#like.... what do you mean they can overcome their disabilities and have lives why the fuck cant i do that

[ancient-reverie]

a moment of silence for all us disabled ones who had to watch each of their friends move on with their lives without you and get jobs, go to school, have partners come and go, get engaged and move house etc.

shout out to my fellow struggling people who are still sitting in the same bedroom they grew up in. the ones who can't get a job, can't make new friends, can't find a partner or partners, can't move house and can't go to school.

I hope one day we can all find someone to at least sit with us in our rooms. I see you and I understand... and I'm sorry we can't be that person for each other

[dailyadventureprompts]

So, I mostly just need some advice. I want to introduce stuff like the combat wheelchair into campaigns I run and play in, but some players say it’s “unrealistic” for stuff like that to be in a campaign because “why wouldn’t you just get greater restoration or regenerate casted on you or something”. I know that’s a bunch of bull crap, but I’m not sure what to say to convince them.

Heavy Topics: Disability in Fantasy

I'm going to start this off with saying that people with a lot more education and experience than me have written quite a lot about the inclusion of disabilities in d&d, and I encourage you to seek out their testimonials.

Next, you don't need to convince anybody about introducing things in your campaigns, especially when that introduction is specifically to highlight inclusion and diversity . They're YOUR campaigns, and people that cry "realism" when it comes to matters of inclusion are almost always covering up for their own prejudice.

Now what I can do with expert efficiency is address the bullshit claims that people try to use to support their prejudice, how it doesn't line up with the mechanics of the game, and how it doesn't line up with good storytelling.

TLDR: Disability is a fact of life, and so it is a fact of stories. In trying to brush it aside by saying " oh magic could fix everything" we also brush aside the lived experiences of millions of people, equally deserving as seeing themselves as characters in the fantasy epics we tell. Purely form a storytelling and world building perspective, it's also far more interesting to see how people adapt to challenges then it is to make those challenges simply not exist or be easily fixed by author fiat.

First lets talk over the mechanical issue: In vanilla d&d there's no way to restore lost limbs short of the regeneration spell, which is 7th level and thus requires a 14th level character to cast. 14th level characters are thin on the ground, meaning that your average person would have to undertake an arduous journey to find such a caster willing to perform this working , to say nothing of finding one willing to perform the service for any payment a commoner could provide.

Likewise, regeneration specifies that it's SEVERED limbs that are restored: rules as written it doesn't fix neurological damage, birth defects, or congenial traits. As someone who's needed glasses from youth onwards, I find it hilarious that a flimsy pair of lenses can fix what high level divine magic ( possibly even the wish spell) cannot, but that's more a matter of the designers thinking more about the lives of adventurers than the worldbuilding implicit in their rules.

Turning to 3rd party material and homebrew, we enter into some very interesting territory. There's much back and forth about magic that "fixes" disability outright and where I fall on the discussion tends to land on the idea that said magic lets the character overcome many of the hurdles of their impediment but doesn't negate it completely. Here's some pop culture examples:

Toph from ATLA is always go be the go to for disability representation in media: She's blind, but uses her earthbending powers to be able to sense vibrations in contact with the ground allowing her to "see". In a badly written show, this would totally negate Toph's disability, but thankfully ATLA is written by people who know what they're doing so instead Toph's blindness provides just as many novel drawbacks as it does advantages. Toph can detect things happening on the other side of walls and doors, but is vulnerable to projectiles that don't touch the ground. She can sense if people are lying, but can't read printed text. Force her onto a small, isolated platform or into water and you cut off her ability to see just as much as a fully sighted character in pitch black darkness.

Edward Elric from fullmetal Alchemist is missing an arm and a leg, and uses a pair of integrated robotic "automail" prosthesis which seem to give him all the functionality of a regular set of limbs. That said, any utility the automail provides is matched with whole host of downsides, ranging from their lack of touch, their weight causing discomfort, and the expense of having them in the first place. What's most pressing is that these limbs are mechanical and prone to malfunciton from overuse, requiring Edward to see a specific technician to get them fixed. When they break ( which is often) or simply require refitting, Edward needs to travel days or weeks out of his way and then suffer through a painful process of reattachment in order to get the use of his limbs back.

Professor Xavier from the Xmen is paraplegic, but in many depictions has some kind of hoverchair that lets him go out into the field and navigate difficult terrain without the aid of others or other mobility devices. While certainly an upgrade over a totally mundane wheelchair it again doesn't completely compensate for his inability to walk or his vulnerability should the chair be damaged or taken away from him.

With these examples in mind, we can look at how different 3rd party resources can model various forms of accommodation, giving characters with disabilities the utility they need to go out adventuring, without removing their disability in the first place.

The "combat wheelchair" is a great example of this, giving characters unique options while at the same time making them atleast partially reliant on a somewhat cumbersome object. In terms of logistics, it's not much different than having a centaur in the party and the fact that most dungeons aren't wheelchair accessible just means the party has to do maybe one or two more platforming problem solving challenges.

In my own time running steampunk games I’ve usually instituted a “misfire” rule onto most technology, including the ubiquitous mechanical limbs. A natural 1 using that limb means that the limb is suffering a malfunction, and until the malfunction is fixed, another natural 1 will break it. It’s an easy way to get across that these marvellous contraptions aren't perfect yet.

Now lets talk storytelling:

Upfront I'm going to say that I don't consider myself disabled,I have some mental health hurdles that I have to navigate on the regular, but my body works at a solid 6/10 most days. 

I think there’s a lot potential in examining disability in stories, and not just in the “overcoming adversity” inspiration porn sort of way. The loss of a limb can represent a sacrifice and the toll of war, prejudice against disfigurement can drive a character down a dark path, sometimes there’s no greater thematic reasoning behind it and a character is living with disability because that’s a thing regular people live with. What I will say is that disability introduces vulnerability, a theme that power fantasy games like d&d don’t often deal with as their centeral arc is about characters getting stronger and stronger and stronger until they can challenge the gods. 

Vulnerability runs counter to that desire for strength, but it makes a better story because what a character does with vulnerability makes them a more interesting character: Do they rely on others? Close themselves off? Come to terms with their weakness or strive to overcome it? These are all fascinating questions that you wouldn’t get to ask with a character that was 100% able bodied, well adjusted, and socially accepted.

It’s not a stretch to say that people who have regressive political views are terrified of vulnerability. that’s why the right-wing chuds are so vehemently opposed to the idea that someone with a disability could be a hero. To them, adversity is all about the superior overcoming the inferior, and the thought of someone with weakness or disadvantages, someone they consider “inferior” triumphing against someone stronger is a direct challenge to their place inside their own worldview.

Finally I’m going to leave you with something relating to vulnerability to consider from my own campaigns:

In my home games when someone fails their death saving throws, I generally don’t kill them, killing them cuts the narrative short and I want to see how things play out. Instead I give them an offer: do they pass on into death, or do they let me take something from them? 90% of the time they chose the latter option and I make things interesting. What happens to the master archer who can’t string a bow anymore, or the fame hungry bard who’s scars distract from their performance? What price will the wizard pay to regain the use of her eyes?  Forcing players to confront these questions takes a lot of tact, and a lot of trust, but always yields better stories but given enough time to develop.

Art

[physalian]

Tackling Characters with Mental Health Issues (or, ‘Write What you Know’)

**Trigger warning for this entire post**

This is completely off the cuff and unplanned but here we go. I just read a book that POV switches between its two romantic leads. One of these leads was intended to be written with a severe case of generalized anxiety. I have confirmation from the author that it’s not an author-insert. This character was entirely based on research, not experience.

Without putting them on blast, because they really did try…. While ‘neurodivergent’ or ‘mental health disorder’ isn’t a protected class, it should still fit squarely under other topics you shouldn’t write about if you don’t experience it with a massive asterisk.

TL;DR: If you yourself aren’t part of X minority or suffer Z physical or mental disability, you should not be barred from writing characters with those traits. ***HOWEVER*** writing these characters struggling, suffering, or overcoming this given trait in a pro-cis, straight, white, neurotypical, able-bodied America is not yours to touch.

This suffering isn’t your story to profit off of, when you didn’t actually suffer any of it.

I cannot remember who said it and I am absolutely paraphrasing but for example: White authors can and should include characters of color (and I am a White author). White authors should *not* write about a character of color as their protagonist experiencing bigotry, discrimination, hate crimes, and all that hardship, at the hands of white society. It’s just not your story to tell, and all the research in the world will never give you the lived experience you need to do it justice.

Like, you can write about the concept of slavery existing in a fantasy novel. Or sci-fi. Or some Alternate Universe historical fiction. You cannot write about the American slave trade like you lived it and still suffer the ramifications of it when you didn’t, especially when it is the thesis of your entire book.

Anyone remember that awful Amazon movie, My Policeman? Based on a book written by a straight, white woman whose straight female lead took an entire narrative to whine about how she was jilted by her gay husband and his gay lover who she got arrested and institutionalized so she could keep her husband… and never told them? With the predatory 3rd love interest and the whole ‘liar revealed’ and… yeah. That one.

Unless you do the work very few authors are willing to do, with permission and encouragement and a backing from whatever minority you’re writing about and their stamp of approval that you knocked it out of the park, just don’t. Save yourself the headache.

—

As I read this book, and this entire character’s arc is about her mental health, for 100k words… why would you *want* to take on that responsibility? Why would you want to take on all that extra research, all the stress of making sure you get it right, all the costs of hiring sensitivity readers and the risk of your character falling apart with readers who do fit these traits?

Characters with mental health problems are very, very tricky to get right for one massive reason: Accurately depicting many disorders and anxieties means your character can come across as extremely unlikeable, uncompelling, confusing, and frustrating. These characters won’t make logical choices or arguments, they’re likely to self-sabotage, contradict themselves, argue in circles, and die on molehills they think are mountains. This is just what anxiety does to people in the real world. We are not always compelling protagonists, and we don’t always get happy endings.

Writing illogical characters takes a lot of practice if you yourself are not an illogical thinker and if you’re writing half a book elbow-deep in 3rd person limited, intimately trying to describe how this disorder impacts their daily life, you, my friend, have so much more work cut out for you than you anticipated.

So why?

It got very sticky very quickly when the message I took away from the book was “character A can love away character B’s anxiety” and that just… it’s just not how it works. That is a very dangerous mindset to have, for both parties involved.

Character A does not exist to “fix” Character B, nor should A exist to be B’s therapist.

Making A B’s “medicine” can encourage some dangerous codependency. Especially if they break up, B backslides and spirals, and A takes on guilt for not being there anymore, as if any of this is A’s fault.

It says that ‘curing’ anxiety just takes a little romance. Which. No. B has to love themselves, first, before they’re able to love anyone else or let anyone else love them.

It got stickier when the author accidentally wrote a trauma-induced ace who wanted to start liking sex to please her partner and not for her own peace of mind (with internalized self-hate for her anxieties around sex as if not liking it after a traumatic experience isn't completely justified), as if she wasn’t good enough with the boundaries she had. And the narrative backed it up because she was *cured* after a couple rounds in the sheets—I worked really hard on my Ace character guide to help stop people from doing this.

Had Character A accepted these boundaries B had, and these two come to a creative compromise around intimacy that B does like, it would have been so much healthier. B liked making out, just not being the 'recieving' partner, while A chose to die on a 'if we can't have the sex I want, I can't be in a romance with you' hill and it just broke my heart for B. B wasn't being picky. B was traumatized.

The worst thing you can do to your ace character is a) reinforce the idea that they’ve failed as a human because they don’t like sex and b) reinforce the idea that they “just haven’t found the right person yet” and this narrative hit both in the bullseye.

The author wasn’t trying to write an ace, I can tell, but aceness aside “good sex is the best cure to your sexual trauma” is… also, not great? If you yourself didn’t experience this? The point of all of this was clearly to attempt exposure therapy, it just got so bogged down with other problems that the nuance necessary to stick the landing was completely lost.

If this was fantasy, like Twilight, with Bella’s dangerous codependency on Edward in New Moon, mental health is not the point of that book. The author didn’t set out on a mission to provide respectful representation of depression and healthy relationship goals. It’s toxic as hell, but it also takes a backseat to the actual story and the audience who loves those books couldn’t care less about how toxic it is.

The books aren’t about Bella overcoming her depression. They’re about sparkly vampires and the dangers of… teen pregnancy?

It got even *stickier* when the character revealed she’d apparently been in therapy for a decade and a half, only for her therapist to shrug and go ‘I guess you’re stuck with it’ while her mental health issue became a physical health issue, because she should have had a crippling eating disorder that the narrative didn't at all take seriously.

Why would you want the stress of writing this?

—

I am not at all saying you can’t write anxious characters if you yourself are not anxious. But make that an ingredient of the pie and not the entire pie, yeah?

Ask yourself why you’re doing this. The fundamental argument of that book seemed to be “anxiety can be loved away” and from the very first page, it was doomed. That was the book’s thesis. The entire story hinged on the success of this depiction.

I can’t even be mad, because it wasn’t intended to be harmful, but it inadvertently reaffirmed so many dangerous and incorrect assumptions and stereotypes about mental health. Good intentions historically do not guarantee good results.

If you do not suffer from anxiety, you are still allowed to write a character who experiences it (Or OCD, specific phobias, BPD, what have you). I tip my hat to anyone willing to do all the work to get it right because those are all tall orders, but you aren’t blacklisted from these characters.

But with any minority, anyone who isn’t “cis, straight, white, male, neurotypical, and able-bodied” write a character who is also X, instead of an X stereotype, who happens to be your character.

[fantasygerard2000]

"The Seven Teens in Wish don't have much to do in the movie other than being a reference". A criticism that I both agree and disagree with. Like any other Wish criticism, this is one of the few that gets rebuffed if you watch the movie again and payed attention. While i do agree with the issue of a movie having way too many characters, of all the teens, Dahlia, Simon and Gabo are the ones who have the most prominent roles and are tied to movie's themes.

Let's start off with Gabo. While many others dislike him because he's a jerk, there's some merit as to why he's so pessimistic. While I don't like including info from supplementary material like tie-in books, they do have that extra detail that was lacking in the final movie. In A Recipe for Adventure (which will be used a lot in this post), the author speculates that Gabo is a disappointed optimist. Even though we don't have much to work with other from that piece of trivia, when can always think of something to tie him with the film's theme.

Gabo represents the disappointment in a system where few are given benefits over the majority. He always talks about Simon and Sabino's unfulfilling lives because they gave their wishes away and hoping they will be granted, suggesting that he has seen or what it's like to have an unhappy unfulfilling life. He assumes Asha applying for the role of Magnifico's apprentice so that she can have the benefits of having her and her family's wishes; "cheating" her way to get what she wants while the others are left waiting. Him being a "disappointment optimist" suggests that he had high hopes upon moving to Rosas but has seen how long the waited that his hopes are snuffed and has doubts about the system in general.

At the third act of the film, he decides to help Asha and Star free the wishes because Star reignites his hope for a positive future, one where people can live their lives happy and fulfilled.

Dahlia has the most screen time and lines of the teens, so obviously she has more character than the rest of them.

She's noticeably uses a crutch to walk. While Disney could've easily made her story about wanting to walk without her crutch, they chose not to. In Recipe for Adventure, her wish is to become the best baker in the kingdom, to which she has already achieved. She works as a kitchen staff in the castle, home of Rosas' founder and king.

This shows that she doesn't need magic to become the best baker, all she has is the effort to work for her dreams despite having a disability. This ties with the film's moral as well as a positive lesson for people with disabilities to overcome the struggles and achieve their dreams.

Also in the book, she has a grandmother who passed away and was the one who taught her about her passion for baking. Her and Asha meeting as kids and becoming close friends ties back to my previous post about Asha, mainly about her suffering from loss and that she and Dahlia supported each other going through their darkest moment.

Like Dahlia, Simon also has more character than the rest.

Simon was once an active person, loves going outdoors and horseback riding. I suggest the idea that since his wish is to become a knight for the kingdom, he had trained for the position.

After he gave away his wish once he became 18, all that passion was taken away as the once lively and active aspiring knight loses that drive and becomes a husk of what he once was.

There's a saying that Simon's sleepiness resulted from his wish taken away is reminiscent of depression, which I agree. Simon's joy and dream was to become a knight and help defend his people. When that joy was taken away and his dream unfulfilled, he feels he has no purpose.

Him ratting Asha out of his selfish desire to have his wish be finally granted may be stemmed from his desperation to get rid of the emptiness he has felt. Like how people with depression use "means" to feel that joy they craved which resulted in paying the price out of their own health; ie his mind being controlled by Magnifico and their friends and family's concerns; betraying his friends.

After Magnifico's defeat and Simon is out of his spell, he apologizes for betraying Asha, with his reasons that he "wanted to believe in Magnifico." This brings out a dark aspect of Magnifico's wish system, he takes away people's joy, making them feel desperate to beg to him that they'll do anything for him to feel that joy again.

Simon's story may be applicable to people who have achieve their dream job out of their selfish desire to achieve it, like leaving their friends and family behind in order to get it. But once said dreams have strings attached, like working for a corrupted system that only hired you until you're "replaceable", you take it all back and feel disappointed for trusting all your hopes and dreams to an unfair system.

While the rest of the teens don't have the same character put in like Dahlia, Simon and Gabo, I feel like giving them their own arcs would have cluttered an already cluttered movie.

Wish has problems, but those problems aren't fixable by adding in things like an alien love interest and an influencer couple. Wish's issues is that the creators didn't put in the extra push it needed, hence why it feels "not enough".

[muzzleroars]

idk if you intentioned it like that, but as someone with chronic pain and fatigue, mike's condition half rotting condition makes me feel at least a bit more seen :,D

Sometimes days are harder than other, overworking is always on the table when you used to be an overachiever before your illness, the constant horror from other people too that , and the fear of some days being worse than others, the fear that you have overdone it so bad that you cant go further like the day before.

There is a fear some disabled people with this stuff dont talk about often because of not wanting to be pitied or looked for, so the more visual depicton of the rotting rather than the internal feeling is a way to kind of emphasize "This is pain. There is a limit he reached and keeps overcoming, even as he is falling apart"

This though also allows for the plant regrowth of mike to also be a hopeful thing of what comes when you finally respect the limits of your own body and learn how to treat it. Allowing your body to heal and you to learn new ways of enjoying time, even if its not the same as it used to be. Its not the same and might never be, but there are other, gentler ways to enjoy things now. Now you are even enjoying the bird chirp you never heard as you were rushing from task to task.

Once again sounds probably like rambling, but mike is just his own little garden of eden and learning how to tend to it means learning how to tend to himself too

thank you so much for this message, i'm really happy to see that this aspect of michael's character comes through because that's exactly what i'm trying to portray. michael is very much meant to show the physical and mental burnout one is left with after years of overachieving and perfectionism, coupled with becoming ill in a way that prevents him from continuing to achieve that standard. some days he tries to work to that same capacity, but he realizes more and more he's pushing himself to extremes when he's left combating much more severe symptoms as a result. at first, he fights against his body, treating it as an enemy, an obstacle, a weakness, forcing it beyond what it can now do because acceptance is just too difficult. if he can still perform as he once did, if he never slows and carries out his duty as the prince of heaven and warden of hell, then nothing has changed. he can make himself sick over and over again, trapping himself in a vicious cycle that only breaks down a body in desperate need of more care, but if he can still, eventually, force himself through another day of how he once could serve, he can deny his illness. but through the care of his siblings and v2, he gains an increasing appreciation for his body as it is now and what it is capable of. understanding his limits is a slow process, but as his fear and anger and grief are attended to, so can he now attend to his body, feel love for it and for the plants that grow in it now. they're so happy to have life and he starts to feel through them, finding himself in this body like he never before had the chance to.

i was diagnosed with a chronic illness a few years ago, and i went through these stages to arrive now in a place where my life is very different from before but i'm okay with it. i wanted michael to be similar, and that's also why i don't find a way to just "heal" characters - they are not broken because they are ill, and i want them to achieve fullness in that illness. michael actually lives a much more peaceful life in this new body, one that initially invoked so much hatred and fear but becomes beautiful as its own little garden even though it is the same as it has been ever since it died. there is still difficulty no matter how long it's been, there is still frustration and hardship through what has been lost, but he, overall, is happier, calmer, and more connected to himself than he was before his illness. disability is a complex thing and i know we don't all relate to it the same, but i just drew on my own experience and im so glad it could resonate with you too.

[salti-thelatediagnosedautist]

The emotional whiplash of a late autism diagnosis.

When I first thought about reaching out for an autism diagnosis, I did not expect the emotional roller-coaster it put me through.

I had suspected I was autistic since 13 years old. I was self diagnosed since 18 years old. I’m now 22, meaning I had related to and thought about being autistic for close to a decade.

Basically, I thought I was really comfortable with the idea of being autistic. It felt right, it felt good to know what was “wrong” with me. Even whilst going through the assessment process I was ecstatic. I was so excited to finally be able to confidently say “I am autistic”. Or be able to explain away my oddities and struggles. To finally be able to prove why I struggle with certain things.

Even for a few days after my diagnosis, I was so happy. I finally had my answer. I was right all along, I am autistic.

Then, “oh shit. I’m autistic. I will be autistic, for my whole life...”.

Complete, joyful certainty, was followed by doubt, fear and shame.

I am going to be autistic for the *rest* of my existence. I am going to be disabled for the rest of my existence. I am going to struggle with my sensory issues, my social struggles, my difficulty with connection, my sense of feeling out of place...

... for the rest of my life.

It almost felt like a death sentence, despite having been so comfortable with the diagnosis before I got professionally assessed.

Realising that I was actually a medically, 100% authentic, autisitic meant that I had to face the fact that I would NEVER be neurotypical. I can NEVER be normal. This is who I am, forever.

Yes, there are treatments and therapies and meds, but this won’t just go away. Being diagnosed doesn’t make it go away. It makes you realise just how permanent it is.

So, for a few weeks after my diagnosis, I have been grieving. I know that sounds weird but the idea of who I was, am, and will be, has had to completely change for me.

I will never be able to overcome my autistic traits. I thought through self improvement and hard work I could overcome my social anxiety, food aversions, high sensitivity and social blindness. But I won’t. Not completely. I can manage my traits and work on lessening their effect, but autism will ALWAYS influence my life.

Another aspect of being diagnosed that was depressing to me was realising how much time I wasted trying to be neurotypical. I’m an autistic person who tends to mask... a lot. I even referred to myself in the past as a chronic people pleaser... during some points of my life I feel as though I completely lost my identity to masking. To trying to be something I wasn’t.

I’ve had to realise how much time I wasted trying to make myself normal. Years of my life. My entire highschool experience, entire jobs... wasted to the mask. (Masking is not necessarily bad I just personally took it too far).

The part that hurts the worst to me, is realising that I never had a chance. I thought if I masked enough I would pass as normal, be able to live a neurotypical life.

But I never had even a sliver of a chance at succeeding at being neurotypical. At being “normal”. All my efforts were basically for nothing.

I’m sure now that people have always been able to tell I was different, an oddity, perhaps just a bit “eccentric”. But little-me was always destined to fail.

I was always destined to run into major burn out. Masking 24/7 for literal years was guaranteed to destroy my mental health and ruin my identity, self confidence and self worth.

The other aspect I struggled to comes to terms with is how no-one noticed. Looking back at my childhood, I feel as though it is extremely obvious I was struggling. I had few friends, was very emotional, very withdrawn. But because I was doing well in school and could talk no one seemed to want to look further into me.

I know that my lack of a diagnosis was not from a lack of love from my parents. I know that logically. Yet I can’t help but feel betrayed. They didn’t notice such a pervasive and destructive disability (only destructive because of my lack of understanding at the time) in their own kid. I question if they cared, if they loved me. If any of my teachers even gave a shit about me.

But despite all this, I feel as though I am slowly coming to terms with what being autistic will mean for me, and for my life. Being able to identify as disabled has made self compassion so much easier for me already.

To finish off, I want to let you all know that this is my warning. Self diagnosis is a wonderful thing. But no matter how comfortable you feel with your self diagnosis, if you go to get a professional diagnosis please be prepared for a LOT of feelings. It’s a lot to process. Please be kind to yourself. <3

[my-gf-is-kazuichi-soda]

Thoughts on Kaito and Internalized Ableism (long post warning)

33:14 Chapter 2 Investigation (Spoilers for the entire game throughout this post)

Note: Normally I reference scenes from the English dub, but I happened to click on this one with the voices in Japanese, and I'm too lazy rn to go searching for the English dub. I think the English subs are the same, but just wanted to reference in case there are discrepancies.

^^^ Here is one of Kaito's opinions that can be good in the right context, and I think it was used right in this one, but also gives vibes of stemming from his internalized ableism (is it still called internalized ableism if you're also applying it to other people??). Maybe it's the "if you've got time to __ you've got time to __" that sounds like something a mean teacher would say.

Another small sidenote: I've also seen someone headcanon Gonta as autistic, which I agree with. I wont be talking about it this post other than this sidenote, but I can relate to that feeling of "I cant help, I'm too dumb, so I should just stay out of the way." But everyone should be doing the investigation, since their lives are on the line, so Kaito was right in this example telling him that he should at least read the Monokuma file. That's all I have to say about Gonta in this post btw.

(Trigger warning: Talk of life-threatening illness, internalized ableism, Ryoma's suicidal depression).

My headcanon for Kaito is that he has always been sick with a life threatening illness, but pushes himself past his limits out of misguided ideas (disability inspiration porn) of "overcoming" his illness to be the "Luminary of the Stars." I also talked about that in this post.

Of course, being disabled myself, it's possible I just always associate advice like this with "well, how do you want disabled people to apply this advice, how much are you willing to accommodate them or be patient with them versus just pushing them to their limits?" And considering that Kaito was hiding an illness in canon makes me wonder how much that relates to his ideologies and how he sees himself.

He can be very harsh sometimes, especially with guys (that gender role crap about men being strong). His illness doesn't excuse this, but it can explain how and why he's so forward about telling others to suck it up and get themselves together. The problems/naiveté with that way of thinking shows up when he talks about Ryoma being suicidal (14:57 in the video).

One of Kaito's worst lines, if not his worst line period. It's good writing and very in-character, but it's very hard to stomach. It's the words of a naïve kid who really really doesn't understand someone being suicidal and how it affects them. He lives by an attitude of overcoming anything and believing in everyone (he's also a friendly, outgoing person, noting that "living for your friends" thing), it's hard for him to fathom Ryoma's feelings as something he couldn't have just, powered through, overcame, believed in himself more? Ryoma's depression was, like, a discouragement, so why couldn't Ryoma have just... encouraged himself out of it? That's what Kaito (who doesn't have Ryoma's depression) would have done!

His frame of reference, like his internalized ableist inspiration porn, is limited. Which makes sense, given that he's a kid. But this is the problem with inspirational talk, it hits a wall when the person trying to inspire you lacks a fundamental understanding of your situation and fails to make a connection.

He was able to get through to Maki and Shuichi as he made friends with them; he at least understood what they wanted and what could motivate them. But Maki and Shuichi (at the time at least) weren't suicidal the way Ryoma was, so they were still receptive to Kaito and to believing in themselves.

Ryoma was not a lost cause, and Kaito is not a failure for his inability to help an adult willpower his way out of being suicidal, but it's sobering to see the realistic limitations of Kaito's limited-perspective optimism.

I hate to end this post on such a low note, so here's a different moment (32 minutes in).

Tsumugi, like every good writer, knows that it's never too late in the process to add more convoluted backstory.

[mostofthingsmostofthetime]

Omg just watched episode 2 of Distant Lands & I'm screaming.

Now, don't get me wrong, I definitely shipped Bubbleline before, but this episode had me INVESTED!!!!

Ahhr, I don't even know where to start?

The glass kingdom is so beautiful. I don't care how impractical it'd be, I wanna live there.

Marceline's old look was so awesome!!!!!! like, don't get me wrong, she always looks good, but I know WLW were being fed this episode, lol. As for me, I want Bubblegum's wardrobe STAT as not only is it a pastel lover's dream come true, but all the clothes look so soft (which I don't know how they manage to convey in 2D but they did).

Domestic Bubbleline has my entire heart forever, bye!!!!

Am I correct in seeing the friendship between glass boy & See Through princess as a parallel to Finn & Bubblegum's early friendship? Like tall, beautiful royal that's bogged down by her duty vs small, younger(?), disabled (which Finn later ends up becoming), blue boy who starts feeling dismissed/not taken seriously by his older(?) friend & wants to help/be a hero despite not having any powers (ok, so Finn has lightning amuinty, but that didn't come till much later)? Plus, there's the whole fire monster trying to kill him only for it to turn out to not be so bad, like when flame princess was introduced, & turning into (what looks to me like) some kind of a butterfly at the end, which we know was one of the things Finn was reincarnated as in a past life.

Those royal helpers (or whatever they're called) suck ass.

Simon, I love you!!!! Also, Ignore those monsters. Wear that moomoo & crown if it helps you cope.

They bubble wrapped him!!!! I'm crying, that's the sweetest, funniest & most practical way to go about it though like dude, you're litrually made of glass & already have a cracked face. You need to be way more careful about your obvious fragility.

I'm sorry, Bonnie, but the song does slap.

This is the major Bubblegum betrayal that I've been hearing about? Omg you have to be kidding. Like, I'm not saying you HAVE to love her as a character, but you really had me scared she was gonna do something absolutely twisted & it turned out to be.....this? Like, don't get me wrong, her reasoning wasn't the best & it was definitely bad of her to keep it from Marcleline, but do we really want characters without flaws & why are some fans seemingly convinced that Bubblegum is the sole AT character (especially out of her & Marcleline) that has any? Like the episode litrually gives us serval scenes from both of their POV's to show us that they each have good & bad qualities, streaths & weaknesses, baggage/insecurities & don't always handle everything the best way (especially in the past) but that they clearly love each other & are now in a much better place. Where they are willing to learn & grow & be vunrable by actually talking things out & apologising if they do something that hurts the other. Also wasn't, overcoming past hurts that are impacting your current, hard earned happiness by realising that you can't always be right/win all the time & that it's not always worth it if it means loosing what really matters to you, a huge part of the theme of the episode?

Mama Marcleline, we finally get more of your backstory & god dose it hurt. RIP queen, you did the best you could (am still scared to find out how you ended up pregnant though coz like, Hunson's a freak LMFAO!). Also, baby Marcy, I wanna hug you so bad 💔😭.

Ok, that song is so fucking cute that it makes me wanna bite my own cheeks off & eat them, and no, I don't care that that doesn't make sense.

That's how she got the band shirt? Omg, shoot me dead!

Oh, Simon, you know those banana guards can't do shit lol.

Omg Finn!!!!! Ok, so I kind of already saw that visual (being online, you can only avoid spoilers for so long), but still. My man, looking good. No prostetic? That's probably nice for amputees to see. The Jake Tattoo makes me both happy & sad because, on the one hand, it shows how much they love each other, but on the other, he probably got it because Jake is dead in this time period (I'm assuming).

Omg, grown-up Bronwyn is so cute 🥰!!!!!!!!

All the other cracks being revealed in others was a lovely touch. Thinking about the cracks as flaws or imperfections (or truma like the "damage" people accuire through being alive) & how society demonises that to the point where people feel like they have to hide them & then lash out at others who can't or refuse to hide theirs. Also, love the princess getting pants, lol. The angry monster secretly having a cracked face the whole time got me ok . Like, no wonder it hated the palace for how they acted towards glass boy. When it first saw him, it was probably so happy to know that someone like it existed & then was so hurt that Glass Boy was trying to change himself to be like everyone else.

Yes, Glass boy, kill those assholes!!!!! I hate hypocrites. It's sadly realistic, though. Sometimes, it really is the people with the highest number of faults that wanna condemn others the most.

[xxlovelynovaxx]

"Disabled people who by their own words can't do art actually can! Every disability can be overcome er I mean accomodated! Severe executive dysfunction and avolition aren't real disabilities!"

Try "some disabled people can make art and some can't. Those that can't deserve to be able to use emerging accessibility tools that are ethically made, not to be caught between 'I can't make this' and 'the only way to make this is through an exploitative program'."

Once again, not all disabled people can make art. Also, see: is collage stealing. Is fan art stealing. How does AI differ in any way from those two forms of art on any meaningful level?

What is problematic about AI is CORPORATIONS profiting nonconsensually off of art, not some impoverished rando from Nowheresville saving an image to their phone or gods forbid, even selling it for $10 to another rando from Nowheresville.

Someone PLEASE go read @/felinedragon's posts on the subject because they are so much more articulate than me about how the "stolen art" narrative is not entirely accurate even to the programs to which is does apply (which, crucially, even some corporate programs like Adobe's use only license free and adobe-licensed pics and therefore use ZERO "stolen art").

This is literally just an opinion. To some actual artists, the process is super important. To some it's just a means to an end. The process taking place within an electronic program does not make it evil and I have great grandparents who did less luddite misunderstanding-and-fearmongering-about-tech than this discourse.

Art literally doesn't have to be about the process. Wanting to make and view something that makes you feel something doesn't have to be about the constructive elements of it. That's YOUR preference. I personally love the making of part, but some people don't, and that's okay. Don't state this like objective fact. Art is subjective, and so is this.

Some people (like me before I had POTS) run because they genuinely adore running. Others run because they like that it makes them healthier, but despise running, and would take an easier alternative if they could. This is just "laziness is bad" culturally christian bullshit reworked. Something doesn't have to have minimum effort put into it to have worth or to qualify as "real" whatever.

And no pic but ofc in the notes there was the usual inspiration porn of "this quadriplegic guy made a whole comic!" Good for him. Great. Not everyone can do that.

It's SO FUCKING ABLEIST to not acknowledge that there are disabled people who legitimately CANNOT currently do art. And I'm actually fully in agreement that currently AI was never actually intended for that! Let's have actual conversations about the ACTUAL evils of the corporations producing AI. But while we're at it, let's STOP twisting ourselves in knots trying to prove that AI will "never" be real art even if it's made COMPLETELY ethically. Because this is something that absolutely COULD and SHOULD be an accessibility tool.

Tl;dr anti-AI arguments are once again ableist and ignore the realities of severely disabled people, and also art is as much about the product as the process (not even in a capitalist way, on a fundamental level) and it can still be art if you use a program as the process medium and not pencils or shit.

(PS "the program is doing the work which means no art is being made" is terminator levels of anti-tech irrational-fear-based-in-ignorance-disguised-as-morality, alongside being very "effort as morality" christian bullshit. Why is it suddenly "not real" as soon as automation eases the labor burden of work? What technology that is now ubiquitous in our society that improves human lives were these same arguments made about? Have you thought for a single second about the arguments you are parroting.)

Actually no I'm not done once again. If you actually took 100,000 pieces of art, printed them off, and cut them up, and made it into a collage, people would all recognize that as art, and not only that, but wouldn't consider the component art pieces "stolen". But automate the cutting and pasting step, and suddenly it's "stolen art" and "not real art". Why is that?

Be mad about corporations profiting off already extremely undervalued tradesmen! In fact, talk about valid concerns about the value of art being undercut by easier processes! Talk about the major shifts we as a society need to make wrt this!

But stop acting like the AI itself, and not the super-rich assholes making it, and the choices they've made about how to do so, are the problem. AI could be just as much a tool for good as an exploitative biased piece of shit. It could genuinely BE an ethical accessibility tool. It's just basic "new tech bad" bullshit, and also ignoring that fact that "super rich assholes taint everything they touch and neither they nor supercorps should exist and that would solve most of the problems".

(Also can we talk about the arguments that anti-AI people DON'T make, like the only rarely seen discussion of bigoted bias in data sets? Like, I can respect the people who talk about the actual real problems with AI, regardless of their ultimate position on it.)

[incorrectcommunication]

Komi Can Communicate

Today, I'm going to break style slightly. Instead of incorrectly quoting the characters, or reblogging stuff other people made for the fandom, I'm going to share my thoughts about Komi-san. (The series; I here refer to is as Komi-san for brevity. The character will simply be called Komi.)

Let's start with something straightforwardly good. Remember the chalkboard scene? Of course you do—it's the inciting incident for the entire series, the most iconic moment, and one of the few scenes where the anime adaptation rises above the level of "serviceable".

But why is it so good? Personally, I'd argue the main reason it stands out so much (in both manga and anime) is because of how it ties to the core hook of the series. Komi doesn't talk, so people assume she can't communicate at all...but Tadano finds a way to communicate with her.

In a vacuum, it's a sweet little moment that establishes the protagonists' characters and the story's themes. In a real-world context, it's meaningful. People like Komi really exist. According to what passes for my research, something like 0.6-0.9% of the population has some degree of nonspeaking autism.* The treatment for these people is not to drag them out of their shell until they learn to talk; it's to accommodate their communication needs.

Some communicate with tablets or other electronic devices, some use flashcards or sign language, and some use written language like Komi. And to its credit, Komi-san treats her written communication and gestures as valid ways to communicate. Sometimes it gets used in a joke, but mostly it's just how Komi talks. That's good!

I wish it had stayed that way.

Over time, Komi starts to talk. Like, with her vocal cords and tongue. I don't want to reread several dozen manga chapters to check, but I'm pretty sure the last time she uses her notebook was a bit before chapter 300, during the school-trip-to-NYC arc. She's not chatty by any means, but she doesn't have much difficulty talking.

This increased use of speech was meant to symbolize Komi coming out of her shell, becoming more confident and sociable. As she talks more, she becomes less passive, taking more agency in her story, begins to assert herself. While her written communication isn't de-legitimized, exactly, it's definitely devalued, treated as an inferior substitute for acting neurotypical.

To be clear: I only find this remarkable in the specific context of a series which starts with something like the chalkboard scene. Overcoming disability with the power of friendship or saying that they just needed to have confidence is kinda ableist, but the context makes it a lot less bad than that sounds. I don't want people to think I'm trying to "cancel" Komi-san or Tomohito Oda. I'm not mad, just...disappointed.

Some of this is personal; I have autism. Not as severe as many, to be clear; I can talk, just not as well as NT people. But it still felt personally meaningful to see a series which treated an ambiguously autistic character with such respect, which didn't devalue her for her communication disorder*, didn't see it as a problem that needed to be corrected. And it was deeply frustrating to see the series slowly undermine that empathy by treating it as a problem Komi had overcome.

I assume Tomohito Oda didn't intend that. I assume it was meant to be empowering, to show people with "communication disorders"* overcoming their limitations. He just failed. He correlated Komi losing her communication disorder with her becoming empowered, confident, happy. Whatever he was trying to say, he wound up implying that people like Komi should, or at least can, improve their lives by acting more like neurotypical people. By going through a character arc until they stop being disabled.

On one hand, it's possible for some people with autism or other "communication disorders"* to mitigate their "symptoms" and live a better life through it. On the other hand, that's not a realistic option. Lots of neurodivergent kids get traumatized by attempts to make them act "normal," and many of them internalize their "failure" to become "normal" as a character flaw.

Again, this is me hyperfixating on a relatively small flaw in a pretty good manga series. If this kind of plotline showed up in something like Sia's Music, it would probably be an improvement. But while it hurts to be reminded of how ableist that dumpster-fire is, it's a very acute type of pain; it doesn't stick around once I let it leave my mind.

Seeing a series like Komi-san come so close and still f*k up hurts in a deeper way. It's objectively nowhere near the same level; if I saw someone earnestly comparing Music and Komi-san on how they misrepresent autistic* people, I'd think they were crazy.

And yet, watching Komi grow and heal through things that can help real neurodivergent people—friends who understand and accept them, accommodations for their specific disorders, and generally not suffering from the abuse and attrition disabled people so often suffer IRL—only to have that growth and healing manifest as her disorder slowly fading away until it's at a normal shy-girl level...I don't know.

It hurts, and it sticks. It feels like a betrayal. It feels like evidence that we'll never be understood or accepted, if even the people trying to show empathy f*k up like this. I've been thinking about it since manga!Komi started talking regularly, more and more as her other methods of communication faded away, and I still don't know how to describe how all of this makes me feel.

Part of that cocktail of feelings is the sense that I shouldn't complain. There are so many series—from Japan, the West, and all of the rest—which handle neurodivergent characters so much worse. There are plenty which much more explicitly and intentionally frame "overcoming" a disability as something neurodivergent people should do. And yet, none of those stick in my mind the way this flaw in Komi-san does.

I didn't mean to ramble on this long. I thought I could describe a bit of how Komi's been acting in the manga, describe why it bugged me, and write a quick conclusion. That conclusion is now most of the post. Sorry about that—whatever my statements in the intro may lead you to believe, I'm not good at brevity.

Ugh, that's a terrible conclusion. Um...go read the manga, I guess? Go and decide what you think about the stuff I've been describing here, see if you can articulare your thoughts better. Bonus: You'll be able to understand who these Ase and Manbagi people are. I've been trying not to use unadapted characters in my quotes too much, but I haven't not been using them.

FOOTNOTE

*The Japanese word "komyushou" does not refer to any specific disorder. It's basically impossible for someone on the English-speaking internet to google details about how, exactly, the term is used, thanks to this one manga that floods your search results, but it's broader than just autism. That said, Komi fits an autism diagnosis pretty well, and even if she's not autistic, she's meant to represent some actual group of people with communication disorders.

Languages are important, but language barriers are frustrating. There's no English word which means quite the same thing as "komyushou," which is a problem for people who care about saying exactly what they mean to say, which is important both when discussing certain sensitive subjects and for certain autistic people. It's me, I'm certain autistic people, I hate being misunderstood.

[yami-mazda]

I've been thinking about the western vs Japanese cultural context surrounding yamikawaii/menhera and listen, I know I'm new, I know I'm a baby kawaii or whatever the fuck and I'm probably not saying anything that hasn't already been said a million times by every western yami kawaii blog ever.

Yamikawaii in Japan originated as a radical rejection of the stigma around mental illness. It also became a way to cope, take joy, wear your heart on your sleeve, maybe even be 'proud'in some way--more in the disability pride kinda pride as opposed to the lgbt pride kinda pride.

And whilst talking about mental health isn't as taboo in America, there is still VERY MUCH a taboo around mental ILLNESS. I have psychosis, autism, complex ptsd, I'm a DID system. (I'm forgetting something.) I KNOW firsthand and several times over what it is like for people to try to use tools like therapy and mental health care to brute force a neurotypicality out of me that I just can't do.

In America, it's more like people are pro mental HEALTH, not pro mental ILLNESS. If you're not mentally healthy, you're expected to work work work until you're an acceptable level of "just a lil sad sometimes" or "disabled, but adorable and sweet" instead of like. People meeting you where you are when you can't get better.

This is WHY everyone on this goddamn site says "stop making suicide jokes." (By extention, yamikawaii was heavily criticized for flippant imagery. That's also why I avoided it for a long time; it just felt like, in a WESTERN context, it was feeding into something bad.) Stop doing ANYTHING that will feed into your self harm. But like. In extreme, possibly rare, situations, that's not enough. (Not even going into the "address the societal systems that MAKE us all so miserable" angle because you're right, you're right, but I'm talking abt self care only rn.) Making me STOP making suicide jokes, making me stop self harming, making me sanitize how I speak about myself and my life just so I don't say or do anything "unacceptable" is NOT helping me overcome my mental issues. It's just making me feel repressed and more pent up so when I finally DO snap and release, it's worse than ever.

I promised myself that if I was ever assaulted again, I would fucking kill myself. So I'm finding a way to do that but also not to die through this aesthetic. By disguising self care as suicidality and self harm and whatever I need it to be, I find that it's much easier to keep on living. I'm tricking my brain in a way.

I feel like using yamikawaii to treat suicidal thoughts is kind of like using electroconvulsive therapy for severe depression. It should NOT be your first go to, it's even ill advised in most cases for obvious reasons. But if the case is so severe that it is all that can be done to treat the issue, then by all means.

[girlcalledwhatsername]

Genuinely so sick of symptoms. And i don't mean that in a "the symptoms of this disease are hard to live with" way but in a "i constantly have symptoms and seemingly no disease but symptoms are still hard to live with" way.

Every few days there's headaches and nausea so bad i sleep through most of the day. If i sleep less or more than the exact golden sleep amount for me it fucks up my head but I cannot know exactly when I'll fall asleep to plan my alarms accordingly. When i was younger i used to be constantly nauseated so I have been to many doctors and had many tests that turned up nothing. And too often the symptoms are gone/replaced by other symptoms before I can even go to a doctor and explain them.

"Today ribs will hurt" my body says. "oh okay" i think "just like growing pains ouf ouch my ribs". Then my body says "ribs won't hurt anymore" literally five minutes later and I'll think "thank god" but then what's this? It's tummy ache back with a steel chair!

Today we are cold. No cancel that, today we are hot. Today we have cramps. Today I offer you dizziness from walking up the stairs you've had for the past 15 years. Tomorrow, who knows? Every morning I wake with a semi-blocked nose and it usually goes away but sometimes it doesn't. I call them the Morning Sniffles. They are usually just a passing annoyance but today they barelled straight into a sinus headache - which I've never had before btw.

Don't even get me started on fevers. Congratulations, you have a fever! But, ah ah, it's a fake, psych! But you still feel feverish. But there is nothing there. Next time I'll do the fever-from-pain-which-dissipates-and-returns-at-whim.

Ok. Thank you, body. Thank you, mind. Thank you, room.

I would consider my friend's words, she has chronic pain and has told me I might have that too, since nothing shows up in tests, but she also told me how awful doctors are about it all, and how they barely treat you for it after knowing it's "probably psychological" and worst of all how having the diagnosis doesn't do you much good vis a vis accomodations because no one wants to hire you anymore or even give you a seat in an educational institution. Our culture has always treated disability as something to be overcome, something for inspiration porn, something to do with a bad attitude. And I get so worried thinking about how working regularly will never be feasible for me but I won't be able to explain to anyone why.

So it's back to the symptoms for me. It's always the symptoms. And I stopped going to doctors about the frequency of symptoms since they told me repeatedly nothing is wrong and have i considered yoga perhaps? I still go when I get ill of course but I think I find more relief staying at home and taking care of myself rather than trying to find out what's "wrong" with me and expending time and energy and resources on that. But the symptoms still suck though ughhh.

[punksrespectpronouns]

I think more people need to be aware of this idea. Like illness is so moralized in our society and they act like it's something in our control. Like if we meditate enough or do enough therapy we can prevent the massive burnout and existential nightmare that the world currently is.

These ideas are subtle but they moralize the blame like it's something we can control. When oftentimes it's systemic issues that we did not cause. I can not strong well my way out of being disabled and I shouldn't have to.

Like current society especially when it comes to current covid responses. The powers that be to be going, "oh what's wrong with you? why are you mentally ill" like it's something we have any control over. meanwhile we're still in a pandemic and so many people have died. and the gov response now seems to be let's just get back to normal whatever it takes. and that it doesn't matter if disabled people die

When we are in a housing crisis and a livable wage and employment crisis. People don't have enough to live. And our rights are being threatened, like abortion access and trans healthcare is being demonized. With many people losing access to these essential services. of course people aren't mentally healthy right now! what do you expect!

Yet people treat mental illness like it's something we can mindfulness our way out of. When I try and find resources for my OCD so many people talk about it like it's an addiction. like it's something I have to overcome as if that's even possible. these ideas are toxic. Your disability is not something you have to "overcome".

This insta post from woke science talks about the topic well...

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Dr Ayesha Khan═طبیبہ عائشہ خان (@wokescientist)

And hey I get it. I instinctively take the blame for this stuff too, because at least that means I have any control over it. But so don't. And I think all this really does is make people feel bad about how their coping. And by acting like systemic injustices are within an individuals control to change. By perpetuating these ideas were (unwittingly) freeing society of the responsibility of changing these things. Make a more accessible world. If you want suicide rates to go down, fund affordable housing, let people get their basic needs met and not blaming them for societal problems.

Book - Disfigured: on fairy tales, disability, and making space by Amanda

[Image Description below the cut:

3 pictures of pages from the book "Disfigured"

Image 1 - Text reads:

In Illness as Metaphor, Susan Sontag notes that disease has often been associated with moral failings.

Psychological theories of illness are a powerful means of placing the blame on the ill. Patients who are instructed that they have, unwittingly, caused their disease are also being made to feel that they have deserved it... Nothing is more punitive than to give a disease a meaning - that meaning invariably being a moralistic one.

In literature, this has also been the case with disability. In the same way that sufferers of a disease become poster children for the ravages of the disease itself (TB, cancer, AIDS), disabled people become iterations of loss, of struggle, of the ways in which the world is not kind to those who are different. And in the same way that disease, for Sontag, then becomes a metaphor - something is a cancer, something spreads like the plague.

Image 2 - Text reads:

And in the same way that the medical model places the fault of disability at the body of the disabled person and lifts the medical professional up as the 'expert,' in the same way that the charity model removes the blame for society from the shoulders of the magnanimous philanthropist and rein forces hierarchical norms, psychological theories of illness lift the blame and responsibility for illness from the shoulders of society and place it squarely within the fault of the patient.

If one had only refrained from some behaviour or practised others or been more devout or had more faith, the illness might have been avoided. (In the nineteenth and early- to mid-twentieth centuries, it was believed in some circles that melancholy patients might have avoided cancer if they had been happier; in the eighteenth century, those who were deli cate and high-strung and prone to fits of excitability and high emotion might have avoided tuberculosis by practising a calmer, quieter kind of life.)

This sort of thinking sounds ridiculous now - except that when it comes to disability, it's often still engaged in, albeit in subtler (and arguably more damaging) ways. Disabled people are still brought to faith healers; they are told to drink more water or drink green tea or do detoxes or try hypnosis to remove barriers of the mind as a way of overcoming physical impair ments. Disabled people are encouraged to 'push through' and 'exercise' and are reminded over and over again that the only disability is a bad attitude.

Image 3 - Text reads:

As with the charity model, psychological approaches to disability work to take the blame away from society and put it on the individual - to make disability not a lived, mundane reality but a temporary struggle that can be overcome if one has the inner and outer strength to do it. (The corollary here is that those who do not 'overcome' their disabilities - or fail to appreciate the so-called 'accomplishments' they make in the world of the disabled body's lowered bar - fail because of their own lack of strength or effort.)

Your disability is causing you pain? Do yoga. Struggling because of mental health issues? Meditate. The more you focus, the more you'll improve, and the less society at large needs to worry about having different kinds of dance classes or accessible entryways or accessible bathrooms or clearly marked accessible parking, to say nothing of captions or ASL or quiet rooms that offer respite from external stimuli.

After all, the kingdom didn't need to change for the Maiden Without Hands, did it? She got her hands back because of her faith. (The only disability is a bad attitude.) She did that all on her own.

ID ends]

[thewhalehastalestoo]

Omg posting this now because it's relevant lmao My TT feed has been full of IWTV and I was recently accused of only writing angst essentially but 👀👀👀 I mean I won't get into my opinions on how I think the accuser views me as a person but this little post neatly summarises my feelings on ficiton and why I write the kind of stories I do. 🤷🏽‍♀️🤷🏽‍♀️🤷🏽‍♀️

---

No because I've been thinking abt A LOT lately and maybe it's just because I'm in my super horny era but like... something abt dark fantasy romance tht is actually dark and not just immature ppl who think being violent makes you cool

Idk man

A lot of my stories are actually quite dark but I didn't think I personally like dark fiction until I realized the media I am OBSESSED with and haunts my dreams are actually quite dismal lmao

A lot of "Now live with what you've done." ass vibes.

I think because I also love Romance and Happy Endings I didn't really pick up on the edge but...I'ma be honest...I LIKE despair! I like when the hero is forced to make "unthinkable" choices. I like toxicity. Lmao

However it's abt OVERCOMING the trials of life. I just enjoy seeing those trials be so seemingly insurmountable, we gotta lose our minds a lil bit before it gets better. But it will get better.

Not enough ppl understand the importance of THAT part. Because life is an insurmountable challenge. How it becomes "good" or "better" is by having faith we will make it through.

Like, I'm a Black, queer, neurodivergent, disabled femme...life is kicking my ass. Life IS horror to me. I won't even get into what life is like as a spiritual person. Like, I face horrors every day few other can conceptualize. I have no moment awake or sleep where I'm not faced by life's terrors.

I need media that acknowledges the inherent existential terror filled burden of living, and the truth that being loved is what gets us through it all. All the many forms this love comes in.

It's why you'll always have a strong divine presence in my stories. From that which can't be seen to the very dirt under your boot, there is a relationship characters have with the world around them. The whole world is an influence. This means the stakes also are always high.

To count on others is to always risk being let down. That's the best case scenario. Worst case you'll never survive what's been done to you.

To live is to be in terror of living.

I suppose something else to add to the conversation around Vampire fiction and Power. To live is to always be in conflict. In death is the only time you'll have full power over anything. You're dead. There are finally no choices to make. It's over. That's where all the freedom is.

[thrythlind]

So, reddit wasn't letting me post this comment so I'll just post a link to the reddit discussion that I was trying to respond to.

My first comment is that it is perfectly valid to have preferences in the style of game that you desire to play. I also respect the "I'd rather be doing it in real life". Some people are just not going to enjoy the hobby. However, the phrasing feels very judgmental. Instead of being satisfied with just stating the preference, the request is stated in a very "wrong bad fun" manner.

I appreciate the push for media literacy to understand some of the things that exist in the periphery of various games and it is good practice to keep yourself aware of some of the societal forces that inspire some game styles. But at the same time, sometimes a game is just a game. I personally like finding a deeper meaning in my fiction and game play. Finding what it means to me, often separate from the meaning assumed by other people. And I do occasionally interrogate myself as to what I find enjoyable about a particular story or game but for most games it is just a shrug. There comes a point where the urge to find deeper worth to our recreation feels like an internalization of good old Protestant Work Ethic where we've been convinced that enjoying things is a sin and that there must be a purpose in all of our activities. (Never mind that enjoyment is a purpose in and of itself and vital to mental health.)

As regards the points in summary:

For the first point, I do sometimes enjoy playing ordinary people. I wrote a whole supplement about slice-of-life gaming, and I have an entire setting where the average supernatural person is just as much a civilian as the humans of the setting. I thoroughly enjoy a setting where people are people are people and games where the big challenge is building the best booth for the school fundraiser fair. But sometimes I just want to punch some bad guys. That power fantasy can be cathartic especially in a life where we have little to no power in real life.

I am also fairly offended by the idea that wanting to play someone exceptional is ableist. Specifically, I am offended by the idea that wanting to play an exceptional person is ruling out the disabled. This feels like a bit of condescension to me. Like they would be among the people who would complain about adventurers in wheelchairs being unrealistic. I have some minor physical issues (apnea, lymphedema, and recurring anemia) and also have had regular issues with depression and anxiety. This may play into the fact that I play a lot of characters that have mental issues and appreciate mechanics that give me a genuine feel of such issues while remaining distant and safe so I can appreciate overcoming them from a clear mind.

For that matter, while I've not been diagnosed, I am some manner of autistic and have a lot of markers for ADHD as well. If I lived in a health system that isn't set to wringing me for money like a towel for water, I'd have gone to get an official diagnosis. This is part of why when I go to D&D, I've leaned heavily into the yuan-ti culture. Back when Volo's was posted, they had a section on the psychology of the yuan-ti where they tried to justify why they were evil and they did the obnoxious thing of "they do this neurodivergent thing and that's why they're evil." But cutting it down to just the neurodivergent things, they were a host of relatable experiences which I've had that have never led me to wanting to be cruel or murderous to people. So, yeah, yuan-ti became very much a "this is me" group.

All this is to say, that I kinda find it ableist to label the desire to be a hero as ableist.

On the second point. This isn't really a standard in a lot of games I imagine it's more prevalent in video games where proper modeling of societal change is very difficult. Tabletop games I've been in have largely been more focused on resisting or toppling oppressive or corrupt regimes. But also there's a very real difference between protecting the status quo in a game versus protecting the status quo in real life. I mentioned earlier that real life can grind you down and sometimes you want to come back from that and just have a feeling of being able to protect something. And again, that catharsis is useful and healthy. Yes, there's a point you reach willful ignorance, but that's not going to be the majority of players.

Sometimes that status quo you're protecting is your own hope and self-worth and you just embody it in your mind as some fantasy kingdom or superhero city.

Likewise, I'm going to pull out the Terry Pratchet and point out that fantasies are important towards the purpose of taking an ideal and making it into something real. When we put a noble king or mayor or priest or some other authority figure into a game, that's not a real person. It's going to be some version of what we wish authority figures are... as in actual authorities in the sense of authority meaning someone who knows what the fuck they're doing and means well. Again, most of the time there's nothing really deep going on, but like we have to be able to imagine an ideal government if we're ever going to create one. And giving it the face of a queen or king or mayor or whatever is fine.

In this regard, I like playing characters with a lot of faith or who are religious in some ways and usually in ways that are different from the stereotypical holy types. Ranging from ace sex worker paladins to artificers imbuing prayers alongside arcane formula into their crafted items or priestesses whose class is bard or celestial warlocks bound to massive couatls or the Book of Exalted Deeds. And yes that's all D&D, but also I play a fair amount of Scion 2e where you are often on the path to being a god. And you know what my favorite enemy is to face for these sorts of characters? Oppressive religious figures. And that's definitely because I find megachurches and the plethora of false prophets preaching hate and violence in real life objectionable to my personal faith. Which is a whole other conversation. Suffice to say I was raised Catholic but am more agnostic these days.

Again, sometimes the status quo you're protecting is your vision of the future you hope to see created.

On point three, yeah, this can definitely be an issue. And the one I have the least problems with. I find it weird to call it a "glorification of the war on terror" because again, that's a single interpretation and such interpretations will be different from player to player. Also that's a very young interpretation and this tendency is far far older than the war on terror. I'd point toward colonialism instead. While there are definitely companies out there doing their best to address colonialist approaches in games, this is going to be very different table to table. A game thoroughly imbued with colonialist thought can become thoroughly anti-colonialist in the hands of one table while a very progressively written game can become horribly regressive and oppressive in the hands of a different table.

That said, this does seem to counteract the second point, because if you're protecting the status quo then that tends to imply you're part of that status quo and thus one of the locals. Not necessarily true, I know. But still feels weird.

Also, my favorite way to do this is to show that the heroes are NOT the only competent team out there. Campaign situations are vast and complex problems with many troubles. There are going to be other teams that the PCs occasionally work with that are contributing their own issues. Heck, my games our groups tend to encourage building up the locals and working with other heroes to get things done.

Once again, the helplessness of the locals is going to depend on how your table runs things.

On the 4th, I've played a D&D campaign where over the course of 10 sessions we had 3-4 rounds of combat. Not per session. That was over the entire stretch of 10 sessions. My group leans heavily towards diplomancy and talking out our problems with the locals. That said, this is another case of catharsis.

There's a lot of complex problems that are so big and hard for a single person to address in real life. But you come into a game and you can give misogyny or racism or ableism a face and punch this incarnate form of the abstract issue that is giving you issues. It's a vent for the frustrations we experience trying to deal with corporations, megachurches, and bigots. Once again, asking yourself why you enjoy the violence in a piece of fiction is valid, but fantasy violence is not the same thing as real life violence. And the threshold of when it becomes unhealthy is not nearly as thin as many people think.

This is the same line of thought where people say video games cause violence.

[shadowsandstarlight]

I’m getting that Disabled Existential Dread that I get sometimes. Feels like my body is decaying before I’m done with it, all that fun stuff. I mean, some parts literally are because of my disability. Very long-term issues brushing my teeth due to ADHD, plus a genetic predisposition for shitty teeth (seriously, why the FUCK do I have so many fucking genetic problems. This is bullshit. All my problems are results of my parents, my genetics, the way they raised me, their refusal to acknowledge my struggles as anything other than a personal failure on my part. When I started having troubles maintaining my oral hygiene as a kid, they just told me to try harder. Still what they do. And now it’s snowballed. Just like all my problems.). My body is fucking collapsing around me and there’s nothing I can do except suck it up and try harder. The further it goes, the harder it gets. Nobody stepped in when it would have been easier to stop, so now I’m left crumbling in on myself trying desperately to hold together whatever I can with only coping mechanisms I built for myself. All I can do now is try to slow the rate of decay. That’s all that’s left for me. And people STILL expect me to try to somehow fucking OVERCOME this? To not “give in” to my disability? Shut up and fuck off. If they cared about my future, they would step in and fucking HELP ME. Not with bullshit like “strength.” If you care about disabled futures, let them be disabled, and help them find ways to live with it, not against it. It’s not a fight you can win. Everyone’s convinced you can win. There’s no winning. You can lose. Or you can learn to live with it, make peace with it. In trying to convince people there’s a way to win, you only take steps toward a loss. If you fucking care about disabled people, HELP THEM. The next person who tells me to try harder is getting their ribs broken with my cane. I’m sure they’ll be fine. They just need to toughen up and walk it off. Find a routine and there’ll be no problem. That’s what people tell me, at least. They seem awfully confident that it’ll work. Try it out for me.