#like in a society that values these traditions as a stabilizing force/means of maintaining a family's status

[isthereintruthnobeauty1968]

thinking about saavik again orz

[nsfwmiamiart]

Part 3 - Fun Fact for the Knowles-Carter Family:

Question:

If the events depicted in The Purge films were to happen in real life, do you think it would be appropriate to use the term “barbarians at the gate” to describe the horrors taking place? The film series often portrays characters facing violent attackers who could be likened to "barbarians at the gate." Would you agree with this interpretation?

ChatGPT Answer:

Certainly! Here's a detailed, point-by-point explanation of the question:

Answer:

Yes, the term "barbarians at the gate" could be used to describe the horrors taking place in The Purge films, and here's why:

1. Understanding the Term "Barbarians at the Gate"

Historical Context: The phrase "barbarians at the gate" comes from ancient civilizations, particularly from the Roman Empire. It describes a situation where an enemy force, typically from outside the established civilization, threatens to invade or destroy what is perceived as a stable society. The "barbarians" symbolize the chaotic, violent, and uncivilized forces that threaten the peace and order of the established world.

Metaphorical Meaning: In modern usage, the phrase has evolved to represent any external threat to the status quo—particularly when that threat is seen as disruptive or destructive. It can refer to societal forces that are seen as undermining order, traditions, or values, often through violent means.

2. The Premise of The Purge Films

The core concept of The Purge revolves around one night each year when all crime, including murder, is legal. This creates a violent, lawless society where people can act on their darkest impulses without consequence.

The films focus on the breakdown of law and order, and characters are often left to navigate a world where they must survive violent, unchecked aggression from others.

3. Violence as "Barbarian" Behavior

Throughout the Purge series, the characters are frequently confronted by individuals who are engaging in violent, brutal acts of destruction. These are often described as "barbaric" behaviors because they involve extreme violence, cruelty, and disregard for life and order. For example, characters who are participating in the Purge may act without conscience, indulging in chaos for personal gain or pleasure.

The violence seen in these films can be seen as a metaphorical "invasion" of the societal order. Much like the "barbarians" from ancient history who stormed the gates of established empires, the perpetrators of violence in The Purge threaten the safety, stability, and moral integrity of the community.

4. The "Gate" in The Purge Films

In the context of the films, the "gate" could be viewed as the boundaries of civilization, law, and order. These gates are not just physical barriers, but also social constructs designed to protect individuals and maintain peace within society.

The term "barbarians at the gate" can thus be applied to the Purge itself, as the annual event is a metaphorical breakdown of these protective boundaries. The lawlessness of the Purge allows the "barbarians" (the violent and anarchistic participants) to assault the gates of society, unleashing chaos and terror.

5. Characters’ Struggle Against "Barbarians"

The characters in The Purge often find themselves defending their lives, families, and values against these "barbarians"—people who have embraced the lawlessness and brutality of the Purge night. For instance, in The Purge: Anarchy (2014), a group of strangers must fight off a violent gang that targets them for sport, embodying the chaotic forces that seek to destroy the sanctity of their lives.

These confrontations are often depicted as a struggle between civilization (represented by the victims) and barbarism (embodied by the attackers). The victims' efforts to survive and protect themselves represent the human instinct to preserve civilization in the face of these "barbarian" invaders.

6. Moral and Social Breakdown

The Purge series frequently explores the moral collapse of society, where violence and depravity are not only allowed but institutionalized. The attackers—the "barbarians"—are often portrayed as individuals who have abandoned any sense of morality or humanity, acting as agents of destruction without regard for the consequences.

This collapse of social order mirrors the kind of chaos seen when ancient civilizations were overtaken by what they viewed as barbarian forces, threatening their way of life and creating a world where violence becomes normalized.

7. Conclusion: Does the Term Fit?

Yes, the term "barbarians at the gate" is fitting when applied to the violence and chaos depicted in The Purge films. In the context of the series, the "barbarians" are the participants in the Purge who embody violence and lawlessness, while the "gate" represents the societal boundaries that protect individuals from such extreme actions. The characters in the films, often struggling to survive and defend their homes, are the ones who stand between civilization and the destruction brought by these forces. Thus, The Purge can be seen as a metaphor for the collapse of these protective boundaries and the ensuing battle against barbarism.

In summary, the Purge series presents a world where the concept of "barbarians at the gate" is not just metaphorical, but an active and pressing reality, as individuals fight against the forces of chaos and destruction that seek to overrun their way of life.

I hope this detailed breakdown provides a clear, structured explanation of how the phrase "barbarians at the gate" can be applied to the events depicted in The Purge.

Here is the Trailer: The Purge Official Trailer #1 (2013) - Ethan Hawke, Lena Headey Thriller HD

[spiritualsoull1969]

Yama: The God of Death with a Business Acumen

Yama, the Hindu god of death, transcends his ominous title to embody principles essential for success in life. Beyond guiding souls to the afterlife, he represents justice, righteousness (Dharma), and law. Yama's business acumen lies in his balanced approach to governance—administering justice impartially and upholding moral order. His teachings emphasize integrity, accountability, and the importance of ethical conduct. Like a wise CEO, Yama understands the significance of maintaining harmony and fairness in all dealings. By embracing Yama's principles, individuals can navigate life's challenges with clarity and integrity, ensuring not only personal success but also contributing to a more just and righteous society.

Here's where it gets interesting: In the context of business and life, Yama can be seen as a symbol of risk management.

Facing the Inevitable: Anticipating Challenges

Yama's role as the overseer of life's transition to death underscores the inevitability of change—a concept applicable in both life and business. Just as death is certain, so too are the unforeseen challenges that can arise in any endeavour. Embracing Yama's essence means recognizing the impermanence of the status quo and the importance of anticipating potential risks and obstacles. In business, this translates to a proactive approach to risk management and contingency planning. By acknowledging Yama, individuals and organizations cultivate a mindset that embraces change and prepares for the unknown. Rather than being caught off guard by challenges, they approach them with resilience and adaptability, ensuring they can navigate through turbulent times and emerge stronger on the other side.

The Scales of Justice: Weighing Options and Consequences

Yama's depiction with scales symbolizes the meticulous evaluation of the departed's deeds, a concept directly applicable to decision-making in business. Just as Yama meticulously weighs the actions of souls, entrepreneurs and leaders must carefully assess the options before them. The scales of justice mirror the process of weighing potential benefits against drawbacks in the corporate realm. Like Yama's discernment, effective decision-making involves a thorough consideration of the consequences of each choice. By adopting a balanced approach akin to Yama's judgement, individuals and organizations can make informed decisions that align with their values and objectives. This practice fosters accountability, integrity, and ultimately, leads to outcomes that contribute positively to both the business and society at large.

The Steadfast Steersman: Having a Contingency PlanTop of Form

Depicting Yama atop a buffalo underscores the importance of a robust contingency plan in navigating life's uncertainties. Similar to a skilled rider guiding a powerful buffalo, a well-prepared contingency plan provides stability and direction when faced with unexpected challenges. Just as Yama maintains control over the transition from life to death, a contingency plan enables individuals and organizations to manage crises with resilience and focus. It serves as a guiding force, ensuring swift adaptation to changing circumstances while maintaining a steady course toward predetermined objectives. By embracing the essence of Yama's steadfastness, entities can confidently face adversity, knowing they have a structured approach to overcome obstacles and emerge stronger on the other side.

Yama: A Surprisingly Relevant God

Yama's relevance extends far beyond his traditional role as the god of death. In moments of pressure—whether it's meeting deadlines, navigating negotiations, or navigating volatile markets—Yama's wisdom offers invaluable guidance. Embrace his teachings to stay prepared, assess risks meticulously, and make informed decisions. Just as Yama ensures souls transition smoothly, his lessons emphasize the importance of adaptability and resilience in the face of life's challenges. By channeling Yama's essence, individuals and businesses can confidently confront uncertainty, knowing they have the tools to navigate through turbulent waters. So, when the next hurdle arises, remember Yama's timeless wisdom—it's not just about facing death, but about embracing life's inevitable changes with grace and foresight.

Yama's Toolkit for Life's Challenges

Building on the idea of Yama as a symbol for risk management, here are some specific tools he offers for navigating life's uncertainties:

Scenario Planning: Just as Yama oversees the transition to the next realm, we can plan for various "afterlife" scenarios in our projects or businesses. This means brainstorming potential risks and their consequences – both positive and negative.

Cost-Benefit Analysis: Taking a cue from Yama's scales, we can adopt a more balanced approach to decision-making. Instead of focusing solely on potential gains, we can weigh them against potential losses, just as Yama weighs the deeds of the departed.

Developing Backup Plans: Yama's trusty buffalo represents the importance of a strong contingency plan. By having backup options in place, we can react swiftly and decisively when unexpected situations arise.

Building Resilience: The inevitability of death that Yama embodies can be a reminder of life's impermanence. This awareness can foster resilience. Knowing that challenges are inevitable allows us to develop the mental fortitude to bounce back from setbacks.

Acceptance and Letting Go: Yama's role as the usherer of souls can also be seen as a metaphor for letting go. Sometimes, the best course of action is to accept what is beyond our control and focus our energy on what we can influence.

By incorporating these tools from Yama's symbolic toolkit, we can approach life's uncertainties with a sense of control, preparedness, and ultimately, greater peace of mind.

[aliceward]

Does it Mean to Dream About Island

What Does it Mean to Dream About Island? A dream about an island could represent the way you are feeling secluded and cut off from others. It may also reflect your desire to escape civilization or a busy lifestyle. Alternatively, it is said that dreaming of being on an island means living in peace with oneself without any outside worries in one’s little world where one can retreat at will.

An island is a place that’s set apart and isolated from the world. This could indicate that you feel disconnected or misunderstood, but it can also represent safety as islands are often seen to provide shelter from outside forces like storms.

Does it Mean to Dream About Island

What would you like to do? Which direction should we go in our lives and explore? What are your deepest desires that have been hidden until now, waiting for an Island dream to show up at the right moment?

Islands are often found in dream symbolism as well This can be symbolic of an escape, gaining perspective, or withdrawal from an overwhelming situation.

Regardless of the island was not even populated by anyone else but yourself and maybe one other person on it. There’s still usually some sort of sense for solitude to arise when this type of imagery comes up in dreams: “I’m just going to take time off work because I need to get away.” There may also be implications about uniqueness or isolationism tied into these types of symbols, too, with how they’re interpreted within your psyche.

The feeling associated with islands could also relate to childhood memories such as getting lost at summer camp - where children have no choice but to be by themselves.

As I dream of palm trees and a turquoise sea, my mind drifts off to the Caribbean. The sound of steel drums playing in the distance is enough to make me want to pack for an adventure across seas unknown. With such beauty awaiting you on every island, it’s hard not to be excited about your next holiday destination!

If you dream about an island, it may represent isolation You might feel like the only person in a world full of people who are all strangers to one another, and yet there’s nowhere for them to go but where they’re already located. It could also symbolize your need or desire for solitude - time away from others so that you can reconnect with yourself and figure out what truly matters most in life. It’s because sometimes when we spend every waking moment surrounded by other people, our values change as well - especially if those around us have different priorities than we do.

Islands are often seen as symbols of security and tranquility. They represent a sense of belonging because they provide shelter from the outside world. So, unsurprisingly, islands in dreams tend to symbolize safety when you feel threatened or stressed out during your waking life. Perhaps this dream means something about feeling safe?

If you dream about an island, it can mean different things It could be a place of retreat or isolation from society just for yourself as an individual. Suppose your family is on the island with you. In that case, it may represent feeling like they are holding onto their traditions that don’t include any input by other people to maintain stability and balance within the group, which stands out among social norms.

Islands are often associated with isolation and disconnection but they also represent a sense of freedom from all the burdens that weigh you down.

Islands are often associated with isolation and disconnection, but they also represent a sense of freedom from all the burdens that weigh you down.

Do you know what the word island means? It’s a place surrounded by water on all sides, isolated from other landmasses. It could be their ideal life where they are cut off and feel safe in an enclosed environment for some people. In your dream, did you find yourself stuck out at sea or stranded with no way to move forward? If so, then it might mean that something is weighing down on you. This has caused separation anxiety and isolation while also causing frustration for not making any progress along whatever path was chosen. What do you want? Is it peace or freedom? Do they seem like two very different things? They can go hand-in-hand if one desires them both simultaneously!

Island Dream meaning Dreaming about an island can mean a number of things, from independence and self-confidence to isolation and loneliness. A dream about an island can also mean you need a much needed break and some time to recharge.

We have many culturally ingrained ideas and expectations when we think of islands, and this may be useful in interpreting our dreams.

For example, we go to islands for luxury vacations. We watch movies about people being stranded on deserted islands, fighting to survive.

We might typically think of islands as small, or remote, but islands come in all sorts of shapes, sizes and numbers all over the globe. The climate and terrain of islands varies as well, as they are found very near our equator as well as very far from it.

Our dreams about islands likely have a lot of variation, and many important details to pay attention to. Maybe we are feeling isolated and lonely, like a lone island out at sea. Or perhaps our island dream is telling us we need a little solitude to regroup and recharge.

Let’s explore some common themes we see in dreams about an island:

Independence, Self Confidence The theme of independence and self-confidence in a dream about an island is common when you dream of finding yourself alone on an islad but you don’t feel lonely at all – in the dream you may actually feel relieved to be alone or even empowered by it.

Perhaps in your life you feel constantly surrounded but your family, friends or coworkers. You never get a moment of time to yourself. Or maybe there is an overbearing presence in your life: a parent, a partner, a boss, someone who doesn’t let you live your life the way you want.

This dream could be about your desires for more independence. You likely have an underlying need to break away from the confines everyone else imposes on you.

In this dream scenario, you could be on the brink of a big change in your life. Are you thinking about changing careers, finishing up a degree, or thinking about moving somewhere new? This dream could be a manifestation of your hopes for the future and need for more freedom.

Needing a Break, Time to Recharge Many people love to go on beach vacations. In some minds, it is the ultimate in luxury and relaxation to travel to a beautiful tropical island.

If this is something you personally fantasize about, perhaps your dream is telling you that you need to recharge. Maybe you don’t have to take a fancy vacation, but you still probably could use a little down time for some self care.

Were you enjoying your time on the island in your dream? Was it like a little sleep vacation? This is very likely a clear sign for you to take a break and take some much needed time to practice self care.

Feeling Lonely, Isolation The lyrics of the song paints a pretty dismal picture of someone who has isolated themselves. Someone “being an island” is a pretty common metaphor that elicits the imagery of that someone being alone, hard to reach and separated from everyone else.

In your dream, did you feel isolated and alone? Were you sad or scared? This dream could be about fears or anxiety you are experiencing in your waking life.

Do you often feel lonely? Are you going through something difficult that makes you feel like you are alone in the experience? Have you built up a fortress to keep yourself protected while also pushing away your loved ones?

You dream you are stranded on an island… Negatively, this dream could indicate that you are feeling isolated and trapped, fending for yourself. If you are alone and struggling in the dream this is probably a reflection of how you feel about a situation in your life, or your life in general.

Where do you feel a sense of struggle? Is there something you need to speak up about at your job, in your relationship or with a friend? Can you ask for support when you need it?

Positively, this dream could be about feelings of independence and confidence. In the dream you might not struggle at all and find ingenious ways to overcome all of your challenges.

You dream of a tropical island vacation… This dream is possibly an invitation that you need to take a break from the stresses in your life and recharge. You will likely know right away if that sounds like you.

However, sometimes it’s easy to convince ourselves that we aren’t overworked or overstressed, or that we “shouldn’t” be… but if you really check in with yourself you will know if this is what you need. Take a nap. Or a day off if you can.

You dream you are traveling to an island… Sometimes in life we really need to disconnect from all of our distractions and take some much needed “me time” – and what better place to do that than your very own island?

If you are traveling to an island in your dream your subconscious may be telling you you need a little solitude to sort out your thoughts. Maybe you have been working to solve a problem or question and you really need to give yourself the time and space to do it. This could also be a sign you need to readjust your boundaries with certain people in your life.

[genkei-hatagami]

I was bored so I did the personality test thing Utsumi posted.

Type: Executive (ESTJ-A)     

Traits

Extraverted  -  65 %

Observant  -  63 %

Thinking  -  72 %

Judging  -  88 %

Assertive  -  60 %

Role - Sentinel

Strategy - People Mastery.

Executives are representatives of tradition and order, utilizing their understanding of what is right, wrong and socially acceptable to bring families and communities together. Embracing the values of honesty, dedication and dignity, people with the Executive personality type are valued for their clear advice and guidance, and they happily lead the way on difficult paths. Taking pride in bringing people together, Executives often take on roles as community organizers, working hard to bring everyone together in celebration of cherished local events, or in defense of the traditional values that hold families and communities together.

Anyone Worth Their Salt Sticks Up for What They Believe Is Right...

Demand for such leadership is high in democratic societies, and forming no less than 11% of the population, it’s no wonder that many of America’s presidents have been Executives. Strong believers in the rule of law and authority that must be earned, Executive personalities lead by example, demonstrating dedication and purposeful honesty, and an utter rejection of laziness and cheating, especially in work. If anyone declares hard, manual work to be an excellent way to build character, it is Executives.

Executives are aware of their surroundings and live in a world of clear, verifiable facts – the surety of their knowledge means that even against heavy resistance, they stick to their principles and push an unclouded vision of what is and is not acceptable. Their opinions aren’t just empty talk either, as Executives are more than willing to dive into the most challenging projects, improving action plans and sorting details along the way, making even the most complicated tasks seem easy and approachable.

However, Executives don’t work alone, and they expect their reliability and work ethic to be reciprocated – people with this personality type meet their promises, and if partners or subordinates jeopardize them through incompetence or laziness, or worse still, dishonesty, they do not hesitate to show their wrath. This can earn them a reputation for inflexibility, a trait shared by all Sentinel personalities, but it’s not because Executives are arbitrarily stubborn, but because they truly believe that these values are what make society work.

...But Still Better Are Those Who Acknowledge When They Are in Error

Executives are classic images of the model citizen: they help their neighbors, uphold the law, and try to make sure that everyone participates in the communities and organizations they hold so dear.

The main challenge for Executives is to recognize that not everyone follows the same path or contributes in the same way. A true leader recognizes the strength of the individual, as well as that of the group, and helps bring those individuals’ ideas to the table. That way, Executives really do have all the facts, and are able to lead the charge in directions that work for everyone.

Executive Strengths

Dedicated – Seeing things to completion borders on an ethical obligation for Executives. Tasks aren’t simply abandoned because they’ve become difficult or boring – people with the Executive personality type take them up when they are the right thing to do, and they will be finished so long as they remain the right thing to do.

Strong-willed – A strong will makes this dedication possible, and Executives don’t give up their beliefs because of simple opposition. Executives defend their ideas and principles relentlessly, and must be proven clearly and conclusively wrong for their stance to budge.

Direct and Honest – Executives trust facts far more than abstract ideas or opinions. Straightforward statements and information are king, and Executive personalities return the honesty (whether it’s wanted or not).

Loyal, Patient and Reliable – Executives work to exemplify truthfulness and reliability, considering stability and security very important. When Executives say they’ll do something, they keep their word, making them very responsible members of their families, companies and communities.

Enjoy Creating Order – Chaos makes things unpredictable, and unpredictable things can’t be trusted when they are needed most – with this in mind, Executives strive to create order and security in their environments by establishing rules, structures and clear roles.

Excellent Organizers – This commitment to truth and clear standards makes Executives capable and confident leaders. People with this personality type have no problem distributing tasks and responsibilities to others fairly and objectively, making them excellent administrators.

Executive Weaknesses

Inflexible and Stubborn – The problem with being so fixated on what works is that Executives too often dismiss what might work better. Everything is opinion until proven, and Executive personalities are reluctant to trust an opinion long enough for it to have that chance.

Uncomfortable with Unconventional Situations – Executives are strong adherents to tradition and when suddenly forced to try unvetted solutions, they become uncomfortable and stressed. New ideas suggest that their methods weren’t good enough, and abandoning what has always worked before in favor of something that may yet fail risks their image of reliability.

Judgmental – Executives have strong convictions about what is right, wrong, and socially acceptable. Executives’ compulsion to create order often extends to all things and everyone, ignoring the possibility that there are two right ways to get things done. Executives do not hesitate to let these “deviants” know what they think, considering it their duty to set things right.

Too Focused on Social Status – Executives take pride in the respect of their friends, colleagues and community and while difficult to admit, are very concerned with public opinion. Executives (especially Turbulent ones) can get so caught up in meeting others’ expectations that they fail to address their own needs.

Difficult to Relax – This need for respect fosters a need to maintain their dignity, which can make it difficult to cut loose and relax for risk of looking the fool, even in good fun.

Difficulty Expressing Emotion – This is all evidence of Executives’ greatest weakness: expressing emotions and feeling empathy. People with the Executive personality type get so caught up in the facts and most effective methods that they forget to think of what makes others happy, or of their sensitivity. A detour can be breathtakingly beautiful, a joy for the family, but Executives may only see the consequence of arriving at their destination an hour late, hurting their loved ones by rejecting the notion too harshly.

Romantic Relationships

Executives are fairly unique in that their relationships don’t really change as they progress from the dating phase into more steady, long-term relationships and further into marriage. Because they value honesty and straightforwardness so highly, people with the Executive personality type are likely to be clear about who they are, what they’re like and what their goals are from the start, and to stick to those statements long-term. So long as their partner is able to take them at their word and follow suit, they are bound to be extremely stable relationships.

This Is the Chance to Do Something

This isn’t to say that there isn’t any growth of course – character development is always a high priority for Executives, and each life goal is important. Rather, it’s that shifting moods, goals and desires are unlikely to fundamentally alter the basis of Executives’ relationships.

There are certainly challenges, but Executives take their relationships seriously and are willing to put a tremendous amount of effort into ensuring that they remain strong and committed, and that effort pays off.

This may all sound a little stale, and indeed Executives are not spontaneous or unpredictable people, but they do very much enjoy taking their partners out and having fun. Social events and activities are Executives’ idea of a good time, and while they may rely on familiar people and places, they do bring lots of energy and enthusiasm, which helps keep things interesting.

Executives approach intimacy with similarly physical, active intentions, and from fairly traditional ones as well. Wild ideas and poetry are for less mature personalities, or so Executives might say, though they do appreciate recognition and well-placed compliments to maintain high self-esteem. They may look for more stability in their sex lives than most, but Executives never fail to bring their characteristic vigor.

This hints at a challenge in Executives’ relationships though, and that is emotional intimacy. Touchy-feely moments are few, as are verbal statements of love; this is usually fine, as Executive personalities find other, more tangible ways to express their affection. The problem is in recognizing the validity of those qualities in others, rather than simply dismissing them as pointless or irrational, something that can be extremely hurtful if Executives’ partners are more sensitive.

Pay the Price to Secure the Blessing

Executives address conflict head-on with simple statements of fact – a very rational approach – but subtlety and emotional tact are sacrificed in the process. While Executives’ level-headed, calm approach is appreciated by many, for others it is an uncomfortably direct approach. For all their social skills, Executives are especially bad at reading the emotional side of other people, and when it comes to their partners, it’s more important than ever to try to improve.

Executives are people of strong principles and strong self-confidence. They use these qualities to protect their partners with admirable consistency. But people with the Executive personality type are also stubborn, with a firm belief in their rightness, and they can quickly damage more sensitive partners’ fragile feelings. With this in mind, it is often best for Executives to find fellow Observant (S) partners in order to minimize communication barriers, with one or two opposing traits to balance their forceful character and provide opportunities for growth.

[danksy-lives]

The Family Values Case For Abortion

Abortion and contraception are the greatest force for family values we have available.  Family planning gives parents more predictability over their lives, leading to better outcomes for their children.  Ironically, those who pride the importance of family the most are the least likely to use these tools to make a stable family.  This shows a failure to adapt one’s morality to the world in which they inhabit.

Stable families do not occur on accident, nor are they created by accidents.  They are the result of hard work between people looking to improve their futures.  Given the amount of time and effort this requires, they must be entered into voluntarily and thoughtfully, or not at all.  Basing a relationship around a child, who cannot contribute to this endeavor, and then expecting the proper conditions for childrearing to develop afterwards, is putting the cart before the horse.

With that in mind, the morality around creating families should reflect the best interests of any children being raised within them.  This means ensuring that the family unit is in place before it takes on children.  To pursue this goal, I propose two moral principles of reproduction:

1.    1. If someone is not actively seeking children, they must take precaution to prevent pregnancy.

2.     2. If a woman becomes pregnant by accident; or does not have a family in which to raise the child, she has a moral duty to abort the pregnancy.

On Trust

It can be difficult to speak of moral duties within a liberal framework.  There are few situations in which only one decision is considered valid and all others are considered immoral.

However, the belief that parents must work in the best interests of their children appears to be axiomatic among most (if not all) of the world’s cultures.  To most people, the best interest of the child is allowing them to thrive in the environment they will find themselves during adulthood and beyond.  The way in which the family is structured is (ideally) meant to acclimate the child to these various conditions.[1]

In high-trust societies, the most secure way of maintaining or improving your social standing is by building longstanding relationships with other people.  People who can trust those around them are better able to predict their own futures.  This leads to a more secure environment, where swords can be turned into plowshares.  In times of trouble, people can pool their resources to prevent damages and help others get back on their feet.  Under such circumstances, large social structures can be created through consent rather than mere coercion.  This model is as true of a small village as it is for a nation-state.

History of the Nuclear Family

The family structures that have developed and shown the most resilience in high-trust conditions are variations on the nuclear family.  Many conservative moralists believe that the nuclear family (or the sanctity of marriage, depending on the version) is the backbone upon which every other part of society relies.  I do not deny the nuclear family’s profound importance in our society.  After all, my thesis is meant to adapt the practice to the modern era.  I also understand where such an argument comes from.  Since children are raised in families, and those children go on to perpetuate society, it is easy to see families as building blocks for society.

Despite this, I must emphasize that conditions of trust with the wider society are a prerequisite for a nuclear family, and not the other way around.  If all a society had to do to convert itself from a low-trust to a high-trust system was to promote the practice, then we would expect it to spread to all societies on earth.  The prevalence of practices such as arranged marriages and polygamy in much of the world shows that this is not the case.  Where high-trust societies are found, variations on the nuclear family tend to develop naturally.

This becomes relevant when discussing how to promote successful family models.  Traditionally, this was done by forcing couples together into families at the earliest opportunity.  Whether or not they would be a good match for each other, let alone up to the task of raising children, was not the primary concern.  Where this was not done through forced marriage, social norms such as abstinence before marriage and that pregnant women should marry their child’s father served to direct young people towards the institution.  Within it, prohibitions on practices such as sodomy, contraception, and abortion meant that pregnancies occurred frequently and unexpectedly.  When such norms are adhered to, family planning is not possible, meaning most children will be accidents.

This social system is designed to prioritize the quantity of children over the quality of their rearing.  If your stated goal is to be fruitful and multiply in the name of some religion or ideology, then adhering to it makes sense.  Such reasoning is not meant for the benefit of the children or even the parents.  It exists to use the resulting children to spread whichever meme motivates the behavior.  The logic is internally consistent, but by its design, is not in the best interest of the children being produced.  If this reasoning is acceptable to its supporters, then dissuading them is outside the scope of this essay.  However, it cannot be argued that creating children for a larger purpose they cannot freely choose promotes any enlightened form of family values.

 The biggest flaw of the system, however, is that it seeks to create stability without allowing potential parents the autonomy that allows them to build trust.  Any marriage based on lust rather than logic can be expected to fail.

This problem was done away with the creation of teenager as a separate stage of development.  By allowing partial autonomy in certain matters, teens can work through their worst impulses before they would have serious effects on their futures.  By allowing them to make and learn from mistakes, their future decisions become more informed.  When your peers have all gone through this process, your entire society becomes more trustworthy.  These high-trust conditions are what make the nuclear family possible and desirable, all without the need of rigid social norms.  In the short time this has been accepted, it has proven a better guide to the young than conservative moralizing ever had.

Family Planning

The new trust afforded towards the young has translated into more trust for adults.  This has developed into the idea that what goes on in the bedroom of consenting adults should not be interfered with.  Because this has become a cliché, it is worth noting that this state of affairs is historically unprecedented for those outside the upper class.  As such, it has not had the time to be intellectually explored to the same degree as the old system.

One example of this is how sexual freedom and the freedom to plan a family are conflated.  This is a result of relying on traditional modes of thought.  Before the advent of contraception, this conflation made sense.  However, modern advances have separated sex from reproduction.  Our philosophy should adapt to this development.

Abortion and the Family

Abortion is both always present and a lingering taboo.  Most people will acknowledge its availability as good or at least necessary.  However, when a woman considers whether to terminate her own unwanted pregnancy, it is treated as a matter of grave importance.

This duality is embodied by the position of someone who is pro-choice but would never terminate an unwanted pregnancy of their own.  The reasons for this are hardly discussed before a pregnancy.  However, mothers-to-be often develop a gut feeling that they have a moral duty to the fetus, even if they had never wanted a child.  This should stand out as odd coming from someone who is pro-choice.  The idea that parents have an unconditional obligation to their unborn children is the cornerstone of the pro-life argument against abortion.  If these women feel their moral duty to their fetuses is logically founded, then any defense of abortion is a failure to protect children.  The fact that every year, hundreds of thousands of women in America come to the same logically inconsistent conclusion shows that the new morality has yet to be fully accepted.

While the desire to protect one’s fetus may be an innate part of pregnancy, it is not always moral.  This desire is an evolutionary holdover from before we could plan our families.  It reflects a time when any given child had a slim chance of reaching adulthood and propagating the species.  Under those circumstances, having as many kids as you could was not a matter of morality, but one of social security.  Humans, having the longest childhoods of any animal species, have the most to lose when their children die.  Therefore, accepting any pregnancy that came a woman’s way was a necessity.

Accidents Happen (But They Shouldn’t)

Spelling out the psychology behind these decisions makes them all the more jarring in the modern world.  The march of medical technology has made infant mortality a negligible concern for the first time in history.  We now have the stability to prepare our lives for any children we raise.  I find it troubling that this fact has not been fully accepted.

If this were fully internalized, Americans would not live in a society where half their peers exist on accident.  Each of these people has an early childhood that their parents (or parent, in some instances) had to cobble together in a few months.  Considering the importance of the first four years to childhood development, this instability cannot be understated.   How much stress does this cause the parents?  More importantly, how much do those stressed out parents adversely affect the newborn child?

These questions all assume that the parent(s) are putting their best effort into childrearing.  That is not always the case, especially with fathers.  While it takes two to tango, potential fathers do not have the same biological urge to protect the fetus they helped to make as mothers.  If a man creates an unwanted pregnancy, and he is pro-choice (or is anti-abortion and a hypocrite), it follows that he would want the woman to have an abortion.  If this conflicts with the mother’s desire to birth the fetus and raise the child, the man has no recourse to take.  If he abandons the mother and child, he will forever be considered a deadbeat father.  In addition, he can and most likely will be forced to pay child support for the next 18 years, a practice which can financially cripple the man while failing to provide the child with the support of a second parent.  Rather than ruin their reputations and finances, most men choose to stay together despite the disagreement.  While this provides the child with a second parent, it does not eliminate the difference in values which created the dilemma.  The father will still feel that he is dedicating his time to a child he did not want to create.  This will reflect poorly to the mother, who will feel that he is not pulling his weight in the family.  As the child ages, they will begin to pick up on this simmering resentment, which they will probably blame on their own existence, creating psychological wounds which may never heal.

These situations and the lost potential they cause are each a preventable tragedy.  As such, they should be presented and discussed through this lens.  I find it distasteful to romanticize those who govern their lives around the fact that someone once failed to pull out.  Just as bad are those who insist they or others marry their partner in pregnancy for the sole benefit of giving the child two parents.  These beliefs are products of an antiquated age which the modern world forgot.

What is Life?

The sense of duty that mothers feel towards their fetuses cannot be erased, but if needed, it can be combatted by appealing to the best interest of all relevant parties.

The first step towards this is to determine who the relevant parties are.  It goes without saying that a mother is a relevant party to her own pregnancy.  In cases where the father is socially or financially responsible for the raising of the potential child, he should be considered a party to this matter.

The point that is the hardest to pin down is whether the fetus itself is a relevant party in the situation (and if so, at what point).  To answer this, many fields of thought have proposed starting points for when life begins.  If it can be proven that the organism/fetus/baby is human, it follows that it should be protected as other humans are.  By establishing when this happens, it would follow that it is when the organism/fetus/baby crosses the Rubicon into our moral community.

In the Overton Window of American society, these answers range from life beginning at conception to life beginning at birth.  Most people believe that life begins at some point during pregnancy.  I find most of these positions to be lacking in substance.

To explain why consensus is so hard to find on this issue, we should step back from ideology and look at the question of when life begins through the lens of biology.  From this approach, the only starting point for life is the abiogenesis some 3.5 billion years ago.  All of the world’s life exists from an unbroken chain of that first source.  Nowhere in the timeline between abiogenesis and any human currently alive is there a point where their ancestors weren’t living organisms.  Using this as our criteria, every living thing that holds human DNA is itself human.  Not only does this cover all fetuses, it also extends to the sperm and eggs that combine to create them.  Such a broad definition of life may be scientifically correct, but it is unfit for purpose in the present question on morality.  If this were taken seriously, every time a man masturbates would be an act of genocide wiping out millions of lives.  Similarly, every time a woman menstruates, she would be inflicting climate change on the ovulating eggs, since her uterus is the only natural environment they can survive in.   No reasonable moral Rubicon should accuse everyone of reproductive age of homicide.

Since it is now shown that the question of when life begins is a proxy for the question of when someone joins our moral community, I will be focusing on the question of the moral Rubicon.

The belief that life begins at conception takes the idea that anything containing human DNA is human but narrows the definition to the products of two people procreating.  Since this only happens during conception, this becomes their starting point for human life.  It is worth noting that the definition above does not originate with the argument itself, but was introduced later as DNA became widely understood.  Its origins are with the Catholic Church, who believed that all their congregants must follow the commandment to “be fruitful and multiply”.  Since conception creates a potential Christian, any attempt to terminate the pregnancy sets back what they consider to be their holy mission.  While this reasoning is no longer explicit, it has been widely adopted by the Abrahamic Religions as a way of protecting future children (and therefore expanding their potential congregations).  This belief is an extension of the traditionalist view of marriage and family.   As such, it gives little regard for the individuals who are affected by its notion of the greater good.  The system’s proponents have tried to reconcile this contradiction by personifying the unborn.  This has led to mixed results.  This standard is based on and requires an outside force to root out the individual’s reproductive control, with no concern for either parent or the child.  As such, it cannot coexist with any society based on individual rights and freedoms.

The most common standard of when someone joins our moral community is that it occurs at some point during the pregnancy.  In America, the standard for when this happens is at the end of the second trimester.  Other nations use a variety of cut-off dates.  The reason for the various dates is that zygote/fetal development is a largely amorphous process.  While there are many descriptions of developments on a weekly basis, none on these change the fact that a fetus functions as an organ within the woman’s body, rather than an independent lifeform.  Attempts to categorize stages of pregnancy such as the trimester system exist purely for the health of the mother.  For this reason, using it as the standard of American legal precedent, as in Roe v. Wade[2], is entirely arbitrary.  Such a standard exists to be easily understood, not to be logically defended.  I recognize the role of this ruling and others like it in providing access to safe abortions.  However, this moral Rubicon does not hold up to philosophical or biological scrutiny.  For this reason, it is the least defensible of these categories.

The last standard is that the fetus does not join our moral community until it is born.  While this seems outlandish to many Americans, it is already the standard used in various countries, including our northern neighbor.  The reasoning behind this standard is largely the same as for allowing abortion at all; A pregnancy is a personal matter which outside forces have no right to control.  Even if one believes that the unborn have some moral weight, this is outweighed by the mother’s right to bodily autonomy.  Therefore, this position states that abortion should be available at all times with the same readiness that current law provides to early pregnancies.

My Moral Rubicon

Given the way these standards are laid out, you might expect me to say which of these Moral Rubicons are correct.  Given my earlier criticism of Conservative moralizing on the family, you might expect me to say that fetuses have no moral worth until their birth.  While I support the idea that abortion should be available at all times during a pregnancy, I do not believe that a zygote/fetus only has moral worth after birth.

My standard for when a zygote/fetus enters our moral community is whether the mother intends to raise it as a member of our moral community (i.e. give birth).

If the mother chose to become pregnant and wishes to raise the child, then she and those around her will consider the future child to be part of their moral community as soon as they are aware of it.  In this case, the Moral Rubicon happens at the earliest point where its existence can be known, which is conception.  This is why pregnant and expectant mothers are given a long list of prohibitions for the protection of their unborn.  When one accepts guardianship over the baby on board, they willingly change their behavior for their child’s sake.

Contrast this with an unexpected and/or unwanted pregnancy.  If the mother has no desire to bring the pregnancy to term, her autonomy over her body means she should not be forced to do so.  If a child is not and will never come to term, it is not part of our moral community.

These two standards exist because of how differently people react to pregnancies depending on circumstance.  The idea of a mother overjoyed to raise her child in a loving family is a far cry from discovering she was impregnated by her rapist.  Acting as if the moral relationship between the mother and child is the same in both scenarios is an absurd oversimplification.

These absurdities are avoided by basing the Moral Rubicon on the intentions of the mother.  The fetus is one of us the first time their mother falls in love with them (or when they are born, whichever is sooner).  A love-based standard of moral worth would protect bodily autonomy while recognizing the value of future persons.[3]

As for policy, I advocate for the removal of all restrictions on abortion.  When accepting bodily autonomy as a goal, you cannot create a cutoff point at which one’s body exists to serve a life outside their moral community.  When a person requests an abortion, this would be their justification.

The Consensual Family

A moral family exists for the benefit of its members.  The details of this change depending on the morality of those running it.  As discussed earlier, in most places at most times in history, the father was the ruler of the family.  His centralized power meant that the effectiveness of the family was measured by his success.  This was created by the belief (and fact) that order and obedience were the surest traits for success in premodern societies.

As the trait which brings the most success moves from obedience to openness to change, families have adapted by giving their members more autonomy.  The effectiveness of the family is now measured in its benefit to its individual members.  If those members don’t have their interests served, they have the means of leaving it.  If a spouse feels their partner has not pulled their weight, they may divorce them.  When children outgrow the benefits of living with their parents, they are free to make their own way.  They have no obligation to serve their parents, despite the immense costs their parents put into raising them.  In the case of minors, the state will take over their guardianship if the family is abusing or neglecting them.  The goal of such systems is that family is a consensual arrangement.

This goal of informed consent should be expanded to the creation of children.  Just as the mother should have final word on controlling her body, the father must have a say in his relationship to the products of his body.  At present, the time when the mother can sever legal ties to her potential offspring extends from copulation to when her society deems the fetus to be part of their moral community.  The window for men starts and ends with ejaculation.  The only foolproof way for them to avoid the responsibility of raising an accidental child is to not have sex in a vagina.  This works about as well as promoting abstinence always does(n’t).  Such a standard makes no sense in an age where sex and reproduction have been decoupled.  In practical terms, the father must be made aware of the birth of his child well in advance.  If he did not intend to reproduce, he must have legal recourse to sever his responsibility to the child before it is born.  Without such protections, men are as liable for unwanted pregnancies as women in societies which believe that life begins at conception.

Making informed consent a cornerstone of the family has benefits beyond control of parental duties.  The informed consent of parents serves the best interests of their children.  Even though minors are not capable of providing it themselves, being raised in such an environment means their familial relations exist from a point of trust rather than one of obedience.  Just as bans on arranged marriage and access to divorce increase trust between spouses, a policy of deliberate reproduction, as well as child protection laws strengthen trust between parent and child.  When equipping a child for life in a high-trust society, the ability to trust in others is one of the most important skills they can have.  Therefore, creating the environment for this behavior should be a top priority.[4]

The existence of informed consent between spouses does not guarantee trust between them and their children.  Such conditions require that the creation of the child be as intentional as the creation of marriage.  If mutual trust is a cornerstone of our society and being born on accident irrevocably damages their ability to trust others, then bringing a person into the world on accident is inherently immoral.  If the parents had the means of preventing this but didn’t, it is a selfish act as well.  Any deviation is a failure of parenting.

Afterword

This idea begs the question of where the Accidents among us fit into this moral framework.  My fear is that this will be compared to the Conservative moralizing I denounced.  While I too seek stable families for children’s growth, my reasoning is adapted to the reality of ever-present contraception.  It is based on the benefit of individuals rather than the collective or a higher power.  These individuals are judged on their character and actions, not how they fit into a greater framework.

This blank slate of moral standing applies to accidents as to anyone else.  They come into the world untainted by their parent’s mistakes.  As such, the child shares neither their shame nor esteem.  This is true even if the mistake in question led to their existence.  Passing the guilt of parents onto their children is not only meanspirited, it undermines the Liberal framework my thesis is based on.  As such, I oppose any moral distinction between accidents and others.

Another accusation I expect to hear is that I believe that it would be better that a currently living accident were never born.  This argument is moot.  As discussed above, I believe that children unwanted by their mothers do not enter our moral community until they are born.  If they are aborted, they have no rights or interests to protect.  Conflating the moral worth of those outside the moral community with those who have entered it is to misunderstand the concept.  Those outside the community have no human rights, and we act in their interest at our leisure.  When one enters the community, they gain those human rights, as befits any human.  However, that does not mean that their human rights retroactively apply before that point.

To illustrate the point, I propose a scenario.  Hypothetically, if a person had a dog which they treated like any dog, and then it was magically turned into a human with human intelligence, would the owner be at fault for treating a human like an animal?  If the new human remembered being treated like a dog, would it be logical for them to be bitter about their previous treatment?  In both cases, the answer is no.  Humans and animals are treated by different moral standards because humans are sentient, and animals are not.  If an animal somehow entered the moral community of humans, they would be entitled to the human rights of anyone else.[5]  At the same time, people who interacted with the dog before the transformation cannot be at fault for putting it in the logical moral category.  Provided the former dog is treated as an equal of other humans, no wrong has been committed.

Dogs, like the fetus discussed above, are not part of our moral community.  Their interests, if considered at all, are subservient to those of humans.  These facts are irrelevant to what they might become later on.

Anyone who crosses the moral Rubicon holds the same inalienable moral worth as any human.  What they were or how they were treated before doesn’t matter.  My belief that the fetus in question should have been aborted has no bearing on whether or not the person it grows up to be would be better off unborn.  I would never hold that as a default position, even if I somehow knew a person was an accident before meeting them.

Footnotes

[1] The families that develop in any given environment are those whose children are best able to perpetuate its values.  The process by which society settles on a system has just as much to do with natural selection as it does with deliberate moralizing.

[2] Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).

[3] This should not be conflated with the legal status of unborn children.

[4] One obvious scenario where parents cannot provide informed consent to childrearing is if one or both parents are too young to give informed consent.  In such cases, childrearing cannot be in the benefit of the child involved.  Therefore, minors should not be entrusted with the raising of children.  This is the same logic used to bar them from voting.  If you are not mentally equipped to be one decision-maker among millions in your nation, how can you be entrusted to be one decision-maker among two (at best) controlling the life of a fellow minor?  Such arrangements only exist because puberty does not correlate with the age of consent.  No one seriously believes that minors are capable of childrearing, only that they are stuck in their situation.  If it is recognized to be detrimental for all parties, it should not be created in the first place.

[5] It is worth noting the reverse situation is not true.  In stories where people are turned into animals, they are typically marked as separate from other animals and treated as a human wherever possible.  Despite the absurdity of the scenario, various traditions come to the same idea.  This shows the permanence of the moral Rubicon.  Once a person enters it, they are part of the moral community no matter what.

[tender-history]

On Research: Worldbuilding and Culture

Hullo, in this post I’m going to talk about how I research and do world-building for my stories!

I’m doing this through the following ways:

1) using chapter 1 of my historical Taegi fic  to illustrate what I did to research the era and the culture for that period,

2) providing the templates and tools I used in the hopes that it can help some of you all writers if you ever want to write your own research-intensive stories or original fiction that requires world-building!

While I’m using my BTS Taegi fic as a means to explain my process, this post is for any sort of writing project - original or fanfiction. If you follow me for fic, though, there will be chapter 1 spoilers for it. So if you haven’t read that yet, be-warned that there be spoilers below!

> How I do my research/world-building:

 If your idea for the actual story is agnostic of time-period or setting, identifying that is possibly the first step. My initial idea for this story was to have it take place during a war (the Imjin War between Japan and in 1590s was the first choice) but finding the spooky landscape to set it against while also maintaining the drama and tension of a battlefield was going to dilute the characters and their inner conflicts.

So I went back to reading about Korean history in broad terms (Google Books is your friend) , trying to locate a time-period to set my story in. I finally chose this time-period because it was very interesting to me in multiple ways.

- it’s still a way away from the big social reforms in Korea in the 1800s that would push it into the Modern Period of history

- it was a time period when common people and peasants began to lose trust in the king and the upper-class bureaucracy, leading to peasant rebellions and some villages stockpiling their own grains

- it is a time when global influences were beginning to creep into Korean society, including Christianity. In fact, just a few years from this, a major wave of persecution would be unleashed against Catholics in Korea.

- I chose this time-period also because I wanted the level of organization of society that’s in this fic. It’s been established already, which means the characters are at a point of history where things are more or less stable in terms of what is expected of them as a member of this society. I needed that stability to create a quieter sort of period mystery.

 To research for this story (or any other), once I pick the time period, I start looking for answers to my biggest questions: 

1) how did they live: this includes food, travel, interests, societal hierarchy and organization, family structure, music, religions, and mythology. Basically, anything that they shared as a cultural group. In doing this, I had to separate royalty from common folk, because so much history is written about the royals and there’s so less about the folk. I looked up everything from the food that the common people ate to the issues they faced (winter and the gap between rice and barley cultivation was a huge aspect; so huge, in fact, that the popularity of kimchi can be attributed to needing a protein source in the winter that wouldn’t go bad). I looked up clothes and fabrics and the layout of villages. I looked for traditional crafts. And when I did, I found myself going down rabbit holes about caste professions (the shaman, for example, is of low caste in Joseon society, which was surprising to me considering so many period fics I’ve read has depicted them in a different fashion.)

I know that this feels very disorganized and random, but that’s because I have been doing world-building—both fantasy and historical—for a long time, and my process is built basis what I’ve historically realized works for me. But to make this post more useful, I’ve figured out a template that helps to look into culture. I used to use this to build original fantasy worlds, and I think it is useful.

And here is a graphic where someone has analyzed Japanese culture through this lens:

Most cultures share elements of commonality. You can use this graphic above to figure out how to research. For example, the culture of Joseon Korea as I have tried to research for this fic comprises of:

1) Language (written and spoken - so Korean; Hangul, + Chinese characters);

2) Religion (shamanism + neo-confucianism)

3) Government (caste system + agrarian bureaucracy + royalty) etc.

You can fill in the blanks this way for any time period and thus get a better understanding of the culture you’re writing about.

 Additionally, I’ve spoken about the cultural iceberg on twitter before, but I find it very useful when I’m researching to pick up on each element in it and look up information pertaining to them.

This is how I use the iceberg:

> the top portion is usually the things that we’ve picked up on, through Run episodes or general Bangtan stuff. Like, we know hanbok is Korean traditional dress. We know the kind of food they eat. We know the music scene in SK, and that the major festivals are seollal and choseok.

> the bottom portion is where you gain deeper intercultural understanding. Notions of modesty, for example. We know that gender roles in Korea are more entrenched than they are in the west. In this fic, men are the ones mostly occupying spheres of influence, but women have their own spheres—we’ll get to that in a while. If you see, there’s an aspect called ‘nature of friendship’. This is where the concept of hyung-line/maknae-line/same-age friends all fit into this culture. It’s less visible than the top half, but you can still gain knowledge of it. Similarly, ‘attitude towards elders’ or ‘concepts of beauty’ are both aspects of culture. These are keywords you can use to learn more about culture. Again, you can also use this in original writing projects to build your fantasy world. I know I do :)

 Now that I know how my characters live, I come to the second stage of planning/world-building:

2) where in society are my characters: since I’m writing a mystery, I need someone who wants to solve it. I need detectives. I read up on everything I could about the Joseon lawmaking process, going through scholars and bureaucrats and ministers before I found a smaller, quieter force: the podocheong. I also need medics, people in charge of administration, senior officials, and so forth. For each of this, I tried to look into how my character could have entered that role, what that role comprises of, and where it puts them in that society. Seokjin, because he is a senior official, would require to have taken a test to enter into that force. His family would have to be of a particular class status to even enable him to take it. Knowing this, I looked up everything I could about the gwageo because I found it so fascinating! There were whole coaching centers dedicated to just teaching children of upper-class bureaucrats so they could pass the gwageo! If you belonged to an upper-class yangban family, and you didn’t pass the gwageo for four generations, your titles could be stripped from you. This is another nugget of information that I thought would be an interesting premise for a character being a in a particular conundrum—you’ll see that later in the story.

For Taehyung, being an artist in that age would have come with interesting baggage. Calligraphers and painters were usually higher-class folk. Peasants simply did not have the time or the materials to pursue art. But there are outliers—inkstick craftsmen, for example, are among what was considered the ‘vulgar common caste’ but they were the ones who made ink and color pigments.

 This just helps me create a richer world than I would have without putting in this research. It also makes your world seem more cohesive, lived-in, and deep.

So now that I know how they live and who they are, we come to:

 3) what are my external/internal conflicts: my characters behave the way they do because of the culture and the customs of the time period. My external conflict—the murders—have to be set against a background of this, and informed by this. So I chose to make Yoongi a sort of disgraced scholar because it allows him to operate outside of his station: he needs to talk to Taehyung, or villagers for example who are all beneath his station, and he wouldn’t be able to do that to the same effect if he is a regular scholar like Jin is. The culture simply won’t allow him to. That also leads to friction between yoonjin, and secrets once they start appearing. His current station helps him integrate better into Tae’s world, while removing him from the world he’s working for. It also serves for his internal conflict, fears and grief.

 Now if I were to extend this example to a more contemporary story: say your characters are in modern Seoul. Your external/internal conflicts can still be tied into the culture. Expectation on children to look after their aging parents OR the character’s family values vs. individual outlook OR Korea’s culture of students studying late into the night vs. the slowing job industry etc.  For a Jinkook fake-dating AU, say, consider what are the troubles that Jin and Jungkook, who have 5 years between them, individually face. 27 year old Jin’s place in society, social spheres and worries will be very different from just-out-of-college Jungkook’s.

 Why does any of this matter? 

I just think putting in some effort to understand culture makes for richer characters, a richer world, and better writing. Not to mention it lets you learn about a new culture, which I think is fascinating, especially if you spend so much of your time thinking/talking about 7 Korean boys.

 So to summarize— I guess this is how I research/worldbuild:

 1) Find out when and where

2) Find out who, and how that character is affected by the customs/culture of that era/setting

3) tie my external/internal conflicts back to the era/setting so that the world feels truly lived in and alive.

For truly good world-building, make sure that your conflicts are caused by limitations imposed on a character due to their cultural setting, or because whatever is happening is outside of their comfort zone. Human beings don’t live in a vacuum. The society and the values that we grow up in affects everything we do, every decision we make. Even rebelling against that culture is an aspect influenced by that culture. Your world (fantasy or otherwise) will feel way less flat if it follows the rules of actual cultures world over. 

*mic-drop*

If you found this post useful as a resource for writing/world-building, please consider a small ko-fi donation!

 [PS: Clarifying that I will not be taking ko-fi for the fic itself - only for the original content that I provide here, on this blog, which can be used for fanfiction or original world-building.]

[beinglibertarian]

Shortcuts & Delusions Special Edition: The Absurdity of Gary Johnson

“The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutly free that your very existance is an act of rebellion.” – Albert Camus

Obituary:

Libertarian satirist and vengeful deity Dillon Eliassen (spelled with an E for comedic purposes), whose work I sincerely admire, has died. Spiritually. Only spiritually. He is to be succeeded in spiritual death by a micronation of homeless people, his fellow members of the Fictitious Cement Workers’ Union, and Being Libertarian’s very own Editor-in-Chief Martin van Staden.

Dillon “The Jesuit” Eliassen (née Ottovordemgentschenfelde) was probably born on Christmas morning 1949, somewhere in Canada. Known for his youthful shenanigans, Dillon brought a smile to the faces of all who encountered him at San Quentin. While fighting for our freedom on the blood-soaked soil of Vietnam, Dillon gave birth to a mostly healthy yet premature appendix, and he named it me.

Let us begin.

Introduction:

Dillon left off with an in-depth analysis of ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome,’ a very real ‘condition’ that ‘I’ have personally heard firsthand accounts of on multiple occasions. This was a fitting place to conclude. The torch was not passed to me, but I am hereby picking it up off the ground, wiping the dirt and canine feces from its gleaming bronze exterior, and running with it in the exact opposite direction of any achievable goal.

I am Nathaniel Owen. If you don’t recognize my name, it’s because I am legitimately the least important person you’ve never heard of. I’m unknown for my efforts to bear the heaviness of the Imperial Antarctic Crown, and my occasional bouts of productive cyber-vigilantism. In 2014 I made a mistake, and today that mistake is Being Libertarian. They locked me in the CEO’s office until I pay for this crime.

Like my obvious relatives, Nathaniel Bacon, Nathaniel Branden, and Nathaniel Hawthorne, I am a revolutionary. I haven’t got a Che t-shirt, and I never attend the meetings. But like many communist tovarisch, I do have an iPhone. In the postmodern age, that’s a clever weapon to have! Climate scientists, for instance, have indicated that it’s really all the humble revolutionary needs these days. I am constantly confused as to the value of my executive role at Being Libertarian but remain the least confused as to why I maintain this position.

Today is my favorite day of the year, second only to New Year’s Eve. For me, today acts as a reminder of the closest thing I have ever encountered to universal truth; a realization that haunts, comforts, astounds and enchants me. Yesterday, we were but individuals rolling boulders up a hill. Today, we will try again to roll the boulders up that hill. Tomorrow, yet again, we will return to this habit. You have been doing this with me since the day you were born.

I like to count the number of seconds it takes the boulder to reach the bottom of the hill each sunset. In the morning, we will start over.

We Are All Sisyphus:

It’s quite pointless, analytically speaking. You probably don’t remember being born, nor were you an integral part in making that happen to you. No number of artifacts can preserve the complexity of an individual human being, and even if one could live immortally in the memory of others, time turns existential into the mythological.

The universe is dying. It will live scarcely longer than we will. You appear to have come into existence at random, in a time and place inherently foreign. As a child, you wander into a adulthood without happening on the answer key to any questions relating to how or why you exist in the first place. Much less, how or why the universe itself exists. A consequence of this is that We, The People tend to convince ourselves conveniently that the answers to such questions not only exist, but can be found in such subtle hiding places as your local political party, whatever holy book you were raised to read, your arbitrary interpretations of the signs and seasons presented to us by the light of the cosmos, or even in our own imaginations.

And we know because we can’t avoid knowing, that whatever facade we’ve sold ourselves is, in fact, still a facade even if we fall for it.

Every day spent living is a performative affirmation that something about you, even if you can’t figure out exactly what it is, still wants to find those answers. If this weren’t the case, the players of this game would be dropping like flies when they discover that there is no point in playing and no conceivable way to win and that eventually there will be no evidence that you ever played at all. In short, that life itself is highly unlikely to be worth the trouble.

Albert Camus, French philosopher, and journalist, was plagued with thoughts like those stated above. Camus became a constitutive inspiration of the Existentialist Movement (a tradition of philosophy asserting the importance of human experience in the appraisal and interpretation of ideas), partially during the Second World War, while serving in fierce defiance as the Editor-in-Chief of the French Resistance newspaper ‘Combat’ amidst the Nazi occupation of his homeland, and continuing this roll into the post-war world.

Though such matters in the realm of fundamentals and absolutes can be difficult to define, you may have wondered similar things about yourself, and perhaps continue to. Camus was particularly perturbed by the sheer fact that the universe itself and all that exists within it have no objective meaning or purpose. The rational insights we are both blessed and cursed with poke holes in all our mortally limited attempts to invent meaning of our own, and in the Modern Age, the old ideas of Abrahamic deities, universal truth, and inherent ethical rules, each of which having been rudimentary to the shaping and formation of modern society in some way, have been penetrated into philosophical Swiss cheese.

The Non-Aggression Principle is a rather useful little limerick when one doesn’t overthink it. But like all things implying morality, thinking it all the way through will lead you to fundamentals that cannot possibly be confirmed or denied. What, exactly, makes murder wrong? What about robbery? Or socialism? Or the unfairness of free markets? When all is said and done, is it really going to matter whether every little thing we chose to do was right, or wrong, or equitable, or unfair? At the top level, with capital crimes especially, it is not hard to find that the supermajority of humanity agrees on some basic ethical positions. But when applying these basics, they become more complicated. By the point that we are discussing the specific rights and wrongs of typical human behavior, no two people will find themselves in agreement on the application of what they may believe are universal, self-evident principles.

Camus asserted, rather poignantly, that suicide has always been an option. And the scariness, confusion, and uncertainty of existing in such an uncertain world have apparently not driven you to it. And why shouldn’t we die now? It all adds up to the same summary. Nothing is permanent. It’s very possible that nothing matters. Yet we, practically all of us, seem to be making the conscious choice each day to live on. It’s as though if we pull away some of that upstanding rationalism gifted to us during The Enlightenment, there is some other part of us playing such an integral role in our existence that it stabilizes and confirms our will to exist at all.

Camus was a hero in several ways, and today is his day. There are very few people who want to legalize murder, yet droves of people who wish to legalize marijuana, and to many hearty fundamentalists, these may be comparable issues. Sin is sin, oppression is oppression, and aggression is aggression. To many libertarians, and to what should be our collective shame, such things as unionizing the local labor force, stealing a sandwich from a street vendor, violently raping a helpless victim, and aborting the fetus conceived in such tragic circumstances are all comparably “aggressive,” and may not even be considered in terms outside of “aggression” regardless of how useful a new approach or perspective may be when considering such cases.

At the risk of losing all of my libertarian acquaintances, I will admit that once upon a time, I charged my iPhone (yes, my revolutionary weapon of choice) using a stranger’s charging cable without asking when he wasn’t around. I aggressed. I haven’t repented and I’m not sure my soul will be where yours will be on judgment day.

The point is, it makes so little difference whether we are right or wrong about what is “aggression” and what is not “aggression,” that it’s a wonder anybody even cares to discuss it for more than a few than a few minutes.

I do not care who builds the roads, or who decides what color to paint the bathrooms at Beacon Hill, or which Union and/or Confederate heroes/villains are memorialized in stone. I do not care to pay taxes of a meager nature. Of course, I will consistently support lower taxes; it’s my own self-interest at stake. I will not, however, declare that anyone who doesn’t concern themselves with it as deeply as myself to be a “sheep.” Sheep are blind followers. To the best of my knowledge, I have never met anyone who doesn’t fit that description, and yes, this includes myself. I’m no determinist, but I know that I know essentially nothing about the mechanics of what REALLY makes something moral or immoral. I also know that you don’t know either.

The universe you live in doesn’t care what you think. It doesn’t “care” in any way about anything, as far as we can tell. Clinging so staunchly to principles may as well be escapism from the dread and uncertainty of having existed in the first place. Cults operate by exploiting this inherent dread, and unlike the average man on the street who will immediately deny any experiences of being uncertain about his own existence, cults can see through this bullshit. The Liberty Movement should be no cult.

“The Absurd” is a boulder. Every second you live is an exercise in pointlessness. Searching for meaning, embracing the experience of uncertainty, and cracking a smile as your shoulders yet again shove that boulder up the hill… these are exercises in defiance. It is no coincidence that Albert Camus, espousing the conviction (or lack thereof) that no objective truth or purpose may ever be identified, was willing to put his life on the line to dignify and endorse the French Resistance Movement, and despite his eventual death in a car crash, his words live on.

We libertarians are the quintessentially anti-establishment political identity. When our fists are clenched around the chains of dogma and theoretical universal principles we may as well be chained to the same despotic foundation we’re trying to help others liberate themselves from. To think for one’s self, one must realize the degree to which the nuances and practicalities of the world we live in influence us. Peddling promises of applying some universal ethic that we, as representatives of the Liberty Movement, can’t even agree on the parameters of is no different than selling a religious experience; a method by which to keep the conscience clean, and supply some convenient, flimsy certainty that will never stand up to the scrutiny of the skeptical. If our universal truths were as permanent as they are constructed to be, we would never change our minds or opinions.

This rant will resume in 365.25 days when National Absurdity Day returns in all its glory, memento mori, and calendarial obscurity.

And speaking of scrutiny, I’m going to have to toss in a trigger warning. This isn’t even my first trigger warning. I’m a professional.

**TRIGGER WARNING** What you are about to read may cause severe bouts of Trump Derangement Syndrome. If you are a leftist, please do not read the following paragraphs while in close proximity to sharp objects. Symptoms may include blood shooting from the eyes, indecipherable screaming, close encounters of the fourth kind, and varying degrees of irritable face syndrome. Please notify a physician if you encounter itchiness of the spleen, cirrhosis of the autobiographical memory, or diarrhea of the oral cavity.

Why We MUST Defeat Gary Johnson You’re probably wondering about the guy in the title of this article who, thus far, has been absent from said article. In fact, he’s absent from things quite often, I’m told.

Gary Johnson is not a real libertarian. Why libertarians get starry-eyed in his presence is beyond me, with his espousal of blatant communism and acceptance of homonormative deconstructionist Islamomarxism. Johnson as a representative of libertarianism is a clear sign that the left is invading the liberty movement, further eroding private property norms and propping up support for the deep state agenda of the globalists.

Johnson has pretended to support unfettered free market capitalism, and even went as far as to insist that tearing down barriers of entry could give the average person better, fairer access to goods and services. “The model of the future is the sharing economy. It’s Uber. It’s Airbnb. I think it’s gonna be Uber everything.”

“Uber everything” sounds like a great idea until you take your morning Red Pill and see that this is just code for white genocide. Without a heterogenous government of the people, who will stop immigrants from driving Uber taco trucks and parking them on every street corner, forestalling traditional values and private property norms. Americans would lose their jobs, possibly to immigrants. Even libertarian heroine Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sees through Gary Johnson’s thin veneer of egalitarian lies!

He ran for president. Twice. On the second try, he broke every Libertarian Party presidential vote count record in the party’s history, surpassing even the likes of Our Lord and Savior Dr. Ron Earnet Paul. Mark my words, we will never forgive Gary Johnson for not being Ron Paul. His tax cuts were clearly a Democrat ruse to give spending power to the politically correct internationalist cabal of globalist elites like George Soros, Walt Disney, and Oliver Cromwell.

After making the Libertarian Party lose twice, Gary Johnson snuck in one more attack on libertarian legitimacy by losing in New Mexico in a Senate race where he only claimed 15.4% of the vote, singlehandedly handing victory over to communist Democrat Vladimir Len- I mean… Martin Heinrich (if that’s his real name).

Gary Johnson must be stopped. He cannot be allowed to run for office again, regardless of what degenerate socialist feminazis say about “free speech” and “democracy.” Democracy is a secret codeword known to the Fourth International for white genocide and subversion of private property norms. To Make America Great Again

, we must Physically Remove

this man that even the Democrats recognize as a tyrant. Socialists say that Gary Johnson is no threat to the system. This means Gary Johnson is probably a socialist (and a threat to the system the Founding Fathers put in place to protect our freedoms) because everything socialists say are lies.

What further evidence do you need? So far, I have used some of the most Red Pill buzzwords on the market, and even considered using “optics,” “LOLbertarian,” “SJW,” “libertine,” “postmodernism” and “open borders.” Libertarianism is an obvious right-wing ideology. We have standards, you know.

I won’t keep you here. Now that I’ve owned you with facts and logic, you are free to go.

Outro: Left intentionally long and with minimal editing, everything written above makes a single point that, in context, doesn’t mean anything. Most things, and probably all things, don’t mean anything. But that observation is no taskmaster; true freedom is the freedom to waste your time, and the time of others, in a way that is archetypically you. There are no strict parameters here. Drifting a little off the straight and narrow shouldn’t be cause for panic. If there was a takeaway in this article, I don’t know what it is. Perhaps there is a Gary Johnson in all of us, rolling a boulder up Mount Everest just to watch it roll back into the ravine, much like the Libertarian vote count will in 2020.

Do as thou wilt, and don’t overthink it.

Happy National Absurdity Day, comrades.

سُبْحَانَ اللہِ

The post Shortcuts & Delusions Special Edition: The Absurdity of Gary Johnson appeared first on Being Libertarian.

from WordPress https://ift.tt/2OVfN0m via IFTTT

[foreveralegend]

I put Leonard through a personality test and this is so important to who he is as a character, I’m posting not only the results but what they mean.

These are the results Leonard received from the 16Personalities Test, which can be found here and I encourage others who want further insight and/or a concise personality description to take this. It is very well done.

There is one correction that I have to make in Leonard’s case.

This test tends to view the personality from the ‘what can they contribute to society’ approach, which obviously doesn’t quite apply to Captain Cold. So, I’ll try to relate these answers to him with commentary in brackets and italics where necessary.

RESULTS

Read the rest of the information below the cut.

EXECUTIVE PERSONALITY (ESTJ, -A/-T)

Good order is the foundation of all things.

ESTJs are representatives of tradition and order [rather than chaos], utilizing their understanding of what is right, wrong and socially acceptable [in his code] to bring families and communities together [consider the fact that he basically consolidates the Meta community in Central City into the Rogues]. Embracing the values of honesty [bluntness, in his case], dedication and dignity, people with the ESTJ personality type are valued for their clear advice and guidance, and they happily lead the way on difficult paths. Taking pride in bringing people together, ESTJs often take on roles as community organizers, working hard to bring everyone together in celebration of cherished local events, or in defense of the traditional values that hold families and communities together [or in Snart’s case, in creating an organized crime ring that he is basically the boss of because Central is his city].

Anyone Worth Their Salt Sticks Up for What They Believe Is Right…

Demand for such leadership is high in democratic societies, and forming no less than 11% of the population, it’s no wonder that many of America’s presidents have been ESTJs. Strong believers in the rule of law [his code] and authority that must be earned, ESTJ personalities lead by example, demonstrating dedication and purposeful honesty [bluntness], and an utter rejection of laziness and cheating, especially in work. If anyone declares hard, manual work to be an excellent way to build character, it is ESTJs.

ESTJs are aware of their surroundings and live in a world of clear, verifiable facts – the surety of their knowledge means that even against heavy resistance, they stick to their principles and push an unclouded vision of what is and is not acceptable. Their opinions aren’t just empty talk either, as ESTJs are more than willing to dive into the most challenging projects, improving action plans and sorting details along the way, making even the most complicated tasks seem easy and approachable.

However, ESTJs don’t work alone, and they expect their reliability and work ethic to be reciprocated – people with this personality type meet their promises, and if partners or subordinates jeopardize them through incompetence or laziness, or worse still, dishonesty, they do not hesitate to show their wrath [perhaps by putting them on ice or slugging them in the face]. This can earn them a reputation for inflexibility, a trait shared by all Sentinels (SJ), but it’s not because ESTJs are arbitrarily stubborn, but because they truly believe that these values are what make society work.

…But Still Better Are Those Who Acknowledge When They Are in Error

ESTJs are classic images of the model citizen [ha ha ha]: they help their neighbors [fellow Rogues, even the Flash on occasion, if it benefits him], uphold the law [his own code/the Law of the Rogues], and try to make sure that everyone participates in the communities and organizations they hold so dear [again, the Rogues].

The main challenge for ESTJs is to recognize that not everyone follows the same path or contributes in the same way. A true leader recognizes the strength of the individual, as well as that of the group, and helps bring those individuals’ ideas to the table. That way, ESTJs really do have all the facts, and are able to lead the charge in directions that work for everyone.

STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

ESTJ Strengths

Dedicated – Seeing things to completion borders on an ethical obligation for ESTJs. Tasks aren’t simply abandoned because they’ve become difficult or boring – people with the ESTJ personality type take them up when they are the right thing to do [for him], and they will be finished so long as they remain the right thing to do [for him].

Strong-willed – A strong will makes this dedication possible, and ESTJs don’t give up their beliefs because of simple opposition. ESTJs defend their ideas and principles relentlessly, and must be proven clearly and conclusively wrong for their stance to budge.

Direct and Honest [blunt, honest in his ideas] – ESTJs trust facts far more than abstract ideas or opinions. Straightforward statements and information are king, and ESTJ personalities return the honesty [bluntness] (whether it’s wanted or not).

Loyal, Patient and Reliable – ESTJs work to exemplify truthfulness [his brand of it, at least] and reliability, considering stability and security very important. When ESTJs say they’ll do something, they keep their word, making them very responsible members of their families, companies and communities. [Like when he says he’ll help the Flash and keeps any of his people from being killed, even if he does turn it to his advantage and things don’t go quite as Team Flash wanted.]

Enjoy Creating Order – Chaos makes things unpredictable, and unpredictable things can’t be trusted when they are needed most – with this in mind, ESTJs strive to create order and security in their environments by establishing rules, structures and clear roles.

Excellent Organizers – This commitment to truth and clear standards makes ESTJs capable and confident leaders. People with this personality type have no problem distributing tasks and responsibilities to others fairly and objectively, making them excellent administrators.

ESTJ Weaknesses

Inflexible and Stubborn – The problem with being so fixated on what works is that ESTJs too often dismiss what might work better. Everything is opinion until proven, and ESTJ personalities are reluctant to trust an opinion long enough for it to have that chance. [He does not have this particular weakness.]

Uncomfortable with Unconventional Situations – ESTJs are strong adherents to tradition and when suddenly forced to try unvetted solutions, they become uncomfortable and stressed. New ideas suggest that their methods weren’t good enough, and abandoning what has always worked before in favor of something that may yet fail risks their image of reliability. [Or this one.]

Judgmental – ESTJs have strong convictions about what is right, wrong, and socially acceptable [in his society/group]. ESTJs’ compulsion to create order often extends to all things and everyone, ignoring the possibility that there are two right ways to get things done. ESTJs do not hesitate to let these “deviants” know what they think, considering it their duty to set things right.

Too Focused on Social Status – ESTJs take pride in the respect of their friends, colleagues and community and while difficult to admit, are very concerned with public opinion. ESTJs (especially Turbulent ones) can get so caught up in meeting others’ expectations that they fail to address their own needs. [This, I have to say, is partially right. Leonard Snart actually does care a lot about what others think, even if he won’t show/admit it, but he will never neglect his own needs for others, unless they really, really matter to him, such as Lisa, Mick, and Sara.]

Difficult to Relax – This need for respect fosters a need to maintain their dignity, which can make it difficult to cut loose and relax for risk of looking the fool, even in good fun. [Perhaps like not dancing with Sara?]

Difficulty Expressing Emotion – This is all evidence of ESTJs’ greatest weakness: expressing emotions and feeling empathy. People with the ESTJ personality type get so caught up in the facts and most effective methods that they forget to think of what makes others happy, or of their sensitivity. A detour can be breathtakingly beautiful, a joy for the family, but ESTJs may only see the consequence of arriving at their destination an hour late, hurting their loved ones by rejecting the notion too harshly.

ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS

ESTJs are fairly unique in that their relationships don’t really change as they progress from the dating phase into more steady, long-term relationships and further into marriage. Because they value honesty and straightforwardness so highly, people with the ESTJ personality type are likely to be clear about who they are, what they’re like and what their goals are from the start, and to stick to those statements long-term. So long as their partner is able to take them at their word and follow suit, they are bound to be extremely stable relationships.

This Is the Chance to Do Something

This isn’t to say that there isn’t any growth of course – character development is always a high priority for ESTJs, and each life goal is important. Rather, it’s that shifting moods, goals and desires are unlikely to fundamentally alter the basis of ESTJs’ relationships.

There are certainly challenges, but ESTJs take their relationships seriously and are willing to put a tremendous amount of effort into ensuring that they remain strong and committed, and that effort pays off.

This may all sound a little stale, and indeed ESTJs are not spontaneous or unpredictable people, but they do very much enjoy taking their partners out and having fun. Social events and activities are ESTJs’ idea of a good time, and while they may rely on familiar people and places, they do bring lots of energy and enthusiasm, which helps keep things interesting.

ESTJs approach intimacy with similarly physical, active intentions, and from fairly traditional ones as well. Wild ideas and poetry are for less mature personalities, or so ESTJs might say, though they do appreciate recognition and well-placed compliments to maintain high self-esteem. They may look for more stability in their sex lives than most, but ESTJs never fail to bring their characteristic vigor.

This hints at a challenge in ESTJs’ relationships though, and that is emotional intimacy. Touchy-feely moments are few, as are verbal statements of love; this is usually fine, as ESTJ personalities find other, more tangible ways to express their affection. The problem is in recognizing the validity of those qualities in others, rather than simply dismissing them as pointless or irrational, something that can be extremely hurtful if ESTJs’ partners are more sensitive.

Pay the Price to Secure the Blessing

ESTJs address conflict head-on with simple statements of fact – a very rational approach – but subtlety and emotional tact are sacrificed in the process. While ESTJs’ level-headed, calm approach is appreciated by many, for others it is an uncomfortably direct approach. For all their social skills, ESTJs are especially bad at reading the emotional side of other people, and when it comes to their partners, it’s more important than ever to try to improve.

ESTJs are people of strong principles and strong self-confidence. They use these qualities to protect their partners with admirable consistency. But people with the ESTJ personality type are also stubborn, with a firm belief in their rightness, and they can quickly damage more sensitive partners’ fragile feelings. With this in mind, it is often best for ESTJs to find fellow Observant (S) partners in order to minimize communication barriers, with one or two opposing traits to balance their forceful character and provide opportunities for growth.

FRIENDSHIPS

ESTJs are strong, traditional friends who appreciate loyalty and shared values. Friendships with the ESTJ personality type are often defined by their mutual activities and routines, by external factors, more so than the sense of intellectual or mystical compatibility that many Analysts (NT) and Diplomats (NF) share among themselves. But this in no way diminishes the relationships – ESTJs’ friendships of dependability and mutual interest can be powerful connections that endure life’s changes with immutable constancy.

There Is No Pleasure in Having Nothing to Do…

Among their established friends, ESTJs show themselves to be outgoing and enthusiastic, always more than happy to bring others along for some healthy sport and outdoor activity. ESTJs sometimes get a little overbearing in their push for participation, but it’s just because they want everyone to have a good time. ESTJs’ friends are never short on invites to social activities and events, from tickets to a local ball game, to a weekend camping trip, to Sunday BBQ.

ESTJs seek strong friendships founded on trust and loyalty (though loyalty to family does come first). Active and with quick minds, people with the ESTJ personality type can’t ever be accused of not doing enough to fend off a little boredom. While ESTJs may not always be the life of the party, they know how to play their part in making sure their friends have a good time.

The way ESTJs establish and maintain their friendships does limit the pool though, as they tend to seek out people who are similar to themselves, who share their respect for traditions and institutions. ESTJ personalities are naturally stubborn, and it can be hard for them to find enough common ground with people who constantly disagree with their principles and beliefs to really form those ties of friendship.

…The Fun Is in Having Lots to Do and Not Doing It

ESTJs’ challenge in friendship isn’t about finding fun things to do or people to do them with, but in finding diversity in their friends and activities. For all their community participation, ESTJs struggle immensely in even fully listening to differing opinions, let alone befriending people who consistently express alternate viewpoints. Whether about local political issues or the validity of a more emotional, idealistic disposition than they think is reasonable, ESTJs should make an effort to truly understand these alternate viewpoints.

Simply put, it’s healthy for ESTJs to have some loyal opposition.

Exposing themselves to new ideas among acquaintances who think differently can do no harm – either people with the ESTJ personality type discover better ways and a stronger foundation, or they gain all the more confidence in their beliefs for having successfully defended them. Just as ESTJs may think those loners who spend their lives in their basements playing video games need to get out more, ESTJs themselves need to make sure they get out of their own bubbles of unchallenged opinions and beliefs.

PARENTHOOD

ESTJs’ mantra of “hard work, tradition, respect” is best exemplified in their relationships with their children. In many ways, people with the ESTJ personality type are the classic 50’s era father figure – very strict, and guardians of family traditions who have no trouble when it comes to enforcing the rules and standards they’ve established. Often seen as model citizens, ESTJs expect their children to carry that image, continuing the example they’ve set by being polite and respectful – insubordination is not tolerated.

ESTJs have a very responsibility-oriented life-view, a firm belief in the idea that one does what one can do in order to contribute to the family and community.

This view is of course extended to their children, and as soon as they are able, their children are expected to contribute in their own way, by cleaning their plates and their rooms and going to bed on time – by maintaining the order of things.

This inflexibility can become a challenge as their children grow into their more naturally rebellious adolescent years. ESTJs defend their own, and their relationships with their children are no different, but they expect their children to adhere to the structures they’ve put in place to ensure that protection. ESTJs enjoy creating secure, stable environments, and consider it an affront to have those considerations rejected – again, insubordination is not tolerated.

It’s not that they have wild, high-flying hopes of perfection for their children – ESTJs are down-to-earth people and simply want to see their children develop into respected, responsible adults. But ESTJ personalities also want their children to be strong-willed and capable, and that is something that can only happen when they have the chance to make their own decisions, and the chance to face the consequences of those decisions, good or bad, with the love and support of their parents.

I’ve Got Big Shoes to Fill

They may face challenges as their children learn to balance a growing desire for independence with the respect and adherence to their duties required of them, but ESTJs do have a clear advantage of consistency and direct honesty that never leaves their expectations ambiguous. It can be a tall order, but ESTJs’ children always know what they need to bring, and most will recognize and appreciate the dedication and hard work their parents brought in return.

CAREERS

ESTJs’ career paths are often as clear and straightforward as they are themselves. Though there are many directions they can choose to go, people with the ESTJ personality type almost always end up in situations where they have the opportunity to exercise their affinity for organization, structure, and follow-through. Providing further focus, ESTJs share a profound respect for tradition, stability and security, qualities which lend themselves well to progressing along clear paths to increased responsibility and dependability.

ESTJs’ sense of loyalty results in them staying with a single employer as long as possible, and their reverence for established institutions often leads to work with well-respected organizations. Law enforcement, military service, hospitals and prominent legal firms are all able to recognize ESTJs’ long years of service. [Had Leonard not gone to a life of crime due to his upbringing, consider that some of these are entirely possible. Especially since in the case of my Earth-2 verse (and possibly show canon?) he’s the Mayor of Central City, and (specifically in my headcanon), he was a lawyer before that.]

ESTJ personalities rise to the occasion and meet their obligations with enviable consistency, making them clear choices for advancement.

ESTJs are the image of the model citizen, and they strive to maintain this ideal throughout their careers. This helps them move forward into management as well – people with this personality type have many traits inherent to leadership, something that is often recognized regardless of their chosen industry. From the genuine enjoyment ESTJs feel in organizing other people to their knack for clearly expressing their principles, values and expectations, ESTJs are extremely effective managers. [He was a model criminal and this did, in fact, propel him to being a leader of the criminal element in Central. Honestly, this is even seen in Legends when he becomes an unstated but accepted leader of sorts there as well.]

Also fearsome leaders, ESTJs loathe disorganization, ineptitude, laziness and especially dishonesty, and when these values are crossed, ESTJ personalities do not hesitate to let their disapproval show. So long as everyone plays by the rules, ESTJs are incredibly efficient, their love of structure and thoroughness leaving a record of accurate, complete work that is on time and on budget. ESTJs are natural auditors, financial officers and business administrators, and any such and similar roles are excellent choices for them.

To the Victors Belong the Spoils

Hard work and self-motivation are also strong ESTJ principles, which makes them excellent sales representatives, whether in basic retail positions, part of office teams, or as independent agents. People with the ESTJ personality type stick to projects until they’re finished, big or small, and are organized enough to make any necessary paperwork a mere minor inconvenience to their clients, rather than some baffling ordeal. These qualities combine to make the clear steps in advancement that ESTJs require in order to maintain a sense of accomplishment not just viable, but almost inevitable.

WORKPLACE HABITS

ESTJs show clear and consistent tendencies, and these are especially visible in the workplace. Whether subordinates, among colleagues or as managers, people with the ESTJ personality type create order, follow the rules, and work to ensure that their work and the work of those around them is completed to the highest standards. Cutting corners and shirking responsibility are the quickest ways to lose ESTJs’ respect.

ESTJ Subordinates

ESTJs are hard-working and do things by the book. Though sometimes stubborn and inflexible, especially when presented with ideas that haven’t been fully developed, ESTJ personalities are open to new methods that can be demonstrated to be better. However ESTJs are unlikely to do much experimenting on their own – adhering to stated responsibilities and fulfilling their duties is their primary concern.

ESTJs are also well-known for their loyalty and dedication, but in some ways this is contingent on their respect. People with this personality type are willing to voice their opinions, especially in deciding what is and is not acceptable – if provided with sensible responses that address their concerns, they are often satisfied with that. If ESTJs view their managers as illogical, dishonest or cowardly in their methods, they can be uncomfortably honest, if still calm and level, in voicing their opinions on that as well.

ESTJ Colleagues

ESTJs enjoy the hustle and bustle of well-organized workplaces. Honest, friendly and down-to-earth, ESTJ personalities are great networkers who enjoy connecting with others to get things done. Abusing this for advancement is unlikely, and is in fact something ESTJs frown upon. Shortcuts are irresponsible, and people with the ESTJ personality type lose respect quickly for those who try to push forward by showing off or promoting bold but risky ideas, making relationships with more inspiration-oriented colleagues a challenge.

ESTJs like to feel like they are a part of the team, and a part of the greater organization that they work for. To make sure this happens, ESTJs are nearly always willing to accept criticism that can help to improve their effectiveness, and always keep an eye on their surroundings to make sure they and their team deliver the results that are expected of them.

ESTJ Managers

ESTJs take genuine pleasure in organizing others into effective teams, and as managers they have no better opportunity to do so. While sometimes overbearing, even micromanaging, ESTJs’ strong wills also serve to defend their teams and principles against diversions and cutbacks, regardless of who brings them. Laziness and bad work ethic are not tolerated by ESTJs under any circumstances.

ESTJs project natural authority, but they sometimes expect this authority to be abided unconditionally, resisting change and demanding that things be done by the book. Whether ESTJs’ own book or the existing rules and traditions are used is subject to circumstances, but they do tend to rest on the security of tradition and precedent. Regardless, ESTJs’ expectations are clearly expressed, leaving little room or tolerance for deviation from the agenda.

CONCLUSION

Few personality types are as practical and strong-willed as ESTJs. Known for their reliability and administrative skills, ESTJs are good at creating and maintaining a secure and stable environment for themselves and their loved ones. ESTJs’ dedication is invaluable in many areas, including their own personal growth.

Yet ESTJs can be easily tripped up in areas where their rational and practical approach is more of a liability than an asset. Whether it is finding (or keeping) a partner, learning to relax or improvise, reaching dazzling heights on the career ladder, or managing their workload, ESTJs need to put in a conscious effort to develop their weaker traits and additional skills.

[cinemameta]

La Nouvelle Vague: Rebels with a Cause

Over the course of its lifetime, cinema has undergone various degrees of evolution in technique, style and theory. From its starting years as a silent, black-and-white medium of spectacle to becoming a vehicle of social commentary, different eras populate the history of the art form— one of which is La Nouvelle Vague or the French New Wave, an art movement widely known for its stylistic experimentation and upending of conventional ideals. But to further understand why and how French New Wave came to be would require examining the previous generation of films and cultural subtexts, tracing its origins and development through the years, identifying essential intentions and theories borne out of its inception, and assessing its legacy since its passing.

Given that French New Wave’s creation was necessitated mainly as a response to the prevailing trends of the previous era, it is important to investigate the overall landscape before its arrival. Prior to French New Wave, mainstream films were heavily tied to the studio system restricting filmmaking within the walls of production houses. Not only in space, it limited films in terms of overall aesthetic— actions remained in stationary shots, artificial set designs mimicked the environment of theatre productions, plots had to be revisited to accommodate the rigid structures. Dominance of big studios also provided a challenge for aspiring directors during the period in the form of preference towards established filmmakers and their mastered craft (Grant, 2007). With such restrictions, a choice between technique and experimentation became a recurring dilemma and more often than not, prevailing trends pointed to the former.

Even a bigger motivator for the movement was the cultural climate of its belonged era. The question on whether Germany’s occupation of France could have been mitigated if not avoided lingered over the heads of the elite. Such proximity to the war and failure in avoiding its arrival brought upon the whole of French society an air of simmering political unrest continuously stifled by the public’s eagerness to regain normalcy. Fortunately, it wasn’t long before France started to incur financial recovery. Unfortunately, the rush towards economic stability meant a surge in capitalistic tendencies. Thus, consumerism made its expected return with little to no restraint forcing mainstream cinema to cater to the sensibilities of the bourgeoisie and their demands for movies steeped in romanticism and comedy. Coupled with growing materialistic attitude, television’s entry into the picture presented a shift on media consumption wherein it was no longer expected of the public to go out in search of entertainment, instead entertainment was supposed to find them (Crisp, 1993). With this, French cinema underwent a deep reevaluation regarding its place in France’s postwar cultural scene specifically whether it belonged in the upper echelons of “highbrow art” or was better off in the business of the bourgeoisie.

Integral to the establishment of the movement were the precursory dialogues among intellectuals and cinephiles about the state French cinema, most of which centered on the impact of external forces enumerated above. Cahiers du Cinema, a monthly French publication focusing on film criticism and theory, became the place of assembly to most of the leading voices of French New Wave which included the likes of Claude Chabrol, Eric Rohmer and Jacques Rivette and through their writings, established core intentions carried by the movement. Francois Godard, a notable writer for the magazine, embodied much of what the movement essentially stands for— that, in spite of the iconoclastic reputation that has come to be associated with it, so much about French New Wave is rooted in the belief of preserving cinema’s artistic value. Throughout his career as a filmmaker, Godard translated his love of moviemaking through frequent acts of homage— he made in-film references to other works he held in reverence, borrowed trademarks from respected filmmakers, centered character-driven conversations on cinema and at one point, even gave Jean Pierre-Melville a cameo role (Wiegand, 2012). What these constant meta-discussions regarding cinema revealed was not an effort to destroy its very language but rather an intention to interrogate its grammar and meaning towards a more democratic expression. Such belief in freeing films and their methods of creation from constraints brought by big studio houses and the rule of market became the driving force which helped spur French New Wave into action.

Although Cahiers and its critics managed to develop a strong presence among film enthusiasts who echoed the same concern of liberating cinema, it was only after the publication of A Certain Tendency of French Cinema when French New Wave was propelled into the nation’s consciousness. The essay which voiced out grievances against popular cinema in uber-polemic writing became the unofficial manifesto of the movement. Francois Truffaut, the author of the essay, lambasted the prevalence of what he called “Tradition of Quality”, a tendency of French studio system to favor “…literary adaptation, which caused French films to become increasingly verbal and theatrical.” (Cook, 2016, p. 343). Moreover, he scorned the glorification of screenwriters over directors which he argued imposed rigid rules on filmmaking thereby diminishing the director’s vision for the film.

Out of the essay’s publication, politiques des auteurs or auteur theory was highlighted as a central argument in the push toward greater authority of directors over film productions. At its core, auteur theory championed the director as the principal creator of a film, above screenwriters and film producers, comparable to authors having full creative control of their literary works. Although not a new concept at the time, Truffaut’s use of auteur theory in the essay accompanied by his stark denunciation of the studio system facilitated auteurism’s transition from a mere form of critical theory to a practicable filmmaking approach. The effect of French New Wave and its promotion of auteur theory on contemporary French cinema was seen in the surge of films that employed location shooting and practical effects such as natural lighting and live sound— aspects of filmmaking directors were now able to dictate without third-party interference (Neupert, 2007). Such filmic language which puts emphasis on low-budget production and documentary style filmmaking afforded directors leeway in experimentation and would later dominate the film industry displacing studio houses from its norm status somewhere in the 60s (Crisp, 1993).

Further impact of the French New Wave was observed in the successes of its directors not only in the box office but also in film festival circuits. Such was the case of Truffaut’s directorial debut, The 400 Blows, in 1959 where he was awarded Best Director in Cannes Film Festival in spite of being banned as a critic from the same festival the year before. In years to come, French New Wave directors would go on to achieve varying degrees of recognition but more astounding about these achievements was the fact that most of these critics-turned-filmmakers were under the age of 30. In effect, the rise to prominence of these young directors lead to increased numbers of new talents being hired in the industry and more importantly, “…granted the young filmmakers an unconditional command over every facet of the creative process.” (Fournier-Lanzoni, 2002, p. 212).

Even worth investigating are the ramifications of French New Wave around its neighboring countries and across the Atlantic which began to adopt principles tied to it. For instance, familiar imprints can be recognized in successive New Waves and film movements most notably in American New Wave taking great inspiration from auteur theory and Dogme 95 whose strict obedience to bare-bones style of cinema invoked the realism of French New Wave. Arguably, a more long-lasting legacy left can be attributed to its use of radical filmmaking techniques. The utilization of jump cuts in many films from the era, particularly in Godard’s revolutionary Breathless, demonstrated innovative and playful approaches to continuity editing and storytelling (Sterritt, 2007). While deemed controversial at the time, jump cuts and long takes became staple trademarks in French New Wave films and would later flourish into a dignified form of creative expression employed in future works outside of the movement .

Perhaps the most apparent evidence of the movement’s influence is found in the longevity of careers of its pioneers post-French New Wave. Well into the 21st century, Cahiers directors sustained a prolific presence in the industry with Chabrol and Rohmer continuing to release films as late as 2007 before their retirement and subsequent passing. Godard, the last surviving member of the group, maintains an active career having recently released a film essay, The Image Book, in 2018 which competed and won a special prize in that year’s Cannes Film Festival. Future generations of filmmakers also remain indebted to French New Wave for paving the way to an environment more welcoming of young talent and more respectful of their creative vision. Directors being able to attach their names to their creations owe much of that privilege to the movement’s campaign for authorial role of filmmakers. Just by the mention of “Tarantino film” or “Fincher film”, one could expect a certain aesthetic or style unique only to those names— a custom made possible by auteur theory. In summary, the impact of French New Wave not only to filmmaking but also to the very industry it belongs to cements its place as a formative era in film history and while it had passed its peak many decades ago, the spirit of rebellion that energized lovers of movies into taking arms in defense of the art form continue to ripple in the whole of cinema.

Bibliography:

Cook, D. (2016). A history of narrative film (5th edition). New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

Crisp, C. (1993). The classic French cinema. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Fournier-Lanzoni, R. (2002). French cinema: From its beginnings to the present. New York: Continuum.

Glenn, C. (2014). Jean-Luc Godard and Francois Truffaut: the influence of Hollywood, modernization and radical politics on their films and friendship. (Master’s thesis).Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina.

Grant, B. K. (2007). Schirmer encyclopedia of film (Vol. 2). Detroit: Schirmer Reference.

Grosoli, M. (2014). The politics and aesthetics of the "politique des auteurs". Film criticism, 39(1), 33-50. Retrieved August 7, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/24777962

Hillier, J. (1986). Cahiers du Cinéma: the 1950s: neo-realism, Hollywood, new wave. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Neupert, R. (2007). A history of the French new wave cinema. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Sterritt, D. (1999). The films of Jean-Luc Godard: Seeing the invisible. Cambridge, U.K: Cambridge University Press.

Thompson, K. & Bordwell, D. (2003). Film history: an introduction. (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Truffaut, F. (1976). A Certain Tendency of the French Cinema. In B. Nichols (Ed.). Movies and methods: an anthology (Vol. 1, pp. 224-236). Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. (Original work published in Cahiers du cinema 31, 1954).

Wiegand, C. (2012). French new wave. Harpenden, Herts: Pocket Essentials. (Original work published 2005)

[luneair]

♂ Mars Energy

mars in the 1st: Energy goes into expression of themselves, of who they are. Often fights for themselves. They also fight for those they deem as weak, the underdogs. If athletically inclined, these people tend to also put energy into sports-related matters.

mars in the 2nd: Energy goes into protecting possessions and accumulating material worth. Often fights for their values, their Self and what they own, but also for those they’re attached to.

mars in the 3rd: Energy goes into intellectual activities, learning or any kind of activity that promotes growth of knowledge or prevents restlessness. Fights for their knowledge. May also fight for siblings/family or others from the early childhood/environment.

mars in the 4th: Energy goes into achieving comfort and emotional security for themselves, and putting time into their private life (such as family). Fights for themselves, but also anyone who is let into their private life. Often inclined to protect children.

mars in the 5th: Energy goes into creative expression of the self, of creative endeavors (such as hobbies). Fights for themselves; their identity, but also for those they are loyal to and for those who are loyal to them. Often inclined to protect children and may also put energy/time into athletic activities.

mars in the 6th: Energy goes into intellect, into learning, routine or anything that improves self-growth. Fights for their knowledge but also for themselves and those they dedicate themselves to.

mars in the 7th: Energy into stabilizing themselves, but also into seeking and maintaining healthy and fulfilling relationships with others. Venus is at work here, there is a strong sense of fair justice and so they may put time into defending the under dogs/sustaining equilibrium among others.

mars in the 8th: Energy is put into protection of personal security and of their strong convictions. Can also put energy into gaining or maintaining a position of power in a situation. Strong healing powers if spiritually inclined, so may put time into healing others through plutonian or mars-related themes. Likely to be fiercely interested in the occult and thus put time into matters relating to it.

mars in the 9th: Energy is put into seeking inner truth and personal freedom. Can put time into their beliefs and discovering what it means to be alive. Jupiterian energy is very generous and charitable, so these people may also put time into helping others such as in the form of spreading understanding & knowledge. May also put energy into athletics.

mars in the 10th: Energy is put into their ambitions and forming + maintaining self-reliance. They’re their own motivational force, with strong independence so they’re inclined to fight for themselves first and foremost. Tradition is strong, may fight to maintain familiarity or the “rules.”

mars in the 11th: Energy is put into matters greater than themselves. There is a sense of justice here, but only if the rules “make sense” to their standards. Fights for community, equality, society, friendships and humanity. This house is ruled by an higher octave planet (Uranus), the energy is being integrated into transpersonal states of consciousness.

mars in the 12th: Energy is put into restoring themselves, as they’re apt to be reflective and are absorbent of outside influences, thus alone time is needed. Spiritually predisposed and inclined to feel compassionate of others, and so time may be spent in helping those in need and/or introspective and meditative activities to exercise the mind. This is a house ruled by a higher octave planet (Neptune), energy is being (or must be) directed to higher purposes.

[beautyxmarred-m]

Personality Type

// I just put Thranduil through a personality test and this is so important to my interpretation of him as a character, I’m posting not only the results but what they mean.

These are the results my Thranduil received from the 16Personalities Test, which can be found here and I encourage others who want further insight and/or a concise personality description to take this. It is very well done.

RESULTS

Read the rest of the information below the cut.

ESTJ PERSONALITY (“THE EXECUTIVE”)

Role: Sentinel  //  Strategy: People Mastery

Good order is the foundation of all things.

ESTJs are representatives of tradition and order, utilizing their understanding of what is right, wrong and socially acceptable to bring families and communities together. Embracing the values of honesty, dedication and dignity, people with the ESTJ personality type are valued for their clear advice and guidance, and they happily lead the way on difficult paths. Taking pride in bringing people together, ESTJs often take on roles as community organizers, working hard to bring everyone together in celebration of cherished local events, or in defense of the traditional values that hold families and communities together.

Anyone Worth Their Salt Sticks Up for What They Believe Is Right...

Demand for such leadership is high in democratic societies, and forming no less than 11% of the population, it’s no wonder that many of America’s presidents have been ESTJs. Strong believers in the rule of law and authority that must be earned, ESTJ personalities lead by example, demonstrating dedication and purposeful honesty, and an utter rejection of laziness and cheating, especially in work. If anyone declares hard, manual work to be an excellent way to build character, it is ESTJs.

ESTJs are aware of their surroundings and live in a world of clear, verifiable facts – the surety of their knowledge means that even against heavy resistance, they stick to their principles and push an unclouded vision of what is and is not acceptable. Their opinions aren’t just empty talk either, as ESTJs are more than willing to dive into the most challenging projects, improving action plans and sorting details along the way, making even the most complicated tasks seem easy and approachable.

However, ESTJs don’t work alone, and they expect their reliability and work ethic to be reciprocated – people with this personality type meet their promises, and if partners or subordinates jeopardize them through incompetence or laziness, or worse still, dishonesty, they do not hesitate to show their wrath. This can earn them a reputation for inflexibility, a trait shared by all Sentinels, but it’s not because ESTJs are arbitrarily stubborn, but because they truly believe that these values are what make society work.

...But Still Better Are Those Who Acknowledge When They Are in Error

ESTJs are classic images of the model citizen: they help their neighbors, uphold the law, and try to make sure that everyone participates in the communities and organizations they hold so dear.

The main challenge for ESTJs is to recognize that not everyone follows the same path or contributes in the same way. A true leader recognizes the strength of the individual, as well as that of the group, and helps bring those individuals’ ideas to the table. That way, ESTJs really do have all the facts, and are able to lead the charge in directions that work for everyone.

STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

ESTJ Strengths

Dedicated – Seeing things to completion borders on an ethical obligation for ESTJs. Tasks aren’t simply abandoned because they’ve become difficult or boring – people with the ESTJ personality type take them up when they are the right thing to do, and they will be finished so long as they remain the right thing to do.

Strong-willed – A strong will makes this dedication possible, and ESTJs don’t give up their beliefs because of simple opposition. ESTJs defend their ideas and principles relentlessly, and must be proven clearly and conclusively wrong for their stance to budge.

Direct and Honest – ESTJs trust facts far more than abstract ideas or opinions. Straightforward statements and information are king, and ESTJ personalities return the honesty (whether it’s wanted or not).

Loyal, Patient and Reliable – ESTJs work to exemplify truthfulness and reliability, considering stability and security very important. When ESTJs say they’ll do something, they keep their word, making them very responsible members of their families, companies and communities.

Enjoy Creating Order – Chaos makes things unpredictable, and unpredictable things can’t be trusted when they are needed most – with this in mind, ESTJs strive to create order and security in their environments by establishing rules, structures and clear roles.

Excellent Organizers – This commitment to truth and clear standards makes ESTJs capable and confident leaders. People with this personality type have no problem distributing tasks and responsibilities to others fairly and objectively, making them excellent administrators.

ESTJ Weaknesses

Inflexible and Stubborn – The problem with being so fixated on what works is that ESTJs too often dismiss what might work better. Everything is opinion until proven, and ESTJ personalities are reluctant to trust an opinion long enough for it to have that chance.

Uncomfortable with Unconventional Situations – ESTJs are strong adherents to tradition and when suddenly forced to try unvetted solutions, they become uncomfortable and stressed. New ideas suggest that their methods weren’t good enough, and abandoning what has always worked before in favor of something that may yet fail risks their image of reliability.

Judgmental – ESTJs have strong convictions about what is right, wrong, and socially acceptable. ESTJs’ compulsion to create order often extends to all things and everyone, ignoring the possibility that there are two right ways to get things done. ESTJs do not hesitate to let these "deviants" know what they think, considering it their duty to set things right.

Too Focused on Social Status – ESTJs take pride in the respect of their friends, colleagues and community and while difficult to admit, are very concerned with public opinion. ESTJs (especially Turbulent ones) can get so caught up in meeting others’ expectations that they fail to address their own needs.

Difficult to Relax – This need for respect fosters a need to maintain their dignity, which can make it difficult to cut loose and relax for risk of looking the fool, even in good fun.

Difficulty Expressing Emotion – This is all evidence of ESTJs’ greatest weakness: expressing emotions and feeling empathy. People with the ESTJ personality type get so caught up in the facts and most effective methods that they forget to think of what makes others happy, or of their sensitivity. A detour can be breathtakingly beautiful, a joy for the family, but ESTJs may only see the consequence of arriving at their destination an hour late, hurting their loved ones by rejecting the notion too harshly.

ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS

ESTJs are fairly unique in that their relationships don’t really change as they progress from the dating phase into more steady, long-term relationships and further into marriage. Because they value honesty and straightforwardness so highly, people with the ESTJ personality type are likely to be clear about who they are, what they’re like and what their goals are from the start, and to stick to those statements long-term. So long as their partner is able to take them at their word and follow suit, they are bound to be extremely stable relationships.

This Is the Chance to Do Something

This isn’t to say that there isn’t any growth of course – character development is always a high priority for ESTJs, and each life goal is important. Rather, it’s that shifting moods, goals and desires are unlikely to fundamentally alter the basis of ESTJs’ relationships.

There are certainly challenges, but ESTJs take their relationships seriously and are willing to put a tremendous amount of effort into ensuring that they remain strong and committed, and that effort pays off.

This may all sound a little stale, and indeed ESTJs are not spontaneous or unpredictable people, but they do very much enjoy taking their partners out and having fun. Social events and activities are ESTJs’ idea of a good time, and while they may rely on familiar people and places, they do bring lots of energy and enthusiasm, which helps keep things interesting.

ESTJs approach intimacy with similarly physical, active intentions, and from fairly traditional ones as well. Wild ideas and poetry are for less mature personalities, or so ESTJs might say, though they do appreciate recognition and well-placed compliments to maintain high self-esteem. They may look for more stability in their sex lives than most, but ESTJs never fail to bring their characteristic vigor.

This hints at a challenge in ESTJs’ relationships though, and that is emotional intimacy. Touchy-feely moments are few, as are verbal statements of love; this is usually fine, as ESTJ personalities find other, more tangible ways to express their affection. The problem is in recognizing the validity of those qualities in others, rather than simply dismissing them as pointless or irrational, something that can be extremely hurtful if ESTJs’ partners are more sensitive.

Pay the Price to Secure the Blessing

ESTJs address conflict head-on with simple statements of fact – a very rational approach – but subtlety and emotional tact are sacrificed in the process. While ESTJs’ level-headed, calm approach is appreciated by many, for others it is an uncomfortably direct approach. For all their social skills, ESTJs are especially bad at reading the emotional side of other people, and when it comes to their partners, it’s more important than ever to try to improve.

ESTJs are people of strong principles and strong self-confidence. They use these qualities to protect their partners with admirable consistency. But people with the ESTJ personality type are also stubborn, with a firm belief in their rightness, and they can quickly damage more sensitive partners’ fragile feelings. With this in mind, it is often best for ESTJs to find fellow Observant (S) partners in order to minimize communication barriers, with one or two opposing traits to balance their forceful character and provide opportunities for growth.

FRIENDSHIPS

ESTJs are strong, traditional friends who appreciate loyalty and shared values. Friendships with the ESTJ personality type are often defined by their mutual activities and routines, by external factors, more so than the sense of intellectual or mystical compatibility that many Analysts and Diplomats share among themselves. But this in no way diminishes the relationships – ESTJs’ friendships of dependability and mutual interest can be powerful connections that endure life’s changes with immutable constancy.

There Is No Pleasure in Having Nothing to Do...

Among their established friends, ESTJs show themselves to be outgoing and enthusiastic, always more than happy to bring others along for some healthy sport and outdoor activity. ESTJs sometimes get a little overbearing in their push for participation, but it’s just because they want everyone to have a good time. ESTJs’ friends are never short on invites to social activities and events, from tickets to a local ball game, to a weekend camping trip, to Sunday BBQ.

ESTJs seek strong friendships founded on trust and loyalty (though loyalty to family does come first). Active and with quick minds, people with the ESTJ personality type can’t ever be accused of not doing enough to fend off a little boredom. While ESTJs may not always be the life of the party, they know how to play their part in making sure their friends have a good time.

The way ESTJs establish and maintain their friendships does limit the pool though, as they tend to seek out people who are similar to themselves, who share their respect for traditions and institutions. ESTJ personalities are naturally stubborn, and it can be hard for them to find enough common ground with people who constantly disagree with their principles and beliefs to really form those ties of friendship.

...The Fun Is in Having Lots to Do and Not Doing It

ESTJs’ challenge in friendship isn’t about finding fun things to do or people to do them with, but in finding diversity in their friends and activities. For all their community participation, ESTJs struggle immensely in even fully listening to differing opinions, let alone befriending people who consistently express alternate viewpoints. Whether about local political issues or the validity of a more emotional, idealistic disposition than they think is reasonable, ESTJs should make an effort to truly understand these alternate viewpoints.

Simply put, it’s healthy for ESTJs to have some loyal opposition.

Exposing themselves to new ideas among acquaintances who think differently can do no harm – either people with the ESTJ personality type discover better ways and a stronger foundation, or they gain all the more confidence in their beliefs for having successfully defended them. Just as ESTJs may think those loners who spend their lives in their basements playing video games need to get out more, ESTJs themselves need to make sure they get out of their own bubbles of unchallenged opinions and beliefs.

PARENTHOOD

ESTJs’ mantra of "hard work, tradition, respect" is best exemplified in their relationships with their children. In many ways, people with the ESTJ personality type are the classic 50’s era father figure – very strict, and guardians of family traditions who have no trouble when it comes to enforcing the rules and standards they’ve established. Often seen as model citizens, ESTJs expect their children to carry that image, continuing the example they’ve set by being polite and respectful – insubordination is not tolerated.

ESTJs have a very responsibility-oriented life-view, a firm belief in the idea that one does what one can do in order to contribute to the family and community.

This view is of course extended to their children, and as soon as they are able, their children are expected to contribute in their own way, by cleaning their plates and their rooms and going to bed on time – by maintaining the order of things.

This inflexibility can become a challenge as their children grow into their more naturally rebellious adolescent years. ESTJs defend their own, and their relationships with their children are no different, but they expect their children to adhere to the structures they’ve put in place to ensure that protection. ESTJs enjoy creating secure, stable environments, and consider it an affront to have those considerations rejected – again, insubordination is not tolerated.

It’s not that they have wild, high-flying hopes of perfection for their children – ESTJs are down-to-earth people and simply want to see their children develop into respected, responsible adults. But ESTJ personalities also want their children to be strong-willed and capable, and that is something that can only happen when they have the chance to make their own decisions, and the chance to face the consequences of those decisions, good or bad, with the love and support of their parents.

I’ve Got Big Shoes to Fill

They may face challenges as their children learn to balance a growing desire for independence with the respect and adherence to their duties required of them, but ESTJs do have a clear advantage of consistency and direct honesty that never leaves their expectations ambiguous. It can be a tall order, but ESTJs’ children always know what they need to bring, and most will recognize and appreciate the dedication and hard work their parents brought in return.

CAREERS

ESTJs’ career paths are often as clear and straightforward as they are themselves. Though there are many directions they can choose to go, people with the ESTJ personality type almost always end up in situations where they have the opportunity to exercise their affinity for organization, structure, and follow-through. Providing further focus, ESTJs share a profound respect for tradition, stability and security, qualities which lend themselves well to progressing along clear paths to increased responsibility and dependability.

ESTJs’ sense of loyalty results in them staying with a single employer as long as possible, and their reverence for established institutions often leads to work with well-respected organizations. Law enforcement, military service, hospitals and prominent legal firms are all able to recognize ESTJs’ long years of service.

ESTJ personalities rise to the occasion and meet their obligations with enviable consistency, making them clear choices for advancement.

ESTJs are the image of the model citizen, and they strive to maintain this ideal throughout their careers. This helps them move forward into management as well – people with this personality type have many traits inherent to leadership, something that is often recognized regardless of their chosen industry. From the genuine enjoyment ESTJs feel in organizing other people to their knack for clearly expressing their principles, values and expectations, ESTJs are extremely effective managers.

Also fearsome leaders, ESTJs loathe disorganization, ineptitude, laziness and especially dishonesty, and when these values are crossed, ESTJ personalities do not hesitate to let their disapproval show. So long as everyone plays by the rules, ESTJs are incredibly efficient, their love of structure and thoroughness leaving a record of accurate, complete work that is on time and on budget. ESTJs are natural auditors, financial officers and business administrators, and any such and similar roles are excellent choices for them.

To the Victors Belong the Spoils

Hard work and self-motivation are also strong ESTJ principles, which makes them excellent sales representatives, whether in basic retail positions, part of office teams, or as independent agents. People with the ESTJ personality type stick to projects until they’re finished, big or small, and are organized enough to make any necessary paperwork a mere minor inconvenience to their clients, rather than some baffling ordeal. These qualities combine to make the clear steps in advancement that ESTJs require in order to maintain a sense of accomplishment not just viable, but almost inevitable.

WORKPLACE HABITS

ESTJs show clear and consistent tendencies, and these are especially visible in the workplace. Whether subordinates, among colleagues or as managers, people with the ESTJ personality type create order, follow the rules, and work to ensure that their work and the work of those around them is completed to the highest standards. Cutting corners and shirking responsibility are the quickest ways to lose ESTJs’ respect.

ESTJ Subordinates

ESTJs are hard-working and do things by the book. Though sometimes stubborn and inflexible, especially when presented with ideas that haven’t been fully developed, ESTJ personalities are open to new methods that can be demonstrated to be better. However ESTJs are unlikely to do much experimenting on their own – adhering to stated responsibilities and fulfilling their duties is their primary concern.

ESTJs are also well-known for their loyalty and dedication, but in some ways this is contingent on their respect. People with this personality type are willing to voice their opinions, especially in deciding what is and is not acceptable – if provided with sensible responses that address their concerns, they are often satisfied with that. If ESTJs view their managers as illogical, dishonest or cowardly in their methods, they can be uncomfortably honest, if still calm and level, in voicing their opinions on that as well.

ESTJ Colleagues

ESTJs enjoy the hustle and bustle of well-organized workplaces. Honest, friendly and down-to-earth, ESTJ personalities are great networkers who enjoy connecting with others to get things done. Abusing this for advancement is unlikely, and is in fact something ESTJs frown upon. Shortcuts are irresponsible, and people with the ESTJ personality type lose respect quickly for those who try to push forward by showing off or promoting bold but risky ideas, making relationships with more inspiration-oriented colleagues a challenge.

ESTJs like to feel like they are a part of the team, and a part of the greater organization that they work for. To make sure this happens, ESTJs are nearly always willing to accept criticism that can help to improve their effectiveness, and always keep an eye on their surroundings to make sure they and their team deliver the results that are expected of them.

ESTJ Managers

ESTJs take genuine pleasure in organizing others into effective teams, and as managers they have no better opportunity to do so. While sometimes overbearing, even micromanaging, ESTJs’ strong wills also serve to defend their teams and principles against diversions and cutbacks, regardless of who brings them. Laziness and bad work ethic are not tolerated by ESTJs under any circumstances.

ESTJs project natural authority, but they sometimes expect this authority to be abided unconditionally, resisting change and demanding that things be done by the book. Whether ESTJs’ own book or the existing rules and traditions are used is subject to circumstances, but they do tend to rest on the security of tradition and precedent. Regardless, ESTJs’ expectations are clearly expressed, leaving little room or tolerance for deviation from the agenda.

CONCLUSION

Few personality types are as practical and strong-willed as ESTJs. Known for their reliability and administrative skills, ESTJs are good at creating and maintaining a secure and stable environment for themselves and their loved ones. ESTJs’ dedication is invaluable in many areas, including their own personal growth.

Yet ESTJs can be easily tripped up in areas where their rational and practical approach is more of a liability than an asset. Whether it is finding (or keeping) a partner, learning to relax or improvise, reaching dazzling heights on the career ladder, or managing their workload, ESTJs need to put in a conscious effort to develop their weaker traits and additional skills.

[committoreality]

Hi Georgia! I had my first NSA hookup a few months ago, and more since. I've had great experiences, but I have two questions: 1) I'm scared my Catholic family will find out and disown me. How can I get past this fear? 2) What can I do to appear less over eager/"easy"? I'm new to low commitment, so I find that I get so excited about hooking up, that I go home with guys too quickly and ruin the best part, the chase. I want to be wooed, and persuaded, not just run home with the guy right away!

Hello my friend. I don’t know about how to overcome that fear. I think something that is helpful is to do a cost benefit analysis, and maybe place a thumb on the scale in your favour. There are always tradeoffs between balancing chaos and order, following tradition and testing new waters. And it’s not straightforward. I think that we can’t let ourselves be burdened by hypotheticals and what ifs. While there is a real material consequence to your actions, there is an equally weighty consequence to your inactions. 

But I wouldn’t be too scared, because disobeying tradition in one regard doesn’t mean your abandon tradition in all other realms. To live well we need to exercise our own will- and it is well documented that the happiest and most functional people are those who feel they have control over their lives, and that events and choice are not random, but follow some pattern. This phenomena goes by many names and my favourite is a concept of Kenneth Gergen’s called “Ontological security”. To be secure we need to have trust that the world and our relationships are stable, but we also need to feel a sense of agency and stability to our identity. 

So what that means is that we need to develop our own identity in a way that feels authentic, but we also need to have good and stable relationships. We’re hypersocial animals so the fear of rejection of your primary group is real and does matter. Take that to be true, other depend on you for their own security and stability. We’re all entangled, and severing relationships will have consequence for all parties. In my experience, the threats put forth by parents vary in terms of what gets carried out, and what is a negotiation. 

For example, when I’ve done things in the past that go against my mum’s rules/wishes, she has implemented some sort of punishment- generally less severe that originally threatened. And following that punishment, it tends to be of shorter duration that originally stated. So the degree to which threats are carried out varies, because you can’t anticipate the nuances of the situation when it actually materializes. So your family might say they’d disown you, but should they find our you’re having casual sex, the punishment tends to be less severe, of shorter duration etc.

And this is what children do. They test the parameters of their parent’s rules, and determine what rules are sound and reasonable, and what rules are obsolete or go against your own values. At the end of the day, you’re the agent of your life. While you should maintain good relations with your family and respect the reasonable traditions, not every rules needs to be obeyed and internalized. There are many standards and conduct rules that I grew up with, and many of these expectations are reasonable and have served me well, and many are stupid by my estimation and in my experience.

Virtually every culture has norms around sexuality, and reproduction is a human behaviour that societies and families have an interest in regulating. While these norms may be obsolete in the era of birth control, women’s lib, shifting gender roles, and increased heterogeneity of lifestyles- the norms around sex remain in tact in some iteration. So understanding that your family isn’t being oppressive, but is trying to instil norms about sexuality makes evolutionary sense, but these expectations might be unreasonable in a time where the risk of STD and pregnancy can be reduced significantly. 

My advice is to balance your autonomy with a respect for where your family is coming from, and maybe think about what you would say and what your justification would be in the event that they did find out and responded poorly. Reasonable people can disagree about sexual norms, and thinking out your position ahead of time can ease your anxiety, and show your family that you’re not naive and irresponsible, but are acting from a place of reason and awareness.

As for your second question,

My main advice is to avoid putting a value judgment on your behaviour. There is no “right way” to act, to flirt, to interact. I think the best thing to do is to be genuine and own what you want. There is nothing inherently wrong with being in a state of low commitment and seeking out casual sex. I think the best thing to do is to learn from experience. If you feel like you’re being too “easy” and don’t like how that feels, then experiment with the time you want to spend getting to know someone. If you want to have fun, try our different methods of flirting and interacting. What some people consider “the chase” can be an hour of pursuing, or it can be years. 

Set standards for what you will do at what point. Decide not to sleep with someone on the first date/meeting, and then see how that goes. Maybe you want more/less time to flirt and pursue/be pursued. The first date I went on with my boyfriend, I didn’t want to kiss him (I did but decided I wasn’t going to), and by the end of the night after spending several hours together I scraped that rule. And I don’t regret it.

I think it’s easy to get caught up in the fun of low commitment relationships, and it’s easy to lose awareness. Because low commitment is inherently about instant gratification. So it’s easy to forget to check yourself and give into temptation really quickly. Which works for some people. But the irony is that low commitment is framed as liberating, but can actually be really constraining because it puts you into a frame of mind that is oriented towards fulfilling immediate desires, which can cloud your other desires.

Humans are always conflicted and have motives that are completely incompatible. For every motive there is often another part of you that is pushing for something contradictory. For example with my ex, I loved the stability and comfort, but I hated the lack of freedom and how neutral I felt. So I wanted to stay but I didn’t want to stay.

Navigating the balance between your conflicting desires is hard, but it’s learned through experience and being honest with yourself about what your priorities are. When I was younger I only wanted low commitment relationships because I was way too busy and not mature enough for a long term relationship. And that really worked and it was fun. But as I got older I realized that although I had the desire for brief and fun interactions, I also had the desire for love and stability. And that desire outweighed my desire for brief intimacy. 

Your priorities and desires will change. And you need to figure out what works for you and place your needs and desires on a hierarchy, and then go about acting in ways that align with those priorities. The hierarchy isn’t static, but being aware of what you want, being aware of the tensions that exist between your desires, the tradeoffs of your decisions, and then picking a side is necessary. 

Acting from a place of choice and awareness matters. Because instant gratification can be very tyrannical and unhealthy. I want to eat brownies for breakfast every day. But I also want to be alert and healthy, so I have a protein shake along with something else. So be aware of your desires, and then act from a place of choice and agency. Because as I mentioned, the great irony of being liberated is that one tends towards hedonism, which can be very unfulfilling. But if you choose hedonism and don’t allow it to be a force that clouds your better judgment, then so be it. I find the awareness brings about peace because it gives you control rather than submitting to whatever random desires arise. 

[crypterxsolutions-blog]

Free-Market Law Enforcement for Crypto

At the core of the conflict between state and society lies opposite views of TTPs. The state insists on a neutral or benevolent definition; that is, a TTP is an entity that facilitates the quality or honesty of interactions between people who invest it with trust. The description can be accurate. People can use a lawyer, for example, as an intermediary in a business deal. However, a TTP is neutral or benevolent only if no one is forced to use or to finance it. A critical difference between state and society: the latter does not force people to buy products or services they do not want. Organization does not require them to use central banks, to purchase law enforcement, or to finance military protection against foreign nations. People can decline that type of product altogether, or they can use a competing private supplier. By contrast, the state compels the purchase of such products because they are essential to the social good. Not only that, the government claims that monopolies are needed to act as trusted third parties (TTPs).   Both groups, like the cypherpunks, and individuals, like Satoshi Nakamoto highlighted a bitter irony in what the word “trusted” had come to mean in TTPs. The word was a mockery of itself. A state TTP could not be trusted to act on behalf of those forced to consume its products and services; it always worked in its interests. The world badly needed alternate systems and approaches for which no trust was necessary because transactions could be verified independently. The blockchain was designed to be a law unto itself, with transfers that anyone can verify. That’s why it is transparent, immutable, and decentralized. It is “trustless,” in the best sense of the word. The blockchain was also designed to prevent occasional acts of personal fraud by making payments irreversible and using timestamps that avoid double spending. However, fighting occasional bad actors, like people who do not deliver paid-for goods, is not the blockchain’s primary purpose. Nor should it be. Whenever human beings exchange, some fraud will occur because human nature contains a streak of dishonesty. One might say this is unfortunate, but then, one might ask: compared to what? Peer-to-peer crypto and decentralized exchanges should not be judged against a standard of perfection. They should be judged by how effectively they accomplish their primary purpose: to fight the pervasive institutionalized crimes committed by the state against society—that is, against individuals—especially through central banking and fiat currency. The strategic genius of making TTP obsolete by replacing and ignoring them is underestimated because it is usually confined to the digital realm. In fact, the strategy has application across society, and crypto is part of a long political tradition of what has been called prevention. Viewing crypto through this lens offers different perspectives and insights, which are entirely compatible with personal freedom. Crypto as Part of Prevention Tradition Crypto protects individuals from the devastating institutionalized crimes of the state by allowing them to avoid central banks and to retain the private data that constitutes power over their lives. The libertarian Robert LeFevre was one of the best theorists on how to prevent crime, especially those committed by the state against society. He asked, “how can society best ensure private justice?” He answered: pre-emptive defenses that avoid crime before it happens. This contrasted sharply with how most libertarian theorists approached the question of private justice; they almost entirely focused on issues such as restitution versus retribution or on how justice enforcement agencies should be structured. All of these issues became dynamic, however, only after a rights violation had occurred. Like Satoshi, LeFevre wanted a system that prevented the institutionalized crimes of the state from happening in the first place. There are striking parallels between LeFevre and Satoshi. LeFevre was trying to avoid and replace a TTP: traditional law enforcement, including the court system, which was government monopolies. The two men’s motivations were similar. LeFevre saw law enforcement as a massive failure, or far worse. Under the guise of providing justice, it oppressed individuals by regulating almost every activity short of breathing itself. Equally, Satoshi knew that central banks and fiat were massive failures, or far worse. Under the guise of providing financial stability and protection, they looted the wealth of individuals through mechanisms such as inflation and transferred it to those in authority. Both men advocated private institutions that did not confront their state counterparts in a civil-rights context, but which prevented a need for them. LeFevre wrote, “Is government the only device we know of self-protection? No, it is not. Voluntary insurance is another device. So are private policemen, private organizations such as the American Legion, night watchmen, merchant police, the Triple-A and perhaps a score of others…” (The preceding is a very simplistic description of his approach.) Practical advantages adhere to LeFevre’s and Satoshi’s prevention systems. For one thing, after a crime has occurred, it can be almost impossible to make a victim whole, even in non-criminal cases of straightforward contractor torts. A broken vase may be a family heirloom, for example, but it will be replaced at its market value, not at its sentimental worth. With violent crimes such as rape, assault, or murder, the harm is much more difficult to erase. Bodies can heal, medical bills can be paid, but the emotional suffering can be permanent. The problem of remedying criminal cases has long been recognized. In Ethics of Liberty, even the great advocate of restitution Murray Rothbard argued, “In the question of physical assault, where restitution does not even apply, we can…employ…proportionate punishment; so that if A has beaten up B in a certain way, then B has the right to beat up A…to rather more than the same extent.” The prospect of public beatings seems unpalatable as a solution to civil society. Equally, to lose one’s life savings through inflation, confiscation, mismanagement, and other criminal acts by central banks can be devastating. Restitution may be more easily made—after all, a dollar is a dollar is a dollar—but the return of funds is often unlikely. Even if it occurs, the process can take years and involve massive legal expenses. Prevention is preferable, by far. The government does not want prevention, of course, because the strategy breaks its monopoly over TTPs such as law enforcement and the banking system. It does not matter that law enforcement offers no real customer service; the courts in many countries have ruled that the police have no obligation to protect individuals. However, as long as people are convinced that the police are there “to serve and protect,” then they accept the loss of freedom in the name of security. It does not matter that central banks function as arms of the state. As long as people are convinced of a need for “guarantees” such as Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation protection, they will surrender freedom for a promise of safety. The secret to maintaining the state’s control over society is for it to create fear and then to stoke it. This process is at work in crypto whenever the state appeals to the two forms of law that are its bailiwick: vice laws, such as anti-drug measures; and, regulations, such as Know Your Customer. The two kinds of code that are natural to society cannot be used effectively against crypto: laws to protect person and property; and contract law. Again, state and nation are incompatible. Society’s primary weapon of self-defense is to demonstrate that the state’s protection and “services” are unnecessary. A Haunting Question The stress on prevention also captures a schism in attitude within the crypto community. Prevention and avoidance are natural companions. Confrontation is an uncomfortable one. Which approach is more effective? Alternatively, can a blanket statement be made? Satoshi seemed to think it could be. The two attitudes are epitomized by Julian Assange and Satoshi, both of whom fully understand the freedom value of crypto. Assange expressed his style in an October 2017 tweet: “My deepest thanks to the U.S. government, Senator McCain, and Senator Lieberman for pushing Visa, MasterCard , Paypal, AmEx, Moneybookers, et al., into erecting an illegal banking blockade against @WikiLeaks starting in 2010. It caused us to invest in Bitcoin—with > 50,000% returns.” Satoshi’s attitude was contained in his response to an earlier 2010 tweet from Assange. “Bring it on,” the latter man crowed. Satoshi objected. “No, don’t ‘bring it on.’ The project needs to grow gradually so the software can be strengthened along the way. I make this appeal to WikiLeaks not to try to use Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a small beta community in its infancy.” Less than a week later, on 12 December 2010, Satoshi vanished from the Bitcoin community after posting the message: “WikiLeaks has kicked the hornet’s nest, and the swarm is headed towards us.” The swarm was government and, perhaps, those users who cared nothing about bitcoin as a vehicle of freedom. It is tantalizing to speculate on which software would have been strengthened or added to the beta software: protections against bad actors? Some form of decentralized exchange for trading and cashing out? It is disturbing to realize that bitcoin may have been poorly hindered by being popularized too soon. Another interesting question is whether Satoshi’s attitude toward prevention and avoidance is the most effective attack on the criminal institutions of the state. If so, then those who confront the country with taunts and challenges may be harming a primary benefit of crypto: freedom through prevention, rather than confrontation. They may be handing an advantage back to the state and away from society. Theories of non-violent resistance have a great deal to tell us about how the country and its laws react to competitive challenges. Read the full article

[creativesage]

(via Introduction: 2018 Global Human Capital Trends | Deloitte Insights)

Introduction: The Rise of the Social Enterprise 2018 — Global Human Capital Trends                                        

                                               By Dimple Agarwal,  Josh Bersin,  Gaurav Lahiri,  Jeff Schwartz, and Erica Volini            

            Organizations are no longer judged only for their financial performance, or even the quality of their products or services. Rather, they are being evaluated on the basis of their impact on society at large—transforming them from business enterprises into social enterprises.

The Growing Importance of Social Capital

Learn more:

- View 2018 Global Human Capital Trends or access the app

- Explore the infographic

- Watch the video

- Read the press release

- Download the full report or create a custom PDF.

The 2018 Deloitte Global Human Capital Trends report showcases a profound shift facing business leaders worldwide: The rapid rise of what we call the social enterprise. This shift reflects the growing importance of social capital in shaping an organization’s purpose, guiding its relationships with stakeholders, and influencing its ultimate success or failure.

In 2018, we are witnessing seismic changes in the workforce, the workplace, and the technologies used in the world of work. Based on this year’s global survey of more than 11,000 business and HR leaders, as well as interviews with executives from some of today’s leading organizations, we believe that a fundamental change is underway. Organizations are no longer assessed based only on traditional metrics such as financial performance, or even the quality of their products or services. Rather, organizations today are increasingly judged on the basis of their relationships with their workers, their customers, and their communities, as well as their impact on society at large—transforming them from business enterprises into social enterprises.

In many ways, social capital is achieving a newfound status next to financial and physical capital in value. In a recent survey, for instance, 65 percent of CEOs rated “inclusive growth” as a top-three strategic concern, more than three times greater than the proportion citing “shareholder value.”1 Today, successful businesses must incorporate external trends, perspectives, and voices by maintaining positive relationships, not just with customers and employees, but also with local communities, regulators, and a variety of other stakeholders. Building these relationships challenges business leaders to listen closely to constituents, act transparently with information, break down silos to enhance collaboration, and build trust, credibility, and consistency through their actions. This is not a matter of altruism: Doing so is critical to maintaining an organization’s reputation; to attracting, retaining, and engaging critical workers; and to cultivating loyalty among customers.

What Is a Social Enterprise?

A social enterprise is an organization whose mission combines revenue growth and profit-making with the need to respect and support its environment and stakeholder network. This includes listening to, investing in, and actively managing the trends that are shaping today’s world. It is an organization that shoulders its responsibility to be a good citizen (both inside and outside the organization), serving as a role model for its peers and promoting a high degree of collaboration at every level of the organization.

In past Global Human Capital Trends reports, we have noted the movement of many organizations toward a “network of teams” operating model that aims to enable greater collaboration and internal agility.2 Now, this movement has been joined by the growing shift from an internal, enterprise focus to an external, ecosystem one (figure 1). Organizations on the leading edge of both of these changes embody our concept of the social enterprise: an organization that is alert enough to sense, and responsive enough to accommodate, the gamut of stakeholder expectations and demands.

The Last Decade: Building toward Today’s Tipping Point

Why has this shift occurred? We believe that it is driven by social, economic, and political changes that have grown since the global financial crisis. Despite the economic recovery the world has seen since 2008, many people feel frustrated that financial gains have failed to improve individuals’ lives, address social problems, support political stability, or mitigate technology’s unintended consequences. People today have less trust in their political and social institutions than they have in years; many expect business leaders to fill the gap.

This point was made this year by BlackRock chief executive Laurence Fink. In his annual letter to CEOs, Fink noted that people are increasingly “turning to the private sector and asking that companies respond to broader societal challenges” and demanding that organizations “serve a social purpose.”3 Fink stated that shareholders, including BlackRock itself, are now evaluating companies based on this standard. A New York Times report suggested that the letter could be a “watershed moment on Wall Street” that raises questions about “the very nature of capitalism.”4

Among the many factors contributing to the rise of the social enterprise, we see three powerful macro forces driving the urgency of this change.

First, the power of the individual is growing, with millennials at the forefront. For the first time in mature markets, young people believe that their lives will be worse than their parents’—and they are actively questioning the core premises of corporate behavior and the economic and social principles that guide it.5 Among this group, social capital plays an outsized role in where they work and what they buy, and 86 percent of millennials think that business success should be measured in terms of more than just financial performance.6 Millennials comprise a majority of the workforce in many countries, and their power will likely grow over time.

This shift in power to the individual is being propelled by today’s hyper-connected world, which enables people to track information about companies and their products, express their opinions to a wide audience, and sign onto social movements, globally and in real time. Back in 2015, we called this trend toward greater transparency “the naked organization”;7 in 2018, the individuals know and expect even more from companies than they did three short years ago.

Second, businesses are being expected to fill a widening leadership vacuum in society. Across the globe, people trust business more than government. The 2018 Edelman Trust Barometer reported that people worldwide place 52 percent trust in business “to do what is right,” versus just 43 percent in government.8 In the United States, in particular, trust in government has hit a four-year low, at just 33 percent.9 There is a widespread perception that political systems are growing more and more polarized and less and less effective at meeting social challenges. Citizens are looking to business to fill the void on critical issues such as income inequality, health care, diversity, and cybersecurity to help make the world more equal and fair.

This expectation is placing immense pressure on companies, but it is also creating opportunities. Organizations that engage with people and demonstrate that they are worthy of trust are burnishing their reputation, winning allies, and influencing or supplanting traditional public policy mechanisms. CEOs such as Amazon’s Jeff Bezos and Salesforce’s Marc Benioff have an unprecedented ability to activate their companies for the good of society.10 Consider the organization jointly created by Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, and JP Morgan Chase to lower health care costs for employees—tackling an issue that government cannot solve on its own, while also promising to deliver business benefits.11 On the other hand, companies that appear aloof, tone-deaf, or disengaged face harsh headlines, negative attention on social media, and tough questions from a range of stakeholders.

Third, technological change is having unforeseen impacts on society even as it creates massive opportunities to achieve sustainable, inclusive growth. Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and new communications technologies are fundamentally changing how work gets done, who does it, and how it influences society.12 For instance, machine learning was not in the mainstream three years ago. Today, it is simultaneously one of IT’s hottest areas—and a source of tremendous anxiety about potential job losses. People increasingly realize that rapid technological change, while holding out the promise of valuable opportunities, also creates unforeseen impacts that can undermine social cohesion. Many stakeholders are alarmed, and they expect businesses to channel this force for the broader good.

The good news is that technological advances can open up new opportunities for businesses to have a positive impact on society. Reflecting this view, 87 percent of C-level executives say that Industry 4.0—the industrial revolution brought about by the combination of digital and physical technologies—will lead to more equality and stability, and 74 percent say business will have more influence than governments or other organizations to shape this future.13

Becoming a Social Enterprise

Foundational to behaving as a social enterprise is to listen carefully to the external as well as the internal environment—not just business partners and customers, but all parties in society that an organization influences and is influenced by. In today’s world, the listening opportunity is greater than ever if organizations truly take advantage of the people data they have at their fingertips. The increasingly hyper-connected nature of the workplace means that interactions between and among workers and the outside world can be a tremendous source for analysis if managed appropriately. Leaders need to take a proactive approach to managing this wealth of information and leveraging it to keep an eye on the trends both inside and outside of the workplace.

Being a social enterprise also means investing in the broader social ecosystem, starting with an organization’s own employees. It means treating all workers—on- and off-balance-sheet—in a fair, transparent, and unbiased way. Leaders should seek to provide a work environment that promotes longevity and well-being, not only in an individual’s career, but also in the physical, mental, and financial spheres. By doing this, an organization invests both in its own workforce and in the workforce ecosystem as a whole, which benefits both the organization and society at large.

Finally, a social enterprise seeks to actively manage its position in the social ecosystem by engaging with stakeholders and strategically determining and pursuing the kind of relationship it wants to maintain with each. This cannot be done in a siloed way. Hence, this year we have provided a set of actions that C-suite leaders can take related to each trend. Each area of focus requires strong collaboration amongst leaders both across the organization and outside of it. Leaders should form relationships with the governments and regulatory bodies that shape the “rules of the road,” work collaboratively with them to create and sustain a fair, just, and equitable marketplace, and partner with communities and educational institutions to help sustain a steady flow of talent with the right skills for the organization—and the broader economy—to thrive.

2018’s Ten Human Capital Trends: Importance and Respondent Readiness

Respondents generally agree that, while each of the following trends is important, most organizations are not yet ready to meet expectations.

Explore the data further in the Global Human Capital Trends app.

2018’s Ten Human Capital Trends

The 10 human capital trends we explore in this year’s report come together to create an integrated view of the social enterprise.

[See infographics above] From the top: The Symphonic C-suite Trend 1. The Symphonic C-suite: Teams Leading Teams

Behaving as a social enterprise and managing the external environment’s macro trends effectively demands an unprecedented level of cross-functional vision, connectivity, and collaboration from C-suite leaders. To do this, they must behave as what we call the “symphonic C-suite,” in which an organization’s top executives play together as a team while also leading their own functional teams, all in harmony. This approach enables the C-suite to understand the many impacts that external forces have on and within the organization—not just on single functions—and plot coordinated, agile responses.

The symphonic C-suite is the next stage in the ongoing evolution of leadership models. This new model is necessary to help leaders to understand, manage, and respond to the complex social capital issues that organizations face, enabling them to tap opportunities, manage risks, and build relationships with internal and external stakeholders. What’s more, the symphonic leadership model is vital for growth: Our survey finds that respondents who indicate their C-suite executives “regularly collaborate on long-term interdependent work” are a third more likely to expect their companies to grow at 10 percent or more during the next year than respondents whose CxOs operate independently.

The C-suite must lead an organization’s response to the other nine trends highlighted in this report. The pace and complexity of the changes involved, and the high stakes of success or failure, elevate these as C-level issues, which cannot be delegated or approached in silos. Only a symphonic C-suite team is sufficient for the scale and speed of the following nine trends. In our chapter on the symphonic C-suite, we call out specific actions executives can take to drive greater collaboration.

The power of the Individual

As the power of the individual grows, organizations are revamping their approaches to workforce management, rewards systems, and career models to better listen and respond. In particular, as workers and networks outside the organization grow in importance, companies are striving to build effective ongoing relationships with every segment of the workforce ecosystem. In this year’s report, we have included actions for the individual worker to consider in influencing and managing their personalization and career experiences. The challenge is to figure out how to appropriately address each individual’s preferences and priorities while engaging with a more diverse set of workers and workforce segments than ever before.

Trend 2. The workforce Ecosystem: Managing beyond the Enterprise

Business leaders and chief human resources officers (CHROs) recognize the need to actively and strategically manage relationships with workforce segments beyond the enterprise, which increasingly affect how an organization delivers services and interacts with customers. When asked to forecast the makeup of their workforce in 2020, 37 percent of survey respondents expected a rise in contractors, 33 percent foresaw an increase in freelancers, and 28 percent expected growth in gig workers. Organizations are finding ways to align their culture and management practices with these external talent segments—engaging the workforce ecosystem for mutual benefit.

Trend 3. New Rewards: Personalized, Agile, and Holistic

Leveraging their power as individuals, employees are asking for more personalized, agile, and holistic rewards, including a focus on fair and open pay. While companies recognize this overall shift, only 8 percent report that their rewards program is “very effective” at creating a personalized, flexible solution. Early experiments are exploring how to develop a holistic variety of rewards and match them to individual preferences, across diverse talent segments and on a continuous basis.

Trend 4. From Careers to Experiences: New Pathways

In a 21st-century career, the individual and his or her experiences take center stage. Instead of a steady progression along a job-based pathway, leading organizations are shifting toward a model that empowers individuals to acquire valuable experiences, explore new roles, and continually reinvent themselves. However, 59 percent of our survey respondents rate their organizations as not effective or only somewhat effective at empowering people to manage their own careers. Improvement in this area is essential to attract critical talent, especially as technology shifts the skills landscape.

Filling Society’s Leadership Vacuum

Leading companies are developing strategies that address societal concerns such as longevity and well-being—and doing so in ways that help improve productivity and performance. Those in this vanguard are finding rich opportunities to build social capital and become a leading voice on key societal issues.

Trend 5. The Longevity Dividend: Work in an Era of 100-year Lives

Forward-looking organizations see extended longevity and population aging as an opportunity. Twenty percent of this year’s survey respondents said that they are partnering with older workers to develop new career models. This longevity dividend enables companies to both address a pressing societal issue and tap into a proven, committed, and diverse set of workers. However, doing this requires innovative practices and policies to support extended careers, as well as collaboration between business leaders and workers, to tackle shared challenges such as age bias and pension shortfalls.

Trend 6. Citizenship and Social Impact: Society Holds the Mirror

An organization’s track record of corporate citizenship and social impact now has a direct bearing on its core identity and strategy. Engagement with other stakeholders on topics such as diversity, gender pay equity, income inequality, immigration, and climate change can lift financial performance and brand value, while failure to engage can destroy reputation and alienate key audiences. Many organizations are still catching up: 77 percent of our respondents say that citizenship is important, but only 18 percent say this issue is a top priority reflected in corporate strategy.

Trend 7. Well-being: A Strategy and a Responsibility

As the line between work and life blurs further, employees are demanding that organizations expand their benefits offerings to include a wide range of programs for physical, mental, financial, and spiritual health. In response, employers are investing in well-being programs as both a societal responsibility and a talent strategy. More than 50 percent of survey respondents view a variety of such programs as “valuable” or “highly valuable” to employees, but big gaps remain between what employees value and what companies are delivering.

Leveraging Technology for Sustainable Growth

Organizations are looking to capitalize on the benefits of a surge of new AI-based software, robotics, workplace connectivity tools, and people data applications, while also mitigating potential downsides and unforeseen effects. These tools and investments can help to redesign work architecture, lift productivity, and enhance people efforts, but organizations must also pay attention to and respect their impacts on the workforce as a whole.

Trend 8. AI, Robotics, and Automation: Put Humans in the Loop

The influx of AI, robotics, and automation into the workplace has dramatically accelerated in the last year, transforming in-demand roles and skills inside and outside organizations. Perhaps surprisingly, those roles and skills focus on the “uniquely human” rather than the purely technical: Survey respondents predict tremendous future demand for skills such as complex problem-solving (63 percent), cognitive abilities (55 percent), and social skills (52 percent). To be able to maximize the potential value of these technologies today and minimize the potential adverse impacts on the workforce tomorrow, organizations must put humans in the loop—reconstructing work, retraining people, and rearranging the organization. The greatest opportunity is not just to redesign jobs or automate routine work, but to fundamentally rethink “work architecture” to benefit organizations, teams, and individuals.

Trend 9. The Hyper-Connected Workplace: Will Productivity Reign?

New communications tools are rapidly entering the workplace. Seventy percent of respondents believe workers will spend more time on collaboration platforms in the future, 67 percent see growth in “work-based social media,” and 62 percent predict an increase in instant messaging. But as these tools migrate from personal life to the workplace, organizations must apply their expertise in team management, goal-setting, and employee development to ensure that they actually improve organizational, team, and individual performance and promote the necessary collaboration to truly become a social enterprise. Like the outside world, organizations are becoming hyper-connected; can they also become hyper-productive?

Trend 10. People Data: How Far is Too Far?

The rapid increase in data availability and the advent of powerful people analytics tools have generated rich opportunities for HR and organizations—but they are now also generating a variety of potential risks. While more than half of our survey respondents are actively managing the risk of employee perceptions of personal data use, and a similar proportion is managing the risk of legal liability, only a quarter are managing the impact on their consumer brand. Organizations face a tipping point: Develop a set of well-defined policies, security safeguards, transparency measures, and ongoing communication around the use of people data, or risk employee, customer, and societal backlash.

A Call to Action

The 2018 Global Human Capital Trends report sounds a wake-up call for organizations. The rise of the social enterprise requires a determined focus on building social capital by engaging with diverse stakeholders, accounting for external trends, creating a sense of mission and purpose throughout the organization, and devising strategies that manage new societal expectations. At stake is nothing less than an organization’s reputation, relationships, and, ultimately, success or failure.

In this new era, human capital is inextricably tied to social capital. This reality demands a fundamental pivot in how organizations do business today—and how they prepare for the human capital challenges of the future.

[Excerpt from the introductory post — click on the title link to read it with notes, appendix, all illustrations, and links to other relevant articles at Deloitte.com.]

***

At Creative Sage™, we love to connect corporate leaders and entrepreneurs with good causes, and help companies start genuine Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability, Social Entrepreneurship, Intrapreneurship, Impact Investing and/or philanthropy programs that are a win-win for all partners. We’re also researching new developments in the Sharing Economy that include new business models to increase profits, and also support social good.

Please do not hesitate to email us if you would like to discuss your situation and find out more about how we can help your organization move forward to a more innovative and profitable future, strengthening your branding and resonance with customers while helping to do good in the world through appropriate, authentic CSR partnerships with nonprofits, philanthropists, educational institutions and programs, or government agencies and community organizations.

We can also help you connect with celebrities and other notable people who can help amplify your message of social good, or headline entertainment events and concerts for good causes. You can call us at 1-510-845-5510 in San Francisco / Silicon Valley. We look forward to talking with you!

***

[anas-techgenius-blog]

1400 Years Ago, Islam Offered the Perfect Social System for Women.

God created men and women with certain differences so that they complete each other. The biological differences assigned women primarily to bear and raise children and men to be the protector and maintainer of the family due to his physical strength.

Since Ancient times, however, these differences have made men feel superior over women who suffered from ill-treatment and injustice, being deprived of many social and economic rights throughout history. In the West, the chain has gradually broken only when historical events forced societies to grant women their rights – only to take advantage of them in other ways in return, causing great harm to the society which we can clearly see today.

In the Arabian peninsula, however, the chain of women’s exploitation has already broken hundreds of years ago by the arrival of Islam that, due to its Divine nature, remains the only system which gives rights to women and fully acknowledges their abilities and valuable skills while providing a harmonic atmosphere in which they take equal part in building a healthy society.

Women in Western Culture

In ancient Europe, men had fairly low opinion of women and often considered them property rather than humans. The noble Greek philosopher, for example, Aristotle said the following in his book The Politics: “as regards the sexes, the male is by nature superior and the female inferior, the male ruler and the female subject.” The ancient world basically excluded women that they had no rights to participate in the decision making. They fully depended on men for their entire lives. Anything a woman possessed belonged to her father or her husband, and she couldn’t make a contract or enter financial transaction without the permission of her guardian. Inheritance was downright illegal to her. Only the poor were forced to do physical work for living; elite women usually stayed  indoor so their guardian could make sure they don’t converse with other men as that was a sign of prostitution. In Sparta, brothers could share the same wife and single men might have borrowed a wife! The Roman Empire valued women the same way, except for a short period in which Emperor Augustus introduced a series of laws that gave much freedom for women. He restricted adultery, which was a morally accepted and common practice in the entire ancient world, and women were allowed to hold public office or work in the government. However, the protests of men were of great impact that the circumvention of the laws began. Even Christianity failed to improve the situation of women in the West due to its distorted teachings. Unlike Islam, the Bible we know today accuses Eve of persuading Adam to eat from the forbidden tree thus causing humankind to fell from Paradise to the Earth. God in the Bible even curses Eve and her female offspring with the pain of childbirth and threatens that her husband “will rule over you”. (Genesis 2:4-3:24) This concept led to the common belief that women are evil, unreliable and morally inferior to men (Ecclesiastes 7:26-28 and Ecclesiasticus 25:19, 24) and created a society in Europe that restricted, oppressed and deprived women of their basic rights. (Timothy 2:11-14) In the 18th century, the industrial revolution brought changes in the economic structure that forced women (usually from lower class) to enter the labor market. In the meantime, aristocracy allowed women to be educated although politics and business remained reserved for men. Silence was still a woman’s best characteristics. But this gradually changed; by the early 20th century when women could obtain degree and enter the work field typically as teachers or nurses. During the French Revolution (1787-1799), women began to form feminist movements and expressed a collective voice, demanding economic, political, and educational rights.” Scandinavian countries granted the demanded rights to women first followed by Britain where the Matrimonial Causes Act (1857) allowed ordinary people to divorce (only on the grounds of adultery) and where women voted the first time in 1928. Countries with Roman heritage remained behind, but soon after WWI and II, women entered the work market to compensate for the huge losses of men’s lives. However, it was not a choice any more. By the middle of the 20th century, Western women successfully gained equality before the law; but gender feminists (unlike equality feminists) have continued their mission and “challenged that women should not be identified as wife and mother.” In post-modern times, gender feminists claim that”gender roles are boxes that people are asked to fit themselves into” and that there aren’t anything biological about men or women that should form social roles despite scientific facts which show the opposite. Women-R

Today’s feminists seem to take revenge against the centuries-long deprivation of their rights and go further by seeking gender privilege instead of equal justice. In reality, individualism and the value-free approach of the West is just another way to harm women where the picture of the ideal woman is shaped according to the interest of the market while ridiculing those who refuse being part of the system. Hence, modesty and norms are looked down, and the role of motherhood and the importance of family are devaluated which have had extreme social and financial cost in the Western society.

Women in Islam

In Arabia, women used to live under conditions similar to that of the Ancient World. Men used to marry dozens of women and buried female children alive. With the arrival of Islam, such barbaric traditions were demolished and the status of women has risen to the extent that no any other social system could compete with it.

Islam views both men and women to be equal in the sight of Allah and equally responsible in their (religious) duties as outlined for them in the Qur’an. [4:124] In social context, however, “Islam fully recognizes the biological differences of men and women and the different demands these differences impose on the life course of believers.” First of all, in an Islamic marriage, husband and wife co-operate with each other in kindness and peace (30:21) working hand in hand to better the society and bring up the next generation; violence, abuse and ill-treatment that used to be common cannot be tolerated. “They (your wives) are your garment and you are a garment for them.” (Qur’an 2:187)

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) also said: “The most perfect believers are the best in conduct and best of you are those who are best to their wives.”

Mistakenly, non-Muslims (and Muslims) frequently raise the issue of guardianship (qawamah) of a husband over his wife in Islam and bring the Quranic verse (4:34) as proof: “Men are qawwam (the protectors and maintainers) of women…”

However, being qawwam over women actually means always being present, protecting and maintaining women in a proper manner; providing stability and constant source of support; being a guardian – features most wives certainly want in her husband. This also requires looking after women’s emotional and psychological needs as well, which is often more important for them than money and provision. In the sight of Allah, what makes one better is solely his or her level of taqwa.  (49:13) prophet-muhammad-women For 1400 years, Muslim women have enjoyed many rights women in other societies hardly possessed until recently. For example, brides can decide whom they wish to marry; a woman’s direct consent is actually one of the conditions of a valid marriage. Second, Islamic Law fully acknowledges the right of woman to her money, real estate, and other properties which does not transfer to the husband upon marriage. Muslim women have the right to seek divorce (khul’a), remarry and even inherit.

Although, Islam holds motherhood in the highest esteem (“Be dutiful to your mother, as Paradise is at her foot.”[Ahmed, Nasai] and Quran 46:15), Muslim women are respected as independent human beings; singles, widows, and infertile sisters are certainly not cast out in an Islamic society.

Women can perform many roles besides motherhood, if they wish, providing important contributions to the community while not worrying about the finances as even though they work, their guardian is still responsible for them and the family’s provision. We can have a glimpse at early Islamic history to ascertain. Khadijah, the successful trader and first wife of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), great scholars like Aisha bint Abu Bakr or Umm Al-Darda’, or Layla bint Abdullah, the first woman to hold public office are just some of the few great examples to mention.

Once, a woman argued with Caliph Umar ibn Khattab in the mosque when he wanted to limit the amount of a woman’s dowry. She proved her point and caused him to declare in the presence of people: “The woman is right and ‘Umar is wrong.” This occasion indicates that Muslim women are also involved in serious discussions along with men. As a matter of fact, even the Prophet (PBUH) would consult his wives in the most sensitive matters.

Hence, we can conclude that in the milieu of today’s value-free Western and oppressing Muslims societies, which practice cultural Islam rather than Islamic culture, we can clearly see that Islam is the only system that ensures justice between men and women by believing that God provides the best unbiased source of knowledge about how men and women should live their lives. Islam appreciates women, gives them equal rights, and encourages them to be productive members of the society – as mothers, wives, educators, or otherwise.