#it's so infantilizing

[theoneandonlynikki]

"NO, you can't be mad at Elon Musk! He didn't know any better! Those poor autistic people are too stupid to understand right from wrong! 🥺🥺🥺"

Guess what, asshole? I'm autistic and I'm perfectly capable of understanding morality and basic empathy. Go fuck yourself.

[giantkillerjack]

Today my therapist introduced me to a concept surrounding disability that she called "hLep".

[plain-text version of this post can be found under the cut]

Which is when you - in this case, you are a disabled person - ask someone for help ("I can't drink almond milk so can you get me some whole milk?", or "Please call Donna and ask her to pick up the car for me."), and they say yes, and then they do something that is not what you asked for but is what they think you should have asked for ("I know you said you wanted whole, but I got you skim milk because it's better for you!", "I didn't want to ruin Donna's day by asking her that, so I spent your money on an expensive towing service!") And then if you get annoyed at them for ignoring what you actually asked for - and often it has already happened repeatedly - they get angry because they "were just helping you! You should be grateful!!"

And my therapist pointed out that this is not "help", it's "hLep".

Sure, it looks like help; it kind of sounds like help too; and if it was adjusted just a little bit, it could be help. But it's not help. It's hLep.

At its best, it is patronizing and makes a person feel unvalued and un-listened-to. Always, it reinforces the false idea that disabled people can't be trusted with our own care. And at its worst, it results in disabled people losing our freedom and control over our lives, and also being unable to actually access what we need to survive.

So please, when a disabled person asks you for help on something, don't be a hLeper, be a helper! In other words: they know better than you what they need, and the best way you can honor the trust they've put in you is to believe that!

Also, I want to be very clear that the "getting angry at a disabled person's attempts to point out harmful behavior" part of this makes the whole thing WAY worse. Like it'd be one thing if my roommate bought me some passive-aggressive skim milk, but then they heard what I had to say, and they apologized and did better in the future - our relationship could bounce back from that. But it is very much another thing to have a crying shouting match with someone who is furious at you for saying something they did was ableist. Like, Christ, Jessica, remind me to never ask for your support ever again! You make me feel like if I asked you to call 911, you'd order a pizza because you know I'll feel better once I eat something!!

Edit: crediting my therapist by name with her permission - this term was coined by Nahime Aguirre Mtanous!

Edit again: I made an optional follow-up to this post after seeing the responses. Might help somebody. CW for me frankly talking about how dangerous hLep really is.

Plain-text version:

Today my therapist introduced me to a concept surrounding disability that she called "hLep".

Which is when you - in this case, you are a disabled person - ask someone for help ("I can't drink almond milk so can you get me some whole milk?", or "Please call Donna and ask her to pick up the car for me."), and they say yes, and then they do something that is not what you asked for but is what they think you should have asked for ("I know you said you wanted whole, but I got you skim milk because it's better for you!", "I didn't want to ruin Donna's day by asking her that, so I spent your money on an expensive towing service!") And then if you get annoyed at them for ignoring what you actually asked for - and often it has already happened repeatedly - they get angry because they "were just helping you! You should be grateful!!"

And my therapist pointed out that this is not "help", it's "hLep".

Sure, it looks like help; it kind of sounds like help too; and if it was adjusted just a little bit, it could be help. But it's not help. It's hLep.

At its best, it is patronizing and makes a person feel unvalued and un-listened-to. Always, it reinforces the false idea that disabled people can't be trusted with our own care. And at its worst, it results in disabled people losing our freedom and control over our lives, and also being unable to actually access what we need to survive.

So please, when a disabled person asks you for help on something, don't be a hLeper, be a helper! In other words: they know better than you what they need, and the best way you can honor the trust they've put in you is to believe that!

P.S. Also, I want to be very clear that the "getting angry at a disabled person's attempts to point out harmful behavior" part of this makes the whole thing WAY worse. Like it'd be one thing if my roommate bought me some passive-aggressive skim milk, but then they heard what I had to say, and they apologized and did better in the future - our relationship could bounce back from that. But it is very much another thing to have a crying shouting match with someone who is furious at you for saying something they did was ableist. Like, Christ, Jessica, remind me to never ask for your support ever again! You make me feel like if I asked you to call 911, you'd order a pizza because you know I'll feel better once I eat something!!

Edit: crediting my therapist by name with her permission - this term was coined by Nahime Aguirre Mtanous!

Edit again: I made an optional follow-up to this post after seeing the responses. Might help somebody. CW for me frankly talking about how dangerous hLep really is.

[sentientsky]

crowley and aziraphale negotiating child support payments in s3

[the-crooked-library]

Nosferatu (2024) is unquestionably a multifaceted work, but what I personally consider to be the unifying idea behind its facets is that, for Ellen, Orlok represents validation.

Her fears are dismissed and called childish?.. He's a nightmarish manifestation of them.

She is consistently disrespected by everyone around her?.. He considers her his only equal. She never uses his title, it's permitted.

She is told to fix herself, misunderstood, and always isolated?.. He knows all the darkest parts of her and is delighted by them. He wants her just as she is, so much that he will lie, kill, and cross the ocean to find her.

The scene in their death/wedding bed is a direct parallel to the scene of her waking in that bed at the beginning of the film. She complains to Thomas that the "honeymoon is yet too short" and tries to pull him down with a kiss - however, he is worried about being late for work, and so he extricates himself and leaves. Cut forward to her sharing the same bed with Orlok, similarly early in the morning; he is startled by cock-crow and begins to rise, but she guides his head back down - and, even though he knows that he will die, he stays. He is her sexual and emotional desire, realized.

Given that there is a plethora of emotions Ellen is forced to suppress on daily basis, there is no singular correct interpretation of her relationship with Orlok. To erase any one of them is to render it shallower than it actually is; but there is no doubt as to why their attachment is mutual. To each, the other is something they’ve never had before.

[sevenhundred721]

Guys it was one person saying this. This post has significantly more interactions than theirs did. This is neither a widespread opinion nor something that matters. We can stop now. Go get mad about something that matters.

GIF unrelated I just want to look at them.

[butcharium]

I often do think it is important to call myself a woman. In past I've had kids ask me "are you a man or a girl" and in hindsight I think these kids were quite perceptive of the world. Especially when you're in your 20s it's men and girls, I've seen students write pieces describing themselves as men, but their female peers of the same age they call girls, but I have also heard bisexual women say they like both men and girls. In past I've fallen into that myself and said that yeah I'm a lesbian I like girls, but do I? No I am in my twenties and I am actually only attracted to my fellow adults - women. It does feel more serious, less trivial, both to be and be attracted to women as opposed to girls, and that can be a bit uncomfortable to be faced with. It is also important to me as a butch. I am no longer a tomboy I am a butch I am no longer a girl I am a woman. I am a woman and women can be like me. I don't feel like I've succeeded enough at adulting to call myself a woman, but that doesn't matter. I am 25, and if the word bears other connotations so be it, that's not my problem.

[wombpala]

yeah to me it feels like the popular idea that John was homophobic/beat his kid(s)/taught them that having emotion makes you weak is just ppl choosing to interpret 'abusive father' in the shallowest most black-and-white movie villain way possible. when the ways he fucks them up in canon are so much more interesting and complicated.

[labotor]

my bougie dwarf LoF rook Tyarva and her sugar baby silly charming professor who she adores so very much <333

[uncanny-tranny]

To any disabled person undergoing tests to find What's Wrong: I hope your results come back the way you hope and that you receive the help you need. I hope you are not denied care, I hope you are taken seriously even after this, and I hope that you will be taken care of compassionately

[nato-obenkrieger]

he’s quite silly to me

[tastycitrus]

"cassandra cain is an innocent cinnamon roll who can do no wrong" incorrect. this is canon accurate cassandra cain

[lyinginthesnow]

thinking abt that line in dundee when logan says shiv makes boogie men out of the clothes she dumps on her bedroom floor. always has.

[antirepurp]

been thinking more about portrayals of naivety and how often it gets viewed on a surface level and further translated into "the character is vulnerable, childish, and must be protected, they are incapable of harm." it's an obvious pet peeve of mine, all similar acts of reducing a character to a single, likely prominent trait is, but it strikes me more with naivety because it can add so much complexity to a character when combined with other traits

for sonic characters, shadow is naive. he's naive all the way from sa2 to shadow 05, way too trusting of others for his own good, and it's not until after 05 that he really begins to acknowledge that tendency and consciously work against it when necessary. it is not his most prominent trait but it's an important feature of him and plays a lot into who he is as a person, but in his case it gets brushed aside because he's also dangerously cool, and for whatever reason the council has deemed naivety to not mix with that particularly well. so instead we get a portrayal of him as someone much more mature than he actually is, at least in terms of fan interpretations. there's nothing inherently wrong with that of course, but it ends up grinding my gears

silver has the exact opposite problem to shadow, where his naivety gets highlighted and played up to the point it drowns out everything else about him. that kind of reading fails to take into account how brutal and reckless he has the capability of being, how many of the choices he makes in 06 stem from a feral desperation to make a change, save his world at any price. he's naive, too trusting for his own good, with a remarkably black and white view of the world, what's right and what's wrong, but to reduce him to a child for it is missing what makes him so interesting in the first place. silver doesn't have the mysterious coolness to him that shadow does, and perhaps for the sake of being a foil to him his naivety is played up to a point of ridicule at times. perhaps some of that could be brushed up to his world being in a relative state of peace after the timeline reset, allowing him to grow into a person who doesn't have to live in a state of survival mode every moment of his life. either way is flattens him in a way that i despise in all honesty

other media also has examples of this kind of stuff, which is what's actually gotten me to think about this in the first place. it is, to a degree, interesting to see which traits people deem worthy of highlighting in any given character admittedly, and gives me food to chew on and ask myself why the characterization feels so off. it may not be a feast, but it gives me ideas on what the feast that i crave so badly consists of

[willpowers]

claps my hands

chilchuck is an ADULT

he should not be compared to those series that make a 1000 year old character look like they're 8

because chilchuck does have signs of aging, is shown to, in the perspective of others of his race, be maturing

it is OK to ship him with another character!

for christs sake his kids are also considered grown adults

it sucks cause like, real life people with developmental disabilities get told they're never going to be able to express themselves sexually or their partners are considered evil, but they deserve to have just as much of a chance at love as others!

chilchuck acts and looks more mature than my 15 year old tall grown up looking cousin, and thats the difference! appearance shouldnt matter, chronologic age should be the only factor. not only is chilchuck older the adult age of his race, but hes also considered way over adult age in human years too!

please please just be normal about chilchuck i beg

[starry-bi-sky]

*grips your shoulders* an eight year old is not gonna act like that. put the pen down. close the laptop. stop writing for a minute. volunteer at a daycare center for a week or smth. an eight year old is typically (unless they're purposely doing it, but at that point you'll be able to tell) not going to speak in one word sentences. that is a child with a possible developmental delay and should probably get an assessment done. that is a two year old with an MLU score of 2.0 who is struggling with their present possessive verbs. look up the average heights of an eight year old because i promise they're bigger than that.

if your six year old is still doing reduplicated babbling and it's not clearly an on purpose active play decision, then they should probably (re: REALLY) undergo evaluation because one of the first signs of a developmental delay is delayed speech. children begin speaking in two word utterances as young as 18 months old. three year olds on average can hold simple conversations with adults. four year olds absoLUTELy can.

i know it's super fun to write children as being dependent and clingy to their parent for your super fluffy found family child fic but that is not a six year old that is a worryingly large two year old with a mild speech delay. you don't have to be 1:1 accurate, god knows i'm not but please at least know that children on average are capable of holding simple conversations by the time they're 4, and are usually doing the baby talk stuff to be cute or as a play thing. which isn't a bad thing but if they're talking like that unironically and ALL the time, then there is likely a problem in their development.

[juststandingthere]

ISTG this game is making me insane, brainrot strong enough for me to make my first analysis post

One thing i love about the narrative is how distorted the characters, relationships and events are from jimmy's pov. Most posts discussing this focus on Anya, and it makes sense bc she's probably the biggest victim of this. She's seen as less than a person, she's an incompetent nurse, she has a meek personality, she'll let anyone(jimmy) step over her and she still follows his orders, despite everything he has done to her. We obviously see, from curly's pov, that she's simply too terrified of her abuser to act any other way, and when she's not with him she's way more confident and competent.

I haven't seen as many people talking about how this "distortion" affects Swansea and Daisuke as well, including the relationship they have with each other.

We see, in the first Curly section, that Swansea is a great mentor to Daisuke (one might even say they have a father-son/uncle-nephew relationship). He takes his time to teach him not just the basics, but also how to do his job as safely as possible. He lets him take notes, he himself writes stuff down for him to remember and even lets him doodle on those notes! Sure he is harsh with him, but he clearly cares about him and wants him to be safe.

And in return Daisuke looks up to him and has great respect for him, as both a mechanic and a man, while he also makes some jokingly offensive comments towards the older man, showing the close bond they have formed.

But that's not what we see when we play as Jimmy.

In his pov we don't see them interacting much, when they do we either see Swansea insulting Daisuke for no apparent reason or, in one occasion, we see him leading the kid down a "bad path" wanting to teach him how to "drink like a man".

When they aren't interacting tho, we do see hints of their actual relationship: Swansea asking where the kid is when he is "partying" in the lounge, confirming that he does not, in fact, hate spending time with him; him looking desperately for something, *anything*, that could help Daisuke with his suffering after he's injured; how whenever Jimmy tries to bring up to Daisuke how "badly" Swansea treats him, or how he "lied" to them about the utility room, Daisuke immediately shuts him down, because he knows what he's saying is completely wrong (i'm pretty sure those are the only times he doubts something Jimmy says), showing once again the trust and respect he has for his mentor.

(this part is kinda speculative but i think it makes sense)

There are two other times where we see them interacting, where we actually see how much Swansea cares for the kid, and coincidentally, neither of them is seen through Jimmy's eyes, but from a third person pov: what Swansea says right before they knock him out with the drink, about how he resents the people that let Daisuke, someone with his whole life ahead of him, with so much optimism and joy, board the ship for a job that would inevitably leave him "mangled" and "smarter in a worse way" (i could make a whole other essay on this part but i won't), and what he says right before mercy killing him. In that scene specifically, as the camera pans out in the corridor as Swansea raises his axe, ready to take the final swing, Jimmy doesn't see the hesitation in his body language, the way his body tenses, the way he comforts the kid, telling him to close his eyes, the heavy breaths (crying?maybe?) right after the act. He only sees the older man as a monster that would take away an innocent life that jimmy would have been able to fix had he been given the time to fucking think.

Hell, now that i think about it, Swansea's final monologue, where we find out that he is in fact a good man who tried his best to better himself, who simply wanted to protect the kid and give him "a chance off this goddamn rock"(implying that the Cryopod was meant for Daisuke all along) is also shown in third person!

A few other things i found interesting:

1-The missing pieces between what happened to Daisuke in the vent and when Swansea started attacking Jimmy. There's a cut from when Daisuke screams to when he's laying on (Swansea's) bed, bloody and in pain; from when Jimmy uses the mouthwash to disinfect him (which only causes him to suffer more) and two hours later; from after the talk the two men have and the moment Jimmy decides to go find the gun, the axe gone from Daisuke's face. What happened in those missing scenes? Was Swansea the one who helped the kid onto his bed, trying to make him as comfortable as possible? Did he try to comfort him, to distract him, and ease his pain as well as he could? What was his reaction when he had to take back the axe off the face of the young man he had started seeing as his own kid, whose life he had hoped he could save but that he ultimately had to take with his own hands?

I personally think those parts are blocked out of Jimmy's mind, as he couldn't fit them in his own narrative, where he was the hero, Swansea the villain and Daisuke the innocent, young man whose life he tried his best to protect from this "monster" that was now going to come after him.

2-Swansea attacking Jimmy with the axe, especially the cemetery scene, and how it can be interpreted in different ways.

We, the viewers, knowing everything that happened, will see it as a desperate man, Swansea, trying to avenge the lives that had been lost on that ship because of Jimmy (wether directly or not), with Daisuke's death being the last straw. But i don't think that's how Jimmy saw it. He saw swansea as a crazed, mad man, a ruthless killer, coming for him after taking an innocent life, Daisuke's photo and mausoleum as a reminder for Jimmy of what the older man had done, and a justification for what he was about to do.

(not to talk about the implication that the fight against swansea was not as intense as we saw it, only confirming the idea that jimmy was looking for a justification for shooting him)