits of the protagonist Tomoko Kuroki, indicate that she is suffering from Social Anxiety Disorder. This is a disorder that is characterized by extreme avoidance of social situations and people, to the extent where it is also considered “social phobia”. If you want to understand this concept more in depth, you can read my previous post, and there are many online resources that can provide more info- I recommend https://adaa.org/understanding-anxiety/social-anxiety-disorder as a great starting point, where I found many of the statistics and verified the information used in my last post.

Anyways, in this post, we will be continuing from where we left off. At the end of the last post, I acknowledged that while SAD seems to be the most plausible diagnosis for Tomoko, some other sources and discussions I came across online while researching suggested that she could be suffering from ASPD (anti-social personality disorder) or BPD (borderline personality disorder), either alongside SAD or alone. Both are widely associated with psychopathy and sociopathy, respectively. To begin, let’s first distinguish the differences and similarities between both. I will add that much of the information on these I’ve gathered is from notes from my abnormal psychology class, so I do genuinely believe it’s reliable- the rest will be in the list of sources.

Anti-social personality disorder, according to the  Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-5), can only be diagnosed after the age of 18- However, signs of it may emerge from around the age of 15 (defined as conduct disorder). Therefore, while she may have some traits of an ASPD affliction, it is already unlikely that Tomoko canonically suffers from this. Even though her age is never directly stated in the anime, she attends high school, implying she’s a teenager. Regardless, for the sake of the article, we’ll discuss some of the characteristics that classify it as its own diagnosis:

- Many behaviours of an individual with ASPD notably indicate a great focus on oneself, regardless of morals or ethical implications. Since they exclusively focus on themselves and personal gain, others are no more than pawns to use and aid them in their own pursuits. True intimate relationships are usually nonexistent due to issues with empathy and a general carelessness for others’ feelings. It is worth noting that, while all psychopaths are narcissists, not all narcissistic individuals exhibit behaviours of a psychopath. 

- Generally, they are manipulative liars, which ties into the above statement that they view others as “pawns”. They use their charm and wit, which they normally learn through observation of others, to convince others of their trustworthiness and integrate into society. 

- Normally, lack of remorse and impulsivity lead to criminal activity in these individuals. Irresponsibility and failure to learn from their mistakes is also commonplace.

BPD, on the other hand, does not have an age requirement to warrant diagnosis. It has been argued that, while Psychopathy/ASPD is within you from birth, despite the 18 or older diagnosis rule, Sociopathy/BPD is developed during one’s life. Some symptoms of it include: 

- Fears of abandonment or rejection. May push the individual to threaten self-harm or suicide.

- Unstable opinions of people and self-image or identity, such as shifting values and thoughts on others (which can intensify the above fears). Moods are also unstable in these individuals, and they often experience intense mood swings. 

- Paranoia caused by stress and losing touch with reality.

- Impulsivity, recklessness and irresponsibility (one symptom BPD shares with ASPD).

So, does Tomoko fit the bill for either of these? 

 I mentioned that narcissists and individuals with ASPD share similar self-centered behaviours. Tomoko does focus on herself, and appears to search for pity and validation among her peers, which narcissists tend to do. One instance that is frequently referred to to justify this argument is the scene in which she claims she has been “raped” to Yu, after hearing other girls in her class have been molested and feels left out. It can be interpreted as a way to exploit Yu’s friendship and get concern and pity from her- I, personally, just see it as another manifestation of her desire to fit in and be like her other peers. It is worth mentioning that, either way you interpret the objective of these questionable actions of her’s- whether fishing for pity or attempting to fit in, both would be indicative of ASPD. It’s a form of manipulative lying, as even if it doesn’t blatatly have any benefits for her, it provides her with some emotional gratification, either through a feeling of belonging or by offering the pity and concern she yearns for.

And that leads to another aspect of Tomoko’s personality worth contemplating-despite her undeniable disdain of her peers, she desires to be like them. I believe that a large part of this disdain towards other girls is actually jealousy, whether she realizes it or not. She attempts to be like them on multiple occasions, and fantasizes about being pretty and popular (although in her mind, this means being a “bitch”, solidifying her grudge/jealousy against other girls). In fact, a small part of her even seems to consider Yu a “bitch”. 

While being arrogant doesn’t always indicate ASPD, it is certainly a symptom, on account of the fact that it heavily ties into narcissism. Again, narcissism doesn’t automatically mean psychopathy- but in this case, it seems it would tie into something greater, since she actively lied and used her closest friend to feed her narcissism.

This arrogance may be a coping mechanism of sorts, a way to help her accept that she is not like them (”who would want to be a basic bitch?”), but her constant cognitive dissonance and changing opinions are indicative of BPD. As I mentioned above, instability in feelings towards people and situations is one of the . Some days, she hates the girls around her, other days she wants to be them. With Yu, Even though she’s a “bitch” like the rest of them, she appears to admire her beauty and popularity (ironically the key things that make her a “bitch”), and sometimes it’s even hinted at throughout the series that she has a crush on her.

*Side note: grabbing her butt is a very impulsive and reckless thing to do, as she isn’t considering Yu’s reaction or the consequences it may have of their friendship. 

Finally, Tomoko demonstrates the paranoia characteristic that is typically associated with BPD. Much of her stress and social anxiety is likely caused by SAD, but this stress undeniably worsens her paranoia. Consequently, she will lose touch with reality as the fear overtakes her- after all, even neurotypical people can drift off and begin to think up ludicrous situations when they’re extremely stressed. This losing touch with reality is VERY different from fantasizing, though, which she does often as well- daydreaming is not necessarily losing touch with reality. For instance, she sometimes daydreams that she has the looks of a sexy centerfold- but will eventually break out of this fantasy and realize she is herself again. Meanwhile, when in a state of panic, it is difficult for her to rationalize and think about the situation, more-so than for most people. In the infamous train scene - which is what leads to her “confessing” to Yu that she had been raped- she fears that she is being molested on the train when she feels something long and hard poking underneath her skirt. She nearly goes into hysterics. Even if she doesn’t blatantly show her fear until the end of the predicament, her internal monologue reveals her utter horror throughout her train ride.

 In reality, in just ended up being a schoolgirl’s stick (I’m unsure if it was a broomstick or what, honestly, but it was a long stick). Not a molester. In her defense, she doesn’t know what a penis feels like, but anyone in this situation probably would have been able to reason their way to the conclusion that it wasn’t. Tomoko jumps from conclusion to conclusion, letting her unrealistic thoughts feed her paranoia and fear.

In conclusion, I certainly think Tomoko suffers from Social Anxiety Disorder- there is no doubt in my mind about that. However, after doing some extensive research, I think it’s also plausible that she has Borderline Personality Disorder. While no trauma or particular cause of the emergence of BPD is shown in the anime, there is a flashback of her as a child in one episode, where she seems like a normal, pleasant child, which leads me to believe the wasn’t always like this. ASPD is not only something you inherently possess, but it seems a little extreme for Tomoko- I feel like she would feel guilt if she were to seriously hurt someone, or at least worry about the consequences afterward (even if her impulsivity prevented her from thinking about this beforehand). Her ever changing internal monologues regarding the things around her, as well as frequently becoming paranoid and losing touch with reality (which I think is worsened by her SAD) are all indicative of BPD. So, yes, I agree that she suffers from SAD and BPD- but not ASPD.

Sources:

https://www.verywellmind.com/the-diagnostic-and-statistical-manual-dsm-2795758- A resource I added for those who are unsure what the DSM is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dv8zJiggBs- A helpful video to distinguish between Narcissism, Sociopathy, and Psychopathy with Dr.Ramani Durvasula.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder Extensive notes on ASPD, good for anyone who wants to do further reading.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/borderline-personality-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20370237 Extensive notes on BPD, for anyone who wants to do further reading.

My class notes from Psychology and Abnormal Psychology classes, which I have used to validate the info found in the above sources (with the exception of the DSM 5 definition and the youtube video).

* Cognitive Dissonance: In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort experienced by a person who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values. This discomfort is triggered by a situation in which a person’s belief clashes with new evidence perceived by the person. (Definition copied from Wikipedia.com).

[timreyals-blog]

Does Psychology Bring Happiness?

Does psychology bring me happiness? No, it doesn’t. While most other people try to buy their happiness, devote their lives to external (mystical) purposes or get involved in communities, or whatever else they do to achieve their sense of happiness, psychology can’t be taken away from me because it's in my head. This makes it stable.

Material possessions can be either lost or stolen-They therefore require security/protection (which causes both stress and additional costs-Unnecessary costs because security doesn't solve problems and protection is only ever necessary when a threat exists). External purposes can be proven false or to not exist, causing it to require willful ignorance and cognitive dissonance; Communities can easily shun people for whatever reason, because they’re irrational. Therefore, none of these are stable sources of happiness.

So, psychology is untouchable, yet, it doesn’t provide me happiness? That’s only because there are problems that can’t be solved because other people are refusing to make necessary social and economic changes, and no matter how loud I yell, or how many times I repeat myself-They still won’t budge. They will only resort to tactics or various fallacies in defense of their positions. I know to question people, but: 1. I'm the only one who does, and 2. They will only make excuses for themselves and walk away.

I am obligated to deal with problems caused by these people; Many don't even see them as problems.

What is happiness? There are a few components that I think happiness depends on: 1. Knowing who you are and being happy with it. This is the only possible happiness because only the person can lose self-esteem. This world being as hateful as it is, the skill to just either question or ignore insults [change if the insult is actually (unintentionally) accurate], is the security. 2. Having abundant access to life’s needs and indulging in the natural aspects of our being (relationships, education, experience, etc.).

Relationships are a grey area, for psychological reasons: Many adults are forced to either end a relationship or suffer it, because the partner is mentally ill. This means happiness can't exist within a relationship for many, because they're unable to find somebody who is rational; Somebody who is rational not under influence (their actual self). This doesn't mean relationships are not part of the equation of happiness, it only means human psychology prevents many from finding a healthy one.

If true love does exist, many people are indoctrinated, and are therefore not their true self; Which means such people would actually be somebody’s “soul mate”, but the indoctrination prevents such a relationship from either happening, or causes the relationship to break up.

I've heard that some people refuse to end the relationship for some reason, because their spouse is mentally ill and they either don’t want to be single or they got married and have kids. These people are only enabling their spouse, therefore, ending the relationship becomes their responsibility for this reason. If these people got married, well, the price they end up paying is the price for their error of getting married.

This world restricts and limits in the manner that we are all obligated to earn life’s needs. You’re criminal if you take without paying, you can only have what you can afford and you can’t have anything without money, or at least having worked for it. Relationships are no different, they can still exist, but, they aren't much fun without an income.

While psychology is how and why people think and behave, skilled people can help others achieve mental stability, if the problem is only an error in thinking. Psychology can’t be the source of happiness if they aren’t the ones who caused a particular problem and also can’t correct or change something to solve it-If they’re forced to deal with those problems while having no control over things.

Psychology needs to be in effect on a global scale, for it to enable and maintain a state of mental well being. It’s not about anybody in particular, but everybody. Jobs are the problem that I’m facing, something that holds me back from fully experiencing life without having one, the same goes with most other people. Ironically, having a job is also what holds most of us back from fully experiencing life. Jobs are therefore, a paradox.

To have a job is to sacrifice that percentage of the day, which can't be spent doing other things we want to do. To not have one, means to not have the money to do anything. This is the paradox.

I see employment as the problem, but most others don't, so, they think I have the problem and I'm the one who needs to change. Many others will complain, but, that's just a part of life to them.

In this world, with the social backwardness, which causes violence, hate, corruption, etc. a world of order, not balance, I need psychology for protection against all negatives-Those who are inept and seek to bring others down with them, or simply feel sorry for themselves but don’t seek self improvement. People who will only perpetuate the social decline, due to psychological weakness. Even positives-Those who are unrealistically optimistic about their own lives and future, while self-projecting their own views onto others.

These people preach their false contentment onto others. Completely and irresponsibly disregarding any issue(s) others are facing, telling them to cheer up, be happy and don’t worry, simply because they are happy. Or at least try to convince themselves and think they are. This world is not the way it is because people communicate and solve problems.

What I mean by “psychology against all negatives” is, I need to question everything and everybody who tries to bring me down or convince me to adhere to their antisocial and fascist worldview. I also need to understand why people have the mentalities they do. Many will give their side of the story about a problem in their lives, not realizing whomever they’re confiding in, doesn’t have everybody else’s side, so, they can’t know what’s actually going on-Many people are dishonest or are simply wrong.

I agree that worrying is useless because it doesn’t solve problems. However, I can look past that because other people cause many problems and believe in many falsehoods (jobs, the legal system, etc.) which everybody else is obligated to comply with and conform to, while nobody solves problems. They instead delegate such responsibilities onto other people and higher causes.

“It wasn’t meant to be”:

This is nonsense. If any opportunities are lost or relationships don't happen, it's because some obstacle prevented them. No greater cause is responsible, only conditions that we've created against ourselves and others, like jobs.

Given that the economy actually causes a strong interference with everybody’s life (I can’t say it dictates our life because people are able to interact), it does hold a lot back from people. People are denied relationships and opportunities because of financial complications, so, to tell anybody “it wasn’t meant to be.” when something either doesn’t happen or fails, is nonsense. The purpose of the economy is to produce for our own survival, not social management. The worship of money is a neurosis because it's purpose is only to purchase, it's never supposed to be valued over life.

Again, given that relationships are essentially maintained by money, maybe I don’t want one, maybe I'm wrong to want one (in economic terms, which is what relationships are actually based on). If I do ever meet somebody, great. If I never do, so be it. I was born into this monetary economy with no options [other than to starve (which others would fallaciously call an option) if I don’t want to work for a living], I can’t change it either, which means it’s a problem I didn’t cause, but, I also can’t solve.

I say that's fallacious because if nobody would ever choose to starve, they're only calling it an option to defend money/capitalism against others who challenge it.

Yes, relationships often end, and usually for the stupidest of reasons. Most relationships are marriages, which makes them difficult to end because certain third parties (divorce lawyers) have their hand in it. This unnecessarily adds hardship to the break-up process, which also intensifies the emotional aspect of it. Does this mean relationships are unstable? Not really. If adults were mature and responsible, they would discuss matters and be able to decide whether or not to end it, which would then be on good terms, if they do end it.

Confusing pleasure with happiness

I’ve already explained that material possessions are unstable because they can be either lost or stolen, they are also unstable because people tend to get bored with them, the pleasure isn’t always lifelong. That’s also it though, pleasure isn’t happiness, it’s sensual gratification. Happiness is mental well-being. Sex is the most pleasurable human experience known to us, and it’s completely natural. Sex isn’t happiness though, because that would mean people can never stop making love. The physical touch is obviously also pleasurable, not just the orgasm, but sex is only a factor, in the equation of a relationship. Relationships alone aren’t even a form of happiness, it’s only a factor of it.

The big picture:

I would say happiness consists of the true self, people who think for themselves because they agree with everything they do, for their own reasons and not what others have convinced them of. Possessing the critical thinking skills to debunk false information and bad opinions down. People who live how they want to, not try to fit in. Those who a psychologically strong enough to ignore peer pressure.

This doesn’t mean people are bad if they’re unable to. Many have the misfortunes of an insufficient upbringing (severe in many cases), which means their environment decides their fate. Many don’t have a chance, and they end up in the point of no return. Meaning, they’re mentally beyond any reasoning, so, it’s best to just wait until they’re gone.

This occurs because those who claim to be “skeptical freethinkers”, are anything but. Everybody who disagrees with anybody else-Who resorts to name calling, insults, ridicule and hate when those with bad ideologies ignore any kind of facts, are no better. Everybody should be questioning them instead. The solution really is the problem underneath.

I think many people are living the wrong idea of happiness-They've merely accepted the way the world is (the way things are), and are erroneously calling that happiness. It isn't so, because they're only accepting what little they have as they're being denied the rest in life.

[ghostmartyr]

SnK 100 Thoughts

“He has the power to wipe out the entire human race, and if we believe there's even a 1% chance that he is our enemy, we have to take it as an absolute certainty. And we have to destroy him.”

Look, if you design a character who agrees with Batman in Batman v Superman, you just sorta have to accept that bad things are going to happen to him.

Though, since we are talking about it...

Now, I’m not making any giant leaps here.

All I’m saying is that technically all Eldians have the name of their mother in common.

Which means Eren’s going to die, Reiner’s Batman, and Wonder Woman is still waiting for her musical cue. Also, War Hammer is Doomsday.

#spoilers

Obviously I missed out on calling Falco Robin, which is even more tragic due to where his life story looks to be taking him, but then we have to get down to assigning a Joker, and I guess Gabi’s a pretty easy Batgirl, but I have a chance here to keep one of these posts short, and I can’t do that if fanfiction is being written in the margin.

Also, I think someone would yell at me if I suggested Zeke for Wonder Woman (heislookingbackatabattlefieldheisdepartingsotheblockingisthereevenifthemoralcenterisn’t) so let’s just stop.

Okay, so the brief summary of this chapter is ding-dong, the witch is dead, only there’s some disagreement over whether it was a good witch or a bad witch. A similar disagreement is ongoing regarding the perpetrator.

Truthfully, the one thing that can be said is that the good or bad witch’s slippers are unlikely to be taken by the good or bad witch who slayed him. They won’t fit, and the good or bad witch murderer already has the most powerful magic in the land.

The briefer summary is that Willy Tybur continues to be terrible, only in such a way that it’s confused for nobility, and I am so very tired of Marley.

He’s willing to die for his belief that his people are irredeemable monsters that should be eradicated--but he’d still rather they not be, because life gives him the warm fuzzies, and maybe the people whose abuse his family’s been profiting off deserve warm fuzzies too.

The idea of a nobleman looking at the life of luxury he has at the cost of his own people, and choosing to make steps to change the world for the better, is not a bad one. Doing that despite a wholehearted belief in their inherent evil is actually very interesting. It’s one more bit of cognitive dissonance that allows Willy to feel guilt over what has been done to his people, even though he thinks the world would be better off without them, and doesn’t mind killing large numbers of them.

At his core, all he is is a man who wants to live in the world he’s been born into, and he’s willing to sacrifice that life for a better world.

Here’s the problem.

His version of a better world is blaming Paradis for everything so that everyone can run off holding hands to murder them all.

He’s willing to die to make that vision a reality.

He’s never met anyone on Paradis. He’s never tried to talk to anyone from Paradis. He’s used diplomacy with nations in the rest of the outside world to ease the horrific damage Marley being Marley has caused itself, but not once with Paradis.

When it comes to the island, murder is always the only solution.

Willy Tybur is the one Eldian with a position in the world that can make a real difference. He can get ambassadors to change their minds. Despite never taking advantage of it, he does have control over Marley. Under his direction, Marley might have avoided the mass series of war crimes that the rest of the world hates them for.

(not that we have any idea why that is)

He doesn’t go that route.

He determines that the best path to world peace is uniting the world to kill his ancestors’ scapegoat.

Martyrdom is not a thing you do because you’re too lazy to put effort into actual change.

It’s easy to look at what Eldians are capable of from birth and call them monsters. It’s easy to say that, obviously, they never should have existed. Even if you have that same blood, and want to be alive, it’s very, very easy to reach that conclusion.

What’s difficult is carving your place into a world that is predisposed to hate you. It takes time, and concentrated effort. It takes giving a damn about treating people decently.

Willy has the means to forge a peaceful, humane coexistence between Eldians and the rest of the world. Or at least the means to make that attempt.

He chooses to forge his peace in the blood of other Eldians. The fact that he’s willing to die for that outcome doesn’t magically turn it into a noble gesture. He’s strong enough to make a decision that will cost countless lives in a war based on nothing but fear and prejudice. And that would be after knowingly sacrificing people he thinks of as less worthy to a terrorist attack.

Ding-dong.

Speaking of, Eren’s response to Willy’s declaration isn’t exactly on the moral highground you’d appreciate from your protagonist, so that’s nice. His lunge is as horizontal as possible, but it would take authorial intervention to keep him from killing civilians when he goes after Willy.

The only way this doesn’t seem like a very bad idea is if Eren agrees with Willy’s decision.

...I want more of a warmup before looking at that too closely.

Elsewhere, Titans in pits.

Or not.

Zeke’s still the only one walking around free. Galliard and Pieck are out of whatever fight’s coming next.

None of that appears to be expected on the Marley side. It looks like they wanted their Warriors gathered when everyone went horribly wrong. Possibly to keep the level of wrongness to a minimum. How thoughtful.

It seems pretty fair to guess that Galliard and Pieck are the work of Eren’s friends, but Zeke and his fancy glasses that hide his eyeballs are a little harder to pin down. We get one shot of him, walking alone.

I’m willing to leave that for another month though, so to the other pit!

Falco being the Eren to Eren’s Reiner is painful. Here he had this thoughtful adult encouraging him all the way into committing treason. He was just being a good person, and Eren takes advantage of that.

And right after all of that hits, he gets to watch Mr. Braun self-destructing, and hears about dead friends and mothers.

Falco’s a good kid. Assuming that Reiner gets him out of this alive, he isn’t only going to take death and betrayals from this. He understands the toll of being a Warrior, and understands enough to hate that people are okay with Gabi selling her life to the role.

Eren looks right at him and says that the people inside the walls are the same as the people outside. I don’t know how well the doubt will stick, but if nothing else, I think there’s a good chance that Reiner won’t be able to keep up the lies about Paradis demons--to Falco, anyway.

Falco’s in this spot because he cares about people no one else sees. I don’t know how much of his path can be changed, given the decisions made this chapter, but I hope that the idea that everyone involved in this war is a person sticks with him.

Even though that will be infinitely more painful than just being a participant fighting off demons.

Oki doki, so.

Eren.

Eren has gone on a very educational journey of learning that people are people. Willy even helps him along by directly quoting something Eren says way back in Trost.

“Because... I was born into this world.”

They’ve all been born into this world, and they all want to live in it, freely.

Time to go attack that island!

Eren spends most of his time in the pit prying everything that went through Reiner’s head out of him. Not for the sake of condemning it. Just to hear the honest words of a man like him, who caused incredible pain in the name of saving the world.

Their whole talk is about their similar intentions and circumstances, and being understood. And finding forgiveness on a road that doesn’t deserve any.

“This whole time... it was painful for you, wasn’t it?”

“I think now... I understand that [...]

I was right. I’m... the same as you.”

So

Yeah, Eren brings down the house.

The final page is his hands extended in Titan form the same way Willy’s are when he makes his declaration.

Reciprocity. Yay.

There are a few concerning things here.

The murder’s pretty low on the list.

These would be the panels that earn Eren the kind of looks Reiner is the recipient of when he’s going through his identity trouble.

Eren, last seen back home speaking as his father and Eren Kruger, has supernaturally granted identity troubles, and not recalling death threats to the point of asking Reiner to ignore that they happened is... weird. Whether or not it means anything, who knows, but Eren’s general stability seems to be mimicking the style of someone who has recently done pot up to his magic handshake. There’s so much personal history involved that it makes sense that Eren’s the one mostly behind the wheel, but... yeah, I’ll stick with weird.

Adding to that is what he says during the magic handshake.

(the magic comes from friendship)

“I just keep moving forward. Until my enemies are destroyed.”

Once upon a time, Kruger explains to Grisha what the Attack Titan is all about.

“No matter the age, this Titan has always moved ahead, seeking freedom. It has fought on for freedom.”

Eren has altered the deal. Pray he doesn’t alter it any further.

No, but I’m not big on speculation. I like waiting to see what the next month brings instead. But I keep waiting for more on the individual Titans having sentience, and it’s hard not to wonder a little if Mr. Attack and Eren are experiencing some unnatural bleed-through.

I don’t know, some things just feel very odd.

Anyway, outside the tempting cracklands of detours, there’s a really uncomfortable prospect presented in this chapter that I would prefer being wrong about, but at the same time, hey, Eren’s causing destruction and murdering people, so clearly happy funtimes are over.

Eren smiles when Willy says he wants his audience to fight with him against Paradis. It is not full of happiness, exactly, but it is not the look you would expect from hearing that kind of statement. Some mix of acceptance and sadness, maybe?

There are a lot of people on Paradis who, if asked, would know the exact best moment to kill Willy that would encourage his message most efficiently.

Eren waits until Willy is done with his speech to kill him.

Willy’s just asked everyone he knows for helps against the island devils, and... Eren gives them one. Whatever destruction does or doesn’t follow, Willy’s message is heard in its entirety, and he’s killed by the enemy he asks for unity in facing.

If you want to limit his support, this is, by far, the worst way to do it.

So even though I can’t imagine why anyone would reach this conclusion, I have to wonder if Paradis agreed with Willy. If they agreed that a unified world could only come about through a common enemy and a martyr.

Thematically, I have all kinds of disagreements with that, but Eren couldn’t have fulfilled Willy’s plan any better if he’d been in the room listening to its design. At the end of a grand speech, a monster rushes out and kills the only one in the world brave enough to call all people to arms against this great threat.

It’s beautiful, and... very on the nose.

You could not pick a better time to attack.

...For Willy’s purposes.

Even if this wipes out a bunch of Marley military personnel, care has been taken to keep all of the Titans out of the way. The main force is secure and breathing. This is not an attack that will devastate; it will invigorate.

And I can’t shake the thought that someone on the Paradis side thought that that was the only hope the rest of the world’s Eldians had. And having said that... it’s hard not to wonder if that someone is Eren.

Staged martyrdom only works this smoothly if both sides have the script.

Or maybe Carla just raised Eren to believe that it’s rude to interrupt people.

I really don’t know how to feel about most of what happens here. This is another chapter that I’d like to think would be benefited by future ones.

Right now there’s just this ominous dread that makes it difficult to appreciate that I don’t have to read Willy talk anymore.

Nothing next month can’t fix, I’m sure.

[idontneedasymbol]

Sam & Dean, leadership, control, obedience, and choice

Spinning this off into a new post because this got so long -- I love this topic, so I have many Thoughts! (Most of this is focused on the psychological side of it as explored through fictional tropes -- the mythological side of their chosen roles is also fascinating and deserving of its own post!)

@zmediaoutlet​ wrote:

I really do feel quite strongly about this, which makes those metas where people insist on calling Dean ‘controlling’ actually a bit infuriating to read. Sam makes decisions; Dean follows. It’s not that way 100% of the time, but it is true way more often than the reverse. It’s part of the deepest core of their natures–which is explained by the archangels they were meant for. Dean is loyal, and Sam rebels. I watched ‘The Vessel’ a few nights ago and was struck so hard by how Dean announces that he shall be the one who goes back to the past. He will be the one who puts himself in danger, because he’s expendable. He states it as a fact, almost bullish… and then still waits for Sam’s permission before he and ‘Castiel’ actually go. It’s just such a fascinating dynamic, made more so by the change-up of roles.

Again yes to all of this. Dean as "controlling" I take as a misinterpretation (--alternative interpretation, though this is a case that I feel strongly enough about the characterizations that I struggle to see the alternatives) of their communication styles -- and Dean's style in particular is molded, not just by John's militaristic upbringing, but by his relationship with Sam.

Dean can be controlling -- especially with innocents in supernatural-emergency situations, it's vital to give orders forcefully enough that you can expect them to be followed. But with Sam, that's rarely what it's about. Dean gives statements of intent to Sam knowing they're not going to be blindly followed -- since he was a little kid, Sam hasn't obeyed him without question. Moreover, Sam has always known that Dean won't actually act without his say-so. (e.g. "After School Special”, in which at 14 Sam is fully capable of letting Dean know what he wants -- Dean is raging "I'll rip his lungs out" about the bully, but he doesn't actually do anything, lets Sam handle it on his own. And it's not played as a "big brother finally lets his little brother out on his own" moment -- Sam is talking to Dean with confidence that he can handle it himself and that Dean won't intervene. He knows Dean has his back if needed, but he doesn't expect Dean to do anything without his agreement.)

Some of the reason this can be misinterpreted is because of their differences in communication and thinking styles. Sam is the kind of person who likes to go into a discussion or argument informed, fully armed -- he doesn't like to talk about anything until he's had time to think it out, to come to a conclusion and come up with counter-arguments, etc. While as Dean is less of a thinker, more of a doer; he wants to talk about what he's thinking/feeling because verbalizing it out loud is how he understands it himself. (Or by acting it, hence him being way more prone to expressing himself through physical violence than Sam.)

The reason this works is because they both understand this about each other.

A lot of their conversations start with Dean making a statement of opinion phrased as an absolute, and then Sam presents his side, softening that absolute. One of my favorite examples is at the end of 11x08:

SAM Dean, we need to seriously discuss me going to the Cage.

DEAN Okay. Not happening. Good talk. ...Sam, even if these visions are real...

Which on its surface can look like Dean is ending the conversation, shutting Sam down. Except that's not what's happening -- that's clearly not how Dean means it, because he immediately continues the discussion. He's not issuing an order to Sam that he expects to be followed -- he's stating his position, clearly telling Sam where his own opinion stands, giving Sam a starting point for his own argument. Which Dean is counting on getting from Sam, because Sam nearly always does.

This isn't perfect communication; it can lead to misunderstandings, and especially when they were younger, Sam could take it as Dean not respecting or listening to him. But they’ve worked like this for a while, mostly effectively. Dean can speak his mind so bluntly, figure out what he’s feeling, with the confidence that Sam will stand up to it. And in the end, Dean usually comes around, unless he can convince Sam otherwise, such as by coming up with an alternative plan.

The one area that this does completely break down is in regards to Sam himself -- the one time Dean will unilaterally go against Sam's "command" is when Sam's own life is at stake, in which case Dean's loyalty to saving Sam comes above obeying him.

And even then, it causes massive cognitive dissonance for Dean. One of the worst tailspins Dean has is in s7, after going against Sam's decision and killing Amy. Dean believes it's the right thing to do, and the right thing to do for Sam; but disobeying Sam and then lying to him about it makes Dean so guilty he can barely function. While as Sam can lie to Dean about the Book of the Damned for weeks without any obvious signs -- Sam feels guilt incredibly strongly, but not about disobedience, not when he thinks he's doing the right thing. Rebellion in itself isn't a sin for Sam -- as you say, it's one of his defining characteristics.

Then @chiisana-sukima​ had a related but different angle:

I would say that mythically, Sam is a King and Dean is his Minister of War. And I also agree that doesnt invalidate what Jared is saying because I think Sam rightfully doesn’t trust what he’s King of. And that a big part of Sam and Dean’s relationship is that Sam trusts Dean- and uses Dean- to be a check on Sam’s power, and a lot of their conflict is about that issue. Sam only wants and needs a check when he’s wrong, and he’s not always wrong. Sometimes he’s right and Dean is wrong (for example: MoC), so Sam can’t just lie down and do whatever Dean says, but he also can’t trust himself. It’s a hard position to negotiate.

I think this is all true -- and yeah, Sam gets very frustrated when he believes he's right and Dean still isn't coming around. Especially because Dean generally digs his heels in hardest when it has to do with Sam’s life/sanity rather than a moral question, which Sam does not believe is a valid argument (s9 got into this some, but as that argument happens perpendicular to the mostly-unspoken one about Dean violating Sam's bodily autonomy to save his life, it doesn't fully get resolved? And then the Mark temporarily upends their dynamic -- Dean starts giving orders actually expecting to be obeyed, and Sam flips from mission statement: saving the world to saving Dean.)

Dean sort of does double-duty as "Minister of War" and also Sam's bodyguard? Along with comparing it to Maiden Rose (which I would love to hear more about! maybe to discuss in person, as @owehimeverything​ has actually read it but prefers talking to writing meta) -- we've compared it ourselves to the even-less-known manga G-defend, in which the central (m/m) ship is between a commander of a sort of SF SWAT-team garrison and his bodyguard. The bodyguard is out of the main chain-of-command; he reports directly to the commander and obeys him in everything except matters pertaining to the commander's own safety, in which as bodyguard he has the authority to decide whether a given action is too dangerous for the commander to take. It's the source of some conflict (not a lot, because G-defend is one of the fluffiest BL series to exist, but...)

Sam and Dean's relationship doesn't map perfectly to these examples (in part because all the writers have a somewhat different take on their dynamic, so it can be inconsistent between eps; and I also think it's because this kind of power positioning is really common in Japanese fiction but less so in American fiction -- like, it's fundamental enough that we respond to it really strongly, e.g. Kirk & Spock; but especially without a clear command structure like the military to justify it, that kind of relationship can feel weird to Americans -- like there's something wrong about Dean being 'subordinate' to Sam when they don't have actual ranks, that it's an imbalance that must be corrected, rather than a mutually satisfying and stable arrangement.) But I have some hopes that if the story starts exploring “Sam as leader” more intentionally, it might drift more in this direction (even if by accident!)

My own view is that I do think people who say Sam is submissive to Dean are right. He lets Dean control a huge proportion of the relationship imo (for example: Dean has Baby/Sam has no car. For another example: Dean uses physical violence on Sam way more often than Sam does on Dean, and generally Sam just pretty much takes it). But power is complicated, and my view is that the operative word is let, and that they are both aware that Sam is delegating something that is his onto Dean.

On the one hand, I don't totally disagree? But on the other, neither of these specific examples seem to me like Sam ceding control. Sam doesn't own a car, but he has full access to transportation. If Dean isn't chauffeuring him, then Sam usually can take the Impala -- but if he can't, he simply steals another vehicle (or possibly they have extra vehicles in the bunker?) We've seen Sam driving multiple cars whenever he wants to go somewhere but Dean is out/Sam doesn't want Dean to know.  I take Sam's not having a car of his own as him not having much interest in personal possessions (e.g. not personalizing his room in the bunker)(and maybe mixed with a little of feeling "unfaithful" to Baby, given that the only time he ever got a car of his own he was soulless? Sam's relationship with Baby as compared to Dean's is fascinating in its own right...)

And Dean's physical violence is problematic for sure, but I have a hard time seeing it as controlling when it never seems to influence Sam? I can think of three times Dean has punched Sam when both were in their right mind (other than sucker punches or getting into a full fight) (in 2x03, 4x04, and (uggggh) 7x03...season starts are rough times?) and Sam doesn't actually agree to what Dean wants any of those times, or seem more than mildly annoyed by it. (I could go on a long tangent here too, the short version is that I think these moments are the show getting confused about what level of violence it operates at. Sam & Dean are rough-and-tumble sorts such that if we actually saw them hitting each other more -- in anger or in sparring -- it would come across as less significant?)

All that being said, Sam does let Dean take the wheel on smaller things (like choosing music) in part because he doesn't have strong opinions on a lot of it (really, given the scope of the issues Sam often is grappling with, he likely has such constant decision fatigue that he vastly prefers Dean to make the basic choices like where to go for dinner.) And I think a key thing here is the "let" -- Sam could get his way (often with just a word; Dean rarely refuses anything Sam asks for outright) but doesn't feel the need to. So I guess I see it as Sam sometimes agrees to submit to Dean, but I hesitate to call him “submissive”? (Or maybe that’s just a matter of definition?)

Meanwhile, when Sam starts working for the BMOL, he's directing their hunts for two weeks and Dean doesn't see anything amiss in it -- Dean is swinging the machete, but Sam is picking the target; Dean is driving, but Sam is the one telling them where to go. And that's how they both like it, and while it's not perfect (especially if their communication breaks down otherwise -- their biggest issues happen when one of them is keeping a secret and so the other is working with incomplete information), it's largely functional, a mutually satisfying and effective personal and professional partnership.

(And yes, this is one interpretation and there is plenty of room for others! But it's one I see strongly enough that I find it kind of baffling when I come across meta holding that Sam not choosing the music shows that Dean is controlling, or that Dean agreeing to work with the BMOL is Sam overriding Dean's will, when I see both as mutually willing choices, not signs of dysfunctionality.)