#it is SUCH a massive pet peeve of mine

[pugwitharug]

Btw if you purposefully mispronounce words, *especially* if they're things that come from different cultures, and think it's funny, I will hit you with a bus

[nyancrimew]

i'm a us liberal and i think you're cool

i highly doubt you're a liberal then and just think liberal = leftist which it very much does not

[ratatatastic]

he is quite literally every techie's worst nightmare girl please stop touching the mic STOP TOUCHING IT. YOU DONT NEED TO CONTINUOUSLY BRING IT CLOSER TO YOU AND MOVING IT BACK THATS THE PERSON ON SOUND'S JOB. STOP IT.

post practise interview | 6.23.24 (x)

[ersatz-colubridae-888]

doomer posts piss me so much the fuck off i've decided i'm going to finally start blocking them. Genuinely can't stand when people say the most hyperbolic bullshit about how everything sucks and nothing will be good ever again. it pisses me off so bad

[keshetchai]

As someone who enjoys religion blogging/discussions, I've come to realize that it's a good practice to be aware of the general signs/symptoms of religious-OCD thinking (aka scrupulosity), because if the conversation is taking on all the hallmarks of scrupulosity, it's actually a definitive sign that we cannot meaningfully and compassionately engage in a conversation about religion in a healthy way. I've actually had this play out a significant number of times online, and when I realized what it was, I also began to realize that the intrusive thoughts/obsessive and compulsive thinking are only ever fed by continuing the discussion with that person.

[[ Important edit to clarify why I am saying it's not healthy — made after I went back to look for more concrete facts about OCD or anxiety (I have GAD, not OCD, but many resources overlap since they're both anxiety disorders):

When Reassurance is Harmful — this explains how/why reassurance-seeking specifically about an OCD fear is a compulsive behavior, and engaging with reassurance-seeking interferes with recovery/management/treatment.

This table from the Anxiety Disorders Center lists key differences between Information Seeking and Reassurance Seeking.

This IOCDF page on Scrupulosity info for Faith Leaders identifies "symptom accommodation" as enabling. Two of the examples of doing this by participating in the OCD behavior are: "Engage in excessive conversation focused on if-then scenarios (e.g., "If I did this, then would X or Y happen? And what if Z was involved? How about W?")" And, "Repeatedly answering questions about ‘correct’ religious or faith practices."

That page also goes on to outline more info about reassurance seeking. "Although providing answers to (often simple!) questions may seem harmless, providing reassurance serves to maintain the anxiety disorder cycle." (This BMC psychiatry article cites a lot of related studies establishing this.)

The IOCDF page on What is OCD and Scrupulosity? ]]

Imo, the responsible thing to do is to recognize that (even if the other person hasn't outright stated it/isn't diagnosed)* the conversation is not about religion, it is about needing mental health support from professionals and experts. Talking to me, the layperson who enjoys chatting theology and my religion — is not only not helping, but is actively harmful. I'm not just talking about the person who I replied to today, either. Like I've said, I've seen this happen dozens of times in various online forums.

*[while I am against diagnosing strangers on the internet, it's important to realize A) lots of people don't know what Scrupulosity is, so it's possible they've never considered this is a mental health concern that could be treated, and that B) for the purposes of my concern, it doesn't matter if they actually have diagnosed OCD. The only thing that matters is that their thought-process causes them genuine distress/fear, and every response given to them seems to only incite new/additional distressing questions/thoughts, or further entrenches the original distress.]

Ultimately, any discussion aside from "you might want to speak to a mental health professional about scrupulosity OCD" seemingly puts me in the position of feeling as if I am being used for their self-harm. I hate that feeling. I do not want to be leverage for fear and pain. I have GAD, I despise the idea that I am making things worse.

No matter how much I love religious discussion, the answer in these cases is always "please reach out to an OCD specialist/mental health professional. I am not qualified to discuss this." And then to stop there. I have never once seen anyone stuck in this compulsive thought spiral be reassured or feel any better by hearing from someone else's approach to theology handled with things like empathy, compassion, logic, or even atheism. It doesn't matter what we say, how we say it, or how we relate to our own religion. The urge to engage in this kind of conversation in order to chat about religion is a sign that we are not equipped to help.

You can't have a conversation here, because intentionally or not, ten times out of ten, you are adding fuel to the fire. Just like people can't simply tell me something that would erase/talk me out of my ADHD/depression/anxiety disorder, you also cannot simply argue/reassure/persuade people out of scrupulosity. We should not try. We have a responsibility to consider that it's outright harmful to do so, and to disengage.

[wistfulwatcher]

"we need to deliver the profile" nails on a chalkboard nails on a chalkboard nails on a chalkboard

[moved-to-piersgender]

WHAT is it about neurotypicals and squeezing your arm or shoulder, putting their arm around you, or patting your back completely unprompted and without permission

[monadocyclone]

I really wish that more people were willing to attach a canon divergence tag/warning to their self indulgent sequel stories if they're gonna flat out ignore canon stuff.

[asktolys]

How tall are you? Do you wish you were taller or shorter than you are right now?

I am 180 cm, er, 5'9" in the imperial system.... I do with I were taller. Most men in my country are 183 cm or taller.... I suspect I am on the shorter side due to a rocky childhood... or maybe it is stress- can stress make you short?

[soarinsugar-homerblog]

Me when I tell someone I like Greek mythology and they start talking about retellings

[steelycunt]

In answer to the the oh my gods question I often see it by those with Percy Jackson brain rot

couldn’t tell you a single thing about Percy Jackson but this makes sense to me

[imsodishy]

what is with fandom and wanging an S on the end of the first syllable of a name and calling it a nickname??

I just saw 'Heaths' as in short for Heather. Please say that out loud right now. It sounds like you're trying not to hurl.

[strixhaven]

honestly nothing annoys me more than whenever medieval fantasy characters have like. modern underwear. your outwear can be whatever fine go ham but the second you put people in normalass bras and panties and dudes in regular underwear. disbelief completely suspended. they would not fucking wear that.

[chaos-of-the-wilds]

Why do people call Phoenix Wright white???

[alpinelogy]

Til that both č and �� are on my English keyboard on phone. Slay my life will be easier

[missbaphomet]

Friendly reminder that some words have specific meanings and using those words in other context expands their meanings to uselessness.

For example, let us examine the word "Nazi".

Nazism is a specific ideology, specifically a mix of Prussian Militarism and German Romanticism, and part of which proclaimed that Exceptional Individuals (in the case of the Nazi party, Germans) were above the law. It emphasized that not being German meant you were subordinate to the state and inherently lesser. They justified this by sorting people into races and believing that it was the right of the strong (Germans) to rule the weak (all others).

Source:

If they do not fit this specific set of beliefs, they are not a nazi. To call someone without these beliefs a nazi for a brief while elevates their supposed crime (say, for example, disagreeing with you politically) to the level of a Nazi. After a while, when enough people who are objectively not nazis get "called out" for being a nazi, the public picks up that odds are the person being called a nazi isn't actually a nazi. Then suddenly one day you find a real, actual nazi and no one believes you.

"That couldn't happen." There have been at least three incidents in recent memory of c-list YouTube celebrities being attacked with false sexual assault allegations, and the reaction gets smaller and smaller each time. It took three incidents to destroy credibility. Now imagine what happens when there is an ACTUAL victim who comes forward.

Know the definition of the words you use, and then use them correctly.