#ive been having a Mental Health Event

[pleckthaniel]

are you still writing brighter fires? it's one of my favorite warriors fanfics of all time so i'm just curious :D

Yessir

[horrorsansdaily]

Day 19

[lord-squiggletits]

Speaking of Tyrest. A lot of people forget that he treated Pharma with absolute disdain, not only using him as a test subject for a clearly painful mass murder machine, but talking to Pharma like he saw him as nothing but some henchman to order around that was nothing more than a 'diseased cripple' if Tyrest hadn't come to rescue him.

Like it really is an interesting background dynamic with some curious implications, but when you look at fandom posts from around that issue/the years after, for some reason people just saw "Pharma worked with Tyrest" and concluded Pharma is a card carrying bigot ksjfnskxkd. Like yeah Pharma didn't do anything to stop Tyrest but it seems his main beef with the Autobots was with Ratchet in particular and maybe a general disdain for his ex-comrades. As well as continuing to hate Decepticons which like, not even the "good Autobots" are immune to (even in Pharma's introduction, First Aid says in his journal something like "yeah we all hate Decepticons, but Pharma REALLY hates them"). And despite what fandom likes to construe there's really no evidence in IDW1 that Autobots and Decepticons are different "races" or "types" of Cybertronians, so Pharma hating Decepticons really isn't a bigotry/robot racism thing. And instead probably has something to do with, idk, the 4 million year long galaxy-spanning blood feud war, or maybe being blackmailed and tortured into insanity by the Biggest and Most Decepticon-y of Decepticons.

Tyrest treated Pharma like trash, the other Decepticons working for Tyrest (how come no one ever brings that up btw) also hated him, so if anything it seems that Pharma was more of a rogue element only staying with Tyrest bc he was his best option and probably had no way to even escape.

I'm glad that at least in recent years the fandom has acquired a keen reading eye and good taste to finally recognize Pharma as the (accidentally) complex character he is instead of making him some posh, racist Starscream clone SHSJDGSGDH

[princessmyriad]

.

[raksh-writes]

Maybe this doesn’t need to be said, but Im feeling awful about it, so -- to any mutuals that might notice Im not following them anymore, I'm sorry about that. I've just seen too many posts on my dash that I have no way of blocking because they're not tagged in any way and they're distressing enough it's turning one of the only places I considered a safe space not safe for me anymore. So for my own mental health, I had to unfollow. I Will refollow in the future and I still love y'all, but I just-- I can’t. Ive been noticing some very worrying stuff about my mental and emotional state and it's just too much currently. I hope it's at least an understandable decision, and I wish y'all are having a good day out there 💗

[quarklynx]

Folks, can we please tag posts regarding current events? not everyone is in a space where they should be seeing content like that quite so frequently

[savage-rhi]

💡

[medicaltechnician]

its so hard looking for a psychologist rn cause im just scared of everyone. i look at their profiles and im like nnn nope that seems like ill have a bad time. im vilifying these poor people in my head

[chradi]

I’m extremely excited to start 2024! The potential of getting a new job doing something I love and getting my motivation back after like an entire year of being in and emotional roller coaster. By god.

[feycreature]

the world is beautiful and im so thrilled i get to live in it

[toytulini]

jalapeño eggggggggggg

[chatceux]

do i need therapy or do I just need to be more vulnerable to my friends

[transmutationisms]

serious question but do you personally believe there is a way to approach psychiatry in a way that uplifts and upholds patient autonomy and wellness or is the entire trade essentially fucked haha. Btw this is an ask coming from a 3rd year med student—with a background of severe mental illness—who is considering a residency in psychiatry after receiving life-saving care in high school pertaining to said conditions. (I have peers who have been involuntarily hospitalized and treated horribly in psych wards, with approaches i patently disagree with, but was lucky not to experience. I don’t like modern american medicine’s approach to mental illness; “throw pills” at it to “make it go away” ie. a problem of overprescribing, inadequate and non-holistic approach to mental health, and i feel a lot of that can be attributed to the capitalistic framework. I also def agree with you that so much of what can be considered normal human responses to traumatic events/normal human suffering can be unnecessarily pathologized—a great example being the whole “chemical imbalances in the brain is the ONLY reason why im like this” argument that ive unfortunately fallen hard for when i was younger and am still currently dismantling within myself…and like dont even get me started on this field’s history of demonizing POC, women, LGBT, etc). Like i deeply love my psych rotations so far, and i utterly feel in my gut that this is the manner in which i would like to help people—a lot of whom are just like me—but im wondering if there is a way to reconcile these aspects in a way that one can feel morally okay participating within such an imperfect system, in ur opinion… ngghhhhhh i just want to be a good doctor to my patients…

(ps i love all ur writing and analysis on succession!! big fan mwah <333)

i don't mean to sound unduly pissy at you, specifically, but i do have to say: every single time i've talked about antipsych or broader criticism of medicine on this website, i immediately get a wave of responses like this, from doctors/nurses/psychs/students of the above, asking me to, like, reassure them that they're not doing something immoral or un-communist or whatever by having or pursuing these jobs. and it's honestly frustrating. why is it that these conversations get re-framed around this particular line of inquiry and medical ego-soothing? why is it that when i say "the medical encounter is not structured to protect patient autonomy or well-being," so many people hear something more along the lines of "doctors are mean and i wish they were nicer"? why is it that it's impossible to discuss the philosophical and structural violence of academic and clinical medicine without it becoming a referendum on the individual morality of doctors?

i'm choosing to read you in good faith because i think it's possible to re-re-frame this line of questioning to demonstrate to you the sorts of critiques and inquiries i find more interesting and more conducive to patient autonomy and liberation. so, let me pick apart a few lines of this ask.

"is the entire trade essentially fucked?"

if you're thinking of trying to 'reform' the project of medical psychology within existing infrastructures and institutions, then yeah, it's fucked. if you're still assuming that affective distress can only be 'treated' within this medical apparatus (despite, again, no psychiatric dx satisfying any pathologist's understanding of a 'disease' ie an aberration from 'normal' physiological functioning) then you're not challenging the things that actually make psychiatry violent. you're simply fantasising about making the violence nicer.

"I don’t like modern american medicine’s approach to mental illness; “throw pills” at it to “make it go away” ie. a problem of overprescribing, inadequate and non-holistic approach to mental health, and i feel a lot of that can be attributed to the capitalistic framework."

i hate when i talk about psychotropic drugs being marketed to patients using lies like the chemical imbalance myth, and then pushed on patients—including through outright force—by psychiatrists, and the discussion gets re-framed as one about 'overprescribing'. my problem is not with people taking drugs. i am, in fact, so pro-drugs that i think even the ones administered in a clinical setting sometimes have value. my issue is with, again, the provision of misleading or outright false information, the use of force and coercion to put patients on such drugs in order to force social conformity and employability, and the general model of medicine and medical psychology that assumes patients ought to be passive recipients of medical enlightenment rather than active participants in their own treatment who are given the agency to decide when and how to engage with any form of curative or meliorative intervention.

'holistic' medicine and psychiatry do not solve this problem! they are not a paradigm shift because they continue to locate expertise and epistemological authority with the credentialed physician, and to position patients as too sick, stupid, or helpless to do anything but receive and comply with the medical interventions. there are certainly psychotropic drugs that are demonstrably more harmful than others (antipsychotics, for example), and some that are demonstrably prescribed to patients who do not benefit from them and are even harmed by them. conversely, there are certainly forms of intervention besides pharmaceuticals that people may find helpful. but my general critique here is aimed less at haggling over specific methods of intervention, and more at the ideological and philosophical tenets of medicine that cause any interventions to be imposed by force or coercion on patients, then framed as being 'for their own good'. were suffering people given the information and autonomy to actually choose whether and how to engage in any kind of intervention, some might still choose drugs! my position here is not one of moralising drugs, but making the act of taking them one that is freely chosen and available as an option without relying on physician determination of a patient's interests over their own assessment of their needs and wants.

"so much of what can be considered normal human responses to traumatic events/normal human suffering can be unnecessarily pathologized"

true, but don't misunderstand me as saying that drugs or any other form of intervention should be forcibly withheld from those who do want them and are made fully aware of what risks and harms seeking them could entail. again, this would still be an authoritarian model; my critique is aimed at increasing patient autonomy, not at creating equally authoritarian and empowered doctors who just have slightly different treatment philosophies.

"dont even get me started on this field’s history of demonizing POC, women, LGBT, etc"

ok, framing this as "demonisation" tells me that you're not understanding that, again, this is a systemic and structural critique. it is certainly true that a great many doctors currently are, and have historically have been, outright racist, trans/misogynist, ableist, and so on. framing this as a problem of a well-intentioned discipline being corrupted by some assholes is getting it backwards. medicine attracts prejudiced people, not to mention strengthens and promotes these prejudices in its entire training and practice infrastructures, because of its underlying philosophical orientation toward enforcing 'normality' as defined by 18th-century statistics and 19th-century human sciences that explicitly place white, cis, able-bodied european men as the normal ideal that everyone else is inferior to or failing to live up to. doctors who really nicely tell you that you're too fat are still using bmi charts that come from the statistical anthropometry of adolphe quételet and the flawed actuarial calculations of metlife insurance. doctors who really nicely deny you access to transition surgery are still operating under a paradigm that gives the practitioner authority over expressions and embodiments of gender. the issue isn't 'demonisation', it's that medicine and psychiatry explicitly attempt to render judgments about who and what is 'normal' and therefore socially 'healthy', and enforce those standards on patients. this is not a promotion of patient well-being, but of social conformity.

"i deeply love my psych rotations so far, and i utterly feel in my gut that this is the manner in which i would like to help people"

let me ask you a few questions. you say that you like your psych rotations... but how do your patients feel about them? is their autonomy protected? are they in treatment by free choice, and free to leave any time they wish? are they treated as human beings with full self-determination? if you witnessed a situation in which a patient was coerced or forced into a certain treatment, or in which you were not sure whether they were consenting with full knowledge or freedom, would you feel empowered to intervene? or would doing so threaten your career by exposing you to anger and retaliation from your higher-ups? what higher-ups will you be exposed to as a resident, and then as a practicing physician? could you practice in a way that committed fully, 100%, to patient autonomy if you were working at someone else's practice, or in a hospital or clinic? could you, according to current medical guidelines, even if you had your own practice?

when you say "this is the manner in which i would like to help people", what do you mean by "this"? can you define your philosophy of treatment, and the relationship and power dynamic you want to have with any future patients? is it one in which you hold authority over them and see yourself as determining what's in their 'best interests', even over their own expressed wishes? have you connected with patient advocates, psych survivors (other than your friends), and radical psychiatrists and anti-psychiatrists who may espouse heterodox treatment philosophies that you could consider? do you think such philosophies are sufficient for protecting patient autonomy and well-being, or are they still models that position the physician's judgment and authority over that of the patient?

"im wondering if there is a way to reconcile these aspects in a way that one can feel morally okay participating within such an imperfect system"

and here is the crux of the problem with this entire ask. you are wondering how to sleep at night, if you are participating in a career you find morally distasteful. where, though, do your patients enter into that equation? do you worry about how they sleep at night, after having interacted with a system of social violence that may very well have traumatised them under the guise of providing help? why does your own guilty conscience worry you more than violations of your patients' bodies, minds, and basic self-determination?

i can't tell you whether your career path is morally acceptable to you. i don't think this type of guilt or self-flagellation is fruitful and i don't think it helps protect patients. i don't, frankly, have a handy roadmap sitting around for creating a new system of medicine and health care that rests on patient autonomy. affective distress is real, and is not something we should have to bear alone or with the risk of having violence inflicted upon us. what you need to ask yourself is: how does the medical model and establishment serve people experiencing such distress? how does it perpetuate violence against them? and how do you see yourself countering, or perpetuating, such violence as someone operating within this discipline? what would it mean to be a 'good' actor within a violent system, if you do indeed believe that such a thing is ontologically possible?

[biblicalhorror]

My sister and dad wanted to work together to build the arch and it was LITERALLY my dad's only job for the entire wedding (he even had someone else pick out his clothes) and both of them seem to have forgotten about it entirely until today, when I asked them if they were still planning on doing that. Luckily, the groom's mother had an extra arch from her garden she was willing to donate, but now they're both too stubborn to give up on this idea of building one from scratch, again, ONE WEEK before the wedding

Life is.. a lot right now

[knikzshi]

IMGONNAGETYOUBACK ! — DOWN BAD

profiles ☆

⋆ ˚｡⋆୨୧˚

y/n l/n : second year in teyvat university. A while back they had an on & off situationship with Scaramouche from their econ class. They broke up over the lack of communication on his part and Scaramouche's deteriorating mental health. They occasionally vlog when their schedule allows it and often collab with Hu Tao in her ghost hunting channel. This resulted in their private twt account being "ghosthunter" as they swiped the user from hu tao (LOL) :P.

lumine : third year in teyvat university, arts & humanities major. She has a twin brother who is a history major. She first met Y/N at the campus library and they immediately hit it off. Ever since then, they'd often get coffee together at a local cafe before their classes.

heizou shikanoin : second year in teyvat university, criminology major. He's a big fan of corny detective shows like inspector gadget, sherlock holmes, etc. He met Y/N through a concert. They liked the same local singer (Scaramouche) and quickly became friends. Of course, he was one of the first people to realize that Y/N had went to the concert because of their situationship with Scaramouche.

venti : second year in teyvat university, liberal arts major with a minor in music. He first met Y/N through Scaramouche. He was friends with Aether and they became close friends at a party. They are often his designated driver at parties or other events including alcohol.

hu tao : second year in teyvat university, also a criminology major. She first met Y/N in high school and have always been their closest friend. She attends similar classes to Heizou, so they often bond over the fact they're incredibly sleep deprived.

IMGONNAGETYOUBACK !

masterlist — prev | next

SYNOPSIS what happens when your ex-boyfriend (?) ex-situationship releases a song on your birthday about your relationship AND TWEETS that he misses you? well of course, you HAD to go get him back !

A/N hii :3 sorry ive been semi-busy and making profiles is so tedious & takes up sm time TT

— taglist is open !!

TAGLIST @state-of-grac3 @kamdenssslover @misswetty @skyoverkill1 @mellowberrie @ssetsuka @kukikoooo @lalalaloveallmydays @vyrsgore @yuminako @featuredtofu @lloovvv @hearts4lizzzz @aruatsu @scaraenthusiast1 @vxcmx @mtndewbajablasted @potteraep @kunikissr @imnotyihzuo @1nakitofan @d4y-dr3am3r @xionri @anqelkoz @lxkeeeee @c4ttheart @cheriswag @devosin

[tea-and-secrets]

i know this is an unpopular opinion bc this is the "cut off your friends for having a bad day!!!! theyre toxic! you don't owe anyone ANYTHING!" site but ive found the more people on here talk about shit like "loving people at their worst" and "helping their friends" and "you have to make peace with being a burden" and "the loneliness epidemic is so sad :(((" type posts the more likely they are to be a shit friend that resents actually having to help you for any reason. if you arent capable of being able to help someone thru a mental health crisis or take a risk helping someone in a bad place or in asking if someone's okay and not immediately dropping it at the extremely-typical-symptom-of-cptsd deflecting, you're not a friend, straight up. that is an acquaintance and that is fine. but acting like that's friendship is lying to yourself. its incredible that people act like this is fine on the site that constantly complains friendships arent taken as seriously as romantic relationships - maybe some people crave that romantic relationship bc it comes with an assurance that they won't be given up on as easily. for a literary culture that romanticises loyalty in a big way everyone on here loves to make up excuses to flake on it in their real life relationships with the excuse that the other is a bad person, a terrible friend, toxic, when id bet my ass they never tried to talk to them about the problems they had with them even once lol and i know everyone on here likes to say they're a people pleaser like that's some virtue and not a maladaptive coping mechanism thatll bite you in the ass and choke out all your friendships, but honestly if you can never get yourself to bring up to someone you call a "friend" that they hurt you or made you upset or made you uncomfortable, and you cut them off for that, you're a shit person. if you never once voice your opinion and fault them for not working around it, you're a shit person. if you get mad at and hold grudges against someone for violating boundaries you never once set up or even tried to hint at, or not solving problems they didn't know existed, you're a shit person. i had friends go nuclear and cut me off during the delusional haze after one of the most traumatic events in my life and it was over shit they'd apparently kept silent about for years. years. and never once tried to bring up. some of those things were things we'd already talked about and i apologized for and i thought we'd cleared the air on, but they were still upset over it and held me acting that way in the first place over my head as if i was evil for having those thoughts in the first place, and they'd never once hinted that they were holding that grudge the entire time we were "friends".

i see posts now that are like "it's sooo great to cut a toxic friend out of your life :) breath of fresh air" and i look at the notes in agreement and wonder how many of those people did what they did, refused to talk about their problems only to hold those problems against someone as black marks on their character. very few people actively want to be an asshole, most of the time just telling someone "this hurts" or "this upsets me" is enough to get them to stop and reconsider what they've been doing. i know i didnt want to. i begged you to tell me if id hurt you and you still lied to my face. why did you think id willingly want to hurt a friend? i tried to work with your symptoms, i always came to you when id been upset to get clarification, and i thought you'd do the same. what did i do to deserve that

.